MovieChat Forums > Pompeii (2014) Discussion > Pompeiians Were Romans

Pompeiians Were Romans


What is this nonsense in the movie where the people of Pompeii resent the "Romans" as conquerors? What is this crap where Cassia describes herself as a "citizen of Pompeii"? She was a Roman. Pompeian citizens were Roman citizens.

I'm sure there was plenty of province-vs-capital tension and suspicion, but the idea that people in Pompeii thought of themselves as a separate nationality or group from Romans is ridiculous. It's not just a typical Hollywood, minor historical inaccuracy; it's a lie, 180% opposite of the truth.

Apparently, Anderson was so determined to make Romans bad guys that he couldn't bring himself to have the heroine and her family be Roman. In fact, the Romans were no morally worse than any other large nationality ("nationality" being an anachronistic word for the period, but I can't think of a better one ATM) at the time. They are also our direct cultural ancestors. The world was and is better off because of the Roman Empire, and, without it, modern Western civilization - and therefore us - would not exist.

I get that filmmakers love to identify with underdogs and prefer to make movies where history's winners are portrayed as evil and cruel (as indeed the Romans often were - just not any more evil and cruel than the people they defeated). I also get that, when making a movie about events that happened 2000 years ago, absolute accuracy is not expected. On the other hand, reversing major historical facts in order to make your Titanic-wannabe storyline work and to fit your "oppression"-obsessed worldview is cheating.

Besides, it's a crap film.

reply

Pompeii was an independent city state annexed by Rome about 100 years earlier, it's called dissent. Think about Ireland and the British.

reply

A shot summary;

Actually, most of what we now call Italy wasn't really Roman at all, at least they did not consider themselves so. The Italic cities certainly had a lot of priviliges most provinces did not have but they were considered Litini or Socii which meant they were independant states under Roman law. Pompeii was, especially in the early years, influenced more by the Samnites (by whom it was probably founded) and the Etruscans and didn't really have anything to do with Rome until they made it their new favourite holiday spot.

reply

Yup, but that had already been over 400 years before.



--
No, Schmuck! You are only entitled to your INFORMED opinion!!
-- Harlan Ellison

reply

Yeah, the CGI in this movie was great, but the historical inaccuracies and "the empire is evil, all Celts are magical" cliches..yikes!

reply

Too start off, I'm browsing the movie - not viewed it yet.

The idea that nationalistic sentiments can't still be ruling the normative political/normative scene whilst within an empire/union/republic/federation
is false.

Nationalistic sentiments are strong, just look to Europe, USA has the vast majority of it's gold, it has military bases all over, it kills democracy actively through the EU regulation when forcing TTIP through undemocratically onto the people (through lobbying and sheer power), when actively taking steps to start a war by disturbing status quo with Russia (getting EU support), when sending aid (dumping GMO crops) on africa, when forcing European countries to take the burden in war and it's result in the middle-east. Despite all of this and the clarity that we live under an undemocratic plutocracy people are more nationalistic than ever before, in the face of annihilation of the different European regional states, culture and democracy people rally to each others help and rise. When protests are outlawed and when ignoring consitutional laws, national laws, international laws and human rights to spread darkness over what is happening people still rally to each other. All that is needed is time on the same path and some sparks (if you are to believe history).


"The world was and is better off because of the Roman Empire, and, without it, modern Western civilization - and therefore us - would not exist."


-That is pure speculation, you have no idea about what would have been if the roman empire never were. Monopolising wealth by extending markets, symbolism, tools, language and other treats to geographical domains does not necessarily mean none else could or that diverging states wouldn't have possibly granted a faster development. That a thing is likely does not make it's a fact until it is proven to be such and here there is no way to prove it.

Who's to say that the greek empire wouldn't have risen and that Rome was the worst thing to happen to humanity..? Who's too say that the trading empire Vikings created and their culture wouldn't have taken a larger place without the structures set in place by the Roman empire and the impact they had (like London, which was built where an old pre-viking settlement were located before the romans took the position over).

That Romans were worse than any other large nationality can be dicussed, they inserted lawful rule (which means the majority of humans suffered the same laws, excluding corruption, cronyism and nepotism) which most likely had a very positive effect on mortality rates if the punishments were deterring enough. With that said don't forget what the Roman empire did to christians and the areanas built in which any uncomfortable persons could be tossed on a whim if the indvidual caused a problem, genetically purging a people from individuals who aren't likeminded usually don't help original thinkers and therefor alternative competition of ideas (the size of the populace of an empire still means that those will arise in great numbers within Rome).

In the end I believe Rome has (even though all the injustice) made a large positive impact to humanity, mostly due to the universality it brought to tools, measurements, languages, symbolism, not to forget the louder voice of the people it allowed compared to monarchies and similar systems.

•As said that does not mean that there couldn't have been a system that was alot better if the Roman empire never existed or was just a small dot on the evolution of regional governance.

•Neither does it mean that Romans in some facetts weren't more cruel than other people (the precision in which they eliminated oposition, and the pure advancement of ruling techniques and torture etc implies they could be more cruel with higher precision).

•Finally neither does it mean that regions can't foster nationalistic thought even when they are a part of a larger regional governance (not claiming Pompeii as a rogue region but the general hypotheses that it simply couldn't be without presenting any sources, links or references doesn't hold up).


Ignorance is only a bliss if you haven't reached awareness.
My imdb posts are getting altered.

reply

ACTUALLY THEY WERE OSCI! THE AREA WAS COLONIZED IN 80 BC! ALOT OF AREAS OF ITALY WERE NOT ORIGINALLY ROMAN SUCH AS SAMNIUM AND CAMPANIA!

reply

I read on wikipedia Pompeji was a Roman colony. So not exactly "Roman citizans" ath the time (but later).

reply