p. 242
SEVENTH CHAPTER.
The sword fight of the Romans. Goodwyn deals with this in detail. Who were the donors. Tomb fighters at the funeral. Prisoners or slaves forced to do this. Freeborn men, and even nobles, put themselves in this danger. Announcement of these fights. Weapons for practice and for earnest. Application to Paul 1 Corinthians 9:26, 27. Preliminary fight with cudgels. Serious fight with other weapons. Continuation or termination of the fight. The crown of the victors was of palm branches. Palm wreath with woollen ribbons. Termination. Wooden sword. Felt cap. Because they used different weapons, they were called net fighters, pursuers, Thracians, myrmillones, hoplomachi, challengers, chariot fighters, blind fighters, two-sword fighters and lasso fighters. Signs for stopping or continuing the fight. Schools of the sword fighters. Masters called 'gladiator masters', and pupils 'groups'. The fencing master 'head of the family'. Signs of challenge.
§. I.
In murderousness, the art of sword fighting was similar to this cruel sport. The sword fight of the Romans, as the renowned Casaubonus has noted (Cafaubonus ad Sueton. Aug. cap. 45.), saying: 'What the gladiators were to the Romans, the pugilists were more or less to the Greeks.
p. 243
In Church History, mention is made several times of condemned men who had to deliver a fistfight; as in the eighth book of Eusebius.'
Therefore, we do not consider it useless to make an digression here to the sword fight. But because it does not actually belong to our work, we will only tell what T. Goodwyn has gathered from Lipfius and others and recorded as follows:
§. II.
“Such games and displays, which were organized by private individuals at their own expense (T. Goodwyn Roman Antiquities, book 2, §. 3. chapter 10, on sword fighting), with which they tried to win the favour of the common people and to pave the way for their own promotion and honor, were called 'honorary games' (Cafaub. in Sueton. Aug. 32). And although every game or display could be intended to curry favour with the people, these were for the most part of that nature, either fencing fights, or stage plays. The fencing: because attending it was so often offered to the people for free, it was therefore often referred to by the Latin word for 'gift' or 'present' (Lipf. Sat. lib. 1. cap. 7). And those who offered these spectacles for free were for the same reason called 'donors'. The origin of this fencing and sword fighting, in which people killed each other, originated from a usual ritual among the pagans during the funeral of their friends (Tertullian and also Servius in Aeneid X), who imagined that the shedding of
p. 244
human blood would serve as atonement for the soul of the deceased. Therefore they wanted to buy prisoners and slaves with the intention of sacrificing them at the funeral. Later, so that these impious spectacles would be more entertaining and pleasant, they changed their offering into a skillful fencing fight, where the contending parties fought for their lives. This particular kind of fencers were called 'tomb fighters', derived from 'bustum', the place where the bodies of dead people were burned. But ambition and cruelty caused these bloody spectacles to occur more often in the following centuries, so that finally prizes were offered, not only at the tombs, but in various other places, such as in the 'circus' (the large circular arena) and in the 'amphitheater' (the round showhouse or fighting place in Rome), and so on. Yes, they were even bequeathed to the people as legacies by last will and testament. These fights lasted many days in a row, and the number of fighters was sometimes countless. In the beginning, no one wanted to risk their lives like this, but prisoners and runaway slaves were forced to do so, having been bought for this purpose. Later, freeborn men hired themselves out for this, which is why they were called 'auctorati' (mercenaries). Yes, even nobles sometimes, because of their dilapidated state, sometimes to earn the love of the emperor, put their lives at stake in this fight (Sen. Epist. 100). Those who were hired bound themselves by a solemn oath to fight to the death; otherwise they would give their bodies to be scourged, yes, even to be burned. To this Horace alludes (Serm. 2. Sat. 7):
p. 245
'What does it matter, whether you are scourged with rods, or are killed by the sword? Whether you go away as a mercenary, or are locked up in a shameful cage?'
The course of this bloody spectacle was as follows: the master, or the organizer of it, made known to the people through a public announcement on what day the fight would take place, how many pairs would fight, what their names were, and so on, in order to bring about a greater expectation and influx of the people. Suetonius speaks about this in his biography of Julius: 'He announced a fight for the people, in memory of his son.' Yes, on panels, which hung in public places, they painted and showed not only the description of the place (Plin. 357), but also the true shape and face of the fencers:
'As if the men really fight, move their weapons, strike and avoid.' (Horat. Serm. lib. 2. Sat. 7.)
On the appointed day, when all came together, the weapons were brought out, and these were of two kinds: 'play or practice weapons',
p. 246
such as spears and sticks or clubs, so that one could throw and the other could fence, to show their dexterity. All this was only preparation for the more solemn and dangerous fight that followed. The Greeks call it 'sphaeromachia' (ball fight), because of the small balls that were tied to the sharp end of the weapon to prevent danger. Others were 'weapons for earnest' (Lipf. Sat. lib. 2. cap. 19). So called, 'because these were given, as it were, by decision of the sheriff or the exhibitor'. These were the weapons with which they actually fought against each other to the death, and therefore they were sometimes called 'battle weapons'. Seneca (Ep. 118) speaks of both: 'Put away these play weapons, serious weapons are needed.' And I dare to dispute that the apostle does not refer to both. 1 Corinthians 9:26, 27, where he says: 'so I fight, not as one who beats the air'. He did not beat the air, nor did he engage in mock fighting with this practice and preparatory weapon, but he truly fought against his natural depravity to wound and subdue it. For 'hypopiazo' (Suidas in voce hypopion) also means festering wounds. The manner of speaking of Seneca (lib. 3. cont.), alluding to the preparation, is not very dissimilar: 'It is one thing to wave, another to fight.' This preliminary fight with clubs was actually called 'prologue'. Megara, speaking about the victory of Hercules over the two snakes that attacked him
p. 247
when he was still a small child, says: 'It was a prelude to the Hydra', that is, that fight was only the prologue, the foreword or introduction to that greater fight (Senec. Herc. fur. vers 221) that would follow between him and the Hydra (a water snake with many heads). After that, when they committed themselves to the real weapons and to an actual fight, then it was said that they fought 'for real' and 'with turned weapons'. That is: to fight with seriousness and with other weapons. This word 'versis' (Lipf. Sat. lib. 2. cap. 19) is used here in the meaning of 'changed'. During the fight they bent and moved their bodies according to the rules of their art, to protect themselves better and to wound their opponent faster. This posture and stance of the body was called by a specific name 'status' or 'gradus' (stand or position), from which this beautiful metaphor is derived: 'to deviate from one's stand', to change one's intention and, as it were, to shrink back from what one had first intended. In the same way we say: 'he is thrown off his game' or 'he is pushed from his position'; he was forced to change his mind, or in general, he is bewildered. In the fight, the gladiators often laid down their weapons, after they had suffered a dangerous wound. Although this happened in the utmost necessity, it was a sign of cowardice, and they were not discharged or exempted on that account. This depended on the will of the emperor, the people, or the master of the spectacle. This discharge was actually called 'missio' (termination). So great was the cruelty of that time, that many fights were announced in which it was made known in advance that such a discharge would neither be considered nor allowed. To which
p. 248
emperor AUGUSTUS (Suet. Aug. 49) made a decree in which he forbade 'that gladiators without the possibility of termination were put on display'. The fighters who were victorious, sometimes received money as a reward, sometimes a wreath, or a crown of palm branches, wound with certain woollen ribbons, called a 'palma lemnisci'. The crown itself was therefore called 'palma lemniscata' (Fran. Sylv. in orat. pro Sext. Rosc.). And from this, 'palma' (palm) has been figuratively transferred to denote the victory itself. And of such a man, who had often won the prize, we say proverbially that he is a 'man of very many palms', a man of very many victories. The reason why the palm tree, more than any other tree, was given as a sign of victory, is explained by several approved authors (Arist. probl. 7. Plut. Symp. 8. q. 4. Aul. Gell. l. 3. cap. 6) as follows: because the palm tree, no matter how great and heavy a weight you place on it, will not bend, but will rather strive upwards. The reward that was given by the people was sometimes one of these sticks or clubs that were used in the preliminary fight. This stick was actually called 'rudis' (wooden sword) and was given as a sign of freedom, with which it was made known that he would henceforth live his life free of bloodshed. Alluding to this custom, this word 'rudis' (Erasm. Adag. Rudem accip.) has come to mean any other form of freedom or relief. To this Horace said of himself that he was 'endowed with a wooden sword', that is, discharged from his work in poetry. Finally, he who was victorious sometimes received a 'pileus', a
p. 249
hat. And here it is not out of place to note the distinction between the palm, the termination, the wooden sword, and the felt cap. The palm was only a sign of victory, not of freedom or discharge. The termination was not a complete exemption, but a kind of postponement, a request that was granted until the next morning or another time. Moreover, this was granted to those who were defeated, not to the victors. The wooden sword was a sign of a complete exemption from bloody combat, by which someone's life could be endangered, but with this distinction: if it was given to free citizens who had been hired for the game, they were thereby also restored to their freedom which they had previously forfeited by taking such a bad condition. For others, who were formerly slaves or prisoners, it was only a sign of freedom and discharge. Nevertheless, such slaves and prisoners sometimes obtained by favor, at the same time as their discharge from fighting, also the benefit of manumission, by which they were henceforth incorporated into the free citizens. The sign of this was the felt cap: for then they received a hat. This last remark helps in understanding Tertullian (de spect. cap. 21), where he says: 'He who demands a lion for every known murderer, the same demands a full discharge for the fierce gladiator and grants him a hat as a reward.' That is: he who demands a lion for every known murderer, let him demand a full discharge from fighting for a cruel fencer, and give him a hat as a reward, that is, grant him his freedom. In this statement, the unjust and unreasonable practice of these pagans is exposed, since they judged that a murderer should be thrown to the lions
p. 250
and wild beasts, but nevertheless wanted to reward the bloodthirstiness of the fencers. These fencers fought with different kinds of weapons and accordingly had specific names. The main ones we encounter are these: 1. Net fighters, so called after 'reticulum', which means 'net', because this kind of fencer fought with a throwing net in one hand, to catch and tie up the head of their opponent, and a three-pronged instrument in the other hand, which they used in place of a sword. Juvenal speaks about this (Satyr. 8):
-- 'Behold, he brandishes his trident.'
They always fought in their underwear, from which the adjective 'tunicati' (dressed in a tunic) came. The reason why they wore sponges above and below, which Tertullian calls 'the sponge of the net fighters', may be to blot up the blood and to clean or stop the wounds, a use of sponges that Pliny (lib. 31. cap. 11) records. Because these net fighters were so lightly armed, they were forced whenever they missed with their net, to retreat until they got hold of their net again. And because of this, the second kind of fencers who fought with them were called 'pursuers', derived from 'insequi', the pursuing of these net fighters (Lipf. Satur. lib. 2. cap. 7). The weapons with which these pursuers fought were a shield to ward off the net of the opponent, a sword and a helmet. 3. Thracians, so
p. 251
called after the Thracian weapons they used. Their shield was round and small, called 'parma'. In the beginning it was used among the Thracians (Turn. Adv. lib. 5. cap. 10), and after that it became so peculiar to this kind of gladiator that 'parmularius' (Sueton. in Domit. 10) meant someone who favored this group or faction of fencers. Their sword was a crooked saber, called 'sica' by them. The Roman soldiers were accustomed to carrying two of these (Alex. ab Alex. lib. 6. cap. 21): a long one on the left side and a shorter one on the right side, comparable to our sword and dagger. But the shape of the sica (or short sword) was always crooked. Secret murderers who killed people seem to have used the small version, like a pocket dagger. Such were the 'sicarii' (dagger men) of whom there is so often mention in Cicero. 4. Myrmillones, sometimes they were called 'Galli' (Gauls), because they were equipped in the manner of the Gauls. Their weapons were a sword, a shield and a helmet with a crest in the shape of a fish. 5. Hoplomachi, the name implies that they fought heavily armed. It is derived from the Greek word 'hoplon' (weapon) and 'machomai' (to fight). In the time of Augustus they were called 'Samnites'. Their armour was a helmet with a plume on top, a sword, a shield and a shin guard on the left leg. 6. Challengers, sometimes called 'probactores', usually fought against the hoplomachi. Their weaponry was a sword, a shield, a helmet and shin guards on both legs. For just as the foot soldiers among the warriors, so also some
p. 252
gladiators used shin guards for the protection of their legs. These shin guards were made of iron (Veget. vide Lipf. de milit. lib. 3. dial. 7) and so common among the Greeks in war, that the shin guards alone often stood for the entire Greek armour, as appears from the usual name of Homer, 'euknemides Achaioi', that is: 'well-shin-guarded Greeks'. They sometimes wore these shin guards on both legs, sometimes on one leg, depending on the manner of fighting required. 7. Chariot fighters, those who fought against each other from chariots, so called after 'essedum', a chariot or carriage. 8. Blind fighters, as it were 'riders', because they fought on horseback or from carriages. This kind of fencer fought with their eyes covered, from which the proverb 'to fight in the manner of the blind fighters' comes. This expression is used aptly when two ignorant persons are heated in a dispute about something that neither of them understands. 9. Two-sword fighters, also called 'orbelae'. They fought against each other with two swords each, as the first name already indicates. 10. Lasso fighters, those who fought with swords and snares. The use of these snares was the same as that of the net fighters with their nets: to throw them around the neck or arm of their opponent, so that they could wound him more easily with their swords. Lipfius deals with all these kinds of fencers in detail (Sat. 2), to whom I refer the reader. Let it only be noted here that it was in the power of the people to discharge someone of these warring parties during the fight. They gave this discharge to be known by 'pressing the thumb downwards';
p. 253
or otherwise to instruct him to continue the fight, even in such great danger. And this last they made known by 'turning the thumb up' (raising it). Juvenal (Sat. 3):
--- 'And with the thumb turned up by the people, they kill everyone for popularity.'
Moreover, so that a sufficient number of gladiators would always be ready, schools were set up, where prisoners, runaway slaves and public criminals were sometimes condemned, sometimes sold. The masters of these schools were called 'lanistae' (gladiator masters); the pupils or sub-fencers who were taught there for more public and dangerous fights, were called 'familiae' (groups). The word 'familia' is often used in this sense to denote the entire group of sub-fencers that belonged to a school, and the fencing master was for this reason more than once called 'pater-familias' (head of the family) by Suetonius (Calig. 26 and in Domit. 10). Furthermore, when one challenged the other to this fight, they made their challenge known by beckoning with their little finger. To this Horace alludes (lib. 1. Serm. 4):
'Crispinus challenges me with his little finger: "Accept if you want, now accept the tablets."'
That is:
'Crispinus challenges me with his little finger, accept if you want, accept the challenge letters.'
p. 254
This must be understood as a beckoning, and indeed with the little finger. For otherwise, if one of the contending parties in the fight raises his finger (Alex. ab Alex. lib. 4. cap. 26), he thereby makes known that he gives up and makes way for his opponent. Some believe that Persius (Sat. 5) alluded to this custom in the expression:
--- 'Raise your finger, you are making a mistake.'
The entire use of all these games was finally abolished by THEODORIC, the king of the Goths. So far Goodwyn.
§. III.
Furthermore, one can clearly see the murderousness of this cruel game in the figures that we can find of it in Mercurialis p. 194. No. 1. and 2.