The point wasn't so much about your comment (though I don't agree with it), its just that pretty much every forum in the last couple years that even mentions this debate you come bull rushing in to defend Matthew's theory, while trying to argue around any other evidence that is contradictory, even if that evidence isn't even related to the discussion. In the age of the internet, that screams fanboy.
You keep commenting that the mid shaft grip in the "Using the spear in ultra tight phalanx formation" video, or the Thrand videos, somehow nullifies their message, neither of which had anything to do with distance (which you keep bringing up as if a few inches of reach is the deciding factor in hoplite warfare). If the spear mockups they are using aren't perfectly balanced like an actual dory, it doesn't matter for the sake of what they are describing. Held in the middle with a evenly balanced spear, or held more in the rear with a tapered or rear heavy dory, an overhand grip makes for a more natural thrust, and gives the ability to properly parry and riposte an enemy's thrust, which is the point of the "Using the spear in ultra tight phalanx formation", not to discuss which spear grip allowed for the longer reach. Thrands videos show that an overhand grip can deliver more power than an underhand and does not interfere with any hoplite in the second rank at all (where as with Matthew's ready guard, the sauroter of the promachoi is going to smash into the second ranker's aspis after every thrust). Again, not something that reach or spear balance has any effect on.
Besides, you keep going on about weight and balance, based on Matthew's work, means you're working on a false assumption. Someone more knowledgeable than you or I (and more knowledgeable than Chris Matthew apparently) has already stated that the sauroters used by Matthew in his tests are too large and too heavy, they are not realistic, making the spear too back heavy.
Further, since Hoplites didn't run at each other with couched spears, as if they were knights without horses (as you claimed a few pages back), it means that a few inches of distance in spear fencing is not going to be the winning factor in a hoplite battle, especially when the only true part of the opponent harmed with the spear will be the ornate painting on the face of an aspis. The ability to accurately and quickly put the spear point into exposed flesh, that is what will win the hoplite fight for the promachoi. Either that or driving them back through intimidation or outright pushing them back (shield to shield othismos).
Why would men only a few inches away to the left or right, with shield's overlapping, be easy targets to a weak, easily telegraphed, underhanded upwards angled thrust?
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=13100]](http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/attachment.php?aid=13100)
![[Image: maxresdefault.jpg]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/3R95N0b0HAw/maxresdefault.jpg)
Show me where all the easy openings to the sides are.
You keep commenting that the mid shaft grip in the "Using the spear in ultra tight phalanx formation" video, or the Thrand videos, somehow nullifies their message, neither of which had anything to do with distance (which you keep bringing up as if a few inches of reach is the deciding factor in hoplite warfare). If the spear mockups they are using aren't perfectly balanced like an actual dory, it doesn't matter for the sake of what they are describing. Held in the middle with a evenly balanced spear, or held more in the rear with a tapered or rear heavy dory, an overhand grip makes for a more natural thrust, and gives the ability to properly parry and riposte an enemy's thrust, which is the point of the "Using the spear in ultra tight phalanx formation", not to discuss which spear grip allowed for the longer reach. Thrands videos show that an overhand grip can deliver more power than an underhand and does not interfere with any hoplite in the second rank at all (where as with Matthew's ready guard, the sauroter of the promachoi is going to smash into the second ranker's aspis after every thrust). Again, not something that reach or spear balance has any effect on.
Besides, you keep going on about weight and balance, based on Matthew's work, means you're working on a false assumption. Someone more knowledgeable than you or I (and more knowledgeable than Chris Matthew apparently) has already stated that the sauroters used by Matthew in his tests are too large and too heavy, they are not realistic, making the spear too back heavy.
Further, since Hoplites didn't run at each other with couched spears, as if they were knights without horses (as you claimed a few pages back), it means that a few inches of distance in spear fencing is not going to be the winning factor in a hoplite battle, especially when the only true part of the opponent harmed with the spear will be the ornate painting on the face of an aspis. The ability to accurately and quickly put the spear point into exposed flesh, that is what will win the hoplite fight for the promachoi. Either that or driving them back through intimidation or outright pushing them back (shield to shield othismos).
Why would men only a few inches away to the left or right, with shield's overlapping, be easy targets to a weak, easily telegraphed, underhanded upwards angled thrust?
Show me where all the easy openings to the sides are.
