Depictions of Underarm Phalanxes

[Robert Vermaat]

Well, here's the Late Roman guy again with his 'phalanx'. Yes I know, it's not the same, but apparently the late guys fight differently, or at least have alternative views that might add some leverage to this discussion.

I think the use of the spear would vary due to the circumstances.

I also think that most people misunderstand underarm fighting. In a phalanx you would never try to fight underarm against the enemy's torso (would be protected by his shield) or head (the angle would be too weird). Underarm fighting while in phalanx would aim at the enemy legs and feet, so you would keep your spear well under your shield too. Such harassment can be a real problem, especially if you are not fully armored on the leg area and makes you wanna bend down...

Not necessarily. You can fight underarm but couched, and aim very well at the enemy's head, as shown in this Late Roman formation. As with the Greek phlanx, legs are protected (but feet aren't! How did the Greeks avoid injuries to the feet?) and large shields protect the torso.
[attachment=679]1_2011-04-27.JPG[/attachment]
[attachment=680]2_2011-04-27.JPG[/attachment]

Not really, since a normal pre Iphicratean spear is not that long as to not being able to draw it back with very quick and simple moves. Someone would have to keep it there in order for you not to be able to draw it back and place it up again and this is highly improbable since that would mean that an enemy first ranker should lay down his own shield and weapon... A spear was supposed to aim at the enemy's face and legs (this is what shin-guards were anyways worn for) and so its length and grip were accordingly calculated.

Do you mean that when formed up in a phalanx, with your shield centered in front of your body, you can move a 210-240 cm spear held towards the rear from under the shield to over without spearing someone behind you? Even if the shields get close together and the man behind starts pressing on your back with their shield? That would be interesting if true.

I agree with Sean, it's a bit like the discussion about using the long spatha in a densely packed formation. Does the wielder of the spear have enough room to gather the momentum, without hitting the man behind him? I would say that if the the formation needed to be dense, the answer would be no. Any movement to the rear would ultimately hit the man behind you, since you could never take enough care to avoid this. Therefore, in a packed dense formation (synaspismos or less) you could only stab without much momentum. As in the Late Roman formation, this must have been the case with Greek hoplites as well. In a Late Roman formation, the man in front would use the spear underarm, and the men behind him all stab downwards, overarm.

Now, in a less dense formation, room could be created betwen the men in fron and the line behind them, allowing them to use the full potential of the spear or sword, which could be wielded with full force, without a care about the man to the back. In such a situation, Paul's figures would be correct I think.
In a Late Roman formation, the men in front also use the overarm stab, with the men behind him probably out of reach of the enemy.