[Illustration: Spines]

[Illustration: Cover]

HISTORY OF EGYPT CHALDEA, SYRIA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA

By G. MASPERO, Honorable Doctor of Civil Laws, and Fellow of Queen'sCollege, Oxford; Member of the Institute and Professor at the College ofFrance

Edited by A. H. SAYCE, Professor of Assyriology, Oxford

Translated by M. L. McCLURE, Member of the Committee of the EgyptExploration Fund

CONTAINING OVER TWELVE HUNDRED COLORED PLATES AND ILLUSTRATIONS

Volume VII. 

LONDON

THE GROLIER SOCIETY

PUBLISHERS

[Illustration: 001. Jpg Frontispiece]

/* Slumber Song--After painting bv P. Grot. Johann*/

[Illustration: Titlepage]

[Illustration: 002. Jpg PAGE IMAGE]

_THE ASSYRIAN REVIVAL AND THE STRUGGLE FOR SYRIA_

_ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL (885-860 B. C. ) AND SHALMANESER III. (860-825 B. C. )--THEKINGDOM OF URARTU AND ITS CONQUERING PRINCES: MENUAS AND ARGISTIS. _

_The line of Assyrian kings after Assurirba, and the Babyloniandynasties: the war between Rammān-nirāri III. And Shamash-mudammiq; hisvictories over Babylon; Tukulti-ninip II. (890-885 B. C. )--The empire atthe accession of Assur-nazir-pal: the Assyrian army and the progress ofmilitary tactics; cavalry, military engines; the condition of Assyria'sneighbours, methods of Assyrian conquest. _

_The first campaigns of Assur-nazir-pal in Nairi and on the Khabur(885-882 B. C. ): Zamua reduced to an Assyrian province (881 B. C. )--Thefourth campaign in Naīri and the war on the Euphrates (880 B. C. ); thefirst conquest of BU-Adini--Northern Syria at the opening of the IXthcentury: its civilisation, arts, army, and religion--The submissionof the Hittite states and of the Patina: the Assyrians reach theMediterranean. _

_The empire after the wars of Assur-nazir-pal--Building of the palaceat Calah: Assyrian architecture and sculpture in the IXth century--Thetunnel of Negub and the palace of Balawāt--The last years ofAssur-nazir-pal: His campaign of the year 867 in Naīri--The death ofAssur-nazir-pal (860 B. C. ); his character. _

_Shalmaneser III. (860-825 B. C. ): the state of the empire at hisaccession--Urartu: its physical features, races, towns, temples, itsdeities--Shalmaneser's first campaign in Urartu: he penetrates as faras Lake Van (860 B. C. )--The conquest of Bīt-Adini and of Naīri (859-855B. C. )_

_The attack on Damascus: the battle of Qarqar (854 B. C. ) and the waragainst Babylon (852-851 B. C. )--The alliance between Judah and Israel, the death of Ahab (853 B. C. ); Damascus successfully resists the attacksof Assyria (849-846 B. C. )--Moab delivered from Israel, Mesha; the deathof Ben-hadad (Adadidri) and the accession of Hazael; the fall of thehouse of Omri-Jehu (843 B. C. )--The defeat of Hazael and the homage ofJehu (842-839 B. C. ). Wars in Cilicia and in Namri (838-835 B. C. ): thelast battles of Shalmaneser III. ; his building works, the revoltof Assur-dain-pal--Samsi-rammān IV. (825-812 B. C. ), his first threeexpeditions, his campaigns against Babylon--Bammdn-nirdri IV, (812-783B. C. )--Jehu, Athaliah, Joash: the supremacy of Hazael over Israel andJudah--Victory of Bammdn-nirdri over Mari, and the submission of allSyria to the Assyrians (803 B. C. ). _

_The growth of Urartu: the conquests of Menuas and Argistis I. , theirvictories over Assyria--Shalmaneser IV. (783-772 B. C. )--Assurdān III. (772-754 B. C. )--Assur-niruri III. (754-745 B. C. )--The downfall ofAssyria and the triumph of Urartu. _

[Illustration: 003. Jpg PAGE IMAGE]

CHAPTER I--THE ASSYRIAN REVIVAL AND THE STRUGGLE FOR SYRIA

_Assur-nazir-pal (885-860) and Shalmaneser III. (860-825)--The kingdomof Urartu and its conquering princes: Menuas and Argistis. _

Assyria was the first to reappear on the scene of action. Less hamperedby an ancient past than Egypt and Chaldęa, she was the sooner able torecover her strength after any disastrous crisis, and to assume againthe offensive along the whole of her frontier line. 

 Image Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bas-relief at Koyunjik of the time of Sennacherib. The initial cut, which is also by Faucher-Gudin, represents the broken obelisk of Assur- nazir-pal, the bas-reliefs of which are as yet unpublished. 

During the years immediately following the ephemeral victories andreverses of Assurirba, both the country and its rulers are plunged inthe obscurity of oblivion. Two figures at length, though at what dateis uncertain, emerge from the darkness--a certain Irbarammān and anAssur-nadinakhź II. , whom we find engaged in building palaces and makinga necropolis. They were followed towards 950 by a Tiglath-pileser II. , of whom nothing is known but his name. * He in his turn was succeededabout the year 935 by one Assurdān II. , who appears to have concentratedhis energies upon public works, for we hear of him digging a canal tosupply his capital with water, restoring the temples and fortifyingtowns. Kammān-nirāri III. , who followed him in 912, stands out moredistinctly from the mists which envelop the history of this period;he repaired the gate of the Tigris and the adjoining wall at Assur, heenlarged its principal sanctuary, reduced several rebellious provincesto obedience, and waged a successful warfare against the neighbouringinhabitants of Karduniash. Since the extinction of the race ofNebuchadrezzar I. , Babylon had been a prey to civil discord and foreigninvasion. The Aramaean tribes mingled with, or contiguous to theremnants of the Cossoans bordering on the Persian gulf, constitutedpossibly, even at this period, the powerful nation of the Kaldā. **

 * Our only knowledge of Tiglath-pileser II. Is from a brick, on which he is mentioned as being the grandfather of Rammān- nirāri II. 

 ** The names Chaldęa and Chaldęans being ordinarily used to designate the territory and people of Babylon, I shall employ the term Kaldu or Kaldā in treating of the Aramęan tribes who constituted the actual Chaldęan nation. 

It has been supposed, not without probability, that a certainSimashshikhu, Prince of the Country of the Sea, who immediately followedthe last scion of the line of Pashź, * was one of their chiefs. Heendeavoured to establish order in the city, and rebuilt the temple ofthe Sun destroyed by the nomads at Sippar, but at the end of eighteenyears he was assassinated. His son Eāmukinshurnu remained at the head ofaffairs some three to six months; Kashshu-nadinakhź ruled three orsix years, at the expiration of which a man of the house of Bāzi, Eulbar-shakinshumi by name, seized upon the crown. ** His dynastyconsisted of three members, himself included, and it was overthrownafter a duration of twenty years by an Elamite, who held authority foranother seven. ***

 * The name of this prince has been read Simbarshiku by Peiser, a reading adopted by Rost; Simbarshiku would have been shortened into Sibir, and we should have to identify it with that of the Sibir mentioned by Assur-nazir-pal in his Annals, col. Ii. 1. 84, as a king of Karduniash who lived before his (Assur-nazir-pal's) time (see p. 38 of the present volume). 

 ** The name of this king may be read Edubarshakīn-shumi. The house of Bāzi takes its name from an ancestor who must have founded it at some unknown date, but who never reigned in Chaldęa. Winckler has with reason conjectured that the name subsequently lost its meaning to the Babylonians, and that they confused the Chaldęan house of Bāzi with the Arab country of Bāzu: this may explain why in his dynasties Berosos attributes an Arab origin to that one which comprises the short-lived line of Bīt-Bāzi. 

 *** Our knowledge of these events is derived solely from the texts of the Babylonian Canon published and translated by G. Smith, by Pinches, and by Sayce. The inscription of Nabubaliddin informs us that Kashu-nadīnakhź and Eulbar- shākinshumu continued the works begun by Simashshiku in the temple of the Sun at Sippar. 

It was a period of calamity and distress, during which the Arabs or theAramęans ravaged the country, and pillaged without compunction not onlythe property of the inhabitants, but also that of the gods. TheElamite usurper having died about the year 1030, a Babylonian of nobleextraction expelled the intruders, and succeeded in bringing the largerpart of the kingdom under his rule. *

* The names of the first kings of this dynasty are destroyed inthe copies of the Royal Canon which have come down to us. The threepreceding dynasties are restored as follows:--

[Illustration: 006. Jpg TABLE OF KINGS]

Five or six of his descendants had passed away, and a certainShamash-mudammiq was feebly holding the reins of government, when theexpeditions of Rammān-nirāri III. Provoked war afresh between Assyriaand Babylon. The two armies encountered each other once again ontheir former battlefield between the Lower Zab and the Turnat. Shamash-mudammiq, after being totally routed near the Yalmān mountains, did not long survive, and Naboshumishkun, who succeeded him, showedneither more ability nor energy than his predecessor. The Assyrianswrested from him the fortresses of Bambala and Bagdad, dislodged himfrom the positions where he had entrenched himself, and at length tookhim prisoner while in flight, and condemned him to perpetual captivity. *

 * Shamash-mudammiq appears to have died about 900. Naboshumishkun probably reigned only one or two years, from 900 to 899 or to 898. The name of his successor is destroyed in the _Synchronous History_; it might be Nabubaliddin, who seems to have had a long life, but it is wiser, until fresh light is thrown on the subject, to admit that it is some prince other than Nabubaliddin, whose name is as yet unknown to us. 

His successor abandoned to the Assyrians most of the districts situatedon the left bank of the Lower Zab between the Zagros mountains and theTigris, and peace, which was speedily secured by a double marriage, remained unbroken for nearly half a century. Tukulti-ninip II. Was fondof fighting; "he overthrew his adversaries and exposed their heads uponstakes, " but, unlike his predecessor, he directed his efforts againstNaīri and the northern and western tribes. We possess no details of hiscampaigns; we can only surmise that in six years, from 890 to 885, * hebrought into subjection the valley of the Upper Tigris and the mountainprovinces which separate it from the Assyrian plain. Having reached thesource of the river, he carved, beside the image of Tiglath-pileser I. , the following inscription, which may still be read upon the rock. "Withthe help of Assur, Shamash, and Rammān, the gods of his religion, hereached this spot. The lofty mountains he subjugated from the sun-risingto its down-setting; victorious, irresistible, he came hither, and likeunto the lightning he crossed the raging rivers. "**

 * The parts preserved of the Eponym canon begin their record in 893, about the end of the reign of Rammān-nirāri IL The line which distinguishes the two reigns from one another is drawn between the name of the personage who corresponds to the year 890, and that of Tukulti-ninip who corresponds to the year 889: Tukulti-ninip II. , therefore, begins his reign in 890, and his death is six years later, in 885. 

 ** This inscription and its accompanying bas-relief are mentioned in the _Annals of Assur-nazir-pal_. 

He did not live long to enjoy his triumphs, but his death made noimpression on the impulse given to the fortunes of his country. Thekingdom which he left to Assur-nazir-pal, the eldest of his sons, embraced scarcely any of the countries which had paid tribute to formersovereigns. Besides Assyria proper, it comprised merely those districtsof Naīri which had been annexed within his own generation; theremainder had gradually regained their liberty: first the outlyingdependencies--Cilicia, Melitene, Northern Syria, and then the provincesnearer the capital, the valleys of the Masios and the Zagros, thesteppes of the Khabur, and even some districts such as Lubdi andShupria, which had been allotted to Assyrian colonists at varioustimes after successful campaigns. Nearly the whole empire had to bereconquered under much the same conditions as in the first instance. Assyria itself, it is true, had recovered the vitality and elasticity ofits earlier days. The people were a robust and energetic race, devotedto their rulers, and ready to follow them blindly and trustinglywherever they might lead. The army, while composed chiefly of the sameclasses of troops as in the time of Tiglath-pileser I. , --spearmen, archers, sappers, and slingers, --now possessed a new element, whoseappearance on the field of battle was to revolutionize the whole methodof warfare; this was the cavalry, properly so called, introduced as anadjunct to the chariotry. The number of horsemen forming this contingentwas as yet small; like the infantry, they wore casques and cuirasses, but were clothed with a tight-fitting loin-cloth in place of thelong kilt, the folds of which would have embarrassed their movements. One-half of the men carried sword and lance, the other half sword andbow, the latter of a smaller kind than that used by the infantry. Theirhorses were bridled, and bore trappings on the forehead, but had nosaddles; their riders rode bareback without stirrups; they sat far backwith the chest thrown forward, their knees drawn up to grip the shoulderof the animal. 

[Illustration: 009. Jpg AN ASSYRIAN HORSEMAN ARMED WITH THE SWORD]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bas-relief in bronze on the gate of Balawāt. The Assyrian artist has shown the head and legs of the second horse in profile behind the first, but he has forgotten to represent the rest of its body, and also the man riding it. 

Each horseman was attended by a groom, who rode abreast of him, and heldhis reins during an action, so that he might be free to make use ofhis weapons. This body of cavalry, having little confidence in its ownpowers, kept in close contact with the main body of the army, and wasnot used in independent manouvres; it was associated with and formed anescort to the chariotry in expeditions where speed was essential, andwhere the ordinary foot soldier would have hampered the movements of thecharioteers. *

 * Isolated horsemen must no doubt have existed in the Assyrian just as in the Egyptian army, but we never find any mention of a _body_ of cavalry in inscriptions prior to the time of Assur-nazir-pal; the introduction of this new corps must consequently have taken place between the reigns of Tiglath-pileser and Assur-nazir-pal, probably nearer the time of the latter. Assur-nazir-pal himself seldom speaks of his cavalry, but he constantly makes mention of the horsemen of the Aramaean and Syrian principalities, whom he incorporated into his own army. 

[Illustration: 010. Jpg A MOUNTED ASSYRIAN ARCHER WITH ATTENDANT]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bronze bas-reliefs of the gate of Balawāt. 

The army thus reinforced was at all events more efficient, if notactually more powerful, than formerly; the discipline maintained was assevere, the military spirit as keen, the equipment as perfect, and thetactics as skilful as in former times. A knowledge of engineering hadimproved upon the former methods of taking towns by sapping and scaling, and though the number of military engines was as yet limited, thebesiegers were well able, when occasion demanded, to improvise and makeuse of machines capable of demolishing even the strongest walls. *

 * The battering-ram had already reached such a degree of perfection under Assur-nazir-pal, that it must have been invented some time before the execution of the first bas- reliefs on which we see it portrayed. Its points of resemblance to the Greek battering-ram furnished Hoofer with one of his mam arguments for placing the monuments of Khorsabad and Koyunjik as late as the Persian or Parthian period. 

The Assyrians were familiar with all the different kinds ofbattering-ram; the hand variety, which was merely a beam tipped withiron, worked by some score of men; the fixed ram, in which the beam wassuspended from a scaffold and moved by means of ropes; and lastly, the movable ram, running on four or six wheels, which enabled it to beadvanced or withdrawn at will. The military engineers of the day allowedfull rein to their fancy in the many curious shapes they gave to thislatter engine; for example, they gave to the mass of bronze at its pointthe form of the head of an animal, and the whole engine took at timesthe form of a sow ready to root up with its snout the foundations of theenemy's defences. The scaffolding of the machine was usually protectedby a carapace of green leather or some coarse woollen material stretchedover it, which broke the force of blows from projectiles: at times ithad an additional arrangement in the shape of a cupola or turret inwhich archers were stationed to sweep the face of the wall opposite tothe point of attack. 

[Illustration: 012. Jpg THE MOVABLE SOW MAKING A BREACH IN THE WALL OF AFORTRESS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bronze bas-reliefs of the gate of Balawāt. 

The battering-rams were set up and placed in line at a short distancefrom the ramparts of the besieged town; the ground in front of them wasthen levelled and a regular causeway constructed, which was paved withbricks wherever the soil appeared to be lacking in firmness. Thesepreliminaries accomplished, the engines were pushed forward by relaysof troops till they reached the required range. The effort needed to setthe ram in motion severely taxed the strength of those engaged in thework; for the size of the beam was enormous, and its iron point, or thesquare mass of metal at the end, was of no light weight. The besiegeddid their best to cripple or, if possible, destroy the engine as itapproached them. 

[Illustration: 013. Jpg THE TURRETED BATTERING-RAM ATTACKING THE WALLS OFA TOWN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bas-relief brought from Nimroud, now in the British Museum. 

Torches, lighted tow, burning pitch, and stink-pots were hurled downupon its roofing: attempts were made to seize the head of the ram bymeans of chains or hooks, so as to prevent it from moving, or in orderto drag it on to the battlements; in some cases the garrison succeededin crushing the machinery with a mass of rock. The Assyrians, however, did not allow themselves to be discouraged by such trifling accidents;they would at once extinguish the fire, release, by sheer force ofmuscle, the beams which the enemy had secured, and if, notwithstandingall their efforts, one of the machines became injured, they had othersready to take its place, and the ram would be again at work after only afew minutes' delay. Walls, even when of burnt brick or faced with smallstones, stood no chance against such an attack. 

[Illustration: 014. Jpg THE BESIEGED ENDEAVOURING TO CRIPPLE OR DESTROYTHE BATTERING-RAM]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bas-relief from Nimroud, now in the British Museum. 

The first blow of the ram sufficed to shake them, and an opening wasrapidly made, so that in a few days, often in a few hours, they becamea heap of ruins; the foot soldiers could then enter by the breach whichthe pioneers had effected. 

It must, however, be remembered that the strength and discipline whichthe Assyrian troops possessed in such a high degree, were common tothe military forces of all the great states--Elam, Damascus, Naīri, theHittites, and Chaldęa. It was owing to this, and also to the fact thatthe armies of all these Powers were, as a rule, both in strength andnumbers, much on a par, that no single state was able to inflict on anyof the rest such a defeat as would end in its destruction. What decisiveresults had the terrible struggles produced, which stained almostperiodically the valleys of the Tigris and the Zab with blood? Afterendless loss of life and property, they had nearly always issued in theestablishment of the belligerents in their respective possessions, with possibly the cession of some few small towns or fortresses to thestronger party, most of which, however, were destined to come back toits former possessor in the very next campaign. The fall of the capitalitself was not decisive, for it left the vanquished foe chafing underhis losses, while the victory cost his rival so dear that he was unableto maintain the ascendency for more than a few years. Twice at leastin three centuries a king of Assyria had entered Babylon, and twice theBabylonians had expelled the intruder of the hour, and had forced himback with a blare of trumpets to the frontier. Although the Ninevitedynasties had persisted in their pretensions to a suzerainty whichthey had generally been unable to enforce, the tradition of which, unsupported by any definite decree, had been handed on from onegeneration to another; yet in practice their kings had not succeeded in"taking the hands of Bel, " and in reigning personally in Babylon, norin extorting from the native sovereign an official acknowledgment ofhis vassalage. Profiting doubtless by past experience, Assur-nazir-palresolutely avoided those direct conflicts in which so many of hispredecessors had wasted their lives. If he did not actually renouncehis hereditary pretensions, he was content to let them lie dormant. Hepreferred to accommodate himself to the terms of the treaty signed afew years previously by Rammān-nirāri, even when Babylon neglectedto observe them; he closed his eyes to the many ill-disguised acts ofhostility to which he was exposed, * and devoted all his energies todealing with less dangerous enemies. 

 * He did not make the presence of Cossoan troops among the allies of the Sukhi a casus belli, even though they were commanded by a brother and by one of the principal officers of the King of Babylon. 

Even if his frontier touched Karduniash to the south, elsewhere he wasseparated from the few states strong enough to menace his kingdom bya strip of varying width, comprising several less important tribes andcities;--to the east and north-east by the barbarians of obscure racewhose villages and strongholds were scattered along the upper affluentsof the Tigris or on the lower terraces of the Iranian plateau: to thewest and north-west by the principalities and nomad tribes, mostly ofAramoan extraction, who now for a century had peopled the mountainsof the Tigris and the steppes of Mesopotamia. They were high-spirited, warlike, hardy populations, proud of their independence and quickto take up arms in its defence or for its recovery, but none of thempossessed more than a restricted domain, or had more than a handfulof soldiers at its disposal. At times, it is true, the nature of theirlocality befriended them, and the advantages of position helped tocompensate for their paucity of numbers. 

[Illustration: 017. Jpg THE ESCARPMENTS OF THE ZAB]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Binder. 

Sometimes they were entrenched behind one of those rapid watercourseslike the Radanu, the Zab, or the Turnat, which are winter torrentsrather than streams, and are overhung by steep banks, precipitous as awall above a moat; sometimes they took refuge upon some wooded heightand awaited attack amid its rocks and pine woods. Assyria wassuperior to all of them, if not in the valour of its troops, at leastnumerically, and, towering in the midst of them, she could single outat will whichever tribe offered the easiest prey, and falling on itsuddenly, would crush it by sheer force of weight. In such a case thesurrounding tribes, usually only too well pleased to witness in safetythe fall of a dangerous rival, would not attempt to interfere; but theirturn was ere long sure to come, and the pity which they had declinedto show to their neighbours was in like manner refused to them. TheAssyrians ravaged their country, held their chiefs to ransom, razedtheir strongholds, or, when they did not demolish them, garrisonedthem with their own troops who held sway over the country. The revenuesgleaned from these conquests would swell the treasury at Nineveh, thenative soldiers would be incorporated into the Assyrian army, and whenthe smaller tribes had all in turn been subdued, their conqueror would, at length, find himself confronted with one of the great states fromwhich he had been separated by these buffer communities; then it wasthat the men and money he had appropriated in his conquests wouldembolden him to provoke or accept battle with some tolerable certaintyof victory. 

Immediately on his accession, Assur-nazir-pal turned his attention tothe parts of his frontier where the population was most scattered, andtherefore less able to offer any resistance to his projects. *

 * The principal document for the history of Assur-nazir-pal is the "Monolith of Nimrud, " discovered by Layard in the ruins of the temple of Ninip; it bears the same inscription on both its sides. It is a compilation of various documents, comprising, first, a consecutive account of the campaigns of the king's first six years, terminating in a summary of the results obtained during that period; secondly, the account of the campaign of his sixth year, followed by three campaigns not dated, the last of which was in Syria; and thirdly, the history of a last campaign, that of his eighteenth year, and a second summary. A monolith found in the ruins of Kurkh, at some distance from Diarbekir, contains some important additions to the account of the campaigns of the fifth year. The other numerous inscriptions of Assur-nazir-pal which have come down to us do not contain any information of importance which is not found in the text of the Annals. The inscription of the broken Obelisk, from which I have often quoted, contains in the second column some mention of the works undertaken by this king. 

He marched towards the north-western point of his territory, suddenlyinvaded Nummi, * and in an incredibly short time took Gubbe, its capital, and some half-dozen lesser places, among them Surra, Abuku, Arura, and Arubi. The inhabitants assembled upon a mountain ridge which theybelieved to be inaccessible, its peak being likened to "the point of aniron dagger, " and the steepness of its sides such that "no winged birdof the heavens dare venture on them. " In the short space of three daysAssur-nazir-pal succeeded in climbing its precipices and forcing theentrenchments which had been thrown up on its summit: two hundred of itsdefenders perished sword in hand, the remainder were taken prisoners. The Kirruri, ** terrified by this example, submitted unreservedly tothe conqueror, yielded him their horses, mules, oxen, sheep, wine, andbrazen vessels, and accepted the Assyrian prefects appointed to collectthe tribute. 

 * Nummi or Nimmi, mentioned already in the Annals of Tiglath-pileser I. , has been placed by Hommel in the mountain group which separates Lake Van from Lake Urumiah, but by Tiele in the regions situated to the southeast of Nineveh; the observations of Delattre show that we ought perhaps to look for it to the north of the Arzania, certainly in the valley of that river. It appears to me to answer to the cazas of Varto and Boulanīk in the sandjak of Mush. The name of the capital may be identified with the present Gop, chief town of the caza of Boulanīk; in this case Abuku might be represented by the village of Biyonkh. 

 ** The Kirruri must have had their habitat in the depression around Lake frumiah, on the western side of the lake, if we are to believe Schrader; Jelattre has pointed out that it ought to be sought elsewhere, near the sources of the Tigris, not far from the Murad-su. The connection in which it is here cited obliges us to place it in the immediate neighbourhood of Nummi, and its relative position to Adaush and Gilzān makes it probable that it is to be sought to the west and south-west of Lake Van, in the cazas of Mush and Sassun in the sandjak of Mush. 

The neighbouring districts, Adaush, Gilzān, and Khubushkia, followedtheir example;* they sent the king considerable presents of gold, silver, lead, and copper, and their alacrity in buying off theirconqueror saved them from the ruinous infliction of a garrison. TheAssyrian army defiling through the pass of Khulun next fell upon theKirkhi, dislodged the troops stationed in the fortress of Nishtun, and pillaged the cities of Khatu, Khatara, Irbidi, Arzania, Tela, andKhalua; ** Bubu, the Chief of Nishtun, *** was sent to Arbela, flayedalive, and his skin nailed to the city wall. 

 * Kirzāu, also transcribed Gilzān and Guzān, has been relegated by the older Assyriologists to Eastern Armenia, and the site further specified as being between the ancient Araxes and Lake Urumiah, in the Persian provinces of Khoī and Marand. The indications given in our text and the passages brought together by Schrader, which place Gilzān in direct connection with Kirruri on one side and with Kurkhi on the other, oblige us to locate the country in the upper basin of the Tigris, and I should place it near Bitlis- tchaī, where different forms of the word occur many times on the map, such as Ghalzan in Ghalzan-dagh; Kharzan, the name of a caza of the sandjak of Sert; Khizan, the name of a caza of the sandjak of Bitlis. Girzān-Kilzān would thus be the Roman province of Arzanene, Ardzn in Armenian, in which the initial g or h of the ancient name has been replaced in the process of time by a soft aspirate. Khubushkia or Khutushkia has been placed by Lenormant to the east of the Upper Zab, and south of Arapkha, and this identification has been approved by Schrader and also by Delitzsch; according to the passages that Schrader himself has cited, it must, however, have stretched northwards as far as Shatakh-su, meeting Gilzān at one point of the sandjaks of Van and Hakkiari. 

 ** Assur-nazir-pal, in going from Kirruri to Kirkhi in the basin of the Tigris, could go either by the pass of Bitlis or that of Sassun; that of Bitlis is excluded by the fact that it lies in Kirruri, and Kirruri is not mentioned in what follows. But if the route chosen was by the pass of Sassun, Khulun necessarily must have occupied a position at the entrance of the defiles, perhaps that of the present town of Khorukh. The name Khatu recalls that of the Khoith tribe which the Armenian historians mention as in this locality. Khaturu is perhaps Hātera in the caza of Lidjō, in the sandjak of Diarbekīr, and Arzania the ancient Arzan, Arzn, the ruins of which may be seen near Sheikh-Yunus. Tila-Tela is not the same town as the Tela in Mesopotamia, which we shall have occasion to speak of later, but is probably to be identified with Til or Tilleh, at the confluence of the Tigris and the Bohtan-tcha. Finally, it is possible that the name Khalua may be preserved in that of Halewi, which Layard gives as belonging to a village situated almost halfway between Rundvan and Til. 

 *** Nishtun was probably the most important spot in this region: from its position on the list, between Khulun and Khataru on one side and Arzania on the other, it is evident we must look for it somewhere in Sassun or in the direction of Mayafarrikin. 

[Illustration: 021. Jpg THE CAMPAIGNS OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL IN NAIRI]

In a small town near one of the sources of the Tigris, Assur-nazir-palfounded a colony on which he imposed his name; he left there a statueof himself, with an inscription celebrating his exploits carved on itsbase, and having done this, he returned to Nineveh laden with booty. 

[Illustration: 022. Jpg THE SITE OF SHADIKANNI AT ARBAN, ON THE KHABUR]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a sketch taken by Layard. 

A few weeks had sufficed for him to complete, on this side, the workbequeathed to him by his father, and to open up the neighbourhood of thenortheast provinces; he was not long in setting out afresh, this time tothe north-west, in the direction of the Taurus. *

 * The text of the "Annals" declares that these events took place "in this same limmu, " in what the king calls higher up in the column "the beginning of my royalty, the first year of my reign. " We must therefore suppose that he ascended the throne almost at the beginning of the year, since he was able to make two campaigns under the same eponym. 

He rapidly skirted the left bank of the Tigris, burned some score ofscattered hamlets at the foot of Nipur and Pazatu, * crossed to the rightbank, above Amidi, and, as he approached the Euphrates, receivedthe voluntary homage of Kummukh and the Mushku. ** But while he wascomplacently engaged in recording the amount of vessels of bronze, oxen, sheep, and jars of wine which represented their tribute, a messenger ofbad tidings appeared before him. Assyria was bounded on the east by aline of small states, comprising the Katna*** and the Bīt-Khalupi, ****whose towns, placed alternately like sentries on each side the Khabur, protected her from the incursions of the Bedāwin. 

 * Nipur or Nibur is the Nibaros of Strabo. If we consider the general direction of the campaign, we are inclined to place Nipur close to the bank of the Tigris, east of the regions traversed in the preceding campaign, and to identify it, as also Pazatu, with the group of high hills called at the present day the Ashit-dagh, between the Kharzan-su and the Batman-tchai. 

 ** The Mushku (Moschiano or Meshek) mentioned here do not represent the main body of the tribe, established in Cappadocia; they are the descendants of such of the Mushku as had crossed the Euphrates and contested the possession of the regions of Kashiari with the Assyrians. 

 *** The name has been read sometimes Katna, sometimes Shuna. The country included the two towns of Kamani and Dur- Katlimi, and on the south adjoined Bīt-Khalupi; this identifies it with the districts of Magada and Sheddadīyeh, and, judging by the information with which Assur-nazir-pal himself furnishes us, it is not impossible that Dur-Katline may have been on the site of the present Magarda, and Kamani on that of Sheddadīyeh. Ancient ruins have been pointed out on both these spots. 

 **** Suru, the capital of Bīt-Khalupi, was built upon the Khabur itself where it is navigable, for Assur-nazir-pal relates further on that he had his royal barge built there at the time of the cruise which he undertook on the Euphrates in the VIth year of his reign. The itineraries of modern travellers mention a place called es-Sauar or es- Saur, eight hours' march from the mouth of the Khabur on the right bank of the river, situated at the foot of a hill some 220 feet high; the ruins of a fortified enclosure and of an ancient town are still visible. Following Tomkins, I should there place Suru, the chief town of Khalupi; Bīt-Khalupi would be the territory in the neighbourhood of es-Saur. 

[Illustration: 024. Jpg ONE OF THE WINGED BULLS FOUND AT ARBAN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch by Layard. 

They were virtually Chaldęan cities, having been, like most of thosewhich flourished in the Mesopotamian plains, thoroughly impregnatedwith Babylonian civilisation. Shadikanni, the most important of them, commanded the right bank of the Khabur, and also the ford where the roadfrom Nineveh crossed the river on the route to Hariān and Carche-mish. The palaces of its rulers were decorated with winged bulls, lions, stelae, and bas-reliefs carved in marble brought from the hills ofSingar. The people seem to have been of a capricious temperament, and, nothwithstanding the supervision to which they were subjected, fewreigns elapsed in which it was not necessary to put down a rebellionamong them. Bīt-Khalupi and its capital Suru had thrown off the Assyrianyoke after the death of Tukulti-ninip; the populace, stirred up no doubtby Aramęan emissaries, had assassinated the Harnathite who governedthem, and had sent for a certain Akhiababa, a man of base extractionfrom Bīt-Adini, whom they had proclaimed king. This defection, if notpromptly dealt with, was likely to entail serious consequences, since itleft an important point on the frontier exposed: and there now remainednothing to prevent the people of Adini or their allies from spreadingover the country between the Khabur and the Tigris, and even pushingforward their marauding bands as far as the very walls of Singar andAssur. 

[Illustration: 024b. Jpg NO. 1. ENAMELED BRICK (NIMROD). NO. 2. FRAGMENTOF MURAL PAINTING (NIMROD). ]

[Illustration: 025. Jpg STELE FROM ARBAN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Layard's sketch

Without losing a moment, Assur-nazir-pal marched down the course of theKhabur, hastily collecting the tribute of the cities through which hepassed. The defenders of Sura were disconcerted by his sudden appearancebefore their town, and their rulers came out and prostrated themselvesat the king's feet: "Dost thou desire it? it is life for us;--dost thoudesire it? it is death;--dost thou desire it? what thy heart chooseth, that do to us!" But the appeal to his clemency was in vain; the alarmhad been so great and the danger so pressing, that Assur-nazir-pal waspitiless. The town was handed over to the soldiery, all the treasureit contained was confiscated, and the women and children of the bestfamilies were made slaves; some of the ringleaders paid the penalty oftheir revolt on the spot; the rest, with Akhiabaha, were carried awayand flayed alive, some at Nineveh, some elsewhere. An Assyrian garrisonwas installed in the citadel, and an ordinary governor, Azilu by name, replaced the dynasty of native princes. The report of this terribleretribution induced the Laqī* to tender their submission, and theirexample was followed by Khaian, king of Khindanu on the Euphrates. He bought off the Assyrians with gold, silver, lead, preciousstones, deep-hued purple, and dromedaries; he erected a statue ofAssur-nazir-pal in the centre of his palace as a sign of his vassalage, and built into the wall near the gates of his town an inscriptiondedicated to the gods of the conqueror. 

 * The Laqī were situated on both banks of the Euphrates, principally on the right bank, between the Khabur and the Balikh, interspersed among the Sukhi, of whom they were perhaps merely a dissentient fraction. 

Six, or at the most eight, months had sufficed to achieve these rapidsuccesses over various foes, in twenty different directions--theexpeditions in Nummi and Kirruri, the occupation of Kummukh, the flyingmarches across the mountains and plains of Mesopotamia--during all ofwhich the new sovereign had given ample proof of his genius. He had, infine, shown himself to be a thorough soldier, a conqueror of the typeof Tiglath-pileser, and Assyria by these victories had recovered herrightful rank among the nations of Western Asia. 

The second year of his reign was no less fully occupied, nor did itprove less successful than the first. At its very beginning, and evenbefore the return of the favourable season, the Sukhi on the Euphratesmade a public act of submission, and their chief, Ilubāni, brought toNineveh on their behalf a large sum of gold and silver. He had scarcelyleft the capital when the news of an untoward event effaced the goodimpression he had made. The descendants of the colonists, planted inbygone times by Shalmaneser I. On the western slope of the Masios, inthe district of Khalzidipkha, had thrown off their allegiance, andtheir leader, Khulaī, was besieging the royal fortress of Damdamusa. *Assur-nazir-pal marched direct to the sources of the Tigris, andthe mere fact of his presence sufficed to prevent any rising in thatquarter. He took advantage of the occasion to set up a stele besidethose of his father Tukulti-ninip and his ancestor Tiglath-pileser, and then having halted to receive the tribute of Izalla, ** he turnedsouthwards, and took up a position on the slopes of the Kashiari. 

 * The position of Khalzidipkha or Khalzilukha, as well as that of Kina-bu, its stronghold, is shown approximately by what follows. Assur-nazir-pal, marching from the sources of the Supnat towards Tela, could pass either to the east or west of the Karajah-dagh; as the end of the campaign finds him at Tushkhān, to the south of the Tigris, and he returns to Naīri and Kirkhi by the eastern side of the Karajah-dagh, we are led to conclude that the outgoing march to Tela was by the western side, through the country situated between the Karajah-dagh and the Euphrates. On referring to a modern map, two rather important places will be found in this locality: the first, Arghana, commanding the road from Diarbekīr to Khar-put; the other, Severek, on the route from Diarbekīr to Orfah. Arghana appears to me to correspond to the royal city of Damdamusa, which would, thus have protected the approach to the plain on the north-west. Severek corresponds fairly well to the position which, according to the Assyrian text, Kinabu must have occupied; hence the country of Khalzidipkha (Khalzilukha) must be the district of Severek. 

 ** Izalla, written also Izala, Azala, paid its tribute in sheep and oxen, and also produced a wine for which it continued to be celebrated down to the time of Nebuchadrezzar II. Lenormant and Finzi place this country- near to Nisibis, where the Byzantine and Syrian writers mention a district and a mountain of the same name, and this conjecture is borne out by the passages of the _Annals of Assur-nazir-pal_ which place it in the vicinity of Bīt-Adini and Bīt-Bakhiāni. It has also been adopted by most of the historians who have recently studied the question. 

At the first news of his approach, Khulai had raised the blockade ofDamdamusa and had entrenched himself in Kinabu; the Assyrians, however, carried the place by storm, and six hundred soldiers of the garrisonwere killed in the attack. The survivors, to the number of threethousand, together with many women and children, were, thrown into theflames. The people of Mariru hastened to the rescue;* the Assyrians tookthree hundred of them, prisoners and burnt them alive; fifty otherswere ripped up, but the victors did not stop to reduce their town. Thedistrict of Nirbu was next subjected to systematic ravaging, and half ofits inhabitants fled into the Mesopotamian desert, while the remaindersought refuge in Tela at the foot of the Ukhira. **

 * The site of Mariru is unknown; according to the text of the Annals, it ought to lie near Severek (Kinabu) to the south-east, since after having mentioned it, Assur-nazir-pal speaks of the people of Nirbu whom he engaged in the desert before marching against Tela. 

 ** Tila or Tela is the Tela Antoninopolis of the writers of the Roman period and the present Veranshehr. The district of Nirbu, of which it was the capital, lay on the southern slope of the Karajah-dagh at the foot of Mount Urkhira, the central group of the range. The name Kashiari is applied to the whole mountain group which separates the basins of the Tigris and Euphrates to the south and south-west. 

The latter place was a strong one, being surrounded by three enclosingwalls, and it offered an obstinate resistance. Notwithstanding this, itat length fell, after having lost three thousand of its defenders:--someof its garrison were condemned to the stake, some had their hands, noses, or ears cut off, others were deprived of sight, flayed alive, or impaled amid the smoking ruins. This being deemed insufficientpunishment, the conqueror degraded the place from its rank of chieftown, transferring this, together with its other privileges, to aneighbouring city, Tushkhān, which had belonged to the Assyrians fromthe beginning of their conquests. * The king enlarged the place, added toit a strong enclosing wall, and installed within it the survivors of theolder colonists who had been dispersed by the war, the majority of whomhad taken refuge in Shupria. **

 * From this passage we learn that Tushkhān, also called Tushkha, was situated on the border of Nirbu, while from another passage in the campaign of the Vth year we find that it was on the right bank of the Tigris. Following H. Rawlinson, I place it at Kurkh, near the Tigris, to the east of Diarbekīr. The existence in that locality of an inscription of Assur-nazir-pal appears to prove the correctness of this identification; we are aware, in fact, of the particular favour in which this prince held Tushkhān, for he speaks with pride of the buildings with which he embellished it. Hommel, however, identifies Kurkh with the town of Matiātō, of which mention is made further on. 

 ** Shupria or Shupri, a name which has been read Ruri, had been brought into submission from the time of Shalmaneser I. We gather from the passages in which it is mentioned that it was a hilly country, producing wine, rich in flocks, and lying at a short distance from Tushkhān; perhaps Mariru, mentioned on p. 28, was one of its towns. I think we may safely place it on the north-western slopes of the Kashiari, in the modern caza of Tchernik, which possesses several vineyards held in high estimation. Knudtzon, to whom we are indebted for the reading of this name, places the country rather further north, within the fork formed by the two upper branches of the Tigris. 

He constructed a palace there, built storehouses for the reception ofthe grain of the province; and, in short, transformed the town intoa stronghold of the first order, capable of serving as a base ofoperations for his armies. The surrounding princes, in the meanwhile, rallied round him, including Ammibaal of Bīt-Zamani, and the rulersof Shupria, Naīri, and Urumi;* the chiefs of Eastern Nirbu alone heldaloof, emboldened by the rugged nature of their mountains and thedensity of their forests. Assur-nazir-pal attacked them on his returnjourney, dislodged them from the fortress of Ishpilibria where they wereentrenched, gained the pass of Buliani, and emerged into the valley ofLuqia. **

 * The position of Bīt-Zamani on the banks of the Euphrates was determined by Delattre. Urumi was situated on the right bank of the same river in the neighbourhood of Sumeisat, and the name has survived in that of Urima, a town in the vicinity so called even as late as Roman times. Nirdun, with Madara as its capital, occupied part of the eastern slopes of the Kashiari towards Ortaveran. 

 ** Hommel identifies the Luqia with the northern affluent of the Euphrates called on the ancient monuments Lykos, and he places the scene of the war in Armenia. The context obliges us to look for this river to the south of the Tigris, to the north-east and to the east of the Kashiari. The king coming from Nirbu, the pass of Buliani, in which he finds the towns of Kirkhi, must be the valley of Khaneki, in which the road winds from Mardin to Diarbekir, and the Luqia is probably the most important stream in this region, the Sheikhān-Su, which waters Savur, chief town of the caza of Avinch. Ardupa must have been situated near, or on the actual site of, the present Mardīn, whose Assyrian name is unknown to us; it was at all events a military station on the road to Nineveh, along which the king returned victorious with the spoil. 

At Ardupa a brief halt was made to receive the ambassadors of one of theHittite sovereigns and others from the kings of Khanigalbat, after whichhe returned to Nineveh, where he spent the winter. As a matter of fact, these were but petty wars, and their immediate results appear at thefirst glance quite inadequate to account for the contemporary enthusiasmthey excited. The sincerity of it can be better understood when weconsider the miserable state of the country twenty years previously. Assyria then comprised two territories, one in the plains of the middle, the other in the districts of the upper, Tigris, both of considerableextent, but almost without regular intercommunication. Caravans orisolated messengers might pass with tolerable safety from Assur andNineveh to Singar, or even to Nisibis; but beyond these places theyhad to brave the narrow defiles and steep paths in the forests of theMasios, through which it was rash to venture without keeping eye andear ever on the alert. The mountaineers and their chiefs recognized thenominal suzerainty of Assyria, but refused to act upon this recognitionunless constrained by a strong hand; if this control were relaxed theylevied contributions on, or massacred, all who came within their reach, and the king himself never travelled from his own city of Nineveh to hisown town of Amidi unless accompanied by an army. In less than the shortspace of three years, Assur-nazir-pal had remedied this evil. Bythe slaughter of some two hundred men in one place, three hundred inanother, two or three thousand in a third, by dint of impalingand flaying refractory sheikhs, burning villages and dismantlingstrongholds, he forced the marauders of Naīri and Kirkhi to respect hisfrontiers and desist from pillaging his country. The two divisionsof his kingdom, strengthened by the military colonies in Nirbu, wereunited, and became welded together into a compact whole from the banksof the Lower Zab to the sources of the Khabur and the Supnat. 

During the following season the course of events diverted the king'sefforts into quite an opposite direction (B. C. 882). Under the name ofZamua there existed a number of small states scattered along the westernslope of the Iranian Plateau north of the Cossęans. * Many of them--as, for instance, the Lullumź--had been civilized by the Chaldęans almostfrom time immemorial; the most southern among them were perpetuallyoscillating between the respective areas of influence of Babylon andNineveh, according as one or other of these cities was in the ascendant, but at this particular moment they acknowledged Assyrian sway. Were theyexcited to rebellion against the latter power by the emissaries ofits rival, or did they merely think that Assur-nazir-pal was toofully absorbed in the affairs of Naīri to be able to carry his armseffectively elsewhere? At all events they coalesced under Nurrammān, the sheikh of Dagara, blocked the pass of Babiti which led to theirown territory, and there massed their contingents behind the shelter ofhastily erected ramparts. **

 * According to Hommol and Tiele, Zamua would be the country extending from the sources of the Radanu to the southern shores of the lake of Urumiah; Schrader believes it to have occupied a smaller area, and places it to the east and south-west of the lesser Zab. Delattre has shown that a distinction must be made between Zamua on Lake Van and the well-known Zamua upon the Zab. Zamua, as described by Assur- nazir-pal, answers approximately to the present sandjak of Suleimaniyeh in the vilayet of Mossul. 

 ** Hommol believes that Assur-nazir-pal crossed the Zab near Altin-keupru, and he is certainly correct: but it appears to me from a passage in the _Annals_, that instead of taking the road which leads to Bagdad by Ker-kuk and Tuz-Khurmati, he marched along that which leads eastwards in the direction of Suleimaniyeh. The pass of Babiti must have lain between Gawardis and Bibān, facing the Kissź tchai, which forms the western branch of the Radanu. Dagara would thus be represented by the district to the east of Kerkuk at the foot of the Kara-dagh. 

Assur-nazir-pal concentrated his army at Kakzi, * a little to the southof Arbela, and promptly marched against them; he swept all obstaclesbefore him, killed fourteen hundred and sixty men at the firstonslaught, put Dagara to fire and sword, and soon defeated Nurrammān, but without effecting his capture. 

 * Kakzi, sometimes read Kalzi, must have been situated at Shemamek of Shamamik, near Hazeh, to the south-west of Erbil, the ancient Arbela, at the spot where Jones noticed important Assyrian ruins excavated by Layard. 

As the campaign threatened to be prolonged, he formed an entrenchedcamp in a favourable position, and stationed in it some of his troops toguard the booty, while he dispersed the rest to pillage the country onall sides. 

[Illustration: 033. Jpg THE CAMPAIGNS OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL IN ZAMUA]

One expedition led him to the mountain group of Nizir, at the end of thechain known to the people of Lullumź as the Kinipa. * He there reduced toruins seven towns whose inhabitants had barricaded themselves in urgenthaste, collected the few herds of cattle he could find, and drivingthem back to the camp, set out afresh towards a part of Nizir as yetunsubdued by any conqueror. The stronghold of Larbusa fell before thebattering-ram, to be followed shortly by the capture of Bara. Thereuponthe chiefs of Zamua, convinced of their helplessness, purchased theking's departure by presents of horses, gold, silver, and corn. **Nurrammān alone remained impregnable in his retreat at Nishpi, and anattempt to oust him resulted solely in the surrender of the fortressof Birutu. *** The campaign, far from having been decisive, had to becontinued during the winter in another direction where revolts had takenplace, --in Khudun, in Kissirtu, and in the fief of Arashtua, **** allthree of which extended over the upper valleys of the lesser Zab, theRadanu, the Turnat, and their affluents. 

 * Mount Kinipa is a part of Nizir, the Khalkhalān-dagh, if we may-judge from the direction of the Assyrian campaign. 

 ** None of these places can be identified with certainty. The gist of the account leads us to gather that Bara was situated to the east of Dagara, and formed its frontier; we shall not be far wrong in looking for all these districts in the fastnesses of the Kara-dagh, in the caza of Suleimaniyeh. Mount Nishpi is perhaps the Segirmc-dagh of the present day. 

 *** The Assyrian compiler appears to have made use of two slightly differing accounts of this campaign; he has twice repeated the same facts without noticing his mistake. 

 **** The fief of Arashtua, situated beyond the Turnat, is probably the district of Suleimaniyeh; it is, indeed, at this place only that the upper course of the Turnat is sufficiently near to that of the Radanu to make the marches of Assur-nazir-pal in the direction indicated by the Assyrian scribe possible. According to the account of the _Annals_, it seems to me that we must seek for Khudun and Kissirtu to the south of the fief of Arashtua, in the modern cazas of Gulanbar or Shehrizōr. 

The king once more set out from Kakzi, crossed the Zab and the Eadanu, through the gorges of Babiti, and halting on the ridges of Mount Simaki, peremptorily demanded tribute from Dagara. * This was, however, merelya ruse to deceive the enemy, for taking one evening the lightest of hischariots and the best of his horsemen, he galloped all night withoutdrawing rein, crossed the Turnat at dawn, and pushing straight forward, arrived in the afternoon of the same day before the walls of Ammali, inthe very heart of the fief of Arashtua. ** The town vainly attempted adefence; the whole population was reduced to slavery or dispersed in theforests, the ramparts were demolished, and the houses reduced toashes. Khudun with twenty, and Kissirtu with ten of its villages, Bara, Kirtiara, Dur-Lullumź, and Bunisa, offered no further resistance, andthe invading host halted within sight of the defiles of Khashmar. ***

 * The _Annals of Assur-nazir-pal_ go on to mention that Mount Simaki extended as far as the Turnat, and that it was close to Mount Azira. This passage, when compared with that in which the opening of the campaign is described, obliges us to recognise in Mounts Simaki and Azira two parts of the Shehrizōr chain, parallel to the Seguirmé-dagh. The fortress of Mizu, mentioned in the first of these two texts, may perhaps be the present Gurān-kaleh. 

 ** Hommel thinks that Ammali is perhaps the present Suleimaniyeh; it is, at all events, on this side that we must look for its site. 

 *** I do not know whether we may trace the name of the ancient Mount Khashmar-Khashmir in the present Azmir-dagh; it is at its feet, probably in the valley of Suleimanabad, that we ought to place the passes of Khashmar. 

One kinglet, however, Amika of Zamru, showed no intention ofcapitulating. Entrenched behind a screen of forests and frowningmountain ridges, he fearlessly awaited the attack. The only access tothe remote villages over which he ruled, was by a few rough roads hemmedin between steep cliffs and beds of torrents; difficult and dangerousat ordinary times, they were blocked in war by temporary barricades, anddominated at every turn by some fortress perched at a dizzy height abovethem. After his return to the camp, where his soldiers were alloweda short respite, Assur-nazir-pal set out against Zamru, though he wascareful not to approach it directly and attack it at its most formidablepoints. Between two peaks of the Lara and Bidirgi ranges he discovered apath which had been deemed impracticable for horses, or even for heavilyarmed men. By this route, the king, unsuspected by the enemy, made hisway through the mountains, and descended so unexpectedly upon Zamru, that Amika had barely time to make his escape, abandoning everything inhis alarm--palace, treasures, harem, and even his chariot. * A body ofAssyrians pursued him hotly beyond the fords of the Lallu, chasing himas far as Mount Itini; then, retracing their steps to headquarters, theyat once set out on a fresh track, crossed the Idir, and proceeded to laywaste the plains of Ilaniu and Suāni. **

 * This raid, which started from the same point as the preceding one, ran eastwards in an opposite direction and ended at Mount Itini. Leaving the fief of Arashtua in the neighbourhood of Suleimaniyeh, Assur-nazir-pal crossed the chain of the Azmir-dagh near Pir-Omar and Gudrun, where we must place Mounts Lara and Bidirgi, and emerged upon Zamru; the only-places which appear to correspond to Zamru in that region are Kandishin and Suleimanabad. Hence the Lallu is the river which runs by Kandishin and Suleimanabad, and Itini the mountain which separates this river from the Tchami-Kizildjik. 

 ** I think we may recognise the ancient name of Ilaniu in that of Alan, now borne by a district on the Turkish and Persian frontier, situated between Kunekd ji-dagh and the town of Serdesht. The expedition, coming from the fief of Arashtua, must have marched northwards: the Idir in this case must be the Tchami-Kizildjik, and Mount Sabua the chain of mountains above Serdesht. 

Despairing of taking Amika prisoner, Assur-nazir-pal allowed him to liehidden among the brushwood of Mount Sabua, while he himself calleda halt at Parsindu, * and set to work to organise the fruits of hisconquest. 

 * Parsindu, mentioned between Mount Ilaniu and the town of Zamru, ought to lie somewhere in the valley of Tchami- Kizildjik, near Murana. 

He placed garrisons in the principal towns---at Parsindu, Zamru, andat Arakdi in Lullumź, which one of his predecessors had re-namedTukulti-Ashshur-azbat, * --"I have taken the help of Assur. " He nextimposed on the surrounding country an annual tribute of gold, silver, lead, copper, dyed stuffs, oxen, sheep, and wine. Envoys fromneighbouring kings poured in--from Khudun; Khubushkia, and Gilzān, andthe whole of Northern Zamua bowed "before the splendour of his arms;" itnow needed only a few raids resolutely directed against Mounts Azīra andSimaki, as far as the Turn at, to achieve the final pacification of theSouth. While in this neighbourhood, his attention was directed to theold town of Atlīla, ** built by Sibir, *** an ancient king of Karduniash, but which had been half ruined by the barbarians. He re-named itDur-Assur, "the fortress of Assur, " and built himself within it a palaceand storehouses, in which he accumulated large quantities of corn, making the town the strongest bulwark of his power on the Cossęanborder. 

 *The approximate site of Arakdi is indicated in the itinerary of Assur-nazir-pal itself; the king comes from Zamru in the neighbourhood of Sulei-manabad, crosses Mount Lara, which is the northern part of the Azmir-dagh, and arrives at Arakdi, possibly somewhere in Surtash. In the course of the preceding campaign, after having laid waste Bara, he set out from this same town (Arakdi) to subdue Nishpi, all of which bears out the position I have indicated. The present town of Baziān would answer fairly well for the site of a place destined to protect the Assyrian frontier on this side. 

 ** Given its position on the Chaldęan frontier, Atlīla is probably to be identified with the Kerkuk of the present day. 

 *** Hommel is inclined to believe that Sibir was the immediate predecessor of Nabubaliddin, who reigned at Babylon at the same time as Assur-nazir-pal at Nineveh; consequently he would be a contemporary of Rammān-nirāri III. And of Tukulti-ninip II. Peiser and Rost have identified him with Simmash-shikhu. 

[Illustration: 037. Jpg THE ZAB BELOW THE PASSES OF ALAN, THE ANCIENTILANIU]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. De Morgan. 

The two campaigns of B. C. 882 and 881 had cost Assur-nazir-pal greatefforts, and their results had been inadequate to the energy expended. His two principal adversaries, Nurrammān and Amika, had eluded him, andstill preserved their independence at the eastern extremities of theirformer states. Most of the mountain tribes had acknowledged the king'ssupremacy merely provisionally, in order to rid themselves of hispresence; they had been vanquished scores of times, but were in no sensesubjugated, and the moment pressure was withdrawn, they again tookup arms. The districts of Zamua alone, which bordered on the Assyrianplain, and had been occupied by a military force, formed a province, akind of buffer state between the mountain tribes and the plains of theZab, protecting the latter from incursions. 

Assur-nazir-pal, feeling himself tolerably safe on that side, made nofurther demands, and withdrew his battalions to the westward part of hisnorthern frontier. He hoped, no doubt, to complete the subjugation ofthe tribes who still contested the possession of various parts ofthe Kashiari, and then to push forward his main guard as far as theEuphrates and the Arzania, so as to form around the plain of Amidi azone of vassals or tutelary subjects like those of Zamua. With this endin view, he crossed the Tigris near its source at the traditional fords, and made his way unmolested in the bend of the Euphrates from the palaceof Tilluli, where the accustomed tribute of Kummukh was brought to him, to the fortress of Ishtarāti, and from thence to Kibaki. The town ofMatiatź, having closed its gates against him, was at once sacked, andthis example so stimulated the loyalty of the Kurkhi chiefs, thatthey ha*tened to welcome him at the neighbouring military station ofZazabukha. The king's progress continued thence as before, broken byfrequent halts at the most favourable points for levying contributionson the inhabitants. 1 Assur-nazir-pal encountered no serious difficultyexcept on the northern slopes of the Kashiari, but there again fortunesmiled on him; all the contested positions were soon ceded to him, including even Madara, whose fourfold circuit of walls did not avail tosave it from the conqueror. ** After a brief respite at Tushkhān, he setout again one evening with his lightest chariots and the pick of hishorsemen, crossed the Tigris on rafts, rode all night, and arrivedunexpectedly the next morning before Pitura, the chief town of theDirrabans. *** It was surrounded by a strong double enceinte, throughwhich he broke after forty-eight hours of continuous assault: 800 ofits men perished in the breach, and 700 others were impaled before thegates. 

 * It is difficult to place any of these localities on the map: they ought all to be found between the ford of the Tigris, at Diarbeldr and the Euphrates, probably at the foot of the Mihrab-dagh and the Kirwāntchernen-dagh. 

 ** Madara belonged to a certain Lapturi, son of Tubusi, mentioned in the campaign of the king's second year. In comparing the facts given in the two passages, we see it was situated on the eastern slope of the Kashiari, not far from Tushkhan on one side, and Ardupa--that is probably Mardin--? on the other. The position of Ortaveran, or of one of the "tells" in its neighbourhood, answers fairly well to these conditions. 

 *** According to the details given in the _Annals_, we must place the town of Bitura (or Pitura) at about 19 miles from Kurkh, on the other side of the Tigris, in a north-easterly direction, and consequently the country of Lirrā would be between the Hazu-tchaī and the Batman-tchaī. The Matni, with its passes leading in to Naīri, must in this case be the mountain group to the north of Mayafarrikīn, known as the Dordoseh-dagh or the Darkōsh-dagh. 

Arbaki, at the extreme limits of Eirkhi, was the next to succumb, afterwhich the Assyrians, having pillaged Dirra, carried the passes of Matniafter a bloody combat, spread themselves over Naīri, burning 250 of itstowns and villages, and returned with immense booty to Tushkhān. Theyhad been there merely a few days when the newt arrived that the peopleof Bīt-Zamāni, always impatient of the yoke, had murdered theirprince Ammibaal, and had proclaimed a certain Burramman in his place. Assur-nazir-pal marched upon Sinabux and repressed the insurrection, reaping a rich harvest of spoil--chariots fully equipped, 600draught-horses, 130 pounds of silver and as much of gold, 6600 pounds oflead and the same of copper, 19, 800 pounds of iron, stuffs, furniturein gold and ivory, 2000 bulls, 500 sheep, the entire harem of Ammibaal, besides a number of maidens of noble family together with their dresses. Burramman was by the king's order flayed alive, and Arteanu his brotherchosen as his successor. Sinabu* and the surrounding towns formed partof that network of colonies which in times past Shalmaneser I. Hadorganised as a protection from the incursions of the inhabitants ofNaīri; Assur-nazir-pal now used it as a rallying-place for the remainingAssyrian families, to whom he distributed lands and confided theguardianship of the neighbouring strongholds. 

 * Hommel thinks that Sinabu is very probably the same as the Kinabu mentioned above; but it appears from Assur-nazir- pal's own account that this Kinabu was in the province of Khalzidipkha (Khalzilukha) on the Kashiari, whereas Sinabu was in Bīt-Zamāni. 

The results of this measure were not long in making themselves felt:Shupria, Ulliba, and Nirbu, besides other districts, paid their duesto the king, and Shura in Khamanu, * which had for some time held outagainst the general movement, was at length constrained to submit (880B. C. ). 

 * Shur is mentioned on the return to Nairi, possibly on the road leading from Amidi and Tushkhān to Nineveh. Hommel believes that the country of Khamanu was the Amanos in Cilicia, and he admits, but unwillingly, that Assur-nazir- pal made a detour beyond the Euphrates. I should look for Shura, and consequently for Khamanu, in the Tur-Abdin, and should identify them with Saur, in spite of the difference of the two initial articulations. 

However high we may rate the value of this campaign, it was eclipsed bythe following one. The Aramęans on the Khabur and the middle Euphrateshad not witnessed without anxiety the revival of Ninevite activity, and had begged for assistance against it from its rival. Two of theirprincipal tribes, the Sukhi and the Laqi, had addressed themselves tothe sovereign then reigning at Babylon. He was a restless, ambitiousprince, named Nabu-baliddin, who asked nothing better than to excite ahostile feeling against his neighbour, provided he ran no risk by hisinterference of being drawn into open warfare. He accordingly despatchedto the Prince of Sukhi the best of his Cossoan troops, commanded byhis brother Zabdanu and one of the great officers of the crown, Bel-baliddin. In the spring of 879 B. C. , Assur-nazir-pal determined oncefor all to put an end to these intrigues. He began by inspecting thecitadels flanking the line of the Kharmish* and the Khabur, --Tabiti, **Magarisi, *** Shadikanni, Shuru in Bīt-Khafupi, and Sirki. ****

 * The Kharmish has been identified with the Hirmās, the river flowing by Nisibis, and now called the Nahr-Jaghjagha. 

 ** Tabiti is the Thebeta (Thebet) of Roman itineraries and Syrian writers, situated 33 miles from Nisibis and 52 from Singara, on the Nahr-Hesawy or one of the neighbouring wadys. 

 *** Magarisi ought to be found on the present Nahr- Jaghjagha, near its confluence with the Nahr-Jerrāhi and its tributaries; unfortunately, this part of Mesopotamia is still almost entirely unexplored, and no satisfactory map of it exists as yet. 

 **** Sirki is Circesium at the mouth of the Khabur. 

Between the embouchures of the Khabur and the Balīkh, the Euphrateswinds across a vast table-land, ridged with marly hills; the left bankis dry and sterile, shaded at rare intervals by sparse woods of poplarsor groups of palms. The right bank, on the contrary, is seamed withfertile valleys, sufficiently well watered to permit the growth ofcereals and the raising of cattle. The river-bed is almost everywherewide, but strewn with dangerous rocks and sandbanks which rendernavigation perilous. On nearing the ruins of Halebiyeh, the rivernarrows as it enters the Arabian hills, and cuts for itself a regulardefile of three or four hundred paces in length, which is approached bythe pilots with caution. *

 * It is at this defile of El-Hammeh, and not at that of Birejik at the end of the Taurus, that we must place the _Khinqi sha Purati_--the narrows of the Euphrates--so often mentioned in the account of this campaign. 

Assur-nazir-pal, on leaving Sirki, made his way along the left bank, levying toll on Supri, Naqarabāni, and several other villages in hiscourse. Here and there he called a halt facing some town on the oppositebank, but the boats which could have put him across had been removed, and the fords were too well guarded to permit of his hazarding anattack. One town, however, Khindānu, made him a voluntary offeringwhich, he affected to regard as a tribute, but Kharidi and Anat appearednot even to suspect his presence in their vicinity, and he continuedon his way without having obtained from them anything which could beconstrued into a mark of vassalage. *

 * The detailed narrative of the _Annals_ informs us that Assur-nazir-pal encamped on a mountain between Khindānu and Bīt-Shabaia, and this information enables us to determine on the map with tolerable certainty the localities mentioned in this campaign. The mountain in question can be none other than El-Hammeh, the only one met with on this bank of the Euphrates between the confluents of the Euphrates and the Khabur. Khindānu is therefore identical with the ruins of Tabus, the Dabausa of Ptolemy; hence Supri and Naqabarāni are situated between this point and Sirki, the former in the direction of Tayebeh, the latter towards El-Hoseīniyeh. On the other hand, the ruins of Kabr Abu-Atīsh would correspond very well to Bīt-Shabaia: is the name of Abu-Sbé borne by the Arabs of that neighbourhood a relic of that of Shabaia. Kharidi ought in that case to be looked for on the opposite bank, near Abu-Subān and Aksubi, where Chesney points out ancient remains. A day's march beyond Kabr Abu-Atīsh brings us to El-Khass, so that the town of Anat would be in the Isle of Moglah. Shuru must be somewhere near one of the two Tell-Menakhīrs on this side the Balikh. 

[Illustration: 044. Jpg THE CAMPAIGNS OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL IN MESOPOTAMIA]

At length, on reaching Shuru, Shadadu, the Prince of Sukhi, trustingin his Cossoans, offered him battle; but he was defeated byAssur-na'zir-pal, who captured the King of Babylon's brother, forcedhis way into the town after an assault lasting two days, and returned toAssyria laden with spoil. This might almost be considered as a repulse;for no sooner had the king quitted the country than the Aramaeans intheir turn crossed the Euphrates and ravaged the plains of the Khabur. *Assur-nazir-pal resolved not to return until he was in a positionto carry his arms into the heart of the enemy's country. He builta flotilla at Shuru in Bīt-Khalupi on which he embarked his troops. Wherever the navigation of the Euphrates proved to be difficult, theboats were drawn up out of the water and dragged along the banks overrollers until they could again be safely launched; thus, partly afloatand partly on land, they passed through the gorge of Halebiyeh, landedat Kharidi, and inflicted a salutary punishment on the cities which haddefied the king's wrath on his last expedition. Khindānu, Kharidi, andKipina were reduced to ruins, and the Sukhi and the Laqi defeated, theAssyrians pursuing them for two days in the Bisuru mountains as far asthe frontiers of Bit-Adini. **

 * The _Annals_ do not give us either the _limmu_ or the date of the year for this new expedition. The facts taken altogether prove that it was a continuation of the preceding one, and it may therefore be placed in the year B. C. 878. 

 ** The campaign of B. C. 878 had for its arena that of the Euphrates which lies between the Khabur and the Balikh; this time, however, the principal operations took place on the right bank. If Mount Bisuru is the Jebel-Bishri, the town of Kipina, which is mentioned between it and Kharidi, ought to be located between Maidān and Sabkha. 

A complete submission was brought about, and its permanency securedby the erection of two strongholds, one of which, Kar-assur-nazir-pal, commanded the left, and the other, Nibarti-assur, the right bank of theEuphrates. *

This last expedition had brought the king into contact with the mostimportant of the numerous Aramaean states congregated in the westernregion of Mesopotamia. This was Bīt-Adini, which lay on both sides ofthe middle course of the Euphrates. ** It included, on the right bank, tothe north of Carchemish, between the hills on the Sajur and Arabān-Su, amountainous but fertile district, dotted over with towns and fortresses, the names of some of which have been preserved--Pakarrukhbuni, Sursunu, Paripa, Dabigu, and Shitamrat. *** Tul-Barsip, the capital, was situatedon the left bank, commanding the fords of the modern Birejīk, ****and the whole of the territory between this latter and the Balīkhacknowledged the rule of its princes, whose authority also extendedeastwards as far as the basaltic plateau of Tul-Abā, in the Mesopotamiandesert. 

 * The account in the Annals is confused, and contains perhaps some errors with regard to the facts. The site of the two towns is nowhere indicated, but a study of the map shows that the Assyrians could not become masters of the country without occupying the passes of the Euphrates; I am inclined to think that Kar-assur-nazir-pal is El-Halebiyeh, and Nibarti-assur, Zalebiyeh, the Zenobia of Roman times. 

 ** Bīt-Adini appears to have occupied, on the right bank of the Euphrates, a part of the cazas of Aīn-Tab, Rum-kaleh, and Birejīk, that of Suruji, minus the nakhiyeh of Harrān, the larger part of the cazas of Membīj and of Rakkah, and part of the caza of Zōr, the cazas being those represented on the maps of Vital Cuinet. 

 *** None of these localities can be identified with certainty, except perhaps Dabigu, a name we may trace in that of the modern village of Dehbek. 

 **** Tul-Barsip has been identified with Birejīk. 

To the south-east, Bīt-Adini bordered upon the country of the Sukhi andthe Laqi, * lying to the east of Assyria; other principalities, mainly ofAramoan origin, formed its boundary to the north and north-west--Shugabin the bend of the Euphrates, from Birejīk to Samosata, ** Tul-Abnīaround Edessa, *** the district of Harrān, **** Bīt-Zamani, Izalla inthe Tektek-dagh and on the Upper Khabur, and Bīt-Bakhiāni in the plainextending from the Khabur to the Kharmish.^

 * In his previous campaign Assur-nazir-pal had taken two towns of Bīt-Adini, situated on the right bank of the Euphrates, at the eastern extremity of Mount Bisuru, near the frontier of the Lāqi. 

 ** The country of Shugab is mentioned between Birejīk (Tul- Barsip) and Bīt-Zamani, in one of the campaigns of Shalmaneser III. , which obliges us to place it in the caza of Rum-kaleh; the name has been read Sumu. 

 *** Tul-Abnī, which was at first sought for near the sources of the Tigris, has been placed in the Mesopotamian plain. The position which it occupies among the other names obliges us to put it near Bīt-Adini and Bīt-Zamani: the only possible site that I can find for it is at Orfah, the Edessa of classical times. 

 **** The country of Harrān is nowhere mentioned as belonging either to Bīt-Adini or to Tul-Abnī: we must hence conclude that at this period it formed a little principality independent of those two states. 

 ^ The situation of Bīt-Bakhiāni is shown by the position which it occupies in the account of the campaign, and by the names associated with it in another passage of the _Annals_. 

Bīt-Zamani had belonged to Assyria by right of conquest ever since thedeath of Ammibaal; Izalla and Bīt-Bakhiāni had fulfilled their dutiesas vassals whenever Assur-nazir-pal had appeared in their neighbourhood;Bīt-Adini alone had remained independent, though its strength was moreapparent than real. The districts which it included had never been ableto form a basis for a powerful state. If by chance some small kingdomarose within it, uniting under one authority the tribes scattered overthe burning plain or along the river banks, the first conqueringdynasty which sprang up in the neighbourhood would be sure to effect itsdownfall, and absorb it under its own leadership. As Mitāni, saved byits remote position from bondage to Egypt, had not been able to escapefrom acknowledging the supremacy of the Khāti, so Bīt-Adini was destinedto fall almost without a struggle under the yoke of the Assyrians. Itwas protected from their advance by the volcanic groups of the Urāa andTul-Abā, which lay directly in the way of the main road from the marshesof the Khabur to the outskirts of Tul-Barsip. Assur-nazir-pal, who mighthave worked round this line of natural defence to the north throughNirbu, or to the south through his recently acquired province of Lāqi, preferred to approach it in front; he faced the desert, and, in spite ofthe drought, he invested the strongest citadel of Tul-Abā in the monthof June, 877 B. C. The name of the place was Kaprabi, and its inhabitantsbelieved it impregnable, clinging as it did to the mountain-side "likea cloud in the sky. "*

 * The name is commonly interpreted "Great Rock, " and divided thus--Kap-rabi. It may also be considered, like Kapridargila or Kapranishā, as being formed of _Kapru_ and _abi_; this latter element appears to exist in the ancient name of Telaba, Thallaba, now Tul-Abā. Kapr-abi might be a fortress of the province of Tul-Abā. 

The king, however, soon demolished its walls by sapping and by the useof the ram, killed 800 of its garrison, burned its houses, and carriedoff 2400 men with their families, whom he installed in one of thesuburbs of Calah. Akhuni, who was then reigning in Bīt-Adini, had notanticipated that the invasion would reach his neighbourhood: he at oncesent hostages and purchased peace by a tribute; the Lord of Tul-Abnīfollowed his example, and the dominion of Assyria was carried at a blowto the very frontier of the Khāti. It was about two centuries beforethis that Assurirba had crossed these frontiers with his vanquishedarmy, but the remembrance of his defeat had still remained fresh in thememory of the people, as a warning to the sovereign who should attemptthe old hazardous enterprise, and repeat the exploits of Sargon of Agadźor of Tiglath-pileser I. Assur-nazir-pal made careful preparations forthis campaign, so decisive a one for his own prestige and for the futureof the empire. He took with him not only all the Assyrian troops at hisdisposal, but requisitioned by the way the armies of his most recentlyacquired vassals, incorporating them with his own, not so much for thepurpose of augmenting his power of action, as to leave no force in hisrear when once he was engaged hand to hand with the Syrian legions. He left Calah in the latter days of April, 876 B. C. , * receivingthe customary taxes from Bīt-Bakhiāni, Izalla, and Bīt-Adini, whichcomprised horses, silver, gold, copper, lead, precious stuffs, vesselsof copper and furniture of ivory; having reached Tul-Barsip, he acceptedthe gifts offered by Tul-Abni, and crossing the Euphrates upon rafts ofinflated skins, he marched his columns against Oarchemish. 

 * On the 8th Iyyār, but without any indication of limmu, or any number of the year or of the campaign; the date 876 B. C. Is admitted by the majority of historians. 

The political organisation of Northern Syria had remained entirelyunaltered since the days when Tiglath-pileser made his first victoriousinroad into the country. The Cilician empire which succeeded to theAssyrian--if indeed it ever extended as far as some suppose--did notlast long enough to disturb the balance of power among the various racesoccupying Syria: it had subjugated them for a time, but had not beenable to break them up and reconstitute them. At the downfall of theCilician Empire the small states were still intact, and occupied, as ofold, the territory comprising the ancient Naharaim of the Egyptians, theplateau between the Orontes and the Euphrates, the forests and marshylowlands of the Amanos, the southern slopes of Taurus, and the plains ofCilicia. 

[Illustration: 050. Jpg CAMPAIGNS OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL IN SYRIA]

Of these states, the most famous, though not then the most redoubtable, was that with which the name of the Khāti is indissolubly connected, andwhich had Carchemish as its capital. This ancient city, seated on thebanks of the Euphrates, still maintained its supremacy there, but thoughits wealth and religious ascendency were undiminished, its territory hadbeen curtailed. The people of Bīt-Adini had intruded themselves betweenthis state and Kummukh, Arazik hemmed it in on the south, Khazazuand Khalmān confined it on the west, so that its sway was only freelyexercised in the basin of the Sajur. On the north-west frontier of theKhāti lay Gurgum, whose princes resided at Marqasi and ruled over thecentral valley of the Pyramos together with the entire basin of theAk-su. Mikhri, * Iaudi, and Samalla lay on the banks of the Saluara, andin the forests of the Amanos to the south of Gurgum. Kuī maintained itsuneventful existence amid the pastures of Cilicia, near the marshes atthe mouth of the Pyramos. To the south of the Sajur, Bīt-Agusi** barredthe way to the Orontes; and from their lofty fastness of Arpad, itschiefs kept watch over the caravan road, and closed or opened it attheir will. 

 * Mikhri or Ismikhri, i. E. "the country of larches, " was the name of a part of the Amanos, possibly near the Pyramos. 

 ** The real name of the country was Iakhānu, but it was called Bīt-Gusi or Bīt-Agusi, like Bīt-Adini, Bīt-Bakhiāni, Bīt-Omri, after the founder of the reigning dynasty. We must place Iakhānu to the south of Azaz, in the neighbourhood of Arpad, with this town as its capital. 

They held the key of Syria, and though their territory was small inextent, their position was so strong that for more than a century anda half the majority of the Assyrian generals preferred to avoid thisstronghold by making a detour to the west, rather than pass beneath itswalls. Scattered over the plateau on the borders of Agusi, or hidden inthe valleys of Amanos, were several less important principalities, mostof them owing allegiance to Lubarna, at that time king of the Patina andthe most powerful sovereign of the district. The Patina had apparentlyreplaced the Alasia of Egyptian times, as Bīt-Adini had supersededMitāni; the fertile meadow-lands to the south of Samalla on the Afrīnand the Lower Orontes, together with the mountainous district betweenthe Orontes and the sea as far as the neighbourhood of Eleutheros, alsobelonged to the Patina. 

[Illustration: 052. Jpg BAS-RELIEF FROM A BUILDING AT SINJIRLI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch by Perrot and Chipiez. 

On the southern frontier of the Patina lay the important Phoeniciancities, Arvad, Arka, and Sina; and on the south-east, the fortressesbelonging to Hamath and Damascus. The characteristics of the countryremained unchanged. Fortified towns abounded on all sides, as well aslarge walled villages of conical huts, like those whose strange outlineson the horizon are familiar to the traveller at the present-day. Themanners and civilisation of Chaldęa pervaded even more than formerly thepetty courts, but the artists clung persistently to Asianic tradition, and the bas-reliefs which adorned the palaces and temples were similarin character to those we find scattered throughout Asia Minor; thereis the same inaccurate drawing, the same rough execution, the sametentative and awkward composition. 

[Illustration: 053. Jpg JIBRĪN, A VILLAGE OF CONICAL HUTS, ON THE PLATEAUOF ALEPPO]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph reproduced in Peters. 

The scribes from force of custom still employed the cuneiform syllabaryin certain official religious or royal inscriptions, but, as it wasdifficult to manipulate and limited in application, the speech of theAramęan immigrants and the Phoenician alphabet gradually superseded theancient language and mode of writing. *

 * There is no monument bearing an inscription in this alphabet which can be referred with any certainty to the time of Assur-nazir-pal, but the inscriptions of the kings of Samalla date back to a period not more than a century and a half later than his reign; we may therefore consider the Aramęan alphabet as being in current use in Northern Syria at the beginning of the ninth century, some forty years before the date of Mesha's inscription (i. E. The Moabite stone). 

Thus these Northern Syrians became by degrees assimilated to the peopleof Babylon and Nineveh, much as the inhabitants of a remote provincenowadays adapt their dress, their architecture, their implements ofhusbandry and handicraft, their military equipment and organisation, tothe fashions of the capital. *

 * One can judge of their social condition from the enumeration of the objects which formed their tribute, or the spoil which the Assyrian kings carried off from their country. 

[Illustration: 054. Jpg THE WAR-CHARIOT OF THE KHĀTI OP THE NINTHCENTURY]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a bas-relief. 

Their armies were modelled on similar lines, and consisted of archers, plkemen, slingers, and those troops of horsemen which accompanied thechariotry on flying raids; the chariots, moreover, closely followed theAssyrian type, even down to the padded bar with embroidered hangingswhich connected the body of the chariot with the end of the pole. 

[Illustration: 055. Jpg THE ASSYRIAN WAR-CHARIOT OF THE NINTH CENTURYB. C. ]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bronze bas-relief on the gates of Balawāt. 

The Syrian princes did not adopt the tiara, but they wore the longfringed robe, confined by a girdle at the waist, and their mode of life, with its ceremonies, duties, and recreations, differed little from thatprevailing in the palaces of Calah or Babylon. They hunted big game, including the lion, according to the laws of the chase recognised atNineveh, priding themselves as much on their exploits in hunting, as ontheir triumphs in war. 

[Illustration: 056. Jpg A KING OF THE KHĀTI HUNTING A LION IN HISCHARIOT]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Hogarth, published in the _Recueil de Travaux_. 

Their religion was derived from the common source which underlay allSemitic religions, but a considerable number of Babylonian deities werealso worshipped; these had been introduced in some cases without anymodification, whilst in others they had been assimilated to more ancientgods bearing similar characteristics: at Nerab, among the Patina, Nuskuand his female companion Nikal, both of Chaldęan origin, claimed thehomage of the faithful, to the disparagement of Shahr the moon andShamash the sun. Local cults often centred round obscure deities heldin little account by the dominant races; thus Samalla reverenced Uru thelight, Bekubźl the wind, the chariot of El, not to mention El himself, Besheph, Hadad, and the Cabin, the servants of Besheph. 

[Illustration: 057. Jpg THE GOD HADAD]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the photograph in Luschan. 

These deities were mostly of the Assyrian type, and if one may drawany conclusion from the few representations of them already discovered, their rites must have been celebrated in a manner similar to thatfollowed in the cities on the Lower Euphrates. Scarcely any signs ofEgyptian influence survived, though here and there a trace of it mightbe seen in the figures of calf or bull, the vulture of Mut or thesparrow-hawk of Horus. Assur-nazir-pal, marching from the banks of theKhabur to Bīt-Adini, and from Bīt-Adini passing on to Northern Syria, might almost have imagined himself still in his own dominions, sogradual and imperceptible were the changes in language and civilisationin the country traversed between Nineveh and Assur, Tul-Barsip andSamalla. 

His expedition was unattended by danger or bloodshed. Lubarna, thereigning prince of the Patina, was possibly at that juncture meditatingthe formation of a Syrian empire under his rule. Unki, in which lay hiscapital of Kunulua, was one of the richest countries of Asia, * beingwell watered by the Afrin, Orontes, and Saluara;** no fields producedsuch rich harvests as his, no meadows pastured such cattle or werebetter suited to the breeding of war-horses. 

 * The Unki of the Assyrians, the Uniuqa of the Egyptians, is the valley of Antioch, the Amk of the present day. Kunulua or Kinalia, the capital of the Patina, has been identified with the Gindaros of Greek times; I prefer to identify it with the existing Tell-Kunāna, written for Tell-Kunāla by the common substitution of _n_ for _l_ at the end of proper names. 

 ** The Saluara of the Assyrian texts is the present Kara-su, which flows into the Ak-Denīz, the lake of Antioch. 

[Illustration: 058. Jpg RELIGIOUS SCENE DISPLAYING EGYPTIAN FEATURES]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the impression taken from a Hittite cylinder. 

His mountain provinces yielded him wood and minerals, and provided areserve of semi-savage woodcutters and herdsmen from which to recruithis numerous battalions. The neighbouring princes, filled withuneasiness or jealousy by his good fortune, saw in the Assyrian monarcha friend and a liberator rather than an enemy. Carchemish opened itsgates and laid at his feet the best of its treasures--twenty talents ofsilver, ingots, rings, and daggers of gold, a hundred talents of copper, two hundred talents of iron, bronze bulls, cups decorated with scenesin relief or outline, ivory in the tusk or curiously wrought, purpleand embroidered stuffs, and the state carriage of its King Shangara. The Hittite troops, assembled in haste, joined forces with the Aramęanauxiliaries, and the united host advanced on Coele-Syria. The scribecommissioned to record the history of this expedition has taken adelight in inserting the most minute details. Leaving Carchemish, thearmy followed the great caravan route, and winding its way between thehills of Munzigāni and Khamurga, skirting Bīt-Agusi, at length arrivedunder the walls of Khazazu among the Patina. *

 * Khazazu being the present Azaz, the Assyrian army must have followed the route which still leads from Jerabis to this town. Mount Munzigāni and Khamurga, mentioned between Carchemish and Akhānu or Iakhānu, must lie between the Sajur and the Koweik, near Shehab, at the only point on the route where the road passes between two ranges of lofty hills. 

The town having purchased immunity by a present of gold and of finelywoven stuffs, the army proceeded to cross the Apriź, on the bank ofwhich an entrenched camp was formed for the storage of the spoil. Lubarna offered no resistance, but nevertheless refused to acknowledgehis inferiority; after some delay, ifc was decided to make a directattack on his capital, Kunulua, whither he had retired. The appearanceof the Assyrian vanguard put a speedy end to his ideas of resistance:prostrating himself before his powerful adversary, he offered hostages, and emptied his palaces and stables to provide a ransom. This comprisedtwenty talents of silver, one talent of gold, a hundred talents oflead, a hundred talents of iron, a thousand bulls, ten thousand sheep, daughters of his nobles with befitting changes of garments, and all theparaphernalia of vessels, jewels, and costly stuffs which formedthe necessary furniture of a princely household. The effect of hissubmission on his own vassals and the neighbouring tribes was shown indifferent ways. Bīt-Agusi at once sent messengers to congratulate theconqueror, but the mountain provinces awaited the invader's nearerapproach before following its example. Assur-nazir-pal, seeing that theydid not take the initiative, crossed the Orontes, probably at the spotwhere the iron bridge now stands, and making his way through the countrybetween laraku and Iaturi, * reached the banks of the Sangura* withoutencountering any difficulty. 

 * The spot where Assur-nazir-pal must have crossed the Orontes is determined by the respective positions of Kunulua and Tell-Kunāna. At the iron bridge, the modern traveller has the choice of two roads: one, passing Antioch and Beīt- el-Mā, leads to Urdeh on the Nahr-el-Kebīr; the other reaches the same point by a direct route over the Gebel Kosseir. If, as I believe, Assur-nazir-pal took the latter route, the country and Mount laraku must be the northern part of Gebel Kosseir in the neighbourhood of Antioch, and Iaturi, the southern part of the same mountain near Derkush. Laraku is mentioned in the same position by Shalmaneser III. , who reached it after crossing the Orontes, on descending from the Amanos _en route_ for the country of Hamath. 

 ** The Sangura or Sagura has been identified by Delattre with the Nahr-el-Kebīr, not that river which the Greeks called the Eleutheros, but that which flows into the sea near Latakia. Before naming the Sangura, the _Annals_ mention a country, whose name, half effaced, ended in _-ku_: I think we may safely restore this name as [Ashtama]kou, mentioned by Shalmaneser III. In this region, after the name of laraku. The country of Ashtamaku would thus be the present canton of Urdeh, which is traversed before reaching the banks of the Nahr-el-Kebīr. 

After a brief halt there in camp, he turned his back on the sea, andpassing between Saratini and Duppāni, * took by assault the fortress ofAribua. ** This stronghold commanded all the surrounding country, and wasthe seat of a palace which Lubarna at times used as a similar residence. Here Assur-nazir-pal took up his quarters, and deposited within itswalls the corn and spoils of Lukhuti;*** he established here an Assyriancolony, and, besides being the scene of royal festivities, it becamehenceforth the centre of operations against the mountain tribes. 

 * The mountain cantons of Saratini and Duppāni (Kalpāni l'Adpāni?), situated immediately to the south of the Nahr-el- Kebīr, correspond to the southern part of Gebel-el-Akrad, but I cannot discover any names on the modern map at all resembling them. 

 ** Beyond Duppāni, Assur-nazir-pal encamped on the banks of a river whose name is unfortunately effaced, and then reached Aribua; this itinerary leads us to the eastern slope of the Gebel Ansarieh in the latitude of Hamath. The only site I can find in this direction fulfilling the requirements of the text is that of Masiad, where there still exists a fort of the Assassins. The name Aribua is perhaps preserved in that of Rabaō, er-Rabahu, which is applied to a wady and village in the neighbourhood of Masiad. 

 *** Lukhuti must not be sought in the plains of the Orontes, where Assur-nazir-pal would have run the risk of an encounter with the King of Hamath or his vassals; it must represent the part of the mountain of Ansarieh lying between Kadmus, Masiad, and Tortosa. 

The forts of the latter were destroyed, their houses burned, andprisoners were impaled outside the gates of their cities. Havingachieved this noble exploit, the king crossed the intervening spurs ofLebanon and marched down to the shores of the Mediterranean. Here hebathed his weapons in the waters, and offered the customary sacrificesto the gods of the sea, while the Phoenicians, with their wontedprudence, hastened to anticipate his demands--Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, Mahallat, Maīza, Kaīza, the Amorites and Arvad, * all sending tribute. 

 * The point where Assur-nazir-pal touched the sea-coast cannot be exactly determined: admitting that he set out from Masiad or its neighbourhood, he must have crossed the Lebanon by the gorge of the Eleutheros, and reached the sea- board somewhere near the mouth of this river. 

One point strikes us forcibly as we trace on the map the march of thisvictorious hero, namely, the care with which he confined himself tothe left bank of the Orontes, and the restraint he exercised inleaving untouched the fertile fields of its valley, whose wealth wasso calculated to excite his cupidity. This discretion would beinexplicable, did we not know that there existed in that region aformidable power which he may have thought it imprudent to provoke. Itwas Damascus which held sway over those territories whose frontiers herespected, and its kings, also suzerains of Hamath and masters of halfIsrael, were powerful enough to resist, if not conquer, any enemy whomight present himself. The fear inspired by Damascus naturally explainsthe attitude adopted by the Hittite states towards the invader, andthe precautions taken by the latter to restrict his operations withinsomewhat narrow limits. Having accepted the complimentary presents ofthe Phoenicians, the king again took his way northwards--making a slightdetour in order to ascend the Amanos for the purpose of erecting therea stele commemorating his exploits, and of cutting pines, cedars, and larches for his buildings--and then returned to Nineveh amid theacclamations of his people. 

In reading the history of this campaign, its plan and the principalevents which took place in it appear at times to be the echo of what hadhappened some centuries before. The recapitulation of the halting-placesnear the sources of the Tigris and on the banks of the Upper Euphrates, the marches through the valleys of the Zagros or on the slopes ofKashiari, the crushing one by one of the Mesopotamian races, ending in atriumphal progress through Northern Syria, is almost a repetition, bothas to the names and order of the places mentioned, of the expeditionmade by Tiglath-pileser in the first five years of his reign. Thequestion may well arise in passing whether Assur-nazir-pal consciouslymodelled his campaign on that of his ancestor, as, in Egypt, RamsesIII. Imitated Ramses II. , or whether, in similar circumstances, heinstinctively and naturally followed the same line of march. Ineither case, he certainly showed on all sides greater wisdom than hispredecessor, and having attained the object of his ambition, avoidedcompromising his success by injudiciously attacking Damascus or Babylon, the two powers who alone could have offered effective resistance. Thevictory he had gained, in 879, over the brother of Nabu-baliddin hadimmensely flattered his vanity. His panegyrists vied with each other indepicting Karduniash bewildered by the terror of his majesty, and theChaldęans overwhelmed by the fear of his arms; but he did not allowhimself to be carried away by their extravagant flatteries, andcontinued to the end of his reign to observe the treaties concludedbetween the two courts in the time of his grandfather Rammān-nirāri. *

 * His frontier on the Chaldęan side, between the Tigris and the mountains, was the boundary fixed by Rammān-nirāri. 

He had, however, sufficiently enlarged his dominions, in less than tenyears, to justify some display of pride. He himself described his empireas extending, on the west of Assyria proper, from the banks of theTigris near Nineveh to Lebanon and the Mediterranean;* besides which, Sukhi was subject to him, and this included the province of Rapiku onthe frontiers of Babylonia. **

 * The expression employed in this description and in similar passages, _ishtu ibirtan nāru_, translated _from the ford over the river_, or better, _from the other side of the river_, must be understood as referring to Assyria proper: the territory subject to the king is measured in the direction indicated, starting from the rivers which formed the boundaries of his hereditary dominions. _From the other bank of the Tigris_ means from the bank of the Tigris opposite Nineveh or Oalah, whence the king and his army set out on their campaigns. 

 ** Rapiku is mentioned in several texts as marking the frontier between the Sukhi and Chaldęa. 

He had added to his older provinces of Amidi, Masios and Singar, thewhole strip of Armenian territory at the foot of the Taurus range, fromthe sources of the Supnat to those of the Bitlis-tchaī, and he held thepasses leading to the banks of the Arzania, in Kirruri and Gilzān, whilethe extensive country of Naīri had sworn him allegiance. Towards thesouth-east the wavering tribes, which alternately gave their adherenceto Assur or Babylon according to circumstances, had ranged themselves onhis side, and formed a large frontier province beyond the borders of hishereditary kingdom, between the Lesser Zab and the Turnat. But, despiterepeated blows inflicted on them, he had not succeeded in weldingthese various factors into a compact and homogeneous whole; some smallproportion of them were assimilated to Assyria, and were governeddirectly by royal officials, * but the greater number were merelydependencies, more or less insecurely held by the obligations ofvassalage or servitude. In some provinces the native chiefs were underthe surveillance of Assyrian residents;** these districts paid an annualtribute proportionate to the resources and products of their country:thus Kirruri and the neighbouring states contributed horses, mules, bulls, sheep, wine, and copper vessels; the Aramaeans gold, silver, lead, copper, both wrought and in the ore, purple, and coloured orembroidered stuffs; while Izalla, Nirbu, Nirdun, and Bīt-Zamāni had tofurnish horses, chariots, metals, and cattle. 

 * There were royal governors in Suru in Bit-Khalupi, in Matiāte, in Madara, and in Naīri. 

 ** There were "Assyrian" residents in Kirruri and the neighbouring countries, in Kirkhi, and in Naīri. 

The less civilised and more distant tribes were not, like these, subject to regular tribute, but each time the sovereign traversed theirterritory or approached within reasonable distance, their chiefs sentor brought to him valuable presents as fresh pledges of their loyalty. Royal outposts, built at regular intervals and carefully fortified, secured the fulfilment of these obligations, and served as depots forstoring the commodities collected by the royal officials; such outpostswere, Damdamusa on the north-west of the Kashiari range, Tushkhān on theTigris, Tilluli between the Supnat and the Euphrates, Aribua among thePatina, and others scattered irregularly between the Greater and LesserZab, on the Khabur, and also in Naīri. These strongholds served asplaces of refuge for the residents and their guards in case of a revolt, and as food-depots for the armies in the event of war bringing theminto their neighbourhood. In addition to these, Assur-nazir-pal alsostrengthened the defences of Assyria proper by building fortresses atthe points most open to attack; he repaired or completed the defences ofKaksi, to command the plain between the Greater and Lesser Zab and theTigris; he rebuilt the castles or towers which guarded the river-fordsand the entrances to the valleys of the Gebel Makhlub, and erected atCalah the fortified palace which his successors continued to inhabit forthe ensuing five hundred years. 

Assur-nazir-pal had resided at Nineveh from the time of his accession tothe throne; from thence he had set out on four successive campaigns, andthither he had returned at the head of his triumphant troops, there hehad received the kings who came to pay him homage, and the governorswho implored his help against foreign attacks; thither he had sentrebel chiefs, and there, after they had marched in ignominy through thestreets, he had put them to torture and to death before the eyes ofthe crowd, and their skins were perchance still hanging nailed to thebattlements when he decided to change the seat of his capital. Theancient capital no longer suited his present state as a conqueror; theaccommodation was too restricted, the decoration too poor, and probablythe number of apartments was insufficient to house the troops of womenand slaves brought back from his wars by its royal master. Built onthe very bank of the Tebilti, one of the tributaries of the Khusur, and hemmed in by three temples, there was no possibility of itsenlargement--a difficulty which often occurs in ancient cities. Thenecessary space for new buildings could only have been obtained byaltering the course of the stream, and sacrificing a large part of theadjoining quarters of the city: Assur-nazir-pal therefore preferred toabandon the place and to select a new site where he would have amplespace at his disposal. 

[Illustration: 067. Jpg THE MOUNDS OF CALAH]

 Drawn by Boudier, from Layard. The pointed mound on the left near the centre of the picture represents the ziggurāt of the great temple. 

He found what he required close at hand in the half-ruined city ofCalah, where many of his most illustrious predecessors had in times pastsought refuge from the heat of Assur. It was now merely an obscure andsleepy town about twelve miles south of Nineveh, on the right bank ofthe Tigris, and almost at the angle made by the junction of this riverwith the Greater Zab. The place contained a palace built by ShalmaneserI. , which, owing to many years' neglect, had become uninhabitable. Assur-nazir-pal not only razed to the ground the palaces and temples, but also levelled the mound on which they had been built; he thencleared away the soil down to the water level, and threw up an immenseand almost rectangular terrace on which to lay out his new buildings. 

[Illustration: 068. Jpg STELE OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL AT CALAH]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by Mansell. 

The king chose Ninip, the god of war, as the patron of the city, anddedicated to him, at the north-west corner of the terrace, a ziggurātwith its usual temple precincts. Here the god was represented as a bullwith a man's head and bust in gilded alabaster, and two yearly feastswere instituted in his honour, one in the month Sebat, the other in themonth Ulul. The ziggurāt was a little over two hundred feet high, and was probably built in seven stages, of which only one now remainsintact: around it are found several independent series of chambers andpassages, which may have been parts of other temples, but it is nowimpossible to say which belonged to the local Belīt, which to Sin, toGula, to Rammān, or to the ancient deity Rā. At the entrance to thelargest chamber, on a rectangular pedestal, stood a stele with roundedtop, after the Egyptian fashion. On it is depicted a figure of the king, standing erect and facing to the left of the spectator; he holds hismace at his side, his right hand is raised in the attitude of adoration, and above him, on the left upper edge of the stele, are grouped the fivesigns of the planets; at the base of the stele stands an altar witha triangular pedestal and circular slab ready for the offerings to bepresented to the royal founder by priests or people. The palace extendedalong the south side of the terrace facing the town, and with the riverin its rear; it covered a space one hundred and thirty-one yards inlength and a hundred and nine in breadth. In the centre was a largecourt, surrounded by seven or eight spacious halls, appropriatedto state functions; between these and the court were many rooms ofdifferent sizes, forming the offices and private apartments of theroyal house. The whole palace was built of brick faced with stone. Threegateways, flanked by winged, human-headed bulls, afforded access to thelargest apartment, the hall of audience, where the king received hissubjects or the envoys of foreign powers. * The doorways and walls ofsome of the rooms were decorated with glazed tiles, but the majority ofthem were covered with bands of coloured** bas-reliefs which portrayedvarious episodes in the life of the king--his state-councils, his lionhunts, the reception of tribute, marches over mountains and rivers, chariot-skirmishes, sieges, and the torture and carrying away ofcaptives. 

 * At the east end of the hall Layard found a block of alabaster covered with inscriptions, forming a sort of platform on which the king's throne may have stood. 

 ** Layard points out the traces of colouring still visible when the excavations were made. 

[Illustration: 070. Jpg THE WINGED BULLS OP ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch by Layard. 

Incised in bands across these pictures are inscriptions extolling theomnipotence of Assur, while at intervals genii with eagles' beaks, ordeities in human form, imperious and fierce, appear with hands fullof offerings, or in the act of brandishing thunderbolts against evilspirits. The architect who designed this imposing decoration, and thesculptors who executed it, closely followed the traditions of ancientChaldęa in the drawing and composition of their designs, and in the useof colour or chisel; but the qualities and defects peculiar to their ownrace give a certain character of originality to this borrowed art. Theyexaggerated the stern and athletic aspect of their models, making thefigure thick-set, the muscles extraordinarily enlarged, and the featuresludicrously accentuated. 

[Illustration: 071. Jpg GLAZED TILE FROM PALACE OF CALAH]

 Drawn by Boudier, after Layard. 

Their pictures produce an impression of awkwardness, confusion andheaviness, but the detail is so minute and the animation so great thatthe attention of the spectator is forcibly arrested; these uncouthbeings impress us with the sense of their self-reliance and theirconfidence in their master, as we watch them brandishing theirweapons or hurrying to the attack, and see the shock of battle and thedeath-blows given and received. The human-headed bulls, standing onguard at the gates, exhibit the calm and pensive dignity befittingcreatures conscious of their strength, while the lions passant whosometimes replace them, snarl and show their teeth with an almostalarming ferocity. 

[Illustration: 072. Jpg LION FROM ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL'S PALACE]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph of the sculpture in the British Museum. 

The statues of men and gods, as a rule, are lacking in originality. Theheavy robes which drape them from head to foot give them the appearanceof cylinders tied in at the centre and slightly flattened towards thetop. The head surmounting this shapeless bundle is the only life-likepart, and even the lower half of this is rendered heavy by the hairand beard, whose tightly curled tresses lie in stiff rows one above theother. The upper part of the face which alone is visible iscorrectly drawn; the expression is of rather a commonplace type ofnobility--respectable but self-sufficient. The features--eyes, forehead, nose, mouth--are all those of Assur-nazir-pal; the hair is arranged inthe fashion he affected, and the robe is embroidered with his jewels;but amid all this we miss the keen intelligence always present inEgyptian sculpture, whether under the royal head-dress of Cheops or inthe expectant eyes of the sitting scribe: the Assyrian sculptor couldcopy the general outline of his model fairly well, but could not infusesoul into the face of the conqueror, whose "countenance beamed above thedestruction around him. "

The water of the Tigris being muddy, and unpleasant to the taste, andthe wells at Calah so charged with lime and bitumen as to render themunwholesome, Assur-nazir-pal supplied the city with water from theneighbouring Zab. * An abundant stream was diverted from this river atthe spot now called Negub, and conveyed at first by a tunnel excavatedin the rock, and thence by an open canal to the foot of the greatterrace: at this point the flow of the water was regulated by dams, andthe surplus was utilised for irrigation** purposes by means of openingscut in the banks. 

 * The presence of bitumen in the waters of Calah is due to the hot springs which rise in the bed of the brook Shor- derreh. 

 ** The canal of Negub--_Negub_ signifies _hole_ in Arabic-- was discovered by Layard. The Zab having changed its course to the south, and scooped out a deeper bed for itself, the double arch, which serves as an entrance to the canal, is actually above the ordinary level of the river, and the water flows through it only in flood-time. 

The aqueduct was named Bābilat-khigal--the bringer of plenty--and, tojustify the epithet, date-palms, vines, and many kinds of fruit treeswere planted along its course, so that both banks soon assumed theappearance of a shady orchard interspersed with small towns and villas. The population rapidly increased, partly through the spontaneousinflux of Assyrians themselves, but still more through the repeatedintroduction of bands of foreign prisoners: forts, established at thefords of the Zab, or commanding the roads which cross the Gebel Makhlub, kept the country in subjection and formed an inner line of defence at ashort distance from the capital. 

[Illustration: 074. Jpg A CORNER OF THE RUINED PALACE OF ASSUR-NAZIR-PAL]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Rassam. 

Assur-nazir-pal kept up a palace, garden, and small temple, near thefort of Imgur-Bel, the modern Balawāt: thither he repaired for intervalsof repose from state affairs, to enjoy the pleasures of the chaseand cool air in the hot season. He did not entirely abandon his othercapitals, Nineveh and Assur, visiting them occasionally, but Calah washis favourite seat, and on its adornment he spent the greater part ofhis wealth and most of his leisure hours. Only once again did he abandonhis peaceful pursuits and take the field, about the year 897 B. C. , during the eponymy of Shamashnurī. The tribes on the northern boundaryof the empire had apparently forgotten the lessons they had learnt atthe cost of so much bloodshed at the beginning of his reign: many hadomitted to pay the tribute due, one chief had seized the royal cities ofAmidi and Damdamusa, and the rebellion threatened to spread to Assyriaitself. Assur-nazir-pal girded on his armour and led his troops tobattle as vigorously as in the days of his youth. He hastily collected, as he passed through their lands, the tribute due from Kipāni, Izalla, and Kummukh, gained the banks of the Euphrates, traversed Grubbu burningeverything on his way, made a detour through Dirria and Kirkhi, andfinally halted before the walls of Damdamusa. Six hundred soldiersof the garrison perished in the assault and four hundred were takenprisoners: these he carried to Amidi and impaled as an object-lessonround its walls; but, the defenders of the town remaining undaunted, he raised the siege and plunged into the gorges of the Kashiari. Havingthere reduced to submission Udā, the capital of Lapturi, son of Tubisi, he returned to Calah, taking with him six thousand prisoners whom hesettled as colonists around his favourite residence. This was his lastexploit: he never subsequently quitted his hereditary domain, butthere passed the remaining seven years of his life in peace, if not inidleness. He died in 860 B. C. , after a reign of twenty-five years. Hisportraits represent him as a vigorous man, with a brawny neck and broadshoulders, capable of bearing the weight of his armour for many hours ata time. He is short in the head, with a somewhat flattened skull and lowforehead; his eyes are large and deep-set beneath bushy eyebrows, hischeek-bones high, and his nose aquiline, with a fleshy tip and widenostrils, while his mouth and chin are hidden by moustache and beard. The whole figure is instinct with real dignity, yet such dignity asis due rather to rank and the habitual exercise of power, than to theinnate qualities of the man. *

 * Perrot and Chipiez do not admit that the Assyrian sculptors intended to represent the features of their kings; for this they rely chiefly on the remarkable likeness between all the figures in the same series of bas-reliefs. My own belief is that in Assyria, as in Egypt, the sculptors took the portrait of the reigning sovereign as the model for all their figures. 

The character of Assur-nazir-pal, as gathered from the dry detailsof his Annals, seems to have been very complex. He was as ambitious, resolute, and active as any prince in the world; yet he refrained fromoffensive warfare as soon as his victories had brought under his rulethe majority of the countries formerly subject to Tiglath-pileser I. Heknew the crucial moment for ending a campaign, arresting his progresswhere one more success might have brought him into collision with someformidable neighbour; and this wise prudence in his undertakingsenabled him to retain the principal acquisitions won by his arms. As aworshipper of the gods he showed devotion and gratitude; he was just tohis subjects, but his conduct towards his enemies was so savage as toappear to us cruel even for that terribly pitiless age: no king everemployed such horrible punishments, or at least none has described withsuch satisfaction the tortures inflicted on his vanquished foes. 

Perhaps such measures were necessary, and the harshness with which herepressed insurrection prevented more frequent outbreaks and so avertedgreater sacrifice of life. But the horror of these scenes so appals themodern reader, that at first he can only regard Assur-nazir-pal as aroyal butcher of the worst type. 

[Illustration: 077. Jpg SHALMANESER III. ]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Mansell, taken from the original stele in the British Museum. 

Assur-nazir-pal left to his successor an overflowing treasury, a valiantarmy, a people proud of their progress and fully confident in their ownresources, and a kingdom which had recovered, during several years ofpeace, from the strain of its previous conquests. Shalmaneser III. * drewlargely on the reserves of men and money which his father's foresighthad prepared, and his busy reign of thirty-five years saw thirty-twocampaigns, conducted almost without a break, on every side of the empirein succession. A double task awaited him, which he conscientiously andsuccessfully fulfilled. 

 * [The Shalmaneser III. Of the text is the Shalmaneser II. Of the notes. --TR. ]

Assur-nazir-pal had thoroughly reorganised the empire and raised it tothe rank of a great power: he had confirmed his provinces and vassalstates in their allegiance, and had subsequently reduced to subjection, or, at any rate, penetrated at various points, the little bufferprincipalities between Assyria and the powerful kingdoms of Babylon, Damascus, and Urartu; but he had avoided engaging any one of thesethree great states in a struggle of which the issue seemed doubtful. Shalmaneser could not maintain this policy of forbearance without lossof prestige in the eyes of the world: conduct which might seem prudentand cautious in a victorious monarch like Assur-nazir-pal would inhim have argued timidity or weakness, and his rivals would soon haveprovoked a quarrel if they thought him lacking in the courage or themeans to attack them. Immediately after his accession, therefore, heassumed the offensive, and decided to measure his strength firstagainst Urartu, which for some years past had been showing signs ofrestlessness. Few countries are more rugged or better adapted fordefence than that in which his armies were about to take the field. Thevolcanoes to which it owed its configuration in geological times, hadbecome extinct long before the appearance of man, but the surface of theground still bears evidence of their former activity; layers of basalticrock, beds of scorias and cinders, streams of half-disintegrated mudand lava, and more or less perfect cones, meet the eye at every turn. Subterranean disturbances have not entirely ceased even now, for certaincraters--that of Tandurek, for example--sometimes exhale acid fumes;while hot springs exist in the neighbourhood, from which steamingwaters escape in cascades to the valley, and earthquakes and strangesubterranean noises are not unknown. The backbone of these Armenianmountains joins towards the south the line of the Grordyasan range; itruns in a succession of zigzags from south-east to northwest, meeting atlength the mountains of Pontus and the last spurs of the Caucasus. 

[Illustration: 079. Jpg THE TWO PEAKS OF MOUNT ARARAT]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by A. Tissandier. 

Lofty snow-clad peaks, chiefly of volcanic origin, rise here and thereamong them, the most important being Akhta-dagh, Tandurek, Ararat, Bingoel, and Palandoeken. The two unequal pyramids which form the summitof Ararat are covered with perpetual snow, the higher of them being16, 916 feet above the sea-level. The spurs which issue from theprincipal chain cross each other in all directions, and make a networkof rocky basins where in former times water collected and formed lakes, nearly all of which are now dry in consequence of the breaking down ofone or other of their enclosing sides. Two only of these mountain lakesstill remain, entirely devoid of outlet, Lake Van in the south, and LakeUrumiah further to the south-east. The Assyrians called the former theUpper Sea of Naīri, and the latter the Lower Sea, and both constituteda defence for Urartu against their attacks. To reach the centre of thekingdom of Urartu, the Assyrians had either to cross the mountainousstrip of land between the two lakes, or by making a detour to thenorth-west, and descending the difficult slopes of the valley of theArzania, to approach the mountains of Armenia lying to the north of LakeVan. The march was necessarily a slow and painful one for both horsesand men, along narrow winding valleys down which rushed rapid streams, over raging torrents, through tangled forests where the path had to becut as they advanced, and over barren wind-swept plateaux where rain andmist chilled and demoralized soldiers accustomed to the warm and sunnyplains of the Euphrates. The majority of the armies which invaded thisregion never reached the goal of the expedition: they retired aftera few engagements, and withdrew as quickly as possible to more genialclimes. The main part of the Urartu remained almost always unsubduedbehind its barrier of woods, rocks, and lakes, which protected it fromthe attacks levelled against it, and no one can say how far the kingdomextended in the direction of the Caucasus. It certainly included thevalley of the Araxes and possibly part of the valley of the Kur, andthe steppes sloping towards the Caspian Sea. It was a region full ofcontrasts, at once favoured and ill-treated by nature in its elevationand aspect: rugged peaks, deep gorges, dense thickets, districts sterilefrom the heat of subterranean fires, and sandy wastes barren for lack ofmoisture, were interspersed with shady valleys, sunny vine-clad slopes, and wide stretches of fertile land covered with rich layers of deepalluvial soil, where thick-standing corn and meadow-lands, alternatingwith orchards, repaid the cultivator for the slightest attempt atirrigation. 

[Illustration: 080. Jpg End of the Harvest--Cutting Straw]

History does not record who were the former possessors of this land;but towards the middle of the ninth century it was divided into severalprincipalities, whose position and boundaries cannot be preciselydetermined. It is thought that Urartu lay on either side of Mount Araratand on both banks of the Araxes, that Biainas lay around Lake Van, *and that the Mannai occupied the country to the north and east ofLake Urumiah;** the positions of the other tribes on the differenttributaries of the Euphrates or the slopes of the Armenian mountains areas yet uncertain. 

 * Urartu is the only name by which the Assyrians knew the kingdom of Van; it has been recognised from the very beginning of Assyriological studies, as well as its identity with the Ararat of the Bible and the Alarodians of Herodotus. It was also generally recognised that the name Biainas in the Vannic inscriptions, which Hincks read Bieda, corresponded to the Urartu of the Assyrians, but in consequence of this mistaken reading, efforts have been made to connect it with Adiabene. Sayce was the first to show that Biainas was the name of the country of Van, and of the kingdom of which Van was the capital; the word Bitāni which Sayce connects with it is not a secondary form of the name of Van, but a present day term, and should be erased from the list of geographical names. 

 ** The Mannai are the Minni of Jeremiah (li. 27), and it is in their country of Minyas that one tradition made the ark rest after the Deluge. 

The country was probably peopled by a very mixed race, for its mountainshave always afforded a safe asylum for refugees, and at each migration, which altered the face of Western Asia, some fugitives from neighbouringnations drifted to the shelter of its fastnesses. 

[Illustration: 082. Jpg THE KINGDOM OF URATU]

The principal element, the Khaldi, were akin to that great family oftribes which extended across the range of the Taurus, from the shores ofthe Mediterranean to the Euxine, and included the Khalybes, the Mushku, the Tabal, and the Khāti. The little preserved of their languageresembles what we know of the idioms in use among the people of Arzapiand Mitānni, and their religion seems to have been somewhat analogousto the ancient worship of the Hittites. The character of the ancientArmenians, as revealed to us by the monuments, resembles in its mainfeatures that of the Armenians of the present time. They appear as tall, strong, muscular, and determined, full of zest for work and fighting, and proud of their independence. 

[Illustration: 083. Jpg FRAGMENT OF A VOTIVE SHIELD OF URARTIAN WORK]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by Hormuzd Rassam. 

Some of them led a pastoral life, wandering about with their flocksduring the greater part of the year, obliged to seek pasturage invalley, forest, or mountain height according to the season, while inwinter they remained frost-bound in semi-subterranean dwellings similarto those in which descendants immure themselves at the present day. Where the soil lent itself to agriculture, they proved excellenthusbandmen, and obtained abundant crops. Their ingenuity in irrigationwas remarkable, and enabled them to bring water by a system of trenchesfrom distant springs to supply their fields and gardens; besides which, they knew how to terrace the steep hillsides so as to prevent the rapiddraining away of moisture. Industries were but little developed amongthem, except perhaps the working of metals; for were they not akin tothose Chalybes of the Pontus, whose mines and forges already furnishediron to the Grecian world? Fragments have been discovered in theruined cities of Urartu of statuettes, cups, and votive shields, eitherembossed or engraved, and decorated with concentric bands of animalsor men, treated in the Assyrian manner, but displaying great beauty ofstyle and remarkable finish of execution. 

[Illustration: 084. Jpg SITE OF AN URARTIAN TOWN AT TOPRAH-KALEH]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Binder. 

Their towns were generally fortified or perched on heights, renderingthem easy of defence, as, for example, Van and Toprah-Kaleh. Even suchtowns as were royal residences were small, and not to be compared withthe cities of Assyria or Aram; their ground-plan generally assumed theform of a rectangular oblong, not always traced with equal exactitude. 

[Illustration: 085. Jpg THE RUINS OF A PALACE OF URARTU AT TOPRAH-KALEH]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Hormuzd Rassam. 

The walls were built of blocks of roughly hewn stone, laid in regularcourses, but without any kind of mortar or cement; they were surmountedby battlements, and flanked at intervals by square towers, at the footof which were outworks to protect the points most open to attack. The entrance was approached by narrow and dangerous pathways, whichsometimes ran on ledges across the precipitous face of the rock. Thedwelling-houses were of very simple construction, being merely squarecabins of stone or brick, devoid of any external ornament, and piercedby one low doorway, but sometimes surmounted by an open colonnadesupported by a row of small pillars; a flat roof with a parapet crownedthe whole, though this was often replaced by a gabled top, which wasbetter adapted to withstand the rains and snows of winter. The palacesof the chiefs differed from the private houses in the size of theirapartments and the greater care bestowed upon their decoration. Theirfaēades were sometimes adorned with columns, and ornamented withbucklers or carved discs of metal; slabs of stone covered withinscriptions lined the inner halls, but we do not know whether thekings added to their dedications to the gods and the recital of theirvictories, pictures of the battles they had fought and of the fortressesthey had destroyed. The furniture resembled that in the houses ofNineveh, but was of simpler workmanship, and perhaps the most valuablearticles were imported from Assyria or were of Aramaean manufacture. The temples seemed to have differed little from the palaces, at leastin external appearance. The masonry was more regular and more skilfullylaid; the outer court was filled with brazen lavers and statues; theinterior was furnished with altars, sacrificial stones, idols in humanor animal shape, and bowls identical with those in the sanctuaries onthe Euphrates, but the nature and details of the rites in which theywere employed are unknown. One supreme deity, Khaldis, god of the sky, was, as far as we can conjecture, the protector of the whole nation, and their name was derived from his, as that of the Assyrians was fromAssur, the Cossęans from Kashshu, and the Khati from Khātu. 

[Illustration: 086. Jpg TEMPLE OF KHALDIS AT MUZAZIR]

This deity was assisted in the government of the universe by Teisbas, god of the air, and Ardinīs the sun-god. Groups of secondary deitieswere ranged around this sovereign triad--Auis, the water; Ayas, theearth; Selardis, the moon; Kharubainis, Irmusinis, Adarutas, andArzi-melas: one single inscription enumerates forty-six, but some ofthese were worshipped in special localities only. 

[Illustration: 089. Jpg ASSYRIAN SOLDIERS CARRYING OFF OR DESTROYING THEFURNITURE OF AN URARTIAN TEMPLE]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Botta. Scribes are weighing gold, and soldiers destroying the statue of a god with their axes. 

It would appear as if no goddesses were included in the native Pantheon. Saris, the only goddess known to us at present, is probably merely avariant of the Ishtar of Nineveh or Arbela, borrowed from the Assyriansat a later date. 

The first Assyrian conquerors looked upon these northern regions as anintegral part of Naīri, and included them under that name. They knew ofno single state in the district whose power might successfully withstandtheir own, but were merely acquainted with a group of hostile provinceswhose internecine conflicts left them ever at the mercy of a foreignfoe. * Two kingdoms had, however, risen to some importance about thebeginning of the ninth century--that of the Mannai in the east, and thatof Urartu in the centre of the country. Urartu comprised the districtof Ararat proper, the province of Biaina, and the entire basin of theArzania. 

 * The single inscription of Tiglath-pileser I. Contains a list of twenty-three kings of Nairi, and mentions sixty chiefs of the same country. 

[Illustration: 090. Jpg SHALMANESEE III. CROSSING THE MOUNTAINS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the bronze gates of Balawāt. 

Arzashkun, one of its capitals, situated probably near the sources ofthis river, was hidden, and protected against attack, by an extent ofdense forest almost impassable to a regular army. The power of thiskingdom, though as yet unorganised, had already begun to inspire theneighbouring states with uneasiness. Assur-nazir-pal speaks of itincidentally as lying on the northern frontier of his empire, * but thecare he took to avoid arousing its hostility shows the respect in whichhe held it. 

 * Arzashku, Arzashkun, seems to be the Assyrian form of an Urartian name ending in _-ka_, formed from a proper name Arzash, which recalls the name Arsčne, Arsissa, applied by the ancients to part of Lake Van. Arzashkun might represent the Ardzik of the Armenian historians, west of Malasgert. 

He was, indeed, as much afraid of Urartu as of Damascus, and thoughhe approached quite close to its boundary in his second campaign, hepreferred to check his triumphant advance rather than risk attackingit. It appears to have been at that time under the undisputed rule of acertain Sharduris, son of Lutipri, and subsequently, about the middleof Assur-nazir-pal's reign, to have passed into the hands of Aramź, whostyled himself King of Naīri, and whose ambition may have caused thoserevolts which forced Assur-nazir-pal to take up arms in the eighteenthyear of his reign. On this occasion the Assyrians again confinedthemselves to the chastisement of their own vassals, and checkedtheir advance as soon as they approached Urartu. Their success was buttemporary; hardly had they withdrawn from the neighbourhood, when thedisturbances were renewed with even greater violence, very probablyat the instigation of Aramź. Shalmaneser III. Found matters in a veryunsatisfactory state both on the west and south of Lake Van: some of thepeoples who had been subject to his father--the Khubushkia, the pastoraltribes of the Gordęan mountains, and the Aramęans of the Euphrates--hadtransferred their allegiance elsewhere. He immediately took measures torecall them to a sense of their duty, and set out from Calah only a fewdays after succeeding to the crown. He marched at first in an easterlydirection, and, crossing the pass of Simisi, burnt the city of Aridi, thus proving that he was fully prepared to treat rebels after thesame fashion as his father. The lesson had immediate effect. Allthe neighbouring tribes, Khargęans, Simisęans, the people of Simira, Sirisha, and Ulmania, hastened to pay him homage even before he hadstruck his camp near Aridi. Hurrying across country by the shortestroute, which entailed the making of roads to enable his chariots andcavalry to follow him, he fell upon Khubushkia, and reduced a hundredtowns to ashes, pursuing the king Kakia into the depths of the forest, and forcing him to an unconditional surrender. Ascending thence toShugunia, a dependency of Aramź's, he laid the principality waste, inspite of the desperate resistance made on their mountain slopes by theinhabitants; then proceeding to Lake Van, he performed the ceremonialrites incumbent on an Assyrian king whenever he stood for the first timeon the shores of a new sea. He washed his weapons in the waters, offereda sacrifice to the gods, casting some portions of the victim intothe lake, and before leaving carved his own image on the surface of acommanding rock. On his homeward march he received tribute from Gilzān. This expedition was but the prelude of further successes. After a fewweeks' repose at Nineveh, he again set out to make his authority felt inthe western portions of his dominions. 

[Illustration: 093. Jpg THE PEOPLE OF SHUGUNIA FIGHTING AGAINST THEASSYRIANS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the bronze gates of Balawāt. 

Akhuni, chief of Bīt-Adini, whose position was the first to be menaced, had formed a league with the chiefs of all the cities which had formerlybowed before Assur-nazir-pal's victorious arms, Gurgum, Samalla, Kuī, the Patina, Car-chemish, and the Khāti. Shalmaneser seized Lalati* andBurmarana, two of Akhuni's towns, drove him across the Euphrates, andfollowing close on his heels, collected as he passed the tribute ofGurgum, and fell upon Samalla. 

 * Lalati is probably the Lulati of the Egyptians. The modern site is not known, nor is that of Burmarana. 

Under the walls of Lutibu he overthrew the combined forces of Adini, Samalla, and the Patina, and raised a trophy to commemorate his victoryat the sources of the Saluara; then turning sharply to the south, hecrossed the Orontes in pursuit of Shapalulme, King of the Patina. 

[Illustration: 094. Jpg PRISONERS FROM SHUGUNIA, WITH THEIR ARMS TIED ANDYOKES ON THEIR NECKS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the bronze gates of Balawāt. 

Not far from Alizir he encountered a fresh army raised by Akhuni andthe King of Samalla, with contingents from Carchemish, Kuī, Cilicia, andIasbuki:* having routed it, he burnt the fortresses of Shapalulme, andafter occupying himself by cutting down cedars and cypress trees on theAmanos in the province of Atalur, he left a triumphal stele engraved onthe mountain-side. 

 * The country of Iasbuki is represented by Ishbak, a son of Abraham and Keturah, mentioned in Genesis (xxv. 2) in connection with Shuah. 

[Illustration: 094b. Jpg SACRIFICE OFFERED BY SHALMANESER III. ]

[Illustration: 095. Jpg COSTUMES FOUND IN THE FIFTH TOMB]

Next turning eastwards, he received the homage offered with alacrity bythe towns of Taia, Khazazu, Nulia, and Butamu, and, with a final tributefrom Agusi, he returned in triumph to Nineveh. The motley train whichaccompanied, him showed by its variety the immense extent of countryhe had traversed during this first campaign. Among the prisoners wererepresentatives of widely different races;--Khāti with long robes andcumbrous head-dresses, following naked mountaineers from Shugunia, whomarched with yokes on their necks, and wore those close-fitting helmetswith short crests which have such a strangely modern look on theAssyrian bas-reliefs. The actual results of the campaign were, perhaps, hardly commensurate with the energy expended. This expedition fromeast to west had certainly inflicted considerable losses on the rebelsagainst whom it had been directed; it had cost them dearly in menand cattle, and booty of all kinds, and had extorted from them aconsiderable amount of tribute, but they remained, notwithstanding, still unsubdued. As soon as the Assyrian troops had quitted theirneighbourhood, they flattered themselves they were safe from furtherattack. No doubt they thought that a show of submission would satisfythe new invader, as it had satisfied his father; but Shalmaneser was notdisposed to rest content with this nominal dependence. He intended toexercise effective control over all the states won by his sword, and theproof of their subjection was to be the regular payment of tributeand fulfilment of other obligations to their suzerain. Year by year heunfailingly enforced his rights, till the subject states were obliged toacknowledge their master and resign themselves to servitude. 

The narrative of his reiterated efforts is a monotonous one. The kingadvanced against Adini in the spring of 859 B. C. , defeated Akhuni nearTul-barsip, transported his victorious regiments across the Euphrateson rafts of skins, seized Surunu, Paripa, and Dabigu* besides sixfortresses and two hundred villages, and then advanced into theterritory of Carchemish, which he proceeded to treat with such severitythat the other Hittite chiefs hastened to avert a similar fate bytendering their submission. 

 * Shalmaneser crossed the Euphrates near Tul-barsip, which would lead him into the country between Birejīk, Rum-kaleh, and Aintab, and it is in that district that we must look for the towns subject to Akhuni. Dabigu, I consider, corresponds to Dehbek on Rey's map, a little to the north-east of Aintab; the sites of Paripa and Surunu are unknown. 

The very enumeration of their offerings proves not only their wealth, but the terror inspired by the advancing Assyrian host: Shapalulmź ofthe Patina, for instance, yielded up three talents of gold, a hundredtalents of silver, three hundred talents of copper, and three hundredof iron, and paid in addition to this an annual tribute of one talentof silver, two talents of purple, and two hundred great beams ofcedar-wood. Samalla, Agusi, and Kummukh were each laid under tribute inproportion to their resources, but their surrender did not necessarilylead to that of Adini. Akhuni realised that, situated as he was on thevery borders of Assyrian territory, there was no longer a chance ofhis preserving his semi-independence, as was the case with his kinsfolkbeyond the Euphrates; proximity to the capital would involve a stricterservitude, which would soon reduce him from the condition of a vassal tothat of a subject, and make him merely a governor where he had hithertoreigned as king. Abandoned by the Khāti, he sought allies further north, and entered into a league with the tribes of Naīri and Urartu. When, in858 B. C. , Shalmaneser III. Forced an entrance into Tul-barsip, and droveback what was left of the garrison on the right bank of the Euphrates, a sudden movement of Aramź obliged him to let the prey escape fromhis grasp. Rapidly fortifying Tul-barsip, Nappigi, Aligu, Pitru, andMutkīnu, and garrisoning them with loyal troops to command the fordsof the river, as his ancestor Shalmaneser I. Had done six centuriesbefore, * he then re-entered Naīri by way of Bīt-Zamani, devastatedInziti with fire and sword, forced a road through to the banks of theArzania, pillaged Sukhmi and Dayaīni, and appeared under the walls ofArzashkun. 

 * Pitru, the Pethor of the Bible (Numb. Xxii. 5), is situated near the confluence of the Sajur and the Euphrates, somewhere near the encampment called Oshériyéh by Sachau. Mutkīnu was on the other bank, perhaps at Kharbet-Beddaī, nearly opposite Pitru. Nappigi was on the left bank of the Euphrates, which excludes its identification with Mabog- Hierapolis, as proposed by Hommel; Nabigath, mentioned by Tomkins, is too far east. Nappigi and Aligu must both be sought in the district between the Euphrates and the town of Saruj. 

Aramź withdrew to Mount Adduri and awaited his attack in an almostimpregnable position; he was nevertheless defeated: 3400 of his soldiersfell on the field of battle; his camp, his treasures, his chariots, andall his baggage passed into the hands of the conqueror, and he himselfbarely escaped with his life. Shalmaneser ravaged the country "as asavage bull ravages and tramples under his feet the fertile fields;" heburnt the villages and the crops, destroyed Arzashkun, and raised beforeits gates a pyramid of human heads, surrounded by a circle of prisonersimpaled on stakes. He climbed the mountain chain of Iritia, and laidwaste Aramali and Zanziuna at his leisure, and descending for the secondtime to the shores of Lake Van, renewed the rites he had performed therein the first year of his reign, and engraved on a neighbouring rock aninscription recording his deeds of prowess. 

[Illustration: 100. Jpg SHUA, KING OF GILZAN, BRINGING A WAR-HORSE FULLYCAPARISONED TO SHALMANESER]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the Black Obelisk. 

He made his way back to Gilzān, where its king, Shua, brought hima war-horse fully caparisoned, as a token of homage. Shalmanesergraciously deigned to receive it, and further exacted from the king theaccustomed contributions of chariot-horses, sheep, and wine, togetherwith seven dromedaries, whose strange forms amused the gaping crowds ofNineveh. After quitting Gilzān, Shalmaneser encountered the people ofKhubushkia, who ventured to bar his way; but its king, Kakia, lost hiscity of Shilaia, and three thousand soldiers, besides bulls, horses, andsheep innumerable. Having enforced submission in Khubushkia, Shalmaneserat length returned to Assur through the defiles of Kirruri, and came toCalah to enjoy a well-earned rest after the fatigues of his campaign. 

[Illustration: 101. Jpg DROMEDARIES FROM GILZAN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the bronze gates of Balawāt. 

But Akhuni had not yet lost heart. Though driven back to the right bankof the Euphrates, he had taken advantage of the diversion created byAramź in his favour, to assume a strong position among the hills ofShitamrat with the river in his rear. *

 * The position of Shitamrat may answer to the ruins of the fortress of Rum-kaleh, which protected a ford of the Euphrates in Byzantine times. 

Shalmaneser attacked his lines in front, and broke through them afterthree days' preliminary skirmishing; then finding the enemy drawn up inbattle array before their last stronghold, the king charged withouta moment's hesitation, drove them back and forced them to surrender. Akhuni's life was spared, but he was sent with the remainder of his armyto colonise a village in the neighbourhood of Assur, and Adini becamehenceforth an integral part of Assyria. 

[Illustration: 102. Jpg TRIBUTE FROM GILZAN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the Black Obelisk. 

The war on the western frontier was hardly brought to a close whenanother broke out in the opposite direction. The king rapidly crossedthe pass of Bunagishlu and fell upon Mazamua: the natives, disconcertedby his impetuous onslaught, nevertheless hoped to escape by puttingout in their boats on the broad expanse of Lake Urumiah. Shalmaneser, however, constructed rafts of inflated skins, on which his men venturedin pursuit right out into the open. The natives were overpowered; theking "dyed the sea with their blood as if it had been wool, " and did notwithdraw until he had forced them to appeal for mercy. 

In five years Shalmaneser had destroyed Adini, laid low Urartu, andconfirmed the tributary states of Syria in their allegiance; butDamascus and Babylon were as yet untouched, and the moment was at handwhen he would have to choose between an arduous conflict with them, orsuch a repression of the warlike zeal of his opening years, that, likehis father Assur-nazir-pal, he would have to repose on his laurels. Shalmaneser was too deeply imbued with the desire for conquest to choosea peaceful policy: he decided at once to assume the offensive againstDamascus, being probably influenced by the news of Ahab's successes, anddeeming that if the King of Israel had gained the ascendency unaided, Assur, fully confident of its own superiority, need have no fear asto the result of a conflict. The forces, however, at the disposal ofBenhadad II. (Adadidri) were sufficient to cause the Assyrians someuneasiness. The King of Damascus was not only lord of Coele-Syria andthe Haurān, but he exercised a suzerainty more or less defined overHamath, Israel, Ammon, the Arabian and Idumean tribes, Arvad and theprincipalities of Northern Phoenicia, Usanata, Shianu, and Irkanata;* inall, twelve peoples or twelve kings owned his sway, and their forces, if united to his, would provide at need an army of nearly 100, 000 men:a few years might see these various elements merged in a united empire, capable of withstanding the onset of any foreign foe. **

 * Irkanata, the Egyptian Arqanatu, perhaps the Irqata of the Tel-el-A marna tablets, is the Arka of Phoenicia. The other countries enumerated are likewise situated in the same locality. Shianu (for a long time read as Shizanu), the Sin of the Bible (Gen. X. 17), is mentioned by Tiglath-pileser III. Under the name Sianu. Ushanat is called Uznu by Tiglath-pileser, and Delitzsch thought it represented the modern Kalaat-el-Hosu. With Arvad it forms the ancient Zahi of the Egyptians, which was then subject to Damascus. 

 ** The suzerainty of Ben-hadad over these twelve peoples is proved by the way in which they are enumerated in the Assyrian documents: his name always stands at the head of the list. The manner in which the Assyrian scribes introduce the names of these kings, mentioning sometimes one, sometimes two among them, without subtracting them from the total number 12, has been severely criticised, and Schrader excused it by saying that 12 is here used as a round number somewhat vaguely. 

Shalmaneser set out from Nineveh on the 14th day of the month Iyyār, 854B. C. , and chastised on his way the Aramaeans of the Balikh, whose sheikhGiammu had shown some inclination to assert his independence. He crossedthe Euphrates at Tul-harsip, and held a species of durbar at Pitru forhis Syrian subjects: Sangar of Carchemish, Kundashpi of Kummukh, Aramźof Agusi, Lalli of Melitene, Khaiani of Samalla, Garparuda who hadsucceeded Shapalulmź among the Patina, and a second Garparuda of Gurgum, rallied around him with their presents of welcome, and probably alsowith their troops. This ceremony concluded, he hastened to Khalmaa andreduced it to submission, then plunged into the hill-country betweenKhalmān and the Orontes, and swept over the whole territory of Hamath. A few easy victories at the outset enabled him to exact ransom from, orburn to the ground, the cities of Adinnu, Mashgā, Arganā, and Qarqar, but just beyond Qarqar he encountered the advance-guard of the Syrianarmy. *

 * The position of these towns is uncertain: the general plan of the campaign only proves that they must lie on the main route from Aleppo to Kalaat-Sejar, by Barā or by Maarźt-en- Nōmān and Kalaat-el-Mudiq. It is agreed that Qarqar must be sought not far from Hamath, whatever the exact site may be. An examination of the map shows us that Qarqar corresponds to the present Kalaat-el-Mudiq, the ancient Apamasa of Lebanon; the confederate army would command the ford which led to the plain of Hamath by Kalaat-Sejar. 

[Illustration: 105. Jpg TRIBUTE FROM GARPARUDA, KING OF THE PATINA]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs on the Black Obelisk. 

Ben-hadad had called together, to give him a fitting reception, thewhole of the forces at his disposal: 1200 chariots, 1200 horse, 20, 000foot-soldiers from Damascus alone; 700 chariots, 700 horse and 10, 000foot from Hamath; 2000 chariots and 10, 000 foot belonging to Ahab, 500soldiers from Kuī, 1000 mountaineers from the Taurus, * 10 chariots and10, 000 foot from Irk and 200 from Arvad, 200 from Usanata, 30 chariotsand 10, 000 foot from Shianu, 1000 camels from Gindibu the Arab, and 1000Ammonites. 

 * The people of the Muzri next enumerated have long been considered as Egyptians; the juxtaposition of their name with that of Kuī shows that it refers here to the Muzri of the Taurus. 

The battle was long and bloody, and the issue uncertain; Shalmaneserdrove back one wing of the confederate army to the Orontes, and forcingthe other wing and the centre to retire from Qarqar to Kirzau, claimedthe victory, though the losses on both sides were equally great. Itwould seem as if the battle were indecisive--the Assyrians, at anyrate, gained nothing by it; they beat a retreat immediately after theirpretended victory, and returned to their own land without prisoners andalmost without booty. On the whole, this first conflict had not beenunfavourable to Damascus: it had demonstrated the power of that state inthe eyes of the most incredulous, and proved how easy resistancewould be, if only the various princes of Syria would lay aside theirdifferences and all unite under the command of a single chief. Theeffect of the battle in Northern Syria and among the recently annexedAļamoan tribes was very great; they began to doubt the omnipotence ofAssyria, and their loyalty was shaken. Sangar of Carchemish and theKhāti refused to pay their tribute, and the Emirs of Tul-Abnī and MountKashiari broke out into open revolt. Shalmaneser spent a whole year insuppressing the insurrection; complications, moreover, arose at Babylonwhich obliged him to concentrate his attention and energy on Chaldęanaffairs. Nabu-baliddin had always maintained peaceful and friendlyrelations with Assyria, but he had been overthrown, or perhapsassassinated, and his son Marduk-nadin-shumu had succeeded him on thethrone, to the dissatisfaction of a section of his subjects. Another sonof Nabu-baliddin, Marduk-belusātź, claimed the sovereign power, and soonwon over so much of the country that Marduk-nādin-shumu had fearsfor the safety of Babylon itself. He then probably remembered thepretensions to Kharduniash, which his Assyrian neighbours had for a longtime maintained, and applied to Shalmaneser to support his totteringfortunes. The Assyrian monarch must have been disposed to lend afavourable ear to a request which allowed him to intervene as suzerainin the quarrels of the rival kingdom: he mobilised his forces, offeredsacrifices in honour of Bammān at Zabān, and crossed the frontier in 853B. C. *

The war dragged on during the next two years. The scene of hostilitieswas at the outset on the left bank of the Tigris, which for tencenturies had served as the battle-field for the warriors of bothcountries. Shalmaneser, who had invested Me-Turnat at the fords of theLower Dīyalah, at length captured that fortress, and after havingthus isolated the rebels of Babylonia proper, turned his steps towardsG-ananatź. **

 * The town of Zabān is situated on the Lesser Zab, but it is impossible to fix the exact site. 

 ** Mč-Turnat, Mź-Turni, "the water of the Turnat, " stood upon the Dīyalah, probably near the site of Bakuba, where the most frequented route crosses the river; perhaps we may identify it with the Artemita of classical authors. Gananatź must be sought higher up near the mountains, as the context points out; I am inclined to place it near the site of Khanekin, whose gardens are still celebrated, and the strategic importance of which is considerable. 

Marduk-belusātź, "a vacillating king, incapable of directing his ownaffairs, " came out to meet him, but although repulsed and driven withinthe town, he defended his position with such spirit that Shalmaneser wasat length obliged to draw off his troops after having cut down allthe young compelled the fruit trees, disorganised the whole system ofirrigation, --in short, after having effected all the damage he could. Hereturned in the following spring by the most direct route; Lakhiru fellinto his hands, * but Marduk-belusātź, having no heart to contend withhim for the possession of a district ravaged by the struggle of thepreceding summer, fell back on the mountains of Yasubi and concentratedhis forces round Armān. **

 * Lakhiru comes before Gananate on the direct road from Assyria, to the south of the Lower Zab, as we learn from the account of the campaign itself: wo shall not do wrong in placing this town either at Kifri, or in its neighbourhood on the present caravan route. 

 ** Mount Yasubi is the mountainous district which separates Khanekin from Holwān. 

Shalmaneser, having first wreaked his vengeance upon Gananatź, attackedhis adversary in his self-chosen position; Annan fell after a desperatedefence, and Marduk-belusātź either perished or disappeared in a lastattempt at retaliation. Marduk-nadīn-shumu, although rid of his rival, was not yet master of the entire kingdom. The Aramęans of the Marshes, or, as they called themselves, the Kaldā, had refused him theirallegiance, and were ravaging the regions of the Lower Euphrates bytheir repeated incursions. They constituted not so much a compact state, as a confederation of little states, alternately involved in pettyinternecine quarrels, or temporarily reconciled under the precariousauthority of a sole monarch. Each separate state bore the name of thehead of the family--real or mythical--from whom all its members pridedthemselves on being descended, --Bīt-Dakkuri, Bīt-Adini, Bīt-Amukkāni, Bīt-Shalani, Bīt-Shalli, and finally Bīt-Yakīn, which in the endasserted its predominance over all the rest. *

 * As far as we can judge, Bīt-Dakkuri and Bīt-Adini were the most northerly, the latter lying on both sides of the Euphrates, the former on the west of the Euphrates, to the south of the Bahr-i-Nejīf; Bīt-Yakīn was at the southern extremity near the mouths of the Euphrates, and on the western shore of the Persian Gulf. 

In demanding Shalmaneser's help, Marduk-nadīn-shumu had virtually thrownon him the responsibility of bringing these turbulent subjects to order, and the Assyrian monarch accepted the duties of his new position withoutdemur. He marched to Babylon, entered the city and went direct to thetemple of E-shaggīl: the people beheld him approach with reverence theirdeities Bel and Belīt, and visit all the sanctuaries of the local gods, to whom he made endless propitiatory libations and pure offerings. He had worshipped Ninip in Kuta; he was careful not to forget Nabo ofBorsippa, while on the other hand he officiated in the temple of Ezida, and consulted its ancient oracle, offering upon its altars the fleshof splendid oxen and fat lambs. The inhabitants had their part in thefestival as well as the gods; Shalmaneser summoned them to a publicbanquet, at which he distributed to them embroidered garments, and pliedthem with meats and wine; then, after renewing his homage to the godsof Babylon, he recommenced his campaign, and set out in the directionof the sea. Baqāni, the first of the Chaldęan cities which lay on hisroute, belonged to Bīt-Adini, * one of the tribes of Bīt-Dakkuri; itappeared disposed to resist him, and was therefore promptly dismantledand burnt--an example which did not fail to cool the warlikeinclinations which had begun to manifest themselves in other parts ofBīt-Dakkuri. 

 * The site of Baqāni is unknown; it should be sought for between Lamlum and Warka, and Bīt-Adini in Bīt-Dakkuri should be placed between the Shatt-et-Kaher and the Arabian desert, if the name of Enzudī, the other royal town, situated to the west of the Euphrates, is found, as is possible, under a popular etymology, in that of Kalaat ain- Saīd or Kalaat ain-es-Saīd in the modern maps. 

He next crossed the Euphrates, and pillaged Enzudī, the fate of whichcaused the remainder of Bīt-Adini to lay down arms, and the submissionof the latter brought about that of Bīt-Yakīn and Bīt-Amukkani. Thesewere all rich provinces, and they bought off the conqueror liberally:gold, silver, tin, copper, iron, acacia-wood, ivory, elephants' skins, were all showered upon the invader to secure his mercy. It must havebeen an intense satisfaction to the pride of the Assyrians to be ableto boast that their king had deigned to offer sacrifices in the sacredcities of Accad, and that he had been borne by his war-horses tothe shores of the Salt Sea; these facts, of little moment to us now, appeared to the people of those days of decisive importance. No king whowas not actually master of the country would have been tolerated withinthe temple of the eponymous god, for the purpose of celebratingthe rites which the sovereign alone was empowered to perform. Marduk-nadīn-shumu, in recognising Shalmaneser's right to act thus, thereby acknowledged that he himself was not only the king's ally, buthis liegeman. This bond of supremacy doubtless did not weigh heavilyupon him; as soon as his suzerain had evacuated the country, the twokingdoms remained much on the same footing as had been established bythe treaties of the three previous generations. Alliances were madebetween private families belonging to both, peace existed between thetwo sovereigns, interchange of commerce and amenities took place betweenthe two peoples, but with one point of difference which had not existedformerly: Assur protected Babel, and, by taking precedence of Marduk, hebecame the real head of the peoples of the Euphrates valley. Assured ofthe subordination, or at least of the friendly neutrality of Babylon, Shalma-neser had now a free hand to undertake a campaign in the remoterregions of Syria, without being constantly haunted by the fear that hisrival might suddenly swoop down upon him in the rear by the valleys ofthe Badanu or the Zabs. He now ran no risks in withdrawing his troopsfrom the south-eastern frontier, and in marshalling his forces on theslopes of the Armenian Alps or on the banks of the Orontes, leavingmerely a slender contingent in the heart of Assyria proper to act as thenecessary guardians of order in the capital. 

Since the indecisive battle of Qarqar, the western frontier of theempire had receded as far as the Euphrates, and Shalmaneser had beenobliged to forego the collection of the annual Syrian tribute. It wouldhave been an excellent opportunity for the Khāti, while they enjoyedthis accidental respite, to come to an understanding with Damascus, forthe purpose of acting conjointly against a common enemy; but they letthe right moment slip, and their isolation made submission inevitable. The effort to subdue them cost Shalmaneser dear, both in time and men;in the spring of each year he appeared at the fords of Tul-barsip andravaged the environs of Carchemish, then marched upon the Orontes toaccomplish the systematic devastation of some fresh district, or toinflict a defeat on such of his adversaries as dared to encounter himin the open field. In 850 B. C. The first blow was struck at the Khāti;Agusi* was the next to suffer, and its king, Aramź, lost Arniź, hisroyal city, with some hundred more townships and strongholds. **

 * Historians have up to the present admitted that this campaign of the year 850 took place in Armenia. The context of the account itself shows us that, in his tenth year, Shalmaneser advanced against the towns of Aramź, immediately after having pillaged the country of the Khāti, which inclines me to think that these towns were situated in Northern Syria. I have no doubt that the Aramź in question is not the Armenian king of that name, but Aramź the sovereign of Bit-Agusi, who is named several times in the Annals of Shalmaneser. 

 ** The text of Bull No. 1 adds to the account of the war against Aramź, that of a war against the Damascene league, which merely repeats the account of Shalmaneser's eleventh year. It is generally admitted that the war against Aramź falls under his tenth year, and the war against Ben-hadad during his eleventh year. The scribes must have had at their disposal two different versions of one document, in which these two wars were described without distinction of year. The compiler of the inscription of the Bulls would have considered them as forming two distinct accounts, which he has placed one after the other. 

In 849 B. C. It was the turn of Damascus. The league of which Ben-hadadhad proclaimed himself the suzerain was still in existence, but it hadrecently narrowly escaped dissolution, and a revolt had almost deprivedit of the adherence of Israel and the house of Omri--after Hamath, the most active of all its members. The losses suffered at Qarqar haddoubtless been severe enough to shake Ahab's faith in the strength ofhis master and ally. Besides this, it would appear that the latter hadnot honourably fulfilled all the conditions of the treaty of peace hehad signed three years previously; he still held the important fortressof Bamoth-gilead, and he delayed handing it over to Ahab in spite of hisoath to restore it. Finding that he could not regain possession of it byfair means, Ahab resolved to take it by force. A great change in feelingand politics had taken place at Jerusalem. Jehoshaphat, who occupied thethrone, was, like his father Asa, a devout worshipper of Jahveh, buthis piety did not blind him to the secular needs of the moment. Theexperience of his predecessors had shown that the union of the twelvetribes under the rule of a scion of Judah was a thing of the past forever; all attempts to restore it had ended in failure and bloodshed, and the house of David had again only lately been saved from ruin by thedearly bought intervention of Ben-hadad I. And his Syrians. Jehoshaphatfrom the outset clearly saw the necessity of avoiding these errors ofthe past; he accepted the situation and sought the friendship of Israel. An alliance between two princes so unequal in power could only result ina disguised suzerainty for one of them and a state of vassalage forthe other; what Ben-hadad's alliance was to Ahab, that of Ahab was toJehoshaphat, and it served his purpose in spite of the opposition ofthe prophets. 1 The strained relations between the two countries wererelaxed, and the severed tribes on both sides of the frontier set aboutrepairing their losses; while Hiel the Bethelite at length set aboutrebuilding Jericho on behalf of Samaria, * Jehoshaphat was collectingaround him a large army, and strengthening himself on the west againstthe Philistines and on the south against the Bedawīn of the desert. **The marriage of his eldest son Jehoram*** with Athaliah subsequentlybound the two courts together by still closer ties;**** mutual-visitswere exchanged, and it was on the occasion of a stay made by Jehoshaphatat Jezreel that the expedition against Eamoth was finally resolved on. 

 * The subordinate position of Jehoshaphat is clearly indicated by the reply which he makes to Ahab when the latter asks him to accompany him on this expedition: "I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses" (1 Kings xxii. 4). 

 ** 1 Kings xvi. 34, where the writer has preserved the remembrance of a double human sacrifice, destined, according to the common custom in the whole of the East, to create guardian spirits for the new building: "he laid the foundation thereof with the loss of Abiram his firstborn, and set up the gates thereof with the loss of his youngest son Segub; according to the word of the Lord. " [For the curse pronounced on whoever should rebuild Jericho, see Josh. Vi. 26. --Tr. ]

 *** [Following the distinction in spelling given in 2 Kings viii. 25, I have everywhere written Joram (of Israel) and Jehoram (of Judah), to avoid confusion. --Tr. ]

 **** Athaliah is sometimes called the daughter of Ahab (2 Kings viii. 18), and sometimes the daughter of Omri (2 Kings viii. 26; cf. 2 Ohron. Xxii. 2), and several authors prefer the latter filiation, while the majority see in it a mistake of the Hebrew scribe. It is possible that both attributions may be correct, for we see by the Assyrian inscriptions that a sovereign is called the son of the founder of his line even when he was several generations removed from him: thus, Merodach-baladan, the adversary of Sargon of Assyria, calls himself son of Iakin, although the founder of the Bīt-Iakīn had been dead many centuries before his accession. The document used in 2 Kings viii. 26 may have employed the term daughter of Omri in the same manner merely to indicate that the Queen of Jerusalem belonged to the house of Omri. 

It might well have appeared a more than foolhardy enterprise, and it wastold in Israel that Micaiah, a prophet, the son of Imlah, had predictedits disastrous ending. "I saw, " exclaimed the prophet, "the Lord sittingon His throne, and all the host of heaven standing on His right hand andon His left. And the Lord said, Who shall entice Ahab that he may go upand fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and anothersaid on that manner. And there came forth a spirit, and stood beforethe Lord, and said, I will entice him. And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit inthe mouth of all his prophets. And He said, Thou shalt entice him, andshalt prevail also: go forth, and do so. Now therefore, behold, the Lordhafch put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets; and theLord hath spoken evil concerning thee. "*

 * 1 Kings xxii. 5-23, reproduced in 2 Chron. Xviii. 4-22. 

The two kings thereupon invested Ramoth, and Ben-hadad hastened tothe defence of his fortress. Selecting thirty-two of his bravestcharioteers, he commanded them to single out Ahab only for attack, andnot fight with others until they had slain him. This injunction happenedin some way to come to the king's ears, and he therefore disguisedhimself as a common soldier, while Jehoshaphat retained his ordinarydress. Attracted by the richness of the latter's armour, the Syriansfell upon him, but on his raising his war-cry they perceived theirmistake, and turning from the King of Judah they renewed their quest ofthe Israelitish leader. While they were vainly seeking him, an archerdrew a bow "at a venture, " and pierced him in the joints of his cuirass. "Wherefore he said to his charioteer, Turn thine hand, and carry meout of the host; for I am sore wounded. " Perceiving, however, that thebattle was going against him, he revoked the order, and remained onthe field the whole day, supported by his armour-bearers. He expired atsunset, and the news of his death having spread panic through the ranks, a cry arose, "Every man to his city, and every man to his country!" Theking's followers bore his body to Samaria, * and Israel again relapsedinto the position of a vassal, probably under the same conditions asbefore the revolt. 

 * 1 Kings xxii. 28-38 (cf. 2 Ohron. Xviii. 28-34), with interpolations in verses 35 and 38. It is impossible to establish the chronology of this period with any certainty, so entirely do the Hebrew accounts of it differ from the Assyrian. The latter mention Ahab as alive at the time of the battle of Qarqar in 854 B. C. And Jehu on the throne in 842 B. C. We must, therefore, place in the intervening twelve years, first, the end of Ahab's reign; secondly, the two years of Ahaziah; thirdly, the twelve years of Joram; fourthly, the beginning of the reign of Jehu--in all, possibly fourteen years. The reign of Joram has been prolonged beyond reason by the Hebrew annalists, and it alone lends itself to be curtailed. Admitting that the siege of Samaria preceded the battle of Qarqar, we may surmise that the three years which elapsed, according to the tradition (1 Kings xxii. 1), between the triumph of Ahab and his death, fall into two unequal periods, two previous to Qarqar, and one after it, in such a manner that the revolt of Israel would have been the result of the defeat of the Damascenes; Ahab must have died in 835 B. C. , as most modern historians agree. On the other hand, it is scarcely probable that Jehu ascended the throne at the very moment that Shalmaneser was defeating Hazael in 842 B. C. ; we can only carry back his accession to the preceding year, possibly 843. The duration of two years for the reign of Ahaziah can only be reduced by a few months, if indeed as much as that, as it allows of a full year, and part of a second year (cf. 1 Kings xxii. 51, where it is said that Ahaziah ascended the throne in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat, and 2 Kings iii. 1, where it states that Joram of Israel succeeded Ahaziah in the 18th year of the same Jehoshaphat). ; in placing these two years between 853 and 851, there will remain for the reign of Joram the period comprised between 851 and 843, namely, eight years, instead of the twelve attributed to him by biblical tradition. 

Ahaziah survived his father two years, and was succeeded by his brotherJoram. * When Shalmaneser, in 849 B. C. , reappeared in the valley of theOrontes, Joram sent out against him his prescribed contingent, and theconquered Israelites once more fought for their conqueror. 

 * The Hebrew documents merely make mention of Ahaziah's accession, length of reign, and death (1 Kings xxii. 40, 51- 53, and 2 Kings i. 2-17). The Assyrian texts do not mention his name, but they state that in 849 "the twelve kings" fought against Shalmaneser, and, as we have already seen, one of the twelve was King of Israel, here, therefore necessarily Ahaziah, whose successor was Joram. 

The Assyrians had, as usual, maltreated the Khāti. After having pillagedthe towns of Carchemish and Agusi, they advanced on the Amanos, heldto ransom the territory of the Patina enclosed within the bend of theOrontes, and descending upon Hamath by way of the districts of Iarakuand Ashta-maku, they came into conflict with the army of the twelvekings, though on this occasion the contest was so bloody that they wereforced to withdraw immediately after their success. They had to contentthemselves with sacking Apparazu, one of the citadels of Aramź, andwith collecting the tribute of Garparuda of the Patina; which done, theyskirted the Amanos and provided themselves with beams from itscedars. The two following years were spent in harrying the people ofPaqarakhbuni, on the right bank of the Euphrates, in the dependenciesof the ancient kingdom of Adini (848 B. C. ), and in plundering theinhabitants of Ishtaratź in the country of Iaīti, near the sources ofthe Tigris (847 B. C. ), till in 846 they returned to try their fortuneagain in Syria. They transported 120, 000 men across the Euphrates, hoping perhaps, by the mere mass of such a force, to crush their enemyin a single battle; but Ben-hadad was supported by his vassals, andtheir combined army must have been as formidable numerically as that ofthe Assyrians. As usual, after the engagement, Shalmaneser claimedthe victory, but he did not succeed in intimidating the allies or inwresting from them a single rood of territory. *

 * The care which the king takes to specify that "with 120, 000 men he crossed the Euphrates in flood-time" very probably shows that this number was for him in some respects an unusual one. 

Discouraged, doubtless, by so many fruitless attempts, he decided tosuspend hostilities, at all events for the present. In 845 B. C. Hevisited Naīri, and caused an "image of his royal Majesty" to be carvedat the source of the Tigris close to the very spot where the streamfirst rises. Pushing forward through the defiles of Tunibuni, henext invaded Urartu, and devastated it as far as the sources of theEuphrates; on reaching these he purified his arms in the virgin spring, and offered a sacrifice to the gods. On his return to the frontier, the chief of Dayaini "embraced his feet, " and presented him with somethoroughbred horses. In 844 B. C. He crossed the Lower Zab and plungedinto the heart of Namri; this country had long been under Babylonianinfluence, and its princes bore Semitic names. Mardukmudammiq, who wasthen its ruler, betook himself to the mountains to preserve his life;but his treasures, idols, and troops were carried off to Assyria, andhe was superseded on the throne by Ianzu, the son of Khambān, a nobleof Cossęan origin. As might be expected after such severe exertions, Shalmaneser apparently felt that he deserved a time of repose, for hischroniclers merely note the date of 843 B. C. As that of an inspection, terminating in a felling of cedars in the Amanos. As a fact, there wasnothing stirring on the frontier. Chaldęa itself looked upon him as abenefactor, almost as a suzerain, and by its position between Elam andAssyria, protected the latter from any quarrel with Susa. The nationson the east continued to pay their tribute without coercion, and Namri, which alone entertained pretensions to independence, had just receiveda severe lesson. Urartu had not acknowledged the supremacy of Assur, but it had suffered in the last invasion, and Aramź had shown nofurther sign of hostility. The tribes of the Upper Tigris--Kummukh andAdini--accepted their position as subjects, and any trouble arisingin that quarter was treated as merely an ebullition of localdissatisfaction, and was promptly crushed. The Khāti were exhausted bythe systematic destruction of their towns and their harvests. Lastly, of the principalities of the Amanos, Gurgum, Samalla, and the Patina, ifsome had occasionally taken part in the struggles for independence, theothers had always remained faithful in the performance of their dutiesas vassals. Damascus alone held out, and the valour with which she hadendured all the attacks made on her showed no signs of abatement; unlessany internal disturbance arose to diminish her strength, she was likelyto be able to resist the growing power of Assyria for a long time tocome. It was at the very time when her supremacy appeared to be thusfirmly established that a revolution broke out, the effects ofwhich soon undid the work of the preceding two or three generations. Ben-hadad, disembarrassed of Shalmaneser, desired to profit by therespite thus gained to make a final reckoning with the Israelites. Itwould appear that their fortune had been on the wane ever since theheroic death of Ahab. Immediately after the disaster at Eamoth, theMoabites had risen against Ahaziah, * and their king, Mesha, son ofKamoshgad, had seized the territory north of the Arnon which belongedto the tribe of Gad; he had either killed or carried away the Jewishpopulation in order to colonise the district with Moabites, and he hadthen fortified most of the towns, beginning with Dhibon, his capital. Owing to the shortness of his reign, Ahaziah had been unable to takemeasures to hinder him; but Joram, as soon as he was firmly seated onthe throne, made every effort to regain possession of his province, andclaimed the help of his ally or vassal Jehoshaphat. **

 * 2 Kings iii. 5. The text does not name Ahaziah, and it might be concluded that the revolt took place under Joram; the expression employed by the Hebrew writer, however, "when Ahab was dead... The King of Moab rebelled against the King of Israel, " does not permit of it being placed otherwise than at the opening of Ahaziah's reign. 

 ** 2 Kings iii. 6, 7, where Jehoshaphat replies to Joram in the same terms which he had used to Ahab. The chronological difficulties induced Ed. Meyer to replace the name of Jehoshaphat in this passage by that of his son Jehoram. As Stade has remarked, the presence of two kings both bearing the name of Jehoram in the same campaign against Moab would have been one of those facts which strike the popular imagination, and would not have been forgotten; if the Hebrew author has connected the Moabite war with the name of Jehoshaphat, it is because his sources of information furnished him with that king's name. 

The latter had done his best to repair the losses caused by the war withSyria. Being Lord of Edom, he had been tempted to follow the exampleof Solomon, and the deputy who commanded in his name had constructed avessel * at Ezion-geber "to go to Ophir for gold;" but the vessel waswrecked before quitting the port, and the disaster was regarded by theking as a punishment from Jahveh, for when Ahaziah suggested that theenterprise should be renewed at their joint expense, he refused theoffer. ** But the sudden insurrection of Moab threatened him as much asit did Joram, and he gladly acceded to the latter's appeal for help. 

 * [Both in the Hebrew and the Septuagint the ships are in the plural number in 1 Kings xxii. 48, 49. --Tr. ]

 ** 1 Kings xxii. 48, 49, where the Hebrew writer calls the vessel constructed by Jehoshaphat a "ship of Tarshish;" that is, a vessel built to make long voyages. The author of the Chronicles thought that the Jewish expedition to Ezion- geber on the Red Sea was destined to go to Tarshish in Spain. He has, moreover, transformed the vessel into a fleet, and has associated Ahaziah in the enterprise, contrary to the testimony of the Book of Kings; finally, he has introduced into the account a prophet named Eliezer, who represents the disaster as a chastisement for the alliance with Ahaziah (2 Ghron. Xx. 35-37). 

Apparently the simplest way of approaching the enemy would have beenfrom the north, choosing Gilead as a base of operations; but the line offortresses constructed by Mesha at this vulnerable point of his frontierwas so formidable, that the allies resolved to attack from the southafter passing the lower extremity of the Dead Sea. They marched forseven days in an arid desert, digging wells as they proceeded for thenecessary supply of water. Mesha awaited them with his hastily assembledtroops on the confines of the cultivated land; the allies routed himand blockaded him within his city of Kir-hareseth. * Closely beset, anddespairing of any help from man, he had recourse to the last resourcewhich religion provided for his salvation; taking his firstborn son, heoffered him to Chemosh, and burnt him on the city wall in sight of thebesiegers. The Israelites knew what obligations this sacrifice entailedupon the Moabite god, and the succour which he would be constrained togive to his devotees in consequence. They therefore raised the siege anddisbanded in all directions. ** Mesha, delivered at the very moment thathis cause seemed hopeless, dedicated a stele in the temple of Dhibōn, onwhich he recorded his victories and related what measures he had takento protect his people. ***

 * Kir-Hareseth or Kir-Moab is the present Kcrak, the Krak of mediaeval times. 

 ** The account of the campaign (2 Kings iii. 8-27) belongs to the prophetic cycle of Elisha, and seems to give merely a popular version of the event. A king of Edom is mentioned (9-10, 12-13), while elsewhere, under Jehoshaphat, it is stated "there was no king in Edom" (1 Kings xxii. 47); the geography also of the route taken by the expedition is somewhat confused. Finally, the account of the siege of Kir- hareseth is mutilated, and the compiler has abridged the episode of the human sacrifice, as being too conducive to the honour of Chemosh and to the dishonour of Jahveh. The main facts of the account are correct, but the details are not clear, and do not all bear the stamp of veracity. 

 *** This is the famous Moabite Stone or stele of Dhibōn, discovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1868, and now preserved in the Louvre. 

[Illustration: 123. Jpg THE MOABITE STONE OF STELE OF MESHA]

 From a photograph by Faucher-Gudin, retouched by Massias from the original in the Louvre. The fainter parts of the stele are the portions restored in the original. 

He still feared a repetition of the invasion, but this misfortune wasspared him; Jehoshaphat was gathered to his fathers, * and his Edomitesubjects revolted on receiving the news of his death. Jeho--his son andsuccessor, at once took up arms to bring them to a sense of their duty;but they surrounded his camp, and it was with difficulty that he cut hisway through their ranks and escaped during the night. 

 * The date of the death of Jehoshaphat may be fixed as 849 or 848 B. C. The biblical documents give us for the period of the history of Judah following on the death of Ahab: First, eight years of Jehoshaphat, from the 17th year of his reign (1 Kings xxii. 51) to his 25th (and last) year (1 Kings xxii. 42); secondly, eight years of Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings viii. 17); thirdly, one year of Ahaziah, son of Jehoram (2 Kings viii. 26)--in all 17 years, which must be reduced and condensed into the period between 853 B. C. , the probable date of the battle of Ramoth, and 843, the equally probable date of the accession of Jehu. The reigns of the two Ahaziahs are too short to be further abridged; we must therefore place the campaign against Moab at the earliest in 850, during the months which followed the accession of Joram of Israel, and lengthen Johoshaphat's reign from 850 to 849. There will then be room between 849 and 844 for five years (instead of eight) for the reign of Jehoram of Judah. 

The defection of the old Canaanite city of Libnah followed quickly onthis reverse, * and Jehoram was powerless to avenge himself on it, thePhilistines and the Bedāwin having threatened the western part of histerritory and raided the country. ** In the midst of these calamitiesJudah had no leisure to take further measures against Mesha, and Israelitself had suffered too severe a blow to attempt retaliation. Theadvanced age of Ben-hadad, and the unsatisfactory result of thecampaigns against Shalmaneser, had furnished Joram with an occasion fora rupture with Damascus. War dragged on for some time apparently, tillthe tide of fortune turned against Joram, and, like his father Ahab insimilar circumstances, he shut himself within Samaria, where the falsealarm of an Egyptian or Hittite invasion produced a panic in the Syriancamp, and restored the fortunes of the Israelitish king. ***

 * 2 Kings viii. 20-22; cf. 2 Ghron. Xxi. 8-10. 

 ** This war is mentioned only in 2 Ghron. Xxi. 16, 17, where it is represented as a chastisement from Jahveh; the Philistines and "the Arabs which are beside the Ethiopians" (Kush) seem to have taken Jerusalem, pillaged the palace, and carried away the wives and children of the king into captivity, "so that there was never a son left him, save Jehoahaz (Ahaziah), the youngest of his sons. "

 *** Kuenen has proposed to take the whole account of the reign of Joram, son of Ahab, and transfer it to that of Jehoahaz, son of Jehu, and this theory has been approved by several recent critics and historians. On the other hand, some have desired to connect it with the account of the siege of Samaria in Ahab's reign. I fail to see any reasonable argument which can be brought against the authenticity of the main fact, whatever opinion may be held with regard to the details of the biblical narrative. 

Ben-hadad did not long survive the reverse he had experienced; hereturned sick and at the point of death to Damascus, where he wasassassinated by Hazael, one of his captains. Hebrew tradition points tothe influence of the prophets in all these events. The aged Elijah haddisappeared, so ran the story, caught up to heaven in a chariot of fire, but his mantle had fallen on Elisha, and his power still survived inhis disciple. From far and near Elisha's counsel was sought, alike byGentiles as by the followers of the true God; whether the suppliant wasthe weeping Shunamite mourning for the loss of her only son, or Naamanthe captain of the Damascene chariotry, he granted their petitions, andraised the child from its bed, and healed the soldier of his leprosy. During the siege of Samaria, he had several times frustrated the enemy'sdesigns, and had predicted to Joram not only the fact but the hour ofdeliverance, and the circumstances which would accompany it. Ben-hadadhad sent Hazael to the prophet to ask him if he should recover, andElisha had wept on seeing the envoy--"Because I know the evil that thouwilt do unto the children of Israel; their strongholds wilt thou set onfire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dashin pieces their little ones, and rip up their women with child. AndHazael said, But what is thy servant which is but a dog, that he shoulddo this great thing? And Elisha answered, The Lord hath showed me thatthou shalt be king over Syria. " On returning to Damascus Hazael gave theresults of his mission in a reassuring manner to Ben-hadad, but "on themorrow... He took the coverlet and dipped it in water, and spread it onhis face, so that he died. "

The deed which deprived it of its king^ seriously affected Damascusitself. It was to Ben-hadad that it owed most of its prosperity; he itwas who had humiliated Hamath and the princes of the coast of Arvad, andthe nomads of the Arabian desert. He had witnessed the rise of themost energetic of all the Israelite dynasties, and he had curbed itsambition; Omri had been forced to pay him tribute; Ahab, Ahaziah, andJoram had continued it; and Ben-hadad's suzerainty, recognised more orless by their vassals, had extended through Moab and Judah as far as theBed Sea. Not only had he skilfully built up this fabric of vassal stateswhich made him lord of two-thirds of Syria, but he had been able topreserve it unshaken for a quarter of a century, in spite ofrebellions in several of his fiefs and reiterated attacks from Assyria;Shalmaneser, indeed, had made an attack on his line, but withoutbreaking through it, and had at length left him master of the field. This superiority, however, which no reverse could shake, lay in himselfand in himself alone; no sooner had he passed away than it suddenlyceased, and Hazael found himself restricted from the very outset to theterritory of Damascus proper. * Hamath, Arvad, and the northern peoplesdeserted the league, to return to it no more; Joram of Israel called onhis nephew Ahaziah, who had just succeeded to Jehoram of Judah, and bothtogether marched to besiege Bamoth. 

 * From this point onward, the Assyrian texts which mentioned _the twelve kings of the Khati_, Irkhulini of Hamath and Adadidri (Ben-hadad) of Damascus, now only name _Khazailu of the country of Damascus_. 

The Israelites were not successful in their methods of carrying onsieges; Joram, wounded in a skirmish, retired to his palace at Jezreel, where Ahaziah joined him a few days later, on the pretext of inquiringafter his welfare. The prophets of both kingdoms and their followershad never forgiven the family of Ahab their half-foreign extraction, northeir eclecticism in the matter of religion. They had numerous partisansin both armies, and a conspiracy was set on foot against the absentsovereigns; Elisha, judging the occasion to be a propitious one, despatched one of his disciples to the camp with secret instructions. The generals were all present at a banquet, when the messenger arrived;he took one of them, Jehu, the son of Nimshi, on one side, anointedhim, and then escaped. Jehu returned, and seated himself amongst hisfellow-officers, who, unsuspicious of what had happened, questioned himas to the errand. "Is all well? Wherefore came this mad fellow to thee?And he said unto them, Ye know the man and what his talk was. And theysaid, It is false; tell us now. And he said, Thus and thus spake he tome, saying, Thus saith the Lord, I have anointed thee king over Israel. Then they hasted, and took every man his garment and put it under him onthe top of the stairs, and blew the trumpet, saying, Jehu is king. "He at once marched on Jezreel, and the two kings, surprised at thismovement, went out to meet him with scarcely any escort. The two partieshad hardly met when Joram asked, "Is it peace, Jehu?" to which Jehureplied, "What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel andher witchcrafts are so many?" Whereupon Joram turned rein, crying tohis nephew, "There is treachery, O Ahaziah. " But an arrow pierced himthrough the heart, and he fell forward in his chariot. Ahaziah, woundednear Ibleam, managed, however, to take refuge in Megiddo, where he died, his servants bringing the body back to Jerusalem. *

 * According to the very curtailed account in 2 Chron. Xxii. 9, Ahaziah appears to have hidden himself in Samaria, where he was discovered and taken to Jehu, who had him killed. This account may perhaps have belonged to the different version of which a fragment has been preserved in 2 Kings x. 12-17. 

When Jezebel heard the news, she guessed the fate which awaited her. Shepainted her eyes and tired her head, and posted herself in one of theupper windows of the palace. As Jehu entered the gates she reproachedhim with the words, "Is it peace, thou Zimri--thy master's murderer? Andhe lifted up his face to the window and said, Who is on my side--who?Two or three eunuchs rose up behind the queen, and he called to them, Throw her down. So they threw her down, and some of her blood wassprinkled on the wall and on the horses; and he trode her under foot. And when he was come in he did eat and drink; and he said, See nowto this cursed woman and bury her; for she is a king's daughter. " Butnothing was found of her except her skull, hands, and feet, which theyburied as best they could. Seventy princes, the entire family of Ahab, were slain, and their heads piled up on either side of the gate. Thepriests and worshippers of Baal remained to be dealt with. Jehu summonedthem to Samaria on the pretext of a sacrifice, and massacred them beforethe altars of their god. According to a doubtful tradition, the brothersand relatives of Ahaziah, ignorant of what had happened, came to saluteJoram, and perished in the confusion of the slaughter, and the line ofDavid narrowly escaped extinction with the house of Omri. *

 * 2 Kings x. 12-14. Stade has shown that this account is in direct contradiction with its immediate context, and that it belonged to a version of the events differing in detail from the one which has come down to us. According to the latter, Jehu must at once have met Jehonadab the son of Rechab, and have entered Samaria in his company (vers. 15-17); this would have been a poor way of inspiring the priests of Baal with the confidence necessary for drawing them into the trap. According to 2 Chron. Xxii. 8, the massacre of the princes of Judah preceded the murder of Ahaziah. 

Athaliah assumed the regency, broke the tie of vassalage which boundJudah to Israel, and by a singular irony of fate, Jerusalem offered anasylum to the last of the children of Ahab. The treachery of Jehu, inaddition to his inexpiable cruelty, terrified the faithful, even whileit served their ends. Dynastic crimes were common in those days, but thetragedy of Jezreel eclipsed in horror all others that had preceded it;it was at length felt that such avenging of Jahveh was in His eyes tooruthless, and a century later the Prophet Hosea saw in the misery of hispeople the divine chastisement of the house of Jehu for the blood shedat his accession. 

The report of these events, reaching Calah, awoke the ambition ofShalmaneser. Would Damascus, mistrusting its usurper, deprived ofits northern allies, and ill-treated by the Hebrews, prove itself asinvulnerable as in the past? At all events, in 842 B. C. , Shalmaneseronce more crossed the Euphrates, marched along the Orontes, probablyreceiving the homage of Hamath and Arvad by the way. Restricted solelyto the resources of Damascus, <Hazael did not venture to advance intoCoele-Syria as Ben-hadad had always done; he barricaded the defiles ofAnti-Lebanon, and, entrenched on Mount Shenir with the flower of histroops, prepared to await the attack. It proved the most bloody battlethat the Assyrians had up to that period ever fought. Hazael lost 16, 000foot-soldiers, 470 horsemen, 1121 chariots, and yet succeeded in fallingback on Damascus in good order. Shalmaneser, finding it impossible toforce the city, devastated the surrounding country, burnt numberlessvillages and farms, and felled all the fruit trees in the Haurān up tothe margin of the desert. This district had never, since the foundationof the kingdom by Bezon a century before, suffered at the hands of anenemy's army, and its population, enriched as much by peaceful labouras by the spoil of its successful wars, offered a prize of incalculablevalue. On his return march Shalmaneser raided the Bekaa, enteredPhoenicia, and carved a triumphal stele on one of the rocks ofBaalirasi. *

 * The site of Baalirasi is left undecided by Assyriologists. The events which follow enable us to affirm with tolerable certainty that the point on the coast where Shalmaneser received the tributes of Tyre and Sidon is none other than the mouth of the Nahr-el-Kelb: the name Baalirasi, "the master of the head, " would then be applicable to the rocky point which rises to the south of the river, and on which Egyptian kings had already sculptured their stelę. 

The Kings of Tyre and Sidon hastened to offer him numerous gifts, and Jehu, who owed to his presence temporary immunity from a Syrianinvasion, sent his envoys to greet him, accompanied by offerings of goldand silver in bars, vessels of gold of various forms, situlę, salvers, cups, drinking-vessels, tin, sceptres, and wands of precious woods. Shalmaneser's pride was flattered by this homage, and he carved on oneof his monuments the representation of this first official connection ofAssyria with Israel. 

[Illustration: 131. Jpg JEHU, KING OF ISRAEL, SENDS PRESENTS TOSHALMANESER]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the scenes represented on the Black Obelisk. 

The chief of the embassage is shown prostrating himself and kissing thedust before the king, while the rest advance in single file, some withvessels in their hands, some carrying sceptres, or with metal bowlssupported on their heads. The prestige of the house of Omri was still aliving influence, or else the Ninevite scribes were imperfectly informedof the internal changes which had taken place in Israel, for theinscription accompanying this bas-relief calls Jehu the son of Omri, and grafts the regicide upon the genealogical tree of his victims. Shalmaneser's victory had been so dearly bought, that the following yearthe Assyrians merely attempted an expedition for tree-felling in theAmanos (841 B. C. ). Their next move was to push forward into Kuī, in thedirection of the Pyramos and Saros (840 B. C. ). In the summer of 839 theyonce more ventured southwards, but this time Hazael changed his tactics:pitched battles and massed movements, in which the fate of a campaignwas decided by one cast of the dice, were now avoided, and ambuscades, guerilla warfare, and long and tedious sieges became the order of theday. By the time that four towns had been taken, Shalmaneser's patiencewas worn out: he drew off his troops and fell back on Phoenicia, layingTyre, Sidon, and Byblos under tribute before returning into Mesopotamia. Hazael had shown himself possessed of no less energy than Ben-hadad;and Damascus, isolated, had proved as formidable a foe as Damascussurrounded by its vassals; Shalmaneser therefore preferred to leavematters as they were, and accept the situation. Indeed the resultsobtained were of sufficient importance to warrant his feeling somesatisfaction. He had ruthlessly dispelled the dream of Syrian hegemonywhich had buoyed up Ben-hadad, he had forced Damascus to withdraw thesuzerainty it had exercised in the south, and he had conquered NorthernSyria and the lower basin of the Orontes. Before running any furtherrisks, he judged it prudent to strengthen his recently acquiredauthority over these latter countries, and to accustom the inhabitantsto their new position as subjects of Nineveh. 

He showed considerable wisdom by choosing the tribes of the Taurus andof the Oappadocian marches as the first objects of attack. In regionsso difficult of access, war could only be carried on with considerablehardship and severe loss. The country was seamed by torrents and denselycovered with undergrowth, while the towns and villages, which clung tothe steep sides of the valleys, had no need of walls to become effectivefortresses, for the houses rose abruptly one above another, and formedso many redoubts which the enemy would be forced to attack and takeone by one. Few pitched battles could be fought in a district of thisdescription; the Assyrians wore themselves out in incessant skirmishesand endless petty sieges, and were barely compensated by the meagrespoil which such warfare yielded. 

[Illustration: 134. Jpg A MOUNTAIN VILLAGE]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Alfred Boissier. 

In 838 B. C. Shalmaneser swept over the country of Tabal and reducedtwenty-four of its princes to a state of subjection; proceedingthence, he visited the mountains of Turat, * celebrated from this perioddownwards for their silver mines and quarries of valuable marbles. 

 * The position of the mountains of Turat is indicated by the nature of their products: "We know of _a silver mine_ at Marash and an iron mine not worked, and _two fine quarries_, one of pink and the other of black marble. " Turat, therefore, must be the Marash mountain, the Aghir-Uagh and its spurs; hence the two sorts of stone mentioned in the Assyrian text would be, the one the pink, the other the black marble. 

In 837 he seized the stronghold of Uźtash in Melitene, and laid Tabalunder a fresh contribution; this constituted a sort of advance postfor-Assyria in the sight of those warlike and continually fluctuatingraces situated between the sources of the Halys and the desert borderof Asia Minor. * Secure on this side, he was about to bring matters toa close in Cilicia, when the defection of Ianzu recalled him to theopposite extremity of the empire. He penetrated into Namri by thedefiles of Khashmur, ** made a hasty march through Sik-hisatakh, Bīt-Tamul, Bīt-Shakki, and Bīt-Shedi, surprised the rebels and drovethem into the forests; he then bore down on Parsua*** and plunderedtwenty-seven petty kings consecutively. 

 * A fragment of an anonymous list, discovered by Delitzsch, puts the expedition against the Tabal in 837 B. C. Instead of in 838, and consequently makes the entire series of ensuing expeditions one year later, up to the revolt of Assur-dain- pal. This is evidently a mistake of the scribe who compiled this edition of the Canon, and the chronology of a contemporary monument, such as the Black Obelisk, ought to obtain until further light can be thrown on the subject. 

 ** For the site of Khashmur or Khashmar, cf. _supra_, p. 35, note 3. The other localities cannot as yet be identified with any modern site; we may conjecture that they were scattered about the basin of the upper Dīyalah. 

 *** Parsua, or with the native termination Parsuash, has been identified first with Persia and then with Parthia, and Rost still persists in its identification, if not with the Parthia of classical geographers, at least with the Parthian people. Schrader has shown that it ought to be sought between Namri on the south and the Mannai on the north; in one of the valleys of the Gordysean mountains, and his demonstration has been accepted with a few modifications of detail by most scholars. I believe it to be possible to determine its position with still further precision. Parsua on one side lay on the border of Namri, which comprises the districts to the east of the Dīyalah in the direction of Zohab, and was contiguous to the Medes on the other side, and also to the Mannai, who occupied the southern regions of Lake Urumiah; it also lies close to Bīt-Khamban, the principal of the Cossęan tribes, as it would appear. I can find only one position on the map which would answer to all these requirements: this is in the main the basin of the Gavź-rud and its small affluents, the Ardelān and the sources of the Kizil-Uzźn, and I shall there place Parsua until further information is forthcoming on the subject. 

Skirting Misi, Amadai, Araziash, * and Kharkhar, and most of thedistricts lying on the middle heights of the table-land of Iran, he atlength came up with Ianzu, whom he seized and brought back prisoner toAssyria, together with his family and his idols. 

 * Amadai is a form of Madai, with a prothetical _a_, like Agusi or Azala, by the side of Guzi and Zala. The inscription of Shalmaneser III. Thus gives us the first mention of the classical Medes. Araziash, placed too far to the east in Sagartenź by Fr. Lenormant, has been located further westwards by Schrader, near the upper course of the Kerkhā; but the documents of all periods show us that on one side it adjoined Kharkhar, that is the basin of the Gamas- āb, on the other side Media, that is the country of Hamadan. It must, therefore, be placed between the two, in the northern part of the ancient Cambadenź in the present Tchamabadān. Kharkhar in this case would be in the southern part of Cambadene, on the main road which leads from the gates of the Zagros to Hamadan; an examination of the general features of the country leads me to believe that the town of Kharkhar should occupy the site of Kirmānshahān, or rather of the ancient city which preceded that town. 

It was at this juncture, perhaps, that he received from the people ofMuzri the gift of an elephant and some large monkeys, representations ofwhich he has left us on one of his bas-reliefs. Elephants were becomingrare, and it was not now possible to kill them by the hundred, asformerly, in Syria: this particular animal, therefore, excited thewonder of the Ninevites, and the possession of it flattered the vanityof the conqueror. This was, however, an interlude of short duration, andthe turbulent tribes of the Taurus recalled him to the west as soon asspring set in. 

He laid waste Kuī in 836 B. C. , destroyed Timur, its capital, and on hisreturn march revenged himself on Aramź of Agusi, whose spirit was stillunbroken by his former misfortunes. 

[Illustration: 137. Jpg ELEPHANT AND MONKEYS BROUGHT AS A TRIBUTE TONINEVEH BY THE PEOPLE OF MUZBI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs of the Black Obelisk. 

Tanakun and Tarsus fell into his hands 835 B. C. ; Shalmaneser replacedKati, the King of Kuī, by his brother Kirri, and made of his dominions akind of buffer state between his own territory and that of Pamphylia andLycaonia. He had now occupied the throne for a quarter of a century, not a year of which had elapsed without seeing the monarch gird on hisarmour and lead his soldiers in person towards one or other pointsof the horizon. He was at length weary of such perpetual warfare, andadvancing age perchance prevented him from leading his troops with thatdash and vigour which are necessary to success; however this might be, on his return from Cilicia he laid aside his armour once for all, anddevoted himself to peaceful occupations. 

But he did not on that account renounce all attempts at conquest. Conducting his campaigns by proxy delegated the command of his army tohis Tartan Dayān-assur, and the northern tribes were the first on whomthis general gave proof of his prowess. Urartu had passed into thehands of another sovereign since its defeat in 845 B. C. , and a secondSharduris* had taken the place of the Aramź who had ruled at thebeginning of Shalma-neser's reign. 

 * The name is written Siduri or Seduri in the text of the Obelisk, probably in accordance with some popular pronunciation, in which the r was but slightly rolled and finally disappeared. The identity of Seduri and Sharduris, has been adopted by recent historians. Belck and Lehmann have shown that this Seduri was not Sharduris, son of Lutipris, but a Sharduris II. , probably the son of Aramź. 

It would appear that the accession of this prince, who was probablyyoung and active, was the signal for a disturbance among the people ofthe Upper Tigris and the Masios--a race always impatient of the yoke, and ready to make common cause with any fresh enemy of Assyria. Aninsurrection broke out in Bīt-Zamani and the neighbouring districts. Dayān-assur quelled it offhand; then, quitting the basin of the Tigrisby the défiles of Armash, he crossed the Arzania, and entered Urartu. Sharduris came out to meet him, and was defeated, if we may givecredence to the official record of the campaign. Even if the account bean authentic one, the victory was of no advantage to the Assyrians, forthey were obliged to retreat before they had subjugated the enemy, andan insurrection among the Patina prevented them from returning to theattack in the following year. With obligations to their foreign masteron one hand and to their own subjects on the other, the princes of theSyrian states had no easy life. If they failed to fulfil their duties asvassals, then an Assyrian invasion would pour in to their country, andsooner or later their ruin would be assured; they would have before themthe prospect of death by impaling or under the knife of the flayer, or, if they escaped this, captivity and exile in a far-off land. Prudencetherefore dictated a scrupulous fidelity to their suzerain. On the otherhand, if they resigned themselves to their dependent condition, thepeople of their towns would chafe at the payment of tribute, or someambitious relative would take advantage of the popular discontent tohatch a plot and foment a revolution, and the prince thus threatenedwould escape from an Assyrian reprisal only to lose his throne or fallby the blow of an assassin. In circumstances such as these the people ofthe Patina murdered their king, Lubarna II. , and proclaimed in hisroom a certain Sum, who had no right to the crown, but who doubtlessundertook to liberate them from the foreigner. Dayān-assur defeated therebels and blockaded the remains of their army in Kinalua. They defendedthemselves at first energetically, but on the death of Surri from someillness, their courage failed them and they offered to deliver over thesons of their chief if their own lives might be spared. Dayān-assurhad the poor wretches impaled, laid the inhabitants under a heavycontribution, and appointed a certain Sāsi, son of Uzza, to be theirking. The remainder of Syria gave no further trouble--a fortunatecircumstance, for the countries on the Armenian border revolted in 832B. C. , and the whole year was occupied in establishing order amongthe herdsmen of Kirkhi. In 831 B. C. , Dayān-assiir pushed forward intoKhubushkia, and traversed it from end to end without encountering anyresistance. He next attacked the Mannai. Their prince, Ualki, quailedbefore his onslaught; he deserted his royal city Zirtu, * and took refugein the mountains. Dayān-assur pursued him thither in vain, but he wasable to collect considerable booty, and turning in a south-easterlydirection, he fought his way along the base of the Gordysean mountainstill he reached Parsua, which he laid under tribute. In 830 B. C. It wasthe turn of Muzazir, which hitherto had escaped invasion, to receive avisit from the Tartan. Zapparia, the capital, and fifty-six other townswere given over to the flames. From thence, Dayān-assur passed intoUrartu proper; after having plundered it, he fell back on the southernprovinces, collecting by the way the tribute of Guzān, of the Mannai, of Andiu, ** and Parsua; he then pushed on into the heart of Namri, andhaving razed to the ground two hundred and fifty of its towns, returnedwith his troops to Assyria by the defiles of Shimishi and throughKhalman. 

 * The town is elsewhere called Izirtu, and appears to have been designated in the inscriptions of Van by the name of Sisiri-Khadiris. 

 ** Andia or Andiu is contiguous to Naīri, to Zikirtu and to Karalla, which latter borders on Manna; it bordered on the country of Misa or Misi, into which it is merged under the name of Misianda in the time of Sargon. Delattre places Andiu in the country of the classical Matiense, between the Mationian mountains and Lake Urumiah. The position of Misu on the confines of Araziash and Media, somewhere in the neighbourhood of Talvantu-Dagh, obliges us to place Andiu lower down to the south-east, near the district of Kurdasir. 

This was perhaps the last foreign campaign of Shalmaneser III. 's reign;it is at all events the last of which we possess any history. The recordof his exploits ends, as it had begun more than thirty years previously, with a victory in Namri. 

[Illustration: 137. Jpg BLACK OBELISK OF SHALMANESER III]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the cast in the Louvre. [The original is in the Brit. Mus. --Tr. ]

The aged king had, indeed, well earned the right to end his allotteddays in peace. Devoted to Calah, like his predecessor, he had thereaccumulated the spoils of his campaigns, and had made it thewealthiest city of his empire. He continued to occupy the palace ofAssur-nazir-pal, which he had enlarged. Wherever he turned within itswalls, his eyes fell upon some trophy of his wars or panegyric of hisvirtues, whether recorded on mural tiles covered with inscriptions andbas-reliefs, or celebrated by statues, altars, and triumphal stelę. The most curious among all these is a square-based block terminatingin three receding stages, one above the other, like the stump ofan Egyptian obelisk surmounted by a stepped pyramid. Five rowsof bas-reliefs on it represent scenes most flattering to Assyrianpride;--the reception of tribute from Gilzān, Muzri, the Patina, theIsraelitish Jehu, and Marduk-abal-uzur, King of the land of Sukhi. Thelatter knew his suzerain's love of the chase, and he provided him withanimals for his preserves, including lions, and rare species of deer. 

[Illustration: 142. Jpg STAG AND LIONS OF THE COUNTRY OF SUKHI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs of the Black Obelisk. 

The inscription on the monument briefly relates the events which hadoccurred between the first and the thirty-first years of Shalmaneser'sreign;--the defeat of Damascus, of Babylon and Urartu, the conquestof Northern Syria, of Cilicia, and of the countries bordering onthe Zagros. When the king left Calah for some country residence inits-neighbourhood, similar records and carvings would meet his eye. AtImgur-Bel, one of the gates of the palace was covered with plates ofbronze, on which the skilful artist had embossed and engraved with thechisel episodes from the campaigns on the Euphrates and the Tigris, thecrossing of mountains and rivers, the assault and burning of cities, thelong lines of captives, the _mźlée_ with the enemy and the pursuit ofthe chariots. All the cities of Assyria, Nineveh, * Arbela, Assur, evento the more distant towns of Harrān** and Tushkhān, ***--vied with eachother in exhibiting proofs of his zeal for their gods and his affectionfor their inhabitants; but his predilection for Calah filled them withjealousy, and Assur particularly could ill brook the growing aversionwith which the Assyrian kings regarded her. It was of no avail that shecontinued to be the administrative and religious capital of the empire, the storehouse of the spoil and annual tribute of other nations, andwas continually embellishing herself with fresh monuments: a spiritof discontent was daily increasing, and merely awaited some favourableoccasion to break out into open revolt. Shalmaneser enjoyed the dignityof _limmu_ for the second time after thirty years, and had celebratedthis jubilee of his inauguration by a solemn festival in honour of Assurand Eammān. ****

 * Nineveh is mentioned as the starting-place of nearly all the first campaigns in the inscription on the _Monolith_; also in the Balawāt inscription, on the other hand, towards the end of the reign, Calah is given as the residence of the king on the _Black Obelisk_

 ** Mention of the buildings of Shalmaneser III. At Harrān occurs in an inscription of Nabonidus. 

 *** The Monolith discovered at Kurkh is in itself a proof that Shalmaneser executed works in this town, the Tushkhān of the inscriptions. 

 **** Any connection established between this thirty-year jubilee and the thirty years' festival of Egypt rests on facts which can be so little relied on, that it must be accepted with considerable reserve. 

[Illustration: 144. Jpg THE BRONZE-COVERED GATES OF BALAWĄT]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the sketch by Pinches. 

It is possible that he may have thought this a favourable moment forpresenting to the people the son whom he had chosen from among hischildren to succeed him. At any rate, Assur-dain-pal, fearing thatone of his brothers might be preferred before him, "proclaimed himselfking, " and nearly the whole of Assyria gathered around his standard. Assur and twenty-six more of the most important cities revolted in hisfavour--Nineveh, Imgur-bel, Sibaniba, Dur-balat, Arbela, Zabān in theChaldęan marches, Arrapkha in the valley of the Upper Zab, and mostof the colonies, both of ancient and recent foundation--Amidi on theTigris, Khindanu near the mouths of the Kha-bur and Tul-Abni on thesouthern slopes of the Masios. The aged king remained in possession onlyof Calah and its immediate environs--Nisibis, Harrān, Tushkhān, and themost recently subdued provinces on the banks of the Euphrates and theOrontes. It is probable, however, that the army remained faithful tohim, and the support which these well-tried troops afforded him enabledthe king to act with promptitude. The weight of years did not permit himto command in person; he therefore entrusted the conduct of operationsto his son Samsi-rammān, but he did not live to see the end of thestruggle. It embittered his last days, and was not terminated till 822B. C. , at which date Shalmaneser had been dead two years. This prolongedcrisis had shaken the kingdom to its foundations; the Syrians, theMedes, the Babylonians, and the peoples of the Armenian and Aramęanmarches were rent from it, and though Samsi-rammān IV. Waged continuouswarfare during the twelve years that he governed, he could onlypartially succeed in regaining the territory which had been thus lost. *

 * All that we know of the reign of Samsi-rammān IV. Comes from an inscription in archaic characters containing the account of four campaigns, without giving the years of each reign or the _limmu_, and historians have classified them in different ways. 

His first three campaigns were-directed against the north-eastern andeastern provinces. He began by attempting to collect the tribute fromNaīri, the payment of which had been suspended since the outbreak ofthe revolution, and he re-established the dominion of Assyria from thedistrict of Paddir to the township of Kar-Shulmānasharid, which hisfather had founded at the fords of the Euphrates opposite to Carchemish(821 B. C. ). In the following campaign he did not personally take part, but the Rabshakeh Mutarriz-assur pillaged the shores of Lake Urumiah, and then made his way towards Urartu, where he destroyed three hundredtowns (820). The third expedition was directed against Misi andGizilbunda beyond the Upper Zab and Mount Zilar. * The inhabitants ofMisi entrenched themselves on a wooded ridge commanded by three peaks, but were defeated in spite of the advantages which their positionsecured for them;** the people of Gizilbunda were not more fortunatethan their neighbours, and six thousand of them perished at the assaultof Urash, their capital. ***

 * Mount Zilar is beyond the Upper Zab, on one of the roads which lead to the basin of Lake Urumiah, probably in Khubushkia. There are two of these roads--that which passes over the neck of Kelishin, and the other which runs through the gorges of Alan; "with the exception of these two points, the mountain chain is absolutely impassable. " According to the general direction of the campaign, it appears to me probable that the king crossed by the passes of Alan; Mount Zilār would therefore be the group of chains which cover the district of Pīshder, and across which the Lesser Zab passes before descending to the plain. 

 ** The country of Misi adjoined Gizilbunda, Media, Araziāsh, and Andiu. All these circumstances incline us to place it in the south-eastern part of Kurdistan of Sihmeh, in the upper valley of Kisil-Uzźn. The ridge, overlooked by three peaks, on which the inhabitants took refuge, cannot be looked for on the west, whore there are few important heights: I should rather identify it with the part of the Gordysean mountains which bounds the basin of the Kisil-Uzźn on the west, and which contains three peaks of 12, 000 feet--the Tchehel- tchechma, the Derbend, and the Nau-Kān. 

 *** The name of the country has been read Giratbunda, Ginunbunda, Girubbunda; a variant, to which no objections can be made, has furnished Gizilbunda. It was contiguous on one side to the Medes, and on the other to the Mannai, which obliges us to place it in Kurdistan of Gerrus, on the Kizil- Uzōn. It may be asked if the word Kizil which occurs several times in the topographical nomenclature of these regions is not a relic of the name in question, and if Gizil-bunda is not a compound of the same class as Kizil-uzźn, Kizil- gatchi, Kizihalān, Kizil-lōk, whether it be that part of the population spoke a language analogous to the dialects now in use in these districts, or that the ancient word has been preserved by later conquerors and assimilated to some well- known word in their own language. 

Mutarriz-assur at once turned upon the Medes, vanquished them, and drovethem at the point of the sword into their remote valleys, returning tothe district of Araziash, which he laid waste. A score of chiefswith barbarous names, alarmed by this example, hastened to prostratethemselves at his feet, and submitted to the tribute which he imposedon them. Assyria thus regained in these regions the ascendency which thevictories of Shalmaneser III. In their time had won for her. 

Babylon, which had endured the suzerainty of its rival for a quarterof a century, seems to have taken advantage of the events occurring inAssyria to throw off the yoke, by espousing the cause of Assur-dain-pal. Samsi-rammān, therefore, as soon as he was free to turn his attentionfrom Media (818), directed his forces against Babylonia. Metur-nāt, as usual, was the first city attacked; it capitulated at once, and itsinhabitants were exiled to Assyria. Kami to the south of the Turnat, andDibina on Mount Yalrnan, suffered the same fate, but Gananātź held outfor a time; its garrison, however, although reinforced by troops fromthe surrounding country, was utterly routed before its walls, and thesurvivors, who fled for refuge to the citadel in the centre of the town, were soon dislodged. The Babylonians, who had apparently been taken bysurprise at the first attack, at length made preparations to resistthe invaders. The Prince of Dur-papsukal, who owned allegiance toMarduk-balatsu-ikbi, King of Babylon, had disposed his troops so asto guard the fords of the Tigris, in order to prevent the enemy fromreaching his capital. But Samsi-rammān dispersed this advanced force, killing thirteen thousand, besides taking three thousand prisoners, andfinally reduced Dur-papsukal to ashes. 

[148. Jpg MONOLITH OF SAMSI-RAMMAN IV]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by Mansell. The original is in the British Museum. 

The respite thus obtained gave Marduk-balatsu-ikbi sufficient time tocollect the main body of his troops: the army was recruited from Kaldāand Ela-mites, soldiers from Namri, and Aramaean contingents, and theunited force awaited the enemy behind the ruins of Dur-papsukal, along the banks of the Dabān canal. Five thousand footmen, two hundredhorsemen, one hundred chariots, besides the king's tent and all hisstores, fell into the hands of the Assyrians. The victory was complete;Babylon, Kuta, and Borsippa capitulated one after the other, and theinvaders penetrated as far as the land of the Kaldā, and actuallyreached the Persian Gulf. Samsi-rammān offered sacrifices to thegods, as his father had done before him, and concluded a treaty withMarduk-balatsu-ikbi, the terms of which included rectification ofboundaries, payment of a subsidy, and the other clauses usual insuch circumstances; the peace was probably ratified by a matrimonialalliance, concluded between the Babylonian princess Sammuramat andBammān-nirāri, son of the conqueror. In this manner the hegemony ofAssyria over Karduniash was established even more firmly than beforethe insurrection; but all available resources had been utilised in theeffort necessary to secure it. Samsi-rammān had no leisure to reconquerSyria or Asia Minor, and the Euphrates remained the western frontier ofhis kingdom, as it had been in the early days of Shalmaneser III. Thepeace with Babylon, moreover, did not last long; Bau-akhiddīn, whohad succeeded Marduk-balatsu-ikbi, refused to observe the terms of thetreaty, and hostilities again broke out on the Turnat and the Tigris, asthey had done six years previously. This war was prolonged from 813to 812 B. C. , and was still proceeding when Samsi-rammān died. His sonBammān-nirāri III. Quickly brought it to a successful issue. He carriedBau-akhiddīn captive to Assyria, with his family and the nobles of hiscourt, and placed on the vacant throne one of his own partisans, whilehe celebrated festivals in honour of his own supremacy at Babylon, Kuta, and Borsippa. Karduniash made no attempt to rebel against Assyria duringthe next half-century. Bammān-nirāri proved himself an energetic andcapable sovereign, and the thirty years of his reign were by no meansinglorious. We learn from the eponym lists what he accomplished duringthat time, and against which countries he waged war; but we have not yetrecovered any inscription to enable us to fill in this outline, and puttogether a detailed account of his reign. His first expeditions weredirected against Media (810), Gozān (809), and the Mannai (808-807); hethen crossed the Euphrates, and in four successive years conducted asmany vigorous campaigns against Arpad (806), Kkazaiu (808), the townof Baali (804), and the cities of the Phoenician sea-board (803). Theplague interfering with his advance in the latter direction, he againturned his attention eastward and attacked Khubushkia in 802, 792, and784; Media in 801-800, 794-793, and 790-787; Lushia in 799; Namri in798; Diri in 796-795 and 785; Itua in 791, 783-782; Kishki in 785. Thisbare enumeration conjures up a vision of an enterprising and victoriousmonarch of the type of Assur-nazir-pal or Shalmaneser III. , one whoperhaps succeeded even where his redoubtable ancestors had failed. The panoramic survey of his empire, as unfolded to us in one of hisinscriptions, includes the mountain ranges of Illipi as far as MountSihina, Kharkhar, Araziash, Misu, Media, the whole of Gizilbunda, Man, Parsua, Allabria, Abdadana, the extensive territory of Istaīri, far-offAndiu, and, westwards beyond the Euphrates, the Khāti, the entirecountry of the Amorites, Tyre, Sidon, Israel, Edom, and the Philistines. Never before had the Assyrian empire extended so far east in thedirection of the centre of the Iranian tableland, nor so far to thesouth-west towards the frontiers of Egypt. *

 * Allabria or Allabur is on the borders of Parsua and of Karalla, which allows us to locate it in the basins of the Kerkhorāh and the Saruk, tributaries of the Jagatu, which flow into Lake Urumiah. Abdadana, which borders on Allabria, and was, according to Rammān-nirāri, at the extreme end of Naīri, was a little further to the east or north-east; if I am not mistaken, it corresponds pretty nearly to Uriād, on the banks of the Kizil-Uzźn. 

In two only of these regions, namely, Syria and Armenia, do nativedocuments add any information to the meagre summary contained in theAnnals, and give us glimpses of contemporary rulers. The retreat ofShalmaneser, after his partial success in 839, had practically left theancient allies of Ben-hadad II. At the mercy of Hazael, the new King ofDamascus, but he did not apparently attempt to assert his supremacy overthe whole of Coele-Syria, and before long several of its cities acquiredconsiderable importance, first Mansuate, and then Hadrach, * both ofwhich, casting Hamath into the shade, succeeded in holding their ownagainst Hazael and his successors. He renewed hostilities, however, against the Hebrews, and did not relax his efforts till he hadthoroughly brought them into subjection. Jehu suffered loss on all hisfrontiers, "from Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, the Keubenites, and the Manassites, from Aroer, which is by the valleyof Arnon, even Gilead and Bashan, "** Israel became thus once moreentirely dependent on Damascus, but the sister kingdom of Judah stillescaped its yoke through the energy of her rulers. 

 * Mansuati successfully resisted Rammān-nirāri in 797 B. C. , but he probably caused its ruin, for after this only expeditions against Hadrach are mentioned. Mansuati was in the basin of the Orontes, and the manner in which the Assyrian texts mention it in connection with Zimyra seems to show that it commanded the opening in the Lebanon range between Cole-Syria and Phoenicia. The site of Khatarika, the Hadrach of Zech. Ix. 1, is not yet precisely determined; but it must, as well as Mansuati, have been in the neighbourhood of Hamath, perhaps between Hamath and Damascus. It appears for the first time in 772. 

 ** 2 Kings x. 32, 33. Even if verse 33 is a later addition, it gives a correct idea of the situation, except as regards Bashan, which had been lost to Israel for some time already. 

Athaliah reigned seven years, not ingloriously; but she belonged tothe house of Ahab, and the adherents of the prophets, whose party hadplanned Jehu's revolution, could no longer witness with equanimity oneof the accursed race thus prospering and ostentatiously practising therites of Baal-worship within sight of the great temple of Jahveh. Onseizing the throne, Athaliah had sought out and put to death all themembers of the house of David who had any claim to the succession; butJeho-sheba, half-sister of Ahaziah, had with difficulty succeeded inrescuing Joash, one of the king's sons. Her husband was the high priestJehoiada, and he secreted his nephew for six years in the precincts ofthe temple; at the end of that time, he won over the captains of theroyal guard, bribed a section of the troops, and caused them to swearfealty to the child as their legitimate sovereign. Athaliah, hasteningto discover the cause of the uproar, was assassinated. Mattan, chiefpriest of Baal, shared her fate; and Jehoiada at once restored to Jahvehthe preeminence which the gods of the alien had for a time usurped(837). At first his influence over his pupil was supreme, but beforelong the memory of his services faded away, and the king sought onlyhow to rid himself of a tutelage which had grown irksome. The templehad suffered during the late wars, and repairs were much needed. Joash ordained that for the future all moneys put into the sacredtreasury--which of right belonged to the king--should be placedunreservedly at the disposal of the priests on condition that theyshould apply them to the maintenance of the services and fabric ofthe temple: the priests accepted the gift, but failed in the faithfulobservance of the conditions, so that in 814 B. C. The king was obligedto take stringent measures to compel them to repair the breaches in thesanctuary walls:* he therefore withdrew the privilege which they hadabused, and henceforth undertook the administration of the TempleFund in person. The beginning of the new order of things was not verysuccessful. Jehu had died in 815, after a disastrous reign, and both heand his son Jehoahaz had been obliged to acknowledge the supremacy ofHazael: not only was he in the position of an inferior vassal, but, inorder to preclude any idea of a revolt, he was forbidden to maintaina greater army than the small force necessary for purposes of defence, namely, ten thousand foot-soldiers, fifty horsemen, and ten chariots. **

 * 2 Kings xii. 4-16; cf. 2 Chron. Xxiv. 1-14. The beginning of the narrative is lost, and the whole has probably been modified to make it agree with 2 Kings xxii. 3-7. 

 ** 2 Kings xiii. 1-7. It may be noticed that the number of foot-soldiers given in the Bible is identical with that which the Assyrian texts mention as Ahab's contingent at the battle of Qarqar, viz. 10, 000; the number of the chariots is very different in the two cases. Kuenen and other critics would like to assign to the reign of Jehoahaz the siege of Samaria by the Syrians, which the actual text of the Book of the Kings attributes to the reign of Joram. 

The power of Israel had so declined that Hazael was allowed to marchthrough its territory unhindered on his way to wage war in the countryof the Philistines; which he did, doubtless, in order to get possessionof the main route of Egyptian commerce. The Syrians destroyed Gath, *reduced Pentapolis to subjection, enforced tribute from Edom, and thenmarched against Jerusalem. Joash took from the treasury of Jahveh thereserve funds which his ancestors, Jehoshaphat, Joram, and Ahaziah, hadaccumulated, and sent them to the invader, ** together with all the goldwhich was found in the king's house. 

 * The text of 2 Kings xii. 17 merely says that Hazael took Gath. Gath is not named by Amos among the cities of the Philistines (Amos. I. 6-8), but it is one of the towns cited by that prophet as examples to Israel of the wrath of Jahveh (vi. 2). It is probable, therefore, that it was already destroyed in his time. 

 ** 2 Kings xii. 17, 18; cf. 2 Chron. Xxiv. 22-24, where the expedition of Hazael is represented as a punishment for the murder of Mechariah, son of Jehoiada. 

From this time forward Judah became, like Israel, Edom, the Philistinesand Ammonites, a mere vassal of Hazael; with the possible exception ofMoab, all the peoples of Southern Syria were now subject to Damascus, and formed a league as strong as that which had successfully resistedthe power of Shalmaneser. Rammān-nirāri, therefore, did not venture toattack Syria during the lifetime of Hazael; but a change of sovereignis always a critical moment in the history of an Eastern empire, and hetook advantage of the confusion caused by the death of the aged king toattack his successor Mari (803 B. C. ). Mari essayed the tactics which hisfather had found so successful; he avoided a pitched battle, and shuthimself up in Damascus. But he was soon closely blockaded, and forcedto submit to terms; Rammān-nirāri demanded as the price of withdrawal, 23, 000 talents of silver, 20 talents of gold, 3000 of copper, 5000 ofiron, besides embroidered and dyed stuffs, an ivory couch, and a litterinlaid with ivory, --in all a considerable part of the treasures amassedat the expense of the Hebrews and their neighbours. It is doubtfulwhether Rammān-nirāri pushed further south, and penetrated in person asfar as the deserts of Arabia Petrsę--a suggestion which the mentionof the Philistines and Edomites among the list of his tributary statesmight induce us to accept. Probably it was not the case, and he reallywent no further than Damascus. But the submission of that city included, in theory at least, the submission of all states subject to her sway, and these dependencies may have sent some presents to testify theirdesire to conciliate his favour; their names appear in the inscriptionsin order to swell the number of direct or indirect vassals of theempire, since they were subject to a state which had been effectuallyconquered. 

Rammān-nirāri did not meet with such good fortune in the North; not onlydid he fail to obtain the brilliant successes which elsewhere attendedhis arms, but he ended by sustaining considerable reverses. The Ninevitehistorians reckoned the two expeditions of 808 and 807 B. C. Against theMannai as victories, doubtless because the king returned with a train ofprisoners and loaded with spoil; but the Vannic inscriptions revealthat Urartu, which had been rising into prominence during the reignof Shalmaneser, had now grown still more powerful, and had begun toreconquer those provinces on the Tigris and Euphrates of which theAssyrians thought themselves the undoubted lords. Sharduris II. Had beensucceeded, about 828, by his son Ishpuinis, who had perhaps measured hisstrength against Samsi-ranimān IV. Ishpuinis appears to have conqueredand reduced to the condition of a province the neighbouringprincipality of Biainas, which up to that time had been governed by asemi-independent dynasty; at all events, he transferred thence his seatof govern-and made Dhuspas his favourite residence. Towards the end ofhis reign he associated with him on the throne his son Menuas, and madehim commander-in-chief of the army. Menuas proved a bold and successfulgeneral, and in a few years had doubled the extent of his dominions. Hefirst delivered from the Assyrian yoke, and plundered on his father'saccount, the tribes on the borders of Lake Urumiah, Muzazir, Gilzān, andKirruri; then, crossing the Gordygean mountains, he burnt the towns inthe valley of the Upper Zab, which bore the uncouth names of Teraīs, Ardis, Khanalis, Bikuras, Khatqanas, Inuas, and Nibur, laid waste themore fertile part of Khubushkia, and carved triumphal stelas in theAssyrian and Vannic scripts upon the rocks in the pass of Rowandiz. 

[Illustration: 156. Jpg TRIUMPHAL STELE OF MENUAS AT KELISHIN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by J. De Morgan. 

It was probably to recover this territory that Rammān-nirāri waged warthree times in Khubushkia, in 802, 792, and 785, in a district which hadformerly been ruled by a prefect from Nineveh, but had now fallen intothe hands of the enemy. *

 * It is probable that the stele of Kelishin, belonging to the joint reign of Ishpuinis and Menuas, was intended to commemorate the events which led Rammān-nirāri to undertake his first expedition; the conquest by Menuas will fall then in 804 or 803 B. C. The inscription of Meher-Kapussi contains the names of the divinities belonging to several conquered towns, and may have been engraved on the return from this war. 

Everywhere along the frontier, from the Lower Zab to the Euphrates, Menuas overpowered and drove back the Assyrian outposts. He took fromthem Aldus and Erinuis on the southern shores of Lake Van, compelledDayaīni to abandon its allegiance, and forced its king, Udhupursis, tosurrender his treasure and his chariots; then gradually descending thevalley of the Arzania, he crushed Seseti, Kulmź, and Ekarzu. In one yearhe pillaged the Mannai in the east, and attacked the Khāti in the west, seizing their fortresses of Surisilis, Tarkhigamas, and Sarduras; inthe province of Alzu he left 2113 soldiers dead on the field after oneengagement; Gupas yielded to his sway, followed by the towns of Khuzanasand Puteria, whereupon he even crossed the Euphrates and levied tributefrom Melitene. But the struggle against Assyria absorbed only a portionof his energy; we do not know what he accomplished in the east, inthe plains sloping towards the Caspian Sea, but several monuments, discovered near Armavir and Erzerum, testify that he pushed his armsa considerable distance towards the north and north-west. * He obligedEtius to acknowledge his supremacy, sending a colony to its capital, Lununis, whose name he changed to Menua-lietzilinis. **

 * The inscription of Erzerum, discovered by F. De Saulcy and published by him, shows that Menuas was in possession of the district in which this town is situated, and that he rebuilt a palace there. 

 ** Inscriptions of Yazli-tash and Zolakert. It follows from these texts that the country of Etius is the district of Armavir, and Lununis is the ancient name of this city. The now name by which Menuas replaced the name Lununis signifies _the abode of the people of Menuas_; like many names arising from special circumstances, it naturally passed away with the rule of the people who had imposed it. 

Towards the end of his reign he partly subjugated the Mannai, plantingcolonies throughout their territory to strengthen his hold on thecountry. By these campaigns he had formed a kingdom, which, stretchingfrom the south side of the Araxes to the upper reaches of the Zab andthe Tigris, was quite equal to Assyria in size, and probably surpassedit in density of population, for it contained no barren steppes such asstretched across Mesopotamia, affording support merely to a few wretchedBedāwin. As their dominions increased, the sovereigns of Biainas beganto consider themselves on an equality with the kings of Nineveh, andendeavoured still more to imitate them in the luxury and display oftheir domestic life, as well as in the energy of their actions and thecontinuity of their victories. They engraved everywhere on the rockstriumphal inscriptions, destined to show to posterity their own exploitsand the splendour of their gods. Having made this concession to theirvanity, they took effective measures to assure possession of theirconquests. They selected in the various provinces sites difficult ofaccess, commanding some defile in the' mountains, or ford over a river, or at the junction of two roads, or the approach to a plain; on suchspots they would build a fortress or a town, or, finding a citadelalready existing, they would repair it and remodel its fortificationsso as to render it impregnable. At Kalajik, Ashrut-Darga, and the olderMukhrapert may still be seen the ruins of ramparts built by Ishpuims. Menuas finished the buildings his father had begun, erected othersin all the districts where he sojourned, in time of peace or war, atShushanz, Sirka, * Anzaff, Arzwapert, Geuzak, Zolakert, Tashtepź, and inthe country of the Mannai, and it is possible that the fortified villageof Melasgerd still bears his name. **

 * The name of the ancient place corresponding to the modern village of Sirka was probably Artsunis or Artsuyunis, according to the Vannic inscriptions. 

 ** A more correct form than Melas-gerd is Manas-gert, _the city of Manas_, where Manas would represent Menuas: one of the inscriptions of Aghtamar speaks of a certain Menuakhinas, _city of Menuas_, which may be a primitive version of the same name. 

His wars furnished him with the men and materials necessary for therapid completion of these works, while the statues, valuable articlesof furniture, and costly fabrics, vessels of silver, gold, andcopper carried off from Assyrian or Asiatic cities, provided him withsurroundings as luxurious as those enjoyed by the kings of Nineveh. Hisfavourite residence was amid the valleys and hills of the south-westernshore of Lake Van, the sea of the rising sun. His father, Ishpuinis, hadalready done much to embellish the site of Dhuspas, or Khaldinas asit was called, from the god Khaldis; he had surrounded it with strongwalls, and within them had laid the foundations of a magnificentpalace. Menuas carried on the work, brought water to the cisterns bysubterranean aqueducts, planted gardens, and turned the whole place intoan impregnable fortress, where a small but faithful garrison could defya large army for several years. Dhuspas, thus completed, formed thecapital and defence of the kingdom during the succeeding century. 

Menuas was gathered to his fathers shortly before the death ofEammān-nirāri, perhaps in 784 B. C. *

 * This date seems to agree with the text of the _Annals of Argistis_, as far as we are at present acquainted with them; Müller has shown, in fact, that they contain the account of fourteen campaigns, probably the first fourteen of the reign of Argistis, and he has recognised, in accordance with the observations of Stanislas Guyard, the formula which separates the campaigns one from another. There are two campaigns against the peoples of the Upper Euphrates mentioned before the campaigns against Assyria, and as these latter follow continuously after 781, it is probable that the former must be placed in 783-782, which would give 783 or 784 for the year of his accession. 

He was engaged up to the last in a quarrel with the princes who occupiedthe mountainous country to the north of the Araxes, and his son Argistisspent the first few years of his reign in completing his conquests inthis region. * He crushed with ease an attempted revolt in Dayaīni, andthen invaded Etius, systematically devastating it, its king, Uduris, being powerless to prevent his ravages. All the principal townssuccumbed one after another before the vigour of his assault, and, fromthe numbers killed and taken prisoners, we may surmise the importance ofhis victories in these barbarous districts, to which belonged the namesof Seriazis, Silius, Zabakhas, Zirimutaras, Babanis, and Urmias, **though we cannot definitely locate the places indicated. 

 * The _Annals of Argistis_ are inscribed on the face of the rock which crowns the citadel of Van. The inscription contains (as stated in note above) the history of the first fourteen yearly campaigns of Argistis. 

 ** The site of these places is still undetermined. Seriazis and Silius (or Tarius) lay to the north-east of Dayaīni, and Urmias, Urmź, recalls the modern name of Lake Urumiah, but was probably situated on the left bank of the Araxes. 

On a single occasion, the assault on Ureyus, for instance, Argistis tookprisoners 19, 255 children, 10, 140 men fit to bear arms, 23, 280 women, and the survivors of a garrison which numbered 12, 675 soldiers at theopening of the siege, besides 1104 horses, 35, 016 cattle, and more than10, 000 sheep. Two expeditions into the heart of the country, conductedbetween 784 and 782 B. C. , had greatly advanced the work of conquest, when the accession of a new sovereign in Assyria made Argistis decide torisk a change of front and to concentrate the main part of his forceson the southern boundary of his empire. Rammān-nirāri, after his lastcontest in Khubushkia in 784, had fought two consecutive campaignsagainst the Aramęan tribes of Itua, near the frontiers of Babylon, andhe was still in conflict with them when he died in 782 B. C. His son, Shalmaneser IV. , may have wished to signalise the commencement of hisreign by delivering from the power of Urartu the provinces which thekings of that country had wrested from his ancestors; or, perhaps, Argistis thought that a change of ruler offered him an excellentopportunity for renewing the struggle at the point where Menuas had leftit, and for conquering yet more of the territory which still remainedto his rival. Whatever the cause, the Assyrian annals show us the twoadversaries ranged against each other, in a struggle which lasted from781 to 778 B. C. Argistis had certainly the upper hand, and thoughhis advance was not rapid, it was never completely checked. The firstengagement took place at Nirbu, near the sources of the Supnat and theTigris: Nirbu capitulated, and the enemy pitilessly ravaged the Hittitestates, which were subject to Assyria, penetrating as far as the heartof Melitene (781). The next year the armies encountered each othernearer to Nineveh, in the basin of the Bitlis-tchaī, at Khakhias; and, in 779, Argistis expressly thanks his gods, the Khaldises, for havinggraciously bestowed upon him as a gift the armies and cities of Assur. The scene of the war had shifted, and the contest was now carried on inthe countries bordering on Lake Urumiah, Bustus and Parsua. The nativesgained nothing by the change of invader, and were as hardly used by theKing of Urartu as they had been by Shalmaneser III. Or by Samsirammān:as was invariably the case, their towns were given over to the flames, their fields ravaged, their cattle and their families carried intocaptivity. Their resistance, however, was so determined that a secondcampaign was required to complete the conquest: and this time theAssyrians suffered a serious defeat at Surisidas (778), and a yearat least was needed for their recovery from the disaster. During thisrespite, Argistis hastened to complete the pacification of Bustus, Parsua, and the small portion of Man which had not been reduced tosubjection by Menuas. When the Assyrians returned to the conflict, hedefeated them again (776), and while they withdrew to the Amanus, wherea rebellion had broken out (775), he reduced one by one the small stateswhich clustered round the eastern and southern shores of Lake Urumiah. He was conducting a campaign in Namri, when Shalmaneser IV. Made a lasteffort to check his advance; but he was again victorious (774), and fromhenceforth these troubled regions, in which Nineveh had so persistentlyendeavoured for more than a century to establish her own supremacy, became part of the empire of Urartu. Argistis's hold of them proved, however, to be a precarious and uncertain one, and before long the samedifficulties assailed him which had restricted the power of his rivals. 

[Illustration: 164. Jpg URARTIAN STELE ON THE ROCKS OF AK-KEUPBU]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Ximones. 

He was forced to return again and again to these districts, destroyingfortresses and pursuing the inhabitants over plain and mountain: in 773we find him in Urmes, the territory of Bikhuras, and Bam, in the veryheart of Namri; in 772, in Dhuaras, and Gurqus, among the Mannai, andat the city of Uikhis, in Bustus. Meanwhile, to the north of the Araxes, several chiefs had taken advantage of his being thus engaged in warfarein distant regions, to break the very feeble bond which held themvassals to Urartu. Btius was the fountain-head and main support of therebellion; the rugged mountain range in its rear provided its chiefswith secure retreats among its woods and lakes and valleys, throughwhich flowed rapid torrents. Argistis inflicted a final defeat on theMannai in 771, and then turned his forces against Etius. He took bystorm the citadel of Ardinis which defended the entrance to the country, ravaged Ishqigulus, * and seized Amegu, the capital of Uidharus: ourknowledge of his wars comes to an end in the following year with anexpedition into the land of Tarius. 

 * Sayce shows that Ishqigulus was the district of Alexandropolis, to the east of Kars; its capital, Irdanius, is very probably either the existing walled village of Kalinsha or the neighbouring ruin of Ajuk-kaleh, on the Arpa-tohāī. 

The monuments do not tell us what he accomplished on the borders ofAsia Minor; he certainly won some considerable advantages there, and theinfluence which Assyria had exercised over states scattered to the northof the Taurus, such as Melitene, and possibly Tabal and Kummukh, whichhad formed the original nucleus of the Hittite empire, must have nowpassed into his hands. The form of Argistis looms before us as that ofa great conqueror, worthy to bear comparison with the most indefatigableand triumphant of the Pharaohs of Egypt or the lords of Chaldęa. Theinscriptions which are constantly being discovered within the limitsof his kingdom prove that, following the example of all Orientalsovereigns, he delighted as much in building as in battle: perhaps weshall some day recover a sufficient number of records to enable us torestore to their rightful place in history this great king, and thepeople whose power he developed more than any other sovereign. 

Assyria had thus lost all her possessions in the northern and easternparts of her empire; turning to the west, how much still remainedfaithful to her? After the expedition of 775 B. C. To the land of Cedars, two consecutive campaigns are mentioned against Damascus (773) andHadrach (772); it was during this latter expedition, or immediatelyafter it, that Shalmaneser IV. Died. Northern Syria seems to have beendisturbed by revolutions which seriously altered the balance of powerwithin her borders. The ancient states, whose growth had beenarrested by the deadly blows inflicted on them in the ninth centuryby Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III. , had become reduced to thecondition of second-rate powers, and their dominions had been split up. The Patina was divided into four small states--the Patina proper, Unki, Iaudi, and Samalla, the latter falling under the rule of an Aramaeanfamily;* perhaps the accession of Qaral, the founder of this dynasty, had been accompanied by convulsions, which might explain the presence ofShalmaneser IV. In the Amanos in 775. 

 * The inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III. Mention Unku, Iaudi, Samalla, and the Patin, in the districts where the texts of Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III. , only know of the Patina. 

All these principalities, whether of ancient or recent standing, rangedthemselves under one of two kingdoms--either Hadrach or Arpad, whosenames henceforth during the following half-century appear in the frontrank whenever a coalition is formed against Assyria. Carchemish, whoseindependence was still respected by the fortresses erected in itsneighbourhood, could make no move without exposing itself to animmediate catastrophe: Arpad, occupying a prominent position a littlein front of the Afrīn, on the main route leading to the Orontes, hadassumed the _rōle_ which Carchemish was no longer in a position to fill. Agusi became the principal centre of resistance; all battles were foughtunder the walls of its fortresses, and its fall involved the submissionof all the country between the Euphrates and the sea, as in former timeshad been the case with Kinalua and Khazazu. *

 * That Arpad was in Agusi is proved, among other places, by the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III. , which show us from 743 to 741 the king at war with Matīlu of Agusi and his suzerain Sharduris III. Of Urartu. 

Similar to the ascendency of Arpad over the plateau of Aleppo wasthat of Hadrach in the valley of the Orontes. This city had taken theposition formerly occupied by Hamath, which was now possibly one of itsdependencies; it owed no allegiance to Damascus, and rallied around itall the tribes of Coele-Syria, whose assistance Hadadezer, but a shortwhile before, had claimed in his war with the foreigner. Neither Arpad, Hadrach, nor Damascus ever neglected to send the customary presents toany sovereign who had the temerity to cross the Euphrates and advanceinto their neighbourhood, but the necessity for this act of homagebecame more and more infrequent. During his reign of eighteen yearsAssurdān III. , son and successor of Shalmaneser IV. , appeared only threetimes beneath their walls--at Hadrach in 766 and 755, at Arpad in 750, a few months only before his death. Assyria was gradually becominginvolved in difficulties, and the means necessary to the preservationof its empire were less available than formerly. Assurdān had franklyrenounced all idea of attacking Urartu, but he had at least endeavouredto defend himself against his enemies on the southern and easternfrontiers; he had led his armies against Gananātź (771, 767), againstItua (769), and against the Medes (766), before risking an attack onHadrach (765), but more than this he had not attempted. On two occasionsin eight years (768, 764) he had preferred to abstain from offensiveaction, and had remained inactive in his own country. Assyria foundherself in one of those crises of exhaustion which periodically laidher low after each outbreak of ambitious enterprise; she might well becompared to a man worn out by fatigue and loss of blood, who becomesbreathless and needs repose as soon as he attempts the least exertion. Before long, too, the scourges of disease and civil strife combined withexhaustion in hastening her ruin. The plague had broken out in the veryyear of the last expedition against Hadrach (765), perhaps under thewalls of that city. An eclipse of the sun occurred in 763, in the monthof Sivān, and this harbinger of woe was the signal for an outbreak ofrevolt in the city of Assur. *

 * The ideas which Orientals held on the subject of comets renders the connection between the two events very likely, if not certain. 

From Assur the movement spread to Arrapkha, and wrought havoc therefrom 761 to 760; it then passed on to Gozān, where it was not finallyextinguished till 758. The last remains of Assyrian authority inSyria vanished during this period: Assurdān, after two years' respite, endeavoured to re-establish it, and attacked successively Hadrach (755)and Arpad (754). This was his last exploit. His son Assur-nirāri III. Spent his short reign of eight years in helpless inaction; he lostSyria, he carried on hostilities in Namri from 749 to 748--whetheragainst the Aramaeans or Urartians is uncertain--then relapsed intoinactivity, and a popular sedition drove him finally from Calah in 746. He died some months later, without having repressed the revolt; none ofhis sons succeeded him, and the dynasty, having fallen into disreputethrough the misfortunes of its last kings, thus came to an end; for, on the 12th of Iyyār, 742 B. C. , a usurper, perhaps, the leader ofthe revolt at Calah, proclaimed himself king under the name ofTiglath-pileser. * The second Assyrian empire had lasted rather less thana century and a half, from Tukulti-ninip II. To Assur-nirāri III. **

 * Many historians have thought that Tiglath-pileser III. Was of Babylonian origin; most of them, however, rightly considers that he was an Assyrian. The identity of Tiglath- pileser III. With Pulu, the Biblical Pul (2 Kings xv. 19) has been conclusively proved by the discovery of the _Babylonian Chronicle_, where the Babylonian reigns of Tiglath-pileser III. And his son Shalmaneser V. Are inserted where the dynastic lists give Pulu and Ululai, the Poros and Eluloos of Ptolemy. 

 ** Here is the concluding portion of the dynasty of the kings of Assyria, from Irba-rammān to Assur-nirāri III. :--

[Illustration: 169. Jpg TABLE OF THE DYNASTY OF THE KINGS OF ASSYRIA]

In the manner in which it had accomplished its work, it resembled theEgyptian empire of eight hundred years before. The Egyptians, settingforth from the Nile valley, had overrun Syria and had at first broughtit under their suzerainty, though without actually subduing it. They hadinvaded Amurru and Zahi, Naharaim and Mitanni, where they had pillaged, burnt, and massacred at will for years, without obtaining from thesecountries, which were too remote to fall naturally within their sphereof influence, more than a temporary and apparent submission; theregions in the neighbourhood of the isthmus alone had been regularlyadministered by the officers of Pharaoh, and when the country betweenMount Seir and Lebanon seemed on the point of being organised into areal empire the invasion of the Peoples of the Sea had overthrown andbrought to nought the work of three centuries. The Assyrians, under theleadership of ambitious kings, had in their turn carried their arms overthe countries of the Euphrates and the Mediterranean, but, like thoseof the Egyptians before them, their expeditions resembled rather thedestructive raids of a horde in search of booty than the gradual andorderly advance of a civilised people aiming at establishing a permanentempire. Their campaigns in Cole-Syria and Palestine had enriched theirown cities and spread the terror of their name throughout the Easternworld, but their supremacy had only taken firm root in the plainsbordering on Mesopotamia, and just when they were preparing to extendtheir rule, a power had sprung up beside them, over which they hadbeen unable to triumph: they had been obliged to withdraw behind theEuphrates, and they might reasonably have asked themselves whether, byweakening the peoples of Syria at the price of the best blood of theirown nation, they had not merely laboured for the benefit of a rivalpower, and facilitated the rise of Urartu. Egypt, after her victory overthe Peoples of the Sea, had seemed likely, for the moment, to make afresh start on a career of conquest under the energetic influence ofRamses III. , but her forces proved unequal to the task, and as soonas the master's hand ceased to urge her on, she shrank back, without astruggle, within her ancient limits, and ere long nothing remained toher of the Asiatic empire carved out by the warlike Pharaohs of theTheban dynasties. If Tiglath-pileser could show the same courage andcapacity as Ramses III. , he might well be equally successful, and raisehis nation again to power; but time alone could prove whether Nineveh, on his death, would be able to maintain a continuous effort, or whetherher new display of energy would prove merely ephemeral, and her empirebe doomed to sink into irremediable weakness under the successors of herdeliverer, as Egypt had done under the later Ramessides. 

CHAPTER II--TIGLATH-PILESER III. AND THE ORGANISATION OF THE ASSYRIANEMPIRE FROM 745 TO 722 B. C. 

_TIGLATH-PILESER III. AND THE ORGANISATION OF THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE FROM745 to 722 B. C. _

_FAILURE OF URARTU AND RE-CONQUEST Of SYRIA--EGYPT AGAIN UNITED UNDERETHIOPIAN AUSPICES--PIŌNKHI--THE DOWNFALL OF DAMASCUS, OF BABYLON, ANDOF ISRAEL. _

_Assyria and its neighbours at the accession of Tiglath-pileser III. :progress of the Aramęans in the basin of the Middle Tigris--Urartu andits expansion into the north of Syria--Damascus and Israel--Vengeance ofIsrael on Damascus--Jeroboam II. --Civilisation of the Hebrewkingdoms, their commerce, industries, private life, and politicalorganisation--Dawn of Hebrew literature: the two historians ofIsrael--The priesthood and the prophets--The prophecy of Amos at Bethel;denunciation of Israel by Hosea. _

_Early campaigns of Tiglath-pileser III. In Karduniash and in Media--Hedetermines to attach Urartu in Syria: defeat of Sharduris, campaignaround Arpad, and capture of that city--Homage paid by the Syrianprinces, by Menahem and Rezin II--Second campaign against theMedes--Invasion of Urartu and end of its supremacy--Alliance of Pekahand Rezin against Ahaz: the war in Judęa and siege of Jerusalem. _

_Egypt under the kings of the XXIIth dynasty--The Thebanprincipality, its priests, pallacides, and revolts; the XXIIIrd Tanitedynasty--Tafnakhti and the rise of the Saite family--The Egyptiankingdom, of Ethiopia: theocratic nature of its dynasty, annexation ofthe Thebaid by the kingdom of Napata--Piōnkhi-Mīamun; his generalsin Middle Egypt; submission of Khmunu, of Memphis, and ofTafnalchti--Effect produced in Asia by the Ethiopian conquest. _

_The prophet Isaiah, his rise under Aliaz--Intervention ofTiglath-pileser III. In Hebrew affairs; the campaign of 733 B. C. AgainstIsrael--Capture of Rezin, and the downfall of Damascus--Nabunazīr;the Kaldd and the close of the Babylonian dynasty; usurpationof Ukīnzīr--Campaign against Ukīnzīr; capture of Shapīa and ofBabylon--Tiglath-pileser ascends the throne in the last-named city underthe name of Fulu (729 B. C. )--Death of Tiglath-pileser III. (727 B. C. )_

_Reorganisation of the Assyrian empire; provinces and feudatorystates--Karduniash, Syria--Wholesale deportation of conqueredraces--Provincial administrators, their military and financialarrangements--Buildings erected by Tiglath-pileser atCalah--The Bit-Khilāni--Foundation of feudallordships--Belharrdn-beluzur--Shalmaneser V. And Egypt: rebellionof Hoshea, the siege of Samaria, and the prophecies ofIsaiah--Sargon--Destruction of the kingdom of Israel. _

CHAPTER II--TIGLATH-PILESER III. AND THE ORGANISATION OF THE ASSYRIANEMPIRE FROM 745 TO 722 B. C. 

_Failure of Urartu and re-conquest of Syria--Egypt again united underEthiopian auspices--Piōnkhi--The downfall of Damascus, of Babylon, andof Israel. _

 * Drawn by Boudier, from Layard. The vignette, also by Boudier, represents a bronze statuette of Queen Karomama, now in the Louvre. 

Events proved that, in this period, at any rate, the decadence ofAssyria was not due to any exhaustion of the race or impoverishment ofthe country, but was mainly owing to the incapacity of its kings and thelack of energy displayed by their generals. If Menuas and Argistis hadagain and again triumphed over the Assyrians during half a century, itwas not because their bands of raw recruits were superior to the triedveterans of Rammān-nirāri in either discipline or courage. The Assyriantroops had lost none of their former valour, and their muster-rollshowed no trace of diminution, but their leaders had lost the power ofhandling their men after the vigorous fashion of their predecessors, and showed less foresight and tenacity in conducting their campaigns. Although decimated and driven from fortress to fortress, and fromprovince to province, hampered by the rebellions it was called uponto suppress, and distracted by civil discord, the Assyrian army stillremained a strong and efficient force, ever ready to make its full powerfelt the moment it realised that it was being led by a sovereign capableof employing its good qualities to advantage. Tiglath-pileser had, doubtless, held a military command before ascending the throne, andhad succeeded in winning the confidence of his men: as soon as he hadassumed the leadership they regained their former prestige, and restoredto their country that supremacy which its last three rulers had failedto maintain. *

 * The official documents dealing with the history of Tiglath-pileser III. Have been seriously mutilated, and there is on several points some difference of opinion among historians as to the proper order in which the fragments ought to be placed, and, consequently, as to the true sequence of the various campaigns. The principal documents are as follows: (1) The _Annals_ in the Central Hall of the palace of Shalmaneser III. At Nimroud, partly defaced by Esarhaddon, and carried off to serve as materials for the south-western palace, whence they were rescued by Layard, and brought in fragments to the British Museum. (2) The _Tablets_, K. 3571 and D. T. 3, in the British Museum. (3) The _Slabs of Nimrud_, discovered by Layard and G. Smith. 

The empire still included the original patrimony of Assur and itsancient colonies on the Upper Tigris, the districts of Mesopotamia wonfrom the Aramęans at various epochs, the cities of Khabur, Khindanu, Laqī, and Tebabnī, and that portion of Bīt-Adini which lay to the leftof the Euphrates. It thus formed a compact mass capable of successfullyresisting the fiercest attacks; but the buffer provinces whichAssur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III. Had grouped round their ownimmediate domains on the borders of Namri, of Naīri, of Melitene, and ofSyria had either resumed their independence, or else had thrown in theirlot with the states against which they had been intended to watch. TheAramaean tribes never let slip an opportunity of encroaching on thesouthern frontier. So far, the migratory instinct which had brought themfrom the Arabian desert to the swamps of the Persian Gulf had met withno check. Those who first reached its shores became the founders of thatnation of the Kaldā which had, perhaps, already furnished Babylon withone of its dynasties; others had soon after followed in their footsteps, and passing beyond the Kaldā settlement, had gradually made their wayalong the canals which connect the Euphrates with the Tigris till theyhad penetrated to the lowlands of the Uknu. Towards the middle ofthe eighth century B. C. They wedged themselves in between Elam andKarduniash, forming so many buffer states of varying size and influence. They extended from north to south along both banks of the Tigris, theirdifferent tribes being known as the Gambulu, the Puqudu, the Litau, theDamunu, the Ruuā, the Khindaru, the Labdudu, the Harīlu, and the Rubuu;*the Itua, who formed the vanguard, reached the valleys of the Turnatduring the reign of Kammān-nirāri III. They were defeated in 791 B. C. , but obstinately renewed hostilities in 783, 782, 777, and 769; favouredby circumstances, they ended by forcing the cordon of Assyrian outposts, and by the time of Assur-nirāri had secured a footing on the Lower Zab. Close by, to the east of them, lay Namri and Media, both at that time ina state of absolute anarchy. The invasions of Menuas and of Argistishad entirely laid waste the country, and Sharduris III. , the king whosucceeded Argistis, had done nothing towards permanently incorporatingthem with Urartu. ** Sharduris, while still heir-apparent to the throne, had been appointed by his father governor of the recently annexedterritory belonging to Etius and the Mannai:*** he made Lununis hisheadquarters, and set himself to subdue the barbarians who had settledbetween the Kur and the Araxes. When he succeeded to the throne, about 760 B. C. , the enjoyment of supreme power in no way lessenedhis activity. On the contrary, he at once fixed upon the sort of wideisthmus which separates the Araxes from Lake Urumiah, as the goal of hisincursions, and overran the territory of the Babilu; there he carried bystorm three royal castles, twenty-three cities, and sixty villages; hethen fell back upon Etius, passing through Dakis, Edias, and Urmes onhis way, and brought back with him 12, 735 children, 46, 600 women, 12, 000 men capable of bearing arms, 23, 335 oxen, 58, 100 sheep, and 2, 500horses; these figures give some idea of the importance of his victoriesand the wealth of the conquered territory. 

 * The list of Aramęan tribes, and the positions occupied by them towards the middle of the eighth century, have been given us by Tiglath-pileser III. Himself. 

 ** Tiglath-pileser did not encounter any Urartian forces in these regions, as would almost certainly have been the case had these countries remained subject to Urartu from the invasions of Menuas and Argistis onwards. 

 *** Argistis tells us in the _Annals_ that he had made his son satrap over the provinces won from the Mannai and Etius: though his name is not mentioned, Sayce believes this son must have been Sharduris. 

So far as we can learn, he does not seem to have attacked Khubushkia, *nor to have entered into open rivalry with Assyria; even under the ruleof Assur-nirāri III. Assyria showed a bold enough front to deter anyenemy from disturbing her except when forced to do so. Sharduris merelystrove to recover those portions of his inheritance to which Assyriaattached but little value, and his inscriptions tell us of more thanone campaign waged by him with this object against the mountaineers ofMelitene, about the year 758. He captured most of their citadels, oneafter another: Dhumeskis, Zapsas, fourteen royal castles, and a hundredtowns, including Milid itself, where King Khitaruadas held his court. **

 * It is evident from the account of the campaigns that Tiglath-pileser occupied Khubushkia from the very commencement of his reign; we must therefore assume that the invasions of Argistis had produced only transient effects. 

 ** These campaigns must have preceded the descent into Syria, and I believe this latter to have been anterior to the expedition of Assur-nirāri against Arpad in 754 B. C. Assur-nirāri probably tried to reconquer the tribes who had just become subject to Sharduris. The descent of this latter into Syria probably took place about 756 or 755 B. C. , and his wars against Melitene about 758 to 757 B. C. 

At this point two courses lay open before him. He could either continuehis march westwards, and, penetrating into Asia Minor, fall upon thewealthy and industrious races who led a prosperous existence betweenthe Halys and the Sangarios, such as the Tabal, the Chalybes, and thePhrygians, or he could turn southwards. 

[Illustration: 180. Jpg A VISTA OF THE ASIANIC STEPPE]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Alfred Boissier. 

Deterred, apparently, by the dreary and monotonous aspect of the Asianicsteppes, he chose the latter course; he crossed Mount Taurus, descendedinto Northern Syria about 756, and forced the Khāti to swear allegianceto him. Their inveterate hatred of the Assyrians led the Bīt-Agusi toaccept without much reluctance the supremacy of the only power which hadshown itself capable of withstanding their triumphant progress. Arpadbecame for several years an unfailing support to Urartu and the basis onwhich its rule in Syria rested. Assur-nirāri had, as we know, atfirst sought to recover it, but his attempt to do so in 754 B. C. Wasunsuccessful, and merely served to demonstrate his own weakness: tenyears later, Carchemish, Grurgum, Kummukh, Samalla, Unki, Kuī--in aword, all the Aramęans and the Khāti between the Euphrates and thesea had followed in the steps of the Agusi, and had acknowledged thesupremacy of Sharduris. *

 * The _minimum_ extent of the dominions of Sharduris in Syria may be deduced from the list of the allies assigned to him by Tiglath-pileser in 743 in the Annals. 

This prince must now haye been sorely tempted to adopt, on his ownaccount, the policy of the Ninevite monarchs, and push on in thedirection of Hamath, Damascus, and the Phoenician seaboard, towardsthose countries of Israel and Judah which were nearly coterminous withfar-off Egypt. The rapidity of the victories which he had just succeededin winning at the foot of Mount Taurus and Mount Amanus must haveseemed a happy omen of what awaited his enterprise in the valleys of theOrontes and the Jordan. Although the races of southern and centralSyria had suffered less than those of the north from the ambition of theNinevite kings, they had, none the less, been sorely tried during theprevious century; and it might be questioned whether they had derivedcourage from the humiliation of Assyria, or still remained in so feeblea state as to present an easy prey to the first invader. 

The defeat inflicted on Mari by Rammān-nirāri in 803 had done but littleharm to the prestige of Damascus. The influence exercised by this statefrom the sources of the Litany to the brook of Egypt * was based on sosolid a foundation that no temporary reverse had power to weaken it. 

 * [Not the Nile, but the Wady el Arish, the frontier between Southern Syria and Egypt. Cf. Josh. Xv. 47; 2 Kings xxiv. 7, called "river" of Egypt in the A. V. --Tr. ]

Had the Assyrian monarch thrown himself more seriously into theenterprise, and reappeared before the ramparts of the capital in thefollowing year, refusing to leave it till he had annihilated its armiesand rased its walls to the ground, then, no doubt, Israel, Judah, the Philistines, Edom, and Ammon, seeing it fully occupied in its owndefence, might have forgotten the ruthless severity of Hazael, and haveplucked up sufficient courage to struggle against the Damascene yoke; asit was, Bammān-nirāri did not return, and the princes who had, perhaps, for the moment, regarded him as a possible deliverer, did not ventureon any concerted action. Joash, King of Judah, and Jehoahaz, King ofIsrael, continued to pay tribute till both their deaths, within a yearof each other, Jehoahaz in 797 B. C. , and Joash in 796, the first in hisbed, the second by the hand of an assassin. *

 * Kings xii. 20, 21, xiii. 9; cf. 2 Citron, xxiv. 22-26, where the death of Joash is mentioned as one of the consequences of the Syrian invasion, and as a punishment for his crime in killing the sons of Jehoiada. 

Their children, Jehoash in Israel, Amaziah in Judah, were, at first, liketheir parents, merely the instruments of Damascus; but before long, theconditions being favourable, they shook off their apathy and initiateda more vigorous policy, each in his own kingdom. Mari had been succeededby a certain Ben-hadad, also a son of Hazael, * and possibly this changeof kings was accompanied by one of those revolutions which had done somuch to weaken Damascus: Jehoash rebelled and defeated Ben-hadad nearAphek and in three subsequent engagements, but he failed to make hisnation completely independent, and the territory beyond Jordan stillremained in the hands of the Syrians. ** We are told that beforeembarking on this venture he went to consult the aged Elisha, then onhis deathbed. He wept to see him in this extremity, and bending overhim, cried out, "My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and thehorsemen thereof!" The prophet bade him take bow and arrows and shootfrom the window toward the East. The king did so, and Elisha said, "TheLord's arrow of victory *** over Syria; for thou shalt smite the Syriansin Aphek till thou have consumed them. "

 * 2 Kings xiii. 24, 25. Winckler is of opinion that Mari and Ben-hadad, son of Hazael, were one and the same person. 

 ** 2 Kings xiii. 25, The term "saviour" in 2 Kings xiii. 5 is generally taken as referring to Joash: Winckler, however, prefers to apply it to the King of Assyria. The biblical text does not expressly state that Joash failed to win back the districts of Gilead from the Syrians, but affirms that he took from them the cities which Hazael "had taken out of the hand of Jehoahaz, his father. " Ramah of Gilead and the cities previously annexed by Jehoahaz must, therefore, have remained in the hands of Ben-hadad. 

 *** [Heb. "salvation;" A. V. "deliverance. "--Tr. ]

Then he went on: "Take the arrows, " and the king took them; then hesaid, "Smite upon the ground, " and the king smote thrice and stayed. And the man of God was wroth with him, and said, "Thou shouldest havesmitten five or six times; then hadst thou smitten Syria till thou hadstconsumed it, whereas now thou shalt smite Syria but thrice. "* Amaziah, on his side, had routed the Edomites in the Valley of Salt, one ofDavid's former battle-fields, and had captured their capital, Sela. **Elated by his success, he believed himself strong enough to break thetie of vassalage which bound him to Israel, and sent a challenge toJehoash in Samaria. The latter, surprised at his audacity, replied in aparable, "The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that wasin Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife. " But "therepassed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon and trode down the thistle. Thou hast indeed smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up:glory thereof and abide at home; for why shouldest thou meddle to thyhurt that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee?" They metnear Beth-shemesh, on the border of the Philistine lowlands. Amaziah wasworsted in the engagement, and fell into the power of his rival. Jehoashentered Jerusalem and dismantled its walls for a space of four hundredcubits, "from the gate of Ephraim unto the corner gate;" he pillagedthe Temple, as though it had been the abode, not of Jahveh, but of somepagan deity, insisted on receiving hostages before he would releasehis prisoner, and returned to Samaria, where he soon after died (781B. C. ). ***

 * 2 Kings xiii. 14-19. 

 ** 2 Kings xiv. 7; cf. 2 Gliron. Xxv. 11, 12. Sela was rebuilt, and received the name of Joktheel from its Hebrew masters. The subjection of the country was complete, for, later on, the Hebrew chronicler tells of the conquest of Elath by King Azariah, son of Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 22). 

 *** 2 Kings xiv. 8-16. Cf. 2 Ghron. Xxv. 17-24. 

Jeroboam II. Completed that rehabilitation of Israel, of which hisfather had but sketched the outline; he maintained his suzerainty, firstover Amaziah, and when the latter was assassinated at Lachish (764), *over his son, the young Azariah. ** After the defeat of Ben-hadad nearAphek, Damascus declined still further in power, and Hadrach, suddenlyemerging from obscurity, completely barred the valley of the Orontesagainst it. An expedition under Shalmaneser IV. In 773 seems to haveprecipitated it to a lower depth than it had ever reached before:Jeroboam was able to wrest from it, almost without a struggle, thecities which it had usurped in the days of Jehu, and Gilead was at lastset free from a yoke which had oppressed it for more than a century. Tradition goes so far as to affirm that Israel reconquered the Bekaa, Hamath, and Damascus, those northern territories once possessed byDavid, and it is quite possible that its rivals, menaced from afarby Assyria and hard pressed at their own doors by Hadrach, may haveresorted to one of those propitiatory overtures which eastern monarchsare only too ready to recognise as acts of submission. The lessersouthern states, such as Ammon, the Bedāwin tribes of Hauran, and, atthe opposite extremity of the kingdom, the Philistines, *** who had bowedthemselves before Hazael in the days of his prosperity, now transferredtheir homage to Israel. 

 * 2 Kings xiv. 19, 20; cf. 2 Ghron. Xxv. 27, 28. 

 ** The Hebrew texts make no mention of this subjection of Judah to Jeroboam II. ; that it actually took place must, however, be admitted, at any rate in so far as the first half of the reign of Azariah is concerned, as a necessary outcome of the events of the preceding reigns. 

 *** The conquests of Jeroboam II. Are indicated very briefly in 2 Kings xiv. 25-28: cf. Amos vi. 14, where the expressions employed by the prophet imply that at the time at which he wrote the whole of the ancient kingdom of David, Judah included, was in the possession of Israel. 

Moab alone offered any serious resistance. It had preserved itsindependence ever since the reign of Mesha, having escaped from beingdrawn into the wars which had laid waste the rest of Syria. It was nowsuddenly forced to pay the penalty of its long prosperity. Jeroboam madea furious onslaught upon its cities--Ar of Moab, Kir of Moab, Dibon, Medeba, Heshbon, Elealeh--and destroyed them all in succession. TheMoabite forces carried a part of the population with them in theirflight, and all escaped together across the deserts which enclose thesouthern basin of the Dead Sea. On the frontier of Edom they begged forsanctuary, but the King of Judah, to whom the Edomite valleys belonged, did not dare to shelter the vanquished enemies of his suzerain, and oneof his prophets, forgetting his hatred of Israel in delight at beingable to gratify his grudge against Moab, greeted them in their distresswith a hymn of joy--"I will water thee with my tears, O HeshbonElealeh: for upon thy summer fruits and upon thy harvest the battleshout is fallen. And gladness is taken away and joy out of the fruitfulfields; and in the vineyards there shall be no singing, neither joyfulnoise; no treader shall tread out wine in the presses; I have made thevintage shout to cease. Wherefore my bowels sound like an harp for Moab, and my inward parts for Kir-Heres. And it shall come to pass, when Moabpresenteth himself, when he wearieth himself upon the high place, andshall come to his sanctuary to pray, he shall not prevail!"*

 * Isa. Xv. 1-9; xvi. 1-12. This prophecy, which had been pronounced against Moab "in the old days, " and which is appropriated by Isaiah (xvi. 13, 14), has been attributed to Jonah, son of Amittaī, of Gath-Hepher, who actually lived in the time of Jeroboam II. (2 Kings xiv. 25). It is now generally recognised as the production of an anonymous Judsean prophet, and the earliest authentic fragment of prophetic literature which has come down to us. 

This revival, like the former greatness of David and Solomon, was duenot so much to any inherent energy on the part of Israel, as to theweakness of the nations on its frontiers. Egypt was not in the habit ofintervening in the quarrels of Asia, and Assyria was suffering froma temporary eclipse. Damascus had suddenly collapsed, and Hadrach orMansuati, the cities which sought to take its place, found themselvesfully employed in repelling the intermittent attacks of the Assyrian;the Hebrews, for a quarter of a century, therefore, had the stage tothemselves, there being no other actors to dispute their possession ofit. During the three hundred years of their existence as a monarchy theyhad adopted nearly all the laws and customs of the races over whom theyheld sway, and by whom they were completely surrounded. The bulk of thepeople devoted themselves to the pasturing and rearing of cattle, and, during the better part of the year, preferred to live in tents, unlesswar rendered such a practice impossible. * They had few industries savethose of the potter** and the smith, *** and their trade was almostentirely in the hands of foreigners. 

 * Cf. The passage in 2 Kings xiii. 5, "And the children of Israel dwelt in their tents as beforetime. " Although the word _ōhel_ had by that time acquired the more general meaning of _habitation_, the context here seems to require us to translate it by its original meaning tent. 

 ** Pottery is mentioned in 2 Sam. Xvii. 28; numerous fragments dating from the monarchical period have been found at Jerusalem and Lachish. 

 *** The story of Tubal-Cain (Gen. Iv. 22) shows the antiquity of the ironworker's art among the Israelites; the smith is practically the only artisan to be found amongst nomadic tribes. 

We find, however, Hebrew merchants in Egypt, * at Tyre, and inCoele-Syria, and they were so numerous at Damascus that they requestedthat a special bazaar might be allotted to them, similar to thatoccupied by the merchants of Damascus in Samaria from time immemorial. **

 * The accurate ideas on the subject of Egypt possessed by the earliest compilers of the traditions contained in Genesis and Exodus, prove that Hebrew merchants must have been in constant communication with that country about the time with which we are now concerned. 

 ** 1 Kings xx. 34; cf. What has been said on this point in vol. Vi. Pp. 432, 441. 

[Illustration: 188. Jpg SPECIMENS OF HEBREW POTTERY]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from sketches by Warren. 

The Hebrew monarchs had done their best to encourage this growing desirefor trade. It was only the complicated state of Syrian politics thatprevented them from following the example of Solomon, and openingcommunications by sea with the far-famed countries of Ophir, either incompetition with the Phoenicians or under their guidance. Indeed, aswe have seen, Jehoshaphat, encouraged by his alliance with the house ofOmri, tried to establish a seagoing fleet, but found that peasants couldnot be turned into sailors at a day's notice, and the vessel built byhim at Eziongeber was wrecked before it left the harbour. 

[Illustration: 189. Jpg ISRAELITES OF THE HIGHER CLASS IN THE TIME OFSHALMANESER III]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bas-reliefs of the Black Obelisk. 

In appearance, the Hebrew towns closely resembled the ancient Canaanitecities. Egyptian influences still predominated in their architecture, as may be seen from what is still left of the walls of Lachish, and theywere fortified in such a way as to be able to defy the military enginesof besiegers. This applies not only to capitals, like Jerusalem, Tirzah, and Samaria, but even to those towns which commanded a road or mountainpass, the ford of a river, or the entrance to some fertile plain; therewere scores of these on the frontiers of the two kingdoms, and inthose portions of their territory which lay exposed to the attacksof Damascus, Moab, Edom, or the Philistines. * The daily life of theinhabitants was; to all intents, the same as at Arpad, Sidon, or Gaza;and the dress, dwellings, and customs of the upper and middleclasses cannot have differed in any marked degree from those of thecorresponding grades of society in Syria. 

 * 2 Chron. Xi. 6-10, where we find a list of the towns fortified by Rehoboam: Bethlehem, Etam, Beth-zur, Soco, Adullam, Gath, Mareshah, Ziph, Adoraim, Lachish, Azekah, Zorah, Ajalon, Hebron. 

[Illustration: 190. Jpg JUDĘAN PEASANTS]

 Drawn by Boudier, from Layard. These figures are taken from a bas-relief which represents Sennacherib receiving the submission of Judah before Lachish. 

The men wore over their tunic a fringed kaftan, with short sleeves, openin front, a low-crowned hat, and sandals or shoes of pliant leather; *they curled their beards and hair, painted their eyes and cheeks, andwore many jewels; while their wives adopted all the latest refinementsin vogue in the harems of Damascus, Tyre, or Nineveh. ** Descendants ofancient families paid for all this luxury out of the revenues of thewide domains they had inherited; others kept it up by less honourablemeans, by usury, corruption, and by the exercise of a ruthless violencetowards neighbours who were unable to defend themselves. 

 * The kaftan met with in these parts seems to correspond to the _meīl_ (R. V. "ephod ") of the biblical texts (1 Sam. Ii. 19; xviii. 4, etc. ). 

 ** Isa. Iii. 16-24 describes in detail the whole equipment of jewels, paint, and garments required by the fashionable women of Jerusalem during the last thirty years of the eighth century B. C. 

Illustration: 191. Jpg WOMEN AND CHILDREN OF JUDĘA

 Drawn by Boudier, from Layard. 

The king himself set them an evil example, and did not hesitate toassassinate one of his subjects in order that he might seize a vineyardwhich he coveted;* it was not to be wondered at, therefore, that thenobles of Ephraim "sold the righteous for silver, and the needy for apair of shoes;"** that they demanded gifts of wheat, and "turned theneedy from their right" when they sat as a jury "at the gate. "*** Fromtop to bottom of the social ladder the stronger and wealthier oppressedthose who were weaker or poorer than themselves, leaving them with nohope of redress except at the hands of the king. ****

 * Cf. The well-known episode of Naboth and Ahab in 1 Kings xxi. 

 ** Amos ii. 6. 

 *** Amos v. 11, 12. 

 **** 2 Kings vi. 26-30; viii. 3-8, where, in both instances, it is a woman who appeals to the king. Cf. For the period of David and Solomon, 2 Sam. Xiv. 1-20, and 1 Kings iii. 16-27. 

Unfortunately, the king, when he did not himself set the exampleof oppression, seldom possessed the resources necessary to make hisdecisions effective. True, he was chief of the most influential familyin either Judah or Israel, a chief by divine appointment, consecratedby the priests and prophets of Jahveh, a priest of the Lord, * and he wasmaster in his own city of Jerusalem or Samaria, but his authority didnot extend far beyond the walls. 

 * Cf. The anointing of Saul (1 Sam. Ix. 16; x. 1; and xiv. 1), of David (1 Sam. Xvi. 1-3, 12, 13), of Solomon (1 Kings i. 34, 39, 45), of Jehu (2 Kings ix. 1-10), and compare it with the unction received by the priests on their admission to the priesthood (Exod. Xxix. 7; xxx. 22, 23; cf. Lev. Viii. 12, 30; x. 7). 

It was not the old tribal organisation that embarrassed him, for thesecondary tribes had almost entirely given up their claims to politicalindependence. The division of the country into provinces, a consequenceof the establishment of financial districts by Solomon, had broken themup, and they gradually gave way before the two houses of Ephraim andJudah; but the great landed proprietors, especially those who held royalfiefs, enjoyed almost unlimited power within their own domains. Theywere, indeed, called on to render military service, to furnish forcedlabour, and to pay certain trifling dues into the royal treasury;* but, otherwise, they were absolute masters in their own domains, and thesovereign was obliged to employ force if he wished to extort any tax oract of homage which they were unwilling to render. For this purposehe had a standing army distributed in strong detachments along thefrontier, but the flower of his forces was concentrated round the royalresidence to serve as a body-guard. It included whole companies offoreign mercenaries, like those Cretan and Carian warriors who, sincethe time of David, had kept guard round the Kings of Judah;** these, intime of war, *** were reinforced by militia, drawn entirely from amongthe landed proprietors, and the whole force, when commanded by anenergetic leader, formed a host capable of meeting on equal terms thearmies of Damascus, Edom, or Moab, or even the veterans of Egypt andAssyria. 

 * 1 Kings xv. 22 (cf. 2 Ohron. Xvi. 6), where "King Asa made a proclamation unto all Judah; none was exempted, " the object in this case being the destruction of Ramah, the building of which had been begun by Baasha. 

 ** The Carians or Cretans are again referred to in the history of Athaliah (2 Kings xi. 4). 

 *** Taking the tribute paid by Menahem to Pul (2 Kings xv. 19, 20) as a basis, it has been estimated that the owners of landed estate in Israel, who were in that capacity liable to render military service, numbered 60, 000 in the time of that king; all others were exempt from military service. 

The reigning prince was hereditary commander-in-chief, but the_sharzaba_, or captain of the troops, often took his place, as in thetime of David, and thereby became the most important person in thekingdom. More than one of these officers had already turned againsttheir sovereign the forces which he had entrusted, to them, and theserevolts, when crowned with success, had, on various occasions, in Israelat any rate, led to a change of dynasty: Omri had been shar zaba when hemutinied against Zimri, the assassin of Elah, and Jehu occupied the sameposition when Elisha deputed him to destroy the house of Omri. 

The political constitutions of Judah and Israel were, on the whole, verysimilar to those of the numerous states which shared the territory ofSyria between them, and their domestic history gives us a fairly exactidea of the revolutions which agitated Damascus, Hamath, Carchemish, Arpad, and the principalities of Amanos and Lebanon about the sameperiod. It would seem, however, that none of these other nationspossessed a literary or religious life of any great intensity. They hadtheir archives, it is true, in which were accumulated documents relatingto their past history, their rituals of theology and religious worship, their collections of hymns and national songs; but none of these havesurvived, and the very few inscriptions that have come down to us merelyshow that they had nearly all of them adopted the alphabet inventedby the Phoenicians. The Israelites, initiated by them into the art ofwriting, lost no time in setting down, in their turn, all they couldrecall of the destinies of their race from the creation of the worlddown to the time in which they lived. From the beginning of themonarchical epoch onwards, their scribes collected together in the _Bookof the Wars of the Lord_, the _Book of Jashar_, and in other works thetitles of which have not survived, lyrics of different dates, in whichnameless poets had sung the victories and glorious deeds of theirnational heroes, such as the Song of the Well, the Hymn of Moses, thetriumphal Ode of Deborah, and the blessing of Jacob. * They were able todraw upon traditions which preserved the memory of what had takenplace in the time of the Judges;** and when that patriarchal form ofgovernment was succeeded by a monarchy, they had narratives of the arkof the Lord and its wanderings, of Samuel, Saul, David, and Solomon, ***not to mention the official records which, since then, had beencontinuously produced and accumulated by the court historians. ****

 * The books of _Jashar_ and of the _Wars of the Lord_ appear to date from the IXth century B. C. ; as the latter is quoted in the Elohist narrative, it cannot have been compiled later than the beginning of the VIIIth century B. C. The passage in Numb. Xxi. Lib, 15, is the only one expressly attributed by the testimony of the ancients to the _Book of the Wars of the Lord, _ but modern writers add to this the _Song of the Well _(Numb. Xxi. 17b, 18), and the Song of Victory over Moab (Numb. Xxi. 27&-30). The _Song of the Bow_ (2 Sam. I. 19-27) admittedly formed part of the _Book of Jashar_. Joshua's Song of Victory over the Amorites (Josh. X. 13), and very probably the couplet recited by Solomon at the dedication of the Temple (1 Kings viii, 12, 13, placed by the LXX. After verse 53), also formed part of it, as also the _Song of Deborah_ and the Blessing of Jacob (Gen. Xlix. 1-27). 

 ** Wellhausen was the first to admit the existence of a Book of Judges prior to the epoch of Deuteronomy, and his opinion has been adopted by Kuenen and Driver. This book was probably drawn upon by the two historians of the IXth and VIIIth centuries B. C. Of whom we are about to speak; some of the narratives, such as the story of Abimelech, and possibly that of Ehud, may have been taken from a document written at the end of the Xth or the beginning of the IXth centuries B. C. 

 *** The revolutions which occurred in the family of David (2 Sam. Ix. -xx. ) bear so evident a stamp of authenticity that they have been attributed to a contemporary writer, perhaps Ahimaaz, son of Zadok (2 Sam. Xv. 27), who took part in the events in question. But apart from this, the existence is generally admitted of two or three books which were drawn up shortly after the separation of the tribes, containing a kind of epic of the history of the first two kings; the one dealing with Saul, for instance, was probably written in the time of Jeroboam. 

 **** The two lists in which the names of the principal personages at the court of David are handed down to us, mention a certain Jehoshaphat, son of Ahilud, who was _mazhir_, or recorder; he retained his post under Solomon (1 Kings iv. 3). 

It may be that more than one writer had already endeavoured to evolvefrom these materials an Epie of Jahveh and His faithful people, butin the second half of the IXth century B. C. , perhaps in the time ofJehoshaphat, a member of the tribe of Judah undertook to put forth afresh edition. *

 * The approximate date of the composition and source of this first _Jehovist_ is still an open question. , Reuss and Kuenen, not to mention others, believe the Jehovist writer to have been a native of the northern kingdom; I have adopted the opposite view, which is supported by most modern critics. 

He related how God, after creating the universe out of chaos, had chosenHis own people, and had led them, after trials innumerable, to theconquest of the Promised Land. He showed, as he went on, the origin ofthe tribes identified with the children of Israel, and the covenantsmade by Jahveh with Moses in the Arabian desert; while accepting thestories connected with the ancient sanctuaries of the north and eastat Shechem, Bethel, Peniel, Mahanaim, and Succoth, it was at Hebronin Judah that he placed the principal residence of Abraham and hisdescendants. His style, while simple and direct, is at the same timesingularly graceful and vivacious; the incidents he gives are carefullyselected, apt and characteristic, while his narrative passes from sceneto scene without trace of flagging, unburdened by useless details, andhis dialogue, always natural and easy, rises without effort from thelevel of familiar conversation to heights of impassioned eloquence. Hisaim was not merely to compile the history of his people: he desiredat the same time to edify them, by showing how sin first came into theworld through disobedience to the commandments of the Most High, andhow man, prosperous so long as he kept to the laws of the covenant, fellinto difficulties as soon as he transgressed or failed to respectthem. His concept of Jahveh is in the highest degree a concrete one: heregards Him as a Being superior to other beings, but made like unto themand moved by the same passions. He shows anger and is appeased, displayssorrow and repents Him of the evil. * When the descendants of Noah builda tower and a city, He draws nigh to examine what they have done, andhaving taken account of their work, confounds their language and thusprevents them from proceeding farther. ** He desires, later on, to confera favour on His servant Abraham: He appears to him in human form, andeats and drinks with him. *** Sodom and Gomorrah had committed abominableiniquities, the cry against them was great and their sin very grievous:but before punishing them, He tells Abraham that He will "go down andsee whether they have done according to the cry of it which is come untoMe; and if not, I will know. "****

 * Exod. Iv. 14 and xxxii. 10, anger of Jahveh against Moses and against Israel; Gen. Vi. 6, 7, where He repents and is sorry for having created man; and Exod. Xxxii. 14, where He repents Him of the evil He had intended to do unto Israel. 

 ** Gen. Xi. 5-8. 

 *** Gen. Xviii. 

 **** Gen. Xviii. And xix. 

Elsewhere He wrestles a whole night long with Jacob;* or falls uponMoses, seeking to kill him, until appeased by Zipporah, who casts theblood-stained foreskin of her child at her husband's feet. ** This book, though it breathes the spirit of the prophets and was perhaps writtenin one of their schools, did not, however, include all the currentnarratives, and omitted many traditions that were passing from lip tolip; moreover, the excessive materialism of its treatment no longerharmonised with that more idealised concept of the Deity which hadalready begun to prevail. Consequently, within less than a centuryof its appearance, more than one version containing changes andinterpolations in the narrative came to be circulated, *** till a scribeof Ephraim, who flourished in the time of Jeroboam II. , took up thesubject and dealt with it in a different fashion. ****

 * Gen. Xxxii. 24, 25. 

 ** Exod. Iv. 24-26. 

 *** Schrader and Wellhausen have drawn attention to contradictions in the primitive history of humanity as presented by the Jehovist which forbid us to accept it as the work of a single writer. Nor can these inconsistencies be due to the influence of the Elohist, since the latter did not deal with this period in his book. Budde has maintained that the primitive work contained no account of the Deluge, and traced the descent of all the nations, Israel included, back to Cain, and he declares he can detect in the earlier chapters of Genesis traces of a first Jehovist, whom he calls J1. A second Jehovist, J2, who flourished between 800 and 700 B. C. , is supposed to have added to the contribution of the first, certain details borrowed from the Babylonian tradition, such as the Deluge, the story of Noah, of Nimrod, etc. Finally, a third Jehovist is said to have thrown the versions of his two predecessors into one, taking J2 as the basis of his work. 

 **** The date and origin of the Elohist have given rise to no less controversy than those of the Jehovist: the view most generally adopted is that he was a native of the northern kingdom, and flourished about 750 B. C. 

Putting on one side the primitive accounts of the origin of the humanrace which his predecessors had taken pleasure in elaborating, heconfined his attention solely to events since the birth of Abraham;* hisorigin is betrayed by the preference he displays for details calculatedto flatter the self-esteem of the northern tribes. To his eyes, Josephis the noblest of all the sons of Jacob, before whom all the restmust bow their heads, as to a king; next to Joseph comes Reuben, towhom--rather than to Judah**--he gives the place as firstborn. He groupshis characters round Bethel and Shechem, the sanctuaries of Israel;even Abraham is represented as residing, not at Hebron in Judea, but atBeersheba, a spot held in deep veneration by pilgrims belonging to theten tribes. *** It is in his concept of the Supreme Being, however, thathe differs most widely from his predecessors. God is, according to him, widely removed from ordinary humanity. He no longer reveals Himself atall times and in all places, but works rather by night, and appearsto men in their dreams, or, when circumstances require His activeinterference, is content to send His angels rather than come in His ownperson. ****

* Budde seems to have proved conclusively that the Elohist did not writeany part of the primitive history of mankind. 

** Gen. Xxxvii. 21, 22, 29, 30; xlii. 22, 27; whereas in Gen. Xliii. 3, 8-10, where the narrative is from the pen of the Jehovist, it is Judahthat plays the principal part: it is possible that, in Gen. Xxxvii. 21, Reuben has been substituted in the existing text for Judah. 

*** Gen. Xxi. 31, 33; xxii. 19; the importance of Beersheba as a holyplace resorted to by pilgrims from the northern kingdom is shown in 1Kings xix. 3, and Amos v. 5; viii. 14. 

**** Gen. Xx. 3-8; xxviii. 11-15; xxxi 24; Numb. Xxii. 8-12, 20. 

Indeed, such cases of active interference are of rare occurrence, andHe prefers to accomplish His purpose through human agents, who actunconsciously, or even in direct contravention of their own clearly, expressed intentions. * Moreover it was only by degrees that He revealedHis true nature and title; the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, andJoseph, had called Him Elohim, or "the gods, " and it was not untilthe coming of Moses that He disclosed His real name of Jahveh to Hisworshippers. **

 * Gen. 1. 20, end of the story of Joseph: "And as for you, ye meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it to pass as it is this day, to save much people alive. "

 ** Exod. Iii. 13, 14; verse 15 is an interpolation of much later date. 

[Illustration: 200. Jpg Prayer at Sunset]

 After Painting by Gerome

[Illustration: 200-text. Jpg]

In a word, this new historian shows us in every line that thetheological instinct has superseded popular enthusiasm, and his workloses unmistakably in literary interest by the change. We feel thathe is wanting in feeling and inspiration; his characters no longerpalpitate with life; his narrative drags, its interest decreases, andhis language is often deficient in force and colour. But while writers, trained in the schools of the prophets, thus sought to bring home tothe people the benefits which their God had showered on them, the peoplethemselves showed signs of disaffection towards Him, or were, atany rate, inclined to associate with Him other gods borrowed fromneighbouring states, and to overlay the worship they rendered Himwith ceremonies and ideas inconsistent with its original purity. Thepermanent division of the nation into two independent kingdoms had hadits effect on their religion as well as on their political life, andhad separated the worshippers into two hostile camps. The inhabitants ofJudah still continued to build altars on their high places, as they haddone in the time before David; there, the devout prostrated themselvesbefore the sacred stones and before the Asherah, or went in untothe _kedeshōth_ in honour of Astarte, and in Jahveh's own temple atJerusalem they had set up the image of a brazen serpent to which theypaid homage. * The feeling, however, that the patron deity of the chosenpeople could have but one recognised habitation--the temple built forHim by Solomon--and that the priests of this temple were alone qualifiedto officiate there in an effective manner, came to prevail more and morestrongly in Judaea. The king, indeed, continued to offer sacrifices andprayer there, ** but the common people could no longer intercede withtheir God except through the agency of the priests. 

 * Cf. What we are told of idolatrous practices in Judah under Rehoboam and Abraham (1 Kings xiv. 22-24; xv. 3), and of the tolerance of high places by Asa and Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xv. 14; xxii. 44); even at the period now under consideration neither Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 4) nor Azariah (2 Kings xv. 4) showed any disposition to prohibit them. The brazen serpent was still in existence in the time of Hezekiah, at the close of the VIIIth century B. C. (2 Kings xviii. 4). 

 ** 2 Kings xvi. 10-16, where Ahaz is described as offering sacrifice and giving instructions to the high priest Urijah as to the reconstruction and service of the altar; cf. 2 Chron. Xxvi. 16-21, where similar conduct on the part of Uzziah is recorded, and where the leprosy by which he was attacked is, in accordance with the belief of later times, represented as a punishment of the sacrilege committed by him in attempting to perform the sacrifice in person. 

The latter, in their turn, tended to develop into a close corporation offamilies consecrated for generations past to the priestly office; theycame in time to form a tribe by themselves, which took rank among theother tribes of Israel, and claimed Levi, one of the twelve sons ofJacob, as its ancestor. Their head, chosen from among the descendants ofZadok, who had been the first high priest in the reign of Solomon, wasby virtue of his office one of the chief ministers of the crown, and weknow what an important part was played by Jehoiadah in the revolutionwhich led to the deposition of Athaliah; the high priest was, however, no less subordinate to the supreme power than his fellow-ministers, and the sanctity of his office did not avail to protect him fromill-treatment or death if he incurred the displeasure of his sovereign. *He had control over a treasury continually enriched by the offeringsof the faithful, and did not always turn his trust to the best uses;in times of extreme distress the king used to borrow from him as alast resource, in order to bring about the withdrawal of an invader, orpurchase the help of a powerful ally. ** The capital of Israel was oftoo recent foundation to allow of its chapel royal becoming the officialcentre of national worship; the temple and priesthood of Samaria neversucceeded in effacing the prestige enjoyed by the ancient oracles, though in the reign of both the first and second Jeroboam, Dan, Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah had each its band of chosen worshippers. ***

 * In order to form an idea of the relative positions occupied by the king and the high priest, we must read what is told of Jehoiadah and Joash (2 Kings xii. 6-16), or Urijah and Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 10-16); the story runs that Zechariah was put to death by Joash (2 Chron. Xxiv. 22). 

 ** Asa did so in order to secure Ben-hadad's help against Baasha (1 Kings xv. 18, 19; cf. 2 Chron. Xvi. 2, 3): as to the revenues by which the treasury of the temple was supported and the special dues appropriated to it, cf. 2 Kings xii. 4, 5, 7-16, and xxii. 4-7, 9. 

 *** In the time of Jeroboam II. , Bethel, Gilgal, and Dan are mentioned by Amos (iv. 4; v. 5, 6; viii. 14), by Hosea (iv. 15; ix. 15; xii. 12). Mizpah is mentioned by Hosea (v. 1), and so is Tabor. The altar of Jahveh on Mount Carmel was restored by Elijah (1 Kings xviii. 30). 

At these centres adoration was rendered to the animal presentment ofJahveh, * and even prophets like Elijah and Elisha did not condemn thisas heretical; they had enough to do in hunting down the followers ofBaal without entering into open conflict with the worshippers of thegolden calf. The priesthood of the northern kingdom was not confined tomembers of the family of Levi, but was recruited from all the tribes;it levied a tithe on the harvest, reserved to itself the pick ofthe offerings and victims, and jealously forbade a plurality ofsanctuaries, ** The _Book of the Covenant_*** has handed down to us theregulations in force at one of these temples, perhaps that of Bethel, one of the wealthiest of them all. 

 * The golden calves at Dan and Bethel are referred to by Amos (viii. 14) and Hosea (x. 5), where Bethel is called Beth-aven; as to the golden calf at Samaria, cf. Amos viii. 14 and Hos. Viii. 5, 6. 

 ** Amos iv. 4, 5; v. 21-23. 

 *** This is the title given in Exod. Xxiv. 7 to a writing in which Moses is said to have entered the covenant made between Jahveh and Israel; it is preserved, with certain interpolations and alterations, in Exod. Xx. 23?--xxiii. 33. It was inserted in its entirety in the Elohist narrative, there taking the place at present occupied by Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch, viz. That of the covenant made between Jahveh and Israel prior to the crossing of the Jordan (Kuenen, _H. C. Onderzoek_, i. § 13, No. 32). Reuss tries to make out that it was the code promulgated on the occasion of Jehoshaphat's legal reforms, which is only referred to in 2 Chron. Xvii. 7-9; cf. Xix. 5. A more probable theory is that it was the "custom" of one of the great sanctuaries of the northern kingdom reduced to writing at the end of the Xth or during the IXth century B. C. 

[Illustration: 202. Jpg EGYPTIAN ALTAR AT DEIK-EL-BAHARI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a restoration by Naville. 

The directions in regard to ritual are extremely simple, and the moralcode is based throughout on the inexorable _lex talionis_, "Life forlife, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. "* This briefcode must have been almost universally applicable to every conjunctureof civil and religious life in Judah no less than in Israel. On onepoint only do we find a disagreement, and that is in connection withthe one and only Holy of Holies to the possession of which the southernkingdom had begun to lay claim: in a passage full of significanceJahveh declares, "An altar of earth thou shalt make unto Me, and shaltsacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings and thy peace offerings, thy sheepand thine oxen: in every place where I record My name I will come untothee and I will bless thee. And if thou make Me an altar of stone, thoushalt not build it of hewn stones: for if thou lift up thy tool uponit, thou hast polluted it. Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto Minealtar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon. "**

 * Exod. Xxi. 23-25. 

 ** Exod. Xx. 24-26. 

The patriarchs and early ancestors of the race had performed theirsacrifices in the open air, on rude and low altars, differing widelyfrom lofty and elaborately ornamented erections like those at Jerusalem, which seem to have borne a resemblance to the altars of the Egyptians:the author of the _Book of the Covenant_ advises the faithful to followthe example of those great men rather than that of the Lévites ofJudah. Nevertheless this multiplicity of high places was not without itsdangers; it led the common people to confuse Jahveh with the idolsof Canaan, and encouraged the spread of foreign superstitions. Themisfortunes which had come thick and fast upon the Israelites eversince the division of the kingdom had made them only too ready to seekelsewhere that support and consolation which they could no longer findat home. The gods of Damascus and Assur who had caused the downfall ofGath, of Calneh, and of Hamath, * those of Tyre and Sidon who lavishedupon the Phoenicians the wealth of the seas, or even the deities ofAmmon, Moab, or Edom, might well appear more desirable than a Being Who, in spite of His former promises, seemed powerless to protect His ownpeople. A number of the Israelites transferred their allegiance tothese powerful deities, prostrated themselves before the celestial host, flocked round the resting-places of Kevan, the star of El, and carriedthe tabernacles of the King of heaven;** nor was Judah slow to followtheir example. The prophets, however, did not view their persistentill-fortune in the same light as the common people; far from acceptingit as a proof of the power of other divinities, they recognised in it amark of Jahveh's superiority. 

 * Amos vi. 2; with regard to the destruction of Gath by Hazael. 

 ** Amos v. 26, 27

In their eyes Jahveh was the one God, compared with Whom the pagandeities were no gods at all, and could not even be said to exist. Hemight, had He so willed it, have bestowed His protection on any one ofthe numerous races whom He had planted on the earth: but as a specialfavour, which He was under no obligation to confer, He had chosen Israelto be His own people, and had promised them that they should occupyCanaan so long as they kept free from sin. But Israel had sinned, Israelhad followed after idols; its misfortunes were, therefore, but thejust penalty of its unfaithfulness. Thus conceived, Jahveh ceased to bemerely the god of a nation--He became the God of the whole world; andit is in the guise of a universal Deity that some, at any rate, of theprophets begin to represent Him from the time of Jeroboam II. Onwards. 

This change of view in regard to the Being of Jahveh coincided with a noless marked alteration in the character of His prophets. At first theyhad taken an active part in public affairs; they had thrown themselvesinto the political movements of the time, and had often directed theircourse, * by persuasion when persuasion sufficed, by violence whenviolence was the only means that was left to them of enforcing thedecrees of the Most High. Not long before this, we find Elisha secretlyconspiring against the successors of Ahab, and taking a decisive partin the revolution which set the house of Jehu on the throne in place ofthat of Omri; but during the half-century which had elapsed since hisdeath, the revival in the fortunes of Israel and its growing prosperityunder the rule of an energetic king had furnished the prophets with butfew pretexts for interfering in the conduct of state affairs. 

 * Cf. The part taken by Nathan in the conspiracy which raised Solomon to the throne (1 Kings i. 8, et seq. ), and previous to this in the story of David's amour with Bathsheba (2 Sam. Xii. 1-25). Similarly, we find prophets such as Ahijah in the reign of Jeroboam I. (1 Kings xi. 29- 39; cf. Xiv. 1-18; xv. 29, 30), and Shemaīah in the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kings xii. 22-24), Jehu son of Hananiah under Baasha (1 Kings xvi. 1-4, 7, 12, 13), Micaiah son of Imla, and Zedekiah under Ahab (1 Kings xxii. 5-28), not to speak of those mentioned in the Chronicles, e. G. Azariah son of Oded (2 Ghron. Xv. 1-8), and Hanani under Asa (2 Ghron. Xvi. 7-10), Jahaziel (2 Ghron. Xx. 14-19), and Eliezer, son of Dodavahu (2 Ghron. Xx. 37), in the time of Johoshaphat. No trace of any writings composed by these prophets is found until a very late date; but in Chronicles, in addition to a letter from Elijah to Jehoram of Juda (2 Ghron. Xxi. 12-15), we find a reference to the commentary of the prophet Iddo in the time of Abijah (2 Ghron. Xiii. 22), and to the "History of Jehu the son of Hanani, which is inserted in the book of the kings of Israel" (2 Chron. Xx. 34), in the time of Jehoshaphat. 

They no longer occupied themselves in resisting the king, but addressedthemselves to the people, pointed out the heinousness of their sins, and threatened them with the wrath of Jahveh if they persisted in theirunfaithfulness: they came to be spiritual advisers rather thanpolitical partisans, and orators rather than men of action like theirpredecessors. Their discourses were carefully prepared beforehand, andwere written down either by themselves or by some of their disciplesfor the benefit of posterity, in the hope that future generationswould understand the dangers or witness the catastrophes which theircontemporaries might not live to see. About 760 B. C. , Amos of Tekōa, * anative of Judaea, suddenly made his appearance at Bethel, in the midstof the festivals which pilgrims had flocked to celebrate in the ancienttemple erected to Jahveh in one of His animal forms. 

 * The title of the Book of Amos fixes the date as being "in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel" (i. 1), and the state of affairs described by him corresponds pretty closely with what we know of this period. Most critics fix the date somewhere between 760 and 750 B. C. , but nearer 760 than 750. 

His opening words filled the listening crowd with wonder: "The highplaces of Isaac shall be desolate, " he proclaimed, "and the sanctuariesof Israel shall be laid waste; and I will rise against the house ofJeroboam with the sword. "*

 * Amos vii. 9. 

Yet Jeroboam had by this time gained all his victories, and never beforehad the King of Samaria appeared to be more firmly seated on the throne:what, then, did this intruder mean by introducing himself as a messengerof wrath in the name of Jahveh, at the very moment when Jahveh wasfurnishing His worshippers with abundant signs of His favour? Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, interrupted him as he went on to declare that"Jeroboam should die by the sword, and Israel should surely be ledaway captive out of his land. " The king, informed of what was goingon, ordered Amos into exile, and Amaziah undertook to communicate thissentence to him: "O thou seer, go, flee thee away into the land ofJudah, and there eat bread, and prophesy there: but prophesy not againany more at Bethel: for it is the king's sanctuary, and it is a royalhouse. " And Amos replied, "I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet'sson; but I was a herdman, and a dresser of sycomore trees: and theLord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto My people Israel. Now therefore hear thou the word of theLord: Thou sayest, Prophesy not against Israel, and drop not thy wordagainst the house of Isaac: therefore thus saith the Lord: Thy wifeshall be an harlot in the city, and thy sons and thy daughters shallfall by the sword, and thy land shall be divided by line; and thouthyself shalt die in a land that is unclean, and Israel shall surely beled away captive out of his land. "*

 * Amos vii. 9-17. 

This prophecy, first expanded, and then written down with a purity ofdiction and loftiness of thought which prove Amos to have been a masterof literary art, * was widely circulated, and gradually gained authorityas portents indicative of the divine wrath began to accumulate, such asan earthquake which occurred two years after the incident at Bethel, * aneclipse of the sun, drought, famine, and pestilence. *** It foretold, in the first place, the downfall of all the surroundingcountries--Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and Judah; then, denouncing Israel itself, condemned it to the same penalties for thesame iniquities. In vain did the latter plead its privileges as thechosen people of Jahveh, and seek to atone for its guilt by endlesssacrifices. "I hate, I despise your feasts, " declared Jahveh, "and Iwill take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Yea, though ye offer Meyour burnt offerings and meat offerings, I will not accept them: neitherwill I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts. Take thou awayfrom Me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thyviols. But let judgment roll down as waters, and righteousness as amighty stream. "****

 * S. Jerome describes Amos as "rusticus" and "imperitus sermone, " but modern writers are generally agreed that in putting forward this view he was influenced by the statement as to the peasant origin of the prophet. 

 ** Amos i. 1; reference is made to it by the unknown prophet whose words are preserved in Zech. Xiv. 5. 

 *** The famine is mentioned in Amos iv. 6, the drought in Amos iv. 7, 8, the pestilence in Amos iv. 10. 

 **** Amos v. 21-24. 

The unfaithfulness of Israel, the corruption of its cities, the pride ofits nobles, had sealed its doom; even at that moment the avenger was athand on its north-eastern border, the Assyrian appointed to carry outsentence upon it. * Then follow visions, each one of which tendsto deepen the effect of the seer's words--a cloud of locusts, ** adevouring fire, *** a plumb-line in the hands of the Lord, **** a basketladen with summer fruits--till at last the whole people of Israel takerefuge in their temple, vainly hoping that there they may escape fromthe vengeance of the Eternal. "There shall not one of them flee away, and there shall not one of them escape. Though they dig into hell, thence shall Mine hand take them; and though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down. And though they hide themselves in thetop of Oarmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though theybe hid from My sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I commandthe serpent, and he shall bite them. And though they go into captivitybefore their enemies, thence will I command the sword, and it shall slaythem; and I will set Mine eyes upon them for evil and not for good. "^

 * Most commentators admit that the nation raised up by Jahveh to oppress Israel "from the entering in of Hamath unto the brook of the Arabah" (Amos vi. 14) was no other than Assyria. At the very period in which Amos flourished, Assurdān made two campaigns against Hadrach, in 765 and 755, which brought his armies right up to the Israelite frontier (Schrader, Keilinschrift. Bibliothec, vol. I. Pp. 210- 213). 

 ** Amos vii. 1-3. 

 *** Amos vii. 4-6. 

 **** Amos vii. 7-9. It is here that the speech delivered by the prophet at Bethel is supposed to occur (vii. 9); the narrative of what afterwards happened follows immediately (Amos vii. 10-17). 

 ^ Amos viii. 1-3. ; Amos ix. 1-4. 

For the first time in history a prophet foretold disaster and banishmentfor a whole people: love of country was already giving place in theheart of Amos to his conviction of the universal jurisdiction of God, and this conviction led him to regard as possible and probable astate of things in which Israel should have no part. Nevertheless, its decadence was to be merely temporary; Jahveh, though prepared tochastise the posterity of Jacob severely, could not bring Himself todestroy it utterly. The kingdom of David was soon to flourish anew:"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtakethe reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and themountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. And Iwill bring again the captivity of My people Israel, and they shall buildthe waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, anddrink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruitof them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no morebe plucked up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lordthy God. "*

The voice of Amos was not the only one raised in warning. From the midstof Ephraim, another seer, this time a priest, Hosea, son of Beeri, **was never weary of reproaching the tribes with their ingratitude, andpersisted in his foretelling of the desolation to come. 

 * Amos ix. 13-15. 

 ** Hoshea (or Hosea) was regarded by the rabbis as the oldest of the lesser prophets, and his writings were placed at the head of their collected works. The title of his book (Hos. I. 1), where he begins by stating that he preached "in the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash (Jehoash), King of Israel, " is a later interpolation; the additional mention of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, is due to an attempted analogy with the title of Isaiah. Hosea was familiar with the prophecies of Amos, and his own predictions show that the events merely foreseen by his predecessor were now in course of fulfilment in his day. The first three chapters probably date from the end of the reign of Jeroboam, about 750 B. C. ; the others were compiled under his successors, and before 734-733 B. C. , since Gilead is there mentioned as still forming part of Israel (Hos. Vi. 8; xii. 12), though it was in that year laid waste and conquered by Tiglath-pileser III. Duhm has suggested that Hosea must have been a priest from the tone of his writings, and this hypothesis is generally accepted by theologians. 

The halo of grandeur and renown with which Jeroboam had surroundedthe kingdom could not hide its wretched and paltry character from theprophet's eyes; "for yet a little while, and I will avenge the blood ofJezreel upon the house of Jehu, and will cause the kingdom of the houseof Israel to cease. And it shall come to pass at that day that Iwill break the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel. "* Likehis predecessor, he, too, inveighed against the perversity andunfaithfulness of his people. The abandoned wickedness of Gomer, hiswife, had brought him to despair. In the bitterness of his heart, hedemands of Jahveh why He should have seen fit to visit such humiliationon His servant, and persuades himself that the faithlessness of whichhe is a victim is but a feeble type of that which Jahveh had suffered atthe hands of His people. Israel had gone a-whoring after strange gods, and the day of retribution for its crimes was not far distant: "Thechildren of Israel shall abide many days without king and withoutprince, and without sacrifice and without pillar, and without ephod orteraphim; afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek theLord their God, and David their king; and shall come with fear unto theLord and to His goodness in the latter days. "**

 * Hos. I. 4, 5. 

 **Hos. I. -iii. Is the story of Hosea and his wife an allegory, or does it rest on a basis of actual fact? Most critics now seem to incline to the view that the prophet has here set down an authentic episode from his own career, and uses it to point the moral of his work. 

Whether the decadence of the Hebrews was or was not due to the purelymoral and religious causes indicated by the prophets, it was only tooreal, and even the least observant among their contemporaries musthave suspected that the two kingdoms were quite unfitted, as to theirnumbers, their military organisation, and monetary reserves, to resistsuccessfully any determined attack that might be made upon them bysurrounding nations. An armed force entering Syria by way of theEuphrates could hardly fail to overcome any opposition that might beoffered to it, if not at the first onset, at any rate after a verybrief struggle; none of the minor states to be met upon its way, suchas Damascus or Israel, much less those of Hamath or Hadrach, were anylonger capable of barring its progress, as Ben-hadad and Hazael hadarrested that of the Assyrians in the time of Shalmaneser III. Theefforts then made by the Syrian kings to secure their independence hadexhausted their resources and worn out the spirit of their peoples;civil war had prevented them from making good their losses during thebreathing-space afforded by the decadence of Assyria, and now thatNature herself had afflicted them with the crowning misfortunes offamine and pestilence, they were reduced to a mere shadow of what theyhad been during the previous century. If, therefore, Sharduris, aftermaking himself master of the countries of the Taurus and Amanos, hadturned his steps towards the valley of the Orontes, he might havesecured possession of it without much difficulty, and after that therewould have been nothing to prevent his soldiers from pressing on, ifneed be, to the walls of Samaria or even of Jerusalem itself. Indeed, heseems to have at last made up his mind to embark on this venture, whenthe revival of Assyrian power put a stop to his ambitious schemes. Tiglath-pileser, hard pressed on every side by daring and restless foes, began by attacking those who were at once the most troublesome and mostvulnerable--the Aramęan tribes on the banks of the Tigris. To give theseincorrigible banditti, who boldly planted their outposts not a score ofleagues from his capital, a free hand on his rear, and brave the fortuneof war in Armenia or Syria, without first teaching them a lesson inrespect, would have been simply to court serious disaster; an Aramęanraid occurring at a time when he was engaged elsewhere with the bulkof his army, might have made it necessary to break off a successfulcampaign and fall back in haste to the relief of Nineveh or Calah(Kalakh), just as he was on the eve of gaining some decisive advantage. Moreover, the suzerainty of Assyria over Karduniash entailed on him theduty of safeguarding Babylon from that other horde of Aramęans whichharassed it on the east, while the Kaldā were already threatening itssouthern frontier. It is not quite clear whether Nabunazīr who thenoccupied the throne implored his help:* at any rate, he took the fieldas soon as he felt that his own crown was secure, overthrew the Aramęansat the first encounter, and drove them back from the banks of the LowerZab to those of the Uknu: all the countries which they had seized to theeast of the Tigris at once fell again into the hands of the Assyrians. 

 * Nabunazīr is the Nabonassar who afterwards gave his name to the era employed by Ptolemy. 

This first point gained, Tiglath-pileser crossed the river, and made ademonstration in force before the Babylonian fortresses. He visited, oneafter another, Sippar, Nipur, Babylon, Borsippa, Kuta, Kīshu, Dilbat, and Uruk, "cities without peer, " and offered in all of them sacrificesto the gods, --to Bel, to Zirbanīt, to Nebo, to Tashmīt, and to Nirgal. Karduniash bowed down before him, but he abstained from giving anyprovocation to the Kaldā, and satisfied with having convinced Nabunazīrthat Assyria had lost none of her former vigour, he made his way back tohis hereditary kingdom. *

 * Most historians believe that Tiglath-pileser entered Karduniash as an enemy: that he captured several towns, and allowed the others to ransom themselves on payment of tribute. The way in which the texts known to us refer to this expedition seems to me, however, to prove that he set out as an ally and protector of Nabonazir, and that his visit to the Babylonian sanctuaries was of a purely pacific nature. 

The lightly-won success of this expedition produced the looked-forresult. Tiglath-pileser had set out a king _de facto_; but now that thegods of the ancient sanctuaries had declared themselves satisfied withhis homage, and had granted him that religious consecration which hadbefore been lacking, he returned a king de jure as well (745 B. C. ). Hisnext campaign completed what the first had begun. The subjugation of theplain would have been of little advantage if the highlands had been leftin the power of tribes as yet unconquered, and allowed to pour downwith impunity bands of rapacious freebooters on the newly liberatedprovinces: security between the Zab and the Uknu could only be attainedby the pacification of Namri, and it was, therefore, to Namri that thesea of war was transferred in 744 B. C. All the Cossęan and Babylonianraces intermingled in the valleys on the frontier were put to ransom oneafter another. 

[Illustration: 216. Jpg MAP OF CAMPAIGNS OF TIGLATH-PILESER III. INMEDIA]

These included the Bīt-Sangibuti, the Bīt-Khambān, the Barrua, theBit-Zualzash, the Bīt-Matti, the Umliash, the Parsua, the Bīt-Zatti, the Bīt-Zabdādani, the Bīt-Ishtar, the city of Zakruti, the Nina, theBustus, the Arakuttu, by which the conqueror gradually made his wayinto the heart of Media, reaching districts into which none of hispredecessors had ever penetrated. Those least remote he annexed tohis own empire, converting them into a province under the rule of anAssyrian governor; he then returned to Calah with a convoy of 60, 500prisoners, and countless herds of oxen, sheep, mules, and dromedaries. Whilst he was thus employed, Assur-daināni, one of his generals to whomhe had entrusted the pick of his army, pressed on still further tothe north-east, across the almost waterless deserts of Media. Themountainous district on the shores of the Caspian had for centuriesenjoyed a reputation for wealth and fertility among the races settledon the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris. It was from thence that theyobtained their lapis-lazuli, and the hills from which it was extractedwere popularly supposed to consist almost entirely of one compact massof this precious mineral. Their highest peak, now known as the Demavend, was then called Bikni, * a name which had come to be applied to the wholedistrict. 

 * The country of Bikni is probably Rhagian Media and Mount Bikni, the modern Demavend. 

To the Assyrians it stood as the utmost boundary mark of the knownworld, beyond which their imagination pictured little more than aconfused mist of almost fabulous regions and peoples. Assur-dainānicaught a distant glimpse of the snow-capped pyramid of Demavend, butapproached no nearer than its lower slopes, whence he retraced his stepsafter having levied tribute from their inhabitants. The fame of thisexploit spread far and wide in a marvellously short space of time, andchiefs who till then had vacillated in their decision now crowded thepath of the victor, eager to pay him homage on his return: even the Kingof Illipi thought it wise to avoid the risk of invasion, and hastened ofhis own accord to meet the conqueror. Here, again, Tiglath-pileserhad merely to show himself in order to re-establish the supremacy ofAssyria: the races of the plain, for many years familiar with defeat, made no pretence of serious resistance, but bowed their necks beneath afresh yoke almost without protest. 

[Illustration: 218. Jpg PRINCIPAL PAK OF MOUNT BIKNI (DEMAVEND)]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. De Morgan. 

Having thus secured his rear from attack for some years at any rate, Tiglath-pileser no longer hesitated to try conclusions with Urartu. Thestruggle in which he now deliberately engaged could not fail to be adecisive one; for Urartu, buoyed up and borne on the wave of some fiftyyears of prosperity, had almost succeeded in reaching first rankamong the Asiatic powers: one more victory over Nineveh, and it wouldbecome--for how long none might say--undisputed mistress of the whole ofAsia. Assyria, on the other hand, had reached a. Point where its wholefuture hung upon a single issue of defeat or victory. The prestige withwhich the brilliant campaigns of Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III. Had invested its name, if somewhat diminished, had still survived itsrecent reverses, and the terror inspired by its arms was so great evenamong races who had witnessed them from a distance, that the image ofAssyria rose involuntarily before the eyes of the Hebrew prophets asthat of the avenger destined to punish Israel for its excesses. *

 * Cf. Amos vi. 4. 

No doubt, during the last few reigns its prosperity had waned and itsauthority over distant provinces had gradually become relaxed; but nowthe old dynasty, worn out by its own activity, had given place to anew one, and with this change of rulers the tide of ill-fortune was, perhaps, at last about to turn. At such a juncture, a successfulcampaign meant full compensation for all past disasters and theattainment of a firmer position than had ever yet been held; whereasanother reverse, following on those from which the empire had alreadysuffered, would render their effect tenfold more deadly, and, by lettingloose the hatred of those whom fear alone still held in check, completeits overthrow. It was essential, therefore, before entering on thestruggle, to weigh well every chance of victory, and to take everyprecaution by which adverse contingencies might be, as far as possible, eliminated. The army, encouraged by its success in the two precedingcampaigns, was in excellent fighting order, and ready to march in anydirection without a moment's hesitation, confident in its ability todefeat the forces of Urartu as it had defeated those of the Medes andAramęans; but the precise point of attack needed careful consideration. Tiglath-pileser must have been sorely tempted to take the shortestroute, challenge the enemy at his most vulnerable point on the shores ofLake Van, and by a well-aimed thrust deal him a blow from which hewould never, or only by slow degrees, recover. But this vital regionof Urartu, as we have already pointed out, presented the greatestdifficulties of access. The rampart of mountain and forest by which itwas protected on the Assyrian side could only be traversed by means ofa few byways, along which bands of guerrillas could slip down easilyenough to the banks of the Tigris, but which were quite impassable toany army in full marching order, hampered by its horses, chariots, and baggage-train: compelled to thread its way, with columns undulyextended, through the woods and passes of an unknown country, whichdaily use had long made familiar to its adversaries, it would have runthe risk of being cut to pieces man by man a dozen times before it couldhope to range its disciplined masses on the field of battle. FormerAssyrian invasions had, as a general rule, taken an oblique coursetowards some of the spurs of this formidable chain, and had endeavouredto neutralise its defences by outflanking them, either by proceedingwestwards along the basins of the Supnat and the Arzania, or eastwardsthrough the countries bordering on Lake Urumiah; but even this methodpresented too many difficulties and too little certainty of success towarrant Tiglath-pileser in staking the reviving fortunes of his empireon its adoption. He rightly argued that Sharduris would be most easilyvulnerable in those provinces whose allegiance to him was of recentdate, and he resolved to seek out his foe in the heart of NorthernSyria. 

[Illustration: 221. Jpg VIEW OF THE MOUNTAINS WHICH GUARD THE SOUTHERNBORDER OF UARTU]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Binder. Taken at Julamerk, near the junction of the mountain tracks leading from the Zab valley to the south-eastern corner of the basin of Lake Van. 

There, if anywhere, every chance was in his favour and against theArmenian. The scene of operations, while it had long been familiar tohis own generals and soldiers, was, on the other hand, entirely newground to those of the enemy; the latter, though unsurpassed in mountainwarfare, lost much of their superiority on the plains, and could not, with all their courage, make up for their lack of experience. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that a victory on the banks of the Afrīn or theOrontes would have more important results than a success gained in theneighbourhood of the lakes or of Urartu. Not only would it free theAssyrians from the only one of their enemies whom they had any causeto fear, but it would also bring back the Hittite kings to theirallegiance, and restore the Assyrian supremacy over the wealthiestregions of Western Asia: they would thus disable Urartu and reconquerSyria at one and the same time. Tiglath-pileser, therefore, crossed theEuphrates in the spring of 743 B. C. , neither Matīlu of Agusi, Kushtashpiof Kummukh, nor their allies daring to interfere with his progress. Hethus advanced as far as Arpad, and, in the first moment of surprise, thetown threw open its gates before him. *

 * Different writers have given different versions of this campaign. Some think that Arpad resisted, and that Tiglath- pileser was laying siege to it, when the arrival of Sharduris compelled him to retire; others prefer to believe that Arpad was still in the hands of the Assyrians, and that Tiglath-pileser used it as his base of operations. The formula ina Arpadda in the Eponym Canon proves that Tiglath- pileser was certainly in Arpad: since Arpad belonged to the Bit-Agusi, and they were the allies or vassals of Sharduris, we must assume, as I have done here, that in the absence of the Urartians they did not dare to resist the Assyrians, and opened their gates to them. 

There, while he was making ready to claim the homage of the surroundingcountries, he learnt that Sharduris was hastening up to the rescue. Heat once struck his camp and marched out to meet his rival, coming upwith him in the centre of Kummukh, not far from the Euphrates, betweenKishtān and Khalpi. Sharduris was at the head of his Syrian contingents, including the forces of Agusi, Melitene, Kummukh, and Gurgum--aformidable army, probably superior in point of numbers to that of theAssyrians. The struggle lasted a whole day, and in the course of it thetwo kings, catching sight of one another on the field of battle, engagedin personal combat: at last, towards evening, the chariots and cavalryof Urartu gave way and the rout began. The victors made their way intothe camp at the heels of their flying enemies. Sharduris abandoned hischariot, and could find nothing but a mare to aid him in his flight;he threw himself upon her back, careless of the ridicule at that timeattached to the use of such a mount in Eastern countries, * fled at agallop all through the night, hard pressed by a large body of cavalry, crossed the hills of Sibak, and with much difficulty reached the bridgeover the Euphrates. 

 * So, too, later on, in the time of Sargon, Rusas, when defeated, gets on the back of a mare and rides off. 

His pursuers drew rein on the river-bank, and Sharduris re-enteredhis kingdom in safety. He had lost nearly 73, 000 men, killed or takenprisoners, in addition to his chariots, and nearly the whole train ofhorses, asses, servants, and artisans attached to his army; he left histent still standing, and those who were first to enter it laid handson his furniture and effects, his royal ornaments, his bed and portablethrone, with its cushions and bearing-poles, none of which had he foundtime to take with him. Tiglath-pileser burnt them all on the spot as athank-offering, to the gods who had so signally favoured him; the bedalone he retained, in order that he might dedicate it as a trophy to thegoddess Ishtar of Nineveh. 

He had covered himself with glory, and might well be proud of hisachievement, yet the victory was in no way a decisive one. The damageinflicted on the allies, considerable though it was, had cost him dear:the forces left to him were not sufficient to enable him to finish thecampaign, and extort oaths of allegiance from the Syrian princes beforethey had recovered from the first shock of defeat. He returned toNineveh, and spent the whole winter in reorganising his troops; whilehis enemies, on the other hand, made preparations to repel the attackenergetically. Sharduris could not yet venture outside his mountainstrongholds, but the hope of being reinforced by him, as soon as hehad got together another army, encouraged the Syrian kings to remainfaithful to him in spite of his reverses. *

 * The part played by Sharduris in the events of the years which followed, passing mention of which was made by Winckler (_Gesch. Bab. Und Ass_, pp. 224, 225), have been fully dealt with by Belck and Lehmann (Chaldische _Forschungen, in Veriiand. Der Berliner anthropol. Gesellschaft_, 1895, pp. 325-336). 

Matīlu of Agusi, unable to carry the day against the Assyrians inthe open field, distributed his men among his towns, and resisted allattacks with extraordinary persistence, confident that Sharduris wouldat length come to help him, and with this hope he held out for threeyears in his town of Arpad. This protracted resistance need no longerastonish us, now that we know, from observations made on the spot, themarvellous skill displayed in the fortification of these Asiatic towns. The ruins of Arpad have yet to be explored, but those of Samalla havebeen excavated, and show us the methods adopted for the defence of aroyal residence about the middle of the century with which we are nowconcerned. The practice of building citadels on a square or rectangularplan, which prevailed so largely under the Egyptian rule, had graduallygone out of fashion as the knowledge of engineering advanced, and theuse of mines and military engines had been more fully developed amongthe nations of Western Asia. It was found that the heavily fortifiedangles of the enclosing wall merely presented so many weak points, easyto attack but difficult to defend, no matter how carefully they mightbe protected by an accumulation of obstacles. In the case of fortressesbuilt on a plain, where the plan was not modified by the nature of thesite, the enclosing wall was generally round or oval in shape, and freefrom useless angles which might detract from its strength. The wallswere surmounted by battlements, and flanked at short intervals by roundor square towers, the tops of which rose but little, if indeed at all, above the level of the curtain. In front of this main wall was a secondlower one, also furnished with towers and battlements, which followedthe outline of the first all the way round at an interval of some yards, thus acting as a sort of continuous screen to it. The gates were littleless than miniature citadels built into each line of ramparts; the gateof the outer wall was often surrounded by lower outworks, two squarebastions and walls enclosing an outer quadrangle which had to be crossedbefore the real gate was reached. 

[Illustration: 226a. Jpg PLAN OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF ZINJIRLI. ]

 A reproduction by Faucher-Gudin of the first plan published by Luschan. 

When a breach had been made in this double enclosure, though the townitself might be taken, the labours of the attacking force were not yetover. In the very centre of the place, on a sort of artificial moundor knoll, stood the royal castle, and resistance on the part of itsgarrison would make it necessary for the enemy to undertake a secondsiege no less deadly and protracted than the first. The keep of Zinjirlihad only a single gate approached by a narrow causeway. 

[Illustration: 226b. Jpg ONE OF THE GATES OF ZINJIRLI RESTORED]

 Reproduction by Faucher-Gudin of the sketch published by Luschan. 

Within, it was divided by walls into five compartments, each of whichwas independent of the rest, and had to be attacked separately. Ma-tīluknew he could hope for no mercy at the hands of the Assyrians; hetherefore struggled on to the last, and when at length obliged tosurrender, in the year 740 B. C. , he paid for his obstinacy by the lossof his throne, and perhaps also of his life. *

 * Our knowledge of these events is imperfect, our only information being derived from the very scanty details given in the _Eponym Canon_; up to the present we can do no more than trace the general course of events. 

[Illustration: 227. Jpg BIRD'S-EYE VIEW OF THE ROYAL CASTLE OF ZINJIRLIAS RESTORED]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the plan published in Luschan. 

The inaction of Sharduris clearly showed that he was no longer in aposition to protect his allies, and that the backbone of his kingdomwas broken; the kings who had put faith in his help now gave him up, andambassadors flocked in from all parts, even from those which were not asyet directly threatened. Kushtashpi of Kummukh, Tark-hulara of Gturgum, Pisiris of Carchemish, Uriaīk of Kuī, came to Arpad in person to throwthemselves at the conqueror's feet, bringing with them offerings ofgold and silver, of lead and iron, of ivory, carved and in the tusk, of purple, and of dyed or embroidered stuffs, and were confirmed in thepossession of their respective territories; Hiram II. Of Tyre, moreover, and Eezin of Damascus sent their greetings to him. *

 * _Annals of Tiglath-pileser III_. , where the statement at the close indicates that Tiglath-pileser received the tributary kings of Syria "in Arpad, " after he had captured that city. 

The Patina, who in days gone by had threatened the fortunes ofAssur-nazir-pal, once again endeavoured to pose as the rivals ofAssyria, and Tutammū, sovereign of Unki, the most daring of the minorstates into which the Patina had been split up, declined to take partin the demonstrations made by his neighbours. Tiglath-pileser marchedon Kinalua, sacked it, built a fortress there, and left a governor andgarrison behind him: Agusi and Unki henceforth sank down to the level ofmere provinces, administered by royal officers in the king's name, andpermanently occupied by Assyrian troops. 

Northern Syria was thus again incorporated with the empire, but Urartu, although deprived of the resources with which Syria had supplied it, continued to give cause for apprehension; in 739 B. C. , however, a largeproportion of the districts of Naīri, to which it still clung, waswrested from it, and a fortress was built at Ulluba, with a view toproviding a stable base of operations at this point on the northernfrontier. A rebellion, instigated, it may be, by his own agents, recalled Tiglath-pileser to the Amanus in the year 738. The petty kingswho shared with Assyria the possession of the mountains and plains ofthe Afrīn could not succeed in living at peace with one another, andevery now and then their disputes broke out into open warfare. Samallawas at that time subject to a family of which the first members known tohistory, Qaral and Panammu, shared Yaudi equally between them. Barzur, son of Panammu I. , had reigned there since about 765 B. C. , and there canbe little doubt that he must have passed through the same vicissitudesas his neighbours; faithful to Urartu as long as Sharduris kept theupper hand, and to Assyria as soon as Tiglath-pileser had humiliatedUrartu, he had been killed in a skirmish by some rival. His son, PanammuIL, came to the throne merely as a nominee of his suzerain, and seems tohave always rendered him faithful service; unfortunately, Yaudi was nolonger subject to the house of Panammu, but obeyed the rule of a certainAzriyahu, who chafed at the presence of an alien power. *

 * Azriyahu of Yaudi was identified with Azariah of Judah by G. Smith, and this identification was for a long time accepted without question by most Assyriologists. After a violent controversy it has finally been shown that the _Yaudi_ of Tiglath-pileser III. 'a inscriptions ought to be identified with the _Yadi_ or _Yaudi_ of the Zinjirli inscriptions, and consequently that Azriyahu was not king of Judah, but a king of Northern Syria. This view appears to me to harmonise so well with what remains of the texts, and with our knowledge of the events, that I have had no hesitation in adopting it. 

Azriyahu took advantage of the events which kept Tiglath-pileser fullyoccupied in the east, to form a coalition in favour of himself among thestates on the banks of the Orontes, including some seventeen provinces, dependencies of Hamath, and certain turbulent cities of NorthernPhoenicia, such as Byblos, Arka, Zimyra, Usnū, Siannu, Coele-Syria, and even Hadrach itself. It is not quite clear whether Damascus and theHebrews took part in this movement. Jeroboam had died in 740, after aprosperous reign of forty-one years, and on his death Israel seemsto have fallen under a cloud; six months later, his son Zechariah wasassassinated at Ibleam by Shallum, son of Jabesh, and the prophecyof Amos, in which he declared that the house of Jeroboam should fallbeneath the sword of Jahveh, * was fulfilled. Shallum himself reignedonly one month: two other competitors had presented themselvesimmediately after his crime;** the ablest of these, Menahem, son ofGadi, had come from Tirzah to Samaria, and, after suppressing hisrivals, laid hands on the crown. *** He must have made himself masterof the kingdom little by little, the success of his usurpation beingentirely due to the ruthless energy invariably and everywhere displayedby him; as, for instance, when Tappuakh (Tiphsah) refused to openits gates at his summons, he broke into the town and slaughtered itsinhabitants. ****

 * Amos vii. 9. 

 ** The nameless prophet, whose prediction is handed down to us in Zech. Ix. --xi. , speaks of three shepherds cut off by Javeh in one month (xi. 8); two of these were Zechariah and Shallum; the third is not mentioned in the Book of Kings. 

 *** 2 Kings xiv. 23-29; xv. 8-15. 

 **** 2 Kings xv. 16. The Massoretic text gives the name of the town as Tipsah, but the Septuagint has Taphōt, which led Thenius to suggest Tappuakh as an emendation of Tipsah: Stade prefers the emendation Tirzah. 

All the defects of organisation, all the sources of weakness, which forthe last half-century had been obscured by the glories of Jeroboam II. , now came to the surface, and defied all human efforts to avert theirconsequences. "Then, " as Hosea complains, "is the iniquity of Ephraimdiscovered, and the wickedness of Samaria; for they commit falsehood:and the thief entereth in, and the troop of robbers spoileth without. And they consider not in their hearts that I (Jahveh) remember all theirwickedness: now have their own doings beset them about; they are beforeMy face. They make the king glad with their wickedness and the princeswith their lies. They are all adulterers; they are as an oven heated bythe baker.... They... Devour their judges; all their kings are fallen;there is none among them that calleth unto Me. "* In Judah, Azariah(Uzziah) had at first shown some signs of ability; he had completed theconquest of Idumsea, Edom, and had fortified Elath, ** but he suddenlyfound himself stricken with leprosy, and was obliged to hand over thereins of government of Jotham. ***

 * Sos. Vii. 1-4, 7. 

 ** 2 Kings xiv. 22; in 2 Ghron. Xxvi. 6-15 he is credited with the reorganisation of the army and of the Judsean fortress, in addition to campaigns against the Philistines and Arabs. 

 *** 2 Kings xv. 5; cf. 2 Ghron. Xxvi. 19-21. Azariah is also abbreviated into Uzziah. Tappuakh was a town situated on the borders of Ephraim and Manasseh (Josh. Xvi. 8; xvii. 7, 8). 

His long life had been passed uneventfully, and without any disturbance, under the protection of Jeroboam; but the very same defects which hadled to the ruin of Israel were at work also in Judah, and Menahem, inspite of his enfeebled condition, had nothing to fear in this direction. 

[Illustration: 232. Jpg TIGLATH-PILESER III. IN HIS STATE CHARIOT]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch published by Layard. 

The danger which menaced him came rather from the east and the north, where Damascus, aroused from its state of lethargy by Rezōn [Rezin] II. , had again begun to strive after the hegemony of Syria. *

 * The name of this king, written Rezin in the Bible (2 Kings xv. 37; xvi. 5, 6, 9), is given as _Razunu_ in the Assyrian texts; he was therefore Ilezōn II. A passage in the _Annals_ seems to indicate that Rezin's father was prince of a city dependent on Damascus, not king of Damascus itself; unfortunately the text is too much mutilated to warrant us in forming any definite conclusion on this point. 

All these princes, when they found that the ambition of Tiglath-pileserthreatened to interfere with their own intrigues, were naturallytempted to combine against him, and were willing to postpone to a moreconvenient season the settlement of their own domestic quarrrels. ButTiglath-pileser did not give them time for this; he routed Azriyahu, andlaid waste Kullani, * the chief centre of revolt, ravaged the valley ofthe Orontes, and carried off the inhabitants of several towns, replacingthem with prisoners taken the year before during his campaign in Naīri. 

 * Kullani is the Calno or Calneh mentioned by Isaiah (x. 9) and Amos (vi. 2), which lay somewhere between Arpad and Hamath; the precise spot is not yet known. 

After this feat the whole of Syria surrendered. Rezin and Menahem wereamong the first to tender their homage, and the latter paid a thousandtalents of silver for the _firman_ which definitely confirmed his tenureof the throne; the princes of Tyre, Byblos, Hamath, Carchemish, Milid, Tabal, and several others followed their example--even a certain Zabibi, queen of an Arab tribe, feeling compelled to send her gifts to theconqueror. 

A sudden rising among the Aramęan tribes on the borders of Elam obligedTiglath-pileser to depart before he had time to take full advantage ofhis opportunity. The governors of Lullumi and Naīri promptly suppressedthe outbreak, and, collecting the most prominent of the rebels together, sent them to the king in order that he might distribute them throughoutthe cities of Syria: a colony of 600 prisoners from the town of Amlatiwas established in the territory of Damaunu, 5400 from Dur were sent tothe fortresses of Unki, Kunalia, Khuzarra, Taī, Tarmanazi, Kulmadara, Khatatirra, and Sagillu, while another 10, 000 or so were scattered alongthe Phoenician seaboard and among the adjacent mountains. The revolthad meanwhile spread to the nations of Media, where it was, perhaps, fomented by the agents of Urartu; and for the second time within sevenyears (737 B. C. ) Tiglath-pileser trampled underfoot the countries overwhich he had ridden in triumph at the beginning of his career--theBīt-Kapsi, the Bīt-Sangibuti, the Bīt-Tazzakki, the Bīt-Zulazash, the Bīt-Matti, and Umliash. The people of Upash, among the Bīt-Kapsi, entrenched themselves on the slopes of Mount Abirus; but he carriedtheir entrenchments by storm. Ushuru of Taddiruta and Burdadda ofNirutakta were seized with alarm, and hid themselves in their mountaingorges; but he climbed up in pursuit of them, drove them out of theirhiding-places, seized their possessions, and made them prisoners. Similar treatment was meted out to all those who proved refractory; somehe despoiled, others he led captive, and "bursting upon the remainderlike the downpour of Bammān, " permitted none of them to escape. Heraised trophies all along his line of march: in Bau, a dependency ofBīt-Ishtar, he set up a pointed javelin dedicated to Ninip, on whichhe had engraved a panegyric of the virtues of his master Assur; nearShilkhazi, a town founded, in bygone days, by the Babylonians, heerected a statue of himself, and a pillar consecrated to Marduk inTil-ashshur. In the following year he again attacked Urartu and occupiedthe mountain province of Nāl, which formed one of its outlying defences(736). The year after he entered on the final struggle with Sharduris, and led the flower of his forces right under the walls of Dhuspas, * theenemy's capital. 

 * The name is written Turuspas in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III. 

Dhuspas really consisted of two towns joined together. One of these, extending over the plain by the banks of the Alaīs and in the directionof the lake, was surrounded by fertile gardens and villas, in whichthe inhabitants spent the summer at their ease. It was protected byan isolated mass of white and red nummulitic chalk, the steep sides ofwhich are seamed with fissures and tunnelled with holes and caverns fromtop to bottom. 

[Illustration: 235. Jpg THE ROCK AND CITADEL OF VAN AT THE PRESENT DAY]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Binder. 

The plateau in which it terminates, and which rises to a height of 300feet at its loftiest point, is divided into three main terraces, eachcompletely isolated from the other two, and forming, should occasionarise, an independent fortress, Ishpuinis, Menuas, Argistis, andSharduris II. Had laboured from generation to generation to make thisstronghold impregnable, and they had succeeded in the attempt. 

[Illustration: 236. Jpg ENTRANCE TO THE MODERN CITADEL OF VAN FROM THEWESTWARD]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Binder. 

There can be little or no doubt, however, that this is merely a variantof the name usually written as Tuspas, Tuspana, Dhuspana, the Thospia ofclassical times; properly speaking, it was the capital of Biainas. Theonly access to it was from the western side, by a narrow bridle-path, which almost overhung the precipice as it gradually mounted to thesummit. This path had been partially levelled, and flanked with wallsand towers which commanded the approach throughout its whole length;on the platforms at the summit a citadel had been constructed, togetherwith a palace, temples, and storehouses, in which was accumulated asufficient supply of arms and provisions to enable the garrison to tireout the patience of any ordinary foe; treason or an unusually prolongedsiege could only get the better of such a position. Tiglath-pileserinvested the citadel and ravaged its outskirts without pity, hoping, nodoubt, that he would thus provoke the enemy into capitulating. Day afterday, Sharduris, perched in his lofty eyrie, saw his leafy gardens laidbare under the hatchet, and his villages and the palaces of his nobleslight up the country round as far as the eye could reach: he did notflinch, however, and when all had been laid waste, the Assyrians set upa statue of their king before the principal gate of the fortress, brokeup their camp, and leisurely retired. They put the country to fire andsword, destroyed its cities, led away every man and beast they couldfind into captivity, and then returned to Nineveh laden with plunder. Urartu was still undaunted, and Sharduris remained king as before; buthe was utterly spent, and his power had sustained a blow from whichit never recovered. He had played against Assur with the empire of thewhole Asiatic world as the stake, and the dice had gone against him:compelled to renounce his great ambitions from henceforth, he soughtmerely to preserve his independence. Since then, Armenia has more thanonce challenged fortune, but always with the same result; it fared nobetter under Tigranes in the Roman epoch, than under Sharduris in thetime of the Assyrians; it has been within an ace of attaining the goalof its ambitions, then at the last moment its strength has failed, andit has been forced to retire worsted from the struggle. Its positionprevented it from exercising very wide influence; hidden away in acorner of Asia at the meeting-point of three or four great mountainranges, near the source of four rivers, all flowing in differentdirections, it has lacked that physical homogeneity without which nopeople, however gifted, can hope to attain supremacy; nature has doomedit to remain, like Syria, split up into compartments of unequal sizeand strength, which give shelter to half a score of independentprincipalities, each one of them perpetually jealous of the rest. Fromtime to time it is invested with a semblance of unity, but for themost part it drags on an uneventful existence, dismembered into as manyfragments as there happen to be powerful states around it, its onlychance of complete reunion lying in the possibility of one or other ofthese attaining sufficient predominance to seize the share of the othersand absorb it. 

The subjection of Urartu freed Assyria from the only rival which couldat this moment have disputed its supremacy on the banks of the Euphratesand the Tigris. The other nations on its northern and eastern frontiersas yet possessed no stability; they might, in the course of a passingoutburst, cut an army to pieces or annex part of a province, but theylacked strength to follow up their advantage, and even their mostsuccessful raids were sure, in the long run, to lead to terriblereprisals, in which their gains were two or three times outweighed bytheir losses in men and treasure. For nearly a hundred years Ninevehfound its hands free, and its rulers were able to concentrate all theirenergy on two main points of the frontier--to the south-west on Syriaand Egypt, to the south-east on Chaldęa and Elam. Chaldęa gave littletrouble, but the condition of Syria presented elements of danger. Theloyalty of its princes was more apparent than real; they had bowed theirnecks after the fall of Unki, but afterwards, as the years rolled onwithout any seeming increase in the power of Assyria, they again tookcourage and began once more to quarrel among themselves. Menahem haddied, soon after he had paid his tribute (737 B. C. ); his son Pekahiahhad been assassinated less than two years later (736)* and his murderer, Pekah, son of Remaliah, was none too firmly seated on the throne. Anarchy was triumphant throughout Israel; so much so that Judah seizedthe opportunity for throwing off the yoke it had borne for well-nigha hundred years. Pekah, conscious of his inability to suppress therebellion, called in Rezin to help him. The latter was already on theway when Jotham was laid with his fathers (736 B. C. ), and it was Ahaz, the son of Jotham, who had to bear the brant of the assault. He wasbarely twenty years old, a volatile, presumptuous, and daring youth, who was not much dismayed by his position. ** Jotham had repaired thefortifications of Jerusalem, which had been left in a lamentable stateever since the damage done to them in the reign of Amaziah;*** hissuccessor now set to work to provide the city with the supply of waterindispensable for its defence, **** and, after repairing the ancientaqueducts, conceived the idea of constructing a fresh one in the spur ofMount Sion, which extends southwards. 

 * 2 Kings xv. 22-26. The chronology of the events which took place between the death of Menahem and the fall of Samaria, as presented by the biblical documents in the state in which they have been transmitted to us, is radically inaccurate: following the example of most recent historians, I have adhered exclusively to the data furnished by the Assyrian texts, merely indicating in the notes the reasons which have led me to adopt certain dates in preference to others. 

 ** 2 Kings xv. 38, xvi. 1, 2. Ahaz is called Iaukhazi, i. E. Jehoahaz, in the Assyrian texts, and this would seem to have been the original form of the name. 

 *** The restoration of the walls of Jerusalem by Jotham is only mentioned in 2 Chron. Xxvii. 3. 

 **** We may deduce this from the words of Isaiah (vii. 3), where he represents Ahaz "at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fuller's field. " Ahaz had gone there to inspect the works intended for the defence of the aqueduct. 

As time pressed, the work was begun simultaneously at each end; theworkmen had made a wide detour underground, probably in order to avoidthe caves in which the kings of Judah had been laid to rest ever sincethe time of David, * and they were beginning to despair of ever unitingthe two sections of the tunnel, when they suddenly heard one anotherthrough the wall of rock which divided them. A few blows with thepick-axe opened a passage between them, and an inscription on the walladjoining the entrance on the east side, the earliest Hebrew inscriptionwe possess, set forth the vicissitudes of the work for the benefit offuture generations. It was scarcely completed when Kezin, who hadjoined forces with Pekah at Samaria, came up and laid regular siege toJerusalem. **

 * This is the highly ingenious hypothesis put forward and defended with much learning by Clermont-Ganneau, in order to account for the large curve described by the tunnel. 

 ** 2 Kings xvi. 5; cf. 2 Chron. Xxviii. 5-8. It was on this occasion that Isaiah delivered the prophecies which, after subsequent revision, furnished the bulk of chaps, vi. 1--x. 4. 

The allies did not propose to content themselves with exacting tributefrom the young king; they meant to dethrone him, and to set up inhis room a son of Tabeel, whom they had brought with them; they werenevertheless obliged to retire without effecting a breach in hisdefences and leave the final assault till the following campaign. Rezin, however, had done as much injury as he could to Judah; he had laid wasteboth mountain and plain, had taken Elath by storm and restored it to theEdomites, * and had given a free hand to the Philistines (735). **

 * 2 Kings xvi. 6, where the Massoretic text states that the Syrians retained the town, while the Septuagint maintain that he restored it to the Edomites. 

 ** Chron. Xxviii. 18, where a list is given of the towns wrested from Judah by the Philistines. The delight felt by the Philistines at the sight of Judah's abasement seems to be referred to in the short prophecy of Isaiah (xiv. 29-32), wrongly ascribed to the year of Ahaz's death. 

[Illustration: 241. Jpg HEBREW INSCRIPTION ON THE SILOAM AQUEDUCT]

 A direct reproduction from a plaster cast now in Paris. The inscription discovered by Schick, in 1880, has since been mutilated, and only the fragments are preserved in the museum at Constantinople. Some writers think it was composed in the time of Hezekiah; for my own part, I agree with Stade in assigning it to the period of Ahaz. 

The whole position seemed so hopeless, that a section of the peoplebegan to propose surrendering to the mercy of the Syrians. *

 * This seems to be an obvious inference from the words of Isaiah (viii. 6): "Forasmuch as this people hath refused the waters of Shiloah that go softly, _and lose courage because of Rezin and Bemaliali's son_. " [The R. V. Reads "_rejoice in_" Rezin, etc. --Tr. ]

Ahaz looked around him in search of some one on whom he might call forhelp. All his immediate neighbours were hostile; but behind them, in thebackground, were two great powers who might be inclined to listen to hisappeal--Egypt and Assyria. Ever since the expedition of Sheshonq intoAsia, Egypt seemed to have lost all interest in foreign politics. Osorkon had not inherited the warlike propensities of his father, and his son, Takelōti I. , and his grandson, Osorkon II. , followed hisexample. *

 * The chronology of this period is still very uncertain, and the stelae of the Serapseum, which enable us to fix the order of the various reigns, yield no information as to their length. Sheshonq I. Did not reign much longer than twenty-one years, which is his latest known date, and we may take the reign of twenty-one years attributed to him by Manetho as being substantially correct. The latest dates we possess are as follows: Osorkon I. , twelfth year, and Takelōti I. , sixth year or seventh year. Lastly, we have a twenty-ninth year in the case of Osorkon II. , with a reference in the case of the twenty-eighth year to the fifth year of a Takelōti whose first cartouche is missing, and who perhaps died before his father and co-regent. In Manetho, Osorkon I. Is credited with a reign of fifteen years, and his three next successors with a total of twenty-five years between them, which is manifestly incorrect, since the monuments give twenty-nine years, or twenty-three at the very least, if we take into account the double date in the case of the first two of these kings. The wisest course seems to be to allow forty-five years to Osorkon and his two successors: if Sheshonq, as I believe, died in 924, the fifty years allotted to the next three Pharaohs would bring us down to 880, and it is in this year that I am, for the present, inclined to place the death of Osorkon II. 

[Illustration: 242. Jpg BRONZE]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from. Lanzone's statuette. 

[Illustration: 243. Jpg THE GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS DURINGNAVILLE'sEXCAVATIONS]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Naville. 

These monarchs regarded themselves as traditionary suzerains of thecountry of Kharu, i. E. Of Israel, Judah, Ammon, and Moab, and theirauthority may perhaps have been recognised by the Philistines in themain, but they seldom stirred from their own territory, and contentedthemselves with protecting their frontiers against the customarydepredations of the Libyan and Asiatic nomads. *

 * Repressive measures of this kind are evidently referred to in passages similar to those in which Osorkon II. Boasts of having "overthrown beneath his feet the Upper and Lower Lotanu, " and speaks of the exploits of the sons of Queen Kalamāīt against certain tribes whose name, though mutilated, seems to have been Libyan in character. 

Under their rule, Egypt enjoyed fifty years of profound peace, which wasspent in works of public utility, especially in the Delta, where, thanksto their efforts, Bubastis came to be one of the most splendid among thecities of secondary importance. *

 * All our knowledge of the history of the temple of Bubastis dates from Naville's excavations. 

Its temple, which had been rebuilt by Ramses II. And decorated by theRames-sides, was in a sorry plight when the XXIInd dynasty came intopower. Sheshonq I. Did little or nothing to it, but Osorkon I. Entirelyremodelled it, and Osorkon II. Added several new halls, including, amongst others, one in which he celebrated, in the twenty-second yearof his reign, the festival of his deification. A record of some of theceremonies observed has come down to us in the mural paintings. Therewe see the king, in a chapel, consecrating a statue of himself inaccordance with the ritual in use since the time of Amenōthes III. , andoffering the figure devout and earnest worship; all the divinities ofEgypt have assembled to witness the enthronement of this new member oftheir confraternity, and take part in the sacrifices accompanyinghis consecration. This gathering of the gods is balanced by a humanfestival, attended by Nubians and Kushites, as well as by the courtiersand populace. The proceedings terminated, apparently, with certainfuneral rites, the object being to make the identification of Osorkonwith Osiris complete. 

[Illustration: 244. Jpg PICTURE IN THE HALL OF THE HARPS IN THE FIFTHTOMB]

The Egyptian deities served in a double capacity, as gods of the dead aswell as of the living, and no exception could be made in favour of thedeified Osorkon; while yet living he became an Osiris, and his doublewas supposed to animate those prophetic statues in which he appeared asa mummy no less than those which represented him as still alive. 

[Illustration: 245. Jpg GATE OF THE FESTIVAL HALL AT BUBASTIS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a restoration by Naville. 

Another temple of small size, also dedicated to Bastīfc or Pasht, whichhad been built in the time of Ramses II. , was enlarged by Osorkon I. , and richly endowed with workshops, lands, cattle, slaves, and preciousmetals: Tumu-Khopri of Heliopolis, to mention but one of thedeities worshipped there, received offerings of gold in value byweight. £120, 000, and silver ingots worth £12, 000. *

 * This is the small temple afterwards described by Herodotus as being dedicated to Hermes. 

A country which could afford to indulge in extravagances of this naturemust have been in a flourishing condition, and everything goes to provethat Egypt prospered under the rule of the early Bubastite kings. 

The very same causes, however, which had ruined the Ramessides andthe Tanites were now openly compassing the downfall of the Bubastitedynasty. The military feudalism from which it had sprung, suppressed fora time by Sheshonq I. , developed almost unchecked under his successors. They had thought to break it up and turn it to their own advantage, bytransferring the more important religious functions and the principalfiefs to their own sons or nephews. They governed Memphis throughthe high priests of Phtah; a prince of the blood represented them atKhmunu, * another at Khninsu** (Heracleopolis), and others in variouscities of the Delta, each of them being at the head of several thousandMashauasha, or Libyan soldiers on whose fidelity they could entirelyrely. 

 * E. G. Namrōti, under Piōnkhi-Mīamun, whose rights were such that he adopted the protocol of the Pharaohs. 

 ** Stole 1959 of the Serapęum contains the names of five successive princes of this city, the first of whom was Namrōti, son of Osorkon II. , and high priest of Thebes; a member of the same family, named Pefzāābastīt, had taken cartouches under Osorkon III. Of the XXIIIrd dynasty. 

Thebes alone had managed to exclude these representatives of the rulingdynasty, and its princes, guided in this particular by the popularprejudice, persistently refused to admit into their bodyguard any butthe long-tried Māzaīu. Moreover, Thebes lost no opportunity of provingitself to be still the most turbulent of the baronies. Its territoryhad suffered no diminution since the time of Hrihor, and half of UpperEgypt, from Elephantine to Siut, acknowledged its sway. 1

 * It is evident that this was so from the first steps taken by Piōnkhi-Miamun's generals: they meet the army and fleet of Tafnakhti and the princes of the north right under the walls of Hormopolis, but say nothing of any feudal princes of the south. Their silence is explained if we assume that Thebes, being a dependency of Ethiopia, retained at that date, i. E. In the time of the XXIInd dynasty, the same or nearly the same boundaries which it had won for itself under the XXIst. 

Through all the changes of dynasty its political constitution hadremained unaltered; Amon still ruled there supreme as ever, and nothingwas done until he had been formally consulted in accordance with ancientusage. Anputi, in spite of his being a son of Sheshonq, was compelledto adopt the title of high priest in order to rule in peace, and hadmarried some daughter or niece of the last of the Painotmu. After hisdeath, good care was taken to prevent the pontificate from passing toone of his children, as this would have re-established a Theban dynastywhich might have soon proved hostile to that of Bubastis. To avoid this, Osorkon I. Made over the office and fief to his own son Sheshonq. Thelatter, after a time, thought he was sufficiently powerful to follow theexample of Paīnotmu and adopt the royal cartouches; but, with all hisambition, he too failed to secure the succession to the male line ofhis descendants, for Osorkon II. Appointed his own son Namrōti, alreadyprince of Khninsu, to succeed him. The amalgamation of these two postsinvested the person on whom they were conferred with almost regal power;Khninsu was, indeed, as we know, the natural rampart of Memphis andLower Egypt against invasion from the south, and its possessor was in aposition to control the fate of the empire almost as he pleased. Osorkon must have had weighty reasons for taking a step which placed himpractically at the mercy of his son, and, indeed, events proved that butlittle reliance could be placed on the loyalty of the Thebans, and thatenergetic measures were imperative to keep them in the path of duty orlead them back to it. The decadence of the ancient capital had sadlyincreased since the downfall of the descendants of Hrihor. 

[Illustration: 248. Jpg SMALL BRONZE SPHINX OF SIAMUN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the original now in the Louvre. 

The few public works which they had undertaken, and which Sheshonq I. Encouraged to the best of his ability, had been suspended owing to wantof money, and the craftsmen who had depended on them for support weresuffering from poverty: the makers of small articles of a religiousor funerary character, carvers of wood or stone, joiners, painters ofmummy-cases, and workers in bronze, alone managed to eke out a barelivelihood, thanks to commissions still given to them by officialsattached to the temples. Theban art, which in its best period hadexcelled in planning its works on a gigantic scale, now gladly devoteditself to the production of mere knick-knacks, in place of the colossalfigures of earlier days. 

[Illustration: 249. Jpg RUINS OF THE TEMPLE AT KHNINSU AFTER NAVILLE'sEXCAVATIONS]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph in Naville. The illustration shows what now remains of the portions of the temple rebuilt in the time of Ramses II. 

We have statuettes some twelve or fifteen inches high, crudely coloured, wooden stelę, shapeless _ushābti_ redeemed from ugliness by a coatingof superb blue enamel, and, above all, those miniature sphinxesrepresenting queens or kings, which present with two human arms eithera table of offerings or a salver decorated with cartouches. The starvingpopulace, its interests and vanity alike mortified by the accession ofa northern dynasty, refused to accept the decay of its fortunes withresignation, and this spirit of discontent was secretly fomented by thepriests or by members of the numerous families which boasted of theirdescent from the Eamessides. Although hereditary claims to the throneand the pontificate had died out or lost their force in the male line, they were still persistently urged by the women: consecrated fromtheir birth to the service of Amon, and originally reserved to singhis praises or share his nuptial couch, those of them who marriedtransmitted to their children, and more especially to their daughters, the divine germ which qualified them for the throne. They and theirfollowers never ceased to look for the day when the national deityshould shake off his apathy, and, becoming the champion of their causeagainst the Bubastite or Tanite usurpers, restore their city to the rankand splendour from which it had fallen. Namrōti married one of theseTheban princesses, and thus contrived to ward off the danger of revoltduring his lifetime; but on his death or disappearance an insurrectionbroke out. Sheshonq II. Had succeeded Osorkon II. , and he, in his turn, was followed by Takelōti II. Takelōti chose Kala-māit, daughter ofNamrōti, as his lawful wife, formally recognised her as queen, and setup numerous statues and votive monuments in her honour. But all invain: this concession failed to conciliate the rebellious, and the wholeThebaid rose against him to a man. In the twelfth year of his reign heentrusted the task of putting down the revolt to his son Osorkon, at thesame time conferring upon him the office of high priest. It took severalyears to repress the rising; defeated in the eleventh year, the rebelsstill held the field in the fifteenth year of the king, and it was nottill some time after, between the fifteenth and twenty-second year ofTakelōti II. , that they finally laid down their arms. * At the end ofthis struggle the king's power was quite exhausted, while that of thefeudal magnates had proportionately increased. Before long, Egypt wassplit up into a number of petty states, some of them containing but afew towns, while others, following the example of Thebes, boldly annexedseveral adjacent nomes. A last remnant of respect for the traditionalmonarchy kept them from entirely repudiating the authority of Pharaoh. They still kept up an outward show of submission to his rule; they paidhim military service when called upon, and appealed to him as umpire intheir disputes, without, however, always accepting his rulings, and whenthey actually came to blows among themselves, were content to exercisetheir right of private warfare under his direction. ** The royal domaingradually became narrowed down to the Memphite nome and the privateappanages of the reigning house, and soon it no longer yielded the sumsnecessary for the due performance of costly religious ceremonies, suchas the enthronement or burial of an Apis. The pomp and luxury usuallydisplayed on such occasions grew less and less under the successors ofTakelōti II. , Sheshonq III. , Pimi, and Sheshonq IV. ***

 * The story of these events is told in several greatly mutilated inscriptions to be found at Karnak on the outer surface of the south wall of the Hall of Columns. 

 ** It is evident that this was so, from a romance discovered by Krall. 

 *** One need only go to the Louvre and compare the Apis stelae erected during this period with those engraved in the time of the XXVIth dynasty, in order to realise the low ebb to which the later kings of the XXIInd dynasty had fallen: the fact that the chapel and monuments were built under their direction shows that they were still masters of Memphis. We have no authentic date for Sheshonq II. , and the twenty-ninth year is the latest known in the case of Takelōti II. , but we know that Sheshonq III. Reigned fifty- two years, and, after two years of Pimi, we find a reference to the thirty-seventh year of Sheshonq IV. If we allow a round century for these last kings we are not likely to be far out: this would place the close of the Bubastite dynasty somewhere about 780 B. C. 

When the last of these passed away after an inglorious reign of at leastthirty-seven years, the prestige of his race had so completely declinedthat the country would have no more of it; the sceptre passed into thehands of another dynasty, this time of Tanite origin. * It was probablya younger branch of the Bubastite family allied to the Ramessidesand Theban Pallacides. Petu-bastis, the first of the line, securedrecognition in Thebes, ** and throughout the rest of Egypt as well, buthis influence was little greater than that of his predecessors; as inthe past, the real power was in the hands of the high priests. 

 * The following list gives the names of the Pharaohs of the XXIIth dynasty in so far as they have been ascertained up to the present:--

[Illustration: 252. Jpg TABLE OF PHARAOHS OF THE XXIITH DYNASTY]

 ** This fact has recently been placed beyond doubt by inscriptions found on the quay at Karnak near the water- marks of the Nile. 

One of them, Auīti by name, even went so far, in the fourteenth orfifteenth year, as to declare himself king, and had his cartouchesinscribed on official documents side by side with those of the Tanitemonarch. * His kingship died with him, just as that of Patnotmu had donein similar circumstances, and two years later we find his successor, Harsiisīt, a mere high priest without pretensions to royalty. 

 * No. 26 of Legrain's inscriptions tells us the height of the Nile in the sixteenth year of Petubastīt, which was also the second year of King Auīti. Seeing that Auīti's name occurs in the place occupied by that of the high priest of Thebes in other inscriptions of the same king, I consider it probable that he was reigning in Thebes itself, and that he was a high priest who had become king in the same way as Paīnotmu under the XXIst dynasty. 

[Illustration: 253. Jpg KING PETUBASTIS AT PRAYER]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a small door now in the Louvre. 

Doubtless his was not an isolated case; all the grandees who happenedto be nearly related either to the dethroned or to the reigning housesacted in like manner, and for the first time for many years Egyptacknowledged the simultaneous sway of more than one legitimate Pharaoh. Matters became still worse under Osorkon III. ; although he, too, introduced a daughter of Anion into his harem, this alliance failed togive him any hold over Thebes, and even the Seven Nomes and the Deltawere split up to such an extent that at one time they included somethinglike a score of independent principalities, three of which, Hermopolis, Heracleopolis, and Tentramu, were administered by kings who boastedcartouches similar to those of Tanis and Bubastis. 

About 740 B. C. There appeared in the midst of these turbulent andextortionate nobles a man who, by sheer force of energy and talent, easily outstripped all competitors. Tafnakhti was a chief of obscureorigin, whose hereditary rights extended merely over the village ofNutirīt and the outskirts of Sebennytos. One or two victories gainedover his nearest neighbours encouraged him to widen the sphere of hisoperations. He first of all laid hands on those nomes of the Deltawhich extended to the west of the principal arm of the Nile, the Saite, Athribite, Libyan, and Memphite nomes; these he administered throughofficers under his own immediate control; then, leaving untouched theeastern provinces, over which Osorkon III. Exercised a make-shift, easygoing rule, he made his way up the river. Maitumu and the Fayumaccepted him as their suzerain, but Khninsu and its king, Pefzāābastīt, faithful to their allegiance, * offered strenuous resistance. 

 * Pefzāābastīt, King of Heracleopolis, seems to be identical with the Pharaoh Pefzābastīt of the Berlin sarcophagus. 

He then crossed over to the right bank, and received the homage ofHeliopolis and Phebtepahź; he put the inhabitants of Uabu to ransom, established a close blockade of Khninsu, and persuaded Namrōti, King ofKhmunu, to take an oath of allegiance. At length, those petty kings andprinces of the Said and the Delta who still remained unconquered calledupon Ethiopia, the only power capable of holding its ground against him, for help. The "vile Kaushu" (Cush) probably rose to be an independentstate about the time when Sheshonq and the Bubastite kings came intopower. 

[Illustration: 255. Jpg VIEW OF A PART OF THE RUINS OF NAPATA]

 Reproduced by Faucher-Gudin, from a lithograph published in Cailliaud. 

Peopled by Theban settlers, and governed by the civil and religious codeof Thebes, the provinces which lay between the cataract of Hannek andthe confluence of the two Mies soon became a second Thebaid, more barrenand less wealthy than the first, but no less tied to the traditionsof the past. Napata, its capital, lay in the plain at the foot of asandstone cliff, which rose perpendicularly to a height of nearly twohundred feet, its summit, when viewed from the southwest, presenting anaccidental resemblance to a human profile. * This was the _Du-uabu_, orSacred Mount, in the heart of which the god was supposed to have hisdwelling; the ruins of several temples can still be seen near thewestern extremity of the hill, the finest of them being dedicated to alocal Amon-Rā. 

 * The natives believe this profile to have been cut by human hands--an error which has been shared by more than one modern traveller. 

[Illustration: 256. Jpg GEBEL-BARKAL, THE SACRED MOUNTAIN OF NAPATA]

 Reproduced by Faucher-Gudin, from a lithograph in Cailliaud. 

This Amon was a replica of the Theban Amon on a smaller scale, and wasassociated with the same companions as his prototype, Maut, his consort, and Khonsu, his son. He owed his origin to the same religious concepts, and was the central figure of a similar myth, the only difference beingthat he was represented in composite shape, with a ram's head; perhapsa survival from some earlier indigenous deity, such as Didun, forinstance, who had been previously worshipped in those parts; his priestslived in accordance with the rules of the Theban hierarchy. 

[Illustration: 257. Jpg RUINS OF THE TEMPLE OF AMON AT NAPATA]

 Reproduced by Faucher-Gudin, from a lithograph published by Cailliaud. 

We can readily believe that when Hrihor extorted the title of "Royal Sonof Kaushu" from the weaklings who occupied the throne at the close ofthe Ramesside dynasty, he took care to install one of the members ofhis family as high priest at Napata, and from henceforward had the wholecountry at his bidding. Subsequently, when Paīnotmu II. Was succeeded byAuputi at Thebes, it seems that the Ethiopian priests refused to ratifyhis election. Whether they conferred the supreme power on one of theirown number, or whether some son of Paīnotmu, flying from the Bubastitekings, arrived at the right moment to provide them with a master, is notquite clear. 

[Illustration: 258. Jpg PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF AMON AT NAPATA]

 Reproduced by Faucher-Gudin, from the plan drawn up and published by Cailliaud. 

The kings of Ethiopia, priests from the first, never lost theirsacerdotal character. They continued to be men of God, and as such itwas necessary that they should be chosen by the god himself. On thedeath of a sovereign, Amon at once became regent in the person of hisprophet, and continued to act until the funeral rites were celebrated. As soon as these ceremonies were completed, the army and the peoplecollected at the foot of the Sacred Mount; the delegates of the variousorders of the state were led into the sanctuary, and then, in theirpresence, all the males of the royal family--"the king's brothers, " asthey were called--were paraded before the statue of the god; he on whomthe god laid his hand as he passed was considered to be the chosen oneof Amon, and consecrated king without delay. *

 * This is the ritual described in the _Stele of the Enthronement_. Perhaps it was already in use at Thebes under the XXIst and XXIInd dynasties, at the election of the high priest, whether he happened to be a king or not; at any rate, a story of the Ptolemaic period told by Synesius in _The Egyptian_ seems to point to this conclusion. 

As may be readily imagined, the new monarch thus appointed by divinedictation was completely under the control of the priests, and beforelong, if he failed to prove sufficiently tractable, they claimed theright to dispense with him altogether; they sent him an order to commitsuicide, and he obeyed. The boundaries of this theocratic state variedat different epochs; originally it was confined to the region betweenthe First Cataract and the mouth of the Blue Nile. The bulk of thepopulation consisted of settlers of Egyptian extraction and Egyptianisednatives; but isolated, as they were, from Egypt proper by the rupture ofthe political ties which had bound them to the metropolis, they ceasedto receive fresh reinforcements from the northern part of the valley asthey had formerly done, and daily became more closely identified withthe races of various origin which roamed through the deserts of Libya orArabia. This constant infiltration of free or slavish Bedāwin blood andthe large number of black women found in the harems of the rich, andeven in the huts of the common people, quickly impaired the purity ofthe race, even among the tipper classes of the nation, and the type cameto resemble that of the negro tribes of Equatorial Africa. *

 * Taharqa furnishes us with a striking example of this degeneration of the Egyptian type. His face shows the characteristic features of the black race, both on the Egyptian statue as well as on the Assyrian stele of Sinjirli. 

[Illustration: 260a. Jpg A NEARLY PURE ETHIOPIAN TYPE]

[Illustration: 260b. Jpg mixed negro and Ethiopian TYPE]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Lepsius. 

The language fared no better in the face of this invasion, and thewritten character soon became as corrupt as the language; words foreignto the Egyptian vocabulary, incorrect expressions, and barbarous errorsin syntax were multiplied without stint. The taste for art decayed, and technical ability began to deteriorate, the moral and intellectualstandard declined, and the mass of the people showed signs of relapsinginto barbarism: the leaders of the aristocracy and the scribes alonepreserved almost intact their inheritance from an older civilisation. Egypt still attracted them: they looked upon it as their rightfulpossession, torn from them by alien usurpers in defiance of all senseof right, and they never ceased to hope that some day, when the god sawfit, they would win back their heritage. Were not their kings of theposterity of Sibu, the true representatives of the Ramessides and thesolar race, compared with whom the northern Pharaohs, even those whosemothers ranked as "worshippers" of Amon, were but mere mushroom kings?Thebes admitted the validity of their claims: it looked to them forhelp, and the revolts by which it had been torn ever since the reign ofOsorkon II. Were, perhaps, instigated by the partisans of Ethiopia. Inthe time of Petubastis its high priests, Harsiisīt and Takelōti, werestill connected with the Tanites; after that it placed itself underthe immediate orders of Ethiopia, and the pontificate disappeared. Theaccession of a sovereign who was himself invested by hereditary rightwith the functions and title of high priest of Amon henceforth renderedthe existence of such an office superfluous at Thebes: it would almosthave meant an _imperium in imperio_. The administration of religious, and perhaps also of political, affairs was, therefore, handed overto the deputy prophet, and this change still further enhanced theimportance of the "female worshippers of the god. " In the absence ofthe king, who had his capital at Napata, they remained the solerepresentatives of legitimate authority in the Thebaid: the chief amongthem soon came to be regarded as a veritable _Lady of Thebes_, and, subject to the god, mistress of the city and its territory. 

It is not quite clear whether it was Piōnkhi Miamun or one of hisimmediate predecessors who took possession of the city. The nomesdependent on Amon followed the example of the capital, and the wholeTheban territory as far as Siut had been occupied by Ethiopian troops, when in the twenty-first year of the king's reign the princes of theDelta and Middle Egypt appealed to the court of Napata for help. 

[Illustration: 262. Jpg MAP OF MIDDLE EGYPT DURING THE CAMPAIGN OFPIONKHI]

Even had they not begged it to do so, it would have been compelledbefore long to intervene, for Tafnakhti was already on his way toattack it; Piōnkki charged Luāmarsakni and Pu-arama, the generals he hadalready stationed in the Thebaid, to hold Tafnakhti in check, till hewas able to get together the remainder of his army and descend the Nileto support them. Their instructions were to spare none of the rebellioustowns, but to "capture their men and their beasts, and their ships onthe river; to allow none of the fellaheen to go out into the fields, nor any labourer to his labour, but to attack Hermopolis and harass itdaily. " They followed out these orders, though, it would seem, withoutresult, until the reinforcements from Nubia came up: their movementsthen became more actively offensive, and falling on Tafnakhti's ships, which were making for Thebes heavily laden with men and stores, theysunk several of them. 

[Illustration: 262. Jpg RUINS OF OXYRRHYNCHOS AND THE MODERN TOWN OFBAHNESA]

 Drawn by Boudier, from an engraving in Vivant Denon. 

Anxious to profit by this first success, they made straight forHeracleopolis with a view to relieving it. Tafnakhti, accompanied by thetwo kings Namrōti and Auputi, was directing the siege in person; hehad under his command, in addition to contingents from Busiris, Mendčs, Thoth, and Pharbaīthos, all the vassals of Osorkon III. , the successorof Petubastis and titular Pharaoh of the whole country. The Ethiopianfleet engaged the Egyptian ships at the end of the island ofHeracleopolis, near the mouth of the canal leading from the Nile to theBahr-Yusuf. * Tafnakhti was defeated, and the remnants of his squadrontook refuge in Pipuga under cover of his land forces. ** At dawn, thenext day, the Ethiopians disembarked and gave battle. The struggle waslong and fierce, but indecisive. Luāmarsakni and Puarama claimed thevictory, but were obliged to effect a retreat on the day followingtheir so-called success, and when they dropped anchor in the harbour ofHermopolis, they found that Namrōti had made his way back to the city byland and forestalled them. Powerless to hold the field without support, he collected all the men and cattle he could lay hands on, and awaitedthe progress of events behind his ramparts. The Ethiopians invested thetown, and wrote to inform Piōnkhi of what they had done--not, however, without some misgiving as to the reception which awaited theirdespatches. And sure enough, "His Majesty became enraged thereat, evenas a panther: 'If they have allowed a remnant of the warriors of thenorth to remain, if they have let one of them escape to tell of thefight, if they make him not to die in their slaughter, then by my life, by the love of Rā, by the praise of Amon for me, I will myself go downand overthrow that which Tafnakhti hath done, *** I will compel him togive up war for ever! Therefore, after celebrating the festivals of theNew Year, when I shall have sacrificed to Amon of [Napata], my father, in his excellent festival wherein he appears in his procession of theNew Year, when he shall have sent me in peace to look upon the [Theban]Amon in his festivals at Thebes, and when I shall have carried his imagein procession to Luxor, in the festival celebrated in his honour amongthe festivals of Thebes, on the night of the feast appointed in theThebaid, established by Rā at the creation, when I have led him in theprocession and brought him unto his throne, on the day for introducingthe god, even the second of Athyr, then will I make the enemy taste thesavour of my claws. '"

 * The ancient geographers looked upon the nome of Heraoleopolis as a large island, its southern boundary being, probably, the canal of Harabshent: the end of the island, which the Egyptians called "the forepart of Khninsu, " was probably Harabshent and its environs. 

 ** Pi-puga is probably El-Fokā, on the Nile, to the north of Harabshent. 

 *** The king does not mention his adversary by name in the text; he is content to indicate him by a pronoun in the third person--"that which he hath done... Then will I make him taste, " etc. 

The generals did their very utmost to appease their master's wrathbefore he appeared on the scene. They told off a force to keep watchover Hermopolis while they themselves marched against the nome of Uabu;they took Oxyrrhynchos by storm, with "the fury of a water-spout, " andinformed the king of this achievement; but "his heart was not softenedthereby. " They crossed over to the right bank; they crushed the peopleof the north under the walls of Tatehni, * they forced the walls of thetown with the battering-ram, and killed many of the inhabitants, amongstothers a son of Tafnakhti, whose body they sent to the king; but "hisheart was not softened thereby. "

They then pushed on as far as Haļt Bonua** and sacked it, but stillfailed to regain favour. On the 9th of Thoth, Piōnkhi came down toThebes, and after hasty attendance at the services to Amon, went torejoin the vanguard of his army under the walls of Hermopolis. 

 * The modern Tehneh, on the right bank of the Nile, a little below Minieh. 

 ** Hāit-Bonu, or Hābonu, is the Hipponon of the Greco-Roman geographers. 

[Illustration: 266. Jpg KING NAMRŌTI LEADING A HORSE TO PIŌNKHI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from an impression of the stele in the Gizeh Museum. 

"No sooner had his Majesty quitted the cabin of his ship, than thehorses were harnessed and the charioteers in their places; the fear ofhis Majesty spread even to the Nomads of Asia, and all hearts trembledbefore him. " Piōnkhi drove back the enemy behind their walls, pitchedhis tent to the south-west of the city, threw up earth-works, andbuilt terraces so as to place his bowmen and sling-ers on a levelwith the battlements of its towers. At the end of three days, Namrōti, finding himself hard pressed on every side, resolved to surrender. Hesent envoys to Piōnkhi laden with rich presents, and despatched QueenNsitentmahīt after them, to beg for mercy from the women who hadaccompanied the Ethiopian, his wives, concubines, daughters, or royalsisters. Their entreaties were graciously received, and Namrōti venturedto come in person, leading a horse with his right hand and shaking inhis left a sistrum of gold and lapis-lazuli; he knelt down and presentedwith his salutations the long train of gifts which had gone before him. Piōnkhi visited the temple of Thoth, and there, amidst the acclamationsof soldiers and priests, offered up the customary sacrifices. 

[Illustration: 267. Jpg RUINS OF THE TEMPLE OF THOTH, AT HERMOPOLIS THEGREAT]

 Drawn by Boudier, from an engraving in Vivant Denon. The portico was destroyed about 1820 by the engineers who constructed the sugar refinery at Rodah, and now only a few shapeless fragments of it remain. 

He then made his way to the palace and inspected its courts, chambers, treasury, and storehouses, and reviewed the whole household, includingeven Namrōti's own wives and daughters, though "he turned not his facetowards any one of them. " He next went on to the stud-farms, and wasindignant to find that the horses had suffered from hunger during thesiege. Thoroughbreds were probably somewhat scarce at Napata, and hehad, no doubt, reckoned on obtaining new blood and a complete relayof chargers from the Egyptian stables; his chances of doing so seemedlikely to vanish if brood mares and stallions had everywhere beendebilitated by the hardships of war. He reserved a part of the booty forhimself, handed over the balance to the priests of Amon at Karnak, andalso, before he left, received tribute from Heracleopolis. Pefzāābastītbrought him horses, the pick of his stables, slaves laden with goldand silver and precious stones; then burying his face in the dust, he offered worship to his liberator: "Hell had swallowed me up, I wasplunged into darkness, and lo, now a light has been given me. Since Ihave found no man to love me in the day of adversity, or to stand by mein the day of battle, save only thee, O victorious king, who hast tornaway the night from above me, I will be thy servant, I and all my house, and Khninsu shall pay tribute into thy treasury. For, as to thee, thouart Harmakhis, chief of the imperishable stars, thou art king, even ashe is king, and even as he doth not destroy himself, neither shalt thoudestroy thyself!"

The downfall of Khmunu led all who might still have shown resistancein Middle Egypt to lay down their arms also. The fortress ofPisakhmakhpirrī* dominated the gorges of Lahunīt, and thus commanded theentrance to the Fayum; but the son of Tafnakhti agreed to surrender it, provided he were allowed to march out with the honours of war. 

 * This fortress, which bears a name compounded with that of Osorkon I. , must have been rebuilt by that monarch on the site of an earlier fort; the new name remained in use under the XXIInd and XXIIIth dynasties, after which the old one reappears. It is Illahun, where Petrie discovered the remains of a flourishing town of the Bubastite epoch. 

Shortly after, Maītumu threw open its gates, and its example wasfollowed by Titauī; at Maītumu there was rioting among the Egyptians inthe streets, one party wishing to hold out, the other to surrender, butin the end the latter had their way. * Piōnkhi discharged his priestlyduties wherever he went, and received the local taxes, always beingcareful to reserve a tenth for the treasury of Amon-Rā; the fact thathis army was kept under rigid control, and that he showed great clemencyto the vanquished, helped largely to conciliate those who were notbound by close ties of interest to the cause of Tafnakhti. On reachingMemphis, Piōnkhi at once had recourse to the persuasive methods whichhad hitherto served him so well, and entered into negotiations with thegarrison. "Shut not yourselves up in forts, and fight not against theUpper Country, ** for Shu the god of creation, when I enter, he entereth, and when I go out, he goeth out, and none may repel my attacks. I willpresent offerings to Phtah and to the divinities of the White Wall, I will honour Sokari in his mysterious coffer, I will contemplateEīsānbuf, *** then I will return from thence in peace. If ye will trustin me, Memphis shall be prosperous and healthy, even the children shallnot cry therein. Behold the nomes of the South; not a soul has beenmassacred there, saving only the impious who blasphemed God, and theserebels have been executed. "

 * Maritumu, or Maītumu, is the modern Meīdum, associated in the inscription with the characteristic epithet, Pisokari- Nibu-Suazu, or "temple of Sokari, master of the transfiguration. " Titauī lay exactly on the frontier between Upper and Lower Egypt--hence its name, which signifies "commanding the two regions;" it was in the Memphite nome, and Brugsch identifies it with the Greek city of Acanthos, near Dahshur, but this position appears to me to be too close to Memphis and too far from the boundary of the nome; I should prefer to place Titauī at Kafr el-Ayat or thereabouts. 

 ** I. E. Against Piōnkhi, who was master of the Upper Country, that is, of Thebes and Ethiopia, and the forces from the whole of the valley to the south of Memphis who accompanied him. 

 *** Lit. , "He who is on the South of his Wall, " a name given to one of the quarters of Memphis, and afterwards applied to the god Phtah, who was worshipped in that quarter. 

This eloquence, however, was of no avail. A detachment of archers, sailors, and engineers sent to make a reconnaissance of the harbour wastaken by surprise and routed with loss, and on the following nightTafnakhti suddenly made his appearance on the spot. He had the 8000 menwho were defending it paraded before him, and made them a speech, inwhich he pointed out the great natural strength of the position, thestoutness of the walls and the abundance of provisions; he then mountedhis horse, and making his way a second time through the enemy'soutposts, headed straight for the Delta in order to levy reinforcementsthere. The next day, Piōnkhi went in person to examine the approaches ofthe city in which his ancestors had once been throned. There was a fullNile, and the river came right up to the walls. He sailed close in alongthe whole of the eastern front, and landed on the north, much vexed anddiscomfited at finding it so strongly fortified. Even the commonsoldiers were astonished, and began to discuss among themselves thedifficulties of the undertaking with a certain feeling ofdiscouragement. It would be necessary, they declared, to open a regularsiege, "to make an inclined plane leading to the city, throw up-earthworks against its walls, bind ladders, set up masts and erect sparsall around it. " Piōnkhi burst into a rage when these remarks wererepeated to him: a siege in set form would have been a most seriousenterprise, and would have allowed the allied princes time to gettogether fresh troops. He drove his ships full speed against the line ofboats anchored in the harbour, and broke through it at the first onset;his sailors then scaled the bank and occupied the houses whichoverlooked it. Reinforcements concentrated on this point graduallypenetrated into the heart of the city, and after two days' fighting thegarrison threw down their arms. The victor at once occupied the templesto save them from pillage: he then purified Memphis with water andnatron, ascended in triumph to the temple of Phtah, and celebrated therethose rites which the king alone was entitled to perform. The otherfortresses in the neighbourhood surrendered without further hesitation. King Auputi of Tentramu, * prince Akaneshu, ** and prince Petisis tenderedthe homage of their subjects in person, and the other sovereigns of theDelta merely waited for a demonstration in force on the part of theEthiopians before following their example. 

 * Probably the original of the statue discovered by Naville at Tel-el-Yahudīyeh. Tentramu and Taānu, the cities of Auputi, are perhaps identical with the biblical Elim (Exod. Xvi. 1) and the Daneon Portus of Pliny on the Red Sea, but Naville prefers to identify Daneon with the Tonu of the _Berlin Papyrus No. 1_. I believe that we ought to look for the kingdom of Auputi in the neighbourhood of Menzaleh, near Tanis. 

 ** Akaneshu ruled over Sebennytos and in the XVIIth nome. Naville discovered at Samannud the statue of one of his descendants, a king of the same name, perhaps his grandson, who was prince of Sebennytos in the time of Psammetichus I. 

Piōnkhi crossed the Nile and marched in state to Heliopolis, there toreceive the royal investiture. 

He offered up prayers at the various holy places along the route, suchas the sanctuary of Tumu at Khriāhu and the temple of the Ennead whodwelt in the cavern from which the Northern Nile was supposed to spring;he then crossed over Mount Ahu, bathed his face in the reputed sourceof the river, and at length penetrated into the dwelling-place of Rā. He ascended the steps leading to the great chapel in order that he mightthere "see Rā in Hāīt-Banbonu even himself. All unattended, he drew thebolt, threw open the doors, contemplated his father Rā in Hāīt-Banbonu, adjusted Ra's boat Mādīt and the Saktit of Shu, then closed the doorsagain, affixed a seal of clay, and impressed it with the royal signet. "He had thus submitted his conduct for the approval of the god in whomall attributes of royalty were vested, and the god had legitimatised hisclaims to universal rule: he was henceforth the master, not merely _dejure_ but _de facto_ as well, and the kings who had hitherto declined torecognise him were now obliged to bow reverently before his authority. 

Osorkon was the first to submit, and did so before the close ofPiōnkhi's stay at Heliopolis; when the latter pitched his camp nearKahani* in the Athribite nome, the nobles of the Eastern Delta, bothsmall and great, came one after another with their followers; amongthem Patinifi of Pisapti, Paimau of Busiris, Pabīsa of Khriāhu and ofPihāpi, ** besides a dozen others. 

 * Kahani is, perhaps, the modern Kaha, some distance to the north of Qaliub. 

 ** Pisapti stood on the present site of Shaft-el-ļļineh. Khriāhu, as we know, formed part of the Heliopolitan nome, and is, very possibly, to be identified with Babylon of Egypt, the Postāt of the Arabs; Pihāpi was a place not far from the supposed source of the Southern Nile. 

He extended his favour to all alike, merely stipulating that they shouldgive him the best of their horses, and undertake to keep careful watchover the prosperity of their stud farms. But Tafnakhti still held out, and seemed determined to defy him to the end; he had set fire to hispalace and taken refuge in the islands on the river, and had provideda hiding-place for himself at Masudīt among the marshes on the coastin case of final defeat. A victory gained over him by the Ethiopiangenerals suddenly induced him to sue for peace. He offered to disbandhis men and pay tribute, provided he was guaranteed undisturbedpossession of Sais and of the western districts of the Delta; herefused, however, to sue for pardon in person, and asked that an envoyshould be sent to receive his oath of allegiance in the temple of Nit. Though deserted by his brother princes and allies, he still retainedsufficient power to be a thorn in his conqueror's side; his ultimateoverthrow was certain, but it would have entailed many a bloodystruggle, while a defeat might easily have shaken the fidelity of theother feudatory kings, and endangered the stability of the new dynasty. Piōnkhi, therefore, accepted the terms offered him without modification, and asked for no guarantee beyond the oath taken in the presence ofthe gods. News was brought him about this time that Cynopolis andAphroditopolis had at last thrown open their gates, and accordingly hesummoned his vassals for the last time to his camp near Athribis. Withthe exception of Tafnakhti, they all obeyed the call, including twominor kings of Upper and two of Lower Egypt, together with barons oflesser rank; but of these, Namrōti alone was admitted to the royalapartments, because he alone was circumcised and ate no fish; afterthis the camp was broken up, and the Ethiopians set out on their returnjourney southwards. Piōnkhi may well have been proud of the result ofthis campaign, both for himself and for his country. The empire of thePharaohs, which had for the last hundred and fifty years been divided, was now re-established from the confluence of the Niles to the shoresof the Mediterranean, but it was no longer Egypt that benefited by thechange. It was now, after many years of slavery, the turn of Ethiopiato rule, and the seat of power was transferred from Thebes or Memphis toNapata. As a matter of fact, the fundamental constitution of the kingdomunderwent no great modification; it had merely one king the more to ruleover it--not a stranger, as we are often tempted to conclude, when wecome to measure these old-world revolutions by our modern standardsof patriotism, but a native of the south, who took the place of thosenatives of the north who had succeeded one another on the throne sincethe days of Smendes. In fact, this newly crowned son of Rā lived a verylong way off; he had no troops of his own further north than Siut, and he had imposed his suzerainty on the rival claimants and reigningprinces without thereby introducing any change in the constitutionof the state. In tendering their submission to him, the heads of thedifferent nomes had not the slightest intention of parting with theirliberty; they still retained it, even though nominally dependent, andcontinued, as in the past, to abuse it without scruple. Namrōti was kingat Khmunu, Pefzāābastīt at Khninsu, Auputi at Tentramu, and OsorkonIII. At Bubastis; the prestige investing the Tanite race persisted soeffectively that the annalists give to the last-named precedence overthe usurpers of the Ethiopian dynasty; the Tanites continued to be theincarnate representatives of legitimate power, and when Osorkon III. Died, in 732, it was his son Psamutis who was regarded as the Lord ofEgypt. Tafnakhti had, in his defeat, gained formal recognition of hisroyalty. He was no longer a mere successful adventurer, a hero of thehour, whose victories were his only title-deeds, whose rights restedsolely on the argument of main force. Piōnkhi, in granting him amnesty, had conferred official investiture on him and on his descendants. Henceforth his rule at Sais was every whit as legitimate as that ofOsorkon at Bubastis, and he was not slow in furnishing material proof ofthis, for he granted himself cartouches, the uraeus, and all the otherinsignia of royalty. These changes must have been quickly noised abroadthroughout Asia. Commercial intercourse between Syria and Egypt wasmaintained as actively as ever, and the merchant caravans and fleetsexported with regularity the news of events as well as the naturalproducts of the soil or of industry. The tidings of an Ethiopianconquest and of the re-establishment of an undivided empire in thevalley of the Nile, coming as they did at the very moment when the firsteffects of the Assyrian revival began to be so keenly felt, could notfail to attract the attention and arouse the hopes of Syrian statesmen. The Philistines, who had never entirely released themselves from theties which bound them to the Pharaohs of the Delta, felt no repugnanceat asking for a renewal of their former protection. 

[Illustration: 276. Jpg KING TAFNAKHTI PRESENTS A FIELD TO TUMU AND TOBASTIT]

 Drawn by Boudier, from Mallet's photograph of the stele in the Museum at Athens. 

As for the Phoenicians, the Hebrews, Edom, Moab, Ammon, and Damascus, they began to consider whether they had not here, in Africa, among themembers of a race favourably disposed towards them by the memories ofthe past and by its ambition, hereditary allies against Nineveh. Thefact that Egypt was torn by domestic dissensions and divided into ascore of rival principalities in no way diminished their traditionaladmiration for its wealth or their confidence in its power; Assyriaitself was merely an agglomeration of turbulent provinces, vassalcities, and minor kingdoms, artificially grouped round the ancientdomain of Assur, and yet the convulsions by which it was periodicallyshaken had not prevented it from developing into the most formidableengine of war that had ever threatened the peace of Asia. The Africanhosts, whether led by ordinary generals or by a king of secondaryrank, formed none the less a compact army well fitted by numbers andorganisation to hold its own against any forces which Tiglath-pilesermight put into the field; and even should the supreme Pharaoh beunwilling to throw the full weight of his authority into the balance, yet an alliance with one of the lesser kings, such as the lord of Saisor of Bubastis, would be of inestimable assistance to any one fortunateenough to secure it. It is true that, in so far as the ultimate issuewas concerned, there was little to be gained by thus pitting the twogreat powers together and persuading one to fight against the other;the victor must, in the long run, remain master alike of those who hadappealed for help and of those who had fought against him, and if Egyptemerged triumphant, there would be nothing for it but to accept hersupremacy. In either event, there could be no question of independence;it was a choice between the hegemony of Egypt or that of Assyria. 

From the moment that Tiglath-pileser had made his appearance on thenorthern horizon, the nations of Southern Syria had instinctively lookedto Pharaoh for aid. There seems to have been an Egyptian faction inSamaria, even during the disorders which broke out after the death ofJeroboam II. , and perhaps it was a hope of overcoming it easily whichled Menahem of his own accord to invoke the still remote suzeraintyof Nineveh, after the fall of Unki in 738;* later on, when Pekah hadassassinated Pekahiah and entered into alliance with Eezin, he adoptedthe view of those who saw no hope of safety save from the banks of theNile, his only reason for doing so being, apparently, because thekings of the fallen dynasty had received support from the valley ofthe Tigris. Hosea continually reproached his countrymen with thisvacillating policy, and pointed out the folly of it: "Ephraim is likea silly dove without understanding; they call unto Egypt, they go untoAssyria; when they shall go I will spread My net upon them, " said theEternal. **

 * The existence of an Egyptian faction at this period has been admitted by Kittel. Winckler has traced to the Arabian or Idumęan Muzri everything previously referred to Egypt. His arguments seem to me to be, in many cases, convincing, as I shall point out where necessary, but I think he carries his theory too far when he systematically excludes Egypt and puts Muzri in its place. Egypt, even in its decadent state, was a far more important power than the Arabian Muzri, and it seems unreasonable to credit it with such a limited share in the politics of the time. I cannot believe that any other power is intended in most of those passages in the Hebrew writings and Assyrian inscriptions in which the words Mizraīm and Muzri occur. 

 ** Hos. Vii. 11, 12. 

They were to be given up to Assyria and dispersed, and while some wereto go into Assur and eat unclean food, Ephraim was to return into Egypt;"for, lo, they are gone away from destruction, yet Egypt shall gatherthem up, Memphis shall bury them. "* Nevertheless, they persisted innegotiating with Egypt, and though there was as yet no formal alliancebetween Samaria and Sais or Tanis, their relations were so close that noenemy of Israel could look for protection from Psamuti or his vassals. Ahaz had, therefore, nothing to hope from this quarter, and wascompelled by the force of circumstances to throw himself into the armsof Assyria, if he decided to call in outside aid at all. His prophets, like those of Pekah, strenuously forbade him to do so, and among themwas one who was beginning to exert a marvellous influence over allclasses of society--Isaiah, the son of Amoz. He had begun his careerin the year that Uzziah died, ** and had continued to prophesy withoutinterruption during the brief reign of Jotham. ***

 * Hos. Ix. 3-6. 

 ** Isa. Vi. 1. 

 *** The fragments which can be assigned to this period now occur as follows: chap. Ii. 2-5 (verses 2-4 are also found in _Micah_ iv. 1-3, and were, perhaps, borrowed from some third prophet), ii. 6-22, iii. , iv. , v. 1-24 (the Parable of the Vineyard), and lastly, chap, vi. , in so far as the substance is concerned; it seems to have been put into its present form long after the events. 

When Jahveh first appeared to him, in the smoke of the altar, seatedon a throne and surrounded by seraphim, a sense of his own unworthinessfilled him with fear, but an angel purified his lips with a live coal, and he heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send, and whowill go for us?" and he replied, "Here am I; send me, " whereupon Jahvehgave him this message: "Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see yeindeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and maketheir ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes andhear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn againand be healed. " Then the prophet asked, "Lord, how long?" And Jahvehanswered, "Until cities be waste without inhabitant and houses withoutman, and the land become utterly waste, and Jahveh have removed men faraway, and the forsaken places be many in the midst of the land. And ifthere be yet a tenth in it, it shall be eaten up; as a terebinth, and asan oak, whose stock remaineth when they are felled, so the holy seed isthe stock thereof. "*

 * An explanatory gloss, "the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria and of the son of Remaliah, " which formed no part of the original prophecy, is here inserted in the text. 

Judah, though less powerful, was quite as corrupt as his brethren ofIsrael, and the divine wrath threatened him no less than them; it restedwith himself, however, to appease it by repentance, and to enter againinto divine favour after suffering his punishment; the Eternal wouldthen gather together on Mount Sion those of His faithful people who hadsurvived the crisis, and would assure them a long period of prosperityunder His law. The prophet, convinced that men could in no wise alterthe decrees of the Highest, save by repentance alone, was astonishedthat the heads of the state should strive to impede the progress ofevents that were happening under their very eyes, by the elaboratelyuseless combinations of their worldly diplomacy. To his mind, theinvasion of Pekah and Eezin was a direct manifestation of the divineanger, and it filled him with indignation that the king should hope toescape from it by begging for an alliance against them with one ofthe great powers: when Jahveh should decide that the punishment wassufficient for the crime, He would know how to shatter His instrumentswithout any earthly help. Indeed, Isaiah had already told his master, some days before the allied kings appeared, while the latter was busysuperintending the works intended to supply Jerusalem with water, to"Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither let thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands.... Because Syria hathcounselled evil against thee, Ephraim also, and the son of Bemaliah, saying, Let us go up against Judah, hem it in, carry it by storm, andset up the son of Tabeel as king: thus saith the Lord God, It shall notstand, neither shall it come to pass. " If, however, the course of thedivine justice was to be disturbed by the intervention of a purely humanagency, the city would doubtless be thereby saved, but the matter wouldnot be allowed to rest there, and the people would suffer even moreat the hands of their allies than they had formerly endured from theirenemies. "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall callhis name Immanuel--God with us.... For before the child shall knowto refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings thouabhorrest shall be forsaken, " and yet "Jahveh shall bring upon thee, andupon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah. "* And then, employing oneof those daring apologues, common enough in his time, the prophet tooka large tablet and wrote upon it in large letters two symbolicalnames--_Spoil-speedeth, Prey-hasteth_--and set it up in a prominentplace, and with the knowledge of credible witnesses went in unto theprophetess his wife. When the child was born in due course, Jahveh badehim call it _Spoil-speedeth, Prey-hasteth_, "for before he shall haveknowledge to cry, My father and, My mother, the riches of Damascus andthe spoil of Samaria shall be carried away before the King of Assyria. "But the Eternal added, "Forasmuch as this people hath refused the watersof Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son;now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of theriver [the Euphrates], strong and many:* and he shall come up over allhis channels, and go over all his banks: and he shall sweep onward intoJudah; he shall overflow and pass through; he shall reach even to theneck, and the stretching of his wings shall fill the breadth of thyland, O Immanuel [God-with-us]!"*** Finding that Egypt was in favourof his adversaries, Ahaz, in spite of the prophet's warnings, turned toAssyria. ****

 * Isa. Vii. 10-17. 

 ** A marginal gloss has here been inserted in the text, indicating that it was «the King of Assyria and all his glory » that the prophet referred to

 *** Isa. Viii. 1-8. 

 **** The following portions of Isaiah are accepted as belonging to the period of this Syrian war: in addition to chap, vii. , chaps, viii. -ix 6. Xi 1-9. Xxii. 1-11; i. 4-9, 18-32; to these Kuenen adds chap, xxiii. 1-8

[Illustration: 282. Jpg MAP THE KINGDOM OF DAMASCUS]

At one time he had found himself so hard pressed that he invoked theaid of the Syrian gods, and made his eldest son pass through the fire inorder to propitiate them:* he collected together all the silver and goldhe could find in his own treasury or in that of the temple and sent itto Tiglath-pileser, with this message: "I am thy servant and thy son:come up and save me out of the hand of the King of Syria, and out of thehand of the King of Israel, which rise up against me. "**

 * 2 Kings xvi. 3 (cf. 2 Chron. Xxviii. 3). There is nothing to indicate the date, but most historians place the event at the beginning of the Syrian war, a little before or during the siege. 

 ** Kings xvi. 7, 8; cf. 2 Chron. Xxviii. 16, 20, 21. 

Tiglath-pileser came in haste, and Rezin and Pekah, at the mere tidingsof his approach, desisted from their attack on Jerusalem, separated, andretired each to his own kingdom. The Assyrian king did not immediatelyfollow them up. He took the road leading along the coast, after leavingthe plains of the middle Orontes, and levied tribute from the Phoeniciancities as he passed; he then began by attacking the western frontierof Israel, and sent a body of troops against the Philistines, who wereceaselessly harassing Judah. Hannon, King of Gaza, did not await theattack, but fled to Egypt for safety, and Ahaz breathed freely, perhapsfor the first time since his accession. This, however, was only abeginning; the real struggle took place in the following year, and washotly contested. In spite of the sorry pass to which its former defeatsand present discords had brought it, Damascus still possessed immensewealth, and its army, when reinforced by the Arabian and Israelitecontingents, was capable of holding its own for a long time againstthe battalions of Assyria, even if it could not hope to conquer them. Unfortunately for its chances, Eezin had failed to inherit the militarycapacity of his great predecessors, Ben-hadad and Hazael; he allowedTiglath-pileser to crush the Hebrews without rendering them anyeffective assistance. Pekah fought his best, but he lost, one afteranother, the strongholds which guarded his northern frontier--Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, and Hazor; he saw the whole ofNaphtali and Gilead laid waste, and their inhabitants carried off intoAssyria without his being able to prevent it; he himself being obligedto evacuate Samaria and take refuge in the mountains almost unattended. Judah followed, with mingled exultation and disquietude, thevicissitudes of the tragic drama which was thus enacted before itseyes, and Isaiah foretold the speedy ruin of the two peoples who had butyesterday threatened to enslave it. He could already see the followingpicture in his mind's eye: "Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap. The cities of Aroer are forsaken: theyshall be for flocks, which shall lie down, and none shall make themafraid. "*

 * Both of these Aroźrs lay beyond Jordan--one in Reuben, afterwards Moab (Judg. Xi. 26; Jer. Xlviii. 19); the other in Amnion, afterwards Gad (Josh. Xiii. 25; 2 Sam. Xxiv. 5); here they stand for the countries beyond Jordan which Tiglath-pileser had just laid waste. The tradition preserved in 1 Citron, v. 26 stated that these inhabitants of Gad and Reuben were led into captivity by Pul, i. E. Tiglath-pileser. 

"The fortress also shall cease from Ephraim, and the kingdom fromDamascus, and the remnant of Syria: they shall be as the glory of thechildren of Israel, saith the Lord of hosts! And it shall come to passin that day, that the glory of Jacob shall be made thin, and the fatnessof his flesh shall wax lean. And it shall be as when the harvestmangathereth the standing corn, and his arm reapeth the ears; yea, it shallbe as when one gleaneth ears in the valley of Ephraim. Yet there shallbe left therein gleanings, as the shaking of an olive tree, two or threeberries in the top of the uppermost bough, four or five in the outmostbranches of a fruitful tree, saith Jahveh, the God of Israel!... In thatday shall his strong cities be as the forsaken places in the wood, andon the mountain top, which were forsaken from before the children ofIsrael:* and it shall be as a desolation. For thou hast forgotten theGod of thy salvation. "**

 * This is probably an allusion to the warlike exploits performed during Rezin and Pekah's invasion of Judaea, a year or two previously. 

 ** Isa. Xvii. 1-6, 9, 10. 

Samaria was doomed to helplessness for many a day to come, if not forever, but it had taken a whole year to lay it low (733); Tiglath-pileserreturned in 732, and devoted yet another year to the war againstDamascus. Eezin had not been dismayed by the evil fortune of hisfriends, and had made good his losses by means of fresh alliances. Hehad persuaded first Mutton II. Of Tyre, then Mitinti of Askalon, andwith the latter a section of the Philistines, to throw in their lot withhim; he had even won over Shamshieh, queen of the Arabs, and with hera number of the most warlike of the desert tribes; for himself, he hadtaken up a position on the further side of Anti-Lebanon, and kept strictwatch from Mount Hermon on the roads leading from the valley of theJordan to the plains of the Abana, in order to prevent the enemy fromoutflanking him and taking him in the rear. But all to no purpose;Tiglath-pileser bore directly down upon him, overwhelmed him in apitched battle, obliged him to take refuge behind the walls of Damascus, and there besieged him. 

[Illustration: 288. Jpg MOUNT HERMON]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph brought back by Lortet. 

The city was well fortified, amply supplied with provisions, andstrongly garrisoned; the siege was, therefore, a long one, and theAssyrians filled up the time by laying waste the fertile country atthe foot of Anti-Lebanon. At last Rezin yielded, gave himself upunconditionally, and was forthwith executed: eight thousand of hisfollowers were carried off to Kīr, on the confines of Elam, * his kingdomwas abolished, and a Ninevite governor was installed in his palace, bywhom the former domain of Damascus and the territory lately wrested fromIsrael were henceforth to be administered. 

 * 2 Kings xvi. 9. Kīr is generally located in Armenia, Media, or Babylonia; a passage in Isaiah (xxii. 6), however, seems to point to its having been somewhere in the direction of Elam, and associated with the Aramęans on the banks of the Tigris. The Assyrian monuments have not, as yet, yielded confirmation of the details given by the _Book of the Kings_ in regard to the captivity of the inhabitants of Damascus. A fragmentary tablet, giving an account of the death of Rezin, was discovered by H. Raw-linson, but it was left in Assyria, and no one knows what has since become of it. 

[Illustration: 289. Jpg AN ARAB]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Layard. 

The coalition he had formed did not long survive its leader. * Muttonhastily came to an understanding with the conqueror; Mitinti, likeHannon, fled into Egypt, and his place was taken by Kukibtu, a partisanof Assyria. Hoshea, son of Elah, rebelled against Pekah, assassinatedhim, and purchased the right to reign over what was left of Israel forten talents of gold. ** Shamshieh alone held out. 

 * The following is a list of the kings of Damascus from the time of David, as far as is known up to the present time:--

[Illustration: LIST OF THE KINGS OF DAMASCUS]

 ** 2 Kings xv. 30. The inscription published by H. Rawlinson, merely states that "they overthrew Pekah, their king, and I promoted Auzi [to the kingship] over them. I received [from him] X talents of gold and... Talents of silver.... "

She imagined herself to be safe among the sands of the desert, and itnever occurred to her that the heavy masses of the Assyrian army woulddream of venturing into these solitudes. Detachments of light cavalrywere sent in pursuit of her, and at first met with some difficulties;they were, however, eventually successful; the Armenian and Cappadociansteeds of the Ninevite horsemen easily rode down the queen's meharis. 

[Illustration: 290. Jpg ARAB MEHARIS RIDDEN DOWN BY THE ASSYRIAN CAVALRY]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the bas-relief reproduced by Layard. 

Their success made a great impression on the Arab tribes, and inducedthe Mashaī, Timaī Sabasans, Khaiapęans, Badanęans, and Khattięans tobend the knee before Assyria. They all sent envoys bearing presents ofgold and silver, camels, both male and female, and spices:* even theMuzri, whose territory lay to the south of the Dead Sea, followed theirexample, and a certain Idibiel was appointed as their chief. **

 * Delitzsch has identified the names of several of these races with names mentioned in the Bible, such as the Temah, Massah, Ephah, Sheba. 

 ** The name Muzri, as Winckler has shown, here refers, not to Egypt, but to a canton near Edom, the Nabatsea of the Greco-Roman geographers. 

While his lieutenants were settling outstanding issues in this fashion, Tiglath-pileser held open courts at Damascus, where he received thevisits and homage of the Syrians. They came to assure themselves by theevidence of their own eyes of the downfall of the power which had formore than one hundred years checked the progress of Assyria. Those who, like Uassarmi of Tabal, showed any sign of disaffection were removed, the remainder were confirmed in their dignities, subject to payment ofthe usual tribute, and Mutton of Tyre was obliged to give one hundredtalents of gold to ransom his city. Ahaz came to salute his preserver, and to obtain a nearer view of the soldiers to whom he owed continuedpossession of Jerusalem;* the kings of Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Askalon, the Philistines and the nomads of the Arabian desert, carried away bythe general example, followed the lead of Judah, until there was not asingle prince or lord of a city from the Euphrates to the river of Egyptwho had not acknowledged himself the humble vassal of Nineveh. 

 * 2 Kings xvi. 10-12. The _Nimroud Inscrip_. Merely mentions his tribute among that of the Syrian kings. 

With the downfall of rezin, Syria's last hope of recovery had vanished;the few states which still enjoyed some show of independence wereobliged, if they wished to retain it, to make a parade of unalterabledevotion to their Ninevite master, or--if they found his suzeraintyintolerable--had to risk everything by appealing to Egypt for help. 

Much as they may have wished from the very first to do so, it was tooearly to make the attempt so soon after the conference at Damascus;Tiglath-pileser had, therefore, no cause to fear a rebellion among them, at any rate for some years to come, and it was just as well thatthis was so, for at the moment of his triumph on the shores of theMediterranean his interests in Chaldęa were threatened by a seriousdanger. Nabonazīr, King of Karduniash, had never swerved from thefidelity which he had sworn to his mighty ally after the events of 745, but the tranquillity of his reign had been more than once disturbed byrevolt. Borsippa itself had risen on one occasion, and endeavoured toestablish itself as an independent city side by side with Babylon. 

When Nabonazīr died, in 734, he was succeeded by his son Nabunādinzīri, but at the end of a couple of years the latter was assassinated duringa popular outbreak, and Nabushumukīn, one of his sons, who had beenimplicated in the rising, usurped the crown (732). He wore it fortwo months and twelve days, and then abdicated in favour of a certainUkīnzīr. *

 * The following is as complete a list as can at present be compiled of this Babylonian dynasty, the eighth of those registered in Pinches' Canons (cf. Rost, _Untersucli. Zur altorient. Gesch. _, p. 27):--

[Illustration: 292. Jpg TABLE OF THIS BABYLONIAN DYNASTY]

It included twenty-two kings, and lasted for about three hundred andfifty years. 

The latter was chief of the Bīt-Amukkāni, one of the most importantamong the Chaldęan communities;* the descendants of the Aramaean nomadswere thus once more placed upon the throne, and their accession put anend to the relations which had existed for several centuries betweenAssyria and Karduniash. 

 * The chronicle is silent with regard to the origin of Ukīnzīr, but Tiglath-pileser, who declines to give him the title of "King of Babylon, " says that he was _mar Amuhlcāni_ = son of Amukkāni. Pinches' _Canon_ indicates that Ukīnzīr belonged to a dynasty the name of which may be read either Shashi or Shapi. The reading Shapi at once recalls the name of Shapīa, one of the chief cities of the Bīt Amukkāni; it would thus confirm the evidence of the Nimroud Inscription. 

These marauders, who had always shown themselves impatient of anysettled authority, and had never proffered more than a doubtfulsubmission to even the most triumphant invader, were not likely toaccept the subordinate position which members of the presiding dynastyhad been, for the most part, content to occupy. It was more probablethat they would, from the very first, endeavour to throw off thesuzerainty of Nineveh. Tiglath-pileser gave the new dynasty no time tosettle itself firmly on the throne: the year after his return from Syriahe got together an army and marched against it. He first cleared theright bank of the Tigris, where the Pukudu (Pekod) offered but a feebleresistance; he annexed their territory to the ancient province ofArrapkha, then crossed the river and attacked the Kaldi scattered amongthe plains and marshes of the Shatt el-Haī. 

[Illustration: 294. Jpg A KALDU]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a woodcut published by Tomkins. 

The Bīt-Shilāni were the first to succumb; their king Nabushabshi wasimpaled before one of the gates of his capital, Sarrabānu, the townitself was taken by storm, plundered and dismantled, and 55, 000 of itsinhabitants were led captive into Assyria. After the Bīt-Shilāni, camethe turn of the Bīt-Shaali. Dur-Illataī, their capital, was razed tothe ground, and its population, numbering 50, 400 men and women, wasdeported. Their chief, Lakiru, who had shown great bravery in thestruggle, escaped impalement, but was sent into captivity with hispeople, a Ninevite governor being appointed in his place. Ukīnzīr, whowas, as we know, hereditary prince of the Bit-Amuk-kāni, came up inhaste to defend his appanage, and threw himself into his fortress atShapīa: Tiglath-pileser cut down the gardens and groves of palms whichlent it beauty, burnt the surrounding farms and villages, and tried, without success, to make a breach in the walls; he still, however, maintained the siege, but when winter came on and the place still heldout, he broke up his camp and retreated in good order, leaving thedistricts which he had laid waste occupied by an Assyrian force. Beforehis departure, he received homage and tribute from most of the Aramęanchiefs, including those of Balasu and the Bīt-Dakkuri, of Nadīnu, andeven of the Bīt-Yakīn and Merodach-baladan, whose ancestors had neverbefore "kissed the foot" of an Assyrian conqueror. In this campaign hehad acquired nearly three-fourths of the whole Babylonian kingdom; butBabylon itself still refused to yield, and it was no easy task tocompel it to do so. Tiglath-pileser spent the whole of the year 730 inpreparing for another attack, and in 729 he again appeared in front ofShapīa, this time with greater success: Ukīnzīr fell into his hands, Babylon opened its gates, and he caused himself to be proclaimed King ofSumir and Akkad within its walls. * Many centuries had passed since thetwo empires had been united under the rule of a single master, or anAssyrian king had "taken the hands of Bel. " Tiglath-pileser acceptedthe condition attached to this solemn investiture, which obliged himto divide his time between Calah and Babylon, and to repeat at everyfestival of the New Year the mystic ceremony by which the god of thecity confirmed him in his office. **

 * Contemporary documents do not furnish us with any information as to these events. The _Eponym Canon_ tells us that "_the king took the hands of Bel_. " Pinches' _Chronicle_ adds that "in the third year of Ukīnzīr, Tiglath-pileser marched against Akkad, laid waste the Bīt- Amukkāni, and took Ukīnzīr prisoner; Ukīnzīr had reigned three years in Babylon. Tiglath-pileser followed him upon the throne of Babylon. "

 ** The _Eponym Canon_ proves that in 728 B. C. , the year of his death, he once more took the hands of Bel. 

His Babylonian subjects seem to have taken a liking to him, and perhapsin order to hide from themselves their dependent condition, theyshortened his purely Assyrian name of Tukulti-abal-esharra into thefamiliar sobriquet of Puru or Pulu, under which appellation the nativechroniclers later on inscribed him in the official list of kings: he didnot long survive his triumph, but died in the month of Tebeth, 728 B. C. , after having reigned eighteen years over Assyria, and less than twoyears over Babylon and Chaldęa. 

The formulae employed by the scribes in recording historical eventsvary so little from one reign to another, that it is, in most cases, adifficult matter to make out, under the mask of uniformity by which theyare all concealed, the true character and disposition of each successivesovereign. One thing, however, is certain--the monarch who now cameupon the scene after half a century of reverses, and in a brief spacerestored to his armies the skill necessary to defeat such formidablefoes as the Armenians or the Syrians of Damascus, must have been an ablegeneral and a born leader of men. Yet Nineveh had never sufferedlong from a lack of capable generals, and there would be little todistinguish Tiglath-pileser from any of his predecessors, if we couldplace nothing more than a few successful campaigns to his credit. His claim to a pre-eminent place among them rests on the fact that hecombined the talents of the soldier with the higher qualities of theadministrator, and organised his kingdom in a manner at once so simpleand so effective, that most of the Oriental powers down to the time ofthe Grecian conquest were content to accept it as a model. As soon asthe ambition of the Assyrian kings began to extend beyond the regionconfined between the Khabur and the Greater Zab, they found it necessaryto parcel out their territory into provinces under the authority ofprefects for the purpose of preserving order among the vanquishedpeoples, and at the same time of protecting them from the attacksof adjacent tribes; these representatives of the central power weresupported by garrisons, and were thus enabled to put down such minorinsurrections as broke out from time to time. Some of theseprovinces were already in existence in the reigns of Shalmaneser orTiglath-pileser I. ; after the reverses in the time of Assurirba, theirnumber decreased, but it grew rapidly again as Assur-nazir-pal andShalmaneser III. Gradually extended the field of their operations and oftheir victories. From this epoch onwards, the monuments mention over ascore of them, in spite of the fact that the list thus furnished isnot a complete one; the provinces of which we know most are those whoserulers were successively appointed to act as _limmi_, each of themgiving their name to a year of a reign. Assyria proper contained atleast four, viz. Assur (called _the country_, as distinguished from allothers), Calah, Nineveh, and Arbela. The basin of the Lesser Zab wasdivided into the provinces of Kakzi, Arrapkha, and Akhizukhīna;* that ofthe Upper Tigris into those of Amidi, Tushkhān, and Gōzan. Kirruri wasbounded by Mazamua, and Mazamua by Arrapkha and Lake Urumiah. We hearof the three spheres of Nazibina (Nisibis), Tela, and Kazappa inMesopotamia, ** the two former on the southern watersheds of the Masios, on the highways leading into Syria; the latter to the south of theEuphrates, in the former kingdom of the Laqī. 

 * Akhizukhīna is probably identical with Arzukhīna = "the City of Zukhma, " which is referred to as being situated in the basin of the Lesser Zab. 

 ** Razappa is the biblical Rezeph (2 Kings xix. 12; Isa. Xxxvii. 12) and the Resapha of Ptolemy, now Er-Rasafa, to the south of the Euphrates, on one of the routes leading to Palmyra. 

Most of them included--in addition to the territory under the immediatecontrol of the governor--a number of vassal states, kingdoms, cities, and tribes, which enjoyed a certain measure of independence, but wereliable to pay tribute and render military service. 

[Illustration: 298. Jpg MAP OF THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE UNDER TIGLATH-PILESERIII. ]

Each new country was annexed, as soon as conquered, to the nearestprovince, or, if necessary, was converted into a distinct province byitself; thus we find that Assur-nazir-pal, after laying hands on theupper valleys of the Radanu and the Turnat, rebuilt the ruined city ofAtlīla, re-named it Dur-Assur, placed a commandant, cavalry, andeunuchs there, and established within it storehouses for the receiptof contributions from the neighbouring barbarians. He followed thesame course on each occasion when the fortune of war brought him freshsubjects;* and his successors, Shalmaneser III. , Samsi-rammān IV. , and Rammān-nirāri did the same thing in Media, in Asia Minor, and inNorthern Syria;** Tiglath-pileser III. Had only to follow their exampleand extend the application of their system to the countries which hegradually forced to submit to his rule. ***

 * We read of the appointment of a governor in Bīt-Khalupi, at Tush-khān, in Naīri, and in the country of the Patina. 

 ** The territory of the Bit-Adini was converted into a province by Shalmaneser III. 

 *** We find the formation of an Aramęan province, with Kar- Assur as its capital, mentioned in the _Annals of Tiglatli- pileser III_. Provinces were also established in Media, in Unki, in the basin of the Orontes, and in Lebanon, from nineteen districts formerly belonging to Hamath, six maritime provinces in Northern Phoenicia and in Coele-Syria, in Galilee, at Gaza. 

In his case, however, certain elements came into play which forced himto modify several of their methods, and to have recourse to otherswhich they had seldom or never employed. The majority of the countrieshitherto incorporated had been near enough to the capital--whether itwere Assur, Calah, or Nineveh--to permit of strict watch being kept forany sign of disaffection, and they could be promptly recalled to orderif they attempted to throw off the yoke. These provinces were, moreover, of moderate area and sparsely populated: once drawn within the orbit ofAssyria's attraction, they were unable to escape from its influence bytheir own unaided efforts; on the contrary, they gradually lost theirindividuality, and ended by becoming merged in the body of the nation. The Aramaean tribes of the Khabur and the Balikh, the Cossęans of theTurnat, the marauding shepherds of the Gordyęan hills and the slopesof the Masios, gradually became assimilated to their conquerors aftera more or less protracted resistance, till at length--in spite ofdifferences of origin, creed, and speech--they became the best ofAssyrians, every whit as devoted to the person of their king and asjealous of his honour as the aboriginal Assyrians themselves. A similarresult could not be looked for in the case of the cities recentlysubdued. It was not to be expected that Babylon and Damascus--to namebut two of the most important--would allow themselves to be influencedand to become reconciled to their lot by artifices which had beensuccessful enough with the Medes and in the country of Tul-Abnī. 

To take the case of Babylon first. It was no mere conglomeration oftribes, nor a state of minor importance, but an actual empire, nearly aslarge as that of Assyria itself, and almost as solidly welded together. It extended from the Turnat and the mountains of Blam to the Arabiandesert and the Nār-Marratūtn, and even though the Cossęans, Elamites, Kaldā, Sumerians, Akkadians, and other remnants of ancient peoples whoformed its somewhat motley population, had dwelt there for centuries ina state of chronic discord, they all agreed--in theory, at any rate--inrecognising the common suzerainty of Babylon. Babylon was, moreover, bygeneral acknowledgment, the ancient metropolis to which Assyria owed itswhole civilisation; it was the holy city whose gods and whose laws hadserved as a prototype for the gods and laws of Assyria; from its templesand its archives the Assyrian scribes had drawn such knowledge as theyhad of the history of the ancient world, their religious doctrines andceremonies, their methods of interpreting the omens and of forecastingthe future--in short, their whole literature, both sacred and profane. The King of Nineveh might conquer Babylon, might even enter within itsgates in the hour of triumph, and, when once he had it at hismercy, might throw down its walls, demolish its palaces, destroy its_ziggurāt_, burn its houses, exterminate or carry off its inhabitants, and blot out its name from the list of nations; but so long as herecoiled from the sacrilege involved in such irreparable destruction, he was not merely powerless to reduce it to the level of an ordinaryleading provincial town, such as Tela or Tushkhān, but he could noteven deprive it in any way of its rank as a capital, or hope to make itanything less than the second city of his empire. As long as it remainedin existence, it necessarily took precedence of all others, thanks toits extensive area, the beauty and antiquity of its buildings, and thenumber of its inhabitants. The pride of its nobles and priests, subduedfor a moment by defeat, would almost instantly have reasserted itself, had the victor sought to lower the dignity of their city; Babylononly consented to accept an alien master provided he bowed himselfrespectfully before its superiority, and was willing to forget that hewas a stranger within its gates, and was ready to comply with its lawsand masquerade as a Babylonian. Tiglath-pileser III. Never dreamt, therefore, of treating the Babylonians as slaves, or of subordinatingthem to their Assyrian descendants, but left their liberties andterritory alike unimpaired. He did not attempt to fuse into a singleempire the two kingdoms which his ability had won for him; he kept themseparate, and was content to be monarch of both on similar terms. Hedivided himself, as it were, into two persons, one of whom reigned inCalah, while the other reigned in Karduniash, and his Chaldęan subjectstook care to invest this dual _rōle_ --based on a fiction so soothingto their pride--with every appearance of reality; he received from them, together with all the titles of the Babylonian kings, that name of Pulu, which later on found its way into their chronicles, and which was solong a puzzle to historians, both ancient and modern. Experience amplyproved that this was the only means by which it was possible to yoketemporarily together the two great powers of the Euphrates and theTigris. Among the successors of Tiglath-pileser, the only sovereignsto rule over Babylon without considerable difficulty were those whofollowed the precedent set by him and were satisfied to divide theirfunctions and reign as dual kings over a dual kingdom. *

 * This was so in the case of Tiglath-pileser III. 's immediate successor, Shalmaneser V. , of Esarhaddon, and of Assur-bani-pal; Shalmaneser was known at Babylon by the name of Ululai, Assur-bani-pal by that of Kanda-lanu. 

This combination, while gratifying to the ambition of its rulers, was, perhaps, more a source of loss than of gain to Assyria itself. It istrue that the power of Karduniash had decreased under the previousdynasty, but it had still been strong enough to hold back the Aramęansof the Persian Gulf on one side, and the Elamite hordes on the other. Itlay like a broad barrier between these barbarians and the cities of theMiddle Tigris; when an unusually vigorous attack compelled it to giveway at some point, it appealed to Nineveh for help, and an Assyrianarmy, entering the country at the fords of the Zab, hastened to driveback the aggressors to the place from which they had set out. When, however, the kings of Assyria had become kings of Babylon as well, thesituation was altered. Several branches of the Kaldā had hitherto heldpossession of the city, and still possessed representatives and alliesamong the other tribes, especially among the Bīt-Yakīn, who believedthemselves entitled to reassert their supremacy within in. The Elamiteprinces, on their part, accustomed to descend at will into the plainsthat lay between the Tigris and the Euphrates, and to enrich themselvesby frequent raids, could not make up their minds to change the habits ofcenturies, until they had at least crossed swords with the new despot, and put his mettle to the test. The Ninevite King of Babylon was thusin duty bound to protect his subjects against the same enemies that hadceaselessly harassed his native-born predecessors, and as the unaidedresources of Karduniash no longer enabled him to do so effectively, hewas, naturally, obliged to fall back on the forces at his disposal asKing of Assyria. Henceforward it was no longer the Babylonian armythat protected Nineveh, but rather that of Nineveh which had to protectBabylon, and to encounter, almost every year, foes whom in former daysit had met only at rare intervals, and then merely when it chose tointervene in their affairs. Where the Assyrian sovereigns had gained akingdom for themselves and their posterity, Assyria itself found littleelse but fresh battle-fields and formidable adversaries, in the effortto overcome whom its energies were all but exhausted. In Syria and onthe shores of the Mediterranean, Tiglath-pileser had nations of lessstubborn vitality to deal with, nor was he bound by the traditions of acommon past to show equal respect to their prejudices. Arpad, Unki, the Bekāa, Damascus, and Gilead were all consecutively swallowed up byAssyria, but, the work of absorption once completed, difficulties wereencountered which now had to be met for the first time. The subordinateto whom he entrusted the task of governing these districts* had oneor two Assyrian regiments assigned him as his body-guard, ** and theseexercised the same ascendency over the natives as the Egyptian archershad done in days gone by: it was felt that they had the whole might ofAssyria behind them, and the mere fact of their presence in the midst ofthe conquered country was, as a rule, sufficient to guarantee the safetyof the Assyrian governor and ensure obedience to his commands. 

 * The governor was called _Shaknu_ = "he whom the king has established in his place, " and _pekhu_ = "the pilot, " "the manager, " whence _pikhatu_ = "a district, " and _bel-pikhati_ = "the master of a district. " It seems that the _shaknu_ was of higher rank than the _bel-pikhati_, and often had the latter under his command. 

 ** Thus Assur-nazir-pal selected the horsemen and other soldiers who were to form the body-guard of the governor of Parzindu. 

This body-guard was never a very numerous one, for the army would havemelted away in the course of a campaign or two, had it been necessary, after each fresh conquest, to detach from it a sufficient force toguard against rebellion. It was strengthened, it is true, by auxiliariesenlisted on the spot, and the tributary chiefs included in theprovincial district were expected to furnish a reasonable quota of menin case of need;* but the loyalty of all these people was, at the best, somewhat doubtful, and in the event of their proving untrustworthy ata critical moment, the little band of Assyrian horse and foot would beleft to deal with the revolt unaided until such time as the king couldcome and relieve them. 

 * In a despatch from Belibni to Assur-bani-pal we find Aramęans from the Persian Gulf submitting to the authority of an Assyrian officer, and fighting in Elam side by side with his troops. Again, under Assur-bani-pal, an army sent to repress a revolt on the part of Kedar and the Nabatseans included contingents from Ammon, Moab, and Edom, together with the Assyrian garrisons of the Haurān and Zobah. 

The distance between the banks of the Jordan or Abana and those of theTigris was a long one, and in nearly every instance it would have beena question of months before help could arrive. Meanwhile, Egypt was athand, jealous of her rival, who was thus encroaching on territory whichhad till lately been regarded as her exclusive sphere of influence, andvaguely apprehensive of the fate which might be in store for her if someAssyrian army, spurred by the lust of conquest, were to cross the desertand bear down upon the eastern frontiers of the Delta. Distrustful ofher own powers, and unwilling to assume a directly offensive attitude, she did all she could to foment continual disturbances among the Hebrewsand Phoenicians, as well as in Philistia and Aram; she carried on secretintrigues with the independent princes, and held out tempting hopesof speedy intervention before the eyes of their peoples; her influencecould readily be traced in every seditious movement. The handful of menassigned to the governors of the earlier provinces close to the capitalwould have been of little avail against perils of this kind. ThoughTiglath-pileser added colony to colony in the distant regions annexed byhim, he organised them on a different plan from that which had prevailedbefore his time. His predecessors had usually sent Assyrians to thesecolonies, and filled the villages vacated by them with families takenfrom the conquered region: a transfer of inhabitants was made, forinstance, from Naīri or from Media into Assyria, and _vice versā_. Byfollowing this system, Tiglath-pileser would soon have scattered hiswhole people over the dependencies of his empire, and have found hishereditary states peopled by a motley and incoherent collection ofaliens; he therefore left his Assyrians for the most part at home, andonly effected exchanges between captives. In his earlier campaignshe brought back with him, on one occasion, 65, 000 prisoners from thetable-land of Iran, in order to distribute them over a province whichhe was organising on the banks of the Turnat and the Zab: he leviedcontributions of this kind without mercy from all the states that heconquered from year to year, and dispersed the captives thus obtainedover the length and breadth of his empire; he transplanted the Aramęansof the Mesopotamian deserts, and the Kaldā to the slopes of Mount Amanusor the banks of the Orontes, the Patinians and Hamathęans to Ulluba, the inhabitants of Damascus to Kīr or to the borders of Elam, * and theIsraelites to some place in Assyria. **

 * 2 Kings xvi. 9. 

 ** 2 Kings xv. 29. 

He allowed them to take with them their wives and their children, theirherds, their chattels, their gods, and even their money. Drafted intothe towns and country districts in batches sufficiently numerous tobe self-supporting, but yet not large enough to allow of their at oncere-establishing themselves as a distinct nation in their new home, theyseem to have formed, even in the midst of the most turbulent provinces, settlements of colonists who lived unaffected by any native influence orresentment. The aborigines hated them because of their religion, theircustoms, their clothing, and their language; in their eyes theywere mere interlopers, who occupied the property of relations orfellow-countrymen who had fallen in battle or had been spirited away tothe other end of the world. And even when, after many years, the nativeowners of the soil had become familiarised with them, this mutualantipathy had struck such deep root in their minds that anyunderstanding between the natives and the descendants of the immigrantswas quite out of the question: what had been formerly a vast kingdom, occupied by a single homogeneous race, actuated by a common patrioticspirit, became for many a year a region capriciously subdivided and tornby the dissensions of a number of paltry antagonistic communities. The colonists, exposed to the same hatreds as the original Assyrianconquerors, soon forgot to look upon the latter as the oppressors ofall, and, allowing their present grudge to efface the memory of pastinjuries, did not hesitate to make common cause with them. In time ofpeace, the governor did his best to protect them against molestation onthe part of the natives, and in return for this they rallied round himwhenever the latter threatened to get out of hand, and helped himto stifle the revolt or hold it in check until the arrival ofreinforcements. Thanks to their help, the empire was consolidated andmaintained without too many violent outbreaks in regions far removedfrom the capital and beyond the immediate reach of the sovereign. * Wepossess very few details with regard to the administration of theseprefects. **

 * This was the history of the only one of those colonies whose fate is known to us--that founded at Samaria by Sargon and his successors. 

 ** The texts contain a certain number of names of offices, the precise nature of which it is not easy to ascertain, e. G. The Khāzanu, the Labuttu, and others. One of them, apparently, should be read _Shuparshak_, and identical with one of the titles mentioned in Ezra (v. 6, vi. 6) as being in existence during the Persian epoch. 

The various functionaries, governors of towns, tax-collectors, heads ofstations, and officers whose duty it was to patrol the roads and lookafter the safety of merchants, were, for the most part, selected fromamong natives who had thrown in their lot with Assyria, and probablyfew Assyrians were to be found outside the more turbulent cities andimportant fortresses. The kings and chiefs whose territory was attachedto a given province, either took their instructions direct from Nineveh, or were sometimes placed under the control of a resident, or _kipu_, with some sort of escort at his back, who kept watch over theirmovements and reported them to the suzerain, and saw that the tributewas paid regularly, and that the military service provided for in thetreaties was duly rendered. Governors and residents alike kept up aconstant correspondence with the court, and such of their letters ashave chanced to come down to us show what a minute account of eventhe most trifling occurrences was required of them by the centralauthorities. They were not only obliged to report any fluctuation inthe temper or attitude of their subordinates, or any intrigues thatwere being entered into across the frontier; they had also to record thetransfer of troops, the return of fugitives, the pursuit of deserters, any chance scuffle between soldiers and natives, as well as thepunishment inflicted on the rebellious, the appearance of a portentin the heavens, or omens noticed by the augurs. There were plentyof envious or officious tongues among their followers to report toheadquarters the slightest failure of duty, and to draw attention totheir negligence. Moreover, it seems certain that the object of thuscompelling them to refer to the king at every turn, was not merely inorder to keep him informed of all that took place in his dependencies, but also to lay bare the daily life of his prefects before his eyes. The latter were entrusted with the command of seasoned troops; they hadconsiderable sums of money passing through their hands, and were oftenobliged to take prompt decisions and enter into diplomatic or militarytransactions on their own responsibility; in short, most of them, atany rate, who were stationed at the furthest confines of the empire werereally kings in all but title, insignia, and birth. There was always thedanger lest some among them should be tempted to reassert, in their owninterest, the independence of the countries under their rule, and seekto found a dynasty in their midst. The strict supervision maintainedover these governors generally nipped any ambition of this kind in thebud; in some cases, however, it created the very danger it was intendedto prevent. If a governor who had been recalled to Nineveh or Calah inorder to explain his conduct failed to clear himself completely, he atonce fell into disgrace; and disgrace in Assyria, as in other countriesof the East, meant, nine times out of ten, confiscation of property, mutilation and lifelong imprisonment, or death in its most hideous form. He would, therefore, think twice before quitting his post, and if hehad any reason to suppose himself suspected, or viewed with disfavour inhigh quarters, he would be in no hurry to obey a summons to the capital. A revolt was almost certain to be crushed without fail, and offeredmerely a very precarious chance of escape, but the governor was seldomlikely to hesitate between almost certain condemnation and the vaguepossibility of a successful rising; in such a case, therefore, he stakedeverything on a single throw. 

[Illustration: 312. Jpg TIGLATH-PILESER III. BESIEGING A REVELLIOUSCITY. ]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by Mansell. 

The system was a defective on, in that it exposed to strong temptationthe very functionaries whose loyalty was most essential to the properworking of the administration, but its dangers were out weighed bysuch important advantages that we cannot but regard it as a very realimprovement on the haphazard methods of the past. In the first place, it opened up a larger recruiting-ground for the army, and, in a measure, guaranteed it against that premature exhaustion which had already ledmore than once to an eclipse of the Assyrian power. It may be that thepick of these provincial troops were, preferably, told off for policeduties, or for the defence of the districts in which they were levied, and that they seldom left it except to do battle in the adjacentterritory;* but, even with these limitations they were none the lessof inestimable value, since they relieved the main army of Assyria fromgarrison duties in a hundred scattered localities, and allowed the kingto concentrate it almost in its entirety about his own person, andto direct it _en masse_ upon those points where he wished to strike adecisive blow. 

 * Thus, in the reign of Assur-bani-pal, we find the militia of the governor of Uruk marching to battle against the Gambulu. 

On the other hand, the finances of the kingdom were put on a morestable and systematic basis. For nearly the whole of the two previouscenturies, during which Assyria had resumed its victorious career, thetreasury had been filled to some extent by taxes in kind or in money, and by various dues claimed from the hereditary kingdom and its fewimmediate dependencies, but mainly by booty and by tribute levied aftereach campaign from the peoples who had been conquered or had voluntarilysubmitted to Assyrian rule. The result was a budget which fluctuatedgreatly, since all forays were not equally lucrative, and the newdependencies proved so refractory at the idea of perpetual tribute, thatfrequent expeditions were necessary in order to persuade them to paytheir dues. We do not know how Tiglath-pileser III. Organised thefinances of his provinces, but certain facts recorded here and there inthe texts show that he must have drawn very considerable amounts fromthem. We notice that twenty or thirty years after his time, Carchemishwas assessed at a hundred talents, Arpad and Kuī at thirty each, Megiddoand Manzuatu at fifteen, though the purposes to which these sums wereapplied is not specified. 

[Illustration: 314. Jpg A HERD OF HORSES BROUGHT IN AS TRIBUTE]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from one of the bronze bas-reliefs on the gates of Balawat. The breed here represented seems to have been common in Urartu, as well as in Cappadocia and Northern Syria. 

On the other hand, we know the precise object to which the contributionsof several other cities were assigned; as, for instance, so much for themaintenance of the throne in the palace, or for the divans of the ladiesof the harem; so much for linen garments, for dresses, and for veils;twenty talents from Nineveh for the armaments of the fleet, and ten fromthe same city for firewood. Certain provinces were expected to maintainthe stud-farms, and their contributions of horses were speciallyvaluable, now that cavalry played almost as important a part as infantryin military operations. The most highly prized animals came, perhaps, from Asia Minor; the nations of Mount Taurus, who had supplied chargersto Israel and Egypt five centuries earlier, now furnished war-horsesto the squadrons of Nineveh. The breed was small, but robust, inured tofatigue and hard usage, and in every way similar to that raised in thesecountries at the present day. In war, horses formed a very considerableproportion of the booty taken; in time of peace, they were used as partof the payment of the yearly tribute, and a brisk trade in them wascarried on with Mesopotamia. 

[Illustration: 315. Jpg A TYPICAL CAPPADOCIAN HORSE]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. Alfred Boissier. 

After the king had deducted from his receipts enough to provide amplyfor the wants of his family and court, the salaries of the variousfunctionaries and officials, the pay and equipment of his army, themaintenance and construction of palaces and fortresses, he had stillsufficient left over to form an enormous reserve fund on which he andhis successors might draw in the event of their ordinary sources ofincome being depleted by a series of repeated reverses. 

Tiglath-pileser thus impressed upon Assyria the character by whichit was known during the most splendid century of its history, and theorganisation which he devised for it was so admirably adapted to theOriental genius that it survived the fall of Nineveh, and served as amodel for every empire-maker down to the close of the Macedonian era andeven beyond it. 

[Illustration: 316. Jpg A SYRIAN BĪT-KHILĀNI]

 Reproduced by Faucher-Gudin, from the restoration published by Luschan. 

The wealth of the country grew rapidly, owing to the influx of capitaland of foreign population; in the intervals between their campaignsits rulers set to work to remove all traces of the ruins which had beenallowed to accumulate during the last forty years. The king hadbuilt himself a splendid palace at Calah, close to the monumentsof Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III. , and its terraces and wallsoverhung the waters of the Tigris. The main entrance consisted of a_Bīt-khilāni_, one of those porticoes, flanked by towers and supportedby columns or pillars, often found in Syrian towns, the fashion forwhich was now beginning to spread to Western Asia. *

 * The precise nature of the edifices referred to in the inscriptions under the name of Bīt-khilāni is still a matter of controversy. It has been identified with the pillared hall, or audience-chamber, such as we find in Sargon's palace at Khorsabad, and with edifices or portions of edifices which varied according to the period, but which were ornamented with columns. It seems clear, however, that it was used of the whole series of chambers and buildings which formed the monumental gates of Assyrian palaces, something analogous to the _Migdol_ of Ramses III. At Medinet-Habu, and more especially to the gates at Zinjirli. 

Those discovered at Zinjirli afford fine examples of the arrangementsadopted in buildings of this kind; the lower part of the walls wascovered with bas-reliefs, figures of gods and men, soldiers mounted oron foot, victims and fantastic animal shapes; the columns, where therewere any, rested on the back of a sphinx or on a pair of griffins of atype which shows a curious mixture of Egyptian and Semitic influences. 

[Illustration: 317. Jpg THE FOUNDATINS OF A Bīt-khilāni]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a sketch published by Luschan. 

[Illustration: 318. Jpg BASE OF A COLUMN AT ZINJIRELI]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph published by Luschan. 

The wood-work of the Ninevite Bīt-khilāni was of cedar from MountAmanus, the door-frames and fittings were of various rare woods, inlaidwith ivory and metal. The entrance was guarded by the usual colossalfigures, and the walls of the state reception-rooms were covered withslabs of alabaster; on these, in accordance with the usual custom, * werecarved scenes from the royal wars, with explanatory inscriptions. The palace was subsequently dismantled, its pictures defaced and itsinscriptions obliterated, ** to mark the hatred felt by later generationstowards the hero whom they were pleased to regard as a usurper; we canonly partially succeed in deciphering his annals by the help of thefragmentary sentences which have escaped the fury of the destroyer. 

 * The building of Tiglath-pileser's palace is described in the Nimroud Inscription. It stood near the centre of the platform of Nimroud. 

 ** The materials were utilised by Esarhaddon, but it does not necessarily follow that the palace was dismantled by that monarch; this was probably done by Sargon or by Sennacherib. 

The cities and fortresses which he raised throughout the length andbreadth of Assyria proper and its more recently acquired provinces havesimilarly disappeared; we can only conjecture that the nobles of hiscourt, fired by his example, must have built and richly endowed morethan one city on their hereditary estates, or in the territories undertheir rule. Bel-harrān-beluzur, the marshal of the palace, who twicegave his name to years of the king's reign, viz. In 741 and 727 B. C. , possessed, it would seem, an important fief a little to the northof Assur, near the banks of the Tharthar, on the site of the presentTel-Abta. The district was badly cultivated, and little better than awilderness; by express order of the celestial deities--Marduk, Nabu, Shamash, Sin, and the two Ishtars--he dug the foundations of a citywhich he called Dur-Bel-harrān-beluzur. The description he gives of itaffords conclusive evidence of the power of the great nobles, and showshow nearly they approached, by their wealth and hereditary privileges, to the kingly rank. He erected, we are told, a _ziggurāt_ on a raisedterrace, in which he placed his gods in true royal fashion; he assignedslaves, landed property, and a yearly income to their priests, in orderthat worship might be paid to them in perpetuity; he granted sanctuaryto all freemen who settled within the walls or in the environs, exemption from forced labour, and the right to tap a water-course andconstruct a canal. A decree of foundation was set up in the temple inmemory of Bel-harrān-beluzur, precisely as if he were a crowned king. It is a stele of common grey stone with a circular top. The dedicatorstands erect against the background of the carving, bare-foot andbare-headed, his face cleanshaven, dressed in a long robe embroidered ina chessboard pattern, and with a tunic pleated in horizontal rows; hisright elbow is supported by the left hand, while the right is raisedto a level with his eyes, his fist is clenched, and the thumb insertedbetween the first and second fingers in the customary gesture ofadoration. 

[Illustration: 320. Jpg stele or bel-Harran-beluzur. ]

 Drawn by Boudier, from the photograph published by Father Scheil. 

What the provost of the palace had done on his land, the other barons inall probability did on theirs; most of the departments which had fallenaway and languished during the disturbances at the close of the previousdynasty, took a new lease of life under their protection. Privatedocuments--which increase in number as the century draws to anend--contracts, official reports, and letters of scribes, all give usthe impression of a wealthy and industrious country, stirred by the mostintense activity, and in the enjoyment of unexampled prosperity. Theexcellent administration of Tiglath-pileser and his nobles had paved theway for this sudden improvement, and had helped to develop it, andwhen Shalmaneser V. Succeeded his father on the throne it continuedunchecked. * The new-comer made no changes in the system of governmentwhich had been so ably inaugurated. He still kept Assyria separate fromKarduniash; his Babylonian subjects, faithful to ancient custom, soon devised a nickname for him, that of Ululai, as though seeking topersuade themselves that they had a king who belonged to them alone; andit is under this name that their annalists have inscribed him next toPulu in the list of their dynasties. **

His reign was, on the whole, a calm and peaceful one; the Kaldā, theMedes, Urartu, and the races of Mount Taurus remained quiet, or, at anyrate, such disorders as may have arisen among them were of too triflinga nature to be deemed worthy of notice in the records of the time. Syria alone was disturbed, and several of its independent statestook advantage of the change of rulers to endeavour to shake off theauthority of Assyria. 

 * It was, for a long time, an open question with the earlier Assyriologists whether or not Shalmaneser and Sargon were different names for one and the same monarch. As for monuments, we possess only one attributed to Shalmaneser, a weight in the form of a lion, discovered by Layard at Nimroud, in the north-west palace. The length of his reign, and the scanty details we possess concerning it, have been learnt from the _Eponym Canon_ and _Pinches' Babylonian Chronicle_, and also from the Hebrew texts (2 Kings xvii. 3- 6; xviii. 9-12). 

 ** The identity of Ululai and Shalmaneser V. , though still questioned by Oppert, has been proved by the comparison of Babylonian records, in some of which the names Pulu and Ululai occur in positions exactly corresponding with those occupied, in others, by Tiglath-pileser and Shalmaneser. The name Ululai was given to the king because he was born in the month of Ulul; in Pinches' list we find a gloss, "Dynasty of Tinu, " which probably indicates the Assyrian town in which Tiglath-pileser III. And his son were born. 

Egypt continued to give them secret encouragement in these tactics, though its own internal dissensions prevented it from offering anyeffective aid. The Tanite dynasty was in its death-throes. Psamuti, thelast of its kings, exercised a dubious sovereignty over but a few of thenomes on the Arabian frontier. *

 * He is the Psammous mentioned by Manetho. The cartouches attributed to him by Lepsius really belong to the Psammuthis of the XXIXth dynasty. It is possible that one of the marks found at Karnak indicating the level of the Nile belong to the reign of this monarch. 

His neighbours the Saites were gradually gaining the upper hand in theDelta and in the fiefs of middle Egypt, at first under Tafnakhti, andthen, after his death, under his son Bukunirīnif, Bocchoris of theGreek historians. They held supremacy over several personages who, likethemselves, claimed the title and rank of Pharaoh; amongst others, overa certain Rudamanu Mīamun, son of Osorkon: their power did not, however, extend beyond Siut, near the former frontier of the Theban kingdom. The withdrawal of Piōnkhi-Mīamun, and his subsequent death, had notdisturbed the Ethiopian rule in the southern half of Egypt, though itsomewhat altered its character. While an unknown Ethiopian king filledthe place of the conquerer at Napata, another Ethiopian, named Kashta, made his way to the throne in Thebes. 

[Illustration: 322. Jpg MANUSCRIPT ON PAPYRUS IN HIEROGLYPHICS]

It is possible that he was a son of Piōnkhi, and may have been placed insupreme power by his father when the latter reinstated the city inits place as capital. With all their partiality for real or supposeddescendants of the Ramesside dynasty, the Thebans were, before allthings, proud of their former greatness, and eagerly hoped to regain itwithout delay. When, therefore, they accepted this Kushite king who, totheir eyes, represented the only family possessed of a legitimate claimto the throne, it was mainly because they counted on him to restore themto their former place among the cities of Egypt. They must have beencruelly disappointed when he left them for the Sacred Mountain. Hisinvasion, far from reviving their prosperity, merely served to ratifythe suppression of that pontificate of Amon-Rā which was the lastremaining evidence of their past splendour. 

[Illustration: 323. Jpg CONE BEARING THE NAME of kashta and of hisDAUGHTER AMENERTAS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, after Prisse d'Avennes. 

All hope of re-establishing it had now to be abandoned, since thesovereign who had come to them from Napata was himself by birth andhereditary privelege and hereditary sole priest of Anion: in hisabsence the actual head of the Theban religion could lay claim only toan inferior office, and indeed, even then, the only reason for acceptinga second prophet was that he might direct the worship of the templeat Karnak. The force of circumstances compelled the Ethiopians tocountenance in the Thebaid what their Tanite or Bubastite predecessorshad been obliged to tolerate at Hermopolis, Heracleopolis, Sais, and inmany another lesser city; they turned it into a feudatory kingdom, andgave it a ruler who, like Auīti, half a century earlier, had the rightto use the cartouches. Once installed, Kashta employed the usual methodsto secure his seat on the throne, one of the first being a marriagealliance. The disappearance of the high priests had naturally increasedthe importance of the princesses consecrated to the service of Amon. From henceforward they were the sole visible intermediaries between thegod and his people, the privileged guardians of his body and his double, and competent to perpetuate the line of the solar kings. The Thebanappanage constituted their dowry, and even if their sex preventedthem from discharging all those civil, military, and religious dutiesrequired by their position, no one else had the right to do so on theirbehalf, unless he was expressly chosen by them for the purpose. Whenonce married they deputed their husbands to act for them; so long asthey remained either single or widows, some exalted personage, theprophet of Amon or Montu, the ruler of Thebes, or the administratorof the Said, managed their houses and fiefs for them with such show ofauthority that strangers were at times deceived, and took him for thereigning monarch of the country. *

 * Thus Harua, in the time of Amenertas, was prince and chief over the servants of the "Divine Worshipper. " Mantumihāit, in the time of Taharqa and of Tanuatamanu, was ruler of Thebes, and fourth prophet of Amon, and it is he who is described in the Assyrian monuments as King of Thebes. 

The Pharaohs had, therefore, a stronger incentive than ever to secureexclusive possession of these women, and if they could not get all ofthem safely housed in their harems, they endeavoured, at any rate, toreserve for themselves the chief among them, who by purity of descent orseniority in age had attained the grade of _Divine Worshipper_. Kashtamarried a certain Shapenuapīt, daughter of Osorkon III. And a Thebanpallacide;* it is uncertain whether he eventually became king overEthiopia and the Sudan or not. So far, we have no proof that he did, but it seems quite possible when we remember that one of his children, Shabaku (Sabaco), subsequently occupied the throne of Napata in additionto that of Thebes. Kashta does not appear to have possessed sufficientenergy to prevent the Delta and its nomes from repudiating the Ethiopiansupremacy. The Saites, under Tafnakhti or Bocchoris, soon got the upperhand, and it was to them that the Syrian vassals of Nineveh lookedfor aid, when death removed the conqueror who had trampled them soruthlessly underfoot. Ever since the fall of Arpad, Hadrach, andDamascus, Shabaraīn, a town situated somewhere in the valley of theOrontes or of the Upper Litany, ** and hitherto but little known, hadserved as a rallying-point for the disaffected Aramaean tribes: onthe accession of Shalmaneser V. It ventured to rebel, probably in 727B. C. , but was overthrown and destroyed, its inhabitants being led awaycaptive. 

 * It may be that, in accordance with a custom which obtained during the generations that followed, and which possibly originated about this period, this daughter of Osorkon III. Was only the adoptive mother of Amenertas. 

 ** Shabaraīn was originally confounded with Samaria by the early commentators on the Babylonian Chronicle. Halévy, very happily, referred it to the biblical Sepharvaīm, a place always mentioned in connection with Hamath and Arpad (2 Kings xvii. 24, 31; xviii. 34; xix. 13: cf. Isa. Xxxvi. 19; xxxvii. 13), and to the Sibraim of Ezekiel (xlvii. 16), called in the _Septuagint_ Samarźim. Its identification with Samaria has, since then, been generally rejected, and its connection with Sibraim admitted. Sibraim (or Sepharvaīm, or Samarźīm) has been located at Shomerīyeh, to the east of the Bahr-Kades, and south of Hamath. 

This achievement proved, beyond the possibility of doubt, that in spiteof their change of rulers the vengeance of the Assyrians was as keenand sharp as ever. Not one of the Syrian towns dared to stir, and thePhonician seaports, though their loyalty had seemed, for a moment, doubtful, took care to avoid any action which might expose them to theterrors of a like severity. * The Israelites and Philistines, alone ofthe western peoples, could not resign themselves to a prudent policy;after a short period of hesitation they drew the sword from itsscabbard, and in 725 war broke out. **

 * The siege of Tyre, which the historian Menander, in a passage quoted by Josephus, places in the reign of Shalmaneser, ought really to be referred to the reign of Sennacherib, or the fragment of Menander must be divided into three parts dealing with three different Assyrian campaigns against Tyre, under Tiglath-pileser, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon respectively. 

 ** The war cannot have begun earlier, for the _Eponym Canon_, in dealing with 726, has the words "in the country, " thus proving that no expedition took place in that year; in the case of the year 725, on the other hand, it refers to a campaign against some country whose name has disappeared. The passages in the _Book of Kings_ (2 Kings xvii. 1-6, and xviii. 9-12) which deal with the close of the kingdom of Israel, have been interpreted in such a way as to give us two campaigns by Shalmaneser against Hoshea: (1) Hoshea having failed to pay the tribute imposed upon him by Tiglath-pileser, Shalmaneser made war upon him and compelled him to resume its payment (2 Kings xvii. 1-3); (2) Hoshea having intrigued with Egypt, and declined to pay tribute, Shalmaneser again took the field against him, made him prisoner, and besieged Samaria for three years (2 Kings xvii. 4-6; xviii. 9-12). The first expedition must, in this case, have taken place in 727, while the second must have lasted from 725-722. Most modern historians believe that the Hebrew writer has ascribed to Shalmaneser the subjection of Hoshea which was really the act of Tiglath-pileser, as well as the final war against Israel. According to Winckler, the two portions of the narrative must have been borrowed from two different versions of the final war, which the final editor inserted one after the other, heedless of the contradictions contained in them. 

Hoshea, who had ascended the throne with the consent of Tiglath-pileser, was unable to keep them quiet. The whole of Galilee and Gilead was nowan Assyrian province, subject to the governor of Damascus; Jerusalem, Moab, Ammon, and the Bedāwin had transferred their allegiance toNineveh; and Israel, with merely the central tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin left, was now barely equal in area and populationto Judah. Their tribute weighed heavily on the Israelites; passingarmies had laid waste their fields, and townsmen, merchants, and noblesalike, deprived of their customary resources, fretted with impatienceunder the burdens and humiliations imposed on them by their defeat;convinced of their helplessness, they again looked beyond their ownborders for some nation or individual who should restore to them theirlost prosperity. Amid the tottering fortunes of their neighbours, Egyptalone stood erect, and it was, therefore, to Egypt that they turnedtheir eyes. Negotiations were opened, not with Pharaoh himself, butwith Shabi, one of the petty kings on the eastern frontier of the Delta, whose position made him better qualified than any other to deal withSyrian affairs. *

 * This individual is called Sua, Seveh, and So in the Hebrew text (2 Kings xvii. 4), and the Septuagint gives the transliteration Sebek side by side with Sźgōs. He is found again under the forms Shibahi, Shabi, Shabé, in Sargon's inscriptions. 

Hannon of Gaza had by this time returned from exile, and it was, doubtless, owing to Shabi's support that he had been able to drive outthe Assyrian generals and recover his crown. * The Israelite aristocracywas led away by his example, but Shalmaneser hastened to the spot beforethe Egyptian bowmen had time to cross the isthmus. Hoshea beggedfor mercy, and was deported into Assyria and condemned to lifelongimprisonment. ** Though deserted by her king, Samaria did not despair;she refused to open her gates, and, being strongly fortified, compelledthe Assyrians to lay regular siege to the city. It would seem that atone moment, at the beginning of operations, when it was rumoured on allsides that Pharaoh would speedily intervene, Ahaz began to fear for hisown personal safety, and seriously considered whether it would not bewiser to join forces with Israel or with Egypt. ***

 * This seems to be the inference from Sargon's inscription, in which he is referred to as relying on the army of Shabi, the _tartan_ of Egypt. 

 ** 2 Kings xvii. 4. 

 *** The _Second Book of Kings_ (xviii. 9, 10; cf. Xvii. 6) places the beginning of the siege of Samaria in the seventh year of Hoshea ( = fourth year of Hezekiah), and the capture of the town in the ninth year of Hoshea ( = sixth year of Hezekiah); further on it adds that Sennacherib's campaign against Hezekiah took place in the fourteenth year of the latter's reign (2 Kings xviii. 13; cf. Isa. Xxxvi. 1). Now, Sennacherib's campaign against Hezekiah took place (as will be shown later on, in vol. Viii. Chapter I. ) in 702 B. C. , and Samaria was captured in 722. The synchronisms in the Hebrew narrative are therefore fictitious, and rest on no real historical basis--at any rate, in so far as the king who occupied the throne of Judah at the time of the fall of Samaria is concerned; Ahaz was still alive at that date, and continued to reign till 716 or 715, or perhaps only till 720. 

[Illustration: 328. Jpg The Sword Dance]

 After Painting by Gerome

The rapid sequence of events, however, backed by the counsel of Isaiah, speedily recalled him to a more reasonable view of the situation. Theprophet showed him Samaria spread out before him like one of thosewreaths of flowers which the guests at a banquet bind round their brows, and which gradually fade as their wearers drink deeper and deeper. "Woeto the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim, and to the fadingflower of his glorious beauty, which is on the head of the fat valleyof them that are overcome with wine. Behold, the Lord hath a mighty andstrong one; as a tempest of hail, a destroying storm, as a tempestof mighty waters overflowing, shall be cast down to the earth withviolence. The crown of the pride of the drunkards of Ephraim shall betrodden underfoot, and the fading flower of his glorious beauty, whichis on the head of the fat valley, shall be as the first ripe fig beforethe summer; which when he that looketh upon it seeth, while it is yet inhis hand he eateth it up. " While the cruel fate of the perverse city wasbeing thus accomplished, Jahveh Sabaoth was to be a crown of glory tothose of His children who remained faithful to Him; but Judah, far fromsubmitting itself to His laws, betrayed Him even as Israel had done. Its prophets and priests were likewise distraught with drunkenness; theystaggered under the effects of their potations, and turned to scorn thetrue prophet sent to proclaim to them the will of Jehovah. "Whom, " theystammered between their hiccups--"whom will He teach knowledge? and whomwill He make to understand the message? them that are weaned from themilk and drawn from the breasts? For it is precept upon precept, preceptupon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little and there alittle!" And sure enough it was by the mouth of a stammering people, bythe lips of the Assyrians, that Jahveh was to speak to them. In vain didthe prophet implore them: "This is the rest, give ye rest to him that isweary;" they did not listen to him, and now Jahveh turns their own gibesagainst them: "Precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line uponline, line upon line, here a little and there a little, "--"that they maygo and fall backward, and be broken and snared and taken. " There was tobe no hope of safety for Jerusalem unless it gave up all dependence onhuman counsels, and trusted solely to God for protection. *

 * Isa. Xxviii. Giesebrecht has given it as his opinion that only verses 1-6, 23-29 of the prophecy were delivered at this epoch: the remainder he believes to have been written during Sennacherib's campaign against Judah, and suggests that the prophet added on his previous oracle to them, thus diverting it from its original application. Others, such as Stade and Wellhausen, regard the opening verses as embodying a mere rhetorical figure. Jerusalem, they say, appeared to the prophet as though changed into Samaria, and it is this transformed city which he calls "the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim. "

Samaria was doomed; this was the general belief, and men went aboutrepeating it after Isaiah, each in his own words; every one feared lestthe disaster should spread to Judah also, and that Jahveh, having oncedetermined to have done with the northern kingdom, would turn His wrathagainst that of the south as well. Micah the Morashtite, a prophetborn among the ranks of the middle class, went up and down the landproclaiming misery to be the common lot of the two sister nations sprungfrom the loins of Jacob, as a punishment for their common errors andweaknesses. "The Lord cometh forth out of His place, and will come andtread upon the high places of the earth. And the mountains shall bemolten under Him, and the valleys shall be cleft, as wax beforethe fire, as waters that are poured down a steep place. For thetransgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of the house ofIsrael. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? andwhat are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem?" The doompronounced against Samaria was already being carried out, and soon thehapless city was to be no more than "an heap of the field, and as theplantings of a vineyard; and I will pour down the stones thereof intothe valley, " saith the Lord, "and I will discover the foundationsthereof. And all her graven images shall be beaten to pieces, andall her hires shall be burned with fire, and all her idols will I laydesolate; for of the hire of an harlot hath she gathered them, and intothe hire of an harlot shall they return. " Yet, even while mourning overSamaria, the prophet cannot refrain from thinking of his own people, forthe terrible blow which had fallen on Israel "is come even unto Judah;it reacheth unto the gate of my people, even to Jerusalem. " Doubtlessthe Assyrian generals kept a watchful eye upon Ahaz during the wholetime of the siege, from 724 to 722, and when once the first heat ofenthusiasm had cooled, the presence of so formidable an army withinstriking distance must have greatly helped the king to restrain theill-advised tendencies of some of his subjects. Samaria still held outwhen Shalmaneser died at Babylon in the month of Tebeth, 722. Whether hehad no son of fit age to succeed him, or whether a revolution, similarto that which had helped to place Tiglath-pileser on the throne, brokeout as soon as he had drawn his last breath, is not quite clear. At anyrate, Sargon, an officer who had served under him, was proclaimed kingon the 22nd day of Tebeth, and his election was approved by the wholeof Assyria. After some days of hesitation, Babylon declined to recognisehim, and took the oath of allegiance to a Kaldu named Marduk-abalidinna, or Merodach-baladan. While these events were taking place in the heartof the empire, Samaria succumbed; perhaps to famine, but more probablyto force. It was sacked and dismantled, and the bulk of its population, amounting to 27, 280 souls, were carried away into Mesopotamia anddistributed along the Balīkh, the Khabur, the banks of the river ofGozān, and among the towns of the Median frontier. *

 * Sargon does not mention where he deported the Israelites to, but we learn this from the _Second Book of Kings_ (xvii. 6; xviii. 11). There has been much controversy as to whether Samaria was taken by Shalmanoser, as the Hebrew chronicler seems to believe (2 Kings xvii. 3-6; xviii. 9, 10), or by Sargon, as the Assyrian scribes assure us. At first, several scholars suggested a solution of the difficulty by arguing that Shalmaneser and Sargon were one and the same person; afterwards the theory took shape that Samaria was really captured in the reign of Shalmaneser, but by Sargon, who was in command of the besieging army at the time, and who transferred this achievement, of which he was naturally proud, to the beginning of his own reign. The simplest course seems to be to accept for the present the testimony of contemporary documents, and place the fall of Samaria at the beginning of the reign of Sargon, being the time indicated by Sargon in his inscriptions. 

Sargon made the whole territory into a province; an Assyrian governorwas installed in the palace of the kings of Israel, and soon the altarsof the strange gods smoked triumphantly by the side of the altars ofJahveh (722 B. C. ). *

 * Kings xvii. 24-41, a passage to which I shall have occasion to refer farther on in the present volume. The following is a list of the kings of Israel, after the division of the tribes:--

[Illustration: 333. Jpg TABLE OF KINGS OF ISRAEL]

 [In this table father and son are shown by a perpendicular line. The king's name in italics signifies that he died a violent death. --Tr. ]

Thus fell Samaria, and with Samaria the kingdom of Israel, and withIsrael the last of the states which had aspired, with some prospect ofsuccess, to rule over Syria. They had risen one after another duringthe four centuries in which the absence of the stranger had left themmasters of their own fate--the Hittites in the North, the Hebrews andthe Philistines in the South, and the Aramęans and Damascus in thecentre; each one of these races had enjoyed its years of glory andambition in the course of which it had seemed to prevail over itsrivals. Then those whose territory lay at the extremities began tofeel the disadvantages of their isolated position, and after one or twovictories gave up all hope of ever establishing a supremacy overthe whole country. The Hittite sphere of influence never at any timeextended much further southwards than the sources of the Orontes, whilethat of the Hebrews in their palmiest days cannot have gone beyond thevicinity of Hamath. And even progress thus far had cost both Hebrews andHittites a struggle so exhausting that they could not long maintainit. No sooner did they relax their efforts, than those portions ofCoele-Syria which they had annexed to their original territory, beingtoo remote from the seat of power to feel its full attraction, graduallydetached themselves and resumed their independence, their temporarysuzerains being too much exhausted by the intensity of their ownexertions to retain hold over them. Damascus, which lay almost inthe centre, at an equal distance from the Euphrates and the "river ofEgypt, " could have desired no better position for grouping the rest ofSyria round her. 

[Illustration: 334. Jpg SARGON OF ASSYRIA AND HIS VIZIER]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch by Flandin. 

If any city had a chance of establishing a single kingdom, it wasDamascus, and Damascus alone. But lulled to blissful slumbers in hershady gardens, she did not awake to political life and to the desire ofconquest until after all the rest, and at the very moment when Ninevehwas beginning to recover from her early reverses. Both Ben-hadads hadhad a free hand given them during the half-century which followed, andthey had taken advantage of this respite to reduce Coele-Syria, the Lebanon, Arvadian Phoenicia, Hamath, and the Hebrews--in fact, two-thirds of the whole country--to subjection, and to organise thatleague of the twelve kings which reckoned Ahab of Israel among itsleaders. This rudimentary kingdom had scarcely come into existence, andits members had not yet properly combined, when Shalmaneser III. Aroseand launched his bands of veterans against them; it however successfullywithstood the shock, and its stubborn resistance at the beginning of thestruggle shows us what it might have done, had its founders been allowedtime in which to weld together the various elements at their disposal. As it was, it was doomed to succumb--not so much to the superiority ofthe enemy as to the insubordination of its vassals and its own internaldiscords. The league of the twelve kings did not survive Ben-hadad II. ;Hazael and his successors wore themselves out in repelling theattacks of the Assyrians and in repressing the revolts of Israel; whenTiglath-pileser III. Arrived on the scene, both princes and people, alike at Damascus and Samaria, were so spent that even their finalalliance could not save them from defeat. Its lack of geographical unityand political combination had once more doomed Syria to the servitudeof alien rule; the Assyrians, with methodical procedure, first conqueredand then made vassals of all those states against which they mighthave hurled their battalions in vain, had not fortune kept them dividedinstead of uniting them in a compact mass under the sway of a singleruler. From Carchemish to Arpad, from Hamath to Damascus and Samaria, their irresistible advance had led the Assyrians on towards Egypt, theonly other power which still rivalled their prestige in the eyes of theworld; and now, at Gaza, on the frontier between Africa and Asia, asin days gone by on the banks of the Euphrates or the Balīkh, these twopowers waited face to face, hand on hilt, each ready to stake the empireof the Asiatic world on a single throw of the dice. 

[Illustration: 336. Jpg TAILPIECE]

CHAPTER III--SARGON OF ASSYRIA (722-705 B. C. )

_SARGON AS A WARRIOR AND AS A BUILDER. _

_The origin of Sargon II. : the revolt of Babylon, Merodach-baladan andElam--The kingdom of Elam from the time of the first Babylonian empire;the conquest's of Shutruh-nalkunta I. ; the princes of Malamīr--The firstencounter of Assyria and Elam, the battle of Durilu (721 B. C. )--Revoltof Syria, Iaubīdi of Hamath and Hannon of Gaza--Bocchoris and the XXIVthEgyptian dynasty; the first encounter of Assyria with Egypt, the battleof Raphia (720 B. C. ). _

_Urartu and the coalition of the peoples of the north-east andnorth-west--Defeat of Zikartu (719 B. C. ), of the Tabal (718), of theKhāti (717), of the Mannai, of the Medes and Ellipi (716), and of theModes (715)--Commencement of XXVth Ethiopian dynasty: Sabaco (716)--The fall of Urzana and Rusas (714) and the formation of an Assyrianprovince in Cappadocia (713-710)--The revolt and fall of Ashdod. _

_The defeat of Merodach-baladan and of Shutruk-nakhunta II. : Sargonconquers Babylon (710-709 B. C. )--Success of the Assyrians at Mushhi:homage of the Greeks of Cyprus (710)--The buildings of Sargon:Dur-sharrukīn--The gates and walls of Dur-sharrukīn; the city andits population--The royal palace, its courts, the ziggurāt, the harem--Revolt of Kummukh (709 B. C. ) and of Ellipi (708B. C. )--Inauguration of Dur-sharrukīn (706 B. C. )--Murder of Sargon (705B. C. ): his character. _

[Illustration: 339. Jpg PAGE IMAGE]

CHAPTER III--SARGON OF ASSYRIA (722-705 B. C. )

_Sargon as a warrior and as a builder. _

Whether Sargon was even remotely connected with the royal line, is aquestion which for the present must remain unanswered. He mentions inone of his inscriptions the three hundred princes who had preceded himin the government of Assyria, and three lines further on he refers tothe kings his ancestors, but he never mentions his own father by name, and this omission seems to prove that he was not a direct descendant ofShalmaneser V. , nor of Tiglath-pileser III. Nor indeed of any of theirimmediate predecessors. It is, however, probable, if not certain, thathe could claim some sort of kinship with them, though more or lessremote. It was customary for the sovereigns of Nineveh to give theirdaughters in marriage to important officials or lords of their court, and owing to the constant contraction of such alliances through severalcenturies, there was hardly a noble family but had some royal blood inits veins; and that of Sargon was probably no exception to the rule. His genealogy was traced by the chroniclers, through several hundredgenerations of princes, to the semi-mythical heroes who had founded thecity of Assur; but as Assur-nazir-pal and his descendants had claimedBel-kapkapi and Sulili as the founders of their race, the Sargonidschose a different tradition, and drew their descent from Belbāni, son ofAdasi. The cause and incidents of the revolution which raised Sargon tothe throne are unknown, but we may surmise that the policy adoptedwith regard to Karduniash was a factor in the case. Tiglath-pileser hadhardly entered Babylon before the fascination of the city, the charm ofits associations, and the sacred character of the legends which hallowedit, seized upon his imagination; he returned to it twice in the space oftwo years to "take the hands of Bel, " and Shalmaneser V. Much preferredit to Calah or Nineveh as a place of residence. The Assyrians doubtlesssoon became jealous of the favour shown by their princes to theirancient enemy, and their discontent must have doubtless conduced totheir decision to raise a new monarch to the throne. The Babylonians, on the other hand, seem to have realised that the change in the dynastypresaged a disadvantageous alteration of government; for as soon as thenews reached them a movement was set on foot and search made for a rivalclaimant to set up in opposition to Sargon. *

 * The succession of events, as indicated in _Pinches' Babylonian Chronicle_, seems indeed to imply that the Babylonians waited to ascertain the disposition of the new king before they decided what line to adopt. In fact, Shalmaneser died in the month Tebeth, and Sargon ascended the throne at Assur in the same month, and it was only in the month Nisān that Mero-dach-baladan was proclaimed king. The three months intervening between the accession of Sargon and that of Merodach-baladan evidently represent a period of indecision. , when it was not yet known if the king would follow the policy of his predecessors with regard to Babylon, or adopt a different attitude towards her. 

Of all the nations who had in turn occupied the plains of the LowerEuphrates and the marshes bordering on Arabia, the Kaldā alone hadretained their full vitality. They were constantly recruited byimmigrants from their kinsfolk of the desert, and the continualinfiltration of these semi-barbarous elements kept the race frombecoming enervated by contact with the indigenous population, and morethan compensated for the losses in their ranks occasioned by war. Theinvasion of Tiglath-pileser and the consequent deportations of prisonershad decimated the tribes of Bīt-Shilāni, Bīt-Shaali, and Bīt-Amuhkāni, the principalities of the Kaldā which lay nearest to Babylonianterritory, and which had borne the brunt of attack in the precedingperiod; but their weakness brought into notice a power better equippedfor warfare, whose situation in their rear had as a rule hithertopreserved it from contact with the Assyrians, namely, Bīt-Yakīn. Thecontinual deposit of alluvial soil at the mouths of the rivershad greatly altered the coastline from the earliest historic timesdownwards. The ancient estuary was partly filled up, especially on thewestern side, where the Euphrates enters the Persian Gulf: a narrowbarrier of sand and silt extended between the marshes of Arabia andSusiana, at the spot where the streams of fresh water met the tidalwaters of the sea, and all that was left of the ancient gulf was a vastlagoon, or, as the dwellers on the banks called it, a kind of brackishriver, _Nār marratum_. Bīt-Yakīn occupied the southern and westernportions of this district, from the mouth of the Tigris to the edgeof the desert. The aspect of the country was constantly changing, andpresented no distinctive features; it was a region difficult to attackand easy to defend; it consisted first of a spongy plain, saturated withwater, with scattered artificial mounds on which stood the clusteredhuts of the villages; between this plain and the shore stretched alabyrinth of fens and peat-bogs, irregularly divided by canals andchannels freshly formed each year in flood-time, meres strewn withfloating islets, immense reed-beds where the neighbouring peasants tookrefuge from attack, and into which no one would venture to penetratewithout hiring some friendly native as a guide. In this fenland dweltthe Kaldā in their low, small conical huts of reeds, somewhat resemblinggiant beehives, and in all respects similar to those which the Bedawinof Irak inhabit at the present day. 

[Illustration: 343. Jpg ASSYRIAN SOLDIERS PURSUING KALDA REFUGEES IN ABED OF REEDS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a bas-relief reproduced in Layard. 

Dur-Yakīn, their capital, was probably situated on the borders of thegulf, near the Euphrates, in such a position as to command the mouthsof the river. Merodach-baladan, who was King of Bīt-Yakīn at the time ofSargon's accession, had become subject to Assyria in 729 B. C. , andhad paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser, but he was nevertheless the mostpowerful chieftain who had borne rule over the Chaldęans since the deathof Ukīnzīr. *

 * Dur-Yakīn was situated on the shores of the Persian gulf, as is proved by a passage in the _Bull Inscription_, where it is stated that Sargon threw into the sea the corpses of the soldiers killed during the siege; the neighbourhood of the Euphrates is implied in the text of the _Inscription des Fastes_, and the _Annals_, where the measures taken by Merodach-baladan to defend his capital are described. The name of Bīt-Yakīn, and probably also that of Dur-Yakin, have been preserved to us in the name of Aginis or Aginnź, the name of a city mentioned by Strabo, and by the historians of Alexander. Its site is uncertain, but can be located near the present town of Kornah. 

It was this prince whom the Babylonians chose to succeed Shalmaneser V. He presented himself before the city, was received with acclamation, and prepared without delay to repulse any hostilities on the part of theAssyrians. 

[Illustration: 344. Jpg A REED-HUT OF THE BEDAWIN OF IRAK]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph in Peters. 

He found a well-disposed ally in Elani. From very ancient times themasters of Susa had aspired to the possession of Mesopotamia or thesuzerainty over it, and fortune had several times favoured theirambitious designs. On one occasion they had pressed forward theirvictorious arms as far as the Mediterranean, and from that time forward, though the theatre of their operations was more restricted, they hadnever renounced the right to interfere in Babylonian affairs, andindeed, not long previously, one of them had reigned for a periodof seven years in Babylon in the interval between two dynasties. Ourinformation with regard to the order of succession and the history ofthese energetic and warlike monarchs is as yet very scanty; their nameseven are for the most part lost, and only approximate dates canbe assigned to those of whom we catch glimpses from time to time. *Khumban-numena, the earliest of whom we have any record, exercised adoubtful authority, from Anshān to Susa, somewhere about the fourteenthcentury B. C. , and built a temple to the god Kirisha in his capital, Liyan. **

 * These names are in the majority of cases found written on stamped and baked bricks. They were first compared with the names contained in the Annals of Sargon and his successors, and assimilated to those of the princes who were contemporary with Sennacherib and Assur-bani-pal; then they were referred to the time of the great Elamite empire, and one of them was identified with that Kudur-Nakhunta who had pillaged Uruk 1635 years before Assur-bani-pal. Finally, they were brought down again to an intermediate period, more precisely, to the fourteenth or thirteenth century B. C. This last date appears to be justified, at least as the highest permissible, by the mention of Durkurigalzu, in a text of Undasgal. 

 ** Jensen was the first to recognise that Liyan was a place- name, and the inscriptions of Shilkhak-Inshusinak add that Liyan was the capital of the kingdom; perhaps it was the name of a part of Susa. Khumban-numena has left us no monuments of his own, but he is mentioned on those of his son. 

His son Undasgal carried on the works begun by his father, but that isall the information the inscriptions afford concerning him, and the mistof oblivion which for a moment lifted and allowed us to discern dimlythe outlines of this sovereign, closes in again and hides everythingfrom our view for the succeeding forty or fifty years. 

[Illustration: 346. Jpg BRICK BEARING THE NAME OF THE SUSIAN KINGSHILKHAK-INSHUSHINAK]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by Marcel Dieulafoy. 

About the thirteenth century a gleam once more pierces thedarkness, and a race of warlike and pious kings emerges intoview--Khalludush-In-shushinak, his son Shutruk-nakhunta, the latter'stwo sons, Kutur-nakhunta and Shilkhak-Inshu-shinak, * and then perhaps acertain Kutir-khuban. 

 * The order of succession of these princes is proved by the genealogies with which their bricks are covered. Jensen has shown that we ought to read Khalludush-Inshushinak and Shilkhak-Inshushinak, instead of the shorter forms Khalludush and Shilkhak read previously. 

The inscriptions on their bricks boast of their power, their piety, andtheir inexhaustible wealth. One after another they repaired and enlargedthe temple built by Khumban-numena at Liyan, erected sanctuaries andpalaces at Susa, fortified their royal citadel, and ruled over Habardīpand the Cossęans as well as over Anshān and Elam. They vigorouslycontested the possession of the countries on the right bank of theTigris with the Babylonians, and Shutruk-nakhunta even succeeded inconquering Babylon itself. He deprived Zamāmā-shumiddin, the last butone of the Cossęan kings, of his sceptre and his life, placed his ownson Kutur-nakhunta on the throne, and when the vanquished Babyloniansset up Bel-nadinshumu as a rival sovereign, he laid waste Karduniashwith fire and sword. After the death of Bel-nadinshumu, the Pashźprinces continued to offer resistance, but at first without success. Shutruk-nakhunta had taken away from the temple of Esagilla the famousstatue of Bel-Merodach, whose hands had to be taken by each newlyelected king of Babylon, and had carried it off in his waggons to Elam, together with much spoil from the cities on the Euphrates. *

 * The name of the king is destroyed on the Babylonian document, but the mention of Kutur-nakhunta as his son obliges us, till further information comes to light, to recognise in him the Shutruk-nakhunta of the bricks of Susa, who also had a son Kutur-nakhunta. This would confirm the restoration of Shutruk-nakhunta as the name of a sovereign who boasts, in a mutilated inscription, that he had pushed his victories as far as the Tigris, and even up to the Euphrates. 

Nebuchadrezzar I. Brought the statue back to Babylon after manyvicissitudes, and at the same time recovered most of his lost provinces, but he had to leave at Susa the bulk of the trophies which hadbeen collected there in course of the successful wars. One of theserepresented the ancient hero Naram-sin standing, mace in hand, on thesummit of a hill, while his soldiers forced their way up the slopes, driving before them the routed hosfcs of Susa. Shutruk-nakhunta left thefigures and names untouched, but carved in one corner of the bas-reliefa dedicatory inscription, transforming this ancient proof of Babylonianvictories over Elam into a trophy of Blamite victories over Babylon. 

[Illustration: 348. Jpg BAS-RELIEF OF NAKAM-SIN, TKANSPORTED TO SUSA BYSHUTKUK-NAKHUNTA]

 Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. De Morgan. 

His descendants would assuredly have brought Mesopotamia into lastingsubjection, had not the feudal organisation of their empire toleratedthe existence of contemporary local dynasties, the members of whichoften disputed the supreme authority with the rightful king. The dynastywhich ruled Habardīp* seems to have had its seat of government atTarrisha in the, valley of Malamīr. **

 * The prince represented on the bas-reliefs gives himself the title Apirra, the name of Apīr, Apirti, or Habardīp. 

 ** Tarrisha is the name of a town, doubtless the capital of the fief of Malamīr; it is probably represented by the considerable ruins which Layard identified as the remains of the Sassanid city of Aidej. 

Three hundred figures carved singly or in groups on the rocks ofKul-Firaun portray its princes and their ministers in every posture ofadoration, but most of them have no accompanying inscription. One largebas relief, however, forms an exception, and from its legend we learnthe name of Khanni, son of Takhkhi-khīkhutur. *

 * The name of Khanni has been explained by Sayce as _the desirable_, and that of his father, Takhkhi-khīkhutur, as _help this thy servant_. 

[Illustration: 349. Jpg THE GREAT ROCK BAS-RELIEF OF MALAMĪR]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph by Babin and Houssay. 

This prince, even if possessed of no royal protocol, was none the lessa powerful and wealthy personage. His figure dominates the picture, thecentral space of which it completely fills;* his expression is calm, butsomewhat severe. His head is covered by a low cap, from which longlocks escape and flow over his shoulders; the hair on his face issymmetrically curled above the level of his mouth, and terminates in apointed beard. The figure is clothed from head to foot in a stiff robeand mantle adorned with tufted fringes, and borders of embroideredrosettes; a girdle at the waist completes the misleading resemblanceto the gala-dress of a Nine vite, monarch. The hands are crossed onthe breast in an attitude of contemplation, while the prince gazesthoughtfully at a sacrifice which is being offered on his behalf. At thebottom of the picture stands a small altar, behind which a priest in ashort tunic seems to be accomplishing some cérémonial rite, while twomen are cutting the throat of a ram. Higher up the heads of three ramslie beside their headless trunks, which are resting on the ground, feetin the air, while a servant brandishes a short sword with which heis about to decapitate the fourth beast. Above these, again, threemusicians march in procession, one playing on a harp, another on afive-stringed lyre, and the third on a tambourine. An attendant holdinga bow, and the minister Shutsururazi, stand quietly waiting till thesacrifice is accomplished. The long text which runs across several ofthe figures is doubtless a prayer, and contains the names of peoples andprinces mingled with those of deities. 

 * Perrot and Chipiez, misled by the analogy of the Hittite bas-relief at Ibriz, took the largest figure for the image of a god. The inscription engraved on the robe, _U Khanni shak Takkhi-khikutur_, "I am Khanni, son of Takhkhi- khīkhutur, " leaves no doubt that the figure represents the prince himself, and not a divinity. 

The memory of these provincial chiefs would be revived, and more oftheir monuments discovered, if the mountains and inaccessible valleys ofancient Elam could be thoroughly explored: it is evident, from the smallportion of their history which has been brought to light, that they musthave been great sources of trouble to the dynasties which reigned inSusa, and that their revolts must often have jeopardised the safety ofthe empire, in spite of the assistance afforded by the Aramęans fromthe tenth or eleventh centuries onwards. All the semi-nomadic tribeswhich densely peopled the banks of the Tigris, and whose advance towardsthe north had been temporarily favoured by the weakness of Assyria--theGambulu, the Pukudu, the Eutu, and the Itua--had a natural tendency tojoin forces with Elam for the purpose of raiding the wealthy cities ofChaldęa, and this alliance, or subjection, as it might be more properlytermed, always insured them against any reprisals on the part of theirvictims. The unknown king who dwelt at Susa in 745 B. C. Committed theerror of allowing Tiglath-pileser to crush these allies. Khumban-igash, who succeeded this misguided monarch in 742 B. C. , did not take up armsto defend Bit-Amuk-kāni and the other states of the Kaldā from 731 to729, but experience must have taught him that he had made a mistakein remaining an unmoved spectator of their misfortunes; for whenMerodach-baladan, in quest of allies, applied to him, he unhesitatinglypromised him his support. *

 * The date of his accession is furnished by the passage in _Pinches' Babylonian Chronicle_, where it is stated that he ascended the throne of Elam in the fifth year of Nabonazir. The Assyrian and Babylonian scribes assimilated the Susian _b_ to the _m_, and also suppressed the initial aspirate of the Elamite name, writing generally Umman-igash for Khumban- igash. 

Assyria and Elam had hitherto seldom encountered one another on thefield of battle. A wide barrier of semi-barbarous states had for a longtime held them apart, and they would have had to cross the territoryof the Babylonians or the Cossęans before coming into contact with eachother. Tiglath-pileser I. , however, had come into conflict with thenorthern districts of Elam towards the end of the twelfth century B. C. , and more recently the campaigns of Assur-nazir-pal, Shalmaneser III. , and Rammān-nirāri had frequently brought these sovereigns into contactwith tribes under the influence of Susa; but the wildness and poverty ofthe country, and the difficulties it offered to the manoeuvres of largearmies, had always prevented the Assyrian generals from advancing farinto its mountainous regions. * The annexation of Aramęan territorybeyond the Tigris, and the conquest of Babylon by Tiglath-pileser III. , at length broke through the barrier and brought the two powers faceto face at a point where they could come into conflict without beingimpeded by almost insurmountable natural obstacles, namely, in theplains of the Umliash and the united basins of the Lower Ulai andthe Uknu. Ten years' experience had probably sufficed to convinceKhumban-igash of the dangers to which the neighbourhood of the Assyriansexposed his subjects. The vigilant watch which the new-comers kept overtheir frontier rendered raiding less easy; and if one of the borderchieftains were inclined to harry, as of old, an unlucky Babylonianor Cossęan village, he ran the risk of an encounter with a well-armedforce, or of being plundered in turn by way of reprisal. 

 * Sargon declares distinctly that Merodach-baladan had invoked the aid of Khumban-igash. 

An irregular but abundant source of revenue was thus curtailed, withouttaking into consideration the wars to which such incidents must perforcelead sooner or later. Even unaided the Elamites considered themselvescapable of repelling any attack; allied with the Babylonians or theKaldā, they felt certain of victory in any circumstances. Sargonrealised this fact almost as fully as did the Elamites themselves; assoon, therefore, as his spies had forewarned him that an invasion wasimminent, he resolved to take the initiative and crush his enemiessingly before they Succeeded in uniting their forces. Khumban-igash hadadvanced as far as the walls of Durīlu, a stronghold which commandedthe Umliash, and he there awaited the advent of his allies before layingsiege to the town: it was, however, the Assyrian army which came to meethim and offered him battle. The conflict was a sanguinary one, as becamean engagement between such valiant foes, and both sides claimed thevictory. The Assyrians maintained then-ground, forcing the Elamitesto evacuate their positions, and tarried some weeks longer to chastisethose of their Aramęan subjects who had made common cause with theenemy: they carried away the Tumuna, who had given up their sheikh intothe hands of the emissaries of the Kaldā, and transported the wholetribe, without Merodach-baladan making any attempt to save his allies, although his army had not as yet struck a single blow. *

 * The history of this first campaign against Merodach- baladan, which is found in a mutilated condition in the _Annals of Sargon_, exists nowhere else in a complete form, but the facts are very concisely referred to in the _Fastes_ and in the _Cylinders_. The general sequence of events is indicated by _Pinches' Babylonian Chronicle_, but the author places them in 720 B. C. , the second year of Merodach- baladan, contrary to the testimony of the _Annals_, and attributes the victory to the Elamites in the battle of Durīlu, in deference to Babylonian patriotism. The course of events after the battle of Durflu seems to prove clearly that the Assyrians remained masters of the field. 

Having accomplished this act of vengeance, the Assyrians suspendedoperations and returned to Nineveh to repair their losses, probablyintending to make a great effort to regain the whole of Babylonia inthe ensuing year. Grave events which occurred elsewhere prevented them, however, from carrying this ambitious project into effect. The fame oftheir war against Elam had spread abroad in the Western provinces of theempire, and doubtless exaggerated accounts circulated with regard tothe battle of Durīlu had roused the spirit of dissatisfaction in thewest. Sargon had scarcely seated himself securely on a throne to whichhe was not the direct heir, when he was menaced by Elam and repudiatedby Chaldęa, and it remained to be seen whether his resources would proveequal to maintaining the integrity of his empire, or whether the exampleset by Merodach-baladan would not speedily be imitated by all whogroaned under the Assyrian yoke. Since the decline of Damascus andArpad, Hamath had again taken a prominent place in Northern Syria:prompt submission had saved this city from destruction in the time ofTiglath-pileser III. , and it had since prospered under the foreignrule; it was, therefore, on Hamath that all hopes of deliverance stillcherished by rulers and people now centred. A low-born fellow, a smithnamed Iaubīdi, rose in rebellion against the prince of Hamath for beingmean-spirited enough to pay tribute, proclaimed himself king, and inthe space of a few months revived under his own leadership the coalitionwhich Hadadezer and Rezon II. Had formed in days gone by. Arpad andBīt-Agusi, Zimyra and Northern Phoenicia, Damascus and its dependencies, all expelled their Assyrian garrisons, and Samaria, though stillsuffering from its overthrow, summoned up courage to rid itself of itsgovernor. Meanwhile, Hannon of Gaza, recently reinstated in his city byEgyptian support, was carrying on negotiations with a view to persuadingEgypt to interfere in the affairs of Syria. The last of the TanitePharaohs, Psamuti, was just dead, and Bocchoris, who had long beenundisputed master of the Delta, had now ventured to assume the diademopenly (722 B. C. ), a usurpation which the Ethiopians, fully engaged inthe Thebaid and on the Upper Nile, seemed to regard with equanimity. Assoon as the petty kings and feudal lords had recognised his suzerainty, Bocchoris «listened favourably to the entreaties of Hannon, and promisedto send an army to Gaza under the command of his general Shabź. Sargon, threatened with the loss of the entire western half of his empire, desisted for a time from his designs on Babylon, Khumban-igash was wiseenough to refrain from provoking an enemy who left him in peace, andMerodach-baladan did not dare to enter the lists without the support ofhis confederate: the victory of Durīlu, though it had not succeeded ingaining a province for Nineveh, had at least secured the south-easternfrontier from attack, at all events for so long as it should pleaseSargon to remain at a distance. 

[Illustration: 356. Jpg IAUBĪDI OF HAMATH BEING FLAYED ALIVE. ]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch by Flandin. 

The league formed by Hamath had not much power of cohesion. Iaubīdi hadassembled his forces and the contingents of his allies at the town ofQarqar as Hadadezer had done before: he was completely defeated, takenprisoner, and flayed alive. His kingdom was annexed to the Assyrianempire, Qarqar was burnt to the ground, the fortifications of Hamathwere demolished, and the city obliged to furnish a force of two hundredcharioteers and six hundred horsemen, probably recruited from amongthe families of the upper classes, to serve as hostages as well asauxiliaries. Arpad, Zimyra, Damascus, Samaria, all succumbed withoutserious opposition, and the citizens who had been most seriouslycompromised in the revolt paid for their disaffection with their lives. This success confirmed the neighbouring states of Tyre, Sidon, Judah, Ammon, and Moab in their allegiance, which had shown signs of waveringsince the commencement of hostilities; but Gaza remained unsubdued, andcaused the more uneasiness because it was perceived that behind her wasarrayed all the majesty of the Pharaoh. The Egyptians, slow to bestirthemselves, had not yet crossed the Isthmus when the Assyrians appearedbeneath the walls of Gaza: Hannon, worsted in a preliminary skirmish, retreated on Raphia, where Shabź, the Egyptian general, had at lengtharrived, and the decisive battle took place before this town. It wasthe first time that the archers and charioteers of the Nile valley hadmeasured forces with the pikemen and cavalry of that of the Tigris;the engagement was hotly contested, but the generals and soldiers ofBocchoris, fighting according to antiquated methods of warfare, gaveway before the onset of the Assyrian ranks, who were better equipped andbetter led. Shabź fled "like a shepherd whose sheep had been stolen, "Hannon was taken prisoner and loaded with chains, and Raphia fell intothe hands of the conqueror; the inhabitants who survived the sack oftheir city were driven into captivity to the number of 9033 men, withtheir flocks and household goods. The manifest superiority of Assyriawas evident from the first encounter, but the contest had been so fierceand the result so doubtful that Sargon did not consider it prudent topress his advantage. He judged rightly that these troops, whom hehad not dispersed without considerable effort, constituted merely anadvanced guard. 4 Egypt was not like the petty kingdoms of Syria or AsiaMinor, which had but one army apiece, and could not risk more than onepitched battle. Though Shabź's force was routed, others would not failto take its place and contend as fiercely for the possession of thecountry, and even if the Assyrians should succeed in dislodging them andcurbing the power of Bocchoris, the fall of Sais or Memphis, far fromputting an end to the war, would only raise fresh complications. AboveMemphis stretched the valley of the Nile, bristling with fortresses, Khininsu, Oxyrhynchus, Hermopolis, Siut, Thinis, and Thebes, the famouscity of Amon, enthroned on the banks of the river, whose very namestill evoked in the minds of the Asiatics a vivid remembrance of all itstriumphal glories. *

 * Thebes was at that time known among the Semites by its popular name of _the city of Amon_--which the Hebrew writers transcribed as Nō-Amon (_Nahum_ iii. 8) or Nō alone (Jer. Xlvi. 25; Ezek. Xxx. 14, 15, 16), and the Assyrians by Ni. 

Thebes itself formed merely one stage in the journey towards Syene, Ethiopia, Napata, and the unknown regions of Africa which popularimagination filled with barbarous races or savage monsters, and howeverfar an alien army might penetrate in a southerly direction, it wouldstill meet with the language, customs, and divinities of Egypt--an Egyptwhose boundary seemed to recede as the invader advanced, and which wasever ready to oppose the enemy with fresh forces whenever its troops hadsuffered from his attacks. Sargon, having reached Kaphia, halted on thevery threshold of the unexplored realm whose portals stood ajar ready toadmit him: the same vague disquietude which had checked the conqueringcareer of the Pharaohs on the borders of Asia now stayed his advance, and bade him turn back as he was on the point of entering Africa. Hehad repulsed the threatened invasion, and as a result of his victory theprinces and towns which had invoked the aid of the foreigner lay at hismercy; he proceeded, therefore, to reorganise the provinces of Philistiaand Israel, and received the homage of Judah and her dependencies. Ahaz, while all the neighbouring states were in revolt, had not wavered in hisallegiance; the pacific counsels of Isaiah had once more prevailed overthe influence of the party which looked for safety in an alliance withEgypt. *

 * Sargon probably alludes to homage received at this time, when he styles himself "the subduer of far-off Judah. " It is not certain that Ahaz was still King of Judah; it was for a long time admitted that Hezekiah was already king when these events took place, in accordance with 2 Kings xviii. 9, 10, where it is stated that Samaria was destroyed in the sixth year of Hezekiah. I consider, in agreement with several historians, that the date of Sennacherib's invasion of Judah must have remained more firmly fixed in the minds of the Jewish historians than that of the taking of Samaria, and as 2 Kings xviii. 13 places this invasion in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah, which corresponds, as we shall see, to the third year of Sennacherib, or 702 B. C. , it seems better to place the accession of Hezekiah about 715, and prolong the reign of Ahaz till after the campaign of Sargon against Hannon of Gaza. 

The whole country from the Orontes to the mountains of Seir and theriver of Egypt was again reduced to obedience, and set itself bypeaceful labours to repair the misfortunes which had befallen it duringthe previous quarter of a century. Sargon returned to his capital, butfate did not yet allow him to renew his projects against Babylon. Barely did an insurrection break out in any part of the country on theaccession of a new king at Nineveh without awaking echoes in the distantprovinces of the empire. The report of a revolt in Chaldęa roused aslumbering dissatisfaction among the Syrians, and finally led them intoopen rebellion: the episodes of the Syrian campaign, narrated inArmenia or on the slopes of the Taurus with the thousand embellishmentssuggested by the rancour of the narrators, excited the minds of theinhabitants and soon rendered an outbreak inevitable. The danger wouldhave been serious if the suppressed hatred of all had found vent at thesame moment, and if insurrections in five or six different parts of hisempire had to be faced by the sovereign simultaneously; but as arule these local wars broke out without any concentrated plan, andin localities too remote from each other to permit of any possibleco-operation between the assailants; each chief, before attempting toassert his independence, seemed to wait until the Assyrians had hadample time to crush the rebel who first took the field, having donewhich they could turn the whole of their forces against the latestfoe. Thus Iaubīdi did not risk a campaign till the fall of Elam andKarduniash had been already decided on the field of Durilu; in the sameway, the nations of the North and East refrained from entering the liststill they had allowed Sargon time to destroy the league of Hamath andrepel the attack of Bharaoh. 

They were secretly incited to rebellion by a power which played nearlythe same part with regard to them that Egypt had played in SouthernSyria. Urartu had received a serious rebuff in 735 B. C. , and the burningof Dhuspas had put an end to its ascendency, but the victory had beeneffected at the cost of so much bloodshed that Tiglath-pileser was notinclined to risk losing the advantage already gained by pushing it toofar: he withdrew, therefore, without concluding a treaty, and did notreturn, being convinced that no further hostilities would be attemptedtill the vanquished enemy had recovered from his defeat. He wasjustified in his anticipations, for Sharduris died about 730, withouthaving again taken up arms, and his son Busas I. Had left Shalmaneser V. Unmolested:* but the accession of Sargon and the revolts which harassedhim had awakened in Busas the warlike instincts of his race, and themoment appeared advantageous for abandoning his policy of inactivity. 

 * The name of this king is usually written Ursa in the Assyrian inscriptions, but the _Annals of Sargon_ give in each case the form Rusa, in accordance with which Sayce had already identified the Assyrian form Ursa or Rusa with the form Rusas found on some Urartian monuments. Belck and Lehmann have discovered several monuments of this Rusas I. , son of Sharduris. 

The remembrance of the successful exploits of Menuas and Argistis stilllived in the minds of his people, and more than one of his generalshad entered upon their military careers at a time when, from Arpad andCarchemish to the country of the Medes, quite a third of the territorynow annexed to Assyria had been subject to the king of Urartu;Eusas, therefore, doubtless placed before himself the possibilityof reconquering the lost provinces, and even winning, by a stroke offortune, more than had been by a stroke of fortune wrested from hisfather. He began by intriguing with such princes as were weary of theAssyrian rule, among the Mannai, in Zikartu, * among the Tabal, and evenamong the Khāti. 

 * Zikruti, Zikirtu, Zikartu, may probably be identified with the Sagartians of Herodotus. 

Iranzu, who was at that time reigning over the Mannai, refused to listento the suggestions of his neighbour, but two of his towns, Shuandakhuland Durdukka, deserted him in 719 B. C. , and ranged themselves underMitātti, chief of the Zikartu, while about the same time the strongholdsof Sukkia, Bala, and Abitikna, which were on the borders of Urartu, broke the ties which had long bound them to Assyria, and concluded atreaty of alliance with Rusas. Sargon was not deceived as to the meaningof these events, and at once realised that this movement was not one ofthose local agitations which broke out at intervals in one or other ofhis provinces. His officers and spies must have kept him informed of themachinations of Eusas and of the revolutions which the migrations ofthe last thirty years had provoked among the peoples of the Iraniantable-land. A new race had arisen in their rear, that of the Cimmeriansand Scythians, which, issuing in irresistible waves from the gorges ofthe Caucasus, threatened to overwhelm the whole ancient world ofthe East. The stream, after a moment's vacillation, took a westerlydirection, and flooded Asia Minor from one end to the other. Sometribes, however, which had detached themselves from the main movementsought an outlet towards the south-east, on to the rich plains of theAraxes and the country around Lake Urumiah. The native races, pressed inthe rear by these barbarians, and hemmed in on either side and in frontby Urartu and Assyria, were forced into closer proximity, and, consciousof their individual weakness, had begun to form themselves into threedistinct groups, varying considerably in compactness, --the Medes in thesouth, Misianda in the north, with Zikartu between them. Zikartu wasat that time the best organised of these nascent states, and its king, Mitātti, was not deficient either in military talent or politicalsagacity. The people over whom he ruled were, moreover, impregnated withthe civilisation of Mesopotamia, and by constantly meeting the Assyriansin battle they had adopted the general principles of their equipment, organisation, and military tactics. The vigour of his soldiers and thewarlike ardour which inspired them rendered his armies formidable evento leaders as experienced, and warriors as hardened, as the officersand soldiers of Nineveh. Mitātti had strongly garrisoned the two rebelcities, and trusted that if the Assyrians were unable to recapture themwithout delay, other towns would not be long in following their example;Iranzu would, no doubt, be expelled, his place would be taken by ahostile chief, and the Mannai, joining hands with Urartu on the rightand Zikartu on the left, would, with these two states, form a compactcoalition, whose combined forces would menace the northern frontier ofthe empire from the Zagros to the Taurus. 

[Illustration: 364. Jpg TAKING OF A CASTLE IN ZIKARTU]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the facsimile by Flandin. 

Sargon, putting all the available Assyrian forces into the field, hurledthem against the rebels, and this display of power had the desiredeffect upon the neighbouring kingdoms: Busas and Mitātti did not dare tointerfere, the two cities were taken by assault, burnt and razed tothe ground, and the inhabitants of the surrounding districts of Sukkia, Bala, and Abitikna were driven into exile among the Khāti. The nextyear, however, the war thus checked on the Iranian table-land broke outin the north-west, in the mountains of Cilicia. A Tabal chief, Kiakkuof Shinukhta, refused to pay his tribute (718). Sargon seized him anddestroyed his city; his family and adherents, 7500 persons in all, werecarried away captives to Assyria, and his principality was given toa rival chief, Mattī of Atuna, on a promise from the latter of anincreased amount of tribute. *

 * The name of Atuna is a variant of the name Tuna, which is found in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III. , and Tuna recalls the name of the old city of Tyana, or that of Tynna or Tunna, near Tyana, in the Taurus. Shinukhta, not far from Atuna, must be the capital of a district situated on the Karmalas or the Saros, on the borders of Cilicia or Cataonia. 

In 717 B. C. More serious dangers openly declared themselves. The Khātihad not forgotten that they had once been the allies of Urartu, andthat their king, Pisiris, together with Matīlu of Agusi, had foughtfor Sharduris against Tiglath-pileser III. Pisiris conspired with Mita, chief of the Mushki, and proclaimed his independence; but vengeanceswiftly and surely overtook him. He succumbed before his accomplicehad time to come to his assistance, and was sent to join Kiakku andhis adherents in prison, while the districts which he had ruled wereincorporated into Assyrian territory, and Carchemish became the seat ofan Assyrian prefect who ranked among the _limmi_ from whom successiveyears took their names. The fall of Pisiris made no impression onhis contemporaries. They had witnessed the collapse of so many greatpowers--Elam, Urartu, Egypt--that the misfortunes of so insignificant apersonage awakened but little interest; and yet with him founderedone of the most glorious wrecks of the ancient world. For more than acentury the Khāti had been the dominant power in North-western Asia, andhad successfully withstood the power of Thebes; crushed by the Peoplesof the Sea, hemmed in and encroached upon by the rising wave of Aramęaninvasion, they had yet disputed their territory step by step with theAssyrian generals, and the area over which they spread can be tracedby the monuments and inscriptions scattered over Cilicia, Lycaonia, Cappadocia, and Northern Syria as far as the basins of the Orontes andthe Litāny. So lasting had proved their influence on all around them, and so fresh was the memory of their greatness, that it would haveseemed but natural that their vitality should survive this last blow, and that they should enjoy a prosperous future which should vie withtheir past. But events proved that their national life was dead, andthat no recuperative power remained: as soon as Sargon had overthrowntheir last prince, their tribes became merged in the general bodyof Aramęans, and their very name ere long vanished from the pages ofhistory. 

Up to this time Eusas had not directly interfered in these quarrelsbetween the suzerain and his vassals: he may have incited the latter torevolt, but he had avoided compromising himself, and was waiting tillthe Mannai had decided to make common cause with him before showinghis hand openly. Ever since the skirmish of the year 719, Mitātti hadactively striven to tempt the Mannai from their allegiance, but hisintrigues had hitherto proved of no avail against the staunch fidelityfirst of Irānzu and then of Azā, who had succeeded the latter about718. At the beginning of the year 716 Mitātti was more successful; theMannai, seduced at length by his promises and those of Eusas, assembledon Mount Uaush, murdered their king, and leaving his corpse unburied, hastened to place themselves under the command of Bagadatti, regentof Umildīsh. Sargon hurried to the spot, seized Bagadatti, and had himflayed alive on Mount Uaush, which had just witnessed the murder of Azā, and exposed the mass of bleeding flesh before the gaze of the people todemonstrate the fate reserved for his enemies. But though he hadacted speedily he was too late, and the fate of their chief, far fromdiscouraging his subjects, confirmed them in their rebellion. They hadplaced upon the throne Ullusunu, the brother of Azā, and this prince hadimmediately concluded an alliance with Eusas, Mitātti, and the people ofAndia; his example was soon followed by other Eastern chiefs, Assurlī ofKarallu and Itti of Allabria, whereupon, as the spirit of revolt spreadfrom one to another, most of the districts lately laid under tributeby Tiglath-pileser took up arms--Niksama, Bītsagbati, Bītkhirmāmi, Kilam-bāfci, Armangu, and even the parts around Kharkhar, and Ellipi, with its reigning sovereign Dalta. The general insurrection dreaded bySargon, and which Eusas had for five years been fomenting, had, despiteall the efforts of the Assyrian government, at last broken out, andthe whole frontier was ablaze from the borders of Elam to those of theMushku. Sargon turned his attention to where danger was most urgent; hemade a descent on the territory of the Mannai, and laid it waste "asa swarm of locusts might have done;" he burnt their capital, Izirtu, demolished the fortifications of Zibia and Armaīd, and took Ullusunucaptive, but, instead of condemning him to death, he restored to him hisliberty and his crown on condition of his paying a regular tribute. Thisact of clemency, in contrast with the pitiless severity shown at thebeginning of the insurrection, instantly produced the good effects heexpected: the Mannai laid down their arms and swore allegiance to theconqueror, and their defection broke up the coalition. Sargon did notgive the revolted provinces time to recover from the dismay into whichhis first victories had thrown them, but marched rapidly to the south, and crushed them severally; commencing with Andia, where he took 4200prisoners with their cattle, he next attacked Zikartu, whose king, Mitātti, took refuge in the mountains and thus escaped death at thehands of the executioner. Assurlī of Karalla had a similar fate toBagadatti, and was flayed alive. Itti of Allabria, with half of hissubjects, was carried away to Hamath. The towns of Niksama and Shurgadiawere annexed to the province of Parsuash. The town of Kishīsim wasreduced to ashes, and its king, Belsharuzur, together with the treasuresof his palace, was carried away to Nineveh. Kharkhar succumbed after ashort siege, received a new population, and was henceforward known asKar-Sharrukīn; Dalta was restored to favour, and retained his dominionintact. Never had so great a danger been so ably or so courageouslyaverted. It was not without good reason that, after his victory over theMannai, Sargon, instead of attacking Busas, the most obstinate ofhis foes, turned against the Medes. Bllipi, Parsuash, and Kharkhar, comprising half the countries which had joined in the insurrection, wereon the borders of Elam or had frequent relations with that state, and itis impossible to conjecture what turn affairs might have taken hadElam been induced to join their league, and had the Elamite armies, inconjunction with those of Merodach-baladan, unexpectedly fallen upon theAssyrian rear by the valleys of the Tigris or the Turnāt. 

[Illustration: 369. Jpg TAKING OF THE CITY OF KISHĪSIM BY THE ASSYRIANS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the facsimile by Plandin. The figures resembling stags' horns, which crown three of the upper towers, are tongues of flame, as was indicated by the red colouring which still remained on them when the bas- relief was discovered. 

Had the Elamites, however, entertained a desire to mingle in the fray, the promptness with which Sargon had re-established order musthave given them cause to reflect and induced them to maintain theirneutrality. The year which had opened so inauspiciously thus endedin victory, though the situation was still fraught with danger. Theagitation which had originated in the east and northeast in 716 reachedthe north-west in 715, and spread as far as the borders of SouthernSyria. Rusas had employed the winter in secret negotiations with theMannai, and had won over one of their principal chiefs, a certainDayaukku, whose name seems to be identical with that which the Greekstransliterated as Deiokes. *

 * The identity of the name Dayaukku with that of Deiokes is admitted by all historians. 

As soon as spring had returned he entered the territory of Ullusunu, andoccupied twenty-two strongholds, which were probably betrayed into hishands by Dayaukku. While this was taking place Mita of Mushki invadedCilicia, and the Arab tribes of the Idumsean desert--the Thamudites, the Ibadites, the Marsimanu, and Khayapā--were emboldened to carry theirmarauding expeditions into Assyrian territory. The Assyrian monarch wasthus called on to conduct three distinct wars simultaneously in threedifferent directions; he was, moreover, surrounded by wavering subjectswhom terror alone held to their allegiance, and whom the slightestimprudence or the least reverse might turn into open foes. 

Sargon resolutely faced the enemy at all three points of attack. As inthe previous year, he reserved for himself the position where dangerwas most threatening, directing the operations against the Mannai. Hecaptured one by one the twenty-two strongholds of Ullusunu which Rusashad seized, and laying hands on Dayaukku, sent him and his family intoexile to Hamath. This display of energy determined Ianzu of Naīri toreceive the Assyrian monarch courteously within the royal residence ofKhubushkia and to supply him with horses, cattle, sheep, and goats intoken of homage. Proceeding from thence in an oblique direction, Sargonreached Andia and took prisoner its king Tilusīnas. Having by thisexploit reduced the province of Mannai to order, he restored thetwenty-two towns to Ullusunu, and halting some days in Izirtu, erectedthere a statue of himself, according to his custom, as a visible witnessof Assyrian supremacy, having done which, he retraced his steps tothe south-east. The province of Kharkhar, which had been reduced tosubjection only a few months previously, was already in open revolt, andthe district of Kar-Sharrukīn alone remained faithful to its governor:Sargon had to reconquer it completely, town by town, imposing on thefour citadels of Kishislu, Kindāu, Bīt-Bagaiā, and Zaria the new namesof Kar-Nabu, Kar-Sin, Kar-Rammānu, and Kar-Ishtar, besides increasingthe fortifications of Kar-Sharrukīn. The Medes once more acknowledgedhis suzerainty, and twenty-two of their chiefs came to tender theoath of allegiance at his feet; two or three districts which remainedinsubordinate were given up to pillage as far as Bīt-Khambān, and theinhabitants of Kimirra were sent into captivity. The eastern campaignwas thus brought to a most successful issue, fortune, meanwhile, havingalso favoured the Assyrian arms in the other menaced quarters. Mita, after pushing forward at one point as far as the Mediterranean, had beendriven back into the mountains by the prefect of Kuī, and the Bedāwin ofthe south had sustained a serious reverse. 

These latter were mere barbarians, ignorant of the arts of reading andwriting, and hitherto unconquered by any foreign power: their survivorswere removed to Samaria, where captives from Hamath had already beenestablished, and where they were soon joined by further exiles fromBabylon. 

[Illustration: 372. Jpg THE TOWN OF BĪT-BAGAĪA BURNT BY THE ASSYRIANS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the facsimile by Flandin. The tongues of flame which issue from the towers still bore traces of red and yellow colouring when the bas-relief was discovered. 

This episode had greater effect than its importance warranted; orperhaps the majority of the neighbouring states made it a convenientpretext for congratulating Sargon on his victories over more seriousenemies. He received gifts from Shamshiź, the Arabian queen who hadformerly fought against Tiglath-pileser, from Itamar the Saboan, and thesheikhs of the desert, from the kings of the Mediterranean sea-board, and from the Pharaoh himself. Bocchoris had died after a troublous reignof seven years. *

 * The two dynasties of Tanis and Sais may be for the present reconstituted as follows:--

[Illustration: 373. Jpg TABLE OF DYNASTIES OF TANIS AND SAIS]

His real character is unknown, but as he left a deep impression on thememories of his people, it is natural to conclude that he displayed, at times, both ability and energy. Many legends in which the miraculouselement prevailed were soon in circulation concerning him. He was, according to these accounts, weak in body and insignificant inappearance, but made up for these defects by mental ability and soundjudgment. He was credited with having been simple in his mode of life, and was renowned as one of the six great legislators produced by Egypt. A law concerning debt and the legal rates of interest, was attributed tohim; he was also famed for the uprightness of his judgments, whichwere regarded as due to divine inspiration. Isis had bestowed on hima serpent, which, coiling itself round his head when he sat on thejudgment-seat, covered him with its shadow, and admonished him not toforget for a moment the inflexible principles of equity and truth. 

Neither Tafnakhti nor any of the local sovereigns mentioned on thestele of Piōnkhi wore comprised in the official computation; there is, therefore, no reason to add them to this list. 

A collection of the decisions he was reputed to have delivered in famouscases existed in the Gręco-Roman period, and one of them is quotedat length: he had very ingeniously condemned a courtesan to touch theshadow of a purse as payment for the shadowy favours she had bestowed ina dream on her lover. 

[Illustration: 374. Jpg KING BOCCHORIS GIVING JUDGMENT BETWEEN TWO WOMEN, RIVAL CLAIMANTS TO A CHILD]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin. 

An Alexandrian poet, Pancrates, versified the accounts of this juridicalcollection, * and the artists of the Imperial epoch drew from it motivesfor mural decoration; they portrayed the king pronouncing judgmentbetween two mothers who disputed possession of an infant, between twobeggars laying claim to the same cloak, and between three men assertingeach of them his right to a wallet full of food. **

 * Pancrates lived in the time of Hadrian, and Athenęus, who has preserved his memory for us, quotes the first book of his Bocchoreidion. 

 ** Considerable remains of this decorative cycle have been discovered at Pompeii and at Rome, in a series of frescoes, in which Lumbroso and E. Lowy recognise the features of the legends of Bocchoris; the dispute between the two mothers recalls the famous judgment of Solomon (1 Kings iii. 16-28). 

A less favourable tradition represents the king as an avariciousand irreligious sovereign: he is said one day to have conceived thesacrilegious desire to bring about a conflict between an ordinary bulland the Mnevis adored at Heliopolis. The gods, doubtless angered by hiscrimes, are recorded to have called into being a lamb with eight feet, which, suddenly breaking into articulate speech, predicted that Upperand Lower Egypt would be disgraced by the rule of a stranger. *

 * This legend, preserved by Manetho and Ulian is also known from the fragments of a demotic papyrus at Vienna, which contains the prophecy of the lamb. 

[Illustration: 375. Jpg SABACO]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Lepsius. 

The monuments of his reign which have come down to us tell us nothing ofhis deeds; we can only conjecture that after the defeat sustained byhis generals at Raphia, the discords which had ruined the precedingdynasties again broke out with renewed violence. Indeed, if he succeededin preserving his crown for several years longer, he owed the fact moreto the feebleness of the Ethiopians than to his own vigour: no soonerdid an enterprising prince appear at Barkal and demand that he shouldrender an account of his usurpation, than his power came to an end. Kashto having died about 716, * his son Shabaku, the Sabaco of theGreeks, inherited the throne, and his daughter Amenertas the priesthoodand principality of Thebes, in right of her mother Shapenuapīt. 

 * The date of the accession of Sabaco is here fixed at 716- 715, because I follow the version of the lists of Manetho, which gives twelve years as the reign of that prince; an inscription from Hammamāt mentions his twelfth year. 

Sabaco was an able and energetic prince, who could by no means toleratethe presence of a rival Pharaoh in the provinces which Piōnkhi hadconquered. He declared war, and, being doubtless supported in hisundertaking by all the petty kings and great feudal nobles whosejealousy was aroused by the unlooked-for prosperity of the Saitemonarch, he defeated Bocchoris and took him prisoner. Tafnakhti hadformerly recognised the Ethiopian supremacy, and Bocchoris, whenhe succeeded to his father's dominions, had himself probably soughtinvestiture at the hands of the King of Napata. Sabaco treated him as arebel, and either burnt or flayed him alive (715). *

 * According to Manetho, he was burnt alive; the tradition which mentions that he was flayed alive is found in John of Antioch. 

The struggle was hardly over, when the news of Sargon's victoriesreached Egypt. It was natural that the new king, not yet securely seatedon his throne, should desire to conciliate the friendship of a neighbourwho was so successful in war, and that he should seize the firstavailable pretext to congratulate him. The Assyrian on his part receivedthese advances with satisfaction and pride: he perceived in them aguarantee that Egyptian intrigues with Tyre and Jerusalem would cease, and that he could henceforth devote himself to his projects againstBusas without being distracted by the fear of an Ethiopian attack andthe subversion of Syria in his rear. 

Sargon took advantage of these circumstances to strike a final blow atUrartu. He began in the spring of 714 by collecting among the Mannai thetribute due from Ullusuna, Daltā, and the Median chiefs; then pushingforward into the country of the Zikartu, he destroyed three forts andtwenty-four villages, and burnt their capital, Parda. Mitatti escapedservitude, but it was at the price of his power: a proscribed fugitive, deserted by his followers, he took refuge in the woods, and neversubmitted to his conqueror; but he troubled him no further, anddisappeared from the pages of history. Having achieved this result, Sargon turned towards the north-west, and coming at length into closeconflict with Eusas, did not leave his enemy till he had crushed him. He drove him into the gorges of Uaush, slaughtered a large number of histroops, and swept away the whole of his body-guard--a body of cavalry oftwo hundred men, all of whom were connected by blood with the reigningfamily. Eusas quitted his chariot, and, like his father Sharduris onthe night of the disaster at Kishtān, leaped upon a mare, and fled, overwhelmed with shame, into the mountains. His towns, terror-stricken, opened their gates at the first summons to the victor; Sargon burntthose which he knew he could not retain, granted the district of Uaushto his vassal Ullusunu as a recompense for his loyalty, and then marchedup to rest awhile in Naīri, where he revictualled his troops at theexpense of Ianzu of Khubushkia. He had, no doubt, hoped that Urzana ofMuzazīr, the last of the friends of Eusas to hold out againstAssyria, would make good use of the respite thus, to all appearancesunintentionally, afforded him, and would come to terms; but as theappeal to his clemency was delayed, Sargon suddenly determined to assumethe aggressive. Muzazīr, entrenched within its mountain ranges, wasaccessible only by one or two dangerous passes; Urzana had barricadedthese, and believed himself in a position to defy every effort of theAssyrians. Sargon, equally convinced of the futility of a front attack, had recourse to a surprise. 

[Illustration: 378. Jpg TAKING OF A TOWN IN URARTU BY THE ASSYRIANS]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the drawing by Botta. 

Taking with him his chariots and one thousand picked horsemen, he leftthe beaten track, and crossing the four or five mountain chains--theShiak, the Ardinshi, the Ulayau, and the Alluria--which lay between himand Muzazīr, he unexpectedly bore down upon the city. Urzana escapedafter a desperate resistance, but the place was taken by assault andsacked, the palace destroyed, the temple overthrown, and the statues ofthe gods Khaldīa and Bagbartu dragged from their sanctuary. The entireroyal family were sent into slavery, and with them 20, 170 of theinhabitants who had survived the siege, besides 690 mules, 920 oxen, 100, 225 sheep, and incalculable spoils in gold, silver, bronze, iron, and precious stones and stuffs, the furniture of Urzana, and even hisseal, being deposited in the treasury at Nineveh. 

[Illustration: 379. Jpg THE SEAL OF URZANA, KING OF MUZAZĪR]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from an impression of the original seal which is preserved at the Hague. 

The disaster at Muzazīr was the final blow to Urartu; it is impossibleto say what took place where Eusas himself was, and whether thefeudatories refused him any further allegiance, but in a short time hefound himself almost forsaken, without friends, troops, or a placeof refuge, and reduced to choose between death or the degradation ofappealing to the mercy of the conqueror. He stabbed himself ratherthan yield; and Sargon, only too thankful to be rid of such a dangerousadversary, stopped the pursuit. Argistis II. Succeeded to what was leftof his father's kingdom, * and, being anxious above all things to obtainpeace for his subjects, suspended hostilities, without however disarminghis troops. 

 * No text states positively that Argistis II. Immediately succeeded his father; but he is found mentioned as King of Urartu from 708 onwards, and hence it has been concluded, not without some reason, that such was the fact. The Vannic inscriptions have not as yet given us this sovereign's name. 

As was the case under Tiglath-pileser III. , Urartu neither submitted toAssyria, nor was there any kind of treaty between the belligerents toprescribe the conditions of this temporary truce. Both sides maintainedtheir positions on their respective territories: Sargon kept thefrontier towns acquired by him in previous years, and which he hadannexed to the border provinces, retaining also his suzerainty overMuzazīr, the Mannai, and the Median states implicated in the struggle;Argistis, on his side, strengthened himself in the regions around thesources of the Euphrates and Lake Van--in Biaīnas, in Etius, and inthe plains of the Araxes. The material injuries which he had received, however considerable they may appear, were not irreparable, and, asa fact, the country quickly recovered from them, but the people'sconfidence in their prince and his chiefs was destroyed. The defeat ofSharduris, following as it did on a period of advantageous victories, may have seemed to Argistis one of those unimportant occurrences whichconstantly take place in the career of the strongest nations; thedisaster of Rusas proved to him that, in attempting to wipe out hisfirst repulse, he had only made matters worse, and the conviction wasborne in upon his princes that they were not in a position to contestthe possession of Western Asia with the Assyrians. They thereforerenounced, more from instinct than as the result of deliberation, the project of enlarging their borders to the south, and if theysubsequently reappeared on the Mesopotamian plains, it was in searchof booty, and not to acquire territory. Any attempt to stop theirincursions, or to disturb them in their mountain fastnesses, found themprepared to hold their own with the same obstinacy as of old, and theywere quite able to safeguard their independence against an intruder. Besides this, the Cimmerians and the Scythians were already pressing ontheir frontier, and were constantly harassing them. 

[Illustration: 379. Jpg THE ASSYRIANS TAKING A MEDIAN TOWN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the facsimile by Flandin. It seems that this town was called Amkaru, and its name appears, as far as I know, in none of the accounts which we possess of the campaigns. The town was apparently situated in Karalla or in Median territory. 

This fresh danger absorbed their entire attention, and from this timeforward they ceased to play a part in general history; the century whichhad seen the rise and growth of their power was also a witness of theirdownfall under the attacks of Assyria. During the last months of 714, the tribes which had formerly constituted the kingdom of Karalla mutiniedagainst the tyranny of their governor, and invited Ami-tashshi, thebrother of their ancient lord Assurlī, to rule over them. Sargonattacked them in the spring of 713, dispersed their troops, held themto ransom, and after having once more exacted homage from Bīt-Dayaukku, *Ellipi, and Allabria. 

 * The Dayaukku who gave his name to this province was at first confounded with the personage who was entangled in the affairs of Ullusunu, and was then banished by Sargon to Hamath. A good number of historians now admit that they were different persons. Bīt-Dayaukku is evidently the district of Ecbatana. 

He made a raid extending as far as the confines of the Iranian desert, the barren steppes of Eastern Arabia, * and the district of Nagirabelonging to the "powerful" Manda. *

 * The Eastern Arabs mentioned here were nomadic, and inhabited the confines of the Great Desert to the south-east of Media, or the steppes of Northern Iran. They are those mentioned in a passage of Appian, together with Parthians, Bactrians, and Tapyręans, as having submitted to Seleucus. 

 ** The "powerful" Manda, encamped in the mountain and desert, and who were named after the Eastern Arabs, must be the peoples situated between the Caspian and the steppes of the Iranian plateau, and a branch of the Scythians who are soon to appear in Asiatic history. 

While he was thus preparing the way for peace in his Median domains, oneof his generals crossed the Euphrates to chastise the Tabal for theirill deeds. The latter had figured, about the year 740 B. C. , among thepeoples who had bowed before the supremacy of Urartu, and their chief, Uassarmi, had been the ally or vassal of Sharduris. Contemptuouslyspared at the taking of Arpad, he had not been able to resign himselfto the Assyrian yoke, and had, in an ill-timed moment, thrown it offin 731; he had, however, been overcome and forced to surrender, andTiglath-pileser had put in his place a man of obscure birth, namedKhulli, whose fidelity had remained unshaken throughout the reign ofShalmaneser V. And the first years of Sargon. Khulli's son, Ambaridis, the husband of a Ninevite princess, who had brought him as dowry aconsiderable part of Cilicia, had been unable to resist the flatteringoffers of Kusas; he had broken the ties which attached him to the newAssyrian dynasty, but had been left unmolested so long as Urartu andMuzazir remained unshaken, since his position at the western extremityof the empire prevented him from influencing in the smallest degree theissue of the struggle, and it was well known that when the fall of Kusastook place Ambaridis would be speedily brought to account. He was, infact, seized, banished to the banks of the Tigris, and his hereditaryfief of Bīt-Burutash annexed to Cilicia, under the rule of an Assyrian. The following year was signalised by a similar execution at which Sargonhimself deigned to preside in person. Tarkhunazi, the King of Miliddu, not only had taken advantage of the troubles consequent on the Armenianwar to rebel against his master, but had attacked Gunzinānu, who held, and had ruthlessly pillaged, the neighbouring district of Kammanu. *Sargon overcame him in the open field, took from him his city ofMiliddu, and stormed the town of Tulgarimmź in which he had takenrefuge. **

 * Kammanu is probably not the Kammanźnc of the Greek geographers, which is too far north relatively to Melitźnč, but is probably Comana of Cappadocia and its district. 

 ** Tulgarimmź has been connected with the Togarmah of the Bible (Gen. X. 3) by Halévy and Delitzsch, and their views on this subject have been adopted by most historians. 

Here again the native kingdom disappeared, and was replaced by anAssyrian administration. Kammanu, wedged in between Urartu and Mushki, separated these two countries, sometimes rivals to each other, butalways enemies to Nineveh. Its maintenance as an independent kingdomprevented them from combining their efforts, and obtaining that unity ofaction which alone could ensure for them, if not a definite triumph, at least preservation from complete extinction and an opportunity ofmaintaining their liberty; the importance of the position, however, rendered it particularly perilous to hold, and the Assyrians succeededin so doing only by strongly fortifying it. Walls were built round tencities, five on the Urartian frontier, three on that of Mushki, and twoon the north, and the country which they protected was made into a newprovince, that of Tulgarimmź, the district of Miliddu being confidedto the care of Mutallu, Prince of Kummukh (710). An incident whichtook place in the following year furnished a pretext for completingthe organisation and military defence of this western border province. Gurgum had been for thirty years or more in the possession ofTarkhulara; this prince, after having served Sharduris, had transferredhis homage to Tiglath-pileser, and he had thenceforward professedan unwavering loyalty to the Assyrian sovereigns. This accommodatingpersonage was assassinated by his son Mutallu; and Sargon, fearinga revolt, hastened, at the head of a detachment of picked troops, toavenge him. The murderer threw down his arms almost without havingstruck a blow, and Gurgum was thenceforward placed under the directrule of Nineveh. The affair had not been brought to a close before anoutbreak took place in Southern Syria, which might have entailed veryserious consequences had it not been promptly dealt with. Egypt, unitedfrom end to end under the sceptre of Sabaco, jealously kept watch overthe political complications in Asia, and though perhaps she was notsure enough of her own strength to interfere openly before the deathof Eusas, she had renewed negotiations with the petty kingdoms of theHebrews and Philistines. Ashdod had for some time past showed signsof discontent, and it had been found necessary to replace their king, Azuri, who had refused to pay tribute, by his brother Akhimiti; shortlyafter this, however, the people had risen in rebellion: they hadmassacred Akhimiti, whom they accused of being a mere thrall of Assyria, and had placed on the throne Yamani, a soldier of fortune, probablyan adventurer of Hellenic extraction. * The other Philistine cities hadimmediately taken up arms; Edom and Moab were influenced by the generalmovement, and Isaiah was striving to avert any imprudent step on thepart of Judah. Sargon despatched the Tartan, ** and the rapidity withwhich that officer carried out the campaign prevented the movement fromspreading beyond Philistia. He devastated Ashdod, and its vassal, Gath, carried off their gods and their inhabitants, and peopled the citiesafresh with prisoners from Asia Minor, Urartu, and Media. Yamaniattempted to escape into Egypt, but the chief of Milukhkha interceptedhim on his way, and handed him over in chains to the conqueror. ***

 * This prince's name, usually written Yamani, is also written Yatnani in the _Annals_, and this variation, which is found again in the name of the island of Cyprus and the Cypriotes, gives us grounds for believing that the Assyrian scribe took the race-name of the prince for a proper name: the new king of Ashdod would have been a Yamani, a Greek of Cyprus. 

 ** The Assyrian narratives, as usual, give the honour of conducting the campaign to the king. Isaiah (xx. 1) distinctly says that Sargon sent the Tartan to quell the revolt of Ashdod. 

 *** The _Annals_ state that Yamani was made prisoner and taken to Assyria. The _Fastes_, more accurate on this point, state that he escaped to Muzri, and that he was given up by the King of Milukhkha. The Muzri mentioned in this passage very probably here means Egypt. 

The latter took care not to call either Moab, Edom, or Judah to accountfor the part they had taken in the movement, perhaps because theywere not mentioned in his instructions, or because he preferred not tofurnish them, by an untimely interference, with a pretext for calling inthe help of Egypt. The year was doubtless too far advanced to allow himto dream of marching against Pharaoh, and moreover that would have beenone of those important steps which the king alone had the right to take. There was, however, no doubt that the encounter between the two empireswas imminent, and Isaiah ventured to predict the precise date of itsoccurrence. He walked stripped and barefoot through the streets ofJerusalem--a strange procedure which he explained by the words whichJahveh had put into his lips: "Like as My servant Isaiah hath walkednaked and barefoot three years for a sign and a wonder upon Egyptand upon Kush (Ethiopia); so shall the King of Assyria lead away thecaptives of Egypt and the exiles of Kush, young and old, naked andbarefoot, and with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. And theyshall be dismayed and ashamed, because of Kush their expectation, andof Egypt their glory. And the inhabitants of this coastland shall say inthat day, Behold, such is our expectation, whither we fled for help tobe delivered from the King of Assyria: and we, how shall we escape?"*

 * Isa. Xx. 

The fulfilment of this prophecy did not take place as quickly as theprophet perhaps desired. Egypt appeared too strong to be openly attackedby a mere section of the battalions at the disposal of Assyria, andbesides, it may have been deemed imprudent to involve the army to anyserious extent on so distant a field as Africa, when Babylon was readyand waiting to fall upon the very heart of Assyria at the first news ofa real or supposed reverse. Circumstances seemed, moreover, to favour awar against Merodach-baladan. This sovereign, who had been received withacclamation by the Babylonians, had already lost the popularity he hadenjoyed at his accession. The fickle character of the people, which madethem nearly always welcome a fresh master with enthusiasm, soon ledthem from love and obedience to hatred, and finally to revolt. Merodach-baladan trusted to the Kaldā to help him to maintain hisposition, and their rude barbarity, even if it protected him against thefickleness of his more civilised subjects, increased the discontent atKutha, Sippar, and Borsippa. He removed the statues of the gods fromthese towns, imprisoned the most turbulent citizens, confiscated theirgoods, and distributed them among his own followers; the other citiestook no part in the movement, but Sargon must have expected to findin them, if not effective support, at least sympathies which wouldfacilitate his work of conquest. It is true that Elam, whose friendshipfor the Aramęan was still undiminished, remained to be reckoned with, but Elam had lost much of its prestige in the last few years. The agedKhumban-igash had died in 717, * and his successor, Shutruk-nakhunta, had not apparently inherited all the energy of his father, ** and it ispossible that troubles had arisen among the vassals of his own kingdomwhich prevented him from interfering on behalf of his ally. Sargon tookaccount of all these circumstances in arranging his plan of campaign. Hedivided his army into two forces, one of which, under his own command, was to be directed against Merodach-baladan, while the other was toattack the insurgent Aramęans on the left bank of the Tigris, and wasto be manoeuvred so as to drive Shutruk-nakhunta back on the marshes ofthe Uknu. *** The eastern force was the first to be set in movement, andit pushed forward into the territory of the Gambulu. These latter hadconcentrated themselves round Dur-Atkharas, one of their citadels;****they had increased the height of the walls, and filled the ditches withwater brought from the Shurappu by means of a canal, and having receiveda reinforcement of 600 horsemen and 4000 foot soldiers, they had drawnthem up in front of the ramparts. 

 * The date of the death of Khumban-igash is indirectly given in the passage of the _Babylonian Chronicle of Pinches_, where it is said that in the first year of Ashshur-nādin- shumu, King of Babylon, Ishtar-khundu (= Shutruk-nakhunta) was dethroned by his brother, Khallushu, after having reigned over Elam eighteen years: these events actually took place, as we shall see below, about the year 699 before our era. 

 ** Shutruk-nakhunta is the Susian form of the name; the Assyrian texts distort it into Shutur-nankhundi, and the _Babylonian Chronicle of Pinches_, into Ishtar-khundu, owing to a faint resemblance in the sound of the name of the goddess Ishtar with the form _Shutur, Sthur_, itself derived from Shutruk, with which the name began. 

 *** The earlier historians of Assyria, misled in the first place by the form in which the scribes have handed down the account in the Annals and the _Fastes_, assumed the existence of a single army, led by Sargon himself, and which would have marched on all the above-mentioned places of the country, one by one. Tiele was the first to recognise that Sargon must have left part of his forces to the command of one of his lieutenants, and Winckler, enlarging on this idea, showed that there were then two armies, engaged at different seats of war, but manoeuvring as far as possible by mutual arrangement. 

 **** The site of Dur-Atkharas is unknown. Billerbeck places it hypotheti-cally on the stream of Mendeli, and his conjecture is in itself very plausible. I should incline, however, to place it more to the south, on account of the passage in which it is said that the Kaldā, to complete the defences of the town, brought a canal from the Shurappu and fortified its banks. The Shurappu, according to Delitzsch, would be the Shatt Umm-el-Jemāl; according to Delattrc, the Kerkha; the account of the campaign under consideration would lead me to recognise in it a watercourse like the Tib, which runs into the Tigris near Amara, in which case the ruins of Kherīb would perhaps correspond with the site of Dur-Atkharas. 

A single morning sufficed to disperse them, and the Assyrians, enteringthe city with the fugitives, took possession of it on the same day. Theymade 16, 490 prisoners, and seized horses, mules, asses, camels, andboth sheep and oxen in large numbers. Eight of the chiefs of theneighbourhood, who ruled over the flat country between the Shurappu andthe Uknu, begged for mercy as soon as they learned the result of theengagement. The name of Dur-Atkharas was changed to that of Dur-Nebo, the territory of the Gambulu was converted into a province, and itsorganisation having been completed, the army continued its march, sweeping before it the Euā, the Khindaru, the Puqudu, in short, all thetribes occupying the district of Yatbur. The chiefs of these provincessought refuge in the morasses of the lower Kerkha, but findingthemselves surrounded and short of provisions, they were forced byfamine to yield to the enemy, and came to terms with the Assyrians, whoimposed a tribute on them and included them within the new provinceof Gambulu. The goal of this expedition was thus attained, and Blamseparated from Karduniash, but the issue of the war remained undecidedas long as Shutruk-nakhunta held the cities at the edge of the plain, from which he could emerge at will into the heart of the Assyrianposition. The conqueror therefore turned in that direction, rapidly tookfrom him the citadels of Shamuna and Babduri, then those of Lakhirimmuand Pillutu, and pitched his camp on the bank of the Naditi, from whencehe despatched marauding bands to pillage the country. Dismay spreadthroughout the district of Rashi; the inhabitants, abandoning theircities--Tīl-Khumba, Durmishamash, Bubī, and Khamanu--migrated as far asBīt-Imbi; Shutruk-nakhunta, overcome with fear, took refuge, so it wassaid, in the distant mountains to preserve his life. *

 * None of these places can be identified with certainty. So far as I can follow the account of this campaign on the map, it seems that the attacks upon Shutruk-nakhunta took place on the plain and in the mountains between the Ab-ī-Gengir and the Tib, so that the river Naditi would be the Aftāh or one of its tributaries. If this were so, Lakhirimmu and Pillutu would be situated somewhere near the Jughaī ben Ruan and the Tope Ghulamen of de Morgan's map of Elam, Shamuna near Zirzir-tźpī, Babdurī near Hosseini-yeh. But I wish it to be understood that I do not consider these comparisons as more than simple conjectures. Bīt-Imbi was certainly out of the reach of the Assyrians, since it was used as a place of refuge by the inhabitants of Rashī; at the same time it must have been close to Rashī, since the people of this country fled thither. The site of Ghilān which de Morgan has adopted on his map seems to me to be too far north to comply with these conditions, and that of Tapa, approved by Billerboek, too southerly. If, as I believe, Rashī corresponds to the regions of Pushti-kuh which lie on both sides of the upper waters of the Mendeli stream, we ought to look for Bīt-Imbi somewhere near the Desht-ī-Ghoaur and the Zenjan, near a point where communication with the banks of the Ab-ī-Kirind would be easy. 

Sargon, meanwhile, had crossed the Euphrates with the other force, andhad marched straight upon Bīt-Dakkuri; having there noticed thatthe fortress of Dur-Ladīnu was in ruins, he rebuilt it, and, firmlyinstalled within the heart of the country, he patiently waited untilthe eastern force had accomplished its mission. Like his adversary, Merodach-baladan, he had no desire to be drawn into an engagement untilhe knew what chance there was of the latter being reinforced by the Kingof Elam. At the opening of hostilities Merodach-baladan claimed the helpof the Elamite king, and lavished on him magnificent presents--a couch, a throne, a portable chair, a cup for the royal offerings, and his ownpectoral chain; these all reached their destination in good condition, and were graciously accepted. But before long the Elamite prince, threatened in his own domain, forgot everything except his own personalsafety, and declared himself unable to render Merodach-baladan anyassistance. The latter, on receiving this news, threw himself with hisface in the dust, rent his clothes, and broke out into loud weeping;after which, conscious that his strength would not permit of his meetingthe enemy in the open field, he withdrew his men from the other side ofthe Tigris, escaped secretly by night, and retired with his troops tothe fortress of Ikbībel. The inhabitants of Babylon and Borsippa didnot allow themselves to be disconcerted; they brought the arks of Bel, Zarpanīt, Nebo, and Tashmīt out of their sanctuaries, and came forthwith chanting and musical instruments to salute Sargon at Dūr-Ladīnu. He entered the city in their company, and after he had celebrated thecustomary sacrifices, the people enthroned him in Merodach-baladan'spalace. Tribute was offered to him, but he refused to accept any part ofit for his personal use, and applied it to a work of public utility--therepairing of the ancient canal of Borsippa, which had become nearlyfilled up. This done, he detached a body of troops to occupy Sippara, and returned to Assyria, there to take up his winter quarters. 

Once again, therefore, the ancient metropolis of the Euphrates was ruledby an Assyrian, who united in one protocol the titles of the sovereignsof Assur and Kar-duniash. Babylon possessed for the kings of Ninevehthe same kind of attraction as at a later date drew the German Cęsars toRome. Scarcely had the Assyrian monarchs been crowned within their owndomains, than they turned their eyes towards Babylon, and their ambitionknew no rest till the day came for them to present themselves in pompwithin the temple of its god and implore his solemn consecration. Whenat length they had received it, they scrupulously secured its renewal onevery occasion which the law prescribed, and their chroniclers recordedamong the important events of the year, the ceremony in which they "tookthe hand of Bel. " Sargon therefore returned, in the month Nisan of theyear 709, to preside over the procession of the god, and he devoutlyaccomplished the rites which constituted him the legitimate successor ofthe semi-fabulous heroes of the old empire, foremost among whom was hisnamesake Shargāni of Agadź. He offered sacrifices to Bel, Nebo, and tothe divinities of Sumir and Akkad, and he did not return to the campuntil he had fulfilled all the duties incumbent on his new dignity. Hewas involved that year in two important wars at opposite points of hisempire. One was at the north-western extremity, against the Mushki andtheir king Mita, who, after having supported Eusas, was now intriguingwith Argistis; the other in the south-east, against the Kaldā, andprobably also against Elam. He entrusted the conduct of the former tothe governor of Kuī, but reserved to himself the final reckoning withMerodach-baladan. The Babylonian king had made good use of the respitegiven him during the winter months. Too prudent to meet his enemy inthe open plain, he had transformed his hereditary principality into aformidable citadel. During the preceding campaign he had devastatedthe whole of the country lying between the marshes and the territoryoccupied by the Assyrians, and had withdrawn the inhabitants. Mostof the towns--Ikbībel, Uru, Uruk, Kishik, and Nimid-laguda--were alsodeserted, and no garrisons were left in them. He had added to thefortifications of Dur-Yakīa, and enlarged the moat till it was twohundred cubits wide and eighteen deep, so as to reach the level ofinfiltration; he then turned into it the waters of the Euphrates, sothat the town appeared to be floating on a lake, without either bridgesor quays by means of which the besiegers might have brought theirmachines within range and their troops been able to approach for anassault. Merodach-baladan had been careful not to shut himself withinthe town, but had taken up a position in the marshes, and there awaitedthe arrival of the Assyrians. Sargon, having left Babylon in themonth of Iyyār, encountered him within sight of Dur-Yakīn. The Aramęaninfantry were crushed by repeated charges from the Mnevito chariotry andcavalry, who pursued the fugitives to the outer side of the moat, andseized the camp with all its baggage and the royal train, including theking's tent, a canopy of solid silver which protected the throne, hissceptre, weapons, and stores of all kinds. The peasants, to the numberof 90, 580, crowded within the lines, also fell into their hands, together with their flocks and herds--2500 horses, 610 mules, and854 camels, as well as sheep, oxen, and asses; the remainder of thefugitives rushed within the outworks for refuge "like a pack of wildboars, " and finally were driven into the interior of the place, orscattered among the beds of reeds along the coast. Sargon cut downthe groves of palm trees which adorned the suburbs, and piled up theirtrunks in the moat, thus quickly forming a causeway right up tothe walls. Merodach-baladan had been wounded in the arm during theengagement, but, nevertheless, fought stubbornly in defence of his city;when he saw that its fall was inevitable, he fled to the other side ofthe gulf, and took refuge among the mud flats of the Lower Ulaī. Sargonset fire to Dur-Yakīn, levelled its towers and walls with the ground, and demolished its houses, temples, and palaces. It had been a sort ofpenal settlement, to which the Kaldā rulers used to consign those oftheir subjects belonging to the old aboriginal race, who had renderedthemselves obnoxious by their wealth or independence of character; thenumber of these prisoners was considerable, Babylon, Borsippa, Nipur, and Sippar, not to speak of Uni, Uruk, Eridu, Larsam, and Kishīk, having all of them furnished their share. Sargon released them all, and restored their gods to the temples; he expelled the nomads from theestates which, contrary to all justice, had been distributed among themin preceding years, and reinstated the former owners. Karduniash, whichhad been oppressed for twelve long years by a semi-barbarian despot, nowbreathed again, and hailed Sargon as its deliverer, while he on hispart was actively engaged in organising his conquest. The voluntarysubmission of Upiri, King of Dilmun, who lived isolated in the opensea, "as though in a bird's nest, " secured to Sargon possession of thewatercourses which flowed beyond the Chaldęan lake into the PersianGulf: no sooner had he obtained it than he quitted the neighbourhood ofDur-Yakīn, crossed the Tigris, and reinforced the garrisons which linedhis Elamite frontier on this side. He had just finished building astrongly fortified citadel on the site of Sagbat, * when ambassadorsarrived from Mita. 

 * This Sagbat, which must not be confused with the district of Bīt-Sagbati mentioned in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III. , seems to correspond with a post to the south of Durīlu, perhaps the ruins of Baksayeh, on the Tchengula. 

The governor of Kuī had at length triumphed over the obstinacy of theMushki, and after driving them from village to village, had compelledthem to sue for terms: the tidings of the victories over the Kaldā haddoubtless hastened their decision, but they were still so powerful thatit was thought wiser not to impose too rigorous conditions upon them. Mita agreed to pay tribute, and surrendered one or two districts, whichwere turned into an Aramęan settlement: the inhabitants were transferredto Bīt-Yakīn, where they had to make the best they could of landsthat had been devastated by war. At this juncture the Greeks of Cyprusflattered the pride of the Assyrians in a most unexpected way: afterthe manner of their race they scoured the seas, and their fleetspersistently devastated the coasts of Syria and Cilicia. 

[Illustration: 396. Jpb STELE AT LARNAKA]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the plaster cast in the Louvre. 

Seven of their kings were so far alarmed by the report of Sargon'sachievements as to dread punishment for their misdeeds. They thereforesent him presents, and, for the moment, abandoned their piraticalexpeditions in Phoenician waters. The homage of these inveterate robbersraised Sargon in his own eyes and in those of his subjects. Some yearslater, about 708 B. C. , he presented them with a stele of blackmarble, on which he had engraved his own portrait, together with a longinscription setting forth his most glorious exploits. They set it upat Kition (Citium), where it has been preserved amongst the ruins, apriceless witness to the greatness of Assyria. 

While war thus raged around him, Sargon still found time for works of apeaceful character. He set himself to remodel and complete the system ofirrigation in the Assyrian plain; he repaired the dykes, and cleaned outand made good the beds of the canals which had been neglected during thetroublous times of the last generation. He erected buildings at Calah*and at Nineveh, but in these cities everything seemed to recall toovividly the memory of the sovereigns who had gone before him: he wishedfor a capital which should belong to himself alone, where he would notbe reminded of a past in which he had no part. After meditating day andnight, his choice fell upon the village of Maganubba, a little to thenorth-east of Nineveh, in a wide plain which extends from the banks ofthe Khuzur to the hills of Muzri, and by a single decree he expropriatedall its inhabitants. He then built on the land which he had purchasedfrom them a city of unrivalled magnificence, which he called by his ownname, Dur-Sharrukīn. **

 * At Calah, he lived in an old palace of Assur-nazir-pal restored and adapted for his use, as shown by the inscription published by Layard. 

 ** In most of the texts the village of Maganubba is not named; it is mentioned in the _Cylinder Inscription_, and this document is the only one which furnishes details of the expropriation, etc. The modern name of the place is Khorsabad, _the city of Khosroes_, but the name of its founder was still associated with its ruins, in the time of Yakut, who mentions him under the name of Sarghun. It was first explored in 1843 by Botta, then by Place and Oppert. The antiquities collected there by Botta and Place constitute the bulk of the Assyrian Museum in the Louvre; unfortunately, a part of the objects collected by Place went to the bottom of the Tigris with the lighter which was carrying them. 

The ground plan of it is of rectangular shape, the sides being about1900 yards long by 1800 yards wide, each corner exactly facing oneof the four points of the compass. Its walls rest on a limestonesub-structure some three feet six inches high, and rise fifty-seven feetabove the ground; they are strengthened, every thirty yards or so, bybattlemented towers which project thirteen feet from the face of thewall and stand sixteen feet higher than the ramparts. *

 * Place reckoned the height of the wall at 75 feet, a measurement adopted by Perrot and Chipiez; Dieulafoy has shown that the height of the wall must be reduced to 47 feet, and that of the towers about 65 feet. 

[Illustration: 398. Jpg PLAN OF THE ROYAL CITY OF DUR-SHARRUKĪN]

 Reduction by Faucher-Gudin, from the plan published in Place. 

Access was gained to the interior by eight gates, two on each side ofthe square, each of them marked by two towers separated from one anotherby the width of the bay. Every gate had its patron, chosen from amongthe gods of the city; there was the gate of Shamash, the gate of Rammān, those of Bel and Beltis, of Ami, of Tshtar, of Eā, and of the Lady ofthe Gods. Each of them was protected externally by a _migdol_, or smallcastle, built in the Syrian style, and flanked at each corner by a lowtower thirteen yards in width; five allowed of the passage of beastsas well as men. It was through these that the peasants came in everymorning, driving their cattle before them, or jolting along in waggonsladen with fruit and vegetables. After passing the outposts, theycrossed a paved courtyard, then made their way between the two towersthrough a vaulted passage over fifty yards long, intersected at almostequal intervals by two transverse galleries. The other three gates had aspecial arrangement of their own; a flight of twelve steps built outin front of the courtyard rendered them inaccessible to animals orvehicles. At the entrance to the passage towered two colossal bulls withhuman heads, standing like sentinels--their faces and foreparts turnedoutward, their hind-quarters ranged along the inner walls--as thoughgazing before them into space in company with two winged genii. The archsupported by their mitred heads was ornamented by a course of enamelledbricks, on which other genii, facing one another in pairs, offeredpine-cones across a circular ornament of many colours. These were themystic guardians of the city, who shielded it not only from the attacksof men, but also from invasions of evil spirits and pernicious diseases. The rays of the sun made the forecourt warm in winter, while it wasalways cool under the archway in summer; the gates served as resorts forpleasure or business, where old men and idlers congregated to discusstheir affairs and settle the destinies of the State, merchantsbargained and disposed of their goods, and the judge and notables of theneighbouring quarter held their courts. 

[Illustration: 400. Jpg PART OF THE ENAMELLED COURSE OF A GATE]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a drawing published in Place. 

It was here that the king generally exposed to view the chieftains andkings whom he had taken captive; here they lay, chained like dogs incages, dependent on the pity of their guards or of passers-by for suchmiserable fare as might be flung to them, and, the first feeling ofcuriosity once passed, no longer provoking even the jeers of the crowd, until a day came when their victor took it into his head to removethem from their ignominious position, and either restored them to theirthrones or sent them to the executioner. * The town itself, beingbuilt from plans drawn up by one mind, must have presented few of theirregularities of outline characteristic of ancient cities. 

 * To mention but a single instance, it was in this way that Assur-bani-pal treated the Arab kings captured by him. 

The streets leading from the gates were of uniform breadth throughout, from one side of the enclosure to the other. They were paved, had nosideways or footpaths, and crossed one another at right angles. Thehouses on either side of them seem, for the most part, to have consistedof a single story. They were built of bricks, either baked orunbaked, the outer surfaces of which were covered with white or tintedrough-casting. The high and narrow doors were nearly always hiddenaway in a corner of the front; the bare monotony of the walls was onlyrelieved here and there at long intervals by tiny windows, but ofteninstead of a flat roof the building was surmounted by a conical domeor by semi-cupolas, the concave sides of which were turned inwards. Theinhabitants varied greatly in race and language: Sargon had filled hiscity with prisoners collected from all the four quarters of his empire, from Elam, Chaldęa, and Media, from Urartu and Tabal, Syria andPalestine, and in order to keep these incongruous elements in check headded a number of Assyrians, of the mercantile, official, or priestlyclasses. He could overlook the whole city from the palace which he hadbuilt on both sides the north-eastern wall of the town, half withinand half without the ramparts. Like all palaces built on the Euphrateanmodel, this royal castle stood on an artificial eminence of bricksformed of two rectangles joined together in the shape of the letterT. The only entrance to it was on the city side, foot-passengers beingadmitted by a double flight of steps built out in front of the ramparts, horsemen and chariots by means of an inclined plane which rose ina gentle gradient along the right flank of the masonry work, andterminated on its eastern front. Two main gates corresponded to thesetwo means of approach; the one on the north-east led straight to theroyal apartments, the other faced the city and opened on to the doublestaircase. It was readily distinguishable from a distance by its twoflagstaffs bearing the royal standard, and its two towers, at the baseof which were winged bulls and colossal figures of Gilgames crushing thelion. 

[Illustration: 402. Jpg bird's eye view of sargon's palace atdur-sharrukīn]

 Drawn by Boudier, from the restoration by Thomas in Place. 

Two bulls of still more monstrous size stood sentry on either side ofthe gate, the arch was outlined by a course of enamelled bricks, whilehigher up, immediately beneath the battlements, was an enamelled mosaicshowing the king in all his glory. This triumphal arch was reserved forhis special use, the common people being admitted by two side doors ofsmaller size less richly decorated. 

[Illustration: 403. Jpg ONE OF THE GATES OF THE PALACE AT DUR-SHARRUKĪN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the restoration by Thomas, in Place. 

Saragon resided at Caleh, where he had taken up his quarters in theformer palace of Assur-nazir-pal, while his new city was still inthe hands of the builders. Every moment that he could spare from hismilitary and administrative labours was devoted to hastening on theprogress of the work, and whenever he gained a victory or pillaged adistrict, he invariably set aside a considerable part of the booty inorder to meet the outlay which the building involved. Thus we find thaton returning from his tenth campaign he brought with him an immenseconvoy laden with timber, stone, and precious metals which he hadcollected in the neighbourhood of Mount Taurus or among the mountains ofAssyria, including coloured marbles, lapis-lazuli, rock crystal, pine, cedar, and cypress-wood, gold, silver, and bronze, all of which wasdestined for Dur-Sharrukīn; the quantity of silver included among thesematerials was so great that its value fell to a level with that ofcopper. 

[Illustration: 404. Jpg PLAN OF THE EXCAVATED PORTIONS OF THE PALACE ATDUR-SHARRUKĪN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the plan by Thomas, in Place. 

The interior of the building, as in the case of the old Chaldęanpalaces, was separated into two well-marked divisions. The larger ofthese was used by the king in his public capacity, and to this thenobles and soldiers, and even the common people, were admitted undercertain conditions and on certain days prescribed by custom. The outercourt was lined on three sides by warehouses and depots, in which werestored the provisions, commodities, and implements required for the hostof courtiers and slaves who depended on the sovereign for support. Eachroom had, as may still be seen, its own special purpose. There werecellars for wine and oil, with their rows of large oblong jars; thenthere were store-rooms for implements of iron, which Place found fullof rusty helmets, swords, pieces of armour, maces, and ploughshares;a little further on were rooms for the storage of copper weapons, enamelled bricks, and precious metals, and the king's private treasury, in which were hidden away the spoils of the vanquished or the regulartaxes paid by his subjects; some fine bronze lions of marvellousworkmanship and lifelike expression were found still shut up here. 

[Illustration: 405. Jpg ONE OF THE BRONZE LIONS FROM DUR-SHARRUKĪN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the original in the Louvre. 

The kitchens adjoined the pantries, and the stables for horses andcamels communicated direct with the coach-houses in which the statechariots were kept, while the privies were discreetly hidden in asecluded corner. On the other side, among the buildings occupying thesouthern angle of the courtyard, the menials of the palace livedhuddled together, each family quartered in small, dark rooms. The royalapartments, properly so called, stood at the back of these domesticoffices, facing the south-east, near the spot where the inclined planedebouched on to the city ramparts. The monumental entrance to theseapartments was guarded, in accordance with religious custom, by acompany of winged bulls; behind this gate was a lawn, then a secondgate, a corridor and a grand quadrangle in the very centre of thepalace. 

[Illustration: 406. Jpg A HUNTING EXPEDITION IN THE WOODS NEARDUR-SHARRUKĪN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a drawing by Flandin, in Botta. 

The king occupied a suite of some twenty rooms of a rather simplecharacter; here he slept, ate, worked, and transacted the greaterpart of his daily business, guarded by his eunuchs and attended by hisministers and secretaries. The remaining rooms were apartments of state, all of the same pattern, in which the crowd of courtiers and employésassembled while waiting for a private audience or to intercept the kingas he passed. A subdued light made its way from above through narrowwindows let into the massive arches. The walls were lined to a heightof over nine feet from the floor with endless bas-reliefs, in greyishalabaster, picked out in bright colours, and illustrating the principaloccupations in which the sovereign spent his days, such as the audiencesto ambassadors, hunting in the woods, sieges and battles. A few briefinscriptions interspersed above pictures of cities and persons indicatedthe names of the vanquished chiefs or the scenes of the various eventsportrayed; detailed descriptions were engraved on the back of theslabs facing the brick wall against which they rested. This was aprecautionary measure, the necessity for which had been but too plainlyproved by past experience. Every one--the king himself included--wellknew that some day or other Dur-Sharrukīn would be forsaken just asthe palaces of previous dynasties had been, and it was hoped thatinscriptions concealed in this manner would run a better chance ofescaping the violence of man or the ravages of time; preserved in them, the memory of Sargon would rise triumphant from the ruins. The godsreigned supreme over the north-east angle of the platform, and a largeirregular block of buildings was given up to their priests; their cellscontained nothing of any particular interest, merely white walls andblack plinths, adorned here and there with frescoes embellished byarabesques, and pictures of animals and symbolical genii. The _ziggurāt_rose to a height of some 141 feet above the esplanade. It had sevenstoreys dedicated to the gods of the seven planets, each storey beingpainted in the special colour of its god--the first white, the secondblack, the third purple, the fourth blue, the fifth a vermilion red;the sixth was coated with silver, and the seventh gilded. There was nochamber in the centre of the tower, but a small gilded chapel probablystood at its base, which was used for the worship of Assuf or of Ishtar. The harem, or _Bīt-riduti_, was at the southern corner of the enclosure, almost in the shadow of the _ziggurāt_. Sargon had probably three queenswhen he founded his city, for the harem is divided into three separateapartments, of which the two larger look out on the same quadrangle. 

[Illustration: 408. Jpg THE ZIGGURAT AT DUR-SHARRUKIN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the restoration by Thomas, in Place. 

Two courses of enamelled bricks ran along the base of the faēade, whilestatues were placed at intervals against the wall, and the bay of thegateway was framed by two bronze palm trees gilt: the palm being theemblem of fruitfulness and grace, no more fitting decoration could havebeen chosen for this part of the building. The arrangement was the samein all three divisions: an ante-chamber of greater width than length;an apartment, one half of which was open to the sky, while the otherwas covered by a half-dome, and a flight of twelve steps, leading toan alcove in which stood a high wooden couch. The queens and princessesspent their lives in this prison-like _bīt-riduti_: their time was takenup with dress, embroidery, needlework, dancing and singing, themonotony of this routine being relieved by endless quarrels, feuds, and intrigues. The male children remained in the harem until the ageof puberty, when they left it in order to continue their education asprinces and soldiers under the guidance of their father. *

 * An inscription of Assur-bani-pal, gives a summary description of the life led in the harem by heirs to the throne, and describes generally the kind of education received by them from their earliest childhood. 

[Illustration: 409. Jpg SECTION OF A BEDROOM IN THE HAREM]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the restoration by Thomas, in Place. 

This group of buildings was completed by a park, in which cedars ofLebanon, pines, cypresses, gazelles, stags, wild asses and cattle, andeven lions, were acclimatised, in addition to a heterogeneous collectionof other trees and animals. Here, the king gave himself up to thepleasures of the chase, and sometimes invited one or other of his wivesto come thither and banquet or drink with him. 

After Mita's surrender, Sargon had hoped to be allowed to finishbuilding his city in peace; but an ill-advised movement in Kummukhobliged him to don his harness again (708 B. C. ). King Mutallu hadentered into an alliance with Argistis of Urartu, and took the fieldwith his army; but when details of what had taken place in Chaldęareached his ears, and he learnt the punishment that had been inflictedon the people of Bīt-Yakin, his courage failed him. 

[Illustration: 410. Jpg MAIN BOOK OF THE HAREM AT DUK-SHARRUKĪN]

 Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the restoration by Thomas, in Place. 

He fled without waiting for the Assyrians to appear, and so great washis haste that he had no time to take his family and treasure withhim. Sargon annexed his kingdom, placed it under the government ofthe _tartan_, and incorporated into his own the whole army of Kummukh, including 150 chariots, 1500 horsemen, 20, 000 archers, and 10, 000pikemen. In the following year (707) his vassal Dalta died, leaving twosons, Nibi and Ishpabara, both of whom claimed possession of the fief ofEllipi; Nibi appealed to Elam for help, and Ishpabara at once turned foraid to Assyria. Sargon sent him a body of troops, commanded by sevenof his generals, while Shutruk-nakhunta lent his _protégé_ 4500 bowmen;Ishpabara won the day, took the city of Marubishti by storm, andcompelled his brother to take refuge in Susian territory. The affairwras over so quickly that it caused practically no delay in thecompletion of the works at the capital. The consecration of a new citynecessitated the observance of a host of complicated ceremonies, whichextended over several months. First of all provision had to be made forits religious worship; the omens were consulted in order to determinewhich of the gods were to be invoked, and, when this was decided, therefollowed the installation of the various statues and arks which were topreside over the destinies of the city and the priests to whom they wereintrusted; the solemn inauguration took place on the 22nd day of Tisri, in the year 707 B. C. , and from that day forward Dur-Sharrukīn occupiedthe rank officially assigned to it among the capitals of the empire. Sargon, however, did not formally take up his residence within it tillsix months later, on the 6th day of Iyyār, 706. He must, by this time, have been advancing in years, and even if we assume him to have been ayoung man when he ascended the throne, after the sixteen years of bodilyfatigue and mental worry through which he had passed since coming intopower, he must have needed repose. He handed over the government of thenorthern provinces to his eldest son Sin-akhź-irba, better known to usas Sennacherib, whom he regarded as his successor; to him he transferredthe responsibility of keeping watch over the movements of the Mannai, of Urartu, and of the restless barbarians who dwelt beyond the zoneof civilised states on the banks of the Halys, or at the foot ofthe distant Caucasus: a revolt among the Tabal, in 706, was promptlysuppressed by his young and energetic deputy. As for Sargon himself, hewas content to retain the direct control of the more pacific provinces, such as Babylon, the regions of the Middle Euphrates, and Syria, and hedoubtless hoped to enjoy during his later years such tranquillity as wasnecessary to enable him to place his conquests on a stable basis. Theenvious fates, however, allowed him but little more than twelve shortmonths: he perished early in 705 B. C. , assassinated by some soldier ofalien birth, if I interpret rightly the mutilated text which furnishesus with a brief mention of the disaster. Sennacherib was recalled inhaste from the frontier, and proclaimed king immediately on his arrival, thus ascending unopposed to the throne on the 12th day of Ab. Hisfather's body had been left unburied, doubtless in order that he mightverify with his own eyes the truth of what had been told him concerninghis death, and thus have no ground for harbouring suspicions thatwould have boded ill for the safety of the late king's councillors andservants. He looked upon his father's miserable ending as a punishmentfor some unknown transgression, and consulted the gods to learn whatit was that had aroused their anger, refusing to authorise the burialwithin the palace until the various expiatory rites suggested by theoracle had been duly performed. *

 * This is my interpretation of the text published and translated by Winckler. Winckler sees in it the account of a campaign during which Sargon was killed by mountaineers, as was Cyprus in later times by the Massagetse; the king's body (according to him) remained unburied, and was recovered by Sennacherib only after considerable delay. In support of his version of this event Winckler cites the passage in Isa. Xiv. 4-20, which he takes as having been composed to exult over the death of Sargon, and then afterwards adapted to the death of a king of Babylon. 

Thus mysteriously disappeared the founder of the mightiest dynasty thatever ruled in Assyria, perhaps even in the whole of Western Asia. Atfirst sight, it would seem easy enough to determine what manner ofman he was and to what qualities he owed his greatness, thanks to theabundance of documents which his contemporaries have bequeathed to us;but when we come to examine more closely, we soon find the task to be byno means a simple one. The inscriptions maintain so discreet a silencewith regard to the antecedents of the kings before their accession, andconcerning their education and private life, that at this distance oftime we cannot succeed in forming any clear idea as to their individualtemperament and character. The monuments record such achievementsas they took pride in, in terms of uniform praise which conceal orobliterate the personality of the king in question; it is always theideal Assyrian sovereign who is held up for our admiration under a scoreof different names, and if, here and there, we come upon some traitwhich indicates the special genius of this or that monarch, we maybe sure that the scribe has allowed it to slip in by accident, quiteunconscious of the fact that he is thus affording us a glimpse of hismaster's true character and disposition. A study of Sargon's campaignsas revealed in his annals will speedily convince us that he wassomething more than a fearless general, with a keen eye to plunder, who could see nothing in the most successful expedition but a means ofenriching his people or adding to the splendours of his court. He wasevidently convinced that certain nations, such as Urartu and Elam, wouldnever really assimilate with his own subjects, and, in their case, headhered strictly to the old system of warfare, and did all he could tobring about their ruin; other nations, on the contrary, he regarded ascapable of amalgamation with the Assyrians, and these he did his best toprotect from the worst consequences of their rebellion and resistance. He withdrew them from the influence of their native dynasties, andconverted their territories into provinces under his own vigilantadministration, and though he did not scruple to send the more turbulentelements among them into exile, and did his best to weaken them byfounding alien colonies in their midst, yet he respected their religion, customs, and laws, and, in return for their obedience to his rule, guaranteed them an equitable and judicious government. Moreover, hetook quite as much interest in their well-being as' in his own militarysuccesses, and in the midst of his heroic struggles against Rusas andMerodach-baladan he contrived to find time for the consideration of suchprosaic themes as the cultivation of the vine and of corn; he devotedhis attention to the best methods of storing wine, and sought to prevent"oil, which is the life of man and healeth wounds, from rising in price, and the cost of sesame from exceeding that of wheat. " We seem to seein him, not only the stern and at times cruel conqueror, but also thegracious monarch, kind and considerate to his people, and merciful tothe vanquished when policy permitted him to indulge his natural leaningto clemency. 

END OF VOL. VII.