Cutting tests with sword and pugio / experiment

[caiusbeerquitius]

Hi! @ Razor: No prob! Give me some! :-)
It is mostly about the special form of wepaons and cut-marks on bones, which will produce some new usable results for Anthropologists to work with.

But I still think that "authentic" armour would be the only thing which could produce usable results. There is basically none available, unless a lot of time and money is invested. Then there would be still a problem with testing: No info about "authentic" padding, at least none contemporary to the weapons we use. We can only supply "authentic" weapons, they were already rather expensive. I think the whole thing depends, as always, on the questions asked. In regard of cut-marks on bones all this could be very enlightening.

@ Moira: Yes, please! :-D

@ John: Apparently they have all kinds of bodies, a large collection indeed.

@ Byron: I cannot say a lot about all the medical stuff, that´s why we will have a Medical Doctor and an Anthropologist. Tendons and soft tissue will be very interesting. I am just looking for sensible scientific questions to start with. :-)
@ creepyness: It´s one thing to see the results, even in reality. it is a completely other thing to hack into a human body in person.

[Vindex]

I'll have a hunt for it and email the test script to you.

@ creepyness: It´s one thing to see the results, even in reality. it is a completely other thing to hack into a human body in person.

If you've used a pig carcase you should be fine :wink:

If not, be ready for the odd sound... :wink: :twisted: (but that may just come from ballisitics..)

[Razor]

Hi! @ Razor: No prob! Give me some! :-)
It is mostly about the special form of wepaons and cut-marks on bones, which will produce some new usable results for Anthropologists to work with.

Haha. But in that case: forget about the armour

[caiusbeerquitius]

Wow, this sounds like an unprecedented opportunity! I can't imagine the paperwork involved in setting that one up...

I imagine the most important thing is to carry out experiments of worth that are non-replicable on non-human test subjects. There's still the limitation that it would presumably be quite difficult to assess things like bruising etc that presumably rely on a working circulatory system. As such I'm worried as to how much use tests with armour would be, or is that a false concern?

Also, is it possible to pose (argh) the cadavers to enable the use of realistic angles of attack, or will the tests be highly mechanical in nature?

Thirdly, are you using only the gladius and pugio? Weapons like the falx might be interesting to try as well, especially given that they apparently lead to the development of strengthened armour to withstand their attacks. It might also be interesting to test the effects of Roman javelin and arrow heads on the body, although I asusme that comparable research using medieval wepaonry could be a stand in there (that said I've never heard of weapon tests on actual bodies before).

Robert, sorry, missed you in my last post...
1. No paperwork (for us, at least) :-D
2. No tests with armour, as explained above. Would be great, but...
3. non-replicable: Mostly skull, this will be. Thigh, hand, upper arm, belly, breast. I htought, so, at least.
What do you think?
4. Only gladius and pugio. I don´t know of any metallurgical analysis for a falx. Any idea, someone?
5. Arrows etc: Yes, I think there is enough comparative material. But a Pilum might be cool. For the next project, then, probably...

[Vindex]

Haven't found the test script yet :roll: but I have found this: an analysis of skeletons from the period of the War of the Roses. Fifteenth Century, but there is some interesting discussion on bone density etc which may be of interest.

[attachment=4836]blood_red_roses_white_review.pdf.pdf[/attachment]

[Olaf]

Great opportunity, looking forward to the results.
A shame you do not have one of the gladiatorial blades from Pompeji to try out.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Give me one, Olaf, and I´ll test it... ;-)

Thanks a lot, Moi, again! :-D

[Sean Manning]

What I suggest is: Make sure you have at least a few people who know how to strike, whether from a few thousand hours of martial arts or from cutting firewood every morning. And document people's knowledge for your test. With cutting, the difference between "fit person whose never sliced anything tougher than a chicken breast" and "fit person who knows how to cut" can be huge. We know that some people could reliably take off arms and heads while some people could cut half a dozen times and inflict half a dozen surface wounds.

Make sure that at least one person with half a clue in a martial art designed to do what you like to someone trying to kill you is involved, and that they talk to someone with an academic understanding of how Roman tactics worked (in a reenactment group neither skill set should be too hard to find).

There are obviously a lot of different ways to strike. You will have to decide which to experiment with based on your resources and goals, but make sure to document every variable. An entry in your report might look like "Strike 9: A diagonal rising false-edge cut to the left thigh, delivered by tester 3 on a pass using gladius A. Strike inflicted a cut three inches long and ..." Elsewhere readers could learn that tester 3 was a 30 year old man with five years of reenactment combat experience and no other martial arts training who frequently uses hand tools.

Good luck. Aside from the Towton skeletons, the report on the Wisby battlefield grave is also worth reading for an idea of the sort of questions that archaeologists can ask a pile of bones. For an example of the potential problems, see Antony Karasulas, "Zaimokuza Reconsidered: The Forensic Evidence, and Classical Japanese Swordsmanship," World Archaeology Vol. 36 No. 4 (2004).

[Kegluneq]

3. non-replicable: Mostly skull, this will be. Thigh, hand, upper arm, belly, breast. I htought, so, at least.
What do you think?
4. Only gladius and pugio. I don´t know of any metallurgical analysis for a falx. Any idea, someone?

I think that sounds reasonable. It might also be possible to test the 'Gladiator' execution method (sword thrust downwards behind left collarbone towarss the heart) although I have no idea if that has any historical basis - if not then obviously disregard!

Not sure what you mean by metallurgical analysis, but Davis Sim made and tested a falx (Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 11:37-41), not on an actual human body though...

Sean Manning's advice is extremely good, can't add much to that!

[Dan Howard]

Also note that live bone has completely different mechanical properties to dead bone. Perhaps use a freshly-slaughtered goat or pig.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

@ Byron: I cannot say a lot about all the medical stuff, that´s why we will have a Medical Doctor and an Anthropologist. Tendons and soft tissue will be very interesting. I am just looking for sensible scientific questions to start with.


I thought that was asensible question.....also along the same lines as Dans comment.
Well known that bone reacts differently. mile:

As for the difference between cutting into a human body and a pig....well, is there a need to use a human body, other that to test the human reaction to performing this task? Surely a study of actual modern combat veterens, who have experienced the reality of hand to hand combat, would be more educational.

[caiusbeerquitius]

As for the difference between cutting into a human body and a pig....well, is there a need to use a human body, other that to test the human reaction to performing this task? Surely a study of actual modern combat veterens, who have experienced the reality of hand to hand combat, would be more educational.

I don´t understand how these will tell us something about the cut-marks? Especially on human skulls?
Can you enlighten?

Also note that live bone has completely different mechanical properties to dead bone. Perhaps use a freshly-slaughtered goat or pig.

The bodies will be very fresh, I was told. They have a huge income of bodies, apparenty.

Not sure what you mean by metallurgical analysis, but Davis Sim made and tested a falx (Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 11:37-41), not on an actual human body though...

This would only help if we got a hold of that weapon... Which would be great, of course. But the blade would need to based on an original in terms of material composition.

@ Sean: will reply later... :-)

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Caius Beerquiter wrote:-

As for the difference between cutting into a human body and a pig....well, is there a need to use a human body, other that to test the human reaction to performing this task? Surely a study of actual modern combat veterens, who have experienced the reality of hand to hand combat, would be more educational.

I don´t understand how these will tell us something about the cut-marks? Especially on human skulls?
Can you enlighten

Nothing at all....just the psychological aspects.... 8-) As mentioned in youtr

Creepy

comment.

[Robert Vermaat]

No armour, I´m afraid. A Roman helmet that would be able to offer adequate results, i.e. an "authentic" helmet is too expensive. If someone wants to sponsor us, go ahead ;-)

Shields?

[Robert Vermaat]

Poses for the bodies are possible, though, but of course not all. The main idea is to document cuts and slashes, plus some stabs, and to investigate marks left on bones, to be able to make comparisons to finds. Also injury to soft tissue should be investigated in depth.

How about the position of the swordman opposite the 'victim'? Blows coming from higher or lower would cause different wounds, I guess?

I know it´s a bit creepy, all that. ^^

It is. But then you're going to document it all, which will receive cult status soon afterwards, I think.