Honestly, the Gesta is one of my favorite chronicles of the First Crusade. It is simple, but easy to read (and Hill's translation is delightfully amusing-- the number of times that the phrase "willy-nilly" appears is INCREDIBLE. We actually asked my professor about the Latin phrase for that one because it was so popular!) I'm not sure this translation is the best from a scholarly standpoint, but it is fun to read! The Gesta is wonderful and weird, though it is missing the Trial by Fire of Peter Bartholomew, which is one of the best parts of the other chronicles. (If you are interested, I suggest you check out the chronicle of Raymond d'Aguilers. He covers the Trial by Fire in extreme detail and it is a sensational event!)
Οι μαρτυρίες και οι πηγές κρύβουν την μαγεία της εξιστόρησης από πρώτο χέρι των γεγονότων, πόσο μάλλον αν πρόκειται για γεγονότα που συντάραξαν την ανθρώπινη ιστορία δεν μπορούν να περάσουν απαρατήρητες ακόμα και για έναν «ερασιτέχνη» ερευνητή. Πολλά τα ερωτήματα, σίγουρα θα επανέλθω στο θέμα των σταυροφοριών σύντομα. Πολύ ευχάριστα διαβάζεται! Το συνιστώ.
I didn't read Hill's edition, but the text with a commentary written by William Turpin available here.
I enjoyed the work, although at times it becomes a bit tedious. It was much more fun when portraying speeches, etc., than when a list of "the count of such and such moved his troops here" kinds of things.
I read its Arabic translation from Latin by Prof. Hassan Habashy of Ain Shams Faculty of Arts, Egypt. The translation is very good and scholarly. I hope I could read Latin to be able to read all the documents of the Crusades.
This is a good read for anybody who wants to study the crusades; however, there are serious doubts about whether it is what it claims to be - was it really written by a simple crusader knight, or is it more likely a piece of medieval propaganda?