I have always been under belief that over time Romans stopped using spears and instead switched to swords, with some groups like triarii using it longer. But I have gotten into argument with other person who believes that they used swords as only secondary weapons, that they instead of throwing all pilum away used the last one for close quarters combat. And as evidence they sent few Roman reliefs showing Romans using pilum. So I would like to ask which one of us is in the right
Even when the Roman legionary used a sword as their main hand-to-hand weapon, there were plenty of spears in the Roman armies: the spear remained a major weapon for the auxilia.
A Roman army was not a bunch of guys with swords and shields only. Not even counting the pila carried by the legionaries, it was a combined armed force, with spearmen, archers and slingers, and cavalry supporting the legionaries.
And as evidence they sent few Roman reliefs showing Romans using pilum.
There is no reason to doubt that the pilum was used, at times, in hand-to-hand combat. As well as art, there are texts describing this (e.g., Arrian, Array against the Alans).
However, we have plenty of literary and artistic sources supporting the idea that the sword was the major hand-to-hand weapon of the legionary (at some times).
This topic has come up before. For some of my past discussion on this, see