Browsing the internet the other day, I came across images of a 25mm Hittite army (not Jon Freitag's). It featured units of two handed axemen. Now , two handed axemen and Hittites are a known combination - what appear to be deities often have axes. The question is, did rank and file Hittites have axes and, if so, did the Hittites assemble units of axemen? It all sort of reminded me of the old WRG days, when it was essential under any pretext to have a unit of 2HCW in your army. But maybe its a real thing?
I dont know about the Hittite axemen legitimacy but can certainly ascribe to the 'must have 2HCW' units in a WRG army philosophy
Quote from: Erpingham on December 11, 2020, 01:25:40 PM
Browsing the internet the other day, I came across images of a 25mm Hittite army (not Jon Freitag's). It featured units of two handed axemen. Now , two handed axemen and Hittites are a known combination - what appear to be deities often have axes. The question is, did rank and file Hittites have axes and, if so, did the Hittites assemble units of axemen? It all sort of reminded me of the old WRG days, when it was essential under any pretext to have a unit of 2HCW in your army. But maybe its a real thing?
Anthony, having seen Peter's 25mm figures of two-handed Hittite axemen ranked shoulder-to-shoulder in close order formation, I had many of the same thoughts. Keep in mind that these figures are part of a refurbishment project picked up from an estate sale purchase so they are likely of an "older school" of thinking. What does historical evidence, anthropology, and wargaming figures and rules suggest? An ambitious undertaking, for sure. Here are some of my brief thoughts against seeing the two-handed axemen unit you mention in battle:
- What does the historical evidence suggest? Surviving reliefs, sculptures, and pottery depict warriors carrying an axe but the artifacts I see suggest a one-handed weapon not two-handed. Most of these depictions show warriors with cone-shaped helmets typically associated to Gods of War. Is this weapon a symbolic representation of status?
- The depicted axe head is small. Would its small size offer much benefit when wielded in a two-handed fashion? If a warrior is using a two-handed weapon, no hand remains for defense with a shield.
- Can a large, two-handed weapon such as an axe be used by close order troops in combat?
- Hittite's are well known for fortification construction. These weapons look more appropriate to either pioneer or sapper usage.
- If two-handed axemen were prevalent in combat, why do the major figure manufacturers not produce them? Wargames Foundry, Warlord Games, Newline Designs, etc. have nothing. Old Glory produces some but with no photos of the figures, it is impossible to determine if these are one or two-handed weapons.
- When an axe is seen with a wargaming figure, the figure is typically in a chariot. Is this a ceremonial or symbolic weapon of status as was the later mace?
- None of the more recent, wargaming rules include this troops type. For example, no inclusion of these troops in "To the Strongest!" or "Impetvs".
My hunch (and it is only a hunch) is that these figures represent pioneers or sappers and definitely would not be found in battle fighting the enemy in close order formations.
The most famous depiction that is not necessarily of a god (but could of course still be so) is the King's Gate relief from Hattusa. Now that is definitely a single-handed axe, with a blade at the front and an elaborate set of spikes or ornamental tangs at the back. (Prof Bryce for some strange reason interprets these as a hairy chest, despite them being a) very obviously carved as part of the axe, and b) off centre for a chest rug... The chap has a helmet, but otherwise just a kilt. No shield. If he is human rather than divine, then definitely seems more credible as a guardsman on palace duties, rather than a chap about to go off on campaign; it seems stretching credibility that someone would have an expensive helmet, and a fancy single handed axe, but no shield. Furthermore, if a guardsman, might he not be more likely to campaign as a charioteer? You are not going to stand guard in a full bronze panoply...
I would need to consult my copy of Beal, but I cannot recall him identifying any evidence of axemen as a distinctive troop type.
QuoteOld Glory produces some but with no photos of the figures, it is impossible to determine if these are one or two-handed weapons.
I think, in fact, the ones in the collection we are talking about are Old Glory. As you said, they are an older collection and looking at other figures in the army, I think they are OG, rather than Ral Partha (which was my original thought).
The usual depiction of Hittite guardsmen with round shields comes from this relief, I think
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR12_tZU-_7U1IfsVBsgyuEnMDOOvsAJowiFQ&usqp=CAU)
The King's Gate figure may be a guard, in which case, he's probably in indoor dress of kilt and bare chest, rather than a tunic. Many people seem to identify him as a deity because of the horns on his helmet, but horned helmets seem to be quite commonplace in the Bronze Age Mediterranean.
Can we bring Hittite / Anatolian double axe influences on Minoan deity art into this thread? Please, please. That way we could make it longer than the 'Size of the Persian Army' thread...
Quote from: Tim on December 12, 2020, 01:27:46 PM
Can we bring Hittite / Anatolian double axe influences on Minoan deity art into this thread? Please, please. That way we could make it longer than the 'Size of the Persian Army' thread...
Well, there is certainly an artistic/cultural debate to be had as to whether the various illustrated axes were ever weapons of war or only held a ritual significance ........
Quote from: DBS on December 11, 2020, 07:39:58 PM
The most famous depiction that is not necessarily of a god (but could of course still be so) is the King's Gate relief from Hattusa. Now that is definitely a single-handed axe, with a blade at the front and an elaborate set of spikes or ornamental tangs at the back. (Prof Bryce for some strange reason interprets these as a hairy chest, despite them being a) very obviously carved as part of the axe, and b) off centre for a chest rug...
That interpretation for the butt of the axe head is strange, indeed. Hairy chest? I don't think so. Definitely part of the axe head. Looks to me that the axe head is a stylized hand grasping the handle.
Quote from: JonFreitag on December 12, 2020, 03:53:48 PM
Quote from: DBS on December 11, 2020, 07:39:58 PM
The most famous depiction that is not necessarily of a god (but could of course still be so) is the King's Gate relief from Hattusa. Now that is definitely a single-handed axe, with a blade at the front and an elaborate set of spikes or ornamental tangs at the back. (Prof Bryce for some strange reason interprets these as a hairy chest, despite them being a) very obviously carved as part of the axe, and b) off centre for a chest rug...
That interpretation for the butt of the axe head is strange, indeed. Hairy chest? I don't think so. Definitely part of the axe head. Looks to me that the axe head is a stylized hand grasping the handle.
Indeed. He described it as chest hair in the course of rebutting another academic who reckoned the figure had breasts and was therefore either a female deity or a proto-Amazon... I agree whole heartedly with his view that it is not a bare-chested female, but not because it has a hairy chest! Especially since there are bronze axe heads of exactly that design known from Anatolia and the Zagros.