if lord of the rings is set in anglo saxon england how acuractely is it represented in the flims?

Question

please use common sense when answering the question i assume orcs and dark lords as a great eye didnt exist. what i want to know is are things such as the architecture people and costumes accurately represented

Answer 1

the author was from Birmingham and took inspiration fromlocal scenery.

Soon after in 1896, they moved to Sarehole (now in Hall Green), then a Worcestershire village, later annexed to Birmingham.[7] He enjoyed exploring Sarehole Mill and Moseley Bog and the Clent Hills and Lickey Hills, which would later inspire scenes in his books along with other Worcestershire towns and villages such as Bromsgrove, Alcester and Alvechurch and places such as his aunt's farm of Bag End, the name of which would be used in his fiction.[8]


we don't have those big mountains like in the film!

Answer 2

The Lord of the Rings is set in Tolkien's fantasy land, Middle Earth.

J. R. R. Tolkien was born in South Africa, but lived as a child outside Birmingham. Some of his ideas were taken from the countryside there.

Perhaps more importantly, Tolkein was Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford: few people realise that if he had never written any fiction Tolkien would still be remembered in academic circles for his pioneering work in understanding the roots of our language, for instance his translation of the Anglo-Saxon epic poem "Beowolf".

Tolkien develop the fantasy language which is a feature of the Hobbit" and "Lord of the Rings" from his unrivalled knowledge of Anglo-Saxon and Norse languages. This involved his immersion also in Norse mythology about creatures like orcs and trolls. So the books, whilst fictional, are a close reflection of Anglo-saxon and Norse mythology.

So far, I have answered about the book. I doubt if the films are such an accurate reflection. Firstly, the architecture is not at all representative of the period because much of it is stone, whereas the Anglo-saxons and Vikings overwhelmingly used wood (but some of this inaccuracy is due to fantasy paintings by Tolekien that the film took account of). I suspect that many of the costumes also relate to a later middle age period rather than Anglo Saxon times. I doubt whether such Norse paintings of dragons etc. relate at all closely to the film, which uses (and develops) modern conventions of what monsters and fantasy figures should look like. Finally, the New Zealand scenery is not really like that in England or Scandanavia in the first Millenium AD.

Answer 3

The Lord of the Rings was not set in Anglo-Saxon England. It is a mythical land created by Tolkien about a mythical time. He used many elements from different sorts of places in time. He was not trying to represent Anglo-Saxon England, but the fight between good and evil, so the places, the costumes, the architecture are the works of his own imagination, but most surely shaped somewhat by his own knowledge of the world, and he lived in a country with a long history and lot of architecture, old stories, and myths.

Answer 4

I think the author based most of the Stories characters on Norse mythological characters so it would make sense to set the story in Anglo-Saxon England. To be honest I don't know how accurate the film represents that as the film was shot in New Zealand but you probably knew that. I would say that the armor is a little of for the Human warriors since warriors in the Anglo-Saxon time period didn't have Plate armor.

Answer 5

Contrary to what some people have said:

1. The Lord of the Rings was written in the 1930s-1950s, not in the late 1800s.

2. He didn't base the topography on New Zealand in the slightest. That's where the films were made, because the topography is so beautiful and unspoiled, and they wouldn't have to keep rubbing out telegraph poles.

3. People seem to be confusing the design of the films with Tolkien's intentions. Tolkien died in 1972(?) and had absolutely no involvement in the design of the films; therefore it is totally wrong to give the impression that anything in the film equates to how Tolkien visualised it. Admittedly, I'd be surprised if, were he alive, he would be at all unhappy with what Peter Jackson did; but please don't think that the films are in any way "Tolkien's" visualisation of Middle Earth.

Answer 6

LOTR was set way before the anglo saxons, its completely 100% fictional. The costumes are similar to what may have been used in the saxon times, maybe slightly more advanced, but the buildings are far to advanced to resemble anglo - saxon architecture. JRR Tolkien wrote the book in the late 1800's and he took many ideas from many different times in history for example in the 'The return of the King' the palace where the King of Gondor returns to had a roman feel to it, with the statues and the marble. So it is possible that at some points in the film there are characteristics of anglo - saxon living.

Answer 7

It isn't set in Anglo-Saxon England. Tolkein was a professor of the Anglo-Saxon language. Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit were heavily influenced by texts dating from this time, such as Beowulf.
The Shire was inspired by the countryside of Staffordshire, as Tolkein supposed it to be prior to the Industrial Revolution.

Answer 8

Very little is known of the first several hundred years of the Anglo Saxon era as the invaders where illiterate so no records where kept.

As for the depiction in the film I would say it was correct .
Architecture was being destroyed due to the warfare but what was left standing was churches as they where made from stone.

Costumes looked very authentic and accurate.

Answer 9

The Lord of the Rings is meant to be the human history of pre-historical Europe. Obviously it's fantasy but dear old J.R.R considered that Europe and in particular Britain's colourful and varied myths and legends were a tad boring.
He therefore decided to invent his own detailed myths and legends complete with languages, customs, civilisations and races.
Tolkien tells us that the age of Elves is coming to an end and the age of Man is beginning, ie. our own documented history. So the book takes place before then.
Much of his other work concerning middle-earth does in fact read like something you would have in your ancient history textbook at University. The Illiad for instance.
Tolkien himself and the film in particular relies on imagery from as far back as civilisation goes in Europe. Exactly the time you have mentioned. However, in Tolkiens fantasy time he can take imagery from any era he chooses and even change it. So some things will be accurate, others just fantasy.

Answer 10

It isn't set in anglo-saxon england, it's set in a make believe land called middle earth. The strength and motivation of characters are much more important than the costumes in the book, just as the portrayal of the eye in the film is in tune with the terror of the concept and description in the novel.

Answer 11

The Hobbits, and their land the Shire, were based upon rural England. They had many of the same customs and the same character. In fact, life in the shire was almost identical to that of rural England in some ways, for instance the language and culture.
Akin the people of rural England the Hobbits were said to be unconcerned about life outside the shire, and most had never left it, which harks back to the days, even less than a century ago, when many village people would only ever stray a few miles from their birthplace in their entire lives. The name the 'Shire' itself is the old word for county; hence why we ave 'Hampshire', 'Buckinghamshire', etc, etc.

The Rohirrim were based mainly on the Anglo-Saxons of old; Tolkien was a scholar of Germanic history, and he used this knowledge when writing about them. The names and many details of their culture are in fact derived from Scandinavian-derived cultures, particularly that of the Anglo-Saxons and their Old English language. Again, their culture and customs are very similar to that of the Anglo-Saxons; even the way they dress is taken from those times.