political.html

Political Connections of the Games

The extent to which Games touched all areas of Roman life is a problematic question. Certainly, they sated the Roman appetite for violence in a controlled atmosphere. However, although an image of snarling lions munching on Christians in front of a bloodthirsty crowd is automatically conjured up by the Roman games, there were definite political aspects of the events. Careers could be made or broken, victories celebrated, and even religion could be espoused by political means. Games were political not only as an example of what could happen to those disobedient to the government of the day -- one misstep and you could be in front of that snarling lion -- but even in their legendary foundation.

Historical sleuthing tells us that the origins of the Roman games might be found as far back as the Monarchy. Great Games sprung out of a victory of Tarquin I, and they continued through the fifth century BCE as a way to celebrate triumphs or special events. However, there is no record of Games being permanent festivals until 366 BCE. According to legend, this development occurred because aediles specifically voiced a desire to be in charge of the Games (Piganiol 75). Immediately, one sees how the Games came into existence from a political event, the victory of a monarch. Likewise, the Games were guaranteed a perpetual place in Roman civilization through political activity -- the desire of aediles to control (and thus take credit for) what evidently were popular festivities. Thus, there is immediately a reason to believe that Games were not held merely because they had become cultural constants or because politicians simply wanted to make people happy.

Games became permanent, simply enough, when they proved to be a route to political success. Unfortunately, the politically ambitious lesser magistrates who hosted them often wound up in the red because of their costly efforts to be renowned for putting on wonderful spectacles (Scullard 41).

Bust of Scipio Africanus

Games evolved not only into annual events, but ones designed to celebrate victories with a clearly political angle. Few will argue that Rome was not an inherently violent society whose very survival was predicated upon continued use of violence. Therefore, politicians had a definite reason to make sure the public knew of and appreciated military victories and political milestones. How could Rome go wrong in propagandizing its power by using the already popular Games? Better yet, why not create even more Games to illustrate to the people how generous Rome's politicians were, and consequently how wise they were for waging wars that would give reason to celebrate? There is a clear pattern of this occurring in Rome, and never before the public was dazzled by "splendid processions" that the government would be sure to sponsor at Games (Scullard 101). Especially after the victory of Scipio Africanus, "...peu a peu ces jeux durent apparaitre comme un accessoire de triomphe" (Piganiol 91). The Ludi Victoriae Sullanae, to commemorate Sulla's victory in 81 BCE, lasted a full week in the autumn and were considered important enough to be staged by praetors (Scullard 196). Similarly, Caesar founded a festival

in honor of Venus Genetrix in 46 BCE whose date became permanent after these Games were celebrated in 44BCE in commemoration of Caesar's funeral (Licht and Raven 19). This phenomenon continued into the Empire: Augustus held Games at which noble men and boys raced chariots to celebrate victory at Actium (Plass 40). The Roman government even used Games to induce military and political victory, not just to celebrate it. This is evidenced by one set of Games being scheduled for 217 BCE specifically to please Jupiter (Piganiol 79) ...which is awfully close to the threat of Hannibal becoming apparent. There does seem to be a clear correlation between Games and political goals; the two enjoyed a symbiotic relationship. The government gained votes from an otherwise unentertained public, and with those votes developed an obvious platform for propaganda. Meanwhile, those who enjoyed viewing the Games were guaranteed a perpetual spectacle.

Bust of Julius Caesar

Machiavelli wrote almost 2000 years later that one quality a ruler should always appear to possess is piousness, whether or not that is actually the case. Knowing that Machiavelli looked ancient Rome as an example, and then looking at rulers' religious conduct regarding the Games, and the political theorist's opinion gains validity. Rulers obviously used religion in the Games to exalt them selves in the eyes of the people. Statues of gods were brought to the Games, and emperors (and presumably before the Empire, consuls) took their places among them (Piganiol 139). In 186 BCE consuls scheduled lengthy festivities at which adults would die during Games and the city would be purified in order to please the gods after a temple had been struck by lightning (Scullard 156). The religious connection of politicians to Games is proven when one considers that when the Hale Bopp comet was spotted during Caesar's funeral games that the people considered this a sign that Caesar had joined the gods (Licht and Raven 1-2). Finally, when one considers that politicians had the final say over when Games were scheduled -- remember that they were in the hands of aediles and new Games could be created easily -- there is no reason to believe that Roman politicians would have had anything to lose by making sure religion had a place in the Games. Indeed, for such practices to develop, it is clear that the public and fellow politicians approved of the religious political link.

While not the most obvious aspect of events which often were designed to be bloodbaths, politics had a large role in the Games. Political links exist throughout the founding, planning, execution, and continuation of Games from the Monarchy up through the Empire. Perhaps Games alone were not the key to Rome's longstanding political success. However, it does seem that hosting a successful set of Games was a rite of passage for young magistrates hoping to climb the political ladder. For Roman government to have devoted as much time, energy, and money to the Games as it obviously did, there had to be an ulterior motive. Pleasing plebes was nice; however, raising votes and morale was necessary in a Republic trying to expand and an Empire attempting to consolidate.

Elizabeth D. Winslow
For more information, click here to return to the directory.