Ancient Rome - What was the arena and what were “the games”?

PREFACE --I'm a writer, That means I write stuff. Please check out my newest release, a short story collection called "Put Your Favorite Picture Here" at https://www.amazon.com -However, that's not my only work. This post is an excerpt from my current project, a guide for wargamers to Roman Gladiators. Taking a tip from Cory Dotorow, I've decided to share this work in progress chapter by chapter on my blog.

If you wish to support this blog, well, at the moment there's no Patreon button, but feel free to show your enthusiasm and support by browsing the blog, checking out the other posts, sending links to friends and sharing through social media, and leaving comments and asking questions or starting discussions. Thanks.

Ancient Rome-What was the arena and what were “the games”?


No automatic alt text available.

The “Roman Games” consisted of several kinds of events. In this section, we will look at the events and discuss what they were as well as look at their potential for gaming. 

1.                   Gladiatorial Combats
Of course, one of the most common and popular events at the Roman Games were Gladiatorial Combats. These consisted of staged fights between individuals or small (perhaps less than ten at the most to give an estimate) groups of fighters. These fights were staged and scheduled. The fighters, although usually not volunteers, could be considered professionals in that they were trained, drilled, and kept in shape for the purpose of appearing in events such as these.
The fighters were classified into different types. Each type was equipped in a certain way to fight and trained to fight in a certain style that fit their armor and weaponry as well as the mythology and background behind the type of fighter they were supposed to be portraying. These different types will be discussed in a later chapter. Suffice it to say that there were customs and traditions and expectations surrounding the gladiator battles of this time.  There were referees and other workers expected to maintain these traditions and ensure that the fights were done in the proper manner.
Although these combats were forced, and thus morally questionable at best, from our safe perspective two thousand years later, give or take a few centuries, there is a lot of potential for small scale historical gaming. Games featuring conflicts between individual gladiators or small groups of gladiators can make good games. Campaigns that follow the ups and downs of an individual or perhaps a gladiatorial “ludi” can also be interesting. (A ludi is a school or troupe of gladiators usually under the ownership of a particular individual,)
This book will focus on such gladiatorial combats and providing the information needed to game them in a  satisfying and reasonably historically correct manner.

2.                   Animal shows
The ancient Romans loved animal shows. As the empire expanded they went to great expense and effort to bring large quantities of exotic animals to Rome in order to parade them before the Roman citizenry. Animals used ranged from ostriches to elephants; hippos and lions also being favorites.
Once the animals were exhibited, however, it was customary to kill them in front of the crowd for the amusement of the spectators.  [1] Sometimes this was done by letting the animals kill and then eat each other. Other times it was done by letting hunters or others shoot them with bows.  The result was a gory spectacle.
 It takes a bit of a stretch to see how these could make good games, but it is possible. Perhaps one could have a game where animals fight each other or archers compete to see who can kill the most animals? It would be an unusual but not impossible game.  

3.                   Venatio
The Venatio were sort of a mixture of gladiatorial contests and animal shows.
Animals were put in the arena and then trained animal fighters called venatores would enter and fight them.   The venatores were trained to do this. Like the gladiators (who fought humans only) many venatores were slaves or people who otherwise were forced to do this.
It should be mentioned that venatores and gladiators were separate categories and people generally did not belong to both or cross back and forth. (Although many gladiator game rules encourage them to do so, for better or worse. If it makes you happy and harms no one, we’re not going to make any effort to stop you. Just please understand that it is not historically correct according to current understanding. )   
The animals were generally dangerous animals that were able to fight back against the venatores, thus ensuring an exciting show for the spectators.
For better or worse, however, this was not always the case.
On one occasion, the Emperor Commodus entered the arena himself and killed a large number of ostriches and other large necked birds in an effort to display his prowess to the crowds. The crowds reportedly cheered although as it would have been dangerous for them not to, they seem to have cheered under duress.
This booklet will only discuss venatio in a superficial manner.

4.                   Chariot races
The Romans loved chariot races, and they were a major part of activity in the arena as well as spectator sports throughout the Roman Empire. 
Although Roman chariot races make a wonderful subject for exciting games, we will not deal with them here. There are, however, several good games that cover Roman chariot races. Not only that, but some Roman gladiator rules include rules for chariots and in some cases extend them to chariot races.

5.                   Mock land battles
Gladiatorial combat involved individual or small groups of highly trained fighters.
By contrast, the Romans occasionally held much larger battles, consisting of small virtual armies and have them fight for the entertainment of the crowds. Like the gladiator fights, the combatants were usually slaves and not willing participants. When compared to the the gladiator contests however, these fights were  much more bloody and the risk of death much higher.
Although a slave, a gladiator was a highly trained, highly specialized, and well fed slave, with the capacity to earn its owner great wealth and prestige and thus highly valuable. Although he, or in some cases, she, might not have much value as a human being, they did have a high value as a commodity and thus a gladiator’s life would not be thrown away casually. Therefore most gladiatorial battles did not end in death for the fighters. (Exact casualty rates will be discussed later.)
By contrast, the fighters in the large scale battles were also slaves but were not trained and did not have as high a monetary value. Therefore, as they possessed less value, it did not matter so much if they died.  So for that reason these battles were not just larger, but also had a high rate of fatalities.
Of course, these could make interesting wargames, particularly as a variant on the more common ancient miniatures battle. A good set of medium size battle rules would be required. However, as the size of the battles and rules required are very different from those of the better known, more common gladiatorial battles these mock land battles will not be discussed in much depth here either.

6.                   Naumachea
Not only did the Romans have mock land battles in which large numbers of slaves were forced to fight one another to the death, but they also had mock naval battles using real ships on artificial lakes, again for the amusement of spectators.  These, too, resulted in large numbers of deaths and casualties.
Again, these could make interesting games. However, as the rules for small scale naval battles are very different from those for small scale gladiatorial battles, they will not be covered except in a cursory manner here.
Romans did not like to see themselves defeated so the battles they recreated rarely involved Rome itself. (Nossov 2009, 41-43) (Junkelmann 2000, 74) (Auget 1994, 1972, 68-71)

7.                   Noxii
The Roman legal system tended to be both brutal and public. For many reasons, including showing that justice was swift and harsh and that the bad would be punished it was considered appropriate for condemned people to be killed in front of a crowd of enthused spectators.  There were several ways in which such condemned people were executed. These included being bound to stakes then fed to or mauled by animals, bound to stakes, then lit on fire (sometimes after being covered with enough pitch and such so that they would be able to function as a torch and light the arena) or put in the arena free, and then mauled and eaten by animals.
The victims of such executions, the people condemned to die, were called “Noxii.”
I cannot imagine that such events would make a good game, and therefore will not discuss them much here. 
Along similar lines, the Emperor Claudius, one of several emperors known for decadent and elaborate spectacles, arranged one in which the sack of a British town or city was simulated for the entertainment of the crowd with he taking the role of commanding general of the sacking army in the event. (Auget 1994, 1972, 70-71)

8.                   Mythological dramas held in the amphitheater (were these the executions?)
In some cases, the Romans put extra time and effort into these executions in order to provide a better spectacle and more entertainment for the audience. Sometimes these executions would take the form of a drama, often from legend or myth, with a condemned person taking the central role. For instance, many know the tale of Icarus, the man who built wings and flew only to fly too close the sun, have the wax on his wings melt, the wings collapse, and then fall to earth and die unable to fly anymore.
The Romans might act this out in the arena in front of a crowd. They might get a pulley system and a rope, take a condemned prisoner, then put wings on him, hoist him up and swing him around for the amusement of the crowd while the audience “oohs” and “aahs” and cheers. All the while someone would narrate the story of Icarus, and then, at the key point where the wings falls off and Icarus plummets to his death, the arena workers would release the rope from which the condemned man hung, causing him to fall to his death.
Gaming possibilities? Not many, and therefore this subject also will not be covered much here.

9.                   Ordinary, by modern standards, performers

Finally, it’s worth mentioning that ordinary dramatic performers would perform in the arena.
These would include dramatic troupes that would perform theatrical presentations such as dramas and comedies. Trained animal acts would also perform. There were a wide variety of such performers.
For better or worse, however, it’s difficult to imagine them as subject of a wargame and therefore they will not be dealt with much further here.



[1] Someone once commented that one of the keys to understanding ancient and medieval history is to realize that many adult type decisions, including “what do we do with the animals at the animal show, once the show is over?” were being made by teenagers or even adolescents.


Work in Progress -Gladiators in the Roman Arena -Who were the Gladiators?

PREFACE --I'm a writer, That means I write stuff. Please check out my newest release, a short story collection called "Put Your Favorite Picture Here" at https://www.amazon.com -However, that's not my only work. This post is an excerpt from my current project, a guide for wargamers to Roman Gladiators.

Image may contain: Peter Huston, sitting, table and indoor
                                        From Albacon 2018, me running a game of Hoc, Habet, Hoc





Most Gladiators were unwilling participants forced to fight against their will. In fact, originally, they were slaves, prisoners of war, and condemned prisoners.
Although historians and other social scientists debate the motivations and appeal of the Roman Games, they generally agree that the Roman Games were a bloody spectacle where the authorities publicly displayed their dominance over criminal elements within the empire, foreign enemies, and the threatening aspects of nature represented in the form of wild and savage animals.
It’s for this reason that those who fought and died in the arena were slaves, prisoners of war, and criminals, condemned men. On occasion these were noteworthy condemned men, for instance, Caligula, one of Rome’s most decadent and insane emperors, occasionally ordered nobles who had offended him or someone else he considered important to fight in the arena but they were still condemned men. (Nossov, p. 147)
Although some gladiators voluntarily took to the life of being a professional fighter who killed and risked death, maiming, or wounding for the amusement of others, this was rare.   
To fight in the arena was unpleasant and dangerous. Not only could gladiators be killed, injured, or maimed, they also could be called upon to fight and kill people they trained with, lived with, and were friends with. Not only that, but in Roman culture, people who entertained others were looked down upon. As the gladiators fought for their lives, drunken spectators would laugh and jeer at them. It was not uncommon for gladiators to attempt suicide rather than face the arena, and although steps were taken to prevent this, nevertheless, some succeeded at ending their own lives. (Nossov, p. 151)
Many gladiators resented their lot. Today, most people have heard of Spartacus’s revolt. Spartacus, a prisoner of war, was forced into being a gladiator. He and his fellow gladiators eventually found a way to take over their ludi (gladiator troupe), escape, and then stage a revolt of gladiators and other slaves. This was a desperate act with little likelihood of real long-term success. Although they had  several successes in battle against the Roman authorities and army, ultimately their revolt was put down and the bulk of the surviving participants executed. A fuller accounting of these vents is included in a later chapter of this work.
One detail of the revolt that is of particular interest here is that on at least one occasion when Spartacus and his troops captured Roman soldiers, they forced them, in turn, to fight as gladiators for the amusement of he and his troops, something that horrified the Roman authorities when they heard of it. To these gladiators turned rebels, this turnabout and punishment of their aggressors, gives an insight into how they really felt about their lot.   
Sometimes the organizers of games did not just want slaves for the arena but wanted particular kinds of slaves in order to present a unique or particularly themed event. Dwarves and women were sometimes sought as a variation on the standard battle between two men. Although Blacks were not uncommon in the arena, there was one game where all the participants were Black, a unique twist on the standard event, much appreciated perhaps by the crowds.
Still, as stated above, not all gladiators were forced into this role. Some were volunteers.  As time went on and the games became more popular and interest in not just gladiatorial events but specific gladiators grew, and some gladiators became popular and admired by the spectators, ordinary Romans often dreamed of emulating them.  In time, volunteer gladiators, called “auctorati,” became increasingly common. Some had debts they had accrued and needed to pay off.  Others sought thrills or glory. Aside from thrill seeking or wishing the glory, although glory mixed with disgust, that eventually came from being a gladiator, motivations could vary. Some were people who had spent their inheritance and now needed funds.  (Wisdom, p. 13) As kidnapping was a real problem in the Roman empire, others took to the arena to win sufficient cash to ransom a friend or relative who was being held captive. (Wisdom, p. 16)  (Nossov, p. 146, 147-148)

 BIBLIOGRAPHY


Auget. 1994, 1972. Cruelty and Civilization --The Roman Games. New York: Barnes and Noble Books.
Fields, Nic. 2009. Spartacus and the Slave War, 73-71 BC -A Gladiator Rebels Against Rome. Oxford, UK : Osprey Publishing .
Junkelmann, Marcus. 2000. "Familia Gladiatoria -The Heroes of the Amphitheatre." In Gladiators and Caesars the Power of Spectacle in Ancient Rome, by Kohne Ewigleben. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Kohne, Eckart and Ewigleben, ?? 2000. Gladiators and Caesars --The Power of Spectacle in Ancient Rome. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Nossov, Konstantin. 2009. Gladiators --Rome's Bloody Spectacles. Oxford UK: Osprey.
Strauss, Barry. 2009. The Spartacus War. New York, N.Y. : Simon & Schuster Paperbacks .
Wisdom, Stephen. 2001. Gladiators 100BC -AD 200. Oxford: Osprey.



Book Review: Terra Cognita -The Mental Discovery of America, by Eviatar Zeruvabel


Years ago, I had the opportunity to ask Magnus Fiskesjo, one of my thesis advisors at Cornell, about Gavin Menzies books on his alleged (and easily disproven) claims of the Chinese discovering America. Dr. Fiskesjo recommended I read this book instead, I did and found it quite interesting and encourage others to do so as well. Please note while I read the first edition, there is now a second edition of the book. (This essay was originally written as a review on . Amazon.com)


Terra Cognita: The Mental Discovery of America by [Zerubavel, Eviatar]



As we all know, Columbus was not aware in 1492 that he had landed on a new continent. Hence the lingering odd term "Indian." This work discusses in great detail the often ignored process, and it emphasizes process, of how and why and when Europeans began to realize that they had discovered an entire new continent (or two) that was completely unconnected with Asia.

The author is an Israeli geographer and does this in large part through discussions of period maps and a couple globes. (The work includes 31 plates of period maps showing how cartographers in Europe viewed the relationship between newly discovered areas of America and the rest of the world.) He emphasizes in great detail the need to look at varying definitions of terms like "continent," "discover," "North America," and so on.

A great deal of time is spent not only on explorers, be they Spanish, Italian, Viking, English or Russian (who approached North America from the West but were the first to truly prove it is not attached to Asia) over a period of many centuries, as well as the cartographers and writers in Europe who disseminated, analyzed, sorted, filtered and processed the new information that was being uncovered and tried to put it in a context. (In fact, this work was first recommended to me by a professor who recommended it as partial refutation of Gavin Menzies silly claims that the Chinese not only discovered America in 1421, but, somehow, instantly new what it was and then told Columbus.)

Best of all, the work is only 118 pages long, plus plates and footnotes, making it a relatively quick read.

It does provide a great deal of information on the context of actions that might otherwise have been missed. (i.e. Coronado was apparently searching for a mythical seven cities of gold, but was not sure how these cities related to the civilization of China and the spice areas of SE Asia, for instance, and thought there might be a connection between the two.)

Dolly Parton sings about women's suffrage






Dolly Parton, yes, THE Dolly Parton has a new song about women's suffrage and how women won the right to vote in the USA. Seems well worth sharing here. Give it a listen and leave a comment about what you think.





HOW TO BROWSE THIS BLOG


If you're on a browser that works like Google Chrome, look to the upper left of the blog post and you will see a box like group of bars. Click on it. Scroll down. Play with the labels and the archive section. If it only shows a limited selection of topics, click on the section that encourages you to see more. When you're done exploring and reading, if you'd like, leave a comment or share through e-mail or social media. Thanks. 

South East Asian Cultural Boundaries of the Pre-Modern World and their Continuing Effects on the Modern World.

Author's note: Originally written almost 9 years ago. Still significant today. I've spent a lot of time in the last ten years studying, visiting, teaching, and hanging out with refugees from this part of the world. This is the map that made a lot of things click.
SUNDAY, APRIL 26, 2009
Asia / Refugee Stuff : South East Asian Cutural Boundaries and the modern world.

Ah! I wish I could go back to graduate school and make writing and researching about Asian culture and history the focus of my life. Alas! It shall not be so anytime soon.

Therefore, for the moment, I must be content to speculate, pontificate and elucidate in these pages instead of elsewhere.

The importance of this map is explained in the text. 


One of the joys of academic research is when you get those wonderful "Eureka" moments. That great "Ah ha!" feeling sweeps throughout you and you realize that a great deal of once complex information suddenly makes sense and fits a pattern. (Of course, one must be careful of assuming this feeling actually means your conclusions are making sense. Conspiracy theorists and schizophrenics, for instance, are blessed with brains that misfire this way all the time. Still, the sensation is blissfully exciting, which explains perhaps why schizophrenics and conspiracy theorists spend so much time lost in their own odd thoughts.)

Recently while reading "In Search of Asia" I had such a moment while viewing this map. The map is entitled "Centers of power in Southeast Asia at the end of the Eighteenth Century" and appears on page 98 of the 1987 edition of "In Search of Southeast Asia."




Essentially what the map shows is the extent of cultural power and cultural influence in various centers in southeast Asia at the beginning of the modern era. At the time the kingdoms and cultures that are now dominant in Burma, Thailand and Vietnam did not have boundaries in the sense of anything resembling the modern sense of the term. And the role of the king was often different than in Europe of the time as well. Simplifying greatly for ease of transmitting a concept, the king hd less of a political role and more of a ritual role in the lives of his citizens. His power was not seen as uniform through a given geographical territory. Instead, his power radiated outward from the center, becoming weaker the further one was from that center. Instead of there being a strict boundary to the state, instead the state just sort of faded away becoming less and less important until it faded away altogether at the edge of civilization. Then came the rugged lands of hills and forest and jungle, the lands where the uncivilized people who existed outside the pale of civilization.

And that's what this map shows. The black "core area" is the center of the civilized area. Beyond it is a gray realm, where civilization exists but there's a certain lack of sophistication although the people are still part of the dominant culture. Light gray is a "fringe area" and the striped lines represent the areas where two different relatively equal states vie for control.




Now if one examines the map of Burma what you essentially see is the way in which Burma is divided between a dominant, Burmese culture, and a surrounding area with many other minority cultures. And it is from these minority cultures, i.e. the Karen, the Chin, that many refugees come. And to some extent the reason they come here is over a dispute over their relationship with the central government of the state now known as Myanmar.

In neighboring Thailand this map also shows the difference between the areas where hill tribes (some of which overlap with Burma) live.

As for Vietnam, the map shows the area where the so-called montagniards live.

A similar map could easily be made for China.



Roman gladiator gaming at Council of Five Nations 2016


Historical miniature gaming has been a hobby of mine since college or earlier. A few years ago, I became interesting in Roman gladiator conflicts and other arena events as a focus for wargaming. I soon painted up some figures, created a model arena, and found a set of rules and ran a few games. One of these was at a local convention called The Council of the Five Nations. These are photos of that game.





I used a set of rules called Red Sand, Blue Sky from a company called Two Hour Wargames. Although I have since moved on to a different set of rules for the period, Hoc, Habet, Hoc from Flagship Games, I had several interesting games with this set of rules although ultimately I found them a bit too mechanical and limited for my tastes. In these rules each turn requires that the players determine initiative and then each gladiator engages in a sequence of actions. To mark which player moved his figure when, a sequence that shifted each turn and depended on the characters' abilities as well as a random dice roll, poker chips with numbers were used.



The players conduct their moves.



Here you can see part of the game, four gladiators, two heavily armored Myrmillo and two lightly armored Retarii armed with a net and trident pair off for battle. This was a historically authentic match.



You can see here that the order of play is determined and marked with the numbered Poker Chips.




A Myrmillo manuevers to attack a retarius from the flank.






The Retarius has thrown his net and missed. It lies nex to a heavily armored Myrmillo making recovery of the net difficult. Can the lightly armored gladiator survive the match?

I've run the game again in 2017 and will be running it again this year in 2018 using a new set of rules (Hoc, Habet, Hoc) and also having upgraded and improved my arena. I look forward to showing more photos of the result.

Martin Van Buren House

In upstate New York,  not too far south from Albany but on the opposite, eastern, side of the Hudson River, lies the former home of Martin Van Buren, the eight president of the USA. Today his home has been restored and is a National Historic Site. Tours are given by Park Rangers, and there is a also a film show and a bookstore. In my opinion, the site is well worth an hour and a half visit.

What follows are pictures of my visit, but you can see the official National Park Service site here:
https://www.nps.gov/mava/index.htm



Martin Van Buren was a single term president. He served from 1837-1841 and was the first US President to serve who was born after independence from Great Britain. Curiously, and as an ESL teacher writing in the midst of an anti-immigrant time, I find it fascinating that while native born, his first language was not English, but Dutch. Many readers will remember that New York was originally settled by the Dutch, only later becoming a British possession, and at this time there were still large Dutch speaking communities in New York State including much of the upstate New York, upper Hudson River, Albany and Rensselaer County areas. For most of his life and time in office, said the Ranger who gave the tour, Van Buren was embarrassed by the fact that when he became excited or agitated, his Dutch accent tended to emerge and become thicker.




Van Buren was born and raised in upstate New York. His father was a tavern owner and he was third of five children, although his mother had three other children, his two half-brothers and his half sister, from a previous marriage.  The tavern was an important local meeting place and it was often used for political meetings. As one of  the key issues in the USA during Van Buren's political career was slavery, and Van Buren's relationship and attitude to that institution has come under intense scrutiny, it is worth mentioning that his father did own a small number of slaves who worked and assisted in the tavern and Van Buren did grow up in a slave owning family at a time when slavery was legal in New York State. 

Timeline copyright 2012 by Encyclopedia Brittanica, no ownership of this image is claimed nor should one be implied.

In 1796 he was apprenticed to a lawyer, learned this trade, and in 1803 opened his own practice with his half-brother James Van Alen. In 1897, he married a cousin named Hannah and the couple had four children before she passed away 12 years later from tuberculosis. He did not remarry and raised four sons as a widower.

Van Buren became active in state politics, and played the political game well in order to get ahead and meet his objectives. In fact, his critics called him shiftless and devious for hiding his beliefs and shifting alliances with the factions that dominated the state's political scene. In 1812 he was elected to the New York State Senate and ultimately became New York State Secretary of State. Van Buren was instrumental in creating the Albany Regency, seen by many as a prototype for the political machines that came to dominate not just Albany but much of the country for years, and, in some locations, even to the present time.

In 1828, he ran for governor and won but resigned only 12 weeks later in order to take a post as Andrew Jefferson's Secretary of State. He had worked for years to support Jackson in this, Jackson's second bid for the presidency. He became an important part of Jackson's cabinet during a particularly tumultuous time in American politics. 

In 1832, Van Buren became Jackson's vice-president.In 1836 he became president himself and served for a single term. Van Buren's party passed him over for re-election and James Polk ran for president in his stead in 1836, winning the next election. Van Buren retired, spent the next few years in Europe, and then returned to live much of the rest of his life at this mansion in upstate New York. 

The key events during his four years in office including avoiding war with Canada during a dispute over the Maine-New Brunswick border, controversy on whether or not to admit Texas into the Union (he was opposed as they were a slave state), and an economic crisis. Despite being largely against slavery (although his own life showed an ambivalent attitude towards the institution at times. He had owned slaves at one point until slavery became illegal in New York in 1827.



Copyright Encyclopedia Britannica

While President, Martin Van Buren was against slavery but was more interested in preserving the union. Some of his actions in this area are troubling, including supporting the sending the slaves who rose up and took over the Amistad to Cuba, where they had been heading as slaves, instead of working for a resolution where they would be free. He also was the President who oversaw the removal of the Cherokee and Seminole Indians from their homelands (the long, draining cost of the Seminole War was one problem in his Presidency.) 

Photos of the Mansion Today


Main living room

Kitchen











Indoor toilets believe it or not (well, it is upstate New York and it does get cold in winter)






A Park Ranger offers a free tour. The tour was quite good and the Ranger quite knowledgable.




Links to More Information

National Park Service Martin Van Buren National Historic Site

University of Virginia, Miller Center, Martin Van Buren

wikipedia

Encyclopedia Britannica

Accessible Archives

New Netherlands Institute

The National Monument's Nature Trails and Preserve


Trump and Musk -What is motivating them? What is their end goal? Partial thoughts First

Trump and Musk -What is motivating them? What is their end goal? Partial thoughts First . . . what the heck is going on here? What are Donal...