Talk:The Gates of Rome

I just need to gripe about the historical inaccuracy of the Emperor series. Let me preface this by saying that I know they were meant to be entertaining (and I even found them so to a point) but if, like me, you find the gross "re-interpreting" of history to be somewhat galling, you know where I'm coming from and you might find a discussion of Iggulden's errors interesting.

The Emperor series can be disappointing to those who are interested in learning something about Roman history and not just reading what I would call "Cheap Pulp Historical Fiction". The books read very well as a heavily sensationalized adventure story with a good historical feel to them, but after reading Colleen McCullough's well-researched and epic Masters of Rome series I was so offended by Iggulden's books that I couldn't finish the third of them. McCullough's highly accurate books inspired me to look up many of the primary sources to verify her work.

Among the historical inaccuracies of Emperor:

Gaius Julius Caesar and Marcus Brutus did not grow up together, as in Emperor. Caesar was at least 12 years older than Brutus in real life and they both grew up in the city, as did most high aristocrats. Furthermore, Brutus was not an orphan but one of the most famous and wealthy aristocrats in Rome. Nor was Brutus a brilliant fighting machine, as in Emperor, but a rather un-martial man.

Caesar's mother, Aurelia, didn't die when Caesar was young, and nor was she mentally ill. She was a respectable Roman matron who played a significant role in his life and died while Caesar was away on his Gallic wars.

In the second Emperor book, Cato dies shortly after Spartacus' rebellion, whereas in reality he lived to continue being a thorn in Caesar's side until the Civil War, surviving even Pompey the Great to oppose Caesar. Nor was Cato fat, oppulent and corrupt, as in Emperor. In reality he followed the Stoic philosophy and was personally fastidious. He was regarded by history, including by the founding fathers of the United States, as a highly principled (if fanatical) protector of the old Roman republic.

The list could go on and on...

-Jeff Dean, 18 April 2006. ---


 * Iggulden does list the historical differences at the end of each book, and to be fair to him, never claims his book is anything other than fiction based on History. John the mackem 11:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


 * McCullough's books may be dull as dishwater, but by god, at least...no, I'm staying with dull.


 * After the assassination of Caesar, Brutus led men with charisma and verve, showing enormous personal courage, but you seem to have forgotten that.


 * It's called historical fiction for a reason.


 * Thanks for that assesment, Jeff Dean. I was thinking of reading these books, but seeing as I love Collen McCulloughs works - I think I'll skip these. Abel29a 16:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * If he told you to jump of a bridge would you do it? The books are fantastic. Read them.


 * Yes - because there is absolutely no difference between following a guys words into certain death, and listening to what appears to be sound literature advice :) Abel29a 09:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

inaccuracy
All the inaccuries are expalined and appologised for in the 'Historical Note' so i really dont see the point in this section —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke12345abcd (talk • contribs) 18:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Link
I'm removing the link in "Catalina", it doesn't lead to anything even remotely related to the subject at hand.Diana Prallon (talk) 17:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Corrected the spelling on the link, it's working now. Diana Prallon (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Summary too long?
Is the full summary section too long? RJFJR (talk) 11:13, 8 June 2016 (UTC)