05-31-2006, 05:24 AM
WoadWarrior,
All professional armies have numerous regulations governing uniforms and equipment.
Yet in the field troops ignore these rules on a regular basis.
Thus TLC's point is well taken.
Is it possible that a Roman might wear certain items that go against most historical evidence?
Of course it is possible.
The study of World War II uniforms is full of such contradictions, exceptions and one of a kind examples. The advantage for the historian, the film maker and the re-enactor is that we have a wealth of photographic evidence to work with as well as all the original uniform regulations, directives, policies etc.
And yet film makers routinely go beyond the possible into the realm of the absurd when it comes to uniforms in World War II films.
Das Boot or Downfall or Soldier Of Orange or the Longest Day -- right on the money.
Raiders Of The Lost Ark -- an insane mishmash. Some obscure details are correct while other items are completely wrong or obvious fabrications.
To Hell And Back -- well the US uniforms are OK, but the German's...
Even Saving Pvt Ryan had its historical problems. (In this case they got the uniforms correct, but misidentified the German unit engaged in the final battle, even though it was correct in the screenplay.)
With Ancient Rome the problems of authenticity are greater still.
There is much evidence to be sure, but as any member here can tell you, what was "known" ten or twenty years ago has been revised several times based on new artifacts found, and new studies conducted.
TLC makes a cogent point -- we can speculate on all manner of what if possibilities for what the Romans might have worn, but why do that?
A lot of hard work went into the costumes used in HBO's Rome so why get it wrong when the same amount of hard work could have gotten it right?
Why display a 10% possibility when you could dress your actors in a 90% probability?
And just for the record, I watched all of the Rome episodes and enjoyed them. Did some of the details drive me crazy? Sure, but I still had fun.
The same holds true for "I Claudius." I have a copy on laser disc and watch it now and again as the mood strikes me. Is the armor correct? Not at all, but I still enjoy it more than any other show or film about Rome.
Perhaps HBO will do better with Rome II -- I'm not holding my breath, but hope springs eternal.
WoadWarrior, there is a wealth of knowledge on this site. Not a day goes by that I do not learn something new. This is a great resource -- use it to your advantage.
Narukami
All professional armies have numerous regulations governing uniforms and equipment.
Yet in the field troops ignore these rules on a regular basis.
Thus TLC's point is well taken.
Is it possible that a Roman might wear certain items that go against most historical evidence?
Of course it is possible.
The study of World War II uniforms is full of such contradictions, exceptions and one of a kind examples. The advantage for the historian, the film maker and the re-enactor is that we have a wealth of photographic evidence to work with as well as all the original uniform regulations, directives, policies etc.
And yet film makers routinely go beyond the possible into the realm of the absurd when it comes to uniforms in World War II films.
Das Boot or Downfall or Soldier Of Orange or the Longest Day -- right on the money.
Raiders Of The Lost Ark -- an insane mishmash. Some obscure details are correct while other items are completely wrong or obvious fabrications.
To Hell And Back -- well the US uniforms are OK, but the German's...
Even Saving Pvt Ryan had its historical problems. (In this case they got the uniforms correct, but misidentified the German unit engaged in the final battle, even though it was correct in the screenplay.)
With Ancient Rome the problems of authenticity are greater still.
There is much evidence to be sure, but as any member here can tell you, what was "known" ten or twenty years ago has been revised several times based on new artifacts found, and new studies conducted.
TLC makes a cogent point -- we can speculate on all manner of what if possibilities for what the Romans might have worn, but why do that?
A lot of hard work went into the costumes used in HBO's Rome so why get it wrong when the same amount of hard work could have gotten it right?
Why display a 10% possibility when you could dress your actors in a 90% probability?
And just for the record, I watched all of the Rome episodes and enjoyed them. Did some of the details drive me crazy? Sure, but I still had fun.
The same holds true for "I Claudius." I have a copy on laser disc and watch it now and again as the mood strikes me. Is the armor correct? Not at all, but I still enjoy it more than any other show or film about Rome.
Perhaps HBO will do better with Rome II -- I'm not holding my breath, but hope springs eternal.
WoadWarrior, there is a wealth of knowledge on this site. Not a day goes by that I do not learn something new. This is a great resource -- use it to your advantage.
Narukami
David Reinke
Burbank CA
Burbank CA
