Are we sure they used it overhand? I mean really sure?

[Watchman]

It'd seem to me the overhand way would also make better use of the arm as a lever - think of an ice-pick downward stab with a dagger for comparision - plus it sort of adds the benefit of gravity to the equation, for whatever that now is worth.

The Irish of them olden days were a bit sui generis mind you. Early Modern English soldiery were still a bit puzzled as to why the Irish cavalry insisted on fighting overarm with light spears without stirrups, and the generally rather antediluvian character of the native warfare...

[Anthony]

It'd seem to me the overhand way would also make better use of the arm as a lever - think of an ice-pick downward stab with a dagger for comparision - plus it sort of adds the benefit of gravity to the equation, for whatever that now is worth.

The Irish of them olden days were a bit sui generis mind you. Early Modern English soldiery were still a bit puzzled as to why the Irish cavalry insisted on fighting overarm with light spears without stirrups, and the generally rather antediluvian character of the native warfare...

They were also puzzled why they rode ponies. Until native Irish 'knights' started drawing Norman cavalry into woods or bogs and tearing them apart with superior mobility in incredibly poor terrain. The English reports of fighting in Ireland were initially all lauding on their own cavalry until it became readily apparent their knights were useless on so much of the awkward terrain there. Even the English lords of Dublin ended up using the natives for their bodyguards (though there were some Irish knights who fought as English ones did, taken out of Ulster, but they weren't used for fighting in Ireland very much).

There character wasn't so out of date initially though, I'd not call it antediluvian, at least until the late-high middle ages; their infantry was pretty capable, the house soldiers at least were pretty well-trained and equipped (though most infantry would have been levies), and the Cambro-Normans got kind of far, then were turned back most places. The initial part of the invasion went well, the middle saw the Normans getting beaten a lot when the shock had worn off, and pared down to the point where England only technically got Dublin, and some Norman lords got settlement grants, but even they had to subvert themselves to native kings, if outside of the Pale, initially. Ireland post-invasion though steadily became more backward due to being cut off from the world, spending most of their time fighting eachother, as opposed to the unification that was occuring when the Normans first invaded (I say Normans, not English, since it was the former king of Leinster who invaded with Norman and Welsh free companies; England's only involvement so far was that Henry paid for them, since he owed Diarmait, said former king, for the use of his navy in campaigns in Wales).

Their army prior to this was hardly stagnate or out-dated, the annals and such all point to them rather rapidly modernizing, and, at a time, they'd have been more modern than most of their neighbors, in that they combined traditional tactics, things they learned fighting the Norse, and still used cavalry regularly (as opposed to the all infantry Saxon and Norse armies near them). Irish warfare actually degenerated a lot by the late middle ages, because it was rarely ever any large engagements by that point (since the kingdoms and royal houses weren't large or powerful enough anymore to raise large armies, and more of the fief-like units in Ireland were independent and not supplying their soldiers to a king), so how to fight in a large engagement was steadily retarded to the point it was remarkably simplistic. Early medieval Gaelic armies were certainly unique, but not really out-dated, they were pretty effective for the time. Even later, Gaelic soldiers were some of the main mercenaries used in the west because they were reliable and well-equipped, and fairly high morale, since they were pretty beauracratic and had all kinds of contracts that provided things similar to life insurance.

Anyway, the overhand style, initially would not have been out-of-date even then. It shows up as well in Saxon England, reliefs of Norman soldiers (footmen, not cavalry, except maybe outrunners, picking off routers), etc. On foot, it's pretty useful, good leverage. If you know how to fight like that, it's pretty easy and utilitarian, and easy to stab about anywhere overhand combined with good footwork.

[Maeran]

Anthony, are there any decent overviews of Irish history?

All I usually find are lots of stuff about the troubles and maybe some dubious collections of Celtic mythology.

[keravnos]

With the complements of IndoGreeks, a people that existed Long ago in a land far far away...



Lysias' coin 130-110 BCE



Diodotos (the founder) about 250 BCE



And the last one Strato II about 10 BCE (Athena Alkidemos on the right has a shield and a spear on overhand position).

In fact, only VERY few of the coins I have seen, and I have seen a lot of them used them under hand, and all of them on horse, much like Knights in medieval times...

[russia almighty]

keravnos I wonder if the indo-greeks did make use of those Indian toe stirrups or even went the extra mile an used a primitive one .

[abou]

To be fair, Keravnos, the Diodotos coin shows the Thundering Zeus with lightning bolts - not a spear - in his hand.