WereKitten said: @Steven
|
(1) You are making a metaphor, I was citing reality. People of ancient and modern times referred to the events leading up to and including the gladiator combat (the arena games) as gladiator combat/shows/pageants/or whatever other name you want to call them... You stretched it to the point of absurdity. I describe two events where success was based on skill, involving human fighters, that happen in the same place, and happen at the same time. You are describing a false analogy... then you produce a smiley gives off the impression that you thought that the argument was undeniable, which is "begging the question".
(2) The difference in the games from their start, in the 1st century, till their end, in the 5th century, went through many changes. Gladiators, especially early on, participated in all types of events. As the sport grew in popularity, it became more like a business. Gladiators became too expensive of an investment to waste on events that paid less than owhat you describe as gladitorial combat (for the most part) but it still happened at one point in history. I provided links and references to prove this in earlier posts.
(3) That is not where I entered. I entered, calling out your mistake on using definitive language for something that I provided sources which had conflicting information.
(4) It depended on the Emperor but, you're right, they did face less danger; they were each the head of state and had responsibilities which would make it irresponsible for them to fight for real... go back and read my citations... while you're at it, provide some of your own. Give me a legitimate source, that says, "No gladiator ever fought as a bestiarius."
Also your latin declension is a little off.
(Edit: WereKittens latin was right, I misread his statements. I am a jack ass.)
I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.