Hbo Rome and... BBC too

[Jordon Harriman]

Two things that slightly bother me about the series: (1) It has thirteen people with "producer" in their title. That just seems obnoxious to me. (2) It is a series about ROME, but the copyright date is not in Roman numerals. The same thing irked me about "Gladiator," which should have used "MM" for its copyright date.

[longbow]

Does any one know what the BBC's involvement in the show is?Theres been very little publicity for Rome in England,i think i've read about it in one newspaper article, but thats about it.The article mentioned its the most expensive BBC drama at

[Favonius Cornelius]

I don't know for sure, but there a quite a few English folk in there. The series has a distinct I Claudius flavor to it as well.

[Denec]

Did anyone watch last night episode?

 

 

I am still reading the book "history of rome" by Michael Grant so have not got up to this part yet.

 

What I am curious about did Mark Anthony ever ponder not joining up with Julius? Or was this something they just threw in?

[Primus Pilus]

They do seem to be taking liberties with some political stances for the sake of entertainment value, but nothing they have presented should be considered an impossibility.

 

They have to play some games with historical continuity to make it all fit (ie they never mention Caesar going to Spain) and the 'disloyalty' of Antony idea might have been presented as a bit too much too soon. There has always been speculation regarding Antony and his motives especially towards the end of Caesar's life (some have suggested his distant involvement in Caesar's assassination, although his behavior afterwards would not indicate that). We do know his political actions while Master of Horse as Caesar was in Egypt and immediately following Caesar's death were brazen, boisterous and largely incompetent. Building up this aspect of Antony's rather unscrupulous behavior is entirely reasonable, though the 'disloyalty' factor seems to have been given too much weight. imo.

[Skarr]

To add to the discussion, I think Caesar trusted Antony especially during this period and there is no reason to believe that Antony was not completely devoted to Caesar at this point in time.

 

I do think that he may had some doubts later, particularly after his failure to meet Caesar's expectations while he was "Master of the Horse". After all, he was supposed to be acting for Caesar while he was away and was in fact, supposed to be doing things as if Caesar himself were there in Rome. This is something that Antony probably brushed aside as he had some blind confidence in his own abilities as a statesman, thinking it of no account to deal with the senators who wished Caesar ill. I guess he learned the hard way that it was much more difficult to manage people in peace than on the battlefield, where clear tactics could be planned to defeat the enemy.

 

Antony was primarily a soldier and a brilliant one, at that. However, he could not grasp the complexities of dealing with various senators and the subtleties involved in the different relationships, something that Caesar grasped almost instinctively. Lacking patience or the understanding to negotiate with the senators, he resorted to his favorite method of settling disputes, through violence, something he clearly understood well. I do think he was tempted a few times to lash out openly against Caesar but in the end, I think he remained faithful to Caesar and one could possibly accuse him of obtuseness as someone more perspicacious and more aware of the political nuances and feelings in Rome would have been more vigilant around Caesar and maybe, even have prevented the assassination of his dear old friend and comrade.

[Violentilla]

I'm new, hope it's okay to jump in. My studies have had more to do with the Religio than history, but watching this series has made me rethink that. I want to know what really happened as well as enjoy this show.

 

So here's a most likely stupid question. Was the peninsula called Italy back then as they do in the show? I always thought it wasn't called Italy until the unification, that each province called itself by name.

 

Can someone explain the whole idea of crossing that creek as a point of no return? Why was the law written that way? Surely generals and their armies crossed it as they went out and returned from foreign battle? I'm just confused.

 

I have read on Roman marriage ceremony, and I guess I assumed it was a binding thing when I read about the rite, but marriages seem to be cast hither and yon in Rome, according to politics and social climbing. Was there nothing binding in the early period regarding marriage? I'm not looking at it from a Christian perspective, I'm just curious how a woman would deal with children of other husbands, that sort of thing. Why get married at all?

 

V.

[Primus Pilus]

I'm new, hope it's okay to jump in.

 

Absolutely... please do!

 

So here's a most likely stupid question. Was the peninsula called Italy back then as they do in the show? I always thought it wasn't called Italy until the unification, that each province called itself by name.

 

'Italia' had roots as an individually name region dating back to the origin of the Itali people. Its incorporation into a single 'province' is a rather long evolution, involving several forms of government and classification. Augustus officially made Italia a single 'province' like area broken into 11 smaller districts, but the name Italy had roots dating back for centuries. Generally before this people would refer to the regions based on the dominant tribe or city of that area... Latium (Latin), Samnium (Samnites), Etruria (Etruscans) etc.

 

A very brief overview Italia

 

Can someone explain the whole idea of crossing that creek as a point of no return? Why was the law written that way? Surely generals and their armies crossed it as they went out and returned from foreign battle? I'm just confused.

 

Quite simply it was the border between Cisalpine Gaul (Gaul this side of the Alps) and 'Italy'. Generals only had imperium within their own provinces and weren't allowed to cross without special permission. Armies entering the province to protect Rome from an invader and armies returning for special invited triumphal marches were perfectly acceptable, but crossing with the intention of seizing power (ie Sulla and Caesar) was an entirely different matter. Armies crossed borders all the time for various purposes. The reaction to these activities depended entirely on the political environment, the reason for the crossing, and who was in command.

 

Why get married at all?

 

I'll let someone else handle the bulk of the social question here... but essentially marriage created alliances societal bonding and perhaps above all... an encouraging arrangement for continued procreation and the preservation of Rome.

[Ursus]

Marriage for the upper classes was a socio-political alliance of families, and a way to produce an heir to carry on the family name.

 

For the lower classes, marriage was probably mostly needed to have extra hands to work around the farm or family business. Although as both agriculture and industry came to be taken over by large companies using slave labor, the need for procreation lessened. Indeed, for the urban proletariat out of work and living on bread and circuses, children would be seen just as more mouths to feed. In the late Republic the birthrate dropped dramatically. Social conservatives like Augustus tried to promote a return to marriage and children, but the results were mixed at best.

[Violentilla]

Thanks for the quick answers!

 

So it wasn't the crossing of the Rubicon, but the intent behind it, that makes much more sense.

 

I've got a lot to read around here!

[Moonlapse]

What I'm wondering is how did they find an actor to play that well endowed slave? And who was the person that gift wrapped it? Is that something you list on your acting resume?

[Violentilla]

That was a latex falsie cock. I could tell, trust me.

 

It actually looked a lot like the one in Boogie Nights, but I'm sure it was a different one!

[Primus Pilus]

I suppose that's easier than putting out a casting call for 'well-endowed' men.

[Moonlapse]

That makes sense. I was actually just discussing the Boogie Nights job with someone lol.

 

I suppose that's easier than putting out a casting call for 'well-endowed' men.

 

Ahhh, but that would have been more comical. Its a shame to think that it didn't happen. Now I've dragged the thread into the toilet!! WEEEEE

[Guest Phallus Maximus]

Thank you HBO for making my investment in Dish Network's High-Definition service pay off every week. It is far better quality technically than most in-theater films, and the camera operators really know how to use depth of field and lighting well. The 5.1 Dolby is very well done, but my wife complains that the sound effects shake the rafters at a volume we can barely hear the dialog.

 

Was sex always without love and love subordinate to politics and expediency in Rome?