Andrew Latham is the author of the recently
released novel “Holy Lance.” Latham has built a great war-story similar in
structure to “Saving Private Ryan” about a small band of men on a dangerous
mission with a guide of uncertain trustworthiness and unexpected enemies in
their own ranks. In “Holy Lance,” we follow a single Templar troop on a fictional but
completely plausible mission to try to recover from deep inside enemy-held
territory a controversial relic found during the First Crusade, the “Holy
Lance,” i.e the lance that pierced Christ’s side before the crucifixion. As I
said in my review, Andrew Latham has with this comparatively short,
action-packed book done the much-maligned Order of the Poor Knights of the
Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem a worthy service by pulling them out of the
realm of mystery and romance and putting back into a historical context and
perspective.
Below is a brief
interview with Andrew about Holy Lance.
Andrew, let’s start at the beginning. What
inspired you to write this book?
Well to be honest, until about three years
ago I never dreamed I’d write a work of historical fiction. I’d always loved reading historical military
adventures, but it simply never occurred to me that I might write one
someday. Scholarly books, yes – that’s
what scholars do. But a novel? I have to confess that the thought never even
crossed my mind.
All that changed, though, as I was nearing
completion of my most recent non-fiction book Theorizing Medieval
Geopolitics. In preparation for writing that book, I’d
been reading pretty widely about war and political violence in later medieval
Europe and had just begun to get handle on the crusades. Then one day I encountered the Templar
knights. Like most people, I thought I
knew what these guys were all about: either odious religious fanatics or
cynical secular thugs using religion to camouflage their all-too-worldly
motives. Like most people, though, I was
wrong. Turns out, there was much more to
these warrior-monks than I had initially thought or than is commonly
supposed. The more I read, the more I
became fascinated by these “new knights”, the Templars in particular – not by
the caricature of them that is so prevalent in contemporary popular culture,
but by the historical reality of them.
Being a scholar by both training and
inclination, my first thought was to make sense of this weird phenomenon by
writing a non-fiction book on the topic.
The more I thought about what I wanted to achieve, however, the more it
seemed that non-fiction would not be the best tool. I was interested in the Templars, not because
of their supposed secrets or mysteries, or their fabulous wealth and influence,
or even their marital exploits, but because of what they were:
warrior-monks. Think about it for a
moment. On the one hand, Templars, like
all medieval knights, were warriors, bred to be brutal and merciless killers. On the other, they were pious monks,
committed to a life of prayer and works of charity. How was that possible? How did they reconcile these two personas?
How, as it were, did they manage to sustain the hyphen between the words
“warrior” and “monk”? Answering these
questions, it seemed to me, required reconstructing the imaginative world of
these self-styled “knights of Christ”.
And the best medium for that sort of project, it seemed to me, has
always been fiction. Thus was born the
idea of The Holy Lance.
That being
said, however, this novel is not simply an academic work dressed up as
fiction. I grew up reading the classics in historical military
adventure: series like C.S. Forester’s Hornblower, Alexander Kent’s Bolitho,
and Bernard Cornwell’s Sharpe. And in
more recent years I have enjoyed the novels of Ben Kane, Anthony Riches, Steven
A. McKay, Angus Donald, Si Turney, and, of course, Helena Schrader. These novels taught me what good historical
fiction looks like. My goal in writing The
Holy Lance was to apply everything I
learned from these great writers to provide an insightful yet entertaining
account of the Templars and the Third Crusade.
And where did you get the idea for the
plot? I kept feeling like this was a medieval version of a number of books and
movies I’ve read or seen that were set in WWII.
Once I’d committed myself to writing a work
of fiction about the realities of Templar life, I asked myself what sort of
plot-structure would provide the best vehicle for revealing those
realities. I did a bit of research (the
scholar instinct kicking in again) and toyed with a number of ideas, but
ultimately decided on that most enduring of plot devices – the quest. Why a quest?
Two basic reasons, I suppose.
First, the quest format allowed me to tell an entertaining story. The
typical quest involves travel, heroic exertions on the part of the protagonist,
danger, battles, romance, and escapades of all sorts – in short, all the basic
ingredients of an enjoyable read. Second, and in some ways more importantly,
the quest format allowed me to really probe the Templar ideal. The key element of any quest story, of
course, is neither the journey, nor the material object of the journey, nor
even the exertions of the protagonist while on the journey. Rather, it is the transformation of the
protagonist into a true hero as a result of his or her journey along a “trail of trials.” Think The Odyssey and Le Morte d’Arthur, or,
more recently, Lord of the Rings and Saving
Private Ryan (this is the World War II
angle you mentioned in your question).
In all of these stories, the challenges encountered while pursuing some
valued object transform the protagonist into a more perfect version of an
ideal. What better way, I thought, to
explore and highlight the true Templar ideal than to have my protagonist embark
on a quest for a religious relic and along the way have him grow into a more
perfect embodiment of the Templar ideal – that is, a more perfect synthesis of
the ferocious warrior and pious monk?
There’s a lot of rubbish out there about
the Templars — they are portrayed as secret Jews, secret atheists, as heretics
of every shape, color and odor. You said in your first answer that you
intentionally set out to counter some of that nonsense. Do you want to expand
on that a little? What have others
gotten wrong and how do your Templar’s differ?
A lot
of rubbish, indeed! As I see it, there
are three basic types of “misrepresentation” of the Poor Knights of the Temple
in film and literature: they are portrayed either as heretics, atheists or (my
personal favorite) late modern secular-humanists; or they are depicted as cynical
thugs concealing their all-too-worldly motives beneath a thin mantle of
religiosity; or they are made out to be murderous religious fanatics, cut from
the same cloth as ISIS fighters in the contemporary world, and every bit as
evil and loathsome. While these
depictions might provide grist for interesting or entertaining stories, they
are not accurate. Indeed, I would argue
that they belong in the realm of what I’ll call “historical fantasy” rather
than historical fiction.
So, yes, I did intentionally set out to
counter some of the more “fantastic” portrayals of the Templars. And the first step in this process was to take
seriously the real, historical religious convictions and motivations of the
typical Templar knight. My point of
departure was not to assume that these guys were all saints – they
weren’t. Rather, it was to accept that
the people of this era understood the world in terms of religious (Christian,
to be precise) categories and concepts.
For them, Christian religious belief was neither a form of mental
illness nor a cynical ideology concealing their real material motives (the
pursuit of power, wealth, glory or sensual pleasure). Instead, rather like the laws of physics do
for us, these beliefs provided the fundamental imaginative matrix through which
they made sense of the world around them.
And if this was true of the average medieval person, it was true in
spades for consecrated religious like the Templars. As I see it, only by restoring orthodox
medieval Christianity to the heart of the Templar story are we able to leave
the realm of historical fantasy and reenter the realm of historical fiction
proper.
What made you give Sergeants and Turcopoles
such a prominent role? I love it, as I think they are given far too little
attention in most fiction, but I’d like to know more about your reasoning?
In addition to wanting to get the spiritual
dimension of the Templar story right, I also wanted to get the material dimension
correct. At one level, this involved
some pretty obvious things like making sure the uniforms were correct and
accurately depicting their weapons and battle tactics. But it also involved getting their
organizational structure right. And that
structure was stratified. The order was dominated
by a relatively small number of high-status knights (drawn from Europe’s
warrior nobility), and these have become iconic of the order as a whole. But below the knights were two other classes
of Templar – classes that comprised the vast majority of the Order’s
members. These were the sergeants, whose
job was to support the knights, both on the battlefield (as warriors) and off
(as craftsmen and labourers) and the turcopoles – lightly armed auxiliaries recruited from among the non-noble Christian
inhabitants of the Latin East. Early on, I decided that if I really was going
to accurately portray Templar life, I would have to find a way to build these
two under-represented groups into my story. Thus was born the roles of William Turcault,
the commander of the turcopoles, and Brother Enyon, the Welsh sergeant with the
extraordinary archery skills.
When doing research for this novel, were
you able to visit the Holy Land and some of the places described?
Although I like to think that I have
exhaustively researched this novel, I did not visit the region where it is
set. The reason for that is probably
obvious: most of the places where my story unfolds are in Syria and Lebanon –
not particularly safe places at the moment (the great Hospitaller fort Krak des
Chevaliers, for example, has been badly damaged as a result of the conflict in
Syria). I will say, however, that once
upon a time in the not-too-distant past I participated in a month-long tour of Canadian
Army peacekeeping operations in the Middle East and so had the opportunity to
travel to southern Lebanon, Israel, Gaza, and the Sinai. As a result, I do have a pretty good first-hand
feel for the climate, topography, military architecture (I visited Belvoir
Fortress, among others), Jerusalem and its approaches, and so on. Not quite the same as visiting with the
purpose of writing historical fiction in mind, but not a bad second-best
option, I think.
What were your most important sources for
doing research on this novel? You seem particularly well versed in medieval
weapons and armor. Do you recommend any particular sources here?
I read widely in preparation for writing
this novel, but broadly speaking I’d say my research was organized into three
files: the history of the Templars; the politics and geopolitics of the Third
Crusade; and the military technology and techniques of the Latin East (and to a
lesser extent of Saladin’s host). Each
of these files is filled with notes distilled from a great many academic and
popular works, and it would be difficult to say which were most important
(other than to say that anything written by Malcolm Barber is invaluable). When it comes specifically to medieval
weapons and armour, however, I would definitely recommend relevant works from
Osprey Publishing’s Warrior and Men-at-Arms series. Particularly helpful to me were Knight
Templar, 1120-1312; Knight of
Outremer, 1187-1344; and Saladin and
the Saracens. These three books were written by knowledgeable historians and
illustrated by talented artists. They had a huge impact on my portrayal of the
fighting men of the Third Crusade. I cannot recommend them highly enough.
As a reader, I had a sense that you really
enjoyed writing this book, but there must have been challenges too. What was
the most difficult aspect of writing this book?
I absolutely loved writing this novel. Not every minute of every day, of
course. The writing process (or rather, my writing process) is just not like
that. But overall, it was a joyful
experience – the research, the character development, the plotting, the drafting, right through to the revising
and editing (well, maybe not the final line-editing). Very different from
academic writing, which can be very fulfilling and professionally satisfying,
but seldom induces feelings of joy (for either writer or reader).
I suppose the most obvious challenge was
finding the time to actually write. Like
many writers, I have a full-time day job and young kids and between the two of
them every hour of every day seems to get chewed up. On the other hand, the nature of my job as a
university professor means that I have big chunks of time in January and over
the summer when I can write full time, so maybe I shouldn’t complain too much.
Beyond that, the really big challenge for me
was to shift gears from writing like a scholar to writing like a novelist. I’ve been writing like an academic my whole
adult life and it is really hard to resist the temptation to support every
claim with a footnote or to explain every move in excruciating detail. But perhaps even more challenging than
switching off my inner scholar was switching on my inner novelist. Before this novel, the last piece of fiction
I can recall writing was a short story I did in elementary school. So, in addition to all the historical
research I did in preparation for the novel, I also had to research the craft
of writing fiction. Thankfully, most
(though not all) of that research involved re-reading great works of historical
fiction with an eye to reverse engineering them – that is, with an eye to
seeing how the master’s worked their literary magic – so it wasn’t as painful
or difficult as it might have been.
The only scene in the book that I really didn’t
like was when Fitz Alan tortures the Arab slavers to confess to crimes
Christian women have already attested to. I seemed completely gratuitous. I
would expect Templars to take the word of a Christian Abbess as sufficient
proof, and to then just dispatch the offenders. In short: kill them, yes, but
why torture them first? Within 120 years the Templars themselves would be
tortured mercilessly to confess crimes they did not commit. Were you in some why trying to establish that the
torture they would later suffer was justified by crimes like these? If not, why
doesn’t Fitz Alan suffer any pangs of conscience about this completely
unnecessary torture? You seem to have missed an opportunity to build up to his
later decision not to kill the hostages. Here he lets his blood-lust get the
better of him, and so fails in his personal mission; later he successfully
overcomes his blood-lust.
I think your last sentence quite effectively
captures what I was trying to accomplish in this scene. It is an important element his evolution into
something more closely approximating the Templar ideal that Fitz Alan is
periodically tested. Sometimes he fails
one of these tests by being too much the brutal knight; other times, by being
too much the pious monk. In the process,
though, he learns to synthesize the two, to become the ideal Templar
warrior-monk. What I wanted to achieve
in this scene was exactly what you have suggested at the end of your question: to
portray an early failure to overcome his bloodlust in order to demonstrate his
evolution when later on in the story he is better able to control his more
brutal impulses.
In this book, your principal protagonist,
Michael Fitz Alan, has a very poor opinion of Richard of England — but then he
seems to have a poor opinion of just about everyone. You imply this is because
of things he saw Richard do — or things they did together — in the past.
Although I don’t mind you not revealing those things in this book, I’d be
curious if you ever intend to tell us about them or if they will remain
shrouded in secrecy to the very end of the series?
I chose the
Third Crusade because I could see great possibilities in contrasting the
world’s premier worldly knight, England’s Richard the Lionheart, with my Fitz
Alan – a heroic figure who embodies Saint Bernard’s ideal of the “New
Knighthood.” Beyond that, though, there
is also a backstory here. I will reveal
more in the next novel, but suffice it to say there is bad blood between
Richard and Fitz Alan. Richard has used Fitz Alan before and, given the
Templar’s martial prowess, is happy to do so again. Fitz Alan, on the other hand, knows he has
been burned by the king in the past and has vowed never again to get caught up
in his schemes. He only accepts the
king’s commission to recover the Holy Lance in this novel because of the high
stakes and the fact that the Templar Grand Master pretty much ordered him to do
so.
How many books do you envisage in this
series? Do you know what the ending of
the series will be? Or are you still searching for it?
Not quite sure. This past January I was able to sketch out a
pretty detailed outline for the next installment of what is currently conceived
as a trilogy but which may evolve into a longer series. And, once it’s officially summer break, I
will begin drafting. The goal is to
complete the sequel to The Holy Lance
before September and write the final installment in January/summer of
2016. Whatever happens, I promise
Michael Fitz Alan will definitely see the Third Crusade through to its bitter
end.
After that, and providing people actually
read what I write, I’ll continue writing historical fiction (can’t see myself
venturing beyond that genre, but one never knows). I may keep on with the English Templars – I
already have many, many more stories half-developed for this “band of brothers”
ready to go – but I may also branch out a bit.
The Hundred Years War appeals a very great deal, as does the First World
War (I’ve written or taught about both in recent years). We’ll just have to wait and see.
You’ll have one reader right here! I look
forward to reading more about Fitz-Alan and his companions — particularly the
Turcopoles and sergeants, while the Hundred Years War is also a period that
fascinates me. In fact, a biographical novel of Edward of Woodstock (more
commonly known as the Black Prince) is one of the tasks I have set myself
before I depart this life.
For now, thank you for taking the time to
answer these questions!
