The Point of No Return

Continuing to appear fresh and rosy-fingered, Dawn never ceased to impress.

I have, as of now, passed the point of no return with my essay; having finalized my topic of Ancient Roman gladiators, and (hopefully) my question of, "To what extent did the gladiatorial displays of the Roman Empire perform important social and political functions rather than just being entertainment?"

With this essay, as it is a "to what extent" question, it is important I look at both sides of the argument, and analyse the positives and negatives of the gladiator games. Opinions from individuals such as Seneca, Stoic and Nero (though he also supported the games on occasion) will help assert negative views, while Vespasian, Titus, Julius Caesar (though he predates the Empire) and other supporters of the games will provide useful contradictory points. This study will look in depth as to the pros and cons of such games and evaluate their social and political benefits to the Emperors of the time. Important events such as the building of the Colosseum, the banning of the games, for 10 years, in Pompeii, and (possibly) the Spartacus Revolt will be some of my historic reference points.

Below is the basic structure of my essay for the moment:

INTRODUCTION

PARAGRAPH 1:
How gladiatorial games were considered, by many higher-class Romans and philosophers, to be pointless entertainment, serving no real purpose in the community.

PARAGRAPH 2:
How gladiatorial games were used for social purposes (eg. manipulate public, increase moral etc.)

PARAGRAPH 3:
How gladiatorial games were used for political/economic purposes (eg. increase income, gain votes etc.)

CONCLUSION

"Salus Populi, Suprema Lex." - The greatest law is the health of the people.