At the risk of treading over old territory yet again, here's some information I found really interesting on the subject of the hoplite panoply and its use in battle. The passages I quote below are from Victor Davis Hanson's edited book Hoplites: The Classical Greek Battle Experience (Routledge, 1993) and there's alot of good information in there on this topic. So here goes...sorry about the rather gross length
, but I hope it's valuable...
Regarding the butt spike, or sauroter: I paraphrase information presented by J.K Anderson in the V.D Hanson book:
A butt-spike or "lizard killer" (sauroter), generally made of bronze, was a feature of the classical hoplite spear...Its primary purpose was probably always to enable the spear to be stuck upright in the earth when not in use; but it might also have served for a downward thrust to finish off a fallen enemy, and square holes in pieces of armor found at the great sanctuaries were, it has been suggested, made with the sauroter. But there is also a possibility that dedicated armor may have been fixed to boards with spikes; perhaps not all of these holes were made in battle.
From this, it seems that the sauroter was used as much for offense as for defense as fjkwgv43 argues so vehemently. It seems that the scholars offer alternative opinions.
Now, regarding the more relevant and controversial "spear thrusting style" of the Greek hoplites: Once again, I first offer this analysis from Anderson, in Hanson:
On the march, including the final approach, as shown on the Chigi vase and other works of art, the spear was carried at the slope on the right shoulder, at an angle of perhaps 30 degrees behind the vertical, with the spear-head upwards...From the slope, the spear could be brought straight down to an underhand thrusting position. The force of the underhand thrust, delivered at a run, has rightly been emphasized. Charging at the double against a mob of demoralized Asiatics, the Greeks at Cunaxa (401BC) evidently carried their spears in this way, since some of them beat their spears against their shields in order to frighten the Persian chariot-horses...But when two hoplite phalanxes met face to face and it was important to preserve the coherence of rank and file, the lowering of the spears was merely a preliminary to raising them again to an overarm position above the right shoulder. Before bringing the spear up, it is necessary to reverse the grip. Not much practice or dexterity are needed to do this by tossing the spear upwards a few inches and catching it again with the grip reversed. This does seem to involve a check in the forward movement of the phalanx, and lacks he warrant of even such slight ancient evidence of the Chigi vase supplies for the other method. The overarm thrust would be directed in the first place at the enemy's throat, which might be left bare if his left arm grew tired and he dropped his guard. But especially in archaic vase-painting it is sometimes aimed more sharply downwards, against the thighs or buttocks below the cuirass, which is generally worn at this period, or against the back of a collapsing enemy. In these circumstances the underhand thrust is the weak retort of the defeated, who turns back as he retreats and jabs at the enemy in the hope of finding an unprotected spot.
I now provide a passage from J. Lazenby, taken from the same Hanson volume:
It may be the case that advancing hoplites carried their spears in the underarm position, but it is unlikely that they delivered their first thrusts underarm, and then changed grip in the melee. More likely they brought their spears to the overarm position, before they came "within spear range", though it is difficult to see how this was done. The change, it must be remembered, involved not just raising the spear, but also turning the hand around on the spear-shaft, since when a thrust is underarm, the thumb is towards the point but when overarm, towards the butt.
The change-over could have been effected by sticking the spear in the ground, then picking it up again with the hand reversed. But this would have required a momentary halt -- difficult when charging at the double, but perhaps possible for the Spartans, or any other troops who halted during the advance. Alternatively, a momentary shift of the spear to the left hand, gripping the strap or cord near the rim at the right of the shield, might have done the trick. More risky, but perhaps easier, would have been to lift the spear above the head, still with the underarm grip, then let go of it for a moment, and catch it as it fell, with the grip reversed. Even lifting the spear from below the waist to above the shoulder would have been much easier if hoplites had not been standing shoulder to shoulder, let alone marching or running, and the difficulties would certainly have been compounded if the change was only made after battle had been joined. But somehow or other it seems to have been done.
With spears probably held high, then, hoplites in at least the front rank, and possibly the front two, thrust downwards, aiming for the face and presumably the throat or shoulders, over the rim of the shield, or for the chest through shield and cuirass. There was, however, no loosening of the close-packed formation, at this point, as some have suggested. Plato's Laches makes it clear that this only happened when one side or the other fled the field, and what would have been the point of each man seeking the protection of the right-hand neighbor's shield during the advance if they then parted company when battle was actually joined?
Passages such as this, and others found elsewhere in this excellent text, provide stout evidence for a predominantly overarm thrusting position for the Greek hoplite's spear while in battle.
fjkwgv43 -- As already pointed out very compellingly by Urnamma, there's really no point in trying to compare the phalangite's sarissa with the hoplite's doru. How could anyone argue that a 6m spear was to be used in a single-handed, overarm grip?! We're not talking about sarissae in this thread, we're talking about the Greek hoplite's weapon of choice. Which, by the way, was most likely used in battle with an overarm grip...
And, finally, may I join others in this thread in reminding you that smart-ass, poorly-researched, half-assed claims made in an offensive manner ain't gonna win you too many admirers in this crowd...you wanna talk credibility, my friend???
I hope this information is helpful to some of you...happy hunting.
Kids, don't call my bluff when I'm not bluffing.
Originally Posted by Sarcasm
Reply With Quote
by Pharnakles
Bookmarks