29853363 Armies of the Ancient Near East

Armies of the Ancient Near East

3,000 BC to 539 BC

Organisation, tactics, dress and equipment. 210 illustrations and 9 maps.

by Nigel StiUman and Nigel Tallis

Egyptian Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, New Kingdom, S,itc, libyan, Nubian, KU5hiu~. Sumerian, Akkadian, Eblaitc. Amoritc, HammUl1lpic lhhylonian, Old Assyrian, Human, MilaMian, K.ssitc, Middle: Assyrian, Neo Assyrian, Neo Babylonia n, Chaldun, GUlian, Mannatan, Iranian, Cimmerian, Hyluos. Canaanite, Syrian, Ugaritic, Hebrew, Philistine, Midianitc Arab, Cypriot, Phoenician, Hanian. Hillile, Anatolian, Sea Peoples, Neo Hin ile, Aramaun, Phrygian. Lydian.

Uranian, Elamilc, Minoan. Mycenaean, Harappan.

A WARGAMES RESEARCH GROUP PUBLICATION

INTRODUCTION

This book. chronologically the finl in the W.R.G. series, attempts the diflkulltaP: of ducribinglhe military organisation and equipment of the many civilisations ohhe ancienl Near East over a period of 2,500 years. It is du.slening to note tbatthis span oftime is equivalent to half of all recorded history and that a single companion volume, should anyone wish to attempt it, wou.ld have to encompass the period 539 BC to 1922 AD! We hope that our researches will rcOca the: .... St amount of archacologiaJ, pictorial and tarual evidence ..... hich has survived and been rW)vered from this region. It is a matter of some rcp-ct that tbe results of much of the research accumulated in this century has tended to be disperKd among a variety of sometimes obscure publications. Consequently, it is seldom that this mJterial is aplo!ted to its full potcoti.al IS a source for military history.

We have attempted 10 be as comptcbensive IS possible and to make UK of the lcuer known sourcCI and the most recent ruearm. Since, although scveral works have coocen~raled on the military aspectS oflhe: bener·known general 'Biblical' nations in some depth, other nations, such IS MitaMi and Urartu, which probably had a greater impact in terms of military developments, hive remained in comparative obKurity. Previous research has also tended 10

focus on the better documented periods while the later dynutiCi of Egypt and the: Early Dynastic and Akkadian periods in Muopotamia for aample, are often summarily dealt with.

Within tbe usually accepted ceographical limits of the Near East (Anatolia, Syria, Egypt, the Levant, Mesopotamia and Iran) _ have included the Aegean civilisations because their military orpniAlion and equipment ..... ere dosely related to their Ncar Eastern contemporarin and because It times they played a signiflcant pan in the politia of the re,ion.

For the ,eneral reader the nature of the evideo« with which we are dealin, often presents problems of interpretation. Ancient styles of an appear unusual and di$toned to the modem eye, the: anistic principles and aims of ancient anisllare frequently not our own. M regards written evidence, we do not pouess the type of histories and military manuab that researches ofiuer ages can dnw on. Instead, one musl utilise the often equally valuable royal annals, chrooklcs, letters, commemorative stelae and all manner of bureaucratic evidence in order (0 ,lean items or military relevance. That many nations were fully competcot in mJtten of organisation, tletia and drill is clear from the Idministrative and economk tats which were conamed only with day to day reality. Obviously, ..... hat can be Aid concerning the various nations ofthc Near Easl at diffuent periods depends on the nature and amount ofthc IUMv' inC cvidencc. HoftYU, this evidence is subject 10 cmtinual iDCale and rc-inttrpmllion IS arch:teoloPcal in\utiptioD in the repon procrCIKI.

For those readers who wilb to pursue tbe subject fuMer we have included I bibliography Illhe bKlt ofthc booIt.. It. lenph well illustrates the IJlUI of infomtation lvailable. In ,eneral it lists only those works either of most usc during out research or those most nsily available for the ,eocral reader, Ind we ofTet our lpolOCicsto tbose tcholtn who were Dot' included, but whose works provided maoy valUlble inai,htl into this period of military history.

We would like to thank Phil Barlter and Bob O'Brien ofW.R.G. for livin, us the: opponunity to write this boolt, and for Iheir great patiencc during the liter stages of the work.

N. R. Stillman, N. C. T allis October 1984

Note OD Term.laololY

Copyrighl 1984 © N. R. Slillman and N. C. Tallis

Military terminolOl)', in the lanJUagcs of the nations concerned, appctn throughout in ittlic. These (emlS often defy adequate tran.llllon, .Ithough Iheir context in ancientlexu indicates their meanin,. In DUny CIJCS it is from the intensive study of such terms thlt mi litary organisa tions can be reconstructed, it is therefore most relevant to include them_ El}'Ptiao terms have been rendered II Egyptologists would pronounce the c:oruonantal skeleton written in hlc:roc.Iyphic and we have followed the convenlion of rendering the Sumerian in capitals with stpartte syllables. Fonunltciy the ocher lanrua,es can be rendered directly.

PbocOKl and printed in England by Flu:iprinl Ltd., Wonhin" SIWCX

2

CONT ENTS

P.,. INTROD UCTION .....•.•.............•...................... .. ........ • ...... 2

ORGANiSATION ............... . ...... .... . . ............... . ...... .... ........ 5 Egypt .............•. . .••.• . • ..• ••. . . ..• • • . •..•.•••••. • •. . .. •• .... 5 Th~ Libyans ........... . • . . •.• .... • .•....•......•. • .. •. •......•.... 13 Nubia ..................... .......... ...............•... ..... 13 Sum~r and Akkad ................. .... ...............•. • ...... •.. .. 15 Th~ Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Kingdoms .............. . ...... ... 20 Milanni and Mesopotamia .... . .....................•.•..•.•.... •.. .. 23 Assyria ..... . .........................................•...... • .... 26 Babylon ....... ...... ........•. ...•.•....•........•....• . •....•.... 32 Canaan and Syria .....•......•••..•••••.. • •• •..... •• ... •. • • ....••... 32 Th~ H~br~ws . .... .......•...•.•..•.•.............•....•.•.. . .•.... 36 Th~ Philistin~s ......................•.............•......•.... •.... 38 Phoenicia and Cyprus ..............••• •• . ..• •. .•.. •• •.... • •••..•••.. 38 Anatolia and lh~ Hittit~ Empir~ .......•......•......•...... •......... 39 Th~ Sea· Peoples ................... •... ......... .. .•.. .. .. • ....•.... 42 Th~ Neo-Hin iles and Aramaeans ..... .... . .... . ....................... 43 Phrygians and Lydians ..............•• • • •.•• • • • ... .. • . . . ... • • ...•... 46 Uranu ............................. •.•....•............... • ....... 46 Elam ............ . .................•... . ..•...............•.... ... 47 The A~g~an ..........•..... , .......•.• . " .•••. , . . ,' •... ".. . ...... 48 Th~ Indus Va ll~y ... , . .•. , .. .. , • •... , ..•. ,........... . ........ . ..... 53

TACTICAL METHODS ..................... . .......... . . ... .... . .... . ......... 53 Egypt .", ... , ....................... •.. .. • . , ... ..........•.•..... 53 Th~ Libyans and Nubians ................ .. , .. . ... , . . . ........ . ..... 58 Sumerian tactics ..... . ......... , ........ ,., ... ,.... . . .. ...... ... .... 59 The Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Kingdoms. . . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 The Mitannians and Kassites .......... , ... ,............. ............. 60 The Assyrians ...................................•. • • . •.. . ...• . .... 60 The Babylonians ...............••• . .... • •.....••.• . ...•.• . ...•.. . .. 62 Th~ Elamit~s ........... . . • ...... • ...... . ........ •. ... •....... ..... 63 Canaan and Syria ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. • . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Hittit~ tactics ..................... . • . ..•.•. . ....•••••••• • . .•.. • .... 64 Th~ N~o-H ittites and Arama~ans ......•.............•.•..• .•.... ...... 65 Th~ Minoans and Myc~na~ans ........ . ........... . .. , . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . 66 The Mountain Kingdoms ............ • .•. . •• • ... ..••. . ...••••... . •... 67 Th~ Nomads ...................• .. • . •.. • .• . ............•. •.... • ... 68

MAJOR BATTLES OF THE PERIOD ....... . . .. . .. . ... . . .. . .... .. ............ .. 69

DRESS AND EQUIPMENT ................. .. .... ... .... . ...... . .... . .. ....... 91

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................... . . ................. . ............ 203

CHRONOLOGICAL CHART 208

3

NILE DELTA EGYPT AND NAUKRATIS

~. , G UI NUBIA Lower Egyptian Nomes Egypt Upper Egypt lower Eg ypt

(' 1

1 1 Ineb-hedj ~ f AY UM<:::::?, " Abu ( E~ph,anu,,4t 1

;L " (McmpI>o1l

71- " • Huald4topol 'l Sina i 2 Djeba (Edlu) 2 Khem

" TdlOl of' 3 Ne'hen 3 Hut-ihyt , " " , (H.ulkonpol.ll

JSIWA " H4trmopol!l 4 Waset (TheMI) 4 Merke • • .. 5 Gebtu (CopI011 5 Sa;t (Sa.d

" "

Upper 6 fune t 6 Per- Wad jet

" " Egypt (Buto, XO!l)

EGYPT • 7 Hut-selc.hem 7 MUE I .. ID , - . -. 8 Abedju tAbydo 8 Per. Alum

• "",10' tp,lhOl'l) .. ,.,.. ~11f'1\

9 Khem-Min 9 Per-Ausor ~. 5 f8u~.m)

- WES H"N • • TH ESES . , . , 10 Ojebo 10 Kem-We, _, OAS ES' , • (AOw.b!l1

, 11 Shos-hot ep 11 Ka-hebes

ELEPHANTINE 12 Tu-ile( 12 Tjeb -nelJer -- IXM""yIOiI

'" CHHln 13 SOU! 1Alrul) 13 funu (H4tI.opo/,,)

NUBIA 14 Qu IeUIU } 14 1jel f~"uml

15 Khmun 15 8o 'h

Wawat lHumopol,,)

16 16 Hebenu Djedjef ~~" tc)ty. ·_l ~ndul

17 Ko-Sa 17 8ehutet lC,nopoI") Buhf" _ -< Medj.y 18 18 Per-8ostet ~ H,pponul

(Bubuml

19 Per-me~ed 19 Djane! 1T1llt11 10.,.,n< II

20 Henen-nesut 20 Pe,-Iopdu

Kush fHt:r,kkopol.l)

21 N ./opohl Fayum,' AM.OdIe-

I" 22 Aph,od'I~1 /(In,IIIOI'I'I '" n ld '

Prow"",

~ . N~P~f' E,'(fIt '''' "amu.o: Abu, lunu, Khmun EU, .... ,,, • LA REACH

4

ORGANISATION

EGYPT

THE OLD AND MIDDLE KlNGDOMS

T he basis of civil and mil itary organisation was the 'nomes' or provinces. These originated as prehistoric tribal districts which combined 10 form the kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. 'The Two Lands' wcrc united into one country around 3000 BC, by the legendary King Menes. He wu possibly HOT-Aha ('Fighting-Falcon'). E:.Jch nomt wu administered by a hat)Nlo meaning 'hereditary-noble' or 'nomarch' ,

The Names

The general reserve of young men eligible for conscription was known as djamu. and from this were drawn those eligible for mil itary service, known as htwt'"~ -lUfru. (youthful recruits). In addition there were hereditary professional soldiers called D."QUlyu (warriors) who WOtt red ostrich plumes in their hair. unain highly ,rained soldiers werc called mOljIJI, offen uanslated as 'shock-troopll ' .

Raising and mining of recruits was probably the responsibility oftbe jmy~r lrnN.nu'Mjrv (Commander of Recrui ts) a function which was usually performed by the nomlrch. The Middle Kingdom Nomarch, Thuthotep, records the muster of the 'youthful r«:m its of the West of the Hare Nome', those of the EaSt of the Hate Nome, and also the 'youths of the warriors of the Hare Nome'. Thus nomes that were simated asuide Ihe Nile had an aUlomalic division of lroops into at lt3st IWO bodies. The 'youlhs of the warriors' refers to the muster of the next generation of hereditary soldiers eligible for service. The ' lnstmctions for King Merykare ' (composed by Khety of the 10th Dynasty for his son), mention trull recruits 'went forth ' althe age of20. The mmjar, or shock-troops, had tbeir own commander; the jm~ mmjar (Commander of shock troops). The various types ofuoops available in the nomes refleets the fact lhat many of the 'reemin' would bt mainly employed as a source oflabout. Good soldier material would have been selected from the youths recruited from the peasantry, 10 be trained and formed into units to supplement the hereditary soldiers. The hereditary soldiers were perhaps a surviwl from the predynastic organisation of the nome. The ordinary recruit may han had a limited term of service while the warrior repla~ his father and served throughout his act ive life_ This system continued up to the btginning of the New Kingdom, for Ahmose, son-ofEbana, states in his tomb inscription; 'my father was a soldier of the King ... Sekenenre ... then I was a soldier in his stead, in the ship, The Wild Bull, in the time of . .. Nebpehtire (Ahmose I)'.

Nomarchs were required to supply contingents for national eITons when requested by the king, and normally led them on campaign as thei r commanders. In the reign of Senusret I (1971-1926 Bq, Amunemhat of the Oryx nome took 400 'of all the most select' of his trOOps on the king's campaign intO Nubia, He took 600 'of all the bravest of the Oryx nome' on a subsequent campaign led by the Vizier SenusreL Nome contingents would wry in size according to the population of the nome concerned, This nome was situated in Middle Egypt, and larger numbers would probably bt mustered from areas such as Memphis, Thebes and the Delta where the cultivated Lands were more extensive.

Nomarchs acted as the generals of the forccs of their nome. A nomarch might be: commissioned by the king [0

use his forces to carry OUt cenain tuks, such as obtaining stone from remote quarrics in the desert, or undenaking trading mission! to distant lands, Small mil itary expeditions might bt mounted by nomarchs as pan of thei r responsibil ities for cenain regions or frontiers. Some nomarchs bore the tille im~ ow, meaning 'scout-kader' or possibly even 'commander offoreigo auxiliaries '. The most notable of these was Harkhufin the 6th Dynasty who led expeditions d~p ioto Africa, Their forccs were likely to include such fortign auxil iaries as Nubians and Aamu Bedouin.

ProtOC1)is from tomb inscrip tions show (hat nomarchs could often hold sever~l other offices such as priest, scout· lcader, sole-<ompanion and Royal Seal-Bearer. This might mean control of yel fUrlher sources of troops and would represent I great concentration of pollo-er in the hands of such magnates. The poli tical reality of the king (nelu) was perhaps that he was just the biggcst noma rch. In timc.s of weak centr.al authority a nomarch could use his position 10 seize control of other nomes and even make himself king. The Nomarch Ankhtify of Hieraconpolis united three nomes under his control during the period of anarchy following the fall of tbe Old Kingdom. The lOth Dynasty was originally com prised of the nomarchs of Heraklcopolis who bcame kings ofNonhern Egypt during this time, Their main rivals were !.he nomarchs of Thebes who led the Southern nomes against them. One of these was Menthuhotep who fought his way 10 the kingship of a united Egypt and fou nded the Middle Kingdom. The kings of the Old Kingdom had apprC(:iDted their posi tion and sought to strengthcQ it by exalting the insli tution of monarchy through religious meam. This was u ltimately not enough and later kings were to make sure that they commanded sufficient OUIteriai power.

5

Retalne" and the Royal Army

A nonarch would usually maintain a body or personal retainers, or slrmuu. In tomb paintings orthe Middle Kingdom these are usually armed with a large shield and hefty axe. They closely accompanied the noble as he carried out his duties and no doubt comprised his personal bodyguard in battle. The king also possessed slrml1u, and an inner ret inue of highly truSted officials known as ' Sole·Companions' to whom might be entrusted any important commis· sion. In the Old Kingdom the slremsu were a very small and select body, possibly nOi entirely military in character.

During the Middle Kingdom the slrmlSu of the king were expanded and organised as a military unit . In the reign of Senusret III (1878·1841 Bq, Sebek·Khu was one of the royal retainers and began his ar«:r in command of a unit of 6 men. He was subsequently promoted to a slremsu tn Irtqa (Retainer of the Ruler) and given command of 60 men on an expedition into Nubia. His gallantry won him promotion to a sthtdj Shemsu (Instructor of Re· tainers) in command ofa unit of 100 men. Sebek·Khu fought at the battle ofSekmem as commander of the rearguard, indicating that the royal retainers had an important role on the battlefield.

The slrtmtu were supplemented by 1r00pS conscripted from the provinces for the Royal Army. These: were called Irtnu.ntJnI (Household Recruits) and were commanded by an imY"" Irmu·nt/nI, (Commander of the Household Recruits). An 'Army·Scribe' was sent into each nome to select one man in a hundred malt'S to form a company for the Royal Army.

A unit mentioned in the Old Kingdom is the tjtstt (battalion), m"ning simply a large body of troops. The sa (Com· pany) appears in the Middle Kingdom but there is no record of its size at this time. Model soldiers from a tomb al Asyut were organised into two bodies of 40 men, which may represent a basic unit of organisation. They march in 10 ranks, "ch rank being 4 abreast, so they are clC2tly drilled troops and probably typical of most provincial soldiers.

Foreign Auxiliaries

Of the Nubian uibesmen who served the Egyptians, the most favoured were the Medjay. They were employed as $COUIS and skirmishers from the Old Kingdom and figure prominently in the campaign of Kamose. The Medjay may be identical to a group known as tbe 'Pan-Gn.ve' people, of whom archaeological evidence has been found in Upper Egypt. Their cemeteries do not atend funher nonh than tbe limit ofTheban territory during the Hyksos period, so they probably featured mainly in Upper Egyptian forces. They originated in the desens east of the Nile, in Lower Nubi • . Burials conain weaponry and various trinkets of Egyptian manufacture, tbe presenC1: of which might indicate their employment IS mercenaries by the Egyptians. Weapon fmds demonstrate tbat tbey were ar· chers. By the beginning of the New Kingdom the Medjay had begun to assimilate Egyplian culture and become indistinguishable in tbe archaeological record.

The model soldiers from a tomb at Asyut comprised a body of Egyptian spearmen and one of Nubian archers. The laner are or~nised in the same way IS the Egyptians, suggesting that some auxiliaries may have been drilled on Egyptian lines as close-order tlOOpt.

Apan from the Medjay other foreign troops employed by tbe Egyptians were Nubians from the tribes of In;el , Yam, Wawat. and Kaau, Tjemehu·Libyans and Bedouin nomads from the eastern dcsens, Sinai and Southern Palestine.

NatJoDal Army

The tomb inscription of Weni contains an order of battle for a major national effon against the nomads ('Sand· Dwellers') of Southern Palestine. They must have posed a seriou5threat to Egypt in the reign of Pc pi I (2289·2255 BC) to require an army numbering ' lens of thousands' to be despatched against them fIVe times. Every a\l1lilable source of troops seems to have been aploited and thus reflects the state of military organisation of the 6th Dynasty. Overall command was given to Weni, a highly trusted royal official.

Egyptian troops were dr.Iwn from tbe whole of Upper and Lower Egypt, troops from Sedjer and Kensedjeru (unknown loations) and auxiliaries from the Nubians of In jet, Mcd jay, Yam, Wawat and Kaau and T jemebu·Lib)'2DS.

EgyptJao eommande" Nomarchs Royal Seal Bearers Sole·Companions of Palace

Possible troop sources represented. Nome contingents. Royal troops. King 's inner retinue of officers.

6

H~dmen of Senlements Companions Scout-Leader. Chief PrieSlS Chief District Officials

Town militias. Royal retainers. Foreign auxiliaries. Troops f1iKd from temple lands. Royal troops from provinces.

Many of Weni'. subordinates would have held several of these offiCeS at the ume time and so not 111 the titles may have b«:n included because they have I militlry aspect. Weni may have listed such titles simply to emphatise the great Authority which had b«:n delegated to him.

There were. twO centntl arsenals, one for Upper and one for Lower Egypt, supervised by the im~ WtIJ (ovUS«.r of the tWO ancnals). These could have functioned as cc.ntro for the:: manufacture and storage ofwapon. to be issued to royal troops and to bring those: mustered for national elTons up to scratch.

THE NEW KINGDOM

As a result of the slfuggle against the Hyksos and imperial cspansion into Asil, the Egyptian army became a major state institution, recruited and maintained csclusively by the « ntral authority.

The coDlllWlder-in-chief of the entire armed forett was the Pharaoh. Directly responsible to him was the Vizier, in his role as Minister of War.

Originally there were only tWO I rmy corps, one positioned in the North, the:: ()(her in the South. These are mentioned in In edict of Horemhab (1148-1120 BC). This was later increased to three; A"um, Re (PTe) and Ptall, named after the patron gods orthe regions in which they were stationed; Thebes, Hdiopolis and Memphis. A rourth army was created in the 19th Dynasty, named &1 (or Sultkh), arter the patron god or the new capital, Pi-Ramesses. This gave a disposition of twO armies in the Eastern Odta, one Centrallnd one Southern army. The main strength was directed towards the CllStern frontier and pj·Rarnesscs was the marshalling point for campaigns into Asia. SigniflClDt1y, there was no army 10 cover the Western Delta, which had nOl been under threat since the Middle Kingdom. Thi. may aplain the difficulty in preventing Libyan incursions at the end ofthe:: New Kingdom even tbough the Western Deltl and desert areas were heavily fortified.

Each army corps (muha) provided a field army for foreign campaigns. The Army was commanded by an imy"" mlslla, or '"tr-,"lSita (Irmy·general), assisled by an idlfu (adjutant or deputy).

Against I rebellion in Hamath, which was in danger of sprelding and threalened Bctb-5han, Sed 1(1118-1304 BC) senl three armies 10 different objectives. The 'First Army of Amu,,·Mighty of Bows' was sent 10 Hamatb, the ' Firsl Army of Re-Plentiful of Valour' was scnt to rel ieve Beth-Shan, Ind the 'Fint army of Stl-Strong of Bows' was despatched to Yenoam (furthcst away from the centre of trouble). The designations 'First Army' and the specill tides mighl indicate thai each army corps could provide more lhan one army, possibly one in the field aDd ODe iD reserve. Alternatively, the home base may have acted II a recruitment and replacement depot, only the best tTOOPS being picked for service in the 'Fint Army'. It also seems likely that there wn a miliary protocol in which the umy or AmUIi held seniority, was given tbe most importlnltasks, and formed tbe vanguard 00 the march (as al Kadesh). Armies could clearly operale IS fully independent forces at some distance from each other; the umy of Set was sent to Yenoam possibly 10 block Iny foreign intervention.

Frontler fortresses were divided into a Northern and Southern command, each under an i,"y--tr /tAtum (overscc:r of fortresses). Glrrison tTOOPS were ailed iwaytr.

RecrWtmeDt

Most ordinary soldiers were enlisted by conscription. In the reign orRamesscs III (1198-1166 Bq Ihis was a draft or one man in ten of thosc eligible for service (djamu). It was arried 01.11 by the 'Scribe of the Recruits'. One source records an incident ofrecruiUDent by impressment. Officers and administrative personnel were usuilly wlunteen. An army career offered greal prospectS of advancement fo r an educated man. Horemhab began his career II In army scribe and eventually became Phafloh. Ay (1152-1348 BC) and Ramesses l (1320-1318 Bq abo begin in the army. Social StltuS and f.mily COMect.iOns played. part in the recruitment of the chariotry.

The best of tht recruits, or rre/ru, were formed into ulflttptrU (drill-complnies) It Memphis or Thebes, and went from there to Ictive service. The term ,"lII/yr was now used ror seasoned soldiery in general. The term for 'private soldier' was wow.

7

w~"" There were two basic types ofinfannYi mtgau (shooters) and na*'ull-QD (band-to-hand fighten, lilerally 'suong-arm boys ').

The basic tactical and administrative unit was the 10 (company). The: full romplcmcnI was 250 mcn but it could sometimes be under strength. Each $1:1 tu.d its own name and standard. This was carried by the: rjai',oyt (5Ilndaed. bearer), who commanded the: unit. Three adminiSlrlltivc: personnel were an ached to the W; a scribe, ad jutant (idnu), and quancemlster.

The so was subdivided into 5 platoons of 50 men each under I 'Grc:uesl ofFifly' , These in turn comprised 5 squads of 10 men each under a 'Greatest ofTen',

Two or morc: companies could be: combined to form a pdjtt (host). This was comnunded by I "~JNdjtt (hOStcommander), Attached (0 the pldjtl were a StlUl (assault~fficcr) and a muhltlb (transpon officer). The pdjtt was probably a tactical formation, the uact sizc of which is not known and may not havc been fIXed. Thc orp n isation ofmc sa was based on multiples of fivc . If this WIIS extcndcd to thc ped jCt it would havc comprised 5 companies (1250 men).

Thc hery-p.tdjet cou ld also act as a garrison commandcr.

Thc names of many infantry companics havc survived and a selection is included below:

Bull in Nubia TIte company oJleing Ntbmare; TIte Aton G/ittm (Ntbmare was thc 'Thronc-namc' of Amunhotcp JJI (1417-1379 BC). TIte company oj Shootmi Aun ApptJlrt For Him Mtnlthtprure; Dtstroyn oj Syria (fhutmoK IV, 1425· 1417 BC). Amun; Strmgth oj tlte Army P(Jdfor oj Gods Strong in V(Jlour Mmkh~t; Ruler oj Rulm (Thutmose UI, 150+1450 BC).

Somc SOUfCC1 mcntion companies of only 200 men, such as a papyrus which statcs that a force of three companics contained 600 mcn, and somc of thc Amarna lettcn in which 200 men o r multiples of 200 arc requcsted. It is dif· ficullto discern any paint at which thc unit size was altered although it had been suggested as pan of a mil itary rcform in the 20th Dynasty. Most probably, 250 men was a muimum and somc units wcrc dcliberatelY maintained at only 200 mcn, or could nOI maintain full st rength.

Chari."" Thc Egyptian term for chariotry was t(J·fUt.ltetry. The basic unit was the vehicle itKlfwhich was driven by a ludjm. 'chariotw, often also called a leerQUI, 'shield·bearer'. The fighting crcwman was called a lomry.

Attached to each ChariOI was a ptA"", ' runner', who fought on foot in suppan oflhe chariot. Also associated with thc cbariony is the taletm-barer, whose function is unknown. It is perhaps an altcrnativc tcrm for onc of thc other soldiers.

Tcn charion and crcws formed a trOOp of charimry, commanded by a letdjm·ttpy, 'lSI charioteer' . F ive trOOpS, com· prising 50 vehicles, formed a squadron, under a 'Standard Bearer of Chariot Warlion'.

Sevcnl sqUlldrons could be: combined to form. chariotry p.tdjtt, led by a 'Commander of. Chariotry Host'. As witb tbc infantry p.tdjer, its enct siu is not known and may havc been variablc. If it followed Ihe same pattern as the smaller unin il would contain 5 squadrons, lotalling 250 vchiclcs.

Maintcnance and administ~tion oflhe chariotry was carried out by ' the liable' (po.jlru). Slable personnel included an adjutant of chariotry, stablemaslcr, various scribes, grooms and artisans.

Tht Phonix and Ma'II!ts/.jn.JuSli£t, are thc names of two charim squadrons. The following unit names could havc belonged 10 either infantry or chariotry:

8

Till Fau 0/ Rt Bdowd 0/ Amu/I Otltr/lrrower 0/ tlrt Evi/·Onts Rtptlltr 0/ tlrt Tthu·Land

CaYal~

Honcmen were used for reconnaissance and carrying messages. They were called Itlrapilyu, 'scouts'. They carried a bow and sometimes wore textile armour but do not appear to have had any other combat role. Linle is known of their organisation but small detachments probably accompanied each battle format ion.

Ellte Troop.

The corps d'tlite of the 18th Dynasty was the ktnyt</luu, or 'King's Braves'. They were probably infantry and were used for leading the assault. These troops were the first to be despatched through the breach in the walls of Kadesh when it was besieged by Thutmose III. The numbers of this elite body were made up by the promotion of ordinary soldiers who had distinguished themselves in banle.

Ramesses II (1304·1237 BC) possessed twO units of guard infantry; one comprising native Egyptians, the other being 'rebellious·hearted Sherden' apprehended while aiding the Della and recognised as useful soldier material.

In battle the Pharaoh was accompanied by a body of chariOtry retainers including high officials, army commanders and royal princes. The Pharaoh's closest retainers were still known as sirmllu.

Marmet

Infantry companies could be selected to become a klttnyt·ntt·stkhlper, 'tnining contingent' of a ship. They would receive training for amphibiou.s operations and then be assigned to a warship. The standard bearer would become the ship's commander. Such troops were distinguished by the wearing of the 'naval·kilt'. Originally this was a slit· leather garment but was later replactd by a kilt in the style of the Sca·Peoples.

A full sa of250 men would seem a large number for a single warship (although the Egyptians were quite capable of building ships large enough to carry a pair of obelian laid end to end!). The son of warship depicted in the naval battle reliefs at Medinet Habu would require only 50 men. The full contingent WlIS probably required for large transpons from wbicb the marines would disembark to fight on land.

Wanhip.

The best representations of warships of a type designed for fighling in naval engagc.menlS occur in the reliefs of a sca·battle at Medinet Habu. These date to the reign of Ramesses iii and record his defeat of the Sea·Peoples. The ships had a single bank or 10 oars on each side. The rowers (being marines like the fighting crew) were protected by high gunwhales. A castle was mounted fore and afl. The prow did not curve upward, but projected for· ward. h was carved in the form of a lion's bead. with a human head in its jaws. and could have been used to ram enemy ships above the water-line. The mast remained upright in action, but the sail WlIS furled. Steering oan were mounted on the af! castle.

Fighting crew occupied the castles and deck, with the addition of a slinger in the crow's nellt, a man swinging a grappling hook in tbe forccasde and another optating a boarding·pike at Ihe bow.

Auxiliary troop.

Foreign troops were organised into separate units on similar lines to native Egyptian troops. The company was commanded by an Egyptian standard·bearer and subdivided into 5 platoons or 50 men. Each of these: was led by a 'Leader-of·Tribesmen' oftht same: nationality as the troops. Aus.iliaries were usually allowed 10 retain their nalive dress and equipment and probably their own style of fighting. As the '50' was not divided into squads. they may ha\"C formed up more loosely than Egyptians and were less rigorously drilled. Foreign troops employed by the: Egyptians included Nubians, Libyans, Sea·Peoples. Bedouin, Canaanites and Syrians. When fighting in Retjennu the Egyptian army might be augmented by allies from Canaanite vassal states. These: could include maryannu and nt'arin elite troops.

,

The Med jay

At the beginning of the New Kingdom the Mediay fulfilled their old function as auxiliary skirmishers and scoutS, and were used as such by Kamose:. Later, the term Medjay had come to mean the spe<:ial 'necropolis·police' of Thebes who guarded the Valley of Kings and patrolled the surrounding desens. Their numbers gradually began to include more Egyptians than Nubians. The commander bore the title 'Chief of Medjay' and was wisted by an ianu. They were organised into companies, each under I Irny-Medjay, and were mainly archen.

Administration and LogI.tie.

Scribes who conveyed instructions 10 the trOOps and recorded the captives and boolY taken after a battle were called flItlrtnu 'heralds'. Deeds of bravery were reported to the Pharaoh by the heralds, and the soldiers concerned were rewarded with 'the gold of Villour, or promotion. In order to assess enemy losses, Egyptian trOOps were given a bounty for every severed hand of a falle n enemy that they brought in. This would obviously open up the possibility dllll Egyptian dead and wounded might be mutilated by their own men. To avoid this, only the hands of enemies with a lighter or duker complexion were taken. The Libyans, however were generally so similar to Egyptians that the only way to ensure distinction was to order the taking of thei r uncircumcised phalli. In the reliefs al Medinet Habu, grisly heaps of both members ue shown being counted by scribes.

In return for male captives and military equipment taken in battle, soldiers were rewarded with gold, fe.male slaves and land-grants.

Allitoops were supplied and equipped by the state. Rations included large amounts of bread, vegetables, meat and replacement linen garments. Officers received such luxuries as wine, olive oil, honey, figs and fish. The staple drink was beer.

Size of Forces.

In the Egyptian accounts of the major battles fought during the New Kingdom ~riod, the numbers of Egyptian troops involved are never given. Allhough figures are often qUOted for the size of Egyptian armies, there is no dirca evidence: 10 suppOrt this. Sucb figu res seem to be estimates derived ultimately from IWO sources: the Wadi Ham· mamat stela dating to the reign of Ramoses IV, (1166- 1160 BC), and Papyrus Anastasi I.

The Hammamat Slela lists the forces sem on an expedition 10 the stone quarries of the Wadi Hammanllil in the easlern desert of Egypt. The mili tary component includes the following:

I DepulY of the Army I Charioleer of the Residence I Scribe of Ihe Army Lists I Scribe of the Deputy of the Army 20 military scribes 20 Chiefs of Coun Slablcs (chariOt warriors?) I Chief of the Commandant of the Army 20 Infantry Commanders 50 Charioteers SOOO infantrymen 50 Mediay police

The twenty infantry commanders would suggest twenty units of 250 infantrymen and these are accompanied by one squadron of fifry chariOlS. On the basis of this information, it has often been assumed that field armies usually numbered SOOO men and that therefore the total of Egyplian forces involving fou r armies would number 20,000 men. However there are reasons for doubting the reliabililY of this document for such calculations, wch as the low ratio of chariotry to infantry and the Don·m.ililary nature of the expedition. The leader of the expedition was the 'Chief ofWor!ts', Ramassesnakht, and il was normal practice to use conscript troops as a source oflobour. Fur· thennore, 900 dead who could ha\'e included military personnel are stated to be excluded from the liS!. The overall total of 8362 contains nOD<ombatants such as Sionecutters and bodies with uncertain function such as 200 'CoU" Fishermen'. What we have here is not an example ofa typical army, but rather the forces required 10 obtain stone from the quarries against a threat no worse than local Bedouin bandits, which the chariotry and Medjay arc ade· quale to deal with. The largesl body of non-specialists are, in this case, the troops providing the manpower 10 move the stone. The other main source is a scribil exercise and may not represent a realistic formation . It concerns a force: of 5000 men including 520 Sherden, 1600 Kehek, 100 Meshwesh, 880 Nubian! and 1900 other auxiliaries.

10

This i, simply a brigade of auxiliary lroopS over which the scribe: must imagine he is in command and for which he must divide up the rations. It is said to be: pan of an army be:ing despatched against Canaanite rebe:ls.

These texts cannot be: regarded as proving a fIXed size or composition ror Egyplian armies. The term mUM is used in tbe same way.as our word 'Army' and can rerer 10 non·military personnel or even objects, as can the wordptdjt t. The size orsuch rorces should be: considered as defined by what was required or available ror the campaign in question. For military action in remote desert regions against less wcll~uipped and organised enemies, a small army with a low ratio or chariotry to inrantry might be: required_ In Syria or Canaan or against major threats, much larger armies with a higher r:nie or chariouy could be expected. The higher ratio or dwiotry required in Asia is demonsU'lItcd by the Armama Lelten in which the Prince or Byblos asked the Pharaoh to provide 200 to 600 inrantry and 20 to 30 chariots_ The ratio he re is one troop or 10 chariots 10 one company of 200 men.

Papyrus Huris records that Ramesses III organised the youth into generations (djamu) of 100,000 according to age. Military recruits were probably drarted from these 'genentions' on an annual basis. A drart or one man in ten would give a figure or 10,000 rresh conscripts rrom each draft. These would augmeOlthe existing forces COOlaining many career soldiers. The exact length or service is not k.nown but was possibly quile long.

UBYAN AND KUSHITE P ERIODS

At the end ofthe New Kingdom, Egypt split into two kingdoms. The priests or Arnun at Thebes ruled the South while the 21st Dynasty ruled the Nonh rrom Tanis in the Delta. A slronghold or the SoUlhernen at Teudioi (El Hibe:h) marked the border.

Libyan incunions had continued unabated since the last victories against them under Ramcsses III. These augmCllted the large numbe:rs or Libyans and Sca-Peoples allowed to senle on tbe land in return for military serviet. This le:d 10 Ihe: de:velopme:nt or a military ClSle: called Ihe: M6hwtJ.h or Ma. The 22nd DynaslY was a Libyan ramily, rounded by the 'Chief of the MtJIrWQIr', Sheshonq I (945-924 BC).

By the mid-8th century BC, Nonhero Egypt had b«ome a p:uchwork or small principalities. Some were ruled by MtJhwtsh chiers, othen by local provincial rulen and rival dynasties. The most powerful state was in the Western Della ruled by the 'Great Chief or the West', Ternakht (724-717 BC). His attempts to gain concrol or the South (which had rallen to Kush), provoked the intervention of tbe Kushite King, Piye (750-712 BC, usually known u Piankhy, but the 'anlth' is silent).

It is not known to what extent New Kingdom organisation continued into this period. Both kingdoms maintained armies, commanded by the high priest in the South, and a royal prince in the Nonh. T he commander-in-chierbore the title mu-mtJha-wtr or 'great army general', lesser officers being hauryu, or ' leaders'. The account orthe Palestinian campaign or Sheshonq I in II Chron. 12; 2-9, gives the composition of his army as 1,200 chariots, 60,000 'horsemen', and countless Luhims, Sikkims and ElhiopialU. The numbe:r of horsemen may be: an exagger:uion for 6000, and cou ld include both chariot crews and some cavalry. The Lubims and Sikkims arc probably Libyan and Sea-People auxiliaries.

The remarkable steia recording in detai l the conquest or Egypt by Piye around 730 BC, reren to 'Libyans and ravourite: soldiers' among the roretS ofnrn~khl. The army or a Northern ruler would be composed of various contingents rrom the princes under his sway. A large proportion would be Libyans or Mtshroesh. Egyptian infantry of the New Kingdom type may have declined or disappearcci_

T HE SAITE PERIOD

The Kushite 25th Dynasty ruled Egypt until they were driven out by the Assyrians. Ashurbanipal appointed Necho, local ruler orSais in the Delta, as his chiervaual in Egypt rollowing the revolt of T anutamun (664-657 BC). His son Psamtik I (664-6 10 BC) took advantage or Assyria's imminmt collapse to make Egypt independent. During the 26th Dynasty, or '8:li te' period, Egypt experienced a renaissance and b«ame once more I major world power. In order to assist tbe Assyrians and block Babylonian advance. Necho II (61()'595 BC) led Egyptian forces to tbe Euphrates. He: also cre3ted a navy equipped with the latest galleys, supposedly sponsored the circum-navigation or Arrica by a Phoenician expedition, and seriously considered II precursor of the Sue:!: canal.

11

An imponam development in the military field was the increasing usc of Greek mercenaries. Greeks were called haw-nebu, 'new-foreigners'. The first body of mercenaries was a party of bronze-clad raiders who had landed in the Delta and were recruiled by Psamtik I. They could possibly have been sent by his ally, Gyges of Lydia, to assist Psamtik to achieve iodepeode.oce. from Assyria. They were. installed in tWO military settlcmems astride the Pelusiac arm of the Nile, known as the stralopaeda. The qualities of the hoplite were rapidly appreciated by the Pharaohs who built up large forces of Ionian and Karian mercenaries. Apries (589·570 BC) had 30,000 of these stationed in Sais according to Herodotus (Book 11).

A major garrison of Greek mercenaries was established at Daphnae in the Eastern Delta and may have been one oflhe Jratopaeda. However, as it was still functioning in the reign of Amasis and continued until the Persian conquest of 525 BC, it may have been a separate senlemem.

Most of the Saite Pharaohs were phil-hellenes who maintained friendly relations with Greek states. The Egyptian population however regarded Greeks as religiously unclean and avoided close association. The native clement of the anny was paniculariy jealous of the favour shown to Greek mercenaries. This resentmem finally erupted into a mutiny against Apries resuiting in his deposition in favour of Amasis (Ahmose ll, 57(}.526 BC).

Herodotus observed that Egyptian troops were provided by a military caste divided into the Calasiriu and the HermOlybif$. They were professional soldiers who spent their time eJrclusively in military training. Membership of this caste was hereditary and each man was supported by a grant of 12 araurae of land, free of tu:. 1000 Calasiries and 1000 Hermotybies were required to serve for a year as the royal body-guard. This was done in rotation so that no man ever se.rved in the guard twice, doubtless a political precaution.

Troops belonging to these castes were sculed in cenain districts listed by Herodotus as folloW'S:

The Calatiriu were settled in Thebes, Bubastis, Aphthis, Mendes, Sebe:nnytus, Athribis, Pharbaethus, Thmuis, Onophis, Anysis and Myecphoris.

Hermorybies were sculed in Busiri!, Sais, Chemmis, Papremis, The Island of Prospi[is and Natho.

Mosl of these districts are Delta nomes or cities. The total number of Caltuiriu was 250,000. The Hermolybies numbered 160,000.

Herodotus records that the Egyptians maintained three major garrisons, one guarding each of the principle fronliers; Daphne watched the Eastern approaches, ElepMOline on the Nubian frontier, and Marea on the Libyan fron· tier. According to the hislOrian, troops served three years on garrison duty without relief, which led to descnions. A colony of such deserters had grown up in Nubia.

A mass desen ion from Elephantine in the reign of Psamlik I is mentioned by Herodotus. A similar incident in the time of Apries was recorded by the inscription of the garrison commander, Nesu-Hor.

Troops from the Egyptian military caste could be used as garrison trOOps.

The Navy

Necho II was very interested in naval mailers and made Egypt into a first-rate naval power. Herodotus says that he had triremes built on both the Mediterranean and Red-Sca coasts. Egyptian foreign policy during this period concentrated on preventing the Babylonians and,laler, the Persians, from expanding into Syria and Palestine . The Phoenician fleet would be at the disposal of any power that conquered this area and thus it was essential for Egypt to have a navy adequate to defend herself. Assyrian wail'paintings from Til Barsip and reliefs from Nine\'Ch demonstrate thaI biremes equipped with rams were available in Phoenicia by 700 BC at the latest.

The standard equipmeOl of the Saite navy was a large warship called Keb"el. This term replaces the previous Egyptian word for warship, ahaw (man-of-war), and so probably refers to a new type of ship. The hieroglyphic deler· minative shows a Greek-style galley and the tenn was st ill used in the Ptolemaic period to descri be: the polyremes used by both Egypt and her enemies.

The strong ties es tablished be:tween the Saite rulers and Greek states such as Corinth (where Periander named his son Psammetichos after Psamtik II), make it likely that Greek CJrpenise in shipbuilding would be: available to tbe Egyptians. The large and effective naval coOlingents, supplied by Egypt as a Persian satrapy, which fought at Salamis and Animision, probably reflt('t Ihe naval build-up of the Saite Pharaohs.

12

The commander of the Egyptian fleet bore the title i",~ keblltt IItSU 'Commander of the King', GaileY" .

Sbortly before Cambyscs'. conquest tbe admiral, WadjahorresDe. and tbe Greek commander, Pbanes of Haliar· nassus, deserted Egypt. The army made a stand al Pc1usium but was defeated.

There were several Egyptian revolts. The revolt of Jnaris was usistcd by the Athenians but crushed by Anuel'lles. A later revolt led toO In IlIiln« with Sparta and I period of ind.ependence under the 30th Dynuty. large numbcn of Greek IDCI'CCf1Iries were employed. Grttb, such as the: Athcn.ian gcncn.l, Chabrias, and the Spartan king, AgisiI.seus, were now in positiDns in the high command.

THE LIBYANS

The term ' libyan' il used here toO include tbe tribes thai inhabiled the western desert and lIeppes Dn the western edge of the Nile Villey. This area Slrtlched frDm tbe Mediterranean cout 100 Nubil, in which the Weslern Oases were the furthest Egyptian outposts.

The libyans were nomldie herdunen WhD lived in latber tenes and relied on hunting, gathering and the produce of cattle and goatl.

At fint the Egyptians encountered only tWO tribes, the Tjehenu and the T jemehu.

The Tjehenu were ethnically Ikin to the Egyptians and probably became culturally distina from them al the time of the unificatiDn. The T jemehu, however, were light·skinned and fair·haired. They probably entered Africa froOm Europe around 3000 BC. Their physical Ippearance is clearly represented in Egyptian ITt.

These peoples were tbe main worry for the Egyptians until the Iller New Kingdom when the Kehek, Meshwesh, Seped, Mlhasun and Libu appear (the name Lib)'1l derives from the l ibu). Some even more obscure tribes appear in the Papyrul Hlrris; me Esbeh, Keykesh, Shai, Hes aDd Deken. One of the main reasons for libyan unresl Will me gradual dcsieauioo of the Sahara whieh forced rribes to mDve ca5twards, pUlling pressUrt on each other which led to incunio ns intO Egypt. The most serious occurCDceJ took place during tbe later New Kingdom Ind continued throughout the follDwing period, resulting in dynasties of Libyan Drigin ruling in Lower Egypt.

In me reigns of Merenptlh I Dd Ramessct lit sevenl tribes formed coalitions, and in the former reign were joined by contingents of Sea·Peoples. They pllccd one cbief as overal.llC2der and mounted mISsive llI5IIulu on Egypt intending to settle. In the face Df defClt, the coalition broke up and the lcader wu deposed. Following these luKb IIl1e numbers of tribesmen were recruited intD the Egyptian army and placed in military settlements. These were later augmented by funher Wives of tribesmen and developed intO I military caste tlking ilS nlme frDm the tribe of the Mcshwesh .

libyan forces o riginally consisted entirely Dfinfantry using throw-sticks, javelins and how1. By the late New KingdDm they hid acquired a fev.' chariots, probably reserved for dUef., and Ilrge numbers of IDng sWDrds Df Sea·Peoples type (possibly obtained from them). At Per-Yer, 9111 copper swords were taken by the Egyptians but only 12 pairs Df hDtSCS. At R auho, 603 bows, 2310 quivers, 93 chariots, 92 spear. Ind 183 Meshwesh horse. and asses were captured. These figures indicate the rcillivc quantities ofwcapons available to the lib)'1los. Numbers of slain and caPNrcd wry frDm 2000 to 12000,10 I coalition of tribes could produce I large army.

NUBIA

Nubia was divided into twO partS; Lower Nubia or Wawat. utending from Elephantine 10 the 2nd Cataraa. Ind Upper Nubia o r Kush extending beyond this. The Nile valley in Wawat was narrDW Ind supponed I small popula' tion. The: dCRn and scrubllnds 10 Em and West we:re inhabiled by Nomadic herdsmen. The Nile valley in Kush widens II the DongDla reach and could support I larger popuililion. It was possible fDr I powerfullr.ingdom to develop here. A kingdom Df Kush arose seven1 times in this area and posed a serious threat toO Egypt.

The Egyptians campaigned into Nubia IS tlrly as the lSI Dynasty, I.Dd began exploiting its raw materials in the Old Kingdom. The so-aIled 'A""IrDUp' inhabillots IItbis time were culturally similar 100 the Predynastic Egyptians. By the 6th Dynasty, however, me .ituation had changed and the 'C-group' appear. They may be equated with the tribes and kingdoms recorded by Weni and Harthuf; The lnjet, MedjlY, Wlwat. Ylm, 8ctju, I Dd K..uu. Harkhuf was able to reach Ylm by selling off from Aswan or the Abydos region (via the Western Oases) 10 it must have lain toO the south.weII, (one journey took 8 mDnths). On one apcd.itiDn Harthuf found that tbe king of Yam bad gDne toO WIt with the Tjemebu Libyans. This king also supplied Harkhuf wi th In cscon of tTOOPS to aupplemcnt his Egyptians IS mey passed through me territDry of I cDnfcd.etltiDD of Jn jet, Sctju and Wawil tribes.

13

The Middle Kingdom F rontier in Nubia

The Pharaohs of the Middle Kingdom embarked on the conquest and annexation of Lower Nubia. They intended 10 exploit the local raw materials (panicularly gold), create wealth by trading with the Nubian tribes, extend the frontier further up the Nile (keeping large military forces under tht conuol of the King to do Ihis) and ultimately 10 curb or conquer the kingdom of Kush, located in Upper Nubia. The process was under way by Ihe reign of Senusretl and completed by Senusret Ill, who led five campaigns into Nubia and established the frontier at Semna. beyond the 2nd Cataract. During this time the Egyptians constructed a remarkable system of fonresses which show that the science of fonification was already well advanced. Proceeding from the outer defences inward, the basic features of each fon were as follows: A glacis surmounted by a covered parapet, then a dry ditch overlooked by loopholed ramparts equipped with round bastions. A single loophole on the inside, divided into three loopholes on the outside. allowed a single archer 10 shoot in three directions while remaining totaUy concealed. There were two levels of loopholes. The gateway was massively fortified aUowing atlackers to be shot at from three sides as they approached the gate. The ditch was crossed by a drawbridge. The gate protruded from a massive enclosure wall equipped with square bastions and towers rising higher than the loopholed outer rampan. The enclosure walls offonresses situated on rocky spurs utilised the contour oflhe ground while those: on level ground were rectangular in plan. Directly behind the wall was an open zone allowing a clear field of fire from the battlements against enemies who might actually force an entry. Construction was of mud·brick and timber.

The largest fort could accommodate 300 men and their dependants while the entire system would require a garrison of several thousands. The population of this pan of Nubia has betn estimated at about 10,000, mainly nomadic people, so the threat from Kush must have been consideral;lle unless the system was also intended to concentrate military power in the hands of the king and away from the provinces (Senusret III actually abolished the nomaTchs). Funerary stelae indicate that most of the garrisons were Thebans.

A Middle Kingdom papyrus has survived which lists tbe Nubian fonresses and gives their Egyptian names. The fortress chain is described below, proceeding from south to north.

I. Subtiun of Nubia; the fortress at Semna South. 2. Khakaure (Senusrtt 1/1) is powerful; the fonress of Semna. This fOri commands the narrowest part of Ihe 2nd

cataract. It was the largest and suongest fon and situated on an 'L·shaped' rocky spur. 3. Warding off lht Bows; Kumma, positioned opposite Semna. 4. Rtpelling the Inu; situated on Uronani island. It had a long tail-wall to enfilade the stretches of the Nile on

either side and impede the progress of enemy vessels.

Semna and Uronani were linked by a wall 4.5 km. in length, situated parallel 10 the river on its western side. This guarded against outflanking movements attempting to by-pass Semna.

5. Curbing Ihe CoUrltn"es; situated al Shalfak and also possessing a spur wall. 6. Iknl j a huge fon and Irading centre at Mirgissa, incorporating a fort on Dabnani Island. This fonress com

manded the Kabuka Rapids. These rapids were impassable during the low Nile and a mud slipway 2 km. in length was constructed around them to enable ships to be dragged overland to keep tht supply line open all year round. The mud has preserved the marks offeet and ships. This fon was a centre for weapon manufacture and stone 'formers' for shields have been found here.

7. Buhnl; this impressive fortress was the administrative centre of Egyptian Nubia. 8. Embracing the T"fOO-Lamls. 9. 'Rt~l/illg th t Mtdjay~ si tuated al Serra. 10. Ma'am ; the vast stronghold of Anieba.

Nonh of this point lookout posts were situated west of the Nile manned by troops from the main fons to guard against outflanking movemems from the desert. The east bank was not so well guarded as the west bank, but it was occupied by friendly Medjay Nubians.

II . Baki; the fortress of Kuban on the East Bank. This was a comrol point for Ihe Wadi·EI.Allaqi gold mines. It also covered a desen rood against possible outflanking movements.

Further nonh there were forts on the Island of Biga. Elephantine (the traditional frontier) and in Upper Egypt.

14

Some food for che garrisons was produced 10000lly bUI most supplic:s were shipped upmc:am from Egypt, which reprc:sc:nled a massive logislial problem. Apan from the slipway, other means of securing year-round passage included a barrage 10 maintain I sufficient heighl of wlter over the rapids and I anal called GDOd art /h, wa)'1 oj Khalcaurt, which WIS 80 metres long and loaled near Sehel, to en.ble wanhips to by·paS! the rapids.

Most fons were wilhin signalling distance of each other or could be linked by signalling OUtposts.

At the eod of the Middle Kingdom high Niles damaged the fonifiations and the weak central authority began to lose: conuol of the relion_ Many fom ..... ere burnt. This could have been done by retreating garrisons recalled to Egypt in the face of the Hybos thrnll!, if not by enemy lction. The kingdom of Kush took over Wawal. The capitll ofthu kingdom wu probably at Kunna where a mauive blockhou5t-like stronghold, Ind burills containing hundreds of sacrificed retainen and Egyptian booty have: been found. Egyptian officials (and possibly garrisons?) switched allegiance: to the: King of Kush. Kush was in contact with the Hyksos and reglrded IS In enemy by Ram05c:.

Kamose: and Ahmose: begDn the rc:conqucsi of Nubia which was completed by Thutmose: I. After this there were only I few minor rebellions Dod punitive raids. Nubia was Innexed and convened into an administrative extension of Egypt ruled by the 'Viceroy of Kush" Issisted by an idnu of the Nonhern region and one for the South. The garrison was commanded by the 'Battalion Commander of Kush' and many of the old fons were re·furbished and altered. Colonial settlements known as 'Temple.towns' ..... ere implanted and Ihe population became incrmingly Egyptianised.

By the end oflhe New Kingdom a serious decline had set in and Egypt completely losl conuol of chis region. One of the last c:vems before the darkness fell was the invasion ofEgypl by the Nubian garrison under the viceroy Pinhasi who reached the nome of Cynopolis. He may have been rontc:nding with Ihe Libyans for control of Egypt.

The Kinsdom of KUl h

Around 850 BC I rc:surgent kingdom of Kush, stee:ped in Egyptian cuhure and fanatially devoted to Egyplian gods (pre:-c:minenlly Amun-rt) began 10 impose iudf on Egypt. King Kuhta already controlled Upper Egypt when he was succc:c:ded by Piyt. Wbe::n Tefnakht Inc:mpled to conquer the South, Piyt turned his initial defe::nsive movc:s into a 'CJUude' to conquer Egypt, tlllbUshing the 25th. Kushile, Dynasty. The following kings, Shabau, Tlhu qa and TlIIutamun, defe::nded Egypt from Assyrian upansioD fintly by supponing israelile and Judean rebels and later on thcir own ground. After y.::an ofhard f1&hting and dc:suuctKlD the Kushites were: e\'e:ntually forced out of Egypt.

The: Piyt Sle!. and Assyrian records show Ihat the Kushite forces included arche:n, slingen, spc:1Innen, c:hariotry and prably Clvalry (Ihe Kusbite kings were panicullrly fond oflheir horses). They were:: also rompele:nl in contempoTlr}' liege tc:<:hniquc:s and possc:uc:d a l1«t. Piyt's success sc:c:ms to have been achic::ved by I combination of fannicism and ingenuity. The later kings fought with great delennination 19ainst Ihe Assyrians.

On the whole, Nubian lribesmen would be organised on the: basis of clln or ad·hoc divisions. The various kingdoms of Kush however could be e:xpc:cted to achieve: I higher level of organisation pouibly imitating conte:mporary Egyptian practice and eve:n utilising Egyptian c:xpc:nisc: when available:.

MESoPOTAMIA

SUMER AND AKKAD: THIRD MILLENNIUM B.C.

Early Dyn.atle Sumer (e.3000.2334 B.C.)

ClimDle and geography ronspired to enforce civilisation on Ihe inhabitanlS of Southern Iraq, for, though the alluvial plain berwec:n the great Tigris and Euphrates rivers is potentially highly productive:, there is scant rainfall and exlensive: anificial irrigalion is c:ssc:ntial for agriculture:.

The need to raise and dirc:<:t the !.hour needed for the digging and mainleoance of canals, wlle:rways and other public works demanded a hi,h degree: of socill organisation and, although the:: evidence for specifiCilly military organisnion is limited, it wu clearly based on that employed for civil projc:<:1I.

By the beginning of the Early Dynl5tic period the population of Soulhern Iraq, thc:.n known 15 Sltm" or SlrumtT, was composed of (V(O main ethnic groups: those who lived in the south and spoke: Sumc:run, and LhoIc:, prc:dominantly in the nonb, who spoke I Semitic language that is now called Akkadian. Both groups shared. common, Sume::rian, culture:: which was widely imitlted in both Syril (as reprtstnted II Mlri and Ebla) and Southern lnn.

"

" ToH~IU~n ch, ,,f lmoun, them

b(ln, P"'""'kh.od~)

• EaLA SU~"'T'

MARTU

\ • SIMMURRUM

LULLUBI

GUTI

9 .. ESHNUNNA. ">c,.

DE. ~ AWAN ~'SH" Y

Sumer. MESOPOTAMIA U' •

in the 3rd millennium Be To Dllmun I nc!

Politically, Sumer was divided into several small, competing city-stAtes, cons.isting Ordle capital city ringed by oUllying lawns and villages and surrounded by wluablc irrigated farm land and uncultivated steppe used for pasture. The cities were generally large and their populations numerous, the walts ofUruk (ltPditionally fim built by the famous Gilgamesh) were: 10 kilometres in circumference, so human resources wert considerable:. However, Su.mcr was com· plettly lacking in Slone, good-qualilY timber and metal ore and the city-states vied with each othcr [0 gain control of either the trade: routes or sources of supply of {hest vi lal raw materials - a simation compounded by endemic disputes over Wllterways and border land .

The Sumerians envisaged each city·slile as belonging to its patron god and his 'family' of minor deities, and early Sumerian rulers reguded themselves only as EN, ' lord ', or ENS!, 'governor', of the god's eanhly estates, their office combining both religious and $«Ular functions. The prttise definition of the differences between the titles EN and ENS! is unciear, however a third title, LUGAL ('grtat man', or 'king') is less ambiguous, and seems 10 have ~ adopted by I ruler wbo had gained hegemony over sevellil city-states. An even more prestigioU$ title, and one thai remained so long after the Early Dynastic period, was 'King of Kish', which, because of the early dominance of that city, became synonymoU$ with Sumerian overlordship. A Sumerian ruler who could gain conuol of Kish and the holy city of Nip pur (the 'borne' ofEnlil, the suprtme god of the Sumerian pantheon) would therefore be universally recognised as overlord of Sumer.

Whether EN, ENS!, or LUGAL I Sumerian ruler WllS an autocrat whose palace and household (E. GAL) came to rival the city's temples.

A Sumerian city-state was a temple, and to I lesser atent, a palace economy. The state's temples functioned as the mater administrative and economic units in Sumer, organising trade and employing lhousands of workers in temple workshops and 00 the land. The bulk of the population consisted of landless tenants and labourers who worked on the csteosive royal and temple estates (which together attOUnted for at least two-thirds of a city-state'!

J6

land). In times of peace these men were organised into specialised group5 according to thei r profession, under the supervision of UGULA, 'commanden', NU. BANDA, 'C3ptains', and certainly in the cue of a temple's tenants, AGRIG, 'superintendents', and SANGA, or 'slew:ards' .

Private landownen did exist but these were family, or 'dan' holdings resembling, on a smaller scale, the estates of the noble and royal 'clans'.

In time of wat a city'. ruler could conseri!" both royal and temple tenann for military service, the extent and condi· tions of which Ire not fully known. Both labouren and soldiers were called ERIN a word which or iginally meant I yoke or necQu)(k and succinctly implies the nature of their employment! Two, mort ezplicitly military, titles wert SHUB.LUGAL, meaning 'king's mainer', and AGA.USH, 'follower'. The SHUB.LUGAL pfObably formed part of the rOY11 household and performed regular military and para.military duties. The AGA.USH, by analogy with the later use ofthiJ term, Ippear to have been ERIN who regularly served IS soldiers, rather than IS labourers., when fulfilling their obligat ions IS royal or temple clients. A general term for a soldier was ERIN.SUMMA, or 'spearman'.

Military uniu seem to have had filled sizes, although the size of similarly organised work·gangs varied according to the nanue oflhe work. It is prob:r.ble that the same officers could be detailed to command both military and civil units.

A NU.BANDA probably commanded between 60 to 100 men (since: the Sumerians used both a decimal and a sell' agcsimal number system - which is why we have sixty minutes in an hour). Officers of higher or lower rank were te rmed UGULA, with the actual sile of Ihe command being indica ted by a numeral SU ffIX , as in, for example, UGULA.NAM.IO('commander of 10'). P resumably thert were six 10 ten UGULA.NAM.IO under a NU.BANDA.

Larger units were probably formed by brigading logether several oflhese NUBANDA companics. The largest uniu mentioned occur in texts from the small city,sllte ofShurrupak, were 67().680 men strong, and are described as 'going into battlc'.

Troops conscripted from temple ellltcs appear 10 have retained thei r own commanders and command 5tructur~. In one documented instance a SANGA of the Nimar temple at Lagasb led troops levied from its eslales 10 overtake .." Mat 6IJI) EbmJu Wdcn an}'inj offbotxY!TOID Uj»b. 1Jx Jiu!K /Jx lJiloIilt lOla iJ D{JJifJQJJ{ iJJ lit//' of lh~ m;Iuw {TOlD SblUTlJpU sd IlJUt:fl1 WI hjgb(r fottmtions W~ utrJIllr 6IJ() (a 7M luane.

In Iddition to the contcTipt militia each cily ... tlle would seem to IUlVe posscucd II lffilll, r~lUlar forct bncd on lhe ruler', househole!. Tan of~.2600 B.C . from Shutrupak. al lhal Ilm~ aub}a:1 10 th" kin. orlh~ pow~rfW . 111"

of Kish, describe. lurprilingly large royal household of SOfDC 600 men, which includes 144 cupbearers, 113 muli· d.ns and 65 cooks (I), together with various cnfismen . Aside from most oftbc: crafismc.n these titles W~.ft probably only honorary, reflecting both the ItIIW of their bolders IS royal retainers and tbe common usage of the eztcnded 'household' U In Idministntive unit in the Near East (the famous Sargon of Akbd began his Clreer u a cupbearer ofth~ king of Kish Ind governor of Aglde). Another lext SI.les lhatlhe 'chief· mason' ofKish was having his banle· Clr repaired in ShurrupU's p.l~ workshop, which suggesu that. proportion at least of the fOyal household usually fought from battlc-can. Certlinly one ruler of the state of Umma had an elite unit of si:ll:ly vehides.

There is little indication oflhe total number ofbanle-ars that could be mustered by Iny one dIY-5tlte, Iside from Umma. However, even if no individual cily could afford 10 maint.in more than 60, this would suggest that a power· ful LUGAL, such as lugllugesi who controlled all southern Sumer, could conceivably field over 600 battle-ars.

Tenants and soldiers, including the household troops, rcc:e:ived monthly rations of food and oil IS wages from tem· pic and pal.ce granaries. Important temple and palace officials liso held grants ofllnd from royal and temple esUtCl, generally fOf life.

The Dynasty of AkUd (e. 2334·2154 B.C.)

The rtign of Sargon (Sharru·kin, 'true, legitirMle king') of Akbd was I momentous turning·poinl in the history of Mesopotamia. He, Ind his dynasty, introduced I new conctpt of kingship and set a mark lhat succttding gen~rations of rulers would Ittempt to emulate. For lhe ftrst time Akbdia.n bccsme the langulge for olTkial inscriptions, and the Semitic-speaking northernen achieved genull political dominance.

To sutxlue the stronpy independent traditions of the conquered city·statCl, Sargon replaced their rulers with his own governors., or JhaUanaiJlJtl. In order to ensurt tbeir loyalty they were IlwlYS Akkadians, Ind of len members ofhis own family or clan. Those nativt rulen who retained their posilion5 ,,"'ere closely walchtd by rOYl1 appointen

11

and officials. Similarly, the religious establishment of Sumer "'{as carefully connolled by SarGon'. installation of his daughter, Enheduanna, as hiGh'priesteM of Nannar (the moon·god) at Ur.

Akkadian tats relating to sp«:ifically military affairs arc rare, though much more extensive thin for the preceeding Early Cynntic period.

Sargon's household consisted of 5400 men, who in Akkadian were termedguruslt, in Sumerian, ERIN. They were stationed in Sargon's p,alace It Agade, where they 'ate bread daily before lhe king' .nd undoubllibly formed the profwional core of his army. High officials were the SAGI./;'fAH, or 'chief cupbearc.r', and SAGI, o r 'cupbearer', as in tbe previous period. The royal cupbearers probably formed an inner bodyguard for the king.

As in the Early Dynastic period bolh work.gangs and military units had a similar, if nO( identical, command struc· Nre. The genersllum for both IOldiers and labourers was either ",rusll, or ERIN, though it would sccm thatgurusll may hive hid a more precise meaning of an adult male who was capable of I full-days work. Royal and temple tenants sccm, as before, to have provided the main pan of Akkadian Irmits, sometimes being described as /u·uru, or 'city men', which suggests that their employment and recruitment was sti1llocal and based on their home city. The levying ofthesc men wn probably the responsibility of the city's GIR.NITAhllakJtanaJuun. They were issued with rations of grain and beer every 4/5 days.

However, an Akkadian innovation was the nlJitum, a class of soldier probably to be ident ified with the aga.us" lugal, or 'royal soldier'. The nirltwrn held plots of land, almost certainly from the king, in addition to recei"ing rations of fi sh and sail every three months. This land·gram marks a considerable change from earlier practice and was probably int roduced to strengthen the soldiers' loyalty 10 the king IS an individual (a royal tenant always remained 10, no maHer who the .ctual ruler was) while reducing the burden on the palacc's economy, since the nisltwm had in pan to maintain himself. The system would also provide greater numbers ofscmi·professional soldiers for the army and ensure thlt roY11 forCC5 would be on hand 10 supprw any revolts loally. Officers and men could be termed miltum .

Other, ra ther comprehensive, terms for soldiers ..... ere: LU. TUKULLA, literally: 'he who lics on the weapon', lind LU Gl$1I GlD. DA or 'spearmen'.

Tats from Umm. show that bmd rations for workmen and soldiers were issued in lots of 30, 60, 90,120,180, 240 and 600 lones, which would seem to indicate the theOretical strengths of Ihe units presenl. Aplin from the suggested unit strengths of30 and 90 men these figures accord quite ..... ell with Early DynllSlicunilS of60 and ~700 Strong, and are in any caSt ttraightforw.rd multiplcs of 60. From this evidence it may be posNllled Ibtt the king's hOUKhold troops comprised nine 'battalions' of6OO men, each probably commanded by. GIR.NITA, or 'coIont.!' . Other ranks of officer included the PA.PA/sM !Utattim, literally: 'he of two ttaffs (of office)', The title indicata lhat this officer commanded t ..... o or more units of6O, since below this rank WIIS the NU-BANDA and the UGULA; the laner .lso remaining in use as a general term for 'officer' (n in UGULA-NU·BANDA) together with the Akka· dian rabi $lJbl~ 'trOOP commander'. The nnk of NU. BANDA remained unchanged as 'capllin' , or 'company com· mander' . UGULA, when used with precision, still meant, 'commander ', or ' n.c.o.'.

Light trOOPS or skirmishers were known as NIM--soldiers, or 'flics', no doubt because of their lack of formation and speed ofmovernent! In the Aklr.adian period these soldien could also be foreign mercenaries, from the Zagros mountains and the west, as well as native troops - probably the younger, less experienced conscripts.

It is difficult due to the scardty of material to judge the different proponions of troops available to an Akkadian commander. However, a list of soldiers guarding the walls at Umma has a body of 107 niJItu and 469 LU.URU 'sleeping on the wall '. l flhis proponion is at all representative it would suggat lru.tlhc.rc were four times as many militiamen to semi.regular nisitu. This does nOI mean of course that Aklr.adian Innics would mainlain these proportions in the fie ld, as the nisltu were regularly moved about the empire, one leiter stales: ' his nilitu have indeed gone away 10 Uruk', while the l.U.URU do nOl appear to have usually campaigned far from home.

The military usc of both banie-c:ars and straddle-c:ars seems [0 have declined rapidly following the Early Dynastic period. One suspects that the fu. rcacbing and strenuous campaigns of the Akbdian kings, often directed against lightly armed tribesmen in rough lerrain, quickly highlighted the deficiencies of vehicles designed for shon-range warfare belween nearby city-states.

Both platform and Slraddlc-cars seem Slilllo have been employed as fut mounts for couriers however, special 'chlriO! roads' being mentioned in some texIS. Other textS list numbers of equid! and their fodder.

18

Army sizes Ire rarely mentioned, though taking III evidence into account, AJr.kadian armies probably numbered over 20,000 men.

Tbe Third DYD.tty of Ur (c, 2112·2004 B.C.)

After nearly I century of anarchy in Sumer, following the collapse of the Dynuty of Akbd's authori ty, when tbe barbarous Guti were the arbiten of power in the land, one UN-Hegal, the king of Uruk, ' returned the ltinphip to Sumer' . What battles this king fought, what allies he had, we do not know in any detlili Ilthough it would seem that most of biJ shon, seven-year reign was spent in driving the Guti out of Sumer and establishing his conuol oftbe country. HOwrlOCf, Utu-Hegal's dynasty was nOl: destined to lut - the king was swept IWIY Ind drowned while supervising the construction ofa new canal. It was his governor ofUr, I man named Ur-Nammu, who was to found a dynasty and an empire that would sec the fmal flowering of Sumerian culture. By his founh year UrNammu, by force oflrms Ind diplomacy, had so enended his rule as to declare himself: 'King ofSumer Ind Allid'.

The ltings of the T hird Dynasty ofUr, unlike tbe imperialistic kings of Allid, did not unduly mCl, their military achievements. Instead their surviving inscriptions concentrate OD tbe digging of canlls, the rebuilding of temples and the restoution of order to the land.

Individull cities and their surrounding districts were administered by governors, ENSI, appointed by, and directly responsible to, the king. The ENSIs were frequ ently moved from city to city (for example, the ENSI of Ashur was transferred to Susa) either to prevent strong local tics developing as a threat to the king, or perhaps to use the talenll of In able man to the full in troublesome areas. Many of these imponant positions, villi to the cohesion of the empire, were filled by clOSt rdalion! of the king. There arc several instances ofgovemors marricd 10 royal princc.s.scs, and in one case a king's uncle was an ENSI.

The duties of an ENSI were to maintain order in his city, to );eep the local canals and road, in good repair, to «IlIecl and organise the district's tribute, and to keep tbe king informed of events in the area. Communications wtre maintained by the use of the numerous royal mcssengcn travelling the well-kept roads from city to city in the empire.

In order to pre>n.nt tbe frequent re\'olts of the Dynasty of Akkad the military responsibilities of the governor were «Inttntrated in a new POSt, sJraUana, of equal lIatus to the ENS/. The tWO types of official, tbe one mili tary, the OI:her civilian aist side by side in some districts, although they were. somelimes combined in one person. This is more commonly the cue in oudying provinces, whose security depended on the military. Thul the governor of Mari was always a sllakAaruJ, IS wu Ihe governor of Elam, while in Zariqum and Ashur it varied according to tbe military situation.

Ouring the reign of Shulgi the sJraltlt.aruJ of Uruk wu his younger son, Sbu-Suen.

& ... ocU as commanding hi. district's soldiers, the shaJrAanaJruJ were responsible for the consc:ription of labourers for agricultural and constructional work.

Collectively, the men employed on civil ian and military tasks were called eitber ERIN, sabuffI, or Ufflfflannum, and they appear to have been «Insc:ripted from tenants on royal and temple land holdings. It would seem that only the besl, finest conscripts were pickcd for regular military service since soldiel1 were sometimes termed SAG. ERIN or ERIN.SAG.GA, 'chosen men'. However, soldiers could st ill be employed on civilian duties, such IS traruporting CUt reeds and digging and clearing canals. The pool of available civilian labour also functioned .. a ' reserve' (DAMU.DIRI. TAl used to IIlcngthen the ERIN.SAG.GA in emergencies.

The ERIN were divided inlO companies, commanded by the familiar NU.BANDA, ideally comprising 100 men in IOSCetions of 10 men each under an UGULA orSHESH.GAL.NAM.10(litenlly: 'big brother of 10'!). However, companies were sometimes as much u 60% undersnength.

The majority of each company were vetet1lns termed ERIN. GAL GAL, or 'strong men', with a .maIl proponion of company sltength made up of ERIN. TUR. TUR, 'youths' or 'recruits' .

All ERIN rccc:ived regular payments of barley, oil and beer, though one leller from a military commander teporu that hi. soldiers would mutiny if their 'wlgcs' were not quickly paid!

Household $Oldim wr:re ailed ERIN.LUGAL or LU. TUKUL

"

BOlh soldiers and workmen 5C1:m 10 have be1:n moved aOOUi the empire as required. and though army sizes are nOI recorded. one body of workmen on canal maintenance was 21,799 strong.

It is probable that higher unit organisation remainea unchanged from the Akkadia n period.

Isin, Lana aDd the Am an te leulement.

Following the collapse of the: Third Dynasty of Ur, a successor kingdom, ccnlerea on the city of Isin, managed to maintain peace and stability in Sumer. The kings of the First Dynasty or hin deliberately strove to mainlain the traditions of the kings of Ur, even to the extenl of retaining Sumerian as the official language of inscriptions, though the majority or the population now spoke Akkadian.

During this period, in the early years orthe second miUenium, many Amorite tribes ceased to be nomadic. Instead, in large numbers, they settled around, and in some cases inside, the old urban centres throughout Mesopotamia and Syria. This process of gradual urbanisation created numerous small Amorite kingdoms, ofwhkh the most signifi· cant wen Aleppo (Yamkhad). Qatna, Mari and Ashur.

The Amoriles in southern Mesopotamia were quickly assimilated culturally and by the end orme Old Babylonian period they had been totally absorbed by the nati\'e, Akk..adian-speaking. population. In Assyria, howe\"Cr, the Arnorite dynuty or Shamshi·Adad I was later regarded as an unwelcome intrusion of roreigners 'not or Assyrian blood'.

or lhe many Amorite kingdoms established in Mesopotamia tWO in panicular achieved considerable power and importance. The first of thC$C was the kingdom of Larsa, founded by Gungunum, c. 1932 B.C. a 'Sheikh of the Amorites' whose tribe settled about ursa in the last days of the Third Dynasty kings of Ur. Gungunum seized Ur rrom Lipit-bhtar of Isin and gained conuol of the lucrative trade between Ur and Dilmun (modern Bahnin) in copper, gold, ivory and precious stones rrom their sources of supply in Iran, Oman, and, possibly, India.

Both bin and Larsa roughl ror dominance amongst t.he multitude of Amorite kingdoms, the kings or both cities claiming 10 be 'King ofSumer and Akkad'. However, by 1860 B.C., Irra·immiti, the king orlsin, ruled linle more th~n the capital. and Amorite sheikhs had eSI~bli5hed kingdoms around Kish, Uruk, Mal"llld, Sippar, and a small lown called Bab-il im, or Babylon. Irra·imi tti must have been an exceedingly unlucky man. When an omen roretold the dealh of the king, Irra·imini followed the standard procedure and proclaimed a 'substitute king', his gardener Enlil·hani. Afler a shon time such 'substitutes' were usually put to death, thereby the omen being fulfilled. Unfor· tunately Im ·imiui ale a precipitate bowl of broth, and died, leaving the gardener as king. The hurriedly deified Enlil·b:mi ruled the steadily eroding Sllle of Isin for over 20 years!

THE OLD BABYLONIAN AND OLD ASSYRIAN KINGDOMS 1894·1595 BC

When Hammul"lllpi (1792·1750 Bq ascended the throne or Babylon, the mosl powe rful Slate in Mesopotamia was Assyria. (known then as Ashur or Subinu,) ruled by Shamshi·Acbd I (1813· 1781 BC). Most orthe area to the south of Babylon was controlled by Rimsin (1822·1763 Bq of Eshnunna. The city-state of Mari, si tuated on the middle stretch of the Euphrates, at the iunction ofimponant trade routes, was within Shamshi·Adad's sphere of influence and administered by his ratber elTete son Yasmakh·Adad, (we know this from the letten sent to him by his father, which make excellent reading!). Assyrian power began to decline witb the death orShamshi·Adad I. Even his com· pelent eldest son and successor, hhme·Dagan. could not prevent Yasnukh·Adad losing Ihe throne orMari to Zimri· Lim, or the rise of Hammurapi 10 supremacy in Mesopotam ia. Hammurapi defeated Assyria, fuhnun D. and Larsa, and remained frien dly with Mari until that ci ty was itselr annexed by him. It is from the enormous palace archive which has survivcd al MIlri, that the political, diplomatic and military situ:Jlion existing II this time can be reconstructed in remarkable detai l.

Military Organisation

Mililary organisation in the Amorite Slates or Mesopotamia and Syria (or which Babylon, Assyria and Yamkhad, or Aleppo, were tbe. mOIl powuful) appears to have been very similar. A common Indition of Amorite tribal organiS:ltion was combined wilh elements of Sumerian tradit ion.

T exIS make it clear that there were two basic types of soldie r; the (proper) soldier, or (qaqad) rtdim , and his reserve, or IQIt.Mlnasnu. They were required to serve either on wllr-Krvice, police-dUlies or labouring (such as d.igging canals and building ronifications). this obligation of service bein,g ICrmed illt.um. In return for this service the soldier and

'0

his family were granted I house Ind lind by the king, and it appears Ihlt ail the male m~Clbers of the family shared the ilkum duties in tum, perhlps on In annUliI basis. These plou of land, generally minimum of one bur or 65 hectares. were apparently divided between tbe udum aod his reserve in the proportion of2:1, and remained the property of the king. This land could neither be leased nor sold, and could be recllimed by the king al any time. The lCtuallength of service involved in j/bm is nOI clear.

The ruler was usually accompanied on ampaign by his household retinue, known at Mati and Ashur either as the girslilum~ the kiJi, IMrrim , or jusl the:: kisrum. AI Babylon the king's retinue was always called the JtUi, IMrri, and seems 10 have comprised 500 to 1000 men.

From tbe rtdu. were selected elite troops known as bdlrntm or hrt'nlm (derived from the: word meaning 'to choose'). Only "willi (free citizens) could b«ome bdhntm.

Unit Organbadon

An anny or 'expediLion' ("'amlltim), could number as many as 20,000, 30,000 or even 60,000 men, but smaller forces of 100, 1000, 2000 and 10,000 are also recorded. The commander·in-chief of an army was known IS an aliJt pdni.

The GAL.MAR . TU. or rDbi Amurrnm, meaning 'Commandu of Amorites', was an administrative rank II Mari, liaising belwun the army and the coun . In Yamkhad, Eshnunna and Babylon (where the rank was UGALA.MA R · TU or _ft.il Amurrnm), he was an active military commander over large bodies of troops, numbering up to 3000.

The DUB.SAR.AiAR. TU or lupsar Amurntm, meaning 'scribe of the Amoriles', could lead forces in the field. He wu s«ond in command 10 Ihe rDbi A murrnm, in charge of the ccnsusand consc:ript IislS.

The GALKUD or rabi pinjm, a 'aptain', (known It Babylon IS a PA.PA or _/til sliD IIlwttim), commanded the 'company', known as a KUD or pirs;m, of 200 men.

The NU.BANDA or lopuuam, commanded units less than 200 strong but grtaler than 10, probably 100 men, IS this number WlIS required to guard I 1wlsiJu:J (district) and a NUBANDA luJisu, was responsible for a vi113ge. He could command a baztJft.AD/Jim (suongpoint) and btJtJr'ntm (elite troops).

The tlJMatum, or squad nflO men wucommanded by an UGAU.(IO) LU or r»a1til (10) aw;/um, a SOrt of'decurion'. At Babylon he was called an UGALA .NAM.(10) nr rcoJtil ul/llmim.

The ordinary ,oldiers .. llere known as UKU. USH or rtdum, 10 which the epithet SI.SA or iSMntm, meaning 'regular' could be added. Small numbers could let as bodyguards alongside Prltqll, in bodies around 500 strong. Militlry reserves were known as LU.DIRIG.GA or I/Xlt/antm at Mati, and DAKH or raJtUAllm It Blbylon.

Small detachments of soldiers used for escon or guard duties were refer~ 10 as an Dlift./um.

Troop Typel

The grealer pan of the army at Ihis time consisted of infantry, of which there were several different typc5. The main diviJion was between ,obum ft.ibitum, or 'heavily-Irmed troops' and sob" m fDllor" m, or ' light troops'. Sources indicate lhat the sobum /tibi/um required tn operate from I base, or tue up holding positions, while the Ulbum qaltatum, were C'lpable nf mounting ambushes or wrmishing, and could include guides and look-outs. Troops could also be defined as sobum emuqo/um. or 'veterans', and as sabum doltnum or sab,,1I'I' dtJmqam, referring to panicularly good or effective troops. An interesting trOOp-type. which appears to have been considered essentia l to take on campaign (Shamsl·Adad once reprimanded Yasmakh·Adad for neglecting 10 mobilise them), were the ba'l·ntm. The tenn is derived from the word meaning 'to hunl ' (like Ihe Napoleonic 'chuseur ' and 'jaeger'), and their principle weapon WI! an ue.

Chariotry consisted of two types oflw()owheeled datiOl, the 1UJrMbsum Ind the nalHJlum. Some chariots were fu rther defined as 'fISt'. ChariotS are known from Syrian and Anatoliln Kals Ind models from Blbylonia at this lime. Their design was a development of the earlier Sumerian 'piliform-car', but were equipped with spoked wheels. They were drawn by twO or four mules. donkeys or horses, which were now making their appc.ranee in the Near EaSt . Le;ther coven for chariot, and animals Ire l iso hinted :It. A limited amounl of tiding 1110 took place, and a leller from "uri, advises the king lhat it was nOI fitting fo r a sove.reign 10 ride I hnrse:.

21

D efe nee

The countrysjde was guarded against marauders by means offon ified outposts or strongpoints called bazaJrhatum, and guard troops who included spears among their equipment. These outpostS reponed movements ofpcoplc, pursued fugitives and were capable of resisting serious attacks. Fire'signals were used to give warning of impending anack and to mobilise the armed forces in defence. A letter from the eldest son of Shams hi· Ad ad I, hhme-Dogan, to his rather incompetent brother, Yasmakh·Adad at Mari, tdls us that when a large raiding party entered his ter· ritory, Yasmakh seems to ha\'C panicked and lit two fire-signals at night, which resulted in complete national mobilisation. His brother advised him to send out m~ngers to repon that it was only a false alarm and hall the process.

Auxiliary T roops

Great reliance was placed on assistance from v:usa.1 or allied states. Contingents supplied by foreign allies were known as sam.1I1 tilJatu1l1 , while native reinforcements were referred to as sahum ruddum. Allied contingents could be very large; one contingent sent to Mllfi from Yamkhad, numbered 10,000 men, another, from Hammurapi, numbered 10,500.

Allies could prove unreliable as Shamshi-Adad I found out. In one letter he refers 10 a cen2in Yashub-Addu, who had altered his allegiance several times in the previous three years and in the space of only two months would swear an 02th of allegiance to one lting and then swear an 02th to another, thereby becoming an enemy of the first king. Another source records that 15 minor ltings followed Hammurapi, with similar numbers allied 10 ursa, Eshnunna and Yamkhad.

Nomadic tribes were often allied or subjCClto the Amorile ltingdoms, and could be levied for military service. This may have been imposed as a condition of settlement within the te rr itory of the state. M ilitary scribes were sent into their encampments to list those eligible for service. Tribesmen were sometimes reluctant to be levied, and in order to encourage them the bead of an executed criminal would be carried around thei r encampments. In one leller Shamshi-Adad states that if the king goes on campaign, every member of the tribe should be made aVlli lable by the tribal chief. To hold anyone back would be 'sacrilege against the lting' . The tribes rKOrded at Mari were the H ana (who were of particular milita ry imponance), Sutu, Banu·yamin (Benjaminitcs) and Bani-Sim'a1. The Banu· yamin were panicularly unreliable and unconuollable. Habi ru, or 'Apiru' tribesmen arc mentioned, and apparently lived in the approaches to Syria.

Composition of Armlcs

A letter from Shamshi-Adad I to Yasmakh·Adad consists ofinslruClions 1510 the mUSler of trOOpS for I campaign, and may provide an example ofa typical army. Yasmakh-Adad has already gOt 3000 men, levied for their military service. 2000 men arc to be levied from among the tribal encampmen ts, for which purpose military scribes have already entered the camps and made lists. 1000 of these men should be Hana, 600 should be levied from the Uprapu, Yarikhu Ind Amanu sub-t ribes, and 200 and 300 can be obtained 'here and there' until sufficient n umber have been collected. Only 1000 personal retainers will be required, and the total of troops will be 6000. To these will be added 10,000 men sent by Shamshi-Adad, probably native Assyrians, described as a strong and well-equippcd contingent . A funher 6000 allied troops are expected to come from Eshnunna. The entirt force is described as '20,000; a strong army', (in fact it tota ls 22,000).

Supply

Apart from soldiers, an army would require supplies and transport . This consisted of pack -donkeys, fou r·wheeled wagons (mqllum ) and boats. The laner would be especially important when it is considered that the Euphrates was a major mil itary route. In one case 200 ships were required to tnnsport 3000 men. Although this suggests small ships carrying only 15 men each, they may have been larger with some devoted to supplies.

Mari was 8 centre for weapon manufacture, and armouries were probably attached to the palace . Shamshi-Adad I scnt orders to Mari for shields, arrowheads and siege equipment, and the palace supplied Hana tribesmen with some weapons.

Military Law

The famous law<Ode of Hammurapi lists several rulings concerning the land holdings granted by the king which carried an obligation for military service. They were intended to protect the system from abuse and ensure that there were always enough soldiers. i f a soldie r did not answer the call-up or sent a substitute, the penalty was death. if a soldier was taken prisoner or missing in action and the land was granted to another, it would be restored to

"

its original owner, logelher with Ihe obligation, ifhe returned .. The land ofa mining or caplured soldier could be given 10 his son, bUI ifhis son was tOO young for mililary $('r".i«, the family only received one third for Iheir support. Any ransom ~uired to recover a capth~ could be paid by the tcmple or Ihe Slate. (In Eshnunna, if the wife ofl missing soldier subsequendy re-married and the soldier laler relUmed, he was entilled 10 have his wife back!). Officus who approprialed a soldier 's land grant or abused Ihe sySlem in OIher ways, were liable 10 Ihe death penalty. The land gnO! was inalienJble and could nOi be willed 10 female heirs. These rules are clearly anempting (0 ensure Ihal lhe land remained directly connected wilh mili tary scrvict .

. ~'c.'" HATT IAN STATES (" 0 ~ CONQuERED BY HITTITES ~c..P~:. f...tU/i/i "-J

..L ':-, ....... ' ... . I, ~

"\ .. " lfSHU ·. ":::.\ • SHUSH"'~

,

• ~ STATES

'0 '---~ - • EBLA -- -.0"",. " . I

'. tv I ""

MARl-RETJENNU I

THE AMORITE WORLD c. 1895- 1595 Be

HAMMUR"PIC EHPIRE - - -

OLD HITTITE EMPIRE .. - . - .

MITANNI AND MESOPOTAMIA 1600 TO 1200 Be

The Hurnans

GUT I

TURUKKU

t" KASS ITI "ESHNUNNA •

-

The original homeland Oflhe Hurri WliIIS s ituated in Ihe highlands where Ihe Euphrates and Tigris rise, and their language was related 10 Uranian. During the 2nd Millennium Be, Hunian. begDn 10 form a growing element in the populaliGns of Syria and Mmpolamia. By the 17th ~ntury BC sevenl Hurrian slates had formed in thm regions. By 16th cenlUry Be a confederation of such Stales had given rise to a powerful Slate in Ihe region of Northcrn Mesopolamia belween the Euphntes and Tigris, known as Ihe l az; r • . This was Ihe kingdom of Mitanni, known as Hanigalbat 10 Ihe Assyrians, Ind probably as Naharin to Ihe Egyptians and Canaaniles. The origil1lll homeland of the Hurri.ns was known to the Hiuites as Ihe 'Hurri-Iond'.

The MilaDD.lan Empire

The kings of Milanni, ruling from lheir c.pital, Washshuganni. spread their influence over the Stiles of Nonhern Syria thaI had been formerly under Hittite control during the Old Hiuile Kingdom; Carchemish, Aleppo, Muki. h., Nukhashshe and n'CfI KizzuW'lnJ in Analolia. Nonhwards, thtir aKltrol extended over the Hum.land, and ca5fWlrds, deep into Mesopollmia, the cities of Arnpha and Nuzi being close 10 Nineveh itself. Au yria was hemmed in 10 west and south by Mitlnni and may even have been • M..iWlnian vassal at Ihis time. This reprelCntl the heighl of Mitannian power in the (Slh century Be, achieved during the reigns of Paratama and Shaullalar. The campaigns ofThutmose 1II expanded the Egyplil n Empire II Mitannian c:xpense, and brought Egypl into direct confila wilh Mi[anni. Analam. I, regained some ICrritory, and Thutmose IV of E&ypI established peaceful rclalions by entering inlo a marriage IlIilnce, after lengthy negOliation. The twO nations became firm allies during the reigns

"

of ShUiama I and ArnuDhOl:ep III of Egypt, perhaps in response 10 the renewed su·tn"h of the Hittites. An anti· Egyptian flKtion, led by a ctruin Ud·ki, opposed the Egyptian alliance and assassinated the king, Anasruhumln, placing his brother. Tusbnna, 00 the throne. He disposed of Ud·ki and renewed the Egyptian pact, but the: sec:dJ of in lema I strife had been sown. The new king of Halli, Suppiluliumu, commenced hostililies Iglinst Mitlnni, bUlan initial made was dcfel'ncd by Tushr:aua. The Hittites then began to outfllnk Mitanni Itrategically by draw· ing Kiuuwl(Da under their control and forming an alliance witb I rival claimant 10 the: throne, Anltlllll. woo had set himself up as king in the Hum·land. In three wan, SuppiJuliwnas conquered Mitlnni'. Syrian vusala ud broke the power of Milanni, aided by civil war within dun counuy. By supponing rival claimants as their prOltgCl the Hittites brought the pelter pan of Mituni under their control. Meanwhile the Assyrians seized this oppor· tunity to secure their independence under Asbur-uballitl, and invaded Mitanni from the East . The final ovcnhrow ofa much reduced Hanigalblt, was accomplimed by Shalmancscrl (127401245 Bq.

Hittite Empire

- --I' Hurri- \ c::!

land I ~ I I , , - - - - - -

Kizzuwatna Mitanni - AssyrJ;-' \) ,

Mukish Naharin HarJiga1b \ 't ,

',/

Mitannian Empire - --

MITANNI AND NEIGHBOURS

c. 1380 Be

I I

Mhannian O,..aniu tion

Elam

Information ahoutthe military organiution of the Kingdom of Mitanni derives from evidence re lating to the Vlssal kingdom of Arraphl. situated on the eastern fringe of the Milannian Empire, contained in the I rchivCJ from Nun.

Arnpha was divided into provinces called nalru, each posscssing I wallcd capital and levenl smaller walled towns, or alu. The province was Rdministered for the king by a IwllUhlu. or r/wln'" mCi/i official. Undcr him, each town and district wu governed by a ntua""u, or 'mayor'. Within each dist rict were nume rous dima /i. These were settle· ments or estates with their own lord, or btl dim!u , The estate comprised a few villages and a forti fied 'manor' or willchtower. It WIIS worked by tenants known as asnJlwbu.

Frequent &kinnishing with Auyria required that each towo be garrisoned by royal Arraphan troops, Arraphan militia, or even regular Millnnian forces. The Iwza""u WIIS responsible for the ICCUrily of his own dist rict, but mlY not have actually been. field commander. The militia were !talioned in Imall forces .t each town.

One of the documents from Nun mentions men ofthe 'lands' of Haoigalbat, Ampha and Mitanni, and perhaps, together with Nlharin, these names refer properly to grtIt provinces of the Mitannian Empire, Ihe names Nlharin and Hanigan)lt beinllUumed by the Egyptians and Assyrians as terms for this peat power, being the names of the reliona with which they had the most contlla. This would aplain why contingent' could be designated u 'of Hanigalbal ' or 'Millnni' Ind the usc of these: names to refer to more specirK: regions within Mitanoi.

24

The warrior cI~ss, or fUlltItIiSIIJItIl, consisu:d of professional soldien and militia who were under In obligation to serve. This obligation was known u isltnrll, (literally 'man of arm",.,') or ;{ltll . Soldien were called Qlilt illtll, 'one who performs the:: illtll dUly' .

MaryllDlIU

The cream oIthe army were the chariot warriors known as maryallll.,. The: skills ofhorKmanship and chariot warfare we:~ highly developed among the Hurrians, and the ' maryalfllll-system' wu prot-bly invented ltId brought to perfection in Mitanni. Millnnian ideas and the: panc:m of their equipment had a profound inIluena: on the:: dcvt:lopment of chariouy in all the neighbouring countries.

The term mar)\:Jnnu, meaning 'noble chariot warrior', derivea from an Indo-European word rdated to the:: Sanskrit marya, meaning 'youth' or 'hero'. Maryalllfu stalUs was connected with land holdings ltId could be: hemiiuuy. TheR: could be: mOR: than one grade of mal'}'Jlfllu-scrvice, but not all chariOtry personnd wcre of mQr)\:Jnllu Slams, and not all mtJ?"I"fUI, posKSSed chariots.

The king poueucd an inner bodyguard of chariot!}' mown u the IMp; IluIrri, (literally 'the fect of the king '). consiJling of about tcn chariots. A force of ten chariotS was also required to provide a bodyguard for the king" son in battle. The rest oftbc chariot ry consisted of elite chariotecn, known as aliA sm', meaning 'campaigner' or 'veteran', IIOd militia charioteen.

Royal moryannu could be: ICnt OUt from the pala« in MilllOni to assist in the dc:fc:ntt of the:: provinces. These 'charioteers of Hanigalbal' are known al four towns, numbering over 200 chariots in aU.

ElIch charioteer was wigned aIIu or 'brothers', (probably grooms or 'squire' ), Ind 'bowmen of the chariotecn'.

Hanigalt-t (Mitann;) Ind Kardiniash (Kassite Babylonia) were noted as sources of good horses. The Hurrian.s appear to have ~ apert It horlCmanship and a Hurrian manual on the subject written by I certain Kikkuli, was transilled intO Hittite It Hattusas, indicating how other nltions valued their aptrtisc. Honea began training in their Itt year and we~ pulling chariot. by their 3rd year. They became proper chariot bones between their 4th and 9th year. Horses were graded accoroins to quality and reserve horses were known u maIm Hones were fed on barley and regular ly aerciscd by being driven certain prescribed distances.

At Nuzi, horlC. were apparently ridden on occuion and messc:ngen called mar l/tipri, arc known to have U'I\-dlcd in this way. A term for 'horstman' was raltib IUli.

Infantry, known u Utllltu(ltlu, comprised both archers ltId spcan:nm who could be equipped witb swords and leather armour.

The alJuhabu tenants could Illso serve u soldien.

Unit Org.Dllation

The: chariot unit, or tmanti. of 5 or 10 vehicles was commanded by an tmalliultlu . SiJ: such unil5 were commande1i by I 'chief tmontultill' . This officer was also involved with supplying rations to the men under his command and one is rKOrdcd as commanding a garrison, so it is possible that he could also command infant!}'.

Apart from the chariot organisllion mentioned above, tats refer to officers called rob (5,4 rob (f0,4 and rob (12), who commanded units of these sizes. The rab (10) was equivalent to the mlon(ultlll. Inventories of equipment are sometimes in quantities of 100 or just over 200, suggesting further possible groupi ngs. One source li.1I 3000 olik iflti, consisting of chariOleers and archen, another records the following troops and numbers; 536 charioteers, 261 Qlilt iflt~ 196 nalthuJ/ultu, 26 asll1lwbu, 82 archers, 66 aliA iflti archers and 55 bowmen ofthe chariotry. Texts also refer to men mustered from particular cities, indicating that districts may have: provided the basis for individual units.

Many Nuzi tablets arc described as 'tablets of the right' or ' left', ltId entriea refer to men of the 'right ' or ' left' and the inspection of equipment belonging to these two divisions. ThiJ would indicate thai the army was divided inlo left and right wings for organisational and tactical purposca. Presumably there was I 'ccnt~' also. TalS speak of 230 men, 156 ofwbom arc chariOtCC:fS, of the ' left', 260 'brothcn' of the 'left ' and acale armour for men IIOd hones of the 'left-', so we should conceive ofleft IIOd right winp of the: anny comprising hundrcdJ of weU-cquipped chariots, probably with infltltry support. Some ofthc:sc men are associated wi th the:: palace and so may be dite troops.

25

Ka rdunia, h; Ka,.ite Babylonia

The Kassites (Kashshu), whose original homcland was in the region of LuriSlan in Iran, made their appearance in Babylonia as the Old Babylonian Empire fell into dedine. They seem (0 have inflilraled peacefully, gndually senling on the land, eventually cre:lling a kingdom on the frontien of Babylonia. While this was happening, Southern Babylonia had rebelled, creating an independent kingdom oflhe 'Sea-Land', but it was the Hittites, under Mursilis I, who delivered the final blow to the Old Babylonian kingdom when they advanced down tbe Euphrata and ucked Babylon. After a sbon period, wben the king oflbe Sea-l.3nd was in control, a Kassite dynasty ascended (he tltrone of Babylon. By 1460 the Sea-Land had fallen under their comrol, and Kirduniash, as Kassile Babylon was known, bc:came a united and apparently well·governed state, r«ognised as a first-nte power by her neighbours.

Milit.ary campaigns were directed at three: main enemies. The Sutu uibc:smen. inhabiting the desens ncar the middle Euphnues, the Elamites, who offen mounled raids into Baby[onia, and chiefly the Assyrians, usually in dispute of border territories. The SUN seem to have been quite a serious menace, one raid pcnetnting as far as Uruk. Messengers to and from Karduniash were regularly interrupted while passing through the regions in which they roomed. Kadc:shman Kharbe led a major campaign against the SUN and established a permanent garris.on 10 secure the route. BOlh Karduniash and Assyria were equally concerned aboul these nomads and s.ometimes co-operated by exchanging intelligence reports. Kurigalzu (1340-[324 Be) achieved a major victory against Elam. and succeeded in c:lpturing $usa. The Elamite king, Khurpatila, bad mustered his army in the fontess ofDur-Shulgi and threatened to invade Babyloni.a. Here he was defeated and pursued imo Elam. Kurigalzu also IIppe~rs to have been successful in one of the many border wars against Assyria, defeating the Assyrians in two battks at Arbela and Sugaga, close to Ashur. the ClIpital of Assyria. These wan usually resulted in a new demarClltion of the border between the tWO countries.

With the collapse of the M itannian Empire, Assyria became stronger and began to intervene in Babylonia. The Kassiles seem to have formed alliances with the Turukku and Guti tribt-s of the bgros mount.ains in order to outflank Assyria, forcing Assyrian expeditions into these regions. Kashtiliash IV (1242-1235 Be) provoked a decisive Assyrian response when he invaded Assyria while Tukulti-Ninurta I \10'.&5 on campaign far 10 the north in the highlands of Nairi. A major war ensued in which KaSliliash was forced back and defeated. The Assyrians went on to c:lpture Babylon. annex important border district! and install their own governors in Babylonia. Following this Auyrians, Elamites and K.assite rebt-ls vied for control until the King ofElam, Shutruk-Nahhunte, invaded Babylonia, defeated her army and plundered Babylon very thoroughly, carrying orr the image of the stale-god, Marduk, to Susa. The Kassite dynasty w:IIS brought to an end.

Surviving records from this period are sparse aDd have received little attention, so il is difficult to reconstruct Kassite military organisation. A system similar to that of Arrapha, described under Mitanni, is likely. The army probably featured a slrong chariot arm as the Kassites, like tbe Hunians, were renowned for their knowledge of horsemanship. Horses from Karduniash were in demand as far aWlilY as Egypt and Hatti. Large quantities of gold were received from Egypt in return for horses and chariots. The kuduml-Stones, inscribed boundary markers recording land-grants, suggest a land-owning aristocracy which could have provided the chariot-warriors. Letters 10 high officials and kings refer to guards, fons and chariotry of thcir cities or territories. The inscription ofWti-Marduk. dating to the following dynasty, records that he was a commander of the chariotry oflhe right-wing. T he inscription conetrns a land-granl in return for his service at the battle of the Ulai (c. 1120 BC). Representations on kudurru demonstnte the existence of infantry archers.

ASSYRIA

The military history of Auyria falls into Ihree main periods; (I) the Old Assyrian Period (2000- 1700 BC), during which time the king. Shamshi-Adad I (1813-1781 Be), created an Assyrian Empire which included the state of Mari. Assyrian military org~nisalion at that time was probably closely related to that of M~ri and is described together with the Old Babylonian system in an earlier section. (2) The Middle Assyrian Period (1365-745 BC), when Assyria broke away from Mitannian domin.ation under Ashur-uballil I, bt-gan to establish her control over Mesopotamia, fought orr the Aramaean incunions and embarked on a policy of conquest which created the Assyrian Empire. (3) The Nto-Assyrian Period (745-609 Be) corresponds to the Assyrian Empire at iu height, from the re-organisation of Tiglath-Pilcser III to its final overthrow by the Medes, Babylonians and Scythians.

THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN PERIOD 1365·745 BC

Up to the time of Ashur-uballit 1(1365-1330 BC), Assyria had been a relatively weak state, restricted to the Uppcr Tigris valley and probably a vassal of Mitanni. The region of Arnpha' and Nuzi, close to Nineveh, was pan of

"

the M itannian Empire, and the military organisation of Assyria was probably ... ery similar. It is likely that later Assyrian military organisation de ... eloped from Mitannian roots. The Assyrians had to defend themsel ... es againsl enemies on all sides, the Mitanni, the KlSsites, Suhu and Ahlamu tribesmen to the south, and mountain peoples to the nonh and tast . When the Mitannian Empire began to break up under Hittite attack, the Assyrians, under Ashul-uballit I and later Shalmaneser I, se.iud terrilory from Hanigalbat (as Milanni was called in Assyria), and arne imoconulC! with the H ittites. A ftw border skinnishes may have: followed, encouraging the Hinites and Egyptian,lO make peace in the face of this new threat . Kassite influence o\'er Assyria was decisively ended by Tukult iNinuna I (1244-1208 8q. The conquest of Hanigalbat probably had:l great st rengthening effect on Assyria IS

tbis region already had a well-developed military organisation and "' .... rrior class. Tigla th-Pileser I (1115·\077 BC) conquered regions fun her west of Assyria and led Assyrian arms across the Euphrates as far as the Mediterranean, but it was a shOll lived success, for the AnlllMean incursions threw Assyria OntO the defensive for several generations. The oomadic Aramaeans overran many of the Hinite successor states. They also occupied the Babylonian countryside, but wert n.,rowly prevented from seuling in Assyria by determined drom on tbe pan of Assyrian kings, although the Assyrian te rritories welt of the T igris were lost.

Adad·Nirari II and Tikulti-Ninuna II campaigned against the Aramaeans and succeeded in conquering terrilOry as far as the river Khabur, and Assyria had r«overed as a mili tary power with the accession of Ashurnasirpal 11 (884-859 8q. T his ruthless and aggressive king led Assyrian arms once again :as far u the Mediterranean COUt . His successor. Shalmaneser 1II (858-824 BC), campaigned in the Taurus and Zagros mountains and in Babylonia, sent an army d~p inlO Iran as fQ r as Media, and allempted a lasting conquest of the Nro-Hinites and Aramaeans west oftbe Euphrates. Bi t-Adini was conquered in 856, and in 853 Shalmaneser crosscd the Euphrates. H e was prevented in achieving his objective by a coalition led by Hamath and Damascus at (he banle or Karkar. Shalmaneser cont inued to allack these stOtes and in 841 'crossed the Euphrates for (he 16th time', but failed to conquer Damascus. Eventually Shalmaneser abandoned this policy. He had also auacked Uranu but, again, without lasting result s.

Despite their m il ita ry proweu, the Assyrians were not able to create an empire out of their conquests. only a sphere ofinfiuence within which they were supreme. The main strategy behind their campaigns was to reduce the power of their rivals and increase their own. Tribute was imposed on conquered SUites, and puniti ... e ezped.itions were sent promptly if it was OOt fonhcoming. This tribute was of massive economic value to Assyria and included livestock, foodstuffs, luxury goods, wood. captive labour and items of dirtCt military value such u horses, chariots, iron, other metals and weaponry. In order to increase respect and renown, a form of psychological warfare was de ... eloped io which se ... ere reprisals were meted out against enemy resistance or rebellion_ Thc:sc: methods were represented in palace rt liefs, where ... isiting dignitaries could I« them and take note. and so may not actually ~ ... e h«n used as much :as it would appear.

MUlta,..,. Organi. atlon.

The military organisation of Assyria at this time was probably developed from the system used in Mitanm, which had once atended into what was OOW Anyna and in t.he rtgions east of the Euphrates which Assyria had taken over. It was probably based. on an obligation to reoder military Krvice to the king on tbe p:at1 of individuals known as the / Ib-obligation. This continued into the N~Assyrian period. and the Ufb Ilta rn element of the later organisation may preserve something of the earlier system, although then eztended to the Empire as writ One source rt'COtds troops known as khurodu (quradu?), who carried OUt the ilJtu~bliplion with thdr 'brothen'. In the time: ofSbal.m.ancstt III men wert levied from the villages and assigned by the provincial governor to various units or officers, in a similar manner to later practice. These unit. wert probably also kim, as the rank 101 kitnl u klturodu ('commander of Jtlturodu units') is known. Some son of substitution may have been possible as lists tJ:is( of men levied as substitutes (.l!umu) ror others.

The army consisted of chariolry, probably provided by a land~wning nobility, and some regular elite chariotry of the king; cavalry, which probllbly de ... eloped during the 9th cenlury OUt of the: cha riotry; and infantry, consisling of Ituplhu and ashorittu. The Itupsltu, were peasant amscripts and the Dlllan'ltu were bener-trained and equipped elite troops. The lerm asllDriltU is related to the words ashantlintu ('prowess') and asltoridll (· ... anguard'). TiglathPileser I records t~t some of his soldiers were trained ' for a fight [0 the finish' . Infantl}' comprised spearmen and archers.

As 10 unit organisation, the basic unit, or lIim, appears to ~ ... ~ tJ:isted and represented troops recruited Crom • cenain loc:aJity. A smaller unit was a squad of ten meo. commanded by IlOilO, or rob tsllirrt. The levy of troops from their villages was the responsibility of the rab Dlanj (village oveneet). Fons (IIDlsll) were manned by wbi osllabll (garrison troops) and commanded by Itomalll, or Itolillu officers.

The: second-in-c-ommand to the Iling was the IIlTlanu, a general who could lead campaigns instead of the king, as did the tllrtanu, Daian-Ashur, during the rtigo of S~lmane:sc:r III.

27

Ludu

'UPPER SEA'

Mushki /

;' \ Tabal

/urartu \

/ .. <'" G"<~ --/

/

Que

v · .. ·, ladnana

SIdOr ~\, ... 1,fe '->:~

J>

C,.chem,st!. •

"",", • Hamllh • Olmncu~ , --/ ARISI

r ,~ ;:f . Jerunlem

r'ih" - '-0 Huu'" ~ Urm'~ ., . ~Nai ro ' .. '_

. ~ "~~ . /(ornrnOhu ,,"' • • 0.,·\-. Mann .. ) . Arbela

~'rrln "- ....,.

,

~ :.I-~ . ~ . ~.

~"

~

"'" • Ellip i

"

" " "

'I:+-,·i l p\J\(,UOU C

t>-~ -Sab,.. 011 11.1 '1"'8,,( 8IT-OAKU "

-"Madal \

\:>, \

Parsumash f

• Suu f Elamtu I

\ Musru

''(" I

~udahO /

BIT-AMW(ANI ~~

" . C(J~~,~, ....... "U ~

/ /

\ / "l -/ - - ;'

/

\

THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE

c. 650 Be •

~.' •

-'lOWER

SEA'

I

1'l

THE NED-ASSYRlAN EMPiRE 745-609 BC

The mililary and adminisf.ralive organisation oflhe Nco-Assyrian Empire .... ,.s probably fhe resul! of reforms made by Tiglalh·Pile:K!r III (745·727 Be). Shalmaneser III died in 824 Be amid rebellion and civi l war in Assyria. He ..... 15 followed by a sUCCCS5ion of wC1lk king. who wtn: unable 10 maintain internal stabili ly and hold Assyria's conqucsis in Ibe face of the growing power ofUrartu. Adad·Nirari III, who did achieve some limiled success, ascc:nded lbe throne as a minor, his mOfher. Sammuramal (Semiramis), acting 15 regenl. The problem was also panly due 10 lhe old mililary and administrative sytlem, which was falling infO decay. In 745 Be a revoir in Kalhu (Nimrod) placed a cenain general Pulu on the Ihrone, who took the name Tiglalh-Pileser (III). Tigialb.Pile:K!r proceeded 10 refonn Ihe government of Assyria in order 10 lirengthen Ihe cenlral aUlhorilY and weld AuyrUin conqucsls intO an empire stronger !han before:. Assyria iuelf was re-orpni5ed inlO strultier provinces. and vassal stalCS ..... ere annes:ed and lnosfonncd inlO further provinces. Each was governed by a 51ale appointed bt/.pilwli (provincitllord) or sWrru (gcm::rnor). Terrilorics nOlsuillble for annendon were nevenhelw supervised by a ,tpll (o .... erseer). An emcienl courier Iyslem \llas tslablished fhroughou l the Empire and the king maintained dOK control over the provinces and rKeived detailed repons (surviving examples being invaluable for the reconstruction of military organisalion). A regular standing army was crealed, backed up in lime of war by a well-organiJed cill-up of men under obligation to render milillry service. Perhaps fhe leaSI successful innoontion was the mJSS deponalion of subject peoples and their re-sculemenl in olher parts of the Empire, probably intended 10 diminish nationilloyaities and enhance a sensc of belonging 10 the Empire. It lended to enhance dislike of Assyril.

The army wu divided in to four component pans; (I) me qurubllti, or 'household IrOOpS', (2) the Itisi, shDmm: or 'king's standing army', (3) Ihe IDb sham, or 'king's men', a son of 'I err ito rial anny', and (4) the dikll/-mati, or 'gene.r.l l levy', a sort of'levy-cn.mlSsc' of the populal ion, likely to be used only in I.imes of greal notional emergency. The fi rst three clements musl now be dc.scribed in greluer detail.

The Qurubull

The ,II",buti, known more rully IS ,II",bu/i Jlto Wpe and often simply as slla sluX eomprised Ihe personal bodyguard of Ihe king. The crown prince and the queen also had their own bodyguard units, fhe qurubutl' mal' sharrland the ,urubut; IImmi sham. The fll,IIbuti contained both cavalry. or ,IIrublltt slla pitllalli and chariOlry, lIarltabtil JIu~ Sargon U rKOrds twO oc:casKIns when he ",-ent into action accompanied only by his bodyguard cavalry, which numbered 1000 men. Bodyguard infantry also aistcd, known IS ~k slttpL One unit was called the .. II,," shtpt ,IIradu, the tenn fllrMII, meaning ' heroes' .

The Kisir Sbarnni

The kis;r sAarnui, or 'king's standin, limy', .... ,.s a luge force composed of regular, professional soldiers, maiotained by the king. ElemenlS of this force would be 5Ialioned throughout Ihe Empire in order 10 back up the locallyrcauitcd forces. M.ost of the troop-types used by Ihe Assyrians were. represented among ilS ranks. These comprised; chariotry (MrkDbrll), caonlry (Pi/MIIII), and infanfry (,,"Jtu). The infantry were funber lub-dividcd into Irchers (MIll '/Uti), speannen (lIasil ~maru), various types oflhield-bcaren, and slingc.n. Records show tbal the best clements in Ihe armies of conquered countries were recruited into the kisir slla""ti. Sargon U, fot cumple recruited 50 chariots from Samaria (Israel), 200 chariolS and 600 Clvalry from Hamath, and 200 cavalry Ind 3000 infantry from Carchemish. Judean infantry and large numbers of Ar.lmacan, ChaldCIJIlnd Elamite Irchen were also recruited into this force on various occasions. Thesc troops would be issued standard Assyrian mililary uniform Ind equipment and become almost indistinguishable from the Assyrian soldiers, unlike provincial levies.

The Sob Shorn

The Jab .IIDrrl~ or 'king's men', were under an obligation to render scrvice to the king, which was known as illru. The illtu-obligllion may have been connected in some way wilh land, ailhough some non·landowners were also liable. It WlIS admini5lered ac«lrding 10 village of reside.nce. Some land-grants carried an es:emplion (~Jtutt) from j/ku. There were three IypC:S of iIJtu·service; IS a soldier (wb IMm). as a reserve soldier (slla ltutaJ/i). or as a worker on capilal projtctS (dllllll). The best men were: sdtcted 10 discharge Iheir obligation as soldiers. Equal numben were seltctcd 10 stand by in reserve and lhe remainder suved IS dll/Ju. Some men could have their service as wb sMm· commulcd 10 bearing the cost of equipping and supplying another wb SMm. The i/ltll-obligarion WlIS a regular Innual requirement and could Ilso be imp05ed especially for a campaign, or 'hulu', perhaps because campaigns wtre sometimes required II unusuai llmes of the year. The provincial governors wtre responsible for Ihe mobilisa· lion of lhe wb slwrri in their province:. Each rob Itim, or 'unit-commander' wu allocalcd I village or group of villages by the king from which to fonn his unil and was responsible for the call up of his own men. The troopl would

29

frequently be required to mo\'e from their province of origin to join a ampaign or serve in Inother province, 50 when the mobilisation was completed, the provincial go\'ernor handed o\ocr the troops 10 In officer responsible for their transit , the slla ,urbuti. This system Ipplied in III the provinces orthc Empire, and it seems that nativt Assyrians provided the majority of the chariOlry Ind cavalry, while subjta peoples, espttially Aram:loeans, p rovided most of Ihe infantry. Under the designltion I4b Utorn' were included $Orne full·time mercenaries who were supported by specialland.grants known as 'bow·land'.

Requisition or HOl"'SCa

Horses were tJ:tremely valuable and vital 10 the military organisation of the stlte. Hones did not figure 115 an impor' lant part orthe rural economy and were hardly e\'er used as ordinary draughtanim:lols along with Olen, donke)'5, mules and ameli. This is demonstrated by census r«Ords and was probably the cue in similar economies such as those of Babylon Ind Egypt. The horse was primarily kept and bred for wlr. Horse stocb within Assyria had to be ~gularly strengthened by horses obtained from such important hone·breeding regions as Inn, Urartu and Anatolia. These could be captured during campaigns o r acquired as tribute (mailof(u). There were IWO types of horses, slla niri or 'yok~horses', the most numerous type. required for luirnessing to chariots, and pitholJu or 'cavalry mounts'. \I,'hich were more valuable. Military horses were most probably state property. They ..... ere kept and looked after, howe\'er, by the soldiers in thei r villages when not on campaign, ..... ho rectived assistance for this from the stale. Ouring the 1st, 2nd and 3Td months (March,May), these horses we~ requisitioned in the provinces in a similar manner to the call.up of the sab sham, the I1Ime term, bit,u, being used for the levy of both. This was in readiness for the beginning of the campaign season in the 4th month (June). The central authority sent OutlWO muslrarkisu officials into each province to collect the horses. They were assisted by a sholmu Iha pirlralli ma'aJI~ or 'governor of the cavalry corral'. There were also musharkiSllI for specific parts of the army, such 115 the musharkisu sha pirhafli qurubult, who coll taed for the cavalry bodyguard. T he hones were assembled at piTTan; (assembly points) situated at Ninevth, Dur-Sharrukin (Khor5:1bad), ~nd Kalhu (Nimrod), where the main anenal, the t1w1·mas1rarr~ was located. The bit,u of horses also included a small proponion of mules (probably for pack animals). This information is based on administrative documenlS including daily reportS of the hones entering the assembly points. These show thaI during the fint three months, hundreds of horses were arriving from the provinces each day. The figu.res ofhorscs are listed according to the province and according to cenlin high officials, rep~senting their great landed estates.

Unit Organisation

The oVCf1lll commander of the army wlllthe king. (,harrum). Under him ..... ere sevtral high officials whose duties were varied, such as the rab slra,t, abcJ,O-Uu, rab tAaffi and rab llIa·rilh". Of these, Ihe rab slraqt could be employed in a military capacity, but the comnunder·in-ch.ief and sccond· in-command 10 the king was the umanu. There were, in fact, twO lurtO"US, the rurta"u Ilia i",ir/~ or 'tunanu of Ihe right', and the tunanu SM Iltumtli. or 'turtanu of the left', the former being Ihe chief turtanu. As the terms IUggest, these commanden probably took d12rge of the right and left wings of the army in battle. Presumably the king commanded the cenue. The btl pilulli and sllaltnu (provincial governors) commanded the forces stationed in their provinces, assuming the title slrut rt:Sh~ or 'general' of the province.

The smallest unit of organiution comprised 10 men under a rab altiTtt, or 'commlnder of 10'. The rob Itisri led his own company or kisru ('knot') of2 platoons raised from his atel. Scvenlltisn' brigaded together under a military slraAlnu (nO[ to be confused with the governorial rank) formed higher tlctical units . Chariot Itliri comprised five 10 vehicle sections under rab ahirll and rab Itisri. This represented the regiment rttrUited from a village or group of \'ilJages, or a garrison.

Troop Types

A great variety of troop types were available to the Assyrian army. These included: chariotry (comprising such crewmen as 'chariOl·men', ' rein·holders' and 'third· men'); cavalry, or slro pitholli (comprising bowmen and spearmen); infan· try, known as :Ilku or auk .htp~ and pioneers, known as Ititltitlu or Itishltodu. There we~ several different t)TCS of infantry, defined according to equipment or function as archers (nolh qashti or sab ,asti), spearmen, or naslr aanront, three types of shield·bearer; IfQSlri lukllr,: IfQSIr kabob; and nash ariru, and slingers. It is not clear as to the distinction between the different types of shield carried by Ihe three types ohhield·belrer. Presumably these troops WCfe equipped with a weapon in addition to the shield, and these may be alternative terms for the speurnen, speci. fying the type of shield being carried. It seems likely that these trOOPS formed the front ranks of mixed bodies of archers and Spc:lrmen. Some troops, Itallapan~ forming the vanguard, seem to havt tnvelled in light vehicles.

Reliefs show that troops also varied lIccording to armour and formation . Scale or lamellar armour was usually issued to elite troops, charicxry, cavalry and closc-formation infantry. Lighdy-anned skirmishers, optrlting in open·formation, armed with bow or sling, were provided by levies from subject peoples such as Anmaean and Chaldean tribesmen. Mercenaries were obtained from these tribes and possibly liso the Cimmerians and Scythians.

JO

Whatever their primary role, troops could be: con\'l:rted to otber function u occasion demanded . II ~ms likely that cavalry were originally chariot cn:ws, re-trained, perhaps, in order to work in difficult lerrain, and charior crews could also be: dismounled 10 operate as a unit during sieges. The well·armoured chariolry crews would perhaps also be: used in the exposed positiol15 on siege-engines.

Sin afForce .

The size of armies would be: dictated by the nature of the campaign, logislical ronsideratiorlS dependenl on t.he dillanet 10 be: covered and nlture of the terrain (apparenl in tbe Egyptian operations and campaigns in mountainous or dCKn tegions), the speed II which the army \Ir"iS ~uired 10 muster (records aiSI of Ibe campaign proceeding before the mustcr was complete due to the urgency of the situalion) and Ibe number ofttoops which could be: spared and nor tied down in orher pans of lhe empire. Ashurnasirpal II rerords an army of 50,000 while his father in 885 Be mustered 1351 ChariOiS. In 842 Shalmaneser III had 2002 chariors and 5542 cavalry of a lotal forC"t of 120,000. Sargon II records that he "ationed the 'left lurtanu' in Kumrnuhu wilh a force of 150 chariOts, 1500 caV1.lry, 20,000 archer. and 10,000 orher infanlry. A repon concerning' review of the sab rnam' stationed in the region of umu., C1rried OUI on royal inmucrions, lists a small force of 1430 men. It consisted of the following:

10 chariots 10 horx teams for Ihe chariots 97 Clvalry mounu II chariot-drivers 12 'third men' 30 messengers 53 'chariot·me n' Total: 106 chariot lroopS 161 cavalrymen 130 'charior·men' 52 other troops of unknown type Total: 343 'chanor·men' 181 amp-followers and other personnel including; servants, tailors, bullers, victuallers, bakers. household penon· nel, scribes, cooks and donkey drivers.

360 Gumya troops 440 IIU'aya Iroops

This is stated to be only pan of the forcu of the province, the rest being still to arrive.

MobiliutioD

The insti tution of the kuir snaJ'Tllti meant that the king did not have to awai t full mobilisation of tbe sab snam before C1)mnlencing a campaign. Esarhaddon records an occasion when he did not waste time with any ofthe nonnal p reparations for a campaign but wenl fonh in the cold winter month of Shabal. These actions would be: required against sudden and unexpected evenu luch as rebelliol15 or invasion. Campaigru; of conquest required careful prcpantion ready for the campaign season. The main .rmy would set fonh from Assyria to be: joined by the C1)ntingents from tbe provinces as it went . Provincial governon laid up supplies in their provinces in case the king'. expedition should pass through. T roops on active service, whether It.isir slraJ'Tllti or sab sllam, could be: kept in the field for long periods, as one letter records that a cavalry unit had not been given leave for th ree years. Service in regions such as Egypt and Babylonia might well require such long periods without re lief.

The Assyrians (reflted advance assembly and supply points near (0 the regions into which Clmpaigns were frequently mounted. One such WII Kar.Shalmanescr. a crossing·point on the Euphrates. Like Kar-Shalmaneser, (fonnerly Til· Banip). these might be fortified royal cities of the previous rulers of conquered regions, and had been garrison cities and supply depou in their lime. These mili tary bases were called birrJrt.

The Royal Courier SYltem

Among surviving Assyrian documents .re numerous letters seDt by military officials and provincial govcrnors to the king, reponing in dellil on such matters as troop dispositions and Illte of readiness. Thil enabled the king to plan military campaigns very carefully and react quickly to t\TeIlts. Mes.sages were carried by mounted mcsse:ngers along planned routts. These rnesKngcrs tf1velled in 20-30 mile stages, perhaps with I cavalry escon. In difficult terrain or bad wefllher conditions foot runners may have been used.

31

BABYLON 1126·539 BC

The period following the reign ofNebuchadrezzar I (1126-1105 Bq, who inflicted a major military defeat on the Elamites, is rather dark and disordered_ Several dynasties passed, but few great kings. Border wars witb Assyria continued, and sometimes Assyrian kings, such as Tukulti-Ninuna II, Sbalmaneser III and Shamshi-Adad V, mounted major campaigns into Babylonia, extending Assyrian political influence over Babylon, but not conquering it. During the 11th ,entury BC large numbers of Aramacans Stttied in Babylonia, forming tribal districts and becoming a ,onstant source of disorder in the following centuries. In 728 BC the unstable situation in Babylonia led to TiglathPileser III making himself King of Babylon. Hencefonh, Assyrian kings ruled Babylonia thcmsdves or, as a son of protector, through a native ruler who met their approval. There were, of course, numerous revolts, usually involving the anti-Assyrian Aramaean and Chaldean tribes, supponed by Elam. Esarhaddon's allemptto form a son of dual monar,hy of Assyria and Babylon, ruled by his tWO sons, Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shuma-ukin, failed when the latter also rose in rebellion against Assyria.

The Chaldeans

The Chaldcans had been in Babylonia at least since the reign of Shalmancscr 1I1. Like the Aramaeans, they were also organised into tribal 'houses' (bitu), each under a sheikh. These were located in the marshy regions of South em Babylonia, ncar the border with Elam, and comprised the Bil-Dakuri, Bit-Yakin and Bit-Amukani. The Chaldean sheikhs were powerful enough to seize the throne of Babylon and rebel against Assyria. One of the mOSt serious rebellions was that of Metodach-Baladan (Marduk-apla-iddina, 721-710 BC, and again in 703 Bq, of the Bit-Yakin tribe. He was a dangerous and persistent enemy of Assyria. Ashurbanipal became King of Babylon himself (as Kandelanu) following the revolt of his brother, but in the ,onfusion that followed his death, another Chaldean, NabopoJassar (Nabu-aplu-usur, 625-605 BC) look the throne of Babylon. The Assyrian Empire collapsed in the face of the combined attacks of Nabopolassar and his allies, the Medes under Cyaxares.

The Neo.Babylonian Empire

Under Nebucbadrezzar II (604-562 BC) the Babylonians created an empire that encompassed nearly all of the pre\'ious Assyrian empire. The Egyptians, who had attempted to prevent this and had assisted Assyria, were pushed back from the Euphrates and as rar as their own borders, but attempts to conquer Egypt were nOI successful. The Medes had pressed as far as Lydia, and the Babylon ians constructed a wall near Sippar, where the Tigris and Euphrates flow close to each other, as a defensive measure against them. Nebuchadreuar was followed by three kings who ruled amid internal disorder, until Nabonidus was placed on the throne by a coup d'etat. H e failed 10 save his kingdom from an easy conquest by the Persian king, Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC.

Military organisation during this period was probably very similar to that of Nco-Assyria and had probably been extended into Babylonia by the Assyrians. The i/b obligation existed in some rorm as it did in Assyria. Babylonian rorces included chariotry, cavalry and inrantry, including 5000 quruburi on the Assyrian model, supplemented with light troopS, especially arcbers, provided by the Aramaeans and Chaldeans. Tbese were available in large numbers and the Babylonian kings seem to have attempted to improve their effectiveness by issuing them with shields and spears. The basic unit was the kini commanded by Ihe shaknu.

CANAAN AND SYRIA 3200· 1700 BC

Little is known about military organisation in the period pr~eding the Amorite settlement and the emergence of the Hyksos state. Canaan was occupied by nomadic tr ibes whose organisation is hinted at in the Egyptian story ofSinuhe. The tribe was ruled by a chieftain who could prove his right to rule with a demonstration of his prowess as a warrior, and defend his position in the same way or with the aid of II champion. He was supported by II personal retinue known as hlnkhu, to the Egyptians, and probably related 10 the Hebrew hanakim. There were also fonified cities (one is shown under attack in an Egyptian tomb scene at Deshashe), or which Sedom and Gomorrah provide famous examples. A battle fought by these cities, leading the forces of a coalition of cities in the Dead Sea region against a Mesopolamian army. is recorded in Genesis. Unfortunately the opposing kings cannot be identified in Mesopotamian records. The Egyptians periodically mounted campaigns into this region and many citY-Slates and tribes arc mentioned in the Egyptian 'execration·texts' (magical curses placed on enemies). T bese mention tribal chiefs and their retainers, such as the Sum, and cities, such as Byblos, Ul1a1:3 and Askelon. To the nortb, there were more cilies and stronger states. Along the coaSt there were pons in contact wit h Egypt, trading in timber and r~eptive to Egyptian culture. In the Syrian hinterland were cities like Ebla, organised on the Sumerian model.

32

Ebla was very populous, weU-(lrganised and clearly an imponant power. It possessed an army and engaged in warfare with Mari. It eventually fell 10 Naram-Suen. The Amoriu:s established powerful SlItes in this region, among them Yamkhad and Qatna. In the south at this time, Amori te political and military organisation (described under the seClions on the Old Babylon.ian and Assyrian Kingdoms), had also taken rool. A federation of Canaanite princes formed the Hyksos Empire which atended its control over Nonhem Egypt.

THE HYKSOS

It is now generally accepted that the Hyksos were not a migrating horde of'chariot·nomads' sweeping through the Near EaS! and conquering Egypt by vinue of new weapons alone. Hyksos is a corruplion of the Egyptian term HtAa·Khffll!tr, meaning 'Foreign Rulm'. Th.i! name had been applied to Canaanite princes befon this time. Knowledge of chariot warfare together with associated developments in the military field had already filtered into Syria and Canaan from Hurrian and Mesopotamian sources.

A large number of Hyksos personal n9mes survive which define them as rulers of Canunite, rather than Hurri.n origin who ruled over Southern Palestine and Nonhem Egypt supponed by many Inste chieflains and Egypti.n provincial nobles.

Egypt did not fall to a sudden invasion. The Hyksos take-over progressed by stages. The 13th Dynasty held powe.r when, in 1720 BC, Ihe Hyksos took advantage of the weakening central authority and seized the capilal of Egypt':! nonhern warer (depanment). This was Avaris (Hill -WOW) in the ElIstern Delta. Hyksos chiefs a~mpanied by retinues of forcign uoops began to take over the Delta. Native resistance held OUI for some lime al Xois, but the rule of Ihe 13th Dynasty receded to the South.

By 1674 BC the Hyluos had appointed an overall chieftain, the first ofa line of'Great-Hyksos', called $aInu. In 1674 he seized Memphis from the Egyptian King Dudimose. Southern Egypt was redu~d to vassaldom. garrisons were pla~ in 'advantageous positions', and Avaris became the Hyluos capital.

Maoetho, I PlOlemaic Egyptian hislOnan, Slatts that $alalis maintained a garrison of240,ooo (uaggeratiool) wellarmed troops It Awris. He came there in summer to 'train them on manoeuvres and so strike terror into foreign tribes' . It is tempting 10 view this as a garbled memory of the creation of the firsl chariOt corps in Egypt. Grtve:s of foreign soldiers have recently been acavated at Katana.Qanti r, now believed to be the site of Avans.

Salatis was followed by Yak-Baal and then Khyan who styled hiauelf 'Embra~r of Regions' . In his reign trading contact! extended throughout the Near EaSI, and the Hyksos state became an important world power. Apophis was the fint of the G reat Hyksos [0 adopt an Egyptian personal name. The Hyksos Kings made great efrons to appear as legitimate Pharaohs. They embraced the local god of Avans, &1, (the Egyptian countupan of Baal). An arrogant ultimatum sent by Apophis to the Theban Icing, Seqenenrc-Tao, sparked off a war ofliberation. Sekenenre 'The Brave ' met his death in bailIe against Apophis. His SOD, Kamosc, continued the war by reducing the Egyptian supponen of the Hyksos and probably recaptured Memphis. His younger brother, Ahmose I, beseiged and took Avaris and pushed on into Palestine where he reduced tbe stronghold of Sharuhen.

Although the wheel and the horse were already known in Egypt. it was the Hyksos who introduced chariotry as a wing of [he armed forces . If the threat made by Kamosc that he would 'take over the chariotry' was actual ly carried OUt by Ahmosc, then the New Kingdom chariot corps mly well have been built up from. nucleus inherited from the Hyksos.

The forces available to the Hyksos state would have included a cenlral body of chariotry and foreign troops belonging to the 'Greal Hyksos' ruler based at Avaris. These would be: augmented by the personal retline.n of the lesser Hyksos chieftains. The foreign element would be backed up by the local troops of Egyptian provincial nobles who suppon ed the Hyksos, and who bore the brunt of the figbting against Kamosc.

Culturally, the Hyksos were related to the Amorites Ind Canuoites.

33

CANAAN AND SYRIA 1700 - 1200 BC

The ancient name 'Canaan', deJlOled the region flom Gua to l.c:banon. Rl rjtrfl1u WIS a general term for Syria and Palestine. Another term used by the Egyptians for Palestine WIS Djahy. Politically this area was divided into many city-states, each ruled by a king or mtli •. The terrain varied greally. The cultiwted plains and valleys in which the cities stood were separated by hills covered by cedar forest or scrub. To the east lay the Syrian steppe, inhabited by nomadic tribes who frequcnlly penelfated into the cuhivated lands. Important SIllies included Amurru, K.inzu (Kadesh), Mukish (Alalakh). Ugarit, Gubla (Byblos), NukhlShshe. Tuni!>, Qatna and Khalba (Aleppo).

• Shooruhen

C archem ish.

Kh.lb. 1t.

".f~ Mukish ... .r-i • 0: ;r-s. "'l JI)kh

i I/Jflip (0

6 CIt' Qatna

Unq i NIY

Ama'u

THE LEVANT in the 2nd millennium Be

The Hebrew Kingdoms x CHARIOT CITIES {:

~flEETS ~ fb ] .4 DISTRICTS t 1don ~

:ji Tyre Dama« ... , •

" 8 HuOf'

Israel Do,

~ ~\J>OO . " °R,moth_ 6 G,lud

Q, .. ,ded ] S~I'" ~ Km,dom ,

7 border • I M'lpah

......" '" • 1'" II 12 ~ • lr "Jerul~lem S A,IIdoct· " • Ekron ,:0 ~ ."".elon

q:: .. ' ~ ~Q (i"'cJ: /t"", .: .

~ BUilth ,. ,,-" Judah Gezer • BetMooron "

EDOM

b ,on Gebr r.l'., MIDIAN

War between c itY-Slltes was commonplace, as were the ravages of nomadic Bedouin and 'Apiru (Jlabiruj. The great powers of Egypt. Mitllnni and Hani made use of these local conflicts to exlend their spheres orinfluence. Canaanite rulers would also anempt to play-ofTthe greal powers against each other to funher their own ambitions. Aziru of Amurru was adept at this during the reign of Akhenllten (1379-1362 Be).

Canaanite armies relied mai nly on high-quality chariotty. provided by a ~ial elite of noble char iot warriors. the maryanna. This term is ultimately derived from 1m 'lndG-European' word meaning youlh or hero. Mar)'Qnna evolved in Canaanite society following the introduction of ChariOI warfare at the beginning of this period. The origin of this institution is probably to be found among the Hurrians of .\titanni. Mitannian military practice had considerable influence on Canaanite warfare and there WllS a strong Human element in the population. especially llmong maryanna.

34

The mal'}"lnnll was I profe"ional chariot warrior who possessed sufficienl wellth to mlintain I two-horse chariot and the a$SOCilted armour and equipment . T he source of this weallh was a Land holding carrying an obligation to scrw: the king. A ntal'}"lnnll would also pos$CS5 such retlineB 15 I driver, grooms and a small number offOCMsoldiers or 'runners' . Mal'}"lnllll status was generally hereditary, initially being conferred by the king. It is possible that maryallllQ could be provided by merchants and craftsmen u well as landed nobility. Rulers possessed I personal re!lnue of elite maryall"" . The term nt'anll IXCUrs in Ugaritic tats, in Egyptian tats u a reference to Ca· naani te enemies and later as a Hebrew term for elite soldiers. A force of nt'an'lI who rescued R2.mcsscs 11 at Kadesh could have been allies from Amurru. This term probably refers to elite mal)l2nllO,

Most of the ordinlry infantry were conscripted from the peasantry, or IIl1psllu. They were free citizens who owned land but were liable for conscription for work or war. In the Amarna letters infantry arc referred to by the Akk2dian terms saM *P~ sabt bitari Pictorial evidence suggc:su that infantry .... 'Cre usually lightly equipped archers or spearmen. They took second place to chariotry Ind acted in suppon of them, in contrast to Egyptian tlctical thinking. Elite units of infantry acted as royal guilds, like the ' Royal Archers' of Piryawaza of Damascus.

Canaanite princes could supplemenl their forces with Shaasu or Sutu Bedouin, and 'Apir'll, or garrison troops pro\·ided by their imperial overlords. 'Apir'll, or Habiru, was a term long used for I clln of fl'CCbooten Ind outcasts including outlaws, fugitives, desen nomads and even some settled people. The similarity of the name to that of the Hebrews has uoused much debate. The term may well have been applied to them by the Canaanites and gave rise to the name Hebrew. These bands were also known as IIabbarll (bandits) Ind 'Dusty-Ones'. They were undoubl:edly rugged and fierce but also unreliable and treachcroU5. 'Apiru were olien employed as merccnuics, Piryawaza of Damascus could count frie ndly Sutu mnd 'Apinl amongst his forces, but non-aligned 'Apirw posed a considerable threat to the Canaanite ci ties. 'Apirll bands could be qui te weil-cquippcd and might even include chariotry.

One of the main occupations for the forces of Canaanite city-states would be curbing the activi ties of 'Apr'ru and descn nomads. Some of then bands could be quite llrge and dangerous. A b:md of SUIU recorded in archive! from Alalakh contained 1436 men, 80 ofthesc were CbariO(etTS Ind 1006 were 1111111OIIU, probably I type of u cher. T he ci ty of Alalakh iuelf could only mUSler 31 mal)'lJfIlll oUI of a male popuialion of around 1200 and the surrounding 22 villages with populations varying from II to 500. One \'i1lage fell to a SUIU force of 17 infantry, 7 chariotecn and 4 IIIaIUinu·troops, while 2000 IIIIbiru captured lallul, on the Euphrates nonh of Car chern ish. An 'Apiru chief posed such I tbrot to the old adversaries, Shuwudata of Hebron and' Abdu·Heha of Jerusalem, that they united Ind even rcccl\-cd SO chariots to a"ist them from Accho and Achshaph. Milkilu of Gczer asked the Pharaoh to provide clwiots to protect his bnd against 'Apiru. Perhaps chariots werc particularly dTectivc: at pursuing Ind roodng out 'ApirN raiders.

Such bands provided I refuge and potential supponers fo r political fugitives like Labaya (who made himself ruler ofScchem with their aid) and Idrimi (who fled to them with only his chariot Ind I groom and ended up IS ruler of ALaIakh).

SMrdanu mercenaries arc mentioned at Byblos and Ugarit.

The Egypdan Empire In Canaao and Syria

By the reign of Amunhotep III Egyptian control had been firmly established in Canaan and Southern Syria. Unlike Nubia which was administered as I Southern extension of Egypt, the Egyptians did not interfere wi th the long established arrangements of the Canaanites. Their main concern was to cnsure a regular now of tribute and the exclusion of any rival power from the region. To achievc: this end, garrisons wcte set up at Ullaza, Sharuhen, SumeTll and Irqata, and administrative centres at Gna and JOPpl. The ITCli was governed by an Egyptian 'Oversecr of All Foreign Countries' (the counterpart of the Viceroy of Kush). Each city-state was supervised by an Egyptian fMpury, a sort of political officer or 'resident', called a 1O"i"l1 by the Canaanites.

Imperial protocol demanded that Canaanite kings be referred to as /tlla:anll, 'headman' or JUSt aw/l/, 'man', of such· and·such city (use of the word IIIt/i! 110'11 considered impeninent by the Egyptians). Local rulers were allowed much freedom of action to defend themselves and indulge in warfare with each other, as lonlll they acted out of loyalty to Pharaoh. They lII'ere nOl slow to usc this acust to obtain material assistance from Emt.

Egyptian garrison ltoopS in Canaan consisted of infantry, usually Egyptian or Nubian archers, and chariO(ry. Garrison forces were $IIlIn; Megiddo and Oezer required only 100 men, other cities as few as SO. Bybl05 once requested IS many all 600 men and 30 chariots while Piryawua required 200. Loca.l rulers were corutlntly requesting the EgyptianJ to send more trOOPS to assist against riwl cities Ind 'Apiru. The Egyptians may sometimes have taken a cynical view of these requests.

35

Garrison uoops seem to have been allocated on an annual basis; vassals often complain that if the Pharaoh doet not send 'archers' this year, he would lose territory to his enemies.

Egyptian garrisons were onen I menace in themselves to their hosts. OfficeI'! indulged in corruption and troops became drunk and disorderly. They might even pillage the palace of the local prince if Iheir rations were not fonhcoming.

Ugarh

This information derives from the palace archives of Ugnit (modem Ras Shamra) situated on the Syrian coast. Many of the temu appearing in these texts are related to AJUr.:Klian, Egyptian and Hurrian military terminology, and demonstrate the great interchange of military ideas in this region. The organisation they portray is probably relevanl to most of the stales of Syria during this period.

Upn! was an important mercantile stale deriving ils wealth from ~ and land commerce. Untillhe mid-14th cen· tury BC it feU within the Egyptian sphere of influence, but later became an ally of the Hiltites.

Forces comprised an army and navy. The navy was imponantlo a COlIstal state like Ugarit, and was probably welldeveloped. It could be used to suppon land operation. and also fighl battles al~. Ug'ltit was sometimes subjected to seaborne raids by pirates like the Lukka. The Ugarilic flt1:1 may have been enli5led by the Hittites when they required naval forces.

T he army was under the command of the prince who constituted a rtsuti, 'subordinate ally' when forming pan of the army of a major power. Fully~uipped troops, sabu natib, consisted ofinfantcy and choriotry. Units were commanded by officen called mur-u, but unit sizes are not known. Mur-u seem to have been connected with land holdings. Some mur-u belonged to special units such as the 'Officers of the Crown Prince'.

The chariolry were commanded by the okil narAabt~ 'Chief ofChariouy'. The main strength of the chariolry were mO~lfna, 'noble chariot warrion'. A son of 'household chariOtty' was provided by the 'Maryo.znna of the King'. The term ne'orim occun at Ugarit, probably referring, IS elsewhere. to elite chariotry. The maryo.znnu was Ihe commander of the chariot. Another chariOtry soldier was the kUy, 'groom' who may have ridden in the chariot and was responsible for three hones (presumably [wo for harnessing to the vehicle and one spare). The tjtnntlf may have been another crewman, possibly an archer. It is possible that Ugarit used three-man chariOIS on the Hillile model. Ugaril wu a wealthy Slale and could muster a large cbariot force numbering 1000 chariots.

Infanlty included palace guards, troops who patrolled the counlryside, and troops recruited from Ihe peasantry, known IS ItMpttj (a venion of huprhu), or awilu Mm/.!. Among troops who cannol be clearly defined are the mtdnfem, possibly archen. and tJTDtli imjlll~ probably spearmen, (tbe imirrll-spear is known from the Old Babylonian period). Some troops may have worn corslets or tiryana (related to the Akkadiln term Ulriam). Uprit was destroyed al the time of the Sea-Peoples' disturbances. Official correspondence between Upril and Aluhiya (Cyprus) (dating to shonly before this happened) Slate thai Ihe Ugaritic forces had all been despatcbed to help the Hittites and that seaborne raiders had appeared 01T the COllSt.

THE HEBREWS

Initially Ihe basic divisions were those of tribe or clan. These rallied to the call of the acknowledged leader. Within these divisions smaller units were formed according to the decimal system, with leaders of 100's and 1000's. All males over 20 yean old were considered Ihe fighting strength. Leaden had to select the troops n~ed for certain tasks from among the generll musler of tribesmen. Forces were divided shortly before the bailie, according to the requirements of the situation. When Joshua was Ittempting 10 oustlhe Belhelites from the ruins of Ai, his scouts estimated Ibat 3000 men would be enough. When the fintlllack. failed. Joshua was forced to use the whole tribal hosl in a feigned flight with a small group of pic ted men to move in behind the enemy. In the face ofa large raid by Midianite and Amalekile nomads, Gideon mustered tribesmen from Asher. Zcbulun, Naptali and Manesseh. Gideon planned a night attack and needed to separate a force of stealthy warrion. He observed how the tribesmen wenlto drink at a water-hole and picked those IMtiay down 10 drink. These men knew tbalthey were most vulnerable al such times lind were clearly uperienced in nomadic-style warfare. Gideon obtained 300 such men whom he subdivided inlO three panies. They were 10 approach the enemy camp from three sides while the rest of the tribesmen were 10 block the enemy's escape route. Funher evidence of the improvised nllturt of tribal warfare comes from the same action in which Gideon had to alen the tribes of Ephraim to block the escape of the enemy across the fords of the Jordan. However, they were not impressed at being warned at such a late stage.

Not III the tribesmen rushed 10 the call oflheir leaden with the same enlhuiasm. In order 10 musler enough men 10 relieve Jabesh..Qilead from the AIDIlekites. Saul threatened 10 kililhe oxen of Inyone who did nOI turn up. As the Dew king, Saul wu e5tablishing his authority to call out the tribal levy. As the Hebrews became uniu:d and organised under a single king I more permanent military organisation developed. Saul created a fo rce of 3000 lill hGllwr, 'cbosc::n men', with whom he seiud Gibeah from the Philistines. On this occasion 1000 men were dcuched under the command of Saul's son, Jonathan.

Da vld'i Military OrsaointJoD

David inherited I system blsed on the musler ofuiballevies in time of war common to many Near·EiJlem states, although most, unlike Israd, supplemented and strengthened these levies with e:hariouy and regular soldiers.

Israel'l militil wu orglnised intO urnlS Iccording to a decimal system under elected 'valiant men' , iJ IIQyil, whn as commanders, .car, led uniu of 1000 (Q'kJplrimJ. 100 (mt'tllrJ. SO and 10. The militia were recrui ted II musters by the tribal chief, or MJ~ and assigned to their individual mt'ttll in peacetime, and ponibly received lOme rudimenlaty training. There were vlrious tribal specialities with cenlin weapons and styles of fighting. The Benjaminiu:s for eumple were considered good at archery and slinging. The Benjaminites of Gibeah could mUlter 700 isll hGltwr, or 'picked men', who 'were left·handed; every onc could sling a stone It a hare and not mill' . The Gldi tes were swift and fierce, the Judeans used spear and buckler, and the tribesmen ofZebulun were competent with all weapons and able to keep rank.

The pressures of conslant warfare made il necessary to appoiot overall leaders and ultimately led to the establish· ment of a monarchy. King Saul came 10 maintain a pe~nal semi·regu l ar army of 3 Q'itJpllim of isll hGllwr in his household, and David, when he Iled from Saul's service, acquired a personal follow ing of his own . This band was perhaps typical ofwhatlhe Canaanites would call 'tJpirw or IIQbiru, consisting of' . . . everyone that was in distress and everyone thai was in debt and every man that wu discontented'. David'. retinue eventually numbered 600 men or 6 mt'ttll~ and 10 escape from Saul he entered the service of the Philistine prince; Aehish ofGath, who placed his contingent in a border outPUll 10 suppress nomadic raiders such as the AmalekitCi. When Saul mel his death in battle with the PhilistinC$ at Gilboa, David seized Ihe opportunily to make himse:lf King of Israel.

David UlCd his band of followers, known as ,iblxm'm, or 'mighty mm', as a core Iround which 10 build rus military organisation. From tbcsc were selC'Cled an inner elite of officers called 'The Thiny'. The tribal levy wu organised into 12 divisions totalling 24,000 men. Each division wu to $land in readintsll for one month in rotalion. The com· manders oflbe divisions were appoinled from among tbe Tbiny. This meant that part oflhe tribal levy was always under the direct control of the king and Ivailable immcdiltdy 10 face any national threat .

David formed a foreign bodyguard of'Cherethiles' and 'Pc:lethites' probably recruited from Philistines and Cretans settled on Ihe coaSt of Soulhern Canaan.

Israelite fortts were mainly infantry untillbe reign of Solomon. Consequenlly Hebrew commanders had always been wary oflhe Canaanite and Philistine chariotry. They usually attempted to fight in terrain that wu unsuitable for charlO( tactics. When David defeated Hadadc:ur orZobeh and his allies from Danwcus, he: captured 1000 chariots but ordered the horses to be ' houghed' except for 100 spans. Obviously David only had need of, or means of supponing, a small force of chariotry.

Solomon'a C hariotry

Solomon had sufficient wealth to organise and maintain a chariot corps. Horses (at 150 shekels each) were purchlsed from Egypt, the Nto· Hiuile lIales and the Aramacan slates of Syria; chariots (at 6000 shekels) were bought from Egypt. In this way a force of 1,400 chariOls and 12,000 chllriotry personnel (referred to as ' horsemen' ) was eslablished. They wtre stalioned in special chariOt cities and a reserve was kept at Jtruulem. The figure: of 12,000 scc:ms large compared 10 the number of verucles. There would have been twO, possibly thrc:e, crewmen 10 each vehicle and the figure probably also includes runners and grooms. Tbere may even have bc:cn replattmC:OI crews and tbe chariotry may have been accompanitd by cavalry. Perhaps some of the runners were mounted (the mounts could then double as spare chariOl horses). Developments such as these were taking place lmong the Nco-Hittites Ind Aramaeans and in Assyria, leading to the devc:lopment of true cavalry. Solomon built stables in the chariot ci ties wllh I totaJ number of staUs to bouse 40,000 (probably 4,(00) horses. Stables dating to the reign of Ahab have: bc:cn c:xcavated at Me,iddo. They contained space for 450 barxs. Assuming that each vehicle required t ..... o horses plus one spare, we arri\~ II a figure of 150 chariots stllioned al Megiddo. This could represc:nl I rhrc:csquadron formation, each squadron comprising 50 \·c:hiclcs.

37

In order to supply the coun and the chariot cities (which were also 'store' cities), Solomon divided his kingdom inlO 12 provinces of equal productive capacity, ~ch controlled by a "uib official. Each province supplied the king ~nd the stables for one month of each r~r in rotation. It seems that this system did not extend to Judah or that region provided some other scrvice which is nO( known.

The ch~riot cities ..... ere probably chosen for their strategic impon:mce ~nd would be located on borders or major military routes. Apan from the king's central reserve at Jerusalem the ehariot cities protr..bly included: Megiddo, Hazor, Gezer, Tadmoor (later known as Palmyra), Hamalh·Zobeh, Beth·horon, Baalath and Tell Qedah.

At Karkar in 853 BC Ah~b led a contingent of 2000 ch:ariots and 10,000 infantry (his was the largest chariot con· tingent). It is possible that Solomon's org~nisation continued into Ahab's reign, or was developed by him, as 12 chariot Cilies with st~bles of the same size as those: at Megiddo would give a total of 1,800 chariots. The funher 200 could be provided by the king's central rescrve, the nl'(;Irin.

THE PIDUSTINES

The name Philistine, and ultim3tely Palestine, derives from the Pelesct, one of the 'Sca.Peoples'. Wnpon finds suggest that some Sea.Peoples were al ready established in Canaan as garrison troops under the Ramenide Phanohs. The origin of the Philistincs probably datet to the rtpulse of the greal I~nd onslaught against Egypt in the time of Ramesscs Ill. With the Egyptian fromier barred 10 them, the inwden Clrved out a territory for thcms.clves around the five citics of Ashdod, Askelon, Ekron, Gath and Gaza. The Tiiller settled on Ihe coast to their nonh and possibly a small group of Cretans 10 their south. The Philistine cities were each ruled by a prince, but they usually acted in concert and met in a council called the SQrnty. They gradually began to assimilate Canaanite culture: lind methods of warfare. Their allempts to exen aUlhority over most of Canaan naturally brought them inlO confliC! wi th the Hebrews. The Philistines seem to have adopted chariotry on the Canaanite model; at Mount Gilboa the Israelitcs were shot down by arrow! from the pursuing Philistines. For campaigns into enemy turitory the prin~ mustered their forccs at Aphek. Advance posilions might be set up from which the surrounding area could be ravaged. At Michmash the Philistint1 divided their forces into three columns for this purpose and placed a rearguard to cover their escape route through the narrow pass. Like the Hebrews, the Philistines were also menaced by nomadic raiders. In order to suppress them and watch the frontie rs, they established sclliements of auxiliaries such as David's ,ibborim, at Ziklag.

PHOENICIA AND CYPRUS 1200-539 BC

The Phoenician pons recovered from the Sea-Peoples' IIllack, but the population now included large endaves of Sea·Peoples. The Egyptian ' Repon of Wen am un' describes this states of affairs and mentions that Dar, for example, was ruled by a prince called Tjcld:er·Ba'~I, and that Tjekker fleet! from these enclaves were still interfe ring wilh trade in these waters in the 11th century BC. Sea·Peoples had also scllied in Cyprus, and it is interesting fO nOle that on an ivory plaque: from Enkomi, runners dresscd exactly like Pele:sct are shown following the: chariot of a Near·Eastern style m(;lryannll. The city-states of Phoenicia did not have the same military strength on land as thei r powerful Nee-Hittite:, Anmaean and Israelite neighbours, bUllheir real strength I~y in their fleets. A Neo-Hillite relief from Kautepe, Assyrian reliefs of Scnnacherib and the Til.Barsip paintings all depict warships that are dearly equipped with nffiS. The Auyrian sources show biremts which have rowers on the lower deck and soldiers on the upper deck, which is prottcted by a gunwhale on which round shields are mounted. The ram in the T il· Barsip example is clearly shod in bronu. Thc:sc: sour~ probably show Phoenician ships which would have been available to the powers which could control the Phoenician pons, and indicate the level of naval developme:nt reached by the 8th century BC. The first land power to make use of such fo rces WloIS Solomon, who formed an alliance with Hiram of Tyre, enabling him to keep a nawl force at Ezion Ge:ber where it could dominate the Red Sea, commanding nOl only imporlant trade rOUlet but Egypt's CIStern flank. Ashurtr..nipal was later to use the fleets of22 ofhis Phoenician vassals to approach Egypt from her weak nonhern flank. The Phoenician contingents recorded at the battle of Karkar may illustrate the weakness in land for~. They contain few or no chario[5 and moslly small numbers of infantry. Unable to compete: with strong inland states, Phoenician Slates narurally employed their navics to expand wcstwardJ into the Mediterranean. The control ofthc:sc: states, which included Aradu!, Byblos, Sidon, Tyre, Accho, Irkate, Arvad, Usanata and Shian, was of great stralegic advantage and also great economic value. Lacking slrong land forces, thc:sc: cities rt lied on wi thstanding sieges in order to survive, perhaps coullting on supply by 5c:a. Some ci ties were actually si tuated on islands separated from the coast, such as Arvad. The Assyrians had to reduce these by construction of siege moles.

AI the time of the Assyrian Empire, Cyprus, or Iadnana as it was known in Assyria, was divided into several city· states. T hese were Edi'il, KilnlSi, Pappa, Silli, Kuri, Tamesi, Nuria, Sillu'ua, Qani.hadasti and Lidir. Cyprus fell

3.

under the control of Assyria following tbe conquest of the Phoenician stalts beg\ln by Tiglath·P ileser III and com· pleted by his successors, becoming tributary under Ashurbanipal. Later, Cyprus was to fa ll for a time within the sphere of influence of the Saite kings of Egypt.

ANATOUA AND THE HITTITE EMPIRE

Ear ly Anatolia

Little can be said of the military organisation of this area before the H ittite Empire. The rich tombs found at Dorak, AIDctI Huyuk and the Pontic region demonstrate the existence of several principalities. From around 2300 BC the mineral wealth of this area had attraded the attention of Akkadian and Assyrian merchants. Assyrian kings sponsored the establishment ofl.rading colonies, called karum, among the city-statts of ccntnlll Anatolia. There were about ten small principalities in this area including Dukhumid, Wakhshushana, K.hurum and most imponantly Kanesh, where the chief karum was situated. T hese states may have been ruled by a single 'Prince of Princes'. Relations with the Assyrians were friendly and the natives profited greatly from their tnllde. No doubt military ideas from Mc.sopoumia filteT(d into Anatolia along the same trade roUtes. The natives were known as the Hatti, but there was alT(ady an intrusive dement in the population who were later to emerge as the H ittites. The Hittites traced their origin to a King of Kus5anll, Pithanas, who conquered Kanesh, and his son Anni tas who made it his capital around j 750 BC. The Hittite language was descended from the tongue spoken in Kanesh and the name of the older inhabitants was adopted as the name of the Hinile state, The founder oflhc H ittite slale was considered to be a king of Kussara, Labarnas, who extended his rule to the sea. It was during this period that knowledge of the two-horsed chariot fi ltered imo Anatolia. A text from the reign of Aninas mentions a body of 1,400 men and a unit of 40 chariots.

Tbe Old Hittile Kingdo m

Labarnas's son, Hanusilis, campaigned against the Amorite states of Syria. reaching the Euphnlltes before being killed in [he war against Yamkhad (Aleppo). M UT'Si lis I completed his conquesl5 and ..... ent on down the Euphrates to sack mighty Babylon, an e\'ent which shook the Near East. This empire was lost under successive weak kings and had to be re-established by Suppiluliumas I.

Little is known about mili tary organisation in this period tllCCpl that a change was taking place in Hittite society with the development of a son of ' feud2-I' aristocracy perhaps connected with the introduction of chariot warfare on the Milannian model. Previously the king was served by a body of fight ing men and officials called the pankhus. Chief offici2-1s were often kinsmen of the king and held military commands as in later times. There was 2- body of high'ranking officers known as the ItJianuui}W and a royal bodyguard called the Intshtdi

THE HITTITE EMPIRE

In his ' 1st Syrian war', Suppiluliumu I (1380-1346 BC) conquered the Slates of Khaleb (Aleppo), Alalakh, Tunip and Nukhuhshe in Nonhern Syria, which brought him into conOid with the Mitannian Empire. In his '2nd Syrian war', Suppiluliumas marched through Mitanoi, plundered the capit2-1 and crossed the Euphrates south ofCarchemish, to arrive in Egyptian territory. The M.itannian state began to collapse. This was followed by the 'Hurrian war', lasting six years, in which Carchemish fell, an Egyptian attack was defea ted and l\.titanni was fmally destroyed (par. titioned between Hatti and Auyria). Suppilul iumas died of a plague brought back by his soldiers from Syria. He had established Hani as a foremost world power, which she remained until her collapse during the Sea-People disturbances around 1200 Be.

The Hittites were great imperialists. They were also highly competent in the ans of war and international diplomacy. War was imerpreted in legal terms. A form al ultimatum was issued before force was applied. Vassal states were bound by trea ties which usually contained the following provisions; The ally was required to suppon the Hittite king on campaign, never give away information to an enemy, rush to the aid of the Hatti-Iand in time of attack or revolt, (and in return could request H illite usinancc in similar ci rcumstances), accommodate and supply Hittite garrisons and trea t them as friends, and had 10 extradite any fugitives (or dissidents) neeing from Hatti . The friends of the H ittites were to be: considered Ihe friends of tbe ally state, and similarly, Hittite enemies WeT( their enemics. An annual tribute in gold or silver had to be paid to the Hitt ite king.

Soldiers were sworn into the army by an oath and the army had to be ritually cleansed before setting oul on ctlm· paign. This was achieved by marching between twO posts, wi th one half of II human sacrifice tied to each post. It wu assumed that no evil could pass through such a barrier. Perhaps this was an archaic ritual restrided [0 an early period of H ittite hiS[ory.

39

The supreme commander was the king, but command could be delegated to other members of the royal family. Beneath the king were governors of conquered territories, including royal princes set up as kings in front ier regions, and vassal rulers who led thei r own contingents. Commanders of smaller divisions were provided by the lesser nobility.

Unit organisation followed the decimal system, with commanders of Tens, Hundreds and Thousands.

T he chariotry were probably the most formidable part of the Hittite army. The Hittites learned the art of training horses to the yoke from the Hurrians. A Hittite version of a Hurrian training manual has actually been found, writteo by an expert called Kikkuli.

A military aristocncy, maimained by land grants, formed the chariotry and are probably comparable to the maryanna of Syria and Mitanni. Maryanna were cenainly included in the allied contingems supplied by Syrian \"1Issal states. The Kadesh inscriptions mention maryanna ofNaharin (the Egyptian name for the region of Mitanni), Carchemish, Keshkc:sh (Kaska?) and Dardany, (so the Egyptians clearly classed some Anatolian chariotry as equivalent to maryanna).

Milim y service was connected with land ownership. Estates were held from the king with an obligation to serve. Lesser classes of land ownen were the 'Weapon.men', or 'Tool-men', who were probably craftsmen rather than soldiers. Terms of service fo r Ihis class were called sakhkhan, and the term for obligation (a concept pervading Hittite society from vassal princes downwards) was iskhuil, or ilkum.

Such obligations were taken very seriously by the Hittites and their allies, and were expected to be upheld to the full.

The Kadesh inscriptions and other Egyptian sources mention troops called tth" or ruhuytnl, possibly a Mitannian term. They formed an important part of the Hittite fo rces and the allied Syrian contingents. A king ofTunip once employed 329 of these soldiers. At Kadesh the two large bodies of infantry numbering several thousands arc called 'fighting ruhuytnl', which might imply that it was a designation of status rather than a completely military term. There were also 'ruhuytnl of chariots' and ruhuytnl sh.ie1d·bearers at Kadesh, so they were not exclusively infantry. A 'Leader of ruhuytnl' is found among the slain Hittite notables listed by the Egyptians.

Order of Battle of the Hittite Empire at Xadesh , 1300 BC

It is possible to reconStruct the Hiuite order ofbaule at Kadesh from Ihe Egyptian recorcb. It must be: an example of one of the largest armies ever raised by the Hittites.

T he ChariOlry and infantry of the King of HaUl.

These ..... ere supported by Allied Contingents including infantry and chariotry from:

Naharin - mainly comprising the former kingdom of Mitanni but including territory west of the Euphrates. Anawa - located in Central Anatolia. Naharin and Arzawa were kuiroxlna states, enjoying preferred status in the

Empire. Dardany - located in North-Western Anatolia, included maryalllla. Possibly associated with the Dardanoi of Homer. Keskesh - probably the Kaska of Northern Analolia, included maryallna. Masa - 10000ted in Western Anatolia. Pitassa - located in Central Anatolia. Arwen - or Arawanna, in Analolia, (possibly ' Ilion', the Egyptians rendered 'I' with the sign for 'r'). Karkisha - localed in South·Western Anatolia. Lukka - situated along the southern coast of Anatolia. Kiuuwatna - located in South-Easl Anatolia (Cilicia) providing maryanlla. Kedy - located north of Syria. Mushanet - location unknown. lnesa - locat ion unknown. lnenes - location unknown. Carchemish - located on the Euphrates in Syria. Ugaril - located on the Syrian coaSt. Nukhashshe - located in Northern Syria. Khaleb - Aleppo (modern Arabic ' Halb') in Syria. Kadesh - the land of Kinza, on the Orontes.

T he dose-order spearmen, called 'fighting ruhuytnl', formed two large formations of 18,000 and 19,000 men. The hieroglyph for '10,000' was missed on early tI'llnslations, leading 10 some sources quoting 8,000 and 9,000.

40

2,500 c.hadOls, organised intO four bodies, formed the first wave of chariotry, consisting of contingents from Haui, Anawa, Mau, and Pitassa, and included chariOl runners. A reserve or second wave of 1,000 chariots wall formed from the contingents of Arzawa, Mau, Arwen, Lukka, Dardany, Carchemish, Karkisha, and Khaleb, each led by their own commander, and Hittites led by brothers of Muwatallis.

In addition to these: there were troops manning the battlements of Kadesh, and lOme Anatolian infantry posit ioned betwtcn the city and the meam that surrounded it (now Ihe EI Mubdiya brook).

Sea Power

For naval operations the Hinies probably called upon the f1tcts of Ugaril, Alashiya or the Lukka. A naval battle is rcalrded in the reign ofSuppiluliumas II at the end of Ihe 13th. t%ntury BC. The Hiuile f1tcl engaged the ships of Alashiya at sea and destroyed them with fire. Either Alashiya was attempting to break away from Hiuiu: control, or other enemies were operating from Alashiya, possibly Sca·Peoples.

THE HITTITES and Neighbours

AnaloUao Stales

Hayasa

Azz i

Aishe

Isuwa <..' v<' b~

..(' ~" "

Ahhiyawa was a maior rival of the Hitt ite Empire. Relations betwtcn the tWO powers arc more fully described in the section on Achaeans. Although the Achaeans seem to be the most likely candidates for identification with this state, it has also been interpreted as pan of Western Anatolia under Achaean influence, Crete, Rhodes and Troy. This Slale possessed chariotry, could mount seaborne ra ids and bad its own vassal states such as Millawanda.

T)le Kaska were the most dangerous and persistent enemies of Ih.e Hittites. They lived in the highlands nonh of the Halti·land and possessed no t%ntral govc.mmc.nt with which the Hiuies could treat. The ternin presented problems for Hitt ite armies which emphasised we of shock chariotry. Guerilla warfare Ilong the frontier was endemic, consisting of raid and counter·nlid which intensified whenever tbe main Hittite forces were OC"CUpied elsewhere. A line of fons was therefore buill along this frontier. The seriousness of the threat from this quatter may be demonstrated by the remarkable concentration of power Muwatallis placed in the hands of his brother Hattusilis who had special responsibility for this region. Hmusilis led a contingent from this command on the Kadesh campaign.

Amwa WI5 a powerful slIIIe lind centre of a group of stiles including Min, Klupalla and the Sheb·river land, known IS the Anawa states. This principality was often a IOUtt% of trouble to ,be Hitti tes. It was Uhha·Zitish of Arzawa wbo originally persuaded MiIlawaoda to switch allegiance to Ahhiyawa, a cause offuture conflicts. Mursilis II defeated Uhbi-Zitish with the usistant% of Sharre-Kushuke of Carchemish. He was a loyal ally of Hlui Ind

41

Mursilis's right-hand man for conuol of me Syrian states. This demonstrates that Syrian contingents could be called upon 10 serve in Anatolian campaigns. Further west lay Assuwa. The Assuwan army consisted of 10,000 infantry and 600 'Lords of the Bridle:' (probably chariotry).

Wilusiya, Taruisha, Arv.'en (Au\\'llnna) and Dardany are all stales or peoplc::s that can be: placed in north-west Anatolia and sc:c:m 10 have some ronnection with Troy (Ilion). The case: for Wilusiya might be further rein forced by lhe mention in Hiuite rc:cords of a king called Alakhshandush (' Alc:x:aoder' being another name of Paris in Gr«k sources), This name occurs in a treaty made betwc:c:n Wilusiya and Halli.

THE SEA PEOPLES

Ouring the 13th ce:nrury BC, for rusons not ytt fully understood, Aegean civilisation collapsed and many of the great citadels were destroyed. Thc:sc e\'ents did not come suddenly but occurred over one or two generations. At the same time in Western AnatolUimere are hints of political strife among the vassals and neighbours of the Hit· tites. The Hittite Empire was on me defensive against Assyria and, particularly, against the Kaska. The central authority howe\'c:T wu weakening. Egypt was friendly and Merenplah even desplltched 'grain in ships to kcc:p alive the land of Kheta (Hani)', for a famine was amiCiing lhat land. Pirate raids were becoming an increasing cause for concern in Alashiya (Cyprus) and at Ugarit.

Egypt was suffering from repeated Libyan incursions, probably forced out of their homelands as conditions bcc:ame drier. This later affected Egypt as Nile levds dropped and the economy became unsilble. In 1231 Be a massive Libyan Inack 'NaS beaten o£fby Merenptlh. With the Libyans had come the first wave of'$ca.Peoplc::s'; the Ekwesh, Terc:sh, l ulla, Sherden and Sheklc::sh.

Egyptian records Slate bluntly what h~ppcned in the yeus that followed; 'the Northerne.rs were disturbed in their islands. All loll once: nations were moving and scattered by 'Nar. No land stood before thcir anru, from Hani, Kade, Carchemish, Anawa and Alashiya, they were wasted' . It IPpears that two main bodies of people were on the move; one proceeding across Anatolia from the north·west, the other adVfmcing Iiong the roast of Anatolia from the south· west. Part of the lalter group were travclling by 5c:3 .

Correspondence found at Ugarit indicatc::s thaI H ittite forces attempted 10 ha.lt the onslaught in the Lulli lands, but were: taken by surprise by anacks from the north in which the capilal, Halluus, was destroyed. Response to Hinite requcsts for assistance Iud strippe:d their Syrian allics of any means to defend themselves. lc:nen from Ugarit addressed to Alasbiya, Slate that the Ugaritic army was sem to the Hatti·land and never returned, while their neet had sai led to the l ukka-lands. Meanwhile enemy ships Iud appc3.fed ofT the coast at Ugari! and shortly afterwards the city was destroyed.

According to the Egyptian account, the two groups joi ned up in Syria and se:t up a camp in the land of Amurru which they desolated. The combined forces comprised the Pelesel, Tjekker, Sheklesh, Dc:nyen and Wesbwc::sh. They planned a simultaneous assault on Egypt by land and Sc:I. AJ they advanced southwards 'the fire was prcplIred before them', possibly a reference to scorched-c:arth tactia.

Only by determined national e£fon were the onslaughu repulsed on the very frontiers of Egypt. The main strength oflhe land assault may have b«n the Pcleset who recoiled from the Egyptian border to carve OUt I state and become known to later history as the Philislines. Other St:a.Pc:oples dispersed throughout the Mediterranean leaving their tribal names as a record of their final places of SC:lllement.

Shert:ien

The Sherden or Shardana are first recorded in the 14th century BC when they were known in Byblos. Early in the reign of Ramcsscs 11 some were caught while raiding the Delta and were placed in the Egyptian army. The characteristic helmet is ofa type: known in the Near EaSt and the Aegean. The long sword is possibly a devc:1opmem of a type: of levantine dagger rather than an Aegean type: . One possible place of o rigin is the Syrian coast north of Ugarit. After the attack on Egypt some ofmem setlled in Cyprus and eventually arrived in Sardinia, giving thei r name to the island.

Lukka

The lulli appear among the Hillite allics al Kadesh and are well known from the rtcarded correspondence be:twc:c:n Ugaril and Aluhlya. They had a repUiation as early as the 14th «ntury BC as pirates and raiders, A king of Alashiya

42

once complained that they seized a small 10wn from his land every yeu. The original lands of the Lukka were on the southern coast of Analolia, and their name may be preserved in Ihe later name, Lycia.

The Lukka were themselves subjected 10 raids from further west. A document from Hittile archives called the 'Tawaglawas lener' was a request from the Hinile king 10 the king of Ahhiyawa 10 lake action concerning his vas~l, Piyama-ndus, who was niding the Lukka from Millawanda (Miletus).

Ekwu h

The Ekwesh or Akawasha, as the name would suggest, may be Achaeans, and both Ekwesh and Achaeans may be connected with Ahhiyawa. One of the main arguments against the identification of the Ekwesh with Achaeans is thltthe former are considered 10 have been circumcised. This idea stems from Ihe fact that the Egyptians CUI off the hands of Ihe slain instead of the phalli as was done to the unci rcumcised Libyans. This is probably I misinterpretation ofthe reason behind the Egyptian practice (see the comments on this in the section on New Kingdom organisation). The hands of the Ekwesh were taken because they were light-skinned. The phalli of the Libyans were taken as the only feature that reliably distinguished them from Egyptians.

Tene. h

The Teresh or Tursha may be the Taruisha mentioned in a Hittite text, and their original home could have been in nonh-western Anatolia . There may even be a connection with Troy, the Tyrrhenians and the Etruscans; the laner wefe anciently considered to have come from Anatolia.

ShekJesh

The Sheklesh aTe possibly associated with the Sikds of Sicily, who were thought 10 have come via Italy following the fa ll of Troy. They were probably originally an Anatolian people.

Pele.et

T he Pdesct may be connected with tbe Pclasgians in the Homeric list of Trojan allies, and more cenainly with the Philistines. The Hebrews thought that they had come from Caphtor, which is probably Crete (Egyptian Ktftui and Akkadian Koptoro). Crete was probably only a siage in their migntion, thei r real origin being somewhere in Anamlia. The chancteristic: head-dress is associated with both regions. Philistine names are linguistically rebted to an ancient language of western Anatolia, (Luwian).

Tje"er

The Tjekitcr eventually settled on the coan of Canaan nonh of the Philistines. The 'Repon of Wen am un', an Egyptian Itxt dating to the end of Ihe New Kingdom, mentions Tjeitker pirates Still active in the: vicinity of Dor.

Denyen

The Denyen probably came from the land of Danuns, 10000ted somewhere north of Ugarit and possibly as far u South·Western Anatolia. In the 8th century BC a Hiuite successor state bore the name Danuniyim, whose king claimed descent from Mepcsh (Mopsus), a hero who mignted through Anatolia around the time of the Trojan war. There may even be a connection with the tr ibe of Dan among the Hebrew uibes Ind the Danleoi, I name applied to some of the Achaean forces in the Iliad.

We. hwe. h

The Weshwesh or Washwasha, are one of the most obscure of all the Sea·PeoplC$. They may have come from the land of Wilusiya 10000led in Anatolia, so a connection with Ilion cannot be ruled out.

THE NEO-HITTITES AND ARAMAEANS

The Neo-Hhtltet

The Nco-Hittite kingdoms were situated in Syria and Eutern Anatolia. These regions, formerly in the Hittite Empire, were overrun by Anatolian peoples during the Sea-People disturbances foltowing the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1200 BC. It is interC$ting to note that one Nco-Hittite king, Azitawadda of Adami (known to Assyria as Que), refers to his people as Danuna in one inscription. These Slates used the as yet undeciphered Hiuite hieroglyphic

43

script inSlead of the Hinite cuflciform used under the Empire. By the 12th century BC, the following states had come into existence; Tabal, II confederation of city'\State5 in the Taurus mountains, Kammanu, the capital of which was Melid (Malatya), Kummuhu (Commagene), Carchemish. Arpad, YlI'diya (Zinji rl i), Hanina, also known as Unqi, Luhuti (Aleppo), Hamath, Til.Barsip, Adana (Que) and Guzana (fell·Halaf). In the 11th century BC, Aramaean tribes stttied in Southern Syria, founding the kingdom of Aram, centered on Dimasqa (Damascus), and Aramaean dynasties established themselves in the Nco-Hittite states of Arpad, which became Bit·Agushi, Ya'diya, which bt:came Sam'al, TiI·Barsip, which btcame Bit·Adini, and GU1Jlna, which bt:ca.me Bit·Bahiani.

Mushki

Kue

' ADANA

Kam::~,~.~

Gurgum Kummuhu

Sam'al

Arpad • ARPAD

Luhuti

. ~ KAPJ(. AR ('(' .

'" • , HAMATH

Harnarh

Aram

Aribi

' DAMASCUS

NEO-HITTITE KINGDOMS 1100 - 700 Be

Shupria !{fj N ai ri

Urartu

Assyria ASHUR

By the reign of Ashumasirpal of Assyria, these Stales became increasingly under threat of Assyrian conquest. Sometimes several Slates combined to resist Assyrian invasions, but during the intervals of respite bttwetn such attempts they often foughl each other. 1bt Bible and Assyrian annals show thatlsratl and Damascus could combint against Assyria, but when the threat passed, were ~n at war with each olher again. Ashurnasirpal conquered the '(lI.tCs east of the Euphratcs, and Shalmancser III conquered Carchemish, Hanina, Bit-Adini, and Sam'a!. Howtver, Hamath and Damascus defied Shalmaneser for the rest of his reign, supporttd by numerous Phocnc<:ian ci tY-Sillies and other allies, Shalmaneser's main offensive bting halted in the major baule ofKarkar. Damascus finally fell to Adad Nirari III (8 10-783 BC) in alliance with Zalr.ir of H amath, who records that Hazad of Aram had made war against him in alliance: with Bargush, Que, Umq) Gurgum, Sam'al and Mdid. Following this, a succession of weak rulen in Assyria allowed the Ne~Hittite statcs of Kammanu, Gurgum, Sam'al, Hattina, Arpad, Carchemish, Kummuhu and Que to be won over by Sarduris II of Uranu. This coalition was def"ted in Kummuhu by Tiglath.Pileser III , who went on to re<onqut r Nonhern Syria and commtnce: tht anneution of the Nco-Hittite and Aramaean slates of Syria as provinces of the Assyrian Empire. This pr0CC:S5 was complete by 700 BC.

Good representational evidence from these kingdoms, supported by Assyrian records, show that armies contai ned well-developtd chariotry and cavalry, infantry spearmen, including rcgul~r guards and light spearmtn, archt.rs, stingers and camdry. Tht good chariotry, cavalry and spearmen perhaps represented the Nco- Hittite dement while the

light lroopS and camelry represented the Aramaean contribution. These Slates could field numerous and powerful armies, especially in coalition, and the forccs of Hamalh and DamuCU5 were effective on their own. The annals of Shalmaneser HI record the contingents making up the allied army that fought against him at Karbr in 853 BC in some detail. The overall commander wu Hadaezer of Damascus, and the order of battle is sct out below:

Damascus; 1,200 chariots, 1,200 caV11ry, 20,000 infantry . Hamath; 700 chariots, 700 cavalry, 10,000 infantry. Israel; 2,000 chariots, 10,000 infantry, (the number of chariots seems to be confirmed by is raelite textual and archaeological evidence). Que; 500 infantry. Musri; 1,000 infantry, (perhaps I minor state in the Taurus Mountains rather than Egypt). Irqltana; 10 chariOts, 10,000 inflntry. ArplId; 200 infantry. Usanata; 200 infantry. Shian; JO chariotry, 10,000 infantry. The Anlbs of Gindubu; 1,000 camel·riders. Ammon; 1,000 or more infantry, (the figure is incomplete).

It will be seen that some of the allies sent only token forces or could only supply small numbers of chariol5. These may represent m inor city·states of Phoenicia, and othu slates who perhap5 believed Hadaner would be defeated, and did not wish to lose their enti re army with him. Losses were indeed heavy.

The sile of Hanina', army is demonsu'Ited by Shalmaneser Ill 's record that he slew 2,900 of her ... eteran soldiers and took a further 14,000 prisoners in one battle. In Shalmanesc:r's campaign against Huael of Damucus, H azael lost 16,000 infanlry, 1,121 chariotry and 470 of his ca ... alry at the baule of Mount &nir (841 BC). l flhe figures given for the forces of Damascus at Kafkar represent the whole of her army, then at Mount Stnir Damascus lost most of her infanuy and ch.riotry, but, quite credibly perhaps, more than half of t he ca ... alry escaped. Some idea of unit sizes may be gleaned from records of troops recruited by the Assyrians into the Itisir sllamlti from NcoH ittite states. Sargon recruited 200 chariots Ind 600 ca .... lry from H amatb, and from Carchemish, 50 chariots, 200 ca ... alry and 3000 infantry (formerly the guard troops of Pisiri of Carcbemish). These figures would suggest groupings of 50, 100 or 200, assuming that the Assyrians wished to recruit existing unilS. T hey may, of course, simply reflect Assyrian unit sizes.

One of the most interesting features of the list of contingents at Karb r is that both Damascus and Hamath hive the same number of caV1lry in their armies as chariotr y. This would suggest some connection betwccn ctu.riou and cavalry. The nature of this connection is unclear but possible explanations might be (I) social- the horseman being a 'retainer' of tbe chariotccr, (2) economic - one c hariot and one borseman being maintained by a lind-grant or indi ... idual as a single unit or contribution, (3) logistical - equal numbers being the result of stabling or supply arrangements, (4) organisational- perhaps the ClIvalry formed pan of the chariotry units, or the borsemen originated as runners riding spare or outrigger chlriot horses, and (5) tactical - ca .... lry may hive bet.n requi red to optnte with chariotry, and a 1: I prop onion was considered best. In all probability, more than one of these reasons may lie behind this arrangement. T his may represent a stage in the process of development of cavalry from chariotry, similar to that talting place in Assyria and possibly also U ranu and Iran. It should be borne in mind that in Assyria cavalry at fi rst operated as a chariot crew, u if such a crew had actually been te-trained, thus creating a direa rela· tionship betwccn the numbers of ca .... lry Ind the potential number of chariots. Nco-H ittite SOUlCes usually show chariot crews comprising two men, al though one source shows I crew of four (in a ... ery heavy chariot), whHe contemporary Assyrians, Egyptians and cartier Hittites used three-man crews. Perhaps the third crewman had become a cavalryman. The Nco-Hittites may have considered that I combin.tion ofewo-man, two-horse chariots and ca ... alry was a better tactical arrangement than three-man chariouy. In the figures of troops levied from Hamath and Carchemish by Sargon (sevenl generations later than Karkar), the numbers of cavalry do not equal chariotry. This may be because the Assyri.ns considered cavalry to be more useful than chariotry and the ca ... alry may now ha ... e become completely separate, unless the connealon was never completely inflexib le.

The AramaeaDI

The Ahklmu are fU'St mentioned in the El Amarna correspondence and laler as one of the allies in a confederation, together with H utrianl and Hittites, defeated by ShaLmaneser 1 of Assyria (1274-1245 BC). By the 11th century BC they were estlblished in Syria forming the states of Aram-Zobeh, Aram·Bct-Rehob, Aram·Ma'akah, Geshur, Aram (Dimasqa-Damascus), Bit.Agushi, Bit-Adini, Bit-Bahiani, and large numben settling to the Wt of the Eupbrates

45

fonning Anm·Naluraim. The prefIX 'Bir ' means 'house' of a particular tribal anceslor and indicates the tribal origins of these Aramaean dynasties. The Aramaeans seem to bave originated as nomadic tribes in Babylonia. The first phase of their expansion began with raiding, probably inspired by famines. They seized key trading centres and became settled into states. From 1150 to 746 BC they are found allied witb Babylon against Assyria. During the 11th and 10th centuries BC Assyria found hersclfunder serious pressure from the Aramaeans and the long period of warfare against them is often considered to luve contributed to Assyria's manial outlook. From 800 Be Aramaans began settling heavily in Babylonia, usurping cultivated land.

Tiglath·Pilescr III claimed 10 have conquered some 36 tribes in Babylonia who were settled along the Tigris and Euphrates as fu as the Gu lf of Persia. These included the following tribes (the six most imporlanl being listed first); ltu'aya, Rubu'aya, Hamarami, Zi'tau, Puqudu, Gambulu, luhautu, Hatallu, Rubbu, Nasuni, GU1WiU, Nahatu, Ramqu, Rummulutu, Adile, Kipre, Ubudu, Gurumu, Huderi, Damanu, Dunanu, Nilqu. Ubulu, Qubi, Marusu, Haga, Hagal1lmi and Tu'muna. Many Itu'aya served in elite units of the Assyrian army.

Infonnation aboUl these tribes comes main ly from Assyrian sources. They were numerically smaller tban the Cbal· dean tribes, had ab!Orbed less of Babylonian culture, and possessed fewer cities. They were also not as unified as the Ch:llde:lns. Each tribe had up to six 'ullilcall~ or 'sheikhs', each over a sub-tribe or clan. These 'sheikhs' were appointed and could be deposed easily. T he economy was based on animal husbandry and agriculture. They kepI hones, mules, oxen, sheep, goalS and camels.

T iglath-Pileser III mentions an Aramaean 'battle-line', but usual tactics were feigned fligbts and ambushes. The Aramaean dynasties of Syria, however, took over much more sopbisticated military systems.

PHRYGIANS AND LYDIANS

Little is known about Central and Western Anatolia following the fall of the Hittite Empire. Greeks began to seule heavily on the Aegean coast, and the interior seems to have been dominated by three main pcuples, the Phrygians, Karians and Lydians. Tbe Pbrygians are probably 10 be identified with the Mushki. who are recorded in Assyrian sources. Tiglath-Pileser accused them of invading Assyrian terri tory with 20,000 men, aDd inflicted a defeat upon them. They may have been moving into Anatolia during his lime. Rulers going by the name Mita (Midas?) figure on sevel'al occasions. and as T iglath·Pileser mentions five kings, they may have comprised a group of tribes.

Ashurbanipal described the l ydians, or Ludu as they were called by Ihe Assyrians, as 'a dinanl land whose name my ancestors had not heard'. Assyrian annals record Ihat Gyges of Lydia sent troops 10 help Psamtik I drive out the Assyrian garrisons from Egypt and defeat his Egyptian rivals. Because of this Ashurbanipal refused to help Gyges against the invading Cimmerian' who sacked Sardis, killed Gyges and devastated Lydia. Ardys. the son of Gyges. subsequenlly begged 10 be made an Assyrian vassal. The Cimmerians swept through Pbyrgia It around the same time, devastating tbal COUntry also. Its king.. Mita, committed suicide. Lydia survived 10 figbt against tbe Medes and the Persians, and fell to the laller under Cyrus the Grell!. Herodotus records tbese events and mentions dUlilhe Lydian cavalry were the cream oftheit army. The Persians held them in such respect that they countered them with baggage amels manned by soldiers in order to upset tbe Lydian cavalry hof$C$. The Lydians then dis· mounted to continue fighting on foot . At this time the cavalry were anned with a long spear and Greek armour. Croesus had tried to form an alliance with Babylon and Spana and revh-e the old alliance with Egypt, but Cyrus did not allow him enough time 10 receive any assistance from these quaners. Lydia feU in 547 BC.

URARTU

Uranu originlled as a number of small Slat~ in the highlands nonh of Assyria, siluated around lues Van and Unnia, centering on Mount Ararat. During the 9tb cel1lury BC tbese states were welded into a single nation. Shalmaneser III of Assyria conducted campaigns in this region against a cenain Arame who was attempting to unite these Jlal~. Ahhough Arame was defeated and his territories ravaged, I new, suong, dynasty, founded by Sarduri I, achieved power in Uranu. The inhabitants of Ihe land were perhaps related 10 the Hurrians, and referred to the dominions of their king as Biaini!i (the kingdom of Van). Sarduri was able 10 extend his rule over the region of Nairi, bordering directly on Assyria.

46

Urartu was rich in metals and a source of good horses. A formidable army, with an especially good cavalry arm was developed, and Uranu 500n emerged as a serious rival to Assyria. The Uranian kings auempted to uercise influence over the Neo-Hiuite and Aramaean Slates of Syria, and rhrough them 10 the ports of Phoenicia. Easl' .... ards, their influence cxtended imo Mannai and yet deeper intO Iran. These developments brought Uranu into direct conflict with Assyria. The influence of Uranu reached its peak during the reigns of Menua (810-786 Be) and Argishti 1 (786-764 BC). U ratian kings also sought to subdue regions to the nonh; Argishti I reached lake $evan in the Caucasus, while Sarduri lJ (164·735 Be) led upeditions as far as Qulha (Colehis). Uranian urns thus penetrated in to the lands of the bhqiyulu, the Uranian name for the Scythians. This apansion had benefited from a period of Assyrian weakness, but, with the accession of Tiglath-Pileser fll , Assyria went onto the offensive and Sarduri 1I and his Neo-Hittite allies were defeated in Kummuhu (Commagene). Soon, the Uranians btCllme preoccupied with evenrs on Iheir nonhern borders, for the Gimirrai (Cimmerians), and following them Ihe Scythians, were approaching their land.

Assyrian fromier posts followed these: proceedings closely. On one occasion, the young Sc.nnacherib, Ihen a gover · nor oflhe nortbem frontier, reponed to his falher, Sargon, that the Uranians had been severely defeated. Their king, Rusas I (735·7 14 BC), had escaped, but his commander·in-chief, Kallidanu, had been captured and three uniu wiped OUI in a battle with (he Cimmerians. Sargon look adv:unage of his neighbours' weakness and marched th rough Mannai, Media and around lake Urmia, defeating the combined forces ofUrartu and Zirkitu at Mount Simirra. This removed Uranu as a serious rival to Assyria.

Urartu, however, had borne Ihe brunt oflhe Cimmerian advanc~. Eventually Ihe Cimmerians divened westwards into Analolia, while the Scythians went east into Media. Uranu survived as an independent stage unlil absorbed by the Archaemenid empire, now on friendly terms with Assyria, and concentrating on devdoping her natural resources to a high degree. A region of Uranu, called Arme, may have been Ihe distant origin of the laler Armenia.

The kingdom of Uranu was divided intO provinces, each ruled by a governor drawn from among the royal family or the nobility. Each provincial capital wu also a fonified citadel, garrison and storehouse. The army was made up of the contin genlS of these: provincial governors augmenting the king's standing army of 5500 qurubuti in the reign of Rusas [I. The army consisted of chariotry, good-qualilY cavalry and infantry. Chariots were drawn by two horses and crewed by IWO men. Sargon II of Assyria was most impressed with the horsemanship of the Uranians and Slated in his annals that their horse trainers were unmatched in their skill with cavalry horses. Horses were specially bred for the Urartian royal contingents and trained never to break rank, whether advancing, wheeling or retreating. Cavalry were equipped with spear and shield, chariolry with spear and bow, and infantry consisted of archers and spearmen.

From the reign of Rusas I, Cimmerians and Scythians were probably employed as mercenaries. Scythian urowhC:ld..s have been found in Uranian arsenals as well as embedded in the walls of their fonresses. Sargon U records that the citadel of the wealthy Uraniao province of Mount Kispal was garrisoned by the most reliable troops in Uranu. Unfonunately the name of this contingent is incompletely preserved.

ELAM

Ancient Elam comprised two geographical regions, Ihe plain of Susa and the highlands of Anshan, and 'King of Anshan and Shwhan' was I lille of the king, or tUl1kir, of Elam. He ruled over a confederation of p rovinces, each under II gO\'emor, or iJhshaJ/. Occasionally the king was known by the title mtnir, meaning a son of'feudal overlord' . During the Old Babylonian Period (1900· 1600 BC) the ruler was known as the sultkal·makh or 'gnnd·regent ' who controlled Anshan directly, while under him were tv.'O sukkab, 'rcgenu', ofthe' provinces ofSusa and Simash. Elamite history can be divided into th ree main epochs, separated by dim periods of two or three centuries. The Old Elamite Period (2700-1500 BC) from which most of our knowledge ofE.1amite political organisation derives, a Middle Elamite Period (1300- 1120 BC) brought 10 an end by Nebuchadre%Ut of Babylon's victory al the river Ulai, and a NeoElamite Period (800-639 BC) when a renewed and powerful Elamite Slate emerged, challenging Assyria until fmally ovenhrown by Ashurbanipal.

The Elamiles were traditional enemies of the Mesopotamians since the first mention of Elam in Sumerian records. Sumerian rulers and later, Akkadians, campaigned in Eillm and the Elamite region of Awan. Occasionally, Elamite forces invaded Sumer. Little is known about Elamile forces at this period. Drawings on pottery dating to before 3000 BC portray virtually naked archers, and archery was always to future as a sltongpoint of Elamite armies. A relief dating to around 2150 BC depicts archers with beards, pigails and wearing kilts.

47

Duriog the 'middle period' Elam emerged as a major military power, Shutruk-Nahhunte exp~nded and consolidated an Elamite empire, made Susa ils capital, and led a devastating invasion of Babylonia. His son, KUl ir-Nahhunte, was established as governor of Babylon, which became an Elamite vassal. His successor, Shilkhak-Jn..shushinak. G1mpaignw further north, conquering Anmaean tribes betwetn the Tigris and the Zagros mountains, pcnetnting Assyria almOSI as far as Ashur. The Elamite umy at this rime was dearly very effective, but again little is known aboUi them. A bronze relief from Susa depicts archers wearing helmets and shon tunics, and bearing bow5 and curved daggers.

Much more is known about the army during the Neo-Elamite period, due to the Assyrian reliefs of Ashurbanipal and Assyrian royal re:e:ords. Elamite armies, sometimes led by the king himself, or by generals, frequently entered Babylonia to suppon rebels against Assyria. The Elamite armies Ilrt described as 'numerous' and accompanied by many allies. These included, on different occasions, Chaldean tribes, Arab tribes such as the Gambulu, and in one instlnce the Iranian region of Parsumash. Texts and reUefs provide evidence of chariOtry (heavy chariots with crews offour drawn by four mules, and light, two-mule types), cavalry armed with spear and bow and numerous archers, and there: are refe rences in Assyrian annals to ' heavily·armed archCfS' and 'men of the bow and the shield ' . The Assyrian account ofthe bailie ofHalule refers to large numbers ofElamite nobles slain, and they may have provided the chariotry. The Elamite troops depicted in reliefs are remarkably unifonn in appearance and equipment, and pan of their forces may have bun organised as a regulir standing army, perhaps augmented by provincial forces. Towards the end of the period Elam fell into civil war, with rival claimants to the throne replacing each other in quick sucC:Cllsion, sometimes friendly, sometimes host ile to Assyria, unt il Teununan (fempt-Humban) was defeated by Ashurbanipal. Elam be:ame divided and was finally overthrown in a further campaign by Ashurbanipal. EvenlUally the region was taken over by Kurash (Cyrus I) of Parsumash (Persia).

THE AEGEAN

The MinOIlD Tbalauoc:racy

Between aboUi 2000 BC 10 around 1400 BC C rete was the dominant power in the Aegean. Political and eronomic administration was cemered on the 'palace'. The mosl imPOrtlLDl palaces were probably Knossos, PhaiSIOS, Mallia, Khania and Zakro, but Ihere were many smaller palaces. The island may have been divided into sevc.ral stales, or comprised a federation over which Knouos held sway. Cretan power probably exlended to pans of the Gre:dt mainland and Aegean islands, as suggttlled by the legend ofThC5C\ls. The figure of Minos might suggcst that there was a single king. Thucydides rerords the existence of an empire of Minos, based on sea power.

Crele was well positioned to exercise control over trade routes from the nonh and west to Ihe Levant and Egypt. Their main rivals at sea would be the Mainlanders, the coaslal states of the Levanl and Analolia, Cyprus and Egypl. There was certainly trade between Crete and the Levant and Egypt bur it seems that relations with these: areas were always friendly.

The fact lhat the palaces lack fonifica tion suggests internal peace and hints that defenu was achieved by control of the sea_ Frescoes depict scabome assaults on settlements and wuships equipped with rarm.

The most serious tbreat to Cre tan power was destruction by eanhquake. The Cretan palaces were destroyed around 1700 BC and later rebuilt. They were destroyed ,pin around 1400 BC. The ause is generally considered to be nalUral rather than military. However, such events would so sc.riously disrupt the stale as to allow rival powers to take advantage of Cretan weakness. The massive volcanic explosion Ihat occurred at Santorini around 1400 BC would have created a tidal wave whicb could have wiped out most of the Cretan fleet and its pons.

Tbe AchaellDl or Mycenaean.

After the Santorini disaster, the balance ofpowu in the Aegean passed to the mainland. Centered around the Peloponnesc was II patchwork of small states. The 'Catalogue of Ships' comained in the lliad is probably derived from an actual Mycenaean document, and indiates the number and relative power of these SIllies in the later 13th century BC. Mycenae held a position of panicular imponance by this time.

As in Crete the organisation of the state ceDlered on tbe palace. Interest in the military ans and the frequeDl occurrence of inter-state warfare is well attested. by archaeology and later legend. Most palaces were fortified citadels.

48

Legend records sevual royal housn. descended from various heroes such as the ' Perseids' and later the ' Pelopids' at My~nae, the house orc:'dmus a, Thebes, the 'Epigoni' whoovt.nhrew Thebes (Cadmeis) and the 'HenkJeidae' who appear as rulen among the Dorian •.

Achaean influence wu ulended 10 Crele, and an Achaean Slate WI. probably established there afier the indigenous organisation wu disrupted by the uplolion of Santorini. II is possible that there wu military intefVention in Western Anllolia before the Trojan war. The rise of the Achaeans coincides with the appeann~ of the state of AhhiyaWi. or Ahhiya, in Hiuile records. This stile WlS clearly a mljor power whose ruler could be considered the equal of those of Hllti, Egypt and Assyril. 11 was .Ito I sea power and lay in Western Analolia or even funher west. It was cenainly some distan~ from its V1wl Slate of Millawanda (Mjletus). and there is archaeological evid~nce for My~naean colonies among the islands Ind on the coast of South· West Anatolia. It is difficult to adequately aplain this state 115 anything other than the Achaeans' U I whole or It least an Achaean state. If we accept another possible location such as Rhodes or Troy, then the great civilisation of the Mycenaeans will appear to have made no impact on its neighboun in the political, diplomllic and military fields . This s«m.5 unlikely considering the v.-ell·attested uading contact.

PAE ONES

AEG EAN

SEA

~

MAS A

THE AEGEAN ./ ! .~

" .:l •

in the Bron ze Age e RET

49

The Hinite records are wonh mentioning as there may have been military contact between the Hitt ies and Achaeans. Relations were friendly at first and rela tives of the king of Ahhiyawa were sent to the Hatti·land to learn chario! driving. Later, around 1300 Be, the Hittites requested the ruler of Ahhiyawa to prevent his vassal in Millawanda (generally regarded as Miletus) from attacking Tawaglawas, the Hiuite vassal in the Lukka-lands.

In the reign of Tuthalias IV (ascended 1265 Be) a ruler of Ahhiyawa began to interfere seriously with the states of Western Anatolia. This was Attarsiyas (Atreus?). Madduwatas was a fugitive from Attarsiyas who fled to the Hittite king. He was set up as a vassal prince in the territory ofZippasla. Anarsiyas, with 100 chariots and a force of infantry, attacked Madduwattas here. A Hittite force, despatched under a general. met Attarsiyas in battle and forced him to withdraw. Later Madduwatas began to work against the Hittites by attempting to unite the West Anatol ian states in a confederation. He even fell in with Attarsiyas in raiding Alashiya.

The 'Catalogue of Ships' in the Iliad shows that for major military enterprises the Achaeans could act together in a coalition under the leadership of the most prominent state. The list of Trojan allies is probably also Mycenaean in origin. It displays only a vague knowledge of the region on the pan ofthe compilers and would be inconsistent with the situation in a later period. The allies seem to include West Anatolian states. The Trojan War might therefore be seen as a major confrontation between an Achaean and an Anatolian coalition, a later development of the son of hostilities recorded in the Hinite archives. The Trojan War is now usually placed about 1200 Be.

Minoan and Mycenaean Organisation

Our knowledge of military organisation is based on information gleaned from the 'Linear B' tablets. These were contemporary records rompiled by the palace bureaucracy, and show that military organisation and maintenance of equipmellt was supervised from the palace. Individuals were under some obligation to provide equipment and render service in respect of their land holdings. Tablets were found al Pylos, Knossos and Mycenae. The tablets concerning military maners bear the tille o-kQ, possibly meaning 'units' or 'commands'. The tablets date to the period of Achaean supremacy.

Rcsiding in the palace as the ultimate owner of the whole state was the wanaka, or ' king'. An imponant official beneath him was the lawagela, variously interpreted as the commander·in-chief of the army, or a civilian official. Each owned a special personal C:5tate or lemena. The pmirewe were regional officials residing in outlying towns. They were lords within their own territory hut owed allegiance to the king. They possessed a ret inue, pmirwija, and were assisted by a council, kvasija. The Ivela were landowners, owing some son of'feudal' service. The maroppas held a 'share ' of land and could hold the position of unit commander. Of the various kinds of noblC:5 and officials, those with the most apparently military fu nction arc the tqela, or 'followers'. It is cen ain from the Linear B tablets, that the eqtla possessed chariots, but there may also have been chariou y who were not of eqela status, since some items of chariot equipment are listed in the tablets as 'suitable for followers' , implying perhaps that the best equipment was reserved for tile eqela. Two other designations for troops arc known; kekide and kureftl(', although the exact type is not clear. It would seem likely that the lvela provided troops, perhaps chariotry, the eqela being the elite chariotry.

Unit organisation was based on the decimal system and trOOpS were conscripted on a regional basis. Units were known by regional or tribal designations. The Pylos tablets listing forces detailed to gua rd the coastline arc all small units comprising multiples of ten between 10 and 110. In this case the size of the forces is probably dictated by the function, and a unit of 10 may have been the basic unit of organisation.

Inf~"" The main pan of the infantry were spearmen. They were originally equipped with large body-1hields and long thrusting spears. The shields were large enough to conceal the bearer completely and were carried by means of a shoulder strap. This left both hands free to wield the spear. Representations of spearmen in action strongly suggest that they were drilled and fought in close form ation. A frC:5co from Thera shows a body advancing in line.

Although ideally suited to hold off chariotry, long spears do nOI always require the stimulus of mounted troops to encourage their development . They were developed to improve the effectiveness of close-formation infantry against similar opponenlS in most historical instances. The spearmen were often well-cquippcd with elaborate bean'·tusk helmets. rfillest troops were DOl simply conscripted and then equipped by the state, but supplied their own weapons, they must have been recruited from a prosperous section of the community. The Linear B tablets do not mention shields and little that can be exclusively attributed to infantry (they seem to be mainly concerned with chariotry). Poorer sections of society arc probably reprcsented by the naked slingers, archers and stone-throwers shown defending a settlement from seaborne allack on the so-called 'siege rhyton', from Mycenae.

50

Light infanlfy consisted of archers, slingers and javelinmen. Well~uipped archers could operate from within the long·spear formations. Poorly-equipped archers and $lingers, probably drawn from the poorest peasants and tov.-nsmcn, provided skirmishers or dc:fenden of settlements in lime of emcrgency.lavelinmen were belter~uipped and organised. A fresco from Kncnsos depicts a line of clark·skinned troops bearing pain of ja\'dins and wearing IWO plumes in their hair. They were probably Libyan auxiliaries from North Mrica.

Whereas Afuioan sources and Minoan inspired works from the ~inland show long-spcar troops, frescoes from Pylos, Tiryns and Mycenae daling 10 the period of Achaean ascendancy depicllroops with shon spears or javelins and round shields.

Charlotry

Knowledge of chariot warfare arrived in the Aegean during the 16th century BC. Chariotry became a wing of the armed forces oflhe state, provided by I clus of chariot -owning nobles called tqtla, or 'followers'. Many tablets deal with the muster of chariots or parts of chariots, indicating that the readiness of the chariot force was closely supervised by the palaCl:. Men providing a complete chariot are mentioned by name only, otherwise Ihe relevant chariot pans are listed. It is clear that many people could only supply incomplete vehicles or pans. The role of the palace adminislrlnion was to organise the various contributions into a battle·ready force. It has often ~n assumed dUll the tablets represent a chariot force in a poor state of readiness which wu being mustered due to some emer· gency. In fact it could indicate that the palace was attempting to organise an adequate and efficient chariot rorce from the contribUlions or many people individually lacking sufficient wealth to provide compiete chariots.

The Knossos tablets would allow for a maximum or 400 chariots to be produced rrom the mUSler. Pylos could produce 82. Only 100 chariots accompanied Altarsiyas to Zippasla (if we assume Ahhiyawa to be an Achaean sute).

During the 13th and 12th centuries BC the design of chi riOtS and the equipment of the crcw changed dramatically. A change in keeping with the contemporary changes occu rring among infantry as well. This almost cenainly accom· panied a change in tactics and most probably a change in the organisation or armies. This was the period in which the palace economies of the Aegean began to collapse, new peoples began 10 move into Greect: from the north-west, and the Sea.People disturbances began in Anatolia. It seems likely that the military organisation represented by the Linear B tablets, dependent on regulation by a literale scribal class on the Ncar Eastern model, was replaced by something betler suited to the times.

Coastal Defen ce

It is clear from the Catalogue of Ships that most Achaean slates had access 10 the sea and were capable or mounting seaborne allacks. This implies that they would have to prepare for a threat from this direction themselves and make arrangements to guard Ibeir coastlines. The Pylos tablets record a ,000 eXlmple of such arrangements. Pylos had a long coastline to protect. The tablets date 10 shortly before the final deslruction of the palace and have often bttn interpreted as wt-minute preparations made in response 10 a new and unexpected threal. The roren, however, arc small and comprise patrols or observation posts only. They probably represent normal arrangements.

The coastline at Pylos W3S divided into 10 sectors. Each sector was allocated a small detachment of 'watchers' . The units are always multiples of 10 varying from 1010 110. They bear regional designations and were conscripted from local settlements. Each group had its own commander and an attached 'follower'. The lauer served 1$ a chariot· mounted courier. These OUlposts were too small to resist more than one or IWO shiploads or raiders and were almost cenainly backed up by more substantial forces inland. The followers were. requited to report to these force.!. It is perhaps more probable thaI the back-up rorce was the Pylian fleet . Tablets record the mUSler of rowers, and the natural harbour at Navarino bay is located near to Pylos. Over 600 rowers are recorded and each ship required 30 men (20 ships). The Thera fresco sbows ships crewed by 42 men. In the 'Catalogue' NeSlor of Pylos is credited with 90 ships, second only to the contingent of Agamemnon.

The preparations al Pylos are dated 10 the spring month of POr(ltDtlO, meaning 'sailing time'.

T be Catalogue of Ships

The $O-C:alled 'Catalogue of Ships' and the list of Trojan allies contained in Book II of the mad are now oOen con· sidered 10 be derived from a Mycenaean source. The political geography portrayed seems to belong 10 the context of the Late Mycenaean period rather than any later lime. The 'Catalogue' indicates Ihe number and relalive power or the Achaean states which had joined IOgether in a temporary coalition. In the Iliad the Mycenaean Greeks as

51

:I. whole are considered to be composed of tWO main peoples, the Achaioi and the Danaoi. The contingents are listed below:

I. Boiotoi; under 5 lead!:rs wilh 50 ships uch carrying 120 men. Th!: mention of many leaders and [owns, with the notabl!: eJ:.ccption of Th!:bes (s.ack!:d before the Trojan War) might suggest a loose tr ibal organislllion.

2. Aspledon and Minyaean Orchomenusj on Ihe coaSt north of Boiotia, under two leaders with 30 ships. 3. Phokeeis; under twO leaders with 40 sbips. 4. Lokroi; under the 'Lesser Aju'. with 40 ships. 5. Abantes; from Euboea, with 40 ships. A fierce tribe described as swift, with hair falling in locks at the back

and wielding ashen thrust ing·spears. 6. Alhenaoi; under Menesl henes, a skilled commander like Nestor, with 50 ships. 7. Salamis; under the 'Greal Ajax', with 12 ships. S. Argos and Tiryns, under Diomedes, wilh 80 ships. His terrilory included pan of the Argive plain, ACle and

Aegina. 9. Mycc.nae. under Agamemnon, with 100 ships. His realm included Ihe Nonh of the Argive plain and territory

along the Gulf of Corinth. 10. Spana; under Menelaus, brOlher of Agamemnon, with 60 ships. II. Pylos; under Nestor, with 90 ships. Nestor was considered a good chariou}' commander who knew older tac·

tical mel hods. His realm was divided into S wstric" in bolh the Iliad and Pylas tablets, but the names do nOI correspond.

12. Arcadians; enough men to fill 60 ships supplied by Agamemnon, as they knew nothing of seafaring. They were trained in hand·ta-hand fighting.

13. Epeioi; from the Nonh-West Peloponnesc, under four leaders with 10 ships each. 14. Epeioi; from the Echinun Islands, wilh 40 ships. 15. Kephallenesj from hhab.. Kephallenia and Zakynlhos, under Odys,seus wi th 12 'Crimson' ships. 16. Aetoli, with 40 ships. 17. Cretans; under the 'spearman' Idomeneus, with SO ships. IS. Rbodes; 3 tribal disuicts under a single leader wilh 9 ships. 19. Syme; an Island near Rhodes, a small contingent with 3 ships. 20. South Sporades Islands; wilh 30 ships. 21. Myrmidones, Hellenes Ind Achaioi of the region around Pelasgian Argos, under Achillel, with 50 ships. 22. Four towns on the Thessalian coast under Protel ilaus, with 40 ships. 23. Four towns on the coaSt nonh of ProtuihlUS, under Eme1us, with II ships. 24. Four towns on the coast to the nort h of Eme1us under Philoctetel, with 7 ships, each carrying 50 archers. 25. Thessalian plain; 3 [Owns under tWO leaders with 30 ships. 26. Thessalian plain; 3 towns, with 40 ships. 27. Thessalian plain; 5 towns, under twO leaden, with 40 ships. 28. Ensenes and Peraebians of the Dodona region, wirh 22 ships. 29. Magnetel; from the region around Mount Pelion, with 40 ships.

The contingents are each under a single commander unlelS otherwise stlled. Overall command seems to have been given 10 AgQmemnon on account of him being th~ single mosl·powerful ruler.

The Tro janl a nd Tbeir Allies

The list of Trojan alliel in Book II of the Iliad may well be derived from I Mycenaean source as it cOnlains less detail than the 'Catalogue of Ships' and shows only a vague knowledge of regions of Anatolia. It probably dates to a time before the Greek settlemenl in Ionia, (which occurred before 1000 BC). Some of these allies may possibly be identified wilh Welt Anatolian !Ialel known from Hin ite records. The contingents are listed below:

1. Trojans; under Hector, son of Priam. They were the most numerous force, described 15 good spearmen. They DUly be the Taruisha oflh~ Hin ite records. The name Ilion may correspond to Wilusiya, (Muwallilis oncc made a trelty with its king, Alwhandush).

2. Dardanoi (Dardlny); under Aeneas and his two subordinutel. 3. Troops ftom Zelia, I TrOjan clan, led by Pandarus. 4. Troops from Adresteia. iQC:Ited neat to Troy, under tWO leaders. 5. T roops from the Dardanelles area, under Asius.

52

6. Tribes of Pelasgi~n spearmen, from thc rcgion juS[ 50mh of T roy, undcr two leadcrs, (pcluct?). 7. Thraces; allies from the European sidc of the Hellespont, under twO leaders, (feucri, T jekkern. 8. 'Warlike' Cicones, also from Europe. 9. Paeones; archers from the river Axius region in Europe.

10. Paphlagone5; from the lands of the EneLi, where wild mules lived, possibly somewhere in the Pontic region. II. Alil:ones; under twO leaders, from beyond thc river Halys. 12. Mysi; undu two leaders, (Masa?). 13. Phryges; from 'remote Ascania', under twO leaders. 14 . Meiones; under tWO leaders, from West Anatolia. IS. lUirts; from the region ofthc river Maeander, who held Milet05 (Milia wanda), under Amphimachus and Nastes.

Probably to be identified with Karkisa. 16. Lycii, from the region of the river Xanthus, under Sarpe<ioll and Glaucus. Probably the Lukka.

A confederation ofWes[ Anatolian Slates including Taruisna, Wilusiya, Karkisa and Luili, known 35 Ihc Assuwan alliance rebelled against the Hittite king. Tudkhaliash IV. This list may represenl a similar but later confederation, formed as the H inites lost control of the area, whose main enemy was now the Achacans.

THE INDUS VALLEY

Berween 2500 BC and around 1750 BC, a civilisation flourished along the Indus river, extcnding for a vasl area from the Punjab to the Arabian sea. The culture was fairly homogeneous and possibly comprised a single slate for much of this time. The main cities were Mohenjo-Da ro in the south and Harappa in the nonh. They may navc exercised dual control unless Harappi developed as an alternative to Mohenjo-Daro, which was subjected to sc.rious flooding. The Indus valley was in tnding contact with Mesopotamia through Magan and Dilmun.

Such a vast area probably required military activity of some son to C5tablish control in the first place and then maintain it. The wealth resulting from well-organised agricuhure and trade would have bce.n a tcmptation to outsiders, and s«urity of the fronLiers would require a mililaty organisation of some kind. Until the script is deciphered we arc dependent on archaeological evidence regarding the Indus fOTces.

Material evidence demonslnltes the existence ofslingers, archers and spcannen. Side-arms included shon swords, axes and maces. Some animals may have been used for war. An elephant, possibly wearing a cloth or harness, is shown on one seal standing before a manger. The principle of the wheel was understood and models of ox-cans have ei ther two or fou r solid wheels and sometimes even a roof. Thw chariotty and elepnantry cannot be ruled out.

TACTICAL METHODS

EGYPT

O ld and Middle Kingdom.

Egyptian forces in this period wcre exclusively infantry. Tactics were based on the usc: of massed formations of close-order archers and hand·to-nand fighters. Archers formed up in lines sc.veral ranks deep. The front ranks shot from a kneeliag position while those behind stood.

Troops armed for hand-to-hand combat countered the missiles with a bull-hide shield which could often be large cDough to cover 1he bearer completely. The characteristic shape of the Egyptian shield deve. loped around the time of the unificalion. It was ideally suiled 10 allow closc.-order troops to form a continuous wall of shields. The flll base: allowed it to be. rcsted finnly on the ground to form a palisade (the battlements of Egyptian fonresses imitated such a palisade in harder material).

Very little in the way ofbattlc reliefs and inscriplions nave. survivc.d frnm these periods compared to the New Kingdom. Such evidence is a major source for tactical methods. Royal monuments such as the pyramid temples and causeways were decorated with such re liefs but were largely destroyed by laler kings and the blocks were re-used. Private tombs and inscriptions can provide much delail but lend to reflect minor local activities.

53

Inrantry lactics were probably similar to those used in Ihe New Kingdom, since Ihe Egyplians or Ihat lime did not rundamenlally ahcr the mdilional inrantry types but de\'dopcd Ihem.

The army would be dh'idcd into len and right wings and c~tre . There could be a vanguard and rearguard or first line and reserve. The commander, or king if he was present, would be positioned in the centre or the first line with his relainer'. Command or the rearguard or reserve was entrusted 10 Ii second-in-command with anolher body or retainers. This s«ms 10 have been the arrangement at Sekmem. The centre or the ballle·line would be composed or close-rormation spearmen and hand-to-hand fighters in rectangular columns or deep lines. supponed by closeorder archers in line. The flanks or the army would be rormed by lighler and more mobile troops such as ja\'din skirmishers and roreign auxiliaries. These troops could also be detached as an advance guard and doubtless also rear and flank screens if required.

T he role or the IlTchers on the battlefield was to maintain a massive volume or missiles as the close-combat troops advanced inlo contact. The function or the latter was to engage Ihe enemy and prevent their own archers rrom being engaged . There is no evidenct ror the usc ormil:ed rormations, probably because the Egyptians considered that it would strengthen neither shooters nor hand-to-hand troops and may even weaken both. By keeping the twO basic trOOP IYPC' in sepanue massed rormations. the close combat trOOPS were giv~ sufficient density to be dTecrive and the archers could kccp clear or close combat, retaining the option to maintain shooting at any enemy formation throughout the battle.

Archer rormations were probably deployed betwccn cJose-combat bodies, or as a Kfccn in front (using high standards of drill to accomplish any evasive manoeuvres required).

The Middle K ingdom fortresses of Nubia display a sound understanding orthe principles or crossfire and enfilade, SO WI: can expca these principles 10 have been PUt into dfttt in Open battle also.

In drawing up the baule-lines attention would also be given to the posilions of the various grades of troops. The raw levies would be flanked and scrccned by more aperi~ctd troops. Retainers and shock. troops would hold the positions of greatest danger.

Ampbiblous OperatioDs

Military action in Egypt or Nubia would of necessity centre around the Nile, Ihe main line of communicalion. Connol or Ihe river in the area of operations would be vital to allow uoops to be transponed rrom one side to the other in order to clear bOlh banks or enemy and ensure secure flanks for funher advance. The simplest and easiest method of moving a large number or lroops wilhin Egypt would be by rivercraft. Often the King and his dite troops moved by river while columns proceeded along each bank. Cities could be CUI off or relieved by sending a flcct as nearly every important point in the Nile valley was accessible by water. Consequently there were often amphibious actions accompanying sieges. Garrisons in the N ubian fortS were supplied by river and elaborate arrangc:meOls were made to ensure year-round access. Covered quays linked the fons 10 the river bank.

Other considerations regarding the amphibious aspcc! of Egyptian warfare arc that the prevailing wind blows upsttcam while the current flows nonhwards, and that Egypt experienced an annual inundation when large areas of the valley were submerged and shallow-draft vessels would be invaluable for communication. As work in the fields then CC2Scd, rhis was also Ihe time when most manpower was available for conscription.

The New Kingdom

Wantry T actics

As in earlier times, archers drew up in closc-order linear formations . Against mainly unarmoured or shieldlcss opponents, Ihe massed volle)'s were sufficient to hill! anacks alone. Against such foes, archers would lead !he advance with close-combat troops following behind as a supponing line. These tactics arc shown in use against Ihe Libyans in reliefs in the monuary temple of Ramcsses III lit Medinet Habu, Thebes.

Againn bellCI-cquippcd enemies the close·combat troops would be required to engage in hand-to-hand fighl ing. The rol.e ofthe archers was then 10 screen the approach and 'sorten·up' the opposition. Closc-combat trOOPS usua lly drew up in linear formations unless advancing in the vicinity or enemy chariotry, in which case they formed dense rectangular columns and were screened and esconed by their own chariotry in line abreast. Such a formation could

54

present a front to an auack from any direction by II simple tum and could not be burst through by a detennined onslaught. The accompanying charimry might be able to hold orr enemy troops while the column deployed inlO battle formati on. These tactics are shown being used by the Army of Pt(J1t in the Klldesh reliefs.

There is no evidence for the combination of dose-formation ardlen and spearmen in the same body during this period.

Infantry advanced at II rapid pace, often with their shields slung on their bacb, leaving both hands fr~ to grasp side·arms and a spear. In the fa ce of enemy missiles the shields would presumably be swung round to form II solid wall and the pace would become slower and steadier. On contact with the enemy the spears were either discharged and followed up by a rush into hand-to-hand combat with side-anns, or retained to be thrust overarm. Reliefs display evidence of both pfllctices.

Perhaps maners such IS this and the arrangement ofunilS into banle formations were the preserve of the 'Assauh Officers'.

It is tempting to view the 'Greatest ofTen' as I file-leader or end-marker of a flink, depending on whether II detp column or linea.r forffillltion was adopted. Each platoon of 50 could be convened from a column of 10 ranks of 5 men into II line, with a depth of 5 ranks of 10 men, by a si mple tum and whet!' The Standard-Bearer could easily signal these manoeuvres, for which the typical flat standards of rea:angulu and fan shape were probably designed. Large scale manoeuvres by greater format ions were probably signalled by the trumpet.

There are no representations of formed Egyptian c1ose-order infantry receiving an enemy chariot charge. Such were seldom attempted. They would only be vulnerable to such an attack while unformed. such as when crossing fords and pitching camp. if surprised while strung out in column of match, or if morale and discipline gave out in the face of determined attack. However, harassment from skirmishing chanotry would impede rapid movement. rule out complex manoeuvres and reduce numbers by attrition. It was therefore necessary for the Egyptians to have their own chariotry in order to campaign in Asil . Enemy charimry had to be prevented from cunailing the efficien· cy of the Egyptian infantry.

Chariotry Tactics

The introduction of the chariot during the H yksos period added a new dimension to Egyptian tactics. The Egyptians rapidly developed their own chariot force. They acquired the relevant tt<:hnology and materials from ..... estem Asia but adapted organisation and tactics 10 their own requirements. By the mid·18th Dynasty the charimry emerge as a fully deve.loped arm with its own organisation and hierarchy of command. However the infantry remained the most numerous and impanant pan of the army. Chariotry were used to suppan and prott<:t the infantry II well as adding long nlOge and mobility to operations. This stands in contfllst to the pfllctice in Canaan and Syria, where chariotry became pre-cminent and supported by the infantry. There are good reasons for this; Egypt had a high population and maopower was always her most valuable resource. The Egyptians were long experienced in the organisation and discipline of large bodies of men as pan of daily life and were naturally good at it . The basis of a professional standing army was inherited from the earlier period; il was of course: infantry.

A body of well· armoured Egyptian chariOtry in line abrea.st is depicted charging into a similar line ofHinite chariotry in reliefs of the batt le ofKadesh at Abu Simbel. This provides I good illustration ora chariotry engagement. Against enemy chariotry, the Egyptians would charge towards them attempting to cause as many casualties as possible from arrows at long range. and light javelins at close range. They would endea.vour 10 avoid roming 100 close to the enemy, where the heavier spears and more numerous crew of the Hitt ites would give them the advantage.

As vehicles would be well·spaced to avoid collision and to eDable turning manoeuvres, the melee would involve interpenetration of the opposing lintS. There would be much wheeling and turning as the chariOts reformed for successive charges.

If the Egyptians could force their opponents to break ofT. they could cause heavy casualties from shooting during the punuit. The main di5advantage to the Egyptians would be the danger of being swept away by their heavier opponentS in the initial charge.

An account of Amunhotep JI 's prowess at archery provides an insight into Egyptian charimry training methods. The chariOt had to be driven at full gallop past copper targets set on poles and placed 12 metres apall. The chariot archer had to try and send a shaft clean through a target, or pierce it with more than one arrow. The spacing of the targets may reflea: the expected freque ncy with which one might be approached by II m(J,),ClIInu assailaot in

"

a chariOt engagement. While the archer concentrated on shooting. his driver concemrated on driving the vehicle. This was probably regarded as being more efficient than anything that could be achieved by a single horseman at this time.

Chariot RUDDCI'"

Integral to the organisation of the chariotry were the runners. These were light troops equipped with javelins or bows. AJ, the name SUggestl , runners were expected to try and keep pace with the chariotry. They could perform several tactical functions such as screening the chariotry, following up a charge to despatch or capture fallen enemy crewmen, clearing and holding any terrain impassable to chariot! and rescuing wounded friendly crewmen.

A body of runners following some distance behind their chariotry, could also engage enemy cbariots who had passed through them and were attempting to rally for a second charge. Enemy chariotry would then be caught between the runners and rerurning friend ly chariotry. Clashes between opposing bodies of runners could also be e:lpeeted in the vicinity of chariotry engagements.

When (harlotry were pursuing routed troops or ch~rging into lOOSely-formed enemy infantry, tbey were accompanied by runneu and other loose-formation troops such as Sea-People auxiliaries. This is shown in reliefs ofthe banle against the land onslaught of the Sea- Peoples at Medinet Habu. These troops would give greater weight 10

the attack. Chariotry alone would not have sufficient density to be successful and could be overwhelmed by force of numbers.

Battlefield D e ploymeDt

Egyptian commanders paid great attention to initial deployment. Many Pharaohs and commanders boast ofthcir p rowess in drawing up the 'batt le-line ' . The army was considered to have left and right wings and a cemre. On the march a vanguard and rearguard could be detached as required to secure passage througb difficult terrain.

Chariotry and loose-formalion infantry were deployed on the flanks of the anny while close-formation troops were positioned in successive lines in the centre.

Despite the numerous archers in the Egyptian army, tactiC$ seldom took the form of static defence behind linear obstacles or on high ground. In battlcs against the Libyans, archers may have been deployed on the banks of canals, such as the 'waters of Re', or western canal, at Hauho, but other pans of the army were used offensively. Archers do not figure prominently in the Kadesh rel iefs which are dominated by chariOtI)' and spearmen_ In all battles at least part oflhe army was intended to act offensively. When the Libyans were hailed by the volleys or the archen, chariotry were despatched to complete the rout Ind destroy the Cflemy by I vigorous punuit. Such action .., .. ould set back their opponents for years to come.

Field Armin

Each of the four field armies would be a self<ontained mil:ed force and the Army of Pta}, is represented as such in the Kadesh reliefs. As large garrisons could also comprise infantty and chariOtry and were usually commanded by a hny-pMjtt, a mil:ed pMjtt might also be possible (in addition to I fully infantry or Chariotry P«Jjtt).

On major campaigns the field armies would invade enemy territory together. They could then separale to attain different objectives, and later rendezvous at any point in o rder to outflank the enemy or bring overwhelming force to bear. AJ, the Egyptian battle plln at Kldesh was made before Ramesses II was misled by the enemy, his armies appear to have been intended to let in this way against for~ drawn up in the plain before the city. The Hi ttite ploy subverted these plans somewhat by encouraging Ramesses to try Ind take the city before the enemy arrived, aUowing him to be CUI off. However, Ramesses held OUt desperately, knowing that more of his forces were to arrive shonty.

The armies could advance by the same route, but spaced some distance apart, in order to give mutual support if attacked. The Kadesh inscriptions record that the armies were spaced I JUT (approximately 10.5 km) apart. It is more likely that this information was lifted from an official daybook or manual than that it was worked out from the geography by a scribe. One advantage nf these: arrangements WliIIS that the whole fnrce could not Ix: destroyed by a well-<lelivered enemy attack. The main problem was ensuring that the armies did not become tOO spread out to assist each other in time. The strength! Ind ~almesses of this system were clearly demonstrated at Kadesh.

"

This wn an ideal5)'$tem to use against enemies wbo relied mainly on skinnishing chariouy. If an army was auacked and the scretning chariotry were swept away, the infanlTy would be besieged on the baulelieid. This system ensured that they would not be held up for long as another anny would arrive to reinforce or rescue them. This force would contain fresh chariotry. AI Kadesh the Army of P'n could no! nsis! Amlin in this way as it was sUrprised by the Hittites and destroyed. The Army of Ptall was unable to assist P're beClilUse it was still in the wood of Rebawy and possibly nOI yet across the ford. It did arrive in time to be effective later on, but the Ne'arun were able to render immediate assistance. One of the chief functions of mounted scouts would be to inform the separate armies, should assistance be required. A distance of I jUr, would be tOO far for them to set wigt was happening but was also too far away to be initially involved.

Thutmosc IV records b.is order of march on a Nubian campaign in an inscription from Konosso. The Pharaoh advanced upstream on board ship together with his shtmsu (retainers). The Mfru marched on the adjacent river banks with the naklP.ru-QQ on their outer flanks . The infantry recruits were thus supponed by seasoned c1osc-combat infantry occupying tbe most vulnerable and exposed posit ion. The Pharaoh was positioned where he could most easily e:nrcise control of troops on either bank.

Naval Tactics

The reliefs of a naval battle at Medinet Habu provide an example of naval tactics against an enemy flett, in thill case that of the Sea-Peoples. The design and equipment of the Egyptian warsb.ips were obviously the result of long development, and the tactics used were planned Ind precise. Although many ships were requisitioned in readiness for this battle, those depicted in the reliefs Ire purpose-built warships. Earlier engagements 'gainst the maritime powers of Phoenicia and the Hyksos must have contributed to the development of a navy as depicted in these reliefs. The navy wn a branch of the 'rmy. drawing its personnel and equipment from there and not conceived of as a separate force.

In the Medinet Habu reliefs the Egyptian vessels possess both oars and sails. unlike the vessels of their Sea'People opponents. The IIH~r appear to use sails only and would be less manoeuverable. It is possible tha t the Egyptians were deliberately trying to depict their technical superiority and represent the enemy as inferior. In many battle scenes only enemies are ever shown dead or wounded and sometimes una.rmoured and without weapons. Peoples such as the Lilla may have betn es:puienced in techniques of sea warfare. and such expertise and wanhips could have been acquired from Abshiya or Phoenicia.

Unlike Egyptian merchant ships on which the sails were lowered to the deck when not in use. those of the warships were raised clear of the deck. The Egyptian ships were: rowed in close to the enemy ships while archers and slingers raked their deckl with missiles, causing heavy loss among the crowded warriors. At close quartets, a marine posi· tioned in the prow hurled a grappling hook intO the enemy rigging. The enemy ship was then capsized as the Egyptian rowers rapidly reversed their vessel. Another method of Iliad: was to board the enemy vessel. Marines armed with long boa rding pikes fended off enemy warriors lIS the vessels collided. The low prow of the Egyptian ship could smash into the hull, raing and disabling the enemy ship. They could not ram below the waterline. Javelinanned marines boarded the vessel, supponed by the shooting of archers in the fore and aft castles and a slinger in the crow's nest. The grappling hooks could be used to hold the ships together u the boarding took place.

Later Egyptian Tactica

The policy of dividing up the forces and despatching armies to different objectives seems to igve continued ioto the Libyan period for we fInd Sheshonq I employing such tactics against Israel. Following the death of Solomon, the Pharaoh seiud hill opportunity to de·stabilise Egypt's nearest rival and potential threat. Forces were sent into the Negev to destroy Israelite outposts and cut Israel oIT from Ezion Geber at the head of the Gulf of Aquaba (a potential threat to Egypt'S Red-Sea coaSt). The main army advanced through Judah to collect tribute and ultimately lay waste to Israel. This was simply a rauia IS Egypt does not seem to have been strong enough to impose lasting conuol of this area.

The division of Egypt into principalities imposed constnlintS on the strategy adopted by Tefnakht against the Kushite king Piye's invasion. The progress of the enemy could be impeded ifimponant cities could be fortified and held long enough to allow the contingents of vassal princes to be mustered. T he success of the Nonh in defending itself would depend on the qualities ofleadership possessed by the foremost prince. Allies would soon desen to the mhu side if help wu not guarlnt~d and there would alwa)'$ be delays in metting threats, surrendering the initiative

57

to vigorous IHackers, such as Piye and la ter the Assyriuu. Piyc's tactics reflect the weaknesses of his opponems in that he was always anxious to reduCt: enemy strongholds quickly by using siege machines or direct assault. Enemy reinforcemems would be intercepted on the river and the troops wert encouraged to pursue the campaign with fan:lticism. Obviously Piye bore in mind the shon length of the campaign season and the great length of the Nile valley.

A stela sct up by Piye to commemorate his conquest describes the campaign in great tactical detail. Piye issued the following instructions to his army 3$ to how they should conduct lhe war: They wert not to delay in their military preparations by day or night or waSle time in battles of manoeuvre. The enemy wert to be engaged immediately on sigbt and forced to give balt ic. If Ihe enemy holding a position had called up support from another city, Piye's generaLs were 10 allow them 10 join up. No doubt Piye preferred to destroy them in one decisive bailie r.IIther than become 'bogged-down' in a succession ofsiegcs (which looked like happening It one point in the ca.mpaign~ However if such supporting princes remained in thei r cities, the army was to scize the opponunity to gain ground. In battle the troops were to give priority to attacking the forces of the supporting princes and the 'Libyans and favourite soldiers' of Tefnakhte (this could be a refereDCt: to the M tJlIfDtJh). The intention here was to attack the wcalr.est clements ofthc enemy forces and cause atuition on their mongest elemems. Fmally, Piyc demOflSl:r.IIled the 'crusading' character of the campaign when he exhoned his men not to heed the clamour of the enemy as they deployed for battie. but to form their own ballle·line in confidenCt:; 'thou knowest Ihat Amun is the god that has sent us'.

The use of close1)rder native infantry (which exisled by the time of the Persian period, but may have been allowed to lapse afier the New Kingdom). combined with large numbers of Greek mercenariu, would provide Saile and Persian period armies with a solid infantry clement 10 form Ihe cemre of the bailIe-line. Chllriony had become heavier and no doubt cavalry had usurped atlthe skirmishing and scoming functions of this arm.

In his fictional 'Cyropaedia', Xtnophon describes the Egyptian infantry tactics in usc during the Persian period. The Egyptians form up in dense columns of 10,000 men with 100 ranks and files. They are armed with shields extending to their feet and long spears. The shields arc applKlltly ideally suited for fi ghting in close formation. The troops arc tOO densely formed to al low intricate manoeuvres, such 3$ rttnct ion of nnb and files from the path of charging scythed chariotry. Despite inflicting many casualties, such an auack faits to break up the formation and the chariots arc overwhelmed by force of numbers. The Egyptians are dcscribed as fighting with tenacity and determination. This description would seem to be based on some degree of personal observation and it is interesting to note that Xenophon assumes that these troops would actually stand and recc.ive a chariot attack, and that such an attack delivered by chariotry specialised for breaking up ma.ssed infantry formations like no earlier chariotry had ever been, could be successfully held. Perhaps he was trying to make the point that with such a dense infantry formation, it would not be necessary to make evasive manotuvres, as contemporary Hoplitcs were doing, possibly on account of less deep columns.

THE UBV ANS AND NUBIANS

The Libyan and Nubian tribes were almost entirely infant ry and generaily less wtll-tquipped than their Egyptian neighbours. Tactics were restricted to skirmishing, ambushes or mac king in muscd waves of loose-formation tribesmen. Like the colonial powers of more recenl times, the Egyptians relied on d iscip line and volume of missiles 10 halt their massed attacks. These allaclts would be effective enough if their opponenlS' discipline or nerve fallered. or their sbooting ability was impaired. Thus we find the Libyans on one occasion attempting a dawn attack to achieve surprise and perhaps utilise the half-light (they were coming from the west). AgainSl tbe Nubians, who were also mainly bowmen, the Egyptians may have been forced to close in for hand·to-hand combat, rather than cs:change missiles with more dispersed and bcuer-concealed opponents. The most powerful Nubian peoples lived along the Nile and probably made USt of large war canoes similar to predynastic Egyptian types. This would aplain the concern of the Egyptians (or defending the river approaches of their fon s and scruring their lines of communi~· tion. Perhaps the best tactics that could be employed by the Libyans and Nubians would be to retreat into the vastness of their domains and allow their enemies to succumb to the hu t,lhirst and distance, combined with constant harassment. At the end of the New Kingdom the Libyans began to auao: Egypt in such strength that the Egyp· tians were unable to prevent large scale SCttlement. The region of Libya extended from the Mediterranean Sea as far as Nubia, and Libyan incursions took plaCt: along this entire frontier, although the main alfacks wt re in Ihe north. The detailed records of the Necropolis workmen at Thebes show that on occasion men wtre toO often afraid 10 walk the shon distance over tht hills to the Valley of Kings, fot fut of the Libyans. The population of Thebes shut themselves up in the walled enclosures of the great rnonuaty temples which lined the west bank of the Nile. to escape the marauding bands of Libyans and disaffccted SOldiery.

58

SUMERIAN TACTICS

Only the vaguest hints of Sumerian battlefield tactics are provided by contemporary textual sources, though rather more may be gleaned from anistic sources. It appears thai the main baule-line of close· order infantry was preceded by skirmishers armed with bows, slings and javelins. The close-order trOOps relied for protection on thick felt or leather cloaks. Around 2500 B.C. a large bodyshield was introduced which sccms to have been cuned by a special shield.bearer, leaving both of the spearman 's hands free to usc his spear.

The chariots were probably originally used as a shock.force, charging down on the enemy infantry and driving them from the field . However il appears thaI the long two-handed spear of Ihe infantry was adopted to kcep chariOIS II a distance, relegating the chariOtry to the pursuing of an enemy already beaten by infantry combat. It is also to be expected that the nature of the terrain in Sumer, with its many irrigation ditches and canals prevented the usc of chariotry to its full potential.

Spearmen seem to have formed up six-deep. The spearheads of the rear ranks protruded beyond the front rank. The 'commanders of 10' formed up on the left of each rank. The famous 'stela of the Vultures ' shows I uni t of 60 men drawn up in this way.

The large shield and long spear continued in usc throughout the Akkadian period and intO the Third Dynasty of Ur. However the large shield and chariotry were often discarded during the Akkadian empire, probably because armies were increasingly required to operate far afield in difficult terrain. The victory stela of Narim·Suen shows infantry armed with long SpOI'S, but without shields, advancing up wooded mountain slopes, supponed by archers.

THE OLD BABYLONIAN AND OLD ASSYRIAN KINGDOMS 1894·1595 B.C.

Troops were divided into two categories; sabum Itibirum, or 'heavily·armed troops' and sabum qallarum, or 'light troops'. The laller were able to mount ambushes while the former may have formed up in banle lines and used holding tactics.

The main body of the army adVlIDC'ed in II 'b:mle-formation', preceded by II vanguud known as a sabum tardj,um or sabum ra fum. One source: mentions a vanguard of 1000 men preceding a main force of 3000. Another source memions a vanguard of Hana lIibesmen numbering 1500.

Light contingents could include tribal troops; a letter requesting thaI a sabum qallatum be sent out to ambush an enemy column resulted in the despatch of 600 troops consisting of 150 Hana, 50 Sutu, 100 men from the 'banks of the Euphrates' and }()O Babylonians. They were sent OUt in alternate groups of 150.

Shamshi·Adad and hhme-Dagan appear to ha\'e been good tacticians. Shamshi·Adad advised his son in one lener to beware of the faUacy of a pa5Sive enemy - while he was manoeuvering against the enemy the enemy would be a!templing 10 do the same to him. Tactics included ambushes, skirmishing with marching enemy columns, com· bined attacks by several allied armies from differem direa:ions, and even sending troops to hide in enemy territory in order to attack them on their return march when least e:xpeaing it.

Many of these tactical methods required good scouting and advlDce warning to be effective. A repon survives rrom a frontier commander 'on the banks of the Euphrates' describing the initial response to a possible threat. Reports were received that 2000 Habiru were massing on the opposite bank of tbe Euphrates. Two local commanden hurried to the spot with their contingents and made a fonified position opposite the enemy, described as ' thiny fields' away. This created enough time for the rest of the area to begin mobilising. In this case the enemy did not attack.

Siege techniques were already well-developed, as was the ;n offon ificllion. Apan from the city walls that already existed, made yet more formidable by the greal 'tells' or mounds on which the older cities stood, angled gateways and the glacis appear at lhis time. This was probably to counteract the bane-ring ram, known at Mari as the ytUhibum,

59

and also re:Cerred 10 in Old Hiu ile sources where iI is consuuaed in the ' Hurriao manner'. Cities could be funhe r defended by ClJning a bilumin·lined dyke from the nCllrest river. Apart from rams, methods ofanack included siege towers, or gis!! dim/14m, in which a ram might be mounted, and burning arrows. At Mari siege engines were con· nruaed at th:n city and then transponed to the scc:ne of 3ction. One machine was called 'wild donkey', and such engines m3Y ha\'e resembled later Assyrian types, which were often made to look like animals.

THE MIT ANl'\'IANS AND KASSITES

The tactics of the Syrians, Canaanites and Hinites, of which we know much more, were probably, like their military organisation, closely related to those of Milanni. It Stems probable that the Mitannians invented the maryanM system and so probably also the chariotry tactics that went with it. The elite and heavilY'armed maryanna were the cream of the army. T he infantry were intended to suppor! them in bailie. Chariolry probably formed the ",ings of the army, as indicated in the inscription of Lakti·Morduk. His account also shows that an attack by one of these wings at a decisive moment could win a battle, and refers to the great confusion that resulted from the combat of massed char iotry. In such circumstances, well.d,rilled and disciplined chariotry, with a good tactical organisation, would prevail. The account referred to above seems to indicate that the opposing centres engaged first.

This account might also suggest that the cen tre of the army would adwnce to engage the enemy centre, while the wings would attack the opposing enemy wings and attempt to sweep away their t hariotry. They could then faU on the flanks of the enemy centre. The centre would probably comain most of the infantry, but smail detachments ofloose·formation infmlry, probably armed with missile weapons, may havt: been used in dose SUPPOr! of t..be charimry.

The capture of the royal or army standards belonging to Mitannian and Kusite armies is recorded in Assyrian sources as if to show a measure of the viClory. In the confusion of a massed chariotry bailie, such standards, mounted in chariots, would provide a useful rallying·point. The standard of the king, perhaps located with the elite chuiotry in the centre, would indicate to the ehariotry on the wings the point to which they should turn having defeated their opponents. Similarly, such standards on the wings would show the commander the progress of his flank charimry so that he would know from which direction support would come and warn him of the danger of envelopment should they be seen moving back. This is aaaly the son of information that the Egyptian king and his army commanders would have required in a battle such as Kadesh, (and prohably did have).

THE ASSYRLANS

General

The main infanlTy battle·line would have cavalry and chariots on the wings for pincer movements and efforlS to overwhelm and turn the enemy flank. For this the cavalry and chariOts would anempt to break through the enemy line, creating a breach which the cavalry could exploit, riding behind the enemy line and allacking the rear. The infantry would then rush up behind to engage along the whole front and to maintain and widen the gap in the enemy front.

Chariotry

The large, four· horse Assyrian chariot was p rimarily used in a 'shock-charge' capacity. II was a developmem from the earlier, lighler vehicles which had to be multi·purpose reconnaissance, despatch and shock-charge vehicles. The first tWO roles had been increasingly taken ovtr by the developing cava lry arm since the 10th century B.C., cavalry being both cheaper and more efficient in these roles. With these limitations upon weight removed, the chariot could beeome far more specialised to meet the purpose for which it was best luited, to deliver an mack by heavily-armed elile !Toops with speed and mobility. A1> CllVlllry began to become effective as mobile missi le troops and, to a limited extent, close-combat troops, the number of the crew, the amount of proteaion and the size of the chariot were increased to the detriment of manoeuvrability, and limited further the terrain on which it could be used.

The chariot units would form up on the wings of the Assyrian battle-line, supported by cavalry to guard the vulnenble flanks and rear. They would then rumble toward the enemy, the shield·bearers holding their shields high ovtr the heads of their companions to guard against enemy arrows descending al long ranges. The sight of tbese ve:hicles thundering across a plain might well have been enough to cause any untrained enemy levies to flee. Those that stood firm would have little hope:, unless they had sufficient volume of missiles to b reak the Assyrian charge by killing the vulnerable chariot hor5t$ (often well protected enough to make this ineffeaive). If they failed to bait the charge, yet thei r nerve held until the shock, the resultant clash might ruin them as " fight ing unit.

To be fu lly ~fTective, howev~r, chanolS wer~ limited to open baule on fairly nat plains or gentle slopes, as at tbe battles of the U lai, Halule and during Ashurbanipal's Arab wars wh~r~ th~ speed ofth~ ~nemy cam~Js prov~d insufficient to escapc a rombined for~ of Assyrian chariots and cavalry.

When campaigning in diffiC\l ltterrain, such as the mountainous regions to the north and cast of Assyria, the chariotry w~re oft~n left behind, or only a small force of chariou was taken. Sometimes only one chariot, that of the king him:iClf, would proceed, accompanied by guard eavalry, probably as a command vehicle. Even then, it might need to be hauled up the mountainsides with ropes.

Cavalry

Horsemen, used as scouts or messeng~rs, had long b«n known in the Nur EaSt, but by the 10th century B.C. tttle cavalry make thei r appearance in sev~ ral r~gion! of the Near East, such as th~ Aramoean and Neo-Hittite states, Iran and possibly Egypt. Th~ first usc of cavalry in Assyria occurs during th~ 9th century B.C. At first cavalry operated in pairs ronsis!ing of an archer and a shield·bearer, the laner holding the reins of the other's horse and screening him with the shield while he shoots. This gives the impression of a cha riot crew and horses operating as a unit while the vehicle itsclfha! been dispensed with. By the lime ofTiglath·Pileser JII the cavalry still operate in pairs but cormol their own horses. By the 7th ~ntury B.C., however, cavalry equipped with both spear and bow, armoured, and ridiog armoured horses were in usc, although the shield had been d.iscarded by AS5yrian cavalry during this prot"ess of development.

The cavalry team of archer and shield-bearer would have the advantage of being able to operate in lerrain that would have rutricted or prevented the usc: of chanotry and were able to carry out the funclion of mobile missile troops. \Vi th the introduction of armour and the cavalry spear, some degree of shocK-charge abi lity was added, making eavalry a really viable replacement for chariotry in any but the most fa\'ourable terrain fo r chariotry, and against any but the most heavily-armed and densely formed enemies. Apan from the general trend in Ihis dircttion in the Ncar East, and the possible «<lnomic advantages of developing eavalry as a replacement for chariotry, the process may also have been encouraged by comaci with Uranu, Iranian peoples and the Cimmerians, some of whom may ~ctually have been recruited inlo the Assynan army, (made indistinguishable from native. Assyrians by the issue of standardised equipment).

The reliefs ofScnnacberib's pa lace give many good examples of cavalry operating in hill-country, forests and charging up hill·sides. One such charge is shown in a very advanced style of composition predaling the Ulai reliefs of Ashurbanipal (and their 'Egyptian' influence). The complete scene, sub-divided by a stream and hills in the bottom register, shows an Assyrian cavalry charge against Elamite archers. UnfoTlunately, the original re lief was losl but a dTllwing of it survives, showing 22 Assyrian horsemen and 43 Elamitcs, witb some damage to the top of the slab making the scene incomplete. The Assyrians are shown unarmourCi1, which might be due to an «<lnomy of sly Ie on the paTl of the 19th century aTliSI, Layard. Half of the Assyrians are using TlIther long spears O\'CTlIrm. Tbe reliefi! perhaps read better from bottom to tOP (lowest r~gislers being the 'foreground' according to ancient NC3 rEastern aTlisl ic principles). An initial Assyrian uphill charge breaks Ihrough and roulS the line of Elamite bowmen holding the heights. A pursuit begins down to the river-valley. The E lamites, fighting now in broken groups, are surrounded and ridden down. The initial Assyrian fonnalion was apparently a front·line of spear-armed horsemen Wilh a s«ond line of horse· archers, shooting over the spearmen's heads. In this way each man could give his full attention to what he was trained to do. We can sec that the spearman's primary weapon was the speIr and tile bow was a secondary weapon, whilst the second line, 'pure' archers role was to shoot accurately in support of tile front line, and perhaps even avoid becoming involved in hand-to-hand fighting.

The Ulai battle re liefs of Ashurbanipal show a combined chanot and cavalry charge upon the Elamite left flank. Unfortunately the slab dealing with the first impact oflhe charge is fragmentary. However, large numbers of armoured cavalry were involved. The Assyrians use the overarm thrust wilh the spear, using it to Slab rather than impaie like a lance. The spearmen are again supporled by horse archers. In hill-count ry mixed heavy/medium infantry appear formed in tWO lines running in open order.

Cavalry could not be used in sieges unless some of the heavy archers shown shooting up al the baulements were dismounted horse archers. However they must have proved invaluable for quick raids, securing lines of communica· tion and armed reconnaissance.

In fantry

The Assyrian dose-ordcr spearman is nearly alw3y1 shown using a downward overarm thrust in combat, while his raised shield covers his face: and body. Occasionally an underarm thrust is shown. There is little information on tra ining methods bUI a suong imprClSion is given tha t discipline was rigorous.

"

Reliefs often show a front line of spearmen with a second line of light or heavy archers. That this is not purely 11 battlefield arrangement is shown by the line of guards esconing Sennacherib at a stone quarry, and with Ashurbanipal on a lion-hunt . Lines of spearmen bearing shields stand at attention with archers safely behind them. The te rm 'lines' is used here rather than ' ranks' as it is not certain whether or not units were actually raised as mixed archers and spearmen.

II is clear from the reliefs that the infantry made up the greater pan of the army and bore the brunt of the fighting. Heavy infantry units would probably be screened and supponed by auxiliary archers and spearmen. Missile suppor! for the spearmen would be provided by the archer units anached to them, possibly both on a permanent and semipermanent basis. This ar rangement would be especially useful to break the impetus of a charge, and mainlain all rition on the enemy when the spearmen were unable 10 close in for hand·to-hand combat.

Use of combinations of infantry types was not necessarily restricted to archers and spearmen as slingers arc sometimes shown directly behind archers in reliefs. They seem to be shooting at a high angle and the combination in this case may have been intended to counteract the effect of the enemy shields. Their opponents would not be able to shield themselves from low angle archery without leaving their heads and bodies exposed to a hail of heavy Assyrian slingshot.

T he Assyrian use of subject and tribal levies was extensive. However, such tribal levies could often provide only light skirmishers. For this reason their use was restricted to skirmishing before the battle-lines met, at which point they would retire or plunder the dead. Other more successful uses were in holding strategic routes or river-crossings for the main army, or raids into enemy territory. Some levies would be given limited training, but their natural skills would often be useful in themselves, especially in difficult te rrain. Subject troops, recruited from the armies of conquered nations, were often incorporated into the kisir sharruti to become professional soldiers in the Assyrian army, equipped and trained on Assyrian lines.

Siege Techniques

Assyrian strategy required that cities be reduced very quickly. Ifmost of the campaign season was to be spent simply in besieging the first few cities which refused 10 submit, then campaigns would have to be given very limited objectives, thus wasting much of the effort and expense of theiT prepaTlltion. Ingenious siege engines and effective siege techniques were thus an essen tial pan of the Assyrian military organisation. For the same reasons it was also their intention to reduce unnecessary casualties by protecting troops with large shields and covered rams.

Assyrian siege techniques were very methodical . The detailed reliefs of the siege of Lachish show the mel hods used against a major lown. A timber-laced and revetted earth ramp was Ihrown up against the wall. Sometimes mud-brick could be used in the construction. Upon the I1Imp a wooden trackway was laid down, on which the siege engines would advance. Funher back, armoured slingers and armoured archers, positioned behind large r«d pavises, shot at the defenders on the walls. The defenders tried 10 stop the engines by dropping flaming torches on them but each engine had a crewman with a long-handled ladle dowsing the machine wilh water. They might even try to ovenum Ihe siege-tower by catching the ram in a chain, hung down from the battlements. Finally the Assyrian auxiliary infantry assaul ted the wall with scaling ladders with light arcbers shooting in support, or poured through the breacb. In the Lachish relief, the defenders had in vain heightened the wall wilh a framework of wood and shields in an attempt to defeat the ramp.

THE BABYLONIANS

Very li ll ie is known about the tactics employed during the Neo-Babylonian Empire, but they were probably similar to those used by the Assyrians. We know more about the period immediately preceding this due to the Assyrian records concerning the wars fought against Babylonian rebels. The Babylonians used the difficulties and nalUral obstacles of their countryside to good effec\. Large partS of Southern Babylonia were marshland in which fugilives could hide with their retinues, emerging when Assyrian forces had gone home, or proceeding to exile in Elam. Merodach-Baladan was once hunted fo r five days in these marshes and there are Assyrian reliefs depicting Iheir troops weeding out resistance in these regions by means of reed boats. Funher nonh, the countryside was scored by numerous irrigation ditches and canals. Skilful choice of defensive positions was thus a fealUre of Babylonian tactics at this time. At Dur-Papsukal, the Babylonian rebel Marduk-balatsu-ikbi, supponed by Elamites and Chaldeans, took up a posi tion surrounded by an 'expanse of waters' which the Assyrians described as difficult to approach. A similar lactic was used by Merodach-Baladan at Our-Yakin. The Babylonians CUt a channel from the

62

Euphrates 200 cubils wide and broke down irrigation dilches in order to nood lhe fields with waler. They then pitched their camp in the middle of this swamped area and awailed the Assyrian army. Howcver, the Assyrians were undaunted and sent elite troops across the defences, while ardiel'S shot ovcr the waters into the Babylonian camp.

The Babylonians may have found it difficult to mustet thc:ir troops quickly, for there arc twO occasions when Babylonian armies turned up late for a battle, their allies having fought and won it on their own. This happened at Dcr, where the Elamites forced an Assyrian relrelU, and when Nineveh fell to the Medes alone. If i01e01ional, lhis must rank among the moS( astute of military tactics!

THE ELAM.ITES

The Elamites are usually credited in contemporary sources with possessing \'ery large armies, probably numbering tens of thousands, most of which would be infantry archers. Such forces could be: quite effective in themselves, but by the 7th century B.C. at the [;uest, their effectiveness had ~n greatly enhanced by mcans oflarge, four-horse or mule, chariOtS, capable of carrying up to three archeI'S in addit ion 10 the driver. The effect of the missiles discharged by a unit ofsucb chari<Mry would cenainly improve their shock effect apinsl most opposition. These vehicles dispense: with the elaboration of other types of chariotry and yet would be: capable of laking on such opponents on equal lerms, if their increased shooting capability did not actually gi\'e Ihem superiority. These chariou may be: panly accountable for the great mobility displayed by Elamile armies. Even if these vehicles were only used to transpon the numerous archers, it would be possible to out·manoeuvre an enemy army with the Elamite infantry alone. The Elamites also possessed ca..,alry, which would have made a good tactical combinalion with the chariotry, especially n such heavy, unmanoeuvrable chariots would benefit rrom cavalry protection or their flanks and rear.

The Elamilcs often fought as allies of Babyloni2n rebels against Assyria, Ind their suppon could usually be: relied upon. If the main Elamite army ilsc:lfwas not present, there might be forces positioned in Babylonia under Elamite commanders (in one ase, 7,500 men). The Elamites were quite prepared 10 mett the Assyrians in pitched SC:1'piece battles (understandable ifthe:y had a superiority in archers, duriots and possibly cavalry), and the lkabylonian chronicle tells us that this Strategy often brought resulu. Alternatively, forces, such as light troops and avairy, could be detached in order to hold up an enemy army, perhaps to create time for a combined Elamite and Babylonian army to assemble.

CANAAN AND SYRIA; from the Hylr.sol 10 Solomon

Canaanite tactics and strategy depended on the use of high quality chariotry to maximum effect. The primary role of the chariot r)' was to skirmish with the enemy and reduce him with atttition by a massive volume of missiles. The speed, manocuverabilily and heavy armour oflhe maryaltna would enable them to do this without scvere losses from enemy missiles. Unsupponed enemy chariOtry would probably be charged outright. Surprise: attacks and flanking manoeuvres by massed chariotry were particularly desirable. To attack the enemy when he was stretched. out in column of march or otherwise poorly deployed could be most effective. The Canaanite confederation led by the king of Kadesh clearly intended to employ such lacties against Thutmosc 1II at Megiddo. Their forces were positioned to cover the nonhem and southern entry points into the Vale of Esdraelon. They could have engaged the Egyptian army as it marched into the valley b)' surprise attack, or impeded its progress by continuous skirmishing. If this failed there wasstillthe walled city of Megiddo into which they could withdraw. An Egyptian army which had alrClldy suffered sc\'erely might abandon tbe idea ofbe:sieging them (much as Rllmesscs II later withdrew from Kadesh). The Canaanitcs had plnced their camp outside the city, be:twetn their two divisions. Thutmosc: foiled Ihis plan by advancing tbrough the difficult but lightly-hdd pass of Aruna. He emerged opposite the Canaanite camp, completely surprising his opponent.

Despite the Egyptians' Strength in infantry they appreciated. the need for good charlotry in order to deal with Canaanite opponents. An infantry army would be cxltemely vulnerable whenever it attempted to move, C\'en though it might prevail in a sct-piece bailie on a rcstricted battlefield. Chariotry were in fact an exctllent form of defenn for the Canaanite cities. They could impede the movement ofinvading forces, ketp the initiative with Ihe defenders as long as possible, and were able to engage Ihe enemy far awa), from the city and ilS supponing cultivation, ketping supply lines open. Enemies who could counter the chariotry with their own, would simply flfld themselves fighting on the same terms witb chariot specialists.

In the early Stages of the Hebrew SC1tlement of Canaan, the Hebrews were: vinually restricted to the: highlands because of the Canaanite strength in chariOiry. The Hebrews were successful when they cou ld lure their opponents into operating in terrain unsuitable for chariotry. This ploy was used by Barak againsl Siscra. If a victory was achieved,

"

the houghing of captured chariot horses, rather than abandoning them if they could not be carried off, might render an opponenl5' military power weaker for years to come. Unlike armies based on masses of infantry. each chariot represented I complex and a:pensive unit. Losses could not be readily replaced.

With the apansion of the Hebrew kingdom inloan empire, embracing lowland plains and with long caravan roUtes and frontiers to police, it was ntceuary for Solomon (%0-930 B.C.) to develop his own chariotry. They were placed in strategic positions and the logistics of their maintenance were carefully planned. In doing tbis he was following Canaanite military tradition.

The Canaanites, in placing their emphasis on chariotry, were opting for defence in depth with mobile forces. It is an ideal option for areas with a comparatively low population but ronsiderable wealth. Other methods of defence would require placing trOOpS on the frontiets (for which there might be insufficient men) or defending the cities at their walls (thereby surrendering their means of support to the enemy). The Canaanites allowed themselves to be besieged only as a Ian reson .

The Hebr-ew Order of March

The Book of Numbers comains details of the arrangement of the Hebrew camp and order of march during the exodus from Egypt. It provides an example of how a large group of nomads or dispossessed people such as the Sea-Peoples. would move as an entire nation, prepared to fight at any time. Each tribe was allocated a panicular fixed area of the camp and position in the line of march. Each man was to pitch his tent near the standard of his tribe or clan. The shrine (!'he Ark of the Covenant, in the case of the Hebrews. but other peoples would have had their tribal gods which they carried with them), was positioned in the centre of the camp and the middle of the line of march. The tribal host Wi! alerted to danger by trumpet signals, for which tWO silver trumpets were used. One blast with both trumpets gathered all the n ibal commanders 10 the leader to receive instructions. A special signal, called the 'Alarm', signalled the advance of one wing of the host when sounded once. Sounded twice, it signalled the other wing to advance. The wings acknowledged the signal with answering blasts. There was probably a system whereby the line of march turned itself inlo a ballic formation facing the di rection of the threat, with the non-combatants falling back to the rear or being protected in the centre of a defensive formation.

The tribes of Judah, Issachar and Zebulun were positioned on the east side of the CIImp and were to form the h! division in the column of march. Reuben, Simeon and Gad were located on the south side of the camp and were to form the 2nd division. They were followed by the Ark accompanied by the Levites from the centre of the camp. The WC$! side was occupied by Ephaim, Mannseh and Benjamin who formed the 3rd division and the north side was occupied by Dan, Asher and Naphl3.li forming the hindmost division. This arrangement was adopted during the nodus rrom Egypt and may be similar to contempol'2ry Egyptian military pr.actice. for txample; the organisa' tion into four bodies.

HITTITE T ACTICS

General

Whatever the area of operation, great emphasis was placed on lurprise attacks, rapid movement and forced marches. The Hittites generally show an ability to use initiative and imlgination. Surprise could be accomplished by march· ing at night, feigned retreats and use of scoutS to mislead the enemy . Hinite scouting seems to have b«n good (their plans often relied on knowing [he exact whereabouts of the enemy before they suspected the presence of the Hittite army). "\,('hen an advantage had been gained there was In inclination to press it n far as possible. This attitude applied to grand strategy as well as battles and is demonstrated by the sack of Babylon and the seizure of Egyptian territory following the successful defence of Kadesh and withdrawal of the Egyptians.

In Syria

In this area Hillite allies were states whose. contingents included large numbers of high -quality chariotry. Thetactics employed were based on Ihe offensive use of chariOtry, with infantry in a supporting role. Baule plans were similar to those of the Canaanite.5 and Syrians. The army would be deployed for a set-piece battle in a strategically imponant plain into which the enemy musl advance. A massed chariotry onslaught would be despatched against the enemy before they could properly deploy their forces. Another option would be to sweep away any opposing chariotry, (Hittite charlotry were designed for close.-combat) and use·their own chariotry's mobility to surround the enemy army on the battlefield. Close-formation spearmen remained in reserve in large bodies. Against enemies

"

who were also Strong in chadony they could be used to resist c hariot allad!s and act ~ a second line or rallying point for their own chariotry. Against opponents with good infantry they rould be used where chariot attacks would not be decisive.

1110 An3colia

In Anatolia there were more occasions when chariolry «mid not be used effectively, such as in highland regions against the Kaska. Infantry would be employed offensively wil.h chariotry held in reserve.

In his campaigns in Anatolia, Mursilis II (I ]46-1]20 B.C.) used a 'flying column', perhaps ronsisting of light infan· try which were sent out ahead of his muchi ng columns 10 dear the way of enemy ambushes. This force was also used to screen the fear of the army and opente on the flanks.

CbariolTy

There appears 10 have been some variation in chariot design ;md chariot tactics within the H illite Empire, reflecting the different regions from which comingems were drawn . The H ittites and, alleast, their allies from Anawa, Masa and Pitaua, used three·man chariots. This may have developed from allowing a runner to ride in the chariot to increase mobility and eventually became standard tactics. Many Hiu ite chariots were more robust in design ttun Syrian and Egyptian types; with eight-spoked wheels and the axle placed further forward (betler suited to carry the extn weight), suggesting that chariot design altered to accommodate this development . Some chHiot crews in· duded ao archer and others comprised only twO crewmen. These: were probably allies from Syria.

Against enemy ( hariotry, the Hitt ite chariotry .... 'Quld charge iOlo dose combat. The H ittites would attempt to get close to their opponenl$ to d ischarge their spears or thrust with them. Against lighter chariotry, the heavier spears and more numerous crew would Icll. A Ihird crewman meanl that a "chicle could afford 10 lose a man withoul becoming ineffective. A chariot charge into loosely·formed or poor-quality infanlry might also be successful. T he greater number of crew would give I greater density of attack and allow some !Toops to lighl on fOOl without greatl y reducing the effectiveness of the chariol. The extra mounted fighler could fulfil many of the functions for which runners would be required. with the additional advllntage of being certain to keep up with the chariot.

THE NEO·HITTITES AND ARAMAEANS

The Nco-Hittite, Anmaean st~tcs of Syria, and Ihe kingdoms ofLsnel and Judah used similar tactics, 35 their armies were ofsimilar o rganisation and composition. C hariotry were still the most important part of the army, many stales supplementing these with good cavalry. Cavalry may hlIve been developed rrom chariotry by mounting chllriol pt.r· sonnel on spare hones instead ofincreasing the size of the crcw, or perhaps mounting troops who would previously have been chariot runners. The process seems 10 have followed a pattern similar 10 thai in Assyria, freeing the ehariotry from many roles requiring speed and mobility (skirmishing, reconnaissance, courier duties for example) and allow· ing greater specialisation in shock tactics. Such shock tact ics would be rendered all the more effective if the chariotry were closely supponed by cavalry to protect their fl anks and rear. Various formations and manoeuvres involving the use or lines of ClI\'lIlry following behind or screening the front of char iou would become possible. Auyrian records mention the Capture of 'royal cities' which were apparently centres for supply and garrisons. ThtlC would have bcf:n nccc:ssary for the maintenance ofa chariot force, as they were in the Israelite organisation of Solomon and Ahab.

Infantry consisted of spearmen. of which some were c1ite troops, archen, slingers and javelin armed men, most of which were probably light, loose·formation troops of Aramaean type.

Scvenll St~tes would sometimes combine in a (:O;Ilition in order 10 have sufficient military strength to resist opponents such as Assyria. The most notable example of this being at Karkar in 853 B.C. T htlC conlingents were probably subordina te to an acknowledged overall commander, such as H adadew. When Israel and Judah combined in a campaign against Damascus, Jehashaphat placed himself under the command of his ally, Ahabj 'my horses (are) as thy hones'.

Occasionally, in the wan between these: states, sieges took place. Zakir of Hamalh records that Hazael of Damascus besieged his Cif), with a 'wall ' and a 'moat '. Usually rulen preferred to meet their opponentS on ground of their own choosing, often near 10 a royal city inlo which they could re tire if defealed. These cities were difficult 10 take, having large reserves of supplies and deep wells sunk within their walls. They might even be able to hold out for sc:vc:ral years. Damascus, Jerusalem and Samaria all defied the Assyrians for long periods. If a siege could be withstood

65

for long enough Ihe besieging forces would be required to abandon Ihe siege as Ihe campaign season ended or because ,hey were needed elsewhere. These: considerations no doubl encouraged the Assyrians (0 develop a large standing army and highly developed siege techniques.

THE MINOANS AND MYCENAEANS

ChanOI Warfare

Although the Aegean Slates could nOl mUSlcr as many chariolS as could their Near·Eastern neighbours II is likely thai chariotry were formed and foughl in organised units in Near·Eastern fashion. Much has been made of the so-called ' Homeric Warrior' who fought as an individual and used his chario t as battlefield transpon. These lactiC'S may well apply to a laler period but do nOl seem 10 comply with the high level of organisation portnyed in the Linear B tablets. There arc also references to other methods of chariot warfare in the Iliad which tend to be overlooked. It is only to be expected that a work concerned wi th the exploits of heroes should emphasise their individual combat. This does nOI mean that such combat was Iypical, nor would it be completely incompaJiblc wilh massed chariOI tactia.

Even in the Near EUI where masK<! chariotry tactics were the rule, literature can st ill emphasise individual circumstances. The Egyptian epic poem on Ihc batik of Kadesh describes Ramesscs as if he was fighting ofTlhe Hit· tites Single-handed. The annals of Amunholep II mention his personal capture of a maryannu in a skirmish. The tomb biognphy of Ahmose, son of Ebana, emphasises his personal captures in Ihe midst of ban Ie and Ihe Biblical account of the bail ie of Ramoth·Gilead ceOlres around the Syrian atlempls 10 single OUI Ihe Israelite Icing in the confu sion ofbaule. Chariot combat was by the very nature of the vehicle, fought in a dispersed and confused fashion .

Part of the Iliad which mentions massed chariot tactics is the description of how Nestor drew up his forces for battle. Ncslor is gid to be old and experienced. He had experience, acqui red in ballies in his youth, of lactics lhal were later falling OUI of use. This sounds ralher like a device to introduce inlO the work a memory of autbenlic Mycenaean practice on the pan ofllaler poet. NeSlor placed dtariotry at the from and a mass of infantry behind them. The chariotry were instrucled to keep connol of thei r hOTSe6lnd not to become entangled in the melee ('keep in line'). BrlIvery and skill did not emilie .ny man to break nnb and fighl the enemy alone, in Neslor's doctrine. No one was 10 drop back and so weaken the force. When a chariOI came within reach of an enemy vehicle, a spear thrust should be allempted. This malerial could have been deliberalely worked imo the Iliad from a Mycenaean source in order 10 comraSI with the methods ofihe other heroes. An image on a Mycenaean carved gemStone from Vapheio shows a chariot fighter using a long spear exactly as Nestor advises.

Other commeOlS in the Iliad hint at the existence of sophisticated chariot tactics. Chariots appear to operate in the space between the lines of opposing inflnlry and withdraw rapidly as the infantry clash. If this implies skirmishing, then it refers 10 a time when the javelin had superseded the chariot lance. It could also indicate screening of the advancing infantry (moving chariotry would raise a lot of noise and dust), or utempllto break up the enemy bailie line to creale advanllge for Iheir own infantry. The rampan buil t 10 protect the Achaean ships from Troian allack incorporliled a ditch and Slakes to ObslruCI c:hariolry, so perhaps subslantial chariotry macks were c:r;pected.

A detai led reconstruction ofa chariot melee serves to demonstrate Ihal I degree ofindividull comb:al cannOI be ruled out. In the opening phases of a bail ie, or on the flanks of the main action, enemy chariotry might allempt 10 impede deployment or allempt 10 break up the bail ie line by Ihrcatening the flanks of the infantry bodies.

They would need to be countered, engaged and driven off by friendly chariotry. Clearing away enemy chariolry would gain respile, while dcsltoying them would gain the initiative. As a troop of CharlOlry advanced into combat with an enemy body, they would initially keep in formation, (probably line abreast). The gaps between vehicles would be wide enough for each to 'aboul lurn'. A second rank would scrvc no useful purpose, whereas I second troop of chariotry or a body of infantry followi ng some distance behind, would render invaluable suppon.

As the clash approached, each charioteer would concentrate on Sleering his car towards the enemy vehicle opposite him. The chariot lancer would brace himself, perhaps !runing in plate armour 10 deflect the thrust of his opponent, against whom bis own spear would be levelled. He might lau nch a javelin 10wardS Ihe opposing line before adopting this position. As Ihe lines imerpenelrated, Ihe can would veer past each O1her and either chariot fighter could be knocked from his vehicle by a well-aimed thrust. T his action would be repealed all along the line. After the formations had passed through each other, many crewmen on both sides wou ld have been killed or dismounted. T he chariots would Ihen aucmpi 10 tum about and engage in funher combal. Drivers might try to rescue Iheir fallen

66

crewmen. Some crewmen might dismounlto despatch fallen opponenls, or engage them on foot . The melee: would bc:come confused and there would be ch3nces for a wamor 10 win renown by seeking OUI and slaying a notable enemy. The undisciplined mighl wasle time dismounting 10 1001 or take captives. If either formation was baded up by a $«Ond wave of chatiotry or infantry, their a"ival al this time could be decisive. finally the remnants of the worsted formation would retire pursued by those: who have not stopped to loot or rescue friends. tfthey should reach the prolection of their own infantry the pursuers could be: repulsed by volleys of missiles or dele"ed by a mass of spears.

A change in chariot tactics probably took place: towards the end of the 13th century B.C. when chariOl design ahuc:d and a less robust vehiclc called the 'rail-<:hari<M' appeared. This is probably a beller candidate for 'balllefieid-iranspon' Ihan the earlier typeS and its introduction may be associated with the cbange in infantry equipment (and presumably also lactics) laking placc al this time.

Infantry Tactin

The Minoans developed drilled close:-order formations equipped with very long spears and large body-shields. The shields wcre initially rectangular, allowing them to mec:t edge-to-edge 10 fonn a continuous wall. This would nOI only render tbe front ranks almost invulnerable to missi les, but prc:venl many missiles from passing inlO the rear ranks, which smaller shields could not do so efTecti~ly. These are cc.nainly the shields of close: order troops. Atchef$ operated from within the spear-fonnalion. no dO\lbl deriving $Orne protection from Ihe $hields. The S1«: of the shields suggests a considerable missile exchange bc:fore contact. The rectangular shield was later accompanied and possibly superscded by the 'figure-of-dgbt' type:. This had ce:nain advantages in that it was dec:per, increasing its defl«:tive quality and the 'waist' provided a gap allowing spears to protrude at a lower level from the shield-wall and greater opportunity to use the thrusting sword in the cramped circumstances ofa closely packed body. This shield also had a long central rib or 'boss' allowing it 10 be used ofTen!ively to pTC$$ apan the shields oftbe opposition and break into their shield-wall. Sources show 'eight-shields' and the rectangular 'tower-shields' in usc within the same formation. h seems a reasonable taaical arrangement to equip a proponion of each body with each type. Alternatively, the variation may be due to personal preference.

With the rise of Mycenaean power, this Iype of infantry gave way to troops equipped with shon spears or javelin! using smaller, round shields. formalions may have bc:come less rigid and styles of fighting more individual. This required use of body annour such as greaves and cuirass. The:re was thus a mo~ towards the 'Sea-Pcoples' type of warrior, whicb was almost complete by the time of the famous 'Warrior-vasc' from Mycenae. Possible reasons for this change: might be an inability to train and organise long-spear fonnations or that they were rendered obsolete by the nec:d5 of the time (such as possible increase in seaborne raiding, or the evolution of fUler moving and less formal battlC5 under the inOuem;e of chariotry).

The Iliad describes combat by both types of speannen, those with man-covering shields slung on shoulder straps and thost; with. round shields combined with cuirass. No doubt a VlIIriety of sources were drawn upon by laler poets, but there would also have been transitional phases in the development of tactics.

MlssUe Tr-oopa

The Iliad makes scveralreferences to archery, and there were: contingents on both sides at Troy which arc said to be archer specialists. The re is also good material and piaorial evidence for archery. Some archers fonned up with the long-spear fonnations. They probably shot from between the ranks and files of the spearmen in order 10 benefit from the shields rather than represcnting an integral pan of the unit organisation.

Armies might bring with them various poorly-equippcd and untrained levies. These provided skirmisbing slingers, archers and stone-throwers on the battlefield. They were held in low esteem by thei r social and military superiors. Nestor placed his inferior troops between the chariOtry and a rearguard of good infantry to discourage them from shunning the fight . If a 5c:ttlement was attacked by surprisc, such as might happen in a seaborne raid, the majority of the defenders would be: such troops. suppaning any more substantial forces that might be stationed there. This may be the cue in the scene on the so-called 'siege-rbyton ' from Mycenae. Here a small group oflarge shield·bearers make a rather forlorn stand assisted by hordes of Daked archers, slingers and stone-throwers.

THB MOUNTAIN KINGDOMS

These: include Uranu, Mannai, Madai (Media) and Slates of lesser imponance: such as Namri, Zikinu, Na'iri. It was difficult for the Assyrians to condua campaigns into these regions. Chariotry were often made inelTeaive by

67

the narure oftbe terrain, requiring (hem to be left behind, dragged up mounlainsides by ropes or even forcing the Assyrians to cut roads for them with the chisel. Funher p roblems we re caused by the weather conditions, raging mountain torrenlS which defied even the Assyrian's river-crossing abilities, and gue rilla lIt'lirfare on the pan of the inhabitants. In some ofthcsc regions there was no real un ity, simply large numbers ofsenlements and ciudels in inaccessible places.

Uranu, Mannai and the Medes appear to ha ... e been the better-organised states. Uranu rose to prominence as a great power and rival to Assyria, but lillie is known of Uran ian tactics. It would appear thaI chariolry were of lesser importance as the mobile arm oflhe army than the cavalry which were highly developed. However, at the battle of Moun t Simirra, Sargon II encountered the Uranians and their allies from Zikinu deployed in a mOUnlain pass with their infanlrY to the fore and their cavalry behind them, somewhat restricted by the position. This would appear to be odd tactics to choose considering the respect wilh which the Assyrians viewed Uranian cavalry, and the Uran ians were on this OCClIsion, defeated. T he comingent from Zikinu may have remained sepanle from Iheir allies, allowing the Assyrians to break through what would otherwise ha ... e been a st rong position. When defeated or forced to retreat from their stronghold, the forces of these mountain kingdoms frequently chose to hold on the slopel of some high peak, forcing the enemy to fight them in temin to which their trOOpS were naturally accustomed. ManlUi possessed chariots, ca ... alry and infantry, but li1r.e Uranu, the chariotry remained the two-horse, light type and probably played a less impon ant pan than the other twO arms. Some of the plaques from Hasanlu show cavalry and infantry archers operating together with chariotry. O ne plaque shows two lines or ranir.s of three Mannaean cavalry. Infantry consisted of archers and spearmen. Arche rs arc sometimes shown shooting in a kneeling position. IU to the Medes, we ir.now very li ttle of their tactics, al though their SUCC'CSS against Assyria would suggest that they were quite well-developed. Herodotus 5tates tha t they were the fint 10 separate the various military arms such as archers, spearmen and cavalry, whereas previously these had fought mixed together. He may have heard garbled accounts of Assyrian and Babylonian mixed units, but it docs indicate that the Medes were more than a mere horde. Both the Mannai and Medes employed Scythian allies or mercenaries, perhaps a force which had moved on from Uranu, led by a cenain Samdaksharru.

THE NOMADS

The nomadic peoples of the Neu Easl, of which there were ... ery many, may be divided up according 10 their principal beut of bu rden. This would, to a large extent innuence their methods of warfare.

The term 'donkey-nomads' may be applied to tribes wandering on Ihe fringes of Mesopotamia lind Syria during the 3rd and 2nd Millennia B.C. These include the Amorites, Sum, Hana, Banu-Yamin, Shauu, and 'Apiru. Most of these were probably branches of the same great movement of peoples. The Amori tes and their sub-tribes were known by various names such as Man u, Tidnum and Aamu_ The 'Apiru arc perhaps not strictly nomads, but included YlIIriI)UJ Killed pc-oples, dispossc~d clementi and bandits, The (erms Habbalu, S A, GAZ and Hapiru Ire all associated with this group. These peoples moved on fOOl or donkey, and were feared and despised by more civilised peoples. Their tactics consisted of massing for large·scale raids which d isrupted agriculture and trade. Uncontrolled set tlement could completely break up the political organisation of more civilised statcs which were already in decline. IU many ofthese tribes assimilated the cultures into whic h they had infitrrated, they began to provide new ruling dynasties. Their tribal organiution, skirmishing weaponry and raiding tactics made them less ofa threat against those Stales which maimained their vigilance and kept up military pressure upon them.

The camel was domesticated around the end of the 2nd MiUennium B.C., and was brought into the old civilisation of the Ncar East by such ·camel·nomads' as the Midianites, Amale1r.itcs, Ahlamu and Aribi. This added mobility added increased range and surpri.sc to thei r attacks. The AssyriaN seem to have fou nd the answer to these nomads, for in his Arabian campaign Ashurbanipal stationed troops at their wells and altacked with mobile forces of combined chariotry and oV1lry. Dc.nied access to their normal watering places and pushed into the desen, their movements were tunailed and tbeir numbers began to dwindle.

The last group to make their appearance were the 'horse-nomads', namely the Gimerraya, or Cimmerians and the Scythian!, known in Auyria as the Isbkuzaya. They were, perhaps, really westem and eastern hranches oftbe same P«Iple. They appeared in the 81h century B.C., the Cimmerians passing through Uranu into Anatolia, leaving severe destruction in their wue. They were followed by the Scyths around the end oflhe 7th century who fought with the Medes and Babylonians as mercenaries and ass isted in the destruction of Assyria. Their arrowheads turn up in a11 the main regions of conflict a! this time. As most N ear·Eastern nations had been in the process of replacing chariotry with effective ClV1lry for the last few centuries, the sudden arrival of such cavalry specialists must have made a g reat military impact, hastening the end of the 'charint age' in tbe Ncar East.

6.

MAJOR BATTLES OF THE PERIOD

ELAM c. 2630 B.C.

Mebarngesi, t he King of Kish and overlord of Sumcr, dcfclllC:d an El3mitc raid and pillaged Elam.

URUK c. 2600 B.C.

Gilgamesh, the King orUruk, had rebelled agains t Kish in the reign of Mebinlgtsi and gained Uruk's indepc:ndcJlce, Gilgamesh having himself captured seven 'heroes' of Kish in baule.

Alier the datil of Mcbaragesi his $On, Agg:!, sent envoys to Uruk to demand the city'S submission. Gilgamesh refused to submit to K ish, though the older men orUruk's assembly wc~ willing 10 do so, :and mustered the young men for the militia.

However, within five days Agga and his army arrived bero~ Uruk having travelled the one hundred and sixty kilometres (100 miles) from Kish by boat down the Euphnnes. Taken by surprise and unable to break the siege GiJgamesh sought teTms and acknowledged Agga" ovcrlordship.

Both Kish Dnd Uruk we(e ovenhrown by Mesannepadda of Ur around 2500 B.C.

THE BATTLE OF THE GU-EDINA c. 2450 B.C.

The city-states of Umtrnl and Lagash had long disputed the ownership of the GU.EDINA ('e-dge of the desen') an area ofvaJuable impted land on their rommon border. The arbitralion of Mesalim, Ihe King ofKish, had resuhe-d in Lagash gaining the land some one hundred years before.

Umtrnl however re~ted this settlemem in Lagash's favour and during the reign ofEannatum ofLagash the soldiers of Umma inv::aded the GU.EDINA and threw down the boundary stelae . Eannatum raised his army and adVlllnced to m«t the Ummaites on Ihe disputed land .

In me battle thai followed Eannatum WlIS victorious, and Ush, the ruler ofUmtrnl , and many of his soldiers were slain. During Ihe banle EannalUm fought on foot in Ihe fronl rank of his spearmen unlil he was wounded by an arrow shOl by an Ummaile skirmisher.

The Lagashilcs raised twenty burial-mounds Over the enemy dead, re-dug the GU.EDINA's boundary dilc.h and replaced the s te lae thai trnIrked it. Eannatum de-dicated several shrines for Ihe vicrory and allowed the Ummaitts barley from the GU.EDINA in rerum for a heavy tlX.

THE FIELDS OF NINGlRSU c. 2425 B.C.

Following Eannatum's death Umma continue-d 10 harass Lagash over the ownership of the GU.EDINA by diverting the water supply of the fields and leaving unpaid the tn: imposed by Eannarum.

Evenrually, Ur·lumma, the ENSI of Umma, led a combine-d army of Ummaites and allics (possibly from M ari) into Ihe disputed territory, destroying the shrines and stelae erected by Eannarum. The army of Lagash was le-d by Entemena, and it fought wilh the limmailes on the lands farme-d by the Temple of Ningirsu.

Umma was again defeated, and the fleeing Umm.aites wcre pursue-d into the city orUmma itself. Ur-Iumma's elite chariot squadr on of sixty teams was trappe-d on the bank oftbe LUMMAGIRNUNTA canal and wa.s wiped out. Five burial mounds were raised over Ihe dead Ummaites.

However, disputes rominue-d over the Umma·Lagash frontier. especially after the weakened Umm.a feU under the control of Zabalam. This situation was remedie-d to some eXlent through Lagash entering into a tTCaty offriendship wi th Lugal·kinishN!udu, the King of U ruk and Uf .

69

THE UNIFIC ATION O F SUMER c. 23 16 B.C.

Lugal.zaggesi the King ofUruk and overlord ofSumer would seem to have gained control over Mui and possibly achieved enough influence in Syria for him to proclaim their vawlage.

In the twenty-founh year of his reign, however, Sargon (SharTU./tin, 'Legitimate King') the King of Kish, moved against Uruk and destroyed it. Lugal-zaggesi mustered a mighty army containing the forces of fifty ENSIs in order to crush Sargon's rtvolt but was himself defeated, taken prisoner and exhibiled in I nedt-sulCk at die Enlil gate in Kish.

Sargon foughl and won thirty·four battles 10 subdue Sumer, sacking Ur, Lagash and UmlTli. and washed his weapons in the waters of the Arab Gulf 10 signal his triumph.

'ANTELOPE' S NOSE' Reign of Pepi I 2289·2255 B.C.

Weni, commanding an Egyptian army of'many tens ofdiousands', intended to ~gage an army of Nomadic tribesmen in Southern Canaan. Weni divided his forces and despatched pan of the army nonhwards by land while the rtmainder made a seaborne landing at a point on the Canaanite coaSt called the 'Antelope's Nose ' (probably near Mount Cannel). These: troops landed behind the: enemy, who wert CIIught between two Egyptian armies and defeated.

THE REVOLT O F BARHASHE, ZAKHARA AND ELAM e. 2272 B.C.

The short reign ofSargoo', 500 and suCtt5sor, Rimush, was almost entirely spent in suppressing the widespread revohs which broke OUt throughout the Empire on Sargon's death. In his inscriptions Rimush describes the defeat and sacking of seyeral major cities in Sumer and Akkad, including Ur, Adab, Umma and Df:r.

The reconquest of Df:r once more gave the Akkadians control of the main route to Elam, which .... 'U in coalition with the smaller Stlltes of Barhashe and Zlikhara., (in south·west Iran).

AdYancing from Der, Rimush and the Akkadian army met the combined forces ofZakhara and Elam on the Kerkha river between Awan and Susa and heayily defeated them, killing 16,212 (variant: 17,211 ) and taking 4,216 .prisoners. The purruit continued all the way to Susa, whicb was ClIIprured and its walls apin demolished. Two burial mounds were heaped up oyer the rebel dead, one lit the site of the battle and the other near Susa where most of the fleeing Elamites were cut down.

The revolt continued until the following year when a second Akkadian victory finally crushed the rebels, resulting in 9,624 El3Jllites killed and captured.

Rimusb was killed in 11 palace conspiracy in 2270 B.C. when his servantS 'killed him with their tablets'l Whether this refers to 11 wrillen character assassination or to his actually hllYing been beaten to death with large, clay tablets is uncenain. What is certain is that the unfonunate Rimush was succeeded by his brother, Manishtushu .

CO NQ UEST OF OMAN e. 2260 B.C.

After campaigning in south-west Iran to subdue the states of Anshan and Shirikum, ManishlUshu 'crossed the Lower Sea in ships' to secure the yitaltrade route that passed through Dilmun (modern Bahrain) and Mapn (Oman ?).

Manishlllshu fought and defea ted a coalition army of]2 kings drawn up for battle, seizing the rich silyer mines and transponing quantities of stone back 10 Sumer and Akbd.

THE THEBAN REVOLT e. 2133 B.C.

The end of the Old Kingdom in Egypt was brought about by an increase in the power and independence of the Nomarchs and 11 decline in the authority of the Pharaoh. In 21]] B.C. the Theban Nomarch, Menthuhotep I, ceas· ed to acknowledge the king of the Tenth Dynasty, residing at Herakleopolis in Nonhern Egypt, as his overlord. In respons.e , T efibi, Nomarch of Asyut, attacked the Thebans on behalf of the king, Wahbre.

Tefibi defeated the Thebans in a river battle and CliIptured the Nome of 'Ab.ydos ' . Howeyer his troops were allowed to taY1lge the: ancimt ccmttery of Abydos, sacred through the supposed burial there of Osiris. Wahlwc deeply regretted this action and was convinced it would bring retribution.

70

The new Theban Nomarch, Inyotef II, counter-anacked with all the more determination bec:luse of this outnge, driving the enemy OUI of the Nome: of Abydos and pushing north to the Nome of Aphrodilopolis.

Soon after, a new king, Merykare, nce:nded the throne and Akhtoy 11 !>tcame Nomuch of Asyut. Both made ptRtt with the Thebans.

THE UBERATION OF SUMER c. 2120 B.C.

Following the death of the deified Naum-Suen and his successor, Shar-bli-sh3rri ('King of all Kings '), the Akkadian Empire rapidly collapsed into anarchy, due to successful revolts in Elam and Sumer and because of damaging raids by the Guti and Lullubi tribesmen in the east, the Hurrians in the north, and by the Amorit e:s in the west. For this period the Sumerian King List states: 'Who was king? Who was not king?'

For a period of about a hundred y~rs Sumer was dominated by the Gutians who look advantage of the rurmoil in the country to sack Ag3de and establish a loose: overlordship. In general, Sumer's c.ilies were left 10 themselves (Gudea, the ENSI of Lagash, fought a campaign in Anshan during this period) though the country wn poor, with litt le foreign trade and an insecure coumryside.

Utuhegal, the king of Urnk, invoked the help of the gods and the semiodivine Gilgamesh to inspire the citizens of Uruk to fight the Gutians. Having picked his soldiers from the men of Uruk, Utuhegal marched to the major shrines of Sumer in tum to rally support, which he apparemly received since Tirigan, the King of Gutium and overlord ofSumer, sent twO ambassadors to scc:k terms. Utubegal would not listen and imprisoned Tirigan's envoys. The king ofGutium had by tben mustered his forces and advanttd to meet Utuhegal who defeated him and captured bis officers and chiefs. Tirigan fled to Dubrom, but he and his fami ly were su rrendered to tbe victorious King of Urnk who set his fOOl upon Tirigan', neck.

THE REBELLION OF THEBES e. 2046 B.C.

On !>th3lf of his overlord in Heraklcopolis, the Nomarch, Ankhtify,led the Nomes of Hic.rakonpolis and Edfu against Thebes, which wn allied wi th Koptos. Ankhtify rc.scued the town of Hermonthis which was under threat from the Thebans and invaded the Theban Nome on both banks of the Nile. Ankhtify desnoyed che town orVushenshen, a few miles north of Thebes.

The Thebans, under Menthuhotep II, fought back and conquered the Nome of Asyut. They advanced nonh,through the Hare Nome where there was much fighting, and the Oryx Nome where there was lillie resistantt, to r~ch Hentkltopolis which fe ll in 2040 B.C.

The last outposts of resistance were suppressed in the Delta and the Oam, whi le the frontiers were secured (the South as far as Nubia was alrady p:1rI of the Theban coalition du.ring the war against Hentk.lcopolis). Mcnthuhotep II took the title 'Smalawy', meaning 'Unite! of the Two Lands', and bcC2me Pharaoh of all Egypt and founder of the Middle Kingdom.

The southcrn Nomarchs were abolished. The Nomarchs of middle Egypt were left alone for the lime being, to be suppreucd by later kings.

'DAY OF SHEDYETSHA' e. 2046 B.C.

During the civil wars between Thebes and Heraklcopoiis there was great diSlrcss in Egypt due to famine and the uvagcs of the opposing armies. When Menthuhotep [J marched into the Hare Nome (KI","m), the royal forces marched in to oppose him. The local Nomarch was Ncheri, who was chief-of-slafl" to Heukleopolis and commander of one of the lWO divisions of ber army. He resolved to save his Nome from the deprcdacions of both sides.

Neheri 's son, Kay, mobilised the young men to fight in companies and formed II 'rearguard' in ShedyelSha con· sisting only of his followers. Here they foughl successfully againsl the forces or Uppcr and Lower Egypt, which included Medjay Nubians and Asiatic alUiliaries. Kay's young troops prOl:cctcd Ihe people ofche Nome who had ned into Ihe swamps, while che older men would not take the field againsl the royal forces. Kay opened his own house co refugees from the figh ting.

M~nwhile, Neheri's other son, Thutnakhte, held Slt:ldy in a fierce battle witb the king'5 troops. These actions were remembered in the Nome as the 'Day of Shedyetsh3'.

Shortly afterwards Neheri decided to join the: Theban side.

71

THE FALL OF UR c. 2004 B.C.

The exertions of Shu·Suen ensured that Ihe Sumerian empire of the Third Dynasty of Ur remained more or less imact. Ebla, Mari, TUllul and Abarnum in the north·west, and Shubur 'on the shores of the Upper Lakes', tOgether with Magan, seem to have remained loyal, these areas being the extreme limits of the Empire at the best of times. However, shortly ancr the accession of Shu-Sucn's son, Ibbi-Sin, large areas of the empire began to break away, Eshnunna in his second year, Susa in his third, Umma in year five.

Also, in year five, the Amorites, or MAR. TV, broke through the 'Rampan of the West' and its fortresses, penetnlting to the hean of the Empire (as the defection of Umma at this lime shows). The Amorite incursions cut Ihe roads and broke down the vi tal chain ofcommunicalion in the Empire, removing the supervision of the king from his ENS/s. As Ibbi·Sin proved unable 10 help the ENSIs were thrown on their own resources and, one by one, declared their independence.

From his sixth 10 his eighth years, Ibbi·Sin built 'great walls' about Nippur and Ur, the two most prestigious cities of his collapsing empire, whilst Lagash and even the administ rative cemfe of Puzrish·Dagan broke away.

Elamite raiders cont ributed to the confusion in the country which resulted in a $evere famine. In order 10 secure ample supplies of gnltn for Ur, Ibbi-Sin sent an expedition under one of his generals, Isbbi·Erra, to Isin. Ishbi·Erra was successful in buying enough grain to feed thc population ofUr for fifteen years (though at a price some sixty times that of normal) however he then wrote to Ibbi-Sin 10 say that the Amorites com rolled the roads to Ur and prevented his return, unless it were by boat along the canals. To ensure the safe return of the gnlin Ishbi·Erra asked for 600 large boats and the governorship of Isin and Nippur. Ibbi·Sin was not in a position to refuse, though by the eleventh year of his reign the wily Ishbi-Ernl had proclaimed himself king of Isin and controlled much of the nonh of the country.

Ibbi·Sin stubbornly resisted the growing pressure from Isin and Elam and achieved some successes against the Amorilesj and, through Ihen enlisting thei r support, launched counter-auacks on Elam and Anshan in years eleven and twelve. In fact Ur, the capital and finally the only city of Ibbi·Sin 's empire, continued the st ruggle fo r another rv .. e1ve years before eventually being captured and sacked by an Elamite army, with ibbi·Sin himselfled captive to Elam.

Within a few years Ishbi·Ernl managed to recapture Ur and was thcrefore able to assume the prestigious title: 'King of Ur, King of Sumer and Akkad'.

SEKMEM Reign of Senusret III

This battle was fought during a campaign of Sen us ret 1Il (1818-1841 B.C.) in Retjennu. The enemy were engaged al Sc:kmem. The Egyptian deployment included a vanguard led by the king and a rearguard under Sc:bek-khu, a commander of the royal retainers. The course of the battle is not recorded exactly but the rearguard was eventually brought into action.

ASHUR c. 1808 B.C.

The city of Ashur was ruled by a native dynasty following the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur unt il the throne was seized by Ilukabhbu, the sheikh of an Amorite tribe that had settled in the }azirah. On his dealh the throne passed to his elder son, Aminu, while Shamshi.Adad, his other son, fled to Babylon, gathered a following of merttnaries, and captured Ekallati, a town on the T igis north of Ashur ,hat was part of the kingdom of Eshnunna.

Shamshi-Adad reigned there for three years before he succC(:ded in capturing Ashur.

ARRAPHA, QABRA AND ARBELA

Moving against the small kingdoms to the north-east and east of Ashur, Shamshi-Adad I (1813-1781 B.C.) allacked and reduced the fonresses of Arrapha in spring. Afler celebnlting the 'Festival of Heat' in Arrapha itSClfthe Assyrian army moved north, crossing the river Zab, and ravaged the harvest of the land of Qabra before macking tbe land of Arbela in late summer.

Shamshi-Adad I reorganised Arrapha and Arbela as Assyrian provincts and established his own governors.

72

THE SEALAND c. 1739 B.C.

Hammurapi's son and successor, Samsu·iluna (1749.1712 B.C.), faced a maior revolt in Sumer in c. 1740 B.C. in· stigated by I1uma·ilu who claimed descent from the last king of bin. This 'Dynasty of the Sealand' probably ruled from Uruku, near Lagash, and controlled the trade routes from Babylon to [he Arab Gulf.

A Kassite invasion prevented Samsu·iluna from reacting to this threat from the south until c. 1739 when he sacked Ur, Uruk and Kish.

The Se:aland Dynasty survived safe in the swamps of southern SUIDe! where the kings of Babylon were unable to reach them. In a vain elTon to trap Iluma·ilu, Abi~buh (1711 .1684 B.C.) dammed tbe Tigris to dry OUt the swamps! The Sealand maintained itself as a thre1llt to Babylon, with varying degrees of success, and was only finally con· quered by the Kusile king U1amburiash c. 1460 B.C.

THE SIEGE OF URSHU c. 1623 B.C.

The Hiuite king, Hattusilis I (c. 1650-1621 B.C.), was campaigning in Nonhern Syria attempting to defeat the Amoritc state ofYamldUld (centered on Aleppo). During these operations he was forced to conduct a long and bitter siege of tbe ciry of Urshu on the Euphnlles. The forces ofCarcbemish (possibly allies of Urshu) were occupying high land nearby.

The siege operations were conducted by a general, Sanw, and supervised by the king. These were alre1lldy going badly when the battering ram broke, whereupon Hmusilis ordered. new balledng ram, 'in the Hunian fuhion ', to be made from timber in the mountains of Hassu, and a siege ramp to be constructed. However, the battering ram, and also a siege tower, were unfonunately delivered 10 the wrong place!

Eight attacks were mounted against the city without success, the delays involved resulting in unnecessary lou of life. It was found that the city was able to maintain contact with allies oUlside so the king ordered it to be more closely invested. In order 10 do this eight separate forces and eighty chario(S were positiooed around the city. However, a fugitive from Unhu revealed that this was still not isolating the city.

The fmal outcome of the siege is not clear, but tbe conquest of Yamkhad and Carchemish was finally achieved by Hallwilis's adopted son, Mursilis I, following Hattusilis's death in banle against Yamkhad.

BABYLON c. 1595 B.C.

After the capture of Carche:mish, Munilis I led a Hiuite army 5OU1h-ea5I, following the coursc of the Euphrates, on a raid deep intO foreign territory. The small kingdoms on Ihe Euphrates seem to have submilled 10 Munilis I withoul a struggle, allowing the Hittites 10 arrive unexpectedly at Babyloo.

Samsu..wtana, the King of Babylon, was taken completely by surprise by the Hittite attack.. Babylon was captured and $licked, and the statues of the national god, Marduk, and his conson, the goddess Sarpanitum, were taken away as hocMy by the Hittites.

Having gained great prestige from his taking of Babylon, though not having the milimy rcsour~ to keep his con· quest, Mursilis retreated back up the Euphrates le1IIving tbe statue of Marduk at the city of Hana 00 tbe middle Euphrates.

Following the withdrawal of the Hittites, the throne of Babylon was seized fint by Gulkishar, the king of the Sealand, and theo by the Kassite kiog, Agum 11 (kakrime), in c. 1570 B.C. It is possible thatlhe Kauites helped Mursilis I in his attack on Babylon, thougb once established in Babylon Agum II made clear his intention to rule as a good Mesopotamian monarch by bringing back the smue of Muduk. and restoring the shrines of the gods destroyed by the Hitlites.

KAMOSE'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE HYKSOS c. 1576 B.C.

Against the advice of his nobles, who were quite cootenl with the status quo, the Theban Pharaoh, Kamose, was delermined to re-unite Egypt and break the power of the Hyksos ruler, Apophis.

73

Kamos sailed nonh with a fleet, wbile his army marched on the banks of the Nile, pre~ed by an advance guard of scouting Medjay Nubians. Teti, an Egyptian noble, and one of the many that supponed the Hytuos, was besieged in his stronghold of Nefruisi. The Mediay were sent ahead to hold ofT any Hyksos reinforcements that might be sent. Nefruisi was taken by a dawn attack and its walls were destroyed. Kamose proceeded to Per·Shak, which was in panic (unfortunately pan of the account is lost and it is not known exactly what took place there). Kamose con· tinued his advance to Per·Djedken and the 'depot of going South', which was apparenlly a Hyksos naval base. To mack this position, Kamose formed his fleet in tine u tern, 'arrayed one aner anmber' . The bodyguard was on the river and Kamose was at the head of the line in a 'ship of gold' . A mtk·ship was despatched to probe the desen edge, followed by a dftlr·ship, (these presumably being special types of warship).

The Hyksos fleet was found to be in the base, the ships being l~ded with produce from Retjennu. It was here that Kamose is recorded as boasting that he would ' take over the cllariotry'. The entire nett was seized and Kamose. advanced into the Nile Delta. Here he desolated the lands of the nobles who had coliaboT1llted with or supponed the Hyksos. At this point Apophis sent a message to the King of Kush, an aUy of the Hyksos, requt:$ting him to attack Egypt from the south. Ramose intercepted this message and had it relurned to Apophis.

Turning south, Kamose ravaged the Nome of Cynopolis because it was the personal propeny of Apophis. While there, he took up a position at Sako to protect his rur from rebels (Egyptians serving the Hyksos), and sent a strong foret: overland 10 lay waste the 8ahariyeh Oasis, west of Cynopolis.

Following this Kamose continued south, crushing every rebel he found until he reached Thebes amid gmlt jubilation.

THE FINAL DEFEAT OF THE HYKSOS c. 1567 B.C.

II was len to Kamose 's brother, Ahmose, to complete the expUlsion of the Hyksos. Kamosc had retann most of Egypt and Ahmose commenced the siege of Avaris, the Hyksos capital.

During the investment of the city. amphibious operations took place in the canal called Pa.Djedku and in the area to the south of Avaris. Following these evenu.. Avaris was captured. Ahmose advanced into Palestine and besieged the Hyksos monghold ofSh:Jruhen for three years before it fell, leaving the way clear for future Egyptian advance into Asia.

Ahmose then turned againsl his southern enemies, defeating the Nubians at Khenthennefer and the forces of Aala, an enemy from further south, at Tint·IO-Amun. On returning nonh, Ahmose defeated the last of the: Egyptian rebels, Tety·an.

Ahmose may have penetrated as far as Fenkhu (Phoenicia?) during the course of his reign.

MEGnmO 1481 B.C.

A coalition of Canaanite and Syrian princes, led by the king ofKadesh, rebelled against Egyptian rule. They prepa~ to block the advanet: of the Egyptian army, led by Thutmose III , al Megiddo in the plain of Esdradon.

The rebels were deployed ready to repel an entry into the plain from north or south. The Egyptians held a council of war at Yehem. Against the advice of his generals, Thutmose decided to approach through the narrow pass of Arona, which crossed the hills between the non hem and southern roultS to Megiddo. AdVancing on foot al the head of his troops, Thutmose led his forces th rough the pus. Fortunately for the Egyptians, the rebels had nOI prepared an ambush. The only action was a skirmish fought by the rearguard of the column at Aruna.

The rebel coalit ion was completely unprepared to meet an advance from this direction and the Egyptians were able to get their entire force into the plain, and even make camp for the night, while the rebels were altering their deployment.

Early next morning the Egyptian army advanced. The southern wing was on a hill south of 'the b rook of Kina', Ihe northern wing was in position north·west of Megiddo, the Pharaoh was in the cenlre.

The rebels were swept away by the onslaught and ned towards Megiddo. The inhabitants had closed the gates of the city and had to tie their clothes together to make ropes in order to haul the routers up the walls to safety. The Egyptian soldiers were more concerned with looting the enemy amp than taking advantage of their vulnerability.

74

After the bailie Thutmosc rebuked the soldiers for Ihis breakdown in discipline. Mcgiddo was surrounded by a timber palisade and the crops wert harvested by Ihe Egyptians. Faced with starvation the cit)' surrendered.

ALALAKH c. 1480 B. C.

While in his youth, Idrimi and his family were fo rced to nee Khlliba (Aleppo) and kek refuge with his uncles at Emar (Meskene) on the Euphrates nellir Carchemish. Finding lilltc honour in Ii\'ing on the charity of his mother's fami ly, Idrimi lefl to seck his fonune with only his horses, his chariot and his groom.

After a journey lhat took him through the lands of Ihe SUIU uibesmen Idrimi arrived in Canaan, where natives of Khalba and nellirby territories nocked to join the son of their old ruter, forming a band of habiTlI.

Idrimi lived with his habim for seven years before deciding 10 rcturn home, building ships to carry his men to the land of Mukish by sea. On landing in his homeland Idrimi gained the submission of his people, though had to fight for seven years against Ihe forces of Pn:lIarna, Ihe King of M ilanni and overlord of ldrimi's lands of Mukish, Niy and Ama'u.

Eventually, Paratama accepted Idrimi as his vassal and gave him charge of the city of Alalakh. As a vassal of Mitanni Idrimi fought against the Hinites, dest roying seven towns, and forced the Sutu within his borders to senle in villages.

NAHARIN 1470 B.C.

After an engagement on the ' heights of Wan', west of Aleppo, Thutmose HI reached the 'great bend of Naharin ' (the EuphratCi south of Carchemish). T hutmosc was determined to cross the river as his grandfather, Thutmosc I, had done, but this time in greater foret, to anack the kingdom of Naharin (Mitanni). Many of the Syrian stales that had hitherto opposed Thutmosc .... 'Cre Mitannian vasuls. Thutmose ordered the tran!ponalion of ships overland by ox-cart from the coast, in order to make his crossing. The Egyptian army crossed over and engaged the forces of Naharin at Senur, where the Egyptians were victorious. This established the limits of the Egyptian Empire on the Euphrates and earned its recognition by the other great powers of the Ncar East. Thutmosc remrned through the wilderness ofNiy where he was able to hunt Etephants (later bunted by Assyrian kin~ in this region). He was rescued from an angry beast by the commander of Ihe Iltnyt ('braves'), Amenemhab.

NUZI c. 1450 B.C.

Border raids and skirmishcs were common between the kingdoms of Assyria and Arrapha even though both slates owed allegiance to Ihe king of Mitanni .

One Assyrian ra id on the Arraphan province of Nuzi rcsuhed in seven dimali, or manors, being anacked, Iheir sheep and oxtn seiud and the unharvested barley being burnt in the fiel ds. The Assyri~n! took away 42 prisoners for ransom or s!:lvery, having kill~d Ihree men in the mack.

IRRITA e. 1348 B.C.

Tushra113, King of Mitllnni, had bc1::n murdered by Shunarna who had Ihen usurped Ihe throne. The dead lUng's son, Man iwal.a, IIppealed 10 the Hin ite king, SuppiJuliumas, for hdp. The Hittites seil:Cd the opportunily to inslal a vassal regime in Milanni and supplied Maniwaza with equipment. The Hinile prince, Piyassilis, was placed in charge of the expcdilion. The IWO leaders met al Carchemish, on the front ier wilh Mitanni, and anempled 10 con· tact the town of Irrila. This town had been bribed 10 remain 10y.Jl to Shunama and would not allow Maniwaza to re-cnler the country. The combined forces of Mattiwlza and the Hillile$ then crossed the Euphrates and defeated the infantry and chariotry of Irrita which opposed them. This encouraged other cities in Milanni to acknowledge Maniwaza, except for the capital, Washshuganni, which had to be re·taken by force .

. KARDUNIASH c. 1340 B.C.

Kadeshman·Kharbe, the King of Babylon (al this time known as Kar·Duniash) and the grandson of the Assyrian king, Ashur·uballit I, fought and defeated the SUleans on the fringes of the Arabian Desert as well as strengthening the fortresses in the area during the early part of his reign. However, the Kassite! rebelled against him and killed him, placing the Kass ite, Shuzigash, on the throne.

Angered by the murder of his daughter's son, Ashur·ubaltit mustered his army lind marched soulh, defeating the Kanite army and killing Shuzigash. Following his victory, Ashur-uball it placed Kurigalzu, K:lIdeshman·Kharbe's son, on the throne of Karduniash.

75

ASTARPA 133& B.C.

Mursilis II moumed a major campaign to conquer Anawa. The Hiuite: forces wefe mustered at Sallapa. where they were joined by the comingenl of the King of Care hem ish, a brothe r of Mursil is. The army croued. the river Schiriya (sangarius) and marched on Arz.:awa. At this point tbe troops witnessed a meteorite pass OV( T them, convinc· ing them dUll the slonn·god approved of thei r cause (tbis anC(:dote is probably H ittite propaganda). They were lhen joined by the King of Min, who luId r«'emly be:uen ofT an Arz.:awan attack. He informed Mursilis that the Arzawan king, Ukha-zitish, lay in his palace at Apsus (Ephesusn, having been injured when the meteorite landed, and that the Arzawan anny under his son, Piy:Hn:a·ndus, .... -:15 forming up at the river Astarpa on the frontier of Aruwa.

Further elated, the Hitt ite forces engaged those of Anawa on the Ast:lrpa and defe:ued them_ During the pursuit and mopping up following the bailie, Ukha·zitish and somc fugitives Oed o ... ersellS, while OIhers fled into the moun· tains of Arinnanda. Here they had to be surroundcd and starved OUI as Ihe terr.ain was impassable for horses. 15,000 were deported to Hani as forced labour.

Some refugees Oed into the highlands of Puranda, ruled by a son of Ukha-litish, Tapala·zunaulis. He led his forces OUI to attack the: H ittites but was defealed and pur.;ued back into the hills. Puranda was besieged and its water supply cut ofT. Tapala-lunaulis attempled to escape by night but was o\'ertaken by pur.;uing Hinile chariolry.

PIGGAINA.RESSA 1330 B.C.

Intending to Ic:ad a camp;!ign into the land of Aui·Hayasa, Mursilis II was mel atlhe city of T egar.ama by officers, including gcncnl Nuwanus. Being advised by them tha t it WII~ tOO late in the yeu 10 anack this region, the king decided 10 make a punith'e expedilion inlo the land of Pigianllreua which had been raiding Hitti lt ICTritOry. The army mustered at Harnna, and by forced marching al night Ihe infllnl ry and char iotry entered steahhily into enemy lerritory. Scver.altowns were allacked and razed. The inhabitants surrendered and become allies of the Hittites, supplying troops as infantry and chariot·warriors.

HUTUPIYANZAS' DEFENCE OF PALA 1324 B.C.

Prince HmupiYlln..:as had been given command of the region of Pal a b)' the father of Mursilis n, Arnuwandas II . lt was an undeveloped region without fortified tOWn5, and the prince did nOI luI ... e an anny at his disposal. Despite this, Hutupiyan..:as held Pala against de\'asuting Kukac:an allacits wilh only a small group of relainers operating from hide-outs in the mountains. Every attack was defutcd, ..... hile fortifications were gradUlllly established. Next spring Mursilis II marched in with the H ittite army. Making a baggage depot ncar the Kaskaean frontier, he advanced 10 capture the city of Tum manna which guarded a pass into Kaskac:an terrilory. The: enemy adv:mct; guards were surprised by a feigned retrtat and night march, allowing their forces to be defc:atcd and pursued to Mount Kassu.

MT KASSU 1324 B.C.

The Hillite army of Munilis II (c. 1346·1320 B.C.) was campaigning in the Kaska·lands, which lay 10 the north of the Haui-Iand. The Kaskaeans hlId been pursued to the foot of M t Kassu ..... here they took up a defensive position on the SICCP slopes knowing that the (ernin was impassable to the Hi ttite chariotry.

Mursilis personally led an assault by his infantry up the mounlain, and the position was laken with hc:avy loss inflicted on the Kl5beans.

After the baule, the enemy livestock in Ihe area was plundered, and the Hittites returned to their marching camp which had been set up nearby.

SUGAGA Reign of EDUI-Duari

Assyrian and Babylonian sources dirrer as to the date and outcome of the battle of Sugaga, near the city of Sugaga on the Tigris. However, it seems mosllikeiy that Enlil·nar.ari (1329-1320 B.C.), son of Ashur-uballit I and the King of Assyria, campaigned in the south against Kurigailu II, King ofKarduniash. Kurigalzu marched nonh to prevent (his and fought the Assyrians at Sugaga, inflicting a hcavy defeat on Enlil·narari who 1051 large numbers of soldiers killed and many officers caplUred.

h appear.; thai later in Enlil·narari's reign the Assyrians defeated Kurigalzu in tWO battles.

76

SAPPIDUWA Reign of MUf'l ilis II , c. 1346·1320 B .C.

The Anatolian prince, Pitaggatalis, with 9000 men, anempted to prevent the Hinite army of Mursilis II from enter· ing the city of Sappiduwa. Leaving his baggage behind, Munilis advanced in battle formation intending to iUrTOUnd the enemy. He found that he was being obscrved by enemy outposts who wouJd warn PitaggataJis, allowing him to escape from envelopment. Mursilis pretended to march away but returned during the night by means of a forced march, arriving outside the city at daybrnk. His opponent \Io1l5 taken by surprise: ~nd defeated.

ARNUNA Re iga of Arik·den-il!

Arik-din·i li , the King of Assyria (1319-1308 B.C.). bad a large battering-ram constructed before going on campaign against the land of Nigimhi in thc Zagros foothills to the east of Assyria.

The .'\ssyrian army met the forces of Nigimhi while they were apparently carrying off their harvest, howcvcr thc Assyrians were victorious, capturing 33 chariots - Arilt-dln-ili leading his chariots in person during the banle.

Esini, the commander of the forces ofNigimhi, fled to the nearby city of Amuna, which the Assyri:lns then besieged, destroying itS gate with the battering-tam buil! specially beforehand. The ci ty appears to have surrendered at this point, the nobility of Amuna taking an oath to Arik-din-ili as their new ~rlord, thOU&h Esini had somchow managed to escape.

KAR-1SHTAR Reign of Adad·narari I

Adad·narari I, King of Assyria (1307-1275 B.C.), established hiJ rule ovcr mOlt of Mitanni (known to the Assyrians as HanigaJbat) as far as Carchcmish and completed the conquest of Nigimhi.

Moving south against Karduniash, Adad·nafllri fought the Kassite king, Nuimuruttash, near the city ofKar-lshtar. The Kassites were defeated, the Assyrians capturing their baggage camp and their divine·standuds.

After this victory the boundary-line bc:tween Assyria and Kardunilsh was fiXed further south.

KADESH 1300 B.C.

Rames~ II, leading fOUf Egyptian armies, invadtd Hitti te tcrritory intending to take the city of Kadesh on the Orontes. The H ittite king, Muwatallis, prepared to SlOP him with a large army. including allied contingents drawn from throughout the empire.

To approach the city the Egyptians had to cross the Orontes II the ford of Shabtuna. The wood of Rebawy was probably situated on high ground 10 the south of this ford father than 10 the north of it. The Egyptian marching columns were sufficiently long for an army to be crossing the ford and partly in the wood at the same time.

Ramcsses detached Lht leading units of his army to form a ' battle-line' protecting the rest of his forces as they croutd the river. This force was the nt'arvn 'from the land of Amor' . Thcy hive been variously tllplained as elite allies from Amurru (the Hitti tes reglrded the b~ltle as a defcl t for both Egypt and their ally Amurru). or a tuk-force scnl along the COISI of Amurru to appear north·west ofK adesh. However, the Orontes may ha~ formed the border bc:t .... -cc:n Amurru and Kinu (Kadesh) althis point and the reference in the Egyptian text to the ·shores of Amurru ' could refer to t.he rh'er bank, 15 the Egypt.ian word wu used for both 'bank' and 'shore'.

AI the ford, Hittite Igents, pretending to be dtstrting Shauu·bc:douin, misled RamcS$CS intO thinking that the H ittitcs were far lway It Aleppo, when they were really hidden bc:hind the great 'ttl' of Kadesh. This encouraged Ramesses to mm haste to reach Kadesh and take it before the H inites urived.

The Pharaoh had arrived at Kadesh aDd the army of Amun was making camp when captured Hittite scouts revealed the true position ofthcir army. Meanwhile the army of P'Tt (liteflllly 'The Rt'). was crossing the ford wilh its rear, and the Plait column still in the wood of Rebawy. Couriers, including the vizier, were sent to hastCD these armies. P'rt was a distance of I iur (lO.S Km). from Ramcsscs.

MuwataJlis now despatched 2,500 chariots in four bodies across the Orontes by. ford south ofKadesh. They burst th rough the Army of P'rt and broke inlo the uncompleted camp of Amun. Ramesses was now CUt orr from the rest of his army.

17

How the Hiuite chariotry managed to conceal !.heir approach and surprise the army of P'rt so completely must remain a mystery, but as they were apparently carrying chariot runners mounted 15 third crewmen, they lI1lIy have been able to penetl'3te between the hastily deploying Egyptian units, isolating !.hem with infantry and chariotry and destroying them pi~mea1.

Routing troops from the anny of P'r~ I'3n through the camp of Amun, spreading panic there also, while the pursuing Hittite chariotry surrounded Ramesses and a remnant of his troops who were attempting to break out. Some Hittites, however, seem to have StOpped to plunder the Egyptian camp.

Fonunately for Ramesses, the Hittites were suddenly attacked in the rear by the nt'ani/!. This caused Muwatallis 10 send in a funher 1,000 chariots which he was holding in reserve, perhaps expecting the approach of another Egyptian army. Despite this the nt'onm broke through to join Ramesses. The combined for« charged into the Hittites six times before finally routing them IcrOSS the Orontes, assisted by the newly-arrived army of Prolr. The Hittites suffered heavy losses from drowning while struggling to crou the river.

It was now dusk and hostilities c~d. Many dispersed Egyptians returned under cover of darkness. MuwatalJis remained on the east side oftbe Orontes throughout tbe battle with two massive bodies of infantry, one of 18,000 men, the other of 19,000 men. These figures, rather than the 8,000 Ind 9,000 often quoted, are suggested by the presen« of the hieroglypb for' 10,000' in the options to the rtIiefs. The following day it seems that sporadic fighting resumed, but Muwatallis offered Rame5$tS a tru« (possibly inspired by the arrival of the intact army of SuuJtlr, whicb is not mentioned as taking pan in the battle, being still ' upon the road'). This allowed Ramesses to withdraw rapidly to Egypt. Altbougb tbe Egyptian army recovered on the baulefield, (wbich says something for their professionalism), the Hittites won the ompaign and were able to seize some Egyptian territory.

This baule must rank among the best documented baules of antiquity. It is recorded in the Egyptian sources in great detail, and Hittite sources for the battle also survive.

SEVEN AGAINST THEBES, 13TH CENTURY B.C.

Many legends recorded by the later Greelts are now considered to be based on actual events that took pla« during the Mycenaean period. One such concerns a siegt of Thebes, in Boeotia, shonly before the Trojan War.

After the death of Oedipus, Eteocles and Polynices contended for the throne of Thebes. Eleodes seized it and Polynices fled to AdraslUs of Argos, where he was joined by another exile, Tydeus. These 'beroes' were joined by four more Ilf!d advanced to attack Thebes. The for~ presumably consisted of their personal followings and the Argive anny. Mycenae declined to take pan in Iht eDlerprise.

After a long siegt a fina l asuult was mounted in which both contenders killed each other. The rest oftht besieging forces then withdrew without taking Thebes.

Thebes was later sacked by the Epigoni (the subjtcl of another lost epic) and 50 does not figu re in the 'Catalogue of Ships' recorded in the Iliad.

HANIGALBAT Reign of SbalmaDuu I

Shalmaneser I (Sirulmanll-Q.Slrortdu), King of Assyria (1274-1245 B.C.), decided to strikt westwards against Hanigalbat and its Hittites allies, possibly because the Hittite suc«sses in Syria were seen to threaten Assyrian possessions in the Jazirah .

Moving through difficult paths IlDd passes in Hanigalbat, the Assyrians found that the passes and fresh-water springs in their path had been seized by the anny of Shattuara, King of Hanigalbat, in combination with a Hittite army and Ahlamu (Aramaean) mercenaries. Tired and without water the Assyrians were suddenly attacked in force by Shattuara, however, the uhausted Assyriam counter-allacked, defeating the allies and inflicting severe losses, pursuing Shattuara wutwards. 14,400 prisonen were taken and blinded in the right eye before being led [0 Assyria.

This Assyrian success seems to have forced the rapprochement between Egypt and Haiti.

78

TIWARA Reign of T udbaliyaJ IV, a,c, 1255 B,C,

Tudhaliyas IV was in Assuwa, having recemly PUt down the rebellion of Kullulis, who had incited the Assuwan anny consisting of 10,000 infantry and 600 'Lords of the Bridle' (Chariotry) to revolt. While he was there the KaWeans had taken the opponunilY to raid the Hani·lIInds. Tudhaliyas rushed back and punued the Kaska into their own country. He encountered the full forces of the Kaska drawn up for bailie al Tiwara. The enemy rear was protected by a wood and their front by a river. Undaunted the H illites advane«l and defeated them. The victory was followed up by the t2lting of many strongholds described as 'difficult of approach'.

DALA WA E nd of reign of T udbaliyas rv

The western Anatolian prince, Madduwattas, was a serious cause for concern to the H ittites. This incident is recorded in a document known as the 'Madduwauas Indictment '. Madduwatlu sent a message to the local Hillite general, Kisnapilis, proposing a combined allack on the cities ofOalawa and Hinduwa in the Lukka lands. Following his pan ofthe plan, Kisnapilis marched on Hinduwa while the treacherous Madduwaltas informed the people ofOalawa of the Hillite position and incited them to mount an ambush. The troops of Dalawa attacked the H illites, killing Kisnapilis and another commander, Partuhallu. In this way Madduwatt3s won ove r the people of Dalawa into allegiance with him.

KARDUNIASH 1235 B.C.

Seeing thai Babylonia was weak following an Elamite victory, Tukulti·Ninum I provoked a war with Kashtiliash IV and fought him near Karduniash (Babylon).

Kashtiliash was captured during the battle and his army defeated. Babylon was then taken by the Assyrians, its walls destroyed and the city sacked. 8mh the statue of M arduk and the unfortunale Kuhtiliash wen:: sent to Assyria, and Assyrian governors established in KarduniDsh.

Assyrian control of Babylon lasted seven yean until 'the Akkadian officen of Karduniash n::belled' . Tukulti-Ninuna I, who had aroused hostility 10 his rule in Assyria, was shut up in a room of his new capital of Kar·Tukult i·Ninuna and killed by one of his sons in 1208 B.C.

THE FIELDS O F PER·YER 1231 B.C.

Libyan tribes under their chief, Meryey, together with contingents of Sea·Peoples, invaded the Western frontier of Egypt. Repeated incunions even pe.netra.ted as far as the Nile. Phanoh Merenptah prepared to hal! II major invasion attempt in the district of Per-Yer in the Western Delta.

Meryey approached the Egyptians at dawn, bul found them deployed with their archen 10 th~ fore, 5upponed by c1ose-combat troops and chariotry. The archen shot down the advancing enemy for six houn before halting and finally rOUling them. The Libyans fled. abandoning their pOSSdSions, closely pursued by Egyptian chariotry. Over 9,000 were killed or captured.

The other Libyan chi~fs in the coalition were so disgusted with the fiasco that they deposed Meryey and soon fe ll into fighting among themselves.

lUON c. 1200 B.C.

The Ancient Gn::cks regarded the T rojan War as a hislorical event which marked the end ofthe 'Heroic Age'. Modem research favoun a date of around 1200 B.C. for this event and there is archaeological evidence lhat Troy VU was besieged and saded. Archaeology and th~ Linear B tablels help to demonstrate thllthe background to the Homeric legends is largely correct. Tbe lists of Achaean and Trojan allies correspond to what is known about Mycenaean and Anatolian political geography at this time but is unlike that ~isting later on. I f the Ahhiyawa of the Hi ttite archives is really a reference to Achaeans, then the activities of Allaniyas were an earlier attempt al ~Iending Acru.ean influence into Western Anatolia. Ananiyas \1,'1$ chased off by the forces of the Hillite Empire, but II generation later this empire was weakening and a confederation of West Anatolian states may have been established.

The cause ofthe war was traditionally the abduct ion of an Achaean royal lady by a Trojan prince. This may indicate something of the relations between the Achaeans and Anatolia; the linear B tablels mention slave women from

79

EaSI Aegean islands and Milelos, possibly indicating Ihar Mycenae:m eolonies indulged in slave Inding or nids inlo Analolia (which had bcf:n a causc of friclion berv.'ttn the Hiltilcs and Ahhiyawa) and we may note the concern for coastal defence al Pylos.

A massh-e seaborne expedi tion was organised by Ag:amc:mnon of MyttIllle who:s«:1IlS to Iu~ been the acknowledged overlord of the Achaelln statts II this time. Etch state supplied a cont ingent under its own leader. The armada totalled 11 76 ships with crews \'arying between 120 to >0 men, As chariotry and non·comballnts would also hlYe bcf:n taken the full siu of the forces was probably small by Near·Eastern standards.

Unlike the catalogue of ships in the lI il1d, the list of Trojan allies provides no figures and much more sketctJy infor· m:llion. Whal is clear is th:u contingents came from many regions of AIllItolia, some being remote and little known to Ihe Achaeans, reinforcing the impression of an Anatolian confederation.

Although the legends imply tlul the war was di rected specifically al Troy, this may simply have bttn the point chosen for the landings as it WIS positioned on the Dardendles. a location of strategic imponance controlling the stnits and the entry into Anllolia from Europe. It would thus become the point at which the Anatolian Slates ""ould anempt 10 h:alt the in~sion. This city would fmd itsclf in I vital posi tion like tlut of K.3desh, Carchemish and Megiddo in Glher Witt. Troy was SlIcked more than once on this account.

Military opt:nlions in the area around Troy cont inued for len years. The defendett fought the Achaeans in open battles before the ci ty. At one poim some of the Ach3ean contingents would nOl co-operate and Agamemnon's authority WllS questioned. This caused a temporary setback and the Achaeans were contained for a time within a defended beachead.

Troy fin ally fell to deception and a device known as the 'Wooden Horse'; (siege machines were ofien named after animals and sometimes decorated to look like them, a practice for which there is ample evidence from the Near East).

Many legeneb concerning he roic fou nders of dynasties traCt their wanderings to the sad: of Troy, and some of the returning Achaeans encountering trouble II home. It is tempting to speculate tlutl long period of warfare between the Aclucan and Analolian SUtts led to their collapse and contributed to the phenomenon of the 'Sa Peoples' . The destruction of I powerful stile in the European approaches 10 Anatolia could luve gnve implications for all the peoples of this region.

HATSHO 1192 B.C.

The Libyan Ir ibet of the Meshwah, Tjemehu and Seped.,led by the chief, Ma hesher, ad~nc:cd lowards Egypt intending to sellie.

They were met II the rronlier fOnfess of Harsho by the Egyptian army ofRamesses III. Linear formations of closeorder archers followed by lines of c1ose-order spearmen adVllncc<l steadily towmls the Libyans. Chariotry and ~vdin. armed inrantry (including Sea·People auxi liaries) anacked on the flan ks. The gurison of Hatsho assisted by shooting from the battlements.

The Libyans were defeated and puttucd for a distance of 8 iter (about 84 Km.), from Hatsho ' to the mount of Horus or Ihe Ean h'. Meshe.sher and 2175 Ubyans were sla in, 2052 were ClIplUr~.

THE SEA· PEOPLES CONSPIRACY 1189 B.C.

The great con federacy of Sea • Peoples which had ovenhrown the Hitt ite Empire arrived in the b nd of AmuIru and prepared to assault Egypt by land and sea. Their main strength were the PelCKt, T iekker, Shek.lesh. Dcnyen and Weshwesh.

AgainS! this threat, RamesSC5 III began a massive mobilisation. including the requisition of all kinds of ships which were manned and dcployed in the Nile mouths. The land onsbught ,,"as 10 be met on the Easlern frontier.

The Sea·Peoples' armadl entered stealthily intO the Nile mouths and straight into I trap. The Egyptian flttt closed in behind them, using grappling hoob to capsize thei r vessels and forcing them towards the shore where massed Egyptian archers were wai ting. The survl\-ors were rounded up and taken prisoner as they emerged from the water.

The land body was surprised as they marched with their families and possessions in ox-cam. They were dispersed by charging cluriolry supponed by runners and Sherden auxiliaries.

80

BATTLE OF T HE ULAI RIVER c. lJ 20 B.C.

Nebuchadnenar I (Nabu·kudllm·-lIsur) of the Second Dynasty of Isin saw it as his divine mission to recover the: statue of Marduk caplured by the Elamiles under Shutruk·nahhunle on tilt collapse of the Kns.ite dynasty in 1157 B.C.

On his firsl campaign inlo Elam Nebuchadneuar reached the Uknu (modem: Kerkha) river though disaster struck when 0 plague: b roke OUI in the Babylonian camp before the urival of the Elamite army. The decimated Babylonian umy lost all discipline and fled in doorder, Nebuchadnc:v:ar nearly losing his life in the process, while the Elamites followed the rout elose.Jy.

CarefuUy waiting until he obtained favourable omens from the gods, Nebuchadnenar led a s«ond ea:pc:d.ition intO Elam from the city of ~r in the height of summer. The Babylonian soldiers and horses suffered badly from thirst and heat uhauslion, even tbe road 'scorched like flame', on a journey of over )30 km . to the river Ulai (the modem Karun river). The timing ofthe campaign, and the different nonhern, as opposed to the previous southern, approach, took the Elamitc:s completely by surprise.

The army of the Elamite king, Hulteludish· lnshushinak, hurriedly advanced to meet the Babylonians, the banle: being fought on the banks of the Ulai. The IWO armies raised great elouds of dust because of the: hot, dry weather, the light of the sun being 10lally obscured, 50 the battle was confused and fought in conditions of lemi-darkness. The battle was finally won by a charge of the righi-flank Babylonian cb.ariony,lcd by the Babylonian border-lord, Lakti-Marduk, which had actually 1051 contact with the king and the main army during the battle.

The Elamite king died in the battle and the statue of Marduk was recovered, Nebuch:ldnezur returning it in triumph to Babylon. This victory established Nebuchadnenar as a national hero and the pious avenger of Babylonia.

ZANQI AND 101 c. 1118 B.C.

Following his vic tory in Elam, Nebuchadnezzar I turned his allention to the nonhern fromier with Assyria. Seeking 10 reduce the Assyrian border fonrw ofZanqi, the Babylonian army, led by the king, included a number of siege engines. However, the Babylonians mighl have betn delayed on tilt march because of this siege train since: the Assyrian king, Ashur-resha-ishi I, was able to muster his chariots and move on Zanqi before the fortress fell. Nebuchadnezzar did not wish to meet the Assyrian army in the fic:ld and so the Babylon ians retreated, burning the siege engines to prevent them falling intO Assyrian hands.

In possibly the same year, Nebuchadneuar besieged Idi, (present-day Hit, on the Euphrates about 180 km. south of ancient Ashur) an Assyrian city on the frontier, with an army of chariots and infanl ry. On hearing of this the Assyrian king senl chariots and infantry to strengthen the city'S forces, which then attacked the Babylonians. Nebuchadneuar was defeated, losing his camp, fony fuUy-equippcd chariots, and his field·marshal, Karashtu, to the Assyrians.

KADMUHU I lJ 51l1t4 B.C.

The land of Kadmuhu, si tuated in the Taurus mountains between the Tigris and the Euphrates, rebelled agains t Assyria and ceased to pay tribute on the death of Ashur-resha-ishi I. At the lime time an alliance of five kings of the Mushki, or Phrygians, moved south with 12,000 (varunt: 20,000) WlITTion from the lands of AIzu and Purulumru (lands conquered by the Mushki fifty yeaT1 before) into Kadmuhu. In this the Mushki were probably taking advan· tage of the instability in Kadmuhu, though it is possible that the Mushki were actually to be used as mercenaries by the rulers of the land.

The new king of Assyria, Tiglath-Pileser I (Tult.ulti-apli-Es/lilrra), quickly mustered his chario" and infantry and crossed the Mount Kashiyari range (to the cast of modern j\1.ardin) without a rearguard, arriving in Kadmuhu probably some time before the Mushki had upc:cted.

The battle took place on level ground, the MU5hki being cut down by Assyrian archery and defeated. 6,000 Mwhki ..... ere taken prisoner and taken to Assyria to be used as either slaves or auxiliary trOOps.

The land of Kadmuhu was then ravaged by the Assyrians, who defeated the army ofKadmuhu and the allied army of Paphu, capturing thei r king, Kili·Teshub.

81

MOUNT BESHRI c. 1110 B.C.

Witb Assyria 's north and north-castem frontiers secure, Tiglath·Pilesc:r I them campaigned aglinst the Aramean nomels who Iud crossed the Euphratcs into Assyri2n territory.

In his first campaign aglinst the Arameans, Tiglath·Pilc:ser I claims to have lurried them from the edge of the land of Suhu (on the middle Euphrates) to tbe city of CarchemUh in a single day, a punuit of .orne 300 km!

The remaining Aramcans fled across tbe Euphrates, followed by the AsSyriins who crossed after them on raflS of inflated gOilSkins, making a stand in Iheir 10\1.'tlS II the fOOl of Mount Bcshri Oabal Bishri, lbout 40 km. WCSt of the modem lown of Dcir-eg·Zor). The Arameans were defeated and six of their towns wt.re sacked.

The Aramcans remained exceedingly troublesome, however, resuming their plundering raids and c:utward expansioo wi thin I few years (during which time Tiglatb.Pilcsc:r I conquered the land of MUlri, around the Gulf of Alenn· drella, Ind their IIliCI the Qumanu). The Assyrians fought 28 wearisome campaigns 19ainst Ihe Anmcans over the Euphrates, even to the elUeot of two campaigns in a single )"cIf, from Mount Lebanon, to T admar (Palmyra), AnI! on tbe middle Euphrates, II far all the Babylonian city of R:iJp iqu.

The continued Assyrian pressure did however keep the Arameans from moving east in strength and had a side benefit in acquainting Assyria with the cilies of the Mediterranean coast. Byblos, Sidon and Arvad scnt gifts to the Assyrian king (including a crocodile and a large female ape), which Tiglath-Pile5Cr naturally regarded as tribute! Indeed, T iglath-Pileser proudly fC«)rds that he braved the dangers of the deep, travelling on a boat from Arvad to Samuro some 30 km. down the COlst, and killing a tIOkhiru or ·sca·horsc· with a lurpoon of his own dC1ign. The Assyrian king was so pleased with his calch that he ordered a replica carved in stone oflhis ·sea·horsc' 10 be SCt up in his palace on his return!

The Aramean anacks increased in feroci ty following the death of Tiglalh-Pilescr I, causing the colbpsc: of tbe M iddle Assyrian Empire,

ISHDISH Reign of Tigla th.Pilcaer I

Tiglath-Pilc:ser I, after the campaign 10 Kadmuhu, moved against the mountainous and troublesome land oflshdish. The Assyrian force consisted ofthiny chariots escorting trained soldiers riding in personnel carriers (zalmagarriia). The Assyrians, including Ihe king, dismounled when the going was rough, riding in the vehicles again wben the way was belieT. Eventually, on Mount Aruma which was impassable for the vehicles, the chariotry were left behind, the king leading his men on fOOl.

Ishdish was ravaged, the cities burnt, and the land subiected 10 Allyrian tribule, taxes, and the provision ofhoslagCl.

Tiglalb·Pilcser I also led an anny inlo Shubartu against 4,000 Kaska and Uromu, Hiuite .uxil~ries who h:ld mutinied and seized several Assyrian Vlwl cities. On tbe approach of the Auyrians the H ittite mutineers surrendered to Tiglath·Pilcsc:r who incorporated them and their 120 cluriOIl into his army.

NAIR. Reign ofTlgla th. PUescr I

Having gained the approval of the gods through divination, Tiglath·Pilescr l ied an Allyrian army deep into the Taurus mountains againSllhe land oftbe Nairi. The Assyrians advanced along rough paths and Ihrough dangerous passes, cutting path. for the chariots wi tb copper picks. The Euphrattl was crossed with wooden bridgC1, built from trc:cs cut down in the mountains, and the Assyrians penetrated beyond Lake Van before meeting the combined armies of 23 kings of the Nairi. The Assyrians defeated the Nairi, capturing 120 equipped chariots, their cities were burnt and their large herds of horses, mulCi and donkeys carried off to Assyria.

The Auyrian king spared tbe lives of the Clptured kings of tbe Nairi in return for an oath of their submission, and the surrender of their IOns t5 hostages . A tribute of 1,200 borses and 2,000 cattle was also imposed. The Hittite city of Mclidia was allO forced into submission, the Assyriara taking hostages and an annual tribute of lead ore.

SURMARRITI c. 108' B .C.

Around J 100 B.C., Marduk-nadin-ahhe, the King of Katduniash, led I Babylonian raid deep inlD Assyria while Tiglllb·Pilcser I was preoccupied with the Ahlamu·Atamaeans. The Babylonians reached IS far as E.kallate. only 32 km. IOUlh of Ashur iudf, whicb they plundered, carrying ofT in triumph tbe Assyrian gods, Adad and Shala. In about tbe year 1091 B.C. the Assyrians were again defeated by Ihe BlbylonianJ, this lime ncar the Babylonian provincial capilli of IrriY' on the Assyrian.Babylonian border, c:ut of the Tigris.

82

Arter this date, howc:ver, the Assyrians eoumer·allicked with more succeu. Tiglath.Pileser l ied his anny across the Lower bb ri\'Cr, plundering Babylonian towns and territory beyond the river Diyala, and drawing up I battle· line of chariots (mustered from the Lower Zab region) against Marduk·nadin·ahhe, near the city of Arzuhinl. The battle appe:an 10 have been indecisive, though le~lIVing Ihe Assyrians in sufficient st rength to march WCSt into the lind of Suhu 10 sad the island city of Sapiraru, and Hind:mu on the Euphrates, before rctuming to Ashur.

The following year Tigluh.Pilcsef I again marcbed against Karduniuh, defntingthe Babylonians decisi\'e:ly at Surmarriti, a ci ty on the T igriJ nonh ofOpiJ. Apparcntly by·pawng Opis, the A$$yrians marched down the Tigris, capturing Dur. Kurigalzu, the tWO Sippars, and Babylon. burning the pala~ofMarduk.nadin.ahhe and laking large numbers of priJoners. The A$$yrians ClIp tured Opis on their return march.

Tighllh-Pilcser I failed to recover the Statues of Adad and Shala, howe\·er. These Assyrian gods remained in humiliating apthity until the sack of Babylon by Se:nnacherib in 689 B.C., when they were relumed to their places in Eullate.

THE AMALEKITES RA ID ZIKLAG c. 1000 D.C.

David. a fugitive from the Hebrew king Saul, had entered Ihe service of the Philistine prince. Achish, and had betn inslllled with 600 followers ('M.ighty M en') in Ziklag. His t.uk was to harul the nomads on the borders of the Philistine lands. David led hi, contingent to join lhe Philistines on campaign IIgainst Saul. Fearing neachery, the other Philistine princes would not permit him to participate. David returned to ZilrJag to find it smouldering from on Amalekite nlid and the families of his men carried ofT. David resolved to pursue the enemy and reKlle them. On reaching the brook of Bcsor, 200 men who could no longer continue were left behind. The remaining 400 carried on and found an Egyptian setvanl of the Amaleki tcs who had fallen sick and ~n left to die in the desert. In remrn for his life he led David to the Amalekites.

David ~nd his men fell upon them as they were encamped and revelling in their spoils. Alier a day's fighting the ' Mighty M.en' had slain all but 400 young men who escaped on camels. David recovered the spoil and drove ofT their flocks and herds.

E KAL-PI·NARI 934 D.C.

In the accession year of the A$$yrian king, Ashur-dan II, Arameans of the Yausu dan came upstream into Assyria from their strongholds in Babylonia. The Assyrian king mustered his chariOls and infantry and anacked their amps in the vidni ty of Ekal.pi·nari. def~ting them ~vily and carrying off their herds and flocks.

Assyria began 10 1'CCO\'Cr from the Al'1Imean in\'1Isions in the reign of Ashur-dan II , recapturing arns of Assyria around the Lo .... 'Cr Zab thaI had been settled by Anmeans. and r~ttling those Assyrians who had fled from Assyria beause OrtM famine and turmoil caused by the Anmtlns.

NASIBINA 896 D.C.

During his sixth campaign .gainn the Arameans settled below the Kashiyari mountains, Adad·narari II, the king of Assyria (911·891 B.C .), had managed to put Nur·Adad, the Tcmannite ruler, under siege in the city of Nasi bin a (situated on the headwllers of the ri\'er Habur).

Nur·Adad had p repared Nuibina for the expected siege by digging a moat some three metres wide down to the wDter· level in the bedrock around the dty. The Assyrians maintained the siege from SC\'en redoubu constructed around the ci lY. The siege probably continued for much longer than the Assyrians expected sina: Ihe king eventually returned to Assyria leaving the Irafanu, or commander.in-chief, Ashur-dini·arnur, to pursue the siege. T he furfanu tightened the siege to prevent gnlin gening into the cily from oUlSide. digging hidden tnipS around Nasibina, and h~ving the Anyrimn troops shout their war-cries at the defende" to lower their morale.

Nur·Adad appears 10 have souJht !Cilia al this point and surrendered, being liken to Nineveh together with his troops :IS hostages, and no doubt 10 fight as auxiliaries with the Assyrian army.

Ouring the reign of Adad'nanlri lithe Assyrian .d\'ance on Babylonia was renewed. The province of Arrapha was rccaplurtd and Del, and Babylonian u:rritory ~'ttn ~ Lower ~b and the Di}'2Ja rh'en, brOUght under Auyrian control. On the Euphrates. the fonresses of Zanqi and Idi were recaplurtd. and Assyrian annia nlvaged most of Babylonia. However, after 893 B.C. the Babylonians under Nabu·shuma·ukin I defeated the Assyrians, prompting an exchange of daughters in marriage, and a peace·trUty reducing Assyria's territorial gains •

• 3

THE REVOLT OF AMEKA AND ARASHTUA 880 B. C.

Early in 880 B.C. a report was brought to Ashurnasirpal II (AJJrur-naljr-oph) at Nineveb truu tbe Zamuan ruiers, Ameka and Arashtua, had not supplied their nibute, or men for royal service. On the first of SiwlI (May-June) AshurnllSirpal II mustered the Assyrian army, moving to the city of Kali;:i, crossing the Lower lab, cnteriog the Babitu pass and erossing the Radanu river before the muner was complete, The king waited for a day at the foot of Mount Simaki for the reit of the army to catch up, and rcai\'ed the tribute of the land of Dagara - this being in the form of provisionli for the army (oxen, sheep and wine),

However , before the main army arrived at Mount Simaki, Ashumasirpal broke C2IIlp taking only his heavy chariotS, the ClU'alry, and the crack trOOps (,:uJran'uu) , Ashurnasirpal marched all day and all night, crossing the Diyala river at dawn and arriving before Arashtu's capital, Ammali, at first light. In a surprise: assault the Assyrians took and sacked the city, killing 800 enemy warriors and taking many prisonel'!. Once the main body of the army arrived, the countryside and neighbouring territoriei were ravaged, some 42 towns being plundered,

Having devastated Arashtu's citiei the Assyrians marched on Zamru, Ameka's capital, situated deeper into the Zagros mountains, Ameka did not walt to greet his erstwhile overlord but fled into the mountains. Pausing only to 1001

Ameka's palace and take possession ofrus chariots, Ashumasirpal chased the Zamuean from mountain to mountain. On Mount Etini, Ameka was forced to lea\'e behind se:veral valuable and bulky, bronte casseroles, bowls and tubs in order (0 escape (he dosing Assyrians. Betwctn Mount Su and MouO! Elaniu the Assyrians caught and massacred m~ny of Ameka's warriors, while Ameb fin~lIy Ib~ndoned all the possessions he had taken from lamru, his provisions and his horscs, and ned up the highly inaccessible Mount Sabua.

Ashumasirpal then SCt about plundering Ameka's cities. While deiu oying the cily ofParsindu, the Assyrim king put the cavalry ~nd light troops in ambush and caught some of Ameka's troops out in the open, killing 50 and capturing 20 (who wert tonured to death). Before his return to Assyria the !ting led a raid, using the cavalry and light trOOpS only, on the land of Anizu. The campaign ended with the Assyrian army cutting its way tbrough Mount lar.I to form a road for the chariotf)'. More tribute and tax were imposed on the unfonurnlle Zamuaeans, and neighbouring lamb hurried to present their own tribute. The final action of the ClImpaign was In attack on various fugith'cs on Mounls Aziru and Simaki, where 500 enemy warriors were slain. The old city of Allila "''IS rebuilt and used to Siore barley and siraw 10 provision Assyrian forces in lamu •.

KARKAR 853 B.C.

Shalmaneser III (SJru/manu-tJJhortdu) of Assyria made many auempts to conquer the powerful Aramaean and NcoHitti te states of Syria. In his 6th regnal year, he muste red his forces at the rcccnlly captured city of Til-Barsip, now re-named Kar·Shalmaneser, and they crossed the flooded Euphrates on rafts supponed by in flated goat.skins. The cOUlluies immediately west orlhe river, including Carchemish, submiHed, and the Assyrian army proceeded unhindered 10 Aleppo. Reiistance began when they wtered the territory of Hamath. AI Karbr, Shalmaneser en· countered the combined forces of Damascus, Hamath, Ahab oflsratl, Que, Musri, Irqanata, Arvad, Usanata, Shian and Gundibu, an Arab chieftain, led by Hadadcur of Damascus, It was an enormous army. comprising a total of 3,940 chariots, 1,800 cavalry, 65,000 inf~ntry and 1,000 Arab C2IIlel-riders, drawn up for a 'decisive batdc',

Shalmaneser claimed to ha\'e defeated them and slain 14,000 enemy soldiers, but it seems probable that at the very least, the Assyrian army was halted. Hamath and Damascus remained to fight Inother day.

RAMOTH·GILEAD c. 850 B.C.

Ahab of Israel and j ehoshaphat of Judah made common cause to retrieve Ramolh-Gilead from the Aramacan state of Damascus, ruled by Ben-Hadad. Possibly worried bypropbecies made before the campaign, Ahab disguised himself before going into action. The army of Ben-Haded contained a large for~ of chariony commanded by 32 'captains' . They were inStructed to 'fight not with small nor great, save only with the King of Israel '. During the baule the Syrian chariotry mistookjehoshaphat for Ahab and concentrated their attackli against him. T hey immediately broke: off when they realised their mistake.

Meanwh.ile Ahab had been wounded by a chance arrow that had penetrated between the scalei of his corslet. The king remained standing in his chariot for the rest ofthc battle in order to maintain command oChi! army and not disheancn them by leaving the field. Slowly bleeding to death, he died at dusk and the Israelites and judcans withdrew.

84

THE REVOLT OF MARDUK·BEL·USATI c. 850 B.C.

Soon arter Ihe accession or Marduk·zahir·shumi I as King or Babylon. his younger brother. '\\ arduk·bel,usllli, led a widespread revolt which he was unable to quell. However. an allian~ with Shalmantser nI or Assyria, made in his rather's t ime, was still in rorce. and in 851 B.C. he called on Assyrian aid.

Shalmaneser marched south wi th an Assyri2n army and defeated tht rebels in thtir Diyala stronghold at Me· Tumat, btrore moving 10 GlImanale lind defeating Muduk·bc:l,us:lti in the fidd . T he Assyrbns railed to take the city. and could only adopt a 'scorched~nh' policy in thc surrounding countrysidc and dam the Diyala rivn.

Nut year, on tht 20th of Nisan, Gamanate rell. but Marduk·btl·US3ti e5C:lped into thc Zagros mountains. The Assyrians pursutd him to Awan, ClIpluring Ihe city and defeating Marduk·bel·u5ati with Babylonian help. Shalmaneser Ihen lurned his attenlion on the rebellious Bit·Dakhuri, a Chaldean tr ibe scllied in Babylonia. This resulted in the submission or the Bit·Amukhani and Bit·Yakin tribes as wd!.

Mt SENlR 841 8 .C.

Shalmaneser III atttmpted to conquer Damascus again in his 18th year. The AM)'Tian army encountered the numerous army or Hazael or Damascus al Mt Stnir (in tht Golan Htights), and dtreated thtm. 16,000 or Hazat\'s soldiers wtrt slain and 1,12 1 chariots, 470 cavalry horscs and the camp, wert captured by thc Assyrians. Hallie:! escaped to Damascus and successrully rtsisted the ensuing sitgt.

PERPEG 730 B.C.

Namlot, princt or Hermopolis and \'ii1ssal or tht Kushitt king, Piyt (Piankhy), derected to the 'Libyan' PhaTlloh, T ernakhte. Piyt responded by stnding an army undtr tht gcntrals Puren and Ltmtrsekeny 10 rtalpturt the province:.

Ttrnakhtt sent a neCt manncd by 50lditn from Lowtr Egypt up the Nile to assist Hcrmopolis bUI il 110'2$ tngaged on the river by Piyc's rorcc:s al Htraklcopolis and dtrealcd. The remnants crosscd to Pcrpcg rollowed by thc Kushit($, who inflictcd ~ runher dereat, causing them to flee nonh.

Tht Kushitts procttded to besiege several towns with batttring rams until Piye himselr arrivcd to hasten operations. Htrmopolis was surrounded by an embankment and 3ttacked with a wooden tower, tnabling :!Tchers and slingers to shoot into the town continuously.

Closely invtsted in this way. the town became 'roullo the nose' and in due course surrendered.

MEMPHIS 730 B.C.

Following the rail or Htrmopolis, Piyt advanced nonh rtcth'ing tht submission or every cilY until he arrived al Mtmphis. T he city was dttcrmined to rtsist, having r~istd ~ ntw rampart and stocked up with provisions. Ter· nalmtt arrived al night with teinrotce:mtnts numbering 8000 men. He ordtred the city to hold out at all COstS and lert on horseback to tally suppan rrom Ihe Della prince:s.

Piye calltd a councilor war to discuss how to capture Ihe mosl slf3legically important city in Egypt; 'tht balance: of the two lands'. Tht gtncrals suggtsted a sitgt ramp and a towtr mode rrom Iht masu or ships. Piye did not think that thtre would be timt for such operations. Insttad ht sent the Kushile fleet into tht harbour or Memphis to scize any snips that wert there.

Thtse craft wert filled with troops and used 10 mount a massivt assault on thc city from its underended sidt racing the Nile. With the rail or Mt mphis, tne enti re Delta including Tcfnakhtt! $ubmint!d 10 Kushile rule.

85

RAPIHU 721 B.C.

Alarmed at Assyrian exp~nsion in Syria and Palestine. the Egyptians encouraged rebellions, promising military assistance. In 721 B.C. Hanno, King of Gaza, rebelled, supported by an Egyptian army commanded by I certain genenl, Sib'e. The allies marched out from Rapihu (Raphaia) for I 'decish'e battle' wilh the Assyrian army of Sargon II.

The Egyptian army 'disap~red' shonly before banle was joined, abandoning the unfonunate Hanno to defeat and capture. Sargon sub$equemly received tribute from ' Pharaoh', Samsi (an Anlbian queen), and It'amar ()fthe Sabaeans (Sheba).

DER 720 B .C.

In 722 B.C., a chief of the Chaldean tribe of Bit· ya1tin, known as Merodach·Baladan (Marduk·apla·iddlna). set himself up as King of Babylon. He was supponed by Humbanignb, King of Elam. Problems of the royal succe»ion had preoccupied the Assyrians while this was happening, but in 720 B.C. the new king, Sargon II, marched into Babylonia.

The Elamite army adV'lllced (0 support their ally and met the Assyrians at Der, where according to the Babylonian chronicle, a major defeat wu inflicted on the Assyrian army and they were forced to reneat. Merodach·Baladan and the Babylonian army which had marched to assist the Elamites, arrived 100 late for the battle.

Mt SlMIRRA 714 B.C.

Sargon II of Assyria led an expedition deep inlo the mountains east of Assyria, imending to break the influence of Uranu in these regions, and march straight through Urartu in a huge arc. At Mount Simirra. Sargon encountered the combined forces of Rusas I of Uranu and his ally. Metani of Zikinu. The Uranian forus consisted of the king and his royal contingents, including cavalry and infantry, those of Zirkitu being an advance guard only of cavalry and elite infantry. They were deployed in a mountain defLIe, which may have restricted their cavalry, and were formed up in two separate commands.

Sargon attllcked with a single chariot (his own) accompanied by his bodyguard cavalry (qurubuti slra pi/ha/II). The Uranians were belIten back by the combined shooting and hand·to-hand combat of the Auyrian cavalry. Rusas be· ing besieged on the banlefield with his retinue lind eventually fleeing on a marc. Turning next on the troops of Zirkitu, the Assyrians broke up their formation and proceeded to destroy the individual contingents.

Sargon allowed the survivors to flee without pursuit, so that they would spread the news of their defeat throughout the mountains. He may have been intending to avoid lOSing control of his troops in difficult terrain and to prevent the enemy regaining their confidence by IIny minor successes using guerilla taClics.

MUSAS IR 71 4 B.C.

Towards the end of Sargon's great march through Uranu. it appears that the king had to allow the main pan of his army to rerurn to Assyria, while he remained with his elite troops and ffi2rched on the city of Musasir. This city housed the temple of the Uranian war god, Haldi, which Sargon proceeded to uck, carrying off an enormous amount of treasure, ffi2inly votive offerings. Rusas I of Uranu. on hearing the news, took his own life through shame. There had been an eclipse of the moon shon ly before Sargon anacked, which Assyrian astrologers had pronounced favourable. Perhaps his army had not been convinced. $everal years later, Sargon was killed white leading a campaign into the highland country ofTabal. This may have made a lasting impression on his son and suCttSsor, Scnnachc:rib, who, throughout his reign, avoided leading an army in person.

CUTHA AND KISH 103 B.C.

Sargon U eventually succeeded in driving out Merodach·Baladan and assumed the kingship of Babylon himself. Following Sargon's death, Merodach·Baladan planned a revolt which he hoped would be synchronised with a revolt by Assyria's \'lISSlIls in Palestine, counting on the support of Elam in Babylonia.

Sennacherib (Sin-QAA-nba) despatched his army against Babylon, having already put down the revolt in Palestine which hlld broken out tOO early for Merodach·Baladan. However, he did have the suppon of the Elamites, and thei r commander, Imbappa, sent a foru of light troops and cavalry forwa rd 10 Cutha in order to hold up the Assyrian ..

advance and force them 10 lay siege to the city. They could not risk having a bostile (and highly mobile) enemy force in their rear. The main Elamite and Babylonian army was to remain at Kish, commanded by the general Tannanu. They would advance and attack tbe AssyrianJ while they were invoh'ed in siege operations and rdievt Cutha.

In response to th is Sll'1ucgy, the Assyrians d ivided their forces also, sending their main force to Cutha and an ad· vance guard to K ish to delay the main enemy army until CUlM had been taken. The advance gtW'd managed to hold for one day and then sent couriers to the main Assyrian army for reinforcements. The following day, Ihe main force made a di rect assault on Cucha and took it. Then they advanced immediately 10 Kish.

The Elamile5 and Babylonians were defeated at Ki$h, and Merodach·BaladaD 0«1 into the marsh!:, of Southern Babylonia.

ELTEKEH 701 B.C.

Hezekiah, King of Judah, had joined a rebellion of Assyrian \'usals in Palestine and on the Levantine coast. Faced with the approaching Assyrian army, he called on me Kushite king of Egypt, Taharqa, for help. With a note of surprise, the Assyrian annals record that an enormous army consiS!ing of archers, chariotry and cavalry of the King of Kush aDd chariotry supplied by the petty princes of Egypt, had actually come to his aid. The Assyrian army came upon their ballle·lines drawn up in the plain of Eltekeh .. Assyrian victory was made possible by the defeat and capture of the Egyptian and Kushite chariolry.

Se:nnx:herib's army, led by the Timan. laid siege to Jerusalem, but Hezckiah stubbornly resisted and the Assyrians had to conten t themselves wi th ravaging his kingdom. Jerusalun did not fall.

HALULE 691 B.C.

Mushezib-Marduk, supported by the Aramaean tribes of Babylonia, seized the throne of Babylon. To help him to withstand the inevitable Assyrian reaction, he hired the 5uppon of the Elamitc. army undc:r H uban·lmmc.na. Sennacherib sent an army as exp«ted, and the Elamite army, accompanied by an 'enormous hosl of allies', marched into Babylonia [0 join up with Mushezib-Marduk. They deployed in the path of the A»yrians at Halule on the bank of the Tigris.

According to the annals of Scnnacherib, the enemy were attacked 'on flank and fronl' and Iheir advance halted. They were reduced by archery, Humbanundasha, tbe Elamite fie ld·marshal, and many Elamite nobles being slain. The battle was dearly a long.fought, dcspenne and confu.sc.d aITair, with horses and chariots whose riders had been slain early in the baule, careering about the battlefield. Scnnacherib claims 150,000 enemy losses, with me kings of Elam and Babylon being pursued from me field by chario try and cavalry.

However, the Babylonian chronicle, generally regarded as an unbiased source, SUtes simply that the Elamites 'caused an Assyrian retreat '. II would seem that Scnnacherib failed to re·assert his control in Babylon unt il 689. In that year the king ofElam bCClme ill and M ushez.ib-Marduk was denied his fonnidable suppan. The Babylonians were eventually defeated and Se:nnacherib swept aside the res traint and respect that his predc«ssors had shown to Babylon, allowing the city [0 be thoroughly sacked and the statues of its gods carried orr to Assyria. His wn, Esarhaddon, was installed as governor.

It is interesting to note that a few years later, Sc.nnacher ib was assassinated by rebellious sons while praying in a temple. He was d ubbed with the statues of gods.

ISHUPRI 61 1 B.C.

Constant Egyptian intrigues wilh their vassals in Palestine finally forced the Assyrians to take decisive action. The first attempt at invasion was mounled by Se:nnacherib, but the ClImpaign was abandoned when the Assyrian camp was ravaged by p lague on the frontier of Egypt. A second campaign mounted by Esarhaddon in 673 also fai led. It is not recorded in Anyrian annals but the Babylonian chronicle stalCS bluntly Ihat on 5th Addar, ' the army of Assyria was ddeated in Egypt'.

In 67 1 B.C. Esarhaddon (AJlrur-alra.jddin) marched on Egypt again. He encountered determined Egyptian resistance led by Taharka, fighting conlinuously from Ishupri to Memphis, a distance of 15 days' march. The Babylonian chronicle records thaI three great battles were fought before Memphis fel l to the mines, breaches and assauh·ladders of the Assyrians on 22nd Du'u~. T aharka escaped to Thebes.

87

KARBANITI 668 B.C.

In 669 Taharka advanced down the Nile from his refuge in Thebes, overthrew the Assyrian governors, and established himself as Pharaoh again in Memphis. Esarhaddon's expedition to remove him was cut shon whc.n the king fell ill and died at Harnm. His son and successor, Ashurbanipal (Aslrur-ban-oplu) was left to resolve the problem of Egypt. He organised a ClImpaign and mobilised the forces of22 vassal kings along the Levantine coaSt. Using ships supplied by these vassals, support was rushed to his garrisons in Egypt by SC:Il as well as land.

The Assyrian army defeated the Egyptians in open battle at Karbaniti, on ' the wide plain'. Taharka retreated to Thebes, while the Assyrians occupied Memphis and received the submission of the Egyptian peny princes. These were re·installed as vassals despite having supplied contingents for Taharka al Karbaniti. It seems that the As.syrians found it difficult to control Egypt, panly due to the long lines of communiClition back to IUsyria and perhaps also to the cultural and political environment there.

The main Assyrian anny ~turned to Assyria leaving behind monger garrisons, including a force to pursue Taharb, making use of the ships which he had abandoned at Memphis. The IUsyrians had realised that theiT opponent was simply conducting a strategic withdrawal, relying on the g~at length of the Nile valley and the Assyrians' over· stretched lines of communication to altow him to regroup. After a journey of one month and ten days, the As.syrians reached Thebes, but Taharka seems to have evaded them by moving his forces to the other side of the river.

The Egyptian vassals vkwcd these events with alann; ' they arc driving out Tahuka, how can we remain?'. They planned an insurrection while the Assyrians were still occupied in the south, bUlthe Assyrian govemon discovered the plot, suppressed it and sem the ringleaders to Nineveh. Only Necho of Sail (father of Psamtik I) was spared and retained as chiefvusal in Egypt. This extraordinary leniency suggCSts that the Assyrians nceded to rule through a native potentate 10 secure their hold on the country. Ashurbanipal was pr0b3bly employing the principle of'divide and rule' by sClting up the Saire Dynasty as his vassals in opposition (0 the Kushites. Thus Necho', and Ashurbanipal'$ intere:;n became (he same, to resiJ( the Kushilts, with the added advamage lhat Assyria now had (0 deal with only one Egyptian prince and not scveral. The Assyrians refer~d to Egypt as 'muui'.

THE SACK OF THEBES 664 B.C.

Tah:lTka was succeeded by his brother, Tanutamun, who embarked on ye t another ~lIempt to regain the throne of Egypt ~nd advanced down the Nile, isolating and besieging the Assyrian garrison in Memphis. Obviously the Assyrians had b«n unable to remove the Kushite threat with their operations three years earlier. This time Nc<:ho opposed the Kushitc:s, but perished in the attempt. Ashurbanipal promptly marched on Egypt and defeated Tanuuunun in open baule, forcing yet another retreat to Thebes. The pursuit was pressed 'o\'er difficult trails', but T anutamun withdrew funher south to Kipkipi. The Assyrians, exasperated, sacked Thebes and 'levelled it like a 0000'. The Kushites made no further attempts to regain Egypt.

ULAI 655 B.C.

The throne of Elam was usurped by a certain Teumman (Ttbt-Humban), who demanded that IUhurbanipal extradite the fugith'e sons of the p~vious king, Urtaki. When Ashurbanipal refused, the El~mites, in alliance wilh the Aramaean tribe of Glimbulu, marched against Assyria. The Assyrian anny advanced to meet them, but when the Elamites heard that the Assyrians had reached Du, and seemed 10 be closer than they had expected, they retired towards Susa. They took up a defensive position in the plain of Susa, on the ri \'u Ulai, ncar the town of Tulliz.

The Elamites were utterly defeated in a hard-fought battle, their fleeing and fallen soldiers choking the river Ulai. Teumman WlIS wounded and tried 10 escape in a wood. but his chariot overturned, and his pursuen ClIught up with him. He was slain and his head was brought back by In Assyrian camp fottower.

Elam was divided and placed under the rule of tWO Assyrian vassals. However, Alhurbanipal had to invade Elam again when the EJamites joined in the revolt ofShllmas-shurna·ulcin. In 639 B.C. EJam was devastated by the Assyrian anny and the capital, Susa, wu sacked. A vaSt amount of booty which the Elamites h3d accumulated over centuries of plundering Babylonia, was discove~d and returned (0 Mesopotamia.

88

THE REVOl.T OF SHAMASH-SHUM.A.UKJN 652-648 B.C.

Esarhaddon of Assyria, perhaps remembtring the difficuhies he had in se:curing his throne after the asussination of his father, Sennacherib, had made $C:CUre arrangements for his son, Ashurbanipal, 10 succeed him. Another son, Shamash-shuma-ukin, was to become King of Babylon. The whole Assyrian Empire was made to swear an oath ofaUegiance to the:se: princes. The:se: arnngemenu worked well enough for Lnany years until, in 652, Shanush·shuma· ukin rebtlled, hoping for the suppon of Elam, the Phoenicians, Judah, the Arab tribes, the Gutl and the Chaldeans.

Ashurbanlpal waged war in Babylonia for two years btfore laying siege 10 Babylon itself. The city held out for a funher twO years until forced to surrender due 10 starvation. Shamash-shuma-ukin shut himsdfup in his palace and sct fire to it, in so doing giving risc to the legend of Sardanapalus.

KABLINU 616 B.C.

The Babylonian army under Nabopolassar (Nabll.apal.usur) advanced up the Euphrates into Assyria. After receiving the submission of the outlying regions ofSukhu and Khimmu, the prae:nce of the Assyrian anny was reponed at Kablinu. The Babylonians advanced to meet them, and on 12th Ab engaged and defeated the Assyrians and their Mannaean allies.

Eventually, the Babylonians began their return march, followed by the Assyrian lItmy reinforced by the Egyptian army. They reached Kablinu, and continued after the Babylonians, catching up with them at Mad:mu, near Arrapha. The Assyrians may now have been without their Egyptian allies, due to NabopolaSSllr's success in avoiding a battle. At Madam .. , the Babylonians defeated the Assyrians and pursued them across the Lower Zab, they then continued their homeward march in ufety.

ASHUR 615 D.C.

The Babylonian army invaded Assyria again, advancing up the Tigris and encamping btfoTe the city of Ashur. The Babylonians attempted one unsuCC'C:$Sful aSSlluh btfore the Assyrian army, under Sin·shar·iskun, marched to ils relief, forcing Nabopolassar 10 retire.. The Assyrians follov."Cd them along the banks of the Tigris, bUI Nabopola.ssar took refuge in Ihe city ofTakri tain. The Babylonians resisted Assyrian assaults for 10 days, inflicting heavy losses on the besiegers. The Assyrians then abandoned the siege and «:tired.

In the foUowing twO years, the Medes under Kyaxares macked Assyria and in 614 captured Ashur.

THE FALL OF NINEVEH 612 B.C.

Nabopolassar and Kyaxares joined forces and, together with Scythian allies, advanced to Nineveh. Three battles were fought in the open btfore the city was besieged. Nineveh fell 10 a single overwhelming assault. The Assyrian king, Sin-shar-ishkun, and his highest officers perished. Nineveh was sacked and turned into 'I mound and a ruin' . Some Assyrian troops managed to escape: and Ashur·uballit was crowned the last king of Assyria in Harran.

HARRAN AND CARCHEMISH 609-605 B.C.

In 609 B.C. an 'enormous Egyptian army', led by Necho II , crossed the Euphrates to link up with the Assyrian army of Ashur-Uballit, which was desperately trying to defend the remnants of the Assyrian Empire. The Assyrians had abandoned Harran to the Babylonians in the previous yellt and were intending to re-capfUre it with Egyptian help. It seems that the Assyrians had requested Josiah of judah to aUow the Egyptians to pass through his land, but j osiah, intent on demonstrating his own sovereignty, allempled to SlOP them at Megiddo. josiah fell to an Egyp· tian arrow while drawing up his baule line, and failed 10 stop the Egyptians. The AssyrianJ and Egyptians defeated the Babylonian garrison of Harran in open battle before the cily, and then besieged it for three months. One assault was 3nempted but with no efftCt . The arrival of the main Babylonian army under Prince Nebuchadrezzar, and the advanced stage of the campaign season forced the Egyptians to withdraw. The Euphrates became the new defensive line againsl Babylon, with the key crossing·point of Carchemish in Egyplian hands.

From 607 B.C. Prince Nebuchadre:zzar made several allempu to cross the Euphrates without succe:ss, until Carchcmish feU in 605 B.C. The main Egyptian anny escaped destruction at Carchemish, but was ovenaken and defeated ncar Hama (Homs). Syria and Palestine were now open to the Babylonians and Egypt would soon bt defending her own borders. It spe:Jt the end for Assyria.

89

MIGDOL 601 B.C.

The Babylonian army, led by Nebuchadreuar II, marched to the Egyptian frontier. Thert they wert enpged by the Egyptian army near the fortress ofTjel, also known as Mekter (Migdol). According to a Babylonian IOW'ce, the twO armies infliaed heavy lo~ on each other in a fiercely·fought open battle. The Babylonians IUrned back and returned 10 Babylonia, where Nebuchadreuar remained and 'organised' his chariots and horses throughout the following year.

IRASA AND MO·MEMPHIS 570 B.C.

Pharaoh Apries (Ha.jtJ.rt, 'HopAra? sent an army consisting only of native Egyptians to assist the Libyan chief, Adieran, against the Greek colony of Cyrene, which was encroaching on Libyan territory. Apries was probably loath to send his Greek mercenaries to fight a Greclr. colony.

The Egyptians were utterly defeated at lrasa. The survivors returned to Egypt convinced th:lt they had been deliberately sacrificed by Apries, who was suspected offavouring the GrcU mercenaries over Egyptians in the army. The Egyptian clement in the army mutinied.

Apries sent Amasu (Ah mosl J 1) to quell the rebellion, bUI he was proclaimed Pharaoh by the troops and joined them. Apries then sent Patarbemis 10 arrest Amasi!, but he failed and was executed by Apries. As Patarbcmis was popular in the land, Apries lost all native suppon and was left only with his Greek mercenaries.

Amasis seized Memphis and set himself up as king. Apriel moved south to attad him with lroops on land and in ships. Amnis defeated them at Mo-Memphis. After protracted fighting in the Della, Apties was ClIpturcd and executed.

Herodotus's account of the civil war is supplemented by the Elephantine stela of Amuis. The Demotie Chronicle ponrays Arnasis as a king with quite a strong personality, iii heavy drinker, but a competent ruler. He probably ClIme from quite a lowly background.

NEBUCHADREZZAR U'S ATTEMPTED INVASION Of EGYPT 568 B.C.

Possibly hoping to benefit from tbe civil war in Egypt, Nebucbadrtuar II of Babylon attempted an invasion. Ama5is, the Egyptian Pharnoh, sccms to have secured the country before the Babylonians attacked, and mobilised his army which included numerous Egyptians, chariotry and trOOps from 'distant regions which are in the midst of the sea' (perhaps Greek mercenaries?). The exact resull of the ensuing engagement is unclear, and the ElephaOline stda of Amuis contains descriptions of troop movements which rnay refer to this invasion attempt rather than the civil war. However, the Egyptians probably won, or effected a Babylonian retreat, as Amasis went on to strengthen his hold on the country, the Saite Dynasty remaining in power until the Persian conquest.

THE FALL OF BABYLON 539 B.C .

The last Babylonian king, Nabonidus (Nabu-Na'ir/), led an army to the oasis to Terna, deep inlide Arabia, and for unknown reasons remained there for ten yean, leaving his son, Bel-shar·usar (Bclshauar), as regent in Babylon. Meanwhile the Persian king, Cyrus the Great, took over the Kingdom of the Medel, and in 547 B.C. accomplished the conquest of Lydia.

Nabonidus returned from Tema, but it seems th:it he was unpopular in many pans of Babylonia, possibly for ncgiecting religious duties. In 539 B.C. Cyrus led his army into Babylonia, capturing the city of Opis by assault, and Sippar without opposition. At this point, Nabonidus savagely put down a revolt by the 'confused' inhabitanlS of Babylonia. Shonly afterwards, the Persian army commanded by Ugbaru (Gobryas) marched into Babylon itself. According to Herodotus, the COUlse of the Euphrates had been di\'ened to allow them to pau through the walls along the river bcd. The Persian army enlered withoul opposition and occupied the city. When Cyrus himself arrived, green fronds were laid down in front of him, and il is possible that he was welcomed by the disaffceted Babylonians. Nobonidus was found in Babylon and put to death.

DRESS AND EQUIPMENT

General Note.:

Judging by the paintings, rclid" statuary and physical remains of the peoples of the ancient Near East it is clear thai they closely resembled their modem counlerpans in ap~arancc . Their cornpla:.ion was heavi ly tanned by the run, geneTally reddish-brown in the cue of Egyptians, and hair was black, or vcry dark brown, and wavy. In Egypt, men were usually clean lhal'cn from the Old Kingdom onwards bul 50Jdicrs would acquire stubbly beards on cam· paign. Elsewhere in the Nelr USI all men. apan from tunudlJ, generally had beards, the growing of which was a sign of manhood.

By far the most common forml of dress were while woollen or linen garments, which would Obviously vary in shade and quality.

Metalwork in the third millennium B.C . could be: copper or bronze, and was mainly bronze thereafter undl the late second millennium. In Egypt, iron WIIS never very much in evidence until the e nd orthe Phanonic period, al though iron had come into widespread usc ror tools, weapons and armour elsewhere in the Ncar East by tbe first millennium B.C .

1. PREDYNASTIC EGYPTIAN WARRIOR

This figure is derived rrom the so-cal1ed ' Ii unters Palene'. There arc reatures or his appcllrancc which bear com· parison with the: Libyans. Many wuriors at thiJ period would have appcllred similar to figure 49.

He wears twO ostrich plumes in his hair, which has been plaited or deroratcd with mud. The distinctive beard was common at this time but was later to become a Jymbol or royalty and divinity, as did the animal lail (which contemporary Mesopotamians usua lly anachcd to arrow-quivers).

The shield (11) is an animal hide stretched over a rrame and has not yet acquired the typical Egyptian shape which appears in hieroglyphs or ist Dynasty date. The change p robably occurs with the invention orclose-orde:r rorma· tionJ and military drill . 11 shows a variant rorm orshleld that Wit to become closely associated with the nomadic peoples or Syria.

Weapons included slone·tipped spears, simple stave bows, throwsticks, flim knh'es, and maces with dilC-shapcd, and la ter pear·shaped, Jtone heads. Arrows were made or reed with hardwood rootings and tips. The lips might be painted red to guide them magically to blood. Paint ings on pollery depict large ships manned by rov. en, and slate palettes (used ror grinding eye·paint) arc often deconl.ted with billie scenes, some showing the destruction or ronified scnlemenlS.

• •• • . ' , , ~ ... . . ," • • I

" f • .. ' I, , . \ • • . ',. . • • •

a 1 2

9'

2. EARLY DYNASTIC PHARAOH c. 3000 B.C.

This figure is based on a represenmion of Narmer, a king of UpJll:r Egypt who conquered a Ddu region during the wars of unification. Similar dress is worn by the lrd Dynasty king, &khemkhet, in carvings from the Wadi Maghara in Sinia. The lxard and animal tai l are already trappings of royalty. He wears the traditional 'White Crown' of Upper Egypt. An early rdiefin the Cairo Museum shows this to have been a wickerwork construction of woven papyrus. The 'Red Crown' of Lower Egypt, shown in 2a, would hi: similarly made. After the unification, these: crowns were symbolically combined to rorm the 'Double Crown', as worn by figu re 9.

His lincn or leather garment fastens at one shoulder. Over Ihis he wears a hl:adwork hl:lt rrom which hang hl:ad panels suspended by gold heads of the cow·goddess, Hathor. He wields a ceremonial mace with a pear·shaped, stone head. One of the ritual adS following a victory was for the king to slay the enemy chief with his ma~.

3. OLD KINGDOM EGYPTIAN ARCHER c. 2551·2528 B.C.

This archer is taken from a fragment of a battle· relief, o riginally from the Great Pyramid complex of Khufu at Giza, which had been re·used in a later pyramid. T he scene shows tWO ranks of archers, the from rank kn~ling to shoot while the rear rank stands.

C losely cropped hair was a common fashion at this time. H is only protection consists of white cloth bands crossing his chest, shoulders and mid rilT. This is a common item of uniform throughout the Old and Middle Kingdom, and may have been derived from Mesopotamian practice.

He uses a simple stave bow called a paJ~r, the origin of the later term for a military formation. Arrows, called SlIlItl or WII, hod reed shofts and footings with tips and nocks of hardwood. Arrows were grasped in the hand when marching as quivers were seldom used.

The bodies of several soldiers who fought for Menthuhotep II, in terred ntar the king's tomb at Deir EI Baturi, exhibit some very stvere wounds inflicted by such arrows. It is possible tha t they were shot at close range from a high angle, as might happen to attackers in a siege.

4. OLD OR MIDDLE KINGDOM EGYPTIAN SPEARMAN

This soldier is based on model spearmen from the 12th Dynasty tomb of Mesehti at AsYUL He is probably typial of lhe maiority ofprovinciai troops conscripted from the peasantry. The shield, or ilcem, 'A70S made of wood and covered with bull-hide. Figures 4b to 4h illustrate some typical shield patterns. 4c and 4e show bands of stitching fastening the sections of hide together. 4b, f and I stem to have an extra piett of hide fixed vertically down the centre of the shield. 4c is a black spotted hide. 4d could be a white or buff hide with black or brown blotches. 4h has while blotches on a black ground and could hi: painled in imitation of hide, allowing divenion from natural p3uerns. There were also completely plain shields. Borden were white Of coloured, often with studs which fastened the hide.

The shon spear, or dfol, had a copper blade attached by a tang. Other hand·to-hand weapons included the stave, axe or ilt.AlI, dub or Qma, and dagger, or tQ-QIIU. Troops equipped with light ja\·t\ins were accompanied by hl:arers arrying quivers of atra missiles, as shown in 4a.

5. MIDDLE KINGDOM EGYPTIAN RETAlNER

Troops equipped in Ihis manner are frequently shown Iccompanying nobles in tomb paintings. They probably represent snemru, or ' retainers'. The shield is quite often the same height as the bearer. The smaUloop at the top was for hanging it up in the armoury. This type of shield could hi: nat or curved. otherwise detonttion and <:onstruction is as described under 4. above. These: ltoops often C3rry an eye-axe resting on the shoulder. This weapon exis ted in both one-handed and two-handed versions, most re tainers using the latter.

Tatile bands and armour as shown in 8, or a breastplate as shown in 6, could hi: worn. Retainen may have been chosen from among the hereditary warriors and so might wear the ostrich plume. Some re tainers would probably be: archers.

92

a

3

e

,. f,

6

5

93

s. MlDDLE KINGDOM EGYPTIAN COMMANDER

Thi. figure i. based on tomb paintinp of provincial nobles Ind their close.t rttlineB. 1nc /f(JIy-tJ4, as the provincial ooble or 'nomarch' WI' known, acted as the commander·in-chief of the forC"C' of his p~ or 'nome' wben ton· ductine optrltions on his own account Of on behalf of the king. He commanded ws own noDlC-COOtineent as pan ofbrger armies raised by the !un, from the nation as a whole. Other officials boldin, web military rank would be lillie different in apPCIrlnce.

The breastplate is shown being worn by a retainer in a tomb at EI Bersch. It is inserted Ixnatb the tCJ:tile band type of armour and was perhlps made of copper or bronze.

Tomb scenes often depict the nomarch conducting an inspection of hi. domain. accompanied by a .unshade·bn.rer, (the sunshade being a nat r«tangular board mounted on a pole with I flbric nip fillins from the rear). variOILl officials. scribes and armed relainers.. Some scenes show retainers screening their lord with their laree shields. No doubt tbe noble and his retinue would prClCota similar siebt on the battlefield. with tbe addition ofl standard bearer bearing the nome·standard. Nobles are liso mown beine carried in liners and in one instlnC"C, even in a liller mounted on the back ofa donkey. Ofcoursc it would be quite common fOf military tommanders to tonduct operations from a boat on the Nile, Ind tbere Ite record. of this tlking pllC"C throughout dynlJlic times.

Chltacteristic ilems of drell included long, brilliant ",'hite or semi-transparent linen ki lt and poaibly ape, wig Ind IIlff~f~mcc . The term for military commander nr o~rseer WlIS inry-u, which may be the remO(e original of the term 'emir '.

7 & 8. MlDDLE KINGDOM EGYPTIAN INFANTRY

ThClC IOldiers are based on figures in tomb paintings from Beni·Hasan, Mitr and E1 Bersch. The archer carries _ quiver, (isptt or !tf!tt) which was now in usc, although many Itchers "ill carried their Irrows loose. The waterskin is Ihown in I dClCn hunting scene and mentioned in lOt. IS being pan of I soldier's equipment. This would be CSSCDtiai in the: arid regions into which opcditions were frequently Itnt. 3000 men led by a C"Cnain Henu to Punt each carried I leather bottle and I carryine-pole for water jan and loaves of bread. Similuly, &nekh, I 'com· mander of trOOp. in tbe dClCrt relions', equipped his men with waterskin. Ind haskell or provisions. On many opc:ditioDs, attrition f,om thirst, fatigue and sickness might be I more KriOUS threat than e:ne:my mion.

Like 7, rllU« 8 is I typical tJllauty (wltrior), wearing tbc red osulch plume in his while headband wwch deDO(ed I hereditary warrior. His armour oftcxtilc bands is dcconted with I brold coloured stripe: Ind ICU u _ halter ror I lCCtion of lCJ:tiie prO(ection for his abdomen. An animal IIjl could be _nIChed to the bKIt of lhe bdl of either soldie:r. He wields lone-handed \'Crsion of the: e:~e: which hu I hand gulrd. Clubl, such u thl' shown in h, were equilly popular. The: dagger hIS I peculiar ball-like lrip.

9 a

9. MIDDLE KINGDOM PHARAOH

This is based on sevenl representations of kings, but chiefly Senusret I (1971-1926 B.C.). He wears the 'doublecrown', a combination of the ancient crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt. This nuy seem rather impractical for campaign (but useful for recognition) and may have been replaced by some other form of headgear in battle. A suitable candidate is the so-called 'cap-ctown', II tight·fitting skull-cap adorned with a royal cobra, which appears in the Old Kingdom. A crown such as this, covered in many small metal discs, is known from many representations dadng from the lite Middle Kingdom through to the ~rly New Kingdom. It was probably the ancestor of the ItAqJl'tslt, or 'war crown' (also knowo IS the 'blue crowD'), a name which first appears in the 13th Dynasty. Thus it would seem to be an indigenous development rather than a Hyksos impon, (9a).

The broad collar, armlets, anklets, bracelets, belt, apron and ritual animal tail would be made of inlaid stone jewellery or beIIdwork. Corslets of such construction ctluld also be worn (imitating hawk feathers), but this figure is shown with a more practical corslet of copper scales. He is armed wilh a small version of the mace·axe, which appears in the Middle Kingdom in the hands of the kiog. The king would be accompanied by numerous nobles, officials, standard·beart rs and armed retainers on the battlefield.

10. EARLY EGYPTIAN STANDARDS

Nome standards were very often totemic animals or fetish objects representing the local god worshipped in the dist rict since prehistoric times.

The standards were carved from wood and painted. They need nOI have been flat, IS often assumed, and surviving cnmples (from later, funerary contexts) might suggest that they could be three-dimensional. Streamers were atuched to the top of the shaft. These would most probably be red for Lower Egyptian nomes and white for Upper Egyplian nomes, these being the traditional colours, symbolic of the two ancient kingdoms. lOb and d show the form of these streamers around the time of the unification (c. 3000 B.C.). The standard pole was roughly twice the height of the bearer.

Standards of this type, and also the large ostrich·feather bthlr-fans which alwa}'$ accompanied the king, already existed in predynastic times. Standard-bearers were dressed appropriately to their StatuS as an officer or retainer. This figu re is wearing a type of kill shown being worn by the sandal-belirer of King Narmer, and dates to the time of the unifiauion of Egypt.

a

b c d e

f g h 10

95

Slandards 10:1< are taken from the 'Narmet·paltlle' and the large, carved, ritual macehead of King 'Scorpion'. lOa represcms the jackal god, Anubis, symbol oftbe nome ofCynopolis. lOb reprcscnlS the Horus fa\con, symbolic oflhe: king who was considered 10 be Ihe physical embodiment oflhe hawk·god, Horus, and also the symbol of Ihe nome of HieT1lconpolis, home of the conquering Upper Egyptian kings of the 1st DynaslY. IOc is difficult 10 identify but is possibly also a nome-standard, perhaps representing Cusae. Two falcons, like that shown in lOb, represented Koptos. lOcI is the Set-animal (an Okapi?), sign oflhe nome ofOmhos. 10e is the hieroglyphie sign fOf 'desen regions' . These standards probably reprcscnt Upper Egyptian nomes under the control of the Prcdynastic kings, Scorpion and Narmer, during the wus of unificluion.

109 and h arc Middle Kingdom standards which arc simply refined versions of their archaic predc:«:ssors, 109 being a later version of lOa and IOh, being Ihe symbol oflhe 'hare nome', Hermopolis.

11 . MIDDLE KINGDOM AUXIUARV OR MERCENARY

Many light·skinned troops wC::Iring 'woolly' or patterned kilts ore depicted in Middlc KJngdom tombs. Thcy use a variety ofwcapons induding bows, slings, throw-slicks, javelins, large clubs and small axes. The archen and slingers do not bear shields and only some of the othcr troops do so. Apan from an odd Egyptian shicld here and there, these take the form iIIusU'llled in lib. There can be bctwCf:n one and three: bosses arranged venically, or an animal hide: panern. The shield is perhaps a hide stretched over a frame and is not far rcmoved from contemporary Amonte shields. Some of these troops have a rathef 'Egyptian ' appearance, others appear as 11a. They are probably the 'Asiatic' 3Ul1:iliaries that ate mentioned in some texts. They wcre rccruited from nomadic bedouin tribes on the e:astern borders of Egypt, to be employed as $Couts and skirmishers like the Nubian Mcdjay. They were perhaps more: common in Lower Egypt, whcrcas thc Medjay wefe found mainly in Upper Egypt.

The slinger illustrated here carries his missile:s in a bag slung over his shoulder. Native Egyptian noops do nOl scem to have t~ken much interest in thc sling as a wcapon of war at this lime. Since most or their encmies wore linle Drmour and thcre was abundant expertise in archcry, the Egyptians probably took the view lhat it was beller to sl3Y 3S many enemies as possible allhe funhest possible distance. These foreign troops were using their nllive wC3pon, devcloped in a differcnt environment and style: of fighting, and werc employed as specialists by thc Egyptians since there was no lack or manpower in Egypt. Thcy may have been valued more on account of their C:J:pcnisc in scouting, skirmishing and ambushes, which were more likely to be the Strong points of nomads than or Egyptians, rathcr than on account of wcaponry alonc. Thc sling is quile often found as a weapon among shcpherds, who usc it to protcct their flocks from predators.

a

11 o

b 96

12 & 13. EARLY NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN INFANTRY

These soldiers arc typical of u oops represemcd on 18th Dynasty monuments before the Amama Period (reign of Akhenaren c.I)79-1362 B.C.). They arc the troops who fought for the conquering Pharaohs, Ahmosc I, Amunhotep I, ThU[rnOst l Ind Thulmose III; the IrOOpS th~ t created the Egypti:!.n Empire. They do not ~pptar to have benefi ted from much protect.ion. T he archer still uses the old stave·bow which was being rtplacW by the composite type introduced during the Hyksos Period. The tubular bow-case was also used during the Middle Kingdom. Over his white linen kilt he wears the so-called 'naV3l·kilt' which was a slit·leather garment worn by sailors and marina. He is shown returning from pursuit, having taken a trophy, and eagerly anticipating the 'gold of valour' .

T he spearman carries I wooden shield covered in hide, (IWO sections stitched along the middle in this oample). and with a painted border. Shields could be slightly convex and coloured plain white or yellow instead of natu ral hide patterns. A flap of stiffened fabric was sometimes worn as protection for the groin. The main weapon is a shon spear or javelin between 1m. and 2m. long. Common side·arms included a small bronze axe, bronze daggers, bronze Itho~Jh ('sickle sword'). staves, clubs and throw-sticks. T hroughout the New Kingdom, side·arms do nOl appear to have been standardised within a unit.

14

15

14. EARLY NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN CHARIOT

This chariot is based on a painting in the lomb ofUserhet. The cab is basically a light wooden frame over which is stretched a fabric cover. T his is coloured blue in this eumple but presumably any plain colour was possible and even bronze scales (shown on a chariOt of T hutmOst IV). The floor WI! D·shaped in a plan and made up of inu:rlaced !emher thongs, covered with a hide or woollen rnrpet. These vehicles were c:xtrtmely light, and are sometimes

97

shown being carried on the shoulders orroreign tribute bearers. An example in the Florence museum is very similar to 11131 illustrated here. The cab was ahoUi 1m. wide, 5Ocm. deep and 75cm. high. The axle was 1.5m. wide and the yoke-pole was 2.5m. long. The simple four-spoked wheels were replaced by six-spoked wheels by the mid 18th Dynasty, and I chariot of Thutmose IV possemd eight-spoked wheels.

Various types of wood, chosen for their qualities of strength and springiness, were employed in the conStruction of chariOTS. To increase lightness, the cover was only stretched over the front of the cab leal/ing a large ' fenestration' at each side. The axle was seilS far ~ck as possible to balance the I/ehicle and to improl/e speed and manocul/rability. The only provisions for weaponry arc the bow<ase5 on each side of the cab. In this iIIUSlration the upper pan of the case hangs down, as the bow has been removed. The strap passing under the belly of each horse was a device intended to allow backward movement of the chariOt, rcquired fot 'dressing' the ranks and manoeul/ring the I/ehicle in the stable. The borders of the COI/et and yoke-S3ddle arc decorated in red and white. Wood and leather work arc various shades of brown or buff. Bow cases arc red. The cbariot was calltd nltTllhaMt, a Canaanite loan·word, or UOtTtTtt.

Horses were small, one buried at Thebes measuring 121!:! hands, and blick, grey, bay and chestnut horses were known. They could be protected in battle by textile or scale trappers, one heing depicted in the tomb of Kenamun (14a). The mane WIIS usually cropped or hoggtd.

15. EARLY NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN CHARIOT EER

Figure 15 shows the full charioteer 's panoply as depicted in the Theban tomb of the noble Kenamun in a series of wall· paintings showing the New Years gifts presented to the Phuaoh.

The corslet, comprising some 450 scales, is coloured yellow to represent bronze, and it is I/ery closely relattd to contemporary Canaanite and Mitannian eumples. It incorporate! a type of bronze neck-guard or collar used in those regions and also known in the Aegean.

He wears a bronze helmet, also derh'ed from foreign models, some of which arc shown being brought into Egypt by tribute-hearers. In Kenamun's lomb the helmets are painted white to represent sill/ered bronze. h could have a fcat her, or a horsehair crest. Helmets identical to figures 90c and 91 are also known in Egypt at Ihis time.

Beneath the scale corslet the warrior wean a thick woollen coal decorated wilh red and blue bands al the hem, and below this he wears B linen kilt and lunic. His wrist-guard or bracer is of red and yellow leather with a green pad, red ties and blue lie-cnds or tags. The bow is of Syrian m3nufacture, painled white with blue and red Inrk inlay. The highly decorated quiver is covered with leopard skin, aod retains the animal's tail for use as a tuscl.

This panoply was probably manufactured in Canaan and brought iDlo Egypt as tribute or booty. A great part of the wedding gifts sent with Tushralla of M itanni's daughter to Pharaoh Amenophis III cOMisted of chariot equipment and horses, including bronze and leather cuirasses for men and horses. shields Ind helmets. However, as with chariots, it was not long before the Egyplians were producing their own armour and developing their own designs. Figure 15a shows what seems to be a greal/e, depicted in the tomb of Khaemhet who is shown wearing Ihem in a civilian tontUI .

IS. MID NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN INFANTRYMAN

This soldier is based on troops depicted on a painted boll: from the tomb of Tutankhamun, and so dales 10 the end of the 18th Dynasty. The longer, pleated kilts, often with a wide pleated apron, worn by troops from the reign of Akhenalen (1379-1362 B.C.) reflect contemporary fashion . In addil ion to this he wears a 'nal/al-kilt ', which also appears in reliefs from Horemhab's tomb at Memphi5, and may hal/e become a normal part of a soldier's uniform by th is date. Usually nothing was wom beneath the 'nal/al-kill", which was CUt out of a single piece ofleQther, leaving a solid panel al the back where the wearu's SCII mel the wooden rowing·hench, so that water would quickly drain away.

Armour begins to appear on New Kingdom infantry atlhis time. This man seems to he wearing while lextile bands around his midriff and across his shoulder on the unshielded sick. Another interprelation might be a SOrt of segmented armour of very stiff fabric.

Other figures from the same source wear a short while tunic which leaves the abdomen aposcd. It is probably I stiff textile, jerkin rather than just a fli msy linen shin.

A helmet worn by troops in Horemhab's reliefs is shown in 16a. It l iso often Ippears in military scenes of the Ramwide period, and it could have been made of leather, paddtd textile or, most pro~bly, bronze.

"

The shield is the usual 18th DynaslY type. A cemral panel or band bean the king 's name, and possibly the unit name. Shields found in Tutankhamun's tomb were made oflight wood covered with antelope or cheellh hide, though the coverings of common soldiers' shields would not be so uOIic. Shields wcre slightly convex and measured about 7Scm. high and sOcm. wide.

The weapon depktcd in 16b is shown being thrust with great ferocity, using both hands, into fallen enemy charioteen in the painted·box scenes. h could be: described as along.handled sword, or a heavy type of short stabbing.,pear. Bronu heads fo r such weapons survive in both the Cairo Museum Ind the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. The latter cxllmple, 16b, bellrs Ihe name ' Kamose ', showing Ihlll they wen: \lsed througho\ll Ihe 181h DynaSly. The head alone measures 6Ocrn. long, and Ihe paintings show its full length to have been about a metre.

b

17. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN MUSICIANS

Two war trumpets bearing the names of Amun, Re and Ptah, possibly a reference to armies, were found in the tomb of Tutankhamun. When played with a modern mouthpiece they produced a particularly evocative sound, though without this could produce only a few raucous notes. T hey were provided with wooden formers to prevent damage when not in use. They were probably used to give general signals to large formations of the whole army, such as 'advance', ' retreat', ' left or right wing advance', and the like. The drum was used on military parades, and would have provided I fitting, relcntleu beat for advancing bodies of close-order infantry. It could also be used for signals wit.hin small format ions.

Egyptian troops at all periods probably chamed nr sang as they wem imo battle and on parades. Texts mention war:eries and clamour before battle began . The 6th Dynasty commander. Weni, even recorded a triumph song in his tomb inscription.

18 &: 19. LATER NEW KINGDOM CLOSE·COMBAT INFANTRY

These figures are based on numerOUi battle reliefs of the 19th and 20th Dynasties, often called the 'Ramesside period'.

Both figu res wear pleated white Iincn kilts with a rrontal flap that may have be:en stilTened. The '$Iriped headdoth' appears at this time. This was not qui le the ume as the Pharaoh's I1n1ItS headdress and may not be: simply doth. One cxplanation might be: leather strips fastened to a cloth base. Figure 18 wears banded textile armour similar to lhal of 16. The textile protection of 19 is an unsegmented venion of this design. Contrary 10 popular imagina' tion, tunics were Dot commonly worn be:neath this type of armour, which would probably be white, brown or buff . ..

19

... -===-Q5>=-a

a ~-~--,-.:--~~.-----b

The shield curied by 18 is typical of that used by spearmen in the RlImcssidc period. lIS large and rectangular shape' .is beneT suiu~d for fighling in dense formations than the earlier New Kingdom type, which continued in use by nemen. marines, runners and light troops. Shields were now painted plain colours such as red or bluc:. They bad a white border decor.llcd with thin black, blue and red lines. The 'boss', positioned over the hand grip, is actually a flat menl disc flanked by TWO sacred robras, showing it to be a solar disc. II was probably a form of unit insignia replacing that of 16.

II was vcry common practice for the shield to be slung on the back by a Strap when marching and even in comba!. The IToopS would also use their shields to mue II pal iude around the camp when on campaign.

The mace-axe carried by 19 existed in bOlh one and 1\\10 handed versions. Examples ofbolh sized blades have been found. A large blade in the British M.useum is shown in 19b, and a reconstruction of the weapon in 19a. The shaft was presumably insened th rough a wooden mace-head which had a groove for the fining of the blade. II is wendesigned 10 combine cuning and concussive effC'Cts.

Side-arIDS included the mace, b~lon, sm~n axe, throw-slick. dagger, shon sword, as shown in 18a. and the khopah as shown in the hand of our spearman. A khoplsh from the tomb of Tutankhamun was 6Ocm. in length, a hefty weapon of bronze, cast in one piece: with the handle. The lower edge was the cuning edge.

The soldier's 'field'pack' is depicted in Egyptian camp scenes and illustrated bere in ISb.

20,21 & 22. LATER NEW IilliGDOM EGYPTiAN ARCHERS

By this time, the composite bow was standard equipment for all archers. Unstrung, the bow had a doublc-<onvex appearance, but when strung, produced the characteristic triangular shape. According to acrounlS of royal feats of archery, the bow was drawn to the ear and could send a shaft through an ingot of copper three 'fingers' thick at close range. Bows were up to l.30m. long and conslNCled by fIXing thin strips of hom to a central wooden core and building in other types of wood and sinew. TUlankh2mun's lomb con tained numerous bows ofdifTerem types. One type was a single stave self·bow, about 70em. long . Another self-bow was made from two Slaves joined at the cenl~ and was about 7Scm. long. Composite bows from the tomb varied from 1.I0m. to 1.23m. long and were very stiff It the cemre. They were strung to create the trilngular shape referred to above. Strings were made of

100

22

20

21 four stands of twisted gut. Arrows usually had a reed shaft, but wcrc fooled wi th hardwood. They were tipped with bronze, the heads rCKmbling miniature spearheads. The nock was also made of hardwood or of ivory. Arrows could be: either three-or four-flctched with [cathers, and up to 1m. in length.

Figure 20 is a type: of arche.r often depicted in baltic scenes of the Ramcssidc period. Their shaven heads are a dislinctivc feature, and they may belong 10 a particular elite unit . Colours have survived on some reliefs, showing that the robes were while while the quiver and quiver-sling were brightly painted wilh mytbologiClilI beasts (such as the winged cobra shown here) or in imitation of antic animal skins. The quiver was made of embossed leather and provided with a lid attached by a thong. Several uampJes arc preserved in the Cairo Museum.

Figure 21 is an unarmoured Ramesside: arche:r, but the: same uniform could be worn with a 'striped' jerkin (possibly representing scale armour). Figure 22 wears a textile helmet, and his tunic mIIy have been some form of armour on which the detail has been eroded aWlly.

The Egyptians of the New Kingdom do not seem to have made much use of the sli ng in warfare: , and the: only reprtsentations of slingers are: in the naval battle: relie:fs of Ramesses III at Medine:t Habu. Here the slingers are in the crows' nests of the Egyptian warships and there may be some special reason for their employment in this position rather than archers. Slings were found in Tutankhamun's tomb but they may havt bttn simply pan of his hunting equipment.

23. LATER NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN CHARIOT

This is based on representa tions from the reigns ofTutankhamun and Ramessn II . Sill-Spoked wheels were: now s[andud and the eab is generally heavier and more robust. It Ippell1 to be: construCted from wood and bull-hiC::e. Two further weapon<ases were added by the time of Seti I, each containing a pair of javelins IS well as arrows. Figure 2)a illustrates a javelin, which was about 1m. long.

101

23

a The cab oCone of TUIQnkhamun's chariots measured 1m. in width and 1.25m. in height. The ule \\'lIIS 1. 75m. wide and the wheels werc 9Ocm. in diameter. The draught-pole was 2.5m. long.

The hone-armour is derived from relicfs at Abu-Simbel in which Egyptian chariots arc charging IOwar<b Hiuite opponents. The latile trapper is covered by rows of bronze or leather scales ahemaling with lines of coloured lacing. This arrangement, or the painting of scales allcmau:ly different colours, creattli a striped appleanlncc. The neck oflhc horse is protected by webbing or leather bands and the head by a bull-hide (alternatively, a scalc)lIIrpisu. The breast harness Sttms 10 have acquired a subsidiary function as a breast-plate. This equipment represtniS the most heavily-armoured chariotry available to the Egyptians and pictorial evidence indicates that there were many units of lighter chariotry used mainly for scouting and skirmishing. The heavy types would be required to engage enemy chariol ry.

a

25

102

24 & 25. LATER NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN CHARIOT CREW

The crew illustrated in 24 wear textile armour with the addition of scale corslet, and scale helmet in the case of the chariot warrior. The driver was usually equipped with a shield during the IUmcsside Period (t9lh and 20th Dynll5ties), those from the source used here being covered in bull-hide. The traditional type was replaced by a round shield among some eluriony in the reign of R~messes III Egyptian chariotry aUlinly fought with long and shon range missile weapons and were probably not inclined to dismount in action unless absolutely necessary.

Figure 25 is equipped with a scale corslet ofa type depicted in the 10mb of Ramesses III . Several pairs ofthe$C: corslets arc shown, together with items of chariot equipment which might indicate that they could be issued to both members of the crew. Scales of varying sizes were used, and the neck was protected much more efficiently than by the earlier corslet of IS. The rows of scales alternate in different colours, and paint or VlIriant alloys of bron%e could have been used to achieve this effect. Another possibility could be tinted leather scales as a sleeveless cuirass of such SCIles was found crumpled in a box in Tutankhamun's tomb. The scales were flied td"a linen base or lining to fonn a close-filling gannent. Such an arrangement of scales (and ronlets in which the lacing was left exposed) have no doubt contributed to their interprel3lion as striped runiC'S. This figure is also equipped wi th a helmet of similar ronstruction. Some of the striped headgear often attributed to Egyptian troops might be beller imerpreted as helmets of this tfPC' (cf. figs. 87, 88 and 90e).

25a is a heavily-cmbroidered (or painted) cuirass depicted in the tomb of Ramcsscs III. It has a fringed lower edge and WlS probably textile. In construcling their non-metallic armour, the Egyptians no doubt used similar techni· ques to those employed to make cartonnage cases for mummies. This involved building up layers of linen treated wilh resins, the results would be "ery tough, but light.

26. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN CHARlOT RUNNER

Runners were infantry intended to act in suppon of the chariotry and were an integrlll pan of chariot unil organisation. The h.ieroglyph.ic 'det~rminative' aCluaily shows II man running with shield and javelin. Presumably especially athletic m~n were selected for service as runnelli. There arc several reliefs which depict runners in action. They are shown running beside the chariot, advancing ahead of the chariotry, or 'mopping·up· after II chariot charge apinst enemy chariot ry. A few figures in these contexts lire shown with bows instead of javelins, and could be crewmen from destroyed vehicles who would join the runnen in the midst of combat. At Medinet Habu, a line of javelinarmed troops :are shown operating on the fl anks of a line of chariolry.

27. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN HORSEMAN

This rider is taken from 19th Dynasty reliefs at Luor. He wears yet another type of textile armour which fastens on the lefl side. He is armed only with a bow. This soldier represents the beginnings of cavalry in Egyptian armies, although numbers would be small. and combat roles limited to scouting and carrying messages. Skirmishes between opposing mou nted scouts were probably not unknown.

103

A rid~r is shown in military r~lief$ from the tomb of Horemhab at Memphis, (which he built while still only II

general). He rides bareback, w~rs little clothing and carries only II whip, so he may juSt be a groom exercising the horses. His hairstyle and appearance arc nther 'Nubian', and it would nOI be unusual 10 find a few foreigners in the ranks of regular units and among the servants attached to officers and chariotry. The design of the saddle in 27 ·is cut from a hide, other $lIIddles were of plaited reed. Horses were probably still tOO small and weak in the spine to enable the development of true cavalry.

b

d 28. NEW KINGDOM PHARAOH'S CHARIOT

Tht Ph.1raoh's chariot was always the most advanced design available and richly decorated. This illustration is derived mainly from Ramesscs II 's 'lion chariot' and a similar 'lion chariot' of Ramesscs III.

ThUlmose IV is shown driving a chariot with eight-spoked wheds in one representation, while his wcll-cquippcd maryannu opponents only have four-spokes.

The cab could be plain and constructed like ordinary chariots but was usually highly decorated. Chariots of wood overlaid with gold .... ·ere perhaps normally reserved for parade, although Thutmosc IIJ fought in a chariot overlaid with clectrum at Megiddo. The above mentioned chariO! of Thutmosc IV had a metal or leather scale covering stretched over the frame. The WlIr chariot o f Tutankhamun depicted on a painted box from his tomb was similar to 23, but the state chariotS from his 10mb were made of wood ove.rlaid with gold and decorated with inlay.

The napper, breast-harness and l"rpisu of 28 afe constructed from inlaid stone or faience beads arranged in lines of different colours as iflhey were tiny sca les. They were p resumably attached 10 a textile back.i.ng. Colours included him:, light green, red and ydlow. Instead of an apotropaic minaf) a fiy-whisk is fastened 10 the yoke-saddle.

The horse-armour shown on the painted box ofTutankhamun is iIlu stI~led by 2Sd. The round disa are coloured yellow and ~ re prob~bly a convention for scales. The trapper was tied under the belly by tapes. The curved lower edge of such tl1lppc:rs may be an attempt by artists to represent the st retching of the covering. The beadwork tl1lpper ofThulmosc IV is shown in 2&. There were many variams of the crest on tbe horses' heads which incorporated dyed ostrich plumes, one version is shown in 28b.

10'

Figure 28a is from a Victorian drawing of an Egyptian relier and represents the sunshade of Ramesscs II , mounted above his chariot. It is possibly just a garblrd fan but the shape argues against this. It is dctorated with a protective vulture deity.

A special fearure orthe Pharaoh's chariot was the solar disc surmounting a wooden hawk, o\'Crlaid with gold, mounted on the draught·pole.

This chariot is appropriate to figure 30. Representat ions always show the Pharaoh rid.ing alone with the re ins tied around his waist. This was probably Pharaonic propaganda, as the epic poem on the battle of Kadesh contains a dialogue belween R2mcsscs and his charioteer Menna, although modern txperiments have shown that it is possi· ble to drive in this fashion at low speeds.

Royal spans were given names such as 'Sm ite,. of Fouigntn' belonging to Seti I, 'ViC/ory in Thlbn' ridden by Ramcsscs II and 'Amun Giw,h the Swori' owned by Ramesses m.

29 &: 30. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN PHARAOHS

Figure 29 is based on representations orThutmosc IV, Tutankhamun and Seti I. He wears the !tJIepresh, often known as the 'blue-crown' or 'war-crown'. The first mention of tbis helmet occun in tbe reign of Neferhotep III of the 13th Dynasty and it was already developing OUI of the 'cap-crown' before the Hyksos period. The crown was made of leather, coloured blue and covered with many small gold or bronu discs. The sacred cobra, or 'uraeus', surmounts the brow . A low ridge crosses the belmet iust behind the dome, and yellow ribbons fa ll rrom the nape.

a

29

b

Around his waist are tied several yellow sashes. The belt, apron, broad<olIar and corslet are made of inlaid stone work. The ap ron ends in a row of cobra terminals. From tbe back of the belt bangs a bead replia or tbe ancient animal tail. The corslet takes the form of twO falcons. Their bodies form the protection for his flanks and thei r wings cross over h.is back and chest. To these are attached inlaid stone sleeves. A band forming pan of the fastcning arrangemcnt can be secn between the talons of the falcons. The inner fcathers of the wings would be red, the outer ones and bodies being blue or light green. The solar discs on their heads, talons and cloisonne holding the inlay would be gold. In battle, less ornate versions of various bronze alloys or tinted leather may have been worn. AnOlher type of corslct which is rather more functional is shown in 29a. It comprises a shon leather or textile jerkin covered with bronze or gold discs. It extends intO (Wo long and tapering bands which wrap around the body and tic at the front. The abdomen is left CJ:poscd but this could also be worn over a white textile undergarment. This jerkin would be coloured yellow, brown or red. The two dark bands arc probably armlel!.

105

His Idi foreann is protected by a leather wrist guard, but embroidered gloves could be worn like those: ofTufankhamun which ClIn be seen in tbe Cairo Museum.

A royal shic:ld is shown in 29b. The froOl could be co\'ered in C:XOl.ic hide, or, as here, consist of a gi lded or ebony openwork raised motif against a white or da rk ground,

Figure 30 is based on a representation of RlImessc:s 11 The variant of the kltqJruh shown here is plain with a gold or embroidered falcon on the back. A iewellery pectoral hanp from his neck, He wean a long scale conle t over white linen robes. This is an Egyptian equivalenl of the Iypt shown in 104. Rows of brorne scales (coloured ye llow) allernate with lines of stilching (represcmed by plain b lue lines), each row of scales sl.ightly overlaps tbe row of stitching directly beneath. T he scales have a small boss in their lower half, and so correspond exactly to scales in the Cairo Museum, some of which belonged 10 a scale corslet of Shc:shonq 1. One of thc:sc scates is shown in 3Oa. This annour was worn only by the Pharaoh and his retinue. His sandals differ from ear lier [}'PCS, having acqui red upturned toes. When not in combat the Pharaoh wore robes like 31 .

31. NEW KINGDOM EG VPTIAN OFF ICER

He wears the typiCllI dress of an offi cial in fashion from the mid·18th Dynasty onwards, consisting of a heavily. pleated kilt worn oYer a long robe or wide sleeved shin. These were alwa~ of brillianl whi te, ocCllsionally semi· transp3rent, linen. Hai r was usually shoulder length but shaven heads and wigs were also possible. Royal princes might accompany their father on campaign as subordinate commanders, and were distinguished by their sidelocb (31a). In action, long robes may have concealed armour, and reliefs show annour, like that illustrated in 25, 30, 32 and 33, being worn over their robes by high ranking officen.

Scribes, who invariably accompanied the army, would be similarly dressed and would ClI rry writing equipment and leather cases for documents (leather shttlS rather than papyrus scrolls when on ClImpaign). Scribes could be taught foreign Io.nguages (chiefly Akkadian, the 'lingua-Franca' of the day) for service with the coun or the army. The Phanoh and high ranking officcrs would be literate.

Lemr officers, such as the standard·bearer, dressed as the rank and file, T he 'greatest of 50' and 'gre:illest of 10' (equivalent 10 NCO's), carried wooden 5lnes. This officcr carries an ostric h plume, possibly the insign ia of chariOtry officers.

32. SHARDANA GUARDSMAN

The T anis stela of Ramcsscs II and a reference in the epic poem on the bailie of Kade!h, tell of Ramcsscs 's c~pture of Sherden raiders and thcir formation into an elite body in time for the Kadesh ClImpaign. T he Kadesh reliefs show Shnden (or Sharelana), and native Egyptian royal guards both equipped with this type of armour. The most detai led representations arc at Abu Sirobel. The Sherden contingent retained their d istinctive shields, swords and helmetS. The Egyptian guards were helmetless. with shoulder-length hair, and carried the shield shown in 32a. T his seems to bear a wheel motif instead of a solar disc. T hey carried spears and small axes. as side-arnu. The Sherden carried only a sword which was about I m long. 32b is an example of this weapon in the British Museum. Other rdiefs show Sherden with javelins, though these may not be guards. The dark-coloured budder was probably leather. The bronze: bosses were arranged with an inner and outer ring Of an outer ring around a centnl boss. The cap-like helmet could have been made from boars'·tusks in Aegean fuhion or with segments of leather or wood, It was sur· mounted by twO cow horns (or boars' tusks) and a disc insignia, This was probably to distinguish Egyptian auxiliary Sherden from enemies, u it appears on Sherden other than guards.

The type of annour shown here appears only during the reign of Ramc:sscs II. It is only shown being worn by royal guards, some chariotry (also likely to be household troops) and some archers (which could possibly be dis-mounted chariOleers). It is apparent ly very rigid, and ukes the form ofa COlIt with two broad straps passing over the shoulden and a frontal fl ap over the chest. T he tapering apron of the kilt is allowed to hang outside, Some idea ofils rigid ity is given by the shaping of the thigh sections to ease movement. This uniform is often rcronmucted the other way around because the reliefs show mirror images of these troops facing each other in order to create a symmenical composition, h most probably fu tened on the shielded side. The flaps, often taken to indiCll te a belt, may be: intended as groin protection, but it is probable tha t they arc meant to represent the other thigh panel protruding beyond the apron of the kilt. No ac tual 'belt ' around the wais t occurs in the reliefs.

The garment is divided into frulny horizontal panels with numerous sfrulil studs positioned along them, and is perhaps best interpreted as a son of coat-<lf-plates. The studs may have fas tened lengths of horn, wood or metal to the back of $Iiffentd teltlile or leather. This might explain its restriction to d ite troops and the curious 'CUI' o f tbe garment.

106

a

31 b

34 /0

a

......, :::::>

b c

101

33. RAM.ESSIDE ROYAL RETAINER

This soldier appears running beside Rame&ses II in his chariO! in a scenc from Abu SimbeL He must be his personal chuiot-runner and sandal-bearer. He wears a different version of thc armour described under 32 . In this case: it is likely 10 be enlirely lextile. The method of fastening on the len side, consisting of tapes passing through ring· shaped buckles, ClIn be clearly Sttn.

34. RAMESSIDE MARINE

This marine is based on reliefs dating to the reign of Ramcsses Ill , chiefly the na\-al battle depicted at Mcdinet Habu. Weapons used at sea included iavelin. mace, composile bow, sling, boarding.pike and grappling-hook. Javelin or bow were used for land operations. The old style naval kilt has been replaced by one of'Sea-Peoples", (originally l..cvantine), type. This was probably linm, strengthened with leather s!Tips. One possible interpretation of the 'Striped' corslets and helmets shown worn by marines, could be bands of plaited fibre or papyrus, but scale annour is probably more likely. The jerkins depicted in the Medinet Habu reliefs bear a suilUng similari ty to the scale corslets depicted in the tomb of Ramesses IU, ilIu$lrated and discussed under 25.

34a shows the fronl of the shield, 34b is the mace side-arm favoured by marines, and 34<: is a variant helmet con· sisting ora tutile or metal helmet with a fabric 'aventail ' . It was worn IOgether with 0 plain tutile jerkin and nor· mal infantry lUI! . This uniform appears on troops in a parade s«:ne fro m the reign of Ramesses III, who appear to be another type of marine.

35. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTlAN STANDARDS

The New Kingdom saw the establ..is luncnt ofa regular national army with a centralised command, consequentl)' completely new types of purely military standards came into being. The majority of New Kingdom military standards were fan-shaped or rcctangular. There were sevenl basic fonnsto whicb insignia indicating any special status could be added. Fan and rectangular types were probably !lat, wlille animal devices could have been three-dimensional. The device was mounted on a pole about 2m. long, 10 which were futened a red and a while Streamer representing Ibe national colours of ancient Egypt, derived from the red and wbite Clowns. The fla t types would be ideaUy suited for indicating basic manoeuvres such as a wheel, and their common occurence might suggest thai they were used by the smaller unin. More compla: typeS were probably tbe insignia of companies or greater formations, Ibeir main fu nction being recognition.

35a is a hehtr-fan. II was made of ostrich feathers dyed in coloured bands. Two such rani were always borne behind the lUng from the earlicst times. In baule they were carried by runners bebind the roy;al chariot .

35b is a typical military fan standard. The design is derived from the IONS flower and the board sits upon a carved lotus terminal on the pole. Colours would be red, blue, green or yellow on a white or yellow ground.

35c is another common type. A white rectangle surmounts a bow-sbaped terminal, (the term ptdfrr derives from a word for the bow). The rectangle could contain tbe Phanoh's names and tilles and probably the unit name. The feather might indicate some special stalus or award, but a red ostrich plume was always a genen! insignia of soldiery in Egypt. 35d is depicted in a tomb at Tell-EI-Amama, tbe capital of Akhenaten. It bears canouches containing the mime of the 111m. To one side is the phonetic hieroglyphic sign for sa, meillning 'compilllY'.

35e. is a IOlus- f1 ower standard carried by a unit that may have been household chariouy, during tbe reign of Ramesses nI.

35fand g are ostrich plume standards carried by chariotry and high ranking stalT(in tbei r role as chariotry officers?). This would be ideal for signalling basic movements to a lToop of chariotry.

35h is a djtd·piJ1or surmounted by a solar-disc and plumes, a symbol of Abydos.

35i is depicted at the temple of Hateshepsut at Dcir·EI·Bahari and consists of a papyrus planl (symbolic of Upper Egypt), rising from a lIa sign, (usually meaning '! pirit', but here it is probably part of a pla~-name). The troops around it arc. labelled; 'uoops of Upper and Lower Egypt. Youtb of T hebes and R«ruils of Khenthennefer' (a Nubian region).

35j contains tbe 'throne name' of Queen Hatshepsut, (Maarllart), enclosed by a cartouche which al ways encircles royal names. It is sunnounted by two royal cobn. and plumes.

35k, I and m bear animal motifs. 351 Sttms to be associated with Theban militia.

108

35

a c d

e f h

g

k m n o

p q r

x

s t v w

109

35n is a human head surmounted by a double plume. 350 is the head of the sun·god R.i .

35p, q and r are probably the standards of'ships contingents' being a combination of infantry fan with a ship device. 35q is from the tomb of Nebamun and btlonged to ' the king's ship Btlowd 0/ Am/m'.

35s·w are represem3th'e of 3 curious type of standard th~t often accompanies the fan type. They Kem to be some sort of hanging object. 35u is coloured red below the lotus-flower, with thin red and yellow horizontal bands.

35x is the standard of the army of Amun. It eomprises the head of the sacred ram of Amun surmounted by a solar disc appropriate to the god's full name of Amun-Ra. A small figu re of lhe Pharaoh is fixed below his countenance. This standard was larger than normal standards and carried in a chariot of its own, accompanied by a drh'er. It led the army on the march. This was presumably the case: with the other armies. The standard of the army of Ra would bt simi.lar 10 350, that of Set (or Sutekh) to IOd, without the archaic features, and Ftah would possibly be reprc:sc:nted by a bull, (the sacred Apis.bull).

Standard·poles were usually yellow. The wigs of gods would be blue. The colours of the hieroglyphs would vary according to the sign con~med. Solar discs would be yellow or gold. Primary colours and green would predominate. Ostrich plumes which were nOI dyed would be white wilh black tips.

36 & 37. UBYAN OR KUSHITE·EGYPTIAN INFANTRY 7TH CENTURY B.C.

Thc:sc: figures ue derived from an ASliyrian palace relief dating 10 Ihe reign of Ashurbanipal (668·627 B.C.). They :lppear defending a fonified Egyptian temple enclosure which must represent either Thebes or Memphis during the revolts of 667 or 66613 B.C. Although these figures are usually regarded as Kushite, on accou nt of their 'Nubian' fealU res, contempol"2ry Egyptian troops would have been similarly dressed and etjuipped. Indeed glazed tiles from Nimrod, probably of the reign of Esarhaddon (680-669 B.C.), show identical fair-skinned soldien.

The plume may simply be: II designation fot 'soldier', and not especililly associated with the Kushites, sin~ the plume was the insignia of the Meshwesh mililary caste.

The small round shields bear a curious 'hollow-sided square' device. This could be an extra piece of hide, (possibly a green hide as tht Assyrians in the relief art using fi rebnnds), 10 incrtast its proltctive qualities or merely as a dewrativc motif.

37 wears lamellar armour which could rum: been captured from Assyri3n. or Assyrian-equipped garrisons o\'erron during the revolts. One (jgun in the relief wears II. simple jerkin with Assyrian 'pteruges' along the lower edge (se; also fig. 25a).

38. LATER EGYPTIAN MOUNTED PHARAOH

Tefnakht is the fint recorded example of a Pharaoh riding on horseback, but this may ha\'e been due to the exceptional circumslances at the siege of Memphis, when hasle was necessary. Riding in a charlOi would «nalnly remain the rule on most occasions, as with all contemporary rulers. However, it does demonstrate thaI Ihe king was likely to be proficient in all aspects of horsemanship. Herodotus records that Amasis rode a horse when he was in rebellion against Apries, and so the practice cannOi be ruled out for nobles and officials, according to the requirements of active sen·ice. That the Egyptians pornssed effeclive cavalry at least by the lime of the Kushite 25th Dynasty is anesled by Assyrian records.

This figu re wears a lamellar corslet, but scale, sh~l-bronze, textile corslets or a corslet of Greek design are equally possible. HerodOlus records dun Amuis donaled a linen corslet to the temple of Alhene at Lindos on Rhodes. The earlier textile corslet illustrated in 25a might perhaps serve as a guide to Ihe possible appearance of such a linen corslet.

T he horse wean 3 necklace of blue faience beads such as adorned the bodies of horses buried in the tombs of several of the Kushite Ph:lraohs at El Kurru in Nubia. After the loss of the Egyptian Empire, most of the military activity look pla~ within the Nile valley and so it is possible that the restrictions of the landscape might encourage the use and development of cavalry as II. panial subslilute for chariOlry, especially in scouting and skirmish.ing roles. This twIy have laken p1a~ in Egypt independently oflhe same process ocrurring at this lime in the rest of the Near EaSt.

38a shows the head of the Kushile Pharaoh, Taharqa (690·664 B.C.), from an Assyrian stela. The helmet is perhaps a melal skull-np wilh the royal cobra affIXed to it.

110

37

a

38

39

39. LATER EGYPTIAN PHARAOH

... &J)J . , , ' , ' .: , , , , " " " " " v

a

He is based mainly on Egyptian-style represemations on ivory objects of Phoenician origin and dates to the 9th or 8th centuries B.C. He wears a shon kilt over a longer kill and shin, all probably affine: white linen. Egyptian shins werc: usually a simple length of cloth with an opening for the head half way aiong its length. The sides were tucked into the kill 10 form. wide sleeves, but garments with sewn sleeves were also known. All the tI'llditional Pharaonic trappings are present, including the broad collar lind uraeus-apron. He carries the heqa scepter and the flail , symbols of royal authori ty throughoullhe dynastic period. The 'bluc<rown' continued to be worn into the 30th Dynasty.

39a shows an axe, tbe blade of which bears the name 'Sheshonq', and ittustrates the form this weapon took in the 9th century 8.C. Scales from the tomb of Sheshonq I indicate that armour, like that of figure 30. continued to be worn by Pharaohs into this period.

III

40,41 & 42. LATER EGYPTIAN CHARJOTRY c. 8TH TO 6TH CENTURY B.C.

It is not clear how long New Kingdom designs relrulined in use, and lOme of the liter repraenllt ions of chariots may be misunderstood copies of older types or ddiberate Itcbaising (I frequent occurrence in art during the 7th and 6th centuries). The: more: rdiable evidence indicates tbat Emt kept pace with cbariotty de:\'c:lopment in the Near East during the ht millennium B.C. The change from sU-spoked to eight·spoked wheels occurred during or shonly after Ihe Libyan period, and Ihe cab then began 10 lequire I rectlngular plln and boa:-like appearance. A drawing of a four·horse chariot on I limestone block shows I C1b similar in design to that depicted in I NeeHiuite rtlief from Sakcagozu, and 10 anOther on a Syrian·style plaque lmong the Nimrud ivories. This ctwloI: is shown in 40. The cab is possibly covered in fabric, as il hiS a fringe Iiong its bottom edge. The wheels Ire qui te large Ind Ihe: ab is raised high off the ground like Assyriln chariots. It. band'grip is required to Issist mounting. These features could place this chirice as early as the 8th century B.C.

The: horses Ire wearing faience bead necklaeu as found on horse burials in tombs of the Kusbite Phinohs at El Kurru. Traces of maning covered by cloth wert also found on the bodies.

The chariot 401 is from a faie nce bowl from Tuna dating to the: Libyan period. II could be simply a m isinterpreted New Kingdom type copied from older rtpresenlations. It has a design similar to earlier chariots with, perhaps, a quilted cover strelched over the frame leaving fenestrations at the sides of the cab.

40 a

A possible reconstruction of a charice crewman is shown in 41 . Round shidds were in use with chariOtry as early IS the reign of Rameucs III. Long coats of scale were common among NC1ar·Eastern chulO( crews during the 10th. 9th and 8th centuries B.C. and 41a mows some scales dating to around 750 B.C. from Emt. The annals ofEsarhad· don, concerning his invasion of Egypt, refer to Egyptian duriots ctC'olo'ed by three men. They art specified as 'holden of reins', 'chariol chiefs' and ' third men on chariO(s'. Interestingly, Assyrian sources show Egyptian chariots as little changed from New Kingdom designs, uide from having eight-spoked wheels.

Although it is quite likely that 40 could be a Saite period vehicle, 42 is an attempt to rccomtJ'UCI an Egyptian chariOt of the 7th or 6th century B.C. The bol. is rectangular in plan and based OD representations of chariots from Cypnu and Phoenicia. These areu were receiving I strong Egyptian influence at this time and are likely to have been close to Egypt in chariOt design, lince they represent one channel through which Egypt would b«-ome acquainted with Near-Eutern developments. The wheel is based on an actual enrnple found in Egypt. Near the base of c:ach spoke is a hole through which a rawhide thong could be threaded. As the thong dried OUt, the spokes would be held firmly to Ihe nlve. 42a is a sunshade, shown on what appears to be 1 Phanloh's chariO(. The horse-armour cons.isu of

112

rows of mml plat~ lind follow$ a palwn known in Syria. 42b is an clIample of such a platc from Nimrud. 42c is an ornate wheel of the Ptolemaic period (from a ritual vehicle). The spokes are carved in the shape of papyrus siems and hobnails are rtxed 10 the rim in the manner of some Assyrian chariolS. T his type of wheel may luve appeared as early as the 51h CCntury H.C.

a

42

[Q). : . . .. . .. :

b c

43, 44 & 45. SAffE EGYPTIAN INFANTRY, 7TH TO 6TH CENTURY B.C.

Figun: 43, who might ~ an officer, is dressed ;!ccording to a description of Egyptian appan:1 by Herodotus, backed up by represent;!tions on G reek painted pottery. Levan tine carved ivori« and Egyptian tomb scenes. II consisted ora linen tun ic. wi lh;! rringed lower edge called;! calasiris, over which was worn;! while woollen kill. Figun: 44 appears on a decorated melal bowl or Phoenician manuracture. This figure would da te to the 8th or 7th centuries B.C. Cavalry from the same source as 44 ;re dressed and armed identically. but lack shields.

113

Nubian soldiers wearing clements of Greek, Persian and Scythian costume (such as patterned tunics and uousc:rs) arc depicted on some Greek painted pottery. They may have betn inspired by Ibe appearance of troops seen by Greek traders in the streets of Cyrent or Naukratis. Nubia was always a major recruiting ground for the Egyptian army, and Greek equipment could euily be obtained through trade, or manufactured in Egypt by Greek anisans, perhaps in the Greek colonies or military settlements. Figure 45 is wearing a linen conlet.

Some troops from the same source as 44 arc dressed identically but wear a helmet wilh a crest like 47. The nDSCguard and check-pieces are nOl prcsc:nt and it is held on with a chin-st rnp. This cou ld be an Egyptian variant of the characteristic Karian helmet_

44

45

.,. EGYPTIAN SPEARMAN, 30TH DYNASTY

Thil figure is a reconstruction of a close-formation spearman of the Persian period (which includes a period of indepmdence under the 28th, 29th and 30th Dynasties), following the descriptiolU of Egyptian troops given by Herodotus and Xenophon. Herodotus says that Egyptian marines in the Persian fleet wore reticulated helmets and con lets aDd were equipped with concave broad rimmed shields, long spears, axes and scimitan. Xenophon records long spears and similar shields which were wcll-designed fo r close-format ion fighting. Infantry of t.his type may have been originally developed in the Saile period when a culrurnl renailsanct. was taking place and there was a great deal of interest in the past. The Saite Pharaohs may have tried to create an army on the traditional model and could have copied items of uniform from ancient reliefs (which was certainly done in the case of anistic composition).

That the Egyptians may have re.-introduccd the traditional shield after 11 long period whcn the round shield appears to have been most common is nOt only suggCSted by the descriptions of Herodotus and Xenophon, but perhaps more Significantly by the introduction of shields of this type into the Assyrian army immediately following thei r contact with Egyptian troops.

The main weapon of the c1osc-tombal infantry was the niUHrl-djntl,lilerally 'hand spear' (i.e. thrusting or Slabbing spear) which existed in long and shon versions during the Pen ian period.

114

a b c

47 . IONIAN, KARIAN OR LYDIAN MERCENARY, 7TH TO 6TH CENTURY B.C.

T his hQ~ntbli or 'new fo rdgntr' carries a brom:e-faccd shield bearing a gorgon's he~d device, like the example found af Carchcmish daling 10 the defeat of the Egyptian garrison by the Babylonians in 605 B.C. The Corittlhian helmet features a 'cocks'<omb' crest, as represented on some pottery heads of rOTcigners from the palace of Apries in Memphis and in a siege Kent from a Cypriot bowl. He uses a pair of javdin~ and so may pre-dale figure 46. as the Egypti.ans may have: adopted the long spear from the Greeks, appreciating its suitability to their c1ose-orde:r style of fighling.

The main elements among the Greek mercenaries employed by the Saitc Phanaohs were Kari:m$. and lonians from Asia Minor. L ydian IcrnacOlla plaques in G reek slyle depict similar warriors 10 47, who may eilhe.r ha\'e been G reek mercenaries rrom the colonies of Asia Minor, or may possibly indicate thaI nalive Lydians had adopted Greek equipment and methods of fighting around 600 B.C. It is possible Ibatlhe 'brazen-men' employed by Psamtik I of Egypt were Lydians sent by Gyges. Assyrian annals of Ashurtmnipal record lhat Gyges sent troops to help Psamtu: drive out the Assyrian garrisons and defeat his Egyptian rivals.

This figure wears sandals and Assyrinn·style socks under his greaves as shown in le rracona plaques. Ahem:uive shield designs are shown in 47a<.

115

48 &; 49. UBYAN WARRIORS

The name 'libya' deri\'cs originally from the libu, a tribe which appeared at the end of the Egyptian New Kingdom among the invaders of Egypt. They figure prominently as an element among the considerable Libyan infiuxtS of the sucettding period. The term 'Liby:iIOs' is used here to embra~ three main peoples. The oldest inhabitants of Egypt's western fringes were the Tjehenu, who wert closely related to the Egyptians. The Tjemehu were light· skinned and fair-haired, lind probllbly crossed into Nonh Africa from Europe in remote prehistory. The Berber tribes, including the Mcshwcsh and Libu, appeared from funher west to~rds the end of the New Kingdom as tbe Sahan became more arid. These put pressure on the older established peoples, who were doubtless also suffering. This ultimately led to mass settlement in Egypt.

On the whole, Libyan dress consisted of very linle. The basic gument was a phallus-sheath of leather attached to a waist belt . With this could be worn a cloak which covered Ihe left shoulder, with a hole for the left arm, and tied up on the right shoulder, leaving this arm free: 10 use a weapon . This ~s made of bull-hide or tbe skin of another animal, such as ginfTe or lion. Alternatively it could be made of plain coloured or panerocd cloth. There were usually coloured or patterned borden and sometimes horizontal blinds across the garment. Colours uicd were red, blue, yellow, black. and white.

The body was sometimes deconted wilh lallOOS or painting. The hair was plaited into thin plaits, and mighl be funher adorned with mud and one or more ostrich plumes. This plume was considered \'ery important, and may ha\'e indicated tribe or S13tuS. The inscriptions of Merenptah record thai Ihe defeated Libyan chief was deprived of his plume by bis followers as a mark of disgn~. Figure 48 is a Libyan chief.

Weapons included throw-sticks, javelins and the bow_ Many trihcsmen involved in the attacks on Egypt during the later New Kingdom had acquired 'copper' swords of Sca·Peoples type and a few, apparc.ndy Egyplian-style chariots. A typical warrior is shown in 49.

The Libyans did nOI usc shields. The beSt c.planalion for Ihis might be dulC the cloak fulfilled Ihis- function . It appears to be a nther thick hide or fabric garment, covering the left side and blick, leaving the right arm unimpeded to use weapons. In combat the left arm could be withdrawn to allow the clOlilk to be swung in front of the wearer, giving him greater covenge than a shield. Besides the thickncu of the material, the for~ of a miuile would be absorbed by the movement of the clOliIk as it struck. This idCll occurs elsewhere in the Near East, usually preceding the invention of shields.

The sources for 48 and 49 mainly date to the New Kingdom, but Libyan dress in earlier times was very similar. A head of a Libyan from a Middle Kingdom tomb at Beni-Hasan is shown in 49a. He wears a long, sleeveless, dull-brown shift. The appearance of 49 was most common among Libyans in the Old and Middle Kingdoms, (c.cepi for the sword), lIS were the bands crossing the chest and passing over the shoulders as in 49b. These ue made of beadwork and may hO\le been intended as some form of protection .

50,51 &; 52. NUBIAN WARRIORS

The inhabitants of Lower Nubia or WOuPal, were physically akin to the Egyptians but somewhat darker while those of Kush or Upper Nubia probably included a strong Negro element.

Clothing usually consisted of leather or animal-hide garments, and exotic skins such as lion, cheetah and antelope were favoured. Belts a.nd sashes were probably made of leather and decorated with beadwork. Jewellery made of ivory, wood, bone, shell, stone and gold was often worn. Hair was decorated with mud or arranged in rows of horizontal ringlets. This could be further adorned by ostrich plumes, headbands or leather caps.

Most tribesmen were archers, using a simple stave bow known lIS the stttfbow. Other weapons included clubs, daggers (with bulbous grips) and possibly a few javelins. Shields wert simply oval seaions of hide stretched over a fnme .

Figure 52 is a chief, from the Late New Kingdom. A more 'Egyptian' appearance would be possible among the mort settled and weahhier clements oflhe population as Egyptian cultural infiuen~ look TOOl. The Med jay, a nomadic tribe from the deserts cast of the Nile in Lower Nubia were favoured as mercenaries in Upper Egypt from the Old to the early New Kingdom. They I re probably to be equated with the 'Pan-Grave' people, whose cxcavau:d ~metuies suggest an appearance similar to figure 50.

II.

49

b

52

117

53. EARLY WARRIOR FROM CANAAN OR SYRIA c. 3200-2200 B.C.

The watch·tower found al ancient Jehrico demonstrates that wufue in the anciem Near East is almost as old as urban life and the practice of agriculture. The wealth of settlements tended to be simply regarded as a resource that could be eJ:ploited like any other in the world, thus provoking organised resistance from those in possession. This warrior dates from considerably later than the nrst evidence for warfare. He is derived from represemations in early Egyptian an, such as an ivory plaque of King Qaa of lhe lSI Dynasty. The 51h Dynasty tomb of inli at Dcshasheh contains a scene of the siege of a Canaanite town defended by warriors dressed like 53.

Finds from tombs and hoards show that weapons included javelins, daggers, flat and crescent shaped axes and maces. Small copper plates from Kfar Monash could be from some son of body armour.

54 . SUMERIAN RULER c. 3500·3000 B.C.

This figure is based on represemations in the ans of the Uruk and Jemdet·Nasr periods of Sumerian prehistory.

Early Sumerian rulers used the title EN 'lord' and their office combined both sacred and secular fuoctions. Indeed, the EN appears to have originally resided in, or very near, the temple of the city's patron deity. Du.ring the Early Dynastic period the title EN came to be applied solely to priests.

His dres5 here consists of a knee· length, wrap·around kilt of woven wool, secured by a wide waist·band. When performing in his role as a priest, however, the EN wore a 'see·throllgh' kilt made of netting, possibly because of an association of nudity with religious purity. His bair is bound with a headband, apparently indicative of his rank, and though bearded, the upper lip is clean shaven.

Anistic representations of tbe period make it clear that the bow, as well as stoutthrusling spears, was used both in hunting and in warfare. One ~presenl ation , on an Uruk period cylinder-seal, clearly depicts a bcw·armed EN sbooting arrows at his fleeing enemies. The type of bow ponrayed is characteristically doublc-curved with reflexed tips - indicating an advanced composite construction of sc:verallayers of wood, horn, and sinew. An even earlier, tbough rather mo~ ambiguous, representation of a composite bow occurs on a Halafian period vusel of c. 5000 B.C. from T ell Arpachi)'1lh, nC:1lT Mosul in nonhem Iraq.

Arrows were made of reed with arrowheads of flint, either leaf·shaped or transverse in form.

Other weapons Qnested include slings, jave lins, stone maces and copper axes.

The maiority of worrion would have dressed in a similar fashion, though their hair would have been in the style of figu res 60b and 64.

55

o

b

118 c

a

55. A lUNG OF UR c. 2600 B.C.

The source for this figure is the tomb of the LUGAL Meskalamdug ('Hero of the Good Land').

A great number and \'3riety of we:lpons were found deposited in this grlm:, induding both lunate and socketed 'chisel' axeheads of bronze, fine copper spearheads and numerous flint arrowheads, together with what could possibly be the mctal p:ms of a romposite bow.

The king is shown here with a sheepskin over his left shoulder, held at the waist by a narrow silver belt which supports a cbgger and a lapis· lazuli whelSlone. His woollen kilt has a dagged, 'neecy' hem which beOlme popular in the Early Dyn3Slic period.

The helmet, madc from a single, nat sheet of elecuum, imitates an elaborate coiffure with tWO plaits brought together and bound above the forehud, the hair at the back of the head being represented in a bun. The king's real hair howe\'er is worn loose and emerges from beneath the rim of the helmet to fall down his back.

The helmet was Ihickly padded wilh wool and lealher, this lining being SKUIW 10 the mml sh~l1 Ihrough hol~s about its rim. This padding not only kept the helmtt on the head but offered further vitll protection against the specialised socketed axe evolved by the Sumerians. These axC$, as illustrated carried by the king, hive heads cast in bronze or copper on II shon wooden shaft, often decorated with bands of gold or silver shect. The blade, with I narrow section was designed for piercing, not CUlling, and was ob\'iously evolved to defeat the protection of a copper helmet. This is by far the commonest type ofne from the Early Dynastic period though crescentic CUlling axes arc attestcd in small numbers.

The dagger ca rried by the king in I leather sheath, or in a gold, openwork scabbard, has a gold blade and in battlc would probab ly ha\'e been replaced by a copper·bladed substitute. The hilts, either of wood or lapis-lazuli could be decorated, as here, with gold granulation and gold pins.

The spear carried is of a ceremonial [}'PC, found upright in the grave, and WlS 1.80 metres in length (excluding the head). 55a and 55b illustrate two military standards shown on late Uruk and Early Dynastic period cylinder seals. 55a reprt'SenlS a temple doorway with the twO, typieal loopN doorposts, 55b is symbolic of an unknown minor deity. 5Se is the standard of the Goddess of Inanna of Uruk..

56. EARLY DYNASTIC BATTLE·CAR c. 2800·2334 B.C.

Four·wheeled banle-cars, as here illustrated, occur in military contexts from the Early Dynntic II period, and probably fell out of use in the early Akkadian period. Texts of the period describe such vehicles, giJ" GIGIR, as issued to troops going into banle. and being returned afterwards.

The battle-car's body was made from thin wooden StrutS backed with red-dyed ox·hide. The floor was very narrow, only wide enollgh for one OCCUp~OI abreast (0.45.{).56 metres) and appears to have been solid. The cab-front, as shown in 56b, was high to offer protection to the driver, though the sides were low; the floor projected back beyond the sides and the relT is often shown closed with D protective cover (56a). It is possible that the sides conceal a seat across the: back, behind the rear axle (cf. figure 58).

The solid disc wheels revolved on fixed axles with lengths between 0.70 and I metre, the actual wheels being carefully constructed from three pieces of wood in order to obtain a greater diameter than that possible from a single section oflrce·trunk. The three s.cctions were bound together with external slals or ropes, perhaps also dowelled together internally, and the whole consolicbted with eithcr a leather, reed or wood tyre. The tyre could be strengthened witf! copper hobnails as in fi8llre 58. Composite wheels such as these were monger than single.section wheels and, being large, allowed much higher speeds. The diameters of wheels from battle-cars excavated at Ur, Kish and Susa vary from 0.50 to 1.05 me\res. The wheel naves were long to prevent them wobbling on the axle.

Draughl for tbe vehicle WlIS provided by four equid., either hemiones and domesticated asStS (ANSHE), mules (ANSHE.BAR.AN), or their possible crosscs. The true horse, though possibly attested for this period under the name ANSHE.SHUL.GI does not, as yet, appear as II draught animal for banlc-can. 56c shows the method of harness· ing the team with simple rope collars, two animals actually being lInder the yoke, the outer two acting as outriggers to encourage them. The harness detail of 56f is taken from representations from Mari, which show the harness in great detail. The method of control, with reins and nose-rings, is for braking only with little or no directional rontrol possible.

119

56

b

c

e

120

A modern reconstruction of a oottle-car pulled by four donkeys managed speeds of between 10-15 mph. It should be noted that hemiones can run at grellt speed but afe poor draught-animals, they make up for this with a foul temper, hence Ihe basketwork muzzles on the headstalls! Some prot«lion is given 10 the team by a fromallrapper composed of leather SlTips, often dyed in alternate colours sueh as red and blue.

The double rein ring is in this case plain bUI they were often dccor2ttd with small figures of animals (cf. fig 57). 56d shows a common method of securing the quiver and an alternative design of chariot - this one being from Lagash.

SIX: shows a plumed charioteers helmet.

57 &: 58. EARLY DYNASTIC S UMERIAN STRADDLE AND PLATFO RM C ARS

Two-wheeled vehicles in Mesopotamia followed twO lines of de\'e:lopment. The 'pl3tform-car' (58) was apparently a simple \'ariant of the four-wheeled hanle-car with a similar high front , bUl only a seat for a single crewman instead of a cab. T he 'straddlc-car' (57) was also a vehicle for a single rider who in this case sat asnide a thick padded saddle over Ihe rear pm oftbe draught-pole. This saddle was often cover«i with leopard skin. The draught·pole could be high and arching, braced by a !hong from the front rail, (57a) or a simple sinight pole. The front rail of 57 was a single pie« of wood bent into :I U shape, and sometimes had a horizontal cross-har.

The quiver anached to the front rail contained iavelins and axes. An estra pair ofjnelins could be slung beneath the draught pole of 57, where they could be reached in action.

Riders of s!raddle-c:l" sat or stood IStride the saddle with their feet either on the fixed we or on special rulS in front of it.

Both types of vehicle were capable of higher speeds !han balt le-can, being lighter and better balanced. It seems !hut they were used as command "ehicles and for couriers in banle, though interestingly it is only the piatform-car that appears to be the fore-runner of the true chariO!.

58

121

59. SUMERIAN SP EARMAN: UR c. 2600 B.C.

This figure is based upon the foot·soldiers depicted on the so-called 'Standard ofUt', a hollow ""OGden box dccorIted with shell mosaic inlay, which once formed the sounding·box of a harp.

He is armed with I long thrusting·spear, OID.DII, which on the 'Standard', is shown IS having I lcaf·shaped head. Ezamples or lC'Iuallpearhcads excavated It Ur show a grcat variety or rorm, however, the commonest type is I ' poker ' pike-bead up to O.35m. lonl (O.68m . induding tang), square in eross·section. This type, CUt in bronu, conlinuN in use until the Akkadian period (d. fig. 59b). Spears were commonly fitted with I domed copper bun· spike and protcctive copper collan at the base of the spearhead.

For protection he ~ars I coppcr helmet, secured by a s!rap under the chin, Ind a long cape, studded ""ilh coppcr disks, Ind rastened Itlhe neck. Made either ofthidt felt or, more probably, ox·hide, capes ofthi, type appear 10 have been I common solulion to the problem of deflecting or absorbing missiles and blows in the absence of I shield (cf. figs. 48 and 73). The Sumerian two-handed spears would, in any case, have mlde the use ofl shield difficult, and indec'd, the earlieS! Sumerian sbields arc carried by special shieldbearers. Leather capes were probably dyed red or grccn, while felt capes would be a neutral buff, or off·white.

59a illustrates an alternative form ofhclmel, in this case excavated from the Royal Cemetery al Ur where it was worn by one of the soldiers killed 10 guard his king in Ihe afterlife. The inside of the helmet was thickly padded with woven stnw .

60 '" 61. KING EANNATU M AND SOLDIERS: LAGASH e. 2500 B.C.

These figures, based on the well·known 'Stela of the Vultures', Clrved to celebnlle the triumph of Eannatum and Lagash's patron god, Ningirsu ('The Lord ofGirsu')' at the battle of the Gu-cdinl, show the king leading his saldien inlo bailie.

£annltum is armed with a bronu sidtle-sword, I slashing wC1lpon invented in Sumer allhis time, tbe shape possibly being derived from I flint·bladed original. The culting-cdge is on the outside of the curved blade.

He wears • coppcr helmet. ill anilicial C1Its, Ind bun of hair It the bad, dosely resemble the earlier helmet of Meskalamdug (lig. 59). His long hair falls fr~ly over his shoulders.

On Ihe lIela, Bannatum is shown wcaring a sheepskin, passed over tbe left shoulder, above a long, flcc:cy kill , which logether arc often referred 10 using the Grcck It:rm of'ltaunakc:s'. Around this time in the long Early Dynastic period (E.D. II lb) it became the fashion, in Sumer and Sumerian influenced arcas, to wear a kilt which WIS e ither of woven wool giving I OctCC effect, or WIS actual.l}' a sheepskin, 50 tanned IS to retain tbe wool.

Bannatum, who was Ipparently of Amorite descent IS he had a second Tidnum tribal name, 'Lumma', was nOied for his great height. He grew sufficiently powerful to assume the title 'King of Kish', gaining suzeraint}' of Abhak, Uruk, Ur, Umma and Mari, as well as Kish, and crushed an Elamire invasion of Sumcr.

61. His soldiers wcar similar, though less elaborate, copper helmers with extended, integral check'picccs. Several acrual cumples were found during excavations a( Girsu, Ihe main cit}' of the LallSh sme.

For protection of the upper·body, crossed leather bellS, much la ter known as Ill/iull or uuiula, arc worn. This form of armour, in numerous varia t ions, can be traced in use in Mcsopotamialo atlelSt the 7th century B.C. and was probably the ancestor oflhc later orienlal 'mi rror' armours. Here the crossed beltllre pllin, though other city-statcs (cf. figs. 62 and 63) employed Iludded versions whicb exhibit their anCCSlty in Ihe earlier studded protective capa. The advantages ove.r the la"utype of prolection would seem principally to be I greater freedom or movement for the arms, combined with I much improved economy of material.

The large, 01', rectangular Sumerian shield, fltSt ilIwttated on the 'Vulture Stela', probably hastened Ihe abandon· ment of the protccth'e Clpc. Made of dyed olhide and having nine (not six IS is often stated) round, coppcr bosses on itl face , each shield is shown as being carried by a special shieldbcarer slInding to the left of each spcarm2D on the stel • . This type of shield continued in usc in Mesopoumia until the end of the Ur III periDd, being then completely displaced by the lighter, less cumbersome Amarite shields (cf. figs. lib, 74b, 76, 77, 79, 80, 84). Both spearmen and Iheir shield·bearers arc shown armed with socketed copper or bronze axes. The spears arc long O/D.DA shown carried levelled II waist height, lOme six rows ofspearhcads projecting beyond the formation's wall of shields.

122

59

•

60

T a

61

b

60a illustrates the emblem of Lagash's divine-standard, the lion-headed eagle: or IMDUGUD bird, a5~iatc:d with the: city', patron god, Ningirsl.l. This standard is dc:piClcd on the reverse: oflhe 'Vultu~ Stela', carried by a goddw standing bebind the viaorious Ningirsu.

The standards ofUmma's gods were carried inlO battle and a fragmentary military scene: from MaTi (tbe 'Standard' of Mati) illustra tes a ~cred ·stlndard bome by 111 shaven headed priest. In blink these standards appear to have been carried by priests dressed as ordinary infantrymen.

60b shows the typical hainlyle of this period when no hdmet was worn.

62 & 63. NORTH SUMERIAN SOLDIERS: MARl AND KlSH c. 2600·2500 B.C.

Though situated on the: middle: Euphrates, in present-day Syria, the Scmilic-spcaking diy-state of Mari was rullurally Sumerian.

62 with his distinctive long beard, represents a high-nnking offietr or king. He wean 1 low, nat hat, also 1(tested at Kish and seemingly typittl in linguinically Semitic areas orSumer, being later worn by Akkadian offietrs, high officials and governors.

He is armed with a straight-bladed, flat-axe and, over his right shoulder, wears 1 vadalion ortigure 61 '5 rl/.l iul/. . This less spec.ialised .ersion could be worn as Ihe wearer, or situation, required, either over the chest, or even over tbe helmet as in 63b.

123

633 shows the type of helmet, square-cut beard and clean·shaven upper lip preferred by Mari's warriors. ClllIriotetrs Olherwise: dressed identically 10 the crew of figure 56, 3ltllough noble crewmen tended 10 wear Ihe 'kaun3kes'.

Mari 's archers (63), used Ihe double-curved, or 'Scythian', composile bow common to all the city·states of Sum cr. This figure, derived from 3 rdief showing a siege scene, is the most unambiguous representation ofSum~rian military archery. On the re:liefthe archer is shown shielded by a chariotetr holding a very large reed siege shield or pavise, identical to figure 61. Simple quivers would resembl~ figure 70a.

Soldiers of Ihe ci ty,slale of Kish had a similar style of dress, though the srudded /urinu are nOI in evidence.

64. SUMERLAN SUNGER e. 3000-2330 B.C.

This figu re is g~nerally representative of the light skirmishers or NIM soldiers in Sumerian armies Ihroughoulthe Early Dynastic period.

His luirstyle is typical of most city·states during the prehistoric and early E.D. periods. Completely shaven heads only appcsr to hne become the fashion later in the south ofSumer; the nonhem, Semitic.speaking stales, always tended 10 fnour beards and long hairstyles.

This man is armed with a simple sling ofplailed leather or straw, for which both stone and baked-clay shot is attested, in grellt quantities, from many sites. During the Early Dynastic period, light troops such as these were probably coll5cripted from shepherds, of which there were many types, 'who were most likely to be skilled in the use of the sling. While a few may have been issued with helmets and weapons from the temple and palace workshops it is probable t.hat the majority were: nOI 50 equipped, the numbers available being the limiting factor.

The sling continued 10 be a popular weapon, together wilh Ihe military throwstick or boomef1l.Dg. gish S HUG, or gis" ELLiG.A, in the Akkadian and Ur III Dynasties (when it was c:alled dal-ush·us, or waspum in Akkadian. Both terms art probably onomatopodc). These later military slingers were probably identically equipped to other soldiers of the period.

63

~ .

~1' ~

~

b 64

124

65. SARGON O F AKKAD c. 2330 B.C.

Sugon, or Shuru.kin, appears here as dressed on an early victory stela, wearing a fleecy 'k.aunakcs' little different from Ihat of Eannalum (fig . 60).

The king's long hair is plaited, the two plaits being brought up around the forehead and held in place by a melal headband. The hllir at the bacir. of the head is lied info a bun. This hairstyle is obviously very similar 10 that reprtsenled by Ihe helmet of Meskalamdug (fig . 55) and is a style favou red by high'T'IInking officials and officers of the Dynasly of Alr.lr.ad.

On the Sleia, Sargon is armed with a ceremonial, round·headed mace. Here, however, the king is iliustT'llled wilh a crescentic DC typical of Ihe period.

The parasol·bearer, who is present for the first time in Mesopotamian an, is dressed almost identicauy 10 the infantry of figure 61, and thi, indicates thaI most ofSargon's soldiers were similar, differing little from Early Dynastic types.

Sargon of Akkad was the greatest figure of the age. He campaigned in areas far beyond Sumer, and for the first time united the IrtlI under one rute. His origins arc obscure hut were probably not quite as lowly as later sources suggest. The cupbeuer ofUr.Zababa, the King ofKish, Sargon survived his master's cvenhrow by his great rival, the powerful ENS! or Umma, Luga]·zagesi ~ who ruled most of soulhern Sumer from his capilal al Uruk. For several years Sargon appears 10 have built·up a following, possibly in the new city of Agade, or Alr.k.ad, which he seems to have found ntar Kish while still a servant ofUr·Zababa. In 2316 B.C. Sugon moved against Luga]·ugesi and liberated Kish, whose citizens swore etemalloyalty to Sugon in gratitude. Sargon probably adopted the name we know him by, 'Tile Legitimate King', and the title 'King of Kish', at this lime.

Following the conquest ofSumer, Sargon campaigned in southern Iran against a coali tion of four kings led by the king of Awan, a powerful kingdom centered on the southern Zagros mountains, and established his own governors in the conquered terri tories ~ most prominently in Elam. Campaigns to the nonh·west resulted in the subjection of the Syriln states of TUl1ul, Mari, Yarmuli and Ebla, and control of the cedar forests and silver mines of the Lebanon. Sargon app(ars also to have fought an arduous campaign in Anatolia to safeguard Aklr.adian merchant colonies in Purushlr.anda (near modern Kayser i), and may even have sailed south to Oman and possibly led an ex· pedition to C~te. What is cenain is that all Sargon's campaigns outside Sumer and Akkad Iud clear economic objectives.

In his old age, afler nearly fifty years of rule, Sargon was faced with luge-scale revolts in Sumer Dnd the nonb of Mesopotamia, II one point being besieged in Agade itself. In both case the rebels failed. Sargon led his troops 10 battle and scal1ered them. However, the revolts were an omen of tbings 10 come for the great king's successors.

66. AKKADIAN G UARDSMAN IN CEREMO NIAL DRESS c. 2316 B.C.

This figure is one of a file of high officials or guardsmen who Ire shown accompanyin, Sargon on his stela_ They carry large, wide·bladed axes resting on their left shoulden, the tOP of the curved shaft above each bl3de Mving decoration in the form of a snarling lion 's mask.

The ' lr.aunakes' of the guardsmen differs from the king's in having several fleecy tiers and a very wide fringe over the left arm. This form of dress rapidly replaces the older ' lr.aunues' in the A1r.kadian period. When dressed for battle however, Aklr.adian guardsmen appear as figures 69 and 70 from the time of Manishtushu. Earlier, in Sargon's reign, they probably resembled figu re 61, though armed with axes.

H igh Akkadian officials, and possibly guardsmen, might wear a round'brimmed flat ha t as shown in figure 62.

67 . AKKADIAN SOWIER e. 2270-2218 B.C.

This man is one of several lMt Ippcar on a fragmentary Akkadian uell which is probably 10 be dated to the re ign of Manishtushu (2269-2255 B.C.).

He wears a fringed, wrap-around kilt with a narrow belt, one end of which hangs loose at the back. he is prolected by Ullittu, and wears I copper helmet with a leather ncek-guard or avenlll!.

67a ilIu5lrates the form of quiver carried by archers whose appearance is otherwise idmticalto figs. 70b and 7Oc. The wscl or tail attached to the base of the quiver is shown on painted panery as earty as 5000 B.C. and is also depicted on several Early Dynutic cylinder seals.

125

65

68

a

67

68. AKKADIAN AUXILIARY ARCHER c. 2250 B.C.

Based upon representations on the cylinder-scal of an Akkadian governor, which depict him on a tour of his province esconed by his bodyguard of awciliary archers.

Allhough his hair is plaited about his head in Akkadian fashion. his shon boots with up-turned toes (which actually make hill-climbing easier becau5C of the loe's springiness) are typical of highland costume throughout the Near East during the period of this book, and mark this man out as an easterner from the Zagros foothills.

He is armed with an Akkadian bow and quiver and wears a simple:, wrB!l"around kilt.

Warriors such as these appear on Mesopotamian \erracoua plaques of the Ur III period and $Cern of len 10 have been used as mercenaries.

126

69

d

70

a

b

c

69 & 70. NARAM·SUEN AND SOLDIERS c. 2254·2218 B.C.

The source for these figures is the famous and of len illustrated 'Victory Stcla' Oflhc Akbdian king. Naram-Sucn (or Naram-Sin), which ~lebr:l!cd the dcfe:lt of S:iluni, chief of the Lullubi.

69 is Naram·Sucn, depicted al the head of his troops on the stela. He wears a bowl-shaped helmet decorated wilh a triple row of horns to symbolize and proclaim his divinity (most Akkadian kings aflu Sargon assumed d ivine honours in their lifetime). His neck is prou:clI:d by a wide avcmail, probably of leather, attached 10 the rur rim of the: helmet; while about his neck is worn a distinClivt, double-s tranded necklace:.

The king wcars a metal bel l Dt the waist and a baldric over his right sboulder, both of which pus beneath I fringed shawl that is carried over the left shoulder and tied at the hip. Otherwise the king appears heroically naked, a.rmed with a single-curve composite bow and a long-handled, chisel-bladed axe.

127

70a is one of several spearmen thaI are represented on Ihe slda ad\'~ncing behind tbe king. He is armed with a long spear (Gl D.DA) carried, in a manner fits! apparent in the Early Dynast ic period, \'enically and resting in the crook of the righl arm. The spearhead (EM£) was generally of poor -quality, wrought copper behind which could be filled a melal collar (GU) weighing 250g. In his left hand he carries a long-hand.led, wide·bladed, alIe.

None of Ihe spearmen on the std~ is depicted with a shield, probably because they were tOO cumbersome to use in the wooded, mountainous, bnds oflhe Lullubi. Howeve r, shields are attested in Old Babylonian copies of Akka· dian textS where they are described as made orleather, and of a type that ' reached down to the graund'. Clearly such shields (E. lB. UR.ME) were very similar to Early Dynastic examples (fig. 61).

70b and d show the twO sacred standards depicted on the stela. 70b represents a divine weapon in the fonn of a GAMLU axe surmounted by a scorpion.man or a winged bull. 70d is a standard in the fonn of a sacred uc:c: .

Bmh standards are crowned wilh twO groups of Streamers or ribbons and are carried by dean-shaven priesl5, who wear long kilts lied with an extensively fringed waistband. Each is armed with an oe.

10e. The archers are dressed identically 10 tbe spearmen, with wrap.around k.i1tS secu red with a wide waistband. They are anned with single-cur\"C composite bows, the arrows being carried in a large quiller over the right shoulder.

All the soldiers wear domed copper helmel5 (SAGSHU) which M\"c large integral cheek'pieces, the nape of the neck. being protected by a leather aventail.

1 1. AKKADIAN SOLDIER c. 2270·2218 B.C.

Based on a fragme ntary Akkadian stda from Nasriyah, Ihis soldier wean a helmet of plaited leather or retd, to which is attached a long leather aventail. Eblaite soldiers appear 10 have worn similar hdmels.

For prOlection he wears an early version of tutillu, wrapped around the body, but otherwise similar to fig . 62. He has both a long.handled axe, and a dagger (of which only the pommel is visible) thrust Ihrough his belt, and appears on the stel~ presenting a captured dagger to the king.

His long, fringed kilt and distinctive armament may indicate that he is a royal guardsman, like the earlier fig. 66.

Other soldiers on Ihe stela carry objecrs wbic.h could be reed shields with shoulder straps (7Ia) though this is uno:rtain.

71

128

72. ANNUBAN INI, CHIEF OF iHS LULLtJBJ e. 2200 B.C.

This Lul1ubi chieftain had himself represented in a rock-carving at Sar·i·pul in the central Zagros region, in a man· ncr reminiscent of Akkadian royal iconography.

He ... ·ears II hat or turban ovc:r his coiled hair and a shon , sheepskin kilt. His weapons are II composite bow and a he:il\'Y axe or GlL\fL U, a weapon so effective tMt it became increasingly usociated with the might of divine vtn~C't.

a

72 73

73. LULLUBI WARRIOR c. 2254-22 18 B.C.

This W1Irr10r wean the l)'Pied garment of II mountaineer; II goatskin tied at Ihe righl shoulder, which probably afforded some prolection in battle (nole, for example, figs. 102, 103 and 167).

The cruar.tCleriSlic long piguil and shaved scalp appear to hll\'e b«n features ofse\'eral highland peoples, It well as Ihe Elamiles, al Ihis time and laler.

73a shows 1'01'0 Lullubi e:ilpli\'CS in an Akkadian necksu)Cx. Foreign male prisoners w~re usually massacred or lransponed to form forced-labour camps.

73b with his pigtail and side-lock is probably a Gutian, who, to the Mesopotamian mind, were nOI distinguishable, from the mass of barbarian highlanders.

Early Hurrian warr iors, dose neighbours of the lullubi, probably dressed very si milarly 10 figu re 73.

l ullubi, Gutians and Hurrians were probably employed as mercenaries and subject troops in large numbers by the Akbdian kings and the later kings of the Third Dynasty of Ur (Shulgi Ttalrds victories against the Lullubi and numerous nonherl"' campaigns in Hurrian territory).

The l ullubi warriors on Nanm-Suen's 'ViclOry Slda' are shown armed with ei lher spears or bows.

129

74. SHULGI, KING OF UR c. 2094·2047 B.C.

Although this figure is derived from a rock·relief of Shulgi, the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, it is in fact representative of Mesopotamian royal dress from the end of the Dynasty of Akkad to the fall of the First Dynasty of Babylon.

The king wears a triple·stranded belt, the 'badge' of heroes since the Early Dynastic period, and carries an axe and composite bow. Over his plaited and coiled hair he wears a turban or hat. Unlike the Akkadian kings his long beard is CUt square, though his necklace seems to have been closely worked after Akkadian originals.

Soldiers of the Nco-Sumerian empire probably differed very linle from later Akkadians in dress (fig. 70). A Sumerian literary to::t , which imagines Ur·Nammu, the first king of the Third Dynasty ofUT, arriving in the Netherworld (following his death in battle), lists tv.'0 complete setS of rontemporary military equipment. The first set is of a mace, a powerful bow (BAN. GAL), a quiver, arrows, knife, and a dyed leather waterbonlej the second comprises a long spear (GlD.DA), a leather shield ' reaching down to the ground' (E./B.UR.LV. US.SA) and a battle·axe. The former set is clearly that of a fully equipped archer, the latter that of a spearman.

By the end of the Neo-Sumerian Empire the large Sumerian shield seems to have fallen out of use in favour of a smaller more manageable shield of Amorite origin. Such a shield, made from a single animal skin stretched over two crossed formers, is shown on a cylinder·seal ofSilulu, a king of Ashur ofc. 2000 B.C., and illustrat~ by 74a. Other than replacing figure 74's bow with the shield, Silulu appears dressed identically to the earlier king ofUr.

a

74

75. MOUNTED MESSENGER c. 2300·1600 B.C.

Figures, essentially similar to that illuSlfated, depicting the riding of equids (hemiones, asses and, eventually, horses) occur frequently in early second millennium B.C. an throughout the Near East.

Throughout this period riders adopted the so-called 'donkey·seat ', necessary because of the slight, sharp withers of asses and hemiones which, for reasons of comfon and security of seat, forced the rider to sit on the rump of the animal.

13{)

The donkey-seal conlinued in use for horse riding, which, Ihough al firsl rare (and considered rather undignified - a chariol, or mule as mounl sccms 10 have been preferred) became increasingly common after aboul 1700 B.C., falling out of use in the laic ninth cenfUry B.C. (d. fig. 121). That it took over 800 YC1l rs 10 appreciate the unsuitability of the donkey-seat for use with the horse, which has more ample witheu for a comfortable forward seat, and ),CI has kidneys vulncrable 10 a rear-mounled rider's bouncing when moving al speed, siresses Ihe IOllllacil of any desi re :al Ihal lime 10 improve mounted wufare beyond the capabilities of Ihe chariot.

This rider, derived from a McsopOl:amian lenacona plaque ofthc: Third Dynasty of Ur, uses a plaited leather belly. band on his mount 10 help keep his scat, either by holding OntO it, or by pushing his knees betv.'een it and the animal's nanks. A nose-ring and rope serve 10 regulate the animal '5 speed, the rider's stick being used for directional conlrol.

Only rarely arc riders shown carrying weapons al this date, and textual sources make it dear thai Ihey funCiioned in mililary contuls only as KOUIS or messengers.

76 & 77. INFANTRYM.EN, FlRST DYNASTY OF ISIN c. 2017·1794 B.C.

76 is a rcconstruCiion oflhe appearance of spearmen ofthe laiC U r HI and early Isin Dynasties, based on representational, lextual and archaeological sourccs.

He wears a pl:ailed cord, lealher, or reed helmel (described in luter lUIS of the Old Babylonian period as: lIubiJU Jhll lIJhlim, 'hc.lmels of ropt'), similar to that worn by figure 71. This type ofhel lT!el is shown being worn by mounted messengers or officers of the Isin Dynasty and probably indicates a shortage of bronze in Mesopotamia during this unsenled period. The helmet's crest is possibly formed by leaving the loose ends of the plaited material uncut. Bot h helmel and cresl were probably dyed either green or red, though it is possible that they were left a natural colour - yellowish·brown in Ihe CUt of goat lealhtr.

1)1

This soldier is equipped with the t)opt of Amorite shield adopted in Mesopotamia at this time. Texts from isin, dealing with the manufacture ofleather goods in pal~ce works.hop5, usc an Akkadian loanword, kaboblllll, to describe shields of this kind. The materials used to make them included gOOt and sheep leather, often described u 'hairy', so if undyed the finished product would most probably be black, or monIed black and white in colour. The usc: of oxhido; and 'wild' oxhides for the construction of some shields possibly suggests that [he tradit ional large Sumerian shield WliIIS still made in small numbers.

T he man's spear is of the long·shafted type which was probably known as slrllkurgalllllll , or 'big needle', known since the Early Dynastic period but now gndually going out of usc.

Texts from Isin also mention the produetion of leather b3gs for bows, and reed quh'ers for arrows.

77 is a light·armed soldier and is possibly an Amorite auxiliury.

He c:mies an I\ morite shield and is armed with twO javelins and a bron1.t sickle·sword. The sickle·sword was a f:wouriu:, though expensh'e, weapon used widdy in the Near EaSt following its invention during the third millen· nium B.C. By the Ur III period the weapon's blade was in general longer and deeper in rel3tion to the shaft, produc· ing an extremely efficient, balanced, slashing sword.

18. AAMU OR MARTU BEDOUIN

The nomadic peoples who lived in southern Palestine, Sinai, and the euttro destrt of Egypt were known to the Egyptians by such vague terms as 'Sand·Dwcllcu' , Attn/jill ('witd-onu'), IUJlltru, ('pillar·folk', a reference to the SlOnes used to mark their routes), and Aamlt or ' lhrow-5tick people'.

T hese people are Aamu as depicted on the walls of the Middle Kingdom tomb of Khnumhotep at Beni· Hasan. T hey are shown visiting the nomarch with their familit5 in order to trade. The leading warrior here is dressed in a characteristic 'coat or many colours', a highly decorated, p3l1erned, slee\'eless woollen garment . The second warrior wears a pallerncd, wrap-around kilt instead. Colours used were red, blue nnd while. The people were lighl' skinned with bl~ck w~vy hait ~nd thin, pointed beards. Over his shoulder the leading warrior carries that necessity of desen lire, a waterskin.

Weapons included short , bronze·headed spears, axes, daggers, slings, throw5ticks, and the 5IU\'e, or simple bow, Arro ..... s were carried in tubular leather quivers.

132

On its saddle of plaited sticks the ass is loaded with a simple leather bellows, (used for the smelting of bronze -this panicular group ue obviously smiths or 'tinken'), a waterskin, and a pair of javdins.

These figures are also representative of the nomadic tribesmen who migrated in large numbers from the Syrian steppe and into the fenile cre$(ent during the late second millennium B.C. (20th· 18th centuries B.C.)

These western nomads were called MARTU, or AMURRIM, 'westerners', by the Mesopotamians, though they are generally known now by the Biblical 'Amorites'.

Haled and despised by the settled Mesopotamians, the MARTUwcre nevertheless employed as agrieulrurallabourers and merctnarics from the late Early Dynastic period. By the Third Dynasty ofUr, however, Amorile raiding and plundering Iud become so serious lhat a great waU, named: Muriq-Tidllllm, 'which kecps out the Tidnum' (an Amorite tribal group), was constructed in the reign of Shu-Suen. It was 270 km. long, and crossed over both the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers, on the desert fringe of the empire. The wall was finally penetrated in the reign of Ibbi-Sin, and the widespread Amorite incursions contributed to the coilapse of the kingdom of Ur,

79 80

79, 80 &: 81. INFANTRY: FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON e. 1850-1595 B.C.

These arc based on the numerous representations of soldiers and military scenes on terraconu of the Old Babylonian period. A.s such they illustrate the soldiers of Babylon, Eshnunna, Larsa, and A$bur_

19 is based on a terraCOlla plaque from Ur, lmd resembles the earlier figure 77, 5ugg"ting that the laller figure is indeed an Amorill!. He wtllTS • simple wrap-around kilt with a triple·stranded btll. The btlt passing over the right shoulder is probably a baldric for his sickle-sword.

His shield, of Amorite type. features tWO additional, venical, supporting Struts between the crossed fonners orthe typical 'X' framework. This produces a shield with straight, rather than concave, sides. The animal's tail has bten retained on the hide for decorative effect .

Two short javelins are carried behind the shield.

133

80 is derived rrom a terracotta discovered at Kish and sho~ a well-equipped soldier or Hammulllpi's kingdom, a sabllm Jdbitum.

His head is protected by a conical helmet, which could either be or bronze. or plaited cord (cf. fig. 76). On his chest he wears a new rorm or tutiUIl which ambits two sets or double straps supporting, D nd subordinate in protect..i\'t value to, a round, bronze, breastplate or irtllm.

An early Old Babylonian ttxt provides the inrorm.alion that 32 shields, lIaiHlbu, could be made rrom 8 oxhides, and 2 small shields made rrom the left-overs. Clearly the larger shields are or the Amorite type, as carried by this figure, though the small shields would be 1m than hair this siu, and were probably carried by the light troops like figure 79. Leather items in Babylonia had to be regularly rubbed with vegetable oil to prevent their drying and cracking in the intense heat or summer, and administrative talS record the issue or oil to soldiers 'ror rubbing shields'. This practice is also mentioned in the Bible, where Saul's leather shield is left 'unanointed' with oil.

He is armed with a heavy,long·handled axe, or GAMLU, which WIIS the usual weapon orthe fully-equipped ba 'irom, or sabum kibitum. Other :u:e types aHested at Mari were the P'Ullu, agowltlkhum, and the khtlssil1l1um - which had a bronze blade weighing 650g. The lauer weapon occurs in pre-Sargonic contexts as the haubll1u and was clear· Iy a common weapon, and is possibly to be identified with the chiseJ·bladed type or socketed·axe.

BOa illustrates several differenltypes or equipment and weaponry, or which either some, or all, could be carried by soldiers like figure SO. These include large military thrownicks, tilpanum or Jhub, shon thrusting·spears or javelins, and abdomen protectors, kUTbisi usll, or woven reed which increased the coverage or the tmittu.

81 is a wcll-equipped archer. He is armed with a simple, Amorile, bow or qasnlUm, and wears a tubular leather or bronu quiver slung over his shoulder on two straps. The other pair or mllps form a simple tllrittu and probably suppons a side·arm, either a dagger or a sickle·sword.

He is drcucd in an elaborate, wrap-around kilt , which is panly edged with a multi-coloured, woollen trim that becomes V1:ry popular rrom this time on. A leather or metal belt is wom about the waist, and a decorated linen shin. The man 's hair is CUt shon and secured al the back with a metal hairband.

813 shows the headgear common al Mari. Obviously derived rrom the typical flat h:n orthe Early Dynaslic and Akkadian periods the hal was made or sort, while or brovro material and secured on the head with a cord above the brow.

a

81

134

82. A KING OF MARl IN CEREMONIAL DRESS c. 1760 B.C.

This figure is taken from wall·paintings deooraling the palace of King Zimri·Lim at Mari. Zimri·Lim's palace was renowned for ils splendour and many travelled to Mari just to see it. Unfortunately for Zimri·Lim, one of these: sightseers WlIS Shamshi·Adad, king of Ashur, and he rather overstayed his welcome! The palace WlIS eventually burnt [0 the ground by Hammurapi, King of Babylon.

Although the king wears constricling, ceremonial robes he appears armed, with a dagger and a throwstick thrust through his belt. In battle, the king would probably ride in a platform-car or an early chariot.

The robe could be of green, brown or white cloth, with green, brown, red and white muhi-coloured trim. The double belt has a narrower, centnll StnlP tied at the back, the loose end of which (clasped in a silver fmial) may be $ten al the right hip.

On his head the king wears I lall, white crown or hat which is to be compared with the lower crowns or turbans of Mesopotamian kings (fig. 74). A long ribbon hangs from the brim of the crown down the king's back. Ham· mUnlpi, on his monuments, appears wearing long, rAther plain, ceremonial robes, but is olherv.·i5t very similar to figure 74, who is actually dressed for war. Shamshi·Adad I, on a damaged figured relief, wears very similar robes to Zimri·Lim, though he wields a chisel-bladed axe.

83. OLD BABYLONIAN PERIOD INFANTRY: MARl c. 1760 B.C.

This warrior i.s also derived from wall-paintings discovered al the palace of Zimri-Lim.

His head is protected by a while, padded, turban with a double neckguard, wrule a long ye llow cape, possibly of goat leather, protects his body. The shon kilt is white wit h multi-coloured blue trim and a black sash or belt. Similar soldiers appear wearing shon-sleeved, 'y'· necktd lunics similar 10 figure 81.

He is armed with I socketed bronzc-headed speat. known as Jhinnum (a name attested only at Mari) or Jh uiekurum. These spears are depicted as slightly taller than a standing man, the much longer shuiekurg(ll/um is only rarely mentioned, and falls Ollt of use completely by [he end of this period. His other weapon is a [hrowstick, rilpanum. A governor of Terqa sent 30 of these: weapons ~s a gift to [he pala~ .

Shields possibly occur at Mari in the written record as Jinnaru, though they are nowhere illustrated. Goli;th 's shield is referred 10 in the Bible using a Hebrew loan-word derived from sinn(l/u. Arrows are mentioned in large numbers in Mari ttxlS. Shamshi·Adad I requtsltd 10,000 10 be made at Mari's palace workshops. The sling, WGspum, 11so occurs, a tablel from Shemshanl lists 500 slings.

8]a shows an allern;tive type of helmet worn at Mari. This version appears (0 hu'e:a bronze bowl with wide leather ch«:kpieces Ind a double padded-leather browband.

, a

Il5

84. OLD BABYLONIAN PERIOD INFANTRY: EBLA c. 1900 H. C.

Several warriors, dressed identically to this, appear on \I stone ritual libation trough discovered at Tell Mardikh, the ancient city of Ebla. Following the sack of Ebla by Nar:lm·Suen, Ebla dwindled in importance (though earlier, c. 2500 B.C., both Mari and Ashur seem to have bten subject to the kings ofEbla) only to bt revived as the c:lpital of an Amorite kingdom in the early second millennium S.c. This Amorite city was destroyed in c. 1600 B.C. by ei ther Hanusilis I, or Mursilis I, during a Syrian campaign of the Hittite kings.

This warrior carries an Amorite shield and is armed with a shon spear or javelin, although other warriors on the trough are armed with javelins and throwsticks, and do not carry shields.

He wears a knee·length, fleecy, woollen garment, which was probably na tural off·white: in colour.

Like figures 77 and 78 this man is representative of the mass of early Amorite wa rriors.

85. EARLY CHARIOTRY c. 1800·1600 B.C.

This is based on representat ions ofa horse·drawn chariot from II Syrian cylinder-seal of the: 18th-17th centuries B.C.

The warrior's long pigtail suggeSts that he is a nonh Syrian, possibly even a Hillitc. He wears a long, shon-sleeved coat with decorated hem and edges reminiscent of the later Syrian mail coats which also overlapped and fastened at the front (cf. fig. 115). His waist belt, which supportS a tubular bronze quiver, ties at the front, the loose end hanging down to the knee. A shon sword is carried through the waistbch, and a bronze helmet protects the warrior's head.

A second crewman, identically dressed and equipped with a quiver, is depicted on the seal climbing into the back of the chariot.

85

a

136

T he true chariot, ~ light vehicle ..... ith two, spoked, wheels and drown by t ..... o or more horses, appears to h~\'e been developed in the Near East from the earlier platform-car during the early second millennium B.C. It docs not seem to have been introduced from oUlSide the art'll, and llithough various Indo-European and other, non-Semitic speaking, peoples c:ame to be su ongly associllted ..... ith it, they did not invem it.

Pla tform-ca rs are shown with cross·bar wheels, disc wheels ..... ith Cl::ntral cut-outs, late in the third millennium, and spoked wheel, (a logial developmem [0 produce yet lighter and Ill rger wheels) appear soon ~rter in the early second millennium B.C. Though four·spoked wheels are the commonest types, six· and eight·spoked wheels occur quite frequently (ten. to twentyc::ight-spoked wheels are attesled in T ranscaucasia) alibis time. Early spoked whttls oRen have small re inforcing strutS where the spoke enters the felloe in order to evenly dist ribute the pressure at this point.

85m shows the from ofa modified pilltform Cllr shown on a terraeolta from Uruk of the Old Babylonian period. This vehicle, shown in typical, distoned perspective, has four-spoked wheels identical to those of 85, and the same double-curved draught-pole. Its single crewman is similar to the rider of figure 75. Unlike earlier platform cars, the front frame has no backing.

Early chariots il!usuated in Mesopotamia, Syria and Anatol ia seem to show thaI the wheels revolved on centraUy. plae«! axles. Though this impression may only be the result of the ratber crude represemations of early cbarion extan1; a Cl::mral axle on II fut-moving vehicle would result in the cab rocking backwa rds and fOf'A'lIrds, esj)«ially if the crew tried to move about in iI. Unless wc accept that euly ch~riots were unbalane«!, rather slow vehicles, il seems probable that the axle was fixed al the rear of the cab.

A slightly earlier, Old Babylonian, representation of a chariot shows a type which is even closer in form to the platform-car, even to the extent ofa rear seat for the single, noble, crewman. Ho ..... ever, both th is vehick, and figure 85, ahibit a significant changt in harnessing practice. Instead of the inefficitm haltcrs orfigurc 56, which probably had a choking effect on the draught-team when moving Dt speed, ~ 'yoke"\Saddle' was used 50 thai the m~in elTort of traction was t~ken on the horse's shoulders, across which the yoke-saddle lay.

In sh~pe the yoke·saddle resembled an invened 'Y', the top of which was fo rmed by a aleite reel on later Egypli~n examples. T he finial this lopped, and the legs of the saddle, were formed from le:lther-covered wood. Near the end of each kg was a hole through which were taken the ends of the ncckstrap which kept the yoke·saddk in place, the legs lying across the horse's shoulders. Some representa tions seem to indicate tha t a backing clement was also present (see figure 119b). In the early second millennium the finial of each yoke-saddle was decorated with horsehair or woollen tufts.

T he yokes at this time appear to have been formed from a simple, genlly curved, pole. Since the chariot noor was deliberately kept low to facilitate mounting and to keep the cemre of gravity of the vehicle as low as possible, the dnught pole comprised a sballow 'S' shape, running beneath the cab noor for extra strength.

Sevenl designs of cMriot ab are apparent in this early period; a type of open, square, framework is shown on Anatolian 5Cll1 impressions. Syrian representations show a similar, 5Olid-sided cab, as well as the advanced, heat-bem framework of 85 thai became standard unl il fifteenth century B.C. (cr. fig . 86a). The curving element joining the cab is a wooden cab-front and draught-pole support.

T he horse, possibly known in " I.esopotamia from the Early Dynastic period under the name ANSHE.zI.ZI or ANSHE.SHUL.GI, is used increasingly during Ihe second millennium as a draught animal. AI that time the horse was called ANSHE.K UR.RU, or ' foreign ass' in Sumerian; in Akkadian the horse WlIS ailed sisum. The chariot itse.lf was still c:alled GI GIR.

Horse remains of the 17th/16th centuries B.C. from Bogau.oy (the sile of the ancient Hinile capital of Hauusu), and Buhen in Egypt, indic:ate that the average height, measured allhe withers, was 1.40-1.50m., in modern teuns about the height or a big pony.

South-cutern Anatolia WlIIS • noted source for horses during this period.

137

86. HYKSOS WARRIORS, l ITH AND 16TH CENTURIES B .C.

There is hardly any evidence for the appearance of real Hyksos warriors (much later Canaanite and Mitannian figures often being mis· interpreted as Hyksos). Graves of foreign soldiers excavated at Katana·Qantir in the eastern Nile Delta, the probable site of Avaris, produced weapons of Canaanite type. The wrap-around garment worn by the right·hand figure is derived from Hyksos engnlved SClnlb!i. It is a shon and simple variant of a typical Levantine garb. The left arm has been tucked inside. Weapons consisted of short spears, composite bows, daggers and small battle·axes. Daggers differed from the older Egyptian types in having. long handle instead of II ball·like grip. The nonnal axe type of the New Kingdom (shown in 13) was introduced during the Hyksos period along with the khopah. The axe shown here, however, hu a longer and narrower blade.

These figures represent the foreign retainers of the Hyksos chieftains. The infantry would be dressed and equipped like this while the charioteus would probably be beneT equipptd. Scale corslets perhaps similar to that in 15, could not be ruled out. A large proponion of Hyksos forces within Egypt would be provided by Egyptian provincial trOOPS supplied by nalive vassals, as indicated by the account of Kamose.

86a sho",-., the probable appearance of a H yksos chariot cab. The fnme is taken from an aample found in Egypt and now in the florence Museum. This is the earliest example of an Egyptian chariOt eJTWU, and must be close to, if not ident ical with, the Hyksos originals.

The simple four·spoked wheels are derived from representations on contemporary Syrian cylinder·seals (the florence chuiot's whttls lack the reinforcing struts at the junction hetwttn spoke and felloe).

Identical light chariots appear on seal impressions from Nuzi of the same date.

138

87,88,89, 90,91 &- 92. HURRI·MITANNIAN C HARIOTEE RS, 15TH CENTURY B.C.

The$C figures are derived from Egyplian represenlal.ions of Hurri-Milannian warriors and equipmenc, and from delailed descriplions of armour lypeS found in Ihe textual sources of Ihe Micannian vassal.kingdom of Arrapha. The appeal1lnce of Kassice, A!.$}'Tian, Elamite, Canaanicc, and, to a leuer excent, Egyptian cha rioc~rs would be very similar as they all uscd forms of armour of Hurrian origin.

87 is an elile charioteer wearing the exceptionally complete and heavy armour known at Nun lIS the 'armour of Hanigalbal' (H anigalbat Wl$ Ihe name used for the kingdom of Milanni in Mcsopotamia).

Scale and lamellar annour appears [0 have ~n a Hurrian invention ofaboul the 17th century B.C. Certainly all the terms used for armour in the Near East were derived from the Hurrian slraryalli, or 'coat of mail' . This ap~rs in Akkadian 1$ san·am, as saryalllli in Hittite, slliryall in Hebrew and Arabic, and as riryana in Ugarilic and Egyptian. Therefore. although the chariot itself was not of Hurr i-Milllnnian origin, one may say that the 'chariot·system', the C(lmbinalion of\'ehide wilh a heavily-armoured warrior-clus, was. This revolutionary C(lncept enabled the Hurri· Mitannians 10 establish a large and powerful kingdom in nonhern Me~pot3mia and Syria in the 16th century B.C.

This man's armour, as described in the Nuti lexlS, comprises 500 large bronze scales for Ihe body, 500 smaller bronze scales for Ihe long sl~ves, aklru, protecting the arms, and 200 small bronze scales for Ihe helmet or gurpifll. A complete armour of this type weighed over 24 kg. It is dear ,h.atthey C(luld be made ofsca1c, sewn on a leather base, or of true, interlaced, lamellae.

Individual armour plates we re called kurs;mru, after the Akkadian for a snake, kursilldu, an analogy no doubt sug· gested by the latter's scales. The painting and tinning of alternate bands of armour scales at this lime may even have been suggested by the highly patlerned skins of wild snake~ .

The warrior's neck is protected by a high bronze likku, or collar, 3 typical feature of Ihe suits of armour of ' his period (ef. figs. 15 and 197).

He carries a composite bow and a highly-decoratcd leathn quiver identical 10 those of figure IS, which are probably of Milannian origin. His wrist is protected from the chafing of the bowstring by a leather wristguarti or bracer.

88. This man is shown in the type of armour known as the 'armour of Arrapha'. SuilSoflhis Iype were less complete than that of 87, comprising 420 scales or lamellae for the body. only 130 for the sleeves, and 170 for the helmet. The total weight of a set of armour such as this was abeul 22 kg. In some cases the mail coat could be slightly longer.

139

Like figure 87. thl: great weighl of (he armour is supponcd at the ""aiS! by a leather belt .

ikneath their armour, both 87 and 88 wear 11 long sltt\·cd garment (cf. fig. 98) d«e>tlucd IJld edged with coloured trim.

~ ~ A .•.• ~. .

a b c

90

f;t d e

89

89 shows the variety of armour worn by the majority of Hurri·Mitannian mariyomla, or milit ia-cha riotttrs as opposed 10 mariYOIIM of the royal , or noble, households.

He .... 'ears I shon lamellar or scale tunic with shon sleeva of ICluhcr lamellae. Suil5 of armour, being of COUrK indhoidually made by specialist cnfumm, \'afkd considtrably in materials and cmrall design. 1bey could be slet\"tless, or wilhom. back. with or without a collar; ofleathcr or bronze $Cales or lamellae, ofiuther with slcc\'cs ofbronzc, or even leather wilh I bronze back. This aqn tw; large ItalAlI, pu::ruges. or nips suspended from the wlisl btll 10 protect the lower body. Ka/ltu could be used to CO\'cr the front or back only or bOlh.

Under a shoner rob(: than 87's or 88's this man wears clostAiuing trouscn.

At Nuzi, all armour was issued in scts from the paJ:a~ ancnal and wu mlde in the pala~ workshops there. Arter usc the armour WilS returned for store if nOI needed, though mOlt men seem to have retained their issues of armour, sloring il ready for use at their homes. Each wurior seems to have betn obliged to It<<p at leut one full quiver of arrows in his housc, ready for instant usc. Armour broken or lost in battle was made up from the palace stocks.

87 and 92 wear the type: orlong dirk or parru commonly issued to chariolccn. One found at Nuzi had a decor:llive iron grip. 'Grelll swords' were much len common.

Weapons were also of palace issue. Old or warped bows lire described as being changed for new ones lIIthe palace. Some bows had bronze 'arms'. G reat quantities of arrows were Siored at the palace for use in emergencies. Batches of 20,000 an: mentioned in texu from Nuzi.

90 illustrafes fhe grell vniety ofhelmelS current in the Near East during the second millennium B.C. Ma,.,~nn(l usually seem to ha\'C shaved their heads in order to wear the tight-filling helmets, as sho ..... n by 9Oa. This probably also made the wearing ofbronu helmets more IOlerable in the heat of summer.

90b is a prpislI mal".i, i1h15trlted on the decorative covering or a chariOi or Tuthmosis IV, Ind described in the: Nuzi texts . Leather helmets were only inrrequently worn by chariOh~ers but were probably the sliIndatd headgear orlhe inrantry. Seven gOltskins were nceded to make three such helmets, the hides being CUt into several triangular strips which were llced together It the edges, alternate strips seem to have betn dyed different colou rs, in thr« or more layen. This panicular helmet has. crest or plaited leather. Crested htlmeu ....-ere described u tqiptu or suppuru.

140

90c i3 a simpl~ , high-crowned, bronze helmet or gurpisu sifXJrri, by far the commonest type of helmet used throughout the Near EaSt by chariot~rs (~r. figs. 15, 89·91). Helmets of this type: are frequently iIIustr:ned in Egyptian sources as tribute from Canaan, Mitanni and Karduniuh (Babylonia). Typically, these helmets have textile creSIS dyed red or blue.

90d is a bronze helmel with a plaited leather crest and separate bronze cheek·pieces and aventail, as described in a Nuzi text, issued to a charioteer together with a sui t ofbronze·sl~\·ed leather armour. It is almost identical 10

the helmet worn by Hitt ite guardsmen (~ f. fig . 107).

90e is a simple gurpifll siparri kllrsimelu, or 'bronze sc:ale helmel', of which 87 and 88 wear more elaborate examples, probably called 'great helmets' . These helmets were always iuued in conjunction with the complete suits of mail of the household charioteers or royal mariyonna. The simpler versions consisted of less than 20 very long, curved scales, while 'great helmets' had from 140-2{)O sc:ales. BOlh types were based on a woollen, felted liner weighing 0.75kg. Thc 100ai \I.·eights of such helmets varied from 2.72·3.56kg.

Though expe:nsh'c and exceedingly complex in const ruct ion, sca.le helmets of this type would offer mu~h greatcr protection against bloW5 and missiles than the leather or sheet bronze: examples .

...

~ .,!,

(9.:

·HIIII

a 0 0

. 0

.0

. 0

. 0

.0 0.----.0 gL-g

92

91 and 92 arc c hariot-drivers. T eXIS from Nuzi make it clear thai both crewmen ofa chariot were issued with suits of armour offering the same levels of protection, though chariot-drivers were in addition pro\·ided with shields, aritu.

9 1 wears a medium· length bronze corslet with the usuall:rlkhaltl, or belt. His helmet is of a tall, bronze: variety iIlustrat~d in Egyptian sources as having a blue· painted reinforcing rib on the aown to which is allached a red textile or horsehair cresl .

In hi3 righl hand he c:arries :II whip or ishwkhkhll, the tOP of which is decoraled with a round ball of lapis lazuli.

92 is t:lken from the gold, deconl ive chariot cab of TUlhmosis IV, on whi~h 3re sce nes of the Phuaoh pUlling 10 flight Canaanite and Syrian chariOIS. Only a few of the warriors ..... ear coats of mail, Ihough several wear helmets, indiClting that Mitanni's ..... estern vusals could nO( always match tne generally high standards of equipment prevalent further east.

141

This driver h:is only a pair of tUfiuu, known in NUli as fUfiwa, though these are covered with numerous bronze discs. Nuz;an texts describe as tarllumazi the set of armour issued to the household charioteers of the kingdom of Arrapha, This comprised a coat of mail with sleeves o\'er which were worn both Italltu and fU fima, together with a collar, dirk, and helmet. These selcet warriors would look like figure 88, though also having 89'5 Ita.!ku and Ihis figure's lUliwa. Other texIS suggest thaI futiwa were frequently worn over other armours for added protection.

This man wears a highly decorated kilt over trousers. Around his neck he wears a common ornament, a melal disc decorated with a cross, sometimes described as a 'Kassite Cross',

91a shows types of shidd (aritu) used by charioteers.

93. HURRI·MITANNIAN CHARIOT

The chariot, or /UJrltabw, and horses, or SiH, were often as well·armoured as the charioteers who dro\'e them, Inven· tories from Nuzi list large numbers and various types of horse and chariOt armour. This is supponed by Ihe pictorial representations from the chariot body ofThutmose IV. Textile protection offeh or h:iir about Jcm. in thickness, and extending from the withers of the horse to the loin, was known as a paras/ullamll_ This was also provided with a neck piece or ", ifu , Sometimes men could be equipped wilh similar lexlile armour. Appa~ntly 22 minas ofh:iir were required to make two sctS of horse armour. The parashshamu could be used on its own or as an undergarment for a leather. copper or bronze scale sariam and lirpisu for the harK. The o:hariot body could also be equipped with a scale soriam. One inventory mentions over 100 chariots with scale prOteC1jon. The ch:iriot shown in 93, derived from the chariot body ofThutmose IV, h3S such a scale coveting on the CIlb, with a hole for the qui~r.

The scales on the coat orthe horse seem to be rather stylised. Archaeological evidence exists for rectangular scales, weighing 80 grammes elich, as shown on the fully armoured horsc in 9Ja. ChariolS could also be provided with simple dyed cloth covers, or pliralll. 12 goatskins with thongs were required 10 cover a chariOt. Chariots were drawn by I span, simiI/O, oftwo horses, which need nOI alwa)'ll be the same colour. Red, black, white and chestnut horses are known.

93

142

Chariot wheels of 4, 6 (93b) and 8 spokes are known from seals, and wheels were oiled to prevem warping in tht hot climate. Between 9 and II sheepskins were required to cover the floor, I1Qruqqa, of the chariot and the yokes wtre padded with wool. Tht equipment of a c.hariot included two bows, twO quivers, a 'chariol·shield' and a ,IIukudu or 'lance'.

Inventories also refer to wagons and possibly even a 4·wheeltd III.-agon.

Assyrian and Kmite chariots would have been similar and there is ample evidence that Mitannian ideas spread as far as Canaan, Egypt, Haui and even the Aegean.

94 & 95. KASSITE BABYLONIANS 17TH TO 13TH CENTURY B.C.

There are few represtntations of uoops known from this period in Babylonia, a period which is gcnmlly poor in most forms of representational an. Thest figures are taken from representations on inscribed boundary stones, known as kudurru . 94 is a Kassite king. The crossed bands on his chest may be textile armour of the tutnoa type. His headdress seems to be an early form of the type later worn by Assyrian and Babylonian kings. The archer shown in 95 is taken from an unfi nished kudurTu, dating to around 1200 B.C., found in SUS3, where it had been uken as booty by the plundering Elamites ofShutruk·Nahunte. Chariots probably owed much of thelr design and equipment to Mitannian models. The chariot was called I1QrkablQ, and Kassite seals depict vehicles with a box·like cab, crossed quivers on the sides, spoked wheels, the axle posi tioned beneath the centre of the cab, a horizontal supporting pole joining the cab to the end of the dnIught·pole and drawn by tWO horses. Representations of Assyrian chariots dating to Ihe end oflhis period show vehicles quite different 10 the 9th century Assyrian type, but perhaps similar to that of the Kassites. The cab consisted of an open framework which does not appear to hav" been covered, although covers, like those used by the Milanni, would perhaps have been available. The draught-polt is braced by a sbon supporting pole as well as a long horizontal pole. Light, six-spoktd wheels were positioned It the rear of the cab. Crossed quivers were moumed on the sidC1 of the cab and g spear was held in a holSter mounted diagonally on the sid" in a similar manner to 96 and most laler Assyrian and Nco-Hittite chariots, (possibly originating with h.-\itannian chariots). One Assyrian seal shows a chariot with I fla t· topped cab which appears to have 'fenestrations' in the sides. The form of some of these chariots is shown in 95a.

94

95

'"

96 & 91. CANAANITE AND SYRIAN CHARIOTRY, 1STH TO 13TH CENTURY B.C.

The chariot is base:d on a vehicle depicted on an ivory plaque from Megiddo d~fing to the 13th century B.C .. The scene shows 11 returning ",o')Gnnu aecomp~nied by runners and leading two bound Shaasu Btdouin or 'Apiru '.

The weapon eases contain a herty spear and a wooden club as well as arrows. In battle the horse would be protected by a textile trapper, which could be covered with scales in the ease of wealthy or elite ",oryan"a . The term for a chariot was merkht!btl. Canaanite and Syrian military organisation was mongly influenced by Al itanni, especially in the case: of chariotry. Many eharioteen would resemble figures 87-92 in appearance and chariots similar to 93 would be known.

Ret jennu charioteen dressed as figure 97 arc shown bring If1I.mpled by Tutankhamun in scenes from a painted box from his 10mb. His richly-coloured and embroidered robes would in reality be concealed by armour, and the Egyptian artiSi may simply have copied the dress of visiting dignitaries. Clothing colours included white (most common), blue, green, crimson and purple. The las t twO colours. kno~-n as argamonnu and rokiltu. were dyes obtained from shdlfish. The dye produced was known as kinaJcltka, and would be u5t'd only by the wealthiest and most impOTlant "'0I)",nllO, madder provided a cheap substitute.

This charioteer carries a painted wickerwork shield. A type ofcrMs·band armour and tuselltd kilt worn by an Vgaritic king is shown in 971. Textual sources indicate that this type of armour known as 'Ulima or ruti"". was sometimes worn over scale or lamellar armour.

98. SYRIAN INFANTRY, ISTH TO 13TH CENTU RY B.C.

These troops represent the supporting infantry of the Syrian chariony. They were usually equipped with welpons best suited to skirmishing, such as javelins, throw-sticks and the bow. Shields were not very common, but would be simi1.ar to that of 97. T he right hand figure wears a long-sleeved robe which faste ned at the front and which is often shown being worn by tribute· bearers in Egyptian tomb scencs. It was usually white with coloured hem-bands.

99. CANAANITE INFANTRY, 1STH TO 13TH CENTURY B.C.

These would be typieal of the majori ty of hupsh", or peasant soldiers. T he left h:.md warrior appears in reliefs of the Rarncs.side period in Egypt. while the righ t hand figure comes from an ivory plaque from Megiddo. These troops supplied their own equipment so there could be great variation. NOI all possessed shields, and many would only have bows or slings, Armour would be very rare Cltcepl ro r simple leJUile Iype$ su(h as webbing or kalher bands, Various types of turban or hc:adc101h could be wom. Figure 99a shows the held of a Shaasu Bedouin with dl4lracteristic swept-back hair, otherwise, his appearance corresponds closely to figure 111. The style oftassclled kilt favoured by the Sea-I'eoples was in fact long, common along the coast of Can~3n and Phoenicia. 99b is an example of the huge ~i l -like standards that flew abo\'e the battlements of Canaanite cities, as depicted in Egyptian reliefs.

100. EARLY HATTIAN WARRIOR , c. 2400 B.C.

Later Hitti te reliefs depicting axe·wielding gods (often considered as evidence for Hittite axemen). arc most probably archaising representations reflecting dress lind equipment of the pre-Hittite inhabitants of the Haiti-land. Reliefs at Malatya show the rather archaic type of chariot iIIustl"3tcd by 100c, which is dearly not contemporary with the types in use in the 1st millennium B.C., the dote of the reliefs. This is a god's vehicle, pulled by oxen, probably deri\'ed from a vehicle like the Sumerian 'stnddle-car'. P resumably onagers would be used in baltle. Hattian seals depict four-wheeled vehicles as well, nOI unlike the Sumerian Iypes. A representation of an Early Hattian charioteer shows him wearing a conical helme!.

Two types ofaxe-hcad arc shown in lOOa, and there 3rc very many variants from different parts of Anatolia during the Early Bronze Age. The spcarhelds shown in lOOb arc long and narrow, perru.ps suitable for long, thrusting·spean.

The dagger is derived from a type found in the princely tombs of Allca Huyuk, U is the bronze stag shown in IOOd. This could ~ 3 5t3nd3rd, 513ff-head or simply a lerminal from a piece of furniture. Other bronze objects which are likely to have been standards were flat, circular, grille-like solar symbols. Weapon finds from tombs at Dom included shon spean, shon swords and daggen, small axes and maces.

Anatolia was rich in metals and wn astride the trade roul~ from Mesopotamia to the sources of tin and copper further west. The Assyrians se:t up special trading colonies among the Hanian city-states to comer this trade. Even iron w~s not unknown to the Hait ians, but it was rare and far more valuable than gold. It remained a symbol of wealth and prcstige unt il well after this period, and was used occasionally for princely weapons. It was no practical substitute for bronze.

144

a

99

145

100 a d

b

101. HIlTITE CHARIOTRY, 14TH TO 13TH CENTURY B.C.

The chariots illustrated hen arc taken from the Egyptian reliefs depicting the bailIe of Kadesh. The varicly of designs probably reflws the vuious regions oflhe Hini!e Empire from which contingents were drawn. 101 and lOla seem (0 be constructed with slats or wood. IOlb, it possibly covered with laminated hide, and 10Ic is similar to the typical Canaanite or Syrian t)'PC and probably belongs 10 allies from this region. The mort robust examples have the axles SC:t funhcr forward than was normal in Syria, Canaan and Egypt. They represent Annolian types crewed by three men. The Hittite chariotrY:1( K.:Idesh would have represented a wide range of chariot lactics, varying from the skirmishing tactics of Syria to the close-combat tedmiques of the Aegean area. How to respond to these different types of chariot tactics must have added somewhat to the Egyptian confusion at Kadcsh.

The horses in the K~desh reliefs are usually shown as unarmoured bUI a scene from the temple of Abu Simbtl shows armour as i1lust:-ated here. The Hinile chariot horses in this scene are clearly armoured with a scale lariam worn over a textile tr~pper, as used by their Mitanni2n counterpans, ~nd a studded fabric girpiJU.

102, 103 & 104.HITTITE CHARIOT CREWMEN, 14TH TO 13TH CENTURY B.C.

The crew of a Hillite three·man chariot consisted of a shieldless driver, shiddless spearman and a shield·btarer who doubled as a spearman. It is possible that the three·man crew developed from a laclic of allowing a chariot runner 10 ride in the chariot. All the crew could bt dressed as 102 and 103, but many were equipped with long, sale (();Its as 104, (I04a is an example of a scale). All the figures here have: bet" given shields 10 iIIuslI1l1e Ippc1lrance Ind varielY. The long scale coats are colou red alternately red and blue in the Ramesseum reliefs giving a striped effect. This is probably intended to represent rows of sales, alternating with stitching, or alternate rows of painted sales.

The sleeveless garments worn by 102 and 103 are probably a form oftcxtile armour. The fact that both arnn arc left free suggests thIn it was Ihid and inflexible. Beneath this was worn long robts in plain colours or with em· broidered patterns.

146

..

' . . . . . . . ' ....

101

~ a

rn a . . ' ..

102

103 104

147

Hinile soldiers were norm~lIy dean·shnen and wore their hair in long pigtails or scalp·locks (102a). 11 has betn often suggested that ~ memory of these vr.lfriors lIl2y have given risc to the legend of the Amazons and it is interesting 10 note that in the Egyplian K~desh inscriptions, R~messes II displiragingly refers to the Hittite charioteers 8sltumty, literally meaning 'woman·warriors'.

Many Hittites wore helmets of Mitannian designs surmounted by plumes. There were tWO types of shidd, both made of wickerwork covered by le~ther. The concave-sided type could be equipped with a boss. Spears were usuall)' over 2m. long and up to four were carried in each vehicle. In the casc of chariotry from Nonhem Syria a few mwmen substituted a bow.

The Hittite charioteers depicted in a scene at Abu Simbel carr)' the..ir spears o\'tr the shoulder and at an angle poi",ing backwards with the shaft pressed into the hip and pit of the arm. This answers to the description of the wJultuIQ7l, or 'at ease' position in Hitti te drill manu als.

105 & 1&6. HITTITE INFANTRY

Hitt ite infantry included native Hittites and allies from Central AnDlolia, dressed as 105, and allies from North· Western and South·Western Anatolia who usually wore short kilts and headge:lt linking them to the laler Sea-Ptoples. 106 illustrates allied infanlry from Syria.

T he Anatolian infantry were Hrmed with short spears and daggcoTS, while some Syrians wcore archers. Thco Anatolians carried a shield likc tha t shown in 105 although not all soldiers possessed one. Syrians appear 10 have been usually shiddless.

Clothing, especially that of the Syrians, would be gaudily embroidered. Glazed tiles, depicting captives, from the si te of Pi-Ramesses in Egypt, indicate the range of colours and patterns. Colours included black, while, red, blue, green and yellow.

These troops, together wilh those described under 108-111, arc somet imes refcrred to as tuhuyeru in Egyptian records.

105 106

o

107

148

107. HlTfITE GUARDSMAN

This is taken from numerous small figurines and sculptures found at Boghaz.koy, the ancient Hill ite capital of HallUS2S, which represent gods in the ceremonial dress ofa royal guardsman. In battle this man would almost cenainly appear as a fully armoured charioteer. He has, however, retained his helmet from his war panoply. This type of helmet is de$Cribed in texts from Nuzi and is associated with the expensive protec1ive equipment of the elite maryll""u, (cr. figure 90(1). The hdmel was &rolred. under the dUn with a leather strap.

Hittite royal guards were known as malwli, and it seems quite reasonable 10 suppose that they were elite chariotry.

In battle the Hitl ite king would have appeared as a panicularly well-cquipped chariOietr.

This guardsman is dr($Sed for palace or parllde duties.

108, 109, 110, JJI & 112. SEA PEOPLES

The 'SelI·People' was a collective name given by the Egyplians 10 various displaced peoples and sea·raiders, consisting oflhe Sherden, Lukka, Ekwesh, Teresh, Sheklesh, Pelesel, Tjeklter, Denyen and Weshwesh. It is nOI possible to establish for certain the appearance of many of these, especi.ally the Ekwesh, Luklta and Weshwesh. The Olhers can be identified in Egyptian reliefs depicting captives, and some may be compared to representations of Hittite allies in eadier reliefs.

A common fealu re of dress was the tasselled kilt, nalive to Soulhern Anatolia and the Levanl. The Tercsh and Shck!esh wore banded linen or leather armour in addition, while the Sherden, Pcleset, (and probably Denyen and Tjeklter) wore a leather or metal cuirass. The homed helmel wn charllcteristic of Ihe Sherden, and also occurs on bronze statues orwarrio('gods from Cyprus and Sardinia (sec also 203). The Sherden were armed with long swords (over I m.), javelins and round bucklers.

The 'tall-crown' worn by the Peleset, Denyen and T jekker was not made with feathe rs as often thought, but was prob~bly a circlet of reeds, stiffened hair, horsehair, linen or leather strips. It wu held in place by a decorated fillet and chin·strap. This headgear is also found on anthropomorphic coffins from Palestine. It may be relaled to a son of swepl-back headdress like that of the Shaasu (99a) and some of the Hittite allies (Illb). This headdress distinguished the Sheklcsh, while III could represent either a Sheklesh or Tercsh. The headcloth shown in lila is also associned with the Te.resh and occurs among some Hiuilt allies, as does a type of turban shown in l l lc, which is associa ted with the PelCSCI and T jekker.

The cuirass worn by 108 and 110 could be bronze or lealher. It appea rs to be similar in conception 10 the Dendra armour but with the abdominal plates reduced in size to give lorso protection only, and without. ne<:k-guard. The studs on the shoulder plates aTe not rivets but an imitation of hum~n anatomy_ This might also explain the rib-li.ke markings on the lower part of the cuirllss instead of plates.

108 109

149

The buckler was pro~bly leather with moulded boucs or bronze bosscs attached, many or the helmets were probably also lealhef.

The kilt may be reinrorced with leather st rips. T he Medinet Habu scenes show clothing brightly coloured in green, blue, red and white.

Most w.:llrriors were inrantry. but some chariots crewed by three men took pan in the land attack on Egypt. Egyptianstyle charims arc depicted, but they may in reality have been an Anatolian type. Illustration 112 shows one orthe cans drawn by fou r oxen c:lrrying the families and belongings of the Sea-Peoples which rormed a large proponion or their land rorces. T he Egyptian reliers show fighting laking place among the cans.

'* a b c

112

113. HEBREW INFANTRYMAN, 11TH CENTURY B.C.

There arc hardly any reprcscmalions of Hebrew warriOR and their appearance has to be aummised wilh evidence gleaned from neighbouring stalcs. This figu re is an attempt to reconstruct the dress and equipment or an il hayi/, a 'valiant man', or an ish ballllf, 'picked man' during the reigns or Saul and Dayid (c. 1025-1006 B.C. and 1006-968 s.c.). His equipment is a mixture orc..naanite and Philistine items and includes a shield, mtlgtn, a thrusting spear, romaA, and a bronze helmet or kobha'. D.:IIvid's 'Mighty Men' or gibborim may have .:IIlso worn a sca le or lamellar corslet, shiryon, similar to that worn by fig. 91 . The great mass or Israel's militiamen would be: much more lighdy· equipped, the majority being armed with the javelin, hani/h, or sling.

ISO

The equipmem of troops such as this would probably be: in a constant process of change u his original 10C1111y made possessions were replaced by booI:y from the battlefield and items obtained by trade.

a

114

.. ".

113

114. AMMONITE RULER

Ammon, Edom and Moab wert kingdoms located ta5t of the Jordan river. Edom was al ready an organised Slate with a king befort the Hebrtws entered Cannn under Joshua. A large pan of their populations were settled and lived in tOWIll.

Their military organisation was similar to that ofthe early Hebrews and based on a uibal levy. Their forces were mainly infinity, and on one occasion the king of Ammon is said to have had to hire chariotry from Mesopotamia, Syril and Anm·Zobeh 10 m~t In Israelite threat.

114a shows the head of the Moabite king, 8alua.

115

I"

115. LEVANTlNE CHARIOTRY, 12TH TO 10TH CENTURY B.C.

These iIlustnllions are based on the numerous Syrian representations of chariotry in ivorywork and on a scene from an ivory box from Enkomi in Cyprus. The charioteers in this hunting scene are accompanied by runners wearing Peleset·style headgear.

T he chariot remained relatively unchanged from earlier Canaanite and Syrian types. The horse is protected with a scale or lamellar trapper and is provided with extra padding beneath the wooden yoke-saddle. The warrior's scale coat fastened at the front on most Syriall examples. and Solomon's charioteers would probably have appeared very similar. Since he obtained his chariots from Egypt they wou.ld presumably be similar to fig. 23. The lail of the horse has been plaited.

Elite Israelite charioteers were called nt"ar, a term obviously derived from the Canaanile Ile-arim. When Ahab was besieged in ~maria by Ben·Hedad II , the Syrians were rOUted by 232 ne'ars who were pan of Ahab's retinue.

116, 117 &: 118. ASSYRIAN ROYAL DRESS, 9TH TO 7TH CENTURIES B.C.

116. These figures are taken fro m the massive stone throne dais found in the eAaf masMTli, or arscn3i, at the Assyrian mili tary capital of Kalhu (modem Nimrod). Scenes on the dais depict the mccting of Shalmaneser Ill, the King of Assyria, with Marduk-z.akir-shumi, the King of Babylon, in about 850 B.C.

Both kings carry long staffs of office, and wear distinctive crowns_ The AS5yrian royal crown appears to have b«n derived from a simple while 'fez' or polos of Kassite origin (cf. fig. 94) which formed pan of Kassite ctlun dreS5. This simple polos was worn by both the king, high officials of the coun, and the nobi lity in Assyria until the tenth century B.c. At this time the king') polos was distinguished by a small cone placed on the top, and, later, by a long, red, brow·band around the base. By the reign of As.hllrnuirpal II, only high-ranking serV;1015 of the king'. household are depicted wearing the simple polos, and even thU restricted usage seems to have been forbidden as royal power and perogative increased during the ninth century. The nobility, however, were quick to usurp the privileges of royal dress when the power of the' monarchy was weak, as was the cue during the reign ofShalmanescr IV (782-773 B.C.).

Shalmane5C.T III wears a long, simple tunic, fringed at the hem, and a shawl thrown over one shoulder and seC\l~d al the waist with ~ broad, metal belt. Marduk,·z.akir-shumi, similarly dressed, wears a fringed double shawl, open at the front on the left side, the long fringe of which is gathered over the right arm_ The sleeves of his long tunic are richly decorated with woven or applique panerns. The decoration on Assyrian royal robes of the time could be similar, with either geometric designs and metal or fabric appliques of chariots and hunting scenes.

The Babylonian king's hair is gathered in a distinctive, thick plait down his back. The Babylonian crown appears in a «mical form which wi ll remain more or less unchlmged for 400 years.

116

117

152

Both kings carry long swords, Shalmancser's being decorated at the hili mod the chape with images oftwistiog, snarling, lions; their interlocked paws grasping each other across the weapon. On tht tnrone dais attendants Sland behind tach king, carrying his bows and quivers.

117 is a reprtsentation of Esarhaddon from the Zinjirli sttla showing the abject subminion of Tirharka of Egypt and Abdi·milki of Sidon. '

The Assyrian crown became progressively taller and more elaboratt during the eighth and seventh centuries, with decorative bands of metal rasellcs.

Tht king's ceremonial robes consist of a long, white robe, split at the front and deroroted with tiers of coloured trim and a rringed, tasse lled, hem. A shon, trimmed shawl is worn over tht shoulders, both robe and shawl being secured with a plaited bell at the waist. The trim and fringes could be coloured red, blue, or green, or mulli-coloured_ The entire robe could also be covered with applique rasellcs or stus.

Unlike earlier kings, Esarhaddon wears boots instead of sandals.

This type or ceremonial royal costume (aside from the crown) is allested from the thirteenth century unt il the end of the Nco-Assyrian period. The mace appears to have constituted part of this formal dress.

In his left hand the king carries a sweet-smelling flower, or a perfume.holder in the form of a lotus.

Before the laIc eighth ccnwry, Assyrian hair was long, faUing on the shoulders in a fan-shape.. Afier this time, Assyrians wore their hair bunched 'square' on the shoulders. Royal beards, cut square, are always shown as impressively long" and much longer than a commoner 's beard.

118 shows King Ashurbanipal dressed for the hunting field, and as such probably cowes close to depicting the kind of garments wor!, by seventh century Assyrian kings when on campaign.

The long robe, richly derorated with metal plaques of stars (the symbol of IshtaT, the Assyrian goddess of 10l'e and war). is hitched up under the metal waistbelt. and is split at the rront for riding. On the breast of the robe is a large, applique panel, with melal plaques or the MorningoStar Oanking a winged disc (the symbol or Ashur) abo\le a sacred tree. The garment's short sleeves, which ha\le bands of intricate decoration, end beneath gold spiral arm·bands.

118

a

153

The king wears high, leather boots, which scem to nave been often dyed blue, with red trim and a brown heelreinforcement and sole. The boots' long laen are carried up to be tied belo ..... the kn~. The long, woollen socks, always worn wi th boots of this typc, have rows of zig·ug colour, either red, blue, green or white, (red, while and blue being the most common combination). The Assyrians ~dopled the wearing of boots ~nd soc:k$ (which end JUSt above the knct) from the highland Manneans during the late eight century.

Around his head the king wears a brow band, with a decoration of large metal rosettes. The long ends of the band tnil down the king 's back to his waist .

As he is hunting, the king carries a shon sword under his sword·belt (abo\'e the metal w:Ustbelt) and suspended from a wide baldric (lISa, omitted from liB for reasons of clarity). A long, composite bow is carried below his left arm, on which he wean a wrist-guard, or bracer, tied around his foreann and thumb.

The 1 ..... '0 rods carried below the waistbelt appear to be writing styli, since AshurbanipaJ, unlike most other oriental monarchs (and, indeed, the great mass of the population) was literate in Akkadian, and to a lesser atent, Sumerian - a feat of which the king was immensely proud. Much of our knowledge of Mesopotamian IiteI'lllure is derived from Assyrian tUtS copied for Ashurbanipal's library at Nineveh (the capital of Assyria in the seventh century B.C.).

The king is shown with dnwn sword about to face a wounded lion on foo t. Captions prepared, but never C2rved OntO, Ashurbanipal's palace rdiefs lell how, after a 5uccessful lion-hum, the king and his bodyguard of young Elamite princes (NS the 'Kardakes', or youth·troop of the later Persian kings) had dismounted to collen the kill. One lion, however, was wounded and only shamming dead; as the king approached it leapt up and attacked the king, who managed to despatch it with his sword - his squires having run off in fright!

All Mesopotamian kings wore large amounts of jewellery. Here, the king we~rs large, lunate earrings and spiral arm bands.

118b shows the shape oflhe royal parasol in the ninth century; lISe the rather more angular eight h and seventh century version with a rearward sunshade. Mesopotamian parasols seem to ha\'e been identiC21 in construction to Chinese examples, the body being stiffened cloth stretched over supporting ribs. The ribs were tied to a ring on the pole, by which it could be o~ned and closed. The edge of the parasol shade was decorated wi th dusters of tassels, the pole itself terminating in a large:, dccontive pomegranate.

Assyrian royal parasols were generally C2rr ied by palace eunuchs, like figure 152. The parasol wu a mark of royalty.

119. ASSYRIAN CHARIOT, 9TH CENTURY B. C.

Assyrian chariot design evolved rapidly in the 9th ~ntury due to innuences from Iran and the Transcaucasus.

In 91h ~ntury Assyrian art the chariot a.b is depicted as ~ 00. of slightly below hip-heigh.I, ilS solid sides sloping gemly down from the rounded up~r rear corners to the front. Although the cab framework is hidden by the solid sides we C2n assume, by analogy with earlier Egyptian chariots still e.tant, that a single wooden pole was heat-bent through steaming to roughly the shape of ~ 'C' to form the lower frame for the chariot floor. The open ends of the 'C' were joined with a mon iced spar, and the actual noor wu made from leather thongs passed through slots cut in the lower-frame and interwoven to provide a nexible, strong and supple surfa~ which would absorb the bumps ~nd jolts of navel on an otherwise unsprung 'Ie hide. T his nooring was usually covered by II woven rug in Near·Eastern chariOts and the tassels of such rugs are onen shown behind the whccls of Assyrian charlOIS (cf. fig. 126). The C2b's upper rail was similarly made from a heat-bent pole, its ends being joined to the rear of the lower frame and secured at the front by one or more straight wooden Struts. This frame was probably covered with oxhide, stitched and luhed around tbe upper rai l and lower frame.

It is dear that this construction was intended to produce a light but strong C2b. T he joints of the floor fnme were kepI tightly dosed by the weight of the ete:w on the interwoven thong floor, and the upper ra il made resilient by the use of as few joints IS possible by heat-bending. The ends of the {loor fnme were probably protected by calcite or bronze knobs, as on earlier Egyptiln chariots. With the change to a sqUire chariot cab in the 8th century these would have ceued to have any practical use, and indeed, later CypriOt chariots had & decorated oval disc secured with a bronze finial in this position.

119a shows a plan view of the C2b, and 119b, the underside revealing the subframe.

154

119

e

b

• • 11'" ow

155

It ls possible that, as with later Cypriot chariolS of similar construction, 9th century Assyrian chariols had an upright partition dividing the cab down the C1: ntre and ~ t~l1 melal hoop si tuated behind this and above the axle. A paTtition would givt tht crtw an inttrnal support to bract thtmsdve$ againat during turns or to Itan on if ti rtd, whilst the hoop would havt been an aid to climb into Ihe cab and have funcliontd 2S the support for the round, spiktd, shield which is often shown closing the open r!!ar of the cab. Assyrian chariolS probabl)' had only a part ial partition as a third crewman is often shown riding behind the other two and is always shown grasping a leather loop knotted to the iunction of the draught-pole supports and upper rail atlhe cab front. This extra handhold may have been necessary because the third crewman's movements were restricted by a partition Ihat kept him off balance whilst not being high enough to provide a handhold.

The cab front was probably aboul 0.80 metres high at the front , rising 10 0.90 metres at Ihe rear, with a depth of box from front to back of 0.63 metres.

It is howe\'cr in the des ign of the chariot sub-frame and the draught-pole ,hat 9th century Assyrian chariots differ most signilicaOily from the cQnstruction Qf ellrlier Near·Easte,rn chariQIS, these: changes being mosl evident on I he highly-detailed ChariOiS frQm the bu·rdiefs of Ashurnasirpal II (883-859 B.C.). Earlier chariots, as exemplified by surviving Egyptian examples, had a simpl!! sub-frame with a single, heal·bent draught-pole sandwiched between the rear·mounted axle and the IWO grooved mountings that connected the axle to the sides of Ihe floor frame. The draught·pole thus ran beneath Ihe centre oftht cab floor, being secured by ltalhtf thongs to tht front of tht floor frame, befort curving up""':Irds IQ suppon the yoke, The chariOts depicted on Ashurnasirpal's reliefs, howe"'tr, displayed several unusual features that one ""'QUId not expect if they were constructed in this ""':Iy. All save IWO of these: charims have draught-poles thai clearly pass acrosstht IQwer from of the cab tQ a ribbed clemen! situated on a wtdgt--shaptd spar that passes at the level of the cab floor, back, behind the wheel, to Ihe axle. In addition, several chariots arc shown with a second curved shafl below the draught·pole which ioins a similar ribbed clement and spar, below, and sometimes overlapped by, the first. These clear and consisltnt details can only mtan that these chariots had tWO draught-poles, no longtr htat-bem 10 pass under the floor frame, but socketed into two separatt spars pbced on either side Qf,he cab, the ribbed eltment being a metal clasp secu ring this vital joint. The twO draught-poles converged a shon distanct ahead of the cab to run together up to tht yoke. This 'Y-pole' construction was most probably derived from the two-wheeled 'A-framt' cans of the Transcaucasus and may possibly have been employed on 10th CCIUUry Iranian chariots .

It is not as ytt clear when Ihis draught system was adopted in Assyria. HQVo'e\'er, Ashurnasirpalll campaigned IQ the non h of Assyria early in his reign and it is prQbable that he made his artists go lQ considerable trouble lQ show a lechnologicalldvance of which he WIllS proud. Cenainly his anisl! seem to hove been very unsure as 10 the btst way Qf portraying the twO draught·poles since Ihc representations ofttn difftr.

This change in construction will have given a much st ronger sub-frame and a more secure cab for only a slight increase in weight. The draught-pole spus, taking tht place of the earlier moumings bc:twctn the floor frame and axle, would hayt supponed the noor fram t for a greater pan Qfitsltngth, whereas a longitudinal beam bc:tween Ihe spars and beneath the front of the cab would have provided more: support here than the earlier, single draughtpole. The dQuble draught·polt would be less susceptible IQ 1:l.[cral stressc:s during turns and would bt Q\'trall more rigid and have a greater resistance to accident and the rigours of campllign. It is also probable that the change from a rounded to a square: cab that took place at t.he end of the 9th century B.C. in Assyria was a by·product of these changes tQ the sub-frame. A more: economical and spacious cQnstruction could be achieved by omitting tht floor frame and basing the ClIb and floor directly on the rectangular sub-frame formed by the draught<pole spars.

In addit ion to the metal clasps at tht junctiQn with the sub-frame, tht 'Y·pole ' ls shQwn IQ be supported at tWO other points; at the point whert the converging draught.poles meet, and at the end of the combined pole$. T he former suplXlrt is clurly derived from earlier pole-braces ofleather thongs which reinforced the connection bttwten pole and cab, or wooden struts, placed so as 10 apptaf IS a 'V' whtn vitwed from above, which also suengthened the cab front. On 9th cefl!ury Assyrian chariots thls combined cab and draught-pole support appears as a curved rod, branch.ing into twO at Ihe junction wilh the draught-pole j where it joins a collar securing the fV,'Q elemenlS of the 'Y-pole'.

The second draught·pole brace was probably designed to support its far end, and takes the fQnn Qf an dliptic~l demenl, of l en with a serrated upper tdge. running from the top of the cab front to the yoke. The serrated effect along the upper edgt of the support proliably represents either a series of metal rings or loops of leather used to fasten a decorative, elliptical, cloth over a wooden polt. This pole curved upwards from the upper rail of the cab bcfQre bending down to join Iht dnught·polc ntar the yoke. One end Qfthe decorative cloth was knQlled to tht top of the cab/draught-pole support, the other to the yoke· peg. A similar arrangement of a doth suspended rrom

156

an upJX' r pole is shown on some early conlemporary Nco-m illie OrthOSI:lU (cf. fig . 169) and on carlier M)'cen~e:m

frescoes. Howe\'er, where t ri3ngul~r , uther than elliplical, c10lhs appear it may be presumed Ih3t the cloth is hung not from :II pole, but from a taut thong supponing the pole·end_ The usc of II thong instead of a pole may be found on earlier, 121h centu ry, Assyrian chariots, on chariots from Geometric Greek vases, and some Neo- Hmile rdiefs. The thong and pole braces funCliontd in a similar way to th ... thongs or StrulS between Ihe cab and draught·pole described previously, wit h the solid pole \'arie ty perhaps preveming the draught·pole from moving venially :lind placing undue strain on the joints with the draught-pole spars.

This lype of chariot is depictcd in reliefs from the reigns of Ashurnasirpal II al Nimrud and on the bronze gates of Balawat, daling to the reign of $halmancse:r III . T hese chariots arc shown being drawn b)' two or thrce horses. It has been suggested thaI the third horse wu a replacement, harnessed to one side of the team as an outrigger. This would present problems in driving and incrtase the chances ofa horse being wounded. Should this occur at speed, lhe cruariOt would proh2bly be rendered usdess as n fighting unit, perhaps collapsing, wrecking the vchicle, Ihrowing the crew and inju ring the other horses; a situation unlikely 10 be reCli fi ed by a single spare horse, and an impraClicaltaClical 3rrangemen1. However Iranian and other sources ckarl)' depiClthree-horse choriots at this dale. Four·horse chllTiots appcar 10 have been reSlTic,,:d 10 elite units. The Iwo-horse ch3riot yoke ..... as adopted 10 take four horses by Ihe outer horses being anached to the upturned ends of the yoke. Only the inner horses bad wooden yoke-saddles and the outer horses would thus exert no pull. This was funher improved later on to enable equal pull. The harnessing arrangemem is shown in 11 9c. T his is designed for a 2, 3, or 4·horsc cha riol and sho ..... s the breast-band 3nd backing dement.

Armament com prised bo ..... , axes, spear and dans. T ..... o crossed qui\,ers were anached 10 the sides of the cab; Ihe spear ..... as held in a separate holster. Sometimes standards w~re carried in the chariot, such as 11ge. They ..... ere disc·shaped, benring the image of the god Ashur or olher religious devices.

The horses in this illuslralion (based on a Nimrud relid ), wear II dC(outed textile armour as shown on the king's chariot. Other chariot hoT$CS have plain lextile armour, some ..... ith lamellar trappers. Figure 119d shows an Assyrian brand.

120

a

121

151

120. ASS YRIAN C HARIOTEER , 9TH CENTURY B.C .

This chariot~r is wearing II long, scale sanam, probably II development of the earlier H urri-Mit:lnnian ty~. It differs in being longer and being equip~d with a scale 'coif (girpisu). On his head he wears II conical Assyrian helmet (hu/iam). Iron (pardll,) was now coming into more general usc, but bronze was still the principle metal ustd for armour, iron being used as a cheap substitute and for weapons. Archers equip~d in this way are depicted in scenes on the bronze gates of Balawat, dating to the reign of Shalmaneser Ill, and on re liefs of Ashumasirpal ll, operating dismounted at seiges. The extra armour would probably be: pa n icularly useful in such exposed aCtivities as mining, and charioU')' could not be usefully employed mounted on such occasions.

Figure 120a shows the small round shield used by ch:lrioteers :It this time. T he boss is shaped in the form of a lion's ht'3d. It rould instead by tovered in spiked bosses (122b). C hariOH:rew consisted Qf two o r three: men, the third man att ing as a shield·bearer to the archer, dressed as figu re 122.

121. ASSYR IAN C AVALRY T EAM, 9TH CENTURY B.C.

The Assyrian use of ovalry, mounted warr iors as opposed to scouts or messengeI"$, is fir:st recorded in the annals of the sixth regnal year of T u kulti-Ninun a II (890-884 B.C.) when it seems that the fi nt faltering steps in this dir«tion wert takm. It 5eCTnlI probable that the use of cavalry grtw naturally OUt of riding unbitthcd chariot outriggers, a process which gained impetus under the stimulus of Iranian, and possibly Aramacan, practic:c. In Assyr ia the e\'olving ovalry arm appears to have become formalised in the reign ofTukulti-Ninurta n, since this reign's style of chariot harness then beromes the 'traditional' form of cavalry harness until the mid-8lh cenrury B.C. These figures an: derived from bas-reliefs of Asumasirpal II.

It is noticeable that cavalrymen were still ronsidercd as pan of the 'chariot-s)'Stem', oper.ning in pairs like charioteers without a t hariot. Here, the 'chariot-warrior' wears a highly dccornted runic lind wrap-around kilt with II wide waistband (cf. fig . 139) under a narrow belt. A tasselled quiver and long iron sword are carried on II single baldric over the right shoulder. His head is p rotected by an iron conical helmet with inlaid bands of crook! of bronze. In contrast, the 'charioteer' wears an iron skullcap or pfgulla/u, and carries a shield and spear, both standard items of chariot equipment. H e manages both horses, like a thariotc:t:r, enabling the :lrcher to concentrate on his shooting just as if he were in a chariot .

Though the riders of non-royal horses are still shown using the 'donkey·scat', and riding on the horse's rump without a saddledoth, the doth on the king'! horse (alwa~ shown in dose attendance on the royal chariot and managed by a cavalry 'charioteer') is in the correct position for a true horse sell. T his probably indicalC$ that the tnditional 'donkey-scat' was at lut seen to be unnt(essary on horseback, no doubt because of a greater exptrienc:c of riding in varying conditions due to cavalry warfare.

In general, [he form ofhorsc-harness is identical to that of chariot horses on plnde. H owever, in using the breastplate as pan of the harness it seems that an earlier element of harness, no longer \'cry common for chariot horses, is rttained as a ' u aditional' element by Ashurnasirpal II 's cavalry, though not by Shalman~r Ill 's ca\'alry horses. Ca\'alry horses are nOt shown wearing any fo rm ofprotecti\,e trapper, in common usc fo r chariot horses, until the mid-7th century B.C.

During the reign of Ashurnasirpai II 's son, Shalmanescr Ill, both members of the ca\'IIlry 'team' were equipped with coniol belmtts. On occasion, when crossing rough tc rnin and bridges, the 'chariote(,r ' is shown carrying the archer's bow and quiver, thereby gh'ing the impression that some 9th century cavalrymen were armed with both spear and bow, although this is not the (lISC.

Here, the cavalry arther is shown with an enemy's severed head slung from the bridle. While it was common for Assyrian warriors to colleCt heads to prove their wlour and gain shares of the C3.mpaign's booty, this practice is also attested ror Iranian mounted nomads and may \lle11 be a result of their general influenc:c at this date. An alternative view would be that it was the Assyrians who introduced the lrani:ans to the pleasures of headhunting!

122, 123, 124 & 125. ASSYRIAN INFANTRY, 9TH CENTURY B.C.

These figures are based on representations of Assyrian soldien from the reigns of AshurnasirpallJ (883-859 B.C .) and his son, Shalmaneser III (858-82>1 B.C.). From the reign of Ashumasirpal ll until the collapse of the Nco-Assyrian empire, the kings of Assyria decorated their palatcs with large limestone bas-reliefs, which came increasingly to depict the military exploits of the king and the State. Due ro their large scale and detail these reliefs pro\'ide the most complete picture available of the appearance of a powerful Near-Eastern Slate at war.

158

a

b 122

12 3

124 125

122 is an infant ry spearman, probably an asJltJriltli. or elite soldier, since non-clitc troops would very likely not be issued with heimets, or wear such richly decorated garmenn. He wears a plain woollen tunic with a wrap-around kil t having rnuticoloured trim, Ind stepped, zig.ng detontion of, probably. Aromacan inspiration (cf. fig. 175). For offence:, the warrior's main weapon is a javelin or short spear, a sword being carried suspended from a baldric. For protection he bears I rectangular com'a shield, made: of wooden slavu. or tetds, bound together with leather lhongs,

"9

1223 and 122b show Ihe Iype of round, bronze-faced shields carried by ca\'~lry shieldbearers ~nd some UJlrurirw_ These: shields could ti lher be plain, wilh a simple boss and turned-o\'er rim (a), or adorned with one or more conttmric ro .... '1 of metal spikes (b) intended for offensive use_ These shields are more frequently used by infantrymen during the reign of Shalmaneser III.

12] is probably an officer, as denoted by the mace he carries and his richly decorated garments. His fringed quiver strap is slightly unusual. He could be a rub kisri commanding archers or spearmen.

124 shows the more reprcstntative dress for Assyrian infamry archcrs oflhis dalt:, save he is vcry likely again an officer as his hdmel h:u a double row of 'crooks', or horns. The majority of archers 31 this time, apart from Ihe uslrurinu, would probably not be issued with hdmel5.

125 is an :1rI:her levied from the subjeo Aramaean Sillies of the lazirah and Syria, though native Assyrian peasam, or Iruprhu, bowmen would be very similar. The man's straighl hai r, which hangs in lhick bunches, and the small end'lassd 9t the back of his headband suggest that thiSlilrcher is a Suhtan . Ashurnasirpal n claimed the submission of Suhi. The land ofSuhi, strategically silUaled on Ihe lower-middle Euphrates nonh of Babylonia, had cellscd paying tribute 10 Assyria in 882 B.C. and, with Babylonian help, had fought olTtwo Assyrian campaigns, in 818 and sometime after 811 B.C. The latter campaign, though not decisively in Assyria's favour, brought Suhi to terms, and numbers of Suheans were settled in Kalhu.

126. NEO-ASSYRIAN C HARIOT 8T H CE"'TURV B.C_

This type first appears in the reign of Tiglath·Pileser 1II (145-121 B.C.). It is larger, heavier and rectangular in pbn. This design makes beller use of the sub-frame introduced in the previous century and described under 119. This chariot could now accommooale as many as four occupants. The crossed quivers were replaced by rued venical quivers althe front corners of the cab. /I. more efJicieOl harnessing arrangement enabled the elliplical duught-poJe suppon 10 be replaced by a thong, still supponing a decorated panel (126~). Eventu311y Ihis w~s dispensed with altogCther. The wheels had become larger, now having eight spokes. The inner rim or felloe is seemingly separate from the oUler felloe, to which it is attached by four quadril31eral pieces of mel ai, nailed on 10 the side of the oUler rim. The na\'e and ends of the wheel spokes was melal sheathed. The OUler rim was rectangular in section.

The actual body of the chariot, wheels, roke and dmught-pole were probably made from a variety of types of wood. The cab, especially thai of the king, was often highly-decot:lted with embossed bronze (or gold in lhe case of the king) strips, mellil rosettes, paim or inlay. This chariot, like one depicted in wall'paintings from Kar-Shalmaneser (Til-Banip), has its c:lb covered in reoanguillf metal plates, as have been found in excavations such as at Nimrud (see 42b and cf. 110). The horse is armoured in a similar manner. The Til-Barsip paintings show the following colours on chariotr},; cr~[s, tassels and fringes attached to the horse harness were coloured red and blue (usually in aitern3ting oonds), ch3riot horses were blue (i.e. grey), red, brown, black and white. The cab could have a red and blue border, while the wheels were coloured yellow or while (natural wood?). Reins and IC3ther equipment were reddish brown.

As with e3rlier ch3riots, four horses were probably used, although only two are shown. Apart from the evidence oflhe harnessing system, some scenes showing chariots being ferried across rh'ers depict four unharnessed horses following behind, and more crests than horses are shown. This type of chariot continued, with minor modifications through Sargon II's reign.

127. NED-ASSYRIAN C HARIOT CREW, 8TH CENTURY B.C. (DISMOUNTED).

Charioteers frequently fought on foot at sieges. Here the chariot drh'e r prOlettS the chariO! archer with the Iypical large siege-shield of plaited reed, while Ihe shield·bearer cominues his function of prolecting Ihe archer from highangle fire with his round shield. Both have drawn their swords sintt they arc emplaced close to Ihe besieged (own and are in danger of sallies from il.

The armour of charioleers became lighter throughout the 8th century, possibly due 10 changes in tactical function, but also probabl)' for reasons of expensc. Tiglat.h-Pi!eser Il l 's reforms had resulted in the chariot corps losing much of its 'feudal', aristocr.uic :!.Spect and the stUle wu now bearing the COSI of its tquipmem to a far gTealct extent. HeN: the lamellar COOl extends 10 the upper thigh only.

160

126

a

127

161

128. C AVALRY OF TIGLATH·PlLESER m, 8TH C ENTURY B.C.

Surviving representations from Tigllllh.Pilcscr lII 's reign do not depict mounted archen, but this is probably due to the chance of disco\'ery and survival of material . Though riders arc still shown in traditional pairs, both now control their own mounu. It is unclear if ClIvalry still aCtually fought in pairs or if this appearance is due to anistic convention alone, though it seems tactically probable that they did. Here the foreground rider lits on a uddlecloth of animal hide which relains its hoo\'cs for d«orative effect . The ncckNnd Iiso appears to be solely decorati\'e.

Armoured horsemen appear for the first time in the reign ofTiglath.Pilcscr lU, (128a). This rider appears 10 be an Aramaean from his uyle of beard, though his equipment is Assyrian.

a

J29. ARCHER OF TIGLATH·PILESER III .

This archer would Ippear to be of the same rank as 123 and, possibly, 132. He is undoubtedly an offlctr and is probably a dismounted C3\'Ilryman. He wears a ribbl:d waist·belt, plain IUnic and plain wrap-3round kilt (sec figure 114). 129a shows I vuiant tasselled form of quivef--cover.

130

a

129

162

130. NEO-ASSYRIAN C HARIOT C REW, REIGN OF SARGON II

During the rtign ofTiglath-Pil~r II , the chariot crew had consisted of three, and occasionally, four. During the reign ofSargon 1I it wu also usually three men, but by the reign of Ashurbanipal at the latest, the standard crew comprised four men. The three-man crew consisted of lhe driver, or m~orrik, archer, or marn dllmqu and the 'thirdman' , or roshlishu, who acted as a shield·bearer and no doubt a spearman. Grooms w~re known as milia! appari. One reason for the increasc in number of crew, and consequ~nl ly slr~ngth in close-combat, may b~ th~ incr~3se in the effiei~ncy of cavalry. Cavalry were making th~ cbariot ever mor~ redundant in all but shock action, in which the chariotry now specialised. This in itself might indicat~ som~whll the limitations of cavalry in this r~specl.

131, 132 & 133 . NEO·ASSYRIAN C AVALRY, REIGN OF SARGON II

These figures are based on the reli~fs from Dur·Sharrukin (Khorsabad; 'Sargon's ci ty') and paintings from Til· Barsip. 131and 133 are spearm~n , equipped additionally with the bow, and 132 is a mount~d archer. Th~ sp~ar was quite long and tbrust ovel'3rm, usually held near the bUll. The Til-Barsip paintings depict cavalry such as 133, dressc:d in wh ile or brown tunics, with a white fringe, red and blue banded socks, black and white pallerned kilts and blue boots. The blue helmelS probably represent iron. Bo .... 'S arc yellow and spear·shaHs, red. Horse \tappings, crests and tassels 3re red and blue. The saddle of 133, which has an animal's paw still attached, could have a black sponed pattern indicating the use of exotic animal skins. Horses could be black, while, grey, reddish brown or darker brown, and texts mention bay horses. Different breeds of horses were known such as the 'kuscan' ('Kushite') and the ' !-.tesean' (from Iran), which were yoke-horscs.

The qUI\-cr of 132, also served as a bow-case. l'he co\'ers of some were decorated with a bird's head instead ofa tassel.

132

133

163

134,135 & 136. INFANTRY, TlGLATH·PILESER m TO SARGON II

Figure 134 is an unannoured infantry speurman as they appeared in the reigns ofthese 1",'0 kings. l14a sho .... ., variant types of helmet. At this time most infantry were Itillunarmoured, as were the cavalry. Figure 135 is an infantry guardsman ofSargon n . He carries a decorated circular, conical shield. These shields were simply a cone ofleather, probably over a wicker base, with a sheet bron7.e central 'boss'. The T il·Barsip paintings show that dothing coloun were predominantly red, blue or white, and shields could be decorated with ahemate concentric bands afblue and red. Figure 136 is an armoured slinger ofTiglath·Pileser III. Like the other infantry, he is not yet equipped with socks and boots, later standard issue and coming inlO use at this time, together with lamellu armour.

There were several types of shield known in the Auyrian army, though to which types the terms; arilu, shallalu, kabobu, sahu and lukslru refer is nOI dta!. A large reed shield for archers was called Iffllslraiabolt (from the word for 'cover'). It was probably like thai in 127, and reeds were espeeially grown for its manufaclU re. Another ilem of soldiers' equipment ..... as the "IIUO'u, or WlIter·bottle .

a

136 134

137. AUXILIARY TROOPS OF TIGLATH·PILESER m The reforms ofTiglath·Pileser III turned conquered regions into provinCC!l, from which lTOOpS could be ailed up as sob sharTi, in the same way as Assyrians. These troops are from the Aramaean and Neo-Hittite pro\'inces, and, at this time, retain some of their distinct ive equipment. The helmets are derived ultimately from Uranian designs, which were used by the Neo-Hittites and, in Anatolia, by the Phrygian! (Mushki). Figures 137b and c wear NcoHillite boots, and figu res 137a and b wear ltIt/iw·baldrics and metal ir/II plates (discussed under 149). l73e, rand g show yet more types of helmet . Helmet crests appear for the first lime in Assyrian armies in the reign ofTiglath. Pileser m.

164

e

f

a b c d 138 & 13" AUXILIARV TROOPS OF SARGON n Figure 138 also ""cars a limit'" and irlll, Uranian or Nto-Hittitt itylc of hclmci and a tunic deconted in I manner known in Uranu, and Nto-Hinite stllles. He carries a sword, (namwnI or patru). and the wickerwork consuuction on the inside of his shield is clearly vis ible.

The archer, 139, may be an Aramacan. [39a and b show other associated hairstyles ofthcsc auxiliuies, and 139d the type: of p:ulcming thaI occurs on their kilts. 139c is a long. narrow form of quiver used by these !toops, Arrows were known as mu/",ul/w, qallN, s/lI"//ali"" shukudu or 111111.

g

d

138

139

c

'65

Aumann lighl-troops, such as Gurrara, h u'ara and Ru'a, were much used as lookouts and for securing lines of communication. Troops from mountainous regions to the nonh-west of Assrria may have been naturally good at operating in difficult terrain .

Assyrian auxiliarie:, and other personnel, shown wearing feather circlets on some reliefs, arc nO! auxiliaries from Philistia, but Assyrian priests and soldiers panaking in a festival.

140. NEO-ASSYRIAN C HARIOT, 7TH CENTURV B.C.

This illustmes the chariot as it appeared in the reigns of Sc:nnacherib and Ashurbanipal.

The dimensions of the cab were about 1.5m. in width, slighlly less than 1m. high and about 1m. deep. 140b shows a plan of the chariot, and 140c shows a section of the whed which is still as described under 126 except that the diameter has increased yet again, and could now be as high as a man. The rim of the wheel was now often studded with the rounded heads of nails driven into it. This would improve grip and strengthen the attachment of the oUler rim to the inner rim. The dimensions and the open back are confirmed by the reliefs of Ashurbanipal's lion·hulll, showing the: rear closed by :I la rge shield. secured by straps to the: cab sides. This is shown being carried on the back ofa servalll during the preparation for the hunt. Ordinary war-chariols had dispensed with such rear protection at this time.

T he draught.pole disappears under the cab and probably continues to the end of the Clib for strength of construction. T he pole is further reinforced by a curved rod connecting it 10 Ihe top of the front of the cab. The axle: was set at the extreme rear of the cab, under the floor .

The chariot was drawn by four horses as revuled by a frontal view of the yoke ( 140a) as it appears in rdiefs. The: horses arc: protected by a fo rm of textile armour. T he reliefs of the battle of the Ulai river from the South West palace at Nineveh show the armour in some detail. Each j, equipped with a large cover upon his back, perhaps of thick fel t or leather. It is secured at the Tear and tOp, and lappets hanging down at each side give some protection to the legs while not impeding movement. The neck and chest are covered up to the car by a thick section secured to the back-cloth and along the back of the neck by a series of toggles. Other reliefs show the neck cloth scored with three lines, which could show that it was later made up ofthrc:c: overlapping seclions giving greater frc:c:dom of movement. Such textile armour would have given adequale protection against spent or stray missiles and lc:ssc:n the impact of di rect hilS.

The horse wu secured to, and pulled the chariot by, a chest-band attached to the yoke. which had four curved :md padded half-collars. ElIch collar had an anached chest-bind. A second band passed under Ihe chest. behind the fore-legs, but is sometimes omilled from reliefs.

Around the neck of each horse went a SlTap for a bell, no doubt to add its \'oice 10 Ihe thunder of a charge for psychological elTecl.

Forward, and each side of the cab were positioned two quivers. apparently an integral pan of the frame and not detachable.

141. NEO·ASSYRIAN CHARIOT CRE W, 7TH CENTURY B.C .

The crew shown here date 10 the re.ign of Ashurbanipal. The archer uses a composite bow and the shield-bearen carry ribbed shields. The shields were held high and tilted to cover both front and side of the dri\'er and archer when ad\'1Incing in the face of mis.s.iles. They also enable the rear to be: protmed in close: combat or when ..... ithdrawing while being shot al. One of the shield-bearers must therefore hold Ihe shield in his right hand. Each of the: crew wears a waisl-length lamellar corslet (often slc:c:vcless) over I short·sleeved tunic reaching 10 Ihe knc:c:. Socks and boots were worn as standard issue in the Assyrian army and somelimes a iOn of 'cummerbund' or sash was worn about the waist. under a thin leather belt.

The quivers contained not only urows but short weighted iavelins or dans known as sllitrakllu, or ,iflaM, (141b).

141a shows I bow-casc:, hung by means of Ihrc:c: st raps attached to a medallion, hanging from the cab.

The artistic record for Wilr chariotS is unfonunalely incomplete for the reigns ofSc:nnacherib and Esarhaddon. Ho_r, a recenlly discovered relieffragmem from Nine\'eh depicts a four-man crew from the reign of Sc:nnacherib. They arc on parade and therefore nOI in armour. There are two shield-bearers wilh con\'ex shields (see fig_ 145).

16'

140 \

a •

•

b

•

=DF' ="W C a b

167

142. NEQ·ASSYRIAN GUARD CAVALRY LANCER, 7TH CENTURY B .C.

T his figure depicts a qumbll/i sha pi/halli from the relief'cycle Set up in the Southern Palace of Sennacherib ('The Palace Without an Equal') representing the Assyrian siege of Lachish in 10 1 S.c.

He wears the now standardised equipment of' Assyrian ' heavy units, comprising a helmet, short corslet, short·sleeved linen tunic, fringed wrap-around kill, and boots with long socks. His sleeveless lamellar corslet has a complete fringe of leather pteruges, and his pointed helmet of polished iron, which has large, hinged cheek-pieces, is adorned with a bronze strip around the rim :md a double row of crooks, possibly to indicate the wearer's rank.

For offence he is armed with both a heavy thrusting·spear, azmarll, and a short composite angular bow, qash/u (later known as the 'Akkadian bow', qashw akkadu, to distinguish it from the Cimmerian or Scythian bow). T he term azmaru, which first occurs during the se<:ond half of the second millenium, had by the time oftbe laler Sargonids come to describe a heavy spear issued to both infantry and some cavalry. It was made of e'm wood or mu"allU (cornel or dogwood), a native hardwood noted for its straight growth, and appears to have been produced in two sizes from 2.5·3.5 metres long. Infantry appear most frequently with shoner azmaru and cavalry lancers with the longer version. The bow, when not in use, was carried in the quiver. Assyrian quivers were usually tubular during the 7th century and made of sheet bronze decorated in repousee with horizontal bands and rosettes. This guardsman has a slightly unusual leather quiver which has clearly stretched to accommodate the bow. Quivers of this type arc sometimes shown with covers decorated with a cockerel's head (no-doubt because of the similarity of a crowing cockerel's head and neck to the long, stretched, cover), fig. 142a.

A short iron sword is suspended from a wide baldric, decorated with metal rosettes, ove.r the right shoulder.

It would appear that all qllrubilli fha pi/halli were usually armed with both spear and bow.

The horse·harness is generally typical of that issued 10 Assyrian cavalry unilS during Ihe reign ofSennacherib, apart from the large, decorated collar which distinguished the horses of royalty and palace unitS. The horse's poll has been shaved for coolness and is protected from the sun by a bead brow cushion. A leather frontlet hangs from the browband and the top of the rrontlet 's point is decorated with a large, domed disc. Actual examples from Zinjirli were 5.2cm. in diameter.

The saddle of plaited leather is decorated at the corners with multi-coloured tassels. The breastband has banjoshaped appliques of brODze or bone and seems to hne secured the saddle in the absence of a girth, which is only rarely shown.

143. NEQ·ASSYRlAN CAVALRY LANCER, LATER ITH CENTURY B.C.

The qurubuti sha pi/halli of Ashurbanipal 's reign, and therefore presumably Esarhaddon's, differed very little in appearance from fig. 142, except that their helmets were more likely to have integral cheek·pieces. However, by 653 S.c. at the latest Assyrian cavalrymen arc always shown in baule riding fully·protected horses.

Rel iefs dating 10 the reign of Ashurbanipal show both cavalry lancers and archers riding horses prolected by textile armour similar to that worn by chariot horses. Two basic designs are shown and also a few minor variations. The main difference being in the number and arrangement of the textile sections and the method offastening. The type illustrated here is the most widely depicted in the reliefs. It consists either ofa single large backcloth, or twO halves, as suggested by the tOggles securing it across the horses' rump. The backcloth is also secured under the tai l and under the belly, the straps being single or double. Four rounded lappets provide some protection for the legs. Another section of cloth covering the horses' chest and throat is anached to the backcloth by toggles at the side of the neck. In what may be a later de\'elopmem, the backcloth cominues around the horse's chest with no visible join, suggesting a one·piece housing which joined on one side of the neck only. Sometimes the backcloth is shown decorated with parallel bands around the borders.

It is imeresting to nOle that the armoured crew, horses and weaponry of a four·man, four· horse chariOI would be equivalent to four of this type of cavalryman, while dispensing with the vehicle. The development of this advanced form of cavalry may thus have hastened the redundancy of the chariot, being more economic and tactically flexible.

168

142

169

144. NEO·ASSYRlAN INFANTRY OFFICER, 7TH CENTURY B.C.

Again derived from the: Ulai rc:lief<yde added to the dc:roration oflhe Southern Palace ofSc:nnacherib by Ashurbanipal, this figure is based on the dl'll.matic scene depiC'ling the duth of the Elamile king, Teumman, and his son, Tammaritu.

This man is 1I1mOSl ctu ainly a rab k im ' or a rhiJlmu, as indicaled by his triple 'crooked ' hetmel, the quantily of jewellery,lInd his distinctive, double·blllded axe. By the 7th century B.C. Assyrilln officers lIppelir to hllve regululy exchanged their small , ctremonial mliCtS (the tradition~1 insignia ofthcir rank) for this more practical battlefield weapon, possibly lIdopted through contact with the Scytho-Cimmerians. T his was the only type of axe used by lhe Assyrians in baule, although large, two-handed, single·bladed axes arc frequently shown being used by work· parties of soldiers engaged in wood-cuuing.

This officer has a gold, spiral arm·band and a single wrist·band . He wears a standard·issue lamellar corsLet, which has a complete fri nge of'pleruges' lit the wais!. Both his helmet and the lamellae of his armour could be of bronze rather than iron since bronze armour seems to hove been highly·regarded still, being both lighter, rust·p roof and more attnctive when polished.

T he fringed wrnp-around kilt WO$ universally worn by the regular Assyrian military from the late 8th century 10

the end of lhe Neo·Assyrian Empire:. The partiol, muhi·coloured fringe seems 10 have b«n attached only to Ihe right-hand side of the kilt's hem. The poimed end was kept loose, being passed over the belt or waistband 10 hang down between the wearer's knees. T his detail is usually concealed by armour or wide metal belts worn over the waistband.

146 147

144

145, 146 & 147. NEO·ASSYRIAN ROYAL GUARDSMEN, 7TH CENTURY B.C.

145 is an infantry guardsman of the reign of Sennachetib (704-681 B.C.). He wears the stllndard issue: lamellar corslet, short·sleeved tunic, wflIp-around fringed kilt, and boolS with long patterned socks. His pointed iron helmet, derorated with bronze sirips and crooks, is t)'pial ofSennacherib's reign, having luge, sepafllte hinged chm-pieces.

The large coniCliI shield, mllde of bronze· coloured 1ellther edged and decofll ted with large bossed rivelS, was only arried by guardsmen. From Ihis il appears tha t in Sen nacherib's reign armoured spearmen did not exiST outside lhe guard or kisir SharTUl i.

170

146 is an infanlryman of the le is;, shamlti ofSennacherib's grandson, Ashurbanipal (668-627 B_G.). His appearance, although superficially similar to fig. 145, demonstrates several changes ofdelai!. The soldier's pointed iron he.lmet has integral cheek-pica:s and a rim that is slighlly lower althe back in order to give some protection to the neck. The most obvious change, the tremendous increase in shield size, is symptomatic of an increasing preoccuplltion with protcetion oflhe later Neo-Assyrian military and reileen II desire to minimise casualties caused by missiles. The change to the larger shield probably came about following Esarhaddon's unsuccessful Egyptian expedition of 674 B.C.

Figure 147 is a guard officer in coun dress with II highly·pa mmed tunic, cord headband and symbolic macc-ofoffice. Such officers were referred to as sha hllla,i, or 'staff-bearers'.

148. NEQ·ASSYRIAN HEAVY INFANTRY SPEARMAN, ITH CENTURY B.C.

Armoured infantry spearmen, apan from guards, do not appear until the reign of Esarhaddon, who gttatly ClI:panded the regular army. He wears a corslet with partial pterugn and a helmet with integral check-pieces. He carries a large, curved, round-topped shield of leather, bound with bronze. The shield is shown painted blue in the source. The considerable variety of helmets which could be worn are shown by 148:1.

14 8

a

149, ISO & 151. NEO·ASSYRIAN MEDIUM INFANTRY SPEARMEN, 7TH CENTURY B.C.

These figures show the later slyies of dress and equipment ofthe Aramaean and Neo-Hittile soldiers first recru.ited intO the: Assyrian army by Tiglath-Pilcscr III and Sargon 11 during the 8th century B.C. All show strong Auyrianizing influences, and have to a great ClI:tem lost their regionl l and nat ional details of dress, probably liS D result of the issue of equipment from central 1110/ masharti, or arKnals, in metropolitan Auyria.

171

149 dau!s from Ihe reign ofSennacherib and Ihe bronze bowl-shaped helmet wi lh separate chcck-piCCC5 and upright 'pole' crest is I dislinnive feature of Ihis king's 'Iuxiliary' spearmen. This soldier wears a long tunic decor-ned wilh broad blue and ~ bands, as shown on :I late-phase NCO-Assyrian wall -])ainting from the governor's palace al Til-Barslp in nonhern Syria. His helmel crest is similarly chequered red Ind blue. Over his mnic he wears a wide bronze belt II the wlisl , a IImitulbaldric 10 suppon his shon iron sword, and a large bronze irtu [0 protect the chcs:l . h is possible 10 identify $C\'eral forms of irtu, the simplest being a large, flll round plate, Ihe more elaborate cxamplcs, u shown here, having I prominenl central domed boss and curled-Q\'er rim. The min's round shield, carried by a central handgrip, was mlde of woven rteds tied with leather or reed binding on the inside and bound by a bronze rim. The: shidd's face, oftm shown with a central bronze boss. is shown in fig. 151 and has the eha.racterlstic 'building-block' effect which was produccd by tbe imerweaving of:l thick rm facing some Scm. thick. FaCC$ of such shields .... ·ete usually plinted I solid colour, red being common.

150 & lSI arc soldiers of Ashurbanipil's army. Both soldiers' helmets ITe of iron inlaid with bronze and ha\'e integral ch«k-picces and crest-holders. The pictorial sources of this king's reign indicate tbat mosl uniu of medium spearmen were equipped with a reed-work version of the new, large body-shield (cf. fig . 148). Rccords of the later 7th «mury mention the large-scale. deliberate plaming of reeds along the Tigris for shield manufacture.

Some companies of spcarmen retained the older form of round shield, however, either because it was tradi tional to their arell of recruitmem or because of Ashurbanipal's particular rcverance for Sennacherib's memory.

151 wears the boots and long socks of 'Assyrian' soldiers, and is either an officer, or more probably belongs to an elite company or the kirir Jlwrrrlti, os is possibly indicated by the double-crooked helmtt. All these warrion art armed with short iron swords slung from a baldric forming pari or thei r lutt itu,

150

152

172

152. ASSYRIAN MILITARY SCRlBE

This scribe 3p~"rs in .:nun dr~, rhOllilh other.! are shown in more prnctiOll clothing like 147. H is long, friniled robe is belted al the WliIIisl and a multi-coloured, fringed shoulder·band is wrapped ~round the body. Such fringes could be coloured ahemately in blue and white, or be red overall. The basic garmtnt was white.

Scribes are usu~lIy shown in pairs, making lists of caprured equipment lind other spoils of war, liS well as recording Ihe names of soldiers. One scribe wrOle in cuneiform on a day tablet, while the other wrote on either II. wax writingboard using a stylus, or in ink on papyrus. It is e\'en possible that some of these scribes He in faa war':lrIists, making skelches in preparation for the delailed battle-reliefs Ihat would be made for the king's palace.

All matters concerning Ihe preparation and condua of a campaign were aHended and rcrorded by scribes. Delailed repom were requirtd by rulers, and military organisation depended on wrinen !'«Ords in order to function effickntly. Such documents were Slored in archh'es together with diplomatic co"espondence. This arrangement applied in the Near East for most of the period covered in Ihis book. The durability of these tablm 3nd the fact that Ihey are devoid of the kind ofexaggtration and propaganda found in royal annals (which would be poimless and coumer' productive in bureaucratic records), make them invaluable sources for reconstructing military organisation.

Couriers carried messages wrilfen on day tablets, one source mentions such a me!;S.lge being found in II. leather bag around the neck of a messenger who was apprehended.

Maps and plans on tablels were nOi unknown.

153

154

153 & 154 . NEO·ASSYRIAN ARMOURED MISSILE TROOPS, 6TH CENTURY B.C.

The slinger is laken from reliefs of Scnnacherib, although those: of Ashurbanipal would be identical. He wears the standard issue equipment of an Assyrian soldier, but some slingers are shown in reliefs with bare fecI.

The large, sphcrical Assyrian sling-stones, consistantly depicted in reliefs, \lre known from excavations at Lachish, :l Judc:ln stronghold Siormed by Sennocherib. Examples examined during rcse:arch for Ihis book have an avenge diameter of6cm., and weigh from 193 to 270gm., which should be compared 10 an average weight of Hellenistic lead sling-shol of around 65gm. T hese: sling-stones had been roughed out of rectangular limestone cubes, with only limited smoothing and finishing, and some had clear evidence of shanering impaclS.

The conlel of the archer is unusual in having shon sleeves but no pteruge~. During the reign of Ashurhanipal, hC3vy archers and slingers commonly wore a headcloth, like that of figure 154, instead of the iron helmet.

173

155 & 156. NEO-ASSYRIAN LIGHT ARCHERS

These soldiers are levies conscripted from subjm peoples, and were employed to fight in thei r nalive fashion. Figure ISS is a Neo-Hiuite from Carchemish doting to the reign of Sennacherib. Alternative headgear is shown in 156a. Figure 156 is an Aramaean \e\'Y of Ashurb3nipal. 156b shows the headgear ofChaldean levies who would otherwise appear similar to these.

156

155

157 & 158. BABYLONAIN ROYAL DRESS 8TH TO 7TH CENTURY B.C.

Figure 157 represents the Chaldean rebel, and sometime king of Babylon, Merodach·Baladan (Marduk·apal.iddina 721·710 B.C.), Dnd 158 represents Nabonidu$ (Nabu Na 'id 556·539 B.C.) last of the Chaldean dynasty ""'hich ruled the Nco-Babylonian Empire . He was an elderly man at the time of his defeat by Cyrus, and is shown here with a white beard. Both carry a staff of kingship and wear the conical Babylonian crown.

159 & 160. NEO·BABYLONIAN TROOPS 7TH TO 6TH CENTURY B.C.

Figure 159 represents :I Babylonian guardsman of the 7th century B.C., and like most nath'e Babylonians (trOOpS from Akkad, 3S opposed to Chaldeans and Arumaeans), is quite 'Assyrian' in his appearance. He wears a helmet and lameller corslet of Assyrian type and a la rge, conical, leather shield as used by Assyrian royal guards (c. r: 146). He wears a simple, plain (Unic and does wit.hout the heavier, woollen gear, socks and boots fU\'ou red in Assyria, where the climate was colder.

The troops illustrated in 160 are Chaldeans, levied by the kings of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. They wore short (Unics, caps or he:ldclolhs ending in long tassels and simple fillets. 160a is an archer, representing the majority of Chaldean troops. These were available in large numbers, and in order to make them more effective in dose· combat some were equipped with spears and shields in addition to the bow, as shown in 160b. Figure 160c is purely a spearman, equipped with a large body·shield, possibly made of woven r~ds, similar 10 thaI used by Assyrian troops towards the end oflhe Assyrian Empire (c.f. 148 and 150).

Babyloni~n cavalry, dtpiCled in Assyrian reliefs, appear to be very similar to 160b and c, but lack shields. Babyloni3n chariots would be similar 10 Assyrian Iypes. However, the captured Babylonian charims of Shamash·shuma·ukin have archaic crossed-qui\'ers al {heir sides, and yokes fo r only two horses, so they may have been slow to match Assyrian changes in design.

'"

157 158

160

a b c

115

161, 162, 163 & 164. ELAMrTe WARRIORS ITH CENTURY B.C.

Thcse illustflltions are based on representations ofElamile troops depicted in thc reliefs from the palace of Ashurbanipal at Nincve.h, now in the British Museum. The reliefs conctrn the victory of Ashurbanipal over the Elamite king, Teumman, at the river Ulai. The Elamite chariot (161) consisted ofa luge, flat platform, which could have low, scmi-cirrular sides (16 1a and b). II had two large, 12·$poked wheels and the axle was positioned beneath the ctnue of the pl:uform. These chariots were dfllwn by two or fOUf mules or small horses. The reliefs depict chariots being swept away by the river Ulai, and show from views oflhe yoke. dearly designed for four horses or mules. Other, overturned chuiots show two or four animals. The crew consisted of a driver and up [0 three archers, who sal or knelt on the platform which was covered in a reed mat. The mobile, massed archers would be quite effective in themselves apart from any dose-combat abili ty these chariol5 may have possessed. They may have provided a son of ban Ie field transport for archers, and reliefs show large numbers making good their escape from the bailie in this way.

Figure 162 is an Elamile king or officer. He wears a long robe and a cloak into which he has tucked his right arm. There are two types of headgear which seems 10 distinguish officen or nobles; the cap worn by 162 has II feather hanging from the back, and 1623 shows a bulbous cap with fabric neck guard and ribbon. The ordinary soldiers wear only a doth headband.

The cavalry, 163, were identical in dress 10 the infantry, but carried a spear and bow. They ride on a larger breed of horse than those shown harnessed 10 the chariots. Like the Assyrians. they probably made a dist inction between riding and dnlught horses, and employed a smaller breed ofhorsc (attested later on in Iran) for dnught purposes. The quiver, which appears 10 be of a Siandard type, may have bee:n embossed lC1lther, stiffened fabric or even panly of bronze. It was tied on, with (he knOt resting on th~ soldier's che:s(.

The infantry archers appear 10 have made up the majority of the infantry, and were quite uniform in appeannce (164). Assyrian texts, however, menlion troops hearing bow and shield and 'heavily.armed archers'. Such trOOpS do not appear in the rdiefs and Iheir appearance is not known. Presumably the Assyrian anins did not have access 10 this informalion, while the scribes had verbal accounts and probably ballle·repons at their disposal. Assyrian accounlS also mention the nobles bed«ked in silver bangles and riding in chariots with gold and si lver trappings.

Elamite armies were effective and numerous, defeating the Assyrians on seveflll occasions. They featured mobility, sound 13ctical sense. and reliably supponed Babylonian rebels against Assyria. Together with Uranu and Egypt, they were a serious rival to the Assyrian Empire.

a

161

b 176

162

164

163

165 & 166 . MANNAEAN WARRIO RS

The Mannal inhubilcd the Iranian highlands direct ly 10 the east of Assyria, and many Assyrian campaigns \l,rere dircCI!:d into Ihis region. These illustrations an: based on drawings on pomry dating 10 Ihe 10th «nlUI')' B.C. Ind Ihe archaeological finds from Hasanlu, dliling 10 the end of the 9th century B.C. hory pands carved with reprcscmations of troops from H asanlu arc panicuiarly informative as 10 miliulry developments in North-Wesl Iran 31 this lime: . Figure 165 is a spcannan wearing some: son of textile body armour and c.arrying a painted wicker shield. 166 is a cavalryman. His horse is decor-ned with a bead-colJar necklace: with 11 bell anached 10 ii, and a pfOlectivt melal from lei. 166a shows 1110'0 types ofhdmcl which could have betn worn by wealthier troops, and may be romparcd with Uranian designs. Figure: 1 65~ is ~n infantryman from the Hasanlu ivories. The diSlincth'c headgear worn by troops from this sourer is perhaps a 'crown' of roldw textile, held on by a chinsua p, with I studded neck.guard. It is somewhat reminiscent of the laler Persian ' tiara'. Metal, Assyrian-ltyle helmets, sometimes with separate earnaps were also worn. Spears had socketed iron or bronze heads and side-urns consisted of swords , mam and small axes. The small round shield, which appears to have been convex with a wide rim, was probably made of leather or wood as no examples have survived. These shields arc also shown on the ivories being used by the enemy troops, who are otherwise completely naked.

Archers depicted on the Huanlu ivories show more variation in appeal1lnee. Some have curly hair while OIhers have straight hair. Some wear turbans, and othert wear studded fillets. "I.ost appear to be dressed in the same type of tunic as 165a. 1l\ey arc olien shown shooting from a knteling posi!ion. Bronze quivert Ind bronze or iron arrowheads were used.

Ca\'1lry on the ivories appear like 166, but wear tunics and helmets like 165a. The ivories also pro\·ide evidence ofchariot ry, which were crewed by two men and drawn by twO horses. Crews and chariot cabs arc not completely preserved. but the cab has a box-like profile, wider a( the top than the bottom. The wheels have sll: spokes and the axle is fixed beneath the centre or the C1IIb. A knob 8t the rear may be a shield boS5 or Structural, and crossed quivers mounted on the side of the cab arc shown on a metal plaque. The chariot crew consisted of an archer and II driver. The chariot horses reKmble that in 166, but wear feathered crcsts.

177

Th~ tlOOPS occur in battlc: scenes which show groups of chariotry, a .... alry and ar t"hers operating together, and in one case tWO ranks of three cavalry operating in line.

166

167. IRANIAN WARRIOR 8TH CENTURY B.C.

Warriors and dignilaries wearing this slyle of dress in Assyrian reliefs represent peoples of the Zagros Mounlains and Nonh·West Iran, such as the Madai (Medes), Mannai, and warriors from regions luch as Zikinu, Zamua, Na'iri and Shupria. The shield is shown being used by the defenders of the ci ty ofPuashi. It was probably made of reeds insened through str ips of coloured leather, in such a way that each reed passed through the strip twice, so that the s!rip would form a panel on the face of the shield. He uses an animal skin cloak, which is shaped 10 faslen over one shoulder lind hn a hole for one arm, to give some protection to his unshielded side. It would be a useful garment generally in these cold regions, (c.f. 73).

168. IRANIAN INFANTRYMAN, 6TH CENTUR Y B.C.

This figure is included in order to show the element of continuity of Assyrian and Babylonian practice into the early Persian period. Although largely outside the time limit of this book, the Archaemenid Empire represents the last greal Near·Easlern military system, and hn more in common wilh its Near·Eastern and cullurally relaled predecessors than Iny later age. Also, before her rise to power, Parsumash or Parsuash, as the small Inn ian region was known, was in conlact with Assyria and Babylon, and for a time, tributary 10 AHyria .

Parsumash began her rise to empire, probably with the take-over of Anshan from the Elamites in the early 7th century B.C. The Medel and Elamites were absorbed in the early 6th century B.C. This was achieved under King Kurash (Cyrus I). The Babylonians referred 10 Ihe Persian trOOpS by a archaic term for the peoples of Ihis part of Inn, calling them 'shield ·bearing Gudans'.

178

168

Tht headclOlh, tunic and d~gger are dislincli~ items of Persian dress. but he wears A»yrian'slyle socks on his legs I1Ither than trousers. He carries a la rge: rectangular ~ed shield. II is interesting to notc that combinations of spear and bow, and shield and bow, wc:re: already being experimented with by the Babylonians al the time orlhe Penian conquest, possibly influencing Persian p~i~. The: basic Achacmc:nid unit was the khafro (I lima! Median translation of kis",) commanded on Babylonian lines by shaJtnu. With the conquest of the East by AIC:llandcr, a complete cycle: of military development comes to a close, to be replaced by another.

169, 170 & 171. NEO·HITTITE CHARIOTRY 9TH TO 8TH CENTURY B.C.

There ate many represc:nt3lions orNeo-Hinill~ chariOl$; sour~ including reliefs from the sites of Care hem ish, Aulatya. Sakje-gozu, Tayanat, Te-ll·H alaf and Zinjirli, and the- ivory plaques of Syrian workmanship from Nimrud (which deconued furniture brought as tribute from Neo-Hinite ci lies). These represemations dale!O the 9th and 8m cmturies B.C. The-re- are many poims of similarity with Assyrian churiots, and the Assyrians may have- been infiue-nce-d by some a5ptC1.s of Neo-Hinite chariot design.

Neo-Hinite- charion exhibit some changes during the 9th and 8th centuries B.C. The axle- was mO\'ed from beneath the cemrc of the- cab to the rear. The number of spokes in the wheel was increased from six 10 eight (although the- six·spoked type continued in use). The- cab was originally curved at the- front and changes to a de-e-pc:r, and perhaps rCClangulur, shape. T he number of cre-w increased from twO to four, as demonstrated in a representation of 11 veT)' heavy Ch3riOt on an ivory from Nimrod (170 and 171). It is also probable thatlhe number of horses increased from tWO 10 four 10 enable the increaSC' in weight and number of crew. Like- many Assyrian re-presenlations, NcoHinite anists did not ancmpt to show four horses, usually making do with only one, (an anislic convenience which the authors IhemSC'lves have found useful!). A captured chariot from Lachish, shown in an Assyrian relief, has a yoke- for four horses and this number we-rein use in Egypt and Cyprus by the 7th century. Funhcrmore, some Neo-Hinill~ reliefs show the horse without a yoke saddle and with a pendant on the outer rein, chal1lctefistic of the outside horses of a four-horsed chariot which were harnessed in a different manner to the inne-r pair. until a new type of yoke wu inv('nt('d in Assyria in Ihe- 8th c('ntury B.C. Th(' horus and crew of the 81h century NeoHinil(, chariots are oft('n shown wuring consid(' rabl(' amounts of seal(' armour, but this was protnbly also available earlier. Crossed quive-rs on the sides, ellipliall supponing rod for the yoke·pole and the shield hung al the rear of Ihe cab. remained characteristic of the Nco-H ittite chariot throughout Ih(' period.

The cab of 169 is based on I rdief from Carchemish. It is probably covered wilh low bronze bosses, unless this is a convention for a scale cover. long known in the Near Easl. later Assyrian chariots also being co\'ered in bronze plales. The scale armour for the hone has the scales arl1lnged in a different direction on the neck to enable movement. An Assyrian text m('ntions an iron sariam for a horse, captured from a Nco-Hillile kingdom. The chariot in 170 is cJelIrly me origin orlhe Egyptian design shown in 40, and a similar hand.grip is present in the relief from Sakjegozu. A fabric panel was hung from the support ing pole, possibly 10 balance the hull)' chariot cab.

119

The ' .... ,o-man ere ..... ' comprised an archer and a driver. The armoured charioleers ""ould resemble figures liS and 120, ..... hile unarmoured chariol crew ..... ould resemble 172. A fouT-man crew, consiSlcd of an unarmoured driver, an n eher, a spenman, and anOlher soldier, possibly a shield-bearer or anOlher spearman. 171 is based on the ere ..... in the Nimrud ivory plaque, butlhe Ur:lTIian-style helmtl is taken from a relief from Zinjirli. The crew arc wtll armoured. The spearman ..... ears a shon, scale corsltl wilh what may be pteruges, but the shape suggcsls a row of large scales like that shown in 4h. The scene makes it quite clear how the spear was mcantto be used. Its size and the knob al the e:nd suggest Ihot it is more than JUSt a javelin. It would be: useful to fend orr cavalry or infamry ..... ho ..... e:re: attacking the vulnerable reu of the chariot , in the same way as reliefs sho"" it being used against lions in hunting see:ne:s.

Nco-Hinite fdids are more than 400 years later than the Hin itc Empire, and do not constitute valid evidence: for the appearance of chariOlS and troop! of that lime:. They cxhibilthe influence of Assyria and Uranu, nOI pre5CnI in the earlier period.

180

171

172. NEO·HITTITE GUARDSMAN AND OFFICER 9TH CENTURY B.C.

These figures are based on reliefs from the royal palace at Carchcmish. These depict a file of soldiers equipped as l72a, and officers or nobles like J 72b. These were probably 11 unit of elite royal guards. Further evidence for such troops could be the 3000 infanlTY of Plairi ofCarchcmish, recruited into the army of Sargon II following the rebellion of Carchcmish. He also recruited 50 chariots and 200 cavalry, probabl}' also elite troops. Figure i 72a wears a distinctive variant of the Nco-Hittite or Uranian type of helmet, which hilS IWO short 'horns' mounted lit the from. T hey aTC probably low, bronze boSKS. Both troops ClI rry large, flat or slightly com'ex round shields, slung on thei r backs by leather straps. The faces of these shields may have bun cO\'ercd in sheet bronze, possibly with embossed decoration, as in Uranu, and may also have had bosses in the form oflions' he3ds, as sho~'ll f!Xed to the back of chariots (169, 170). 172a wears traditional Hinitc-style boots. Weaponry comprised thrusting-spea,., and straight swords.

172

a b

181

173 & 174 . ARAMAEAN AND NEO-HITTITE CAVALRY 9TH CENTURY B.C.

The use of cavalry by Neo-Hiuile and Aramaean slales is attC'Sled by numerous references in Assy rian records and reliefs depicting cavalrymen from Zinjirli and Tell-Halaf. A representation from Tell-Halaf is Ihe basis for figure 174, and shows Ihat cavalry were using shields, as they were also in Urartu and for a short lime in Assyria. 173 shows a mounted archer. T hc lisl of forcC'S al the battle of Karkar includes equal numbers of cavalry 10 chariotry in Ihe forces of Hamalh and Damascus, and this mighl suggesl some connection between horsemen and chariol crews in the mil ilary organisalion. T actically, they were probably required 10 operate with the chariotry, :as were Assyrian caval ry. The position of the shield in the Tell-H:alafreliefindicatcs that it was either strapped to the arm to allow the hand to control the reins, or possibly slung on the back. The shield had a ce-ntral boss, and Ihe horseman completes his equipment with a helmet and shon spea r.

175. ARAMAEAN INFANTRYMAN , 10TH TO 8TH CENTURY B.C. The majority of the infantry levied by the Aramaean and Nco-Hittite states were lightly equipped. This figure is a spearman, but archers and slingers were dressed almost identically, though lacking shields and wearing their hair as shown in 175a. Weapons were now made of iron, shidds were prob:lbly of leluher and clothing was made of woollen cloth, with simple decorative borden and fri nges.

176. ARAMAEAN CAMELRY 9TH TO STH CENTURY B.C. Representations of camel· riders are known from Zinjirli, Tell-Halafand Carchcmish. T hey are sometimes shown armed with a bow, so may have been used in a military role if only to prOleCt caravans. Camelry were prob:lbly introduced by the Aramaeans, but were also found in Neo· Hitti te sla tes. Al lhe battle of Karkar, 1000 camel·riders of an allied Arabian tribe were presem, fighting 310ngside tht NCO-Hittite and Aram2ean comingems. The twO ClImel· riders illustra ted in 176 show the \'lilriatioo in appearance-. Two t)'PCs of saddle were used, one apparently a rectangular 'cushion' or pad of cloth, the other a 50rt of saddle-doth and harness, which had straps for the rider 10 grip with his feet.

177,178 & 179. NEO-HITTITE TROOPS, STH CENTURY B.C.

These soldiers arc derived from reliefs at Karatepe, and so may represent the forces of the sme of Que. One of the most interesting fea tures of equipment is Ihe helmel worn by 178. who is presumably a guardsman, or eli le infanuyman. This is very similar 10 the helmet worn by 172a, exce-pt that the crest has become larger. T his is the ultimate development of lhe Uranian style of crested helmet and gives this soldier an almost 'hoplile' appearance, although Nco-Hill ite representations pre-dale Ihe introduct ion of the hoplite panoply in Greece. In fa ctlhe Greeks may have been influenced by items of Neo-Hitti le and Ura rtian manufacture as the Argos panoply would indicate. The cavalry are shown unshielded bUI using a Ihrusting-spear in an underarm manner, contrary to contemporary Assyrillfl practice. The archer is equipped with a narrow bronze belt, as would be used by many Nco-Hittite troops. He wears one of the many different types of , turban' by which the various Aramaean tribes and North Syrian peoples may be distinguished.

174

173

182

176

(( 175

r 17~7====~~~~~~========~~

179 178

18J

ISO. ARAMAEAN AND NEO-HlTTrTE HEADGEAR

By examination of foreign tribute-bearers in Assyrian sourCC$ and comparing them to representations from the various Slates of Northern Syria, Anatolia and the Levant, it is possible to establish their distinctive styles of headgear. Judean styles ofwntpping a long, scarf· like headcloth are shown in ISOa . 180b shows ",arianl forms of Phoenician 'turban'. 180c was worn in Tyre. The cap shown in 1SOd is depicted being worn by Jehu of israel on the 'black obdisk' orShalmaneKr III, and was also worn in Damucu5, Kallina, Unqi, and Bit-Adini. l8Oc, which ends in a tusel, was worn in Hamath. 180fis another fashion from Unqi. The headgear in lSOg ""'2S worn in Carchemish, and 1SOh is further headgear from Que and Sam'al. The hat on the right, was fonned by tying·up the cheekpieces on top of the head. ISOi shows twO heads belonging to Mushki. The plaited forelocks on the righi-hand head are allowed to hang over the front of the fillet.

a c d

e f g h

180

181. JUDEAN SOLDIER 8TH TO 7TH CENTURY B.C.

This figure is taken from the Assyrian reliefs showing the. sack of Lachish by Scnnacherib in 701 B.C. This represents the equipment ora typical Judean soldier, and exhibits marked AS$)"Tian influence, panicularly in the helmet and shield. Scnnacherib conscripted many Judeans inlo the kilir Jharruli (royal army). In this corps they appear wearing Assyrian issue boots, socks and shield but retaining nal ive tunic and headdress. This huddress, a son of wrap' around scarf shown in ISla, could be worn instead of, or beneath a helmet.

181

182

184

I

182 & 183. A.R A.BlAN DESERT NOMA.DS

~ included the Midianitcs,. Amalc:k.iu:s and the later Allib tribes of the hamme, Nabaita~, KJdnaya and Atarunwn \\'hich fought the Assynans. The camellirlt IPpears as a mount for warriors II the beginning of the 151 mllienmum B.C. Before the 7th century It was probably more usual 10 lind a smgle nder, since Auynan repreknllilons of Arabs riding tWO 10 a amel may well be: an mdlCalion of the succeu of dl(: Assymnl' campaign of allnuon. ThlJ in\'OI\"Cd poisoning of well. and garrisoning of oun. forcing lhe nomads 10 .lauGhler their camds and n 'en to dnnk their blood.

Tribes were headed either by kinp, or surpmingly, queen5, as IIluSlnalCd in 182. Organiuuon would be: ~Kd on dan. Ind In army would l imply comprise: a muster of a11lribesmen acknowledging the authonlY of I panKUlar leader.

\V'hen raiding, mobility and speed would rcqutrC all'lo'afTiors 10 be: mounled, as tbey could always diimounl ifrcquiml.. The main armament was the bow. Standmi Ixtia consisted ofhit·.oo.run raids in search of easy plundc:r and CJpthu.

183

184, 185, 186 & 181. URA RT IAN WARRIORS Uranu .... u rich In melal5, and beame 1 cenlre for the manufacture of arm •. The inOuence of UrAnian drs igns can be: uxcd over a wide arel, utending beyond the conlinel oflhe Near East, II lellSt as far lIS Grrett. Items of Unruan manufacture were not only spread by trade. but no doubl: also among the booty of the Cimmerians and Scythians, and lhe tribute nK'!ed by Auyria. Bronze was used extensively, not only for weapoos, scale corslel5, helmets, shields, chariot finlngs and horse: Ifllppinl', bul also bellS and quivers. Iron "''IS a cheap alternative to bronu, uxd for ffiO$I tools and weapons and also 10 some exteot, for armour. The amount of mel:!l rquipmenl available to dlt Urand.QS II uldicatcd by the quantitiel of tribule recorded in inscriptions. and archxologial evidence from excavated cit.dels conllming arsenals. Sarduri II of Uranu once received a .. ribute of 2000 coppcr shields from Kushtuhpi of Kummuhu, Ind when Sargon U sacked Musasir, brontA: crests, scale corslet., hclmelland O\'er 25,000 copper dlirlds were limon, the booty. Howevt-r many items mlly hlI\~ been votive ofTerings, unsuitable for USC: in blttle.

185

These illustrations are based on represtnl:ltions of Uranian uoops in Assyrian reliefs, and on Uranian embossed bronu belts, quivers and armour as ..... ell as extensive an:h.aeoJogical evidence.

Figure 184 shows an Unnian spearman of the mid 9th. century B.C. He wears a crested helmet of which there ..... ere many varian IS. 1843 shows a type: "lith a purely metal em!. A type depie1C::d on the 'bronze gates of Bala ..... at' daling 10 Ihe reign ofShalmanestr II of Assyria, sho....., a helmet with a crest running di rectly over Ihe crown, a type Huested in other sources and by surviving examples. It is reminiscent of descriptions of the Karian helmet and possibly anctstrallo it, ultimately influencing Greek designs. Around his waist, over his shorl fringed tunic, he wears a bronze bell, which could pro\'ide limited protection for the abdomen.

The Uranian chariot shown in 185 wu similar 10 contemporary Assyrian types in general design, bUllighter, being cre ..... ed by t ..... o men and drawn by twO horses. The chariot and harness feature filIny bronze fillings, such as the bosses decor-lling the cab, the bells around the horses' necks and the frontlets ( 185a) protecting thei r foreheads. Heads of animals, such :as horses, could be mounted at the end of the draughl pole. Armament comprises the bow and spear. the Jailer fixed althe rear orlhe c-ab. Chniotry ..... eR probllbly provided by Ihc nobility and high offidals, Uranian engraved seals depict the king in his chariot accompanied by an umbrella·bearer, and a variant rype of chariot ..... ith large looped hand·grips attached to the cab. The profile of this variant Cllb shows that its upper edge curves do ..... n at the sides and up at the front, and the wheels have eight Clltved spokes which are rather bulbous at the base.

Figure 186 shows an Urartian cavalryman, the cream of the Uf1l rtian army. He is equipped wilh spear and shield. Horse·archers probably also existed and Cimmerian mercenaries were probably employed, who would no doubt make extensive use of Urarrian equipmenl.

187 is an Uran;mn noble or omen . Both he and 186 wear boou and leggings and 3 shon tunic, over which 187 wears a long, fringed kilt. Both are equipped with convex, embossed·bronu shields, probably backed by wood or leather. D«oration consisted of concentric rows of animals (187a shows a profile view). Sbields with bosses in the form of the heads of dogs, lions, griffins and bulls were also used.

186, 187 and the crew in 185 are wearing scale or lamell-ar corslets. Scales were usuaUy bronze, measuring Scm long and 2cm wide, with rounded boHoms. They were assembled with Ihe lacing exposed. These figures are aU equipped wilh Ihe conicallype of helmet, ..... hich could be of bronze or iron, decorated with stylised thunder or antler symbols, or rows of serpents. They also wear VlI riant types of bronze bell, which were often highly-decorated with embossed motifs.

Archers were similar in appearance to 184. Bronu quivers found in Unnian Drsena\s contained betwee:n 354 0 arrows. There were tWO main types of arrowhead, mOSI ofwbich were iron. The mltive type was fiat and spade· shaped, with two barbs, while the distincth'C, barbed, Scythian types were also available. Surviving bronze quh'ers are tubular in shape, tWO examples measuring 70 and 90cm in length and IOcm in width. Quivers could also be part bronze and pan leather. Figure l86a shows a bronze quiver.

a

184 •

186

Uranian wall-paintings depict garments coloured red and white, with red or white borders. Chequercd and strip«! patterns were used. Other colours appearing in paintings, which could have been available for clothing, comprise dark·blue, light-blue, bbck and reddish-brown_

185

a

187

a

187

188. CIMMERIAN HORSEMAN 8T H·7TH CENTURY B.C.

The Cimmerians, or Gimirraya, were forced from their homelands in southern Russia and across the Caucasus by their dose relations, the Scythians or Ishkula)'a. In terms of dress and appc:ar.mce thtse two tribes of nomadic horsc~n appear virtually identical. Indeed, the Babylonian! of the 6th century B.C. knew what we call the 'Scythian' bow as the 'Cimmerian' bow, and describc<i tall, pointed hats (as shown on reliefs from the apadana al Pc:rsepolis worn by Scythians) (0 be Iypical 'Cimmerian' dress!

This man, tal100ed in Scythian fashion , Ius acquired several items of equipment of Urartian manufaclUrc:, either through trade, plundering or through serving as a mercenary. He wears a bronze, Ur:ln.ian helmet and uses a bronze, IUbul3r quiver dc:cor:lted with plain, horizontal, repou~ bands. T he round shield is ofleathet wi th a conical bronze bou.

The Assyrians used both Cimmc:rians and Scythian! as mercenaries and allies; when in Assyrian sen-icc one would ClCpc'ct their equipment to ha\'e a more Assyrian flavour, however. Some Cimmerians could even be found in regular Assyrian units of infantry and cavalry, when, like Anmaean, Nco-Hittite, " I.annean and Chaldea n soldiers in the Assyrian regular army, they would be impossible to lel1 apart from 'native' Assyrians.

The human head hanging from the horse·trappings hu had the skull removed and only the tanned flesh preserved. According 10 Herodotus, these were the heads of enemies killed in bailie, the best and most respected warriors having, of course, the greatest number.

The presence of Innian mounted nomads at the destruction of numerous cities in Asia Minor and Mesopotamia is often attested by the discovery of numbers of the Iypical. small, trilobate bronze arrowheads at such siles. These arrowheads were caSt in threes in small, portable moulds.

189

lBB

a

.88

189 & 190. PHRYGIANS AND L YDlANS 11TH TO 6TH CENTURIES

Th~ illustrations are baxd on representations on poltery, temOOlti plaques and &.syrian SOUfte5. 189a is a Phrygian, or Mushki, as they were known in Auyria. A representation oran Anatolian emissary in the Assyrian Til·Barsip paintings depicts a style or dress Ih:1t bears comparison with figures on the plaques rrom Paurli. Tunics decorated with broad coloured or embroidered bancb were worn. So were A5syri~n·style socks decora ted in the same way. The Phrygians were noted ror Iheir skill in Ihis kind or decoration, The Pazarli plaques show what may be greaves WOrn over the socks, while the Til·Barsip painting shows boots. This figure wears the typiCliI type: or boot worn by many mountain peoples at this time and which was adopted in Assyria. Armamenl comprises a shon spear and highly-decoTated small round shield. 189b is an archer carrying what appears 10 be a bow c:lSe on his back. The helmet shown in the Paurli plaque is often considered 10 be or Greek type, but it could equally well be derived rrom Unrlian or Nco-Hittite designs, which is perhaps more likely (c.c. 137, 178 and 184). Clothing colours included red, black and blue on white.

a 190

Lydian ClII'alry are shown in 190 and 1903, Lydian or Karian inrantry would be like the mercenary iIIus1r.lted in 47. These horsemen are light cavalry. Heavy cavllry would be equipped as 47 but bare.legged. Again, embroidered bands and brightly coloured clothing arc features orthese tcoopt. The horse in 190 appears to have a brand. According to Het(xlotus, Lydian cavalry were armed with long spears and were the most imporlant pari of the Lydian roren. They also seem to have been good and tenacious fighters. Lydian cavalry do not ap~ar to have used the shield.

191 & 192. CYPRIOT WARRIORS 7TH CENTURY B.C.

These illustrations arc based on discoveries rrom the tombs of Salamis, pottery figurines or warriors, Ind chariotS and representations on embossed metal bowls.

Cypriot chariOtS generally followed Near·Eastern designs. This chariO! is one of the latest lypeS, daling 10 the 7th anlUry B.C. Earlier types would closely rnc:mble 9th century Nco-Hittite and A5Syri~n \'ehic\es. From the 81h century B.C. Assyrian influwce beame stronger, following the conquest oflhe Phoemcian statts, (for ye t euli~r chariots refer to 115). This chariot is baxd on actual examples aca\lllted at Salamis on CYPIl15. The cab is constructed of leather over a wooden rramework sUPporling panels or osier. There was a central parlition ending in i bronze looped hand·grip al the rear. The third crewman stood behind the driver and second crewman, holding on to the hand·grip which could also serve as a shield support. In this WDY the rear orthe chlriot was protected. From the late 7th century B.C. onwards, the chariot would have two draught·poles, also appt:l ring in the Neu East, furthe r reslTiaing the chariot's manocu'lTlbiliIY. The wheels of the chuiot had ten spokes, strengthened by len iron nails dril'en through the rim and secured to the axle with large decorated Iynch·pins. The twO drnught'poles were joined by a straight yoke accommodating four horses, and decorated with rour bronze 'standards' in a similar manner to a model chariot in the Oxus treasure.

189

Horse armour comprised an Oll·hide 'apron', as shown here, wilh a melal breast.plate and side pendanl!. Thesr wrre derorated with Assyrian·inspirrd motifs such as a naked figurr of !shlar (a goddess of 10lle and war) standing on, or holding bac.k lioD figures . The horses also wore metal frontlets and creslS. These tnppings were of bronze, or iC'3ther covered wilh sheet gold. One chariot cab .... 'IS deconted with Ii\'e lions' heads.

The crew were armed with Ihru.Sling·spcars and round shields. The headgear worn by twO of the CTew are 'turbans' of Ar.lmaean Style, popular in Cyprus al Ihis time.

Figure 192 is a CypriOt spearman, based on pouery models of wlrnort and some piclorial representations. Cypriot forces also included arch".rs and ClInlry who were similar in appraunce but lacked shietds.

The shietd shown in 192c has a red centre and small red dots on while petals against a black ground as painted on a ponery figure. Olher shields could have long, poimed, bronze bosses. Variant helmets are shown in 192a, the lower example originating in Urartu, a major apoTler of arms and metalwork.

191

'- !) ~ """- J o 0 .. • '.,' " . 0

• a

192

11 ~ b

190

193, 194 & 195. MINOAN' AND MYCENAEAN SPEARMEN c. 161)0- 131)0 B.C.

There are many represemations of this type of infantry in Aege:an ut, The principal sourccs for these figures arc a fresco from Thera, a battle-scene on a sih'cr crater and a decorated dagger blade from Mrcenac, and various engr.lved seals.

These spearmen appear to have fought in dose formation and were probably drilled. The spear. called t }u-Q, was used for thrusting and was at least 4m long. To achieve maximum effect with this weapon, both hands were used and a large body-shield was hung from the shoulder with a Strap. Spears and shields answering to this description are mentioned in the Iliad. 193 holds his spear in a posi tion su itable for advancing into combat, as depicted on the Them fresco, where a line of spearmen is advancing in this fashion. 193a shows a man who has been beaten to his kn~ in combat, taken from a gold seal engraving, and demOnstmtC1 how the shield provided complete covemge in such a 'receiving' position. 194 and 19 5 have spears levelled for the charge. Two opposing bodies arc: shown dashing in this way on the silver crater from Mycenae.

The elabomtc: boars'-tusk helmets and the possession of swords indica tes that these spearmen arc pc:ople of some wealth and social standing (unless infant ry were equipped from palace armouries). The shields render body armour unnecessary. Ifsuch troops ""'eTC to keep rook with shields meeting edgNc>cdge, they would achieve efficient protection for all the individual soldiers by acting togtther as a cohesive body. Such a 'shield·wall ' would be paniculariy effective against missiles. Archers opc:roted from between the ranks and files of the spearmen, seeking the protection of the shields, (200 shows an archer from the same source as 194 operating in this manner). Swords, or pakana, were long" narrow and, like all weaponry, bronn. They were better suited for thrusting than slashing. 1953 is a Minoan sword.

It would doubtless be difficult to break into a densely packed shield·wall. AnemplS to fmd ways of doing so may have led to the invention of the ·figurc.of-eight' shield. This type is carried by 195 and shown in profile in 195b. It is clearly a shield that could be used more offensively than the ' tower-shield' curied by 193 and 194. It is deep and possesses a dt-flective ability. A ridge of wood or tough leatht-r Nns down the centre. The 'waist ' might allow greater usc of the thrusting·sword in the 'press '. With such I shield the bearer could have a better chancc of battering through the ranks of his oppont-nts. When this type appears it is used alongside the tower·shitld. Perhaps only a proponion of the formation were equipped with them in order 10 give a 'biting-edge' to the body, bUI personal preference cannot be ruled out .

191

-

194

j " ," - --~ ', .

' - "

, ' ' .. " ... '

" . " ~, -- - .f . , . .. ..

.:' . . ;:', .:. ,:' ~ "-.

195

a b The shields were made of ox·hide, and paneTOs consisted of black. brown or buffblolchcs on a while ground. Lines of stitching visible on the from correspond 10 the machment of the shoulder-snap and frame on the reverse. The central ridge of the figurc-of-eight shield was generally buff, the outer edge of the rim being blue, and the inner «Ige. yellow,

Helmets, koroto, were m3de from 51iven of horn CUI from boars' tusks and bound 10 a leather base with leather thongs. The ef(5[ of lhe helmet worn by 193 is possibly also made or horn, alternatively, black or black and whilt horsch:iir plumes and crests could be :l1I3chcd.

Kilts could be fringed and elabora tely embroidered. Dress sometimes consisted only of ~ coloured 'cod.pit«'.

The Aegean peoples werc gener~lIy laU, slim and h~d a 'bronzed' complexion. Hair was very dark, wavy alld usually worn long. Burds were uncommon, but gold death·masks from the shaft·graves of Mycenae suggest that they could Ix worn by kings.

196. MINOAN AND EARLY MYCENAEAN CHARIOTRV c. 1550· 1250 B.C.

Introduced inlo the Aegean in Ihe 161h celllUry B.C., Ihe Aegean chariol soon began 10 differ in terms of delail from the Near·Easlern Iype. The four·spoked wheels remained standard for a 10llger pcriod but were made stronger and more robust. The axle was posilioned near Ihe rur of the cab, and the draught-pole was strengthened by iii

second pole joining il horizolllally from Ihe yoke 10 the fronl oflhe cab. Both shafts were funher Strengthened by ~ wooden suppa" or thongs. It is possible lhat Ihis second shaft c:xtended backwards wilhin the cab and curved round to join the noor, providing a panition and means of suppan for the crewmen. These: are all developments designed 10 increase: the strength of the vehicle. In Egypt and Canaan the emphasis was on lightness because: speed and manocu\'rability were requi red for a primarily skirmishing role over nat open ground. The Aegean chariOl, however, was clearly ~ more robust vehicle intended 10 take the strain of close·combat over broken ground.

192

196

a

D ~ a

0 c b

197

198

d

'9]

Aegean chariot warfare is 11 much debau:u subiect, the discussion of ..... hich might benefit from the appreciation thai chariO! design underv.'em signific:mt change within the period c. 1550-1150 B.C. T he carliest design ..... :as a type: that has been called the 'bo)«hariot', illustrated in 196a. T his W,IS in usc: bet ..... etn 155{1 and 145{1 B.C. Bet ..... etn 1450 and 1200 B.C. a type: C1Illed the 'dual<hariO!' came into usc, both 196 and 196b being cxamples of this type. Chariot design changed dramatiC1l lly with the appearance of the so-called 'rail<hariot ', in usc: from about 1250 to 1150 B.C. As the nome ,uggests this was a u ther spindly ope:n·sided \'ehide shown in 196c, (of which more will be said under 204), This design probably marks the transition from a fighting vehide to a banlefield transporl, a gradual process occurring in some stales hl:fore others, and perhaps still incomplete at the time of the Troian War, which might go some way 10 explaining the confusing accounlS in the Iliad.

T here arc a few representations of chariots with three and four cn:wmen, which appear to hi: 'dual<hariots'. In one example Ihe crew curry disc·shaped standards on poles, so these may hi: 'command' Ch:lriOlS.

The linear B tablets deal with chariotry in great detai l, and indicate that chariOIS were Slored diSlII2ntled (a practice referred to in the Iliad). The wheels, or (;IIIIOli, had to be: fitted to the wheel·lelS body, or (;It(;ltnoumOla. The chariO! frame, aMmoto, had to be covered with a hide or fabric co\'er. T able:ts me:ntion red hides and crimson cruniOls (the: term for crimson was poPli.ija, probably the famous Phoenician dye made from shellfish). Frescoes 2nd paintings on ponery show bull·hide patterning and yellow and black chariot cabs. Chariot pans were made in the amortjqruuk (chariot workshop) by an alllo/tli (chariot builder). Wheels and frames were made: from elm, willow, yew, boxv.·ood and cypress. Cabs could also be made of basketwork. Spedal fIXtures might require the usc: of ebony, hom, ivory, bronl.e, silver and gold. Such materials would not usually hi: lavished on ordinary line chariots. Less expensive dCCQration was achieved by painl ing, as on Ihe whetls of 196. II is deu from the labletl that chariots varied grenly in type, age and condi tion. Among the commenlS pertlining \0 whccls in the tablels ..... e find refe rences 10 ornate ones bound with silver, or inlaid with ivory. Some ha\'e bronze tyres. Others are described as 'old wheels for rollowers' (which might indicate: the existence: of chariotetrs who were not t9t1a, possibly Ihe uncertain UtttO~) or 'old spindly wheels' and whetls ror followers which arc 'unfil for sc.n'ice:'.

T he te rm for chariot was i9ija. Another word VIlIS __ .a, meaning 'vehicle' and deriving from the same fOOl as our own word. Horses, ;-qo (hippos), \Io'en: quite small, of pony size, and were usually blick, brown or while. The mane was tied up intO rufts. The halter was ailed poqnuijoi, and could have ivory oP090 (cheek-piccC1l or blinkers) allaehc:d. The reins were ailed anijo.

Some signs appearing in the tablets an: thought 10 reprC1Cnt bronze ingots, which were commonly shaped like a stfetched hide. This might indicate IMI bronze was being issued ror the: manuracture ore:quipment inlltad of the finished Inicle. However the signs might instead represcm trappers for the chariot horses (cf. fig. 14a).

197 & 198. MINOAN AND EARLY MYCENAEAN CHARIOTEERS c. 1550. 1.250 B.C.

Figure 197 represcnts the probable appearance: oflhe better-cquipped tIlt,a, or 'rollowers' in full banlt gear. Hi, armour is based on the famous Dendra panoply. The bronze plates Issemble to rorm front and back 'halves', Ind it is difficult 10 establish whether the lablelS refer to the two hal\'CS or to I pair of corslets aaociated with each SC:I of ch:lriot gear. The plates were backed with ltather or linen, and were loosely fastened by leather thongs 10

allow some degree of movemenl. The corslet \Io'as called a ,0nJtt (thorll1), and the component pans, whether platcs or sarles, were known as opowota. Linear B signs sctm to depiC'l corsletS of this Iype in which the neck.guard is dearly discernible. 197d shows ,lllerll view of one 'hair or. pllte corslet. The tablelS n:fer to corslets consisting of20 or 22 large, and 10 or 12 small, upau!o,a. These could hi: types of plate Irmour, or scale corslets on the Near· Eastern model (sec fig. 15). As these usually required rna.ny more scales than this, rows of scales mighl be imended in the tablets.

The Dendra panoply included 1000'er arm guard" ailed 9"0 in the toblNS, where I pair Ire associated wilh each corslel (197a). He: wtars grtl\'CS ofa type found al KaJlithea, the Iype: from Dend ra being shown in 197b.

A less ..... ell-cquipped follOVo'er, or I driver, is shown in 198. Such chariOIcc: rs in qui lted white, presumably linen, TUnics arc shown in a fresco from Mycenae. Such a tunic wou ld also make ideal padded proteclion to be worn beneath Ihe armour of 197. Tunia such 15 those described under 202 could also be. worn. T he gmves arc while and appear to hi: stiffened fabric, probably linen. They appear abundantly in frescoes, even on otherwise lighdy~uipped troops.

With the Dendra panoply were found Ihe pans for a boars'·tusk helmet which had bronze chetk-picces instead of the more usual horn type. Completely bronze helmels arc ,Iso known. Helmets were tilled .ortto and some arc described as having 4 Opawol D and 2 chttk-pieces.

"4

Arm~mcnl for ~ chariol warrior comprised a long spear, il being 10 denea the thrusts ohhi! weapon thaI armours such as the Dendlll panoply were e1pecially devised. An engraved gemstone from Vapheio shows a chariol spearman in aelion. hc uses bolh hands. The source from which 198 is lak~n shows short spears or javelins. These could have ~n alt~rnaliv~ armament or laler have replaced Ihe long spear. Side·arms comprised a lapering shon sword, up 10 60cm long, suilable for insening bet .... ·cen Ihc plalcs of an adversary's armour, (197e).

The appearance of lhc armour worn by 197 calls 10 mind medieval lilt-armour. and is clearly designed to deflect IhruSIS. The prolection of the throa! and shoulders is particularly emphasised. The armour imposes limitalions on manocuvrnbility, especially if the wearer was forced 10 fight dismounted. He would be well advised to follow the innruclions attributed in the Iliad 10 warriors of the old .school, such as Nestor, and not break rank and attempt to fight alone, but 'when a man in his own chariot cornell wilhin reach of an enemy chariOl, he should attempt a spear thrust '.

from the mid 13th century B.C., charioteers began to appear as in 204, which probably indicates a change ofl:lcti($.

Followers may ha\'e worn special uniforms. Tablets refer to (trlain while cloaks as being 'suilable for followers'. The lablelS also confirm lhat an Aegean warrior migh! actually bear the name Achilles or Hector. They also reveal thai so could many of his less noble companiots!

The linear B tablets make no mention of shields in usociation with charioleers' equipment and there is nO real evidence thai lower or figure-of-eighl shields were ever used by chariony. The use of round shields by charioteers occurs laler on with the in!roduction of the 'roil ' chariot (sec 204).

199 & 200. MINOAN AND MYCENA.EA.N LIGHT T ROOPS

A fresco from KnosS05 depiclS a line of dark·skinned troops dressed and equipped as 199. The IWO plumes suggesl that they might be Lib~n auxiliaries from Nonh Africa. Tbe so-alled 's iege rhYlon' from M.ycenae shows 11 lown under Inac:k. It is defended by Q few men bearing large reetangular shields and more numerous archers, slingers and slone-throwers. These are completely naked and probably represent the local peasanl! and IOwnsmen nsisting Ihe soldiery. One of these slingers is iIluSITaled in 200. The archer in 200 coml:S from Ihe silver ct"ll ter from Myctnae mentioned under 193-195 on which archers like lhis arc shown shooling from among Ihe ranks of the spea.rmen. He wears an elaborate boan'-tusk helmet with crest.

Archery figures quite prominently in the Iliad, wherc both sides included conringcnlS of archer specialists. This agrm with the impression given by Aegean art that archery played an imporlanl part in warfare. In the Iliad, bows arc made of goats' horns, one hom providing each arm of Ihe bow. Arrows wcrc originally lipped with bone or flint, but later langed bronze types were used.

Javelins werc most probably called palarja, a term ancestral to the later patton meDning 'javelin'

199

200

195

201

(0:: ' .. . .

a

202

b

201. MYCENAEAN U GHT INFANTRYMAN AND OPPONENT

Combat betwet:n Jightly-cquippcd Achaean troops and rather barbaric opponents is the subject of a fresco at Pylos. II is a mystery who the$( barbarians might be. b\lllbc Iliad reo>rds that the father ofPo]ypoetes, (who led a C<lntingem from North-Eastern Greece), once fought against 'shaggy people or the wilds' . Perhaps they were hill uibes from the cenual Pcloponnesc ofNorth-Wc:stem Greece. They need not have been the aggressors as pcoplts such as Ihes<' might be encountered on slaving or plundering raids mounted by the Achaeans. GarmentS could consist of sheepskin, wolf or lion pelts (20Ib). The kill of the Pylian is coloured black and white.

The Pylians bear no shields and fight with short spears or narrow rapier-type swords, the latter comprising the only armament oflhtir adversaries. The Pylians wear boors"lusk helmets and white textile greaves. Some trOOps wear the helmel shown in 201a. This is yellow and might represem embossed bronze or studded fabric. II has been suggested that the wearer might be a mercenary from central Europe or the Balkans. There is material evidence indianing the possible presence of these in the Aegean, and there was «nainly some inte rchange of military ideas between the regions, especially concerning sword design and the developmem of sheet metal armour.

202. MYCENAEAN INFANTRYMAN c. 1300-1250 B.C.

This ' longhaired Achaean' is typical of many troops depicted in frescoes from Mycenae, Pylos and Tiryns. He carries a round shield and short spear and could wear a boars' ·wsk helmet . He wears sandals in addition to his greavcs. T he exact form of this footwear is illuStrated by I model fOOl from Mallia (2021). The great populuity of linen greaves may be because they served the purpose of boolS and would be useful protection when figbting, hunting and travelling among the rocky hillsides and scrub of the region.

He wears a white tunic, or !tilO, edged with black bands. T ablets list various items of clothing, including tunics of purple wool, edged dIHh, and grey or white doth. Large woollen cloaks and purple 'double cloaks' ue ment ioned. Cloaks and tunics could also be of linen. The Tiryns frescoes show green and red tunics.

'"

203

a

• • • •• , . •

203. LATER MYCENAEAN WARRIOR 13TH TO 12TH CENTURY B.C.

204

Taken from the famous 'warrior vase' from Mycenae, this figure chtes to the darkening daY' of My~naean civilisation around 1200 B.C. He could answer to some of the descriptions of warriors in the Iliad, with his sheet·bronze cuirass, greaves and almost round shield (like an invened peltl, Iller characteristic of the Troad and Dardanelles region). The markings on the: inside edge of the shield reveal how the outer layer of hide, possibly even sheel bronze. was attach·ed. He wears a 'bell' cuirass of bronze. a type allesu:d also in cent ral Europe. The helmet could be studded fabric. leal her or embossed bronze. The auachment of boars' tusks or cows' horns gives an effect reminiscent of the Sherden. The bronze greaves were possibly worn O\'er the textile t)'PC. or even over woollen socks as were later used by the Phrygians, Urartians and Assyrians.

He marches wilh a few personal nllions tied up in a bundle and hanging from his shoTt spear. His principal side·arm would be II long slashing sword, as shown in 20)a. This replaces the carlier narrow types and t.he design may havt originated in cenlnll Europe.

On the vase, the armour i.s coloured black, probably representing dark bronze, and the inside of the shield is buff.

197

204 . LATER MYCENAEAN CHARIOTEERS AND HORSEMAN, c. 1250·1100 B.C.

The IYPC of chariOl shown here, known as the 'rail-chariol', appeared during the 13th century B.C. and eventually replaced the earlier Iypcs. This illustration is based on various depictions of chariOlry on pottery, which show chariots consisting oflinlc besides a platform and a rail. The legs of the crew arc clearly visible through the open sides. The appc:annce of the charioteen is similar to the warrior described in 203 and similarly markedly diffcrenl from Ihe preceding age. II was common (or one or both of the wurion to carry round shields and they were armed with short spears or javelins.

This chariot and its crtw arc most cenainly Ihe rcsull of a major change in chariot (actics, if not military organisation in general. h would 5«m highly probable thai Ihcsc men mighl dismount 10 fi ght more readily Ihan earlier Aegean chariotry, and they answer well to mosl of Ihe descriptions of chariot fight ing contained in the Iliad.

These charioteen seem to be wearing linen cuirasscs which do not eXlend over their shoulden. Around their waim the)' may be wearing bronze bellS. They wear woollen socks beneath bronze greaves, or only linen greaves. They !u\'e simple crested helmeu. There arc drawingsof'dual '-chariots wllh three·and four·man ~drcsscd in a similar manner to these, accompanied by standards like that in 204b.

204a is a hOl'$(man, also known from drawings on ponery. There are a few such representations daling from the late ISlh century B.C. 10 around 1200 B.C., bUI they probably became increasingly common beyond this date. One example shows a m:ln currying what appears to be a round shield. This figure wears a bronze helmet, a 'bell· cuirass' and possibly greaves.

The evemual breakdown of the Aegean palace economics (and therefore the elabofllle organisation required to maintain the chariotry) may have hastened the development of cavalry. Litency was lost and only returned centuries later wi th a different scripi (derived from I'hocnicil), so the palace regulation of mililary foren probably ceased . It is possible thai the horseman was simply a warrior not wealthy enough to possess a chariot and so uses a horse to transport him to the b3lllefield. Alternatively, the dnmalic change in chariot tactics might be partly due to t.he appearance of horsc:men who could fulfil the majorily of their roles more economically.

205. HARAPPAN PRINCE

The drcss of Ihis figure is taken from a fngment of sculpture which is usually regarded as represcnting a prince: or II pricst. His dress is quite possibly purely civilian or religious in function. It is illuslflilled here to portny a high ranking personage. The rank and file probably wore a plain white cOllon dhoti. Small domed pieces of copper have been found which might have been fixed to II textile base as II SOrt of armour. The decoralion oftMS man's robe mal' be a stylised imitation of animal skin or similar scwn-on obiects. A rectangular shield is possibly represented on one Indus seal.

205

a

b 198

The metal weapons were made of copper or poor-quality bronze and arc rather weak in design. They include langed spearheads which ne brood, leaf·shaped and flat. They would need to be insened into the shaft to provide a stn:ngthening central rib. :\xe blades were also flat; socketed types being known. but f'~re (205b). A type of shon sword is shown in 205a. Three ty~ of SlOne mace head existed. round, pen.shaped and mOSt commonly, lentoid.

The under-del'eloped close-rombat weapons 'tand in contrast to Ihe missile weapons. The balhed arrowheads were alwars copper. Sling proi~l ill.'$ came in three types; a small round or slight ly o\'al type, and tWO much hea\'ier I)'pe.$ of baked clay \\'dghing ]75g and 750g. Some large potlery balls found at the bak: of defences could ha\'e been hand thrown mbsiles. A) sling ammunition is associated with the defences oflown5, this may be the weapon of the rank and file milit ia in times of emergency.

206. EGYPTIAN SIEGE DEVICE

Siege methods during the Old and Middle Kingdoms included the use ofooltering-rams and wheeled scaling-ladders (shown in a 10mb at Saqqara and demonstrating that the wheel was known before tht Hrksos). A de\·ice depicted in tombs of the 12th Dynasty 31 Beni·Hasan was a long·shafted weapon with. presumably,:J. hefty melal poim, which required three men to wield. This was opcr:ued directly beneath the battlements, the crew being protected by a large pavise. h WllS either used to prise apm the mud bricks or thc rampan or to kctp points of the wall clear of defenders to enable assault by scaling-ladder. While the ass:lUh ",us in progress, archers suppressed the defenders with shooting.

In the New Kingdom, d ties were assaulted through breachC':S in the walls, probubly created by rams or mining. Elite units usually led the aS$2ult . Other methods were 10 assault the walts wilh scaling. ladders or desHoy the gates wilh axes or fire. On one occasion an assault party was smuggled into Joppa hidden in b.1skets. Rdiefs of the siege of Oapur in Canaan at the Ramesseum show troops approocbing the walts under co\'er of pem.houses. These were fab ric stfetched over a wooden frame and concealed a smDll assaul t pany from missiles.

In la ter pcrioos, siege techniques became more sophisticated. The !'iye stela memions siege'lOwers, b;illering.rams and siegc-- ramps. Egyptian ci ties comained \':1.51 (emple enclosures which were used as fOTi resst'5 in times of emergency. lo \emphis was captured by Piye by means of amphibious assault through the harbour.

206

207. ASSYRIAN SIEGE ENGINES

Fixed or mobile siege towers equipped with a massive iron·shod ram fi rst appear in reliefs during the reign of Ashumasirpal. T here is te)(t ual evidence that such de\'kcs existed in some form a few centuries before in the Near East. These towers appear to have bet'n cOnStrocted at the siegt' sinCl: they uti lise large numbers of infanu,)' shields and sometimes chariot wheels. Two of Asburnasirpal's engines art' shown in 207a and b.

".

207

••• b

d

200

By the reign ofTiglath-Pileser HI, the ram had developed into a lighter and more-mobile weapon, (207c-f are engines from the reigns of Tiglath-Pileser 10 Sennacherib). The ram body could be made of three sections, front , middle and rear, most probably of wicker, covered in leather and sometimes secured b}' two double rows of toggles (207f, daling to Sennacherib). The front was usually taller than the rest forming a small turret with a window. The ram was usually moved on four wheels, but some early types show six.

T he ram itself was long and thin, protruding from high up the front of the machine, ending in a large 'spearhead'. This type of ram, known 10 the classical world as a 'drill ' was inserted between the courses of the wall 's brickwork and moved from side to side, pulling out the bricks and weakening the wall.

Often twO such 'drills' are preseO! (207d and e), which together with a long hanging loop that sometimes occurs, gives the impression that the ram was intended [0 imitate an elephant, (herds of which still existed in the wilderness regions on the banks of the Euphrates, and were hunted by Assyrian kings). Indeed, other siege engines certainl)' attempt [0 imitate other animals, such as 207c and another shown on the bronze gatcs of Bala""'3t, dating 10 Shalmanescr Ill . In these cases, the 'snow' of the beast was probably shod in metal to provide a ram. These rams would be used against [he gates.

The size of the crew and how the ram was worked is not readily apparent. One archer and :I man with a water ladle arc shown in the 'drill' types, and perhaps four men were required to work the 'drill '. These together with a couple of archers, an officer and a 'ladler', comprised the crew.

T he body of the 'drill' engine was about 5-Sm long and was pushed up to the wall by the crew inside, with perhaps some outside help. The ram itself was probably some Sm in length. A text of Sennacherib refers to siege engines as 'great wall flies' , perhaps this is a reference to the rather light rams shown in 207d-f.

Rivers were crossed by means of innated animal skins, either supporting individual swimming soldiers (207g), or joined together to support rafts. Horses were swum across, while unharnessed chariots were transported by means of the kelek, a large round 'coracle' of hides stretched O\'er a frame.

208

208. NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIAN BAGGAGE d In enemy territory Egyptian armies constructed marching camps surrounded by a palisade of shields. The entrances were closed by large grid-like gates and guarded by sentries with staves. Chariots and ox-carts (208 a-c) were parked in special areas, and the Pharaoh's large pre-fabricated tent was set up in ils own enclosure in the centre of the camp. It included a throne dais, shrine and folding campaign furniture. 20Bd is a pack-donkey.

The soldiers pitched small, rectangular-plan, round-topped lents which probably served a small group of men. Equipment and packs were stacked at the enlrance of the tent.

Camp followers included artisans 10 repair chariots, boys who carried OUI menial tasks for the soldiers and no doubt numerous women. In faci some female members of Ramesses' household had to be instructed to keep clear of the fighting by the vizier, when Ihe Amun camp was attacked at Kadesh.

201

209. ASSYRIAN CAMP AND BAGGAGE

Assyrian camps depicted in relief" are shown 10 be:: fortified. They were 0 \ '31 in sh3pe wilh lowers al regular intervals. These camps firs! appured during Ihe reign of Ashurnasirpal, when Ihey were divided imo quarters by cr05s· ro~ds.

By the time of Senn~cherib Ihere is only one road running Ihrough Ihe cenlre of the camp. It is probable that thest camps were n01 buill every nighl, but as a secure bast for a whole campaign. The ClImp w~s probably buill of mud· brick for the lower p~n ofJhe wall, with wooden upper·works and b~l11ements. It was possibly surrounded by a ditch.

The reliefs show the interior of the tamp laken up by twO types of tent, and baggage animals and equipment. The ordinary soldiers' and officers ' lents resemble Ihose oflhe Bedouin (modern and ~ncient), being open fronted to altch the cool brec-zes, the side walls kepI up by guy ropes, helped by a three-branched internal support, CUt from a nec-. This type is shown in 209a. The scene inside is shown in gre~t detail in the reliefs. Jars and pots hang from the tent-poles, often also a double·yoke fo r ~ cart, and a donkey pannier.

Officers had proper beds and more equipment than do the 'mher-ranks', who make do with mattrnses. only. In both ClIse5 each native Assyrian is shown with one or more attendants (grooms, kitchen servants), who, in the case of 'other ranks ' at least, would be a soldie r of a lower grade (an auxiliary or levy archer).

The king's tent is different from the olhers. It is mostly hidden by a canyas screen around ii, but the visible top shows [I 10 have had an open stction in Ihe roof for lighl (209b).

209

c

202

It is possible ttJ.at one tent was provided for each live-or ten·man section in the Royal Army, the lower status levies having to make-do without.

The tentS and equipment were carried on the backs of mules, donkeys and camels, attended by dril'ers (209c). The bulkiest items were loaded OntO cans.

210

210. ASSYRIAN SACRED CHARIOT

Like many Near·Eastern arm ies, the Assyrians carried images of their gods into battle in the form of military standards. These pro\·ided a rallying point and source of encouragement for the noops, and the practice is attested for the Mitanni, Kassites, Egyptian s, HinittS, Sumerians and Akkadians as well lIS Assyrians. It was also common practice to mount such standards in chariOI5 of their own and use them to lead sections of the army on the march. The Assyrians regarded their chid god, Ashur, lIS a prolttlor oflheir army and the state, and belie:ved Ihaltheir mili tary conquests were carried OUt according to his will . The Mitanni and H itt ites thought in a similar manner and also regarded war between opposing counnies lIS a kind of lawsuit, in which the gods were the judges. This chariot is one of a pair of religious chariots depicted in a relief dating 10 the reign of5f:nnacherib. It is shown unharnessed in the camp. attended by priests. The dix mounted upon the pole bore the image of the god. Only the rare and valuable white horses were considered sui table for the se:rvice: of the gods. Assyrian texIS sometimes mention a great number of gods accompanying the army including; Ashur, Sin, Shamash, Adad, Bel, Nabu,lshtar of Nineveh, Queen of Kidmuki, Ishtar of Arbela, Ninuna, Urgal and Nusku. Perhaps these refer to unit standards lIS well , or standards accompanying wings and larger formations within the army. Armies .... 'efC olien accompanied by priests who considered the omens before campaigns and battles were commenced.

SELECT BmLlOGRAPHY The following works are some of the most useful for study of the warfare of the ancient Near East. Howe\·er it is far from exhaustive and readers who wish to pursue the subjttl funher are advised to consult lhe bibliographies of these works also.

ADAMS, W. Y. Nllbia, Corridor ro Afrim . 1977. ANDERSON, J. K . Ancitnl Grllk Horu manslrip. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1961. ANDRAE, W. CDlouud Cuamit:s f rom A slrur and Earlitr Ancirnt A ssyrian ]flail· Paintings. London, 1925.

Alugrabllngtn in StndSt:lrirll: V. Djt Kltinfllndt W II Stndst:lrirli. Berlin, 1943. HAINES, J. and ,\1ALEK, J. Atlas of Anotnt Egypt. Oxford, 1980. BARNETT, R. D . and FORMAN, W. Auyrjan Palau Relit/! alld Tnl'ir injlutnCl' on tlrt ScJllpturtl of Babylollia

IJnd PtrJia. PI1Igue, 1959.

203

BARNETI, R. D. and FAULKNER, M. The SculptllrtJ of Tiglarh·Pileser Ill. London, 1962. BARNETI, R. D. North Syrian and Related Harness Decoration, Vordero{lsiatische Arcllaologie. Festschrift A.

Moortgat (ed. BITIEL K., el al). Berlin p. 21·6. A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivoriu, with other examples of Ancient Ncar Eastern Ivories in the British Museum.

2nd cd. London, 1975. Sculptures from the Nor/h Palau of Ashurbanipal at Nillnith. London, 1976.

BIETAK, M. Avaris alld Piramesse, Archaeological Exploration ill the East"" Nile Delta. Oxford, 1979. BLEGEN et al. The Palau of Nmor at Pylas /·/11. 1973. BOEHMER, R. Die Klein/umle WII Bogazko;rHattusna. Wisscnschafiliche Veroffendichlungen der deutschen Orient·

Gescllschaft 87. Berlin, 1972. BOTIA, P. E. and FLANDIN, M. E. MonlimentS de Nim.'wh: decouvert et decrit par M.P.E. Botta; mesure et

dessine par M. E. F1andin. 5 Vo1s. Paris, 1849·50. BREASTED, 1. H. The Baule of Kaderh. Univ. of Chicago Decennial Publications 5,1903.

Ancient Records of Egypt I-IV. Chicago, 1906. BRINKMAN, j. A. A Political History of Post·Kassite Babylonia. An. Or. 43. BUDGE, E. A. W. Assyrian Seulplum in the British Museum: Reig" of Ashur,"asir.pal, 885·860 B.e. London, [914. BUREN, E. D. van. Symboh of rhe gods in Mesopofamian aTi. Rome, 1945. BURNE, A. H. Some Notes on the Battle of Kadesh. JouTllal of EgyplJan Archaeology 7, 1921. CANBY, 1. V. Decorated Garments in Ashurnasirpal 's Sculpture. Iraq 33(1) 1971 , pp. 3 1·53. CARTER, H. and MACE, A. C. The tomb of Tuto{lllkho{lmen 1. London, 1923. CARTER, H. Thr lomb of Tut~nkh~men II. London, 1927. CHAMPOLLION. MOllumentt de l'Egypu et de la Nubie Ill. Paris, 1829. CURTIS, 1. E. An examinatioll of Late Asryrian mtfolwork with special refi'TrnCi' 10 maurialfrom Nimrod. Unpublished

Thesis, Univ. of London, 1979. CURTO, S. The Military Art of the Allciellt Egyptians. DALTON, O. M. The Treasure of the OXIIS. 3rd ed. London, 1964. DARESSY, M. G. Fouilla de 10 oollee des rois, 1898-99. Cairo, 1902. DAVIES, N. de G. The Rock Tombs of El Amarna i·vi. London, 19{)3-o8.

The Rock Tombs of Deir el Gebrawi i·ii. London, 1902. DAVIES, N. de G. The Tomb of Ken·Amun a/ Thebes, two parts. New York, 1930. DAVIES, T . M. The Tomb of louiya and Touiyou. London, 1907. DAVIES, W. V. The Origin of the Blue Crown. Journal of Egypllall Archaeology 68, 1982. DESBOROUGH, V. R. d'A. The Lan Mycenaeans and fheir Sua:;mors 1200-1000 Be. Oxford, 1964. DUNHAM, D. The Royal Cemeteries of Kush: EI Kurru. Cambridge (Mass.), 1950. DYSON, R. H., Jr. The Architecture of Hasanlu; Periods I to IV, American Journal of Archaeology. 81, 1977 pp.

548·52. ELA T, M. The Campaigns ofShaimaneser III against Aram and Israel,lmul Explorafioll Journal 25, 1975, pp. 25·35. ELLIS, R. A Note on some Ancient Near Eastern Linchpins, Berytus 16, 1966, pp. 41·8. EMERY, W. B. Egypt in Nubia. London, 1965.

Archaic Egypt. Harmondswonh, 196 1. ERMAN, A. L'fe in Anciem Egypf. 1895.

The Litera/ure af the Anclem Egyptians. London, 1927. FAULKNER, R. O. The Battle of Kadesh. MDAIK 16, 1958, pp. 93·111

Egyptian Military Standards. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 39, 1953. Egyptian Standards. JouTllal Df Egypllan Art:haeology 27, 1941.

FINKELSTEIN, J. J. Cuneiform Texts from Tell Billa, Journal of Cliliei/orm Studies, 7(1), 1953 pp. 111·176. FRANKFORT, H. The Art and Archiucture of the Ancient Orient. Harmondsworth, 1970. FLOOKER, J. T. Mycenaean Greece. 1977. FRANKEL, D. F. Tht Ancient Kingdom of Urartu. London, 1979. GADD, C. J. The Stones of Asryria. London, 1936. GARDENER, A. H. The Kadesh /liscriptions of Ramesm II. Oxford, 1960. GARSTANG, J. and GURNEY, O. R. The Geography of fhe Hittite Empire. London, 1959. GELB, I. J. Hurrians and Subarians. Chicago, 1944. GHIRSHMAN, R. Fouilles de Sialk pres de Kashan. 2 Vols. Paris, 1939.

The arn of Ancient Iran from in Origins to Ihe lillie of Alexander Ihe Great. New York, 1964. Deux oeillieres en bronze des rois d'Uraflu, Arlibus Asiae 27, 1964, pp. 49·60.

GjERSTADT, E. The Swtdish Cyprus Expedilioll, 11. Stockholm, 1935. GORDON, C. H. Ugaritic Literature. Rome, 1949. GOEDICKE, H. The Battle of Kadesh. Journal of Egyplian Archaeology 58, 1972. GOETZE, A. Warfare in Ancient Minor, Iraq 25, 1963.

204

GRAYSON, A. K. Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, 1,2. Wiesbaden, 1976. Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. New York, 1975.

GREENHALGH, P. The Dendra Charioteer, in Antiquity LlV, 1980. GURNEY, O. R. The Hiuiw. Bungay, 1952. HOOD, S. The Minoans. HROUDA, B. Dcr assyrischc Sueitwagen, Iraq 25, 1963, pp. 155·8.

Die KulrurgtJehichu des aSJyrischen F1achbildtJ. Berlin, 1965. HROZNY. B. L'entrainement des chevaux chez les anciens Indo·Europcens, d'apres un texte mitannien·hinile

provenam du 14e slecle avo lC. , Archiv Orientalni 3, 1931, pp. 431·61. JAMES, F. Chariot Fittings from Late Bronze Age Bet h Shan. In Archatology in lhe Levant. Essays for K. Kenyon

(ed. Moorey, P. R. S. and Parr, P) Warminster, 1978, pp. 102·15. KAMMENHUBER, A. H ippologia hethitica. Wiesbaden, 1961. KANTOR, H. A bronle Plaque with Rel ief Decoration from Tell Tainat,lourm.zl of Near EtlJ/ern St/ldie~ 21, 1962,

pp.93·117. KARAGEORGHIS, V. Une Tombe de Guerrier a Palaepaphos, Bulletill de CorrtJpondtnct Hellel/iqut, 87, 1963,

pp. 265·300. Excovations in the Necropolis of Salamis, I. Nicosia, 1967. Excavalions in the Nuropolis of Salamis, Ill. Nicosia, 1973. and MASSON, E. A propos de la decoun:ne d'ecailles d'armure en bronze a Gastria·Alaas (Chypre), ArchaologiJcher Anztiger 1975, Heft 2, pp. 209·22.

KELLNER, H. Uranu, Ein Wiederentdeckler Rivale Assyriens. Munchen, 1976. KING, L. W. BrOllze Reliefs from the Gates of Shalmalleser, King of Assyria. London, 1915. KINNlER WILSON, l V. The Nimrud Wille Lim. London, 1972. KITCHEN, K. A. The Third Intermedia te Period in T:gypr. (1100-650 BC). Warminster, 1973. KNUDTZON, J. A. Die el·Amarlla Tafeln. Leipzig, 1915. KOSSACK, G. The Construction of the Felloe in Iron Age Spoke Wheels. In The EuropeiJn Community in Later

Prehistory. Studies in Honour ofC. F. C. Hawkes (ed. Boardman et al.). London, 1971, pp. 143·63. KUPPER, J. ·R. Les nomades en Mesopolamie IlU ltmp! des roi! de Mari. Paris, 1957. LACHEMAN, E. R. Exwootions at Nuzi, Vol. VI., The Administrative Archives. Cambridge (Mass.), 1955. LAMBERT, W. G. Baby/onion Wi.ulom Literature. Oxford, 1960.

The Sultantepc Tablets VIII. Shalmaneser in Ararat, Alla/olian Swdies II , 196 1, pp. 143·58. LAYARD, A. H. Ninewh and ilS Remains. 5th ed. in 2 Vols. London, 1850.

The MonumenlJ of NinefN!h, Vol. 1. London, 1849. LECLANT, J. Auarte a cheval d'apres les representariollS egyprienlles, Syria 37, 1960, pp. 1·67. LEVI, P. At/Ils of tht Gruk I"(!orld. Oxford, 1980. L1CHTHEIM, M. Ancient Egyptian Lilerature 1·1II. London, 1975. L1TTAUER, M. A. The function of the Yoke Saddle in Ancient Harnessing. Anliquity 42, 1968, pp.27·3 1.

Bits and Pieces, Antiquity 43, 1969, pp.289-300. The Military Use of the Chariot in the Aegean in the Late Bronze Age, American J ournal of Archaeology 76,

1972, pp.145·57. New Lighl on the Assyrian Chariot, Orientalia 45, 1976, pp. 217·26. Rock Carvings of Chariots in Trans-caucasia, Central Asia and Outer Mongolia, Proceedings of the Prehistorit

Society 43, 1977, pp. 243·62. and CROUWEL, J. H. The Dating of a Chariot Ivory from Nimrud Considered Once Again, Bullerin of rhe

American Schools of On'ental Research 209, 1973, pp. 27-33. A Bronze Chariot Group from the Levant in Paris, Levant 8, 1976, pp. 71·9. Chariots with Y-Poles in the Ancient Near East, Archaologischer Anuiger, 1977. Heft I, pp. 1·8. An Egyptian Wheel in Brooklyn, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 65, 1979, pp. Wheeled Vehicles and Ridden Animals in the Ancient Nellr East. LeidenfKoln, 1979. and KARAGEORGHIS, V. Note on Prometopidia, Archuologisther Anzeiger, 1969, pp. 152·60.

LOON, M. N. van. Uranian Art. Istanbul, 1966. LORIMER, H. L. Homer and rhe Monum elllS. London, 1950. LOUD, G. Khorsabad I, Excavations in the Palace and al the City Gate. OriemaIInSlitutePublications28.Chicago.

1936. LUSCHAN, F. von. Ausgrabungen in Sendsthirli, IV. Berlin, 191J. MADHLOOM . T. A. The Chronology of Nto-Auyrian Art. London, 1970. MALLOWAN. M. E. L. Nimrud and in Remains. 2 Vols. London, 1966.

and DAVIES, L. G. Ivories in Assyrian Style. Ivories from Nimrud (1949·1963), Fascicule II. Aberdeen, 1970. MANITIUS, W. Das slehende Hcer der Assyrer Konige und seine Organisation. Zeiut.hrljt fur Assyri%gie 24,

1910, pp. 97 IT.

205

MdEOD, W. E. Egyptian Composite Bows in New York.. Ammcan Journal of Archaeology 66, 1962. MEYER, G. R. DUTch !JilT Jahrlau1t:ndc altwTduasiatischu Jtultur. Betlin, 1962. MICHEL. E. Die Assur-T cllte Salmanassars III (858·824 B.C.) Die Wllt Des OritllS I, 1947, p. 44. MOOREY, P. R. S. Pictoral Evidence for the History of Horse-Riding in Iraq before the Kassites, Iraq 32, 1970,

pp. 36-50. Cata/ofUl of Ih t Ancilnl Plrsiall Bronzu in Iht Ashmollan MUJlum, Oxford, 197 1.

MUHLESTEIN, Dil Krmst dlT EtrusJtlT. Berlin, 1929. NAGEL, W. Dil MllOpDtamischl Strl itwagln und Jl'int Emwitkltlllg ill oSlmtdittTTantn Bnridr. Beriin, 1964 . NELSON, H. H. The Naval Battle of Medinet Habu. J Ollrnol of Nlar Eostffll Studils 2, 1943. NEWBERRY, P. E. and GRIFFITH, F. C. Blni Hasall i·if). London, 1890·1900. NOBLE, D. S. Tlu Dtwlopment of Transport in Allcitm MuoptJlamia. Unpublished Thesis, London Institute of

Archaeology, 1975. NOETTES, L des. L 'alll/agl, Il th~1 dt sdlt a tra f) lTI Its agu. Paris, 1931 . OATES, J. Baby lon. London, 1979. O 'CALLAGHAN, R. New Light on thc Maryannu as "Chariot-Warrior", ]ahrbllth fliT klt inosiotiuht Forsthung

I, 1950, pp. )09·24. OHNEFALSCH-RICHTER, M. Kypros, tht Biblt and flomlT. 2 pans, London, 1893. ORCHARD, J, J. Eqrltftrian Bridlt-Hlm~ OrnamenlJ. Ivories from Nimrod (1949.1963), Fascicule I pt_ 2. Aberdeen,

1967. ORTHMANN, W. et al. Der AlIt Qritlll. Berlin, 1975. PARKER, B. Middle Assyri~n Seal Impressions from Tell AI Rimah, Iraq 39, 1971, pp. 257-68. PARROT. A. NiniVlh olld Babylon. London, 1961.

M.ission Archaeologique de Mari, n, LI Pallll's, 2, Ptinluru nlurolu. Paris, 1958. Mission Archaeologique de Mari, III, La Ttmplu d'isil/aral II dl Ninlli-Zoza. Paris, 1967,

PETRIE, W. M . FLINDERS. Tht Palau of Apn'ts (Memphis II). British School of Archaeology in Egypt. 1909. PIOTROVSKI, B. B. Urartu. London, 1969. PORADA, E. CorpUI of Near Easter" &ab ill North Americall Col/telions, I, Thl CoII«tion of tht Pierpoint Morgall

Library. Washington, 1948. POSTGATE, J. N. Taxation arul Conseriplioll in tht ASfyrion Empirt. Rome, 1974. POTRATZ, 1- A. H. Dit Pftrd,trt llJtn des alten Orient. Rome, 1966. PRITCHARD, 1- B. Ancitnt Ntar EaSllTn TI:t1S Rt lating to tht Old Ttstamtnt, Princeton, 1950. QUIBELL, 1- E. Tht Tomb of YI/OO Q/ld Thuiu, Cairo, 1908. RAINEY, A. F. The Military Personnel of Uglrit, JOllrnal of Ntflr Eastern Sflldies 24, 1965, pp. 17·27. READE, J. E, Ashurnasirpal I and the White Obelisk, Iraq 37, 1975, pp. 12·50.

Assyrian Archi tectural Decoration: Techniques and Subject Matter, BaghdadtT Millt ilunlln 10, 1979, pp. 17-49, Narrative Composition in Assyrian Sculpture, HaghdadC'Mil/tilunglll la, 1979, pp, 52-110.

REISNER and DUNHAM, D. Royal ~mtltriu of Kush V. ROUX, G. Ancitntlraq. 2nd cd. Bungay, 1980. SALONEN, A. Dit lAndfohruull tits alltn Mtsapo/amilll , Helsinki, 1951. HipptJla~ia a«adita. Helsinlti, 1956.

SALONEN, E. Dit Wafftn dlT alltn MtsaptJ/amilT. Helsinki, 1965. SANDARS, N . K. Tht &a-PlOp/no London, 1978. SASSON, J. M . Tht Mililary Euab/ishm/llis al Mar,: Rome, 1969. SCHUL\-\AN, A. R. Military Rallk, Titlt and Organisolion in Iht Egyplia" NlfJ.I Kingdom ,

Thl N"n at the Battle of Kadesh. Jaru I, 1962, pp. 41·54. The Egyplian Chariotry: A Re-tlamination. Jara 2, pp. 75·98. Remarks on the Military Background of the Amama Period. Horsemen and Riding in Ancient Egypt. JOllrnal of NeGT Easttnl Studies 16, 1951.

SETERS,1- van. Tht flyksos. Newhavcn and London, 1966. SETHE, K. and HELCK, H. W. UrJtumhn thr 18 Dyn. (Urk. IV), Hefte 1·22. Leipzig and Berlin, 1906-58. SODEN, W. von. Zur Dalierung des "Weissen Obelisken", Zti/Sthrift fur Assyrialogit, 64, 1975, pp. 180-91. SOLLBERGER, E. The White Obelisk, Iraq 36, 1974, pp. 231·8.

and KUPPER, 1- -R. Imm/,,;onl Royalu Sumer;lnnu II Akkadimllu. Paris, 1971. SPALINGER, A. j, Asptt1J of tht Military DocIlmenfJ of Ihl Antitlll Egyp/ians. Newhaven and London, 1982 , SPE ISER, E. A. On sollle Anicles of Armour and their Names, Jourllal of till Amtn'tan Orimtal Sotitfy 70, 1950,

pp. 47-9. SIJRUYTTE, J. Eludu Ixpcimenta/ts sur /'am/age. IJar is, 1977. STARR, R. F. S_ MUiI; HI. Cambridge (Mass.), 1937·)9. STUDNICZKA, F. Der Rennwagen im syrisch-phoniltischen etbiet, Jahrbudr tits dnmdwr archaalogisthen Instiluts,

Abteilung Athen 22, 1907, pp. 147·96.

206

TALLIS, N. C. The Design 0/ Nro.Assyriali Horse Hamus and Chariotsdrm'lIg the Ninth Ce,rtUry B. C. Unpublished M.A. Thesis. Birmingham, 1982.

TATTON·BROWN, V. ed. Cyprus BC, 7000 Years 0/ History. London, 1979. THOMPSON, R. CAMPBELL and HUTC H1NSON, R. W. A Century 0/ Exploration in Nil/twh. London, 1929.

The Sit(' ofth(, Palace of Ashurnasirpal at Ninev('h, ('xcavated in 1929-30 on be'half of the British Museum. Annals 0/ Ar(hatology and Anthropology, University of Liverpool 18, 1931, pp. 79-112.

THUREAU-DANGIN, F. Unt rllation de fa huiriemerompagrredtSargon (7 14 avo J. -C.) T~tes cuneiforrnes, Louvre III. Paris, 191 2.

et al. Anlan Tash. Paris, 1931. and DUNAND, M. Til Barsip. 2 Vols. Paris, 1936.

TRIGGER, B. G. Nubia Under the Pharaoh London, 1976. UNGER, E. Die Wicderherstellung des Bronzetores von Balawat, MilleilulIgmdtJ dnlfSfhm Ardlaologisrhm lnstituts,

Alhenische ableilung, 45, 1920, pp. I-IDS. Der Obelisk des Konigs Auurnasirpall aus Niniw. Leipzig, 1932.

VENTRIS, M. and CHADWICK, J. Documtnts in MJI'enaean Greek. 2nd ed. Cambridge, 1973. WAINWRIGHT, G. A. Some Sea Peoples. Journal 0/ Neor Eastern Studrts 41, 1961. WHEELER, M. The Indus Civilisation. , 1953. WOLFF, D. M. Ein hiSlOrischcr Wagentyp im Fddheer Sanheribs,Arrhiv/ur On"mt/orschung II, 1936, pp. 231-4.

and OPITZ, S. Jagd zu pferde in der ahorientalischen und k1assischen Kunst, Ar,hiv fur Oriell1/0rKhung 10, 1935, pp. 317·59.

WOOLLEY, C. L. and LAWRENCE, T. E. Charchemish 1·111. O)[ford, 1914. Ur E)[cav3tions II. Tht Royal Cemttery. O)[ford, 1934.

W1LKINSON, J. G. Manl/tTs and Cuuoms 0/ the Ancient Egyptians. London, 1878. XENOPHON, Allabasis.

Cyropatdia. Jlellenica.

YADIN, Y. The Art 0/ War/are in Biblical Lands in the Light 0/ Archatological DiKOWry. London, 1963. YEIVIN, S. Canaanite and Hittite Strategy. Joumal 0/ Near Eastern Srudits 9, 1950. YOUNG, R. S. The 1961 Campaign al Gordion, AmtTican Journal 0/ Archatology 66, 1962, pp. 153-68. YOYOTTE, J. and LOPEZ, J. L'Organisalion de l'Armee au Nouvd Empire Egyplien. Bib. Or. 1/2, 1969. ZACCAGNINI, C. The Rural Landscape 0/ th~ Land 0/ ATTaphe. Rome, 1979.

In addition much useful information on military matlers may be' found in the revised edition of the Cambn"dge Ancr"etrt Hisrory I-IV, 3rd ed., Cambridge, 1970-.

207

ill

VJ

N ~

ARCH

A

Sum

£o"y

EBL

~

~

R

v'

0

Egy

pt

OLD

KIN

f>r Dyn

osfic

GU

T!

IND

US

N

\J1 8

N ~

\J1 0

/-;AT

TlAN

S

r;DO

M

MI

"J

o ~

~ ~

MIN

OAN

S Hyk

sos -

OLE

Kdm

.

h N

Kush

,l!:

.! BJ

l A

KK

AD

IAN

/sl

n,

Emp.

Lo

rso

Hommur~

HU

RRI

MAR

l M

IT.

OLD

ASS

YRIA

AMO

RIT

STAT

ES O

F SY

RI

-HYKSOS

ELAM

~

\J1 o

~

N

\J1

ACH

AEAN

S -

~ IT

TIT

ES f III

W K

ING

DO

M

BY

LON

i

KASS

ITES

p..N

NI M

IDD

LE

CAN

AAN

ITES

~

o o ~ C

IMM

EA

I

PHR)

{ N

EO-

LYD

IA

HIT

TITE

S --Li

byan

tSA

IT

dyns

. Ku

sh

RAM

AEAN

S -NEO M

BYLO

I

AS

SY

RIA

-

SYRI

A NE~'AI

ASSY

RI

HEB

REW

Kdm

s

URA

RTU

MED

fS

PI. 8 N' A

NIJ

l ~n

~ 0 -F

JOlh

dyn

IAN

.Ein

p.

Emp.

i'i ~ z ~

1<SI

A

("') ::c ~ ~ t"

" o C"l

(=i

>

t""

("') ::c ~

29853363 Armies of the Ancient Near East

Documents

Transcript of 29853363 Armies of the Ancient Near East