volume one

HISTOBT or THE CETJSADES. 165
gination of both leaders and soldiers was easily led away
by the promises which were made to them in the name of
Heaven. The hopes of a more prosperous future began to
re-animate their courage. Tancred, as a good and loyal
knight, swore, that as long as he had sixty companions left,
he would never abandon the project of delivering Jerusalem.
Grodfrey, Hugli, Kaymond, and the two Roberts took the
same oath. The whole army, after the example of their
leaders, promised to fight and to suffer until the day
appointed for the deliverance of the holy places.
In the midst of this reviving enthusiasm, two deserters
came before the Christian army, and related that, when
endeavouring to escape from Antioch, they had been stopped,
the one by his brother, who had been killed in fight, the
other by Jesus Christ himself. The Saviour of mankind
had promised to deliver Antioch. The warrior who had
fallen under the sword of the Saracens had sworn to issue
from the grave with all his companions, equally dead as him-
self, to fight with the Christians. In order to crown all
these heavenly promises, a priest of the diocese of Marseilles,
named Peter Barthelemi, came before the council of
the leaders, to reveal an apparition of St. Andrew, which
had been repeated three times during his sleep. The holy
apostle had said to him : " Gro to the church of my brother
Peter at Antioch. Near the principal altar you will find,
by digging up the earth, the iron head of the lance which
pierced the side of our Eedeemer. "Within three days this
instrument of eternal salvation shall be manifested to his
disciples. This mystical iron, borne at the head of the
army, shall efiect the deliverance of the Christians, and
shall pierce the hearts of the infidels." * Adhemar, E-ay-
* The discovery of this lance and the prodigies that it operated are
related by all the historians of the Crusades. The Arabian historian
Aboul-Maha^en agrees, in the principal circumstances, with the Latin
historians. The most credulous of the latter, and he who gives the
greatest number of details, is Raymond d'Agiles. Albert d'Aix, William
of Tyre, Guibert, and Robert, raise not the least doubt about the authenticity
of the lance. Foucher de Chartres, less credulous, says, when
relating the discovery, Audi fraudem et non fraudem. He afterwards
adds, whilst speaking of the lance, that it had been concealed in the place
from which it was taken : Invenit lanceam, fallaciter occultatam forsitan.
The historian Paulus Emilias, who relates the same fact, accompanies it