Someone posted this in another thread on the LXX vs the Masoretes, which I think warrants its own discussion, as would be off-topic there. It is regarding Goliath.
So my criticism:
Firstly, Goliath doesn't mean giant. The term came to be applied to what is gigantic, due to Goliath. It is similar to how Jumbo became to mean big, but was originally the name of an Elephant that toured the US.
The name is in fact a cognate of Lydian Alyattes or Carian Wliad, related to Hititte Walad - so probably means something like Lion or the Strong one. Remember the Philistines are the same people as the Peleset of the Sea Peoples, so probably of Anatolian descent. This is confirmed further, by the Greek-like armour Goliath is described as wearing.
Secondy, as to his armour weighing 5000 shekels: The text says shekels of brass. Now there are various shekels; such as shekels of silver, gold, brass, iron, etc. Shekel is not a specific weight, but a descriptive for a form of reference to weight. It is the equivalent of mile or pound, where the value changes depending on reference - a Roman mile is different from an English Imperial one, or a pound Stirling different from a Troy pound or an avurdupois pound.
So a simple value of 5000 shekels of brass is difficult to determine. People cared about gold and silver, so based on extent coinage and references to how many minas make a shekel and so forth, that we can determine. But the Shekel for brass is more difficult. The term translated 'brass' is anyway wrong, as brass as alloy of copper and nickel is much later. It likely references bronze or copper itself. So we have no way to establish the reference weight, unsure what metal exactly is being referenced, nor how much makes a shekel - being more quotidian, the weights and measures aren't as well recorded as gold or silver. Further, how do we establish if the later weights is the equivalent of the weights as used in the time of Saul? Weights and measures change according to economic factors, and kings commonly used to proclaim changes to the standards (Diocletian, or Edward I spring to mind). 5000 also sounds a suspiciously round number, so is anyway just a rough estimate.
But let us grant the weight of 5000 shekels to be more or less the equivalent of that stated above. Apologies, but I am more comfortable with the metric system and will use that rather. So it comes to Goliath's armour weighing 56 kg. That is quite a lot. However, a Greek hoplite had armour weighing 32 kg, a Roman Legionary's arms was 45 kg. A mediaeval knight on tournament had suits of plate from 40-50 kg. None of these above were all necessarily large men, and they are carrying almost the equivalent in the latter two cases. Granted, these were special cases, as tournament knights wore heavier kit to add weight behind their lance and allow ornament, and Roman arms included extras like 2 pilums that weren't necessarily carried into battle. The Roman legionaries did carry it over great distances though.
So a hero in the Homeric mode, as Goliath is described as a 'man of the inbetween', would be able to shoulder such weight for a short period at least. The Philistines were of this Aegian heroic culture, where it described how heroes are ferried to and fro from the battlefield with their arms. Goliath only comes out to taunt the army, then retires.
The armour was likely ornate too, him being the chosen hero of the whole Philistine Confederation.
So a strong soldier of the ancient world, akin to Roman Legionaries carrying heavy packs over great distances (Marius' mules) or Pheidipiddes running in full armour, could certainly shoulder this great weight for a short time. Even more so if a hoplite with a spear, as is likely, for he would be waiting for his opponent to come to him. If the warrior in question is particularly large, it makes the possibility even more credible.
So, neither the weight of the armour, nor the name, necessarily suggests the 3m or so of the Masoretic text. The LXX's height is still a great one for that age, where people were on average significantly shorter, but far more physiologically possible.
So my criticism:
Firstly, Goliath doesn't mean giant. The term came to be applied to what is gigantic, due to Goliath. It is similar to how Jumbo became to mean big, but was originally the name of an Elephant that toured the US.
The name is in fact a cognate of Lydian Alyattes or Carian Wliad, related to Hititte Walad - so probably means something like Lion or the Strong one. Remember the Philistines are the same people as the Peleset of the Sea Peoples, so probably of Anatolian descent. This is confirmed further, by the Greek-like armour Goliath is described as wearing.
Secondy, as to his armour weighing 5000 shekels: The text says shekels of brass. Now there are various shekels; such as shekels of silver, gold, brass, iron, etc. Shekel is not a specific weight, but a descriptive for a form of reference to weight. It is the equivalent of mile or pound, where the value changes depending on reference - a Roman mile is different from an English Imperial one, or a pound Stirling different from a Troy pound or an avurdupois pound.
So a simple value of 5000 shekels of brass is difficult to determine. People cared about gold and silver, so based on extent coinage and references to how many minas make a shekel and so forth, that we can determine. But the Shekel for brass is more difficult. The term translated 'brass' is anyway wrong, as brass as alloy of copper and nickel is much later. It likely references bronze or copper itself. So we have no way to establish the reference weight, unsure what metal exactly is being referenced, nor how much makes a shekel - being more quotidian, the weights and measures aren't as well recorded as gold or silver. Further, how do we establish if the later weights is the equivalent of the weights as used in the time of Saul? Weights and measures change according to economic factors, and kings commonly used to proclaim changes to the standards (Diocletian, or Edward I spring to mind). 5000 also sounds a suspiciously round number, so is anyway just a rough estimate.
But let us grant the weight of 5000 shekels to be more or less the equivalent of that stated above. Apologies, but I am more comfortable with the metric system and will use that rather. So it comes to Goliath's armour weighing 56 kg. That is quite a lot. However, a Greek hoplite had armour weighing 32 kg, a Roman Legionary's arms was 45 kg. A mediaeval knight on tournament had suits of plate from 40-50 kg. None of these above were all necessarily large men, and they are carrying almost the equivalent in the latter two cases. Granted, these were special cases, as tournament knights wore heavier kit to add weight behind their lance and allow ornament, and Roman arms included extras like 2 pilums that weren't necessarily carried into battle. The Roman legionaries did carry it over great distances though.
So a hero in the Homeric mode, as Goliath is described as a 'man of the inbetween', would be able to shoulder such weight for a short period at least. The Philistines were of this Aegian heroic culture, where it described how heroes are ferried to and fro from the battlefield with their arms. Goliath only comes out to taunt the army, then retires.
The armour was likely ornate too, him being the chosen hero of the whole Philistine Confederation.
So a strong soldier of the ancient world, akin to Roman Legionaries carrying heavy packs over great distances (Marius' mules) or Pheidipiddes running in full armour, could certainly shoulder this great weight for a short time. Even more so if a hoplite with a spear, as is likely, for he would be waiting for his opponent to come to him. If the warrior in question is particularly large, it makes the possibility even more credible.
So, neither the weight of the armour, nor the name, necessarily suggests the 3m or so of the Masoretic text. The LXX's height is still a great one for that age, where people were on average significantly shorter, but far more physiologically possible.
Last edited:
