roman-auxillia single combat

[Marcus Caecilius Avitus]

Jeff,

I'm not sure about the face being a primary target. I have heard the opposite and the face was avoided due to the ammount of bones which can cause a blade to become lodged. Also you would have to reach up, exposing your armpit.

A better area would be the stomach, provided that there was no, or little armour. The groin is also ideal as severing the femoral arterry would cause rapid death. :evil:

[Marcus Mummius]

Jeff,

I'm not sure about the face being a primary target. I have heard the opposite and the face was avoided due to the ammount of bones which can cause a blade to become lodged. Also you would have to reach up, exposing your armpit.

A better area would be the stomach, provided that there was no, or little armour. The groin is also ideal as severing the femoral arterry would cause rapid death. :evil:

I agree, though psychologically a stab to the face works wonders )

[garrelt]

so in fact not armored soft areas.
The face i can understand : block your opponents weapon and shield an stab him in the eye, mouth, throat or neck.
Than you have to be very close to your opponent.
Works well in a shield formation
The groin (could also be the upper leg): this means stabbing with the opponents defences out of your way of attack.
But also your own shield scutum, not a clipius/parma because they are flat, is a bit open otherwise it is difficult to make this move.
Will work well in a hand to hand combat.
But also you have to be in close due to the length of the gladius blade.
A spatha gives more reach.
No mention of a sideways attack were you go for the kidneys.

[garrelt]

If you are so close to your opponent, you can also hit him with pommel of the gladius and break his nose, or hit him on the throat.
He will go down anyway and let the second line finish it off.

[Marcus Caecilius Avitus]

Let's be a little careful here, we are talking about two things at once; Actual ancient fighting techniques and recreating these techniques, they are quite different.

Jef, totally agree about the face if you fighting legionaries. Not much else is exposed.

Garrelt, the side attack you talk about would require rather more freedom in movement than I beleive the legionaries usually employed. I tend to think of the legion being a discplined body working almost like a machine.

[garrelt]

true about the techniques.
You can show or point out the real target areas and moves, not in full motion, in a training or show.
In a fight we can't because we don't want real injuries.

The legionairs, heavy armor , they are restricted in their moving.
Heavy armour can slow you down so that you are a easy target.

But what about the lighty armored auxillia or the velles.

[Marcus Caecilius Avitus]

The Pommel strike is a nice one to use, but generally reserved for VERY close work; pressing against a shield wall.

Historically speaking a pommel strike would not be favoured as it only disables the oponent.

I think the style of fighting your after would probably be represented in that of the Velites or Auxilia. Agin two very different fighting sty;es I only have limited knowledge on. Peroni and Caballo may be able to describe the use of the stabbing hasta at greater length.

[garrelt]

For me every style is interesting.
I want to understand the ancient techniques, and see if they have changed much during time.
This is because i also train people in the use of sword, spear (one and two handed), axe and knive in combination with the shield or an other weapon in their normal shieldhand.

[Marcus Mummius]

I think a pommel strike would be rarely usefull and only in opportunistic/coincidental situations. The pompei gladius at least is VERY short and you'll almost always find the room to stab with it, or push, doing more permanent damage than with the pommel. IMHO of course

[Marcus Caecilius Avitus]

From a style point of view, almost anything goes with auxilia.

Although we always think of our hasta and clipeus totin' Batavian buddies. Auxiliary troops often continued fighting in their traditional style, such as balearic slingers, hamian archers, sarmatian cavalry and so on.

Back to legionaries; A bit of laeteral thought suggests the development of the manica was fairly obvious. A falx would put the oponent out of the normal reach of the gladius so a longer reach would be needed, this exposed the arm, hence the manica was used to provide some additional protection.

[Maximio]

The Pommel strike is a nice one to use, but generally reserved for VERY close work; pressing against a shield wall.

I'm not so sure about this one at all. Think about it - one is pressed up sheild to sheild with the enemy, closely packed in by one's comrades either side. In order to strike the opponent with the pommel one would have to referse one's arm position thus presenting the pommel into the other man's face and so presenting the sword toward oneself. A good heave either by the second rank behind or by the enemy line in front and one would have a face full of gladius - one's own.

It also brings the arm up and exposes the axila as a target to the enemy.

As a "back slash" in looser close quarter combat it may have a role to stun the opponent if one has over reached him. Otherwise I would think this a move only of use to knock out an already disarmed opponent. But hell that's what the brow guard of one's cassis is for. :twisted:

By the way I don't recommend one should try this in a reenactment situation unless we discuss foam brow guards first

[garrelt]

We only show the pommel hitting in a display setting.
It is a move which you can do with only your underarm, without showing your armpit.
When doing normal reenactment fighting it is an illegal move.
Rule nr1tay away from the face.

Question:
If the primarly use of the gladius stabbing is why is it than sharp over the complete lenght of the blade and so broad.
I find than the angle of the blade tip (almost 90degrees) a bit blunt, 60 degrees or less would be better.

[garrelt]

Forget the remark about the angle of the gladius blade i'm wrong here, looking at the pictures that i have.

The shield can also be used offensive, but we only do this within our own training(combat)group, where the whole body is a target area.

We also use hasta for cutting.
Back of the knee.

[Marcus Mummius]

If the primarly use of the gladius stabbing is why is it than sharp over the complete lenght of the blade and so broad.

To stab deep? What do you mean with the gladii being wide/broad? About what type of gladius are you talking?

Reconstructions of pompei gladii are almost always too long and too wide. A typical pompei blade, if such a thing existed, would have been about 4,5cm wide.

You can read the ESG article about this subject, it's titled: 'Are our gladii too wide?'

[garrelt]

The width of 4.5cm is almost the same as the average width of a late roman or Merovingian spatha and later swords.

For soft unarmored targets the weapon will work fine.
But what against a chainmail?
The point will not go in very deep and you need a lot of force to open up the rings (butted).
If the rings are rivited, penetration is even harder.
If someone is then also wearing a submaralis it will even be harder.
To get trough chainmail you need a narrow pointed weapon, like some spearheads.

I think that a gladius is a perfect infantry weapon.
Short enough for being used in close formation.
Strong enough to strike and parry with it.
Pointy enough to stab with it.
Usable in any situation