CLASSICAL SPARTAN EQUIPMENT-ARMOR-SHOULDER GUARDS-SHIELD-SPEAR-HELMET-SPARTAN,THEBEAN,MAKEDONIAN,HOMERIC WAY OF WAR-GREAVES-HOPLITE,PELTAST,PSILOI-JAVELIN GRIP,SPEAR GRIP.
Some good points regarding the fighting. But it maintains the myth of the Hoplite-Titan. On the contrary, hoplite equipment was surprisingly light as the average equipment weight was 18-19 kilos (including arms, shield and armor). The secret was that all were made by forging/hammering thin bronze sheets, not by molding the bronze. In archeological findings one may see how thin the bronze is. Unfortunately, there are no such craftsmen nowadays. That's why replicas are 2-3 times heavier than the originals.Hence the widespread misconception of the hoplite carrying 30-40 kilos in battle.
Yes, plus you don't really need the bronze cuirasse when holding huge bronze shield which anyway covers not only your body plus, two guys near by. Later on they decided that when you have longer spear so that become pike you can have smaller lighter shield because the first rank can still hold enemy first enemy rank at distance by pushing him in the middle of the shield while first rank trying to get the spear into his skull :))) or mash his face by hitting the top edge of his Hoplon, I think now I understand this better... very interesting...
there were discovered dendrite apnea specific to the Mycenaean period and the Trojan war. the reconstruction of the panoplasty weighs 18-20 kg. thin bronze plate (1mm) quite uncomfortable does not allow quick movements. bronze weapons quite heavy ax epsilon (4 kg) swords, 3kg ... I do not know who the man in the picture says that the weapons of that period were 60kg and shields of 30 kg. the Greek armor (linothorax) did not have 10 kg, even with the bronze reinforcements. but who knows, maybe in the future they will discover and analyze the tombs of warriors from that period to see what kind of people they were
@@Hashishtani The clashes between the phalanx formations were like rugby matches, teams pushing each other to the pile. it was a ritual confrontation, with strict rules, the loss of human life was quite small when two phalanges were formed. those who had stronger nerves won the fight. you renounced the classic formula (stronger right wing) number of rows, rows lines, Spartans were defeated at Leuctras by Epaminonda who had fewer soldiers)
@@tomlloyd2603 nope, he really said "thirty kilos": τριαντά κιλό. The very word "kilogram" is of Greco-Roman origin: χίλιοι = thousand; γράμμα = in Greek means "letter" or "character", but in Late Latin it became a word meaning "small measure", like the Gram itself. So it's literally "a thousand Grams".
Yeah it was 30lbs, but still, that's still heavy to take in to battle and why they only used minimal body armour, the shield was to be a defence, attack and mobile movable armour and not to mention the 9 ft dory their xiphos sword and heavy helmet and a few extra javelins. These guys must have been machines to be so manouverable and dance in battle with all that extra weight like it was the waltz
Most kit entailed that you operate the aspis with one hand and the doru with another. He should be demonstrating those techniques accordingly, but only shows spear attacks using two hands. We really need more hands on research through more sparring.
A 30kg shield is simply unrealistic. Bronze is almost as dense as Steel or Iron, around 8000kg/m³, so a 90cm aspis would never have a mass of 30kg, not in this world. And that is even considering an aspis would be entirely made out of Bronze, which is debatable since some believe they were made of Wood with sheets of Bronze covering it. Furthermore, @Temenos Lykourgos comment does a good job debating the overhand x underhand grip of the spear and I agree 100%.
Curious, the way he holds the spear when he mentions that one could make that circle from up to down, he is referring to it in use when not in a phalanx (shield-wall), correct? Else, that wouldn't be possible. I could counter a number of these points into oblivion or at least spark up a good debate but I'm quite sure the language barrier makes such attempts moot. Firstly, rear-weighting a spear brings it's center of balance, and therefore grip spot, the same regardless of what method you hold it. Low underarm, shoulder level, overarm, the place you grab the shaft at is the same so rear-weighting it gives you the same benefits regardless of grip type. There are a multitude of depictions which show men fighting overarm where the situation demands that they're not using javelins but spears. This is not even scratching the surface. - www.forensicfashion.com/files/BC490GreekHopliteContextArtDMA01a.JPG There is nearly overwhelming evidence of combat spear portrayal which speaks against him. I'm also extremely skeptical of archeological finds indicating two *specific* points that aspis shields were struck at again and again. Two other things, one I brushed up on above. This full circle that the spear, when held thumb-forward, is allowed to move through, is a good concept but only truly relevant to single combat. Group combat sees your shields overlapped one way or the other and you can't change grips unless you break the wall. On top of that, I can actually shift from overarm to underarm fairly easily without excluding either grip type, and I can teach anyone to do the same. From said position I could thrust at his face down to his belly, you do it by exposing your right arm in the process but that's just what happens with a centrally held spear. He also states you 'drop' javelins when in fact you 'toss' them forward and through, in much the same way a proper overarm strike is made with full range of motion applied. Lastly, he takes note of how the man on the left can't attack him lower than his belly, again entirely irrelevant in a hoplite against hoplite encounter as that sees the shields overlapped for mutual protection, and the aspis and greaves prevent lower attacks from having any success while the helmet protects the head at least relatively well. Videos like this disappoint me a bit, though it is no surprise that folks have such different views on a fighting style so far removed from us today, and with so very little evidence to say for it.
Realistically a phalanx will not always hold together, the enemy could break into it or your comrades may get blood thirsty and rush out in that case its best to have your spear ready for the circle motion and besides, that is how its held he is right about how it is less effective your spear goes down try it yourself with a broom
Tywin Lannister Ser Twyin Lannister, I'm sorry to report to you that this is very incorrect. The benefit of holding it thumb forward is that you can indeed switch it to a lower grip if you need to, but, while a phalanx *ultimately* will not indefinitely hold together (as clearly evidenced by two all-hoplites forces entering combat and one obviously coming out as the victor), overarm is neither a weak grip, nor an ineffective grip at all. And in the close press that is a hoplite phalanx, indeed overarm is the more powerful of any over-the-shield strikes you can manage with a spear. I can attest to it, scholarly studies have attested to it, and most folks who have held a spear and have tried this out in earnest, (without bias, which is rare), can attest to it as well. I can provide video evidence if you should wish it. As a noble Lannister, you are most familiar I imagine with the longsword, and fighting from horseback perhaps? Well, having experience in handling these weapons myself, weapons of the common infantryman, shield and spear, I can say that this is a very viable form of attack from a dense formation and a shieldwall especially. Comrades rushing out may have happened, but it would be very much advised against, very much disliked and undoubtedly reprimanded. And a phalanx breaking as you say typically means wholesale defeat and slaughter for that side, or that unit, hence a breaking of the phalanx would be a very dangerous, perhaps singular event. It would not be common enough to necessitate thumb-forward striking. Lend me a spear of similar balance, weight and length and I could show you personally how you could switch from overarm to underarm quickly without much fuss. I speak from experience when I say I believe that shoulder-level thrusts and thumb-forward thrusts are neither as powerful nor as versatile and mobile as thumb-back traditional overarm thrusts.
Janas Aurora I'm glad to see other person thinking the same about this matter. Thank you. I personally feel that most people analyzing phalanx do not analyze it like a 2 row of 5 men each, unit at least, as a formation which it is, to see it in a complete way. They do not talk about your row partners that cover each other with shields overlapped and might apply strikes in an angle, how phalanx press on enemy formation to push them back and crush the formation itself, that 2nd row takes part in the attack while not getting exposed and that counter weight on the end of the spear is perfect for such over arm strikes while still staying behind.
ADEI7T Exactly. There really are a lot of theories to phalanx combat, and some of them you can argue for. Some even say that not until later on was the phalanx ever an orderly or organized formation. But yeah, all of the possibilities mentioned above go over the head of this guy.
Janas Aurora There is truth that in some cases, phalanx might be of average organization and of course ill equipment if the State itself was oriented on different matters or was poor at that moment. However known sources, at least those I've read about 450-500bc shows that some greek hoplite units were mercenaries for hire, well known and well paid. That not many enemies without a proper reason would even think about fighting them. Even the persians. So, I believe it was pretty intuitive and rather simple in it's core, however required the will, the discipline and the fit and guts to achieve.
There are some interesting points in the video, but still many I wish to object by simple logic behind. 1. Weight of equipment. I do believe that a 30kg particular shield is a misunderstanding in a way. If more ancient shields were used with wood and bronze, there would be no reason to increase weight in future models. Any equipment must be useful and effective, especially when it goes through centuries of wars. Especially when carried by infantry during long marches. The other thing I have a need to point out is - temperature and weather conditions. A 10kg shield is not much of a problem to carry in a formation when it's basically a passive defense. As long as it can't be penetrated by enemy spear and arrow that's all that is needed. Carrying a 30kg shield for extensive period is still tiresome with no visible benefits. Sweating aka losing water is a problem for a warrior, it weakens the body and isn't phalanx all about constantly pushing forward? Same goes to swords. I believe xiphos was born to be used in a situation where 2 formation clash with shields. It's obviously not a fencing type weapon and was used with no space where only short strikes are possible. I think it was quite effective to hit enemy helmet and shoulders to either cut or to stun and with a weight concentrated on point I don't think there might be any other reason. This idea can be seen with the more modern Falchion. As I've seen, even a blunt sword is very effective in disturbing the enemy that is using well made 13-15 century helmets. 2. The upper arm stance. I think that counterweight on a spear would mean one thing - to hold a spear farther to the end thus increasing it's reach while been able to pull it back after a strike. You can also carry it on a shoulder and shield in this stance, like swordsmen lay their swords on a shoulder. There is one more reason why it might've been used - unlike sword, you don't extend you arm from beyond the defense of shield for attack. A sword in a situation showed in a video would expose your arm and getting cut when there is not one but many enemies, is something warriors did everything to avoid. In the Viking age I think that actually lead to reforming these phalanx ideas (I think intuitively) in a specific Sword + Shield fencing while using huge round shields. I take on basis that phalanx is a formation that must be kept intact to succeed and disciplined warriors like Hoplites (who were well known mercenaries on top of everything else) had that reflex beat in them extremely well. I appreciate anyone reading this.
Shield was heaviest part of equipment the rest was made of leather or linen as he describes... so there were no much more to carry around except of the shield. Note it's made of bronze.... This shield REALLY have to be that strong... because Phalanx does not push with strength of one man it's entire weight of formation that pushes. He also mention that 'Dori' (the pike) was also bronze.. they would simply crack other type shields. For example he mentions they pushed with Dori to the upper part of the shield with such strength that they were broken face bones and necks and also bend the corner of the shield. It was that much force applies on that spear, I'm not sure wooden/leather shield would not simply crack or chip corner under pressure. It was real shield wall they were supporting corners of each other shields by overlapping them, in order to prevent other side from opening the phalanx... it wasn't really fight like in duel case it was pressure and applying force on corners to break through other side defense.. It was like applying huge collective force on other side equipment to overpower other side rather than fencing... Imagine you are in front range you choose the point on enemy shield and then 6 people behind you push you and push your Dori into that point, if they on other side didn't manage to turn your shield first you will turn his shield around by force and thrust through one person, it will open the gap and they will be in very bad situation. So SHIELD in this type batter must be as heavy as possible. He also mentioned that Macedonians returned back to original Dory design (which they named Sarisa) :) it had V shaped edges to pull the shield in using collective force, rather than pushing it :)) Due to huge length of Sarisa the strength of their shield lost the importance (since enemy can't push it) that why they adopted much smaller and lighter shields (which needs to be just big enough to cover you from arrows and javelins). I think this is quite reasonable and no logical inconsistency here. I guess that when phalanx would initially engaged they would push to the center just to establish the pressure... then they would try to flip other side shields around or smash the opposite guy skull my hitting to the top of his shield. They were also trying to push the other shield down by brute forcing on it :))) In my opinion counter weight is needed only so that they can move point of the spear faster, it's not about striking fast and pulling it back fast. Overpowering as probably more important part of their martial art... plus I find its fine that that type of skill used by infantry was probably useless in any one to one battle. Yes counter weight is needed just so that you can hold longer spear easier.. but I doubt they were really fencing using the spear, as he shows they pushed in different part of the spot probably even with help with man that stands behind, in order to open the gap in shield wall and thrust into it. Sarisa was nice solution because it was long enough to hold enemy at distance and to try to grab the shield without exposing your own shield to pressure. Primitive? Yes! But worked very well... Concerning the Dori doing circle around the shield... I simply disagree with him and believe it could have been make sense in ancient combat when formation did not get to density of 2 men per 1 step of the front... With overlapped shield formation Dori would not circle anything.. wall is closed. From that point everybody holds it in any way is more comfortable for him to push it harder.
I dont think that shields were that heavy like they say in this video. 30 kilograms is a lot to carry. A full suit of plate armor was about that weight. Hoplite shields were made of wood and then a thin sheet of bronze was spread over the face of the shield to make it sturdier. And that pressing with the shield wall with a lot of people behind you is useless. All soldiers in the first ranks would be crushed so nobody would want to be in front. That mass of dead bodies would make a barrier between two armies and it would be pointless to fight a battle like that.
you are right here theoretically so it is but as the fight unfolds in reality you do not know what it is like if you are there. Sacred battalion of Thebes lost in Cheroneea, even if he defeated the Spartan phalanx at Leuctra ..... so in a real fight, it is not like in movies, where the sinister movements directed, known beforehand, repeated, the Spartans dominated the battles where they fight in the phalanx until they were defeated by the Thebans (they changed the organization). the Romans defeated the Macedonian phalanx also due to the tactics, the terrain .....
very interesting......about that thing that you cant fight with spear "from the top".....are we sure about it? I mean are there some historical evidence, or its just based on experience of this man? It sounds logical, but can we take it as a real fact?
Despite the constant and lengthy debate over whether this is true or not, I haven't really seen any in-depth testing and scientific measuring of the facts of it. One would think this would have happened by now. It's interesting to look into, at the least. One can say it surely would have been for the benefit of these kinds of fighters to use different methods depending on the situation.
Look he pointed out the importance of overlapping the shield edges so that enemy cannot flip the shield when pushing at it's corner... the only logical concussion, with overlaped shields of the size of Hoplon, there is simply no gap in the shields where under arm spear would go.... as long as homplon was that big there were no other solution. When Thebese and Macedonian infantry started using long pikes the shield lost that much meaning and they started using smaller shields and under arm grip which is more comfortable and actually only possible with pike of such length.
Now I think they overcomplexified things... why not just throw sharpened hook-like blades over enemy infantry ranks and use 6 rare ranks to pull them... once phalanx ranks locked on each other ... They would cult lots of legs, that would definitely help phalanx to push...damn I have sick ideas today... I think Chinese infantry even had special shape blades on long wooden poll to do things like that. Mongols did something similar with hooks on chain and then pulled it using their horses...
He's very knowledgeable indeed, but some things make sense, others are bullshit. Like having spear shaft out of bronze because the tip weighs 1 kg and the counterweight 3 ? Sorry but NOPE. Anyone who made a post fence realizes that immediately - have you ever pulled a post out of the ground with a little chunk of cement and swing it around? Also certain types of hardwood are extremely resilient.
Saying people back then were bigger, stronger is such a cliche - just because battles were mainly mellee doesn't mean soldiers were some anabolic type jacked up dudes - iadmit they were probably strong but not 6kg spear with 60 kg armor strong People in nacient times were lot smaller that nowadays due to nutritions, genetics etc - spartans could have been buff but not HUGE There's a reason none of the weapons he speaks about was found and that reason is not that medieval people turned them into candle holders LOL
I think every people can't be Spartan warriors because spartan warriors must train after he come into the world But I respectfully with this martial arts, because I like spartan:) Btw I'm sorry if my English is bad:v
Hmn...Spartans, proto-NAzi's who trained so they could keep most of the population as slaves, invaded neighbours just so they could enslave them, had to murder a slave to become a man and became so socially warped most couldnt bang their wives unless the wife was disguised as a small boy...while their women turned into lesbians. Sparta is the first example of a government building a system so bad that it actually failed.....this led to their appaling low birthrate later on. Not sure I really want to emulate them... Pretty interesting video though.
I understand only one thing: they were badass as they come.
Fascinating. Nothing like learning about the actual tactics employed in ancient warfare, not just what you see in movies.
"Philosophy of battle."
Jeez, what a cliffhanger! I hope there's part 2.
dude blows my mind right around the 4 minute mark.
Wow, this was incredibly insightful! Now to go hunt for part 2!
Some good points regarding the fighting. But it maintains the myth of the Hoplite-Titan. On the contrary, hoplite equipment was surprisingly light as the average equipment weight was 18-19 kilos (including arms, shield and armor). The secret was that all were made by forging/hammering thin bronze sheets, not by molding the bronze. In archeological findings one may see how thin the bronze is. Unfortunately, there are no such craftsmen nowadays. That's why replicas are 2-3 times heavier than the originals.Hence the widespread misconception of the hoplite carrying 30-40 kilos in battle.
Yes, plus you don't really need the bronze cuirasse when holding huge bronze shield which anyway covers not only your body plus, two guys near by.
Later on they decided that when you have longer spear so that become pike you can have smaller lighter shield because the first rank can still hold enemy first enemy rank at distance by pushing him in the middle of the shield while first rank trying to get the spear into his skull :))) or mash his face by hitting the top edge of his Hoplon, I think now I understand this better... very interesting...
George Mitsikas I'm learning a lot from your comments. awesome stuff. I'm trying to learn as much as I can about them and knights templar
there were discovered dendrite apnea specific to the Mycenaean period and the Trojan war. the reconstruction of the panoplasty weighs 18-20 kg. thin bronze plate (1mm) quite uncomfortable does not allow quick movements. bronze weapons quite heavy ax epsilon (4 kg) swords, 3kg ... I do not know who the man in the picture says that the weapons of that period were 60kg and shields of 30 kg. the Greek armor (linothorax) did not have 10 kg, even with the bronze reinforcements. but who knows, maybe in the future they will discover and analyze the tombs of warriors from that period to see what kind of people they were
@@Hashishtani The clashes between the phalanx formations were like rugby matches, teams pushing each other to the pile. it was a ritual confrontation, with strict rules, the loss of human life was quite small when two phalanges were formed. those who had stronger nerves won the fight. you renounced the classic formula (stronger right wing) number of rows, rows lines, Spartans were defeated at Leuctras by Epaminonda who had fewer soldiers)
30 kilogram shield lol. My aspis is 6kg and it is heavy enough. I would not think any shield anywhere used with 1 hand could be that weight!
I agree. Mine is 10 kilo and it's pretty heavy for the arm.
This was a mistake in translation I believe. They were in fact 30 pounds (lbs) not kg.
@@tomlloyd2603 nope, he really said "thirty kilos": τριαντά κιλό.
The very word "kilogram" is of Greco-Roman origin: χίλιοι = thousand; γράμμα = in Greek means "letter" or "character", but in Late Latin it became a word meaning "small measure", like the Gram itself. So it's literally "a thousand Grams".
@@rodri_merli27 oh, well in that case he's wrong. It's meant to be 30 lbs haha!
Yeah it was 30lbs, but still, that's still heavy to take in to battle and why they only used minimal body armour, the shield was to be a defence, attack and mobile movable armour and not to mention the 9 ft dory their xiphos sword and heavy helmet and a few extra javelins.
These guys must have been machines to be so manouverable and dance in battle with all that extra weight like it was the waltz
Very intriguing presentation. Only question I have is how a Greek soldier in a phalanx could make those circle movements with the spear [12:16]?
Most kit entailed that you operate the aspis with one hand and the doru with another. He should be demonstrating those techniques accordingly, but only shows spear attacks using two hands. We really need more hands on research through more sparring.
I love to learn more over spartans !
A 30kg shield is simply unrealistic. Bronze is almost as dense as Steel or Iron, around 8000kg/m³, so a 90cm aspis would never have a mass of 30kg, not in this world. And that is even considering an aspis would be entirely made out of Bronze, which is debatable since some believe they were made of Wood with sheets of Bronze covering it.
Furthermore, @Temenos Lykourgos
comment does a good job debating the overhand x underhand grip of the spear and I agree 100%.
is his personal opinion, he said that there were no original weapons from that period (Homeric)
excellent...
Curious, the way he holds the spear when he mentions that one could make that circle from up to down, he is referring to it in use when not in a phalanx (shield-wall), correct? Else, that wouldn't be possible.
I could counter a number of these points into oblivion or at least spark up a good debate but I'm quite sure the language barrier makes such attempts moot. Firstly, rear-weighting a spear brings it's center of balance, and therefore grip spot, the same regardless of what method you hold it. Low underarm, shoulder level, overarm, the place you grab the shaft at is the same so rear-weighting it gives you the same benefits regardless of grip type. There are a multitude of depictions which show men fighting overarm where the situation demands that they're not using javelins but spears. This is not even scratching the surface. - www.forensicfashion.com/files/BC490GreekHopliteContextArtDMA01a.JPG There is nearly overwhelming evidence of combat spear portrayal which speaks against him. I'm also extremely skeptical of archeological finds indicating two *specific* points that aspis shields were struck at again and again.
Two other things, one I brushed up on above. This full circle that the spear, when held thumb-forward, is allowed to move through, is a good concept but only truly relevant to single combat. Group combat sees your shields overlapped one way or the other and you can't change grips unless you break the wall. On top of that, I can actually shift from overarm to underarm fairly easily without excluding either grip type, and I can teach anyone to do the same. From said position I could thrust at his face down to his belly, you do it by exposing your right arm in the process but that's just what happens with a centrally held spear. He also states you 'drop' javelins when in fact you 'toss' them forward and through, in much the same way a proper overarm strike is made with full range of motion applied.
Lastly, he takes note of how the man on the left can't attack him lower than his belly, again entirely irrelevant in a hoplite against hoplite encounter as that sees the shields overlapped for mutual protection, and the aspis and greaves prevent lower attacks from having any success while the helmet protects the head at least relatively well.
Videos like this disappoint me a bit, though it is no surprise that folks have such different views on a fighting style so far removed from us today, and with so very little evidence to say for it.
Realistically a phalanx will not always hold together, the enemy could break into it or your comrades may get blood thirsty and rush out in that case its best to have your spear ready for the circle motion and besides, that is how its held he is right about how it is less effective your spear goes down try it yourself with a broom
Tywin Lannister Ser Twyin Lannister, I'm sorry to report to you that this is very incorrect. The benefit of holding it thumb forward is that you can indeed switch it to a lower grip if you need to, but, while a phalanx *ultimately* will not indefinitely hold together (as clearly evidenced by two all-hoplites forces entering combat and one obviously coming out as the victor), overarm is neither a weak grip, nor an ineffective grip at all. And in the close press that is a hoplite phalanx, indeed overarm is the more powerful of any over-the-shield strikes you can manage with a spear. I can attest to it, scholarly studies have attested to it, and most folks who have held a spear and have tried this out in earnest, (without bias, which is rare), can attest to it as well. I can provide video evidence if you should wish it.
As a noble Lannister, you are most familiar I imagine with the longsword, and fighting from horseback perhaps? Well, having experience in handling these weapons myself, weapons of the common infantryman, shield and spear, I can say that this is a very viable form of attack from a dense formation and a shieldwall especially.
Comrades rushing out may have happened, but it would be very much advised against, very much disliked and undoubtedly reprimanded. And a phalanx breaking as you say typically means wholesale defeat and slaughter for that side, or that unit, hence a breaking of the phalanx would be a very dangerous, perhaps singular event.
It would not be common enough to necessitate thumb-forward striking. Lend me a spear of similar balance, weight and length and I could show you personally how you could switch from overarm to underarm quickly without much fuss. I speak from experience when I say I believe that shoulder-level thrusts and thumb-forward thrusts are neither as powerful nor as versatile and mobile as thumb-back traditional overarm thrusts.
Janas Aurora I'm glad to see other person thinking the same about this matter. Thank you. I personally feel that most people analyzing phalanx do not analyze it like a 2 row of 5 men each, unit at least, as a formation which it is, to see it in a complete way. They do not talk about your row partners that cover each other with shields overlapped and might apply strikes in an angle, how phalanx press on enemy formation to push them back and crush the formation itself, that 2nd row takes part in the attack while not getting exposed and that counter weight on the end of the spear is perfect for such over arm strikes while still staying behind.
ADEI7T Exactly. There really are a lot of theories to phalanx combat, and some of them you can argue for. Some even say that not until later on was the phalanx ever an orderly or organized formation.
But yeah, all of the possibilities mentioned above go over the head of this guy.
Janas Aurora There is truth that in some cases, phalanx might be of average organization and of course ill equipment if the State itself was oriented on different matters or was poor at that moment. However known sources, at least those I've read about 450-500bc shows that some greek hoplite units were mercenaries for hire, well known and well paid. That not many enemies without a proper reason would even think about fighting them. Even the persians.
So, I believe it was pretty intuitive and rather simple in it's core, however required the will, the discipline and the fit and guts to achieve.
Fascinating.
Damn that metal scratch sound😂
Very nice!
the 2 guys behind are paricipants of the seminar.Alround there were people.
Any chance we can get the second part? Any other videos of him teaching spartan combat techniques? Did not found any in englisch.
more videos in a better quality please!
There are some interesting points in the video, but still many I wish to object by simple logic behind.
1. Weight of equipment. I do believe that a 30kg particular shield is a misunderstanding in a way. If more ancient shields were used with wood and bronze, there would be no reason to increase weight in future models. Any equipment must be useful and effective, especially when it goes through centuries of wars. Especially when carried by infantry during long marches.
The other thing I have a need to point out is - temperature and weather conditions. A 10kg shield is not much of a problem to carry in a formation when it's basically a passive defense. As long as it can't be penetrated by enemy spear and arrow that's all that is needed. Carrying a 30kg shield for extensive period is still tiresome with no visible benefits. Sweating aka losing water is a problem for a warrior, it weakens the body and isn't phalanx all about constantly pushing forward?
Same goes to swords. I believe xiphos was born to be used in a situation where 2 formation clash with shields. It's obviously not a fencing type weapon and was used with no space where only short strikes are possible. I think it was quite effective to hit enemy helmet and shoulders to either cut or to stun and with a weight concentrated on point I don't think there might be any other reason. This idea can be seen with the more modern Falchion. As I've seen, even a blunt sword is very effective in disturbing the enemy that is using well made 13-15 century helmets.
2. The upper arm stance. I think that counterweight on a spear would mean one thing - to hold a spear farther to the end thus increasing it's reach while been able to pull it back after a strike. You can also carry it on a shoulder and shield in this stance, like swordsmen lay their swords on a shoulder. There is one more reason why it might've been used - unlike sword, you don't extend you arm from beyond the defense of shield for attack. A sword in a situation showed in a video would expose your arm and getting cut when there is not one but many enemies, is something warriors did everything to avoid. In the Viking age I think that actually lead to reforming these phalanx ideas (I think intuitively) in a specific Sword + Shield fencing while using huge round shields.
I take on basis that phalanx is a formation that must be kept intact to succeed and disciplined warriors like Hoplites (who were well known mercenaries on top of everything else) had that reflex beat in them extremely well.
I appreciate anyone reading this.
Shield was heaviest part of equipment the rest was made of leather or linen as he describes... so there were no much more to carry around except of the shield. Note it's made of bronze.... This shield REALLY have to be that strong... because Phalanx does not push with strength of one man it's entire weight of formation that pushes. He also mention that 'Dori' (the pike) was also bronze.. they would simply crack other type shields. For example he mentions they pushed with Dori to the upper part of the shield with such strength that they were broken face bones and necks and also bend the corner of the shield. It was that much force applies on that spear, I'm not sure wooden/leather shield would not simply crack or chip corner under pressure. It was real shield wall they were supporting corners of each other shields by overlapping them, in order to prevent other side from opening the phalanx... it wasn't really fight like in duel case it was pressure and applying force on corners to break through other side defense.. It was like applying huge collective force on other side equipment to overpower other side rather than fencing...
Imagine you are in front range you choose the point on enemy shield and then 6 people behind you push you and push your Dori into that point, if they on other side didn't manage to turn your shield first you will turn his shield around by force and thrust through one person, it will open the gap and they will be in very bad situation. So SHIELD in this type batter must be as heavy as possible.
He also mentioned that Macedonians returned back to original Dory design (which they named Sarisa) :) it had V shaped edges to pull the shield in using collective force, rather than pushing it :)) Due to huge length of Sarisa the strength of their shield lost the importance (since enemy can't push it) that why they adopted much smaller and lighter shields (which needs to be just big enough to cover you from arrows and javelins).
I think this is quite reasonable and no logical inconsistency here.
I guess that when phalanx would initially engaged they would push to the center just to establish the pressure... then they would try to flip other side shields around or smash the opposite guy skull my hitting to the top of his shield. They were also trying to push the other shield down by brute forcing on it :))) In my opinion counter weight is needed only so that they can move point of the spear faster, it's not about striking fast and pulling it back fast. Overpowering as probably more important part of their martial art... plus I find its fine that that type of skill used by infantry was probably useless in any one to one battle.
Yes counter weight is needed just so that you can hold longer spear easier.. but I doubt they were really fencing using the spear, as he shows they pushed in different part of the spot probably even with help with man that stands behind, in order to open the gap in shield wall and thrust into it. Sarisa was nice solution because it was long enough to hold enemy at distance and to try to grab the shield without exposing your own shield to pressure. Primitive? Yes! But worked very well...
Concerning the Dori doing circle around the shield... I simply disagree with him and believe it could have been make sense in ancient combat when formation did not get to density of 2 men per 1 step of the front... With overlapped shield formation Dori would not circle anything.. wall is closed. From that point everybody holds it in any way is more comfortable for him to push it harder.
I dont think that shields were that heavy like they say in this video. 30 kilograms is a lot to carry. A full suit of plate armor was about that weight.
Hoplite shields were made of wood and then a thin sheet of bronze was spread over the face of the shield to make it sturdier. And that pressing with the shield wall with a lot of people behind you is useless. All soldiers in the first ranks would be crushed so nobody would want to be in front. That mass of dead bodies would make a barrier between two armies and it would be pointless to fight a battle like that.
you are right here theoretically so it is but as the fight unfolds in reality you do not know what it is like if you are there. Sacred battalion of Thebes lost in Cheroneea, even if he defeated the Spartan phalanx at Leuctra ..... so in a real fight, it is not like in movies, where the sinister movements directed, known beforehand, repeated, the Spartans dominated the battles where they fight in the phalanx until they were defeated by the Thebans (they changed the organization). the Romans defeated the Macedonian phalanx also due to the tactics, the terrain .....
Pensé que se iban a dar madrasos
very interesting......about that thing that you cant fight with spear "from the top".....are we sure about it? I mean are there some historical evidence, or its just based on experience of this man? It sounds logical, but can we take it as a real fact?
Despite the constant and lengthy debate over whether this is true or not, I haven't really seen any in-depth testing and scientific measuring of the facts of it. One would think this would have happened by now. It's interesting to look into, at the least. One can say it surely would have been for the benefit of these kinds of fighters to use different methods depending on the situation.
Look he pointed out the importance of overlapping the shield edges so that enemy cannot flip the shield when pushing at it's corner... the only logical concussion, with overlaped shields of the size of Hoplon, there is simply no gap in the shields where under arm spear would go.... as long as homplon was that big there were no other solution. When Thebese and Macedonian infantry started using long pikes the shield lost that much meaning and they started using smaller shields and under arm grip which is more comfortable and actually only possible with pike of such length.
Theban.
Υπαρχουνε ακομα τετοια σχολεια Αθηνα?
Now I think they overcomplexified things... why not just throw sharpened hook-like blades over enemy infantry ranks and use 6 rare ranks to pull them... once phalanx ranks locked on each other ... They would cult lots of legs, that would definitely help phalanx to push...damn I have sick ideas today... I think Chinese infantry even had special shape blades on long wooden poll to do things like that. Mongols did something similar with hooks on chain and then pulled it using their horses...
Where is part 2?
Where is Koryvantes?
I have typed in to look bit obviously the nearest thing that appears is the Koryvbantes from Greek mythology.
He's very knowledgeable indeed, but some things make sense, others are bullshit. Like having spear shaft out of bronze because the tip weighs 1 kg and the counterweight 3 ? Sorry but NOPE. Anyone who made a post fence realizes that immediately - have you ever pulled a post out of the ground with a little chunk of cement and swing it around? Also certain types of hardwood are extremely resilient.
the throwing spears made of ash / the big spears for the hoplites were made of hornwood
Where can I get some
60 kilograms were are talking giants.
Saying people back then were bigger, stronger is such a cliche - just because battles were mainly mellee doesn't mean soldiers were some anabolic type jacked up dudes - iadmit they were probably strong but not 6kg spear with 60 kg armor strong
People in nacient times were lot smaller that nowadays due to nutritions, genetics etc - spartans could have been buff but not HUGE
There's a reason none of the weapons he speaks about was found and that reason is not that medieval people turned them into candle holders LOL
You are wrong
An 8 Meter Spear?
He picked up an 8 foot pole.
8 Meters would be 26+ Feet Long.
Prostagma? :v
I think every people can't be Spartan warriors because spartan warriors must train after he come into the world
But I respectfully with this martial arts, because I like spartan:)
Btw I'm sorry if my English is bad:v
You can be a formidable warrior, even if you don't train from birth, you just had to put in extra effort because, learning from young is easier .
Φιλε μου τι εγινε το part 2?
ΔΕΝ ΕΧΕΙ ΦΤΙΑΧΤΕΙ ΑΚΟΜΗ ΤΟ PART2 ΕΠΕΙΔΗ ΕΧΩ ΜΠΛΕΞΕΙ ΜΕ ΠΟΛΥ ΔΟΥΛΕΙΑ.ΘΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΡΟΣΘΕΣΩ ΟΜΩΣ.ΘΕΛΕΙ ΝΑ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΘΕΣΩ ΥΠΟΤΙΤΛΟΥΣ ΑΓΓΛΙΚΟΥΣ
πολύ ενδιαφέροντες ολες αυτές οι πληροφορίες. Υπάρχει κάποιο βιβλίο που μπορω να προμηθευτώ το οποίο αναφέρει τέτοιες λεπτομέρειες;;;;.
Do you have more videos of Sifu Theo/Theo?
unfortunately no.search for his videos .SIFUTHEO
i want to return 2011, that's good year
Hmn...Spartans, proto-NAzi's who trained so they could keep most of the population as slaves, invaded neighbours just so they could enslave them, had to murder a slave to become a man and became so socially warped most couldnt bang their wives unless the wife was disguised as a small boy...while their women turned into lesbians. Sparta is the first example of a government building a system so bad that it actually failed.....this led to their appaling low birthrate later on. Not sure I really want to emulate them... Pretty interesting video though.
Almost all of what you wrote is mythology. Xenophon is the most reliable source on the Spartans, and most of the rest is just slander.
Al Al pretty dumb comments mostly. The low birth rate I agree with though.
Where is part 2?