MovieChat Forums > Boudica (2003) Discussion > Why does everyone dislike the Romans?

Why does everyone dislike the Romans?


I know they conquered a lot of countries and were cruel but howcome it's always the Romans that get the bad rap? What about the Mongol Empire led by Genghis Kahn? He was a barbarian too wasn't he? Also, not just the Mongol Empire but weren't all empires back in those days power hungry?

I saw this movie in World Mythology, I think my teachers got something against Italians or something. Like she always makes it sound like the Romans were the only ones who treated other people cruelly. It just bothers me because I'm part Italian myself.

reply

They rampaged around europe killing Celts and Teutons! In most battles they killed 80,000+ natives! I wonder why! lol Mind you as with most empires they introduced technological change and ideas. Although alot of these were from Hellenistic sources.

I think though, more empires are seen as the bully, because thats the way they behaved, same with the Greek,Ottoman,British,Empires!

reply

I think my teacher just dislikes Italians. Like she always makes it sound like it's only the Romans that were cruel to people.

reply

Romans were beastly. But I do not think they take the cake on bad people in history. But they are pretty high up there.

reply

you can disagree with what the Romans did, but you cant dislike them, they are fasinating, just like all the other empires are. All countries have terrible historys but the Romans are just more well known thats all

reply

Disliking Italians is nasty, truly. Although I also consider them to be the unofficial clowns of Europe but I would never hate them though.

Play it again Frank, I don't give a damn.

reply

It might be the textbook she's using. Apparently Jackson J. Spielvogel's works are popular for Community College history courses, and a lot of Amazon comments have been pointed at them for having an anti-Italian slant.

reply

Rampaged around Europe?
You should beat youe history teacher to death, cause it is a total moron. The Celts attacked first, the Teutons attacked first.
Those barbarians RAMPAGED FIRST!

God promises eternal life, we deliver it.
How I rose from the dead in my spare time so can YOU.

reply

hmmm, what was so bad about the Romans? ummmm...something about Christians and lions? Perhaps something to do with crucifixtion? How about Nero literally useing human beings, Christians among them, 50 or 100 at a time as torches to light a night time party? Vomitoriums? Organized crime? Wholesale destruction of other cultures, (although they didn't invent that)? They didn't invent slavery either but they sure had lots of slaves. Other than that and lots of of other things they were cool! And pretty much like human beings are when they get control over others.

reply

They weren't much worse than anyone else, especially the Celts, who carved human beings up alive on altars as sacrifices to their pagan gods. It was a practice Rome abolished centuries before and outlawed in its subject lands. If you watch Italian "sword and sandal" pictures, you know they portray Roman soldiers as the good guys. Besides, the British more than got even in WWII when they mopped the floor with the Italian Army. Of course, everybody else did too.

As far as I'm concerned, Boudica's loss of the Second Battle of Mona (Battle of Watling Street if you're British), the slaughter of her army by Suetonius' much smaller Roman force, the suicides of her and her family, and Rome's continued rule of Britannia for almost 400 years more all made for a happy ending. How can I say it's a happy ending? Because when your ancestors all came from Italy, it's a happy ending - that's how.

Of course, if I were British it would be a tragic ending. But remember, to Germans, "Das Boot" has an unhappy ending. To British viewers, it's a happy ending. Sometimes, it all depends on your point of view.

To all Italians and people of Italian descent who want to act "enlightened" and side with Boudica and the Britons, I have two words: Siete traditori!

reply

If it were not for Euro-Celts mining gold to buy Roman wine the Romans would have had to work a lot harder and not been such badasses as they got to be. They did business with the Celts for hundreds of years before they got strong enough and the Celts were disorganized enough

reply

That's what they get for being boozers. No wonder they were so disorganized; they were smashed on Roman wine. Besides, anyone stupid enough to trust the Italians deserves whatever they get. We are a very sneaky and treacherous people, and quite proud of it.

reply

I don't think that everyone dislikes the Romans at all. I think people in Britain have a high opinion of the Romans as intelligent and in no way savages. I think we are in some ways grateful for the literacy and technologies that came with being part of the Empire. Briton's during the Roman times kept their culture and language, while having a centralised government and laws. I think if Briton's today resent anything about the Roman Empire it was the way in which they left after 400 years of rule, leaving the people in anarchy, with no protection and no economy that triggered the Dark Ages. I think it is this power vacuum, which allowed the Anglo's and Saxons to eradicate Brythonic culture and language from a huge portion of the island (what would become England) that people regret most about Romano-British rule. I say this as a Welshman, maybe an Englishman would feel differently?

reply

I think to say one "likes or dislikes" the Romans seems to be missing the point. Empires tend to be quiet brutal, a point that is easily lost when even reading through the best-written history textbooks which represent empires as merely lines spreading across a map, as if all of those different peoples just joined a big club! The Roman Empire is the other part of this problem - remember a lot of Roman writers hated the Roman "Empire," and compared it negatively to the more "moral" days of the Roman Republic. What is really despised in an empire is the ruling classes, and in this case the patricians and those who ruled as "emperors," though not always using such a title. When the Roman army, sent by Roman rulers, invaded, it was an ugly scene.

Of course, this goes for all empires, and in comparison, the Roman Empire tended to be less brutal than most (the Persians were similar in their attitude to the Romans), but the brutal empires were legion before and after Rome: the Assyrians, the Neo-Babylonians, the Athenians and Spartans, the Mongols (the film "Mongol" is rather generous towards Temujin), and the Qin, just to name a few. In modern times, most any European power (but especially King Leopold's fiefdom in Congo) was particularly brutal in the African continent.

Empires are great only for the elites in the ethnic group in power. I dare say the ancestors of many Italians were, at best, mixed in their reactions to the empire.

reply

frequency-2 You are correct the romans killed christians.Poor christians.What about christians burning and killing everyone who refuses to follow christianity in the Americas.
What about christians killing each other due to formal divergences.
The christians are so good,everyone noticed.

reply

Vomitoriums are a myth. The word was used to describe the exits of the Colosseum because it vomited people out of it. There was no such room and there is no basis for thinking the Romans threw up so they could fit more in. Even if they did, would that have been as bad a thing as genocide or murder? It doesn't seem on the same scale to me.

They didn't invent any of that other stuff either. Crucifiction was used by the Carthaginians and forms of execution by exposure had been around since at least the Egyptians, burning people to death was a common enough punishment in extreme cases (although Nero using them to light his festival is almost certainly a myth), organized crime was around before the Romans and if their criminals were more organized then that's because they were more organized as a people, and slavery of course was not unique to the Romans. The only cruelty that can be laid solely at the Roman's feet was gladiatorial combat. Nobody did that before them (except possibly the Etruscans).

FABRICATE DIEM, PVNC

reply

Thank you. This strikes me a scholarly.

Carpe Noctem!

reply

Personally I think it's all in how you're viewing it. Romans made powerful enemies. They wanted to rule the world. If they weren't so power hungry they might have done just that.

But I still say it's all in the way you view it. I guess I don't see it the way you do.

Watching the Mongol's fighting would be like watching Flavor Flav take on the Incrediable Hulk, which doesn't make good tv, unless it's a comedy.

Romans on the other hand is like watching Arnold Swarznegger <sp> taking on the enemies in the Terminator movies.

Get it? They are a suitable enemy... a powerful force. Which makes good tv.

Why does everyone see things so negatively. GEEEEEZZZZZ

reply

Cause if you want to join the People's Front of Judea, you have to really hate the Romans.

reply

Who hates Romans? I find their culture a wonderful adventure to explore. Like any other culture, they were both good and bad. Slavery, the poor, Armies, battles, monuments, roads, etc. Why they are always portrayed as the bad guys, is that there are more little people in the world than big people. The little people think the big people are bad, the big people want to make movies with the little people being the heroes and the little people spend their money on movie tickets, making the big people even bigger!

reply

"Apart from the aqueducts, the roads, sanitation, irrigation, medicine, public baths, education, wine, and public order, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

"Uh, brought peace . . ."

"Oh, PEACE?? Ah, shaddup!"



All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?

reply

Romans were easily among the least cruel in the ancient world, still they were quite cruel by any modern standards. Romans definitely were more lenient than the Britons of the earliest centuries.

Play it again Frank, I don't give a damn.

reply

[deleted]

Not anyone disliked Romans my dear...;;) For instance ..ME! lool
Roman empire brought CIVILIZATION in Europe and almost ALL we have today is because of ...THEM! They invented the paved roads, baths,bridges,aquaducts,concrete etc etc.If you are British you should look to the bright side: if weren't they, you would be today speaking...celtic instead of...English! lloooll
Roman empire had a modern,discipline army , maybe the MOST one in the whole world in those times...if they had developed their own cavalry, they would've dominated the world another 1000 years back;)
They were so good that winning with only two legions (10.000 men)against 200.000 was not a problem to them, so bad-asses they were!:)
Though, one man frightened them most and almost erased them from the map: HANNIBAL! Romans were good and survived almost a millenium because they adapted and learned from mistakes like not other people in history that time.They learned lessons the hard way in Hannibal times.:)

reply

Those numbers 10.000 men against 200.000 is such a piece of garbage.
The Celtics would have at best 20.000 and i'm being nice.
The numbers were told by a roman to make them look like gods.
Look at the Trojan war if you read the book literally (like so many are doing today with religious texts)that would lead you to the conclusion that Troy was a formidable huge force.
Wrong!Troy was a small kingdom.

reply