Examines three medieval Jewish accounts of the First Crusade massacres in the Rhine area: the "Mainz Anonymous, " the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle, " and the "Eliezer bar Nathan Chronicle." Discerns five voices or perspectives in these narratives due to the fact that the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle" is a compilation of several prior compositions. Suggests that the narratives were composed in order to provide important time-bound information (the course of events, apology of the Jews - both those who chose martyrdom and those who converted, etc.), as well as to address critical timeless issues (including guidance for the future, theodicy, "Kiddush Hashem, " etc.). Believes that the data provided by the two early narratives - the "Mainz Anonymous" and the Speyer-Worms-Mainz unit of the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle" - are historically reliable, while the other narratives are less reliable. Concludes that the combination of time-bound and timeless concerns reflects an innovative style of historical writing and new views on the relationship between God, humanity, and history.