DURYEA
Tom Duryea
Dr. David Churchman
HUX 580 Ancient Near East
1 December 2004
The Battle of Kadesh
In the 13th century B.C., two large empires battled for
domination of the Eastern Mediterranean.
One the south, the
Egyptians, under Ramesses I, Seti I and Ramesses II dominated
North Africa, the Levant (Palestine) and encroached on modern
Syria. The Hittite Empire on the north controlled Anatolia and
spread south conquering minor vassal states in western
Mesopotamia and northern Syria.
The two great powers clashed in the petty vassal state of
Kadesh.
The Egyptians and the Hittites fought over Kadesh many
times before and Kadesh changed hands just as often.
At the
opening of this final battle of it, Kadesh was in Hittite hands.
These two long time enemies concluded a peace after the Battle
of Kadesh (Qadesh) with a marriage between a Hittite king and an
Egyptian princess.
The Battle of Kadesh represents the earliest
known battle with a written record of the details of the
conflict.
What was the state of affairs in these two empires
before the battle and why did they fight this battle?
Background of the Two Kingdoms
This period of Egyptian history (1540 – 1070 B.C) covers
the 18th and 19th dynasties.
The New Kingdom of Egypt (Kemp 183)
finally became a mature state.
The Sun God, Amun-Ra (or simply
Amun), was the chief or supreme deity to the Egyptians.
Unlike
DURYEA 2
earlier Egyptian gods, Amun took the form of a man.
Since Amun
sired the kings through a reigning king’s wife, he was the
father figure for all of Egypt.
Since the kings were demigods, they had unquestioned
authority over the people of Egypt.
The people did not find a
need to change their lot in life and
accepted whatever the king told them to
do.
During most of the New Kingdom
Memphis served as the center of the
royal court and higher administrative
offices.
Farther up the Nile River was
the monumental center of the New Kingdom
in Thebes.
Vast tracts of farmland were
under royal control to provide cereal
grains for the temples.
Devotion to the
Statue of an Egyptian
king, to the chief god Amun-Ra and the
king at the Memphis
lesser gods consumed much of the
Museum (Duryea)
Egyptians’ time.
Life in the New Kingdom centered on the Nile River.
The
kings traveled extensively throughout the empire and most travel
was on boats along the Nile.
boat on the Nile.
Harvested grain also traveled by
Most settlements and cities in the New
Kingdom were within walking distance of the river.
The kings also had a taste for territorial expansion and
supremacy over other peoples.
The Egyptians had skirmishes with
other kingdoms and empires including the Hittites, Assyrians and
Mitanni.
They also conquered lesser city-states and imposed
DURYEA 3
suzerainty over them.
At the time of the final battle at
Kadesh, the Egyptians held territory along the Nile River from
the sea well into Nubia, Canaan and most of the Levant.
All of
the Egyptian holdings were close to either the Nile River or the
Mediterranean Sea.
The Hittite Empire was newer than the Egyptian one.
The
Hittites settled in Anatolia (modern Turkey) as early as 1900
B.C.
They ruled from the city of Hattusas (Hattusha).
(Conquistador) In the beginning of the Hittite empire, they
enjoyed trade with the Assyrians.
They became enemies with
their neighbors and fought wars with Syria and Assyria. King
Mursilis I (1620-1590 B.C) sacked Babylon in 1595 B.C. with the
aid of mercenaries (from city-states friendly to their cause)
and ended the Old Kingdom of Babylon. King Mursilis I was later
killed, and the land to the east was lost.
The Kingdom of Mitanni (modern northern Iraq) put pressure
on the weakened Hittite Empire, but the Hittites recovered and
eventually dominated the Mitanni kingdom.
The Hittite Empire
grew under the reign of King Suppilulimas in the 14th century
B.C. He built up an empire using alliances with smaller citystates that rivaled Egypt. The New Kingdom is the moniker given
to the Hittite Empire during this period in history. King
Suppilulimas took Syria and conquered parts of Canaan.
The
stage is set for conflict between the Hittites and the
Egyptians. There was soon to be strife between the strong, longlived empire of the Egyptians to the south and the newcomer
Hittites to the north.
DURYEA 4
The Situation Putting the Two Empires at Odds
Virtually from the inception of the Egyptian Empire, the
Egyptians considered the Levant region of southern Syria to be
under their sphere of influence.
The prize possession of this
area was the Syrian port city of Byblos. (Leading Up to the
Battle of Kadesh)
Whether or not the Egyptians actually
controlled this region, they still considered it part of their
diplomatic and trade territory.
Trade was good between the ancient great powers of the Near
East. Syria was the crossroads for all traffic between the
kingdoms of Mesopotamia and the Aegean.
Goods from southern
Europe (Greece, the Balkans and Italy) came into the Near East
at ports such as Byblos and Ugarit.
The imported goods included
copper and tin products,
chemicals, tools, glass
ingots, ivory, jewelry,
luxury goods, timber,
textiles and foodstuffs.
Raw materials from the east
including copper, tin, lapis
lazuli and other products
came from as far away as
Persia and Afghanistan.
(Leading Up to the Battle
of Kadesh)
Map of the Egyptian and Hittite
Empires at 1300 B.C. (Fox)
Whoever controlled these ports would gain the taxes from
DURYEA 5
this trade.
In addition, whichever empire controlled these
trade routes would rise in importance and prestige.
One empire
would not easily cede this rich trade area to another.
Control
over this region was both economically and politically important
and was synonymous with being a world power.
Egypt under the New Kingdom had strong interest in
establishing an Asiatic empire.
They used a mix of military
campaigns and diplomacy to exert their influence over the petty
city-states in the Levant and southern Syria.
a framework of alliances in the region.
the principle foe of the Egyptians.
They established
At first, Mitanni was
Tuthmosis III had many
military campaigns in the region and he backed up his victories
with garrisoned forts and treaties leaving many of the defeated
city-states under suzerainty o the Egyptians.
He brought many
of these local chiefs back to Egypt with him, trained them in
his ways and returned them as puppet rulers.
This resulted in
the assessment that southern Syria was a permanent Egyptian
territory.
Tuthmosis IV (1425-1417 B.C.) of Egypt signed a peace
treaty with Mitanni that ended the enmity between the two
kingdoms.
Mitanni had little choice.
The Hittite Empire was on
the rise and the Mitanni could not fight a war on two fronts.
The peace treaty between Egypt and Mitanni set the border in
central Syria giving Kadesh to the Egyptians.
Both countries
prospered under this peace.
The Eleutheros River and its valley ran east west across
the territory giving Egypt access to Kadesh and other holdings
DURYEA 6
along the Orontes River.
Besides being a trade route, Egypt
traditionally used this route for military excursions to the
north.
Neither the Mitanni nor the Hittites gave the Egyptians
trouble over this territory.
of Amurru.
Rather, it was an emerging fiefdom
This area had not been a kingdom at the time of the
signing of the treaty between Egypt and Mitanni, but strong
tribal leaders made it a petty kingdom strong enough to trouble
the peace in the region.
The Egyptian king Amenhotep III had a relative indifference
to the region at the time so could not be bothered to send a
military expedition to quell the insurrection.
Other vassals in
the area complained to the Pharaoh, but there was still inaction
on the part of the king.
Events became so bad that the Mitanni
considered it necessary to intervene and take military action.
This inactivity on the part of the pharaoh showed the Hittites
that the territory was ripe for conquest.
Early in the 14th century B.C., the Hittites gained a strong
king, Suppiluliumas.
He assumed the throne in approximately 180
B.C. Suppiluliumas attacked the now weakened Mitanni kingdom (in
modern northern Syria and Iraq).
He also attacked the vassal
states of Aleppo, Alalakh, Nuhashshe and Tunip.
He then
attacked the Mitanni Empire directly, crossed the Euphrates
River and set siege on the capitol Washukkanni.
Now that the
power of the Mitanni Empire was all bone destroyed, he turned
back to the west and conquered all of northern Syria including
the city states of Ugarit and Kadesh.
Suppiluliumas took the king of Kadesh to the Hittite
DURYEA 7
capitol of Hattusas (Boghzkoy in modern Turkey).
returned him to Kadesh as king.
vassal of Egypt.
Suppiluliumas
He reestablished Kadesh as a
This was in fact a trick and the King of
Kadesh actually tried to convince other vassal kings to leave
Egypt for the Hittites.
This military and treasonous activity caused Amenhotep IV
(Akhenaten) to take action.
He recalled the rebellious vassal
leaders to Egypt, but to no avail.
Suppiluliumas had a firm
grip on northern Syria and the important cities there including
Aleppo, Carchemish and Kadesh.
The time for war between the
Egyptians and the Hittites was at hand.
Characteristics of the Two Armies
The Egyptian and Hittite armies had very little in common.
The Hittites were a warrior people who supplemented their army
with mercenaries from allied city-states and petty kingdoms.
The Egyptian army had a long and proud history of being
professional soldiers.
The armies used different weapons,
different armament and different tactics.
Even their chariots
were significantly dissimilar and used in a different manner.
Egypt did use composite forces during this campaign.
majority of the Egyptian forces were regulars.
The
This was the
first major conflict for the Egyptians to have a significant
number of foreign fighters within their ranks.
The foreign
fighters mixed in with the Egyptian regulars included Nubians,
Sheridens and Libyans.
Along the way north, loyal Canaanites
joined the Egyptian force. (The Actual Battle of Kadesh)
force consisted of four armies (named Amun, P’Re, Ptah and
This
DURYEA 8
Sutekh) of between 4,000 and 5,000 each for a total of between
16,000 and 20,000 ground troops.
Ramesses elite troops were in
the Amun army. There were also an estimated 2,000 Egyptian
chariots supplementing the infantry.
The Egyptian chariots were small, light and agile.
One
horse pulled them.
Oftentimes, the chariot
would have only one
warrior instead of
having a driver and an
archer.
The Egyptians
had long been skilled in
using these chariots in
battle.
The number of
chariots usually
represented ten percent
of the numbers in the
infantry.
Ramesses II firing an arrow from
his chariot.
The Egyptian chariots
were smaller and lighter then their
Hittite counterparts. (Fox)
The Egyptian army still used the armament of the Bronze
Age.
Light bronze armor and shields were the issue to the
infantry.
Bronze helmets donned the heads of the infantry.
infantry also used spears, bows, axes and swords.
The
The Egyptian
charioteers wore bronze scale mail armor.
The Egyptian tactics were simple.
The chariots would
approach the enemy line; turn to retreat back to their own line
and the onboard archers would fire at the enemy line while
readying themselves for a new attack.
(The Hittite Empire)
DURYEA 9
One problem that the Egyptian army had was the long march
to battle.
home.
The Egyptains were as much as a two-week march from
This meant a long resupply line.
This also meant that
the infantry and the horses were fatigued from the long march.
Ramesses II also wanted to arrive at the battlefield ahead of
the Hittites.
This would add to the fatigue of his army.]
The Egyptians were motivated.
They wanted to reclaim their
northern territories that were “stolen” from them by the upstart
Hittites.
They could smell blood and were ready for revenge.
Out of necessity, the Hittite army was composed of Hittite
regulars with many mercenary forces.
These mercenaries were
from allied city-states with enmity towards the Egyptians.
These foreign fighters included a massive confederation from
Aleppo, Naharin, Arvad, Mesa, Luka, Kezweden, Ekereth, Kode,
Nuges, Mesheneth, Carchemish, Canaan, Kadesh and the Sea Peoples
(Karkisha and Lukka) (Ramesses II's Battle of Kadesh
Inscriptions).
All of these fighters shared hatred towards the
Egyptians. The strength totals for the Hittites were
approximately 20,000 infantry and 3,000 chariots.
The
interesting point is that the Hittite infantry did not engage
the enemy.
The mercenaries for the opposing armies also fought with
different motivations.
regular pay.
pay.
The Egyptian mercenaries fought for
The Hittite mercenaries did not fight for regular
They fought solely for the spoils of war, forgoing pay
from the king.
Another difference between the armies is their uniforms.
DURYEA 10
The Egyptians had their regular uniforms whenever and wherever
they fought.
The Hittites had different uniforms that were
appropriate for the location of any given battle.
This is
similar to the modern United States military having different
colored uniforms depended upon the theater of operations.
The choice of weapons was also different for the Hittites.
The Hittites were the first to successfully use iron weapons in
battle, which gave them an advantage over Bronze Age armies.
Although iron weapons were extent used by the Hittites, most
hand weapons were sickle swords and battle-axes made of bronze.
Their iron weapons consisted of thrusting spears and short
stabbing daggers.
The infantry also wore helmets and bronze
scale armor, sometimes covered by cloth coveralls.
The Hittite chariots were also different form those the
Egyptians used.
The Hittite
chariots were larger and heavier
than the chariots employed by the
Egyptians and thus less
maneuverable.
The Hittite chariots
were strong enough to carry three
warriors.
One warrior drove the
chariot while the other two used
weapons such as composite bow and
A Hittite chariot carrying
arrows or a long thrusting spear.
a driver, an archer and
The spear was the main weapon
running over an adversary.
aboard the chariots.
(Conquistador)
The tactics
DURYEA 11
used by the Hittite charioteers was different from the Egyptians
also.
The Hittite charioteers would drive their chariots
directly into the enemy line, running over the enemy infantry in
the process.
The long thrusting spear was plunged into the
enemy line for further mayhem.
Special training for the horses
for the Hittite chariots ensured they would remain calm
throughout the charge.
The stage was set.
The opposing armies were at the ready.
The king and the pharaoh had the resolve.
It was time for
battle.
The Battle Itself
The battle was engaged on the 10th day of Shemu (late May)
in the 5th year of the reign of Ramesses II (either 1299 or 1285
B.C.).
The 1299 date is the one most commonly accepted.
The
outcome of the battle was due more to intrigue and cunning that
the skill of the armies.
Ramesses’ main army (Amun) broke camp on the east bank of
the Orontes River sometime on the 9th day of Shemu and began the
relatively short march north to Kadesh.
After crossing the
river, the Amun encountered two Bedouin nomads.
The Bedouins
notified Ramesses that the Hittite army was still far to the
north (perhaps Aleppo or Khaleb).
The pharaoh took this as good news.
time to rest his infantry and reorganize.
advantage over the Hittites.
This would give him
He would have a great
His armies would be ready.
The
Amun army reached their campsite northwest of the Kadesh city
walls in a relaxed and causal manner.
DURYEA 12
In fact, King Muwatalli set Ramesses up for an ambush.
Soon some Egyptian guards captured two Hittite scouts.
After
the Egyptians tortured the scouts, they confessed that the
Hittite army was not far to the north, but rather encamped close
by.
The following account is from the Poem of Pentaur.
Then the King of Khita-land,
With his warriors made a stand,
But he durst not risk his in battle with our Pharaoh,
So his chariots drew away,
Unnumbered as the sand,
And they stood, three men of war
On each car,
And gathered all in force
Was the flower of his army,
For the fight in full array,
But advance, he did not dare,
Foot or horse.
So in ambush there they lay,
Northwest of Kadesh town;” (Egyptian Accounts of the Battle
of Kedesh)
The Hittite army was in fact laying in ambush to the
northeast of Kadesh.
The Egyptian force was now encamped to the
northwest of Kadesh.
The army of P’Re tried to catch up to the
army of Amun to reinforce them, but to was to no avail.
Perhaps
500 Hittite chariots crossed the Orontes River and engaged the
P’Re army. The Hittite chariots smashed into the P’Re line and
DURYEA 13
nearly decimated the entire force.
The superior weaponry of the
charioteers was too much for the nearly exhausted infantry.
remnants of the Army of P’Re were scattered.
The
The remnant tried
to regroup and advance to meet with the Army of Amun. Some of
them made it.
The Hittite chariots were in hot pursuit.
As the Army of
P’Re joined the Army of Amun, the Hittite chariots crashed
through the Egyptian line again.
They again caused much damage
and loss of life to the Egyptian forces.
The Egyptians soon
gained the upper hand.
The Hittite horses became tired during their second battle
of the day.
The large, unmanageable chariots of the Hittites
bogged down in the well-established Egyptian camp.
The chariots
could not maneuver well with all of the obstacles in the camp
and they became disorganized.
It was time for the tables to
turn.
Ramesses II now “…appeared in glory like his father Montu,
he assumed the accoutrements of battle, and he girded himself
with his corslet”. (The Actual Battle of Kadesh)
After ensuring
his family’s safety, Ramesses enjoined the battle. According to
the Egyptian accounts, Ramesses fought valiantly and, together
with his personal guard, routed the remaining Hittite
charioteers.
The Egyptian chariots were much more maneuverable
than the slower Hittite chariots and the Egyptian horses were
fresh.
Ramesses opined,
“I found the 2,500 chariots in whose midst I was,
sprawling before my horse.
Not one of them found his
DURYEA 14
hand to fight…and they were unable to shoot.
They
found nor their hearts to seize their javelins.”
The Hittites lost their initial advantage.
King Muwatalli
must have lost heart with the quick Egyptian recovery.
king ordered a second wave of chariots into battle.
of charioteers was composed of the Hittite nobles.
Hittites were fresh and the Egyptians fatigued.
The
This wave
Now the
When the
Hittites seemed assured of a route, another wave of Egyptian
troops arrived.
It is not clear whether this new wave of Egyptians was the
Army Set of another group called the Ne’arin (young Canaanites)
is not clear form the record.
What is clear is that the Hittite
chariots retreated across the Orontes River to their camp and
retired.
Many of the Hittite nobility lay dead either in the
battlefield or drowned during their hasty retreat across the
river.
What is odd about the battle is the Hittite infantry did
not engage the enemy at all.
Only the Hittite charioteers
joined battle with the Egyptians while King Muwatalli watched
from the sidelines with his infantry.
The battle ended in a draw.
Both sides would claim
victory, but the truth is neither side won.
The Consequences of the Battle and the Peace
The battle for supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean ended
in a draw.
A treaty thirteen years later sealed the peace
between Egypt and the Hittites.
signed this treaty.
Ramesses II and Hattusilis III
The peace treaty sets a border between
Egyptian and Hittite lands in the Levant.
The details of the
DURYEA 15
two versions of the treaty (one Egyptian and one Hittite)
differ, but the result is that a Hittite princess becomes a wife
for Ramesses II.
The Egyptian version of the treaty states that the gods
kept the two countries at peace until the Hittite king caused
the war.
The countries will now be in eternal peace.
This new
peace is better than the old peace and the land is filled with
goodwill.
A mutual defense pact is part of the treaty as well
as an admonition to the subject peoples of the Levant to not
cross either of the overlords.
The Hittite version is in essence the same as the Egyptian
version, except that it is less wordy.
The Egyptian version is
full of honorific titles and the Hittite version uses plain
language.
Peace in the region was the short-term effect of the Battle
of Kadesh.
The Egyptian Empire and the Hittite Empire would
never go to battle against each other again.
to prosper again.
Trade was now able
The major trade routes between the Orient and
Southern Europe were now open and secure.
The Egyptian Empire would continue to flourish in the
south.
Her major enemies to the north and east either were now
allies or vanquished.
Egypt’s main troubles from now on would
be internal.
The Hittite empire would not be as lucky.
The Sea People,
their allies at the Battle of Kadesh, would permeate the Hittite
lands.
In 1193 B.C., a final invasion of the Sea People brings
the Hittite Empire to an end.
DURYEA 16
The lessons from this battle are of interest to the
military historian.
The Egyptian armies used tried and true
methods of Bronze Age warfare to the battle.
They used the
weapons and tactics that served them well for hundreds of years.
The problem with this is that the Hittites used relatively
modern weapons (iron versus bronze).
This left the Egyptians
with a disadvantage.
The Egyptian leadership (Ramesses II) fought under some bad
assumptions.
He took the information freely given by the
Bedouins as the truth and therefore let his guard down.
turned out to be a costly mistake.
This
He should have followed up
this information with an advance party to verify the
information.
The Hittites used advanced weaponry against the Egyptians.
They also used tactics that were unfamiliar to the Egyptians.
Because of this, they were able to fight the Egyptians to a draw
while being outnumbered ten to one on the battlefield.
The
tactic of using large chariots with iron weapons to charge
directly into the Egyptian lines proved to be a decisive
advantage.
The Pharaoh was engaged in the battle personally.
For this
reason he could not see the battle and was a to a tactical
disadvantage to Muwatalli, the Hittite, who could observe the
battle from the sidelines.
If Ramesses had received a mortal
wound during the battle, which would have led to an Egyptian
loss in the battle.
The Battle of Kadesh teaches many lessons to the modern
DURYEA 17
military leader.
Keep your weaponry modernized.
The old tried
and true weapons will not stand up to a better-equipped foe.
Fight the battle as close to your home front as practical, or at
least close to your supply depot.
Moreover, know your enemy.
militarily superior force.
Logistics can be a downfall.
A crafty enemy can defeat a
DURYEA
Works Cited
The Actual Battle of Kadesh (The Battle of Kadesh, Part II). Ed.
Troy Fox. 2003. InterCityOz, Inc.. 29 Nov. 2004
<http://touregypt.net/featurestories/kadesh.htm>.
Battle of Kadesh. Ed. Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 30 Nov. 2004
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kadesh>.
Churchman, David, and Claudette Cardey. Readings in Ancient Near
Eastern History. Carson: California State U Dominguez
Hills, 2002.
Egyptian Accounts of the Battle of Kedesh. Ed. Reshafim.
November 2003.
<http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/kadeshaccounts.htm>.
28 November 2004
Healy, Mark. Armies of the Pharaohs. New York: Osprey
Publishing, 1992.
Healy, Mark. The Warrior Pharaoh:
Ramesses II and the Battle of
Qadesh. New York: Osprey Publishing, 1993.
The History of the Hittites. Ed. Troy Fox. 2003. InterCityOz,
Inc.. 29 Nov. 2004
<http://touregypt.net/featurestories/hittites.htm>.
The Hittite Empire. Ed. Conquistador. All Empires.com. 30 Nov.
2004
<http://www.allempires.com/empires/hitties/hitties1.htm>.
Kemp, Barry J. Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilization. New
York: Routledge, 2004.
Leading Up to the Battle of Kadesh (The Battle of Kadesh, Part
DURYEA 19
I). Ed. Troy Fox. 2003. InterCityOz, Inc.. 29 Nov. 2004
<http://touregypt.net/featurestories/hittites.htm>.
Ramesses II:
The Battle of Kedesh. Ed. Reshafim. November 2003.
<http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/ramsesseskadeshcampaign.htm>
. 28 November 2004
Ramesses II's Battle of Kadesh Inscriptions. Ed. Megaera Lorenz.
Purdue State University. 29 Nov. 2004
<http://www.courses.psu.edu/cams/cams400w_aek11/www/kadesh.
html>.
Shaw, Ian. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. London: Shire
Publications LTD, 1991.
Shaw, Ian, and Paul Nicholson. The Dictionary of Ancient Egypt.
n.p.: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1995.
Tappan, Eva
March. The World's Story: A History of the World in
Story, Song and Art. Vol. III. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1914.
Copyright © 2004 Tom Duryea