[674] Bohadin, 229, 230; _Est._, ll. 4841-63. [675] _Gesta_, 174; Bohadin, 230. [676] Bohadin, _l.c._ [677] According to one version, they implicitly refused it by requiring, in addition, other conditions such as the garrison had not power to accept without Saladin’s consent, which he was quite certain not to give; _Gesta_, _l.c._, followed by R. Howden, iii. 171. Cf. Bohadin, 233. [678] Cf. Bohadin, 234, with _Gesta_, _l.c._ [679] _Est._, ll. 4927-42; cf. _Itin._, 224, 225. [680] _Gesta_, 175; cf. _Est._, ll. 4943-7, and _Itin._, 225. [681] _Est._, ll. 4948-5040; _Itin._, 225-8; date from _Gesta_, 174. [682] _Gesta_, 175. [683] “Le Balafré.” [684] See the conflicting accounts in _Itin._, 229, _Gesta_, 175, and R. Howden, iii. 118, 119. [685] Bohadin, 230, 235. [686] See the various accounts of these negotiations in Bohadin, 235-7; Ibn Alathyr, _Recueil des Hist. des Crois., Hist. Orient._, II, i. 44-7; other Arab authorities collected in Abu Shama, _ib._, V, 22-5; _Gesta_ and R. Howden, _ll.cc._ [687] _Gesta_, 177, 178. [688] _Ib._, 178. [689] See Note II at end. [690] _Itin._, 233. [691] R. Devizes, 52. [692] _Itin._, 233, 234. According to Bohadin, French ed. p. 238, this duty was entrusted to Conrad; the passage is omitted in the Leyden MS. edited by Schultens, but is reproduced in an emphatic form by Abu Shama (_Recueil, Hist. Orient._, V, 26). [693] _Gesta_, 179, 180; _Itin._, 234. [694] Bohadin, 237, 242; _Gesta_, 179. The _Estoire_, ll. 5217-19, says the Franks were to have as hostages “Les plus hauz Turs e les plus sages Que l’em poreit en Acre eslire,” and does not specify what was arranged as to the garrison. But from the sequel it is quite clear that the hostages really consisted of the whole body of the garrison. [695] Bohadin, 238. Cf. Ibn Alathyr, 47. [696] He had sent his baggage thither on the night of the 12th, Bohadin, 239; a fact which misled the author of the _Itinerarium_ (234) into saying that Saladin himself retired “eadem nocte sequenti proxima post ingressionem nostram.” The _Gesta_, 181, agrees with Bohadin in placing Saladin’s own removal on July 14. [697] Bohadin, _l.c._ [698] _Ib._, 239, 240; cf. _Gesta_, 180. [699] _Gesta_, 181, 182. [700] _Ib._, 182. Cf. _Itin._, 234. [701] See Note I at end. [702] Otto of S. Blaise says of Richard: “Praeda communi universorum sudore adquisita inter suos tantum distributa reliquos privavit, in seque odia omnium concitavit. Omnibus enim fortiori militum robore praestabat, et ideo pro velle suo cuncta disponens reliquos principes parvipendebat” (Pertz, xx. 323). “Reliquos” seems here to include Philip. Even Rigord does not go so far as this. It is certain that Philip got his due share of the prisoners; and there is no reason to doubt that he also got, as the English writers say, his due share of the city and its contents. [703] _Gesta_, 182, 183. [704] _Ib._, 184; _Est._, ll. 5050-61; _Itin._, 235, 236. [705] _Gesta_, _l.c._ [706] _Itin._, 236.