[split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear

[Crispianus]

2cm thickness? that would make it quite heavy i suppose.. any tests been made against such armor?

Some observations...

Uncompressed oak tanned Bovine leather 8mm thick is approx 2Lbs(900grms) a square foot(300x300mm) by my estimate you would use about 6 square foot (12 Lbs)more or less, 2 back, 1.5 front, 1 sides, 1 shoulders combined with back.
The thickness can be tailored by adjusting the thickness by extra layers, thinning or by using thinner material on less exposed or reinforced areas, the body could be made from several pieces joined together or one piece adjusted for thickness where appropriate, the front or any area could be reinforced with raw hide ...
Felt could be used as a backing...
The Pteruges: leather or a strip woven material such as tablet weave(see image), I appreciate that this image is not Greek:
    Image credit RomanHideout.com

Weapon penetration(speculative: although I did try a steel spike with a long thin point as hard as I could strike overhand on two layers against a wooden block, but it has no weight! it pentrated one layer about 5-6mm)
I need a razor edge to cut this material and some force to open the cut, a sword or spear point I think would be somewhat blunter, a sword thrust IMHO wouldn't stand much chance, a spear would likely penetrate one layer and  would likely be stopped by a second layer, though this would depend entirely on the weight and power of the blow and the type of spearhead.

so I would say on this unhardened leather, one thickness would provide minimal protection against a spear thrust more if a double layer is used or if the leather is hardened, doubled, or has a shock absorbant backing of any kind... even if the armour was pentrated the attacker may well find themselves with the spear stuck in their opponent as it would tend to stick in the leather.. and that fraction of a second struggling to free it could easily result in injury by a second opponent targeting the armpit...

Apart from any protective qualities it might give, Armour such as this may act more as deterrant forcing the opponent to a pick a more exposed area as and when chance allowed... for me this would be the thigh, neck or shoulder region not covered by protection, a meaningfull strike to the unprotected area of the shoulder would effectively disable/disarm the opponent...

The downside:
Such thick veg tanned leather could take years to tan if such a tanning method was available at this time, the current archaeological evidence would point towards this not being the case though it could be possible that the Greeks had access to it, in any case thick leather suitable for shoe soles was available.
The other possiblity is that such armour is made from Rawhide or partially tanned or cured with a rawhide core, or wholly oil tanned leather such as Buff....

Note: Vegetable tanned leather is well established  from surviving leatherwork from the late first century BC at least.

Edit: Theophrastus (371-287bc) in his book "Enquiry into plants" mentions Vegetable Tanning from a variety of sources including Oak Galls, Pine Bark and Acacia Pods and Sumach(white leather) and Alder(possibly red) for dying.
Original credit: C. van Driel-Murray " Leatherwork and Skin Products" in "Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology".
https://archive.org/details/enquiryintoplant01theouoft

[Dan Howard]

It should be pointed out that every spear-using culture on earth uses the 'overarm' technique..

Except the Zulus. Around the time of Shaka they replaced their longer iklwa with the shorter assegai and changed to close-quarters underarm thrusts.

[Paul Bardunias]

2cm thickness? that would make it quite heavy i suppose.. any tests been made against such armor?

I did some tests using a modern razor broadhead arrow and a relatively light bow 30-35lbs at point blank range against layers of ether doubled linen and 5mm thick leather.  I cannot recall off the top of my head whether 10 or 15mm stopped them.  These arrowheads penetrate far better than ancient arrows according to Aldrete. I used a light 30-35lbs biw for 2 reasons: I have one, and I wanted to simulate shots at range because if you are shooting arrows at charging hoplites 20m away you are going to die.

[Bryan]

It should be pointed out that every spear-using culture on earth uses the 'overarm' technique..

Except the Zulus. Around the time of Shaka they replaced their longer iklwa with the shorter assegai and changed to close-quarters underarm thrusts.

I don't think that's correct, the Zulus continued using an overarm grip for the assengai.

[Paullus Scipio]

Thank you Crispianus/Ivor for your most informative post, which I regard as fairly authoritative, given your longstanding interest in all things leather. Well done !
As both Paul B. and Crispianus point out, to be effective against leather, a weapon must be razor sharp, and on a battlefield very few are, and those that are don't remain that way for long!

Dan Howard wrote:
"Except the Zulus. Around the time of Shaka they replaced their longer iklwa with the shorter assegai and changed to close-quarters underarm thrusts."


I'm afraid you have that the wrong way round, Dan. 'Assegai' is a generic word for spear ( from the Berber?), and generally refers to a lightish dual-purpose spear around 6 ft long used for both throwing and stabbing ( in effect a 'longche/lancea'). Shaka's reform was to invent what was effectively a sword with a blade up to 2 ft/60 cm long mounted on a short shaft and overall a sword-like 30inches/75 cm long. This weapon could not, of course, be thrown and necessitated hand-to-hand combat. Shaka named this new type of assegai 'iklwa', an onomatopoeic word supposedly reflecting the sound it made as it was withdrawn from the victim's body. The older weapon continued in use as a preliminary 'missile weapon' and for skirmishing. [see e.g. "The washing of the spears" Donald Morris]

As Bryan has pointed out, this weapon was used overarm as well as underarm in swordlike fashion. Anyone who has watched the film "Zulu", in which real Zulus played the part of their ancestors will have seen 'iklwas' being used overarm.

I am curious as to why you assert that leather armour in a Graeco-Macedonian context would be 15-20 mm thick ? Do you have evidence for this - I don't know of any - or are you basing this on what thickness is necessary to be relatively 'weapon-proof'?

Bear in mind that throughout history, right down to modern armoured vehicles, few defensive measures are designed to be fully 'weapon-proof', for degree of protection is but one of many factors........

In my view, most T-and-Y corselets will probably have been around 5 mm thick, and 10 mm for overlapping 'double breasted' types based on a number of factors.......

[Paul Bardunias]

I just took a look at the data in my book.  A modern razor broadhead from a 30lb bow cuts right through 4mm of leather, pierces, but incompletely penetrates two layers of 8-10mm, and is stopped by 12 mm with no perforation on the inner layer.  For comparison, 6-8mm of twinned linen was incompletely penetrated, and around 4-5mm of linen stopped it cold when treated with kaolin clay.

[JaM]

Except the Zulus. Around the time of Shaka they replaced their longer iklwa with the shorter assegai and changed to close-quarters underarm thrusts.

And lets not forget Medieval infantry (italic states used shield and spear infantry up to renaissance times), which tended to strap their shields to one arm so they could use spear in both hands underarm... Technically speaking, with two handed underarm thrust, you are not getting more speed than with one hand, you only add more power to the thrust..


plus, keeping spear in low underarm position is actually preferable when facing cavalry, as you can just simply brace the spear to the ground, same way as renaissance pikemen did it when facing cavalry, or even 18.century musketeers did this too with their muskets and attached bayonets when facing cavalry in a square.


My point is, both overarm and underarm spear uses have their advantages and disadvantages, and they would be used alongside based on situation what spearmen would see as appropriate. There was hardly some strict rule to not use the spear one way or another, which is why even pictographic evidence (vases) shows both uses in roughly 50:50 numbers..



And regarding thickness of T-Y armors, i think its most likely due to amount of protection these armors would have to provide.. 5-10mm thick would not provide enough of protection, therefore would be inadequate. I guess these would need to provide at least similar level of protection as bronze breastplates,which were typically 1-1.5mm thick, therefore, leather armor of similar protection level would have to be almost 2cm thick. (correct me if im wrong)

[Paul Bardunias]

No one here has said that Greeks did not thrust underhand.  Every Spartan hoplite worth his salt used a spear two handed and underhand.  But only when using boar spears to hunt!  All we are saying  is that they used overhand when in formation.  I have gone so far as to suggest that they switched to underhand after one side broke and they fought with more room to move.

[JaM]

they are not portrayed on almost every second vase hunting boars..  (but lets not rehash this discussion again, we probably posted everything there is for both already)

[Paul Bardunias]

they are not portrayed on almost every second vase hunting boars..  (but lets not rehash this discussion again, we probably posted everything there is for both already)

They are never shown using the dory two handed in battle. You brought it up.  I am agreeing that hoplites knew how to hold a spear 2 handed underhand.

Every second vase does not show men in phalanx combat.  If you are willing to accept that all those vases showing individual combat are the ones showing underhand, I am with you completely.

[JaM]

no, i said Medieval spearmen used it twohanded. not Ancient greeks. Macedonians used two hands but with the sarrissa

[Dan Howard]

I am curious as to why you assert that leather armour in a Graeco-Macedonian context would be 15-20 mm thick ? Do you have evidence for this - I don't know of any - or are you basing this on what thickness is necessary to be relatively 'weapon-proof'?

We know how leather armour was made. We have plenty of examples from all over the world. The only examples that are less than 1cm thick (such as the cuir bouilli tested by Williams) were layered over other armour. Standalone leather armour was generally multi layered and always over 1cm thick.

And regarding thickness of T-Y armors, i think its most likely due to amount of protection these armors would have to provide.. 5-10mm thick would not provide enough of protection, therefore would be inadequate. I guess these would need to provide at least similar level of protection as bronze breastplates,which were typically 1-1.5mm thick, therefore, leather armor of similar protection level would have to be almost 2cm thick. (correct me if im wrong)

Exactly. If I were making a spolas I would use 1 layer of 5-8mm of rawhide or semi-cured hide on the back and shoulders and 2-3 layers on the front (depending on whether the hide was compressed and whether the design was double-breasted).

[Paullus Scipio]

Your generalisation isn't really true. For example, as you are well aware from postings on other Forums, 'Buff' coats used by cavalry in the 17C were some 5 mm thick i.e. made from a single hide layer, and were considered perfectly adequate protection against swords and spent bullets, as I have posted on the other 'Phalanx' thread.

Crispianus ( above) provided an estimate of around 12lbs [5.5 kg aprox] for a single layer Tube-and-Yoke. With a design as you describe, which may well have existed, considering these were individually made generally, you are looking at a much heavier corselet - say 18[double]-30 lbs[triple] 8 to 13.6 kg aprox. Even only 'triple layered' in front that's a pretty heavy body armour!

If you were on a 'losing' side and having to run for your life, even after having discarded your shield, you are as good as dead.......
That too should be a factor in deciding how much protection you want, and may explain ( inter alia) the trend toward lighter equipment, including no body armour, in the 5c BC ( though it is likely that at no time did all hoplites wear body armour)

[Paul Bardunias]

If you were on a 'losing' side and having to run for your life, even after having discarded your shield, you are as good as dead.......

They are really easy to get out of, literally drop your shield and pull two or three cords and run like hell.

[Paullus Scipio]

I just took a look at the data in my book.  A modern razor broadhead from a 30lb bow cuts right through 4mm of leather, pierces, but incompletely penetrates two layers of 8-10mm, and is stopped by 12 mm with no perforation on the inner layer.  For comparison, 6-8mm of twinned linen was incompletely penetrated, and around 4-5mm of linen stopped it cold when treated with kaolin clay.

Just one problem........ancient archers didn't have "modern razor broadheads" so your figures are irrelevant, meaningless and don't apply. If you are going to use 'modern' offensive weapons, then perhaps you ought only to compare them to 'modern' defences, rather than comparing apples with oranges......And kaolin clay impregnated linen is just another completely unevidenced wild theory........

---

If you were on a 'losing' side and having to run for your life, even after having discarded your shield, you are as good as dead.......

They are really easy to get out of, literally drop your shield and pull two or three cords and run like hell.

Perhaps, but there are a minimum of 3 fastenings, sometimes more, and as anyone who owns laced shoes can tell you, they have the habit of becoming 'knotted' at the most inconvenient moments, and in the case of a 'spolas', you hardly want 'quick release' type fastenings for it would be mighty embarrassing to have your corselet fall off in action........so not so easy to discard.
There are many, many other disadvantages to having a relatively heavy 'thoraka' - see Xenophon "Anabasis" III.4, the incident with Soteridas for example.........