Throughout its history, Rome has been characterized both by values we would consider negative: brutality, violence, and pride, as well as the more positive pietas: allegiance to the gods, the state, and one’s family. The Roman Republic pioneered the establishment of a representative democracy, becoming one of the earliest nations to do so. However, Rome’s values, both positive and negative, informed its transition from a republic to an empire. A closer examination of Roman culture, particularly its entertainment avenues, reveals the roots of not only the Republic’s demise, but the state of current American political affairs.
Chariot racing was the oldest and most popular spectator sport in Ancient Rome. Circuses held these famous races, and the oldest and most prominent was the Circus Maximus, first built in the 6th century BCE. According to Livy, Lucius Tarquinius Priscus, the fifth king of Rome, ordered the arena to be built for entertainment purposes, on the site of the rape of the Sabine women. This tragic event also had its roots in equestrian games. Romulus, the founder of Rome, and his followers needed women to increase the population. Following failed attempts at negotiating with Sabine leaders, Romulus invited the men to watch mesmerizing chariot races. While they were distracted, the Romans stole the Sabine women (Livy, Ab Urbe Condita 1.9). The project was likely built fully by enslaved people, who constructed most grand Roman architecture. The arena reached its full scale in the era of Julius Caesar.
Throughout Roman history, the popularity of chariot racing transcended social boundaries, drawing in spectators from all walks of life. Enslaved persons and emperors alike were intrigued by swift and talented charioteers. The most sought-after seats in the arena were those near the curving terminus of the bullet-shaped circuit, as they afforded the best view of the spectacular and often brutal crashes between charioteers. Ovid, a famous Roman author born during the Republic and writing during the first years of the Imperial period, or the Principate, wrote that chariot races were a common location for Roman men to seek out women. Vestal virgins were allowed to sit in the front row for the best view of the spectacle, while other women were forced to sit in the back.
Four racing companies called factiones, or factions, were known for the colors their charioteers wore. They consisted of red, white, blue, green, and briefly during the reign of Domitian, gold and purple. Each of these factions was associated with a season and a god. Like sports in the modern day, spectators became attached to one of these factions. The blue and green factions were the largest and had the fiercest rivalry. Historians are not fully agreed upon how exactly one became attached to a particular faction; however, it can be inferred that they represented either neighborhoods or particular trades. Loyalty to the factions was encouraged by establishing “clubhouses” in Rome first and later in other parts of the Roman Empire. Later on, these factions acquired political influence. For example, Junius Bassus, a consul during the empirical period in 331 CE, portrayed himself in a mosaic driving a chariot with four horsemen behind him in the colors of the four circus factions. Similar to the patricians of Rome, contemporary wealthy leaders in the United States leverage sports to wield influence. Figures such as Mark Cuban and Jerry Jones have acquired teams, occasionally sparking clashes with local supporters who oppose their team management strategies.
Roman chariots were designed to be as light as possible, and so they were built with wood. This structure meant very little support for the charioteer, who was forced to prop himself up on the axle as he drove. Most chariots which appeared in these races were four-horse chariots called quadrigae. However, there were some two-horse chariots as well, called biga. There were very few rules in chariot racing, and the minimal regulations governing the events meant that participants could act with impunity, subjecting their opponents to a wide range of violent attacks without fear of retribution. Drivers were known to strike or whip their adversaries mercilessly, often leading to grave injuries or even fatalities. The races themselves were fraught with danger, with charioteers being violently hurled from their vehicles, trampled underfoot, or dragged to their deaths by their horses when they could not cut themselves free with the knives they were equipped with. The absence of rules, coupled with the inherent viciousness of the races, rendered the sport a breeding ground for savagery and cruelty.
The Nika Riots were an event of political upheaval during the reign of Emperor Justinian I which were greatly motivated by the violence of chariot races. This event was sparked in 532 CE by increasing political tension between the Emperor and the chariot-racing blue and green factions. The emperor mishandled the issue and refused to accept any of the faction’s demands to free their members, who the factions believed had been arrested after a failed execution attempt. The city of Constantinople was plunged into chaos for five days. As a result of the rioting, a great fire ravaged the city. Under pressure from his wife, Justinian sent the army to end this calamity. However, he used this violence as an opportunity to take out his enemies and solidify his rule by crushing the factions, leading to an unprecedented massacre in which there were significant amounts of civilian casualties. Sports riots in recent United States history also elucidate major social issues of their time. A series of race riots occurred throughout the United States after African American boxer Jack Johnson defeated a white boxer, James J. Jefferies. The Johnson-Jeffries riots illustrate the power of sports in violently illustrating major tensions of an era, such as racial divisions and discrimination.
Chariot racing and other forms of Roman entertainment speak to the worsening state of Roman values. In the first century CE, during the empirical period, the satirist Juvenal spoke at length about the decay of Roman society. He thought back to the earlier Republic era, and criticized his own society through the lens of the past. He states, “Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses.” (Satire X.75-82) Many rulers during the Republic leveraged free food and entertainment to keep citizens happy and satisfied with their rule. Instead of addressing serious issues in a city where vast splendor lived alongside hunger and overcrowding, politicians relied on simple pleasures to showcase their power. Politicians retained their military and political superiority by keeping their people placated and unquestioning of their rule. People in the Roman Republic, who once cared about a functioning democracy and civic duty, could now be easily placated. This mollification elucidates the downfall of the Roman Republic, as the people were susceptible to propaganda and easily manipulated into believing what influential leaders told them to.
Military conquest characterized Roman society. As such, brutality was an essential part of both the Republic and the Empire, shaping all aspects of their culture. Using violence and brutality in public spectacles, such as chariot racing, was a form of entertainment that helped shape Roman attitudes toward violence and death. It is possible that Romans became more desensitized to these acts, leading to more violence occurring. Religious myths included stories of rape, fratricide, and brutal violence within wars. The rape and suicide of the noblewoman Lucretia was the catalyst that began the Republic. The use of violence, specifically in the forms of entertainment, in the Roman Republic and Empire not only served as a means of consolidating power and maintaining social order but reflected Roman society’s deeply ingrained values and beliefs. Despite the short-term success of using violence to quell social unrest, violence, and intimidation in Rome was not always successful in maintaining social order. Throughout Roman history, various enslaved persons’ uprisings and civil wars elucidate some of this system’s fragilities. Most charioteers were enslaved people, freedmen, or foreigners from outside the Empire. Nevertheless, violence in the Roman Republic was central to society, shaping political power structures and cultural norms. Juxtaposingly, in United States culture, violence is seen as a negative act. Harming others, unless it is self defense, is taboo. Thus, United States sports can be seen as ritualized warfare, where people can participate in violence within being seen as cruel, and facing ostracization from society.
As the Roman people became more mollified by and satisfied with the appeasements their leaders gave them, they were able to be “tamed” and brought under the thumb of influential leaders. As the Roman Republic ended and the Empire began, many Romans felt the leaders of Rome’s past and their spirits were long gone. Juvenal speaks to the changes he saw within his time period by relating it back to the events of the late Republic:
"What destroyed the Crassi, the Pompeys, and that man Caesar
Who brought the Romans under his lash, and so tamed them?
Simply seeking that place at the top, using every trick that
Exists, simply extravagant prayer granted by spiteful gods.
Few kings go down to Ceres’ son-in-law, Dis, free from
Blood and carnage, few tyrants achieve a tranquil death."
(Satire X, 53-60)
The rise of the idea of “bread and circuses” and the desensitization of the Roman people to increased violence greatly led to the end of Roman democracy according to authors looking back on the past. By providing entertainment to the people, the Roman leaders were able to bring people “under [their] lash” and to “tame” them. They were able to keep them happy and appeased, uncaring about the greater world around them. According to an author living under empirical rule, this is what primed Roman society for the changing of tides that accompanied the imperial period.
Loyalty is a common way to create unwavering trust within a nation or state. Creating passionate and loyal citizens quells disillusionment and governmental opposition. Moreover, loyalty was the glue that held the Roman Empire together. Allegiance to their state and pride kept Romans supportive of their leaders. In Chariot Racing, the factions that were supported represented this loyalty. Pliny the Younger, a Roman statesman and writer during the imperial period, criticized the deep support many had for their faction. He stated:
"I am the more astonished that so many thousands of grown men should be possessed again and again with a childish passion to look at galloping horses, and men standing upright in their chariots. If, indeed, they were attracted by the swiftness of the horses or the skill of the men, one could account for this enthusiasm. But in fact it is a bit of cloth they favor, a bit of cloth that captivates them. And if during the running the racers were to exchange colours, their partisans would change sides, and instantly forsake the very drivers and horses whom they were just before recognizing from afar, and clamorously saluting by name."
(Letters 9.6)
According to Pliny the Younger, the widely popular chariot races contributed to the decline of the Republic. Pliny stated that circus patrons of his day would throw their weight behind any candidate affiliated with their faction, without considering their competence or aptitude. This assertion illustrates the disturbing ease with which the people of Rome could be appeased, ultimately leading to a diminishing appreciation for independent thought and analysis of politics and culture.
Juvenal continues to speak about the mollification of the Roman people throughout his Satires. In Satire X, he described how emperors could subdue the once politically active Roman population.
"But what of the Roman
Mob? They follow Fortune, as always, and hate whoever she
Condemns. If Nortia, as the Etruscans called her, had favoured
Etruscan Sejanus; if the old Emperor had been surreptitiously
Smothered; that same crowd in a moment would have hailed
Their new Augustus."
(Satire X, Lines 73-82)
Sejanus was a soldier and confidant to the Roman Emperor Tiberius killed for treason in 31 AD. Juvenal believes that if fortune and luck had favored Sejanus and his opponent was killed, the Roman mob would have embraced him despite any moral or ethical concerns. Furthermore the Roman people were willing to support whomever they deem to have fortune without regard for the individual’s character or actions. Juvenal implies that if the old Emperor had been replaced by a new figure whom fortune favored, the same mob would quickly shift their allegiance to an emperor like Augustus. Augustus was the first emperor of Rome, who kickstarted Rome’s transformation from a Republic to an Empire. Juvenal’s comparison underscores the fickleness of the Roman mob, ready to support any leader who appears to be in a position of power and favor. The mob’s shifting allegiance based on the perceived favor of fortune demonstrated their detachment from deeper political and ethical considerations. Having lost their political agency, the Roman mob had become a malleable force more concerned with immediate gratification and entertainment than the consequences of political actions. The leaders’ strategy of mollification through satisfying basic needs and providing distracting entertainment is clear: panem et circenses.
In the modern day, the pattern of fortune allowing a candidate is mirrored by the rise of political entertainers. United States politicians like Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger established careers utilizing their movie and television personas to gain favor from the public. Reagan's portrayal of strong, principled characters and his seamless transition into a role as a comforting and authoritative communicator during his time as a sportscaster and actor helped foster a trustworthy image. This "good guy" reputation made it easier for him to be perceived as a leader capable of guiding the nation. Schwarzenegger similarly benefited from his roles as a decisive, action-oriented hero in films, translating into public perception of him as a figure of strength and determination, qualities desirable in a political leader. Similarly, in Ukraine, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy first gained fame through starring in a television show, Servant of the People, where he played a relatable school teacher whose rant on government corruption turned him into a favorable president. The character's outspoken and honest demeanor resonated deeply with the Ukrainian public, who were tired of the real-life political corruption and inefficiency. Zelenskyy's role allowed him to present himself as an everyman who understands the struggles of the average citizen, crafting an image not of a distant politician but of a relatable figure ready to challenge the status quo. His transition from a fictional president battling corruption to an actual presidential candidate promising similar reforms exemplified how powerful a relatable presence can be in garnering power and favor from the common people.
In Ancient Rome, Juvenal went on to criticize the emperors that caused desensitization to occur.
"Democritus’ sides used to shake with perpetual laughter, despite
The fact that the cities of his day lacked togas with purple borders,
And togas with purple stripes, rods of office, litters, and tribunals.
What if he’d seen our eminent praetor standing there in his high
Chariot, in the midst of the dust in the Circus, in Jupiter’s tunic,
With that regal Tyrian ornamentation, on the embroidered toga
Falling from his shoulders, and a crown of such huge diameter,
That there isn’t a neck created made strong enough to bear it?"
(Satire X.30-37)
Juvenal suggests that no one is fit for the level of power that emperors in his day demanded. They used entertainment to convince the people of their power and to convince the public that they were superior to them. However, no one is meant for this absolute and total control over people. In Rome’s past, there used to be many influential leaders who shared the burden of ruling. In Juvenal’s time, the idea of democracy as they knew it was long gone, and the Principate was the status quo. For Juvenal, one who truly knows about the world can no longer feel like Democritus, a Greek philosopher known for being cheerful and happy, due to the deterioration of society.
There is a striking parallel between the Roman Empire's political crisis and contemporary American politics. Mass polarization into "red" and "blue" parties permeates every inch of US culture. Much like the Romans, who shifted allegiances based on fortune rather than ethical considerations, American voters are increasingly identifying with political parties as teams, focusing more on tribal affiliation than critical policy issues. A report from the Pew Research Center states that the overall number of Americans holding consistently conservative or consistently liberal opinions has doubled from 10% to 21% from 1990 to the present. Furthermore, the alignment of ideology with party affiliation has become much stronger. 92% of Republicans positioned to the right of the median Democrat, and 94% of Democrats positioned to the left of the median Republican. This polarization is not only evident in political discourse but also extends to everyday life. People with similar political beliefs are more likely to associate with one another, shaping their social networks and even affecting their preferences for where to live. These statistics illustrate the depth of partisan antipathy. It's clear that in today’s world ideological victory is prioritized over substantive political discourse.
The mollification seen in Rome is also mirrored today, where political coverage often resembles entertainment programming, aiming to enhance engagement at the cost of depth and policy understanding. Fox News, one of America's most beloved news stations, claimed to be “entertainment” to avoid following protocols for accurate journalism. Juvenal's critique of Roman emperors who used spectacle to maintain power resonates in US culture, where political figures often leverage media outlets to construct favorable public personas. They sidestep complex policy debates in favor of sound bites and even sensationalism. This confluence of entertainment and politics simplifies complex issues, and it promotes a political landscape more concerned with spectacle than the democratic process, echoing the Roman shift from a republic to an autocratic regime underpinned by spectacle and superficial allegiance. Similarly to what Pliny describes in his Letters, a cult of personality has formed around many powerful political leaders in the modern day. Some politicians have garnered so much favor, that no matter what they say or do, they will maintain their following. This unwavering support speaks to the mollification that is also currently occurring in Western society.
Roman values offer a telling glimpse into the broader cultural trends that prevailed in the ancient civilization. A thorough exploration of entertainment, specifically chariot races, reveals the difficulties and challenges that the people of Rome faced. The pervasive brutality that was a hallmark of the Roman way of life extended to all aspects of their existence, numbing them to the horrors of violence. This desensitization was then harnessed to pacify the masses, a strategy that paved the way for the Principate. The willingness of Romans to offer unswerving loyalty to their leaders facilitated this process, as it enabled them to be taken in by propaganda. Similarly, the deepening ideological divides within contemporary American politics reflect a cultural shift where party loyalty often supersedes the broader policy considerations, echoing the Roman populace's focus on spectacle over substance. This comparison demonstrates the importance of understanding historical precedents to better navigate the complexities of the modern world.
Comments