The Day Commodus Killed a Rhino: Understanding the Roman Games

Witness to Ancient History

by Jerry Toner

In ancient times, the Roman games―that heady cocktail of mass slaughter, gladiatorial combat, and chariot racing―made strong political, social, and cultural statements. The Roman emperor Commodus wanted to kill a rhinoceros with a bow and arrow, and he wanted to do it in the Colosseum. Commodus’s passion for hunting animals was so fervent that he dreamt of shooting a tiger, an elephant, and a hippopotamus; his prowess was such that people claimed he never missed when hurling his javelin or firing arrows from his bow. For fourteen days near the end of AD 192, the emperor mounted one of the most lavish and spectacular gladiatorial games Rome had ever seen. Commodus himself was the star attraction, and people rushed from all over Italy to witness the spectacle. But this slaughter was simply the warm-up act to the main event: the emperor was also planning to fight as a gladiator. Why did Roman rulers spend vast resources on such over-the-top displays―and why did some emperors appear in them as combatants? Why did the Roman rabble enjoy watching the slaughter of animals and the sight of men fighting to the death? And how best can we in the modern world understand what was truly at stake in the circus and the arena? In The Day Commodus Killed a Rhino , Jerry Toner set out to answer these questions by vividly describing what it would have been like to attend Commodus’ fantastic shows and watch one of his many appearances as both hunter and fighter. Highlighting the massive logistical effort needed to supply the games with animals, performers, and criminals for execution, the book reveals how blood and gore were actually incidental to what really mattered. Gladiatorial games played a key role in establishing a forum for political debate between the rulers and the ruled. Roman crowds were not passive: they were made up of sophisticated consumers with their own political aims, which they used the games to secure. In addition, the games also served as a pure expression of what it meant to be a true Roman. Drawing on notions of personal honor, manly vigor, and sophisticated craftsmanship, the games were a story that the Romans loved to tell themselves about themselves.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Roman History, Ancient History, Roman

144 pages, Hardcover

First published December 4, 2014

About the author

Dr Jerry Toner is Fellow and Director of Studies in Classics at Churchill College, Cambridge.

Reviews

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is actually quite a good look at the world of Roman entertainment within its cultural context but it is designed to piggy-back on the 'Gladiator' film so it is 'popular' history, but written to be faithful to truth. It is not compromised by trying to present Romans as 'just like us' because they weren't and trying to work our way into such an alien mind set is incredibly difficult. This book at least makes that difference plain.

Enjoyable but slight.

[Diarmuid Angland · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a really fun short book using Commodus’s interests in the arena to explore the importance of entertainment in Rome.

Its strengths were bringing out the differences in the different forms of entertainment between the theatre, the amphitheater and the circus, as well as the role of the public using these venues to make their voice heard.

I would have liked to have seen a bit more linkage post the adoption of Christianity in eastern Rome and the idea of the Emperor seeking legitimacy through these entertainment venues (and the end of the amphitheater).

[Ron Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read it on and off whenever i was at the beach but this was a really fun and interesting book! learned a good bit about the Roman Games and how they influenced society. the scale of some of these games is absolutely crazy.

[Aislinn · Rating 4 out of 5]

As soon as I saw the title of this book, I knew I had to get it. Roman emperors killing rhinos - just what I need most in my life.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅

As the title suggests, Toner has a good sense of humor, even as he deals with the most gruesome of events. He is also a good writer, knowing how to spin an interesting tale while advancing his point. He certainly possesses a repertoire of primary sources that is more than abundant, such that he can effortlessly pull from it the most baffling appropriate examples to support his case.

In a book of just 120 pages, not counting the bibliography and index, we read about Christians being fed to leopards, crocodiles going on hunger strikes, Saxon prisoners strangling each other the night before their scheduled gladiatorial combat, arena seats being scrawled with gaming boards and phalluses, and Commodus killing a hundred bears along with a giraffe along with a rhino along with an ostrich along with others, others, and others. Every page is full of events that I can rattle off endlessly the next time I want to give a random fact about the Roman Empire.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅

Toner approaches the Romans and their excesses with relentless teasing - all of which I gleefully soaked up like a xylospongium sponge - but this book is, at its core, a rigorous academic work. The book never stops at giving us vivid (and, yes, memorable) anecdotes about the Roman games. Ironically, after giving us more ammunition than we possibly need to bash the brutality of those impossible Romans, Toner takes up the cudgels and rides in their defense.

Of course, like a normal human being, Toner gives much sympathy to the gladiators and condemned criminals who were sent to their ghastly ends for all sorts of petty reasons. He even tries to reconstruct their absolute terror as they faced down an opponent much stronger and more experienced than themselves, amid the jeers and roars of the spectators from the high seats, knowing that they would not leave the arena in one piece.

But Toner also asserts, respectfully but firmly, that we should not assess the Romans (and perhaps any pre-industrial society) by our modern Western - and often Christian - standards. He argues, I would say persuasively, that the Roman games were held not just for the entertainment of a bloodthirsty mob of lunatics, but acted as the glue that bound together the vast and diverse population of the empire. The games, especially the gladiatorial contests, reaffirm "traditional Roman values" such as militarism, hierarchy, and masculinity by shoving them in the faces of the assembled Roman citizens.

The games, distasteful as they may seem to us, form a core part of Roman society, if not of Roman identity itself; they are regarded by the emperor and citizens alike as an integral part of their daily lives. There's a reason why the Colosseum was built in the heart of Rome, on the site of Nero's Golden Palace (p.37); likewise, when Constantine founded his new Christian capital, Constantinople, the Circus Maximus was not only in the heart of the city but also right next to the imperial palace (p.117).

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅

If I have to, I suppose I can find two minor gripes with the book. Firstly, some of Toner's explanations for the popularity of Roman games come a little too close to speculation for my taste, at times bordering on psychoanalysis of the entire population of an ancient empire. Take, for example, the following passage:

The strong competition between the [gladiatorial] fighters and the [chariot] factions also reflected the vigorous competitiveness of normal life. People had to struggle hard to work their way up the status ladder. Surviving Roman graffiti is full of depictions of gladiators. It is possible to see this as a vicarious identification with the fighters who symbolized the ordinary people’s own struggle to make ends meet and even improve their situation a little. This gladiator graffiti tends to contain lots of information in the form of facts and figures. Boiling down a gladiator’s existence to a series of hard numbers reflected the focus on practical outcomes that the ordinary people had. What mattered were results. It also suggests that numeracy was far more important in their outlook than we might otherwise imagine. Literacy was a luxury that most could do without. The ability to count and calculate, to know how to price and evaluate were indispensable skills.

The spectators issued a constant stream of vocal commentary on how each competitor was performing. This reflected the vocal manner in which daily opinions and judgments were formed. In this Roman rat race, people had to work hard to maintain their reputations and coneal their weak points. The gladiator himself acted as a lesson in how to hide what he was really thinking. An old proverb said “the gladiator takes counsel in the sand.” He had to think on his feet and keep poker faced so that his opponent had no clue what move he intended to make next. Similarly, the charioteer had to be prepared to make brave maneuvers to force rivals into colliding and coming to grief. Like the gladiators, charioteers epitomized the attributes that people needed in their daily lives: technical expertise, resilience, strength, nous, the ability to jockey for position, and to cheat. The games therefore allowed the Romans to personify popular virtues in heroic terms. (p. 82)

I find this a plausible interpretation. However, I also can't help but imagine a puzzled cyborg historian from two thousand years in the future - if humanity still exists then - trying to explain why the apes of the 21st century descend into fisticuffs over basketball or scream their voices hoarse at a K-pop concert. The short answer may just be that a) it was fun and b) everyone else was doing it.

My second gripe: although the book seems to be about all three major types of games - gladiatorial combat, chariot racing, and theatrical performances - it undoubtedly devotes most of its attention to the arena, occasionally to the circus, and only tangentially to the theater.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅

Nonetheless, I find the book's information about all three games fascinating. My favorite part is about the not-so-subtle differences between the attendees of the different games, which obviously existed, given that Rome boasted a population of one million at the time of the empire (p. 35).

The gladiatorial games throughout the empire were mostly financed by the wealthy who wished to parlay their financial capital into political support. They usually distributed tickets for their games, which were probably free, through their patronage network (p. 50). As a result, the audience in the arena was most likely the upper class of society. In the case of the Colosseum: out of its fifty thousand spectators, "perhaps as many as 80 percent of the seats were filled by the well-off, with only 20 percent being reserved for the urban poor and women" (p. 67).

The chariot races, on the other hand, was open to a much more mixed crowd. The Circus Maximus was five times the size of the Colosseum, a size which represented about a quarter of the total population of Rome. But the percentage becomes even more impressive if we exclude the slave population from our calculations. (Although the slaves were allowed to attend, we have good reason to doubt their presence at the scene before annual leave was a thing.) The result: "Given that perhaps 30 to 40 percent of the population of Rome was servile, the crowd at the Circus Maximus was comprised of 35 to 40 percent of the entire free population" (p. 68). Can you imagine 35-40% of your city's population turning up at the same event? Unlike the arena, the Circus saw a truly "representative" audience, including poor and rich, men and women, and very occasionally the free and the enslaved.

The crowd at the theater was probably very similar to the Circus' - if not even more mixed and uninhibited. For one thing, the plays being put on in the theater often had a sexual flair and were rife with bawdy jokes. (Marcus Aurelius, the last "Good Emperor" of the Nerva-Antonine Dynasty, once had to watch a play in which the comedians made jokes at the emperor's expense about the emperor's wife and her alleged lover. "Poor Marcus," Toner tells us, "had to sit there and put up with it" (p. 41).) Indeed, the theater's abandoned atmosphere made it seem "little more than a pick-up joint" (p. 69).

As Toner puts it of the gladiatorial combats: "This was more like opera than football" (p. 68). Building on his analogy, I suppose we can summarize the three types of games as follows: The arena was the ancient Roman equivalent of the opera; the circus, the football match; and the theater, the nightclub.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅

This is an incredibly short but enjoyable read. According to Toner himself:

This book aims to provide an up-to-date and graphic analysis of the Roman games for a general and introductory audience. It tries to give a modern, nonjudgmental presentation of this important topic from the emperors at the top to the lowest performers and spectators. The work I have contributed to the subject of the Roman games is spread around several specialist volumes and I wanted to present it in a more unified, accessible format. I also wanted to develop a number of new ideas I have had on the subject, which will, I hope, make this volume also of interest to a more academic audience. (p. 121)

"Up-to-date," I cannot tell; "graphic," certainly; "for a general and introductory audience," most absolutely. Toner is an engaging and thoughtful writer, whose work once again proves that academics are more than capable of producing page-turners, even - or perhaps especially - in the realm of history.

[Yomna asaad · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is what the hunger games wished to be

[Erik Graff · Rating 5 out of 5]

The strength of the Roman state was substantially predicated upon its military. Under the Republic the legions were, as the term indicates, formed by levies of citizens and allies. Although they were often raised to meet real threats, there was also an aggressive tendency built into the system itself, successful prosecution of wars of conquest promoting careers and providing wealth, often in the form of slaves, upon whom the economy grew increasingly dependent. Thus the Republic expanded to become an empire spanning the Mediterranean and the Senatorial oligarchy based in Rome itself became subservient to a princeps, an imperator increasingly likely to be a creature of a professional military ever more identified with him than with the state it ostensibly served. Toner's book promises to deal with this transition in terms of the games, the races and the theater, the popular entertainments of the pre-Christian empire.

Although this book, in keeping with its title, does give a brief biography of Commodus (161-192, reigning from 180), the first emperor born to the purple, and to his uniquely intimate involvement in the games, this is not its point. Rather, Commodus and his performances function as an extreme type, representing what such public entertainments, imitated, albeit less lavishly, throughout the Romanized world, meant. Here, author Toner attempts to show how they fit and functioned within their socio-political context.

The food dole and the entertainments, the proverbial “bread and circuses”, did more than just mollify the populace, distracting them from what the elites might find to be disruptive political concerns. In fact, Toner asserts, they served positive political purposes. With the expansion of Rome the old forms of political participation, the citizen armies and the popular assemblies, disappeared. Short of riots and revolt, the will of the people was most constructively expressed within the context of the games, the only occasion when the three legs of Roman society—the Senate, the People and the Executive—were together assembled. This was no small thing, the population of the city being estimated at about a million, the capacity of the Circus at a quarter of that and of the Colosseum at 50,000—and this when 30-40% of the population were servile and thus poorly represented at the races and not represented at all at the games. Indeed, the games allowed for a certain bipolarity of power, the emperor and the crowd in dialog, sometimes at the expense of the traditional elites, the great families embodied in the Senate. Indeed, the games and their fans, properly exploited, were a source of the emperor's power as well an expression of Roman values. Here Commodus again serves to highlight the point, his relations with the Senate being particularly strained, but other examples of such imperial populism are adduced as well.

Toner is to be complimented for a graceful, contemporary writing style. Throughout he makes asides to modern popular culture, drawing parallels between our entertainments and those of our cultural forebears in order to make the Romans more understandable. More detailed accounts of the games are available elsewhere, such as in Michael Grant's Gladiators or Fik Meijer's The Gladiators, and Toner acknowledges this in his helpful suggestions for further reading. The only disappointment is his failure to deliver any substantial treatment of the Roman theater. It's mentioned, repeatedly, but never really described. Still, from the perspective of the games and the races, this book offers the general reader a unique insight into the character of imperial Roman culture and politics.

[Christopher Angulo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Way better than Gladiator 2.

[readsinthemist · Rating 4 out of 5]

I just finished The Day Commodus Killed a Rhino by Jerry Toner this morning, and I'm still sniffing away the aftershocks. The epilogue had me in tears for most of its pages. Having recently visited Rome, where I soaked up the history and atmosphere, I made sure to pick up a few books to accompany my trip. After visiting the Colosseum in person, reading Toner's vivid account has only deepened the site's haunting significance. The spectacles that once took place there, from gladiatorial combat, executions, and even compassion being exercised, to the brutal games in the Circus Maximus, (being a different crowd entirely), now feels even more visceral and unsettling.
Toner does an excellent job of guiding the reader through the maze of ancient Roman history, carefully distinguishing what happened where (allegedly) and offering insights into the mindsets of key players. He doesn't just focus on the emperors like Commodus, but also takes us in the shoes of the Senate, the gladiators, the beasts, Christian martyrs, and -of course- the bloodthirsty crowds of Roman citizens. It's an incredible feat to make sense of such violence, but Toner's approach, blending historical analysis with an understanding of human psychology, makes the barbarism a little easier to digest.
I found myself reflecting on how these groups - emperors, gladiators, spectators -responded to the spectacle. It's difficult to fathom how these people reconciled such violence with everyday life, but Toner's keen insights help explain the dynamics at play. The book was a great introduction to many figures I'm eager to explore further, like Blandina, Constantine, Nero, and especially Perpetua - each a fascinating character in their own right.
The games of Ancient Rome were not just entertainment; they were a complex and deeply ingrained part of culture - especially with politics. Toner's deft interpretation of ancient texts offers a window into the reality of those blood-soaked arenas, and I now have a much clearer picture of what Roman spectacle really looked like. Highly recommended for anyone interested in Rome's bloody history and the psychology of power, violence, and faith.

[Krisley Freitas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Com texto claro e de fácil leitura, o autor faz análises interessantíssimas sobre o significado dos jogos romanos, a sociedade romana e a chegada do cristianismo numa profundidade que ainda não vi em outros livros.

Os jogos são detalhadamente abordados, tanto as corridas de bigas, as caças de animais, execuções de condenados, confrontos de gladiadores e teatro, destacando o Coliseu e o Circus Maximus. Os jogos de Commodus, o rinoceronte e as “lutas” dele contra gladiadores tem um destaque, mas não é a maior parte do livro.

Não gostei muito da separação dos capítulos, o livro poderia ter sido melhor dividido. O texto ficou um pouco repetitivo também, voltando a vários pontos já comentados. Mas isso não tira o mérito dessa bela obra. Recomendo!

[Sean Binkley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great survey of the ancient Roman games. This book isn't just a history of gladiators but also covers chariot races, and dramas which were all part of the games that Roman society loved to indulge in. It's particularly fascinating when Toner examines the psychology of Roman spectators and the social dimensions of these games which while extremely violent to modern senses, served a very interesting purpose as a source of social cohesion.

[Renee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lovely look at the philosophy of the gladiators and the games.

I was disappointed not to see more statistics or feel like I had learned all *that* much more, but it was a fun, conversational, pleasant read.

[Jiazi Du · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author elaborated on what the Roman Games mean to ancient Roman people from cultural, political, and social perspectives. I wish the book could be longer.

[Jill · Rating 3 out of 5]

Started off strong and then got bogged down in the martyrdom. The writing is better than a college essay, but not by much. Still an interesting and quick read.

[Christopher Spiteri · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very enjoyable book and went in depth on the topic from a variety of angles.

The only small critic that I have is that for a book as short as this it still was a bit repetitive.

8/10

[Nancy Dedman]

Commodus was literally started the empire’s flop era

[Mateo Toledo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ameno

[Josh Gilbert · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great read for anyone who is looking to dip their toe into reading ancient history. A short, yet very dense read

[Odin_reviews · Rating 3 out of 5]

⭐⭐⭐

"Ave, César, los que van a morir te saludan"

[Warbotter · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good start kinda slogs at the end, would have liked the focus to remain a bit more focused on the nuts and bolts of it all.

[Jengordon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Commodus, according to Gibbon, was the emporer whose ascension marked the decline of the Roman Empire. The son of the Stoic emporer Marcus Aurelius, he was the first biological son to inherit the throne. His reign was marked by relative peace, but also economic upheaval and food supply problems in Rome.
This book opens with the title scene of Commodus killing a rhinoceros in the Colosseum as part of a multi-day performance of hunting and gladiator skills. Eyewitness senators, such as Dio Cassius (whose written history of Commodus' reign is one of our primary sources of information about it and the games he put on) were appalled: for a member of the nobility to put on a public spectacle was not the expected behavior. Demeaning. The book goes on to discuss the meaning and uses of the games in the Colosseum and in stadia elsewhere in the empire, looks briefly at the history and social situation of gladiators and the meaning of the gladiator role for the Roman public, and at other nobles who had participated, albeit less publicly, in gladiator-type behaviors.
A few tidbits from the book were striking, especially in light of contemporary America.
(1) The Roman nobility had a "culture of benefaction" -- a sense of duty to give benefits to the Roman people, the "citizen body who had provided manpower for the legions that had conquered" and created the Empire's wealth. Those benefits came in the form of a sure supply of food, which provided time for leisure, and entertainments like the Games. While "bread and circuses" is today understood as a snide comment on the people's willingness to be bought and ruled over by a nobility --a sale of one's liberty-- at the time it was also a recognition that the wealthy wouldn't have their wealth if it weren't for the labor of the people. That direct grain subsidy --40% of the cost of the food requirements for a family of four-- was a wealth-sharing scheme that freed up the average citizen's income for other purposes.
(2) The host of a set of games paid for them to entertain the people and "give back" to them. But the games were also a venue for the host to show off his power -- and to show off that he was one of the people. Which included sharing their interests and "above all, share their sense of humor. It was this ability to take a joke at his own expense that is a remarkable feature of many accounts of emperors at the games."
(3) The games provided a place where popular feelings could be openly expressed: it was possible for chants and shouts to be heard by the emporer, with a cloak of anonymity. In a significant way, they provided a means for the people to give direct feedback to the ruling class, which (because they wanted to maintain a functioning society of which they were the leaders) had to pay attention.
All in all, a short but interesting book.