Gladiator
Gladiator is the general name given to men who were trained to combat with deadly weapons, for the amusement of the Roman citizens, at public funerals, in the circus, and more particularly in the amphitheatres. They were selected for the most part from captives taken in -war, but were sometimes slaves, and more rarely freeborn citizens who volunteered for the occasion. They are said to have been first exhibited by the Etruscans, and to have had their origin from the custom of killing slaves and captives at the funeral pyres of the deceased.
Gladiators were first exhibited at Rome in B. G. 264, in the Forum Boarium, by Marcus and Decimus Brutus, at the funeral of their father. They were at first confined to public funerals, but afterwards fought at the funerals of most/ persons of consequence, and even at those of women. Private persons sometimes left a sum of money in their will to pay the expenses of such an exhibition at their funerals. Combats of gladiators were also exhibited at entertainments, and especially at public festivals by the sedilcs and other magistrates, who sometimes exhibited immense numbers with a view of pleasing the people. Under the empire the passions of the Romans for this amusement rose to its greatest height, and the number of gladiators who fought on some occasions appears almost incredible. After Trajan’s triumph over the Dacians, there were more than 10,000 exhibited.
The Gladius was a sword, in some respects a general term descriptive of a certain class of instruments, which admit of occasional variety both in size and shape, but more particularly used to designate the straight, two-edged, cutting and thrusting arms of the Greek and Roman soldiery, as distinguished from the curved and fine-pointed swords used by foreign nations, or by particular classes of their own countrymen. The Romans used a sword of similar character to the Greek one until the time of Hannibal, when they adopted the Spanish or Celtiberian blade, which was straightedged, longer, and heavier than that of the Greeks.
Gladiators were first exhibited at Rome in B.C. 264, in the Forum Boarium, by Marcus and Decimus Brutus, at the funeral of their father. They were at first confined to public funerals, but afterwards fought at the funerals of most persons of consequence, and even at those of women. Private persons sometimes left a sum of money in their will to pay the expenses of such an exhibition at their funerals. Combats of gladiators were also exhibited at entertainments by the degraded nobles of Campania, though not at Rome, and especially at public festivals by the aediles and other magistrates, who sometimes exhibited immense numbers with the view of pleasing the people. Under the empire the passion of the Romans for this amusement rose to its greatest height, and the number of gladiators who fought on some occasions appears almost incredible. After Trajan's triumph over the Daciaus, there were more than 10,000 exhibited.
Under the empire, notwithstanding sumptuary enactments, the passion for the arena steadily increased. Augustus, indeed, limited the shows to two a year, and forbade a praetor to exhibit more thau 120 gladiators, yet allusions in Horace (Sat. u. 3. 85) and Persius (vi. 48) show that 100 pairs was the fashionable number for private entertainments; and in the Marmor Ancyranum the emperor states that more than 10,000 men had fought during his reign. The imbecile Claudius was devoted to this pastime; and would sit from morning till night in his chair of state, descending now and then to the arena to coax or force the reluctant gladiators to resume their bloody work. Under Nero senators and even well-born women appeared as combatants; and Juvenal (via. 199) has handed down to eternal infamy the descendant of the Gracchi who appeared without disguise as a retiarius, and begged his life from the seculor, who blushed to conquer one so noble and so vile.
Titus, whom his countrymen surnamed the Clement, ordered a show which lasted 100 days; and Trajan, in celebration of his triumph over Decebalus, exhibited 5000 pairs of gladiators. Domitian at the Saturnalia of A.d. go arranged a battle between dwarfs and women. Even women of high birth fought in the arena, and it was not till A.d. 200 that the practice was forbidden by edict. How widely the taste for these sanguinary spectacles extended throughout the Roman provinces is attested by monuments, inscriptions and the remains of vast amphitheatres. From Britain to Syria there was not a town of any size that could not boast its arena and annual games. After Italy, Gaul, North Africa and Spain were most famous for their amphitheaters; and Greece was the only Roman province where the institution never thoroughly took root.
Both the estimation in which gladiatorial games were held by Roman moralists, and the influence that they exercised upon the morals and genius of the nation, deserve notice. The Roman was essentially cruel, not so much from spite or vindictiveness as from callousness and defective sympathies. This element of inhumanity and brutality must have been deeply ingrained in the national character to have allowed the games to become popular, but there can be no doubt that it was fed and fostered by the savage form which their amusements took. That the sight of bloodshed provokes a love of bloodshed and cruelty is a commonplace of morals. The horrors of the arena may be attributed in part, not only the brutal treatment of their slaves and prisoners, but the frequency of suicide among the Romans.
On the other hand, care should be taken not to exaggerate the effects or draw too sweeping inferences from the prevalence of this degrading amusement. Human nature is happily illogical; and many of the Roman statesmen who gave these games, and themselves enjoyed these sights of blood, were in every other department of life irreproachable - indulgent fathers, humane generals and mild rulers of provinces. In the present state of society it is difficult to conceive how a man of taste can have endured to gaze upon a scene of human butchery. Yet it is not so long since bear-baiting was prohibited in England.
Hardly one of the Roman moralists is found to raise his voice against this amusement, except on the score of extravagance. Cicero in a well-known passage commends the gladiatorial games as the best discipline against the fear of death and suffering that can be presented to the eye.
It is obvious that Marcus Tullius Cicero, an equestrian and self-styled champion of the Republic, often speaks slightingly of the games. So far as may be judged from the letters, gladiatorial contests were not to Cicero's personal liking, vulgarity and extravagance being the assigned grounds of his disfavor, rather than immoral disregard for the life and happiness of fellow-men. Here moderns look in vain for any recognition of the rights of the slave as a man.
In Cicero's accounts of hostilities in Cilicia, in the most matter-of-fact, businesslike tone he tells of laying waste the enemy's country (F., 15, 4, 8-9), or selling the captives into slavery (A., 5, 20, 5), giving no indication of humanitarian sentiments of pity for the enemy to differentiate him from his contemporaries.
The important question is concerning the ground of the disparagement. Once we find Cicero hastening to Antium, and eagerly leaving behind the gladiatorial show of Metellus (A., 2,1,1). Again, although he has intended to take Tullia to see games—gladiators are not specified (A., 2, 8, 2) — he gives up the plan on the ground that it would be somewhat incongruous for one who wishes to avoid all suspicion of luxury (deliciae) to undertake a journey for the sake of amusement, and foolish amusement at that (non solum delicate sed etiam inepte, A., 2, 10).
On another occasion, the extension of the games for an additional day is a reason for being content to spend that day quietly at one of his villas (A., 4, 8a, 1). While others are sweltering at the games, Cicero is refreshing himself with the rare beauty of the scenery along the river at Arpinum (Q. F., 3, 1, 1). He discourages Curio from giving gladiatorial funeral games in memory of his father. Other means which involve talent and character are more effective for gaining popularity. Games are merely a matter of money, and everybody is tired of them anyway (F., 2, 3, 1).
While in Cilicia he rallied his friend Caelius for filling letters with gladiatorial gossip which no one would venture to tell him at Rome (F. 2, 8, 1). Still he expresses a friendly interest in the gladiators of Atticus (4, 4a, 2; 4, 8, 2), and suggests that Tiro witness a gladiatorial exhibition (F., 16, 20). These incidental references are in general keeping with the detailed discussion of the subject in the letter consoling a friend for his inability to attend the games (i7., 7, 1), though in such a letter we should expect the attitude of disparagement. "The games were splendid, but not to your taste" (F., 7, 1, 2) — this is the keynote of the letter.
The elaborate stage accessories were vulgar; e. g., six hundred mules in Clytamestra or three thousand goblets in The Trojan Horse. Cicero approaches the subject from the point of view of taste. So, speaking of the fighting of men and beasts, he says (F., 7, 1, 3): "But what pleasure can there be to a cultivated man when a weak man is mangled by a powerful beast, or a fine beast is pierced with a hunting spear?" The sacrifice of the man and that of the beast are spoken of in the same tone.
The emperor Claudius, although naturally of a gentle disposition, is said to have been rendered cruel by often attending the spectacles. The younger Pliny, who perhaps of all Romans approaches nearest to the modern ideal of a cultured gentleman, speaks approvingly of them. Marcus Aurelius, though he did much to mitigate their horrors, yet in his writings condemns the monotony rather than the cruelty. Seneca is indeed a splendid exception, and his letter to Lentulus is an eloquent protest against this inhuman sport. But it is without a parallel prior to the writings of the Christian fathers, Tertullian, Lactantius, Cyprian and Augustine. In the Confessions of the last there occurs a narrative which is worth quoting as a proof of the strange fascination which the games exercised even on a religious man and a Christian. He relates that his friend Alipius was dragged against his will to the amphitheater, how he strove to quiet his conscience by closing his eyes, how at some exciting crisis the shouts of the whole assembly aroused his curiosity, how he looked and was lost, grew drunk with the sight of blood, and returned again and again, knowing his guilt yet unable to abstain.
Shows of gladiators were abolished by Constantiue (Cod. 11, tit. 43) - the first Christian emperor was persuaded to issue an edict abolishing gladiatorial games (325), yet in 404 an exhibition of gladiators was held to celebrate the triumph of Honorius over the Goths, and it is said that they were not totally extinct in the West till the time of Theodoric.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
