Gladiator fights are definitely among the favourite subjects tackled both by professional and amateur historians. All the more that new aspects of this horrific practice come to light. Archaeologist Georges Ville believes that the phenomenon is far worse than we had imagined, explicable through reasons quite different from those that led to other horrors such as the Inquisition, the Holocaust or the gulags. Sadistic behaviour has always been a constant component of humanity, but gladiator combats exploit it in a seemingly original manner.

First of all we should notice that most gladiators were actually volunteers, pretty much like the modern bullfighters. The encounters were not always fought to the death in order to see who was more powerful or wielded the most powerful weapons. This can be deduced from the relatively small number of frescoes that depict gladiators crossing their swords or piercing each other. Rapidly solving the conflict by means of weapons was not the main attraction of the public. In other depictions they do not even engage in combat, but instead one of them looks toward the ground, while the other raises his sword and does not stare at his opponent, but somewhere in the distance. The defeated stands on his feet, he is not wounded, but raises his finger as sign of defeat, because he is aware he cannot handle his enemy. Now he is merely waiting for the public to make the decision.

Gladiators usually made use of really heavy equipment and more than often they would succumb to fatigue or mental breakdown. The supreme moment is represented by the decision of the public. It was less about a fair fight and more about the crowd that had the unique opportunity to manifest its omnipotence when the fate of a human being depends upon it. The looks on the faces of those who could possibly face death were probably the most intriguing ones, t