A reasonable guess is that war between the city-states was more like a case of blustering, with maneuvering and threatening, but not so much crashing home to put the enemy heavy infantry phalanx to the test. Historians refer to this as “endemic” warfare, where the fighting is highly ritualized with a number of taboos and practices that limit the duration of the fight, and the number of casualties. The idea of two opposing champions who fought on behalf of THEIR army, is really an example of endemic warfare. That’s not to say that the pressure might not build up and that we escalate into a “real” war every couple of years, but generally speaking, endemic war is a low-grade conflict. (A bit like North American Indians who “counted coupes” where they raced up and hit an enemy on the head, then raced away).

Looking at the light infantry as the second element in the Sumerian army, there seem to have been a lot of light troops (both light infantry, and skirmishers, from the towns as well as other tribal mercenaries?) who could support the chariots during an attack, swarming like so many fleas between chariots. These troops were not as well armored as the heavies, so they were probably largely opportunistic, intended to run in and finish off any isolated enemy chariot in trouble, or to run in and try to save their own chariot-guys hides, when threatened. The Standard of Ur shows light troops with several different kinds of skirts, bringing captives and booty to the king, and taking captives away. There are 8 heavy infantry, another 4 bodyguards with socketed war axes, and a total of 12 light infantry foot.

For the third element, we need to look at the various chariots themselves, and there are a number of well-known engravings of both the 4-wheeled war chariots (6), and lighter chariots (2-wheeled so-called straddle cars, like a saddle on a small chariot, and a crude version of the later Egyptian chariot, except with quite large solid wooden wheels). There are several references from shortly after this period for the more conventional 2-wheeled chariots (7) so we can safely assume that there were a reasonable number of these 2-wheeled chariots available for the period we want to explore (1850 BC). Both types of chariots are shown as trampling over fallen enemy who were hit or slain, and lying stripped on the ground, although this was largely a painter’s standard convention --- smiting the enemy. This doesn’t automatically mean these middle-bronze-age chariots were anywhere near as effective as say, the later Mitanni chariots, or the even-later more technologically-advanced Egyptian chariots. But regardless of the period, a chariot was far too valuable to just charge pell-mell with it into enemy troops that might hamstring the onagers.

Even a small Sumerian city-state would have at least 60 or so chariots, so they must have been useful, or else why waste the resources on them? And if many larger towns had several hundred chariots, then they weren’t being used simply as a raised command-stand for unit leaders --- there must have been some other use (probably in battle, but possibly in religious parades?) to justify such extravagant expense. And if the chariot was SO expensive, then surely the aim in battle would be to capture the enemy chariots for our own use, not simply destroy the enemy’s chariots.

Our best evidence for the importance of place for Sumerian chariots in battle comes from that Standard of Ur (really a wooden box-top-like object, inlaid with army battle scenes in shell). It was discovered around the tomb of Ur-Pabilsag, who died about 2550 BC. The top line (of three) shows a dismounted command chariot on the left, with 3 heavy infantry bodyguards with hand axes, a young horse-holder (smaller figure) and the king or the army commander in the middle of the top row, the place of importance. The king holds a distinctive ceremonial spear with a feathered tassel near the spear-point. The right hand side of this top line has 5 light infantry bringing 6 bound-and-bleeding captives to the king.

On the second row, the whole left hand side shows a line of 8 men who are part of a Sumerian battlegroup (with possibly metal-cap helmets with some sort of liner and a chin-strap, spears and heavy capes with reinforcing metal studs or decorative dots), and to the right the rest of the row has 5 variously uniformed Sumerian light infantry, or guards with more wounded prisoners.

There is a dramatic third line of four heavy 4-wheel (and 4-onager) war chariots in a line, each with a driver and passenger (three of these are equipped with a spear, and one with a war mace; two of the drivers have short sticks left, that could have been either kind of weapon). That’s probably the best pictorial clue we’ll get of the various armed elements. But look carefully at the wheels on these old 4-wheel chariots. They are small diameter, have fixed axels (so they can’t steer left or right), and the whole chariot is heavy on the front end, and more like a farm-cart with a pavaise or fighting tower attached. They couldn’t turn, and in a plowed field they’d be more like a sled than a wheeled chariot. Moderately difficult to pull forward for about a mile before the animals conked out, but almost impossible to turn except in super wide arcs on super firm ground. They were just too heavy. With 4 onagers and 2 men on board, they would have very limited speed on anything but a paved and tiled highway.

So how do we put all this together on the battlefield? Does the space on the panel reflect the approximate division of the forces? Twice the lights as the heavy phalanx? And are the line of battle chariots “placed” right, below (or behind?) the heavy infantry and foot? Or are we reaching, and the artist wasn’t reflecting a battle set-up. How do we interpret all this? (One researcher even thinks this panel has to be read from the bottom to the top!)