I've often wondered which melee weapon is most effective the sword or the spear? The only two armies that I know that heavily used swords were the Romans and Fedual Japan. Most other armies ancient and medieval I know of primarily used spears primarily but not exclusively. For example was the Roman Army under Caeser with the Gladius or the Roman infantry man under Stilicho with the Spatha more effective than say the infantry of Heraclius in the 7th century who primarily used spears. I realize this is an overly broad question but when it comes to the nitty-gritty of killing men face to face in formation which is more effective?
Posts: 4,861
Threads: 129
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation:
32
That depends on the context and the situation. The Roman army under Stilicho would have had spears as their primary armament as well, and switched to swords when their spears broke or weren't effective.
Posts: 2,730
Threads: 20
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
33
Romans only used swords under limited situations. Usually only when they were on the offensive and fighting on open ground. Spears were used in other situations. Japanese never used swords as their primary battlefield weapon. They used polearms like everyone else.
Posts: 2,730
Threads: 20
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
33
There are no spearheads because the pilum served the same purpose. Which author mentioned the legionary who parried with his pilum so much that it resembled a strigil?
