7 Ways Gladiator Was Historically Accurate (& 8 Ways It Wasn’t)

7 Ways Gladiator Was Historically Accurate (& 8 Ways It Wasn’t)

Gladiator is one of the most beloved historical epics of all time but how much of the movie is accurate and how much changes history?

You Are Reading :[thien_display_title]

Hollywood has never shied away from plumbing the annals of history for inspiration. Oftentimes, it has led to highly entertaining films and Oscar-winning performances, as evidenced by films like Gandhi, Braveheart, and Titanic. One of Ridley Scott’s best movies is undoubtedly the massive hit Gladiator, which attempts to leverage history while making a few changes in the background.

Although the dramatic value of the film is top-notch, its historical accuracy is highly questionable. Artistic merit is one thing, but when it comes at the cost of historical accuracy, problems ensue. Gladiator gets a lot of things right about Roman history while botching a few key truths in the process.

Updated on August 28th, 2021 by Derek Draven: Many Hollywood films like to replicate history with a grain of salt, and Gladiator is no exception. It’s important to understand the real history behind any story, whether myth or actual account, and Gladiator’s attention to historical accuracy both deserve praise and criticism in equal measure.

15 Inaccurate: Weapons Of War During The Time Period

Historical movies tend to fudge the little things, but those who know said history can spot them a mile away. Weapons are one of the things that suffer the most in adaptations, as filmmakers sometimes yank items out of an arsenal from an entirely different time period.

Gladiator features massive dart launchers and catapults to sell the excitement of the opening scene in Germania; one of the most epic opening battles in cinematic history. Unfortunately, these were siege weapons in use at the time as a means of stationary defense, as opposed to moving platforms fighting in a forested environment. It just doesn’t pan out.

14 Accurate: The Symbol Of Freedom

One of the more interesting characters in the film was Proximo, the former gladiator who opened his own arena in Rome after gaining his freedom. His description of the process by which a gladiator would be given his freedom is historically accurate.

Once a gladiator had survived to reach retirement or had earned his freedom, he was given a wooden sword, or ‘rudis’, as a symbol. Although Proximo was freed by Emperor Marcus Aurelius, it was not necessary for every gladiator to receive that dispensation from the Emperor himself.

13 Inaccurate: Thumbs Up/Down

The heat of historical battles like the ones depicted in Gladiator relies a great deal on intense drama and exciting themes to draw the audience in. One of the ways the film does this is by featuring several scenes where the fate of the arena combatants is decided with a thumbs up or down gesture by the reigning Caesar.

However, there is little-to-no evidence that these precise gestures were used. The erroneous belief comes from a painting of Roman gladiators by Jean-Léon Gérôme named Pollice Verso, which shows the audience using the thumbs down sign to call for the death of the defeated gladiator. Alternate historical sources suggest that these gestures were indeed used, but in reverse.

12 Accurate: The Social Status Of Gladiators In Rome

The film attempts to add a bit of glamor to the life of a gladiatorial combatant by suggesting that the best of the best would achieve some sort of celebrity status, with perks to go around.

In reality, the combatants were lower than dirt in the eyes of the Roman people. They were there to fight and die, nothing more. That being said, the cost-prohibitive nature of bouts to the death meant that most gladiators yielded in combat, in order to fight another day.

11 Inaccurate: The Presence Of Christianity In The Film

The film insinuates that Christianity is an influential religion during the time period that the story takes place. Hints of this are strewn about, particularly during a conversation between Lucilla and Maximus where she mentions praying in a manner that suggests it’s a private matter.

Historically speaking, this is all-but-impossible. Lucilla would never have gone against the Roman religion of the time, and Christianity would not hold sway over the Empire until much later. It lends the film a sense of dramatic gravitas by adding Christianity in there as an anchor for the audience, but it’s a false assumption.

10 Accurate: The War In Germania

Gladiator had one of the most stunning and visceral openings to a classical epic ever filmed – a huge battle between the Roman army, and the Germanic hordes. Shot in a jarring and violent manner, the sequence put the audience directly in the middle of the battle to feel the raw grit, dirt, and blood.

Historically speaking, the suggestion that the Roman Empire was engaged in a prolonged war with Germanic tribes is accurate. Marcus Aurelius spent the latter part of his reign securing the northern frontier in an attempt to keep the Germanic tribes at bay.

9 Inaccurate: Maximus’ Existence

Russell Crowe’s portrayal of Maximus is obviously the highlight of the film, as it sets the narrative tone the audience can follow. His tribulations, losses, and victories are all born from a system that once held him aloft, only to send him into the abyss when it was convenient.

As effective as the story of Maximus is, the character didn’t actually exist. Rather, he’s a complete fabrication created solely for the film and has no mention in history whatsoever. Hollywood films often do this in order to create a recognizable anchor for the audience to follow along. In Maximus’ case, he’s there to sell big moments, such as a vengeful speech delivered unto his blood enemy Commodus in one of the most iconic quotes Gladiator has to offer.

8 Accurate: Maximus’ Character

The character of Maximus Decimus Meridius may have been fictional, but his personality and characteristics were firmly steeped in Roman history. When Rome faced a dire external threat, the Senate would appoint one man to see it through, with the expectation that they would relinquish power when the threat had been vanquished.

As the legend goes, the Senate approached the farmer Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus to subdue a hostile force. It took Cincinnatus a mere fifteen days to quell the threat, and once he did, he returned to his modest farming life. Maximus’ steadfast refusal to assume power in Rome mirrors that of the legendary Roman general Cincinnatus, as does his preference for a simple life.

7 Inaccurate: Lucilla & Commodus

Lucilla was presented as an upstanding woman in Gladiator who was concerned with the state of the Roman Empire. Her tempestuous relationship with her cruel brother Commodus is a main theme in the movie. Although it’s true that Lucilla did organize a botched assassination attempt on Commodus, there’s no evidence that he ever harbored any erotic feelings towards her.

It’s probable that Rome’s reputation as an opulent, corrupt and depraved empire may have inspired the film’s screenwriters to include such a salacious plot point in the script, but it has no basis in historical fact.

6 Accurate: Enmity Between The Praetorian Guard & The Legion

The Praetorian Guard were the Roman Emperor’s personal bodyguards and intelligence gatherers, keeping him safe from physical and political threats. The life of a Praetorian Guardsman was different than that of a Legionnaire, as they got to stay in Rome in relative comfort and safety, while the legions fought on the outskirts of the Empire.

This didn’t sit well with the average soldier, who looked at the Praetorians with disdain, disgust, and no doubt envy. This is mirrored throughout the film, perhaps most prevalently in the scene where Maximus escapes his execution in the North, calling one of his would-be executioners “Praetorian” in a derisive way, before dispatching him.

5 Inaccurate: Roman Democracy

Audiences may have thought the Roman Empire more progressive than they originally perceived when Gracchus states that “…the Senate is the people, sire. Chosen from among the people. To speak for the people,” envisioning a state similar to modern forms of representative democracy.

Gracchus’ statement is somewhat misleading, as the Roman Senate’s composition was actually made up of representatives from Rome’s oldest leading families. Eventually, the nouveau-riche and provincials gained entry as well, but the interests of the Senate were usually selfish in nature, looking to increase personal and familial stature, and rarely looking out for the common folk.

4 Accurate: Loyalty Of The Legion

When Maximus tells Gracchus, “Let my men see me alive, and you shall see where their loyalties lie”, he wasn’t kidding. Roman armies were extremely loyal to their generals, for many reasons. First, there is a strong sense of loyalty and camaraderie from having fought and bled together, as is common among soldiers throughout history, even up to the modern-day.

Second, Roman generals were often responsible for securing retirement packages for their troops in the form of land, pensions, or the promise of spoils from war. Generals who ate with their soldiers, slept in the same barracks, fought side-by-side with them, and guaranteed their comfortable retirement were often idolized and fought for till death.

3 Inaccurate: The Deaths Marcus Aurelius & Commodus

Marcus Aurelius was one of the greatest Emperors of Rome, the last of the ‘Five Good Emperors’ of the Antonine Dynasty, and historically renowned as a platonic philosopher-king for his works in Stoic philosophy. Although it makes for a compelling drama to have him smothered by his son Commodus so he could claim the throne, Marcus Aurelius actually died of natural causes.

As for Commodus, his fate was far less extravagant than the one seen in the film. He was actually assassinated by his sparring partner, a wrestler by the name of Narcissus, who had been bribed in a plot to replace the mad Emperor. Such was the way of Rome.

2 Accurate: Marcus Aurelius, The Man

The film takes a few liberties with the character of Marcus Aurelius, particularly when it comes to the nature of his rule. At the time, he co-ruled alongside Lucius Verus, his daughter’s husband. Besides the small caveats, Aurelius was something of a rock star during his time.

He was considered a good ruler, both competent and sound of mind, fair and tempered. This certainly seems to translate well into the figure depicted on screen.

1 Inaccurate: Commodus, The Man

Commodus is depicted as something of an unhinged villain in the film, but his real-life persona was far more outlandish. In fact, the film touches only lightly on the depths of his depravity. Once in power, he literally renamed Rome “the Colony of Commodus” in an obvious example of megalomania run wild.

He was more like Caligula in many respects, with massive indulgences being something of a staple of his weekly schedule. Unfortunately, his legacy would suffer at the hands of historians who did not take pity on him as they recounted his deeds. Likewise, despite its Oscar status, Gladiator is one Best Picture that hasn’t aged well, either.

Link Source : https://screenrant.com/ridley-scott-gladiator-movie-historical-accuracy-guide/

• Alfred Hitchcock His 5 Best (And 5 Worst) Films According To IMDb

• 90 Day Fiance Angelas Abusive Behavior & TLC Called Out By Fans

• AC Valhalla Players Hoping For 4K 60FPS Max Settings Will Be Disappointed

• Army of the Deads Opening Scene Has Two UFOs

• AC Valhallas Hidden Connection To Original Assassins Creed Discovered

• 15 Nickelodeon Kid Stars That Grew Up And Became Really Hot

• Arrow Ending After Season 8; Will Only Be 10 Episodes