This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
You Fail History Forever indeed! The pity of it is the real story is certainly cinematic enough - but less Politically Correct.
The real Sibylla of Jerusalem was deeply in love with her second husband Guy de Lusignan - who btw was both young and good looking. When she suceeded her son she agreed to divorce Guy on the condition she was allowed to choose her new husband. Then at ther coronation she personally crowned Guy as her consort and co-ruler - a Crowning Moment Of Awesome if ever there was one.
The political infighting of the Crusader Kingdom is incredibly complex (you thought the Wars of Roses were bad? They're clear as crystal compared to the intrigues of the Court of Jerusalem!). Historians have traditionally followed William of Tyre in making diplomatic engagement as opposed to aggressive military action the key issue between the 'Court Party' who favored the latter led by Sibylla and Guy, and the 'Country Party' pushing for the former led by Raymond of Tripoli, the Ibelins, et-al. Modern research questions this but if there was indeed any truth to it then Guy had a point. Saladin both as an imperialist and a good Muslim was about as interested in peaceful co-existence with the Crusader states as his 21st c. successors are with coming to terms with Israel.
It was of course this very division that gave Saladin his opportunity. And if Guy's strategy was right his tactics were woeful. Those who opposed him as King-consort had damn good reason apart from policy disagreements, he was not a very able or effective leader.
Interestingly Balian of Ibelin WAS indeed married to a Queen of Jerusalem, but it was Sybilla's stepmother Maria Comnena, widow of Amaury I. He was also a middle aged nobleman born and raised in the Kingdom not a 'blacksmith' fresh from Europe.
Far from running away after the fall of Jerusalem both Sibylla and Balian stayed and fought, each other unfortunately, trying in their different ways to save the Kingdom.
As for Saladin, he seems to have deserved the respect he got from his enemies and have been as chivalrous and generous as his reputation BUT his virtues most certainly did not include relgious tolerance - which was NOT considered a virtue at all in his time by either side.
He executed all the Templars captured at Hattin out of hand after offering them the alternative of conversion to Islam (a few are said to have accepted). Had a Christian monarch done the same, forced a choice between conversion and death on his captives, it would have been an atrocity seeing however that it was Saladin it becomes an act of mercy. On the other hand Saladin's ire towards Raynald de Chatillon was fully justified - though Raynald wasn't the monster portrayed but simply a jerkass opportunist. The Soldan's lack of hostility towards Balian after the surrender of Jerusalem strongly implies that the story of Balian swearing to forgo further resistance in exchange for his freedom is untrue as some historians argue.
Balian and the Patriarch Heraclius made tremendous efforts to raise the money to ransom the entire Christian population of Jerusalem. When they fell short they offered themselves as exchange hostages but Saladin preferred to sell the remaining captives into slavery. Presumably he needed the cash more than he needed to eliminate two Crusader leaders. Of course he was also interested in encouraging the conflict between the parties and to that end released Guy. Sibylla was probably the only person on the Christian side happy about that. She died in 1189 while she and Guy were besieging Acre, leaving her half-sister Isabella heir to the Kingdom - or such as was left of it.
And finally Saladin's bloodless retaking of Jerusalem, oft contrasted with the City's blood soaked fall to the Crusaders, reflects the difference between a city taken by negotiated surrender and one taken by storm NOT any exceptional humanity on the part of the Soldan or brutality of the First Crusaders. Saladin was quite capable of slaughtering both armed foes and civilians if and when called for.
As inaccurate as this movie is, I have to speak up in defense of Godfrey's swordfighting lessons. I'm learning how to fight with a longsword and high guard is acutally a very good guard for a beginner to learn. It enables very fast and powerful attacks from several different angles that are tricky to block and is easier to master than some other, more defensive guards.
- berr: As the history goes, (as told by the lord of Tiberias' IRL sympathetic chronicler) Balian sent word to Saladin asking to be released from his promise not to put up a defense; seeing as how there were only three knights left in the city, Saladin agreed.
Of course, under this story it's notable Balian was captured and not killed in Hattin as all the rest of the knights ransomed fled to the coast. Saladin must have had some ire for the Templars... then again, the vast majority of the soldiers at Hattin were massacred.
