Hattian Kingdoms

(2700 BC onwards)


These armies represent the mineral rich feudal states to the North West of Mesopotamia in Anatolia, those that eventually went on to form the basis of the Hittite empire in the 2nd millennium BC.

Anatolia’s coherent zones of habitation and settlements actively traded with one another, developing and founding the basis for advancement in their societies. Small settlements grew into political and religious centers, wielding their influence over larger dominions ultimately becoming a group of city-states united in a trade network. The discovery and development of the mineral sources in northern Anatolia is believed to have been one of the stimulating factors leading to this geo-political landscape.

The City-states that we know off include Hattusa, Hassum, Kanesh, Zalwar and Purushanda, along with others in south central Anatolia. A typical Early Bronze fortress city would have a wall of mud bricks with a stone foundation, defensive ditch, fortified gates, and projecting round towers. Overall, Hattian urbanisation would be characterized by wealthy war-like dynasties ruling strongly fortified citadels, indicating quite a degree of military activity.

Exact dates for contact with the Hattians southern neighbours are not known but we have references indicating that by 2700 BC Sumerian trade routes had been established. The adjoining ‘state’ of Ebla and its highly organised and trade based society also made it probable that the Hattians would have been in contact with them also. From this it seems reasonable to assume that the Hattians emerge on scene with a scattered but interrelated number of regional hegemonic independent city-states by the time of the mid third millennium.

Militarily we have no firm records of engagements until the time of Sargon, where the ‘King of Battle’ epic gives us details. Given the nature of the societies and there long history it seems probable that with the abundance of natural resources the city-states would have clashed with each other and possibly their nearby southern neighbours. Whilst conjectural, it seems reasonable to assume the patterns of inter urbanised conflict of the other regions of this time also apply to Hattian kingdom city-states as well.

Sargon’s invasion (c.2300 BC) was directed at the carrying out of an expedition against Purushanda's ruler Nur-Dagan. Purushanda was at the end of two important trade routes, abundant in merchandise like silver, copper, textile, wool and tin. In the ‘King of Battle’ epic, telling of Sargon’s expedition, we hear of Sargon’s generals advising him against his own desire for action but a message from forlorne Akkadian merchants in Purushanda pleading for help, decided the issue. He mobilised his army and marched off through difficult terrain, launching a surprise attack and capturing Purushanda. Nur-Dagan was taken prisoner, submitting to Sargon, and (possibly) swearing allegiance as a vassal. After three years the Akkadians leave, taking with them the spoils of war.

The next incursion that we hear of by the Akkadians comes from Naram Sin. He is said to have marched against a coalition of seventeen kings, including Pamba of Hattusa and Zipani. The previous reigns of Akkadian kings spent most of their energies undertaking expeditions in the east and south as well as suppressing internal rebellion. It would appear that by the time of Naram Sin, some 80 years or so after Sargon’s expedition, the Hattian kingdoms had grown wealthier and more independent, forming a broad Anatolian coalition that had resolved to throw of Akkadian authority. This co operation between city states indicates a degree of cooperation which in this case was to expel Akkadian influence. Interestingly there have been findings of royal seals with the name of Ibbi-Sin of Ur suggesting that there may have been a Sumerian presence as late as 2025 BC. Detail is scarce on the Hattians and more research is needed.


(Note – it must be acknowledged that information on third Millennium Hattian societies, weapon and military activities is very scarce. I have tried to pull together enough information to give a general understanding of what forces were at play from which can built reasonable assumptions as to likely interactions between neighbouring peoples and possible causes of conflict between them). 

Troop Type	Number	Q	P	CV	Range	Pts
General (mounted)	1	-	*	5	n/a	50
Ally King (mounted)	1-2	-	*	5	n/a	25
Sub General  (mounted)	0-1	-	*	5	n/a	50
Captain	1 per unit	R	*	5	n/a	20
- change to veteran	any	V	*	5	n/a	25
Noble 4-Ass Battle Carts	0-4	V	S	special	4	35
- exchange for 4-Ass Straddle Car / Platform Cart	0-1	V	U/P	special	4	20/25
Bodyguard Spearmen	0-1	V	P	4	n/a	16
- equip as Axemen	0/all	V	P	5	n/a	18
City Militia Spearmen	2-6	R	P	3	n/a	7
- upgrade to Shielded	any	R	S	3	n/a	8
City Militia Axemen	1-3	R	U	4	n/a	5
- upgrade to Shielded	any	R	S	4	n/a	8
Wild Tribesmen	0-2	R	U	special	2/4	6
- change to Skirmishers	any	R	U	n/a	4	4
Slingers	0-1	L	U	n/a	4	2
Mercenary Archer Skirmishers	0-1	R	U	n/a	4	4
Wurbartum Wild Tribesmen	0-1	R	U	special	2/4	6
Wurbartum javelin or Archer Skirmishers	0-1	R	U	n/a	4	4

Hattian Kingdom Allies and Enemies

Dynastic Sumerian

Akkadian

Early Eblan

Old Elam

Zagros Mountain

Hattian Kingdoms

Neo -Sumerian

Amorite Nomads

Magan

Harrapan

2700 BC

2600 BC

2500 BC

2400 BC

2300 BC

2200 BC

2100 BC

2000 BC

Special Rules & Notes

• During Terrain Setup, if a Hattian kingdom force is Defending then the die roll to move terrain is 5,6 for Left, Centre and Right sections of the table (this increases the likely hood that rough terrain will be centrally placed on the battlefield).