Wielding a sarissa overarm

[RichT]

That's interesting - the left hand of the two red shirted men at minute 20 still has his shield to the left of the shaft (and shaft angled down, so not a viable pike pose). The right hand man's pose though is much more like the Perg plaque - I've not seen that before. That could be a pike pose (at 20:25 he holds the pose nicely). Though of course the Perg plaque shields are neither small nor 'not too deep', unless that's just due to artistic limitations as well (could be - some Greek artists struggle with depictions of round shields in angled views, as can be seen from some hoplite shield depictions).

[Dangun]

Geometrically that sounds very odd...
At 45degrees and grounded, a 2.6m long pike would have raised its pointy end to above the height of most human opponents (1.8m).

Not if the human is sitting on a horse.

Very droll. 
But a 18 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the pointy end 12.7ft up in the air. I'm guessing higher than most horses. 
Even a 12 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the business end 8.5ft up in the air.

More seriously, if you are going to ground a pike that is 12ft long, to keep the pointy end at 5ft up you'll have to hold it at 25 degrees, at 18ft long its 16 degrees. Assuming you can reach forward 3ft, your knuckles will be about 10 inches off the ground. Not comfortable.

[Justin Swanton]

Incidentally this clip - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kQwMbJpBTs - is, though maddeningly badly filmed, quite interesting. At around 1:44 the ranks are shown each holding their sarissa slightly higher, still underarm (well, for the guy in the mask helmet, it's borderline if this is low hold or high hold). I think this reconstruction looks quite convincing (aside from the little dude in the front rank, but maybe he's very brave). Who's convinced it might have worked this way? I just wish the History channel would provide this sort of funding for some proper research.

This part? They appear to have widened to files to an irregular open order and put all the short people in front.



It's clearer here:



There's a short clip in the video (the clip is a CG animation) where the phalangites are in closeish order and the pikes are presented over the shields. Looks convincing to me.

Justin - nobody is going to be able to prove you wrong to your satisfaction, not least because you set an impossibly high standard of proof. That does not however mean you are right. Can you understand that?

Personally, I would prefer just examining the arguments for and against and seeing where they lead. I think we can all understand the difference between definitive, probable and possible proof.

[PMBardunias]

That's interesting - the left hand of the two red shirted men at minute 20 still has his shield to the left of the shaft (and shaft angled down, so not a viable pike pose). The right hand man's pose though is much more like the Perg plaque - I've not seen that before. That could be a pike pose (at 20:25 he holds the pose nicely). Though of course the Perg plaque shields are neither small nor 'not too deep', unless that's just due to artistic limitations as well (could be - some Greek artists struggle with depictions of round shields in angled views, as can be seen from some hoplite shield depictions).

I am agnostic on what exactly the artist was showing on the Pergamum plaque.  Maybe he did not really understand what a pike phalanx looked like and so just created something that looked a bit like hoplites rather than true pikeman?  Maybe they were hoplites? Maybe he did not want to cross the ornate shield face with the shaft of the sarissa? and maybe they held the sarissa as in the video I posted, but the shields are just too big on the plaque. Many, many maybes.  What is somewhat amazing is that we only have one image that is possibly sarissaphoroi from the century+ we are told they dominated.

[Dangun]

What is somewhat amazing is that we only have one image that is possibly sarissaphoroi from the century+ we are told they dominated.

Indeed!

Archaeology > Literary History? Discuss. 

[Justin Swanton]

That's interesting - the left hand of the two red shirted men at minute 20 still has his shield to the left of the shaft (and shaft angled down, so not a viable pike pose). The right hand man's pose though is much more like the Perg plaque - I've not seen that before. That could be a pike pose (at 20:25 he holds the pose nicely). Though of course the Perg plaque shields are neither small nor 'not too deep', unless that's just due to artistic limitations as well (could be - some Greek artists struggle with depictions of round shields in angled views, as can be seen from some hoplite shield depictions).

I am agnostic on what exactly the artist was showing on the Pergamum plaque.  Maybe he did not really understand what a pike phalanx looked like and so just created something that looked a bit like hoplites rather than true pikeman?  Maybe they were hoplites? Maybe he did not want to cross the ornate shield face with the shaft of the sarissa? and maybe they held the sarissa as in the video I posted, but the shields are just too big on the plaque. Many, many maybes.  What is somewhat amazing is that we only have one image that is possibly sarissaphoroi from the century+ we are told they dominated.

Taking yet another look at the plaque, there's actually no indication the phalangites are holding their spears/pikes/sarissas/long pointy sticks with two hands. One would expect to see the left hand projecting beyond the rim of the shield and holding the shaft if this was meant to be a forensic illustration of pikemen.

Of course there's no definitive indication they aren't holding the shafts two-handed either.

[Mark G]

Well I am amazed.

I had assumed Justin would only accept video, but he even dismissed that out of hand when it disagrees with his view.

It is also the first time I can recall him ever dismissing a written source more than 1000 years old.

So I guess that just leaves computer generated images as the only evidence Justin will accept. 

It's all become even more pointless than usual, at 5 pages.  Usually it takes to seven

[RichT]

Paul - Pergamon plaque - yes it's a problem image in many ways isn't it. Yet as you say, in three centuries of phalanx warfare, this is pretty much all there is - not that surprising - taking away the Chigi vase, how many depictions of hoplite phalanx warfare are there? Without vase painting, how many depictions of hoplites? The Hellenistic world was without vase painting, 99% of painted and decorative art is lost, and sculptural art has a tradition of depicting intertwined bodies or individuals, not mass formations. So the PP is all we have - it would be good to incorporate it into whatever model we have of phalanx warfare, but it isn't a precise and detailed source of perfect information either (to say the least).

One more question - you said:

You cannot hold a sarissa with a classical Greek aspis, I have tried, and the rim is in the way.

Were you holding the shield by a porpax, or by an ochane (however you might interpret that)?

Justin - do you really think you are the only one who prefers "examining the arguments for and against and seeing where they lead"? What do you imagine the rest of us are doing, and in some cases have been doing for several decades?

[Patrick Waterson]

Mark, if you have some actual evidence or logic to submit, please do so, otherwise I would ask that you refrain from this kind of comment.

It is hard to know what to make of the Pergamene bronze.  To begin with, cavalry using xyston and large shield appear to be charging pikemen - if these are indeed pikemen - frontally,  in conjunction with figures which bear sword and thureos and might be Romans or Gauls.  Is the Pergamene artist depicting Pergamene cavalry assailing Seleucid pikes or Seleucid cavalry assailing the Macedonian camp guard, or what?  The important question is whether we can derive any meaningful conclusions from this unusual piece of work.

Justin actually gave us two tangible criteria why the underarm hold might be considered suspect - indeed, these drove him to seek out the possibility of an overarm hold in the first place.  These are (Justin, please correct me if I have misunderstood):
1) The shield is in the way.
2) A sarissa (meaning a Macedonian pike) held underarm would have a drooping point, which would get caught up on or in terrain.

Deal with these objections and the need for an overarm grip vanishes.

Justin - do you really think you are the only one who prefers "examining the arguments for and against and seeing where they lead"? What do you imagine the rest of us are doing, and in some cases have been doing for several decades?

Politeness forbids response.   Seriously, no need to get uppity about it.  If existing members are deterred from pursuing lines of thought, new members are not going to discuss ideas here for fear of ridicule.

[RichT]

Mark's comment is entirely reasonable. It has the support of the entire forum (I imagine), less two. There are two problem posters on this forum - Justin Swanton and Patrick Waterson. We all know this. Generally, we are polite and pleasant enough to hedge and fudge around it, but sometimes such politeness may be counterproductive, and after being called 'uppity' I'm disinclined to continue the charade. Get uppity about that. 

[Mark G]

Page five is usually where Patrick takes over, as previous threads can attest, so that is not a surprise eitger

[Justin Swanton]

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Peace, brothers! It's going to get really difficult to continue with the discussion if we don't get off the personal approach. Can we keep this objective?

do you really think you are the only one who prefers "examining the arguments for and against and seeing where they lead"? What do you imagine the rest of us are doing, and in some cases have been doing for several decades?

Obviously I don't think this. My point is that rather than being told I can't be proven wrong to my satisfaction (I can - remember the kneeling hoplite mercenaries?) and that I set an impossibly high standard of proof (I don't) I would prefer that we stick to the topic. You have been doing this much longer than me, so please bring in the sources. I'm listening.

[Mick Hession]

Geometrically that sounds very odd...
At 45degrees and grounded, a 2.6m long pike would have raised its pointy end to above the height of most human opponents (1.8m).

Not if the human is sitting on a horse.

Very droll. 
But a 18 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the pointy end 12.7ft up in the air. I'm guessing higher than most horses. 
Even a 12 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the business end 8.5ft up in the air.

More seriously, if you are going to ground a pike that is 12ft long, to keep the pointy end at 5ft up you'll have to hold it at 25 degrees, at 18ft long its 16 degrees. Assuming you can reach forward 3ft, your knuckles will be about 10 inches off the ground. Not comfortable.

All true, but that presumes that the plan is to impale the cavalry as they crash into impact rather than to present a front that makes them pull up, which evokes another recent thread in which we all reached consensus.   
Cheers
Mick   

[Justin Swanton]

Geometrically that sounds very odd...
At 45degrees and grounded, a 2.6m long pike would have raised its pointy end to above the height of most human opponents (1.8m).

Not if the human is sitting on a horse.

Very droll. 
But a 18 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the pointy end 12.7ft up in the air. I'm guessing higher than most horses. 
Even a 12 foot pike held at 45 degrees would have the business end 8.5ft up in the air.

More seriously, if you are going to ground a pike that is 12ft long, to keep the pointy end at 5ft up you'll have to hold it at 25 degrees, at 18ft long its 16 degrees. Assuming you can reach forward 3ft, your knuckles will be about 10 inches off the ground. Not comfortable.

All true, but that presumes that the plan is to impale the cavalry as they crash into impact rather than to present a front that makes them pull up, which evokes another recent thread in which we all reached consensus.   
Cheers
Mick

We all reached consensus? Where? Lemme see!

[Erpingham]

The high holds that Anthony's pictures depict are interesting, though the spears are very short - is that an artistic thing too?

It's probably artistic.  Note the second version labels the weapon as Lanza Longa. 

This roughly contemporary image shows the weapon in more realistic proportion