![]() ![]() Zorn Department of Near Eastern Studies 409 White Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 The text of 1 Sam 17:4–7 gives a detailed account of the arms and armor of the Philistine champion who battled David in the Elah Valley, a description unmatched for detail in any other biblical text. If, instead, one sees Goliath as a chariot warrior, most, if not all, of the problems associated with an early dating for the description Reconsidering Goliath: An Iron Age I Philistine Chariot Warrior Jeffrey R. However, it is the very combination of weapons and armor with which he was equipped-and which to some have seemed a cultural hodge-podge, suggesting a completely non-historical character-that are actually the key to understanding the nature of this figure. Because the duel took place on foot, scholars have assumed, without comment, that the Philistine described was an infantry man, or foot soldier. While vari- ous scholars have contributed many valuable insights on this subject over the years, the contention advanced here is that a fundamental misunderstanding has always been made in the approach to this passage. Given the flurry of recent studies on this topic, a legitimate question is whether another review of the subject is warranted. (Lorimer 1950: 132–306), showing that a writer working centuries after the events he describes can preserve at least some memories of the distant past. After all, Homer recalls authentic touches of a Myceanean military kit when he describes boar’s tusk helmets, tower shields, etc. the question remains whether these late editors were aware of and relied upon earlier traditions, including those of Philistine weaponry and armor, or whether Goliath’s kit is a priori a late fabrication, if anything reflecting the equipment of Greek mercenaries of the era of the editors. by the Low Chronol- ogy (Mazar 2005: 23). by the Modified Conventional Chronology (Mazar 2005: 16, table 2.1) or 1200–920 b.c. While not doubting the late editing of the biblical text, or that the editor’s knowl- edge of earlier times might be imperfect or limited, 1 Ca. Yadin’s (1963: 265–67, 354–55) understanding is essentially correct, and that the description of the Philistine’s gear corresponds to that of a late Myce- naean or Sea Peoples soldier from the end of the Late Bronze Age/Iron I period. Yadin (2004: 375–76), favor in one way or another the approach laid out by Galling (1966: 150–69), according to which the description of this gear was fabricated by late Deuteronomistic editors and has little, if anything, to do with the material cul- tural realities of the Iron I period. Some, such as Finkelstein (2002: 142–48) and A. 6 kg (13.2 lbs).1 introduction I n recent years several scholars have revisited the issues surrounding the description of the weapons and armor of the Philistine warrior who fought the famous duel with a youthful David in the Elah Val- ley (1 Sam 17:4–7). ![]() The thickness is about 11 mm (0.43”) and it weighs approx. The diameter of the shield is approximately 97 cm (38”) and the vault approx. On the rear side there is a leather handle and a rope attached to the bracket. It is made of bent plywood that is covered with canvas and painted by hand. This shield we sell is the exact copy of this Spartan shield. For example the Spartans painted the letter lambda on their shields during the Peloponnesian War. The shields were often decorated with symbols such as those of the city-states or luck. This large shield protected the carrier effectively against the opponent´s arrows, spears and swords, although it was very heavy to carry: it weighed up to 8 kg (18 lbs). It was circular article called hoplon (often also called aspis) made of wood, measuring roughly one meter in diameter. Many famous personalities, philosophers, artists and poets, fought as hoplites.Įach hoplite provided his own equipment and the most distinctive armour of a hoplite was the shield. However, the father of Alexander the Great, Philip II of Macedon solved the problem by establishing the first hired-army ever. At first most of the hoplites were poor farmers, who weren´t much of a use to the city-state army because they had to stay home most of the year farming. The exact time when hoplitic warfare was developed is uncertain, but according to the prevalent theory it was established sometime during the 8th or 7th century BCE. A hoplite was a citizen-soldier of the heavy infantry of ancient Greek city-states. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |