3 ms·
The king's weapon combined the best qualities of the two bashing weapons that had previously been available to elite soldiers of the 22nd century BC: bricks and
by logfromblammo 8y ago
The king's weapon combined the best qualities of the two bashing weapons that had previously been available to elite soldiers of the 22nd century BC: bricks and sticks.
This photo caption makes more sense if you are inscribing your gripe against the city you are warring with on your weapon:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:This_cuneiform_text_gives_the_city_of_Umma%27s_account_of_its_long-running_border_dispute_with_Lagash._Circa_2350_BCE._From_Umma,_Iraq._The_British_Museum,_London.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:This_cuneiform_text_gives...
- CobrastanJorji 8y agoYou may just be joking, but just in case, the Mesopotamian early dynastic period was very familiar with metalworking. Metal swords were common, and there are several examples of fine gold and silver-decorated weapons.
- logfromblammo 8y agoI was joking. But because it was the bronze age, I figured I'd make it a little clearer by specifying "bashing" weapons. As far as I know, metal would have been expensive, and limited specifically to the purposes where it would be strictly advantageous: spearheads, axe heads, sword blades, forge tools, helmets, shields, maybe torso-only armor. And if you're rich: mirrors, cups, jewelry, and artwork. The king of Umma would have likely owned a lot of bronze stuff, commanding soldiers with bronze arms and armor. It is possible that a mace head with cuneiform inscriptions served a ceremonial purpose. Executions of captured prisoners, maybe? I imagine it would have been like Negan from the Walking Dead, except barbed wire hadn't been invented yet.