Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:57:15.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pictorial Evidence for the History of Horse-Riding in Iraq before the Kassite Period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

P. R. S. Moorey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The problems involved in any attempt to elucidate the earliest history of the domesticated horse in the Near East are notorious; an enormous literature already bears witness as much to the popularity as to the complexity of the subject. After over a century's research and argument there is still no certainty, nor even a general agreement, about where and when the animal first appeared in the area, who brought it and what it was first used for. The three main categories of evidence—osteological, philological and pictorial—are of uneven significance. Thorough scientific examination of osteological evidence is fundamental in any attempt to establish indisputably the presence of the domesticated horse at any specific time on any particular site. This was clearly demonstrated by the re-examination of the equid bones from Anau, Sialk II and Shah Tepe II/III in Iran which showed them to those of asses or half-asses not horses as had previously been supposed. Although a certain amount is now known about the onager (a half-ass) from the ninth millennium onwards in Syria and Iraq through osteological evidence, horse bones have yet to be identified in a Near Eastern archaeological context before the later third millennium B.C. Despite uncertainties of translation in the earliest texts from Iraq philological evidence is of the greatest importance and has been the most fruitful source of fresh historical information in recent years. Pictorial evidence is severely compromised by the difficulty of distinguishing with confidence between various types of ass and the horse when portrayed by ancient artists, often working on a very small scale. This has inevitably led to widely ranging discussions of equids of uncertain identity.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , Spring 1970 , pp. 36 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I have used particularly the comprehensive studies of Hancar, F., Das Pferd in prähistorischer und früher historischer Zeit, 1956Google Scholar; Potratz, J. A. H., Die Pferdetrensen des Allen Orient, 1966Google Scholar; Anderson, J. K., Ancient Greek Horsemanship, 1961Google Scholar.

2 Zeuner, F., A History of Domesticated Animals, 1963, 315 ffGoogle Scholar.

3 The onager is very edible (Xenophon, Anabasis i.5.2.; Layard, A. H., Nineveh and its Remains, 265 ff.Google Scholar) and was probably hunted for food in the first instance.

4 Salonen, A., Hippologica Accadica, 1956Google Scholar, with Lambert's, M. review in RA 51 (1957), 211 ffGoogle Scholar. on the question of the earliest references to horses; Kammenhuber, A., Hippologia Hethitica, 1961Google Scholar with Goetze's, A. review in JCS 16 (1962), 34 ffGoogle Scholar. and Güterbock, H. G. in JAOS 84 (1964), 272 ffGoogle Scholar.

5 See particularly Opificius, R., Das Altbabylonische Terrakottarelief, 1961Google Scholar; Barrelet, M. T., Figurines et Reliefs en terre cuite …, I, 1968Google Scholar. Free-standing models are not included in this paper, since they are usually so crude as to increase rather than reduce the problem of identity. In such figurines details of mane and tail are very rarely explicit.

6 Buren, Van, The Fauna of Mesopotamia, 1939, 28 ffGoogle Scholar. must be used with caution for the earliest history of the horse, as considerable doubt attaches to the identity of the animal on any object before the final quarter of the third millennium B.C.

7 For good photographs see E. Strommenger, The Art of Mesopotamia, pl. 256–8 (horses), pl. 259 (onagers). For an excellent third millennium representation of an onager see the electrum animal on the silver rein-ring from Ur: Woolley, C. L., UE II, pl. 166Google Scholar.

8 Hilzheimer, M., Animal Remains from Tell Asmar, 1941, 3 n. 10Google Scholar.

9 For an illustration see F. E. Zeuner, A History of Domesticated Animals, fig. 12 (2).

10 Amiet, P., Elam, 194–5, fig. 143Google Scholar.

11 CAD 3, 64Google ScholarPubMed.

12 Salonen, op. cit., 70–2.

13 CAD 1/1, 141Google Scholar; Sollberger, E., The Business and Administrative Correspondence under The Kings of Ur, 113 (175)Google Scholar.

14 Anderson, J. K., Ancient Greek Horsemanship, 87Google Scholar.

15 On this question see Antonius, O., ‘Zur Frage der Zähmung des Onagers bei alten Sumerern’, Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde, Leiden, 1938Google Scholar. I am grateful to Mr. Crouwel for bringing this paper to my attention. Antonius makes clear that the ring must have gone through the nose not the lip.

16 See a text from Tell Asmar with an oil issue for lubricating reins: CAD 1/2, 182 (a)Google ScholarPubMed.

17 PZ, XXII (1931), 11 ffGoogle Scholar.

18 Woolley, C. L., UE II, pl. 91–2Google Scholar.

19 Parrot, A., Mari, III, Les Temples d'Ishtarat et de Ninni-zaza, pl. LXV.3072Google Scholar.

20 appatu, ašâtu: Poebel, A., Assyriological Studies XIV, 37 n.9Google Scholar.

21 See notes 23–24.

22 Gardiner, A. H.et al., The Inscriptions of Sinai, Part I (2nd Ed.), London, 1952, pls. XXXVII, XXXIX, XLIV, LXXXVGoogle Scholar.

23 R. Opificius, Das Altbabylonische Terrakottarelief, no. 633, pl. XXI.

24 Legrain, L., Bulletin of the University Museum, Philadelphia, (04, 1946), 33, fig. 5Google Scholar.

25 Schulman, A., JNES 16 (1957), pl. XXXVIII.3, XXXIX.4Google Scholar.

26 Hood, S., BSA 48 (1953), 84ffGoogle Scholar.

27 Cynegetica i 4. 23–24Google Scholar.

28 L'Attelage et le Cheval de Selle, 227fr., fig. 256.

29 Dickson, H. R. P., The Arab of the Desert, (1959), p. 388Google Scholar.

30 For a graphic description of a Bedouin charge see H. R. P. Dickson, op. cit., 390–1.

31 L. W. King, The Gates of Shalmaneser, pl. LXXII.

32 R. D. Barnett and M. Falkner, The Sculptures of Tiglath-pileser III, pl. LXVII.

33 Bittel, K., MDOG 88 (1955), fig. 8, p. 22Google Scholar; Mozolics, , Acta Arch. Hung. 12 (1960), fig. 1, p. 28Google Scholar; Koşay, H. Z., Alaca Hüyük Kazısı 1937–1939 Raporu, pl. LXXXIV.1,3Google Scholar. For a widely ranging discussion of antler and bone cheekpieces see Foltiny, S., Bonner Jahrbücher 167 (1967), 11 ffGoogle Scholar. The object from Megiddo illustrated on fig. 3 of Foltiny's article as a ‘cheekpiece of ivory’ is in fact an elaborate cosmetic box, as indicated by the cavity cut into it, not a harnesstrapping.

34 Gimbutas, M., Bronze Age Cultures in Central and Eastern Europe, 540Google Scholar, fig. 363; for circular bone cheekpieces see Foltiny, op. cit., fig. 11.8.

35 Potratz, J. A. H., Die Pferdetrensen des Alten Orient, 116ffGoogle Scholar.

38 The Anatolian Group of Cylinder Seal Impressions from Küiltepe, 1968, 67ffGoogle Scholar. Professor Özgüç writes of ‘animals with long heads, with manes and tails which doubtless belong to horses’; but long heads are more likely to denote the proportionally longer head of the onager or ass. Nor are the tails or manes very horse-like; but Mrs. Littauer has pointed out to me that the relatively straight profiles and slender muzzles, which obviously caught the artist's eyes, as well as the small, erect ears, speak for a horse.

37 Garelli, P., Les Assyriens en Cappadoce (1963), 303Google Scholar; Blegen, C., Troy, III, 10Google Scholar.

38 N. Özgüç, op. cit., 68, pl. XXVI.77.

39 Amschler, J. W., Forschungen und Fortschritte, 10 (1934). 298ffGoogle Scholar.

40 Mecquenem, de, MDP XXV (1934), 199, fig. 38 no. 24–5Google Scholar; L'Anthropologie 40 (1930), 227ff., fig. 1.8Google Scholar.

41 Gordon, , JCS 12 (1958), 19Google Scholar; Falkenstein, A., ZA 50 (16) (1952), 64ff.Google Scholar; Civil, M., JCS 20 (1966), 121ffGoogle Scholar.

42 For example Goetze, A., JNES 12 (1953), 117Google Scholar cf. Goetze, A., JCS, 7 (1953), 103Google Scholar; Salonen, A., Hippologica Accadica, 224–6Google Scholar.

43 JCS 16 (1962), 35Google Scholar.

44 Kupper, J. R., RA 41 (1947), 166Google Scholar.

45 Jean, C. F., RA 19 (1922), 1ffGoogle Scholar.

46 Kupper, J. R., ARM VI (1954), no. 76Google Scholar. Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem on an ass (Matt. 21: 1–7Google Scholar; John 12:14Google Scholar; Zech. 9:9Google Scholar) may, despite its Biblical glosses of humility, also reflect a very ancient association between this beast and royalty.

47 JCS 12 (1958), 18–19Google Scholar.

48 Sollberger, E., JEOL 20 (1967–1968), 51Google Scholar.

49 JCS 20 (1966), 121–2Google Scholar.

50 van Loon, M., Archaeology 22 (1969), 68Google Scholar.

51 JCS 12 (1958), 18–19Google Scholar.

52 Lewy, J., Archiv Orientalni 18 (3) (1950), 396 n.150Google Scholar; Kammenhuber, A., Hippologia Hethitica, 13Google Scholar.

53 A. Kammenhuber, op. cit., 14 with references.

54 Ch. Ziegler, Die Terrakotten von Warka, no. 289, pl. 8.137.

55 A. Kammenhuber, op. cit., 1ff.