"Why pikes one piece; compare to the sarissa" Topic

I have been researching the question of the Macedonian pike (sarissa) and if it was composed of one wooden shaft or two held together in the middle by a metal "collar". The matter is hotly debated by academics and writers -- one relevant argument, I think, comes from those who cite examples from other periods and armies composed of long spears or pikes. The Scots had long spears, and then all those Renaissance and ECW armies with pikes, for a century or two -- these pikes were all one piece in the wooden shaft, weren't they? The spearhead and buttspike notwithstanding. If these soldiers found one long shaft best for the job and not an undue encumbrance on the march, why wouldn't the Macedonians, goes one argument. Whereas a two-piece shaft joined in the middle has demonstrated drawbacks that reenactors and researchers have discovered. So what are opinions here among those familiar with this period?

Crossposted to ECW, Renaissance, and Ancients boards.

The engineering to create a connector for 2 spear parts could be done but in the long run it is easier to grow longer trees. I guess they used some variant of coppicing to ensure suitable long wooden shafts. Another thought if these connectors were common why are we not finding large numbers when spear heads show up?

I researched this for my book Ancient Battle Formations. Couldn't find any conclusive evidence that the sarissa was ever composed of two pieces.

It was a popular theory for a while, based on the discovery of a tube with the same internal diameter as a spearhead and a buttspike found together with it; originally proposed in a 1970 article by Andronikos – link

I guess this wasn't especially solid evidence in the first place, and most opinion seems against it now.

Any joint would be a weak point in push and shove I'd suggest.

I would recommend Christopher Matthews book "An Invincible Beast" which includes a pretty extensive study on the sarissa including from archeological evidence and reenactments.

I can see a two-part pike arising from a lack of trees large enough to turn into 15'- 24' poles— possibly an issue in the Mediterranean, but not so much in Northern Europe?
But that's pure speculation based on accepting the "joined" design as legitimate or wide spread. Also, never having visited Greece, I don't know whether or not appropriate trees of suitable height/branch length exist there.
Just throwing it out there as a possibility.

Good input, thanks to all! Keep 'em coming!

My gut feeling is single piece. I think there would have been contemporary references to a join and the problems which went with it. But it's not something I'd put a lot of money on.

Parzival, not sure how much the trip would help. One way or another, Greece seems to have lost a lot of topsoil since classical times. And consider how easy it would be to import. No shortage of trees in Gaul in classical times, or up in what used to be Yugoslavia. Inside the Med, trade by sea is relatively easy and cheap. It's not as though you were trying to import from those probably mythical "tin islands" north of Gaul, after all.

I have been to Greece several times and can assure you that they have plenty of trees. Still you don't want to cut down whole trees. You make the branches grow up – coppicing – and cut off those shoots leaving the main tree still growing.