Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes/The Romans


 * Nero was only 26 - 28 at the time this story was set and not middle aged as he is presented here.
 * Perhaps the decadent lifestyle was catching up with him. Also, famous rulers, particularly ones history hasn't been kind to, in movies and TV shows are often depicted older than they really were. Richard III was only in his early thirties when he died, yet he's often depicted as being much older.


 * The swords used are not historically accurate and the assassin's blade tip is circular.
 * In the Whoniverse, Roman swords may not be the exact same type used in the Real World. Also time is in flux.


 * The events of this story while presented for comic effect deviate a great deal from accepted historical fact.
 * Accepted history is sometimes inaccurate.


 * Nero shows remarkably little curiosity as to who it was trying kill him. Surely he would have pressed the Doctor to find out how he knew the goblet was poisoned.


 * It is highly unlikely that Sevcheria, a lowly slave trader cum games organizer, would ever be put in charge of security at the imperial palace.


 * Why doesn't Barbara say anything about their trip to Rome when they are back in the TARDIS. She doesn't even react to hearing that The Doctor was actually the lyre player that she had helped save.
 * She does say something, it just doesn't happen until the following episode, The Web Planet. She explains to Vicki that she didn't have the chance to say anything about it earlier.


 * The guards are seen carrying swords with nets, something that would never have happed in ancient Rome,
 * Accepted history is sometimes inaccurate. Also, events in the Whoniverse sometimes happen differently.


 * Locusta, though a real person, was not an 'official prisoner'
 * Accepted history is sometimes inaccurate. Also, events in the Whoniverse sometimes happen differently.