Talk:Balian of Ibelin

message: It is very unfortunate that someone who is certainly ignorant of medieval law and customs renamed Morgengab as dowry in the article. As Maria Komnena's Byzantine family was in no position to provide the territory of Nablus (in Palestine) as any sort of dowry to any of Maria's husbands, the person should have understood his mistake already on the spot. It is of course clear that Nablus was given by its former owner, a Palestinian. I.e, Amalric I. And because it went eventually to the rule of Maria's second husband, one could have thought of the inconsistency of the first husband giving DOWRY to the second husband. Thus, the person should have understood on the spot that the recipient was Maria herself, and not directly any of her husbands. And, after all these conclusions that require more cleverness than present in some, the person should have understood that it does not fit into the established definition of dowry, which is "from bride's family to the bridegroom".62.78.105.225 14:20, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm sorry, I should have used "morgengab", a word which I had never seen before and doesn't seem to exist in English...Adam Bishop 16:47, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The English word (or rather phrase) is "morning gift," which in principle was a gift given to the wife the morning after marriage as compensation for the loss of her virginity (from whence, supposedly, the term "morganatic", a morganatic wife being compensated solely by the morning gift). And 62.78.*, please be civil to Adam, who has contributed a great number of useful articles and cleaned up a number of your edits. Choess 18:05, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a single English word, and I suspect it may simply have been confused with "dowry", as it's "dower" - a gift from a husband to a wife which she is to retain in the event of her widowhood. A "dower house", for example, is a house on an estate for the proprietor's widow after her children inherit. Silverwhistle 18:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I learn something every day around here. Choess 02:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dowry 

message: In some accounts, at Hattin, Raymond of Tripoli led a breakthrough attempt that failed when Saladin's army simply opened up and let him through. This group was then outnumbered and forced to retreat. Was this the case, or did Raymond simply flee the battle in the manner that the article suggests? Being no expert, I leave it to others to edit (or not, as the case may be) the article, showing Raymond and Balian of Ibelin in a more favourable light.
:No one is really sure what happened there. The only Christian eyewitness source is Ernoul, who was in the rear with Balian. I don't recall what the Arabic sources say...probably what happened is closer to what you mentioned, Raymond tried to break though, but then when they let him pass he didn't stick around to get slaughtered. Does that count as fleeing the battle? But there is also the story of some of Raymond's knights defecting to Saladin, and Raymond's previous alliance with Saladin, so maybe there is more to it. Adam Bishop 03:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ernoul's MS doesn't exist in its original form, but in fragments embedded in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre, all copies of which are from well into 13C, and we can't be sure who wrote which bits originally; so I would be wary of claiming 'him' as an "eyewitness". The reference to him, Raymond and Reynaud of Sidon and "ceteri Pullani" riding over the Christians (and Turks and the Cross) is from the anonymous De Expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum Libellus, which, as Edbury points out, is anti-Polein. And there's the problem of the anti-Polein bias of all the Angevin sources (the Itinerarium, Roger of Howden, Ambroise, & c.) Raymond gets accused of all sorts: no wonder he was utterly broken and died shortly after... Silverwhistle 07:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Hattin 

message: Does that seal say "Ibelirni"? Is that a copying error? Adam Bishop 18:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen a photo of the original of this one. Not sure if it's a copying error, but one does sometimes find odd spellings on seals, and Middle-Eastern placenames did often get mangled as they tried to turn them into declinable Latin! Silverwhistle 18:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Nothing exciting, just "Seal of Balian, lord of Ibelin." Adam Bishop (talk) 00:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seal 

message: The article says that "In 1179, Baldwin was captured by Saladin after the Battle of Jacob's Ford" but the article on Battle of Jacob's Ford says that "they were too late to save the 700 knights, architects, and construction workers who were killed and the other 800 who were taken captive. Baldwin and his reinforcements turned back towards Tiberias". It seems that one of the articles is wrong, isn't it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mablanco (talk • contribs) 20:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It just needs clarification - Baldwin of Ibelin was captured, King Baldwin IV came with reinforcements. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I forgot to sign my previous message. Adam, I've read again the concerning paragraph under the light you've thrown and it's now as clear as water. The paragraph starts talking about both brothers, so maybe there's no need for a clarification. My confusion came from the coincidence of reading both articles one after the other. --Mablanco (talk) 19:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible inconsstency? 

message: The image :Image:Koh balian.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyright problem with Image:Koh balian.jpg 

message: Good level of detail and range of sources but total lack of inline citation prevents an assessment above start class.  If this were tackled, there is a good chance of B or higher.  B class checklist inserted. Monstrelet (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  MILHIST initial assessment