Chapter 22
TERTULLIAN
murderer to be cast before the lion will have the staff and cap of liberty granted as a reward to a savage gladiator,* 2 while he will demand that the other man who has been slain be dragged back to feast his eyes upon him, taking delight in scrutinizing close at hand the man he wished killed at a distance3—and, if that was not his wish, so much more heartless he!
Chapter 22 (1) What wonder! Such are the inconsistencies of men who confuse and confound the nature of good and evil through their fickleness of feeling and instability in judgment. (2)
Take the treatment the very providers and managers of the spectacles accord to those idolized charioteers, actors, athletes, him, burn him! Why is he so afraid of facing the sword? Why is he not bold enough to give the death stroke? Why is he not ready enough to die?' (Seneca, Ep. 7.4) . Cf. Lactantius, Divinae institutiones
6.20.13: 'They are even angry with the combatants, unless one of the two is quickly slain; and, as though they thirsted for human blood, they hate delays.'
2 Popular and successful gladiators received a staff (rudis) as a sign of their honorable discharge from active service. Though they were exempted from any further obligation to perform, they remained slaves in their gladiatorial school and were promoted to an overseership. Only with the bestowal of the cap of liberty (pilleus) did a gladiator win complete freedom. The pilleus was a felt cap, shaped like the half of an egg, and made to fit close; it was given to a slave at his enfranchisement as a sign of freedom.
3 Tertullian alludes to a special piece of equipment in the amphi theater. It consisted of a platform in the middle of the arena, on which the wounded victims were placed, thus enabling the spectators to observe more accurately their death-struggle. Such a platform was used, for instance, in the amphitheater of Tertullian's native city,
Carthage (cf. Passion of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas 21) . Cf. a similar allusion in Lactantius, Divinae institutiones 6.20.12.
SPECTACLES
and gladiators, to whom men surrender their souls and women even their bodies, on whose account they commit the sins they censure: for the very same skill for which they glorify them, they debase and degrade them; worse, they publicly condemn them to dishonor and deprivation of civil rights, excluding them from the council chamber, the orator's plat form, the senatorial and equestrian orders, from all other offices and certain distinctions.1 (3) What perversity! They love whom they penalize; they bring into disrepute whom they applaud; they extol the art and brand the artist with disgrace. (4) What sort of judgment is this—that a man should be vilified for the things that win him a reputation?
Yes, what an admission that these things are evil, when their authors, at the very peak of their popularity, are marked with disgrace!
1 The best performers in the circus, theater, amphitheater, and stadium became popular favorites. At their appearance they were greeted with shouts of applause and good wishes. Often, they received handsome gifts in the form of money, landed property, and fine clothing. Poets sang their praises; commemorative columns and gilded bronze busts and statues perpetuated their fame. Scorpus, a famous charioteer under Domitian, was called by .Martial (Epigr. 10.53) 'the lustre of the noisy circus, the short-lived delight of Rome and the object of its applause.' The heroes of the arena were especially the ladies' favorites, as can be seen from the graffiti (scribblings) on the Avails of Pompeii.
'Lord of lassies' (dominus puparum) and 'Maidens' sigh' (suspirium puellarum) are terms of endearment lavished upon some of these idols. Tertullian's statement that social and legal infamy was attached to all these professions needs some qualification. It applies to the performers in the arena and on the stage. On the other hand, the charioteer Avas not as contemptible as an actor or gladiator, though, to the Roman way of thinking, exposing oneself for popular pleasure always implied a loss of dignity. Athletes, finally, were hardly affected in their social and legal position. According to the Roman jurists (Digesta 3.2.4), they did not follow an actor's trade, but performed only to show their bravery. Morover, the reputation once enjoyed by the athletes in Greece still clung to them.