The Hierosolymita (or Libellus de expugnatione Hierosolymitana) of ЕKKEHARD, of the Benedictine abbey of Aura near Kissingen, was published in the Amplissima Collectio of Martene and Durand (vol. 5, p. 511 sqq.), where it might have been consulted by Gibbon, but he does not seem to have known of it. Ekkehard went overland to Constantinople with a company of German pilgrims in 1101, sailed from the Imperial city to Joppa, remained six weeks in Palestine, and started on his return journey before the year was out. He became abbot of his monastery and died in 1125. His Chronicon Universale is a famous work and is the chief authority for German history from A.D. 1080 to the year of the author's death. The Hierosolymita has the value of a contemporary work by one who had himself seen the Holy Land and the Greek Empire. [Edited in Pertz, Mon. vi. p. 265 sqq.; and by Riant in the Recueil, vol. 5, p. 1 sqq.; but most convenient is the separate edition of Hagenmeyer, 1877.]

Another contemporary writer on the First Crusade, who had himself visited Palestine, is CAFARO di Caschifelone, of Genoa. He went out with the Genoese squadron which sailed to the help of the Crusaders in 1100. He was at Jerusalem at Easter 1101 and took part in the sieges of Arsuf and Caesarea in the same year. He became afterwards a great person in his native city, was five times consul, composed Annales Genuenses, and died in 1166. His work De Liberatione civitatum Orientis was not accessible to Gibbon; for it was first published in 1859 by L. Ansaldo (Cronaca della prima Crociata, in vol. i. of the Acts of the Società Ligure di storia patria). It was then edited by Pertz, Mon. xviii. p. 40 sqq.; and in vol. v. of the Recueil des historiens des croisades. Contents: chaps. 1-10 give the events of the First Crusade before the author's arrival on the scene; c. 11 relates the arrival of the Genoese fleet at Laodicea, and the defeat of the Lombard expedi tion in Asia Minor in 1101; chaps. 12-18 (in the edition of the Recueil) are an extract from the Annales Genuenses, inserted in this place by the editor Riant, and describing the events of the year 1100-1101; chaps. 19-27 enumerate the towns of Syria and their distances from one another; describe the capture of Margat in 1140 by the Crusaders; a naval battle between the Genoese and Greeks; and the capture of Tortosa, Tripolis, and other places. The work seems never to have been completed.

For the authorship of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta regis Ricardi, see above, p. 367, note 89. It remains to be added that in its Latin form the work is not an original composition, but is a very free elaboration of a French poem written by a Norman named AMBROSE, in rhyming verses of seven syllables. In the prologue to the Latin work (p. 4, ed. Stubbs) the writer says nos in castris fuisse cum scripsimus; but we should expect him to mention the fact that he had first written his account in Franco-Gallic. Nicholas Trivet (at the beginning of the 14th cent.) distinctly ascribes the Itinerarium to Richard of London, Canon of the Holy Trinity (qui itinerarium regis prosa et metro scripsit); 17 but the contemporary Chronicon Terrae Sanctae (see below) states that the Prior of the Holy Trinity of London caused it to be translated from French into Latin (ex Gallica lingua in Latinum transferri fecit). 18 The natural inference is that Richard the Canon transformed the rhymed French of Ambrose into a Latin prose dress; but it is not evident why the name of Ambrose is suppressed. Nor is it quite clear whether Trivet, when he says prosa et metro, meant the French verse and the Latin prose, or whether metro refers to the Latin rhymes which are occasionally introduced (chiefly in Bk. I.) in the Itinerarium. [Extracts from the Carmen Ambrosii are edited by F. Liebermann (1885) in Pertz, Mon. 27, 532 sqq. See Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, ed. 6, ii. p. 316.]

For the crusade of Richard I. RALPH OF COGGESHALL'S Chronicon Anglicanum (A.D. 1066-1223) is an important authority, and it was the source of the account in Matthew Paris. Ralph, who was abbot of the Cistercian Monastery of Coggeshall, in Essex, died about 1228, was not in the Holy Land himself, but he obtained his information from eye-witnesses (e.g. from Hugh de Neville, who described for him the

episode of Joppa in Aug. 1192, and from Anselm, the king's chaplain). the Rolls series by J. Stevenson, 1875.]

[Edited in

Another contemporary account of the Third Crusade is contained in the CHRONICON TERRAE SANCTAE, ascribed without any reason to Ralph of Coggeshali, and printed along with his Chronicle in Martene and Durand, Ampl. Coll. vol. 5, and in the Rolls series (p. 209 sqq.). An independent narrative, derived apparently from a crusader's journal,19 is incorporated in the Gesta Henrici II. et Ricardi I., which goes under the name of Benedict of Peterborough (who, though he did not compose the work, caused it to be compiled). [Edited by Stubbs in the Rolls series, 1867.] Material for Richard's Crusade will also be found in other contemporary English historians, such as Ralph de Diceto, William of Newburgh, &c.

WILLIAM OF TYRE is the greatest of the historians of the Crusades and one of the greatest historians of the Middle Ages. He was born in Palestine in 1127 and became archbishop of Tyre in 1174. A learned man, who had studied ancient Latin authors (whom he often cites), he had the advantage of being acquainted with Arabic, and he used Arabic books to compose a history of the Saracens from the time of Mohammad (see his Prologue to the History of the Crusades). He was always in close contact with the public affairs of the kingdom of Jerusalem, political as well as ecclesiastical. He was the tutor of Baldwin IV., and was made Chancellor of the kingdom by that king. His great work (Historis reram in partibus transmarinis gestarum) falls into two parts: (1) Books 1-15, to A.B 1144: so far his narrative depends on "the relation of others" (Bk. 16, c. 1), and he has used (though he does not say so) the works of earlier writers (such as Fulcher of Chartres, and Albert of Aachen), as well as the memories of older men with whom he was acquainted; but his judgment is throughout entirely independent. (2) Books 16-23, to A.D. 1184: here he writes as a contemporary eye-witness, but he is careful and conscientious in informing himself, from every possible source, concerning the events which he relates; and he is remarkably cautious in his statements of facts. The miraculous seldom plays a part in his story; he is unfeignedly pious, but he seeks an earthly explanation of every earthly event. 20 His history, along with the Book of the Assises, is the chief material for forming a picture of the Latin colonies in Palestine. Chronology, Sybel remarks, is the weak side of his work; and we may add that it is often spoiled by too much rhetoric. It was translated into French in the second quarter of the 13th century. [Included in the Recueil, Hist. Occ., vol. i. (1844).]

The work of William of Tyre was continued in French by ERNOUL (Squire of Balian, lord of Ibelin; he had taken part in the battle of Hittin and the siege of Jerusalem) down to 1229; and by BERNARD (the Treasurer of St. Peter at Corbie) down to 1231. These continuations were continued by anonymous writers down to 1277; and the French translation of William along with the continuations was current as a single work under the title of the Chronique d'Outremer, or L'Estoire de Eracles. [The Continuations were first critically examined and analysed by M. de Mas-Latrie, who edited the works of Ernoul and Bernard (1871). Edition of Guillaume de Tyr et ses Continuateurs, by P. Paris, 2 vols., 1879-80.]

It may be added here that the charters and letters pertaining to the Kingdom of Jerusalem have been edited under the title Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, by Röhricht, 1893. The documents bearing on the First Crusade have been collected by Hagenmeyer, Epistolæ et chartæ ad historiam primi belli sacri spectantes que supersunt aevo æquales et genuine, 1901. The numismatic material has been collected and studied by M. G. Schlumberger: Numismatique de l'Orient Latin, 1878.

Marshal VILLEHARDOUIN'S Conquest of Constantinople is, along with Nicetas, the main guide of Gibbon in his account of the Fourth Crusade. Gibbon thought,

19 Cp. Stubbs, Introd. to Itinerarium, p. xxxviii.

20 Sybel, Gesch. des ersten Kreuzzuges, ed. 2, p. 120.

21 An absurd title taken from the opening sentence of William of Tyre.

22 Essai de classification, &c., in Bibl. de l'école des chartes, Sér. V. t. i. 38 sqq., 140 sqq. (1860); and in his ed. of Ernoul and Bernard, p. 473 sqq.

and it has been generally thought till late years, that this famous book, composed by one of the wisest and most moderate of the Crusaders, was a perfectly naïve and candid narrative, partial indeed to the conduct of the conquerors, but still—when allowance has been made for the point of view-a faithful relation of facts without an arrière pensée. But, if there are some who, like his editor M. de Wailly, still maintain the unblemished candour of Villehardouin as an author, recent criticism in the light of new evidence leaves hardly room for reasonable doubt that Villehardouin's work was deliberately intended to deceive the European public as to the actual facts of the Fourth Crusade. There can be no question that Villehardouin was behind the scenes; he represents the expedition against Constantinople as an accidental diversion, which was never intended when the Crusade was organized; and therefore his candour can be rescued only by proving that the episode of Constantinople was really nothing more than a diversion. But the facts do not admit of such an interpretation. During the year which elapsed between the consent of the Venetian Republic to transport the Crusaders and the time when the Crusaders assembled at Venice (A.D. 1201-2), the two most important forces concerned in the enterprise-Venice and Boniface of Montfrrat-had determined to divert the Crusade from its proper and original purpose. Venice had determined that, wherever the knights sailed, they should not sail to the place whither she had undertaken to transport them, namely to the shores of Egypt. For in the course of that eventful year she made a treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, pledging herself that Egypt should not be invaded. And on his part, Boniface of Montferrat had arranged with the Emperor Philip and Alexius that the swords of the Crusaders should be employed at Constantinople. (For all this see above, p. 400-1, n. 51 and 53, and p. 404, n. 63.) On these facts, which were of the first importance, Villehardouin says not a word; and one cannot hesitate to conclude that his silence is deliberate. In fact, his book is, as has been said, an "official" version of the disgraceful episode. The Fourth Crusade shocked public opinion in Europe; men asked how such a thing had befallen, how the men who had gone forth to do battle against the infidels had been drawn aside from their pious purpose to attack Christian states. The story of Villehardouin, a studied suppression of the truth, was the answer. [Mas-Latrie and Riant take practically this point of view, which has been presented well and moderately by E. Pears in his Fall of Constantinople (an excellent work), 1885. J. Tessier, La diversion sur Zara et Constantinople (1884), defends Villehardouin. Cp. also L. Streit's Venedig und die Wendung des vierten Kreuzzuges gegen Constantinopel; and W. Norden, Der vierte Kreuzzug im Rahmen der Beziehungen des Abendlandes zu Byzanz, 1898.-Editions: by N. de Wailly, 3rd ed., 1882; E. Bouchet, 2 vols., 1891.]

Besides Gunther's work, which Gibbon used (see p. 401, note 54), some new sources on the Fourth Crusade have been made accessible. The most important of these is the work of ROBERT DE CLARY, Li estoires de chiaus qui conquisent Constantinoble; which, being "non-official," supplies us with a check on Villehardouin. [Printed by Riant in 1868 and again in 1871, but in so few copies that neither issue could be properly called an edition. Edited (1873) by Hopf in his Chroniques Gréco-romanes, p. 1 sqq.]

Another contemporary account is preserved, the DEVASTATIO CONSTANTINOPOLITANA, by an anonymous Frank, and is an official diary of the Crusade. [Pertz, Mon. xvi. p. 9 sqq.; Hopf, Chron. Gréco-romanes, p. 86 sqq.]

The work of Moncada, which Ducange and Gibbon used for the history of the Catalan expedition, is merely a loose compilation of the original Chronicle of RAMON MUNTANER, who was not only a contemporary but one of the most prominent members of the Catalan Grand Company. A Catalonian of good family, born at Peralada, in 1255, he went to reside at Valencia in 1276, witnessed the French invasion of Philip the Bold in 1285, and in 1300 set sail for Sicily and attached himself to the fortunes of Roger de Flor, whom he accompanied to the east. He returned to the west in 1308; died and was buried at Valencia about 1336. The account of the doings of the Catalans in the east is of course written from their

point of view; and the adventurer passes lightly over their pillage and oppression. It is one of the most interesting books of the period. [Most recent edition of the original Catalan, by J. Corolen, 1886; conveniently consulted in Buchon's French version, in Chroniques étrangères (1860). Monographs: A. Rubió y Lluch, La expedicion y dominacion de los Catalanes en oriente juzgedas por los Griegos, 1883, and Los Navarros en Grecia y el ducado Catalan de Atenas en la época de su invasion, 1886 (this deals with a later period); G. Schlumberger, Expédition des Almugavares ou routiers catalans en Orient, 1902.]

ORIENTAL SOURCES

[Extracts from the writers mentioned below, and others, will be found in vol. iv. of Michaud's Bibliothèque des Croisades (1829), translated and arranged by M. Reinaud.]

IMAD AD-DIN al-Katib al-Ispahāni was born at Ispahan in A.D. 1125, and studied at Baghdad. He obtained civil service appointments, but fell into disfavour and was imprisoned; after which he went to Damascus, where Nur ad-Din was ruling. He became the friend of prince Saladin, and was soon appointed secretary of state under Nur ad-Din, but after this potentate's death his position was precarious, and he set out to return to Baghdad. But hearing of Saladin's successes in Egypt he went back to Damascus and attached himself to his old friend. After Saladin's death (A.D. 1193) he withdrew into private life. He wrote a history of the Crusades with the affected title: Historia Cossica [Coss was a contemporary of Mohammad' de expugnatione Codsica [that is, Hierosolymitana], of which extracts were published by Schultens; he also wrote a History of the Seljuks. See Wüstenfeld, Arabische Geschichtschreiber, no. 284.

BAHA AD-DIN (the name is often corrupted to Bohadin) was born in 1145 st Mōsil, and became professor there in 1174 in the college founded by Kamal adDin. In 1188 he made the pilgrimage to Mecca, and on his way back visited Damascus, where Saladin sent for him and offered him a professorship at Cairo. This he declined, but he afterwards took service under Saladin and was appointed judge of the army and to a high official post at Jerusalem. After Saladin's death he was made judge of Aleppo, where he founded a college and mosque, and a school for teaching the traditions of the Prophet. He died in 1234. His biography of Saladin is one of the most important sources for the Third Crusade, and the most important source for the life of Saladin. [Edited with French translation in vol. iii. of the Recueil des historiens des Croisades, Hist. Or. (Here too will be found a notice of the author's life by Ibn Khallikan.) Translation (unscholarly) published by the Palestine Exploration Fund, 1897.]

Abu l-Hasan Ali IBN AL-ATHIR was born A.D. 1160. He studied at Mōsil and was there when Saladin besieged it in 1186. He was in Syria about 1189, so that he saw something of the Third Crusade. But he was a man of letters and took little part in public affairs. He wrote (1) a history of the Atabegs of Mōsil and (2) a universal history from the creation of the world to A.D. 1231. The part of this second work bearing on the Crusades, from A.D. 1098 to 1190, will be found in the Recueil, Hist. Or. vol. i. p. 189 sqq.; and on the author's life see ib. p. 752 sqq. The history of the Atabegs is published in the 2nd part of vol. ii.

KAMAL AD-DIN ibn al-Adim, born c. A.D. 1192, belonged to the family of the cadhis of Aleppo. Having studied at Baghdad and visited Damascus, Jerusalem, &c., he became judge of Aleppo himself, and afterwards vizier. When the Tartars destroyed the place in A.D. 1260, he fled to Egypt. He wrote a History of his native city, and part of this is the Récit de la première croisade et des quatorze années suivantes, published in Defrémery, Mémoires d'histoire orientale, 1854. [Recueil des hist. des Croisades, Hist. Or. vol. iii. p. 577 sqq.]

Abu-1-Kāsim ABD AR-RAHMAN (called Abu Shama, "father of moles") was born in Damascus A.D. 1202 and assassinated A.D. 1266. He wrote Liber duorum hortorum de historia duorum regnorum, a history of the reigns of Nur ad-Din and Saladin, which is edited by Quatremère in vol. ii. of the Recueil des hist. des Croisades, Hist. Or.

JALAL AD-DIN (A.D. 1207-1298) was born at Hamah in Syria and afterwards went to Egypt, where he was a witness of the invasion of Louis IX. He visited Italy (1260) as the ambassador of the Sultan Baybars to King Manfred. He was a teacher of Abu-l-Fidā, who lauds his wide knowledge. He wrote a history of the Ayyubid lords of Egypt. The work which Reinaud used for Michaud's Bibliothèque des Croisades is either part of this history or a separate work.

ABU-L-FIDA, born at Damascus A.D. 1273, belonged to the family of the lords of Hamah (a side branch of the Ayyubids). He was present at the conquest of Tripolis in A.D. 1289 and at the siege of Acre (which fell A.D. 1291); and he joined in the military expeditions of his cousin Mahmud II. of Hamah. He took part also in the expeditions of the Egyptian Sultan, to whom he was always loyal. In A.D. 1310 he received himself the title of sultan, as lord of Hamah. But in this new dignity, which he was reluctant to accept, he used to go every year to Cairo to present gifts to his liege lord. He died in A.D. 1332, having ruled Hamah for eleven years. His great work, Compendium historiae generis humani, came down to A.D. 1329. (The first or pre-Mohammadan part has been edited with Lat. tr. by Fleischer in 1831; the second, or Life of Mohammad-ed. by Gagnier, 1723--was translated into French by M. des Vergers, 1837.) The post-Mohammadan part of this work was edited by Reiske in 5 vols. under the title Annales Moslemici, with Lat. transl. (1789-1794); Gibbon had access to extracts in the Auctarium to the Vita Saladini of Schultens (1732). A summary of Abu-l-Fida's account of the Crusades will be found in vol. i. of the Recueil, Hist. Or. [F. Wilken, Commentatio de bellorum cura ex Abulf. hist., 1798.]

A large number of extracts from Armenian writers, bearing on the Crusades, are published with French translation by Dulaurier in the Recueil des historiens des Croisades, Doc. Arm. tome i. Among these is the Chronological Table (A.D. 1076-1307) of HAITUM (p. 469 sqq.), who belonged to the family of the princes of Lampron, and became Count of Courcy (Gorigos). He became a monk of the Praemonstratensian order in 1305 and went to Cyprus. He visited Clement V. at Avignon, and Gibbon refers to the History of the Tartars, which he dictated, at the Pope's request, in French to Nicolas Falconi, who immediately translated it into Latin. This work of "Haythonus" is extant in both forms. Among the other sources included in this collection of Dulaurier may be mentioned: a rhymed chronicle on the kings of Little Armenia, by Vahram of Edessa, of the 13th cent. (p. 493 sqq.); works of St. Narses of Lampron (born 1153); extracts from Cyriac (Guiragos) of Gantzac (born 1201-2), who wrote a history of Armenia 23 from the time of Gregory Illuminator to 1269-70. There are also extracts from the chronicle of SAMUEL of Ani, which reached from the beginning of the world to 1177-8 (p. 447 sqq.), and from its continuation up to 1339-40: this chronicle was published in a Latin translation by Mai and Zohrab, 1818, which is reprinted in Migne's Patr. Gr. 19, p. 599 sqq. But the best known of these Armenian authors is MATTHEW Of Edessa, whose chronicle covers a century and three quarters (A.D. 963-1136). We know nothing of the author's life, except that he flourished in the first quarter of the 12th century. His work is interesting as well as valuable; his style simple, without elegance and art; for he was a man without much culture and had probably read little. He depended much on oral information (derived from "old men"); but he has preserved a couple of original documents (one of them is a letter of the Emperor Tzimisces to an Armenian king, c. 16). He is an ardent Armenian patriot;

This has been translated (along with a tenth century historian, Uchtanes of Edessa)

by Brosset, 1870-1.