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.
Jaroslav Jakubov
