Talk:The Stolen Eagle

message: I would have preferred a screenshot with the recovered eagle, but was unable to find one among the online trailers. If anyone can find a better shot, please replace :Image:Rome episode 1.png (note: the image should be 320px wide and 180px high). --MarkSweep (call me collect) 08:18, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenshot

message: OK - I've reverted to quote spacing again.
I'm not sure whether your intense dislike of spacing quotes is part of the style manual or not, but my rational for using them is as follows:
Bullet points, which otherwise be ideal, won't work with multi-line quotes. The second line, and those following, cannot be made to line up with the initial like. Using an indent spacer doesn't indent the same amount as a bullet - and none of the couple of other tactics I tried to use to get bullets to work, dod.
Dividing lines are indistinguishable from the horizontal lines used as the main section dividers. I tried used a shorter horizontal rule, in the same manner that publishers use to divide breaks in the text flow, but you removed those as well.
Spaces aren't ideal, but nothing else to date seems to work constantly across multi-line quotes, on all pages.
If you can find a way to delineate mutli-line quotes, that works across all episode pages, that can't be confused for other page elements, that doesn't use spaces, that's fine - I'm not clinging to spaces out of any strong personal preference. I'm doing it because it's the only thing that seems to function unambiguously.
Beowulf314159 15:28, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting Quote 

message: Wouldn't be a less negative naming of the section more approbiate like "artistic license and deviations from history". I only think it stupid that anything that deviates from history is an error when the producers explicitly said they wouldn't follow history precisely but more in spirit trying to be authentic but not accurate. The current title implies they didn't know any better. Has anyone any proof for that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.13.71.152 (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I brought this up at Talk:Passover (Rome) - for Passover (Rome), I've suggested "Differences from historical events". The current wording that's used on all these episodes is pov/unsourced, and it's highly unlikely that these were errors, as opposed to intentionally meant to be fictional. Mdwh (talk) 01:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies and errors 

message: Somebody signing only as  68.194.241.81 commented that the way Octavian's age is depicted is "not actually inaccuracy, in episode 6 when talking about losing his virginity Octavian is said to be 13, and obviously some time has passed between eps 1 and 6" ... I beg to differ : Whether or not Octavius was 13 when he lost his virginity or not, something is deeply wrong here. Alright, he's "only 13" later in the series, and might be assumed to be younger at this point, but this does not change the fact that the Max Pirkis is obviously too old to portray an 11 year old, and that the responsibility of making the trip from Rome to Gaul with a prize gift, even under supervision by a trusted servant, is much too great for one so young (no matter how ambitious and politically minded mama is, and how trusted the slaves are, which may not be much, given her threats at departure). Also, by the time the events pictured in ep 2 (with the crossing of the Rubicon : 49 BC) happen, he is already 14 ... This should have been taken into account for later episodes (but I've not yet studied the timeline, so cannot assay when ep 6 might really be taking place, late 48, when he was 15, if already existing evaluations are right). But given milius' notorious record in adapting facts, or even existing data, in his scripts, I'm not at all surprised such a discrepancy should be present. Since he also vandalized this part of the article, before making an inaccurate "qualification", I'm taking the liberty to suppress it, having explained the fallacy of it. Any comments can be added onto this, or taken directly to me --Svartalf 22:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your argument makes sense to me. I was just tidying up, not trying to change what was put here - and thus incorporated that comment into the main point better. That particular comment about Octavian's age has been in the page for quite a while - Beowulf314159 22:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep... you did it while I was writing the comment above, I got the surprise as I was about to do the deleting. I was deeply riled up by mr number's shenanigans from the start, but had not studied the historical and series timeline deeply enough to feel right about acting on it before tonight, and decided to proceed anyway. Do we agree to let things stand as per latest edit? --Svartalf 23:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Octavian's age 

message: You know - I think it would have tickled Caesar's vanity to have Vercingetorix to surrender to him personally and not the state of Rome :) - Beowulf314159 22:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite possibly... A great man for vanity was Julius Caesar. But I strongly doubt he would have allowed himself such a trivial pleasure, at the risk of endangering his position... He was berated by the Optimates for his illegal wars, and pandering to the plebs with the huge profits thereof ; and he knew he was under frequent accusations of wishing to make himself king, the ultimate crime in Republican Rome. (which is why I guess he contended himself with overly extended stints as dictator, even more power and staying within republican forms) So it's unlikely he would have flouted the senate by taking personal victory and surrender from the Gauls rather than receiving them in the name of Rome.--Svartalf 23:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forms of surrender 

message: I notice that Caesar's paymaster and possibly secretary bears the name Strabo... and the link under the guest stars takes us to an article that mainly mentions the historian and geographer of that name. Is there any evidence whether the character is indeed supposed to stand for the geographer (who would have been a child at the time), or any other historical Strabo, or is he only supposed to be homonymous to them? --Svartalf 23:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it can be the historical Strabo, as you note, he would have been 8 or 9 years old at the time. I think I put that link in more for the comment on "Strabo" being a common nickname.  The character is actually shown on camera in the second episose. He is not a boy of 10 or 11 at that point. - Beowulf314159 23:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strabo 

message: Does anyone know anything about who the Blue Spaniards that captured Octavian were? Should the fact that Octavian was held prisoner by them be mentioned in the article? --Zegoma beach 19:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue Spaniards 

message: The use of the name Octavian should NOT be considered an historical inaccuracy, as claimed in the article.  It is true that his name was "Octavius", but "Octavian" is the accepted English translation.  If Octavian is an inaccuracy, then so are many other proper names in the series.  Cicero was pronounced "KEY-ker-oh" by the Romans, not "SIS-er-oh."  Caesar was pronounced like German "Kaiser."  Cato was "KA-toh," not "KAY-toh."  The producers' choice of Octavian over Octavius conforms to their choice that the scripts be written in English, not Latin, despite the fact that the Romans didn't speak English.
:Frankly, the whole "Inaccuracies and errors" section might as well be titled "Historical speculation, trivia, and original research".  The various instances of "it seems unlikely", the claims of an erroneous implication that Caesar was consul at the time (huh?), the quibbling over the amount of hair Ciaran Hines has...  Alai 15:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Historical Inaccuracies" Octavian vs. Octavius 

message: Despite the differences, the opening battle featuring Pullo and Vorenus seems very close to the depictions of them in De Bello Gallico. Pullo charges forward and Vorenus comes forward to get his sorry hide out of there. It takes an artistic license like the rest of Pullo and Vorenus' appearences in the series(and they're fighting a Celtic tribe, not a Belgae tribe), but it does seem similar to Caesar's description.--2ltben 02:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Opening Battle 

message: "Mark Antony comments to Vorenus that the Tribunes have noted him for his intelligence. Given the positions of the Tribunes (in this case probably the Tribuni Angusticlavii) within the legion, this meant that Vorenus had not only caught the attention of his commanding officer, but of 'mid-level' senior officers (Tribuni Angusticlavii being roughly the equivalent of a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Military). Vorenus must be a superlative officer."
This makes no sense. With five tribunes abgusiclavii and one tribunus militum Laticlavius in any legion and 60 centurions at full strength a veteran centurion who survived the whole 8 years campaign would be known by any tribune of that legion regardless of his capabilities (as centurions led by example their mortality rates were very high and legions rarely at full strength). So him being effective, loyal and coolheaded would be enough to raise some heads esspecially as the leadership of a legion was far less detached and  centurions actually very important to run it effectively (the first centurion would be close to the executive commander of a legion as the Legate and tribunes often were politicians and thus he'd be often the most seasoned officer in a legion.
It is however difficult to define what a "second spear centurion" is meant to be. Vorenus is made "first spear" lateron. If the latter actually meant "Primus Pilus" he'd be member of the first cohort before and thus an esspecially highranked centurion leading a double century.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.13.93.12 (talk) 23:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character description 

message: According to the Roman Consul article "Two consuls were elected each year, serving together with veto power over each other's actions, a normal principle for magistracies." Pompey, however, uses his consular veto against a senator's (Cato) proposal. Was this possible? Wasn't such a broad veto reserved to tribuni plebis only (and possibly dictators)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.101.185.82 (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consular Veto 

message: The Casting, Filming and Marketing sections should be moved to the Rome series article as they apply to the entire series, not this episode per se.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bron6669 (talk • contribs) 07:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:TVPRODUCTION, episode articles are meant to include background and production information. This article is about the pilot episode to the series, therefore it would not be complete without including some information about how the series was conceived. I wrote this article several years ago, but if I recall correctly, most of the sources discussed both the conception of the series and pilot episode interchangeably. Ruby 2010/2013 15:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections in wrong page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on The Stolen Eagle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://emmys.org/downloads/images/2006emmys/PrimetimeNoms.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:51, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Stolen Eagle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120410055109/http://www.visualeffectssociety.com/ves-awards/previous/4th-annual to http://www.visualeffectssociety.com/ves-awards/previous/4th-annual
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified