Colosseum Lift That Carried Wild Animals Into Arena Rebuilt

An anonymous reader writes: Archaeologists have built a replica of the lift that was used to move lions and other wild animals into the Colosseum 1,500 years ago. It is estimated that a million animals may have been killed in the history of the arena. It took a year and a half for the archaeologists and engineers to build the 23ft-high timber lift, using only materials that would have been available to the ancient Romans. Gary Glassman, a director who made a documentary about the project said, "One of the reasons we are attracted to the Colosseum is because of the incredible violence that went on here. The question it poses is, how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles? The Colosseum is a snapshot in stone, a physical embodiment of the culture of Rome."

Comments

Let me answer this question:

[iamwhoiamtoday]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Arguably, the question should be "how could a less advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

All kinds of engineering talent, organizational expertise, a logistics and trade network that spanned the Mediterranean world; were necessary to run something like the Colosseum. Those loads of wild animals(some pretty exotic) and ample supplies of variously trained gladiators don't just deliver themselves, you know; nor is building that much stadium seating with rocks and manual labor exactly trivial.(Never mind the 'let's flood the place and have a lethal naval battle' days, those are a huge pain.)

Any mangy barbarian can enjoy drunken brawling, hunting, and the occasional duel or dog fight; but bloody spectacle is something best left to the experts.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[geekmux]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.

And however you doll up humanity today, it is merely an illusion that anything has changed since then.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[arglebargle_xiv]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Nowadays we do it with drones and remote cameras.

Re: Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe this is being done as a reminder to the migrants crossing into Italy...

Re: Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

A large number of people are engaging with violent bloody spectacles all the time. Look at all the blood and gore in video games.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[jellomizer]

While advanced culture, there is the human worry that they are not tough enough to handle the world. Watching gladiators kill lions and elephants is the same as use watching Zombie movies. Half of the interest is what is going on in your head, you try to figure out what you would do in their place.
Then the outcome will normally please you.
The gladiator dies, validating that your different approach is better
The animal dies when the gladiator does what you would do, validating your idea.
The animal died with a different method, then you learned a new survival idea.

The moral issue of human and animal life, can so easily be shoved away with propaganda (still today) that for most of the population it doesn't even occur to them.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Easily. Because being "advanced" do not in any way imply that a culture abstain from killing and violence. A culture may excel in various technologies, military power, and arts. It may or may not value nice behaviour - that is orthogonal!

Romans had their period of glory - and violent entertainment. Later governments organized witch hunts & public burnings. Then a colonial era with lots of unnecessary violence, done by 'advanced cultures of the time.' Then a certain advanced culture arranged the holocaust.

I am not even counting the various wars - wars are necessarily bloody and violent. We are lucky to live in times where the leading cultures value life for its own sake - to some extent.

Re: Let me answer this question:

[Dunbal]

Or on television. Or in the cinema. Or in books. Or in plays. Why just single out video games? We live in a society where violent murder is more socially acceptable for public consumption than nudity.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Bongo]

And however you doll up humanity today, it is merely an illusion that anything has changed since then.

Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature makes a case that, however bad things look today, the past was much much more violent. Actually his book tries to ask why things have improved so much. Part of our modern feeling that today is terrible, is because we are more sensitive and more empathetic than we've ever been before, so we notice stuff more than we used to. Of course, caveats, not all the planet is living in the 21st Century today, but there is a trend. And we hope it continues. So yes, we are still pretty crappy as humans, but let's not start believing that we are irredeemable—we have made a lot of progress and that means we can make more progress in universal empathy and care and compassion.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.

And however you doll up humanity today, it is merely an illusion that anything has changed since then.

Almost half a *millenium* before the Romans built Colosseum (and had their bloody spectacles in it - including killing Christians!), (we) Greeks had fought the Persian invadors and won - one of those Greeks fighting against them, Aeschylus (who was so proud for this that asked to be the only thing mentioned in his grave), wrote a tragedy called "The Persians": instead of writing "Greece... fuck yeah... we fucked you barbarians!", he mostly wrote about the psychological drama experienced by the Persians back home, in a way that... well, i watched this tragedy performed in one of our ancient Greek theaters, and i felt pity for the Persians!

My point is that "Humanity" it too "big" of a word to make such statements about how it is an illusion that has changed - it is surely better today than what it was at the Colosseum times (but at that time it was worse than what it was when Greeks were "in charge" of humanity!). BUT today we have the "Muslim world" (doing what we all know) against the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization.

Humanity must choose its civilization.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Demonoid-Penguin]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Nowadays we do it with drones and remote cameras.

And MMA.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

I seriously fail to understand how we, the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization, "provoke the Muslims" (and "in a way that it has never done to us"?!), plus, that (general) Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization can be adopted by anyone who wants to be civilized* (and since i am a Greek that mentioned the Persians: Persians, who had a civilized enough culture before they were forced to become Muslims, have done it in some extend, so, excluding their current barbaric Muslim religion, they are civilized enough "barbarians", surely more than any Arab for example - take it from a Greek, a couple of milleniums "old enemy" of the Persians!). If we stop interacting with the "Muslim world" (something that many Muslim want, BUT MANY WESTERNERS WANT ALSO!), what you think will be the outcome for the Muslims? And did you know that it is Muslims those who ask from us, Westerners, to "interact", and then, the same people, call that a "provocation" - i surely don't understand why it is our fault!

* Let's not start a "relevitism" of the "what you mean civilized?" type.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Intrepid imaginaut]

Or instead of descending to outright misanthropy we could look at the political climate and situation in Rome at the time, where lots of citizens lived largely on state handouts and whose main entertainment was the Colosseum, bread and circuses. Bored and indolent, they needed continually escalating spectacles - they actually flooded the Colosseum and lifted ships in to do battle, naumachiae - so is this period in Roman history a warning about meaningless lives lived without industry, Roman culture, or human nature?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[penguinoid]

I'll add my own answer: the Colosseum was so popular, because swordfight training videos in roman times were sorely lacking. Wouldn't you be much more interested in watching some real medieval violence if your life depended on properly handling your weapon later on the front line?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

We in the West have enough firepower to back our provocations with slaughter on an epic scale. Too bad we're not too good at following.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[AmiMoJo]

It's more fundamental than that. In those days a lot of people died from things that are unimaginable in modern developed nations. Starvation, lack of clean water, lack of basic medicines, war and lawlessness. Most people didn't live much beyond 30 anyway, and by that age tended to have severe "disabilities", for want of a better word (even poor eyesight was uncorrectable and could prevent someone working effectively).

So life was cheap. Rome needed big armies and needed a system that would integrate the less civilized people it subjugated into its society. Thus the Roman system, where anyone could become a citizen by serving the empire, was created. Equally those who were not citizens didn't have rights or legal protections (a bit like how the US treats non-US citizens today), and really were seen as property and somewhat sub-human, or at least sub-citizen, in the same way that for example black people were at times in the last few hundred years. So lacking any useful entertainment skills and otherwise being of little use, literally throwing them to the lions made a kind of sense.

There was also the punishment aspect. Some parts of the world still kill people convicted of crimes, and allow others to watch (although they would say it isn't for entertainment). Fear helped keep people in line, much like how these days fear of terrorism is used for the same purpose. Do as we say, or die (in the arena / in a terrorist attack).

Re:Let me answer this question:

[drinkypoo]

The problem is that those guys could only afford the nosebleed seats, only the rich could afford to really be down where they could get a good look at the action.

The colosseum was so popular because the Romans were bloodthirsty fucks, just like most people are now, which is why so many nations still have a death penalty.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[CrimsonAvenger]

Persians, who had a civilized enough culture before they were forced to become Muslims

The Persians had a civilized culture long after "they were forced to become Muslims".

Compare the culture of 10th century Persia to 10th century France or England sometime. Or even the 15th century.

And do try to remember that "algebra" isn't an Anglo-Saxon acronym....

Re:Let me answer this question:

[CrimsonAvenger]

Rome needed big armies and needed a system that would integrate the less civilized people it subjugated into its society.

Umm, no. Rome had a miniscule army for most of its history, when compared to its population. That's the advantage of an Empire as opposed to a city-state or similar flyspeck "nation".

Re:Let me answer this question:

[amias]

we invade their countries , we interfere in their political systems , we call them terrorists.

can't really make it any more obvious than that.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Rome was BEFORE the Middle Ages, shitboy.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[fluffernutter]

We would have these spectacles too if it weren't for the invention of professional sports.

Re: Let me answer this question:

[ArcadeMan]

We live in a society where violent murder is more socially acceptable for public consumption than nudity.

I think you mean "In American society, violent murder is more socially acceptable for public consumption than nudity."

There's a lot of countries where nudity isn't such a big deal but violence is. Same thing with guns.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

The selfie snapping crowd may be self involved, but they're not the source of modern day violence.

In the US, bigoted and intolerant people claiming to be Christian have accounted for a fair amount of the violence. Most American "Christians" aren't exactly overflowing with compassion and would call Jesus a pussy if they actually knew anything about him.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[penguinoid]

So what would you call weapons similar to medieval weaponry except from Roman times?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[GLMDesigns]

Provoked in what way? By saying - you don't want to eat pork? Fine. But f*** you for prohibiting it for me. You want to say praise muhammad go ahead. But if I want to say f*** muhammad then no laws or violence or threats of violence should be issued against me. If they do - they you (the oh-so-offended-defender-of muhammad) are the aggressor.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[GLMDesigns]

and? That's true but and that shows that Islam does not equal the salafist bullsh*t being promoted by ISIS et al.

Now that we no that Islam is not necessarily equal to ISIS then what? (if ISIS wins and converts all muslims to their viewpoint and / or kills the rest) then ISIS = Islam).

Re:Let me answer this question:

[mu51c10rd]

This. We do similar things today but without the death part. Go watch MMA, boxing, or American football.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Christianity. Granted, it was the Age of Enlightenment that lead to scientific advancement and overall physical improvement to the human quality of life. But, you could argue that the Christian movement paved the path towards mass compassion at the global scale. That has to account for some significance.

ROFL?

Cruasades
Inquestion
Irish catholic war

Christianity is responsible for MORE murders then every other religon combined.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

I am afraid that Persians started to gradually become *less* civilized the moment they were forced to become Muslims - plus, this "algebra" thing is someway a "myth" (with some truth of course, i don't try to deny it totally - i am a G[r]eek!)

Re:Let me answer this question:

[gstoddart]

Bronze age? Ancient? Roman era?

Pretty much anything except "medieval" which, kind of by definition, came after the Roman empire collapsed.

And then pretty much everything which came after that is the world "discovering" things which had been known before "medieval" times and acting like it was new.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

we invade their countries

I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade. Don't make the common mistake to think that we go there uninvited, and don't become a victim of your own opinion (i.e., even if you disagree with going there -something that i will respect-, you should not convert that in your mind as an invasion).

we interfere in their political systems

You mean that we go there and vote for their elected representatives? The Muslim countries you probably refering to, don't have a "political system" (other than the "well known" to those been oppressed there - AND IT IS NOT OUR FAULT!). You are the victim of the usual mistake: while even without any interaction with us, the Muslims there will had the same problematic "political system", just because we interact with them you think we interfere. But then you will be the first to blame us for not doing anything, when you will watch in TV local Muslims crying "why the West does not do something?"

we call them terrorists.

Hmmm... i wonder why...

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Applehu Akbar]

But we're just as bad, because Windows 8.1 .

Re:Let me answer this question:

[fustakrakich]

Probably has more to do with our 'new' system of instant communication that came with radio. Now that we all can see war, we are finding it a little less palatable.

I'm a businessman. Blood is a big expense.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Obviously Gary Glassman has never watched the evening news.

Re: Let me answer this question:

[fustakrakich]

All very primal. The alpha male is the only one with the harem.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

So, when the America falls it will be back to the good old Medieval days for a few hundred years. The US is the only thing keeping the planet as peaceful as it is. Without them, it it's gonna be a global brawl.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[argStyopa]

Except, interestingly, we seem to have 'evolved' past the idea that we are allowed to make any such judgements, as it inherently involves subjective value - a (secular) sin in the modern era of cultural relativism..

In the Roman era, I doubt that *anyone* would have argued if you stated "Rome is more advanced than the Gauls" - neither Roman, nor Gaul, nor an objective 3rd party.

Yet try to make a similar assertion today, and half of the listeners immediately object that any such value-judgement is impossible and wrong.

How is one to "choose" when one is forbidden to even make a value judgement (or even worse, dare to discuss it openly)?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[tehcyder]

"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.

The Romans didn't have Call of Duty.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[rogoshen1]

You realize that the "didn't live long past 30" thing is a bit of a myth right? Basically if someone survived childhood, or in the case of women, giving borth -- They'd likely live to their 60's and beyond.

It was childhood disease, and childbirth that skewed the average.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct. Look how sophisticated the gas chambers were. Yes I went there

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats the one thing to know your dealing with an idiot. If you see "most didnt live past 30" you can stop reading.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

Absolutely agree! I am a (sexist and racist) Greek... my ancient ancestors used to say "Thank Zeus that i was born as a human and not a beast, a man and not a woman, a Greek and not a barbarian" - usually barbarians used to agree and some/many tried to become "Greeks", in the same way nowadays i try to become more of a "German" (you know our state's little financial crisis!).

Unfortunately, we, "people of (some common) reason", are usually cowards... and our self-censorship leads to your very *wise* last question: How is one to "choose" when one is forbidden to even make a value judgement (or even worse, dare to discuss it openly)?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

In 600 AD the entire Mediterranean was Christian. By 700 North Africa, the Mideast and even parts of Europe were Muslim. All of these areas were converted by the sword, not through proselytizing. Mainly by invasion. From the early medieval period until the 16th century Islam continued to encroach on European lands. It attacked the Byzantine empire, which resulted in them asking Rome for help. That was the Crusades, an effort at self defense for Byzantium and an attempt to ensure pilgrims could continue to visit sites in Christian Holy Lands in the Mideast.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Non-citizens in the U.S. have the same rights and freedoms as citizens. The constitution does not limit the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights to citizens.
Illegals with in U.S. boarders still have the same rights as citizens. If I as a citizen break the law I can be arrested, detained and punished. Illegals within the U.S. have the right to appear before a magistrate and appeal their decision. They don't have a right to flout immigration laws any more than I have a right to flout other laws.
For an illegal who breaks other laws their rights are the same as a citizen. They are entitled to legal counsel. They have 5th amendment protections. The right to a jury trial, etc. That they might be deported is not a punishment. They have no right to have crossed the border to begin with.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[fpoling]

Pinker claims have been debunked as available histirical data is compatible with a hypothesis that nothing has changed regarding violence for the last 3000 years, http://www.fooledbyrandomness....

Re:Let me answer this question:

[praxis]

I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.

You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.

If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

In 600 AD the entire Mediterranean was Christian. By 700 North Africa, the Mideast and even parts of Europe were Muslim. All of these areas were converted by the sword, not through proselytizing. Mainly by invasion. From the early medieval period until the 16th century Islam continued to encroach on European lands. It attacked the Byzantine empire, which resulted in them asking Rome for help. That was the Crusades, an effort at self defense for Byzantium and an attempt to ensure pilgrims could continue to visit sites in Christian Holy Lands in the Mideast.

I am Greek... when i hear/read those Westerners who, instead of recognizing the historic truth, insist on blaming the Western/Christian worlds for defending itself from the Muslim hordes... you understand! No need for them to accept some superiority of the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization, they just need to stop distorting historic facts AND read the Islamic history (writen by Muslims: oh... they are so proud for their mass conversion by the sword that they don't hide it!).

Re:Let me answer this question:

[schlachter]

because they had soldiers coming home from war that needed an outlet for killing, and because you had slaves that could be force to fight.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[HornWumpus]

Just not true. People died at accelerated rates though out their lives.

Women in particular were fucked by multiple births and poor nutrition.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[antiperimetaparalogo]

I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.

You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.

If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?

I thought it was easy to understand that the vast majority of the oppresed majority wanted the West's intervention:
* Kuwait - it (and the rest of Arab states) asked the West to liberate it from Iraq.
* Iraq - the vast majority of the oppresed majority (i.e., Shia and Kurds) asked and received! Hint: check the first election in Iraq after the fall of Saddam.
* Afghanistan - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan" (a.k.a. "North Alliance" - old friends of Soviets!) asked the West for help (not that the US needed any permision to go get Bin Laden hidding there, and the Talibans who ruled Afghanistan proudly protected, saying to US: we don't give him to you...)
* Libya - East and West, united against Gaddafi (hidding in a hole... like Saddam! notice the "Allahu Akbar")

But your basic question is "if an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion?". Yes it is, or at least invalidates this "the West goes to Muslim countries uninvited". You don't have to agree with the liberation of the oppressed, but you can not claim that the West attacks Muslims (especially that it does it "in the name of God", as many, Muslims and Westerners, -ridiculously- claim)

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is the only thing keeping the planet as peaceful as it is

Arguably, there's many places in the world which are less stable and peaceful because asshole Americans have been fucking things up.

America was a state sponsor of terrorism right up until it but them in the ass in 2001.

America toppled democratic governments because they weren't as friendly as a dictator to US business interests.

America has toppled dictators and then ran away claiming to have solved the problems.

America has cause as much instability as they've allegedly fixed.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

I see it more like sports. I'm not a particularly big sports fan, but I was at least a fair weather fan in the past and I rarely tried to imagine what I would do in a situation. Maybe I would play Monday morning quarterback after a game, but unless a game is rigged nobody knows who will win or what will happen.

There is of course some game-rigging going on in sports today, but I don't doubt that similar things happened in ancient Rome.

When an athlete gets hurt on the field, you know he's actually hurt and feels real pain. Movies only simulate this.

A zombie movie (or really any work of fiction) may have you sympathizing with the characters, rooting for them even, but in the end you know it's just fiction and in a lot of cases you know nothing too bad will happen to a main character no matter how grim things look for them - at least for a movie with a top-billed actor that starts out with them in grave danger (e.g. just about every James Bond movie) you know they can't kill them in the first scene (unless maybe the rest of the movie is a flashback to how they arrived in that situation.

They might die in the end, but if you look at your watch and see that there's still 45 minutes left in a film they'll probably escape their immediate predicament.

And in the case of a character like James Bond you know he's going to survive the ending as well (maybe someday they'll kill him off - we can only hope).

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Christianity

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm... please tell me that was intentional

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Bongo]

Thanks, I'll read that. Then I'll try to summarise both positions in my head, understand what they are each saying, and then try to figure out which one makes more sense to me. Taleb may be talking more about technicalities, and Pinker may have had to rely more on anecdotes about people's attitudes. It really might mean something that the laws in Britain chose to forbid "cruel and unusual punishments" — what was it that they were doing that was "cruel" and "unusual"? Why do we think that lashing people is barbaric today? So I wouldn't jump to the "debunked" claim, until I understand what Taleb's criticism is actually about. Also, a curious thing about Taleb, I think he claimed somewhere that Lebanon had been a wonderfully stable and diverse and rich society for centuries, so its collapse was a complete shock, whereas, the fall of the Ottoman Empire basically destroyed the foundations of the whole region, so why would its collapse be such a surprise? Sometimes I wonder that Taleb thinks that every other nation should fear collapse and is fooling itself about stability. But then the UK has had the Magna Carta for 800 years, which means that for 800 years it has been gradually building post-authoritarian institutions... so the use of stats is wonderful and all, but I often wonder what Taleb misses in his technical critiques.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Bongo]

If Jesus was real and really did say stuff like, "turn the other cheek", then yes he was an individual who was teaching others to start to find their own personal freedom, literally a higher state of intelligence, a more humanistic and identity-less intelligence. Ie. more like what the Buddha is supposed to have been.

But later, with the various Christian sects, it became political, and the Roman Empire got involved, and basically it was turned into a political empire movement. And the kinds of people who want to belong to a giant massive organism because it has power and survival mechanisms, they flock to such "religions" (which are really empires), so they are about power, and yeah they'll go on wars of conquest, as did Moslems and as did Christians. The Ottoman Empire didn't just grow out of smiles and roses. Likewise for all empires of the world.

Arguably, Jesus did something quite clever, he inserted an idea of personal freedom into the monotheistic Judaic line of culture, and he was killed for that, but it was too late, he'd introduced the idea, and some do argue that that idea did influence Western development, and in the end, some individuals felt enough of a sense of personal freedom that they started the Western Enlightenment.

Re:Let me answer this question:

[Shalhav]

Yeah, right.

Crusades were 800 years ago, and instigated by Muslims killing pilgrims. The jews killed by errant knights, probably in the hundreds, were done in disobedience to the bishop's contrary orders. Doctors have killed more people than that.

The "inquestion" resulted in a thousand odd deaths over a several decades - actually in higher numbers by secular judges than church judges. More people than that have died due to cell phones on the road. [http://www.strangenotions.com/spanish-inquisition/]

Maybe 3000 died in the Irish catholic war. Hamburgers have killed more.

"Christianity is responsible for MORE murders then every other religon combined."

Really!? Pulled a statement out of your ass, eh? What "religons" are you combining? Stalin's? Hitler's?

We're humans.

[Anonymous Coward]

Killing is kind of our thing. Advanced or savage.

How is it

[SuperKendall]

The question it poses is, how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

So I take it you've not seen a movie made in the last 20 years?

Re:How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

Are You Not Entertained?

Re: How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference being that we don't kill people (intentionally, anyway) to make movies.

Re: How is it

[viperidaenz]

No, but we like to watch people get killed in movies.
The Romans didn't have the technology to fake it like we do.

Re: How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is the progress we've made, we can satisfy that part of us without the annoyance of finding people to kill.

Re: How is it

[Livius]

But only because using actual people is no longer cost effective.

Re: How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

troll

Re: How is it

[martin-boundary]

That depends. This may be an unpopular point of view to some here, but the value of people depends on supply and demand, just like the value of goods. To lower the value of people in a country, all it takes is a large increase in population way beyond the required workforce and the available resources. Below a certain value, people will become disposable entities just like the slaves in Roman times. In some of the poorest countries around the world, this is partially happening. In the richer countries around the globe, this could also happen, either because our mix of resources and work changes too radically for our population at some point, or because the poor from other countries flee their homes in extreme numbers at some point.

We can't assume that human life will always be valued in the future like it is now.

Re: How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to ISIS.

Re: How is it

[Demonoid-Penguin]

The difference being that we don't kill people (intentionally, anyway) to make movies.

True - but we still cater to blood lust with executions. The English (and others) always drew a crowd for public executions and torture until relatively recently, and the USA had their "witch trials". It's not hard to conclude the demand for blood-lust even under the thinnest of moral justifications still exist - you don't have to go to youtube, the football, or a boxing match, to see that as you'll find plenty that wish graphic violence visited on others right here on this site.

How many best seller fiction books are about serial killers?

Re: How is it

[Anonymous Coward]

Modern day gladiator: Yah want fries wizzat?

Re: How is it

[Oligonicella]

No we don't, we know full well it's a fiction. At the distances they watched the fights, the Romans could have easily faked it. They chose not to fake it, we chose to fake it.

Re: How is it

[schlachter]

and they couldn't just rewind and replay it. so they had to kill someone anew at every showing!

think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[ihtoit]

the Triskelions in Star Trek - got off on blood sports.
The Running Man - Bread and Circuses for a collapsed US economy.
Rollerball - street hockey and motorcycles.
Death Race 2000 - Cannonball Run with real cannonballs.
Death Race - like the preceding, but laps around a prison island and the entire country's putting bets on. Kinda like The Running Man but with miniguns. And Tombstones. Gotta love those Tombstones.

The first King novel I ever read was his masterpiece "The Long Walk". Death Race 2000 but without the cars. Published as part of the Bachman anthology in 1985.

More recently, we have Battle Royale and its Hollywood ripoff, The Hunger Games.

See, the Romans had it right. Give the plebs just enough food to survive and keep them entertained, they stay compliant and content. Hence, "Bread and Circuses".

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

More recently, we have Battle Royale and its Hollywood ripoff, The Hunger Games.Hollywood doesn't publish books....

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[ljw1004]

Think of advance civilizations in fiction... See, the Romans had it right. Give the plebs just enough food to survive and keep them entertained, they stay compliant and content. Hence, "Bread and Circuses".

Don't you think the fiction *copied* from past human cultures, particularly the Romans?

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[sexconker]

Hollywood absolutely does publish books and prop up manufactured "young adult" titles and authors as floaters.
It's much cheaper to secure the teens and tweens BEFORE you greenlight the film.

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Long Walk" was great. Four miles per hour, baby. Gotta take a shit? God help you... Most of King's short stories were pretty good back in the day.

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Where is there a book written 2000 years ago in Latin that The Hunger Games could have been copied from?

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget Idiocracy's Dilldozer.

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[weilawei]

I believe the GP is implying that modern fiction often copies real life events from historical cultures, not that it rips off their fiction directly (which some works do, but that's tangential to the actual point).

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[ihtoit]

does "Ow! My Balls!" count as bloodsport?? o.0

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[ihtoit]

better tell Viacom that they don't own Simon & Schuster or Paramount Pictures, then, that'll edgumicate 'em!

Hollywood has absolutely depended on books since its inception. Major publishing houses, especially those not wholly owned or subsidiaries of Hollywood companies, depend on Hollywood cash pre-injections (and big-name spamming, hello King, Clancy and Rowling) to turn a profit. A quick example: OJ Simpson's lawyer wrote a book called Journey To Justice. It got optioned by the publisher, but because it didn't appear on Oprah's reading list, it flopped. In 1997, the first six books that appeared on Oprah's reading list made the bestseller list. ALL six got optioned and made into movies.

And now for my raw, unadulterated opinion: The Harry Potter books just really aren't that good. The only reason Rowling has been so successful is because she got in early and got the first book optioned, got movie rights signed away and got rich off the back of a promise to keep churning out pulp bubblegum romance which is what HP basically is. Clancy hasn't written a paragraph since his first Op Center novel (read his books in publishing order, there's a marked and dramatic change in writing style and the level of technical description). How many ghost writers does he have on his staff, anyway? King will be churning out books long after he's dead, and people will still buy them because - and I'm gonna hate myself for saying this - it's not the storytelling prowess of the man, it's the name: STEPHEN FUCKING KING!

Re:think of advanced civilisations in fiction

[RobinH]

I think the GP's point is obvious. When you see/read the Hunger Games, your first reaction is disbelief that this could happen, and then it hits you that it did happen (Rome, etc.). I think that was one of the major points of the book: same old human cruelty in a different setting.

Still in sad condition

[Spy Handler]

I clicked on the link and saw all the pictures. Sadly the Colosseum still looks like a ruin, and the government of Italy has no money to halt the decay let alone a restoration to former glory.

As a Rome Total War player and an aficionado of all things Roman, I would love to see the Colosseum as it was originally. Yes I realize a restoration would cost billions and modern Italy as a PIIG nation cannot afford it. It really speaks to the immense power, wealth and engineering skill of the ancients that they BUILT this thing so long ago.

I still keep hoping that some internet billionaire will take it upon himself as his life achievement to do a full restoration and that I will get to see it before I die. Barring that, I hope someone will do a very high quality rendering of every inch of the original Colosseum that we can navigate freely in Oculus VR. Maybe even host virtual games with thousands of online participants and spectators.

Re:Still in sad condition

[m.alessandrini]

What do you mean? Rebuilding it as it was originally? But then it would not be original anymore! There's a reason ancient monuments are kept as they are. Yes of course all monuments desperately need to be better preserved, especially here in Italy. But the Colosseum, for example, lacks much of its external walls because in the centuries after Romans its stone blocks were "stolen" to build other things, before a culture of preserving the past was fully developed. Anyway, nobody would think of rebuilding it, because even as it is, it is a testament of the past history.

Re:Still in sad condition

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You have to wonder where it all went wrong for the Romans to turn into Italians.

Re:Still in sad condition

[phantomfive]

If you're not too picky, you can still check out the Verona Arena, which is still very large and remains in use for concerts today.

Re:Still in sad condition

[foreverdisillusioned]

I don't think that's a settled debate. The Parthenon is seeing some fairly major restorations, not a total rebuild but you can see in the photos that new marble is definitely being laid on top of old. It's understandable that people are nostalgic for what they know, but there's also a pretty clear argument for seeing something as it was and as it was intended by those of the culture that created it, as opposed to merely seeing the ruins of a building that was blown-up by barbarians in a relatively paltry and uninteresting battle centuries later. Just think about the implications of your argument here--if an earthquake damages a monument, that damage should be left there to remind us of the earthquake? Should the Elgin marbles be permanently left out of the Parthenon to remind us of their theft? Should the damage to the Mona Lisa not been repaired, so as to remind us of the vandals? I feel the bias here must always be on the side of restoration, provided such restoration does not damage any of the original work.

Of course, some people like ruins for their own sake, including Hilter. So, I mean, I totally understand if you still disagree with me. It just means you're some kind of Nazi.

/Godwin

Re:Still in sad condition

[cyn1c77]

It really speaks to the immense power, wealth and engineering skill of the ancients that they BUILT this thing so long ago.

You're forgetting the key ingredient: SLAVES.

They used lots and lots of slaves to build it. And they didn't give them workers comp or health benefits. Their retirement was probably a shallow grave.

It's in disrepair and so expensive to fix today because you can't abuse people like that anymore, although with all the retirement benefit cuts and debt restructuring, governments are doing their best to get back to that point!

Re:Still in sad condition

[peppepz]

To be fair, the colosseum has just been restored (not rebuilt), this year, with contribution from private sponsors. There's an approved plan from the government to rebuild the inner arena to make it walkable again in five years, for 20 mln €. Piig or not, that's not much for the fourth economy of the EU; for comparison, it's 1/6 the cost of a single F-35 fighter and Italy is going to buy 90 of them from the US. However you are right, Italians just can't be bothered to spend money for the preservation of their historic heritage, and will happily watch it crumble to nothingless (see what's happening to the houses of Pompeii) while they build campy villas around and over the ruins.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

> I still keep hoping that some internet billionaire [...]

I still keep hoping that internet (and other) billionaires get taxed appropriately so that some poor devils don't have to drown in the Mediterranean and Pacific in order to escape their even more miserable hellholes. And as a little collateral, perhaps Italy (and Greece) would have a bit of extra change left to look after their historical heritage, to your and my benefit as curious tourists visiting.

Re:Still in sad condition

[peppepz]

I think it’s the same reason why often the children of successful entrepreneurs fail to keep their fathers’ empires running. When you no longer need to practice some kind of culture, you don’t, and when a culture isn’t practiced, you lose it for good, and finally competition (from other companies, from the Barbarians, from the Chinese) does the rest. Also known as “resting on your laurels”.

Re:Still in sad condition

[m.alessandrini]

It's not nostalgy, or being Nazi/communist/gay, as is usual when one's opinion is different from yours, it's how much you want to "change the past". Earthquake is not an event tied to human evolution and civilization. An "uninteresting" battle of barbarians instead is part of history, in my opinion, and should not be discarded because previous events were cooler.

Re:Still in sad condition

[m.alessandrini]

If I was an irritable Italian (maybe I am a bit) I would reply with a famous line: "your ancestors were painting their faces when ours were building aqueducts and sewers."

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Their hellholes can be fixed, but probably not by taxing 'internet billionaries'. They need some cultural change, to value peace instead of bloody conquest. Even if there is less short-term profits (such as spoils of war) that way. Then they need to keep their populations below what their countries can support. Africa keep failing because a few good years is a perfect excuse to have lots of children - who starves in the next bad year that few bothers preparing for. Then local warlords have an easy time recruiting for the next war over food or whatever resources they can sell for food and luxuries. Education from the outside can help, but their culture really needs to change.

The biggest success of the western world is families with only two children. When the population no longer grow, each generation gets about the same opportunities as the previous ones, as well as inheriting any long-lasting value or knowledge they may have built. Democracy & high-tech has helped too of course. But we would be as bad as Africa in a generation or two if we kept with 8 kids per family. If populations keep growing, then no amount of green revolutions or bio-technology will help - once there are too many, starvation sets in. Then war follows, and the survivors will have plenty of reasons for hating and not cooperating with their neighbours.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

You're completely uninformed. Firstly, Italy IS restoring the Colosseum, the arena in particular, recently they polished the external walls too, and I'm quite astonished that the /. article doesn't mention it:

http://roma.repubblica.it/cron...

Obviously you cannot rebuild it exactly as it was, not because of lack of money, which is not a problem for the Italians (see next paragraph), but because they should use the very same marble which was used by their Ancestors, and get it from the same mountains. It would cause an environmental disaster.

Secondly, Italy hasn't received any money from the EU or the IMF, actually its 10-year sovereign bonds yield LESS than the US treasuries with the same maturity, which means that markets technically consider the Italian debt less risky than the american, for how unbelievable it might seem to you:

http://www.marketwatch.com/

(click on "rates").

So they really don't need any "help", let alone from some random american internet billionaires whose main concern would be the wifi coverage rather than rebuilding the Colosseum as it was.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an indictment of modern Italians. Why aren't they decades ahead of everyone with that head start?

Re:Still in sad condition

[m.alessandrini]

Well, you're perfectly right. Anyway Italy had a difficult history after that, and not a peaceful evolution like other countries enjoied. First, centuries of domination from almost all the other european powers, from middle age to 19th century. Then finally half a century of united Italy. Then a dictatorship and two world wars. And they were not "easy" wars, like the modern technologic ones. Basically half Europe was destroyed. Then reconstruction, thanks also to american help, and some really good decades where Italy was among the most powerful countries in the world. Now, down again, this time for the world-wide crysis, but also the fault of our recent governments and of italian mentality, I admit.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out the Latifunda.

Rome stopped supporting its populace, but instead gave the few and wealthy its support. This lead to the public moving to the city where they could do nothing but watch games.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to see the Colosseum the way it used to look, go to Verona. That one was exactly the same and it is still mostly intact.

Re:Still in sad condition

[swb]

Ha!

You might argue that their *Italianess* is what led to their downfall. The corruption, the killings for political advantage, the decadent wealth, there are times where I get the distinct impression that Rome was more or less the management style of the Sopranos done in togas and sandels.

While I find myself fascinated with the scale and sophistication of the Roman civilization and the reach of its empire, it often strikes me that it never quite stabilized. Maybe there was a period of stability in the Republic after the the Punic Wars but from about the time of Marius, through the Social Wars, the Serville Rebellion until the reign of Augustus there was a constant struggle between the aristocracy and the "new men" internally and constant warfare on its borders, sometimes victorious but often quite tenuous.

Re:Still in sad condition

[greatpatton]

And if you want to move to France, you still get roman arena (quite well preserved) in use and where animal still get killed: * Arles Amphitheatre (built 10 year after Collessum) where Bullfight still take place http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... * Arena of Nîmes (90-120AD), also used for bullfight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Guys, you can downvote me, but the OECD and World Health Organization statistics are going to stay the same anyways, they don't change if you mod them down. The US will keep having the highest obesity and one of the lowest life expectancies in the west, while the Italians will keep being the second longest-living people in the world, and among the slimmest in the west. Reality cannot be modded down, sorry.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Oligonicella]

Oh fucking horse shit. Equating a job at Costco with slavery is just retarded. You can always walk off and get another job. Same with cage fights and sports, the participants volunteer, they're not slaves. You have a tiny point with bum fights, but those are illegal, not sanctioned.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Applehu Akbar]

But it's the wimpy French form of bullfighting, in which you just annoy the bull.

Re:Still in sad condition

[RabidReindeer]

It wasn't original then either. The Coliseum was in service for a LONG time and various changes and repairs of greater and lesser degree were done to it for its entire career as a combat venue, to say nothing of the things that people did with it afterwards. The idea that you'd build something and leave it fundamentally unchanged until the day you knocked it down again isn't something that really had that much going for it until recently when the expected lifespans of structures grew less and the engineered durability of structures became greater (or, if the bean-counters took charge, less).

They rebuilt one small section of the Coliseum using native materials and Roman building techniques. As far as possible, the only difference was that the people who were involved were born about 2000 years later than the original artisans.

if 100% material authenticity were the only thing, then the best we could do is try and remove later changes and watch the original structure slowly crumble into the landscape. But the importance of the Coliseum isn't just the stone, mortar, wood fragments and residual metal, it's the conception of one of the most important aspects of Rome, and to properly grasp that, you need an opportunity to see it as the Romans themselves saw it.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Not entirely true. While I think the attacks on Italians being unable to do things are unfounded as Italy is quite a productive and modern state in most parts(the deep south and many rural villages excluded). The government is a train wreck and really the root of pretty much almost everything that ails Italy(Entwined with massive corruption in public/private partnerships). As for interest rates what you are seeing is not a vote of confidence in Italy's credit worthiness but rather the effect of ECB quantitative easing and other bond purchase programs. But alas I will agree that the notion of lazy Greeks, Spaniards, and Italians not being productive as the cause of their economic issues, nothing could be further from the truth and in my experience the average person from the southern euro countries if employed is working harder and more hours than your average German or Austrian, orderliness and organization....well the stereotypes are somewhat true.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Great things began to happen in Italy by the 12th Century, art, science, etc but barbarians were always a problem and if you haven't noticed Italy has a huge coast line and everyone wanted a piece of it, they had to keep the Turks at bay and also where constantly threatened by their neighbors and often times needed the support of hostile neighbors to keep the muslims out(See Normans and Spanish control of the kingdom of two sicilies). Italy had thriving republics when Europe had feudal lords and kings, the Germans and Napolean made sure that didn't hold, see the fall of Venice which spelled an end to the longest republic in history. Roman technology and advanced engineering was spread all over Europe, but not written down hence it was lost to history.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

.... the effect of ECB quantitative easing and other bond purchase programs.

... which is exactly what the Federal Reserve has done too, in far bigger size than the ECB, and for more years. Which means that the Italian bonds' interest rates would be lower than USA T-bills' anyways. The financial stability of a country depends on the private debt too, not only on the government debt. And - surprise! - the Italians are in a pretty good position on this:

http://data.worldbank.org/indi...

USA: 192% of GDP

ITALY: 117% of GDP

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

You can see the Parthenon in Nashville.

Re:Still in sad condition

[HornWumpus]

You have to live longer. Because you live with your mothers until you are 40+.

Re:Still in sad condition

[HornWumpus]

Before surrendering to it?

Re:Still in sad condition

[Coren22]

I would rather eat well and live four years less than starve myself to live an extra four years.

Live life to the fullest.

Re:Still in sad condition

[greatpatton]

No they do real corrida in their. Just check the program and the next one in Arles is the 18th of July and they are going to kill 7 bulls.

Re:Still in sad condition

[Anonymous Coward]

Eating "well" is one of the most likely reasons why Italians perform so good in those two statistics (life expectancy and obesity). Olive oil is full of vitamin E and polyphenols, very powerful antioxidants, just like fresh tomatoes, oranges, wine (as long as one doesn't get drunk), and other typical Italian products. Italy is also the world's biggest producer of kiwis (yes, even more than New Zealand), a massive source of vitamin C. That's what I call eating "well".

Re:Still in sad condition

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Oh fucking horse shit. Equating a job at Costco with slavery is just retarded. You can always walk off and get another job.

Slaves got fed. Costco workers don't - instead they get a wage you could not live on. Sure they can get another job - at the fucking Waffle House, just like slaves could get another job - at the Colleseum. No need to guess your nationality - or your politics when you push the "poverty is a choice" bullshit. Semantic pedantics aside the reality is people live in their cars and work at Costco because they don't have a choice.

Roman slaves had a choice too. Just the same as those chopping cotton and digging ditches in chain gangs.

You have a tiny point with bum fights, but those are illegal, not sanctioned.

And the people who make those Apple products? The people making high priced sports shoes in factories in US territory? Next time you're at a restaurant wander out into the back lane and tell those "illegals" who made the perilous journey across at least one border to support your lifestyle they aren't slaves. Or better still - hang around the right taco stand in LA and take a day job with them. Then you can tell yourself you know for a fact those people clipping hedges and mowing lawns aren't slaves either. They get paid - and illegal wage, so I guess they're not slaves. That'll be why Australia never had slavery (the Kanacks, the Koories, the Murrays, the convicts, and all those "indentured" Scottish laborers weren't slaves either (they had "choices"). No more than the Afghan collecting trolleys at the Costco down the road for $8 an hour is a slave (the minimum wage is twice that - but when the practice is illegal, regardless of the scale or importance to the established economy we'll just pretend it doesn't count. At least the Romans (and many other cultures) were honest about slavery.

Feel free to point at well publicized examples of when Costco workers "make good" - don't bother to think about whether it'd be newsworthy if it wasn't so rare. I won't be surprised when you shift those goal posts and claim that their lack of choice is the result of being ignorant and uneducated (and pretend they had a choice about that).

Been living under a rock?

[fahrbot-bot]

That was on the PBS series NOVA on Feb 11, 2015 - I saw it then. Way to be current anon.

Re:Been living under a rock?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was about to post the same thing, but...

The Brits to tend to be behind the Times. Actually, this article was in the Telegraph.

NOVA covered this months ago

[Anonymous Coward]

this is pretty old news, NOVA had a episode about this months ago

Re: NOVA covered this months ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually 4 months ago.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/building-wonders.html#colosseum-death-trap

Re: NOVA covered this months ago

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw it. It was pretty good--but do note this big anachronism:

The basic structure was built in a workshop outside the city and then lifted into the Colosseum by a giant crane.

They were awfully nervous when using that crane around the Colosseum. I wondered why they didn't just try to reassemble the contraption in place.

Stupid question

[viperidaenz]

how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

We're the dominant predator on the planet. We didn't get here by being friendly.
We don't have large teeth.
We don't have claws.
We're not overly big or strong.
We use our brains to figure out how to hunt and kill prey.

Pretty much all reasonably intelligent animal kill for entertainment.

Re:Stupid question

[geekmux]

how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

We're the dominant predator on the planet. We didn't get here by being friendly. We don't have large teeth. We don't have claws. We're not overly big or strong. We use our brains to figure out how to hunt and kill prey.

Pretty much all reasonably intelligent animal kill for entertainment.

While you make a strong point as to where we truly stand in the evolutionary chain, Native American Indians and Eskimos would tend to disagree with that last part. I'm certain they're not the only ones who did not kill merely for entertainment.

As for the rest of us, watch a documentary. Visit a slaughterhouse. There is nothing entertaining about the mindless way we kill chickens and cattle for food.

Re:Stupid question

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? Of course they both kill for entertainment. If you've been listening to some ecological myth-makers stop that and go look at the actual archaeological evidence.

Native Americans were your usual tribal mix, with the odd wise guy running stuff in one place for a while only to get replaced by some nutcase who demanded blood for imagined sleights. This whole "wise red man knows to give back" stuff has no relationship to what America was actually like before European "explorers" with guns showed up.

Re:Stupid question

[Maxo-Texas]

I don't know about the eskimos but if you think native american indians didn't kill for entertainment you are sadly mistaken.

Native americans tortured captives for sport long before europeans landed in the americas.

Native americans practiced human sacrifice, infanticide, rape, as well as leisurely and creative torture such as roasting people alive and stopping to wait for victims to recover consciousness before continuing. They didn't do it because they were angry or evil (in their context)-- they did it because they enjoyed doing it. It was entertaining. It was fun.

They were no better- nor any worse- than the Europeans. Europeans also had a long history of enjoying torture- watching bears being torn apart by dogs- watching humans being "drawn and quartered" or burned alive. The religious ones were especially creative towards heretics and homosexuals.

Some particular tribes were friendlier than other tribes and didn't practice torture or practiced it less. Here I venture into speculation and speculate that they were less common. There's ample evidence that most native american tribes were constantly at war with other native american tribes.

I'm not dissing them- I have choctaw and cherokee blood. I'm just relating reality.

Re:Stupid question

[Anonymous Coward]

did not kill merely for entertainment

Citation please!

Re:Stupid question

[geekmux]

I don't know about the eskimos but if you think native american indians didn't kill for entertainment you are sadly mistaken.

Native americans tortured captives for sport long before europeans landed in the americas.

Native americans practiced human sacrifice, infanticide, rape, as well as leisurely and creative torture such as roasting people alive and stopping to wait for victims to recover consciousness before continuing. They didn't do it because they were angry or evil (in their context)-- they did it because they enjoyed doing it. It was entertaining. It was fun.

They were no better- nor any worse- than the Europeans. Europeans also had a long history of enjoying torture- watching bears being torn apart by dogs- watching humans being "drawn and quartered" or burned alive. The religious ones were especially creative towards heretics and homosexuals.

Some particular tribes were friendlier than other tribes and didn't practice torture or practiced it less. Here I venture into speculation and speculate that they were less common. There's ample evidence that most native american tribes were constantly at war with other native american tribes.

I'm not dissing them- I have choctaw and cherokee blood. I'm just relating reality.

And you bring all valid points here, when discussing how man treats fellow man under the illusion of beliefs or entertainment.

That said, when speaking of predator and prey, I was more referring to the recycling abilities and respect that these tribes had for their food source, as there is also sufficient evidence to prove they used the meat, bones, and skin for various needs instead of merely killing the animal for sport every time.

What can I say, I don't disagree with your former points. We are a violent species who will reach for just about any pathetic excuse to exercise it. The sad part is we don't have to be that way.

Makes you wonder why we call our society "advanced" these days. We've just gotten more efficient at killing each other while the reasons remain the same.

Re:Stupid question

[DogDude]

"reasonably intelligent animal kill for entertainment."

Human intelligent? Not sure.

Re:Stupid question

[Nidi62]

While you make a strong point as to where we truly stand in the evolutionary chain, Native American Indians and Eskimos would tend to disagree with that last part. I'm certain they're not the only ones who did not kill merely for entertainment.

Uh, what? The Iroquois Indians (and many other Native American tribes) would stage multi-day mock battles involving hundred of participants on each side. You essentially had mobs of people rushing each other with sticks and you couldn't try to avoid blows. Severe injuries or deaths could easily be expected in those conditions. Mandatory wagers by participants included everything form small possesions such as knives all the way up to family members such as wives or children. This sport is of course still played today,but it is known as lacrosse.

Re:Stupid question

[Oligonicella]

... there is also sufficient evidence to prove they used the meat, bones, and skin for various needs instead of merely killing the animal for sport every time.

Their level of technology required that as did European stone age technology. You might also look up Alfred Jacob Miller's "Driving Herds of Buffalo over a Precipice", 1867. Don't overly romanticize things.

Re:Stupid question

[dryeo]

Some of our closest relatives spend all their time fucking instead of killing and are quite peaceful after all the fucking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

Re:Stupid question

[khallow]

Makes you wonder why we call our society "advanced" these days. We've just gotten more efficient at killing each other while the reasons remain the same.

The body counts don't remain the same. There's all this efficiency, but there isn't the higher body count (per capita of course) to go with that efficiency.

Re:Stupid question

[Maxo-Texas]

If you look at many measures of humans killing humans (including war deaths), we have been improving continuously since world war 2.

There is reason for hope if we get past 2100 without another major war.

Confused documentary maker.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

how could such an advanced culture (as Rome) have staged such bloody spectacles?

How could such an advanced culture (as ours) have prominent media people who confuse "advanced" with "non-bloody" (or "squeamish")?

Answer: Freedom of speech and of the press. Even the clueless can be read and heard by millions.

Meanwhile, our culture seems to be decaying in much the pattern of Rome's. Let's hope that, if we can't fix it, it takes as many centuries to fall, rather than going down "in internet time" or "as we approach the singularity".

Re:Confused documentary maker.

[phantomfive]

Meanwhile, our culture seems to be decaying in much the pattern of Rome's.

What pattern is that?

Re:Confused documentary maker.

[weilawei]

The one where an expansionist empire stopped growing and began stagnating until it stopped being an empire?

Re:Confused documentary maker.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Meanwhile, our culture seems to be decaying in much the pattern of Rome's"

I had a history prof that said once, "Those who only study high school history are doomed to repeatedly make poor comparisons to the Roman Empire".

Re:Confused documentary maker.

[dryeo]

Anti-science is one similarity. The enlightenment was as much a scientific revolution and now science is under attack and distrusted, especially by governments as science is at heart anti-authoritarianism. Examples include the climate change deniers and the anti-vaccinationers.

Re:Confused documentary maker.

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile, our culture seems to be decaying in much the pattern of Rome's.

What pattern is that?

Outsourcing our military to the point we can't defend ourselves?

Ask the Spanish

[ChunderDownunder]

Bloodsport continues to this day in the form of bullfighting.

Trophy hunters are of the same mindset

[BillBrains]

There is no difference between what the Romans did and what trophy hunters/killers and poachers do today. Whether it's fox hunting, cock fighting, bull fighting, rhino poaching or simply killing animals because "it's fun". All humans are inhuman deep down. It's just that we have learned to be compassionate, and we bury our innate desire to be cruel.

Dragons

[Ann Coulter]

But did it carry dragons?

Re:Dragons

[Picass0]

No, dragons bring fiery death from above.

bloody spectacles

[Black Parrot]

how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

Asks the society that puts two men in a ring to beat each other up until one can't go any more.

Or runs racehorses until their ankles break, then kills them.

Commenter's Psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

Interestingly, most people who commented seems to be drawn by the same question: "how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?" The more advance = the bloodier? Or is curiosity derived from fiction takes the best of people making it a justifiable reaction when presented with the bloody conundrum? (Think "Saw", "Final Destination", etc). Will humanity eventually succumbs to the same fate if A MAN -given enough time- is granted an absolute power over society?

Fluffy piece is fluffy

[Anonymous Coward]

I wanted to know how that thing works and how they figured out how to make it. All I get are mugshots of the people that've done it. Boo.

Maybe cause and effect are reversed?

[Swoopy]

Has anyone given a thought to the possibility that the Roman civilisation could get "so advanced" BECAUSE they had such violent entertainment, providing both an 'escape valve' / release mechanism for violent tendencies, as well as a demonstration of how bad things can get when violence is let loose rampant in society in general?
Think of American Football in comparison - fake / controlled violence of two teams head-butting a ball across a field for the sake of sport ... then extrapolate.
(And if you hold the position that American Football isn't violent, then why do players need more body armour than any in other team sport in existence?)
The abhorrence for violence is a rather newly developed cultural trait in western 'civilised' society and the way that question is being framed is a judgemental way of projecting that cultural value onto the ancient Romans:
"how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"
It's a rather emotional way of asking, unless taken literally, when the answer is "by using slaves and wild animals and staging violent scenes in a controlled environment such as a theatre" - duh ...

Re:Maybe cause and effect are reversed?

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Has anyone given a thought to the possibility that the Roman civilisation could get "so advanced" BECAUSE they had such violent entertainment, providing both an 'escape valve' / release mechanism for violent tendencies, as well as a demonstration of how bad things can get when violence is let loose rampant in society in general? Think of American Football in comparison - fake / controlled violence of two teams head-butting a ball across a field for the sake of sport ... then extrapolate.

Um, so dicks in padding running at each other made the USA great? Nah - if they'd had the Colleseum instead of playing pat-arse we'd all have flying cars by now. In fact if it wasn't for water-boarding we wouldn't have the internets.

Oh wait - you mean entertainment relieved stress and exposure to violence brought peace. That'll be why we are all so laid back and peaceful. 24/7 entertainment and graphic violence - the basis of any advanced civilisation(?).

Of course it's possible that the average Roman could see plenty of violence outside the Colleseum - unless they just glared at slaves. And didn't they have plays and drugs for entertainment? Maybe acrobats, jugglers, dancers, musicians and magicians too. And why do I seem to vaguely recall the Colleseum was about displaying wealth, power, and distraction? Kind of like the Edinburgh Tattoo but with cage fighting and man vs. bear. Mas Oyama had no shortage of venues to fight bulls in (he killed 52), and the last US man vs. bear fight was probably 1949 (the bear won, which is probably why it was the last one).

Re:Maybe cause and effect are reversed?

[Oligonicella]

That'll be why we are all so laid back and peaceful.

Current times are far below previous history in terms of violence. If you believe otherwise, you're making the mistake of raw numbers as opposed to percentages.

Re:Maybe cause and effect are reversed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do we think "advanced" means peaceful? that's showing the effects of Christianity and how it has completely won the argument, so much so that it has receded into the background and forms the invisible base of our moral judgments.

Our pre-Christian ancestors would have been puzzled by the idea that advanced means peaceful.

Re:Maybe cause and effect are reversed?

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Current times are far below previous history in terms of violence.

I suspect you are correct - but I'd like to see some facts to support it. e.g. it seems that world wide there are now more people fleeing their countries than ever before. Then you have the number of people incarcerated... add in all those being killed in war. Or are you suggesting that the Romans killed more people in their conquest of Britain than have died in Iraq?

I look forward to seeing relevant figures. Hint: police statistics from the USA aren't particularly relevant.

If you believe otherwise, you're making the mistake of raw numbers as opposed to percentages.

Was that meant to be gibberish - or do you believe that making those sort of empty statements is the equivalent of supplying actual data? Percentages of deaths during childbirth have likely gone down considerably - but what of percentages of live births that are terminated (left on a hillside)?

My point, which you've possibly overlooked in nationalistic fervor is that the unsupported claim that football results in less violence without any supporting data is a meaningless and stupid claim. Feel free to continue pushing a belief unencumbered by facts - in the meantime I'll continue to maintain a cynically open mind.

Obviously not a Star Trek fan

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you would know why. Then you would know why.

Advanced culture and incredible violence ..

[nickweller]

"One of the reasons we are attracted to the Colosseum is because of the incredible violence that went on here. The question it poses is, how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"

'What I would like to argue is that situations created by violence, particularly structural violence, by which I mean forms of pervasive social inequality that are ultimately backed up by the threat of physical harm, invariably tend to create the kinds of willful blindness we normally associate with bureaucratic procedures'.

In such a society the state exercises authority through the threat of violence, the 'games' act as a legitimate outlet for the populaces hostility towards the state.

The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy, by David Graeber

Modern Colosseum

[Anonymous Coward]

Televised war is a modern version of the colosseum, along with fights on Youtube, death video on various sites, etc. Its just more diverse today.

Funny anecdote

[m.alessandrini]

My great-uncle (who lived in Rome) told me that when the alleys entered Rome after the second war, and after having bombed quite a lot, an American or English general saw the half-destroyed colosseum (as it's actually been for centuries) and said "my God, what have we done!".

Playing the Devil's Advocate

[weilawei]

Since we're talking restoring monuments to violence, why not rebuild the Berlin Wall in the spirit of cultural preservation?
 
/ducks

Re:Playing the Devil's Advocate

[Anonymous Coward]

Auschwitz and Treblinka too?

Hmmmm ....

[gstoddart]

I'm pretty sure I watched this on TV several months ago,
So I'm kind of surprised to see it being presented as fresh news now.

It's cool and all, but from what I can tell it was aired in February on PBS and they'll even sell you the DVD.

Old news

[Anonymous Coward]

I've already seen the documentary about building and testing the contraption on TV.

Sounds like the Internet

[Koreantoast]

All kinds of engineering talent, organizational expertise, a logistics and trade network that spanned the Mediterranean world; were necessary to run something like the Colosseum. Those loads of wild animals(some pretty exotic) and ample supplies of variously trained gladiators don't just deliver themselves, you know; nor is building that much stadium seating with rocks and manual labor exactly trivial.(Never mind the 'let's flood the place and have a lethal naval battle' days, those are a huge pain.)

Sounds kind of like the Internet - millions of advances in science, engineering, commerce and logistics across the entire planet so individuals can get cat videos and porn on demand.

Not News

[Anonymous Coward]

How can this possibly be breaking tech news? I watched this documentary on NOVA six months or so ago.

they want us dead

[schlachter]

well the problem is they want us dead.

fortunately, they want each other dead as well, but they are reproducing faster than they are killing each other, so it's still a problem for the west to deal with.

Re:they want us dead

[antiperimetaparalogo]

well the problem is they want us dead.

There is *at least* one more problem: every Westerner that knows what "the problem" is being attacked as "racist" by other Westerners who don't understand "the problem"!

fortunately, they want each other dead as well, but they are reproducing faster than they are killing each other, so it's still a problem for the west to deal with.

Thank Allah, yes... they like to kill each other also - but we Westerners must protect ourselves (and this is the only way to give Muslims a chance to become civilized... imagine if we Westerners disappear... poor Muslims, poor Humans!)

"bloody spectacles"

[roc97007]

> The question it poses is, how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

Obviously the author has never been to a Liam Neeson flick.

Beats me.

[Anonymous Coward]

> The question it poses is, how could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?

I think we'll never know because we finally attained such a peaceful cultural stage that we are prevented from understanding such bloody displays.

But then Rome was known for the wars it waged in the Middle East. Such violent folks...

Yes we do

[SuperKendall]

They are called Stunt Men. Do we all not see a movie when a stunt man dies filming it? No.

In the gladiatorial ring, the combatant MIGHT NOT die. There might be a pardon. The difference is only in degree, not kind.