Roman History to Know Before Watching Gladiator II

With Gladiator II on the horizon, my anticipation is through the roof.

As a sequel to the 2000 classic, Gladiator II takes place two decades after the original film's events. When I first watched Gladiator, I was captivated by Maximus’s heroism but also skeptical about its historical accuracy—could Maximus really just kill an emperor so openly in the arena? As I delved into Roman history, it became clear that there were many liberties taken.

Let’s start with the original Gladiator.

First, Maximus isn’t a real historical figure but rather a character created by combining traits of various historical figures. His loyalty to Rome, military valor, and favor with the emperor before falling victim to political betrayal closely mirror the lives of several Roman generals of the time. However, there is no “Maximus Decimus Meridius” in Roman history—a general turned gladiator avenging himself in the Colosseum never existed. Real Roman generals who defied the emperor usually faced exile, assassination, or revolt rather than public duels in the arena. Maximus’s journey, then, is more a dramatic tale of heroism than a historical retelling, designed to engage viewers.

The portrayal of Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus is also a significant creative adaptation. In Gladiator, Marcus Aurelius wishes to pass his power to Maximus but is murdered by Commodus. Historically, however, Marcus Aurelius was not killed by Commodus. He died of an illness during a military campaign, and though he had concerns about his son’s character, he did not strip him of succession rights. Gladiator reshapes Marcus Aurelius’s death to add dramatic tension rather than adhering to the facts.

Another dramatic choice was Maximus and Commodus’s climactic duel. In the film, Maximus defeats Commodus in the Colosseum, completing his arc of justice. But historically, Commodus wasn’t assassinated in the arena. In 192 AD, frustrated Roman elites conspired to end his reign by hiring his wrestling coach to strangle him in his residence. The historical Commodus met a quiet end rather than a public defeat, and his tyranny concluded in secret rather than as a spectacle.

The characters’ personalities also deviate from historical records. The movie shows a scrawny, conniving Commodus, whereas the real Commodus was strong and physically imposing. Obsessed with gladiatorial games, he often fought in the arena himself. Seeing himself as a reincarnation of Hercules, he liked to stage performances such as wrestling with animals and forced Roman nobility to watch, reveling in their discomfort.

Lucilla, Marcus Aurelius’s daughter, is portrayed as a delicate noblewoman in Gladiator. But in real life, she was far from passive—she actually attempted to assassinate Commodus. In 182 AD, Lucilla and a group of conspirators plotted against him, but the plan failed, and she was ultimately executed. The film simplifies her character, perhaps to fit the more traditional archetype of a “loyal woman,” overlooking her more complex historical role.

Now, let’s discuss the 20-year gap between the two films and what happened in Rome during that time.

Following Commodus’s assassination, the empire fell into a period of political chaos known as the "Year of the Five Emperors". In 192-193 AD, five men briefly held the title of emperor one after another, causing instability. Eventually, Septimius Severus, a North African general, seized control and founded the Severan dynasty, bringing temporary stability.

Gladiator II takes place in this Severan era, as hinted by trailers that introduce two new Roman emperors, Caracalla and Geta, sons of Severus. Historically, Caracalla and Geta had a deeply hostile relationship, sharing power briefly before Caracalla murdered his brother in 211 AD, assumed sole control and began a ruthless reign.

Lastly, let’s consider the relationship between history and cinema.

While Gladiator takes historical liberties, I believe these adaptations add dramatic depth. Film isn’t bound to historical precision; rather, it aims to inspire interest in history, prompting viewers to seek the real story behind these tales by themselves. In this way, historical fiction can both entertain and serve as a gateway to greater understanding.

In my view, knowing the history doesn’t diminish the film’s impact; instead, it enriches the viewing experience. Watching these scenes with a background in history lets us appreciate the artistry while maintaining a sense of reverence and curiosity for the real events and people who once lived in that legendary era.