Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Mistakes In Hbo's Rome


spittle

Recommended Posts

[This isn't really related to any of the mentioned questions..but I have a question of my own:

WHEN IS THERE GOING TO BE A MOVIE?!??!?!?

 

Have a look at this IMDB link . . . http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057918/

 

 

 

 

:naughty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 2 years later...

HBO is showing the first season again and and it's hard to resist nit-picking.

 

Aside from calling Servilia a Iunius (her father was a patrician Servilius Caepio - much more important than her husband - a plebian Iunius Brutus) and Atia a Julia (although her mother was Caesar's sister, her father Atius wasn't even a senator. And she married an Octavius who was at least a senator but no big whig, and later a Marcius Phillipus who was at least a consular.) They treated the Augers oddly. These priests were not a separate sect outside the mainstream that had to be influenced by secret negotiations, but were elected from the main players in the state. In fact Antonius and Pompey were Augers, and Caesar, as Pontifex Maximus, was responsible for their supervision.

Edited by Pompieus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well, there is bound to be inaccuracies in historical series or dramas. I just sit back and enjoy it for what it is - entertainment with a historical flavour.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 8/12/2014 at 5:34 PM, Pompieus said:

They treated the Augers oddly. These priests were not a separate sect outside the mainstream that had to be influenced by secret negotiations, but were elected from the main players in the state. In fact Antonius and Pompey were Augers, and Caesar, as Pontifex Maximus, was responsible for their supervision.

Yes and no; I think they (correctly) showed Cicero lurking among the augurs, but the whole business of auspication was a travesty. The question of whether the PM supervised augurs is rather thorny; Mommsen thought so, but Jerzy Linderski states in the beginning of his article on the augural law in ANRW that pontifices took care of sacra and augurs of auspicia, and that was that. Further, R. E. A. Palmer argues in "The Deconstruction of Mommsen on Festus 462/464, or the Hazards of Interpretation," in Imperium sine fine: T. Robert S. Broughton and the Roman Republic (F. Steiner, 1996), pp. 75-101, that Mommsen's reconstruction of the source was wrong: it was not an augur but a reluctant choice for flamen Dialis whom the PM tried to discipline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...