Great Video, Paul. One of the main advantages of your documentaries is that they have a more technical, physiological approach to the topic of classical hoplite warfare due to your studies in natural sciences. It adds a more plausible layer of explanation than a purely historical approach. (Currently chewing through Van Wees´ "Greek warfare" with it´s emphasis on a mere historical view. So I was more than happy to find a more technical bias in your videos) By the way, did you also spot this cerberus-like creature just popping up behind the palm at min 20:35? :´-) Don´t worry, it was neither a gorgon nor a hydra, but just a tiny squirrel.
Excellent video! I agree with most of this, though it's been too long since I've really practiced weaponed sparring. I like the idea of fighting out of measure, and stepping in to occasionally strike in-measure. I'll also add that you can thrust with either style of sword from above, and of course, the xiphos can strike with the false edge in a wrap-around cut too. This would be one of the only ways I could attack someone who was at point-blank range if I was using that very long xiphos, (I have that Alfadena model, which is tremendously long). I think the bits about using the sword (whether it's xiphos/kopis), the sparabara, and all sorts of interactions within a phalanx (v. monomachia) could all be different videos unto themselves! :) But nice to see it all! Great addition.
hello, I really like the video. Since i am jousting, I totally agree with e the Dory (or the Sarissa being balanced to the real) i did not think of holding it behind the CG for the extra reach and parry. I like you take on the formation battle and the getting close with the kopis/makaeira. As well i like the "uberlauffen" explanation. (15th German fencing expansion of reach reduction on a lower arc of a circle, minus slip of the front leg and the hit on the head). nice explanation of Silver true times as well. In short, it confront me that that grip is probably the best (the one that makes "more sense" for formation fighting with a dori. on that not edo you think that the Greek phalanx could change density/frontage as per Asclepiodotus for the Macedonian phalanx? I would say that in duelling or open fighting (there might be a more defined "Zu fecheten" phase in open fight, due to multiple opponents in open fight and the Hoplite kit not being as protective as padding+mail+quilting, transitional armour or full plate) I found the underhand/sword grip is probably better, as it gives all the option of the overhand grip (the one in the video) plus basically every thing we see in Saviolo. I know Saviolo is "spado de lato" and open hand (or whatever you have in the hand you do not have the sword in) to deflect the strike, so 16th cent but the principle of what he says kinds of stay true to any shield that is bid enough not to be deceived by changing the trajectory of the strike at the last minute, like a buckler in medial sword and buckler (not he case in ghatka sword and buckler or with any sword that keeps the hand in a fixed position. So changing the trajectory can not be as quick). Phil
Thank you. I use overhand for duelling. There are a number of advantages to overhand evennin 1 on 1 matches. I had a chance recently to duel some very experienced hoplite reenactors and some of our matches were filmed. I shall be putting together a video updating this one and cutting in footage from competitive matches.
@@paulbardunias5950 Thanks for taking the time to respond I am looking forward to that. from past experience even with video it is difficult to see what other means :-). For the record I think what you do works and is martially sound, I am really saying that you can do all that from underhand grip (though i have seen not depiction of it in period arts). Now I have to say that i have probably a strong bias as my experience with fighting in armour, using my left arm to deflect the blows (as per the manual), using "ochs and the second position/guard when in armour"as well as Saviolo rapier batting the point away with the left hand. gives you both the shallow passing of the point and simultaneity, that repeatedly and consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range . So that you the source i interpret is Ringeck (MS Dresd.C.487) (Lichtanauer tradition, fighting with long sword, sword and buckler spear on foot on horse with and without armour), I have a reasonable understanding of Fiore, the 15th cent side of Lllcthtanauer tradition (from around 1400), Saviolo and Swetnam rapier and a passing understanding of Silver and Meyer. That being said it is easier for medieval fencing to have to wider exposure. Ie There are much more styles and existing MA to spare with (i.e. test your interpretation)with. I tend to use sparing to tell me what is not working in my interpretations. I mean after 20 years i have a version of the Sheitel haw that I feel works consistently. :-)
@@willaumep “on that not edo you think that the Greek phalanx could change density/frontage as per Asclepiodotus for the Macedonian phalanx?” Hoplites did not generally change frontage for combat by doubling up their files. They doubled down to their final frontage prior to combat. This would have been a frontage between 90-60cm, with 72cm the most comfortable to fight in. Generally when we read of a Greek phalanx being dense, it is closer to 60cm, but they are very unlikely to have ever formed in true open order (2m frontage). We tested this with men in full HEMA gear, around 25 per side(~3 ranks, 8 wide). It was ugly. The opened order guys got slaughtered. You do not need more than 60cm frontage to use a spear and the 2m frontage guys were simply fighting too many opponents. “ I found the underhand/sword grip is probably better, as it gives all the option of the overhand grip (the one in the video) plus basically every thing we see in Saviolo.” We need to be careful here, because the grip used in a “hanging guard” with he sword is not the same as the overhand grip with the spear. We call the grip when you raise and underhand, thumb pointing forward, grip to a position above the shoulder “high underhand”. It has many disadvantages when compared to true, thumb pointing backward, overhand. True overhand is far stronger, faster, is easier to gig, or slide, with, and high underhand exposes the arm pit in a way that overhand does not. I use true overhand for all the reasons I describe in the video, but to be clearer you have a far greater range of motion in overhand because your body is not in the way. In overhand I can strike anywhere from the right, on lines from over my head to waist level, but I can also cross over my head and deliver a “punto reverso” from my left side, either with the point or if I want to close, flipped to strike with the sauroter, butt spike. When I face an opponent holding the spear in underhand, I circle right. To keep up he has to rotate is body to keep his spear on line, where I can strike back on a line from my left. This may be hard to envision, but having to rotate more than me opens him up for a punto reverso strike. I also have greater range because I can gig, or let the spear slide through my hand, then catch it at the rear, with much more speed and force than he can. I use this to strike at feet and shins to either render him lame or simply force him to drop the shield to protect his legs and open up his face. If you have never read him, the best source for spear and shield is Achille Marozzo. His description of partisan and rotella opens with instructions to strike in overhand “as though throwing”, wiktenauer.com/wiki/Achille_Marozzo#Fourth_Book_.28Pole_Weapons.29 “I am looking forward to that. from past experience even with video it is difficult to see what other means :-). For the record I think what you do works and is martially sound, I am really saying that you can do all that from underhand grip (though i have seen not depiction of it in period arts).” We can be pretty sure that they did use an underhand grip sometimes, because it is seen in art often. “Now I have to say that i have probably a strong bias as my experience with fighting in armour, using my left arm to deflect the blows (as per the manual), using "ochs and the second position/guard when in armour"as well as Saviolo rapier batting the point away with the left hand. gives you both the shallow passing of the point and simultaneity, that repeatedly and consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range . So that you the source i interpret is Ringeck (MS Dresd.C.487) (Lichtanauer tradition, fighting with long sword, sword and buckler spear on foot on horse with and without armour” I would like to know more of your opinion here, but I would caution that is may not be so simple to transfer a two handed grip, like ochs, to a single handed grip. In particular, could you explain this: “consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range”. If you read Marozzo above, or Manciolino, they advise to strike and then get back out of measure. But I do not have a cohesive system for fighting underhand. Getting hoplite reenactors to understand the value of overhand is a heavy lift, they generally need to be shown.
@@PMBardunias Hello thanks for taking the time to reply about the hoplite phalanx just to be clear, i am totally sold on the "true overhand" in formation. I think the point of phalanx is to increase the number of active fighter per meter of frontage and still being able to move at a reasonable rate. In your trials, am U right guessing that second row was probably about 60 cm (may be 45-50) behind and staggered in the interval of the two in front? did you manage to get the three row fighting or was it more a matter of the 3rd row taking the occasional shot? From what I understand the 4 cubits(2 meters or 175-185 according to whose cubit we think he used) (frontage for the Macedonians was more a mouvement formation ,if the translation I have is correct and I understand it was 2 cubits space was used for attack and 1 cubit for defence. so I think the formed up before as well. About the underhand sorry for the confusion yes that is well represented, but I have not seen any "high underhand" representation. the ox or hanging are used in one handed weapons, but i understand it more are the most threatening/useful for the paradigm position when you have the hands high and forward. it gives you a greater reach than thumb up. You can lean forward further, which i think is only good for out of formation fight. Ages ago, when I tried with spear at a test cutting, I was able to get more range and control with that now we used my boar spear (250 and 3.2 kg) and broad bladed lighter 250-270? spear and the target was pig carcass) . We tried gig (to check if that is how pilum could have been used.) I tried again in my garden after our chat and i it is still the case but I am certain that the control side is a mater of me being more used to the grip and it shows more with a heavy spear. For the breaking the darting in-darting out is better explained by the defence with left hand when fighting in armour. Basically it is close to what modern fencing calls a single time counter when you split the defence and the offence (but he single time can turn into 1.5 2 ish). So either he/she/ey extend to get you or Der text von absetzen mitt lerer hand. Lincke lanck von hand schlache. Spring wyßlich, vnd den fache. Ob er will zucken von schaiden, fach vnd truck in, daß in die bloß mitt Schwertes ort verdroß. Glosa. Wenn du staust in der vndern hut, sticht er dir an oben zu mitt dem sper vnd hat das gefasst, daß im der ort lang für die hand vsß gat, vnd sticht dir domitt oben zu, so schlach in mitt der lincken hand sin sper beseytz abe; vnd begryff din schwert bald wider mitt der lincken hand mitten in der clingen. Vnd spring zu im, vnd setz im an. The text from the set aside with the free hand Left hips from the hand strike, spring knowingly and then drive. If he will zuck (twitch) from separating (schaiden=scheiden).,Drive and press in that in the opening with the sword point you stop. Glose When you stand in the lower guard, thrust he high at you with the spear, and has it gripped that the length of the point goes long from the hand, and thrust he you above with that, so strike with the left hand sending his spear away (or down) and grab your sword boldly with the left hand in the middle of the blade, and springs at him and set it at him. Lastly thanks for Marrozo, I i have to say that i have been trying to stay clear from the Bolognese unless it is a sauce. :-). i will have look though. Seriously though the Lichtanauer school is kind of big so i really only dabbed in Saviolo, Silver and Swetnam to get a bity more context on what Meyer says , like i dabbed in Fiore and Vadi and there is so much a man can take.
Thank you. There is no easy answer to this, because hoplites did face Romans with a mixed win/loss record. It is not a cop out to say it really comes down to troop quality and chaotic events on the battlefield. As an example, at the battle of Bagradas, where the Spartan general Xanthippus commanded the Carthaginian army in the first Punic war and humbled the Romans, many of his troops were hoplites. There was a body of hoplites on the Carthaginian right wing mixed with Celts and Iberians, they were beaten by the Romans. But the rest of the line of Carthaginian Levy spearmen, either hoplites or very close in panoply, decimated the Romans because the Romans had to fight through a screen of elephants to get to them and were probably somewhat disorganized. Pyrrhus may have had hoplites in his forces. One on one, I give the advantage to the Roman, especially if he enters combat with two pila. The scutum is better than any other shield for closing with a spearman. It covers so much of the body that the only targets are feet and face. Feignting to foot and striking to the face is far slower than feignting to the thigh and striking the face for example. The hemicylindrical shape makes spear strikes from off- line more difficult. More importantly, pila force the hoplite to close so as to not sit at the range where they cannot answer throws, but try to maintain a sweet spot between out of spesr range and in sword range. That bug shield makes it easier to get into sword range. When in a phalanx, the spears get an advantage, just because so many spears can hit a single roman- especially if you believe that they stood at a 6' frontage while the Greeks were less than 3'. That puts 6 spears per Roman. (I don't believe they fought at 6' for this reason). The Romans don't get the same flanking benefits they enjoyed against sarissa from a well-led classical phalanx.
@@paulbardunias5950 its so interresting, however wouldnt the hoplite be closer to 2 or 1.5 feet or 1 cubit (around 45 cm)? thats the defnce formation of the sarrisa phalanx, tho it doesnt work as it is shoulder to shoulder. Now the reason the sarissa phalanx need 3 feet is bc of the 4/5 sarissas of the men behind him. A hoplite phalanx doesnt need that. How would the roman fair against the first row tho? isnt that in a way othismos? can give me your view on othismos
@@paulbardunias5950 How do you reconcile a Roman advantage in sword-length combat with your model of othismos? In essence the latter, per my understanding, implies extremely, claustrophobically close combat with swords as an integral and decisive component of hoplite combat; it follows naturally that the Hellenic panoply should be considerably optimized for such confrontation - and therefrom that Roman legionaries should not hold any considerable advantage in their preferred measure.
@@melanoc3tusii205 The Roman gladius is short compared to some Gallic swords and later medieval types, but would not be considered a short sword by a hoplite. The better comparison to the "enchiridia" or daggers that we see in the hands of hoplites by the end of the Peloponnesian war would be the Roman pugio. In fact there is some evidence that Romans used the pugio when combat became very close.
@@giftzwerg7345 Hoplites cannot form at 45cm because of the porpax of a 90cm aspis (there would be no room for the arm if they overlapped by half). They also need to rotate the right arm forward to strike- unlike Sarissaphoroi who lead with the left hand. In testing, 60cm is about the minimum you can still fight in. 72cm is perhaps ideal.
This guy is a true professional teacher. Fantastic work!
I don’t know why TH-cam showed me your video, but I’m glad it did. You should make more videos.👍🏻
I came here while reading the Iliad. It all makes so much more sense now. Thank you!
Thanks, glad I was informative.
This makes so much more sense than the other way to wield a spear in such close quarters. Thank you so much for this video
Great video. I came here after watching Viking combat videos. I just got my first sword, a Saxon/viking sword. Love living/experimental history.
Awesome video!
Thank you. I hope you find it useful. Feel free to ask any questions.
Just noticed you’ve only got one video?!? You have to do more! Your channel will definitely grow if you do.
Great Video, Paul. One of the main advantages of your documentaries is that they have a more technical, physiological approach to the topic of classical hoplite warfare due to your studies in natural sciences. It adds a more plausible layer of explanation than a purely historical approach. (Currently chewing through Van Wees´ "Greek warfare" with it´s emphasis on a mere historical view. So I was more than happy to find a more technical bias in your videos) By the way, did you also spot this cerberus-like creature just popping up behind the palm at min 20:35? :´-) Don´t worry, it was neither a gorgon nor a hydra, but just a tiny squirrel.
Excellent video! I agree with most of this, though it's been too long since I've really practiced weaponed sparring. I like the idea of fighting out of measure, and stepping in to occasionally strike in-measure. I'll also add that you can thrust with either style of sword from above, and of course, the xiphos can strike with the false edge in a wrap-around cut too. This would be one of the only ways I could attack someone who was at point-blank range if I was using that very long xiphos, (I have that Alfadena model, which is tremendously long).
I think the bits about using the sword (whether it's xiphos/kopis), the sparabara, and all sorts of interactions within a phalanx (v. monomachia) could all be different videos unto themselves! :)
But nice to see it all! Great addition.
Thanks!
learned a lot, thanks
Esta guay
hello, I really like the video.
Since i am jousting, I totally agree with e the Dory (or the Sarissa being balanced to the real) i did not think of holding it behind the CG for the extra reach and parry.
I like you take on the formation battle and the getting close with the kopis/makaeira. As well i like the "uberlauffen" explanation. (15th German fencing expansion of reach reduction on a lower arc of a circle, minus slip of the front leg and the hit on the head). nice explanation of Silver true times as well.
In short, it confront me that that grip is probably the best (the one that makes "more sense" for formation fighting with a dori.
on that not edo you think that the Greek phalanx could change density/frontage as per Asclepiodotus for the Macedonian phalanx?
I would say that in duelling or open fighting (there might be a more defined "Zu fecheten" phase in open fight, due to multiple opponents in open fight and the Hoplite kit not being as protective as padding+mail+quilting, transitional armour or full plate) I found the underhand/sword grip is probably better, as it gives all the option of the overhand grip (the one in the video) plus basically every thing we see in Saviolo.
I know Saviolo is "spado de lato" and open hand (or whatever you have in the hand you do not have the sword in) to deflect the strike, so 16th cent but the principle of what he says kinds of stay true to any shield that is bid enough not to be deceived by changing the trajectory of the strike at the last minute, like a buckler in medial sword and buckler (not he case in ghatka sword and buckler or with any sword that keeps the hand in a fixed position. So changing the trajectory can not be as quick).
Phil
Thank you. I use overhand for duelling. There are a number of advantages to overhand evennin 1 on 1 matches. I had a chance recently to duel some very experienced hoplite reenactors and some of our matches were filmed. I shall be putting together a video updating this one and cutting in footage from competitive matches.
@@paulbardunias5950 Thanks for taking the time to respond
I am looking forward to that. from past experience even with video it is difficult to see what other means :-).
For the record I think what you do works and is martially sound, I am really saying that you can do all that from underhand grip (though i have seen not depiction of it in period arts).
Now I have to say that i have probably a strong bias as my experience with fighting in armour, using my left arm to deflect the blows (as per the manual), using "ochs and the second position/guard when in armour"as well as Saviolo rapier batting the point away with the left hand. gives you both the shallow passing of the point and simultaneity, that repeatedly and consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range .
So that you the source i interpret is Ringeck (MS Dresd.C.487) (Lichtanauer tradition, fighting with long sword, sword and buckler spear on foot on horse with and without armour), I have a reasonable understanding of Fiore, the 15th cent side of Lllcthtanauer tradition (from around 1400), Saviolo and Swetnam rapier and a passing understanding of Silver and Meyer.
That being said it is easier for medieval fencing to have to wider exposure. Ie There are much more styles and existing MA to spare with (i.e. test your interpretation)with. I tend to use sparing to tell me what is not working in my interpretations. I mean after 20 years i have a version of the Sheitel haw that I feel works consistently. :-)
@@willaumep “on that not edo you think that the Greek phalanx could change density/frontage as per Asclepiodotus for the Macedonian phalanx?”
Hoplites did not generally change frontage for combat by doubling up their files. They doubled down to their final frontage prior to combat. This would have been a frontage between 90-60cm, with 72cm the most comfortable to fight in. Generally when we read of a Greek phalanx being dense, it is closer to 60cm, but they are very unlikely to have ever formed in true open order (2m frontage). We tested this with men in full HEMA gear, around 25 per side(~3 ranks, 8 wide). It was ugly. The opened order guys got slaughtered. You do not need more than 60cm frontage to use a spear and the 2m frontage guys were simply fighting too many opponents.
“ I found the underhand/sword grip is probably better, as it gives all the option of the overhand grip (the one in the video) plus basically every thing we see in Saviolo.”
We need to be careful here, because the grip used in a “hanging guard” with he sword is not the same as the overhand grip with the spear. We call the grip when you raise and underhand, thumb pointing forward, grip to a position above the shoulder “high underhand”. It has many disadvantages when compared to true, thumb pointing backward, overhand. True overhand is far stronger, faster, is easier to gig, or slide, with, and high underhand exposes the arm pit in a way that overhand does not.
I use true overhand for all the reasons I describe in the video, but to be clearer you have a far greater range of motion in overhand because your body is not in the way. In overhand I can strike anywhere from the right, on lines from over my head to waist level, but I can also cross over my head and deliver a “punto reverso” from my left side, either with the point or if I want to close, flipped to strike with the sauroter, butt spike. When I face an opponent holding the spear in underhand, I circle right. To keep up he has to rotate is body to keep his spear on line, where I can strike back on a line from my left. This may be hard to envision, but having to rotate more than me opens him up for a punto reverso strike. I also have greater range because I can gig, or let the spear slide through my hand, then catch it at the rear, with much more speed and force than he can. I use this to strike at feet and shins to either render him lame or simply force him to drop the shield to protect his legs and open up his face. If you have never read him, the best source for spear and shield is Achille Marozzo. His description of partisan and rotella opens with instructions to strike in overhand “as though throwing”,
wiktenauer.com/wiki/Achille_Marozzo#Fourth_Book_.28Pole_Weapons.29
“I am looking forward to that. from past experience even with video it is difficult to see what other means :-). For the record I think what you do works and is martially sound, I am really saying that you can do all that from underhand grip (though i have seen not depiction of it in period arts).”
We can be pretty sure that they did use an underhand grip sometimes, because it is seen in art often.
“Now I have to say that i have probably a strong bias as my experience with fighting in armour, using my left arm to deflect the blows (as per the manual), using "ochs and the second position/guard when in armour"as well as Saviolo rapier batting the point away with the left hand. gives you both the shallow passing of the point and simultaneity, that repeatedly and consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range . So that you the source i interpret is Ringeck (MS Dresd.C.487) (Lichtanauer tradition, fighting with long sword, sword and buckler spear on foot on horse with and without armour”
I would like to know more of your opinion here, but I would caution that is may not be so simple to transfer a two handed grip, like ochs, to a single handed grip. In particular, could you explain this: “consistently breaks the darting in darting out at the edge of the range”. If you read Marozzo above, or Manciolino, they advise to strike and then get back out of measure. But I do not have a cohesive system for fighting underhand. Getting hoplite reenactors to understand the value of overhand is a heavy lift, they generally need to be shown.
@@PMBardunias Hello thanks for taking the time to reply
about the hoplite phalanx
just to be clear, i am totally sold on the "true overhand" in formation. I think the point of phalanx is to increase the number of active fighter per meter of frontage and still being able to move at a reasonable rate.
In your trials, am U right guessing that second row was probably about 60 cm (may be 45-50) behind and staggered in the interval of the two in front?
did you manage to get the three row fighting or was it more a matter of the 3rd row taking the occasional shot?
From what I understand the 4 cubits(2 meters or 175-185 according to whose cubit we think he used) (frontage for the Macedonians was more a mouvement formation ,if the translation I have is correct and I understand it was 2 cubits space was used for attack and 1 cubit for defence. so I think the formed up before as well.
About the underhand sorry for the confusion yes that is well represented, but I have not seen any "high underhand" representation.
the ox or hanging are used in one handed weapons, but i understand it more are the most threatening/useful for the paradigm position when you have the hands high and forward. it gives you a greater reach than thumb up. You can lean forward further, which i think is only good for out of formation fight. Ages ago, when I tried with spear at a test cutting, I was able to get more range and control with that now we used my boar spear (250 and 3.2 kg) and broad bladed lighter 250-270? spear and the target was pig carcass) . We tried gig (to check if that is how pilum could have been used.)
I tried again in my garden after our chat and i it is still the case but I am certain that the control side is a mater of me being more used to the grip and it shows more with a heavy spear.
For the breaking the darting in-darting out is better explained by the defence with left hand when fighting in armour. Basically it is close to what modern fencing calls a single time counter when you split the defence and the offence (but he single time can turn into 1.5 2 ish). So either he/she/ey extend to get you or
Der text von absetzen mitt lerer hand.
Lincke lanck von hand schlache. Spring wyßlich, vnd den fache. Ob er will zucken von schaiden, fach vnd truck in, daß in die bloß mitt Schwertes ort verdroß.
Glosa.
Wenn du staust in der vndern hut, sticht er dir an oben zu mitt dem sper vnd hat das gefasst, daß im der ort lang für die hand vsß gat, vnd sticht dir domitt oben zu, so schlach in mitt der lincken hand sin sper beseytz abe; vnd begryff din schwert bald wider mitt der lincken hand mitten in der clingen. Vnd spring zu im, vnd setz im an.
The text from the set aside with the free hand
Left hips from the hand strike, spring knowingly and then drive. If he will zuck (twitch) from separating (schaiden=scheiden).,Drive and press in that in the opening with the sword point you stop.
Glose
When you stand in the lower guard, thrust he high at you with the spear, and has it gripped that the length of the point goes long from the hand, and thrust he you above with that, so strike with the left hand sending his spear away (or down) and grab your sword boldly with the left hand in the middle of the blade, and springs at him and set it at him.
Lastly thanks for Marrozo, I i have to say that i have been trying to stay clear from the Bolognese unless it is a sauce. :-). i will have look though. Seriously though the Lichtanauer school is kind of big so i really only dabbed in Saviolo, Silver and Swetnam to get a bity more context on what Meyer says , like i dabbed in Fiore and Vadi and there is so much a man can take.
Excellent video. How do you think a hoplite phalanx would fare against a roman legion?
Thank you. There is no easy answer to this, because hoplites did face Romans with a mixed win/loss record. It is not a cop out to say it really comes down to troop quality and chaotic events on the battlefield. As an example, at the battle of Bagradas, where the Spartan general Xanthippus commanded the Carthaginian army in the first Punic war and humbled the Romans, many of his troops were hoplites. There was a body of hoplites on the Carthaginian right wing mixed with Celts and Iberians, they were beaten by the Romans. But the rest of the line of Carthaginian Levy spearmen, either hoplites or very close in panoply, decimated the Romans because the Romans had to fight through a screen of elephants to get to them and were probably somewhat disorganized. Pyrrhus may have had hoplites in his forces.
One on one, I give the advantage to the Roman, especially if he enters combat with two pila. The scutum is better than any other shield for closing with a spearman. It covers so much of the body that the only targets are feet and face. Feignting to foot and striking to the face is far slower than feignting to the thigh and striking the face for example. The hemicylindrical shape makes spear strikes from off- line more difficult.
More importantly, pila force the hoplite to close so as to not sit at the range where they cannot answer throws, but try to maintain a sweet spot between out of spesr range and in sword range. That bug shield makes it easier to get into sword range.
When in a phalanx, the spears get an advantage, just because so many spears can hit a single roman- especially if you believe that they stood at a 6' frontage while the Greeks were less than 3'. That puts 6 spears per Roman. (I don't believe they fought at 6' for this reason). The Romans don't get the same flanking benefits they enjoyed against sarissa from a well-led classical phalanx.
@@paulbardunias5950 its so interresting, however wouldnt the hoplite be closer to 2 or 1.5 feet or 1 cubit (around 45 cm)? thats the defnce formation of the sarrisa phalanx, tho it doesnt work as it is shoulder to shoulder. Now the reason the sarissa phalanx need 3 feet is bc of the 4/5 sarissas of the men behind him.
A hoplite phalanx doesnt need that.
How would the roman fair against the first row tho? isnt that in a way othismos? can give me your view on othismos
@@paulbardunias5950 How do you reconcile a Roman advantage in sword-length combat with your model of othismos? In essence the latter, per my understanding, implies extremely, claustrophobically close combat with swords as an integral and decisive component of hoplite combat; it follows naturally that the Hellenic panoply should be considerably optimized for such confrontation - and therefrom that Roman legionaries should not hold any considerable advantage in their preferred measure.
@@melanoc3tusii205 The Roman gladius is short compared to some Gallic swords and later medieval types, but would not be considered a short sword by a hoplite. The better comparison to the "enchiridia" or daggers that we see in the hands of hoplites by the end of the Peloponnesian war would be the Roman pugio. In fact there is some evidence that Romans used the pugio when combat became very close.
@@giftzwerg7345 Hoplites cannot form at 45cm because of the porpax of a 90cm aspis (there would be no room for the arm if they overlapped by half). They also need to rotate the right arm forward to strike- unlike Sarissaphoroi who lead with the left hand. In testing, 60cm is about the minimum you can still fight in. 72cm is perhaps ideal.