The prologue for the History of the Pilgrims commences.
Often and for a long time, O venerable man, I have weighed my own abilities and ‘how they refuse to bring what they ought to completion’,2 and that paucity of skill has previously dissuaded me; but finally your order had forced me to set this in motion. Although some say, perhaps ironically, that I ‘have dreamed in Parnassus’,3 I deem it more tolerable, however, to expose my muse among those who charge [me] with presumption or to the teeth of detraction rather than to disobey your order by continuing to remain silent. And if in this little work the beauty of song or the arrangement of words does not caress the ears of the reader, the importance of the subject can at least be set against the poison of an uncultivated pen. I intend, insofar as my ability to explain allows me, to write about this subject briefly and succinctly, so that I shall seek out the unvarnished truth about the journey of our pilgrims and the deeds they accomplished, without the addition of any invention or the insertion of any tales. It is especially proper to explain among other matters how both Frederick, the most Christian and most invincible Emperor of the Romans, a man of great experience imitating Charles in his valour,4 and his most distinguished son, the illustrious Duke of Swabia, an heir not unworthy of the uprightness and name of his father, like two shining beacons and bastions of the Christian faith under the banner of the life-giving Cross, striving bravely and in proper fashion, were the guides and leaders of the army of Christ, so that they now rightly enjoy the payment of eternal reward in Heaven and that on earth their reputation is rendered more celebrated to those who come after them. For Thou, lord God, along with them, ‘hast led forth the people which Thou has redeemed’,5 thus Thou would not allow either the untrustworthiness of the Greeks nor the deceits and battles of the Turks to prevail over them. It was indeed a miracle, not of human power but of Divine virtue, that the people of God, though so few, having triumphantly entered through the passes and bounds of Greece, should subdue almost all that land and bring it to surrender; afterwards they passed through all sorts of anxieties and many different tribulations, which the following history will explain each in its own place. Finally ‘the snare of the fowler is broken’6 and they stormed Iconium, defeating six hundred thousand Turkish cavalry. A little while earlier, as if secure and glorying in their triumph over them, the enemy was saying: ‘I have pursued mine enemies and overtaken them’ [and] ‘I will divide the spoil; my lust shall be satisfied’.7 But finally the Divine commandment ordained differently, as the course of events afterwards proved.
Sometimes by reading about the brave deeds of men of old, this helps the audience of our own day and incites their courage. Indeed, what is more worthy of record and better suited to edification than to recall the labours of pilgrims and those fighting for the Holy Cross, the men who in our times have experienced so many travails and such dangerous wars for the name of Christ, and [in doing so] have left such examples of courage and steadfastness to be imitated? For ‘narrow is the way which leadeth unto life’,8 and since ‘he rejoices in the patience of suffering’,9 those who are faithful to Christ and have chosen with devoted and intrepid heart to suffer hard and bitter things for His sake may expect the reward of eternal life. And truly happy is he whose soul is not dulled by the fear of labour nor is deterred by bodily discomforts, but who is rather encouraged by such examples. For sometimes He ‘who is the true vine, and purges his branches, that they may bring forth more fruit’,10 examines those He loves on the road of adversity, and is accustomed to summon them to their reward through bitter tribulation and labour.
Therefore, to proceed with this work of history in the proper order, one should first explain the nature and gravity of the crisis that roused so many distinguished warriors to make their pilgrimage against the evil race of the Turks.
In the year from the Incarnation of the Word 1187 the sins of men decreed that ‘the Lord made a way for his anger’11 over the holy city and the whole kingdom of Jerusalem, so that their wretched grief and wailing could equal the lamentations of Jeremiah. It was not through any act but by Divine judgement that almost the whole of Christianity overseas was given over to destruction and ruin; for ‘there was no truth in the Land’,12 faith and justice were shut out, it flourished as the root and nursery of all evil, ‘greed undermines the hearts of men, and turns them away from the path of truth’. For, according to the poet, ‘blind love of gold does not force mortal breasts to hear’;13 thus, while a seven-year peace had been previously established between the kingdom of Jerusalem and Saladin and confirmed on oath by both sides, it happened that within that same period companies of merchants, which are called in the vernacular ‘caravans’, who were subject to Saladin, were travelling from Aleppo to Babylon with uncountable merchandise of great value, accompanied by several emirs.14 The soldiers and allies of Rainald, who was the stepfather of Prince Bohemond of Antioch, acting treacherously and in defiance of the truce, captured these various companies and laid rapacious hands on them and their money just as they liked, as ‘young lions that roar after their prey’.15 Because he was weighed down by debts to others, Rainald was shamefully consumed by greed for money, and he preferred shamelessly to commit the crime of perjury rather than respecting the aforesaid truce and heeding Saladin’s requests that he restore his plunder. Thus he kept the booty for himself and consigned the men to imprisonment, to the shame and dishonour both of himself and of the whole land. Saladin therefore immediately sent an embassy to King Guy asking that, in accordance with the laws and customs of the Christians, he have the case heard by the barons and men learned in the law at his royal court to decide whether the booty should be returned or retained. Even after he was unable to secure this, he was [still] willing to forego any legal complaint and abandon any compensation for the stolen money if his men who were being held in prison were immediately granted their freedom. But when this too was refused to him and his envoys returned empty-handed, he was extremely annoyed. From that time onwards he undoubtedly sought an opportunity to attack the kingdom of Jerusalem, and he mustered a very great and powerful army from the different nations of the Saracens.
Fear stalked the land, and the stability of the kingdom of Jerusalem also began to be weakened through a dispute that developed between the king and Count Raymond of Tripoli. The origin and cause of this was as follows. The king was a foreigner, an immigrant from the nation of Poitou, of middling rank but a knight of handsome appearance and valiant in war. When the queen cast her eyes upon him, she yielded to her nature as a lover and a woman and married him, against the wishes of the count and the other princes.16 Thence it happened that through hatred of the king the count joined himself in friendship to Saladin. However, the barons and leading men of the kingdom, together with the Templars and Hospitallers, anxious in such a crisis to safeguard the defence of the land quickly sought to negotiate a beneficial peace [between them]. Meanwhile ten thousand Turks had secretly gathered between Tiberias and Mount Tabor, and were observing from their place of ambush the journey of those men who were travelling to the count to negotiate the peace, news of which had already come before them. The count had found out about the ambush laid by the Turks and immediately sent word to those who were preparing to come to him, warning them of the trap. The latter were however rash and overconfident, and despite the warning travelled along the planned route, where they were ambushed by the Turks, who rushed upon them from all sides. A fierce battle began, in which our men, although they had rashly entered the fight, stained their swords with a great deal of Turkish blood that day; but eventually the Turks, who were much more numerous, prevailed. Roger the Master of the Hospitallers fell in that battle, along with many others, though not without inflicting great slaughter among the enemy.17 Those who had been able to escape came to the count and through their mediation peace was established between the king and him; the count then sent a message to Saladin repudiating their aforesaid friendship and alliance. Saladin [then] entered the land with a vast force of Saracens and through hatred of the count besieged Tiberias. Meanwhile the king and his army mustered at the springs of Sephoria, and despite the persuasion of the count they then marched out and pitched camp in a place that was known locally as Marscalcia.
O matter of wonder, O terrible presage of the approaching disaster! That night in the patriarch’s tent, where the Holy Cross was, during the office of Matins it happened that there was read, quite by chance, ‘the ark of the Covenant was taken by the Philistines in battle and carried off’.18 Thus the hearts of all those who heard this and understood were immediately struck with fear, since as the poet says: ‘fear [is] the gloomiest of augurs in perplexity’.19 When morning came Saladin hastened to meet the king with a vast army and offered battle. The Turks bravely made ready for the fight, fiercely provoking our men to fight with trumpets and arrows. The division of the Templars was at the forefront of the battle, and casting their spears they spurred their horses and boldly charged the Turkish squadrons.20 However, after they had slaughtered a host of enemies, they resumed their formation but were unable to withdraw, for they were surrounded on all sides by swarms of Turks, and almost all of them were cut off by them and trapped. On seeing this catastrophe the Count of Tripoli and a few of his men threw down their arms and fled to Safed.21 The Turks, who had lit fires round the army of the king, saw that the army was now suffering wretchedly from the heat and thirst and they pressed more boldly, launching unceasing attacks on our men and threatening them from all sides. Finally God permitted the Holy Cross and the king to be captured and victory was granted to the Turks. Some of the Christians were wretchedly put to death immediately, while others were kept in chains for lengthier torment, but once the victorious battle was concluded they were brought to Saladin and on his order were slain with the edge of the sword. After this dreadful massacre, and once Saladin had slain Rainald, about whom we made mention above, with his own hand, he returned triumphantly to Tiberias, and with the bravest and more outstanding men of the kingdom slain in the recent battle he was easily able to force the surrender not only of that place but also of Acre, Ascalon and almost all the land of Jerusalem.
Meanwhile, by the command of God who [even] in his anger knows [that] ‘I have remembered with mercy’,22 and lest what was left of Christianity in those parts should completely perish, it happened that Conrad, Margrave of Montferrat, should be sailing as a pilgrim from Constantinople to worship at the Holy Sepulchre. He was of the Italian nation, and a blood relation of the most serene Emperor Frederick, a man both clever and valiant, wisely trained in matters warlike through long practice in the use of arms. When he had already almost sailed into the port, he saw that the city of Acre and all the land around it had recently been sacked and occupied by the Turks. He ordered a change of course and sailing before the wind he reached Tyre. The citizens, who had been deprived of the protection of a ruler and governor, welcomed him enthusiastically and made themselves and their city subject to his protection and guidance. The Count of Tripoli, who was now suspected by some of treachery, left Tyre and went to Tripoli, where not long afterwards, or so some people say, he fell victim to a lethal dose of poison, although according to others he ended his life in disgust and anguish because of the evils and desolation of the land.
Saladin then came to Tyre, bringing with him Margrave Rainier of Montferrat, whom he had captured in the war, since he hoped through him to force his son Conrad to an immediate surrender of the city.23 O how admirable, that with ‘pious impiety’24 he judged the love of God to be preferable to the love of a father! Saladin was unable to weaken the constancy of this man in return for the freedom of his father, nor to influence him either with threats or promises. He therefore departed to deal with the matters that required his attention with regard to the kingdom and the cities that had just been conquered. He ordained ‘satraps and judges’ in them,25 appointing emirs to rule over them. A short time later he returned to Tyre with a great army and for almost two months he fiercely besieged it by land and sea. The citizens were now hemmed in by assault from without and suffering from shortage of food within, for they now had nothing except hazelnuts through which to sustain themselves. Eventually the citizens cunningly seized an opportunity to do battle, and they launched a night attack with the few ships that they had on those who were blockading the city at sea. They captured some of Saladin’s ships, damaged and sank others along with their crews, and they brought the defeated archpirate as prisoner back into the town amid tumult and great rejoicing.26 When those who were besieging the city on land heard the noise of the naval battle, although they did not then know of the disaster that had befallen their men, they gathered themselves for a simultaneous attempt to storm the city with their siege-engines and an assault. The Turks broke through the outer defences and were now destroying part of the inner walls while they were also climbing up the main city wall. However, Conrad, a great-hearted man experienced in warfare, encouraged his men and led them out to battle, calling upon God [for help]. He immediately and valiantly charged the enemy, making a fierce and noisy attack, and through the power of God he overcame their resolution with his victorious hand. Three hundred of the Turks met with a well-merited death there; the rest turned in flight and they burned their camp and the siege-engines they had built to capture the city. Our men were rewarded with booty and rejoiced in the lord who had thus secured a double triumph, ‘raising up the horn of safety’,27 and saving both the city and its people. Moreover Hugh of Tiberias, the stepson of the aforementioned Count Raymond, made a sortie from Tyre with a column of troops and came to Arsuf, which he stormed and plundered.28 The Turkish garrison was slain, the emir who was the governor of the town was captured, and Hugh returned joyful and victorious. Saladin was much upset by this, but as he was haughty of mind he played down the defeat for a time. He departed [northwards] and apart from the two cities of Antioch and Tripoli and a handful of castles he captured the rest of that land and its fortresses, and almost all ‘the land was silent in his sight’.29
* * * *
Once the rumours of the dreadful tidings had spread, to be greeted with horror, and news reached the Roman See of the disaster and destruction of the kingdom of Jerusalem, the Roman pontiff was filled with paternal affliction at this great loss for Christendom, and he vehemently lamented. After discussion and sensible advice he felt it necessary, because of this crisis, to send a legation to the kings and princes, and in particular to the invincible Emperor of the Romans, Frederick, on which mighty and most excellent man the hope and trust of Holy Mother Church now depended mightily, as its guardian and champion in remedying this injury.30 The legation was directed universally to all suitable men accustomed to arms who were described by the name of Christian, inviting and earnestly advising them through Apostolic authority, either in writing or through preaching, to take part in the liberation of the Holy Sepulchre for remission of [their] sins.
The envoys of the Holy and Apostolic See travelled to Germany by the direct route and were eagerly and kindly received by the emperor at the city of Strassburg, sited on the River Rhine, where the emperor was then holding a court to deal with the business of the empire, to which the territorial princes had been summoned.31 It is believed that it was not by chance but by Divine command that this great host of important men had gathered there, so that a happy beginning was made there to the expedition to Jerusalem, which was subsequently more fully discussed and promoted at the court of God and the pilgrims held at Mainz, which will be discussed below. The next day, with the bishops and other princes sitting alongside the emperor, and with a great crowd of knights and citizens also gathered there, the legates called for silence and began to sow the word of God in the ears of those present, encouraging them to [take part in] the expedition to Jerusalem. In response to their preaching, founded as it was on the gracious sweetness of eloquence, only one single knight among so many thousands was so consumed by devotion that he took the Cross there and pledged himself to undertake the journey.32 However, the Bishop of Strassburg, Henry by name, a man experienced and wise in both religious and secular matters, saw and lamented that this exhortation had failed to rouse all but a very few hearts from their stubborn slumber. It was as if he had heard from on high: ‘Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it’.33 He seized the opportunity to speak and won over all his audience through a persuasive display of Ciceronian eloquence, which went like this:
‘O distinguished knights; it is an extraordinary thing! Courage and innate steadfastness have given you a great reputation for military activity, and have rendered you more famous [for this] than other peoples. We wonder greatly, and it is a matter for amazement, that in this great crisis your devotion to God has grown so shamefully cold and sluggish, and that you have forgotten your customary courage as if you were lazy and degenerate. Some pantomime or theatrical play has entertained you and enticed away your hearing, and the words of God have stirred up no response within you, as though you find them too difficult and hard to understand. O what grief! Charity has frozen in the hearts of all. For shame! “They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy, there is none that doeth good”.34 There is no one who has been stirred by the injury to his Saviour, so that once again it has been possible to say: “I have trodden the winepress alone, and of the people there was none with me”.35 What would happen if somebody saw his earthly lord suffer injury through destruction or disinheritance? If you did not take up arms on his behalf you would undoubtedly be considered shameful and disgraced. How much more do we owe to Him, all [of us] under one head, namely “the members of Christ”:36 [we owe] what we are, that we exist, and we have all received what we have from His plenitude. But the shoots are not coming forth from the tree; the branches of the vine do not give heed to the goodness. To weep with those who are weeping is a matter of piety, yet the grief and desolation of the land of Jerusalem does not move you to tears, though what we have just heard inclines every faithful soul to bitterness and “the cup of desolation”.37 Need requires a friend, and lo, once again, He is suffering, so that He calls on and tries his [friends]. He invites you to furnish your help; He who for your redemption took on human form, was fixed to the Cross, and worked on earth for your salvation. This is the land of the Lord’s inheritance, where His feet stood, from where first through the Prophets and then by the Apostles the first plantation of our faith was propagated in the world. And when God should be glorified “in all places of His dominion”,38 that place is especially worthy to be regarded with veneration, for it happened that the Son of God consecrated it by the deliberate touch of his presence to secure our redemption. May He therefore put grief in your hearts, may He move and incite you to revenge, because the mother and nurse of your faith, the holy city of Jerusalem, is in thrall to the profane rites of the pagans, and the worship of the Christian religion has been destroyed and wiped out therein. For if, may this not happen, there is no one who helps or consoles her from all those dear to Him, what will happen in the future apart from the plantation of Christianity being gravely maimed and the shoots of paganism becoming spread more widely? If on the other hand someone were to encourage you to theft or some other sort of crime, by promoting evil he would easily find many accomplices for this iniquity, whereas God has gained only one from all these knights to fight for him. Think therefore, distinguished knights, how happy, how favourable and excellent is this sort of warfare, what fruitful work [it is], the reward for which is remission of sins, what indeed God promises and offers to His pilgrims.’
After these words the devotion of all, which had previously seemed to be sleeping, was roused. Pious tears welled up from contrite hearts. Many counts and barons, and many thousands of both knights and footmen, hastened together to receive the sign of the Cross. In a short time news of this spread far and wide, and roused all sorts of far peoples. Although the emperor had already privately decided that he wished to make the pilgrimage, as a man of wide-ranging circumspection, however, he still pretended [that he had not], waiting until a larger group of the princes and other men took the Cross without retraction, since with their help and involvement he would be able more easily and effectively to forward the business of the expedition. Thus expressly to arrange matters for the pilgrims with wise and necessary planning, he summoned a court to meet at Mainz in the middle of Lent, which [day] then fell on 27 March. This was rightly called the ‘court of God’.
Meanwhile Henry, Cardinal Bishop of Albano, a religious man distinguished by his knowledge of letters and his delightful eloquence, had been sent by the Apostolic See as legate for the same purpose, since he was a distinguished preacher. He went first to the emperor, as was proper, by whom, as was fitting, he was received kindly and with due ceremony. He realised, after some private enquiry and discussion, that the latter looked favourably on the business of the pilgrimage, and rejoicing in the Lord he travelled around Germany, ‘casting the seed’, that is the Word of the Lord, ‘into good ground’,39 and in a short space of time he recruited many for the expedition’s journey to Jerusalem. He then travelled to Philip, the most serene King of the French, and King Henry of England, who were at that time in dispute, and through his persuasive speech he convinced them to make peace. Both they and many of the leading men from each kingdom received the sign of the Cross. Then he decided to return to Germany to attend the aforesaid ‘court of God’, the time for which was now approaching.
When the appointed time for the court had arrived, the most serene emperor and many archbishops, bishops, dukes, margraves, counts and barons gathered at the place designated, along with innumerable pilgrims and a host of other people. The city of Mainz rejoiced to be chosen and named as the site for discussing this matter so conducive to the common good and welcomed them as its guests. The court was celebrated with great ceremony and religious observance, so as to find favour and veneration from everyone. Among those present there was Bishop Gottfried of Würzburg, a man of prudence and eloquence, who was admirable and widely esteemed for his probity and other innate good qualities. He too was a pilgrim of the life-giving Cross, and, as a distinguished sower of the Divine Word, he gained the good opinion of his hearers through a persuasive and pleasing sermon, and he preached well and effectively, advancing many good arguments, to encourage them towards the way [of the Cross].40 For the most Christian emperor himself, his illustrious son the Duke of Swabia, many bishops and princes along with other high-ranking men took the sign of the Cross from his hand there and bound themselves on oath and in public to undertake the journey. Many other people burned with devotion to undertake this enterprise, and all these great men were determined to make war against the hateful people of the Turks; [indeed] it was as if they were already in sight of the enemy, and imagined that they were already fighting them. As a consequence of the news of these great military preparations, the Christians became justifiably and increasingly joyful, while the Saracens were struck with terror and dread. All the pilgrims were very pleased by the presence of the duke; for thereafter, as his deeds will testify, not only was he highly distinguished by both birth and character, but in many dangerous military situations and while suffering great tribulations on behalf of the army of Christ, he often, indeed always, called forth his courage to do great deeds, and through his valour he won golden opinions from everyone. The emperor saw and rejoiced that the knighthood of Christ was so fruitfully increased, but he issued a decree that forbade anyone on foot, or who lacked capacity in the use of arms, also anyone who could not finance themselves for the journey for at least two years, from undertaking the way of pilgrimage with him, since a weak and unwarlike crowd was customarily more of a hindrance than a help to such a difficult expedition.41 He explained to the rest that such an arduous operation required some pause and delay to make preparations for the journey. Thus it seemed to the emperor, after taking advice from the princes in private, that the proposed expedition should be put off for a year from Easter, which was approaching; the pilgrims should then muster at Regensburg on 23 April, that is, the feast of St George. Everyone was in full agreement to this. Once these arrangements had been settled, everyone was given permission to return home.
Since the most serene emperor and Saladin had for a long time been friends, sending a succession of envoys and gifts to each other,42 the emperor thought it necessary for the reputation of his throne to send the latter an embassy with a declaration of war to initiate hostilities between them, unless Saladin returned the Holy Cross that had been taken in battle from the Christians, along with the land of Jerusalem that he had made subject to his yoke. The task of leading the embassy to Saladin was undertaken, at the emperor’s request, by Count Henry of Dietz.43 In addition, the emperor sent other embassies to King Bela of Hungary, to confirm the provision of markets, safe conduct along the way and a secure peace between the two of them, to the Emperor Isaac in Greece and to the Sultan of Iconium, with whom he had already long ago established good relations and friendship through an interchange of envoys, gifts and messages. The King of Hungary responded speedily and favourably to the request of the emperor and pilgrims concerning this matter. The chancellor and envoys of the Emperor of Constantinople then arrived and came into the presence of the most serene emperor, who received them kindly, at Nuremberg, where they conducted negotiations for the aforesaid peace.44 They received sworn security from the distinguished Duke of Swabia and the other princes and great men who were present there, and in return they bound themselves on oath to him to secure a comprehensive peace treaty. They suggested that important and high-ranking envoys should be sent to Constantinople to receive fuller assurances from them there and to confirm the peace more fully. Amid other terms of the treaty that were agreed was this clause in particular: that the pilgrims might be allowed to take fruit from the trees, vegetables from gardens, wood to make fires provided houses were not damaged, and fodder and straw for the needs of their horses. Other clauses dealt with the provision of markets according to the resources of [particular] regions and the exigencies of the season. The following distinguished envoys were chosen to carry out this embassy after discussion between the emperor and the princes; namely the Bishop of Münster, Count Rupert of Nassau and Count Henry of Diez the younger.45 And thus the aforesaid chancellor and his colleagues were bid a generous and honourable farewell by the emperor and returned to Greece. In addition to this, it had happened that a little while earlier other envoys had arrived, deceitfully making all sorts of promises of friendship on behalf of the sultan [of Iconium], not only with regard to markets and to security on the road but also for the continuation of the long-standing love [between them] and to show the emperor every mark of respect, which, so they said, the sultan would like to do in person. But, as events afterward proved, the message that the sultan had sent to the emperor was empty and faithless, and bore no relation to the truth. So what actually befell him was well deserved, for subsequently, after his deceit had been revealed, he received an appropriate recompense for the treachery he had perpetrated; [and] his lying and deceitful promise rightly rebounded to his detriment and ignominy. However, the emperor rashly believed in this vain promise, and he who had formerly been circumspect in all things and was usually adroitly on his guard was now heedless and was deceived by the lying words of the aforesaid envoys. After receiving them kindly and keeping them with him for a long time and looking after them more carefully than the others, he allowed them to go, sending back along with them a man named Gottfried, on a mission of peace and friendship to the sultan.46
As the starting date for the pilgrimage approached, ‘the sower of the tares’ and ‘the kindler of all evils’,47 the devil, stirred up dissension and disrupted the peace between the King of the French and the King of England. For this reason both they and many others involved in conflicts now set aside the journey proposed. Some others chose to travel by ship, abandoning the intention to travel by land, which seemed to be more difficult and dangerous. Some indeed took the opportunity to make their excuses and, steeped in sin, they turned back, but ‘no man having put his hand to the plough and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God’.48 The most Christian emperor, however, great of heart as he was, remained nevertheless determined to undertake the journey, thinking it proper and suitable if he might make recompense in this holy service for the frequent successes by which he had earlier been distinguished, with a worthy ‘fulfilment of his courageous endeavours’.49 Thus, as had been arranged, on 23 April the pilgrims mustered at Regensburg.
The Bishop of Münster, Count Rupert of Nassau and Henry the younger of Dietz, who had been sent on the aforesaid embassy to Constantinople, had already gone on ahead, taking with them a hundred knights and with many other people in their train. After crossing Bulgaria and Macedonia with considerable difficulty, they arrived at Constantinople, where they stayed for some time, awaiting the return of the Emperor of Constantinople, who was then absent. When the emperor did return they came into his presence, and his demeanour was cheerful, as if he was overjoyed by the coming of the pilgrims. O unheard-of wickedness! O monstrous treachery! However, in the words of Claudianus, ‘he learned the arts of injury and deceit, how to conceal the intended menace and cover his treachery with a smile’.50 The envoys were therefore mistakenly cheerful and returned to their lodgings. Why had the crafty emperor pretended to show a cheerful countenance to the envoys of peace and good faith, when, showing himself ‘a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence’51 to all Christendom, he was plotting their destruction? The next day the envoys were arrested on his order, plundered, assaulted, and finally wretchedly marched off, brought under armed guard and subject to all sorts of fearful threats, to a place of torment and thrown into prison. Thus the ancient rights of envoys and of hospitality were shamefully dishonoured at the expense of innocent and peaceful men to secure the favour and grace of Saladin. This most wicked emperor had only recently given audience in friendly fashion to their embassy. He ought at least first to have paid attention to that pagan saying that ‘it is worse to cast out a guest than not to receive him’.52
Meanwhile the most serene emperor Frederick, who knew nothing of this wicked act, had gone down the river by ship from Regensburg into Austria, while his army with its horses and carts marched by land. He had a town called Mauthausen, sited on the bank of the Danube, completely destroyed by fire as a punishment, since its inhabitants had arrogantly presumed to extort an unjustified toll from the pilgrims crossing [the river]. After the army had arrived at Vienna, Duke Leopold of Austria, who was famous and renowned among everyone as a beacon of generosity, made admirable efforts to provide for the pilgrims, both by furnishing them with a market and through happily making gifts from his own property.
[The account of the Crusade continues thereafter.]
1 Translated from Quellen, pp. 116–30.
2 Horace, Ars Poetica, v. 38.
3 Persius, Saturarum Prologus, v. 2.
4 Charlemagne, King of the Franks 768–814, the first medieval emperor, from 800, who was considered a model for all his successors.
5 Exodus 15:13.
6 Psalm 123:7 (Vulgate), 124:7 (AV).
7 Psalm 17:38 (Vulgate), 18:37 (AV); Exodus 15:9.
8 Matthew 7:14.
9 Lucan, Pharsalia, IX.403.
10 John 15:1–2.
11 Psalm 77:50 (Vulgate), 78:50 (AV).
12 Hosea 4:1.
13 Here three similar but separate lines from the Aeneid are conflated: Aeneid, I.349, III.56–7, IV.412.
14 Here Babylon was used, as it often was in medieval Latin, to refer to Cairo, or in a more general sense Egypt.
15 Psalm 103:21 (Vulgate), 104:21 (AV). Rainald of Châtillon had become Prince of Antioch through his marriage to the widowed Princess Constance in 1153, her son Bohemond III at that stage being only an infant. But, after his capture by Nur-ed-Din in 1161, Rainald had spent many years in prison, during which time his wife had died. Soon after his release in 1176 he married Stephanie of Milly, the heiress of Oultre-Jordain, from which lordship he had conducted a series of raids against the Muslims. See especially Bernard Hamilton, ‘“The Elephant of Christ”, Reynald of Chatillon’, Studies in Church History 15 (1978), 97–108.
16 The story that Sybilla herself was responsible for her marriage to Guy was also told by Ernoul, the earliest continuator of William of Tyre, but was contradicted by William’s own account, which made clear that the choice was made by Baldwin IV; see Bernard Hamilton, The Leper King and his Heirs. Baldwin IV and the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (Cambridge 2000), pp. 150–8. The Lusignans were, in fact, the most powerful noble family in Poitou, even though Guy was a younger son. While Count Raymond III of Tripoli ruled his own independent state, he was also through his marriage to the widowed Princess of Galilee a vassal to the King of Jerusalem, as well as first cousin to Baldwin IV.
17 The Battle of Cresson, May 1187. For other, fuller, contemporary accounts, the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre, in Edbury, The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade, pp. 31–4; a papal letter of September 1187, based on a report by the Master of the Temple, in ibid., pp. 156–7; Nicholson, Chronicle of the Third Crusade, pp. 25–6; and the De Expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum, in Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. J. Stevenson (Rolls Series, London 1875), pp. 211–17.
18 Probably I Samuel 4:11.
19 Statius, Thebaïs, III:6.
20 Cunei, literally ‘wedge-shaped formations’.
21 A castle in northern Galilee, built c. 1101 in the earliest days of Crusader settlement: the surviving remains on this site are those of the rebuilt thirteenth-century castle, Hugh Kennedy, Crusader Castles (Cambridge 1994), p. 40.
22 Psalm 97:3 (Vulgate), 98:3 (AV)
23 Conrad’s father, who had been captured at Hattin, was Margrave William: here the author of the HP seems to have copied a mistake in the Historia de Expeditione [above, p. 63 and note 157], where William and his eldest son Rainier (d. 1182) were confused.
24 Ovid, Metamorphoses, VIII.477.
25 Esther 3:12.
26 The ‘archpirate’ was presumably Fâris al-Dîn Badrân, the commander of Saladin’s naval squadron blockading Tyre, the defeat of which, on 30 December 1187, the sultan’s biographer ascribed to the failure of the sailors to keep a proper watch at night, The Rare and Excellent History, p. 79. For another account of this naval battle, see the letter of the Templar official Terricus to Henry II of England, Edbury, Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade, p. 166.
27 Lucan, Pharsalia, 1:69.
28 Hugh was one of the four sons of Eschiva of Bures by her first husband; she subsequently married Raymond of Tripoli in 1175.
29 I Maccabees 1:3.
30 This ignores the often very difficult relations between Frederick and the papacy, especially under Urban III (pope 1185–7), for which see especially I.S. Robinson, The Papacy 1073–1198. Continuity and Innovation (Cambridge 1990), pp. 499–505.
31 December 1187.
32 The Annales Marbacenses, p. 58, named him as Siegfried, ‘a rich and valiant’ knight, who was one of the ministeriales of Count Albrecht of Dagsburg.
33 Psalm 80:11 (Vulgate), 81:10 (AV). For the bishop, see History of the Expedition, note 46.
34 Psalm 13:3 and 52:4 (Vulgate), 14:3 and 53:3 (AV).
35 Isaiah 63:3.
36 I Corinthians 6:15.
37 Ezekiel 23:33.
38 Psalm 102:22 (Vulgate), 103:22 (AV).
39 Mark 4:26. For Henry of Albano, History of the Expedition, note 35.
40 His preaching at the Mainz assembly was also noted by Arnold of Lübeck, Chronica Slavorum, IV.7, p. 128. For Gottfried, see History of the Expedition, note 47.
41 The English Itinerarium Peregrinorum said that Frederick insisted that all participants have the means for one year’s absence, Nicholson, Chronicle of the Third Crusade, p. 55.
42 Saladin had sent an embassy to Frederick in 1173, Chronica Regia Coloniensis, p. 124; the emperor had dispatched his own ambassador to Egypt two years later, a report from whom was preserved by Arnold of Lübeck, Chronica Slavorum, VII.8, pp. 264–77. The Annales Stadenses, MGH SS xvi.350, suggested that an envoy from Saladin arrived at Frederick’s court in 1185.
43 This embassy was not mentioned by the History of the Expedition, but is confirmed by the Chronica Regia Coloniensis, p. 140. Henry of Diez was one of the emperor’s closest and most loyal supporters, who had played a particularly prominent part in his Italian expedition of 1174–8, and was a frequent witness of his charters [see above, p. 23]. However, what purport to be the texts of this letter and of Saladin’s response, reproduced in the Itinerarium Peregrinorum and several other English sources, are forgeries, part of the propaganda of the upcoming Crusade, Das Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 280–8, c. 18 (English translation, Nicholson, Chronicle of the Third Crusade, pp. 49–54); Ralph of Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. W. Stubbs (2 vols, Rolls Series, London 1876), ii.56–7. See H.E. Mayer, ‘Das Brief Kaiser Friedrichs I. an Saladin von Jahre 1188’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 14 (1958), 488–94.
44 End of December 1188; see the History of the Expedition, above, p. 45 and note 55..
45 For these men, see History of the Expedition, note 59.
46 Gottfried of Wiesenbach, who in October 1189 was dispatched on a further mission to Constantinople and Iconium; for which the History of the Expedition, above, p. 75 and notes 197, 247.
47 Cf. Matthew 13:25; II Maccabees 4:1.
48 Luke 9:62.
49 Ecclesiasticus 50:11 (Vulgate), a quotation copied from the History of the Expedition [above, p. 37]. A very similar phrase was used about Frederick and the Crusade by Arnold of Lübeck, Chronica Slavorum, IV.7, pp. 127–8: ‘he directed the strength of his forces to attack the enemies of the Cross of Christ, thinking that this was a good fulfilment for his struggle’.
50 Claudianus, In Rufinum, I, lines 98–9: the translation is that of Maurice Platnauer, in the Loeb edition (Cambridge, MA, 1922), p. 33.
51 I Peter 2:8.
52 Ovid, Tristia, V.vi.13.