+- 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 - Bryan - 08-23-2016
You haven't figured out Lindybeige has almost no idea what he is talking about in pretty much every video he ever made? He's quirky and entertaining sometimes and every once in a while brings up an interesting point but his theories are usually completely wrong. He does not have the background to discuss this topic effectively, especially the overhand/underhand topic when it comes to ancient hoplites.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-23-2016
so far didnt seen much of his theories be wrong.. on contrary, he was most of the time spot on.. plus, he mentioned he was member of dark age reenactment society and they did a lot of mock fighting in formations.. seen one of his videos on that topic (even though its quite funny, kinda like benny hill videos)
but of course, nobody is always right.. people make mistakes (and he covers a lot of diverse topics), its how you learn from your mistakes what is important, because it allows you to improve..
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Bryan - 08-23-2016
Choice A. Come to RAT and explore it and discuss Roman and Greek topics with some of the most educated and up to date historians on the subject (not me mind you, I just regurgitate things they say for the most part).
Choice B. Go on Youtube and watch the videos of an entertainer who generalizes historical subjects he isn't really qualified to discuss.
One of these is a poor choice to learn about history.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Paul Bardunias - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 07:53 PM)JaM Wrote: 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.
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)
1. Ha, I got about a minute in before I ran into trouble believing him because my dory is 9 feet long and rear weighted to be the equivalent in reach to a 12 foot spear! He is proven wrong from the get go.
The best way to think of it is this. A spear couched underarm is like a gun in a sponson, while a spear overarm is like a gun in a turret. Far more targets. It is often missed that these spears are long. This means more space between the opposing lines, which in turn means less need to angle down to hit thighs and calves.
2 This is bull. You are getting this from Mathew's book where he just decided that any test done by Gabriel and Metz that blew his pet theory out of the water was really a thrown spear. See the attached image of real tests of strikes. The left side is penetration tests by De Groote in a recent paper. The right side is a table from a paper by Connolly from...wait for it...2001. If you are a man of honor ask yourself why that was not cited. Are you getting a feel for why some are upset?
Your last point is again something that sounds nice until you actually try it. Knights add the momentum of a charging horse! A man moving at walking speed adds nothing compared to a strike. I won't even go into how unlikely fixing a sauroter in your aspis is, but I do wonder what the heck you think a phalanx looked like. In order for the second rank to use their spears underhand, they had to have their arms and shoulders right behind the sauroter of the man in front. If the shield was in line with the sauroter, their spear would be in the back of the man ahead!
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-24-2016
values for energy are a bit low.. If the spear is 1.3kg heavy, and you give it 5.8m/s it will generate 21 joules (to get to 35J you need a spear 2.1kg heavy which is a bit too much).
Plus, speeds for underarm are way too low. seen other tests where speed was double the values in that table, so i would guess the technique they used was not right. and thats the problem with all this.. usually people want to disprove the other theory, but they don't use the right technique to prove their point.. look at boxers or martial artists how they perform forward punch, its exactly the same trajectory as with underarm thrusts, and they can generate an insane amount of energy and speed.
btw, what DOP should represent in first table?
Quote:Bryan wrote: Choice A. Come to RAT and explore it and discuss Roman and Greek topics with some of the most educated and up to date historians on the subject (not me mind you, I just regurgitate things they say for the most part).
Choice B. Go on Youtube and watch the videos of an entertainer who generalizes historical subjects he isn't really qualified to discuss.
One of these is a poor choice to learn about history.
Funny how these arguments swapped isn't it? I told you almost the same thing when you came with Thrand video..
edit:
did what you said, took a stick, weighted on the back and tried to thrust with it extensively against a solid object. Thing is, i did feel far more fatigue overarm, specifically on my triceps (i was hitting hard object, not just thrusting into empty space), while underarm (at the shoulder height) it was not that big problem, but also after some time i mostly felt my pectorals and my back. i don't have the means to measure speed, yet i felt far better thrusting underarm than overarm. Tried the Thrand technique as well, but with weight in the back, its very problematic to do it the way he does. (turning to point heavy makes it easy though)
But of course, i don't claim this to be decisive proof or anything, as I said, for that, it would be important to get skilled guy with a historically accurate equipment and then do the measuring. (no disrespect, but neither you or Matthew (or me for that matter)are example of an athletic soldier, so any testing result wont be optimal in any way.)
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Dan Howard - 08-24-2016
The discussion about the amount of force that can be delivered with various techniques isn't particularly relevant or useful.
It takes very little energy to stab a spear into flesh; any technique can accomplish this very easily.
No human can stab a one-handed spear through armour regardless of the technique being used.
No experienced fighter uses full force to stab a spear in battle because it increases fatigue, it risks the spear getting stuck, and there is more chance of being knocked/pulled off balance.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-24-2016
yes, thats why i don't see those values prove anything, as neither value would allow penetrating armor, and all values would allow lethal wounds to the flesh. So i guess it would be about handiness of each technique withing confined space of close formation, battle fatigue and how fast it happen etc..
unrelated, but back to those speeds - average boxer can achieve with a direct punch velocity of around 10m/s, good boxers go over 12m/s. So if somebody presents values that are almost 3x lower for the same trajectory, something is most definitely not right with the technique. (muscles used in a punch and in overarm shoulder height thrust are exactly the same) (btw, Guinness record is 19m/s)
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-24-2016
It is not the same to punch with the nucklebones facing forward like a boxer, and with your wrist twisted like you would do with an underhand grip. Let alone carrying a spear.
Here's another video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p93xUp9GrQ
And there's this also
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-24-2016
no it actually is.. its the same movement, only you have your wrist differently, but that has nothing to do with the muscles behind that motion, which is exactly the same.
guy on the video don't have the right technique. These things needs to be tested with guys with some experience with martial arts, Hema or something similar. Reenactment is not a fight/ cannot be used as a proof of anything.
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-24-2016
You are just going to reject anything that disproves your points.
Regardless, you didn't comment on the second video, conducted in a martial arts school.
I wonder though how far will you go disregading all the evidence just because you feel personally attacked due to everybody else here having different opinions, based on the tests that you haven't done.
Khaire
Giannis
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-24-2016
nope, you are wrong. I don't feel personally attacked, or anything. and yes, i did some my tests that kinda proven the point for me.. i did feel much more fatigue overarm than underarm. If anything, your last post is kinda trying to steer the direction into personal attacks than anything written here so far.
For example, those numbers Paul posted, i seen them before (Connoly figures), yet, whats very strange about them is the fact that he got below average speeds for underarm thrusts. Matthew at the other side got below average speed for overarm.. So either Connoly is right, or Matthew is right, or both are for their contemporary technique. Mathew reported 7m/s (if i recall right) with underarm, which is not that far off the typical punch speed of average person (boxers as mentioned do 10m/s and more..) THats why I said we need somebody with the right technique in both cases, because to me it seems like they both did something wrong in their tests.
and mind you - this is all PHYSICS.. there are no different versions of it based on opinion.. so it kinda has to "click" together...
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-24-2016
It does sound like you do though, since you are quick to reject pretty much every photo, table, video or argument that anyone here has made so far, not by disproving it or pointing to other tables and arguments based on your actual experience but by doubting their credibility! It is not my business but I wonder why.
You probably don't understand what a rear weighted spear is. You added weight to the rear, so you changed the point of balance backwards. Then, do you not also change your grip backwards, to place it in the new point of balance? If not, why! That's the whole point of rear weighting as spear! It doesn't really effect how a spear feels, only a little, it only changes your reach.
And still you haven't commented on my second video.
Khaire
Giannis
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Robert Vermaat - 08-24-2016
[mod mode on]
Gentlemen, this is has so far a very interesting discussion,and you kept it civil for the past week. However, I must now urge you to keep it up. Personal insults will be dealt with and eventually so will you. Overarm or underarm.
[mod mode off/]
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - JaM - 08-24-2016
Giannis K. Hoplite: you should probably re-read the whole thread, because the point of weighted spear was risen by me when Bryan came with Thrand video. Weighted spear gives you ability to use the spear easily from the rear end (Thrand used is holding it in the front, and sliding the spear in his palm with a throwing motion, which seems quite effective technique, but as i said before, with a back heavy spear, its much more problematic)
And my questions to Paul are mostly to the usability of the spear area. accuracy with it, sustainability, and fatigue. he suggested me to try it with a broomstick and i admit, i don't have dory to practice, but did try it with something resembling it, with a weighted back. Yes, i could hold it overarm and underarm, yet when i hit the solid object while thrusting for several minutes, i felt much more fatigue with overarm grip than with underarm..
I've seen tables Paul provided before, and i told you why i find those values strange. They don't fit up with the base kinematic of human body, for the same trajectory Connoly gets much lower speed than others get. I'm not saying he is totally wrong in everything he wrote so far, just because he made mistake, and i kinda have that approach to every work i read so far... maybe Chris Matthew made some mistakes in his work, but that doesn't automatically make all his finding faulty. Instead, i wanna find out what precisely was in his work faulty... If i didn't had such approach, i would just dismiss practically every single historian who ever published some work, because everybody makes mistakes. and I said multiple times that once Paul's book is out, i will read it, and if I find those arguments answering my questions, i have no problem defending his book afterwards...
on a side note, if everybody always took word of somebody as granted, we would still believe world is flat on a back of a turtle...
RE: [split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear - Giannis K. Hoplite - 08-24-2016
You will notice that I am not accusing Matthews's book, since I haven't read it.
I am merely pointing out the sheer inability to use a Hoplite spear, however long and weighted, by any type of underarm grip in a tightly packed phalanx. Once the shields overlap, and we know that they did, there is no room for underhand use.
Once there is a man behind you who will may even put his shield on your back, there is no means to use a spear underhand.
I have even seen underhand held spears being pushed sideways, unable to point to the enemy in front, because the shield from behind pressed it!
I have seen reenactors using a spear underhand, but then only in 1m distance between the files. And then not with much success.
Your generalized comment about dismissing a reenactor because he's a reenactor and not a martial artist is also faulty. As if if you are a reenactor you cannot also be a martial artists, and as if martial artists are always justified to talk about any period fighting. Any martial artist reenactor I know vigorously supports the overhand grip in a phalanx. If Christian Cameron's account was still active here on RAT he would certainly contribute to this thread in favor of the overhand grip, and apparat from having one of the best archaic panoplies out there, he teaches medieval martial arts. In fact he teaches among others spear and rotella, an Italian round concave shield in roughly the size of an aspis without rim. Not surprisingly, spear and rotella according to the rennaissance manuals is fought overhand.
Still, it is the third time I'm inviting you to disregard the arguments posed in the second video I posted. Either you are imagining a much different phalanx than the one I do, or I can't see how underhand mechanics would work in the phalanx.
Further reference to the 15th century manuals about round shield and spear: http://elegant-weapon.blogspot.gr/2016/04/episode-62-bolognese-partisan-and.html
From the article's text:
" Interestingly, in the first two of these pictures, Marozzo has his right foot forward, something that isn't really recommended by the bulk of his instruction on the matter, where he usually recommends the guard shown in the Spiedo illustration. Also in the first image of the Partisan and shield, he shows his fighter engaged in the underhand grip**, something that he doesn't even cover in his material, as it is all done using the overhand style shown in the classical image. At least this is what I am assuming, as both Marozzo and Manciolino instruct their students to hold the spear in the manner of casting it***.
I find these two Bolognese masters very interesting in how they describe their system. This is because I feel like there has always been a bit of a contentious attitude among historical presentations in popular culture and academic experts about how useful it is to use a spear in this manner. On the one hand, the Bolognese system is probably an attempt to "recreate" the older way of fighting just as much as we are trying the "recreate" their material now. However, these Bolognese men would have been skilled warriors. steeped in martial tradition, so if they decided that this is the best way to make a system of use out of the overhand grip, then I believe they would be quite qualified in doing so.
The basics for this system are quite simple:
The Rotella defends thrusts made above the waist, while returning single time thrusts of your own.
Thrusts delivered to your legs are defended with the shaft of the Partisan, but with the spearhead pointed to the ground.
If a spear is thrown at you, void your body and use the shaft of the Partisan to deflect, again with the spearhead pointed to the ground.
If you get into trouble and are having difficulty controlling your Partisan with one hand, grab the Partisan with the left hand, still strapped to the Rotella, and treat it like a regular spear; or let Rotella fall off of your arm, and again treat like a spear.
While not complicated, this system is actually pretty elegant, and I have to say that I am having a lot of fun playing with it. One of the things that using a Partisan in this manner does, is relieve a lot of the arm strain, for which some of the normal criticism on the overhand grip is directed. This is because the need to use the spear itself for defense on the legs brings the spear into a much more comfortable position. "
I remind that this is advice from people who actually fought in battle in this manner.