How accurate is the historical portrayal in “The Crown”?
"The Crown", created and primarily written by Peter Morgan, is indeed based on real events from Queen Elizabeth II’s reign. However, it is important to remember that it's a dramatic work of fiction, not a documentary. The series blends fact with creative conjecture to service the narrative, including imagined conversations and relationships. Specific events like the Great London Smog of 1952, the Profumo scandal, Winston Churchill's stroke, and the Aberfan disaster are accurately represented in the series. Most of the characters and incidents represented do exist or did happen, but always verify from a historical point of view before accepting them as completely true. For example, one of the show's more controversial deviations from historical accuracy is the depiction of a close relationship between Queen Elizabeth and Lord Porchester (or "Porchie"), implying a potential romantic connection. In reality, there is no evidence supporting these implications and it has been strongly denied by the Royal Household. Also, the portrayal of Prince Philip as strongly opposed to Prince Charles's investiture as Prince of Wales in 1969 is another scene often cited as purely fictional. Furthermore, some characters may be exaggerated or their characteristics amplified for dramatic effect, like Prince Philip's mother, Princess Alice, or the Duke of Windsor's attachment to Nazi Germany. In the end, while "The Crown" is an excellent show that gives viewers an opportunity to understand and appreciate British royal history, I encourage viewers to separately read about the events and personas being portrayed to get a more accurate historical perspective. Remember that at the end of the day, it is a work of fiction inspired by true events, not an historical documentary.