<i>The Day Commodus Killed a Rhino: Understanding the Roman Games</i>, by Jerry Toner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Day Commodus Killed a Rhino: Understanding Roman Games, by Jerry Toner. Witness Ancient History Series. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014. 136 pp. $49.95 US (cloth), $19.95 US (paper). Thanks in part cinema, gladiatorial fantasies of Emperor Commodus (died ce 192) are well known. Son of noble philosopher-emperor, Marcus Aurelius, Commodus abandoned his father's conquests in Germania and retired city pursue his passions: most famously, games of amphitheatre. We know so much about them because they were witnessed, recorded, and vilified by senator and historian, Cassius Dio. Toner's little book tries put Commodus's gladiatorial interests into context. The book is first of new Witness Ancient History series from Johns Hopkins University Press and its aim is to provide an up-to-date and graphic analysis of Roman games for a general and introductory though Toner also wanted develop a number of new ideas that he had on topic (p. 121). The result is a small book that takes Commodus's interests in arena as a jumping off point into a wider exploration of this key Roman cultural institution. Toner is aware of preconceptions that many modern readers, especially those from his target audience, will bring any study of Roman arena and he is keen put these stereotypes aside. For example, when describing Roman audience's willingness witness fatal spectacles, he notes that while the modem Western world tends see most forms of violence in moral terms, ancient spectators saw combination of grace, control, and aggression, when done well, as both beautiful and virtuous (p. 96). At other times, however, he slips and so we still read of gladiator facing death in front of fifty thousand baying (p. 12) or the bloodlust of crowd (p. 60). And what are we make of a chapter about organization of games entitled Feeding Monster? Still, Toner's ability confront and handle such stereotypes, both modern and ancient, is a real strength of book. Another strength is Toner's astute perception of popular appeal of performers--the gladiators and charioteers in particular--especially for average Roman. While he explores fully importance of shows for elite (politicized leisure), it is his understanding of how poor majority would have seen such men that is so insightful. These men needed be resourceful, competitive, skilled, and tough survive, all qualities shared by everyday Romans. Toner also explores opposition games, mostly through a retelling of Martyrdom of Perpetua in Carthage (CE 203). At one point Toner states that Romans hunted down and attacked Christians (p. 110) though on next page admits that such persecutions were actually rare. Indeed, Hilarianus, official who condemned Perpetua and her fellow Christians, has been shown have been an unusually extreme religious fundamentalist (J. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".