2. A mong the Early Nations, Neiyhhors to the Israel- ites.— From the existing monuments of Egypt and As- syria, we learn that war was, among the ancient na- tions, the main business of life. The Egyptians early possessed a considerable standing army, which was prob- ably kept up by conscription. " Wherever," says Ro- sellini, "the armies are represented on the great monu- ments of Egyi)t, they are composed of troops of infantry, armed with the bow or lance, and of ranks of war-char- iots, drawn by two horses. The few figures upon horses almost all belong to foreigners." Chariots also appear in Homer, as the principal strength of the Egyptian army {/Had, ix, 383). Champollion also says of the war-chariots: "This was the cavalry of the age; cav- alry, proi)erly speaking, did not exist then in Egypt." Hence, when Pharaoh pursued the fugitive Hebrews, he "took six hundred chosen chariots," evidently the royal guard ; and also all the chariots of Egypt, i. e. the remainder of liis disposable mounted forces; as the in- fantrj' could not well take part in the pursuit. "And the Egyptians followed them and overtook them, where they were encamped by the sea, all the chariot-horses of Pharaoh and his riders and his host" (Exod. xiv, 6, 7, 9, 23, 25, 26, 28). The Assyrian monuments exhumed b.v Botta and Layard exhibit the military force of the Assyrians as composed of infantry, armed with the bow and the lance ; also of war-chariots and regular cavalry (Isa. xxxvi, 8, 9; Ezek. xxiii, 12). The war-chariots which are depicted on the walls of Khorsabad are low, with two small wheels, with one or two persons stand- ing in each, besides the driver; the horses are full of mettle, some of them spleudidly caparisoned (Nah. iii, 2, 3). See Chariot.
IL Military Tactics among the Hebi-eics. — (In this section we follow Kitto's Cyclopmdia. ) The Hebrew nation, so long as it continued in Egyptian bondage, might be regarded as unacquainted with military af- fairs, since a jealous government would scarcely permit so numerous and dense a population as the pastoral families of Israel which retained their seat in Goshen certainly were to be in possession of the means of re- sistance to authority; but, placed as this portion of the people was, with the wanderers of the wilderness to the south and the mountain robbers of Edom to the east, some kind of defence must have been i)rovided to pro- tect its cattle and, in a measure, to cover Lower Eg^'pt itself from foreign inroads. Probably the laboring pop- ulation, scattered as bondmen through the Delta, were alone destitute of weapons; while the shepherds had the same kind of defensive arms which are still in use and allowed to all classes in Eastern countries, whatever be their condition. This mixed state of their social position appears to be countenanced by the fact that,
when suddenh' permitted to depart, the whole organi- zation required for the movement of such a multitude was clearly in force ; yet not a word is said about phys- ical means to resist the pursuing Egyptians, although at a subsequent period it does not appear that they were wanting to invade Palestine, but that special causes pre- vented them from being immediately resorted to. The Israelites were, therefore, partlj' armed; they, doubtless, had their bows and arrows, clubs, and darts, wicker or ox-hide shields, and helmets (caps) of skins or of woven rushes.
From their familiar knowledge of the Egyptian insti- tutions, the Israelites, doul)tless, copied their military organization, as soon as they were free from bondage, and became inured to a warlike life during their forty years' wandering in the desert; but with this remarka- ble difference, that while Egypt reckoned her hundred thousands of regulars, either drawn from the provinces or nomes by a kind of conscription, such as is to be seen on the monuments, i)r from a military caste of hereditarv soldiers, the Hebrew people, having preserved the patri- archal institution of nomads, were embodied by fami- lies and tribes, as is [)lainly proved by the order of march which was preserved during their pilgrimage to the Land of Promise. Tliat order likewise reveals a mili- tary circumstance which seems to attest that the dis- tribution of the greatest and most warlike masses was not on the left of the order of movement — that is, to- wards their immediate enemies — but always to the front and right, as if even then the most serious opposition might be expected from the east and north-east — possi- bly from a reminiscence of past invasions of the giant races and of the tirst conquerors, furnished with cavalry and chariots, having come from those directions.
At the time of the departure of Israel, horses were not yet abundant in Egypt, for the pursuing army had only six hundred chariots; and the shepherd people were even prohiljited from breeding or possessing them. The Hebrews were enjoined to trust, under divine pro- tection, to the energies of infantry alone, their future country being chiefly within the basin of high moun- tains, and the march thither over a district of Arabia where, to this day, horses are not in use. We may in- fer that the inspired lawgiver rejected horses because the}' were already known to be less tit for defence at home than for distant expeditions of conquest, in which it was not intended that the chosen people should en- gage.