Page:A History of the Knights of Malta, or the Order of St. John of Jerusalem.djvu/68

46 mark of appreciation of his gallantry. It is, however, most probable that this statement must be ranked with the numerous myths with which the records of those times abound. The other event to which allusion has been made was the punishment of twelve knights of the Temple for cowardice in having yielded the cave or grotto of Tyre without sufficient resistance. For this offence Almeric caused them all to be hanged, a sentence which threw a great slur on the general body at the time. Cowardice, however, was not one of the usual crimes of that fraternity. It is therefore not improbable that they were sacrifloed to the wrath of the Christians for not having performed an impossibility. It is also quite possible that the statement itself was untrue, the records of it being only to be found on the pages of historians by no means generally friendly to the Templars.

Arnaud do Comps died in the year 1168, and the unfortunate Gilbert d’Ascali was appointed to the vacant office. Soon afterwards Almeric suggested the advisability of a second expedition into Egypt. He had been so struck with the wealth and other attractions of the country during his first incursion, that he was prompted both by ambition and avarice to desire its acquisition. In this project he was warmly seconded by the Greek emperor of Constantinople, who was naturally desirous of seeing as effectual a barrier as possible erected between his frontier and the infidels who surrounded him. With this view he contributed a large sum towards the expenses of the proposed expedition.

The propriety of joining with the king in this enterprise was warmly debated amongst the knights of St. John. The caliph of Egypt had but lately entered into a treaty of peace with the Christians by which he had bound himself to pay them an annual tribute. This treaty had so far been scrupulously observed by him; it was therefore argued by some of the more conscientious among them that they were not justified in waging war against him. Their Master, however, strenuously supported the undertaking, and his detractors assert that his object in so doing was to replenish by the spoils of Egypt the treasury of the Order, which he had much reduced by his extravagance. He was backed by the majority in the council.