Gladiator Historical Accuracy

As a writer at Gladiators Monthly, I am examining the historical accuracy of the movie Gladiator. There are aspects of Gladiator that do and do not hold true to the historical accuracy of the Romans under Commodus. This essay will show how the depiction of Commodus has both accurate and inaccurate qualities, while the portrayal of the Roman crowd determining the fate of the gladiators is quite accurate. In reality, Commodus did not kill his father, Marcus Aurelius, nor did he reign for such a short period of time. In class on February 2nd, we discussed the chronology of Commodus’s life. The chronology pointed out that Commodus reigned from 180 AD until 192 AD meaning that he reigned for twelve years. In the movie, the viewers might think that Commodus ruled for only a few months to a year. The real Commodus never had incestuous relations with his sister, rather, he had a wife and a mistress. Toner mentions that Marcus Aurelius had arranged a marriage between his son and Crispina (22). The movie portrays Commodus as loving his sister and

One of the reasons that the depiction of Commodus is inaccurate is that “he [Commodus] used to contend as a gladiator...but in public he refrained from using steel and shedding human blood” (Dio Cassius 73.16-17). The evidence proves that Commodus did not fight with metal weapons and he did not fight to kill. In the movie, Commodus fought with a sword and fought for the sole purpose of killing Maximus. Also, Commodus’s lack of metal weaponry in his performances is known because evidence shows that “he used those of the secutores… he held the shield in his right hand and the wooden sword in his left” (Dio Cassius 73.18-21). Since Commodus would have been using a wooden sword it can be argued that he engaged in a type of fighting that lacked any real danger, which is not the case for the character Commodus in