Disciplinary, Moral, and Ascetical Works

Introduction

INTRODUCTION DN THE TIME of the emperors the Roman world knew and enjoyed especially four kinds of public amusement : the chariot-races of the circus; the gladiatorial combats and hunting spectacles of the amphitheater; the performance of farces, such as mimes and pantomimes, in the theater; and the athletic contests of the stadium. The omnipotent rulers saw in these amusements the best means for purchasing popular favor, keeping the masses contented, and making them forget their own insignificance. Each emperor tried to outdo his predecessor in the frequency and splendor of his spectacles, so that, under some emperors, almost one half of the days of the year were given to public exhibitions. The Roman poet Juvenal (Sat. 10.81) summed up the desires of the people in the often-quoted words panem et circenses ('bread and races'). Still worse, every art was employed on such occasions to intoxicate the senses of the spectators and quiet their moral scruples. Thus it is not surprising to find a number of passages in the works of pagan authors, cautioning against the degrading influences of the spectacles. Yet the adverse judgment of these writers was not primarily evoked by those very features which, 33 34 TERTULLIAN because of their moral perversity, justly deserved condemnation : the wholesale destruction of life, human and animal, in the arena for the amusement of spectators, or the crude coarseness and frivolous obscenity of the mimes and pantomimes which had long displaced the tragedies and comedies of old. Their criticisms are rather philosophical commonplaces , emphasizing some evil effects of the spectacles on men. Dio Chrysostom, for instance, disapproves of the undignified behavior of the spectators in the circus, theater, and stadium (Drat. 32.41-43); Libanius takes exception to the races in the circus because they keep men from studying rhetoric (Drat. 35.13), or he finds fault with people going to the theater because this pastime leads to idleness (Drat. 41.7). Only the philosopher Seneca, speaking of the crude slaughter in the amphitheater (Ep. 7.2ff.), finds words of condemnation which, to some extent at least, express our own thought and feeling concerning these inhuman delights. Unlike the pagan authors, the Christian writers, beginning with the early Greek apologists, are uncompromising in their attitude toward the spectacles. They do not content themselves with merely censuring the brutalizing effects of the circus, theater, athletic contests, and gladiatorial encounters on the minds and souls of the spectators. They rather attack the very nature of these amusements and find them incompatible with the idea of God as Creator of the world and with man's right and dignity. Accordingly, they assert that it is the stern duty of all men to absent themselves from such pastimes. Weaning the Roman world from its long-cherished amusements was a long and painful process. Legislation, both ecclesiastical and imperial, had to be added to the untiring efforts of Christian writers and preachers to stamp out the last vestiges of the pagan spec- SPECTACLES 35 tacles. Even so, it lasted centuries, until the race courses, theaters, amphitheaters, and gymnasia, whose walls had begun to crumble and fall into decay, were finally abandoned. In view of Tertullian's fiery, irascible and intolerant disposition , it is hardly surprising that none of the early Christian authors has attacked the pagan spectacles so relentlessly and violently as this aggressive and headstrong African writer. He missed no opportunity to demonstrate and expose their deceitful character. Hence, longer or shorter passages condemning one or the other kind of these amusements can be found in several places of his works (Apology 6.3; 15.1-6; 38.4; 42.7;, De cultu feminarum 1.8.4-5; Scorpiace 6.2-5; De corona 6.3; De pudicitia 7.15). Moreover, he considered the question whether a Christian was allowed to attend the performances in the circus, theater, amphitheater, and stadium so important that he wrote a special treatise on this subject, entitled De spectaculis. In Tertullian's day some Christians evidently held rather broad views concerning the lawfulness of frequenting the pagan spectacles. Catechumens, still only slightly familiar with the demands of Christian life, or too ready to elude them, seem to have thought these amusements permissible, as long as they were, at least formally , still pagans. But a number of baptized Christians, too, apparently found it difficult to give up entertainments they had greatly enjoyed in their former life...