Is Excalibur the ultimate pleb filter?

Absolutely love it. Nicol Williamson IS Merlin.

The armour in Excaliber was anachronistic with certain exceptions.
The History of Arthur and the time period is sort of fuzzy, and nobody realy knows what kind of armour Arthur and his knights would have been wearing.
I always thought Mordred’s helmet and Armour looked ridiculously out of place, but a helmet and breastplate of that type might have actually been worn during that period as Parade, Gladiator, or ceremonial armour of some type, and I wouldn’t put it past a soldier to continue wearing something like that in battle for psychological reasons.
Otherwise, the type of plate armour was late Medievel period armour.
Roman plate armour, or Anglo Saxon chain mail, or Central Asian style chain mail/ plate armour would likely have been more realistic.

Attached: B6F87880-045A-4727-9AE3-7F7937990E57.jpg (580x326, 27K)

The Crosby Garret helmet is an example of the type of helmet similar to the Mordred helmet.
As are the Newstead and Ribchester helmets.

Attached: 1CFB641E-E7EA-40E7-9499-A8B64554CCF4.jpg (800x1128, 108K)

nobody knows if arthur was even real my man, or in what time he lived

It's not a historical film. Mordred's armor fits his image. He is like a romantic painting come to life.

There was likely at least One person called Arthur, and the battles are likely based on historical battles that happened, although it’s possible more than one individual’s stories got combined into the Arthur legend.
As for time period, 500AD give or take seems to be the general time period.

It's not really a movie. It's theater recorded on film.

Historical accuracy is for plebs

The people who wrote the original poems and stories didn't give a fuck. There's literally a poem portaying Orpheus as a medieval knight from that same literary tradition. The symbolism is what matters, not how the characters are portrayed.

I’ve always wondered if Julek Heller did illustrations for the production design in Excaliber, although the bios of him I can find don’t list him working on the film.
He was working for the BBC before Excaliber was made though, and he did visualizations for King Solomon's Mines 1983 after.

Attached: 1694FFF6-8CED-4AA2-9673-88C6C89A0007.jpg (848x1226, 277K)

why did artie an hero himself

But the Romans actually had garish armour of this type.

were brits truly such barbaric goblins to the point they left nothing from that era to decipher?

British has a wet humid climate, and mice and rats, so old historical documents on parchment don’t survive well, with certain exceptions, such as being recopied.
If Arthur was only a king involved in battles in a certain area, rather than all of Britain, then histories that exist from other areas might not mention him.
Egypt for instance had transitional periods with multiple Pharoahs, ruling different areas of Egypt, so not all surviving Egyptians Kings lists are consistent, and some Pharoahs were unkown until their tombs were discovered.
Orally passing down tales of historic figures was also a thing during this time period, amongs the Irish, Britains, and other peoples like the Scandinavian peoples, so if the historic bards killed records would dissapear or get garbled.

The Vikings and Henry VIII together basically destroyed all of Britain's written history.

Yes

Attached: Excalibur (1981).webm (800x450, 1.4M)

HIstorical note.
Ancient Crltic tribes had some custom of depositing weapons and other items in lakes marshes and other bodies of water for ceremonial purposes including burial.

This, Arthur was always an idea, not to be read as some gritty history, and was romanticized from the start.

I will say, I love the medieval periods and can enjoy both depictions that get the armor and architecture etc right, or interpretations that go for a more romanticized, mythical take. Keep in mind they were already romanticizing themselves during their own period, and the French Arthurian romances mixed up any sense of coherent origin or era. I just think that the deep medieval world is really cool which is why I think I enjoy the Rohan parts of the LOTR movies more than the Gondor parts.

But yeah with the elaborate plate armor, you were getting into a period where they had long been romanticizing themselves and a lot of those classic helmet designs etc we associate with knights were actually just ceremonial and for parades and stuff at the end of the medieval period or even already getting into the Renassance. I do like those eras too, and it does work well for depicting a kind of mythological idea of the medieval.

>I love the medieval periods and can enjoy both depictions that get the armor and architecture etc right, or interpretations that go for a more romanticized, mythical take

If this wasn't written clearly, I mean I can appreciate both approaches, more accurate or more mythologized.

Btw though by a more historically-accurate take I don't mean 00s-style 'gritty realism' or Game of Thrones bullshit cynicism. The medieval period was extremely religious and 'magical', a numinous world teaming with significance and beauty. It wasn't some mundane Guy Ritchie world of atheist dudebros with roman haircuts.

>Historical accuracy is for plebs
>t. nigger
Go back to your thread celebrating nigger elves.

People who talk about historical accuracy in medievalism in film rarely are the ones to do it justice though. And if you study the medieval period, you might come to agree that you arguably can get a much more 'truthful' snapshot of that period and its character through an understanding of its beliefs, character, and mythos, than just focusing on class dynamics or something or how dirty the armor looks. Don't get me wrong, I think the village life should look dirty and smelly, and guys should have long stringy heavy metal hair, but there should also be a constant sense of piety and allusion to the beauty of creation. LOTR are absolutely more truthful to the medieval period than Game of Thrones, which has zero understand of the character, values, or aesthetic of those times. Do a cursory study of medieval spirituality, philosophy, and aesthetics, and you'll see how truthful and deeply knowledgeable LOTR is regarding the soul of the medieval, wheres Game of Thrones is more of a reflection of our own times and vacancy of values. It's all materialist cynicism and nihilism. Which had absolutely zero place in the medieval.

Soap was available in the Medieval Period, as well as both before and after it.
Recipes for soap have been found in Egypt, and there are historical mentions thereafter.
Most large towns, and cities would have had soap makers, and rural areas likely would have made their own.
I’m sure there were areas were soap making knowledge wasn’t known, and were the locals might not be wealthy enough to purchase soap routinely from elsewhere, but any place that gad a decent monastery probably had some form of soap for washing clothes and themselves, since simple sosps can be made with animal and vegetable fats and wood ash.
Vinegar would likely have been used for washing clothes which would then be rinsed.
Only desert areas might not have plentiful soap, because they didn’t have enough water, but even there they would wash ghemselves occasionally, and use perfumes when they couldn’t.
Leather is pretty good at not stinking, especially when cured certain ways.