The Knights Of The Black And White: Bk. 1 [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

I accidentally stumbled across this book. I bought it (in paperback) because I'm interested in the Templars' story. I'd never read Jack Whyte's books before. I found it a great read and very well written. I'm somewhat mystified by others' complaints about the book, though, and since those who complained weren't really very explicit about what it was that they didn't like, I hope I can explain exactly why I DID like it in order to be helpful to those thinking about buying it and who might enjoy it, as I did. (I suspect that the complainers may have been like those who rejected "The Da Vinci Code" out of hand because they were so shocked at the suggestion of a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene that they couldn't handle it. Actually, this book does not take the same tack, but may be equally shocking to those of fragile faith.)

First, I thought Mr. Whyte took a very interesting approach to the Templar story, one that was different from the tack taken by "The Da Vinci Code" and its imitators. (Nothing wrong with that -- those books are entertaining in their own way, but they are not focused on the Templars, per se.) Whyte's story starts with the men who went to take part in the first Crusade and later founded the Templar Order, particularly Hugh de Payens. Whyte fills in a surprising and interesting backstory about another ancient, secret Order behind the scenes which provided the motivation for the men who later founded the Order. In Whyte's story, these men didn't go to the Crusades, found the Templars, then later stumble across secrets in the foundations of the Temple Mount -- they went to the Crusades with the intention of finding something on the Temple Mount and already were in possession of information about what they might find and where they might find it. They founded the order that later became known as the Templars as a means for them to accomplish their secret purpose -- since it allowed them to hide in plain sight what they were actually doing. That's quite an interesting take on the story.

Second, I liked the development of the whole plot line of the book. The character of Hugh de Payens is an interesting portrayal of a very serious, taciturn, principled man of action. Although some reviewers complained about "talky" passages being too long, I disagree. I thought that the passages in which his elders in the secret order explain to Hugh their beliefs and his duties are necessary. (There were lots of people who complained about the character Morpheus's "talky" parts of the film "The Matrix," too -- but I disagree about that, as well. Sometimes you just have to have someone tell you the information that is the "set-up" for the story or belief system that the new person -- and over his shoulder, the reader -- is learning about.) I thought this was a reasonable way to do it, and I liked the "re-cap" as well, meaning that after the first round of informative explanation about the secret order as they join up, Hugh and his two best friends spend a later chapter talking to each other about what they think about what they've recently learned and -- now that they have a secret they can't share -- how it sets them apart from everyone they have previously been close to. I found that an interesting and plausible description of that situation. I thought the description of the experiences of the major characters during the Crusades (the middle section of the book) was good -- it was fast, action-packed, and provided a solid narrative that the reader can follow to see what it might have been like to have been there. The final section, regarding the founding of the Templar order (not called that at first, though) and the digging in the Temple ruins, was quite interesting, I thought. Perhaps some people became impatient with the narrative and wanted to just skip on to the part where they finally find the ruins beneath the ruins, but I thought it made the story more realistic (i.e., true to the experience) as well as more plausible (i.e., it's reasonable to assume that the Templars may have had had an inkling going in of the significance of what they were searching for if they had to dig so long and so hard to find it).

Third, I thought that the story provided an interesting take on the relationships between people in the area (i.e., the primarily Sunni people of Jerusalem and others in the wider Middle East -- like the Shi'a in what is now Iraq who later gave rise to Saladin, who bested (in the Third Crusade) Richard the Lionheart and denied him entry into Jerusalem.) Whyte's story thus provides a glimpse of the world the Templars have taken (temporarily) and the forces that begin to react to their being there and continue to affect them as long as they are there. For example, I have read other books -- like "The Templars and the Assassins: The Militia of Heaven" by James Wasserman -- that discuss possible connections and cross-influences between the followers of the Old Man of the Mountain and the Templars, if only to be aware of and to try to understand each others' effectiveness as fighters. Thus, I found Whyte's depiction of the aquaintance between the youngest Templar, Stephen St. Clair, and Hassan the Assissin to be interesting and plausible.

Perhaps this story isn't for everyone -- but for me, it was a good read and had lots of interesting ideas and characters.

I'm eagerly awaiting the second book in the trilogy!

Jewish families escaping the wrath of the Christian conquest of the Roman Empire create a secret society, the Order of the Rebirth of Sion, whose long term objective is to reveal the truth about the Church that they believe is built on lies and "an invalid creation". Over the centuries they hide, but prepare and wait patiently for the opportunity to destroy the myth. Late in the eleventh century, the chance arrives when Pope Urban calls for a Crusade to take back the Holy Land from the Infidels because the order believes that the proof is hidden under the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

Joining the Christian army is sworn members of the Order of the Rebirth of Sion like Sir Hugh de Payens and Stephen St. Clair. During the effort to free Jerusalem from the Muslims, men like these two seek entry into the Temple Mount where they plan to excavate. The violent war is a cover for competing western groups who either want to prove a sham or destroy the evidence, if any exists while the Muslims block their path into one of the holiest shrines.

Conceptually the first book of the latest Templar tales contains a terrific theme as various hostile sides converge on the temple Mount. However, the story line is slowed down by obloquies, soliloquies and colloquies that ironically provide a key feel for the conditions of the First Crusaders but also lacks action. Still the Knights Templar crowd will enjoy the newest entry that enthusiastically illuminates what has become an inundated topic.

Harriet Klausner

I had just finished the last book in the Camulod Series, and was thrilled to find more works by Jack Whyte. I wanted to like this book so much, but after reading 200 pages I gave up. I swear one of my most favorite authors did not write this book!

I decided to see what other readers here thought of the book, just to make sure part of my brain wasn't missing or something. It looks like readers either really liked, or really didn't like it. The readers who liked it found it riveting and interesting, while I found it neither. The only explanation I can imagine for this is that the other half of us got a different book.

At any rate, if you have not read Jack Whyte before, and are interested in the Templars, you might like this book. However, if you hungrily read every book of the Camulod Chronicles and found the writing to be some of the best you've ever enjoyed, you probably won't like this book. If you are in the latter category, stick with Camulod and cut your losses. Don't say I didn't warn you.