A few points people seem not to be grasping about this. First a typical picture of hoplite combat...
The spear for one isn't held like they did in 300. It's used more like if one was stabbing with a knife; it's a pretty powerful jab and just as accurate as any one-handed underarm once you get the hang of it.
People are saying it's dangerous and can hit people in the face if the spear was used overhand. They seem to forget that it is probably as dangerous in that respect when you use a spear underhanded. Especially considering that pretty much everyone had some form of head protection and not everyone owned a piece of armour. The spear itself would be at an acute angle pointing upwards anyway. In any case it would only really be a problem for the first rows, the others could hold their spear normally as they pushed forward.
The spear-butt itself can obviously be used to rest. You weren't expected to be in that pose for the entire battle, or hold your shield for that matter. The combat itself would be rather short, and most probably not all in one single bout. Not only wouldn't the whole line engage at the same time, you would probably be able to rest and rotate at least the front ranks before joining battle again. Another thing people are probably missing is that this piece enables you to use the spear farther to the back due to its weight.
You can argue that the shield would protect the back rows (what about the front ones?) from the spear-butt, but if they did indeed push forward with an underhand grip, the spears would have to pass through some space, and then you're breaking up the formation and loosing shock value. Same thing applies to the front ranks - to use an underhand grip you have to open the shield wall a bit, something that you can take advantage. The trajectory of the spear itself would mean that you would be aiming at the most protected part of the other guy, the shield.
As for cavalry, you can hardly apply the same principle here. It's a whole new ball game.
Bookmarks