Aegean Chariots and Horses in the Bronze Age

The use of horses in warfare is a time-honored tradition, and cavalry has often been the turning point of a battle. There are several examples of this, even in the rough terrain of Greece. But the cavalry charge itself is a much more recent phenomenon than the use of the horse. So what were the horses used for, and were they anything like horses today?

Greek horses in the Bronze Age would have been rather small, though still larger than ponies. Archaeological evidence suggests that an average horse from the time would stand at height of 14 hands. As for the body type, "...ancient Greek horses seem to belong to the Oriental type...slender, fast, and rather small" (Gaebel 2002, 19). The colors of the horses would have been very similar to horses today. Homer specifically mentions the colors bay, chestnut, white, dun, and some dapple (Richter 1968, 73).

In the Bronze Age there were two primary uses for horses. The first was simply as a status symbol. Horses in Greece were expensive, and hard to raise. In fact by 400 BC a horse could cost anywhere from 200 to 1200 drachmas, with the average price being 500. To put this in perspective, a human slave would cost 140 to 360 drachmas (Gaebel 2002, 21). We can safely assume that the price of horses would have been comparable if not higher in the Bronze Age.

The second and more practical use for a horse was as part of a chariot team. The chariots used in Greece were vastly different from the chariots used in the Middle
East and Egypt. "The Egyptians used a lightweight chariot drawn by a pair of horses as a mobile firing platform...The Hittites preferred a slightly heavier vehicle whose pair of horses pulled a crew composed of a charioteer, a shield-bearer, and a spearmen" (Worley 1994, 7).

Some of the more specific differences between the Greek and Egyptian chariots were that the Egyptian chariots would have had rings fastened to the horses' harness for the reins to pass through, to help with control, and a six-spoked wheel for added strength. One of the most interesting differences though, is the placement of the axle to the rear, which would have added stability in turns.

Instead, the Greek chariots had only four spokes on their wheels, and no rings for the reins to pass through. These differences would have meant that the chariots were more delicate, and harder to control, respectively. The placement of the axle was also farther to the front, usually located in the middle of the platform, or just slightly to the rear, which would have made the chariots harder to turn at high speeds without flipping. According to Gaebel, this placement would have been more suitable for smooth, level roads (42).

Fortunately for the Mycenaeans, a road network existed in their territory. "The roads were generally as wide as 3.5 meters, and are thought to have been used for military transport, including chariots" (Gaebel 2002, 40). Though there are arguments that that the purpose of the roads was to give access to the fertile inland territories that were of particular concern to Mycenae (Jansen 2002). This road system would have been essential for the use of chariots in mainland Greece, a place renowned for its rockiness, and broken, uneven landscape.

Another difference between Greek and Near Eastern and Egyptian chariots were the way they were used in battle. Egyptian and Near Eastern were primarily used as quick moving, and thus very responsive, missile units. One of the most famous examples of this was the battle of Kadesh, in which the Pharos' use of his chariots saved him from a defeat.

Another use for the chariot was as a tool for scouting or as a fast transport for messengers, or small groups of important people.

In fact, transport was the main way the Greeks used their chariots. Though of course there have been arguments to the contrary. In fact, P.A. L. Greenhalgh makes the argument that "Mycenaeans used massed chariots in the manner of the Hittites...with long thrusting-spears, apparently about seven feet long" (Greenhalgh 1973, 10).

But the idea that Greek chariots were used in battle makes little sense. As Gaebel points out, "there is no evidence that the bow was used from chariots in Greece, the sword was too short to be effective, and head-to-head physical shock was too destructive" (Gaebel 2002, 41).

The only other tactic for chariots to use in battle would be to use the spear mentioned by Greenhalgh. But there is a problem with this idea. If the fighter is standing on the small platform of a chariot with an open back, how could the soldier lance somebody and stay standing. The momentum of the impact would either tear the spear from his hands, or knock him off the back of the platform.

So the only reasonable use left for the Greek chariot must be as a transportation device. Which is a theory supported by the Homer's accounts of battle in the Iliad. Homer writes:

"Then you would not have seen brilliant Agamemnon asleep nor skulking aside, nor in any way a reluctant fighter, but driving eagerly toward the fighting where men win glory. He left aside his chariot gleaming with bronze, and his horses, and these breathing hard were held aside by a henchman..."

This selection shows that Agamemnon used his chariot as transport to the battle and then dismounted from it to fight. Another selection details him using the chariot as means of withdrawal after he is wounded.

Though the chariot was an excellent battle tool, its size, price of upkeep, and unwieldiness left it to fall out of use in Greece. The next step in the use of horses in warfare was mounted warriors. So what happened to the chariot after its replacement in battle? Gaebel goes on to answer this by writing that the chariot survived but was used primarily for racing, and religious processions, and that its relative importance declined as riding became more common.

But when did horseback riding begin in Greece? Gaebel says that "It is clear that some Greeks were skilled riders by the eight century. It is true that Homer refers to riding rarely, but when he does so it is obvious that riding is no novelty and the level of ability is high" (55).

However, this is not an uncontested fact. The scholar Leslie Worley makes a bold argument and writes that, "Though the evidence is sparse, it appears that the mounted warriors were used in various areas of the Aegean from as early as 1400 B.C." (7). One of the pieces of evidence Worley uses to back this argument is a set of tablets found at Knossos that record the issuing of a corslet and a horse to separate individuals. Because these issues are so different from that of a charioteer, he concludes that it must have been for two men with armor, on horseback.

Another piece of evidence that supports this claim is an amphoriod crater with Cryro-Minoan script on it that can be dated back to 1400 B.C. Also on the crater is a depiction of chariot with three unarmed occupants behind a rider who is wearing a helmet and body armor. Worley interprets this as an escort, or guard for the occupants of the chariot (9).

Some of his most convincing evidence, though, is the terra-cotta figuring found at Mycenae that depicts a man on top of a horse wearing a conical helmet and holding a weapon. This figure dates back to 1300 B.C. But this wasn't the only figurine of this type found. Another was found by Carl Blegen at Prosymna, near Argos.

Worley makes an excellent point when he writes that the military capabilities of the horsemen can be guessed at by analyzing the equipment they are depicted with. His point is that these mounted soldiers must have been prepared to fight in close quarters from horseback due to the fact that they aren't shown with missile weapons, and don't have shields, so must not have been expected to dismount (9).

The use of horses in Greece has a long and interesting history. Having been of a small and fast breed, they were perfectly suited for use with chariots. A technology adopted from the Hittites and Egyptians the chariot was easily adapted for use in Greece. Combined with the Mycenaean road system the chariot was the perfect taxi to and from a battle, and as shown in Homer's Iliad it could be used for transport within a battle as well.

But as with most technologies, the chariot eventually fell out of use and was replaced by the more effective, and certainly more versatile, mounted soldier. Though the concept of mounted cavalry may not have been as recent as originally believed, it was adopted and perfected after chariots, and continued to be the main form of cavalry for several thousand years.

Bibliography

Gaebel, Robert. Cavalry Operations in the Ancient Greek World. University of Oklahoma Press: Norman, 2002.

Greenhalgh, P. A. L. 1973 Early Greek Warfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hom. Iliad. 2.220-232; using the translation of Richmond Lattimore. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1951.

Jansen, A.G. A Study of the Remains of Mycenaean Roads and Stations of Bronze Age Greece. Levinston NY: Edwin Mellen, 2002.

Richter, W. 1968. Die Landwirtschaft im homerischen Zeitalter. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.

Worley, Leslie J. Hippies. Boulder, San Francisco: Oxford, 1994.