10-28-2008, 01:21 PM
We don't double grip our spears with or without pelte. An old SCA spear fighter once said "double gripping a spear is for a man who fears his opponent" or words to that effect. I agree. White you should deliver a stronger blow, the aggregate effect is a series of prods rather than blows that will have effect--and of course, you can't throw the thing when it is gripped two-handed.
As to under hand vs. over hand--it's funny, because I did quite a bit of bayonet fencing in a former life and I have a natural pre-disposition for the underhand--but I have to admit that I think it is merely a guard, neither more nor less useful than overhand--in fact, I think it slightly LESS useful. The reasons are subtle, but I'll try to encapsulate them.
First, underhand has slightly better reach but only at the expense of power. This summer, I did some tests striking at a steel 55 gallon drum with a lonche. The spear point more frequently penetrated the steel from an overhand strike, even at three feet, using the overhand. Again, these are one man's results and further, the difference wasn't broad enough to be significant--except that the overhand position DID generate a lot of power.
Second, overhand offers the fighter a wider selection of targets and a greater capability to feint. An underhand thrust has a very limited line--the swing of the arm, the fighter's own shield, etc. Overhand allows a fighter--especially one with a full sized aspis--the full range of options, including a very deceptive strike down into the foes upper thigh. Most importantly, though, the high or overhand guard ensures that the fighter's spear will NOT be trapped between or below shields when the press gets close, nor will the butt interfere with his file partner. All this has doubtless been said before, but it is more exciting when you experience it for yourself!
Finally, the underhand thrust is "in line" with the fighter's body and the foe's shield, where the overhand thrust is "out of line" or rather from an angle--close in, it is possible to strike OVER a shield, and farther out, some other geometries can play. The most important (although we're just beginning to experiment with this as we produce more aspides!) is that a fighter in the high guard can thrust diagonally at opponents to his right and left in the full press of "othismos" or the like, which is deadly, especially when someone with good point control is able to start working "across the grain" (that is, into the unshielded sides of fighters to his front and right due to line problems.) In one experiment, one fighter was able to down eight opponents and shatter a 24 person block simply by feinting at the immediate enemy and thrusting diagonally--the experiment was to determine what would happen when a phalanx formed too closely or was packed in by othismos and faced a lighter armed enemy.
We still have so much learning to do that I fear to announce "results". But I think I'm starting to get a feel for hoplite fighting, and I think I see why they de-emphasized "fencing" hoplomache in favor of endurance sports such as running and pankration. We find that with a big shield and armour, the odds of taking a killing blow are very small--at first. But--as you tire, your odds of taking a killing blow rise, and rise. It's an interesting question how this would play into morale with real weapons and death as a potential result. I have a growing suspicion that, when the first men start to die, their deaths signal to the whole phalanx that they have reached a point of fatigue where men die (hope that sentence makes sense) and suddenly the game changes--and the rules of morale take over. The side with the better physical fitness and endurance can keep their shields up and their spears engaged longer, and so they reach the point of mortality more slowly. Deeper, stiffer formations don't have the same contact with the front rank that a shallower formation (4 deep or even eight) has, so whether or not the men are "pushing" (and I won't begin to weigh in on that!) a deeper formation tires, as a body, more slowly and is less immediately concerned with front rank losses.
That's a LOT of guesswork based on about forty hours of spear fighting with an aspis. I can smell the hubris from here! But I'm finding it all so fascinating I had to report on it. And I'd really like to hear from anyone else doing Greek style fighting. I'd like to discuss safety, arms and armour, and what we're learning.
As to under hand vs. over hand--it's funny, because I did quite a bit of bayonet fencing in a former life and I have a natural pre-disposition for the underhand--but I have to admit that I think it is merely a guard, neither more nor less useful than overhand--in fact, I think it slightly LESS useful. The reasons are subtle, but I'll try to encapsulate them.
First, underhand has slightly better reach but only at the expense of power. This summer, I did some tests striking at a steel 55 gallon drum with a lonche. The spear point more frequently penetrated the steel from an overhand strike, even at three feet, using the overhand. Again, these are one man's results and further, the difference wasn't broad enough to be significant--except that the overhand position DID generate a lot of power.
Second, overhand offers the fighter a wider selection of targets and a greater capability to feint. An underhand thrust has a very limited line--the swing of the arm, the fighter's own shield, etc. Overhand allows a fighter--especially one with a full sized aspis--the full range of options, including a very deceptive strike down into the foes upper thigh. Most importantly, though, the high or overhand guard ensures that the fighter's spear will NOT be trapped between or below shields when the press gets close, nor will the butt interfere with his file partner. All this has doubtless been said before, but it is more exciting when you experience it for yourself!
Finally, the underhand thrust is "in line" with the fighter's body and the foe's shield, where the overhand thrust is "out of line" or rather from an angle--close in, it is possible to strike OVER a shield, and farther out, some other geometries can play. The most important (although we're just beginning to experiment with this as we produce more aspides!) is that a fighter in the high guard can thrust diagonally at opponents to his right and left in the full press of "othismos" or the like, which is deadly, especially when someone with good point control is able to start working "across the grain" (that is, into the unshielded sides of fighters to his front and right due to line problems.) In one experiment, one fighter was able to down eight opponents and shatter a 24 person block simply by feinting at the immediate enemy and thrusting diagonally--the experiment was to determine what would happen when a phalanx formed too closely or was packed in by othismos and faced a lighter armed enemy.
We still have so much learning to do that I fear to announce "results". But I think I'm starting to get a feel for hoplite fighting, and I think I see why they de-emphasized "fencing" hoplomache in favor of endurance sports such as running and pankration. We find that with a big shield and armour, the odds of taking a killing blow are very small--at first. But--as you tire, your odds of taking a killing blow rise, and rise. It's an interesting question how this would play into morale with real weapons and death as a potential result. I have a growing suspicion that, when the first men start to die, their deaths signal to the whole phalanx that they have reached a point of fatigue where men die (hope that sentence makes sense) and suddenly the game changes--and the rules of morale take over. The side with the better physical fitness and endurance can keep their shields up and their spears engaged longer, and so they reach the point of mortality more slowly. Deeper, stiffer formations don't have the same contact with the front rank that a shallower formation (4 deep or even eight) has, so whether or not the men are "pushing" (and I won't begin to weigh in on that!) a deeper formation tires, as a body, more slowly and is less immediately concerned with front rank losses.
That's a LOT of guesswork based on about forty hours of spear fighting with an aspis. I can smell the hubris from here! But I'm finding it all so fascinating I had to report on it. And I'd really like to hear from anyone else doing Greek style fighting. I'd like to discuss safety, arms and armour, and what we're learning.
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
