Understanding War Language In Ancient Near East and Middle East Cultures

Pretend you are an archaeologist living 2,000 years from now.  It’s a bright and warm day as you carefully sift through the ancient ruins, feeling the weight of history resting upon your shoulders. As you excavate, an intriguing document catches your eye. Upon closer examination, you uncover a text that speaks of one side demolishing the other side. The words “murdered,” “slaughtered,” “annihilated,” and “killed them” are prevalent, leaving you to ponder the context of such violence. Could this be an account of a brutal battle during the Civil War, with soldiers clashing and lives hanging in the balance? Alternatively, it might depict a major sports event where two opposing teams fiercely competed, their passion and determination reminiscent of a fierce war. As you contemplate these possibilities, it dawns on you that future generations may struggle to comprehend the true nature of the events being described, lacking the context and understanding that are familiar to us today. The passage of time can obscure the nuances behind such language, blurring the lines between historical conflicts and sporting rivalries.

While today in cultures influenced by Western Civilization we appreciate the use of precise language when discussing war, it’s important to acknowledge the differing perspectives on this matter. In contrast to the Western approach, other cultures, particularly those in the Near East, continue to embrace a more embellished and colorful language when it comes to the topic of war. This divergence stems from historical and cultural differences, with the exaggeration of war language serving various purposes. In ancient times, the use of exaggerated language in describing warfare was not merely a stylistic choice, but a strategic necessity. Any indication of weakness, real or perceived, in a written account had the potential to be interpreted as an open invitation for rival nations to exploit and conquer. Hence, the tradition of employing exaggerated language and expressions in the context of warfare became deeply ingrained as a means of projecting strength and deterring potential adversaries.

For example, Merneptah (son of Rameses II) had a Stele which reads in part:

“The princes are prostrate, saying ‘Shalom!’
Not one of the Nine Bows [foreigners] raises his head:
Seized is Libya, Hatti pacified,
Plundered is The Canaan, entirely woe.
Carried off is Ashkelon, captured is Gezer,
Yanoam is made as nothing,
Israel is desolate, its seed is no more,
Syria now a widow because of Egypt.
All lands together are pacified.”

-Translated by Josh Meynell

Yet, Israel’s seed continued and Israel was not made “desolate” by Merneptah.  It’s war language.

Merneptah’s father, Rameses II, did the same.  In the Kadesh inscription we read:

“Who fights a hundred thousand without soldiers and chariots,
Come quick, flee before him,
To seek life and breathe air;
For he who attempts to get close to him,
His hands, all his limbs grow limp.
One cannot hold either bow or spears,
When one sees him come racing along!”
My majesty hunted them like a griffin,
I slaughtered among them unceasingly.”

– The Battle of Kadesh

Again, an embellishment of the actual facts (unless one believes Rameses II slaughtered 100,000 warriors single handedly). It’s the language of war, where legend intertwines with historical events, creating larger-than-life narratives that capture the imagination of generations and place fear in the hearts of those who would oppose them.

Dr. Paul Copan notes that,

“Egypt’s Tuthmosis III (later fifteenth century) boasted that ‘the numerous army of Mitanni was overthrown within the hour, annihilated totally, like those (now) not existent.’ In fact, Mitanni’s forces lived on to fight in the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries BC.”
– Paul Copan, Is God A Moral Monster?, p. 171-172.

“Hittite king Mursilli II (who ruled from 1322–1295 BC) recorded making ‘Mt. Asharpaya empty (of humanity)’ and the ‘mountains of Tarikarimu empty (of humanity).’”

– (Ibid)

“The Assyrian ruler Sennacherib (701–681 BC) used similar hyperbole: ‘The soldiers of Hirimme, dangerous enemies, I cut down with the sword; and not one escaped.’”

– (Ibid)

Copan also writes:

“. . . ancient Near Eastern war texts used heavy hyperbole along with stereotypical words or phrases like ‘leave alive nothing that breathes’; ‘man and woman, young and old’; ‘no survivors’; ‘utterly destroy’; ‘perished. It’s an ancient version of modern-day ‘trash talk’ . . . “

– Paul Copan, Is God A Vindictive Bully?, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2022,
p. 200

Scholar, G.B. Caird wrote:

“Hyperbole or overstatement is a figure of speech common to all languages. But among the Semitic peoples its frequent use arises out of a habitual cast of mind, which I have called absoluteness – a tendency to think in extremes without qualifications, in black and white, without intervening shades of gray.”

– G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible, (London: Duckworth, 1980), p. 110.

The use of exaggerated language in the context of ancient warfare is a fascinating aspect to explore. It’s evident that the accounts of historic events must be interpreted considering the propensity for hyperbolic language during that era. This practice appears to be consistent across various cultures of the ancient Near East, indicating that ancient Israel likely employed similar literary techniques. Therefore, the presence of such language in the Scriptures should not be surprising. It’s crucial to acknowledge that while the use of war language was customary and a prevalent literary style of the time, the underlying events themselves would still be bound by the principles outlined in the Mosaic Law (Exodus 23:7-9). This presents an intriguing perspective on the intersection of historical accounts and the cultural and literary norms of the era.

“Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent or the righteous, for I will not justify the guilty. And you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of the just. And you shall not oppress a sojourner, since you yourselves know the soul of a sojourner, for you also were sojourners in the land of Egypt.”

Exodus 23:7-9 (LSB)

If we are to be faithful in our interpretation of Scripture, it is crucial to consider the original context in which war language is used. By delving into the historical and cultural context, we can gain a deeper understanding of the intended meaning behind the words. This enables us to avoid misinterpretations and misapplications of the text, ensuring that we uphold its true message in a manner that aligns with the original author’s intent. Additionally, embracing a contextual and cultural approach allows us to appreciate the richness and complexity of the ancient texts, shedding light on the intricate dynamics at play during the time of their conception.