The Dory

[Paullus Scipio]

This has very little do do with tapering and back-weighting. Surely you don't think a 18' sarissa was balanced at 3' from the rear???

No....to be exact a replica sarissa balances at about 4 cubits of it's 12 cubit length, but only alittle over 2 cubits protrudes behind the pikeman, as I said. ( see e.g. photo I posted of Matthew Connolly with reproduction sarissa)

The two handed sarissa is not a direct outgrowth of the rear-weighted, one handed dory. In fact the opposite. If sarissa were tapered and rear weighted, then it is a parallel evolution of a simple, non-tapered pike to a tapered form that had the advantages described above.

I would strongly disagree...if you place the simple dory, kamax/late dory, and sarissa side by side, the evolution and similarities are all too obvious. For parallel evolution as you describe, there would have to be a "non-tapered pike" as you describe, and there is no evidence I know of for such a beast. Furthermore, as Connolly has demonstrated and contra Markle, no such beast could exist, for a parallel shafted sarissa can barely be lifted !

The whole point of the taper and weighting system is to NOT make the spear any longer.

I'm not necessarily saying it is. Perhaps the original purpose was to allow increased reach for a given length, but it must have been quickly realised that increased length was now possible.

To get a spear longer than about 8' tapered, 12' untapered, you need two hands I'm guessing

Yes, around 8 ft/2.4 m untapered or 12 foot/3.6 m tapered is the upper practical limit for a single-handed spear......