The Roman army never took commands from the pope. The film conflates Roman Christianity from antiquity with the Holy Roman Empire of the Middle Ages, giving the Catholic Church way more power and legitimacy than it should've had. Lancelot and the others are also said to be Sarmatians, but Sarmatia was controlled by the Byzantine Empire at the time, not the Western Roman Empire. The armor they wear is also from the wrong time period (Arthur shouldn't be dressed like Julius Caesar) and their use of different weapons would not have been allowed if they were conscripts of the very uniform Roman army. Guinevere also mentions that she was tortured with machines, but torture devices were a product of the Middle Ages and didn't exist in the ancient Rome. Christians also had no power in Britain at the time, meaning that the people who were holding Guinevere wouldn't have existed.
Guinevere and her people are Picts (not Woads, so I have no idea why they call them that), based on the blue paint they wear. However, Picts are native to Northern Britain around Scotland (like Braveheart). Not only did the Romans never get that far up, the Picts never went far south enough to reach Hadrian’s Wall; which was not being used like that by the end of Roman occupation. Picts and Romans also never fought together, especially not to fend off Saxons. Picts also didn't use trebuchets, which hadn't been introduced to Europe yet.
I could keep going, but I feel like I've ranted long enough. I give King Arthur an F for historical accuracy. If you're hoping to learn about British history from this film, I'm afraid all it will do is confuse you.
Indeed - history is rather slippery in this film! Some of the points you mention are things we might need to clarify, though! ;-)
ReplyDelete