The Roman Arena

Misha Glenny and guests discuss the countless venues across the Roman Empire which for over five hundred years drew the biggest crowds both in the Republic and under the Emperors. The shows there delighted the masses who knew, no matter how low their place in society, they were much better off than the gladiators about to fight or the beasts to be slaughtered. Some of the Roman elites were disgusted, seeing this popular entertainment as morally corrupting and un-Roman. Moral degradation was a less immediate concern though than the overspill of violence. There was a constant threat of gladiators being used as a private army and while those of the elite wealthy enough to stage the shows hoped to win great prestige, they risked disappointing a crowd which could quickly become a mob and turn on them. With Kathleen Coleman James Loeb Professor of the Classics at Harvard University John Pearce Reader in Archaeology at King’s College London And Matthew Nicholls Fellow and Senior Tutor at St John’s College, Oxford Producer: Simon Tillotson Reading list: C. A. Barton, The Sorrows of the Ancient Romans: The Gladiator and the Monster (Princeton University Press, 1993) Roger Dunkle, Gladiators: Violence and Spectacle in Ancient Rome (Pearson, 2008) Garrett G. Fagan, The Lure of the Arena: Social Psychology and the Crowd at the Roman Games (Cambridge University Press, 2011) A. Futrell, Blood in the Arena: The Spectacle of Roman Power (University of Texas Press, 1997) A. Futrell, The Roman Games: A Sourcebook (Blackwell Publishing, 2006) Keith Hopkins and Mary Beard, The Colosseum (Profile, 2005) Luciana Jacobelli, Gladiators at Pompeii (The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2003) Eckart Köhne and Cornelia Ewigleben (eds.), Gladiators and Caesars: The Power of Spectacle in Ancient Rome (University of California Press, 2000) Donald Kyle, Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome (Routledge, 1998) F. Meijer, The Gladiators: History’s Most Deadly Sport (Souvenir, 2004) Jerry Toner, The Day Commodus killed a Rhino: Understanding the Roman Games (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) K. Welch, The Roman Amphitheatre from its Origins to the Colosseum (Cambridge University Press, 2007) T. Wiedemann, Emperors and Gladiators (Routledge, 1992) In Our Time is a BBC Studios Production

• 0:00Speaker 00

  This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.

• 0:05Speaker 00

  Sometimes we all need an extra helping hand, especially with a tricky business problem you've been putting off. Claude is the AI for just that. It's the collaborator that understands your entire workflow and thinks with you, not for you. And Claude isn't just for quick questions. Hand it a whole task, like turning a folder of scattered notes into a report, and it does the work and hands back something finished that you can open and edit. Claude can now draft a doc or deck right in front of you, and Claude Design now lives right inside Claude. Describe the website or prototype you're picturing, attach your design system, and it comes back in your own design language, ready to edit right on the canvas. It works with your files and the tools you already use,

• 0:49Speaker 00

  like Gmail and Slack. And whether you're debugging code at midnight, building a financial model, or strategizing your next business move, Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter. For problems worth solving, get started with Claude at claude.ai/solve. That's claude.ai/solve. And check out Claude Pro, which includes access to all of the features mentioned in today's episode. claude.ai/solve.

• 1:16Speaker 01

  Overwhelmed? That was me with diabetes. Hey, I'm Jabraan. Between teaching and coaching, managing diabetes felt like an extra job. With the Freestyle Libre 3CGM, I get real-time glucose readings and have the insights to make informed decisions. My life feels lighter now. Learn more at freestylelibre.us.

• 1:36Speaker 02

  The views expressed should not be used for medical diagnosis or treatment as a substitute for professional medical advice. Individual circumstances may vary. For prescription only. Safety info found at freestylelibre.us.

• 1:46Speaker 03

  Hey, I'm Niall Rogers. This fall, I'll be driving across the country, meeting some of today's coolest and most fascinating artists. We'll explore the stories before the moments that changed everything. Because every musician remembers the moment where it all began. Experience Before the Moment, a Lincoln Original Series on the iHeartRadio app, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 2:20Speaker 04

  This is In Our Time from BBC Radio 4, and this is one of more than a thousand episodes you can find in the In Our Time archive. A reading list for this edition can be found in the episode description wherever you're listening. I hope you enjoy the programme. Hello. For over 500 years, Roman arenas staged gladiatorial combats, drawing the biggest crowds both in the Republic and under the emperors. These events delighted the masses. No matter how low their place in society, it was a great comfort to ordinary people that they were much better off than the gladiators about to fight or the beasts being slaughtered.

• 3:04Speaker 04

  But some members of the elite were disgusted. They saw this essential Roman entertainment as morally corrupting and un-Roman. Those among them wealthy enough to stage the shows could, however, win great prestige, as long as the mob enjoyed themselves. With me to discuss the Roman arena are Kathleen Coleman, James Lope, Professor of the Classics at Harvard University, John Pearce, Reader in Archaeology at King's College London, and Matthew Nicholls, Fellow and Senior Tutor at St John's College, Oxford. Matthew, what can you tell us about how these arena games began?

• 3:42Speaker 05

  Yes, the Romans themselves reflected on this, and they were glad that they could see an Italian origin in this very military and hardy combat, not like money at their entertainments they borrowed from the Greeks. And they thought maybe it came from Etruria, or more probably from southern Italy, from Campania, where it began as a sort of ritual combat at the funerals of aristocrats, borrowed by the Romans and incorporated into their own funeral ceremonies from about the middle of the third century BC. As Rome expanded and grew more powerful, these games... Themselves grew bigger. We hear first of three pairs of gladiators, then sixteen, then twenty-two, then sixty. So they keep getting bigger and bigger. And they begin to take on a life of their own, independent from the funeral and the honouring of the dead. They start to attract a large audience, and because they're given by aristocrats,

• 4:26Speaker 05

  they attract a sort of political power, because you're now pleasing the mob who are your electorate. So they get attached to state games or ludie. They get put on by prominent magistrates at Rome, seeking election or reelection, or just currying popular favour. And by the first century B.C., that link to funerals is really getting stretched. Julius Caesar puts on a set of games in honour of his deceased father, who'd actually been dead for twenty years at that point. So I don't think anyone really believed him, but it was a convenient fig leaf. Eventually, that link to funerals drops away, and they just become games in their own right.

• 4:56Speaker 04

  Now, we know them, of course, because we can still see the ruins of the Colosseum, and there are other great stone arenas, like those in Aisle and Nîmes in the south of France. But that wasn't how it started, was it?

• 5:10Speaker 05

  No, that's right. Originally, as funeral combats, perhaps they happen near tombs or funeral pyres. In Campania, we think they sometimes were attached to banquets. But in Rome, almost as soon as Roman magnates start putting these things on, they look for big areas of empty space to do it in, where lots of people can see. So as early as 264, we have combat in the forum, boarium, or cattle market, actually, which is a convenient city centre open space. By 216 B.C., it's in the forum itself, so the heart of Rome, which is significant, I think. And that's a sort of rectangular, trapezoidal space, surrounded by big buildings on whose rooftops and balconies you can stand and watch. Then wooden stands were put up, maybe some subterranean structures added to the forum to facilitate the games, it's a bit hard to tell. But always a temporary and contingent arena, put up

• 5:53Speaker 05

  a set of games, and taken away again. And the Romans quite liked these being temporary arenas, that they had a moral suspicion of entertainment, so they didn't want anything permanent, disfiguring the city. They worried a bit about the seditious nature of large crowds, so better a temporary arena than something where large crowds could keep gathering. And perhaps most importantly, republican Rome had annually elected magistrates. So if you were trying to bribe the electorate, it's better to spend all your money on gladiators and silver armour and dancing girls, and a rickety wooden stage to show it all. And you take that down, and it's done. You don't really have a vested interest in creating an expensive, permanent arena.

• 6:27Speaker 04

  Kathleen Coleman, despite those misgivings that Matthew alluded to about the mob and the potential sedition, these became incredibly popular. Why did they spread so fast?

• 6:40Speaker 06

  Well, the games themselves become a way for local magnates to show their generosity to their community. And interestingly, in terms of the stone buildings, the earliest ones we know of were actually outside Rome. And we have evidence from Campania, the most famous one obviously is the amphitheatre at Pompeii, which dates to the 70s B.C. And there were others in cities of that area. And these seem to have been associated with the spread of Roman influence. The one in Pompeii, for example, was built on the site of an old Samnite section of the city, leaning into the city wall. And it was built for

• 7:24Speaker 06

  the colonists, making a very powerful statement to the local inhabitants of Pompeii.

• 7:30Speaker 04

  But the earliest arenas were, as we've heard, made of wood. They were sort of portable structures, almost pop-up venues, as it were. What was the shift to the permanent stone ones? That must have been a shift in the politics of the games as well.

• 7:48Speaker 06

  Well, I think because the earliest stone ones we know of are from outside Rome, it's very much the Romans putting their stamp, a sort of permanent stamp, on the local population. You can't miss the amphitheatre at Pompeii, even today, it's the largest structure in the city. And interestingly, apart from what seems to have been a very small structure put up in the dying years of the Republic, near the Tiber, we don't actually have a permanent amphitheatre until the construction of the Colosseum in Rome. Even the large thing that Nero put up was a wooden amphitheatre.

• 8:26Speaker 04

  So it's much later on that we see the stone arenas being built?

• 8:31Speaker 06

  In the city of Rome itself, yes. But outside Rome, they date back to the first century B.C.

• 8:39Speaker 04

  John Pearce, talking about the content of the games, you've been studying, I understand, a third-century male skeleton in York, whose pelvis appears to have been bitten by a lion or a leopard around the time of the man's death. What were lions doing in York in the third century? Were they roaming free on the dales of Yorkshire?

• 9:04Speaker 07

  I don't think we need to see this as part of Roman climate change, that saw lions transplanted to live out their lives in the Yorkshire dales. I think this is testimony to the spread of games across the Roman Empire, that wherever you are in the Roman world, especially in an urban setting, you're going to find gladiatorial combat and the associated spectacles, which include the use of animals as agents of execution, and animals as part of those staged confrontations, where humans fight animals, animals are pitted against other examples. So finding this at York, I think the main surprise is that we imagine that games of these kinds spread everywhere. We see the amphitheaters across the Roman

• 9:45Speaker 07

  world, obviously not all as splendid as the Colosseum, or Arles, or Neme, sometimes simpler structures, but their ubiquitous, or other kinds of spaces are adapted. But the idea that you would be able to transplant what we might have thought of as an element of Mediterranean spectacle, the city of Rome, other Italian cities perhaps, finding that in York speaks to a complex logistical structure that takes animals from North Africa, across the Mediterranean, across Europe by road and river, and then to Britain. The challenge is knowing how frequent that was. Was that the one time this happened in Britain? Or was it a part of the recurring spectacle culture, of which we see a glimpse here? That's difficult to answer.

• 10:26Speaker 04

  Presumably it was a pretty punishing experience from the animals being transported from Africa to all over Europe.

• 10:32Speaker 07

  Yes, I mean, the best comparative light we have shed on that is the 19th-century zoological expeditions, where you look at the cargo manifests in Mombasa, what's being shipped out of East Africa, and you see what turns up in Hamburg, or London, or New York, and usually 90% of the animals have died by that time. So we'd have to Imagine with the Roman world, a similar likely attritional rate. You know, we have a letter from Pliny that says, shame about your exhibition in Verona. Luckily, the gladiators were there. Unfortunately, the Panthers didn't turn up. And you can imagine the potential obstacles that got in the way of of those Panthers being there. One of the best testimonies to how this worked is a book written in the first half of the 20th century

• 11:13Speaker 07

  from a classicist who was also zookeeper in Manchester and talks about the different kinds of caging you need as you move an animal from the wild to its ultimate destination, where you have to keep adjusting how you house it for it to adjust to the experience of the logistical implications, you know, keeping it fed, keeping it appropriately housed. A rather mind blowing, really, for how that works in the Roman world.

• 11:36Speaker 04

  Just to get this straight, I think you've written that the animals tended to appear in the morning. There was a whole day's show going on. What was the order of service, as it were, for one of these games?

• 11:48Speaker 07

  So we don't have very much evidence for how that works, but we have Seneca telling us indirectly mid first century AD that you might expect, you know, the animal games take place in the morning, executions at lunchtime, and then the gladiators as the culmination in the afternoon, where you get the skilled fighters pitted against one another.

• 12:08Speaker 04

  Who's being executed at lunchtime?

• 12:11Speaker 07

  The poor people who've been condemned, you know, the Roman term damnatio ad bestia. So a criminal conviction means that you're condemned to be executed, using the animal as the agent of execution. Seen very vividly on mosaics in North Africa, for example.

• 12:26Speaker 04

  Kathleen Coleman, I want to go on to the gladiators themselves. I'd like you to tell us who these people were, but before you do, can you tell us what the word gladiator means?

• 12:40Speaker 06

  Well, that's somebody who uses a gladius, which is a particular type of sword. And these people were either slaves or assimilated to the status of a slave. In other words, what I mean by that is that these would have been free persons who voluntarily took up the gladiatorial oaths and basically sold themselves, we believe on a temporary basis, to an owner trainer and could, after a certain number of years, have earned their their freedom. I think that the majority were probably slaves. I don't know how common it was for people to voluntarily take up the role of a gladiator. But I think it's absolutely critical to realise that for the people,

• 13:25Speaker 06

  the free persons in the stands, there was a gulf between them and these performers in the arena, these people who really had no status. They were objects, they were possessions, that's what a slave was. It was a human possession. And I think that explains why people could watch these things with a certain degree of equanimity and a feeling of a distance. Of course, enslaved persons, we believe, were also present in the audience, probably feeling grateful that they weren't in the arena itself. But the paradox is that these persons were highly trained. They had a special diet, they had special accommodation.

• 14:08Speaker 06

  You need to be pretty fit to fight in in public like that. And so we see in occasional sources this kind of grudging admiration for the bravery and simply the skill of these performers, who trained extensively for, as far as we know, quite rare appearances.

• 14:30Speaker 04

  And were they all men?

• 14:32Speaker 06

  No, there were female gladiators. The best piece of evidence is actually sitting in the British Museum. It's a little stone plaque that shows two female combatants in fighting stance and their names are inscribed under them, and those are speaking names. They must have been their professional names. One is Amazon, which is obviously very appropriate for a female fighter, given the mythology of the Amazons. And the other one is Achilles, so the female version of the name Achilles, who was the most famous Greek warrior in the Trojan War. And above their heads is inscribed in Greek, "They were granted a reprieve."

• 15:13Speaker 06

  And that, I think, explains why they're both in a fighting stance. They fought to a draw.

• 15:19Speaker 04

  Matthew, I want to go to the most famous arena of all, the Colosseum. We've mentioned it before, but tell me, who built it and why?

• 15:28Speaker 05

  The Colosseum was built by the Flavian Dynastine Emperors, and Colosseum actually is a nickname for it, a later nickname after a giant statue, Colossus, that stood nearby. They probably referred to it as the New Amphitheatre or just the Amphitheatre. It was built by Vespasian and his two sons, Titus and then Domitian, who succeeded him as emperor between the years of sixty-nine and ninety-six A.D. And it was built, I think, to understand why and where it was built, we need to think about the context by which that dynasty came to power. They came in after a civil war. They swept away and replaced the hated reign of Nero, who had been in love with high culture in the Greek world and chariot racing, and had garnered a lot of approbrium by gobbling up large trunks of city centre real estate to build his palace, the Golden House.

• 16:11Speaker 05

  And when he was swept from power and forced to suicide in eighty-sixty-eight, there was then a period of civil war and also culture wars around the legacy of the emperor and the best way to be an emperor. And it was won by this gruff, grizzled military veteran, Vespasian, who demolished Nero's luxury palace and took the garden and the boating lake from that palace, drained it and used it to build the Colosseum. So it was right in the city centre. It's in the private grounds of this hated despot, and it's a conspicuous gift to the people of Rome for tough, martial, vigorous Italian combat. And the loyalist poet Marshley, who writes a rather sycophantic book of poetry celebrating the opening games of the Colosseum, says, "What a wonderful thing this is. These are the private grounds of a hated autocrat have been given to the people." And it achieves its aim of being a conspicuous gesture. So it's very much a political monument.

• 16:55Speaker 05

  It's right in the middle of the city, so it puts into the heart of Rome this concept of entertainment as an imperial prerogative and gesture. And it's architecturally rather elegant. It was a huge building. It goes up pretty quickly for its size. Lovely elegant classical architectural treatment on the façade that kind of speaks of permanence and stability and acceptability. And it seems to have achieved instant classic status. It gets put on the coins. Rather brilliantly, we have the tomb of a Roman contracting builder called Quintus Aterius Ticicus, who probably worked on it because he puts a little picture of the Colosseum on his tomb alongside his building crane to celebrate his involvement in this monument of the age. So it achieves that propagandistic aim of the empress who set out to build it.

• 17:35Speaker 04

  And the Colosseum, is it true that they filled it with water and had maritime battles? Or is that an urban myth?

• 17:40Speaker 07

  Oh, it's difficult to say, I'm afraid. The sources are naturally contradictory. So Dio, writing rather later, says Titus brilliantly filled the arena with water and reenacted a famous naval battle there. But Suetonius, who's a century closer in time to those actual events, doesn't say that. And looking at the architecture of the Colosseum, it's a little bit hard to see how it could have been done. If you've seen a picture of it, it's now where the arena floor used to be. You now look down into this maze of corridors and lifts and hoists, which are mostly later. So if at the time there was a much simpler substructure or no substructure, then maybe at the opening games it could have been flooded. There's plenty of water nearby, there are aqueducts, it's in a kind of valley of a culverted stream. It could have been filled, it could have been drained, but it's hard to see how it could have been done that more than once after its opening games.

• 18:25Speaker 04

  John Pearce, this seems to me like big business, the games, the arenas and so on. What was the day-to-day's system? Because, I mean, they weren't performing in the arenas every day, were they?

• 18:39Speaker 07

  No, so there's a very substantial infrastructure behind gladiatorial combat. There are two key roles in this. There's the person who pays for the games, who pays for the show, the sponsor, or the Roman, one of the Roman terms is the editor. And then there's the person responsible for the organisation, for making sure that gladiators are housed, trained, looked after and so on. Sometimes that's the same person. So when we begin to get better evidence for how gladiators work, as it were, in the late Republic, it seems it's quite commonplace for Roman aristocrats involved in that political competition to have their own gladiatorial training school. It's quite often in Campania, in southern Italy, which seems to be the possible area in which the games begin, sometimes in Rome.

• 19:23Speaker 07

  With the imperial period, there's an imperial takeover of that, because the emperor partly is interested in making sure that the show happens, so needs a lot of gladiators for the spectacle he puts on to be appropriate to the scale of the building we've just heard about. There's also a potential political danger with gladiators, that if you've got a band of armed men, trained Killers who depend on you for their housing, their feeding and so on. Then they're also at your disposal, as it were, in political violence. And we see them used sometimes in the Roman Republic for that. So the emperor takes over much of that infrastructure. Then, under him, or under our republican sponsor, we have a manager, the lanista,

• 20:05Speaker 07

  the figure kind of made familiar by Oliver Reed in the first Gladiator film. The person who seems to be responsible, if you want to put on a show, he'll hire the gladiators to you, he'll arrange the price.

• 20:20Speaker 08

  Sometimes we all need an extra help in hand, especially with the tricky business problem you've been putting off. Claude is an AI for just that. It's the collaborator that understands your entire workflow and thinks with you, not for you. And Claude isn't just for quick questions. Hand it a whole task like turning a folder of scattered notes into a report, and it does the work and hands back something finished that you can open and edit. Claude can now draft a doc or deck right in front of you, and Claude Design now lives right inside Claude. Describe the website or prototype you're picturing, attach your design system, and it comes back in your own design language, ready to edit right on the canvas. It works with your files and the tools you already use, like Gmail and Slack.

• 21:04Speaker 08

  And whether you're debugging code at midnight, building a financial model, or strategizing your next business move, Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter for problems worth solving. Get started with Claude at claude.ai/solve. That's claude.ai/solve. And check out Claude Pro, which includes access to all of the features mentioned in today's episode. Claude.ai/solve.

• 21:30Speaker 03

  Hey, I'm Niall Rogers, producer, songwriter, guitarist and co-founder of the group Sheik. A great song has a way of defining a moment, a moment of joy, heartbreak, or anything in between. This fall, I'll be driving across the country, dropping in on some of the coolest, most fascinating artists working today. We'll go deep into their lives and careers and hear what it was like before the moment that made them. From hitmakers like Miguel...

• 22:04Speaker 09

  That last year, finishing that record was the hardest experience of my life. Regardless of how everyone else buys into this, I believe in this and I'm gonna push.

• 22:15Speaker 03

  To rising stars like Alex Warren.

• 22:18Speaker 09

  You know, a song is a story and the verse is setting the scene. And for me at least, it's allowing me to be personal and vulnerable with the audience, whether it's about my wife and I'm being vulnerable about her, or it's about, you know, my parents, I'm being vulnerable to them. And it's almost like a cinematic piece in a way where each song tells that beautiful story.

• 22:36Speaker 03

  It's gonna be one hell of a trip. Experience Before the Moment, a Lincoln original series on the iHeartRadio app, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 22:49Speaker 10

  OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 23:20Speaker 04

  So what we're really looking at is sort of big business like sport today. You have your performers, and it was interesting what Kathleen was saying about the names of the female gladiators, presumably the male gladiators all had their names. There would be stars, people would flock to this thing, adverts and things like that?

• 23:44Speaker 07

  Yes, there seems to be a lot of anticipation of games and that's partly natural. You know, it's the city at rest or the city at play. People look forward to their day off, but that's partly managed. Pompeii provides us the best evidence for that kind of anticipatory build up. We see the proclamations of the addict are painted on the walls that say, on this day, for the magistracy of so and so, or for the health of the emperor, these games will take place. It'll get, they'll tell you the date. At Pompeii, they're also advertising games in neighboring cities too, not just at Pompeii. And it will also say there will be an animal show. There will be awnings, you'll be in the shade when you're watching, and there will be a certain

• 24:25Speaker 07

  number of pairs of gladiators, ten gladiators will, ten pairs will fight, twenty pairs will fight. So there's that, there are probably announcements. In the immediate build up, there's, there are indications of how this work. It may be that there's, as it were, a public dinner the night before, where you can go and see the stars, as it were, enjoying the sort of equivalent of the condemned man's last meal. On the day itself, a procession, which will be a mixture of the circuses coming to town, plus the Lord Maes show, because the sponsor needs to be very clearly identifiable in that, he's paid for it after all.

• 25:00Speaker 04

  But Kathleen, if I can bring you in on the, on this issue, we always get the impression that these were fights to the death, but that's not actually the case. These people, the gladiators, were incredibly important assets to the people who owned them. So the last thing they wanted, I presume, is for them to be, to be slaughtered at the end of the game.

• 25:20Speaker 06

  Yes, absolutely. We have a wonderful legal text from the second century where a jurist is trying to explain the difference between hire and purchase. And he says, think of a gladiator, you rent a gladiator, you send him back to barracks after his show in pretty okay shape, you pay twenty denari for him. But if he's either killed or severely maimed, then you pay a thousand denari, you've basically bought him. So, you know, there was a huge markup there. And for the people renting the gladiators, there was obviously a strong incentive to stop the fights before a fatality. And some of the emperors even put a ban on fights with sharp weapons, whatever precisely that means.

• 26:03Speaker 06

  But, um, yes, uh, we think, uh, that probably about five percent of fights might, might have ended with a very serious injury or even a death.

• 26:12Speaker 04

  Oh, really?

• 26:13Speaker 06

  But then the people, that's, that's what calculated. Of course, we're basically relying on tombstones.

• 26:21Speaker 06

  Because gladiators, many, many, well, we don't know how many of them, but some of the gladiators are actually commemorated on tombstones. And they say proudly, or their tombstone says proudly, what style of gladiator they were. There's no attempt to hide the fact that they were gladiators, they're proud of it. Sometimes, especially in the Greek East, you have a little relief of them standing proudly there next to their shield with their helmet standing on top of the shield, and all the wreaths that they've won, their distinctions carved around them.

• 26:53Speaker 04

  Thanks for that, Kathleen. And Matthew, I'd like to pick up something that John mentioned, and that's about how the games and the imperial project of Rome. So we've had the Republic, and then after Caesar we get Augustus becoming the first emperor, and things start to change in the relationship between the state and the games. What's all that about?

• 27:20Speaker 05

  The emperors start to monopolize the production of games at Rome. It's too powerful and too spectacular, a gift to the people to be allowed into other hands. So Augustus and his successors as emperor gradually acquire the sole prerogative of giving games. And by the reign of Domitian about a century into the imperial period, only the emperor can give games at Rome. Augustus does it three times in his own name, five times in the names of his sons, twenty-six, I think, beast hunts. So an escalating diet of violent spectacle. Because it's so very popular, it's something the emperor needs to do and has done really since the inception of the imperial project. Even Julius Caesar, Augustus's predecessor, didn't really like the games. Apparently he used to sit at the back of his box doing his correspondence and got rather bad reputations for being aloof and standoffish.

• 28:04Speaker 05

  So emperors not only have to do this, they have to go and they have to be seen to be enjoying it, but not too much. Some emperors get too fond of it and they attract criticism for that as well. So they need to be in among the crowds but restraining themselves.

• 28:16Speaker 04

  But Caesar, Julius Caesar organized a lot of these games. I mean, he may not have enjoyed them, but... He seemed to think that they were important.

• 28:26Speaker 05

  Oh, he absolutely did. I mean, he put on a famous games with three hundred and twenty pairs of gladiators and he would have done more if the Senate hadn't stopped him because, as John says, people were concerned about the potential for violence and this is a kind of private army in the city of Rome. So Caesar was very well aware of the importance of games, among many other sorts of benefaction, it has to be said, chariot racing, beast hunts, banquets, later on, public bathing. All of these are things that the emperor gives to the people in this culture of bread and circuses.

• 28:50Speaker 04

  And just out of interest, is the the idea of the thumbs down or the thumbs up to end the life of a gladiator, is that nonsense or is it based in truth?

• 29:01Speaker 05

  It is not quite nonsense. There is one source, Juvenal Third Satire, that says a sort of the guy who used to play the trumpet in these arenas now gives games himself and the the mob bit him with a turned thumb, Pollice Verso, to spare the life of a gladiator. But we don't know if that means thumbs up or thumbs down. It's only one source, it's echoed later by Prudentius. We don't know how common it was, we don't know exactly what it means. It's not it's not nothing, but it's not as firm as we think it might be.

• 29:24Speaker 04

  John?

• 29:25Speaker 07

  Well, it seems quite clear, as as Matthew said, we don't know which way which way it goes, but it seems to be almost the pivotal moment of the show. It's very often shown in Roman art when a gladiator surrendered, holds up his finger, there's a recognisable gesture, and that seems to be the image that's created to bring back the memory. Do you remember, you were there, we were in the seats when we saw this, because then you're waiting for that decision. Which way will that gesture go? Either the sponsor or the sponsor extends the opportunity to the crowd to decide. So though maybe not many gladiators die as a proportion, nonetheless, this is a really high-risk moment, and so it's a very dramatic gesture, lots depends on it.

• 30:04Speaker 05

  It's a moment of communication between the emperor or the gear of the games and the crowd, and that that compact between them is part of what this arena display is. It's a chance for the emperor to show himself to the people, for the people in some sense to communicate with the emperor. It's a very political moment, very communal moment.

• 30:19Speaker 04

  Sounds a little bit like waiting for a VAR result in the Premier League. John, another myth busting thing here. I was brought up told, being told that Christians were thrown to the lions. Were they?

• 30:34Speaker 07

  Certainly Christians do feature among the victims of these arena executions. There's an extraordinarily vivid account from the early third century AD, a martyrdom of a Christian woman, Perpetua, and that describes the various ordeal she goes through in prison beforehand and in the games at the end where a combination of animals and human executioners are used to try and kill her, often to little avail. The first evidence for Christians being killed in the arena is under Nero in one of those temporary arenas, but not by lions, dogs are involved, but also Christians are set alight. There aren't that many martyrdom stories that have ancient authority. The instance of Perpetua in North Africa is one. There's

• 31:19Speaker 07

  another vivid story from Lyon in the 8170s of another. But there are many other individuals who seem to be put to death in this way, criminals, prisoners of war quite likely as well.

• 31:32Speaker 04

  Kathleen Coleman, I want to drill down a little bit more on the business. Who made money out of this? By the sounds of it, the gladiators themselves didn't, didn't make money, but presumably they got something out of it if they weren't killed.

• 31:48Speaker 06

  Well, we assume for the gladiators that being slaves or equivalent thereof, they would have got like a little piggy bank, as it were, for when they might ultimately be retired from the spectacle, just as ordinary domestic slaves would have got a little peculium, some kind of nest egg for afterwards. But I think our modern concept is you want to make money out of everything, whereas the games are very much about the acquisition of status. So for the impresario actually putting on a spectacle, this was an opportunity for him to illustrate his generosity to his community. And so far, we've been talking mainly about the games in Rome itself, but we have masses and masses and masses of evidence

• 32:33Speaker 06

  about games in little tin pot towns around the fringe of the empire, when the local impresario, the local squire, puts on a set of games. Very small scale, you know, they're boasting about having four beasts or whatever it is. And this, this is cultural capital. They get recognition from their community because they could have spent their money on a donation of oil to the baths, which is the equivalent of ancient soap, or they could have had a banquet every year if they're really rich, or maybe every four years to celebrate the birthday of their child or something like that. Or they can put on games and that's a big, big deal. Must have cost them a lot of money.

• 33:15Speaker 06

  The people who would have imported the animals, we have fascinating evidence from North Africa for these companies, these sodalitatis, who imported animals and sent them abroad to the arenas. One of them in particular was diversified and it also exported olive oil and things like that. So this, this must have been a money-making operation for them, but for the ultimate consumer in the, in the form of the impresario, it was a money-losing operation. But you are demonstrating your free status. The root of our word liberality is the Latin for free.

• 33:55Speaker 06

  As a free person, you can own property and therefore you can dispense with it, you can give it away. And that is so antithetical to the modern idea of capitalism where we make more and more and more money all the time for ourselves, but that's not the point in antiquity.

• 34:10Speaker 04

  In terms of evidence, Matthew, how confident are we that the written evidence gives an accurate picture of the, the games and, and the business behind the games?

• 34:23Speaker 05

  Well, as we often say as ancient historians, our literary evidence is actually rather patchy and partial. It doesn't contain a single clear description of exactly what happened in the arena because most of our surviving authors. Aren't really directly interested in it. The biographers want to talk about how it illuminates imperial character. The historians want to talk about how it affects politics in the city of Rome. There are flattering poets like Marshall or Statius or Calpurnius Siculus who give us pictures and anecdotes but not a clear description. As we've already seen, you did some myth busting earlier, things that we think we know, like the thumb, actually turn out to rest on rather thin ice. Similarly, the famous hail Caesar, we who are about to die, salute you, is only attested once, and then it's not in Rome at all. It's at a naval combat on a lake outside Rome, and it all goes wrong because

• 35:08Speaker 05

  they they say that, and the emperor makes a kind of feeble joke and says, oh, maybe not. And they think that they've been pardoned and refused to fight. So all of these things that we think we're sure about, actually, we're not. And then, our Roman writers mostly are elite male aristocrats. They're moralists. They're rather sniffy about populist entertainment. They don't really want to describe too much what goes on in the arena. Tacitus is famously disdainful about it and says, these things belong in the kind of in the Daily Gazette, they don't belong in my histories. So we don't have a very clear, three picture. We have anecdote and snippet. We have moralizing, like the famous bit of Seneca, where he says the famous German gladiator, who is so terrified of the arena, he shakes himself to death on the xylo sponge him, the kind of sponge on a stick they use in the latrine, to escape

• 35:51Speaker 05

  his fate in the arena. And this is a noble end. So we get those little anecdotes and tales, but not not a coherent picture. We have to piece it together, then we have to go to archaeology and material evidence, too.

• 36:01Speaker 04

  So, obviously, these days, we'd probably be pretty horrified by some of the things going on in the in the games, although, of course, hundreds, millions of people around the world watch boxing and wrestling and and that sort of thing. Although there was this disgust expressed by some of the writers and the moralizers and so on, clearly, these were immensely popular. I mean, the crowds coming into the arenas were absolutely, absolutely huge. So were these writers running against the tide, as it were, of of social mores?

• 36:38Speaker 05

  Well, we don't have an absolute moral condemnation of violence. The whole games are founded on violence, and we tend not to get authors until the Christian period saying this is simply wrong in itself. You'd rather get moral critique of the wrong kind of violence, or emperors being capricious, or mean, or executing the wrong kind of people, or forcing citizens into the arena. So that's the sort of moral objection that writers make. When they talk about the games, they also show us what the appeal might have been. And there are elements of any society that likes to witness violence as an entertainment, as a kind of exploration of the limits of human character. People in our society play violent video games, or watch violent movies. It's the same kind of impulse. But actually, it wasn't just endless slaughter, it was also a sport with rules, and maybe a referee, and special costumes,

• 37:19Speaker 05

  and conventions. And sport is a more universal, and perhaps happier, point of comparison. And it was also just a great big spectacle. And Rome as a society founded on spectacle, and intensely visual culture. There are processions and banquets, and imperial relief art shows the emperor moving among his people, and the arena brings that to life. The emperor's there, the senators are there, vestal virgins, the people, kind of sort of arrayed in social order in the stands. And it's a microcosm of the Roman world looking at itself, and feeling part of the crowd. And like in a modern sporting stadium, must have been part of the appeal to people.

• 37:49Speaker 04

  John, Matthew's told us about the written evidence. What about the pictorial evidence?

• 37:56Speaker 05

  So the pictorial evidence is, again, there are the problems of the patchiness, patchiness over time, patchiness in space and so on. There are lots of mosaics from North Africa showing the games, very few from Britain, for example. The pictorial evidence tends to concentrate in the mid-imperial period. We don't have very much from the Republic. So as always, it's the ancient world, there's that issue of gaps. One thing, for example, I think we would not really understand from literary sources, but get a very clear understanding from visual evidence, is from the different forms that gladiators take. These are rather specialised styles of fighting. They come with their particular name, you know, the Thracian, the Murmelo. They have a very particular set of arms and

• 38:39Speaker 05

  armour. The animal hunters often have very kind of sparkly costumes, as it were. So we wouldn't get a sense really of how does it work in practice, were it not for the visual evidence. And experimental archaeologists have built on that, say, okay, if you're using this kind of arms, if you're wearing this kind

• 38:57Speaker 07

  Of armour, how does it work in practice? They've shown that, for example, you can't fight for very long, wearing a lot of styles of gladiatorial armour, because with these face masks very tight on your face, you can't breathe deeply, you quickly run out of oxygen. So it's very short, sharp bursts of violence, then the waiting, you know, waiting for your moment. So the show gets kind of lengthened because of that. The visual evidence is also really important, I think, for telling us about, as Kathleen said, there are those multiple cities across the empire where it's really important to show up as the big generous donor. And you have your moment in the sun, you're there receiving the acclamation from the crowd, next year someone else will do it. How do you make your games remembered?

• 39:38Speaker 07

  You create a mosaic for your reception room. On your tomb, you show the games that were shown. So it's not just what happened, but it's also the sort of the memory culture around games that visual evidence is crucial for.

• 39:50Speaker 04

  Kathleen, talking about, talking about visual evidence, I think many people get most of their knowledge about gladiatorial combat from the movies. And I feel I should point out here that you were a consultant on Ridley Scott's Gladiator, and indeed Matthew, also in the studio, was a consultant on Gladiator Two, so we really have great expertise here. Kathleen, how much did, how much do the movies, does Hollywood get right about the games? And what does it get wrong?

• 40:23Speaker 06

  Well, I think there are two things that really struck me as very successful with the first Gladiator movie. And one was the sheer range, geographical range of the empire, all the way from that forest in Germany in the opening scene, which is actually a forest in Hampshire, all the way down to the deserts of North Africa. And I thought that was great, actually, that they showed that the Roman Empire really extended over a huge area and was cemented, if you like, by this sort of militant gladiatorial culture. But the other thing that that I thought they did really well was the camaraderie in the gladiatorial training school.

• 41:06Speaker 06

  And it is fascinating to think about what it must have been like to live in one of those barracks. The most famous is the Ludus Magnus. You can see a quarter of it's been excavated just next door to the Colosseum. Has its little training arena, it's got cells all the way around, there would have been maybe a couple of thousand people living in there. And when gladiators were rented, they seemed to have been rented from a single training school. So you might end up fighting in the arena with someone you knew really well and that you're trained with. So that sense of both camaraderie and rivalry, that I think is sometimes captured really well by by Hollywood, maybe because it's, you know, something familiar to us from the

• 41:50Speaker 06

  locker rooms of sports events and so on. In terms of what they get wrong, well, we've covered a lot of that already, that it's not a fight to the death. In fact, you're trying to avoid having people killed. The notion of of a reprieve, that's when you've actually been technically defeated, but you may be misus, you may be reprieved. To go back, you fought well enough, you you reprieved and sent back to gladi- to gladiatorial barracks to practise for next time. The idea that a gladiator might fight a man and then turn and fight an animal is completely erroneous. As far as we know, gladiatorial combat was very, very specialised, as has just been explained, with all those different forms of armour and fighting technique and so

• 42:35Speaker 06

  on. And the beasts were similarly in combat with people who knew how to handle them. And it's really interesting that in the late Republic, potent Tate in North Africa, supplies beasts for the arena in Rome. And he supplies the fighters. Because, you know, if you were thrown into the arena in front of a lion, you wouldn't know what to do. But if you, I assume, maybe you would. But, you know, if you're a trained hunter who spends his time hunting lions in the forests of wherever, then, you know, you know how to do it. And we see in some of these reliefs and wonderful things that John and Matthew have been talking

• 43:16Speaker 06

  about, we see all these amazing structures put into the arena to try and fool the animals so that you could have a little kind of swivel that you stood behind. That, you know, that, that's really, it requires a lot of technique. And as far as we are aware, the gladiators were one category of person and the beast fighters were another category of person, possibly even lower in status, but also very skilled and experienced.

• 43:42Speaker 04

  Matthew, what was, what was your experience doing Gladiator Two? I have to say, I, I started watching it quite recently and I was quite shocked to see the first battle between gladiators and what looked like a hybrid between a baboon and a dog.

• 43:58Speaker 05

  Yes, it, it's a striking moment, isn't it? Well, like Kathleen says, they, they get many things right and other things, they take some, some artistic liberties in the making of a movie. Later on, there are, there are sharks in the Colosseum, for example. But what I think they, they, they do focus on, I think successfully, is the idea of the Colosseum as an arena where the emperor comes face to face with his people. And we've all been talking about that all the way through the programme in different ways. Of course, in the film, it's fictionalised, but the idea that this is an arena where the emperor has to put on spectacle because the people demand it. And as has been said, holding the Roman people is like holding a wolf by the ears. You've got to, you dare not let it go. You've got to keep feeding it or entertaining it. So that broader perspective, I think, is an interesting one.

• 44:37Speaker 04

  I think we've got time for about one more question and I'm going to ask John Pearce, why did the games die out?

• 44:46Speaker 07

  It's probably the main factor is one we've been talking about quite a lot, and which is to do with money, that gladiators are very expensive. We've talked about the investment that you need to put in to create a trained fighter who will give you a who will give you a good show. Kathleen, I think, alluded to the edict from the AD 170s where there's an attempt to put a price cap on the rental for gladiators because people responsible for putting on shows have been complaining that it's bankrupting them. So those urban elites seem always to be under pressure, and it's likely that by the fourth century AD, that pressure has become too much for many of them. That's a time when the cities of many of the Roman provinces are shrinking. They're becoming less significant as places

• 45:31Speaker 07

  of ceremony, places of political theatre. People seem whether spending their money, they're spending it on their rural on their rural villas. So the combination of cost, possibly availability of performers is shrinking, those territorial wars on the margins of empire are cutting off the supply of animals, sometimes perhaps from North Africa, or captives who are being fed into the arena. So performer availability goes down. Elite incentive to invest because they're no longer so engaged with urban political process. So that probably has a sort of a gradual effect on reducing arena culture. It tends to then focus on places that are closely connected to the emperor, who's still invested, or his nearby kind of political associates who remain invested in doing that. So Rome

• 46:15Speaker 07

  continues to see them. Places like Trier, these regional capitals, continue to see them. There is also ideological opposition to some degree. Christians are concerned, but they're much more concerned about the effect on the viewer than they're concerned for the effect on the people in the arena, because the Christians who write about the games tend to be the same kinds of people, like the Ciceroes and the Tacituses. They come from that elite class. They're more worried about what it does to you if you show up as a spectator. You lose your mind, you kind of you're overtaken by the spirit of the crowd, by bloodlust. You stop rationalizing. It's not good for you to go to the to go

• 46:55Speaker 07

  to the games. So you have kind of that opposition, and then intermittent emperors who are Christians closing off the supply to by saying, AD 325, for example, Constantine says it's no longer a penalty to send someone to the arena. They go to the mines instead if you want to severely punish a criminal.

• 47:14Speaker 04

  Well, my thanks to John Pearce, Kathleen Coleman and Matthew Nicholls. Next week, it's Full Staff, Hotspur and Howl: How Shakespeare Explored Succession Crises Through Henry IV, Part One. Thank you for listening.

• 47:29Speaker 11

  And the In Our Time podcast gets some extra time now with a few minutes of bonus material from Misha and his guests.

• 47:36Speaker 04

  Is there anything else you feel we missed here that should be mentioned?

• 47:42Speaker 06

  I'd love to mention that the games were accompanied by music. The main evidence for that comes from some mosaics in North Africa, some of the things that John was talking about, where we can see sometimes the critical moment where the referee is waiting for the decision as to what is to happen to the defeated gladiator. And the musicians are there with their instruments poised, the water organ, the horn players and the trumpeters, and presumably they would play mood music to accompany the decision.

• 48:15Speaker 04

  Yes, I wonder if it would be upbeat if the gladiator lost, or downbeat, it's hard to tell really, isn't it? They certainly seem to enjoy the violence, these spectators. John, what about you?

• 48:29Speaker 07

  To follow up Kathleen's point, I would add, you know, as part of the expense, there's this whole infrastructure of support staff. So Kathleen's just talked about, there are the musicians, there are also the referees, the attendants, the people who drag the bodies out and so on. We know there are masses. Also, there are two kinds of doctor. There's the doctor in the Roman sense, who's the trainer. So each of our class of gladiators seems to have a specialised trainer, probably former gladiators, who survived their experience, who are now earning a living doing that. But also the surgeons, who are keeping the bodies of the gladiators together. So one of our most famous Roman medics, Galen, serves a period of time as a doctor in the gladiatorial school at Pergamon and learns part of his surgery trade from that.

• 49:14Speaker 04

  Does he describe it at all, Galen? Because, as Matthew said, we don't have that many descriptions.

• 49:19Speaker 07

  He doesn't describe the games themselves, but in describing some of his experiences of learning. Learning how to treat certain kinds of injuries, what you can stitch to what, that you can stitch skin to skin. But it's not good to stitch muscles to muscles, apparently is what he is what he tells us. So he does. It's one another of those frustrating things indirectly, you see it. But they're never telling us directly what's going on in front of them. Why would they? Their audience has all seen it and all they all know it.

• 49:48Speaker 04

  Matthew?

• 49:49Speaker 05

  Well, there are some wonderful inscriptions we could talk more about. We did mention epigraphic evidence in the programme. There's, for example, the tombstone of a disgruntled gladiator from Amisus in modern Turkey, who says he died because the referee made a mistake. And he resented this decision of the sumerudus, the ref in the arena. Also, some of the the worst excesses of the the gladiator-loving emperors. I described it, I think, as a kind of line they had to tread between showing interest in the games, but not getting too into it, not not losing control of themselves. Caligula did, Nero did, perhaps most notoriously, the late second-century emperor Commodus. Went absolutely mad for gladiatorial posing. He fought hundreds of bouts. He cut the head off an ostrich and waggled it at the Senate and they all had to chew their laurels to stop themselves from laughing, which would have been a fatal mistake.

• 50:33Speaker 05

  So emperors could really tip too far over into a love of this populist entertainment and and forget themselves.

• 50:40Speaker 04

  So that was Commodus proving what a great guy he is, that he can fight with the best of them and.

• 50:48Speaker 05

  Well, if we believe, yes, I think so, sort of physical strength and fitness to rule, but taken to a ludicrous extreme. By that day, he'd also tried to rename every month of the year after himself and carved the word gladiator on the bottom of a statue and shortly after he was assassinated. So I think we see it as a reign in decay. But interesting that gladiatorial combat, if there's any truth in those stories, is so potent a tool of imperial self-presentation that emperors can lean disastrously too far into it.

• 51:12Speaker 04

  Kathleen, I just wanted to pick up on one thing that you've said, and that was you, you know, you were pointing out that this was not like a capitalist business, as say, the sports industry would be today. But nonetheless, as John was talking about the masseurs, the doctors, all the backup staff, the musicians, singers, dancers, whatever it is. Presumably, they're being paid for all this.

• 51:36Speaker 06

  Well presumably they're mostly slaves and so their, yes, so their payment would have been, you know, their, their board and lodging so to speak, uh, in the training school or in the premises of, of the person who supplied them, uh, to the arena. We even have people whose job it is to rake the sand in the arena. Um, these must have been the lowest of the low, uh, uh, in terms of the slave hierarchy. Uh, but one thing I wanted to point out that we really don't know about, and that must be the religious aspect of this. How was religion implicated in these spectacles? Uh, we mentioned very briefly, uh, that the Vestal Virgins were present.

• 52:19Speaker 06

  They were sitting in prime seating, although there's a lot of argument about where exactly their seats were, but they represented the, the permanence of the Roman state because they tended the fire of Vesta, the goddess, and the fire that must never go out. So to have them present, sitting very close to the emperor, somewhere in those, uh, front stands, must suggest that there's a religious element here that, that is holding Rome together, and that is something that we know very little about.

• 52:51Speaker 04

  Matthew, um, you wanted to come in there?

• 52:53Speaker 05

  Uh, yes, that, that's right. I mean, there were other priestly colleges there too. The Arvel Brethren had allocated seats. Um, Nemesis, the goddess of revenge, is sometimes associated with arena sport. I was going to, to come in on the question of, of money and business. I mean, it must have been, um, I'm sure Catherine's quite right, that many of the, uh, employees were enslaved, but the, the business of feeding and arming and equipping tens of thousands of people and, I mean, ten thousand wild beasts in some of these games must have been very considerable. There's an anecdote that Caligula ran out of cattle to feed the beast or, or found it too expensive and started randomly throwing criminals to feed the beast instead, and people thought this was poor form. So just the logistics of keeping the thing running must have been extremely demanding.

• 53:30Speaker 04

  Well, it was Caligula after all. One final question I've got for all of you. If you were a gladiator and you were a slave, could you win your freedom by being a great fighter?

• 53:41Speaker 06

  Well, it does seem that you could ultimately retire from the arena. But whether you got that because you were very good, or whether because you were very good you were kept in the household doing it, is obviously an open question.

• 53:55Speaker 05

  Gladiators could certainly make money from the arena. We talked earlier of their tombs, and you have to have a certain amount of money to leave a tomb. We hear about gladiators who owned and freed slaves, so they could accumulate property. And it seems if they got to the end of their career, some of them could die old, although the mean age of death on the tombstone is actually quite young, so not many did make it.

• 54:14Speaker 04

  Well, with that, it's the end of the game, and thank you very much to all three of you. Here comes the producer.

• 54:21Speaker 07

  Do you want tea or coffee?

• 54:23Speaker 04

  Tea or coffee? Coffee would be lucky. A cup of tea would be great, thank you. I'll have a cup of tea.

• 54:29Speaker 07

  Brilliant, thank you very much.

• 54:31Speaker 11

  In Our Time with Mischa Glenny is produced by Simon Tillotson, and it's a BBC Studios production.

• 54:38Speaker 12

  If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft turns out to be flawed? In 1999, four apartment buildings were blown up in Russia, hundreds killed. But 25 years on, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. Because these bombs, they're part of the origin story of one of the most powerful men in the world, Vladimir Putin. I'm Helena Maryman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss first time round?

• 55:20Speaker 12

  The History Bureau, Putin and the Apartment Bombs. Listen first on BBC Sounds.

• 55:28Speaker 08

  Sometimes we all need an extra helping hand, especially with a tricky business problem you've been putting off. Claude is AI for just that. It's a collaborator that understands your entire workflow and thinks with you, not for you. And Claude isn't just for quick questions. Hand it a whole task like turning a folder of scattered notes into a report and it does the work and hands back something finished that you can open and edit. Claude can now draft a doc or deck right in front of you and Claude Design now lives right inside Claude. Describe the website or prototype you're picturing, attach your design system and it comes back in your own design language, ready to edit right on the canvas. It works with your files and the tools you already use, like Gmail and Slack.

• 56:11Speaker 08

  And whether you're debugging code at midnight, building a financial model or strategising your next business move, Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter. For problems worth solving, get started with Claude at claude.ai/solve. That's claude.ai/solve. And check out Claude Pro, which includes access to all of the features mentioned in today's episode. Claude.ai/solve.