Subject: Heh, thanks.
Author:
Posted on: 2011-11-07 16:56:00 UTC
I've been burned by Wikipedia in the past, so I automatically avoided it. *hangs head in shame*
-
"300" research advice? by
on 2011-11-07 04:43:00 UTC
Reply
Hey, all. I'm currently working on a sporking of a very, very painful 300 Suefic, and I've come across a problematic piece of verbiage. Would anyone else familiar with the movie care to weigh in?
In the Suefic, the auxiliaries who at first challenge the Spartans on the road are referred to as "Acadians." The problem is that I can't find much information about what these guys are actually called in the film, especially since a lot of the dialogue is slurred and/or yelled. They could be Arcadians or Achaeans (both legitimate regions in Greece), or very improbably, Akkadians. The only Acadia I've been able to turn up is a Canadian region colonized by the French in the 17th century.
So I guess my question is--is this the Suethor's mistake, or Frank Miller's? Were these guys actually called Acadians in the film, or are there going to be confused French-Canadian settlers in the middle of ancient Greece? I've been searching, but I can't seem to find it out one way or the other. Any help would be greatly appreciated. -
Research should have been done... by
on 2011-11-07 11:34:00 UTC
Reply
...because even if may or may not be historical bull excrements, Arcadians are canon in 300.
Also, French-Canadians in ancient Greece are just too awesome. :D -
So . . . by
on 2011-11-07 16:56:00 UTC
Reply
Arcadians are canon, but Acadians are not. :D French-Canadian settlers it is, then.
-
It's the Suethor's mistake, but... by
on 2011-11-07 06:52:00 UTC
Reply
I'd give it a small amount of leeway, at least, owing to Gerard Butler's heavily-accented pronunciation of "Arcadian." It's extremely easy to mishear; I had to double-check it myself just to make sure I'd heard him right.
-
No! No leeway! (nm) by
on 2011-11-07 09:03:00 UTC
Reply
-
Argh. Ahem: No! No leeway! by
on 2011-11-07 09:04:00 UTC
Reply
The comedic possibilities of the confused French Canadian settlers are too incredible!
hS, with friendly return key -
Re: Argh. Ahem: No! No leeway! by
on 2011-11-07 17:05:00 UTC
Reply
I defer to your superior judgment, m'lord. *Vader kneel*
-
"Où sommes-nous? Et... by
on 2011-11-07 14:35:00 UTC
Reply
...oh non. Ils sont les Spartans. Et ils nous regarderont comme des Hilotes ou comme des ennemis."
(Where are we? And... oh no. They are the Spartans. And they'll see us as Helots or as enemies.) -
Laconia and Arcadia and Achaea by
on 2011-11-07 05:25:00 UTC
Reply
Sparta was actually the main city of Laconia, or Lacedaemonia. Laconia was a city state in ancient Greece on the Peloponnese (that nobbly large island part of greece), to the south-east. With its military might, it was the head of the Pelopnnesian League.
Arcadia was another province in on the Peloponnese, and a member (whether it liked it or not) of the Pelopnnesian League. It was located in the highlands, in the center of the Peloponnese.
Achaea was the strip directly to the north of Arcadia, also a part of the Pelopnnesian League. It is still not Laconia/Sparta.
I have no idea if the Spartans were called 'Arcadians' or Achaeans in the film, but even if they were, calling them as such is still incorrect. There were no Arcadians or Achaeans at Thermopolae: There were only Spartans, Thespians, and Thebans. -
Re: Laconia and Arcadia and Achaea by
on 2011-11-07 06:57:00 UTC
Reply
Really? From what I've read there were around 1100 Arcadians at Thermopylae, at least according to the accounts of Herodotus.
The movie never referred to the Spartans as Arcadians; the Arcadians showed up as aliies to Sparta, which -
They probably were there, but... by
on 2011-11-07 15:41:00 UTC
Reply
Not at the 'famous last stand' that the movie 300 talks about. There were uh... *checks wikipedia to supplement her old Classical Political history class* approx. 7000 Greeks in general at the battle of Thermopylae, but not all of them were fighting with the Spartans holding the pass at the battle the movie '300' depicts. There were approximately 300 Spartans, 700 Thespians, and 400 Thebans (it is unclear if the Thebans retreated, I forget if they did or not), and possibly a few hundred other people at THAT part of the battle.
Of course, ancient estimates (by Herodotus and others) for the amount of Persian soldiers ranges from 800,000 to four million which is highly unlikely, so... >_>; -
Re: They probably were there, but... by
on 2011-11-07 16:59:00 UTC
Reply
Then 300 definitely got it right; the Arcadians left before the big Last Stand.
Of course, they got other bits wrong, like I said, but the Arcadian bit was pretty much right. -
It ate the bottom half of my post... by
on 2011-11-07 07:00:00 UTC
Reply
Continuing from the above, the movie had the Arcadians show up as allies, which matches my sources as historically accurate.
The movie's by no means historically correct in every detail, but they got THAT part right, at least. -
It was never... by
on 2011-11-08 03:07:00 UTC
Reply
... intended to be historically accurate.
I might be jumping the gun here or making a fu over an implied obvious fact, but both 300 and the original film that Frank Miller based his comic on, "The 300 Spartans" (1962) were both differing interpretation of the events that took place. Neither were intended to be bang-on accurate about the course of the three day battle, but they get the general facts correct.
Another nitpick I noted within the modern "300" - why aren't the Spartans wearing armour? And wouldn't they dump their cloaks aside (as they would usually get in the way or become entangled mid battle)
Once again, this is down to the original creator's take on the battle, but it did kind of not make any initial sense that Spartan hoplites would be charging about with minimal protection.
But, that's just my opinion. -
Wikipedia says.... by
on 2011-11-07 05:08:00 UTC
Reply
Arcadians in the film, Thespians in the comics.
*kazoo* -
Re: Wikipedia says.... by
on 2011-11-07 22:08:00 UTC
Reply
I would argue the film version had way more thespians than the comic version!
-
Acting puns? by
on 2011-11-07 22:27:00 UTC
Reply
Well, of course, since the film had way more action than the comic.
-
Heh, thanks. by
on 2011-11-07 16:56:00 UTC
Reply
I've been burned by Wikipedia in the past, so I automatically avoided it. *hangs head in shame*
-
But but but... by
on 2011-11-07 05:26:00 UTC
Reply
... MY HISTORY SENSE. IT HURTS.
SO... INACCURATE... DUMB FILMS/COMICS... D8
-
Inaccurate? THIS... IS... SPARTA!!!! (nm) by
on 2011-11-08 09:51:00 UTC
Reply
-
There, there ... by
on 2011-11-07 10:02:00 UTC
Reply
*Pats Aster comfortingly on the arm*
At least this makes for a very useful thread, because I've often wondered how it should be treated in badfics, when fictionalized versions of historical events gets the facts wrong. -
Re: There, there ... by
on 2011-11-07 17:04:00 UTC
Reply
Presumably you'd accept the depicted versions as some kind of alternate-universe canon; I know that's how one would handle a Stargate work, so I figure it's the same deal here.