The Pushing Match

[saka-rauka1]

I've changed my stance on the use of overhand spears several times now; the last being when I read posts explaining how hoplites would fight in very close proximity and thus not be able to take advantage of the extra reach of an underhand grip. Just now however, I have seen this video on youtube, and I have decided to change my position again :)

I would like to know what answers you would give to the questions aired on the above video. I now find it increasingly doubtful that hoplite warfare would consist of a great amount of pushing given that from what I've read here, casulties were very light. If such a pushing match occurred, routing would fast get the front lines killed. With a formation 8 ranks deep, I suspect 4/5 would be summarily slaughtered.

[bobbin]

I cannot say much in relation to that specific video (i haven't watched it) but people have posted up some of his stuff before and from what I've seen he's not very convinving

He ignores lots of basic facts, for example in one video he claims that the overhand grip has a shorter reach becuase you need to hold the spear in the middle, completely ingoring the fact that Hoplite spears had counterweights to solve this exact problem.

The main problem with theories is that vast majority of ancient depictions of Hoplites show them using the overhand grip, he says this is due to "artistic license" which is a very weak argument given the tens or hundreds of thousands of depictions that have been found.

[saka-rauka1]

Would the artists involved in the creation of said depictions understand the finer points of combat? One point that is brought up in another video is that even modern media gets many things wrong when it depicts modern combat. He also mentions that he went to a mueseum and counted the number of vases that depicted overarm use as well as the ones that depicted underarm use. Overarm won out but only very slightly.

I'm wondering why, if the two front lines were so close, why they would use spears at all when a smaller, bladed weapon would be much less cumbersome.

Another thing that's nagging at me is that in such formations routing becomes suicidal, when casulties in battle were very low for hoplite vs hoplite battles.

[Rahl]

Haha, I saw the title of the thread and thought "this guy has looked lindybeiges newest vids"^^
All in all I like that guy, he's quite funny and often his claims make sence, but when it comes to ancient warfare it's like bobbin says, most times he's not very convincing.
I don't understand much of combat (I like strategy aspects more) but the arguments for the overhand grip seem the most logical to me. When he argues against this he ignores facts so I don't believe him there. Though on other topics he's not as stubborn.
When it comes to the Hoplite Phalanx and shoving matches I would say pure pushing doesn't make much sence to me, but I've no personal experience (but I don't think he has more with Hoplite combat).

[fomalhaut]

I was actually going to post a video from this guy in regards to the overhand grip 'debate' but nice to see bobbin answer any question i may have had. He is super smart and witty but i don't necessarily use him as a source for anything ancient. Wait! i do like that he says Linen Cuirass and not Linothorax

[Antinous]

You guys should read "The Western way of War". It is a really good book and specifically talks about how hoplites held their spears.

[jirisys]

I've changed my stance on the use of overhand spears several times now; the last being when I read posts explaining how hoplites would fight in very close proximity and thus not be able to take advantage of the extra reach of an underhand grip. Just now however, I have seen this video on youtube, and I have decided to change my position again :)

I would like to know what answers you would give to the questions aired on the above video. I now find it increasingly doubtful that hoplite warfare would consist of a great amount of pushing given that from what I've read here, casulties were very light. If such a pushing match occurred, routing would fast get the front lines killed. With a formation 8 ranks deep, I suspect 4/5 would be summarily slaughtered.

Overarm and underarm.

Pushing.

It's the freaking OP!

I can't really debate past this point since my knowledge of that time period is very limited. I will say however that WRE's declining Heavy Infantry was one of the factors that contributed to its collapse.

Actually, I think the lack of men and economy made the WRE collapse, the lack of proper heavy infantry was a consequence of that.

Remember the romans were beaten multiple times. Tactics and strategy weren't really as important to them as was discipline and numbers.

Definately not what I think of when I imagine warfare.

It seems you do; as you think that a spear is actually useful for keeping men at a distance. While it was rather to kill men with forward momentum.

This is the context you were lacking when you decried my points as lacking consistency. Furthermore your example was little more than a strawman. You came up with some ridiculous concept for a drawing and then implied that any and all depictions were to be disregarded. Ironically this is the same point Lindybeige makes.

I didn't say ALL drawings are to be disregarded. That is YOUR strawman. I implied that I could draw anything. But that didn't mean it's true. It can be or it cannot.

What I imply and you infer are clearly two different things. I'll clear this up now: overarm usage in general is not awkward. Overarm usage in the pose depicted on that particular vase is laughable. It only takes a few seconds to realise that turning your hand through 180 degrees for any great length of time with a heavy spear in that hand will lead to quite a few sprained wrists.

I wasn't addressing that.

~Jirisys ()