by Oisin » Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:24 pm
Yeah, I think you're right about the colors being wrong--there's a lot of anachronistic time-frame stuff. Balian was in his 40's during the defense of Jerusalem, his father was like 30 years dead I think, and I don't think he ever even went to France, let alone live there as a blacksmith. He was a politician and knight of Outremer for his whole life. IIRC, they also get the kinship mixed up in the movie. Cousins who were actually brothers, or something like that. Also some of the friendships were wrong. I don't remember the exact details, I know a lot more about the period of the First Crusade than the Third (or, in this case, the events which led up to it). Try searching wikipedia for Balian of Ibelin.
As far as the Templars are concerned, they were formed right after the First Crusade, and officially sanctioned in the early 1100's, and were in fact a . The colors of the clothes the Hospitallers (or whoever those guys in blue were supposed to be, but I think they were Hospitallers) wore were completely wrong, but whatever. Also, Raymond (Tiberius in the movie, after his home fiefdom) was not a member of the Hospitallers, and neither Guy nor Raynald were Templars (though they were political allies), or quite as stupid, although every bit as bloodthirsty, as in the film. The army of Jerusalem marching out to its slaughter at the Horns of Hattin was also not a unilateral decision of Guy's, but reached after council between all of the main players, including Raymond and Balian, after the two parties (which were pretty much as in the movie--Guy and Raynald and the Templars on one side, Raymond and Balian and some others on the other, rivalry if anything more bitter than in the movie) had a pretty good reconciliation.
Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú RuadhAn Fhírinne in aghaidh an tSaoil--Truth against the world.