[960] _Est._, ll. 10089-135; _Itin._, 377, 378. Both writers give the date as “the third day before S. John’s,” and the Latin one adds “die S. Albani,” _i. e._ June 22. On June 22, however, Richard was, as we have seen, at Galatia. Roger of Howden’s account of the affair (iii. 182) is obviously confused. He gives no date; but in his work, as in the _Estoire_ and the _Itinerarium_, the story is immediately followed by that of the Egyptian caravan. Probably therefore the true date is Sunday, June 21. [961] R. Coggeshall, 40, 41. [962] Joinville, c. 108. [963] Bohadin, 315; _Est._, ll. 10704-5. [964] Bohadin, 316. [965] Bohadin, 316-22; obviously more authentic than the version in _Est._, ll. 10747-63, and _Itin._, 398, 399. [966] _Est._, ll. 10706-14; _Itin._, 397, giving the date. [967] _Est._, ll. 10768-85; _Itin._, 399-401. The date of leaving Joppa comes from Bohadin, 322, that of the arrival at Acre from _Itin._, 400-1. [968] _Est._, ll. 10935-55; _Itin._, 403-4. (The dates will appear from the sequel.) The former writer seems to imply, and the latter distinctly states, that Richard had really and avowedly called his ships together for the purpose of sailing at once for Europe, the attack on Beyrout being intended as a mere incident on the way. I cannot believe this view of the matter to be based on anything else than an erroneous impression current among the lower ranks of the host. Richard may very likely have hoped that the capture of Beyrout would lead to fresh overtures for peace on the part of the Moslems, and to such concessions from them as might enable him to make a treaty which would end the war for a time, and thus set him honourably free to depart before the date which he had fixed; he may have made preparations for such a contingency, and if so, he would no doubt make them openly because a possibility of their purpose being misconstrued could hardly occur to his mind. Richard might break a treaty or a contract without scruple, and also without appreciable damage to his reputation in his own day; but a sudden desertion of the Holy Land such as these writers supposed him to have contemplated would have been a flagrant breach of what he and every other man of the world of chivalry held far more sacred than any treaty or contract—his knightly word, solemnly and publicly pledged only a few weeks before. Such an act must infallibly have brought upon him, in his own eyes and in the eyes of all true knights, a double share of the “shame and everlasting contempt” which he had once denounced against Philip Augustus, and would be utterly irreconcileable with his whole character. The Beyrout project seems really to have been much more definite and important than we should gather from the casual way in which it is mentioned by the two Frank chroniclers. It had evidently been planned in concert with the other leaders before Richard left Joppa, since as early as July 22—five days before the