As regards the sword debate I would simply point out the following.

1. Much of the Medieval swordfighting technique has not come down to us.

2. A sword can be very accurate when properly balanced.

3. Hollow-ground and fullered blades are light and quick.

4. Straight balded weapons are not that heavy and were not, as a rule, used to crush armour.

5. Straight blades were capable of all the slashing attacks of a sabre but they could also take off arms and legs.

6. The idea that the blade crushed and did not cut is simply wrong and is in fact a product of literature and a belief that the straight sword must be worse is a 19th Century idea.

7. The skill in using both types effectivly is the same, sabre is not more complex, its just that more of the teaching has come down to us.

8. A sabre is a blade-only weapon for the most part, a cruciform sword incorporates use of every part of the weapon.

Regarding spears I would simply point out that the phalanx relied on overlapping shields, which would require overhand use in at least the first rank. Added to which an overhand spear can be thrown, something attested in Greek literature.