Accuracy of HBO Series: Rome (would like opinions before buy

[Phaichtos]

trying to tie the storyline into the whole Christ saga or whatever I got a little scared about these guys' ability to keep on with it. Still, since most people don't really know the history of these things anyway

I see a couple of flaws here....
* Most people don't know the history of the Battle of Pharsalus, or why that was important, so perhaps they ought not to show that event?
* Even fewer people perhaps know the history, say, of Caesar's having been captured by pirates, ransomed back from them and exacting revenge on them later on, so...?
**For the reason that people DON'T know is exactly the reason that historical events ought to be presented: to educate the readers/watchers.
Maybe I'm just confused in thinking that education is how we overcome ignorance?

I know what you mean, and I completely agree. Problem is, we are not television producers, whose job it is to cherrypick the "sexiest" aspects from history to present to a general audience in an easily digestible fashion. As long as the idea is to turn a profit, I tend to think producers--who themselves probably aren't history majors, or perhaps don't even care about the subject matter to begin with--are going to go with something that they think will make the most amount of cash. Since the logic indicates this will be the things the most amount of people will have heard of in some way (assassination of Caesar, rise of Octavian), I just don't see how they would rationalize making a 3rd season "prequel" with Caesar's wars in Gaul...

Even though it would be amazing!!! The times when they actually showed battle scenes were among my favourite in Rome for the obvious reasons. But as I mentioned above, these are often some of the most expensive bits to put together, so there is yet another reason where I'm afraid it would never happen that they would make a 3rd season just about the Gallic Wars.

Unfortunately.