Amidst these sanguinary disputes, Conrad, who had an ambassador at the

court of Saladin, unable longer to endure the authority of Richard,

entered into an alliance with the Mussulmans. Saladin, by treaty,

abandoned to the marquis of Tyre all the cities the latter might take

from the Christians, and promised to aid him in his conquests, only

reserving the booty for the Mussulman soldiers. This treaty, dictated

by hatred to Richard, was the signal for the death of Conrad; a very

short time afterwards the marquis of Tyre perished by an unknown hand.

English authors assert that Conrad had had quarrels with the chief of

the Ismaëlians, and that he was assassinated by the orders of this

redoubtable enemy. Two young slaves left the voluptuous gardens, in

which their master had brought them up, to execute his vengeance. They

arrived at Tyre, and, in order to conceal their purpose the better,

received baptism. They engaged themselves in the service of Conrad,

and remained six months about his person, apparently only occupied

in offering up prayers to the God of the Christians. One day, as the

marquis was coming from dining with the bishop of Beauvais, the two

Ismaëlians attacked him, and wounded him mortally. Whilst the people

congregated tumultuously, one of the assassins fled into a neighbouring

church, into which, likewise, the bleeding marquis was borne. The

Ismaëlian, who had concealed himself, suddenly rushed through the

crowd, and again falling upon Conrad, struck him repeatedly with his

dagger, till he was quite dead. The two assassins were seized, and both

died amidst tortures, without uttering a single groan, or naming the

person who had employed them to take away the life of the marquis of

Tyre.[348]

The continuator of Tabary says that Saladin had offered the Old Man of

the Mountains ten thousand pieces of gold if he would cause the marquis

of Tyre and the king of England to be assassinated; but the prince of

the mountain, adds the same historian, did not think proper to deliver

Saladin entirely from his war with the Franks, and only performed

half of that which had been required of him. The Christians did not

attribute the death of Conrad to Saladin, but many among them accused

Richard of it. A short time after the murder, a letter was published,

in which the lord of the mountain avowed himself to be the author of

the assassination; but this letter bore no character of authenticity

about it. The savage lord of the mountain could not write, and could

have no interest in making the apology of a Christian prince.[349] The

king of England himself strengthened the public suspicions by taking

possession of Tyre, and giving the widow of Conrad in marriage to his

nephew, the count of Champagne. However it may be, this accusation,

which was accredited among the Christians, announced plainly the idea

they entertained of the character of Richard. The account of the death

of Conrad soon reached Europe, and Philip Augustus, dreading the same

fate, no longer appeared in public without being surrounded by a guard.

The court of France accused Richard of the blackest attempts; but it is

probable that Philip, on this occasion, showed more fear than he really

felt, in order to render his rival the more odious, and to arm against

him the hatred of the pope, and the indignation of all the princes of

Christendom.

After the death of Conrad, Richard had no rivals to suspect, or

enemies to fight with among the Christians; the opinion even that was

entertained of his character, only served to augment his authority, by

creating a dread of his hatred or vengeance. He took advantage of a

moment, in which Saladin disbanded part of his army, to get possession

of the castle of Darcum, built upon the confines of Palestine, towards

Egypt. He undertook several other enterprises, which spread terror and

surprise among the Saracens; and, all at once, to satisfy the wishes

of the Crusaders, marched towards Jerusalem, in which city Saladin had

shut himself up with all the troops he could gather together. At the

approach of the Christians, the sultan convoked his emirs, and made

them swear, on the stone of Jacob, to be buried beneath the ruins of

the city rather than yield it up to the soldiers of Richard.

The Christian army encamped at the foot of the mountains of Judea,

all the passes of which were guarded by the troops of Saladin and

the Saracen peasants of Naplouse and Hebron. As Richard drew near

to Jerusalem, his aversion to the idea of allowing the duke of

Austria and the duke of Burgundy to share in such a glorious conquest

increased; whilst they were not at all willing to assist the king

of England in an enterprise that would so much augment his pride

and renown. Every time that he proposed to proceed against the holy

city, the zeal of the leaders of the army appeared to cool;[350] and

when Richard sought to defer the conquest, most of them endeavoured

to arouse the enthusiasm of the Crusaders, and repeated the oath

they had taken to deliver the tomb of Christ. Thus the proximity to

Jerusalem, which ought to have united the Christians more firmly, only

served to increase their divisions, and spread trouble, disorder, and

discouragement through the whole army.

The Christians were but a few leagues from Jerusalem, and the council

assembled to determine what steps must be taken. Many of the leaders

thought that they ought at once to besiege the city, and spoke of the

consternation of the Mussulmans. The soldiers of Saladin, said they,

had not forgotten the evils of Ptolemaïs, and trembled at the idea of

again shutting themselves within the ramparts of a city. Fugitives from

Jerusalem had informed them that the presence even of Saladin could

not keep up the spirits of the soldiers, and that all the inhabitants,

seized with terror, were upon the point of flying to Damascus.

They who maintained an opposite opinion, among whom was Richard,

thought that the reports spread regarding the disposition of the

Mussulmans were but a snare of Saladin’s, by which he hoped to lure

the Crusaders into places in which he could destroy them without

fighting. “At the moment in which we are speaking,” said they, “the

Mussulman cavalry surround the plain on which our army is encamped. It

is difficult and dangerous to advance across the mountains of Judea.

The roads, bordered by precipices, are, in many places, cut through the

solid rock, and are dominated by steep heights, from which ill-armed

peasants will be sufficient to crush, or at least to stop the columns

of the Christians. How are we to transport through such narrow passes

our baggage, our machines, or our munitions of war? If our bravery

should succeed in surmounting all these difficulties, will it be easy

to keep up our communications with the coast? If we are conquered, how

shall we make our retreat, pursued by the army of Saladin?”

Opinions continued to be divided: the king of England wished to retreat

to Ascalon; whilst the dukes of Austria and Burgundy warmly maintained

that they ought to march towards Jerusalem. Twenty-four knights were

selected to determine upon the course that was to be adopted, and the

Christian army awaited their decision with an impatience mingled with

fear. After having deliberated for some time, the twenty-four knights

concluded that the army could not pursue its march without danger, and

that the most prudent plan would be to retreat towards the sea-coast.

Richard, after having given the order for retreat, whether he was

sincerely afflicted, or whether he wished to regain the confidence and

esteem of the Crusaders, turned towards Jerusalem with his eyes filled

with tears, and covering his face with his buckler, declared himself

unworthy to behold a city that he could not conquer.

The Crusaders once more turned their backs upon Jerusalem, which they

had sworn so often and so solemnly to deliver, the soldiers totally

unable to comprehend the policy or intentions of their leaders.

Richard, who had led the Christian army towards the holy city, might

at least be accused of want of determination of purpose.[351] The

uncertainty of his plans completed the destruction of the confidence

which his skill and great military talents had created; and the despair

of the Crusaders put an end to the fear of a chief they no longer

loved. Discord broke out with fresh fury; such as remained partisans

of Richard, reproached his enemies with misleading the spirit of

the army; but all parties mutually accused each other of favouring

the cause of the infidels. As is generally the case in unsuccessful

wars, perfidy and treachery were the subjects most current among the

Crusaders.

The most violent complaints were uttered against Richard, who replied

to his enemies in a strain of high-minded bravery, worthy of an Amadis

or a Roland. At the head of a weak detachment, he took a convoy of

seven thousand camels on the way to Jerusalem; on another occasion,

going on board a vessel with a few knights, he landed at Jaffa, where

the banners of Saladin floated over the towers and ramparts; he

pursued the conquerors sword in hand, and forced them to abandon their

temporary conquest. A few days after, the king of England, with a troop

of his chosen knights, attacked a body of seven thousand Mussulman

horse; he rushed in amongst them, and with a stroke of his sabre struck

dead at his feet the leader of the Saracens, who all appeared stupified

and motionless with surprise and fear.

But all these perils and all this glory were lost for the cause of the

Christians. Richard became every day more odious to his associates; the

duke of Burgundy with the French retired discontented to Ptolemaïs;

the Germans, commanded by the duke of Austria, quitted Palestine,

and Richard remained alone with the English.[352] Hitherto the king

of England, as he himself told the ambassadors of Saladin, had taken

but little interest in the deliverance of the holy places, and had

only performed such prodigies of valour to increase his fame in the

Christian world. A desire to efface the glory of Philip, much more than

a zeal for religion, governed him in his contests with the Saracens;

he underwent the labours of the holy war in the hope that his exploits

in Palestine would assist him in triumphing over his rivals and

enemies beyond the seas; but as he began to fear being left without

an army, and dreaded the enterprises of Philip, and the plots of his

brother John, against his European states, he determined to resume his

negotiations with Saladin. The various thoughts that harassed his mind,

the shame of not having conquered Jerusalem, the fear of losing his own

kingdom, made him adopt and reject resolutions of the most opposite

nature. At one time he determined upon returning to Europe without

making peace at all—first he supplicated, then he menaced Saladin,

and endeavoured to frighten him, by spreading a report that the pope

was about to arrive in Palestine with an army of two hundred thousand

Crusaders.

Winter had not yet passed away, and the passage of the Mediterranean

was not without danger. “The sea is stormy,” wrote he one day to

Saladin, “but I will brave its tempests, and return to Europe if you

are disposed to make peace. But if you still desire war, I will brave

all its perils, and will lay siege to Jerusalem.” Saladin was encamped

in the vicinity of Ramla, and called his emirs together to deliberate

upon the proposals of Richard. “Up to this period,” said he, “we have

fought with glory, and the cause of Islamism has triumphed by our arms.

I fear that death may surprise me during a peace, and may prevent my

terminating the good work we have begun. Since God gives us victory,

he commands us to continue the war, and we ought to obey his will.”

Most of the emirs applauded the courage and firmness of Saladin, but

they represented to him, “that the cities were without defence, and

the provinces were devastated; the fatigues of war had weakened the

Mussulman army; the horses wanted forage, and provisions for the

soldiers were dearer than gold.” “If we reduce the Franks to despair,”

added they, “they may still overcome us, and wrest all our victories

from our hands. It is wise to observe the maxim of the Koran, which

orders us to grant peace to our enemies when they ask it. Peace will

give us time to fortify our cities, to recruit our forces, and resume

the war with advantage; when the Franks, always faithless in treaties,

will offer us fresh pretexts for attacking them.”

Saladin plainly perceived by this speech of his emirs, that the greater

part of the Saracen warriors were beginning to lose the ardour and

zeal they had evinced for the cause of Islamism. The sultan was

abandoned by several of his auxiliaries, and dreaded the appearance

of division in his own empire. The armies were close to each other,

and the dust which arose from the two camps, says an Arabian author,

mingled in the air and formed but one cloud. Neither the Christians nor

the Mussulmans showed the least impatience to go beyond the boundaries

of their ramparts and ditches, and both being equally tired of the

war, it became the interest of the two leaders to make peace. The

disposition of the minds of the combatants, with the impossibility of

pursuing any warlike enterprises, at length led to the adoption of a

truce for three years and eight months.[353]

It was determined that Jerusalem should be open to the devotion of

the Christians, and that they should hold all the sea-coast from

Jaffa to Tyre. The Saracens and the Christians had both claims upon

Ascalon, which was considered as the key to Egypt, and which the Arabs

called the _spouse of Syria_. To terminate these disputes, it was

agreed that this city should be again demolished. It is not unworthy

of remark, that not a word was said about the true cross, which had

been the subject of the first negotiations, and for which Richard had

sent several ambassadors to Saladin. The principal leaders of the two

armies swore, on the one side upon the Koran, and on the other upon the

Gospel, to observe the conditions of the treaty. Royal majesty assumed

something more imposing and august than even the sanctity of an oath,

for the sultan and the king of England contented themselves with giving

their word and touching the hands of the ambassadors.

All the Mussulman and Christian princes of Syria were invited to sign

the treaty concluded between Richard and Saladin. Among those who

were called upon to be guarantees of the peace, neither the prince

of Antioch, who had taken little share in the war, nor the chief of

the Ismaëlians, the enemy of both Christians and Mussulmans, was

forgotten. Guy de Lusignan alone was not named in the treaty. This

prince enjoyed a momentary importance from the dissensions he had given

birth to, and sunk into oblivion as soon as fresh subjects of discord

arose among the Crusaders. Despoiled of his kingdom, he obtained that

of Cyprus, a far more real possession, but for which he was obliged

to pay the Templars, to whom Richard had sold it. Palestine was

ceded to Henry, count of Champagne, the new husband of that Isabella

who appeared to be promised to all the pretenders to the crown of

Jerusalem, and who, by a singular destiny, had married three kings,

without being able to ascend a throne.[354]

The conclusion of the peace was celebrated by tournaments and

festivities, in which the Mussulmans and Christians laid aside the

fanaticism and hatred which had led them to shed so much blood. Most

of the warriors of the West, by the invitation of Saladin, visited

the holy places they had been unable to deliver, and then embarked

for Europe. At the moment of departure, the French lost the duke

of Burgundy, who fell sick and died in the city of Tyre, as he was

preparing to leave Palestine.

Thus finished this third crusade, in which all the western powers in

arms obtained no greater advantages than the taking of Ptolemaïs and

the demolition of Ascalon; in it Germany lost, without glory, one of

the greatest of its emperors and the finest of its armies. If we may

believe Arabian authors, six hundred thousand Crusaders appeared before

Ptolemaïs, and scarcely one hundred thousand of these warriors saw

their native country again. Europe had the greater reason to deplore

the losses of this war, from the fact of her armies having been so much

better composed than in preceding expeditions; criminals, adventurers,

and vagabonds, had been strictly excluded from the ranks. All that the

West could boast of the most noble and illustrious of its warriors had

taken up arms.

The Crusaders that contended with Saladin were better armed and better

disciplined than any that preceded them in Palestine; the foot-soldiers

employed the cross-bow, which had been neglected or prohibited in the

second crusade. Their cuirasses, and their bucklers covered with thick

leather, defied the arrows of the Saracens; and on the field of battle,

soldiers were often seen bristling with arrows and darts, whom the

Arabs compared to porcupines, still keeping their ranks and fighting

bravely. The Saracens had likewise made some progress in the art of

war, and began to resume the use of the lance, which they did not

employ when the first Crusaders arrived in Syria. The Mussulman armies

were not confused multitudes; they remained longer under their banners,

and fought with less disorder. The Curds and Turks surpassed the

Franks in the art of attacking and defending cities and castles. The

Mussulmans had, besides, more than one advantage over the Crusaders;

they made war upon their own territories and in their own climate; they

were under the command of one single leader, who communicated the same

spirit to all, and only presented to them one cause to defend.

In this crusade the Franks appeared to be more polished than they had

been till that time. Great monarchs making war against each other

without ceasing to give evidences of mutual esteem and generous

feeling, was a new spectacle for the world. Subjects followed the

example of their princes, and lost beneath the tent much of their

barbarism. The Crusaders were sometimes admitted to the table of

Saladin, and emirs received at that of Richard. By thus mingling

together, Saracens and Christians might make a happy exchange of

usages, manners, knowledge, and even virtues.

The Christians, rather more enlightened than during the first crusades,

stood in less need of excitement from the visions of fanaticism.

The passion for glory was for them almost as powerful a principle

as religious enthusiasm. Chivalry also made great progress in this

crusade; it was held in such honour, and the title of KNIGHT was so

glorious, even in the eyes of the infidels, that Saladin did not

disdain to be decorated with it.

The sentiment of honour, and the humanity which is inseparable from it,

often dried tears that the disasters of war had caused to flow; tender

and virtuous passions associated themselves in the minds of heroes with

the austere maxims of religion and the sanguinary images of battle.

Amidst the corruption of camps, love, by inspiring the knights and

troubadours who had taken the cross with noble and delicate sentiments,

preserved them from the seductions of gross debauchery. More than one

warrior, animated by the remembrance of beauty, caused his bravery to

be greatly admired, whilst fighting against the Saracens. It was in

this crusade that the Châtelain de Coucy fell, mortally wounded, by

the side of King Richard. In a song, which is still extant, he had bid

adieu to France, saying that he went to the Holy Land to obtain three

things of inestimable value to a knight,—_Paradise, glory, and the

love of his mistress_.[355] A chronicle of the middle ages relates,

that after he had received a mortal wound and was about to breathe his

last sigh, the faithful Châtelain first confessed himself to the legate

of the Pope, and then charged his squire to bear his heart to the lady

de Fayel. The last commands of Coucy, and the horrible banquet that a

cruel husband caused to be served up to the victim of his jealousy,

show at once what chivalry could inspire of the most touching kind, and

that which the manners of the twelfth century could exhibit of the most

barbarous.[356] The troubadours celebrated in their songs the chivalric

love of the noble Châtelain, and the despair of the beautiful De Vergy,

when she learnt she had eaten the heart of her faithful knight. If we

may believe old chronicles, the lord de Fayel, pursued by remorse and

the opinion of his contemporaries, was obliged to go to the Holy Land,

to expiate his crime and the death of his unfortunate wife.

In this crusade, in which so many knights rendered themselves

illustrious, two men acquired an immortal glory, one by a useless

bravery, and qualities more brilliant than solid, the other by real

successes and virtues that might have served as models to Christians.

The name of Richard remained during a century the terror of the East,

and the Saracens and Turks celebrated him in their proverbs a long time

after the crusades. He cultivated letters, and merited a place among

the troubadours; but the arts did not at all soften his character; it

was his ferocity as well as his courage that procured him the surname

of Cœur de Lion. Carried away by the inconstancy of his inclinations,

he often changed his projects, his affections, and his principles of

action; he sometimes braved religion, and very often devoted himself to

its service. Sometimes incredulous, as often superstitious; measureless

in his hatred as in his friendship, he was extravagant in everything,

and only showed himself constant in his love for war. The passions

which animated him scarcely ever permitted his ambition to have an

aim or a determinate object. His imprudence, his presumption, and the

unsteadiness of his plans, made him lose the fruits of his exploits. In

a word, the hero of this crusade is more calculated to excite surprise

than to create esteem, and appears to belong less to history than to

the romances of chivalry.

With less rashness and bravery than Richard, Saladin possessed a more

firm character, one far better calculated to carry on a religious

war. He paid more attention to the results of his enterprises; more

master of himself, he was more fit to command others. When mounting

the throne of the Atabeks, Saladin obeyed rather his destiny than his

inclinations; but when once firmly seated, he was governed by only two

passions,—that of reigning, and that of securing the triumph of the

Koran. On all other subjects he was moderate, and when a kingdom or the

glory of the prophet was not in question, the son of Ayoub was admired

as the most just and mild of Mussulmans. We may add that the stern

devotion[357] and ardent fanaticism that made him take up arms against

the Christians, only rendered him cruel and barbarous in one single

instance. He displayed the virtues of peace amidst the horrors of war.

“From the bosom of camps,” says an Oriental poet, “_he covered the

nations with the wings of his justice, and poured upon his cities the

plenteous showers of his liberality_.” The Mussulmans, always governed

by fear,[358] were astonished that a sovereign could inspire them with

so much love, and followed him with joy to battle. His generosity, his

clemency, and particularly his respect for an oath, were often the

subjects of admiration to the Christians, whom he rendered so miserable

by his victories, and of whose power in Asia he had completed the

overthrow.[359]

The third crusade, which was so glorious for Saladin, was not entirely

without advantages for Europe. Many Crusaders on the way to Palestine,

stopped in Spain, and by their victories over the Moors, prepared the

deliverance of the kingdoms situated beyond the Pyrenees. A great

number of Germans, as in the second crusade, prevailed upon by the

solicitations of the pope, made war upon the barbarous inhabitants

of the shores of the Baltic, and thus, by useful exploits, extended

the limits of the Christian republic in the West. As in this war

the greater part of the Crusaders went to Palestine by sea, the

art of navigation made a sensible advance; the maritime nations of

Europe acquired an accession of prosperity, their fleets became more

formidable, and they were able, with glory, to dispute the empire of

the sea with the Saracens.

In several states of Europe, commerce, and the spirit of the holy

wars contributed to the enfranchisement of the lower classes. Many

serfs, upon becoming free, took up arms. It was not one of the least

interesting spectacles of this crusade, to see the standards of several

cities of France and Germany floating in the Christian army amongst the

banners of lords and barons.

This crusade was particularly beneficial to France, from which it

banished both civil and foreign wars. By prolonging the absence of the

great vassals and the enemies of the kingdom, it weakened their power,

and gave Philip Augustus authority to levy imposts, even upon the

clergy. It afforded him an opportunity of surrounding his throne with

a faithful guard, to keep up regular armies, and prepare, though at a

distance,[360] that victory of Bovines which proved so fatal to the

enemies of France.

A long captivity awaited Richard on his return to Europe. The vessel in

which he embarked was shipwrecked on the coast of Italy, and fearing

to pass through France, he took the route of Germany, concealed under

the habit of a simple pilgrim. His liberality betrayed the monarch,

and as he had enemies everywhere, he was seized by the soldiers of the

duke of Austria. Leopold had not sufficient generosity to forget the

outrages received from Richard at the siege of Ptolemaïs, and detained

him prisoner. It was not known in Europe what had become of King

Richard, when a gentleman of Arras, named Blondel, set out in search

of his master, and traversed Germany in the dress and with the lyre

of a minstrel. On his arrival before a castle, in which, it was said,

languished an illustrious captive, Blondel began to sing the first

couplet of a song which he had composed in conjunction with Richard.

From the top of a high tower a voice answered him, and sang the second

couplet.[361] Then the faithful troubadour returned into England to

announce that he had discovered the prison of the king. The duke of

Austria, terrified at this discovery, did not dare to detain longer his

redoubtable captive in his own hands, and gave him up to the emperor of

Germany. Henry VI., who had likewise insults to revenge, was rejoiced

to get Richard in his power, and kept him in chains, as if he had made

him a prisoner in the field of battle. The hero of the crusade, who had

filled the world with his renown, was cast into a dark dungeon, and

remained a long time a victim to the vengeance of his enemies—and they

were Christian princes.

He was brought before the German diet, assembled at Worms, where he

was accused of all the crimes that hatred and envy could invent. But

the spectacle of a king in chains was so affecting, that no one durst

condemn Richard, and when he offered his justification, the bishops

and nobles melted into tears, and besought Henry to treat him with less

injustice and rigour.

Queen Eleanor implored all the powers of Europe for the release of

her son. The complaints and tears of a mother touched the heart of

Celestine, who had recently ascended the chair of St. Peter. The pope

several times demanded the liberty of the king of England, and even

excommunicated the duke of Austria and the emperor; but the thunders

of the Church had so often been launched against the thrones of

Germany, that they no longer inspired fear. Henry braved the anathemas

of the Holy See; the captivity of Richard lasted another year; and

he only obtained his liberty after engaging to pay a considerable

ransom. His kingdom, which he had ruined at his departure for the

Holy Land, exhausted itself to hasten his return; and England gave

up even her sacred vases to break the chains of her monarch. He was

received with enthusiasm by the English; his adventures, which drew

tears, obliterated the remembrance of his cruelties, and Europe only

recollected his exploits and his misfortunes.

After the truce made with Richard, Saladin retired to Damascus, where

he enjoyed his glory but one year. The Orientals celebrate the edifying

manner in which he died, distributing his alms or benevolences to

Mussulmans and Christians alike. Before he expired he ordered one of

his officers to carry his shroud through the streets of his capital,

and to cry with a loud voice: “_Behold all that Saladin, who overcame

the East, bears away of his conquests._”

Scarcely had he ceased to breathe, when nothing remained but a vain

remembrance of his laws and his victories; his death was attended by

that which so frequently happens in Oriental monarchies, where nothing

is regulated concerning the succession; where victory appears to be the

most legitimate title, and where a too numerous offspring await the

death of the prince in fear, servitude, and in ignorance of the affairs

of the state.

Saladin only left behind him slaves intimidated by his glory and his

boundless power, who divided his authority among them, but could not

support the weight of it. Twelve of his sons and relatives succeeded

him and disputed the sovereignty. Malek-Adel, the brother of the

sultan, and companion in his exploits, profited by the inexperience of

his nephews, and took possession of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The most

powerful of the emirs followed his example, and shared the cities and

provinces amongst them. Asia then beheld that empire fall to decay,

which, raised for the ruin of the Christians, had, in its growth and

progress, twice roused all the nations of the West to arms.

END OF VOL. 1.

FOOTNOTES:

[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 eleemosynâ mittendâ 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 causâ in urbe Jerlm_. ’_Hierusalem_) cle_rici

et laïci à Britanniâ usque ad Nilum velificaverunt_.—DICUIL, De Mensurâ

Orbis, edit. Walcknaer, p. 17.

[13] _Ibi habetur hospitale, in quo suscipiuntur omnes qui causâ

devotionis illum adeunt locum, linguâ 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 causâ negotiationis acti, alii causâ devotionis et

peregrinationis._—J. DE VITRY. _Quod Latini devotionis gratiâ 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. Quæsitâ igitur arietis vesicâ, purgatâ 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 sodomiticâ 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, primâ 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 mirâ 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

magnâ pluviæ undâ 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 totâ 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

cœpit 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

vespertinâ 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 fœtæ mulieres exsiccatis faucibus, arefactis

visceribus ... mediâ plateâ in omnium aspectu fœtus suos enixæ

relinquebant; aliæ miseræ juxta fœtus 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 partâ victoriâ 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 matronâ 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 dextrâ 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 illâ die martyrisati ex nostris militibus seu

peditibus plusquam mille, qui in cœlum 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 fœderis 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 mœstissimus valor in totâ

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 ecclesiâ in ecclesiam, explicant;

confessione peceatorum sincerâ se mundant, et episcopali vel

sacerdotali consequenter absolutione promeritâ, corporis ac sanguinis

Domini sacramento, plenâ fide communicant, &c.—_Guibert_, lib. vi.

Missæ per ecclesias celebratæ sunt; omnesque sanctâ 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 cœlo 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 morâ 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, quantâ poterant jaculabantur instantiâ, ut eos à muro

propellerent.—_Will. Tyr._ lib. vii. cap. 9.

[140] Audivi namque, qui dicerent cibi se coactos inopiâ 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 verbosâ seductum se

fatetur, errasse pœnitet.—_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 aquâ

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 horrendâ 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.