This goal of this paper is to critically assess the Battle of Kadesh through the analysis of both primary texts, relief carvings, and secondary analysis by scholars. The Battle of Kadesh is by and large considered to be a stalemate for the Hittites and the Egyptians, as no territory was gained or lost. However, the reliefs and texts that were created six times on the sides of temples reveal a celebration of Ramesses II’s victory over the Hittites despite the battle being near disastrous for the Egyptians as well as praise for Amun-Re for the divine intervention on behalf of the king. By assessing the “propagandistic” nature of these reliefs and comparing them to the texts found with them, this paper will aim to argue the various narratives of the Battle of Kadesh and to whom those varying narratives were intended for out of political
…show more content…
At almost every instance that the poem refers to the Hittites or any of their allies, they are met with negative and derogatory terms. A common example of this in the poem is, “vanquished chief of Kheta” and “wretched chief of Kheta” (Breasted 1988: 144,149). These terms however were oddly omitted from Kitchen’s translation of the passages (Kitchen 1982: 56). Furthermore, they are visually represented as looking different from the Egyptians in terms of their clothing, complexion, and chariot technologies to list a few (Baines and Malek 1988: 202-03). Shaw however points out that many “Sea Peoples” coming from the Mediterranean and Syria-Palestine migrated to Egypt in fairly large numbers, and it not only included warriors and soldiers that later became Egyptian mercenaries, but entire families as well. Despite them living harmoniously in Egypt, artistically foreigners of any kind were depicted as “ugly” in terms of Egyptian artistic ideals. (Shaw 2002:
At almost every instance that the poem refers to the Hittites or any of their allies, they are met with negative and derogatory terms. A common example of this in the poem is, “vanquished chief of Kheta” and “wretched chief of Kheta” (Breasted 1988: 144,149). These terms however were oddly omitted from Kitchen’s translation of the passages (Kitchen 1982: 56). Furthermore, they are visually represented as looking different from the Egyptians in terms of their clothing, complexion, and chariot technologies to list a few (Baines and Malek 1988: 202-03). Shaw however points out that many “Sea Peoples” coming from the Mediterranean and Syria-Palestine migrated to Egypt in fairly large numbers, and it not only included warriors and soldiers that later became Egyptian mercenaries, but entire families as well. Despite them living harmoniously in Egypt, artistically foreigners of any kind were depicted as “ugly” in terms of Egyptian artistic ideals. (Shaw 2002: