ces of
the discovery, and the character of the prophet; and the pious Bohemond
ascribed their deliverance to the merits and intercession of Christ
alone. For a while, the Provincials defended their national palladium
with clamors and arms and new visions condemned to death and hell the
profane sceptics who presumed to scrutinize the truth and merit of the
discovery. The prevalence of incredulity compelled the author to submit
his life and veracity to the judgment of God. A pile of dry fagots, four
feet high and fourteen long, was erected in the midst of the camp; the
flames burnt fiercely to the elevation of thirty cubits; and a narrow
path of twelve inches was left for the perilous trial. The unfortunate
priest of Marseilles traversed the fire with dexterity and speed; but
the thighs and belly were scorched by the intense heat; he expired the
next day; [992] and the logic of believing minds will pay some regard to
his dying protestations of innocence and truth. Some efforts were made
by the Provincials to substitute a cross, a ring, or a tabernacle,
in the place of the holy lance, which soon vanished in contempt and
oblivion. [100] Yet the revelation of Antioch is gravely asserted by
succeeding historians: and such is the progress of credulity, that
miracles most doubtful on the spot, and at the moment, will be received
with implicit faith at a convenient distance of time and space.

[Footnote 99: The Mahometan Aboulmahasen (apud De Guignes, tom. ii. p.
ii. p. 95) is more correct in his account of the holy lance than the
Christians, Anna Comnena and Abulpharagius: the Greek princess confounds
it with the nail of the cross, (l. xi. p. 326;) the Jacobite primate,
with St. Peter's staff, (p. 242.)]

[Footnote 991: The real cause of this victory appears to have been the
feud in Kerboga's army Wilken, vol. ii. p. 40.--M.]

[Footnote 992: The twelfth day after. He was much injured, and his
flesh torn off, from the ardor of pious congratulation with which he
was assailed by those who witnessed his escape, unhurt, as it was first
supposed. Wilken vol. i p. 263--M.]

[Footnote 100: The two antagonists who express the most intimate
knowledge and the strongest conviction of the miracle, and of the fraud,
are Raymond des Agiles, and Radulphus Cadomensis, the one attached
to the count of Tholouse, the other to the Norman prince. Fulcherius
Carnotensis presumes to say, Audite fraudem et non fraudem! and
afterwards, Invenit lance