Yes, but you have spear as a separate weapon, with different qualities - the spear is versatile (so, the idea of using two hands on a spear is already there), and can be thrown.
But not reach, the raison detre of the spear since the stone age. Admittedly, /that/ is primarily an issue of granularity. In a more granular system an axe would have reach over a dagger, a spear over that, and a very long spear called a lance or pike would beat out a regular spear. A binary reach (for pikes, lances & whips) / no reach (for everything else from spears & greatswords to daggers & head-buts) loses a lot of that. FWIW.
It's been an issue for like 3 eds, now: no spear (the broad category of long, pointy weapons, not a specific weapon entry called that in D&D) w/ reach if you're using a shield. Well, unless you get on a horse, then it's OK. Phalanxes? Nah, hobgoblins use flail & shield to form those (a flail? in a phalanx?).
It's just one of those weird little blocks systems develop sometimes. One-handed spear, with reach, and a shield is somehow unthinkable. Whip or kusari-gama or something weird being one-handed with reach, sure, but not a spear.
:shrug:
Not a big deal, just a funny little rut the game's been in for like 12 years.
