Wars between different human groups
It is difficult to determine the time when wars began between different human groups, but it can be said that the construction of walls, towers and fortifications can give evidence of this beginning. It is known that the archaeological excavations that took place at the Jericho site in Palestine led to the discovery of the oldest The city fortifications known so far dating back to the Neolithic era (PPNB) . These fortifications consist of a trench dug out of rock and next to it is a wall 8 meters long, 3 meters wide, and 8.5 meters high. Built of stone, this wall rests on a huge tower also made of stone. He also revealed a wall surrounding the “Haloula” site, which is located on the right bank of the Upper Euphrates in the area of the Tishreen Dam. This wall is similar to the Wall of Jericho, although it is a little newer. The construction of fortifications increased in subsequent periods until they appeared in most excavated sites. The construction of these fortifications indicates the presence of an authority that supervised it to confront potential dangers from neighboring groups.
Relief sculpture depicting part of the Assyrian military attack on the city of Alamu (perhaps in Turkey or Iran today)
(Neo-Assyrian period 700-692 BC)
As a result of the increase in wealth with the increase in agricultural land areas and the expansion of trade exchanges; The desire of some rulers to expand their scope of control and establish major states increased. For example, the rulers of the Egyptian regions sought to unify Egypt under one state. But this did not happen until after fierce wars, and these wars were documented on some artifacts found by archaeologists, such as the prayer of King Narmer. The same thing happened in Mesopotamia when Lugal Zagezi, the ruler of Umma, towards the middle of the twenty-fourth century BC, tried to unify The Sumerian city-states were under his authority, and he fought many wars for this, but in the end the matter was accomplished by the Akkadian “Sharukin,” who appeared at almost the same time in the city of “Kish” and was able to defeat Lugal-Zagezi, capture him, and unify Mesopotamia under his rule.
A relief from Ashurbanipal's palace at Nineveh depicts the battle on the Ulai River (today's Karkheh River) and shows Assyrian infantrymen of spearmen and archers fighting collaborators.
The kings tried to give their wars a religious character in order to gain the support of their people for these wars. And to find a justification for it, when they lead their armies, they do so by order of the gods - and these gods were marching at the forefront of these armies - and when they are victorious, it is thanks to these gods and their satisfaction with them, and the defeated king is the one with whom the gods are no longer satisfied, and when they return victorious, a portion of the spoils It must be offered to the temples of the main gods, and the echo of all of this can be seen in the writings of these kings that they wrote to commemorate their wars and victories, or in the scenes of these battles that they were ordered to draw or engrave on various materials. One of the oldest scenes is the prayer of King Narmer, which represents the victory of the King of Upper Egypt, Narmer, over Lower Egypt. At the end of the process of unifying Egypt under one state, where the head of a cow is seen at the top of the scene, which symbolizes the goddess Hathor. The scene also shows the god Horus, who is symbolized by a falcon, who tied a captive with a rope by his nose while dragging him, as well as the scene in the falcon monument, which depicts the victory of the king of Lagash, “E-Anatum,” over the city of Uma, where the image of the god Ningersu - the god of Lagash - appears on the front face of the monument. Holding a net that resembles a fisherman's net, which is filled with soldiers from Uma, he beats them. As for Sharukin the Akkadian, after Lugal-Zagizi defeated the Sumerian king, he put him in a net and led him to the temple of the god Enlil - the main god of the Sumerians - in the city of Nippur. In a symbolic scene with deep connotations, it is as if Sharukin wanted to show the Sumerians how their god abandoned their king and sided with him as evidence of his dissatisfaction with him.
Since the military character is dominant in the modern Assyrian state; Its kings are keen to highlight the role of the god Assyria - their main god - in these wars, as he is the one who marches at the forefront of their armies and his weapons are what brought victory to them. King “Adad-narari II” (911-891 BC) says in the chronicles of the sixth year of his reign “By the command of (the god) Ashur, my lord, my great commander, and Ishtar, the mistress of battles and wars, who marches before my countless forces...” “Ashur-nasirpal II” (884-859 BC) said while talking about the campaign he carried out against Beit-Khulubi in the Middle Euphrates region: “From the city of Sur in Beit-Khulubi, I approached, and the terror of the great god Assyria, my lord, Own them...” As for Shalmaneser III (859-824 BC), he said while talking about one of his campaigns against the House of Adin: “..., by the order of Assyria, my great commander, and Nergal who follows me...” Here the hadith shows a god leading him and another following him, and often The phrase “the powerful weapons of my lord, the god Assyria,” is often repeated in the writings of these kings
It is worth noting that economic interests and the desire for expansion were among the most important causes of wars since the beginning of history. Lugal Zagezi sought to unify the Sumerian city-states under his control in the twenty-fourth century BC in a step towards unifying all of Mesopotamia within the framework of a single state under his rule. But before he achieved his goal, he clashed with Sharrukin the Akkadian, who had the same ambitions, and in the end victory went to Sharrukin. The same thing was repeated by the Babylonian king Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) when he reunified Mesopotamia under his authority after it had returned to division and division in previous periods. The most fervent desire to establish major empires was among the kings of the Neo-Assyrian state who did not They contented themselves with placing all of Mesopotamia under their authority; Rather, they annexed Syria and, at a later stage, Egypt, albeit for a temporary period.
A wall sculpture showing the destruction of the city of Susa, the capital of Elam, at the hands of King Ashurbanipal in 647 BC.
The most important economic factor lies in the desire of countries to establish international trade routes. The places of extraction of raw materials - especially wood and metals - are under its authority, in addition to obtaining lucrative spoils during military campaigns. The news of the campaigns of the Egyptian and Assyrian kings is full of the types of spoils they obtained from their wars, especially in Syria. These spoils included hardwoods, herds of various livestock, gold, silver, copper, wool, purple and linen clothing, wooden furniture, and many other things. It is known that Egypt and Mesopotamia lacked hardwoods that... It was necessary in many construction works (buildings, ships, etc.), and therefore it can be said that the expansionist goals were to serve economic purposes.
Scenes of the Battle of Kadesh between the Egyptians and the Hittites are carved on the walls of the Ramesseum Temple in Luxor
As a result of the passage of international trade routes from Syria, and the availability of raw materials that the major neighboring countries lacked (Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Hittites in Anatolia), it was a target that these countries sought to control, and thus major battles took place between them. Or between it and local forces supported by external forces on its lands. Perhaps the most important of these battles is the Battle of Megiddo[t] - which took place in 468 BC - which took place between the Egyptians led by King Thutmose III and the alliance of Syrian princes led by the Prince of Kadesh and supported by the King of Mitanni[t]. ], Thutmose was able to defeat the allied forces, and it is noted in this battle that the Mitanni king did not participate directly in it. As for the second major battle that took place on Syrian soil, it was the Battle of Kadesh[t] in the year 1285 BC. Between the Hittites - led by their king “Muwattali” - and their allies among the princes of the Syrian cities, and between the Egyptians led by their king Ramesses II and their Syrian allies as well. Ramesses II immortalized the news of this battle in text and images on the walls of Egyptian temples, claiming to have achieved a great victory in it, and the Hittites[t] Records of this battle date back to the reign of King Hattusilis III, successor to Muwattali, and it seems that the outcome of the battle was not decisive for either side; Because the areas of influence on the ground remained as they were before the battle, and perhaps the signing of the peace agreement between the Hittite and Egyptian states several years after the battle is evidence of that as well.
Rameses II on his chariot at the Battle of Kadesh
As for the third important battle that took place on Syrian soil, it was the Battle of Qarqar[t] (north of Hama) between the Assyrians led by their king Shalmaneser III (859 - 824 BC) and the alliance of the Syrian emirates led by “Barhadad II,” king of Aram-Damascus, and “Erkhulini.” » King of Hamah; With twelve other princes and kings, Barhadad mobilized to stop the advance of the Assyrian forces in the Syrian lands located to the west of the Euphrates River. This battle took place in the sixth year of the reign of Shalmaneser III. That is, around the year 856 BC, and with Shalmaneser III claiming victory in the numerous writings that he ordered to be published in commemoration of this battle; The facts show the opposite. Instead of continuing his path south towards Hama and Damascus, the two leaders of the coalition, he retreated back to his capital, and did not repeat the attempt again until several years later.
Hittite sculpture of the war chariot that the Hittites used in their battles
The warring armies used weapons of various shapes and types and made of different metals. The discovery of a new metal and its use in manufacturing weapons contributed to the superiority of one armies over others. When man learned to manufacture bronze and began to manufacture his weapons from it; This gave an advantage over the armies that continued to make their weapons from copper, and the use of bronze weapons may have been one of the factors that contributed to the victory achieved by Sharukin the Akkadian over the Sumerian king Lugal-Zagesi. The same thing was repeated with the beginning of the manufacture of weapons from iron at the end of the second millennium BC. Which gave the advantage in war to the armies that began using iron swords instead of bronze. This is due to the hardness of iron compared to bronze. In addition to this, the introduction of the use of horses in battles played a major role in changing the balance of power between the warring armies. Forming cavalry teams gave the army the speed required to reach the battlefield, and these teams were able to reach rugged areas that heavy teams, such as chariot teams, could not reach. Especially those that were pulled by bulls. It is noted that the Assyrian state in its modern era - especially during the reign of its king Tiglath-Pileser[r] III (745-727 BC) - relied heavily on cavalry teams, which gave it great superiority over its various enemies.
The Treaty of Kadesh between the Egyptians and the Hittites, which is one of the oldest peace treaties in history (Istanbul Antiquities Museum)
Armies were often forced to impose sieges on some sites, such as cities and castles. To do so, they used various tools to besiege and destroy walls. These tools often appear on wall inscriptions ordered by victorious kings, and are sometimes mentioned in their writings. Perhaps one of the most famous tools used to smash walls is what is known as battering rams, as well as building towers against besieging walls in order to reach the defenders of these walls. Or digging trenches and tunnels to infiltrate besieged areas. Perhaps the text of “Zakur,” the Aramaic king of Hama, clarifies this aspect when he talks about the siege that was imposed on him in “Hazerak,” describing those besieging him as “they built a wall higher than the wall of Hazerak, and dug a trench deeper than its trench.”
Source: websites