WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.180 Hey, everyone. Welcome to the show. You know, 00:00:02.200 --> 00:00:03.620 I was thinking about this earlier, and it just 00:00:03.620 --> 00:00:06.599 hit me. Imagine being a woman in ancient Rome. 00:00:06.919 --> 00:00:09.740 Not just any woman, but a woman who's right in 00:00:09.740 --> 00:00:11.759 the thick of it. All the political trauma, the 00:00:11.759 --> 00:00:14.800 power struggles. And, well, she's not just watching. 00:00:14.859 --> 00:00:16.940 She's making things happen. You're talking about 00:00:16.940 --> 00:00:19.039 a world where the Caesars and the generals, they're 00:00:19.039 --> 00:00:22.559 the names we remember. Exactly. But like we've 00:00:22.559 --> 00:00:24.539 seen in other deep dives, women were there too, 00:00:24.699 --> 00:00:27.260 right? Pulling strings, fighting for their place, 00:00:27.379 --> 00:00:29.579 even when the history books try to forget them. 00:00:29.699 --> 00:00:32.520 Absolutely. And their stories often challenge 00:00:32.520 --> 00:00:35.079 the simple narratives, the ones where women are 00:00:35.079 --> 00:00:37.259 just background figures. Which brings us to the 00:00:37.259 --> 00:00:40.840 book we're tackling today, Fulvia by Jane Dracot. 00:00:41.000 --> 00:00:44.039 A biography that throws light on one of these 00:00:44.039 --> 00:00:46.960 women, one who was married not once, not twice, 00:00:47.000 --> 00:00:49.140 but three times to some of the most powerful 00:00:49.140 --> 00:00:53.090 men of her day. Clodius Pulcher, Gaius Grabonius 00:00:53.090 --> 00:00:56.630 Curio, and the one everyone's heard of, Mark 00:00:56.630 --> 00:00:59.469 Antony. Yes. It really does read like a political 00:00:59.469 --> 00:01:01.829 thriller, doesn't it? It does. And that's what 00:01:01.829 --> 00:01:04.269 I love about this book. Dracut doesn't just dismiss 00:01:04.269 --> 00:01:07.049 Fulvia as some ambitious villain. Right. There's 00:01:07.049 --> 00:01:09.549 more to her than that. Yeah. It made me think, 00:01:09.609 --> 00:01:12.650 how much do we really know about these historical 00:01:12.650 --> 00:01:16.170 figures, especially women whose voices were often 00:01:16.170 --> 00:01:19.829 silenced? It's so easy to fall into those oversimplified 00:01:19.829 --> 00:01:23.650 stories, isn't it? It is. Dracod's book reminds 00:01:23.650 --> 00:01:27.250 us to look closer, to question the sources, and 00:01:27.250 --> 00:01:30.329 to think about the context. Like The Late Republic, 00:01:30.530 --> 00:01:33.390 that was a wild time, right? Absolutely. A period 00:01:33.390 --> 00:01:36.250 of incredible instability. Exactly. And this 00:01:36.250 --> 00:01:38.010 book doesn't just focus on the big events. It 00:01:38.010 --> 00:01:41.010 dives into daily life, too. The customs, even 00:01:41.010 --> 00:01:43.170 how people show their status. It's like you're 00:01:43.170 --> 00:01:45.530 right there with them. The detail is incredible. 00:01:45.590 --> 00:01:47.590 You get a real feel for what it was like to live 00:01:47.590 --> 00:01:49.909 in that world. Which leads us to one of the challenges 00:01:49.909 --> 00:01:52.590 with this kind of biography. We're dealing with 00:01:52.590 --> 00:01:55.659 sources that are often... How should I put it? 00:01:55.739 --> 00:01:58.099 Pious. Yeah. They were mostly written by men 00:01:58.099 --> 00:02:01.280 and they often had their own agenda. So piecing 00:02:01.280 --> 00:02:03.280 together Fervia's story is like... Solving a 00:02:03.280 --> 00:02:07.939 puzzle. Yes. A puzzle with missing pieces. Draycott 00:02:07.939 --> 00:02:10.900 tackles this head on and forces us to question 00:02:10.900 --> 00:02:12.500 everything. Honestly, I think that's what makes 00:02:12.500 --> 00:02:14.699 it so interesting. It's what historians do, right? 00:02:15.060 --> 00:02:17.330 Unraveling the past. Trying to get as close to 00:02:17.330 --> 00:02:19.530 the truth as possible. Exactly. And that's why, 00:02:19.629 --> 00:02:22.530 for me, Fulvia is a solid four out of five stars. 00:02:22.770 --> 00:02:25.569 I agree. Dreycott's a skilled storyteller. You 00:02:25.569 --> 00:02:28.409 get the scholarship, but it's also a really engaging 00:02:28.409 --> 00:02:29.930 read, the kind of book that makes you want to 00:02:29.930 --> 00:02:33.090 keep digging deeper. So let's dig in, shall we? 00:02:33.400 --> 00:02:35.460 One of the first things that struck me, and this 00:02:35.460 --> 00:02:37.139 might seem like a small detail, but it's really 00:02:37.139 --> 00:02:39.719 fascinating, is how Roman naming conventions 00:02:39.719 --> 00:02:42.780 worked. For men, it's pretty straightforward, 00:02:43.020 --> 00:02:45.560 right? Yes, the three names. Prenomen, like a 00:02:45.560 --> 00:02:48.159 first name, then the nomen, the family name, 00:02:48.340 --> 00:02:51.159 and finally the cognomen, often a nickname or 00:02:51.159 --> 00:02:53.000 something that set them apart within the family. 00:02:53.219 --> 00:02:56.240 Right, like Marcus Tullius Cicero. But for women, 00:02:56.300 --> 00:02:58.280 it was usually just the nomen, the family name. 00:02:58.439 --> 00:03:00.439 And maybe some descriptors to tell sisters apart. 00:03:01.419 --> 00:03:03.599 Think Livia, the sister of Grusus. Yeah, like 00:03:03.599 --> 00:03:05.939 a label. What does that tell us about their place 00:03:05.939 --> 00:03:08.939 in society? It's pretty telling, isn't it? Women 00:03:08.939 --> 00:03:11.719 were defined by their family connections. First 00:03:11.719 --> 00:03:14.419 their father's family, then their husbands. As 00:03:14.419 --> 00:03:16.240 if their individual achievements didn't matter 00:03:16.240 --> 00:03:18.939 as much. It makes you wonder how it impacted 00:03:18.939 --> 00:03:21.560 their sense of self, their ability to be seen 00:03:21.560 --> 00:03:24.419 as individuals, as agents of their own destiny, 00:03:24.680 --> 00:03:27.080 a question Draycott raises throughout the book. 00:03:27.240 --> 00:03:29.259 And then there's how we refer to these figures 00:03:29.259 --> 00:03:32.000 today. We often use the names that became most 00:03:32.000 --> 00:03:34.560 familiar, even if those names changed throughout 00:03:34.560 --> 00:03:37.340 their lives. Like, we all know Octavian, right? 00:03:37.629 --> 00:03:40.430 He wasn't always Octavian. Exactly. He was Gaius 00:03:40.430 --> 00:03:43.050 Octavius Therinus before his adoption by Julius 00:03:43.050 --> 00:03:45.650 Caesar. And that change wasn't just a formality. 00:03:45.750 --> 00:03:48.129 It was a huge power move, connecting himself 00:03:48.129 --> 00:03:50.669 directly to Caesar's legacy. It's amazing how 00:03:50.669 --> 00:03:52.770 much a name can reveal about the politics of 00:03:52.770 --> 00:03:54.629 the time. Speaking of power moves, let's talk 00:03:54.629 --> 00:03:57.349 about Fulvia's first husband, Publius Clodius 00:03:57.349 --> 00:04:00.330 Pulcher. This guy was a lightning rod, a real 00:04:00.330 --> 00:04:03.469 firebrand. And the late Republic, as the book 00:04:03.469 --> 00:04:06.819 describes it, was already a tinderbox. Oh, absolutely. 00:04:07.039 --> 00:04:09.479 You had these deep political rivalries, often 00:04:09.479 --> 00:04:12.099 fueled by personal vendettas. It wasn't just 00:04:12.099 --> 00:04:16.439 about ideas. It was about power, revenge, survival. 00:04:16.920 --> 00:04:19.339 And Clodius, he wasn't afraid to use violence 00:04:19.339 --> 00:04:22.319 to get what he wanted. His assassination by Milo 00:04:22.319 --> 00:04:24.660 near Beauville really highlights how dangerous 00:04:24.660 --> 00:04:27.180 Roman politics had become. Imagine, both men 00:04:27.180 --> 00:04:29.980 had armed bodyguards, essentially private armies. 00:04:30.240 --> 00:04:32.100 It's almost like a gang war, but with togas. 00:04:32.560 --> 00:04:35.300 In a way, yes. It shows you how fragile the rule 00:04:35.300 --> 00:04:37.740 of law was, how easily it could break down when 00:04:37.740 --> 00:04:40.019 personal ambition and political maneuvering took 00:04:40.019 --> 00:04:42.600 center stage. And then there's Fulvia's reaction 00:04:42.600 --> 00:04:45.480 to Clodius's death. She doesn't just grieve privately. 00:04:45.579 --> 00:04:48.199 She puts his body on display right out in the 00:04:48.199 --> 00:04:51.480 open for everyone to see. A powerful image. And 00:04:51.480 --> 00:04:53.920 a major departure from the usual Roman funeral 00:04:53.920 --> 00:04:56.779 customs, which were very controlled, very ritualized. 00:04:56.860 --> 00:04:58.860 Why do you think she did that? It's a key moment 00:04:58.860 --> 00:05:01.060 in the book, and it really speaks to Fulvia's 00:05:01.060 --> 00:05:03.740 character. Draycott suggests that Fulvia understood 00:05:03.740 --> 00:05:06.500 how to use public spectacle, how to turn grief 00:05:06.500 --> 00:05:09.180 into outrage and outrage into political action. 00:05:09.420 --> 00:05:11.740 She wasn't just a grieving widow. She was making 00:05:11.740 --> 00:05:15.139 a statement. She was defying expectations. It 00:05:15.139 --> 00:05:17.100 makes you wonder why she provoked such strong 00:05:17.100 --> 00:05:19.759 reactions, both from people at the time and from 00:05:19.759 --> 00:05:22.079 historians later on. Well, some of it was just 00:05:22.079 --> 00:05:24.699 plain misogyny, right? Ancient Rome wasn't exactly 00:05:24.699 --> 00:05:27.300 known for its gender equality. No, definitely 00:05:27.300 --> 00:05:30.500 not. But Dracut goes further, arguing that the 00:05:30.500 --> 00:05:32.800 attacks on Fulvia's character were often deliberate 00:05:32.800 --> 00:05:36.300 tactics, especially during the propaganda war 00:05:36.300 --> 00:05:39.040 between Antony and Octavian. Absolutely. They 00:05:39.040 --> 00:05:41.439 were using her as a weapon to attack each other, 00:05:41.600 --> 00:05:44.060 painting her as power -hungry, manipulative, 00:05:44.220 --> 00:05:47.220 even sexually deviant. Anything to discredit 00:05:47.220 --> 00:05:50.519 her and, by association, Discredit Antony. So 00:05:50.519 --> 00:05:52.620 was she really as bad as they say? That's the 00:05:52.620 --> 00:05:54.699 question Dracaut wrestles with. And it's a tough 00:05:54.699 --> 00:05:56.459 one. We have to remember, the sources we have 00:05:56.459 --> 00:05:59.319 are often biased. They have an agenda. So we 00:05:59.319 --> 00:06:02.160 can't take them at face value. But surely there 00:06:02.160 --> 00:06:04.180 must be some truth to the accusations, right? 00:06:04.279 --> 00:06:07.240 Maybe. But even if she was ambitious, even if 00:06:07.240 --> 00:06:09.300 she enjoyed wielding power, does that make her 00:06:09.300 --> 00:06:12.420 a monster? Or just a woman trying to survive 00:06:12.420 --> 00:06:14.639 and thrive in a world that wasn't built for her? 00:06:14.860 --> 00:06:17.360 It's so easy to judge people from the past, isn't 00:06:17.360 --> 00:06:19.730 it? to forget that they were living in a completely 00:06:19.730 --> 00:06:22.209 different world with different values, different 00:06:22.209 --> 00:06:24.790 pressures. Exactly. And that's what Dracot does 00:06:24.790 --> 00:06:27.850 so well. She helps us understand Fulvia in her 00:06:27.850 --> 00:06:31.089 own time, in her own context, to see her as a 00:06:31.089 --> 00:06:33.709 product of her world, not just as a villain in 00:06:33.709 --> 00:06:35.870 someone else's story. Which reminds me of something 00:06:35.870 --> 00:06:38.370 we talked about earlier. Roman women couldn't 00:06:38.370 --> 00:06:40.370 hold public office. They couldn't lead armies. 00:06:40.670 --> 00:06:44.110 So how did they exert influence? It was often 00:06:44.110 --> 00:06:46.980 subtle, behind the scenes. Think about social 00:06:46.980 --> 00:06:49.519 networks. Women like Fulvio were at the center 00:06:49.519 --> 00:06:52.019 of these webs of relationships. They could use 00:06:52.019 --> 00:06:54.139 those connections to advocate for their husbands, 00:06:54.480 --> 00:06:56.660 their families, or even their own interests. 00:06:57.060 --> 00:06:59.420 And religion too, right? Like the Vestal Virgins. 00:06:59.560 --> 00:07:01.860 They weren't politicians, but they had enormous 00:07:01.860 --> 00:07:04.199 prestige and influence. Absolutely. They were 00:07:04.199 --> 00:07:06.420 seen as intermediaries between the gods and the 00:07:06.420 --> 00:07:08.699 people. Their pronouncements could sway public 00:07:08.699 --> 00:07:11.800 opinion, influence political decisions. And they 00:07:11.800 --> 00:07:14.519 weren't the only ones. Roman women often use 00:07:14.519 --> 00:07:18.079 religious rituals, omens, even dreams to shape 00:07:18.079 --> 00:07:20.740 events. It's like they found ways to work within 00:07:20.740 --> 00:07:23.279 the system to bend the rules without breaking 00:07:23.279 --> 00:07:25.819 them. And sometimes they broke the rules, too. 00:07:26.000 --> 00:07:29.720 Definitely. Draycott gives us examples of women 00:07:29.720 --> 00:07:32.819 who went beyond what was considered proper. Women 00:07:32.819 --> 00:07:35.860 who spoke out, who took risks, who fought for 00:07:35.860 --> 00:07:38.550 what they believed in. And those stories... They 00:07:38.550 --> 00:07:40.949 often get forgotten. They don't fit the neat 00:07:40.949 --> 00:07:43.930 narrative of the submissive Roman matron. But 00:07:43.930 --> 00:07:46.230 they were there, weren't they? Pushing the boundaries, 00:07:46.350 --> 00:07:48.730 making their voices heard. They were. And their 00:07:48.730 --> 00:07:51.389 stories are just as important, just as fascinating 00:07:51.389 --> 00:07:54.470 as the stories of the men who dominated the history 00:07:54.470 --> 00:07:57.149 books. Speaking of which, let's talk about Fulvia's 00:07:57.149 --> 00:07:59.389 family background. She wasn't born into poverty, 00:07:59.529 --> 00:08:02.110 was she? No, not at all. She came from a wealthy, 00:08:02.230 --> 00:08:04.709 influential family. Her father was a senator, 00:08:04.870 --> 00:08:07.050 I think. Right. And they had a villa in Tusculum. 00:08:07.399 --> 00:08:10.000 Sort of like a country estate, a place for the 00:08:10.000 --> 00:08:12.319 wealthy to escape the hustle and bustle of Rome. 00:08:12.519 --> 00:08:14.660 Yeah, and those villas weren't just about relaxation. 00:08:14.920 --> 00:08:17.100 They were centers of culture with libraries, 00:08:17.319 --> 00:08:20.399 art collections. Places where ideas were discussed, 00:08:20.500 --> 00:08:22.699 where connections were made. It was a different 00:08:22.699 --> 00:08:25.139 world from the back alleys and the forum, but 00:08:25.139 --> 00:08:27.810 it was just as important in its own way. And 00:08:27.810 --> 00:08:30.350 knowing about Fulvia's upbringing, it helps us 00:08:30.350 --> 00:08:32.429 understand her later choices, her ambitions. 00:08:32.730 --> 00:08:35.009 It gives us context, right? She didn't just appear 00:08:35.009 --> 00:08:36.950 out of nowhere. She was shaped by her family, 00:08:37.090 --> 00:08:39.409 her social circle, the world she grew up in. 00:08:39.549 --> 00:08:42.690 Exactly. And speaking of shaping, let's talk 00:08:42.690 --> 00:08:45.149 about marriage in ancient Rome. It wasn't just 00:08:45.149 --> 00:08:47.690 about love and romance, was it? No, not for the 00:08:47.690 --> 00:08:50.970 elite anyway. Marriage was a political act, a 00:08:50.970 --> 00:08:54.889 way to forge alliances, to solidify power. And 00:08:54.889 --> 00:08:57.580 the laws surrounding marriage... They were changing 00:08:57.580 --> 00:09:00.240 in Fulvia's time. Yeah, I remember reading about 00:09:00.240 --> 00:09:03.340 that, the shift from Kumano to Sinmanu marriages. 00:09:03.720 --> 00:09:06.759 A big change. Under Kumano, a woman came completely 00:09:06.759 --> 00:09:09.820 under her husband's control. But Sinmanu, she 00:09:09.820 --> 00:09:11.919 retained more legal and financial independence. 00:09:12.419 --> 00:09:14.659 Which would have given Fulvia more freedom to 00:09:14.659 --> 00:09:16.580 act, wouldn't it? To manage her own affairs, 00:09:16.659 --> 00:09:19.289 to make her own decisions. Exactly. And she had 00:09:19.289 --> 00:09:21.570 money of her own, too, from her inheritance. 00:09:21.649 --> 00:09:23.990 So she wasn't completely dependent on her husbands, 00:09:24.230 --> 00:09:26.529 which is probably one reason why she was able 00:09:26.529 --> 00:09:28.649 to play such a prominent role in Roman politics. 00:09:28.870 --> 00:09:31.330 It's interesting how even within a patriarchal 00:09:31.330 --> 00:09:35.389 system, women found ways to carve out space for 00:09:35.389 --> 00:09:38.190 themselves, to exert their influence. It's about 00:09:38.190 --> 00:09:40.970 resilience, isn't it? About adapting to the circumstances, 00:09:41.049 --> 00:09:43.649 finding ways to make the system work for you, 00:09:43.730 --> 00:09:46.309 even when it's stacked against you. And speaking 00:09:46.309 --> 00:09:48.750 of stacked against, let's be honest, Roman society 00:09:48.750 --> 00:09:50.889 had some pretty rigid expectations for women, 00:09:50.970 --> 00:09:53.029 right? Oh, absolutely. There was a very clear 00:09:53.029 --> 00:09:55.590 idea of what a virtuous Roman woman should be. 00:09:55.690 --> 00:09:58.450 She should be modest, obedient, focused on her 00:09:58.450 --> 00:10:01.210 family. And preferably silent. Yes. Her role 00:10:01.210 --> 00:10:03.629 was to support her husband, raise her children, 00:10:03.710 --> 00:10:06.529 and manage the household, not to meddle in politics 00:10:06.529 --> 00:10:09.850 or, heaven forbid, lead armies. And yet, as we've 00:10:09.850 --> 00:10:12.230 seen, Fulvia did all those things. So how do 00:10:12.230 --> 00:10:14.909 we reconcile those contradictions? Was she just 00:10:14.909 --> 00:10:18.250 an anomaly? A one -off? I don't think so. Draycott 00:10:18.250 --> 00:10:20.809 makes the point that Fulvia wasn't alone. There 00:10:20.809 --> 00:10:23.370 were other women who challenged the norms, who 00:10:23.370 --> 00:10:26.169 stepped outside the boundaries of what was considered 00:10:26.169 --> 00:10:28.350 acceptable. And they paid a price for it, didn't 00:10:28.350 --> 00:10:31.750 they? Often, yes. Their actions were criticized. 00:10:31.870 --> 00:10:34.889 Their motives questioned. They were accused of 00:10:34.889 --> 00:10:37.889 being unfeminine, of being too ambitious, of 00:10:37.889 --> 00:10:40.289 being power hungry. Sounds familiar, doesn't 00:10:40.289 --> 00:10:42.730 it? It does. It shows you how little has changed 00:10:42.730 --> 00:10:45.710 in some ways. Women who dare to be ambitious, 00:10:45.830 --> 00:10:48.309 who dare to seek power, they're still seen as 00:10:48.309 --> 00:10:50.690 a threat. But their stories are important, aren't 00:10:50.690 --> 00:10:52.950 they? Yeah. They remind us that women have always 00:10:52.950 --> 00:10:55.549 been there, fighting for their place, making 00:10:55.549 --> 00:10:58.029 a difference, even when history tries to erase 00:10:58.029 --> 00:11:01.360 them. Absolutely. And Fulvia's story is a powerful 00:11:01.360 --> 00:11:03.639 example of that. She was a woman who replies 00:11:03.639 --> 00:11:06.419 to be silenced, who dared to live on her own 00:11:06.419 --> 00:11:08.980 terms, even in a world that tried to confine 00:11:08.980 --> 00:11:10.960 her. I love how you put that. She lived on her 00:11:10.960 --> 00:11:13.559 own terms. OK, so we've talked about her background, 00:11:13.700 --> 00:11:16.220 her marriages, the social constraints of Roman 00:11:16.220 --> 00:11:18.740 society. Oh, we haven't even gotten to the Perusian 00:11:18.740 --> 00:11:21.590 War yet. Oh, you're right. The event that really 00:11:21.590 --> 00:11:24.750 solidified Fulvia's place in history, or at least 00:11:24.750 --> 00:11:26.870 in infamy. That's the thing, isn't it? The Parisian 00:11:26.870 --> 00:11:29.269 War is often presented as the defining moment 00:11:29.269 --> 00:11:31.990 of Fulvia's life. The moment she went too far. 00:11:32.129 --> 00:11:34.490 The moment she revealed her true nature as a 00:11:34.490 --> 00:11:37.389 ruthless, power -hungry woman. But Draycott challenges 00:11:37.389 --> 00:11:39.909 that interpretation, doesn't she? She argues 00:11:39.909 --> 00:11:42.590 that Fulvia has been unfairly singled out. Exactly. 00:11:42.590 --> 00:11:45.970 She compares Fulvia to other Roman women who 00:11:45.970 --> 00:11:48.210 were involved in warfare, who led armies, who 00:11:48.210 --> 00:11:51.070 defended their cities. And those women were often 00:11:51.070 --> 00:11:53.149 praised, weren't they? They were seen as heroes. 00:11:53.409 --> 00:11:56.600 So why is Fulvia different? Partly it's because 00:11:56.600 --> 00:11:59.080 she lost. History is often written by the victors. 00:11:59.100 --> 00:12:02.240 And in this case, the victor was Octavian. And 00:12:02.240 --> 00:12:04.600 Octavian had every reason to demonize Fulvia. 00:12:04.700 --> 00:12:06.799 Oh, yeah. His propaganda was brutal. I mean, 00:12:06.799 --> 00:12:08.960 those sling bullets with the insults. Brutal 00:12:08.960 --> 00:12:11.980 and effective. They painted her as a sexually 00:12:11.980 --> 00:12:15.100 frustrated, jealous woman who was driving Antony 00:12:15.100 --> 00:12:18.200 to ruin. It was a smear campaign, pure and simple. 00:12:18.399 --> 00:12:21.279 And it worked. It did. It cemented Fulvia's image 00:12:21.279 --> 00:12:24.259 as a villain. And that image has persisted for 00:12:24.259 --> 00:12:27.639 centuries. But Dracot's book forces us to reconsider, 00:12:27.879 --> 00:12:30.659 doesn't it? To look beyond the propaganda and 00:12:30.659 --> 00:12:34.299 see Fulvia as a complex, multifaceted woman who 00:12:34.299 --> 00:12:36.700 is trying to protect her own interests, her family, 00:12:36.779 --> 00:12:39.399 her legacy. Exactly. She was a product of her 00:12:39.399 --> 00:12:41.860 time, just like everyone else. A time of incredible 00:12:41.860 --> 00:12:45.580 upheaval and violence. A time when survival often 00:12:45.580 --> 00:12:47.860 meant making difficult choices. And she wasn't 00:12:47.860 --> 00:12:49.899 afraid to make those choices, even when it meant 00:12:49.899 --> 00:12:52.059 going against the grain, defying expectations 00:12:52.059 --> 00:12:54.690 and risking everything. That's what makes her 00:12:54.690 --> 00:12:57.750 story so compelling. She wasn't perfect. She 00:12:57.750 --> 00:13:00.570 made mistakes. But she was a force to be reckoned 00:13:00.570 --> 00:13:02.929 with. A woman who dared to challenge the status 00:13:02.929 --> 00:13:05.769 quo. A woman who, in many ways, was ahead of 00:13:05.769 --> 00:13:07.990 her time. And that, I think, is a fitting way 00:13:07.990 --> 00:13:10.870 to end our deep dive into Fulvia. A reminder 00:13:10.870 --> 00:13:13.230 that history is never simple. That the stories 00:13:13.230 --> 00:13:15.450 we tell and the stories we choose to believe 00:13:15.450 --> 00:13:17.870 can have a profound impact on how we see the 00:13:17.870 --> 00:13:20.700 world. and how we see ourselves. So keep questioning, 00:13:20.820 --> 00:13:23.100 keep exploring, and keep searching for those 00:13:23.100 --> 00:13:25.580 hidden stories, those untold truths that can 00:13:25.580 --> 00:13:27.820 help us understand the past and perhaps even 00:13:27.820 --> 00:13:30.600 guide us in the present. Beautifully said. And 00:13:30.600 --> 00:13:32.539 if you want to explore Fulvia's story in more 00:13:32.539 --> 00:13:35.279 depth, there's a link to Jane Dracod's book on 00:13:35.279 --> 00:13:37.539 Amazon in the description below. Be sure to check 00:13:37.539 --> 00:13:39.379 it out. And let us know what you think. We'd 00:13:39.379 --> 00:13:42.019 love to hear your thoughts on Fulvia, the Persean 00:13:42.019 --> 00:13:44.399 War, or anything else that struck you during 00:13:44.399 --> 00:13:46.820 our conversation today. Leave a comment below 00:13:46.820 --> 00:13:49.679 or share this episode with your friends. Let's 00:13:49.679 --> 00:13:52.460 keep the conversation going. And that's it for 00:13:52.460 --> 00:13:54.820 this episode of The Deep Dive. Thanks for joining 00:13:54.820 --> 00:13:57.240 us, and we'll see you next time for another journey 00:13:57.240 --> 00:13:59.460 into the past. Until then. Bye, everyone. Goodbye.