The History of the Crusades (vol. 1 of 3)Michaud, J. Fr. (Joseph Fr.)
History
The History of the Crusades (vol. 1 of 3)
Michaud, J. Fr. (Joseph Fr.)
Crusades
The unfortunate issue of this crusade, which was directed entirely
against the Greeks, became fatal to the Christians established in
Syria, and deprived them of the succours they had reason to expect
from the West. Tancred, who still governed Antioch, in the absence
and after the death of Bohemond, was attacked several times by the
Saracens of Aleppo, and only resisted them by displaying prodigies of
valour. Josselin and Baldwin du Bourg did not return to their states
till after five years of captivity. When Baldwin came back to Edessa,
he was so poor that he could not pay his common domestics; and an
Armenian prince, whose daughter he had married, was obliged to redeem
the beard[236] of his son-in-law, which he had pledged for the means
of paying his soldiers. The resources of the government of Antioch
were not less exhausted than those of the county of Edessa. In the
extremes of their misery, Tancred and Baldwin du Bourg had several
disputes; each, by turns, called in the Saracens to defend his cause,
and everything was in confusion on the banks of the Euphrates and the
Orontes.
Neither was Jerusalem free from discord. Baldwin could not pay his
soldiers, and demanded money of the patriarch, who was the depositary
of the alms of the faithful. Daimbert at first refused to assist the
king, who resolved to employ force to compel him: “Yes,” said he to the
patriarch, in a transport of anger, “I will bear away the treasures of
the church and the holy sepulchre; I wish to save Jerusalem and the
Christian people; when I have accomplished that noble project, I will
restore the riches of the all-powerful God.” Daimbert, intimidated by
the menaces of Baldwin, consented to give up a part of his treasures;
but as fast as the king of Jerusalem experienced new wants, he made
fresh demands, to which the pontiff responded by an insulting refusal.
He accused the king of profaning and plundering the sanctuary; whilst
the king, on his part, accused Daimbert of betraying the cause of
the Christians, and of dissipating in pleasures and festivities the
treasures of Jesus Christ. The quarrels of Baldwin and the patriarch
were renewed every year; both, in the end, often conveyed their
complaints to the Holy See, which pronounced no decision likely to
conciliate the angry parties. The death of Daimbert could alone put an
end to these discussions, which spread scandal through the church of
Christ, and by weakening the authority of the king, were likely to
lead to the ruin of the kingdom.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account