Kingdom of Heaven review: Historical Inaccuracies and Accuracies: Part 2

www.realcrusadeshistory.com
www.defenderofjerusalem.com
www.helenapschrader.com
Facebook:
/ 220051141405247
Twitter:
/ crusadeshistory
The second installment in Real Crusades History's epic analysis of the movie Kingdom of Heaven. Is the film historically accurate or inaccurate? Find out now! J Stephen Roberts is joined by historians Helena P. Schrader and Paul Copenhagen.

[@williamcooke5627]

This is an excellent and valuable series.

[@RealCrusadesHistory]

William Cooke Thanks Willliam.

[@300warrior300]

few comments about the knights templar costume. Firstly I would say that the main indication of being a knight's templar in this period seems to have been the cloak or mantle, not the surcoat. The surcoat also would have looked more like a monk's habit then a surcoat in this period. Probably with long sleeves. Next I would say that if Guy is supposed to be a templar in this film, he shouldn't be allowed the long flowing hair and the fur trimmed cloak. Both were forbidden by the order.

[@wisdoomoperational9965]

cmon now, scott didnt want to make documentary on that period, he wanted to pass on postmodern man's judgement on those times

[@g0atboy207]

Apart from it being historicly completely inaccurate I'm pretty disturbed that in the film to portray the West as backwards, unhiegenic and stupid they use mentally handicaped characters to represent that. That's pretty disgusting.

[@nrxmonk]

What makes it more disturbing is WHEN the film was released.

[@Thor-Orion]

@@nrxmonkthe Hindenburg disaster?

[@Jeremiah17v9]

An opportunity missed. Accurate & informative upload.

[@mrfrains]

I saw this movie. I can see y it did not come together for me.

[@Strategos300]

Excellent! Excellent! Excellent! You are a major asset for all amateur, and professional, historians alike!

[@patsyk1213]

Thank you, J. Stevens Roberts, for bring to life the history of the Crusades. It is good to separate what really happened from all the false accusations about the admirable Crusades.

[@RealCrusadesHistory]

Patsy Koenig You are very welcome Patsy!

[@monjiaitaly]

Patsy Koenig there was nothing admirable about the crusades.

[@LuffyuzumakiPotter]

***** no there is cleaarly something that was in reality admirable

[@monjiaitaly]

LuffyuzumakiPotter what was it?

[@timothymartin9085]

+monjiaitaly Oh, I dunno, defending innocents maybe? Not ALL the crusades had good intent, and some were manipulative, but the first was certainly with good intent.

[@Sole-Witness]

Great review. Can't wait for the next part.

[@Alva_Lombax]

I have a question, and this is about our protag being Knighted, you said "than the king would pass the land and title to whom he would deem worthy" more or less.... so lets say the king would favor the Protag, even if hes a bastard, would we be able to get such titles and lands by that way ?

[@pl33]

I really enjoy and appreciate your excellent analysis..

[@redneckjack4750]

27:30 Perfect description there by Paul Copenhagen of Spain also there are a number of books on the subject of multi cultural Spain a few I can suggest are called Exotic Nation By Elizabeth Fuchs and another one by Edward Stanton Called Customs and Culture of Spain where he clearly states . " That unlike other Western European Countries who can claim a Teutonic,, Celtic or Latin past none not even Portugal had seven continuous centuries of Islamic presence.This is the great division,the parting of the waters that separates Spanish culture from mainstream the of European history"

[@RealCrusadesHistory]

[@andrewsapia]

Real Crusades History Steven, I was wondering if you get more if I watch the entire ad and or if I click on it and go to the ad page? That is what I have been doing but if it doesn't matter then I would prefer to skip ad.

[@monjiaitaly]

Real Crusades History You are only looking at it from the western view point, so in all your intelligent efforts, you fail.

[@eklektos44]

History is history. What utter postmodern nonsense. Is that you Said?

[@Alemag_]

Thanks, Real Crusade History, for reminding my love for history, which was relegated. Amazing channel.

[@storymaker299]

I think you should have done a crossover with History buffs when he did this movie

[@wasneeplus]

"...Between Saladin and the king we try..." That doesn't sound like those two are contributing to the peace. I don't thing Ridley Scott was trying to say they were.

[@esburnside]

don't get me wrong, I love this channel, but... This was either heavily edited or pre-planned/scripted. Longer is OK. Free flowing discussion, managed somewhat of course, is better. But good stuff.

[@user-ly3rz1lu5w]

I love the story of the Crusader trying to help the praying muslim.

[@Thor-Orion]

33:10 ah yes the scene that would have gotten Baldwin IV excommunicated if he had actually done it in reality.

[@Thor-Orion]

34:06 I knew she was going to mention this, that’s why i said the above comment. You couldn’t just execute Templars because they answered directly to the pope. Furthermore, no king is going to weaken his best fighting force by killing it’s members, they were SO important to the overall defense of Jerusalem that it would be downright lunacy to kill any of them c much less kill like 6-12 of their knights of noble birth and extensive military training.

[@gussetma1945]

Catholic doctrine allows lethal force in self-defense or in defense of others. This is same doctrine we have currently.

[@bassault]

9:05 "second sons", this is proven false. Everyone from anywhere went on a crusades, not particulary second sons.

[@DEATH-THE-GOAT]

About Messina, I still believe stone buildings was plastered.

[@MeneerAanvalsbeer]

First of all: great video, I think it is good to know even minor inaccuracies about modern films. However, there are some points to where I disagree. The general lack of mediaeval mentality can be attributed to the fact that characters need to be relatable to the audience for films to be successful. However, the non-mediaeval mentality of the knight hospitaller can be perfectly explained. I theorised this myself before actually finding out it is true, but both Ridley Scott and the producer of the film saw the knight hospitaller as an angel or an entity. This would mean that he would have a far 'wiser' or 'better', more accepting understanding of God and Christianity. Even if you don't choose to see him as an angel, it could still be that some highly intelligent individuals have their own, alternate opinions. As you say he is devoted to religion as he is a hospitaller, one can argue that he is actually devoted to other purposes of the knights hospitaller, like protecting pilgrims and serving hospitals etc. All that said, the director's cut is a lot better and makes the characters far deeper. Also, an example of European technological superiority, even in agriculture, like mentioned in episode one: when Balian becomes lord of Ibelin, he transforms the place from a dusty, poor place, to a well-tended, fertile and prosperous land with water supply and everything.

[@RealCrusadesHistory]

Glad you liked the review. I just don't see the view espoused by the Hospitaller as anything inherently higher. It represents a postmodern bias that I have no doubt that most medieval people would have considered vile and base. I see no reason to consider present day views any more valid than medieval ones. After all, moral views change over the centuries, who are we to say that a moral view is better simply because it is held today? I think it's very possible to give a character a medieval attitude and still make them someone a modern audience can relate to. Novelists do it all the time. There are many historical novels which portray accurate medieval views of the world and yet the characters are very likable. Scott is simply not interested in the Middle Ages, dismissing them as backward and wicked. He has no interest in portraying a medieval story, he just wants to preach his own personal political and moral views through characters wearing medieval costume.

[@MeneerAanvalsbeer]

Well said, sir. I agree, morals etc change over time and it's a matter of opinion which is better. I do agree a lot with mediaeval perspectives, especially those of the 12th century. I did a presentation once on how I believe life in the 12th century was better than now. Although I won't go into detail now, I believe with all the superficial and commercial mess of today, life was generally more real and beautiful back then. The biggest counter argument people have for this is that people died a lot more and the average age at death was around 30-40 I believe, but 30-40 years is already old, it's just our conception of age today, with people on average becoming a lot older, that we see 30-40 as very young to die. Also, I do agree the church could be corrupt and not accepting enough perhaps, towards other beliefs, but the church also supplied shelter, food, hospitals etc. Anyway, I could talk about this for years but the comment section is probably not the right place for that.

[@RealCrusadesHistory]

Tomaz van der Merwe What I find interesting about the medieval perspective is that virtue was prized above things like comfort. Medieval people tended to think it was more important to demonstrate a heroic virtue than it was to be comfortable. Also, I appreciate the boldness with which medieval people asserted their views. The Crusaders were willing to march into Jerusalem and impose their will on it with no apologies. There's just something kind of refreshing about that in our age of political correctness. In our world, we're always so concerned about offending people, trying not to rock the boat, etc, and doesn't that seem a little milk toast? The medieval world was one of passion, vigor, and intensity. Not saying I would want to live back then, I do love our health care system these days! But it's worth admiring from a distance. Thanks for the interesting discussion my friend, take care.

[@MeneerAanvalsbeer]

Good discussion indeed. And I agree, what you describe is what I mean with the general more reality of life. I especially like the Norman ideals.

[@daemonad]

Real Crusades History You have stolen thoughts from my mind, and for that I will have to buy your book :) PS. Regarding slave ownership by Christians. I cannot speak for western Europe but in Hungary during the reign of the crusader King Andrew II (1205-1235), a complaint has been brought to pope that Muslims and Jews in the employment of the king owned Christian slaves. The Holy Sea expected the King to renounce his non-christian advisers and forbid them to own Christian slaves. This was only reinforced years later when some of these non-Christian dignitaries supposedly advised the king to seize the property of the archbishop of Esztergom haha.

[@turningundead]

just bought this movie on blue ray.... why!!!!

[@bassault]

The siege scene is pretty badass.

[@thehussarsjacobitess85]

Giovanni Llerena Well, that's one good thing about the film. It provides beautiful footage for all the lovely crusade-themed videos on youtube. :)

[@Gabriel-di9uq]

+turningundead Its still one of my favorite movies. I love the scenery and music.

[@vitorfaster3577]

30:04 The right would be, his Religious and Moral view points, not medieval, for the Christian Faith no just religiosity, but too a way to life, and it is is not tied to a certain era, the True Good and God fearing Christian of today is no different from the one of the middle ages, just look to Christian Saints of today and from the past, Saint Francis and Padre Pio, for example, they've managed to reach to the totality of the True Faith, that was not only the Adoration (not veneration), life of praye, but indeed too the care with the poor, love, forgiveness and to see that we are not made for this world, nor for it's passions, but that we all should live humble and moderate lives, with the total recognition of the prominence of our only Lord God, Jesus, over any question and decision.

[@richarddixon4303]

Bot account

[@Catonius]

Free burgers?! Yum! yes, I know.

[@davidanderson669]

You say "pure fiction" as if it's murder and mayhem.

[@Oscar51169]

Guys it's a story, a movie, an adventure, not a documentaire. It is fiction. Oh...if Guy is a Templar, can he marry?

[@wkvalader]

+oscar de Boer The point is that a lot of people watch this movie and see it as fact. The director also imposes this movie through his own lens of anti-western sentiment. It is common in Hollywood and in far left leaning circles.

[@N00bsNxtDoor]

I know this is a year late, but when I was in high school we were showed the film in a history class. Keep in mind, I am from the south where more people are religious and more accepting towards defending the Crusades. We were taught it as fact, even though it was historically inaccurate even here.

[@richarddixon4303]

1 comment in 14yrs bot account

[@richarddixon4303]

​@@N00bsNxtDoor1 comment in 13yrs

[@judithpeters9352]

who are you to disect the kingdom of heaven.

[@nemo0036]

+Judith Peters Someone with the will and intellect to do so.

[@eklektos44]

Is it sacred or something? What a silly question.

[@raphmaster23]

Oh idk perhaps a channel called Real Crusades History might have some skin in the game on clearing up some Hollywood misinformation in a movie about the crusades.

[@richarddixon4303]

All 4 comments are done by bots with 1 to 5 comments on accounts as old as 15yrs