J. Fr. Michaud

[1] Le Corbeau et le Renard.

[2] Anna Comnena, History of the Emperor Alexius.

[3] History of the Holy War made by the French and other Christians for the deliverance of Judea and the Holy Sepulchre, composed in Greek and French, by Yves Duchat, a Trojan. This history is translated almost literally from the History of Accolti, entitled De Bello Sacro.

[4] See the letter of St. Gregory of Nyssen, translated into Latin and commented on by Casaubon. St. Augustin, and St. Jerome himself, raised their voices against the abuses of pilgrimages. ’See the first of the Appendix, in which is an abridgment of the pilgrimage of St. Jerome and St. Eusebius of Cremona.)

[5] See, in the Appendix at the end of the volume, a bibliographical, historical, and geographical analysis of “The Itinerary from Bordeaux to Jerusalem,” by M. Walcknaer: this piece throws great light upon ancient geography, and that of the middle ages.

[6] This festival is known under the name of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, and is celebrated on the 14th of September.

[7] The voyage of St. Antony is found in three very ancient manuscripts, which may be consulted in the Imperial Library. It has been printed also in a small volume in 4to. ’See the Appendix.) The relation of the pilgrimage of St. Arculphus, arranged by Adaman in 690, was published by Gretzer of Ingoldstadt, 1619, in 4to., under this title, “De Locis TerrÆ SanctÆ.” It has since been published by Mabillon.

[8] Lucida plerumque recepit intervalla.—William of Tyre.

[9] A capitulary of Charlemagne, of the year 810, is conceived in these terms: “De eleemosyn mittend ad Hyerusalem propter ecclesias Dei restaurandas.” Ob hoc maximÈ ’says Eginard) transmarinorum regum amicitias expetens, ut Christianis sub eorum dominatu degentibus refugerium aliquod ac relevatio proveniret.—Vita Caroli Magni, cap. 27, p. 101, edit. of Bredow, 12mo. Helmstadt, 1806.

[10] Claves sepulcri Domini, claves etiam civitatis et montis cum vexillo detulerunt.—William of Tyre.

[11] A relation of this pretended voyage may be found in the old chronicles. Sanuti and Robert Gaguin have mentioned it, without doubt from traditions existing in their time.

[12] At the commencement of the ninth century, pilgrims flocked thither quite from the extremities of Europe. Dicuil, who wrote in Ireland in the year 825, gives several details:—Fidelis frater ... narravit coram me ... quÒd adorationis caus in urbe Jerlm. ’Hierusalem) clerici et laÏci À Britanni usque ad Nilum velificaverunt.—Dicuil, De Mensur Orbis, edit. Walcknaer, p. 17.

[13] Ibi habetur hospitale, in quo suscipiuntur omnes qui caus devotionis illum adeunt locum, lingu loquentes RomanÂ, cui adjacet ecclesia in honore SanctÆ MaricÆ; nobilissimam habent bibliothecam studio prÆdicti imperatoris Caroli Magni.—This passage is taken from the Voyage of the monk Bernard to the Holy Land. This monk was a Frenchman by birth; he set out for Palestine in 870 with two other monks, one of whom was of the monastery of St. Innocent, in the country of Benevento, and the other a Spanish monk. ’See an account of this pilgrimage in the Appendix.)

[14] Alii caus negotiationis acti, alii caus devotionis et peregrinationis.—J. de Vitry. Quod Latini devotionis grati aut negotiationis advenientes.—Sanuti. Non defuerunt de occidentalibus multi qui loca sancta, licet in hostium potestate redacta, aut devotionis, aut commerciorum, aut utriusque gratiÂ, visitarent aliquoties.—William of Tyre. Diversarum gentium undique prope innumera multitudo, 15 die Septembris anniversario more, in Hierosolymam convenire solet ad commercia mutuis conditionibus et emptionibus peragenda.—Voyage of St. Arculphus.

[15] There is an excellent dissertation, by M. de Guegnes, upon the commerce of the French in the Levant before the Crusades, in the 37th vol. of the “MÉmoires de l’AcadÉmie des Inscriptions.”

[16] Mohamed.

[17] Lebeau, in his “History of the Lower Empire,” relates, after contemporary historians, an incident which plainly shows what was the spirit of the Greeks at that time. “A small town of Silicia being invaded by the Saracens, the curÉ of the place, named Themal, was saying mass at the time. At the noise which he hears he descends briskly from the altar, without taking off his pontificals, arms himself with a hammer which served for a bell in many eastern churches, goes straight to meet the enemy, wounds, knocks down, crushes all that he meets, and puts the rest to flight. Although he had delivered his town from an invasion of the Saracens, the curÉ Themal was censured and suspended by his bishop. He was so ill treated that he sought refuge with the Saracens, and embraced the religion of Mahomet.”

[18] We owe a great portion of these details to an ancient Armenian manuscript, composed in the twelfth century by Matthew of Edessa, several fragments of which have been translated into French by Messrs. Martin and Chahan de Cirbier. These fragments were printed under the title, “Historical Details of the First Expedition of the Christians into Palestine, under the Emperor Zimisces.” In the Appendix of this history is an interesting letter from Zimisces to the king of Armenia.

[19] The second memoir of the AbbÉ GuenÉe upon Palestine may be read here. This estimable scholar speaks of the different dynasties which, at this period, had by turns conquered Jerusalem. We have felt that all these details, though quite in their place in a memoir, would only interrupt the course of our narration, without furnishing the reader with any useful information.

[20] Whilst reading the letter of Zimisces, which gives an account of these events, we feel astonished that he does not show more eagerness to see Jerusalem; but such was the character of the Greeks, that they set more value on the acquisition of relics, which were borne in triumph to Constantinople, than in delivering the holy city and the tomb of Christ. It is thence apparent that this expedition was not at all directed by the same spirit as the crusades.

[21] Et ita pro fratribus animam ponens, cum pietate dormitionum accepit optimam, habens positam gratiam.—William of Tyre. The translator of the Latin historian Du PrÉau thus renders the thought of the original: “Thus, giving up his life for his brothers, exchanged the misery of this world for a happy eternal repose, and received the high reward prepared for all lovers of perfect charity.”

[22] It was pretended that the thousand years of which the Scripture speaks, were about to be accomplished, and that the end of the world was approaching. In an act of donation made by St. GÉraud, Baron d’Aurillac, are these words, “Appropinquante mundi termino.”

[23] These and the following details have been drawn from the accounts of several pilgrimages, in Mabillon, in the “Recueil des Bollandistes,” and the chronicles of the times.

[24] These mountains, called Monts de Joux ’Montes Jovis), now bear the names of the Great and Little St. Bernard. When St. Bernard founded these two hospitals, the inhabitants of the Alps were still idolaters, and the Saracens had penetrated into Le Valais, where they constantly annoyed the march of the pilgrims.

[25] William, duke of Normandy ’917), Richard I. ’943), and Richard II. sent considerable sums into Syria.—See Glaber, lib. i. cap. 4; Duchene, vol. iv.

[26] Non quÆrunt mala, sed legem eorum adimplere cupiunt.—Guillebard. The account of the pilgrimage of St. Guillebard ’Villibaldus), drawn up by a nun of Heindenheim, at his relation, is to be found in the “Acta Sanctorum Ord. Sanct. Ben.” sÆculi 3, part. 2.

[27] The account of the pilgrimage of Frotmonde, drawn up by an anonymous monk of Redon, is inserted in the “Acta Sanctorum Ordin. Sanct. Ben.” sÆculi 4, part. 2.

[28] The aggregated history of the annals and chronicles of Anjou, which describes the pilgrimages of Foulque, relates an incident which appears to deserve to be known, for the full relation of which we refer to the Appendix.

A Latin chronicle, entitled “Gesta. Consulum Andegav. Spicilegium,” tom. x. p. 465, relates the same fact, with more brevity and some circumstantial differences:—

Dixerunt, nullo modo ad sepulcrum optatum pervenire posset nisi super illud et crucem Dominicam mingeret; quod vir prudens licet invitus annuit. QuÆsit igitur arietis vesicÂ, purgat atque mundatÂ, et optimo vino repletÂ, quÆ etiam aptÈ inter ejus femora posita est, et comes discalciatus ad sepulcrum Domini accessit, vinumque super sepulcrum fudit, et sic ad libitum cum sociis omnibus intravit, et fusis multis lacrymis peroravit.

[29] The pilgrimage of Frederick is related by Dom Calmet, vol. i. p. 1072, of the “Civil History of Lorraine.” It is to be found also in the “History of the Bishops of Lorraine,” vol. i. pp. 203—205.

[30] See the Life of St. Helena, in the seventh volume of the month of July, pp. 332, 333, of the Bollandists.

[31] Raoul Glaber bestows great praise on this pilgrim, named Lethal, “who,” says he, “was not one of these who go to Jerusalem to court admiration,—ut solummodo mirabiles habeantur.”

[32] This pilgrimage of Litbert, or LiÉbert, is described in his life, written by Raoul ’Radulfus), his contemporary. See vol. iv. month of June, pp. 595—605, of the Bollandists.

[33] Ingulfus, a Norman monk, who had accompanied the pilgrims who left Normandy, has made the relation of this pilgrimage. The account of Ingulfus has been copied almost literally by Baronius. An account of the same pilgrimage is likewise to be found in the chronicle of Marianus Scotus pp. 429, 430.

[34] It would have been easy for me to have spoken of a great number of other pilgrimages undertaken before the Crusades. An abridgment of the most interesting accounts will be found in the Appendix at the end of this volume.

[35] A picture of the excesses and shameless debaucheries committed by the Turks after the conquest of Asia Minor, may be found in a letter of Alexis, quoted by the AbbÉ Guibert, lib. i., cap. 4: “Dicit eos quemdam abusione sodomitic intervenisse episcopum; matres correptÆ in conspectu filiarum multipliciter repetitis diversorum coitibus vexabantur. FiliÆ existentiÆ terminum prÆcinere saltando cogebantur,—mox eadem passio ad filias,” &c.

[36] This expedition, which was a true crusade, appears to have been forgotten by all the historians of the crusades.

[37] Al-Mahadia, the chief of the cities conquered by the Christians, according to Oriental geographers, was founded in the year 303 of the Hegira, by Obeidallah, or Abdallah. It was still considerable in the fifteenth century. Shaw, who saw it in 1730, calls it El-Medea. It is situated thirty marine leagues south of Tunis. Sibila, which is the other city conquered in this expedition, and which Shaw takes for the ancient Turris Annibalis, is two leagues more to the south, on the same coast of the Mediterranean.

[38] Anna Comnena calls Peter the Hermit CucupiÈttore, which appears to be taken from the Picard word kiokio, little, and from the word Petrus, Peter, little Peter. If we are to believe Oderic-Vital, the hermit had still another name, and was called Peter of Achiris. He is styled in this manner in the chronicle of the counts of Anjou: “Heremita quidam Petrus Achiriensis.” William of Tyre informs us that he was a hermit in name and in fact: “Heremita nomine et effectu.” Adrian Barland, in his book De Gestis Ducum BrabantiÆ, expresses himself thus: “Petrus Heremita, Ambianensis, vir nobilis, prim Ætete rei militari deditus, tametsi litteris optimÈ imbutus, sed corpore deformis ac brevis staturÆ,” &c. The life of Peter the Hermit has been written by AndrÉ Thevet, in his “History of the most Illustrious and Learned Men of their Ages,” and by Father Outtreman, a Jesuit. Several families have pretended to be descended from Peter the Hermit. The most rational and best supported claim is that of the family of Souliers, which still exists in the Limousin.

[39] This letter of Alexius, quoted in extract by the AbbÉ Guibert, and the whole of it by Robert the Monk. M. Heeren, in his learned Latin commentary on the Greek historians, doubts its authenticity. The principal reason he gives for his opinion is, that this letter differs too strongly from the known character of the Greek emperors. This reason does not appear to me sufficient; we know very well that the Greek emperors affected great haughtiness in their correspondence, but we know also that they spared no prayers when they were in any danger, or wanted assistance: nothing suits better with vanity than servility. Some critics cannot believe that Alexius should have spoken in his letters of the beautiful women of Greece; the thing may, however, well be believed when we recollect that the Turks, who were invading the empire of Byzantium, sought with great eagerness to obtain Greek women. Montesquieu remarks it, when speaking of the decline of the empire. It seems then very natural that Alexius should speak of the beautiful women of Byzantium, when addressing the Franks, whom the Greeks considered barbarians, and governed by the same tastes as the Turks.

[40] See William Aubert’s “History of the Conquest of Jerusalem.”

[41] We have at command several historians who report the speech of Urban; they are agreed as to the principal points, but differ in the details. The monk Robert, who was present at the council, says: HÆc et id genus plurima ubi Papa Urbanus urbano sermone peroravit. Baldric or Boudri expresses himself thus: His vel hujuscemodi aliis, &c. Everything leads us to believe that the pope pronounced his discourse in the language of the country. That which renders this opinion more probable, is that Urban was a Frenchman, and that otherwise it was of consequence to make himself well understood by the barons and the knights, who were not acquainted with Latin. If he had not pronounced his discourse in the vulgar tongue, he would not have produced that extraordinary enthusiasm which contemporary history says so much of.

[42] Dieu le veut was pronounced in the language of the times Dieu li volt, or Diex le volt.

[43] The cross which the faithful wore in this crusade was of cloth, and sometimes even of red-coloured silk. Afterwards they wore crosses of different colours. The cross, a little in relief, was sewed upon the right shoulder of the coat or mantle, or else fastened on the front of the helmet, after having been blessed by the pope or some bishop. The prayers and ceremonies used on this occasion are still to be found in the Romish ritual. On returning from the Holy Land, they removed this mark from the shoulder and placed it on the back, or else wore it at the neck. ’See Le PÈre Montfaucon, Ducange, Mailly, and Le PÈre d’Outremant.)

[44] Robert le Frisin, second son of the count of Flanders, not being allowed a share of the wealth of his house, said to his father, “Give me men and vessels, and I will go and conquer a state among the Saracens of Spain.”

[45] The archbishop of Dol could not refrain from showing his surprise by words very remarkable for the time: Excessit tamen medicina modum, quia plus quÀm debuit in quibusdÀm eundi voluntas surrepsit.—Baldric, Archiep. lib. i.

[46] The AbbÉ Guibert quotes the example of a monk who made a large incision on his forehead in the form of a cross, and preserved it with prepared juices. He took care to report that an angel had made this incision, which procured for him, during both the voyage and the war, all the help he could desire. He became archbishop of CÆsarea. Foulque, of Chartres, relates that a vessel with Crusaders having been wrecked on the coast of Brundusium, all the shipwrecked bodies appeared with a kind of cross imprinted on their flesh, and on the very part on which it had been worn on their clothes when they were alive.

[47] Erat eo tempore antequÀm gentium fieret tanta profectio, maxima ad invicem hostilitatibus totius Francorum regni facta turbatio; crebra ubique latrocinia, viarum obsessio, passim audiebantur, immo fiebant incendia infinita.—Mox ergo et mir et incredibili, ob insperabilitatem, animorum immutatione commoti, signum pontificis prÆceptione indictum, cruces videlicet, ab episcopis et presbyteris sibi precantur imponi, et sicuti rapidissimi venti impetus solet non magn pluviÆ und restringi, ita illicÒ contigit ad invicem simultates universarum et bella sopiri, per inditam sibi aspirationem, haud dubium quin Christi.—Guibert, Abb. lib. i. ch. 7.

[48] Tristitia remanentibus, gaudium autem euntibus erat.—Fulc. Carnot.

[49] Videres mirum quiddam, ipsos infantulos, dum obviam habent quÆlibet castella vel urbes, si hÆc esset Jerusalem, ad quam tenderent, rogitare.—Guibert, Abb.

[50] William of Tyre tells us that Walter had exchanged his fortune for the name by which he is known. Latin historians designate him sine habere, sine pecuniÂ; the old French chronicles call him, senz avehor, senz-aveir; the English writers term him the penniless. Walter was a Burgundian gentleman. Some historians say that an uncle of Walter the Penniless was first named lieutenant to Peter, and that the latter had not the command till after the death of his uncle, who died just as the pilgrims entered the territories of the Bulgarians.

[51] St. Stephen had been king of Hungary before Coloman, who reigned at the time of the first crusade.

[52] Among the small number of knights in the army of Peter, were Renaud de BreÏs, Gauthier de Breteuil, Fealcher d’OrlÉans, and Godfrey Burel d’Etampes.

[53] William of Tyre and other Latin historians call this city Malle Villa in the first place because they were ignorant of its proper name, and in the second because it was fatal to the Crusaders. All the French historians who have spoken of the crusades have translated Malle Villa by Malleville.—See Marsigli, Danubius Pannonico, Mysicus.

[54] Consult William of Tyre, or still better, Albert d’Aix, who, of all the historians of the crusades, enlarges most upon these first expeditions.

[55] Amongst this confused multitude were Thomas de FeÜ, Cleremhault de Vaudeuil, Guillaume Charpentier, Count Herman, &c.

[56] Fuit et aliud scelus detestabile in hÂc congregatione pedestris populi stulti, et vesanÆ levitatis, anserem quemdam divino spiritu asserebant afflatum, et capellam non minus eodem repletam, et has sibi duces secundÆ viÆ fecerant in Jerusalem, quos et nimium venerebantur et bestiali more his intendebant ex tot animi intentione.—Alb. Aq. lib. i. cap. 31.

[57] The Mersbourg of the Crusaders is now called Ovar; in German Ungarisch-Altenburgh; in Sclavonic Stare-Hrady. It is situated in the marshes that the Leytha forms on its embouchure into the Danube. Its position is such that it is impossible to go from Austria into Hungary on that side without passing by it. ’See Busching, Geog.) The name of Mersbourg, which Albert d’Aix gives to this place, is no longer in use: but that of Altenburgh, which has succeeded it, and which signifies old city, indicates sufficiently clearly a more ancient name; and the name of Moisson, which other historians of the crusades give to the same place, is still found in the Latin and Hungarian name of the county of Wieselbourg, upon which this city depends; Mesony wanmgye, Mesoniensis Comitatus.

[58] There were in the army of Peter the Hermit, says Anna Comnena, ten thousand Normans, who committed horrible excesses in the neighbourhood of Nicea. They chopped children in pieces, stuck others upon spits, and exercised all sorts of cruelties against aged persons. ’See the Alexiad, book x.) We have no need to repeat our caution against the exaggeration of Anna Comnena, who is always pleased with an opportunity of accusing the Crusaders.

[59] This Rinaldo, of whom nothing else is known, except that he was an Italian, is the only personage so called who has any event of importance in the first crusade attached to his name. Tasso, who has taken most of his characters from history, has borrowed the person and character of Rinaldo, in the “Jerusalem Delivered,” entirely from his imagination.

[60] Instead of acknowledging his fault, says Anna Comnena, he laid it upon those who had disobeyed his orders and insisted upon doing as they pleased, calling them robbers and brigands, whom God had deemed unworthy of seeing and adoring the tomb of his Son.—Alexiad, lib. x. ch. 8.

[61] Godfrey of Bouillon was born at Baysy, a village of Wallon Brabant, now in the department of La Dyle, two leagues south-east of Nevilles, and not far from Fleurus. Aubert le Mire, and the Baron Leroy, in the geography of Brabant, report that in their time the remains of the castle in which Godfrey was brought up were to be seen.

[62] An anonymous historian of the crusades, when speaking of Godfrey, expresses himself thus: Tantum lenis, ut magis in se monachum quÀm militem figuraret. Guibert further says: Cujus mira humilitas et monachis jam imitanda modestia.—See Bongars, p. 548.

[63] Abbot Guibert speaks thus of William, viscount de Melun: Cum Jerosolymitanum esset agressurus, iter direptis contiguorum sibi peuperum substantiolis, profanum viaticum prÆparavit.—Lib. iv. c. 7.

[64] Le PÈre Maimbourg.

[65] Nothing is more common than to attribute the combinations of a profound policy to remote ages. If certain persons are to be believed, the men of the eleventh century were sages, and we are barbarians. I feel it just to report the opinion of Montesquieu on this subject: “To transport all the ideas of the age in which we live into remote periods is the most abundant source of error. To those people who wish to render all ancient ages modern, I will repeat what the priests of Egypt said to Solon, ‘Oh Athenians, you are but children.’”—Esprit des Lois, liv. xxx. c. 18.

[66] Eo tempore cum inter regni primates super hÂc expeditione res fieret, et colloquium ab eis cum Hugone Magno, sub Philippi regis prÆsentiÂ, Parisiis haberetur, mense Februario, tertio idus ejusdem, luna, eclipsim patiens, ante noctis medium, sanguineo paulatim coepit colore velari, donec in cruentissimum tota horribiliter est conversa ruborem; et ubi aurora crepusculo naturÆ rediit, circa ipsum lunarem circulum insolitus splendor emicuit. Quidam autem Æstivi diei vespertin irruente horÂ, tanta aquilonis plagÆ efflagratio apparuit, ut plurimi È domibus suis sese proriperent, quÆrentes quinam hostes provincias suas adeÒ grave ambustione vastarent.—Guibert, Abb. lib. i. ch. 17.

[67] Raoul de Caen has written, half in prose and half in verse, the “Gestes de TancrÈde.” ’See “Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum” of D. Martenne, vol. i., or the “Recueil de Muratori,” tom. iii.)

[68] Consult the history of Raymond d’Agiles, chaplain of the count de Thoulouse, for the description of this march of the Crusaders of the south across a country till that time unknown.

[69] An Armenian historian says of the preparations for this crusade, “The gates of the Latins were opened, and the inhabitants of the West saw issuing from their countries armies and soldiers numerous as locusts or the sands of the sea.”

[70] Nothing can be more diffuse than historians upon the march of the different princes of the crusade; each body of the Christian army has its particular historian, which is very injurious to perspicuity: it is exceedingly difficult to follow so many different relations.

[71] The Crusaders who followed Raymond are designated by historians ProvenÇalex. This comes from the ancient denomination of Provincia Romana, or Provencia Narbonensis, which comprised Languedoc, DauphinÉ, and Provence.

[72] The contemporary historians who have spoken of the crusades, and who have made this enumeration, had doubtless in their minds the numbering which is found in Scripture, which makes the number of the soldiers of Israel amount to six hundred and thirty-three thousand five hundred and fifty. I believe I ought to add some passages from the historians: Si omnes qui de domibus suis egressi votum jam iter ceperant, simul illuc adessent, procul dubio sexagies centum millia bellatorum adessent.—Foulcher de Chartres. Opinionem hominum vincebat numerus, quamvis Æstimarentur sexagies centum millia itinerantium.—Malmesbury, book iv.

[73] Such might be the character of the hundred thousand horse; but the five hundred thousand foot by no means merited such a description.—Trans.

[74] Quis tot principes, tot duces, tot equites, tot pedites, sine rege, sine imperatore dimicante hactenÙs audivit, neque siquidem in isto exercitu alter alteri prÆfuit, alius aliis imperavit.—Baldric, ch. 13.

The reader may keep his attention fixed upon this, as the source of most of their disasters; and in all the history of the Crusaders there is no miracle greater than that an army so constituted could achieve anything.

[75] The Armenian history of Matthew of Edessa is among the manuscripts of the Imperial Library, “Ancien Fonds,” No. 99. We quote it from a translation which M. de St. Martin has been so kind as to communicate to us, and likewise the translation which M. Cerbeid, Armenian professor at the Imperial Library, has made for the purpose of elucidating some manuscripts.

[76] The Pisans, the Genoese, and the greater part of the nations of Italy, after the Greeks, showed themselves most skilful in the construction of machines for war.

[77] These iron hands were nothing more than the machine called the raven by the Romans, which they employed in grappling vessels: they likewise made use of it in sieges.

[78] See William of Tyre, lib. iii.

[79] This valley, formed on the north by the mountain in-Eengni, and watered by a river which runs from west to east, and which is perhaps the Bathis of the ancients, having the villages of Taochanlu and Gourmen on the east, and that of Yen-Euglu on the west;^(a) this last is but three marine leagues, or nine miles, from DorylÆum. Albert d’Aix calls this valley Dogorganhi, which appears to be the Oriental name, from which the Latin historians have made that of Gorgoni, which paints in some sort the horrors of this fatal day. Ozellis is apparently the name which the Greeks gave it. We owe these particulars to the learned inquiries of Walckenaer.

^(a) See Arrowsmith’s Map of Constantinople and its environs.

[80] HÂc crudelitate atrocissimÆ mortis stupefactÆ tenerÆ puellÆ et nobilissimÆ, vestibus ornari festinabant, se offerentes Turcis, ut saltem amore honestarum formarum accensi et placati, discant captivarum misereri.—Alb. Aq. lib. iii. cap. 4.

[81] I have made earnest researches to discover by what means the Christian army was provisioned, and I can learn nothing beyond the fact that the Crusaders carried hand-mills with them.

[82] Tunc autem vere vel rideretis, vel forsitan pietate lachrymaremini, cum multis nostrum jumentis egentes, verveces, capras, sues, canes, de rebus suis orerabant. Equites etiam supra boves cum armis suis interdum scandebant.—Ful. Carn. apud Bougais, p. 589.

[83] The Isauria trachea of the ancients.

[84] QuamplurimÆ namque foetÆ mulieres exsiccatis faucibus, arefactis visceribus ... medi plate in omnium aspectu foetus suos enixÆ relinquebant; aliÆ miserÆ juxta foetus suos in vid communi volutabantur, omnem pudorem et secreta sua oblitÆ.—Alb. Aquem. lib. iii. cap. 2.

[85] This remarkable circumstance is taken from the Life of Godfrey, by Jean de Launel, Écuyer seigneur de Chantreau, and Du Chaubert.

[86] Consult, for this expedition, Pelloutier, Histoire des Celtes.

[87] Now Konieh, in Caramania.

[88] Ancient history presents us with something exceedingly like that which is related here. During the civil wars that divided the Roman empire under the triumvirate, Cassius and Dolabella disputed the possession of the town of Tarsus. Some, says Appian, had crowned Cassius, who had arrived first in the city; others had crowned Dolabella, who came after him. Each of the two parties had given a character of public authority to their proceedings; and in conferring honours, first to one and then to the other, they each contributed to the misfortunes of a city so versatile in its likings.—Appian, Hist. of the Civil Wars, b. iv c. 8.

[89] This is the Messis of Aboulfeda. See an article upon this city in Mannert, tom. vi. p. 2, p. 101, which is very learned and very well done.

[90] When Baldwin quitted the Christian army, it had arrived at Marrash.

[91] None of the Latin historians have given us the name of the governor of Edessa. The name of Theodore is found in the History of Matthew of Edessa, from which we have taken, according to the translation of M. Corbied, several curious details, which would be sought for in vain elsewhere.

[92] Intra lineam interulam, guam nos vocamus comisiam, nudum intrare eum, faciens, sibi adstrinxit; et deinde omnia osculo libata firmavit, idem et mulier post modum fecit.—Guib. Abb. lib. iii. ad finem.

[93] In the first book of the Jerusalem Delivered, when the Eternal turns his eyes on the Crusaders, he sees in Edessa the ambitious Baldwin, who only aspires to human grandeurs, with which he is solely occupied.

[94] At the present day named Aassy ’the Rebel), or el Macloub, the Reversed, because it flows from south to north, an opposite direction to that of the other rivers of the same country.

[95] Ancient Antioch is not to be recognised in the straggling village that the Turks call AntakiÉ; it is even sufficiently difficult to ascertain its ancient extent. We may consult the description of it given by Pococke and Drummond, and compare it with that which is said by Raymond d’Agiles. Albert d’Aix, William of Tyre, and the ancient historians.

[96] The name of this Seljoucide prince has been disfigured by the greater part of the Latin historians. Tudebode and the monk Robert call him Cassianus; Foucher de Chartres, Gratianus; William of Tyre, Acxianus; Albert d’Aix, Darsianus; M. de Guignes, and the greater part of the Orientalists, call him, after Abulfeda, Bayhistan; but in other Oriental historians he is named Akby Syran ’brother of the black), which is more conformable to the corrupt name of Accien, which he bears in our “History of the Crusades.”

[97] Plurimum quoque interest ad disciplinam militiÆ, insuescere milites nostros, non solum part victori frui, sed si etiam res sit lentior, pati tÆdium, et quamvis serÆ spei exitum exspectare, nec sicut Æstivas aves, instante hyeme, tecta ac recessum circumspicere.—Accolti, de Bello contra Turcas, lib. ii.

[98] Alearum ludo pariter recreari et occupari cum matron quÂdam, quÆ magnÆ erat ingenuitatis et formositatis. Matronam vero vivam, et intactam armis, rapientes traxerunt in urbem, per totam noctem immoderatÆ libidinis suÆ incesto concubitu eam vexantes, nihilque humanitatis in eam exhibentes.—Alb. Ag. lib. iii. p. 46.

[99] We have taken the details of the siege of Antioch from the following authors: William of Tyre, Albert d’Aix, Baudry, Robert, Tudebode, Raymond d’Agiles, Guibert, Raoul de Caen, Foucher de Chartres, Oderic-Vital, Paul Emile, Bernard Thesaurius, Accolti, Duchat, Mailly, De Guignes, Albufaradge, &c. &c.

[100] The historian of Burgundy, Urbain Plancher, without alleging any reason, and without quoting any authority, treats this event as a fable, although it is attested by William of Tyre, Albert d’Aix, and several other nearly contemporary historians. Mallet says nothing of it in his “History of Denmark;” nevertheless Langbeck, in his collection of the Danish historians, says he has seen a basso-relievo, in bronze, in which the Sweno, of whom this history speaks, is represented with the attributes of a Crusader. This basso-relievo was executed by the order of Christian V.; at the bottom of the portrait of Sweno are several Latin verses which describe his glorious and tragical death. The “Scriptores Rerum Danicarum” may be consulted for the dissertation in which Langbeck discusses the passages of the ancient historians, and clearly demonstrates the truth of their accounts. This dissertation is entitled, “Infelix Suenonis Danici adversus Turcas.”

[101] According to William of Tyre, the bread which sufficed for the daily food of one man cost two sous instead of a denier; an ox two marks of silver, instead of five sous; a kid or a lamb five or six sous, instead of three or four deniers; the expense of a horse for a single night arose as high as eight sous, whilst it had only been two or three deniers at the commencement of the siege.

[102] Sed non hoc metu prÆliorum, ut speramus fecerat; sed tantum famie injuriam pati nunquam didicerat.—Rob. Mon. lib. iv.

[103] This great faster, says Maimbourg, who by a voluntary austerity which had acquired him such a great reputation of sanctity, made profession to eat neither bread nor meat, could not endure a necessary fast.

[104] Et quis esse poterat aditus voluptatis, ubi erat indesinens suspicio mortis!—Guib. lib. vi. cap. 15.

[105] This circumstance is taken from an Armenian manuscript of Matthew of Edessa. It is surprising that the Latin historians have made no mention of it; but they never speak of any means of providing provisions employed by the Crusaders.

[106] A chronicle printed at Paris in 1517, which bears for title, “Grand Voyage d’Outre-Mer,” places the following speech in the mouth of Godfrey: “Brave seigneurs, my brothers and companions in Jesus Christ; if the news we hear be true, that for our sins these cruel dogs have thus killed these valiant men, and of great consideration, I only perceive two things, that we shall die with them as good and loyal Christians, assured of receiving our guerdon from our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for whose service we came here and have quitted our native lands and our kindred; or if it should please him, that he allow us to take vengeance and obtain victory over these vile dogs who have thus degraded and weakened Christianity in its valiant men.”

[107] Sed est quod stupeam, nec satis valeam stupere: cum homo tam pretiosus laudis emptor mox prÆsentis ora armigeri silentio concluserit adjurato.—Gest. Tanc. cap. 52; Muratori, vol. iii. The historian whom we have just quoted endeavours to explain the fact which he relates. He asks himself whether it was from modesty or a religious spirit, or whether Tancred might fear not to be believed, either upon his own word or that of his squire, that the Christian hero desired silence to be preserved. In all these cases the fact appears to him to be a prodigy. He adds that the squire was faithful to his oath, and that it was not till a long time afterwards that the feats of Tancred on that day became known. We have but to compare this with what old Horace says of his heroes.

[108] Sic lubricus ensis super crus dextrum integer exigit, sicque caput integrum cum dextr parte corporis immersit gurgite, partemque quÆ equo prÆsidebat remisit civitati.—Rob. Mon. Cujus ense trajectus Turcus duo factus est Turci; ut inferior alter in urbem equitaret, alter arcitenens in flumine nataret.—Rad. Cad.

[109] Feruntque in ill die martyrisati ex nostris militibus seu peditibus plusquam mille, qui in coelum lÆtantes ascendebant, atque candidati ferentes stolam recepti martyrii, glorificantes et magnificantes Dominum Deum nostrum trinum et unum, in quo feliciter triumphabant; et dicebant concordabili voce: Quare non defendis sanguinem nostrum, qui hodie pro tuo nomine effusus est?—Gesta Francorum, lib. xviii cap. 18, p. 13.

[110] These particulars are related by Abbot Guibert, lib. iv. In this historian will be found most particulars regarding morals.

[111] Et si Sarracenum noviter interfectum invenerunt, illius carnes, ac si essent pecudis, avidissimÈ devorabant.—Gesta Francorum.

[112] Matthew of Edessa does not name the Mussulman who gave up Antioch to the Christians. Abulfaradge calls him Ruzebach, and says that he was a Persian by origin. Anna Comnena pretends that he was an Armenian. Most historians call him Pyrrus, or Phirous. William of Tyre gives him the name of Emir Feir, and Sanuti calls him Hermuferus. It may most probably be said that he had abjured Christianity. If authors are not agreed as to his name, it may be believed that some have called him by his proper name, and that others have designated him by a name which expressed his profession. William of Tyre says that he was born of a family called in Armenian Beni Zerra, that is, the family of the makers of cuirasses.

[113] Apparuit enim ei Dominus Jesus Christus per visum, et ait; Vade et redde civitatem Christianis.—Gesta Francorum, lib. v. cap. 12.

[114] A comet appeared on the very night of the taking of Antioch, June 3, 1098.—See Robert. Monach. lib. v. ad finem; Chronicon FossÆ NovÆ, in Muratori, tom. vii.; Chronica Mailross. ab anno 733 ad 1270, per diversos auctores in Rerum Anglicarum Script. tom. i.; Annales Waverlienses, ibid. tom. ii.; Pingie, ComÉtographie, tom. i. p. 382.

[115] The anonymous author of a chronicle entitled Passages d’Outre-Mer, expresses himself thus, p. 46: “But there was not one among them who did not refuse to mount except Bohemond, whom Æmiscrius received with great joy, and showed him his brother lying in his bed, whom he had just killed because he would not join the enterprise....cunctis vero, qui cum Bohemondo erant, diffidentibus ad ascensum, solus Bohemondus foederis fide fultus, per funem ascendit.—Bernardus Thesaurius, cap. 36; Muratori, tom. iii.

[116] Sicut aquila provocans pullos suos ad volandum, et super eos volitans.—Rad. Cair. tom. iii. p. 66.

[117] All these details of the siege and the taking of Antioch, which appear to belong to the epopea, are taken literally from the ancient historians of the crusades. See Albert d’Aix, lib. iii. and iv.; William of Tyre, lib. v.; Robert the Monk, lib. v. and vi.; and the authors of the Collection of Bongars. All these historians agree in the principal circumstances. The monk Robert, in the recital that he makes of it, expresses his surprise in these words: “Non est lingua carnis quÆ satis valeat enarrare, quid Francorum manus valuit persundare.” Foulcher de Chartres, who, according to common opinion, was the first to mount the ladder of ropes, never speaks of himself in his narration, which fact is luite consistent with the spirit of the Christian knights.

[118] Matthew of Edessa estimates this army at a hundred thousand horse and three hundred thousand foot. Abulfaradge speaks of “mille mille” horse. The Latin historians do not exaggerate so much, but do not at all agree in their accounts.

[119] Alii multi, quorum nomina non tenemus, quia delecta de libro vitÆ, prÆsenti operi non sunt inserenda.—Will. of Tyre, lib. iv.

[120] These speeches and the complaints of the Crusaders are almost all translated from contemporary historians. We feel it our duty to report the text of them here.

O Deus verus, trinus et unus, quam ob rem hÆc fieri permisisti? cur populum sequentem te in manibus inimicorum incidere permisisti? et viam tui itineris, tuique sancti sepulchri liberantem tarn citÒ mori concessisti? ProfectÒ, si hoc verum est, quod nos ab istis nequissimis audivimus, nobis referentibus, nos et alii Christiani derelinquemus te, nec te amplius remorabimur, et unus ex nobis non audebit ulteriÙs nomen tuum invocare. Et fuit is sermo moestissimus valor in tot militiÂ; ita quÒd nullus nostrorum audebat, neque archiepiscopus, neque episcopus, neque abbas, neque presbyter, neque clericus, neque quisque laicus Christi invocare nomen per plures dies. Nemo poterat consolari Guidonem.—De Hierosolymitano itinere, DuchÉne’s Collection, tom. iv. p. 799.

The following is the speech which Robert the Monk puts into the mouth of Guy, the brother of Bohemond:—

O Deus omnipotens, ubi est virtus tua? Si omnipotens es, cur hÆc fieri consensisti? Nonne erant milites tui et peregrini? Quis unquam rex aut imperator aut potens dominus familiam suam ita permisit occidi, si ullo modo potuit adjuvare? Quis erit unquam miles tuus aut peregrinus? &c. &c.—Robert. Monach. lib. v.

[121] We have thought it our duty to report all these miraculous visions as they are found in contemporary historians, because they produced a great effect upon the mind of the Christians, and that in becoming the origin and the cause of the greatest events, they are in themselves important events for history.

[122] The discovery of this lance and the prodigies that it operated are related by all the historians of the Crusades. The Arabian historian Aboul-MabaÇen agrees, in the principal circumstances, with the Latin historians. The most credulous of the latter, and he who gives the greatest number of details, is Raymond d’Agiles. Albert d’Aix, William of Tyre, Guibert, and Robert, raise not the least doubt about the authenticity of the lance. Foucher de Chartres, less credulous, says, when relating the discovery, Audi fraudem et non fraudem. He afterward adds, whilst speaking of the lance, that it had been concealed in the place from which it was taken: Invenit lanceam, falliciter occultatam forsitan. The historian Paulus Emilius, who relates the same fact accompanies it with highly philosophical reflections. Yves Duchat says, on commencing the relation “Then there happened a marvellous affair, of which some have left a written account, which I would not affirm to be entirely true, nor would I oppugn it as false.” Anna Comnena says nothing about the lance, but speaks of the nails which had been used to nail Christ to the cross. Albufaradge commits the same error. In general the accounts of both the Greeks and the Arabians of this war must be read with much precaution; they furnish us with very few positive ideas.

[123] This speech is reported by most of the Latin historians of the crusades. We have preserved the spirit of it, with the most scrupulous exactness.

[124] Anna Comnena speaks of a pretended single combat between the count of Flanders and the general of the Saracens.

[125] Letanias supplices, ab ecclesi in ecclesiam, explicant; confessione peceatorum sincer se mundant, et episcopali vel sacerdotali consequenter absolutione promeritÂ, corporis ac sanguinis Domini sacramento, plen fide communicant, &c.—Guibert, lib. vi.

MissÆ per ecclesias celebratÆ sunt; omnesque sanct dominici corporis communione communicati sunt.—Robert. Mon. lib. vii.

[126] Vidi ego hÆc quÆ loquor, et dominicam lanceam ibi ferebam.—Raym. d’Agiles, p. 155, apud Beng.

[127] Pierre Angelli, author of a Latin poem on the first crusade, which has for title, Syriados Libri XII., describes this battle at great length, and reports one part of the miraculous circumstances by which it was accompanied; but his recital is too diffuse to excite much interest. The Syriade begins with the first voyage of Peter the Hermit to Jerusalem, and is nothing but a copy in verse of the histories of William of Tyre, Albert d’Aix, and others. After having described the march and the early labours of the Crusaders, the Latin poet arrives, towards the end of the last canto, at the siege of Jerusalem, to which he only consecrates a hundred verses.

[128] It is surprising that Raoul de Caen, who describes this battle, and in epic verse too, has related no marvellous circumstance. Raymond d’Agiles makes no mention of the heavenly legion, but he says: Multiplicavit insuper adeo Dominus exercitum nostrum, ut qui ante pugnam pauciores eramus quÀm hostes, in bello plures eis fuimus. Oderic Vital speaks thus of the legion which appeared to descend from heaven: Ecce, Deo gratias, ab ipsis montanis visus est exire exercitus innumerabilis, albis equis insidentes, et in manibus Candida vexilla prÆferentes. Hoc multi viderunt Christianorum, et sicut putant, gentilium, et hÆsitantes, mirabantur quidnam esset. Tandem utrique cognoverunt signum de coelo factum, et duces illius agminis, sanctos martyres Georgium, Demetrium, et Theodorum sua signa ferentes prÆcedere cognoverunt. Sarracenis multus timor inhÆsit, et Christianis spes melior crevit.—Od. Vital. lib. ix. Robert the Monk and Baldric relate the same circumstance and the same details.

[129] This tent was able to contain more than two thousand persons. Bohemond sent it into Italy, where it was preserved for a length of time.

[130] Gemaleddin, who of all the Oriental historians gives the greatest number of details upon the taking and the battle of Antioch, reports that a violent quarrel had broken out between the Turks and the Arabs; he even adds that the Arabs had retired before the battle, and that in the courseof it the Turks turned their arms against their allies.

[131] The leaders of the Crusades declared that the siege and the battle of Antioch had scarcely cost them ten thousand men.

[132] Corvini generis legatus, postea non rediit.—Bald. lib. iv.

[133] Albert d’Aix says a hundred thousand.

[134] Tasso makes Adhemar die at the siege of Jerusalem, and makes him die by the hands of a woman. Some historians attribute the canticle “Salve Regina” to Bishop Adhemar. The bishops of Puy, his successors, bear in their coat of arms the sword on one side and the pastoral staff on the other. It is added that the canons of the same city wore every year, at Easter, a cloak in the form of a cuirass.

[135] This anecdote, which is here quoted without giving it any more importance than it merits, is related in the Magnum Chronicon Belgicum, which is found in the collection of the historians of Germany of Pistorius. The author says the lion followed Geoffrey like a hare:—Eum sequitur, sicut lepus; et quamdiÙ fuit in terrÂ, nunquam recedens, multa ei commoda contulit tam in venationibus quam in bello; qui carnes venaticas abundanter dabat. Leo verÒ quÆcunque domino suo adversari videbat, prosternabat, quem, ut dicunt, in navi positum cÙm domum rediret, derelinquere noluit, sed nolentibus eum, ut crudele animal, in navem recipere nautis, secutus est dominum suum, natando per mare, usque quo labore deficit.

The same fact is related by le PÈre Maimbourg, who adds to his recital this singular reflection. “Strange instruction of nature, which casts shame upon men by giving them, as she has done more than once, lions for masters.”

[136] Albert d’Aix is the only historian who relates this and the following facts.

[137] Some learned writers cannot trace messages by pigeons further back than the reign of Saladin. It is true that it was in the reigns of Nouradin and Saladin that regular posts, served by pigeons, were organized in Egypt; but this means of communication was very ancient in the East. The recital of Albert d’Aix cannot be doubted. The historian speaks of the surprise that this sort of messengers produced among the Crusaders; and as the fact appeared remarkable to him, he has not neglected the smallest details of it:—Legati sine mor columbas duas, aves gratas et domitas, secum allatas eduxerunt È sinu suo, ac chartÂ, ducis responsis promissisque fidelibus inscriptÂ, caudis illarum filo innodatÂ, È manibus suis has ad ferenda lÆta nuncia emiserunt.... Jam cum chartis sibi commissis aves advolaverunt, in solium et mensam ducis Hasart fideliter reversÆ.... Princeps autem ex more solito aves domesticas piÈ suscipiens, chartas intitulatas À caudis earum solvit, secreta ducis Godfredi perlegit. We shall see in the fourth book of this history another example of this means of communication employed by the Saracens.

[138] Globes of fire, or ignited globes, as naturalists call them, might have produced this appearance.

[139] Lapides, ignem, et plena apibus alvearia, calcem quoque vivam, quant poterant jaculabantur instantiÂ, ut eos À muro propellerent.—Will. Tyr. lib. vii. cap. 9.

[140] Audivi namque, qui dicerent cibi se coactos inopi ad humanÆ carnis edulium transiisse, adultos gentilium cacabo immersisse, pueros infixisse verubus, et vorasse adustos; vorando Æmulati sunt feras, torrendo homines, sed caninos. Hunc ipsum finem membris propriis minabantur, cÙm aliena deficerent; nisi aut captÆ urbis, aut cereris advenÆ intercessio esuriem lenisset.—Rad. Cadom. cap. 27. We cannot forbear adding to this quotation the words of Albert d’Aix, who is astonished to see Christians eat the bodies of Mussulmans, but still more so at seeing them devour dogs. Mirabile dictu et auribus horrendum, quod nefas est dicere, nefas facere. Nam Christiani non solÙm Turcos sed Sarracenos occisos, verum etiam canes arreptos et igni coctos comedere non abhorruerunt prÆ inopiÂ, quam audistis.—Ab. Aq. lib. v. cap. 29.

[141] This circumstance is related by Mailly, but he does not say upon what authority.

[142] Archas is mentioned by Strabo, Ptolemy, Josephus, and the Itinerary of Antonine, which latter places this city at sixteen miles from Tripoli. Pococke ’tom. ii. p. 299) and Maundrell ’vol. i. p. 41) speak of a river which still bears this name. Abulfeda speaks of it under the name of Aarkat. The Itinerary from Bordeaux to Jerusalem also mentions Archas.

[143] Laodicea still exists under the name of Lakikieh. It has been long famous for its trade in tobacco.

[144] Gibel. This word signifies mountain, in Arabic. Gibel is the Gabala of Strabo and Pliny; the Gavala of the table of Peutinger. It still subsists under its ancient name of Djebil, and the remains of an amphitheatre are still to be seen there. It is, I believe, the Giblim of the Bible, whence was embarked the wood of Lebanon sent to Solomon.

[145] Tortosa is the Antaradus of Ptolemy and the Itinerary of Bordeaux.

[146] Raymond d’Agiles, before relating this and several other similar facts, expresses himself thus:—Quod si quicquam ego prÆter credita et visa studeo referre, vel odio alicujus apposui, apponat mihi Deus omnes inferni plagas, et deleat me de libro vitÆ. The same fact is reported in Raoul de Caen.

[147] Raoul de Caen, who was not a partisan of the lance, and who cries out, whilst speaking of this pretended discovery, “O fatuitas rustica! O rusticitas credula!” does not at all spare the ProvenÇals, and has transmitted to us the reproaches made to them in the Christian army.

[148] Videns quid actum est, populus, calliditate verbos seductum se fatetur, errasse poenitet.—Rad. Cad. cap. 109.

[149] Accounts of this event may be read in William of Tyre, Robert d’Aix, and above all in Raymond d’Agiles, who does not omit the least circumstance.

[150] The picture of the march and the impatience of the Christians is to be found in Tasso, in the same colours and almost the same circumstances as in the historians.

[151] We think it right here to give the account of Albert d’Aix:—Calamellos mellitas per camporum planiciem abundanter repertos, quas vocant ZUCRA, suxit populus, illarum salubri succo lÆtatus et vix ad saturitatem prÆ dulcedine expleri hoc gustato valebant. Hoc enim genus herbÆ summo labore agricolarum, per singulos excolitur annos. Deinde, tempore messis maturum mortariolis indigenÆ contundunt, succum collatum in vasis suis reponentes quousquÈ coagulatum indurescat sub specie nivis vel salis albi. Quem rasum cum pane miscentes aut cum aqu terentes, pro pulmento sumunt, et supra favum mellis gustantibus dulce ac salubre videtur.... His ergo calamellis melliti saporis populus in obsidione AlbariÆ, MarrÆ et Archas, multum horrend fame vexatus, est refocillatus.—Alb. Aq. lib. v. cap. 3.

[152] Sanuti proposed to plant the sugar-cane in Sicily and Apulia. This idea was not carried into execution before the end of the fourteenth century. The sugar-cane did not pass, as has been said, from Sicily to America; it was transported to Madeira from the coast of Spain, whither it had been brought by the Saracens. The sugar-cane is still found in some parts of the kingdom of Grenada.

[153] I at first thought that these serpents could be only the dipsada, or fire-serpent. I communicated this opinion to M. Walckenaer, who with reason had seen nothing in the reptiles of which Albert d’Aix speaks, but the common gecko of Egypt ’Lacerta gecko of LinnÆus), which Belon and Hasselquits have found in great numbers in Syria, Judea, and Egypt. This species is very venomous; it resembles other species of the same genus and of the genus stellion, which appear to be harmless, and are found in France, Italy, Sardinia, and on all the coasts of the Mediterranean Sea, where it is called tarente, tarenta, tarentola, &c. The opinion of M. Walckenaer appears the more reasonable, from the two species of serpents and vipers to which naturalists have given the name dipsada, the one, the Coluber dipsas of LinnÆus, which is the dipsada, properly speaking, being only found in America; the other, the black viper, Coluber prÆster of LinnÆus, appears peculiar to Europe, and is more common in the north than in the south. We may venture to quote the passage of Albert d’Aix in Latin, which speaks of the remedy advised by the inhabitants of the country against the bite of the tarenta:—Similiter et aliam edocti sunt medicinam, ut vir percussus sine mor coiret cum muliere, cum viro mulier, et sic ab omni tumore veneni liberaretur uterque.—Alb. Aq. lib. iv. cap. 40. The same historian speaks of another remedy, which consisted in pressing strongly the place of the bite, to prevent the communication of the venom with the other parts of the system.

[154] It is Raymond d’Agiles alone who speaks of this strange deliberation of the leaders; if this historian had not been present, we could give no credit to it.—See Raym. d’Agiles, in the Collection of Bongars, p. 173. Albert d’Aix contents himself with saying that the leaders, after having traversed the territory of PtolemaÏs, deliberated whether they should not go to Damascus.

[155] Tasso has spoken of the enthusiasm of the Crusaders at the sight of Jerusalem. The historians of the crusades, Albert d’Aix, the author of the Gesta Francorum, Robert the Monk, Baldric or Baudry, and William of Tyre, present us with the same picture that Tasso does. We will content ourselves with quoting here a passage from the “History of Jerusalem and Hebron,” which proves that the sight of that city likewise awakens the enthusiasm of Mussulmans: “The coup d’oeil of Jerusalem,” says this history, “is very fine, particularly when seen from the Mount of Olives. When the pilgrim arrives there, and sees the buildings nearer, his heart is filled with an inexpressible joy, and he easily forgets all the fatigues of his voyage.” Hafiz, the son of Hadjar, improvised on his arrival at Jerusalem four verses, of which this is the translation: “When we approached the holy city, the Lord showed us Jerusalem; we had suffered much during our voyage, but we believed ourselves then entering into heaven.” We have heard several modern travellers, of different manners, religions, and opinions, say that they all felt a lively emotion at seeing Jerusalem for the first time. See the beautiful description that M. de Chateaubriand has given of it in his Itinerary.

[156] The name of Solyma was formed from that of Hierosolyma.

[157] The Mussulmans call Jerusalem El Cods ’the holy), Beit-ul-MocaddÈs ’the holy house), and sometimes El Cherif ’the noble). A description of Jerusalem may be seen in the extracts from the Arabian history of Jerusalem and Hebron, translated into French and inserted in the German Journal, entitled “The Mines of the East.”

[158] Tasso here makes Tancred contend with Clorinda. The personages of Clorinda and Herminia are the invention of the poet.

[159] This fact, which Tasso has mixed with some fictions, is related by Raoul de Caen, Gesta Tancredi, cap. 112. The same historian adds that Tancred met upon the Mount of Olives a hermit who was born in Normandy, and who had been the enemy of Robert Guiscard and his family. This hermit welcomed the Italian hero with respect, and showed him the places around Jerusalem the most venerated by pilgrims.

[160] See, for this arrival of the Christians, William of Tyre, lib. vii. cap. 25.

[161] In comparing the description of the siege of Jerusalem by the Crusaders with that of the siege which the Romans carried on under Vespasian, we find that the quarters of Godfrey were in the same place as those of Titus, when he directed his first attacks against the city. See the History of Josephus.

[162] An admirable picture is to be found in Tasso of this drought, which is also described by Robert the Monk, Baldric, Raymond d’Agiles, Albert d’Aix, William of Tyre, and by Gilles or Gilou, in his Latin poem upon the first crusade.

[163] Maimbourg does not seem to credit the existence of this forest, and says that it is an invention of Tasso’s. He might have read in William of Tyre this sentence, which is not at all equivocal:—Casu affuit quidam fidelis indigena natione Syrus, qui in valles quasdam secretiores, sex aut septem ab urbe distantes milliaribus, quosdam de principibus direxit, ubi arbores, etsi non ad conceptum opus aptas penitus, tamen ad aliquem modum proceras invenerunt plures. Raoul de Caen is much more positive and explicit than William of Tyre; this is the way in which he expresses himself:—Lucus erat in montibus et montes ad Hyerusalem remoti ei; quÆ modo Neapolis, olim Sebasta, ante Sychar dictus est, propriores, adhuc ignota nostratibus via, nunc celebris et ferme peregrenantium unica.—Rad. Cad. cap. 121.

[164] A sufficiently remarkable circumstance is, that the shrub which grows most freely in the territory of Jerusalem, and which the Crusaders must have used, was the rhamnus, a thorny shrub, of which, if we give faith to the opinion of Pierre Belon, was formed the crown of thorns of Christ. Christopher Hasselquoit, it is true, is not of this opinion, and pretends that the crown of thorns was of the shrub nakba.

[165] Quemdam egregium et magnificum virum, dominum videlicet Gastonem de Bearn, operi prefecerunt.—Will. Tyren. lib. viii. cap. 10. Raymond d’Agiles and Abbot Guibert speak also of Gaston de BÉarn.

[166] The chevalier le Felart, in his treaty on The Attack of Places, at the end of his commentary upon Polybius, speaks of the tower of Godfrey, which he improperly calls the tower of Frederick the First of Jerusalem. He gives a detailed and very exact description of this tower, which is likewise well described by contemporary historians.

[167] Cruces fixerunt, super quas aut spuebant, aut in oculis omnium mingere non abhorrebant.—Ab. Aq. lib. vi.

[168] See, for this procession, Baldric, bishop of Dol. lib. iv.; Accolte, lib. iv.; Albert d’Aix, lib. vi.; William of Tyre, lib. vii. It cannot be doubted that the leaders caused this procession to be made round Jerusalem, in order that the sight of so many places should arouse the enthusiasm of the Crusaders. We must regret that Tasso, who speaks of this procession, has scarcely said anything of the places the Christians visited; these details would have furnished poetical beauties, without in anything departing from the exactitude of history.

[169] Raymond d’Agiles says that Godfrey’s tower was transplanted by night a mile from the spot where it had been constructed; which leads us to believe that the principal attack was directed near the gate of Cedar, towards the entrance of the Valley of Jehoshaphat. For the rest, we must regret that M. de Chateaubriand, who has written a very interesting dissertation upon the military positions of Tasso, has not thrown light upon the obscurities of the historians which present themselves in this portion of their accounts of the siege.

[170] This circumstance is thus related by Abbot Guibert:—Est etiam mihi non inferiori relatione compertum, Robertum NormandiÆ comitem Robertumque alterum Flandriarum principem, junctis pariter convenisse moeroribus, et se cum fletibus uberrimis conclamasse miserrimos, quos suÆ adoratione crucis, et visione, immo veneratione sepulchri, tantoperÈ Jesus Dominus judicaret indignos.—Lib. vii. cap. 6.

[171] As Tasso often employs magic, we have sought with care for all that relates to this species of the marvellous in the contemporary historians. That which we have just quoted from William of Tyre, is the only instance we have been able to find. Some historians likewise have said that the mother of Kerbogh was a sorceress, and that she had foretold to her son the defeat of Antioch. It is in vain to seek for similar incidents in the history of the first crusade. We ought to add that magic was much less in vogue in the twelfth century than in that in which Tasso lived. The Crusaders were no doubt very superstitious, but their superstitions were not attached to little things; they were struck by the phenomena they saw in the heavens; they believed in the appearance of saints, and in revelations made by God himself, but not in magicians. Ideas of magic came to us a long time afterwards, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The chroniclers of that period, who speak of anterior facts, fill their recitals with whimsical and ridiculous fables, such as are not to be found in more ancient authors. We must not judge of the middle ages by the chronicles of Robert Gaguin, or by those of Archbishop Turpin, the work of a monk of the twelfth century; still less by the romances of the same period.

[172] We report this circumstance here, in order to give an idea of the fire which was launched against the Christians. Albert d’Aix expresses himself thus:—Qualiter ignis, aqu inextinguibilis solo aceti liquore restingui valeat.—Alb. Aq. lib. vi. cap. 18.

[173] This is repeated by William of Tyre and some other writers. Raymond d’Agiles very naively says: Quis autem miles ille fuerit cognoscere non potuimus.—Raym. d’Ag. p. 171, Bongars.

[174] Matthew of Edessa says that Godfrey used in this assault the sword of Vespasian, which thus assisted, for the third time, in the destruction of Jerusalem. No Latin historian mentions it.

[175] Oderic Vital attributes to Reimbault Creton of Cambresis the glory of having first entered Jerusalem. Other historians only name him among those who followed most closely the steps of the brothers Lethalde and Engelbert of Tournai. This is the text of Orderic Vital:—Reimboldus Creton qui primus in expugnatione Jerusalem ingressus est, &c. The descendants of Reimbolt Creton bore indifferently up to the sixteenth century the names of Creton and Estourmel. This family preserved as its device these words, “Vaillant sur la crÊte;” and La Morliere, the historian of Picardy under Louis XIII., speaks of them in these terms: “It adds not a little to the lustre of this family, that it is acknowledged that they owe the origin of their arms to the first crusade which the Christians made for the recovery of the Holy Land, bestowed by the hand of Godfrey of Bouillon, king of Jerusalem, who, to do honour to the valour of the sieur d’Estourmel, whom he had seen bear himself so valiantly at the taking of that city, made him a present of a crenated cross of silver, in which was enchased a piece of the true cross.” This precious reliquary was passed down from generation to generation to the eldest sons of this house. In the reign of Louis XIII. the marquis d’Hautefort having espoused the only daughter of Antoine d’Estourmel, cordon bleu, and first equerry to madame la duchesse d’OrlÉans, pretended that this piece of the true cross made a part of the inheritance. This discussion was submitted to the arbitration of the president of Mesmes, who decided that the cross was to revert to the branch of the house of Estourmel, which possesses it to this day.

[176] The details of this assault are repeated by all contemporary historians, several describe it at length. Foulcher de Chartres, who without doubt distinguished himself there, is the one who says the least. Anna Comnena says that the Christians took Jerusalem in fifteen days, but gives no details.

[177] The Oriental authors give no details of the siege of Jerusalem. The manuscript history of Jerusalem and Hebron, which is in the Imperial Library, and of which M. Jourdain has been kind enough to translate several fragments for me, contains nothing but vague notices. The author contents himself with saying that the siege lasted more than forty days, and that the Christians killed a great number of Mussulmans. We may here make a general remark: when the Mussulmans experience reverses, the Arabian authors are very sparing of details, and satisfy themselves with telling things in a vague manner, adding, “So God has willed it, may God curse the Christians.” Aboul-Feda gives very few more details than the rest. He says that the massacre of the Mussulmans lasted during seven consecutive days, and that seventy thousand persons were killed in the mosque of Omar, which is evidently an exaggeration.

[178] Raoul de Caen, cap. 132 et 133.

[179] We shall content ourselves with repeating here the words of Raymond d’Agiles, Foulcher de Chartres, and Robert the Monk:—In eodem templo decem millia decollati sunt; pedites nostri usque ad bases cruore peremptorum tingebantur; nec foeminis nec parvulis pepercerunt.—Ful. Caen. ap. Bong. p. 398. Tantum enim ibi humani sanguinis effusum est, ut cÆsorum corpora, und sanguinis impellente, volverentur per pavimentum, et brachia sive truncatÆ manus super cruorem fluitabant.—Rob. Mon. lib. 9. In templo et porticu Solomonis equitabatur in sanguine usque ad genua et usque ad frÆnos equorum.—Raym. d’Ag. Bong. p. 179. These words of Raymond d’Agiles are evidently an hyperbole, and prove that the Latin historians exaggerated things they ought to have extenuated or concealed.... In a letter written to the pope, the bishops, and the faithful, by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, Godfrey of Bouillon, and Raymond de St. Gilles, is this remarkable passage: “If you desire to know,” say they, “what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses.”—Si scire desideratis quid de hostibus ibi repertis factum fuerit, scitote quia in porticu Salomonis, et in templo nostri equitabant in sanguine foedo Sarracenorum usque ad genua equorum.—See Novus Thesaurus Anecdotorum, tom. i. p. 282.

[180] Albert d’Aix names these three attendants Baldric, Adelborde, and Stabulon.

[181] Some historians say that the Christians did not go to the Holy Sepulchre until the day after the conquest. We here adopt the opinion of Albert d’Aix, which appears to us the most probable.

[182] Le P. Maimbourg, Histoire des Croisades.

[183] Albert d’Aix gives the sentence which emanated from the council of the leaders. This sentence is supported by the motives we have pointed out.

[184] We have already quoted some of these historians; others relate nearly the same details, and with the same sang froid. We will quote no other but Raymond d’Agiles, who expresses himself thus:—Alii namque illorum, QUOD LEVIUS ERAT, obtruncabantur capitibus; alii autem sagittati, de turribus SALTARE cogebantur; alii vero diutissimÈ torti et ignious adusti flammeriebantur ’sic). Videbantur per vicos et plateas civitatis AGGERES capitum et manuum atque pedum.—Raym. de Ag. p. 178.

[185] Tankredus miles gloriosus super hÂc sibi illat injuriÂ, vehementi ir succensus est.—Alb. Aq. lib. vi. cap. 29.

[186] Comes Raymundus, avariti corruptus, Sarracenos milites quos in turrim David elapsos obsederat, accept ingenti pecuniÂ, illÆsos abire permisit.—Alb. Aq. lib. vi. cap. 28

[187] Robert the Monk expresses himself thus: “Flebant et extrahebant.”

[188] Properly speaking, this was a kind of lustre which the Arabians call tradour. The Mussulmans have them of so large a size that it is necessary to enlarge the doors of the mosques by a breach, in order to admit them.

[189] See, for this deliberation and this speech, the History of Accolti lib. iv., and that of Yves Duchat.

[190] The English historian Brompton expresses himself thus whilst relating the misfortunes that Robert afterwards experienced:—Sic reddidit Dominus vicem pro vice duci Roberto, quia cum gloriosum in actibus Jerosolimitantis eum Dominus redderet, regnum Jerosolimitantum sibi oblatum renuit, magis eligens quieti et desidiÆ in Normania deservire quam regi regum in sanct civitate militare. Damnavit igitur eum Deus desidi perenni et carcere sempiterno.—See the HistoriÆ AnglicÆ Scriptores, tom. i. p. 1002.

[191] See Abbot Guibert, lib. vii. cap. 12.

[192] Albert d’Aix, who relates these two visions at length, terminates thus:—Horum somniorum prÆsignatione ex Dei ordinatione, populi Christiani benevolentiÂ, Godefrido in solio regni Jerusalem exaltato.

[193] We may see in Raoul de Caen the debates which arose on this subject, and particularly the accusation directed against Tancred by Arnold de RohÉs, in the name of the Latin clergy.

[194] We here give the translation of some passages of an elegy of the poet Modhaffer Abyverdy upon the taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, inserted by Aboul-Feda in his Annales, tom. iii. p. 319. This translation is by M. Jourdain.

“Our blood is mingled with our tears, and no part of our being remains to us that can be the object of the blows of our enemies.

“O misfortune! if tears take the place of true arms, when the fires of war break forth!

“How can the eye close its lids, when catastrophes such as ours would awaken even those who slept in the most profound repose!

“Your brethren have no other resting-places in Syria but the backs of their camels and the entrails of vultures!

“The Franks treat them like vile slaves, whilst you allow yourselves to be drawn carelessly along by the skirt of the robe of effeminacy, as people would do in perfect security!

“What blood has not flowed! how many women have been forced by modesty to conceal their beauty with their bracelets!

“Will the chiefs of the Arabs, the heroes of the Persians, submit to such degradation?

“Ah! at least, if they do not defend themselves, from attachment to their religion, let them be animated on account of their own honour, and by the love of all that is dear to them!”

[195] Eos tanquam segetem in transverso gladii secabant.—Bald. lib. iv.

[196] Subito sagitt transfigebant, et quasi aves volatili telo percussas, ab ipsis arborum ramis moribundos humi procumbere cogebant.—Alb. Aq. lib. v. cap. 49.

[197] Anna Comnena, who speaks of the battle of Ascalon, says that the Franks were at first conquerors, and that they were afterwards attacked and beaten near Ramla. She mentions Baldwin, who was not then in Palestine, and did not come thither till after the death of Godfrey. It is easy to see that she confounds, as often happens with her, two different periods, that of the battle of Ascalon and that of the battle of Ramla, which was fought three years after, in the reign of Baldwin I.

[198] It is commonly believed that this battle of Ascalon served Tasso as a model for the great battle which terminates the Jerusalem Delivered. It is easy to see that the poet had also in view the battle of Antioch, which was fought at the gates of the city, of which the Christians were the masters. Raymond could not be present, because he held the citadel of Antioch in check, still in the power of the enemy. These circumstances, and several others, are found equally in the battle of the Jerusalem Delivered and in the historians who have described the battle of Antioch.

[199] There is in the Arabian history of Jerusalem and Hebron, a quatrain addressed to the count of St. Gilles, upon the defeat of Afdhal-Ben-Bedr-al-DjÉmaly, general of the army of Egypt, before Ascalon:—

Tu as fait triompher par ton ÉpÉe la religion du Messie,
Dieu nous preserve d’un homme tel que Saint Gilles!
Jamais les hommes n’avaient entendu rien de pareil À ce qu’il a fait;
Il a mis dans la plus honteuse fuite Afdhul.

We quote this quatrain less for any idea that it contains, than to show that Raymond enjoyed great fame among the Mussulmans.

[200] This emissary is called Bohemond by Raymond d’Agiles. It is believed that it was Phirous who gave up Antioch to the Christians, that had taken the name of Bohemond.

[201] For this quarrel between Godfrey and Raymond, see Albert d’Aix, lib. vi. cap. 41, 42, and 43.

[202] In the genealogical history of several houses of Brittany, is the following rather curious passage: “Rion de Loheac acquired in this voyage beautiful and rich spoils from the enemies of Christianity, the Saracens; and above all things he was curious to seek for and collect heaps of the sacred and precious relics which were in those regions, in the number of which was a part and portion of the true cross upon which our Saviour Jesus Christ suffered death for the salvation of the human race, and of the stone of the sepulchre in which the said Saviour was buried. These relics he intended to bring into his own country; but being prevented by a disease of which he died in the said country of Syria, he sent them to his brother Gauthier de Loheac, by his squire called Simon de Ludron, who had accompanied him in this voyage.” We might quote many other similar facts which prove that the Christians of the West set the greatest value upon relics brought from the East.

[203] This circumstance is related in the Chronicle of Hainault ’Gisleberti Chronica HannoniÆ:)—Tacendum non est, says this chronicle, quod uxor ejus Yda comitissa domini sui occasum ut audivit, sed incerta si occisus fuerit, vel captus teneretur, Deum et virum suum diligens, partes illas eum labore magno et gravibus expensis adire non dubitavit: unde ipsa priÙs de viro suo incerta, incertior rediit.—P. 37.

[204] See the Life of Peter the Hermit, by le P. d’Oultremont. Peter the Hermit was returning from the Holy Land in 1102, with a nobleman of the country of LiÉge, named the count de Montaign, when he was assailed by a violent tempest, during which he made a vow to build an abbey. It was in performance of this vow that he founded the abbey of Neufmontier at Huy, in Le Condrez, on the right bank of the Meuse, in honour of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem. Alexander, bishop of LiÉge, dedicated it in 1130. Peter died there at an advanced age, and desired, from humility, to be buried outside the church. It was not till a hundred and thirty years after his death that the abbot and the chapter caused his relics to be removed to a coffin covered with marble before the altar of the twelve apostles, in the year 1242, with a sufficiently long epitaph, which M. Morard, of the Academy of Sciences, read on passing through Huy in 1761, which is reported in the 3rd vol. of the MSS. of the Library of Lyon, by M. Delandine, p. 481.

[205] Robert, count of Flanders, was killed by a fall from his horse.

[206] William IX. is the first troubadour known. He was a valorous and courteous knight, but a great deceiver of ladies. He bade adieu in a song to the Limousin, to Poitou, to chivalry, which he had loved so much, and to mundane vanities, which he describes as coloured habits and beautiful hose. On his return he sang the fatigues, the dangers, and the misfortunes of this expedition, in a poem which is lost. His usual gaiety pervaded it, according to Oderic Vital, in spite of the sadness of the subject.—See the History of the Troubadours, by Millet, tom. i.

[207] Guichenon, in his History of the House of Savoy, expresses himself thus: “William Paradin relates that this prince ’Humbert, second count of Savoy) went to the Holy Land in the crusade which was determined on at the council of Clermont, under Godfrey of Bouillon,” which the greater part of the historians have confirmed after him ’such as Pingon, Vanderb, Dogliani, Chiesa, Balderan, Buttel, and Henning). Papyrus Masson has rejected this, because neither the manuscript chronicle, nor the authors of the crusades, who name many lords of less consequence, have mentioned him. Botero has said nothing of him. “Nevertheless we cannot doubt this voyage; for about that time this prince gave the monks of the Bourget in Savoy a property called Gutin, for the health of his soul, of that of count AmÉ, his father, and of his ancestors. This donation, dated at d’Yenne in Savoy ’and not Jena in Thuringia, as is said in the Art of Verifying Dates), imports that the count bestowed this liberality to obtain from God a fortunate establishment ’consulat) in his voyage beyond sea. Now this word consulat then signified a principality, government, or sovereignty. Oderic Vital gives to Roger, count of Sicily, the title of consul of Sicily.” Guichenon adds here many other examples of the same kind. That which created doubts of the voyage of Humbert is the silence of the historians of the first crusade, as well as all the acts of this prince that have been preserved, and which prove that he was in Europe in the year 1100; but all these doubts vanish, when we know that he went in the second expedition.

[208] The details of this last expedition are found scattered in the works of several historians. They who afford the most information are Albert d’Aix, Oderic Vital, Foulcher de Chartres, Chronicon Uspergensis, Alberici Chronicon, &c. &c.

[209] For these various positions, see the Map and the explanatory Memoir.

[210] The body of the duke of Burgundy was brought back to France, and buried at Citeaux. Urban Planchier says in his history, that they observed the anniversary of the death of this prince on the Friday before Passion Sunday. After the death of her husband, Mahaul, the wife of Eude, and mother of Florine, retired to the abbey of Fontevrault.

[211] It has been said that Arpin, on setting out for the crusade, sold the county of Berri to Philip, king of France, for the sum of 60,000 crowns. This is the way in which the fact is related in the History of Berri: “King Philip redeemed his city of Bourges, which Henry his father had engaged for 60,000 crowns, from Arpin. Thus Bourges returned to its natural prince.”—History of Berri, by Chaumeau, p. 97.

[212] Ancient historians contain many other details concerning this expedition that we have not thought it necessary to notice. This expedition presents nothing but scenes of carnage and reverses, without glory or results. We shall be obliged to return to it hereafter.

[213] Alexander, say the Greek historians, had thirty thousand infantry and five thousand horse. A single historian, Anaximenes, makes the Macedonian army amount to forty-eight thousand men.

[214] The Turks, thirty years before the taking of Jerusalem by the Christians, had scarcely met with any resistance to their invasions of some of the richest provinces of Asia, because the Mussulman religion, which they had recently embraced, was that of the countries against which they directed their arms. If the Tartars at different epochs have invaded several countries of the globe, and have maintained themselves in them, it was because on issuing from their deserts they had almost no religion, and were thus disposed to adopt any advantageous faith they might meet with in their passage. It will be objected to me that the Arabians, in the first ages of the Hegira, invaded a great part of Asia and Africa, where they found other religions than their own long established; but it may be answered that these religions were sinking to decay. When the Mussulmans presented themselves in Europe, where the Christian religion was better established than in the East, this religion offered an insurmountable barrier to their progress.

[215] Daimbert, Godfrey of Bouillon, and Raymond de St. Gilles, when writing to the pope and the faithful of the West, say that the victory of DorylÆum had filled the pilgrims with pride, and that God, to punish them, opposed Antioch to them, which delayed them nine months.

[216] Tasso himself was of this opinion, as may be seen in an interesting letter addressed to us by M. Dureau Delamalle. The admiration which I entertain for the Poet of the Crusades, makes me exceedingly anxious that M. Baour Lormian should finish the undertaking he has begun, so worthy of his rare talent, a translation in verse of the Jerusalem Delivered.

[217] M. GuinguenÉ, in his Histoire LittÉraire d’Italie, has deigned to adopt, with some modification, several of these observations, which is the most worthy reward of my labours and researches.

[218] In our general conclusions, we shall often have to quote the works of M. Heeren and M. Choiseuil d’Aillecourt upon the influence of the crusades.

[219] The verse of this writer is much better than his prose, which is very incorrect, and sometimes unintelligible.

[220] We have obtained these details from a manuscript history of BÉarn, which has been kindly communicated to us by one of our most distinguished magistrates, who consecrates his leisure to the cultivation of letters. This history, remarkable for a wise erudition and sound criticism, is likely to throw a great light upon the remote times of which we speak.

[221] All the ordinances of Gaston de BÉarn are to be found in the decrees of the synod or council held in the diocese of Elne, in Roussillon, the 16th of May, 1027. These dispositions had for object the Truce of God. The council decreed that no unarmed clerk or monk should be attacked, nor any man who was going to church or coming from it, or was walking with women. At the council of Bourges in 1031, and in several others, these regulations were renewed; labourers, their cattle and mills, were placed under the safeguard of religion.—See the Collection of the Councils by le P. Labbe. It is not useless to remark that these regulations were at first received in Aquitaine. The council of Clermont caused them to be adopted throughout the greater part of Europe.

[222] I only here speak of the clergy with regard to its knowledge. The opinion I express is not only applicable to France, but to all the states of Europe.

[223] What a comment upon man’s assumption is the history of France since this was written!—Trans.

[224] An excellent dissertation on the Holy Land, by the AbbÉ GuÉnÉe, in Les MÉmoires de l’AcadÉmie des Inscriptions, may be consulted with advantage.

[225] We have been guided principally in the history of Jerusalem, by the chronicle of Foulcher de Chartres, that of Albert d’Aix, the anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum expugnantium Hierusalem, and the history of William of Tyre. There is nothing in French upon the kingdom of Jerusalem. Being ignorant of the German language, we regret our inability to avail ourselves of the second volume of the History of the Crusades, by M. Walken, to the extent we could have wished. We may say the same of the history by M. Hacken, and several other German works upon the establishment of the Christians in the East.

Among the Arabian historians from whom the learned D. Bertheraud has made extracts, we have consulted—1. The Mussulman Annals of Aboulfeda. 2. The History of Tabari, or rather the continuation of that historian, who is called the Livy of the Arabians. 3. The History of Jerusalem, by Moudgireddin. 4. The History of Aleppo, by Kemaleddin. 5. The History of the Attabecs, by Ben Latir. These historians and some others have furnished us with some points of comparison, and some document frequently incomplete, generally useless. The Oriental historians only become an abundant source of information at the epoch of the reigns of Noureddin and Saladin.

[226] This account is found entire in Albert d’Aix, book vii. chaps. 8, 9, &c.

[227] The Assizes of Jerusalem, transported into the kingdom of Cyprus, were collected in the thirteenth century, by John d’Ibelin, count of Jaffa and Ascalon. They were printed by Baumancir, and commented upon by Thomas de la ThaumasiÈre. It is to be lamented that the French publicists, and Montesquieu himself, have studied so superficially this monument of modern legislation, which is able to throw great light upon the history, laws, and manners of the middle ages.

[228] Dolens aliquantulÙm de fratris morte et plus gaudens de hÆreditate.—Fulch. Carn. lib. x. cap. 22.

[229] The Christians were in so much danger in this expedition, that Foulcher de Chartres exclaims in his history, “I would rather have been at Chartres or Orleans,” “Ego quidem vel Carnoti vel Aurelianis mallem esse quam ibi.”—Lib. x. cap. 22.

[230] “Ubi ego ipse Fulcherius adaquavi meos.”—In Bongars, p. 405. The same historian speaks in the same chapter of the Dead Sea, and of the phenomena he had remarked. Foulcher de Chartres seldom neglects an opportunity of speaking of himself; these words, “Ego Fulcherius,” very frequently appear in his narration.

[231] William of Tyre, in his account of the taking of CÆsarea, speaks of a precious vase which fell to the share of the Genoese. “At this time,” says he, “was found a vase in the shape of a dish, of a bright green colour, which the Genoese, believing it to be an emerald, were desirous of having, at the valuation of a large sum of money, to make an offering of to their church as an excellent ornament, and which they are accustomed to exhibit to the great lords who pass through their city.” This vase found at CÆsarea, and preserved at Genoa till the end of the last century, is now in the Cabinet of Antiques in the Imperial Library at Paris. [Qy. whether restored to the Genoese in 1815?—Trans.]

[232] This singular fact is related by William of Tyre with all its details.—Chap. x.

[233] We here follow the version of Foulcher de Chartres, who makes use of the word vivit instead of vincit, which appears to have prevailed afterwards. The device Christus regnat, vincit, imperat, forms the legend of the reverse of all the gold coins struck in France from the time of John to that of Louis XVI., under the different names of Francs À pied et À cheval, of Agnelets, or Ecus d’or, or Louis. In the most ancient, the Francs, the verb vincit is the first: X. P. C. vincit; X. P. C. regnat; X. P. C. imperat; Christ conquers, Christ reigns, and Christ governs; which proves that this device or war-cry may be traced back to the time of the crusades.

[234] See Gibbon for the interesting memoir of this noble family, whose name so frequently occurs in our own history, and is, I believe, still extant, in the Courtenays, earls of Devon.—Trans.

[235] “Anna Comnena adds, that to complete the deceit, he was shut up with a dead cock; and wonders how the barbarian could endure the confinement and putrefaction.”—Notes to Gibbon.—Trans.

[236] This may at first appear a singular pledge; but when we remember the great consideration in which beards were and are held in the East, we are reconciled to the fact. Beckford makes Vathek inflict loss of beard upon the sages who cannot decipher the magic characters upon the sabres, as the greatest possible punishment; and few were better acquainted with Eastern manners than the master of Font-hill Abbey.—Trans.

[237] These details are taken from the Arabian historian NovaÏry.

[238] Sir William d’Avenant elegantly calls books “the monuments of deceased minds.”—Trans.

[239] Aboulfeda in his account justifies the Genoese for the massacre of the Mussulmans; the city being taken by assault, they did not exceed the usual rights of war. Another Arabian historian, Ebn-Abi-Tai, says that the Christians exhibited at the taking of Tripoli the same destructive fury as the Arabs had who burnt the library of Alexandria. The same historian speaks of the incredible number of three millions of volumes. We have preferred the version of NovaÏry, who reduces the number of volumes to a hundred thousand. This author states that the library of Tripoli was founded by the cadi Aboutaleb Hasen, who had himself composed several works.

[240] The governor of Mossoul is called by the Latins Maledoctus, Mandult, and by the Arabians Mauduts. Togdequin was prince of Damascus.

[241] We have avoided mentioning too frequently the sultans and emirs of Syria, whose names seem the more barbarous as they are correctly written.

[242] Tabari and Aboul-Feda.

[243] See, for an account of this disaster, Kemaleddin and Tabari.

[244] The account of this battle, and the preparations for it, are taken from Robert of the Mount ’Robertus de Monte, Appendice ad Sigebertum). This author speaks of the fast the troops were ordered to undergo, as had been done at Nineveh: “Universo pecori pabula negabantur.” He also speaks of the milk of the holy Virgin, carried in a vase: “Episcopus Bethleemides ferens in pyxide lac sanctÆ MariÆ virginis.”

[245] This act is reported in its entirety by William of Tyre.

[246] Albert d’Aix finishes his history in the first year of the reign of Baldwin II., and Foulcher de Chartres terminates his after the siege of Tyre. We may consult for this reign many passages of Baronius, Robert of the Mount, Sanuti, and particularly William of Tyre and Bernardus Thesaurius. We are in possession of the second part of a History of Jerusalem, the anonymous author of which speaks of the reigns of the two first Baldwins.

It will be said perhaps that I have borrowed from these different historians too many details; but I could not resist the desire I had to impart to my readers things that have never hitherto been related in the French language. It is surprising that, notwithstanding Jerusalem was almost always governed and defended by the Franks, no writer of our nation has spoken of it.

[247] The emir Balac was a prince of the family of Ortoc, who possessed many places on the Euphrates, reigned in Aleppo and Mesopotamia, and could set on foot innumerable armies of Turcomans.

[248] Edma, the daughter of Baldwin, still a child, was violated by the Mussulmans, to whom her father had given her as an hostage.

[249] See, as well for the incursion of the Turks as of those of the Christians, Kemaleddin, Tabari, and Aboul-Feda.

[250] Our learned Orientalists have furnished us with some very useful and profound works on the IsmaËlians; at their head is M. de Sacy, who has made us acquainted with the doctrine and many of the usages of this singular people. M. Jourdain has on this subject supplied us with a very interesting memoir.

[251] See, for the origin and the reign of Zengui, the History of the Atabecks, by Ben Latir.

[252] The history of the knights of St. John has been written in Italian by Bosio, and translated into French by Boyssat. The history since written by the AbbÉ de Vertot has caused all that preceded it to be forgotten. The Templars, after their tragical end, had no historian of their exploits in the Holy Land; but they have in our days found a very eloquent one in M. Raynouard.

[253] See Saint Bernard, Exhortatio ad Milites Templi.

[254] We will relate in full the decrees of the council of Naplouse, which form a precious monument of the history of these distant times; but the greater part of the crimes and offences against which the fathers of this council raised their voices, do not permit us to give these statutes in French or English, or present the most curious details of them.

[255] The castle of Puyset, near Orleans, was besieged three times by all the forces of Louis le Gros; this castle was at length taken and demolished. Veilly, and all the French historians, having neglected to read William of Tyre, make the seigneur de Puyset die in the kingdom of Naples.

[256] When quoting William of Tyre, I avail myself always of the old translation, whose naÏf and simple style associates best with the spirit and manners of the twelfth century.

[257] In William of Tyre may be seen the letter which the vizir of Damascus addressed to the Christian princes of Jerusalem.

[258] The Assizes of Jerusalem speak thus of the coronation of the king:—Ly met l’anneau au doigt, qui sinefie foi; et asprÈs ly ceint l’espÉe, qui sinefie justice, À deffendre foi et sainte esglise; et asprÈs la couronne, qui sinefie la dignitÉ; et asprÈs le sceptre, qui sinefie chastier et deffendre; et asprÈs la pomme, qui sinefie la terre du royaume. [Although offering a translation, I cannot resist giving this very curious piece of old French.—Trans.]

They put the ring on his finger, as signifying faith; then they girded on the sword, which means he must defend justice, faith, and the holy church; next the crown, which denotes dignity; after that the sceptre, with which he is both to punish and defend; and at last the apple or globe, which signifies the kingdom of the earth.

[259] William of Tyre attributes the determination of the king and the barons to the cries of the populace of Jerusalem; the same historian relates this expedition with many details in his sixteenth book, ch. vii.-xiii.

[260] Kemaleddin, an Arabian historian, and William of Tyre agree as to the principal circumstances of this siege.

[261] We have before us in manuscript some historical and geographical notes upon the city of Edessa, communicated to us by M. J. Chahan de Cerbied, an Armenian professor. This work is rendered more valuable by M. J. Chahan de Cerbied’s ’its author) being born at Edessa, where he passed many years. These notes are to be published in a general picture of Armenia, which will not fail to attract the attention of the learned.

[262] The greater part of the Arabian historians assert that Zengui sought to repair the evils his army had caused to the inhabitants of Edessa. Kemaleddin relates the following anecdote on this subject, which makes us at the same time acquainted with the Mussulman spirit of history and manners. We will transcribe the Latin extract from Dom. Berthereau:—Norredinus ingressus est urbem, diripuit eam, incolas jugo captivitatis submisit; illis evacuata fuit urbs, pauci tantÙm remanserunt. Ex captivis unam misit ancillam Norredinus ad Zeineddinum Ali Koudgoucum, pro rege, patris sui in Mosul inter munera quÆ ad eum misit; quam cum vidisset ille, statim ill usus est; lavit se posteÀ, dixitque suis: Nostisne quid mihi hac die acciderit? Dixerunt, non. Dixit: Cum Roham cepimus, regnante Zengui, inter res raptas in manus meas incidit ancilla pulchra, ejusque pulchritudo mihi admodÙm placuit; ad eam declinavit cor meum, statimque jussu Zengui martyris fuit inclamatum: Redde servos opesque raptas. Metuendus porrÒ erat et reverendus; ancillam reddidi, ei vero semper adhÆsit cor meum: novÈ verÒ misit mihi dona Norredinus, quÆ inter, ancillas misit plures, quas inter eamdem ancillam. Coitu earn subegi, nÈ adhuc etiam tolletur.—Kemaleddin, Hist. de Halep. p. 62, translation of Dom. Berthereau.

[263] M. Cerbied has translated this piece into French, which for several reasons deserves to be known. This poem, in seven cantos, was composed by Narses-le-Beau, the Armenian patriarch of the city of Edessa, to console his fellow-citizens in their misfortune, and arouse the zeal of the defenders of the Christian religion against the Turks.

[264] Godfrey, who was abbot of Clairvaux after St. Bernard, has left us a life of this saint, in which he does not speak of the crusade; the reason of this is that St. Bernard was reproached with the crusade, and that his panegyrist thence thought proper to pass over this remarkable epoch. We have several other lives of St. Bernard; the best and most complete is that which is printed in La France LittÉraire.

[265] Commota est quidem et contremuit terra, quia coepit Deus coeli perdere terram suam.—St. Bernard, epist. cccxxii.

[266] Nunquid potest mittere angelorum plusquam duodecim legiones, aut certÈ dicere verbo, et liberabitur terra sua?—St. Bernard, epist. cccxxii.

[267] The pulpit from which St. Bernard preached the crusade remained in the church of VÈzelai until the period of the revolution of 1789.

[268] The AbbÉ Velly thus relates the same fact: “Satisfied with the character of preacher and thaumaturge ’performer of miracles), St. Bernard set out for Germany, where he put to silence another monk, who, without having the authority of the pope, dared to exhort the Christian nations to take up arms for the assistance of their brethren in Asia.”

[269] These exclamations were pronounced in old German:—Christ uns gende, die heiligen alle helffen uns.

[270] Philip, archdeacon of Liege, afterwards a monk of Clairvaux, has made a detailed relation of the miracles of St. Bernard, from the first Sunday in Advent, the first day of December, 1146, to Thursday, the second day of the following January. In his relations he produces ten ocular witnesses, whose names he gives. Le PÈre Maimbourg, in his History of the Crusades, does not appear to believe in the authenticity of the miracles of St. Bernard; the author of the Life of Suger, 3 vols. in 12mo., sharply reproves Maimbourg for his incredulity. We do not think it at all necessary to go into this question; we believe it to be quite sufficient to know that the contemporaries of St. Bernard had faith in his miracles, and that this faith made them perform things which simple reason might call miraculous.

[271] A German historian speaks thus of this crusade:—Si autem aliter non, hÂc tamen ratione, exitum habuit expeditio frequens, purgaretur eo genere hominum qui rapinis consueverunt victitare; moestum devotione qualicunque, omnes id genus homines, pro remedio peccatorum sacram amplexi militiam, in eam nomine dedÊre volentes expeditionem.—Krantz, vi. sax. c. 13; De Regibus Hierosolymorum, auctore Christophano Besoldo, p. 214.

[272] The pope had forbidden luxury among the Crusaders; he expressed himself thus in a circular:—Nec eant in vestibus pretiosis, et cum canibus sive avibus, aut aliis quÆ ostentationi potius et lasciviÆ, quam necessariis videantur usibus deservire, sed in modesto apparatu, et habitu, in quo poenitentiam potius agere quam inanem affectari gloriam videantur.

[273] We quote here the words of Belle Forest, which we should not use if they were not translations from contemporary chronicles. We will only repeat a single passage, which is taken from the chronicle of Raoul:—De dicette: Per totam Galliam fit descriptio generalis; non sexus, non ordo, non dignitas quempiam excusavit, quin auxilium regi conferret; cujus iter multis imprecationibus persequebatur.

[274] Montfaucon speaks of these pictures in Les Monuments de la Monarchie FranÇaise, vol. i.

[275] Otto of Frisingen, an eye-witness, describes this misfortune at great length.

[276] Odo de Deuil gives an account of this deliberation, and reports the speech of the bishop of Langres, on whom he bestows the greatest praise.

[277] Otto of Frisingen, an ocular witness, gives none of the details of the rout of the Germans, saying as his excuse that he had nothing agreeable to relate. The Gesta Ludovici and William of Tyre supply the silence of Otto of Frisingen.

[278] Nicetas, in his account, confounds the army of the French with that of the Germans, who did not fight on the banks of the Meander; all which Louis did he attributes to Conrad. The German historians have followed him, and state the victory near the Meander to have been gained by the sovereign of their own nation.

[279] The Crusaders had then a march of forty days before them to arrive at Antioch by land. They might have reached it in three days by sea.

[280] Odo de Deuil is the only writer who speaks of these events; but his account appears to us full of obscurity in some parts.

[281] The 19th of March, 1148.

[282] See the translation of William of Tyre, book xiii. ch. 21.

[283] Some romancers, and even some historians, have advanced that Eleanor of Guienne was in love with Saladin, who founded the dynasty of the Ayoubites. Saladin, the son of Ayoub, was born the same year that Eleanor married Louis VII., and was scarcely ten years old at the time of the second crusade. Her second son, by Henry II. of England, became the great rival of Saladin in military glory.—Trans.

[284] Percussit eum inter collum et sinistrum humerum ictu mirabili; ita quÒd ensis secuit totum pectus cum humeris et descendit obliquando usque ad latus dextrum, taliter quÒd pars dexterior abscissa penitÙs cum capite cecidit super terram, et tunc omnes Turci, qui ictum tam formidabilem viderant stupefacti, statÌm fug remedio nostrorum gladios evaserunt.—G. C. chap. ii.

[285] All these details, and some others which were not known to the authors of the West, are taken from the Arabian chronicle of Ibuferat.

[286] Abulfeda, Abulfarage, and some other Arabian historians speak of the siege of Damascus; but it is difficult to reconcile their account with that of the Latins. We have taken some few circumstances from them that appeared the most probable. The Chronicle of Ibuferat is that which gives the most circumstantial details.

[287] The Chronicle of Geuvais attributes the retreat of the Christians to the perfidy of the Templars:—Cum civitas Christianis reddenda esset, accesserunt Templarii, dicentes se primam habituros pugnam, ut omnes deinde in communi victoriam obtinerent, statuerunt itaque tentoria sua inter civitatem et exercitum Christianorum, et cum his qui erant in civitate paganis proditionis pactum inierunt. Cives igitur eorum agnoscentes cupiditatem, promiserunt eis tres cados plenos bisantis aureis, si eos ab obsidione liberarent. Delusi itaque Christiani per milites Templi, Damasco recesserunt. Post modicum verÒ cum Templarii promissos À viribus recipissent cados, in eisdem non nummos aureos, sed cupreos invenerunt, miraculoque quÆ ascripserunt.

[288] William of Tyre, b. xvii. chap. 6.

[289] This crusade from the north is mentioned by Otto of Frisingen. Saxo the grammarian gives the most ample details in his thirteenth book. The reader may likewise consult the Latin History of Germany, by Kruntz. The History of Denmark, by Mallet, does not say a word of this war.

[290] Arnold, a Flemish preacher, on the publication of the second crusade, exhorted the nations of France and Germany to enrol themselves in this pious army; he followed the Crusaders who laid siege to Lisbon, under the command of Arnold count d’Arschot. Arnold sent an account of this siege to Milo, bishop of Terouane, in a letter published by Dom MartÈne, in the first volume of his great collection, upon two manuscripts. The relation of Arnold, an eye-witness, different from that of Robert of the Mount, is adopted by Fleury. The historian of Portugal, Manoel de Faria y Sousa, speaks also of this expedition of the Crusaders.

[291] St. Bernard wrote to the Estates of the kingdom, assembled by Suger, to repress the ambition of a brother of the king and some great vassals. He also wrote to the abbot of St. Denis: “Whilst Louis,” said he in his letter, “is fighting for a king whose reign is eternal; whilst in the flower of his age he exiles himself from his kingdom to serve Him who causes them to reign that serve him, is it possible there can be men so rash as to create disorder and troubles in his states, and to attack in his person the Lord and his Christ?”—Ep. 337.

[292] The legend of one of these medals is conceived in these terms:—

Regi invicto ab oriente reduci,
Frementes lÆtitia cives.

In another medal the Meander is represented, and a trophy raised upon its banks, with this inscription—

Turcis ad ripas MÆandri cÆsis fugatis.

[293] We have a life of Suger, written by his secretary. We have in French a Life of the abbot of St. Denis, in three volumes. L’AcadÉmie FranÇaise in 1778 proposed the Eulogy of Suger as a subject for a prize; the discourse of M. Garrat, which was crowned, contains many very eloquent passages. We have before us another discourse which was published in 1779, which presents an exaggerated, but very ingenious satire upon the life and administration of Suger.

[294] Robert of the Mount.

[295] William of Tyre says that he was once much scandalized by a question Amaury put to him concerning the next world.

[296] Among the Arabian authors who give the greatest number of details of the conquest of Egypt, the continuator of Tabari deserves remark; Chehabeddin, son of Mohammed, the author of the Roudatins ’the two gardens or lives of Noureddin and Salabeddin), is also very explicit upon this war between the Christians and the Mussulmans. Moudjireddin, in his History of Jerusalem, says a few words of the conquest of Egypt by Chirkou. Aboulmahason speaks also of the conquest of Egypt by the Turks. When speaking of the influence the Franks exercised at Cairo, he says they had a particular quarter of the city, and a market which Chaver had had built for them. Kemaleddin, in his History of Aleppo, relates these events with his usual clearness. This author agrees with Tabari. Ibu-elatir, in his History of the Attabeks, says but a very few words about the conquest of Egypt; he agrees with the continuator of Tabari and Kemaleddin. Dzemaleddin, in his History of Egypt, is also very brief on this important event. Macrizi, in his Kitab-alsolouek Timaresch Doual Almoulouek ’Institution on the Knowledge of the Dynasties of Kings), only speaks with brevity of these events. Amongst the Latin authors who have spoken of the conquest of Egypt, we principally quote William of Tyre, and the Latin history of the latter years of the kingdom of Jerusalem, which is met with in the Collection of Bongars.

[297] Near the castle of Toura, two leagues from Cairo, opposite ancient Memphis.

[298] Saladin has had many historians. Among the Arabian authors the most celebrated are Bohaddin, who has written his life; Omad-el-Cathed, secretary of the sultan, and author of the Phatah; Schahab-Eddin, author of the lives of Noureddin and Saladin, entitled El Reudatains ’or the two gardens). Several particulars relative to the Mussulman hero are to be met with in Aboulfeda, who was of the family of Ayoub, and in several other Arabian writers quoted by D. Berthereau. There is a Life of Saladin in French, by Marin. In the Imperial Library [of France—Trans.] two manuscript Lives may likewise be consulted, one by the AbbÉ Renaudot, and the other by Galland, the translator of the Thousand and One Nights.

[299] This was a common punishment in the East. In the Persian “boat-death,” as described by Plutarch, the criminal was nailed down in a boat, leaving only his head bare;—thus smeared, exposed, and left to die.—Trans.

[300] Schahabbedin, Tabari, and Aboulfeda relate this fact at great length.

[301] I am inclined to think this was a kind of ceremony—the liege lord demanding entrance to the fortress of his vassal.—Trans.

[302] Jacques de Vitri does not spare the Christians of the East in his History, particularly in the chapters entitled “De corruptione prÆlatorum; de regularibus irregulariter viventibus; de corruptione TerrÆ SanctÆ.” The satires of Juvenal would appear moderate by the side of the pages of this historian, who had been in the Holy Land in the quality of a legate.

[303] This was the same Andronicus who afterwards ascended the throne of Constantinople, and became notorious for his cruelties.

[304] The Latin history of the kingdom of Jerusalem contains this curious passage: Quidam verÒ, ut fama ferebat, ardentiÙs cÆteris movebatur, et abscissis viri genitalibus, ea tanquam in usum gignendi reservare deposuit, ut vel mortua membra, si fieri posset, virtutis tantÆ suscitarent hÆredem.—See the Collection of Bongars, p. 1151.

[305] Among the Christian historians who have spoken of the battle of Tiberias, the following may be consulted: Chronica TerrÆ SanctÆ; the two continuations of William of Tyre, by Harold and Hugh de Plagon; and the Latin history of Jerusalem. Jacques de Vitri, William de Newbridge, the Chronicle of Gervais, Paule Emile Roger de Hoveden, and Matthew Paris also give some details of this battle, and of the events by which it was followed. None of these authors, however, have described it at sufficient length to give a complete idea of it; they are not even always agreed, and ought to be read with much precaution.

[306] Saladin adds in his letter that the Franks flew round the cross like moths round light.

[307] The continuator of Tabary speaks with much detail of this battle; the author of the Roudatain, in the description which he has given of this day, shows all the enthusiasm of a Mussulman. We find in these two histories, and even in Omad ’the secretary of Saladin), more words than things, more Oriental figures than historical circumstances. They may, however, be profitably consulted by comparing their accounts with those of the Latins.

[308] Many Christian historians accuse Raymond of having assisted the cause of Saladin. No Mussulman historian is of this opinion; indeed several of them speak of him as the most cruel enemy of the Saracens. The continuator of Tabary positively says that the count of Tripoli was opposed to the marching of the Franks towards Tiberias. M. Marin, in his History of Saladin, has discussed this point of history, and the proofs that he gives leave no doubt respecting the sincerity of the intentions of Raymond. Abulfeda, in the short description which he gives of the day of Hetin, praises the valour of Raymond, and says that he died of the grief created by the defeat of the Christians. In a letter written in the name of Saladin by the Cadi Alfdel to the Iman Nassir-Sedin-Illah-Aboul-Abbas-Ahmed, are these remarkable words: “Not one of the Christians was able to escape except the count of Tripoli. May God curse him; God caused him afterwards to die, and sent him from the kingdom of death to hell.” This letter of Saladin’s, which speaks also of the taking of Jerusalem, has been preserved by Ebu-Khilcan in his Biography. M. Jourdain had the intention of giving a translation of it; but the text presents so many difficulties, from the use of Oriental figures and bad copying, that he was obliged to be satisfied with making some extracts from it.

[309] For the siege of Jerusalem we may consult the continuator of Tabary, the author of the Roudatains, and the letter from Saladin before mentioned. All the Arabian historians are agreed as to the principal circumstances. Moujireddin, in his History of Jerusalem, of all the Arabian writers of this period, gives the fewest particulars of the siege and capture of the holy city. We need not repeat that the greater part of these historians are known to us by the Latin extracts of Dom. Bertreau.

[310] Most historians say that Saladin granted a delay of forty days to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. In the position that matters were in, Saladin could not remain forty days before a captured city; and what proves that historians are mistaken in this respect is, that they themselves say that Saladin took Jerusalem in the beginning of October, and that he set out on the day of All Saints, which is always the first of November, from PtolemaÏs to go to the siege of the city of Tyre.

[311] Marin and most historians say that Sibylla was not at Jerusalem during the siege: they are in error. The author of the Roudatains says positively that that princess came out of Jerusalem with the other captives, followed by her treasures and her attendants. She asked permission of Saladin to rejoin her husband, who was then detained a prisoner at Naplouse.

[312] This fact, which is not mentioned by our Western authors, is related with many details by BohaËddin and Abulfeda.

[313] These prodigies remind us of those related by the historian Josephus, in his account of the conquest of Jerusalem.

[314] Marin, in his History of Saladin, and several others after him, have pretended that the William who came into Europe to preach the crusade, was not the author of the History of Jerusalem. This assertion is founded on an obscure passage of Hugh de Plagon, and is not at all confirmed by the testimony of contemporary historians. Matthew Paris, and all the other authors of the time, give the name of William to the archbishop of Tyre who came into Europe; if this William had not been the same as the historian of this name, would it not have been remarked by contemporary chronicles? All these chronicles give us some details of the birth and life of William, author of the History of Jerusalem; and if another William, archbishop of Tyre, came into the West, why have not the historians of the time made him known, and said something of him? His mission was sufficiently important, the see in which he was placed attracted attention enough, for the second to be mentioned as well as the first, if there was one.

[315] For the history of this period, the following authors may be consulted with advantage:—The Acts of Rymer, the historian Rigord, Roger of Hoveden, Matthew Paris, William of Newbridge, the Chronicle of Alberic of Trois Fontaines, Otho of St. Blaise, Brompton, the Chronicle of Gervais, &c.

[316] “The noblest monument of a conqueror’s fame and of the terror which he inspired, is the Saladin tenth.”—Gibbon.—Trans.

[317] There is extant in Latin an account of the journey of Archbishop Baldwin through the country of Wales, entitled Itinerarium CambriÆ, drawn up by Barry, who accompanied the preacher of the crusade. This journey is curious, from the singular prodigies and miracles which are related in it. If this relation may be credited, Archbishop Baldwin neglected no means to induce the people to take the cross; he enrolled one day, says Barry, a great number of men who came to him in a state of nudity, their clothes being secreted by their wives and friends, who wished to prevent their going.

[318] The discourse of Peter of Blois, which is printed in his works, has for title, Tractatus de Jerosolymitan Peregrinatione. After having quoted several passages from the Bible and Testament to exhort the Crusaders to set out, he cites two verses from the tenth chapter of Juvenal, and two verses from the Fasti of Ovid. He is not satisfied with presenting to the pilgrims the example of Abraham, but points out to them all the kings and captains of profane antiquity. Peter of Blois does not spare, in his discourse, the princes and nobles who compelled the clergy to pay tribute towards the expenses of the holy war.

[319] Cantipratensis apud Surium, die Junii, cap. 20. This is likewise related by Besoldo, De Regibus Hyerosolimitanorum, p. 274.

[320] The letter written by Frederick to Saladin, and the answer of Saladin to Frederick, have been preserved by Baronius and Matthew Paris.

[321] In the works of Peter of Blois is a letter which Alexander III. wrote to the sultan of Iconium, giving him counsels to direct him in his conversion. The same letter is in many other collections.

[322] The monk Pant, who was himself a Crusader, and Crusius, both attest this miracle.

[323] Most historians make Frederick perish in the river Cydnus, in which Alexander bathed; but they have confounded the Cydnus with the Selef, according to historians of the time. The Cydnus, which is now called Kara-sou, that is to say, black water, flows from Antitaurus into Lower Armenia, near ancient DianÆa; it enters Cilicia, passes by the city of Tarsus, and falls into the sea two leagues from that city. Selef, a little river, has its source in the mountains of Isauria, and bathes the walls of Seleucia; the inhabitants commonly call it “the water of SelefkÉ.” According to Armenian historians, it was in this river Frederick Barbarossa met his death. S. Narses, of Lampron, sent by the Armenians to compliment the emperor of Germany, says that that prince, bathing in the river Selef, was carried away by the rapidity of the stream, and that, being weakened by age, he was not able to contend against it, and was drowned. ’This precious and authentic information is given us by M. Cahan de Cerbied, Armenian professor.) The Arabian historian Omad relates that Frederick Barbarossa was drowned in endeavouring to cross the river on horseback; the force of the stream carried him towards a tree, against which he struck his head. He was dragged out of the water, adds Omad, and his soul being ready to quit his body, the angel of death took possession of it, and carried it to hell.

[324] The chronicle entitled Historia Hierosolymitana relates all that passed in the kingdom of Jerusalem from 1177 to the siege of PtolemaÏs inclusively. The Chronicle of the Holy Land, the two continuators of William of Tyre, Florent and the bishop of PtolemaÏs, give some particulars of the siege, but much less than the Arabian historians, to whom we shall often have recourse.

[325] Karacoush was the first minister of Saladin in Egypt. It was he who caused the well of Joseph to be dug, built the citadel, and began the inclosure of Cairo. Karacoush was short and hump-backed. His name is employed now in Egypt for a sort of Punchinello, who amuses the people in the streets, in whose mouth are placed abundance of obscenities.

[326] The Arabian historians ChÉhabeddin, the author of the Roudatins, Omad of Ispahan, and Bohaddin, give many more particulars of the siege of PtolemaÏs than the Latin historians. These three Mussulman historians accompanied Saladin in all his expeditions.

[327] This day I was among the holy men, and I was upon the hill with them, looking at the fight, and watching for what would happen to the enemy. We had no idea that the battle would reach us; but when the enemy became mingled with us, we mounted on our mules, without any equipments, and seeing that all the army had turned their backs, fled away. We reached Tiberias, with others who had taken the same road. Every one of us had forgotten to either eat or drink. Other fugitives went as far as Damascus without stopping on their way, constantly pursued by fear.—Chehabeddin.

[328] The author of the Roudatains says that one thousand Mussulman horsemen were all that maintained and recovered the battle. Saladin, adds the same author, remained alone upon the field, and angels defended him.

[329] Our author before mentions Gerard d’Avesnes as left in charge of the camp; but I am not sufficiently certain there were not two of the name to alter the text.—Trans.

[330] This accident of a loose horse is related by the anonymous author of the History of Jerusalem ’Historia Hierosolymitana).

[331] The Arabian historians say that a horse escaped from a vessel, and was pursued; he threw himself among the Mussulmans, who presented him to Saladin, which was considered an evil presage.—See ChÉhabeddin, the historian of Saladin.

[332] Florentinus, bishop of PtolemaÏs, relates, that when the famine began to reign among the besiegers, to put a check upon the greediness of those who sold provisions at too high a price—

Barones constituunt uno prorsÙs ore
Ut dentur cibaria precio minore.
Sed error novissimus pejor fit priore
DÙm non audent vendere consueto more.
Non enim tÙm cibaria inveniuntur
Per forum venalia; sed effodiuntur
Pavimenta, domini recluduntur.
Sic inops et locuples famem patiuntur.

[333] Fleury relates this fact in his Ecclesiastical History, after the English historian Roger Hoveden. The same Roger speaks of the predictions and visions of Abbot Joachim, who finished by incurring the censure of the Holy See.

[334] Could not the reader imagine these kings were playing the siege of Troy, and that Richard was the sulky Achilles? There is a strong resemblance in the constitution of the forces before Troy and the independent nations, baronies, and counties of the Crusaders—thence the dissensions, delays, and disasters of both. History becomes the test of poetry, and Homer shines forth not only the great poet, but the veracious historian and clear-sighted philosopher.—Trans.

[335] I would fain translate this word shield or buckler; but as I cannot find the word cuirasse ever used for one of these, am obliged to follow my original.—Trans.

[336] Either the English took less part in the crusades than we generally imagine, or a French historian does not mete them due honour; the archbishop of Canterbury is the only name clearly English in this list. I shall have occasion to recur to this subject.—Trans.

[337] Saladin had a copy of the Koran, compiled by Omar, always carried with his army.

[338] Florentinus, bishop of PtolemaÏs, describes with horror the impiety of the Turks:—

Milites aspiceres super muros stantes
Turcos, sanctam manibus crucem elevantes
Cum flagellis asperis eam verberantes,
Et cum impropriis nobis minitantes.

[339] “One of our people,” says Omad, “having been made prisoner, was burnt, and the flames accompanied him to his place of everlasting repose; we took a Christian, we burnt him, and the flames that devoured him mingled with the fires of hell.”—See the MS. of Dom Berthereau.

[340] A combat of children is related by Omad of Ispahan; and the same author speaks of the Christian heroines who mingled in the fight. He adds, that the young women fought, and the old women animated them by their cries.

[341] The march and the contests of the Christians and the Mussulmans are described in fullest detail by Omad-al-Kabel, secretary to Saladin, in his book entitled the Pheta; and by Schahabeddin, author of the Roudalain. These two historians almost always make the Mussulmans triumph. “We have,” say they, “animated the tongues of lances and swords to speak to the Christians, and to hear their words. Then God rendered sweet to us all that was bitter, and by his goodness drew near to us all that was at a distance.” We shall not follow these two historians, nor even Bohaddin, through the combats of the Mussulmans and Christians, combats in which the latter are, by their account, always conquered, and yet always continue to advance into their enemy’s country.

[342] Omad says that the Mussulmans surrounded the army of their enemy as the eyelashes surround the eye. The Mussulman authors speak highly of Jacques d’Avesnes. All the historians of Saladin do not agree as to his defeat, and say that Richard got possession of Jaffa after being conquered. Aboulfeda is more honest; Tabary agrees also that the Mussulmans were put to flight; the same historian adds to his faithful account the following remarkable circumstance: “Near the Mussulman army was a thick wood, into which they retreated. The Franks believed that this retreat was a stratagem, and did not dare to pursue their enemies, whom they might have destroyed if they had followed up their victory.” For these authors, see the Latin extracts of Dom Berthereau.

[343] Arabian historians say nothing of the single combat between Richard and Saladin. English historians alone mention it.

[344] I cannot attach much consequence to the silence of the Arabian writers on this subject, neither can I think, with our author, such a rencontre so improbable in such a mÊlÉe. The principal argument against it is, that Saladin survived the battle. Richard was at least twelve years younger than Saladin, and in the full vigour of a large, powerful frame, whilst Saladin was weakened by toil and disease.—Trans.

[345] This gallant act of devotedness of William de Pourcelet, a ProvenÇal gentleman, is related by both the Latin and Oriental historians.

[346] This negotiation is related by the principal Arabian historians. BohaËddin and the author of the Phatah. Although Christian writers have not spoken of it, it would be difficult to cast doubt upon, or weaken the evidence of Arabian authors, who were ocular witnesses, and were themselves mixed up with the affair. It is this negotiation that gave Madame Cottin the idea of her romance of Mathilda, or the Crusades; a work full of eloquent pictures and heroic sentiments, drawn from the history of chivalry.

[347] M. Paultre, in his manuscript history of the states of Syria, believes that this city, so named by the historians of the crusade, is the city of Eleutheropolis, situated nine or ten leagues east of Ascalon, on the road to Jerusalem, in a valley crossed by the torrent of Ascalon, seven leagues west of Jerusalem, and six of Ramla.

[348] The assassination of Conrad is thus related in the continuator of Tabary.—See the MS. of D. Berthereau.

[349] Our author’s argument is very weak here. Gibbon says: “I cannot believe that a soldier so free and fearless in the use of his lance as Richard, would have descended to whet a dagger against his valiant brother Conrad de Montferrat.”—Decline and Fall, vol. viii. p. 426.—Trans.

[350] It is difficult to follow the accounts of several historians at this period, who affirm that Richard was not willing to take Jerusalem. M. Paultre, a distinguished officer who made the campaign of 1799, has furnished us with all the means of understanding the old chronicles, and to appreciate their testimony. Historians, from ignorance of the country, are often deceived with respect to military events. The situation of places and a knowledge of the country are often the best commentaries we can have upon the old historians of the crusades. M. Paultre has himself related part of the events which we repeat; and his account, which he has kindly confided to us, has given us useful information, which will throw light upon this part of our history.

[351] Gibbon’s conclusion is very different. He says, “The laurels of Richard were blasted by the prudence or envy of his companions.”—Trans.

[352] The historian BohaËddin relates that Richard, in an interview with Aboubeker, the ambassador of Saladin, said “That he only sought for a pretext to return to Europe; that he took little interest in the affairs of Palestine; that the Christians could not stand against the Mussulman power when deprived of his support; that a very small force would be sufficient to take the few places they still possessed; that the sultan need not be difficult, as the peace would only be simulated, and would serve to remove the only obstacle to the conquests of that prince.”—See Life of Saladin, by Marin.

[353] The Latin historians say that the truce was for three years, three months, three weeks, and three days. We prefer the version of the Oriental writers, who say that the truce was for three years and eight months. Omad, whose account we adopt, declares he wrote the treaty with his own hand.

[354] Gibbon says, “A personal interview with Richard was declined by Saladin, who alleged their mutual ignorance of each other’s language.”—Vol. viii. p. 429.—Trans.

[355] L’amour de sa mie.—Trans.

[356] The adventures of the ChÂtelain de Coucy and the lady de Fayel are related in an old chronicle quoted by the President Faucher. There exists in the Imperial Library a manuscript copy of this chronicle, which appears to have been written towards the beginning of the thirteenth century, a short time after the third crusade. M. Roquefort, whose authority is of great weight in all which concerns the middle ages, does not appear to adopt the account of the chronicle quoted in his article “Coucy” of La Biographie Universelle, and is of the opinion of Father Papon, who attributes the adventure of the ChÂtelain to the troubadour Cabestan. We may object to M. Roquefort, that the adventure of Cabestan is not the same as that of Coucy, and that one may be true without rendering the other doubtful. We find in the works of Belloc a dissertation which has not been refuted, which proves the truth, if not of some details, of the principal facts related in the chronicle we have quoted.

[357] Saladin had but little indulgence in religious matters. The AbbÉ Renaudot, in his manuscript history, relates that he caused a philosopher to be strangled who ventured to preach new doctrines in the city of Aleppo.

[358] To know the character and virtues of Saladin, it is sufficient to quote the discourse he addressed to his son El-daher, to whom he had confided the government of a province: “My son,” said he, “you are about to reign over states that I have bestowed upon you. My infirmities give me reason to fear that I may never see you again; I recommend you, then, my son, as my last command, to love and honour God, who is the source of all good, and to observe the precepts of his law; for your welfare depends upon it. Spare human blood, for fear it should fall again upon your own head; for blood once shed never sleeps. Endeavour to gain the hearts of your subjects; administer justice, and be as careful of their interests as of your own. You will have to render an account to God of this trust which I confide to you in his name. Show respect and condescension for the emirs, the imauns, the caliphs, and all persons placed in authority. It is only by mildness and clemency that I have attained the elevated position in which you behold me. We are all mortal, O my son! entertain then no malice, no hatred against any one. Be careful, above all things, to offend nobody; men only forget injuries when they have revenged them, whilst God grants us pardon for our errors for a simple repentance; for he is beneficent and merciful.” This speech of Saladin to his son has been transmitted to us by BohaËddin, who heard it delivered.—See the Life of Saladin, by Marin, book xiii.

[359] Although, happily, the time is gone by in which an English writer would break a lance in defence of the entire character of Richard, much as I admire the general reflections and spirit of my author, I cannot but think he has scarcely done him justice. His faults are always thrown into high relief, whilst his good qualities,—for he had some,—are either shaded or entirely concealed. In the disputes which his position naturally drew him into, his antagonists are always made to be in the right, Richard in the wrong. Not a single act is recorded before PtolemaÏs, and yet Richard had five thousand prisoners; most authors say three thousand, but the larger number is assumed, for the sake of the massacre. The more eminent the exploits of Richard, in an army constituted like that of the Crusaders, the greater were sure to be the envy and hatred of his fellow-leaders. Richard is no worse than other heroes of the sword, from Achilles downward. I greatly fear it is his successful rivalry with the more astute French monarch that is the cause of this bias. Against the comparison with Saladin I say nothing—Saladin was a greater man than Richard.—Trans.

[360] This crusade terminated in 1192; the battle of Bovines was fought in 1214.—Trans.

[361] Our author has given an extract from the interesting manuscript which has furnished him with this account; but it is so long, the French is so old, and the story so well known, I have thought best to omit it—a translation would spoil it. It is remarkable that the manuscript chronicle makes Richard see Blondel, and sing first—our author reverses this:—Ensi com il estoit en cette pensÉe, li rois regarde et vie Blondel, et pensa comment li se feroit À lui connoistre, et li souvint d’une canchon que ils avoient fait entre aus deux que nus ne savoit fois que il roi. Si commencha haut et clerement À canter le premier vier, car il cantoit trÈs bien. There appear to me discrepancies in the language of this manuscript chronicle, which make the date of it, the thirteenth century, very apocryphal.—Trans.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES:

—Obvious print and punctuation errors were corrected.

—The transcriber of this project created the book cover image using the title page of the original book. The image is placed in the public domain.