Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Depictions of Underarm Phalanxes
#1
I'm trying to figure out how exactly an underarm spear formation would have looked when it did occur. Aside from the Chigi vase, are there any ancient depictions (Greek or otherwise) of how an underarm phalanx might have looked in battle?


Edit: I meant to put this in the 'Greek Military History & Archaeology' forum but I'll let a Moderator move it to wherever it's best suited
Henry O.
Reply
#2
No such depictions of hoplites in close formation exist. Almost all representations of spears wielded underarm portray one-on-one "heroic" duels. The only known exception is on a 7th century aryballos from Thebes, but even on that only three out of the dozen or so hoplites using spears are wielding underarm.
Hello, my name is Harry.
Reply
#3
Unfortunately there are not many depictions of phalanxes in combat generally and even those that exist we are not really sure if they are depicting ranks or files... Generally, we can come to conclusions even from depictions of single combat instances or even better from depictions of battles with ranks/files of 2 or 3 figures. Yet, here are some relative pics. i am not sure about the 3rd image which could either be an overarm or an underarm depiction... I did not look for a more complete image. :


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
                                   
Macedon
MODERATOR
Forum rules
George C. K.
῾Ηρακλῆος γὰρ ἀνικήτου γένος ἐστέ
Reply
#4
Quote:Aside from the Chigi vase, are there any ancient depictions (Greek or otherwise) of how an underarm phalanx might have looked in battle?

The spears on the chigi are held overhand, so I hope there is not some confusion on terms. I think the underarm grip, thumb toward enemy, was not regularly used when Greek phalanxes clashed, but was used after the collapse of one side. There are some advantages to the underhand grip, but the problems with it are even greater. On the plus side, you gain a bit of over-reach, because you can hold the spear back beyond the balance point if you use the forearm to brace it, and it is easier to pin a man's shield and hold him away pushing through the spear.

But this comes at a sacrifice in striking power. Underarm strikes have been shown in a study by Connolly et al. to be only 20-30% as forceful as overhand strikes. This is huge difference, and but because reenactors do not regularly kill one another, I think the difference has been muted in their experience and the underarm rendered more attractive.

In addition, the overarm strike allows for more target choice laterally. Think of the overarm strike as analogous to a gun in a tank turret, while the underarm strike is like a gun in a sponson on one of those WWI tanks.

I should note that the Connolly study did find the underarm strike slightly more accurate, but I have had the opposite experience and believe I know why. Englishmen don't throw overhand from childhood in their sports to the same extent Americans do. The overhand strike has much in common with the overhand throwing motion, which I think has led to some confusion in differentiating the two on vases. Years ago I played 'catch' with an Australian friend of mine with a child-sized rugby ball. I naturally threw it in an overhand motion, while he could not, and punted it back. If I am at all correct in this, then americans, or ancient greeks who may have trained to strike overhand, would be more accurate than the tests predicted.

If you wish to see the underarm strike in action, you need only rent "300". Of course, I would suggest it is no more accurate than the other elements of history in that film.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#5
Something that I have reenacted and whose results was interesting was the first rank to fight in underarm and the second and third in overarm positions. The first rank of the opponents suddenly has to keep their shield low to better guard the lower parts of their bodies thus making it more likely to inadvertently make themselves vulnerable in their face and shoulder area. Reenactor hoplites who were faced with such a double threat tended to bow forward a bit to present a shorter target and so better protect themselves but then they had some balance problems... Anyways, this is another thing that would be interesting to reenact more...
Macedon
MODERATOR
Forum rules
George C. K.
῾Ηρακλῆος γὰρ ἀνικήτου γένος ἐστέ
Reply
#6
The men in the center are holding their spears overhand (although they might be armed with throwing spears) it's the group on the far right that appears to be holding their spears underarm. Although it still looked a little odd so I was trying to figure out if there were any others.

[attachment=658]spear3.jpg[/attachment]


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Henry O.
Reply
#7
Quote:it's the group on the far right that appears to be holding their spears underarm

I think they are holding it overarm as well, just low.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#8
Quote:But this comes at a sacrifice in striking power. Underarm strikes have been shown in a study by Connolly et al. to be only 20-30% as forceful as overhand strikes. This is huge difference, and but because reenactors do not regularly kill one another, I think the difference has been muted in their experience and the underarm rendered more attractive.
Do you have the citation? Horsfall et al., "An Assessment of Human Performance in Stabbing," Forensic Science International 102 (1999) only got a 2:1 difference in energy between overhand and underhand stabs with a knife.

Don't forget ancient pikemen, who used the low spear guard because they needed their left arm low to control the shield. Medieval pikemen used both high and low guards.
Nullis in verba

I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
Reply
#9
Surely when you fight in a rank in a hoplite phalanx - all shields overlapping and touching you can only really prod and thrust at the enemy with your spear OVER the shields and therefore overarm?

All of the images above just strike me as artistic licence. They are showing individual warriors in somewhat dramatic posed fashion. None apart from the odd image like the Chigi line-up is showing a mass of hoplites fighting shoulder to shoulder.

You get far more power stabbing with a spear with your arm bent up from the elbow and therefore thrusting overarm, than ever would underarm which is more difficult to control.
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#10
Quote:Englishmen don't throw overhand from childhood in their sports to the same extent Americans do. The overhand strike has much in common with the overhand throwing motion, which I think has led to some confusion in differentiating the two on vases. Years ago I played 'catch' with an Australian friend of mine with a child-sized rugby ball. I naturally threw it in an overhand motion, while he could not, and punted it back

As an Englishman I find that a rather odd remark Paul. The Ozzies may be different. I don't play Rugby and never did, but these guys that do can certainly throw overarm. When we play cricket (properly as opposed young kids) we bowl overarm - not quite the same as throwing - but still over. Baseball players pitch sort of overarm - but again not quite throwing. As a kid who played any manner of ball games including Kerby - we most definitely threw overarm as much as we did under ... probably moreso.
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#11
Quote:As an Englishman I find that a rather odd remark Paul. The Ozzies may be different.

As an Aussie, I'd agree with the oddity noted in the remark. Any throw in cricket, that is a return from the outfield, is overarm. The only occasion a ball is returned underam is in close proximity to the stumps and largely depends upon circumstances (pick up and lob; side arm etc).

The only other recorded use in the source material of what the "Tacticians" describe as the underarm is the famous battle against Kiwis when the attacker was in danger of giving away the victory...
Paralus|Michael Park

Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους

Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!

Academia.edu
Reply
#12
I find underarm a little easier too, I think it has more to do with either being used to fencing in a somewhat similar way or aiming your whole forearm at the target rather than just the wrist. If the artwork shows men fighting both overarm or underarm it doesn't it mean that it most likely just had a lot to do with personal preference?


As far as literary sources go I think one of the viking sagas described troops forming a wall of overlapping shields with their spears sticking out from the bottom of each shield. But at the time they were preparing for a sea engagement, not a land battle.
Henry O.
Reply
#13
I also think that most people misunderstand underarm fighting. In a phalanx you would never try to fight underarm against the enemy's torso (would be protected by his shield) or head (the angle would be too weird). Underarm fighting while in phalanx would aim at the enemy legs and feet, so you would keep your spear well under your shield too. Such harassment can be a real problem, especially if you are not fully armored on the leg area and makes you wanna bend down...
Macedon
MODERATOR
Forum rules
George C. K.
῾Ηρακλῆος γὰρ ἀνικήτου γένος ἐστέ
Reply
#14
Quote:As a kid who played any manner of ball games including Kerby - we most definitely threw overarm as much as we did under

I may well be in need of correcting, but I didn't say that Prisoners and Escapees of Mother England don't throw overhand, just that they don't do so to the same extent as Americans. There is no american sport that men play wherein we commonly throw underhand, and the big 3 american sports all have a throwing component. Not being able to throw overhand, accurately as well as far, can make you a pariah who faces the dreaded experience of "being picked last" for teams.

My son just started playing baseball, so I thought I'd pitch to him underhand like in softball to make it easier for him. After hitting him a few times I realized my lack of accuracy.

Quote:If the artwork shows men fighting both overarm or underarm it doesn't it mean that it most likely just had a lot to do with personal preference?

Uniformity may have been imposed on the men if those behind them faced a sauroter in gut- as we see on a number of vases like that above. Once one side broke, then underhand could probably have been used, and it might be the type of sweeping, underhand strikes that many modern reenactors use, that were part of the "moves" taught by hoplomachoi which we are told were most useful after victory or defear of the phalanx.

Quote:Underarm fighting while in phalanx would aim at the enemy legs and feet, so you would keep your spear well under your shield too.

I'd be wary about lowering my spear beneath my shield. If the phalanx presses in you might find it stuck down there. Up top you can use it to ward your face.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#15
Interesting, I decided to try out the different grips on a log out back and the overarm grip was able to penetrate a little farther than the underarm one, although oddly enough by far the most penetration came out of outright throwing the spear (maybe it would have been even greater with a throwing string?) if the fight was all about power it seems like you might as well throw the spear and gain a reach advantage while you're at it.


Although I don't think it takes much strength to penetrate human skin while the underarm grip still maintains the reach advantage and, if using one of the braced positions suggested by some reenactors, offers significantly more lateral control.
Henry O.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Macedonian phalanx: overarm or underarm? Justin Swanton 3 3,378 03-13-2018, 03:05 AM
Last Post: Michael J. Taylor
  Flexibility of various Greek/Hellenic phalanxes. FarDarter 20 8,240 02-25-2016, 08:14 AM
Last Post: Paralus

Forum Jump: