+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Greek Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear (/showthread.php?tid=27459)
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-22-2016, 11:30 PM)Giannis K. Hoplite Wrote: Sure Paul, I'm sure you wanted to be in there yourself, but you had other important stuff to do. Many of the interesting observations however were made before the official experiment when we were mostly 'playing' like little boys and like a plague more and more people were adding into the pushing match. It was there that bad positioning and odd circumstances flipped me facing backwards! The things that can happen!
Yea, I remember you ending up sitting in your aspis bowl! Imagine the nicknames your fellow hoplites would come up with? Giannis leads from behind! At one point I threw my whole body, all 290lbs of it, off the ground into a two rank shield wall to see what would happen. I just bounced off.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-23-2016
(08-22-2016, 10:06 PM)Bryan Wrote: There are a whole lot of odd things that the ancients did that I should think they didn't need to be a genius to realize they are counter productive.
As Paul has said, every single loss in a hoplite battle after othismos started means the rear rankers were the ones who started the rout (they need to run off to give everyone else room to run too). So if the rear rankers are always the oldest, steadiest, and given increased levels of responsibility, would that still happen often? Wouldn't battles become bloodier, as older ouragos kill their own middle rankers who keep moving backwards?
I'm just saying that besides the Spartans, Thebens, and to some extent at certain times, the Athenians, I can't remember any other city state that had well trained/drilled/repeatedly successful hoplites forces.
As I tried to demonstrate in my previous post, the oldest hoplites were the ones that decided how many of their sons died before retreat! It is not necessary that their rout started only with their personal benefit in mind, but also in cases where a retreat was indeed the better of the two options.
Besides, there is a whole lot of reasons one army might have lost even in the case of othismos, like casualties or exhaustion and not necessarily because the rear rankers deserted.
We should always have in mind that the othismos might have happened in small portions of the line, and then possibly for short periods of time. The fighting would be so intense for the first three ranks that i doubt any army could maintain the fighting for long. The first rankers would be helmet to helmet with their oponents, grabing crests, beards and puting fingers in the eyes, perhaps even biting. In such compressed conditions even the third rankers can use their spears to reach the oponent, which means that even the third rank sustains casualties.
Now if we allow for some casualties before the othismos, from spear or arrow or slingshot, and for a phalanx of six ranks, the third ranker possibly only had one man behind him only, or in extreme cases none! This could result to a break in the line during othismos, and this is yet another reason that a phalanx might have lost during the othismos phase.
Athe second phase of the battle of Koroneia, the Thebans were trying to break through the Lakedaemonian phalanx. It is one of the few descriptions of battles where we are almost certain that the othismos occured, and yet Xenophon says that some of the Thebans managed to "break through" the Spartans and find refuge at a shrine. If this break through happened by a winning army rather than one that was trying to escape it might have been reason for victory!
It is also a misconception that during the golden age of the hoplite, the 7th and 6th century bc Athens Sparta and Thebes were the only good armies. In fact there is plenty of evidence that they weren't, both literary and archaeological.
Even in later times, after the Persian Wars, there is no reason to believe that lesser states didn't imitate the military practise of their stronger allies. So Herodotus puts the Thebans of the middle 6th century to consider the armies of Tanagra, Coroneia and Thespiai their customary followers to every one of their military campeigns. I would think that by the 5th century these cities fought in much the same way as the Thebans, imitating their most successful practises.
But lets face it, economic prosperity comes with military prowess and vice versa, especially in the greek workd of constant strife, and if we look at the dedications of the cities in the archaic times in the big sanctuaries, both individual objects and whole buildings and treasuries we willl see that Athens Thebes and Sparta were not so much better than many others, if at all!
And ultimately, who fought the peloponnesian war? The 6000 Spartans that seldom left their city, or the multitude of cities of the Peloponnesus and elsewhere, who were their subordinate allies?
Khaire
Giannis
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
Quote:This is funny Jaroslav, but I just realized that you are the reason I wrote my book! Not like guys like you, but you. A couple of years ago I got a notice that my name came up on a TW thread. It was your presentation of Mathew's book that made me send out a call to my peeps as to why no one had shot down what to many of us was obvious baloney. You may not know that many of us on RAT told him he was going wrong back in the day. I realized then that those of us who knew better had a duty to correct the misinformation and Fred Ray and I finally pulled the trigger on writing a book. So if what I am posting here makes you question what you currently believe at all, then I have done my job. Note that I am not saying I am all correct (I have to present it that way for arguments sake), there is so much we don't know. But I do hope to balance some of the notions that are out there.
lol, ok, thats really funny.. and to clear this up further - i don't claim i have ultimate right, I have stated that in this thread before. Yet, so far, nobody actually presented any sort of data that would disprove what Chris Mathew wrote back then. (btw, seems like you also need to convince Lindybeige as well)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-xtFXThEOc
As I said, i will read your book, and if it will make sense, i have no problem defending your book afterwards.. but until then, i'm more incline to believe in what i wrote so far. Up to this point, i didn't see anybody posting any proof about formation spacing (not just single line pictures, but at least 8x8 formation with everybody able to present their spears into ready, match and combat postures), or about how such formation would fare while using spears for extended time (over 15 minutes) And here is the catch - such study would need to be unbiased. As you claim, Chris didn't used correct postures, or didn't used spear with good overarm grip. So to prove the point, its actually necessary to use both techniques right, and not just rig the results for underarm to prove the point...
Personally, i see multiple issues with the overarm theory, starting with spear balancing towards its rear, with quite problematic movement with the spear within closed ranks (closed ranks = you would not be able to put spear in vertical position) or comparing the actual reach and spear control with both overarm and underarm, sustainability of thrusts, possible type of wounds vs typical protection used, etc etc... there are many aspects that people always forget to consider...
And of course, there is this whole notion of over-stressing the vase paintings.. which is very strange thing, considering painters were not soldiers, therefore would know practically nothing about warfare.. as lindybeige in his video said - vase paintings say about hoplite combat as much as Rambo movie says about modern infantry combat tactics... (and he is also spot on about dolphins and wheels with wings..)
Because i feel like this whole topic just got way too personal.. and people are defending their theories and thrashing others theories without actually trying to understand arguments used.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
I understand, and you have hit upon why some of use get quickly frustrated with these discussions. You unfortunately have been put in the position of defending a position that to many of us is simply obviously wrong. If I told you that people throw balls faster underhand than overhand, you would immediately know that was bull because you have done both and know from personal experience what the truth was. That is where many of us are with the dory. Now imagine you are posting on a baseball forum about some guy you read who assures you that underhand throws are best and all of us who have been pitching for years are wrong. Our immediate reaction would be to write you off, but perhaps there is an explanation that you were really reading an author playing softball or cricket where the odd rules they chose to play by made underhand the only option. That is quite literally what has happened to this debate. That is why our first advice is try it yourself.
Mathew was a disappointment because many of us had called for years for historians to pay attention to what reenactors had to say. Then when the first reenactor breaks into their circle, he is peddling crap that none of us believe in and is not representative of our experience. He also played fast and loose with the truth in a manner that if I had done so in my thesis I would not be called Dr. Bardunias. You probably remember his diagram of men formed in close order at 45cm (he often calls this 45-50cm because even he must have realized 45 is impossible) opposed to men at 90cm. He makes it seem like a 2 to 1 match up and his whole schtick relies on this match up going bad for those at 90cm. Take a look at the same drawing below, redrawn with only 2 changes. I lined up the spears instead of staggering them to make the comparison obvious, and I allowed the 90cm to have a second rank behind them, which he conveniently does not. Simple math equation 90cm = 45cm+45cm. Not surprisingly, if three spears line up against 2, this is 90 + 90= 60 +60+60. His hoplites are all at a minimum spacing of about 60cm, which is the limit to how close you can squish hoplites along a front and have them function and present the shield face forward. I leave it up to you to decide if a match up of 6-vs-8 would be decisive, I don't, but at least this is the true presentation.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-23-2016
It seems that you feel a need for everything to be written down in a scholarly manner in a book, or else it doesn't hold truth. There are many ways to make a spear, to hold a spear, that thrust or even slash with a spear, to change grips with a spear, and it seems you would like all these somehow documented and written down in a book.
Well, one of the benefits of reenactment is that provided you put enough effort in order to create the right tools, i.e. As close to the originals as possible, you can answer many of these questions by yourself.
Yes, the things have been tried in a formation of four ranks by eight shields, the overhand works just fine. The underhand, well it works as well in theory, but I have seen a pointed sauroter in front of my eyeslits and I didn't want the man in front of me even pretend to fight.
One of the possible reasons they didn't always opt for a rear weighted spear is perhaps exactly this. In overhand you usually hold your spear at a slight downward angle. The longer the shaft behind your hand, the higher the butt spike rests over the rear rankers' heads.
The sauroter can become dangerous also in overhand, when you hold the spear next to your ear.
This is a very useful grip, that you can use to rest your arm of not actively using your spear. It has the advantage that the spear is still pointing the enemy and is ready to use, yet the you use no force to keep your spear up, and you can even rest the shaft on the rim of your shield.
Paul B. demonstrated to us at Marathon how one can shift from spear on the ground into horizontal overhand grip in very close formation without threatening the men around him. Works best with a rear weighted spear. You first raise the arm high above your head and then change grip. Otherwise most people find it natural to change grip on the side at the hight of their head, which can be dangerous in close formation.
So again Jaroslav, join the ranks and try the things yourself. It is more convincing than reading other people's opinions and some times dubious experiments on scholarly books.
After all, I can't convince you with my own experiences, but you can convince yourself ;-)
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 12:22 PM)JaM Wrote: Personally, i see multiple issues with the overarm theory, starting with spear balancing towards its rear, with quite problematic movement with the spear within closed ranks (closed ranks = you would not be able to put spear in vertical position) or comparing the actual reach and spear control with both overarm and underarm, sustainability of thrusts, possible type of wounds vs typical protection used, etc etc... there are many aspects that people always forget to consider...
And of course, there is this whole notion of over-stressing the vase paintings..
I am not sure why you believe there is a problem with a rear weighted spear overhand. By definition, you are holding it at the mid-point of the weight distribution, and it is exactly like holding a plain spear in the middle. In fact, the weighting and taper I think are evidence for overhand, because you can more easily hold an underhand spear back from its balance point and the weighting is less important.
As to raising the spear in the press, this is quite easy, but you would have to see it done. I showed them at Marathon how the spear was raised. You hold the shaft, thumb down- as can be seen on many vases. This eliminates that whole section of Mathew's book on changing the grip- in never happened, the spear is always held thumb towards the sauroter. I can raise my dory with a man at my back and front.
As for accuracy, I am much more accurate overhand and practice by hitting a hanging softball on a rope. This should be obvious because you throw most accurately overhand and the overhand strike is just a throw that you don't let go (or you could if you are Thrand).
Holding the spear is only fatiguing if you hold your arm up in the air the whole time. Put your hand by your shoulder and this goes away. Toss the spear a few inches past the balance point and you can sit like that all day. Hoplites also seem to be making use of a neat bit of physics by holding the spear angled down in front. This greatly reduces the torque on the hand and is a better position to parry than holding the spear straight out.
Reach? See below. Note that my overhand arm is not even fully extended because the one advantage of underarm is that I cannot hold the spear at full extension in overhand. But in a strike there is no reach advantage.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
weighting the back of the spear means you cannot hold it in the middle, or at front, as for example Thrand is doing with his sliding throws. It means you have to hold it in the rear, and also such weapon is then unsuitable to be thrown at all (so no ankyle on it) as it would have incorrect flight trajectory (but thats besides the point.)
Next thing is the that with weighted spear, and thrusts, you kinda have sauroter at the height of your face, but more importantly a man behind you. if you try to withdraw the spear, you might hit him in the head, plus, its kinda something you would not have to be worried about in the heat of battle while standing behind somebody. yes, you can rise the arm higher, to get the spearpoint in correct height, but then you will experience faster fatigue due to blood loss.. plus, again, you would have to be constantly aware of what you are doing to not hurt people behind..
Then there is the whole grip notion. with overarm, your wrist is the most stressed part. Each hit against something would create stress, any attempt to maneuver with spear, would just increase the stress. and if you are holding the spear in the back, your wrist has to hold the whole weight alone during the attacks.
Also, i would like to see some measuring for speed of attack with such thrusts. Yes, Thrand overarm is very fast, but that's not thrust, but throw, and his spear grip is different, his spear is differently weighted. I can imagine this type of attack to be used with a throwing spear/heavy javelin, properly weighted towards front (you get better speed with weight in front with the trajectory of the throw.)
And yes, i kinda cannot imagine how you would move the spear into overarm while its still at horizontal position in a formation. I'm not talking about single file, or single row, but let say if you are in a second row and you have men in front of you, on sides of you and behind you, and all have shields and own spears, and have to do the same thing at once. Any chance you have some video of that?
and about previous posts:
Quote:I understand, and you have hit upon why some of use get quickly frustrated with these discussions. You unfortunately have been put in the position of defending a position that to many of us is simply obviously wrong. If I told you that people throw balls faster underhand than overhand, you would immediately know that was bull because you have done both and know from personal experience what the truth was. That is where many of us are with the dory. Now imagine you are posting on a baseball forum about some guy you read who assures you that underhand throws are best and all of us who have been pitching for years are wrong. Our immediate reaction would be to write you off, but perhaps there is an explanation that you were really reading an author playing softball or cricket where the odd rules they chose to play by made underhand the only option. That is quite literally what has happened to this debate. That is why our first advice is try it yourself.
yes, throw is better overarm, due to upward trajectory to the certain point. afterwards, speed decreases drastically, so practically, you need to release the missile before you reach that point. with the thrust, you are getting way after that point, unless you use the spear the way Thrand does.
Oh, and yes, you are completely right about the spacing, i was fighting this while working on the mod for R2TW (must say, that was the least satisfying experience so far, game is a hot mess, and CA should be punished for spreading so many nonsense things into common population).. using these numbers he had in book were just way too tight so eventually, i had to use 0.6 value too. (kinda funny how game actually forces you into the right conclusion, isnt it?)
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 03:11 PM)JaM Wrote: weighting the back of the spear means you cannot hold it in the middle, or at front, as for example Thrand is doing with his sliding throws. It means you have to hold it in the rear, and also such weapon is then unsuitable to be thrown at all (so no ankyle on it) as it would have incorrect flight trajectory (but thats besides the point.)
Next thing is the that with weighted spear, and thrusts, you kinda have sauroter at the height of your face, but more importantly a man behind you. if you try to withdraw the spear, you might hit him in the head, plus, its kinda something you would not have to be worried about in the heat of battle while standing behind somebody. yes, you can rise the arm higher, to get the spearpoint in correct height, but then you will experience faster fatigue due to blood loss.. plus, again, you would have to be constantly aware of what you are doing to not hurt people behind..
Then there is the whole grip notion. with overarm, your wrist is the most stressed part. Each hit against something would create stress, any attempt to maneuver with spear, would just increase the stress. and if you are holding the spear in the back, your wrist has to hold the whole weight alone during the attacks.
Also, i would like to see some measuring for speed of attack with such thrusts. Yes, Thrand overarm is very fast, but that's not thrust, but throw, and his spear grip is different, his spear is differently weighted. I can imagine this type of attack to be used with a throwing spear/heavy javelin, properly weighted towards front (you get better speed with weight in front with the trajectory of the throw.)
I know what rear weighted means. But I do not know why you think it is somehow different in overhand or underhand grip. You can see in the photo I attached that I am using a severely rear weighted dory with no problem overhand. Underhand only helps is the spear is NOT rear weighted.
As to your second point, this is why we discovered the "J-stroke". As the arm moves back, the spear is angled down in front and the sauroter is never in a position to hit the man behind you because it is angled up over his head. Even if it did get pushed back, it would hit him with the side of the shaft, not the point. When you strike, the spear moves forward and the tip comes up until the final strike is on a flat trajectory, or even angled upwards. because the sauroter never comes down until the strike has started, the comes down directly over your shoulder and cannot hit the man behind.
The grip is less a problem than you think because most of the force comes from accelerating a heavy spear. If the shaft loses linkage with your hand and slides it will not matter. You are not pushing with the spear. Again it is very much like a throw.
"and if you are holding the spear in the back, your wrist has to hold the whole weight alone during the attacks." That sentence makes me think you are not understanding what a rear weighted spear feels like. The part in front of the grip is completely balanced by the part behind. There is no special stress in holding such a spear near the rear. It is exactly like holding a regular spear in the middle.
As to the speed of the strike. All that matters is the strength of the muscles engaged and their mechanical advantage and the amount of time the hand spends in contact with the shaft accelerating it. The muscle groups used in the overhand strike are far stronger and in fact have evolved in humans specifically to throw- Chimpanzees can't throw like us. The range of motion is far greater as well, meaning more time to accelerate. Overhand is far faster. Again, this has been tested by Connolly and De Groote.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
Quote:The grip is less a problem than you think because most of the force comes from accelerating a heavy spear. If the shaft loses linkage with your hand and slides it will not matter. You are not pushing with the spear. Again it is very much like a throw.
but if you hold it back, you dont have enough of "spear" to let it slide.. for that you would need to hold it in the front,same as Thrand is doing.
Quote:"and if you are holding the spear in the back, your wrist has to hold the whole weight alone during the attacks." That sentence makes me think you are not understanding what a rear weighted spear feels like. The part in front of the grip is completely balanced by the part behind. There is no special stress in holding such a spear near the rear. It is exactly like holding a regular spear in the middle.
yet wrist is the most vulnerable part of the arm..its not that hard to twist it.. with undearm fixed grip, no such thing can happen.
Quote:As to the speed of the strike. All that matters is the strength of the muscles engaged and their mechanical advantage and the amount of time the hand spends in contact with the shaft accelerating it. The muscle groups used in the overhand strike are far stronger and in fact have evolved in humans specifically to throw- Chimpanzees can't throw like us. The range of motion is far greater as well, meaning more time to accelerate. Overhand is far faster. Again, this has been tested by Connolly and De Groote.
yes, but throw to be effective, it has to have quite a different trajectory for maximum speed.. while you are thrusting on downward path, not upwards. from your picture, it even looks like the only muscle that does the work is Triceps, which is again not that effective, and in no way more powerful than using high underarm and more of a "benchpress" move with all muscles in upper front body together. and btw, you can have slow forward "punches" like this, but also quite dynamic ones and very fast. its all about the technique.
Overarm is only faster for the release trajectory, not past it, then it slows down quite dramatically.. you would have to do a throwing move with the spear to keep the speed with it.. if you keep holding it, your own body will slow it down.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Bryan - 08-23-2016
Watch this video
This is Thrand performing a powerful overhand thrust without using the slide. Clearly there is still significant power without sliding/short throwing the shaft. Nor is power even that necessary, it takes little pressure for combat sharp iron to pierce flesh, and attacking any form of armor isn't wise.
Besides, Thrand is the only one promoting the slide. While its very interesting, there isn't any historical precedent for it. Maybe it was used, maybe it wasn't. Even if it wasn't, there are still plenty of reasons why overhand was better than under (re-read the entirety of this thread and a hundred similar threads in RAT for the answers as to why).
The wrist is not the most vulnerable part of the arm, I would say that's that would be the part that either has the largest and most easy accessible artery clusters (brachial in the upper arm), or the part which large and easy to reach muscles that can most easily disable the whole arm (again, upper arm, partial bicep or tricep severs cripple whole arm), or the area where the bones are at the thinnest and most easy to break (forearm).
I've pointed out to you before, the basic angle of the underhand grip already starts the spear user with an unnatural angle of the wrist. Look at this picture that shows a hoplite using the Chris Matthew/JaM Medium Guard Underhand grip, the wrist is not straight, it is heavily bent, angled. Have you heard of carpal tunnel syndrome? It is caused by compressing the median nerve in the wrist from holding the hands at awkward angles while typing, like this. Now compare those improper typing angles to the grip angle of the medium guard underhand grip and you'll see that the Medium Guard Underhand grip has the wrist at an angle that compressed the median nerve. Making it a weaker grip angle and more dangerous.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 05:10 PM)JaM Wrote: but if you hold it back, you dont have enough of "spear" to let it slide.. for that you would need to hold it in the front,same as Thrand is doing.
yes, but throw to be effective, it has to have quite a different trajectory for maximum speed.. while you are thrusting on downward path, not upwards. from your picture, it even looks like the only muscle that does the work is Triceps, which is again not that effective, and in no way more powerful than using high underarm and more of a "benchpress" move with all muscles in upper front body together. and btw, you can have slow forward "punches" like this, but also quite dynamic ones and very fast. its all about the technique.
Overarm is only faster for the release trajectory, not past it, then it slows down quite dramatically.. you would have to do a throwing move with the spear to keep the speed with it.. if you keep holding it, your own body will slow it down.
You misunderstand. I am not sliding the spear forward like Thrand. I am telling you that the mass of the spearshaft is what causes the damage, not your hand holding it. If your wrist were at risk, you could let the spear slide BACK through your hand as it impacts. Essentially letting it go, and the strike will still be strong. You really need to hit something. Find a broom.
You misunderstand as well what is happening in that picture. In the image I am about 90% of the way through a strike. The strike trajectory is flat, not down. at full strike my arm will be straight in line with the spear, perpendicular to the ground. Prior to that image my arm is way back and up, hence the "J" description. The strike uses all of the major muscle groups of my back and chest and incorporates the torqueing of my whole upper body. I am NOT thrusting downwards at all, and note that I am not hitting the head of the man behind me (closer than he would actually stand). I have attached an image set of the whole J-strike. No part of my strike is being slowed down by my body prior to contact, it just keeps accelerating.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
but that will only work for you if you are in a front row, with the second row, your spear would have to go over the guy in front of you, and the trajectory you are making would collide with him. (or you would have to be in an staggered formation, not the line formation)
plus, your arm is up at the start, presenting nice target - your armpit, area enemy would definitely want to exploit (not necessarily the one in front of you, but guys from sides. plus, to me it looks like you need to do quite a lot of movements with your arm this way.
Anyway, if you are comfortable with it, that's fine. what interests me most would be how it would compare in all those areas i mentioned before. and at the same time, what would be the accuracy, or ability to parry, or prevent enemy from parrying your spear sideways (not really something you want to be blocking with your wrist) Because the main problem is to find out the most efficient way how to use the spear (as Dan said, not necessarily the one that gives you the strongest blow) within the formation.
Bryan:
With underarm you do the twisting move which is perfectly natural for the forearm. while rising the spear with the wrist with the thumb pointing back is not very natural, and has its limits.
and btw, yes, i seen that video, was watching all his videos recently. yet must say that he does the underarm trusts much less seriously than he does his slides or anything else. at least that was my observation from it.
and on a side note, what i mentioned before, i kinda see the Macedonian phalanx to be an evolution of the hoplite phalanx and not a new concept.. yes, spear got longer, but overall concept to keep enemy at bay was same. Yet, if overarm was the main use of the spear, i would imagine Macedonians to be also trying to hold pikes in similar fashion, so they would be more inclined to come with a grip very similar to the one Pike and Shot era Pikemen used, but instead, they are shown with the underam low grip with it.. why would they go and come with such a completely different fighting style?
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Bryan - 08-23-2016
Twisting your wrist unnaturally does not make for a perfectly natural forearm. Compressing a nerve in the wrist does not make for a more natural wrist angle. Make a fist like you want to punch something, or grab a hammer. The wrist is perfectly straight. There is nothing at all taxing about that grip. And that's the overhand grip.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 07:09 PM)JaM Wrote: but that will only work for you if you are in a front row, with the second row, your spear would have to go over the guy in front of you, and the trajectory you are making would collide with him. (or you would have to be in an staggered formation, not the line formation)
plus, your arm is up at the start, presenting nice target - your armpit, area enemy would definitely want to exploit (not necessarily the one in front of you, but guys from sides. plus, to me it looks like you need to do quite a lot of movements with your arm this way.
Anyway, if you are comfortable with it, that's fine. what interests me most would be how it would compare in all those areas i mentioned before. and at the same time, what would be the accuracy, or ability to parry, or prevent enemy from parrying your spear sideways (not really something you want to be blocking with your wrist) Because the main problem is to find out the most efficient way how to use the spear (as Dan said, not necessarily the one that gives you the strongest blow) within the formation.
This discussion goes better if you don't make statements like "that will only work for you if you are in a front row" if you have not tried it yourself. Ask instead "but can that work in the second row?" To which I will answer "Yes, since we have done this four billion times". None of what you conjecture above actually happens in real life.
As for my arm up, sure it creates a target, but this is mitigated by the fact that my body is twisted back as I rear back so my armpit is not facing forward. It also only happens at maximum rearward extension, most strikes would be less than full strength and start at panel two. A lot of movements with my arm translates into a lot of range of motion adding force to the strike- that is the whole point! You can also jab quite effectively. Remember it is Mathew who tried to set strength of strike as the criteria we should use to decide which they used. Humorously, he is completely wrong within his own criteria.
I have already answered most of these other questions.
The overhand strike: Has a far greater range of targets
Is both faster and stronger
Can me modified to hit with a range of strengths from a quick jab to committed strike
Parries well, with the shaft- akin to parrying with the forte of a rapier
Recovers easily when knocked off line- you just bring the spear back and it ends up pointing straight ahead
Is more accurate
Is hard to parry because the shaft is angled downwards until the rapid strike- not held out straight
When parried, it rotates harmlessly over head rather that swiveling into someone
When stuck in someone is less likely to get propelled backwards into the men behind you
When angled down completely protects the right forearm from oncoming strikes
Any other questions?
(08-23-2016, 07:09 PM)JaM Wrote: and on a side note, what i mentioned before, i kinda see the Macedonian phalanx to be an evolution of the hoplite phalanx and not a new concept.. yes, spear got longer, but overall concept to keep enemy at bay was same. Yet, if overarm was the main use of the spear, i would imagine Macedonians to be also trying to hold pikes in similar fashion, so they would be more inclined to come with a grip very similar to the one Pike and Shot era Pikemen used, but instead, they are shown with the underam low grip with it.. why would they go and come with such a completely different fighting style?
A) No one believes the Sarissa to be the direct descendant of the dory. The Macedonians were either influenced by Iphicratids or by the same influences that led to Iphicrates experiments- perhaps Thracian spearmen.
B) Macedonians are holding the sarissa exactly how all Greek hoplites hold the two handed spear. But Greeks only use these for hunting.
c) They used a shoulder strap to hold up the front hand, this can only be used if held low.
d) I don't think anyone ever said that hoplites never hold their dory underhanded. I think this was perhaps the go to position after one side routed. We are saying it was not the manner of use in phalanx combat.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
1. in video below Lindybeige doesnt agree:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klOc9C-aPr4
2. that would have to be measured first. From what i remember, every times somebody did that, results were flawed, like for example only measuring the trajectory for throwing, not for thrusting.
3,5 and 6 same thing in that video, you can pretty much parry quite well with underarm and your grip is much stiffer and you can better fix your spear from ever being pushed aside
4. would need to be measured.
7. guys behind are behind their own shields, so sauroter is not endangering them at all, plus, farthest it would go is precisely where their shield is. Which would actually allow transferring the movement energy of the entire formation into the speartip, but crouching the spear, fixing it against the shield of guy behind me and hitting the enemy like that in the charge.. momentum would give far more energy in such charge than any kind of a thrust. (charging medieval knight principle)
8. not sure what you mean by that.