Glad to be a gladiator!
QUESTION Were all Roman gladiators former captives or did citizens volunteer? Gladiators were typically recruited from criminals, slaves and prisoners of war, but some free-born men voluntarily chose the profession and pledged themselves to the owner ( lanist) of a gladiatorial troupe ( familia). according to Petronius they swore an oath ‘to endure branding, chains, flogging or death by the sword’.
These volunteers, called auctorati, took on slave status for an agreed period of time. By doing so, they suffered the ultimate social disgrace and were declared infamia. seneca described this oath as ‘ most shameful’ ( turpissimi). They did not, however, lose their citizenship.
This class of gladiator appears to have emerged during the Late republic period, but just how many of them there were is debatable. Historian Keith Hopkins wrote: ‘The existence of the word auctorati for free-born gladiators suggests that they were quite commonplace.
‘This is corroborated by the presence of free names (e.g. Q. petillus) in surviving advertisements of programmes of gladiatorial contests. In one list, nine out of 28 gladiators were apparently free men .
‘The motives for free men to become gladiators probably ranged from poverty to prodigality.’
Georges ville, in La Gladiature En Occident, suggests that by the end of the republic as many as half of all gladiators were auctorati. Numerous laws passed between 38 BC and aD 69 attempted to restrict or end citizens’ participation in the arena, and these laws are an indication of the arena’s allure.
There were good reasons for free men to become gladiators. Many recruits were debtors, and if they could survive the games, they could emerge wealthy men.
For others it offered improved status: the gladiator recruit became a member of a cohesive group known for its courage, good morale, military discipline and absolute fidelity to its master to the point of death.
It also offered more carnal rewards, as examples of graffiti from Pompeii illustrate, including ‘Celadus the Tracian, three times victor and three times crowned, adored by young girls.’ and ‘Crescans the nocturnal netter ( retiarius) of young girls’.
Adam Benn, Bristol. QUESTION In historical documentaries and dramas, medieval kings are addressed as ‘Your Grace’. When did we start to address a monarch as ‘Your Majesty’? FrOM the 12th to the 15th century, the kings of France, England, Castile, aragon and Portugal were generally styled Highness, though not to the exclusion of other styles; English kings and powerful nobles were addressed ‘Your Grace’ and French kings were ‘Excellence’.
European title inflation began when Charles v became Holy roman Emperor in 1519. He did not deem Highness worthy of his elevated status, and instead chose Majesty (derived ultimately from the Latin maiestas, meaning ‘greatness’).
His rival Francois I of France immediately followed suit: the treaty of Cambrai (1520) styles only the Emperor as Majesty, but the treaty of Crepy has Francois as ‘royal Majesty’ and Charles as ‘Imperial Majesty’, and the Cateau-Cambresis treaty (1559) goes further with ‘Most- Christian and royal Majesty’.
Henry vIII was the first English monarch to adopt the title Majesty, but in England the terms Majesty, Grace and Highness were interchangeable.
In documents from Henry vIII’s reign, all three styles were used; in the King’s judgment against Dr Edward Crome ( d. 1562), article 15 begins with ‘also the Kinges Highness hath ordered’, 16 with ‘ Kinges Majestie’, and 17 with ‘Kinges Grace’.
In the Dedication of the authorised version of the Bible of 1611, James I is styled both Majesty and Highness; thus, in the first paragraph, the appearance of ‘Your Majesty, as of the sun in his strength, instantly dispelled those supposed and surmised mists . . . especially when we beheld the government established in Your Highness and Your hopeful seed, by an undoubted title.’ Late in James I’s reign, Majesty became the official style.
Catherine Hall, Matlock, Derbys. QUESTION Does any other language have an equivalent of the meaningless ‘you know’ used so often these days? FUrTHEr to the earlier answer, the expression ‘you know’ as an interjection is what is known as a ‘phatic utterance’ and is used to maintain the flow of speech.
Expressions such as ‘like’ or ‘sort of’ serve the same purpose. The expression ‘hello’ was adopted in the early days of the telephone to let the caller know that you were receiving them.
Many radio interviewees now begin an answer with the word ‘so’.
Phatic utterances need not consist of words. If you listen to two Frenchmen conversing, they often use a droning sound in the throat ‘uuuuh’ between phrases or sentences to convey ‘I am still speaking’.
Clive Northey, Aylsham, Norfolk.
IS THERE a question to which you have always wanted to know the answer? Or do you know the answer to a question raised here? Send your questions and answers to: Charles Legge, Answers To Correspondents, Daily Mail, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT. You can also fax them to 01952 780111 or you can email them to charles. legge@dailymail.co.uk. A selection will be published but we are not able to enter into individual correspondence.