'The Roman games were cruel and degrading and cannot be justified.' How far do you agree with this opinion?

There is no doubt that ethnical and social understanding was in truth limited in the era of the roman prints. Ethics, wildcat rights and punishment had not been create strongly enough to put one over assertive judgements rough the games that provided so much entertainment for the bloodthirsty society. I deal that the romish games were brutal and degrading, but the communities at the time original them as amusement, encouraging solidarity amongst the masses. Before the Colosseum was build the games took part in spheres surrounded by muddy banks or by spectators sit charge on wooden piers enclose the performance area, so it is evident they were happening over a number of centuries. One aspect of the papistic games was the introduction of animals into the arena. In target to do this the animals had to be captured on hunts, often using nets with which to nail down them and beaters with torches to literally beat them into their cages. But the concomitant is, many of the animals died in shipping or whilst they were being held in anticipation. Apuleius (born c. 125 CE) voiced this in The robbers tale (unit 5, imagination relief 1, p 95), as the bears were attacked by a sudden epidemic and their numbers bite back to almost nothing. Life, be it human or animal, is hence decreased to a shadowy state.

Perhaps, even the Roman citizens cerebration that this was cruel as Cicero utter in his Letters to his Friends (Unit 5, Resource Book, p. 97) that the handling of the herd of elephants brought pity from the crowd. The spectators reactions were a whole step that this animal had something in common with the human race. When we couple the number of animals that have been killed whilst in the arena with those who died it amounts to a massive number... If you fate to get a honorable essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper