DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.13851#0499
OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS OF GREECE.
473
other methods were practised against them, as when the Tyrians, heat-
ing brass bucklers red hot, and filling them with sand and lime, poured
it upon Alexander's soldiers, which getting between their armour and
flesh, burned vehemently, and caused them to fling off their armour, so
that the besieged wounded them at pleasure, without receiving any hurt
Several ways they had to elude the force of their engines, and defeat
tbeir stratagems : their mines they rendered ineffectual by counter-mines :
their mounts they let fall to the ground, by undermining the foundations .
their towers, and all their engines, they burned with fire-balls: them
selves they defended with skins, wool-packs, and other things proper to
ward off stones, and other missile weapons : the heads of battering rams
they broke off with stones of a prodigious size from the walls ; or (as
%ve read of the Tyrians) rendered them useless, by cutting the ropes
whereby they were governed with long scythes ; and if there remained
no hope of defending their walls, they sometimes raised new ones, with
forts within. Many other contrivances were used, as the posture of af-
fairs required, and as the besieged were ingenious in finding out methods
for their own preservation.
Their manner of treating the cities they had taken was not always the
same, depending upon the temper of their general, who sometimes put
all, at least all that were in arms, to the sword, demolished the walls
and buildings, and mad^ the rest slaves ; sometimes graciously received
them into favour, requiring only some tributary acknowledgment. The
Athenians had a custom of sending colonies to inhabit the places they
had depopulated, which they divided by lots among some of the common-
alty, when met together in a public assembly (1).
When they demolished a city, it was frequent to pronounce direful
curses upon whoever should endeavour to rebuild it ; which some
imagine was the reason that Troy could never be raised out of its ashes,
though several persons attempted it, being devoted to eternal and irre-
parable ruin by Agamemnon (2). This seems to have been a very
ancient custom, and derived from fhc eastern nations ; for (to omit other
instances) we find Joshua, at the destruction of Jericho, to have fixed
an imprecation upon the person that should rebuild it (3), which was
accomplished in Hiel, the Bethelite, many ages after, in the reign of
Ahab (4) *
CHAP, xr
OF THE SLAIN, AND THEIR FUNERAL.-:.
The ancient Grecians seems to have treated the bodies of their dead
enemies in a very indecent and inhuman manner, basely revenging the
injuries they had received from them whilst living, by disfiguring and
stabbing their carcases, and exposing them to scorn and ignominy ;
which cruel and barbarous practice was not thoroughly reformed in
(1) Aristophanes Scholiastes Nubibus, p,134„ (3) Joshua, cap. vi. 26.
(2) Eustathius Iliad. 5'. p. 350. (4) 1 Reg. cap. xvi, 34
60
473
other methods were practised against them, as when the Tyrians, heat-
ing brass bucklers red hot, and filling them with sand and lime, poured
it upon Alexander's soldiers, which getting between their armour and
flesh, burned vehemently, and caused them to fling off their armour, so
that the besieged wounded them at pleasure, without receiving any hurt
Several ways they had to elude the force of their engines, and defeat
tbeir stratagems : their mines they rendered ineffectual by counter-mines :
their mounts they let fall to the ground, by undermining the foundations .
their towers, and all their engines, they burned with fire-balls: them
selves they defended with skins, wool-packs, and other things proper to
ward off stones, and other missile weapons : the heads of battering rams
they broke off with stones of a prodigious size from the walls ; or (as
%ve read of the Tyrians) rendered them useless, by cutting the ropes
whereby they were governed with long scythes ; and if there remained
no hope of defending their walls, they sometimes raised new ones, with
forts within. Many other contrivances were used, as the posture of af-
fairs required, and as the besieged were ingenious in finding out methods
for their own preservation.
Their manner of treating the cities they had taken was not always the
same, depending upon the temper of their general, who sometimes put
all, at least all that were in arms, to the sword, demolished the walls
and buildings, and mad^ the rest slaves ; sometimes graciously received
them into favour, requiring only some tributary acknowledgment. The
Athenians had a custom of sending colonies to inhabit the places they
had depopulated, which they divided by lots among some of the common-
alty, when met together in a public assembly (1).
When they demolished a city, it was frequent to pronounce direful
curses upon whoever should endeavour to rebuild it ; which some
imagine was the reason that Troy could never be raised out of its ashes,
though several persons attempted it, being devoted to eternal and irre-
parable ruin by Agamemnon (2). This seems to have been a very
ancient custom, and derived from fhc eastern nations ; for (to omit other
instances) we find Joshua, at the destruction of Jericho, to have fixed
an imprecation upon the person that should rebuild it (3), which was
accomplished in Hiel, the Bethelite, many ages after, in the reign of
Ahab (4) *
CHAP, xr
OF THE SLAIN, AND THEIR FUNERAL.-:.
The ancient Grecians seems to have treated the bodies of their dead
enemies in a very indecent and inhuman manner, basely revenging the
injuries they had received from them whilst living, by disfiguring and
stabbing their carcases, and exposing them to scorn and ignominy ;
which cruel and barbarous practice was not thoroughly reformed in
(1) Aristophanes Scholiastes Nubibus, p,134„ (3) Joshua, cap. vi. 26.
(2) Eustathius Iliad. 5'. p. 350. (4) 1 Reg. cap. xvi, 34
60