Customer Reviews

The Gladiator: The Secret History Of Rome's Warrior Slaves

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Since I was in my teens, movie pictures like "Spartacus", "Demetrius the gladiator" and "Quo Vadis?" inspired me with an inextinguishable thirst to know facts about Gladiators & Roman Circus. I was able to find more than one book about Spartacus and his revolt, but on gladiator's everyday life, origins, evolution among other issues, I was unsuccessful. Worst of all, the recent movie "Gladiator", renew my interest.
Finally I found this book at Amazon's Store (where else?).
It is at the same time an oasis for my thirst and a let down in some aspects.
First the bright side: Mr. Baker has done a very interesting research and show his findings in a very amenable way.
All the main issues are addressed: origin of gladiatorial institution, organization, evolution and extinction. Weaponry, different kinds of fights, ceremonies, circus emplacement, glossary of terms. A vivid reconstruction of "A day at the Circus" and some other interesting items about these ancient warriors.
The shadowy side: the edition and typography of the book is poor, it looks as it was given to press in a hurry (trying to catch with film success?). Some side stories are well known, other are not directly related with the main object of the book. Bibliography is scarce and no reproductions are shown.
Balancing pros & cons the book is fairly good read for anyone interested in this particular subject.
Reviewed by Max Yofre.

I was really disappointed by this book. I confess to being something of a classics nerd, so I was hoping for a proper historical look at the gladiatorial games. And while it's true that Baker does look at most aspects of the phenomenon, he doesn't do so with a good historian's perspective.

Early in the book, he warns against applying modern sensibilities to ancient intitutions. This is a wise and reasonable approach. It is therefore a pity that he utterly abondons it, making countless judgements throughout the book. Some of these are explicit, but most are implicit in his choice of phrasing and other subtler aspects of his writing. While I agree that, to my modern morals, these games were barbaric, I find his judgements annoying and out of place in a historical work.

Another great flaw of this book is that the author takes every historical account as true. Seutonius, for example, is full of racey tales of the dark sides of the early emperors. (Plus Caesar who, despite Baker's assertions, is not considered an emporor. This isn't the only minor inaccuracy I noticed, incidentally.) However, it's doubtful that all of it, or even necessarily most of it is true. But Baker relies on Seutonius and others as literal fact upon which to base his "history". It's difficult to know how much of Baker to trust given his apparent inability to be skeptical.

Finally, the chapter on the Emperor-Gladiators is a wretched peice of work. The account of Caligula is just a transcribed Seutonius. (Why not just read the original in the first place, then?). And the overwelming majority of the chapter has nothing to do with these emperors' behavior in the arena, it's just a long liteny of how these men were depraved. This isn't the only case where Baker shows a poor ability to stay focused on his topic, but it's the most vexing.

Overall, I get the sense that Baker lacks a solid background in history. (Which may not be correct, but that's the impression this book conveys.) Instead, I get the impression of an author who is out to titillate the audience more than to provided a careful historical look at the gladiatorial games. On the one hand, this makes the book more interesting and approachable for a broad audience. On the other hand, it makes it a poor read for anyone seeking real understanding,

"The Gladiator" is a readable and sometimes melodramatic account of the gladiatorial games of ancient Rome. The book is not a systematic, chronological history of the arena--rather, it offers an impression of what the contests would have been like at various points in the development of the Republic and the Empire.

The games started as sword fights between slaves at funeral ceremonies--sometimes to the death, sometimes not. Over time, successful Romans undertook to display their wealth by producing increasingly elaborate spectacles. The cost and complexity of the enterprise eventually became so great that the state became involved in staging the proceedings.

Baker describes (sometimes in upsetting detail) the different contests that a Roman could expect to see at the arena: battles between warriors armed with various types of weapons and armor, fights to the death between "hunters" and terrified animals, naval battles between fleets manned by doomed slaves, and brutal executions. Occasionally, an Emperor would step into the arena to display his fighting prowess (or to indulge his taste for sadism)--of course, his guard always made sure that his opponents were armed with wooden swords and doomed to die at the Emperor's hand.

Baker's book culminates in a chapter called "A Day at the Games." The account is lurid and unsettling, and Baker brings home the terror and pain of the men, women and animals who died in the arena to the cheers of the crowd.

The cruelty of the games simply staggers the imagination, to say nothing of the fact that this went on for hundreds of years. It makes you think that the term "Roman civilization" is a bit of an oxymoron.

This book reads like an undergrad paper; it is short, repetitive, and derivative, and the author obviously isn't an expert in classics, or military history, or archaeology, or anything that might apply to the topic. He isn't a very good writer, either. Or maybe he just had a poor editor.

This might be good for kids, or for people who know nothing about the ancient world, but I suspect they will be a little disapppointed by the total lack of illustrations; there are no artist's renderings of a gladiator's armor and weapons, no reproductions of ancient paintings or mosaics, and no photos or maps of Rome, an amphitheatre, or anything. If you are interested in gladiators, I suggest you look elsewhere.

This book is a popular history about the gladiatorial games in ancient Rome. As such, it has no footnotes and limited sources. Still, Baker does a pretty good job of giving a concise account of this fascinating aspect of ancient history. Various chapters cover such things as different types of gladiators, emperors who fought in the arena, and the Spartacus slave revolt. The book ends with an examination of why the gladiatorial games ended (Christianity, in a nutshell). The highpoint of the book is a fictional account of a day at the games under the emperor Commodus. Did this guy write the screenplay to the movie Gladiator? I don't think so, but he is obviously influenced by that film.

What should become apparent as this book unfolds is the changing nature of the games and spectacles. The munera, or gladiatorial contests, originally began as a funeral ritual. During the Republic, the religious implications of these contests increasingly became politicized. Temporary theaters were constructed so people could recline and watch. The sponsors of these contests were increasingly magistrates and others who wanted to curry favor with the masses. The number of fighters also increased as the years went by. It was with the installation of Augustus that the games became codified in political terms. Augustus passed legislation concerning seating in the arena and took over many of the aspects concerning the games. Menageries holding animals used for exhibitions and executions were owned by the emperors, as were the gladiatorial schools housing the fighters. Other officials were banned for the most part from sponsoring games, although provincials were allowed to do so under strict supervision from Rome. Those officials who were allowed to hold games were held to strict limits so as not to upstage the emperor. Marcus Aurelius went so far as to construct a price schedule for the games. Officials could hold games, but the money amounts required were way below what the emperor could spend. This allowed the emperors to keep a tight check on potential rivals to the throne.

Even with this concern over the games, it is highly unlikely anyone but the emperor could have afforded the kind of spectacles some of the rulers put on. Some emperors staged enormous recreations of naval battles on artificial lakes involving thousands of fighters. Not only was this highly entertaining, the battles provided a political basis for imperial rule. Augustus, for instance, came to power after the battle at Actium. Recreations of these sorts of battles reinforced his power. The gladiatorial games also accomplished this; gladiators fought in the dress of conquered peoples. This showed the subservience of these peoples to the power of Rome.

Baker has written an entertaining, if somewhat melodramatic account of the games. Problems emerge when sensationalism is dwelled upon. The accounts of Caligula are a good example. Baker borrows heavily from Suetonius in this section. While most of the stories of Caligula's depravity are entertaining, many have nothing to do with the arena. Also, Suetonius wrote his accounts under the auspices of Hadrian, some time after Caligula's rule. It may have been in the interests of the time to paint these earlier emperors in a harsh light. Keep these things in mind while reading the book. Overall, Baker does a good job and the book is entertaining.

Appallingly poor.

Reads like its been written in the back of the school bus on the way to the exam.

Very little info on actual Gladiators, it mostly focuses on tabloid style shock stories and continuously tells the reader how "bad" these things are (like we need to be told).

This book is divided into chapters, the names of which have little bearing on the actual contents of the chapters and has the most god-awful repetitive and disjointed flow I've seen in a book quite a while, random thoughts and stories put down with no coherent plan.

The Author also refuses to give any sources on anything and so when he tells his stories you'll just have to take it as gospel.

Do not get this "book".

For a readable book with no footnotes, Baker's THE GLADIATOR is surprisingly detailed. Pretty much everything you could want to know about the Roman gladiators - who they were, why they fought, how they were perceived by others, what kinds of weapons and fighting styles they used, what kinds of elaborate setups they fought in, where the whole practice came from and how it developed - is contained within this book, as well as a little more information than you probably wanted to know about Roman public executions. The finale of THE GLADIATOR is a horrifying fictional chapter describing what a typical day at the Roman games might have been like - definitely not for the faint-hearted, but it makes one very happy to be living in better times.

I picked this book up with a passing interest in the subject matter. My knowledge on gladiators was basically limited to viewing movies such as Spartacus and Gladiator. So, I was interested in gaining at least a little deeper insight into galdiatorial contests. On that note this book did not disappoint me. It was written in a style and manner that kept my attention and allowed to get a broad overview on the subject without getting bogged down in detail.

If you are looking for a serious scholarly work, then you may be a bit disappointed (at least that seems to be the concensus from reading a few of the other reviews). However, if you are looking for a general overview and easy read, then I think you will find yourself happy with this purchase.

This is an outstanding tome about the bloody combats known as gladiatoral games. Far from being comprised of just paired male combatants that most people think, the author shows that the games often had groups of men fighting against other groups, women fighting against dwarves, animals fighting against animals, men fighting against animals, etc. Detailed is the fact that even though gladiators were considered lowest of the low by Rome's citizenry, they were schizophrenically idolized by Rome's men and women to a point that freeborn men sometimes voluntarily joined the gladiator ranks and freeborn women would leave much wealth in order to run away with the fighters. Although the book would be better if it was footnoted, this can be overlooked because of the reading quality.

For a good read on the savagery that was the gladiatoral arena, this book is one to get. Readers, though, should be advised that some of the imagery conjured up is quite harsh.

My reading of "The Gladiator" was begun with a mote of lowered expectations. However, after reading the preface where the author clearly outlines that this is not meant to be a flawless historical tome, one can sit back, read , and enjoy this entertaining, lurid, and oft informative piece.

The world of the gladiators is often glorified; its virtues extolled where little attention has been paid to the societal motivations, public melieu of the time that fostered the growth of these "munus". The public's view of gladitorial events is rife with dichotomy. On the one hand, adoration is showered upon the contestants/slaves/prisoners, yet on the other, they are scorned, and sentenced to the most horrific of ends. It is this clearly outlined duplicity that personified the Roman Republic's transformation to Empire. Cities were stripped of their freedom; the last being Rome once the famed Rubicon was crossed by Gaius Julius Caesar, individuals subjugated themselves to the will of the state, and a people's bloodlust was satisfied. Rome's supremacy over nature and foe was best exemplified within the confines of the ring. To die under such circumstances was met with fickle resolve, even honor.

Yes, this book is often perfunctory, and written with the novice in mind. But it is at the task of introducing a casual reader to the period that it excels. Precious few books that aim for loftier goals achieve them in such fashion.