I recently finished watching Rome on HBO, which was amazing. Rome is the kind of program that shows television's potential as a medium for art and great theater, rather than a device for injecting pollution into your brain. (Though, most of it really is pollution.)
The last episode left me with a burning question, though. (And I'm going to freely post "spoilers" since Roman history isn't much of a secret. If you don't at least vaguely remember from history or from reading Shakespeare in grade school that Brutus stabs Caesar, then you're probably only watching Rome for the sex.)
One of Caesar's acts as a tyrant was his addition of Gauls and Celts and various Roman commoners as new senators, and the program portrays this as a reason why we should sympathize with the conspiracy. Obviously he did this to weaken the individual power of the existing senators and also as an insult to them. But in a modern context, can we actually despise him for this? Look at this way - the straw that broke the camel's back was Caesar bringing in representatives from the faraway lands that Rome conquered, rather than treating them as voiceless vassal states. And for this, the noble senators (who, again, we are meant to sympathize with) resented Caesar. Caesar was, to be sure, a power hungry bastard, but so were the existing Roman senators. They wanted their own wealth and influence to rule the empire, with no input from anyone else.
So now that I've typed all this out, I don't think I have a burning question after all, though I do find it interesting how the conspiracy is portrayed. There really are no "good guys" or "bad guys" - just two sides jockeying for power. After he dies, I almost find myself feeling sympathy for Caesar and his scheming family, as his system, while insulting to the nobility, ultimately seems more fair to the conquered lands and to the lower classes of Rome. I might change my mind again, though. Either way, I hope they hurry up with that second season.
The last episode left me with a burning question, though. (And I'm going to freely post "spoilers" since Roman history isn't much of a secret. If you don't at least vaguely remember from history or from reading Shakespeare in grade school that Brutus stabs Caesar, then you're probably only watching Rome for the sex.)
One of Caesar's acts as a tyrant was his addition of Gauls and Celts and various Roman commoners as new senators, and the program portrays this as a reason why we should sympathize with the conspiracy. Obviously he did this to weaken the individual power of the existing senators and also as an insult to them. But in a modern context, can we actually despise him for this? Look at this way - the straw that broke the camel's back was Caesar bringing in representatives from the faraway lands that Rome conquered, rather than treating them as voiceless vassal states. And for this, the noble senators (who, again, we are meant to sympathize with) resented Caesar. Caesar was, to be sure, a power hungry bastard, but so were the existing Roman senators. They wanted their own wealth and influence to rule the empire, with no input from anyone else.
So now that I've typed all this out, I don't think I have a burning question after all, though I do find it interesting how the conspiracy is portrayed. There really are no "good guys" or "bad guys" - just two sides jockeying for power. After he dies, I almost find myself feeling sympathy for Caesar and his scheming family, as his system, while insulting to the nobility, ultimately seems more fair to the conquered lands and to the lower classes of Rome. I might change my mind again, though. Either way, I hope they hurry up with that second season.
