epigraphs in the battle of kadesh reliefs

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


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



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



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



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



6/19


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



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



8/19


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)



9/19


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



10/19


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



11/19


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);



12/19


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



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.


14/19


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



15/19


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.



16/19


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



17/19


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,



18/19


. 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



19/19


(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.

epigraphs in the battle of kadesh reliefs

Documents