What rights did gladiators have?

Answer 1

Yes, they had certain rights. After five successful fights a gladiator had the right to be freed. This not only applied to slaves, but to those who were free men who swore an oath to their trainer/owner. They were also paid after every fight and were allowed to keep their money. After five years a free man could retire and go on to teach or become an instructor in the army which welcomed ex-gladiators as trainers.

Answer 2

The rules of the gladiatorial contests varied. There was a senior referee, the summa rudis, and an assistant who had staffs (rudes) which were used to caution or separate opponents. These interventions were aimed at ensuring fair play. The referee could also pause the fight to allow for rest. A winning gladiator who overwhelmed his opponent raised his index finger to ask what he was meant to do next (whether to spare or kill the gladiator who lost).

A gladiator could acknowledge defeat by raising his index finger which signalled the summa rudis to stop the combat. He then cast aside his weapons, kneeled and raised his hand to ask for mercy. The referee would then refer this to the editor who was the producer of the fights. The editor made the final decision about the fate of gladiator. His decision usually rested on the wish of the spectators. A wounded gladiator laid down his shield and raised his left hand as a plea for mercy. When a gladiator went down the crowd often shouted Habet, Hoc habet! (He's had it!), and shouts of Mitte! (Let him go!) or Iugula! (Kill him!).

An editor could decide whether or not the fights were going to be ad digitum (lasting to the "the finger") which meant that they stopped when the defeated gladiator raised his finger. In the latter case, the fight lasted until the spectators asked for the dismissal of the fighters. The editor then decided whether to accept this or let the fight continue to "the finger." The editor could also choose a game sine remissione (without dismissal). These were fights to the death. In some cases both gladiators were dismissed or released from the arena stantes missi (released standing). Missi was a plural for on the verb.

Contrary to the common stereotype, sparing the defeated gladiator was the common practice. Gladiatorial contests were fights to the death only at their beginning when they were part of funerary rites at the private funerals of the rich families. This stopped when they became public games. Skills and the quality of the fight were more important that bloodshed. Some gladiators were praised for winning without shedding blood. Gladiators became big business for their owners: trainers, aspiring politicians or high ranking men. The professional trainers made a living out of gladiators. Gladiators were an important investment for trainers and those who sponsored them. They did not want to see the gladiators die immediately. Nevertheless, it was still a dangerous game and death rates were significant.

The popular notion that thumbs up meant spare the gladiator and thumbs down meant kill is questionable. It stems from poor translations form Latin. Roman writers made reference to gestures which involved the use of thumbs. However, and the Latin language does not give a precise understanding of their position. Two expressions were used: pollices premere (to press the thumbs) and infesto police (hostile thumb). The former was a gesture of approval and the latter a gesture of disapproval. An early sixth-century AD collection of poems (Anthologia Latina) mentioned that: "Even in the fierce arena the conquered gladiator has hope, although the crowd threatens with its hostile thumb." The poet Juvenal mentioned that spectators demanded the deathblow by verso pollice and the poet Prudentius mentioned that they did so by converso pollice. The meaning of these two expressions in unclear.

Based on depictions on mosaics and medallions, it has been suggested pollices premere, meant pressing the thumb on the index finger of a fist. In the case of gladiatorial contests, this would have been a sign of mercy. Infesto police has been interpreted as meaning an erect thumb pointing upward. In the case of gladiatorial contests, this would have been a sign of death.

Answer 3

Roman gladiators were mostly slaves with practically no rights. a very few were free men and did it for the money - which was considerable. A slave gladiator could rarely win his freedom by fighting in match for a wooden sword (rudis) usually needing approval from a senator or emperor at the end of the match. The emperor Commodus was rumored to have been fathered by a gladiator and often fought to the death in the arena - having more rights than any other roman citizen.

Answer 4

Gladiators were mostly slaves and therefore, being the property of someone else, they did not have any rights. There were some Roman citizens who volunteered to be gladiators. By doing so they paced themselves in the lowest Roman social status: infamia (literally, not reputation). This was a status of disgrace, dishonour, which was bestowed on actors, entertainers, prostitutes, pimps and Roman gladiators. An infamis (plural infames) could not vote, stand for public office, or be a witness in trials, and could be inflicted corporal punishment (which was otherwise restricted to slaves).

Answer 5

They would be either slaves or had done a crime. They would be forced to do it by their master or leader. They may get freed from inprisonment or slavery if they perform well.

Answer 6

They did not have any duties. They were slaves who fought in the gladiatorial games. They did not do anything else.