Tango01 | 25 Mar 2013 11:24 a.m. PST |
Spartacus is ending, and that great serie shows in his last chapter how young Caesar (not so young) lost his
dignitiy in the hands of the son of Crassus. Why did the writers decided to tell that? Was necessary?. Cannot undestand well. By the way, Crassus had a son? I cannot find any history about that guy. Do you know any of him? Amicalement Armand |
Dynaman8789 | 25 Mar 2013 11:28 a.m. PST |
Your wondering why Spartacus had some extra bit of perversion at the end? Does not compute
(I mean that parts of the show nearly count as soft core p*rn) |
CPBelt | 25 Mar 2013 12:00 p.m. PST |
You mean these TV shows are hot historically accurate and are done for no other reason than to titillate for higher revenues?!? |
Marshal Mark | 25 Mar 2013 12:03 p.m. PST |
parts of the show nearly count as soft core p*rn What do you mean, nearly ?! |
yoakley | 25 Mar 2013 12:12 p.m. PST |
Crassus had a son who died with him at Carrhae. |
Huscarle | 25 Mar 2013 12:23 p.m. PST |
Crassus's youngest son Publius served under Caesar & later led the Gallic horse at Carrhae; he was about 30 years of age when he bought it. It's safe to say that it is some TV titillation, no basis in fact. link |
John the OFM | 25 Mar 2013 12:25 p.m. PST |
TMP link This was from Suetonius' Lives of the Caesars. Julius Caesar was quite a naughty boy, having affairs with men and women both. Nicomedus of Bythinia being one of the most famous. Apparently, from the soldiers' bawdy song in his Triumph, he was a "catcher" with Nic, and not a "pitcher". So, the precedent is there. |
Caesar | 25 Mar 2013 1:06 p.m. PST |
"My taste includes both snails and oysters." |
mjkerner | 25 Mar 2013 1:37 p.m. PST |
Just one more reason I can't stand any of the Spartacus series
the arena or the war version. So much real potential turned into so much drivel. |
CommanderCarnage | 25 Mar 2013 2:00 p.m. PST |
If I remember correctly some political opponents of Caesar referred to him as the queen of Bythnia. |
LeadAsbestos | 25 Mar 2013 3:05 p.m. PST |
Nope, the kid, Tiberius, is pure invention, and the raping of our man Caesar is just to make us hate the little bastard even more. I'm a big fan of the show, and am looking forward to seeing the cruel end that Tiberius comes to. |
bsrlee | 26 Mar 2013 12:00 a.m. PST |
Big Julius was also 'known' as the Queen of Bythinia, so there would likely have been little likelihood of 'rape' as such. Just another mad r**ter. |
SonofThor | 26 Mar 2013 3:24 a.m. PST |
They must have people from the History Channel writing for that show. |
Militia Pete | 26 Mar 2013 6:31 a.m. PST |
|
LEGION 1950 | 26 Mar 2013 9:51 a.m. PST |
I am to a fan of the show!! It is all hollywood! Mike Adams |
Marcus Maximus | 27 Mar 2013 1:54 a.m. PST |
In those days Tango, they batted for both sides
.. |
LEGION 1950 | 27 Mar 2013 6:38 a.m. PST |
Calling Dr. Phil!!!!!!!!!!! Mike P.S. Tango, sex was very open and not hidden away like in todays world. |
brevior est vita | 27 Mar 2013 11:06 a.m. PST |
Yep, even alleged sex featured in smear campaigns run by political opponents was right there in the open for all to see. Tango – You can read more about Marcus Licinius Crassus and his son Publius here: link |
Tango01 | 27 Mar 2013 11:36 a.m. PST |
Many thanks my friend!. Amicalement Armand |
brevior est vita | 27 Mar 2013 12:30 p.m. PST |
Prego, Armand! Cheers, Scott |
Tango01 | 27 Mar 2013 10:20 p.m. PST |
I had enjoy very much the reading my friend. Amicalement Armand |
Tango01 | 27 Mar 2013 10:21 p.m. PST |
Al vostro servizio il mio amico! Amicalement Armand |
brevior est vita | 28 Mar 2013 6:07 a.m. PST |
I am glad that you enjoyed Plutarch's biography on Crassus, Armand. Here is his biography of Caesar: link Modern discussions of the rumors regarding Caesar and King Nicomedes of Bithynia may be found here: link link |
Tango01 | 28 Mar 2013 10:48 a.m. PST |
Many thanks again my friend!. Amicalement Armand |
Tango01 | 30 Mar 2013 12:08 p.m. PST |
|
aapch45 | 02 Apr 2013 1:43 p.m. PST |
I watch the show, and was literally shocked at this. Roman against (on top of?)roman. hollywood plot device to keep people saying "", and "whoa slo-mo", "history" is awesome. its like the writers all sat down and said "There's this guy, and he is a gladiator, and there is lots of blood, guts, and lady parts. Get ron jeremy, and one of the ancient alien guys, we're making a show." Suprisingly
. I still watch it. |
Gazzola | 09 Apr 2013 3:52 a.m. PST |
I'm enjoying the series but you do have to switch off your accuracy head, since virtually all 'historical' dramas work on the basis 'don't let the truth get in the way of a good story'. Entertainment comes first. Sharpe's Waterloo is another example of enjoyable entertainment at the expense of historical acuracy. But it would be nice to see someone produce an enjoyable and accurate historical drama, for a change. |
aapch45 | 10 Apr 2013 7:48 p.m. PST |
The only accurate piece of historic work at all was gladiator
. duhh Tongue away from cheek
.. Its basically impossible to create "accurate" for anything set before 1600 simply because the majority of authors and historians of those times were tilted, and often flat out lied. What is true? Only what we can see of course. Until we can peer back at history, we are stuck doing guesswork
. and if that means gaius Julius Caesar gets raped
. oh well. I mean
. its kind of foreshadowing. |
Gazzola | 16 Apr 2013 3:31 a.m. PST |
Tango01 One of the most unhistorical series I've ever seen. Totally inaccurate. A bit like the depiction of the French in the Sharpe series. Going by this series you wonder just how did the Romans ever build such a large and long lasting Empire? And apart from the end where the Romans fail to get hold of Sparatcus's body, a total rejection of reality! Drat, I'm going to miss it! Thoroughly enjoyable! But I just hope they don't bring him back as a Zombie or Vampire Spartacus. |
Cyclops | 16 Apr 2013 3:57 p.m. PST |
Ahistorical in details maybe but very historical in attitudes. We'll never know the what, who, why and how of Spartacus but this version is the closest we've come. Unfortunately many can't see beyond the sex and buckets of blood to see the actually rather good acting from all involved. It's about time we stopped viewing the Romans as the Royal Shakespeare Company on a good day and more like the Mafia in skirts. If you read about the trials and tribulations of the Republic it seems a miracle they managed to create an Empire in between the endless infighting. |
Gazzola | 20 Apr 2013 2:23 p.m. PST |
I think there is too much of the goody goody barbrians all living peacfully with each other who are then conquered by the nasty nasty Romans, when in reality the tribes, barbarians, Germans, Celts or whatever, were usually fighting each other and often sided with the Romans to get one up on their own kind. The Romans did not really have to divide and conquer, their opponents were already divided. Yet they proved what they could do when they did unite. And yes, the Roman Republic and Empire periods were full of infighting and civil wars, but they still managed to build and maintain an empire. Their troops had to know how to fight and more importantly, how to win, which they did, in order to do so. When you watch the historical dramas you would never believe that possible. But most of the dramas are intended to entertain, not teach or be accurate. |