Constantinopolitana," the discovery of which is due to recent research. This work was written, according to Charles Hopf,[1] by a clerk from Germany; according to Klimke, by one from what is now Austria; according to Tessier, by a Lombard, possibly writing under the orders of Boniface himself. Robert de Clari's valuable book, "La Prise de Constantinople," mentioned on page 250, is the most valuable contemporary account which modern research has brought to light on the Latin conquest. Indications of great value upon the conduct of Venice, and upon various other points in the history of the event in question, are contained in many of the MSS. collected together in the "Exuviæ Sacræ"[2] of Count Riant, a writer who has done more than any other to elucidate the questions raised during the last few years regarding the Fourth Crusade. La Société de l'Orient Latin, the foundation of which was, I believe, due to Count Riant, is engaged in the publication of every scrap of evidence which bears on the Latin occupation of Constantinople and other places in the Levant.
Until within our own times the controversy as to the Fourth Crusade was allowed to sleep. The narrative of Villehardouin, clear, flattering to France, and singularly interesting, was taken from Gibbon to Finlay almost as a conclusive statement upon all which related to the conquest of the city. As his account coincided with others which are aptly classified by Dr. Klimke as official versions, those of more or less independent observers were forgotten or overlooked. M. de Mas-Latrie, in his "History of Cyprus," was probably the first to call attention to the untrustworthy character of Villehar-
