[147] The original of this fragment is in the Bibl. Græc. of Fabricius, vol. vi, p. 405, and in the first volume of the Imperium Orientiale of Bandière. It is not in the editions of Nicetas.
[148] Coins worth two shillings and fourpence each.
[149] This is an extraordinary description of what must have been a surprising work of art; but we cannot reconcile the idea we entertain of a basilisk with that of the animal mentioned—we thought a basilisk was a kind of serpent.—Trans.
[150] Vincent Bellev. Specul. Hist. book xxx. chap. 5; Albert Stad. Chron. fol. 202; Godefr. Monach. Annal. ap. Frch. Collect. Alberici, p. 489; Sicard. Chron. ap. Murat. vol. vii. p. 623.
[151] Thomas de Cantipr. De Apibus.
[152] Chron. Argent, ap. Urtii, Collect. vol. i. p. 1.
[153] Jacob de Vorrag. Chron. Januense, ap. Murat. vol. ix. p. 46. What proves the error of this date is, that Bizarre (Hist. Genuens.), who has copied this chronicle, places the event under the year 1212. I do not know by what authority John Massey places it in his chronicle in 1210.
[154] See the Chron. Anon. of Strasburg, Godfrey the Monk, James of Varagine, and Bishop Sicard.
[155] Alberic enters into copious details; and though this historian generally sins on the side of extravagant credulity, his evidence cannot, in this case, be doubted.
[156] Jacques de Vorrag.