Why They Used The XIII Legion

[spittle]

Caesars Tenth is the Legion most associated with G J C. Others, including Legion X, had been with him from the beginning of his Imperator to Gaul. In the past there have been posts pondering why, of all his legions, the makers of HBO's Rome decided to use the thirteenth?

 

When Caesar crossed the Rubicon and entered Rome (the die is cast...) he did so with a single Legion. The Thirteenth. In my opinion that is why the 13th were used from the start.

[Primus Pilus]

When Caesar crossed the Rubicon and entered Rome (the die is cast...) he did so with a single Legion. The Thirteenth. In my opinion that is why the 13th were used from the start.

 

I'm sure that had something to do with it, though whichever way they went, there were going to be historical issues. Pullo and Vorenus were historically from Legio XI, but as you point out, this legion did not cross with Caesar into Italy. However, none of the legions discussed (X, XI or XIII) were with Caesar in Alexandria. A quick breakdown:

 

Legio X - In action throughout the Gallic Wars. Present at Dyrrhachium, Pharsalus, Africa and Munda (Hispania)

 

Legio XI - Recruited for the Helvetti campaign and served throughout Gaul. Fought in Caesar's war against Pompey's army in Hispania, and was present at Dyrrhachium, Pharsalus. Was disbanded until Philippi where it fought for Octavian/Antony against the 'Republicans'

 

Legio XIII - Recruited for the Belgica campaign in Gaul. Crossed the Rubicon with Caesar and was present at Dyrrachium. Was not at Pharsalus nor Alexandria but did serve in Africa and were likely involved at Munda.

[spittle]

Both Pullo and Vorenus were also Centurians. Caesar mentioned their constant rivalry (I think the source of this was the audio commentary on the DVD).

 

To me 'Rome' is the same principle as Forest Gump. Take fictional or obscure character/s and place them at the center of histories major events.

 

I thought they went too far by making Pullo the father of Cleopatra's child to Caesar but now I see the future will involve Vorenus fighting with Antony and Pullo with Octavian it seems more clear. When Octavian has Ceasarian killed it will surely tie into the fact that he his actually the bioliogical son of Titus Pullo?

[The Augusta]

I thought they went too far by making Pullo the father of Cleopatra's child to Caesar but now I see the future will involve Vorenus fighting with Antony and Pullo with Octavian it seems more clear. When Octavian has Ceasarian killed it will surely tie into the fact that he his actually the bioliogical son of Titus Pullo?

 

Yep, Octavian had Caesarion killed, citing that he was illegitimate and not the true son of Caesar. But he would have said this anyway, wouldn't he? How could he have left a possible claimant to Caesar's fortune alive? Seems to me that HBO are going to be quite pro-Augustan and win the viewers' sympathy for him. The viewers already know that Caesarion is NOT Julius' child. Therefore, when Octavian kills him it will not be so hard to bear.

 

I have a constant love-hate relationship with this series: love it one minute, loathe it the next.

[spittle]

BLASPHEMER! You must never HATE this series! NEVER!

 

Actually, Gail, I didn't know that Octavian had claimed Caesarian was not Caesars child. I was just adding the events of the series to my knowledge that he's had Caesarian killed so, with this new info you have supplied, they didn't really go too far by having Pullo sire the child.

 

In reality though I doubt whether Augustus believed him to be another mans son. His motives, as you point out, were transparent. As for him being illegitimate....Caesars marriage to Calpurnia at the time of the childs birth makes that a fact but did that really mean that much to the Romans?

 

I know a huge stigma was attached to 'bastards' in the middle ages but did the ancients also feel this way?

Edited November 13, 2006 by spittle

[cptlouis]

I know a huge stigma was attached to 'bastards' in the middle ages but did the ancients also feel this way?

 

 

Without hijacking the thread, Roman law was very pliable and flexible. If you recall, GJC adopted Octavian in his will. Adoptions were the easiest thing in the Roman world. At the end of the day, the only thing that mattered was whether or not you inherited any money or property. No one cared if your parent's weren't married. The only stigma in Rome was being poor.

 

In some sources, many believed that Brutus was Caesar's son! What mattered was how he was treated by his family, and in turn, society treated him the same.

Edited January 29, 2007 by cptlouis

[Mosquito]

Seems to me that HBO are going to be quite pro-Augustan and win the viewers' sympathy for him. The viewers already know that Caesarion is NOT Julius' child. Therefore, when Octavian kills him it will not be so hard to bear.

 

Im not sure about it. First thing is that they didnt portrayed Caesar in the way he could have win sympathy of viewer's.

Second thing is that they invented story about incest between Ocatvius and Octavia not to mention the murder. He is not presented as the good boy but appears to be a little monster. I think they are going to show proscriptions and Octavians role in proscripting people. Except for Pullo and Vorenus there is hard to find the people one may like. Cicero is weak, Anthony is wild, Cato was stupid what was already stressed by Cicero. From the historical characters only Brutus looks like a good man.

Edited February 2, 2007 by Mosquito

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

Seems to me that HBO are going to be quite pro-Augustan and win the viewers' sympathy for him. The viewers already know that Caesarion is NOT Julius' child. Therefore, when Octavian kills him it will not be so hard to bear.

 

Im not sure about it. First thing is that they didnt portrayed Caesar in the way he could have win sympathy of viewer's.

Second thing is that they invented story about incest between Ocatvius and Octavia not to mention the murder. He is not presented as the good boy but appears to be a little monster. I think they are going to show proscriptions and Octavians role in proscripting people. Except for Pullo and Vorenus there is hard to find the people one may like. Cicero is weak, Anthony is wild, Cato was stupid what was already stressed by Cicero. From the historical characters only Brutus looks like a good man.

 

I sort of agree, in series 1 Octavius comes across as a spoilt, sniveling little s*** with a vindictive and evil streak, i don't think it showed him in a very good light although it did show him to be intelligent and politically wise above his years, so maybe it's just paving the way for when he grows from a boy to a man in series 2.

 

BTW i thought Anthony's character was great!

[Mosquito]

BTW i thought Anthony's character was great!

 

 

Oh yes, they did excellent job with Antonius. But i dont like the fact that they didnt show the speech of Antonius on funneral of Caesar. The speech wich made the crowd mad.

[cptlouis]

 

BTW i thought Anthony's character was great!

 

 

Oh yes, they did excellent job with Antonius. But i dont like the fact that they didnt show the speech of Antonius on funneral of Caesar. The speech wich made the crowd mad.

 

 

Actually, I loved the fact they didn't show the speeches. First and foremost, no historical source exists that preserves the actual speeches. While the show has proved they are not excessively concerned with history, they are concerned with good story telling. And that brings me to the other reason why I like that they didn't show the speeches: it could never compare with Shakespeare!

 

Think about it. The majority of people know everything they know about Julius Caesar because of Shakespeare. And as a friend of mine is fond of saying "Shakespeare gets an 'A' for literature but a 'D' in history."

 

Any speeches the writers could have come up with would have been based on Shakespeare's formula, but they would have fallen far short of his brilliantly written words. Therefore, in order to avoid a situation where the show whould draw unreasonable comparison with Shakespeare, they simply opted to avoid it and fill in the blanks with the reactions of the "man on the street."

 

I choose to see it as a brilliant homage to the great works of William Shakespeare. While you are more than deserving of your opinion, it seems to me that the writers of the show were smart enough to avoid stepping on a small, yet critical landmine.

 

Kudos to the producers, writers, actors and everyone else involved with Rome. As a community theater director and a fan of the historical period in question, I am impressed with how well they are telling these intricate stories. I do not believe they are ultimately trying to make us prefer any character (other than Pullo!). The characters are somewhat true to their historical namesakes and the overall story is compelling and entertaining. I cannot wait for the next episode.