State Archives of Assyria Bulletin ISSN 1120-4699 Volume XIX 2011–2012 State Archives of Assyria Bulletin Volume XIX, 2011–2012 ───────────── Editors Frederick Mario Fales, Giovanni-Battista Lanfranchi, Simonetta Ponchia Published by S.A.R.G.O.N. Editrice e Libreria — Via Induno 18/A — I-35134 Padova (Italy) Distributed by Casalini Libri S.p.A. — Via Faentina 169/15 — I-50010 Caldine (FI) (Italy) — www.casalini.it Arbor Sapientiae s.r.l. — via Bernardo Barbiellini Amidei 80 — I-00168 Roma (Italy) — www.arborsapientiae.com Eisenbrauns — POB 275 Winona Lake, IN 46590-0275 (USA) — https://www.eisenbrauns.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1–27 JAMIE NOVOTNY, The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III and Shalmaneser V: An At-a-glance Akkadian Glossary of the RINAP 1 Corpus 29–86 JAMIE NOVOTNY, The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon: An At-a-glance Akkadian Glossary of the RINAP 4 Corpus 87–152 EVA CANCIK-KIRSCHBAUM, J. CALE JOHNSON, Middle Assyrian Calendrics 153–174 NATALIE M. MAY, The Comeback of talīmu: A Case of the Invention of A Word-meaning by Neo-Assyrian Scribes 175–202 FABRICE DE BACKER, Scale-Armours in the Neo-Assyrian Period: A Survey 203–237 NICOLAS GILLMANN, Les bas-reliefs neo-assyriens : une nouvelle tentative d’interpretation 239–265 NATHAN MORELLO, Public and Private Archives from Fort Shalmaneser 267–278 STEFAN ZAWADZKI, Ummān-manda Revisited 279–328 SALVATORE GASPA, A Bibliography of Neo-Assyrian Studies (2007–2012) Editore: S.A.R.G.O.N. Editrice e Libreria — Via Induno 18/A — I-35134 Padova (Italy) Stampa: Copisteria Stecchini — Via Santa Sofia 58–62 — I-35121 Padova (Italy) Direttore responsabile: Prof. Dr. Ines Thomas Finito di stampare il 15.09.2013 State Archives of Assyria Bulletin Volume XIX (2011–2012) SCALE-ARMOURS IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY * Fabrice De Backer Introduction For more than a hundred and fifty years, the Assyrians have fascinated scholars for their military history, artistic conventions or archaeological sites. Most archaeologists, however, left aside the study of the scale-armour in the Neo-Assyrian period. The first attempts to do so were those of E. Speiser in 1953 for the philological aspect, of D. Stronach in 1957 for the study of typologies, and of O. White Muscarella in 1988 for a complete catalogue.1 Recently, the present author studied the evolution of the equipment of the Neo-Assyrian army;2 and Dr. Amy Barron studied Late Assyrian weapons and armours, although this study is mainly concentrated on the discrepancies between the material items and the Neo-Assyrian visual representations.3 In this article, I shall list the Neo-Assyrian representations of scale-armours according to four kinds of support: the human body, the animal body, the chariot, and the siege-engine. I shall discuss the different kinds of armours depicted in the visual representations and mentioned in the texts, thus providing the reader with a broad overview of the armour materials and of their evolution during the Neo-Assyrian period. The design of the scales could be very different according to the area to be protected, from a rectangular to an almost circular shape, and sizes could be very different as well.4 Roughly, the older exemplars had a round head, while the later exemplars have usually two square extremities (Figs. 1‒2).5 Armourers employed different methods for * 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. I wish to thank Profs. Maynard Maidman and Paola Negri Scafa for their help in the treatment of the Nuzi texts (Negri Scafa 1995: 53‒69). I also warmly thank Dr. Ralf-Bernhardt Wartke for his most valuable help in the study of the armour-scales from Sendjirli. I am sincerely grateful to Prof. Timothy Matney for his help in the study of the armour-scales from Ziyaret Tepe. Speiser 1950: 48; Stronach 1958: 169‒181; Muscarella 1988: 54‒69, 318, 451‒459. De Backer 2004; De Backer 2013. Barron 2010. Stronach 1958: 173; Muscarella 1988: 54‒318. Stronach 1958: 173. 176 FABRICE DE BACKER lacing the scales on the back, which are reflected in the number and in the disposition of the perforations in the scales.6 Some parts of the body evidently required specially designed armour-scales, like, e.g., the pauldrons, which allowed the movement of the arms in combat, like some exemplars discovered at Hasanlu.7 Some other parts should have had an inner padding, to counteract the wear and tear of the leather support, mixed with dirt and sweat, on the soldier’s skin: I would suggest three solutions. First, an independent gambeson to absorb the shock of weapons; this, however, would have produced additional warmth, more sweat, and consequently a bigger wear and tear.8 Second, a leather undergarment, like the Roman subarmalis, employed only for protecting the skin and/or the garment under the armour.9 Third, the attachment of a wool padding inside the armour on certain spots subject to intensive motion, like armpits or throat and neck. Since the wool paddings could be produced easily, replaced quickly and repaired cheaply, it is possible that they were chosen when the Assyrians started industrial production of scale-armours. The Neo-Assyrian craftsmen also designed caparisons and protections for horses and chariots.10 No evidence of the system employed by the Neo-Assyrians to fasten their scalearmours has been hitherto found. A detailed lexicographical and iconographical research on the Neo-Assyrian garments might help to detect the names of the different types of scales, as it has been done with the Nuzi texts and materials.11 J. N. Postgate and S. Parpola noted that an armoured garment is mentioned in the Neo-Assyrian texts.12 Parts To Be Covered: Some Definitions The main problem encountered in the study of the scale-armour in the first millenium BC is the lack of textual references with specific and precise lexicographical meanings. Accordingly, it is necessary to recur to other words from comparative contexts which are better documented in the texts. In the following, I shall propose some definitions regarding the pieces of the armour depicted and employed during the Neo-Assyrian period.13 – Broad Belt: element of armour protecting the lower abdomen, the hips and the kidneys of the human body; – Byrnie: armour designed to cover the human body, mainly waist-long;14 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Stronach 1958: 173. Muscarella 1988: 54. de Vaublanc 1844: 30. Gilbert 2004: 49. Speiser 1950: 48; Muscarella 1988: 69. Kendall 1981: 210--232. Postgate 2001: 386. For further discussion on the definitions proposed here cf. De Backer 2011. Demmin 2008: 241. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 177 – Baldric / tutittu: basic armour designed to cover part of the chest and at least one hip of the human body; – Caparison: armour designed to cover the body of a horse; – Coif: conventionally, any protective garment protecting the head of human beings and made out of scales;15 it can be attached to the helmet, or be detached from it; – Cuisse: protective garment designed to cover the thighs of the human body;16 – Hauberjon/Habergeon: element of armour, mainly knee-long, protecting the human body, with or without spaldrons covering the head of the humerus;17 – Hauberk: element of armour, mainly ankle-long, protecting the human body, with or without pauldrons covering the head of the humerus;18 – Headband: element of armour designed to cover the forehead, the temples and the back of the head of the human body; – Gorget: piece of armour intended to protect the throat of the human body;19 – Pauldrons: piece of armour covering the shoulders of the human body;20 – Pteruges: hardened leather lappets intended to allow motion and to provide basic protection to the limbs of the human body.21 Philological Remarks Very few Neo-Assyrian texts deal with scale-armours. Except for the mention of such garments in the archives of kings Ashurnasirpal II and Sargon II, the complementary and comparison evidence can be found only in the Nuzi Texts. Very interestingly, the literary evidence from Nuzi provides the names of the pieces of the scale-armour according to their employment. The term for scale is kursindu; the scales are further classified as GAL.MEŠ, “large”, or TUR.TUR.MEŠ, “small”. The term for the body part of the armour is ramānu / IM, that for the sleeves aḫu.22 As regards the Akkadian terms designating armour pieces, there is disagreement as regards gurpisu: according to T. Kendall, W. Ventzke and R. Drews it indicates the helmet, for C. Zaccagnini the gorget.23 As we shall see below, this is not a crucial issue. As is clear from the visual and textual evidence of the time of Ashurnasirpal II, some helmets could be fitted with scale-gorget and neck-armour, and this might explain the common name. Anyhow, 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Bradbury 2004: 254. Demmin 2008: 320, no. 26. Bradbury 2004: 254. Ibid. Ibid. Houston 1996: 202. Simkins 2000: 18. Zaccagnini 1979: 5, n. 13. Kendall 1981: 221; Ventzke 1983: 97, fig. 46; Drews 1995: 111; Zaccagnini 1979: 5, n. 13. 178 FABRICE DE BACKER in the Nuzi texts other interesting issues can be found, such as the differences between the scale-armour in the Nuzi and in the Ḫanigalbat styles, the former seemingly having long sleeves and a large gorget, the latter having shorter ones.24 No doubt the same issue regarding regional types of scale-armour still existed during the Neo-Assyrian period, but further research is needed. In the Neo-Assyrian texts, the scale armour is designated gur-pi-si.25 The scalearmours were so valuable as to be mentioned among the royal gifts sent to the Assyrian king and the items of the booty taken in Urartu by Sargon II during his 8th campaign (Fig. 20).26 The Ninth Century BC: The Neo-Assyrian Pre-Sargonids At the beginning of the first millenium BC, the experiments with the scale-armour gave way to some peculiar adaptations of the older models to the specific needs of each culture, such as the search for further protection, the need to cover specific areas of the human body according to the development of specific functions for the soldiers and to new engineering, and the need to reduce the weight of the armour on the soldier’s shoulders. Although size and shape of the scale-armour underwent many changes, the extremity of the scales remained quite rounded, as is shown in the Neo-Assyrian reliefs and in the material found in the excavations in Nimrud and in numerous other sites (Figs. 1‒2).27 Further, the space between the scales on the back was progressively shortened, until the Neo-Assyrian craftsmen introduced the system of three overlapping scales (Fig. 3):28 the blows were softened by the air buffer-zone between the scales and the backing, were deviated by the central ridges of the elements, and had to pierce three layers of metal or leather before touching the soldier’s body (Fig. 4). According to N. Stillmann, the Neo-Assyrian soldiers probably wore lamellar armours, like those used by the Roman legionarii of Tiberius.29 No evidence, however, supports his suggestion. As it will be demonstrated below, the scale-armour was designed only for soldiers wearing pointed helmets or headbands, thus mostly Assyrian or Assyrianized soldiers.30 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Zaccagnini 1979: 6. Speiser 1950: 50. Thureau-Dangin 1912: 60, l. 392; Yadin 1963: 495. Stronach 1958: 169‒181, pl. XXXIV, figs. 1‒10; Muscarella 1988:, 54, nn. 62‒63, figs. 62‒63. Stronach 1958: 173, pl. XXXIV, nn. 1‒3. Stillman & Tallis 1984: 170. Reade 1972: 102. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 179 A. Man A.1. Head Large Version. As attested in the bronze bands and in the reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III, siege-archers, shield-bearers and archers wear the coif made with armour-scales (Figs. 5‒8; 11‒14).31 Sappers and siege-engines crews also wore this kind of garment, certainly because of their need of protection against the threats coming from the top of the ramparts (Figs. 6; 11; 13‒14).32 In the bronze bands of Shalmaneser III, most of the Neo-Assyrian soldiers wear a coif made with square armour-scales. Such a shape can be attributed to the artist’s search for an easier way of depicting round-head scales in a small area; this can be applied to the rectangular shape as well. Taking into account the huge amount of roundhead scales discovered in some Neo-Assyrian contexts of the 9th century BC, it seems that the square and rectangular shapes were mainly artistic and conventional shortcuts in the Neo-Assyrian visual repertoire (Figs. 11‒14).33 A.2. Body A.2.a. Wide version In the reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II and in the bronze bands of Shalmaneser III two lengths of body armour — hauberk and haberjeon — are displayed, although the charioteers seem to have been preferred the latter (Fig. 5).34 The hauberk of scale-armour has short sleeves and comprises a kind of folding face to allow the fighter, either a charioteer, an infantryman or a sapper, to climb the siege-ladder or to fight on foot when dismounted (Figs. 5‒6; 8; 11).35 It is also worn by sappers when approaching the walls and excavating under the enemy’s missiles and slings: surely it was very efficient in allowing soldiers to work without shields (Figs. 6; 11; 13).36 These huge scale-armours, mostly leaning on the soldier’s neck and shoulders, were of course exceedingly heavy, and this represented a major problem. The relevant solution is displayed in the depictions of some Neo-Assyrian warriors of the period of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III: in order to transfer some weight to their hips, they used a broad belt, which also granted them extra-protection (Figs. 5‒8; 11‒14)37. Some contemporary Nimrud ivories display a very accurate picture of this armoured garment, 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. Barnett 1962: pl. CXVIII; Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XXIV, a; King 1915: pl. XXXIX, Bd. VII, 3. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XXIV, a; King 1915: pl. XXXIX, Bd. VII, 3. Mallowan 1966: 410, n. 336, a-e; Klengel 1980: 141, ill. 234. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XVIII, a; King 1915: pl. X, Bd. II, 4. Wallis-Budge 1914: pls. XIII, a; XXIV, a; King 1915: pls. XX, Bd. IV, 2; XXI, Bd. IV, 3; L, Bd. IX, 3; LIII, Bd. XX, 6. 36. De Backer 2007: 45‒64. 37. Barnett 1962: 170, pl. CXV; King 1915: pl. X, Bd. II. 4. 180 FABRICE DE BACKER either in the Assyrian or in the Syrian style (Figs. 15‒16).38 A.2.a.1. Long Version. In its first version, this scale-armour reaches down to the soldier’s ankle. This model might have been designed for charioteers, siege-redoubt archers and shield-bearers, with slight variations according to peculiar requirements (see below) (Figs. 6‒7; 11‒14).39 This model is a direct heir of the Middle and Late Bronze Age scale-armour.40 During the reign of Ashurnasirpal II, it seems that the scales still had a round head oriented upwards (Figs. 5‒6; 8).41 Samples of armour-scales similar to those found in Kalḫu/Nimrud were discovered in Lachish and in Samʾal/Zincirli, two very important scenarios for the study of the campaigns of the Neo-Assyrian kings from the 9th century to the beginning of the 7th century BC (Figs. 17‒18). Thus, it came as no surprise to discover the same types of armour-scales at the sites of Kunulua/Tell Taynat, Dūr-kātlimmu/Tell Sheikh Hamad, and Tušḫan/Ziyaret Tepe (Fig. 19). During the reign of Shalmaneser III, also the coat seems to have been made of a strong, flexible material, very probably leather. It was apparently covered with what seems to be rectangular scales, although the artist might have interrupted the details of the extremities to ease his work (Figs. 11‒14). Very few armours are known from items excavated in Urarṭian territory, due to the types of objects which have survived: small metal artefacts like broad belts, quivers, shields and helmets could not be reproduced easily on them. Anyhow, similar pieces, with only some variations in the pattern of the holes, were discovered as well.42 A full set of scale-armours for the human body (large and short version) was acquired in London in 1982/83 (Fig. 20), but was badly restored and then sold at Bonham’s in 2006;43 these rare original pieces are irreparably lost for researchers. The set was wrongly attributed to the Persian culture and period. An armour with round-head scales appears in the depictions of charioteers in the Neo-Hittite sites, like Sakçagözü (Figs. 21‒22).44 A.2.a.2. Short version. During the reign of Ashurnasirpal II, some shorter versions of the body armour are worn mostly by siege-redoubt members working during sieges 38. Mallowan 1966: 493, n. 388; 497, n. 393. 39. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XVIII, a; King 1915: pl. X, Bd. II, 4. 40. For further discussion on the apparition and the evolution of the scale-armour in the Ancient Near East, see De Backer 2011. 41. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XXIV, a. 42. Merhav 1991: 71, no 19. 43. For £ 3,600. Cf. http://www.bonhams.com/cgi-bin/public.sh/pubweb/publicSite.r?sContinent=EUR& screen=lotdetailsNoFlash&iSaleItemNo=2745919&iSaleNo=13686&sServer=http://images1.bonhams. com/&sPath=200603/09/94301426-1-1.jpg). 44. Orthmann 1971: pl. 51, Sakçagözü B/1. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 181 45 (Fig. 8). Probably, these coats of armour reaching beyond the knee were also part of the equipment of sappers and charioteers (Figs. 5; 21).46 Accordingly, economy of materials, ease of motion, and protection offered by the frontal part of the chariot might have been some of the reasons for such an alternative choice. A.2.b. Slim version According to the bronze bands and the reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III, it seems that light archers only very rarely wore a broad strap covered with continuous square scales, either in metal(?) or in leather, for the protection of the chest. A.3. Arms (Shield) Some of the small rectangular shields wielded by Neo-Assyrian soldiers seem to have scales covering their leather or wooden surface.47 In this period, however, this seems hardly possible: rather, they seem to have been made out of wickerwork, which is undoubtedly lighter to carry and cheaper to produce. B. Chariot At a close observation, there is no clear depiction of scale-armours designed for chariots in the reliefs sculptured during the reign of Ashurnasirpal II and in the bronze bands incised for the gates of the Imgur-Enlil palace under Shalmaneser III. C. Animals Similarly, in the same period there is no clear depiction of scale-armours for horses. The horses of Ashurnasirpal II’s chariot, however, wear a small caparison reinforced with small circular studs (Fig. 9).48 C.1 Body C.1.a. Long Version. The horses of the king’s chariot are strongly protected by a long armour made of scales. C.1.b. Short Version. In some Nimrud ivories the caparison, a kind of scale-armour designed for the protection of horses, is represented (Fig. 36).49 These garments seem to have included a neck-piece, perhaps a protection for the forehead (?) and a body piece. In some reliefs of the Neo-Hittite area depicting charioteers and infantrymen, square and/or rectangular scales appear on armour for horses, as at Sakçagözü (Fig. 37).50 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. Barnett 1962: pls. CXIX; CXXII. Barnett 1962: pls. CXIX; CXXII. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XV, b. Barnett 1962: 171. Barnett 1957: pl. XVIII, S1. Orthmann 1971: pl. 51, Sakçagözü B/1. 182 FABRICE DE BACKER D. Siege-Engines (?) According to the available data, it is not possible to identify any kind of armour-scale with round head protecting siege-engines during the Neo-Assyrian Pre-Sargonid period. On the reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II, some siege-engines seem to be covered with rectangular plates, decorated with a striped pattern, and placed along the front and the sides of the machines for protection against missiles and fire thrown down by the defenders (Fig. 10).51 These items should probably be identified with the rectangular shields wielded by the Neo-Assyrian infantrymen who did not use a bow, both on the same scenes and on others scenes from the same period.52 Curiously enough, a kind of metal scale-armour, supposedly designed for a huge siege-engine, has been found in Dura Europos at the Palmyra Gate, dating to the 3rd century AD. This may suggest that a device of this kind was produced only in the Graeco-Roman period:53 earlier, metal was still quite expensive. Unfortunately, further relevant data have not been published. The Eighth Century BC: The Neo-Assyrian Proto-Sargonids Seemingly, under Tiglath-pileser III the appearance of the armoured garments changes, certainly because of a larger mobility, a wider diffusion and a cheaper equipping cost of the Assyrian army. This appears both in the depictions of siege-archers, most of whom were obviously dismounted chariot-fighters, and in the abandonment of the large hauberk, a typical armour of the earlier period. The pictorial data show that Tiglath-pileser III experimented with different models of armour and different types of scales, either square, or rectangular with a round head, or simply rectangular. Under Sargon II, infantrymen still had to rely on the wickerwork shield, helmet and light armour to storm the ramparts, like under the previous kings. In the meantime, it seems that the byrnie was adopted as a regular part of the equipment of siege-archers, and particularly of soldiers serving in the siege-redoubts, certainly related to the chariots as well. The reigns of Tiglath-pileser III and Sargon II were a key period for the development of Neo-Assyrian warfare for equipment know-how, which further evolved during the following period. A. Man A.1. Head A.1.a. Large Version. In the late Neo-Assyrian period, the scale coif seems to have disappeared, since it leaves no traces either in the textual or in the visual materials. The scales found in the archaeological layers of this period can only be used to reconstruct 51. Wallis-Budge 1914: pls. XIII, a; XXIV, a; King 1915: pls. XX, Bd. IV, 2; L, Bd. IX, 3. 52. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XV, b. 53. Leriche 1994: 415. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 183 some pieces of armour, but a precise identification of these fragments is hardly possible on the basis of the available evidence.54 A.1.b. Slim Version. Except for several different types of helmets, no headgear seems to have been covered with scales during the reigns of the Proto-Sargonids. A.2. Body A.2.a. Wide version A.2.a.1. Long Version. During the late Neo-Assyrian period, the long scale-armour is depicted differently from that of the previous reigns; this might depend on the vast military reforms of Tiglath-pileser III and Sargon II.55 A.2.a.2. Short Version. Archers and slingers of Tiglath-pileser III usually employed three types of scale armours: the byrnie, the armour with small scales, and the armour with large scales (Figs. 23‒31).56 A peculiar kind of short scale-armour is depicted in the reliefs of Tiglath-pileser III: square pieces sewn in overlapping or juxtaposed layers were attached to a leather garment;57 the latter was mainly worn by the siege-redoubt crews (Figs. 23‒24).58 Similar garments appear in the paintings at Til Barsip. They have a different pattern, closely similar to the circular studs reinforcing the mantel of the pikemen portrayed on the Ur Standard; here, these circles and squares seem rather to form the checquered decoration pattern produced by the interlocking threads composing the cloth (Figs. 25‒26).59 Other types of scales are also represented on the chests of siege-redoubt archers, slingers, infantrymen and cavalrymen, either simply rectangular or rectangular with a down-turned round head (Figs. 30‒31).60 Comparable scales fitting the components of such a garment were found in Tušḫan/Ziyaret Tepe (Fig. 20).61 In the drawings of the reliefs of Sargon II, three kinds of armour appear on the chests of the siege-redoubt archers, possibly members of a dismounted chariot crew, and of the infantry spearmen. The scales can be square, rectangular, or rectangular with a downturned round end (Figs. 41‒43)62. V. Place excavated thousands of pieces of such armour-scales in the basement of the palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad, but they were 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. Mallowan 1966: 409–411; Speleers 1923: 10. Gabriel 2003: 46. Barnett 1962: 88; 102; 104f. Barnett 1962: pls. XXXIX; LXXVII. Barnett 1962: pl. XXXIX. Thureau-Dangin 1936: pl. XXVIIXLIX. Barnett 1962: pls. XXXIX; LXXVII; LVIII; LIV‒LV; LII; XCIV. Matney 2007: 72, fig. 21. Albenda 1986: pls. 95; 102; 107. 184 FABRICE DE BACKER lost in the shipwreck of the rafts transporting them to Mossul.63 On the few preserved depictions of Sargon II’s times, the scale-armour is reserved only for siege-archers and some infantrymen. Some infantry spearmen and archers are represented wearing another type of short scale-armour which covers their chest, but this seems to be made of rectangular elements sewn in juxtaposed or overlapping ways (Fig. 41).64 A.2.b. Slim version Light infantry archers of Tiglath-pileser III sometimes wear a baldric decorated with a fish-scale pattern; probably it represents only the threads of the cloth (Fig. 32).65 A.3. Arms (Shield) The circular shields wielded by the Neo-Assyrian light lancers usually appear covered with strange lines, quite similar to the scale-armour pattern (Fig. 41). In this period, however, this seems hardly possible: rather, they seem to have been made out of wickerwork, which is undoubtedly lighter and cheaper. B. Chariot During the reign of Tiglath-pileser III, the chariot could be protected with a scale-armour, like in a relief from Nimrud displaying the chariot and its driver in the battlefield (Fig. 33).66 This also appears in the chariots represented on a relief from Ḫadattu and in some paintings of Til Barsip. Caution, however, is due when using this kind of materials.67 Chariots displayed in the reliefs of Sargon II also present a kind of cover with square pieces following a battlement pattern; this seems a clue for a scale-armour, but further research is required on this topic (Fig. 44).68 In some contemporary Neo-Hittite sculptures and reliefs, as in Karkemish, chariots appear to be reinforced with circular pieces studded on the cab (Fig. 34).69 C. Animals The bodies of the charioteers are somehow covered with overlapping, square scales during the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (Figs. 35‒37).70 Once again, they could simply represent the composing threads; but they may have been true armours, because they protected essential and vulnerable parts of the horse such as the chest and back from the 63. Speleers 1923: 10. 64. Albenda 1986: pls. 95; 107. 65. Barnett 1962: 85. 66. Barnett 1962: 92f., pls. XLIII‒XLIV. 167. Thureau-Dangin 1931: pl. VII; Thureau-Dangin 1936: pls. XXVII; XLIX. 68. Albenda 1986: pls. 111; 121; 129. 69. Orthmann 1971: pl. 24, Karkemish C/5-9. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 185 71 threats coming from above and ahead. At Nimrud, M. Mallowan discovered some metal plates which he interpreted as remains of a byrnie, and suggested it was a horse caparison. By the way, we should note that the square plates represented on men and animals in the Neo-Assyrian reliefs have the same size.72 As for the reliefs of Sargon II, it is to be noted that horses, either belonging to chariot-teams or to the cavalry, are never protected with any kind of scale-armour.73 D. Siege-engines (?) Some of the siege-engines represented in the reliefs of Tiglath-pileser III exhibit a peculiar kind of decoration with circular spots (Fig. 38; 40).74 On another relief, they are covered with square elements, like in the wickerwork design (Fig. 39).75 These might represent a kind of scale-amour employed for protecting the frame and the interior of the engines during their activation and manipulation within the range of enemy shots.76 M. Dureau de la Malle suggested a long time ago that, according to the surviving traces of colour, these were brass plates in a tegulated array.77 During the reign of Sargon II, this pattern has various forms, but is usually made either of square and “battlement-shaped” designs or of blanks (Figs. 45‒46).78 In a different perspective, these patterns might be understood as a highly symbolic decoration, aimed at enhancing the gods’ protective power over the decorated items, at least according to the iconographic conventions and the cultural features of the Neo-Assyrian and older periods. The Seventh Century BC: The Neo-Assyrian Sargonids It seems that in the middle of the 9th century BC a new, peculiar design of scales was introduced. They are rectangular, still curving in length and width, with a central ridge.79 This kind of armour appears more and more frequently, mainly under Tiglathpileser III, and later, from Sennacherib onwards.80 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. Barnett 1962: 62f. Barnett 1962: 62f., pls. XIV‒XV. Mallowan 1966: 409‒426. Albenda 1986: pls. 102; 123. Barnett 1962: 88f., pls. XXXIX‒XL. Barnett 1962: 1112, pl. LXII. Postgate 2000: 97; Yadin 1963: 422; Madhloom 1965: 15; Barnett 1962: 102. Dureau de la Malle 1849: 408. Albenda 1986: pls. 124; 136; 138. Muscarella 1988: 317‒321, nos. 451‒459, figs. 451‒459. Barnett 1962: 108; 122; Barnett 1976: pl. XXXVI; Barnett 1998: pls. 42; 511. 186 FABRICE DE BACKER A. Man Unfortunately, very few full scale-armours from the Neo-Assyrian period have been found in a good state of conservation and forming a complete set, and we have to deal only with single scales and with broken and/or corroded fragments. The first diggers disregarded, left aside or even lost a huge part of this kind of material, since they sought precious artefacts rather than small pieces of common metal. As an example, I would mention the different models of scales: square, rectangular, rectangular with a rounded head, or cicular (Figs. 1‒2; 40).81 As for the late kings, V. Place found heaps of scales in Khorsabad, but they were too corroded for scientific treatment.82 A.1. Head A.1.a. Large Version. For the Sargonid period, the main and most frequent archaeological evidence for the head armour is the helmet; it seems that the coif was progressively discarded. A.1.b. Slim Version. A kind of armoured headband sometimes appears in the reliefs of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal (Fig. 47). Although this too might be interpreted as a representation of cloth threads, smaller scales could be employed for manufacturing such armour. A.2. Body A.2.a. Wide version During the late Neo-Assyrian period, the long scale-armour rarely appears as it was depicted during the previous period. A.2.a.1. Long Version. In the preserved reliefs of the late Neo-Assyrian kings the long scale armour is never displayed, and the material evidence is too scanty and sketchy to provide relevant data. A.2.a.2. Short Version. Some examples of round-head scales, perhaps belonging to an older type of armour, were found in a destruction context in Lachish, which was besieged and taken by Sennacherib in 701 BC (Fig. 17).83 Later, armour-scales always appear as rectangular: this might depend either on a general standardisation in the types of scale-armours, or on the tendency of the artists to “shorthand” (Figs. 48‒52; 54; 56‒57).84 Some pieces of armour belonging to the rectangular type of scales were discovered in Kalḫu/Nimrud and in Zeyve Höyük/Porsuk (Figs. 1‒2).85 Of course, this does not imply 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. Stronach 1958: 169‒181. Speleers 1923: 10. Ussishkin 1982: 57, no. 48. Barnett 1998: pls. 328‒334, 349‒351. Mallowan 1966: 421; Muscarella 1988: 318; De Backer 2010. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 187 that earlier types were no longer employed, and it does not rule out the possibility that there were local variations in the design of the scales, as shown by the materials found in excavations in Iran and Syria.86 In the reliefs of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal, Neo-Assyrian infantrymen and some auxiliary soldiers continue to wear the short, rectangular scale-armour covering the chest, sometimes with leather pteruges slightly protecting the rear part and the thighs, with an opening for the groin (Figs. 48‒52; 54‒57).87 The reduced size of the scalearmour and the replacement of part of its lower layers with leather surely helped to improve the soldiers’ mobility and to diminish the weight of the corslet placed on their shoulders. Cavalrymen and charioteers of Sennacherib were provided with the scale-armour as well, but with some leather pteruges added to the waist, and interrupted where the chariot cab covers their body (Fig. 51).88 A.2.b. Slim version With the possible exception of those of Sargon II, light infantry archers usually display a broad strap, covered with square or rectangular elements on their chest (Figs. 47‒53).89 This part of the armour surely originated from the tutittu, an identical strap which is portrayed in the Early Dynastic period (Fig. 58).90 Sometimes light archers also wear a broad belt, either in combination with the scale-armour or alone, as in the older periods (Fig. 49). Judging from some genuine scales found in some sites like Kalḫu, it is possible that these square elements were in bronze, a metal cheaper than iron; further research, however, is still necessary (Figs. 1‒2).91 They, however, might simply be representations of the cloth threads forming the strap itself; but, as stated above, this is difficult to believe. Since these soldiers are usually portrayed as acting in the most dangerous places during the combats, like the first fighting line of the pitched battles or near the enemy when climbing siege-ladders, they must have worn some kind of armour, even a basic form. A.3. Arms (Shield) The drawings of the reliefs of the palace of Sargon II, and the reliefs of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal found at Nineveh display a peculiar type of small, circular shield-cover, commonly known as the wickerwork pattern (Figs. 41; 48; 55).92 The material which protected the front part of this type of shield is still unknown: it may have been either 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. Dezsö 2004: 319‒323. Barnett 1998: pl. 42; Barnett 1976: pl. XXXIV. Reade 1972: 102. Barnett 1976: pls. XXXV‒XXXVI; Barnett 1998: pls. 170; 288‒291. For further discussion, see De Backer 2011. Stronach 1958: 173; Mallowan 1966: 409. Madhloom 1970: 55f.; Albenda 1986: pl. 101; Barnett 1998: pls. 270‒271; Barnett 1976: pl. XXXVI. 188 FABRICE DE BACKER thatched reed, or metal or leather scales. The later Scythian comb from Solokha clearly shows a small but rectangular shield with rectangular scales reinforcing the front part of the armour (Fig. 59).93 It is possible that both solutions were in use, since the Assyrians and the “Scythians” were in contact for a long time, and Esarhaddon planned to give his daughter in marriage to Bartatua, who was perhaps a “Scythian” king.94 A.4. Lower Limbs (?) Skirts with a decoration pattern similar to a checquerboard appear on the paintings of Til Barsip; I would suggest very cautiously that this is the representation of the threads composing the cloth out of which the garments were sewn (Fig. 25).95 Some reliefs from the reign of Ashurbanipal display what could be identified as a kind of scale-armour designed to protect thighs, the cuisses (Fig. 57).96 Two types of such cuisses, covering the thighs of two riders, are represented in the same relief. The first is made of horizontal and stripped bands, exactly the same motif used by the craftsmen for representing the scale-armour. The second, which has just long vertical strips, is a kind of lamellar armour, perhaps the undergarment mentioned in the Neo-Assyrian texts of this period.97 B. Chariot In the representations of chariots during the reigns of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal there is no trace of a scale-armour.98 C. Animals The chests of the cavalry and chariotry horses represented in the reliefs of Sennacherib presents a kind of broad belt with a square pattern design (Fig. 49).99 Although this seems like a slim scale-armour issued to protect the most vulnerable part of a standing horse from hits and missiles, further research is needed, since it may represent the threads of the cloth as well. The slimmer bands covering the chests of the cavalry and chariotry horses represented on Ashurbanipal’s reliefs do not have such kind of pattern (Figs. 52; 56‒57).100 D. Siege-engines The siege-engines of Sennacherib are not decorated with that motif; rather, they seem to 93. Cernenko 2003: 8. 94. Boardman 1991: 564. 95. Thureau-Dangin 1936: pls. XXVII; XLIX. 96. Barnett 1976: pls. XVI; XXXVI; LXVIII. 97. Postgate 2001: 386. 98. Barnett 1998: pls. 342‒343, nos. 435a‒435b; 437a‒437b; Barnett 1976: pl. LXIX. 99. Barnett 1998: pls. 342‒343, nos. 435a‒435b; 437a‒437b; Barnett 1976: pl. LXIX. 100. Barnett 1976: pl. LXIX. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 189 be covered with some kind of tough leather, evidently designed to protect the engines from incendiary missiles while advancing to the besieged walls (Fig. 50).101 Siegeengines are not represented during the reign of Ashurbanipal. Conclusion The scale-armour models followed a peculiar evolution during the Neo-Assyrian period. During the reigns of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III, the hauberk and the related armour were very similar to the models employed during the Middle and Late Bronze Age in the Ancient Near East. It this then no surprise if the armour took the name of the earlier gorget, the gurpisu, as attested by the large employment of the coif.102 Later, in the reign of Sennacherib, the scale-armour seems to have been produced in a standard form, the rectangular scale type being the most widespread model for the byrnie, which was made lighter replacing the lower part of the armour with leather pteruges. Interestingly, these pteruges were interrupted in the same area of the earlier hauberk, i.e. the front of the body, where the face of the chariot cab would have provided enough protection to allow the absence of armour in that point of the human body. This, of course, does not mean that the older armours were disregarded of left aside: the cost of their manufacture in metal was still very high, and this might explain the reason why the round-head scale can be found in Late Assyrian contexts as well, like at Lachish, Tušḫan/Ziyaret Tepe and Til Barsip. As may be seen, this survey shows that the visual representations and the archaeological materials are very similar, apart from the differences due to some artistic conventions and shortcuts. Although with all due caution, many data can be recovered from the visual representations; they should compensate for the lack of precision of the texts when cross-referenced with the archaeological materials. The cultures of the regions adjoining the Neo-Assyrian kingdom, like Urarṭu, the Neo-Hittite and the Aramaean states offer comparative and complementary data which can be employed for the study of the scale-armours. Fascinating results for the knowledge of the Neo-Assyrian scale-armours can be obtained from an overall comparative and cross-study of the pictorial, textual and ethnographical data; for example, a better understanding of the fastening system, of the reasons leading to the choice of a specific typology of scale, and its military applications. The present author has done it recently.103 101. Barnett 1998: pls. 332‒333, nos. 430a‒430b; 431a‒ 31b. 102. De Backer 2011. 103. De Backer 2013. 190 FABRICE DE BACKER BIBLIOGRAPHY P. Albenda 1986, Le palais de Sargon d’Assyrie, Paris. R. D. Barnett 1957, A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories, London. —— 1962, The Sculptures of Aššur-nasir-apli II (883–859 B.C.), Tiglath–pileser III (745–727 B.C.), Esaraddon (682–669 B.C.) from the Central and South-West Palaces at Nimrud, London. —— 1976, Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (668–627 B.C.), London. —— 1998, The Sculptures from the South–West Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh, London. A. E. Barron 2010, Late Assyrian Arms and Armours: Art versus Artifact, unpubl. Ph.D. Diss. Univ. Toronto. J. Boardman 1991, The Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and Other States of the Near East, from the Eighth to the Sixth Centuries B.C. (The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 3, part 2), Cambridge. J. Bradbury 2004, The Routledge Companion to Mediaeval Warfare, London. E. Cernenko 2003, The Scythians 700‒300 B.C. (Men-at-Arms 137), Oxford. F. De Backer 2004, Notes sur l’équipement de l’armée néo-assyrienne, de Téglath-Phalazar III à Ashurbanipal, basées sur les bas-reliefs découverts à Ninive, Kalhu et Dûr-Sharrûkin, unpublished M. A. Thesis, Louvain-La-Neuve. —— 2007, “Notes sur certains sapeurs néo-assyriens”, Res Antiquae 4, 45‒64. —— 2010, “Un fragment d’armure du VIIIème siècle avant notre ère à Zeyve Höyük – Porsuk”, Anatolia Antiqua / Eski Anadolu XVIII, forthcoming. —— 2011, “Evolution of the Scale-Armour in the Ancient Near East, Aegean and Egypt: An Overview from the Origins to the Sargonids”, Res Antiquae 8, 63‒104. —— 2013, Scale-Armour in the Neo-Assyrian Period: Manufacture and Maintenance, Saarbrücken A. Demmin 2008, An Illustrated History of Arms and Armours, Teddington. T. Dezsö 2004, “Panzer”, in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiastischen Archäologie, 10, 5./6., Berlin, New York. V. de Vaublanc 1844, La France au temps des croisades ou Recherches sur les mœurs et coutumes des Français au XIIe et XIII siècles, 2ème partie: État militaire et chevaleresque, Paris. R. Drews 1995, The End of the Bronze Age. Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C., Princeton. M. Dureau de la Malle 1849, “Mémoire sur la poliorcétique assyrienne et l’âge des monuments de Ninive”, Mémoires de l’Académie Nationale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres XVIII, Paris. R. Gabriel 2003, The Military History of Ancient Israel, Westport. F. Gilbert 2004, Le soldat romain à la fin de la République et sous le Haut Empire, Paris. M. Houston 1996, Mediaeval Costume in England and in France: the 13th, 14th and 15th Centuries, Mineola. T. Kendall 1981, “Gurpisu ša awēli: The Helmets of the Warriors at Nuzi”, in D. Owen, I. Morrisson (eds.), Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians in Honor of R. Lacheman, Winona Lake, 201‒231. L. King 1915, Bronze Reliefs from the Gates of Shalmaneser King of Assyria 860‒825 B.C., London. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY 191 H. Klengel 1980, Geschichte und Kultur Altsyriens, Wien. P. Leriche 1994, “Doura Europos. Bilan des recherches récentes”, Comptes-rendus des séances de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 138, n° 2, 395‒420. T. Madhloom 1965, “Assyrian Siege-Engines”, Sumer 21, 9‒15. M. Mallowan 1966, Nimrud and Its Remains, London. T. Matney 2007, “Report on Excavations at Ziyaret Tepe, 2006 Season”, Anatolica 33, 23‒73. R. Merhav 1991, Urartu: A Metalworking Centre in the First Millenium B.C.E., Jerusalem. O. Muscarella 1988, Bronze and Iron. Ancient Near Eastern Artifacts in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. P. Negri Scafa 1995, “The Scribes of Nuzi and Their Activities Relative to Arms According to Palace Texts”, in D. Owen, I. Morrisson (eds.), Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians in Honor of R. Lacheman, Winona Lake, 53‒69. W. Orthmann 1971, Untersuchungen zur Späthetitischen Kunst, Bonn. A. Parrot 1970, Assur (L’univers des formes 2), Paris. J. N. Postgate 2000, “The Assyrian Army in Zamua” Iraq 62, 89‒108. —— 2001, “Assyrian Uniforms”, in T. Van Soldt (ed.), K. Veenhof Anniversary Volume (Uitgaven van het Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul 89), Leiden, 373‒ 388. J. Reade 1972, “The Neo-Assyrian Court and Army: Evidence from the Sculptures”, Iraq 34, 90‒107. M. Simkins 2000, Legions of the North, Oxford. L. Speleers 1923, Le vêtement en Asie antérieure ancienne, Wetteren. E. Speiser 1950, “On Some Articles of Armour and Their Names.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 70, 47‒49. N. Stillman, N. Tallis 1984, Armies of the Ancient Near East 3,000 B.C. to 539 B.C. (Wargame Research Group), Goring by Sea. D. Stronach 1958, “Metal Objects from the 1957 Excavations at Nimrud.” Iraq 20, 169‒181. F. Thureau-Dangin 1912, Une relation de la huitième campagne de Sargon (Textes cunéiformes, Musées du Louvre 3), Paris. —— 1931, Arslan-Tash (Bibliothèque archéologique et historique XVI), Paris. —— 1936, Til Barsip (Bibliothèque archéologique et historique XXIII), Paris. O. Tufnell 1953, Lachish III. The Iron Age, Oxford. D. Ussishkin 1982, The Conquest of Lachish by Sennacherib, Tel-Aviv. L. Vanden Berghe 1982, Urartu een vergeten cultuur uit het bergland Armenië, 9 oktober 1982– 30 januari 1983. Centrum voor Kunst en Cultuur, Sint–Pietersabdij, Gand. W. Ventzke 1983, “Zur Rekonstruktion e. bronzenen Schuppenpanzers”, in R. Hachmann (ed.), Frühe Phönikern im Libanon: 20 Jahre deutsche Ausgrabungen in Kāmid el-Lōz, Mainz, 94– 100. I. Winter 2010, On Art in the Ancient Near East. Vol. II. From the Third Millenium B.C.E. (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 342), Leiden. E. Wallis-Budge 1914, Reign of Ashur-Nasir-Pal, 885‒860 B.C., London. Y. Yadin 1963, The Art of Warfare in the Biblical Lands in the Light of Archaeological Discovery, London. C. Zaccagnini 1979, “Les rapports entre Nuzi et le Hanigalbat: the tallu Measure of Capacity at Nuzi”, Assur 2, 1‒27. 192 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 1. Nimrud. Pieces of scale-armours discovered by M. Mallowan. Mallowan 1966: 410, no. 336, a‒e. Fig. 2. Nimrud. Different types of armour-scales discovered by M. Mallowan. Stronach 1958: pl. XXXIV no. 2‒10. Fig. 3. Schematic representation of the overlapping system of the Neo-Assyrian armour-scales. Stronach 1958: pl. XXXIV, 1. Fig. 4. Transverse view of the overlapping scales in a Neo-Assyrian scale-armour system. Drawing of the author. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY Fig. 5. Ashurnasirpal II. Charioteer. Barnett 1962: 171. Fig. 6. Ashurnasirpal II. Sapper. Barnett 1962: 172. Fig. 7. Ashurnasirpal II. Siege-archer and shield-bearer. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XVIII, 2. Fig. 8. Ashurnasirpal II. Siege-archer and shield-bearer. Barnett 1962: 178. Fig. 9. Horse from the chariot-teams of Ashurnasirpal II. Barnett 1962: 171. 193 194 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 10. Ashurnasirpal II. Siege-engine. Wallis-Budge 1914: pl. XIII, 1. Fig. 12. Shalmaneser III Siege-archer and shield-bearer in a pitched battle. King 1915: pl. X, Bd. II, 4. Fig. 11. Shalmaneser III. Siege-redoubt, sapper and infantryman. King 1915: pl. XXI, Bd. IV, 3. Fig. 13. Shalmaneser III. Sappers. King 1915: pl. XXI, Bd. IV, 3. Fig. 14. Shalmaneser III. Siege-engine. King 1915: pl. XX, Bd. IV, 2. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY Fig. 15. Nimrud Ivory. Warrior wearing a hauberk. Mallowan 1966: 493, ill. 388. Fig. 17. Lachish. Siege ramp. Armour-scale. Tufnell 1953: pl. 39. Fig. 18. Samʾal/Zincirli. Armour-scales. 9th‒8th c. BC. Klengel 1980: 141, ill. 59. 195 Fig. 16. Nimrud Ivory. Warrior wearing a hauberk. Mallowan 1966: 497, ill. 392. Fig. 19. Tušḫan/Ziyaret Tepe. Late Assyrian armour-scales. Matney 2007: 72, fig. 21. Fig. 20: Urarṭian armour-scales hazardously arrayed on a modern leather-jacket (see fn. 44, above). 196 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 21. Sakçagözü. Slab. Foot soldier hunting with a hauberk. Winter 2010: 271, ill. 2010. Fig. 23. Tiglath-pileser III. Siege-Archer and Shield-Bearer. Barnett 1962: 102. Fig. 25. Neo-Assyrian soldier wearing a shirt decorated with a square pattern. Parrot 1969: XIII. Fig. 22. Sakçagözü. Slab. Charioteers in scale-armour. Winter 2010: 271, ill. 2010. Fig. 24. Tiglath-pileser III. Siege-Archer and Shield-Bearer. Barnett 1962: 127. Fig. 26. Neo-Assyrian soldier wearing a dotted shirt. Parrot 1969: 107, fig. 116) SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY Fig. 27. Tiglath-pileser III. Siege-archer and shield-bearer. Barnett 1962: 102. Fig. 28. Tiglath-pileser III. Foot guard soldiers. Barnett 1962: 108. Fig. 29. Tiglath-pileser III. Siege-archers and slingers. Barnett 1962: 145. Fig. 31: Tiglath-pileser IIII. Cavalry spearmen. Barnett 1962: 116. 197 Fig. 32. Tiglath-Pileser III. Light Archer Barnett 1962: 85. Fig. 30. Tiglath-Pileser III. Siege-archer and shield-bearer. Barnett 1962: 104. Fig. 33. Chariot of Tiglath-Pileser III. Barnett 1962: 93. 198 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 34 : Karkemish. Slab. Chariot. Orthmann 1971: pl. 24, Karkemish C/7. Fig. 36. Nimrud Ivory. Horse with a caparison. Mallowan 1966: 541, ill. 462. Fig. 38. Tiglath-Pileser III. Siege-engine. Barnett 1962: 88. Fig. 35. Horse belonging to a chariot-team of Tiglath-Pileser III. Barnett 1962: 63. Fig. 37. Sakçagözü. Slab. Caparison of the horse-team. Winter 2010: 271, ill. 2010. Fig. 39. Tiglath-Pileser III. Siege-engine. Barnett 1962: 112. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY Fig. 40. Piece of metal perhaps belonging to a scale-armour. Vanden Berghe 1983: 142, no. 144. Fig. 42. Sargon II. Siege-redoubt. Albenda 1986: pl. 102. Fig. 43. Sargon II. Siege-redoubt. Albenda 1986: pl. 100. Fig. 45. Sargon II. Siege-engines. Albenda 1986: pl. 138. 199 Fig. 41. Soldiers of Sargon II. Albenda 1986: 96. Fig. 44. Chariot of Sargon II. Albenda 1986: pl. 121. Fig. 46. Sargon II. Siege-engine. Albenda 1986, pl. 124. 200 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 47. Sennacherib. Light archer. Barnett 1998: pl. 174, no. 243 a. Fig. 48. Sennacherib. Light spearman and heavy archer. Barnett 1998: pl. 199, no. 278 a. Fig. 49. Sennacherib. Siege-redoubt, slinger and horse-archer. Barnett 1998: pl. 199, no. 278a. Fig. 50. Sennacherib. Siege-engine. Barnett 1998: pl. 330, no. 430a. Fig. 51. Sennacherib. Pteruges on the lower perimeter of the scale-armours. Barnett 1998: pl. 252, no. 346a. SCALE-ARMOUR IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN PERIOD: A SURVEY Fig. 52. Sennacherib. Horses from the cavalry. Barnett 1998: pl. 458, no. 628a. Fig. 53. Ashurbanipal. Light archer. Barnett 1998: pl. 288, no. 381a. Fig. 55. Ashurbanipal. Light infantry. Barnett 1998: pl. 288, no. 381a. Fig. 54. Ashurbanipal. Heavy infantry. Barnett 1976: pl. LXVIII. Fig. 56. Ashurbanipal. Charioteers and cavalry. Barnett 1976: pl. LXIX. 201 202 FABRICE DE BACKER Fig. 57. Ashurbanipal. Cavalryman. Barnett 1976: pl. LXVIII. Fig. 58. Mari. Shell-inlay. Siege- redoubt archer. Drawing of the author. Fig. 59. Solokha. Comb. Cernenko 2003: p. 16.