Infantry Relief System

[Robert Vermaat]

It's now a completely separate thread question really - but I have to ask - why spears and not spiculum, verrutum (thinking of heavy/light javelins) or martiobarbuli/plumbata (thinking darts)? I do tend to think of the general return to spears as more a (Early-) Byzantine thing; with the post-Constantine field armies of the 3rd & 4th (early 5th?) centuries as more like the previous troops, but changing and apparently deteriorating. It's the Byzantine manuals that seem to have forgotten the Roman period, want to be more Greek in style and be reinventing infantry from scratch. :unsure:

Indeed a separarte thread may be neede, so I'll split the answer should we head there.
You can see it in Arrian already, as I've argued elsewhere (http://www.fectio.org.uk/articles/arrian.htm) that the 'kontos' may have been a hasta. The reason for this develeopment may have been the development of ever more enemy cavaly, or shield walls perhaps. Missiles remain important, but these are for suppressing fire, while the main weapon serves for gain a longer reach. It's echoed by a certain Julianus Magister during the Several early 3rd century: the spears are too short against cavalry. I think that's part of the development towards spear-armed close-order heavy infantry.