Question About Hoplites

[psprpg]

Ive downloaded Europa Barbarorum today, installed and shockingly when i enter the game as the helenistic greeks i find hoplite spearmen with illogical positioned spears (holding them over the head), is this like some random glitch or were people oddly muscled enough to acctualy hold spears above their heads whilst having sheilds on (the shields could be used to brace the spears and prevent the majority of movement).. slightly mystifying because ive trained with a staff spear with my ninjitsu master, and i can use a spear quite proficiently. the spear would be almost impossible to use unless you were using two hands with the left (or right) hand supporting slightly towards the spear head and the right hand (or left depending on if your kaky handed) holding closer to the end of the spear.

just a random question, because it is utterly illogical to hold a spear over your head simply because of the depth perception problems, But hey odd things work sometimes if trained enough, like that lady that can pop her eyes out a massive distance


-Regards - psp

[Sarcasm]

Oh my. Another katana blonker.

Asian martial arts rule. Katanas are totally the best sword ever. We get it. Move along.

[johnhughthom]

Do a search of the forum, there have been quite a few threads on this topic. From what I can gather on a subject I know little about it seems you can either believe that as modern re-enactors find it difficult to use a spear overarm ancient hoplites couldn't have fought that way, or you can accept the huge amount of ancient art that shows hoplites using spears in an overarm fashion. Not really too much to think about in my view.

[psprpg]

Oh my. Another katana blonker.

Asian martial arts rule. Katanas are totally the best sword ever. We get it. Move along.

did i say that katanas rule? NO, i dislike katanas especially.... katana's were the weapons that millions of japanese people killed each other with...by far not the perfect weapon if you asked me. i was meerly asking wether it is acctualy possible and considering i have studied staff/spear it just seemed a bad way to use a weapon. but if you would like to go on assuming that your preconcieved idea that people that like the katana as a weapon are foolhardy, then by all means do it somewhere else, especially in a topic where im meerly asking a question.

anyway thanks john
i just didnt think it would work but ill have to investigate it more.
(btw i dont spend all of my time looking at the huge ammounts of ancient art)

[oudysseos]

The point is that all the actual evidence in art, statuary and writing point to the overarm stance as being prevalent. This is why the EB team, with their emphasis on historical accuracy, decided to implement the overarm animation for hoplites. The game engine is limited and can never be a totally accurate model of the real world, so while it may be true, as has been pointed out a gazillion trillion times in other threads, that under-arm grips may also have been used at times, the team feels (I don't speak for them, just paraphrasing) that they have done the best that one could do.

Modern re-enactments may be fun for everyone involved but do not ever prove anything about what actually happened. At the very utmost they can prove what would have been possible- a very different coloured kettle of sea-horses.

I just love mixed metaphors. Also, the katana blonker poster shouldn't have been so sarcastic. Your original post was not rude and you seem truly interested. But there have been a gazillion very repetitive threads on this issue.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...%3Den%26sa%3DN

[psprpg]

ahhh =D thanks oudysseos, i think ill research it a bit to get the fundamentals right about it. =D and i wasnt really refering to modern re enactments but thats all good. and i am in no way attacking at the team of europa barbarorum... its an excellent mod, i guess it just looks a little odd with the game engine =D but thats a given as most things look a little odd in rtw most of the time lol. (once i had upside down samnite mercs in vanilla O.o)

[NeoSpartan]

Hoplites fought in a tight formation with overlaping shields, the 2 ranks in the front did most of the fighting while the 6 ranks behind pushed men the men front. (The other side is doing the same). So there is really no room to hold spear at waist level, as u can easely hit the guy behind u, and try to use it like u speak off. UNLESS the men break formation.

Also, the Dori was weighted so the balance point would be farther back, that way the hoplite could have most of the spear in front of him.

In the game keep your Hoplites with "HOLD" on while they fight and you will see what I mean.

my2cents

[Watchman]

I would observe that by the sounds of it the OP has trained in two-handed spear/staff techniques - which, like two-handed swordsmanship, are quite the different beast from one-handed techniques with a shield, nevermind ones for such a specialised tactical system as the hoplite shieldwall.

[Sarcasm]

did i say that katanas rule? NO, i dislike katanas especially.... katana's were the weapons that millions of japanese people killed each other with...by far not the perfect weapon if you asked me. i was meerly asking wether it is acctualy possible and considering i have studied staff/spear it just seemed a bad way to use a weapon. but if you would like to go on assuming that your preconcieved idea that people that like the katana as a weapon are foolhardy, then by all means do it somewhere else, especially in a topic where im meerly asking a question.

anyway thanks john
i just didnt think it would work but ill have to investigate it more.
(btw i dont spend all of my time looking at the huge ammounts of ancient art)

No, you were not asking a question. Your entire first post was built around how this form of Western combat technique which was used for over a millennia was illogical, impossible to use without two hands (what are you even talking about? Spears were used one-handed the majority of the times) and only for people with an odd musculature.

Even if you weren't being somewhat insulting towards the team for representing it in its mod, or towards the millions of people who fought and died in this manner, I think I'm just tired of people who practice Japanese/Chinese/Korean martial arts, thinking they've found the end-all, superior form of combat. I'm especially not fond of Westerners who just throw their entire martial heritage out the window, and proclaim to the heavens just how these weapons and combat forms are superior to everything else.

Reminds me of a time this Kenjutsu master had all his pupils over at an arms convention, and he proudly chopped a pair of bamboos with his katana as the crowd behind and his own students cheered on. At one point these 2 guys, who were fencing with German bastards swords in the background, became somewhat angry. So one of these guys jumps over the fence, approaches the bamboos that were all set up for more chopping, and proceeded to do the same as the Japanese guy and cut through all of them. Did I mention that the bastard swords were dull? Heh, funny, ain't it?

[russia almighty]

Actually, it would be easy to get use to stabbing with a dori in the over hand style. Practice stabbing like that and you'll get all the endurance you need built up, in those small, rarely trained muscles (there are a lot up in the area connecting the arm to the rest of the body).

I've actually seen something like that Sarcasm. Cept, Katana vs. a Bastard sword. Both were like 3000 dollar swords, the bastard sword broke the Katana after a few blows.



No offense, Sarcasm, but what no weapons martial arts wise are there in the west, besides boxing and wrestling? Now if your including BJJ and Sambo ignore this statement then.

[Watchman]

Pankration went pretty far along the road of unarmed striking techniques AFAIK (on top of the usual slew of joint lock, strangling techniques, throws, takedowns etc. pretty much every martial tradition everywhere included pretty much by default, and often in rather advanced forms), and Savate's around as kick-crazy as TKD by what I know of it. Dunno if you can count Capoiera in too.

Europeans seem to generally have preferred to do their killing with weapons though, and grappling techniques achieved most of the rest well enough. Probably had something to do with the blunt fact most "Western" societies until quite recently were armed to the proverbial teeth at every level, regardless of what the matter was supposed to be.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Ah, where's Urnamma when you need him.... He could you tell quite a bit about katana's and how they are not superior to other swords.

Nevermind now this daydreaming: the OP wonders about the practice of overhand spear-fighting. We must keep in mind that there is a small but significant difference between martial arts and martial arts. The one used in combat is to be as effective as possible, and not getting yourself killed. Killing the guy opposing you is totally irrelevant, and besides the point (if you are not convinced, I sugges tot try and find statistics of how many soldiers actually aimed during WO2... nevermind now, how many soldiers actually shot...).

The other is more of an art form intent on -basically- showing off how well trained one is...

If we assume both to be the same, then there is also no sense in the Roman fighting techniques: I mean that scutum kinda takes up all the room to manoeuvre. However, since we do not assume this we can easily understand the combination: you hold the scutum frantically in front of you waiting until either the opponent stops stabbing at you or makes a mistake so you can stab at him...

[Watchman]

Ah, where's Urnamma when you need him.... He could you tell quite a bit about katana's and how they are not superior to other swords.

I can fill in if you need me to - I got a lot of practice at that back when I was still hanging out on the D&D official forums. And let's just say I wasn't the only well-read hobbyist there either.

[Sarcasm]

Actually, it would be easy to get use to stabbing with a dori in the over hand style. Practice stabbing like that and you'll get all the endurance you need built up, in those small, rarely trained muscles (there are a lot up in the area connecting the arm to the rest of the body).

I've actually seen something like that Sarcasm. Cept, Katana vs. a Bastard sword. Both were like 3000 dollar swords, the bastard sword broke the Katana after a few blows.

No offense, Sarcasm, but what no weapons martial arts wise are there in the west, besides boxing and wrestling? Now if your including BJJ and Sambo ignore this statement then.

Well first of all you're putting every kind of boxing and wrestling into the same bag, when different regions had different traditions. And I wasn't referring at all to just unarmed martial traditions...staff/spear/polearm fighting techniques in particular were really widespread, and for just two quick examples you have the Jogo Do Pau right here in Portugal or the Bata in Ireland.

[Spartan198]

I'm staying out of the western-eastern combat techniques debate that appears to be arising here,but IMO the two seperate techniques were developed because they both worked.

As far as the hoplite question,I'm inclined to accept the archeological evidence for dorata being wielded overhand. It just seems like common sense to use it in that manner. I know I wouldn't want that nasty buttspike rammed into my gut or groin.

Besides,classical hoplites just seem to fight better in the overhand style,plus they can charge and seem (at least to me) somewhat more tactically flexible (and Hypaspistai aren't needed to guard the right flank,leaving room for siege artillery!)

[Sarcasm]

People sooooo miss the point. I'm not saying Eastern techniques didn't work. I'm saying Western techniques were just as effective in their own context.

[Dhampir]

Is there really an argument about this?

[Spartan198]

People sooooo miss the point. I'm not saying Eastern techniques didn't work. I'm saying Western techniques were just as effective in their own context.

That's what I said,just worded slightly differently. Both one- and two-handed techniques were adopted because they both work.

Is there really an argument about this?

Maybe 'debate' would have been a better word.

[Watchman]

Mortal combat is a Darwinian enough hobby that techniques, weapons etc. that are no good tend to, well, die out pretty fast. Usually with their adherents too.

[Spartan198]

Mortal combat is a Darwinian enough hobby that techniques, weapons etc. that are no good tend to, well, die out pretty fast. Usually with their adherents too.

Valid point.

[fjkwgv43]

http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/spear.html

There are many writers who insist that spears were used over-arm. I believe these writers to be wrong. The pictorial evidence is very poor. Where spears are shown to be used over-arm, it seems that this is for dramatic effect rather than for authenticity. Archaeology will tell us nothing on this issue, and I have come across no written record from antiquity which strongly backs up the over-arm theory. I shall now present my case for the under-arm use of spears.

The OP here had a valid point, and all I see addressing it are a bunch of mindless parrots claiming a "huge amount of ancient art" they've never personally looked at as corroborating evidence. The sense I get is that you all think "it's right because that's how the EB devs did it".

[Watchman]

Yeah, like most depictions of non-"lancer" cavalry ever... I also notice the article you linked seems to have some rather peculiar ideas about the "grip points" of spears which do not seem to be given too much in the way of explanation to back them up, but do seem to play a rather central part in the argument being made...

I daresay that smacks of bad form, if not outright bias.

[NeoSpartan]

http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/spear.html



The OP here had a valid point, and all I see addressing it are a bunch of mindless parrots claiming a "huge amount of ancient art" they've never personally looked at as corroborating evidence. The sense I get is that you all think "it's right because that's how the EB devs did it".

now you have done it..... That "author" was brought up a long time ago and it was, how should I say, horribly dismembered.

now please EB, members please, this is NOT the OP. This is another guy, and so take it easy with the fire. Besides it might just be a provocation to start a flame war.

So fellas... again with the flame thrower

[Moros]

Every hoplite depicted on vases I've seen fought overhand. And I don't see why overhand spears would add dramatic effect either. Also Logic tells us they used it overhand.

So that's logic+depictions vs. the possiblity they didn't.
In other words you could safely say, they fought overhand.

[Watchman]

Well, I've seen a fair few using an "underarm" grip too. At least one which is definitely the ancient equivalent of the Early Modern pikeman's "set to receive horse" stance, and another of a (presumably Spartan) hoplite downing a sword-wielding Persian archer by what looks a lot like a thrust under the shoulder-piece of the latter's linothorax.

But the overarm seems to particularly dominate scenes associated with mass combat, and quite logically so given the way the hoplite phalanx seems to have worked.

Moreover, the OP's argument about "dramatic effect" is kinda dodgy. This was art made for the very people who quite often enough fought that way and regularly enough trained for it; much like with Medieval religious iconography (which quite faithfully reproduces period war gear as well as a lot of the fighting stances known from Fechtbuchs and other surviving sources on the practicalities of combat, to the degree that one of the high wards has been sometimes dubbed "the St. George Guard" due to its prevalence in depictions of the saint...), the target audience well familiar with the nitty-gritty of the action depicted is unlikely to have appreciated half-assed if not outright flawed depictions of the subject.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

At the end of the day Hoplites fought with locked shields, if you actually think about it just under two thirds over every man's shield was in contact with the shields to left and right. How would you get a spear under that? It's a litteral wall of bronze.

On the other hand, in looser formations we get the underarm versian as often as not.

[fjkwgv43]

Okay, first of all, the hoplite spear was called a doru (ΔΟΡΥ, that's delta omicron rho upsilon, and pronounced 'doe-roo), not a dori, so right there anyone calling it a dori automatically doesn't know what they're talking about. Ancient Greek was not pronounced the same as Modern Greek, and upsilon has changed pronunciation between now and then. In Modern Greek, ΔΟΡΥ would indeed best be pronounced "dori". But in Ancient Greek, "dori" would be the dative case of this word, as in for instance ΔΩΡΙΕΙΣ / Dorieis ("Dorian"); tribe of the spear (dative, see?). The usage of omega here instead of omicron represents a shift in pronunciation too. Doe (ΔΟ) vs. daw (ΔΩ). This is another difference between Ancient and Modern Greek. Knowing how to pronounce Modern Greek doesn't give you mystical information about ancient Greek weaponry. Neither does being Greek, for that matter.

Second of all, the doru had a hollow metal spike (ΣΑΥΡΩΤΗΡ) at the butt, which would have been an extreme hazard if the doru had been wielded overhand above the body. In fact, if you're looking to kill your mates behind you and your enemies in equal number, that's a great way to do it.

Not to mention the obvious point about why spears intended to be wielded overhand would even have butt-spikes, which are meant to dig into the ground for added stability. There's no ground above head-level, unless you've already lost.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...try%3D%2393462

http://www.cig-icg.gr/images/Fig.%204.jpg
A sauroter.

http://www.christybeall.com/images/greek_small.jpg
"Look at me, with the slightest jolt to my doru I can quite effectively stab the guy behind me in the face, neck, shoulder, or chest! Go team!"

vs.

http://www.livius.org/a/1/greece/phalanx.jpg
"Look at us, we're not stabbing our buddies! Forward to India!"

Third, the doru was replaced by the sarissa in Macedon, and they otherwise used similar (but admittedly not identical) tactics compared to Greek hoplites. The sarissa is physically too long to wield overhand to any reasonable effect -- due to the leverage and weight distribution of it -- so there can be no dispute whatsoever that pezhetairoi carried their spears exclusively underhanded, even if you want to argue that hoplites did not. The situation of the sarissa is pretty much rock-solid, for a variety of reasons.

http://www.clas.canterbury.ac.nz/gra...sarissa_1b.jpg

Well, if the sarissa was used that way and the doru was not, it represents a severe difference between pezhetairoi and hoplites which is not attested or emphasized in any known text which talks about both (e.g. Polybius), though those texts do list other differences in equipment and tactics.

Fourth, why would the doru and sarissa be wielded overhand when the Macedonian xyston (which was of a size between the doru and sarissa) was typically wielded underhand? The xyston situation implies that even without access to the ground, it's still better to wield the spear underhand, for reasons of control.

http://www.ancientbattles.com/Macedo...ston_large.jpg
http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/He...ginal/d14d.jpg

What about the kamax, the spear that the xyston replaced?

https://img339.imageshack.us/img339/7702/kamaxxc0.png

Here it's wielded overhand. What does that imply? The underhand xyston being more recent than (and a replacement for) the overhand kamax implies that the underhand posture is fundamentally better, and represents an advantageous evolution from the old style. This could be used to suggest that the hoplite attacked overhand and the pezhetairoi attacked underhand, but again, why no contemporary mention of this difference?

Finally, the fact that this point has multiple threads devoted to it already, repeating the same arguments over and over again, doesn't mean the issue is contentious or unresolved. It just means that none of you know what you're talking about, and rather than take personal initiative and do independent research, you'd rather just repeat what other people have said before, when you don't even know where to find the evidence for yourself. That's pretty pathetic, even for a web forum (which is assumed to be pathetic from the start anyway).

This is no more "controversial" than the "argument" between evolution and intelligent design, or between people who believe the moon landings are a hoax and people not on Prozac. Meaning that it's basically a contest between fact and stupidity. I'm going to have to go with fact, since it has a proven reputation for being able to correctly explain things.

Also, just because it needs emphasis:

Even if you weren't being somewhat insulting towards the team for representing it in its mod, or towards the millions of people who fought and died in this manner

That is an extremely over-the-top stupid and contrived accusation, and you pretty much just lost all credibility, forever.

[Vorian]

Without getting into scientific and other discussions may I ask why on earth every artist painted hoplites with the spears over their shoulders if nobody used it that way?

Plus I can't imagine how can a man use a 2-meter long spear underarm while he doesn't even have room to move. Macedonian phalanxes were much more loose than the classical ones.

[Watchman]

---

Aw ferchrissakes. Just go away you bloody fool, and come back when you actually understand what the fig you're talking about.

And have learned some basic debate etiquette.

Just for the record, but you've got to be the first guy to make it onto my personal loathing list with so few posts.

[Dayve]

I once asked the same question. I haven't read the whole thread and i'm sure somebody will have already said this but what the hell, i feel like typing.

A lot of ancient artworks show Greek hoplites holding their spears over-arm. I tried it one day with a mop handle, hitting the sofa. Under-arm, you can get a good hard thrust. Over-arm, not so good, so i came here and asked the question you asked.

It's so simple when you think about it though. The ancient Greeks used very large round shields and fought in tight formation, shield-wall, side by side, presenting a wall of shields.

If you hold the shield under-arm you have two big problems. Firstly the guy on the right's shield is going to restrict you from doing anything but a straight-forward thrust. Secondly all you're going to hit with a straight-forward thrust is your enemies shield, over and over and over again.

However! Overarm, your spear is above the man on the right's shield, giving you more room to move it about. Not much more i'll grant you that but more room nonetheless. Also, you can poke over your enemies shield rather than directly into it, and rape your enemies face with your spear.