Evolution of the Scale Armour in the Ancient Near East, Aegean
and Egypt :
An Overview from the Origins to the Pre-Sargonids
Abstract
To what it appears at first, the scale armour used in the
ancient Near East, Egypt and Aegean has not been surveyed as a
hole yet, except for some isolated articles which provided the
basis for the coming others.
This paper presents a broad overview of the apparition and
evolution of the scale armour in the ancient Near East, Egypt
and Aegean. The main objective of this contribution lies in the
proposition of a general geographic and time frame for the
research, confronting textual, visual and material evidences
when they are available. Definitions will be set, but then they
will be used as such to illustrate the different types of
armour for the goal of this paper. The author means absolutely
no links of inheritance, copy, technological steal or the like
between the different civilizations discussed in this paper,
except otherwise stated in the text.
A proposal for some essential reasons that might have lead
to the choice of the scale armour as a kind of “standard”
protection for the Bronze and Early Iron Age in the
Mediterranean rather than other systems, will come to finish
this first part of a series devoted to the scale armour.
Before proceeding further, some might say that the
present author is wrong in designating ancient near eastern,
aegean and egyptian realities by “European” mediaeval names.
Some might be right…but, then, the present author awaits their
full study of the armour lexicography in the ancient Near East,
Aegean and Egypt during the IIIrd, IInd and Ist millennia B.C.,
with special references to visual and material evidences, to be
published.
Acknowledgements
Professor R. Lebrun is to mentioned hereby for being, in a
way, at the origin of this paper.
Professor D. Owen has to be thanked as well, for the
information he shared with the present author at the 218th
AMAOS of Albuquerque, in 2009.
Professor M. Maidman will find here the warm thanks of the
present author, for the data he shared with hi mat the 218th
AMAOS of Albuquerque, in 2009.
Professor G. Bunnens also deserves the present author’s
gratitude, for the excavations at Tell Ahmar in 2009.
Professor K. Aslihan Yener, from the Oriental Institute of
Chicago, is to be mentioned among the people to whom the
present author is grateful.
Professor T. Dezö will find here the warm thanks of the
author for their meeting at the 52nd RAI in Münster, in 2006.
M. A. Salimbetti has also to be congratulated for his
wonderful website on the Greek Bronze Age Military Equipment,
which should be published, and enhanced with bibliographical
references as well.
Introduction
When it comes to wear any kind of armour, man usually
employs a cloth to be worn under, as to avoid the scratches and
haematoms induced the by slashes and thrusts received in
combat. For the roman period, this was simply a leather jacket,
the subarmalis, while the mediaeval men might have employed the
gambeson, either padded with wool or horsehair. Nowadays,
armour are padded underneath with Goretex, cotton or nylon, to
prevent too huge a wear, and the burns of the sweat macerating
in cloths worn for long very close to the body and subject to
heavy, numerous and prolonged drifts.
For peculiar areas of the body, the craftsmen employed
peculiar forms of scales, such as squared or rounded, around
the shoulder for example, to maximize protection in the weak
points, such as the throat and armpit1. Other areas of the
underlayer of the armour must have been reinforced with leather
stripes, against too quick a wear and tear.
I. Definitions
Some definitions can be useful to make the differences
between the items depicted, mentioned or found in the ancient
near eastern sources, the names that the later armour were
given and the possible similarities between them.
In any case, each of the following types of armour could
be the protection depicted and mentioned in the ancient near
eastern and egyptian sources, this is why a full review of them
might help to find the kind which is represented.
1. Muscarella O., 1988, p. 54.
A) Mail armour
Mail armour is composed of hundreds of small rings,
interlocking together with different patterns, in order to form
a mesh designed to protect the body of the slashing blows
(Figure 1 - 2)2. Too many times is this term mistakenly
employed to designate scale armour when the topic of armour
represented in the ancient Near East comes about.
B) Scale armour
Scale armour is composed of many small scales, either in
leather, metal or horn (as Pausanias mentioned it for the
Sarmatians)3, attached to a hard backing, like leather or
strong cloth (Figure 3 - 4)4. Many variations exist in the
shape, size, pattern or lacing, length and types of such an
armour, but in the ancient Near East, peculiar types seem to
have been preferred.
C) Ring armour
2. Demmin A., 2008, p. 314, n° 6.3. Pausanias, Description of Greece 1.21.5-64. Demmin A., 2008, p. 314, n° 5 ; Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 22, fig. 1; Thordemann B., 1939, p. 278.
Ring armour is composed of several rings, or small plates,
circular or not, metallic of made out hardened leather, usually
sleeveless (Figure 5 - 6)5. As the reader can guess it already,
this can hardly be the kind of armour depicted on a lot of
ancient near eastern and egyptian evidences, although it could
be an issue to the type of armour worn during the Early
Dynastic period and by some charioteers during the Late Bronze
Age6.
D) Coat of plates
This is a basic thorax armour, made with large metallic
plates covered by a cloth layer and riveted onto a leather or a
cloth backing, usually sleeveless (Figure 7 - 8)7. Thus, in no
way can one identify this kind of armour with the element
mainly depicted or told about in the Egyptian or Near Eastern
evidences relating to body defence.
E) Jack of plates
This is a thorax armour designed with small metal plates
sewn onto a hard backing, without overlapping between one5. Stone G., 1961, p. 22.6. Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 24, fig. 4 ; p. 83, fig. 3. 7. Williams A., 2003, p. 54 ; Demmin, 2008, p. 320, n° 25; Thordemann B., 1939, p. 212; 351, pl. 32 ; 38 ; 126.
anther, and covered with cloth, usually sleeveless (Figure 9 -
10)8. As these metal plates were apparently covered with cloth
or leather, this would hardly be the kind of armour depicted in
the ancient near eastern, egyptian nor aegean evidences, but it
could be a clue to the kind of armour worn by the Peleset
depicted at Medinet Abu.
F) Brigandine
This is a thorax armour, designed with small metal plates
riveted on a hard backing and covered with cloth, usually
sleeveless (Figure 11 - 12)9. This is not what appears on the
ancient near eastern nor egyptian evidences, but might well be
a clue to the Early Dynastic and some Aegean armours depicted
with small dots10.
G) Lamellar armour
Lamellar amour is designed with small scales, laced
together in horizontal and vertical rows, with any peculiar
array, being an evolution of the scale armour in so that it
8. Williams A., 2003, p. 54 ; Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 23, fig. 2; Thordemann B., 1939, p. 223, pl. 93 ; 125-126.9. Williams A., 2003, p. 54 ; Demmin A., 2008, p. 318, n° 19, fig. 19 ; Broquin J., 2001, p. 31.10. Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 81, fig. 7.
does not need a backing to support the scales (Figure 13 -
14)11. This kind of armour might be a clue to the
identification of the main types of armours depicted and
mentioned in the ancient near eastern, egyptian and aegean
evidences. Anyways, it is not the case, for a lot of the
original pieces and textual evidences present traces or
fragments of the backing, either made in leather or in cloth12.
H) Splint/Laminated armour
Splint armour covers limbs and is designed with
longitudinal, narrow and convex strips of metal, the splints,
sewn or riveted onto a hardened backing (Figure 15 - 16)13.
Original pieces were found in scythian tombs, and were
recommended to be used by greek cavalrymen, according to
Xenophon14.
I) Broigne
11. Robinson H., 1967, p. 7 (a mistaken point of view) ; Parani M., 2003,p. 104 ; Thordemann B., 1939, p. 255, fig. 241-244 ; pl. 120 ; 134 ; Viscaino Sanchez J., 2008, p. 207, fig. 6.12. Thordemann B., p. 255, fig. 241, c-d; pl. 134.13. Robinson H., 1967, p. 13, fig. 6.14. Xenophon, Hipparchos, 12, 5; Cyropaedia, 6.4.1; 7.1.2 ; Anabasis 1.8.6.
This kind of armour is very similar to the concept of the
ring armour and of the coat of plates, but it differs in that
the plates are sewn on the backing, thus visible, and that they
are made in horn, metal or leather (Figure 17 - 18)15.
Variations existed, based on the method, design and elements
employed for the armour, as the meshed type, with leather
straps and metal nails, and the studded type, with metal
plates16.
J) Plate Armour
The armour of plates consists of a series of plates, of
metal, horn, leather, reed or even wood, that are assembled and
jointed in order to form a continuous protection for the body
(Figure 19 - 20)17.
K) Latticed Armour
Within the first types of armours, one can think about the
simple leather jack, the harder boiled leather coat and the
even stronger latticed armour. The latticed armour is made of
leather stripes studded and nailed on a specific, usually
15. Broquin J., 2001, p. 31.16. Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 25, fig. 6.17. Yaxley D., 2003, p. 4.
square, pattern, on the surface of a hard leather garment,
boiled or not, in order to provide a maximum protection against
blows, slashes and thrusts weapons (Figure 21 - 22)18.
II. Protecting Beings and Things : Areas to Cover
When designing an armour, the craftsman has essentially to
know which kind of places he will endeavour to protect, where,
and how.
As the choice has been, for some reasons the scholar can
only assess nowadays, set on the scales principle, either
juxtaposed or in overlapping layers, one already has a piece of
the concept, now the elements and areas protected will be
discussed in the following lines.
A) The Man
First of all, the warrior has to be protected in combat,
so to keep the fighting ability to a higher ratio by reducing
casualties, and wounds. Those, in the middle of a fight
deprived of the gunpowder weapon technology, usually strike the
18. Bernage G. (éd.), 2003, p. 23, fig. 3.
parts of the body most directly offered to threats when a
person is moving.
1) Head
The head is among the weakest points in the human anatomy,
as it contains four of the five sensitive organs, i.e. the
eyes, ears, nose and tongue. Moreover, this is also where the
essential arteries of the human body converge, and the seat of
its life engine : the brain. Anybody having ever suffered a
headache or a serious head wound will surely agree : it can
causes great distress, suffering and massive bleeding.
On the top of the head, the helmet can be realised with
scales, studded leather or reinforced plates (Figure 23)19.
For the sake of understanding, any protective garment,
like an armoured hood, made out of scales will be called a coif
in this paper (Figure 23)20. This will sum up the two main
variations one can induce from the evidences : a hood-like
model or just a neck flap model.
2a) Body, Wide version
19. Margueron J.-C., 2004, p. 293, fig. 282, n° 7.20. Bradbury J., 2004, p. 254.
The first of the two essential point a warrior wants to
protect in his body lies, usually, in the torso area, as it
contains the vital organs : lungs and heart, and belly area,
with digestive system. The essential reason belongs to human
anatomy again : only the rib cage covers the upper part of
those organs.
For the sake of understanding, different names will be
used in this paper to designate different length of armour
garment, although these belong to the chain mail technology,
their employment mainly relies on the surface of the human body
covered.
The are the following : gorget, for the element protecting
the throat ; hauberk, if it is knee-length; haubergeon / hauberjon,
if it is mid-thigh length; brynie if it is waist-length (Figure
24)21.
Another kind of armoured garment can find its place here,
as the reader will understand it in the chapter related to the
Early Dynastic period, is the bishop mantle or clavain, a kind of
21. Demmin A., 2008, p. 241 ; Nicolle D., 1994, p. 58 ; Bradbury J., 2004, p. 256 ; Réau L., 1930, p. 70 ; Hooper N., 1996, p. 158 ; Mantello F., 1996, p. 448.
huge collar, protecting the neck, throat, shoulders and upper
arms of the wearer (Figure 25)22.
2b) Body, Slim version
There was, as usual, another second solution for the
essential area to protect in a combat, much more cheap. This
would provide basic armour to places where no bone can hamper a
wound on the arteries, the breathing system, or the sides of
the lower digestive system (Figure 26). More than that, one can
hardly move with an injured hip, and keeping in motion is often
the main point in a combat situation, so as to give or to avoid
the hits.
This is where the ancient near eastern texts come to the
help of the researcher, providing the name of such an armour
that is quite scare to find in the inventories : the tutittu
baldric23. This is the garment depicted on the Early Dynastic
shell ornaments and Akkadian steles, such as the Tello
Fragments, as well24.
3) Arms (Shield)22. Demmin A., 2008, p. 316, n° 14 ; Bernage G. (ed.), 2003, p. 96-98, fig. 1-2 ; von Seggern B., 2003, p. 311, fig. 14.23. Kendall T., 1981, p. 202, note 9.24. Amiet P., 1976, p. 25; p. 90, fig. 25 a.
The crucial surfaces which are firstly, and mostly,
offered to the enemy attacks are the limbs ; mainly the upper
ones if the combat situation includes close- or ranged weapons,
for their proximity with the head and torso. This means that a
warrior involved in fighting, with either one or two hands,
needs to have them protected in a way or in another.
The basic solution was found in times who let no visible
traces nowadays, but the Stele of the Vultures depicts the
first shields we know about in the ancient Near East. As a
matter of a fact, these have been reinforced with circular
studs, maybe made of metal or leather, as a way to counter the
enemy missiles or projectiles when approaching (Figure 26).
With the need to handle the long poles of their weapons with
both hands, one can guess these shields have been suspended or
strapped in some way to the chests of the warriors, thus
providing an extra-arm to protect and deflect the threats.
This basic solution also developed in another direction,
during later periods and in some specific contexts. To the
contrary of what is usually though, the shield just not
represents a mere, passive protection, but could also be used
as an active weapon25. Effectively, the shield has some power
25. Brunaux J.-R., 1988, p. 17, fig. 10.
as a thrusting and blowing weapon when correctly wielded. This
type of fighting techniques also appears on the neo-assyrian
bronze bands and reliefs, but it should not impede the similar
employment during previous periods, at least when the shield
was small enough to be handled with a single hand26.
4) Lower Limbs
Some eastern cultures seem to have employed a kind of
protective garment designed to cover the thighs : the cuisses
(Figure 26)27.
B) The Chariot
Albeit the chariot cab can constitute a protection by
itself, spare armour on the most targeted areas of the vehicle
can be useful. Reinforcing the front, and also maybe the
flanks, of the chariot can hamper the enemy missiles,
projectiles or blows directed toward the articulated or
supporting parts, and thus protect the crew in the meantime
(Figure 27).
26. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XV, b.27. Demmin A., 2008, p. 320, n° 26.
C) The Animal
When fighting on vehicles draught by animals, it seems
essential to protect the source of motion from the enemy
threats, like missiles, projectiles or blows28. Thus, by
providing an armoured garment to the teams, the caparison, the
charioteer can reinforce his possible resistance to wear and
tear, so as to conserve his ability to move, thus being
operational, quite longer (Figure 27).
D) The Siege-engines
Some neo-assyrian reliefs might let think about some kind
of scale armour for the siege-engines, mainly during the reigns
of Assurnasirpal II, Tiglath-Pileser III or Sargon II (Figure
28)29. Scale armour can offer good reasons, being easy to
realise and repair, to set and to take off a siege-engine
structure, when it was designed to and that the warriors had
experience or training in doing so. Anyways, this might have
been an attempt without consequence, or an artistic convention,
or rely in another field of possible reasons, like symbolism,
or not.
28. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48 ; White Muscarella O., 1988, p. 69.29. Please refer to these respective paragraphs in the chapter about the evolution of the scale armour.
III. Evolution of the Scale Armour
1) Early Bronze Age, XXVIth - XXIIth century B.C.
The basic designs and protective components of the
essential scale armour appeared during the Early Dynastic
Period, if one has to believe the visual data actually at
hands.
A) The Man
Different models were realised for people, mostly
warriors, and were apparently designed according to the areas
to cover and, surely thus, also to other factors. As it is well
known : the best the armour, the highest the cost.
1) Head
To protect the head of peculiar warriors, or person when
just the depictions of the heads are available, the craftsmen
designed a kind of small hood, a coif, covering the head, the
face and the shoulders of warriors with a kind of padded
leather cap (Figure 29)30. On some, it seems that some metallic
(?), or leather, circular plates were sewn. In any case, this
30. Parrot A., 1967, p. 213, n° 2500.
kind of hat might have proven quite efficient against direct
blows in a period where the mace was a common weapon. More than
that, it also allows protection to the most vulnerable body
parts to the threats coming from above : the head, neck and
shoulder against arrows and slingshots.
Some might argue that this can be the depiction of a kind
of ceremonial attire, for the Mari inlays are usually not
assembled, which would provide the context, but lots of them
are still awaiting to be published31.
2a) Body, Wide version
The War Panel of the Standard of Ur provides the
researcher with depictions of a huge cape, maybe of leather,
covered with a series of circular dots, maybe implying some
kind of metallic (?), or leather, circular plates designed to
reinforce its resiliency (Figure 30)32. The Infantry pikemen,
using their long shaft weapon with both hands, had no room for
a shield, and thus were provided such a kind of protective
garment. The huge studded bishop mantle made out of hard
leather and completed with hemispheric, or flat, metal (bronze31. As are all the scholars interested in such a matter, the present author also would like the person in charge to hurry up or to delegate sucha huge, and important, work.32. Pritchard J., 1954, p. 97, fig. 303.
or copper) or even leather circular plates covering the heavy
infantry on the Ur Standard can be a clue to propose this
period for the apparition of the proto- scale armour. Once
again, some might say this could be more a kind of ceremonial
ritual, but this seems not to be the case as the context for
this is clearly war and combat. Otherwise, the whole
iconography of the Ur Standard and of the neo-assyrian visual
data would have to be revised, which could be an interesting
thing, but which does not appears that convincing.
According to some authors, the Stele of Narâm Sîn would
depict samples of scale armour during the Akkadian period,
around 2100 B.C., but a closer look at the Akkadian visual
evidences just show no traces of such thing33.
2b) Body, Slim version
On the Mari inlays, one scene provides the scholar with
the depiction of a siege-redoubt, relying on the association of
a shield-bearer and of an archer (Figure 31)34. As the archer
needs his two hands to shoot the bow on the enemy, he wears a
kind of rectangular scarf, covering his chest and his back from
33. Gabriel R., 2007, p. 78.34. Margueron J.-C., 2004, p. 290, fig. 278.
one shoulder to the opposite hip. This item seems to be made
out of leather, and also presents the circular dots series all
over its surface.
Once again, once can be tempted to see this as a kind of
ceremonial dress, for the Mari Inlays have other depictions of
people wearing the same garment. The fact is that these same
persons are usually depicted with the contemporary,
iconographic, features of higher status, being either the
beards or peculiar glaberness, or the axe. Thus, knowing the
importance of the Archer motif and function throughout most of
the ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian societies in mind, this
could show that some kinds of peculiar scale armour were
designed and / or reserved for peculiar fighters, or higher
status.
3) Arms (Shield)
Another means to protect the body of warriors is
represented on the Stele of the Vultures, where the Infantry
pikemen advance to combat behind their King in his chariot,
yielding their long pikes with both hands (Figure 32)35. Having
no spare hand to use in the manipulation of their shield, it
35. Pritchard J., 1954, p. 95, fig. 300.
seems those have been suspended around their neck, or shoulder,
so to free both upper limbs for the fight. In the meantime,
this practice provide the soldiers with a protection for the
upper part of their body, and for their arms as well. On the
face of these rectangular shields, one can observe a series of
metallic, undoubtedly, circular dots, lined in two vertical
arrays. Those were surely nailed on the shield to enhance its
resilience.
B) The Chariot (?)
On the broken Stele of Khafadje, it appears that the
frontal part of the chariot cab is covered with a kind of
leather cape, decorated with circular dots (Figure 33)36. Once
again, this might be the display of a high status person’s
parade garment or armour during the funeral procession, or the
reinforcement of the frontal part of this light chariot with a
leather cape, covered with metallic (?) or leather circular
pieces.
C) The Animals
36. Frankfort H., 1969, pl. 33 B.
At this very moment, the present author has not found any
sources mentioning any kind of scale or similar armour designed
for the ride or draught animal teams in the sources of that
time (Figure 34). Some kind of breast protective garment appear
on the Standard of Ur and on the Mari Inlays, but one would be
much more tempted to see these as made out of cloth, maybe
leather, but they show not traces or depictions of added
reinforcements, either circular or not37.
D) The Siege-engines
Until now, very few descriptions and depictions of siege-
engines coming back from the IIIrd Millenium B.C. are known by
the scholars (Figure 35-36)38. Some sources point out the
existence of such a kind of technology at that time, and one
can guess such engines needed to be protected, but it would
rather seem that leather was then used for that function, as
metal was still quite expensive.
2) Middle Bronze Age, XVIth – XVth century B.C.
37. Margueron J.-C., 2004, p. 293, fig. 282, 14-15.38. Scurlock J. A., 1989, p. 129-131; Kupper J.-R., 1997, p. 121-133.
During the IInd Millenium B.C., the technological advance
represented by the invention and development of the light war
chariot will lead to an evolution of the personal armour. By
the way, as the main warrior of a chariot usually shoots the
bow, for which the soldier needs his both hands, his body must
be correctly protected against the enemy missiles and
projectiles39. In the meantime, the armour also needs to be
quite mobile and stable, resilient and flexible. Thus, a
snake’s scales are a good compromise to provide a solution for
such an armour. According to some author, it seemed logical
that the animal whose body defence had been copied gives his
name to the armour issued by the research endeavouring to adapt
it to the human body40.
A) The Man
In the ancient Near East, scale armours are attested since
the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age41. Linked to the
functions of soldiers when they needed their both hands, the
scale armours were a good solution to the absence of a shield.
Although some shortcoming are to be noticed, such as the
39. De Vaux R., 1967, p. 428.40. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48.41. Drews R., 1995, p. 110.
weakness in the armpit for the arrows shot during a flight,
scales can cover the whole body and allow a certain mobility,
despite the huge weight it means for the wearer.
1) Head
According to the texts found at Nuzi, around the XVth
century B.C., peculiar helmets made out of leather and covered
with scales, varying in size, were designed to give maximum
protection for minimal weight : the gurpisu42. As the point of
this paper is to provide an overview of the development of the
scale armour in the ancient Near East, Egypt and Aegean, the
deeper study of this topic will not be undertaken here. Such a
helmet can be observed on the depiction of a marya represented
on the chariot of Thutmosis IV, among a lot of other
contemporary egyptian visual evidences (Figure 37)43. This coif
protected the head and neck of the warriors, and could be
enhanced with a leather, tubular collar, a kind of gorget, as it
is depicted on the painting in the Tomb of Kenamun, TT93 at
Sheik Abd el-Qurnah (Figure 38)44.
42. Ventzke W., 1983, p. 97, fig. 46 ; Drews R., 1995, p. 111.43. Kendall T., 1981, p. 210-232.44. Robinson H., 1967, p. 2, fig. 1.
Among the eastern civilizations, the Myceneans and the
Minoans were also great employers of scale helmets, having left
various and numerous depictions, mentions and original
materials for the present-day scholars45. Homer describes such
boar tusks slivers scales sewn on a leather backing that could
be could be used as helmets46. This also appears on some
frescoes discovered at Akrotiri from around 1600 B.C. and the
original helmet found in Kolonna Aegina from the MH II, around
1800 B.C. (Figure 39).
2a) Body, Wide version
1) Long
Huge amounts of copper scales were discovered at Nuzi, a
city were the textual archives pay a special attention to the
armour corslets (Figure 40)47. The hurrian term that designates
a single scale, often noticed under its plural form kùr-zi-me-te
MEŠ, is kùr-zi-me-tù at Nuzi and gur-pi-ši at Boghasköy, where
genuine metal scales were found as well in the temple district
45. Xenaki-Sakellariou A., 1953, p. 46-58.46. Homer, The Iliad, Book 10, 260-5.47. Starr R., 1939, pl.126 A-L ; Starr R., 1939, p. 475 ff. For a very deep, and wonderful, analysis of the scale armours according to the Nuzi archives, see Kendall T., 1981, p. 210-232.
(Figure 41)48. Etymology reveals that this word comes from the
Classic Akkadian kursindu, « wild snake »49.
In the contemporary texts of Amarana, this akkadian term
is KUŠ sa-ri-am50, which means, added to siparru, that the armour
was realised on a leather or on a cloth backing51.
At Nuzi, the charioteer’s scale armour was named the
sariam, made of the leather from a goatskin (usually), with
small sleeves and falling either down the knee, as a hauberk,
or down to midcalf, which could be called a great hauberk52.
A very interesting fact is that the literary evidence from
Nuzi at this period provide the names of the pieces of scale-
armour, according to their employment. The scale is a kursindu,
while the large ones are the GALMEŠ and the small ones are the
TUR.TURMEŠ; the body part of the armour is the ramānu / IM; and
that of the sleeves, the ahu53. The only slight problem for the
akkadian terms designating armour pieces is that the gurpisu is
the helmet, according to T. Kendall, W. Ventzke and R. Drews
48. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48-49 ; Civil M., 1971, p. 567, 1 ; 568, 2; NeveP., 1999, pl. 25, b; pl. 32, a-c.49. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48-49 ; Civil M., 1971, p. 567, 1 ; 568, 2.50. Speiser E., 1950, p. 47.51. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48.52. Drews R., 1995, p. 111. 53. Zaccagnini C., 1979, p. 5, note 13.
and the gorget, according to C. Zaccagnini54. As the reader
will read it in the next chapter of this paper, this is not
that an issue, for some helmets could be fitted with scale-
gorget and neck-armour, thus explaining maybe their common
name. This will more clearly appear on visual and textual
evidences from the time of Assurnasirpal II.
Anyhow, other interesting issues can be found as well in
the Nuzi archives, such as the differences between the scale-
armour nuzite- or hanigalbat-styles, the previous seemingly
having long sleeves and large gorget, while the latter had
shorter ones55.
The scale armour appears under the hurrian word ša/za-ri-(a-)
am, or šar-ya-an-ni in the texts of Boghasköy56. It is the opinion
of the present author that this word has been chosen to
designate the scale armour as its semantic root is linked with
the idea of “lining”, “making horizontal stripes”57. Those
armours were realised with scales designed in two sizes “big”
and “small”, often gathered by lots on a leather backing to
54. Kendall T., 1981, p. 221; Ventzke W., 1983, p. 97, fig. 46 ; Drews R., 1995, p. 111 ; Zaccagnini C., 1979, p. 5, note 13.55. Zaccagnini C., 1979, p. 6.56. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48-49 ; Civil M., 1971, p. 567, 1 ; 568, 2.57. Güterbock H. (ed.), 2005, p. 259, šāriya – B 2.
cover the body of a man or of an animal (Figure 40 - 42)58.
Several hundreds of scales were sewn to the backing to protect
the upper part of the body and the skirt, often around 400 or
500 pieces for the chest, 160 for the sleeves and 140 for the
helmet, and more were used for the sleeves59. The weight of the
full dress, as it can be reconstructed from the pieces found at
Nuzi and according to the textual evidences, has been estimated
around 15 to 35 kg, which, of course, does not include weapons
and ammunitions60.
Such a kind of armour might have been introduced by the
Hyksos in Egypt around 1700 B.C., which seems possible but
lacks some evidences to support the assertion61. Another
possible way for the Egyptians to have known about these scale
armours would have been the tribute of Asiatic vassals, such as
the Retenu during the reign of Thutmosis II, or as gifts sent
by eastern neighbours, as the piece sent by Tushratta to
Amenhotep II62. These scale armours were very important, as
58. Speiser E., 1950, p. 48-49 ; Civil M., 1971, p. 567, 1 ; 568, 2 ; Kendall T., 1981, p. 213. 59. Kendall T., 1981, p. 221, note 56.60. Drews R., 1995, p. 111, note 30.61. Gabriel R., 2007, p. 78.62. Kendall T., 1981, p. 222, note 62 ; Sethe K., 1907, III, p. 732.
being mentioned in the annals of Thutmosis III among the booty
he brought back from his campaigns at Qadesh and Megiddo63.
A detail of a scene represented of the chariot of
Thutmosis IV shows such an armour and its weakness in the
armpit as worn by a marya in flight, and shot from behind
(Figure 37)64. The oldest depictions of such a full hauberk
appears in the Tomb of Kenamun, TT93 at Sheik Abd el-Qurnah,
who was Royal Steward of Amenhotep III (1436-1411 B.C.)65. The
armour consists of ribbed bronze (?) scales, laced to a
foundation, with blue bands at the neck, sleeves and bottom
edges (Figure 38)66. Some examples of such scales were
recovered at Thebes, in a palace of Amenhotep III, and, while
the whole set displays the holes to be sewn on the backing, one
has still some original cloth backing stuck to its rear (Figure
43)67. Flinders-Petrie has also found scales from armour dating
back to Thutmosis III and Amenhotep II at Biban el-Moluq68.
Tutankhamun (1333-1323 B.C.) had some pieces of an armour, made
of thick leather scales, maybe tinted in red and yellow,
63. Aldred C., 1970, p. 107. For a deeper study of theses armour in the egyptian litterature, please refer to Kendall T., 1981, p. 222, note 63.64. Yadin Y., 1963, p. 192.65. Bryan B., 2002, p. 247.66. Robinson H., 1967, p. 1-2, fig. 1, a.67. Wise T., 2002, p. 20.68. Flinders-Petrie W., 1917, p. 18.
crafted on a linen backing, without sleeves, and found by H.
Carter in his tomb, KV 62, in the Valley of the Kings69.
Peculiar sample of egyptian and nuzite origins have been
discovered, with very slight differences in shapes and somehow
in size70.
2) Short
In Crete, a tomb of the site of Arkalokori has yielded
five bronze round plates dated around 1500 B.C. and that could
have been used to realise a kind of armour, like the bishop
mantel of the soldiers depicted on the Standard of Ur (Figure
30)71. These plates seem to have bee sewn on a backing, as the
small holes barely visible all around the plates edge could
were employed used for their fixation to a perishable material.
Similar pictorial evidences from the Linear B tablets of
Tiryns might support this idea72.
2b) Body, Slim version
69. Moorey P., 2001, p. 5 ; Vogelsang-Eastwood G., 1999, 109-111.70. Robinson H., 1967, p. 4, fig. 2, a-b.71. According to A. Salimbetti, the Arakalochori plates seem not to have been published. Actually displayed at the Eraklion Museum.72. Vandenabeele F., 1978, p. 33, fig. 18.
Until now, no evidences have revealed a point in favour of
the existence of such a kind of armour corslet at that time.
3) Arms (Shield)
As the scale armour was designed to compensate the absence
of the shield on a chariot, the evidences actually known show
no traces of a point in favour of such a possible protective
item covered with scales in the ancient Near East or Egypt.
In Crete, a tomb of the site of Arkalokori has yielded
five bronze round plates dated around 1500 B.C. and that could
have been used to realise a shield, like those observed on the
Vultures Stele (Figure 32). These plates seem to be sewn on a
backing, as the small holes barely visible all around the
plates edge could were employed used for their fixation to a
perishable material.
B) The Chariot
Until now, no evidences have revealed a point in favour of
the existence of such a kind of armour for a chariot at that
time.
C) The Animals
According to the texts found at Nuzi, during the XVth
century B.C., the horse-teams of chariots were sometimes
protected with scale armours as well (Figure 42)73.
This could thus be somehow similar to a horse scale
armour, dating back to the IIIrd century B.C., and found at
Dura Europos (Figure 44)74.
D) The Siege-engines
There is hardly a depiction or a full description of a
siege-engine from this period, although some essential
components are mentioned in the royal archives of Ebla, Mari,
the letters of Zimri-lim or lines 86-95 of tablet VII A, from
the explicative series HAR.ra = hubullu75. Thus, the possible
covering of such engines with a kind of scale armour is all but
hypothesis.
3) Late Bronze Age, XIVth - XIIIth centuries B.C.
During the Late Bronze Age, the scale armour closely
followed the evolution of the war chariot, and of the other
73. Drews R., 1995, p. 111, note 31.74. Wilcox P., 1986, p. 9 ; Robinson H., 1967, p. 6.75. Scurlock J. A., 1989, p. 129-131 ; Kupper J.-R., 1997, p. 121-133.
military techniques that would be more and more employed with
the advance realised in architecture. Practical experiences
will provide support for upgrades, as the originally flat and
rounded of the scales will become more and more lengthened, and
receive further enhancements, mainly provided by the smiths.
The scale will be more and more curved in the width and in the
length, dished with a central ridge, in order to reinforce its
resiliency and to prevent too wide an overlapping. The size of
the scales will be reduced, in order to save room and metal,
and the lacing system will be enhanced to allow more
flexibility to the motions of the wearer.
These innovations can be observed on some pieces of scale
armour discovered at Kamid el-Los, and brilliantly studied by
W. Ventzke (Figure 45)76.
A) The Man
1) Head
Until now, no evidences have revealed a point in favour or
against the existence of such a kind of armour at that time in
the ancient Near East.
76. Ventzke W., 1983, p. 97, fig. 47 ; 98, fig. 48-49 ; 99, fig. 50 ; 117; 149, fig. 54.
From the 14th century B.C., original boar tusks shaped as
scales to design a helmet to fit the requirement for the
protection of the head of such a kind were found in Chamber
Tomb n° 515 at Mycenae 77. Original boar tusks from such a
helmet were found in the Warrior Tomb of Dendra, from the LH
III B, while the contemporary texts mention the name of such
helmet : a koreto (Figure 46)78.
2a) Body, Wide version
1) Long Version
The reliefs from the temples of Sethi I and Ramses II in
Egypt, depicting their campaigns against the Eastern enemies,
sometimes show a long garment that is worn by the charioteers
(Figure 47)79. The depiction of such a scale armour can be
fully observed, with a lot of details, in the Tomb of Ramses
III (1198-1167 B.C.), KV11 in the Valley of the Kings (Figure
48)80. The armour consists of several bronze scales, each one
with a central ridge, laced together in horizontal and vertical
rows, with a standing collar and short sleeves.
77. National Archaeological Museum in Athens, n° P6568.78. McDonald W., 1992, p. 277; Gabriel R., 2007, p. 79.79. Rossellini I., 1832, vol. III, pl. CII.80. Robinson H., 1967, p. 2, fig. 1, B.
Several means and ways could be employed to fix the scales
to the backing, one of which was brilliantly studied and
proposed by W. Ventzke for a latter type of scale armour found
in Kamid el-Los. In that same great paper, W. Ventzke also
provided some basis for a typology of the scale armour of that
period, some issue that deserved to be mentioned in this paper
(Figure 49)81.
From the XIIIth century B.C., similar specimens of scale
armour, made in bronze and having a rounded extremity, with
holes for the lacing system, were found at Alalakh, Ugarit,
Troy and Cyprus82.
2) Short Version
Such a kind of bronze reinforcements, maybe intended to be
sewn on a backing, were discovered in the warrior grave A of
Kallithea, buried around LH IIIC83. These bronze flat stripes and
small rounded plates, some of those still having the nails
employed to secured them could be a clue to the possible
81. Ventzke W., 1983, p. 95, fig. 45.82. Woolley L., 1955, p. 278, pl. LXXI, n° AT/38/137 a and b ; SchaefferC., 1937, p. 144, fig. 9 ; Schaeffer C., 1951, p. 13, fig. 6; Lagarce E.,1994, p. 110, pl. IV, fig. 3, n° B.72.8 ; B.72.18 ; Karageorghis V., 1973,p. 642 ; Karageorghis V., 1982, p. 723.83. Connolly P., 1999, p. 31, n° 5.
employment of a mix of lamellar armour and brynie corslet
(Figure 50).
A brynie, possibly consisting of a backing with small,
rounded bronze plates sewn over it, has been found in a warrior
tomb from Liatovouni hill, dated around the XIIIth - XIIth
century B.C., in a warrior tomb (Figure 51)84. The mycenean
infantry warriors depicted on the Warrior Vase and Warrior
Stele seem to wear armour as well, but shorter models, as a
kind of brynie, during the transition during Late Helladic III B
and C (Figure 52)85.
2b) Body, Slim version
Until now, no evidences have revealed a point in favour of
the existence of such a kind of armour corslet at that time.
3) Arms (Shield)
As the scale armour was designed to compensate the absence
of the shield on a chariot, the evidences actually known show
no traces of a points in favour of such a possible protective
item made with scales. Moreover, the front part of the shields,
84. Salimbetti A., http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/armour2.htm.85. Drews R., 1995, p. 176, note 8.
mainly yielded by the Hittites on the egyptian visual sources,
usually appears to be completely deprived of visible
reinforcement86. One would think that, during that period,
these scales were primarily intended for the helmet and armour.
4) Lower Limbs
A Hittite Warrior statuette, kept at the Louvre Museum,
presents a kind of thick, armoured or reinforced garment which
seems to protect the rear and the lower parts of the thighs of
the individual (Figure 53). According to some authors, this
might be a specific type of scale armour, intended to protect
the waist of the warrior87.
The present author went to see it, and just noticed
details that tend to depict cloth decorations, with different
sewing techniques and patterns.
B) The Chariot
Until now, no evidences have revealed a point in favour or
against the existence of such a kind of armour corslet at that
time.
86. Bryce T., 2007, p. 19.87. Bryce T., 2007, p. 16.
C) The Animals
Few, if any, evidences allow the scholars to think of a
protective garment designed for the horses during that time in
the ancient Near East. Anyways, more than the hypothesis that
the tradition went on, chances are that they were such horse
armours, as some can be observed on the visual evidences from
other Mediterranean areas, like Cyprus and Egypt.
Some author assume that Egyptian horses belonging to
chariot-teams can be protected with scale armour sometimes, but
it is usually hard to make the difference between scales and
decorative pattern in the cloth or leather on such scene, at
least under the reigns of Tutankhamun down to Ramses II (Figure
47)88.
D) The Siege-engines
There is hardly a depiction or a full description of a
siege-engine from this period. Thus, the possible cover of such
engines with a kind of scale armour is all but hypothesis.
4) Early Iron Age : IX th –VIII th centuries B.C.
88. Drews R., 1995, p. 111, note 31.
At the beginning of the Ist Millenium B.C., the
experimentations with the scale armour will give way to some
peculiar adaptations of the former models, according to the
specific needs of the civilizations concerned. Among these, one
can remind the research for further protection, the need to
cover particular areas of the human body, which was linked to
the development of specific function of soldiers and
engineering at that time, and the need to reduce the weight of
the armour on the soldiers’s shoulders. Thus, a particular
solution was found with the broad belt, reporting a part of the
weight of the armour on the waist of the man. This clearly
appears on the neo-assyrian depictions of such a long scale
armour (Figure 54-56).
Anyways, if the size and shape undergo lots of changes,
the extremity of the scales stays quite rounded, as the
contemporary neo-assyrian reliefs and objects found in
excavations at Nimrud and at Hasanlu show it89. In the akkadian
texts from the Ist Millenium B.C., as the neo-assyrian annals
are a good and essential component of this research, the word
for scale armour is gur-pi-si, under Assurnasirpal II90.
89. Stronach D., 1958, p. 169-181, pl. XXXIV, fig. 1-1, 0 ; White Muscarella O., 1988, p. 54, n° 62-63, fig. 62-63.90. Speiser E., 1950, p. 50.
A) The Man
1) Head
As it can be observed on the bronze bands and reliefs of
Assurnasirpal II and Salmanazar III, the charioteers and siege-
redoubts shield-bearers and / or archers, with the sappers as
well could wear the scale armour coif (Figure 54 - 55)91.
2) Body, Wide version
The reliefs of Assurnasirpal II and the bronze bands of
Salmanazar III display two length of body armour, hauberk and
hauberjeon, although the latter seem to have been preferred by
the charioteers (Figure 55-57)92.
Some might say these are just an artistic convention to
depict neo-assyrian soldiers, which fact might be true, but
then it comes back to the idea of the status of the people
depicted.
1) Long version
91. Barnett R., 1962, pl. CXVIII ; Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XXIV, a ; King L., 1915, pl. XXXIX, Bd. VII. 3.92. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XVIII, a ; Barnett R., 1962, pl. CXIX ; CXXII ; King L., 1915, pl. X, Bd. II. 4.
During the reign of Assurnasirpal II, it seems that the
scales employed still had a round head directed downstairs
(Figure 58-59)93. During the reign of Salmanazar III, the coat
of scales also seems to be made out of a strong, flexible
material, thus one could assume this is leather. It was
apparently covered with what seems to be rectangular scales,
although the extremities can have been cut off to ease the
artist’s work when realising so many depictions.
The contemporary depictions of charioteers from the neo-
hittite sphere present armour made out of rectangular scales,
as in Sakçagözü (Figure 60)94. By the way, the same remark as
for the scales of Salmanazar III can be used here as well.
2) Short version
During the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III and down to the
end of the period of the Sargonids, some shorter versions of
the body armour can be observed (Figure 61-64)95.
2b) Body, Slim version
93. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XXIV, a.94. Orthmann W., 1971, pl. 51, Sakçagözü B/1.95. Barnett R., 1962, pl. LXVII ; Albenda P., 1986, pl. 102 ; Barnett R.,1998, pl. 295, n° 383 b ; Barnett R., 1976, pl. 314, n° 388.
On the bronze reliefs of Tiglath-Pileser III and down to
the end of the period of the Sargonids, it seems that the light
archers had a broad strap covered with continuous square,
metallic (?) or leather, scales, to protect their chest96. The
similarities between this scale baldric and the tuttitu of the
Early Dynastic and Sargonic periods are somehow very
interesting (Figure 31; 63; 65).
3) Arms (Shield)
Some of the small rectangular shields wielded by the neo-
assyrian soldiers of Assurnasirpal II might have been realised
with scales covering the leather, or wooden, face of the object
(Figure 66)97. Anyways, for this period, this seems poorly
possible, as it rather appears they might have been realised
out of wickerwork, being lighter and cheaper.
B) The Chariot
Contemporary neo-hittites materials sometimes display the
reinforcement of chariots with circular pieces studded on the
cab, as in Karkemish (Figure 67)98.
96. Barnett R., 1962, pl. XXXVI.97. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XV, b.98. Orthmann W., 1971, pl. 24, Karkemish C/5-9.
C) The Animals
The close observation of the reliefs realised during the
reign of Assurnasirpal II and the bronze bands decorating the
gates of Imgur Enlil palace under the government of Salmanazar
III show no clear depictions of scale armour on the horses.
Anyways, the scale pattern usually employed closely fits
with these represented on one of the somehow contemporary
Nimrud Ivories from Assyria, kept at the British Museum, which
might be a clue in that direction (Figure 68)99.
The contemporary depictions of charioteers from the neo-
hittite cultural sphere show representations of rectangular
scales providing an armour corslet designed for horses, such as
in Sakçagözü (Figure 59)100.
D) The Siege-engines (?)
On the reliefs of Assurnasirpal II, some siege-engines
seem to be covered with rectangular plates, comprising a lined
decoration on the front, and disposed on the face and side of
the machines to protect them from missiles and incendiary
99. Barnett R., 1957, pl. XVIII, S1.100. Orthmann W., 1971, pl. 51, Sakçagözü B/1.
substances sent by the besieged population (Figure 66)101.
Anyway, one would rather identify these items with the
rectangular shields wielded by the neo-assyrian Infantry
warriors not using a bow, on the same scenes, and others from
the same period102.
During the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III, a siege-engine
was depicted with circular dots covering the outer layer of the
cab. The similarities with the principle of the tuttitu
protection with bronze or leather plates, reinforcing a boiled
leather cover are very interesting (Figure 69).
During the Sargonid era, starting under Senacherib, the
siege-engines will have another type of cover, but this does
not seem to have included scales103.
IV. Apparition of the Scale Armour : Related Elements ?
The element that lead to the design of the scale armour
was the need from protection in combat, without any doubts. In
the same time, other factors also played in favoured of such an
armour. As stated higher in these lines, the scale armour would
be harder to be pierced or slashed, from a certain distance at101. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XIII, a ; XXIV, a ; King L., 1915, pl. XX,Bd. IV, 2 ; L, Bd. IX, 3.102. Wallis-Budge E., 1914, pl. XV, b.103. Barnett R., 1998, pl. 331, n° 430c.
least, which was surely not the case for other types of
armours, like leather or maybe cloth protective garments.
Practically, and apart for the time and wealth absorbing
aspects of its manufacture, the only shortcoming of the scale
armour is in its weight. As seen in the previous paragraphs,
the huge scale armour, during any period, seemed to have been
reserved for slow moving, even static warriors, mostly. Thus,
it does not mean the problem was solved, as the Infantry
warriors wearing such a garment would have to be quite strong
and tough, but with some training, one can guess some can get
accustomed to wearing such a weight in combat, as the later
legionaries or mediaeval knights could prove it as well.
Some other elements also played in favour for the choice
of a kind of a flexible armour rather than of a rigid armour,
like huger metallic plates in the fashion of the Archaic and
Classical Greek models (Figure 46).
1) Fighting Technique : Two Hands
As previously stated, the scale armour concept might be a
consequence for the need of soldier to use both hands while in
a combat zone in order to achieve, or try to, their respective
goals, be they archers, spearmen, sappers or chariotry shield-
bearers104.
With a flexible, although somehow heavy armour, they could
give stronger blows with their weapons or tools, manipulate the
siege-engines, shoot faster, or be able to hold on to the
chariot’s handle while it was on the move (Figure 30-32; 37,
42; 54; 56-57; 60-62; 64; 66).
2) Military Doctrine : Fight in Formations
As the soldiers use their both hands to fight, whatever
heir task, this undoubtedly means that, somehow, their weak
point is protected by a fellow or a friendly warrior, close on
their side (Figure 30-31; 42; 57; 62; 64; 66). Thus, this would
be a point to induce that the military doctrine relying on the
fight as a group in specific formations, Synaspism (?), and
areas could be another reason for such an improvement in
armour.
a) Block and Distance Infantry Tactics
One of these earlier signs of fight in formations appears
on the Standard of Ur War panel and on the Stele of the
104. De Backer F., 2009, p. 69-115.
Vultures as well, where the pikemen advance to contact in close
formation with pike heads protruding in successive ranks
(Figure 30; 32). As these seemed to be either quite long, i. e.
the Stele of the Vultures, or heavy, i. e. the Standard of Ur,
warrior needed their both hands in order to pierce with enemy
with stronger weight.
b) Long Range Infantry Tactics
Coming to the ranged weapons, one can understand how hard
and uneasy it is for an infantry archer to achieve accurate,
fast, numerous and hitting shoots with the weight of a shield
relying on one arm (Figure 31; 55; 57; 62). The solution was
found by the adjunction of a huge shield to cover the archer,
and of a spearman to wield it and protect the shooter when he
is most vulnerable : when he reloads.
As previously seen, the ridge of the scales forming the
armour could deflect and stop most of the thrusts, blows or
missile, which is hardly the case with a rigid armour, fastly
pierced or broken (Figure 3-4; 43; 45; 48; 59).
3) War-Chariot Tactics
The same reflects here for the charioteers, be they axe-,
mace-, spear-, or bow-wielding soldiers, as it also appears in
the texts of Nuzi105. The chariot, even although very slow
during the first phases of its development, was surely quite
unstable and rocking. So, it enhanced the need for the persons
carried on board to hold on to something, if they were not able
to support their own weight with their foot alone because of
their fighting task. Such leather tongue handles appear on the
paintings of the palace of Til Barisp’s neo-assyrian period
hunt scenes, fixed on the side of the cab of the chariot106. In
the meantime, the extra-weight provided by the scale armour at
different periods could have helped the warrior to stabilise
his balance by lowering his centre of gravity.
4) Horsemanship Warfare
Being a further development of chariot warfare, the horse
is a faster and lighter shooting platform. It is then no
surprise to observe that the first horse-archers would have
been equipped with a scale armour, as it allows the two hands
105. Negri-Scafga P., 1981, p. 53 ; 55.106. Thureau-Dangin Fr., 1936, pl. LIII, XXVII e.
to be freed for the wielding of a shield, and was still related
to archery (Figure 37; 42; 47; 54; 60 – 61; 64; 67).
5) Siegecraft : Destroying while Being Protected against
Destruction
For the sappers, the essential point was to realise the
destruction of the fortifications as they were assigned to,
although it usually meant they would do it under the missiles
and projectiles, within the very close range of the enemy
(Figure 56)107. Thus, as a shield would surely have slowed down,
or hampered their tasks, solutions might have been found in the
scale armour, being resilient and flexible, offering an
acceptable cover to most of the threats they encountered, with
the noticeable exception of fire.
6) Socio-Political Factors : “Parade” Armours
To the contrary of what this subtitle might imply, the
“parade” armour relies much more on the idea of conspicuous
depictions of skills, wealth, status, or a combination of the
three, BUT without reducing the potential of armour.
107. De Backer F., 2007, p. 45 - 64.
The simple silver armour scale that was found at Taynat
might be a good clue for the existence of such parade armours
during the Middle to Late Bronze Age108.
Other ancient texts mentions such parade armour, that the
authors had understood as fighting armour, even were they made
out of gold, but then, they might have been gilded, as those
who were found at Persepolis109. Others could even bear the name
of the king to whom they belang, be it Ramses II or Sheshonq
(Figure 70)110.
Such examples can be found in the history of the Persian
general Masistios, that will be deeper explained later in these
lines. Another example, with the relative historical value of
the armour as a parade garment in this paper, in the story of
David and Goliath, when Saül proposes his armour to the young
shepherd who finds it too huge and unnecessary for him111.
Some might say the scale armours merely represent a
peculiar cloth, being an iconographic convention, employed by
the artist to highlight peculiar person depicted. Although this
can be true for earlier period, and peculiar areas like Egypt,108. Yener K., 1991, p. 555 ; 572.109. Herodotes, History, IX, 22 ; Schmidt E., 1957, p. 100, pl. 77.110. BBC News, 28 March 2006, http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4853332.stm; Wilkinson J., 1994, vol. 1, p. 368, ill. 324 a, fig. 1. 111. 1 Sam 17:5-7 ; 1 : Sam 17 : 38-39.
how could we explain then the huge amount of such material
discovered in excavations and fitting with both textual and
visual evidences ?
Anyhow, this is also true, but it does not impede the
aspect of fighting skills, wealth or other upper status
markers.
a) High Fighting Skills
The main point for a commander is to provide the best
warriors at his disposal with the best equipment available,
which is always expensive, and try to avoid high casualties
among their ranks, such as to keep a strong military asset
while involved in a combat situation (Figure 1-22; 30; 61).
Thus, and as it appears in the visual and textual evidences
recorded in this paper, those are the highly efficient
charioteers, as their weaponry surely demanded a high training
or experience (Figure 34; 37; 42; 47; 54; 60; 64; 67-68).
The second type of warrior being provided with the scale
armour are the strong and essential Heavy Infantry units,
wielding either the pike or the spear, and who allows, as a
massive conglomerate of fighters moving like a single one, the
occupation of the field112. This might find its origin in the
fact that the enemy forces had to be kept busy or preoccupied
by numerous troops, so to allows much more freedom to the
Chariotry movements on the battlefield and around the foe. So,
to enhance the resilience of the occupying troops against the
enemy hits, one might have chosen to give them extra-
protection, in the shape of scale armour corslets, or tall
shields reinforced with studded scales (Figure 30-32; 55; 57;
60; 62 – 63; 66).
Then, for populations militarily dealing with open areas,
like flood plains or marshes, the archer is essential when
dealing with enemy units afar. Even in mountainous fields, the
archer has his value as a mean to harass and keep the enemy
busy while trying to flank him. Being able to delay, disable or
destroy the opposite forces from a distance surely finds some
efficiency in a combat situation where other factors than the,
usual, numerical asset can play a decisive role. Then the
protection of highly trained or experimented archers can be a
way to enhance their resilience to enemy missiles and
projectiles, thus lengthening the time they can be employed and
112 A spear is a weapon yielded with either one or two hands, and made with a long shaft ; a pike is a weapon yielded with two hands, mostly, and made with a very long shaft.
their availability as an operational fighting strength (Figure
31; 55; 57; 62; 63).
The Queen of Battles, the Infantry, has always been used
to form the core of any Royal or elite bodyguard, and thus the
members of these were supposed to have the best equipment
possible, as they must protect and die for their sovereign. It
is then no surprise that peculiar footmen are depicted with
different types of armour, if one thinks about the visual
effect intended on other people, enemies and subjects, as well
as regarding to their different fighting abilities (Figure 19;
30 - 32; 55; 57; 60; 62-63; 65).
Finally, sapping the besieged walls surely asked for an
extreme toll of coolness and bravery, if not foolishness, to
the sappers in charge. As their tasks were usually very closely
related to the political and economical aspects of the
besieger’s own reign, as a siege is an extremely risky and
costly situation, one sees no surprise while observing them
clothed in a scale armour, at least under the neo-assyrian
kings (Figure 56; 66).
b) Wealth
Being extremely efficient an armour, and demanding a high
toll of craftsmanship and materials, it is no surprise ether to
think, and observe, that ancient near eastern kings and wealthy
Egyptian people displayed a scale armour on their visual
materials (Figure 38; 48).
The same is also true for the houses of military V.I.P.’s,
as the manufacture and ownership of such a garment could only
mean one thing : the maintenance of such armour, moreover
linked with the chariot and chariot teams, must have been very
costly as well. Thus, this must have been the pride of rich
people, as the metal armour was also and usually part of the
wealth belonging or controlled by the upper layers of the
societies (Figure 1-22; 39-41; 43-46; 49; 58-59). In that idea,
one can understand the description of the armour of the Persian
General Masistios, who wore a coat of “golden scales” under his
crimson tunic, as a token for the Greeks to enhance their
victory on such a rich and noble man113.
c) Status
While rich and skilled people, already two social status
markers, could order, own, use and maintain a scale armour, one
113. Herodotes, History, IX, 22.
can guess the higher status people would do so as well, being
skilled or not. But texts from Nuzi prove that the city’s
magistrates could also rent or borrow scale armours to low
classes citizens that were able to shoot114. This is where the
“parade” aspect of the scale armour can come into handy, but
the evidences hardly mention or depict such a case, surely for
artistic conventions, with political and cultural reasons
associated.
The long description of Goliath’s scale armour in the
Bible is noteworthy as well, illustrating the heavy abyss
between the young shepherd and the Champion of the Philistines,
wearing the best armour of his time.
Conclusion
To the contrary of what some might think, scale armour did
not end with the Middle Ages or Renaissance in the East. In
1900, one travelling far enough towards Asia through the steppe
would have surely met some members of the Koryak people, whose
men wore the same kind of scale armour as the Scythians, two
thousand years before present.
114. Kendall T., 1981, p. 210-232 ; Negri-Scafa P., 1981, p. 54-56.
The interest in the research over the scale armour lies in
a lot of different advantages, but just some of them will be
mentioned here. First of all, this aspect of the material
evidences can provide the digger with a good clue for relative
chronology, be it on the field or during the preparation of the
publication.
The second one relies on the interest on the crosses-study
of the texts, the material and the visuals to enhance the
modern knowledge of these wonders of technology we know so few
about.
Finally, this fills the personal interests of the present
author, with delight.
Bibliography
- ALBENDA P., Le palais de Sargon d’Assyrie, « Synthèse » n° 22, Paris,
1986.
- ALDRED C., « The Foreign Gifts offered to Pharaoh », dans
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 56, 1970, p. 105-16.
- AMIET P., L’art d’Agadé au Musée du Louvre, Paris, 1976.
- ASLIHAN YENER K., « Swords, Armor, and Figurines », dans The
Biblical Archaeologist Vol. 58, No. 2, June 1995, p. 101-107.
- ASLIHAN YENER K., « Stable Lead Isotope Studies of Central
Taurus Ore Sources and Related Artifacts from Eastern
Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites », dans
Journal of Archaeological Science 18, 1991, p. 541-577.
- BARNETT R., A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories, London, 1957.
- BARNETT R. D., FALKNER M., The Sculptures of Aššur–Nasir–Apli II (883–
859 B. C.), Tiglath–Pileser III (745–727 B.C.), Esaraddon (682–669 B.C.) from the
Central and South-West Palaces at Nimrud, London, 1962.
- BARNETT R.D., BLEIBTREU E., et alii, The Sculptures from the South–
West Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh, London, 1998.
- BARNETT R. D., Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at
Nineveh (668–627 B.C.), London, 1976.
- BBC News, 28 March 2006,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4853332.stm.
- BERNAGE G. (ed.), Armes médiévales, Paris, 2003.
- BRADBURY J., The Routledge Companion to Mediaeval Warfare, London,
2004.
- BROQUIN J., Lexique militaire et guide médiéval, Turquant, 2001
(Collection Hermine).
- BRUNAUX J.-L., RAPIN A., Gournay II. Boucliers et lances. Dépôts et
trophées, Paris, 1988 (Revue Archéologique de Picardie).
- BRYAN B., « The 18th Dynasty before the Amarna Period », dans
SHAW I. (ed.), The Oxford Illustrated History of Ancient Egypt, Oxford,
Oxford, 2002, p. 218-270.
- BRYCE T., Hittite Warrior, Oxford, 2007 (Warrior, 120).
- CIVIL M., et alii, The Assyrian Dictionnary of the Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago, vol. 8, K, Chicago, 1971.
- CONNOLLY P., The Ancient Greece of Odysseus, Oxford, 1999 (The
Ancient World).
- CURTIS J., The Balawat Gates of Ashurnasirpal II, London, 2008.
- DE BACKER F., Notes sur l’équipement de l’armée néo-assyrienne, de Téglath-
Phalazar III à Assurbanipal, basées sur les bas-reliefs découverts à Ninive, Kalhu
et Dûr-Sharrûkin, Mémoire de licences inédit, Louvain-La-Neuve,
U.C.L., 2004.
- DE BACKER F., « Notes sur certains sapeurs néo-assyriens »,
dans Res Antiquae 4, 2007, p. 45 - 64.
- DE BACKER F., « Some Basic Tactics of Neo-Assyrian Warfare
», dans Ugarit Forschungen 39, 2009, p. 69-115.
- DEMMIN A., An Illustrated History of Arms and Armours, Teddington,
2008.
- DE VAUX R., « Les Hurrites de l’Histoire et les Horites de
la Bible », dans Comptes-rendus des séances de l'Académie des
inscriptions et belles-lettres, vol. 111, n° 3, 1967, p. 427 – 436.
- DEZSÖ T., « Panzer », in EBELING, E. (éd.), Reallexikon der
Assyriologie und Vorderasiastischen Archäologie, Bd 10, 5./6. Lief.,
Panzer-Pflanzenkunde, Berlin, 2004, p. 319-323.
- DREWS R., The End of the Bronze Age, Princeton, 1995.
- FLINDERS PETRIE W., Tools and Weapons, London, 1917.
- FRANKFORT H., The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Near East, London,
1969 (The Pelican History of Art).
- GABRIEL R., Soldiers’s Lives Through History. The Ancient World,
Westport, 2007.
- GÜTERBOCK H. et alii (ed.), The Hittite dictionary of the Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago, 2005.
- HERODOTES, History.
- Holly Bible.
- HOMER, The Iliad.
- HOOPER N., The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare : The Middle Ages 768-
1487, Cambridge, 1996.
- KARAEORGHIS V., « Chronique des fouilles et découvertes
archéologiques à Chypre en 1972 », dans Bulletin de
correspondance hellénique vol. 97, n° 2, 1973, p. 601 – 689.
- KARAGEORGHIS V., « Deux avant-postes militaires de la fin du
XIIIe s. av. J.-C. à Chypre », dans Comptes-rendus des séances de
l'Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, vol. 126, n° 4, 1982, p.
704 – 724.
- KENDALL T., « Gurpisu ša awēli : The Helmets of the Warriors at
Nuzi », dans MORRISSON I., OWEN D. (ed.), Studies on the
Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians in Honor of R. Lacheman,
Winona Lake, 1981, p. 210-232.
- KING L., Bronze Reliefs from the Gates of Shalmaneser King of Assyria B.C.
860-825, London, 1915.
- KUPPER J.-R., « Béliers et tours de siège », dans Revue
Archéologique, 91, 1997, p. 121-133.
- LAGARCE E., « La XXIIIe campagne de fouilles à Enkomi-Alasia
(Chypre). Rapport préliminaire », dans Syria, vol. 50, n° 1,
1973, p. 101 – 114.
- LERICHE P., « Doura Europos. Bilan des recherches récentes
», dans Comptes-rendus des séances de l'Académie des inscriptions et belles-
lettres, vol. 138, n° 2, 1994, p. 395 – 420.
- MAC DONALD W. (ed.), The Bronze Age Occupation, Minneapolis,
1992 (Excavations at Nichoria in Southwest Greece, volume
2).
- MANTELLO F. (ed.), Medieval Latin : An Introduction and Bibliographical
Guide, United States of America, 1996.
- MARGUERON J.-C., Mari Métropole de l’Euphrate au IIIe et au début du IIe
millénaire av. J.-C., Paris, 2004.
- MOOREY P., « The Mobility of Artisans and Opportunities for
Technology Transfer between Western Asia and Egypt in the
Late Bronze Age », dans SHORTLAND A. (ed.), The Social Context of
Technological Change : Egypt and the Near East, 1650–1550 B.C. : Proceedings of
a Conference Held at St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, 12–14 September 2000,
Oxford, 2001, p. 1-14.
- NEGRI-SCAFA P., The Scribes of Nuzi and Their Activities
Relative to Arms According to Palace Texts, dans MORRISSON
I., OWEN D. (ed.), Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the
Hurrians in Honor of R. Lacheman, Winona Lake, 1981, p. 53-69.
- NEVE P., Die Oberstadt von Hattuša. Die Bauwerke. 1. Die Bebautung im
Zentralen Tempelviertel, Berlin, 1999 (Deutsches Archäologisches
Institut).
- NICOLLE D., Saracen Faris 1050-1250 A.D., Oxford, 1994 (Warrior,
10).
- ORTHMANN W., Untersuchungen zur Späthetitischen Kunst, Bonn, 1971.
- PARANI M., Reconstructing the Reality of Images. Byzantine Material Culture
and Religious Iconography, Leiden, 2003 (The Mediaeval
Mediterranean, vol. 41).
- PARROT A., Mission Archéologique de Mari, Vol. III. Les Temples d’Ishtarat et
de Ninni-Zaza, Paris, 1967 (Bibliothèque archéologique et
historique, t. LXXXVI).
- PAUSANIAS, Description of Greece.
- PRITCHARD J., The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old
Testament, Princeton, 1954.
- RÉAU L., Dictionnaire Illustré d’Art et d’Archéologie, Paris,1930.
- ROBINSON H., Oriental Armour, London, 1967.
- ROSSELLINI I., Monumenti dell’ Egitto et della Nubia, vol. III, Pisa,
1844.
- SALIMBETTI A., The Greek Age of Bronze, http://www.salimbeti.com.
- SCHAEFFER C., « Fouilles de Ras Shamra-Ugarit . Huitième
campagne (printemps 1936) », dans Syria vol. 18, n° 2, 1937,
p. 125 – 154.
- SCHAEFFER C., « Reprises des recherches archéologiques à Ras
Shamra-Ugarit. Sondages de 1948 et 1949, et campagne de 1950
», dans Syria, vol. 28, n° 1, 1951, p. 1 – 21.
- SCHMIDT E., Persépolis II : Contents of the Treasury and Other Discoveries,
Chicago, 1957.
- SCURLOCK J. A., « Assyrian Battering-Ram Revisited », dans
State Archives of Assyria Bulletin III/ii, 1989, p. 129-131.
- SETHE K., Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, B. 3, Historisch-Biographische
Urkunden, Leipzig, 1907.
- SPEISER E., « On Some Articles of Armour and their Names »,
dans Journal of the American Oriental Society LXX, 1950, p. 47-50.
- STARR R., Nuzi ; Report on the Excavations at Yorgna Tep Near Kirkuk, Iraq,
Cambridge, 1939.
- STONE G., A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and
Armor in all Countries and in all Times: Together with some Closely Related
Subjects, New York, 1961.
- STRONACH D., « Metal Objects from the 1957 Excavations at
Nimrud », dans Iraq, 20, 1958, p. 169-181.
- THORDEMAN B., Armour From the Battle of Wisby 1361 (Vol. 1, Text; Vol. II :
Plates), Stockholm, 1939.
- THUREAU-DANGIN Fr., Til Barsip, I/II, Paris, 1936 (Bibliothèque
archéologique et historique, XXIII).
- VANDENABEELE F., « L’idéogramme de l’armure sur une tablette
en Linéaire B de Tirynthe », dans Bulletin de Correspondance
Hellénique vol. 102, n° 1, 1978, p. 25-39.
- VENTZKE W., « Zur Rekonstruktion eines bronzen
Schuppenpanzers », Frühe Phöniker in Libanon 20 Jahre Deutsche
Ausgrabungen in Kamid el-Loz, Mainz am Rhein, 1983, p. 94-100 ;
117, 149.
- VIZCAINO SANCHEZ J., « Early Byzantine Lamellar Armour From
Carthago Spartaria (Cartagena, Spain) », dans Gladius XXVIII,
2008, p. 195-210.
- VOGELSANG-EASTWOOD G. M., Tutankhamun's Wardrobe: Garments from
the Tomb of Tutankhamum, Rotterdam, 1999.
- WALLIS-BUDGE E., Reign of Ashur-Nasir-Pal, 885-860 B.C., London, 1914.
- WHITE-MUSCARELLA O., Bronze and Iron. Ancient Near Eastern Artifacts in
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, 1988.
- WILCOX P., Rome’s Enemies (3) : Parthians and Sassanid Persians, Oxford,
1986 (Men-at-Arms, 175).
- WILKINSON J., The Ancient Egyptians. Their Life and Customs, Vol. 1,
London, 1994.
- WILLIAMS A., The Knight and the blast furnace : A History of the Metallurgy of
Armour in the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, Leiden, 2003
(History of Warfare, volume 12).
- WISE T., Ancient Armies of the Middle East, Oxford, 2002 (Men-at-
Arms, 109).
- WOOLLEY L., Alalakh, An Account of the Excavations at Tell Atchana,
Oxford, 1955 (Reports of the Research Committee of the
Society of Antiquaries of London).
- XENAKI-SAKELLARIOU A., « La représentation du casque en
dents de sanglier (Époque minoenne) », dans Bulletin de
Correspondance Hellénique vol. 77, n° 77, 1953, pp. 46-58.
- XENOPHON, Hipparchos.
- XENOPHON, Anabasis.
- XENOPHON, Cyropaedia.
- YADIN Y., The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in the Light of Archaeological
Discovery, London, 1963.
- YAXLEY D., A Researcher’s Glossary of Words Found in Historical Documents
of East Anglia, Fakenham, 2003.
- ZACCAGNINI C., Les rapports entre Nuzi et le Hanigalbat,
dans Assur, vol. 2, n° 1, July 1979, pp. 1-27.
Figure 1 : Mail armour worn by a knight. Drawing of the author.Figure 2 : Detail of the interlocking rings composing the mail armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 3 : Scale armour worn by a rider. Drawing of the authorFigure 4 : Detail of the scales laced on the backing composing the scale armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 5 : Ring armour worn by a rider. Drawing of the author.
Figure 6 : Detail of the rings sewn on the backing composing the ring armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 7 : Coat of plates worn by a knight. Drawing of the author.Figure 8 : Detail of the plates riveted between two layers of backing and composing the coat of plates. Drawing of the author.
Figure 9 : Jack of plates worn by a rider. Drawing of the author.Figure 10 : Detail of the small plates sewn between two layers of backing and composing the jack of plates. Drawing of the author.
Figure 11 : Brigandine worn by a footman. Drawing of the author.Figure 12 : Detail of the small plates riveted between two layers of backing and composing the brigandine. Drawing of the author.
Figure 13 : Lamellar armour worn by a mongolian rider. Drawing of the author.Figure 14 : Detail of the lamellae laced together to compose the lamellar armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 15 : Laminated armour worn by a knight. Drawing of the author.Figure 16 : Detail of the metal stripes riveted together and composing the laminated armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 17 : Broigne worn by a knight. Drawing of the author.Figure 18 : Detail of the metal nails studded on the backing inorder to compose a broigne. Drawing of the author.
Figure 19 : Plate armour worn by a knight. Drawing of the author.Figure 20 : Detail of the metal plates riveted, laced and fastened together in order to compose a plate armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 21 : Latticed armour worn by a rider. Drawing of the author.Figure 22 : Detail of the interlocking, sewn and riveted leather stripes composing the latticed armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 23 : Protections for the head. Left : helmet; right : coif. Drawing of the author.
Figure 24 : Protections for the body, wide version. Left : brynie (from top to the white line), hauberjon (from top to bottom); right : hauberk (from top to bottom). Drawing of the author.
Figure 25 : Protection for the neck and shoulders. Left : gorget; right : bishop mantle. Drawing of the author.
Figure 26 : Protection for the body, slim version. Left : tuttitu. Protection for the arm, right : shield. Protection for the lower limbs, bottom : cuisses. Drawing of the author.
Figure 27 : Protection for the vehicles. Above : cab of the chariot; bottom : caparison covering the flanks, back and chest of the horse. Drawing of the author.
Figure 28 : Protection of the siege-engines. Left : covered battering-ram, right : siege-tower. Drawing of the author.
Figure 29 : Early Dynastic coif. Drawing of the author.
Figure 30 : Early Dynastic bishop mantle. Drawing of the author.
Figure 31 : Early Dynastic tuttitu worn by a siege archer. Drawing of the author.
Figure 32 : Reinforced shield worn by an Early Dynastic pikemanto use both hands. Drawing of the author.
Figure 33 : Early Dynastic chariot covered with an animal skin or a leather reinforced garment. Drawing of the author.
Figure 34 : Chariot and onagres depicted on the War Panel of the Standard of Ur. Drawing of the author.
Figure 35 : Siege-engines from the beginning of the Bronze Age.Drawing of the author.
Figure 36 : Siege-engines from the period of Akkad. Drawing of the author.
Figure 37 : Marya warrior shot by an arrow in the armpit, the weak point of his scale armour. Drawing of the author.Figure 38 : Scale armour as depicted in the Tomb of Kenamun. Drawing of the author.
Figure 39 : Components and schematic of the Kolonna Aegina boartusks helmet. Drawing of the author.Figure 40 : Nuzi “big” and “small” scales from the house of Ini-Teshup. Drawing of the author.
Figure 41 : Boghazkoy armour scales found in the temple district. Drawing of the author.Figure 42 : The full set of scale armour as worn by the maryannu, according to the archaeological, visual and textual evidences. Drawing of the author.
Figure 43 : The scales from the Metropolitan Museum of Arts. Drawing of the author.Figure 44 : The horse scale armour from Dura Europos. Drawing of the author.
Figure 45 : Armour scales from Kamid el Loos. Drawing of the author.Figure 46 : The armour of Dendra and boar tusks helmet. Drawingof the author.
Figure 47 : The charioteer of Ramses II, Mena, depicted at the Temple of Abu Simbel. Drawing of the author.
Figure 48 : Scale armour depicted in the Tomb of Ramses III. Drawing of the author.Figure 49 : Different types of armour scales from Kamid el Loos. Drawing of the author.
Figure 50 : Pieces of bronze stripes from Kallitheia, perhaps from an armour corslet. Drawing of the author.Figure 51 : Bronze plates from Liatovouni, perhaps from an armour corslet. Drawing of the author.
Figure 52 : A soldier from the Warrior Vase. Drawing of the author.Figure 53 : Statue of a warrior or of a god with fringed skirt.Drawing of the author.
Figure 54 : Chariot crew from the time of Assurnasirpal II. Drawing of the author.Figure 55 : Siege-redoubt crew from the time of Assurnasirpal II. Drawing of the author.
Figure 56 : Sapper of Assurnasirpal II wearing a hauberjon. Drawing of the author.Figure 57 : Siege-redoubt crew from the time of Salmanazar III.Drawing of the author.
Figure 58 : Types of neo-assyrian armour scales found at Nimrud. Drawing of the author.Figure 59 : Lacing method of the neo-assyrian armour scales. Drawing of the author.
Figure 60 : Hunt relief from Sakçagözü displaying horse and manscale armour. Drawing of the author.
Figure 61 : Cavalrymen of Tiglath-Pileser III. Drawing of the author.Figure 62 : Siege-redoubt of Sargon II. Drawing of the author.
Figure 63 : Infantry binom of Senacherib. Drawing of the author.
Figure 64 : Chariot crew of Assurbanipal. Drawing of the author.
Figure 65 : Infantry binom of Tiglath-Pileser III. Drawing of the author.Figure 66 : Siege-engine of Assurnasirpal II with cover of overlapping shields. Drawing of the author.
Figure 67 : Chariot from Karkemish with roundels on the cab. Drawing of the author.Figure 68 : Nimrud ivory displaying horse with scale armour. Drawing of the author.
Top Related