Search the Community

I came across the August issue of National Geographic and not suprisingly the cover picture of a murmillo gladiator caught my eye. The feature was an article explaining what was actually going in the arena compared to popular perceptions of Roman blood sports, and not a bad article as such, though I would like to comment on some of the assertions made in the article. Why would You Bring So Much Armour To A knife Fight? - Well, the gladiators sword did get quite small but remember this was a trend that developed over a number of centuries. The idea of a shorter sword is that the fight gets close in and fast, making for more impressive displays (the article stresses the need to perform for the public, though it neglects to point out that it was in the gladiator's interest to show off - it improved his chances of missio if he could not continue the fight). Perhaps more importantly the armour worn by gladiators was usually (not always) designed not to keep the gladiator alive, but to keep him fighting. The Romans wanted to see a professional fight, not a slaughter of men disabled by wounds. That might sound odd considering the other forms of arena killing, but it's all about context. Gladiators Fought For Show - To some extent, yes they did. The article does mention fights staged sine missio (No Mercy) and that one fight was advertised as using sharp weapons, but it is well known that gladiators often fought demonstration fights especially in wandering troupes who could not easily replace their fighters and blunt weapons, also used for training, were expected. Morning bouts were generally considered warm-up events and nobody expected deaths at that stage. The headline acts might well be more serious, sharp edges, a chance for the audience to decide fate, and so on. Gladiators Fought At Similar Skill Levels - Yes, this did occur, as for instance the account of a fight between Priscus and Verus at the Colosseum written by Martial, and famously the Emperor Titus gave both men victory and freedom for their epic duel. Whilst it is true that the public wanted a fair fight, sometimes it would not be possible to match people exactly or indeed it might not be wise to risk a star gladiator unnecessarily. So sometimes an expert would be matched with a tiro. The outcome was never certain, but highly probable. Gladiators Survived 90% Of The Time - The rate of survival is commonly stated as such, but this would be between experienced fighters with reputations, such that even if they lost a section of the audience at least would be rooting for them and call for missio. However, the odds of a tiro fighting his first match might well be considerably more dangerous, with the possibility of facing a more experienced man, less investment in training, and no reputation to spur public support. Some statistics suggest that one in three gladiators got invalidated out in training, and another one in three would die in their first fight. Our concepts of gladiator fights are often hopelessly distorted. Television and film usually show gladiators dressed in all sorts of get-ups and using weapons inherited from fantasy. Fights were strictly categorised into standard pairs and as the article does mention, controlled by referees. Gladiators Swore An Oath To Be Punished And Killed - Yep, very true. They were slaves, whether purchases or volunteers, and expected to obey their masters. "He vows to endure to be burned, to be bound, to be beaten, and to be killed by the sword." - Satyricon (Petronius) Further, Cicero outlines the stoicism and loyalty of typical gladiators... "Just look at the gladiators, either debased men or foreigners, and consider the blows they endure! Consider how they who have been well-disciplined prefer to accept a blow than ignominiously avoid it! How often it is made clear that they consider nothing other than the satisfaction of their master or the people! Even when they are covered with wounds they send a messenger to their master to inquire his will. If they have given satisfaction to their masters, they are pleased to fall. What even mediocre gladiator ever groans, ever alters the expression on his face? Which one of them acts shamefully, either standing or falling? And which of them, even when he does succumb, ever contracts his neck when ordered to receive the blow." - Letters (Cicero) Yet things weren't always so honourable or dramatic. Suetonius records how Caligula stopped a fight and scolded the assembled fighters for being too wussy. One man immediately sought to impress the Roman head of state by slaughtering his hapless colleagues with a trident. Caligula was apparently appalled at the sight (and that from a man recorded as killing a helpless gladiator as a mock victory) The article was overall quite good - and interestingly, printed the image of a full size gladiator sword across the bottom of a folding page!