It is interesting from the start, covering a brief history of the crusades in general, before focussing more on the Templars, though they are never considered in isolation - it is not a work that lists the names of all knights and their deeds to the exclusion of all else. It a plan that works exceedingly well at introducing the foundations of the Temple in context. He clearly states in the introduction that this is not a masterwork of historical writing, but a tale of the Templars. There are no footnotes, which I did wish for, but there are translations of all quotations (whilst I can struggle through some untranslated passages, and even occasionally enjoy the challenge, I do not have a ready command of ancient languages, though I would prefer to see the translation with the original alongside).

My only real gripe (again, we are forewarned in the introductory piece, so I cannot be too harsh), it that he picks and chooses history to present. Where there are three versions of an event, one will be presented. Whilst it is not grossly inaccurate (though many points are widely open to debate), it is misleading, as there is no aside (or footnote) to bring your attention to the fact that this is a contentious point, or perhaps even direct you to other accounts of the event.

It's not a book to base research on and it was never intended to be. It was meant to take the path of the Templars, threading through history, the background, some background political dealings and highlight the magnificence of the Templar order. The story as written is compelling, entertaining and very enjoyable and more or less accurate. It whets the appetite, and would serve as an excellent and gentle introduction. Past that, those wanting more historical detail, background, and a more rigorous treatment may want to investigate Malcolm Barber's "The New Knighthood" for Templar material and Steven Runciman's excellent three volume History of the Crusades.