[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: orion-list 1Chr 27, 1QM and 11QT on militia

    [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set]
    [Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-8" character set]
    [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: <RGmyrken@aol.com>
An: <orion@mscc.huji.ac.il>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juli 1999 16:54
Betreff: Re: orion-list 1Chr 27, 1QM and 11QT on militia

> The War Scroll keeps the four lines, with 1000 in each for a total
> of 4000 infantry, still in 40 centuries or 80 maniples, in keeping with
> Biblical system of 1000s, 100s, 50s and 10s.  The only major effect was
> reducing overall infantry strength by a ratio of 20/21.

Unfortunately the Scroll refers to seven lines seven ranks deep on four
wings (or sides).
Too many foot for one legion and to less for two...
I recall the depth of the centuriae as formed by a file of eight, the
so-called contubertina.
Moreover, were does the biblical warfare comes from if not from the (early)
Hellenistic Age?

> The War
> Scroll strategist favored the higher number [of cavalry]
I find 1750 cavalry on each side (7er symbolism with astronomical
orientation) or 1500 (6/12er tribe- or month-symbolism).

> The figure 6000 itself was
> suggestive, being divisible by 12, so the authors of the War Scroll
> on a (theoretical) conscription level of 600 per tribe.

That is exactly what I've meant when speaking of the 6er/12er symbolism as
the underlying stage of  redaction - 500 per tribe.

>    Another interesting case is the 12,000 elite troops of the Royal Guard
> the Temple Scroll.  This is clearly modeled on the 12,000 elite troops of
> Royal Guard of the Seleucid army in the Maccabean period.

Wrong. The Seleucid elite troops were formed by the 20,000 agyraspides of
the Royal Guard,
whereas the crack force of the hypaspists was numbered 10,000 foot - at
Daphne 166/5 BC they were divided into 5,000 chalkaspides and 5,000 foot
dressed as Romans.

However, I accept your manipular thesis, but only as the second or - more
probable - the third stage of redaction. By no means it can refer to the
primary source.

Nota bene we should keep in mind that Jewish mercenaries are widely attested
in the early  2nd c. BC.  They had already a glorious military tradition
when they joined the Maccabean uprising after (!) the Temple cleansing - and
they doubtlessly filled the gaps together with their amarment, their
sarissa, hoplon and/or pelte.

Military tradition is a thing which dies hard. Revolution doesn't take
place, only careful reforms. Otherwise the last Philipp would have adopted
the Roman manipular tactics instead to lengthen the sarissa and to increase
the depth of the phalanx.


PS I've got your articles right now. Excellent work.

>    Russell Gmirkin

For private reply, e-mail to "Dierk" <haGalil@gmx.net>
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to majordomo@panda.mscc.huji.ac.il with
the message: "unsubscribe Orion." For more information on the Orion Center
or for Orion archives, visit our web site http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.