epigraphs in the battle of kadesh reliefs
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
1/19
Israel Exploration Societyis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toEretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies / : -
http://www.jstor.org
/ EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS Author(s): Anthony J. Spalinger and 'Source:Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies / : -Vol. HAYIM and MIRIAM TADMOR VOLUME / (2003 / pp. 222*-239* "(,Published by: Israel Exploration SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23629879
Accessed: 23-04-2016 06:47 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
2/19
EPIGRAPHS IN
THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS
Anthony J. Spalinger
The University of Auckland
New Zealand
Discussions of Egyptian warfare have given short
shrift to small, often laconic captions accompany
ing Pharaonic military reliefs.1 Although the data
they contain about locations and personal names
have provided much grist for the historian's mill,
the information remains undervalued because
these snippets have been misinterpreted as mere
decoration for the long war records they glossed.
Scholarly research has neglected to examine the
purpose of such epigraphs. The well-developed
story of Ramesses II at Kadesh is a useful place
to begin such a study.
Why were such epigraphs written? What was
memorialized and what was edited out? Often we
possess more than one pictorial representation of
a battle scene, and the citations are not always
consistent. Place and time were the two decisive
factors. The city under siege or about to be taken
(Kadesh, Tunip) had to be identified and the
topography described: forests (Rebawi), rivers
(Orontes), fords. The reason underlying such an
notations was a desire to commemorate each vie
tory as unique. The date was almost as important.
Seti I's war records on the exterior northern hypo
style court at Karnak, even while lacking a de
tailed textual rendition, nevertheless specified one
temporal reference to a campaign in regnal year
l.2 Inclusion of the time, however, was not de
rigeur. Of the many undated war reliefs of
Ramesses II, those dealing with his Trans
jordanian campaign immediately come to mind,
as does the resultant difficulty in dating them
exactly.
Almost all of these cases are simple and
straightforward. Verisimilitude was not a value.
How many cities located on a hill or a tell reappear
in Ramesside war reliefs, and can one find explicit
differences in their representation? Excluding
Ramesses II's Kadesh campaign, the answer is
usually in the negative. The identity of such for
tresses was vested in the accompanying name,
although particular facts might also be carved in
hieroglyphs beside the generic scene. The caption
to the depiction of the arrival of Egyptian rein
forcements at Kadesh is the classic example where
the epigraphs provide considerably more informa
tion than mere background. At the Ramesseum
and Luxor, Ramesses II is said to have fought for
two hours without his armor.3 This caption may
well be a reference to a literary complement that
has not survived. It would not be uncharacteristic
of Ramesses for this exploit worthy of record
for its singularity and its personal aspect not
to have been given the full treatment. Indeed,
Gardiner recognized the Kadesh Bulletin as
"clearly no more than one of those legends which
served to explain the accompanying reliefs."4 The
counterclaim runs that the Bulletin exists in more
than one version, contains literary formations, and
is quite lengthy and detailed.5
What were the sources from which the master
scribe and designer worked? Everything, down to
certain recurring geographical details in the por
trayals of Kadesh and its environs, implies that
drawings were made on the spot and distributed
to the carvers back home. The facts were regis
tered by army scribes who accompanied the Egyp
tian forces abroad for the sole purpose of ensuring
that not a single instance of Pharaonic valor would
be lost to history. Their presence is felt in any
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
3/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 223*
New Kingdom war record, with the tallies of
enemy slain, hands counted, prisoners taken, char
iots captured, and chattel seized. The recorder
scribe of the Egyptian army traversed the bloody
battlefield at the end of the first day's fighting at
Kadesh. He determined the names and ranks of
the enemy casualties, alive or dead, and made an
exact reckoning.
Who or what was perpetuated in the official
records is another matter. The standard scenes
always portray the king in the temple, his depar
ture, his arrival in enemy territory, the battle or
chariot scene, the counting of the defeated, the
return home, and the reception by Amun-Re. None
of these are unique to any war, even though the
entire sequence need not be carved.6
What is interesting in the analysis of military
texts is the variance in accounts of the same
incident, the emphasis placed on certain deeds and
the silence on other events that we know occurred.
When parallel verbal and graphic representations
are examined together, the contrasts mount. How
ever, much of this effect was intentional, since the
two types were often designed to be viewed as a
pair, and so there was no reason to duplicate
information. But what is the significance underly
ing names and events that were retained in one
place and not in another?
The exact memories that were publicized in the
official chronicles were also circulated in popular
accounts. They were written down in sufficient
frequency and uniformity of style to constitute a
distinct literary subgenre, but they do not survive
in quantity because of the fragility of the papyri
on which they were produced. Therefore, Egyp
tologists often have nothing left to examine but
the monumental records. A case in point is the
recent flurry of scholarship on Merenptah's Asi
atic campaign.
Yet New Kingdom literary reflexes of foreign
climes are not that difficult to pinpoint.7 While
the Doomed Prince and the Tale of the Two
Brothers are the most famous, others relating to
the military aspects of Egypt in Asia are more
explicit.8 For example, from a battle relief of
Ramesses II and additional data from P. Anastasi
I, Posener extracted a story of a man treed by a
bear.9 Only in Asia could this purported mis
adventure have happened. Without having seen it,
how could the Egyptians have retold it, with pen
and paper as well as with chisel? But owing to
the paucity of written material, the scholar often
(and unfortunately, sometimes exclusively) exam
ines the pictorial depictions of military scenes.10
An apropos episode features the king of Aleppo,
who was singled out for dishonorable mention in
the Kadesh Reliefs (R 40). Did his waterlogged
experience in the Orontes earn him a place in the
annals that he would not have merited simply by
being king of an important Syrian city-state? There
is a soldier, Nht-'Imn, whose role in the battle of
Kadesh is unclear due to the fragmentary nature
of the passage (R 22),11 like Mehy, a ts pdwt and
tiy hw of Seti I.12 Little is known of the latter; his
appearance in a relief of a military action of the
Pharaoh, however, may predicate a separate cycle
relating his heroic deeds on the battlefield. Thus,
Mehy's presence can be compared to that of
Ramesses' shieldbearer Menna, whose character
in the Poem is significant. Both men remind us of
Thutmose IH's general Dhwty, who appears in the
story of "The Taking of Joppa," and perhaps even
of the personage of Khaemwaset depicted in
Merenptah's reliefs of a Canaanite war.13 Hence,
it would not be speculative to conclude that the
relief of Seti I with Mehy is based upon an
anecdote of personal bravery and trustworthiness
that must have endured among the heroic narra
tives of the day.
The purely literary accounts still extant on pa
pyri include Ramesses II's "Battle of Kadesh,"
contained in P. Sallier III and the Chester Beatty
III,14 "The Taking of Joppa," an incomplete record
of Thutmose III in Asia, a yet unpublished Louvre
papyrus fragment that seems to recount a Libyan
war of Ramesses III, and the poorly preserved
account of the Apophis and Seqenenre conflict.15
In the New Kingdom, literary versions of military
actions were officially sponsored. Within the mo
numental accounts, sub-sections are marked, writ
ten in a distinctive style that must be considered
a separate literary topos. Redford, for example,
has defined one major theme of "dissolution and
restoration" that is clearly not a dry narration of
historical events.16 His analysis of Merenptah's
Libyan wars could be applied to the common
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
4/19
224 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
introductions present in Thutmose IIFs Megiddo
campaign, Sethnakht's official victory stela, and
of course the historical record in the Great Harris
papyrus.17
If many of the hieroglyphic narratives of war
had literary antecedents or even literary passages,
illustrations did not accompany them. The artistry
is a source of different information owing to the
presence of details and captions that, for the most
part, are not referred to in the texts. One can liken
the physical representations to film and the textual
to a "voice over" that accompanies the images.
Furthermore, certain elements vary in the depic
tions and thereby compound the anomalies be
tween and among parallel editions. With respect
to the Battle of Kadesh we possess three versions
from Luxor, as well as an original one, making a
total of four; two more from the Ramesseum (two
are palimpsests); one each from Abydos and Abu
Simbel (the latter compressed);18 and two from
Karnak.19 Space considerations, as well as the date
of the actual carving and the local or particular
interests of the master coordinator of the entire
project, have led to differentiation among these
versions.20 Major elements were often removed.
For example, Kitchen notes the absence of Scene
III (The Presentation) in the K, version.21 The
Bulletin normally would be placed next to (or
within) the first episode (The Camp and Council
of War); but at Luxor, the facade of the pylon
(north face, west wing: version L,) has the camp
above the Poem and the battle above the conclu
sion to the Poem and the Bulletin (north face, east
wing) Here symmetry between the east and west
wings of the pylon was desired, a challenge espe
daily after the removal of an earlier version of
the Poem (Lp) on the west wing.22 In addition, at
L3 the Poem has been moved away from its im
mediate connection to Episode II, the Battle, and
Episode II has been inserted between them.
Whether or not this was also due to space consid
erations,23 it is obvious that as the pylons for L,,
owing to their location, must have forced a recon
struction of the basic artistic setup, they did so
equally for version R,.
The architecture and the availability of blank
walls forced certain layouts, and we can see this
most clearly at L, where the east wing (north face)
of the pylon includes events from the eighth regnal
year of Ramesses. Clearly, Episode II of Kadesh
which was carved there did not encompass the
entire space on the fatjade. Moreover, at the
Ramesseum the Poem is located on the front face
of the north wing of Pylon II. Hence, it is directly
opposite Episode I, which is carved on the rear
face of the north wing of the first pylon (R,
version). As the Poem was apparently to be in
eluded after Episode III (see below), its presence
separate from the first two episodes of R, makes
some sense.
New Kingdom literary accounts, whether on
papyri or on temple walls, shared more in common
with each other than with artistic representations.
But like the depictions, they would vary from
place to place, even on various walls in the same
building. In K, Episode IV has been expanded into
two parts to show three rows of prisoners being
led by the king and his sons (R 63-90) with the
Theban Triad receiving them (R 91). The Poem is
located underneath this unique scene with addi
tional spoils placed before Amun, Mut and
Khonsu at the south-east exterior corner of the
Great Hypostyle Hall (R 92-97). (They corre
spond somewhat to the presentation of captives to
the triad at Abu Simbel in R 98-100.24) The earlier
event, the arrival of the Nacarn troops, is found on
the southern approach wall (west face) to the
Hypostyle Hall, but not too far along.25
In examining the relief captions, it is useful to
emphasize the Abu Simbel version because it is
complete, although compressed. One recognizes
the importance of the epigraphs without worrying
about any lost portions of the Kadesh battle.
Nevertheless, the self-imposed limits of the com
position allow us to notice which items in the
battle were worthy of specific mention and how
the artists and designers transformed the material
obtained from the field into their depiction.
The relief captions were listed by Kitchen, in
his Ramesside Inscriptions II, following Kuentz.
Episode I: The Camp and Council of War
1. R 1. There is a brief note whose purpose is
to identify the first division of Ramesses and to
orient the activity at the tent which was being
pitched around the king. Only R, parallels Abu
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
5/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 225=
Simbel. The scene at K, is a badly worn palimp
sest; K2 is in such poor condition that we cannot
be sure whether this epitaph was in fact there. L3
probably included the scene, although this might
be questioned; R, and A have lost the scene.26 L,,
however, definitely omits the caption; beside the
camp a mere sketch is drawn. This Luxor version
simply did not have enough room for the captions.
The same may pertain to the absence of R 2-4
there.
The caption is essential to the ensuing action
because it supplies the physical Sitz im Leben for
the pictorial account. The viewer must begin with
this notation in order to understand Episode I.
The similarity of R, and I coincides with the
artistic representation: only these two contain the
horizontal band of hieroglyphs leading to the
(viewer's) left edge of the camp. Indeed, Abu
Simbel is even more detailed than its parallel from
the Ramesseum.
2. R 2-5. Interestingly, only Abu Simbel main
tains these captions, although the caveat regarding
preservation holds here as in the previous case.
None of the captions is fundamental to the battle,
but the mention of the king's lion in R 2 and the
beating of an Egyptian are not devoid of interest.27
Nonetheless, these details are minor.
No other extant exemplar contains the scene of
the beaten man, although R, has the ox carts; both
R, and L, depict the king's lion. Therefore, only
at Abu Simbel are the details made more explicit
through these epigraphs. Perhaps an alteration was
made here from the original design.28 However,
in the Luxor exemplar the camp was drawn
smaller, leaving less space in which to carve these
epigraphs. One has the sense that the designers
considered these captions secondary to the pic
tures.
R 5, however, is parallel to the following cita
tion.
3. R 6. The name of the enthroned king appears
only at Luxor (L,). A, K,, K2, R, and L3 may have
preserved it; R 5 at Abu Simbel takes its place.
However, R1 definitely did not preserve it, despite
a parallel scene of the king faced by his own
chariot and officers. This detail is not overly
important for understanding the course of events,
but I am convinced that the divergence between
the Ramesseum and Luxor accounts of the battle
generated this difference.29
4. R 7. The Ramesseum (R ) version diverges
from that at Luxor < L,) once more by containing
this caption. R, places the remark above a chariot
moving to the right; L,, on the other hand, encloses
the king who is followed by his officers
between captions R 6 and R 8. The difference
appears mainly to do with the location of the
Bulletin and the more cramped space there. R, has
it carved above the figure of Ramesses, whereas
in L it is below and separate from Episode II.
Luxor and Abu Simbel do not depict the king's
chariot being prepared for his attack upon the
Hittites, but with the Bulletin above the king in
version I and R 5 there is no room for detail. Such
was not the case in Lr
Version R, currently stands alone in the artistic
representation of the chariot. I presume that R2
and possibly A originally contained the scene
together with caption.
5. R 8. When we move to the important scene
of the beating of the Hittite spies, we are on firmer
ground, historically speaking. Ramesses suddenly
discovered that the Hittite king and his troops were
close by and not to the north of Kadesh at Aleppo.
R 8 had to be included because it was crucial. All
of our extant sources preserve this text and scene:
A, L,, R,, and I. I am sure that the palimpsest
version K, contained it as well, and the recent
discovery by Prof. Murnane of this part of the
Bulletin (his version Kp) supports my inference.30
6. R 9-10. Only R, includes the captions of
two royal fan bearers. The extant version at Luxor,
Lp lacks the respective labels, but some of the
figures in chariots can be discerned. (Note, how
ever, that it is a palimpsest.) There, the artists
included the enemy chariots at the corner of the
camp, but not the useful remarks of R 9 and 10
concerning the attack and subsequent flight of one
royal fan bearer, the king's son Prc-hr-wnm.f.
Version I can also be referred to, as in the middle
of the right-hand side of the north wall there
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
6/19
226 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
appears to be a close parallel to this scene.
R 9 refers to the instruction given by a fan
bearer to the king's sons to avoid the battle.31 R
10 mentions Ramesses' third son, Prc-hr-wnm.f.32
From his titles (especially "first charioteer") we
know that this individual was there for combat
and not for training.
The information in the Ramesseum version is
supplemental to the depiction. Abu Simbel fails
to mention it because the picture of the camp is
compressed and shows it only being partly entered
by the enemy.
7. R 11. This is the famous Nacarn scene in
which those elite troops are arriving to stop the
Hittite onslaught. Its importance for a philological
understanding of the Kadesh Inscriptions cannot
be understated. It was studied by Hartman in his
dissertation of the verbal patterns in this account.33
(L,, L3 , 2, R> and I contain the text.) It must
have been included in all the editions and not
only because there is plenty of space to reconstruct
this crucial event. Even the small version I has it.
Gardiner noted that Abu Simbel is the best pre
served and in fact contains some passages not
found at Luxor.34 R,, K2 and I similarly omit a
portion; I and K2 coincide by lengthening the
account and the end, whereas the two Luxor
versions separately dovetail within the middle of
the caption. (The Luxor variants sometimes "go
their own way," a fact noted earlier in the schol
arly literature.35) On the other hand, I, R and K2
present a slightly different narrative for a while.
The lack of space does not appear to be the cause
of this discrepancy. Readers who could have ap
preciated these subtleties were few, if any. The
temple staffs may, in fact, have performed an
interpretation of the events for visitors.36
At Abu Simbel a horizontal band of chariots
separates Episodes I (bottom) and II (top). K2 uses
the river as a partial means of demarcation, or, to
be more precise, the end of the middle section of
the Orontes leading off to the right forms a barrier.
This aspect is even more starkly apparent at
Abydos .
From most of the scenes, however, Episodes I
and II appear as if joined. In K2 they are split by
a doorway, whereas at Abydos each episode is
located on a different wall, west (I) and south (II).
Finally, in R,, even though the first episode is
mainly lost, the movement in the second court
from the north wall to the flanking east wall forms
an effective break as well.
Episode II: The Battle
K, (palimpsest) is virtually lost; a few portions of
K2 and A remain, while L3 is completely destroyed
(if we assume, as I think reasonable, that this scene
was originally present there).
1. R 12. The first match consists of the two
Luxor versions (L, and L3) with Abu Simbel. A is
missing, but we have the scenes of the two
Ramesseum variants. In fact, those versions are
reasonably detailed, lending strong support to the
hypothesis that the Ramesseum differs from Luxor
in more than one case. This example (and the
following three) depicts the rapid dispatch of
officials south to inform the rear divisions of the
Egyptian army that their help was needed. Such
information is important for an understanding of
the battle.
L, adds a few more words to the caption, and I
is the shortest. Space was not a hindrance for the
designer to have carved the lengthiest caption in
all three versions, but the aesthetic factor in favor
of a large number of troops and chariots in L,
hemmed in the epigraphs. Free space on the upper
right side of the north wall of Abu Simbel gave
the artist room for striking impressions of the
battle. Epigraphs for this and the following group
at the Ramesseum (versions R, and R2) were not
included, but we have to remember that the orig
inal designs were revised when they were overlain
by the king in his chariot.37 At Luxor and Abu
Simbel the Pharaoh is not present in that location.
Furthermore, neither Ramesseum version includes
the motif of troops facing each other in that
position. Abu Simbel, on the other hand, has
chariots on the top coming from both sides located
above the city of Kadesh. L, divides the scene into
two sections. The west wall depicts chariots on
the left moving right and on the right moving left.
Here, the balance of troops above Kadesh does
not divide the scene into two roughly equal por
tions as at Abu Simbel, but the arrangement is
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
7/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 227
parallel. On the east wall the same scene together
with R 12 is interpreted with troops coming from
behind and moving right, while in front of the
vizier a series of chariots proceeds ahead and so
to the extreme right.
Abu Simbel has telescoped events. The individ
uals of R 13-15 and the vizier of R 12 appear to
have been shown leaving the battlefield, but the
presence of the original king in the chariot scene
with the rows of chariots turning away from the
city did not cause R 12 and R 13-16 to be
sacrificed at the Ramesseum. The designer of
those two wall reliefs followed a policy that differs
to some degree from the other temples. The ab
sence of these captions in no way lessens the
impact of the military encounter. These small yet
pertinent details were already well remembered by
the astute viewing public. It was only that
non-royal personages could be omitted in the
historical record, whereas the king could not,
unless he was subject to a later damnatio
2. R 13-15. That only version I encompasses
both the mention and depiction of the scouts is
due mainly to the arrangement of the full north
wall scene with these individuals about to scurry
away for help. But the L, variant (on the east wing
of the north face of the pylon) omits them for lack
of space, The upper left portion of the scene
contains a register of soldiers moving right, pre
ceded by the figure of the vizier facing left and
then caption R 12 between them. There are stand
ard bearers, foot soldiers and one chariot. For all
the activities the entire depiction is rather small.
3. R 16. This caption merely gives the name
of the king; it is present in the two Ramesseum
versions, as well as Abu Simbel, but not at Luxor
(L ). The arrangement of L, again precluded this
unimportant notation.
4. R 17-19. Here, the two Ramesseum versions
agree in R 19, as might be expected, and distin
guish themselves from the one extant Luxor ren
dition (L,: R 17) and Abu Simbel (R 18). Luxor
contains a shortened rhetorical text referring to the
king in his chariot, whereas I, being less over
worked with figures of fighting, has room for more
commentary. R, and R2 have an even more expan
sive text, one that is narrative in tone.39 But one
can discern the initial plan for this epigraph by
analyzing the original scene with its separate cap
tion about the king in his chariot (R 20).
5. R 20. In R a rhetorical passage on the king
in his chariot was removed and re-cut as chariotry.
The final (or second) scene thus came to duplicate
that presented in the other Ramesseum version,
R2, itself redrawn.40 In other words, both R, and
R2 originally presented the same layout.
6. R 21. At this point the royal chariot span is
identified in L" Rl R2 and an earlier version
(another palimpsest), R2p.41 The Ramesseum is
once more consistent, even with the original carv
ing at R2. Abu Simbel avoided this epigraph due
to space limitations. It is not important in any case.
(Note that in Episode I, only R, provides the name
of the king's chariot span.)
7. R 22. What interested Gardiner in this older
epigraph was an individual Nht-'lmn, who actually
speaks.42 Evidence for Abydos being dubious, this
caption is present only at R2 and it was later
erased. This legend never unfolded at Luxor (L,)
or at Abu Simbel; and at the Ramesseum there
was not enough space for it to be included among
these scenes.
Did the composer of this battle scene intend to
commemorate the bravery of a non-royal Egyp
tian? Or instead, was Nht-'lmn one of those fright
ened soldiers who was rallied by the heroic
Ramesses? It is unlikely that this humble soldier
performed a role similar to the impressive Mehy
during Seti's campaigning.43 I suspect that this
caption was intended to glorify the Pharaoh. It was
good though expendable propaganda. The reasons
for the erasure remain unclear. However, the call
"Come to me" which is partially preserved in the
text echoes Ramesses appealing to Amun-Re. In
fact, the traces that can be read immediately there
after quote Ramesses (... .kwi).
R2 as a rule labels the fallen Hittites and their
allies by name and title far more often than the
other versions (see below). Perhaps we can infer
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
8/19
228 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
the same practice here, namely, a desire to be as
specific as possible as to the participants in the
battle. I would also maintain that the people ere
ating these reliefs had in their hands a list of such
particulars: names, titles, singularity of event, and
the like. Whether or not they chose to include all
such components depended upon a number of
factors, among which the propaganda aspect fig
ured the highest, but which was impacted by the
artistic layout. Nonetheless, the absence of R 22
in the second variant at the Ramesseum (R,) may
imply that at a time subsequent to the completion
of R2 (and after recarving the original layout),
work on R, was still being executed. Hence, cap
tion R 22 was never included in that episode. This,
however, is speculative. At any rate, I see the same
original design employed for both Ramesseum
variants, and then the alteration on both being
accomplished under the same direction.
It is evident that R2 was redrawn considerably,
as Wreszinski demonstrated.44 During the recarv
ing, earlier captions such as this one may no longer
have served their purpose. There was no ulterior
motive for the later erasure.
8. R 23-40. R, is the most fastidious in writing
down the names and the titles of the defeated
Hittites. For R 23, see Fig. 1. "Overkill" was how
Kitchen assessed the thrice-repeated epigraph and
carving of the Hittite king's charioteer in R 24.45
On some occasions R, dovetails with R2 but this
is not a rule by any means. Multiple battlefield
vignettes were added not merely because there
happened to be empty spaces.46 The other extant
temple series could easily have included them if
it had been desired. Likewise, the fragmentary
Abydos depiction preserves R 23 and R 24; how
many others it included must unfortunately remain
unknown. Abu Simbel, as well, contains R 23, 25
and 33.
The Hittite foes were identified by rank or
position and their names were rendered into Egyp
tian by army scribes with ad hoc accuracy.47 The
roll case of so many important men, among them
Fig. 1. A common caption in the Battle of Kadesh scenes (Ramesseum)
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
9/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 229
the king's brother, symbolized the debacle they
suffered at the Orontes. Citing the names and titles
of the defeated served to magnify the victory of
Ramesses. For this reason the same personages
reappear more or less consistently throughout the
monumental editions. The humorous drama of the
king of Aleppo, for example, is present as R 40
in both versions of the Ramesseum.48
However, at Luxor (L,), although some Hittites
are shown being rescued from the Orontes, the
prince is absent. Instead, the artistic arrangement
was constructed to emphasize the headlong plunge
into the river. While the full setup of battle is well
drawn, the carnage and destruction are not vivid.
Individual drama is not the subject of this com
position, and the prince of Aleppo disappears. The
lost parallel of L3 probably would have been the
same.
Version I at Abu Simbel is a more complex and
pictorially detailed account of the battle, but it is
considerably more compressed than either of the
Ramesseum reliefs. In R 33, for example, I merely
indicates the name whereas R2 adds his title, the
"chief bowman." The absence of specific enemies
such as the luckless prince of Aleppo is under
standable. Again, the artistic priority abridged the
texts.
The reliefs at Abydos are in fragmentary con
dition. The brother and charioteer of the Hittite
king show up in the wall scenes of R 23-24. There
is no evidence that the other individuals so well
recorded in R2 were not also included in the
depiction of the battle. They belong here if any
where because Abydos was the first temple to be
carved with the Kadesh account and, moreover,
there was more than enough space for these cap
tions.49 Abydos also contains the only Kadesh
reference to the word tprt, Babylonian "Lastkarre,"
"transport wagon" in R 47 with singular represen
tation of four heavily-laden carts all containing
food.50 It is not presumptuous to expect that Aby
dos laid out the full Kadesh battle, embellished
with events and actions not included in the stand
ard reliefs, and at least as many epigraphs as fill
the Ramesseum.
9. R 41-42. Version L,, perhaps surprisingly,
refers to the Hittite king in R 41; the other extant
scenes do not. In this case R 42 (R,, R2 and I)
complements the brief notation at Luxor. The
Ramesseum variants not only coincide, but they
are more fulsome than the rendition at Luxor
(R 41). Abu Simbel goes along with the two
Ramesseum texts (but is shorter), thereby comple
menting the account of R 18 with respect to R 19.
10. R 43. The thr warriors of King Muwatallis
are introduced. Only R2, as might be expected, and
I present this caption. Both versions count 18,000
men in the cramped epigraph; I is more detailed.
Gardiner claims that the legend only occurs at Abu
Simbel, but this is incorrect; we do not know
whether Abydos presented this section because the
scene is now too fragmentary.51 There can be no
reason for the absence of this notation at L, except
the lack of enough space in front of the first group
soldiers.52 R, does not include these words, but
there is a colonnade interrupting the scene at the
right, leaving room for only the rows of soldiers.
In fact, this portion of the depiction is considera
bly reduced in size in comparison to R2.
Of equal if not greater historical value is the
following epigraph.
11. R 44. The additional 19,000 thr are now
listed. A, fortunately, is still partly extant and K2
provides further information; L,, R, and I comple
ment them. Again, the first Ramesseum version
omits the caption, probably once more due to the
architectural interruption of the colonnade. Only
Abu Simbel identifies these men as other thr
warriors," thereby indicating that caption R 43 is
related to this one.
Both R 43 and 44 provide striking information
about the number and disposition of the additional
enemy troops who remained on the east side of
the Orontes. They are separate from the troops in
R 43 "in front of' the king; those in R 44 are
"behind him." They were guarding the Hittite
ruler, and they apparently were not chariot war
riors. On the first day of fighting Muwatallis had
sent his massive chariot divisions across the ford
to attack the Egyptians; that portion of the battle
was mainly equestrian. Perhaps the thr became
involved on the second day, when the Egyptians
could have crossed the ford to the east and en
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
10/19
230 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
gaged in hand-to-hand combat with their oppo
nents (or vice versa). This, however, is specula
tive.
But the numbers of these thr remain suspect.
18,000 and 19,000, as integers, sound large, es
pecially when the Poem refers to 2,500 chariots
(P 84 and 132 with R 19): that hemmed in
Ramesses at his camp.53 That account also speci
fies an additional 1,000 chariots sent as reinforce
ments, which the Egyptians counter-attacked (P
153 .54
If we add those two figures together and mul
tiply by three occupants, then the total number of
Hittites on chariots comes to 10,500, a not unrea
sonable tally. But combined with 37,000 foot
soldiers, the total of 47,500 foes is remarkable and
arguably false.55 The written allegation of these
numbers was intended to convey the impression
of the awesome size of the host.
12. R 45. Abydos and L, join at this point in
mentioning additional Hittite troops: the thr shield
bearers.56 Presumably many of these epigraphs
would be in A, if it were fully preserved. L,
includes R 45 (plus depiction) as the area is not
affected by any space limitations. The two
Ramesseum versions do not, but the reasons are
plain. R,, as we have seen, is compressed by the
colonnade, and R2 is missing certain portions to
the right.
13. R 46. This is a mere label over one Hittite
soldier. It is included in I (with the depiction).
14. R 47. This scene and caption, found no
where else but at Abydos, is remarkable because
of the wagons (8).57 The relief text refers to a
separate group of thr soldiers. Here is another case
where further information has been disclosed in a
relief without textual corroboration. One has the
recurring suspicion that the Abydos account is
independent from the others. Granted that these
pictorial details are minor here the facts refer
simply to the camp of the Hittite king and not to
the battle nevertheless, the split of I from the
other versions is distinct. Verisimilitude is, how
ever, heightened.
15. R 48. Additional Hittite personnel are only
at Abydos.
16. R 49. The city of Kadesh is labeled, but
only I, L, and R, contain it. There are three
possible explanations as to why R, omits the name.
There is less space there than in R2. The scene
itself is a palimpsest, and perhaps with the artistic
alteration the city's name was ignored. Finally,
there is a small portion missing on the top of the
depiction of the city, and it is possible that the
name of Kadesh was originally carved there.
For the artists and designers of the reliefs, the first
day's fighting was literally a field day. When
disaster seemed inevitable, Ramesses' struggle to
victory was high drama for the artist ... and for
the writer. Captions doubled the propagandistic
value of the visual record created for the monu
ments.
From the inception, Episode II demanded
graphic elucidation because the scenes being pre
sented were not the stereotypical ones. While the
enemy citadel is rather generic in appearance, the
topography surrounding it is full of local color.
The cowardly Hittite king, drawn to appear as
static as his description in 65-66 in the Poem,
is a stick figure; but Ramesses smashing the char
iots of his foe is a heroic individual. The theme
of this episode is contrast, and it is dramatized in
the details. The master arrangement included as
many specific components as imaginable.
Episode III: Captives and Spoils
At this section the Ramesseum ceases to be a
source, for only the first two episodes were carved.
With respect to R, this occurred because the ex
terior north and south wings performed their role
as complementary scenes. In like manner, the
depictions in the second court (R2) were set up to
encompass only the first two episodes. After all,
these were the most valuable, historically and
dramatically.
Similarly, the northern wall at Abu Simbel was
dressed to accommodate these two segments. A
few additional notations (R 50-52) and standard
scenes can be found: the king inspecting booty
and two brief notations. The grotto temple of Abu
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
11/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 231
Simbel did not have room for more on the north
wall, and it would have been too costly and time
consuming to construct extra space. Note that
Episode IV is even further curtailed: only R 98
100 can be linked with this final portion of the
Kadesh account which is to be found on the west
wall.
Abydos had space for Episode III and the Poem,
after the interruption of a doorway; but only the
lowermost sections remain. Therefore, at this
point we rely heavily upon K, although about fifty
percent of the scene is lost, as well as I and version
L3; the last is poor. Lp insofar as it is located on
the exterior northern face of the temple's pylons,
parallels the arrangement of R,. K, appears to have
eliminated the third episode. L2 contains only the
Poem and Bulletin, but the expected accompany
ing reliefs were never carved. One moves from
the southern wall of the great hypostyle court past
the northern portion of the transverse wall (south
ern approach) leading to pylons VII-IX-X. On the
inside west side of that wall will be found traces
of the first episode but nothing of the third. Be
yond that wall and east of it there is Episode IV
(top) and the Poem (bottom).
The Poem thus appears with illustrations at L3
and without them at L2. The second version con
tains both the Poem and the Bulletin on the outside
of the east and south-east walls of the court of
Ramesses II. Nevertheless, those two texts are not
simple complements of the fagade reliefs of Epi
sodes I and II. There was originally enough room
to include some reliefs, and Kitchen observes that
these were to be expected but never carved.58
Insofar as the Poem is usually placed next to
(and following) Episode III (see L3, K2 and A),
can we therefore assume that Episode III in L2 was
to be positioned after the Poem? Or, as L2 com
plements the depictions on the pylon (L,: Episodes
I and II), can we presume that both belong to
gether? The first possibility is likely if only be
cause there was so much room left at Luxor for
carving more of the Kadesh campaign. Indeed, to
the south of the Poem will be found another blank
section of the exterior wall surrounding the
18th-Dynasty colonnade.59 It is contiguous to the
Bulletin, but whether or not the designers intended
this area to include Kadesh material is a question
that cannot be answered. One thing is relatively
sure: the Poem should have followed Episode III
and the Bulletin would have been directly con
nected to Episode I: see I (with only the Bulletin);
A; both exemplars of the Ramesseum (with only
the Bulletin); and K2 (although here the presence
of the Bulletin is not assured).60 K, is an exception
in that the Poem is written under Episode IV.
In L2 the Poem (written from the eastern door
way southwards around the corner) and the Bui
letin (carved on the south wall after the Poem)
usually connected to and following Episode III
can be considered to be related to the pylon
scenes. Therefore, the best place where the (pre
sumed) missing Kadesh episodes could have been
carved (but was not) would have been to the south
of the Poem and Bulletin, in an area immediately
flanking the east wing of the 18th-Dynasty colon
nade.
In L3 the Poem is similarly located on the
exterior walls, but this time covering the west
faces and occupying the space at the colonnades
of Amunhotpe III. The Bulletin, interestingly
enough, may or may not have been carved to the
north.61
At Abu Simbel the upper register right side of
the northern wall presents the necessary scene
king in chariot and captives with some epigraphs
(R 50-52). The depiction is compressed and the
Poem has been omitted.
Thus, with Episode III we are dependent upon
the fragmentary representations of I, A, K2 and L3.
1. R 50-52. The presentation of the Hittites is
accompanied at Abu Simbel by three captions that
only occur here. The texts, however, are simple
and standard: king's cartouches; a rhetorical
phrase relating the inspection of the war booty;
and the name of the royal chariot span once more.
As the absence of these epigraphs on any of the
other temple walls may be due to their fragmentary
nature, it would be hazardous to speculate that
only I contained these three notations. Most cer
tainly the other depictions show the captives, king
and royal chariot.
2. R 53-55. L3 presents the figures and names
of three of the king's sons: Hr-hr-wnm.f (twelfth);
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
12/19
232 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
Mry-Rc[l] (eleventh); and Sthy (ninth).62 As befits
their youth, there are no military ranks or titles
next to their names, unlike that of the third son
Pr'-hr-wnm.f (royal fan bearer, royal scribe, gen
eralissimo, first charioteer of his majesty) in R 10.
Abu Simbel does not portray these men in the
upper right of the scene, whereas K, contains a
different series of epigraphs. Nevertheless, it
might be the case that all of these sons were
honored at Abu Simbel despite the absence of any
name or title.63 They were probably documented
in K-, although the loss of the middle of the scene
yields uncertainty.64
Luxor offers the most specific rendition of this
episode, which was compressed in I and K2.
3. R 56-58. Here K2 is the only source, al
though the captions are mere paeans to the king
and thus lacking the specificity that R 53-55
indicates.65 Except for version I, which merely
consists of R 50-52, the other wall scenes which
probably had this episode are partly lost. There
fore, no conclusion can be reached concerning the
absence of these captions. A, of course, is virtually
useless owing to the extreme deterioration of the
wall.
4. R 59-62. These epigraphs state the sober
facts of victory: living captives and the hands of
the slain Hittites. Three temples present these texts
(R 59: A and K2; R 60: L3; R 61: A; R 62: A and
K2) and it seems likely that the lost portions of L,
did the same. The more constricted nature of
version I eliminated these captions. Excluding
Abu Simbel, since all the other three extant scenes
are fragmented, it is reasonable to conclude that
they dovetailed at this point.
Episode III, though incompletely preserved, none
theless reveals a degree of specificity concerning
the three royal sons. Otherwise, this section is by
nature not historically informative. Most details
are useful for a viewer to read, but they do not
convey the singularity of the event. By this time
booty displays were a regular feature of Egyptian
monumental reliefs, and they were considerably
less dynamic than the scenes which enacted the
battlefield charge of the king.66 Topographical and
onomastic details are always less significant for a
victory celebration than for the campaign which
produced the loot. Episode III contains stock
scenes from the canon of Egyptian military depic
tions.67 The artists deliberately relegated this chap
ter to a secondary position. Albeit not completely
static in outlook, Episode III receives less empha
sis because it offers minimal dramatic interest. K,
leaves it out, but adds Episode IV in its place; I
has a small depiction; in K2 it is less extensive
than the preceding episodes; A likewise presents
a reduced scene; the Ramesseum omits it, as does
L,. Only in L3 does Episode III take up as much
space as Episode I, considerably larger in size than
Episode II in comparison. This may have been due
to the need to carve around the colonnades of
Amunhotpe III, which turn outward to the west,
and around the end of the Tutankhamun colonnade
in the south. The uncarved portion of the eastern
wall of L2 (18th-Dynasty colonnade) poses an
insoluble problem although the designers had in
eluded the Poem.
Episode IV: Presentation of Spoils to the Gods
At Luxor we do not find this scene, although it
must be borne in mind that we do not know what
was originally planned for version L2. L3 appears
to have had one additional scene (now lost) to the
south of the Poem a row of chariot warriors is all
that remains and no captions are present.68
At Abu Simbel a brief and independent presen
tation scene on part of the north side of the west
wall is sui generis.
Whether or not Episode IV was to have been
contained in K2 is another one of these unanswer
able questions.69 As a result, the scholar is forced
to rely upon version K,,70 in which the fourth
episode is placed above the Poem to the south of
the transverse wall that covered Episode I. Then
one turns to the rear of the hypostyle court for
another scene of the king offering spoils to the
gods; there are no epigraphs. In essence, we run
from Episode II directly to IV, quite possibly
because space had been reserved for the details in
R 64ff. (Note that the carved inner west side of
the transverse wall is located to the right [east]
and between Episodes I and IV.)
After the Poem in K2 a large section of the south
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
13/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 233H
approachway beyond Pylon IX but before X was
left uncarved. It might have been intended for
Episode IV. It looks as if we have the same
situation in K2 and L2.
1. R 63-66. This first series of captions in K,
describes the king leading prisoners to the Theban
triad. It parallels the brief depictions at Abu
Simbel (R 92-95). R 64-66 name kinglets who
were brought back to Egypt by Ramesses (unless
this depiction is viewed as a pious fraud, of
course .
2. R 67-90. The arrangement of these epi
graphs is in a grid pattern.71 The royal sons are
shown presenting captives to their father
Ramesses II. Read from the bottom to the top in
order to arrive at the correct chronological order
of birth, they are:
a. 'Imn-hr-hps.ffirst; g. Mry-'Imn seventh;
b. R'-ms-ss second; h. ['Imn-m-wiS] eighth;
c.
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
14/19
234 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
with regard to the epigraphs. The information they
contain topographical details and specific par
ticipants is too precise to be untrue. In Episodes
I and II especially, the Battle of Kadesh is treated
as a unique event. Just as the scenes are relatively
accurate, so are the captions. Both belong to
gether, of course, and the propagandistic effect is
overwhelming. But despite the overt slant, there
was an attempt to define the individual compo
nents of the conflict. The Kadesh reliefs, after all,
are not mere stereotypical representations of forts,
citadels, king in chariot, and the like. In fact, only
the fourth episode dissolves into a standard pres
entation to the gods, although in its first half K,
shows that the designers were experimenting with
an extraordinary image, if not ideology, by includ
ing the group of twelve princes.
All armies count their own dead and those of
their enemy, but the artist-scribes81 of Ramesses
accumulated a greater quantity and variety of
information than had even been deemed valuable
before, and they developed a new and sophisti
cated method for doing their work. Crucial to an
understanding of the epigraphs is the implicit
means of their circulation within Egypt. Tracing
back from the idiosyncracies of the multiple ver
sions to what they increasingly have in common,
we infer that the designers of the reliefs must have
consulted a template that contained not only a
formal pattern for the first three basic episodes,
but even the captions themselves. A precedent
exists in the literary Vorlage. The epigraphs would
have been written down separately in hieratic
on papyrus but instructions would have been
given beside the pictures as to where the text was
to be incorporated into the ultimate representation.
Thus the carving process would have followed a
compendium of drawings, notes and directions,
covering where something was to be set, whether
or not there would be a caption accompanying it,
and whether and what part of it was essential.
So it was not for lack of data that monumental
reliefs might go unannotated. Just as some scenes
could be omitted, it was always understood that
not every caption was necessary. Propaganda (the
sons of Ramesses in Episode IV), site constraints
(Abu Simbel) and redesign (Luxor) all influenced
the choices. We can determine what was most
consequential to the king's political strategy by
gathering parallels from among all of the depic
tions.
The second day's events, when Ramesses was
forced to leave the field and come to terms with
the Hittites, were definitely to be avoided. The
Poem eschews incisive as well as detailed cover
age of the stalemate. There are no commemorative
reliefs on the temple walls recounting these
events. A monument is not a suitable venue for a
denouement.
Undoubtedly, participant recollection also in
fluenced the design of the reliefs. Were the direct
quotes of R 9 and 22 part of an oral tradition that
someone preserved? These are strikingly different
from the stock rhetorical epigraphs such as R 19,
which is unmistakably literary in style. Input for
the finished designs was accepted from a variety
of knowledgeable sources.
Memory fades. Without the captions, the reliefs
would have lost some of their essence and their
allure. Because of the epigraphs the monuments
saved the history that the army scribes had re
corded with such diligence and propagandized it
for public consumption, until from the scribal
tradition and the popular imagination together
there emerged in hieratic and on papyrus a literary
subgenre of its own.
Not every caption was necessary, it appears. But
how much this was due to the specific artistic
rendition has been demonstrated in this discus
sion. Then too, we must remember that some of
these reliefs were later redrawn before the entire
relief was completed. Therefore, from time to time
a text remark could have been omitted and for
reasons that have nothing to do with the original
size or shape of the wall. What was important we
can gather from the parallels among all the depic
tions. King, chariot span, Hittite, and the like. But
even here the apparent lack of the name of the
city Kadesh itself in R, is striking, although per
haps due to redrawing. At Abu Simbel the setup
is far more rigid and organized, so that the depic
tion of king on chariot plus troops and captive foe
has shrunk to some degree in comparison to the
other depictions. One can also note the artistic
detail of the chariots forming an effective hori
zontal band separating Episode I on the bottom
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
15/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 235
from Episode II above. In contrast to chariots, K2
(and possibly L3, but the scene is lost) partly
utilizes the river itself as a means of demarcation,
or, to be more precise, as a middle element. This
aspect is shown even more starkly at Abydos.
However, K2 separates Episode II from Episode I
by means of a doorway. A moves to a separate
wall, as does R2.
In the Poem the events of the second day are
not covered with any historical details. The reliefs
entirely omit this later action and it is not hard to
determine the reasons. At that subsequent time
Ramesses was forced to come to terms with his
Hittite enemy and leave the field. Such a failure
could not be carved (nor expressed in sober facts)
on the temple walls. Instead, the almost miracu
lous counter-attack of the Pharaoh and resultant
success hogs the stage.
Our general conclusions must not end with what
has been omitted from the conflict itself. Crucial
to any understanding of these epigraphs is their
availability within Egypt. The designers of these
temple walls had to depend upon some type of
template already prepared for them and from
which they could effect a degree of change, albeit
not too great. Behind all of these depictions,
therefore, was a ready-at-hand outline upon which
not only were the basic three episodes set up in a
formal pattern, but in which the captions them
selves would have had to be placed. How the latter
were first incorporated into the picture is a key
matter. I suspect that such texts were written down
in hieratic separately, but notations would have
had to be made where they could be carved into
the final drawing. Owing to this I believe that the
entire operation of carving had to be based upon
a complex of notes, drawings, annotations and
directions all covering where something was
to be set, whether there was to be a caption
accompanying it, what and whether all of those
words were essential or not. In other words, I
suspect that the omission of some of the epigraphs
was mainly due to local peculiarities such as size
and location of the walls. After all, not every
pictorial detail occurs on all of the variants; local
choice must have come into play at some point
and the designers probably felt that some of the
captions were not necessary. But this presupposi
tion moves us far too deeply into the area of
individual psychology and speculation.
The scintillating work by Susanna Heinz, Die
Feldzugdarstellungen des Neuen Reiches, Vienna,
2001, appeared after work on the present article
was completed. I have referred to it above, but
only in brief. A detailed review is to appear in
J AOS.
NOTES
This statement does not hold true for Neo-Assyrian palace
reliefs. See, in particular, J.E. Reade's studies in JNES 35
(1976), pp. 95-104; BaM 10 (1979), pp. 52-110; 11
(1980), pp. 71-74, 75-87. Also see I.J. Winter, "The
Program of the Throneroom of Assurnasirpal II," in P.
Harper and H. Pittman (eds.), Essays on Near Eastern Art
and Archaeology in Honor of Charles Kyrle Wilkinson,
New York, 1983, pp. 15-32; and P. Gerardi, in JCS 40
(1988), pp. 1-35. Additional studies could be mentioned,
but Gerardi's study encompasses them all.
See, conveniently, K.A. Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions,
Oxford, 1975 (henceforth; KRT), I 8.8.
KRIII 174.9/10-175.11/12; and K. Sethe, "MiBverstandene
Inschriften," Zeitschrift fur agyptische Sprache 44 (1907),
pp. 36-39.
A. Gardiner, The Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II,
Oxford, 1960, 3.
I would not deny that the purpose of the Bulletin was to
accompany the scene where Ramesses II receives the
unwelcome news that the Hittite army is at Kadesh and not
far off to the north. On the other hand, its length as well
as its language and grammar imply that it was composed
by a literary artist.
According to A. Loprieno, it was because the Poem was
written on papyrus that it was intertextually more powerful
than the Bulletin; "Defining Egyptian Literature," in A.
Loprieno (ed.), Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and
Forms, Leiden, 1996, p. 52. This matter is discussed in
detail in my forthcoming work, The Transformation of an
Ancient Egyptian Narrative: P. Saltier III and the Battle
of Kadesh, Wiesbaden, 2002.
I can now refer to the useful Magisterarbeit of M. Midler,
Die Thematik der Schlactenreliefs, Tubingen, 1995. Chap
ter 5 covers the various "Bildtypen" available to the artists.
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
16/19
236 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
See recently the detailed study of S. Heinz, Feldzug
darstellungen des Neuen Reiches. Eine Bildanalyse, Vi
enna, 2001.
The following discussion appears in Chapter XI ("Military
Compositions as Literature") of Spalinger (above, n. 5).
For the Tale of the Two Brothers, see E. Blumenthal,
Zeitschriftfur agyptische Sprache 99 (1972), pp. 1-17; and
J. Assman. Zeitschrift fiir agyptische Sprache 104 (1977),
pp. 1-25; as well as W. Helck's useful article on the
Doomed Prince, "Die Erzahlung vom Verwunschenen
Prinzen," in J. Osing and G. Dreyer (eds.), Form undMass,
Beitrdge zur Literatur, Sprache und Kunst des alten
Agypten: Festschrift fiir Gerhard Fecht zum 65.
Geburtstag am 6. Februar 1987, Wiesbaden, 1987, pp.
218-225.
Astarte and the Sea (A. Gardiner, "The Astarte Papyrus,"
in Studies Presented to F. LI. Griffith, London, 1932, pp.
74-85) is not concerned with royal figures or private
individuals and thus is non-historical. More recently, see
Redford's analysis of the text, "The Sea and the Goddess,"
in S. Israelit-Groll (ed.), Studies Presented to Miriam
Lichtheim II, Jerusalem, 1990, pp. 824-835, and that of
W. Helck, "Zur Herkunft des sog. 'Astarte Papyrus,"' in
M. Gorg (ed.), Fontes atque Pontes: eine Festgabe fiir
Hellmut Brunner, Wiesbaden, 1983, pp. 215-223. See now
P. Collombert and L. Coulon, "Les dieux contre la mer. Le
debut du 'Papyrus d'Astarte' (pBN 202)," Bulletin de
I'lnstitut Frangais d'Archeologie Orientale 100 (2000), pp.
193-242.
G. Posener, "La mesaventure d'un Syrien et le nom
egyptien de ours," Orientalia 13 (1944), pp. 193-204.
See K.A. Kitchen, "Interrelations of Egypt and Syria." in
M. Liverani (ed.). La Syria nel Tardo Bronzo, Rome, 1969,
pp. 87-88, for Syria as a "romantic" setting for many Late
Egyptian stories.
Perhaps the military scenes of the 19th-20th Dynasties
which contain an important Canaanite ritual have at their
genesis a religious narrative; see A. Spalinger, "A Canaan
ite Ritual Found in Egyptian Reliefs," Journal of the
Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 8 (1978), pp.
47-60.
KRI II 136.12-15; cf. Gardiner (above, n. 4, Kadesh
Inscriptions), p. 39.
W.J. Murnane, The Road to Kadesh: A Historical Inter
pretation of the Battle Reliefs of King Sety I at Kamak,
Chicago, 1985, pp. 163-175; W. Helck, Der
'geheimnisvolle Mehy," Studien zur Altagyptischen Kultur
15 (1988), pp. 143-148; and A.M. Gnirs, Militar und
Gesellschaft, Heidelberg, 1996, p. 123. Murnane has
re-examined the significance of Mehy in "The Kingship of
the Nineteenth Dynasty: A Study in the Resilience of an
Institution," in D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman (eds.),
Ancient Egyptian Kingship, Leiden, 1995. pp. 206-207.
Helck (above, n. 12), p. 147. For Merenptah's reliefs, see
F.J. Yurco, "Merenptah's Canaanite Campaign," Journal
of the American Research Center in Egypt 23 (1986), pp.
189-215, and p. 205 for Khaemwaset. I follow the
convincing position of Yurco, and not that of D.B. Redford,
"The Ashkelon Relief at Karnak and the Israel Stela," IEJ
36 (1986), pp. 188-200. See now the summary of I. Singer,
"Egyptians, Canaanites, and Philistines," in I. Finkelstein
and N. Na'aman (eds.), From Nomadism and Monarchy,
Jerusalem, 1994, pp. 286-289. Most recently, Kitchen has
devoted some pages to this important group of scenes in
Ramesside Inscriptions. Translated and Annotated. Notes
and Comments II, Oxford, 1999, pp. 72-78, and I concur
with his judicious analysis.
14 These are covered in Chapter XI of Spalinger (above, n.
5 .
15 P. Louvre 3136 (not in Deveria; no known provenance).
For Apophis and Seqenenre, see, most recently, H.
Goedicke, The Quarrel of Apophis and Sequenenre, San
Antonio, 1986.
16 D.B. Redford, Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals and Day
Books, Mississauga, 1986. pp. 259-275.
17 The last narrative account was compressed to the point of
telescoping contemporary records (e.g., those at Medinet
Habu) that were written on papyrus. This is a time-honored
technique for dealing dramatically with historical events.
18 At this location the Poem is missing. See Gardiner (above,
n. 4, Kadesh Inscriptions), p. 3 and n. 2, who adds that
the Report "is not found at Karnak, no longer at least."
However, this has now been disproved by Prof. Murnane,
who identified a separate version with he labels Kp. That
account differs to some degree from the others.
19 Very useful diagrams of these scenes are to be found in
KRIII 125-128. In his Die Thematik der Schlachtenreliefs
(above, n. 6), Miiller has copied them with accompanying
photographs as Abb. 29 (Abydos), 33 (Luxor), 45 (Rame
sseum), 51 (Abu Simbel) and 63 (Karnak). Note that one
Luxor version (L2) contains only the Poem and Bulletin,
but not scenes.
20 Chronologically, the temple of Abydos was the first in the
series. See A.J. Spalinger, "Historical Observations on the
Military Reliefs of Abu Simbel and Other Ramesside
Temples in Nubia," Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 66
(1980), pp. 83-99; and I. Hein, Die Ramessidische
Bautdtigkeit in Nubien, Wiesbaden, 1991, pp. 107-112 (for
Nubia, of course).
21 KRI II 125. In general, see G.A. Gaballa, Narrative in
Egyptian Art, Mainz am Rhein, 1976. I follow Kitchen's
basic arrangement of scenes: Episode I = The Camp and
Council of War (the arrival of the Na'arn is part of this
scene); Episode II = The Battle; Episode III = Presentation
of Captives and Spoils to the King; and Episode IV =
Presentation of Spoils to the Gods.
In his volume Die Thematik der Schlachtenreliefs
(above, n. 6), Midler posits five separate scenes, not all of
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
17/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 237
which had to be depicted: 1) Erschlagen der Feinde (not
important and could be excluded); 2) Der Beginn der
Kampfhandlungen; 3) Der Konig beim Angriff; 4) Das
Ergebnis der Kampfhandlungen; and 5) Der Konig
prasentiert die Beute. In essence, however, his arrangement
dovetails with Kitchen's in that (1) is not essential.
Although by no means unimportant, it is not integral to the
Battle of Kadesh. Note that (1) occurs only at Abu Simbel
(Miiller, p. 96), where the grotto wall is a single mural and
the Poem does not fit.
See, in particular, C. Kuentz, La bataille de Qadech, Cairo,
1928-34, 101-108.
Episode III begins on the west walls (west faces, southern
portion) at the wall colonnade of Tutankhamun. Beyond
this area it changes direction at the point where the
colonnades of Amunhotpe III begin. The abutment to the
west may have forced the designers of the battle to alter
their original plan. Even more problematic, there is a
doorway west of center on the exterior north wall of the
Amunhotpe III colonnade area. The Poem is placed just
where one turns south from this wall.
The gods are ReHarachty, 'Iw.s-'i.s, and the defied king.
They are portrayed on the north side of the west wall in
the great pillared hall. Hence, the scene (Kitchen's Episode
IV) is presented apart from the battle, which is located on
the north wall.
See the diagram in KRIII 152, with II125. Over the Kadesh
scene, a palimpsest, Yurco discovered part of Merenptah's
Asiatic war scenes. See n. 13 above; add Miiller (above, n.
6, Die Thematik), 114-118, with Abb. 74.
KRI II 126-128.
For the lion, see Gardiner's brief yet important comments
on R 2 and R 3 (above, n. 4, Kadesh Inscriptions), 35.
See W. Wreszinski, Atlas zur altagyptischen Kultur
geschichte II, Leipzig, 1935, PI. 82 in particular.
This is discussed in Spalinger (above, n. 5). For the
moment, however, see my "Remarks on the Kadesh
Inscriptions of Ramesses II. The 'Bulletin,'" in H. Goedicke
(ed.). Perspectives on the Battle of Kadesh, Baltimore,
985, pp. 43-75.
See above, n. 18. KRI II 125 (top third) provides the
necessary reconstruction, with references as well.
KRI II 130.11-12, with Gardiner (above, n. 4, Kadesh
Inscriptions), 36. There is a problem with the reading of
Mwt ntrt (seen by Lepsius, the first two groups are now
lost). I doubt if [Nfri-iry-mry(t)]-n-Mwt, the great royal wife
of Ramesses II, is to be read.
KRI II 130.15 and K.A. Kitchen, Review of F. Gomaa,
Chaemwese, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 61 (1975),
p. 271.
T.C. Hartman, The Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II. An
Analysis of the Verbal Patterns of a Ramesside Royal
Inscription (Ph.D. diss., Brandeis University), Ann Arbor
MI, 1967.
34 Gardiner (above, . 4, Kadesh Inscriptions), 36. See, in
particular, KRI II 131-132.
35 See above, n. 29.
36 The battle scenes were strategically located in public areas
and were inherently propagandistic on behalf of the king,
the monarchy, the state and the gods. To date, no
Egyptologist has made a sociological study of what these
monuments represented to the public, beyond the ubiqu
itous concepts of triumph of Ma'at and the defeat of Chaos.
We lack background about the guides who were there on
the site. How, when and why did they do their job? Were
they paid professionals or were they on the temple staff?
Did they merely explain the pictures or could they read the
captions? With questions such as these, new information
could yet be gleaned from a fresh analysis of the artistic
evidence.
37 R 20 and 21 provide the captions. R 20 is present in Rp
but it is a palimpsest as it was included with a preliminary
scene of the king. Likewise, R 2Ibis in R2 was later erased.
R 21 itself will be found in L,, R and R2.
38 Yet see the telling detail of R 12: the division of Ptah is
identified (restored, but certain): KRI II 133.5. As Gardiner
(above, n. 4, Kadesh Inscriptions), 38, saw, the Bulletin
merely reads "the division of his majesty" (B 72). R 14
(Abu Simbel only) also notes the name of this section of
Ramesses' army.
39 Despite the schematic, laconic syntax, the presence of the
Non Initial Main Sentence is just one clue that what we
have here is a narrative. The caption remains true to its
purpose, however, as the key opening phrase indicates:
"The arising which his majesty did..." (pB V ir.n hm.fi.
40 Here, Episodes I and II of R, are located within the second
court (north and east walls, the former now virtually lost)
and R, is to be found on the rear southern wing of the first
pylon. It is reasonable to conclude that the carving pro
ceeded from rear to front, with the pylons the last to be
decorated. (Medinet Habu provides an excellent example
of such an architectural and artistic program.) In other
words, the carving of R^ may have begun before that of
Rj. Note, however, that both contained the same scene that
was subsequently erased in the course of the decoration:
see captions R 20 in R, and R 21 bis in R,. Owing to this,
I suspect that the carving of both Ramesseum versions
overlapped in time.
I am not arguing that the "natural" progress of carving
was in a direction rear to front. Rather, the pylons tended
to be the last carved, owing to their vulnerable position at
the front of the temple, as well as their size, which would
take longer to complete decorating.
41 Kitchen has some crucial comments about Wreszinski's
line drawing in his Atlas (above, n. 28), PI. 101: KRI II
136, n. 6a. R2p is labeled R 2Ibis.
42 Gardiner (above, n. 4, The Kadesh Inscriptions), 39;
complete text now in KRI 11136.12-15. Wreszinski (above,
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
18/19
238 ANTHONY J SPALNGER
. 28, Atlas), PI. 101, called it a graffito. Some phrases
that Gardiner did not translate can be read: Come to
me " (?); "Then his majesty caused"; "ignoring" (the enemy
I presume); and possibly "rowing" (a boat determinative
may be present here), or "brook." The king also appears in
the first person at the beginning of this caption: see the
suffix .kwi.
This text is written over the extreme left front leg of the
otherwise hidden horse of Ramesses.
43 See above, n. 12.
44 Wreszinski (above, n. 28, Atlas), PI. 101; see also R,.
45 KRIII 137, n. 5a (version R2).
46 See Wreszinski (above, n. 28, Atlas), Pis. 100, 101.
47 See E. Edel, Hethitische Personennamen in hiero
glyphischer Umschrift," in E. Neu and C. Riister (eds.),
Festschrift Heinrich Otten, Wiesbaden, 1973, pp. 59-70.
48 In this case, why did R,, for example, omit mention of the
Hittite king's brother and charioteer (R 23-24)? Was this
due to lack of space?
49 See in particular KRI II 128, top, and the edition of E.
Naville, Details releves dans les ruines de quelques
temples egyptiens, Paris, 1930, Pis. V-XXV. I am relying
upon my own photographs of the entire Kadesh war at
Abydos taken in the winter of 1983.
50 E. Edel, Kleinasiatische und Semitische Namen und
Worter aus den Texten der Qadesschlacht in
hieroglyphischer Umschrift," in M. Gorg (ed.), Fontes
atque Pontes, Wiesbaden, 1983, pp. 99-105. The scene is
represented in a line drawing by Naville (above, n. 49,
Details releves), PI. XVII.
51 Gardiner (above, n. 4, The Kadesh Inscriptions), 41.
52 See the useful line drawing in Wreszinski (above, n. 28,
Atlas), PI. 84. I am referring to the middle of the plate at
the point where the Orontes swings down to the right. There
is not enough space for verbiage.
The first two contingents of thr troops face right and the
third faces left. Ostensibly, the second and third groups are
R 44 and 45 respectively; see below. However, the third
body of soldiers faces left and, if Gardiner is correct, then
R 45, which mentions shield bearers (The Kadesh Inscrip
tions, 42), is odd insofar as the thr "carry no shields, but
in front of them, near the Hittite king's chariot, is a man
very conspicuously brandishing one." Is it therefore the
case that some captions, meant to belong to the military
scenes, simply do not mesh completely owing to the artist's
or draughtsman's final product? That is to say, the
idiosyncracies of those men would have altered the final
product in some way sundering the link between image and
word.
53 The Relief account specifies that the 2,500 chariots came
in four separate groups.
54 P. Sallier III mistakenly writes 2,500 chariots, probably due
to the copyist's memory of the previous number: KRI II
51.16.
K.A. Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant. The Life and Times
of Ramesses II, Warminster, 1982, p. 53, leaves open the
question whether these numbers are exact or exaggerated.
Indeed, how could this total have been known to the
Egyptians?
See the previous note. At L , this part of the scene is to
the left. Nonetheless, there remains the problem of the
missing shields, a situation which troubled Gardiner.
See above, n. 50.
L3: KRIII 126. L2: KRIII 126 and 179 for diagrams; see
Kuentz (above, n. 22, La bataille de Qadech), 69; and
Porter-Moss, Topographical Bibliography II2, Oxford,
1972, 334-335 with Pis. XXX-XXXI (216-218). Scene
215 was finally carved to depict the later Syrian (top
register) and Moabite wars (bottom register) of Ramesses
II (ca. year 11-20 of the Pharaoh); K.A. Kitchen, "Some
New Light on the Asiatic Wars of Ramesses II," Journal
of Egyptian Archaeology 50 (1964), pp. 47-62 and 63-69
in particular; add J.C. Darnell and R. Jasnow, "On the
Moabite Inscriptions of Ramesses II at Luxor Temple,"
JNES 52 (1993), pp. 263-274. For the texts and a
convenient diagram, see KRI II 179-183. The writing of
the king's prenomen as R'-ms-s(s), however, implies a date
ca. years 11-18, more likely at the beginning of this
interval.
The third, if not the fourth, episode could have been
made to fit to the south of the Poem (see PI. XXXI in
Porter-Moss), but whether this was the original plan must
still remain unclear. Similarly, could Episodes I-II have
originally been planned for the northern exterior side of the
east wall ([215] in Porter-Moss; other texts and scenes now
occupy that space: KRI II 179-183.5)? As L2 now stands,
it complements the depictions on the pylon.
See KRI II 179 for a diagram.
Kitchen queries this in KRI II 125.
Cf. KRI II 126.
See F. Gomaa, Chaemwese. Sohn Rameses' II, und
Hoherpriester von Memphis, Wiesbaden, 1973, 2-11. I
disagree with the author's contention that these king's sons
did not participate in the Battle of Kadesh, although I am
willing to concede that the younger ones probably avoided
combat and were there for reasons of experience and
upbringing. Let us not forget caption R 9. Note Kitchen's
important review of Gomaa (above, n. 32), pp. 270-272.
See Ch. Noblecourt el al., Centre de Documentation et
d'Etudes sur Tancienne Egypt, Grande Tempel d'Abou
Simbel, La bataille de Qadech, Cairo, 1971, PI. IV with
Pis. XXXIX-XXXIX bis. In this scene one can easily pick
out the military supervisors of captive Hittites. They look
just like the sons of Ramesses in L3 (R 53-55) although I
count four men. Gomaa (above, n. 62, Chaemwese), 5,
refers to the presence of the first three sons of Ramesses
at Kadesh. In this case (L3) they are named and represented
on the southern portion of the west wall of that temple
This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 06:47:43 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
-
7/25/2019 Epigraphs in the Battle of Kadesh Reliefs
19/19
EPIGRAPHS IN THE BATTLE OF KADESH RELIEFS 239
(colonnade of Tutankhamun) instead of at the north.
64 This is best seen in Wreszinski (above, n. 28, Atlas), Pis.
68-70.
65 Ibid., PI. 63.
66 Miiller (above, n. 6, Die Thematik), with pp. 35-36 in
particular.
67 Ibid.
68 See KRIII 126 with Kuentz (above, n. 22, La bataille de
Qadech), 69.
69 KRI II 125: IV lost?
70 For additional blocks probably belonging to this episode,
see KRI II 927.12-13. They appear to be connected to the
prince list.
71 See Gomaa (above, n. 62, Chaemwese), 5-6.
72 There was not enough room to write his name: see KRI II
144, n. 10a.
73 KRI II 145, n. 7a.
74 The order of the ninth and tenth was often inverted: see
Gomaa's charts, which are located after p. 8 in his book.
75 The twelfth son, Hr-hr-wnm.f, is not present; see below.
76 KRI II 145.14. L.-A. Christophe, "La carriere du prince
Merenptah et les trois regences ramessides," ASAE 51
(1951). discusses the early career of Merenptah as Crown
Prince in pp. 335-351. The titles of Merenptah here are
clearly late ones.
77 In private correspondence. Prof. Kitchen indicates that
perhaps Hr-hr-wnm.f may have been dead before this scene
was executed ca. year 9 of Ramesses or somewhat later
and that his titles were modified much later. Unfortunately,
Kuentz mentions no alterations when he saw it, and Kitchen
himself could not locate the fragment when he was copying
and collating this inscription.
However, Kitchen assumes that this presentation scene
had been executed late in the reign of Ramesses II (above,
n. 13, Ramesside Inscriptions, p. 605).
78 The king's sons are frequently encountered in Ramesside
military reliefs. They may be depicted or named or included
by both means.
79 Mtiller (above, n. 6, Die Thematik), 108: "Dies hat keine
Parallele.
80 KRI II 125. The episode has two parts.
81 The Egyptians had been acquainted with the city of Kadesh
since the mid-18th Dynasty. Nonetheless, the telling details
in Ramesses II's reliefs could not have been derived from
previous general knowledge.