The Anachronism of 'England' in 'King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword'

Introduction

The term England first appeared as a geographical and political entity around the 10th century, whereas the timeline of King Arthur is generally placed around 500 AD. This presents a significant anachronism in the film King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword, directed by Guy Ritchie. The use of the term 'England' in a pivotal scene has sparked debate among historians, critics, and fans regarding the film's adherence to historical accuracy.

The Historical Context

The choice of the word 'England' in the film reflects its historical context. The film is set in a period when the concept of a unified England was still emerging. The political and social landscape during the time of King Arthur was fragmented, with various tribes and kingdoms vying for power. The Saxons, Britons, Vikings, and other groups coexisted in a complex power dynamic. By using 'England,' the filmmakers may have attempted to capture the essence of a unified land emerging from various warring factions.

Reflection of Arthur's Personal Growth and Broader Implications

Additionally, the use of 'England' in the last scene serves as a pivotal moment in the film, indicating Arthur's personal growth and the broader implications for the future of the realm. This choice reinforces the themes of unity and leadership. As Arthur gains acceptance and recognition from his people, referring to a unified 'England' could symbolize the beginning of a new era of peace and cooperation. This narrative device could be seen as a way to appeal to contemporary audiences by drawing parallels between historical struggles and current societal issues.

Criticisms and Defensive Reactions

Reacting to the anachronism, many critics and viewers have pointed out the historical inaccuracy of using 'England' in the context of King Arthur. Guy Ritchie's Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch are highly acclaimed films in their own right, but his portrayal of Arthur as a Welsh figure has raised suspicions. Some argue that the use of 'England' is a manifestation of the scriptwriters' lack of historical research or their desire to present a more generalized historical setting rather than a specific one.

Others, however, defend the movie by asserting that the filmmakers deliberately chose a more abstract term to reflect the fluidity of the period. Some even argue that such liberties are typical of Hollywood adaptations of mythological figures and that inaccuracies are to be expected. The debate highlights the balance between creative liberty and historical authenticity in filmmaking.

Conclusion: A Critical Look at Historical Accuracy in Hollywood

The anachronism of using 'England' in the film King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword sparks a broader discussion about the importance of historical accuracy in Hollywood adaptations of mythological and historical figures. While some see it as a creative choice, others argue that it detracts from the film's credibility and the intellectual integrity of the source material. This debate illustrates the ongoing tension between historical accuracy and cinematic storytelling.

Further Reading

For more detailed discussions on historical accuracy and the role of anachronisms in film, refer to academic articles and books on historical film analysis, such as Filming History: The Art of Historical Film Analysis by Peter C. Rollins and Film and History: An Introduction by Barry Reiss and Gerald L. Brabham.