[101] According to William of Tyre, the bread which sufficed for the daily food of one man cost two sous instead of a denier; an ox two marks of silver, instead of five sous; a kid or a lamb five or six sous, instead of three or four deniers; the expense of a horse for a single night arose as high as eight sous, whilst it had only been two or three deniers at the commencement of the siege.
[102] Sed non hoc metu præliorum, ut speramus fecerat; sed tantum famie injuriam pati nunquam didicerat.—Rob. Mon. lib. iv.
[103] This great faster, says Maimbourg, who by a voluntary austerity which had acquired him such a great reputation of sanctity, made profession to eat neither bread nor meat, could not endure a necessary fast.
[104] Et quis esse poterat aditus voluptatis, ubi erat indesinens suspicio mortis!—Guib. lib. vi. cap. 15.
[105] This circumstance is taken from an Armenian manuscript of Matthew of Edessa. It is surprising that the Latin historians have made no mention of it; but they never speak of any means of providing provisions employed by the Crusaders.
[106] A chronicle printed at Paris in 1517, which bears for title, “Grand Voyage d’Outre-Mer,” places the following speech in the mouth of Godfrey: “Brave seigneurs, my brothers and companions in Jesus Christ; if the news we hear be true, that for our sins these cruel dogs have thus killed these valiant men, and of great consideration, I only perceive two things, that we shall die with them as good and loyal Christians, assured of receiving our guerdon from our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for whose service we came here and have quitted our native lands and our kindred; or if it should please him, that he allow us to take vengeance and obtain victory over these vile dogs who have thus degraded and weakened Christianity in its valiant men.”
[107] Sed est quod stupeam, nec satis valeam stupere: cum homo tam pretiosus laudis emptor mox præsentis ora armigeri silentio concluserit adjurato.—Gest. Tanc. cap. 52; Muratori, vol. iii. The historian whom we have just quoted endeavours to explain the fact which he relates. He asks himself whether it was from modesty or a religious spirit, or whether Tancred might fear not to be believed, either upon his own word or that of his squire, that the Christian hero desired silence to be preserved. In all these cases the fact appears to him to be a prodigy. He adds that the squire was faithful to his oath, and that it was not till a long time afterwards that the feats of Tancred on that day became known. We have but to compare this with what old Horace says of his heroes.
[108] Sic lubricus ensis super crus dextrum integer exigit, sicque caput integrum cum dextrâ parte corporis immersit gurgite, partemque quæ equo præsidebat remisit civitati.—Rob. Mon. Cujus ense trajectus Turcus duo factus est Turci; ut inferior alter in urbem equitaret, alter arcitenens in flumine nataret.—Rad. Cad.
[109] Feruntque in illâ die martyrisati ex nostris militibus seu peditibus plusquam mille, qui in cœlum lætantes ascendebant, atque candidati ferentes stolam recepti martyrii, glorificantes et magnificantes Dominum Deum nostrum trinum et unum, in quo feliciter triumphabant; et dicebant concordabili voce: Quare non defendis sanguinem nostrum, qui hodie pro tuo nomine effusus est?—Gesta Francorum, lib. xviii cap. 18, p. 13.
[110] These particulars are related by Abbot Guibert, lib. iv. In this historian will be found most particulars regarding morals.