Such was Venice when the crusaders put in an appearance. Geoffrey de

Villehardouin,[g] seneschal to the court of Champagne, himself narrates

the mission in which he took part. It was a curious sight--that of the

feudal lords obliged, kneeling and in tears, to beg the people humbly for

ships. “We will grant them; we will grant them,” replied the sovereign

people. City of merchants and seamen, Venice could not but sell such a

service, and demanded 85,000 marks or 20,230 kilograms of silver, which

to-day would be equal to about £161,840 or $809,200, but in those days

was worth much more. The knights could not produce such a sum, and in

place of cash the Venetians offered to take in payment a hostile city

if the crusaders would capture it for them. They had already taken from

the Greeks the principal cities of the Dalmatian coast--Spalato, Ragusa,

and Sebenico. One alone remained to prevent their complete dominion over

the Adriatic--Zara, still occupied by the king of Hungary. In vain did

Innocent III thunder against this detour from the crusade; the Venetians

got Zara and Doge Dandolo, ninety years old, assumed the cross (1202).

The little account settled, they could go; but whither? The set-backs

of the last Crusades showed that it was necessary to have some point of

support in order to operate successfully in Palestine, and this point

must be either Egypt or the Greek Empire. The Venetians persuaded their

allies that the keys of Jerusalem were either at Cairo or Constantinople.

There was some truth in this idea, but there was much more commercial

interest. The possession of Cairo would give the Venetians the route

to India; that of Constantinople would assure them the commerce of the

Black Sea and the whole Grecian archipelago. The crusaders decided on

Constantinople, whither a young Greek prince, Alexius, offered to lead

them provided they would re-establish on the throne his father Isaac

Angelus who had been deposed (1203).

The account of the assault on Constantinople, given more fully in the

history of the Byzantine Empire, may be briefly sketched here. When

the French came in sight of Constantinople, saw its high walls, its

innumerable churches whose gilded domes glistened in the sun, and their

glances wandered, as Villehardouin says, “over the length and breadth

of the city, sovereign of all others, there was none so brave whose

heart did not tremble, and each one looked at the arms which he would

soon need.” Along the shore there was lined up a magnificent army of

sixty thousand men. The crusaders counted on a terrible battle. Barges

brought them fully armed to the shore. Before even touching the strand

“the knights jumped into the water up to their waists, fully armed, the

lance men, the sword bearers, the good archers, and the good sergeants,

and the good cross-bowmen. And the Greeks made much pretext to stop

them. And when the crusaders came with lowered lances, the Greeks turned

their backs and fled, leaving them the shore. And know that nothing more

glorious ever took place.” The 18th of July (1203) the city was carried

by assault; the old emperor was brought from his cell and put back on

the throne. Alexius had made the crusaders the most glowing promises; to

keep them he imposed new taxes and so angered the weakened people that

they strangled their emperor, set up another, Mourzoufle, and shut the

city’s gates. The crusaders attacked at once. Three days sufficed to get

them in again (March, 1204); this time they put it to the sack. One whole

quarter, a square league of territory, was burned. And what works of art

perished! Four hundred thousand marks were collected in a church for

distribution.[68]

Then they divided the empire up. Baldwin IV, count of Flanders, was

elected emperor of Romania. He won against his opponents, Dandolo and

Boniface of Montferrat. The Venetians did not like the idea of seeing

their doge on the imperial throne. They took (which pleased them better)

a portion of Constantinople with the shore of the Bosporus and the

Propontis, and a majority of the Archipelago islands, Candia, etc., and

dubbed themselves lords of a quarter and a half of the Eastern Empire.

The marquis of Montferrat was elected king of Macedonia; Villehardouin,

marshal of Romania, and his nephew, prince of Romania. The count of

Blois received the Asiatic provinces. There were dukes of Athens and

Naxos, counts of Cephalonia, and lords of Thebes and of Corinth. A new

France, with all its feudal customs, arose at the eastern end of Europe.

Members of the Comnenus family, however, managed to keep several portions

which they divided into principalities--Trebizond, Napoli of Argolis,

Epirus and Nicæa. But the crusaders were too few to hold their conquest

long. In 1261 this Latin Empire fell to pieces. But, up to the end of

the Middle Ages and the conquests of the Turks, there still subsisted

in certain parts of Greece remnants of the feudal principalities so

strangely established by the French in the ancient land of Miltiades and

Leonidas.[b]

[Sidenote: [1204-1261 A.D.]]

The establishment of the Latins in Constantinople was the important

though unlooked-for issue of the Fifth Crusade; but their dominion

lasted only fifty-seven years. The history of that period forms a part

of the annals of the Lower Empire, and not of the holy wars. But we may

remark, generally, that in a very few years fortune ceased to smile

on the conquerors. Their arrogant and encroaching temper awakened the

jealousy of the king of Bulgaria. The fierce mountaineers, who had so

often insulted the majesty of the Roman Empire, now redeemed themselves

from the sin of rebellion, by ceaseless war on the usurpers of their

former master’s throne. The change of the Greek ritual into the service

of the Latin church, was a subject of perpetual murmur and discontent.

The feudal code of the kingdom of Jerusalem was violently imposed on the

people, in utter contempt of their manners and opinions. The Greeks,

too, were not admitted into any places of confidence in the government,

and the nobility gradually retired from Constantinople, and associated

themselves with the princes of the deposed royal family. Several of

those princes formed states out of the ruins of the empire, and Manuel

Palæologus, the emperor of Nicæa, descendant of Lascaris, son-in-law

of the usurper Alexius, had the glory of recovering the throne of the

Cæsars, and of finally expelling the usurpers from Constantinople. On the

Asiatic side of the Bosporus the Latins never had much power.

The jealousy which Genoa entertained of her great rival, Venice, was

one of the most active causes of the fall of the Latin Empire. In

the eleventh and twelfth centuries, commercial concessions had often

purchased for Constantinople the military and naval aid of the sovereign

of the Adriatic; and at the time of the Fifth Crusade, the empire

appeared to acknowledge the equality of the republic. The imperial throne

gained the friendship of other Italian princes, and the Pisans as well

as the Venetians had almost unlimited commerce with the Grecian states.

Each of these allies had its church and its exchange in Constantinople;

its consuls decided the causes of their respective citizens, and both

nations enjoyed the rare and blessed privilege of exemption from payment

of public taxes. In the middle of the twelfth century, Genoa had obtained

commercial immunities; but it does not appear that they were so extensive

as those which had been acceded to the Venetians and Pisans. When the

crusaders captured Constantinople, the commerce of the Black Sea was

open to the Venetians, a commerce, which before that event had only been

slightly enjoyed by the Italians. The Genoese, alarmed at the maritime

progress of the Venetians, took up arms against them; fortune befriended

the inferior power, and in the year 1215 a treaty was concluded,

whereby the Genoese were confirmed in the commercial privileges which

they had enjoyed under the Greek emperor. But the political situation

of the Venetians continued a great source of superiority, and their

rivals incited and assisted the Greeks to throw off the Latin yoke, and

recapture Byzantium.[c]

RESULTS OF THE FIFTH CRUSADE

An old empire which moulders away, a new empire ready to sink into

ruins--such are the pictures that this crusade presents to us; never did

any epoch offer greater exploits for admiration, or greater troubles

for commiseration. The Greeks, a degenerate nation, honoured their

misfortunes by no virtue; they had neither sufficient courage to prevent

the reverses of war, nor sufficient resignation to support them. When

reduced to despair, they showed some little valour; but that valour

was imprudent and blind; it precipitated them into new calamities, and

procured them masters much more barbarous than those whose yoke they

were so eager to shake off. They had no leader able to govern or guide

them; no sentiment of patriotism strong enough to rally them; deplorable

example of a nation left to itself, which has lost its morals, and has no

confidence in its laws or its government! The Franks had just the same

advantages over their enemies that the barbarians of the north had over

the Romans of the Lower Empire. In this terrible conflict, simplicity

of manners, the energy of a new people for civilisation, the ardour for

pillage, and the pride of victory, were sure to prevail over the love

of luxury, habits formed amidst corruption, and vanity which attaches

importance to the most frivolous things, and only preserves a gaudy

resemblance of true grandeur.

This spirit of conquest, which appeared so general among the knights,

might favour the expedition to Constantinople; but it was injurious to

the holy war, by turning the crusaders aside from the essential object of

the crusade. The heroes of this war did nothing for the deliverance of

Jerusalem, of which they constantly spoke in their letters to the pope.

The conquest of Byzantium, very far from being, as the knights believed,

the road to the land of Christ, was but a new obstacle to the taking of

the Holy City; their imprudent exploits placed the Christian colonies in

greater peril, and only ended in completely subverting, without replacing

it, a power which might have served as a barrier against the Saracens. To

recapitulate in a few words our opinion of the events and consequences of

this crusade, we must say that the spirit of chivalry and the spirit of

conquest at first gave birth to wonders, but that they did not suffice

to maintain the crusaders in their possessions. The crusaders evinced a

profound contempt for the Greeks, whose alliance and support they ought

to have been anxious to seek; they wished to reform manners and alter

opinions, a much more difficult task than the conquest of an empire, and

only met with enemies in a country that might have furnished them with

useful allies.

We may add that the policy of the holy see, which at first undertook

to divert the Latin warriors from the expedition to Constantinople,

became, in the end, one of the greatest obstacles to the preservation of

their conquests. The counts and barons, who reproached themselves with

having failed in obedience to the sovereign pontiff, at length followed

scrupulously his instructions to procure by their arms the submission

of the Greek church, the only condition on which the holy father would

pardon a war commenced in opposition to his commands. To obtain his

forgiveness and approbation, they employed violence against schism and

heresy, and lost their conquest by endeavouring to justify it in the eyes

of the sovereign pontiff. The pope himself did not obtain that which he

so ardently desired. The union of the Greek and Roman churches could

not possibly be effected amidst the terrors of victory and the evils of

war; the arms of the conquerors had less power than the anathemas of the

church, to bring back the Greeks to the worship of the Latins. Violence

only served to irritate men’s minds, and consummated the rupture, instead

of putting an end to it. The remembrance of persecutions and outrages,

a reciprocal contempt, an implacable hatred arose and became implanted

between the two creeds, and separated them forever.

History cannot affirm that this crusade made great progress in the

civilisation of Europe. The Greeks had preserved the jurisprudence of

Justinian; the empire possessed wise regulations upon the levying of

imposts and the administration of the public revenues; but the Latins

disdained these monuments of human wisdom and of the experience of many

ages; they coveted nothing the Greeks possessed but their territories

and their wealth. Most of the knights took a pride in their ignorance,

and amongst the spoils of Constantinople, attached no value to the

ingenious productions of Greece. Amidst the conflagrations that consumed

the mansions and palaces of the capital, they beheld with indifference

large and valuable libraries given up to the flames. We may add that the

necessity for both conquerors and conquered of intercommunication must

have contributed to the spreading of the Latin language among the Greeks,

and that of the Greeks among the Latins.

The crusaders likewise profited by several useful inventions, and

transmitted them to their compatriots; and the fields and gardens of

Italy and France were enriched by some plants till that time unknown in

the West. Boniface sent into his marquisate some seeds of maize, which

had never before been cultivated in Italy; a public document, which

still exists, attests the gratitude of the people of Montferrat. The

magistrates received the innocent fruits of victory with great solemnity,

and, upon their altars, called down a blessing upon a production of

Greece, that would one day constitute the wealth of the plains of Italy.

Flanders, Champagne, and most of the provinces of France, which had

sent their bravest warriors to the crusade, fruitlessly lavished their

population and their treasures upon the conquest of Byzantium. We may say

that these intrepid fighters gained nothing by this wonderful war, but

the glory of having given, for a moment, masters to Constantinople, and

lords to Greece. And yet these distant conquests, and this new empire,

which drew from France its turbulent and ambitious princes, must have

been favourable to the French monarchy. Philip Augustus must have been

pleased by the absence of the great vassals of the crown, and had reason

to learn with joy that the count of Flanders, a troublesome neighbour,

and a not very submissive vassal, had obtained an empire in the East.

The French monarchy thus derived some advantage from this crusade; but

the republic of Venice profited much more by it. This republic, which

scarcely possessed a population of two hundred thousand souls, and had

not the power to make its authority respected on the continent, in the

first place, made use of the arms of the crusaders, to subdue cities,

of which, without their assistance, she could never have made herself

mistress. By the conquest of Constantinople, she enlarged her credit and

her commerce in the East, and brought under her laws some of the richest

possessions of the Greek emperors. She increased the reputation of her

navy, and raised herself above all the maritime nations of Europe. The

Venetians never neglected the interests or glory of their own country,

whilst the French knights scarcely ever fought for any object but

personal glory and their own ambition. Of her new possessions in the

East, Venice only retained such as she judged necessary to the prosperity

of her commerce, or the maintenance of her marine.[d]

THE CHILDREN’S CRUSADE (1212 A.D.)

[Sidenote: [1212 A.D.]]

Some of the best witnesses for the history of the Middle Ages affirm

that, seduced by the preaching of fanatics, the children of France and

Germany, about the year 1212, thought themselves authorised by heaven to

attempt the rescue of the Sepulchre, and ran about the country, crying,

“Lord Jesus Christ, restore thy cross to us.” Boys and girls stole from

their homes, “no bolts, no bars, no fear of fathers or love of mothers,

could hold them back,” and the number of youthful converts was thirty

thousand. They were organised by some fanatical wretches, one of whom

was taken and hanged at Cologne. The children drove down France, crossed

the Alps, and those who survived thirst, hunger, and heat, presented

themselves at the gates of the seaports of Italy and the south of France.

Many were driven back to their homes; but seven large ships full of them

went from Marseilles; two of the vessels were wrecked on the isle of

St. Peter, the rest of the ships went to Bougie and Alexandria, and the

masters sold the children to slavery. These singular events are mentioned

by four contemporary writers. (1) Alberic, monk of Trois Fontaines, in

his chronicle. (2) Godfrey of St. Pantaleon, in his annals. The editor

cites in his margin a Belgic chronicle as a testimony. (3) Sicard, bishop

of Cremona. (4) M. Paris. Roger Bacon, who flourished in the middle of

the thirteenth century, thus speaks of the Crusade of Children: “_Forsan

vidistis aut audistis pro certo quod pueri de regno Franciæ semel

occurrebant in infinita multitudine post quondam malignum hominem, ita

quod nec a patribus, nec a matribus, nec amicis poterant detineri, et

positi sunt in navibus et Saracenis redditi, et non sunt adhuc 64 anni._”

Honest Fuller says: “This crusade was done by the instinct of the devil,

who, as it were, desired a cordial of children’s blood, to comfort his

weak stomach, long cloyed with murdering of men.”[c]

[Illustration: A GERMAN NOBLE, THIRTEENTH CENTURY]

This expedition beyond the seas, undertaken about 1212, and composed

entirely of children, if not one of the most striking events of the

Crusades, certainly appears not one of the least extraordinary. Whoever

is acquainted with the taste of the Middle Ages for the marvellous, and

has only read the incomplete account of the modern historians of the

Crusades, is at first tempted to range this expedition among fabulous

adventures; and to procure it any credit, it is necessary to produce

evidences worthy of our confidence.

With regard to the date, contemporary historians all place this crusade

under the year 1212, or 1213 at the latest. It is only by an error very

easy to be reconciled, that others advance it twelve years, or put it

back ten. As to the places that witnessed the birth and growth of such

an enterprise, it appears that the crusaders belonged to two nations,

and formed two troops, which followed different routes; one, leaving

Germany, traversed Saxony and the Alps and arrived on the shores of the

Adriatic Sea; France furnished the others, who, after collecting in the

environs of Paris, crossed Burgundy, and arrived at Marseilles, the place

of embarkation. Prestiges, fanaticism, the announcement of prodigies,

were all employed to rouse the youth of these countries and put them

in motion. It was reported, according to Vincent de Beauvais, that the

Old Man of the Mountain, who was accustomed to educate _arsacides_ from

the tenderest age, detained two clerks captives, and would only grant

them their liberty upon condition that they brought him back some young

boys from France. The opinion then was, that these children, deceived by

false visions, and seduced by the promises of these two clerks, marked

themselves with the sign of the cross.

The promoter of the crusade in Germany was a certain Nicholas, a German

by nation. “This multitude of children,” says Bezarre, “were persuaded

by the help of a false revelation, that the drought would be so great

that year that the abysses of the sea would be dry; and they went to

Genoa, with the intention of passing over to Jerusalem, across the arid

bed of the Mediterranean.” The composition of these troops corresponded

with the means employed to seduce them. There were children of all ages

and conditions, and of both sexes; some of them were not more than

twelve years old; they set out from villages and towns, without leaders,

without guides, without provisions, and with empty purses. It was in vain

their parents or friends thought to dissuade them by showing them the

folly of such an expedition; the captivity to which they condemned them

redoubled their ardour; breaking through doors, or opening themselves

passages through walls, they succeeded in escaping, and went to rejoin

their respective bands. If they were questioned upon the object of their

voyage, they answered that they were going to visit the holy places.

Although a pilgrimage commenced under such auspices, and stained with

all sorts of excesses, must have been an object of scandal rather than

of edification, there were people senseless enough to see in it an act

of the all-powerful God; men and women quitted their houses and their

lands to join these vagabond troops, believing they pursued the way of

salvation; others furnished them with money and food, thinking they aided

souls inspired by God, and guided by sentiments of divine piety. The

pope, when informed of their proceedings, exclaimed, with a groan: “These

children reproach us with being buried in sleep, whilst they are flying

to the defence of the Holy Land.” If some few of the clergy, endowed with

a little foresight, openly blamed this expedition, their censures were at

once attributed to motives of avarice and incredulity; and, in order to

avoid public contempt, wisdom and prudence were condemned to silence.

The event, however, proved that all which man undertakes without

employing the balance of reason and earnest reflection, does not come

to a fortunate issue; “for soon,” says Bishop Sicard, “this multitude

entirely disappeared: _quasi evanuit universa_.” But we must carefully

distinguish between the fate of the German and that of the French

crusaders, although a part of the latter directed their course towards

Italy. It required nothing beyond wearing the cross to be admitted into

the crusade; if the watchful care of princes and prelates in expeditions

directed by ecclesiastical and secular power could not succeed in

excluding from them men of bad morals, what sort of people must have been

mixed with a host got together without the least care, and under the eye

of no superior intelligence, the greater part of whom fled, like the

prodigal son, from the paternal dwelling, in order to give themselves up,

without restraint, to their vicious inclinations? The account of Godfrey

the Monk, therefore, does not at all astonish us when he says that

thieves insinuated themselves among the German pilgrims, and disappeared

after having plundered them of their baggage and the gifts the faithful

had bestowed upon them. One of these thieves, being recognised at

Cologne, ended his days on the rack.

To this first misfortune a crowd of evils quickly succeeded, the

necessary result of the want of foresight of the crusaders. The fatigue

of a long journey, heat, disease, and want, swept away a great number

of them. Of those who arrived in Italy, some, dispersing themselves

over the country, and plundered by the inhabitants, were reduced to

servitude; others, to the amount of seven thousand, presented themselves

before Genoa. At first the senate gave them permission to remain six

or seven days in the city; but reflecting afterwards upon the folly of

the expedition, fearing that such a multitude would produce famine,

and, above all, apprehending that Frederick, who was then in a state

of rebellion against the holy see and at war with Genoa, might take

advantage of the circumstance to excite a tumult, they ordered the

crusaders to depart from the city. Some, finding their error, turned

back towards their own country again; and these crusaders, who had been

seen advancing in numerous troops, and singing animating songs, returned

singly, robbed of everything, walking barefooted, undergoing the pangs of

hunger, and subjected to the scoffs and derision of the population of the

cities and countries they passed through; it is not to be wondered at,

that in such circumstances many young girls lost the chastity which had

been their ornament in their homes.

The crusaders from France experienced a nearly similar fate; a very

slender portion of them returned; the rest either perished in the

waves or became an object of speculation for two Marseilles merchants.

Hugh Ferrers and William Porcus, so were they named, carried on a

trade with the Saracens, of which the sale of young boys formed a

considerable branch. No opportunity for an advantageous speculation

could be more favourable; they offered to transport to the East all the

pilgrims who arrived at Marseilles, without any kind of charge for the

voyage; assigning piety as the motive for this act of generosity. This

proposition was joyfully accepted; and seven vessels, laden with these

pilgrims, set sail for the coast of Syria. At the end of two days, when

the ships were off the Isle of St. Peter, near the Rock of the Recluse, a

violent tempest arose, and the sea swallowed up two of them, with all the

passengers on board. The other five arrived at Bougie and Alexandria, and

the young crusaders were all sold to the Saracens or to slave-merchants.

The caliph bought forty of them, all of whom were in orders, and caused

them to be brought up with great care in a place set apart for the

purpose; twelve of the others perished as martyrs, being unwilling to

renounce their religion. None of the clerks purchased by the caliph,

according to the account of one of them who afterwards obtained his

liberty, embraced the worship of Mohammed; all faithful to the religion

of their fathers, practised it constantly in tears in slavery. Hugh and

William, having at a later period formed the project of assassinating

Frederick, were discovered, and perished in an ignominious manner, with

three Saracens, their accomplices, receiving, in this miserable end, the

wages due to their treachery.

Pope Gregory IX afterwards caused a church to be built in the island

of St. Peter, in honour of those who were shipwrecked, and instituted

twelve canonships to provide for the duties of it. In the time of Alberic

the spot was still pointed out where the bodies cast up by the waves

were buried. As for the crusaders who survived so many calamities, and

remained in Europe, with the exception of some old and infirm persons,

the pope would not release them from their vows; they were obliged either

to perform the pilgrimage at a maturer age, or to redeem it by alms.

Such was the issue of this crusade, so justly designated by two

chronicles, _expeditio nugatoria, expeditio derisoria_.

Two facts strike us as extraordinary in this account; the condition

attached by the Old Man of the Mountain to the liberty of the clerk of

whom Vincent de Beauvais speaks, and the trade in children carried on by

the merchants of Marseilles. Upon the first point we can offer nothing

but the opinion received among the nations of the West. It was generally

believed in the thirteenth century, that the Old Man of the Mountain kept

up a connection with Christian Europe; several princes were even accused

of having had recourse to the daggers of his Assassins to get rid of

their enemies. Frederick received ambassadors from him in Sicily. Roger

Bacon complains bitterly of the fascinations secretly employed by the

Saracens to seduce the young servants of Christ; the name of Assassins

had already passed into the vulgar tongue in the thirteenth century,

and was the object of general terror. In spite, then, of the opinion of

some critics, a more extended examination is necessary, before we reject

the account of Vincent de Beauvais. As to the trade in young boys, that

is not at all a new fact; many traces of it are found much anterior to

this period. The Greeks and Venetians practised it openly enough. Pope

Zacharias repurchased, in 748, many Christian slaves, who had been taken

away from Rome by Venetian merchants; the people of Verdun, as witnessed

by Liutprand, were about to sell to the Arabs of Spain some young boys

they had mutilated, and who were to serve as guards to the women of

seraglios. Besides, the fate of the young crusaders who embarked at

Marseilles, and found degradation and slavery instead of the sacred soil

promised to their blind zeal, is attested by two contemporary writers,

worthy of perfect confidence: Thomas de Champré and Roger Bacon.[e]

THE SIXTH CRUSADE (1217-1229 A.D.)

[Sidenote: [1210-1215 A.D.]]

The successful heroism of the French adventurers before Constantinople

alarmed the Mussulmans, and Saphedin had gladly concluded a treaty

for six years’ peace with the Christians. Palestine soon again became

the theatre of ambition and of glory. Almeric and his wife died, and

Mary, the daughter of Isabella and Conrad of Tyre, was the new ideal

queen of Jerusalem, while Hugh de Lusignan, son of Almeric by his first

wife, was proclaimed king of Cyprus. Hugh had married the princess

Alice, half sister of the young queen, and daughter of Henry count of

Champagne, and Isabella. There was not at that time any nobleman of

rule or influence in Palestine capable of governing the state; and the

ecclesiastical and civil potentates resolved that Philip Augustus of

France should provide a husband for Mary. Philip Augustus fixed his eyes

on Jean de Brienne, son of the count of Brienne in Champagne. Though the

sovereignty over Jerusalem was titular, yet the command of the Christian

army in Palestine, and the possession of a young queen so desirable as

the ambassadors painted the daughter of Almeric, were circumstances so

flattering to the imagination of an aspiring cavalier, that Jean de

Brienne received the gift with joy; and the deputies were dismissed

with the promise that in two years he would join them in Palestine with

a powerful band. The truce of six years was on the point of expiring,

and Saphedin offered to renew it, and to resign to the regency any ten

castles or towns they might select, to be retained by them in perpetuity

if the Saracens broke their faith. The knights of St. John, and those

of the Teutonic order, argued strenuously for the acceptance of this

offer; but the spirit of party was always the enemy of Palestine, and the

Templars and clergy declared for war.

[Illustration: THIRTEENTH CENTURY CRUSADER]

At the appointed time Jean de Brienne arrived at Acre; the next day

he received the hand of Mary, and shortly afterward was crowned, and

received the oaths of allegiance of the barons. Only three hundred

knights had participated in his hopes of restoring the fortunes of

the Holy Land, for the enthusiasm and love of glory of the western

chivalry were diverted into new channels. England and Germany were torn

by internal disturbances, the court of France was watching the turn of

events, and Pope Innocent employed the penitents in putting an end to

the heresy of the Albigenses. The destroyers of heretics and of infidels

were alike praiseworthy; and a crusade into the south of France was

less dangerous than a voyage to Syria. From these various causes the

Mussulmans in Asia were forgotten or disregarded.[69] As peace had been

refused, Saphedin marched an army to the country round Tripolis. The king

displayed his valour in many a fierce encounter; and though he never

conquered his foes, yet he broke the impression of the enemy, and saved

his states from utter annihilation. He foresaw the approaching ruin of

the holy cause; every day the Saracens made some acquisition; and the

Latin barons, by every opportunity, and for every pretext, returned to

Europe. He wrote, therefore, to the pope that the kingdom of Jerusalem

consisted only of two or three towns, and that the civil wars between

the sons of Saladin alone suspended its fate.

[Sidenote: [1215-1217 A.D.]]

Every project of ambition which the daring genius of Gregory VII had

formed was embraced by the ardent spirit of Innocent III. In raising

a fabric of ecclesiastical policy on the ruins of gospel liberty, the

importance of guiding the military arm of Europe was not lost sight

of. The commands of the Vatican were hurled upon every part of Europe,

calling men to exterminate infidelity. The protection of St. Peter was

promised to the families and fortunes of the pilgrims. They who had bound

themselves to pay usury were released from their oaths; and secular

power should compel the Jews to remit their claims. The indulgences were

revoked which had been granted to those who quitted their homes in order

to exterminate heresy in Provence, and infidelity in Spain.

Among those who most loudly and successfully pleaded the cause

of religion was Robert de Courçon; a man inferior in talents and

consideration to St. Bernard, but whose fanaticism was as fervent as that

of Peter and Fulk. By parentage and birth he was an Englishman; but he

had been educated in the university of Paris, and in that famous seat of

learning had lived as a friend with a fellow student, who afterwards sat

in the papal chair, under the title of Pope Innocent III. The associate

of his holiness was promoted to various dignities in the church; his

talents for business were employed by Innocent in clerical embassies,

and his abilities as a public orator were matured under the care of Fulk

de Neuilly. He was the papal legate in France, and after having appeased

the foreign and internal distractions of that kingdom, he quitted Paris

in 1215, descended by the way of Burgundy to the southern provinces,

left no quarter of the south unvisited; and then, after having traversed

with speed and success the western provinces, the saint-errant returned

to the capital. Twenty years before he had preached the same theme to

the same people, as the humble assistant of Fulk. Clad in the Roman

purple, and armed with the authority of the vicar of Jesus Christ, the

cardinal gave every possible dignity to the office of missionary. But

his prudence kept not pace with his zeal, for, like Peter the Hermit,

he admitted everyone to take the cross. Women, children, the old, the

blind, the lame, the lepers, all were enrolled in the sacred militia. The

multitude of the crusaders was innumerable, and the voluntary offerings

of money which was put into the charitable boxes in the churches were

immense. Philip Augustus contributed the fortieth part of his revenues;

and it is singular that this money was to be employed for purposes of

the holy war, agreeably to the directions of the kings and barons of

France and England. But the alms of the people of France were not applied

exclusively to sacred purposes. Robert de Courçon was openly convicted of

peculation, and his papal friend was obliged to remit his own dignity,

and intercede with the French prelates, in order to save the legate from

punishment.

The pope, treading in the steps of his predecessors, convoked a general

council for the purpose of chastising vice, condemning heresy, and of

inducing the princes and people to undertake the sacred expedition. In

the month of November, 1215, the religious and political authorities

assembled in the church of the Lateran, and the greatness of their

number, and their exalted rank, testify the zealous preaching of the

pope’s legates. All the clergy (except those who were crusaders) were

for three years to contribute the twentieth part of their ecclesiastical

revenues; tournaments during the three years of the crusade were

forbidden, lest the representation of war should draw men’s attention

from war itself. Civil dissensions were to be suspended, and peace was

to reign in the Christian world during all the time of the holy contest.

The necessity of extirpating heresy, and quelling rebellion in the south

of France, was the pretence of the French king for not embracing the

crusade. The emperor Frederick II remained to establish his authority

in Apulia and Sicily, and to advance the favourite project of himself

and family, and of making Italy the seat of the empire of the West.[70]

The Hungarians who had been the scourge of the first crusaders, took

the lead on this occasion. Their king, Andrew, incited by the example

of his mother Margaret, the wish of his father, and certain political

considerations, made a vow to march to Jerusalem. The dukes of Austria

and Bavaria, and indeed all the ecclesiastical and secular potentates of

lower Germany, joined their forces to those of the monarch. The united

army marched to Spalato. The ships of Venice, and other ports of the

Adriatic, transported them to Cyprus; and after having enjoyed for a

while the pleasures of an island consecrated to Venus, the holy warriors

sailed for and arrived at Acre, in company with fresh crowds of crusaders

from Marseilles, Genoa, and Brundusium. The Mussulman powers were

astonished at, and unprovided for this sudden and large reinforcement of

the Latins. The sons of Saphedin were the lords of Syria, while Saphedin

himself, retired from the constant toils of royalty, was contented with

the respect of the army and people in times of difficulty and danger.

The Saracens pressed to the country about Nablus, but not in sufficient

numbers to meet the new crusaders, who ravaged the country and slew

thousands of their foes. But they did not confine their cruelties to

the infidels. The soil of Palestine, in the year in which the present

crusaders landed, had been less productive than in most seasons; the

soldiers had carried thither no provisions, and when not engaged in

distant excursions into the enemy’s territories, they took the shorter

course of robbing the private and religious houses of the Latins and

Syrians.

[Illustration: A KNIGHT’S ESQUIRE, THIRTEENTH CENTURY]

[Sidenote: [1217-1219 A.D.]]

Pious exercises, however, re-established order. The ecclesiastical chief

of the Latin Christians led the army in religious procession across the

river of Kishon, to the valley of Jezreel. They bathed in the Jordan,

made their pilgrimage to the Lake of Gennesaret, observed with devout

awe the scenes of various miracles performed by Christ, and returned to

Acre. But they soon repaired their wasted strength, and trod with holy

reverence the road to the scene of the transfiguration. The ascent to

Mount Tabor, however, was difficult; and the summit was defended by a

strongly garrisoned tower. Attached as much to pilgrimages as to war,

the crusaders went in holy order to Tyre and Sidon; but the inclemency of

the season drove them into disorder, and the Saracens made dreadful havoc

on their divided parties. The Christians separated for the remainder of

the winter. The kings of Cyprus and Hungary repaired to Tripolis; and

if the people were grieved at the death of the former of these princes,

their feelings were quickly changed into indignation against the latter.

Neither the entreaties nor the threats of the clergy could persuade the

unstable Andrew to remain in Palestine. Taking with him most of his

soldiers and stores, he traversed Armenia and the Greek Empire, and at

last returned to his kingdom, which had been so deeply exhausted by this

expensive expedition, that it did not for years recover its pristine

strength.

The king of Jerusalem, the duke of Austria, and the master of the

Hospitallers, took up a strong position on the plains of Cæsarea. The

Templars, the Teutonic knights, and Walter d’Avesnes, occupied Mount

Carmel, and their station was defended by a tower which the Templars

had formerly erected, for the defence and protection of the Jerusalem

pilgrims. In the spring of the following year they were joined by new

and zealous crusaders from the north of Germany. Cologne had been the

rendezvous, and nearly three hundred vessels sailed from the Rhine. Many

of the ships were wrecked by the violence of the autumnal winds, and the

remainder anchored off the Portuguese shore. By the aid of the Germans,

the queen of Portugal took Alcacer from the Moors. Conscience and valour

would be equally satisfied by the slaughter of Saracens, in whatever

country they might be. As soon as the Cologne reinforcements arrived, the

chiefs assembled in council, and it was agreed that siege should be laid

to Damietta, which was looked upon as the key of Egypt. A voyage of a few

days brought the Christian army within sight of Damietta. The catapults

and ballistæ shook the walls of the citadel to their foundations, and the

garrison was happy in surrendering to the discretion of the besiegers.

Before the joy of the Christians had subsided, news arrived of the death

of Saphedin. The power of his house had lately been strengthened by the

death of the sultan of Mosul, the last great supporter of the name of the

atabegs. But Saphedin did not live to complete the addition of all Mosul

to his empire of Damascus and Egypt. The brother of Saladin has been

variously represented, according to the different feelings with which he

was regarded. But the crusaders had such a limited knowledge of oriental

affairs, that their invectives cannot be opposed to the reputation which

he acquired for virtue and ability. His second son, Coradin, the prince

of Syria and Palestine, did not proclaim the death of his father till he

had secured himself in the possession of the royal coffers. Discord and

rebellion were universal throughout Egypt, when the news arrived of the

death of Saphedin; and his son Kamil, lord of that country, was compelled

to fly into Arabia for protection from his mutinous people.

After the surrender of the castle of Damietta, the acquisition of the

city appeared so easy an achievement, that the besieging army sunk into

inertness and dissoluteness. The sultan of Syria had anticipated the

fall of Damietta, the sultan of Egypt despaired of its defence, and no

wisdom could calculate the magnitude of the effects which its capture

might produce. Prudence suggested the policy of negotiation, and the

Latins were therefore offered the piece of the true cross, the city of

Jerusalem, and all the prisoners in Syria and Egypt. The Mussulmans

were to rebuild the walls of the sacred city. Of the whole kingdom

of Palestine they only proposed to retain the castles of Karak and

Montreal, as necessary for the safe passage of the Meccan pilgrims and

merchants. The evacuation of Egypt was the equivalent expected from the

Christians for these important concessions.

[Sidenote: [1219-1220 A.D.]]

All the legitimate consequences of the Crusades were at the command of

the soldiers of the cross. The king, the French, the earl of Chester,

and the Teutonic knights hailed with joy the prospect of the termination

of the war. But the legate, the bishops, the Italians, the Templars,

and Hospitallers were deaf to counsels of moderation. They contended

that no faith could be reposed upon the promises of infidels, unless

peace was made at the point of a victorious sword. The siege had already

lasted seventeen months, and it would be disgraceful to fly from the

fair prospect of success. Unhappily for the general interests of the

Christian cause, the mild suggestions of policy were disregarded amidst

the clamours of thoughtless valour. Hostilities were recommenced. The

besiegers interrupted all communication between the Egyptian army and the

garrison of Damietta. Resistance was fruitless, but the Mussulmans were

too brave and too proud to surrender. The legate and the king assaulted

the walls, and soon entered the city, with the same ruthless feelings

as had maddened the early crusaders, when they first leaped on the

battlements of Jerusalem.

But revenge sought its victims in vain. Damietta was one vast

charnel-house. Of a population, which at the beginning of the siege

consisted of more than seventy thousand souls, three thousand only were

the relics. The conquerors marched through a pestilential vapour. The

streets, the mosques, and the houses were strewn with dead bodies. From

scenes of death the Christians turned to plunder. Damietta was as rich a

city as any in Islam, and the terrible anathemas of the legate could not

prevent self-appropriation of spoil. Dominion over the place was given to

the king of Jerusalem. The splendid mosque was converted into a Christian

church, and dedicated to the Virgin and all the apostles. But the

soldiers were soon compelled to return to the camp, for pestilence was

in the city. Life and liberty were granted to the surviving Mussulmans,

on their performing the horrid and melancholy task of cleansing the city

from the remains of their relations and friends.

So great was the terror which the loss of Damietta spread among the

Mussulmans, that the fortress of Tanis surrendered. By this acquisition,

the way into Palestine was open. But instead of urging their advantages,

the army passed the winter in luxury and in discord, and in the spring

more than half of the soldiers returned to Europe. The power of the

legate was supreme, and the king of Jerusalem retired in disgust to Acre.

The duke of Bavaria, and many knights from Germany and Italy, arrived,

as soon as the weather would permit the passage; but they disdained

to submit to the command of a bishop, and Pelagius was compelled to

solicit with humility the return of the king. Jean de Brienne repaired to

Damietta, and a council was held on the subject of hostile operations.

The conquest of Egypt was resolved upon, and the army marched by the

eastern side of the Fatimite branch of the Nile, till their progress was

arrested by the canal of Ashmun. On the southern side of that canal the

Mussulman forces were posted. Every sultan of Syria had sent assistance

to their brother in the faith, and the allied troops under Kamil could

cope with the Latins in the field.

The sultan, however, would not trust his kingdom to the caprice of

fortune. He offered peace to the Christians on nearly the same terms

as those which had been proposed previously to the last assault on

Damietta. The legate refused with indignation these noble offers; but

instead of crossing the canal and giving the enemy battle, he remained

for more than a month inactive on his post expecting the unconditional

surrender of the sultan. During this time the Nile had rapidly increased

in height. The Mussulmans opened the sluices and inundated their enemy’s

camp. The Christians could neither advance nor retreat; and, to use the

humble simile of a Templar, they were enclosed like a fish in a net. When

the overflowings of the Nile had swept away all the tents and baggage,

Pelagius sent an embassy to the Mussulman camp, imploring a safe return

to Acre, and offering to surrender Damietta and Tanis to the Mussulmans.

The distress of the Christian army was mitigated by the humanity of

Kamil. The king of Jerusalem was one of the hostages, and in an interview

with the sultan, he wept for the miserable state of his army. “Why do you

weep?” inquired the sultan. “I have reason to weep,” replied the king,

“for the people whom God has given into my charge, are perishing in the

midst of the waters, or dying of hunger.” The sultan shed tears of pity,

and opened the Egyptian granaries for their relief. When, after eight

months’ possession by the Latins, Damietta was delivered into the power

of the Mussulmans, the hostages were exchanged, and the Christian army

retreated to the seacoast, through the road by which they had advanced in

full confidence of victory. The barons of Syria, and the military orders,

retired to Acre; and the volunteers returned to Europe.

[Sidenote: [1220-1227 A.D.]]

The pope cast all the odium on the emperor Frederick, a man who had

thrice sworn to redeem the Holy Land, and had compromised with his

conscience by merely sending soldiers and provisions. Frederick despised

the thunders of the Vatican; but although he was not awed by force, he

could not resist papal artifice. Honorius soothed his irritated mind, and

received him again as a faithful son of the church. Hermann von Salza,

master of the Teutonic order, returned to Europe, and gave the emperor

the hope of being the redeemer of Palestine. Yolande, the daughter of

the king of Jerusalem, could easily be obtained in marriage, and her

father would cede his rights, which he was wearied of endeavouring to

convert into an actual and firm dominion. The emperor and the pope

approved of this project. Frederick accepted from the king of Jerusalem a

renunciation of all his claims to the Holy Land, as the dowry of Yolande;

and he pledged his honour to the pope, the cardinals, and the masters of

the Hospitallers and Teutonic knights, that he would within two years

travel with a powerful army into the East, and re-establish the throne

of Godfrey de Bouillon. For the succeeding five years, rebellions in

Italy, and the insurrections of the Saracens in Sicily, detained the

emperor from his purpose. Honorius did not live to witness the event of

his exertions, but his successor, Gregory IX, was equally furious in the

cause.

At the time appointed for the sailing of the expedition, Brundusium

and its vicinity were crowded with soldiers. But the heats of summer

destroyed the health of the people of the north; thousands died, and

of those who endeavoured to return to their homes, the greatest part

perished through poverty or disease. Although the emperor did not escape

the common illness, yet he embarked at Brundusium. But after sailing

for three days, additional infirmity compelled him to return. Gregory

inherited the papal virtues of violence and ambition; he pronounced a

sentence of excommunication against the emperor, for declining to combat

the enemy of God.[71]

[Sidenote: [1227-1229 A.D.]]

The thunders of the Vatican rolled again and again over the head of

the emperor, but the author of them suffered more than the object. The

emperor sent troops into the papal territories, who ravaged the march

of Ancona, and the patrimony of St. Peter. Such of the Hospitallers and

Templars (the firm friends of the pope) as had estates in the imperial

dominions in Italy, were plundered and dispossessed.[72] The emperor

heavily taxed his subjects, both churchmen and laity, for the expenses

of the holy war. In defiance of Gregory’s warnings against his entering

on the crusade, till he should be relieved from the censures of the

church, Frederick embarked at Brundusium in August, 1228, and arrived

shortly afterwards at Acre. The joy of the Christians at the arrival of

the emperor was soon checked by letters which the patriarch received

from the pope, prohibiting the faithful from obeying a rebellious son

of the church. The Teutonic knights feared no clerical censures; and at

their head, and of some other soldiers, the emperor quitted Acre, went to

Joppa, and repaired the fortifications of that important city. He then

made further advances towards Jerusalem.

While matters were in this state, news was brought to the emperor of

an effectual method which the pope had taken of preventing him from

continuing the war in Palestine with the enemies of Christ. The pope’s

troops, of whom Jean de Brienne (the father-in-law of Frederick) was

one of the chief commanders, burned the imperial towns in Italy,

imprisoned, tortured, and robbed the people. The duke of Spalato, the

emperor’s lieutenant, had been unable successfully to resist, though

the imperial army had been but little impaired by Frederick’s foreign

expedition. These circumstances made the emperor anxious to return to

Europe; a treaty was immediately signed. For ten years the Christians

and Mussulmans were to live upon terms of brotherhood. Jerusalem,

Joppa, Bethlehem, Nazareth, and their appendages, were restored to the

Christians. The Holy Sepulchre likewise was given to them; and the people

of both religions might offer up their prayers in the place of devotion,

which the former class called the temple of Solomon, and the latter named

the mosque of Omar. The address of Frederick more effectually promoted

the object of the holy wars than the heroic frenzy of Richard; many of

the disasters consequent on the battle of Tiberias were wiped away, and

the serious and habitual hopes of Europe, for a permanent settlement

in Asia, seemed to be realised. But the barons of the Holy Land,

breathing interminable war, and secretly envying superior genius, avowed

indignation that a Christian sovereign should accept the friendship of

the infidels. The patriarch and clergy hated an excommunicated prince;

a man too who had given licence to the Saracens to adore their God

in a Christian temple. With some appearance of reason, however, they

contended that the treaty was not binding on the Mussulmans while the

approbation of the sultan of Damascus was withheld. But, despising the

blood-thirstiness of the barons, and the cruel bigotry of the priests,

Frederick asserted his royal prerogatives; and, as he had acquired some

of the old possessions of the Bouillon family, he avowed his intention

of having the crown placed upon his head in the Holy City agreeably to

constitutional forms.

Some persons, discontented with the conditions of the treaty, wished

to betray him into the hands of the sultan of Egypt. The guilt of this

treachery lies between the Hospitallers and the Templars. Kamil read

the letter which conveyed to him the news, exclaimed to his associates,

“See the fidelity of these Christian dogs”; and despatched a friend to

Frederick with the paper which he had received. The emperor repaired to

Jerusalem; but no hosannas welcomed his approach. By the command of the

patriarch no religious ceremonies were performed in the churches during

his stay. Even the German prelates preferred their spiritual to their

temporal allegiance; and the emperor, accompanied only by his courtiers

and the Teutonic knights, went to the church of the sepulchre. He boldly

took the crown from the altar, and placed it on his own head, and Hermann

von Salza pronounced a laudatory oration. Orders were then given for the

restoration of the city’s walls, and the emperor returned to Acre. In

that city too there was every demonstration of sorrow at his appearance.

Mass was performed in secret; the churches were deprived of their

ornaments; the bells were not rung, and the dead were interred without

any religious ceremony. But by some well-measured acts of severity, a

semblance of respect was at length shown to the emperor; and he then

returned to Europe, leaving the priests and people to thank Heaven for

his departure.

Few parts of the Crusades are more difficult to understand, and to reduce

into a clear and intelligible form, than the expedition of Frederick. He

was vilified by the Templars and Hospitallers, and other friends of the

pope; and their narratives of events are more numerous than those of the

imperial party. He gained more for the Christians than any prince had

acquired since the first establishment of the kingdom; and if the pope

had not hated him worse than his holiness hated the Saracens, and thereby

caused his return to Europe, there is every probability that after the

death of the sultan of Damascus, the emperor would have brought matters

to an issue completely triumphant. Gregory IX and his clergy had the

effrontery to tell the world that Frederick had left the sepulchre of

Christ in the hands of the infidels. But the fact was that it was given

to the Christians. The temple of Solomon indeed, or rather the mosque of

Omar, was left in the hands of the Mussulmans; a right of visiting it,

however, being allowed to the Christians.[c]

FOOTNOTES

[68] [It will be well to refer back to the earlier account of the sack

of Constantinople in Vol. 7, Chap. 11, p. 352. It is noteworthy how much

more atrocious was the barbarity of the crusaders to these their own

people, than was that of the Moslems themselves when they took the same

city in 1453.]

[69] According to Fuller’s[f] _Holy War_, “Pope Innocent III, having

lately learned the trick of employing the army of pilgrims in

bye-services, began now to set up a trade thereof. He levied a great

number of crusaders, whom he sent against the Albigenses in France.

These were reputed heretics, whom his holiness intended to root out

with all cruelty, that good shepherd knowing no other way to bring home

a wandering sheep than by worrying him to death. He freely and fully

promised the undertakers the self-same pardons and indulgences as he

did to those who went to conquer the Holy Land; and very conscionably

requested their aid only for forty days, hoping to chop up these

Albigenses at a bit. The place being nearer, the service shorter, the

work less, the wages the same with the voyage into Syria, many entered

themselves in this employment, and neglected the other.”

[70] The pope and emperor were struggling for supremacy, and the cunning

pontiff thought he could get rid of his rival by commanding him to take

the cross; and such was the state of the times that Frederick would not

have been considered a Christian if he had refused. Voltaire is right

in saying, “_L’empereur fit le vœu par politique; et par politique il

différa le voyage_.” _Essai sur les Mœurs des Nations_, Chap. 52.

[71] A curé at Paris, instead of reading the bull from the pulpit in the

usual form, said to his parishioners, “You know, my brethren, that I am

ordered to fulminate an excommunication against Frederick. I know not the

motive. All that I know, is, that there has been a quarrel between that

prince and the pope. God alone knows who is right. I excommunicate him

who has injured the other; and I absolve the sufferer.” The emperor sent

a present to the preacher, but the pope and the king blamed this sally;

_le mauvais plaisant_ was obliged to expiate his fault by a canonical

penance.

[72] The soldiers employed on these occasions were Saracens, subjects of

the emperor in Sicily. Like their master, they derided the papal bulls.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

CHAPTER VI. THE LAST CRUSADES

The poet, As-Sahib Jemal ad-Din ben Matrub made the following

verses on the failure of Saint Louis’ Crusade, his capture and

ransom:

“Bear to the king of France, when you shall see him, these

words, traced by a partisan of truth: The death of the servants

of the Messiah has been the reward given to you by God.

“You have landed in Egypt, thinking to take possession of it.

You have imagined that it was only peopled with cowards! you

who are a drum filled with wind.

“You thought that the moment to destroy the Mussulmans was

arrived; and this false idea has smoothed, in your eyes, every

difficulty.

“By your excellent conduct, you have abandoned your soldiers on

the plains of Egypt, and the tomb has gaped under their feet.

“What now remains of the seventy thousand who accompanied you?

Dead, wounded, and prisoners!

“May God inspire you often with similar designs! They will

cause the ruin of all Christians, and Egypt will have no longer

to dread anything from their rage.

“Without doubt your priests announced victories to you; their

predictions were false.

“Refer yourselves to a more enlightened oracle.

“Should the desire of revenge urge you to return to Egypt, be

assured the house of Lokman still remains, that the chain is

ready prepared, and the eunuch guard awake.”

[Sidenote: [1239-1314 A.D.]]

The council of Spoleto decreed that fresh levies should be sent into

Asia on the expiration of the truce with Kamil. The Franciscans and

Dominicans were the bearers of the resolutions to the princes and people

of Christendom. But it was soon apparent that the recovery of the Holy

Land was not the paramount consideration in the mind of Gregory IX, for

the preaching of the crusade once more became the means of filling the

papal coffers. By the different engines of persuasion and compulsion, the

missionaries gained numberless converts, and then allowed the unwilling,

and compelled the wealthy crusaders to give the church great largesses

in exchange for the vow. The once humble friars grew so rich by these

exactions, that their pride and magnificence were detestable in the

eyes of the people. These disgraceful scenes were acted in England for

two years; but the indignation of society at the avarice of the pope

was so strong, that the preaching ceased. Some of the English nobility

were inflamed by the love of warlike praise, and took the cross with no

intention of submitting to a pecuniary commutation. The earl of Chester,

and also Richard, earl of Cornwall, brother to King Henry II, prepared to

measure lances with the Saracens.

RICHARD OF CORNWALL’S CRUSADE (THE SEVENTH)

[Sidenote: [1236-1240 A.D.]]

The desire of crusading was influenced by events in Palestine. A truce

between the sultan of Aleppo and the Templars expired with the life of

the Mussulman prince; and when his successor renewed the war with them,

they sustained so severe a defeat, that every commandery in Europe

sent them succours; and even the Hospitallers resolved to avenge the

death of their rivals. Three hundred knights and a considerable body of

stipendiaries went from London.

The spirit of crusading burned in France, particularly in the middle

and southern provinces; and many barons assembled at Lyons in order to

concert the means of giving effect to their common desire. But a legate

of the pope interrupted their councils with announcing the commands of

his master for the dissolving of the assembly, and the return of the

members to their homes. The barons remonstrated against this versatility

of opinion in an infallible guide. The nuncio was contumeliously

dismissed. Most of the nobility pressed forwards to Marseilles, and

hoisted sail for the Holy Land. Indignant at their contempt of his

wishes, the emperor prohibited the governors of Apulia and other

countries from affording aid to the crusaders. This measure prevented

many parties of cavaliers from pursuing the voyage; but it did not impede

those fanatical and romantic warriors, the king of Navarre, the duke

of Burgundy, and the counts of Bar and Brittany, from continuing their

course to Acre.

News of the warlike preparations of Europe had been communicated to

the sultan of Egypt; and the first moment when the faith of treaties

opposed not a hostile course, he drove the Latins out of Jerusalem, and

overthrew the tower of David, which, until that time, had always been

regarded as sacred by all classes of religionists. After this capture

Kamil died; various princes of Syria and Egypt asserted their pretensions

to the vacant throne; but the military spirit was too active among the

Mussulmans, to allow the Christians rationally to hope that they should

eventually profit by these dissensions. The war began by a successful

irruption of the count of Brittany into the Damascene territories. But in

the vicinity of Gaza three hundred Frenchmen, who wished to imitate the

glory of the cavaliers of Brittany, were defeated by a smaller number of

Turks.

[Sidenote: [1240-1244 A.D.]]

The pope renewed his endeavours to persuade the English to commute their

piety for gold, but his ministers, the Franciscans and Dominicans, were

treated only with contempt; and in the spring of the year 1240, Richard,

earl of Cornwall, William Longespee or Longsword, Theodore, the prior of

the Hospitallers, and many others of the nobility, embarked at Dover.

The arrival of Richard and the other barons at Acre, took place shortly

after the signature of the discordant treaties between the Templars

and the emir of Karak, and the Hospitallers with the sultan of Egypt.

The English were astonished to find that the king of Navarre and the

count of Brittany had fled from the plains of Syria, when they received

intelligence of the departure of reinforcements from Europe. The emir of

Karak, too, could not fulfil his treaty, or even restore to the Templars

the prisoners which had been made in the battle of Gaza. Richard marched

to Joppa, but as the sultan of Egypt (then at war with the sultan of

Damascus) sent to offer him terms of peace, he prudently seized the

benefits of negotiation. With the consent of the duke of Burgundy, the

master of the Hospitallers, and other lords of high degree, he accepted

a renunciation of Jerusalem, Berytus, Nazareth, Bethlehem, Mount Tabor,

and most of the Holy Land. An exchange of prisoners was to cement the

union. The great object of the crusaders seemed now to be accomplished.

Palestine belonged to the Christians. Richard returned to Europe, and

was received in every town as the deliverer of the Holy Sepulchre. From

neglect or inability he had not induced the Templars to consent to his

completion of the hopes of the West; and in spleen and revenge the

cavaliers renewed those unfraternal altercations with other knights which

had hastened the ruin of the kingdom in the time of Saladin (1241).

The Hospitallers opened their treasury for the re-edification of the

walls of Jerusalem. The patriarch and clergy entered the sacred city,

and reconsecrated the churches. For two years Christianity was the only

religion administered in Jerusalem, and the faithful began to exult in

the apparent permanent downfall of infidelity, when a new enemy arose

more dreadful than even the Mussulmans.

THE TATAR CREVASSE

[Sidenote: [1244 A.D.]]

The great Tatarian princes, Jenghiz Khan and his successors, had

obliterated the vast empire of Khwarizm; and the expelled and defeated

Tatars fled to the south. The storm rolled on towards Egypt, the

Khwarizmians demanded a settlement; the sultan was the only Moslem prince

who entered into treaties with those barbarians; and he advised them to

fix themselves in Palestine. He sent one of his principal emirs, and a

large body of troops as their guides and coadjutors, and at the head of

twenty thousand horse, Barbacan, the Khwarizmian general entered the Holy

Land. The Christians in Jerusalem heard with dismay that the Tatarian

tempest had reached their territories. It was evident from the ruined

state of the walls that Jerusalem was no longer tenable. The cavaliers,

and many of the inhabitants, abandoned the sacred city.

The Khwarizmians entered it, spared neither lives nor property, and

violated both Christian and Mussulman sanctuaries. In the wantonness of

cruelty they disinterred the departed great, and made a cremation of

venerable remains. The insulting fanatics of savageness murdered priests

round the altars, exclaiming while they stabbed the holy men, “Let us

pour their blood on the place where they poured out wine in commemoration

of their crucified God.” As crafty as ferocious, they planted a banner

of the cross upon the walls, and, deceived by this joyful appearance,

several thousands of the fugitives returned to the city, but only to

partake of the miserable doom of their friends.

The repeated solicitations of the Templars at length brought four

thousand soldiers from their Syrian allies. The united Christian and

Mussulman forces were so far inferior to the Tatars, that policy required

a course of measures perfectly defensive. But the fury of the patriarch

precipitated the army into the gulf of destruction. The awful conflict

raged for two days. The soldiers of Damascus and Emesa were soon slain,

or scattered. The loss of every part of the army was great, almost beyond

example. Only sixteen Hospitallers, thirty-three Templars, and three

Teutonic cavaliers remained alive and free. These soldiers fled to Acre,

and that city became the refuge of the Christians. After having razed the

fortifications of Askalon, and the castle of Tiberias, the Khwarizmians

and Egyptians encamped on the plains of Acre, devastated the country, and

slew or led into captivity all straggling Franks.

A united force of Khwarizmians and mamelukes conquered Damascus,

and Europe heard with dismay that the Mussulman power was again

consolidating. But the members soon were separated, for the sultan of

Egypt, faithless as cruel, denied his allies a permanent settlement on

the shores of the Nile. The soldiers of fortune flew to the banner of

the Damascene prince, and assisted him in his efforts to recover his

capital. But the cause of the mamelukes was felt as the common interest

of the Moslem world, and all Syria, as well as all Egypt, was in arms in

order to exterminate the northern barbarians. In a general engagement

the Khwarizmians were defeated and scattered. Barbacan was slain, and

southern Asia recovered from its panic and distress.

THE CRUSADE OF ST. LOUIS (THE EIGHTH)

[Illustration: A TATAR]

The superstition of a French king, and the successes of the savage

Khwarizmians, gave birth to the Eighth Crusade. Pope Innocent IV

convoked a general council at Lyons; the Bishop of Berytus described

the effects of the Tatarian storm, and left his ecclesiastical brethren

to conclude, whether one effort should not be made for a restoration of

things to the state in which Richard, earl of Cornwall, had left them.

It was accordingly resolved that a crusade should be preached throughout

Christendom, and that for four years peace and seriousness should reign

over Europe. Such of the faithful as did not expose their persons in

the holy cause were to give the subsidiary aid of treasure; and the

contribution to be made by the cardinals was fixed at a tenth, and that

of the other ecclesiastics at a twentieth part of their yearly revenues.

The pope wrote to Henry III, king of England, urging him to press on his

subjects the necessity of punishing the Khwarizmians. But the spirit of

crusading raged more strongly in France than in any other country of the

West; and it revived in all its fierceness of piety and chivalry in Louis

IX. Agreeably to the temper of the times, he had vowed, whilst afflicted

by a severe illness, that in case of recovery he would travel to the Holy

Land. In the delirium of his fever, he had beheld an engagement between

the Christians and the Saracens; the infidels were victorious, and the

brave king of a valiant nation fancied it his duty to avenge the defeat.

The victories of the Khwarizmians were a realisation of part of his

dream, and his preparations had anticipated the decrees of the Lyonese

council. This vow was made about the year 1244, according to Nangis and

Chronicle of St. Denis, cited in Du Cange’s notes. From the moment of his

resolving to go to the Holy Land, St. Louis quitted all pomp of dress; he

exchanged his purple for black, a royal for a religious habit. During the

crusade he abstained from wearing scarlet, vair, or ermine. The example

of the monarch gave efficacy to the laws regarding simplicity of dress,

and the lord of Joinville assures us, that, during the whole time he was

attending the king on his crusade, he never once saw an embroidered coat

of arms. The French barons, however, when resident in Damietta, were less

rigid in morality than in dress. The cross was likewise taken by the

three royal brothers, the counts of Artois, Poitiers, and Anjou, by the

duke of Burgundy, the countess of Flanders, and her two sons, the count

of St. Paul, and many other knights.

Sentiments of respect for the king of France were not felt in his country

alone; the people of England revered his name, and avowedly in imitation

of his example, the bishop of Salisbury, William Longespee, Walter de

Lucy, and many other English nobles and gentlemen were crossed. William

Longespee was, or feigned himself, poor, and went to Rome to solicit

the aid of the pope. He returned to England, and extorted more than a

thousand marks from the religious, while the less scrupulous or more

powerful earl of Cornwall was insatiable in his avarice, and gained

from one archdeacon alone, six hundred pounds. Political circumstances

detained St. Louis in France for three years; but the money and troops

which he sent to the Holy Land invigorated the hopes of the Latin

Christians. The ranks of the military orders were recruited by hired

troops and regular knights from the different stations in Europe.

On the 12th of June, 1248, Louis, attended by his three brothers,

went to the abbey of St. Denis, and received from the pope’s legate

the oriflamme, the alms’ purse, and pilgrim’s staff. He sailed from

France at the end of August, and arrived in September at Cyprus, the

appointed rendezvous for his barons and their vassals. The king remained

eight months in Cyprus, employed in organising his troops, in works of

piety, and particularly in healing the breaches in charity between the

military orders. The Venetians and other people assisted the French

with provisions; on one occasion the supplies of the emperor Frederick

preserved the army, and the grateful king implored the pope to absolve

a man who had been benevolent to the soldiers of the church. The

ambassadors of a Tatarian prince appeared before Louis, offering their

master’s aid to root the Saracens and pagans out of the Holy Land.

The king sent a magnificent present to his ally, in order to bribe

him to become a Christian. Two black monks, who understood the Arabic

language, were charged with the missionary office, and their eloquence

and embroidered representation of some of the mysteries of Christianity

were to effect the conversion of the Scythian savage and his court. In

the spring of the year 1249, the soldiers of Louis were mustered, and his

ships prepared for sea; fifty thousand men formed his military force,

and eighteen hundred was the number of his transports, palendars, and

store ships. They set sail for Egypt; a storm separated the fleet, and

the royal division, in which were nearly three thousand knights and their

men-at-arms, arrived off Damietta.

[Sidenote: [1249 A.D.]]

The shores were lined by the sultan’s troops, who astonished the French

by the clangour of trumpets and brazen drums. The heralds of the king of

France instantly went to the sultan, Nejm ad-Din (a son of Kamil), near

Ashmun, and spared no language of exaggeration in describing the power of

their master. The only way to avoid the tempest was to receive priests

who would teach the Christian religion to the people of Egypt:[73]

otherwise he would pursue them everywhere, and God should decide to whom

the country should be given. The sultan replied that he also knew the

use of arms, and like the French, inherited valour. The cause of the

Mussulmans was that of justice; and the _Koran_ declared, that they who

made war unjustly should perish.

Some of the knights wished to dissuade the king from landing, till the

appearance of their brethren in arms; but on the second day after their

arrival, Louis commanded the disembarkation; he himself leaped into the

water; his shield was suspended from his neck, his helmet was on his

head, and his lance on his wrist. His soldiers followed him to the shore;

and the Saracens, panic-struck at their boldness and determination,

made but a slight show of defence, and fled into the interior of the

country. Although Damietta was better prepared for a siege than in those

days when it had sustained an attack of eighteen months’ duration, yet

the garrison sought safety in the fleetness of their horses. They were

received at Cairo with the indignation which their cowardice merited; and

the sultan (who had repaired thither from Ashmun) strangled fifty of the

chiefs. The people of Damietta loaded themselves with their most valuable

effects, set fire to the part of the city in which their merchandise

and plunder were collected, and then took flight for Cairo. Louis fixed

his residence in the city; a Christian government was established; and

the clergy, agreeably to old custom, purified the mosques. According to

ancient usage, one-third part of the spoil should have been allotted to

the general-in-chief, and the remaining portions had been usually divided

among the pilgrims; but, at the suggestion of the patriarch of Jerusalem,

Louis ordered that the corn and provisions should form a magazine for the

common benefit of the army; and he retained to himself the rest of the

movable booty.

Neither the religious character of the war, nor the importance of

preserving military discipline, had any effect on the conduct of the

holy warriors. So general was the immorality, that the king could

not stop the foul and noxious torrent. The hope of the reward of a

piece of gold for an enemy’s head, inspirited the Mussulmans to many

enterprises of difficulty and danger; but Louis prevented at length their

incursions into his camp, for he surrounded it with deep ditches, and

his cross-bowmen galled the approaching parties of Mussulman cavalry.

The French looked with impatience for the count of Poitiers and the

arrière-ban of France, the remainder of the force which had sailed from

Cyprus, and had been driven to Acre in the tempest. In October 1249 the

count of Poitiers reached Egypt. The French also were joined by two

hundred English knights.

THE BATTLE OF MANSURA

[Sidenote: [1250 A.D.]]

At the close of November, the army commenced its march to the capital of

Egypt. Until their approach to the vicinity of Mansura, they overcame the

open and insidious enmity of the Saracens. Soon after his departure from

Damietta, the king accepted the proffered aid of five hundred horsemen

of the sultan, and commanded his army to respect their guides. Vainly

thinking that this order was inflexible to circumstances, the Saracens

attacked the Templars, who formed the van of the army. But the valiant

knights rallied round their grand master, and invoking God to aid them

in this perilous conjuncture, they rushed upon and destroyed their

treacherous foes. Fakhr ad-Din, the Egyptian emir, and his army were

encamped on the opposite side of the Ashmun canal, which the French in

vain endeavoured to cross. They commenced a causeway over the canal; but

the Saracens ruined in a day the work of a month; and even crossed the

Nile by one of the passages which were familiar to them and gave battle

to the enemy.[b]

It is so hard for the layman to get a true idea of the chaos and

disintegrated nature of a battle, that a realistic account of how St.

Louis fought the Saracens is well worth quoting, especially from the pen

of the lord of Joinville whose sword was busy in these very scenes.[a]

DE JOINVILLE’S ACCOUNT OF THE BATTLE OF MANSURA

A Bedouin had lately come to say that if we would give him five hundred

golden besants, he would show a safe ford, which might easily be crossed

on horseback. The day appointed for this purpose was Shrove-Tuesday,

which, when arrived, we all mounted our horses, and armed at all points,

followed the Bedouin to the ford. On our way thither, some advanced too

near the banks of the river, which being soft and slippery, they and

their horses fell in and were drowned. The king seeing it, pointed it out

to the rest, that they might be more careful and avoid similar danger.

Among those that were drowned was that valiant knight Sir John d’Orleans,

who bore the banner of the army. When we came to the ford, we saw on the

opposite bank full three hundred Saracen cavalry ready to defend this

passage. We entered the river, and our horses found a tolerable ford with

firm footing, so that by ascending the stream we found an easy shore,

and through God’s mercy we all crossed over with safety. The Saracens,

observing us thus cross, fled away with the utmost despatch.

Before we set out, the king had ordered that the Templars should form

the van, and the count d’Artois his brother should command the second

division of the army; but the moment the count d’Artois had passed the

ford with all his people, and saw the Saracens flying, they stuck spurs

into their horses and galloped after them; for which those who formed

the van were much angered at the count d’Artois, who could not make any

answer, on account of Sir Foucquault du Melle, who held the bridle of

his horse; and Sir Foucquault, being deaf, heard nothing the Templars

were saying to the count d’Artois, but kept bawling out, “Forward,

forward!” When the Templars perceived this, they thought they should be

dishonoured if they allowed the count d’Artois thus to take the lead,

and with one accord they spurred their horses to their fastest speed,

pursuing the Saracens through the town of Mansura, as far as the plains

before Babylon; but on their return the Turks shot at them plenty of

arrows and other artillery, as they repassed through the narrow streets

of the town. The count d’Artois and the lord de Coucy, of the name of

Raoul, were there slain, and as many as three hundred other[74] knights.

The Templars lost, as their chief informed me, full fourteen score men

at arms and horses. My knights, as well as myself, noticing on our left

a large body of Turks who were arming, instantly charged them; and when

we were advanced into the midst of them, I perceived a sturdy Saracen

mounting his horse, which was held by one of his esquires by the bridle,

and while he was putting his hand on the saddle to mount, I gave him such

a thrust with my spear, which I pushed as far as I was able, that he fell

down dead. The esquire, seeing his lord dead, abandoned master and horse;

but, watching my motions, on my return struck me with his lance such a

blow between the shoulders as drove me on my horse’s neck, and held me

there so tightly that I could not draw my sword, which was girthed round

me. I was forced to draw another sword which was at the pommel of my

saddle, and it was high time; but, when he saw I had my sword in my hand,

he withdrew his lance which I had seized and ran from me.

It chanced that I and my knights had traversed the army of the Saracens,

and saw here and there different parties of them, to the amount of about

six thousand, who, abandoning their quarters, had advanced into the

plain. On perceiving that we were separated from the main body, they

boldly attacked us, and slew Sir Hugues de Trichatel, lord d’Escoflans,

who bore the banner of our company. They also made prisoner Sir Raoul de

Wanon, of our company, whom they had struck to the ground. As they were

carrying him off, my knights and myself knew him, and instantly hastened,

with great courage, to assist him, and deliver him from their hands.

In returning from this engagement the Turks gave me such heavy blows,

that my horse, not being able to withstand them, fell on his knees, and

threw me to the ground over his head. I very shortly replaced my shield

on my breast, and grasped my spear, during which time the lord Errart

d’Esmeray, whose soul may God pardon! advanced towards me, for he had

also been struck down by the enemy; and we retreated together towards

an old ruined house to wait for the king, who was coming, and I found

means to recover my horse. As we were going to this house, a large body

of Turks came galloping towards us, but passed on to a party of ours

whom they saw hard by; as they passed, they struck me to the ground,

with my shield over my neck, and galloped over me, thinking I was dead;

and indeed I was nearly so. When they were gone, my companion Sir Errart

came and raised me up, and we went to the walls of the ruined house.

Thither also had retired Sir Hugues d’Escosse, Sir Ferreys de Loppei, Sir

Regnault de Menoncourt, and several others; and there also the Turks came

to attack us, more bravely than ever, on all sides. Some of them entered

within the walls, and were a long time fighting with us at spear’s

length, during which my knights gave me my horse, which they held, lest

he should run away, and at the same time so vigorously defended us

against the Turks, that they were greatly praised by several able persons

who witnessed their prowess.

Sir Hugues d’Escosse was desperately hurt by three great wounds in the

face and elsewhere. Sir Raoul and Sir Ferreys were also badly wounded

in their shoulders, so that the blood spouted out just like to a tun of

wine when tapped. Sir Errart d’Esmeray was so severely wounded in the

face by a sword, the stroke of which cut off his nose, that it hung down

over his mouth. In this severe distress, I called to my mind St. James,

and said, “Good Lord St. James, succour me, I beseech thee; and come to

my aid in this time of need.” I had scarcely ended my prayer, when Sir

Errart said to me, “Sir, if I did not think you might suppose it was done

to abandon you and save myself, I would go to my lord of Anjou, whom I

see on the plain, and beg he would hasten to your help.” “Sir Errart,” I

replied, “you will do me great honour and pleasure, if you will go and

seek succour to save our lives; for your own also is in great peril”;

and I said truly, for he died of the wound he had received. All were of

my opinion that he should seek for assistance; and I then quitting hold

of the rein of his bridle, he galloped towards the count d’Anjou, to

request he would support us in the danger we were in. There was a great

lord with him who wished to detain him, but the good prince would not

attend to what he urged, but, spurring his horse, galloped towards us

followed by his men. The Saracens, observing them coming, left us; but

when on their arrival they saw the Saracens carrying away their prisoner,

Sir Raoul de Wanon, badly wounded, they hastened to recover him, and

brought him back in a most pitiful state. Shortly after, I saw the king

arrive with all his attendants, and with a terrible noise of trumpets,

clarions, and horns. He halted on an eminence, with his men at arms, for

something he had to say; and I assure you I never saw so handsome a man

under arms. He was taller than any of his troop by the shoulders; and

his helmet, which was gilded, was handsomely placed on his head; and

he bore a German sword in his hand. Soon after he had halted, many of

his knights were observed intermixed with the Turks; their companions

instantly rushed into the battle among them; and you must know, that in

this engagement were performed, on both sides, the most gallant deeds

that were ever done in this expedition to the Holy Land; for none made

use of the bow, cross-bow, or other artillery. But the conflict consisted

of blows given to each other by battle-axes, swords, butts of spears, all

mixed together. From all I saw, my knights and myself, all wounded as we

were, were very impatient to join the battle with the others. Shortly

after, one of my esquires, who had once fled from my banner, came to me,

and brought me one of my Flemish war-horses; I was soon mounted, and rode

by the side of the king, whom I found attended by that discreet man, Sir

John de Valeri. Sir John seeing the king desirous to enter into the midst

of the battle, advised him to make for the riverside on the right, in

order that in case there should be any danger, he might have support from

the duke of Burgundy and his army, which had been left behind to guard

the camp; and likewise that his men might be refreshed and have wherewith

to quench their thirst; for the weather was at this moment exceedingly

hot.

[Illustration: THIRTEENTH CENTURY CRUSADER]

As this was doing, Sir Humbert de Beaujeu, constable of France, came up,

and told the king that his brother, the count d’Artois, was much pressed

in a house at Mansura, where, however, he defended himself gallantly,

but that he would need speedy assistance; and entreated the king to go

to his aid. The king replied, “Constable, spur forward, and I will follow

you close.” All of us now galloped straight to Mansura, and were in the

midst of the Turkish army, when we were instantly separated from each

other by the greater power of the Saracens and Turks. Shortly after, a

serjeant at mace of the constable, with whom I was, came to him, and said

the king was surrounded by the Turks, and his person in imminent danger.

You may suppose our astonishment and fears, for there were between us

and where the king was full one thousand or twelve hundred Turks, and

we were only six persons in all. I said to the constable, that since it

was impossible for us to make our way through such a crowd of Turks, it

would be much better to wheel round and get on the other side of them.

This we instantly did. There was a deep ditch on the road we took between

the Saracens and us; and, had they noticed us, they must have slain us

all; but they were solely occupied with the king, and the larger bodies;

perhaps also they might have taken us for some of their friends. As we

thus gained the river, following its course downward between it and the

road, we observed that the king had ascended it, and that the Turks were

sending fresh troops after him. Both armies now met on the banks, and the

event was miserably unfortunate; for the weaker part of our army thought

to cross over to the division of the duke of Burgundy, but that was

impossible from their horses being worn down, and the extreme heat of the

weather. As we descended the river, we saw it covered with lances, pikes,

shields, men, and horses, unable to save themselves from death. When we

perceived the miserable state of our army, I advised the constable to

remain on this side of the river to guard a small bridge that was hard

by; “for if we leave it,” added I, “the enemy may come and attack the

king on this side; and if our men be assaulted in two places, they must

be discomfited.”

There then we halted; and you may believe me when I say, that the good

king performed that day the most gallant deeds that ever I saw in any

battle. It was said, that had it not been for his personal exertions,

the whole army would have been destroyed; but I believe that the great

courage he naturally possessed was that day doubled by the power of God,

for he forced himself wherever he saw his men in any distress, and gave

such blows with battle-axe and sword, it was wonderful to behold. The

lord de Courtenai and Sir John de Salenai one day told me, that at this

engagement six Turks caught hold of the bridle of the king’s horse, and

were leading him away; but this virtuous prince exerted himself with such

bravery in fighting the six Turks, that he alone freed himself from them;

and that many, seeing how valiantly he defended himself, and the great

courage he displayed, took greater courage themselves, and abandoning

the passage they were guarding, hastened to support the king. After some

little time, the count Peter of Brittany came to us who were guarding the

small bridge from Mansura, having had a most furious skirmish. He was so

badly wounded in the face that the blood came out of his mouth, as if it

had been full of water, and he vomited it forth. The count was mounted

on a short, thick, but strong horse, and his reins and the pommel of his

saddle were cut and destroyed, so that he was forced to hold himself

by his two hands round the horse’s neck for fear the Turks, who were

close behind him, should make him fall off. He did not, however, seem

much afraid of them, for he frequently turned round, and gave them many

abusive words by way of mockery.

In our front were two of the king’s heralds; the name of one was

Guillaume de Bron, and that of the other John de Gaymaches; against whom

the Turks led a rabble of peasants of the country, who pelted them with

clods of earth and large stones. At last, they brought a villainous Turk,

who thrice flung Greek fires at them; and by one of them was the tabard

of Guillaume de Bron set on fire; but he soon threw it off, and good need

had he, for if it had set fire to his clothes, he must have been burned.

We were also covered with these showers of stones and arrows which the

Turks discharged at the two heralds. I luckily found near me a gaubison

of coarse cloth which had belonged to a Saracen, and turning the slit

part inward, I made a sort of shield, which was of much service to me;

for I was only wounded by their shots in five places, whereas my horse

was hurt in fifteen. Soon after, as God willed it, one of my vassals of

Joinville brought me a banner with my arms, and a long knife of war,

which I was in want of; and then, when these Turkish villains, who were

on foot, pressed on the heralds, we made a charge on them and put them

instantly to flight. Thus when the good count de Soissons and myself were

returned to our post on the bridge, after chasing away these peasants,

he rallied me, saying, “Seneschal, let us allow this rabble to bawl and

bray; and, by the _Cresse Dieu_,” his usual oath, “you and I will talk

over this day’s adventures in the chambers of our ladies.”

It happened that towards evening, about sunset, the constable, Sir

Humbert de Beaujeu, brought us the king’s cross-bows that were on foot;

and they drew up in one front, while we horsemen dismounted under shelter

of the cross-bows. The Saracens observing this immediately took to

flight, and left us in peace. The constable told me that we had behaved

well in thus guarding the bridge; and bade me go boldly to the king, and

not quit him until he should be dismounted in his pavilion. I went to the

king, and at the same moment Sir John de Valeri joined, and requested

of him, in the name of the lord de Chastillon, that the said lord might

command the rear guard, which the king very willingly granted. The king

then took the road to return to his pavilion, and raised the helmet from

his head, on which I gave him my iron skull-cap, which was much lighter,

that he might have more air. Thus as we were riding together, Father

Henry, prior of the hospital of Ronnay, who had crossed the river, came

to him and kissed his hand, fully armed, and asked if he had heard any

news of his brother the count d’Artois. “Yes,” replied the king, “I have

heard all”; that is to say, that he knew well he was now in paradise. The

prior, thinking to comfort him for the death of his brother, continued,

“Sire, no king of France has ever reaped such honour as you have done;

for with great intrepidity have you and your army crossed a dangerous

river to combat your enemies; and have been so very successful that you

have put them to flight and gained the field, together with their warlike

engines, with which they had wonderfully annoyed you, and concluded the

affair by taking possession this day of their camp and quarters.” The

good king replied that God should be adored for all the good he had

granted him; and then heavy tears began to fall down his cheeks, which

many great persons noticing, were oppressed with anguish and compassion

on seeing him thus weep, praising the name of God who had enabled him to

win the victory.[f]

RESULTS OF MANSURA

The count of Artois had rallied his forces in the town. The Egyptian

chief invested Mansura; and, with ability equal to his spirit, placed

a body of troops in such a station as to intercept the communication

between the count and the king. The soldiers in Mansura engaged the

French. The inhabitants partook of the perils of the day, and poured

upon their enemy, with deadly effect, burning coals, boiling water, and

stones. The count did not survive to witness all the dreadful issues of

his rashness. William Longespee and a numerous band of gallant men also

perished. The grand master of St. John fell into the enemy’s hands; and

the master of the Templars was happy in escaping with the loss of an

eye. On the side of the enemy Fakhr ad-Din was slain; but his station

was quickly filled by a chief of equal bravery and conduct. The king

and his army had crossed the ford, and prevented the total rout of the

Christians. The valiant master of the Templars was slain in this renewed

engagement. Egyptian and Christian annalists have claimed the honour and

rewards of victory for their respective sides; but in truth the result of

the battle appears to have been indecisive.

The Saracens, however, cut off all communications between St. Louis

and Damietta. Famine and disease appeared in the Christian camp, and

the French described the latter of those evils as having sprung from a

pestilential air emitted from the dead bodies of their friends and foes,

and from eating eel pouts which had fed on corpses in the river.[b]

“From this poisonous diet,” says De Joinville, “and from the bad air

of a country where it scarcely ever rains, the whole army was infected

by a shocking disorder, which dried up the flesh on one’s legs to the

bone, and our skins became tanned as black as the ground, or like an old

boot that has long lain behind a coffer. In addition to this miserable

disorder, those afflicted by it had another sore complaint in the mouth,

from eating eel pouts that rotted the gums. Very few escaped death that

were attacked, and the surest symptoms of its being fatal was a bleeding

at the nose. The barbers were obliged to cut away large pieces of flesh

from the gums to enable the patient to eat. It was pitiful to hear the

cries and groans of those on whom the operation was performed; they

seemed like to the cries of women in labour, and I cannot express the

great concern all felt who heard them.”[f]

ST. LOUIS A PRISONER

Negotiations for peace were opened between the contending powers, and the

exchange of the lordship of Jerusalem for that of Damietta formed the

basis of the treaty. The king offered either of his brothers as a hostage

for the delivery of Damietta to the Egyptians; but the sultan objected,

and all hopes of peace were abandoned, because the Christians would not

consent to the delivery of their king as the hostage. The miserable

condition of the French army forbade all thoughts of victory, and called

for a retreat to Damietta.

The retreat was ordered; but those who attempted it by the river were

taken by the enemy, and the fate of such as proceeded by land was equally

disastrous. While they were occupied in constructing a bridge over the

canal, the Mussulmans entered the camp, and murdered the sick. The

valiant Louis, though oppressed with the general calamity of disease,

sustained boldly, with Sir Godfrey de Sergines, the shock of the enemy,

and threw himself into the midst of them, resolved to perish in defending

his troops. The brave Sergines, who never left him, succeeded at last in

drawing him from the foe, and conducted him to a village, where he sank

into insensibility and helplessness.[75]

In that state the Mussulmans made him prisoner. Charles count of Anjou,

Alphonsus of Poitiers, and indeed all the nobility fell into the

enemy’s hands. The sultan clothed the king and the nobles with robes of

honour, and treated them with kindness and generosity. But many of the

unfortunate men who were ill, and therefore useless, were killed by their

new masters in defiance of the command of Saladin, and the general usage

of oriental nations not to put to death anyone to whom they had given

bread and salt. Other prisoners saved their lives by renouncing their

religion; the Saracenic commander indulged the fanaticism of his people

by allowing the converts to be received, though he well remembered the

sage remark of Saladin, that a Christian was never known to make a good

Moslem, nor a good Saracen a Christian.[76] So great were the calamities

of the French in this attempted retreat, that twenty thousand were made

captives, and seven thousand were slain or drowned.[b] The last battles

and disasters of St. Louis made, it may well be believed, a vivid

impression on the Saracens. We may quote the account of Makrisi, a Moslem

historian.[a]

MOSLEM ACCOUNT OF ST. LOUIS’ CAPTURE

The day of Bairam (January 6th, 1250) a great lord and relative to the

king of France was made prisoner. Not a day passed without skirmishes on

both sides, and with alternate success. The Mussulmans were particularly

anxious to make prisoners, to gain information as to the state of the

enemy’s army, and used all sorts of stratagems for this purpose. A

soldier from Cairo bethought himself of putting his head withinside of

a watermelon, the interior of which he had scooped out, and of thus

swimming towards the French camp; a Christian soldier, not suspecting

the trick, leaped into the Nile to seize the melon; but the Egyptian was

a stout swimmer, and catching hold of him, dragged him to his general.

On Wednesday, the 7th day of the moon Shawwal (January 13th, 1250), the

Mussulmans captured a large boat, in which were a hundred soldiers,

commanded by an officer of distinction. On Thursday, the 15th of the same

moon, the French marched out of their camp, and their cavalry began to

move. The troops were ordered to file off, when a slight skirmish took

place, and the French left on the field forty cavaliers with their horses.

Some traitors having shown the ford over the canal of Ashmun to the

French, fourteen hundred cavaliers crossed it and fell unexpectedly

on the camp of the Mussulmans, on a Tuesday, the 15th day of the moon

Dhul-Kadeh (February 15th), having at their head the brother of the

king of France. The emir Fakhr ad-Din was at the time in the bath; he

instantly quitted it with precipitation and mounted a horse without a

saddle or bridle, followed only by some slaves. The enemy attacked him

on all sides, and his slaves like cowards, abandoned him when in the

midst of the French; it was in vain he attempted to defend himself; he

fell pierced with wounds. The French, after the death of Fakhr ad-Din,

retreated to Jédilé; but their whole cavalry advanced to Mansura, and,

having forced one of the gates, entered the town; the Mussulmans fled

to the right and left. The king of France had already penetrated as far

as the sultan’s palace, and victory seemed ready to declare for him,

when the Baharite slaves, led by Bibars, advanced and snatched it from

his hands; their charge was so furious that the French were obliged to

retreat. The French infantry, during this time, had advanced to cross

the bridge; had they been able to join their cavalry, the defeat of the

Egyptian army, and the loss of the town of Mansura, would have been

inevitable.

Night separated the combatants, when the French retreated in disorder to

Jédilé, after leaving fifteen hundred of their men on the field. They

surrounded their camp with a ditch and wall, but their army was divided

into two corps; the least considerable body was encamped on the branch

of the Ashmun, and the larger on the great branch of the Nile that runs

to Damietta. A pigeon had been let loose to fly to Cairo the instant the

French had surprised the camp of Fakhr ad-Din, having a note under its

wing, to inform the inhabitants of this misfortune. The melancholy event

had created a general consternation in the town, which the runaways had

augmented, and the gates of Cairo were kept open all the night to receive

them. A second pigeon bearing the news of the victory over the French,

had restored tranquillity to the capital. Joy succeeded sorrow; and

each congratulated the other on this happy turn of affairs, and public

rejoicings were made.

[Illustration: A SARACEN]

Boats sent from Damietta brought all sorts of provisions to the French

camp, and kept it abundantly supplied. Turan Shah caused many boats to be

built which, when taken to pieces, he placed on the backs of camels, and

had them thus carried to the canal of Méhalé, when they were put together

again, launched on the canal, and filled with troops for an ambuscade.

As soon as the French fleet of boats appeared at the mouth of the canal

of Méhalé, the Mussulmans quitted their hiding-place and attacked them.

While the two fleets were engaged, other boats left Mansura filled with

soldiers, and fell on the rear of the French. It was in vain they sought

to escape by flight; a thousand Christians were killed or made prisoners.

In this defeat fifty-two of their boats laden with provisions were taken,

and their communication with Damietta by the navigation of the Nile was

cut off, so that within a short time the whole army suffered the most

terrible famine. The Mussulmans surrounded them on all sides, and they

could neither advance nor retreat.

On the first of the moon Dhul-hija (March 7th), the French surprised

seven boats; but the troops on board had the good fortune to escape. In

spite of the superiority of the Egyptians on the Nile, they attempted to

bring up another convoy from Damietta, but they lost it; thirty-two of

their boats were taken and carried to Mansura, on the ninth of the same

moon. This new loss filled the measure of their woes, and caused them

to propose a truce and send ambassadors to treat of it with the sultan.

The emir Zain ad-Din and the kadi Bedr ad-Din were ordered to meet and

confer with them, when the French offered to surrender Damietta, on

condition that Jerusalem, and some other places in Syria, should be given

in exchange for it. This proposal was rejected, and the conference broken

up.

On Friday, the 27th of the moon Dhul-hija (April 2nd), the French set

fire to all their machines of war and timber for building, and rendered

almost all their boats unfit for use. During the night of Tuesday,

the third day of the moon Muharrem (April 7th), in the year of the

Hegira 648, the whole of the French army decamped, and took the road

to Damietta. Some boats which they had reserved fell down the Nile at

the same time. The Mussulmans having, at break of day of the Wednesday,

perceived the retreat of the French, pursued and attacked them.

The heat of the combat was at Fariskur. The French were defeated and put

to flight; ten thousand of their men fell on the field of battle, some

say thirty thousand. Upwards of one hundred thousand horsemen, infantry,

tradespeople, and others were made slaves. The booty was immense in

horses, mules, tents, and other riches. There were but one hundred slain

on the side of the Mussulmans. The Baharite slaves, under the command of

Bibars al-Bundukdari, performed in this battle signal acts of valour. The

king of France had retired, with a few of his lords, to a small hillock,

and surrendered himself, under promise of his life being spared, to the

eunuch Jemal ad-Din Mahsun as-Salih; he was bound with a chain, and in

this state conducted to Mansura, where he was confined in the house of

Ibrahim ben Lokman, secretary to the sultan, and under the guard of the

eunuch Salih. The king’s brother was made prisoner at the same time, and

carried to the same house. The sultan provided for their subsistence.

The number of slaves was so great, it was embarrassing, and the sultan

gave orders to Saif ad-Din Jusuf ben Tardi to put them to death. Every

night this cruel minister of the vengeance of his master had from

three to four hundred of the prisoners brought from their places of

confinement, and after he had caused them to be beheaded, their bodies

were thrown into the Nile; in this manner perished one hundred thousand

of the French.

The sultan departed from Mansura, and went to Fariskur, where he had

pitched a most magnificent tent. He had also built a tower of wood

over the Nile; and, being freed from a disagreeable war, he there gave

himself up to all sorts of debauchery. The victory he had just gained

was so brilliant that he was eager to make all who were subjected to him

acquainted with it. He wrote with his own hand a letter, in the following

terms, to the emir Jemal ad-Din ben Jagmur, governor of Damascus:

“Thanks be given to the All-powerful, who has changed our grief to joy;

it is to Him alone we owe the victory. The favours He has condescended

to shower upon us are innumerable, but this last is most precious. You

will announce to the people of Damascus, or, rather, to all Mussulmans,

that God has enabled us to gain a complete victory over the Christians

at the moment they had conspired our ruin. On Monday, the first day of

this year, we opened our treasury and distributed riches and arms to our

faithful soldiers. We had called to our succour the Arabian tribes, and a

numberless multitude of soldiers ranged themselves under our standards.

On the night between Tuesday and Wednesday our enemies abandoned their

camp, with all their baggage, and marched towards Damietta; in spite

of the obscurity of the night, we pursued them, and thirty thousand of

them were left dead on the field, not including those who precipitated

themselves into the Nile. We have, besides, slain our very numerous

prisoners, and thrown their bodies into the same river. Their king had

retreated to Minieh; he has implored our clemency, and we have granted

him his life, and paid him all the honours due to his rank. We have

regained Damietta.”

The sultan, with this letter, sent the king’s cap, which had fallen in

the combat; it was of scarlet, lined with a fine fur. The governor of

Damascus put the king’s cap on his own head when he read to the public

the sultan’s letter. A poet made these verses on the occasion: “The cap

of the French was whiter than paper; our sabres have dyed it with the

blood of the enemy, and have changed its colour.”[g]

As ransom for the noble prisoners the sultan offered to accept some

of the baronial castles in Palestine, or those which belonged to the

Templars and Hospitallers. But the king and his peers replied that the

liege lord, the emperor of Germany, would never consent that a pagan or

Tatar should hold any fief of him; and that no cession of the property

of the knights could be made, for the governors of their castles swore

on their investiture that they would never surrender their charge for

the deliverance of any man. The king was even threatened with torture,

but as the Mussulmans saw in him no symptoms of fear on which they could

work, they proposed to make a pecuniary ransom. Louis offered to pay

ten thousand golden besants, which were equal to five hundred thousand

livres, for the deliverance of his army, and that as the royal dignity

could not be estimated by a vulgar scale, he would for his own freedom

surrender the city of Damietta. The sultan was liberal in the fulness of

his joy at such a completion of his victories, and remitted a fifth part

of the pecuniary ransom.[77] Peace was to continue for ten years between

the Mussulmans and the Christians, and the Franks were to be restored to

those privileges in the kingdom of Jerusalem which they enjoyed before

the landing of Louis at Damietta. The repose which succeeded the treaty

was interrupted by the murder of the sultan; but after a few acts of

hostility the successful emirs, and their mamelukes, renewed with a

few changes the condition of amity. One moiety of the ransom was to be

discharged before the king left the river, and the other on his arrival

at Acre. The sick at Damietta, with the stores and baggage, were to be

retained by the sultan till the last portion of the ransom should be paid.

Damietta was accordingly surrendered. But the mamelukes were more

savage and unprincipled than any preceding enemies of the Latin name.

They burned all the military engines, murdered the sick, and some of

the most ferocious thirsted for the blood of the Christian potentates.

The counsels of justice prevailed, and the Christians were relieved

from their fears that the treaty would not be acted upon. The counts of

Flanders and Brittany, the count of Soissons, and others embarked for

France. The royal treasure at Damietta could not furnish the stipulated

portion of the ransom. The new grand master of the Templars opposed the

institutes of his order to the king’s request for a loan of the funds

of the society, and contended that he could not divert them from their

regular and appointed purposes. But state necessity trampled over mere

statutable forms, and the chest of the Templars was seized by the royal

officers. The king’s person was redeemed, and the French went to Acre.

The expedition of St. Louis into Egypt resembles in many respects the war

in Egypt thirty years before. In both cases the Christian armies were

encamped near the entrance of the Ashmun canal; they could not advance,

and the surrender of Damietta was the price of safety.

[Sidenote: [1250-1254 A.D.]]

Many of Louis’ council were astonished at his resolution to remain in

Palestine while political affairs were calling him to his duty to France.

They were divided in their patriotism and their allegiance. The sultan

of Damascus, a relative of the murdered Egyptian lord, solicited the aid

of Louis to revenge the murder, and stimulated his virtue by the promise

that in the event of victory he would deliver to the Christians the

city of Jerusalem. The king replied that he would send to the mamelukes

at Damietta, to know whether they would repair their violations of the

treaty, and that, in case of their refusal, he would assist the sultan

of Damascus. On intelligence of this negotiation, the people of Damietta

restored to the king all the knights and common soldiers whom they had

detained in prison. Louis wisely profited by circumstances, and declared

that he would not enter upon a truce with the Egyptians, until they had

absolved him from the payment of the remaining moiety of the ransom, and

restored to him the heads of those Christians on the walls of Cairo, who

had fallen in the battle near Mansura, and such Christian children as

they had forced to become Mussulmans. The emirs and mamelukes complied

with these terms, and, on condition of the alliance of the French king,

they engaged to deliver up to him Jerusalem itself. The military force

of Louis did not much exceed four thousand men. The king’s two brothers

returned to Europe; and, in order to retain a respectable army, Louis was

obliged to be liberal of his treasure. Louis remained a year at Cæsarea,

and rebuilt its houses and repaired its fortifications. Joppa was the

next object of his care. The war between the Egyptians and Syrians raged

with dreadful violence. By the mediation of the caliph, the Mussulmans

made peace; Egypt and Jerusalem were to belong to the mamelukes; and

the countries beyond the Jordan to the sultan of Syria. But the united

infidels did not pursue their schemes of destruction with that vigour

and ability which had distinguished the fierce and dreadful movements of

Nur ad-Din and Saladin. They might have swept the feeble and exhausted

Christians from the shores of Palestine; but they merely ravaged the

country round Acre, and then proceeded to Sajecte, in whose strong castle

were Louis and most of the army. The blood and property of the citizens

satisfied the Moslems, who departed without trying the valour of the

French in garrison.

Perpetual disappointment gradually desiccated the spring of hope, and the

king turned his mind to France. His friends marked his change of purpose,

and news from Europe of the death of his royal mother, the regent of his

kingdom, made him openly proclaim his resolution to return. The patriarch

and barons of Palestine offered him their humble thanks and praise

for the great good and honour he had conferred on the Holy Land; and,

shortly after Easter, he embarked for the West. Louis IX gathered no new

laurels in his transmarine expedition. All that was great and chivalric

in France had been spread out in martial array, and had met with little

else than discomfiture and defeat. In the course of Louis’ stay at

Joppa, the sultan of Damascus sent him permission to visit Jerusalem.

The king ardently desired to behold the sacred places, and was slow in

allowing considerations of policy to conquer selfish feelings. The reason

which dissuaded him from the journey, was, that if he should perform a

pilgrimage to Jerusalem without delivering it from the enemies of God,

every subsequent crusading monarch would think a similar proceeding

sufficient, and would not consider himself obliged to perform more than

what the king of France had done. St. Louis was also reminded that

Richard Cœur de Lion refused to behold Jerusalem as a pilgrim.

THE CHRISTIANS QUARREL AMONG THEMSELVES

[Sidenote: [1255-1259 A.D.]]

All the blood which had been shed, and all the treasure which France

had lavished for the crusade of St. Louis, did not long preserve the

Christians in Palestine from the hostilities of the Mussulmans, and,

as no new succours arrived from Europe, the barons and knights were

compelled, in some cases, to keep within the shelter of their fortresses,

and at other times to make disadvantageous treaties with their foe.

Although it was evident that nothing but unanimity in the holy warriors

could preserve the remnants of the kingdom of Godfrey de Bouillon

from annihilation, yet the Christians wasted their strength in party

collisions, instead of watching the politics of the Saracenian courts,

and gathering those branches of power which their enemies, in their

ambitious feuds, continually broke from the tree of Islamism. The haughty

republicans of Italy would never enter into any common bond of union,

and the Venetians, the Pisans, and the Genoese had frequent hostile

encounters, respecting the possession of churches to which each nation

asserted her claims. The two great military orders only forgot their

mutual jealousies when in the field they were opposed to the Moslems,

but in every interval of peace, the knights, incapable of any exertions

or thoughts but those which war inspired, gratified their arrogance and

restlessness in disputes touching military prowess and precedency. As

reason did not give birth to these altercations, she did not control the

decision.

[Illustration: A GERMAN CRUSADER, THIRTEENTH CENTURY]

The jealousy and rancour of the Hospitallers and Red Cross knights were

frequently aggravated by irregular skirmishes, and at length the kindred

squadrons met in a general engagement. Victory sat on the helms of the

cavaliers of St. John; few prisoners were taken, and scarcely a Templar

escaped alive. But new companions from Europe gradually filled the places

of the deceased brethren. New occasions demanded all their valour and

skill, and civil discord was lost amidst the more honourable war with the

real enemies of the state.

A blood-stained revolution in Egypt had placed the mameluke chief Bibars,

or Bundukdari, on the throne of that country; he was well disposed to

lead his savage mamelukes against the Christians, and his ferocity did

not want the excitement which the military orders gave it, of refusing,

contrary to treaty, to deliver to him some Mohammedan prisoners. His

soldiers, as savage as the Khwarizmians, demolished the churches of

Nazareth, and the fortress and church on Mount Tabor. They made their

way to the gates of Acre with fire and sword, and such of the Christians

as were immediately slain were not so much objects of compassion as the

prisoners on whom the Turks inflicted every description of torture, in

order to force a change of religion. Though Acre itself was saved for

a few years, yet Cæsarea did not escape the wide-spreading calamities.

Through these dreadful scenes the military orders fought with their

usual heroism, and in the sieges of the strong fortresses of Azotus and

Saffuria, the spirit of devotion which they manifested to their cause

had never been equalled. The small force of ninety Hospitallers held

possession of the former of these places. The number gradually diminished

on each renewed assault, and when the Turks mounted the breach, they

trampled on the bodies of the last of the knights.

After ravaging the neighbourhood of Acre, Tyre, and Tripolis, the

Egyptians laid siege to the fortress of Saffuria. The fall of that

place was inevitable, and the prior of the Templars therefore agreed to

capitulate, and, on the surrender being made, the knights and garrison,

altogether amounting to six hundred men, were to be conducted to the next

Christian town. The sultan was invested with lordship over the fortress,

but he violated the conditions of the surrender, and left the knights

only a few hours to determine on the alternative of death or conversion

to Islam. The prior and two Franciscan monks were earnest in fixing the

faith of the religious cavaliers, and, at the appointed time for the

declaration of their choice, they unanimously avowed their determination

to die rather than incur the dishonour of apostacy. The decree for the

slaughter of the Templars was pronounced and executed; and the three

preachers of martyrdom were flayed alive.

HISTORY OF ANTIOCH (1206-1268 A.D.)

[Sidenote: [1206-1268 A.D.]]

Before we continue our review of the calamities of Palestine, a

retrospect must be taken of a principality whose fate was closely

connected with that of the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem. Bohemond IV

continued to be the reputed lord of Antioch, from the year 1206 till the

time of his death in 1233. But for many years during this interval he

did not exercise any royal authority, for he was a tyrant, and was both

hated by the people and excommunicated by the clergy. His nephew Rupin,

the right heir, was aided by the papal legate, who was present at the

great siege of Damietta, in the year 1218, and made several attempts

to recover his thrones of Antioch and Tripolis; but he died some years

before Bohemond, in a prison at Tarsus, into which he had been cast

by Constantius, nominal regent of Antioch, and guardian of Isabella,

daughter and successor of Livon, king of Armenia. From Bohemond IV and

his first wife Plaisance, daughter of the lord of Gabala, Bohemond V

descended. To him succeeded Bohemond VI. It does not appear that the

family of the Bohemonds were entire masters of the principality and

county from the year 1233 till their absorption in the Egyptian power.

It is certain that Bohemond V was reigning over Antioch and Tripolis

in 1244, when he became tributary to the Khwarizmians; and that in

1253 Bohemond VI was made a knight by St. Louis, and was considered

lawful prince of Antioch, though he was a minor, and under his mother’s

tutelage. But it is equally certain that at times, from 1233 to 1288,

Frederick and Conrad, a son and grandson of the emperor Frederick II, had

possession of all or part of the states of Antioch and Tripolis.

RAVAGES OF BIBARS

[Sidenote: [1268-1269 A.D.]]

We may now resume the thread of the general history. Joppa and the castle

of Beaufort were the mameluke conquests which succeeded in point of time

to those of Azotus and Saffuria.

The tempest at length burst upon the state of Antioch; and the city of

that principality yielded without even the formality of a siege (1268).

The reproach of treachery is alternately cast upon the patriarch and

the inhabitants; and heavy is the disgrace of causing an event which

occasioned the destruction of forty thousand, and the captivity of one

hundred thousand Christians. Bibars ravaged the country round Tyre;

but being equally religious and cruel, he gave the Franks a respite by

pilgrimising to the holy places in Arabia. He soon, however, resumed his

fell purpose of exterminating the Christians; Laodicea and many other

places submitted to him; and the knights of St. John gained immortal

honour by their brave, though fruitless, defence of the fortress of

Karak, between Arca and Tortosa. The prince of Tripolis preserved

his title by the sacrifice of half of his territory. Acre was saved

in consequence of the reported succour of the king of Cyprus. Bibars

returned to Cairo, hastily fitted out a fleet for the conquest of the

island, which was without the presence of its monarch. But his ships were

lost in a tempest; Cairo was overwhelmed with sorrow, and none of his

efforts could re-establish affairs.

SECOND CRUSADE AND DEATH OF LOUIS IX

[Sidenote: [1269-1270 A.D.]]

Before the news of the capture of Antioch reached Europe, the people

of the West had contemplated a new crusade. St. Louis thought that his

first expedition to the Holy Land brought more shame on France than

good on the Christian cause; and he feared that his own personal fame

had withered. The pope encouraged his inclinations for a new attempt.

England was at that time in a state of repose, and her martial youth

were impatient of indolence. Prince Edward, with the earls of Warwick

and Pembroke, received the holy ensign. The assumption of the cross by

the heir of the English throne spread great joy throughout France. He

was invited to Paris; the co-operation of the English and French was

determined upon; and Louis lent his youthful ally thirty thousand marks

on the security of the customs of Bordeaux. The prelates and clergy of

England agreed to contribute a tenth of their revenue for three years;

and by a parliamentary ordinance, a twentieth part was taken from the

corn and movables which the laity possessed at Michaelmas. A crusade had

for many years been popular in England. During the first expedition of

St. Louis, and soon after the departure of William Longsword, Henry III

engaged to fight under the sacred banners. But he was slow in preparing

to go to the Holy Land; and the public murmured the suspicion that he had

only assumed the cross as a pretence for collecting money. It was found

that five hundred knights had been crossed; and the number of inferior

people could not be counted. The holy warriors resolved to commence their

voyage at midsummer; but the king had anticipated all their proceedings;

and he declared that if they dared to march without him the thunders

of the Vatican should be hurled against them. Some people submitted

to, and others clamoured at this menace of papal interference; and the

religious ardour of the most enthusiastic was cooled by the king’s

delays, and the news of the disastrous events in Egypt. The pope and

king were deaf to the reproaches of the French nation that indifference

to Christianity could be the only motive for obstructing the pious wishes

of the English people.[78] The king’s poverty was ever the alleged cause

of his remissness; and two years after his dissolution of the association

of English knights, he endeavoured to extort money from the clergy on

the pretence of a journey to Syria. But they resisted his demands; and

reproached him with his avarice and violation of oaths.

[Illustration: DEATH OF ST. LOUIS]

Anticipating the laurel of victory, or the crown of martyrdom, St. Louis

spread his sails for the Holy Land in 1270. Sixty thousand soldiers were

animated by their monarch’s feelings of religious and military ardour;

and we may remark among the leaders the lords of Flanders, Champagne,

and Brittany. The fleet was driven into Sardinia; and at that place a

great change was made in the plan of operations. The king of Tunis had

formerly sent ambassadors to Louis, and expressed a wish to embrace the

only true religion. Northern Africa had formerly paid a pecuniary tribute

to the sovereign of the Two Sicilies; and Charles of Anjou, the reigning

monarch, concealing his selfishness under the garb of piety and justice,

strongly urged his brother to restore the rights of Christendom. The

soldiers too, now more greedy of plunder and revenge than zealous in

bigotry, entreated to be led to Tunis. The subjugation of the Mussulmans

in Africa was declared to be a necessary preliminary to successes in

Palestine; the French soon reached the first object of their hopes; and

the camp and town of Carthage were the earliest rewards of victory. But

every sanguine expectation was damped when a pestilential disease spread

its ravages through the Christian ranks.

The great stay of the Crusades fell August, 1270. During his illness

Louis ceased not to praise God, and supplicate for the people whom he

had brought with him. He became speechless; he then gesticulated what

he could not utter; he perpetually made signs of the cross, stretched

himself on the floor, which was covered with ashes; and in the final

struggle of nature he turned his eyes to heaven, and exclaimed, “I will

enter thy house, I will worship in thy sanctuary.”

PRINCE EDWARD LEAVES ENGLAND

Before this calamitous event Prince Edward, Edmund Crouchback, earl of

Lancaster, four earls, four barons, and the English division, had not

only arrived in Africa, but had left it for Sicily, in despair that

their French compeers would ever march to Palestine. The winter season

was passed by Prince Edward in military exercises, and in the various

occupations of chivalry, and in the following spring he turned his prow

up the Mediterranean and arrived at Acre.