Page images
PDF
EPUB

handle was usually fixed horizontally, but sometimes perpendicularly, so that the warrior might pass his arm through it, and grasp a spear. In marching it must have been thrown behind, as we see from the instance of the margin of Hector's shield smiting his heels as he walked. In marching immediately to the assault, it was however sometimes turned entirely in front; the warrior then advanced, like Mars

[ocr errors]

Behind his broad shield pacing ;'

but then the length of the shield obliged the owner to walk
with short steps, like Deïphobus:-

Tripping he came, with shorten'd steps, his feet
Shelt'ring behind his buckler.'

This also shews its length, and seems at the same time to prove that its weight prevented it, under such circumstances, from being held at such a distance before the body, as to allow the free action of the feet. The weight of the larger kind of shield rendered it so great an incumbrance to a person otherwise heavily armed, that persons

of consideration had an attendant, whose principal business it was to carry the shield of his superior. And this he did not merely when it was not wanted, but in action he sometimes marched before the warrior, to ward off the missiles which were aimed against him. The warrior of course sometimes took it himself, when in close action. David was made Saul's armour-bearer. Jonathan's armourbearer took a very active part in his master's exploit against the Philistine garrison (1 Sam. xiv.). Goliath had an armour-bearer who carried his great shield before him (1 Sam. xvii. 6, 7, 45). Arrian relates that Alexander had the shield which had been taken from the temple of the Trojan Pallas carried before him in all his wars. The large shields were of great service when a body of men, acting in concert, joined their shields and opposed, as it were, a wall against the assault of the foe. In attacking fortified places the soldiers also joined their shields over their heads, to protect themselves from the missiles which were discharged upon them by the besieged. This was called the testudo, or tortoise, because the soldiers were thus covered from the weapons of their enemies as a tor

The TESTUDO, or Tortoise-shaped Assemblage of Shields.-From the Column of Trajan.

toise is by its shell. This invention was exhibited in various forms, which ancient authors describe. That it was known to the Jews is clear from its having been in use among the ancient Egyptians, as shewn in the note to Deut. xx. 12; and that they also knew it as in use among the Babylonians, appears from Ezek. xxvi. 8, where the king of Babylon is described as lifting up the buckler against the city of Tyre. To render this junction of shields the more compact, the Roman legions had their scutum, with squared sides. It was of an oblong form (Polybius says, generally four feet long by two and a half broad) with a convexity given to its breadth. This shield, though it seems to have been reduced by the Romans to a comparatively moderate size, may be taken as an average representative of the class of large shields, and therefore may be put in the same group with the Hebrew tzinnah. But the square form being intended to assist united action, we are not to expect to find it so prevalent among Orientals and barbarians, who trusted less to the effect of combined action than did the Romans; and to an individual, a square shield with its sharp angles, is less convenient than one more or less of a rounded figure. Hence we seldom find shields other than round or oval among the Orientals, either ancient or modern. Those commonly in use among the ancient Egyptians were, however, rounded

only at the top; and as the shields of this people were, in all probability, such as the Israelites continued to use for some time after their departure from Egypt, they claim particular notice. In their general form they were similar to our common grave-stones, circular at the summit, and squared at the base; sometimes with a slight increase or swell towards the top, and near the upper part of the outer surface is usually seen, instead of a boss, a circular hollow, the purpose of which it is difficult to ascertain. In some instances at least this national shield appears to have been concave within. Its size was generally about half the height of a man by double its own breadth.

Another Hebrew shield was the magen, which is the first that the Scripture mentions (Gen. xv. 1), and seems to have been that which was most commonly in use; being conveniently portable, and perhaps really more useful than the large one; for although it did not protect the whole person, it could be turned with facility to ward off a coming blow or missile. This kind of shield is generally mentioned in connection with arrows and swords; but the tzinnah with spears. It was about half the size of the latter, as we see that Solomon only appropriated three hundred shekels of gold for the manufacture of a magen, but six hundred for a tzinnah. Among the ancients, the lesser shield seems to have been always used by horsemen

[graphic]

From a Sculpture at Thebes; contrasting the common Shield of the Egyptians with the round Shields of their Adversaries.

and persons who fought in chariots, and occasionally by lightly armed footmen. The large shield was not the only one in use in the Homeric period. Neptune's advice to the Argives shews this:

'The best and broadest bucklers of the host, And brightest helmets put we on, and arm'd With largest spears advance.

Ye then, who feel your hearts Undaunted, but are arm'd with smaller shields, Them give to those who fear, and in exchange Their stronger shields and broader take yourselves.' And again:

With many a stroke

The bull-hide shields and lighter targes rang. Perhaps, however, there was not such a contrast of size between the smaller and larger shields mentioned here, as between the tzinnah and magen. The latter is the shield which the present text mentions, and is thought by Gesenius to be analogous to the Roman clypeus. In this opinion we concur, because both seem to have been shields of

average form and size. The Roman clypeus was a mediumsized shield, round, oval, or hexangular in figure; and had sometimes a boss in the centre, as had the Hebrew magen, to which bosses are assigned in Job xv. 26:- The thick bosses of his bucklers.' The central boss, which was a kind of projecting dagger, does not however seem to have been peculiar to any one kind of shield. It rendered the shield at the same time an offensive as well as a defensive weapon, and was of great use in bearing down the enemy in close fight. The shield of Agamemnon had twentyone bosses,-twenty surrounding bosses, and one in the

centre.

The Hebrews must have had a considerable variety of shields; for besides these two, which occur most frequently, there are others of which we know nothing distinctly; but may infer that the different terms describe peculiarities of form and size. One of these is the sohairah, which, from the etymology, would seem to have been of a round form, which was and is a very common shape for the smaller kind of shields, and sometimes for the larger, as will appear by our cuts. It may well be

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Roman Combat with the Spear and the small round Shield (called parma).-From a Bas-relief at Pompeil. taken as the type of the Roman shield called parma, a small round shield much used by the cavalry and light armed foot, and now very common in the East. Another is the shelet (which occurs only in the plural), and as it appears, from a comparison of parallel passages, to be sometimes used as synonymous with magen, we may infer that the former was essentially the same as the latter, with

some small variation of make or ornament. See, for instance, Sol. Song, iv. 4, Thy neck is like the tower of David, builded for an armoury, whereon there hang a thousand bucklers (maçen), all shields (shiltai, sing. shelet) of mighty men.' The last clause is evidently a repetition of the preceding, shelet being used as a verbal change for magen. We do not notice the ji kidon, translated

[ocr errors]

'target' and 'shield,' in 1 Sam. xvii. 6, 45; because it is more than doubtful that any thing of the kind is intended.

Thus much for the different descriptions of shields. The varieties of form and size in which they were cast the wood-cuts will sufficiently represent. We have now to mention the materials of which shields were made. They were sometimes of wood, as they still are in several barbarous nations. Xenophon describes the bucklers of the Egyptians who served in the army of Artaxerxes at the battle of Cunaxa, as long wooden shields which reached down to the feet. Plutarch, in his Life of Camillus, says, that the Romans used wooden shields till the time of that general, who caused them to be covered with plates of iron. This agrees with the description of Polybius, who says that the larger Roman shields were in his time composed of two planks glued together, and covered first with linen and then with hide. The extreme edges, both above and below, were guarded with plates of iron; as well to secure the shield against the strokes of swords, as that it might, without injury, be rested on the ground. To the surface was likewise fitted a shell of iron, to turn aside the more violent strokes of stones, spears, or other ponderous weapons. But the ancient shields with which we are historically best acquainted, were made wholly of bull's hide doubled or tripled, or even more thickly folded. A previous extract from the Iliad shews Hector's shield to have been of this material; and this seems to have been the case with the shields of most of the Homeric heroes, whether Greeks or Trojans. These shields were often anointed and rubbed, to keep them in good condition, and prevent cracking or injury from wet, as were also those of metal, to preserve them from rust. To which there are allusions in Scripture, as in 2 Sam. i. 21, 22; and in Isa. xxi. 5: Arise, ye princes, and anoint the shield.' These shields of skin had often a metallic border, to preserve the margin from injury. The hides were often plated and otherwise strengthened and ornamented with metal; most commonly brass, but often silver and gold. Such were many of the shields of Homer's heroes. That most fully described is the shield of Ajax, and the description is most instructive. It is given in the account of the fight between that hero and Hector :

'Ajax approach'd him, bearing, like a tow'r,

His seven-fold brazen shield, by Tychius wrought
With art elaborate; like him was none

In shield-work, and whose home in Hyla stood;
He fram'd the various shield with seven hides
Of fatted beeves, all plated o'er with brass.'

Hector hurls his spear at Ajax :

It struck the shield of Ajax; through the brass, Its eighth integument, through six of hide It flew, and spent its fury on the seventh.' Afterwards, Hector

'Retiring, heav'd

A black, rough, huge stone-fragment from the plain,
Which hurling at the seven-fold shield, he smote
Its central boss; loud rang the brazen rim.'

We beg to direct attention to the circumstance, that this shield is called a brazen shield, though seven of its eight integuments were of skin. We may therefore infer with probability that the 'brazen' shield of Goliath was merely covered with brass; for if it had been of solid metal, and had been, like his other weapons, proportioned to his gigantic bulk, it is not easy to understand how his armourbearer could have supported its weight. This conjecture might also apply to the 'golden' shields which were made by Solomon; and for which, after they had been taken away by Shishak, king of Egypt, Rehoboam substituted shields of brass. However, we will not insist on this, because such shields, hung up for display in armouries and sacred places, were often, among the heathen, of solid metal. (See 1 Kings x. 16, 17; and xiv. 25-28.) Men

prided themselves on keeping these plated shields bright and polished, whence Homer so frequently applies to them epithets expressing their brightness and splendour. They were kept in a case, seemingly of leather, when not in use: and hence to uncover the shield' is an expression denoting preparation for battle (Isa. xxii. 6).

But although shields for action were generally plated with metal, those entirely of metal were also known. Hadadezer had golden shields, which became the prey of David (2 Sam. viii. 7). Alexander the Great had a body of Argyraspides, or soldiers with silver shields; and Alexander Severus established a troop of Chrysaspides, or soldiers with golden shields. Judging from the account of the famous shield of Achilles, we should suppose that the shields then used were not of a solid mass, but that their thickness was composed of several plates of the same or different metal. Of this shield we learn incidentally, in the account of the owner's combat with Æneas, that— 'With five folds

Vulcan had fortified it; two were brass;

The two interior, tin; the midmost, gold.'

For the reason already stated, it is important to note further the materials of the Egyptian shields. From the paintings, they appear to have been commonly covered with bull's hide, having the hair outwards, sometimes strengthened by one or more rims of metal, and studded with nails or metal pins; the inner part being probably wicker-work, or a wooden frame. See Wilkinson, i. 288.

The mention of this shield leads us to notice the elaborate and costly ornamental work with which the higher class of shields were ornamented, and which, very probably, belonged to the golden shields of Solomon. There was, in fact, no part of their armour which the ancients prized so highly and took so much delight in ornamenting. They adorned its broad disk with all sorts of figureswith birds, beasts, and the inanimate works of naturewith representations of their own or other exploits-with historic scenes-with the picturesque circumstances of life-and with the effigies of gods and heroes. Like the gorgeous works in metal described by Spenser, they

were

'Wrought with wilde antickes which their follies play'd, In the rich metall as they living were.'

We have endeavoured to make this note as complete, for the purposes of Scripture illustration, as our limits would allow. We have given such particulars concerning the shields of the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans as our object required. With those of ancient Persia, the Hebrews were certainly at one time acquainted, and we therefore give specimens taken from the existing sculptures of that country. We have little to add to the information which the cuts afford. It will be seen that the shields were round or oval, those for the cavalry being, as usual, the smallest. From ancient authors we only learn that some of their shields were light, being formed of common osier work but they had others of brass, and of very large size.

Under the impression that the forms of the ancient offensive and defensive arms are in general well preserved in the East, we give a group of modern Oriental shields and spears. Those of Arabia deserve particular attention. The shields now used by the Arabs are generally round, and may vary from ten to eighteen inches in diameter. The most valued are made of the hide of the wild ox or the hippopotamus: they have also a sort made of the skin of a fish, which Sir William Ouseley could only get them to describe as a great fish;' Morier says it was the whale; but we have no doubt it was the manat (Trichechus manatus, Linn.), with the skin of which the Arabs make shields said to be musket-proof. They have, besides, shields of metal, generally copper, and also of hard wood: the latter are sometimes plated with copper, or covered with iron bars. The others require no remark, unless to direct attention to the general resemblance of the Mameluke shield to the scutum of the Romans.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

a, Large Arabian Shield; b, small do.; c, side view of the same; d, large Turkish Shield; e, Mameluke Shield; f, Arabian Spear; 9, Turkish; h, Mameluke.

SPEARS.-Spears, as offensive weapons, are as ancient and as universal as the shield is for defence. In fact, these two seem, of all others, to be the most general of offensive and defensive arms. The origin of a spear is very easily traced. A stick sharpened at one end, and hardened in the fire, was probably the first spear, and continues to be the only offensive weapon of some savages. Attention would of course be directed to the improvement of its point, in order to render it a more complete instrument of destruction; and, for this purpose, horn, fish-bone, flints, etc., were employed, as they still are by the rude people to whom the use of metals is unknown. Brass, or rather copper, was no doubt the first metal used for this and other purposes, and it continued to be employed long after the use of iron was known. The epithet 'brazen' is continually applied to spears in Homer; and we might almost suspect that they were wholly of brass, were it not probable that he merely intended to describe them as having the head and heel of that metal, the wooden shaft being also perhaps covered or decorated with it. It seems certain, at all events, that the spearheads were of brass; for all those that are not simply mentioned as 'brazen spears' are, with some variety of expression, like that of Teucer,

'Rough-grain'd, acuminated sharp with brass.' Even the gods in Homer are furnished with brazen spears. Herodotus, in speaking of the Massageta (Clio, 215), tells us that their spears, the points of their arrows, and their battle-axes, were of brass. From this it is clear that the whole was of brass, or covered with brass, else he would have said, as well of the spears as of the arrows, that they were headed with that metal. Such seem to have been known to the Hebrews, since the spear is, in the Hebrew poetry, sometimes called, as in Homer, the glittering spear, which seems to imply that something more than the head was of polished metal. Indeed, the lance which Goliath carried, besides his great heavy spear, is expressly described as a brazen lance (improperly rendered target,' 1 Sam. xvii. 6). Iron, steel, and other metals,

[merged small][graphic]

Ancient Persian Shields and Spears.-From Sculptures at Persepolis.

We know little about the construction of the Hebrew spears; and, in so simple an instrument, nothing very pe culiar is to be expected, as we find the same forms, with little variation, in nations the most remote from each other. Our wood-cuts will exhibit the forms of those which were anciently in use, and the manner in which they were emploved. Like other nations, the Hebrews seem to have had two kinds of spears-one a missile, to be discharged

It

at the foe, and the other for giving thrusts. It would seem, however, that the same weapon was often made to serve both purposes on occasion, as it certainly did with Homer's heroes. They begin their combats with throwing their spears at each other; then each endeavours to recover the spear he has thrown, and falls to close onset. is evident that, in this case, a person who could not recover his own spear, would, in most instances, be able to secure that which had been thrown by the other; and as, no doubt, every one preferred his own weapon, there was perhaps an understanding between the combatants, that each should be allowed to recover his own, if both had been ineffectually thrown. It is else difficult to understand how it happens that the heroes so long retain possession of the same favourite spear, which they are continually throwing away. Some of the heroes came into action, however, like Goliath, with two spears, one carried behind the buckler, and the other in the right hand. Probably one was a lance intended to be thrown in the first instance, and the other a spear for closer action; or, it is possible, that the one was merely intended as a provision against the loss of the other. So far as the spear and javelin were distinct, the former seems to have no determined size any more than the latter. We read of them as long and short among different people or individuals. Great length in the spear was, however, usually affected. Of Hector, it is said:

'Eleven cubits' length

Of massy spear he bore, its brazen point
Star-bright, and collar'd with a ring of gold.'

This was a moderate length of spear, compared with the sarissa of the Macedonians, which is stated, by different ancient authors, to have been of the scarcely credible length of sixteen cubits, that is, about eight yards. That some of the Hebrew spears were of great length (perhaps the length was a token of dignity) will be inferred from the fact, that Joshua's spear, when he held it up, served as a signal to the ambuscade in the affair of Ai (Josh. viii. 18-26). The Romans reduced their spears to more moderate length. Those used in the time of the emperors were generally between six and seven feet long, including the point.

Roman Attack, with Spear, on a Barbarian protected by a large Shield of very ancient form. From an antique Gem.

But we incline to think that perhaps the most probable representation of the Hebrew spear is that still retained by the Arabs, and which serves both for thrusting and for throwing to a short distance. It is about twelve feet long, with a pointed head of iron or steel. It is often quite plain; but sometimes it has two balls or tufts of black ostrich feathers, as large as fists, placed at a short distance from each other towards the top; the upper ball being fringed with white ostrich feathers. These ornaments give the weapon a rather elegant appearance. It is only thrown

by an Arab to a short distance, and when he is sure of his aim, generally at a horseman whom he is pursuing and cannot overtake. To strike with the lance, he poises it for a time over his head, and then thrusts it forward, or else holds and shakes it at the height of the saddle. A pursued Arab continually thrusts his lance backward to prevent the approach of the pursuer's mare, and sometimes kills either pursuer or his mare by dexterously throwing the point of his lance behind. It will be observed that the weapon has at the lower extremity an iron spike, which alone is often sufficient for these purposes. The Hebrew spears were furnished in the same manner, and applied to exactly the same uses. Abner was pursued by the swift-footed Asahel, who would not be persuaded to desist :- He refused to turn aside, wherefore Abner with the hinder end of the spear smote him under the fifth rib, that the spear came out behind him, and he fell down there and died.' (2 Sam. ii. 23.) This spike at the lower end is intended for the purpose of sticking the spear into the ground when the warrior is at rest. This is a common custom in the East; and it was usual among the Hebrews. When Saul pursued David into the wilderness of Ziph, he is described as asleep in his encampment, with his spear stuck in the ground at his bolster (1 Sam. xxvi. 7). This also was the custom among Homer's warriors, whose spears were similarly spiked at the nether end for the same purpose. Thus, when Nestor and Ulysses go in the night to Diomede

'Him sleeping arm'd before his tent they found
Amidst his sleeping followers; with their shields
Beneath their heads they lay, and at the side
Of each, stood planted in the soil his spear
On its inverted end; their polished heads
All glitter'd like Jove's lightning from afar.'

The Arabs have also a shorter kind of lance, which we may properly call the javelin, perhaps answering to that of the Hebrews, and which can be hurled to a considerable distance. This, among them, is chiefly used by those who act on foot. The ancient darts and javelins were too various for us to describe particularly. The cuts exhibit the principal forms of these missiles. We are perhaps best acquainted with those of the Romans, which may be fairly taken as types of the rest. One of them was a light kind of dart, about three feet long, and not more than an inch thick, with a point four inches long. It was a sort of handarrow. The point was made to taper to so fine an end, that it bent at the first stroke, so as to prevent the enemy from throwing it back again. These weapons were used by the light-armed troops, who carried several of them in the left hand, with which they held the buckler, leaving the right hand free either to throw the darts or use the sword. Something of this sort, but probably less delicate, may have been the darts. Of this kind seem to have been the darts' (shebatim) of which Joab took three in his hand, and struck them through the heart of Absalom, as he hanged in the tree (2 Sam. xviii. 14). Besides these slender darts, the Romans had other javelins longer, and stronger, and heavier. The two principal sorts were between four and five feet long; and the metal was carried halfway down the haft, which in one sort of javelin was square, and in another round. These weapons were discharged at the enemy in commencing an action; but if there was no time or distance for this, the soldiers threw their missiles to the ground, and assailed the foe sword in hand. There are many allusions in the Greek and Latin poets and some in Scripture to poising of the javelin, its whistling motion through the air, and the clash of the adverse missiles striking against each other. So Virgil:

'Pois'd in his lifted arm, his lance he threw ;
The winged weapon, whistling in the wind,
Came driving on, nor miss'd the mark design'd.'

[graphic]

And again :

'Thick storms of steel from either army fly,

And clouds of clashing darts obscure the sky."'

« PreviousContinue »