Home Region:  Iran (Southwest Asia)

Susa III

EQ 2020  ir_susa_3 / IrSusa3

While no information could be found in the sources consulted regarding the polity’s overall population, it is estimated that the largest settlement - Tall-i Malyan at Fars, Anshan region – may have had up to ten thousand inhabitants. [1] However it is also believed that during this period there was a decrease in population following a rapid urbanisation of the mountain heartland, followed by a collapse and possible reversion to nomadism. [2]
There were three tiers of settlement in the area: Susa, the centre and capital of the polity, the villages that surrounded Susa, and other small sites such as farmsteads or seasonal sheparding areas. [3] During the Susa III phase, Susa has been considered to have been the "centre of greatest economic activity in literate Iran", which led to it being annexed by Anshan. [4]
During this time writing developed in response to the administrative requirements of urban societies during this period. [3] Administration was usually run through the temples in the urban centres, which would deal with anything from dealing with trade to accounting to government duties. [5]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 5) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[3]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179.

[4]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[5]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
39 R  
Original Name:
Susa III  
Capital:
Susa  
Alternative Name:
Proto-Elamite Period  
Susa C  
Late Banesh  
Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[3,100 BCE ➜ 2,675 BCE]  
Political and Cultural Relations
Supracultural Entity:
Sumerian  
Succeeding Entity:
Elam - Awan Dynasty I  
Preceding Entity:
Susa II  
Degree of Centralization:
confederated state  
unitary state  
Language
Linguistic Family:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI  
Language:
Sumerian  
Proto-Elamite  
Religion
Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[2,500 to 10,000] people  
Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
[2 to 3]  
Religious Level:
[2 to 3]  
Military Level:
[2 to 3]  
Administrative Level:
4  
Professions
Professional Soldier:
absent  
present  
Professional Priesthood:
unknown  
Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
inferred present  
Full Time Bureaucrat:
inferred present  
Law
Professional Lawyer:
inferred absent  
Judge:
inferred absent  
Court:
inferred absent  
Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
unknown  
Irrigation System:
present  
Food Storage Site:
unknown  
Drinking Water Supply System:
unknown  
Transport Infrastructure
Road:
inferred present  
Canal:
inferred absent  
Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
unknown  
Information / Writing System
Written Record:
present  
Script:
present  
Nonwritten Record:
present  
Mnemonic Device:
inferred present  
Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
inferred present  
Religious Literature:
inferred present  
Practical Literature:
inferred present  
Lists Tables and Classification:
present  
Calendar:
inferred present  
Information / Money
Precious Metal:
inferred present  
Paper Currency:
unknown  
Indigenous Coin:
unknown  
Foreign Coin:
unknown  
Article:
inferred present  
Information / Postal System
Courier:
present  
Information / Measurement System
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
  Wooden Palisade:
unknown  
  Stone Walls Non Mortared:
absent  
  Stone Walls Mortared:
absent  
  Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present  
  Modern Fortification:
absent  
  Moat:
unknown  
  Fortified Camp:
unknown  
  Earth Rampart:
unknown  
  Ditch:
unknown  
  Complex Fortification:
absent  
  Long Wall:
absent  
Military use of Metals
  Steel:
absent  
  Iron:
absent  
  Copper:
present  
  Bronze:
inferred present  
Projectiles
  Tension Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling:
present  
  Self Bow:
inferred present  
  Javelin:
unknown  
  Handheld Firearm:
absent  
  Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent  
  Crossbow:
absent  
  Composite Bow:
present  
  Atlatl:
absent  
Handheld weapons
  War Club:
present  
  Sword:
present  
  Spear:
present  
  Polearm:
absent  
  Dagger:
inferred present  
  Battle Axe:
present  
Animals used in warfare
  Horse:
absent  
  Elephant:
absent  
  Donkey:
unknown  
  Dog:
present  
  Camel:
absent  
Armor
  Wood Bark Etc:
unknown  
  Shield:
unknown  
  Scaled Armor:
absent  
  Plate Armor:
absent  
  Limb Protection:
inferred absent  
  Leather Cloth:
unknown  
  Laminar Armor:
absent  
  Helmet:
inferred absent  
  Chainmail:
absent  
  Breastplate:
absent  
Naval technology
  Specialized Military Vessel:
absent  
  Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
unknown  
  Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
absent  
Religion Tolerance Nothing coded yet.
Human Sacrifice Nothing coded yet.
Crisis Consequences Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions Nothing coded yet.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Susa III (ir_susa_3) was in:
 (3100 BCE 2676 BCE)   Susiana
Home NGA: Susiana

General Variables
Identity and Location


"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC." [1]

[1]: (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton.


Alternative Name:
Proto-Elamite Period

Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [1]
3000-2800 BCE. Khuzistan: Susa C; Zagros: Godin 4; Fars: Late Banesh. [2]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 83) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

Alternative Name:
Susa C

Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [1]
3000-2800 BCE. Khuzistan: Susa C; Zagros: Godin 4; Fars: Late Banesh. [2]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 83) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

Alternative Name:
Late Banesh

Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [1]
3000-2800 BCE. Khuzistan: Susa C; Zagros: Godin 4; Fars: Late Banesh. [2]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 83) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[3,100 BCE ➜ 2,675 BCE]

"But toward the end of the fourth millennium, when the brilliant civilization of the Uruk period had collapsed in Mesopotamia and at Susa, the population of Fars broke with the prehistoric past and achieved in their turn a kind of historical consciousness, establishing a large center which perhaps had already acquired its name, Anshan (modern Tal-i Malyan)." [1]

[1]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.


Political and Cultural Relations
Supracultural Entity:
Sumerian

Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [1]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.


Succeeding Entity:
Elam - Awan Dynasty I


Degree of Centralization:
confederated state

Proto-Elamite period reference: "The geography of Iran, with its fertile lands surrounded by mountains, or on the margins of the central deserts, favoured the rise of local political entities. The latter would eventually unit in a sort of federal system (especially in the following period). Among these various local entities, Susiana remains a unique case, due to its exposure to Mesopotamian influences." [1]
Uruk phase "Urban Revolution therefore led to the formation of the Early State, not just in its decisional function, which already existed in pre-urban communities, but in the fullest sense of the term. The latter is to be understood as an organisation that solidly controls and defends a given territory (and its many communities) and manages the exploitation of resources to ensure and develop the survival of its population. What distinguishes the State is the stratified, yet organically coherent, structure of the human groups constituting it. In other words, the formation of the State placed collective interests above individual ones (or of individual groups such as families, villages and so on), the former being pursued in the various functions and contributions provided by each group." [2]
"Established in the late fourth millennium B.C., the Elamite Empire was the first Iranian experience in empire building and state tradition. ... the federated state of Elam practiced public administration ... The federal system of Elam was composed of several major kingdoms (the Kassite, the Guti, the Lullubi, Susiana, and Elamite), all being of the same racial group of the pre-Aryan people." [3] -- Note that Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [4]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Farazmand 2001, 535) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.

[4]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Degree of Centralization:
unitary state

Proto-Elamite period reference: "The geography of Iran, with its fertile lands surrounded by mountains, or on the margins of the central deserts, favoured the rise of local political entities. The latter would eventually unit in a sort of federal system (especially in the following period). Among these various local entities, Susiana remains a unique case, due to its exposure to Mesopotamian influences." [1]
Uruk phase "Urban Revolution therefore led to the formation of the Early State, not just in its decisional function, which already existed in pre-urban communities, but in the fullest sense of the term. The latter is to be understood as an organisation that solidly controls and defends a given territory (and its many communities) and manages the exploitation of resources to ensure and develop the survival of its population. What distinguishes the State is the stratified, yet organically coherent, structure of the human groups constituting it. In other words, the formation of the State placed collective interests above individual ones (or of individual groups such as families, villages and so on), the former being pursued in the various functions and contributions provided by each group." [2]
"Established in the late fourth millennium B.C., the Elamite Empire was the first Iranian experience in empire building and state tradition. ... the federated state of Elam practiced public administration ... The federal system of Elam was composed of several major kingdoms (the Kassite, the Guti, the Lullubi, Susiana, and Elamite), all being of the same racial group of the pre-Aryan people." [3] -- Note that Potts (2016) says that the link between what has been called "Proto-Elamite" and Elamite culture does not exist, "Proto-Elamite" is a misnomer. Writing system of the succeeding period was derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II/Uruk IV. [4]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Farazmand 2001, 535) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.

[4]: (Potts 2016, 76) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.


Language

Language:
Sumerian

Sumerian in neighbouring Mesopotamia: "Until Sargon, records from Akkad had been written in Sumerian." [1] Proto-Elamite descendent fro Uruk IV writing and developed different signs to the Sumerian of Jemdet Nasr. Susiana was a centre of Proto-Elamite culture along with Tall-i Malyan at Fars. [2] Susa III texts c3000 BCE not related to Old Elamite inscriptions c2300 BCE. "simply indefensible to claim that Malyan was the site at which the Susa III writing system originated." It was a system derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II / Uruk IV. [3]

[1]: (Middleton 2015) Middleton, John. 2015. World Monarchies and Dynasties. Routledge.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Language:
Proto-Elamite

Sumerian in neighbouring Mesopotamia: "Until Sargon, records from Akkad had been written in Sumerian." [1] Proto-Elamite descendent fro Uruk IV writing and developed different signs to the Sumerian of Jemdet Nasr. Susiana was a centre of Proto-Elamite culture along with Tall-i Malyan at Fars. [2] Susa III texts c3000 BCE not related to Old Elamite inscriptions c2300 BCE. "simply indefensible to claim that Malyan was the site at which the Susa III writing system originated." It was a system derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II / Uruk IV. [3]

[1]: (Middleton 2015) Middleton, John. 2015. World Monarchies and Dynasties. Routledge.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.


Religion

Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[2,500 to 10,000] people

Inhabitants. Tall-i Malyan at Fars, Anshan region. Estimate based on 50 hectares at Seshat standard rate of 50-200 inhabitants per hectare.
Tall-i Malyan at Fars "the settlement extended over 50 hectares, ten times the size of contemporary Susa (Levels 16-13 of the acropolis).". [1]
"During the early third millennium B.C., the Susa III Period was marked by a population minumum in the Susiana Plain. Susa itself was only slightly more than 10 hectares in size, little more than a large village." [2] "... Susa covered about 11 hectares during the Susa III Period. The area was probably somewhat less in the early part of the period and somewhat greater at the end, although such fine distinctions are of dubious merit when so little reliable information is available." [3]
"Susa was annexed by Anshan. Although it was a much smaller center than Anshan, its long previous period of cultural development enabled it to contribute to the formation of the new civilization, which expanded into ethnically related regions." [4] -- Actually in Susa III Susa was the "centre of greatest economic activity in literate Iran" and Tal-i Malyan did not annex Susa. [5]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Alden 1987, 157) Alden, John R. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.

[3]: (Alden 1987, 159) Alden, John R. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.

[4]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[5]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
[2 to 3]

levels.
1. Center - Susa
2. Villages3. Other sites
In his review of J Alden’s paper, Sumner (1988) says: "Susa was the center of a very small system with 5 villages and a scatter of 26 sites that are interpreted as representing brief occupations by local shepards." [1]

[1]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179.


Religious Level:
[2 to 3]

levels.
1. Priest-king?
2. Priests appointed by king3. Lesser priests?
"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted." [1]
"During the third millennium B.C.E., the most important deity in Elam was the goddess Pinikir, ’the great mother of the gods to the Elamites’ and the great mistress of heaven. Later, another goddess, Kirrisha, surpassed her, but many goddesses were gradually demoted and replaced in rank by male gods. Yet Kirrisha never lost her title as the main goddess of Elam, and it is significant for later developments that she married two of her brothers who were major gods. Kings often built temples to honor her and appear to her for protection. Despite being demoted, Elamite goddesses retained a higher status than goddesses in Mesopotamia." [2]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[2]: (Nashat 2003, 14) Nashat, Guity. Women in Pre-Islamic and Early Islamic Iran. in Nashat, Guity. Beck, Lois. eds. 2003. Women in Iran: From The Rise Of Islam To 1800. University of Illinois Press. Urbana.


Military Level:
[2 to 3]

levels.
Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE "monopoly of defence forces to protect internal cohesion. The wealth and technical knowledge accumulated in cities had to be defended against foreign attacks, both from other city-states and other enemies (for instance, nomadic tribes). This defence system then turned into an offensive tactic. ... Instrumental for these kinds of activities was the creation of an army, which was divided into two groups. One group was made of full-time workers, specialised in military activities (although this remains purely hypothetical for the Uruk period). In case of war, an army was assembled through military conscription, and was supported by mandatory provisions of military supplies." [1]
Liverani notes of previous Uruk phase "Urban Revolution therefore led to the formation of the Early State, not just in its decisional function, which already existed in pre-urban communities, but in the fullest sense of the term. The latter is to be understood as an organisation that solidly controls and defends a given territory (and its many communities) and manages the exploitation of resources to ensure and develop the survival of its population." [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Administrative Level:
4

levels.
1. King
2. Administration system - presumably temple based, run by accountants3. Scribes
3. Teachers at scribal schools4. Specialised workers who produced the stuff that accountants do accounting for e.g. shepherds
Writing developed "as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time." [1]
"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a ’scribe’, who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State." [1]
"Sumerian management depended on dense concentrations of workers at the disposal of temples and other large institutions, minutely graded into teams and sets of entitlements." [2]
"While internal independence of the member states was respected, intergovernmental relations on civil administration were regulated by various administrative rules and ordinances." [3]
"Established in the late fourth millennium B.C., the Elamite Empire was the first Iranian experience in empire building and state tradition. ... the federated state of Elam practiced public administration ... The federal system of Elam was composed of several major kingdoms (the Kassite, the Guti, the Lullubi, Susiana, and Elamite), all being of the same racial group of the pre-Aryan people. The Elamite over-lordship in Susa was the main power of the federated states, the heads of which frequently assembled for political and military purposes. Decision making was based on equality, and cooperation was key to the coordinated system of government in a federal structure." [4]
Lower Mesopotamia at this time had city-states and inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): "the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent ’barbarian’ groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman." [5]
"Susa was annexed by Anshan. Although it was a much smaller center than Anshan, its long previous period of cultural development enabled it to contribute to the formation of the new civilization, which expanded into ethnically related regions." [6]
"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted." [7]
Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: "The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur. The bureaucratic management of these provinces was uniform and interchangeable, and could be applied throughout the land (although some some local variations remained in place)." [8]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Foster 2016, 17) Foster, Benjamin R. 2016. The Age of Agade. Inventing Empire In Ancient Mesopotamia. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Farazmand 2001, 536) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.

[4]: (Farazmand 2001, 535) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.

[5]: (Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[6]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[7]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[8]: (Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Professions
Professional Soldier:
absent

Possibility of this in Uruk phase: "hypothetical." Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE "monopoly of defence forces to protect internal cohesion. The wealth and technical knowledge accumulated in cities had to be defended against foreign attacks, both from other city-states and other enemies (for instance, nomadic tribes). This defence system then turned into an offensive tactic. ... Instrumental for these kinds of activities was the creation of an army, which was divided into two groups. One group was made of full-time workers, specialised in military activities (although this remains purely hypothetical for the Uruk period). In case of war, an army was assembled through military conscription, and was supported by mandatory provisions of military supplies." [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

Professional Soldier:
present

Possibility of this in Uruk phase: "hypothetical." Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE "monopoly of defence forces to protect internal cohesion. The wealth and technical knowledge accumulated in cities had to be defended against foreign attacks, both from other city-states and other enemies (for instance, nomadic tribes). This defence system then turned into an offensive tactic. ... Instrumental for these kinds of activities was the creation of an army, which was divided into two groups. One group was made of full-time workers, specialised in military activities (although this remains purely hypothetical for the Uruk period). In case of war, an army was assembled through military conscription, and was supported by mandatory provisions of military supplies." [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.



Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
present

"While internal independence of the member states was respected, intergovernmental relations on civil administration were regulated by various administrative rules and ordinances." [1]

[1]: (Farazmand 2001, 536) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.


Full Time Bureaucrat:
present

"While internal independence of the member states was respected, intergovernmental relations on civil administration were regulated by various administrative rules and ordinances." [1]

[1]: (Farazmand 2001, 536) Farazmand, Ali in Farazmand, Ali ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.


Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent

"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60." [1]

[1]: J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html


Temple complex based government. "Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor." [1]
A "legal system" may have been present. Were there specialist judges or were judges priests? "the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60." [2]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[2]: J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html


Temple complex based government. "Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor." [1]
A "legal system" may have been present. Were there specialist courts or was this among the activities of the temple complexes? "the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60." [2]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[2]: J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html


Specialized Buildings: polity owned

Irrigation System:
present

"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60." [1]

[1]: J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html




Transport Infrastructure

"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC... was an advanced civilisation ... administration, and even a postal service." [1] -- postal service may imply an interest in the formal maintenance of at least some routes. Also, for trade. Proto-Elamite accounting system found as far east as Shahr-e Sukhteh on the Iran-Afghan border. Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: "bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade." [2] -- key infrastructures likely to have included some roads along which trade was carried.

[1]: J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Certainly in neighbouring Mesopotamia c2000-1500 BCE: "It was an important task for the rulers of Mesopotamia to dig canals and to maintain them, because canals were not only necessary for irrigation but also useful for the transport of goods and armies. The rulers or high government officials must have ordered Babylonian mathematicians to calculate the number of workers and days necessary for the building of a canal, and to calculate the total expenses of wages of the workers." [1]

[1]: Muroi in J J O’Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html


Special-purpose Sites

Information / Writing System
Written Record:
present

c1557 texts found at Susa. [1] Susa III texts c3000 BCE not related to Old Elamite inscriptions c2300 BCE. "simply indefensible to claim that Malyan was the site at which the Susa III writing system originated." It was a system derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II / Uruk IV. [2]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 68) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.


Script:
present

Susa III texts c3000 BCE not related to Old Elamite inscriptions c2300 BCE. "simply indefensible to claim that Malyan was the site at which the Susa III writing system originated." It was a system derived from proto-cuneiform Susa II / Uruk IV. [1] glyptic style writing found at Tepe Sialk (north) and especially Tepe Yahya (southeast) [2] Proto-Elamite descendent fro Uruk IV writing and developed different signs to the Sumerian of Jemdet Nasr. Susiana was the centre of Proto-Elamite culture along with Tall-i Malyan at Fars. [3]

[1]: (Potts 2016, 71) Potts, D T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[3]: (Leverani 2014, 91) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Nonwritten Record:
present

"From about 8000 BC, a system of recording involving small clay tokens was prevalent in the Near and Middle East. Tokens were small geometric objects, usually in the shape of cylinders, cones, and spheres." [1] "From about 3000 BC, among the Sumerians, tokens for different goods began appearing as impressions on clay tablets, represented by different symbols and multiple quantities represented by repetition. Thus three units of grain were denoted by three "grain marks," five jars of oil by five "oil marks," and so on." [2]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 134) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[2]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.


Mnemonic Device:
present

"The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted." [1]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.


Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
present

Mathematics. "A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted." [1]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.


Religious Literature:
present

Lake Uruk phase administrative tablets show royal inscriptions, prayers and divinatory texts. [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 78) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Practical Literature:
present

literature relating to accounting in the temple complexes, such as metrological systems. "A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted." [1] "Proto-Elamite influence even spread across the great eastern desert of Lut to Shahr-i Sokhta, where the Proto-Elamite accounting system is found in use by people whose cultural affinities lay not with the Proto-Elamite world but with the inhabitants of Turkmenia and the region south of the Hindu Kush mountain range." [2] Lake Uruk phase (second half fourth millennium BCE) administrative tablets show land management records. [3]

[1]: (Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.

[2]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[3]: (Leverani 2014, 78) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Lists Tables and Classification:
present

"Clay tablets with Proto-Elamite writing also occur at Anshan in an association with a large building embellished with paintings." [1] "Proto-Elamite influence even spread across the great eastern desert of Lut to Shahr-i Sokhta, where the Proto-Elamite accounting system is found in use by people whose cultural affinities lay not with the Proto-Elamite world but with the inhabitants of Turkmenia and the region south of the Hindu Kush mountain range." [1] Lake Uruk phase (second half fourth millennium BCE) administrative tablets show: lists divided into categories such as professions, birds, vases, plants.. [2]

[1]: (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 78) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Calendar:
present

"The great organisations of the first phase of urbanisation rose to prominence without writing. The latter developed relatively quickly as a response to these institutions’ needs." [1] Liverani says the so-called "urban revolution" of the Uruk phase was from 3800-3000 BCE. [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 73) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Leverani 2014, 69-70) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Information / Money
Precious Metal:
present

"There were two main units of value in Mesopotamia: barley and silver (and sometimes copper). Barley was readily available, of low value, and thus often present in exchanges. On the contrary, silver was a precious and rare metal, but also non-perishable (since it could not be consumed), allowing its accumulation." [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 71) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.





Article:
present

"There were two main units of value in Mesopotamia: barley and silver (and sometimes copper). Barley was readily available, of low value, and thus often present in exchanges. On the contrary, silver was a precious and rare metal, but also non-perishable (since it could not be consumed), allowing its accumulation. These were two very different materials, to be used as units on different occasions with different goods, and thus complementing each other." [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 71) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Information / Postal System

Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Wooden Palisade:
unknown

‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture [1]

[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56


Stone Walls Non Mortared:
absent

Technology not yet available


Stone Walls Mortared:
absent

Technology not yet available


Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present

Base camps with fortified walls are present, defending against animal or human attackers [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 39-42) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Modern Fortification:
absent

Technology not yet available


‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture [1]

[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56


Fortified Camp:
unknown

‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture [1]

[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56


Earth Rampart:
unknown

‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture [1]

[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56


‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture [1]

[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56


Complex Fortification:
absent

Technology not yet available



Military use of Metals

Technology not found in archaeological evidence until much later


Technology not found in archaeological evidence until much later


Copper:
present

The materials used for weapons were mainly copper for this period [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 81) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


Bronze:
present

Compositional analyses of five objects from Kalleh Nisar Area AI suggest the intentional alloying of copper and tin to produce bronze, as suggested by tin contents of 3.52 percent and 14.8 percent in two finger rings; 3.85 percent and 3.49 percent in two bracelets; and 3.74 percent in a pin (Fleming et al. 2005: table 1). For the moment, these are the earliest tin-bronzes known in Iran (Fleming et al. 2005: 37; Pigott 2008: 56-7). [1] No clear evidence that is was used for military purposes though

[1]: Daniel T. Potts, ‘Luristan and the Central Zagros in the Bronze Age’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 208


Projectiles
Tension Siege Engine:
absent

Base camps with fortified walls are present, defending against animal or human attackers. [1] In Anatolia siege warfare was mentioned in Old Hittite records. [2] 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". [3] Marsden (1969) said archaeological records exist before the 4th century BCE. [4] The Achaemenids (c400 BCE?) are assumed to have had the catapult because the Macedonians did. [5] Pollard and Berry (2012) say torsion catapults first came into widespread use in the Hellenistic period 4th - 1st centuries BCE. [6] 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. [7] 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]: (Leverani 2014, 39-42) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: 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

[3]: (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.

[4]: (Marsden 1969, 5, 16, 66.) Marsden, E. W. 1969. Greek and Roman Artillery: The Historical Development. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

[5]: (Dandamaev 1989, 314) Dandamaev, M A. 1989. A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire. Brill.

[6]: (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

[7]: (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.


Sling Siege Engine:
absent

The counter-weight trebuchet was first used by the Byzantines in 1165 CE.


Archaeologist have found sling bullets at the Chalcolithic site of Chogha Gavaneh dating from 5000-4000 BCE. [1] "Round and ovoid sling pellets have been dug up in early Sumer and Turkestan. Ovoid sling pellets have been unearthed at the neolithic sites on the Iranian tableland. In later times, the sling was used in Palestine and Syria. It was introduced in Egypt at a still later date." [2] According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): 4000 BCE in the Middle East and southeastern Europe: "sling, dagger, mace, and bow are common weapons". [3]

[1]: (Forouzan et al. 2012: 3534) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/ainsworth/items/itemKey/Q5RVEPUU.

[2]: (Singh 1997, 90) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.

[3]: (Gabriel 2007, xii) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Self Bow:
present

According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): "The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age". [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.


Javelin:
unknown

Bone harpoons found since the Paleolithic, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these. [1] According to a military historian (a polity specialist ought to be able to elaborate on this claim): "Unlike other areas of the world where the spear developed into a thrown weapon, in the Middle East it remained primarily a stabbing weapon." [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 59) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Handheld Firearm:
absent

Not invented at this time.


Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent

Not invented at this time.


Crossbow:
absent

Not present at this time: "the hand-held crossbow was invented by the Chinese, in the fifth century BC, and probably came into the Roman world in the first century AD, where it was used for hunting." [1] The crossbow also developed after the Syracuse Greek Dionysios I invented a form of crossbow called the gastraphetes in 399 BCE. [2]

[1]: (Nicholson 2004, 99) Helen Nicholson. 2004. Medieval Warfare: Theory and Practice of War in Europe, 300-1500. PalgraveMacmillan. Basingstoke.

[2]: (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.


Composite Bow:
present

Recurved bows are depicted in seals, showing arrows being fired at humans in warfare. [1] According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): "The first evidence of the composite bow appears on the victory stele of Naram Sin (2254-2218 B.C.E.)". [2] "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." [3]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 75) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.

[3]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.


Not mentioned in evidence and extremely unlikely being a weapon of the Americas


Handheld weapons
War Club:
present

According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): mace was the dominant weapon of war between 4000-2500 BCE before the helmet was invented. [1] According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): 4000 BCE in the Middle East and southeastern Europe: "sling, dagger, mace, and bow are common weapons". [2]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 24) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.

[2]: (Gabriel 2007, xii) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Copper swords have been found in the region. [1] According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): In Sumer the first swords appeared about c3000 BCE but until c2000 BCE their use were restricted because the blade often became detached from the handle. The sickle-sword of c2500 BCE was cast whole but it was unable to break armour so the battle axe was preferred. [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 88) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 63) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Copper spearheads have been found in the region. [1] According to a military historian (a polity specialist ought to be able to elaborate on this claim): "Unlike other areas of the world where the spear developed into a thrown weapon, in the Middle East it remained primarily a stabbing weapon." [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 88) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 59) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Polearm:
absent

Technology not found in archaeological evidence until much later


Dagger:
present

Bone needles/knives were present by 7200 BC, but no hard evidence for use in warfare. [1] Stone blades had been in production in Iraq/Iran since the Paleolithic: ’The Baradostian lithic industry is dominated by blade production. Characteristic tools include slender points, backed blades and bladelets, twisted bladelets with various kinds of light retouch, end scrapers, discoidal scrapers, side scrapers, and burins.’ [2] Obsidian blades have also been found for this period [3] Knife blades became longer during this time but this was for butchery rather than warfare. [4] According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): 4000 BCE in the Middle East and southeastern Europe: "sling, dagger, mace, and bow are common weapons". [5]

[1]: (Alizadeh 2003, 82)

[2]: Nicholas J. Conard, Elham Ghasidian, and Saman Heydari-Guran, ’The Paleolithic of Iran’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, pp. 38-39

[3]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 57

[4]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[5]: (Gabriel 2007, xii) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Battle Axe:
present

‘circulation of characteristic Late Chalcolithic double axes’ and these axes were used as weapons. [1]

[1]: Barbara Helwing, ‘The Chalcolithic of Northern Iran’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 87


Animals used in warfare

Technology not yet available


Elephant:
absent

Not in military use until much later


Donkey:
unknown

Evidence for use as Pack Animals appears by around 7000 BC onward [1] The donkey was probably domesticated from the African wild ass ’in more than one place’ but for the Nubian subspecies 5500-4500 BCE in the Sudan. [2]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Mitchell 2018, 39) Peter Mitchell 2018. The Donkey in Human History: An Archaeological Perspective. Oxford University Press. Oxford.


Dogs were used to defend villages against attacking humans/animals [1]

[1]: (Leverani 2014, 41-44) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.


3rd millenium BC, bactrian camels appear in engravings showing their importance but no military use until much later. [1]

[1]: Javier Alvarez-Mon, ‘Khuzestan in the Bronze Age’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, pp. 312-314


Armor
Wood Bark Etc:
unknown

Technology not found in archaeological evidence until much later


Shield:
unknown

Not mentioned in the archaeological evidence


Scaled Armor:
absent

Technology not yet available. According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): "The first recorded instance of body armor is found on the Stele of Vultures in ancient Sumer, which shows Eannatum’s soldiers wearing leather cloaks on which are sewn spined metal disks. The disks do not appear to be arranged in any order, and we do not know if the disks were made of copper or bronze. By 2100 BCE the victory stele of Naram Sin appears to show plate armor, and it is likely that plate armor had been in wide use for a few hundred years. Plate armor was constructed of thin bronze plates sewn to a leather shirt or jerkin." [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.


Plate Armor:
absent

Technology not yet available


Limb Protection:
absent

According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): the earliest reference, for Greece c1600 BCE: "Early Mycenaean and Minoan charioteers wore an arrangement of bronze armor that almost fully enclosed the soldier, the famous Dendra panoply." [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2007, 78) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.


Leather Cloth:
unknown

There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’ [1]

[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7


Laminar Armor:
absent

Technology not yet available. According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): Lamellar armour introduced by the Assyrians (9th century BCE?): "a shirt constructed of laminated layers of leather sewn or glued together. To the outer surface of this coat were attached fitted iron plates, each plate joined to the next at the edge with no overlap and held in place by stitching or gluing." [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.


Helmet:
absent

According to a military historian (a polity specialist needs to check this data): earliest helmet 2500 BCE in Sumer was a "a cap of hammered copper" fitted onto a leather cap. [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 22) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.


Chainmail:
absent

Iron chain mail not introduced until the third century BCE, probably by Celtic peoples. [1]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.


Breastplate:
absent

Technology not yet available


Naval technology
Specialized Military Vessel:
absent

Technology not yet available


Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
unknown

Not mentioned in the archaeological evidence


Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
absent

Technology not yet available



Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.