[split] Phalanx warfare: use of the spear

[Paullus Scipio]

Dan wrote:
"The primary danger on any battlefield for three thousand years was from spears and arrows. All extant examples of leather/hide armour are heavy enough to do this."

Again, you make a sweeping generalisation without any supporting evidence. If you had said spears and missiles ( including javelins, slingstones, hand thrown stones etc) it would have been closer to the mark. Which weapons represented the major threat depended very much on time and place, for example out on the steppes arrows represented the major threat, whilst in internecine Greek warfare they were rare, but large heavy spears common......

As everyone knows, offensive weapons versus defensive protection are always in a constant 'arms race'. In addition, as I have repeatedly said, degree of protection is only one factor among many when producing armour, and 'weapon proof' is a rarity. Adequate  protection usually suffices. Once again the exceptional circumstances of Xenophon's anecdotes (Anabasis IV.1.18] referred to above, regarding Leonymus and Basias demonstrate that the combination of helmet (variable, but generally 1-2mm thick) shield and 'spolas' was considered more than adequate in most circumstances to keep out arrows or spearheads, javelin heads, slingstones etc, but not against the exceptional power (for the time) of the Carduchi longbows. Such evidence as we have points to 'spolades' generally being a single layer (i.e. circa 5-8 mm thick, which may have been 'hardened', with double-breasted examples being twice this thickness in front. Most of the protection from this 'spaced armour' for the torso came from the shield, with the corselet secondary. Hoplites did not fight 'shieldless', and thus had no need of 15-20 mm thick 'spolades' which for reasons of practicality, manufacture, weight, expense etc are most unlikely to have been the norm, as Ivor/Crispianus has also pointed out above.......