05-02-2011, 12:17 AM
Yes, I suspect that the manner of thrusting (overarm or underarm) was more a function of what you could hit even more than how hard you could hit - though both probably played into a general intimidation factor that might force a foe backwards to the attacker's advantage. Given use of greaves (at least in the forward ranks) and a shield that covered to the knees, the most likely target in a hoplite duel would seem to have been above the shield (face and neck, less likely arm) which appears to favor an overhand approach. Of course, there's always the possibility of shoving the shield aside enough to get in a quick shot at an armpit - something akin to the Zulu technique with the asegai in underhand grip. However, I suspect that this might have been difficult to execute against a shield front that was so closely spaced as to nearly overlap. Such a method might better fit shorter weapons (along the lines of the asegai) like a short-sword (especially that employed at Sparta) or broken spear-shaft with sauroter. These could maybe be used more effectively to push an opposing shield to the bearer's right per the Zulu custom and thus allow the side-ways strike.
It\'s only by appreciating accurate accounts of real combat past and present that we can begin to approach the Greek hoplite\'s hard-won awareness of war\'s potential merits and ultimate limitations.
- Fred Eugene Ray (aka "Old Husker")
- Fred Eugene Ray (aka "Old Husker")
