After Hattusa was destroyed by fire ending the New Kingdom period of the Hittites
[1]
elements of the Hittite civilization lingered in peripheral areas of the former kingdom
[1]
which included the Konya Plain region. The primary region of the Syro-Hittite kingdoms was however in Syria. The small states lasted for almost 500 years and were culturally and politically prominent from c900 BCE until the last of them fell to the Assyrian king Sargon II between 717-708 BCE.
[1]
The cultural links between these kingdoms and the Late Bronze Age Hittite Empire can be seen in the iconography and architecture.
[2]
In the 1180-900 BCE post-Empire period the region reorganized into city-states.
[3]
The earliest written records suggest there was no kind of federation, "each was entirely independent from the others, each had its own autonomous ruler."
[4]
The label ’Neo-Hittite’ applies to 15 states spread through south-eastern Anatolia and northern Syria.
[5]
Those present in the area around or on the Konya Plain were the following: Pisidia; Pamphylia; Lycaonia; Tabal; Cilicia (Hilakku and Que).
[6]
Although there was some continuity with the preceding period major cultural changes occurred in the Neo-Hittite era. According to Bryce (2012) "Hittite cuneiform disappeared entirely. There is not the slightest trace of it in any of the Iron Age successor-kingdoms of the Hittites. One might reasonably suppose that along with the disappearance of the written language, Nesite also disappeared as a spoken one."
[7]
Although we do not have any historical records associated with this epoch, historians have speculated that the society of this era used the Hieroglyphic Luwian language.
[8]
[9]
I. Yakibovich has suggested that the core area of Luwian population was located in central Anatolia, in the region of the Konya Plain.
[10]
Many Neo-Hittite rulers took the titles "Great King" and "Hero" and it is likely an administrative centre existed in the central town.
[11]
At the better known Neo-Hittite site of Carchemish, in western Anatolia, a central bureaucracy is known which had scribes, clerks and other officials
[12]
; although "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption"
[13]
which might not be the case for other lesser-known polities of the Neo-Hittite states.
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 9) T Bryce. 2002. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 47) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Thuesen 2002, 43) I Thuesen. 2002. "The Neo-Hittite City-States" in Mogens, H H ed. A Comparative Study of Six City-state Cultures: An Investigation, Volume 27. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab.
[4]: (Bryce 2012, 52) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[5]: (Bryce 2012, 2) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[6]: (Bryce 2012, 32) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[7]: (Bryce 2012, 16) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[8]: (Popko 1999, 93-111) M Popko. 1999. Ludy i języki starożytnej Anatolii. Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog. Warszawa. pp.93-111
[9]: (Van de Mieroop 2008, 207) M Van de Mieroop. 2008. Historia starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu ok. 3000-323 p.n.e. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Kraków.
[10]: (Bryce 2012, 17) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[11]: (Bryce 2012, 80) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[12]: (Bryce 2012, 54) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[13]: (Bryce 2012, 63) T Bryce. 2012. The World of The Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
| 36 S |
| Neo-Hittite Kingdoms |
| Unknown |
| Early Iron Age in Central Anatolia | |
| wczesna epoka zelaza w centralnej Anatolii | |
| Fruhe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien | |
| Debut de l age du fer en Anatolie centrale | |
| Orta Anadolu da Erken Demir Cagi |
| alliance with [---] |
| Neo-Hittite |
| Tabal Kingdoms |
| continuity |
| Succeeding: Tabal Kingdoms (tr_tabal_k) [continuity] | |
| Preceding: Hatti - New Kingdom (tr_hatti_new_k) [continuity] |
| quasi-polity |
| present |
| unknown | 1180 BCE 1000 BCE |
| present | 1000 BCE 901 BCE |
| absent |
| present |
| absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| present |
| absent |
| present |
| unknown |
| unknown |
| inferred present |
| present |
| absent |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| absent |
| inferred present |
| absent |
| unknown |
| Year Range | Neo-Hittite Kingdoms (tr_neo_hittite_k) was in: |
|---|---|
| (1180 BCE 901 BCE) | Konya Plain |
wczesna epoka żelaza w centralnej Anatolii; Frühe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien; Début de l’âge du fer en Anatolie centrale; Orta Anadolu’da Erken Demir Çağı ... this is not machine readable.
wczesna epoka żelaza w centralnej Anatolii; Frühe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien; Début de l’âge du fer en Anatolie centrale; Orta Anadolu’da Erken Demir Çağı ... this is not machine readable.
wczesna epoka żelaza w centralnej Anatolii; Frühe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien; Début de l’âge du fer en Anatolie centrale; Orta Anadolu’da Erken Demir Çağı ... this is not machine readable.
wczesna epoka żelaza w centralnej Anatolii; Frühe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien; Début de l’âge du fer en Anatolie centrale; Orta Anadolu’da Erken Demir Çağı ... this is not machine readable.
wczesna epoka żelaza w centralnej Anatolii; Frühe Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien; Début de l’âge du fer en Anatolie centrale; Orta Anadolu’da Erken Demir Çağı ... this is not machine readable.
1180-900 BCEIn south-east Anatolia "The crucial period when the region was organised into city-states covers the five hundred years from ca. 1200 to ca. 700 B.C."
[1]
mid-9th century BCE Assyrian records suggest Tabal "consisted of a number of small independent states (which may have evolved several centuries earlier) whose rulers became tributaries of Assyria."
[2]
"The Neo-Hittite period can be divided into two main phases, as suggested by Mazzoni ([1995] 189). The first phase covers the period from the 12th century to the mid 9th century B.C. This period is characterised by the rise of kingdoms each centred on a town. Some of these towns were new foundations, but some were refoundations of earlier urban centres now embellished with monumental iconography. The second period covers the ca. 150 years from the mid 9th century to the Assyrian conquest in the late 8th century B.C. This phase saw the growth of centres and also an increasing concern for security expressed in the building of fortified strongholds throughout the region."
[3]
[1]: (Thuesen 2002, 43)
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
[3]: (Thuesen 2002, 45-46)
"the Neo-Hittite kingdoms of the Land of Hatti were essentially an evolution out of the peoples who were already there rather than the result of large waves of new immigrants from devastated homelands in the west. And whether they were of post-Bronze Age or earlier origin, the Luwian-speaking inhabitants of these kingdoms probably constituted only a minority of their populations." [1] "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption." [2] Tabal region (Konya Plain): "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period." [3]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 60)
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[3]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
Tabal region: "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period." [1] Tuwana: "Conceivably, the kingdom arose in the wake of the Hittite empire’s fall, with a population perhaps largely made up of Luwian elements from Tuwanuwa." [2]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 148)
(Relationship): "the Neo-Hittite kingdoms of the Land of Hatti were essentially an evolution out of the peoples who were already there rather than the result of large waves of new immigrants from devastated homelands in the west. And whether they were of post-Bronze Age or earlier origin, the Luwian-speaking inhabitants of these kingdoms probably constituted only a minority of their populations."
[1]
"Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption."
[2]
Tabal region (Konya Plain): "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period."
[3]
(Entity): "Hittite appanage kingdom called Tarhuntassa, which extended eastwards through part of Classical Cilicia and inland to the region of modern Konya."
[4]
"According to a proposal recently made by I. Yakibovich, the core area of Luwian population was located in central Anatolia, in the region of the Konya Plain, and Luwian migration into western Anatolia occurred only after the Arzawan kingdom had been established."
[5]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 60)
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[3]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
[4]: (Bryce 2012, 38)
[5]: (Bryce 2012, 17)
Autonomous states:"from the time written records begin for the individual states that lay within the land called Hatti in Iron Age texts, it is clear that there was no sense of these states constituting a single political entity, or any form of political federation. Each was entirely independent from the others, each had its own autonomous ruler."
[1]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 52)
"The region called Tabal in the Iron Age extended over a large part of south-eastern Anatolia, southwards from the southern curve of the Halys river (Kizil Irmak) toward the Taurus mountains, westwards to the Konya Plain and eastwards towards the anti-Taurus range. The population of the region was very likely a predominantly Luwian one, as it had been throughout the Late Bronze Age and perhaps already in the early second millennium." [1] "In the post-Bronze Age era, Hittite cuneiform disappeared entirely. There is not the slightest trace of it in any of the Iron Age successor-kingdoms of the Hittites. One might reasonably suppose that along with the disappearance of the written language, Nesite also disappeared as a spoken one." [2]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 141)
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 16)
18,000 if we use Carchemish as an outside of NGA analogue at 200 per 90ha.
Carchemish (outside NGA region unless Carchemish had some control over Konya Plain region in early period)
"The area enclosed by the outer wall covered more than 90 ha, which made it the largest urban centre in the region."
[1]
[1]: (Thuesen 2002, 47)
"The Neo-Hittite states varied considerably in size, from a few to several hundred square kilometres. The smaller Tabalian kingdoms are examples of the former, Hamath and Bit-Burutash of the latter."
[1]
Tabal --- the region
"Tabal covered much of what was called the Lower Land in Late Bronze Age Hittite texts, including the territory of the Classical Tyanitis. Westwards, it extended to the Konya Plain, encompassing the sites now known as Kizildag and Karadag. The region had been integrated into Hittite territory, probably very early in Hittite history, and served as a kind of southern and south-western buffer zone to the Hittite homeland."
[2]
Northern Tabal (Tabal ’Proper’) --- a kingdom in the region of Tabal
ruling line possibly dates to mid-9th century BCE but could be earlier
[3]
largest of the Tabal Kingdoms, probably contained sub-regions
[4]
"it corresponded roughly to the modern provinces of Kayseri and Nigde."
[3]
Carchemish --- may have had some control over Konya Plain region after the fall of the Hittite Empire?
"If one identifies the agricultural hinterland of Karkamis with the plains and valleys west of the river and excludes the mountainous regions to the north, the territory of the kingdom can be assessed at over 750 km2."
[5]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 80)
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
[3]: (Bryce 2012, 142)
[4]: (Bryce 2012, 141-142)
[5]: (Thuesen 2002, 47)
New Kingdom of Hatti coded 2 million for up to 45,000 km2, which is 44.4 per km2. Neo-Hittite state of 700 km2 * 44.4 density per km2 would provide an estimate of about 30,000. However, the Neo-Hittite states were no doubt based around the larger urban areas so this could be a bottom line figure. Considering that there would need to be 100 such states in the region of Turkey to reach the 3 million population figure (for Turkey - see McEvedy and Jones estimate) this "bottom line" figure may be too low. 3 million split among, say, 15 states in Turkey as a whole would give us 200,000 per polity. This seems closer to a reasonable range of perhaps 80,000-160,000.
Turkey contained 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age".
[1]
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
1. City/Town
At time when Konya Plain controlled by larger kingdom e.g. Carchemish? Northern Tabal?
2. Village3. Hamlet
In the early iron age in central Anatolia are known only villages and hamlets (Gordion, Boğazköy, Kaman Kalehöyük)
[1]
[2]
"Peripheral areas within the kingdom’s frontiers typically contained a number of communities called ’cities’ in the texts, the majority of which could have been no more than small villages. But the larger kingdoms must have contained, in addition to the capital, one or more relatively large settlements or cities, the centres probably of regional sub-kingdoms, over each of which a local ruler presided. Regional administrations under local rulers appear to be attested within the kingdoms of Carchemish and Adanawa, for example. at certain periods in their history. The local man was subordinate and directly answerable to the occupant of the royal seat in the kingdom’s capital."
[3]
[1]: Genz H. "The Iron Age in Central Anatolia".In: Tsetskhladze G. R. (2011) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the first millenium BC. Paris. Pg: 336.
[2]: Voigt M. M. "The Changing Political and Economic Roles of a First Millennium B.C.E. City". In: Steadman. S. R., McMahon G. (2011) The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia. Oxford. Pg: 1077.
[3]: (Bryce 2012, 81)
1. King
many Neo-Hittite rulers took the titles "Great King" and "Hero".
"There are inscriptions that identify Kuzi-Teshub as Great King of Carchemish and son of Talmi-Teshub, the last-known Hittite viceroy at Carchemish. They indicate that at least one branch of the royal dynasty survived the fall of the empire and continued to exert authority through the early decades of the Iron Age. Since Hattusa was abandoned c.1185, Kuzi-Teshub’s rule at Carchemish must date to the first half of the 12th century. His title ’Great King’ is a significant one. No subordinate ruler within the Hittite kingdom, even a viceroy, would have used such a title while there was still a central regime at Hattusa."
[1]
2. Head bureaucratic official (inferred)"The focus of each state was an administrative centre where the royal seat was located."
[2]
central bureaucracy in Carchemish with scribes, clerks and other officials
[3]
and note that "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption."
[4]
3. Assistant scribe (inferred)4. Lesser scribes (inferred)
_Sub-Kingdom administration_
2. Sub-king"Peripheral areas within the kingdom’s frontiers typically contained a number of communities called ’cities’ in the texts, the majority of which could have been no more than small villages. But the larger kingdoms must have contained, in addition to the capital, one or more relatively large settlements or cities, the centres probably of regional sub-kingdoms, over each of which a local ruler presided. Regional administrations under local rulers appear to be attested within the kingdoms of Carchemish and Adanawa, for example. at certain periods in their history. The local man was subordinate and directly answerable to the occupant of the royal seat in the kingdom’s capital."
[5]
3. Village leader (inferred)
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 53)
[2]: (Bryce 2012, 80)
[3]: (Bryce 2012, 54)
[4]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[5]: (Bryce 2012, 81)
unknown. Present for the New Kingdom Hatti which preceded the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: "the core of the defence force was a full-time, professional standing army. ... They lived together in military barracks, so that they could be mobilized at a moment’s notice." [1] According to H. Genz "So far not a single burial from the Early Iron Age is known from Central Anatolia" [2] which makes it difficult tell whether professionalism was maintained.
[1]: (Bryce 2007, 11)
[2]: Genz H. "The Iron Age in Central Anatolia".In: Tsetskhladze G. R. (2011) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the first millenium BC. Paris. Pg: 343.
unknown. Present for the New Kingdom Hatti which preceded the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: "the core of the defence force was a full-time, professional standing army. ... They lived together in military barracks, so that they could be mobilized at a moment’s notice." [1] According to H. Genz "So far not a single burial from the Early Iron Age is known from Central Anatolia" [2] which makes it difficult tell whether professionalism was maintained.
[1]: (Bryce 2007, 11)
[2]: Genz H. "The Iron Age in Central Anatolia".In: Tsetskhladze G. R. (2011) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the first millenium BC. Paris. Pg: 343.
"the retention of the Luwian language and script in various parts of the Neo-Hittite world until the end of the 8th century attests the existence of a professional scribal class trained in reading and writing the language." [1] However, we have found no references to specialized government buildings in the sources consulted.
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 60)
Coded present for New Kingdom of Hatti (predecessor). "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption." [1] Tabal region (Konya Plain): "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period." [2]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
Coded present for New Kingdom of Hatti (predecessor). "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption." [1] Tabal region (Konya Plain): "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period." [2]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
Coded present for New Kingdom of Hatti (predecessor). "Carchemish and probably Malatya apparently continued from their Late Bronze Age predecessors with little or no interruption." [1] Tabal region (Konya Plain): "There is nothing in the material record to indicate that it was significantly affected by the upheavals at the end of the Late Bronze Age, or by the collapse of the Hittite empire. Certainly there is no evidence of a shift of peoples from it in this period." [2]
[1]: (Bryce 2012, 63)
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 43)
’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
following evidence between 1000 BCE and 700 BCE: Urartu’s craftsmen used iron picks and hammers to forge horizontal planes out of bedrock on which to erect the empire’s numerous and imposing stone fortresses. [1]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
following evidence between 1000 BCE and 700 BCE: Urartu’s craftsmen used iron picks and hammers to forge horizontal planes out of bedrock on which to erect the empire’s numerous and imposing stone fortresses. [1]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
stone only being used as a wall foundation in previous polity (Around the citadel in Gordion) [1] . Wall fortifications found in Kaman Kalehöyük [2] [3] .
[1]: DeVries, K., 1993, “The Gordion Excavation Seasons of 1969-1973 and Subsequent Research”, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 94, No. 3, pg:374
[2]: Genz H. "The Iron Age in Central Anatolia".In: Tsetskhladze G. R. (2011) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the first millenium BC. Paris. Pg: 336.
[3]: Matsumura K., “The Early Iron Age in Kamankale-Höyük: The Search for ist Roots”. In: D. Bonatz, R.M. Czichon, F.J. Kreppner (2008), Fundstellen Gesammelte Schriften zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens ad honorem Hartmut Kühne. Wiesbaden. Pg: 41-50.
Boğazköy on the hill. ‘judging from the fact that in the Late Bronze I (Period V B, 1750-1600 b.c.e.), a town gate was built in the Arslantepe earthen wall defense system, flanked by two bipartite quadrangular towers, which was highly reminiscent of similar central Anatolian gates, such as those at AliŞar or Boğazköy (Palmieri 1978). ... this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
same as the previous polity: ’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1] e.g. Carchemish: "The defence consisted of several walls or ramparts that protected an outer city with private houses and an inner city with gates, temples, the Great Staircase and hilani-buildings. A fortified citadel was located by the river at what was probably the centre of the city. ... According to Mazzoni a new lay-out of the citadel, squares and public buildings with facade sculptures took place during the late 11th and early 10th centuries B.C. (Mazzoni [1995] 182). Thereafter there is a change in iconography marked by the disappearance of the traditional Hittite motifs..." [2]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
[2]: (Thuesen 2002, 47)
"Iron was first utilized as a technology of war around 1300 BCE by the Hittites." [1] At the earliest times bronze was preferred and iron had mainly ornamental uses. [2] In Eastern Anatolia "the shift from bronze to iron was more gradual than abrupt" and in some areas bronze was used into the 750-400 BCE period. [3] Iron was used for weapons and tools, and by non-elites, from the Urartian period after about 850 BCE. [4] In nearby Georgia, a regional center for iron smelting, massive finds of iron tools and weapons appear from about 700 BCE. [5]
[1]: (Carey, Allfree and Cairns 2006, 25)
[2]: Angela Ryczkowski. April 25 2017. Weapons Used by Hittites. Sciencing.
[3]: Lori Khatchadourian. The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia. Sharon R Steadman. Gregory McMahon. eds. 2011. The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE). Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[4]: (Cifci 2017, 139) Ali Cifci. 2017. The Socio-Economic Organisation of the Urartian Kingdom. BRILL. Leiden.
[5]: (Gamkrelidze 2013) Gamkrelidze, Gela. Researches in Iberia-Colchology (History and archaeology of ancient Georgia). Braund, David. ed. 2012. Georgia National Museum.
In Anatolia siege warfare was mentioned in Old Hittite records. [1] Presumably at this time the catapult was not used? In India, according to Jain texts, Ajatashatru, a 5th century BCE king of Magadha in North India, used a catapult "capable of hurling huge pieces of stone". [2] Marsden (1969) said archaeological records exist before the 4th century BCE. [3] The Achaemenids (c400 BCE?) are assumed to have had the catapult because the Macedonians did. [4] Pollard and Berry (2012) say torsion catapults first came into widespread use in the Hellenistic period 4th - 1st centuries BCE. [5] The Syracuse Greek Dionysios I invented a form of crossbow called the gastraphetes in 399 BCE which encouraged the development of large tension-powered weapons. [6] There is no direct evidence for catapults for this time/location. The aforementioned evidence we currently have covering the wider ancient world suggests they were probably not used at this time, perhaps because effective machines had not been invented yet.
[1]: Siegelova I. and H. Tsumoto (2011) Metals and Metallurgy in Hittite Anatolia, pp. 278 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 275-300
[2]: (Singh 2008, 272) Upinder Singh. 2008. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Longman. Delhi.
[3]: (Marsden 1969, 5, 16, 66.) Marsden, E. W. 1969. Greek and Roman Artillery: The Historical Development. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
[4]: (Dandamaev 1989, 314) Dandamaev, M A. 1989. A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire. Brill.
[5]: (Pollard and Berry 2012, 45) Pollard, N, Berry, J (2012) The Complete Roman Legions, Thames and Hudson, London Rives, J (2006) Religion in the Roman Empire, Wiley
[6]: (Keyser and Irby-Massie 2006, 260) Paul T Keyser. Georgia Irby-Massie. Science, Medicine, And Technology. Glenn R Bugh. ed. 2006. The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
The counter-weight trebuchet was first used by the Byzantines in 1165 CE.
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [1] "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [2]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
"The principal weapon of the Hittite chariot contingent was the bow and arrow. The bow was made of a composite of wood and horn glued together, which gave it a lot of strength and flexibility." [1] . "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [2]
[1]: Bryce T. (2007) Hittite Warrior, Oxford: Osprey Publishing, pp. 20
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
Swords had long been in use and have been uncovered in Anatolia during this time. [1] ‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [2] According to a military history (data requires check by polity expert): "All armies after the seventeenth century B.C.E. carried the sword, but in none was it a major weapon of close combat; rather, it was used when the soldier’s primary weapons, the spear and axe, were lost or broken." [3]
[1]: Altan Çilingiroğlu, ‘Ayanis: An Iron age Site in the East’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 1060
[2]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 26-27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [1] According to a military history (data requires check by polity expert): Spear-using phalanx first used in Sumer 2500 BCE. The phalanx was in use until the 1st century BCE. [2]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 25) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [1] also presence in previous polity
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
[1] . "The horse and light chariot were introduced into the Hittite world, as elsewhere in the Near East, probably around 1600..." [2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 139 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 111)
"The shields are either rectangular or of the figure-of-eight type [1] also presence in previous polity
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 139 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [1] also presence in previous polity
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
Closest reference in Anatolia is the Hittite period. [1] According to a military history (data requires check by polity expert): In Greece c1600 BCE: "Early Mycenaean and Minoan charioteers wore an arrangement of bronze armor that almost fully enclosed the soldier, the famous Dendra panoply." [2]
[1]: Bryce T. (2007) Hittite Warrior, Oxford: Osprey Publishing, pp. 15
[2]: (Gabriel 2007, 78) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region. [1] Which time/polity does this quote precisely refer to? Helmets were present in Egypt probably worn by charioteers by the 18th Dynasty c1500 BCE. [2] According to a military history (data requires check by polity expert): Earliest known helmet dates to 2500 BCE in Sumer. After this time use of helmets became widespread. [3]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480
[2]: (Hoffmeier 2001) J K Hoffmeier in D B Redford. ed. 2001. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 22) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
not mentioned in archaeological record, but this code has not yet received an expert check
’There was no Hittite fleet, and we do not know what ships were used for intercourse with the island of Cyprus, which the Hittites appear to have controlled. They used the services of the countries covered, especially Ugarit. However, the last king of Hatti, Suppiluliuma II actually boasts of victory in two sea battles (but does not describe them).’ [1]
[1]: Gurney, O. R. (1952) The Hittites, Penguin. pp. 103
’There was no Hittite fleet, and we do not know what ships were used for intercourse with the island of Cyprus, which the Hittites appear to have controlled. They used the services of the countries covered, especially Ugarit. However, the last king of Hatti, Suppiluliuma II actually boasts of victory in two sea battles (but does not describe them).’ [1]
[1]: Gurney, O. R. (1952) The Hittites, Penguin. pp. 103