While dramatic, swinging a weapon is only a small part of warfare. Destroying an enemies food/water source/shelter/family is probably more effective that trying to take on them on mano a mano. A small guy can burn a barn in November as well as a big guy.
With respect to David v. Goliath, Malcolm Gladwell had a great TedTalk on this:
http://www.npr.org/2013/11/15/243294593/what-s-the-real-lesson-of-david-and-goliath
Sam1911 - Yup, Gladwell is the author of the book I mentioned. Nom probably should have helped him get the technical points right.
Nom de Forum - Like another very intelligent and educated man, Issac Newton, Malcolm Gladwell is not immune to enormous self-deception. For Newton it was Alchemy, for Gladwell it is obviously David versus Goliath. There are so many assumptions and historical misinterpretations in Malcolms analysis and conclusion it qualifies as a classic case of a man seeing hoof prints, assuming zebras must have passed by, constructing elaborate apparently rational explanations how zebras could have made the hoof prints, but never having any experience with zebras, and living where horses are plentiful and zebras very rare.
Please correct me if I am wrong but a reasonably accurate summary of what Malcolm Gladwell says in his video is as follows:
The Philistines challenged the Hebrews with a 6’9” tall man named Goliath that for 40 days they kept the Hebrews from discovering was nearly blind and a weakling. Then on the 40th day, just like the previous 39 days, Goliath has to be led to the battlefield by an attendant because he is a nearly blind weakling, physical characteristics that the Hebrews still have not discovered over the previous 40 days, and a Hebrew boy slings a very dense stone, at the speed a junior high school pitcher throws baseball, that Goliath cannot move his forehead 6” out of the way to dodge or deflect with his shield.
Please consider the following:
The Philistines and Hebrews had a long history of cultural contact before Goliath and David battled. Both sides would be very knowledgeable about each other.
These people were not naive fools. We know from the Bible that the Hebrews long before the time of David were experienced in espionage and unconventional warfare. They would not have been kept from knowing about Goliath’s abilities and disabilities. There is also no reason to believe a culture as sophisticated as the Philistines would not know this about their enemy.
There is no way the Philistines would attempt to deceive the Hebrews with the nearly blind weakling giant Gladwell describes Goliath as being. It would be impossible to keep secret. Someone so unusual in appearance as Goliath would have been well known by the Hebrews long before 40 days of Goliath issuing challenges occurred.
Gladwell considers the quality of the stones David used as projectiles being very significant. He claims they were made of very dense Barium Sulfate and when launched by David’s sling at 35 meters per second = 78 miles per hour = 115 feet per second they had the stopping power of a 45mm (sic) hand gun. When you stop laughing about the “45 mm handgun” comment google barium sulfate for another good laugh. Here’s the thing, at 115 feet per second you don’t need anything but a common river rock to have a deadly projectile. In my previous post I mentioned that 90 mile per hour = 132 feet per second fastballs are routinely dodged. Also routinely dodged are 205 mile per hour = 300 feet per second tennis ball serves.
Gladwell mentions that slingers were time and time again the decisive factor in battles. For decades I have been reading about many of the most famous and decisive ancient battles and slingers are not mention as being the decisive factor on the battlefield. If I recall correctly Xenophon mentions in the Anabasis that slingers were useful during the retreat to the sea to reply to attack from harassing enemy slingers and archers.
Gladwell supports his argument that Goliath was nearly blind and a weakling because he was led to the battlefield by someone. There is nothing unusual about Goliath, an elite heavy infantryman being accompanied by a shield bearer. It is the equivalent of a knight 2000 years later being accompanied by a squire. Gladwell’s statement about how slow Goliath moved does not mean Goliath was incapable of moving faster. There was no need to move fast on to the field. Saving energy to move fast once combat has begun is important. According to Gladwell, Goliath was supposedly a 6’9’ tall, near blind weakling carrying 100lbs of armor and thus capable of only moving very slowly. How was Goliath even able to carry 100lbs of armor if he was so weak? Knights 2000 years later could run in full plate armor. In the U.S. Army I have seen 5’9” men sprint while carrying 100lbs of gear. Roman heavy infantryman routinely began a running charge from approximately 20 yards and there is no reason to not believe Goliath would not have done the same.
I am not going to comment on Gladwell’s analysis of the language and actions The Bible says Goliath used other than to say he is wrong in his conclusions about “sticks” and Goliath needing to call for David to approach as indicating vision problems.
Much more could be written pointing out how silly Gladwell’s analysis and conclusions are. I have no doubt it was possible, even if improbable for David to defeat Goliath without any of the handicaps Gladwell thinks Goliath had. Gladwell has essentially insulted the intelligence and skill of David, Goliath, the Hebrews, and the Philistines. It is amazing a guy like Gladwell can make money spewing his nonsense about David and Goliath. At the beginning of the video Gladwell says everything he thought he knew about David and Goliath was wrong. That did not change after he made the video.
