https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/mar/10/babylonian-treasure-seized-at-heathrow-to-be-returned-to-iraq
QuoteIt dates from the reign of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar I (about 1126-1103 BC), not to be confused with his famous later namesake Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562 BC).
This ruler is practically unknown beyond his victory over the kingdom of Elam in present-day Iran, when he recovered the cultic idol of the Babylonian state god, Marduk. The kudurru's inscription refers to a military campaign, perhaps that very one.
This is of course the campaign discussed in http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=1498.0
I knew they had dogs to sniff out tablets, but didn't think it would be this kind.
Following upnthe reference to he earlier discussion that Duncan gives I see that the king of the Medes chariots and horsemen are scattered. Should a Mede army have chariots, or is that statement just a formulaic way of describing victory?
Quote from: aligern on March 11, 2019, 08:16:58 AM
Following upnthe reference to he earlier discussion that Duncan gives I see that the king of the Medes chariots and horsemen are scattered. Should a Mede army have chariots, or is that statement just a formulaic way of describing victory?
I assume that you're looking at Patrick's long quote in the 4th post - "he overthrew all the power of Arphaxad, and all his horsemen, and all his chariots"?
(a) This passage probably refers to Nebuchadnezzar II (if "Nabuchodonosor" is a Nebuchadnezzar at all, and not some other figure entirely) whereas the Heathrow tablet is of Nebuchadnezzar I, and I think that we all eventually agreed that the kudurru that's the basis of the earlier battle account belongs to Nebuchadnezzar I as well.
(b) The source of the quotation is the
Book of Judith (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Judith), which is not widely regarded as entirely historical, and may be a complete fiction.
(c) Even if the book is a broadly historical record of a 7th-century campaign against the Medes, then I would share your suspicions that the phrase might be a
topos, and would not regard it as a reliable source for Median chariots.
(d) OTOH, a few chariots in a 7th-century Median army would not seem out of the question. I believe the DB** lists allow chariot-mounted generals.