Latest Pictures Gladiators of Ars Dimicandi

[caiusbeerquitius]

During our bouts we found that aside from the lovely metal ringing noise the public hear, the gladiator wearing the helmet can also be disorientated by such a blow - especially to the faceplate.

Junkelmann also describes hits against the helmet as very effective, giving the same reason. I made the same experience.

I have seen several gladiator shows, in the USA and in Europe, and I have to say that I felt Ars Dimicandi group gave the best 'historical' show I have seen.

As far as entertainment goes, and as far as the fights themselves are concerned, I can wholeheartedly second that.
But these guys also make a very good (IMO even better) "show", e.g.:

Talsker Wölfe
Talsker Wölfe I
Talsker Wölfe II
Talsker Wölfe III

That´s the question again: Why would I do all this?
As an experiment?
Or as a show?

If I were to do it as a show, but would use the label "(archaeological) experiment", how responsible would that be towards the audience? ( my question above )

I quote myself once again:

Every group that makes public displays should be aware of the fact that usually the visitors remember what they see unfiltered as factual. In that sense such displays are irresponsible towards the audience unless they are commented and the hypothetical character as well as mistakes or free interpretation of certain artefacts are explained to the audience.

[Martin Moser]

I think it is basically impossible to actually find out HOW gladiators fought, it is only possible to find out what kinds of movements were possible with the equipment, and what kinds of "moves" (ROFL) are sensible. However, people (also the Romans) often didn´t (or don´t, as is) behave in a way we would call "logical" or "practical". There may have been very well certain "ritualized" elements in gladiatorial combat which we will never know of.

So I don´t see a way to make a (scientific) EXPERIMENT which can tell us HOW gladiators actuall fought. This renders the use of hypothetical produced gladiatorial equipment unsensible. Sensible would be e.g. to reconstruct gladiatorial equipment, fill out the gaps as described above, and to test it under all kinds of different aspects. This also would have the spirit of a "true" experiment, since everybody could repeat it and gain very similar results (if not identical ones).

Very well put, Christian, I absolutely agree. I don't think there is any group at the moment that could seriously claim to be doing so. Pretty much the same where the term "experimetal archaeology" is wedded with reenactment groups (whatever era they may be in). Which is not to deny that many, many groups do a tremendous job in spreading knowledge, helping common misconceptions to be overcome and teaching the (interested) public on a high level.

[Conal]

Such blows are occsionally shown in mosaics, especially from tridents & spears ....

Do you have the examples to hand?

Thanks

Conal

[Velite]

Dear Aurelianus, this is a reply for you

In answer to your criticisms on our resounding errors both on the armaments and on the techniques of fight, I beg you to look at these two video.
Before see this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shtYfeMxRLA

and then see this videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDCOILg_9QY

The invitation is turned to all the frequenters of the forum.

I leave every comment to the numerous frequenters of this forum about it. :wink:

Besides I would like to answer to your question

Quote:
By the way: Could you please explain me the reason why you always hit eachother with the swords at your helmets?
For modern and uninformed public that may be funny but ……….. O.K. now we are actually on the beginning of this discussion again ………

Well you have to know that AD gladiators don't hit eachother with the swords on the helmet of intention, but they try to climb over the defense and the shield of the adversary lowering from the tall one the hits of sica.
And the wide brim of gladiatorial helmets are used by the gladiators themselves to protect the hits of sica that arrive from the tall one, as you can see very well in these photos.





I'm not a gladiator but i know this dynamics of fight. :wink:

I hope to have been clear :roll:

[john m roberts]

Such blows are occsionally shown in mosaics, especially from tridents & spears ....

Do you have the examples to hand?

Thanks

Conal

The Junkelmann book (I don't have it to hand) shows a lamp depicting a murmillo being led away from his opponent, a hoplomachus, with his hand over his visor. Clearly, he's taken a spear hit to the visor, wounding and perhaps blinding him.
In the Royal Ontario Museum I saw an eastern relief that clearly depicted a retiarius thrusting his trident into his secutor opponent's "bell" style helmet's visor. Sorry I can't post pictures. Maybe someone else here can.

[M. Demetrius]

Different people and groups approach this activity with different things in mind, and different goals, different audiences, etc., etc. It's ok to be different. Some groups specialize in precise garments, long narratives explaining the sort of gladiator about to present himself to the public, while others don't bother with the precision, and some fight with soft or needledfelt weapons. If it's all for the entertainment of the crowd, and the crowd is entertained, it's all good.

Some prefer stage blood and hope to avoid the real blood, others don't bother with the stage blood. The crowds are happy? You did your job.

Some are more into the bluster and such, others are much more athletic and make quite a lot of sweat.

I was once in a gladiator group, and we had a lot of fun with "fighting" children, everyone using soft weapons. It was for the entertainment of the kids in that case, and not really about historicity. Mostly, the children won. It's all ok if that's the way it goes down. We attracted some attention to our venture, and people wanted to see more. For us, that is what it was all about, and we even let old fat men like myself be in the arena.

[Opifex]

Ave!

...
By the way: Could you please explain me the reason why you always hit eachother with the swords at your helmets?
...
.

Just get yourself any authentic gladiator helmet. And try the following:

Your "freind" takes an authentic sica. And hit you on your helmet. With 100% strength. Then you will hear nothing but feel the blood which is wearm and slipy and which covers your eyes because the hit reaches your skull and the matal hurts the skin.. you are still alive but closer to the death than before.

And you will understand that the helmet is good but not everything once your retiarius friend punctures your helmet with a trident then as he pulls it back it, just hits your helmet from the side with the other end of the trident. As puncture hits your head it goes back 20cms and you feel your neck is going to break. But you have good muscles because 1000+ hours of training so you are still alive. Then you got the hit, so you loose your balance again. That means your shield does not cover you enough...

So in sentence for all these things. Try how it works and speak. But once you injure don't go to the hospital it is not real in 200 AD.

[Opifex]

Well you have to know that AD gladiators don't hit eachother with the swords on the helmet of intention, but they try to climb over the defense and the shield of the adversary lowering from the tall one the hits of sica.
And the wide brim of gladiatorial helmets are used by the gladiators themselves to protect the hits of sica that arrive from the tall one, as you can see very well in these photos.

I can say the same after 10+ years of "non experimental not archeology".
The wide brim is my main amour for my shoulders.

[Aurelianus]

You tell me nothing new about hitting each other on the helmet! And I know from my own experience that a right push with the scutum is much more effective.

Why I wrote the question:

By the way: Could you please explain me the reason why you always hit eachother with the swords at your helmets?

I just hit at the fact that I've seen several fights of Ars Dimicandi where they hit the helmets all too often and much more for show effect - nice sound - than anything else (even when they could place a nice “stabâ€

[hephestus]

When I compare to the group of Marcus Junkelmann I just have to say that there are "worlds" between the works of both groups...... And it gets really clear why Junkelmann can talk about experimental archaeology in contrast to …….

Curtain closed

.

Thanks :wink:

[Ceannt]

I think the pics were very good.

[jbd_29349]

I agree with both sides of the discussion. I agree that Ars Dimicandi hit each other a little to often. The sound of a metal weapon hit a metal helmet is something unique but mainly for the audience. I also think that they hit themselves a lot on the helment because they use metal weapons. Since they use metal weapons they have to sacrifice in some areas for the safety of the gladiators. Unfortunely, the Roman Empire is gone so we are unable to easily replace the gladiators. This is the modern age where slaves are no more, gladiator fighting is no longer an occupation except for a hobby, and killing people in the name of entertainment is highly frowned upon.

They could use wooden weapons instead of metal but I think that they would not be has highly thought of as they are. The gladiator school I belong to and the school I fight with use wooden weapons. I get hit all over including my helmet. Sometimes it just hurts for a while and every once and a while we break something.

Like M. Demetrius said each gladiator school does something different. Just like every Roman group does something different.

I like the pictures and videos that Ars Dimicandi does!!!

[jvrjenivs]

But is metal really more dangerous than wood? I would say the only things that bother are the thickness of the edges and the impact of the blow, bot the material. On the other hand, wood can get splinters, iron cannot.

I mean you can hit someone into hospital with a wooden one as easily as with a iron weapon.

Finally it's all about the purposes of the group, which I hope always have an educational part. Not purely art of fighting.

[Carlton Bach]

But is metal really more dangerous than wood? I would say the only things that bother are the thickness of the edges and the impact of the blow, bot the material. On the other hand, wood can get splinters, iron cannot.

I mean you can hit someone into hospital with a wooden one as easily as with a iron weapon.

It is easier not to hurt someone with a wooden weapon than with a metal one. THe sheer weight of steel means that if you give a blade the impact sureface that would be 'safe' for a wooden one, its mass will make it a bone-breaker. You hae to actively pull your blows with those. A wooden blade just requires you nopt to use too much force - if you go too fast, you can let go of the grip and cause no more than a bruise. A metal blade only knows Physics 101.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Heavy impacts in a helmet can produce cerebral lesions, even no perceptibles for a long time. Heavy padding of helmets help to avoid that, but i think it's too serious to be avoided...