Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Well, after watching parts of it again, and diving back into some books and papers, I'd say both accurate and inaccurate.
It seems the clothing, armor, etc. are all pretty accurate, better than in most movies of this type. The Latin spoken is the "perceived" ancient reconstructed "Latin", not ecclesiastical Church Latin, so I guess that's pretty accurate, but it's paired with very modern German. I don't know how that could be "adjusted", however, since as far as I know there is no record of the "German" spoken by the various tribes of the period, so what were they supposed to do? Maybe using a more "rustic" version of Low German might have been less jarring for German speakers?
As for Arminius himself and his inner motivations, we can't know them; this is a fictionalized version so you just have to accept it as it is. The world view of the creators is going to inform it. They may or may not be aware of the messages they're sending out. You either agree with that view of the relationship between Rome and the Germanics or between any group and foreigners entering their country or you don't.*
What I do know, however, is that the account of the battle is completely inaccurate. It was more like the Battle of the Alamo if the Texans had been lured there by a man they trusted rather than what was portrayed here. The Romans walked into an ambush, into an area in which it was impossible for them to deploy their natural battle tactics; they were surrounded. They held on for three days but ultimately all were slaughtered. The series made it seem like a few hundred natives massacred a huge Roman force in a few hours. Good myth making, perhaps, but false. Also, no Barbarian sword was going to pierce Roman armor. They would have had to slog it out, surrounding each man and aiming for the throat and other exposed areas, knocking off the helmets perhaps.
Another thing that really irritated me was the depiction of the actions of the Roman army itself. Anyone who knows the least little bit about Roman military tactics knows that the first thing that the Romans did when stopping even for a day was to set up fortifications. Where were they?
Also, all respect to German women for fighting along side their men, but the idea that a woman could pierce through Roman armor like she was spitting a chicken or rabbit to place over the fire is ridiculous.
So, an interesting and exciting series, but not historically accurate. It just seems it's not just Hollywood that never gets it quite right.
https://www.ancient.eu/article/1010/battle-of-teutoburg-forest/
For anyone interested in the minutia of the Latin used, this showed up on my youtube feed this morning.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7uBUCZgpw8
For what it's worth, his own American accent and "ear", imo, informs some of his criticism, although I think he's right in that the other Italian actors get it more "right" than the actor playing Varus, as good as he is as an actor.
Ed. * I, for one, don't believe that "blood" always triumphs over later associations, at least not in the modern era. I'm living with a prime example: 100 percent Italian in ethnicity, but an absolutely 100 percent American in terms of loyalties. No third column here with most immigrants.
It seems the clothing, armor, etc. are all pretty accurate, better than in most movies of this type. The Latin spoken is the "perceived" ancient reconstructed "Latin", not ecclesiastical Church Latin, so I guess that's pretty accurate, but it's paired with very modern German. I don't know how that could be "adjusted", however, since as far as I know there is no record of the "German" spoken by the various tribes of the period, so what were they supposed to do? Maybe using a more "rustic" version of Low German might have been less jarring for German speakers?
As for Arminius himself and his inner motivations, we can't know them; this is a fictionalized version so you just have to accept it as it is. The world view of the creators is going to inform it. They may or may not be aware of the messages they're sending out. You either agree with that view of the relationship between Rome and the Germanics or between any group and foreigners entering their country or you don't.*
What I do know, however, is that the account of the battle is completely inaccurate. It was more like the Battle of the Alamo if the Texans had been lured there by a man they trusted rather than what was portrayed here. The Romans walked into an ambush, into an area in which it was impossible for them to deploy their natural battle tactics; they were surrounded. They held on for three days but ultimately all were slaughtered. The series made it seem like a few hundred natives massacred a huge Roman force in a few hours. Good myth making, perhaps, but false. Also, no Barbarian sword was going to pierce Roman armor. They would have had to slog it out, surrounding each man and aiming for the throat and other exposed areas, knocking off the helmets perhaps.
Another thing that really irritated me was the depiction of the actions of the Roman army itself. Anyone who knows the least little bit about Roman military tactics knows that the first thing that the Romans did when stopping even for a day was to set up fortifications. Where were they?
Also, all respect to German women for fighting along side their men, but the idea that a woman could pierce through Roman armor like she was spitting a chicken or rabbit to place over the fire is ridiculous.
So, an interesting and exciting series, but not historically accurate. It just seems it's not just Hollywood that never gets it quite right.
https://www.ancient.eu/article/1010/battle-of-teutoburg-forest/
For anyone interested in the minutia of the Latin used, this showed up on my youtube feed this morning.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7uBUCZgpw8
For what it's worth, his own American accent and "ear", imo, informs some of his criticism, although I think he's right in that the other Italian actors get it more "right" than the actor playing Varus, as good as he is as an actor.
Ed. * I, for one, don't believe that "blood" always triumphs over later associations, at least not in the modern era. I'm living with a prime example: 100 percent Italian in ethnicity, but an absolutely 100 percent American in terms of loyalties. No third column here with most immigrants.
Last edited: