[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion-list 1QM Col. ix.3-5; Origins of differentworkinghypotheses .
[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: Donnerstag, 5. August 1999 20:32
Betreff: Re: orion-list 1QM Col. ix.3-5; Origins of
differentworkinghypotheses .
According to 1Macc 5 Judas and his brother Simon start campaigns to the
North, South, West and East similar to the sons of Jacob in Jub 38, who,
subdivided into *four groups*, advance from the *four sides* of the (farm)
tower to the *four directions* for a terminal rout of the enemies. Even 2
Macc's subdivision into *four hosts* belongs in here.
If we assume a dependence of the War Scroll on the tradition of Jubilees -
already col. 1 shows a close connection - then the 'camp' reflects nothing
but the modernized transformation of earlier tower-symbolism. If that has at
least a little substance we can postulate that we should reduce the 'battle'
in col. 5-9 to a campaign of one group advancing from one side of the camp
to one direction to fight a specific enemy not in the short, but more likely
in the medium range of the camp.
It is not to decide in the moment if the camp is to be understood as a
fortified city, a fortress or a temporary, fortified field camp. However, to
reduce the sides of the camp merely to the two flanks of a standard battle
formation or to four flanks if we assume a square formation would
consequently mean, that the scroll conserves two different definitions of
'camp as a technical term. And that seems to be less probable, at least to
me.
I hope that the list, even if the feedback is more than weak for the thread
is less philanthropic ('Essene') but more essential ('martial'), may
understand that we are talking about fundamental things of ancient life,
when peace was understood in a somewhat negative fashion, simply as the
absence of war. Therefore I beg the peaceful 'Essenes' among you for pardon.
I come now to Yadin's(?) seven stages of battle. Hard tobacco from the
6-days General staff, for everybody who ever had participated in a pitched
battle knows that only two stages of battle are given: attack and retreat.
Beside that we have tactical movements and stratagems based upon so-called
'principles of war', i.e., learned lessons of the ancestors. But their
success is only less more than roughly calculable in front of a likewise
trained enemy like the 'mighty men of war'- the Kittim of Jubilees and 1QM.
Moreover, it seems to be a weak argument to count non-coordinated and merely
peripheral actions like skirmishing causing no enemy reaction (where is he?)
as a kind of stage. For me the columns 3-9 are nothing but a worth maneuver,
simply because the redactors are unable to construct coordinated actions,
e.g. to develop the flanks by a classical cavalry attack on a specific enemy
wing, the first thing we'd expect in an ancient battle. Instead of that, the
scroll starts with skirmishing, which refers to an enemy who has no cavalry,
for skirmishers are utmost vulnerable against counterattacks by cavalry. The
only possibility to understand the tactical intentions of the source (not
the text!) is to assume, that we see a kind of later literary overworking of
Lysias' historical march on rough terrain to Beit Zachariah. There it was
temporarily impossible for the Seleucid Army to develop a frontline wider
than a single chiliarchia and their small wing cavalry, so they formed
similar to the 'northern' War Scroll corps a defile of eight units of a
Thousand one behind the other, whereas the lights of both infantry and
cavalry made themselves superfluous in the hills on both sides of the valley
and played to role in the battle.
Therefore I draw the conclusion that the 'lots' refer to a succession of
battles over a longer, perhaps much longer period than usually supposed.
Russell asks what the strategic logic behind bringing 21 legions to the
field that one does not intent to use in battle may be.
Well, the 21 chiliarchies (not legions!) of the remaining three corps are
not involved in the battle by two possible reasons: (1) the pitched but not
decisive battle takes place on the outer lines of the military range of the
camp as part of a campaign; or (2) the other three corps are (were or will
be) involved in other campaigns, see col. 2; or (3) the redactors or their
military source didn't have the ability to command (or develop) more than
such a corps of roughly 8,000 men.
A brief word about Scipio in special and warfare in general. He was the
father of several successful innovations in warfare. And every good son
should learn the lessons of war, for only that enables him to teach his
grandchildren how to increase the chance to stay alive under fire.
Shalom
Dierk
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.