Guards lieutenant of the army of ancient Egypt. Part of 3. Peacetime life

Quartering

In peacetime, troops were stationed in fortresses, making up their garrisons, in fortified camps, in cities and the residences of kings — as many texts indicated (for example, in the city of Ha'Uar, before the Egyptian historian Manetho was, there were 240 thousand troops Anastasia III (4 - 6) talks about the location of troops in the border fortifications, etc.).

Wherever possible, the troops were located in barracks specially built for them - and it was observed that, in order to preserve discipline and internal order, separate units were located together - under the command of their commanders (Brugsh. East. Trans., Vlast., 234-235; Erm. Aeg. U. Aeg. Leb II. S. 708; Chabas, Vog. Dun. Eg. P. 63-65, Masp. Hist. Anc. 1895, P. 212).

Egyptian warriors of the epochs of the Libyan, Cushitian and Saissian dynasties of the 946-525. BC er

big chariot


spearman

cavalryman


archer

royal guard of shardan

Food and salary. Military warehouses and workshops

The question of food supply in peacetime was, of course, a matter of great importance.

With the strict organization of the internal state structure that has been established in Egypt since the times of the Middle Kingdom, it was possible to achieve an orderly system of allowances for the armed forces. The population, including the rich and noble people, carried a full-fledged compulsory service - which went for various state needs and for the maintenance of the armed forces.

The inscription of the Una dignitary (Old Kingdom, ca. 3200 BC) records the care of the troops, indicating that the Egyptians were not exempt from service according to the army (“It was necessary to take bread and goats in every village” Erm. Aeg. u aeg. Leb. ​​II, S. 689).

Manetho said that the king, arriving at the camp at the city of Haar-Uar (the beginning of the New Kingdom), observed, among other things, the distribution of wages and food to the troops - and this confirms the important role the authorities gave to this issue (Brugsh. East. . Trans. Power., 239).

Food and salary were given out to every soldier in his arms - but how great that both were, we unfortunately do not know. The composition of the food was quite diverse; The supplies issued to the troops consisted of different sorts of bread, meat and wine (Pap. Anastasi I (XVII, 2 - XVIII, 2) says that when departing for one expedition of a detachment to 4000, the person did not have the following amount of provisions: 300 baskets of one sort bread, 1400 pieces of other varieties, live cattle of different breeds - 120 heads, as well as wine - 30 jugs. Chabas. Voy. d'un eg. p. 52; Masp. Hist. anc. 1895, II, p. 220) .

Food supplies were concentrated in special stores and warehouses - and then they were given out to the troops. Such warehouses existed for armaments and equipment (Instructions on food stores and military warehouses, where various armaments were stored for equipment, are on wall paintings in Medinet-Abu and other places (Rosselini Monumenti storici, CXXV and T. V, p 19 - 23), Brugsch, East .U. Lane Power 113; Pap. Anastasi I (XII 2 - XVIII3).

These shops and warehouses were under the jurisdiction of special officials subordinate to the regional governor, and the allowance of troops from them was carried out both in peacetime and during mobilization, before the army went abroad (Masp. Hist. Anc. 1895, II, p. 220 ).

There were special workshops for the manufacture of weapons and equipment — both chariots and siege vehicles were made in special establishments. Many monuments have preserved images of such workshops, while others mention such industries. So, on one of the tombstones of the Louvre Museum, found by Mariette, is depicted armory onion dressing workshop: an owner named Iofer - Sachau sits on a stool and finally finishes the already bent bow; 2 ready-made bows with a stretched bowstring lie on the floor right there; and of the two workers depicted, one is working on a tree for a bow, and the other is preparing to paint a finished tool - but without a bowstring; behind are materials and tools. Stella belongs to the era of the XVIII dynasty (c. 1700 BC) (Moret. Une fabr. D'arcs (Rev. arch. 1899. I, pp 231–239; Also Pap. Anastasi I (XXVI, 3 8) and Wilk. Anc. Eg. 1, 374, 377, 378).

Discipline

The importance and necessity of strict discipline in a well-organized army was undoubtedly recognized in Egypt at all times. Naturally, only a strictly disciplined mass could produce such buildings as the pyramids or the tombs of the kings in the Theban necropolis. And the main labor was the people, who were supposed to supply a certain number of workers from each village for a certain period of time - after which others came to replace them. Engineers, architects and craftsmen were only leaders and instructors, but, at the same time, they were bosses over the workers. Thus, the Egyptian people from a young age accustomed to discipline - and therefore it was already in this respect, an excellent contingent to replenish the troops.

The inscriptions confirm how seriously the Egyptians looked at the question of discipline. Thus, one of the nomarchs of the epoch of the times of tsar Usurtusen I (XII., Ca. 2433 BC), describing his march, specifically noted the discipline and order among the troops, twice mentioning the absence of at least one case of desertion (Masp Hist. Anc. 1876, p. 121. LD II, 122.).

And discipline violations were so rare and were considered such serious misconduct that they caused not only an appropriate punishment, but also royal anger and. In the description of the battle under Megiddo during the Syrian campaign of Tuthmosis III (XVIII din. Approx. 1481 BC), it is told about such royal anger caused by the fact that Egyptian troops, carried away by an easy victory, did not persevere with the enemy battles, attacking carts - as a result, a significant mass of enemy troops escaped captivity (Inscription of the Karnak Temple, Brugsch, East. Eg. Trans. Power. 302 f., Bissing, Taf. v., Karn, Masp. La camp de Mageddo).

A. Yezhov.
Egyptian infantry of the field army of the XVIII dynasty:
1. Nubian archer
2. XVIII dynasty shield spear
3. Warrior armed with a two-handed ax
4. Pharaoh's Guardsman
5. Lightly armed warrior

Продолжение следует ...

Comments

[sxfRipper]

To the author - one more THANKS!

[Molot1979]

I am connecting myself to the author - many thanks for the cognitive cycle. I would only like to clarify what kind of "siege machines" were meant? It seems like their invention is attributed to the Assyrians. What can the Egyptians boast about in this regard?

[Albatroz]

what kind of "siege machines" meant? It seems like their invention is attributed to the Assyrians. What can the Egyptians boast about in this regard?

Or maybe there will be more about this?
By the way, you can partially answer your question - conflicts with the Assyrians could not but lead to borrowing. Plus their best practices.
I personally read that the Egyptians used the technique - from assault ladders (on wheels) to siege towers and throwing machines.

[Cartalon]

The Egyptians began conflicts with the Assyrians much later during the Ethiopian dynasty

[Adjutant]

And cars appeared earlier.
Paradox however?

[cost]

On the Egyptian frescoes there are images of siege mines, with the subsequent burning of brushwood and sedimentation in them. I remember still wondering where they found so much brushwood in their climate

[Adjutant]

A full-fledged and well-organized army.
For good reason and military success.
Thank you

[Seal]

to the words of the Egyptian historian Manetho,

"The works of the priest of Manetho" are the most important source of information for modern professional historians and others who write on equally "historical" topics. The priest himself has already been promoted to historians. And did any of the professional historians see these “works” in their eyes even in photocopies? No! The originals of the Manetho’s works are not in nature. But for professional historians it does not matter. They say that there is a list (copies or extracts from the writings of the Manetho) made by a certain "ancient Greek" Eusebius. Well, but maybe one of them was holding or saw a photocopy of the original of this Eusebius? No, and Eusebius does not exist in the scripts either. But for professional historians, this does not matter. They say that there is a list (excerpts from the works of Eusebius, which contains excerpts from the works of Manetho), made by some ancient Latin Jerome. You will certainly laugh, but the originals from this Jerome also did not remain !!!! There is a list (copy) of the medieval Byzantine George Sinkeloss, who cites the “works of Jerome”, which refer to the “works of Eusebius,” which in turn contain a reference to a certain “ancient Egyptian priest Manethon and some of what he allegedly wrote or what he said. "
And how many professional historians this "Manetho" has already allowed to "earn" for bread and butter, and even for bread with butter and red caviar, and even for bread with butter and black caviar with cognac Hennessy ..... it’s incomprehensible to the mind.

[Adjutant]

How do you know - maybe Lieutenant Posypkin possessed the original Manetho?
However, I look at the source base, and even without a priest ...

[Barcid]

Fomenko is not you, by chance? And it’s not quite, a lot has been written and complete nonsense, all as in the works of Fomenko.

[Seal]

For you 15 lines - is it already a lot? Oh well

[Adjutant]

Barcid (Andrey) Yesterday, 12:36 ↑
Fomenko is not you, by chance? And it’s not quite, a lot has been written and complete nonsense, all as in the works of Fomenko.

Are you asking me Fomenko am I?
And I think Posypkin’s work is very solid. It’s always easier to pour mud over unfounded.

[Operator]

The main drawback of Posypkin’s work is that he does not understand that during the 3000 years there were several “Egypts”, i.e. local civilizations and their armies:
- in the Early Kingdom, the militia;
- in the Ancient Kingdom, a foot army without defensive weapons and bows;
- in the Middle Kingdom after the conquest of Egypt, Asia Minor nomads Hyksos added chariots and archers;
- in the New Kingdom, after the conquest of Egypt by the Assyrians, cavalry was added.

Accordingly, the organization and tactics of the Armed Forces of Egypt changed.

[Adjutant]

He understands everything. Not dumber than you and me.
He wrote about the embryonic tendencies in the Ancient Kingdom.
A classic army - in the Middle and especially the New Kingdom.
As for the military branches, as I understand it, it will be. So far, general questions.

[Albatroz]

Yes, in previous articles, by the way, it is written that in the Early Kingdom a militia, a regular army appeared in the Ancient Kingdom.
And the periodization of the kingdom with periods of civil war between them was already known, and Pasypkin also writes about them.
So the work is great, and thanks for the article

[Operator]

Do you catch the differences between the militia from the army, javelin throwers from archers, infantry from chariots, chariots from cavalry?

Each time, the transition from one civilization / army to another in Egypt was stimulated by external factors. The early kingdom (in two copies at once - Upper and Lower Egypt) was generally organized from local Hamites (haplogroup E1) by Celtic migrants on their way from the Caucasus to Gibraltar - the pharaohs of the first dynasty were carriers of the haplogroup R1b.

Pospykin is forgiven for not knowing this at the beginning of the 20 century, after 100 years you don’t.

[Albatroz]

I catch it.
And you catch that about the types of troops have not yet been written and probably will be. And they’ll say everything.
Or the gutters strangle it is not clear why?

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

I catch

Does not look like it.

[Albatroz]

this is not like you.
And I wrote that in the Early Kingdom there was a militia, and a regular army appeared in the Ancient Kingdom.
Even without you, everyone has long known this, however, a discovery.
And they will still write about the combat arms. Wait for the end of the cycle, and then get clever.
In this article, if read, about housing, contentment and discipline.

[Adjutant]

Crazed on their gallogroups got out.
Even 2 crown was - Upper and Lower Egypt. By the way, during the inter-dynastic periods and the Civil Wars, Northern Egypt invariably won and united the whole country.
I take into account the increased value of Posypkin’s work - I recommend sipping it little by little, like good wine)

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

In this article, if read, about housing, contentment, and discipline

In which of the four kingdoms?

[Albatroz]

So what is written concerns, as Posypkin previously wrote, of a regular army - that is, of the Ancient, Middle and New (mainly) kingdoms.

[Albatroz]

In general, 2 operator recommendations:
1) read more carefully;
2) ask questions to Pasypkin (preferably).
Although such a cool nameless "Egyptologists" (just kidding of course) - the devil himself is not a brother.

[Operator]

Quote: Adjutant

Even 2 crown was - Upper and Lower Egypt. By the way, during the inter-dynastic periods and the Civil Wars, Northern Egypt invariably won and united the whole country.
I take into account the increased value of Posypkin’s work - I recommend sipping it little by little, like good wine)

What crowns in ancient Egypt - are you a victim of the exam?

And where does the internal conflict have to do with it - the progress in the military affairs of the Egyptian kingdoms is considered, which occurred every time after the destruction of the next kingdom by external invaders, which Posypkin does not say a word about.

In general, study the subject, otherwise you have the word "Egypt" associated no further than with King Farouk.

[Albatroz]

I also read about 2 crowns - Upper and Lower Egypt.
They united in the unification of kingdoms.
What is the exam - I do not know, you know better.

And where does the internal conflict go - the progress in the military affairs of the Egyptian kingdoms, which occurred every time after the destruction of the next kingdom by external invaders, is considered

Naturally. And the Civil Wars after the suppression of dynasties.
But the revival of the kingdoms occurred after inter-dynastic periods - they influenced the military organization. And about the trends Pasypkin has.

In general, study the subject, otherwise you have the word "Egypt" associated no further than with King Farouk.

the same recommendation for you - squared

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

I also read about 2 crowns - Upper and Lower Egypt.
But the revival of the kingdoms occurred after inter-dynastic periods - they influenced the military organization. And about the trends Pasypkin has

Hde - show a picture of the "crowns" of Upper and Lower Egypt (except for reading, it’s still useful and thinking about what you read)

In Posypkin (as in the text of the article under consideration) / Pasypkin (as in the title of the 1901 edition of the year), in terms of the reasons for the changes in the military affairs of the Egyptian kingdoms, everything was turned upside down - in its interpretation, not external invaders forcefully introduced the local residents to new types of weapons , and the locals invented them on their own to counter the invaders. Which in chronology is complete nonsense.

[Albatroz]

show a picture of the “crowns” of Upper and Lower Egypt (besides reading, it’s still useful and thinking about what you read)

For Posypkin (as in the text of the article under consideration) / Pasypkin (as in the title of the 1901 edition), in terms of the reasons for the changes in the military affairs of the Egyptian kingdoms, everything is turned upside down - in its interpretation, it was not outside invaders who forcefully introduced the local residents to new types of weapons , and the locals invented them on their own to counter the invaders.

Where they read it is not clear. They themselves came up with, and ascribe Pasypkin.

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

Where they read it - it’s not clear

You, damn it, read the article in question or kind of got acquainted - then read carefully: "Egypt itself begins to undertake campaigns in Asia; the development of state life has caused communication with neighboring peoples, which also could not always remain peaceful - all this brought to life a significant development of military art "(C)

The crown is:



And what you brought is called millet (mitra). More often, the pharaohs were depicted in a striped head lash - nemesa (klaft):

[Albatroz]

Egypt itself begins to undertake campaigns in Asia; the development of state life caused communication with neighboring peoples, which also could not always remain peaceful - all this brought to life a significant development of military art

That's right, campaigns and contacts always cause the development of military art.
But that doesn’t mean how you wrote -

it was not the outside invaders who forcefully introduced the local residents to new types of weapons, but the locals invented them independently to counter the invaders.

A mutual process took place - the invaders brought in something, and something else brought their own. It always happens, especially since Egypt was one of the most (and perhaps most) advanced civilizations of the era.

what you brought is called pschen (miter).

no, just the crowns.
but why is this

More often, the pharaohs were depicted in a striped head lash - nemesa (klaft):

and the muzzle below is incomprehensible.

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

A mutual process took place - the invaders brought something, something their own

According to chronology, the process was one-sided - from invaders to local terpils.

[Albatroz]

No, just the process was a combination - both in chronology and in the logic of things

[Albatroz]

For example, Thutmose’s campaigns against the Hittites did not enrich the military art of Ancient Egypt ??

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

No, just the process was a combination - both in chronology and in the logic of things

Chronology is objective, logic is subjective (you call a miter a crown).

[Albatroz]

And why did you get that your definition is true - that it is a miter, and not a crown?
Who are you - a famous Egyptologist?
And what about my question (just within the framework of chronology) - did Thutmose’s campaigns against the Hittites not enrich the military art of Ancient Egypt?

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

For example, Thutmose’s campaigns against the Hittites did not enrich the military art of Ancient Egypt ??

Give an example of enrichment.

[Albatroz]

Can we wait for the cycle to continue?

[Albatroz]

In general, it is Jewish - to answer a question with a question))

[Operator]

Where did you see the question in your statement?

[Albatroz]

Here, and even with 2 exclamation points

For example, Thutmose’s campaigns against the Hittites did not enrich the military art of Ancient Egypt ??

[Albatroz]

I have long understood that only you are always right.
Although, as a rule, it is the other way round, well, God be with him.
The main thing is clicks)

[Operator]

If you read my comments on my profile, you will see that I always admit that I am wrong. This is relatively rare - call me, if cho.

[Albatroz]

relatively rare

what I wrote above

you are always right

I emphasize that this applies not so much to the nickname as to the owner)

[Operator]

Quote: Albatroz

And why did you get that your definition is true - that it is a miter, not a crown

This is common knowledge.

[Albatroz]

This is common knowledge.

Great phrase.
Covering just the same thing that is just the same is unknown, or is known to one inventor.

[Operator]

The wheel is round, the water is wet, the crown is a hoop with teeth, the miter is a cap.

[Albatroz]

Well, prove not that

The wheel is round, the water is wet, the crown is a hoop with teeth, the miter is a cap.

- but the fact that

well known

, and the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt are not crowns

[Operator]

The wheat / miter of the Egyptian pharaohs is called the "crown" in popular publications on the history of Egypt.

For example, the head of the Catholic Church in Russian literature is persistently called the pope, which is a literal translation of his sarcastic title in Protestant paplets. However, initially the title of head of the Catholic Church was a pontiff (literally - the builder of bridges) and was borrowed from the high pagan priest of Rome. For some time, the head of the Catholic Church held the double title of pontiff-patriarch in defiance of the heads of the Orthodox local churches. But from the middle of the 20 century, the head of the Catholic Church was again called unambiguously a pontiff.

The same substitution of the term can be observed in popular publications regarding the name of one of the two headdresses of the pharaohs.

[Albatroz]

The wheat / miter of the Egyptian pharaohs is called the "crown" in popular publications on the history of Egypt.

What is the source (s) behind this phrase ?? Serious source (not Wikipedia I mean)

the head of the Catholic Church in Russian literature is persistently called the pope, which is a literal translation of his sarcastic title in Protestant paplets. However, initially the title of head of the Catholic Church was a pontiff (literally - the builder of bridges) and was borrowed from the high pagan priest of Rome. For some time, the head of the Catholic Church held the double title of pontiff-patriarch in defiance of the heads of the Orthodox local churches. But from the middle of the 20th century, the head of the Catholic Church was again called unambiguously a pontiff.

And what, there was no historical transformation of crowns - and we look at everything under one medieval comb ??

[Operator]

The transformation of the crowns was - for example, the crowns of the British and Russian empires are a hoop, the teeth of which are closed at the top.

For other occasions, it is useful to use direct analogies with a hoop, cap, tiara, head scarf or buckle fastening a scarf (Uraeus).

[Albatroz]

These are all common phrases.
Again, hear only yourself. I asked:

The wheat / miter of the Egyptian pharaohs is called the "crown" in popular publications on the history of Egypt.
What is the source (s) behind this phrase ?? Serious source (not Wikipedia I mean)

And about this:

The transformation of the crowns was - for example, the crowns of the British and Russian empires are a hoop, the teeth of which are closed at the top. For other cases of life, it is useful to apply direct analogies with a hoop, cap, diadem, head scarf or buckle fastening a scarf (uraeus).

I also repeat - what, there was no historical transformation of the crowns of empires, but from Egypt to the later ones?
Yes, it certainly was, because at that time it was called the crown.
Yes, and words such as Miter, 3000 years ago, go and did not know)

[Operator]

The imperial crowns were precisely what transformed from a hoop with teeth, and the Egyptian millet, as was originally a cap, remained so.

Why miter - because it is more harmonious than a cap.

[Albatroz]

This is not a cap, but a crown.
You cannot tell about the transformation from Egypt and deep into the crowns.
As well as confirm the sources of the concept of miter / crown (whether the difference was understood and whether the difference was in Egypt).
So what to talk about

[Albatroz]

Thank you of course for your time, but not convinced

[Seal]

Quote: Barcid

Fomenko is not you, by chance? And it’s not quite, a lot has been written and complete nonsense, all as in the works of Fomenko.

In fact, there is something to argue? And then in fact to write a standard expression that supposedly full nonsense is supposedly written - a lot of mind is not necessary.

[Seal]

Quote: Adjutant

However, I look at the source base, and even without a priest ...

Source base ??? Where is she? After all, in fact, the proposed version of Champollion translation of the "ancient Egyptian" hieroglyphs in fact:
- not the fact that the right one. But universally recognized.
- even Champollion admitted that the same sign could have more than one meaning.

Tables of the Pharaohs ?? The fruit of agreements between historians. How many pharaohs were - one devil knows. Could breed by budding. As if we had several kings between 1682 and 1724:
1. Tsar Petriivan.
2. The Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich
3. Tsar autocrat Peter the Great
4. Emperor Peter
5. Emperor Peter Romanov
..... etc.

It’s a good thing to consider the “history of Ancient Egypt.” Cool as you like. Anyway, there is no evidence.

[Adjutant]

It’s a good thing to consider the “history of Ancient Egypt.”

And I thought it was a sinful thing - that we are not considering the history of Ancient Egypt, but are getting acquainted with the work of Lieutenant Posypkin, dedicated to the army and military organization.

Anyway, there is no evidence.

There is a set of classic sources known from the 19th century and earlier. However, if this is approached - then there is generally no evidence - not for any period of history.

[Mikhail Matyugin]

Maybe I'm too critical, but still where does the guard lieutenant here? and the level of articles, well, how to say. just above the school essay. Nevertheless, it is somehow weak for a world-class analytical and information resource.