[952] Cf. Bohadin, 309, _Est._, ll. 10565-75, and _Itin._, 392. Bohadin says they got back to their camp on “Friday, 16 Jomada II,” which is self-contradictory, as 16 Jomada II (= June 26) that year was Monday. He may have meant either Monday June 26 or Friday 30; he may even have meant both, and confused them together. The indications in _Estoire_ and _Itinerarium_ are vague, but they seem to imply a two days’ journey from the Round Cistern to Ramlah; thus Ramlah may have been reached on the 26th and the “camp” proper, at Beit Nuba, on the 30th. Richard seems not to have gone to Beit Nuba at all, but to his former quarters at Castle Arnold; R. Coggeshall, 40. [953] _Est._, ll. 10576-626; _Itin._, 393, 394. [954] _Est._, ll. 10639-64; _Itin._, 394, 395. [955] R. Coggeshall, 39, 40. Ralf says Richard caused Saladin’s captured envoys to be shot to death with arrows by his own servants in the sight of the host, neither portion of it (that is, his own adherents or those of Burgundy) knowing whence the victims came nor why they were thus slain. It seems hardly possible that Ambrose should have omitted to mention so strange an incident if it really was seen by the Crusaders of whom he was one. Ralf further represents Hugh as setting out for Acre with his forces immediately, and Richard with the rest of the host following next day; whereas Ambrose distinctly says that the French quitted Beit Nuba at the same time as the king (_Est._, ll. 10709-10). The _Itinerarium_, 397, says the same. [956] Bohadin, 315. [957] “Quatre liues,” _Est._, l. 10690; “quatuor tantum nunc distabant millia,” _Itin._, 396. Beit Nuba is about thirteen miles from Jerusalem. Seemingly “liues” and “millia” here must stand for hours of march, as Stubbs says they often do in Crusade history. [958] _Itin._, 376. This passage follows the account of an event which the same writer dates June 17, and other authorities June 16. [959] “Par la Porte David estoit la voie qui maine en Belleem. Em mi voie estoit une Esglyze ou Seint Elie fu mananz,” _Contin. W. Tyr._, MS. Rothelin, _Recueil Hist. Occid._, ii. 512. R. Howden, iii. 182, calls the place “capellam S. Elyae quae distat a Jerusalem per tres leucas.” As the distance between Jerusalem and Bethlehem is about six miles, Roger must here have used the word _leuca_ as equivalent to a mile (as the author of the _Itinerarium_ seems to have done frequently). On the other hand, there appears to be a mistake in the passage from the Rothelin MS.; seeing that “David’s Gate” was the west gate of Jerusalem, and that Bethlehem lies south of that city, the natural “way that leads to Bethlehem” would be by the “Gate of Sion.”