|
Does anyone remember a miniseries about Caesar that was Richard Harris's last movie (he played Sulla)? I vaugely remember it and was wondering if the history goons thought it was any good.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 07:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Does anyone remember a miniseries about Caesar that was Richard Harris's last movie (he played Sulla)? I vaugely remember it and was wondering if the history goons thought it was any good. It's called Julius Caesar, and also features Christopher Walken as Cato the Younger. My recollection of it was that it was good in terms of the history (other than Sulla dying instead of retiring), but as a movie it was pretty dull.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 14:44
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:It's called Julius Caesar, and also features Christopher Walken as Cato the Younger. My recollection of it was that it was good in terms of the history (other than Sulla dying instead of retiring), but as a movie it was pretty dull. If nothing else, it seems like Walken as Cato the Younger would make it worth a watch
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:If nothing else, it seems like Walken as Cato the Younger would make it worth a watch I hope they have the scene where Cato makes an Egyptian ambassador listen to him talk while he's in the commode. Walken rambling away while the uncomfortable ambassador awkwardly hangs out in the bathroom would own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:If nothing else, it seems like Walken as Cato the Younger would make it worth a watch If it covers the Catiline conspiracy in any depth it is absolutely worth a watch with Walken as Baby Cato.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
That'd be tough to do since we really don't have any idea what the details are of the Catiline conspiracy. Though I guess you could just run hog wild with it and make a good story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
At the risk of seriously derailing this, I pretty much can't get Walken out of my head as any number of famous Romans, now. Thanks. Pulcher: "These birds, they're not HUNGRY *shrugs shoulders* ... maybe they're just thirsty." Antony: "I didn't come here.....to praise Caesar. I came. To bury him there." Nero: "What an ARTIST this world is losing. Here. Me." Big Beef City fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
The Entire Universe posted:If it covers the Catiline conspiracy in any depth it is absolutely worth a watch with Walken as Baby Cato. What do you mean 'baby Cato?'
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Big Beef City posted:At the risk of seriously derailing this, I pretty much can't get Walken out of my head as any number of famous Romans, now. Thanks. Calligula: I hid this uncomfortable hunk of metal up my rear end two years
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
Which one is the famous Pulcher?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Which one is the famous Pulcher? Publius Claudius Pulcher is famous for losing the Battle of Drepana, an absolute shitshow for the Romans that started with him giving the finger to Roman tradition and ignoring bad omens (The aforementioned sacred chickens refusing to eat and being tossed into the ocean "to drink"). His Great-great-great Grandson Publius Clodius Pulcher is the more well known one, who crossdressed to sneak into women only ceremonies and gently caress Caesar's wife, used the Tribunate to become a Mob Boss, and after he died in a streetfight with another mobster/politician his followers cremated him by burning the Senate to the ground around his body. Slantedfloors fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
Did the Romans have any concept of alcoholism or was it more that you were just considered to be a drunkard? Did they know about the physiological effects at all, or the psychological components of addiction? Were there any other recreational drugs they used? I think someone may have mentioned opium earlier. Did Romans suffer from any culture bound syndromes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
In the HBO series Rome they smoked some plant that I want to say was cannabis but no idea if that's what it was. If it was - was cannabis really a thing even back then?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
Yep. The first mention of it I'm aware of is Herodotus, where he mentions hotboxing (cannabis thrown on a fire inside a sealed tent until happiness occurs) being part of a Scythian funeral ritual. Presumably people used all forms of drugs available, we don't really know about it. Addiction as a medical concept wasn't a thing until like the 1800s I think? Or maybe even 1900s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
^^ efb  Wasn't the British fostering/ practically forcing addiction to Opium one of the big causes of the Opium Wars? Or am I misremembering. bobthedinosaur posted:If it was - was cannabis really a thing even back then? Dunno what they were smoking in the series, but yeah, it absolutely was. The Scythians in particular are practically famous for smoking it all the drat time, and you can bet there were plenty of Romans with access too. Koramei fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:22
|
|
|
Tojai posted:Did the Romans have any concept of alcoholism or was it more that you were just considered to be a drunkard? Did they know about the physiological effects at all, or the psychological components of addiction? "Drunkard" is synonymous with alcoholic, so far as I know. So in terms of "this guy was physically addicted to drink", yes. The symptoms of alcoholism would have been obvious and redundant in this context, unless you're implying something I'm not aware of. Culturally, being a noted 'drunkard' would have implied the same. Romans, much like all other societies, used opiates and alcohol, along with presumably cannabinoids (though this may have been mostly in incense...but I doubt it) There are published studies of opiate trade from germania to india and beyond. So far as I am aware, and please post to prove me wrong, are that drug/alcohol abuse was seen as a moral failing, but one that was well known and not overly criticized more than common day. People love to get high, and in a globally linked trade network like the Roman empire, there were bound to be plenty of supplies. I'm not familiar with any particulars about how Junius Priscus Jr. imported weed from Afghanistan or whatever. edit: beaten like a gallic opiate user.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Didn't the Assyrians use it as currency?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Wasn't the British fostering/ practically forcing addiction to Opium one of the big causes of the Opium Wars? Or am I misremembering. Well, I mean the concept is obvious and observable in people, but the idea of addiction as a medical condition rather than moral issue/willpower or something is relatively new. I think. I am not a medical historian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:27
|
|
|
Yes I probably phrased that question poorly but what I was getting at was if addiction was seen as a purely moral failing or acknowledged as a disease. Was there any sort of regulation of drugs at all or were you free to go hog wild (assuming you could afford it)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Wasn't the British fostering/ practically forcing addiction to Opium one of the big causes of the Opium Wars? Or am I misremembering. Yep. The Chinese were pissed off because everyone was getting addicted to British Opium, but the British refused to stop selling it because they sure as gently caress weren't going to pay for Chinese tea with valuable silver if there was an easy alternative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 06:54
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Not ancient history, but the opium trade was very unpopular in British society at large on moral grounds. Business interests kept it from being outlawed despite its unpopularity. Ditto for the Opium Wars. So it's not like England was evil, more like capitalism is evil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 07:59
|
|
|
If the ancients were smoking weed, why are there no documents praising it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 08:49
|
|
|
Certainly true. One also needs to remember that at this point, India was actually under the control of the East India Company, rather than the British government directly. It was the EIC that was actually doing all the trading, along with other private merchants. But that's more than enough about 19th Century East Asia in the ancient history thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 08:50
|
|
|
That Roman joke book is pretty amazing. Thanks for linking it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 10:03
|
|
|
Tojai posted:Was there any sort of regulation of drugs at all or were you free to go hog wild (assuming you could afford it)? As far as I know there was no regulation of any drug use other than public shame kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 13:47
|
|
|
bobthedinosaur posted:In the HBO series Rome they smoked some plant that I want to say was cannabis but no idea if that's what it was. If you watch the series with the pop up historical details on, it says Cleopatra is smoking opium (I think that is the scene you are talking about)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:If you watch the series with the pop up historical details on, it says Cleopatra is smoking opium (I think that is the scene you are talking about)? There's one with Octavian's sister and I think Atia.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 14:27
|
|
|
Big Beef City posted:So far as I am aware, and please post to prove me wrong, are that drug/alcohol abuse was seen as a moral failing, but one that was well known and not overly criticized more than common day. In a surprise twist the vikings actually warned against drinking too much. From Håvamål (High speech, a bunch of sayings attributed to Odin): 11. A worse provision on the way he cannot carry than too much beer-bibbing; so good is not, as it is said, beer for the sons of men. 12. A worse provision no man can take from table than too much beer-bibbing: for the more he drinks the less control he has of his own mind. 13. Oblivion’s heron ‘tis called that over potations hovers, he steals the minds of men. With this bird’s pinions I was fettered in Gunnlöds dwelling. 14. Drunk I was, I was over-drunk, at that cunning Fjalar’s. It’s the best drunkenness, when every one after it regains his reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Tojai posted:Yes I probably phrased that question poorly but what I was getting at was if addiction was seen as a purely moral failing or acknowledged as a disease. There weren't drug laws or "controlled substances" like we'd understand them. Essentially anyone who could get access to ingredients could make whatever they wanted. But on the other side of that, there were special laws and penalties for killing someone via poison. If you sold someone something and they died as a result of taking it, you'd be in a world of hurt. I don't think the ancients would have understood addiction as a disease or as a moral failing in the same way that AA or modern temperance movements do. Greeks and Romans valued moderation as the cornerstone of all other virtues, so I think many of them would think someone who was addicted to drugs was failing to be appropriately moderate regarding temperance. Ancient drug culture isn't well-understood as a whole because of the lack of sources. There's an argument that traditionally classicists have been either too prudish to treat the matter fairly or too unlearned in pharmacology/too innocent to recognize what they were seeing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
Slantedfloors posted:His Great-great-great Grandson Publius Clodius Pulcher is the more well known one, who crossdressed to sneak into women only ceremonies and gently caress Caesar's wife, used the Tribunate to become a Mob Boss, and after he died in a streetfight with another mobster/politician his followers cremated him by burning the Senate to the ground around his body. Good to know, though it may have been said before: Clodius's sister has also been immortalised in history through the poetry of Catullus. The Clodii apparently all loved partying hard, consequences be damned, because Clodia was married when she carried on her affair with Catullus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 09:14
|
|
|
the jizz taxi posted:Good to know, though it may have been said before: Clodius's sister has also been immortalised in history through the poetry of Catullus. The Clodii apparently all loved partying hard, consequences be damned, because Clodia was married when she carried on her affair with Catullus. Clodia also got called a whore by a dude, got mad about it, hired some guys to gang rape the dude and sent him a message afterwards saying "who's the whore now?" All class, the Clodii. Also rumors of incest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
I know that's a common story (the raping of the dude's butt and the note), but is it factual? Like are there multiple reliable sources that state that dude got revenge-raped? So many of these tales are just one-off stories, and they're funny, cool, or just rememberable, but I wonder their accuracy
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Big Beef City posted:
Welcome to studying the ancient world. It's "this is our only evidence" all the way down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
homullus posted:Welcome to studying the ancient world. It's "this is our only evidence" all the way down. Mostly you look at it and say "well, it's an anecdote so we don't know that it happened, but we do know that the anecdote was told so..." And see where that gets us. So this story, well, maybe we don't know exactly how hardcore this lady was, but we get a good insight into Roman attitudes re: reputation and penetration, so that's pretty worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
For those sorts of stories we often just believe them when there's only one source and they aren't patently absurd. Like this example, there's no way to know if she actually had someone revenge raped but there's nothing about the story that strikes one as particularly unlikely, it provides cultural insight as the JJ says, and ultimately it's not like it matters in the grand scheme of history, so we just take it as being true.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Even if they seemed absurd it could still be referring to something badly misinterpreted, rather than fictional right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
veekie posted:Even if they seemed absurd it could still be referring to something badly misinterpreted, rather than fictional right? It could, but just because it's written down by someone doesn't mean that it's not entirely (or mostly) fictional. Oftentimes a document tells more about its writer than about the subject, and this applies to this day except for peer-reviewed studies which may be assumed to be impartial and well considered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:ultimately it's not like it matters in the grand scheme of history, so we just take it as being true. That I'd disagree with. I'm more with Nenonen here, we can use text to explore the writer much more than we do the things that were written.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
What is the written source though for Clodia's rape story? A cursory google search gives me nothing about the subject. An anecdote like this, wherever real or not, ought to be more "popular". Actual myths about Romans are widespread, but i can't find anything on Clodias rape story.
Falukorv fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Dec 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
Everyone loves a good gossip.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 23:02
|
|