PDA

View Full Version : Hospitallers?



Maximus1170
11-01-2006, 12:26 PM
I was watching the E3 trailer for AC and I noticed that Hospitallers were hanging three victims. This didnt make sense because in 1187, when the kingdom of Jerusalem fell, the hospitallers were confined to the Country of Tripoli. This county is nowhere near the three cities in the game. They may have killed by the Hashashin because they were out of the county, but why were the public not acting against them and why werent the gaurds of the city atatcking the Hospitallers? Are they part of the conspiracy that applies to modern day? Discuss.

terminalShock09
11-01-2006, 07:48 PM
They may have killed by the Hashashin because they were out of the county, but why were the public not acting against them and why werent the gaurds of the city atatcking them?

Why weren't the guards attacking the Hashishin? I'm a little confused by this sentence... I'm pretty sure the guards were trying to attack Altair in the trailer, and the people might not have attacked because not everyone feels that they can fight a fleeing assassin.

entropy777
11-02-2006, 01:50 AM
<span class="ev_code_GREY">I think he is asking why the guards of the city aren't engaging the Hospitallers, since apparently they're not welcome.</span><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The enthusiasm of a woman's love is even beyond the biographer's. -Jane Austen, Mansfield Park.

Maximus1170
11-02-2006, 02:06 PM
Thats exactly what i was saying, the hospitallers have been confined to a distant county, how come the Hospitallers werent opposed when they entered the city.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There are exceptions to everything, nothing is absolute.

Crukis
11-18-2006, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by terminalShock09:
I'm pretty sure the guards were trying to attack Altair in the trailer
The guards are not trying to attack him in the trailer, they point their sword at him to make him surrender.(This is what I think it looks like so then it's probably right...)

entropy777
11-18-2006, 11:49 AM
<span class="ev_code_GREY">I'm getting it to this: The guards that go after Altair are Hospitallers, and there should really be other guards that make sure that those guards (the hospitallers) aren't inside the city..</span><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The enthusiasm of a woman's love is even beyond the biographer's. -Jane Austen, Mansfield Park.

TraceurX
11-19-2006, 04:51 AM
Maybe... they werent hopsitallers?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

When a man fights for his heart, he cares not about the size of his opponent. If he is in love, he will find a way.

Maximus1170
11-20-2006, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by entropy777:
<span class="ev_code_GREY">I'm getting it to this: The guards that go after Altair are Hospitallers, and there should really be other guards that make sure that those guards (the hospitallers) aren't inside the city..</span>

No, the hospitallers are doing the executions. the gaurds, not necessarily hospitallers, arent arnt opposing the hospitalsers doing the executions, they are opposing the hashashin who try to make a public assassination.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There are exceptions to everything, nothing is absolute.

RetiredHatch
11-20-2006, 04:49 PM
I imagine the guards hospitallers or not would care more about the guy who just stabbed a guys neck in broad daylight in the middle of a crowd then a few guys who aren't causing any trouble at the moment in time.... (other than hanging people -_-)

Maximus1170
11-21-2006, 10:38 AM
Clearly, this topic is causeing lots of confusion, so im going to say it again in simpler form.

In 1187 (before the game is featured) the Hospitallers were banished to a county that had none of the three cities(Acre, Damascus, and Jerusalem) in the game inside of its borders.
Assuming that the trailer took place in one of the three cities in the game, the hospitallers should not be in any of these cities.

I then wanted to know everybodys thoughts on:

- Why the hospitallers were allowed into these cities. (if they are in Acre, Damascus, or Jerusalem)
- If they arent in Acre, Damascus, or Jerusalem, why does this matter to the story in AC, and why do their actions call for them to be assassinated.
- Are the hospitallers part of the conspiracy that applies to modern times?

dragon_802
11-21-2006, 03:28 PM
Are the hospitallers part of the conspiracy that applies to modern times?
History is rewritten and retold thousands of times. How can you be sure about the data you are presenting is correct? Did you live during the crusades? If you are right this is the most reasonable explanation: There were no newspapers, magazines, channel 11 news reports back then. Many people knew nothing about what was going on in thier cities let alone cities miles away. The crowd must have thought nothing of who these executioners were, hospitallers or not. All they cared about was seeing another man die. Also, guards were uneducated so they probally didn't even know how to spell hospitallers therefore, they had no idea who they were, however, they were smart enough to know that when a man stabs another man in the throat that they`should arrest them. This was a good topic though. Good job.

entropy777
11-21-2006, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by dragon_802:
guards were uneducated so they probally no how to spell hospitallers

<span class="ev_code_GREY">On the contrary, modern day man is unedjucated, in the past people were very edjucated and far more intelligent.

You, my friend, is a perfect example of that..</span><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The enthusiasm of a woman's love is even beyond the biographer's. -Jane Austen, Mansfield Park.

dragon_802
11-21-2006, 04:53 PM
And you are not? You can't puncuate correctly. Obviously, we are both perfect examples.

terminalShock09
11-21-2006, 06:10 PM
It's spelled "educated"... and it's also "You ARE" rather than "You is". Anyway. I think you're putting past people on a pillar that's a tad too big. There has always been and will always be an upper crust.



Also, guards were uneducated so they probally didn't even know how to spell hospitallers therefore, they had no idea who they were

People would be able to identify a Hospitaller by the tabards/cloaks that they wore (Black with a white cross). They were also very helpful in protecting/healing the pilgrims and such, so it would be hard to find someone who didn't recognise them.

I actually wasn't aware that they were banished after the battle of Hattin... Where did you find this?


The guards are not trying to attack him in the trailer, they point their sword at him to make him surrender

I'm pretty sure that when they decided to chase him, they had intent to kill or interrogate (which would most likely end in death).

entropy777
11-21-2006, 11:33 PM
<span class="ev_code_GREY">Thank you terminal, you and my insomnia just won me $30.</span><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The enthusiasm of a woman's love is even beyond the biographer's. -Jane Austen, Mansfield Park.

terminalShock09
11-22-2006, 01:39 AM
I'm sure it did. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Bloxham
11-22-2006, 11:08 AM
The Hospitaliers themselves seem to disagree with you.

http://www.conservatoire-larzac.fr/

------------------------------------

c. 1070 Merchants from Amalfi create an hospice at Jerusalem to lodge and treat the sick and pilgrims

1099 Conquest of Jerusalem by the crusaders

1113 The religious Order of the Hospitallers is recognised by Pope Pascal II

1130 - 1140 The Order takes on a military aspect

1187 Jerusalem re-taken by the Muslims. The Hospitallers retreat to Acre

1291 With the loss of Acre, the Hospitallers retreat to Cyprus

1306 - 1309 The Hospitallers conquer Rhodes

-----------------------------

Other sources say they moved toward Acre in 1189. Either way, it appears as though there could have been a Hospitaller presence in 1191 (which is when the game takes place).

Keep in mind Saladin controlled the city from 1187 until it's recapture in 1191. It's possible that a small Hospitaller presence was allowed to remain (since they were healers), but the 1189 date could be just as valid as it's when Guy of Lusignan began HIS siege of Acre - and the Hospitallers may have been coming to assist with this.

Either way - with the recapture of the city in 1191, it's likely many different crusader orders would want to establish a presence in the city: to aid in its reconstruction and benefit from its status as a port city and gateway into the holy land.

Thus it is entirely possible for Hospitallers to have been in Acre in 1191.

Maximus1170
11-22-2006, 02:50 PM
After spend a few hours searching further into what Bloxham said, Ive found that after the seige of Acre, the muslim prisioners were to be ransomed off to Saladin. Richard the Lionheart thought that Saladin took too long with paying the ransoms and decided to kill all the prisoners that hadnt been ransomed. Of course, the muslims didnt agree to this and tried to stop the executions from starting.

This answers two of my questions, what the hospitallers were doing in one of the three cities, and why they werent opposed by the gaurds.

however, it doesnt make sense to me that the Hashashin would be killing the executioners of the prisoners, and not the man who order the prisoners to be killed. And if they were to be killing all the executioners, there would be to many people to kill, and some executions wouldnt be publicized as soon as they figured out that the executioners are being killed.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There are exceptions to everything, nothing is absolute.

terminalShock09
11-22-2006, 09:34 PM
He wasn't just any executioner. A run-of-the-mill executioner wouldn't be able to afford his kind of armor, so he was probably just a high-ranking Hospitaller making a guest appearance at an execution to make a point. Hence his little morality speech to the people.

Bloxham
11-22-2006, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by Maximus1170:
After spend a few hours searching further into what Bloxham said, Ive found that after the seige of Acre, the muslim prisioners were to be ransomed off to Saladin. Richard the Lionheart thought that Saladin took too long with paying the ransoms and decided to kill all the prisoners that hadnt been ransomed. Of course, the muslims didnt agree to this and tried to stop the executions from starting.

This answers two of my questions, what the hospitallers were doing in one of the three cities, and why they werent opposed by the gaurds.

however, it doesnt make sense to me that the Hashashin would be killing the executioners of the prisoners, and not the man who order the prisoners to be killed. And if they were to be killing all the executioners, there would be to many people to kill, and some executions wouldnt be publicized as soon as they figured out that the executioners are being killed.

As was already mentioned, the guy he killed was probably not just some random executioner, but a high profile target who happened to be performing the execution himself. So in this particular scenario the executioner and the person who ordered the execution are likely one in the same.

That said - a public execution is just that - very public. So another possibility is Altair wanted to get the attention of (or send a message to) the person who ordered the execution.

Either scenario seems like it would work.

Maximus1170
11-23-2006, 02:05 PM
Yes, but the hospitallers were healers and they had only taken to arms against muslims in only one major battle. I cant see why any one would feel the need to have a Hospitaller killed, unless opposition from the same relgious side felt threatened by this "high profile target".<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There are exceptions to everything, nothing is absolute.

terminalShock09
11-23-2006, 05:37 PM
The Templars and Hospitallers were known rivals, so I suppose it could be part of the game's conspiracy. Templars infiltrating and switching out targets? Even if it's kind of ridiculous, I guess that the game developers can do whatever they want http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Bloxham
11-24-2006, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by Maximus1170:
Yes, but the hospitallers were healers and they had only taken to arms against muslims in only one major battle. I cant see why any one would feel the need to have a Hospitaller killed, unless opposition from the same relgious side felt threatened by this "high profile target".

This is incorrect.

Here is a brief overview of the Hospitallers as well as a selected bibliography:

http://www.adambennington.com/military_orders/hospitallers.html

Around 1160 the Hospitallers began engaging in military activities to the point where these overshadowed their healthcare operations. They were, and I quote: "involved in almost every major military action undertaken before 1291."

You are likely thinking of the Battle of Hattin (which took place a few years before the events of AC). While certainly one of the more famous battles involving the Hospitaller Knights, it's clearly not the only skirmish they were involved in.

Kryce
11-25-2006, 07:34 AM
aha<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Filesize exceeds the guidelines. Please resize the sig to a maximum filesize of 64 kb - Thanks //zgubilici

Maximus1170
11-28-2006, 02:28 PM
origionaly posted by Bloxham:
They were, and I quote "involved in almost every major military action undertaken before 1291


Between 1160 and 1191, the hospitallers participated in four battles. The battle of Hattin, the battle of Cresson, the seige of Krak des Chevaliers, and the seige of Acre.

i dont think that the seige of Krak des Chevaliers(a Hospitaller Castle)counts as a battle becasue they were protecting their land rather than fighting for or against any religious side.

So they did participate in more than one major battle against the muslims. however i still think that these actions were heavily overshadowed by the military strength of the Kights Templar (who were present in all of the battles except for the seige on Krak des Chevaliers). So even thought the Hospitallers were emerging as a military presence, the major threat was the Templars who already were a major military force that were widely spread throughout the territory.

Cool fact:
On May 22, 1176 the hashashin attemted to assassinate Saladin near Aleppo.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There are exceptions to everything, nothing is absolute.