In closing it must be discussed that while we know how fights were carried out and the probable result of the fights, which ended in the death of the loser, how many were stantes missi? We cannot be sure since no hard data exists. Also circumstances must of changed a great deal over the years, look for example how football has changed in the last 79 years.

Figure 6: A Thrax takes a victory lap holding his palm branch (palma, sign of victory). After receiving his prizes and congratulations, he was expected to run once around the sand so he might receive the acclamation of the crowd. He was to wave his palm frond while running to encourage more cheers and tokens of favor from the spectators. From a Greek tombstone, circa 200 CE.

When it comes to the dawn of Gladiatorial combat in the Middle Republic the few written records gives one the impression that the duels had a lethal finale. There were several reasons for this. Usually the swordsmen were prisoners of war, and likely life as a slave would be their reward. Also the deceased man's shade had to be appeased by shedding of blood

By the late Republic, gladiators had taken part in several revolts and only a desperate man revolts. Since munera were a medium between rival noblemen, they tried to surpass each other by arranging shows with large numbers of fighters. Because they had to seem extravagant in the scrutiny of the Roman people, the such editors must have shed blood of gladiators, with little or no hesitation. Since most gladiators were prisoners of war, criminals, or debtors, they was a ready made supply and their lives were meaningless.

With the coming of the Principate things started to be in flux. First, Augustus understood that the way to political power was through the ludi and munus, so he regulated them. Now there was no longer a need to be bloodthirsty editor. The German wars proved that supply of POWs were drying up, Germans made poor gladiators, often taking their lives before entering the arena. Jews were the same. Especially as the current cost of a trained swordsman was now triple of the old, dead gladiators were not always desirable. We see this happening with Augustus' ban of automatic fights to the death, the "sine missione" or "no mercy." Because the cost and training of gladiator was expensive, and the new raw material was lacking, this made sense. We even find gladiators being used by Emperors as fighting men due to the lack of army manpower. Such a thing would have been unheard of in the pervious century. Nobody would have trusted them.

However by the 3rd century CE, the supply of POWs increased, mostly from the East. And gladiator life expectancy dropped accordingly.

The author, Georges Ville, in his book, "La gladiature en occident des origines a la mort de Domitien" probes known results of a hundred duels of the first century CE. His conclusion'? Nineteen of the two hundred gladiators involved actually were killed as a result of these fights. That means that a swordsman entering the arena had a 9 in I chance to make it. Unfortunately, he has no idea how many of the dismissed gladiators died later of their wounds, the Romans kept no records of that. Based on my own study of military casualties in ancient wars, an additional 1 in 4 likely succumbed later, so the total is 24. For the second and third centuries CE, Ville does not have as much material, but he believes there are enough statistics to validate an escalating frequency. Based on his data Ville makes an estimated guess that by the third century CE every other fight ended in the death of one of the gladiators, a casualty rate of nearly 50%. If we include the quarter addition because of wounds, the death toll approaches nearly 65%. It can be no coincidence that this rate corresponds with Rome's increasing wars of defense and the taking of prisoners.

If a gladiator could survive his three to six yearly appearances in the arena, his survivability to gain rudis would increase accordingly. Veterans had increased lethality while able to defend themselves against all manner of attack. We saw this demonstrated in the SCA Lists. A top fighter can disable four novice fighters in a row with little problem. Granted a lucky blow could be landed, but that was fate, and in the hands of the gods. Because of this, novices rarely were paired against vets.

By the time the fighter had built a successful rep, even if a lucky blow did cause him to lose his supporters would demand that he would be allowed to live. Rarely if ever did the editor go against the wishes of the crowd. If one looks at averages, if the fighter survived the first three years of combats, he probably would make it to retirement. We read of many retired gladiators becoming bodyguards, joining the army to teach tyros sword fighting and shield techniques, often also becoming instructors in self defense for rich Senator's sons, or opening their own gladiatorial schools and becoming lanista. The frequency this is mentioned in writings proves the rudis was not unattainable. However, if the average age of a tyro was 18, then likely he was dead before 23-25. But if he survived, by 27-28 he presumably could be a free man. Our Inheritance From Rome

The closest we have to a bout today is the bullfight, directly traceable to the venatio of the arena. However the bull is not another human being so while the drama might be there, (death in the afternoon) brute strength against skill and cunning is not a true contest. (All though I'm sure many Latinos would disagree with me.)

Football players are called the modern gladiators, especially in the pros. I have played myself, and while there are many elements present, death is not the ultimate outcome. Sure there are a chance of injuries, some drama, and the Romans would appreciate the military maneuvering and ball handling skill, but it would not be the same as the munus.

Boxing, both amateur and pro, has the most elements, the man to man skillful combat, the competition, the spectacle, there is even a pompa at the beginning of a major fight, but it is really a Greek sport. The Romans brutalized it with the lead castas. Pro wrestling also has elements but Romans would never stand for scripting fights, at best this would be a warm up for the main event.

To me what makes the gladiator contest unique and impossible to do nowadays, would be the so called moment of truth when a fighter after doing his best, gives himself up to the crowd for condemnation or clemency, who have independence to choose life or death with no culpability. The waiting for pronouncement of such a verdict must have been the significant moment of the munus. The eternal struggle of life over death, like that of good and evil, must have given each bout a legendary feel, one that could be not replicated with today's lack of reverence. And that air of enrapture while honoring ancestors is something that drove the munus, something that was very Roman and very absent today.

Illustration Credits

Fig 1. National Archaeological Museum, Naples.
Fig. 2. Archeological Museum, Tripoli Fig.
3 National Archeological Museum, Madrid Fig
4. National Archaeological Museum, Naples Fig.
5. Archeological Museum, Tripoli Fig.
6. Rijkmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden, NL.

More History of the Munus Part 2 Gladiatorial Contests

Executing the Munus
The Preparation
Conduct of the Gladiatorial Contests
The Fight and Post Combat
Gladiators and Their Future

More History of the Munus Part 1 Gladiatorial Contests

Origins
The First Contests in Rome
The Games as a Political Tool
The Demise of the Munus
Ave Imperator: Gladiator Game Rules
Ave Imperator: Record Sheet
Re-enactor: Maximus the Lanista