teevee: Rome

[anotheranon]

I know I'm very late coming to the game, but I'm finally seeing HBO's Rome for the first time and am quite enjoying it.

For those even later to the game than I am - it's a historical drama that takes place in Rome after the Gallic War and covers the political/martial machinations between Caesar (military) and Pompey (Senate). A lot of the action is seen through the eyes of two of Caesar's soldiers.

The "making of" feature suggests that this series is what happens when hardcore historians are given a budget - my surface impression is that sets, costumes, social/mores, religion, etc. were researched to within an inch of their lives and presented as accurately as possible, with all the sex, violence, and gore that suggests. Even the two soldiers are based on people mentioned in a historical account of the Gallic Wars. If this is true (and I have my doubts, see below), I have to ask - why aren't more historical movies/tv shows as thorough and good as this? Is it funding, or just skimping on the details to appeal to a wider audience?

But, I'm no expert on Roman history so I'm throwing the question out there (aimed particularly at wcg, but anyone who knows feel free to pitch in): are they getting this right? How much creative license are they taking? I'm particularly curious about the role of women, as Atia and the other female characters seem to have a lot more autonomy/freedom of movement than my high-school level "history of the Roman Empire" suggested.

Comments

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

I guess I'm just surprised to see their freedom of movement and agency - Atia starts divorce proceedings for her daughter in order to free her up for a more advantageous match (I would have thought that the daughter's husband could have stopped the proceedings at any time), the women walk around in the street on their own (or, at least, without male relatives), and Atia has multiple lovers in and out of her bed (admittedly, possibly an anachronistic "sex appeal" to modern viewers).

Maybe I'm conflating Roman attitudes with later Italian restriction of noblewomen (16th century Venice)?

[semmie17.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's what you're doing.

Women were a lot more free in Rome, especially in the later part of the Empire timeline. They were literate, educated, could own property, could advocate for themselves, could purchase birth control and/or abortifacents, and could travel as they liked. When Rome fell in 444, women didn't regain that power until the 1100's, and then lost it again during the so-called "Renaissance" in the 1400's. We've only recently regained that sort of freedom since the 1900's.

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

Interesting...in order to appreciate the accuracies (or not) in this show I'm going to need to reframe where I'm coming from. Can you (and/or WCG) recommend something I might find in the library ("Roman Culture for Dummies")?

[wcg.livejournal.com]

Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities is the best thing you'll find online. It's huge. For a good introduction to Roman culture, I recommend As the Romans Did by Jo-Ann Shelton. There's also the wonderful Masters of Rome series of books by Colleen McCullough, beginning with The First Man in Rome. I could lend you my copies of both books. It'd be a great excuse to meet you finally.

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

I'd be willing to take you up on the loan, but I have no idea when I'd be able to arrange for pick up/drop off, not at least until after the 15th, certainly.

What's your schedule like late March?

[wcg.livejournal.com]

I'll be off work for the rest of this week after today, though I do have to teach tomorrow evening. Next week's a usual work until Thursday, then I'll be working the overnight shift Thursday night into Friday morning. The week after that is spring break at TU, and I'm hoping to get out of the state for a few days of it. Then back to the grind for the rest of the month.

Re: Smith's Dictionary

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

Was just able to peruse the link - this book was first published 1875. I know that the Victorians got a LOT of things wrong about antiquity; does later research bear out what's in this volume?

Re: Smith's Dictionary

[wcg.livejournal.com]

It has its errors, especially with regard to details of law. But it's still considered an authoritative source, and it's certainly the best thing available online.