[1] We find copious details upon these disputes, and their origin, in Sanuti, which we have thought it best to abridge.

[2] We have adopted the version of M. Deguignes as the most probable. (See History of the Huns.)

[3] One of the principal difficulties that an historian of this epoch experiences, is, to preserve the connection in his narrative, from having to speak at the same time of the West and of the East, of the Christians, the Mamelukes, and the Tartars. Here a new people start up upon the stage, there an old empire falls to decay: all the events are hurried and confounded together, and the march of history is embarrassed among so many ruins. We endeavour to be as clear as possible.

[4] Many chronicles say that Oulagon shut the caliph up in the midst of all his treasures, and left him to die of hunger: this circumstance is not at all probable, and has not been acknowledged by M. Deguignes.

[5] Most historians have taken their accounts of this war of the Moguls from an esteemed work, entitled Fragmentum de Statu Saracoenorum; it, however, contains many errors, and ought to be rectified in several places by the study of the Oriental historians. Some valuable information respecting this war of the Tartars may also be found in the Armenian Hayton, and in Sanuti; but these authors must be read with precaution and suspicion.

[6] Bela IV., king of Hungary, wrote to the pope, that if he were not speedily succoured he should form an alliance with the Tartars. The pope reproved him warmly. Alexander IV. wrote to all Christian princes, prelates, and communities, to consult upon the means of resisting the barbarians, as well in the East as in the West. In Raynaldi—the year 1262, Nos. 29 and 30—his letter may be seen, in which he enters into many details upon the levy of soldiers, and upon subsidies. This letter has been preserved by Matthew Paris, who speaks of the councils held on this subject; some facts relative to the invasion of the Tartars may likewise be found in William of Nangis and Matthew of Westminster, as well as in the Collection of Councils.

[7] This singular fact is related by the Arabian historian Aboulfeda, and repeated by M. Deguignes, vol. iv. p. 133.

[8] This circular is reported by Raynaldi, Nos. 68 and 69. The motives alleged by the pope, in his letter, astonish the wise Fleuri, who observes upon the spirit of contradiction which we have mentioned.

[9] These expeditions of Bibars are related with all their details in the chronicles of Ibn-Ferat and in Makrizi. Although we have much abridged our account, we fear we shall be accused of tediousness. We have yielded to our inclination of filling up the deficiencies which exist in all the chronicles of the West in their accounts of this period. The life of Bibars has likewise been of great service to us.

[10] The Arabian chronicles describe this event in a very obscure and equivocal manner; they scarcely mention the massacre of the prisoners, and say but little of the capitulation; they accuse the Franks of having taken Mussulman prisoners away with them, which is not very probable.

[11] We are afraid M. Michaud carries the partialities of Biography into the pages of History: in the former, such are sometimes excusable; in the latter, never. Our readers who look back to the taking of Jerusalem or PtolemaÏs, will at once see how weak is the claim of the Christians to a superiority over their adversaries in mercy. As to the religious portion of the account, history teems with wholesale conversions of conquered armies and nations. See Charlemagne and our own Alfred, for instance. We thought that the idea of Mahometanism being a religion of the sword was exploded. Gibbon positively denies it to be so, and asserts that no precept or passage of the Koran inculcates it.—Trans.

[12] Sanuti is almost the only Christian writer that affords information on the taking of Sefed.

[13] “I cannot tell the amount,” says Joinville, “of what the king laid out for the fortification of Jaffa, it was so great. He closed the canal between the two seas, he built twenty-four towers, and cleansed the ditches without and within. There were three gates, of which the legate built one, and likewise part of the walls. And in order to show you what the king must have expended, I will tell you what the legate said when I asked him how much that gate and the wall had cost him. I had reckoned that the first cost him five hundred livres, and the latter three hundred livres; but he told me, as God might help him, that the gate and the wall had cost him thirty thousand livres.”

[14] This little incident is quite dramatic, and, in good hands, would not look badly on canvass. Would it not assist art, if historians, when forcibly struck by the scenes they describe, would suggest to painters, who so frequently prove they are at a loss for subjects by their injudicious choice, events, persons, and passions fit for the pencil?—Trans.

[15] This letter of Bibars, which was written by his secretary, the author of the life we have of this sultan, does not only speak of the taking and the destruction of Antioch, but of the ravages committed by the Mamelukes in the territory of Tripoli. This letter is of great length, but we find in it more declamatory sentences and Oriental figures than facts for the pen of the historian.

[16] Sirvente is a kind of poem peculiar to the troubadours.

[17] This sirvente, which is attributed to a knight of the Temple, has been translated by the AbbÉ Millot, who appears to have altered the sense of it. It is printed in the fourth volume, p. 131, of the Choix des PoÉsies des Troubadours, by M. Raynouard, perpetual secretary to the French Academy. We make use of a literal translation that M. Raynouard has kindly communicated to us.

[18] These details, as well as the most of those that precede them, concerning the Mussulmans, are taken from the valuable chronicle of Ibn-Ferat.

[19] “He was of opinion,” says William de Nangis, “that the kingdom of France had undergone great disgrace in the first pilgrimage.” Le pÈre Maimbourg expresses himself thus upon the king’s determination:—“St. Louis, great saint as he was, could not help thinking that much shame lay upon him for having succeeded so ill in Egypt.”

[20] Hist. de St. Louis, by Filleau de la Chaise.

[21] See the letters of Clement, in Duchesne, epist. 269.

[22] Joinville, when present at the mass in the chapel, heard two knights conferring; one said, that if the king took the cross, it would be one of the most fatal days ever seen in France; for if we take the cross, we shall ruin the king; and again, if we take the cross, we shall lose God’s grace, because we do not take the cross for the sake of him.

[23] When our readers look back to the means employed in former crusades to extort money from all classes, as well as from the clergy, we think they will partake of our surprise at this assertion. The clergy had been, in most cases, the recipients of the taxes upon the laity, and according to our author himself, had not always proved trustworthy collectors.—Trans.

[24] All these details upon the tenths are of great importance for the history of the crusades: for this negotiation the following authorities may be consulted: Raynaldi, No. 59; the SpicilÈge, vol. xiii. p. 221; the Supplement to Raynaldi, book lxix. No. 42; Fleury’s Ecclesiastical History, and the Acts of Rymer.

[25] As historians, we should hesitate to assert this, and should advise our readers to adopt it with much caution, and many limitations.—Trans.

[26] This dissertation, which has been sent to us by the author, bears for title, An Historical Dissertation upon the Part the Spaniards took in the Wars beyond the Seas, and upon the Influence of these Expeditions, from the Eleventh to the Fifteenth Century, by Don Fernandez de Crevarette. This work, in which a learned criticism and a sound erudition prevail, contains many valuable documents; we shall often have occasion to quote it.

[27] Migeray thus describes the murder of Conradin:—“As Charles had determined to go into Africa with the king, St. Louis, not knowing what to do with Conradin and Frederick, whom it was dangerous to keep, and still more to release, in a kingdom filled with faction and revolt, he ordered them to be brought to trial before the syndics of the cities of the kingdom.”

[28] For the preparations for the voyage of Louis IX., William of Nangis, Geoffrey de Beaulieu, the Gestes of St. Louis, the continuator of Matthew Paris, and Joinville, may be consulted.

[29] “It is true that before the king Louis took the cross, he had had several messages from the king of Tunis, and at divers times, and many had been sent to him; these messages gave Louis to understand that the king of Tunis was willing to become a Christian, and that he would the more willingly change his faith if an opportunity should occur in which his own honour and the welfare of his people would be secured. The good Christian king believed that if he and his renowned hosts should come to Tunis suddenly, scarcely could the king of Tunis refuse or excuse such a reasonable opportunity for receiving holy baptism,” &c.—Annals of the Reign of St. Louis, by William of Nangis.

[30] Some classical authorities name it Tunetum; others, Tunes.—Trans.

[31] Louis makes use of the expression: “Je vous dis le ban,” &c. which word cannot be used in this sense in English, but is very effective in French, and was employed in many legal proclamations connected with royal or seignorial rights,—as, for instance: ban is a proclamation by which all who held lands of the crown of France were summoned to serve the king in his wars.—Trans.

[32] William of Nangis says on this subject:—“This was great treachery on the part of the Saracens, and great simplicity on the part of the Christians.”

[33] Geoffrey de Beaulieu has given an account of these instructions in Latin. They are in old French in Joinville and in the Annals of the Reign of St. Louis. These three authors give them with remarkable differences. Moreau, in the twentieth volume of his Discours sur l’Histoire de France, gives another new version, which he declares to have been copied from one of the registers of the Chamber of Accounts, in which, probably, Philip le Hardi was desirous this monument should be preserved. It is this version we have principally followed in the extract we have here given.

[34] Details upon the death of St. Louis may be found in Geoffrey de Beaulieu, William of Chartres, William of Nangis, and in a letter from the bishop of Tunis, reported by Martenne; Joinville relates a few circumstances of it; but it is very much to be regretted that the good seneschal was not present at the last moments of St. Louis; how touching would his relation have been! and how much better would it have been than that which is given to us by eyewitnesses, who have written with such unfeeling dryness and conciseness!

[35] This letter, which has been translated into Latin, may be found in the collection of Martenne. We will give an extract from it in our Appendix.

[36] We read in the life of Bibars and in the chronicle of Ibn-Ferat, that the sultan of Cairo was much dissatisfied with the conduct of the king of Tunis. The peace which the latter made, left the Crusaders at liberty to carry their arms into Egypt. Bibars would have wished the Christian army to have been detained on the coast of Africa. He threatened to dethrone his ally, and told the ambassadors of the king of Tunis, that such a prince as he was not worthy to reign over Mussulmans.

[37] For the events that followed the death of St. Louis, see Duchesne, and le SpicilÈge, vol. i.

[38] We hope our readers, while they peruse the latter part of this otherwise good paragraph, will not forget that we are only translators.—Trans.

[39] Among the numerous panegyrics of Louis IX. there are few that have stood the test of time. Voltaire has drawn a fine portrait of the good king. M. Dampmartin, in his work upon the kings of France, has spoken of this great prince with ability and truth.

[40] Words of the Bull of Canonization.

[41] The Arabian chroniclers have preserved several of these treaties: we find in the extracts from Oriental manuscripts, a treaty between the sultan of Cairo and the little city of Tortosa. When reading the titles and the dependencies of the masters and the inhabitants of Tortosa, we may fancy we read the lease of a bailiwick or a farm, made before a notary.

[42] In Ibn-Ferat we may read the letter which the sultan of Cairo wrote on the subject of the princess of Berouth, who had left her little principality without the consent of the sultan. (See the extracts from Arabic manuscripts.)

[43] This account is much longer in Ibn-Ferat; whilst endeavouring to preserve the tone and the Oriental colouring of it, we have felt it necessary to abridge it. The chronicle of Ibn-Ferat, which is a collection of many other chronicles, contains several different versions; this appears to us the most probable, and, at the same time, the one best calculated to show what were the resources of the nations of Asia against the excesses of despotism.

[44] Many historians think that Charles’s preparations were intended to be directed against Constantinople. Without contradicting this opinion, we may believe that the king of Sicily thought likewise of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Charles was always very secret in his political projects; and very frequently the dissimulation of princes causes as much embarrassment to historians as it could have done ill to the countries exposed to its attempts.

[45] The text of this treaty may be read in the life of Kelaoun.

[46] M. de Sacy has translated a treaty concluded between the sultan of Egypt and the kings of Sicily and Arragon. The following is one of the clauses of this treaty:—“If the case should happen that the pope of Rome, the kings of the Franks, of the Greeks, of the Tartars, or others, should ask the king of Arragon or his brothers, or should cause to be asked in the states of their dominions, auxiliary troops or any succour, whether of cavalry, infantry, money, vessels, clothing, or arms, the said princes would give no consent to it, either openly or in secret; they would grant them no succour, and would consent to nothing of the kind. If the king of Arragon should learn that one of the above-named kings should have any intention of carrying war into the states of the sultan, or to cause him any prejudice, he will send and advise the sultan of it, and will inform him on what side his enemies propose to attack him, and that with the shortest delay possible, before they shall be put in motion, and he will conceal nothing concerning it from him.” This treaty is very long, and provides against all difficulties. We may here make a general remark, which is, that most of the treaties made between the Orientals and the Christians surpass, in some sort, the sagacity of modern diplomacy; so much mistrust gave foresight to the negotiators and the contracting powers.

[47] We can find no document on this subject in the chronicles of the West; our guide has been Ibn-Ferat.

[48] All these curious details upon PtolemaÏs, its morals, and the mode of living of its inhabitants, are furnished by Herman Cornarius (Ekard’s Collection). A more extensive extract will be found in our analysis of the German authors.

[49] We find this fact in two Austrian chronicles, which have for title, one, Chronicon Anonymi Leobensis; the other, Thomoe Ebendorfeiri de Haselbach Chronicon. The first says that the legate called together the people of PtolemaÏs, that he launched against them the anathemas of the Church, and then embarked to return to Rome. This last circumstance appears to us improbable, and we have, therefore, passed it over in silence.

[50] This circumstance is related in the life of the sultan Kelaoun. (See the extracts from Arabian manuscripts in our Appendix.)

[51] For the siege of PtolemaÏs we have consulted Sanuti, Herman, and a manuscript relation. This relation, written in the French of the time, appears to have been drawn from a letter from John de Vile, marshal of the hospital of St. John, who wrote to his brother, William de Vile, prior of St. Gilles, in Provence. Either John de Vile was at PtolemaÏs, or he wrote from the evidence of some Hospitallers who had escaped the swords of the Mussulmans, and had retired to the isle of Cyprus. This manuscript chronicle, which we often use, is divided into twenty-two chapters It is in the King’s Library, No. 1290.

[52] This fact is related in the chronicle we have before quoted.

[53] A manuscript account of the siege and taking of Acre by the Saracens.

[54] This extraordinary fact is related in a discourse addressed to Pope Nicholas IV. by Brother Arsene, a Greek priest, who had been on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in the time of the siege of PtolemaÏs. This account is found in Muratori; we have translated it entirely, as will be seen in our Appendix.

[55] This fact is likewise attested by the chronicle of Herman Cornarius, which we have already quoted.

[56] A German chronicle of Thomas Ebendorft relates the miraculous stories that were circulated among the Saracens. According to this chronicle, when a Christian expired, another issued from his mouth, ex ore. There were two souls in every body; in uno corpore duo fuerunt hominis.

[57] The Arabian chronicles speak of the sieur de TÉlema or BarthÉlemi, who never ceased to provoke the fury of the Saracens. The Western chronicles say nothing of him; one of them merely says that a Frank, banished from PtolemaÏs on account of murder, took refuge with the sultan of Egypt, and pointed out to him the means of taking the city.

[58] Wadin, the author of a chronicle entitled Annales Minorum, tom. ii. p. 585, quotes a circumstance which St. Antonine relates in the third part of his Somme Historique. After having said that the greater part of the French Cordeliers were killed by the Saracens, he adds these words: “But not one of the virgins of St. Claire escaped.” The abbess of this order, who possessed a masculine spirit, having learnt that the enemy had entered the city, called all her sisters together by the sound of the bell, and by the force of her words persuaded them to hold the promise they had made to Jesus Christ, their spouse, to preserve their chastity: “My dear daughters, my excellent sisters,” said she, “we must, in this certain danger of life and modesty, show ourselves above our sex. The enemies are near to us; not so much to our bodies as to our souls; these barbarians, who, after having satisfied their brutal lusts upon all they meet, slay them with their swords. In this crisis we cannot hope to escape their fury by flight, but we can by a resolution, painful it is true, but sure. Most men are seduced by the beauty of women; let us deprive ourselves of this attraction, let us seek a preservative for our modesty in that which serves as a cause for its violation. Let us destroy our beauty to preserve our virginity pure. I will set you the example; let those who desire to meet their heavenly spouse imitate their mistress.” At these words she cut her nose off with a razor; the others did the same, and boldly disfigured themselves, to present themselves more beautiful before Jesus Christ. By these means they preserved their purity, for the Saracens, on beholding their bleeding faces, conceived a disgust for them, and killed them all, without sparing one.

[59] Quand il fut revenu au milieu de la citÉ, son dextrier fut molt las, et lui-mÊme aussi; le dextrier resista en contre les espÉrons, et s’arresta dans la rue comme qui n’en peut plus. Les Sarrasins, À coups de flÈches, ruÈrent À terre frÈre Guillaume; ainsi ce loyal champion de Jesus-Christ rendit l’Âme À son CrÉateur.

[60] Among the marvellous accounts to which the destruction of the Christian colonies in Syria gave birth, history has preserved the following:—“In the year 1291, the house of the holy Virgin at Nazareth, in which she conceived the Son of God, was transported by angels to the top of a little mountain in Dalmatia, on the shore of the Adriatic Sea: three years afterwards it was transported to another shore of the same sea, in a wood which belonged to a widow named Loretto. There have been since built upon this spot a small city and a magnificent church, which still preserve the name of this widow.”

[61] We are not able to add anything to the learned researches of M. Raynouard upon the condemnation of the Templars. We refer our readers to his work, and to our Appendix.

[62] This article of the will of Charles-le-Bel is related by Ducange. It has been remarked that it is dated the 24th of October, 1324, and that Charles died in 1327: we may suppose that the date is incorrect, or that Charles-le-Bel did not perform his vow.

[63] We have before us a will made at this period, in which a gentleman of the name of Castellen, already illustrious in the times of the crusades, gives a sum for the expenses of the holy war. We regret we are not able to publish the text of this document, which has been communicated to us by the family of the testator.

[64] A memoir on the part which the Spaniards took in the crusades, read at the Academy of Madrid, describes the labours, the adventures, and wanderings of Raymond Lulli. The Histoire Ecclesiastique of Fleury may likewise be consulted.

[65] We have taken these particulars of Raymond Lulli from the Spanish dissertations upon the crusades, which we have already quoted in the preceding book.

[66] See what Sanuti himself relates in his book, from which we shall take many extracts.

[67] It appears almost incomprehensible that our author should, in these reflections, omit that which must strike every one else as the principal cause of the change he affects to lament. In the days of Peter the Hermit, a crusade was a golden day-dream, in which ambition and cupidity indulged as strongly as piety or superstition. But experience had not only proved it to be “a baseless fabric,” but a cruel and a bitter scourge to all who had embarked in one. The first Crusaders were visionary—later ones must have been mad.—Trans.

[68] Et venoist À tous seigneurs moult grande plaisance, et spÉcialement À ceux qui vouloient le temps dispenser en armes, et qui adonc ne le tuvoient mie bien raisonnablement employer ailleurs.—Froissart.

[69] The eternal production of the Holy Ghost, which proceeds from the Father and the Son.—Trans.

[70] Our readers will observe by this, that the crescent, which has generally, but falsely, been taken as the standard of all Saracens, belongs to the Ottomans: it has never been mentioned in this history before.—Trans.

[71] The character of Constantine was worthy of being celebrated by the epic muse. One of our most distinguished statesmen has undertaken this glorious task.—See the poem of The Last Constantine, by M. de Vaublanc. [We wonder our author is not here struck by the very palpable reflection, that empires, kingdoms, and other institutions, which have richly merited their fall, frequently expire under the immediate rule of men who have not been instrumental in bringing about their ruin—they are but the last step of a headlong declivity,—if they are of adamant they must yield. The history of his own country and of ours might have supplied him with hints for such a reflection.—Trans.]

[72] For the siege of Constantinople, the very detailed account of Gibbon, and the rapid but complete picture of M. Salabury, in his History of the Turkish Empire, may be consulted.

[73] Olivier de la Marche, after giving a description of the festival and of the divers spectacles offered to the eyes of the guests, adds: “Such were the dainty mundane dishes of this festival, of which I will leave others to speak, to give an account of a pitiable portion of it, which appears to me of more consequence than the others,” &c.

[74] Olivier de la Marche says, that the duke of Burgundy had already undertaken, three years before, to make a crusade against the Turks, in an assembly held at Mons.

[75] Some modern historians who have spoken of these vows of the knights, have exaggerated the fantasticalness of them. I find, among others, in one of these historians, this sentence: “In short, what gives the best idea of the devotion of these new Crusaders is, that one vowed that if, up to the moment of his departure, he could not obtain the favours of his mistress, he would marry the first demoiselle he should meet with having twenty thousand crowns.” We have found nothing like this in either Montstrelet or Olivier de la Marche, who are the only authors of the times who speak of this festival.

[76] We smile when reading this strange scene of safe and ignorant boasting; but if a Grand Turk ever indulges in mirth, we should think it would have excited the laughter of Mahomet, if he chanced to hear of it.—Trans.

[77] He should have reminded him of glorious old Henry Dandolo.—Trans.

[78] Nothing can be more unaccountable than such reflections! What did these wretched outcasts know or care about the dangers of Europe? What they sought was relief from the destitution they suffered; and if the Turks had been in Europe, they would have enlisted with them.—Trans.

[79] Jacques Coeur was condemned to death, and his property was confiscated. Charles VII. contented himself with banishing Jacques Coeur; but his property was not restored for a long time. Sixty of the clerks of Jacques Coeur subscribed together, and made up a sum of 60,000 crowns, with which he retired to the isle of Cyprus and reËstablished his trade. He founded an hospital for pilgrims there, and a Carmelite convent, in which he was buried. Jacques Coeur built many houses at Marseilles, Montpellier, and Bourges: among others, the beautiful house which is now the municipality. It was Louis XI. who reinstated the memory of Jacques Coeur. The inscription which is here mentioned must have been also in the hospital for pilgrims at Cyprus.

[80] The saying of the AbbÉ de Vertot was but an expression of politeness addressed to somebody who offered him documents, not in the interests of truth, but in the interest of some families, who wished that their names should be mentioned. In fact, if the documents they offered him concerned the truth, they had nothing to do but to publish them; now, we see nothing that has been published upon the siege of Rhodes that proves that the AbbÉ de Vertot was mistaken, or forgot anything of importance. It has not even been attempted to attack the authenticity of the facts he relates by any criticism that has survived to our times. There only remains the famous expression, my siege is completed, without any one having sought to explain in what sense and upon what subject this expression was made.

[81] Mahomet II. took Constantinople in 1453, and died in 1481.—Trans.

[82] The reflections this passage gives birth to might fill pages; but almost the most striking is, to observe how the operations of men’s minds and industry, in their progress, obliterate that which is gone before, and then again, after a season, which season has done its work in spreading civilization and intelligence, return to old courses. Though science is bringing us back to the old route to India, what wonders the discovery of Vasco de Gama has effected for the progress of the Great Scheme!—Trans.

[83] To what extent this sort of profanation is carried, even by so-called civilized nations, may be seen by the story (we hope not a true one) of Sir Sidney Smith and a party of English sailors, after the siege of Acre, singing “God save the king,” in full chorus, in the great mosque of Omar, at Jerusalem.—Trans.

[84] This is the passage of the ordinance that relates to the banners that were to be carried in procession:—“There shall be made, at the same time, a handsome banner, upon which shall be painted our holy father the pope, in his full pontificals, accompanied by several cardinals and other prelates, being in pontificals, and mitred with white mitres; the pope shall be on the dexter, the king on the sinister, armed completely in white except his armour of state, which shall be borne by his squire, accompanied by several princes and other lords, all armed; on the other side of the said banner, histories and other pictures, full of Turks and other Infidels.”

[85] All these documents are unpublished, and very voluminous; we will give some extracts from them in our Appendix.

[86] Some writers have pretended, against the opinion of Bossuet and David Hume, that Luther was not drawn into his opposition by a motive of jealousy, and by a sentiment of self-love. In spite of their objections, the fact is demonstrated. The learned Mosheim, in his history, has not thought proper to justify Luther on this head; which is besides of very little importance.

[87] The fruit became ripe in the age of Leo, and therefore he generally has the merit of the cultivation. Nicholas V. promoted the growth of intelligence and the arts quite as earnestly as Leo, and with more prudence and less pretension. But this is a common error: no age was ever more forgetful that all knowledge is progressive, than the present; we enjoy much, and claim all the merit of it; but very unjustly.—Trans.

[88] This question, we think, will admit of another decision. M. Michaud confounds the aristocracy with the middle class. When a class becomes raised, by any means, to an hereditary superiority, not purchased by individual merit of any other kind, manners are too frequently set at defiance, and morals become corrupt. What he says of the middle class is quite correct. The whole history of the world cannot furnish such an instance of stability and prosperity, as is now offered in England by the influence of an intelligent, prudent, moral middle class.—Trans.

[89] Will not much of this apply to all religions, all times, and all countries? Success hallows everything—it makes rebellion, revolution; assassination, patriotism; crimes, virtues. The Jesuits are said to be the warmest religionists in the world. Could Mussulman priests have expressed more delight in the advent and success of the strongest despotism that Europe ever witnessed, than they have done recently?—Trans.

[90] I look for you six months hence on the shores of the Hellespont.

[91] The last capitulations are of the reign of Louis XV.

[92] This resignation is expressed in a very singular manner in an extract from the manuscript of the library of Berne,—“Upon the cause why the Saracens possess the Holy Land.”

Brother Vincent, in a sermon which he made, and which had for its text, “Ecce ascendimus Hierosoleman,” gives three reasons for it:—“The first,” said he, “is to excuse the Christians; the second is for the confusion of the Saracens; and the third is for the conversion of the Jews. As to the first reason, we ought all to know that there is no Christian, however holy, who does not sin, and has not sinned, except Jesus and his mother, the glorious Virgin Mary; and God is not willing that Christians should sin in the land in which Jesus Christ, his son, suffered the passion for the sins of men; and would account it a great offence. But He is not thus offended by the Saracens; for they are dogs. It would displease the king if his children or his knights should make water in his chamber; but when a dog makes water there, he takes no account of it.”

See Catalogus Codicum MSS. BibliothecÆ Bernensis, &c. tom. i. p. 79.

[93] This account of the crusades at first appeared in the Mercury, and was afterwards printed in a little volume. It is now merged in Voltaire’s Histoire GÉnÉrale.

[94] Two memorials obtained prizes; one was by M. Hercen, the other by M. Choisseul d’Aullecourt. Both are remarkable for erudition and spirit of criticism; they marked out the way we have followed, and we take pleasure in acknowledging all we owe them.

[95] When a person moderately read in French history remembers the selfish, sensual, wicked characters here so unduly eulogized, he may forgive himself for the smile with which he must read the “impotent conclusion.”—Trans.

[96] Say, rather—rendered so infamous by his cruelties.—Trans.

[97] The chronicle of Tours tells us, with the greatest simplicity, that Charlemagne was called the Great on account of his great good luck; thus historians confounded, as the vulgar do, glory with fortune.

[98] These must be exceedingly remote times, indeed; such as we have no account of. The oldest poems, the oldest histories, describe no such state; the savage tribes of the forest and the desert have something of a pride of ancestry, and are known as the sons of their fathers, as well as Achilles was known as Pelides, or Gaul as the son of Morni.—Trans.

[99] It does not become us, as translators, to enter into controversy with our original, otherwise, much might be said in reply to this truly conservative paragraph. But, as readers of history, we think we may be permitted to observe, that the advantages pointed out in the first lines of it do not appear in the history of Venice. She was never so great or so prosperous as when purely mercantile. When territory was acquired, and nobility arose, corruption and decay soon followed.—Trans.

[100] And yet we cannot think that the custom of the Scotch lairds, who assume the name of their estates, can be traced to this source, although they do it in the same way. It seems probable that the French de, generally admitted as a proof of gentility, at least, was adopted upon such an occasion; but even this de is subject to doubt, as implying the lord of the estate, country, or city, or the man who raised himself into note from the country or city.—Trans.

[101] How was it, then, that William of Normandy, on his conquest of England, two centuries before, created so many of his knights, earls and barons, giving them titles of the places and estates he at the same time bestowed? Philip-le-Hardi, no doubt, gave the newly-created nobles means to support their honours and nobility was connected with property, as it had been.—Trans.

[102] In this suggestive passage we are sorry to find the prejudices of our original inducing him to give a false colouring to his picture. Monarchs granted no immunities to the people out of love for either liberty or the people, but to gain their assistance against their enemies, the great vassals or barons—thence the consequences; the principle was carried so far, that the monarch was elevated into the despot; and then another change ensued; when his power was so complete that his old enemies looked upon him as the source of all honours and riches, they united with him; both joined in their endeavours to oppress and plunder the people; and then came the last phase.—Trans.

[103] And yet he lived under Richelieu, in the nominal reign of Louis XIII., and in the reign of Louis XIV.!—Trans.

[104] Most political economists call man’s labour property; M. Michaud has shown that the bulk of the people, under the feudal system, paid society labour, life, and liberty; and yet he calls these nothing!—Trans.

[105] I do not recollect this prediction; but I perfectly remember Montesquieu foretells that France will perish by the sword.—Trans.

[106] What can this mean? Taxation is as old as governments of any kind.—Trans.

[107] Servez Dieu, et il vous aidera: soyez doux et courtois À tout gentil-homme en otant de vous tout orgueil; ne soyez flatteur ne rapporteur; car telles maniÈres de gens ne viennent pas À gran le perfection. Soyez loyal en faits et en dits; tenez votre parole; soyez secourables À pauvres et orphelins, et Dieu vous le guerdonnera.

[108] Le PÈre HÉlyot, in his Histoire des Ordres Monastiques, vol. i. p. 263, expresses himself thus, when speaking of the order of St. Lazarus:—“What is very remarkable is, that they could only elect as grand-master, a leprous knight of the hospital of Jerusalem, which lasted up to the time of Innocent IV., that is to say, about the year 1253, when, having been obliged to abandon Syria, they addressed the pontiff, and represented to him, that always having had, from their foundation, a leprous knight for grand-master, they found themselves in the impossibility of electing one, because the infidels had killed all the leprous knights of their hospital at Jerusalem. For this reason, they prayed the pontiff to allow them to elect, for the future, as grand-master, a knight who had not been attacked by leprosy, and who might be in good health; and the pope referred them to the bishop of Trascate, that he might accord them this permission, after having examined if that could be done according to the will of God. This is reported by Pope Pius IV., in his bull of the year 1565, so extended and so favourable to the order of St. Lazarus, by which he renews all the privileges and all the gifts that his predecessors had granted to it, and gives it fresh ones. Here is what he says of the election these knights ought to make of a leprous grand-master:—Et Innocentius IV., per eum accepto, quod licet de antiqu approbat et hactenÙs pacificÈ observat consuetudine obtentum esset, ut miles leprosus domÛs Sancti-Lazari Hierosolymitani in ejus magistrum assumeretur; verÙm quia ferÈ omnes milites leprosi dictÆ domÛs ab inimicis fidei miserabiliter interfecti fuerant, et hujusmodi consuetudo nequiebat commodÈ observari: idcircÒ tunc episcopo Tusculano per quasdam commiserat, ut, si sibi secundÙm Deum visum foret expedire fratribus ipsis licentiam, aliquem militem sanum et fratribus prÆdictÆ domÛs Sancti-Lazari in ejus magistrum (non obstante consuetudine hujusmodi de cÆtero eligendi) auctoritate apostolic concederet.

[109] For serfs this might be a blessing, but for free labour it was complained of as an evil. La Fontaine’s Cobbler, when describing his state to the Financier, says:—

“Chaque jour amÈne son pain,
TantÔt plus, tantÔt moins: le mal est que toujours
(Et sans cela nos gains seraient assez honnÊtes),
Le mal est que dans l’an s’entremÊlent des jours
Qu’il faut chÔmer; on nous ruine en fÊtes;
L’une fait tort À l’autre; et monsieur le curÉ
De quelque nouveau saint charge toujours son prÔnÉ.”

Every day brings its bread; sometimes more, sometimes less: the worst is that always (and without that our gains would be very tolerable), the evil is, that in the year so many days creep in in which we must be idle—we are ruined in festivals; one treads upon the heels of another; and master curate is always introducing some new saint into his sermon.—Trans.

[110] We are constantly withheld, by the respect due from translators to originals, from making remarks in opposition to our author, when he lays down the historian’s pen to get into the philosopher’s chair. In the course of this chapter, our readers must have observed much reflection that is not deep, and some passages that are contradictory of others; but all has one great merit—it is extremely suggestive.—Trans.

[111] How could the clergy be said to pay for these wars? What became of the vast sums raised by the sale of indulgences of all kinds? The clergy had the collecting of the offerings of the faithful, which we have seen was sometimes profitable. Besides, the barons and knights paid for their own and their vassals’ equipments as long as they had a coin left; then the king or leader, as Louis IX. did, sometimes helped them.—Trans.

[112] This is one of innumerable instances in the course of the work, in which the reader must regret that M. Michaud was not aware he was writing for the world; his views, and, I am sorry to say, his biasses, are exclusively French.—Trans.

[113] Surely he should have added to these, the human passions and mundane interests of these ignorant, independent tyrants.—Trans.

[114] Is not there always some such dominant principle in society? Is not money now as powerful as brute force or skill in arms were in the middle ages?—Trans.

[115] Nothing has been better said upon the influence of the clergy and religion, in the middle ages, than that which we read in a work entitled Des IntÉrÊts et des Opinions, by M. FievÉe:—“At a time in which the Church imposed public penitences, whilst the tribunals only ordered judgments by arms, we cannot see how the high police could not have fallen into the hands of the ecclesiastics; and it was because they alone exercised it, that, in the civil wars, fortunate princes confided to the monks the guarding of princes, from whom the fate of battle or treachery took the rights they possessed to share the kingdom. It was necessary that the void left by the laws should be filled up, or the state would perish; and the priests alone enjoyed a moral authority sufficiently great to supply the weakness of legislation;—exalted passions, more powerful virtues, great crimes, great remorse; a proud independence, salutary fears; an excess of force, and no regulations; courage in everything and everywhere: such was, at this period, the state of society;—it is easy to perceive that religion alone contended with barbarism.” We regret not to be able to quote more than a fragment of a work filled with ingenious perceptions and profound views, upon the march of civilization in the middle ages.

[116] The author of A Memoir to serve as a New History of Louis XII. carries the first appearance of judicial reform in France to the reign of that monarch. He has prosecuted on this subject learned researches, and his work has given us much information upon the spirit and the march of our legislation in the middle ages. Although we do not always agree as to the consequences of the principles he develops, particularly as to their application to that which is passing at present, we take pleasure in rendering justice to the rare sagacity with which he has cleared up questions which have been scarcely perceived by our best historians.

[117] La Fontaine.

[118] And yet Marseilles had been a flourishing port for ages. In the early crusades it did not belong to the French monarchy.—Trans.

[119] “A skilful man, appointed to view and make a report of a thing,” in this case; but it has several other meanings; as a man of worth, probity, or even valour.—Trans.

[120] Hotspur says to his lady—

“Swear me, Kate, like a lady, as thou art,
A good mouth-filling oath!”

The queen’s anathema upon Joinville, is, in the original, something of this character.—Trans.

[121] M. de Choiseul d’Aillecourt gives in his MÉmoire a very extended nomenclature of the inventions brought from the East into Europe by the Crusaders.

[122] And has not this been the case with all rich and prosperous nations? What invariably follows this high state of opulence, of the fine arts, and their attendant sensuality, is a question for every great nation that is so circumstanced to ask itself.—Trans.

[123] We are not positive whether the small-pox was known in Europe previously to the Crusaders. Its introduction amongst us is frequently attributed to them; and we observe, in reading the history of Mahomet and his successors, many persons were marked with the scars left by this disease. We wonder Michaud does not mention it.—Trans.

[124] The Moors of Spain may be adduced as an example against this opinion. It is true that the Moors of Granada cultivated the arts and sciences for a long time, and with much success; but what became of them when they returned to the coast of Africa?

[125] Lord Bolingbroke said: “After all, it is Nicholas V. to whom Europe is obliged for its present state of learning” (Spence).—Trans.

[126] The best answer to this is, that the too widely extended Mussulman power was as much split into sections by discord and ambition as Europe was. At the time of the first crusade there was no dread of invasion from the East; and the invasion of the Christians produced unanimity in defence of Mahomedanism.—Trans.

[127] It is somewhat remarkable, that in this very interesting summary, Michaud makes no mention of the exact sciences. We are generally supposed to be indebted to the Arabians for great improvement, if not for entire knowledge of mathematics; and although that knowledge may have come to us through Spain, we cannot think mention of the circumstance would have been out of its place here.—Trans.

[128] Although we cannot pretend to be perfectly acquainted with all the saints of these ages, we think this may be the same Paulinus who had been bishop of Nola, and who, if not the first inventor of bells, was the first who applied them to sacred purposes.—Trans.

[129] M. Michaud says, we must consider this Itinerary as the first account of the voyage to the Holy Land that we are in possession of.

Bordeaux, at the time of the pilgrims’ departure, was one of the principal cities of the Gauls. It is situated at the mouth of the Garonne, in the Bay of Biscay, and is strongly associated with English history, as having been for a long time the residence of the Black Prince, and the birth-place of the unfortunate Richard II.—Trans.

[130] Our readers will judge, by two or three humorous traits in this description, that our monk of Malmesbury had no objection to a joke. The national characteristics here mentioned are curious, as proving how long our northern friends have been jeered at for their scratching propensities, and that the love of drinking was peculiar to the Dane before it was reprobated by Hamlet:—

“This heavy-headed revel, east and west,
Makes us traduced, and taxed of other nations:
They clepe us drunkards, and with swinish phrase
Soil our addition,”

[131] This was St. Hugh, consecrated in the year 1081, by Pope Gregory VII., the same who, a short time after, received St. Bruno and his companions, and gave them the solitude of the Chartreuse, to found a new order there. The church of Tours was then governed by Rodolph II.

[132] Saladin here speaks of the battle of Tiberias.

[133] The count of Tripoli.

[134] To understand this phrase, we must remember that the author of the letter compares the fortifications of Jerusalem to a necklace.

[135] This is a most extraordinary circumstance and proclaims to us not only the fame of Saladin, the monarch of such a distant country, but likewise the fear in which he was held in Europe. Notwithstanding his greater proximity, we did not call our income-tax the Buonaparte tax, as we might have done.—Trans.

[136] Here is a little bit for the antiquaries of Clerkenwell, which is, no doubt, meant by this.—Trans.

[137] This is a valuable hint for poets, painters, and novelists.—Trans.

[138] This may appear improbable; but there is no doubt Richard was a perfect horseman; and we very well remember Mr. Goldham, of the London and Westminster volunteer light-horse, performing the broad sword exercise with a sword in each hand, and his horse at speed, before George III., in Hyde Park.—Trans.

[139] Although our chronicler does not tell us so, we may presume that when one of Richard’s troop cut down a Turkish horseman, he did not leave his saddle long empty, and that such accessions enabled the Christians to make an effective pursuit.—Trans.

[140] If any limner had the skill to paint Richard’s countenance at parting with such a friend as his “good sword,” this would make a fine picture. The feelings, which must have nearly suffocated his lion heart, would furnish matter for a poem.—Trans.

[141] We give a translation of this extract because it is very curious; but we have no faith in it with respect to the date; it appears to us to be much more modern, and some parts of the language inconsistent with others.—Trans.

[142] But, as in most such cases, religion was rather the cloak than the basis of ambition. The Mussulman empire, after the three first caliphs, became too large and too complicated to be governed by a simple Arab; and the miraculous conquests of the sect naturally made the generals who achieved them ambitious of governing what they conquered. The religious feud was but an excuse.—Trans.

[143] This doctrine prevailed among the IsmaËlians of Persia during nearly fifty years; but Djelah-ed Din, grandson of Hassan, reËstablished the worship in its purity.

[144] Dai, an Arabian participle, signifies properly him who calls,—advocans; and by extension it designates a person who preaches to men, and invites them to embrace some doctrine. The title of dai was common in the first century of Islamism. Every sect had its own.

[145] A passage of the historian Mirkhoud supports this account; he informs us that Hassan, after getting possession of the castle of Altamont, caused a canal to be dug, and brought water from a great distance to the foot of his castle. Fruit-trees were planted round it, and he encouraged the inhabitants to sow the land. It was thus that the air of this place, which had been unwholesome, became pure and salubrious.

[146] M. Jourdain, who addressed this interesting letter to me, has published a work entitled La Perse, ou le Tableau de l’Histoire du Gouvernement, de la LittÉrature, de cet Empire, des Moeurs et Coutumes des Habitants. This work, in five vols. in 18mo., contains many new notions and curious details, and does honour to the talent as well as to the erudition of the Orientalist.

[147] The original of this fragment is in the Bibl. GrÆc. of Fabricius, vol. vi, p. 405, and in the first volume of the Imperium Orientiale of BandiÈre. It is not in the editions of Nicetas.

[148] Coins worth two shillings and fourpence each.

[149] This is an extraordinary description of what must have been a surprising work of art; but we cannot reconcile the idea we entertain of a basilisk with that of the animal mentioned—we thought a basilisk was a kind of serpent.—Trans.

[150] Vincent Bellev. Specul. Hist. book xxx. chap. 5; Albert Stad. Chron. fol. 202; Godefr. Monach. Annal. ap. Frch. Collect. Alberici, p. 489; Sicard. Chron. ap. Murat. vol. vii. p. 623.

[151] Thomas de Cantipr. De Apibus.

[152] Chron. Argent, ap. Urtii, Collect. vol. i. p. 1.

[153] Jacob de Vorrag. Chron. Januense, ap. Murat. vol. ix. p. 46. What proves the error of this date is, that Bizarre (Hist. Genuens.), who has copied this chronicle, places the event under the year 1212. I do not know by what authority John Massey places it in his chronicle in 1210.

[154] See the Chron. Anon. of Strasburg, Godfrey the Monk, James of Varagine, and Bishop Sicard.

[155] Alberic enters into copious details; and though this historian generally sins on the side of extravagant credulity, his evidence cannot, in this case, be doubted.

[156] Jacques de Vorrag.

[157] Albert de Stadt.

[158] Anonymous Chronicle of Strasburg.

[159] This account is furnished by Alberic, and is confirmed by Thomas of ChamprÉ and Roger Bacon.

[160] Chron. Augus.; Chron. Argent.

[161] Godfrey the Monk.

[162] Opus Majus, p. 254, ed. in fol.

[163] See Marin, Storia Civile e Politica del Commercia de’ Veneziani, vol. i. p. 206; Do Guignes, MÉmoires sur le Commerce des Francs dans le Levant, &c.; vol. xxxvii. of Les MÉmoires de l’Acad. des Inscr.

[164] Videmus anno incarn. Di. 1213, infinitam puerorum multitudinem spiritu deceptionis arreptos, cum signaculo crucis iter Hierosolymitanum agressos fuisse, periisseque diversis in locis; et maximam ex eis multitudinem per malefices quosdam Sarracenis in mari venditos extitisse.—Lib. de Apibus.

[165] Forsan vidistis aut audivistis pro certo quod pueri de regno FranciÆ semel occurrebant in infinit multitudine post quemdem malignum hominem, ita quod nec À patribus, nec À matribus, nec ab amicis poterant detineri, et positi sunt in navibus et Sarracenis venditi, et non sunt adhuc 64 annis.—Opus Majus, p. 254.

[166] We promised to give in the Appendix some letters and the Bull of this pope relative to the crusade of 1197; but as the contents of these pieces are all alike, with the exception of some trifling expressions, we shall confine ourselves to this one.

[167] Lord, know that he who shall not go to that land where God was both living and dead, and who shall not take the cross beyond the seas, shall have no chance of going into Paradise: he who has pity and remembrance of the Lord, ought from war and vengeance to deliver his land and his country.... Now, every valiant bachelor will go who loves God and honours the holy mountain; they who act wisely will go to God, the base and the vile will stay behind: they are blind, as I think, who in their lives offer no assistance to God, and lose the glory of the mount for such a trifle. God suffered for us on the cross; and will say to us on the day to which all will come:—“You who helped me to bear my cross, you shall go where angels dwell, and shall there see both me and my mother Mary; and you from whom I have received nothing, descend all into the depths of hell!”

[168] Mrs. Hemans’ beautiful poem, Messages to the Dead, is upon this subject; and in a note, quoted from Mr. Brunton’s Discipline, she says that the custom was not uncommon in the Highlands.—Trans.

[169] In the regulations which were made for the Prussian converts, the popes particularly condemned the funeral customs of these people. “The neophytes,” say these regulations, “promise not to burn their dead, and not to bury with them men, or horses, arms, clothes, or valuable things. They will no longer have those impostors called ligastons, who resemble pagan priests, and who, at funerals, praise the dead for robberies, impieties, and other sins,” &c. These regulations enable us to become acquainted with many of the ancient customs of the Prussians.

[170] This is a most remarkable resemblance to the word signifying bard in Welsh, and to the name of the Welsh bard, par excellence.—Trans.

[171] The reader may remember they were left in the camp with the duke at Burgundy.

[172] This passage is very obscure.

[173] These instructions were inscribed in a register of the Chamber of Accounts. To facilitate the reading of them to the public, some impressions have been modernized.

[174] That is, the papers or accounts. We have given it exactly as it stands, that our readers may the more plainly perceive the nature of these documents.—Trans.

[175] By which we may perceive that dining at parish meetings is not a custom confined to modern times.

[176] By which we learn that the charge of a notary was one livre per diem.

[177] This must be Henry VII. from the dates, the contemporary princes, and the character given of the monarch.—Trans.

[178] How amusing, and, at the same time, wonderfully instructive it is, to read these schemes of philosophers and statemen a hundred and fifty years after they have occupied their thoughts by day and their visions by night!—Trans.

[179] Words intertwined with the letters of the cipher of the Grand Seignor.

[180] This passage being the basis of all the privileges of the French in Turkey, it often serves as a motive in the requests of ambassadors, and as a foundation for the firmans of the Grand Seignor.

[181] Much more is wanting to show that the informations received against the Templars furnished either moral or legal proof of the existence of the Bafometic figures. The act of accusation says not one word of it. There is no mention of it in the great procedure instituted at Paris, or in the numerous depositions of the witnesses whom the inquisitor and the commissaries of the pope questioned. Of the six witnesses heard at Carcassonne, who declared that an idol was presented to them, only two designated it in Figuram Bafometi. One, Gaucerand de Montpesat, when brought to Paris, retracted all preceding confession; there only then remained one single witness, of whose ulterior conduct and end nothing is known. It is proved, that of the other four persons interrogated at Carcassonne, Jean Cassauhas and Peter de Mossi retracted their first deposition, and Jean Cassauhas was burnt in that city.

[182] The pretended truncated cross, which M. Hammer believed he recognised upon the medals, which otherwise have nothing to do with the Templars, is nothing but the effect of the superposition of a hand upon the upper part of an ordinary cross; this hand, which holds the cross by the top, is found upon many medals and coins which M. Hammer himself would not dare to attribute to the Templars.

[183] Raimundus de Agiles says of the Mahometans: In ecclesiis autem magnis Bafumarias faciebant ... habebant monticulum ubi duÆ erant BafumariÆ. The troubadours employ Baformaria for mosque, and Bafomet for Mahomet.