[176] The details of this assault are repeated by all contemporary historians, several describe it at length. Foulcher de Chartres, who without doubt distinguished himself there, is the one who says the least. Anna Comnena says that the Christians took Jerusalem in fifteen days, but gives no details.
[177] The Oriental authors give no details of the siege of Jerusalem. The manuscript history of Jerusalem and Hebron, which is in the Imperial Library, and of which M. Jourdain has been kind enough to translate several fragments for me, contains nothing but vague notices. The author contents himself with saying that the siege lasted more than forty days, and that the Christians killed a great number of Mussulmans. We may here make a general remark: when the Mussulmans experience reverses, the Arabian authors are very sparing of details, and satisfy themselves with telling things in a vague manner, adding, “So God has willed it, may God curse the Christians.” Aboul-Feda gives very few more details than the rest. He says that the massacre of the Mussulmans lasted during seven consecutive days, and that seventy thousand persons were killed in the mosque of Omar, which is evidently an exaggeration.
[178] Raoul de Caen, cap. 132 et 133.
[179] We shall content ourselves with repeating here the words of Raymond d’Agiles, Foulcher de Chartres, and Robert the Monk:—In eodem templo decem millia decollati sunt; pedites nostri usque ad bases cruore peremptorum tingebantur; nec fœminis nec parvulis pepercerunt.—Ful. Caen. ap. Bong. p. 398. Tantum enim ibi humani sanguinis effusum est, ut cæsorum corpora, undâ sanguinis impellente, volverentur per pavimentum, et brachia sive truncatæ manus super cruorem fluitabant.—Rob. Mon. lib. 9. In templo et porticu Solomonis equitabatur in sanguine usque ad genua et usque ad frænos equorum.—Raym. d’Ag. Bong. p. 179. These words of Raymond d’Agiles are evidently an hyperbole, and prove that the Latin historians exaggerated things they ought to have extenuated or concealed.... In a letter written to the pope, the bishops, and the faithful, by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, Godfrey of Bouillon, and Raymond de St. Gilles, is this remarkable passage: “If you desire to know,” say they, “what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses.”—Si scire desideratis quid de hostibus ibi repertis factum fuerit, scitote quia in porticu Salomonis, et in templo nostri equitabant in sanguine fœdo Sarracenorum usque ad genua equorum.—See Novus Thesaurus Anecdotorum, tom. i. p. 282.
[180] Albert d’Aix names these three attendants Baldric, Adelborde, and Stabulon.
[181] Some historians say that the Christians did not go to the Holy Sepulchre until the day after the conquest. We here adopt the opinion of Albert d’Aix, which appears to us the most probable.
[182] Le P. Maimbourg, Histoire des Croisades.
[183] Albert d’Aix gives the sentence which emanated from the council of the leaders. This sentence is supported by the motives we have pointed out.
[184] We have already quoted some of these historians; others relate nearly the same details, and with the same sang froid. We will quote no other but Raymond d’Agiles, who expresses himself thus:—Alii namque illorum, QUOD LEVIUS ERAT, obtruncabantur capitibus; alii autem sagittati, de turribus SALTARE cogebantur; alii vero diutissimè torti et ignious adusti flammeriebantur ’sic). Videbantur per vicos et plateas civitatis AGGERES capitum et manuum atque pedum.—Raym. de Ag. p. 178.
[185] Tankredus miles gloriosus super hâc sibi illatâ injuriâ, vehementi irâ succensus est.—Alb. Aq. lib. vi. cap. 29.