How were the Romans civilised and uncivilised?

even the highest class of Romans liked seeing people slaughtered in amphitheatres and other things to do with blood and guts

Addendum:

Civilised (and Uncivilised) has become one of those value-loaded Words which are applied, according to preferences and tastes, to people(s) whom you like or don't like.

The Word comes from civis = city, those who formed themselves into cities had social and governmental srtucture and amenities and were civilised. Those living in tribal situations in the countryside and not citizens were therefore uncivilised ie without the organisation and benefits of being part of and using the advanced life of the cities (another name was pagans = those living about, also now a value-loaded religious Word).

A common non-value-loaded definition is: 'the social process whereby societies achieve an advanced stage of development and organization'.

So were the Romans uncivilised? They were citizens of a city. The city had a strong governmental, legal and religious system. It was properly supplied with defensive walls for security, water, sewerage and an organised corn supply. It had a safety net to support the poor. It had public buildings, art, theatre, and other social amenities to a high standard.

Yes, they had some unpleasant tastes and used slaves. Slavery still exists in the world today. In fact looking at the history of slaughter, terror, abuse of those unable to defend or sustain themselves in the world over the past five hundred years, if we are to apply the standard of not being nasty to others, is there any country which today can be called civilised?

We either acknowledge that the Romans, by any reasonable standard were civilised, or simply use the Word as a label for things we don't like and also brand ourselves as uncivilised also.