Later Roman spear length

[Bran ap Maclou]

Hello,

I tried both positions for holding the spear and holding it overarm is far easier and dynamic than holding it underarm in my first opinion.

The first rank is 1.8 m before the second rank according to Vegetius in "de re militari" (Edit : Strategikon=my mistake ! :? ) . So it pleads for keeping freedom in fighting with the spear. If I keep my spear underarm, I don't need such a gap between the two ranks in this case. Moretheless It would almost be better then to stick the first rank in order to protect them a bit like a Phallangian hedgehog. According to ancient authors, each warrior defend a 3 feet (About a yard !) large part of the frontline, then to keep the spear underarm does not allow me enough movement ease.

If I fight with the spear overarm, I'm fully free and more dynamic to hit someone on feet on the right arm when he prepares to strike, to the neck, in the face without exposing me too much outside my shield shelter. And this way, my shield is not a pain to aim anywhere I want to hit. If the ennemy comes close and stick to my shield, I can react instantaneously without retreating or moving back my spear.
Last but not least, It allows me to be replaced by the guy behind me easily but I go on threatening the ennemy till the end of the turn.

I guess that the underarm holding way can be useful against knights however.

So, to strike fast and easily, holding the spear overarm, my opinion is that a spear quite short is the best one. About 2 meters long is quite a pleasure to fight with.

Regards

Greg