| Military Architecture of Ancient Egypt | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Unless an enemy was willing to besiege a stronghold until it surrendered or could surprise its garrison and subdue it, he had to conquer it by forcing the gates, by scaling the walls or by breaching them. Since the earliest times measures were taken to prevent these possibilities: Hence, there was an attempt to build fortification walls with massive thickness and of a height that ladders could not be built to scale them. The gates were specifically protected. While the tops of walls are often decayed completely, drawings indicate that there were cornices all around, behind which the defenders could take cover. In fact, the distinctive features of Egyptian forts, with their symmetrical and often elegant designs, probably reflect the monumental traditions of Egyptian religious architecture just as much as pragmatic military requirements. Various terms could be used to designate a fortified structure, corresponding to various types, including bekhen, meaning "tower", nekhetw, meaning "fortress" and simply nekhet, meaning "strong". The frontier posts were often called khetem, which means "seal". Architectural Definitions Balk: A wooden beam or rafter. Bastion: A projecting part of a fortification. Battlement: A projecting structure, such as a beam, that is supported at one end and carries a load at the other end or along its length. Cantilever: A projecting structure, such as a beam, that is supported at one end and carries a load at the other end or along its length. Corbeled: A bracket of stone, wood, brick, or other building material, projecting from the face of a wall and generally used to support a cornice or arch.
Machicolation: A projecting gallery at the top of a castle wall, supported by a row of corbeled arches and having openings in the floor through which stones and boiling liquids could be dropped on attackers. Sally-Port: An opening in the wall of a fort used by soldiers going out to attack. The Defense of Egypt's Frontiers Egypt's true military fortresses, as opposed to fortified towns, is very closely connected with the empire's frontiers. We can define Egypt's traditional frontiers as the Western Desert, the Sinai Desert to the east, the Mediterranean coast to the north and the First Nile cataract at Aswan in the south. These were the natural physical barriers that allowed protection to the Egyptians from outside interference during the early, predynastic period when this great civilization was formed. Later, while these boundaries helped maintain Egypt's independence during periods of relative weakness, they required fortification to do so. Of course, the fortresses became even more important over time, and as rulers such as Tuthmosis III expanded the Egyptian boarders to their farthermost extent into Syria and as far south as the Fifth Nile Cataract in Nubia. The Old Kingdom
The Middle Kingdom
Hence, these frontiers were more or less fortified from the Middle Kingdom onward. Along the Eastern Delta, Amenemhet I began the construction of the Walls of the Prince (inebw heka), a string of fortresses on the eastern border of the Delta which was later protected by a string of fortresses during the reign of Ramesses II, taking advantage of the watery obstacles of the region.
And in the fictional account of Sinuhe, we also hear:
These fortifications were more or less well defended and maintained over the centuries. They were intended to prevent invasion along the coastal route from the Levant, which was known as the Way of Horus during the Middle Kingdom. Under the coregency of Amenemhet II and Senusret II, the official Hapu had the following inscription made:
During the 2nd Intermediate Period they were probably largely abandoned, but the New Kingdom saw their restoration. Under Seti I there seems to have existed a bridge at Sile spanning a crocodile infested waterway. At about the same time as the
Walls of the Prince were built, Amenemhat I also seems to have built a
fortress in the Wadi Natrun in order to defend the western Delta from the
Libyans. This border was protected by a huge mudbrick wall, measuring some 7.5 kilometers (4 1/2 miles) long, probably built principally in the 12th Dynasty. The land route at the Second Cataract in the region of Semna was defended by a similar fortification built probably during the reign of Senusret III after his conquest of Nubia. We are told that:
During the Middle Kingdom, Egypt embarked on a program of military expansion into Nubia, bolstering their position with a long chain of fortresses between modern Aswan and the region of the Second Cataract. These were heavily fortified settlements, located at the most vulnerable points in the trade route from the south and were simultaneously both military outposts and customs stations. Though most have now vanished beneath the waters of Lake Nasser, the rescue excavations of the Nubian Salvage Campaign (1959-1969) did provide a great deal of information about these unique sites. These fortresses were actually some of the most sophisticated fortifications ever built in ancient Egypt, with many features that look forward to the much later medieval fortifications.
The principal reason for these fortresses was apparently not the protection of Egypt's southern border, for they could have been easily outflanked by desert invaders on either side of the Nile. They also appear not to have been designed simply to subjugate the Lower (Northern) Nubians, since the local population does not seem to have been considered much of a threat. The names of the forts do seem to refer to enemies of Egypt located further south, and they may have provided bases from which to launch attacks on Upper (southern) Nubia. In fact, the enormous amount of space devoted to granaries at such fortresses as Askut, together with trances of buildings interpreted by Barry Kemp as royal "campaign palaces" at Uronarti and Kor, all suggest the use of these Lower Nubian fortresses as a 12th Dynasty springboard into Africa. However, their main function was probably to protect Egypt's monopoly on trade goods emanating from deeper Africa, further still to the south, which was known to the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom as Yam. The southernmost of these fortresses, at Semna, Kumma, Uronarti and Semna South, were about 50 kilometers (30 miles) south of the Second Cataract, around the narrowest gorge in the whole course of the Nile, and these marked the final frontier in the 12th Dynasty. Although the general uniformity of ground plan in these Middle Kingdom forts suggest that they were probably designed by only one or perhaps two architects, with those north of the Second Cataract simply rectangular structures, those south of this natural boundary show fascinating variations in response to the local topology. At Kumma on the right bank advantage was taken of a natural hillock of about 60 meters width with steep rocky faces. The inner and outer walls follow the contour of the knoll. The entrance is a passage between two ramparts close to each other and thus easily protected by crossfire. The outer wall is at four meters distance from the inner wall for most of its trajectory, apart from two bastion-like salients.
The outer drystone wall rose to a height of two to three meters and had a gap in its northern side opposite the main gate of the fortress. All these precautions seem alas to have been to no no avail. A breach in the southern wall between the two ramparts closest to the river indicates that the fortification was conquered.
Uronarti is an island very near Semna, and there the fort was triangular in shape, with a northern side that was more heavily fortified with huge towers because the flatter terrain to the north made the possibility of attack more dangerous. It had two long spur walls which stretched out to the south and northeast from the main fort, so that the whole of the irregular island was afforded maximum protection.
Mirgissa is now securely identified with the fort named as Iken in the Semna stele of Senusret III. It consisted of a whole complex of smaller sites, including the fortress itself, two separate towns (only one of which was fortified) and two cemeteries. Like Uronarti, one side (in this case, the one facing the western desert) of the main Mirgissa fortress was felt to be more vulnerable to attack. Hence, it was given an additional outer wall. Aniba (Mi'm), further north, must have originally had some connection with the diorite quarries about 80 kilometers (50 miles) to the southwest. However, it was located within an area of relatively dense Nubian population. It may have been the only one of these Middle Kingdom garrisons specifically intended as a military check on the Lower Nubians themselves. This city was eventually enlarged into a rectangle of some 200 by 400 meters by the addition of an area of 20,000 square meters enclosed within a simple wall about five meters in thickness. A dry mote with a stone foundation surrounded the wall. A large gateway opened into the western side, flanked by two high towers and fronted by a bridge spanning the mote. The landing quay of the harbor was heightened on account of the higher levels of the Nile. There were also smaller forts
at Faras and Serra, only about 15-25 kilometers (10-15 miles) north of
Buhen. Their purpose is not clear, but the inclusion of part of the Nile
actually within the fortification at Serra perhaps suggest a concern with
regulation of river traffic. With the New Kingdom begins an
era of Egyptian expansion in Asia. Come records of the momentous
expeditions is to be found in the contemporaneous literature and in the
extensive low-relief representations of Syrian fortresses on the walls of
Egyptian temples and private tombs. In fact, despite the abundant military
scenes on temple walls, not much can be derived from the text about
military architecture. Almost all of the fortresses represented were
located in Syria, being either Syrian structures or Egyptian fortresses
built to control Egypt's Asiatic possessions. They are rarely accompanied
by more than a mere mention of their name. These cities and fortresses easily withstood traditional Egyptian siege techniques. Megiddo for instance fell to Tuthmosis III only after it was beleaguered for seven months. During the 19th dynasty a number of Canaan-style stone fortresses were erected along the Egyptian eastern frontier. They were called by their Semitic name magadilu (In Hebrew for instance migdal means tower; cf. the biblical Migdol [Jer. 44:1; 46:14] ). From representation of these types of fortresses, Naumann has classified them into three chronological groups, from the time of Seti I, Ramesses II and Ramesses III. The earliest group represent fortresses in south Palestine of a uniform, presumably simplified type, characterized by an enclosure with four bastions and one or two doorways. Above the wall rises a second similar but smaller one, perhaps a citadel. The bastion seems to be crowned by a balcony with machicolations, possibly built on corbeling balks. The second group shows more types, varying according to the sites. The fortresses in Palestine are of the former, simple type, with windows, whereas those in North Syria occupied by the Hittites are more complex and characterized by loft towers. Those of the latest group show both simple and complex types used by the Hittites all over Syria and Palestine. Basically, all of these fortresses may be grouped according to their enclosure walls. They consist of:
The simplest types of these forts feature a single vertical enclosure battlemented and opening through a central or side doorway. The top of the wall runs at one straight horizontal level, with semicircular, triangular or rectangular battlements, while bastions, probably rising at the corners, have cantilever machicolation similar to those represented in the paintings of Egyptian forts from the Middle Kingdom at Beni Hassan. Enclosures with a citadel are similar to the simplest form of fortification, though they have a central isolated tower which is the highest in the whole fort. A fortress with a double enclosure and one doorway has an internal enclosure that appears above the external wall. This inside structure usually is narrower, has battlements and is provided with bastions. These types of fortresses, with a dry moat between the two enclosures, were not unlike those that Egypt built in Nubia during the Middle Kingdom. Similarly, the fortresses with double enclosures and two doorways have portals that are flanked by two machicolated bastions which open at either end of the facade. The number of bastions on the inner enclosure can vary from those on the outer enclosure. In a representation of a
Libyan fort we find a typical example of a fortress with double enclosures
with towers. Here, three small towers rise above each of the outer and
inner enclosures. These may have served as observation posts. In a
representation of Ascalon in the Most of the larger Syrian towns, though not Kadesh, are shown with two enclosures, the inner one being surmounted by several towers, and a central citadel. At least three, battlemented walls rise at different levels, indicating presumably as many stories. The upper battlement is provided with towers similar to those of the enclosure wall itself. We also find some fortresses with three or more enclosures of the same width, suggesting that they rose on a slope and were terraced like a step pyramid. Windows open into the upper enclosure or in the citadel crowning the structure. Towers are occasionally erected on the citadel, topped with the emblem of the city. No strongholds of this era
remain, but the temple of Ramesses III at Medinet Habu shows a number of
features characteristic of New Kingdom fortification. A crenellated outer
stone wall The two-towered migdol is 22
meters high with its front measuring 25 meters wide. It surrounds and
controls a courtyard which one has to cross in order to enter the temple.
Its walls have windows and loopholes that are high enough to be
inaccessible to the enemy on the ground. There was also a parapet along
the edge of the flat roof. Its foundation wall is five meters high and has
a slight inclination. The reason for this is twofold. First, the wall
becomes less vulnerable to sapping and secondly, the projectiles dropped
from above bounce off the inclined stone wall, changing their direction
and hurtling on a horizontal trajectory into the massed enemies. In the south, the fortresses of Nubia seem to have been maintained, with all of the fortresses under the central command of Buhen. Now, these fortresses appear to be symbolic from the standpoint of defense, for we find temples and settlements built outside any enclosures. However, it was entirely possible that as in the Middle Kingdom, they may have been used as springboards for military campaigns deeper into Africa. The fortresses were often improved during the New Kingdom, mostly in response to such technological weapon innovations as the chariot. A series of lookout posts were built, consisting of clusters of rough stone huts at strategic high points along the banks so that strong communications could be maintained between the forts. All information, however trivial, was conveyed back to the military headquarters in Thebes. From one Papyrus, called the Ramesseum Onomasticon (papyrus Berlin 10495) we also find a list of seventeen of the Nubian forts by name, including "Repelling the Seti", "Warding off the Bows" and "Curbing the Countries". |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|