Full blown combat or display only?

[Hodekin]

Greetings,

I am an old ‘combat’ re enactor, and although biased to that form of historical interpretation for public performances, I would like to hear from you all as to the merits and minuses of this as opposed to the non combatant form of re enacting.

I realise of course that where combat is concerned, as a safety measure if nothing else, certain historical compromises need to be made, which I guess purists will claim detracts from the overall message. There again, one can argue that if combat is done well (and this is not always the case) then that is a tremendous way of advertising our interests to the general public at large, hopefully to bring in even more recruits!

Anyway, I would appreciate your views re this issue both for and against. Perhaps there is a middle ground in all this?

Ken.

[jvrjenivs]

Maybe you should also look in the ancient combat subforum, as there have been discussed this kind of questions too.

The problem with 'legionary' combat is that they hardly fight in 1-to-1 fight in the first and second century, so it's hard to show the public a good 'historical fight', I think.

We therefore are preparing willow training shields and have wooden rudi, to show how the roman legionary trained at the 'palus' and against each other. We can simply show this, as you don't hurt each other (the opponet have to examine his defense also).

On the other hand you've the thing that have to do with gladiators. Those fight also 1 to 1, so here you can show the public a fight. Therefore you can show a nice piece of combat that is worth looking to it. I currently fight with wood, but I hope to change to metal blades soon.

[richsc]

Other than training on the wooden post, I don't believe anyone knows how the Romans actually fought in any formation. Am I behind on this?

Now, if you had enough folks you might try recreating a formation and trying to work out an attack with some helpful gauls, but you would have to have a judge to keep track of who gets 'killed' and is out, and try to have some structure to it. Otherwise it all looks very rennfair. Since you can't capture the reality of dying/maiming in the mind of the soldier, nor the incentive of looting, I consider this a kind of moving display, where you explain to the crowd that it is a kind of experiment and the limitations of doing this.

But the public does love seeing people bash each other, that's for sure. Your vendors will probably sell a ton of shields and swords to kids who'll beat each other mercilessly all afternoon.

[Hodekin]

Maybe you should also look in the ancient combat subforum, as there have been discussed this kind of questions too.

Thanks for the Jurjen, I'll certainly check those posts out.

Hodekin

[John Conyard]

I think there is a middle ground to the initial question.

Let me start by saying I disagree with the view that the public like to see people hitting each other. I'm sure audiences vary. But Comitatus audience feedback forms suggest our audiences expect rather more. They certainly find the idea of grown men pretending to fall over dead very amusing and perplexing. After a while the public get bored of watching people hit each other. It's rather repetitive, unless of course you are taking part.

And I also disagree with the idea that people hitting each other is a good advert for re-enactment. It certainly allows the public to pigeon hole re-enactors as dangerous nutters, or even "cavorting ninnies". There really is little difference between two lines of people hitting each other no matter if they are dressed as Romans, Vikings, or whatever.

There are perhaps two exceptions to this rule.

Combat situations may enable you to demonstrate the differing manoeuvers or orders from each period. But that can also be done as part of a standard drill display. And if two sides contact each other it's back to hitting people. Differing period fighting styles are rarely brought out, except perhaps by Regia Anglorum and the various gunpowder societies.

Secondly, the public is draw to big battle spectaculars, especially if on the actual battle site. Lansdown (1643) in 1993 was very special, as was Hastings (1066) in 2006. But you really need at least around 1,000 per side for such events. Too often we witness just a few hundred trying to recreate a major battle, with no sense of scale or tactical truth.

If we have any pretension to entertain, or even educate, we need to be professional. We need to demonstrate what the real weapon was like and how it was used.

As long as individuals think about how they use the potentially lethal equipment, this is relatively easy for missile weapons. We can recreate the size and correct weight of the weapon, and find out how it was used and repaired. Amusingly old combat re-enactors who join Comitatus are often scared by the thought of carrying sharp weapons. They see it as requiring more discipline than carrying a blunt iron bar around with them.

Hand to hand combat is a different matter. We need to demonstrate the dynamic of each weapon. But we can't use accurate copies on each other. Luckily drill manuals give us the opportunity to use wooden swords and wicker shields, or blunt swords and capped spears. The combat can be displayed as training exercises, where we can demonstrate the correct heft of the weapon, and the associated moves involved. This allows us to entertain and educate. For example the very act of parrying with the shield alone makes the use of unauthentic armoured gloves no longer necessary. Authenticity and safety benefits.

I was going to conclude that in my opinion for training exercises are the way forward. However I suspect most Roman societies concluded that long ago.

[Tarbicus]

Other than training on the wooden post, I don't believe anyone knows how the Romans actually fought in any formation. Am I behind on this?

It's in plain black & white from a primary source that the legionary practiced the Roman way of leaping from the line to quickly stab an opponent, and leapt backwards into the line again.

Can't remember the source, though, but it's cited in a secondary source.... which I can't recall off the top of my head :roll:

[Hodekin]

Hello John,

Thank you for your very detailed reply; it was just the sort of response I was hoping for in this thread.

I have to say that I saw your group ‘Comitatus’ on the second day of your recent Rockingham event, the day earlier I also saw ‘Britannia’ over at Flag Fen, two entirely different groups with two entirely different ways of portraying their particular period, and in my opinion both extremely good at what they do!

There are a few points of your posting that I would like to pick up on, purely my take on things and certainly not a criticism you understand.

You state that you disagree with the view that the public like to see people ‘hitting’ each other. You go on to say that audiences vary. Yes! I agree that is true, but I have to say that the vast majority of the public who attend these Bank Holiday events do expect exactly that! These people are coming to see a festival of warriors and weapons, so it comes as no surprise that they might reasonably expect (but don’t always get of course) some sort of combat. Since time began, peoples idea of entertainment (and that’s what these people look for at these open events) has always been verging on the side of violence! They love to see other people ‘risking it’ when they don’t have to, the Colosseum being a point in case. This of course (in a re enactment sense) can be done well or poorly, especially as when you say ‘Grown men’ pretend to fall over dead, but if that’s the case, then you, I, and nearly everyone here on this forum will have been guilty of that misdemeanour at some time I think!

You also disagree with the idea that people ‘hitting’ each other is a good advert for re enactment. I entirely take your point here John, but I would say that once again it all boils down to if the ‘hitting’ is done well or poorly. There is a world of difference between those who appear as ‘dangerous nutters’ and ‘cavorting ninnies’ and those who seek to portray a real ‘dirt under the fingernails’ scenario of a battle situation. Do the general public care about this? In the main No! But we do, and therein lies the difference.

On the second Rockingham day when I saw you, there were no audience ‘feedback’ forms distributed I have to say, but if there had, I am sure they would all have been most complimentary.

I entirely agree with your views on the large battles of 1000 or more taking part. I too have fought at Hastings on a number of occasions and guess what; I also was at Lansdown in 1993! But having said this, I still think there is room (in Britain at least) for the smaller event depicting two moderate sized war bands confronting each other. The big battles are what the history books gush over, but the thousands of small unknown skirmishes that took place between Romano Briton and Teuton/Scot/Pict also have a place within re enactment I would argue.

I agree with your conclusion that ‘training exercises’ are the way forward, but I would qualify that further by saying that this mostly applies to a group that does not engage in freestyle combat. For those that do, I would argue that it’s more than a simple case of carrying around a ‘blunt iron bar’ if it is to look and feel ‘right’! With this in mind, I am happy to report that the Britannia show was extremely good, as indeed yours was in a non combative sense. The delicate balance between education and entertainment will always be a thorny issue I fear, and I am aware that ‘combat’ groups attempt o remedy this with living history encampments at their events.

Either way, I am happy that there appears to be ‘something for everyone’ and enough diversity to entertain and educate alike.

Thank you again for your reply, I appreciate it.

Ken.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Hello all. Me coming from the Greek world,I always wonder even if we gather a considerable number of hoplites lets say,how can we show the bublic how they fought? We should form two tightly packed lines,with two or three lines of spearheads coming out in the front,and marching against each other,but to actually show the ingenuity of this kind of combat and why it was successful we need make the groups come into contact,and actually push really hard! That said,it's nearly unthinkable to do this correctly even with covered spear points. Once again individual fighting is pointless and inaccurete.
I agree with both that people are attracted by the "violence" included and that this violence is no good advertising. We need to gain their appreciation and not just make the lough with(at) us,which is also entertainment.
I think we can use those facts by showing them everything we have gathered by our research.Drill,maneuvers,complexity of movements,strategy,and finally,the initial combat,which should have become a minor part of the whole show. After all,we're talking about armies like the Romans and the Greeks,who have conquered the world by their greatness,and sure this greatness is ww aught to bring out.
To do this,firt ourselves must be able to reach a lever of discipline and accuracy,I know. But it's a nice goal,I think.
Large numbers neede? Of cource it's glorious to have over 1000 combatants,but in REAL occasions we're told of incidents that the involved units were no more than some dozens.
Khairete
Giannis

[Hodekin]

Large numbers neede? Of cource it's glorious to have over 1000 combatants,but in REAL occasions we're told of incidents that the involved units were no more than some dozens.
Khairete
Giannis

Greetings Giannis,

Yes of course we must try to get the appreciation of the public by putting into practice all the hard research that has got us to the event field.

Interesting that you mention the incidents of combat where only a few dozen or more comprised a unit. It's in scenarios like this that individual combat alongside the usual push of spear or pike would be able to be demonstarted perhaps?

Thanks for your welcome input.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Perhaps yes,but usually they were cut off from the formation,or were sent in outflanking moves,or more often to reach first the top of a hill and hold it.They may needed to fight one by one,but probably it was even more vital to them to keep their discipline and put in action what they were trained to do. In Sphacteria the Spartans were no more than some hundreds,and actually divided in three different places in the island. However they fought as a phalanx-and lost.
The elite units of each city where rarely more than some hundrets.
What could the elite do in a combat situation? Can we do the same in the safety of a re-enacting event?
Khaire
Giannis

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

From a personal perspective, having seen many re-enactment fairs as part ot the public, I would have to say at some level the public generally welcome some form of 'combat', wether it be man against man, a little skirmish between men or simulated attacks against wooden targets and so on.

That being said, I generally found the displays I have seen lacking in combat. While formations, drills and so on are informative, they generally lack that ''wow'' factor that combat gives, even if only for a short time. (if done for too long, as has been mentioned, it becomes boring). I remember an event I watched at Scarborough in 2007 as a re-enactor that involved cavalry. The trooper was charging a stick with a small fruit on top of it. I wondered how much more ''interesting'' it would have been if it was a watermelon. Illustrates nicely the effect of having one's head cleaved off or split in half without the gore that usually accompanies it.

Its a hard job for us. We have to draw a fine line between ''education'' and ''entertainment''. Its almost like school, and I would say one of the biggest problems of education is getting the ''fun'' factor in. In re-enactment, lean too much to the ''educate the public'' approach and you are boring. Lean too much to the ''combat and entertainment'' approach and you become innacurate and uninformative.

Also, with only one to three groups usually per fair (usually all roman), the only combat we could re-enact would be the civil wars. Its still rare I think to see both barbarian and roman re-enacting together, although I have seen a few. If only there were more lol.

[Ebusitanus]

In events such as Tarraco Viva I enjoyed inmensly shows such as the Gladiatura fights shown by Ars Dimicandi. I gets you all worked up

[Salvianus]

I would like to hear from you all as to the merits and minuses of this as opposed to the non combatant form of re- enacting.

Personally, I enjoy Comitatus' approach in showing 'training' rather than combat most, for verisimilitude and I think it facilitates carrying more expensive and fragile kit like top notch segmented lorica, but I have also very much enjoyed good scripted and unscripted but structured combat re-enactment e.g. Regia at Jorvik and also greatly enjoyed non-combative Living History displays.

Unhelpfully, I don't think there's a best compromise: I think the aims of each are very different and suit different events and groups and appeal to different MOPs, but many won't be able to guess in advance what they are in for, and often simply take or leave what is on offer. If it's good at whatever it offers, I think most people enjoy it.

My observations as requested :

I've heard MOPs talking about some displays being more violent than they expected re their little kids, despite attending a 'battle'
:roll:

I've worried people (not MOPs, but friends, colleagues etc) when it's come up that I carry a sharp - but they haven't had the whole thing explained during our display. And they tend to be the ones who think re-enactment is crazy anyway :?

I've experienced idiots getting dangerous on the field despite Regia's very thorough systems and checks. wink:

hope that helps

[Hodekin]

Greetings Salvianus,

I remember you from Rockingham, I think you were the one cracking jokes in Latin...am I right? :wink:

Thanks for your input, you have the best of both worlds with no compromise inbetween seeing as you belong to two outfits which cater for either style...nice one! lesser mortals however may have to decide one or the other :?

The public are always fickle, and you will always manage to upset someone no matter how much you try not to! I was impressed with your performance at Rockingham Salvianus, and thankyou for taking the time to explain the crossbow to me.



Hodekin

[Salvianus]

Ah, well met and my thanks! ita vero balatro sum

I haven't done many multi-period events and I particularly enjoy seeing the variety of approaches: I very much liked the sabre practice of the BlueJackets (a bit like boken kata) and the larger scale formations of the Napoleonics and ACW (with quite a bit of Moonlighting raising the numbers).