So it all ends with CRUCIFIXION?


I think the Romans recaptured and crucified the slave rebels in the end, unless this show is an alternate "history." The Romans have crucified about six thousand of them, if I remember correctly.

reply

Yep it didnt end too well for them

reply

Crucifixion was too good for em! Lucky lucky Bastards!

Keef, trying to make sense out of chaos!

reply

I can't imagine how gory of a scene that will be

reply

Probably not worse than The Passion of the Christ

reply

Most certainly not, The Passion of the Christ is a snuff film.

Stupidity is the hallmark of humanity, the torch that is passed down throughout the ages.

reply

Maybe they'll go with a punk rock ending like in Inglourious Basterds when they kill Hitler, in the case of Spartacus have his Army conquer Rome and kill Crassus! Who cares if it is accurate it is way more fun if it is a surprise.

reply

I'm with you.

Have an epilogue set in the modern day in which Rome never fell; the possibilities for a spin-off are endless.

reply

I'm out if it goes that far. I can only stand so much blood and gore. The last fight scene of GOTA freaked me out! I almost fainted when the guy's face was ripped apart.

reply

The series ending HAS to be gory as hell. The "Appian Display" will have to be touched upon. Remember, Spartacus was never found after the final battle. All we know, he could have escaped with a small group over the maountains with a non fatal war wound. I hope the writers take it in that direction.

reply

[deleted]

Probably, according to various history, more than 3,000 people were crucified on the road to Rome.

Monkeys aren't donkeys, STOP MESSING WITH MY HEAD!

reply

Well, considering this isn't the actual tale of Spartacus then there's nothing to worry about here.

He was named Spartacus by Batiatus due to the nature of his win in the arena and the fact that he's a Thracian.

It may be that he is indeed crucified at the end of the last series, given that this was the way of the Romans, but it doesn't need to as they are two different stories.

If I built a big ship, sailed it across the Atlantic and called it Titanic ... Would that ship also hit an iceberg and sink? No, because although named the same, they're two different ships!

reply

I think they've made it clear from the beginning that they are indeed conforming to the historical Spartacus, but filling in a lot of detail since the historical record is only broad strokes. I never got the impression that "they are two different stories".

reply

So thats six thousand slave rebels on crosses along the Appian Way then?

Flynn 24

reply


Crucifixion´s a doddle.



If it harms none, do what thou wilt.

reply

> Well, considering this isn't the actual tale of
> Spartacus then there's nothing to worry about here.

What are you smoking???


> but it doesn't need to as they are two different stories.

There is only _ONE_ "Third Servile War". Go look it up. There are _NO_ "two stories" here. This is precisely what we are watching here. The "Third Servile War" aka "Gladiator War" aka "War of Spartacus" that took place between 73 and 71 BC during the Republican era of Ancient Rome.

So much for you paying attention to the show and your lacking education.

reply

[deleted]

> historicly its not known if Spartacus was his
> real name or even if he was a thracian.

Exactly. Some of the Latin sources simply say that he was a "Thraex". That can be a Thracian. But it could also just be the gladiator type and style (others being e.g. "Murmillo", "Secutor", "Retiarius", "Hoplomachus", etc.) he was trained in. So here in the show ... they made him both Thracian and Thraex, before he switched to the two-sword style "Dimachaerus".

The Latin texts are not really saying a lot about it. Roman authors totally avoided the topic for like more than 100 years! Or there was heavy censorship by the Roman authorities and all more detailed texts are lost to us. It's obvious that the Roman authorities were not very keen on having Spartacus' story spreading too far (the last thing they needed was slaves trying yet another rebellion) and it's entirely possible that whatever information the Romans had about Spartacus was on purpose destroyed by themselves hoping nobody would remember him ... Well, they almost succeeded in that.

So ... here in the show they took the liberty to make a lot of stuff up. They had to or else there would be no story to tell.

Given time + location (Roman Republic, around 70 BC in Capua) and the persons involved (Lentulus Batiatus, owner of a brutal gladiator school in Capua) one should actually be able to get the idea that this is the story of Spartacus, the leader of the slave revolt, and not some "other" Spartacus somewhere somehow.

(yes, at least in Western cultures one is supposed to learn that stuff in school ....)

reply

[deleted]

If you was to watch the first series they named him Spartacus AFTER the rebel Thracian.

You're the one smoking something my friend. Time to give it up, it's messing with your brain.

reply

Spartacus AFTER the rebel Thracian.


Wrong. They name him right there in the arena after a legendary Thracian king who lived several centuries earlier. Pay attention next time?? Given time (70 BC), place (Capua, Roman Republic) and the other people involved (Batiatus, Crassus, Caesar, Pompey...) it should be very obvious that this Spartacus is the Spartacus, the rebel leader of the Third Servile War.

reply

Crucifixion ain't no fiction; so-called chosen frozen. Apologies made to whomever it pleases. Still they got me like Jesus.

reply

[deleted]