Medieval England. Which movie got it right?

[MaDuce]

Here's something interesting for you.

We'll look at 3 medieval movies (unfortunately just the trailers) and see which of them accurately depicted the medieval period.


#1. Braveheart.
Mel Gibson's famed historical epic.

#2. Robin Hood
The newer Russel Crow movie said to be the first shot giving us Robin Hood with great historical accuracy.

#3. A Knight's Tale
A family comedy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClNPiTjo808

Compare them to the attached real contemporary medieval pictures of England and France.

Well, let's start with what all 3 got right. People had swords. Also, peasant clothing seams to be consistent with reality in all 3 though I wouldn't call this anything special as you have plenty of room to be creative here.

Braveheart shows soldiers in Lamellar. As the pictures show, there's reason to suggest that the Normans may have used it to that extent but by the late 1200s and 1300s European armor was undergoing a transition to plate armor. Because of the transitional time Braveheart was set in, it's not beyond plausibility that they were using lamellar to that extent but I think the more likely reality is that armor was a much more mixed bag for both sides. Also, the real William Wallace probably looked more like the King Edward of the movie while the real King Edward was; by all accounts, an exceptionally tall and imposing figure.

Robin Hood DOES seam to do a decent job of depicting rural medieval life. Even better then brave heart. The one thing I though they did surprisingly well at is accurately portraying the personalities of Richard the Lion Heart and Bad King John, at least to the extent of what is known about them.

 But beyond that; both movies badly mess up. I can go on all day about issues with them but the biggest one IMO is simply making medieval society look completely undeveloped. Particularly depicting medieval towns and cities as heaps of mud and feces with a few small huts for homes. Keep in mind there's only a roughly 60 year gap between the time of Braveheart and the time of A Knight's Tale.

While A Knight's Tale is ultimately a comedy, the movie is surprisingly accurate outside of the silly behavior. The armor actually matches medieval pictures of the armor, the structures match, the banquets depict women in similar dress to medieval pictures we have with the elaborate hair styles often seen in medieval pictures. On top of that, the medieval towns and cities appear pretty accurate to the time, especially seeing London with the multi-story apartment complexes and nobility bleachers at sports arenas that we know were there but almost never see in so-called historical movies.

And aside from what we're looking at, the story elements fit surprisingly well in many ways. The movie is set in 1356 as society was recovering from the black death pandemic of which women profited from and saw some changes and relaxation in the social order. The main foe in that movie is; in many ways a pretty classic example of a typical medieval knight, though greatly cleaned up as a fully unrestrained example of a typical medieval knight would have left the movie both R and X rated.

  The Black Prince himself was the sort who preferred to honor men according to their abilities and performance, so it's very conceivable that he would have knighted a peasant who proved his merit. It's actually more suspect that he would use family history (real or fabricated) as justification. BTW. The Black Prince was the first European military commander to effectively use cannons on the battlefield, which he used to help win the battle of Crecy in 1346.

 

 

Ironic isn't it. That people spend so much $ making these super realistic epics that they greatly screw up on yet a family spoof gets it right.

Edited January 22, 2014 by MaDuce

[blue109]

I just finished a book called timeline by Michael Crighton (sp?) About some historians who get stick in the 1300s. Its just scifi, but he tends to be accurate in the details. On of the characters in the book brought up this same observation, that modern movies and even some historical sources really get this period wrong. He shows them being pretty "modern" culturally, as oppose to the Monty python filth farmersmany people envision.

Edited January 22, 2014 by blue109

[MaDuce]

I just finished a book called timeline by Michael Crighton (sp?) About some historians who get stick in the 1300s. Its just scifi, but he tends to be accurate in the details. On of the characters in the book brought up this same observation, that modern movies and even some historical sources really get this period wrong. He shows them being pretty "modern" culturally, as oppose to the Monty python filth farmersmany people envision.

 

Doesn't surprise me at all. Sci fi authors tend to be more in the know. And yes, the 1300s is one of the more misunderstood centuries in history. In many ways the reverse of what people today think.

 

 Funny you mentioned Monty Python though. Terry Jones and I heard (but never saw proof) that one other are actually pretty good historians who tell it like it is outside of the Monty Python films.

 

They say that in the 1300s the English were very similar culturally to present day USA and individual accounts I've read from during the reign of king Richard II seam to suggest that..

Edited January 22, 2014 by MaDuce