Post originally by Oliver at 2004-04-01 02:57:12
Converted from Phorums BB System



Sergio Mascarenhas wrote:
-------------------------------
Well, this does not apply to a young knight (remember, we are discussing starting characters). He would have lived under his lord of father. Most of his youth would have been dedicated to combat skills. He would have been taken to batlle as he was very young (say, from around 10 to 12). Yes, he might also have studied how to read/write, etc. But combat would have been a very important part of his activities.
-------------------------------

Actually, that is incorrect. He would have spent a large part of his youth learning courtly manner. From about age six or seven, he would have been working and learning as a page first, acquiring courtly skills and helping other people. While he would MAYBE receive some combat training, it would be largely playful.

Only from the age of fourteen, and only when he showed promise, he would be promoted to squire, when real training at arms commended. And even then, he would have continued to train hunting, and spent a large time assisting his patron, rather than fighting himself.

>False on two accounts. For a start, a pit slave only became so when he was a grown up. No one trained children into pit slaves. The reason is simple: it's much easier and less expensive to buy a grown up slave with potential than to create him from childhood. So, if we compare a young knight and a young pit slave (say, both are 18 to 20 years old), the knight will have much better combat skills.

Incorrect, for the reasons described. And you ignore the potential, which translates to better attributes or preexisting skill. Mayn of the gladiators were criminals, others were bankrupt citizens specifically selling themselves into gladiatorship instead of other forms of slavery. Assumably because they reckoned they had a chance to survive.

And as for talking about young gladiators, here's an inscription from a roman inscription commemorating a gladiator:

"To the Departed Spirits. To Urbicus, secutor, main trainer, from Florence, who fought thirteen times, he lived twenty two years. Olympia, the daughter he left at five months, and his daughter Fortunensis and Laurica, his wife, (set this up) for the well deserving husband, with whom she lived for seven years. And I warn you, that whoever he defeated, he killed. His fans celebrated his spirit."

He LIVED TWENTY TWO YEARS. And was already proficient enough to be a trainer, and had been married for sevem years.


>Second, pit slaves had a lot of other things to do besides combat training. For a start, they had to care for themselves. The idea that pit slaves would nothing in the course of the day other than training for combat is false.

They had MUCH LESS other things to do than a knight. Compared to combat training, their other activities were negligible. If they weren't, there owner would see to it. And I am not sure what you consider having to care for themselves. In Roman gladiatorial schools, the fighters received three meals a day and medical service. No slave of any kind truly had to care for himself (which would translate to failure of the owner to maintain his property) and especially in gladiatorial schools, the owner had every interest in not seeing their property succumb to illness or starvation.

>There's a further problem you are not considering: variability in combat skills, specially for one-on-one close combat - the ones the pit slave would learn. Young knights were trained on exactly those skills. Yes, they didn't learn it to combat in the pit, but they learned it to plenty of other situations.


No, knights were NOT trained specifically for one-on-one close combat. That was PART of their training. But it was the very doom of the knight that he was a generalist, not a specialist. He fought on horseback and on foot, with polearms and with short arms, and consequentially could be beat by specialists in all of them.