Some historians call it "The Stirrups Issue."
The Romans didn't have them, so why do so many "Swords and Sandals" films — "Gladiator" to name but one Oscar-winning example — suggest otherwise? (Hint: They don't want their actors getting killed.)
And should either scholars or general filmgoers care?
The necessity of historical accuracy in film "is really something scholars in classics have been talking about a lot," said Stacie Raucci, an assistant professor of classics at Union College. She teaches a course titled "The Ancient World in Film and Literature," focusing on how films "recast and reinterpret classical texts to reflect modern interests." (A television example would be how classical myths are portrayed in the NBC drama "Heroes.")
Academics and filmmakers will gather at Union in Schenectady today and Saturday for a two-day conference "Re-creating the Classics: Hollywood and Ancient Empires." The conference, which Raucci organized, is free and open to the public.
Accuracy not the point
Raucci said some scholars argue that these historical interpretations are pointless for us to watch. "I disagree," she continued. "Hollywood, while they are using the basic premise of the myths, their point is not accuracy, and we as scholars should accept that."
Forget the vans that can be seen in the distance during a pair of scenes in "Braveheart" (1995) — that's just a screw-up. But what about Mel Gibson's movie (which, like "Gladiator," won a best picture Oscar) changing the location of the Battle of Stirling from a bridge to an open field?
Or the Arch of Constantine's prominence in the 1963 film "Cleopatra" — when the Roman edifice wasn't built until three centuries after her reign?
The "I am Spartacus!" scene from Stanley Kubrick's 1960 classic "Spartacus"? One of the most memorable in movie history, to be sure — even if it never could have happened in real life: While Kirk Douglas' character sits anonymously among his captured rebel army, the actual Spartacus is thought to have died in battle.
Taking liberties
Historical dramas owe the spine of their stories to both actual and literary history, whether it's a World War II saga or an epic tale from antiquity. But what does the drama — by definition a fictionalized account — owe to historical accuracy?
Many films take liberties — some inadvertent, others intentional — with historical texts. While these are dramas — fictional, or at least fictionalized — many casual observers draw their historical conclusions from these works. After all, when was the last time you picked up Homer? (Your "Simpsons" figurine doesn't count.)
For years, many classicists have been dismissive of Hollywood treatments based on antiquity, due in large part to the liberties taken with facts. For the truly knowledgeable, details large and small presented incorrectly render the effort a failure.
"We are classicists," said conference attendee Monica Cyrino, a classics professor at the University of New Mexico who has written a book on the HBO series "Rome." "But some people are more accuracy-obsessed and grumpy than the rest of us. … Professors can drive themselves crazy pointing out (errors) like that."
The reason is while these works don't religiously hew to actual events, they can provide a starting point for viewers to find out more on their own. In addition, these films and series often use period films to offer commentary about present-day conditions: "Spartacus," for example, was very relevant to the Civil Rights Movement.
"Maybe I have a more forgiving attitude," said Hans-Friedrich Mueller, chair of Union's Department of Classics. "There is a tradition in classical literature to take what a predecessor did and adapt it. To people who complain about the movie 'Troy' and what they did with Homer, I say (the filmmakers are) just working as they did in the ancient world: They shape it for their own need."
But dramas still have an obligation, of sorts.
Accuracy "does matter, but at the same time you have to make a distinction between documentary and film work," said Jonathan Stamp, a BBC documentarian who served as a historical consultant for the HBO series "Rome." "That is a real concern, because (these dramas are) largely where people get their history." (Note: "Rome" removed stirrups from horses for close-ups.)
Changing the surface
Niels Mueller, brother of the Union professor, served as writer, director and producer of the 2004 drama "The Assassination of Richard Nixon" (2004), based on a real 1972 incident in which a distraught man (played in the film by Sean Penn) plotted to hijack a plane and bomb the White House.
In that film, "sometimes I would change surface facts to get to a deeper truth," Mueller said. The filmmaker chose to make minor factual changes from the record to further the narrative.
That said, extraordinary effort goes into getting little details right, Mueller said, from the types of planes used in his film set in 1972 to clothing.
"You want everything that you can possibly keep accurate: There is no reason not to be accurate," Mueller said. "You want to be with the details as accurate as you can. Most of the filmmakers I know are obsessive."
But sometimes errors are made: You can find thousands detailed on the Web. Sometimes things simply get missed. Sometimes there is no time to reshoot a scene or change location. CGI can't fix everything.
"If the choice is between getting the scene and not getting the scene," said Niels Mueller, "you get the scene."