Tested by their ideas, their picture of political society, and their descriptions of burial rites1, the presumed authors of the alleged2 expansions of the Iliad all lived in one and the same period of culture. But, according to the prevalent critical theory, we read in the Iliad not only large “expansions” of many dates, but also briefer interpolations inserted by the strolling reciters or rhapsodists. “Until the final literary redaction had come,” says Mr. Leaf — that is about 540 B.C.—“we cannot feel sure that any details, even of the oldest work, were secure from the touch of the latest poet.” 99
Here we are far from Mr. Leaf’s own opinion that “the whole scenery of the poems, the details of armour3, palaces, dress, decoration . . . had become stereotyped4, and formed a foundation which the Epic5 poet dared not intentionally6 sap. . . . ” 100 We now find 101 that “the latest poet” saps as much as he pleases down to the middle of the sixth century B.C. Moreover, in the middle of the sixth century B.C., the supposed editor employed by Hsistratus made “constant additions of transitional passages,” and added many speeches by Nestor, an ancestor of Pisistratus.
Did these very late interlopers, down to the sixth century, introduce modern details into the picture of life? did they blur7 the unus color? We hope to prove that, if they did so at all, it was but slightly. That the poems, however, with a Mycenaean or sub-Mycenaean basis of actual custom and usage, contain numerous contaminations from the usage of centuries as late as the seventh, is the view of Mr. Leaf, and Reichel and his followers8. 102
Reichel’s hypothesis is that the heroes of the original poet had no defensive9 armour except the great Mycenaean shields; that the ponderous10 shield made the use of chariots imperatively11 necessary; that, after the Mycenaean age, a small buckler and a corslet superseded12 the unwieldy shield; that chariots were no longer used; that, by the seventh century B.C., a warrior13 could not be thought of without a breastplate; and that new poets thrust corslets and greaves into songs both new and old.
How the new poets could conceive of warriors14 as always in chariots, whereas in practice they knew no war chariots, and yet could not conceive of them without corslets which the original poet never saw, is Reichel’s secret. The new poets had in the old lays a plain example to follow. They did follow it as to chariots and shields; as to corslets and greaves they reversed it. Such is the Reichelian theory.
The Shield
As regards armour, controversy15 is waged over the shield, corslet, and bronze greaves. In Homer the shield is of leather, plated with bronze, and of bronze is the corslet. No shields of bronze plating and no bronze corslets have been found in Mycenaean excavations16.
We have to ask, do the Homeric descriptions of shields tally17 with the representations of shields in works of art, discovered in the graves of Mycenae, Spata in Attica, Vaphio in Sparta, and elsewhere? If the descriptions in Homer vary from these relics19, to what extent do they vary? and do the differences arise from the fact that the poet describes consistently what he sees in his own age, or are the variations caused by late rhapsodists in the Iron Age, who keep the great obsolete20 shields and bronze weapons, yet introduce the other military gear of their day, say 800–600 B.C.— gear unknown to the early singers?
It may be best to inquire, first, what does the poet, or what do the poets, say about shields? and, next, to examine the evidence of representations of shields in Mycenaean art; always remembering that the poet does not pretend to live, and beyond all doubt does not live, in the Mycenaean prime, and that the testimony22 of the tombs is liable to be altered by fresh discoveries.
In Iliad, II. 388, the shield (aspis) is spoken of as “covering a man about” ([Greek: amphibrotae]), while, in the heat of battle, the baldric (telamon), or belt of the shield, “shall be wet with sweat.” The shield, then, is not an Ionian buckler worn on the left arm, but is suspended by a belt, and covers a man, or most of him, just as Mycenaean shields are suspended by belts shown in works of art, and cover the body and legs. This (II. 388) is a general description applying to the shields of all men who fight from chariots. Their great shield answers to the great mediaeval shield of the knights25 of the twelfth century, the “double targe,” worn suspended from the neck by a belt. Such a shield covers a mounted knight’s body from mouth to stirrup in an ivory chessman of the eleventh to twelfth century A.D., 103 so also in the Bayeux tapestry26, 104 and on seals. Dismounted men have the same shield (p. 132).
The shield of Menelaus (III. 348) is “equal in all directions,” which we might conceive to mean, mathematically “circular,” as the words do mean that. A shield is said to have “circles,” and a spear which grazes a shield — a shield which was [Greek: panton eesae], “every way equal”— rends27 both circles, the outer circle of bronze, and the inner circle of leather (Iliad, XX. 273–281). But the passage is not unjustly believed to be late; and we cannot rely on it as proof that Homer knew circular shields among others. The epithet28 [Greek: eukuklykos], “of good circle,” is commonly given to the shields, but does not mean that the shield was circular, we are told, but merely that it was “made of circular plates.” 105 As for the shield of Menelaus, and other shields described in the same words, “every way equal,” the epithet is not now allowed to mean “circular.” Mr. Leaf, annotating30 Iliad, I. 306, says that this sense is “intolerably mathematical and prosaic,” and translates [Greek: panton eesae] as “well balanced on every side.” Helbig renders the epithets31 in the natural sense, as “circular.” 106
To the rendering32 “circular” it is objected that a circular shield of, say, four feet and a half in diameter, would be intolerably heavy and superfluously33 wide, while the shields represented in Mycenaean art are not circles, but rather resemble a figure of eight, in some cases, or a section of a cylinder35, in others, or, again, a door (Fig24. 5, p. 130).
What Homer really meant by such epithets as “equal every way,” “very circular,” “of a good circle,” cannot be ascertained36, since Homeric epithets of the shield, which were previously37 rendered “circular,” “of good circle,” and so on, are now translated in quite other senses, in order that Homeric descriptions may be made to tally with Mycenaean representations of shields, which are never circular as represented in works of art. In this position of affairs we are unable to determine the shape, or shapes, of the shields known to Homer.
A scholar’s rendering of Homer’s epithets applied38 to the shield is obliged to vary with the variations of his theory about the shield. Thus, in 1883, Mr. Leaf wrote, “The poet often calls the shield by names which seem to imply that it was round, and yet indicates that it was large enough to cover the whole body of a man. . . . In descriptions the round shape is always implied.” The words which indicated that the shield (or one shield) “really looked like a tower, and really reached from neck to ankles” (in two or three cases), were “received by the poet from the earlier Achaean lays.” “But to Homer the warriors appeared as using the later small round shield. His belief in the heroic strength of the men of old time made it quite natural to speak of them as bearing a shield which at once combined the later circular shape and the old heroic expanse. . . . ” 107
Here the Homeric words which naturally mean “circular” or “round” are accepted as meaning “round” or “circular.” Homer, it is supposed, in practice only knows the round shields of the later age, 700 B.C., so he calls shields “round,” but, obedient to tradition, he conceives of them as very large.
But, after the appearance of Reichel’s speculations39, the Homeric words for “round” and “circular” have been explained as meaning something else, and Mr. Leaf, in place of maintaining that Homer knew no shields but round shields, now writes (1900), “The small circular shield of later times . . . is equally unknown to Homer, with a very few curious exceptions,” which Reichel discovered — erroneously, as we shall later try to show. 108
Thus does science fluctuate! Now Homer knows in practice none but light round bucklers, dating from about 700 B.C.; again, he does not know them at all, though they were habitually40 used in the period at which the later parts of his Epic were composed. We shall have to ask, how did small round bucklers come to be unknown to late poets who saw them constantly?
Some scholars, then, believe that the old original poet always described Mycenaean shields, which are of various shapes, but never circular in Mycenaean art. If there are any circular shields in the poems, these, they say, must have been introduced by poets accustomed, in a much later age, to seeing circular bucklers. Therefore Homeric words, hitherto understood as meaning “circular,” must now mean something else — even if the reasoning seems circular.
Other scholars believe that the poet in real life saw various types of shields in use, and that some of them were survivals of the Mycenaean shields, semi-cylindrical41, or shaped like figures of 8, or like a door; others were circular; and these scholars presume that Homer meant “circular” when he said “circular.” Neither school will convert the other, and we cannot decide between them. We do not pretend to be certain as to whether the original poet saw shields of various types, including the round shape, in use, though that is possible, or whether he saw only the Mycenaean types.
As regards size, Homer certainly describes, in several cases, shields very much larger than most which we know for certain to have been common after, say, 700 B.C. He speaks of shields reaching from neck to ankles, and “covering the body of a man about.” Whether he was also familiar with smaller shields of various types is uncertain; he does not explicitly42 say that any small bucklers were used by the chiefs, nor does he explicitly say that all shields were of the largest type. It is possible that at the time when the Epic was composed various types of shield were being tried, while the vast ancient shield was far from obsolete.
To return to the size of the shield. In a feigned43 tale of Odysseus (Odyssey44, XIV. 474–477), men in a wintry ambush45 place their shields over their shoulders, as they lie on the ground, to be a protection against snow. But any sort of shield, large or small, would protect the shoulders of men in a recumbent position. Quite a large shield may seem to be indicated in Iliad, XIII. 400–405, where Idomeneus curls up his whole person behind his shield; he was “hidden” by it. Yet, as any one can see by experiment, a man who crouched46 low would be protected entirely47 by a Highland48 targe of less than thirty inches in diameter, so nothing about the size of the shield is ascertained in this passage. On a black-figured vase in the British Museum (B, 325) the entire body of a crouching49 warrior is defended by a large Boeotian buckler, oval, and with échancrures in the sides. The same remark applies to Iliad, XXII. 273–275. Hector watches the spear of Achilles as it flies; he crouches50, and the spear flies over him. Robert takes this as an “old Mycenaean” dodge51 — to duck down to the bottom of the shield. 109 The avoidance by ducking can be managed with no shield, or with a common Highland targe, which would cover a man in a crouching posture52, as when Glenbucket’s targe was peppered by bullets at Clifton (746), and Cluny shouted “What the devil is this?” the assailants firing unexpectedly from a ditch. A few moments of experiment, we repeat, prove that a round targe can protect a man in Hector’s attitude, and that the Homeric texts here throw no light on the size of the shield.
The shield of Hector was of black bull’s-hide, and as large and long as any represented in Mycenaean art, so that, as he walked, the rim21 knocked against his neck and ankles. The shape is not mentioned. Despite its size, he walked under it from the plain and field of battle into Troy (Iliad, VI. 116–118). This must be remembered, as Reichel 110 maintains that a man could not walk under shield, or only for a short way; wherefore the war chariot was invented, he says, to carry the fighting man from point to point (Leaf, Iliad, vol. i. p. 573). Mr. Leaf elaborates these points: “Why did not the Homeric heroes ride? Because no man could carry such a shield on horseback.” 111 We reply that men could and did carry such shields on horseback, as we know on the evidence of works of art and poetry of the eleventh to twelfth centuries A.D. Mr. Ridgeway has explained the introduction of chariots as the result of horses too small to carry a heavy and heavily-armed man as a cavalier.
The shield ([Greek: aspis]), we are told by followers of Reichel, was only worn by princes who could afford to keep chariots, charioteers, and squires53 of the body to arm and disarm54 them. But this can scarcely be true, for all the comrades of Diomede had the shield ([Greek: aspis], Iliad, X. 152), and the whole host of Pandarus of Troy, a noted55 bowman, were shield-bearers ([Greek: aspistaon laon], Iliad, IV. 90), and some of them held their shields ([Greek: sakae]) in front of Pandarus when he took a treacherous56 shot at Menelaus (IV. 113). The whole host could not have chariots and squires, we may presume, so the chariot was not indispensable to the écuyer or shield-bearing man.
The objections to this conjecture57 of Reichel are conspicuous58, as we now prove.
No Mycenaean work of art shows us a shielded man in a chariot; the men with the monstrous59 shields are always depicted60 on foot. The only modern peoples who, to our knowledge, used a leather shield of the Mycenaean size and even of a Mycenaean shape had no horses and chariots, as we shall show. The ancient Eastern peoples, such as the Khita and Egyptians, who fought from chariots, carried small shields of various forms, as in the well-known picture of a battle between the Khita, armed with spears, and the bowmen of Rameses II, who kill horse and man with arrows from their chariots, and carry no spears; while the Khita, who have no bows, merely spears, are shot down as they advance. 112. Egyptians and Khita, who fight from chariots, use small bucklers, whence it follows that war chariots were not invented, or, at least, were not retained in use, for the purpose of giving mobility62 to men wearing gigantic shields, under which they could not hurry from point to point. War chariots did not cease to be used in Egypt, when men used small shields.
Moreover, Homeric warriors can make marches under shield, while there is no mention of chariots to carry them to the point where they are to lie in ambush (Odyssey, XIV. 470–510). If the shield was so heavy as to render a chariot necessary, would Homer make Hector trudge63 a considerable distance under shield, while Achilles, under shield, sprints64 thrice round the whole circumference65 of Troy? Helbig notices several other cases of long runs under shield. Either Reichel is wrong, when he said that the huge shield made the use of the war chariot necessary, or the poet is “late”; he is a man who never saw a large shield like Hector’s, and, though he speaks of such shields, he thinks that men could walk and run under them. When men did walk or run under shield, or ride, if they ever rode, they would hang it over the left side, like the lion-hunters on the famous inlaid dagger66 of Mycenae, 113 or the warrior on the chessman referred to above (p. 111).
Aias, again, the big, brave, stupid Porthos of the Iliad, has the largest shield of all, “like a tower” (this shield cannot have been circular), and is recognised by his shield. But he never enters a chariot, and, like Odysseus, has none of his own, because both men come from rugged67 islands, unfit for chariot driving. Odysseus has plenty of shields in his house in Ithaca, as we learn from the account of the battle with the Wooers in the Odyssey; yet, in Ithaca, as at Troy, he kept no chariot. Here, then, we have nations who fight from chariots, yet use small shields, and heroes who wear enormous shields, yet never own a chariot. Clearly, the great shield cannot have been the cause of the use of the war chariot, as in the theory of Reichel.
Aias and his shield we meet in Iliad, VII. 206–220. “He clothed himself upon his flesh in all his armour” ([Greek: teuchea]), to quote Mr. Leaf’s translation; but the poet only describes his shield: his “towerlike shield of bronze, with sevenfold ox-hide, that Tychius wrought68 him cunningly; Tychius, the best of curriers, that had his home in Hyle, who made for him his glancing shield of sevenfold hides of stalwart bulls, and overlaid the seven with bronze.”
The shield known to Homer then is, in this case, so tall as to resemble a tower, and has bronze plating over bull’s hide. By tradition from an age of leather shields the Currier is still the shield-maker, though now the shield has metal plating. It is fairly clear that Greek tradition regarded the shield of Aias as of the kind which covered the body from chin to ankles, and resembled a bellying70 sail, or an umbrella unfurled, and drawn71 in at the sides in the middle, so as to offer the semblance72 of two bellies73, or of one, pinched in at or near the centre. This is probable, because the coins of Salamis, where Aias was worshipped as a local hero of great influence, display this shield as the badge of the AEginetan dynasty, claiming descent from Aias. The shield is bossed, or bellied74 out, with two half-moons cut in the centre, representing the waist, or pinched — in part, of the ancient Mycenaean shield; the same device occurs on a Mycenaean ring from AEgina in the British Museum. 114
In a duel75 with Aias the spear of Hector pierced the bronze and six layers of hide on his shield, but stuck in the seventh. The spear of Aias went through the circular (or “every way balanced”) huge shield of Hector, and through his corslet and chiton, but Hector had doubled himself up laterally76 ([Greek: eklinthae], VII. 254), and was not wounded. The next stroke of Aias pierced his shield, and wounded his neck; Hector replied with a boulder77 that lighted on the centre of the shield of Aias, “on the boss,” whether that means a mere29 ornament78 or knob, or whether it was the genuine boss — which is disputed. Aias broke in the shield of Hector with another stone; and the gentle and joyous79 passage of arms was stopped.
The shield of Agamemnon was of the kind that “cover all the body of a man,” and was “every way equal,” or “circular.” It was plated with twelve circles of bronze, and had twenty [Greek: omphaloi], or ornamental80 knobs of tin, and the centre was of black cyanus (XI. 31–34). There was also a head of the Gorgon81, with Fear and Panic. The description is not intelligible82, and I do not discuss it.
A man could be stabbed in the middle of the belly69, “under his shield” (XI. 424–425), not an easy thing to do, if shields covered the whole body to the feet; but, when a hero was leaping from his chariot (as in this case), no doubt a spear could be pushed up under the shield. The ancient Irish romances tell of a gae bulg, a spear held in the warrior’s toes, and jerked up under the shield of his enemy! Shields could be held up on high, in an attack on a wall garrisoned83 by archers85 (XII. 139), the great Norman shield, also, could be thus lifted.
The Locrians, light armed infantry86, had no shields, nor bronze helmets, nor spears, but slings88 and bows (XIII. 714). Mr. Leaf suspects that this is a piece of “false archaism,” but we do not think that early poets in an uncritical age are ever archaeologists, good or bad. The poet is aware that some men have larger, some smaller shields, just as some have longer and some shorter spears (XIV. 370–377); but this does not prove that the shields were of different types. A tall man might inherit the shield of a short father, or versa.
A man in turning to fly might trip on the rim of his shield, which proves how large it was: “it reached to his feet.” This accident of tripping occurred to Periphetes of Mycenae, but it might have happened to Hector, whose shield reached from neck to ankles. 115
Achilles must have been a large man, for he knew nobody whose armour would fit him when he lost his own (though his armour fitted Patroclus), he could, however, make shift with the tower-like shield of Aias, he said.
Fig. 1. “The Vase of Aristonothos”
The evidence of the Iliad, then, is mainly to the effect that the heroes carried huge shields, suspended by belts, covering the body and legs. If Homer means, by the epithets already cited, “of good circle” and “every way equal,” that some shields of these vast dimensions were circular, we have one example in early Greek art which corroborates90 his description. This is “the vase of Aristonothos,” signed by that painter, and supposed to be of the seventh century (Fig. 1). On one side, the companions of Odysseus are boring out the eye of the Cyclops; on the other, a galley91 is being rowed to the attack of a ship. On the raised deck of the galley stand three warriors, helmeted and bearing spears. The artist has represented their shields as covering their right sides, probably for the purpose of showing their devices or blazons93. Their shields are small round bucklers. On the ship are three warriors whose shields, though circular, cover the body from chin to ankles, as in Homer. One shield bears a bull’s head; the next has three crosses; the third blazon92 is a crab94. 116
Such personal armorial bearings are never mentioned by Homer. It is not usually safe to argue, from his silence, that he is ignorant of anything. He never mentions seals or signet rings, yet they cannot but have been familiar to his time. Odysseus does not seal the chest with the Phaeacian presents; he ties it up with a cunning knot; there are no rings named among the things wrought by Hephaestus, nor among the offerings of the Wooers of Penelope. 117
But, if we are to admit that Homer knew not rings and seals, which lasted to the latest Mycenaean times, through the Dipylon age, to the very late AEginetan treasure (800 B.C.) in the British Museum, and appear again in the earliest dawn of the classical age and in a Cyclic poem, it is plain that all the expansionists lived in one, and that a most peculiar95 ringless age. This view suits our argument to a wish, but it is not credible96 that rings and seals and engraved97 stones, so very common in Mycenaean and later times, should have vanished wholly in the Homeric time. The poet never mentions them, just as Shakespeare never mentions a thing so familiar to him as tobacco. How often are finger rings mentioned in the whole mass of Attic18 tragic98 poetry? We remember no example, and instances are certainly rare: Liddell and Scott give none. Yet the tragedians were, of course, familiar with rings and seals.
Manifestly, we cannot say that Homer knew no seals, because he mentions none; but armorial blazons on shields could be ignored by no poet of war, if they existed.
Meanwhile, the shields of the warriors on the vase, being circular and covering body and legs, answer most closely to Homer’s descriptions. Helbig is reduced to suggest, first, that these shields are worn by men aboard ship, as if warriors had one sort of shield when aboard ship and another when fighting on land, and as if the men in the other vessel99 were not equally engaged in a sea fight. No evidence in favour of such difference of practice, by sea and land, is offered. Again, Helbig does not trust the artist, in this case, though the artist is usually trusted to draw what he sees; and why should he give the men in the other ship or boat small bucklers, genuine, while bedecking the warriors in the adverse100 vessel with large, purely101 imaginary shields? 118 It is not in the least “probable,” as Helbig suggests, that the artist is shirking the trouble of drawing the figure.
Reichel supposes that round bucklers were novelties when the vase was painted (seventh century), and that the artist did not understand how to depict61 them. 119 But he depicted them very well as regards the men in the galley, save that, for obvious aesthetic102 reasons, he chose to assume that the men in the galley were left-handed and wore their shields on their right arms, his desire being to display the blazons of both parties. 120 We thus see, if the artist may be trusted, that shields, which both “reached to the feet” and were circular, existed in his time (the seventh century), so that possibly they may have existed in Homer’s time and survived into the age of small bucklers. Tyrtaeus (late seventh century), as Helbig remarks, speaks of “a wide shield, covering thighs104, shins, breast, and shoulders.” 121
Nothing can be more like the large shields of the vase of Aristonothos. Thus the huge circular shield seems to have been a practicable shield in actual use. If so, when Homer spoke23 of large circular shields he may have meant large circular shields. On the Dodwell pyxis of 650 to 620 B.C., a man wears an oval shield, covering him from the base of the neck to the ankles. He wears it on his left arm. 122
Of shields certainly small and light, worn by the chiefs, there is not a notice in the Iliad, unless there be a hint to that effect in the accounts of heroes running, walking considerable distances, and “stepping lightly” under shields, supposed, by the critics, to be of crushing weight. In such passages the poet may be carried away by his own verve, or the heroes of ancient times may be deemed capable of exertions105 beyond those of the poet’s contemporaries, as he often tells us that, in fact, the old heroes were. A poet is not a scientific military writer; and in the epic poetry of all other early races very gross exaggeration is permitted, as in the Chansons de Geste, the old Celtic romances, and, of course, the huge epics106 of India. In Homer “the skill of the poet makes things impossible convincing,” Aristotle says; and it is a critical error to insist on taking Homer absolutely and always au pied de la lettre. He seems, undeniably, to have large body-covering shields present to his mind as in common use.
Small shields of the Greek historic period are “unknown to Homer,” Mr. Leaf says, “with a very few curious exceptions,” 123 detected by Reichel in Book X. 15 124, where Diomede’s men sleep with their heads resting on their shields, whereas a big-bellied Mycenaean shield rises, he says, too high for a pillow. But some Mycenzean shields were perfectly107 flat; while, again, nothing could be more comfortable, as a head-rest, than the hollow between the upper and lower bulges108 of the Mycenzean huge shield. The Zulu wooden head-rest is of the same character. Thus this passage in Book X. does not prove that small circular shields were known to Homer, nor does X. 5 13. 526–530, an obscure text in which it is uncertain whether Diomede and Odysseus ride or drive the horses of Rhesus. They could ride, as every one must see, even though equipped with great body-covering shields. True, the shielded hero could neither put his shield at his back nor in front of him when he rode; but he could hang it sidewise, when it would cover his left side, as in the early Middle Ages (1060–1160 A.D.).
The taking of the shield from a man’s shoulders (XI. 374) does not prove the shield to be small; the shield hung by the belt (telamon) from the shoulder. 125
So far we have the results that Homer seems most familiar with vast body-covering shields; that such shields were suspended by a baldric, not worn on the left arm; that they were made of layers of hide, plated with bronze, and that such a shield as Aias wore must have been tall, doubtless oblong, “like a tower,” possibly it was semi-cylindrical. Whether the epithets denoting roundness refer to circular shields or to the double targe, g-shaped, of Mycenaean times is uncertain.
We thus come to a puzzle of unusual magnitude. If Homer does not know small circular shields, but refers always to huge shields, whereas, from the eighth century B.C. onwards, such shields were not in use (disregarding Tyrtaeus, and the vase of Aristonothos on which they appear conspicuously109, and the Dodwell pyxis), where are we? Either we have a harmonious110 picture of war from a very ancient date of large shields, or late poets did not introduce the light round buckler of their own period. Meanwhile they are accused of introducing the bronze corslets and other defensive armour of their own period. Defensive armour was unknown, we are told, in the Mycenaean prime, which, if true, does not affect the question. Homer did not live in or describe the Mycenaean prime, with its stone arrow-tips. Why did the late poets act so inconsistently? Why were they ignorant of small circular shields, which they saw every day? Or why, if they knew them, did they not introduce them in the poems, which, we are told, they were filling with non-Mycenaean greaves and corslets?
This is one of the dilemmas111 which constantly arise to confront the advocates of the theory that the Iliad is a patchwork112 of many generations. “Late” poets, if really late, certainly in every-day life knew small parrying bucklers worn on the left arm, and huge body-covering shields perhaps they rarely saw in use. They also knew, and the original poet, we are told, did not know bronze corslets and greaves. The theory of critics is that late poets introduced the bronze corslets and greaves with which they were familiar into the poems, but scrupulously113 abstained114 from alluding115 to the equally familiar small shields. Why are they so recklessly anachronistic116 and “up-to-date” with the corslets and greaves, and so staunchly but inconsistently conservative about keeping the huge shields?
Mr. Leaf explains thus: “The groundwork of the Epos is Mycenaean, in the arrangement of the house, in the prevalence of copper” (as compared with iron), “and, as Reichel has shown, in armour. Yet in many points the poems are certainly later than the prime, at least, of the Mycenaean age”— which we are the last to deny. “Is it that the poets are deliberately118 trying to present the conditions of an age anterior119 to their own? or are they depicting120 the circumstances by which they are surrounded — circumstances which slowly change during the period of the development of the Epos? Cauer decides for the latter alternative, the only one which is really conceivable 126 in an age whose views are in many ways so na?ve as the poems themselves prove them to have been.” 127
Here we entirely side with Mr. Leaf. No poet, no painter, no sculptor121, in a na?f, uncritical age, ever represents in art anything but what he sees daily in costume, customs, weapons, armour, and ways of life. Mr. Leaf, however, on the other hand, occasionally chides122 pieces of deliberate archaeological pedantry123 in the poets, in spite of his opinion that they are always “depicting the circumstances by which they are surrounded.” But as huge man-covering shields are not among the circumstances by which the supposed late poets were surrounded, why do they depict them? Here Mr. Leaf corrects himself, and his argument departs from the statement that only one theory is “conceivable,” namely, that the poets depict their own surroundings, and we are introduced to a new proposition. “Or rather we must recognise everywhere a compromise between two opposing principles: the singer, on the one hand, has to be conservatively tenacious124 of the old material which serves as the substance of his song; on the other hand, he has to be vivid and actual in the contributions which he himself makes to the common stock.” 128
The conduct of such singers is so weirdly125 inconsistent as not to be easily credible. But probably they went further, for “it is possible that the allusions126” to the corslet “may have been introduced in the course of successive modernisation such as the oldest parts of the Iliad seem in many cases to have passed through. But, in fact, Iliad, XI. 234 is the only mention of a corslet in any of the oldest strata127, so far as we can distinguish them, and here Reichel translates thorex ‘shield.’” 129 Mr. Leaf’s statement we understand to mean that, when the singer or reciter was delivering an ancient lay he did not introduce any of the military gear — light round bucklers, greaves, and corslets — with which his audience were familiar. But when the singer delivers a new lay, which he himself has added to “the kernel,” then he is “vivid and actual,” and speaks of greaves and corslets, though he still cleaves128 in his new lay to the obsolete chariot, the enormous shield, and, in an age of iron, to weapons of bronze. He is a sadly inconsistent new poet!
Meanwhile, sixteen allusions to the corslet “can be cut out,” as probably “some or all these are additions to the text made at a time when it seemed absurd to think of a man in full armour without a corslet.” 130 Thus the reciters, after all, did not spare “the old material” in the matter of corslets. The late singers have thus been “conservatively tenacious” in clinging to chariots, weapons of bronze, and obsolete enormous shields, while they have also been “vivid and actual” and “up to date” in the way of introducing everywhere bronze corslets, greaves, and other armour unknown, by the theory, in “the old material which is the substance of their song.” By the way, they have not even spared the shield of the old material, for it was of leather or wood (we have no trace of metal plating on the old Mycenaean shields), and the singer, while retaining the size of it, has added a plating of bronze, which we have every reason to suppose that Mycenaean shields of the prime did not present to the stone-headed arrow.
This theory of singers, who are at once “conservatively tenacious” of the old and impudently129 radical130 in pushing in the new, appears to us to be logically untenable. We have, in Chapter I, observed the same inconsistency in Helbig, and shall have occasion to remark again on its presence in the work of that great archaeologist. The inconsistency is inseparable from theories of expansion through several centuries. “Many a method,” says Mr. Leaf, “has been proposed which, up to a certain point, seemed irresistible131, but there has always been a residuum which returned to plague the inventor.” 131 This is very true, and our explanation is that no method which starts from the hypothesis that the poems are the product of several centuries will work. The “residuum” is the element which cannot be fitted into any such hypothesis. But try the hypothesis that the poems are the product of a single age, and all is harmonious. There is no baffling “residuum.” The poet describes the details of a definite age, not that of the Mycenaean bloom, not that of 900–600 A.D.
We cannot, then, suppose that many generations of irresponsible reciters at fairs and public festivals conservatively adhered to the huge size of the shield, while altering its material; and also that the same men, for the sake of being “actual” and up to date, dragged bronze corslets and greaves not only into new lays, but into passages of lays by old poets who had never heard of such things. Consequently, the poetic132 descriptions of arms and armour must be explained on some other theory. If the poet, again, as others suppose — Mr. Ridgeway for one — knew such bronze-covered circular shields as are common in central and western Europe of the Bronze Age, why did he sometimes represent them as extending from neck to ankles, whereas the known bronze circular shields are not of more than 2 feet 2 inches to 2 feet 6 inches in diameter? 132 Such a shield, without the wood or leather, weighed 5 lbs. 2 ozs., 133 and a strong man might walk or run under it. Homer’s shields would be twice as heavy, at least, though, even then, not too heavy for a Hector, or an Aias, or Achilles. I do not see that the round bronze shields of Limerick, Yetholm, Beith, Lincolnshire, and Tarquinii, cited by Mr. Ridgeway, answer to Homer’s descriptions of huge shields. They are too small. But it is perfectly possible, or rather highly probable, that in the poet’s day shields of various sizes and patterns coexisted.
Archaeology133 of the Shields
Turning to archaeological evidence, we find no remains134 in the graves of the Mycenaean prime of the bronze which covered the ox-hides of Homeric shields, though we do find gold ornaments135 supposed to have been attached to shields. There is no evidence that the Mycenaean shield was plated with bronze. But if we judge from their shape, as represented in works of Mycenaean art, some of the Mycenaean shields were not of wood, but of hide. In works of art, such as engraved rings and a bronze dagger (Fig. 2) with pictures inlaid in other metals, the shield, covering the whole body, is of the form of a bellying sail, or a huge umbrella “up,” and pinched at both sides near the centre: or is like a door, or a section of a cylinder; only one sort of shield resembles a big-bellied figure of 8. Ivory models of shields indicate the same figure. 134 A gold necklet found at Enkomi, in Cyprus, consists of a line of models of this Mycenaean shield. 135
Fig. 2. Dagger with Lion-Hunters
There also exists a set of small Mycenaean relics called Palladia, found at Mycenae, Spata and in the earliest strata of the Acropolis at Athens. They resemble “two circles joined together so as to intersect one another slightly,” or “a long oval pinched in at the middle.” They vary in size from six inches to half an inch, and are of ivory, glazed136 ware89, or glass. Several such shields are engraved on Mycenaean gems137; one, in gold, is attached to a silver vase. The ornamentation shown on them occurs, too, on Mycenaean shields in works of art; in short, these little objects are representations in miniature of the big double-bellied Mycenaean shield. Mr. Ernest Gardner concludes that these objects are the “schematised” reductions of an armed human figure, only the shield which covered the whole body is left. They are talismans138 symbolising an armed divinity, Pallas or another. A Dipylon vase (Fig. 3) shows a man with a shield, possibly evolved out of this kind, much scooped139 out at the waist, and reaching from neck to knees. The shield covers his side, not his back or front. 136
One may guess that the original pinch at the waist of the Mycenaean shield was evolved later into the two deep scoops140 to enable the warrior to use his arms more freely, while the shield, hanging from his neck by a belt, covered the front of his body. Fig. 4 shows shields of 1060–1160 A.D. equally designed to cover body and legs. Men wore shields, if we believe the artists of Mycenae, when lion-hunting, a sport in which speed of foot is desirable; so they cannot have been very weighty. The shield then was hung over one side, and running was not so very difficult as if it hung over back or front (cf. Fig. 5). The shields sometimes reach only from the shoulders to the calf141 of the leg. 137 The wearer of the largest kind could only be got at by a sword-stab over the rim into the throat 138 (Fig. 5). Some shields of this shape were quite small, if an engraved rock-crystal is evidence; here the shield is not half so high as an adjacent goat, but it may be a mere decoration to fill the field of the gem117. 139
Fig. 5. Rings: Swords and Shields
Other shields, covering the body from neck to feet, were sections of cylinders142; several of these are represented on engraved Mycenaean ring stones or on the gold; the wearer was protected in front and flank 140 (Fig. 5).
In a “maze of buildings” outside the precincts of the graves of Mycenae, Dr. Schliemann found fragments of vases much less ancient than the contents of the sepulchres. There was a large amphora, the “Warrior Vase” (Fig. 6). The men wear apparently143 a close-fitting coat of mail over a chiton, which reaches with its fringes half down the thigh103. The shield is circular, with a half-moon cut out at the bottom. The art is infantile. Other warriors carry long oval shields reaching, at least, from neck to shin. 141 They wear round leather caps, their enemies have helmets. On a Mycenaean painted stele144, apparently of the same relatively145 late period, the costume is similar, and the shield — oval — reaches from neck to knee. 142 The Homeric shields do not answer to the smaller of these late and ugly representations, while, in their bronze plating, Homeric shields seem to differ from the leather shields of the Mycenaean prime.
Finally, at Enkomi, near Salamis, in Cyprus, an ivory carving146 (in the British Museum) shows a fighting man whose perfectly circular shield reaches from neck to knee; this is one of several figures in which Mr. Arthur Evans finds “a most valuable illustration of the typical Homeric armour.” 143 The shield, however, is not so huge as those of Aias, Hector, and Periphetes.
I can only conclude that Homer describes intermediate types of shield, as large as the Mycenaean but plated with bronze, for a reason to be given later. This kind of shield, the kind known to Homer, was not the invention of late poets living in an age of circular bucklers, worn on the left arm, and these supposed late poets never introduce into the epics such bucklers.
What manner of military needs prompted the invention of the great Mycenaean shields which, by Homer’s time, were differentiated147 by the addition of metal plating?
Fig. 6. Fragments of Warrior Vase
The process of evolution of the huge Mycenaean shields, and of the Homeric shields covering the body from chin to ankles, can easily be traced. The nature of the attack expected may be inferred from the nature of the defence employed. Body-covering shields were, obviously, at first, defences against showers of arrows tipped with stone. “In the earlier Mycenaean times the arrow-head of obsidian148 alone appears,” as in Mycenaean Grave IV. In the upper strata of Mycenae and in the later tombs the arrow-head is usually of bronze. 144 No man going into battle naked, without body armour, like the Mycenaeans (if they had none), could protect himself with a small shield, or even with a round buckler of twenty-six inches in diameter, against the rain of shafts149. In a fight, on the other hand, where man singled out man, and spears were the missiles, and when the warriors had body armour, or even when they had not, a small shield sufficed; as we see among the spear-throwing Zulus and the spear-throwing aborigines of Australia (unacquainted with bows and arrows), who mainly use shields scarcely broader than a bat. On the other hand, the archers of the Algonquins in their wars with the Iroquois, about 1610, used clubs and tomahawks but no spears, no missiles but arrows, and their leather shield was precisely150 the [Greek: amphibrotae aspis] of Homer, “covering the whole of a man.” It is curious to see, in contemporary drawings (1620), Mycenaean shields on Red Indian shoulders!
In Champlain’s sketches151 of fights between French and Algonquins against Iroquois (1610–1620), we see the Algonquins outside the Iroquois stockade152, which is defended by archers, sheltering under huge shields shaped like the Mycenaean “tower” shield, though less cylindrical; in fact, more like the shield of the fallen hunter depicted on the dagger of Mycenae. These Algonquin shields partially153 cover the sides as well as the front of the warrior, who stoops behind them, resting the lower rim of the shield on the ground. The shields are oblong and rounded at the top, much like that of Achilles 145 in Mr. Leaf’s restoration? The sides curve inward. Another shield, oval in shape and flat, appears to have been suspended from the neck, and covers an Iroquois brave from chin to feet. The Red Indian shields, like those of Mycenae, were made of leather; usually of buffalo154 hide, 146 good against stone-tipped arrows. The braves are naked, like the unshielded archers on the Mycenaean silver vase fragment representing a siege (Fig. 7). The description of the Algonquin shields by Champlain, when compared with his drawings, suggests that we cannot always take artistic155 representations as exact. In his designs only a few Algonquins and one Iroquois carry the huge shields; the unshielded men are stark156 naked, as on the Mycenaean silver vase. But in his text Champlain says that the Iroquois, like the Algonquins, “carried arrow-proof shields” and “a sort of armour woven of cotton thread”— Homer’s [Greek: linothoraex] (Iliad, II. 259, 850). These facts appear in only one of Champlain’s drawings 147 (Fig. 8).
These Iroquois and Algonquin shields are the armour of men exposed, not to spears, but to a hail of flint-tipped arrows. As spears came in for missiles in Greek warfare157, arrows did not wholly go out, but the noble warriors preferred spear and sword. 148 Mr. Ridgeway erroneously says that “no Achaean warrior employs the bow for war.” 149 Teucer, frequently, and Meriones use the bow; like Pandarus and Paris, on the Trojan side, they resort to bow or spear, as occasion serves. Odysseus, in Iliad, Book X., is armed with the bow and arrows of Meriones when acting158 as a spy; in the Odyssey his skill as an archer84 is notorious, but he would not pretend to equal famous bowmen of an older generation, such as Heracles and Eurytus of OEchalia, whose bow he possessed159 but did not take to Troy. Philoctetes is his master in archery. 150
Fig. 7. Fragment of Siege Vase
The bow, however, was little esteemed160 by Greek warriors who desired to come to handstrokes, just as it was despised, to their frequent ruin, by the Scots in the old wars with England. Dupplin, Falkirk, Halidon Hill and many another field proved the error.
There was much need in Homeric warfare for protection against heavy showers of arrows. Mr. Monro is hardly correct when he says that, in Homer, “we do not hear of bodies of archers, of arrows darkening the air, as in descriptions of oriental warfare.” 151 These precise phrases are not used by Homer; but, nevertheless, arrows are flying thick in his battle pieces. The effects are not often noticed, because, in Homer, helmet, shield, corslet, zoster, and greaves, as a rule prevent the shafts from harming the well-born, well-armed chiefs; the nameless host, however, fall frequently. When Hector came forward for a parley161 (Iliad, III. 79), the Achaens “kept shooting at him with arrows,” which he took unconcernedly. Teucer shoots nine men in Iliad, VIII. 297–304. In XI. 85 the shafts ([Greek: belea]) showered and the common soldiers fell —[Greek: belea] being arrows as well as thrown spears. 152 Agamemnon and Achilles are as likely, they say, to be hit by arrow as by spear (XI. 191; XXI. 13). Machaon is wounded by an arrow. Patroclus meets Eurypylus limping, with an arrow in his thigh — archer unknown. 153 Meriones, though an Achaean paladin, sends a bronze-headed arrow through the body of Harpalion (XIII. 650). The light-armed Locrians are all bowmen and slingers (XIII. 716). Acamas taunts162 the Argives as “bowmen” (XIV. 479). “The war-cry rose on both sides, and the arrows leaped from the bowstrings” (XV. 313). Manifestly the arrows are always on the wing, hence the need for the huge Homeric and Mycenaean shields. Therefore, as the Achaeans in Homer wore but flimsy corslets (this we are going to prove), the great body-covering shield of the Mycenaean prime did not go out of vogue163 in Homer’s time, when bronze had superseded stone arrow-heads, but was strengthened by bronze plating over the leather. In a later age the bow was more and more neglected in Greek warfare, and consequently large shields went out, after the close of the Mycenaean age, and round parrying bucklers came into use.
The Greeks appear never to have been great archers, for some vases show even the old heroes employing the “primary release,” the arrow nock is held between the thumb and forefinger164 — an ineffectual release. 154 The archers in early Greek art often stoop or kneel, unlike the erect165 archers of old England; the bow is usually small — a child’s weapon; the string is often drawn only to the breast, as by Pandarus in the Iliad (IV. i 23). By 730 B.C. the release with three fingers, our western release, had become known. 155
Fig. 8. Algonquin Corslet.
From Laverdiere, Oeuvres de Champlain, vol. iv. fol. 4. Quebec, 1870.
The course of evolution seems to be: (1) the Mycenaean prime of much archery, no body armour (?); huge leather “man-covering” shields are used, like those of the Algonquins; (2) the same shields strengthened with metal, light body armour-thin corslets — and archery is frequent, but somewhat despised (the Homeric age); (3) the parrying shield of the latest Mycenaean age (infantry with body armour); (4) the Ionian hoplites, with body armour and small circular bucklers.
It appears, then, that the monstrous Mycenaean shield is a survival of an age when bows and arrows played the same great part as they did in the wars of the Algonquins and Iroquois. The celebrated166 picture of a siege on a silver vase, of which fragments were found in Grave IV., shows archers skirmishing; there is an archer in the lion hunt on the dagger blade; thirty-five obsidian arrow-heads were discovered in Grave IV., while “in the upper strata of Mycenae and in the later tombs the arrow-head is usually of bronze, though instances of obsidian still occur.” In 1895 Dr. Tsountas found twenty arrow-heads of bronze, ten in each bundle, in a Mycenaean chamber167 tomb. Messrs. Tsountas and Manatt say, “In the Acropolis graves at Mycenae . . . the spear-heads were but few . . . arrow-heads, on the contrary, are comparatively abundant.” They infer that “picked men used shield and spear; the rank and file doubtless fought simply with bow and sling87.” 156. The great Mycenaean shield was obviously evolved as a defence against arrows and sling-stones flying too freely to be parried with a small buckler. What other purpose could it have served? But other defensive armour was needed, and was evolved, by Homer’s men, as also, we shall see, by the Algonquins and Iroquois. The Algonquins and Iroquois thus prove that men who thought their huge shields very efficient, yet felt the desirableness of the protection afforded by corslets, for they wore, in addition to their shields, such corslets as they were able to manufacture, made of cotton, and corresponding to the Homeric [Greek: linothoraex]. 157
Mr. Leaf, indeed, when reviewing Reichel, says that “the use of the Mycenaean shield is inconsistent with that of the metal breastplate; “the shield” covers the wearer in a way which makes a breastplate an useless encumbrance168; or rather, it is ignorance of the breastplate which alone can explain the use of such frightfully cumbrous gear as the huge shield.” 158
But the Algonquins and Iroquois wore such breastplates as they could manufacture, though they also used shields of great size, suspended, in Mycenaean fashion, from the neck and shoulder by a telamon or belt. The knights of the eleventh century A.D., in addition to very large shields, wore ponderous hauberks or byrnies, as we shall prove presently. As this combination of great shield with corslet was common and natural, we cannot agree with Mr. Leaf when he says, “it follows that the Homeric warriors wore no metal breastplate, and that all the passages where the [Greek: thoraes] is mentioned are either later interpolations or refer to some other sort of armour,” which, ex hypothesi, would itself be superfluous34, given the body-covering shield.
Shields never make corslets superfluous when men can manufacture corslets.
The facts speak for themselves: the largest shields are not exclusive, so to speak, of corslets; the Homeric warriors used both, just as did Red Indians and the mediaeval chivalry169 of Europe. The use of the aspis in Homer, therefore, throws no suspicion on the concomitant use of the corslet. The really surprising fact would be if late poets, who knew only small round bucklers, never introduced them into the poems, but always spoke of enormous shields, while they at the same time did introduce corslets, unknown to the early poems which they continued. Clearly Reichel’s theory is ill inspired and inconsistent. This becomes plain as soon as we trace the evolution of shields and corslets in ages when the bow played a great part in war. The Homeric bronze-plated shield and bronze corslet are defences of a given moment in military evolution; they are improvements on the large leather shield of Mycenaean art, but, as the arrows still fly in clouds, the time for the small parrying buckler has not yet come.
By the age of the Dipylon vases with human figures, the shield had been developed into forms unknown to Homer. In Fig. 3 (p. 131) we see one warrior with a fantastic shield, slim at the waist, with horns, as it were, above and below; the greater part of the shield is expended170 uselessly, covering nothing in particular. In form this targe seems to be a burlesque171 parody172 of the figure of a Mycenaean shield. The next man has a short oblong shield, rather broad for its length — perhaps a reduction of the Mycenaean door-shaped shield. The third warrior has a round buckler. All these shields are manifestly post-Homeric; the first type is the most common in the Dipylon art; the third survived in the eighth-century buckler.
收听单词发音 |
1
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
armour
|
|
| （=armor）n.盔甲；装甲部队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
stereotyped
|
|
| adj.(指形象、思想、人物等)模式化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
epic
|
|
| n.史诗，叙事诗；adj.史诗般的，壮丽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
intentionally
|
|
| ad.故意地，有意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
blur
|
|
| n.模糊不清的事物；vt.使模糊，使看不清楚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
followers
|
|
| 追随者( follower的名词复数 )； 用户； 契据的附面； 从动件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
ponderous
|
|
| adj.沉重的，笨重的，(文章)冗长的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
imperatively
|
|
| adv.命令式地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
superseded
|
|
| [医]被代替的，废弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
warriors
|
|
| 武士，勇士，战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
excavations
|
|
| n.挖掘( excavation的名词复数 )；开凿；开凿的洞穴（或山路等）；（发掘出来的）古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
tally
|
|
| n.计数器，记分，一致，测量；vt.计算，记录，使一致；vi.计算，记分，一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
attic
|
|
| n.顶楼，屋顶室 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
relics
|
|
| [pl.］n.遗物，遗迹，遗产；遗体，尸骸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
obsolete
|
|
| adj.已废弃的，过时的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
rim
|
|
| n.(圆物的)边，轮缘；边界 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
fig
|
|
| n.无花果(树) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
knights
|
|
| 骑士； （中古时代的）武士( knight的名词复数 )； 骑士； 爵士； （国际象棋中）马 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
tapestry
|
|
| n.挂毯，丰富多采的画面 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
rends
|
|
| v.撕碎( rend的第三人称单数 )；分裂；（因愤怒、痛苦等而）揪扯（衣服或头发等）；（声音等）刺破 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
epithet
|
|
| n.（用于褒贬人物等的）表述形容词，修饰语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
annotating
|
|
| v.注解，注释( annotate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
epithets
|
|
| n.（表示性质、特征等的）词语( epithet的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
rendering
|
|
| n.表现，描写 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
superfluously
|
|
| 过分地； 过剩地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
superfluous
|
|
| adj.过多的，过剩的，多余的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
cylinder
|
|
| n.圆筒，柱(面)，汽缸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
ascertained
|
|
| v.弄清，确定，查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
previously
|
|
| adv.以前，先前（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
habitually
|
|
| ad.习惯地，通常地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
cylindrical
|
|
| adj.圆筒形的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
explicitly
|
|
| ad.明确地，显然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
feigned
|
|
| a.假装的，不真诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
odyssey
|
|
| n.长途冒险旅行；一连串的冒险 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
ambush
|
|
| n.埋伏(地点)；伏兵；v.埋伏；伏击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
crouched
|
|
| v.屈膝，蹲伏( crouch的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
highland
|
|
| n.(pl.)高地，山地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
crouching
|
|
| v.屈膝，蹲伏( crouch的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
crouches
|
|
| n.蹲着的姿势( crouch的名词复数 )v.屈膝，蹲伏( crouch的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
dodge
|
|
| v.闪开，躲开，避开；n.妙计，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
posture
|
|
| n.姿势，姿态，心态，态度；v.作出某种姿势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
squires
|
|
| n.地主，乡绅( squire的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
disarm
|
|
| v.解除武装，回复平常的编制，缓和 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
treacherous
|
|
| adj.不可靠的，有暗藏的危险的；adj.背叛的，背信弃义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
conspicuous
|
|
| adj.明眼的，惹人注目的；炫耀的，摆阔气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
depicted
|
|
| 描绘，描画( depict的过去式和过去分词 )； 描述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
depict
|
|
| vt.描画，描绘；描写，描述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
mobility
|
|
| n.可动性，变动性，情感不定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
trudge
|
|
| v.步履艰难地走；n.跋涉，费力艰难的步行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
sprints
|
|
| n.短距离的全速奔跑( sprint的名词复数 )v.短距离疾跑( sprint的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
circumference
|
|
| n.圆周，周长，圆周线 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
dagger
|
|
| n.匕首，短剑，剑号 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
rugged
|
|
| adj.高低不平的，粗糙的，粗壮的，强健的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
belly
|
|
| n.肚子，腹部；(像肚子一样)鼓起的部分，膛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
bellying
|
|
| 鼓出部；鼓鼓囊囊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
71
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
semblance
|
|
| n.外貌，外表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
bellies
|
|
| n.肚子( belly的名词复数 )；腹部；（物体的）圆形或凸起部份；腹部…形的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
bellied
|
|
| adj.有腹的，大肚子的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
duel
|
|
| n./v.决斗；(双方的)斗争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
laterally
|
|
| ad.横向地；侧面地；旁边地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
boulder
|
|
| n.巨砾；卵石，圆石 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
ornament
|
|
| v.装饰，美化；n.装饰，装饰物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
joyous
|
|
| adj.充满快乐的；令人高兴的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
ornamental
|
|
| adj.装饰的；作装饰用的；n.装饰品；观赏植物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
gorgon
|
|
| n.丑陋女人，蛇发女怪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
garrisoned
|
|
| 卫戍部队守备( garrison的过去式和过去分词 )； 派部队驻防 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
archer
|
|
| n.射手，弓箭手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
archers
|
|
| n.弓箭手，射箭运动员( archer的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
infantry
|
|
| n.[总称]步兵(部队) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
sling
|
|
| vt.扔；悬挂；n.挂带；吊索，吊兜；弹弓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
slings
|
|
| 抛( sling的第三人称单数 )； 吊挂； 遣送； 押往 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
ware
|
|
| n.(常用复数)商品，货物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
corroborates
|
|
| v.证实，支持（某种说法、信仰、理论等）( corroborate的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
galley
|
|
| n.（飞机或船上的）厨房单层甲板大帆船；军舰舰长用的大划艇； | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
blazon
|
|
| n.纹章，装饰；精确描绘；v.广布；宣布 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
blazons
|
|
| v.广布( blazon的第三人称单数 )；宣布；夸示；装饰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
94
crab
|
|
| n.螃蟹，偏航，脾气乖戾的人，酸苹果；vi.捕蟹，偏航，发牢骚；vt.使偏航，发脾气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
credible
|
|
| adj.可信任的，可靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
engraved
|
|
| v.在（硬物）上雕刻（字，画等）( engrave的过去式和过去分词 )；将某事物深深印在（记忆或头脑中） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
tragic
|
|
| adj.悲剧的，悲剧性的，悲惨的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
vessel
|
|
| n.船舶；容器，器皿；管，导管，血管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
adverse
|
|
| adj.不利的；有害的；敌对的，不友好的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
aesthetic
|
|
| adj.美学的，审美的，有美感 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
thigh
|
|
| n.大腿；股骨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
thighs
|
|
| n.股，大腿( thigh的名词复数 )；食用的鸡（等的）腿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
exertions
|
|
| n.努力( exertion的名词复数 )；费力；（能力、权力等的）运用；行使 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
epics
|
|
| n.叙事诗( epic的名词复数 )；壮举；惊人之举；史诗般的电影（或书籍） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
bulges
|
|
| 膨胀( bulge的名词复数 )； 鼓起； （身体的）肥胖部位； 暂时的激增 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
conspicuously
|
|
| ad.明显地，惹人注目地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
harmonious
|
|
| adj.和睦的，调和的，和谐的，协调的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
dilemmas
|
|
| n.左右为难( dilemma的名词复数 )；窘境，困境 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
patchwork
|
|
| n.混杂物；拼缝物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
scrupulously
|
|
| adv.一丝不苟地；小心翼翼地，多顾虑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
abstained
|
|
| v.戒（尤指酒），戒除( abstain的过去式和过去分词 )；弃权（不投票） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
alluding
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
anachronistic
|
|
| adj.时代错误的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
gem
|
|
| n.宝石，珠宝；受爱戴的人 [同]jewel | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
anterior
|
|
| adj.较早的；在前的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
depicting
|
|
| 描绘，描画( depict的现在分词 )； 描述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
sculptor
|
|
| n.雕刻家，雕刻家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
chides
|
|
| v.责骂，责备( chide的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
pedantry
|
|
| n.迂腐，卖弄学问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
tenacious
|
|
| adj.顽强的，固执的，记忆力强的，粘的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
weirdly
|
|
| 古怪地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
allusions
|
|
| 暗指，间接提到( allusion的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
cleaves
|
|
| v.劈开，剁开，割开( cleave的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
impudently
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
irresistible
|
|
| adj.非常诱人的，无法拒绝的，无法抗拒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
poetic
|
|
| adj.富有诗意的，有诗人气质的，善于抒情的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
archaeology
|
|
| n.考古学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
ornaments
|
|
| n.装饰( ornament的名词复数 )；点缀；装饰品；首饰v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
glazed
|
|
| adj.光滑的，像玻璃的；上过釉的；呆滞无神的v.装玻璃( glaze的过去式)；上釉于，上光；（目光）变得呆滞无神 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
gems
|
|
| growth； economy； management； and customer satisfaction 增长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
talismans
|
|
| n.护身符( talisman的名词复数 )；驱邪物；有不可思议的力量之物；法宝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
scooped
|
|
| v.抢先报道( scoop的过去式和过去分词 )；（敏捷地）抱起；抢先获得；用铲[勺]等挖（洞等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
scoops
|
|
| n.小铲( scoop的名词复数 )；小勺；一勺[铲]之量；（抢先刊载、播出的）独家新闻v.抢先报道( scoop的第三人称单数 )；（敏捷地）抱起；抢先获得；用铲[勺]等挖（洞等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
calf
|
|
| n.小牛，犊，幼仔，小牛皮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
cylinders
|
|
| n.圆筒( cylinder的名词复数 )；圆柱；汽缸；（尤指用作容器的）圆筒状物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
stele
|
|
| n.石碑，石柱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
relatively
|
|
| adv.比较...地，相对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
carving
|
|
| n.雕刻品，雕花 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
differentiated
|
|
| 区分，区别，辨别( differentiate的过去式和过去分词 )； 区别对待； 表明…间的差别，构成…间差别的特征 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
obsidian
|
|
| n.黑曜石 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
shafts
|
|
| n.轴( shaft的名词复数 )；（箭、高尔夫球棒等的）杆；通风井；一阵（疼痛、害怕等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
sketches
|
|
| n.草图( sketch的名词复数 )；素描；速写；梗概 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
stockade
|
|
| n.栅栏，围栏；v.用栅栏防护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
partially
|
|
| adv.部分地，从某些方面讲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
buffalo
|
|
| n.(北美)野牛；(亚洲)水牛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
artistic
|
|
| adj.艺术(家)的，美术(家)的；善于艺术创作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
stark
|
|
| adj.荒凉的；严酷的；完全的；adv.完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
warfare
|
|
| n.战争(状态)；斗争；冲突 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
esteemed
|
|
| adj.受人尊敬的v.尊敬( esteem的过去式和过去分词 )；敬重；认为；以为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
parley
|
|
| n.谈判 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
taunts
|
|
| 嘲弄的言语，嘲笑，奚落( taunt的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
forefinger
|
|
| n.食指 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
erect
|
|
| n./v.树立，建立，使竖立；adj.直立的，垂直的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
chamber
|
|
| n.房间，寝室；会议厅；议院；会所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
encumbrance
|
|
| n.妨碍物，累赘 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
chivalry
|
|
| n.骑士气概，侠义；（男人）对女人彬彬有礼，献殷勤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
expended
|
|
| v.花费( expend的过去式和过去分词 )；使用（钱等）做某事；用光；耗尽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
burlesque
|
|
| v.嘲弄，戏仿；n.嘲弄，取笑，滑稽模仿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
parody
|
|
| n.打油诗文，诙谐的改编诗文，拙劣的模仿；v.拙劣模仿，作模仿诗文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |