Emperors and Gladiators the History

Emperors and Gladiators

The history of the Roman Empire can be considered to be one of the most controversial yet most interesting pieces of history. It deals with an issue that has been a clear and constant subject for debate in all manuals of history. The talk about emperors and gladiators represented one of the most interesting themes of the history of ancient times and a lot of books addressed this issue. However, "Emperors and Gladiators" by Thomas Wiedemann tends to look at this relation from a different angle. In this sense, he discusses in his book the relationship that exists between the rulers and the ruled ones. However, he achieves this by pointing out several elements which determined the experience of the gladiators as well as the rulers.

The fact that the subject can be seen as being overly discussed is rather obvious. However, the innovative issue about the book is its approach. As he states in his introductory passages, his book would not focus on "a comprehensive collection of the surviving evidence about munera," nor would it be a description of different types of gladiatorial fighting, but an exploration of the "significance of gladiatorial combat in the context of Roman ideas about the society, morality and mortality" (Wiedemann, 1992, xvii-xviii). This is the best description of the book possible. It is not merely a historical account on the way in which gladiators were presented in the Roman society, their status, and their social relations. It is their presence and their role in the Roman society and what they signified for the society as a whole, as a cultural element which defined the society in its most intimate beliefs.

The major points of the book try to focus on precisely the idea of the inclusion of gladiators in the system of beliefs practiced by the Roman Empire, but in particular by the capital of the Roman Empire. From this point-of-view, the author makes clear the importance of the dwellers of the city as opposed to the dwellers of the provinces. It is not the fact that in the provinces the phenomenon of gladiators was not present, but in the capital it was the most important event taking place.

The origins of the phenomenon of gladiators are discussed in the first part of the book. Most importantly, they are not dealt with necessarily in the light of the historical events surrounding their existence but rather in terms of their significance for the Roman world. In this sense, the author points out that "they hold a central place in modern popular perception of Roman behavior. They were without a doubt also of major influence to the way the Romans themselves ordered their lives. (...) Gladiatorial contests did not originate as state occasions, but as obligatory offerings (munera) owed to important men at their deaths. It would be misleading to call them private occasions, since the men so honored had generally been public figures, and the object of the exercise was to broadcast their prestige and that of their families to the roman public in general" (Wiedemann, 1992, 2).

The author points out in a first instance the actual role of the gladiators. This was strictly directed towards the public and to their entertainment. Whether it was a matter of worship or whether it was an issue of honoring living persons, the gladiators were firstly seen as representatives of a show, of a spectacle. However, most of them honored those who had died in battle. Even so, one shortcoming of the depiction of the early days of gladiators is the fact that there is no reference made concerning their actual origins. Nonetheless, the author points out precisely the beliefs of the Romans associated with the fights. In the end, it was a matter of life overcoming death. Due to the fact that the fights would go on until one of the two died, it represented the symbolic meaning for the overcoming of death. This is an interesting point because it places very clearly the idea of gladiators as part of the Roman beliefs on mortality, on life and death.

The fact that the fate of the gladiators was determined by their will to survive and overcome death or by their ability to impress the crowd to such an extent as to have their lives spared is an important element to be underlined. Through this ritual the author makes it clear for the reader of the extent to which the lives of the gladiators were in the hands of fate which was determined by either the other man fighting for his life or the crowd enjoying the spectacle. It proves the fact that indeed the gladiators were part of the society and of the Roman system of belief.

The fight of the gladiators was in the author's opinion in the first instance not a display of power, as the ludi games were for the Romans, but rather a connection with mortality. In this sense, he argues that "they came to be associated with something that had developed under different circumstances as a different form of display, the gladiatorial munus, originally connected not with public power, but with individual mortality." (Wiedemann, 1992, 5)

Another major point made by Wiedemann is the one related to the change in perspective inside the Roman society. This is visible in the way in which the author describes the evolution of the fights with gladiators. In this sense, in the first part of the book the authors underlines the fact that it the beginning the main heroes were the ones that came back victoriously from the fights. However, in time, this attention shifted to the emperor especially as the Empire extended and more and more territorial conquests were being made. From this shift of view two ideas can be drawn. On the one hand, the fact that the center of attention became the emperor and the society came to see him as the one to worship; on the other hand, the fact that the gladiatorial contests became the main attraction of the day, aside from the fights with the animals in the morning and the executions of the convicted criminals.

The fights with gladiators were a sign of the Roman culture. They represented the Roman society during the time of the empire and remained a symbol of cruelty but also of cultural heritage. This is rather evident in the way in which the fights were depicted through mosaics, art, as well as different stone constructions. The author offers concrete evidence in the examples he provides to support his argument. In this sense, he considered the Colosseum as the main proof of the existence of the gladiators. Indeed, in every major depiction of Rome, the Colosseum as well as the fights with gladiators are essential. However, the authors notices, there have been a lot of inquiry in the ways in which these fights were conducted and their significance for Rome and the Roman culture. In any case, Wiedemann includes them as important pieces of the cultural heritage of the Roman Empire.

The power of the Colosseum and of the meaning it had for the Roman culture was so strong that it determined the provinces to copy it. More precisely, "if the Colosseum could not be emulated any more than Rome itself could, that did not stop municipalities throughout the western Mediterranean from devoting their financial resources to the erection of similar massive stone structures. Greek cities had a financial advantage here, in that they already had public theaters suitable for such spectacles, and only minor architectural alternations for safety reasons were required; and in the Celtic north west of the empire, both the availability of funds and local experience of massive earthworks meant that earthen rather than masonry structures were preferred" (Wiedemann, 1992, 22). Therefore, it can be said that gladiators and their place of fighting came to represent a cultural element that was soon exported throughout the empire.

The fights of the gladiators meant, according to Wiedemann, winning of the popularity in front of the people. This can largely be considered a fact because more and more local masters were willing to invest in the organization of such games. This comes to point out the fact that in the end the gladiators appealed to the violent, human nature of the individuals. In the first instance, the ones attending the shows had little to do with the more profound aspects of the fight against mortality. From this point-of-view, there is evidence to argue that the popularity of the emperor or local leader depended on his arrangements of the shows. Thus, "historical sources note that emperors who were unwilling to give games, like Tiberius, were unpopular as a direct result, while those who did, like Tiberius' successor Caligula won great popularity, if only temporarily" (Wiedemann, 1992, 23).

This aspect is all the more obvious in the fact that such shows were a social event. There were certain aspects of the shows any intellectual had to know. Aside from the philosophical aspects of the world "their audience will understand some of the technical vocabulary, and will admire and approve" the conduct of those arranging the games.

Another major point in Wiedemann's depiction of the Roma world is his connection to the morality of the fights with gladiators. He comes to depict them in the wider context of the religious beliefs of the Romans. More precisely, it was considered that gladiators possessed a certain virtue which could absolve them of any wrongdoing. At this point however, this belief entered in collision with the Christian belief in the Jesus.

There are several theoretical aspects which can be considered in terms of the Christian opposition towards the fights with gladiators. The author points out the fact that Christians considered the games to be repulsive from the point-of-view of the Christian doctrine. Indeed, while the Romans viewed the fights as a means to find forgiveness, the Christinas viewed faith and not virtue as a means to be absolved at this point. However, the author mentions a certain sense of morality to the games in the sense that he finds them justification in the desire of man to fight mortality. Still, taking into account the fact that Wiedemann mentions the participants to these fights to be also individuals who were eager to be paid for their participation, it is rather hard to determine their moral incentive for their contest.

The morality of the fights appears to lack a solid foundation in terms of arguments. Indeed, in the mythology of the Romans there are references made with concern to the virtuous nature that would eventually save the individual. However, through the arguments Wiedemann presents, it is rather obvious the fact that the main motivation was not related to ancient mythology. In the contests, the majority of them were in fact war prisoners or slaves who had been brought from the provinces as war trophies.

To illustrate this point there have been a number of pictures made on the issue of gladiators. One of the most recent and one which clearly points out this fact is the 2000 film "Gladiator" starring Russell Crowe. The account of the lives of gladiators represents in fact a small part of the film. Yet the details clearly point out the fact that the fights that went on between gladiators were by no means ones for absolution, but rather for survival. At the other end of the story, their organization represented simply a popular means of controlling the degree of happiness of the people. Therefore, it can be said that the idea of the morality of the fights with gladiators can be contested.