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 ducribingl he military organisa-

tion 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

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

Note

OD

Term.laololY

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 .............•. . .••.• . • ..• ••. . . ..• • • . •..•.•••••. • •. . .. •• .... Th~ Libyans ........... . • . . •.• .... • .•....•......•. • .. •. •......•.... Nubia ..................... .......... ...............•... ..... Sum~ r and Akkad ................. .... ...............•. • ...... •.. .. Th~ Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Kingdoms .............. . ...... ... Milanni and Mesopotamia .... . .....................•.•..•.•.... •.. .. Assyria ..... . .........................................•...... • .... Babylon ....... ...... ........•. ...•.•....•........•....• . •....•.... Canaan and Syria .....•......•••..•••••.. • •• •..... •• ... •. • • ....••... Th ~ H~br~w s . .... .......•...•.•..•.•.............•....•.•.. . .•.... Th~ Philistin~s ......................•.............•......•.... •.... Phoenicia and Cyprus ..............••• •• . ..• •. .•.. •• •.... • •••..•••.. Anatolia and lh~ Hittit~ Empir~ .......•......•......•...... • ......... Th~ Sea· Peoples ................... •... ......... .. .•.. .. .. • ....•.... Th~ Neo-Hin iles and Aramaeans ..... .... . .... . ....................... Phrygians and Lydians ..............•• • • •.•• • • • ... .. • . . . ... • • ...•... Uranu ............................. • .•....•............... • ....... Elam ............ . .................•... . ..•...............•.... ... The A~g~a n ..........•..... , .......•.• . " .•••. , . . ,' •... ".. . ...... Th~ Indus Va ll ~y ... , . .•. , .. .. , • •... , ..•. ,........... . ........ . .....

5 13 13 15

20 23 26 32 32 36 38 38 39 42 43

46 46 47 48 53

TACTICAL METHODS ..................... . .......... . . ... .... . .... . .........

53

Egypt .", ... , ....................... •.. .. • . , ... ..........•.•..... Libyans and Nubians ................ .. , .. . ... , . . . ........ . ..... Sumerian tactics ..... . ......... , ........ ,., ... ,.... . . .. ...... ... .... The Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Kingdoms. . . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Mitannians and Kassites .......... , ... ,............. ............. The Assyrians ...................................•. • • . •.. . ...• . .... The Babylonians ...............••• . .... • •.....••.• . ...•.• . ...•.. . .. Th~ Elamit~s ........... . . • ...... • ...... . ........ •. ... •....... ..... Canaan and Syria ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. • . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . Hittit ~ tactics ..................... . • . ..•.•. . ....•••••••• • . .•.. • .... Th~ N~o- H ittites and Arama~a ns ......•.............•.•..• .•.... ...... Th~ Minoans and Myc~na~ans ........ . ........... . .. , . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . The Mountain Kingdoms ............ • .•. . •• • ... ..••. . ...••••... . •... Th~ Nomads ...................• .. • . •.. • .• . ............•. • .... • ...

58 59 59 60 60 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 68

MAJOR BATTLES OF T HE PERIOD ....... . . .. . .. . ... . . .. . .... .. ............ ..

69

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

91

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................... . . ................. . ............

203

CHRONOLOG ICA L CHART

208

Th~

3

53

NILE D ELTA NAUK RATIS

,

~.

G UI

Lower Egypt ('

lower Eg ypt Upper Egypt Abu ( E~ph,anu,,4t 1 Ineb-hedj

1

~

f AY UMo1l

Sina i

" " "•

,

JSIWA

EGYPT AND NUBIA Egyptian Nomes

'

~11f' 1\

f8u~.m)

5

,

11

Shos-hot ep

12 Tu-il e( 1Al rul) 13 '" C HHln 14 Qu 15 Khmun Wawat 16 tc)ty. Hebenu ·_ l Ko-Sa 17 lC,nopoI") Medj.y 18 H,pponul Per- me~ed 19 10.,.,n< II ELEPHANTINE

--

SOU!

IeUIU }

NUBIA

lHumopol,,)

~~" Buhf" _

-<

~

Kush I"

. .... • ~

20

Henen-nesut

21

N ./opohl

22

N~P~f' LA REAC H

,,, 4

fHt:r,kkopol.l)

Ka-hebes

-nelJer 12 TjebIXM""yIOi I

13

14 15 16 17 18

19

20

funu

(H4tI.opo/,,)

1jel

f~"uml

8o 'h Djedjef

~ndul

8ehutet Per-8ostet

(Bubuml

Djane! 1T1llt11

Pe,-Iopdu

Fayum,'

Aph,od'I~1

E,'(fIt'''' "amu.o:

11

AM.OdIe-

/(In,IIIOI'I'I '" n ld '

Prow"",

Abu, lunu, Khmun

EU,

ORGANISATION EGYPT THE OLD AND MIDDLE KlNGDOMS

T he basis of civil and military 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:.Jc h nomt wu administe red 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 th is were drawn those eligible for military service, known as htwt'"~ -lUfru. (youthful recruits). In addition there were hereditary profes-

sional 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 Recruits) a function which was usually performed by the nomlrch. The Middle Ki ngdom 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), menti on 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 su pply contingents for national eITons when requested by the king, and normally led the m 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 no me. A nomarch might be: commissioned by the king [0 use his forces to carry OUt cenain tuks, such as obtaining sto ne from remote quarrics in the desert, or undenaking trading mission! to distant lands, Small military expeditions might bt mounted by nomarchs as pan of thei r responsibilities 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 H arkhufin the 6th Dynasty who led expeditions d~p ioto Africa, Their forccs were likely to include such fortign aux ilia ries as Nubians and Aamu Bedouin. ProtOC1)is from tomb inscrip tions show (hat nomarchs could o ften hold sever~l other offices such as priest, scout· lcader, sole-,

~

~­"

,~

' ("

Madal \

~.

,

ARISI

- "-

) . Arbela

.

~

Hamllh

•

Huu'"

....,.

"",", •

ladnana

'UPPER SEA'

r'ih"

~

G", Qatna and Khalba (Aleppo).

The Hebrew Kingdoms

C archem ish.

Kh.lb.

1t.

".f~

0:

i

6 CIt'

x CHARIOT CITIES

Muk ish ....r-i • ;r-s. "'l JI)kh

Qatna Unq i Ama'u

~

fb

~

don

] .4 DISTRICTS

I/Jflip (0

{:

t:ji 1

~flEETS

Tyre

"

NIY Do,

Israel

.

~ ~\J>OO "

,

] S~I'"

Q,.. ,ded Km,dom border

Dama« ... , •

8 Hu Of'

•

°R,moth_ 6

G,lud

7

~

M'lpah

......"

~

• 1'" II "Jerul~lem

12

• lr

S A,IIdoct· " • Ekron ~ ."".elon q:: .. ' ~

. ,,-" Judah

(i"'cJ:.:

/t"",

I '"

,:0

~Q ~

BUilth

,.

Gezer

•

BetMooron "

EDOM

•

Shooruhen

THE LEVANT in the 2 nd millennium Be

b ,on Geb r 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 war rior who possessed sufficienl wellth to mlintain I two-horse c hariot 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 numbe r 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 we re free citizens who owned land but we re 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 c hariotry 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 we re 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 cities. '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 desc n nomads. Some of then bands could be quite llrge and dange rous. 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 city 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 Gcze r asked the Pharaoh to provide clwiots to protect his bnd against 'Apiru. Perhaps c hariots 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 Ca naa o a nd S yria By the reign of Amunhotep III Egyptian control had been firmly established in Canaan and Southern Syria. Unlike Nubia which was admi nistered as I Southern extension of Egypt, the Egyptians did not interfere wi th the long established arra ngements 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 gove rned by an Egyptian 'Oversecr of All Foreign Count ries' (the coun terpart 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 mate rial 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 Baby lonian 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 Uga ritic 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 picted 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 e5tablishi ng his authority to call out the tribal levy. As the Hebrews became uniu:d and organised under a single king I more pe rmanent 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.

urnlS

Israel'l militil wu orglnised intO 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 co nsidered 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~na l semi·regu l ar army of 3 Q'itJpllim of isll hGllwr in his household, and David, when he Iled from Saul's service, acqu ired 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· Hi uile 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 pe rsonnel (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 cities 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 comp rising 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 natu rally 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 we re 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 ad va ntage and also great economic value. Lacking slrong land forces, thc:sc: cities rtlied on wi thstanding sieges in order to survive, perhaps coullting on supply by 5c:a. Some cities were actually situated 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 ilese r 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 Ea r 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 mine ral 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 we re about ten small principalities in this area including Dukhumid, Wakhshushana, K.hurum and most imponantly Kanes h, where the chief karum was sit uated. 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 roUt es. 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 Kingd o 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'Silis 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 taki ng 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 bodygua rd 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 M itanoi, 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). Suppiluliumas died of a plague brought back by his soldiers from Syria. H e had established H ani as a foremost wor ld 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 in ternational dip lomacy. 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 suppo n the Hittite king on campaign, never give away information to an enemy, rush to the aid of t he H atti-Iand in time of attack or revolt, (and in return could request H illite usinancc in similar circumstances), accom modate and supply Hittite garrisons and trea t them as friends, an d had 10 extradite any fugitives (or dissidents) neeing from H atti. The friends of the H ittites were to be: considered Ihe friends of tbe ally state, and similarly, Hittite enemies WeT( their enemics. An an nual tribute in gold or silver had to be paid to the Hitt ite king. Soldiers were sworn in to 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 we re the 'Weapon.men', or 'Tool-men', who were probably craftsmen rather than soldie rs. Terms of service fo r Ihis class we re 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 Kades h, so they we re not exclusively infantry. A 'Leader of ruhuytnl' is found among the slain Hittite notables listed by the Egyptians. O rde r of Ba ttle of the Hittite Empire at Xadesh , 1300 BC

It is possible to reconStruct the Hiuite order ofbaule at Kadesh from Ihe Egyptian recorcb. It mus t be: an example of one of the largest armies ever raised by the Hittites. T he ChariOlry and infantry of the Ki ng of HaUl. These ..... ere supported by Allied Contingen ts 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. Nahari n and Arzawa were kuiroxlna states, enjoying preferred status in the Empi re. 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 Ana tolia. Pitassa - located in Central Anatolia. Arwen - or Arawa nna, 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'll nslations, 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: the re 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

Hayas a

Azz i Aishe

=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, showi ng 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-