Author: Graham Ashford
Experimentation and study by: Graham Ashford, Chris Gainey and John Morgan.

Abstract:
Our first point of study for our examination of gladiatorial fighting forms is the basic stance. In most forms of combat a basic stance is taught to students to enable them to have a common platform upon which they can refer and base most further instruction. It is normally the physically most economic form of passive defence.

For the purposes of this document and our future studies we will refer to this basic stance as the Classic Stance.

A Statement about Evidence.
It is only with the weight of evidence that we can draw conclusions on what this stance might have been. Consequently, the concepts proposed here may change over time as new information becomes available. To attempt to create accurate fighting techniques based upon history we must try to rely upon evidence left us as much as possible. Throughout our experimentation and examination of the forms possibly employed by the gladiators of the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD we must, as much as we can, refrain from contaminating the evidence left us with our modern understandings of close combat.

The evidence used throughout the exploration of the Classic Stance, is from primary sources in the form of statues, mosaics, pictures and reliefs. Secondly, it comes from recreations of equipment used by the gladiators. Where ever the two are in conflict with one another we refer always to the Primary Source as definitive.

Popular.
A good proportion of the images left us of gladiators, show them in a similar stance, which we refer to as the Classic Stance. The three images below illustrate applications of this position.

It is from this stance that we believe gladiators began their combat. Without a doubt there would have been regional variations and developments over time. As much as is possible the primary evidence that we have worked from is from the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD in and around Rome.

The history of the Classic Stance.
The Classic Stance is an innovation that appears almost as soon as there are images of gladiators. This may mean that the stance was borrowed from military or other contemporary and prior sources. In the image below from a Lucanian tomb painting of gladiatorial combat fifth century BC we can clearly see the round shield variation of the stance being employed by the two fighters on the left.

Here also we can see the round shield version of the classic stance employed by two equus gladiators. (Image courtesy of The Roman History Reading Group).


This paintings are not the only type to represent fighters in this stance. Early Greek vases show fighters in massed or single combat in a similar stance. The earliest Republican Roman images of gladiators show the same position adopted by the combatants. It can be safely said that the Classic Stance of the gladiators was a mainstream shield fighting position of the early classical periods.

It is with little wonder that the so called Classic Stance was such a success. Early shields (possibly due to the history of lined phalanx style combat) despite a multitude of variations were generally large enough to hide at least the torso behind.

There is little you can do with a shield of this size in the advance to combat other than hold it between you and the enemy, which perhaps explains the little change in the stance in the evidence left us.

There appears to have been a subtle change in the stance by our time of study. Rome, it appears, preferred a central hand held handle as opposed to the forearm holds utilised by the Greeks and those contemporary to them. Changes in combat from the formidable but unwieldy combat doctrines of the phalanx to the far more manoeuvrable combat eventually adopted by the Romans must have had a deciding factor in this shield holding migration. It is possibly this change in combat procedures that resulted in the shield being held so close to the body, supported against the shoulders and lead leg as there is little stability on a centrally held handle in comparison to a shield supported with the whole forearm.

Description of the Classic Stance.
This description is based upon a full length scutum extending from the left knee to the throat of the holder. The curve is such that the body of the defender can be safely hidden within its shape. Variations in the stance should be employed at the differing times of the combat, initial advance to contact and the advance to combat, these are described in more detail later.

The Classic Stance is formed by pulling the shield lightly against the left leg and left arm of the body, while the shield is held almost flat across the body. The right leg is used to support the stance from the rear with the weight distributed evenly across both feet when static.

As much as is possible the shield ought to have three points of contact with the body otherwise its size can prove counter productive and easily unbalanced when under attack.

The right arm is kept behind the shield with either the front end of the sword facing out to the enemy or hidden behind the shield to hide the swords full length and position. On some people the latter sword position can place a strain on the shoulder that can cause early fatigue.

The top of the shield should cover the shoulders, so that when viewed from the front none of the shoulder can be seen. The body should be held almost parallel to the shield and be pressed further into the shield as the distance between the combatants is shortened.

Initial Advance to Contact.
By definition this the time when neither gladiator can reach one another with any ease or sudden movement. Stances can be relaxed as the fighters gain the measure of each other. During this time the Classic Stance is adopted in so far as the scutum is always held flat to the enemy and weapons should be hidden behind them so the enemy cannot gain intelligence about their design.

It is permissible to cross legs as you advance to combat at this stage and the body can be allowed to be away from the shield, pulling it in closer as the distance shortens until properly positioned when within distance.

Advance to Contact.
The advance to contact begins when either gladiator can easily reach one another with a few short steps.

By this time the body should be pulled in against the shield, shoulders hidden and parallel to the shield front of the shield. Legs should not be crossed at any time now, movement is done by advancing with the lead led in short steps or reversing with small steps from the rear leg. (Image courtesy of The Roman History Reading Group).

The weapon should be brought to a comfortable position along the side of the shield with the sword arm held behind the safety of the shield.

Benefits of the Classic Stance.
As ever having a successfully tried and tested procedure to rely upon in a quick thinking combat is an immediate benefit as it allows the fighter to remain in control of himself and hopefully the situation he finds himself in.

The position of the body to the shield is pivotal. By holding the scutum slightly above shoulder height the gladiator is not only able to see everything that his enemy is doing whilst hiding much of his own movements. Also, he can defend his shoulders without any movement at all. As far as ancient armour is made the gladiators shoulders are generally, unusually bare. The scutum held in this position recovers that lack.

By being correctly positioned within the shield attacks from the side, in an attempt to break the fight, can be easily avoided as the side of the shield pushes the blade past the back and sides or in the worst case relegates a potentially lethal blow to a painful one. It is precisely to combat this that the sica was probably designed.

In many gladiatorial images the fight is all but lost because of the incorrect position of the scutum which has left a side or arm uncovered. Wounds to these locations will often result in the eventual defeat of the injured gladiator as exhaustion is quick to follow.

The Practical Application of the Classic Stance.
The practical application of the Classic Stance is difficult to get a grip of. It is hard to feel as though you can move comfortably and quickly pressed in hard against a shield in the manner explained above and shown us in the primary record.

However, after a short time the common sense of the technique shines through. The gladius is reduced in its lethality almost immediately. Sica are another matter as the bend in the blade allows people to cut your flanks with more ease.

In most images left us where a contest has been broken it is normally because someone has managed to get around the side, back or underneath or the shield. It is this 'breaking of the fight' that the Classic Stance is designed to limit by giving maximum protection behind the shield to the user not just to the immediate front but also to their flanks.

Breaking the fight is often difficult and perilous as the attacker has to make a dangerous move by exposing their sword arm to attack or has to bind the opponents shield with their own which can prove lethal against someone using the techniques mentioned above properly. In a number of images left us the protagonists have managed to simultaneously stick one another as they have bound one anothers shields with each other and have stabbed to the now exposed flanks.

The most common mistake we have found with the Classic Stance is to back out of the shields protection when the other person closes threateningly, this quickly leaves your back and sides open to punishment. However, by staying tight into the shield and turning it slightly to meet the on coming attack the blow is normally always deflected.

Conclusion.
The Classic Stance as we have defined it is under our constant attention as new evidence comes to our knowledge and we advance in our work. However, as a starting point for all future movements it has so far served us very well.

The weight of evidence left us shows that this position must have been a common because gladiators are so frequently depicted in it. So it is with some confidence that we claim its use in our work today.

As ever, we invite feedback and debate over this piece of work as we don't claim to know everything and its brevity can often force us to leave out something others may feel worthy of inclusion.