10-21-2012, 03:45 AM
Hi Marja and Dithyrambus. I would like to add a couple of point of observation on top of my above long text. I think it is more the fighters of SCA who can hint. They may use armors of less historic accuracy and rattan-made blunt weaponry but they gather greater numbers and clash near-full strength something re-enactors are far from being able to do given security considerations and more expensive armors - re-enactors tend to be a more refined lot of people ;-)
So during such SCA fights it has been repeatedly shown that even very sparse initial formations may end up in a quite dense push match that lasts for some seconds during which the 3 front lines of each side cannot even use short rattan weaponry (let alone longer spear-like one) which lasts for several seconds until one side losens up a bit. Imagine that these are amateurs and while using force they will not go for a kill but will try and avoid accidents. We have to transfer that to a real battle. It always pays off to stick to shield than spear for the first impact.
The above is characterised by the usual description of the phalanxes acquiring during the last meters a rather diagonal line with the well-guarded left side moving forward and the least guarded right side remaining back (this as seen from own side) - if really the first thing to do in the collision would be to use the spear and attack then that should not happen - this is a quite strong hint (in my eyes at least) for main use of shield rather than spear.
I have seen depictions of more sparse 1-2-3 front lines and I am highly sceptical. Such lines can be dropped to their knees by a compact group falling on them. At the end of the day, why not? Sacrifice the first lines to provide a damping effect? But this sounds not that Greek. It sounds quite Asiatic or Roman, cultures that amassed thousands and thousands of armies. Roman armies were caste armies and their tactics aimed at practically consuming the soldiers rather than maintaining their lifes - and there is a lot of policy behind that (as it was more prudent to consume vassals, allies and mercenaries and even lose the battle rather than permit them to go back to their homes where you have to pay them while one day may as well turn against you). In Greek armies it was not the poor class but the middle and upper classes and even the sons of aristocracy enterred and led the battles in the front lines. The fighters formed tight military units that would move to achieve the best results suffering the least of casualties. Essentially this is a "conservative" style of fighting - this is what differentiated this mode from the previous more "heroic" mode of fighting (which also was not similar to Roman methods as this too did not aim at consuming soldiers).
Said the above (and I am sure many will find points to disagree) we have to bear in mind one basic thing:The hoplite weapons were already developed in pre-phalanx days and essentially these were weapons and armors taylored more for Homeric-like fighting rather than phalanx one. And then one has really to wear the armor and go try a duel. It is there where one can realise that over-playing with the spear can be fatal while it always pays off to stick to shield use for attacking. The main issue is always to bring the enemy to the ground. There you can finish him off with the savroter - which often saw far more use in the battles than the spearhead. If this is a case in a duel, then imagine how it can be the case in dense close combat fighting.
So during such SCA fights it has been repeatedly shown that even very sparse initial formations may end up in a quite dense push match that lasts for some seconds during which the 3 front lines of each side cannot even use short rattan weaponry (let alone longer spear-like one) which lasts for several seconds until one side losens up a bit. Imagine that these are amateurs and while using force they will not go for a kill but will try and avoid accidents. We have to transfer that to a real battle. It always pays off to stick to shield than spear for the first impact.
The above is characterised by the usual description of the phalanxes acquiring during the last meters a rather diagonal line with the well-guarded left side moving forward and the least guarded right side remaining back (this as seen from own side) - if really the first thing to do in the collision would be to use the spear and attack then that should not happen - this is a quite strong hint (in my eyes at least) for main use of shield rather than spear.
I have seen depictions of more sparse 1-2-3 front lines and I am highly sceptical. Such lines can be dropped to their knees by a compact group falling on them. At the end of the day, why not? Sacrifice the first lines to provide a damping effect? But this sounds not that Greek. It sounds quite Asiatic or Roman, cultures that amassed thousands and thousands of armies. Roman armies were caste armies and their tactics aimed at practically consuming the soldiers rather than maintaining their lifes - and there is a lot of policy behind that (as it was more prudent to consume vassals, allies and mercenaries and even lose the battle rather than permit them to go back to their homes where you have to pay them while one day may as well turn against you). In Greek armies it was not the poor class but the middle and upper classes and even the sons of aristocracy enterred and led the battles in the front lines. The fighters formed tight military units that would move to achieve the best results suffering the least of casualties. Essentially this is a "conservative" style of fighting - this is what differentiated this mode from the previous more "heroic" mode of fighting (which also was not similar to Roman methods as this too did not aim at consuming soldiers).
Said the above (and I am sure many will find points to disagree) we have to bear in mind one basic thing:The hoplite weapons were already developed in pre-phalanx days and essentially these were weapons and armors taylored more for Homeric-like fighting rather than phalanx one. And then one has really to wear the armor and go try a duel. It is there where one can realise that over-playing with the spear can be fatal while it always pays off to stick to shield use for attacking. The main issue is always to bring the enemy to the ground. There you can finish him off with the savroter - which often saw far more use in the battles than the spearhead. If this is a case in a duel, then imagine how it can be the case in dense close combat fighting.
