After Christian fighters captured Jerusalem during the First Crusade, groups of pilgrims from across Western Europe began visiting the Holy Land. Many were killed while crossing through Muslim-controlled territory during their journey. Around 1118, a French knight named Hugues de Payens founded a military order along with eight relatives and acquaintances, calling it the Poor Knights of the Temple of King Solomon (later known as the Knights Templar). With the support of Baldwin II, the king of Jerusalem, they set up headquarters on the sacred Temple Mount and pledged to protect Christian visitors to the city.
After facing initial criticism by religious leaders, in 1129 the knights received the formal endorsement of the Catholic Church and support from Bernard of Clairvaux, a prominent abbot. New recruits and lavish donations began pouring in from across Europe. (Though the Templars themselves took vows of poverty, the order could accrue wealth and land.) It was also around this time that the knights adopted an austere code of conduct and their signature style of dress: white habits emblazoned with a red cross.
The Knights Templar Branch Out
Now numbering in the thousands, the Templars established new chapters throughout Western Europe. They developed a reputation as fierce warriors during key battles of the Crusades, driven by religious fervor and forbidden from retreating unless vastly outnumbered. They also set up a network of banks that enabled religious pilgrims to deposit assets in their home countries and withdraw funds in the Holy Land. Along with their donated fortune and various business ventures, this system gave the Knights Templar enormous financial sway. At the height of their influence, they boasted a sizeable fleet of ships, owned the island of Cyprus and served as a primary lender to European monarchs and nobles.
From the execution of the last known Templar grand-master on Friday the 13th Medieval France to Leonidas the Spartan General in the battle of 300 against Persians in Ancient Greece. Accurate research from Ubisoft into these events has taught history to many Gamers worldwide in the best form of fun.
Assassins creed does give a history lessen and it can be educational. But, people will never say that it is educational because it has killing and it is a video game that is not real. However the game is educational the game goes through many snorers through history. Yes they do tweak the real story's a bit but the story still is real. Thanks for your time my name is Logan Louviere.
Assassin's creed is a very history-based game series, with each game tackling a new historical era, event, or time period. The games are obviously based around history, and provide fascinating facts about little-known or widely remembered historical figures. The games also are quite useful for studying before an important test for college or the SATs
I learn history from Assassin's Creed instead in History lesson and from the book. They made it very interesting for people who don't like books. It is more for people who love science fiction, travel back time, history, horror, and fantasy. Very educational for everyone in different age group! I recommend you play or read it !
I've been playing the AC games since they came out, and i will say that this title CAN teach you certain things. My favorite title is Assassin's Creed 3, i happened to learn about the oppression of the Native Americans. There is a part that you get to play as a child, and witness almost your whole tribe get burned alive, just so the white man can have land. Yes the titles get a little out there... It does get most of it correct.
I have been teaching history for 10 years now, and recently one of my lower level students has been doing better work than most of the class. When i asked him about his studying he said:"i havent been studying, ive just been playing assassins creed 2." I remembered playing the game as a child and remembered the occasional italian speech, so i talked to this students language teacher, and said his italian has come significantly far. I think this confirms this
I have been playing Assassins Creed for about 4 years now, and since then, my history class grades have been really good. Yeah it may have a fictional plot, but alot of it is true. I was told by my mom and her boyfriend that all of it is fake, but they haven't sat down and played it or payed attention to it. But still, a lot of it is true. AC3 is the best one.
This game is an immersive experience and is filled with the knowledge and the history of the world of times gone by and people long gone who stand out throughout all of history and they shall never ever be forgotten because they contributed towards the ever-changing human existence and giving their experiences to their own kind
You could rush through the whole game without learning a thing: cancel all videos, don't listen, just do missions and kill people. On the other side, an interested player could watch the cutscenes, read the extra information about all the people, buildings, boats,...
So I would say you CAN learn a lot about history, if you are willing to.
While it is set during historical periods of time, and it even manages to include some historically accurate points in time, the main narrative is about the knights templar and a cult of assassins waging a war lasting centuries. It also includes notions that humans were created by an alien race, and that there's an orb which has the power to save the world from destruction. If you think that's historical accuracy at it's finest, what are you smoking and where can I find some? It sounds awesome.
They ofcourse have their own historian who makes sure that to a certain degree, their games are actually showing historical events.
But these people have to write an entire story each 2 years of an entirely new period. We cannot expect them to do all necessary research.
For example, Machiavelli is considered a famous and good person, so they make him an assassin. The Borgia are considered evil, so they make them templars. Unfortunately, the historian hasn't even read Machiavelli's "Il Principe" and missed the fact that Machiavelli was supporting the Borgia and praised them whenever he could.
I'm not a medieval expert, but I'm sure similar mistakes have been made all along. For example, the deaths of certain characters are contradictory to history just so the player would be able to defeat the bad guy personally.
In AC II, they were decent enough to let Roderigo Borgia live but you still got to beat him up. How is that historically accurate? Blackbeard died while getting his head cut off and being captured. His enemies triumphed. In AC IV though, no mention is made about this heroic victory and instead, Edward Kenway even saves his own men and defeats all enemy ships.
PRO argues that it does teaches SOME history, to a certain degree. In order to actually teach history, it should stick with the facts and not alter history even one bit. I know it is hard to do such a thing, but making Lorenzo De' Medici seem like less of a tyrant is wrong. There are points where it did not matter for the templars-assassins storyline, but they still altered history.
Lastly I would like to add that it does provide a slight start for someone to gain interest in an era. Children will know about terms as "Boston tea party" and "Boston masacre" thanks to AC.
Unfortunately though, they will picture it entirely wrong and unless they take their time to look it up, even the descriptions in the sequence menu thing do not provide the actual historical truth.
I am also very afraid that they make history too black & white, for example, IF they do the napoleontic era, either the French or the English will become the evil templars and the other side the good assassins. History is not like that. It would be wrong if thanks to this series, people would think of the actual medieval templars as "evil, bad persons".
My personal conclusion?
Don't use this to teach yourself history. It is only there as an arousal for your interest.