Film Review: Spartacus Essay, Research Paper

What is clearly justified by the historical sources

In Stanley Kubrick’s film of Spartacus, many events that are documented in the

historical sources are accurately portrayed. In the film, we see Spartacus and other

slaves seize kitchen implements from the cookhouse in which they are eating and

attack the guards. This is clearly justified by Plutarch in Fall of the Roman Empire;

“seventy-eight, who realised this, managed to act in time and get away, armed with

choppers and spits which they seized from some cookhouse”.

The film shows that in the summer of 73 BC, “about seventy slaves escaped from

Batiatus’s training school at Capua and established a defensible position on Mount

Vesuvius some thirty kilometres away. ” This is clearly justified by the historical sources

and is accurately portrayed in the film.

The film also correclty portrays the Cilicians pulling out of an agreement with

Spartacus, in which they were going to transport slaves to Sicily. The Cilicians are

bribed by the Romans to pull out of the agreement, so that they can quell the slave

revolt. This left the slaves trapped near Rhegium in the Peninsula of Brittium, and with

armies marching towards them from north and east, Spartacus was left with no choice

but to turn and face Crassus…

What is contradicted by the historical sources

In the film, Spartacus says that he was a slave from birth and that his father before

him was also a slave. However, this is contradicted by accounts of Spartacus’ life. It is

said that he had once served with the military service with the Romans and was then

later sold as a slave.

The next contradiction is when, in the film, Spartacus leads the slaves to cross the

Alps where they would disperse and go to their homes. However, Plutarch claims that

the slaves had not agreed with Spartacus’ plan: “His men however, would not listen to

him. They were strong in numbers and full of confidence, and they went about Italy

ravaging everything in their way.1″

One of the most incorrectly portrayed events in the film is when spartacus dies. In the

film, Spartacus is crucified after being forced to have a gladiatorial fight with his close

friend. However, it is documented that Spartacus actually died in battle, when he ran

at Crassus: “Though he did not reach Crassus, he cut down two centurions who fell on

him together.”

What has been added in

In the film, Spartacus falls in love with a kitchen slave who he takes with him and who

eventually has his child. However, none of this is documented in the historical sources

and was probably added in to have the seemingly mandatory love interest that is in

Hollywood movies.

Along with Spartacus’ ‘wife’ comes Spartacus’ baby son who was born shortly before he

died. This has been added in by the film makers, probably to give the story an element

of happiness in the end because after the birth of Spartacus’ son, his blood line is

continued even though he is now dead.

It is clear that the film Spartacus is not a completely historically accurate depiction of

the actual events that happened around 73BC. Instead, it has taken certain events

and dramatised them in order to keep entertainment value high and keep the viewers

interested. However, in doing this, the film has become less historically accurate to the

extent that it could even be called a fiction film.

Bibliography

KR Bradley, Slavery and Rebellion in the Roman World, Indiana University Press,

Bloomington, Indiana, USA, 1989

Plutarch, Fall of the Roman Empire, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1972