Sivut kuvina

55 4 And when Saul saw David go forth | ter of the Philistine, Abner took him, and against the Philistine, he said unto Abner, brought him before Saul with the head of the captain of the host, Abner, whose son is the Philistine in his hand. this youth? And Abner said, As thy soul 58 And Saul said to him, Whose son art liveth, O king, I cannot tell.

thou, thou young man? And David an56 And the king said, Enquire thou swered, I am the son of thy servant Jesse the whose son the stripling is.

Beth-lehemite. 57 And as David returned from the slaugh

[graphic][merged small]

Verse 1. Shochoh... Azekah... Ephes-dummim.”—These three places were evidently at no great distance from eac ther, the Philistines being encamped at the last of these places and between the two former. Shochuh is mentione n Josh. xv. 35, among the towns of the tribe of Judah “in the valley;" that is, in the western plains of that trib Jerome says, that in his time there were two small villages of this name, one on a mountain and the other on the plai nine miles from Jerusalem, on the road to Eleutheropolis. Azekah, in his days, was also a village on the same roa Ephes-dammim is evidently between these two. In 1 Chron. xi. 13, it is mentioned under the name of Pas-dammim.

2. Valley of Elah.Elah means an oak or terebinth-tree: wherefore Jerome renders it " the valley of the oak;" an the Vulgate, the valley of the terebinth," or turpentine-tree. In the Targum, the valiey is called Butma, which the Arabic signifies a terebinth ; and, according to Egmont and Heyman, it continued to hear a similar name, for the say that it is called “the vale of Bitumen, very famous over all these parts for David's victory over Goliath.” Sandy says he passed through it at four miles from Ramah, on the road from Jerusalem to Joppa, and therefore north-we frúm Jerusalem. He says, “ After four miles riding (from Rama) wee descended into the valley of Terebinth, famou though little, for the slaughter of Golias. A bridge here crossed the torrent, neere which the ruins of an ancient m nasterie, more worthie the observing for the greatnesse of the stones than finenesse of the workmanship.”

4. Whose height was six cubits and a span.”—See the note on Deut. iii. 11.

5.He had an helmet of brass upon his head,&c.—Here we have the first account of what we may call a complete su of defensive armour; which naturally gives occasion to some remarks on the subject generally, and on the several par of armour which we find here specified. Sir Samuel Meyrick says, that body armour had its origin in Asia. "Ti warlike tribes of Europe at first contemned all protection but their innate courage, and considered any uth defence but the shield as a mark of effeminacy. He adds, that all the European armour, except the plate, which was not introduced till the fourteenth century, was borrowed from the Asiatics. This is of importance, because it enlarges our range of illustration ; since the ancient armour being borrowed from the East, its condition there is more distinctly illustrated by the information we possess concerning the derived armour of the ancient European nations. The present notice of a suit of armour is the earliest on record, and, to those who feel interest in the matter, is an important indication of the period when armour had arrived at a state of some completeness, though it does not enable us to ascertain the period when its several parts were invented. It is evident that armour hal at this time become not uncommon. Saul himself had armour composed of nearly the same articles as that of Goliath, the use of which he offered to David, who being, from his youth and manner of life, unaccustomed to such warlike harness, preferred to act without such defence. This fact helps us to the conclusion, that, as Saul was himself a giant, taller by the head and shoulders than any other Israelite, while David was but a stripling, his intention to make David wear his amour, proves that the armour then in use was not so nicely adapted to the size or form of the person destined to Fear it, as we find it to have been in later times.

[graphic][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors]

4, , c, Egyptian Helmets worn by Warriors; d, e, Caps of Egyptian Soldiers ; f, g, Persian Helmets ; h, i, k, Syrian ; l, m, n, o, Phrygian;

Pog, Dacian,

HELMETS.-Of all kinds of armour, a strong defence for the head was unquestionably the most common, and perhaps the most early. The shield and helmet have indeed formed the only defensive armour of some nations.

When men began to feel the need of a defence for the head in war, they seemed in the first instance merely to have given a stronger make to the caps which they usually wore. Such caps were at first quilted or padded with wool ; then they were formed of hard leather; and ultimately of metal; in which state they gradually acquired various additions and ornaments, such as embossed figures, ridges, crests of animal figures, horsehair, feathers. &c. ; and also flaps to protect the neck and cheeks, and even visors to guard the face. Visors do not, however, appear to have been used by the ancient Orientals ; nor do we know any helmet but that of the Phrygians with a ridge or crest. When the dress, or at least the war-dress. of ancient people consisted of skins, it was frequently the custom for the wearer to cover his head with the head-skin of the animal; and long after other dress was adopted for the body, it remained the custom among several nations to wear, as a war-cap or helmet, the skin of an animal's head, with the hair on, and in every other respect as like life as possible. The head-skins of lions, wolves, horses, and other animals, sufficiently grim in their appearance, and with hides of suitable strength, were preferred for this purpose ; and the terrible effect of this defensive head-dress was increased by the teeth being exposed, so as to appear grinning savagely at the enemy. Now when such people began to find that more convenient war-caps might be invented, they were unwilling to forego the effect which their savage helmets produced, and therefore affixed the animal's head, and ultimately a representation of it, as conveniently as they could, to the top of their new war-cap. Count Caylus and Sir Samuel Meyrick concur in

[ocr errors]

the opinion that this was the origin of crests and other annexations of helmets. Even the skins of large birds and fishes were employed in the same manner; and we have thus an easy explanation not only of the crest, but of the erect ears, horns, wings, &c., which we see in ancient helmets. The horsehair, which was anciently and is still displayed on helmets, admits of the same explanation. It arose from the custom of wearing the head of a horse with the mane remaining, either proper, or cut short so as to stand erect like a hog's bristles ; the tail also being annexed. The Ethiopians and Libyans had horse-head helmets: their Egyptian neighbours gave up animal heads for helmets, but continued them as crests; the crest of the royal helmet among that people being, according to Diodorus, the heads of the horse, lion, or dragon. Now Herodotus says, that the Greeks borrowed their helmets, as well as their shields, from the Egyptians. But those we have mentioned were far from being the only people who had animal-head helmets.

Of the Hebrew helmets (called yaid, coba ; or yaip, koba) we only kuow that they were generally of brass ; and that the helmet of the king was distinguished by its crown. It is, however, interesting to learn that metallic helmets were, so far as appears, exclusively in use among them. Homer's heroes have also, generally, helmets of brass, Whether the Hebrews had crests to their helmets or not, it is impossible to say distinctly. We do not think that the crest was a characteristic of Oriental helmets ; but as the royal helmet in Egypt had a crest—as the helmets of Asia Minor were sometimes crested—and as in the Trojan war a crested helmet was worn by the Trojans, and also, it would seem, by the Greeks—it is not unlikely that the crest was known to the Jews. Plumes we are not to expect; they were not used in the most ancient periods, and but sparingly in later antiquity. Homer never mentions plumes ; but often horsehair. So of Paris it is said:

“He set his helmet on his graceful brows,

Whose crest of horsehair nodded to his step

In awful state.”
In the combat which followed, Menelaus was dragging him along by this horsehair crest, when :-

“ The broider'd band,
That under braced his helmet at the chin,
Strain'd to his smooth neck with a ceaseless force

Choked him." But, fortunately for him, this band, “ though stubborn, by a slaughtered ox supplied,” snapped, leaving the said helmet only in the victor's hand. It seems that in these crests the ridge was covered with hair from the mane of the horse, while other and longer hair hung dependent from the extremity behind; but the ridge often terminated in a horse-tail when its surface had other ornaments. Meyrick seems to think that the horsehair was sometimes gilt, which is less unlikely than that, as he also supposes, this ornament was sometimes composed of wires of gold.

As we do not know the form of the Hebrew helmet, we shall add a few remarks concerning those of the nations who either were their neighbours, or with whom they were connected, or to whom they were subject at the different periods of their history; and whose helmets at such times they probably wore, or at least allowed the forms they exhibited to modify their own. They must certainly have been well acquainted with them.

EGYPTIANS. In this country the kings and nobles only wore helmets of metal; the common soldiers wore caps of woollen or of linen strongly quilted. There are specimens of these in our wood-cut.-PHRYGIANS. The Phrygian bonnet in peace, and the helmet in war, was the prevalent head-dress of the inhabitants of Asia Minor, and in Meyrick's opinion the helmet is one of the most ancient, and the same which was worn by the Trojan heroes in Homer. Its general form will be seen in our wood-cut; and the following particulars deserve attention, as they illustrate our preceding observations concerning the transmutation of a cap into a helmet. Its principal characteristics were those of a cap with the point bent forward, and with long flaps descending to the shoulders. It sometimes appears as a mere cap of the most soft and pliable stuff, unable to support itself, and hanging down in large wrinkles ; at others it appears to have formed a helmet of the most hard and inflexible substance of leather, or even metal, standing quite stiff and smooth, and enriched with embossed ornaments.

of these there are four flaps, which would appear to have been made from the leg skins of the animals of whose skin the cap was originally formed ; but in the lighter caps there are only a single pair of Aaps, which are often tucked up and confined by a string around the crown. A flap of mail frequently descended from under the helmet to protect the neck and shoulders. The Syrians seem to have adopted, with some modification, the cylindrical helmet or cap of the Persians; but there is one, represented in our wood-cut, which is considered more peculiarly Syrian, and the resemblance of which, as Sir S. Meyrick remarks, to that of the modern Chinese is very great. They have alike a high ornamental spike at the top: that which terminates the Syrian one is a lily, which, according to Herodotus, was the ornament which the Assyrians bore on the tops of their walking-sticks.— The Assyrians had helmets of brass. — The Medes and Persians. As we are not stating minute distinctions, we may mention generally that the helmets or “ impenetrable caps," as Xenophon rather calls them, of the Medes and Persians, exhibit four principal forms in the accounts of ancient writers and in the sculptures of Persepolis: these are cylindrical, hemispherical, semi-oval, conical. To these also applies the remark concerning the origin of the form of the national helmet in that of the national cap. The cylindrical cap and helmet must, however, be particularly regarded as a national characteristic of the ancient Persians, the other forms being to general to be assigned as a national distinction. It is exhibited in the form of a cylinder of various height, with a some what wider diameter at top than at bottom, and resembling a hat without a brim-particularly such hats with broad crowns as were in use a few years since. It is either plain, or fluted, or otherwise ornamented ; and we see it exhibited either simply, or in various combinations—sometimes as a diadem, often radiated at top, and variously embossed and ornamented, and encircling one of the round, semi-oval, or conical caps. This cylindrical cap or helmet became greatly diffused by the conquests of the Persians, and must have been well known to the Jews during the captivity, and while Palestine was a Persian province. Xenophon speaks of brazen helmets with white crests; but no crests appear in the sculptures of the country.–We need not particularly dwell on the helmets of the Greeks and Romans. These were, indeed, well known to the Jews in the later period of their history ; but much that might be said concerning them has been anticipated in our first observations. The Roman helmet was borrowed from the Greeks with slight modifications. Of the more elaborate Greek helmet our cut of a Greek warrior furnishes a very fine specimen, which will be better understood by the eye than by technical description. It has three crests of horsehair from the mane, cut short and square, with a dependent tail. Some helmets had as many as five crests of this sort. The more common helmet of both the Greeks and Romans, is fairly represented by that which appears on the heads of the Roman soldiers in the cut, p. 612. vol. i., being merely a scull-cap without ridge or crest, but having at top a knob or button, and differing in no material respect from that of the mounted Dacian below, except that the latter has a spike instead of a knob. The helmets and caps of the figures in the cuts to Judges v. will very materially assist in the illustration of the present nute.

To ma

[graphic][ocr errors][subsumed][merged small][ocr errors][graphic][graphic][subsumed][merged small]

a, Egyptian; b. Phrygian ; c, Dacian ; d, Roman, Common Soldier ; e, Do. Officer; f, Do, Imperial.

"Ceed of mail.”—When men had realized a means of protecting their heads by strong caps and helmets, they natuTally began soon to think of extending the same protection to other parts of the body. It would be absurd to suppose that every nation adhered to the same rule of progression ; but it may perhaps be stated as a general rule, with large variations, that the progressive kinds of armour were-1. The skins of various animals, and even, in some countries, of birds and fishes. 2. Hides, mats, wood ; linen or woollen padded or folded; strong twisted linen. 3. Leather bordered with metal. 4. Entire plates of metal; but as these were heavy and inflexible, various contrivances were resorted to in order to obtain the security which metal gives, without its rigidity, and without all its weight. For this purpose

, the leather was covered with square pieces of metal, riveted on; or else, embossed pieces of metal were fastened en so as to protect the more important parts of the person, and to serve at once for ornament and use. Sometimes ess

, the defence was formed of bands or hoops of metal, sliding over each other, and therefore yielding to the motions of the body. 5. We then come to what is properly mailed

armour, by which a higher degree of flexibility

was obtained than a metallic covering might be supposed capable of affording. This armour was of several kinds. Leather, linen, I woollen, was covered with rings or with scales. The rings were of various kinds and sizes, and variously disposed. Sometimes they were fixed independently of each other, as in the very fine specimen of Phrygian mail which our woodeut exhibits : in other instances, the rings were twisted into each other, like the links of a chain ; and, in some cases, the rings were set edgewise, as shown in the Egyptian hauberks (fig.

a of the above cut), which Denon copied iruin the walls of Carnac, and which, in Sir S. Meyrick's opinion, affords the earliest known specimen of this kind of amour. Seale armour was that which obtained the same effect by arranging small pieces of metal, cut into the shape of leares, seales, &c., in such

a manner that they fell over each other like the feathers of a bird, or the scales of a fish. This kind of armour had grown

into extensive use long before it was adopted by the Romans, who regarded it as a characteristic of barbarians—that is, of any nations except themselves and the Greeks. In the time of the emperors, they were, however, led to adopt it from the Dacians and Sarmatians. This scaled armour was not, however, always of metal

; for the last-named people had none such. They were without proper metals, and therefore they collected the hoofs of horses

, and after purifying, cut them into slices, and polished the pieces so as to resemble the scales of a dragon, or a pine cone when green. These scales they sewed together with the sinews of horses and oxen; and the body armour thus manufactured was, according to Pausanias, not inferior

to that of the Greeks either

in elegance or strength. The Emperor Domitian had, after this model, a cuirass of boars' hoofs stitched together; and this, indeed, would seem better adapted to such armour than the hoofs of horses. With such armour as this of scales, or indeed that of rings, any part of the body might be covered ; and, accordingly, we see figures covered with a dress of scale, ring, or chain armour, from head to foot, and even mounted on horses which have the whole body, to the very hoofs,

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small]
« EdellinenJatka »