Those coupling-sleeves again...

[Paralus]

Just received my copy of Ancient Warfare XIII.1 and what do I see in the background? Epirote phalangites wielding sarrisae with coupling-sleeves...  Matthew's An Invincible Beast had 'em, but I could ignore the specific chapter, as it's a decent work, while Dahm's Macedonian Phalangite vs Persian Warrior: Alexander confronts the Achaemenids, 334–331 BC  lazily regurgitated it, like a pair of Hawkwood's dismounted men-at-arms wielding a single spear. Why is the coupling sleeve still perpetuated, despite no other examples and no mention of it in accounts?

I guess they just cannot imagine how else you could make such a long pike.... so it would seem logical, even if the evidence doesn't fit the logic.

Thought it worthwhile to check [url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.183503/page/n261]

"The height of the male tree is at most 12 cubits, the length of the longest macedonian spear"

I have no idea if this is true, that the longest spear is 12 cubits or about 18ft but at least its contemporary, and if so would suggest you could make the Sarissa from one piece with no need for any join.

Theophrastus means only that the longest sarissa of his day was the same length as the height of the male cornelwood tree. It does not mean it was made of such wood.

On the "coupling" sleeve, this is a nonsense. As has been remarked, such simply introduces a major flaw into the weapon. Firstly, the supposed sleeve is far too short for such a task. Secondly, the only discovered specimen has no nail holes for securing said sleeve. There is no way such a two piece sarissa would stay corporate with such a "connector" during battle.

On the cover of AW X111.2, I've never taken the prodromoi as infantry sarissa armed as Markle would have it. An eighteen foot pike would be an extremely unwieldy weapon to handle from horseback - especially given the lack of stirrups. The Macedonian cavalry spear was the xyston at, perhaps, twelve feet long (Kinch tomb, Alexander Mosaic). While Markle demonstrated an infantry sarissa could be carried by a rider, he did not demonstrate it could be handled in close cavalry combat.

It's as well to remember that the Macedonians used "sarisa" to refer to spears; the word did not strictly mean the long infantry pike. To a Greek, a cavalryman carrying an eleven or twelve foot xyston might well be carrying what appears to be the classic sarissa. In such a view, cavalry called "sarissaphoroi" need not be a technical term denoting someone wielding and infantry sarissa on horseback. We might note that Arrian happily refers to the Macedonian phalangites as "hoplites" in the early part of his work. These histories were not technical manuals.