StarZ TV Spartacus series, were the fight scenes accurate? Part One - Arms and Armor.

I've recently begun rewatching the TV series Spartacus, a show that ran for four seasons on the Starz Cable TV network. (It's a rumored there may be a fifth one some day. We can only hope.) While one of the most lurid and visceral television spectacles, I've ever been exposed to, the show is exciting, entertaining, and addictive, just be careful who you watch it with. The high levels of  sexual content and nudity, as well as violence and blood splashing gore, is higher than in any television show I've ever seen.

As long time readers of this blog (or you intelligent people who actually take the time to look at old posts) know, over the last few years, I've done a lot of research into the Roman gladiators and done some wargaming and figure modelling for the period. (In fact, one of my motives for rewatching was trying to find ways to add backstory and better characterization to my historical miniature games based on Roman gladiators.)

For those wondering, Spartacus was an actual historical figure. There was indeed a gladiator who fought under that name, who led a gladiator uprising that became a major slave revolt and troubled the Romans for years until he and all his followers were put down. The series is a cinematic retelling of this historical event, and while much of the details remain unknown, and there are few first hand period sources to tell the story, the series creators freely admit they took great liberties with the actual history. For more details on the actual history, I've included links to a few well chosen books, all books that I've actually read, below and if you purchase them by following these links, you'll also help support this blog.

For now, we're focusing on the gladiatorial fight scenes in the arena and their historical accuracy, nothing else.

A key fight scene from Spartacus: Gods of the Arena. 

While the second season filmed, this six episode mini-series is actually a prequel to the events that occur in season one. The titular character Spartacus never appears, but we get to see more of the villainous ludus owners, a ludus being a gladiator school or troupe, who own and train and fight the gladiators, and learn more about what it was like to be part of this establishment and owned and forced to fight in the arena against one's will. 

I hope to write a few blog posts on the degree of accuracy of the fight scenes in this series, but for now:  

1. General accuracy of the arms and armor and fighting styles: 

Much to my pleasant surprise, this is actually quite high. If you watch this show, the portrayal of the gladiators and their equipment is quite accurate, particularly since many cinematic depictions of gladiators are completely off.

The gladiators fought in certain distinctive ways using distinctive styles of armor and weaponry. During the latter part of the gladiatorial period, while there were local variations and locally known styles of fighters, the types allowed in the arena was largely proscribed by law.

For instance, in the scene below we witness two fighters. One of them is wearing heavy armor and carrying a straight, short sword -the Roman gladius- and carrying a large shield similar to what a legionnaire of the time would wear. This type was called a "mymillio" and the characters in the series refer to the fighters garbed and equipped in this way by that name.

The other carries two swords and is clearly intended to portray a "dimarchus," a gladiator who fight with two swords or one sword and a dagger.

To my mind there's nothing grossly wrong with the depiction of the Myrmillio. in the scene above. If I quibble, pontificate, and wax pedantic, then I must point out, for instance, that while his helmet does look like the helmet of a myrmillio, the perfect helmet for a myrmillio would look exactly this BUT with the addition of a fish, yes, a sculpted fish, added to the crest of the helmet. (This made more sense, from the Roman perspective, when you remember that a Myrmillio was often matched against a Retarius, the net and trident man. Therefore, ipso facto, par for the corso, ergoto, you would have a fisherman --the net and trident fighter-- fighting an opponent with a fish on his helmet. See! It makes perfect sense. Fisherman VS Fish. Understand that, learn some Latin and you'll soon be right up there, seeing the world from the traditional Roman perspective.)

And in a perfect world, the Myrmillio would also wear one greave, a piece of armor for his shin. Interestingly enough, most Myrmillio only had one greave, and it was on the right shin on the side opposite the heavy shield. While Roman soldiers wore them in pairs, gladiators often did not, and many of the carefully defined classes of gladiators wore just one with it being carefully prescribed as to which side of the body they wore it. If you look carefully this gladiator, this Myrmillio, has no leg armor, but you have to watch real carefully and be looking for this detail to even notice.

As for the character, Gannicus, the man with the two swords in the above clip, he is fighting in the style of a dimarchi. This is also a historically recognized style of gladiator, but one not as common as the myrmillio.

Here, I have a bigger quibble, a more glaring complaint. Historically the fighter really should be wearing a face concealing helmet, something much closer to that worn by the myrmillio in the clip.

Face concealing helmets were an important part of the dress of most gladiators. Not only did they protect the face, but they also concealed it, dehumanizing the wearer to his or her opponent. Gladiators were often paired off to fight with other members of their own ludus (school or troupe). And they had no choice in the matter,

Not only did they tend to fight harder when they couldn't see the face of their opponent, often a friend or colleague, but the concealing helmets often concealed their fear and anxiety about the match. Therefore face concealing helmets were a pretty standard part of most gladiators gear.

Interestingly enough, the retarius, the net and trident fighter, was one of the few types that did not normally wear a face concealing helmet.

A gladiator game I held at the Council of the Five Nations, a local adventure and historical game convention. I've since expanded the arena and built stands. If you blow up the picture you can see a pair of retarii, fighting a pair of secutors while a Myrmillo and a referee watch.

By contrast the only known period depiction of a dimarchi, a sculptural bas relief, shows him wearing a face concealing helmet and holding two swords, one of which is curved,

Yet throughout the Spartacus series characters tend to fight without helmets, Why? If you watch the scene, it's obvious. Gannicus is a handsome, well built man with an expressive face and a roguish grin.  If you watch, you can clearly see that he's quite comfortable in his role as star gladiator, enjoying the fight, the adulation of the crowds, and even the thrill of the kill. And if his face were concealed? Well, you'd get none of this. Characterization and story telling benefits in this case from the removal of the helmet.

If you watch the series, other types of gladiators are reasonably well portrayed --aside, of course, from that matter with the face concealing helmets. The characters usually seem to have a helmet where you can see their face or at least enough to get a sense of their emotions, or else, perhaps even more foolishly, they somehow manage to lose or pull off their helmets in the heat of battle.

Still the gladiators portrayed in the Starz TV series Spartacus do tend to fall within recognized historical types and be reasonably well portrayed.

The retarius are there, although interesting some do have helmets. The thracians with the curved swords. The hoplomachii with their long spear and small shields and faux Greek style helmets. The secutors, a type of gladiator that was equipped similar to the myrmillio but had a smoother, rounder, helmet so that it would be less likely to be snared in the net, All these can be seen, and are depicted with reasonable yet less than 100% accuracy, in the show.

Recommended books on Types of Gladiator and their 
Arms, Armor, and Fighting Styles

These three books all have good details on the types of gladiators and how they fought. My personal favorite is Nossov's Gladiator, Rome's Bloody Spectacle and I can't recommend it highly enough if the subject interests you. The Gladiators and Caesars book is also quite good, but be forewarned only one chapter of this book focuses specifically on gladiators. The others tend to discuss things like chariot racing or animal fighting or other arena and coliseum type events.

  

This is an unusual yet well done book that contains interesting but largely hypothetical descriptions on how to train and fight in a realistic manner that may be similar to how the Roman gladiators fought. It's currently being sold by two different publishers so it's available on Amazon from two different sources. After Paladin went bankrupt, the rights reverted to the author and it was soon re-released.

    

Finally, a pair of books on the history of the Spartacus revolt. I've read both of these (I've read everything I've linked to on this page. In some cases, you can even find my reviews on Amazon for the products.) and I definitely prefer Strauss's The Spartacus War over the Osprey book. I have however included the link to the Osprey book as many people (myself included) just like Osprey books and they don't take up much space on the shelf. 

      

Finally, if you wish to support this blog, please consider buying any of the following books, all written by yours truly. People who've read them, tell me they've enjoyed them. 

     

Current Reading: Endurance, Shackleton's Incredible Voyage, by Alfred Lansing

Endurance, Shackleton's Incredible Voyage, by Alfred Lansing. 1959. Carrol and Graff Publishers. New York. 282pp. 

In 1914, a British expedition set sail for Antarctica. Carrying 27 men, its goal was to land on the southern continent and be the first men ever to traverse the continent on foot. Unfortunately, the expedition soon met with tragedy. The ship, The Endurance, became trapped in the ice and unable to escape. As the ice shifted and pressures on the ship grew, it became clear that the ship was going to be crushed and the only sane course of action was for the men to abandon the ship and set up camp on the Antarctic coast. Trapped, with no way home, but fortunately still equipped with a shipload of supplies, these men under the command of Ernest Shackleton survived six months alone and abandoned and out of communication with the outside world, moving camp and travelling several times in the process. And not a single one of them died despite these harsh conditions in one of the most dangerous places on Earth.

It's an amazing story and one that's been told many times in many formats including both books and documentaries. Yet this book is considered the classic. It often appears on lists of recommended non-fiction or top 50 non-fiction books you must read and so on, It's been on my personal list of desired reading for years, I think, and it's often recommended reading in schools or courses on leadership. Much can be learned of leadership and management from following the actions of Shackleton as he kept his men together, united, and focused despite challenges from weather, boredom, a sense of feeling trapped and hopeless and more, 

I'm about  a third of the way though this book but enjoying it greatly.

     

The Stillwater Blockhouse

In the small Saratoga County town of Stillwater, on the banks of the Hudson, lies a park with an 18th Century style blockhouse. While not an original construction from the era, it has an interesting history of its own. 

In 1927 the blockhouse was constructed to celebrate the 150th Anniversary of the Battle of Saratoga, what many consider the turning point of the American revolutionary war. It was then placed on the battlefield, a National Historic Park, and used as the original visitor center for the park.  At some point, the park stopped using it as a visitor center but kept it on the park where it fascinated visitors and let them see what a small fortification of that era would have looked like, 

The problem with the blockhouse though was that no such fortification ever stood at the battlesite and its presence confused visitors some of whom thought it had been used in the battle. In 1999, a decision was made to remove the blockhouse and put it in this small scenic site on the banks of the Hudson where visitors can picnic and enjoy the site. 

What follows next are a series of pictures of the blockhouse. I've attempted to include photos showing details for people who might wish to know how it was constructed or have enough information to build a model of it. 

After that I've included pictures of the park, and after that a few pictures, just for fun, of the non-authentic model cannon that someone built and put in the lot of the apartment building next store. 

The park itself is located at a scenic site on the banks of the upper Hudson so I've includede several photos of that.

Finally, the apartment building next door has a model cannon behind its parking lot, overlooking the Hudson. It's clearly something that was built for fun, constructed out of what seems to be PVC pipe, and completely and totally non-firing and contains many inaccuracies. It should not be viewed as an authentic replica of a weapon of the time. (an homage perhaps? ) Regardless, it was kind of fun and there's no reason not include these photos of it. Perhaps someone will have fun counting the inaccuracies in the model.

A few people wrote their name in the concrete while it was wet.  

Miniature Wargaming --15mm Boxer Rebellion Russians

The Boxer Rebellion was a conflict that occured in 1900 in China. It began when a secret society called "Yi He Chuan" or "Yi He Tuan" emerged. The names mean "Fists of Harmonious Righteousness" and "Society of Harmonious Righteousness" respectively. It was a reactionary group that tried to use magic and Chinese mystical traditions to drive foreign influence from their nation. This included violence against missionaries and their local converts, as well as attacks on the embassies in Beijing. (It is worth mentioning that the Chinese had never really seen much purpose for embassies from foreign countries and had only permitted their appearance as one of the terms for peace following a series of conflicts with the British and other foreign nations.

A Russian force for the conflict in 15mm scale. Most of the figures are from Old Glory 15s but there is a unit of the old Frontier Miniatures infantry in front. Some liberties were taken with uniforms in that most, if I understand correctly, are wearing their winter pants with their summer shirts. This is how they are shown in the Osprey book to the period, but I've seen photos from the conflict that show them dressed entirely in their summer uniforms. In classic wargaming style, I chose color over accuracy. 

The Chinese refer to the conflict as "the Eight Nation War," because it involved warfare between their nation and eight other nations all of whom were involved in colonialist endeavors in China. In fact, however, the bulk of the foreign troops came from four of the nations. These were Britain (who sent mostly Indian troops ), the USA, Japan, and Russia. The other four nations who fought, France, Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary sent much smaller forces, token forces,or forces that arrived after the conflict began.

Russian artillery and a pair of commanders. A force like this really should include some automatic weapons but this one doesn't. Neither range included gatling or machine guns. 

When the conflict began, Russia took advantage of the need to protect foreign interests and civilians by sending a large force into Manchuria, intent on conquest and acquisition of territory.
According to most sources, the Russian forces were very brutal and prone to mistreating and committing atrocities on the Chinese civilian population. However, according to some sources, strangely enough, the Russians, being a force of largely, unsophisticated peasants, did not have some of the condescending attitudes that other Europeans had when in China. In other words, while they did burn down houses, loot indiscriminately, and rape and brutalize people, it wasn't because they felt they were better than those people. Merely because they had the chance to do so. Yeah, not much of a consolation I know. But history is often full of strange, tragic situations.

Russian Infantry. Old Glory 15s. 

Two units of Cossacks

A unit of Russian dragoons. 

If you wish to support this blog, you can purchase these books from Amazon through these links. They are not intended to be a definitive bibliography on the subject. Cohen's a history in three keys is a classic on the conflict but sparse on military details. It does make it clear that in addition to fighting in the main conflict the Russians were fighting their own campaign in the north east. Bayonets before Bullets is considered by many to be the best book available on the Russian army of the period and how it fought and campaigned. However, it is out of print, expensive to acquire, and I read it by borrowing from the library through interlibrary loan and would recommend you consider doing so. The Osprey book on the subject is not a bad introduction although it is considered to have some innacuracies in it.

If interested, these are three of my books written by me. Please feel free to purchase them and support this blog that way as well.

    

Social Media Hoax: Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

[UPDATE FROM MARCH 9,2020]


Arguably not history, but it's been a while since I posted here, and when I created this blog, I had hoped to do more here to expose the problem of pseudo-history, pseudo-archeology, and other false claims about history. (And while I'm on the subject, please check out the work of Jason Colavito . He's got a great blog, a free e-mail newsletter, he sends out each week like clockwork and lots of good stuff. Honestly, one reason why I skipped several proposed posts on false historical claims was that Jason Colavito has already done them.) This was originally posted on my other blog, peterhuston.blogspot.com , a less focused blog where I post about many subjects on an intermittent schedule. You can see it here, if you wish: https://peterhuston.blogspot.com/2019/02/social-media-hoaxes-alexandria-ocasio.html

So . . . with no further ado, a post on what will some day be a minor historical hoax. (Hmmmm. When do current events become history?  Heavy thought.)

I like to think the truth has a value. I like to think that misrepresentation is grounds for suspicion and looking carefully at the motivations of the people making them. And having said that, I think it's obvious that a lot of people out there are very, very scared of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, also known to many as "AOC." At least scared enough to knowingly spread lies about her. In these pages, I hope to expose some of those lies and misrepresentations.

For the record, I am actually not a fan of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her views. Honestly, in most cases, I don't claim to know enough about many of the issues she talks about and the economics surrounding them to hold an educated view. I do think she's making following the news more fun, and that it's great to see the field of discussion expanded when it comes to suggesting solutions to societal problems. (For instance, while I do not feel qualified to discuss whether a 70% tax on the extremely rich is a good idea or not, I think it's great that the idea has been not just proposed but also put in historical context as something that has been done in the past.)

I support truthful discussion and even attacks on her proposals and political views. This is what American politics should involved. I do not consider dishonest attacks on her character to be good, helpful, or conducive to a healthy political climate in our nation.

So, with that said, let's look at a hoaxed AOC photo, I found on FB.

First, here's the photo:

[UPDATE --OBVIOUSLY THE PICTURE IS GONE. WHY DO THEY DISAPPEAR LIKE THAT? IF SOMEONE KNOWS PLEASE EXPLAIN IN THE COMMENTS SECTION. WHILE I AM VERY PROUD THAT I DID MY OWN "DETECTIVE WORK" AND FOUND THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS MYSELF, THEY ARE NOW GONE FROM THIS BLOGPOST. WHY? WHY? WHY?
REGARDLESS, SOMEONE ELSE DID IT TOO, AND HERE'S THEIR WEBSITE:
https://www.truthorfiction.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-splits-image/  THANKS GUYS.]

While not my original work, this gives the basic idea of what I discovered. 

Obviously, not very flattering. Also, perhaps equally troubling, it offers no political insight or commentary and contains zero discussion of any issues. Which makes it even more problematic.

But looking into it a bit more, I found this.

Clearly one of these photos is an alteration of the other. Same young man holding a woman with spread legs, same room, even the same news show in the background. Obviously one is a photoshopped alternation of the other. And I think it's safe to say the upper photo is the reworked one. There are several reasons for this. The clothes on the upper photo do not look real to me. 

Not sure what to make of that "flaming fart" spewing forth from her bottom, but then again, that's not really the point of the thing, is it?

I also think that on the one above, AOC's head looks reattached. My guess is that the head shot used came from here:  

So . . . cheap smear job. Nothing more. Bad photo job. Again, if you want to attack OAC, and do it in a fair and fact focused, mature manner that contributes to mature political discussion, be my guest. I encourage it. But cheap smear jobs are nothing but cheap smear jobs and only weaken our nation and lower the level of political discourse.

Book Review Donald Featherstone's Wargamers Handbook of the American War of Independence

Recently I purchased this book from Amazon. Quick review after giving it an evenings examination, partial reading, lots of skimming, is that while it's not awful it's not really that great either. I would not recommend it, except to the completist. The work is basically a reworking of a book he wrote in 1977, although with editing and new portions added by a gentleman named John Curry (hence the 2010 copyright date on this.)

Donald Featherstone was one of the classic publicizers and promoters of the hobby. In 1977, the year after the American bicentennial when interest in the period was high, he released the early edition of this book. Therefore the bulk of the information in this book is "state of the art" but for the 1970s. Much has changed since then, and not just with the death of disco.

Today's wargaming guides usually contain much more detailed information on uniforms, unit sizes, and troop types than this book contains. The author's ideas on what a set of rules should or should not contain are a key part of the book and some of these, for instance, the use of "chance cards" are less popular now than they were then.

A picture from an AWI Wargame I recently played using a friends figures and terrain.
Rules used were first edition Black Powder from Warlord Games and the conflict was hypothetical.

In some portions I caught what I feel are errors.

For instance on page 28, he refers to "Rogers' Rangers" as the most famous of the "ranger units" of the war. I would question this. It is my understanding that while Robert Rogers, head and founder of the famed French and Indian War Roger's Rangers, did found a second rangers unit during the revolution, he soon left it to do other things having been forced from military service due to "poor health" (he suffered from alcoholism at this time) and it became much better known as "the Queens Rangers" under the command of  John Graves Simcoe.

Another photo of the same game as described in the above photo.

On page 31, he states that the Brunswick and Hesse-Hanau line regiments had not just a grenader company, but also a light company. This seems to be false. I have looked into the issue and they did not. Of course, in fairness to Featherstone, I am writing 40 years later and have the benefit of access to 40 more years of research on the matter, much of it done by decades of obsessive wargamers trying to answer this very question. While on one hand, it seems to be unfair to attack this book, judging it by modern standards, on the other hand, it is being sold on Amazon with a 2010 copyright date.

The battle guides are also not up to modern standards. For instance, most modern day gamers when reading of a battle wish to know exactly which units were there and how large each unit was. Instead the gives the number of troops on each side and hints at this with large sweeping numbers. While this information is generally available elsewhere it is the sort of thing expected in a modern wargamers guide to a conflict.

Another photo of the same game. British troops assault the American line.

Some parts, however, have been updated. For instance, there is an update, useful list of figure manufacturers included at the end. The modern day editor, John Curry, also added a set of wargame rules for the period, written by Featherstone as well. So it is an updated text. On the other hand, in my opinion, the primary value of this book for a modern wargamers who games the American War of Independence is as a historical document, a look at the earlier days of the hobby. If takes as such, it should be a fun read and purchase, a stroll down memory lane. But if one expects an up-to-date guide to the period of modern standards, you are likely to be disappointed.

If one wishes to buy this book and support this blog, please feel free to do so by using the link below. 

If interested, these are three of my books written by me. Please feel free to purchase them and support this blog that way as well.

    

Pulp Fiction Asian Bandits

People seem to like seeing pictures of nicely painted figures so here's a recent project. If anyone asks these are "modern day Pulp-fiction Asian fantasy Bandits" and should not be seen as representations of any historical or modern day people. The figures are actually 28mm Montagniards from Westwind Productions Vietnam War range and while nice figures, they don't resemble any photos of Montagniards from the period that I've ever seen. As for the Buddha in the tree trunk scenery piece that came from the aquarium decorations section of the pet area of a particularly large Walmart. Again, I refuse to comment on whether or not it's actually representative of anything anywhere.

Close ups of some of the figures. What's with the guy in the gasmask? No idea.
If someone has ever heard of SE Asian people donning gasmasks please let me know. 

Again, no idea if it's historically accurate but it'd make a great pulp fiction character.