Assassin’s Creed is a series of video games that take place in the past and are based on actual historical eras and events.  Assassin’s Creed: Origins, the newest game in the series, is a prequel to all of the other games and its story is set in ancient Egypt. The story line is all about finding and killing corrupt people who are in highly powerful positions. The virtual landscape and scenery encountered when playing the game is mind blowing and actually makes the player feel as if they have gone back in time. There are many parts of this game that are accurate, but there are also many parts that were made up for the enjoyment of the player.

When it comes to accuracy, this game hits the mark. It’s packed full of famous landmarks, real Egyptian religion, and certain events that actually took place in ancient Egypt. There was a lot of research and consultation with historians in order to make sure that the game was actually historically accurate. The map, in which the player has the freedom to travel wherever they wish, is full of actual landmarks such as the pyramids of Giza, the sphinx, the Nile river, and even some of the major cities in Egypt. The clothing, transportation, weapons, and the architecture all accurately represent the time period in which the game is set. The Egyptian gods have a large representation throughout the game, as they were a huge part of everyday life in ancient Egypt.

Although the game is historically accurate, for the most part, there are also some additions to the game play that were added to be more entertaining for the player. While the Egyptians did believe in the Egyptian gods, there were no actual interactions with deities, but the game has a few parts where the main character does have actual contact with a deity. Along the same lines, there is also an aspect of the game called “eagle vision” which allows the player to scout the land around him by seeing through the eyes of the main character’s pet eagle. When it comes to weaponry, while most weapons are accurately represented, the hidden blade is a fictional device. This is the main weapon that is used throughout the series, but there are no actual instances recorded of anyone really using a hidden blade strapped to their wrist.

The history that people learn from modern sources, such as video games and movies, isn’t always reliable. These sources have certain aspects that contain accurate representations of the past, but they also contain quite a bit of inaccurate information in order to be more entertaining.

Ancient Greece was not unified in terms of geography or politics. Mountains, waterways, and islands split the region making political alliances somewhat inconvenient. There was never any sense of “Greece” as a country in the ancient world. Instead, Greece was made up of many city-states, or poleis, each independent from the other and possessing distinct ethnicities and cultures. This true ancient Greece doesn’t fit with today’s definition of a nation, and attempting to explain this relationship would drag out a movie for too long. In an attempt to overcome this barrier, filmmakers have often chosen to focus on the battle of Thermopylae, a historical moment in which Greece banded together against Persian invaders. Taking place in 480 BCE, this battle has been remembered in history as a defining moment of the Persian Wars. Films such as 300, The 300 Spartans, and Last stand of the 300 have chosen to focus on Thermopylae itself rather than the war overall, probably because of the notorious reputation of the battle throughout the ages as the “Greek Alamo.” Take the movie 300 for example. This film does not even pretend to be historically accurate. It made no attempt to explain the complex issues faced by the Greek poleis when faced with the Persian invasion. As mentioned previously, since there was no sense of a unified Greece, the act of joining forces would’ve been a daunting task for the Greeks and a difficult concept to explain to a modern audience within the time frame of a film. 300 avoids this issue by removing itself from the war almost entirely, fixating on the Spartan perspective as the main protagonists for the whole battle. This makes for an interesting and clear storyline, easy for an audience to follow, yet the sense of a unified Greece is lost in the process.

Works Cited

“The Success and Failure of Greek History in Film”, http://etc.ancient.eu/culture/greek-history-in-film/

In a world where video games are used to transport a player into a land of fantasy, Assassins Creed Origins manages to deliver a player right into the culture of ancient Egypt in a historically accurate ride. While the notion of the game is to take control of a character during a historical period and murder it’s most notable and infamous figures, the backdrop provides historical relevancy that is unmatched in open world artistic representations of ancient Egypt. Not only does the game seek to recreate many of the decaying monuments, but also the daily lives of many Egyptians in this once great kingdom.

Watching the sunset over the Pyramids, the dozens of recreated and researched Egyptian cities have a bustling daily life with the computer-simulated character performing daily tasks of occupational specialization showcasing the immense social stratification present in the complex society. As you travel through the ancient landscape you experience many perspectives of Egyptian lifestyle from the poorest man to the Pharaoh. While in reality, the divineness of the pharaoh would have secluded almost everyone from viewing his perspective, this adds to the historical relevance. Another aspect that needs to be ignored is the non-existence of “Ki” or the life force present in every Egyptian according to their culture. In reality, the assassin would be committing many crimes that would cause Osiris to sentence his soul to darkness. The video game designers cannot reflect the main character in a negative manner as the gamer would be turned off by the dark interpretation of their actions in the sandbox arena. In true ancient Egyptian society, everyone is subordinate to the pharaoh and disloyalty to his divinity would be a crime against the Gods. In assassin’s creed origins, the main character is placed in many positions to challenge the pharaohs and thus not recognize his divine authority. In a player-centered solo gameplay experience, the player would not be fully satisfied in obeying the Pharaoh’s (Computer Generated figure) authority, especially when they have the power to assassinate almost anyone in the society in their way. Although the divinity is ignored in order to predicate a positive gaming experience, the historical accuracy of the game still remains intact.

As we evaluate history in the class and beyond, the unique perspective that comes with riding down ancient Egyptian streets an observing the way of life to fighting Egyptian soldier utilizing ancient battle techniques, Assassins creed provides a medium for which history is represented fairly. Even though the designers added unrealistic attributes to enhance the video game experience, the historical narratives are kept constant leading to an engaging and immersive ride centered on ancient Egyptian culture.

The 2004 film, Alexander, outlines the life of Alexander the Great. Alexander was the king of Macedonia and one of the greatest warriors in history, who led his men up against the powerful Persian Empire. Throughout his short life, he conquered much of the then known world and went on to build one of the largest empires in history. Many scholars and historians contemplated the historical accuracy of the film by evaluating how the battles were depicted and how the Persians were portrayed.

One of the most accurate parts of the movie was the producer’s depiction of the Battle of Gaugamela. It is evident that they put a lot of effort into attaining authentic weapons and body armor to recreate the battle which emphasized the importance Alexander the Great’s army placed on the use of pikes and spears. The small details when it came to wardrobe and accessories were also accurately representative of the ancient culture of Macedonia.

However, there are many aspects of the film that were not historically accurate. For example, the movie focused much of its time on the Battle of Gaugamela and missed many other important battles that established Alexander’s legacy as a great leader and military general. In addition, the movie’s illustration of the Persians was not factual. The movie made it seem as though the Persians were an easy group to conquer, they appeared to be chaotic and their approach in fighting seemed to be unmethodical. In fact, the Persians were a reputable force that required planning and great skill to defeat.

When producing a historical drama, it is nearly impossible to include every detail of the actual events that occurred. It is up to the creative mind of the producer to pick and choose what to include and what to omit. Often times, producers alter what actually happened because they believe that it is what their audience wants to see. For example, the producer of Alexander believed that people would be more interested in seeing the large Battle of Gaugamela rather than smaller conflicts so they emphasized that battle by adding gory and dramatic scenes. Despite the attraction, I do not believe that watching historical dramas is a good way of examining history because the viewer is unsure of what is historically true and what is just Hollywood “facts”. However, I do believe it is a good way to spark people’s interest in learning about different time periods. But then it is up to the viewer to further research the accuracy of the events depicted.

Stone, Oliver, director. Alexander. Warner Bros, 2004.

Interpretations of Ancient Greece has fascinated society for hundreds of years. The Greeks seemed larger than life with all of their epic stories. This has led to a majority of the literature and films about the era to discuss the great heroes and gods. These films are not expected to be extremely historically accurate due to the fictional nature of the original story. When I looked at the 2014 film depiction of Hercules I did not find much of it to but be proven by facts, but much of it was very plausible. The first aspect that I enjoyed was the idea that all the mythological aspects of the culture were explainable. The movie went through and debunked many of the common myths such as, Hercules was not the son of Zeus, hydras were warriors in lizard masks, centaurs were horseback archers that only attacked at night, and many others. The movie explains how when stories are retold many times, they begin to twist and shape until everyone believes the most dramatic aspect of them.

The tactics and techniques of the army of heroes was also one of the more accurate parts of the movie. The soldiers were heavily reliant on their shields and spears creating a focus toward the shield line. The “good guy” style of warfare was consistent with the historical proof, but the armies of the villains were almost completely wrong. These other armies came with a larger force from an established city but used no armor or shields, and stuck to no formation of battle that would have been typical at the time. The reason the heroes were fighting the enemy was also inaccurate. In the film Hercules was fighting against the ruler of the land who was a “tyrant” and took power away from the people. I believe that all of these events, consistent with history or not, were done to create an easily ingested and convenient  version of history. The intentional disregard for historical accuracy, like the enemy army, was done so it would be very clear who the bad guy was. If people saw Greeks fighting Greeks the image would have not been as polarizing as the action of Greeks fighting barbarian warriors. Similarly it is easy for an audience, especially one from America, to believe that Hercules was fighting for democracy when having a tyrant was actually typical for the time.  Audiences do not want historically accurate movies, they want convenient stories that fit with what they believe.