THE SEVEN GREAT MONARCHIES

OF THE

ANCIENT EASTERN WORLD;

OR, THE HISTORY, GEOGRAPHY, AND ANTIQUITIES OF CHALDAEA, ASSYRIA

BABYLON, MEDIA, PERSIA, PARTHIA, AND SASSANIAN, OR NEW PERSIAN EMPIRE. 

BY

GEORGE RAWLINSON, M. A. , CAMDEN PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

IN THREE VOLUMES. 

VOLUME II. 

WITH MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS

PERSIA PROPER. 

[Illustration: MAP]

THE FIFTH MONARCHY. 

PERSIA. 

CHAPTER I. EXTENT OF THE EMPIRE. 

The geographical extent of the Fifth Monarchy was far greater than thatof any one of the four which had preceded it. While Persia Proper is acomparatively narrow and poor tract, extending in its greatest lengthonly some seven or eight degrees (less than 500 miles), the dominions ofthe Persian kings covered a space fifty-six degrees long, and in placesmore than twenty degrees wide. The boundaries of their empire were thedesert of Thibet, the Sutlej, and the Indus, on the east; the IndianSea, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian and Nubian deserts, on the south;on the west, the Greater Syrtis, the Mediterranean, the Egean, and theStrymon river; on the north, the Danube, the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the Caspian, and the Jaxartes. Within these limits lay a territory, theextent of which from east to west was little less than 3000 miles, while its width varied between 500 and 1500 miles. Its entire area wasprobably not less than, two millions of square miles--or more than halfthat of modern Europe. It was thus at least eight times as large as theBabylonian Empire at its greatest extent, and was probably more thanfour times as large as the Assyrian. 

The provinces included within the Empire may be conveniently dividedinto the Central, the Western, and the Eastern. The Central are PersiaProper, Susiana, Babylonia, Assyria, Media, the coast tract of theCaspian, and Sagartia, or the Great Desert. The Western are Paeonia, Thrace, Asia Minor, Armenia, Iberia, Syria and Phoenicia, Palestine, Egypt, and the Cyrenaica. The Eastern are Hyrcania, Parthia, Aria, Chorasmia, Sogdiana, Bactria, Scythia, Gandaria, Sattagydia, India, Paricania, the Eastern AEthiopia, and Mycia. 

Of these countries a considerable number have been already described inthese volumes. Susiana, Babylonia, Assyria, Media, the Caspian coast, Armenia, Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine, belong to this class; and itmay be assumed that the reader is sufficiently acquainted with theirgeneral features. It would therefore seem to be enough in the presentplace to give an account of the regions which have not yet occupied ourattention, more especially of Persia Proper--the home of the dominantrace. 

Persia Proper seems to have corresponded nearly to that province of themodern Iran, which still bears the ancient name slightly modified, beingcalled Farsistan or Fars. The chief important difference between the twois, that whereas in modern times the tract called Herman is regarded asa distinct and separate region, Carmania anciently was included withinthe limits of Persia. Persia Proper lay upon the gulf to which it hasgiven name, extending from the mouth of the Tab (Oroatis) to the pointwhere the gulf joins the Indian Ocean. It was bounded on the west bySusiana, on the north by Media Magna, on the east by Mycia, and onthe south by the sea. Its length seems to have been about 450, and itsaverage width about 250 miles. It thus contained an area of rather morethan 100, 000 square miles. 

In modern times it is customary to divide the province of Fars intothe _ghermsir_, or, "warm district, " and the _serdsir_, or "coldregion"--and the physical character of the country must have made such adivision thoroughly appropriate at every period. The "warm district"is a tract of sandy plain, often impregnated with salt, which extendsbetween the mountains and the sea the whole length of the province, being a continuation of the flat region of Susiana, but falling verymuch short of that region in all the qualities which constitute physicalexcellence. The soil is poor, consisting of alternate sand and clay--itis ill-watered, the entire tract possessing scarcely a single streamworthy of the name of river--and, lying only just without the northernTropic, the district is by its very situation among the hottest ofwestern Asia. It forms, however, no very large portion of the ancientPersia, being in general a mere strip of land, from ten to fiftymiles wide, and thus not constituting more than an eighth part of theterritory in question. 

The remaining seven eighths belong to the serdsir, or "cold region. "The mountain-range which under various names skirts on the east theMesopotamian lowland, separating off that depressed and generallyfertile region from the bare high plateau of Iran, and runningcontinuously in a direction parallel to the course of the Mesopotamianstreams--i. E. From the north-west to the south-east--changes its courseas it approaches the sea, sweeping gradually round between long. 50° and55°, and becoming parallel to the coast-line, while at the same time itbroadens out, till it covers a space of nearly three degrees, or abovetwo hundred miles. Along the high tract thus created lay the bulk ofthe ancient Persia, consisting of alternate mountain, plain, and narrowvalley, curiously intermixed, and as yet very incompletely mapped. Thisregion is of varied character. In places richly, fertile, picturesque, and romantic almost beyond imagination, with lovely wooded dells, greenmountain-sides, and broad plains suited for the production of almost anycrops, it has yet on the whole a predominant character of sterility andbarrenness, especially towards its more northern and eastern portions. The supply of water is everywhere scanty. Scarcely any of the streamsare strong enough to reach the sea. After short courses they areeither absorbed by the sand or end in small salt lakes, from whichthe superfluous water is evaporated. Much of the country is absolutelywithout streams, and would be uninhabitable were it not for the_kanats_, or _karizes_, subterranean channels of spring-water, describedat length in a former volume. 

The only rivers of the district which deserve any attention are the Tab(or Oroatis), whereof a description has been already given, the Kur orBendamir (called anciently Araxes), with its tributary, the Pulwar (orCyrus), and the Khoonazaberni or river of Khisht. 

The Bendamir rises in the mountains of the Bakhtiyari chain, in lat. 30° 35', long. 51° 50' nearly, and runs with a course which is generallysouth-east, past the ruins of Persepolis, to the salt lake of Neyrizor Kheir, which it enters in long. 53° 30'. It receives, where itapproaches nearest to Persepolis, the Pulwar or Kur-ab, a small streamcoming from the north-east and flowing by the ruins of both Pasargadaeand Persepolis. A little below its junction with this stream theBendamir is crossed by a bridge of five arches, and further down, on theroute between Shiraz and Herman, by another of twelve. Here its watersare to a great extent drawn off by means of canals, and are made tofertilize a large tract of rich flat country on either bank, after whichthe stream pursues its course with greatly diminished volume to the saltlake in which it ends. The entire course, including only main windings, may be estimated at 140 or 150 miles. 

The Khoonazaberni or river of Khisht rises near the ruins of Shapur, ata short distance from Kazerun, on the route between Bushire andShiraz, and flows in a broad valley between lofty mountains towardsthe south-west, entering the Persian Gulf by three mouths, the chief ofwhich is at Rohilla, twenty miles north of Bushire, where the stream hasa breadth of sixty yards, and a depth of about four feet. Above Khishtthe river is already thirty yards wide. Its chief tributary is theDalaki stream, which enters it from the east, nearly in long. 51°. Theentire course of the Khisht river may be about 95 or 100 miles. Itswater is brackish except near the source. 

The principal lakes are the Lake of Neyriz and the Deriah-i-Nemek. TheDeriah-i-Nemek is a small basin distant about ten miles from Shiraz, which receives the waters of the streams that supply that town. It has alength of about fifteen and a breadth of about three or three and a halfmiles. The lake of Neyriz or Kheir is of far larger size, being fromfifty to sixty miles long and from three to six broad, though in thesummer season it is almost entirely dried up. Salt is then obtainedfrom the lake in large quantities, and forms an important feature in thecommerce of the district. Smaller lakes, also salt or brackish, exist inother parts of the country, as Lake Famur, near Kazerun, which is aboutsix miles in length, and from half a mile to a mile across. 

The most remarkable feature of the country consists in the extraordinarygorges which pierce the great mountain-chain, and render possible theestablishment of routes across that tremendous barrier. Scarped rocksrise almost perpendicularly on either side of the mountain-streams, which descend rapidly with frequent cascades and falls. Along the slightirregularities of these rocks the roads are carried in zigzags, oftencrossing the streams from side to side by bridges of a single arch, which are thrown over profound chasms where the waters chafe and roarmany hundred feet below. 46 [PLATE XXVI. ] The roads have for the mostpart been artificially cut in the sides of the precipices, which risefrom the streams sometimes to the height of 2000 feet. In order to crossfrom the Persian Gulf to the high plateau of Iran, no fewer than threeor four of these kotuls, or strange gorge-passes, have to be traversedsuccessively. Thus the country towards the edge of the plateau ispeculiarly safe from attack, being defended on the north and east byvast deserts, and on the south by a mountain-barrier of unusual strengthand difficulty. 

[Illustration: PLATE XXVI. ]

It is in these regions, which combine facility of defence withpleasantness of climate, that the principal cities of the district haveat all times been placed. The earliest known capital of the region wasPasargadae, or Persagadae, as the name is sometimes written, of whichthe ruins still exist near Murgab, in lat. 30° 15' long. 53° 17'. Here is the famous tomb of Cyrus, whereof a description will be givenhereafter; and here are also other interesting remains of the oldPersian architecture. Neither the shape nor the extent of the town canbe traced. The situation was a plain amid mountains, watered by smallstreams which found their way to a river of some size (the Pulwar)flowing at a little distance to the west. [PLATE XXVII Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXVII. ]

At the distance of thirty miles from Pasargadae, or of more than fortyby the ordinary road, grew up the second capital, Persepolis, occupyinga more southern position than the primitive seat of power, but stillsituated towards the edge of the plateau, having the mountain-barrierto the south-west and the desert at no great distance to the north-east. Like its predecessor, Persepolis was situated in a plain, but in a plainof much larger dimensions and of far greater fertility. The plain ofMerdasht is one of the most productive in Persia, being watered by thetwo streams of the Bendamir and the Pulwar, which unite a few milesbelow the site of the ancient city. From these two copious and unfailingrivers a plentiful supply of the precious fluid can at all times beobtained; and in Persia such a supply will always create the loveliestverdure, the most abundant crops, and the richest and thickest foliage. The site of Persopolis is naturally far superior to that in whichthe modern provincial capital, Shiraz, has grown up, at about thesame distance from Persepolis as that is from Pasargadae. And in thesame--i. E. In a south-west--direction. 

Besides Persepolis and Pasargadse, Persia Proper contained but fewcities of any note or name. If we include Carmania in Persia, Carmana, the capital of that country, may indeed be mentioned as a third Persiantown of some consequence; but otherwise the names which occur in ancientauthors are insignificant, and designate villages rather than towns ofany size. Carmana, however, which is mentioned by Ptolemy andAmmianus as the capital of those parts, seems to have been a place ofconsiderable importance. It may be identified with the modern Kerman, which lies in lat. 39° 55', long. 56° 13', and is still one of thechief cities of Persia. Situated, like Pasargadae and Persepolis, in acapacious plain surrounded by mountains, which furnish sufficient waterfor cultivation to be carried on by means of kanats in most parts of thetract enclosed by them, and occupying a site through which the trade ofthe country almost of necessity passes, Kerman must always be a town ofno little consequence. Its inland and remote position, however, caused it to be little known to the Greeks; and, apparently, the greatAlexandrian geographer was the first who made them acquainted with itsexistence and locality. 

The Persian towns or villages upon the coast of the Gulf were chieflyArmuza (which gave name to the district of Ar-muzia), opposite themodern island of Ormuz; Sisidona, which must have been near Cape Jerd;Apostana, probably about Shewar; Gogana, no doubt the modern Kongoon;and Taoce on the Granis, famous as having in its neighborhood a royalpalace, which we may perhaps place near Dalaki, Taoce itself occupyingthe position of Rohilla, at the mouth of the Khisht river. Of the inlandtowns the most remarkable, after Persepolis, Pasargadse, and Carmana, were Gabae, near Pasar-gadae, also the site of a palace; Uxia, or theUxian city, which may have occupied the position of Mai-Amir, Obroatis, Tragonice, Ardea, Portospana, Hyrba, etc. , which it is impossible tolocate unless by the merest conjecture. 

The chief districts into which the territory was divided wereParaetacene, a portion of the Bakhtiyari mountain-chain, which some, however, reckoned to Media; Mardyene, or the country of the Mardi, alsoone of the hill tracts; Taocene, the district about Taoce, part of thelow sandy coast region; Ciribo, the more northern portion of the sameregion; and Carmania, the entire eastern territory. These districts werenot divided from one another by any marked natural features, the onlydivision of the country to which such a character attached being thetriple one into the high sandy plains north of the mountains, themountain region, and the Deshtistan, or low hot tract along the coast. 

From this account it will be easy to understand how Persia Properacquired and maintained the character of "a scant land and a rugged, "which we find attaching to it in ancient authors. The entire area, ashas been already observed was about 100, 000 square miles--little morethan half that of Spain, and about one fifth of the area of modernPersia. Even of this space nearly one half was uninhabitable, consistingeither of barren stony mountain or of scorching sandy plain, illsupplied with water, and often impregnated with salt, the habitableportion consisted of the valleys and plains among the mountains andalong their skirts, together with certain favored spots upon the banksof streams in the flat regions. These flat regions themselves weretraversed in many places by rocky ridges of a singularly forbiddingaspect. The whole appearance of the country was dry, stony, sterile. Asa modern writer observes, "the livery of the land is constantly brownor gray; water is scanty; plains and mountains are equally destitute ofwood. When the traveller, after toiling over the rocky mountains thatseparate the plains looks down from the pass he has won with toiland difficulty upon the country below, his eye wanders unchecked andunrested over an uniform brown expanse losing itself in distance. "

Still this character, though predominant, is not universal. Whereverthere is water, vegetation springs up. The whole of the mountain regionis intersected by valleys and plains which are more or less fertile. The line of country between Bebahan and Shiraz is for above sixty miles"covered with wood and verdure, " in East of Shiraz, on the route betweenthat city and Kerman the country is said to be in parts "picturesque andromantic, " consisting of "low luxuriant valleys or; plains separatedby ranges of low mountains, green to their very summits with beautifulturf. " The plains of Khubbes, Merdasht, Ujan, Shiraz, Kazerun, and others, produce abundantly under a very inefficient system ofcultivation. Even in the most arid tracts there is generally a time ofgreenness immediately after the spring rains, when the whole countrysmiles with verdure. 

It has been already remarked that the Empire, which, commencing fromPersia Proper, spread itself towards the close of the sixth centurybefore Christ, over the surrounding tracts, included a number ofcountries not yet described in these volumes, since they formed no partof any of the four Empires which preceded the Persian. To complete, therefore, the geographical survey proper to our subject, it will benecessary to give a sketch of the tracts in question. They willfall naturally into three groups, an eastern, a north-western, and asouthwestern--the eastern extending from the skirts of Mount Zagros tothe Indian Desert, the north-western from the Caspian to the Propontis, and the south-western from the borders of Palestine to the shores of theGreater Syrtis. 

Inside the Zagros and Elburz ranges, bounded on the north and west bythose mountain-lines, on the east by the ranges of Suliman and Hala, andon the south by the coast-chain which runs from Persia Proper nearlyto the Indus, lies a vast tableland, from 3000 to 5000 feet above thesea-level, known to modern geographers as the Great Plateau of Iran. Itsshape is an irregular rectangle, or trapezium, extending in its greatestlength, which is from west to east, no less than twenty degrees, orabove 1100 miles, while the breadth from north to south varies fromseven degrees, or 480 miles (which is its measure along the line ofZagros), to ten degrees, or 690 miles, where it abuts upon the Indusvalley. The area of the tract is probably from 500, 000 to 600, 000 squaremiles. 

It is calculated that two thirds of this elevated region are absolutelyand entirely desert. The rivers which flow from the mountainssurrounding it are, with a single exception--that of the Etymandrus orHelmend--insignificant, and their waters almost always lose themselves, after a course proportioned to their volume, in the sands of theinterior. Only two, the Helmend and the river of Ghuzni, have even thestrength to form lakes; the others are absorbed by irrigation, or suckedup by the desert. Occasionally a river, rising within the mountains, forces its way through the barrier, and so contrives to reach the sea. This is the case, especially, on the south, where the coast chain ispierced by a number of streams, some of which have their sources at aconsiderable distance inland. On the north the Heri-rud, or River ofHerat, makes its escape in a similar way from the plateau, but only tobe absorbed, after passing through two mountain chains, in the sands ofthe Kharesm. Thus by far the greater portion of this region is desertthroughout the year, while, as the summer advances, large tracts, whichin the spring were green, are burnt up--the rivers shrink back towardstheir sources--the whole plateau becomes dry and parched--and thetraveller wonders that any portion of it should be inhabited. 

It must not be supposed that the entire plateau of which we have beenspeaking is to the eye a single level and unbroken plain. In the westernportion of the region the plains are constantly intersected by "brown, irregular, rocky ridges, " rising to no great height, but serving tocondense the vapors held in the air, and furnishing thereby springsand wells of inestimable value to the inhabitants. In the southern andeastern districts "immense" ranges of mountains are said to occur; andthe south-eastern as well as the north-eastern corners of the plateauare little else than confused masses of giant elevations. Vast flats, however, are found. In the Great Salt Desert, which extends from Kashanand Koum to the Deriah or "Sea" in which the Helmend terminates, andin the sandy desert of Seistan, which lies east and south-east of thatlake, reaching from near Furrah to the Mekran mountains, plains of abovea hundred miles in extent appear to occur, sometimes formed of loosesand, which the wind raises into waves like those of the sea, sometimeshard and gravelly, or of baked and indurated clay. 

The tract in question, which at the present day is divided betweenAfghanistan, Beloochistan, and Iran, contained, at the time whenthe Persian Empire arose, the following nations: the Sagartians, theCossseans, the Parthians, the Hariva or Arians, the Gandarians, theSattagydians, the Arachotians, the Thamanseans, the Sarangae, and theParicanians. The Sagartians and Cossseans dwelt in the western portionof the tract, the latter probably about the Siah-Koh mountains, theformer scattered over the whole region from the borders of Persia Properto the Caspian Gates and the Elburz range. Along its northern edge, eastof the Sagartians, were the Parthians, the Arians, and the Gandarians. Occurring in that order as we proceed from west to east. The Parthiansheld the country known now as the Atak or "Skirt, " the flat tract at thesouthern base of the Elburz from about Shahrud to Khaff, together witha portion of the mountain region adjoining. This is a rich and valuableterritory, well watered by a number of small streams, which, issuingfrom the ravines and valleys of the Elburz, spread fertility around, butlose themselves after a short, course in the Salt Desert. Adjoining theParthians upon the east were the Haroyu, Hariva, or Arians, an Iranicrace of great antiquity, who held the country along the southern skirtsof the mountains from the neighborhood of Khaff to the point where theHeri-rud (Arius) issues from the Paropamisan mountains. The characterof this country closely resembles that of Parthia, whereof it is acontinuation; but the copious stream of the Heri-rud renders it evenmore productive. 

The Gandarians held Kabul, and the mountain tract on both sides of theKabul river as far as the upper course of the Indus, thus occupyingthe extreme north-eastern corner of the plateau, the region where itselevation is the greatest. Lofty mountain-ridges, ramifying in variousdirections but tending generally to run east and west, deep gorges, narrow and tremendous passes, like the Khyber, characterize thisdistrict. Its soil is generally rocky and barren; but many of thevalleys are fertile, abounding with enchanting scenery and enjoying adelightful climate. More especially is this the case in the neighborhoodof the city of Kabul, which is perhaps the Caspatyrus of Herodotus, where Darius built the fleet which descended the Indus. 

South of Aria and Gandaria, in the tract between the Great Desertand the Indus valley, the plateau was occupied by four nations--theThamanseans, the Sarangians, the Sattagydians, and the Arachotians. The Thamanaean country appears to have been that which lies south andsouth-east of Aria (Herat), reaching from the Haroot-rud or river ofSubzawar to the banks of the Helmend about Ghirisk. This is a variedregion, consisting on the north and the north-east of several highmountain chains which ramify from a common centre, having betweenthem large tracts of hills and downs, while towards the south and thesouth-west the country is comparatively low and flat, descending tothe level of the desert about the thirty second parallel. Here theThamanseans were adjoined upon by the Sarangians, who held the landabout the lake in which the Helmend terminates--the Seistan of ModernPersia. Seistan is mainly desert. One third of the surface of the soilis composed of moving sands, and the other two thirds of a compactsand, mixed with a little clay, but very rich in vegetable matter. Itis traversed by a number of streams, as the Haroot-rud, the riverof Furrah, the river of Khash, the Helmend, and others, and isvery productive along their banks, which are fertilized by annualinundations; but the country between the streams is for the most part anarid desert. 

The Sattagydians and Arachotians divided between them the remainder ofAfghanistan, the former probably occupying south-eastern Kabul, from theGhuzni river and its tributaries to the valley of the Indus, while thelatter were located in the modern Candahar, upon the Urghand-ab andTurnuk rivers. The character of these tracts is similar to that ofnorth-western Kabul, but somewhat less rugged and mountainous. Hills anddowns alternate with rocky ranges and fairly fertile vales. There isa scantiness of water, but still a certain number of moderate-sizedrivers, tolerably well supplied with affluents. The soil, however, iseither rocky or sandy; and without a careful system of irrigation greatportions of the country remain of necessity barren and unproductive. 

The south-eastern corner of the plateau, below the countries of theSarangians and the Arachotians, was occupied by a people, calledParicanians by Herodotus, perhaps identical with the Gedrosians oflater writers. This district, the modern Beloochistan, is still veryimperfectly known, but appears to be generally mountainous, to have asingularly barren soil, and to be deficient in rivers. The nomadic lifeis a necessity in the greater part of the region, which is in few placessuitable for cultivation, but has good pastures in the mountains or theplains according to the season of the year. The rivers of the countryare for the most part mere torrents, which carry a heavy body ofwater after rains, but are often absolutely dry for several months insuccession. Water, however, is generally obtainable by digging wells intheir beds; and the liquid procured in this way suffices, not only forthe wants of man and beast, but also for a limited irrigation. 

The Great Plateau which has been here described is bordered everywhere, except at its north-eastern and north-western corners, by low regions. On the north the lowland is at first a mere narrow strip interveningbetween the Elburz range and the Caspian, a strip which has been alreadydescribed in the account given of the Third Monarchy. Where, however, the Caspian ends, its shore trending away to the northward, theresucceeds to this mere strip of territory a broad and ample tract ofsandy plain, extending from about the 54th to the 68th degree of eastlongitude--a distance of 760 miles--and reaching from the 36th to the50th parallel of north latitude--a distance not much short of a thousandmiles! This tract which comprises the modern Khanats of Khiva andBokhara, together with a considerable piece of Southern Asiatic Russia, is for the most part a huge trackless desert, composed of loose sand, black or red, which the wind heaps up into hills. Scarcely any region onthe earth's surface is more desolate. The boundless plain lies stretchedbefore the traveller like an interminable sea, but dead, dull, andmotionless. Vegetation, even the most dry and sapless, scarcely exists. For three or four hundred miles together he sees no running stream. Water, salt, slimy, and discolored, lies Occasionally in pools, oris drawn from wells, which yield however only a scanty supply. Foranything like a drinkable beverage the traveller has to trust to theskies, which give or withhold their stores with a caprice that is trulytantalizing. Occasionally, but only at long intervals, out of thelow sandy region there issues a rocky range, or a plateau of moderateeminence, where the soil is firm, the ground smooth, and vegetationtolerably abundant. The most important of the ranges are the Greatand Little Balkan, near the Caspian Sea, between the 39th and 40thparallels, the Khalata and Urta Tagh, north-west, of Bokhara, and theKukuth; still further to the north-west in latitude 42° nearly. Thechief plateau is that of Ust-Urt, between the Caspian and the Sea ofAral, which is perhaps not more than three or four hundred feet abovethe sandy plain, but is entirely different in character. 

This desolate region of low sandy plain would be wholly uninhabitable, were it not for the rivers. Two great streams, the Amoo or Jyhun(anciently the Oxus), and the Sir or Synuti (anciently the Jaxartes), carry their waters across the desert, and pour them into the basin ofthe Aral. Several others of less volume, as the Murg-ab, or river ofMerv, the Abi Meshed or Tejend, the Heri-rud, the river of Maymene, theriver of Balkh, the river of Khulm, the Shehri-Sebz, the Ak Su or riverof Bokhara, the Kizil Deria, etc. , flow down from the high groundinto the plain, where their waters either become lost in the sands, orterminate in small salt pools. Along the banks of these streams the soilis fertile, and where irrigation is employed the crops are abundant. Inthe vicinity of Khiva, at Kermineh on the Bokhara river, at Samarcand, at Balkh--and in a few other places, the vegetation is even luxuriant;gardens, meadows, orchards, and cornfields fringe the river-bank; andthe natives see in such favored spots resemblances of Paradise! Often, however, even the river-banks themselves are uncultivated, and thedesert creeps up to their very edge; but this is in default, not inspite, of human exertion. A well-managed system of irrigation could, in almost every instance, spread on either side of the streams a broadstrip of verdure. 

In the time of the Fifth Monarchy, the tract which has been heredescribed was divided among three nations. The region immediately to theeast of the Caspian, bounded on the north by the old course of the Oxusand extending eastward to the neighborhood of Merv, though probablynot including that city, was Chorasmia, the country of the Chorasmians. Across the Oxus to the north-east was Sogdiana (or Sugd), reachingthence to the Jaxartes, which was the Persian boundary in thisdirection. South of Sogdiana, divided from it by the Middle and UpperOxus, was Bactria, the country of the Bakhtars or Bactrians. Theterritory of this people reached southward to the foot of theParopamisus, adjoining Chorasmia and Aria on the west, and on the southSattagydia and Gandaria. 

East of the table-land lies the valley of the Indus and its tributaries, at first a broad tract, 350 miles from west to east, but narrowing asit descends, and in places not exceeding sixty or seventy miles, across. The length of the valley is not less than 800 miles. Its area isprobably about a hundred thousand square miles. We may best regard itas composed of two very distinct tracts--one the broad triangular plaintowards the north, to which, from the fact of its being watered by fivemain streams, he natives have given the name of Punj-ab, the other thelong and comparatively narrow valley of the single Indus river, which, deriving its appellation from that noble stream, is known in moderngeography as Sinde. The Punjab, which contains an area of above fiftythousand square miles, is mountainous towards the north, where itadjoins on Kashmeer and Thibet, but soon sinks down into a vast plain, with a soil which is chiefly either sand or clay, immensely productiveunder irrigation, but tending to become jungle or desert if left withouthuman care. Sinde, or the Indus valley below the Punjab, is a region ofeven greater fertility. It is watered, not only by the main stream ofthe Indus, but by a number of branch channels which the river begins tothrow off from about the 28th parallel. It includes, on the right bankof the stream, the important tract called Cutchi Gandava, a triangularplain at the foot of the Suliman and Hala ranges, containing about 7000square miles of land which is all capable of being made into a garden. The soil is here for the most part rich, black, and loamy; water isabundant; and the climate suitable for the growth of all kinds of grain. Below Cutchi Gandava the valley of the Indus is narrow for about ahundred miles, but about Tatta it expands and a vast delta is formed. This is a third triangle, containing above a thousand square miles ofthe richest alluvium, which is liable however to floods and to vastchanges in the river beds, whereby often whole fields are swept away. Much of this tract is moreover low and swampy; the climate is trying;and rice is almost the only product that can be advantageouslycultivated. 

The low region lying south of the Great Plateau is neither extensivenor valuable. It consists of a mere strip of land along the coast ofthe Indian Ocean, extending a distance of about nine degrees (550 miles)from the mouth of the Persian Gulf to Cape Monze, near Kurrachee, butin width not exceeding ten or, at the most, twenty miles. This tractwas occupied in ancient times mainly by a race which Herodotus calledEthiopians and the historians of Alexander Ichthyophagi (Fish-Eaters). It is an arid, sultry, and unpleasant region, scarcely possessing aperennial stream, and depending for its harvests entirely upon thewinter rains, and for its water during the summer on wells which arechiefly brackish. Tolerable pasturage is, however, obtainable in placeseven during the hottest part of the year, and between Cape Jask andGwattur the crops produced are far from contemptible. 

A small tract of coast, a continuation of the territory just described, intervening between it and Kerman, was occupied in the early Persiantimes by a race known to the Persians as Maka, and to the Greeks asMycians. This district, reaching from about Cape Jask to Gombroon, is one of greater fertility than is usual in these regions, beingparticularly productive in dates and grain. This fertility seems, however, to be confined to the vicinity of the sea-shore. 

To complete the description of the Eastern provinces two other tractsmust be mentioned. The mountain-chain which skirts the Great Plateau onthe north, distinguished in these pages by the name of Elburz, broadensout after it passes the south-eastern corner of the Caspian Sea till itcovers a space of nearly three degrees (more than 200 miles). Insteadof the single lofty ridge which separates the Salt Desert from the lowCaspian region, we find between the fifty-fourth and fifty-ninth degreesof east longitude three or four distinct ranges, all nearly parallel toone another, having a general direction of east and west. Broad and richvalleys are enclosed between these latitudinal ranges which are wateredby rivers of a considerable size, as more especially the Ettrek andthe Gurgan. Thus a territory is formed capable of supporting a largishpopulation, a territory which possesses a natural unity, being shut inon three sides by mountains, and on the fourth by the Caspian. Here inPersian times was settled a people called Hyrcani; and from them thetract derived the name of Hyrcania (Vehrkana), while the lake on whichit adjoined came to be known as "the Hyrcanian Sea. " The fertilityof the region, its broad plains, shady woods and lofty mountains werecelebrated by the ancient writers. 

Further to the east, beyond the low sandy plain, and beyond themountains in which its great rivers have their source--on the otherside of the "Roof of the World, " as the natives name this elevatedregion--lay a tract unimportant in itself, but valuable to the Persiansas the home of a people from whom they obtained excellent soldiers. Theplain of Chinese Tartary, the district about Kashgar and Yarkand, seemsto have been in possession of certain Sacans or Scythians, who in theflourishing times of the empire acknowledged subjection to the Persiancrown. These Sacans, who call themselves Huma-varga or Amyrgians, furnished some of the best and bravest of the Persian troops. Westwardthey bordered on Sogdiana and Bactria; northward they extended probablyto the great mountain-chain of the Tien-chan; on the east they were shutin by the vast desert of Gobi or Shamoo; while southward they must havetouched Gandaria and perhaps India. A portion of this country--thattowards the north and west--was well watered and fairly productive; butthe southern and eastern part of it must have been arid and desert. 

From this consideration of the Eastern provinces of the Empire, we passon naturally to those which lay towards the North-West. The Caspian Seaalone intervened between these two groups, which thus approached eachother within a distance of some 250 or 260 miles. 

Almost immediately to the west of the Caspian there rises a hightable-land diversified by mountains, which stretches eastward for morethan eighteen degrees between the 37th and 41st parallels. This highlandmay properly be regarded as a continuation of the great Iranean plateau, with which it is connected at its south-eastern corner. It comprisesa portion of the modern Persia, the whole of Armenia, and most of AsiaMinor. Its principal mountain-ranges are latitudinal or from west toeast, only the minor ones taking the opposite or longitudinal direction. Of the latitudinal chains the most important is the Taurus, which, commencing at the southwestern corner of Asia Minor in longitude 29°nearly, bounds the great table-land upon the south, running parallelwith the shore at the distance of sixty or seventy miles as far asthe Pylse Cilicise, near Tarsus, and then proceeding in a directiondecidedly north of east to the neighborhood of Lake Van, where it uniteswith the line of Zagros. The elevation of this range, though not equalto that of some in Asia, is considerable. In Asia Minor the loftiest ofthe Taurus peaks seem to attain a height of about 9000 or 10, 000 feet. Further to the east the elevation appears to be even greater, the peaksof Ala Dagh, Sapan, Nimrud, and Mut Khan in the tract about Lake Vanbeing all of them considerably above the line of perpetual snow, andtherefore probably 11, 000 or 12, 000 feet. 

At the opposite side of the table-land, bounding it towards the north, there runs under various names a second continuous range of inferiorelevation, which begins near Brusa, in the Keshish Dagh or MysianOlympus, and proceeds in a line nearly parallel with the northern coastto the vicinity of Kars. Between this and Taurus are two other importantridges, which run westward from the neighborhood of Ararat to about the34th degree of east longitude, after which they subside into the plain. 

The heart of the mountain-region, the tract extending from the districtof Erivan on the east to the upper course of the Kizil-Irmak riverand the vicinity of Sivas upon the west, was, as it still is, Armenia. Amidst these natural fastnesses, in a country of lofty ridges, deepand narrow valleys, numerous and copious streams, and occasional broadplains--a country of rich pasture grounds, productive orchards, andabundant harvests--this interesting people has maintained itself almostunchanged from the time of the early Persian kings to the present day. Armenia was one of the most valuable portions of the Persian Empire, furnishing, as it did, besides stone and timber, and several mostimportant minerals, an annual supply of 20, 000 excellent horses to thestud of the Persian king. 

The highland west of Armenia, the plateau of Asia Minor, from thelongitude of Siwas (37° E. ) to the sources of the Meander and theHermus, was occupied by the two nations of the Cappadocians andPhrygians, whose territories were separated by the Kizil-Irmak or Halysriver. This tract, though diversified by some considerable ranges, andpossessing one really lofty mountain, that of Argseus, was, comparedwith Armenia, champaign and level. Its broad plains afforded the bestpossible pasturage for sheep, while at the same time they bore excellentcrops of wheat. The entire region was well-watered; it enjoyed adelightful climate; and besides corn and cattle furnished many productsof value. 

Outside the plateau on the north, on the north-east, on the west, andon the south, lie territories which, in comparison with the highregion whereon they adjoined, may be called lowlands. The north-easternlowland, the broad and rich valley of the Kur, which corresponds closelywith the modern Russian province of Georgia, was in the possession of apeople called by Herodotus Saspeires or Sapeires, whom we may identifywith the Iberians of later writers. Adjoining upon them towards thesouth, probably in the country about Erivan, and so in the neighborhoodof Ararat, were the Alarodians, whose name must be connected with thatof the great mountain. On the other side of the Sapeirian country, inthe tracts now known as Mingrelia and Imeritia, regions of a wonderfulbeauty and fertility, were the Colchians--dependants, but not exactlysubjects, of Persia. 

The northern lowland, which consisted of a somewhat narrow strip of landbetween the plateau and the Euxine, was a rich and well-wooded region, 630 miles in length, and in breadth from forty to a hundred. It wasinhabited by a large number of rude and barbarous tribes, each of whompossessed a small portion of the sea-board. These tribes, enumerated inthe order of their occurrence from east to west, were the following:the Moschi, the Macrones (or Tzani), the Mosy-noeci, the Mares, theTibareni, the Chalybes, the Paphlagones, the Mariandyni, the Bithyni, and the Thyni. The Moschi, Macrones, Mosynoeci, Mares, and Tibarenidwelt towards the east, occupying the coast from Batoum to Ordou. The Chalybes inhabited the tract immediately adjoining on Sinope. The Paphlagonians held the rest of the coast from the mouth of theKizil-Irmak to Cape Baba, where they were succeeded by the Mariandyni, who owned the small tract between Cape Baba and the mouth ofthe Sakkariyeh (Sangarius). From the Sangarius to the canal ofConstantinople dwelt the Thynians and Bithynians intermixed, the formerhowever affecting the coast and the latter the interior of the country. The entire tract was of a nearly uniform character, consisting of woodedspurs from the northern mountain-chain, with, valleys of greater orless width between them. Streams were numerous, and vegetation wasconsequently rich; but it may be doubted whether the climate washealthy. 

The western lowland comprised the inland regions of Mysia, Lydia, and Caria, together with the coast-tracts which had been occupied byimmigrant Greeks, and which were known as Juolis, Doris, and Ionia. Thebroad and rich plains, the open valleys, the fair grassy mountains, thenoble trees, the numerous and copious rivers of this district are toowell known to need description here. The western portion of Asia Minoris a terrestrial paradise, well deserving the praises which Herodotuswith patriotic enthusiasm bestowed upon it. The climate is delightful, only that it is somewhat too luxurious; the soil is rich and varied inquality; the vegetable productions are abundant; and the mountains, atany rate anciently, possessed mineral treasures of great value. 

The lowland upon the south is narrower and more mountainous than eitherof the others. It comprised three countries only--Lycia, Pamphylia, andCilicia. The tract is chiefly occupied by spurs from Taurus, betweenwhich lie warm and richly wooded valleys. In Lycia, however, themountain-ridges embrace some extensive uplands, on a level not muchinferior to that of the central plateau itself, while in Pamphylia andCilicia are two or three low alluvial plains of tolerable extent andof great fertility. Of these the most remarkable is that near Tarsus, formed by the three streams of the Cydnus, the Sarus, and the Pyramus, which extends along the coast a distance of forty miles and reachesinland about thirty, the region which gave to the tract where it occursthe name of Cilicia Campestris or Pedias. 

The Persian dominion in this quarter was not bounded by sea. Opposite toCilicia lay the large and important island of Cyprus, which was includedin the territories of the Great King from the time of Cambyses to theclose of the Empire. Further to the west, Rhodes, Cos, Samos, Chios, Lesbos, Tenedos, Lemnus, Imbrus, Samothrace, Thasos, and most of theislands of the Egean were for a time Persian, but were never graspedwith such firmness as to be a source of real strength to theirconquerors. The same may be said of Thrace and Pseonia, subjugated underDarius, and held for some twenty or thirty years, but not assimilated, not brought into the condition of provinces, and therefore rathera drain upon the Empire than an addition to its resources. It seemsunnecessary to lengthen out this description of the Persian territoriesby giving an account of countries and islands, whose connection with theEmpire was at once so slight and so temporary. 

A few words must, however, be said respecting Cyprus. This island, whichis 140 miles long from Bafa (Paphos) to Cape Andrea, with an averagewidth for two thirds of its length of thirty-five, and for the remainingthird of about six or seven miles, is a mountainous tract, picturesqueand varied, containing numerous slopes, and a few plains, well fittedfor cultivation. According to Eratosthenes it was in the more ancienttimes richly wooded, but was gradually cleared by human labor. Its soilwas productive, and particularly well suited for the vine and the olive. It grew also sufficient corn for its own use. But its special valuearose from its mineral products. The copper mines near Tamasus wereenormously productive, and the ore thence derived so preponderated overall other supplies that the later Romans came to use the word Cypriumfor the metal generally--whence the names by which it is even now knownin most of the languages of modern Europe. On the whole Cyprus wasconsidered inferior to no known island. Besides its vegetable andmineral products, it furnished a large number of excellent sailors tothe Persian fleet. 

It remains to notice briefly those provinces of the south-west which hadnot been included within any of the preceding monarchies, and which aretherefore as yet undescribed in these volumes. These provinces are theAfrican, and may be best considered under the three heads of Egypt, Libya, and the Cyrenaica. 

Egypt, if we include under the name not merely the Nile valley and theDelta, but the entire tract interposed between the Libyan Desert on theone side and the Arabian Gulf or Red Sea on the other, is a country ofnearly the size of Italy. It measures 520 miles from Elephantine to theMediterranean, and has an average width of 150 or 160 miles. It mustthus contain an area of about 80, 000 square miles. Of this space, however, at least three fourths is valueless, consisting of bare rockymountain or dry sandy plain. It is only along the course of the narrowvalley in which the Nile flows from the Cataracts to beyond Cairo, inthe tract known as the Faioum, and in the broad region of the Delta, that cultivation is possible. Even in the Delta itself there are largespaces which are arid, and others which are permanent marshes, so thatconsiderable portions of its surface are unfitted for husbandry. But ifthe quantity of cultivable land is thus limited in Egypt, the quality isso excellent, in consequence of the alluvial character of the soil, thatthe country was always in ancient times a sort of granary of the world. The noble river, bringing annually a fresh deposit of the richest soil, and furnishing a supply of water, which is sufficient, if carefullyhusbanded, to produce a succession of luxuriant crops throughout theyear, makes Egypt--what it is even at the present day--one of the mostfertile portions of the earth's surface--a land of varied products, all excellent--but especially a land of corn, to which the principalnations of the world looked for their supplies, either regularly, or atany rate in times of difficulty. 

West of Egypt was a dry and sandy tract, dotted with oases, butotherwise only habitable along the shore, which in the time of thePersian Empire was occupied by a number of wild tribes who were mostlyin the lowest condition to which savage man is capable of sinking. Thegeographical extent of this tract was large, exceeding considerably thatof Egypt; but its value was slight. Naturally, it produced nothing butdates and hides. The inhumanity of the inhabitants made it, however, further productive of a commodity, which, until the world ischristianized, will probably always be regarded as one of highvalue--the commodity of negro slaves, which were procured in the Saharaby slave-hunts, and perhaps by purchase in Nigritia. 

Still further to the west, and forming the boundary of the Empire inthis direction, lay the district of the Cyrenaica, a tract of singularfertility and beauty. Between Benghazi, in east longitude 20°, and theRas al Tynn (long. 23° 15'), there rises above the level of the adjacentregions an extensive table land, which, attracting the vapors that floatover the Mediterranean, condenses them, and so abounds with springsand rills. A general freshness and greenness, with rich vegetation inplaces, is the consequence. Olives, figs, carobs, junipers, oleanders, cypresses, cedars, myrtles, arbutus-trees, cover the flanks of theplateau and the hollows which break its surface, while the remainder issuitable alike for the cultivation of cereals and for pasturage. Naturehas also made the region a special gift in the laserpitium or silphium, which was regarded by the ancients as at once a delicacy and a plantof great medicinal power, and which added largely to the value of thecountry. 

Such was the geographical extent of the Persian Empire, and suchwere the chief provinces which it contained besides those previouslycomprised in the empires of Media or Babylon. Territorially, the greatmass of the Empire lay towards the east, between long. 50° and 75°, orbetween the Zagros range and the Indian Desert. But its most importantprovinces were the western ones. East of Persepolis, the only regionsof much value were the valleys of the Indus and the Oxus. Westward laySusiana, Babylonia, Assyria, Media, Armenia, Iberia, Cappadocia, AsiaMinor, Cyprus, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, the Cyrenaica--all countries ofgreat, or at least considerable, productiveness. The two richest graintracts of the ancient world, the best pasture regions, the districtswhich produced the most valuable horses, the most abundant of knowngold-fields, were included within the limits of the Empire, which maybe looked upon as self-sufficing, containing within it all that man inthose days required, not only for his necessities, but even for his mostcherished luxuries. 

The productiveness of the Empire was the natural result of itspossessing so many and such large rivers. Six streams of the firstclass, having courses exceeding a thousand miles in length, helped tofertilize the lands which owned the sway of the Great King. These werethe Nile, the Indus, the Euphrates, the Jaxartes, the Oxus, and theTigris. Two of the six have been already described in these volumes, andtherefore will not need to detain us here; but a few words must besaid with respect to each of the remaining four, if our sketch of thegeography of the Empire is to make any approach to completeness. 

The Nile was only in the latter part of its course a Persian stream. Flowing, as we now know that it does, from within a short distance ofthe equator, it had accomplished more than three fourths of its coursebefore it entered a Persian province. It ran, however, through Persianterritory a distance of about six hundred miles, and conferred onthe tract through which it passed immeasurable benefits. The Greekssometimes maintained that "Egypt was the gift of the river;" and, thoughthis was very far from being a correct statement in the sense intended, there is a meaning of the words in which we may accept them asexpressing a fact. Egypt is only what she is through her river. The Nilegives her all that makes her valuable. This broad, ample, and unfailingstream not only by its annual inundation enriches the soil and preparesit for tillage in a manner that renders only the lightest further labornecessary, but serves as a reservoir from which inexhaustible suppliesof the precious fluid can be obtained throughout the whole of the year. The water, which rises towards the end of June, begins to subside earlyin October, and for half the year--from December till June--Egypt isonly cultivable through irrigation. She produces, however, during thisperiod, excellent crops--even at the present day, when there are fewcanals--from the facility with which water is obtained, by means ofa very simple engine, out of the channel of the Nile. This unfailingsupply enabled the cultivator to obtain a second, a third, and evensometimes a fourth crop from the same land within the space of a year. 

The course of the Nile from Elephantine, where it entered Egypt, toCercasorus, near Heliopolis, where it bifurcated, was in general north, with, however, a certain tendency westward. It entered Egypt nearly inlong. 33°, and at Neapolis (more than two degrees further north) it wasstill within 15° of the same meridian; then, however, it took a westerlybend, crossed the 32nd and 31st meridians, and in lat. 28° 23 reachedwest as far as long. 30° 43'. After this it returned a little eastward, recrossed the 31st meridian, and having reached long. 31° 22' nearAphroditopolis (lat. 29° 25), it proceeded almost due north to Cercasorusin lat. 30° 7'. The course of the river up to this point was, from itsentry into the country, about 540 miles. At Cercasorus the Delta began. The river threw out two branches, which flowed respectively to thenorth-east and the north-west, while between them was a third channel, a continuation of the previous course of the stream, which pierced theDelta through its centre, flowing almost due north. Lower down, furtherbranch channels were thrown out, some natural, some artificial, and thetriangular tract between the two outer arms of the river was intersectedby at least five, and (in later times) by fourteen large streams. Theright and left arms appear to have been of about equal in length, andmay be estimated at 150 or 160 miles; the central arm had a shortercourse, not exceeding 110 miles. The volume of water which the Nilepours into the Mediterranean during a day and night is estimated at from150, 000 millions to 700, 000 millions of cubic metres. It was by far thelargest of all the rivers of the Empire. 

The Indus, which was the next largest of the Persian rivers to the Nile, rose (like the Nile) outside the Persian territory. Its source is in theregion north of the Himalaya range, about lat. 31°, long. 82° 30'. Itbegins by flowing to the north-west, in a direction parallel to that ofthe Western Himalayas, along the northern flank of which it continuesin this line a distance of about 700 miles, past Ladak, to long. 75°nearly. Here it is met by the Bolor chain, which prevents its furtherprogress in this direction and causes it to turn suddenly nearly at aright angle to the south-west. Entering a transverse valley, it finds away (which is still very imperfectly known) through the numerous ridgesof the Himalaya to the plain at its southern base, on which it debouchesabout thirty miles above Attock. It is difficult to say at what exactpoint it crossed the Persian frontier, but probably at least the first700 miles of its course were through territory not Persian. From Attockto the sea the Indus is a noble river. It runs for 900 miles in ageneral direction of S. S. W. Through the plain in one main stream (whichis several hundred yards in width), while on its way it throws off alsofrom time to time small side streamlets, which are either consumed inirrigation or rejoin the main channel. A little below Tatta its Deltabegins--a Delta, however, much inferior in size to that of the Nile. Thedistance from the apex to the sea is not more than sixty miles, andthe breadth of the tract embraced between the two arms does not exceedseventy miles. The entire course of the Indus is reckoned at 1960 miles, of which probably 1260 were through Persian territory. The volume ofthe stream is always considerable, while in the rainy season it is verygreat. The Indus is said then to discharge into the Indian ocean446, 000 cubic feet per second, or 4280 millions of cubic yards in thetwenty-four hours. 

The Oxus rises from an Alpine lake, lying on the western side of theBolor chain in lat. 37° 40', long. 73° 50'. After a rapid descent fromthe high elevation of the lake, during which it pursues a somewhatserpentine course, it debouches from the hills upon the plain aboutlong. 69° 20', after receiving the river of Fyzabad, and then proceeds, first west and afterwards north-west, across the Great Kharesmian Desertto the Sea of Aral. During the first 450 miles of its course, while itruns among the hills, it receives from both sides numerous and importanttributaries; but from the meridian of Balkh those fail entirely, andfor above 800 miles the Oxus pursues its solitary way, unaugmented by asingle affluent, across the waste of Tartary, rolling through the deserta wealth of waters, which must diminish, but which does not seem verysensibly to diminish, by evaporation. At Kilef, sixty miles north-westof Balkh, the width of the river is 350 yards; at Khodja Salih, thirtymiles lower down, it is 823 yards with a depth of twenty feet; at Kerki, seventy miles below Khodja Salih, it is "twice the width of the Danubeat Buda-Pesth, " or about 940 yards; at Betik, on the route betweenBokhara and Merv, its width has diminished to 650 yards, but its depthhas increased to twenty-nine feet. Finally, at Gorlen Hezaresp nearKhiva, the breadth of the Oxus is so great that both banks are hardlydistinguishable at the same time; but the stream is here comparativelyshallow, ceasing to be navigable at about this point. The present courseof the Oxus from its rise in Lake Sir-i-Kol to its termination in theSea of Aral is estimated at 1400 miles. Anciently its course must havebeen still longer. The Oxus, in the time of the Achaemenian kings, fellinto the Caspian by a channel which can even now be traced. Its lengthwas thus increased by at least 450 miles, and, exceeding that of theJaxartes, fell but little short of the length of the Indus. 

The Oxus, like the Nile and the Indus, has a periodical swell, whichlasts from May to October. It does not, however, overflow itshanks. Under a scientific system of irrigation it is probable that aconsiderable belt of land on either side of its course might be broughtunder cultivation. But at present the extreme limit to which cultureis carried, except in the immediate vicinity of Khiva, seems to be fourmiles; while often, in the absence of human care, the desert creeps upto the very brink of the river. 

The Jaxartes, or Sir-Deria, rises from two sources in the Thian-chanmountain chain, the more remote of which is in long. 79° nearly. The twostreams both flow to the westward in almost parallel valleys, unitingabout long. 71°. After their junction the course of the stream is stillto the westward for two degrees; but between Khokand and Tashkend theriver sweeps round in a semicircle and proceeds to run first due northand then north-west, skirting the Kizil Koum desert to Otrar, whereit resumes its original westerly direction and flows with continuallydiminishing volume across the desert to the Sea of Aral. The Jaxartesis a smaller stream than the Oxus. At Otrar, after receiving its lasttributary, it is no more than 250 yards wide. Below this point itcontinually dwindles, partly from evaporation, partly from the branchstream which it throws off right and left, of which the chief are theCazala and the Kuvan Deria. On its way through the desert it spreads butlittle fertility along its banks, which are in places high and arid, inothers depressed and swampy. The branch streams are of some service forirrigation; and it is possible that a scientific system might turn thewater of the main channel to good account, and by its means redeem fromthe desert large tracts which have never yet been cultivated. But nosuch system has hitherto been applied to the Sir, and it is doubtfulwhether success would attend it. The Sir, where it falls into the Seaof Aral, is very shallow, seldom even in the flood season exceeding fourfeet. The length of the stream was till recently estimated at more than1208 miles; but the latest explorations seem to require an enlargementof this estimate by at least 200 or 250 miles. 

In rivers of the second class the Persian Empire was so rich that itwill be impossible, within the limits prescribed for the present work, to do more than briefly enumerate them. The principal were, in AsiaMinor, the Hermus (Ghiediz Chai), and the Maeander (Mendere) on thewest, the Sangarius (Sakka-riyeh), the Halys (Kizil Irmak), and the Iris(Yechil Irmak) on the north, the Cydnus (Tersoos Chai), Sarus (CilicianSyhun), and Pyramus (Cilician Jyhun) on the south; in Armenia and theadjacent regions, the Araxes (Aras), Cyrus (Kur), and Phasis (Eion); onthe Iranic plateau, the Sefid-rud, the Zenderud or river of Isfahan, theEtymandrus (Helmend), and the Arius (Heri-rud); in the low country eastof the Caspian, the Gurgan and Ettrek, rivers of Hyrcania, the MargusChurghab (or river of Merv), the Delias or river of Balkh, the Ak Su orBokhara river, and the Kizil Deria, a stream in the Khanat of Kokand;in Afghanistan and India, the Kabul river, the Hydaspes (Jelum), theAoesines (Chenab), the Hydraotes (Ravee), and the Hyphasis (Sutlejor Gharra); in Persia Proper, the Oroatis (Hindyan or Tab), and theBendamir; in Susiana, the Pasitigris (Kuran), the Hedypnus (Jerahi), the Choaspes (Kerkhah), and the Eulsenus (a branch of the same); in theUpper Zagros region, the Gyndes (Diyaleh), and the Greater and LesserZabs; in Mesopotamia, the Chaboras (Kha-bour), and Bilichus (Belik);finally, in Syria and Palestine, the Orontes or river of Antioch(Nahr-el-asy), the Jordan, and the Barada or river of Damascus. Thus, besides the six great rivers of the Empire, forty other considerablestreams fertilized and enriched the territories of the Persian monarch, which, though they embraced many arid tracts, where cultivation wasdifficult, must be pronounced upon the whole well-watered, consideringtheir extent and the latitude in which they lay. 

The Empire possessed, besides its rivers, a number of important lakes. Omitting the Caspian and the Aral, which lay upon its borders, therewere contained within the Persian territories the following importantbasins: the Urumiyeh, Lake Van, and Lake Goutcha or Sivan in Armenia;Lakes Touz-Ghieul, Egerdir, Bey-Shehr, Chardak, Soghla, Buldur, Ghieul-Hissar, Iznik, Abullionte, Maniyas, and many others in AsiaMinor; the Sabakhah, the Bahr-el-Melak, and the Lake of Antioch inNorthern Syria; the Lake of Hems in the Coele-Syrian valley; theDamascus lakes, the Lake of Merom, the Sea of Tiberias, and the DeadSea in Southern Syria and Palestine; Lake Moeris and the Natron lakes inEgypt; the Bahr-i-Nedjif in Babylonia; Lake Neyriz in Persia Proper;the Lake of Seistan in the Iranic Desert; and Lake Manchur in the In dusvalley. Several of these have been already described in thesevolumes. Of the remainder the most important were the Lake of Van, theTouz-Ghieul, the great lake of Seistan, and Lake Moeris. These cannot bedismissed without a brief description. 

Lake Van is situated at a very unusual elevation, being more than 5400feet above the sea level. It is a triangular basin, of which the threesides front respectively S. S. E. , N. N. E. , and N. W. By W. The sidesare all irregular, being broken by rocky promontories; but the chiefprojection lies to the east of the lake, where a tract is thrown outwhich suddenly narrows the expanse from about fifty miles to less thanfive. The greatest length of the basin is from N. E. To S. W. , where itextends a distance of eighty miles between Amis and Tadvan; its greatestwidth is between Aklat and Van, where it measures across somewhat morethan fifty miles. The scenery which surrounds it is remarkable forits beauty. The lake is embosomed amid high mountains, picturesque inoutline, and all reaching in places the level of perpetual snow. Itswaters, generally placid, but sometimes lashed into high waves, areof the deepest blue; while its banks exhibit a succession of orchards, meadows, and gardens which have scarcely their equals in Asia. The lakeis fed by a number of small streams flowing down from the lofty ridgeswhich surround it, and, having no outlet, is of course salt, thoughfar less so than the neighboring lake of Urumiyeh. Gulls and cormorantsfloat upon its surface fish can live in it; and it is not distasteful tocattle. Set in the expanse of waters are a few small islets, whose vividgreen contrasts well with the deep azure which surrounds them. 

The Touz-Ghieul is a basin of a very different character. Situated onthe upland of Phrygia, in lat. 39°, long. 33°, 30', its elevation is notmore than 2500 feet. Low hills of sandstone and conglomerate encircleit, but generally at some distance, so that a tract of plain, six orseven miles in width, intervenes between their base and the shore. Theshape of the lake is an irregular oval, with the greater axis runningnearly due north and south. Its greatest length is estimated atforty-five miles, its width varies, but is generally from ten to sixteenmiles. At one point, however, nearly opposite to Kodj Hissar, the lakenarrows to a distance of no more than five miles; and here a causewayhas been constructed from shore to shore, which, though ruined, stillaffords a dry pathway in the summer. The water of the Touz-Ghieul isintensely salt, containing at some seasons of the year no less thanthirty-two per cent of saline matter, which is considerably more thanthe amount of such matter in the water of the Dead Sea. The surroundingplain is barren, in places marshy, and often covered with anincrustation of salt. The whole scene is one of desolation. The acridwaters support no animal organization; birds shun them; the plain growsnothing but a few stunted and sapless shrubs. The only signs of lifewhich greet the traveller are the carts of the natives, which pass himladen with the salt that is obtained with ease from the saturated water. 

The Zerreh or Sea of Seistan--called sometimes the Hamun, or"expanse"--is situated in the Seistan Desert on the Great Iranicplateau, and consequently at an elevation of (probably) 3000 feet. Itis formed by the accumulation of the waters brought down by the Helmend, the Haroot-rud, the river of Khash, the Furrah-rud and other streams, which flow from the mountains of Afghanistan, with converging coursesto the south-west. It is an extensive basin, composed of two arms, aneastern and a western. The western arm, which is the larger of thetwo, has its greatest length from N. N. E. To S. S. W. , and extends in thisdirection about ninety miles. Its greatest width is about twenty-fivemiles. The eastern arm is rather more than forty miles long, and fromten to twenty broad. It is shaped much like a fish's tail. The two armsare connected by a strait seven or eight miles in width, which joinsthem near their northern extremities. The water of the lake, thoughnot salt, is black and has a bad taste. Fish support life in it withdifficulty, and never grow to any great size. The lake is shallow, notmuch exceeding a depth of three or four feet. It contracts greatly inthe summer, at which time the strait connecting the two arms is oftenabsolutely dry. The edges of the lake are clothed with tamarisk andother trees; and where the rivers enter it, sometimes by severalbranches, the soil is rich and cultivation productive; but elsewhere thesand of the desert creeps up almost to the margin of the water, clothedonly with some sickly grass and a few scattered shrubs. 

The Birket-el-Keroun, or Lake Moaris of the classical writers, is anatural basin--not, as Herodotus imagined, an artificial one--situatedon the western side of the Nile valley, in a curious depression whichnature has made among the Libyan hills. This depression--the moderndistrict of the Faioom--is a circular plain, which sinks graduallytowards the north-west, descending till it is more than 100 feet belowthe surface of the Nile at low water. The Northern and northwesternportion of the depression is occupied by the lake, a sheet of brackishwater shaped like a horn (whence the modern name) measuring aboutthirty-five or thirty-six miles from end to end, and attaining in themiddle a width of between five and six miles. The area of the lake isestimated roughly at 150 square miles, its circumference at about ninetymiles. It has a depth varying from twelve to twenty-four feet. Thoughthe water is somewhat brackish, yet the Birket contains several speciesof fresh-water fish; and in ancient times its fisheries are said to havebeen exceedingly productive. 

The principal cities of the Empire were, besides Pesargadae andPersepolis, Susa--the chief city of Susiana--which became the capital;Babylon, Ecbatana, Rhages, Zadracarta, Bactra (now Balkh), Maracanda(now Samarcand), Aria, or Artacoana (Herat), Caspatyrus on the UpperIndus, Taxila (Attock?), Pura (perhaps Bunpoor), Carmana (Kerman), Arbela, Nisibis, Amida (now Diarbekr); Mazaca in Cappadocia; Trapezus(Trebizond), Sinope, Dascyleium, Sardis, Ephesus, Miletus, Gordium, Perga, and Tarsus in Asia Minor: Damascus, Jerusalem, Sidon, Tyre, Azotus or Ashdod, and Gaza in Syria; Memphis and Thebes in Egypt; Cyreneand Barca in the Cyrenaica. Of these, while Susa had from the time ofDarius Hystaspis a decided pre-eminence as the main residence of thecourt, and consequently as the usual seat of government, there werethree others which could boast the distinction of being royal abodesfrom time to time, either regularly at certain seasons, or occasionallyat the caprice of the monarch. These were Babylon, Ecbatana, andPersepolis, the capitals respectively of Chaldaea, Media, and PersiaProper, all great and ancient cities, accustomed to the presence ofCourts, and all occupying positions sufficiently central to render themnot ill-suited for the business of administration. Next to these inorder of dignity may be classed the satrapial residences, often thechief cities of old monarchies, such as Sardis, the capital city ofLydia, Dascyleium of Bithynia, Memphis of Egypt, Bactra of Bactria, andthe like; while the third rank was held by the towns, where there was noCourt, either royal or satrapial. 

Before this chapter is concluded a few words must be said with respectto the countries which bordered upon the Persian Empire. The Empirewas surrounded, for the most part, either by seas or deserts. TheMediterranean, the Egean, the Propontis, the Euxine, the Caspian, theIndian Ocean, the Persian Gulf, and the Arabian Gulf or Bed Sea washedits shores, bounding almost all its western, and much of its northernand southern sides; while the sands of the Sahara, the deserts ofArabia and Syria of India and Thibet, filled up the greater part of theintervening spaces. The only countries of importance which can be viewedas in any sense neighbors of Persia are European and Asiatic Scythia, Hindustan, Arabia, Ethiopia, and Greece. 

Where the Black Sea, curving round to the north, ceased to furnish tothe Empire the advantage of a water barrier, a protection of almostequal strength was afforded to it by the mountain-chain of the Caucasus. Excepting on the extreme east, where it slopes gently to the Caspian, this range is one of great elevation, possessing but few passes, andvery difficult to traverse. Its fastnesses have always been inhabited bywild tribes, jealous of their freedom; and these tribes may have causedannoyance, but they could at no time have been a serious danger tothe Empire. They were weak in numbers, divided in nationality and ininterests, and quite incapable of conducting any distant expedition. Like their modern successors, the Circassians, Abassians, and Lesghians, their one and only desire was to maintain themselves in possession oftheir beloved mountains; and this desire would cause them to resistall attempts that might be made to traverse their country, whetherproceeding from the north or from the south, from the inhabitants ofEurope or from those of Asia. Persia was thus strongly protected in thisquarter; but still she could not feel herself altogether safe. Once atleast within historic memory the barrier of the Caucasus had proved tobe surmountable. From the vast Steppe which stretches northwards fromits base, in part salt, in part grassy, had crossed into Asia--throughits passes or round its eastern flank--a countless host, which had sweptall before it, and brought ruin upon flourishing empires. The Scythianand Samaritan hordes of the steppe-country between the Wolga andthe Dnieper were to the monarchies of Western Asia a permanent, if asomewhat distant, peril. It could not be forgotten that they hadproved themselves capable of penetrating the rocky barrier which wouldotherwise have seemed so sure a protection, or that when they swarmedacross it in the seventh century before our era, their strength was atfirst irresistible. The Persians knew, what the great nations of theearth afterwards forgot, that along the northern horizon there lay ablack cloud, which might at any time burst, carrying desolation totheir homes and bringing ruin upon their civilization. We shall find thecourse of their history importantly affected by a sense of this danger, and we shall have reason to admire the wisdom of their measures ofprecaution against it. 

It was not only to the west of the Caspian that the danger threatened. East of that sea also was a vast steppe-region--rolling plains of sandor grass--the home of nomadic hordes similar in character to those whodrank the waters of the Don and Wolga. The Sacse, Massagetse, and Dahseof this country, who dwelt about the Caspian, the Aral, and the LowerJaxartes, were an enemy scarcely less formidable than the Sarmatiansand the Scyths of the West. As the modern Iran now suffers from theperpetual incursions of Uzbegs and Turcomans, so the north-easternprovinces of the ancient Persia were exposed to the raids of the AsiaticScythians and the Massagetse, who were confined by no such barrier asthe Caucasus, having merely to cross a river, probably often fordableduring the summer, in order to be in Persia. Hyrcania and Parthia hadindeed a certain amount of protection from the Kharesmian Desert; butthe upper valleys of the great streams--the satrapies of Sogdiana andBactria--must have suffered considerable annoyance from such attacks. 

On the side of India, the Empire enjoyed a twofold security. From theshores of the Indian Ocean in the vicinity of the Runn of Cutch to the31st parallel of north latitude--a distance of above 600 miles--thereextends a desert, from one to two hundred miles across, whicheffectually shuts off the valley of the Indus from the rest ofHindustan. It is only along the skirts of the mountains, by Lahore, Umritsir, and Loodiana, that the march of armies is possible--by thisline alone can the Punjabis threaten Central India, or the inhabitantsof Central India attack the Punjab. Hence in this quarter there was buta very narrow tract to guard; and the task of defence was still furtherlightened by the political condition of the people. The GangeticIndians, though brave and powerful, were politically weak, from theirseparation into a number of distinct states under petty Rajahs, whocould never hope to contend successfully against the forces of a mightyEmpire. Persia, consequently, was safe upon this side, in the divisionof her adversaries. Nor had she neglected the further security which wasobtainable by an interposition between her own actual frontier and herenemies' dominions of a number of half-subject dependencies. Nativeprinces were allowed to bear sway in the Punjab region, who acknowledgedthe suzerainty of Persia, and probably paid her a fixed tribute, butwhose best service was that they prevented a collision between the Powerof whom they held their crowns and the great mass of their own nation. 

The Great Arabian Peninsula, which lay due south of the most centralpart of the Empire, and bordered it on this side for about thirteendegrees, or (if we follow the line of the boundary) for above a thousandmiles, might seem to have been the most important of all the adjacentcountries, since it contains an area of a million of square miles, andis a nursery of brave and hardy races. Politically, however, Arabia isweak, as has been shown in a former volume; while geographically shepresents to the north her most arid and untraversable regions, so thatit is rarely, and only under very exceptional circumstances, that shemenaces seriously her northern neighbors. Persia seems never to haveexperienced any alarm of an Arab invasion; her relations with the tribesthat came into closest contact with her were friendly; and she left thebulk of the nation in unmolested enjoyment of their independence. 

Another country adjoining the Persian Empire on the south, and one whichmight have been expected to cause some trouble, was Ethiopia. To EgyptEthiopia had always proved an unquiet, and sometimes even a dangerous, neighbor; she was fertile, rich, populous; her inhabitants were tall, strong, and brave; she had a ready means of marching into Egypt down thefertile valley of the Nile; and her hosts had frequently ravaged, and even held for considerable terms of years, that easily subjectedcountry. It is remarkable that during the whole time of the Persiandominion Ethiopia seems to have abstained from any invasion of theEgyptian territory. Apparently, she feared to provoke the power whichhad seated itself on the throne of the Pharaohs, and preferred the quietenjoyment of her own wealth and resources to the doubtful issues of acombat with the mistress of Asia. 

On her western horizon, clearly discernible from the capes and headlandsof the Asiatic coast, but separated from her, except in one or twoplaces, by a tolerably broad expanse of sea, and so--as it might haveseemed--less liable to come in contact with her than her neighbors uponthe land, lay the shores and isles of Greece--lovely and delightfulregions, in possession of a brave and hardy race, as yet uncorrupted byluxury, though in the enjoyment of a fair amount of civilization. As theeye looked across the Egean waters, resting with pleasure on the variedand graceful forms of Sporades and Cyclades, covetous thoughts mightnaturally arise in the beholder's heart; and the idea might readilyoccur of conquering and annexing the fair tracts which lay so temptinglynear and possessed such numerous attractions. The entire region, continent and islands included, was one of diminutive size--not halfso large as an ordinary Persian satrapy; it was well peopled, but itspopulation could not have amounted to that of the Punjab or of Egypt, countries which Persia had overrun in a single campaign; its inhabitantswere warlike, but they were comparatively poor, and the true sinews ofwar are money; moreover, they were divided amongst themselves, locallysplit up by the physical conformation of their country, and politicallyrepugnant to anything like centralization or union. A Persian king likeCambyses or Darius might be excused if, when his thoughts turned toGreece, he had a complacent feeling that no danger could threaten himfrom that quarter--that the little territory on his western border was aprey which he might seize at any time that it suited his convenience orseemed good to his caprice; so opening without any risk a new worldto his ambition. It required a knowledge that the causes of militarysuccess and political advance lie deeper than statistics can reach--thatthey have their roots in the moral nature of man, in the grandeur of hisideas and the energy of his character--in order to comprehend the fact, that the puny power upon her right flank was the enemy which Persia hadmost to fear, the foe who would gradually sap her strength, and finallydeal her the blow that would lay her prostrate. 

CHAPTER II. CLIMATE AND PRODUCTIONS. 

It is evident that an Empire which extended over more than twentydegrees of latitude, touching on the one hand the tropic of Cancer, while it reached upon the other to the parallel of Astrakan, and whichat the same time varied in elevation, from 20, 000 feet above to 1300below the sea level, must have comprised within it great differences ofclimate, and have boasted an immense variety of productions. No generaldescription can be applicable to such a stretch of territory; and itwill therefore be necessary to speak of the various parts of theEmpire successively in order to convey to the reader a true idea ofthe climatic influences to which it was subject, and the animals, vegetables, and minerals which it produced. 

Commencing with Persia Proper, the original seat and home of the racewith whose history we are specially concerned at present, we may observethat it was regarded by the ancients as possessing three distinctclimates--one along the shore, dry and scorchingly hot; another in themountain region beyond, temperate and delightful; and a third in thetract further inland, which was thought to be disagreeably cold andwintry. Moderns, on the contrary, find two climates only in Fars--onethat of the Desbistan or "low country, " extremely hot and dry, with frequent scorching and oppressive winds from the south and thesouth-east; the other, that of the highlands, which is cold in winter, but in summer pleasant and enjoyable. In the Deshistan snow never falls, and there is but little rain; heavy dews, however, occur at night, sothat the mornings are often fresh and cool; but the middle of the dayis almost always hot, and from March to November the temperature at noonranges from 90° to 100° of Fahrenheit. Occasionally it reaches 125°, andis then fearfully oppressive. Fierce gusts laden with sand sweep overthe plain, causing vegetation to droop or disappear, and the animalworld to hide itself. Man with difficulty retains life at these tryingtimes, feeling a languor and a depression of spirits which are barelysupportable. 10 All who can do so quit the plains and betake themselvesto the upland region till the great heats are past, and the advance ofautumn brings at any rate cool nights and mornings. The climate of theuplands is severe in winter. Much snow falls, and the thermometer oftenmarks from ten to fifteen degrees of frost. From time to time there arefurious gales, and, as the spring advances, a good deal of wet falls;but the summer and autumn are almost rainless. The heat towards middayis often considerable, but it is tempered by cool winds, and even at theworst is not relaxing. The variations of temperature are great in thetwenty-four hours, and the climate is, so far, trying; but, on thewhole, it seems to be neither disagreeable nor unhealthy. 

A climate resembling that of the Deshtistan prevailed along the entiresouthern coast of the Empire, from the mouth of the Tigris to that ofthe Indus. It was exchanged in the lower valleys of the great streamsfor a damp close heat, intolerably stifling and oppressive. The uppervalleys of these streams and the plains into which they expanded were atonce less hot and less moist, but were subject to violent storms, owingto the near vicinity of the mountains. In the mountains themselves, inArmenia and Zagros, and again in the Elburz, the climate was of a morerigorous character--intensely cold in winter, but pleasant in the summertime. [PLATE XXVII. , Fig. 3. ] Asia Minor enjoyed generally a warmerclimate than the high mountain regions; and its western and southerncoasts, being fanned by fresh breezes from the sea, or from the hillsof the interior, and cooled during the whole of the summer by frequentshowers, were especially charming. In Syria and Egypt the heats ofsummer were somewhat trying, more especially in the Ghor or depressedJordan valley, and in the parts of Egypt adjoining on Ethiopia; but thewinters were mild, and the springs and autumns delightful. The rarity ofrain in Egypt was remarkable, and drew the attention of foreigners, who recorded, in somewhat exaggerated terms, the curious meteorologicalphenomenon. In the Cyrenaica there was a delicious summer climate--anentire absence of rain, with cool breezes from the sea, cloudy skies, and heavy dews at night, these last supplying the moisture which throughthe whole of summer covered the ground with the freshest and loveliestverdure. The autumn and winter rains were, however, violent; andterrific storms were at that time of no unusual occurrence. The nativesregarded it as a blessing, that over this part of Africa the sky was"pierced, " and allowed moisture to fall from the great reservoir of"waters above the firmament;" but the blessing must have seemed one ofquestionable value at the time of the November monsoon, when the countryis deluged with rain for several weeks in succession. 

On the opposite side of the Empire, towards the north and thenorth-east, in Azerbijan, on the Iranian plateau, in the Afghan plains, in the high flat region east of the Bolor, and again in the low plainabout the Aral lake and the Caspian, a severe climate prevailed duringthe winter, while the summer combined intense heat during the day withextraordinary cold--the result of radiation--at night. Still more bitterweather was experienced in the mountain regions of these parts--inthe Bolor, the Thian Chan, the Himalaya, and the Paropamisus or HinduKush--where the winters lasted more than half the year, deep snowcovering the ground almost the whole of the time, and locomotion beingrendered almost impossible; while the summers were only moderately hot. On the other hand, there was in this quarter, at the very extremeeast of the Empire, one of the most sultry and disagreeable of allclimates--namely, that of the Indus valley, which is either intolerablyhot and dry, with fierce tornadoes of dust that are unspeakablyoppressive, or close and moist, swept by heavy storms, which, whilethey somewhat lower the temperature, increase the unhealthiness of theregion. The worst portion of the valley is its southern extremity, wherethe climate is only tolerable during three months of the year. FromMarch to November the heat is excessive; dust-storms prevail; there aredangerous dews at night; and with the inundation, which commences inApril, a sickly time sets in, which causes all the wealthier classesto withdraw from the country till the stagnant water, which the swellalways leaves behind it, has dried up. 

Upon the whole, the climate of the Empire belonged to the warmer classof the climates which are called temperate. In a few parts only, indeed, as in the Indus valley, along the coast from the mouth of the Industo that of the Tigris, in Lower Babylonia and the adjoining portionof Susiana, in Southern Palestine, and in Egypt, was frost absolutelyunknown; while in many places, especially in the high mountainousregions, the winters were bitterly severe; and in all the more elevatedportions of the Empire, as in Phrygia and Cappadocia, in Azerbijan, onthe great Iranian plateau, and again in the district about Kashgar andYarkand, there was a prolonged period of sharp and bracing weather. Butthe summer warmth of almost the whole Empire was great, the thermometerprobably ranging in most places from 90° to 120° during the months ofJune, July, August, and September. The springs and autumns were, exceptin the high mountain tracts, mild and enjoyable; the Empire had few veryunhealthy districts; while the range of the thermometer was in most ofthe provinces considerable, and the variations in the course of a singleday and night were unusually great, there was in the climate, speakinggenerally, nothing destructive of human vigor--nothing even inimical tolongevity. 

The vegetable productions of Persia Proper in ancient times (so far aswe have direct testimony on the subject) were neither numerous nor veryremarkable. The low coast tract supplied dates in tolerable plenty, and bore in a few favored spots, corn, vines, and different kinds offruit-trees; but its general character was one of extreme barrenness. In the mountain region there was an abundance of rich pasture, excellentgrapes were grown, and fruit-trees of almost every sort, except theolive, flourished. One fruit-tree, regarded as indigenous in thecountry, acquired a special celebrity, and was known to the Romansas the persica, whence the German Pfirsche, the French peche, and our"peach. " Citrons, which grew in few places, were also a Persian fruit. Further, Persia produced a coarse kind of silphium or assafoetida; itwas famous for its walnuts, which were distinguished by the epithetof "royal"; and it supplied to the pharmacopeia of Greece and Rome acertain number of herbs. 

The account of Persian vegetable products which we derive from antiquityis no doubt very incomplete; and it is necessary to supplement it fromthe observations of modern travellers. These persons tell us that, whileFars and Kerman are ill-supplied with forest-trees, they yet produce inplaces oaks, planes, chenars or sycamores, poplars, willows, pinasters, cypresses, acacias, fan-palms, konars, and junipers. Among shrubs, theybear the wild fig, the wild almond, the tamarisk, the myrtle, the box, the rhododendron, the camel's thorn, the gum tragacanth, the caperplant, the benneh, the blackberry, and the liquorice-plant. They boast agreat abundance of fruit-trees--as date-bearing palms, lemons, oranges, pomegranates, vines, peaches, nectarines, apricots, quinces, pears, apples, plums, figs, cherries, mulberries, barberries, walnuts, almonds, and pistachio-nuts. The kinds of grain chiefly cultivated are wheat, barley, millet, rice, and Indian corn or maize, which has been importedinto the country from America. Pulse, beans, sesame, madder, henna, cotton, opium, tobacco, and indigo, are also grown in some places. Thethree last-named, and maize or Indian corn, are of comparatively recentintroduction; but of the remainder it may be doubted whether there is asingle one which was unknown to the ancient inhabitants. 

Among Persian indigenous animals may be enumerated the lion, the bear, the wild ass, the stag, the antelope, the ibex or wild goat, the wildboar, the hyena, the jackal, the wolf, the fox, the hare, the porcupine, the otter, the jerboa, the ichneumon, and the marmot. The lion appearsto be rare, occurring only in some parts of the mountains. The ichneumonis confined to the Deshtistan. The antelope, the wild boar, the wolf, the fox, the jackal, the porcupine, and the jerboa are common. Wildasses are found only on the northern side of the mountains, towards thesalt desert. In this tract they are frequently seen, both singly and inherds, and are hunted by the natives, who regard their flesh as a greatdelicacy. 

The most remarkable of the Persian birds are the eagle, the vulture, thecormorant, the falcon, the bustard, the pheasant, the heath-cock, thered-legged partridge, the small gray partridge, the pin tailed grouse, the sand-grouse, the francolin, the wild swan, the flamingo, the stork, the bittern, the oyster-catcher, the raven, the hooded crow, andthe cuckoo. Besides these, the lakes boast all the usual kinds ofwater-fowl, as herons, ducks, snipe, teal, etc. ; the gardens and grovesabound with blackbirds, thrushes, and nightingales; curlews and peewitsare seen occasionally; while pigeons, starlings, crows, magpies, larks, sparrows, and swallows are common. The francolin is hunted by men onfoot in the country between Shiraz and Kerman, and is taken by the handafter a few flights. The oyster-catcher, which is a somewhat rare bird, has been observed only on Lake Neyriz. The bustard occurs both in thelow plain along the coast, and on the high plateau, where it is capturedby means of hawks. The pheasant and the heath-cock (the latter a blackspecies spotted with white) are found in the woods near Failyun. Thesand-grouse and the pin-tailed grouse belong to the eastern portionof the country, the portion known anciently as Carmania or "the hotregion. " The other kinds are diffused pretty generally. 

The shores and rivers of Persia Proper supplied the people veryplentifully with fish. The ancient writers tell us that the inhabitantsof the coast tract lived almost wholly on a fish diet. The Indian Seaappears in those days to have abounded with whales, which were notunfrequently cast upon the shores, affording a mine of wealth to thenatives. The great ribs were used as beams in the formation of huts, while the jaws served as doors and the smaller bones as planking. Dolphins also abounded in the Persian waters; together with many otherfish of less bulk, which were more easy to capture. On these smallerfish, which they caught in nets, the maritime inhabitants subsistedprincipally. They had also an unfailing resource in the abundance ofoysters, and other shell-fish along their coast--the former of excellentquality. 

In the interior, though the lakes, being salt or brackish, had nopiscatory stores, the rivers were, for the most part, it would seem, well provided; at least, good fish are still found in many of thestreams, both small and large; and in some they are exceedinglyplentiful. Modern travellers fail to distinguish the different kinds;but we may presume that they are not very unlike those of the adjoiningMedia, which appear to be trout, carp, barbel, dace, bleak, and gudgeon. 

The reptiles of Persia Proper are not numerous. They are chieflytortoises, lizards, frogs, land-snakes, and water-snakes. Theland-snakes are venomous, but their poison is not of a very deadlycharacter; and persons who have been bitten by them, if properlytreated, generally recover. The lizards are of various sizes, some quitesmall, others more than three feet long, and covered with a coarse roughskin like that of a toad. They have the character of being venomous, andeven dangerous to life; but it may be doubted whether they are not, likeour toads and newts, in reality perfectly harmless. 

The traveller in Persia suffers less from reptiles than from insects. Scorpions abound in all parts of the country, and, infesting houses, furniture, and clothes, cause perpetual annoyance. Mosquitoes swarmin certain places and seasons, preventing sleep and irritating thetraveller almost beyond endurance. A poisonous spider, a sort oftarantula, is said to occur in some localities; and Chardin furthermentions a kind of centipede, the bite of which, according to him, isfatal. To the sufferings which these creatures cause, must be added aconstant annoyance from those more vulgar forms of insect life whichdetract from the delights of travel even in Europe. 

Persia, moreover, suffers no less than Babylonia and Media, from theravages of locusts. Constantly, when the wind is from the south-east, there cross from the Arabian coast clouds of these destructive insects, whose numbers darken the air as they move, in flight after flight, across the desert to the spots where nature or cultivation has clothedthe earth with verdure. The Deshtistan, or low country, is, of course, most exposed to their attacks, but they are far from being confined tothat region. The interior, as far as Shiraz itself, suffers terriblyfrom this scourge, which produces scarcity, or even famine, when (asoften happens) it is repeated year after year. The natives at such timesare reduced to feeding on the locusts themselves; a diet which they donot relish, but to which necessity compels them. 

The locusts of Persia Proper are said to be of two kinds. One, whichis regarded as bred in the country, bears the name of _missri_, beingidentified with the locust of Egypt. The other, which is thought tobe blown over from Arabia, and thus to cross the sea, is known as the_melelch deriai_, or "sea-locust. " The former is regarded as especiallydestructive to the crops, the latter to the shrubs and trees. 

The domestic animals in use at the present day within the provinces ofFars and Kerman are identical with those employed in the neighboringcountry of Media, and will need only a very few words of notice here. The ordinary horse of the country is the Turcoman, a large, strong, butsomewhat clumsy animal, possessed of remarkable powers of endurance;but in the Deshtistan the Arabian breed prevails, and travellers tell usthat in this region horses are produced which fall but little short ofthe most admired coursers of Nejd. Cows and oxen are somewhat rare, beefbeing little eaten, and such cattle being only kept for the supplyof the dairy, and for purposes of agriculture. Sheep and goats areabundant, and constitute the chief wealth of the inhabitants; the goatis, on the whole, preferred, and both goats and sheep are generally ofa black or brown color. The sheep of Kerman are small and short-legged;they produce a wool of great softness and delicacy. 

It is probable that in ancient times the domestic animals of the countrywere nearly the same as at the present day. The statement of Xenophon, that anciently a horse was a rarity in Persia Proper, is contradicted bythe great bulk of the early writers, who tell us that the Persians werefrom the first expert riders, and that their country was peculiarly wellfitted for the breeding of horses. Their camels, sheep, goats, asses, and oxen, are also expressly mentioned by the Greeks, who even indicatea knowledge of the fact that goats were preferred to sheep by theherdsmen of the country. 

The mineral treasures of the country appear to have been considerable, though to what extent they were known and made use of in ancient timesis open to some question. Mines of gold, silver, copper, iron, red lead, and orpiment are said to have been actually worked under the Persiankings; and some of the other minerals were so patent and obvious, thatwe can scarcely suppose them to have been neglected. Salt abounded inthe region in several shapes. It appeared in some places as rock salt, showing itself in masses of vast size and various colors. In otherplaces it covered the surface of the ground for miles together with athick incrustation, and could be gathered at all seasons with littlelabor. It was deposited by the waters of several lakes within theterritory, and could be collected round their edges at certain timesof the year. Finally, it was held in solution, both in the lakes and inmany of the streams; from whose waters it might have been obtained byevaporation. Bitumen and naphtha were yielded by sources near Dalaki, which were certainly known to the ancients. Sulphur was deposited uponthe surface of the ground in places. Some of the mountains containedordinary lead; but it is not unlikely that this metal escaped notice. 

Ancient Persia produced a certain number of gems. The pearls ofthe Gulf, which have still so great a reputation, had attracted theattention of adventurers before the time of Alexander, whose navalcaptains found a regular fishery established in one of the islands. TheOrientals have always set a high value on this commodity; and it appearsthat in ancient times the Gulf pearls were more highly esteemed than anyothers. Of hard stones the only kinds that can be distinctly assigned toPersia Proper are the iritis, a species of rock-crystal; the atizoe, awhite stone which had a pleasant odor; the mithrax, a gem of many hues, the nipparene, which resembled ivory; and the the lycardios or mule, which was in special favor among the natives of the country. 

From this account of the products of Persia Proper we have now to passto those of the Empire in general--a wide subject, which it will beimpossible to treat here with any completeness, owing to the limits towhich the present work is necessarily confined. In order to bring thematter within reasonable compass, the reader may be referred in thefirst instance to the account which was given in a former volume of theproducts of the empire of Babylon; and the enquiry may then be confinedto those regions which were subject to Persia, but not contained withinthe limits of the Fourth Monarchy. 

Among the animals belonging to these regions, the following areespecially noticeable:--The tiger, the elephant, the hippopotamus, thecrocodile, the monitor, the two-humped camel, the Angora goat, the elk, the monkey, and the spotted hysena, or _Felis chaus_. The tiger, whichis entirely absent from Mesopotamia, and unknown upon the plateau ofIran, abounds in the low tract between the Elburz and the Caspian, inthe flat region about the Sea of Aral, and in the Indus valley. Theelephant was, perhaps, anciently an inhabitant of Upper Egypt, where theisland of Elephantine remained an evidence of the fact. It was also inPersian times a denizen of the Indus valley, though perhaps only in adomesticated state. The hippopotamus, unknown in India, was confined tothe single province of Egypt, where it was included among the animalswhich were the objects of popular worship. The crocodile--likewise asacred animal to the Egyptians--frequented both the Nile and the Indus. Monitors, which are a sort of diminutive crocodiles, were of two kinds:one, the _Lacerta Nilotica_, was a water animal, and was probably foundonly in Egypt; the other, _Lacerta scincus_, frequented dry and sandyspots, and abounded in North Africa and Syria, as well as in the Nilevalley. The two-humped camel belonged to Bactria, where he was probablyindigenous, but was widely spread over the Empire, on account of hisgreat strength and powers of endurance. 

The Angora goat is, perhaps, scarcely a distinct species. If notidentical with the ordinary wild goat of Persia and Mesopotamia (_Capracegagrus_), he is at any rate closely allied to it; and it is possiblethat all his peculiar characteristics may be the effect of climate. Hehas a soft, white, silky fleece, very long, divided down the back bya strong line of separation, and falling on either side in beautifulspiral ringlets; his fleece weighs from two to four pounds. It isof nearly uniform, length, and averages from five to five and a halfinches. 

The elk is said to inhabit Armenia, Affghanistan, and the lower part ofthe valley of the Indus; but it is perhaps not certain that he is reallyto be found in the two latter regions. Monkeys abound in Eastern Oabuland the adjoining parts of India. They may have also existed formerlyin Upper Egypt. The spotted hyena, _Felis chaus_ (_Canis crocuta_ ofLinnaeus), is an Egyptian animal, inhabiting principally the hills onthe western side of the Nile. In appearance it is like a large cat, with a tuft of long black hair at the extremities of its ears--a featurewhich it has in common with the lynx. 

Among the rarer birds of the Empire may be mentioned the ostrich, whichoccurred in Mesopotamia; parrots, which were found in Cabul and thePunjab; ibises, which abounded in Egypt, and in the Delta of the Indus, the great vulture (Vultur cinereus), which inhabited the Taurus, theIndian owl (_Athena Indica_), the spoonbill (_Platalea nudifrons_); thebenno (_Ardea bubulcus_), and the sicsac (_Charadrius melanocephalus_). 

The most valuable of the fish belonging to the Persian seas and riverswere the pearl oyster of the Gulf, and the murex of the Mediterranean, which furnished the famous purple dye of Tyre. After these may be placedthe sturgeon and sterlet of the Caspian, the silurus of the Sea of Aral, the Aleppo eel, and the palla, a small but excellent fish, which iscaptured in the Indus during the flood season. The Indian Ocean andthe Persian Gulf, as we have seen, were visited by whales; dolphins, porpoises, cod, and mullet abounded in the same seas; the large riversgenerally contained barbel and carp; while some of them, together withmany of the smaller streams, supplied trout of a good flavor. TheNile had some curious fish peculiar to itself, as the oxyrinchus, the lepidotus, the Perca Nilotica, the Silurus Schilbe Niloticus, theSilurus carmuth and others. Great numbers of fish, mostly of the samespecies with those of the Nile, were also furnished by the Lake Moeris;and from these a considerable revenue was derived by the Great Kings. 

Among the more remarkable of the reptiles which the Empire comprisedwithin its limits may be noticed--besides the great saurians alreadymentioned among the larger animals--the Nile and Euphrates turtles(_Trionyx Egypticus_ and _Trionyx Euphraticus_), iguanas (_Stelliovulgaris_ and _Stellio spinipes_), geckos, especially the Egyptian housegecko (_O. Lobatus_), snakes, such as the asp (_Coluber haje_) andthe horned snake (_Coluber cerastes_), and the chameleon. The Egyptianturtle is a large species, sometimes exceeding three feet in length. Itis said to feed on the young of the crocodile. Both it and the Euphratesturtle are of the soft kind, i. E. , of the kind which has not the shellcomplete, but unites the upper and under portions by a coriaceousmembrane. The turtle of the Euphrates is of moderate size, not exceedinga a length of two feet. It lives in the river, and on warm days sunsitself on the sandbanks with which the stream abounds. It is active, strong, violent, and passionate. When laid on its back it easilyrecovers itself. If provoked, it will snap at sticks and other objects, and endeavor to tear them to pieces. It is of an olive-green color, withlarge irregular greenish black spots. 

Iguanas are found in Egypt, in Syria, and elsewhere. The most commonkind (_Stellio vulgaris_) does not exceed a foot in length, and is ofan olive color, shaded with black. It is persecuted and killed by theMahometans, because they regard its favorite attitude as a derisiveimitation of their own attitude of prayer. There is another species, also Egyptian, which is of a much larger size, and of a grass-greencolor. This is called _Stellio spinipes_: it has a length of from two tothree feet. 

The gecko is a kind of nocturnal lizard. Its eyes are large, and thepupil is extremely contractile. It hides itself during the day, and islively only at nights. It haunts rooms, especially kitchens, in Egypt, where it finds the insects which form its ordinary food. Its feetconstitute its most marked characteristic. The five toes are enlargedand furnished with an apparatus of folds, which, by some peculiaraction, enable it to adhere to perfectly smooth surfaces, to ascendperpendicular walls, cross ceilings, or hang suspended for hours on theunder side of leaves. The Egyptians called it the abu burs, or "fatherof leprosy, " and there is a wide-spread belief in its poisonouscharacter; but modern naturalists incline to regard the belief asunfounded, and to place the gecko among reptiles which are absolutelyharmless. [PLATE XXVIII. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXVIII. ]

The asp of Egypt (_Coluber haje_) is a species of cobra. It is a largesnake, varying from three to six feet in length, and is extremelyvenomous. It haunts gardens, where it is of great use, feeding on mice, frogs, and various small reptiles. It has the power of greatly dilatingthe skin of the neck, and this it does when angered in a way that isvery remarkable. Though naturally irritable, it is easily tamed; and theserpent-charmers of the East make it the object of their art more oftenthan any other species. [PLATE XXVIII. , Fig. 2. ] After extracting thefangs or burning out the poison-bag with a red-hot iron, the charmertrains the animal by the shrill sounds of a small flute, and it is soonperfectly docile. 

The cerastes is also employed occasionally by the snake-charmers. Ithas two long and thin excrescences above the eyes, whereto the name of"horns" has been given: they stand erect, leaning a little backwards;no naturalist has as yet discovered their use. The cerastes is of avery pale brown color, and is spotted with large, unequal, andirregularly-placed spots. Its bite is exceedingly dangerous, since itpossesses a virulent poison; and, being in the habit of nearly buryingitself in the sand, which is of the same color with itself, it is themore difficult of avoidance. Its size also favors its escaping notice, since in length it rarely much exceeds a foot. [PLATE XXVIII. , Fig. 3. ]

The chameleon has in all ages attracted the attention of mankind. It isfound in Egypt, and in many others parts of Africa, in Georgia, and inIndia. The power of changing color which it possesses is not really itsmost remarkable characteristic. Far more worthy of notice are its slowpace, extraordinary form, awkward movements, vivacity, and control ofeye, and marvellous rapidity of tongue. It is the most grotesque ofreptiles. With protruding and telescopic eyes, that move at will inthe most opposite directions, with an ungainly head, a cold, dry, strange-looking skin, and a prehensile tail, the creature slowly stealsalong a branch or twig, scarcely distinguishable from the substancealong which it moves, and scarcely seeming to move at all, until it hascome within reach of its prey. Then suddenly, with a motion rapid asthat of the most agile bird, the long cylindrical and readily extensiletongue is darted forth with unerring aim, and the prey is seizedand swallowed in a single moment of time. The ordinary color of thechameleon is a pale olive-green. This sometimes fades to a sort ofashen-gray, while sometimes it warms to a yellowish-brown, on whichare seen faint spots of red. Modern naturalists, for the most part, attribute the changes to the action of the lungs, which is itselfaffected chiefly by the emotions of anger, desire, and fear. [PLATEXXVIII. , Fig. 5. ]

The great extent of the Empire caused its vegetable productions toinclude almost all the forms known to the ancient world. On the onehand, the more northern and more elevated regions bore pines, firs, larches, oaks, birch, beech, ash, ilex, and junipers, together with theshrubs and flowers of the cooler temperate regions; on the otherhand, the southern tracts grew palms of various kinds, mangoes, tamarind-trees, lemons, oranges, jujubes, mimosas, and sensitive plants. Between these extremes of tropical and cold-temperate products, theEmpire embraced an almost infinite variety of trees, shrubs, andflowers. The walnut and the Oriental plane grew to avast size in manyplaces. Poplars, willows, fig-mulberries, konars, cedars, cypresses, acacias, were common. Bananas, egg-plants, locust-trees, banyans, terebinths, the gum-styrax, the gum-tragacanth, the assafoetida plant, the arbor vitse, the castor-oil plant, the Judas-tree, and othersomewhat rare forms, sprang up side by side with the pomegranate, the oleander, the pistachio-nut, the myrtle, the bay, the laurel, themulberry, the rhododendron, and the arbutus. The Empire grew all theknown sorts of grain, and almost all the known fruits. Among its variousproductions of this class, it is only possible to select for noticea few which were especially remarkable either for their rarity or fortheir excellent quality. 

The ancients celebrated the wheat of AEolis, the dates of Babylon, the citrons of Media, the Persian peach, the grapes of Carmania, the Hyrcanian fig, the plum of Damascus, the cherries of Pontus, themulberries of Egypt and of Cyprus, the silphium of Gyrene, the wine ofHelbon, the wild-grape of Syria. It is not unlikely that to thesemight have been added as many other vegetable products of first-rateexcellence, had the ancients possessed as good a knowledge of thecountries included within the Empire as the moderns. At present, themulberries of Khiva, the apricots of Bokhara, the roses of Mexar, thequinces and melons of Isfahan, the grapes of Kasvin and Shii-az, thepears of Natunz, the dates of Dalaki, have a wide-spread reputation, which appears in most cases to be well deserved. On the whole, it iscertain that for variety and excellence the vegetable products of thePersian Empire will bear comparison with those of any other state orcommunity that has as yet existed, either in the ancient or the modernworld. 

Two only of these products seem to deserve a longer description. TheCyrenaic silphium, of which we hear so much, as constituting the mainwealth of that province, was valued chiefly for its medicinal qualities. A decoction from its leaves was used to hasten the worst kind of labors;its root and a juice which flowed from it were employed in a varietyof maladies. The plant, which is elaborately described by Theophrastus, appears to have been successfully identified by modern travellers inthe Cyrenaica, who see it in the drias or derias of the Arabs, anumbelliferous plant, which grows to a height of about three feet, has adeleterious effect on the camels that browse on it, and bears a strikingresemblance to the representations of the ancient silphium uponcoins and medals. This plant grows only in the tract between Merj andDerna--the very heart of the old silphium country, while that it hasmedicinal properties is certain from its effects upon animals; there canthus be little doubt that it is the silphium of the ancients, somewhatdegenerated, owing to want of cultivation. 

The Egyptian byblus or papyrus (_Cyperus papyrus_) was perhaps themost valuable of all the vegetables of the Empire. The plant was atall smooth reed of a triangular shape. It grew to the height of ten orfifteen feet, and terminated in a tuft or plume of leaves and flowers. Though indigenous in the country, it was the subject of carefulcultivation, and was grown in irrigated ground, or in such lands as werenaturally marshy. The root of the plant was eaten, while from its stemwas made the famous Egyptian paper. The manufacture of the papyrus wasas follows; The outer rind having been removed, there was exposed alaminated interior, consisting of a number of successive layers of innercuticle, generally about twenty. These were carefully separated fromone another by the point of a needle, and thus were obtained a numberof strips of the raw material, which were then arranged in rows, coveredwith a paste, and crossed at right angles by another set of stripsplaced over them, after which the whole was converted into paper bymeans of a strong pressure. A papyrus roll was made by uniting togethera greater or less number of such sheets. The best paper was madefrom the inmost layers of cuticle. The outer rind of the papyrus wasconverted into ropes; and this fabric was found to be peculiarly adaptedfor immersion in water. 

The mineral treasures of the Empire were various and abundant. It hasbeen noticed already that Persia Proper, if we include in it Carmania, possessed mines of gold, silver, copper, iron, red lead, orpiment, andsalt, yielding also bitumen, naphtha, sulphur, and most probably commonlead. We are further informed by ancient writers that Drangiana, orSarangia, furnished the rare and valuable mineral tin, without whichcopper could not be hardened into bronze; that Armenia yielded emery, sonecessary for the working and polishing of gems; that the mountainsand mines of the Empire supplied almost all the varieties of useful andprecious stones; and that thus there was scarcely a mineral known to andrequired by the ancients for the purposes of their life which the GreatKing could not command without having recourse to others than his ownsubjects. It may be likewise noticed that the more important were veryabundant, being found in many places and in large quantities. Gold wasfurnished from the mountains and deserts of Thibet and India, from therivers of Lydia, and probably from other places where it is still found, as Armenia, Cabul, and the neighborhood of Meshed. Silver, which wasthe general medium of exchange in Persia, must have been especiallyplentiful. It was probably yielded, not only by the Kerman mines, but also by those of Armenia, Asia Minor, and the Elburz. Copper wasobtained in great abundance from Cyprus, as well as from Carmania; andit may have been also derived, as it is now in very large quantities, from Armenia. Iron, really the most precious of all metals, existedwithin the Persian territory in the shape of huge boulders, as wellas in nodules and in the form of ironstone. Lead was procurable fromBactria, Armenia, Korman, and many parts of Affghanistan; orpimentfrom Bactria, Kerman, and the Hazareh country; antimony from Armenia, Affghanistan, and Media; hornblende, quartz, talc, and asbestos, fromvarious places in the Taurus. 

Of all necessary minerals probably none was so plentiful and so widelydiffused as salt. It was not only in Persia Proper that nature hadbestowed this commodity with a lavish hand--there was scarcelya province of the Empire which did not possess it in superfluousabundance. Large tracts were covered by it in North Africa, in Media, in Carmania, and in Lower Babylonia. In Asia Minor, Armenia, Syria, Palestine, and other places, it could be obtained from lakes. In Kerman, and again in Palestine, it showed itself in the shape of large masses, not inappropriately termed "mountains. " Finally, in India it was thechief material of a long mountain-range, which is capable of supplyingthe whole world with salt for many ages. 

Bitumen and naptha were also very widely diffused. At the eastern footof the Caucasus, where it subsides into the Caspian Sea, at variouspoints in the great Mesopotamian plain, in the Deshtistan or low countryof Persia Proper, in the Bakh-tiyari mountains, and again in the distantJordan valley, these two inseparable products are to be found, generallyunited with indications of volcanic action, present or recent. Thebitumen is of excellent quality, and was largely employed by theancients. The naphtha is of two kinds, black naphtha or petroleum, andwhite naphtha, which is much preferred to the other. The bitumen-pitsalso, in some places, yielded salt. 

Another useful mineral with which the Persians were very plentifullysupplied, was sulphur. Sulphur is found in Persia Proper, in Carmania, on the coast of Mekran, in Azerbijan, in the Elburz, on the Iranianplateau, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea, and in very large quantitiesnear Mosul. Here it is quarried in great blocks, which are conveyed toconsiderable distances. 

Excellent stone for building purposes was obtainable in most parts ofthe Empire. Egypt furnished an inexhaustible supply of the best possiblegranite; marbles of various kinds, compact sandstone, limestone, andother useful sorts were widely diffused; and basalt was procurable fromsome of the outlying ranges of Taurus. In the neighborhood of Nineveh, and in much of the Mesopotamian region, there was abundance of greyalabaster, and a better kind was quarried near Damascus. A grittysilicious rock on the banks of the Euphrates, a little above Hit, wassuitable for mill-stones. 

The gems furnished by the various provinces of the Empire are toonumerous for mention. They included, it must be remembered, all thekinds which have already been enumerated among the mineral products ofthe earlier Monarchies. Among them, a principal place must, one wouldthink, have been occupied by the turquoise--the gem, par excellence, ofmodern Persia--although, strange to say, there is no certain mentionof it among the literary remains of antiquity. This lovely stoneis produced largely by the mines at Nishapur in the Elburz, and isfurnished also in less abundance and less beauty by a mine in Kerman, and another near Khojend. It is noticed by an Arabian author as early asthe twelfth century of our era. A modern writer on gems supposes that itis mentioned, though not named, by Theophrastus; but this view scarcelyseems to be tenable. 

Among the gems of most value which the Empire certainly produced werethe emerald, the green ruby, the red ruby, the opal, the sapphire, theamethyst, the carbuncle, the jasper, the lapis lazuli, the sard, theagate, and the topaz. Emeralds were found in Egypt, Media, and Cyprus;green rubies in Bactria; common or red rubies in Caria; opals in Egypt, Cyprus, and Asia Minor; sapphires in Cyprus; amethysts also in Cyprus, and moreover in Egypt, Galatia, and Armenia; carbuncles in Caria;jaspers in Cyprus, Asia Minor, and Persia Proper; the lapis lazuli inCyprus, Egypt, and Media; the sard in Babylonia; the agate in Carmania, Susiana, and Armenia; and the topaz or chrysoprase in Upper Egypt. 

The tales which are told of enormous emeralds are undoubtedly fictions, the material which passed for that precious substance being really inthese cases either green jasper or (more probably) glass. But lapislazuli and agate seem to have existed within the Empire in huge masses. Whole cliffs of the former overhang the river Kashkar in Kaferistan; andthe myrrhine vases of antiquity which were (it is probable) of agate, and came mainly from Carmania, seem to have been of a great size. 

We may conclude this review by noticing, among stones of lessconsequence produced within the Empire, jet, which was so called frombeing found at the mouth of the river Gagis in Lycia, garnets, which arecommon in Armenia, and beryl, which is a product of the same country. 

CHAPTER III. CHARACTER, MANNERS AND CUSTOMS, DRESS, ETC. , OF THE PEOPLE. 

"I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before theriver a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but onewas higher than the other, and the higher came up last. "--Dan. Viii. 3. 

The ethnic identity of the Persian people with the Medes, and theinclusion of both nations in that remarkable division of the humanrace which is known to ethnologers as the Ipanic or Arian, have beenmaintained in a former volume. To the arguments there adduced it seemsunnecessary to add anything in this place, since at the present dayneither of the two positions appears to be controverted. It is admittedgenerally, not only that the Persians were of the same stock with theMedes, but that they formed, together with the Medes and a fewother tribes and peoples of less celebrity, a special branch of theIndo-European family--a branch to which the name of Arian may beassigned, not merely for convenience sake, but on grounds of actualtradition and history. Undistinguished in the earlier annals of theirrace, the Medes and Persians became towards the eighth or seventhcentury before our era, its leading and most important tribes. Closelyunited together, with the superiority now inclining to one, now to theother, they claimed and exercised a lordship over all the other membersof the stock, and not only over them, but over various alien racesalso. They had qualities which raised them above their fellows, and acivilization, which was not, perhaps, very advanced, but was still notwholly contemptible. Such details as could be collected, either fromancient authors, or from the extant remains, of the character, mode oflife, customs, etc. , of the Medes, have already found a place in thiswork. 

The greater part of what was there said will apply also to the Persians. The information, however, which we possess, with respect to this latterpeople, is so much more copious than that which has come down to us withregard to the Medes, that, without repeating anything from the formerplace, our materials will probably enable us to give to the presentchapter considerable dimensions. 

The woodcuts of the preceding volume will have made the readersufficiently familiar with the physiognomy of the Persians, or, at anyrate, with the representation of it which has come down to us upon thePersian monuments. It may be remarked that the type of face and head isuniform upon all of them, and offers a remarkable contrast to the typeassigned to themselves by the Assyrians, from whom the Arians evidentlyadopted the general idea of bas-reliefs, as well as their general modeof treating subjects upon them. The novelty of the physiognomy isa strong argument in favor of its truthfulness; and this is furtherconfirmed by the evidence which we have, that the Persian artists aimedat representing the varieties of the human race, and succeeded fairlyin rendering them. Varieties of, physiognomy are represented upon thebas-reliefs with much care, and sometimes with remarkable success, asthe annexed head of a negro, taken from one of the royal tombs, willsufficiently indicate. [PLATE XXIX. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXIX. ]

According to Herodotus, the skulls of the Persians were extraordinarilythin and weak--a phenomenon for which he accounted by the national habitof always covering the head. There does not seem to be in reality anyground for supposing that such a practice would at all tend to producesuch a result. If, therefore, we regard the fact of thinness asestablished, we can only view it as an original feature in the physicaltype of the race. Such a feature would imply, on the supposition thatthe heads were of the ordinary size, a large brain-cavity, and soan unusual volume of brain, which is generally a concomitant of highintellectual power. 

The Persians seem, certainly, to have been quick and lively, keen-witted, capable of repartee, ingenious, and, for Orientals, far-sighted. They had fancy and imagination, a relish for poetry andart, and they were not without a certain power of political combination. But we cannot justly ascribe to them any high degree of intellectualexcellence. The religious ideas which they held in common with the Medeswere, indeed, of a more elevated character than is usual with races notenlightened by special revelation; but these ideas were the common stockof the Iranic peoples, and were inherited by the Persians from a remoteancestry, not excogitated by themselves. Their taste for art, thoughmarked, was neither pure nor high. We shall have to consider, in afuture chapter, the architecture and mimetic art of the people to weightheir merits in these respects, and, at the same time, to note theirdeficiencies. 

Without anticipating the exact verdict then to be pronounced, we may sayat once that there is nothing in the remains of the Persian architectureand sculpture that have come down to us indicative of any remarkableartistic genius; nothing that even places them on a par with the bestworks of the kind produced by Orientals. Again, if the great work ofFirdausi represents to us, as it probably does, the true spirit of theancient poetry of the Persians, we must conclude that, in the highestdepartment of art, their efforts were but of moderate merit. A tone ofexaggeration, an imagination exuberant and unrestrained, a preferencefor glitter over solid excellence, a love of far-fetched conceits, characterize the Shahnameh; and, though we may fairly ascribe somethingof this to the idiosyncrasy of the poet, still, after we have made alldue allowance upon this score, the conviction presses upon us that therewas a childish and grotesque character in the great mass of the oldPersian poetry, which marks it as the creation of moderate rather thanof high intellectual power, and prevents us from regarding it with therespect with which we view the labors of the Greeks and Romans, or, again, of the Hebrews, in this department. A want of seriousness, awant of reality, and, again, a want of depth, characterize the poetryof Iran, whose bards do not touch the chords which rouse what is noblestand highest in our nature. They give us sparkle, prettiness, quaint andingenious fancies, grotesque marvels, an inflated kind of human heroism;but they have none of the higher excellencies of the poetic art, none ofthe divine fire which renders the true poet, and the true prophet, one. 

Among moral qualities, we must assign to the Persians as their mostmarked characteristics, at any rate in the earlier times, courage, energy, and a regard for truth. The valor of their troops in the greatcombats of Platsea and Thermopylae extorted the admiration of theirenemies, who have left on record their belief that, "in boldness andwarlike spirit, the Persians were not a whit behind the Greeks, "and that their defeat was "wholly owing to the inferiority of theirequipment and training. " Without proper shields, with little defensivearmor, wielding only short swords and lances that were scarcely morethan javelins, they dashed themselves upon the serried ranks of theSpartans, seizing the huge spear-shafts of these latter with theirhands, striving to break them, and to force a way in. No conduct couldhave been braver than this, which the modern historian well compareswith brilliant actions of the Romans and the Swiss. The Persiansthoroughly deserved to be termed (as they are termed by AEschylus), a"valiant-minded people;" they had boldness, elan, dash, and considerabletenacity and stubbornness; no nation of Asia or Africa was able to standagainst them; if they found their masters in the Greeks, it was owing, as the Greeks themselves tell us, to the superiority of Hellenic arms, equipment, and, above all, of Hellenic discipline, which togetherrendered the most desperate valor unavailing, when it lacked the supportof scientific organization and united simultaneous movement. 

The energy of the Persians during the earlier years of their ascendancyis no less remarkable than their courage. AEschylus speaks of amysterious fate which forced them to engage continually in a long seriesof wars, to take delight in combats of horse, and in the siege andoverthrow of cities. Herodotus, in a tone that is not very different, makes Xerxes, soon after his accession, represent himself as bound bythe examples of his forefathers to engage his country in some greatenterprise, and not suffer the military spirit of his people to decaythrough want of employment. We shall find, when we come to consider thehistory of the Empire, that, for eighty years, under four sovereigns, the course indicated by these two writers was in fact pursued--thatwar followed on war, expedition on expedition--the active energy ofsovereign and people carrying them on, without rest or pause, in acareer of conquest that has few parallels in the history of Orientalnations. In the subsequent period, this spirit is less marked; but, at all times, a certain vigor and activity has characterized the race, distinguishing it in a very marked way from the dreamy and listlessHindus upon the one hand, and the apathetic Turks upon the other. 

The Persian love of truth was a favorite theme with the Greeks, whowere, perhaps, the warmer in their praises from a latent consciousnessof their own deficiency in the virtue. According to Herodotus, theattention of educators was specially directed to the point, and eachyoung Persian was taught by his preceptors three main things:--"Toride, to draw the bow, and to speak the truth. " We find that, in theZendavesta, and more especially in its earliest and purest portions, truth is strenuously inculcated. Ahura-Mazda himself is "true, ""the father of all truth, " and his worshippers are bound to conformthemselves to his image. Darius, in his inscriptions, protestsfrequently against "lies, " which he seems to regard as the embodimentof all evil. A love of finesse and intrigue is congenital to Orientals;and, in the later period of their sway, the Persians appear to haveyielded to this natural inclination, and to have used freely in theirstruggle with the Greeks the weapons of cunning and deception; but, in the earlier period, a different spirit prevailed; lying was thenregarded as the most disgraceful act of which a man could possibly beguilty truth was both admired and practised; Persian kings, entrappedinto a promise, stood to it firmly, however much they might wish itrecalled; foreign powers had never to complain that the terms of atreaty were departed from; the Persians thus form an honorable exceptionto the ordinary Asiatic character, and for general truthfulness and afaithful performance of their engagements compare favorably with theGreeks and Romans. 

The Persian, if we may trust Herodotus, was careful to avoid debt. He had a keen sense of the difficulty with which a debtor escapessubterfuge and equivocation--forms, slightly disguised, of lying. To buyand sell wares in a market place, to chaffer and haggle over prices, was distasteful to him, as apt to involve falsity and unfairness. Hewas free and open in speech, bold in act, generous, warm-hearted, hospitable. His chief faults were an addiction to self-indulgence andluxury, a passionate abandon to the feeling of the hour, whatever thatmight happen to be; and a tameness and subservience in all his relationstowards his prince, which seem to moderns almost incompatible with realself-respect and manliness. 

The luxury of the Persians will be considered when we treat oftheir manners. In illustration of the two other weak points of theircharacter, it may be observed that, in joy and in sorrow, they werealike immoderate; in the one transported beyond all reasonable bounds, and exhibiting their transports with entire unreserve and openness;in the other proportionately depressed, and quite unrestrained inthe expression of their anxiety or misery. AEschylus' tragedy of the"Persae" is, in this respect, true to nature, and represents withaccuracy the real habits of the nation. The Persian was a strangerto the dignified reserve which has commonly been affected by the morecivilized among Western nations. He laughed and wept, shouted andshrieked, with the unrestraint of a child, who is not ashamed to laybare his inmost feelings to the eyes of those about him. Lively andexcitable, he loved to give vent to every passion that stirred hisheart, and cared not how many witnessed his lamentations or hisrejoicings. 

The feeling of the Persian towards his king is one of which moderns canwith difficulty form a conception. In Persia the monarch was so much theState, that patriotism itself was, as it were, swallowed up in loyalty;and an absolute unquestioning submission, not only to the deliberatewill, but to the merest caprice of the sovereign, was, by habit andeducation, so engrained into the nature of the people that a contraryspirit scarcely ever manifested itself. In war the safety of thesovereign was the first thought, and the principal care of all. The tales told of the self-devotion of individuals to secure thepreservation of the monarch may not be true, but they indicatefaithfully the actual tone of men's sentiments about the value of theroyal person. If the king suffered, all was lost; if the king escaped, the greatest calamities seemed light, and could be endured withpatience. Uncomplaining acquiescence in all the decisions of themonarch--cheerful submission to his will, whatever it might chance tobe--characterized the conduct of the Persians in time of peace. Itwas here that their loyalty degenerated into parasitical tameness, and became a defect instead of a virtue. The voice of remonstrance, ofrebuke, of warning, was unheard at the Court; and tyranny was allowed toindulge unchecked in the wildest caprices and extravagances. Thefather, whose innocent son was shot before his eyes by the king in purewantonness, instead of raising an indignant protest against thecrime, felicitated him on the excellence of his archery. Unfortunates, bastinadoed by the royal orders, declared themselves delighted, becausehis majesty had condescended to recollect them. A tone of sycophancyand servility was thus engendered, which, sapping self-respect, tendedfatally to lower and corrupt the entire character of the people. 

In considering the manners and customs of the Persians, it will beconvenient to follow the order already observed in treating of Assyriaand Media--that is to say, to treat, in the first instance, of theirwarlike, and subsequently of their peaceful usages. On the latter themonuments throw considerable light; on the former, the information whichthey supply is comparatively scanty. 

The Persians, like the Medes, regarded chariots with disfavor, andcomposed their armies almost entirely of foot and horse. The ordinarydress of the foot-man was, in the earlier times, a tunic with longsleeves, made of leather, and fitting rather tightly to the frame, whichit covered from the neck to the knee. Under this was worn a pair oftrousers, also of leather, and tolerably tight-fitting, especially atthe ankles, where they met a sort of high shoe, or low boot. The headwas protected by a loose round cap, apparently of felt, which projecteda little in front, and rose considerably above the top of the head. Round the waist was worn a double girdle or belt, from which depended ashort sword. [PLATE XXVIII Fig. 4. ]

The offensive arms of the foot-man were, a sword, a spear, and a bow. The sword, which was called by the Persians _akinaces_, appears tohave been a short, straight weapon, suited for stabbing rather than forcutting, and, in fact, not very much better than a dagger. [PLATE XXIX. , Fig. 2. ] It was carried in a sheath, and was worn suspended from thegirdle on the right side. From the Persepolitan sculptures it wouldseem not to have hung freely, but to have been attached to the rightthigh by a thong which passed round the knee. The handle was short, and generally unprotected by a guard; but, in some specimens, we see asimple cross-bar between the hilt and the blade. 

The spear carried by the Persian foot-man was also short, or, at anyrate, much shorter than the Greek. To judge by the representations ofguardsmen on the Persepolitan sculptures, it was from six to six and ahalf or seven feet in length. The Grecian spear was sometimes as much astwenty-one feet. The Persian weapon had a short head, which appears tohave been flattish, and which was strengthened by a bar or ridge downthe middle. The shaft, which was of cornel wood, tapered gradually frombottom to top, and was ornamented at its lower extremity with a ball, sometimes carved in the shape of an apple or a pomegranate. [PLATEXXIX. , Fig. 3. ]

The Persian bow, according to Herodotus and Xenophon, was of unusualsize. According to the sculptures, it was rather short, certainly notexceeding four feet. It seems to have been carried strung, either on theleft shoulder, with the arm passed through it, or in a bow-case slung atthe left side. It was considerably bent in the middle, and had the endsslightly turned back. [PLATE XXX. , Fig. 1. ] The arrows, which were ofreed, tipped with metal, and feathered, were carried in a quiver, whichhung at the back near the left shoulder. To judge from the sculptures, their length must have been about two feet and a half. The arrow-heads, which were either of bronze or iron, seem to have been of variousshapes, the most common closely resembling the arrow-heads of theAssyrians. [PLATE XXX. , Fig. 3. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXX. ]

Other offensive weapons carried occasionally by the Persian foot-menwere, a battle-axe, a sling, and a knife. The battle-axe, which appearsin the sculptures only in one or two instances, is declared to have beena common Persian weapon by Xenophon, who, upon such a point, would seemto be trustworthy. The use of the sling by the Persian light-armed isquite certain. It is mentioned by Curtius and Strabo, no less than byXenophon; and the last-named writer speaks with full knowledge on thesubject, for he witnessed the effect of the weapon in the hands ofPersian slingers during his return with the Ten Thousand. The onlymissiles which the Persian slingers threw were stones; they did not, like the Rhodians, make use of small lumps of lead. 

The knife seems also to have been a Persian weapon. Its blade appears tohave been slightly curved, like that of a pruning-hook. It was worn in asheath, and was probably thrust into the belt or girdle like the similarweapon, half knife, half dagger, of a modern Persian. 

The ordinary defence of the Persian against the weapons of his enemy wasa shield of wicker-work, which covered him almost from head to foot, and which probably differed little from the wattled shield of theAssyrians. [PLATE XXX. , Fig. 2. ] This he commonly planted on the ground, supporting it, perhaps, with a crutch, while he shot his arrows frombehind it. Occasionally, he added to this defence the protection of acoat of mail, composed either of scale armor, or of quilted linen, likethe corselets of the Egyptians. Armor of the former kind was almostimpenetrable, since the scales were of metal--iron, bronze, or sometimesgold--and overlapped one another like those of a fish. 

The Persian cavalry was armed, in the early times of the monarchy, almost exactly in the same manner as their infantry. Afterwards, howevera considerable change seems to have been made. In the time of theyounger Cyrus cavalry soldiers were very fully protected. They worehelmets on their heads, coats of mail about their bodies, and greaveson their legs. Their chief offensive arms seem, then, to have been theshort sword, the javelin, and the knife. It is probable that they werewithout shields, being sufficiently defended by their armor, which (aswe have seen) was almost complete. 

The javelin of the horseman, which was his special weapon, was a shortstrong spear or pike, with a shaft of cornel-wood, and an iron point. Itwas common for him to carry two such weapons, one of which he used asa missile, while he retained the other in order to employ it inhand-to-hand combat with the enemy. It was a stout manageable weapon, and though no match for the longer and equally strong spear ofthe Macedonian cavalry, was preferred by Xenophon to the long weakreed-lance commonly carried by horse-soldiers in his day. 

It was the practice of the later Persians to protect with armor, notonly the horseman, but the horse. They selected for the service largeand powerful animals, chiefly of the Nisaean breed, and cased themalmost wholly in mail. The head was guarded by a frontlet, and the neckand chest by a breast-piece; the sides and flanks had their own specialcovering and cuisses defended the thighs. These defences were notmerely, like those of the later Assyrian heavy cavalry, of felt orleather, but consisted, like the cuirasses worn by the riders, of somesuch material covered with metal scales. The weight which the horse hadto sustain was thus very great, and the movements of the cavalry forcewere, in consequence, slow and hesitating. Flight was difficult; and, ina retreat, the weaker animals were apt to sink under their burdens, andto be trampled to death by the stronger ones. 

There can be no doubt that, besides these heavy horsemen, the Persiansemployed, even in the latest times, and much more in the earlier, a light and agile cavalry force. Such were the troops which, underTissaphernes, harassed the Ten Thousand during their retreat; and such, it may be conjectured, was really at all times the great body of theircavalry. The education of the Persian, as we shall see hereafter, wasdirected to the formation of those habits of quickness and agility inthe mounting and managing of horses, which have a military value onlyas furnishing a good training for the light-cavalry service; and thetendency of the race has at all times been, not to those forms ofmilitary organization which are efficient by means of solidity andstrength, but to those lighter, more varied, and more elastic brancheswhich compensate for a want of solidity by increased activity, readiness, and ease of movement. 

Though the Persians did not set any great store by chariots, as an armof the military service, they nevertheless made occasional use of them. Not only were their kings and princes, when they commanded their troopsin person, accustomed to direct their movements, both on the march andeven inaction, from the elevation of a war-chariot, but now and then, ingreat battles, a considerable force of them was brought into the field, and important consequences were expected from their employment. Thewheels of the war-chariots were armed with scythes; and these, when thechariot was set in motion, were regarded as calculated to inflict greatdamage on the ranks of opponents. Such hopes seem, however, to havebeen generally disappointed. As every chariot was drawn by at leasttwo horses, and contained at least two persons--the charioteer and thewarrior--a large mark was offered by each to the missiles of the lighttroops who were commonly stationed to receive them; and, as practicallyit was found that a single wound to either horse or man threw the wholeequipage into confusion, the charge of a scythed chariot was commonlychecked before it reached the line of battle of the enemy. Where thiswas not the case, the danger was escaped by opening the ranks andletting the chariots pass through them to the rear, a good account beingspeedily given of any adventurer who thus isolated himself from thesupport of his own party. 

The Persian war-chariot was, probably, somewhat loftier than theAssyrian. The wheels appear to have been from, three to four feet indiameter; and the body rose above them to a height from the ground ofnearly five feet. The person of the warrior was thus protected up to hismiddle by the curved board which enclosed the chariot on three sides. The axle-tree is said to have been broad, since breadth afforded asecurity against being overturned, and the whole construction to havebeen strong and solid. The wheels had twelve spokes, which radiated froma nave of unusual size. The felloes were narrower than the Assyrian, butwere still composed, like them, of two or three distinct layers of wood. The tires were probably of metal, and were indented like the edge of asaw. [PLATE XXXI. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXI. ]

No great ornamentation of the chariot appears to have been attempted. The body was occasionally patterned with a chequer-work, which maybecompared with a style common in Assyria, and the spokes of the wheelswere sometimes of great elegance, but the general character of theworkmanship was massive and plain. The pole was short, and terminatedwith a simple curve. From the evidence of the monuments it would seemthat chariots were drawn by two horses only; but the classical writersassure us that the ordinary practice was to have teams of four. Theharness used was exceedingly simple, consisting of a yoke, a belly-band, a narrow collar, a head-stall, a bit, and reins. When the charioteerleft his seat, the reins could be attached to a loop or bar whichprojected from the front of the chariot-board. 

Chariots were constructed to contain two, or perhaps, in some instances, three persons. These consisted of the warrior, his charioteer, who stoodbeside him, and an attendant, whose place was behind, and whose businessit was to open and shut the chariot doors. The charioteer wore a visorand a coat of mail, exposing nothing to the enemy but his eyes. 

The later Persians made use also of elephants in battle, but to a verysmall extent, and without any results worth mentioning. 

The chief points of Persian tactics were the following. The army wasorganized into three distinct services--those of the chariots, thehorse, and the foot. In drawing up the line of battle, it was usual, where chariots were employed, to place them in the front rank, in frontof the rest of the army. Behind the chariots were stationed the horseand the foot; the former generally massed upon the wings; the latterplaced in the middle, drawn up according to nations, in a number ofoblong squares, which touched, or nearly touched, one another. Thebravest and best armed troops were placed in front; the ranks towardsthe rear being occupied by those of inferior quality. The depth of theranks was usually very great, since Oriental troops cannot be trusted tomaintain a firm front unless they are strongly supported from behind. No attempt, however, seems to have been made at forming a second line ofbattle in the rear of the first, nor does there even seem to have beenany organized system of reserves. When the battle began, the chariotswere first launched against the enemy, whose ranks it was hoped theywould confuse, or, at any rate, disturb. After this the main lineadvanced to the attack, but without any inclination to come at once toclose quarters. Planting their shields firmly on the ground in front ofthem, the Persian heavy-armed shot flight after flight of arrows againsttheir foe, while the slingers and other light-armed in the rear sentclouds of missiles over the heads of their friends into the adverseranks beyond them. It was usually the enemy which brought this phase ofthe battle to an end, by pressing onward and closing with the Persianmain line in a hand:to-hand combat. Here the struggle was commonlybrief--a very few minutes often decided the engagement. If the Persianline of battle was forced or broken, all was immediately regarded aslost--flight and rout followed. The cavalry, from its position onthe wings, might attempt, by desperate charges on the flanks of theadvancing foe, to stay his progress, and restore the fortune of theday, but such efforts were usually unavailing. Its line of battleonce broken, a Persian army lost heart; its commander commonly set theexample of flight, and there was a general rush of all arms from thebattle-field. 

For success the Persians trusted mainly to their numbers, which enabledthem, in some cases, to renew an attack time after time with freshtroops, in others to outflank and surround their adversary. Their besttroops were undoubtedly their cavalry, both heavy and light. The heavy, armed in the old times with bows, and in the later with the javelins, highly distinguished itself on many important occasions. The weight ofits charge must have been great; its offensive weapons were good; andits armor made it almost invulnerable to ordinary weapons. Thelight cavalry was celebrated for the quickness and dexterity of itsmanoeuvres. It had the loose organization of modern Bashi-Bazouks orCossacks; it hung in clouds on the enemy--assailed, retreated, rallied, re-advanced--fled, and even in flight was formidable, since each riderwas trained to discharge his arrows backwards with a sure aim. Against the pursuing foe. The famous skill of the Parthians in theirhorse-combats was inherited from their Persian predecessors, who seem tohave invented the practice which the later people carried to perfection. 

Though mainly depending for success on their numbers, the Persians didnot wholly despise the use of contrivance and stratagem. At Arbela, Darius Codomannus had spiked balls strewn over the ground where heexpected the Greek cavalry to make its attacks. [PLATE XXX. , Fig. 5];and, at Sardis, Cyrus obtained his victory over the Lydian horseby frightening them with the grotesque and unfamiliar camel. Otherinstances will readily occur to the reader, whereby it appears that theart of war was studied, and ingenuity allowed its due place in militarymatters, by this people, who showed a fair share of Oriental subtlety inthe devices which they employed against their enemies. 

It is doubtful whether we are to include among these devices the use ofmilitary engines. On the one hand, we have several distinct statementsby the author of the "Cyrpoasdia, " to the effect that engines were wellknown to the Persians; on the other, we remark an entire absence fromthe works of other ancient writers of any notice that they actuallyemployed them, either in their battles or their sieges. The silence ofScripture, of Herodotus, of the inscriptions, of Quintus Curtius, ofArrian, may fairly be regarded as outweighing the unsupported authorityof the romance-writer, Xenophon; and though it would be rash to decidethat such things as siege-towers, battering rams, and balistce--allof which are found to have been in constant use under the Assyrian andBabylonian monarchies--were wholly discarded by, or unknown to, their successors in the government of Asia, yet a wise criticism willconclude, that they were, at any rate, unfamiliar to the Persians, rarely and sparingly (if at all) employed by them, other methodsof accomplishing the ends whereto they served having more approvedthemselves to this ingenious people. In ordinary sieges it would seemthat they trusted to the bank or mound, while sometimes they drove minesunder the walls, and sought in this way to effect a breach. Where theplace attacked was of great strength, they had recourse in generaleither to stratagem or to blockade. Occasionally they employed thedestructive force of fire, and no doubt they often succeeded by thecommon method of escalade. On the whole, it must certainly be said thatthey were successful in their sieges, exhibiting in their conduct ofthem courage, activity, and considerable fertility of resource. 

A Persian army was usually, though not always, placed under a singlecommander. This commander was the monarch, if he was present; if not, itwas a Persian, or a Mede, nominated by him. Under the commander-in-chiefwere a number of general officers, heads of corps or divisions, of whomwe find, in one instance, as many as nine. Next in rank to these werethe chiefs of the various ethnic contingents composing the army, whowere, probably, in general the satraps of the different provinces. Thusfar appointments were held directly from the crown; but beyond this thesystem was changed. The ethnic or satrapial commanders appointed theofficers next below themselves, the captains over a thousand, and (iftheir contingent was large enough to admit it) the captains over tenthousand; who, again, nominated their subordinates, commanders of ahundred, and commanders of ten. Thus, in the main, a decimal scaleprevailed. The lowest rank of officers commanded each ten men, the nextlowest a hundred, the next to that a thousand, the next ten thousand. The officer over ten thousand was sometimes a divisional chief;sometimes he was subject to the commander of an ethnic contingent, whowas himself under the orders of the head of a division. Altogether therewere six ranks of officers, exclusive of the commander-in-chief. 

The proper position of the commander-in-chief was considered to be thecentre of the line of battle. He was regarded as safer there thanhe would have been on either wing; and it was seen that, from such aposition, his orders would be most rapidly conveyed to all parts of thebattlefield. It was not, however, thought to be honorable that he shouldkeep aloof from the fight, or avoid risking his own person. On thecontrary, he was expected to take an active part in the combat; andtherefore, though his place was not exactly in the very foremost ranks, it was towards the front, and the result followed that he was oftenexposed to imminent danger. The consequences of this arrangementwere frequently disastrous in the extreme, the death or flight of thecommander producing universal panic, stopping the further issue of anygeneral order, and thus paralyzing the whole army. 

The numbers of a Persian army, though no doubt exaggerated by theGreeks, must have been very great, amounting, probably, on occasions, to more than a million of combatants. Troops were drawn from the entireempire, and were marshalled in the field according to nations, each tribe accoutred in its own fashion. Here were seen the gildedbreastplates and scarlet kilts of the Persians and Medes; there thewoollen shirt of the Arab, the leathern jerkin of the Berber, or thecotton dress of the native of Hindustan. Swart savage Ethiops from theUpper Nile, adorned with a war-paint of white and red, and scantilyclad with the skins of leopards or lions, fought in one place with hugeclubs, arrows tipped with stone, and spears terminating in the horn ofan antelope. In another, Scyths, with their loose spangled trousers andtheir tall pointed caps, dealt death around from their unerring blows;while near them Assyrians, helmeted, and wearing corselets of quiltedlinen, wielded the tough spear, or the still more formidable iron mace. Rude weapons, like cane bows, unfeathered arrows, and stakes hardened atone end in the fire, were seen side by side with keen swords anddaggers of the best steel, the finished productions of the workshopsof Phoenicia and Greece. Here the bronze helmet was surmounted withthe ears and horns of an ox; there it was superseded by a fox-skin, aleathern or wooden skull-cap, or a head-dress fashioned out of a horse'sscalp. Besides horses and mules, elephants, camels, and wild asses, diversified the scene, and rendered it still more strange and wonderfulto the eye of a European. One large body of cavalry was accustomedto enter the field apparently unarmed; besides the dagger, which theOriental never lays aside, they had nothing but a long leathern thong. They used this, however, just as the lasso is used by the natives ofBrazil, and the wretch at whom they aimed their deadly noose had smallchance of escape. The Persians, like the Assyrians, usually avoidedfighting during the winter, and marched out their armies against theenemy in early spring. With the great hosts which they moved a fixedorder of march was most necessary; and we find evidence of so muchattention being paid to this point that confusion and disorder seemscarcely ever to have arisen. When the march lay within their owncountry, it was usual to send on the baggage and the sumpter-beasts inadvance, after which came about half the troops, moving slowly in a longand continuous column along the appointed line of route. At this pointa considerable break occurred, in order that all might be clear forthe most important part of the army, which was now to follow. A guard, consisting of a thousand horse and a thousand foot, picked men of thePersian people, prepared the way for what was most holy in the eyes ofthe nation--the emblems of their religion, and their king. The formerconsisted of sacred horses and cars; perhaps, in the later times, ofsilver altars also, bearing the perpetual and heaven-kindled fire, which was a special object of Persian religious regard, and which thesuperstition of the people viewed as a sort of palladium, sure to bringthe blessings of heaven upon their arms. Behind the sacred emblemsfollowed the Great King himself, mounted on a car drawn by Nisseansteeds, and perhaps protected on either side by a select band of hisrelatives. Behind the royal chariot came a second guard, consisting, like the first, of a thousand foot and a thousand horse. Then followedten thousand picked foot, probably the famous "Immortals;" then camea body of ten thousand picked Persian horsemen. After these a space offour hundred yards (nearly a quarter of a mile) was left vacant; thenmarched, in a second continuous column, the remainder of the host. 

On entering an enemy's country, or drawing near a hostile force in theirown, certain alterations in these dispositions became necessary, andwere speedily effected. The baggage-train was withdrawn, and instead ofmoving before the army, followed at some little distance in the rear. Horsemen were thrown out in front, to feel for the enemy and notify hisarrival. Sometimes, if the host was large, a division of the troopswas made, and several _corps d'armee_ advanced against the foesimultaneously by distinct routes. When this took place, thecommander-in-chief was careful to accompany the central force, so as tofind himself in his proper position if he was suddenly compelled to givebattle. 

Night movements were seldom attempted by the Persians. They marched fromsunrise to sunset, halting, probably, during the midday heat. In theirmost rapid marches they seldom accomplished more than from twenty totwenty-five miles in the day; and when this rate was attempted for anycontinuance, it was necessary to rest the men at intervals for as muchas three days at a time. The great drag upon rapidity of movement wasthe baggage-train, which consisted ordinarily of a vast multitude ofcamels, horses, asses, mules, oxen, etc. , in part carrying burthens upontheir backs, in part harnessed to carts laden with provisions, tents, and other necessaries. The train also frequently comprised a number oflitters, in which the wives or female companions of the chief men wereluxuriously conveyed, amid a crowd of eunuchs and attendants, and withall the cumbrous paraphernalia of female wardrobes. Roads, it must beremembered, did not exist; rivers were not bridged, except occasionallyby boats; the army marched on the natural ground along an establishedline of route which no art had prepared for the passage of man or beast. Portions of the route would often be soft and muddy; the carts andlitters would become immovable, their wheels sinking into the mire upto the axles; all the efforts of the teams would be unavailing; it musthave been imperative to halt the main line, and employ the soldiers inthe release of the vehicles, which had to be lifted and carried forwardtill the ground was sufficiently firm to bear them. When a river crossedthe line of route, a ford had to be sought, boats procured, or raftsextemporized. The Persians were skilful in the passage of streams, towhich they became accustomed in their first campaigns under Cyrus; butthe march was necessarily retarded by these and similar obstacles, andwe cannot be surprised that the average rate of movement was slow. 

As evening approached the Persians sought a suitable place for theircamp. An open plain was preferred for the purpose, and the vicinity ofwater was a necessity. If an enemy was thought to be at hand, a ditchwas rapidly dug, and the earth thrown up inside; or if the soil wassandy, sacks were filled with it, and the camp was protected withsand-bags. Immediately within the rampart were placed the _gerrhophori_, or Persians armed with large wicker shields. The rest of the soldiershad severally their appointed places, the position assigned to thecommander-in-chief being the centre. All the army had tents, which werepitched so as to face the east. The horses of the cavalry were tetheredand hobbled in front of the tents of their owners. 

The Persians disliked encamping near to their enemy. They preferred aninterval of seven or eight miles, which they regarded as a considerablesecurity against a surprise. As their most important arm was thecavalry, and as it was impossible for the cavalry to unfasten andunhobble their steeds, to equip them properly, to arm themselves, andthen to mount in a short space of time, when darkness and confusionreigned around, a night attack on the part of an enterprising enemywould have been most perilous to a Persian army. Hence the precautionwhich they observed against its occurrence--a precaution which wasseldom or never omitted where they felt any respect for their foe, and which seems to have been effective, since we do not hear of theirsuffering any disaster of the kind which they so greatly feared. 

The Persians do not seem to have possessed any special corps ofpioneers. When the nature of the country was such as to require thefelling of timber or the removal of brushwood, the army was halted, andthe work was assigned to a certain number of the regular soldiers. Forthe construction of bridges, however, in important places, and forother works on a grand scale intended to facilitate an expedition, preparations were made beforehand, the tasks being entrusted either toskilled workmen, or to the crews of ships, if they were tolerably easyof performance. 

Commissariat arrangements were generally made by the Persians on alarge scale, and with the best possible results. An ample baggage-trainconveyed corn sufficient to supply the host during some months and incases where scarcity was apprehended, further precautions were taken. Ships laden with corn accompanied the expedition as closely as possible, and supplemented any deficiency that might arise from a failure on thepart of the land transport department. Sometimes, too, magazines wereestablished at convenient points along the intended line of marchpreviously to the setting forth of the army, and stores were thusaccumulated at places where it was probable they would be found of mostservice. 

Requisitions for supplies were also made upon the inhabitants of thetowns and villages through which lay the route of the army. Whenever thehost rested for a night at a place of any consequence, the inhabitantsseem to have been required to furnish sufficient bread for a mealto each man, and, in addition, to provide a banquet for the king(or general) and his suite, which was always very numerous. Suchrequisitions, often intolerably burthensome to those upon whom theywere laid, must have tended greatly to relieve the strain upon their ownresources, which the sustentation of such enormous hosts as the Persiankings were in the habit of moving, cannot have failed to produce in manycases. 

The effectiveness of these various arrangements for the provisioning oftroops upon a march was such that Persian armies were rarely, if ever, in any difficulty with respect to their subsistence. Once only inthe entire course of their history do we hear of the Persian forcessuffering to any considerable extent from a want of supplies. Accordingto Herodotus, Cambyses, when he invaded Ethiopia, neglected the ordinaryprecautions and brought his army into such straits that his men began toeat each other. This caused the total failure of his expedition, andthe loss of a great proportion of the troops employed in it. Thereis, however, reason to suspect that, even in this case, the loss anddifficulty which occurred have been much exaggerated. 

The Persians readily gave quarter to the enemy who asked it, andgenerally treated their prisoners of war with much kindness. Personagesof importance, as monarchs or princes, either preserved their titlesand their liberty, with even a certain nominal authority, or receivedappanages in other parts of the Persian territory, or, finally, wereretained about the Court as friends and table-companions of the GreatKing. Those of less rank were commonly given lands and houses in someprovince remote from their own country, and thenceforth held the sameposition as the great mass of the subject races. Exchanges of prisonersdo not seem to have been thought of. In a few cases, persons, whom weshould regard as prisoners of war, experienced some severities, butprobably only when they were viewed by the Persians, not as fairenemies, but as rebels. Rebels were, of course, liable to any punishmentwhich the king might think it right to inflict upon them, and there wereoccasions after a revolt when sentences of extreme rigor were passedupon the persons considered to have been most in fault. According toHerodotus, three thousand Babylonians were crucified by order ofDarius, to punish their revolt from him; and, though this is probably anexaggeration, it is certain that sometimes, where an example was thoughtto be required, the Persians put to death, not only the leader of arebellion, but a number of his chief adherents. Crucifixion, or, atany rate, impalement of some sort, was in such cases the ordinarypunishment. Sometimes, before a rebel was executed, he was kept for awhile chained at the king's door, in order that there might be no doubtof his capture. 

Among the minor punishments of rebellion were branding, and removal ofthe rebels _en masse_ from their own country, to some remote locality. In this latter case, they were merely treated in the same way asordinary prisoners of war. In the former, they probably became royalslaves attached to the household of the monarch. 

Though the Persians were not themselves a nautical people, they werequite aware of the great importance of a navy, and spared no pains toprovide themselves with an efficient one. The conquests of Phoenicia, Cyprus, Egypt, and the Greek islands were undertaken, it is probable, mainly with this object; and these parts of the Empire were alwaysvalued chiefly as possessing skilled seamen, vessels, and dockyards, from which the Great King could draw an almost inexhaustible supply ofwar-ships and transports. Persia at times had the complete command ofthe Mediterranean Sea, and bore undisputed sway in the Levant duringalmost the whole period of her existence as an empire. 

The war-ship preferred by the best naval powers during the whole periodof the Persian rule was the trireme, or decked galley impelled by rowerssitting in three tiers, or banks, one above another. This vessel, theinvention of the Corinthians, had been generally adopted by the nationsbordering on the Mediterranean in the interval between B. C. 700 and B. C. 525, when by the reduction of Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Egypt, the Persiansobtained the command of the sea. Notwithstanding the invention ofquadriremes by the Carthaginians before B. C. 400, and of quinqueremes byDionysius the Elder soon after, the trireme stood its ground, and fromfirst to last the Persian fleets were mainly composed of this class ofvessels. 

The trireme was a vessel of a considerable size, and was capable ofaccommodating two hundred and thirty persons. Of these, two hundredconstituted the crew, while the remaining thirty were men-at-arms, corresponding to our own "marines. " By far the greater number of thecrew consisted of the rowers, who probably formed at least nine-tenthsof the whole, or one hundred and eighty out of the two hundred. Therowers sat, not on benches running right across the vessel, but on smallseats attached to its side. They were arranged, as before stated, inthree tiers, not, however, directly one over the head of another, butobliquely, each at once above and behind his fellow. Each rower had thesole management of a single oar, which he worked through a hole piercedin the side of the vessel. To prevent his oar from slipping he had aleathern strap, which he twisted round it, and fastened to the thole, probably by means of a button. The remainder of the crew comprised thecaptain, the steersman, the petty officers, and the sailors proper, orthose whose office it was to trim the sails and look to the rigging. The trireme of Persian times had, in all cases, a mast, and at least onesail, which was of a square shape, hung across the mast by means of ayard or spar, like the "square-sail" of a modern vessel. The rudderwas composed of two broad-bladed oars, one on either side of the stern, united, however, by a cross-bar, and managed by a single steersman. Thecentral part of a trireme was always decked, and on this deck, whichwas generally level with the bulwarks, stood and fought the men-at-arms, whose business it was to engage the similar force of the enemy. 

The weapon of the trireme, with which she was intended chiefly toattack her foe, was the beak. [PLATE XXXI. , Fig. 3. ] This consisted ofa projection from the prow of the ship, either above or below thewater-line, strongly shod with a casting of iron, and terminating eitherin the head of an animal, or in one or more sharp points. A trireme wasexpected, like a modern "ram, " to use this implement against the sidesof her adversary's vessels, so as to crush them in and cause the vesselsto sink. Driven by the full force of her oars, which impelled her almostat the rate of a modern steamer, she was nearly certain, if she struckher adversary full, to send ship and men to the bottom. She mightalso, it is true, greatly damage herself; but, to preclude this, it wascustomary to make the whole prow of a trirene exceedingly strong, and, more particularly, to support it with beams at the side which tended toprevent the timbers from starting. 

Besides triremes, which constituted the bulk of the Persian navy, therewere contained in their fleet various other classes of vessels, astriaconters, penteconters, cercuri, and others. Triaconters were long, sharp-keeled ships, shaped very much like a trireme, rowed by thirtyrowers, who sat all upon a level, like the rowers in modern boats, fifteen on either side of the vessel. [PLATE XXXI. , Fig. 2. ]Penteconters were very similar, the only difference being in the numberof the oars and oarsmen. [PLATE XXXI. , Fig. 4. ] Both these classes ofvessels seem to have been frequently without sails. Cercuri were lightboats, very long and swift. They are said to have been invented by theCyprians, and were always peculiar to Asia. 

The transports of the Persians were either for the conveyance of horsesor of food. Horse-transports were large clumsy vessels, constructedexpressly for the service whereon they were used, possessing probably aspecial apparatus for the embarkation and disembarkation of the animalswhich they were built to carry. Corn-transports seem to have been of asomewhat lighter character. Probably, they varied very considerably intheir size and burthen, including huge and heavy merchantmen on the onehand, and a much lighter and smaller craft on the other. 

The Persians used their ships of war, not only for naval engagements, but also for the conveyance of troops and the construction of bridges. Accustomed to pass the great streams which intersect Western Asiaby bridges of boats, which were permanently established wherever anunfordable river crossed any of the regular routes connecting theprovinces with the capital, the Persians, when they proceeded to carrytheir arms from Asia into Europe, conceived the idea of bridging theinterval between the continents, which did not much exceed the width ofone of the Mesopotamian streams, by constructions similar in principleand general character to those wherewith long use had made them familiarin their own country. Ranging a number of vessels side by side, at nogreat distance one from another, parallel with the course of the stream, which ran down the straits, anchoring each vessel stem and stern to keepit in place, and then laying upon these supports a long wooden platform, they made a floating bridge of considerable strength, reaching fromthe Asiatic to the European coast, on which not only men, but horses, camels, chariots, and laden carts passed over safely from the onecontinent to the other. Only, as the water which they had to cross wasnot a river, but an arm of the real salt sea, and might, therefore, incase of a storm, show a might and fury far beyond a river's power, theythought it necessary to employ, in lieu of boats, the strongest shipswhich they possessed, namely, triremes and pentecon-ters, as bestcapable of withstanding the force of an angry sea. Bridges of thiskind were intended sometimes for temporary, sometimes for permanentconstructions. In the latter case, great care and much engineering skillwas lavished on their erection. The shore cables, which united the shipstogether, and sustained the actual bridge or platform, were made of mostcarefully selected materials, and must have been of enormous strength;the ships were placed in close proximity one to another; and by thesubstitution of a double for a single line--of two bridges, in fact, forone--the solidity of the work was very largely augmented. Yet, rare aswas the skill shown, solid and compact as were the causeways thusthrown by human art over the sea, they were found inadequate to the enddesired. The great work of Xerxes, far the most elaborate of its class, failed to withstand the fury of the elements for a single year; thebridge, constructed in one autumn, was utterly swept away in the next;and the army which had crossed into Europe by its aid had to embark asit best could, and return on board ship to Asia. 

As the furnishing of the Persian fleet was left wholly to the subjectnations of the Empire, so was its manning intrusted to them almostentirely. Phoenicians, Syrians, Egyptians, Cypriots, Cilicians, Lycians, Pamphylians, Carians, Greeks, equipped in the several costumes of theircountries, served side by side in their respective contingents of ships, thereby giving the fleet nearly the same motley appearance whichwas presented by the army. In one respect alone did the navy exhibitsuperior uniformity to their sister service--the _epibatae_, or"marines, " who formed the whole fighting force of the fleet while itkept the sea, was a nearly homogeneous body, consisting of three racesonly (two of which were closely allied), namely, Persians, Medes, andSacse. Every ship had thirty such men on board; all, it is probable, uniformly armed, and all animated by one and the same spirit. To thisforce the Persians must have owed it mainly that their great fleetswere not mere congeries of mutually repellant atoms, but were capable ofacting against an enemy with a fair amount of combination and singlenessof purpose. 

When a fleet accompanied a land army upon an expedition, it was usuallyplaced under the same commander. This commander, however, was notexpected to adventure himself on board much less to take the directionof a sea-fight. He intrusted the fleet to an officer, or officers, whomhe nominated, and was content himself with the conduct of operationsashore. Occasionally the land and sea forces were assigned to distinctcommanders of co-ordinate authority--an arrangement which led naturally, to misunderstanding and quarrel. 

The tactics of a Persian fleet seem to have been of the simplestkind Confident in their numbers, until experience had taught them thefallaciousness of such a ground of hope, they were chiefly anxiousthat their enemy should not escape. To prevent this they endeavored tosurround the ships opposed to them, advancing their line in a crescentform, so as to enclose their adversary's wings, or even detachingsquadrons to cut off his retreat. They formed their line several shipsdeep and when the hour of battle came, advanced directly at their bestspeed against the enemy, endeavoring to run down his vessels by sheerforce, and never showing any acquaintance with or predilection formanoeuvres of a skilful antagonist, who avoided or successfullywithstood this first onset, they were apt through their very numbers tobe thrown into disorder: the first line would become entangled with thesecond, the second with the third, and inextricable confusion would bethe result. Confusion placed them at the mercy of their antagonist, who, retaining complete command over his own vessels, was able to striketheirs in vulnerable parts, and, in a short time, to cover the sea withshattered and sinking wrecks. The loss to the Persians in men as wellas in material, was then sure to be very great; for their sailors seldomknew how to swim, and were consequently drowned, even when the shore wasbut a few yards distant. 

When, from deficiency in their numbers, or distrust of their ownnautical skill in comparison with that of their enemy, the commanders ofa Persian fleet wished to avoid an engagement, a plan sometimes adoptedwas to run the ships ashore upon a smooth soft beach, and, after drawingthem together, to surround them with such a rampart as could be hastilymade, and defend this rampart with the sailors. The crews of the Persianvessels were always more or less completely armed, in order that, ifoccasion arose, they might act as soldiers ashore, and were thus quitecapable of fighting effectively behind a rampart. They might count, too, under such circumstances, upon assistance from such of their own landforces as might happen to be in the neighborhood, who would be sure tocome with all speed to their aid, and might be expected to prove a sureprotection. 

The subject nations who furnished the Persians with their fleet were, in the earlier times, the Phoenicians, the Egyptians, the Cypriots, theCilicians, the Syrians of Palestine, the Pamphylians, the Lycians, theCarians, and the Greeks of Asia Minor and the islands. The Greeks seemto have furnished the largest number of ships; the Phoenicians, thenext largest; then the Egyptians; after them the Cypriots; then theCilicians; then the Carians; next the Lycians; while the Pamphyliansfurnished the least. The best ships and the best sailors were thePhoenicians, especially those of Sidon. In later times, ships were drawneither from Phoenicia alone, or from Phoenicia, Cilicia, and Cyprus. 

The limits assigned to the present work forbid the further prosecutionof this branch of our inquiry, and require us now to pass on from theconsideration of the Persian usages in war, to that of their mannersand customs, their habits and proceedings, in time of peace. And hereit will once more be convenient to follow a division of the subject withwhich the reader is familiar, and to treat first of the public life ofthe King and Court, and next of the private life of the people. 

The Persian king held the same rank and position in the eyes of hissubjects which the great monarch of Western Asia, whoever he might be, had always occupied from time immemorial. He was their lord and master, absolute disposer of their lives, liberties, and property; thesole fountain of law and right, incapable himself of doing wrong, irresponsible irresistable--a sort of God upon earth; one whose favorwas happiness, at whose frown men trembled, before whom all bowedthemselves down with the lowest and humblest obeisance. 

To a personage so exhalted, a state and pomp of the utmost magnificencewas befitting. The king's ordinary dress in time of peace was the longflowing "Median garment, " or _candys_--made in his case (it is probable)of richest silk, which, with its ample folds, its wide hanging sleeves, and its close fit about the neck and chest, gave dignity to almost anyfigure, and excellently set off the noble presence of an Achaemenianprince. The royal robe was either of purple throughout, or sometimes ofpurple embroidered with gold. It descended below the ankles; resting onthe foot even when the monarch was seated. A broad girdle confined it atthe waist. Under it was worn a tunic, or shirt, which reached from theneck to the knee, and had tight-fitting sleeves that covered the arm tothe wrist. The tunic was purple in color, like the _candys_, or robe, but striped or mixed with white. The lower limbs were encased introusers of a crimson hue. On his feet the the king wore shoes likethose of the Medes, long and taper at the toe buttoned in front, and reaching very high up the instep: their color was deep yellow orsaffron. [PLATE XXXII. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXII. ]

Thus far the monarch's costume, though richer in material than the dressof the Persian nobles, and in some points different in color, was on thewhole remarkably like that of the upper class of his subjects. Itwas, however, most important that his dress should possess somedistinguishing feature, and that that feature should be one ofvery marked prominency. In an absolute monarchy the king must beunmistakable, at almost any distance, and almost in any light. Consequences of the gravest kind may follow from any mistake of theroyal identity; and it is therefore essential to the comfort both ofprince and subject that some very conspicuous badge shall mark andnotify the monarch's presence. Accordingly, it appears that the Persianruler was to be known by his headdress, which was peculiar alikein shape and in color, and was calculated to catch the eye in bothrespects. It bore the name _kitaris_ or _hidaris_, and was a tall stiffcap, slightly swelling as it ascended, flat at top, and terminating in aring or circle which projected beyond the lines of the sides. Roundit, probably near the bottom, was worn a fillet or band--the diademproper--which was blue, spotted with white. 

As the other Persians wore either simple fillets round their heads, orsoft, rounded, and comparatively low caps, with no band round them, theking's headdress, which would tower above theirs and attract attentionby its color, could readily be distinguished even in the most crowdedCourt. 

It has been asserted that the _kidaris_, or tiara of the Persian kings, was "commonly adorned with gold and jewelry;" and this may possibly havebeen the case, but there is no evidence that it was so. Its materialwas probably either cloth or felt, and it was always of a bright color, though not (apparently) always of the same color. Its distinguishingfeatures were its height, its stiffness, and the blue and white filletwhich encircled it. 

Among other certain indications of the royal presence may be mentionedthe golden sceptre, and the parasol. The sceptre, which is seenfrequently in the king's hands, was a plain rod, about five feet inlength, ornamented with a ball, or apple, at its upper end, and at itslower tapering nearly to a point. The king held it in his right hand, grasping it near, but not at, the thick end, and rested the thin end onthe ground in his front. When he walked, he planted it upright beforehim, as a spearman would plant his spear. When he sate, he sloped itoutwards, still, however, touching the ground with its point. 

The parasol, which has always been in the East a mark of dignity, seemsin Persia, as in Assyria, to have been confined, either by law or usage, to the king. The Persian implement resembled the later Assyrian, exceptthat it was not tasselled, and had no curtain or flap. It had the sametent-like shape, the same long thick stem, and the same ornament at thetop. It only differed in being somewhat shallower, and in having thesupports, which kept it open, curved instead of straight. It was heldover the king's head on state occasions by an attendant who walkedimmediately behind him. [PLATE XXXII. , Fig. 3. ]

The throne of the monarch was an elevated seat, with a high back, butwithout arms, cushioned, and ornamented with a fringe, and with moldingsor carvings along the back and legs. The ornamentation consisted chieflyof balls and broad rings, and contained little that was artistic orelaborate. The legs, however, terminated in lions' feet, resting uponhalf balls, which were ribbed or fluted. The sides of the chairbelow the seat appear to have been panelled, like the thrones of theAssyrians, but were not adorned with any carving. The seat of the thronewas very high from the ground, and without a rest the legs would havedangled. A footstool consequently was provided, which was plain, likethe throne, but was supported on legs terminating in the feet of bulls. Thus the lion and the bull, so frequent in the symbolism of the East, were here again brought together, being represented as the supports ofthe throne. 

With respect to the material whereof the throne was composed, therecan be no doubt that it was something splendid and costly. Late writersdescribe it as made of pure gold; but, as we hear of its having silverfeet, we may presume that parts at least were of the less preciousmetal. Ivory is not said to have been used in its composition. We may, perhaps, conjecture, that the frame of the throne was wood, and thatthis was overlaid with plates of gold or silver, whereby the whole ofthe woodwork was concealed from view, and an appearance of solid metalpresented. 

The person of the king was adorned with golden ornaments. He hadearrings of gold in his ears, often inlaid with jewels he wore goldenbracelets upon his wrists; and he had a chain or collar of gold abouthis neck. [PLATE XXXIII. , Fig. 1. ] In his girdle, which was also ofgold, he carried a short sword, the sheath of which was formed of asingle precious stone. The monuments, unfortunately, throw little lighton the character and workmanship of these portions of the royal costume. We may gather from them, perhaps, that the bracelets had a large jewelset in their centre, and that the collars were of twisted work, wornloosely around the neck. The sword seems to have differed little fromthat of the ordinary Persians. It had a short straight blade, a merecrossbar for a guard, and a handle almost devoid of ornament. Thisplainness was compensated, if we may trust Curtius, by the magnificenceof the sheath, which was, perhaps, of jasper, agate, or lapis lazuli. [PLATE XXXIII. , Fig. 2. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXIII. ]

The officers in most close attendance on the monarch's person were, in war, his charioteer, his stool-bearer, his bow-bearer, and hisquiver-bearer; in peace, his parasol-bearer, and his fan bearer, whowas also privileged to carry what has been termed "the royalpocket-handkerchief. "

The royal charioteer is seemingly unarmed. His head is protected merelyby a fillet. He sits in front of his master, and both his hands arefully occupied with the management of the reins. He has no whip, andseems to urge his horses forward simply by leaning forward himself, andslackening or shaking the reins over them. He was, no doubt, in everycase a Persian of the highest rank, such near proximity to the Royalperson being a privilege to which none but the very noblest couldaspire. [PLATE XXXIII. , Fig. 2. ]

The office of the stool-bearer, was to assist the king as he mounted hischariot or dismounted from it. He carried a golden stool, and followedthe royal chariot closely, in order that he might be at hand wheneverhis master felt disposed to alight. On a march, the king was wont tovary the manner of his travelling, exchanging, when the inclination tookhim, his chariot for a litter, and riding in that more luxurious vehicletill he was tired of it, after which he returned to his chariot fora space. The services of the stool-bearer were thus in constantrequisition, since it was deemed quite impossible that his Majesty couldascend or descend his somewhat lofty war-car without such aid. 

The rank of the bow-bearer was probably nearly as great as that of thedriver of the chariot. He was privileged to stand immediately behind themonarch on grand occasions, so carrying in his left hand the weapon fromwhich he derived his appellation. The quiver-bearer had the next place. Both wore the Median costume--the _candys_, or flowing robe, the girdle, the high shoe, and the stiff fluted cap, or, perhaps, occasionally thesimple fillet. Sometimes the two offices would seem to have been heldby the same person, unless we are to attribute this appearance, whereit occurs, to the economy of the artist, who may have wished to savehimself the trouble of drawing two separate figures. [PLATE XXXIII. , Fig. 5. ]

The parasol-bearer was attired as the bow and quiver bearers, except that he was wholly unarmed, and had the fillet for his properhead-dress. Though not a military officer, he accompanied the monarch inhis expeditions, since in the midst of war there might be occasions ofstate when his presence would be convenient. The officer who bore theroyal fan and handkerchief had generally the same costume; but sometimeshis head was enveloped in a curious kind of cowl or muffler, whichcovered the whole of it except the forehead, the eyes, the nose, themouth, and the upper portion of the cheeks. [PLATE XXXIV. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXIV. ]

The fan, or fly-chaser, had a long straight handle, ornamented witha sort of beading, which held a brush of some springy fibrous matter. [PLATE XXXIII. , Fig. 4. ] The bearer, whose place was directly behind themonarch, held his implement, which bent forward gracefully, nearly atarm's length over his master's head. 

It would seem that occasionally the bearer of the handkerchieflaid aside his fly-chaser, and assumed in lieu of it a small bottlecontaining perfumery. [PLATE XXXIV. , Fig. 4. ] In a sculptured tablet atPersepolis, given by Ker Porter, an attendant in the Median robe, with afillet upon his head, who bears the handkerchief in the usual way in hisleft hand, carries in the palm of his right what seems to be a bottle, not-unlike the scent-bottle of a modern lady. It has always been anOriental custom to wash the hands before meals, and the rich commonlymix some perfumery or other with the water. We may presume that thiswas the practice at the Persian Court, and that the Great King thereforetook care to have an officer, who should at all times be ready toprovide his guests, or himself, with the scent which was most rare ormost fashionable. 

The Persians seem to have been connoisseurs in scents. We are told that, when the royal tiara was not in wear, it was laid up carefully with amixture of myrrh and _labyzus_, to give it an agreeable odor. Unguentswere thought to have been a Persian invention, and at any rate were mostabundantly used by the upper classes of the nation. The monarch appliedto his own person an ointment composed of the fat of lions, palm wine, saffron, and the herb helianthes, which was considered to increase thebeauty of the complexion. He carried with him, even when he went to thewars, a case of choice unguents; and such a treasure fell into the handsof Alexander, with the rest of Darius's camp equipage, at Arbela. It maybe suspected that the "royal ointment" of the Parthian kings, composedof cinnamon, spikenard, myrrh, cassia, gum styrax, saffron, cardamum, wine, honey, and sixteen other ingredients, was adopted from thePersians, who were far more likely than the rude Parthians to haveinvented so recondite a mixture. Nor were scents used only in this formby the ingenious people of whom we are speaking. Arabia was requiredto furnish annually to the Persian crown a thousand talents' weight offrankincense; and there is reason to believe that this rare spice waslargely employed about the Court, since the walls of Persepolis haveseveral representations of censers, which are sometimes carried inthe hands of an attendant, while sometimes they stand on the groundimmediately in front of the Great King. 321 [PLATE XXXIV. , Fig. 2. ]

The box or vase in which the Persians commonly kept their unguents wasof alabaster. This stone, which abounded in the country, was regarded aspeculiarly suited for holding ointments, not only by the Persians, butalso by the Egyptians, the Greeks, and (probably) the Assyrians. TheEgyptian variety of stone seems to have been especially valued; andvases appear to have been manufactured in that country for the use ofthe Persian monarch, which were transmitted to the Court, and becamepart of the toilet furniture of the palace. 330 [PLATE XXXIV. , Fig. 3. ]

Among the officers of the Court, less closely attached to the person ofthe monarch than those above enumerated, may be mentioned the stewardof the household; the groom or master of the horse; the chief eunuch, or keeper of the women; the king's "eyes" and "ears, " persons whosebusiness it was to keep him informed on all matters of importance;his scribes or secretaries, who wrote his letters and his edicts; hismessengers, who went his errands; his ushers, who introduced strangersto him; his "tasters, " who tried the various dishes set before him lestthey should be poisoned; his cupbearers who handed him his wine, andtasted it; his chamberlains, who assisted him to bed; and his musicians, who amused him with song and harp. Besides these, the Court comprisedvarious classes of guards, and also doorkeepers, huntsmen, grooms, cooks, and other domestic servants in great abundance, together witha vast multitude of visitors and guests, princes, nobles, captives ofrank, foreign refugees, ambassadors, travellers. We are assured thatthe king fed daily within the precincts of his palace as many as fifteenthousand persons, and that the cost of each day's food was four hundredtalents. A thousand beasts were slaughtered for each repast, besidesabundance of feathered game and poultry. The beasts included not onlysheep, goats, and oxen, but also stags, asses, horses, and camels. Amongthe feathered delicacies were poultry, geese, and ostriches. 

The monarch himself rarely dined with his guests. For the most part hewas served alone. Sometimes he admitted to his table the queen and twoor three of his children. Sometimes, at a "banquet of wine, " a certainnumber of privileged boon companions were received, who drank in theroyal presence, not, however, of the same wine, nor on the same terms. 

The monarch reclined on a couch with golden feet, and sipped the richwine of Helbon; the guests drank an inferior beverage, seated upon thefloor. At a great banquet, it was usual to divide the guests into twoclasses. Those of lower degree were entertained in an outer court orchamber to which the public had access, while such as were of higherrank entered the private apartments, and drew near to the king. Herethey were feasted in a chamber opposite to the king's chamber, which hada curtain drawn across the door, concealing him from their gaze, but notso thick as to hide them from their entertainer. Occasionally, on somevery special occasion, as, perhaps, on the Royal birthday, or othergreat festival, the king presided openly at the banquet, drinking anddiscoursing with his lords, and allowing the light of his countenance toshine freely upon a large number of guests, whom, on these occasions, he treated as if they were of the same flesh and blood with himself. Couches of gold and silver were spread for all, and "royal wine inabundance" was served to them in golden goblets. On these, and, indeed, on all occasions, the guests, if they liked, carried away any portionof the food set before them which they did not consume at the time, conveying it to their homes, where it served to support their families. 

The architecture of the royal palace will be discussed in anotherchapter; but a few words may be said in this place with respect to itsfurniture and general appearance. The pillared courts and halls ofthe vast edifices which the Achaemenian monarchs raised at Susa andPersepolis would have had a somewhat bare and cold aspect, if it had notbeen for their internal fittings. The floors were paved with stonesof various hues, blue, white, black, and red, arranged doubtless intopatterns, and besides were covered in places with carpeting. The spacesbetween the pillars were filled with magnificent hangings, white green, and violet, which were fastened with cords of fine linen (?) and purpleto silver rings and pillars of marble, screening the guests from sight, while they did not too much exclude the balmy summer breeze. The wallsof the apartments were covered with plates of gold. All the furniturewas rich and costly. The golden throne of the monarch stood under anembroidered canopy or awning supported by four pillars of gold inlaidwith precious stones. [PLATE XXXV. ] Couches resplendent with silver andgold filled the rooms. The private chamber of the monarch was adornedwith a number of objects, not only rich and splendid, but valuable asproductions of high art. Here, impending over the royal bed, was thegolden vine, the work of Theodore of Samos, where the grapes wereimitated by means of precious stones, each of enormous value. Here, probably, was the golden plane-tree, a worthy companion to thevine, though an uncourtly Greek declared it was too small to shade agrasshopper. Here, finally, was a bowl of solid gold, another workof the great Samian metallurgist, more precious for its artisticworkmanship than even for its material. 

[Illustration: PLATE XXXV. ]

Nothing has hitherto been said of the Royal harem or seraglio, which, however, as a feature of the Court always important, and ultimatelypreponderating over all others, claims a share of our attention. In theearly times, it would appear that the Persian kings were content withthree or four wives, and a moderate number of concubines. Of the wivesthere was always one who held the most exalted place, to whom aloneappertained the title of "Queen, " and who was regarded as "wife" in adifferent sense from the others. Such was Atossa to Darius Hystaspis, Amestris to Xerxes, Statira to Darius Codomannus. Such, too, were Vashtiand Esther to the prince, whoever he was, whose deeds are recorded inScripture under the name of Ahasuerus. The chief wife, or Queen-Consort, was privileged to wear on her head a royal tiara or crown. She wasthe acknowledged head of the female apartments or Gynaeceum, and theconcubines recognized her dignity by actual prostration. On greatoccasions, when the king entertained the male part of the Court, shefeasted all the females in her own part of the palace. She had alarge revenue of her own, assigned her, not so much by the will of herhusband, as by an established law or custom. Her dress was splendid, and she was able to indulge freely that love of ornament of which fewOriental women are devoid. Though legally subject to her husband as muchas the meanest of his slaves, she could venture on liberties which wouldhave been fatal to almost any one else, and often, by her influence overthe monarch, possessed a very considerable share of power. 

The status of the other wives was very inferior to this; and it isdifficult to see how such persons were really in a position muchsuperior to that of the concubines. As daughters of the chiefnobles--for the king could only choose a wife within a narrowcircle--they had, of course, a rank and dignity independent of thatacquired by marriage; but otherwise they must have been almost on a parwith those fair inmates of the Gynaeceum who had no claim even tothe name of consort. Each wife had probably a suite of apartments toherself, and a certain number of attendants--eunuchs, and tirewomen--ather disposal; but the inferior wives saw little of the king, being onlysummoned each in their turn to share his apartment, and had none of theprivileges which made the position of chief wife so important. 

The concubines seem to have occupied a distinct part of the Gynaeceum, called "the second house of the women. " They were in the special chargeof one of the eunuchs, and were no doubt kept under strict surveillance. The Empire was continually searched for beautiful damsels to fill theharem, a constant succession being required, as none shared the royalcouch more than once, unless she attracted the monarch's regard veryparticularly. In the later times of the Empire, the number of theconcubines became enormous, amounting (according to one authority) tothree hundred and twenty-nine, (according to another) to three hundredand sixty. They accompanied the king both in his wars and in his huntingexpeditions. It was a part of their duty to sing and play for the royaldelectation; and this task, according to one author, they had to performduring the whole of each night. It is a more probable statement thatthey entertained the king and queen with music while they dined, one ofthem leading, and the others singing and playing in concert. 

The Gynaeceum--in the Susa palace, at any rate--was a building distinctfrom the general edifice, separated from the "king's house" by a court. It was itself composed of at least three sets of apartments--viz. Apartments for the virgins who had not yet gone into the king, apartments for the concubines, and apartments for the Queen-Consort andthe other wives. These different portions were under the supervisionof different persons. Two eunuchs of distinction had the chargerespectively of the "first" and of the "second house of the women. " TheQueen-Consort was, at any rate nominally, paramount in the third, herauthority extending over all its inmates, male and female. 

Sometimes there was in the Gynaeceum a personage even more exalted thanany which have as yet been mentioned. The mother of the reigning prince, if she outlived his father, held a position at the Court of her sonbeyond that even of his Chief Wife. She kept the ensigns of royaltywhich she had worn during the reign of her husband; and wielded, asQueen-Mother, a far weightier and more domineering authority than sheever exercised as Queen-Consort. The habits of reverence and obedience, in which the boy had been reared, retained commonly their power over theman; and the monarch who in public ruled despotically over millionsof men, succumbed, within the walls of the seraglio, to the yoke of awoman, whose influence he was too weak to throw off. The Queen-Motherhad her seat at the royal table whenever the king dined with his wife;and, while the wife sat below, she sat above the monarch. She had asuite of eunuchs distinct from those of her son. Ample revenues weresecured to her, and were completely at her disposal. She practicallyexercised--though she could not perhaps legally claim--a power of lifeand death. She screened offenders from punishment, procuring for themthe royal pardon, or sheltering them in her own apartments; and shepoisoned, or openly executed, those who provoked her jealousy orresentment. 

The service of the harem, so far as it could not be fitly performed bywomen, was committed to eunuchs. Each legitimate wife--as well as theQueen-Mother--had a number of these unfortunates among her attendants;and the king intrusted the house of the concubines, and also that of thevirgins, to the same class of persons. His own attendants seem likewiseto have been chiefly eunuchs. In the later times, the eunuchs acquireda vast political authority, and appear to have then filled all the chiefoffices of state. They were the king's advisers in the palace, and hisgenerals in the field. They superintended the education of the youngprinces, and found it easy to make them their tools. The plots andconspiracies, the executions and assassinations, which disfigure thelater portion of the Persian annals, maybe traced chiefly to theirintrigues and ambition. But the early Persian annals are free from thesehorrors; and it is clear that the power of the eunuchs was, during thisperiod, kept within narrow bounds. We hear little of them in authentichistory till the reign of Xerxes. It is remarkable that the Persepolitansculptures, abounding as they do in representations of Court life, ofthe officers and attendants who approached at all closely to the personof the monarch, contain not a single figure of a eunuch in their entirerange. We may gather from this that there was at any rate a markeddifference between the Assyrian and the early Persian Court in theposition which eunuchs occupied at them respectively: we should not, however, be justified in going further and questioning altogether theemployment of eunuchs by the Persian monarchs during the early period, since their absence from the sculptures may be accounted for on othergrounds. 

It is peculiarly noticeable in the Persian sculptures and inscriptionsthat they carry to excess that reserve which Orientals have alwaysmaintained with regard to women. The inscriptions are wholly devoidof all reference to the softer sex, and the sculptures give us norepresentation of a female. In Persia, at the present day, it isregarded as a gross indecorum to ask a man after his wife; and ancientlyit would seem that the whole sex fell under a law of taboo, whichrequired that, whatever the real power and influence of women, allpublic mention of them, as well as all representations of the femaleform, should be avoided. If this were so, it must of course still morehave been the rule that the women--or, at any rate, those of the upperclasses--should not be publicly seen. Hence the indignant refusal ofVashti to obey the command of King Aha-suerus to show herself to hisCourt. Hence, too, the law which made it a capital offence to address ortouch one of the royal concubines or even to pass their litters uponthe road. The litters of women were always curtained; and when the QueenStatira rode in hers with the curtains drawn, it was a novelty whichattracted general attention, as a relaxation of the ordinary etiquette, though only females were allowed to come near her. Married womenmight not even see their nearest male relatives, as their fathers andbrothers; the unmarried had, it is probable, a little more liberty. 

As the employment of eunuchs at the Persian Court was mainly in theharem, and in offices connected therewith, it is no wonder thatthey shared, to some extent, in the law of taboo, which forbade therepresentation of women. Their proper place was in the female courts andapartments, or in close attendance upon the litters, when members ofthe seraglio travelled, or took the air--not in the throne-room, or theantechambers, or the outer courts of the palace, which alone furnishedthe scenes regarded as suitable for representation. 

Of right, the position at the Persian Court immediately below that ofthe king belonged to the members of certain privileged families. Besidesthe royal family itself--or clan of the Achaemenidae--there weresix great houses which had a rank superior to that of all the othergrandees. According to Herodotus these houses derived their specialdignity from the accident that their heads had been fellow-conspiratorswith Darius Hystaspis; but there is reason to suspect that the rankof the families was precedent to the conspiracy in question, certainfamilies conspiring because they were great, and not becoming greatbecause they conspired. At any rate, from the time of Darius I. , there seem to have been seven great families, including that of theAchaemenidae, whose chiefs had the privilege of free communicationwith the monarch, and from which he was legally bound to choose hislegitimate wives. The chiefs appear to have been known as "the SevenPrinces, " or "the Seven Counsellors, " of the king. They sat next to himat public festivals; they were privileged to tender him their advice, whenever they pleased; they recommended important measures of state, andwere, in part, responsible for them; they could demand admission to themonarch's presence at any time, unless he were in the female apartments;they had precedence on all great occasions of ceremony, and enjoyeda rank altogether independent of office. Sometimes--perhaps mostcommonly--they held office; but they rather conferred a lustre on theposition which they consented to fill, than derived any additionalsplendor from it. 

It does not appear that the chiefs of the seven great families had anypeculiar insignia. Officers of the Court, on the contrary, seem to havealways carried, as badges marking their position, either wands aboutthree feet in length, or an ornament resembling a lotos blossom, whichis sometimes seen in the hands of the monarch himself. Such officerswore, at their pleasure, either the long Median robe and the fluted cap, or the close-fitting Persian tunic and trousers, with the loose felt[Greek name]. All had girdles, in which sometimes a dagger was placed;and all had collars of gold about their necks, and earrings of gold intheir ears. The Median robes were of various colors--scarlet, purple, crimson, dark gray, etc. Over the Persian tunic a sleeved cloak, orgreat coat, reaching to the ankles, was sometimes worn; this garment wasfastened by strings in front, and descended loosely from the shoulders, no use being commonly made of the sleeves, which hung empty at thewearer's side. [PLATE XXXVI. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXVI. ]

An elaborate Court ceremonial was the natural accompaniment of the ideaswith respect to royalty embodied in the Persian system. Exceptingthe "Seven Princes, " no one could approach the royal person unlessintroduced by a Court usher, Prostration--the attitude of worship--wasrequired of all as they entered the presence. The hands of the personsintroduced had to be hidden in their sleeves so long as their audiencelasted. In crossing the Palace Courts it was necessary to abstaincarefully from touching the carpet which was laid for the king to walkon. Coming into the king's presence unsummoned was a capital crime, punished by the attendants with instant death, unless the monarchhimself, as a sign that he pardoned the intrusion, held out towards theculprit the golden sceptre which he bore in his hands. It was also acapital offence to sit down, even unknowingly, upon the royal throne;and it was a grave misdemeanor to wear one of the king's cast-offdresses. Etiquette was almost as severe on the monarch himself as onhis subjects. He was required to live chiefly in seclusion; to eat hismeals, for the most part, alone; never to go on foot beyond the palacewalls; never to revoke an order once given, however much he might regretit; never to draw back from a promise, whatever ill results he mightanticipate from its performance. To maintain the quasi-divine characterwhich attached to him it was necessary that he should seem infallible, immutable, and wholly free from the weakness of repentance. 

As some compensation for the restrictions laid upon him, the Persianking had the sole enjoyment of certain luxuries. The wheat of Assos wassent to the Court to furnish him with bread, and the vines of Helbonwere cultivated for the special purpose of supplying him with wine. Water was conveyed to Susa for his use from distant streams regarded asspecially sweet and pure; and in his expeditions he was accompanied, bya train of wagons, which were laden with silver flasks, filled from theclear stream of the Choaspes. The oasis of Ammon contributed the saltwith which he seasoned his food. All the delicacies that the Empireanywhere produced were accumulated on his board, for the supply of whicheach province was proud to send its best and choicest products. 

The chief amusements in which the Great King indulged were hunting andplaying at dice. Darius Hystaspis, who followed the chase with suchardor as on one occasion to dislocate his ankle in the pursuit of a wildbeast, had himself represented on his signet-cylinder as engaged in alion-hunt. From this representation, we learn that the Persian monarchs, like the Assyrian, pursued the king of beasts in their chariots, andgenerally despatched him by means of arrows. Seated in a light car, and attended by a single unarmed charioteer, they invaded the haunts ofthese fiercest of brutes, rousing them from their lairs--probably withIndian hounds, and chasing them at full speed if they fled, or, if theyfaced the danger, attacking them with arrows or with the javelin. [PLATEXXXVI. , Fig. 2. ] Occasionally the monarch might indulge in this sportalone; but generally he was (it seems) accompanied by some of hiscourtiers, who shared the pleasures of the chase with him on thecondition that they never ventured to let fly their weapons before hehad discharged his. If they disregarded this rule they were liableto capital punishment, and might esteem themselves fortunate if theyescaped with exile. 

Besides lions, the Persian monarch chased, it is probable, stages, antelopes, wild asses, wild boars, bears, wild sheep, and leopards. [PLATE XXXVI. , Fig. 3. ] These animals all abounded in the neighborhoodof the royal palaces, and they are enumerated by Xenophon among thebeasts hunted by Cyrus. The mode of chasing the wild ass was for thehorsemen to scatter themselves over the plain, and to pursue theanimal in turns, one taking up the chase when the horse of another wasexhausted. The speed of the creature is so great that no horse witha rider on his back can long keep pace with him; and thus relays werenecessary to tire him out, and enable the hunters to bring him withinthe range of their weapons. 

When game was scarce in the open country, or when the kings weretoo indolent to seek it in its native haunts, they indulged theirinclination for sport by chasing the animals which they kept in theirown "paradises. " These were walled enclosures of a large size, wellwooded, and watered with sparkling streams, in which were bred or keptwild beasts of various kinds, chiefly of the more harmless sorts, asstags, antelopes, and wild sheep. These the kings pursued and shot witharrows, or brought down with the javelin; but the sport was regarded astame, and not to be compared with hunting in the open field. 

Within the palace the Persian monarchs are said to have amusedthemselves with dice. They played, it is probable, chiefly with theirnear relatives, as their wives, or the Queen-Mother. The stakes, as wasto be expected, ran high, as much as a thousand darics (nearly L 1100. )being sometimes set on a single throw. Occasionally they played for thepersons of their slaves, eunuchs, and others, who, when lost, became theabsolute property of the winner. 

Another favorite royal amusement was carving or planing wood. Accordingto AElian, the Persian king, when he took a journey, always employedhimself, as he sat in his carriage, in this way; and Ctesias speaks ofthe occupation as pursued also within the walls of the palace. Manualwork of this kind has often been the refuge of those rulers, who, satedwith pleasure and devoid of literary tastes, have found time hang heavyupon their hands. 

In literature a Persian king seems rarely to have taken any pleasure atall. Occasionally, to beguile the weary hours, a monarch may have hadthe "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Persia and Media" readbefore him; but the kings themselves never opened a book, or studied anybranch of science or learning. The letters, edicts, and probably eventhe inscriptions, of the monarch were the composition of the Courtscribes, who took their orders from the king or his ministers, andclothed them in their own language. They did not even call upon theirmaster to sign his name to a parchment; his seal, on which his name wasengraved, sufficiently authenticated all proclamations and edicts. 

Among the more serious occupations of the monarch were the holding ofcouncils, the reviewing of troops, the hearing of complaints, and thegranting or refusing of redress, the assignment of rewards, perhaps, insome cases, the trying of causes, and, above all, the general directionof the civil administration and government of the Empire. An energeticking probably took care to hear all the reports which were sent up tothe Court by the various officials employed in the actual government ofthe numerous provinces, as well as those sent in by the persons who fromtime to time inspected, on the part of the Crown, the condition of thisor that satrapy. Having heard and considered these reports, and perhapstaken advice upon them, such a monarch would give clear directions asto the answers to be sent, which would be embodied in despatches by hissecretaries, and then read over to him, before he affixed his seal tothem. The concerns of an empire so vast as that of Persia would havegiven ample employment for the greater part of the day to any monarchwho was determined not only to reign, but to govern. Among the Persiansovereigns there seems to have been a few who had sufficient energy andself-denial to devote themselves habitually to the serious duties oftheir office. Generally, however, the cares of government were devolvedupon some favorite adviser, a relative, or a eunuch, who was entrustedby the monarch with the entire conduct of affairs, in order that hemight give himself up to sensual pleasures, to the sports of the field, or to light and frivolous amusements. 

The passion for building, which we have found so strong in Assyria andBabylonia, possessed, but in a minor degree, a certain number of thePersian monarchs. The simplicity of their worship giving little scopefor architectural grandeur in the buildings devoted to religion, theyconcentrated their main efforts upon the construction of palaces andtombs. The architectural character of these works will be considered ina later chapter. It is sufficient to note here that a good deal of thetime and attention of many monarchs were directed to these objects; andparticularly it is interesting to remark, that, notwithstanding theirworldly greatness, and the flattering voices of their subjects, whichwere continually bidding them "live for ever, " the Persian kings werequite aware of the frail tenure by which man holds his life, and, whilethey were still in vigorous health, constructed their own tombs. 

It was an important principle of the Magian religion that the bodyshould not after death be allowed to mingle with, and so pollute, anyone of the four elements. Either from a regard for this superstition, orfrom the mere instinctive desire to preserve the lifeless clay as longas possible, the Persians entombed their kings in the following way. The body was placed in a golden coffin, which was covered with aclose-fitting lid, and deposited either in a massive building erected toserve at once as a tomb and a monument, or in a chamber cut out of somegreat mass of solid rock, at a considerable elevation above its base. Ineither case, the entrance into the tomb was carefully closed, after thebody had been deposited in it, by a block or blocks of stone. [PLATEXXXVII. , Fig. 1. ] Inside the tomb were placed, together with the coffin, a number of objects, designed apparently for the king's use in the otherworld, as rich cloaks and tunics, trousers, purple robes, collars ofgold, earrings of gold, set with gems, daggers, carpets, goblets, and hangings. Generally the tomb was ornamented with sculptures, andsometimes, though rarely, it had an inscription (or inscriptions) uponit, containing the name and titles of the monarch whose remains reposedwithin. 

[Illustration: PLATE XXXVII. ]

If the tomb were a building, and not rock-hewn, the ground in thevicinity was formed into a park or garden, which was planted with allmanner of trees. Within the park, at some little distance from thetomb, was a house, which formed the residence of a body of priests, whowatched over the safety of the sepulchre. 

The Greeks seem to have believed that divine honors were sometimes paidto a monarch after his decease; but the spirit of the Persian religionwas so entirely opposed to any such observance that it is most probablethe Greeks were mistaken. Observing that sacrifices were offered once amonth in the vicinity of some of the royal tombs, they assumed thatthe object of the cult was the monarch himself, whereas it was no doubtreally addressed either to Ormazd or to Mithras. The Persians cannotrightly be accused of the worship of dead men, a superstition from whichboth the Zoroastrian and the Magian systems were entirely free. 

From this account of the Persian monarchs and their Court, we maynow turn to a subject which moderns regard as one of much greaterinterest--the general condition, manners, and customs of the Persianpeople. Our information on these points is unfortunately far less fullthan on the subject which we have been recently discussing, but still itis perhaps sufficient to give us a tolerably complete notion of the realcharacter of the nation. 

The Persians, according to Herodotus, were divided into ten tribes, ofwhich four were nomadic and three agricultural. The nomadic were theDai, the Mardi, the Dropici, and the Sagartii; the agricultural werethe Panthilaei, the Derusisei, and the Germanii, or Carmanians. What theoccupation of the other three tribes was Herodotus does not state;but, as one of them--the Pasargadae--was evidently the ruling class, consisting, therefore (it is probable), of land owners, who did notthemselves till the soil, we may perhaps assume that all three occupiedthis position, standing in Persia somewhat--as the three tribes ofDorians stood to the other Greeks in the Peloponnese. If this were thecase, the population would have been really divided broadly into the twoclasses of settled and nomade, whereof the former class was subdividedinto those who were the lords of the soil, and those who cultivated it, either as farmers or as laborers, under them. 

The ordinary dress of the poorer class, whether agricultural or nomade, was probably the tunic and trousers of leather which have been alreadymentioned as the true national costume of the people. The costume wascompleted by a loose felt cap upon the head, a strap or belt round thewaist, and a pair of high shoes upon the feet, tied in front with astring. [PLATE XXXVIII. , Fig. 2. ] In later times a linen or muslin ragreplaced the felt cap, and the tunic was lengthened so as to reach halfway between the knee and the ankle. 

[Illustration: PLATE XXXVIII. ]

The richer classes seem generally to have adopted the Median costumewhich was so prevalent at the Court. They wore long purple or floweredrobes with loose hanging sleeves, flowered tunics reaching to the knee, also sleeved, embroidered trousers, tiaras, and shoes of a more elegantshape than the ordinary Persian. Nor was this the whole of their dress. Under their trousers they wore drawers, under their tunics shirts, ontheir hands gloves, and under their shoes socks or stockings--luxuriesthese, one and all, little known in the ancient world. The Persianswere also, like most Orientals, extremely fond of ornaments. Men of rankcarried, almost as a matter of course, massive chains or collars of goldabout their necks, and bracelets of gold upon their arms. The sheathsand handles of their swords and daggers were generally of gold, sometimes, perhaps, studded with gems. Many of them wore earrings. Greatexpense was lavished on the trappings of the horses which they rode ordrove; the bridle, or at least the bit, was often of solid gold, and therest of the equipment was costly. Among the gems which were especiallyaffected, the pearl held the first place. Besides being set in theordinary way, it was bored and strung, in order that it might be usedfor necklaces, bracelets, and ankles. Even children had sometimes goldenornaments, which were preferred when the gold was of a reddish color. 

Very costly and rich too was the furniture of the better class ofhouses. The tables were plated or inlaid with silver and gold. Splendidcouches, spread with gorgeous coverlets, invited the inmates to reposeat their ease; and, the better to insure their comfort, the legs of thecouches were made to rest upon carpets, which were sufficiently elasticto act as a sort of spring, rendering the couches softer and moreluxurious than they would otherwise have been. Gold and silver plate, especially in the shape of drinking-cups, was largely displayed in allthe wealthy mansions, each household priding itself on the show which itcould make of the precious metals. 

In respect of eating and drinking, the Persians, even better sort, werein the earlier times noted for their temperance and sobriety. Theirordinary food was wheaten bread, barley-cakes, and meat simply roastedor boiled, which they seasoned with salt and with bruised cress-seed, asubstitute for mustard. The sole drink in which they indulged was water. Moreover, it was their habit to take one meal only each day. The poorerkind of people were contented with even a simpler diet, supportingthemselves, to a great extent, on the natural products of the soil, asdates, figs, wild pears, acorns, and the fruit of the terebinth-tree. But these abstemious habits were soon laid aside, and replaced by luxuryand self-indulgence, when the success of their arms had put it in theirpower to have the full and free gratification of all their desires andpropensities. Then, although the custom of having but one meal in theday was kept up, the character of the custom was entirely altered bybeginning the meal early and making it last till night. Not many sortsof meat were placed on the board, unless the occasion was a grand one;but course after course of the lighter kinds of food flowed on inan almost endless succession, intervals of some length being allowedbetween the courses to enable the guests to recover their appetites. Instead of water, wine became the usual beverage; each man pridedhimself on the quantity he could drink; and the natural result followedthat most banquets terminated in general intoxication. Drunkenness evencame to be a sort of institution. Once a year, at the feast of Mithras, the king of Persia, according to Duris, was bound to be drunk. A generalpractice arose of deliberating on all important affairs under theinfluence of wine, so that, in every household, when a family crisisimpended, intoxication was a duty. 

The Persians ate, not only the meats which we are in the habit ofconsuming, but also the flesh of goats, horses, asses, and camels. Thehump of the last-named animal is considered, even at the present day, adelicacy in many parts of the East; but in ancient Persia it would seemthat the entire animal was regarded as fairly palatable. The horseand ass, which no one would touch in modern Persia, were thought, apparently, quite as good eating as the ox; and goats, which were farcommoner than sheep, appeared, it is probable, oftener at table. Thedietery of a grand house was further varied by the admission into itof poultry and game--the game including wild boars, stags, antelopes, bustards, and probably partridges; the poultry consisting of geeseand chickens. Oysters and other fish were used largely as food by theinhabitants of the coast-region. 

Grades of society were strongly marked among the Persians; and theetiquette of the Court travelled down to the lowest ranks of the people. Well-known rules determined how each man was to salute his equal, his inferior, or his superior; and the observance of these rules wasuniversal. Inferiors on meeting a decided superior prostrated themselveson the ground; equals kissed each other on the lips; persons nearly butnot quite equals kissed each other's cheeks. The usual Oriental rulesprevailed as to the intercourse of the sexes. Wives lived in strictseclusion within the walls of the Gynaeceum, or went abroad in litters, seeing no males except their sons, their husbands, and their husbands'eunuchs. Concubines had somewhat more freedom, appearing sometimes atbanquets, when they danced, sang, and played to amuse the guests oftheir master. 

The Persian was allowed to marry several wives, and might maintain inaddition as many concubines as he thought proper. Most of the richerclass had a multitude of each, since every Persian prided himself on thenumber of his sons, and it is even said that an annual prize was givenby the monarch to the Persian who could show most sons living. Theconcubines were not unfrequently Greeks, if we may judge by the case ofthe younger Cyrus, who took two Greek concubines with him when he madehis expedition against his brother. It would seem that wives didnot ordinarily accompany their husbands, when these went on militaryexpeditions, but that concubines were taken to the wars by most Persiansof consideration. Every such person had a litter at her disposal, and anumber of female attendants, whose business it was to wait upon her andexecute her orders. 

All the best authorities are agreed that great pains were taken bythe Persians--or, at any rate, by those of the leading clans--in theeducation of their sons. During the first five years of his life the boyremained wholly with the women, and was scarcely, if at all, seen by hisfather. After that time his training commenced. He was expected to risebefore dawn, and to appear at a certain spot, where he was exercisedwith other boys of his age in running, slinging stones, shooting withthe bow, and throwing the javelin. At seven he was taught to ride, andsoon afterwards he was allowed to begin to hunt. The riding included, not only the ordinary management of the horse, but the power of jumpingon and off his back when he was at speed, and of shooting with the bowand throwing the javelin with unerring aim, while the horse was still atfull gallop. The hunting was conducted by state-officers, who aimed atforming by its means in the youths committed to their charge all thequalities needed in war. The boys were made to bear extremes of heatand cold, to perform long marches, to cross rivers without wetting theirweapons, to sleep in the open air at night, to be content with a singlemeal in two days, and to support themselves occasionally on the wildproducts of the country, acorns, wild pears, and the fruit of theterebinth-tree. On days when there was no hunting they passed theirmornings in athletic exercises, and contests with the bow or thejavelin, after which they dined simply on the plain food mentioned aboveas that of the men in the early times, and then employed themselvesduring the afternoon in occupations regarded as not illiberal--forinstance, in the pursuits of agriculture, planting, digging for roots, and the like, or in the construction of arms and hunting implements, such as nets and springes. Hardy and temperate habits being securedby this training, the point of morals on which their preceptors mainlyinsisted was the rigid observance of truth. Of intellectual educationthey had but little. It seems to have been no part of the regulartraining of a Persian youth that he should learn to read. He was givenreligious notions and a certain amount of moral knowledge by means oflegendary poems, in which the deeds of gods and heroes were set beforehim by his teachers, who recited or sung them in his presence, andafterwards required him to repeat what he had heard, or, at any rate, to give some account of it. This education continued for fifteen years, commencing when the boy was five, and terminating when he reached theage of twenty. 

The effect of this training was to render the Persian an excellentsoldier and a most accomplished horseman. Accustomed from early boyhoodto pass the greater part of every day in the saddle, he never felt somuch at home as when mounted upon a prancing steed. On horseback hepursued the stag, the boar, the antelope, even occasionally the bearor the lion, and shot his arrows, or slung his stones, or hurled hisjavelin at them with deadly aim, never pausing for a moment in hiscareer. [PLATE XXXVII. , Fig. 2. ] Only when the brute turned on hispursuers, and stood at bay, or charged them in its furious despair, theywould sometimes descend from their coursers, and receive the attack, or deal the _coup de grace_ on foot, using for the purpose a shortbut strong hunting-spear. [PLATE XXXVII. , Fig. 3. ] The chase was theprincipal delight of the upper class of Persians, so long as the ancientmanners were kept up, and continued an occupation in which the bolderspirits loved to indulge long after decline had set in, and the advanceof luxury had changed, to a great extent, the character of the nation. 

At fifteen years of age the Persian was considered to have attained tomanhood, and was enrolled in the ranks of the army, continuing liable tomilitary service from that time till he reached the age of fifty. Thoseof the highest rank became the body-guard of the king, and these formedthe garrison of the capital. They were a force of not less than fourteenor fifteen thousand men. Others, though liable to military service, didnot adopt arms as their profession, but attached themselves to the Courtand looked to civil employment, as satraps, secretaries, attendants, ushers, judges, inspectors, messengers. A portion, no doubt, remainedin the country districts, and there followed those agricultural pursuitswhich the Zoroastrian religion regarded as in the highest degreehonorable. But the bulk of the nation must, from the time of the greatconquests, have passed their lives mainly, like the Roman legionariesunder the Empire, in garrison duty in the provinces. The entirepopulation of Persia Proper can scarcely have exceeded two millions. Notmore than one fourth of this number would be males between the agesof fifteen and fifty. This body of 500, 000 men, besides supplying theofficial class at the Court and throughout the provinces, and alsofurnishing to Persia Proper those who did the work of its cultivation, had to supply to the whole Empire those large and numerous garrisons onwhose presence depended the maintenance of the Persian dominion in everyprovince that had been conquered. According to Herodotus, the singlecountry of Egypt contained, in his day, a standing army of 120, 000Persians; and, although this was no doubt an exceptional case, Egyptbeing more prone to revolt than any other satrapy, yet there is abundantevidence that elsewhere, in almost every part of the Empire, largebodies of troops were regularly maintained; troops which are alwayscharacterized as "Persians. " We may suspect that under the name wereincluded the kindred nation of the Medes, and perhaps some other Arianraces, as the Hyrcanians, and the Bactrians, for it is difficult toconceive that such a country as Persia Proper could alone have kept upthe military force which the Empire required for its preservation;but to whatever extent the standing army was supplemented from thesesources, Persia must still have furnished the bulk of it; and thedemands of this service must have absorbed, at the very least, one thirdif not one half of the adult male population. 

For trade and commerce the Persians were wont to express extremecontempt. The richer classes made it their boast that they neitherbought nor sold, being supplied (we must suppose) from their estates, and by their slaves and dependents, with all that they needed for thecommon purposes of life. Persians of the middle rank would condescend tobuy, but considered it beneath them to sell; while only the very lowestand poorest were actual artisans and traders. Shops were banishedfrom the more public parts of the towns; and thus such commercialtransactions as took place were veiled in what was regarded as a decentobscurity. The reason assigned for this low estimation of trade was thatshopping and bargaining involved the necessity of falsehood. 

According to Quintus Curtius, the Persian ladies had the same objectionto soil their hands with work that the men had to dirty theirs withcommerce. The labors of the loom, which no Grecian princess regardedas unbecoming her rank, were despised by all Persian women except thelowest; and we may conclude that the same idle and frivolous gossipwhich resounds all day in the harems of modern Iran formed the mainoccupation of the Persian ladies in the time of the Empire. 

With the general advance of luxury under Xerxes and his successors, ofwhich something has been already said, there were introduced into theEmpire a number of customs of an effeminate and demoralizing character. From the earliest times the Persians seem to have been very careful oftheir beards and hair, arranging the latter in a vast number of shortcrisp curls, and partly curling the former, partly training it to hangstraight from the chin. After a while, not content with this degreeof care for their personal appearance, they proceeded to improve it bywearing false hair in addition to the locks which nature had given them, by the use of cosmetics to increase the delicacy of their complexions, and by the application of a coloring matter to the upper and lowereyelids, for the purpose of giving to the eye an appearance of greatersize and beauty. They employed a special class of servants to performthese operations of the toilet, whom the Greeks called "adorners". Theirfurniture increased, not merely in splendor, but in softness; theirfloors were covered with carpets, their beds with numerous and delicatecoverlets; they could not sit upon the ground unless a cloth was firstspread upon it; they would not mount a horse until he was so caparisonedthat the seat on his back was softer even than their couches. At thesame time they largely augmented the number and variety of their viandsand of their sauces, always seeking after novel delicacies, and offeringrewards to the inventors of "new pleasures. " A useless multitude of lazymenials was maintained in all rich households, each servant confininghimself rigidly to a single duty, and porters, bread-makers, cooks, cup-bearers, water-bearers, waiters at table, chamberlains, "awakers, ""adorners, " all distinct from one another, crowded each noble mansion, helping forward the general demoralization. It was probably at thiscomparatively late period that certain foreign customs of a sadlylowering character were adopted by this plastic and impressible people, who learnt the vice of paederasty from the Greeks, and adopted from theAssyrians the worship of Beltis, with its accompaniment of religiousprostitution. 

On the whole the Persians may seem to have enjoyed an existence freefrom care, and only too prosperous to result in the formation of a highand noble character. They were the foremost Asiatic people of theirtime, and were fully conscious of their pre-eminency. A small rulingclass in a vast Empire, they enjoyed almost a monopoly of office, andwere able gradually to draw to themselves much of the wealth of theprovinces. Allowed the use of arms, and accustomed to lord it over theprovincials, they themselves maintained their self-respect, and showed, even towards the close of their Empire, a spirit and an energy seldomexhibited by any but a free people. But there was nevertheless a darkside to the picture--a lurking danger which must have thrown a shadowover the lives of all the nobler and richer of the nation, unlessthey were utterly thoughtless. The irresponsible authority and crueldispositions of the kings, joined to the recklessness with which theydelegated the power of life and death to their favorites, made itimpossible for any person of eminence in the whole Empire to feel surethat he might not any day be seized and accused of a crime, or evenwithout the form of an accusation be taken and put to death, aftersuffering the most excruciating tortures. To produce this result, it wasenough to have failed through any cause whatever in the performance ofa set task, or to have offended, even by doing him too great a service, the monarch or one of his favorites. Nay, it was enough to haveprovoked, through a relation or a connection, the anger or jealousy ofone in favor at Court; for the caprice of an Oriental would sometimespass over the real culprit and exact vengeance from one quiteguiltless--even, it may be, unconscious--of the offence given. Theoretically, the Persian was never to be put to death for a singlecrime; or at least he was not to suffer until the king had formallyconsidered the whole tenor of his life, and struck a balance between hisgood and his evil deeds to see which outweighed the other. Practically, the monarch slew with his own hand any one whom he chose, or, ifhe preferred it, ordered him to instant execution, without trialor inquiry. His wife and his mother indulged themselves in the samepleasing liberty of slaughter, sometimes obtaining his tacit consent totheir proceedings, sometimes without consulting him. It may be saidthat the sufferers could at no time be very many in number, and thattherefore no very wide-spread alarm can have been commonly felt; butthe horrible nature of many of the punishments, and the impossibilityof conjecturing on whom they might next fall, must be set against theirinfrequency; and it must be remembered that an awful horror, from whichno precautions can save a man, though it happen to few, is more terriblethan a score of minor perils, against which it is possible to guard. Noble Persians were liable to be beheaded, to be stoned to death, to besuffocated with ashes, to have their tongues torn out by the roots, tobe buried alive, to be shot in mere wantonness, to be flayed and thencrucified, to be buried all but the head, and to perish by the lingeringagony of "the boat. " If they escaped these modes of execution, theymight be secretly poisoned, or they might be exiled, or transported forlife. Their wives and daughters might be seized and horribly mutilated, or buried alive, or cut into a number of fragments. With these perilsconstantly impending over their heads, the happiness of the nobles canscarcely have been more real than that of Damocles upon the throne ofDionysius. 

In conclusion, we may notice as a blot upon the Persian character andsystem, the cruelty and barbarity which was exhibited, not only in theseabnormal acts of tyranny and violence, but also in the regular and legalpunishments which were assigned to crimes and offences. The criminalcode, which--rightly enough--made death the penalty of murder, rape, treason, and rebellion, instead of stopping at this point, proceededto visit with a like severity even such offences as deciding a causewrongfully on account of a bribe, intruding without permission on theking's privacy, approaching near to one of his concubines, seatingoneself, even accidentally, on the throne, and the like. The modes ofexecution were also, for the most part, unnecessarily cruel. Poisonerswere punished by having their heads placed upon a broad stone, and thenhaving their faces crushed, and their brains beaten out by repeatedblows with another stone. Ravishers and rebels were put to death bycrucifixion. The horrible punishment of "the boat" seems to have been noindividual tyrant's cruel conception, but a recognized and legal form ofexecution. The same may be said also of burying alive. Again the Persiansecondary punishments were for the most part exceedingly barbarous. Xenophon tells us, as a proof of the good government maintained by theyounger Cyrus, in his satrapy, that under his sway it was common to seealong all the most frequented roads numbers of persons who had hadtheir hands or feet cut off, or their eyes put out, as a punishmentfor thieving and rascality. And other writers relate that similarmutilations were inflicted on rebels, and even on prisoners of war. It would seem, indeed, that mutilation and scourging were the ordinaryforms of secondary punishment used by the Persians, who employedimprisonment solely for the safe custody of an accused person betweenhis arrest and his execution, while they had recourse to transportationand exile only in the case of political offenders. 

CHAPTER IV. LANGUAGE AND WRITING. 

It has been intimated in the account of the Median Empire which wasgiven in a former-volume that the language of the Persians, which wasidentical, or almost identical, with that of the Medes, belonged to theform of speech known to moderns as Indo-European. The characteristics ofthat form of speech are a certain number of common, or at leastwidely spread, roots, a peculiar mode of inflecting, together witha resemblance in the inflections, and a similarity of syntax orconstruction. Of the old Persian language the known roots are, almostwithout exception, kindred forms to roots already familiar to thephilologist through the Sanscrit, or the Zend, or both; while many areof that more general type of which we have spoken--forms common to all, or most of the varieties of the Indo-European stock. To instance in afew very frequently recurring words--"father" is in old Persian (asin Sanscrit) _pitar_, which differs only in the vocalization from theZendic _patar_, the Greek [ ], and the Latin _pater_, and of whichcognate forms are the Gothic _fadar_, the German voter, the English_father_, and the Erse _athair_. 

 [See the html version for the following pages of this chapter which is a section with hundreds of Greek words. ]

[Illustration: PAGE 365]

[Illustration: PAGE 366]

[Illustration: PAGE 367]

[Illustration: PAGE 368]

[Illustration: PAGE 369]

[Illustration: PAGE 370]

[Illustration: PAGE 371]

[Illustration: PAGE 372]

[Illustration: PAGE 373]

[Illustration: PAGE 374]

[Illustration: PAGE 375]

[Illustration: PAGE 376]

[Illustration: PAGE 377]

[Illustration: PAGE 378]

The ordinary Persian writing was identical with that which has beendescribed in the second volume of this work as Median. A cuneiformalphabet, consisting of some thirty-six or thirty-seven forms, expressive of twenty-three distinct sounds, sufficed for the wants ofthe people, whose language was simple and devoid of phonetic luxuriance. Writing was from left to right, as with the Arian nations generally. Words were separated from one another by an oblique wedge; and weredivided at any point at which the writer happened to reach the end ofa line. Enclitics were joined without any break to the words which theyaccompanied. 

The Persian writing which has come down to us is almost entirely uponstone. It comprises various rock tablets, a number of inscriptions uponbuildings, and a few short legends upon vases and cylinders. It is inevery case incised or cut into the material. The letters are of varioussizes, some (as those at Elwend) reaching a length of about two inches, others (those, for instance, on the vases) not exceeding the sixth ofan inch. The inscriptions cover a space of at least a hundred and eightyyears, commencing with Cyrus, and terminating with Artaxerxes Ochus, the successor of Mnemon. The style of the writing is, on the whole, remarkably uniform, the latter inscriptions containing only twocharacters unknown to the earlier times. Orthography, however, andgrammar are in these later inscriptions greatly changed, the characterof the changes being indicative of corruption and decline, unless, indeed, we are to ascribe them to mere ignorance on the part of theengravers. 

There can be little doubt that, besides the cuneiform character, whichwas only suited for inscriptions, the Persians employed a cursivewriting for common literary purposes. Ctesias informs us that the royalarchives were written on parchment; and there is abundant evidence thatwriting was an art perfectly familiar to the educated Persian. It mighthave been supposed that the Pehlevi, as the lineal descendant of theOld Persian language, would have furnished valuable assistance towardssolving the question of what character the Persians employed commonly;but the alphabetic type of the Pehlevi inscriptions is evidentlySemitic; and it would thus seem that the old national modes of writinghad been completely lost before the establishment by Ardeshir, son ofBabek, of the new Persian Empire. 

CHAPTER V. ARCHITECTURE AND OTHER ARTS. 

If in the old world the fame of the Persians, as builders and artists, fell on the whole below that of the Assyrians and Babylonians--theirinstructors in art, no less than in letters and science--it was not somuch that they had not produced works worthy of comparison with thosewhich adorned Babylon and Nineveh, as that, boasting less antiquity andless originality than those primitive races, they did not strike in thesame way the imagination of the lively Greeks, who moreover could notbut feel a certain jealousy of artistic successes, which had rewardedthe efforts of a living and rival people. It happened, moreover, thatthe Persian masterpieces were less accessible to the Greeks than theBabylonian, and hence there was actually less knowledge of their realcharacter in the time when Greek literature was at its best. Herodotusand Xenophon, who impressed on their countrymen true ideas of thegrandeur and magnificence of the Mesopotamian structures, neverpenetrated to Persia Proper, and perhaps never beheld a real Persianbuilding. Ctesias, it is true, as a resident at the Achaemenian Courtfor seventeen years, must certainly have seen Susa and Ecbatana, if noteven Persepolis, and he therefore must have been well acquainted withthe character of Persian palaces; but, so far as appears from thefragments of his work which have come down to us, he said but littleon the subject of these edifices. It was not until Alexander led hiscohorts across the chain of Zagros to the high plateau beyond, that aproper estimate of the great Persian buildings could be made; and thenthe most magnificent of them all was scarcely seen before it was laidin ruins. The barbarous act of the great Macedonian conqueror, incommitting the palace of Persepolis to the flames, tended to preventa full recognition of the real greatness of Persian art even after theGreeks had occupied the country; but we find from this time a certainamount of acknowledgment of its merits--a certain number of passages, which, like that which forms the heading to this chapter, admit alikeits grandeur and its magnificence. 

If, however, the ancients did less than justice to the efforts of thePersians in architecture, sculpture, and the kindred arts, moderns have, on the contrary, given them rather an undue prominence. From themiddle of the seventeenth century, when Europeans first began freely topenetrate the East, the Persian ruins, especially those of Persepolis, drew the marked attention of travellers; and in times when the site ofBabylon had attracted but scanty notice, and that of Nineveh and theother great Assyrian cities was almost unknown, English, French, andGerman savans measured, described, and figured the Persian remains witha copiousness and exactness that left little to desire. Chardin, theelder Mebuhr, Le Brun, Ouseley, Ker Porter, exerted themselves with themost praiseworthy zeal to represent fully and faithfully the marvels ofthe Chehl Minar; and these persevering efforts were followed within novery lengthy period by the splendid and exhaustive works of the BaronTexier and of MM. Flandin and Coste. Persepolis rose again from itsashes in the superb and costly volumes of these latter writers, whorepresented on the grandest scale, and in the most finished way, not only the actual but the ideal--not only the present but thepast--placing before our eyes at once the fullest and completest viewsof the existing ruins, and also restorations of the ancient structures, some of them warm with color and gilding, which, though to a certainextent imaginary, probably give to a modern the best notion that it isnow possible to form of an old Persian edifice. 

It is impossible within the limits of the present work, and with theresources at the author's command, to attempt a complete description ofthe Persian remains, or to vie with writers who had at their disposalall the modern means of illustration. By the liberality of a well-knownauthority on architecture, he is able to present his readers withcertain general views of the most important structures; and he alsoenjoys the advantage of illustrating some of the most curious of thedetails with engravings from a set of photographs recently taken. Theselast have, it is believed, an accuracy beyond that of any drawingshitherto made, and will give a better idea than words could possibly doof the merit of the sculptures. With these helps, and with the additionof reduced copies from some of MM. Flandin and Coste's plates, theauthor hopes to be able to make his account fairly intelligible, and togive his readers the opportunity of forming a tolerably correct judgmenton the merit of the Persian art in comparison with that of Babylon andAssyria. 

Persian architectural art displayed itself especially in two forms ofbuilding--the palace and the tomb. Temples were not perhaps unknown inPersia, though much of the worship may always have been in the openair; but temples, at least until the time of Artaxerxes Mnemon, wereinsignificant, and neither attracted the attention of contemporaries, nor were of such a character as to leave traces of themselves to aftertimes. The palaces of the Persian kings, on the other hand, and thesepulchres which they prepared for themselves, are noticed by manyancient writers as objects of interest; and, notwithstanding certaindoubts which have been raised in recent years, it seems tolerablycertain that they are to be recognized in the two chief classes ofancient ruins which still exist in the country. 

The Persian palatial buildings, of which traces remain, are four innumber. One was situated at Ecbatana, the Median capital, and was a sortof adjunct to the old residence of the Median kings. Of this only a veryfew vestiges have been hitherto found; and we can merely say that itappears to have been of the same general character with the edificeswhich will be hereafter described. Another was built by Darius andhis son Xerxes on the great mound of Susa; and of this we have theground-plan, in a great measure, and various interesting details. Athird stood within the walls of the city of Persepolis, but of this notmuch more is left than of the construction at Ecbatana. Finally, therewas in the neighborhood of Persepolis, but completely distinct from thetown, the Great Palace, which, as the chief residence, at any rate ofthe later kings, Alexander burnt, and of which the remains still tobe seen are ample, constituting by far the most remarkable group ofbuildings now existing in this part of Asia. 

It is to this last edifice, or group of edifices, that the reader'sattention will be specially directed in the following pages. Here thegreatest of the Persian monarchs seem to have built the greatest oftheir works. Here the ravages of time and barbarism, sadly injuriousas they may have been, have had least effect. Here, moreover, modernresearch has spent its chief efforts, excavations having been made, measurements effected, and ground-plans laid down with accuracy. Indescribing the Persepolitan buildings we have aids which mostly fail uselsewhere--charts, plans, drawings in extraordinary abundance and oftenof high artistic value, elaborate descriptions, even photographs. [PLATEXXXVIII. , Fig. 3. ] If the describer has still a task of some difficultyto perform, it is because an overplus of material is apt to cause almostas much embarrassment as too poor and scanty a supply. 

[Illustration: PLATE XXVIII. ]

The buildings at Persepolis are placed upon a vast platform. It wasthe practice of the Persians, as of the Assyrians and Babylonians, toelevate their palaces in this way. They thus made them at once morestriking to the eye, more dignified, and more easy to guard. InBabylonia an elevated habitation was also more healthy and morepleasant, being raised above the reach of many insects, and laid open tothe winds of heaven, never too boisterous in that climate. Perhaps theAssyrians and Persians in their continued use of the custom, to someextent followed a fashion, elevating their royal residences, not so muchfor security or comfort, as because it had come to be considered that apalace ought to have a lofty site, and to look down on the habitationsof meaner men; but, however this may have been, the custom certainlyprevailed, and at Persepolis we have, in an almost perfect condition, this first element of a Persian palace. [PLATE XXXIX. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XXXIX. ]

The platform at Persepolis is built at the foot of a high range ofrocky hills, on which it abuts towards the east. It is composed of solidmasses of hewn stone, which were united by metal clamps, probably ofiron or lead. The masses were not cut to a uniform size, nor even alwaysto a right angle, but were fitted together with a certain amountof irregularity, which will be the best understood from the woodcutoverleaf. Many of the blocks were of enormous size; and theirquarrying, transport, and elevation to their present places, imply veryconsiderable mechanical skill. They were laid so as to form a perfectlysmooth perpendicular wall, the least height of which above theplain below is twenty feet. The outline of the platform was somewhatirregular. Speaking roughly, we may call it an oblong square, with abreadth about two thirds of its length; but this description, unlessqualified, will give an idea of far greater uniformity than actuallyprevails. [PLATE XL. , Fig. 1. ] The most serious irregularity is on thenorth side, the general line of which is not parallel to the south side, nor at right angles with the western one, but forms with the generalline of the western an angle of about eighty degrees. The cause of thisdeviation lay probably in the fact that, on this side, a low rockyspur ran out from the mountain-range in this direction, and that itwas thought desirable to accommodate the line of the structure to thenatural irregularities of the ground. In addition to the irregularityof general outline thus produced, there is another of such perpetualoccurrence that it must be regarded as an essential element of theoriginal design, and therefore probably as approving itself to theartistic notions of the builder. This is the occurrence of frequentangular projections and indentations, which we remark on all three sidesof the platform equally, and which would therefore seem to have beenregarded in Persia, no less than in Assyria, as ornamental. 

[Illustration: PLATE XL. ]

The whole of the platform is not of a uniform height. On the contrary, it seems to have been composed, as originally built, of several quitedistinct terraces. Three of these still remain, exhibiting towards thewest a very marked difference of elevation. The lowest of the three ison the south side, and it may therefore be termed the Southern Terrace. It extends from east to west a distance of about 800 feet, with a widthof about 170 or 180, and has an elevation above the plain of from twentyto twenty-three feet. Opposite to this, on the northern side of theplatform, is a second terrace, more than three times the breadth of thesouthern one, which may be called, by way of distinction, the NorthernTerrace. This has an elevation above the plain of thirty-five feet. Intermediate between these two is the great Central or Upper Terrace, standing forty-five feet above the plain, having a length of 770 feetalong the west face of the platform, and a width of about 400. Uponthis Upper Terrace were situated almost all the great and importantbuildings. 

The erection of a royal residence on a platform composed of severalterraces involved the necessity of artificial ascents, which thePersian architects managed by means of broad and solid staircases. Thesestaircases constitute one of the most remarkable features of the place, and seem to deserve careful and exact description. [PLATE XLI. , Fig. 2. ]

[Illustration: PLATE XLI. ]

The first, and grandest in respect of scale, is on the west front of theplatform towards its northern end, and leads up from the plain to thesummit of the northern terrace, furnishing the only means by which theplatform can even now be ascended. It consists of two distinct sets ofsteps, each composed of two flights, with a broad landing-place betweenthem, the steps themselves running at right angles to the platform wall, and the two lower flights diverging, while the two upper ones convergeto a common landing-place on the top. The slope of the stairs is sogentle that, though each step has a convenient width, the height of astep is in no case more than from three to four inches. It is thuseasy to ride horses both up and down the staircase, and travellers areconstantly in the habit of ascending and descending it in this way. 

The width of the staircase is twenty-two feet--space sufficient to allowof ten horsemen ascending each flight of steps abreast. Altogether thisascent, which is on a plan unknown elsewhere, is pronounced to be thenoblest example of a flight of stairs to be found in any part of theworld. It does not project beyond the line of the platform whereto itleads, but is, as it were, taken out of it. [PLATE XLII. ]

[[Illustration: PLATE XLII. ]

The next, and in some respects the most remarkable of all thestaircases, conducts from the level of the northern platform to that ofthe central or upper terrace. This staircase fronts northward, and openson the view as soon as the first staircase (A on the plan) has beenascended, lying to the right of the spectator at the distance of aboutfifty or sixty yards. It consists of four single flights of steps, twoof which are central, facing one another, and leading to a projectinglanding-place (B), about twenty feet in width; while the two othersare on either side of the central flights, distant from them abouttwenty-one yards. The entire length of this staircase is 212 feet;its greatest projection in front of the line of the terrace whereon itabuts, is thirty-six feet. The steps, which are sixteen feet wide, risein the same gentle way as those of the lower or platform staircase. Theheight of each is under four inches; and thus there are thirty-one stepsin an ascent of ten feet. 

The feature which specially distinguishes this staircase from the lowerone already described is its elaborate ornamentation. The platformstaircase is perfectly plain. The entire face which this staircasepresents to the spectator is covered with sculptures. In the firstplace, on the central projection, which is divided perpendicularly intothree compartments, are represented, in the spandrels on either side, a lion devouring a bull, and in the compartment between the spandrelseight colossal Persian guardsmen, armed with spears and either withsword or shield. Further, above the lion and bull, towards the edge ofthe spandrel where it slopes, forming a parapet to the steps, [PLATEXLIII. , Fig. 1. ] there was a row of cypress trees, while at the end ofthe parapet and along the whole of its inner face were a set of smallfigures, guardsmen habited like those in the central compartment, butcarrying mostly a bow and quiver instead of a shield. Along the extremeedge of the parapet externally was a narrow border thickly set withrosettes. [PLATE XLIII. , Fig. 2. ] Next, in the long spaces between thecentral stairs and those on either side of them, the spandrels containrepetitions of the lion and bull sculpture, while between them and thecentral stairs the face of the wall is divided horizontally into threebands, each of which has been ornamented with a continuous row offigures. The highest row of the three is unfortunately mutilated, theupper portion of all the bodies being lost in consequence of theirhaving been sculptured upon a parapet wall built originally to protectthe edge of the terrace, but now fallen away. The middle and lowest rowsare tolerably perfect, and possess considerable interest, as well assome artistic merit. The entire scene represented on the right sideseems to be the bringing of tribute or presents to the monarch by thevarious nations under his sway. On the left-hand side this subject wascontinued to a certain extent; but the greater part of the space wasoccupied by representations of guards and officers of the court, theguards being placed towards the centre, and, as it were, keeping themain stairs, while the officers were at a greater distance. The threerows of figures were separated from one another by narrow bands, thicklyset with rosettes. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLIII. ]

The builder of this magnificent work was not content to leave it tohistory or tradition to connect his name with his construction, butdetermined to make the work itself the means of perpetuating his memory. In three conspicuous parts of the staircase, slabs were left clear ofsculpture, undoubtedly to receive inscriptions commemorative of thefounder. The places selected were the front of the middle staircase, theexact centre of the whole work, and the space adjoining the spandrels tothe extreme right and the extreme left. In one instance alone, however, was this part of the work completed. On the right hand, or westernextremity of the staircase, an inscription of thirty lines in the oldPersian language informs us that the constructor was "Xerxes, the GreatKing, the King of Kings, the son of King Darius, the Achaemenian. " Thecentral and left-hand tablets, intended probably for Babylonian andScythic translations of the Persian legend, were never inscribed, andremain blank to the present day. 

The remaining staircases will not require very lengthy or elaboratedescriptions. They are six in number, and consist, in most instances, of a double flight of steps, similar to the central portion of thestaircase which has been just described. Two of them (e and f) belongedto the building marked as the "Palace of Darius" on the plan, and gaveentrance to it from the central platform above which it is elevatedabout fourteen or fifteen feet. Two others (c and d) belonged to the"Palace of Xerxes. " These led up to a broad paved space in front ofthat building, which formed a terrace, elevated about ten feet abovethe general level of the central platform. Their position was at the twoends of the terrace, opposite to one another; but in other respectsthey cannot be said to have matched. The eastern, which consisted of twodouble flights, was similar in general arrangement to the staircase bywhich the platform was mounted from the plain, excepting that it was notrecessed, but projected its full breadth beyond the line of the terrace. It was decidedly the more elegant of the two, and evidently formed themain approach. It was adorned with the usual bull and lion combats, withfigures of guardsmen, and with attendants carrying articles needed forthe table or the toilet. The inscriptions upon it declare it to bethe work of Xerxes. [PLATE XLIV. ] The western staircase was composedmerely of two single flights, facing one another, with a narrowlanding-place between them. It was ornamented like the eastern, butsomewhat less elaborately. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLIV. ]

A staircase, very similar to this last, but still one with certainpeculiarities, was built by Artaxerxes Ochus, at the west side of thePalace of Darius, in order to give it a second entrance. [PLATE XLV. , Fig. 1. ] There the spandrels have the usual figures of the lion andbull; but the intermediate space is somewhat unusually arranged. It isdivided vertically and horizontally into eight squared compartments, three on either side, and two in the middle. The upper of these twocontains nothing but a winged circle, the emblem of Divinity being thusplaced reverently by itself. Below, in a compartment of double size, isan inscription of Ochus, barbarous in language, but very religious intone. The six remaining compartments had each four figures, representingtribute-bearers introduced to the royal presence by a court officer. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLV. ]

The other, and original, staircase to this palace (f on the plan) wastowards the north, and led up to the great portico, which was ancientlyits sole entrance. Two flights of steps, facing each other, conducted toa paved space of equal extent with the portico and projecting in frontof it about five feet. On the base of the staircase were sculptures ina single line--the lion and bull in either spandrel--and between thespandrels eighteen colossal guardsmen, nine facing either way towardsa central inscription, which was repeated in other languages on slabsplaced between the guardsmen and the bulls. Above the spandrels, onthe parapet which fenced the stairs, was a line of figures representingattendants bringing into the palace materials for the banquet. A similarline adorned the inner wall of the staircase. 

Opposite to this, at the distance of about thirty-two yards, was anothervery similar staircase, leading up to the portico of anotherbuilding, erected (apparently) by Artaxerxes Ochus, which occupied thesouth-western corner of the upper platform. The sculptures here seem tohave been of the usual character but they are so mutilated that no verydecided opinion can be passed upon them. 

Last of all, a staircase of a very peculiar character, (h on the plan)requires notice. This is a flight of steps cut in the solid rock, which leads up from the southern terrace to the upper one, at a pointintervening between the south-western edifice, or palace of Artaxerxes, and the palace of Xerxes, or central southern edifice. These steps aresingular in facing the terrace to which they lead, instead of beingplaced sideways to it. They are of rude construction, being without aparapet, and wholly devoid of sculpture or other ornamentation. They furnish the only communication between the southern and centralterraces. 

It is a peculiarity of the Persepolitan ruins that they are notcontinuous, but present to the modern inquirer the appearance, atany rate, of a number of distinct buildings. Of these the platformaltogether contains ten, five of which are of large size, while theremainder are comparatively insignificant. 

Of the five large buildings four stand upon the central or upperterrace, while one lies east of that terrace, between it and themountains. The four upon the central terrace comprise three buildingsmade up of several sets of chambers, together with one great openpillared hall, to which are attached no subordinate apartments. Thethree complex edifices will be here termed "palaces, " and will takethe names of their respective founders, Darius, Xerxes, and ArtaxerxesOchus: the fourth will be called the "Great Hall of Audience. " Thebuilding between the upper terrace and the mountains will be termed the"Great Eastern Edifice. "

The "Palace of Darius, " which is one of the most interesting of thePersepolitan buildings, stands near the western edge of the platform, midway between the "Great Hall of Audience" and the "Palace ofArtaxerxes Ochus. " [PLATE XLVI. , Fig. 1. ] It is a building about onehundred and thirty five feet in length, and in breadth a little short ofa hundred. Of all the existing buildings on the platform it occupiesthe most exalted position, being elevated from fourteen to fifteen feetabove the general level of the central terrace, and being thus four orfive feet higher than the "Palace of Xerxes. " It fronted towards thesouth, where it was approached by a double staircase of the usualcharacter, which led up to a deep portico of eight pillars arranged intwo rows. On either side of the portico were guard-rooms, which openedupon it, in length twenty-three feet, and in breadth thirteen. Behindthe portico lay the main chamber, which was a square of fifty feet, having a roof supported by sixteen pillars, arranged in four rows offour, in line with the pillars of the portico. [PLATE XLV. , Fig. 2. ]The bases for the pillars alone remain; and it is thus uncertain whethertheir material was stone or wood. They were probably light and slender, not greatly interrupting the view. The hall was surrounded on all sidesby walls from four to five feet in thickness, in which were doors, windows, and recesses, symmetrically arranged. The entrance from theportico was by a door in the exact centre of the front wall, on eitherside of which were two windows, looking into the portico. Theopposite, or back, wall was pierced by two doors, which faced theintercolumniations of the side rows of pillars, as the front door facedthe intercolumniation of the central rows. Between the two doorswhich pierced the back wall was a squared recess, and similar recessesornamented the same wall on either side of the doors. The side wallswere each pierced originally by a single doorway, between which and thefront wall was a squared recess, while beyond, between the doorwaysand the back wall, were two recesses of the same character. Curiouslyenough, these side doorways and recesses fronted the pillars, not theintercolumniations. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLVI. ]

No sculpture, so far as appears, adorned this apartment, exceptingin the doorways, which however had in every case this kind ofornamentation. The doorways in the back wall exhibited on their jambsfigures of the king followed by two attendants, one holding a cloth, andthe other a fly-chaser. [PLATE XLV. , Fig. 3. ] These figures had in everycase their faces turned towards the apartment. The front doorway showedon its jambs the monarch followed by the parasol-bearer and the bearerof the fly-chaser, with his back turned to the apartment, issuing forth, as it were, from it. On the jambs of the doors of the side apartmentswas represented the king in combat with a lion or a monster, the kinghere in every case facing outwards, and seeming to guard the entrancesto the side chambers. 

At the back of the hall, and at either side, were chambers of verymoderate dimensions. The largest were to the rear of the building, where there seems to have been one about forty feet by twenty-three, andanother twenty-eight feet by twenty. The doorways here had sculptures, representing attendants bearing napkins and perfumes. The side chambers, five in number, were considerably smaller than those behind the greathall, the largest not exceeding thirty-four feet by thirteen. 

It seems probable that this palace was without any second story. Thereis no vestige in any part of it of a staircase--no indication of itsheight having ever exceeded from twenty-two to twenty-five feet. It wasa modest building, simple and regular, covering less than half the spaceof an ordinary palace in Assyria. [PLATE XLV. , Fig. 2. ] Externally, it must have presented an appearance not very dissimilar to that ofthe simpler Greek temples; distinguished from them by peculiarities ofornamentation, but by no striking or important feature, exceptingthe grand and elaborately sculptured staircase. Internally, it wasremarkable for the small number of its apartments, which seem not tohave been more than twelve or thirteen, and for the moderate size ofmost of them. Even the grand central hall covered a less area than threeout of the five halls in the country palace of Sargon. The effectof this room was probably fine, though it must have been somewhatover-crowded with pillars. If these were, however (as is probable), light wooden posts, plated with silver or with gold, and if the ceilingconsisted (as it most likely did) of beams, crossing each other at rightangles, with square spaces between them, all likewise coated with theprecious metals; if moreover the cold stone walls, excepting wherethey were broken by a doorway, or a window, were similarly decked; ifcurtains of brilliant hues hung across the entrances; if the pavementwas of many-colored stones, and in places covered with magnificentcarpets; if an elevated golden throne, under a canopy of purple, adornedthe upper end of the room, standing against the wall midway between thetwo doors--if this were in truth the arrangement and ornamentation ofthe apartment, we can well understand that the _coup d'oeil_ musthave been effective, and the impression made on the spectator highlypleasing. A room fifty feet square, and not much more than twenty high, could not be very grand; but elegance of form, combined with richnessof material and splendor of coloring, may have more than compensated forthe want of that grandeur which results from mere size. 

If it be inquired how a palace of the dimensions described can havesufficed even for one of the early Persian kings, the reply mustseemingly be that the building in question can only have containedthe public apartments of the royal residence--the throne-room, banqueting-rooms, guard-rooms, etc. , --and that it must have beensupplemented by at least one other edifice of a considerable size, theGynaeceum or "House of the Women. " There is ample room on the platformfor such a building, either towards the east, where the ground is nowoccupied by a high mound of rubbish, or on the west, towards the edge ofthe platform, where traces of a large edifice were noted by Niebuhr. Onthe whole, this latter situation seems to be the more probable; and theposition of the Gynaeceum in this quarter may account for the alterationmade by Artaxerxes Ochus in the palace of Darius, which now seriouslyinterferes with its symmetry. Artaxerxes cut a doorway in the outerwestern wall, and another opposite to it in the western wall of thegreat hall, adding at the same time a second staircase to the building, which thus became accessible from the west no less than from the south. It has puzzled the learned in architecture to assign a motive for thisalteration. May we not find an adequate one in the desire to obtain aready and comparatively private access to the Gynaeceum, which must havebeen somewhere on the platform, and which may well have lain in thisdirection?

The minute account which has been now given of this palace will renderunnecessary a very elaborate description of the remainder. Two grandpalatial edifices seem to have been erected on the platform by laterkings--one by Xerxes and the other by Artaxerxes Ochus; but the latterof these is in so ruined a condition, and the former is so like thepalace of Darius, that but few remarks need be made upon either. Thepalace of Xerxes is simply that of Darius on a larger scale, the pillarsin the portico being increased from two rows of four to two rows of six, and the great hall behind being a square of eighty instead of a squareof fifty feet, with thirty-six instead of sixteen pillars to supportits roof. On either side of the hall, and on either side of the portico, were apartments like those already described as abutting on the sameportions of the older palace, differing from them chiefly in beinglarger and more numerous. The two largest, which were thirty-one feetsquare, had roofs supported on pillars, the numbers of such supportsbeing in each case four. The only striking difference in the plans ofthe two buildings consisted in the absence from the palace of Xerxes ofany apartments to the rear of the great hall. In order to allow spacefor an ample terrace in front, the whole edifice was thrown back soclose to the edge of the upper platform that no room was left for anychambers at the back, since the hall itself was here brought almost tothe very verge of the sheer descent from the central to the low southernterrace. In ornamentation the palaces also very closely resembled eachother, the chief difference being that the combats of the king withlions and mythological monsters, which form the regular ornamentationof the side-chambers in the palace of Darius, occur nowhere in theresidence of his son, where they are replaced by figures of attendantsbringing articles for the toilet or the table, like those which adornthe main staircase of the older edifice. Figures of the same kind alsoornament all the windows in the palace of Xerxes. A tone of mere sensualenjoyment is thus given to the later edifice, which is very far fromcharacterizing the earlier; and the decline of morals at the Court, which history indicates as rapid about this period, is seen tohave stamped itself, as such changes usually do, upon the nationalarchitecture. 

A small building, at the distance of about twenty or twenty-five yardsfrom the eastern wall of the palace of Xerxes, possesses a peculiarinterest, in consequence of its having some claims to be consideredthe most ancient structure upon the platform. It consists of a hall andportico, in size, proportions, and decoration almost exactly resemblingthe corresponding parts of Darius's palace, but unaccompanied by anytrace of circumjacent chambers, and totally devoid of inscriptions. Thebuilding is low, on the level of the northern, rather than on that ofthe central terrace, and is indeed half buried in the rubbish which hasaccumulated at its base. Its fragments are peculiarly grand and massive, while its sculptures are in strong and bold relief. There can be littledoubt but that it was originally, like the hall and portico of Darius, surrounded on three sides by chambers. These, however, have entirelydisappeared, having probably been pulled down to furnish materials formore recent edifices. Like the palaces of Xerxes and Artaxerxes Ochus, and unlike the palace of Darius, the building faces to the north, whichis the direction naturally preferred in such a climate. We may supposeit to have been the royal residence of the earlier times, the erectionof Cyrus or Cambyses, and to have been intended especially for summeruse, for which its position well fitted it. Darius, wishing for a winterpalace at Persepolis, as well as a summer one, took probably this earlypalace for his model, and built one as nearly as possible resembling it, except that, for the sake of greater warmth, he made his new erectionface southwards. Xerxes, dissatisfied with the size of the old summerpalace, built a new one at its side of considerably larger dimensions, using perhaps some of the materials of the old palace in his newbuilding. Finally, Artaxerxes Ochus made certain additions to the palaceof Xerxes on its western side, and at the same time added a staircaseand a doorway to the winter residence of Darius. Thus the Persepolitanpalace, using the word in its proper sense of royal residence, attainedits full dimensions, occupying the southern half of the great centralplatform, and covering with its various courts and buildings a space500 feet long by 375 feet wide, or nearly the space covered by the lessambitious of the palaces of Assyria. 

Besides edifices adapted for habitation, the Persepolitan platformsustained two other classes of buildings. These were propylaea, orgateways--places commanding the approach to great buildings, where aguard might be stationed to stop and examine all comers--and halls of avast size, which were probably throne-rooms, where the monarch heldhis court on grand occasions, to exhibit himself in full state to hissubjects. The propylaea upon the platform appear to have been fourin number. One, the largest, was directly opposite the centre of thelanding-place at the top of the great stairs which gave access to theplatform from the plain. This consisted of a noble apartment, eighty-twofeet square, with a roof supported by four magnificent columns, eachbetween fifty and sixty feet high. The walls of the apartment were fromsixteen to seventeen feet thick. Two grand portals, each twelve feetwide by thirty-six feet high, led into this apartment, one directlyfacing the head of the stairs, and the other opposite to it, towards theeast. Both were flanked with colossal bulls, those towards the staircasebeing conventional representations of the real animal, while theopposite pair are almost exact reproductions of the winged andhuman-headed bulls, with which the Assyrian discoveries have made us sofamiliar. The accompanying illustration [PLATE XLVII. , Fig. 1. ], whichis taken from a photograph, exhibits this inner pair in their presentcondition. The back of one of the other pair is also visible. Two ofthe pillars--which alone are still standings appear in their places, intervening between the front and the back gateway. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLVII. ]

The walls which enclosed this chamber, notwithstanding their immensethickness, have almost entirely disappeared. On the southern side alone, where there seems to have been a third doorway, unornamented, are thereany traces of them. We must conclude that they were either of burntbrick or of small blocks of stone, which the natives of the countryin later times found it convenient to use as material for their ownbuildings. 

An edifice, almost exactly similar to this, but of very inferiordimensions, occupied a position due east of the palace of Darius, anda little to the north of the main staircase leading to the terrace infront of the palace of Xerxes. The bases of two pillars and the jambsof three doorways remain, from which it is easy to reconstruct the mainbuilding. Its position seems to mark it as designed to give entranceto the structure, whatever it was, which occupied the site of the greatmound (M on the Plan) east of Darius's palace, and north of the palaceof his son. The ornamentation, however, would rather connect it withthe more eastern of the two great pillared halls, which will have to bedescribed presently. 

A third edifice of the same kind stood in front of the great easternhall, at the distance of about seventy yards from its portico. Thisbuilding is more utterly ruined than either of the preceding, and itsdimensions are open to some doubt. On the whole, it seems probable thatit resembled the great propylaea at the head of the stairs leading fromthe plain rather than the central propylaea just described. Part of itsornamentation was certainly a colossal bull, though whether human-headedor not cannot be determined. 

The fourth of the propylaea was on the terrace whereon stood the palaceof Xerxes, and directly fronting the landing-place at the head of itsprincipal stairs, just as the propylaea first described fronted thegreat stairs leading up from the plain. Its dimensions were suited tothose of the staircase which led to it, and of the terrace on which itwas placed. It was less than one fourth the size of the great propylaea, and about half that of the propylaea which stood the nearest to it. The bases of the four pillars alone remain in situ; but, from theproportions thus obtained, the position of the walls and doorways istolerably certain. 

We have now to pass to the most magnificent of the Perse-politanbuildings--the Great Pillared Halls--which constitute the glory of Arianarchitecture, and which, even in their ruins, provoke the wonder andadmiration of modern Europeans, familiar with all the triumphs ofWestern art, with Grecian temples, Roman baths and amphitheatres, Moorish palaces, Turkish mosques, and Christian cathedrals. Of thesepillared halls, the Persepolitan platform supports two, slightlydiffering in their design, but presenting many points of agreement. Theybear the character of an earlier and a later building--a first effortin the direction which circumstances compelled the architecture of thePersians to take, and the final achievement of their best artists inthis kind of building. 

Nearly midway in the platform between its northern and its southernedges, and not very far from the boundary of rocky mountain on whichthe platform abuts towards the east, is the vast edifice which has beencalled with good reason the "Hall of a Hundred Columns, " since itsroof was in all probability supported by that number of pillars. Thisbuilding consisted of a single magnificent chamber, with a portico, andprobably guard-rooms, in front, of dimensions quite unequalled uponthe platform. The portico was 183 feet long by 52 feet deep, and wassustained by sixteen pillars, about 33 feet high, arranged in two rowsof eight. The great chamber behind was a square of 227 feet, and hadtherefore an area of about 51, 000 feet. Over this vast space weredistributed, at equal distances from one another, one hundred columns, each 35 feet high, arranged in ten rows of ten each, every pillar thusstanding at a distance of nearly 20 feet from any other. The four wallswhich enclosed this great hall had a uniform thickness of 10 1/2 feet, and were each pierced at equal intervals by two doorways, the doorwaysbeing thus exactly opposite to one another, and each looking down anavenue of columns. In the spaces of wall on either side of the doorways, eastward, westward, and southward, were three niches, all square-topped, and bearing the ornamentation which is universal in the case of allniches, windows, and doorways in the Persepolitan ruins. [PLATE XLVII. , Fig. 2. ] In the northern, or front, wall, the niches were replaced bywindows looking upon the portico, excepting towards the angles of thebuilding, where niches were retained, owing to a peculiarity in theplan of the edifice which has now to be noticed. The portico, insteadof being, as in every other Persian instance, of the same width with thebuilding which it fronted, was 44 feet narrower, its antce projectingfrom the front wall, not at either extremity, but at the distance of 11feet from the corner. While the porch was thus contracted, so that thepillars had to be eight in each row instead of ten, space was left oneither side for a narrow guard-room opening on to the porch, indicationsof which are seen in the doorways placed at right angles to the frontwall, which are ornamented with the usual figures of soldiers armedwith spear and shield. It has been suggested that the hall was, like thesmaller pillared chambers upon the platform, originally surrounded onthree sides by a number of lesser apartments; and this is certainlypossible: but no trace remains of any such buildings. The ornamentationwhich exists seems to show that the building was altogether of a publiccharacter. Instead of exhibiting attendants bringing articles for thetoilet or the banquet, it shows on its doors the monarch, either engagedin the art of destroying symbolical monsters, or seated on his throneunder a canopy, with the tiara on his head, and the golden sceptre inhis right hand. The throne representations are of two kinds. On thejambs of the great doors leading out upon the porch, we see in the topcompartment the monarch seated under the canopy, accompanied by fiveattendants, while below him are his guards, arranged in five rows often each, some armed with spears and shields, others with spears, shortswords, bows and quivers. Thus the two portals together exhibit thefigures of 200 Persian guardsmen in attendance on the person of theking. The doors at the back of the building present us with a stillmore curious sculpture. On these the throne appears elevated on a loftyplatform, the stages of which, three in number, are upheld by figuresin different costumes, representing apparently the natives of all thedifferent provinces of the Empire. It is a reasonable conjecture thatthis great hall was intended especially for a throne-room, and that inthe representations on these doorways we have figured a structure whichactually existed under its roof (probably at t in the plan)--a platformreached by steps, whereon, in the great ceremonies of state, the royalthrone was placed, in order that the monarch might be distinctly seen atone and the same time by the whole Court. 

[Illustration: PLATE XLVIII. ]

The question of the lighting of this huge apartment presents somedifficulties. On three sides, as already observed, the hall had (sofar as appears) no windows--the places where windows might have beenexpected to occur being occupied by niches. The apparent openings areconsequently reduced to some fifteen, viz. , the eight doorways, andseven windows, which looked out upon the portico, and were thereforeoverhung and had a north aspect. It is clear that sufficient light couldnot have entered the apartment from these--the only visible--apertures. We must therefore suppose either that the walls above the niches werepierced with windows, which is quite possible, or else that light was insome way or other admitted from the roof. The latter is the suppositionof those most competent to decide. M. Flandin conjectures that the roofhad four apertures, placed at the points where the lines drawn fromthe northern to the southern, and those drawn from the eastern to thewestern, doors would intersect one another. He seems to suppose thatthese openings were wholly unprotected, in which case they would haveadmitted, in a very inconvenient way, both the sun and the rain. May wenot presume that, if such openings existed, they were guarded by louvressuch as have been regarded as probably lighting the Assyrian halls, andof which a representation has already been given?

The portico of the Hall of a Hundred Columns was flanked on either sideby a colossal bull, standing at the inner angle of the antes, and thusin some degree narrowing the entrance. Its columns were fluted, andhad in every case the complex capital, which occurs also in the greatpropylaea and in the Hall of Xerxes. It was built of the same sort ofmassive blocks as the south-eastern edifice, or Ancient Palace--blocksoften ten feet square by seven feet thick, and may be ascribed probablyto the same age as that structure. Like that edifice, it is situatedsomewhat low; it has no staircase, and no inscription. We may fairlysuppose it to have been the throne-room or great hall of audience of theearly king who built the South-eastern Palace. 

We have now to describe the most remarkable of all the Persepolitanedifices--a building the remains of which stretch nearly 350 feet in onedirection, while in the other they extend 246 feet. Its ruins consistalmost entirely of pillars, which are divided into four groups. Thelargest of these was a square of thirty-six pillars, arranged in sixrows of six, all exactly equidistant from one another, and coveringan area of above 20, 000 square feet. On three sides of this square, eastward, northward, and westward, were magnificent porches, eachconsisting of twelve columns, arranged in two rows, in line with thepillars of the central cluster. These porches stood at the distance ofseventy feet from the main building, and have the appearance of havingbeen entirely separate from it. They are 143 feet long, by thirty broad, and thus cover each an area of 4260 feet. The most astonishing featurein the whole building is the height of the pillars. These, according tothe measurements of M. Flandin, had a uniform altitude throughout thebuilding of sixty-four feet. Even in their ruin, they tower over everyother erection upon the platform, retaining often, in spite of theeffects of time, an elevation of sixty feet. 

The capitals of the pillars were of three kinds. Those of the sidecolonnades were comparatively simple: they consisted, in each case, ofa single member, formed, in the eastern colonnade, of two half-griffins, with their heads looking in opposite directions [PLATE XLVII, Fig. 2];and, in the western colonnade, of two half-bulls, arranged in thesame manner [PLATE XLVII. , Fig. 3]. The capitals of the pillars in thenorthern colonnade, which faced the great sculptured staircase, andconstituted the true front of the building, were of a very complexcharacter. They may be best viewed as composed of three distinctmembers--first, a sort of lotos-bud, accompanied by pendent leaves;then, above that, a member, composed of volutes like those of the Ionicorder, but placed in a perpendicular instead of a horizontal direction;and at the top, a member composed of two half-bulls, exactly similar tothat which forms the complete capital of the western group of pillars. The pillars of the groat central cluster had capitals exactly like thoseof the northern colonnade. 

The bases of the colonnade pillars are of singular beauty. Bell-shaped, and ornamented with a double or triple row of pendent lotus-leaves, somerounded, some narrowed to a point; they are as graceful as they are rarein their forms, and attract the admiration of all beholders. Above themrise the columns, tapering gently as they ascend, but without any swellor entasis. They consist of several masses of stone, carefully joinedtogether, and secured at the joints by an iron cramp in the direction ofthe column's axis. All are beautifully fluted along their entire length, the number of the incisions or flutings being from forty-eight tofifty-two in each pillar. They are arcs of circles smaller thansemicircles, thus resembling those of the Doric, rather than those ofthe Ionic or Corinthian order. The cutting of all is very exact andregular. 

There can be little doubt but that both the porches, and thegreat central pillar-cluster, were roofed in. The double-bull anddouble-griffin capital are exactly suited to receive the ends of beams, which would stretch from pillar to pillar, and support a roof and anentablature. [PLATE L. , Fig. 1. ] We may see in the entrances to the royaltombs the true use of pillars in a Persian building, and the characterof the entablature which, they were intended to sustain, Assuming, then, that both the great central pillar phalanx and the three detachedcolonnades supported a roof, the question arises, were the colonnadesin any way united with the main building, or did they stand completelydetached from it? It has been supposed that they were all porticos _inantis_, connected with the main building by solid walls--that the greatcentral column-cluster was surrounded on all sides by a wall of a verymassive description, from the four corners of which similar barrierswere carried down to the edge of the terrace, abutting in front uponthe steps of the great sculptured staircase, and extending eastward andwestward, so as to form the antce of an eastern and a western portico. In the two corners between the northern in _antae_ of the side porticosand the _antae_ of the portico in front are supposed to have been largeguard-rooms, entirely filling up the two angles. The whole building isthus brought into close conformity with the "Palace of Xerxes, " fromwhich it is distinguished only by its superior size, its use of stonepillars, and the elongation of the tetrastyle chambers at the sides ofthat edifice into porticos of twelve pillars each. 

[Illustration: PLATE L. ]

The ingenuity of this conception is unquestionable; and one is temptedat first sight to accept a solution which removes so much that ispuzzling, and establishes so remarkable a harmony between works whoseoutward aspect is so dissimilar. It seems like the inspiration of geniusto discern so clearly the like in the unlike, and one inclines at firstto believe that what is so clever cannot but be true. But a rigorousexamination of the evidence leads to an opposite conclusion, and if itdoes not absolutely disprove Mr. Fergusson's theory, at any rate showsit to be in the highest degree doubtful. Such walls as he describes, with their _antae_ and their many doors and windows, should have leftvery marked traces of their existence in great squared pillars at thesides of porticos, in huge door-frames and window-frames, or at leastin the foundations of walls, or, the marks of them, on some part of thepaved terrace. Now the entire absence of squared pillars for the endsof antce, of door-frames, and window-frames, or even of such sculpturedfragments as might indicate their former existence, is palpable and isadmitted; nor is there any even supposed trace of the walls, exceptingin one of the lines which by the hypothesis they would occupy. In frontof the building, midway between the great pillar-cluster and the northcolonnade, are the remains of four stone bases, parallel to one another, each seventeen feet long by five feet six inches wide. Mr. Fergussonregards these bases as marking the position of the doors in his frontwall; and they are certainly in places where doors might have beenlooked for, if the building had a front wall, since the openings areexactly opposite the inter-columniations of the pillars, both in theportico and in the main cluster. But there are several objections to thenotion of these bases being the foundations of the jambs of doors. Inthe first place, they are too wide apart, being at the distance from oneanother of seventeen feet, whereas no doorway on the platform exceeds awidth of twelve or thirteen feet. In the second place, if these massivestone bases were prepared for the jambs of doors, it could only havebeen for massive stone jambs like those of the other palaces; butin that case, the jambs could not have disappeared. Thirdly, if thedoorways on this side were thus marked, why were they not similarlymarked on the other sides of the building? On the whole, the suppositionof M. Flandin, that the bases were pedestals for ornamental statues, perhaps of bulls, seems more probable than that of Mr. Fergusson;though, no doubt, there are objections also to M. Flandin's hypothesis, and it would be perhaps best to confess that we do not know the use ofthese strange foundations, which have nothing that at all resembles themupon the rest of the platform. 

Another strong objection to Mr. Fergusson's theory, and one of whichhe, to a certain extent, admits the force, is the existence of drains, running exactly in the line of his side walls, which, if such wallsexisted, would be a curious provision on the part of the architect forundermining his own work. Mr. Fergusson supposes that they might beintended to drain the walls themselves and keep them dry. But as it isclear that they must have carried off the whole surplus water fromthe roof of the building, and as there is often much rain and snowat Persepolis, their effect on the foundations of such a wall as Mr. Fergusson imagines would evidently be disastrous in the extreme. 

To these minute and somewhat technical objections may be added themain one, whereof all alike can feel the force--namely, the entiredisappearance of such a vast mass of building as Mr. Fergusson'shypothesis supposes. To account for this, Mr. Fergusson is obliged tolay it down, that in this magnificent structure, with its solidstone staircase, its massive pavement of the same material, and itsseventy-two stone pillars, each sixty-four feet high, the walls were ofmud. Can we believe in this incongruity? Can we imagine that a prince, who possessed an unbounded command of human labor, and an inexhaustiblesupply of stone in the rocky mountains close at hand, would have hadrecourse to the meanest of materials for the walls of an edifice whichhe evidently intended to eclipse all others upon the platform. And, especially, can we suppose this, when the very same prince used solidblocks of stone, in the walls of the very inferior edifice which heconstructed in this same locality? Mr. Fergusson, in defence ofhis hypothesis, alleges the frequent combination of meanness withmagnificence in the East, and softens down the meanness in the presentcase by clothing his mud walls with enamelled tiles, and painting themwith all the colors of the rainbow. But here again the hypothesis iswholly unsupported by fact. Neither at Persepolis, nor at Pasargadae, nor at any other ancient Persian site, has a single fragment of anenamelled tile or brick been discovered. In Babylonia and Assyria, wherethe employment of such an ornamentation was common, the traces of itwhich remain are abundant. Must not the entire absence of such tracesfrom all exclusively Persian ruins be held to indicate that this mode ofadorning edifices was not adopted in Persia?

If then we resign the notion of this remarkable building having been awalled structure, we must suppose that it was a summer throne-room, open to all the winds of heaven, except so far as it was protected bycurtains. For the use of these by the Persians in pillared edifices, wehave important historical authority in the statement already quoted fromthe Book of Esther. The Persian palace, to which that passage directlyrefers, contained a structure almost the exact counterpart of thisat Persepolis; and it is probable that at both places the intersticesbetween the outer pillars of, at any rate, the great central colonnade, were filled with "hangings of white and green and blue, fastened withcords of white and purple to silver rings, " which were attached to the"pillars of marble;" and that by these means an undue supply of lightand air, as well as an unseemly publicity, were prevented. A travellerin the country well observes, in allusion to this passage from Esther:Nothing could be more appropriate than this method at Susa andPersepolis, the spring residences of the Persian monarchs. It must beconsidered that these columnar halls were the equivalents of the modernthrone-rooms, that here all public business was dispatched, and thathere the king might sit and enjoy the beauties of the landscape. Withthe rich plains of Susa and Persepolis before him, he could well, afterhis winter's residence at Babylon, dispense with massive walls, whichwould only check the warm fragrant breeze from those verdant prairiesadorned with the choicest flowers. A massive roof, covering the wholeexpanse of columns, would be too cold and dismal, whereas curtainsaround the central group would serve to admit both light and warmth. Nothing can be conceived better adapted to the climate or the season. 

If the central cluster of pillars was thus adapted to the purposes ofa throne-room, equally well may the isolated colonnades have served asante-chambers or posts for guards. Protected, perhaps, with curtainsor awnings of their own, of a coarser material than those of the mainchamber, or at any rate casting, when the sun was high, a broad and deepshadow, they would give a welcome shelter to those who had to watchover the safety of the monarch, or who were expecting but had not yetreceived their summons to the royal presence. Except in the very hottestweather, the Oriental does not love to pass his day within doors. Seatedon the pavement in groups, under the deep shadows of these colonnades, which commanded a glorious view of the vast fertile plain of theBendamir, of the undulating mountain-tract beyond, and of thepicturesque hills known now as Koh-Istakhr, or Koh-Rhamgherd, thesubjects of the Great King, who had business at Court, would wait, agreeably enough, till their turn came to approach the throne. 

Our survey of the Persepolitan platform is now complete; but, before weentirely dismiss the subject of Persian palaces, it seems proper to saya few words with respect to the other palatial remains of Achasmeniantimes, remains which exist in three places--at Murgab or Pasargadse, atIstakr, and at the great mound of Susa. The Murgab and Istakr ruins werecarefully examined by MM. Coste and Flandin; while General Williams andMr. Loftus diligently explored, and completely made out, the plan of theSusian edifice. 

The ruins at Murgab, which are probably the most ancient in Persia, comprise, besides the well-known "Tomb of Cyrus, " two principalbuildings. The largest of these was of an oblong-square shape, about 147feet long by 116 wide. It seems to have been surrounded by a loftywall, in which were huge portals, consisting of great blocks ofstone, partially hollowed out, to render them portable. There was aninscription on the jambs of each portal, containing the words, "I amCyrus the King, the Achaemenian. " Within the walled enclosure which mayhave been skirted internally by a colonnade was a pillared building, ofmuch greater height than the surrounding walls, as is evident from thesingle column which remains. This shaft, which is perfectly plain, andshows no signs of a capital, has an altitude of thirty-six feet, witha diameter of three feet four inches at the base. On the area around, which was carefully paved, are the bases of seven other similar pillars, arranged in lines, and so situated as apparently to indicate an oblonghall, supported by twelve pillars, in three rows of four each. Thechief peculiarity of the arrangement is, a variety in the width of theintercolumniations, which measure twenty-seven feet ten inches in onedirection, but twenty-one feet only in the other. The smaller building, which is situated at only a short distance from the larger one, covers aspace of 125 feet by fifty. It consists of twelve pillar bases, arrangedin two rows of six each, the pillars being somewhat thicker than thoseof the other building, and placed somewhat closer together. [PLATEXLIX. , Fig. 5. ] The form of the base is very singular. It exhibitsat the side a semicircular bulge, ornamented with a series of nineflutings, which are carried entirely round the base in parallelhorizontal circles. [PLATE L. , Fig. 2. ] In front of the pillar bases, at the distance of about twenty-three feet from the nearest, is a squarecolumn, still upright, on which is sculptured a curious mythologicalfigure, together with the same curt legend, which appears on the largerbuilding--"I am Cyrus, the King, the Achaemenian. "

[Illustration: PLATE XLIX. ]

There are two other buildings at Murgab remarkable for their masonry. One is a square tower, with slightly projecting corners, built ofhewn blocks of stone, very regularly laid, and carried to a heightof forty-two feet. The other is a platform, exceedingly massive andhandsome, composed entirely of squared stone, and faced with blocksoften eight or ten feet long, laid in horizontal courses, and rusticatedthroughout in a manner that is highly ornamental. [PLATE L. Fig. 3. ] Thestyle resembles that of the substructions of the Temple of Jerusalem. It occurs occasionally, though somewhat rarely, in Greece; but thereis said to exist nowhere so extensive and beautiful a specimen of it asthat of the platform at this ancient site. [PLATE L. , Fig. 4. ]

The palace at Istakr is in better preservation than either of the twopillared edifices at Murgab; but still, it is not in such a condition asto enable us to lay down with any certainty even its ground-plan. [PLATELI. , Fig. 1. ] One pillar only remains erect; but the bases of eightothers have been found in situ; the walls are partly to be traced, and the jambs of several doorways and niches are still standing. Theseremains show that in many respects, as in the character of the pillars, which were fluted and had capitals like those already described, in themassiveness of the door and window jambs, and in the thickness ofthe walls, the Istakr Palace resembled closely the buildings on thePersepolitan platform; but at the same time they indicate that its planwas wholly different, and thus our knowledge of the platform buildingsin no degree enables us to complete, or even to carry forward to anyappreciable extent, the ground-plan of the edifice derived from actualresearch. The height of the columns, which is inferior to that of thelowest at the great platform, would seem to indicate, either that thebuilding was the first in which stone pillars were attempted, or thatit was erected at a time when the Persians no longer possessed themechanical skill required to quarry, transport, and raise into place theenormous blocks used in the best days of the nation. 

[Illustration: PLATE LI. ]

The palace of Susa, exhumed by Mr. Loftus and General Williams, consisted of a great Hall or Throne-room, almost exactly a duplicateof the Chehl Minar at Persepolis, and of a few other very inferiorbuildings. It stood at the summit of the great platform, a quadrilateralmass of unburnt brick, which from a remote antiquity had supported theresidence of the old Susian kings. It fronted a little west of north, and commanded a magnificent view over the Susianian plains to themountains of Lauristan. An inscription, repeated on four of itspillar-bases, showed that it was originally built by Darius Hystaspis, and afterwards repaired by Artaxerxes Longimanus. As it was so exactlya reproduction of an edifice already minutely described, no furtheraccount of it need be here given. 

From the palaces of the Persian kings we may now pass to their tombs, remarkable structures which drew the attention of the ancients, andwhich have been very fully examined and represented in modern times. These tombs are eight in number, but present only two types, so thatit will be sufficient to give in this place a detailed account of twotombs--one of each description. 

The most ancient, and, on the whole, the most remarkable of the tombs, is almost universally allowed to be that of the Great Cyrus. It isunique in design, totally different from all the other royal sepulchres;and, though it has been often described, demands, and mustreceive, notice in any account that is given of the ancient Persianconstructions. The historian Arrian calls it "a house upon a pedestal;"and this brief description exactly expresses its general character. On abase, composed of huge blocks of the most beautiful white marble, 1 whichrises pyramidically in seven steps of different heights, there stands asmall "house" of similar material, crowned with a stone roof, whichis formed in front and rear into a pediment resembling that of a Greektemple. [PLATE LI. , Fig. 3. ] The "house" has no window, but one of theend walls was pierced by a low and narrow doorway, which led into asmall chamber or cell, about eleven feet long, seven broad, and sevenhigh. Here, as ancient writers inform us, the body of the Great Cyruswas deposited in a golden coffin. Internally the chamber is destituteof any inscription, and indeed seems to have been left perfectly plain. Externally, there is a cornice of some elegance below the pediment, agood molding over the doorway, which is also doubly recessed--and twoother very slight moldings, one at the base of the "house, " and theother at the bottom of the second step. [PLATE LI. , Fig. 2. ] Except forthese, the whole edifice is perfectly plain. Its present height abovethe ground is thirty-six feet, and it may originally have been a footor eighteen inches higher, for the top of the roof is worn away. Itmeasures at the base forty-seven feet by forty-three feet nine inches. 

The tomb stands within a rectangular area, marked out by pillars, thebases or broken shafts of which are still to be seen. They appear tohave been twenty-four in number; all of them circular and smooth, notfluted; six pillars occupied each side of the rectangle, and they stooddistant from each other about fourteen feet. It is probable that theyoriginally supported a colonnade, which skirted internally a smallwalled court, within which the tomb was placed. The capitals of thepillars, if they had any, have wholly disappeared; and the researchesconducted on the spot have failed to discover any trace of them. 

The remainder of the Persian royal sepulchres are rock-tombs, excavations in the sides of mountains, generally at a considerableelevation, so placed as to attract the eye of the beholder, while theyare extremely difficult of approach. Of this kind of tomb there arefour in the face of the mountain which bounds the Pulwar Valley on thenorth-west, while there are three others in the immediate vicinity ofthe Persepolitan platform, two in the mountain which overhangs it, andone in the rocks a little further to the south. The general shape ofthe excavations, as it presents itself to the eye of the spectator, resembles a Greek cross. [PLATE LII. , Fig. 1. ] This is divided byhorizontal lines into three portions, the upper one (corresponding withthe topmost limb of the cross) containing a very curious sculpturedrepresentation of the monarch worshipping Ormazd; the middle one, whichcomprises the two side limbs, together with the space between them, being carved architecturally so as to resemble a portico; and the thirdcompartment (corresponding with the lowest limb of the cross) being leftperfectly plain. In the centre of the middle compartment is sculpturedon the face of the rock the similitude of a doorway, closely resemblingthose which still stand on the great platform; that is to say, doublyrecessed, and ornamented at the top with lily-work. The upper portion ofthis doorway is filled with the solid rock, smoothed to a flat surfaceand crossed by three horizontal bars. The lower portion, to the heightof four or five feet, is cut away; and thus entrance is given to theactual tomb, which is hollowed out in the rock behind. 

[Illustration: PLATE LII. ]

Thus far the rock tombs, are, with scarcely an exception, of the sametype. The excavations, however, behind their ornamental fronts, presentsome curious differences. In the simplest case of all, we find, onentering, an arched chamber, thirteen feet five inches long by sevenfeet two inches wide, from which there opens out, opposite to the doorand at the height of about four feet from the ground, a deep horizontalrecess, arched, like the chamber. Near the front of this recess is afurther perpendicular excavation, in length six feet ten inches, inwidth three feet three inches, and in depth the same. This was theactual sarcophagus, and was covered, or intended to be covered, by aslab of stone. In the deeper part of the recess there is room for twoother such sarcophagi; but in this case they have not been excavated, one burial only having, it would seem, taken place in this tomb. Othersepulchres present the same general features, but provide for a muchgreater number of interments. In that of Darius Hystaspis the sepulchralchamber contains three distinct recesses, in each of which are threesarcophagi, so that the tomb would hold nine bodies. It has, apparently, been cut originally for a single recess, on the exact plan of the tombdescribed above, but has afterwards been elongated towards the left. [PLATE LIII. , Fig. 1. ] Two of the tombs show a still more elaborateground-plan--one in which curved lines take to some extent the placeof straight ones. [PLATE LII. , Fig. 2. ] The tombs above the platform ofPersepolis are more richly ornamented than the others, the lintelsand sideposts of the doorways being covered with rosettes, and theentablature above the cornice bearing a row of lions, facing on eitherside towards the centre. [PLATE LIII. , Fig. 2. ]

[Illustration: PLATE LIII. ]

A curious edifice, belonging probably to the later Achaemenian times, stands immediately in front of the four royal tombs at Nakhsh-i-Eustam. This is a square tower, composed of large blocks of marble, cut withgreat exactness, and joined together without mortar or cement ofany kind. The building is thirty-six feet high; and each side of itmeasures, as near as possible, twenty-four feet. It is ornamented withpilasters at the corners and with six recessed niches, or false windows, in three ranks, one over the other, on three out of its four faces. Onthe fourth face are two niches only, one over the other; and belowthem is a doorway with a cornice. The surface of the walls between thepilasters is also ornamented with a number of rectangular depressions, resembling the sunken ends of beams. The doorway, which looks north, towards the tombs, is not at the bottom of the building, but half-way upits side, and must have been reached either by a ladder or by a flightof steps. It leads into a square chamber, twelve feet wide by nearlyeighteen high, extending to the top of the building, and roofed in withfour large slabs of stone, which reach entirely across from side toside, being rather more than twenty-four feet long, six feet wide, andfrom eighteen inches to three feet in thickness. [PLATE LIII. , Fig. 3. ]On the top these slabs are so cut that the roof has every way a slightincline; at their edges they are fashioned between the pilasters, intoa dentated cornice, like that which is seen on the tomb. Externally theywere clamped together in the same careful way which we find to have beenin use both at Persepolis and Parsargadae. The building seems to havebeen closed originally by two ponderous stone doors. [PLATE LIV. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE LIV. ]

Another remarkable construction, which must belong to a very ancientperiod in the history of the country, is a gateway composed of enormousstones, which forms a portion of the ruins of Istakr. [PLATE LIV. , Fig. 2. ] It has generally been regarded as one of the old gates of the city;but its position in the gorge between the town wall and the oppositemountain, and the fact that it lies directly across the road fromPasargadae into the plain of Merdasht, seem rather to imply that it wasone of those fortified "gates, " which we know to have been maintained bythe Persians, at narrow points along their great routes, for the purposeof securing them, and stopping the advance of an enemy. On eitherside were walls of vast thickness, on the one hand abutting upon themountain, on the other probably connected with the wall of the town, while between them were three massive pillars, once, no doubt, thesupports of a tower, from which the defenders of the gate would engageits assailants at a great advantage. 

We have now described (so far as our data have rendered it possible)all the more important of the ancient edifices of the Persians, andmay proceed to consider the next branch of the present inquiry, namely, their skill in the mimetic arts. Before, however, the subject of theirarchitecture is wholly dismissed, a few words seem to be required on itsgeneral character and chief peculiarities. 

First, then, the simplicity and regularity of the style are worthy ofremark. In the ground-plans of buildings the straight line only is used;all the angles are right angles; all the pillars fall into line; theintervals between pillar and pillar are regular, and generally equal;doorways are commonly placed opposite intercolumniations; where there isbut one doorway, it is in the middle of the wall which it pierces; wherethere are two, they correspond to one another. Correspondence is thegeneral law. Not only does door correspond to door, and pillar topillar, but room to room, window to window, and even niche to niche. Most of the buildings are so contrived that one half is the exactduplicate of the other; and where this is not the case, the irregularityis generally either slight, or the result of an alteration, madeprobably for convenience sake. Travellers are impressed with the Greciancharacter of what they behold, though there is an almost entire absenceof Greek forms. The regularity is not confined to single buildings, butextends to the relations of different edifices one to another. The sidesof buildings standing on one platform, at whatever distance they may be, are parallel. There is, however, less consideration paid than we shouldhave expected to the exact position, with respect to a main building, in which a subordinate one shall be placed. Propylaea, for instance, are not opposite the centre of the edifice to which they conduct, butslightly on one side of the centre. And generally, excepting in theparallelism of their sides, buildings seem placed with but slight regardto neighboring ones. 

For effect, the Persian architecture must have depended, firstly, upon the harmony that is produced by the observance of regularity andproportion; and, secondly, upon two main features of the style. Thesewere the grand sculptured staircases which formed the approaches to allthe principal buildings, and the vast groves of elegant pillars in andabout the great halls. The lesser buildings were probably ugly, exceptin front. But such edifices as the Chehl Minar at Persepolis, and itsduplicate at Susa--where long vistas of columns met the eye on everyside, and the great central cluster was supported by lighter detachedgroups, combining similarity of form with some variety of ornament, where richly colored drapings contrasted with the cool gray stone of thebuilding, and a golden roof overhung a pavement of many hues--musthave been handsome, from whatever side they were contemplated, and forgeneral richness and harmony of effect may have compared favorablywith any edifices which, up to the time of their construction, had beenerected in any country or by any people. If it may seem to some thatthey were wanting in grandeur, on account of their comparatively lowheight--a height which, including that of the platform, was probably inno case much more than a hundred feet--it must be remembered that thebuildings of Greece and (except the Pyramids) those of Egypt, had thesame defect, and that, until the constructive powers of the arch came tobe understood, it was almost impossible to erect a building that shouldbe at once lofty and elegant. Height, moreover, if the buildings are foruse, implies inconvenience, a waste of time and power being involvedin the ascent and descent of steps. The ancient architects, studyingutility more than effect, preferred spreading out their buildingsto piling them up, and rarely, unless in thickly-peopled towns, evenintroduced a second story. 

The spectator, however, was impressed with a sense of grandeur inanother way. The use of huge blocks of stone, not only in platforms, but in the buildings themselves, in the shafts of pillars, the antae ofporticos, the jambs of doorways, occasionally in roofs, and perhaps inepistylia, produced the same impression of power, and the same feelingof personal insignificance in the beholder, which is commonly effectedby great size in the edifice, and particularly by height. The mechanicalskill required to transport and raise into place the largest of theseblocks must have been very considerable, and their employment causes notmerely a blind admiration of those who so built on the part of ignorantpersons, but a profound respect for them on the part of those who are bytheir studies and tastes best qualified for pronouncing on the relativeand absolute merits of architectural masterpieces. 

Among the less pleasing peculiarities of the Persian architecture may bementioned a general narrowness of doors in proportion to their height, awant of passages, a thickness of walls, which is architecturally clumsy, but which would have had certain advantages in such a climate, aninclination to place the doors of rooms near one corner, an allowance oftwo entrances into a great hall from under a single portico, a peculiarposition of propylaea, and the very large employment of pillars inthe interior of buildings. In many of these points, and also in thearchitectural use which was made of sculpture, the style of buildingresembled, to some extent, that of Assyria; the propylaea, however, wereless Assyrian than Egyptian; while in the main and best features of thearchitecture, it was (so far as we can tell) original. The solid andhandsome stone platforms, the noble staircases, and the profusion oflight and elegant stone columns, which formed the true glory ofthe architecture--being the features on which its effect chieflydepended--have nowhere been discovered in Assyria; and all theevidence is against their existence. The Arians found in Mesopotamia anarchitecture of which the pillar was scarcely an element at all--whichwas fragile and unenduring--and which depended for its effect on alavish display of partially colored sculpture and more richly tintedenamelled brick. Instead of imitating this, they elaborated forthemselves, from the wooden buildings of their own mountain homes, astyle almost exactly the reverse of that with which their victories hadbrought them into contact. Adopting, of main features, nothing but theplatform, they imparted even to this a new character, by substitutingin its construction the best for the worst of materials, and by furthergiving to these stone structures a massive solidity, from the employmentof huge, blocks, which made them stand in the strongest possiblecontrast to the frail and perishable mounds of Babylonia and Assyria. Having secured in this way a firm and enduring basis, they proceeded toerect upon it buildings where the perpendicular line was primary and thehorizontal secondary--buildings of almost, the same solid and massivecharacter as the platform itself--forests of light but strong columns, supporting a wide-spreading roof, sometimes open to the air, sometimesenclosed by walls, according as they were designed for summer or winteruse, or for greater or less privacy. To edifices of this characterelaborate ornamentation was unnecessary; for the beauty of the column issuch that nothing more is needed to set off a building. Sculpturewould thus be dispensed with, or reserved for mere occasional use, andemployed not so much on the palace itself as on its outer approaches;while brick enamelling could well be rejected altogether, as too poorand fragile a decoration for buildings of such strength and solidity. 

The origination of this columnar architecture must be ascribed to theMedes, who, dwelling in or near the more wooden parts of the Zagrosrange, constructed, during the period of their empire, edifices ofconsiderable magnificence, whereof wooden pillars were the principalfeature, the courts being surrounded by colonnades, and the chiefbuildings having porticos, the pillars in both cases being of wood. Awooden roof rested on these supports, protected externally by plates ofmetal. We do not know if the pillars had capitals, or if they supportedan entablature; but probability is in favor of both these arrangementshaving existed. When the Persians succeeded the Medes in thesovereignty of Western Asia, they found Arian architecture in thiscondition. As stone, however, was the natural material of their country, which is but scantily wooded and is particularly barren towards the edgeof the great plateau, where their chief towns were situated, and asthey had from the first a strong desire of fame and a love for thesubstantial and the enduring, they almost immediately substituted forthe cedar and cypress pillars of the Medes, stone shafts, plain orfluted, which they carried to a surprising height, and fixed with suchfirmness that many of them have resisted the destructive powers oftime, of earthquakes, and of vandalism for more than three-and-twentycenturies, and still stand erect and nearly as perfect as when theyreceived the last touch from the sculptor's hand more than 2000 yearsago. It is the glory of the Persians in art to have invented this style, which they certainly did not learn from the Assyrians, and whichthey can scarcely be supposed to have adopted from Egypt, where theconception of the pillar and its ornamentation were wholly different. We can scarcely doubt that Greece received from this quarter the impulsewhich led to the substitution of the light and elegant forms whichdistinguish the architecture of her best period from the rude and clumsywork of the more ancient times. 

Of the mimetic art of the Persians we do not possess any great amount, or any great variety, of specimens. The existing remains consist ofreliefs, either executed on the natural rock or on large slabs of hewnstone used in building, of impressions upon coins, and of a certainnumber of intaglios cut upon gems. We possess no Persian statues, nomodelled figures, no metal castings, no carvings in ivory or in wood, noenamellings, no pottery even. The excavations on Persian sites have beensingularly barren of those minor results which flowed so largelyfrom the Mosopotamian excavations, and have yielded no traces of thefurniture, domestic implements, or wall-ornamentation of the people;have produced, in fact, no small objects at all, excepting a fewcylinders and some spear and arrow heads, thus throwing scarcely anylight on the taste or artistic genius of the people. 

The nearest approach to statuary which we meet with among the Persianremains are the figures of colossal bulls, set to guard portals, or porticos, which are not indeed sculptures in the round, but arespecimens of exceedingly high relief, and which, being carved in frontas well as along the side, do not fall very far short of statues. Ofsuch figures, we find two varieties--one representing the real animal, the other a monster with the body and legs of a bull, the head of aman, and the wings of an eagle. There is considerable merit in bothrepresentations. They are free from the defect of flatness, or want ofbreadth in comparison with the length, which characterizes the similarfigures of Assyrian artists; and they are altogether grand, massive, andimposing. The general proportions of the bulls are good, the limbs areaccurately drawn, the muscular development is well portrayed, and thepose of the figure is majestic. Even the monstrous forms of human-headedbulls have a certain air of quiet dignity, which is not without itseffect on the beholder; and, although implying no great artistic merit, since they are little more than reproductions of Assyrian models, indicate an appreciation of some of the best qualities of Assyrianart--the combination of repose with strength, of great size with themost careful finish, and of strangeness with the absence of any approachto grotesqueness or absurdity. The other Persian reliefs may be dividedunder four heads:

(1) Mythological representations of a man--the king apparently--engagedin combat with a lion, a bull, or a monster; (2) Processions of guards, courtiers, attendants, or tribute-bearers; (3) Representations of themonarch walking, seated upon his throne, or employed in the act ofworship; and (4) Representations of lions and bulls, either singly orengaged in combat. 

On the jambs of doorways in three of the Persepolitan buildings, a humanfigure, dressed in the Median robe, but with the sleeve thrown back fromthe right arm, is represented in the act of killing either a lion, abull, or a grotesque monster. In every case the animal is rampant, andassails his antagonist with three of his feet, while he stands on thefourth. The lion and bull have nothing about them that is very peculiar;but the monsters present most strange and unusual combinations. Oneof them has the griffin head, which we have already seen in use inthe capitals of columns, a feathered crest and neck, a bird's wings, a scorpion's tail, and legs terminating in the claws of an eagle. Theother has an eagle's head, ears like an ass, feathers on the neck, thebreast, and the back, with the body, legs, and tail of a lion. [PLATELV. , Fig. 1. ] Figures of equal grotesqueness, some of which possesscertain resemblances to these, are common in the mythology of Assyria, and have been already represented in these volumes; but the Persianspecimens are no servile imitations of these earlier forms. The idea ofthe Assyrian artist has, indeed, been borrowed; but Persian fancy hasworked it out in its own way, adding, modifying, and subtracting in sucha manner as to give to the form produced a quite peculiar, and (so tospeak) native character. 

[Illustration: PLATE LV. ]

Persian gems abound with monstrous forms, of equal, or even superiorgrotesqueness. As the Gothic architects indulged their imaginationin the most wonderful combinations to represent evil spirits or thevarieties of vice and sensualism, so the Persian gem-engravers seemto have allowed their fancy to run riot in the creation of monsters, representative of the Powers of Darkness or of different kinds of evil, The stones exhibit the king in conflict with a vast variety of monsters, some nearly resembling the Persepolitan, while others have strangeshapes unseen elsewhere. Winged lions, with two tails and with the hornsof a ram or an antelope, sphinxes and griffins of half a dozen differentkinds, and various other nondescript creatures, appear upon the Persiangems and cylinders, furnishing abundant evidence of the quaint andprolific fancy of the designers. 

The processional subjects represented by the Persian artists are ofthree kinds. In the simplest and least interesting the royal guards, orthe officers of the court, are represented in one or more lines of verysimilar figures, either moving in one direction, or standing in twobodies, one facing the other, in the attitude of quiet expectation. Inthese subjects there is a great sameness, and a very small amount ofmerit. The proportion of the forms is, indeed, fairly good, the headsand hands are well drawn, and there is some grace in certain ofthe figures, but the general effect is tame and somewhat heavy; theattitudes are stiff, and present little variety, while, nevertheless, they are sometimes impossible; there is a monotonous repetition ofidentically the same figure, which is tiresome, and a want of groupingwhich is very inartistic. If Persia had produced nothing better thanthis in sculpture, she would have had to be placed not only behindAssyria, but behind Egypt, as far as the sculptor's art is concerned. 

Processional scenes of a more attractive character are, however, tolerably frequent. Some exhibit to us the royal purveyors arriving atthe palace with their train of attendants, and bringing with them theprovisions required for the table of the monarch. Here we have somevarieties of costume which are curious, and some representationsof Persian utensils, which are not without a certain interest. Occasionally, too, we are presented with animal forms, as kids, whichhave considerable merit. 

But by far the most interesting of the processional scenes, are thosewhich represent the conquered nations bringing to the monarch thoseprecious products of their several countries which the Lord of Asiaexpected to receive annually, as a sort of free gift from his subjects, in addition to the fixed tribute which was exacted from them. Here wehave a wonderful variety of costume and equipment, a happy admixture ofanimal with human forms, horses, asses, chariots, sheep, cattle, camels, interspersed among men, and the whole divided into groups by means ofcypress-trees, which break the series into portions, and allow the eyeto rest in succession upon a number of distinct pictures. Processions ofthis kind occurred on several of the Persepolitan staircases; but by farthe most elaborate and complete is that on the grand steps in front ofthe Chehl Minar, or Great Hall of Audience, where we see above twentysuch groups of figures, each with it own peculiar features, and allfinished with the utmost care and delicacy. The illustration [PLATE LV. , Fig. 2], which is taken from a photograph, will give a tolerable ideaof the general character of this relief; it shows the greater portion ofsix groups, whereof two are much injured by the fall of the parapet-wallon which they were represented, while the remaining four are in goodpreservation. It will be noticed that the animal forms--the Bactriancamel and the humped ox--are superior to the human, and haveconsiderable positive merit as works of art. This relative superiorityis observable throughout the entire series, which contains, besidesseveral horses (some of which have been already represented in thesevolumes), a lioness, an excellent figure of the wild ass, and twotolerably well-drawn sheep. [PLATE LVI. , Fig. 2 and 3. ]

[Illustration: PLATE LVI. ]

The representations of the monarch upon the reliefs are of three kinds. In the simplest, he is on foot, attended by the parasol-bearer andthe napkin-bearer, or by the latter only, apparently in the act ofproceeding from one part of the palace to another. In the more elaboratehe is either seated on an elevated throne, which is generally supportedby numerous caryatid figures, or he stands on a platform similarlyupheld, in the act of worship before an altar. This latter is theuniversal representation upon tombs, while the throne scenes arereserved for palaces. In both representations the supporting figuresare numerous; and it is here chiefly that we notice varieties ofphysiognomy, which are evidently intended to recall the differencesin the physical type of the several races by which the Empire wasinhabited. In one case, we have a negro very well portrayed; in otherswe trace the features of Scyths or Tatars. It is manifest that theartist has not been content to mark the nationality of the differentfigures by costume alone, but has aimed at reproducing upon the stonethe physiognomic peculiarities of each race. 

The purely animal representations which the bas-reliefs bring before usare few in number, and have little variety of type. The most curious andthe most artistic is one which is several times repeated at Persepolis, where it forms the usual ornamentation of the triangular spaces on thefacades of stairs. This is a representation of a combat between a lionand a bull, or (perhaps, we should rather say) a representation of alion seizing and devouring a bull; for the latter animal is evidentlypowerless to offer any resistance to the fierce beast which has sprungupon him from behind, and has fixed both fangs and claws in his body. [PLATE LVI. , Fig. 4. ] In his agony the bull rears up his fore-parts, andturns his head feebly towards his assailant, whose strong limbs and jawshave too firm a hold to be dislodged by such struggles as his unhappyvictim is capable of making. In no Assyrian drawing is the massivenessand strength of the king of beasts more powerfully rendered than inthis favorite group, which the Persian sculptors repeated without theslightest change from generation to generation. The contour of the lion, his vast muscular development, and his fierce countenance are reallyadmirable, and the bold presentation of the face in full, instead of inprofile, is beyond the ordinary powers of Oriental artists. 

Drawings of bulls and lions in rows, where each animal is the exactcounterpart of all the others, are found upon the friezes of some of thetombs, and upon the representations of canopies over the royal throne. These drawings are fairly spirited, but have not any extraordinarymerit. They reproduce forms well known in Assyria. A figure of a sittinglion seems also to have been introduced occasionally on the facades ofstaircases, occurring in the central compartment of the parapet-wall attop. These figures, in no case, remain complete; but enough is leftto show distinctly what the attitude was, and this appears not to haveresembled very closely any common Assyrian type. [PLATE LVII. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE LVII. ]

The Persian gem-engravings have considerable merit, and need not fear acomparison with those of any other Oriental nation. They occur uponhard stones of many different kinds, as cornelian, onyx, rock-crystal, sapphirine, sardonyx, chalcedony, etc. , and are executed for the mostpart with great skill and delicacy. The designs which they embody are ingeneral of a mythological character; but sometimes scenes of real lifeoccur upon them, and then the drawing is often good, and almostalways spirited. In proof of this, the reader may be referred to thehunting-scenes already given, which are derived wholly from this source, as well as to the gems figured [PLATE LVI. , Fig. 3], one of which iscertainly, and the other almost certainly, of Persian workmanship. Inthe former we see the king, not struggling with a mythological lion butengaged apparently in the actual chase of the king of beasts Two lionshave been roused from their lairs, and the monarch hastily places anarrow on the string, anxious to despatch one of his foes before theother can come to close quarters The eagerness of the hunter and thespirit and boldness of the animals are well represented. In the othergem, while there is less of artistic excellence, we have a scene ofpeculiar interest placed before us. A combat between two Persians andtwo Cythians seems to be represented. The latter marked by their peakedcap and their loose trousers, fight with the bow and the battle-axe, the former with the bow and the sword One Scyth is receiving hisdeath-wound, the other is about to let loose a shaft, but seems at thesame time half inclined to fly The steady confidence of the warriorson the one side contrasts well with the timidity and hesitancy of theirweaker and smaller rivals. [PLATE LVII. , Fig. 3. ]

The vegetable forms represented on the gems are sometimes gracefuland pleasing. This is especially the case with palm-trees, a favoritesubject of the artists, who delineated with remarkable success thefeathery leaves, the pendant fruit and the rough bark of thestem. [PLATE LVIII. , Fig 1. ] The lion-hunter represented on thesignet-cylinder of Darius Hystaspis takes place in a palm-grove, andfurnishes the accompanying example of this form of vegetable life. 

[Illustration: PLATE LVIII. ]

One gem, ascribed on somewhat doubtful grounds to the Persians ofAchaemenian times, contains what appears to be a portrait. It is thoughtto be the bust of a satrap of Salamis in Cyprus, and is very carefullyexecuted. If really of Persian workmanship, it would indicate aconsiderable advance in the power of representing the human countenancebetween the time of Darius Hystaspis and that of Alexander [PLATE LVII. Fig. 2. ]

Persian coins are of three principal types. The earliest have on the oneside the figure of a monarch bearing the diadem and armed with the bowand javelin, while on the other there is an irregular indentation of thesame nature with the _quadratum incusum_ of the Greeks. This rude formis replaced in later times by a second design, which is sometimes ahorseman, sometimes the forepart of a ship, sometimes the king drawingan an arrow from his quiver. Another type exhibits on the obverse themonarch in combat with a lion while the reverse shows a galley, or atowered and battlemented city with two lions standing below it, back toback. The third common type has on the obverse the king in his chariot, with his charioteer in front of him, and (generally) an attendantcarrying a fly-chaser behind. The reverse has either the trireme or thebattlemented city. A specimen of each type is given. [PLATE LVII. , Fig. 4. ]

The artistic merit of these medals is not great. The relief is low, and the drawing generally somewhat rude. The head of the monarch in theearly coins is greatly too large. The animal forms are, however, muchsuperior to the human, and the horses which draw the royal chariot, thelions placed below the battlemented city, and the bulls which are foundoccasionally in the same position, must be pronounced truthful andspirited. 

Of the Persian taste in furniture, utensils, personal ornaments and thelike, we need say but little. The throne and footstool of the monarchare the only pieces of furniture represented in the sculptures, and these, though sufficiently elegant in their forms, are not veryremarkable. Costliness of material seems to have been more prized thanbeauty of shape; and variety appears to have been carefully eschewed, one single uniform type of each article occurring in all therepresentations. The utensils represented are likewise few in number, and limited to certain constantly repeated forms. The most elaborate isthe censer, which has been already given. With this is usually seena sort of pail or basket, shaped like a lady's reticule, in which thearomatic gums for burning were probably kept. [PLATE LVIII. , Fig. 5. ]A covered dish, and a goblet with an inverted saucer over it, are alsoforms of frequent occurrence in the hands of the royal attendants; andthe tribute-bearers frequently carry, among their other offerings, bowlsor basons, which, though not of Persian manufacture, were no doubt leftat the court, and took their place among the utensils of the palace. [PLATE LVIII. , Figs. 2 and 3. ]

In the matter of personal ornaments the taste of the Persians seems tohave been peculiarly simple. Earrings were commonly plain rings of gold;bracelets mere bands of the same metal. Collars were circlets of goldtwisted in a very inartificial fashion. There was nothing artisticin the sheaths or hilts of swords, though spear-shafts were sometimesadorned with the representation of an apple or a pomegranate. Dressesseem not to have been often patterned, but to have depended generallyfor their effect on make and color. In all these respects we observea remarkable contrast between the Arian and the Semitic races, extreme simplicity characterizing the one, while the most elaborateornamentation was affected by the other. 

Persia was not celebrated in antiquity for the production of any specialfabrics. The arts of weaving and dyeing were undoubtedly practised inthe dominant country, as well as in most of the subject provinces, andthe Persian dyes seem even to have had a certain reputation; but noneof the productions of their looms acquired a name among foreign nations. Their skill, indeed, in the mechanical arts generally was, it isprobable, not more than moderate. It was their boast that they weresoldiers, and had won a position by their good swords which gave themthe command of all that was most exquisite and admirable, whether in thenatural world or among the products of human industry. So long as thecarpets of Babylon and Sardis, the shawls of Kashmir and India, the finelinen of Borsippa and Egypt, the ornamental metal-work of Greece, the coverlets of Damascus, the muslins of Babylonia, the multiformmanufactures of the Phoenician towns, poured continually into PersiaProper in the way of tribute, gifts, or merchandise, it was needless forthe native population to engage largely in industrial enterprise. 

To science the ancient Persians contributed absolutely nothing. Thegenius of the nation was adverse to that patient study and thoselaborious investigations from which alone scientific progress ensues. Too light and frivolous, too vivacious, too sensuous for such pursuits, they left them to the patient Babylonians, and the thoughtful, many-sidedGreeks. The schools of Orchoe, Borsippa, and Miletus flourished undertheir sway, but without provoking their emulation, possibly without somuch as attracting their attention. From first to last, from the dawnto the final close of their power, they abstained wholly from scientificstudies. It would seem that they thought it enough to place before theworld, as signs of their intellectual vigor, the fabric of their Empireand the buildings of Susa and Persepolis. 

CHAPTER VI. RELIGION. 

The original form of the Persian religion has been already describedunder the head of the third or Median monarchy. It was identical withthe religion of the Medes in its early shape, consisting mainly inthe worship of Ahura-Mazda, the acknowledgment of a principle ofevil--Angro-Mainyus, and obedience to the precepts of Zoroaster. Whenthe Medes, on establishing a wide-spread Empire, chiefly over races bywhom Magism had been long professed, allowed the creed of their subjectsto corrupt their own belief, accepted the Magi for their priests, andformed the mixed religious system of which an account has been given inthe second volume of this work, the Persians in their wilder country, less exposed to corrupting influences, maintained their original faithin undiminished purity, and continued faithful to their primitivetraditions. The political dependence of their country upon Media duringthe period of the Median sway made no difference in this respect; forthe Medes were tolerant, and did not seek to interfere with the creed oftheir subjects. The simple Zoroastrian belief and worship, overlaid byMagism in the now luxurious Media, found a refuge in the rugged Persianuplands, among the hardy shepherds and cultivators of that unattractiveregion, was professed by the early Achaemenian princes, and generallyacquiesced in by the people. 

The main feature of the religion daring this first period was theacknowledgment and the worship of a single supreme God--"the Lord God ofHeaven"--"the giver (i. E. Maker) of heaven and earth"--the disposer ofthrones, the dispenser of happiness. The foremost place in inscriptionsand decrees was assigned, almost universally, to the "great god, Ormazd. " Every king, of whom we have an inscription more than two linesin length, speaks of Ormazd as his upholder; and the early monarchsmention by name no other god. All rule "by the grace of Ormazd. " FromOrmazd come victory, conquest, safety, prosperity, blessings of everykind. The "law of Ormazd" is the rule of life. The protection of Ormazdis the one priceless blessing for which prayer is perpetually offered. 

While, however, Ormazd holds this exalted and unapproachable position, there is still an acknowledgment made, in a general way, of "othergods. " Ormazd is "the greatest of the gods" (_mathista baganam_). It isa usual prayer to ask for the protection of Ormazd, together with thatof these lesser powers (_hada bagaibish_). Sometimes the phrase isvaried, and the petition is for the special protection of a certainclass of Deities--the _Dii familiares_--or "deities who guard thehouse. "

The worship of Mithra, or the Sun, does not appear in the inscriptionsuntil the reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon, the victor of Cunaxa. It is, however, impossible to doubt that it was a portion of the Persianreligion, at least as early as the date of Herodotus. Probably itbelongs, in a certain sense, to primitive Zoroastrianism, but was keptin the background during the early period, when a less materialisticworship prevailed than suited the temper of later times. 

Nor can it be doubted that the Persians held during this early periodthat Dualistic belief which has been the distinguishing feature ofZoroastrianism from a time long anterior to the commencement of theMedian Empire down to the present day. It was not to be expectedthat this belief would show itself in the inscriptions, unless in thefaintest manner; and it can therefore excite no surprise that they aresilent, or all but silent, on the point in question. Nor need we wonderthat this portion of their creed was not divulged by the Persians toHerodotus or to Xenophon, since it is exactly the sort of subject onwhich reticence was natural and might have been anticipated. Neither thelively Halicarnassian, nor the pleasant but somewhat shallow Athenian, had the gift of penetrating very deeply into the inner mind of aforeign people; added to which, it is to be remembered that they wereunacquainted with Persia Proper, and drew their knowledge of Persianopinions and customs either from hearsay or from the creed and practicesof the probably mixed garrisons which held Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt. 

Persian worship, in these early times, was doubtless that enjoined bythe Zendavesta, comprising prayer and thanksgiving to Ormazd and thegood spirits of his creation, the recitation of Gathas or hymns, theperformance of sacrifice, and participation in the Soma ceremony. Worship seems to have taken place in temples, which are mentioned(according to the belief of most cuneiform scholars) in the Behistuninscription. Of the character of these buildings we can say nothing. It has been thought that those two massive square towers so similar inconstruction, which exist in a more or less ruined condition at Murgaband Nakhsh-i-Rustam, are Persian temples of the early period, built tocontain an altar on which the priests offered victims. But the absenceof any trace of an altar from both, the total want of religious emblems, and the extremely small size of the single apartment which each towercontains, make strongly against the temple theory; not to mention that amuch more probable use may be suggested for the buildings. 

With respect to the altars upon which sacrifice was offered, we are notleft wholly without evidence. The Persian monarchs of the early period, including Darius Hystaspis, represented themselves on their tombs in theact of worship. Before them, at the distance of a few feet, stands analtar, elevated on three steps, and crowned with the sacrificial fire. Its form is square, and its only ornaments are a sunken squared recess, and a strongly projecting cornice at top. The height of the altar, including the steps, was apparently about four and a half feet. [PLATELVIII. , Fig. 4. ]

The Persians' favorite victim was the horse; but they likewisesacrificed cattle, sheep, and goats. Human sacrifices seem to have beenalmost, if not altogether, unknown to them, and were certainly alien tothe entire spirit of the Zoroastrian system. The flesh of the victim wasprobably merely shown to the sacred fire, after which it was eaten bythe priests, the sacrificer, and those whom the latter associated withhimself in the ceremony. 

The spirit of the Zendavesta is wholly averse to idolatry, and we mayfully accept the statement of Herodotus that images of the gods wereentirely unknown to the Persians. Still, they did not deny themselves acertain use of symbolic representations of their deities, nor didthey even scruple to adopt from idolatrous nations the forms of theirreligious symbolism. The winged circle, with or without the addition ofa human figure, which was in Assyria the emblem of the chief Assyriandeity, Asshur, became with the Persians the ordinary representation ofthe Supreme God, Ormazd, and, as such, was placed in most conspicuouspositions on their rock tombs and on their buildings. [PLATE LVIII. , Fig. 7. ] Nor was the general idea only of the emblem adopted, but allthe details of the Assyrian model were followed, with one exception. Thehuman figure of the Assyrian original wore the close-fitting tunic, withshort sleeves, which was the ordinary costume in Assyria, and had onits head the horned cap which marked a god or a genius. In the Persiancounterpart this costume was exchanged for the Median robe, and a tiara, which was sometimes that proper to the king, 23 sometimes that worn withthe Median robe by court officers. [PLATE LVIII. , Fig. 7. ]

Mithra, or the Sun, is represented in Persian sculptures by a disk ororb, which is not four-rayed like the Assyrian, but perfectly plainand simple. In sculptures where the emblems of Ormazd and Mithra occurtogether, the position of the former is central, that of the lattertowards the right hand of the tablet. The solar emblem is universal onsculptured tombs, but is otherwise of rare occurrence. 

Spirits of good and evil, the Ahuras and Devas of the mythology, wererepresented by the Persians under human, animal, or monstrous forms. There can be little doubt that it is a good genius--perhaps the"well-formed, swift, tall Serosh"--who appears on one of the squarepillars set up by Cyrus at Pasargadae. This figure is that of a colossalman, from whose shoulders issue four wings, two of which spread upwardsabove his head, while the other two droop and reach nearly to his feet. [PLATE LIX. ] It stands erect, in profile, with both arms raised and thehands open. The costume of the figure is remarkable. It consists of along fringed robe reaching from the neck to the ankles--apparently ofa stiff material, which conceals the form--and of a very singularhead-dress. This is a striped cap, closely fitting the head, overshadowed by an elaborate ornament, of a character purely Egyptian. First there rise from the top of the cap two twisted horns, which, spreading right and left, become a sort of basis for the other forms torest upon. These consist of two grotesque human-headed figures, one ateither side, and of a complex triple ornament between them, clumsilyimitated from a far more elegant Egyptian model. [PLATE LX. , Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE LIX. ]

The winged human-headed bulls, which the Persians adopted from theAssyrians, with very slight modifications, were also, it is probable, regarded as emblems of some god or good genius. They would scarcelyotherwise have been represented on Persian cylinders as upholding theemblem of Ormazd in the same way that human-headed bulls uphold thesimilar emblem of Asshur on Assyrian cylinders. [PLATE LX. , Fig. 2. ]Their position, too, at Persepolis, where they kept watch over theentrance to the palace, accords with the notion that they representedguardian spirits, objects of the favorable regard of the Persians. Yetthis view is not wholly free from difficulty. The bull appears inthe bas-reliefs of Persepolis among the evil, or at any rate hostile, powers, which the king combats and slays; and though in theserepresentations the animal is not winged or human-headed, yet on somecylinders apparently Persian, the monarch contends with bulls of exactlythe same type as that which is assigned in other cylinders to theupholders of Ormazd. It would seem therefore that in this case thesymbolism was less simple than usual, the bull in certain combinationsand positions representing a god or a good spirit, while in others hewas the type of a deva or evil genius. 

[[Illustration: PLATE LX. ]

The most common representatives of the Evil Powers of the mythologywere lions, winged or unwinged, and monsters of several differentdescriptions. At Persepolis the lions which the king stabs or stranglesare of the natural shape, and this type is found also upon gems andcylinders; but on these last the king's antagonist is often a winged, while sometimes he is a winged and horned, lion. [PLATE LX. , Fig. 3. ]The monsters are of two principal types. In both the forms of a bird anda beast are commingled; but in the one the bird, and in the other thebeast predominates. Specimens are given [PLATE LX. , Fig. 4] taken fromPersian gems and cylinders. 

Such seems to have been, in outline, the purer and more ancient formof the Persian religion. During its continuance a fierce iconoclasticspirit animated the princes of the Empire, who took every opportunity ofshowing their hatred and contempt for the idolatries of the neighboringnations, burning temples, confiscating or destroying images, scourgingor slaying idolatrous priests, putting a stop to festivals, disturbing tombs, smiting with the sword animals believed to be divineincarnations. Within their own dominions the fear of stirring upreligious wars compelled them to be moderately tolerant, unless itwere after rebellion, when a province lay at their mercy; but when theyinvaded foreign countries, they were wont to exhibit in the most openand striking way their aversion to materialistic religions. In Greece, during the great invasion, they burned every temple that they came near;in Egypt, on their first attack, they outraged every religious feelingof the people. 

It was during this time of comparative purity, when the anti-idolatrousspirit was in full force, that a religious sympathy seems to have drawntogether the two nations of the Persians and the Jews. Cyrus evidentlyidentified Jehovah with Ormazd, and, accepting as a divine command theprophecy of Isaiah, undertook to rebuild their temple for a people who, like his own, allowed no image of God to defile the sanctuary. Darius, similarly, encouraged the completion of the work, after it had beeninterrupted by the troubles which followed the death of Cambyses. Thefoundation was thus laid for that friendly intimacy between the twopeoples, of which we have abundant evidence in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, a friendly intimacy which caused the Jews tocontinue faithful to Persia to the last, and to brave the conquerorof Issus rather than desert masters who had shown them kindness andsympathy. 

The first trace that we have of a corrupting influence being broughtto bear on the Persian religion is connected with the history of thepseudo-Smerdis. According to Herodotus, Cambyses, when he set out onhis Egyptian expedition, left a Magus, Patizeithes, at the capital, ascomptroller of the royal household. The conferring of an office of suchimportance on the priest of an alien religion is the earliest indicationwhich we have of a diminution of zeal for their ancestral creed on thepart of the Achaemenian kings, and the earliest historical proof of theexistence of Magism beyond the limits of Media. Magism was really, itis probable, an older creed than Zoroastrianism in the country where thePersians were settled; but it now, for the first time since the Persianconquest, began to show itself, to thrust itself into high places, andto attract general notice. From being the religion of the old Scythictribes whom the Persians had conquered and whom they held in subjection, it had passed into being the religion of great numbers of the Persiansthemselves. The same causes which had corrupted Zoroastrianism in Mediasoon after the establishment of the Empire, worked also, though moreslowly, in Persia, and a large section of the nation was probably weanedfrom its own belief, and won over to Magism, before Cambyses wentinto Egypt. His prolonged absence in that country brought matters toa crisis. The Magi took advantage of it to attempt a substitutionof Magism for Zoroastrianism as the religion of the state. Whenthis attempt failed, there was no doubt a reaction for a time, andZoroastrianism thought itself triumphant. But a foe is generally mostdangerous when he is despised. Magism, repulsed in its attempt to oustthe rival religion, derived wisdom from the lesson, and thenceforth setitself to sap the fortress which it could not storm. Little by littleit crept into favor, mingling itself with the old Arian creed, notdisplacing it, but only adding to it. In the later Persian system theDualism of Zoroaster and the Magian elemental worship were jointlyprofessed--the Magi were accepted as the national priests--the rightsand ceremonies of the two religions were united--a syncretism notunusual in the ancient world blended into one two creeds originallyquite separate and distinct, but in few respects antagonistic--and thename of Zoroaster being still fondly cherished in the memory of thenation, while in their practical religion Magian rites predominated, the mixed religion acquired the name, by which it was known to the laterGreeks, of "the Magism of Zoroaster. "

The Magian rites have been described in the chapter on the MedianReligion. Their leading feature was the fire-worship, which is stillcherished among those descendants of the ancient Persians who didnot submit to the religion of Islam. On lofty spots in the highmountain-chain which traversed both Media and Persia, fire-altars wereerected, on which burnt a perpetual flame, watched constantly lest itshould expire, and believed to have been kindled from heaven. Over thealtar in most instances a shrine or temple was built; and on thesespots day after day the Magi chanted their incantations, displayedtheir barsoms or divining-rods, and performed their choicest ceremonies. Victims were not offered on these fire-altars. When a sacrifice tookplace, a fire was laid hard-by with logs of dry wood, stript of theirbark, and this was lighted from the flame which burned on the altar. On the fire thus kindled was consumed a small part of the fat of thevictim; but the rest was cut into joints, boiled, and eaten or soldby the worshipper. The true offering, which the god accepted, was, according to the Magi, the soul of the animal. 

If human victims were ever really offered by the Persians as sacrifices, it is to Magian influence that the introduction of this horrid practicemust be attributed, since it is utterly opposed to the whole spirit ofZoroaster's teaching. An instance of the practice is first reported inthe reign of Xerxes, when Magism, which had been sternly repressed byDarius Hystaspis, began once more to lift its head, crept into favorat Court, and obtained a status which it never afterwards forfeited. According to Herodotus, the Persians, on their march into Greece, sacrificed, at Ennea Hodoi on the Strymon river, nine youths and ninemaidens of the country, by burying them alive. Herodotus seems to haveviewed the act as done in propitiation of a god resembling the GrecianPluto; but it is not at all certain that he interpreted it correctly. Possibly he mistook a vengeance for a religious ceremony. The Brygi, whodwelt at this time in the vicinity of Ennea Hodoi, had given Mardoniusa severe defeat on a former occasion; and the Persians were apt totreasure up such wrongs, and visit them, when occasion offered, withextreme severity. 

When the Persians had once yielded to the syncretic spirit so far as tounite the Magian tenets and practices with their primitive belief, theywere naturally led on to adopt into their system such portions of theother religions, with which they were brought into close contact, aspossessed an attraction for them. Before the date of Herodotus they hadborrowed from the Babylonians the worship of a Nature-Goddess, whom theGreeks identified at one time with Aphrodite, at another with Artemis, at another (probably) with Here, and had thus made a compromise with oneof the grossest of the idolatries which, theoretically, they despisedand detested. The Babylonian Venus, called in the original dialect ofher native country Nana, was taken into the Pantheon of the Persians, under the name of Nansea, Anaea, Anaitis, or Tanata, and became in alittle while one of the principal objects of Persian worship. At firstidolatry, in the literal sense, was avoided; but Artaxerxes Mnemon, theconqueror of Cunaxa, an ardent devotee of the goddess, not content withthe mutilated worship which he found established, resolved to show hiszeal by introducing into all the chief cities of the Empire the imageof his patroness. At Susa, at Persepolis, at Babylon, at Ecbatana, atDamascus, at Sardis, at Bactra, images of Anaitis were set up by hisauthority for the adoration of worshippers. It is to be feared that atthis time, if not before, the lascivious rites were also adopted, whichthroughout the East constituted the chief attraction of the cult ofVenus. 

With the idolatry thus introduced, another came soon to be joined. Mithra, so long an object of reverence, if not of actual worship, tothe Zoroastrians, was in the reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon, honored, likeAnaitis, with a statue, and advanced into the foremost rank of deities. The exact form which the image took is uncertain; but probability is infavor of the well-known type of a human figure slaying a prostrate bull, which was to the Greeks and Romans the essential symbol of the Mithraicworship. The intention of this oft-repeated group has been wellexplained by Hyde, who regards it as a representation of the Sunquitting the constellation of Taurus, the time when in the East hisfructifying power is the greatest. The specimens which we possess ofthis group belong to classical art and to times later than Alexander;but we can scarcely suppose the idea to have been Occidental. TheWestern artists would naturally adopt the symbolism of those from whomthey took the rites, merely modifying its expression in accordance withtheir own aesthetic notions. 

Towards the close of the Empire two other gods emerged from theobscurity in which the lower deities of the Zoroastrian system wereshrouded during the earlier and purer period. Vohu-manu, or Bah-man, and Amerdat, or Amendat, two of the councillors of Ormazd, became theobjects of a worship, which was clearly of an idolatrous character. Shrines were built in their honor, and were frequented by companiesof Magi, who chanted their incantations, and performed their ritesof divination in these new edifices as willingly as in the oldFire-temples. The image of Bah-man was of wood, and was borne inprocession on certain occasions. 

Thus as time went on, the Persian religion continually assimilateditself more and more to the forms of belief and worship which prevailedin the neighboring parts of Asia. Idolatries of several kinds cameinto vogue, some adopted from abroad, others developed out of theirown system. Temples, some of which had a character of extraordinarymagnificence, were erected to the honor of various gods; and thedegenerate descendants of pure Zoroastrian spiritualists bowed down toimages, and entangled themselves in the meshes of a sensualistic andmost debasing Nature-worship. Still, amid whatsoever corruptions, theDualistic faith was maintained. The supremacy of Ormazd was from firstto last admitted. Ahriman retained from first to last the same characterand position, neither rising into an object of worship, nor sinking intoa mere personification of evil. The inquiries which Aristotle caused tobe made, towards the very close of the Empire, into the true nature ofthe Persian Religion, showed him Ormazd and Ahriman still recognizedas Principles, still standing in the same hostile and antitheticalattitude, one towards the other, which they occupied when the firstFargard of the Vendidad was written, long anterior to the rise of thePersian Power. 

CHAPTER VII. CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY. 

"I saw the man pushing westward, and northward, and southward; sothat no beast might stand before him, neither was there any that coulddeliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and becamegreat. "--Daniel, viii. 4. 

The history of the Persian Empire dates from the conquest of Astyages byCyrus, and therefore commences with the year B. C. 558. But the presentinquiry must be carried considerably further back, since in this, asin most other cases, the Empire grew up out of a previously existingmonarchy. Darius Hystaspis reckons that there had been eight Persianskings of his race previously to himself; and though it is no doubtpossible that some of the earlier names may be fictitious, yet we canscarcely suppose that he was deceived, or that he wished to deceive, asto the fact that long anterior to his own reign, or that of his eldercontemporary, Cyrus, Persia had been a monarchy, governed by a line ofprinces of the same clan, or family, with himself. It is our business inthis place, before entering upon the brilliant period of the Empire, tocast a retrospective glance over the earlier ages of obscurity, andto collect therefrom such scattered notices as are to be found of thePersians and their princes or kings before they suddenly attractedthe general attention of the civilized world by their astonishingachievements under the great Cyrus. 

The more ancient of-the sacred books of the Jews, while distinctlynoticing the nation of the Medes, contain no mention at all of Persiaor the Persians. The Zendavesta, the sacred volume of the peoplethemselves, is equally silent on the subject. The earliest appearanceof the Persians in history is in the inscriptions of the Assyrian kings, which begin to notice them about the middle of the ninth century B. C. At this time Shalmaneser II. Found them in south-western Armenia, wherethey were in close contact with the Medes, of whom, however, they seemto have been wholly independent. Like the modern Kurds in this sameregion, they owned no subjection to a single head, but were under thegovernment of numerous petty chieftains, each the lord of a single townor of a small mountain district. Shalmaneser informs us that he tooktribute from twenty-five such chiefs. Similar tokens of submission werepaid also to his son and grandson. After this the Assyrian records aresilent as to the Persians for nearly a century, and it is not until thereign of Sennacherib that we once more find them brought into contactwith the power which aspired to be mistress of Asia. At the time oftheir reappearance they are no longer in Armenia, but have descended theline of Zagros and reached the districts which lie north and north-eastof Susiana, or that part of the Bakhtiyari chain which, if it is notactually within Persia Proper, at any rate immediately adjoins upon it. Arrived thus far, it was easy for them to occupy the region to whichthey have given permanent name; for the Bakhtiyari mountains command itand give a ready access to its valleys and plains. 

The Persians would thus appear not to have completed their migrationstill near the close of the Assyrian period, and it is probable thatthey did not settle into an organized monarchy much before the fall ofNineveh. At any rate we hear of no Persian ruler of note or name in theAssyrian records, and the reign of petty chiefs would seem therefore tohave continued at least to the time of Asshur-bani-pal, up to which datewe have ample records. The establishment, however, about the yearB. C. 660, or a little later, of a powerful monarchy in the kindred andneighboring Media, could not fail to attract attention, and might wellprovoke imitation in Persia; and the native tradition appears to havebeen that about this time. Persian royalty began in the person of acertain Achaemenes (Hakhamanish), from whom all their later monarchs, with one possible exception, were proud to trace their descent. 

The name Achaemenes cannot fail to arouse some suspicion. The Greekgenealogies render us so familiar with heroes eponymi--imaginarypersonages, who owe their origin to the mere fact of the existenceof certain tribe or race names, to account for which they wereinvented--that whenever, even in the history of other nations, wehappen upon a name professedly personal, which stands evidently in closeconnection with a tribal designation, we are apt at once to suspect itof being fictitious. But in the East tribal and even ethnic nameswere certainly sometimes derived from actual persons; and it may bequestioned whether the Persians, or the Iranic stock generally, had thenotion of inventing personal eponyms. The name Achaemenes, therefore, in spite of its connection with the royal clan name of Achaemenidae, maystand as perhaps that of a real Persian king, and, if so, as probablythat of the first king, the original founder of the monarchy, who unitedthe scattered tribes in one, and thus raised Persia into a power ofconsiderable importance. 

The immediate successor of Achaemenes appears to have been his son, Teispes. Of him and of the next three monarchs, the information thatwe possess is exceedingly scanty. The very names of one or two in theseries are uncertain. One tradition assigns either to the second or thefourth king of the list the establishment of friendly relations witha certain Pharnaces, King of Cappadocia, by an intermarriage between aPersian princess, Atossa, and the Cappadocian monarch. The existenceof communication at this time between petty countries politicallyunconnected, and placed at such a distance from one another asCappadocia and Persia, is certainly what we should not have expected;but our knowledge of the general condition of Western Asia at the periodis too slight to justify us in a positive rejection of the story, whichindicates, if it be true, that even during this time of comparativeobscurity, the Persian monarchs were widely known, and that theiralliance was thought a matter of importance. 

The political condition of Persia under these early monarchs is a moreinteresting question than either the names of the kings or the foreignalliances which they attracted. According to Herodotus, that conditionwas one of absolute and unqualified subjection to the sway of the Medes, who conquered Persia and imposed their yoke upon the people beforethe year B. C. 634. The native records, however, and the accounts whichXenophon preferred, represent Persia as being at this time a separateand powerful state, either wholly independent of Media, or, at anyrate, held in light bonds of little more than nominal dependence. On thewhole, it appears most probable that the true condition of the countrywas that which this last phrase expresses. It maybe doubted whetherthere had ever been a conquest; but the weaker and less developed ofthe two kindred states owned the suzerainty of the stronger, and thoughquite unshackled in her internal administration, and perhaps not verymuch interfered with in her relations towards foreign countries, was, formally, a sort of Median fief, standing nearly in the position inwhich Egypt now stands to Turkey. The position was irksome to thesovereigns rather than unpleasant to the people. It detracted from thedignity of the Persian monarchs, and injured their self-respect; itprobably caused them occasional inconvenience, since from time to timethey would have to pay their court to their suzerain; and it seemstowards the close of the Median period to have involved an obligationwhich must have been felt, if not as degrading, at any rate as verydisagreeable. The monarch appears to have been required to send hiseldest son as a sort of hostage to the Court of his superior, where hewas held in a species of honorable captivity, not being allowed toquit the Court and return home without leave, but being otherwise welltreated. The fidelity of the father was probably supposed to be in thisway secured while it might be hoped that the son would be conciliated, and made an attached and willing dependent. 

When Persian history first fairly opens upon us in the pages of Xenophonand of Nicolaus Damascenus, this is the condition of things which wefind existing. Cambyses, the father of Cyrus the Great--called Atradatesby the Syrian writer--is ruler of Persia, and resides in his nativecountry, while his son Cyrus is permanently, or at any rate usually, resident at the Median Court, where he is in high favor with thereigning monarch, Astyages. According to Xenophon, who has here thesupport of Herodotus, he is Astyages' grandson, his father, Cambyses, being married to Mandane, that monarch's daughter. According toNicolaus, who in this agrees with Ctesias, he is no way related toAstyages, who retains him at his court because he is personally attachedto him. In the narrative of the latter writer, which has already beenpreferred in these volumes, the young prince, while at the Court, conceives the idea of freeing his own country by a revolt, and entersinto secret communication with his father for the furtherance of hisobject. His father somewhat reluctantly assents, and preparations aremade, which lead to the escape of Cyrus and the commencement of a warof independence. The details of the struggle, as they are related byNicolaus, have been already given. After repeated defeats, the Persiansfinally make a stand at Pasargadae, their capital, where in two greatbattles they destroy the power of Astyages, who himself remains aprisoner in the hands of his adversary. 

In the course of the struggle the father of Cyrus had fallen, and itsclose, therefore, presented Cyrus himself before the eyes of the WesternAsiatics as the undisputed lord of the great Arian Empire which hadestablished itself on the ruins of the Semitic. Transfers of sovereigntyare easily made in the East, where independence is little valued, and each new conqueror is hailed with acclamations from millions. Itmattered nothing to the bulk of Astyages' subjects whether they wereruled from Ecbatana or Pasargadae, by Median or Persian masters. Fatehad settled that a single lord was to bear sway over the tribes andnations dwelling between the Persian Gulf and the Euxine; and thearbitrament of the sword had now decided that this single lord should beCyrus. We may readily believe the statement of Nicolaus that the nationspreviously subject to the Medes vied with each other in the celerityand zeal with which they made their submission to the Persian conqueror. Cyrus succeeded at once to the full inheritance of which he haddispossessed Astyages, and was recognized as king by all the tribesbetween the Halys and the desert of Khorassan. 

He was at this time, if we may trust Dino, exactly forty years of age, and was thus at that happy period in life when the bodily powershave not yet begun to decay, while the mental are just reaching theirperfection. Though we may not be able to trust implicitly the details ofthe war of independence which have come down to us, yet there can be nodoubt that he had displayed in its course very remarkable courage andconduct. He had intended, probably, no more than to free his countryfrom the Median yoke; by the force of circumstances he had been led onto the destruction of the Median power, and to the establishment of aPersian Empire in its stead. With empire had come an enormous accessionof wealth. The accumulated stores of ages, the riches of the Ninevitekings--the "gold, " the "silver, " and the "pleasant furniture" of thosemighty potentates, of which there was "none end"--together with all theadditions made to these stores by the Median monarchs, had fallen intohis hands, and from comparative poverty he had come per saltum into theposition of one of the wealthiest--if not of the very wealthiest--ofprinces. An ordinary Oriental would have been content with such aresult, and have declined to tempt fortune any more. But Cyrus wasno ordinary Oriental. Confident in his own powers, active, not to sayrestless, and of an ambition that nothing could satiate, he viewed, the position which he had won simply as a means of advancing himself tohigher eminence. According to Ctesias, he was scarcely seated upon thethrone, when he led an expedition to the far north-east against therenowned Bactrians and Sacans; and at any rate, whether this be true orno--and most probably it is an anticipation of later occurrences--itis certain that, instead of folding his hands, Cyrus proceeded withscarcely a pause on a long career of conquest, devoting his whole lifeto the carrying out of his plans of aggression, and leaving a portionof his schemes, which were too extensive for one life to realize, as alegacy to his successor. The quarter to which he really first turnedhis attention seems to have been the north-west. There, in the somewhatnarrow but most fertile tract between the river Halys and the Egean Sea, was a state which seemed likely to give him trouble--a state which hadsuccessfully resisted all the efforts of the Medes to reduce it, andwhich recently, under a warlike prince, had shown a remarkable powerof expansion. An instinct of danger warned the scarce firmly-settledmonarch to fix his eye at once upon Lydia; in the wealthy and successfulCroesus, the Lydian king, he saw one whom dynastic interests mightnaturally lead to espouse the quarrel of the conquered Mede, and whosepower and personal qualities rendered him a really formidable rival. 

The Lydian monarch, on his side, did not scruple to challenge a contest. The long strife which his father had waged with the great Cyaxareshad terminated in a close alliance, cemented by a marriage, which madeCroesus and Astyages brothers. The friendship of the great power ofWestern Asia, secured by this union, had set Lydia free to pursuea policy of self-aggrandizement in her own immediate, neighborhood. Rapidly, one after another, the kingdoms of Asia Minor had been reduced;and, excepting the mountain districts of Lycia and Cilicia, all Asiawithin the Halys now owned the sway of the Lydian king. Contented withhis successes, and satisfied that the tie of relationship secured himfrom attack on the part of the only power which he had need to fear, Croesus had for some years given himself up to the enjoyment of hisgains and to an ostentatious display of his magnificence. It was a rudeshock to the indolent and self-complacent dreams of a sanguine optimism, which looked that "to-morrow should be as to-day, only much moreabundant, " when tidings came that revolution had raised its head in thefar south-east, and that an energetic prince, in the full vigor of life, and untrammelled by dynastic ties, had thrust the aged Astyages fromhis throne, and girt his own brows with the Imperial diadem. Croesus, according to the story, was still in deep grief on account of theuntimely death of his eldest son, when the intelligence reachedhim. Instantly rousing himself from his despair, he set about hispreparations for the struggle, which his sagacity saw to be inevitable. After consultation of the oracles of Greece, he allied himself with theGrecian community, which appeared to him on the whole to be the mostpowerful. At the same time he sent ambassadors to Babylon and Memphis, to the courts of Labynetus and Amasis, with proposals for an allianceoffensive and defensive between the three secondary powers of theEastern world against that leading power whose superior strength andresources were felt to constitute a common danger. His representationswere effectual. The kings of Babylon and Egypt, alive to their ownperil, accepted his proposals; and a joint league was formed between thethree monarchs and the republic of Sparta for the purpose of resistingthe presumed aggressive spirit of the Medo-Persians. 

Cyrus, meanwhile, was not idle. Suspecting that a weak point in hisadversary's harness would be the disaffection of some of his morerecently conquered subjects, he sent emissaries into Asia Minor to soundthe dispositions of the natives. These emissaries particularly addressedthemselves to the Asiatic Greeks, who, coming of a freedom-loving stock, and having been only very lately subdued, would it was thought, belikely to catch at an opportunity of shaking off the yoke of theirconqueror. But, reasonable as such hopes must have seemed, they were inthis instance doomed to disappointment. The Ionians, instead of hailingCyrus as a liberator, received his overtures with suspicion. Theyprobably thought that they were sure not to gain, and that they mightpossibly lose, by a change of masters. The yoke of Croesus had not, perhaps, been very oppressive; at any rate it seemed to them preferableto "bear the ills they had, " rather than "fly to others" which mightturn out less tolerable. 

Disappointed in this quarter, the Persian prince directed his efforts tothe concentration of a large army, and its rapid advance into a positionwhere it would be excellently placed both for defence and attack. Thefrontier province of Cappadocia, which was only separated from thedominions of the Lydian monarch by a stream of moderate size, theHalys, was a most defensible country, extremely fertile and productive, abounding in natural fastnesses, and inhabited by a brave and warlikepopulation. Into this district Cyrus pushed forward his army with allspeed, taking, as it would seem, not the short route through Diarbekr, Malatiyah, and Gurun, along which the "Royal Road" afterwards ran, but the more circuitous one by Erzerum, which brought him into NorthernCappadocia, or Pontus, as it was called by the Romans. Here, in adistrict named Pteria, which cannot have been very far from the coast, he found his adversary, who had crossed the Halys, and taken severalCappadocian towns, among which was the chief city of the Pterians. Perceiving that his troops considerably outnumbered those of Crcesus, helost no time in giving him battle. The action was fought in the Pteriancountry, and was stoutly contested, terminating at nightfall without anydecisive advantage to either party. The next day neither side made anymovement; and Crcesus, concluding from his enemy's inaction that, thoughhe had not been able to conquer him, he had nothing to fear fromhis desire of vengeance or his spirit of enterprise, determined ona retreat. He laid the blame of his failure, we are told, on theinsufficient number of his troops, and purposed to call for thecontingents of his allies, and renew the war with largely augmentedforces in the ensuing spring. 

Cyrus, on his part, allowed the Lydians to retire unmolested, thusconfirming his adversary in the mistaken estimate which he had formed ofPersian courage and daring. Anticipating the course which Croesus wouldadopt under the circumstances, he kept his army well in hand, and, assoon as the Lydians were clean gone, he crossed the Halys, and marchedstraight upon Sardis. Croesus, deeming himself safe from molestation, had no sooner reached his capital than he had dismissed the bulk ofhis troops to their homes for the winter, merely giving them orders toreturn in the spring, when he hoped to have received auxiliariesfrom Sparta, Babylon, and Egypt. Left thus almost without defence, hesuddenly heard that his audacious foe had followed on his steps, hadventured into the heart of his dominions, and was but a short distancefrom the capital. In this crisis he showed a spirit well worthy ofadmiration. Putting himself at the head of such an army of nativeLydians as he could collect at a few hours' notice, he met the advancingfoe in the rich plain a little to the east of Sardis, and gave himbattle immediately. It is possible that even under these disadvantageouscircumstances he might in fair fight have been victorious, for theLydian cavalry were at this time excellent, and decidedly superiorto the Persian. But Cyrus, aware of their merits, had recourse tostratagem, and by forming his camels in front, so frightened the Lydianhorses that they fled from the field. The riders dismounted and foughton foot, but their gallantry was unavailing. After a prolonged andbloody combat the Lydian army was defeated, and forced to take refugebehind the walls of the capital. 

Croesus now in hot haste sent off fresh messengers to his allies, begging them to come at once to his assistance. He had still a good hopeof maintaining himself till their arrival, for his city was defendedby walls, and was regarded by the natives as impregnable. An attempt tostorm the defences failed; and the siege must have been turned intoa blockade but for an accidental discovery. A Persian soldier hadapproached to reconnoitre the citadel on the side where it was strongestby nature, and therefore guarded with least care, when he observed oneof the garrison descend the rock after his helmet, which had fallen fromhis head, pick it up, and return with it. Being an expert climber, heattempted the track thus pointed out to him, and succeeded in reachingthe summit. Several of his comrades followed in his steps; the citadelwas surprised, and the town taken and plundered. 

Thus fell the greatest city of Asia Minor after a siege of fourteendays. The Lydian monarch, it is said, narrowly escaped with his lifefrom the confusion of the sack; but, being fortunately recognizedin time, was made prisoner, and brought before Cyrus. Cyrus at firsttreated him with some harshness, but soon relented, and, with thatclemency which was a common characteristic of the earlier Persian kings, assigned him a territory for his maintenance, and gave him an honorableposition at Court, where he passed at least thirty years, in high favor, first with Cyrus, and then with Cambyses. Lydia itself was absorbed atonce into the Persian Empire, together with most of its dependencies, which submitted as soon as the fall of Sardis was known. There still, however, remained a certain amount of subjugation to be effected. TheGreeks of the coast, who had offended the Great King by their refusal ofhis overtures, were not to be allowed to pass quietly into the conditionof tributaries; and there were certain native races in the south-westerncorner of Asia Minor which declined to submit without a struggle tothe new conqueror. But these matters were not regarded by Cyrus asof sufficient importance to require his own personal superintendence. Having remained at Sardis for a few weeks, during which time he receivedan insulting message from Sparta, whereto he made a menacing reply, andhaving arranged for the government of the newly-conquered province andthe transmission of its treasures to Ecbatana, he quitted Lydia forthe interior, taking Croesus with him, and proceeded towards theMedian capital. He was bent on prosecuting without delay his schemesof conquest in other quarters--schemes of a grandeur and acomprehensiveness unknown to any previous monarch. 

Scarcely, however, was he departed when Sardis became the scene of aninsurrection. Pactyas, a Lydian, who had been entrusted with the dutyof conveying the treasures of Croesus and his more wealthy subjects toEcbatana, revolted against Tabalus, the Persian commandant of the town, and being joined by the native population and numerous mercenaries, principally Greeks, whom he hired with the treasure that was in hishands, made himself master of Sardis, and besieged Tabalus in thecitadel. The news reached Cyrus while he was upon his march; but, estimating the degree of its importance aright, he did not suffer it tointerfere with his plans. He judged it enough to send a general witha strong body of troops to put down the revolt, and continued his ownjourney eastward. Mazares, a Mede, was the officer selected forthe service. On arriving before Sardis, he found that Pactyas hadrelinquished his enterprise and fled to the coast, and that the revoltwas consequently at an end. It only remained to exact vengeance. Therebellious Lydians were disarmed. Pactyas was pursued with unrelentinghostility, and demanded, in succession, of the Cymaeans, theMytilenseans, and the Chians, of whom the last-mentioned surrenderedhim. The Greek cities which had furnished Pactyas with auxiliaries werethen attacked, and the inhabitants of the first which fell, Priene, wereone and all sold as slaves. 

Mazares soon afterwards died, and was succeeded by Ha-pagus, anotherMede, who adopted a somewhat milder policy towards the unfortunateGreeks. Besieging their cities one by one, and taking them by meansof banks or mounds piled up against the walls, he, in some instances, connived at the inhabitants escaping in their ships, while, in others, he allowed them to take up the ordinary position of Persian subjects, liable to tribute and military service, but not otherwise molested. Solittle irksome were such terms to the Ionians of this period that eventhose who dwelt in the islands off the coast, with the single exceptionof the Samians--though they ran no risk of subjugation, since thePersians did not possess a fleet--accepted voluntarily the sameposition, and enrolled themselves among the subjects of Cyrus. 

One Greek continental town alone suffered nothing during this time oftrouble. When Cyrus refused the offers of submission, which reached himfrom the Ionian and AEolian Greeks after his capture of Sardis, he madean exception in favor of Miletus, the most important of all the Greciancities in Asia. Prudence, it is probable, rather than clemency, dictatedthis course, since to detach from the Grecian cause the most powerfuland influential of the states was the readiest way of weakening theresistance they would be able to make. Miletus singly had defied thearms of four successive Lydian kings, and had only succumbed at lastto the efforts of the fifth, Croesus. If her submission had been nowrejected, and she had been obliged to take counsel of her despair, thestruggle between the Greek cities and the Persian generals might haveassumed a different character. 

Still more different might have been the result, if the citiesgenerally had had the wisdom to follow a piece of advice which the greatphilosopher and statesman of the time, Thales, the Milesian, is saidto have given them. Thales suggested that the Ionians should formthemselves into a confederation, to be governed by a congress whichshould meet at Teos, the several cities retaining their own laws andinternal independence, but being united for military purposes into asingle community. Judged by the light which later events, the greatIonian revolt especially, throw upon it, this advice is seen to havebeen of the greatest importance. It is difficult to say what check, oreven reverse, the arms of Persia might not have at this time sustained, if the spirit of Thales had animated his Asiatic countrymen generally;if the loose Ionic Amphictyony, which in reality left each state inthe hour of danger to its own resources, had been superseded by atrue federal union, and the combined efforts of the thirteen Ioniancommunities had been directed to a steady resistance of Persianaggression and a determined maintenance of their own independence. Mazares and Harpagus would almost certainly have been baffled, and theGreat King himself would probably have been called off from his easternconquests to undertake in person a task which after all he might havefailed to accomplish. 

The fall of the last Ionian town left Harpagus free to turn hisattention to the tribes of the south-west which had not yet made theirsubmission--the Carians, the Dorian Greeks, the Caunians, and the peopleof Lycia. Impressing the services of the newly-conquered Ionians andAEolians, he marched first against Caria, which offered but a feebleresistance. The Dorians of the continent, Myndians, Halicarnassians, andCnidians. Submitted still more tamely, without any struggle at all; butthe Caunians and Lycians showed a different spirit. These tribes, whichwere ethnically allied, and of a very peculiar type, had never yet, itwould seem, been subdued by any conqueror. Prizing highly the libertythey had enjoyed so long, they defended themselves with desperation. When they were defeated in the field they shut themselves up withinthe walls of their chief cities, Caunus and Xanthus, where, findingresistance impossible, they set fire to the two places with their ownhands, burned their wives, children, slaves, and valuables, and thensallying forth, sword in hand, fell on the besiegers' lines, and foughttill they were all slain. 

Meanwhile Cyrus was pursuing a career of conquest in the far east. Itwas now, according to Herodotus, who is, beyond all question, a betterauthority than Ctesias for the reign of Cyrus, that the reduction of theBactrians and the Sacans, the chief nations of what is called by modernsCentral Asia, took place. Bactria was a country which enjoyed thereputation of having been great and glorious at a very early date. Inone of the most ancient portions of the Zendavesta it was celebratedas "Bahhdi eredhwo-drafsha, " or "Bactria" with the lofty banner; andtraditions not wholly to be despised made it the native country ofZoroaster. There is good reason to believe that, up to the date ofCyras, it had maintained its independence, or at any rate that it hadbeen untouched by the great monarchies which for above seven hundredyears had borne sway in the western parts of Asia. Its people wereof the Iranic stock, and retained in their remote and somewhat savagecountry the simple and primitive habits of the race. Though their armswere of indifferent character, they were among the best soldiers tobe found in the East, and always showed themselves a formidable enemy. According to Ctesias, when Cyrus invaded them, they fought a pitchedbattle with his army, in which the victory was with neither party. They were not, he said, reduced by force of arms at all, but submittedvoluntarily when they found that Cyrus had married a Median princess. Herodotus, on the contrary, seems to include the Bactrians among thenations which Cyrus subdued, and probability is strongly in favor ofthis view of the matter. So warlike a nation is not likely to havesubmitted unless to force; nor is there any ground to believe that aMedian marriage, had Cyrus contracted one, would have made him any themore acceptable to the Bactrians. 

On the conquest of Bactria followed, we may be tolerably sure, an attackupon the Sacae. This people, who must certainly have bordered on theBactrians, dwelt probably either on the Pamir Steppe, or on the highplain of Chinese Tartary, east of the Bolar range--the modern districtsof Kashgar and Yarkand. They were reckoned excellent soldiers. Theyfought with the bow, the dagger, and the battle-axe, and were equallyformidable on horseback and on foot. In race they were probably Tatarsor Turanians, and their descendants or their congeners are to be seenin the modern inhabitants of these regions. According to Ctesias, theirwomen took the field in almost equal numbers with their men; and themixed army which resisted Cyrus amounted, including both sexes, to halfa million. The king who commanded them was a certain Amorges, who wasmarried to a wife called Sparethra. In an engagement with the Persianshe fell into the enemy's hands, whereupon Sparethra put herself at thehead of the Sacan forces, defeated Cyrus, and took so many prisonersof importance that the Persian monarch was glad to release Amorges inexchange for them. The Sacse, however, notwithstanding this success, were reduced, and became subjects and tributaries of Persia. 

Among other countries subdued by Cyrus in this neighborhood, probablyabout the same period, may be named Hyrcania, Parthia, Chorasmia, Sogdiana, Aria (or Herat), Drangiana, Arachosia, Sattagydia, andGandaria. The brief epitome which we possess of Ctesias omits to makeany mention of these minor conquests, while Herodotus sums them allup in a single line; but there is reason to believe that the Cnidianhistorian gave a methodized account of their accomplishment, of whichscattered notices have come down to us in various writers. Arrianrelates that there was a city called Cyropolis, situated on theJaxartes, a place of great strength defended by very lofty walls, whichhad been founded by the Great Cyrus. This city belonged to Sogdiana. Pliny states that Capisa, the chief city of Capisene, which lay not farfrom the upper Indus, was destroyed by Cyrus. This place is probablyKafshan, a little to the north of Kabul. Several authors tell us thatthe Ariaspse, a people of Drangiana, assisted Cyrus with provisions whenhe was warring in their neighborhood, and received from him in return anew name, which the Greeks rendered by "Euergetse"--"Benefactors. " TheAriaspae must have dwelt near the Hamoon, or Lake of Seistan. We havethus traces of the conqueror's presence in the extreme north on theJaxartes, in the extreme east in Affghanistan, and towards the south asfar as Seistan and the Helmend; nor can there be any reasonable doubtthat he overran and reduced to subjection the whole of that vast tractwhich lies between the Caspian on the west, the Indus valley and thedesert of Tartary towards the east, the Jaxartes or Sir Deria on thenorth, and towards the south the Great Deserts of Seistan and Khorassan. 

More uncertainty attaches to the reduction of the tract lying southof these deserts. Tradition said that Cyrus had once penetrated intoGedrosia on an expedition against the Indians, and had lost his entirearmy in the waterless and trackless desert; but there is no evidence atall that he reduced the country. It appears to have been a portion ofthe Empire in the reign of Darius Hystaspis, but whether that monarch, or Cambyses, or the great founder of the Persian power conquered it, cannot at present be determined. 

The conquest of the vast tract lying between the Caspian and theIndus, inhabited (as it was) by a numerous, valiant, and freedom-lovingpopulation, may well have occupied Cyrus for thirteen or fourteen years. Alexander the Great spent in the reduction of this region, after theinhabitants had in a great measure lost their warlike qualities, asmuch as five years, or half the time occupied by his whole series ofconquests. Cyrus could not have ventured on prosecuting his enterprises, as did the Macedonian prince, continuously and without interruption, marching straight from one country to another without once revisitinghis capital. He must from time to time have returned to Ecbatana orPasargadae; and it is on the whole most probable that, like the Assyrianmonarchs, he marched out from home on a fresh expedition almost everyyear. Thus it need cause us no surprise that fourteen years wereconsumed in the subjugation of the tribes and nations beyond the Iranicdesert to the north and the north-east, and that it was not till B. C. 539, when he was nearly sixty years of age, that the Persian monarchfelt himself free to turn his attention to the great kingdom of thesouth. 

The expedition of Cyrus against Babylon has been described already. Its success added to the Empire the rich and valuable provinces ofBabylonia, Susiana, Syria, and Palestine, thus augmenting its size byabout 240, 000 or 250, 000 square miles. Far more important, however, than this geographical increase was the removal of the last formidablerival--the complete destruction of a power which represented to theAsiatics the old Semitic civilization, which with reason claimed to bethe heir and the successor of Assyria, and had a history stretching backfor a space of nearly two thousand years. So long as Babylon, "theglory of kingdoms, " "the praise of the whole earth, " retained herindependence, with her vast buildings, her prestige of antiquity, herwealth, her learning, her ancient and grand religious system, she couldscarcely fail to be in the eyes of her neighbors the first power in theworld, if not in mere strength, yet in honor, dignity, and reputation. Haughty and contemptuous herself to the very last, she naturally imposedon men's minds, alike by her past history and her present pretensions;nor was it possible for the Persian monarch to feel that he stood beforehis subjects as indisputably the foremost man upon the earth until hehad humbled in the dust the pride and arrogance of Babylon. But, withthe fall of the Great City, the whole fabric of Semetic greatness wasshattered. Babylon became "an astonishment and a hissing"--all herprestige vanished--and Persia stepped manifestly into the place, whichAssyria had occupied for so many centuries, of absolute and unrivalledmistress of Western Asia. 

The fall of Babylon was also the fall of an ancient, widely spread, and deeply venerated religious system. Not of course, that the religionsuddenly disappeared or ceased to have votaries, but that, from adominant system, supported by all the resources of the state, andenforced by the civil power over a wide extent of territory, it becamesimply one of many tolerated beliefs, exposed to frequent rebuffs andinsults, and at all times overshadowed by a new and rival system--thecomparatively pure creed of Zoroastrianism, The conquest of Babylon byPersia was, practically, if not a death-blow, at least a severe wound, to that sensuous idol-worship which had for more than twenty centuriesbeen the almost universal religion in the countries between theMediterranean and the Zagros mountain range. The religion neverrecovered itself--was never reinstated. It survived, a longer or ashorter time, in places. To a slight extent it corrupted Zoroastrianism;but, on the whole, from the date of the fall of Babylon it declined. "Bel bowed down; Nebo stooped;" "Merodach was broken in pieces. "Judgment was done upon the Babylonian graven images; and the system, ofwhich they formed a necessary part, having once fallen from its proudpre-eminence, gradually decayed and vanished. 

Parallel with the decline of the old Semitic idolatry was the advanceof its direct antithesis, pure spiritual Monotheism. The same blow whichlaid the Babylonian religion in the dust struck off the fetters fromJudaism. Purified and refined by the precious discipline of adversity, the Jewish system, which Cyrus, feeling towards it a natural sympathy, protected, upheld, and replaced in its proper locality, advanced fromthis time in influence and importance, leavening little by little thefoul mass of superstition and impurity which came in contact with it. Proselytism grew more common. The Jews spread themselves wider. Thereturn from, the captivity, which Cyrus authorized almost immediatelyafter the capture of Babylon, is the starting point from which we maytrace a gradual enlightenment of the heathen world by the disseminationof Jewish beliefs and practices--such dissemination being greatly helpedby the high estimation in which the Jewish system was held by the civilauthority, both while the empire of the Persians lasted, and when powerpassed to the Macedonians. 

On the fall of Babylon its dependencies seem to have submitted tothe conqueror, with a single exception. Phoenicia, which had neveracquiesced contentedly either in Assyrian or in Babylonian rule, saw, apparently, in the fresh convulsion that was now shaking the East, anopportunity for recovering autonomy. It was nearly half a century sinceher last struggle to free herself had terminated unsuccessfully. A newgeneration had grown up since that time--a generation which had seennothing of war, and imperfectly appreciated its perils. Perhaps somereliance was placed on the countenance and support of Egypt, which, itmust have been felt, would view with satisfaction any obstacle to theadvance of a power wherewith she was sure, sooner or later, to come intocollision. At any rate, it was resolved to make the venture. Phoenicia, on the destruction of her distant suzerain, quietly resumed her freedom;abstained from making any act of submission to the conqueror; while, however, at the same time, she established friendly relations forcommercial purposes with one of the conqueror's vassals, the prince whohad been sent into Palestine to re-establish the Jews at Jerusalem. 

It might have been expected that Cyrus, after his conquest of Babylon, would have immediately proceeded towards the south-west. The reductionof Egypt had, according to Herodotus, been embraced in the designs whichhe formed fifteen years earlier. The non-submission of Phoeniciamust have been regarded as an act of defiance which deserved signalchastisement. It has been suspected that the restoration of the Jews wasprompted, at least in part, by political motives, and that Cyrus, whenhe re-established them in their country, looked to finding them of useto him in the attack which he was meditating upon Egypt. At any rate itis evident that their presence would have facilitated his march throughPalestine, and given him a _point d'appui_, which could not but havebeen of value. These considerations make it probable that an Egyptianexpedition would have been determined on, had not circumstances occurredto prevent it. 

What the exact circumstances were, it is impossible to determine. According to Herodotus, a sudden desire seized Cyrus to attack theMassagetae, who bordered his Empire to the north-east. He led his troopsacross the Araxes (Jaxartes?), defeated the Massagetae by stratagem ina great battle, but was afterwards himself defeated and slain, his bodyfalling into the enemy's hands, who treated it with gross indignity. According to Ctesias, the people against whom he made his expeditionwere the Derbices, a nation bordering upon India, Assisted by Indianallies, who lent them a number of elephants, this people engaged Cyrus, and defeated him in a battle, wherein he received a mortal wound. Reinforced, however, by a body of Sacae, the Persians renewed thestruggle, and gained a complete victory, which was followed by thesubmission of the nation. Cyrus, however, died of his wound on the thirdday after the first battle. 

This conflict of testimony clouds with uncertainty the entire closingscene of the life of Cyrus. All that we can lay down as tolerably wellestablished is, that instead of carrying out his designs against Egypt, he engaged in hostilities with one of the nations on his north-easternfrontier, that he conducted the war with less than his usual success, and in the course of it received a wound of which he died (B. C. 529), after he had reigned nine-and-twenty years. That his body did not fallinto the enemy's hands appears, however, to be certain from the factthat it was conveyed into Persia Proper, and buried at Pasargadae. 

It may be suspected that this expedition, which proved so disastrous tothe Persian monarch, was not the mere wanton act which it appears to bein the pages of our authorities. The nations of the north-east were atall times turbulent and irritable, with difficulty held in check by thecivilized power that bore rule in the south and west. The expeditionof Cyrus, whether directed against the Massagetae or the Derbices, wasprobably intended to strike terror into the barbarians of these regions, and was analogous to those invasions which were undertaken under thewisest of the Roman Emperors, across the Rhine and Danube, againstGermans, Goths, and Sarmatae. The object of such inroads was not toconquer, but to alarm--it was hoped by an imposing display of organizedmilitary force to deter the undisciplined hordes of the prolific Northfrom venturing across the frontier and carrying desolation through largetracts of the Empire. Defensive warfare has often an aggressive look. Itmay have been solely with the object of protecting his own territoriesfrom attack that Cyrus made his last expedition across the Jaxertes, ortowards the upper Indus. 

The character of Cyrus, as represented to us by the Greeks, is themost favorable that we possess of any early Oriental monarch. Active, energetic, brave, fertile in stratagems, he has all the qualitiesrequired to form a successful military chief. He conciliates his peopleby friendly and familiar treatment, but declines to spoil them byyielding to their inclinations when they are adverse to their trueinterests. He has a ready humor, which shows itself in smart sayings andrepartees, that take occasionally the favorite Oriental turn of parableor apologue. He is mild in his treatment of the prisoners that fall intohis hands, and ready to forgive even the heinous crime of rebellion. Hehas none of the pride of the ordinary eastern despot, but converses onterms of equality with those about him. We cannot be surprised that thePersians, contrasting him with their later monarchs, held his memoryin the highest veneration, and were even led by their affection forhis person to make his type of countenance their standard of physicalbeauty. 

The genius of Cyrus was essentially that of a conqueror, not of anadministrator. There is no trace of his having adopted anything like auniform system for the government of the provinces which he subdued. In Lydia he set up a Persian governor, but assigned certain importantfunctions to a native; in Babylon he gave the entire direction ofaffairs into the hands of a Mede, to whom he allowed the title and styleof king; in Judaea he appointed a native, but made him merely "governor"or "deputy;" in Sacia he maintained as tributary king the monarch whohad resisted his arms. Policy may have dictated the course pursuedin each instance, which may have been suited to the condition of theseveral provinces; but the variety allowed was fatal to consolidation, and the monarchy, as Cyrus left it, had as little cohesion as any ofthose by which it was preceded. 

Though originally a rude mountain-chief, Cyrus, after he succeeded toempire, showed himself quite able to appreciate the dignity and valueof art. In his constructions at Pasargadae he combined massivenesswith elegance, and manifested a taste at once simple and refined. Heornamented his buildings with reliefs of an ideal character. It isprobably to him that we owe the conception of the light tapering stoneshaft, which is the glory of Persian architecture. If the more massiveof the Persepolitan buildings are to be ascribed to him, we must regardhim as haying fixed the whole plan and arrangement which was afterwardsfollowed in all Persian palatial edifices. 

In his domestic affairs Cyrus appears to have shown the same moderationand simplicity which we observe in his general conduct. He married, asit would seem, one wife only, Cassandane, the daughter of Pharnaspes, who was a member of the royal family. By her he had issue two sonsand at least three daughters. The sons were Cambyses and Smerdis;the daughters Atossa, Artystone, and one whose name is unknown to us. Cassandane died before her husband, and was deeply mourned by him. Shortly before his own death he took the precaution formally to settlethe succession. Leaving the general inheritance of his vast dominions tohis elder son, Cambyses, he declared it to be his will that the youngershould be entrusted with the actual government of several large andimportant provinces. He thought by this plan to secure the well-being ofboth the youths, never suspecting that he was in reality consigningboth to untimely ends, and even preparing the way for an extraordinaryrevolution. 

The ill effect of the unfortunate arrangement thus made appeared almostimmediately. Cambyses was scarcely settled upon the throne before hegrew jealous of his brother, and ordered him to be privately put todeath. His cruel orders were obeyed, and with so much secrecy thatneither the mode of the death, nor even the fact, was known to more thana few. Smerdis was generally believed to be still alive; and thus anopportunity was presented for personation--a form of imposture verycongenial to Orientals, and one which has often had very disastrousconsequences. We shall find in the sequel this opportunity embraced, andresults follow of a most stirring and exciting character. 

It required time, however, to bring to maturity the fruits of the crimeso rashly committed. Cambyses, in the meanwhile, quite unconscious ofdanger, turned his attention to military matters, and determined onendeavoring to complete his father's scheme of conquest by the reductionof Egypt. Desirous of obtaining a ground of quarrel less antiquatedthan the alliance, a quarter of a century earlier, between Amasis andCroesus, he demanded that a daughter of the Egyptian king should be sentto him as a secondary wife. Amasis, too timid to refuse, sent a damselnamed Nitetis, who was not his daughter; and she, soon after herarrival, made Cambyses acquainted with the fraud. A ground of quarrelwas thus secured, which might be put forward when it suited his purpose;and meanwhile every nerve was being strained to prepare effectuallyfor the expedition. The difficulty of a war with Egypt lay in herinaccessibility. She was protected on all sides by seas or deserts; and, for a successful advance upon her from the direction of Asia, it wasdesirable both to obtain a quiet passage for a large army through thedesert of El-Tij, and also to have the support of a powerful fleet inthe Mediterranean. This latter was the paramount consideration. An armywell supplied with camels might carry its provisions and water throughthe desert, and might intimidate or overpower the few Arab tribes whichinhabited it; but, unless the command of the sea was gained and thenavigation of the Nile closed, Memphis might successfully resistattack. Cambyses appears to have perceived with sufficient clearnessthe conditions on which victory depended, and to have applied himself atonce to securing them. He made a treaty with the Arab Sheikh who had thechief influence over the tribes of the desert; and at the same timehe set to work to procure the services of a powerful naval force. Bymenaces or negotiations he prevailed upon the Phoenicians to submitthemselves to his yoke, and having thus obtained a fleet superior tothat of Egypt, he commenced hostilities by robbing her of a dependencywhich possessed considerable naval strength, in this way still furtherincreasing the disparity between his own fleet and that of his enemy. Against the combined ships of Phoenicia, Cyprus, Ionia, and AEolis, Egypt was powerless, and her fleets seem to have quietly yielded thecommand of the sea. Cambyses was thus able to give his army the supportof a naval force, as it marched along the coast, from Carmel probablyto Pelusium; and when, having defeated the Egyptians at the last-namedplace, he proceeded against Memphis, he was able to take possession ofthe Nile, and to blockade the Egyptian capital both by land and water. 

It appears that four years were consumed by the Persian monarch in hispreparations for his Egyptian expedition. It was not until B. C. 525 thathe entered Egypt at the head of his troops, and fought the great battlewhich decided the fate of the country. The struggle was long and bloody. Psammenitus, who had succeeded his father Amasis, had the services, notonly of his Egyptian subjects, but a large body of mercenaries besides, Greeks and Carians. These allies were zealous in his cause, and are saidto have given him a horrible proof of their attachment. One oftheir body had deserted to the Persians some little time before theexpedition, and was believed to have given important advice to theinvader. He had left his children behind in Egypt; and these his formercomrades now seized, and led out in front of their lines, where theyslew them before their father's eyes, and, having so done, mixed theirblood in a bowl with water and wine, and drank, one and all, of themixture. The battle followed immediately after; but, in spite of theircourage and fanaticism, the Egyptian army was completely defeated. According to Ctesias, fifty thousand fell on the vanquished side, whilethe victors lost no more than seven thousand. Psammenitus, after hisdefeat, threw himself into Memphis, but, being blockaded by landand prevented from receiving supplies from the sea, after a stoutresistance, he surrendered. The captive monarch received the respectfultreatment which Persian clemency usually accorded to fallen sovereigns. Herodotus even goes so far as to intimate that, if he had abstained fromconspiracy, he would probably have been allowed to continue rulerof Egypt, exchanging, of course, his independent sovereignty for adelegated kingship held at the pleasure of the Lord of Asia. 

The conquest of Egypt was immediately followed by the submission of theneighboring tribes. The Libyans of the desert tract which borders theNile valley to the west, and even the Greeks of the more remote Barcaand Cyrene, sent gifts to the conqueror and consented to become histributaries. But Cambyses placed little value on such petty accessionsto his power. Inheriting the grandeur of view which had characterizedhis father, he was no sooner master of Egypt than he conceived the ideaof a magnificent series of conquests in this quarter, whereby he hopedto become Lord of Africa no less than of Asia, or at any rate to leavehimself without a rival of any importance on the vast continent whichhis victorious arms had now opened to him. Apart from Egypt, Africapossessed but two powers capable, by their political organization andtheir military strength, of offering him serious resistance. These wereEthiopia and Carthage--the one the great power of the South, the equal, if not even the superior, of Egypt--the other the great power of theWest--remote, little known, but looming larger for, the obscurity inwhich she was shrouded, and attractive from her reputed wealth. Theviews of Cambyses comprised the reduction of both these powers, andalso the conquest of the oasis of Ammon. As a good Zoroastrian, he wasnaturally anxious to exhibit the superiority of Ormazd to all the"gods of the nations;" and, as the temple of Ammon in the oasis had thegreatest repute of all the African shrines, this design would be bestaccomplished by its pillage and destruction. It is probable that hefurther looked to the subjugation of all the tribes on the north coastbetween the Nile valley and the Carthaginian territory; for he wouldundoubtedly have sent an army along the shore to act in concert with hisfleet, had he decided ultimately on making the expedition. An unexpectedobstacle, however, arose to prevent him. The Phoenicians, who formedthe main strength of his navy, declined to take any part in an attackon Carthage, since the Carthaginians were their colonists, and therelations between the two people had always been friendly. Cambysesdid not like to force their inclinations, on account of their recentvoluntary submission; and as, without their aid, his navy was manifestlyunequal to the proposed service, he felt obliged to desist from theundertaking. 

While the Carthaginian scheme was thus nipped in the bud, theenterprises which Cambyses attempted to carry out led to nothing butdisaster. An army, fifty thousand strong, despatched from Thebes againstAmmon, perished to a man amid the sands of the Libyan desert. A stillmore numerous force, led by Cambyses himself towards the Ethiopianfrontier, found itself short of supplies on its march across Nubia, andwas forced to return, without glory, after suffering considerable loss. It became evident that the abilities of the Persian monarch werenot equal to his ambition--that he insufficiently appreciated thedifficulties and dangers of enterprises--while a fatal obstinacyprevented him from acknowledging and retrieving an error while retrievalwas possible. The Persians, we may be sure, grew dispirited under sucha leader; and the Egyptians naturally took heart. It seems to havebeen shortly after the return of Cambyses from his abortive expeditionagainst Ethiopia that symptoms of an intention to revolt began tomanifest themselves in Egypt. The priests declared an incarnation ofApis, and the whole country burst out into rejoicings. It was probablynow that Psammenitus, who had hitherto been kindly treated by hiscaptor, was detected in treasonable intrigues, condemned to death, andexecuted. At the same time, the native officers who had been left incharge of the city of Memphis were apprehended and capitally punished. Such stringent measures had all the effect that was expected from them;they wholly crushed the nascent rebellion; they left, however, behindthem a soreness, felt alike by the conqueror and the conquered, whichprevented the establishment of a good understanding between the GreatKing and his new subjects. Cambyses knew that he had been severe, andthat his severity had made him many enemies; he suspected the people, and still more suspected the priests, their natural leaders; he soonpersuaded himself that policy required in Egypt a departure from theprinciples of toleration which were ordinarily observed towards theirsubjects by the Persians, and a sustained effort on the part of thecivil power to bring the religion, and its priests, into contempt. Accordingly, he commenced a serious of acts calculated to have thiseffect. He stabbed the sacred calf, believed to be incarnate Apis; heordered the body of priests who had the animal in charge to be publiclyscourged; he stopped the Apis festival by making participation in it acapital offence; he opened the receptacles of the dead, and curiouslyexamined the bodies contained in them, he intruded himself into thechief sanctuary at Memphis, and publicly scoffed at the grotesqueimage of Phtha; finally, not content with outraging in the same way theinviolable temple of the Cabeiri, he wound up his insults by orderingthat their images should be burnt. These injuries and indignitiesrankled in the minds of the Egyptians, and probably had a large share inproducing that bitter hatred of the Persian yoke which shows itself inthe later history on so many occasions; but for the time the policy wassuccessful: crushed beneath the iron heel of the conqueror--their faithin the power of their gods shaken, their spirits cowed, their hopesshattered--the Egyptian subjects of Cambyses made up their minds tosubmission. The Oriental will generally kiss the hand that smites him, if it only smite hard enough. Egypt became now for a full generation theobsequious slave of Persia, and gave no more trouble to her subjugatorthan the weakest or the most contented of the provinces. 

The work of subjection completed, Cambyses, having been absent from hiscapital longer than was at all prudent, prepared to return home. He hadproceeded on his way as far as Syria, when intelligence reached him ofa most unexpected nature. A herald suddenly entered his camp andproclaimed, in the hearing of the whole army, that Cambyses, son ofCyrus, had ceased to reign, and that the allegiance of all Persiansubjects was henceforth to be paid to Smerdis, son of Cyrus. At first, it is said, Cambyses thought that his instrument had played him false, and that his brother was alive and had actually seized the throne; butthe assurances of the suspected person, and a suggestion which he made, convinced him of the contrary, and gave him a clue to the real solutionof the mystery. Prexaspes, the nobleman inculpated, knew that theso-called Smerdis must be an impostor, and suggested his identity witha certain Magus, whose brother had been intrusted by Cambyses with thegeneral direction of his household and the care of the palace. He wasprobably led to make the suggestion by his knowledge of the resemblanceborne by this person to the murdered prince, which was sufficientlyclose to make personation possible. Cambyses was thus enabled toappreciate the gravity of the crisis, and to consider whether he couldsuccessfully contend with it or no. Apparently, he decided in thenegative. Believing that he could not triumph over the conspiracywhich had decreed his downfall, and unwilling to descend to a privatestation--perhaps even uncertain whether his enemies would spare hislife--he resolved to fly to the last refuge of a dethroned king, andto end all by suicide. Drawing his short sword from its sheath, he gavehimself a wound, of which he died in a few days. 

It is certainly surprising that the king formed this resolution. Hewas at the head of an army, returning from an expedition, which, ifnot wholly successful, had at any rate added to the empire an importantprovince. His father's name was a tower of strength; and if he couldonly have exposed the imposture that had been practised on them, he might have counted confidently on rallying the great mass of thePersians to his cause. How was it that he did not advance on thecapital, and at least strike one blow for empire? No clear and decidedresponse can be made to this inquiry; but we may indistinctly discerna number of causes which may have combined to produce in the monarch'smind the feeling of despondency whereto he gave way. Although hereturned from Egypt a substantial conqueror, his laurel wreath wastarnished by ill-success; his army, weakened by its losses, anddispirited by its failures, was out of heart; it had no trust inhis capacity as a commander, and could not be expected to fight withenthusiasm on his behalf. There is also reason to believe that he wasgenerally unpopular on account of his haughty and tyrannical temper, and his contempt of law and usage, where they interfered with thegratification of his desires. Though we should do wrong to accept astrue all the crimes laid to his charge by the Egyptians, who detestedhis memory, we cannot doubt the fact of his incestuous marriage with hissister, Atossa, which was wholly repugnant to the religious feelings ofhis nation. Nor can we well imagine that there was no foundation atall for the stories of the escape of Croesus, the murder of the sonof Prexaspes, and the execution in Egypt on a trivial charge of twelvenoble Persians. His own people called Cambyses a "despot" or "master, "in contrast with Cyrus, whom they regarded as a "father, " because, asHerodotus says, he was "harsh and reckless, " whereas his father wasmild and beneficent. Further, there was the religious aspect of therevolution, which had taken place, in the background. Cambyses may haveknown that in the ranks of his army there was much sympathy with Magism, and may have doubted whether, if the whole conspiracy were laid bare, he could count on anything like a general adhesion of his troops to theZoroastrian cause. These various grounds, taken together, go fartowards accounting for a suicide which at first sight strikes us asextraordinary, and is indeed almost unparalleled. 

Of the general character of Cambyses little more need be said. Hewas brave, active, and energetic, like his father: but he lacked hisfather's strategic genius, his prudence, and his fertility in resources. Born in the purple, he was proud and haughty, careless of the feelingsof others, and impatient of admonition or remonstrance. His pride madehim obstinate in error; and his contempt of others led on naturallyto harshness, and perhaps even to cruelty. He is accused of "habitualdrunkenness, " and was probably not free from the intemperance whichwas a common Persian failing; but there is not sufficient ground forbelieving that his indulgence was excessive, much less that it proceededto the extent of affecting his reason. The "madness of Cambyses, "reported to and believed in by Herodotus, was a fiction of the Egyptianpriests, who wished it to be thought that their gods had in this waypunished his impiety. The Persians had no such tradition, but merelyregarded him as unduly severe and selfish. A dispassionate considerationof all the evidence on the subject leads to the conclusion that Cambyseslived and died in the possession of his reason, having neither destroyedit through inebriety nor lost it by the judgment of Heaven. 

The death of Cambyses (B. C. 522) left the conspirators, who hadpossession of the capital, at liberty to develop their projects, andto take such steps as they thought best for the consolidation andperpetuation of their power. The position which they occupied was oneof peculiar delicacy. On the one hand, the impostor had to guard againstacting in any way which would throw suspicion on his being reallySmerdis, the son of Cyrus. On the other, he had to satisfy the Magianpriests, to whom he was well known, and on whom he mainly depended forsupport, if his imposture should be detected. These priests must havedesired a change of the national religion, and to effect this must havebeen the true aim and object of the revolution. But it was necessary toproceed with the utmost caution. An open proclamation that Magism wasto supersede Zoroastrianism would have seemed a strange act in anAchaemenian prince, and could scarcely have failed to arouse doubtswhich might easily terminate in discovery. The Magian brothers shrankfrom affronting this peril, and resolved, before approaching it, toobtain for the new government an amount of general popularity whichwould make its overthrow in fair fight difficult. Accordingly the newreign was inaugurated by a general remission of tribute and militaryservice for the space of three years--a measure which was certain togive satisfaction to all the tribes and nations of the Empire, exceptthe Persians. Persia Proper was at all times exempt from tribute, andwas thus, so far, unaffected by the boon granted, while military servicewas no doubt popular with the ruling nation, for whose benefit thevarious conquests were effected. Still Persia could scarcely takeumbrage at an inactivity which was to last only three years, whileto the rest of the Empire the twofold grace accorded must have beenthoroughly acceptable. 

Further to confirm his uncertain hold upon the throne, thePseudo-Smerdis took to wife all the widows of his predecessor. This isa practice common in the East; and there can be no doubt that it gives anew monarch a certain prestige in the eyes of his people. In the presentcase, however, it involved a danger. The wives of the late king werelikely to be acquainted with the person of the king's brother; Atossa, at any rate, could not fail to know him intimately. If the Magus allowedthem to associate together freely, according to the ordinary practice, they would detect his imposture and probably find a way to divulge it. He therefore introduced a new system into the seraglio. Instead of thefree intercourse one with another which the royal consorts had enjoyedpreviously, he established at once the principle of complete isolation. Each wife was assigned her own portion of the palace; and no visitingof one wife by another was permitted. Access to them from without wasaltogether forbidden, even to their nearest relations; and the wiveswere thus cut off wholly from the external world, unless they couldmanage to communicate with it by means of secret messages. Butprecautions of this kind, though necessary, were in themselvessuspicious; they naturally suggested an inquiry into their cause andobject. It was a possible explanation of them that they proceeded froman extreme and morbid jealousy; but the thought could not fail to occurto some that they might be occasioned by the fear of detection. 

However, as time went on, and no discovery was actually made, the Magusgrew bolder, and ventured to commence that reformation of religion whichhe and his order had so much at heart. He destroyed the Zoroastriantemples in various places, and seems to have put down the old worship, with its hymns in praise of the Zoroastrian deities. He institutedMagian rites in lieu of the old ceremonies, and established hisbrother Magians as the priest-caste of the Persian nation. The changesintroduced were no doubt satisfactory to the Medes, and to many ofthe subject races throughout the Empire. They were even agreeable to aportion of the Persian people, who leant towards a more material worshipand a more gorgeous ceremonial than had contented their ancestors. Ifthe faithful worshippers of Ormazd saw them with dismay, they were tootimid to resist, and tacitly acquiesced in the religious revolution. 

In one remote province the change gave a fresh impulse to a religiousstruggle which was there going on, adding strength to the side ofintolerance. The Jews had now been engaged for fifteen or sixteen yearsin the restoration of their temple, according to the permission grantedthem by Cyrus. Their enterprise was distasteful to the neighboringSamaritans, who strained every nerve to prevent its being brought to asuccessful issue, and as each new king mounted the Persian throne, made a fresh effort to have the work stopped by authority. Theirrepresentations had had no effect upon Cambyses; but when they wererepeated on the accession of the Pseudo-Smerdis, the result wasdifferent. An edict was at once sent down to Palestine, reversing thedecree of Cyrus, and authorizing the inhabitants of Samaria to interfereforcibly in the matter, and compel the Jews to desist from building. Armed with this decree, the Samaritan authorities hastened to Jerusalem, and "made the Jews to cease by force and power. "

These revelations of a leaning towards a creed diverse from that of theAchaemenian princes, combined with the system of seclusion adopted inthe palace--a system not limited to the seraglio, but extending alsoto the person of the monarch, who neither quitted the palace precinctshimself, nor allowed any of the Persian nobles to enter them--must haveturned the suspicions previously existing into a general belief andconviction that the monarch seated on the throne was not Smerdis the sonof Cyrus, but an impostor. Yet still there was for a while no outbreak. It mattered nothing to the provincials who ruled them, provided thatorder was maintained, and that the boons granted them at the opening ofthe new reign were not revoked or modified. Their wishes were no doubtin favor of the prince who had remitted their burthens; and in Media apeculiar sympathy would exist towards one who had exalted Magism. Suchdiscontent as was felt would be confined to Persia, or to Persia and afew provinces of the north-east, where the Zoroastrian faith may havemaintained itself. 

At last, among the chief Persians, rumors began to arise. These weresternly repressed at the outset, and a reign of terror was established, during which men remained silent through fear. But at length some ofthe principal nobles, convinced of the imposture, held secret counciltogether, and discussed the measures proper to be adopted under thecircumstances. Nothing, however, was done until the arrival at thecapital of a personage felt by all to be the proper leader of the nationin the existing crisis. This was Darius, the son of Hystaspes, aprince of the blood royal who probably stood in the direct line of thesuccession, failing the issue of Cyrus. At the early age of twenty hehad attracted the attention of that monarch, who suspected him even thenof a design to seize the throne. He was now about twenty-eight yearsof age, and therefore at a time of life suited for vigorous enterprise;which was probably the reason why his father, Hystaspes, who was stillalive, sent him to the capital, instead of proceeding thither in person. Youth and vigor were necessary qualifications for success in a struggleagainst the holders of power; and Hystaspes no longer possessed thoseadvantages. He therefore yielded to his son that headship of themovement to which his position would have entitled him; and, with theleadership in danger, he yielded necessarily his claim to the firstplace, when the time of peril should be past and the rewards of victoryshould come to be apportioned. 

Darius, on his arrival at the capital, was at once accepted as head ofthe conspiracy, and with prudent boldness determined on pushing mattersto an immediate decision. Overruling the timidity of a party among theconspirators, who urged delay, he armed his partisans, and proceeded, without a moment's pause, to the attack. According to the Greekhistorians, he and his friends entered the palace in a body, andsurprised the Magus in his private apartments, where they slew himafter a brief struggle. But the authority of Darius discredits the Greekaccounts, and shows us, though with provoking brevity, that the courseof events must have been very different. The Magus was not slain in theprivacy of his palace, at Susa or Ecbatana, but met his death in a smalland insignificant fort in the part of Media called "the Maesan plain, "or, more briefly, "Nisaea, " whither he appears to have fled with a bandof followers. Whether he was first attacked in the capital, and escapingthrew himself into this stronghold, or receiving timely warning of hisdanger withdrew to it before the outbreak occurred, or merely happenedto be at the spot when the conspirators decided to make their attempt, we have no means of determining. We only know that the scene of thelast struggle was Sictachotes, in Media; that Darius made the attackaccompanied by six Persian nobles of high rank; and that the contestterminated in the slaughter of the Magus and of a number of hisadherents, who were involved in the fall of their master. 

Nor did the vengeance of the successful conspirators stop here. Speeding to the capital, with the head of the Magus in their hands, andexhibiting everywhere this proof at once of the death of the late kingand of his imposture, they proceeded to authorize and aid in carryingout, a general massacre of the Magian priests, the abettors of the laterusurpation. Every Magus who could be found was poniarded by the enragedPersians; and the caste would have been well-nigh exterminated, if ithad not been for the approach of night. Darkness brought the carnageto an end; and the sword, once sheathed, was not again drawn. Only, tocomplete the punishment of the ambitious religionists who had insultedand deceived the nation, the day of the massacre was appointed to bekept annually as a solemn festival, under the name of the Magophonia;and a law was passed that on that day no Magus should leave his house. 

The accession of Darius to the vacant throne now took place (Jan. 1, B. C. 521). According to Herodotus it was preceded by a period of debateand irresolution, during which the royal authority was, as it were, incommission among the Seven; and in this interval he places not only thechoice of a king, but an actual discussion on the subject of the properform of government to be established. Even his contemporaries, however, could see that this last story was unworthy of credit and it may bequestioned whether any more reliance ought to be placed on the remainderof the narrative. Probably the true account of the matter is, that, having come to a knowledge of the facts of the case, the heads of theseven great Persian clans or families met together in secret conclaveand arranged all their proceedings beforehand. No government but themonarchical could be thought of for a moment, and no one could assertany claim to be king but Darius. Darius went into the conspiracy as apretender to the throne: the other six were simply his "faithful men, "his friends and well-wishers. While, however, the six were far fromdisputing Darius's right, they required and received for themselves aguarantee of certain privileges, which may either have belonged to thempreviously, by law or custom, as the heads of the great clans, or mayhave been now for the first time conceded. The king-bound himself tochoose his wives from among the families of the conspirators only, andsanctioned their claim to have free access to his person at all timeswithout asking his permission. One of their number, Otanes, demanded andobtained even more. He and his house were to remain "free, " and were toreceive yearly a magnificent kaftan, or royal present. Thus, somethinglike a check on unbridled despotism was formally and regularlyestablished; an hereditary nobility was acknowledged; the king becameto some extent dependent on his grandees; he could not regard himself asthe sole fountain of honor; six great nobles stood round the throneas its supports; but their position was so near the monarch that theydetracted somewhat from his prestige and dignity. 

The guarantee of these privileges was, we may be sure, given, and thechoice of Darius as king made, before the attack upon the. Magus began. It would have been madness to allow an interval of anarchy. WhenDarius reached the capital, with the head of the Pseudo-Smerdis in hispossession, he no doubt proceeded at once to the palace and took hisseat upon the vacant throne. No opposition was offered to him. ThePersians gladly saw a scion of their old royal stock installed in power. The provincials were too far off to interfere. Such malcontents asmight be present would be cowed by the massacre that was going on in thestreets. The friends and intimates of the fallen monarch would be onlyanxious to escape notice. The reign of the new king no doubt commencedamid those acclamations which are never wanting in the East when asovereign first shows himself to his subjects. 

The measures with which the new monarch inaugurated his reign had fortheir object the re-establishment of the old worship. He rebuilt theZoroastrian temples which the Magus had destroyed, and probably restoredthe use of the sacred chants and the other accustomed ceremonies. It maybe suspected that his religious zeal proceeded often to the length ofpersecution, and that the Magian priests were not the only persons who, under the orders which he issued, felt the weight of the secular arm. His Zoroastrian zeal was soon known through the provinces; and the Jewsforthwith resumed the building of their temple, trusting that theirconduct would be consonant with his wishes. This trust was notmisplaced: for, when the Samaritans once more interfered and tried toinduce the new king to put a stop to the work, the only result wasa fresh edict, confirming the old decree of Cyrus, forbiddinginterference, and assigning a further grant of money, cattle, corn, etc. , from the royal stores, for the furtherance of the piousundertaking. Its accomplishment was declared to be for the advantage ofthe king and his house, since, when the temple was finished, sacrificeswould be offered in it to "the God of Heaven, " and prayer would be made"for the life of the king and of his sons. " Such was the sympathy whichstill united pure Zoroastrianism with the worship of Jehovah. But thereign, which, so far, might have seemed to be auspiciously begun, was destined ere long to meet opposition, and even to encounter armedhostility, in various quarters. In the loosely organized empires ofthe early type, a change of sovereign, especially if accompaniedby revolutionary violence, is always regarded as an opportunity forrebellion. Doubt as to the condition of the capital paralyzes theimperial authority in the provinces; and bold men, taking advantageof the moment of weakness, start up in various places, assertingindependence, and seeking to obtain for themselves kingdoms out ofthe chaos which they see around them. The more remote provinces areespecially liable to be thus affected, and often revolt successfully onsuch an occasion. It appears that the circumstances under which Dariusobtained the throne were more than usually provocative of the spiritof disaffection and rebellion. Not only did the governors of remotecountries, like Egypt and Lydia, assume an attitude incompatible withtheir duty as subjects, but everywhere, even in the very heart of theEmpire, insurrection raised its head; and for six long years the newking was constantly employed in reducing one province after another toobedience. Susiana, Babylonia, Persia itself, Media, Assyria, Armenia, Hyrcania, Parthia, Margiana, Sagartia, and Sacia, all revolted duringthis space, and were successively chastised and recovered. It maybe suspected that the religious element entered into some of thesestruggles, and that the unusual number of the revolts and the obstinatecharacter of many of them were connected with the downfall of Magism andthe restoration of the pure Zoroastrian faith, which Darius was bent oneffecting. But this explanation can only be applied partially. We mustsuppose, besides, a sort of contagion of rebellion--an awakening ofhopes, far and wide, among the subject nations, as the rumor thatserious troubles had broken out reached them, and a resolution to takeadvantage of the critical state of things, spreading rapidly from onepeople to another. 

A brief sketch of these various revolts must now be given. Theycommenced with a rising in Susiana, where a certain Atrines assumedthe name and state of king, and was supported by the people. Almostsimultaneously a pretender appeared in Babylon, who gave out that he wasthe son of the late king, Nabonidus, and bore the world-renowned nameof Nebuchadnezzar. Darius, regarding this second revolt as the moreimportant of the two, while he dispatched a force to punish theSusianians, proceeded in person against the Babylonian pretender. Therivals met at the river Tigris, which the Babylonians held with a navalforce, while their army was posted on the right bank, ready to disputethe passage. Darius, however, crossed the river in their dispute, and, defeating the troops of his antagonist, pressed forward against thecapital. He had nearly reached it, when the pretender gave him battlefor the second time at a small town on the banks of the Euphrates. Fortune again declared in favor of the Persians, who drove the host oftheir enemy into the water and destroyed great numbers. The soi-disantNebuchadnezzar escaped with a few horsemen and threw himself intoBabylon; but the city was ill prepared for a siege, and was soon taken, the pretender falling into the hands of his enemy, who caused him to beexecuted. 

Meanwhile, in Susiana, Atrines, the original leader of the rebellion, had been made prisoner by the troops sent against him, and, beingbrought to Darius while he was on his march against Babylon, was put todeath. But this severity had little effect. A fresh leader appeared inthe person of a certain Martes, a Persian who, taking example from theBabylonian rebel, assumed a name which connected him with the old kingsof the country, and probably claimed to be their descendant, but thehands of Darius were now free by the termination of the Babyloniancontest, and he was able to proceed towards Susiana himself. Thismovement, apparently, was unexpected; for when the Susianians heard ofit they were so alarmed that they laid hands on the pretender and slewhim. 

A more important rebellion followed. Three of the chief provinces ofthe empire, Media, Armenia, and Assyria, revolted in concert. A Medianmonarch was set up, who called himself Xathrites, and claimed descentfrom the great Oyaxares; and it would seem that the three countriesimmediately acknowledged his sway. Darius, seeing how formidable therevolt was, determined to act with caution. Settling himself at thenewly-conquered city of Babylon, he resolved to employ his generalsagainst the rebels, and in this way to gauge the strength of theoutbreak, before adventuring his own person into the fray. Hydarnes, one of the Seven conspirators, was sent into Media with an army, whileDadarses, an Armenian, was dispatched into Armenia, and Vomises, aPersian, was ordered to march through Assyria into the same country. All three generals were met by the forces of the pretender, and severalbattles were fought, with results that seem not to have been verydecisive. Darius claims the victory on each occasion for his owngenerals; but it is evident that his arms made little progress, andthat, in spite of several small defeats, the rebellion maintained a boldfront, and was thought not unlikely to be successful. So strong wasthis feeling that two of the eastern provinces, Hyrcania and Parthia, deserted the Persian cause in the midst of the struggle, and placedthemselves under the rule of Xathrites. Either this circumstance, or thegeneral position of affairs, induced Darius at length to take the fieldin person. Quitting Babylon, he marched into Media, and being met by thepretender near a town called Kudrus, he defeated him in a great battle. This is no doubt the engagement of which Herodotus speaks, and which herightly regards as decisive. The battle of Kudrus gave Ecbatana into thehands of Darius, and made the Median prince an outcast and a fugitive. He fled towards the East, probably intending to join his partisans inHyrcania and Parthia, but was overtaken in the district of Rhages andmade prisoner by the troops of Darius. The king treated his captive withextreme severity. Having cut off his nose, ears, and tongue, he kepthim for some time chained to the door of his palace, in order that theremight be no doubt of his capture. When this object had been sufficientlysecured, the wretched sufferer was allowed to end his miserableexistence. He was crucified in his capital city, Ecbatana, before theeyes of those who had seen his former glory. 

The rebellion was thus crushed in its original seat, but it had still tobe put down in the countries whereto it had extended itself. Parthiaand Hyrcania, which had embraced the cause of the pretender, were stillmaintaining a conflict with their former governor, Hystaspes, Darius'sfather. Darius marched as far as Rhages to his father's assistance, anddispatched from that point a body of Persian troops to reinforce him. With this important aid Hystaspes once more gave the rebels battle, andsucceeded in defeating them so entirely that they presently made theirsubmission. 

Troubles, meanwhile, had broken out in Sagartia. A native chief, movedprobably by the success which had for a while attended the Median rebelwho claimed to rule as the descendant and representative of Cyaxares, came forward with similar pretensions, and was accepted by theSargartians as their monarch. This revolt, however, proved unimportant. Darius suppressed it with the utmost facility by means of a mixedarmy of Persians and Medes, whom he placed under a Median leader, Tachamaspates. The pretender was captured and treated almost exactlyin the same way as the Mede whose example he had followed. His nose andears were cut off; he was chained for a while at the palace door; andfinally he was crucified at Arbela. 

Another trifling revolt occurred about the same time in Margiana. TheMargians rebelled and set up a certain Phraates, a native, to be theirking. But the satrap of Bactria, within whose province Margiana lay, quelled the revolt almost immediately. 

Hitherto, however thickly troubles had come upon him, Darius could havethe satisfaction of feeling that he was contending with foreigners, and that his own nation at any rate was faithful and true. But nowthis consolation was to be taken from him. During his absence inthe provinces of the north-east Persia itself revolted against hisauthority, and acknowledged for king an impostor, who, undeterred by thefate of Gomates, and relying on the obscurity which still hung overthe end of the real Smerdis, assumed his name, and claimed to be thelegitimate occupant of the throne. The Persians at home were eitherdeceived a second time, or were willing to try a change of ruler; butthe army of Darius, composed of Persians and Medes, adhered to thebanner under which they had so often marched to victory, and enabledDarius, after a struggle of some duration, to re-establish his sway. The impostor suffered two defeats at the hands of Artabardes, oneof Darius's generals, while a force which he had detached to exciterebellion in Arachosia was engaged by the satrap of that province andcompletely routed. The so-called Smerdis was himself captured, andsuffered the usual penalty of unsuccessful revolt, crucifixion. 

Before, however, these results were accomplished--while the fortune ofwar still hung in the balance--a fresh danger threatened. Encouragedby the disaffection which appeared to be so general, and which had atlength reached the very citadel of the Empire, Babylon revolted for thesecond time. A man, named Aracus, an Armenian by descent, but settledin Babylonia, headed the insurrection, and, adopting the practiceof personation so usual at the time, assumed the name and style of"Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus. " Less alarmed on this occasion thanat the time of the first revolt, the king was content to send aMedian general against the new pretender. This officer, who is calledIntaphres, speedily chastised the rebels, capturing Babylon, and takingAracus prisoner. Crucifixion was again the punishment awarded to therebel leader. 

A season of comparative tranquillity seems now to have set in; and itmay have been in this interval that Darius found time to chastisethe remoter governors, who without formally declaring themselvesindependent, or assuming the title of king, had done acts savoring ofrebellion. Oroetes, the governor of Sardis, who had comported himselfstrangely even under Cambyses, having ventured to entrap and put todeath an ally of that monarch's, Polycrates of Samos, had from thetime of the Magian revolution assumed an attitude quite above that of asubject. Having a quarrel with Mitrobates, the governor of a neighboringprovince, he murdered him and annexed his territory. When Darius sent acourier to him with a message the purport of which he disliked, he setmen to waylay and assassinate him. It was impossible to overlook suchacts; and Darius must have sent an army into Asia Minor, if one ofhis nobles had not undertaken to remove Oroetes in another way. Arminghimself with several written orders bearing the king's seal, he wentto Sardis, and gradually tried the temper of the guard which the satrapkept round his person. When he found them full of respect for the royalauthority and ready to do whatever the king commanded, he producedan order for the governor's execution, which they carried into effectimmediately. 

The governor of Egypt, Aryandes, had shown a guilty ambition in a morecovert way. Understanding that Darius had issued a gold coinage ofremarkable purity, he, on his own authority and without consulting theking, issued a silver coinage of a similar character. There is reason tobelieve that he even placed his name upon his coins; an act which tothe Oriental mind distinctly implied a claim of independent sovereignty. Darius taxed him with a design to revolt, and put him to death on thecharge, apparently without exciting any disturbance. 

Still, however, the Empire was not wholly tranquillized. A revolt inSusiana, suppressed by the conspirator Gobryas, and another among theSacse of the Tigris, quelled by Darius in person, are recorded on therock of Behistun, in a supplementary portion of the Inscription. Wecannot date, unless it be by approximation, these various troubles; butthere is reason to believe that they were almost all contained withina space not exceeding five or six years. The date of the BehistunInscription is fixed by internal evidence to about B. C. 516-515--inother words, to the fifth or sixth year of the reign of Darius. Itserection seems to mark the termination of the first period of the reign, or that of disturbance, and the commencement of the second period, orthat of tranquillity, internal progress, and patronage of the fine artsby the monarch. 

It was natural that Darius, having with so much effort and difficultyreduced the revolted provinces to obedience, should proceed to considerwithin himself how the recurrence of such a time of trouble might beprevented. His experience had shown him how weak were the ties which hadhitherto been thought sufficient to hold the Empire together, and howslight an obstacle they opposed to the tendency, which all great empireshave, to disruption. But, however natural it might be to desire a remedyfor the evils which afflicted the State, it was not easy to devise one. Great empires had existed in Western Asia for above seven hundred years, and had all suffered more or less from the same inherent weakness; butno one had as yet invented a cure, or even (so far as appears) conceivedthe idea of improving on the rude system of imperial sway which thefirst conqueror had instituted. It remained for Darius, not only todesire, but to design--not only to design, but to bring into action--anentirely new form and type of government. He has been well called "thetrue founder of the Persian state. " He found the Empire a crude andheterogeneous mass of ill-assorted elements, hanging loosely together bythe single tie of subjection to a common head; he left it a compactand regularly organized body, united on a single well-ordered system, permanently established everywhere. 

On the nature and details of this system it will be necessary to speakat some length. It was the first, and probably the best, instance ofthat form of government which, taking its name from the Persian wordfor provincial ruler, is known generally as the system of "satrapial"administration. Its main principles were, in the first place, thereduction of the whole Empire to a quasi-uniformity by the substitutionof one mode of governing for several; secondly, the substitution offixed and definite burthens on the subject in lieu of variable anduncertain calls; and thirdly, the establishment of a variety of checksand counterpoises among the officials to whom it was necessary that thecrown should delegate its powers, which tended greatly to the securityof the monarch and the stability of the kingdom. A consideration of themodes in which these three principles were applied will bring before usin a convenient form the chief points of the system. 

Uniformity, or a near approach to it, was produced, not so much by theabolition of differences as by superadding one and the same governmentalmachinery in all parts of the Empire. It is an essential feature ofthe satrapial system that it does not aim at destroying differences, orassimilating to one type the various races and countries over whichit is extended. On the contrary, it allows, and indeed encourages, theseveral nations to retain their languages, habits, manners, religion, laws, and modes of local government. Only it takes care to place aboveall these things a paramount state authority, which is one and the sameeverywhere, whereon the unity of the kingdom is dependent. The authorityinstituted by Darius was that of his satraps. He divided the wholeempire into a number of separate governments--a number which must havevaried at different times, but which seems never to have fallen shortof twenty. Over each government he placed a satrap, or supreme civilgovernor, charged with the collection and transmission of the revenue, the administration of justice, the maintenance of order, and the generalsupervision of the territory. These satraps were nominated by the kingat his pleasure from any class of his subjects, and held office for nodefinite term, but simply until recalled, being liable to deprivationor death at any moment, without other formality than the presentationof the royal firman. While, however, they remained in office they weredespotic--they represented the Great King, and were clothed with aportion of his majesty--they had palaces, Courts, body-guards, parksor "paradises, " vast trains of eunuchs and attendants, well-filled, seraglios. They wielded the power of life and death. They assessed thetribute on the several towns and villages within their jurisdictionat their pleasure, and appointed deputies--called sometimes, likethemselves, satraps--over cities or districts within their province, whose office was regarded as one of great dignity. They exacted fromthe provincials, for their own support and that of their Court, over andabove the tribute due to the crown, whatever sum they regarded them ascapable of furnishing. Favors, and even justice, had to be purchasedfrom them by gifts. They were sometimes guilty of gross outrages on thepersons and honor of their subjects. Nothing restrained their tyrannybut such sense of right as they might happen to possess, and the fear ofremoval or execution if the voice of complaint reached the monarch. 

Besides this uniform civil administration, the Empire was pervadedthroughout by one and the same military system. The services of thesubject nations as soldiers were, as a general rule, declined, unlessupon rare and exceptional cases. Order was maintained by large andnumerous garrisons of foreign troops--Persians and Medes--quarteredon the inhabitants, who had little sympathy with those among whom theylived, and would be sure to repress sternly any outbreak. All places ofmuch strength were occupied in this way; and special watch was kept uponthe great capitals, which were likely to be centres of disaffection. Thus a great standing army, belonging to the conquering race, stoodeverywhere on guard throughout the Empire, offending the provincials nodoubt by their pride, their violence, and their contemptuous bearing, but rendering a native revolt under ordinary circumstances hopeless. 

Some exceptions to the general uniformity had almost of necessity to bemade in so vast and heterogeneous an empire as the Persian. Occasionallyit was thought wise to allow the continuance of a native dynasty in aprovince; and the satrap had in such a case to share with the nativeprince a divided authority. This was certainly the case in Cilicia, andprobably in Paphlagonia and Phoenicia. Tribes also, included withinthe geographical limits of a satrapy, were sometimes recognized asindependent; and petty wars were carried on between these hordes andtheir neighbors. Robber bands in many places infested the mountains, owing no allegiance to any one, and defied alike the satrap and thestanding army. 

The condition of Persia Proper was also purely exceptional. Persia paidno tribute, and was not counted as a satrapy. Its inhabitants were, however, bound, when the king passed through their country, to bring himgifts according to their means. This burthen may have been felt sensiblyby the rich, but it pressed very lightly on the poor, who, if they couldnot afford an ox or a sheep, might bring a little milk or cheese, afew dates, or a handful of wild fruit. On the other hand, the king wasbound, whenever he visited Pasargadae, to present to each Persian womanwho appeared before him a sum equal to twenty Attic drachmas, or aboutsixteen shillings of our money. This custom commemorated the servicerendered by the sex in the battle wherein Cyrus first repulsed theforces of Astyages. 

The substitution of definite burthens on the subject in lieu of variableand uncertain charges was aimed at, rather than effected, by the newarrangement of the revenue which is associated with the name of Darius. This arrangement consisted in fixing everywhere the amount of tributein money and in kind which each satrapy was to furnish to the crown. Adefinite money payment, varying, in ordinary satrapies, from 170 to1000 Babylonian silver talents, 330 or from L42, 000. To L250, 000. Of ourmoney, and amounting, in the exceptional case of the Indian satrapy, toabove a million sterling, was required annually by the sovereign, and had to be remitted by the satrap to the capital. Besides this, apayment, the nature and amount of which was also fixed, had to be madein kind, each province being required to furnish that commodity, orthose commodities, for which it was most celebrated. This latter burthenmust have pressed very unequally on different portions of the Empire, if the statement of Herodotus be true that Babylonia and Assyria paidone-third of it. The payment seems to have been very considerablein amount. Egypt had to supply grain sufficient for the nutriment of120, 000 Persian troops quartered in the country. Media had to contribute100, 000 sheep, 4000 mules, and 3000 horses; Cappadocia, half the abovenumber of each kind of animal; Armenia furnished 20, 000 colts; Ciliciagave 360 white horses and a sum of 140 talents (L35, 000. ) in lieuof further tribute in kind. Babylonia, besides corn, was required tofurnish 500 boy eunuchs. These charges, however, were all fixed by thecrown, and may have been taken into consideration in assessing the moneypayment, the main object of the whole arrangement evidently being tomake the taxation of each province proportionate to its wealth andresources. 

The assessment of the taxation upon the different portions of hisprovince was left to the satrap. We do not know on what principles heordinarily proceeded, or whether any uniform principles at all wereobserved throughout the Empire. But we find some evidence that, inplaces at least, the mode of exaction and collection was by a land-tax. The assessment upon individuals, and the actual collection from them, devolved, in all probability, on the local authorities, who distributedthe burthen imposed upon their town, village, or district as theythought proper. Thus the foreign oppressor did not come into directcontact with the mass of the conquered people, who no doubt paid thecalls made upon them with less reluctance through the medium of theirown proper magistrates. 

If the taxation of the subject had stopped here, he would have hadno just ground of complaint against his rulers. The population of theEmpire cannot be estimated at less than forty millions of souls. Thehighest estimate of the value of the entire tribute, both in money andkind, will scarcely place it at more than ten millions sterling. Thusfar, then, the burthen of taxation would certainly not have exceededfive shillings a head per annum. Perhaps it would not have reached halfthat amount. But, unhappily, neither was the tribute the sole tax whichthe crown exacted from its subjects, nor had the crown the sole rightof exacting taxation. Persian subjects in many parts of the Empire paid, besides their tribute, a water-rate, which is expressly said to havebeen very productive. The rivers of the Empire were the king's; and whenwater was required for irrigation, a state officer superintended theopening of the sluices, and regulated the amount of the precious fluidwhich might be drawn off by each tribe or township. For the opening ofthe sluices a large sum was paid to the officer, which found its wayinto the coffers of the state. Further, it appears that such thingsas fisheries--and if so, probably salt-works, mines, quarries, andforests--were regarded as crown property, and yielded large sums to therevenue. They appear to have been farmed to responsible persons, whoundertook to pay at a certain fixed rate, and made what profit theycould by the transaction. The price of commodities thus farmed would begreatly enhanced to the consumer. 

By these means the actual burthen of taxation upon the subject wasrendered to some extent uncertain and indefinite, and the benefits ofthe fixed tribute system were diminished. But the chief drawback uponit has still to be mentioned. While the claims of the crown upon itssubjects were definite and could not be exceeded, the satrap was atliberty to make any exactions that he pleased beyond them. Thereis every reason to believe that he received no stipend, and that, consequently, the burthen of supporting him, his body-guard, and hisCourt was intended to fall on the province which had the benefit of hissuperintendence. Like a Roman proconsul, he was to pay himself out ofthe pockets of his subjects; and, like that class of persons, he tookcare to pay himself highly. It has been calculated that one satrap ofBabylon drew from his province annually in actual coin a sum equal toL100, 000. Of our money. We can scarcely doubt that the claims made bythe provincial governors were, on the average, at least equal tothose of the crown; and they had the disadvantage of being irregular, uncertain, and purely arbitrary. 

Thus, what was gained by the new system was not so much the relief ofthe subject from uncertain taxation as the advantage to the crown ofknowing beforehand what the revenue would be, and being able to regulateits expenditure accordingly. Still a certain amount of benefit didundoubtedly accrue to the provincials from the system; since it gavethem the crown for their protector. So long as the payments made to thestate were irregular, it was, or at least seemed to be, for the interestof the crown to obtain from each province as much as it could anyhowpay. When the state dues were once fixed, as the crown gained nothing bythe rapacity of its officers, but rather lost, since the province becameexhausted, it was interested in checking greed, and seeing that theprovinces were administered by wise and good satraps. 

The control of its great officers is always the main difficulty of adespotic government, when it is extended over a large space of territoryand embraces many millions of men. The system devised by Darius forchecking and controlling his satraps was probably the best that hasever yet been brought into operation. His plan was to establish in everyprovince at least three officers holding their authority directly fromthe crown, and only responsible to it, who would therefore act as checksone upon another. These were the satrap, the military commandant, andthe secretary. The satrap was charged with the civil administration, andespecially with the department of finance. The commandant was supremeover the troops. The office of the secretary is less clearly defined;but it probably consisted mainly in keeping the Court informed bydespatches of all that went on in the province. Thus, if the satrapwere inclined to revolt, he had, in the first place, to persuade thecommandant, who would naturally think that, if he ran the risk, it mightas well be for himself; and, further, he had to escape the lynx eyes ofthe secretary, whose general right of superintendence gave him entranceeverywhere, and whose prospects of advancement would probably depend agood deal upon the diligence and success with which he discharged theoffice of "King's Eye" and "Ear. " So, if the commandant were ambitiousof independent sway, he must persuade the satrap, or he would have nomoney to pay his troops; and he too must blind the secretary, or elsebribe him into silence. As for the secretary, having neither mennor money at his command, it was impossible that he should think ofrebellion. 

But the precautions taken against revolt did not end here. Once a year, according to Xenophon, or more probably at irregular intervals, anofficer came suddenly down from the Court with a commission to inspecta province. Such persons were frequently of royal rank, brothers or sonsof the king. They were accompanied by an armed force, and were empoweredto correct whatever was amiss in the province, and in case of necessityto report to the crown the insubordination or incompetency of itsofficers. If this system had been properly maintained, it is evidentthat it would have acted as a most powerful check upon misgovernment, and would have rendered revolt almost impossible. 

Another mode by which it was sought to secure the fidelity of thesatraps and commandants was by choosing them from among the king's bloodrelations, or else attaching them to the crown by marriage with one ofthe princesses. It was thought that the affection of sons and brotherswould be a restraint upon their ambition, and that even connections bymarriage would feel that they had an interest in upholding the power anddignity of the great house with which they had been thought worthy ofalliance. This system, which was entensively followed by Darius, had onthe whole good results, and was at any rate preferable to that barbarouspolicy of prudential fratricide which has prevailed widely in Orientalgovernments. 

The system of checks, while it was effectual for the object at which itspecially aimed, had one great disadvantage. It weakened the hands ofauthority in times of difficulty. When danger, internal or external, threatened, it was an evil that the powers of government should bedivided, and the civil authority lodged in the hands of one officer, themilitary in those of another. Concentration of power is needed for rapidand decisive action, for unity of purpose, and secrecy both of plan andof execution. These considerations led to a modification of the originalidea of satrapial government, which was adopted partially at first--inprovinces especially exposed to danger, internal or external--but whichultimately became almost universal. The offices of satrap, or civiladministrator, and commandant, or commander of the troops, were vestedin the same person, who came in this way to have that full and completeauthority which is possessed by Turkish pashas and modern Persiankhans or beys--an authority practically uncontrolled. This system wasadvantageous for the defence of a province against foes; but it wasdangerous to the stability of the Empire, since it led naturally to theoccurrence of formidable rebellions. 

Two minor points in the scheme of Darius remain to be noticed, beforethis account of his governmental system can be regarded as complete. These are his institution of posts, and his coinage of money. 

In Darius's idea of government was included rapidity of communication. Regarding it as of the utmost importance that the orders of the Courtshould be speedily transmitted to the provincial governors, and thattheir reports and those of the royal secretaries should be receivedwithout needless delay, he established along the lines of routes alreadyexisting between the chief cities of the Empire a number of post-houses, placed at regular intervals, according to the estimated capacity of ahorse to gallop at his best speed without stopping. At each post-housewere maintained, at the cost of the state, a number of couriers andseveral relays of horses. When a despatch was to be forwarded it wastaken to the first post-house along the route, where a courier receivedit, and immediately mounting on horseback galloped with it to the nextstation. Here it was delivered to a new courier, who, mounted on a freshhorse, took it the next stage on its journey; and thus it passed fromhand to hand till it reached its destination. According to Xenophon, themessengers travelled by night as well as by day; and the conveyance wasso rapid that some even compared it to the flight of birds. Excellentinns or caravanserais were to be found at every station; bridges orferries were established upon all the streams; guard-houses occurredhere and there, and the whole route was kept secure from the brigandswho infested the Empire. Ordinary travellers were glad to pursue soconvenient a line of march; it does not appear, however, that they couldobtain the use of post-horses even when the government was in no needof them. The coinage of Darius consisted, it is probable, both of a goldand silver issue. It is not perhaps altogether certain that he wasthe first king of Persia who coined money; but, if the term "daric" isreally derived from his name, that alone would be a strong argument infavor of his claim to priority. In any case, it is indisputable thathe was the first Persian king who coined on a large scale, and it isfurther certain that his gold coinage was regarded in later times as ofpeculiar value on account of its purity. His gold darics appear to havecontained, on an average, not quite 124 grains of pure metal, whichwould make their value about twenty two shillings of our money. They were of the type usual at the time both in Lydia and inGreece--flattened lumps of metal, very thick in comparison with the sizeof their surface, irregular, and rudely stamped. The silver daricswere similar in general character, but exceeded the gold in size. Theirweight was from 224 to 230 grains, and they would thus have been worthnot quite three shillings of our money. It does not appear that anyother kinds of coins besides these were ever issued from the Persianmint. They must, therefore, it would seem, have satisfied the commercialneeds of the people. 

From this review of the governmental system of Darius we must now returnto the actions of his later life. The history of an Oriental monarchymust always be composed mainly of a series of biographies; for, as themonarch is all in all in such communities, his sayings, doings, andcharacter, not only determine, but constitute, the annals of the State. In the second period of his reign, that which followed on the time oftrouble and disturbance, Darius (as has been already observed)appears to have pursued mainly the arts of peace. Bent on settling andconsolidating his Empire, he set up everywhere the satrapial form ofgovernment, organized and established his posts, issued his coinage, watched over the administration of justice, and in various waysexhibited a love of order and method, and a genius for systematicarrangement. At the same time he devoted considerable attention toornamental and architectural works, to sculpture, and to literarycomposition. He founded the royal palace at Susa, which was the mainresidence of the later kings. At Persepolis he certainly erected onevery important building; and it is on the whole most probable that hedesigned--if he did not live to execute--the Chehl Minor itself--thechief of the magnificent structures upon the great central platform. Themassive platform itself, with its grand and stately steps, is certainlyof his erection, for it is inscribed with his name. He gave his worksall the solidity and strength that is derivable from the use of hugeblocks of a good hard material. He set the example of ornamenting thestepped approached to a palace with elaborate bas-reliefs. He designedand caused to be constructed in his own lifetime the rock-tomb atNakhsh-i-Rustam, in which his remains were afterwards laid. Therock-sculpture at Behistun was also his work. In attention to thecreation of permanent historical records he excelled all the Persiankings, both before him and after him. The great Inscription of Behistunhas no parallel in ancient times for length, finish, and delicacyof execution, unless it be in Assyria or in Egypt. The only reallyhistorical inscription at Persepolis is one set up by Darius. He was theonly Persian king, except perhaps one, who placed an inscription uponhis tomb. The later monarchs in their records do little more than repeatcertain religious phrases and certain forms of self-glorification whichoccur in the least remarkable inscriptions of their great predecessor. He alone oversteps those limits, and presents us with geographicalnotices and narratives of events profoundly interesting to thehistorian. 

During this period of comparative peace, which may have extendedfrom about B. C. 516 to B. C. 508 or 507, the general tranquillity wasinterrupted by at least one important expedition. The administrationalmerits of Darius are so great that they have obscured his militaryglories, and have sent him down to posterity with the character of anunwarlike monarch--if not a mere "peddler, " as his subjects said, yet, at any rate, a mere consolidator and arranger. But the son of Hystaspeswas no carpet prince. He had not drawn the sword against his domesticfoes to sheath it finally and forever when his triumph over them wascompleted. On the contrary, he regarded it as incumbent on him to carryon the aggressive policy of Cyrus and Cambyses, his great predecessors, and like them to extend in one direction or another the boundaries ofthe Empire. Perhaps he felt that aggression was the very law of theEmpire's being, since if the military spirit was once allowed to becomeextinct in the conquering nation, they would lose the sole guarantee oftheir supremacy. At any rate, whatever his motive, we find him, afterhe had snatched a brief interval of repose, engaging in great warsboth towards his eastern and his western frontier--wars which in bothinstances had results of considerable importance. 

The first grand expedition was towards the East. Cyrus, as we have seen, had extended the Persian sway over the mountains of Affghanistan and thehighlands from which flow the tributaries of the Upper Indus. From theseeminences the Persian garrisons looked down on a territory possessingevery quality that could attract a powerful conqueror. Fertile, well-watered, rich in gold, peopled by an ingenious yet warlike race, which would add strength no less than wealth to its subjugators, thePunjab lay at the foot of the Sufeid Koh and Suliman ranges, invitingthe attack of those who could swoop down when they pleased upon the lowcountry. It was against this region that Darius directed his first greataggressive effort. Having explored the course of the Indus from Attockto the sea by means of boats, and obtained, we may suppose, in this waysome knowledge of the country and its inhabitants, he led or sent anexpedition into the tract, which in a short time succeeded in completelyreducing it. The Punjab, and probably the whole valley of the Indus, wasannexed, and remained subject till the later times of the Empire. Theresults of this conquest were the acquisition of a brave race, capableof making excellent soldiers, an enormous increase of the revenue, asudden and vast influx of gold into Persia, which led probably to theintroduction of the gold coinage, and the establishment of commercialrelations with the natives, which issued in a regular trade carriedon by coasting-vessels between the mouths of the Indus and the PersianGulf. 

The next important expedition--one probably of still greatermagnitude--took exactly the opposite direction. The sea which boundedthe Persian dominion to the west and the north-west narrowed in twoplaces to dimensions not much exceeding those of of the greater Asiaticrivers. The eye which looked across the Thracian Bosphorus or theHellespont seemed to itself to be merely contemplating the oppositebank of a pretty wide stream. Darius, consequently being master ofAsia Minor, and separated by what seemed to him so poor a barrierfrom fertile tracts of vast and indeed indefinite extent, such as werenowhere else to be found on the borders of his empire, naturally turnedhis thoughts of conquest to this quarter. His immediate desire was, probably, to annex Thrace; but he may have already entertained widerviews, and have looked to embracing in his dominions the lovely islesand coasts of Greece also, so making good the former threats of Cyrus. The story of the voyage and escape of Democedes, related by Herodotuswith such amplitude of detail, and confirmed to some extent from othersources, cannot be a mere myth without historical foundation. Nor isit probable that the expedition was designed merely for the purpose of"indulging the exile with a short visit to his native country, " or ofcollecting "interesting information. " If by the king's orders a vesselwas fitted out at Sidon to explore the coasts of Greece under theguidance of Democedes, which proceeded as far as Crotona in MagnaGrsecia, we may be tolerably sure that a political object lay at thebottom of the enterprise. It would have exactly the same aim and end asthe eastern voyage of Scylax, and would be intended, like that, to pavethe way for a conquest. Darius was therefore, it would seem, alreadycontemplating the reduction of Greece Proper, and did not requireto have it suggested to him by any special provocation. Mentally, oractually, surveying the map of the world, so far as it was known tohim, he saw that in this direction only there was an attractive countryreadily accessible. Elsewhere his Empire abutted on seas, sandy deserts, or at best barren steppes; here, and here only, was there a rich prizeclose at hand and (as it seemed) only waiting to be grasped. 

But if the aggressive force of Persia was to be turned in thisdirection, if the stream of conquest was to be set westward along theflanks of Rhodope and Haemus, it was essential to success, and even tosafety, that the line of communication with Asia should remain intact. Now, there lay on the right flank of an army marching into Europe a vastand formidable power, known to be capable of great efforts, which, ifallowed to feel itself secure from attack, might be expected at anytime to step in, to break the line of communication between the eastand west, and to bring the Persians who should be engaged in conqueringPseonia, Macedonia, and Greece, into imminent danger. It is greatly tothe credit of Darius that he saw this peril--saw it and took effectualmeasures to guard against it. The Scythian expedition was no insaneproject of a frantic despot, burning for revenge, or ambitious of animpossible conquest. It has all the appearance of being a well-laidplan, conceived by a moderate and wise prince, for the furtherance ofa great design, and the permanent advantage of his empire. The lord ofSouth-Western Asia was well aware of the existence beyond his northernfrontier of a standing menace to his power. A century had not sufficedto wipe out the recollection of that terrible time when Scythian hordeshad carried desolation far and wide over the fairest of the regions thatwere now under the Persian dominion. What had occurred once might recur. Possibly, as a modern author suggests, "the remembrance of ancientinjuries may have been revived by recent aggressions. " It was at anyrate essential to strike terror into the hordes of the Steppe Region inorder that Western Asia might attain a sense of security. It was stillmore essential to do so if the north-west was to become the sceneof war, and the Persians were to make a vigorous effort to establishthemselves permanently in Europe. Scythia, it must be remembered, reached to the banks of the Danube. An invader, who aspired to theconquest even of Thrace, was almost forced into collision with her nextneighbor. 

Darius, having determined on his course, prefaced his expedition by araid, the object of which was undoubtedly to procure information. Heordered Ariaramnes, satrap of Cappadocia, to cross the Euxine with asmall fleet, and, descending suddenly upon the Scythian coast, to carryoff a number of prisoners. Ariaramnes executed the commission skilfully, and was so fortunate as to make prize of a native of high rank, thebrother of a Scythian chief or king. From this person and his companionsthe Persian monarch was able to obtain all the information which herequired. Thus enlightened, he proceeded to make his preparations. Collecting a fleet of 600 ships, chiefly from the Greeks of Asia, andan army estimated at from 700, 000 to 800, 000 men, which was made upof contingents from all the nations under his rule, he crossed theBosphorus by a bridge of boats constructed by Mandrocles a Samian;marched through Thrace along the line of the Little Balkan, receivingthe submission of the tribes as he went; crossed the Great Balkan;conquered the Getae, who dwelt between that range and the Danube; passedthe Danube by a bridge, which the Ionian Greeks had made with theirvessels just above the apex of the Delta; and so invaded Scythia. Thenatives had received intelligence of his approach, and had resolved notto risk a battle. They retired as he advanced, and endeavored to bringhis army into difficulties by destroying the forage, driving off thecattle, and filling in the wells. But the commissariat of the Persianswas, as usual, well arranged. Darius remained for more than two monthsin Scythia without incurring any important losses. He succeeded inparading before the eyes of the whole nation the immense military powerof his empire. He no doubt inflicted considerable damage on the hordes, whose herds he must often have captured, and whose supplies of forage hecurtailed. It is difficult to say how far he penetrated. Herodotus wasinformed that he marched east to the Tanais (Don), and thence north tothe country of the Budini, where he burnt the staple of Gelonus, whichcannot well have been below the fiftieth parallel, and was probablynot far from Voronej. It is certainly astonishing that he should haveventured so far inland, and still more surprising that, having doneso, he should have returned with his army well-nigh intact. But we canscarcely suppose the story that he destroyed the staple of the Greektrade a pure fiction. He would be glad to leave his mark in the country, and might make an extraordinary effort to reach the only town that wasto be found in the whole steppe region. Having effected his purpose byits destruction, he would retire, falling back probably upon the coast, where he could obtain supplies from his fleet. It is beyond dispute thathe returned with the bulk of his army, having suffered no loss butthat of a few invalid troops whom he sacrificed. Attempts had been madeduring his absence to induce the Greeks, who guarded the bridge overthe Danube, to break it, and so hinder his return; but they wereunsuccessful. Darius recrossed the river after an interval of somewhatmore than two months, victorious according to his own notions, andregarded himself as entitled thenceforth to enumerate among the subjectraces of his empire "the Scyths beyond the sea. " On his return marchthrough Thrace, he met, apparently, with no opposition. Before passingthe Bosphorus, he gave a commission to one of his generals, a certainMegabazus, to complete the reduction of Thrace, and assigned him for thepurpose a body of 80, 000 men, who remained in Europe while Darius andthe rest of his army crossed into Asia. 

Megabazus appears to have been fully worthy of the trust reposed in him. In a single campaign (B. C. 506) he overran and subjugated the entiretract between the Propontis and the Strymon, thus pushing forward thePersian dominion to the borders of Macedonia. Among the tribes which heconquered were the Perinthians, Greeks; the Pseti, Cicones, Bistones, Sapaei, Dersaei and Edoni, Thracians; and the Paeoplae and Siripasones, Pseonians. These last, to gratify a whim of Darius, were transportedinto Asia. The Thracians who submitted were especially those of thecoast, no attempt, apparently, being made to penetrate the mountainfastnesses and bring under subjection the tribes of the interior. 

The first contact between Persia and Macedonia possesses peculiarinterest from the circumstances of the later history. An ancestor ofAlexander the Great sat upon the throne of Macedon when the general ofDarius was brought in his career of conquest to the outskirts of theMacedonian power. The kingdom was at this time comparatively small, notextending much beyond Mount Bermius on the one hand, and not reachingvery far to the east of the Axius on the other. Megabazus saw in it, we may be sure, not the fated destroyer of the Empire which he wasextending, but a petty state which the mere sound of the Persianname would awe into subjection. He therefore, instead of invading thecountry, contented himself with sending an embassy, with a demandfor earth and water, the symbols, according to Persian custom, ofsubmission. Amyntas, the Macedonian king, consented, to the demandat once; and though, owing to insolent conduct on the part of theambassadors, they were massacred with their whole retinue, yet thiscircumstance did not prevent the completion of Macedonian vassalage. When a second embassy was sent to inquire into the fate of the first, Alexander, the son of Amyntas, who had arranged the massacre, contrivedto have the matter hushed up by bribing one of the envoys with a largesum of money and the hand of his sister, Gygsea. Macedonia took up theposition of a subject kingdom, and owned for her true lord the greatmonarch of Western Asia. 

Megabazus, having accomplished the task assigned him, proceeded toSardis, where Darius had remained almost, if not quite, a full year Hisplace was taken by Otanes, the son of Sisamnes, a different person fromthe conspirator, who rounded off the Persian conquests in these partsby reducing, probably in B. C. 505, the cities of Byzantium, Chalcedon, Antandrus, and Lamponium, with the two adjacent islands of Letnnos andImbrus. The inhabitants of all were, it appears, taxable, either withhaving failed to give contingents towards the Scythian expedition, or with having molested it on its return--crimes these, which Otanesthought it right to punish by their general enslavement. 

Darius, meanwhile, had proceeded to the seat of government, whichappears at this time to have been Susa. He had perhaps already builtthere the great palace, whose remains have been recently disinterredby English enterprise; or he may have wished to superintend the work ofconstruction. Susa, which was certainly from henceforth the main Persiancapital, possessed advantages over almost any other site. Its climatewas softer than that of Ecbatana and Persepolis, less sultry than thatof Babylon. Its position was convenient for communicating both withthe East and with the West. Its people were plastic, and probablymore yielding and submissive than the Medes or the Persians. The king, fatigued with his warlike exertions, was glad for a while to rest andrecruit himself at Susa, in the tranquil life of the Court. For someyears he appears to have conceived no new aggressive project; and hemight perhaps have forgotten his designs upon Greece altogether, had nothis memory been stirred by a signal and extraordinary provocation. 

The immediate circumstances which led to the Ionian Revolt belong toGreek rather than to Persian history, and have been so fully treated ofby the historians of the Hellenic race that a knowledge of them may beassumed as already possessed by the reader. What is chiefly remarkableabout them is, that they are so purely private and personal. A chancequarrel between Aristagoras of Miletus and the Persian Megabates, pecuniary difficulties pressing on the former, and the natural desireof Histiseus, father-in-law of Aristagoras, to revisit his native place, were undoubtedly the direct and immediate causes of what became agreat national outbreak. That there must have been other and widerpredisposing causes can scarcely be doubted. Among them two may besuggested. The presence of Darius in Asia Minor, and his friendlinesstowards the tyrants who bore sway in most of the Greek cities, werecalculated to elate those persons in their own esteem, and to encouragein them habits and acts injurious or offensive to their subjects. Theirtyranny under these circumstances would become more oppressive andgalling. At the same time the popular mind could not fail to associatetogether the native despot and the foreign lord, who (it was clear toall) supported and befriended each other. If the Greeks of Asia, like somany of their brethren in Europe, had grown weary of their tyrantsand were desirous of rising against them, they would be compelled tocontemplate the chances of a successful resistance to the Persians. And here there were circumstances in the recent history calculatedto inspirit them and give them hopes. Six hundred Greek ships, mannedprobably by 120, 000 men, had been lately brought together, and hadformed a united fleet. The fate of the Persian land-army had dependedon their fidelity. It is not surprising that a sense of strength shouldhave been developed, and something like a national spirit should havegrown up in such a condition of things. 

If this were the state of feeling among the Greeks, the merit ofAristagoras would be, that he perceived it, and, regardless of all classprejudices, determined to take advantage of the chance which it gavehim of rising superior to his embarrassments. Throwing himself on thepopular feeling, the strength of which he had estimated aright, he bythe same act gave freedom to the cities, and plunged his nation intoa rebellion against Persia. It was easy for reason to show, when thematter was calmly debated, that the probabilities of success againstthe might of Darius were small. But the arrest of the tyrants byAristagoras, and his deliverance of them into the hands of theirsubjects, was an appeal to passion against which reason was powerless. No state could resist the temptation of getting rid of the tyranny underwhich it groaned. But the expulsion of the vassal committed those whotook part in it to resist in arms the sovereign lord. 

In the original revolt appear to have been included only the citiesof Ionia and AEolis. Aristagoras felt that some further strength wasneeded, and determined to seek it in European Greece. Repulsed fromSparta, which was disinclined to so distant an expedition, he appliedfor aid to cities on which he had a special claim. Miletus countedAthens as her mother state; and Eretria was indebted to her forassistance in her great war with Chalcis. Applying in these quartersAristagoras succeeded better, but still obtained no very important help. Athens voted him twenty ships, Eretria five and with the promise ofthese succors he hastened back to Asia. 

The European contingent soon afterwards arrived; and Aristagoras, anxious to gain some signal success which should attract men to hiscause, determined on a most daring enterprise. This was no less than anattack on Sardis, the chief seat of the Persian power in these parts, and by far the most important city of Asia Minor. Sailing to Ephesus, hemarched up the valley of the Cayster, crossed Mount Tmolus, and tookthe Lydian capital at the first onset. Artaphernes, the satrap, was onlyable to save the citadel; the invaders began to plunder the town, and inthe confusion it caught fire and was burnt. Aristagoras and his troopshastily retreated, but were overtaken before they could reach Ephesus bythe Persians quartered in the province, who fell upon them and gavethem a severe defeat. The expedition then broke up; the Asiatic Greeksdispersed among their cities; the Athenians and Eretrians took ship andsailed home. 

Results followed that could scarcely have been anticipated. The failureof the expedition was swallowed up in the glory of its one achievement. It had taken Sardis--it had burnt one of the chief cities of the GreatKing. The news spread like wildfire on every side, and was proclaimedaloud in places where the defeat of Ephesus was never even whispered. Everywhere revolt burst out. The Greeks of the Hellespont--not onlythose of Asia but likewise those of Europe--the Carians and Caunians ofthe south-western coast--even the distant Cyprians broke into rebellion;the Scythians took heart and made a plundering raid through the GreatKing's Thracian territories;4 vassal monarchs, like Miltiades, assumedindependence, and helped themselves to some of the fragments of theEmpire that seemed falling to pieces. If a great man, a Miltiades ora Leondias, had been at the head of the movement, and if it had beendecently supported from the European side, a successful issue mightprobably have been secured. 

But Aristagoras was unequal to the occasion; and the struggle forindependence, which had promised so fair, was soon put down. Despite anaval victory gained by the Greeks over the Phoenician fleet off Cyprus, that island was recovered by the Persians within a year. Despite acourage and a perseverance worthy of a better fate, the Carians weresoon afterwards forced to succumb. The reduction of the HellespontineGreeks and of the AEolians followed. The toils now closed around Ionia, and her cities began to be attacked one by one; whereupon the incapableAristagoras, deserting the falling cause, betook himself to Europe, where a just Nemesis pursued him: he died by a Thracian sword. Afterthis the climax soon arrived. Persia concentrated her strength uponMiletus, the cradle of the revolt, and the acknowledged chief of thecities; and though her sister states came gallantly to her aid, and afleet was collected which made it for a while doubtful which way victorymight incline, yet all was of no avail. Laziness and insubordinationbegan and treachery completed the work which all the force of Persiamight have failed to accomplish; the combined Ionian fleet was totallydefeated in the battle of Lade; and soon after Miletus herself fell. The bulk of her inhabitants were transported into inner Asia and settledupon the Persian Gulf. The whole Ionian coast was ravaged, and thecities punished by the loss of their most beautiful maidens and youths. The islands off the coast were swept of their inhabitants. The cities onthe Hellespont and Sea of Marmora were burnt. Miltiades barely escapedfrom the Chersonese with the loss of his son and his kingdom. The flamesof rebellion were everywhere ruthlessly trampled out; and the powerof the Great King was once more firmly established over the coasts andislands of the Propontis and the Egean Sea. 

It remained, however, to take vengeance upon the foreigners who haddared to lend their aid to the king's revolted subjects, and had bornea part in the burning of Sardis. The pride of the Persians felt suchinterference as an insult of the grossest kind: and the tale may well betrue that Darius, from the time that he first heard the news, employedan officer to bid him daily "remember Athens. " The schemes which he hadformerly entertained with respect to the reduction of Greece recurredwith fresh force to his mind; and the task of crushing the revolt was nosooner completed than he proceeded to attempt their execution. Selecting Mardonius, son of Gobryas the conspirator, and one of hisown sons-in-law, for general, he gave him the command of a powerfulexpedition, which was to advance by way of Thrace, Macedonia, andThessaly, against Eretria and Athens. At the same time, with a wisdomwhich we should scarcely have expected in an Oriental, he commissionedhim, ere he quitted Asia, to depose the tyrants who bore rule in theGreek cities, and to allow the establishment of democracies in theirstead. Such a measure was excellently calculated to preserve thefidelity of the Hellenic population and to prevent any renewal ofdisturbance. It gave ample employment to unquiet spirits by opening tothem a career in their own states--and it removed the grievance which, more than anything else, had produced the recent rebellion. 

Mardonius having effected this change proceeded into Europe. He had alarge land force and a powerful navy, and at first was successful bothby land and sea. The fleet took Thasos, an island valuable for itsmines; and the army forced the Macedonians to exchange their positionof semi-independence for that of full Persian subjects, liable to bothtribute and military service. But this fair dawn was soon overcast. Asthe fleet was rounding Athos a terrible tempest arose which, destroyed300 triremes and more than 20, 000 men, some of whom were devoured bysea-monsters, while the remainder perished by drowning. On shore, a night attack of the Brygi, a Thracian tribe dwelling in the tractbetween the Strymon and the Axius, brought disaster upon the land force, numbers of which were slain, while Mardonius himself received a wound. This disgrace, indeed, was retrieved by subsequent operations, whichforced the Brygi to make their submission; but the expedition founditself in no condition to advance further, and Mardonius retreated intoAsia. 

Darius, however, did not allow failure to turn him from his purpose. The attack of Mardonius was followed within two years by the well-knownexpedition under Datis (B. C. 490), which, avoiding the dangers of Athos, sailed direct to its object, crossing the Egean by the line of theCyclades, and falling upon Eretria and Attica. Eretria's punishmentwarned the Athenians to resist to the uttermost; and the skill ofMiltiades, backed by the valor of his countrymen, gave to Athens thegreat victory of Marathon. Datis fell back upon Asia, having sufferedworse disasters than his predecessor, and bore to the king themelancholy tidings that his vast force of from 100, 000 to 200, 000 menhad been met and worsted by 20, 000 Athenians and Plataeans. 

Still Darius was not shaken in his resolution. He only issued freshorders for the collection of men, ships, and materials. For three yearsAsia resounded with the din of preparation; and it is probable that inthe fourth year a fresh expedition would have been led into Greece, hadnot an important occurrence prevented it. Egypt, always discontentedwith its subject position under a race which despised its religion, andperhaps occasionally persecuted it, broke out into open revolt (B. C. 487). Darius, it seems, determined to divide his forces, and proceedsimultaneously against both enemies; he even contemplated leading oneof the two expeditions in person; but before his preparations werecompleted his vital powers failed. He died in the year following theEgyptian revolt (B. C. 486), in the sixty-third year of his age, andthe thirty-sixth of his reign, leaving his crown to his eldest son byAtossa, Xerxes. 

The character of Darius will have revealed itself with tolerableclearness in the sketch which has been here given of the chief eventsof his reign. But a brief summary of some of its main points may not besuperfluous. Darius Hystaspis was, next to Cyrus, the greatest of thePersian kings; and he was even superior to Cyrus in some particulars. His military talent has been underrated. Though not equal to the founderof the Empire in this respect, he deserves the credit of energy, vigor, foresight, and judicious management in his military expeditions, ofpromptness in resolving and ability in executing, of discrimination inthe selection of generals, and of a power of combination not often foundin Oriental commanders. He was personally brave, and quite willing toexpose himself, even in his old age, to dangers and hardships. Buthe did not unnecessarily thrust himself into peril. He was content toemploy generals, where the task to be accomplished did not seem to bebeyond their powers; and he appears to have been quite free from anunworthy jealousy of their successes. He was a man of kindly and warmfeeling--strongly attached to his friends; he was clement and evengenerous towards conquered foes. When he thought the occasion requiredit, he could be severe but his inclination was towards mildness andindulgence. He excelled all the other Persian kings in the arts ofpeace. To him, and him alone, the Empire owed its organization. He wasa skilful administrator, a good financier, and a wise and far-seeingruler. Of all the Persian princes he is the only one who can be called"many-sided. " He was organizer, general, statesman, administrator, builder, patron of arts and literature, all in one. Without him Persiawould probably have sunk as rapidly as she rose, and would be known tous only as one of the many meteor powers which have shot athwart thehorizon of the East. 

Xerxes, the eldest son of Darius by Atossa, succeeded his father byvirtue of a formal act of choice. It was a Persian custom that the king, before he went out of his dominions on an expedition, should nominate asuccessor. Darius must have done this before his campaign in Thraceand Scythia; and if Xerxes was then, as is probable, a mere boy, it isimpossible that he should have received the appointment. Artobazanes, the eldest of all Darius's sons, whose mother, a daughter of Gobryas, was married to Darius before he became king, was most likely thennominated, and was thenceforth regarded as the heir-apparent. When, however, towards the close of his reign Darius again proposed to heada foreign expedition, an opportunity occurred of disturbing thisarrangement, of which Atossa, Darius's favorite wife, whose influenceover her husband was unbounded, determined to take advantage. Accordingto the law, a fresh signification of the sovereign's will was nowrequisite; and Atossa persuaded Darius to make it in favor of Xerxes. The pleas put forward were, first, that he was the eldest son of theking, and secondly, that he was descended from Cyrus. This latterargument could not fail to have weight. Backed by the influence ofAtossa, it prevailed over all other considerations; and hence Xerxesobtained the throne. 

If we may trust the informants of Herodotus, it was the wish of Xerxeson his accession to discontinue the preparations against Greece, andconfine his efforts to the re-conquest of Egypt. Though not devoid ofambition, he may well have been distrustful of his own powers; and, having been nurtured in luxury, he may have shrunk from the perils of acampaign in unknown regions. But he was surrounded by advisers who hadinterests opposed to his inclinations, and who worked on his faciletemper till they prevailed on him to take that course which seemed bestcalculated to promote their designs. Mardonius was anxious to retrievehis former failure, and expected, if Greece were conquered, that therich prize would become his own satrapy. The refugee princes of thefamily of Pisistratus hoped to be reinstated under Persian influence asdependent despots of Athens. Demaratus of Sparta probably cherisheda similar expectation with regard to that capital. The Persian noblesgenerally, who profited by the spoils of war, and who were still full ofthe military spirit, looked forward with pleasure to an expeditionfrom which they anticipated victory, plunder, and thousands of valuablecaptives. The youthful king was soon persuaded that the example of hispredecessors required him to undertake some fresh conquest, while thehonor of Persia absolutely demanded that the wrongs inflicted upon herby Athens should be avenged. Before, however, turning his arms againstGreece, two revolts required his attention. In the year B. C. 485--thesecond of his reign--he marched into Egypt, which he rapidly reduced toobedience and punished by increasing its burthens. Soon afterwards heseems to have provoked a rebellion of the Babylonians by acts which theyregarded as impious, and avenged by killing their satrap, Zopyrus, andproclaiming their independence. Megabyzus, the son of Zopyrus, recoveredthe city, which was punished by the plunder and ruin of its famoustemple and the desolation of many of its shrines. 

Xerxes was now free to bend all his efforts against Greece, and, appreciating apparently to the full the magnitude and difficulty of thetask, resolved that nothing should be left undone which could possiblybe done in order to render success certain. The experience of formeryears had taught some important lessons. The failure of Datis had provedthat such an expedition as could be conveyed by sea across the Egeanwould be insufficient to secure the object sought, and that the onlysafe road for a conqueror whose land force constituted his real strengthwas along the shores of the European continent. But if a large armytook this long and circuitous route, it must be supported by a powerfulfleet; and this involved a new danger. The losses of Mardonius off Athoshad shown the perils of Egean navigation, and taught the lesson that thenaval force must be at first far more than proportionate to the needsof the army, in order that it might still be sufficient notwithstandingsome considerable disasters. At the same time they had indicated onespecial place of danger, which might be avoided, if proper measureswere taken. Xerxes, in the four years which followed on the reduction ofEgypt, continued incessantly to make the most gigantic preparationsfor his intended attack upon Greece, and among them included all theprecautions which a wise foresight could devise in order to ward offevery conceivable peril. A general order was issued to all the satrapsthroughout the Empire, calling on them to levy the utmost force of theirprovince for the new war; while, as the equipment of Oriental troopsdepends greatly on the purchase and distribution of arms by theircommander, a rich reward was promised to the satrap whose contingentshould appear at the appointed place and time in the most gallant array. Orders for ships and transports of different kinds were given to themaritime states, with such effect that above 1200 triremes and 3000vessels of an inferior description were collected together. Magazinesof corn were formed at various points along the intended line of route. Above all, it was determined to bridge the Hellespont by a firm andcompact structure, which it was thought would secure the communicationof the army from interruption by the elements; and at the same time itwas resolved to cut through the isthmus which joined Mount Athos to thecontinent, in order to preserve the fleet from disaster at that mostperilous part of the proposed voyage. These remarkable works, which madea deep impression on the minds of the Greeks, have been ascribed toa mere spirit of ostentation on the part of Xerxes; the vain-gloriousmonarch wished, it is supposed, to parade his power, and made a uselessbridge and an absurd cutting merely for the purpose of exhibiting tothe world the grandeur of his ideas and the extent of his resources. Butthere is no necessity for travelling beyond the line of ordinary humanmotive in order to discover a reason for the works in question. Thebridge across the Hellespont was a mere repetition of the constructionby which Darius had passed into Europe when he made his Scythianexpedition, and probably seemed to a Persian not a specially dignifiedor very wonderful way of crossing so narrow a strait, but merely thenatural mode of passage. The only respect in which the bridge of Xerxesdiffered from constructions with which the Persians were thoroughlyfamiliar, was in its superior solidity and strength. The shore-cableswere of unusual size and weight, and apparently of unusual materials;the formation of a double line--of two bridges, in fact, instead ofone--was almost without a parallel; and the completion of the work bylaying on the ordinary plank-bridge a solid causeway composed of earthand brushwood, with a high bulwark on either side, was probably, if notunprecedented, at any rate very uncommon. Boat-bridges were usually, as they are even now in the East, somewhat rickety constructions, whichanimals unaccustomed to them could with difficulty be induced to cross. The bridge of Xerxes was a high-road, as AEschylus calls it along, whichmen, horses, and vehicles might pass with as much comfort and facilityas they could move on shore. 

The utility of such a work is evident. Without it Xerxes must have beenreduced to the necessity of embarking in ships, conveying across thestrait, and disembarking, not only his entire host, but all its stores, tents, baggage, horses, camels, and sumpter-beasts. If the numbers ofhis army approached even the lowest estimate that has been formed ofthem, it is not too much to say that many weeks must have been spent inthis operation. As it was, the whole expedition marched across in sevendays. In the case of ship conveyance, continual accidents would havehappened: the transport would from time to time have been interrupted bybad weather; and great catastrophes might have occurred. By means of thebridge the passage was probably effected without any loss of either manor beast. Moreover, the bridge once established, there was a safeline of communication thenceforth between the army in Europe and theheadquarters of the Persian power in Asia, along which might passcouriers, supplies, and reinforcements, if they should be needed. Further, the grandeur, massiveness, and apparent stability of the workwas calculated to impose upon the minds of men, and to diminish theirpower of resistance by impressing them strongly with a sense of theirresistible greatness and strength of the invader. 

The canal of Athos was also quite a legitimate and judiciousundertaking. [PLATE LXI. ] No portion of the Greek coast is so dangerousas that about Athos. Greek boatmen even at the present day refuse toattempt the circumnavigation; and probably any government less apatheticthan that of the Turks would at once re-open the old cutting. The workwas one of very little difficulty, the breadth of the isthmus being lessthan a mile and a half, the material sand and marl, and the greatestheight of the natural ground above the level of the sea about fiftyfeet. The construction of a canal in such a locality was certainlybetter than the formation of a ship-groove or Diolcus--the substitutefor it proposed by Ferodotus, [PLATE LXI. ] not to mention that it isdoubtful whether at the time that this cutting was made ship-grooveswere known even to the Greeks. 

[Illustration: PLATE LXI. ]

Xerxes, having brought his preparations into a state of forwardness, having completed his canal and his bridge--after one failure with thelatter, for which the constructors and the sea were punished--proceeded, in the year B. C. 481, along the "Royal Road" from Susa to Sardis, andwintered at the Lydian capital. His army is said to have accompaniedhim; but more probably it joined him in the spring, flocking in, contingent after contingent, from the various provinces of his vastEmpire. Forty-nine nations, according to Herodotus, served under hisstandard; and their contingents made up a grand total of eighteenhundred thousand men. Of these, eighty thousand were cavalry, whiletwenty thousand rode in chariots or on camels; the remainder served onfoot. There are no sufficient means of testing these numbers. Figuresin the mouth of an Oriental are vague and almost unmeaning; armies arenever really counted: there is no such thing as a fixed and definite"strength" of a division or a battalion. Herodotus tells us that a roughattempt at numbering the infantry of the host was made on this occasion;but it was of so rude and primitive a description that little dependencecan be placed on the results obtained by it. Ten thousand men werecounted, and were made to stand close together; a line was then drawnround them, and a wall built on the line to the height of a man's waist;within the enclosure thus made all the troops in turn entered, and eachtime that the enclosure appeared to be full, ten thousand were supposedto be within it. Estimated in this way, the infantry was regarded asamounting to 1, 700, 000. It is clear that such mode of counting was ofthe roughest kind, and might lead to gross exaggeration. Each commanderwould wish his troops to be thought more numerous than they really were, and would cause the enclosure to appear full when several thousandsmore might still have found room within it. Nevertheless there would belimits beyond which exaggeration could not go; and if Xerxes was made tobelieve that the land force which he took with him into Europe amountedto nearly two millions of men, it is scarcely doubtful but that it musthave exceeded one million. 

The motley composition of such a host has been described in a formerchapter. Each nation was armed and equipped after its own fashion, andserved in a body, often under a distinct commander. The army marchedthrough Asia in a single column, which was not, however, continuous, but was broken into three portions. The first portion consisted of thebaggage animals and about half of the contingents of the nations; thesecond was composed wholly of native Persians, who preceded and followedthe emblems of religion and the king; the third was made up of theremaining national contingents. The king himself rode alternately ina chariot and in a litter. He was preceded immediately by ten sacredhorses, and a sacred chariot drawn by eight milk-white steeds. Roundhim and about him were the choicest troops of the whole army, twelvethousand horse and the same number of foot, all Persians, and those toonot taken at random, but selected carefully from the whole mass of thenative soldiery. Among them seem to have been the famous "Immortals"--apicked body of 10, 000 footmen, always maintained at exactly the samenumber, and thence deriving their appellation. 

The line of march from Sardis to Abydos was only partially along theshore. The army probably descended the valley of the Hermus nearly toits mouth, and then struck northward into the Caicus vale, crossingwhich it held on its way, with Mount Kara-dagh (Cane) on the left, across the Atarnean plain, and along the coast to Adramytium (Adramyti)and Antandros, whence it again struck inland, and, crossing the ridgeof Ida, descended into the valley of the Scamander. Some losses wereincurred from the effects of a violent thunderstorm amid the mountains;but they cannot have been of a any great consequence. On reaching theScamander the army found its first difficulty with respect to water. That stream was probably low, and the vast host of men and animalswere unable to obtain from it a supply sufficient for their wants. Thisphenomenon, we are told, frequently recurred afterwards; it surprisesthe English reader, but is not really astonishing, since, in hotcountries, even considerable streams are often reduced to mere threadsof water during the summer. 

Rounding the hills which skirt the Scamander valley upon the east, thearmy marched past Rhoeteum, Ophrynium, and Dardanus to Abydos. HereXerxes, seated upon a marble throne, which the people of Abydos haderected for him on the summit of a hill, was able to see at one glancehis whole, armament, and to feast his eyes with the sight. It is notlikely that any misgivings occurred to him at such a moment. Before himlay his vast host, covering with its dense masses the entire low groundbetween the hills and the sea; beyond was the strait, and to his leftthe open sea, white with the sails of four thousand ships; the greenfields of the Chersonese smiled invitingly a little further on; while, between him and the opposite shore, the long lines of his bridges laydarkling upon the sea, like a yoke placed upon the neck of a captive. Having seen all, the king gave his special attention to the fleet, whichhe now perhaps beheld in all its magnitude for the first time. Desirousof knowing which of his subjects were the best sailors, he gave ordersfor a sailing-match, which were at once carried out. The palm was borneoff by the Phoenicians of Sidon, who must have beaten not only their owncountrymen of Tyre, but the Greeks of Asia and the islands. 

On the next day the passage took place. It was accompanied by religiousceremonies. Waiting for the sacred hour of sunrise, the leader of thehost, as the first rays appeared, poured a libation from a golden gobletinto the sea, and prayed to Mithra that he might effect the conquest ofEurope. As he prayed he cast into the sea the golden goblet, and with ita golden bowl and a short Persian sword. Meanwhile the multitude strewedall the bridge with myrtle boughs, and perfumed it with clouds ofincense. The "Immortals" crossed first, wearing garlands on theirheads. The king, with the sacred chariot and horses passed over on thesecond day. For seven days and seven nights the human stream flowedon without intermission across one bridge, while the attendants and thebaggage-train made use of the other. The lash was employed to quickenthe movements of laggards. At last the whole army was in Europe, and themarch resumed its regularity. 

It is unnecessary to follow in detail the advance of the host along thecoast of Thrace, across Chalcidice, and round the Thermaic Gulf intoPieria. If we except the counting of the fleet and army at Doriscus nocircumstances of much interest diversified this portion of the march, which lay entirely through territories that had previously submittedto the Great King. The army spread itself over a wide tract of country, marching generally in three divisions, which proceeded by three parallellines--one along the coast, another at some considerable distanceinland, and a third, with which was Xerxes himself, midway between them. At every place where Xerxes stopped along his line of route the nativeshad, besides furnishing corn for his army, to entertain him and hissuite at a great banquet, the cost of which was felt as a heavy burthen. Contributions of troops or ships were also required from all the citiesand tribes; and thus both fleet and army continually swelled as theyadvanced onward. In crossing the track between the Strymon and the Axiussome damage was suffered by the baggage-train from lions, which camedown from the mountains during the night and devoured many of thecamels; but otherwise the march was effected without loss, and the fleetand army reached the borders of Thessaly intact, and in good condition. Here it was found that there was work for the pioneers, and areconnaissance of the enemy's country before entering it was probablyalso thought desirable. The army accordingly halted some days in Pieria, while preparations were being made for crossing the Olympic range intothe Thessalian lowland. 

During the halt intelligence arrived which seemed to promise the invaderan easy conquest. Xerxes, while he was staying at Sardis, had sentheralds to all the Grecian states, excepting Athens and Sparta, with ademand for earth and water, the recognized symbols of submission. Hisenvoys now returned, and brought him favorable replies from at leastone-third of the continental Greeks--from the Perrhaebians, Thessalians, Dolopians, Magnetians, Achaeans of Phthiotis, Enianians, Malians, Locrians, and from most of the Boeotians. Unless it were theinsignificant Phocis, no hostile country seemed to intervene between theplace where his army lay and the great object of the expedition, Attica. Xerxes, therefore, having first viewed the pass of Tempe, and seen withhis own eyes that no enemy lay encamped beyond, passed over the Olympicrange by a road cut through the woods by his army, and proceededsouthwards across Thessaly and Achaea Phthiotis into Malis, the fertileplain at the mouth of the Spercheius river. Here, having heard that aGreek force was in the neighborhood, he pitched his camp not far fromthe small town of Trachis. 

Thus far had the Greeks allowed the invader to penetrate their countrywithout offering him any resistance. Originally there had been anintention of defending Thessaly, and an army under Evsenetus, a Spartanpolemarch, and Themistocles, the great Athenian, had proceeded to Tempe, in order to cooperate with the Thessalians in guarding the pass. But thediscovery that the Olympic range could be crossed in the, place wherethe army of Xerxes afterwards passed it had shown that the position wasuntenable; and it had been then resolved that the stand should bemade at the next defensible position, Thermopylae. [PLATE LXII. ] Here, accordingly, a force was found--small, indeed, if it be compared withthe number of the assailants, but sufficient to defend such a positionas that where it was posted against the world in arms. Three hundredSpartans, with their usual retinue of helots, 700 Lacedaemonians, otherPeloponnesians to the number of 2800, 1000 Phocians, the same numberof Locrians, 700 Thespians, and 400 Thebans, formed an army of 9000men--quite as numerous a force as could be employed with any effect inthe defile they were sent to guard. The defile was a long and narrowpass shut in between a high mountain, Callidromus, and the sea, andcrossed at one point by a line of wall in which was a single gateway. Unless the command of the sea were gained, or another mode of crossingthe mountains discovered, the pass could scarcely be forced. 

[Illustration: PLATE LXII. ]

Xerxes, however, confident in his numbers--after waiting four days atTrachis, probably in the hope that his fleet would join him--proceededon the fifth day to the assault. First the Medes and Cissians, thenthe famous "Immortals" were sent into the jaws of the pass against theimmovable foe; but neither detachment could make any impression. Thelong spears, large shields, and heavy armor of the Greeks, their skilfultactics, and steady array, were far more than a match for the inferiorequipments and discipline of the Asiatics. Though the attack was madewith great gallantry, both on this day and the next, it failed toproduce the slightest effect. Very few of the Greeks were either slainor wounded; and it seemed as if the further advance of a million of menwas to be stopped by a force less than a hundredth part of their number. 

But now information reached Xerxes which completely changed the faceof affairs. There was a rough mountain-path leading from Trachis upthe gorge of the Asopus and across Callidromus to the rear of the Greekposition, which had been unknown to the Greeks when they decided onmaking their first stand at Thermopylae, and which they only discoveredwhen their plans no longer admitted of alteration. It was, perhaps, not much more than a goat-track, and apparently they had regarded it asscarcely practicable, since they had thought its defence might be safelyentrusted to a thousand Phocians. Xerxes, however, on learning theexistence of the track, resolved at once to make trial of it. HisPersian soldiers were excellent mountaineers. He ordered Hydarnes totake the "Immortals, " and, guided by a native, to proceed along the pathby night, and descend with early dawn into the rear of the Greeks, whowould then be placed between two fires. The operation was performed withcomplete success. The Phocian guard, surprised at the summit, left thepath free while they sought a place of safety. The Greeks in the passbelow, warned during the night of their danger, in part fled, in partresolved on death. When morning came, Leonidas, at the head of abouthalf his original army, moved forward towards the Malian plain, andthere met the advancing Persians. A bloody combat ensued, in which thePersians lost by far the greater number; but the ranks of the Greekswere gradually thinned, and they were beaten back step by step into thenarrowest part of the pass, where finally they all perished, except thefour hundred Thebans, who submitted and were made prisoners. 

So terminated the first struggle on the soil of Greece, between theinvaders and the invaded. It seemed to promise that, though at vastcost, Persia would be victorious. If her loss in the three days' combatwas 20, 000 men, as Herodotus states, yet, as that of her enemy was 4000, the proportionate advantage was on her side. 

But, for the conquest of such a country as Greece, it was requisite, notonly that the invader should succeed on land, but also that he should besuperior at sea. Xerxes had felt this, and had brought with him a fleet, calculated, as he imagined, to sweep the Greek navy from the Egean. Asfar as the Pagasaean Gulf, opposite the northern extremity of Euboea, his fleet had advanced without meeting an enemy. It had encountered oneterrible storm off the coast of Magnesia, and had lost 400 vessels; butthis loss was scarcely felt in so vast an armament. When from Aphetse, at the mouth of the gulf, the small Greek fleet, amounting to no morethan 271 vessels, was seen at anchor off Artemisium, the only fear whichthe Persian commanders entertained was lest it should escape them. Theyat once detached 200 vessels to sail round the Coast coast of Euboea, and cut off the possibility of retreat. When, however, these vesselswere all lost in a storm, and when in three engagements on threesuccessive days, the Greek fleet showed itself fully able to contendagainst the superior numbers of its antagonist, the Persians themselvescould not fail to see that their naval supremacy was more than doubtful. The fleet at Artemisium was not the entire Greek naval force; on anotheroccasion it might be augumented, while their own could scarcely expectto receive reinforcements. The fights at Artemisium foreshadowed a daywhen the rival fleets would no longer meet and part on equal terms, butPersia would have to acknowledge herself inferior. 

Meanwhile, however, the balance of advantage rested with the invaders. The key of Northern Greece was won, and Phocis, Locris, Boeotia, Attica, and the Megarid lay open to the Persian army. The Greek fleet could gainnothing by any longer maintaining the position of Artemisium, and fellback towards the south, while its leaders anxiously considered where itshould next take up its station. The Persians pressed on both by landand sea. A rapid march through Phocis and Boeotia brought Xerxes toAthens, soon after the Athenians, knowing that resistance would be vain, had evacuated it. The Acropolis, defended by a few fanatics, was takenand burnt. One object of the expedition was thus accomplished. Athenslay in ruins; and the whole of Attica was occupied by the conqueror. The Persian fleet, too, finding the channel of the Euripus clear, saileddown it, and rounding Sunium, came to anchor in the bay of Phalerum. 

In the councils of the Greeks all was doubt and irresolution. Thearmy, which ought to have mustered in full force at Thermopylae andCallidromus, and which, after those passes were forced, might havedefended Cithseron and Parnes, had never ventured beyond the Isthmusof Corinth, and was there engaged in building a wall across the neck ofland from sea to sea. The fleet lay off Salamis, where it was detainedby the entreaties of the Athenians, who had placed in that island thegreater part of the non-combatant population; but the inclination wasstrong on the part of many to withdraw westward and fight the nextbattle, if a battle must be fought, in the vicinity of the land force, which would be a protection in case of defeat. Could Xerxes have hadpatience for a few days, the combined fleet would have broken up. ThePeloponnesian contingents would have withdrawn to the isthmus; and theAthenians, despairing of success, would probably have sailed away toItaly. But the Great King, when he saw the vast disproportionbetween his own fleet and that of the enemy, could not believe in thepossibility of the Greeks offering a successful resistance. Like amodern emperor, who imagined that, if only he could have been with hisfleet, all would necessarily have gone well, Xerxes supposed that byhaving the sea-fight under his own eye he would be sure of victory. Thusagain, as at Artemisium, the only fear felt was lest the Greeks shouldfly, and in that way escape chastisement. Orders were therefore issuedto the Persian fleet to close up at once, and blockade the eastern endof the Salaminian strait, while a detachment repeated the attemptedmanoeuvre at Euboea, and sailed round the island to guard the channel atits western outlet. 

These movements were executed late in the day on which the Persianfleet arrived at Phalerum. During the night intelligence reached thecommanders that the retreat of the Greeks was about to commence at once;whereupon the Persian right wing was pushed forward into the strait, and carried beyond the Greek position so as to fill the channel whereit opens into the bay of Eleusis. The remainder of the night passedin preparations for the battle on both sides. At daybreak both fleetsadvanced from their respective shores, the Persians being rather theassailants. Their thousand vessels were drawn up in three lines, andcharged their antagonists with such spirit that the general inclinationon the part of the Greeks was at first to retreat. Some of their shipshad almost touched the shore, when the bold example of one of thecaptains, or a cry of reproach from unknown lips, produced a revulsionof feeling, and the whole line advanced in good order. The battle wasfor a short time doubtful; but soon the superiority of Greek navaltactics began to tell. The Persian vessels became entangled one withanother, and crashing together broke each other's oars. The tripleline increased their difficulties. If a vessel, overmatched, sought toretreat, it necessarily came into collision with the ships stationedin its rear. These moreover pressed too eagerly forward, since theircaptains were anxious to distinguish themselves in order to merit theapproval of Xerxes. The Greeks found themselves able to practicewith good effect their favorite manoeuvre of the _periplus_, and thusincreased the confusion. It was not long before the greater part ofthe Persian fleet became a mere helpless mass of shattered or damagedvessels. Five hundred are said to have been sunk--the majority by theenemy, but some even by their own friends. The sea was covered withwrecks, and with wretches who clung to them, till the ruthless enemyslew them or forced them to let go their hold. 

This defeat was a death-blow to the hopes of Xerxes, and sealed the fateof the expedition. From the moment that he realized to himself the factof the entire inability of his fleet to cope with that of the Greeks, Xerxes made up his mind to return with all haste to Asia. Fromover-confidence he fell into the opposite extreme of despair, and madeno effort to retrieve his ill fortune. His fleet was ordered to sailstraight for the Hellespont, and to guard the bridges until he reachedthem with his army. He himself retreated hastily along the same roadby which he had advanced, his whole army accompanying him as far asThessaly, where Marnonius was left with 260, 000 picked men, to preventpursuit, and to renew the attempt against Greece in the ensuing year. Xerxes pressed on to the Hellespont, losing vast numbers of his troopsby famine and sickness on the way, and finally returned into Asia, notby his magnificent bridge, which a storm had destroyed, but on board avessel, which, according to some, narrowly escaped shipwreck during thepassage. Even in Asia disaster pursued him. Between Abydos and Sardishis army suffered almost as much from over-indulgence as it hadpreviously suffered from want; and of the mighty host which had goneforth from the Lydian capital in the spring not very many thousands canhave re-entered it in the autumn. 

Still, however, there was a possibility that the success which hisown arms had failed to achieve might reward the exertions of hislieutenants. Mardonius had expressed himself confident that with 300, 000picked soldiers he could overpower all resistance, and make Greecea satrapy of Persia. Xerxes had raised his forces to that amount bysending Artabazus back from Sestos at the head of a _corps d'armee_numbering 40, 000 men. The whole army of 300, 000 wintered in Thessaly;and Mardonius, when spring came, having vainly endeavored to detach theAthenians from the Grecian ranks, marched through Boeotia in Attica, andoccupied Athens for the second time. Hence he proceeded to menace thePeloponnese, where he formed an alliance with the Argives, who promisedhim that they would openly embrace the Persian cause. At the same timethe Athenians, finding that Sparta took no steps to help them, began towaver in their resistance, and to contemplate accepting the terms whichMardonius was still willing to grant them. The fate of Greece trembledin the balance, and apparently was determined by the accident of a deathand a succession, rather than by any wide-spread patriotic feeling orany settled course of policy. Cleombrotus, regent for the young sonof Leonidas, died, and his brother Pausanias--a brave, clever, andambitious man--took his place. We can scarcely be wrong in ascribing--atleast in part--to this circumstance the unlooked-for change of policy, which electrified the despondent ambassadors of Athens almost as soon asPausanias was installed in power. It was suddenly announced thatSparta would take the offensive. Ten thousand hoplites and 400, 000light-armed--the largest army that she ever levied--took the field, and, joined at the isthmus by above 25, 000 Peloponnesians, and soonafterwards by almost as many Athenians and Megarians, proceeded to seekthe foreigners, first in Attica, and then in the position to which theyhad retired in Boeotia. On the skirts of Citheeron, near Platsea, ahundred and eight thousand Greeks confronted more than thrice theirnumber of Persians and Persian subjects; and now at length the trialwas to be made whether, in fair and open fight on land, Greece or Persiawould be superior. A suspicion of what the result would be might havebeen derived from Marathon. But there the Persians had been taken at adisadvantage, when the cavalry, their most important arm, was absent. Here the error of Datis was not likely to be repeated. Mardonius had anumerous and well-armed cavalry, which he handled with no little skill. It remained to be seen, when the general engagement came, whether, withboth arms brought fully into play, the vanquished at Marathon would bethe victors. 

The battle of Plataea was brought on under circumstances veryunfavorable to the Greeks. Want of water and a difficulty aboutprovisions had necessitated a night movement on their part. Thecowardice of all the small contingents, and the obstinacy of anindividual Spartan, disconcerted the whole plan of the operation, andleft the Lacedaemonians and the Athenians at daybreak separated fromeach other, and deserted by the whole body of their allies. Mardoniusattacked at once, and prevented the junction of the two allies, so thattwo distinct and separate engagements went on at the same time. In boththe Greeks were victorious. The Spartans repulsed the Persian horse andfoot, slew Mardonius and were the first to assail the Persian camp. TheAthenians defeated the _medizing_ Greeks, and effected a breach inthe defences of the camp, on which the Spartans had failed to make anyimpression. A terrible carnage followed. The contingent of 40, 000 troopsunder Artabazus alone drew off in good order. 

The remainder were seized with panic, and were either slaughtered likesheep or fled in complete disarray. Seventy thousand Greeks not onlydefeated but destroyed the army of 300, 000 barbarians, which meltedaway and disappeared making no further stand anywhere. The disaster ofMarathon was repeated on a larger scale, and without the resource ofan embarkation. Henceforth the immense superiority of Greek troops toPersian was well known on both sides; and nothing but the distance fromGreece of her vital parts, and the quarrels of the Greek states amongthemselves, preserved for nearly a century and a half the doomed empireof Persia. 

The immediate result of the defeats of Salamis and Platsea was acontraction of the Persian boundary towards the west. Though a fewPersian garrisons maintained themselves for some years on the furtherside of the straits, soothing thereby the wounded vanity of the GreatKing, who liked to think that he had still a hold on Europe; yet therecan be no doubt that, after the double flight of Xerxes and Artabazus, Macedonia, Pseonia, and Thrace recovered their independence. Persia losther European provinces, and began the struggle to retain those of Asia. Terminus receded, and having once receded never advanced again in thisquarter. The Greeks took the offensive. Sailing to Asia, they not onlyliberated from their Persian bondage the islands which lay along thecoast, but landing their men on the continent, attacked and defeatedan army of 60, 000 Persians at Mycale, and destroyed the remnant of theships that had escaped from Salamis. Could they have made up their mindsto maintain a powerful fleet permanently on the coast of Asia, theymight at once have deprived Persia of her whole sea-hoard on thePropontis and the Egean; but neither of the two great powers of Greecewas prepared for such a resolve. Sparta disliked distant expeditions;and Athens did not as yet see her way to undertaking the protectionof the continental Greeks. She had much to do at home, and had notyet discovered those weak points in her adversary's harness, whichsubsequently enabled her to secure by treaty the freedom of the Greekcities upon the mainland. For the present, therefore, Persia only lostthe bulk of her European possessions, and the islands of the Propontisand the Egean. 

The circumstances which caused a renewal of Greek agressions upon Asiatowards the close of the reign of Xerxes are not very clearly narratedby the authors who speak of them. It appears, however, that after twelveyears of petty operations, during which Eion was recovered, and Doriscusfrequently attacked, but without effect, the Athenians resolved, in B. C. 466, upon a great expedition to the eastward. Collecting a fleet of300 vessels, which was placed under the command of Cimon, the son ofMiltiades, they sailed to the coast of Caria and Lycia, where they drovethe Persian garrisons out of the Greek towns, and augmenting theirnavy by fresh contingents at every step, proceeded along the shores ofPamphylia as far as the mouth of the river Eurymedon, where they founda Phoenician fleet of 340 vessels, and a Persian army, stationed toprotect the territory. Engaging first the fleet they defeated it, anddrove it ashore, after which they disembarked and gained a victoryover the Persian army. As many as two hundred triremes were takenor destroyed. They then sailed on towards Cyprus, where they met anddestroyed a squadron of eighty ships, which was on its way to reinforcethe fleet at the Eurymedon. Above a hundred vessels, 20, 000 captives, and a vast amount of plunder were the prize of this war; which had, however, no further effect on the relations of the two powers. 

In the following year the reign of Xerxes came to an end abruptly. With this monarch seems to have begun those internal disorders of theseraglio, which made the Court during more than a hundred and fortyyears a perpetual scene of intrigues, assassinations, executions, andconspiracies. Xerxes, who appears to have only one wife, Amestris, the daughter (or grand-daughter) of the conspirator, Otanes, permittedhimself the free indulgence of illicit passion among the princessesof the Court, the wives of his own near relatives. The most horribleresults followed. Amestris vented her jealous spite on those whom sheregarded as guilty of stealing from her the affections of her husband;and to prevent her barbarities from producing rebellion, it wasnecessary to execute the persons whom she had provoked, albeit they werenear relations of the monarch. The taint of incontinence spread amongthe members of the royal family; and a daughter of the king, who wasmarried to one of the most powerful nobles, became notorious forher excesses. Eunuchs rose into power, and fomented the evils whichprevailed. The king made himself bitter enemies among those whoseposition was close to his person. At last, Artabanus, chief of theguard, a courtier of high rank, and Aspamitres, a eunuch, who held theoffice of chamberlain, conspired against their master, and murdered himin his sleeping apartment, after he had reigned twenty years. 

The character of Xerxes falls below that of any preceding monarch. Excepting that he was not wholly devoid of a certain magnanimity, whichmade him listen patiently to those who opposed his views or gave himunpalatable advice and which prevented him from exacting vengeance onsome occasions, he had scarcely a trait whereon the mind can rest withany satisfaction. Weak and easily led, puerile in his gusts of passionand his complete abandonment of himself to them--selfish, fickle, boastful, cruel, superstitious, licentious--he exhibits to us theOriental despot in the most contemptible of all his aspects--thatwherein the moral and the intellectual qualities are equally in defect, and the career is one unvarying course of vice and folly. From Xerxes wehave to date at once the decline of the Empire in respect of territorialgreatness and military strength, and likewise its deterioration inregard to administrative vigor and national spirit. With him commencedthe corruption of the Court--the fatal evil, which almost universallyweakens and destroys Oriental dynasties. His expedition against Greeceexhausted and depopulated the Empire; and though, by abstaining fromfurther military enterprises, he did what lay in his power to recruitits strength, still the losses which his expedition caused werecertainly not repaired in his lifetime. 

As a builder, Xerxes showed something of the same grandeur of conceptionwhich is observable in his great military enterprise and in the works bywhich it was accompanied. His Propylaea, and the sculptured staircase infront of the Chebl Minar, which is undoubtedly his work, are among themost magnificent erections upon the Persepolitan platform; and are quitesufficient to place him in the foremost rank of Oriental builders. Ifwe were to ascribe the Chehl Minar itself to him, we should have to givehim the palm above all other kings of Persia; but on the whole itis most probable that that edifice and its duplicate at Susa wereconceived, and in the main, constructed, by Darius. 

Xerxes left behind him three sons--Darius, Hystaspes, andArtaxerxes--and two daughters, Amytis and Rhodogune. Hystaspes wassatrap of Bactria, and at the time of their father's death, only Dariusand Artaxerxes were at the Court. 

Fearing the eldest son most, Artabanus persuaded Artaxerxes that theassassination of Xerxes was the act of his brother, whereupon Artaxerxescaused him to be put to death, and himself ascended the throne (B. C. 465). 

Troubles, as usual, accompanied this irregular accession. Artabanus, notcontent with exercising an influence under Artaxerxes such as hascaused some authors to speak of him as king, aimed at removing theyoung prince, and making himself actual monarch. But his designs beingbetrayed to Artaxerxes by Megabyzus, and at the same time hisformer crimes coming to light, he was killed, together with his toolAspamitres, seven months after the murder of Xerxes. The sons ofArtabanus sought to avenge his death, but were defeated by Megabyzus inan engagement, wherein they lost their lives. 

Meanwhile, in Bactria, Hystaspes, who had a rightful claim to thethrone, raised the standard of revolt. Artaxerxes marched against himin person, and engaged him in two battles, the first of which wasindecisive, while in the second the Bactrians suffered defeat, chiefly(according to Ctesias) because the wind blew violently in their faces. So signal was victory, that Bactria at once submitted. Hystaspes' fateis uncertain. 

Not long after the reduction of Bactria, Egypt suddenly threw off thePersian yoke (B. C. 460). Inarus, a king of the wild African tribes whobordered the Nile valley on the west, but himself perhaps a descendantof the old monarchs of Egypt, led the insurrection, and, in conjunctionwith an Egyptian, named Amyrtseus, attacked the Persian troops stationedin the country, who were commanded by Achaemenes, the satrap. A battlewas fought near Papremis in the Delta, wherein the Persians weredefeated, and Achaemenes fell by the hand of Inarus himself. TheEgyptians generally now joined in the revolt; and the remnant of thePersian army was shut up in Memphis. Inarus had asked the aid of Athens;and an Athenian fleet of 200 sail was sent to his assistance. This fleetsailed up the Nile, defeated a Persian squadron, and took part in thecapture of Memphis and the siege of its citade (White Castle). Whenthe Persian king first learned what had happened, he endeavored to ridhimself of his Athenian enemies by inducing the Spartans to invade theircountry; but, failing in his attempt, he had recourse to arms, and, levying a vast host, which he placed under the command of Megabyzus, sent that officer to recover the revolted province. Megabyzus marchedupon Memphis, defeated the Egyptians and their allies in a great battle, relieved the citadel of Memphis from its siege, and recovered the restof the town. The Athenians fled to the tract called Prosopitis, whichwas a a portion of the Delta, completely surrounded by two branchstreams of the Nile. Here they were besieged for eighteen months, tillMegabyzus contrived to turn the water from one of the two streams, whereby the Athenian ships were stranded, and the Persian troops wereable to march across the river bed, and overwhelm the Athenians withtheir numbers. A few only escaped to Cyrene. The entire fleet fell intothe enemy's hands; and a reinforcement of fifty more ships, arrivingsoon after the defeat, was attacked unawares after it had entered theriver, and lost more than half its number. Inarus was betrayed by someof his own men, and, being carried prisoner to Persia, suffered death bycrucifixion. Amyrtseus fled to the fens, where for a while he maintainedhis independence. Egypt, however, was with this exception recovered tothe Empire (B. C. 455); and Athens was taught that she could not alwaysinvade the dominions of the Great King with impunity. 

Six years after this, the Athenians resolved on another effort. A fleetof 200 ships was equipped and placed under the command of the victorof the Eurymedon, Cimon, with orders to proceed into the EasternMediterranean, and seek to recover the laurels lost in Egypt. Cimonsailed to Cyprus, where he received a communication from Amyrtseus, which induced him to dispatch sixty ships to Egypt, while with theremaining one hundred and forty he commenced the siege of Citium. Herehe died, either of disease or from the effects of a wound; and hisarmament, pressed for provisions, was forced soon afterwards to raisethe siege, and address itself to some other enterprise. Sailing pastSalamis, it found there a Cilician and Phoenician fleet, consisting of300 vessels, which it immediately attacked and defeated, notwithstandingthe disparity of number. Besides the ships which were sunk, a hundredtriremes were taken; and the sailors then landed and gained a victoryover a Persian army upon the shore. Artaxerxes, upon this, fearing lesthe should lose Cyprus altogether, and thinking that, if Athens becamemistress of this important island, she would always be fomentinginsurrection in Egypt, made overtures for peace to the generals who werenow in command. His propositions were favorably received. Peace was madeon the following terms:--Athens agreed to relinquish Cyprus, and recallher squadron from Egypt; while the king consented to grant freedom toall the Greek cities on the Asiatic continent, and not to menace themeither by land or water. The sea was divided between the two powers, Persian ships of war were not to sail to the west of Phaselis in theLevant, or of the Cyanean islands in the Euxine; and Greek war-ships, wemay assume, were not to show themselves east of those limits. On theseconditions there was to be peace and amity between the Greeks and thePersians, and neither nation was to undertake any expeditions againstthe territories of the other. Thus terminated the first period ofhostility between Greece and Persia, a period of exactly half a century, commencing B. C. 499 and. Ending B. C. 449, in the seventeenth year ofArtaxerxes. 

It was probably not many years after the conclusion of this peace thata rebellion broke out in Syria. Megabyzus, the satrap of that importantprovince, offended at the execution of Inarus, in violation of thepromise which he had himself made to him, raised a revolt againsthis sovereign, defeated repeatedly the armies sent to reduce him toobedience, and finally treated with Artaxerxes as to the terms on whichhe would consent to be reconciled. Thus was set an example, if not ofsuccessful insurrection, yet at any rate of the possibility of rebellingwith impunity--an example which could not fail to have a mischievouseffect on the future relations of the monarch with his satraps. Itwould have been better for the Empire had Megabyzus suffered the fateof Oroetes, instead of living to a good old age in high favor with themonarch whose power he had weakened and defied. 

Artaxerxes survived the "Peace of Callias" twenty-four years. Hisrelations with the Greeks continued friendly till his demise, though, on the occasion of the revolt of Samos (B. C. 440), Pissuthnes, satrap ofSardis, seems to have transgressed the terms of the treaty, and tohave nearly brought about a renewal of hostilities. It was probablyin retaliation for the aid given to the revolted Samians, that theAthenians, late in the reign of Artaxerxes, made an expedition againstCaunus, which might have had important consequences, if the Caunianshad not been firm in their allegiance. A revolt of Lycia and Caria underZopyrus, the son of Megabyzus, assisted by the Greeks, might have provedeven more difficult to subdue than the rebellion of Syria under hisfather. Persia, however, escaped this danger; and Artaxerxes, no doubt, saw with pleasure a few years later the Greeks turn their arms againsteach other--Athens, his great enemy, being forced into a contest forexistence with the Peloponnesian confederacy under Sparta. 

The character of Artaxerxes, though it receives the approval of Plutarchand Diodorus, must be pronounced on the whole poor and contemptible. His ready belief of the charge brought by Artabanus against his brother, Darius, admits perhaps of excuse, owing to his extreme youth; but hissurrender of Inarus to Amestris on account of her importunity, hisreadiness to condone the revolt of Megabyzus, and his subjectionthroughout almost the whole of his life to the evil influence of Amytis, his sister, and Amestris, his mother--both persons of ill-regulatedlives--are indications of weakness and folly quite unpardonable ina monarch. That he was mild in temperament, and even kind andgood-natured, is probable. But he had no other quality that deserves theslightest commendation. In the whole course of his long reign he seemsnever once to have adventured himself in the field against an enemy. He made not a single attempt at conquest in any direction. We have noevidence that he patronized either literature or the arts. His peacewith Athens was necessary perhaps, but disgraceful to Persia. Thedisorders of the Court increased under his reign, from the license(especially) which he allowed the Queen-mother, who sported with thelives of his subjects. The decay of the Empire received a fatal impulsefrom the impunity which he permitted to Megabyzus. 

Like his father, Artaxerxes appears to have had but one legitimate wife. This was a certain Damaspia, of whom nothing is known, except that shedied on the same day as her husband, and was the mother of his onlylegitimate son, Xerxes. Seventeen other sons, who survived him, werethe issue of various concubines, chiefly--it would appear--Babylonians. Xerxes II. Succeeded to the throne on the death of his father (B. C. 425), but reigned forty-five days only, being murdered after a festival, in which he had indulged too freely, by his half-brother, Secydianus orSogdianus. Secydianus enjoyed the sovereignty for little more than halfa year, when he was in his turn put to death by another, brother, Ochus, who on ascending the throne took the name of Darius, and became known tothe Greeks as Darius Nothus. 

Darius Nothus had in his father's lifetime been made satrap of Hyrcania, and had married his aunt, Parysatis, a daughter of Xerxes. He hadalready two children at his accession, --a daughter, Amestris, and ason, Arsaces, who succeeded him as Artaxerxes. His reign, which lastednineteen years, was a constant scene of insurrections and revolts, someof which were of great importance, since they had permanent andvery disastrous consequences. The earliest of all was raised by hisfull-brother, Arsites, who rebelled in conjunction with a son ofMegabyzus, and, obtaining the support of a number of Greek mercenaries, gained two victories over the forces dispatched against him by the king. At last, however, the fortune of war changed. Persian gold was usedto corrupt the mercenaries; and the rebels being thus reduced toextremities, were forced to capitulate, yielding themselves on thecondition that their lives should be spared. Parysatis induced herhusband to disregard the pledges given and execute both Arsites and hisfellow-conspirator--thus proclaiming to the world that, unless by theemployment of perfidy, the Empire was incapable of dealing with thosewho rebelled against its authority. 

The revolt of Pissuthnes, satrap of Lydia, was the next importantoutbreak. Its exact date is uncertain; but it seems not to have verylong preceded the Athenian disasters in Sicily. Pissuthnes, who had heldhis satrapy for more than twenty years, was the son of a Hystaspes, andprobably a member of the royal family. His wealth--the accumulations ofso long a term of office--enabled him to hire the services of a body ofGreek mercenaries, who were commanded by an Athenian, called Lycon. Onthese troops he placed his chief dependence; but they failed him in thehour of need. Tissaphernes, the Persian general sent against him, bribedLycon and his men, who thereupon quitted Pissuthnes and made commoncause with his adversaries. The unfortunate satrap could no longerresist, and therefore surrendered upon terms, and accompaniedTissaphernes to the Court. Darius, accustomed now to disregard thepledged word of his officers, executed him forthwith, and made over hissatrapy to Tissaphernes, as a reward for his zeal. Lycon, the Atheniantraitor, received likewise a handsome return for his services, therevenues of several towns and districts being assigned him by the GreatKing. 

The rebellion, however, was not wholly crushed by the destruction ofits author, Amorges, a bastard son of Pissuthnes, continued to maintainhimself in Caria, where he was master of the strong city of Iasus, onthe north coast of the Sinus Iasicus, and set the power of Tissaphernesat defiance. Having probably inherited the wealth of his father, hehired a number of Peloponnesian mercenaries, and succeeded in maintaininghimself as an independent monarch for some years. 

Such was the condition of things in Asia Minor, when intelligencearrived of the fearful disasters which had befallen the Athenians inSicily--disasters without a parallel since those of Salamis--sudden, unexpected, overwhelming. The news, flying through Asia, awokeeverywhere a belief that the power of Athens was broken, and that herhostility need no longer be dreaded. The Persian monarch considered thatunder the altered circumstances it would be safe to treat the Peace ofCallias as a dead letter, and sent down orders to the satraps of Lydiaand Bithynia that they were once more to demand and collect the tributeof the Greek cities within their provinces. The satraps began tospeculate on the advantages which they might derive from alliance withthe enemies of Athens, and looked anxiously to see a Peloponnesian fleetappear off the coast of Asia. Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus vied witheach other in the tempting offers which they made to Sparta, and it wasnot long before a formal treaty was concluded between that stateand Persia, by which the two powers bound themselves to carry on warconjointly against Athens. 

Thus the contest between Persia and her rival entered upon a new phase. Henceforth until the liberties of Greece were lost, the Great King couldalways count on having for his ally one of the principal Grecian powers. His gold was found to possess attractions which the Greeks were quiteunable to resist. At one time Sparta, at another Athens, at anotherThebes yielded to the subtle influence; Greek generals commanded thePersian armies; Greek captains manoeuvered the Persian fleets; the veryrank and file of the standing army came to be almost as much Greek asPersian. Acting on the maxim, _Divide et impera_, Persia prolonged foreighty years her tottering Empire, by the skilful use which she made ofthe mutual jealousies and divisions of the Hellenic states. 

It scarcely belongs to the history of Persia to trace in detail thefortunes of the contending powers during the latter portion of thePeloponnesian war. We need only observe that the real policy of theCourt of Susa, well understood, and, on the whole, tolerably wellcarried out by the satraps, was to preserve the balance of powerbetween Athens and Sparta, to allow neither to obtain too decided apreponderance, to help each in turn, and encourage each to waste theother's strength, but to draw back whenever the moment came for strikinga decisive blow against either side. This policy skilfully pursuedby Tissaphernes (who had a genius for intrigue and did not requirean Alcibiades to give him lessons in state-craft), more clumsilyby Pharnabazus, whose character was comparatively sincere andstraightforward, prevailed until the younger Cyrus made his appearanceupon the scene, when a disturbing force came into play which haddisastrous effects both on the fortunes of Greece and on those ofPersia. The younger Cyrus had personal views of self-aggrandizementwhich conflicted with the true interests of his nation, and was so benton paving the way for his own ascent to sovereign power that he did notgreatly care whether he injured his country or no. As the accomplishmentof his designs depended mainly on his obtaining a powerful land-force, he regarded a Spartan as preferable to an Athenian alliance; and, havingonce made his choice, he lent his ally such effectual aid that intwo years from the time of his coming down to the coast the war wasterminated. Persian gold manned and partly built the fleet whichconquered at AEgos-Potami; perhaps it contributed in a still moredecisive manner to the victory. Cyrus, by placing his stores at theentire command of Lysander, deserved and acquired the cordial good-willof Sparta and the Peloponnesians generally--an advantage of which weshall find him in the sequel making good use. 

The gain to Persia from the dominion which she had reacquired over theGreeks of Asia was more than counter-balanced by a loss of territory inanother quarter, which seems to have occurred during the reign of DariusNothus, though in what exact year is doubtful. The revolt of Egypt isplaced by Heeren and Clinton in B. C. 414, by Eusebius in B. C. 411, byManetho in the last year of Darius Nothus, or B. C. 405. The earlierdates depend on the view that the Amyrtseus of Manetho's twenty-eighthdynasty was the leader of the rebellion, and had a reign of six yearsat this period--a view which is perhaps unsound. Manetho probablyrepresented Nepherites (Nefaorot) as the leader; and it is quite clearthat he placed the re-establishment of the old throne of the Pharaohs inthe year that Darius Nothus died. As his authority is the best that wecan obtain upon this obscure point, we may regard the last days ofthe Persian monarch as clouded by news of a rebellion, which had beenperhaps for some time contemplated, but which did not break out until hewas known to be in a moribund condition. 

A few years earlier, B. C. 408 or 409, the Medes had made an unsuccessfulattempt to recover their independence. The circumstances of this revolt, which is mentioned by no writer but Xenophon, are wholly unknown, but wemay perhaps connect it with the rebellion of Terituchmes, a son-in-lawof the king. The story of Terituchmes, which belongs to this period, deserves at any rate to be told, as illustrating, in a very remarkableway, the corruption, cruelty, and dissoluteness of the Persian Court atthe time to which we have now come. Terituchmes was the son of Idernes, a Persian noble of high rank, probably a descendant of the conspiratorHydarnes. On the death of his father, he succeeded to his satrapy, asto a hereditary fief, and being high in favor with Darius Nothus, hereceived in marriage that monarch's daughter, Amestris. Having, however, after his marriage become enamored of his own half-sister, Roxana, andhaving persuaded her to an incestuous commerce, he grew to detest hiswife, and as he could not rid himself of her without making an enemy ofthe king, he entered into a conspiracy with 300 others, and planned toraise a rebellion. The bond of a common crime, cruel and revolting inits character, was to secure the fidelity of the rebels one to another. Amestris was to be placed in a sack, and each conspirator in turn wasto plunge his sword into her body. It is not clear whether this intendedmurder was executed or no. Hoping to prevent it, Darius commissioneda certain Udiastes, who was in the service of Terituchmes, to save hisdaughter by any means that might be necessary; and Udiastes, collectinga band, set upon Terituchmes and slew him after a strenuous resistance. After this, his mother, brothers, and sisters were apprehended by theorder of Parysatis, the queen, who caused Roxana to be hewn in pieces, and the other unfortunates to be buried alive. It was with greatdifficulty that Arsaces, the heir-apparent, afterwards ArtaxerxesMnemon, preserved his own wife, Statira, from the massacre. It happenedthat she was sister to Terituchmes, and, though wholly innocent of hisoffence, she would have been involved in the common destruction of herfamily had not her husband with tears and entreaties begged her life ofhis parents. The son of Terituchmes maintained himself for a while inhis father's government; but Parysatis succeeded in having him taken offby poison. 

The character of Darius Nothus is seen tolerably clearly in the accountof his reign which has been here given. He was at once weak and wicked. Contrary to his sworn word, he murdered his brothers, Secydianus andArsites. He broke faith with Pissuthnes. He sanctioned the wholesaleexecution of Terituchmes' relatives. Under him the eunuchs of the palacerose to such power that one of them actually ventured to aspire to thesovereignty. Parysatis, his wife, one of the most cruel and malignanteven of Oriental women, was in general his chosen guide and counsellor. His severities cannot, however, in all eases be ascribed to herinfluence, for he was anxious that she should put the innocent Statirato death, and, when she refused, reproached her with being foolishlylenient. In his administration of the Empire he was unsuccessful; for, if he gained some tracts of Asia Minor, he lost the entire Africansatrapy. Under him we trace a growing relaxation of the checks by whichthe great officers of the state were intended to have been heldunder restraint. Satraps came to be practically uncontrolled in theirprovinces, and the dangerous custom arose of allowing sons to succeed, almost as a matter of course, to the governments of their fathers. Powers unduly large were lodged in the hands of a single officer, andactions, that should have brought down upon their perpetrators sharpand signal punishment, were timorously or negligently condoned by thesupreme authority. Cunning and treachery were made the weapons wherewithPersia contended with her enemies. Manly habits were laid aside, and thenation learned to trust more and more to the swords of mercenaries. 

Shortly before the death of Darius there seems to have been a doubtraised as to the succession. Parysatis, who preferred her second son toher first-born, imagined that her influence was sufficient to induce herhusband to nominate Cyrus, instead of Arsaces, to succeed him; and Cyrusis said to have himself expected to be preferred above his brother. Hehad the claim, if claim it can be called, that he was the first sonborn to his father after he became king; but his main dependence wasdoubtless on his mother. Darius, however, proved less facile in hisdying moments than he had been during most of his life, and declinedto set aside the rights of the eldest son on the frivolous pretencesuggested to him. His own feelings may have inclined him towardsArsaces, who resembled him far more than Cyrus did in character; andCyrus, moreover, had recently offended him, and been summoned to court, to answer a very serious charge. Arsaces, therefore, was nominated, andtook the name of Artaxerxes--as one of a king who had reigned long, and, on the whole, prosperously. 

An incident of ill omen accompanied the commencement of the new reign(B. C. 405). The inauguration of the monarch was a religious ceremony, and took place in a temple at Pasargadae, the old capital, to whicha peculiar sanctity was still regarded as attaching. Artaxerxes hadproceeded to this place, and was about to engage in the ceremonies, whenhe was interrupted by Tissaphernes, who informed him that his life wasin danger. Cyrus, he said, proposed to hide himself in the temple, and assassinate him as he changed his dress, a necessary part of theformalities. One of the officiating priests--a Magus, as it wouldseem--confirmed the charge. Cyrus was immediately arrested, and wouldhave been put to death on the spot, had not his mother interfered, and, embracing him in her arms, made it impossible for the executioner toperform his task. With some difficulty she persuaded Artaxerxes to sparehis brother's life and allow him to return to his government, assuringhim, and perhaps believing, that the charges made against her favoritewere without foundation. 

Cyrus returned to Asia Minor with the full determination of attackinghis brother at the earliest opportunity. He immediately began thecollection of a mercenary force, composed wholly of Greeks, on whosearms he was disposed to place far more reliance than on those ofOrientals. As Tissaphernes had returned to the coast with him, and wasclosely watching all his proceedings, it was necessary to exercise greatcaution, lest his intentions should become known before he was ready toput them into execution. He therefore had recourse to three differentdevices. Having found a cause of quarrel with Tissaphernes in theambiguous terms of their respective commissions, he pressed it on toan actual war, which enabled him to hire troops openly, as against thisenemy; and in this way he collected from 5000 to 6000 Greeks--chieflyPeloponnesians. He further gave secret commissions to Greek officers, whose acquaintance he had made when he was previously in these parts, to collect men for him, whom they were to employ in their own quarrelsuntil he needed their services. From 3000 to 4000 troops were gatheredfor him by these persons. Finally, when he found himself nearly readyto commence his march, he discovered a new foe in the Pisidians ofthe Western Taurus, and proceeded to levy a force against them, whichamounted to some thousands more. In all, he had in readiness 11, 000heavy-armed and about 2000 light-armed Greeks before his purpose becameso clear that Tissaphernes could no longer mistake it, and thereforestarted off to carry his somewhat tardy intelligence to the capital. 

The aims of Cyrus were different from those of ordinary rebel satraps;and we must go back to the times of Darius Hystaspis in order to find aparallel to them. Instead of seeking to free a province from the Persianyoke, or to carve out for himself an independent sovereignty in someremote corner of the Empire, his intention was to dethrone his brother, and place on his own brows the diadem of his great namesake. It wasnecessary for him therefore to assume the offensive. Only by a boldadvance, and by taking his enemy to some extent unprepared, and so at adisadvantage, could he hope to succeed in his audacious project. It isnot easy to see that he could have had any considerable party amongthe Persians, or any ground for expecting to be supported by any ofthe subject nations. His following must have been purely personal; andthough it may be true that he was of a character to win more admirationand affection than his brother, yet Artaxerxes himself was far frombeing unpopular with his subjects, whom he pleased by a familiarity anda good-nature to which they were little accustomed. Cyrus knew thathis principal dependence must be on himself, on his Greeks, and on thecarelessness and dilatoriness of his adversary, who was destitute ofmilitary talent and was even thought to be devoid of personal bravery. 

Thus it was important to advance as soon as possible. Cyrus thereforequitted Sardis before all his troops were collected (B. C. 401), andmarched through Lydia and Phrygia, by the route formally followed in thereverse direction by the army of Xerxes, as far as Celsense, wherethe remainder of his mercenaries joined him. With his Greek force thusraised to 13, 000 men, and with a native army not much short of 100, 000, he proceeded on through Phrygia and Lycaonia to the borders of Cilicia, having determined on taking the shortest route to Babylon, through theCilician and Syrian passes, and then along the course of the Euphrates. At Caystrupedion he was met by Epyaxa, consort of Syennesis, thetributary king of Cilicia, who brought him a welcome supply of money, and probably assured him of the friendly disposition of her husband, whowas anxious to stand well with both sides. In Lycaonia, Cyrus dividedhis forces, and sending a small body of troops under Menon to escortEpyaxa across the mountains and enter Cilicia by the more western of thetwo practicable passes he proceeded himself with the bulk of his troopsto the famous Pylae Cilicias, where he probably knew that Syennesiswould only make a feint of resistance. He found the pass occupied; butit was evacuated the next day, on the receipt of intelligence that Menonhad already entered the country and that the fleet of Cyrus--composedpartly of his own ships, partly of a squadron furnished to him bySparta--had appeared off the coast and threatened a landing. Cyrusthus crossed the most difficult and dangerous of all the passes thatseparated him from the heart of the Empire, without the loss of a man. 

Thus far it would appear that Cyrus had to a certain extent masked hisplans. The Greek captains must have guessed, if they had not actuallylearnt, his intentions; but to the bulk of the soldiery they had beenhitherto absolutely unknown. It was only in Cilicia that the light brokein upon them, and they began to suspect that they were being marchedinto the interior of Asia, there to engage in a contest with the entirepower of the Great King. Something of the horror which is ascribed toCleomenes, when it was suggested to him a century earlier that he shouldconduct his Spartans the distance of a three months' journey from thesea, appears to have taken possession of the minds of the mercenarieson their awaking to this conviction. They at once refused to proceed. Itwas only by the most skilful management on the part of their captains, joined to a judicious liberality on the part of Cyrus, that they wereinduced to forego their intention of returning home at once, and sobreaking up the expedition. A perception of the difficulty of effectinga retreat, together with an increase of pay, extorted a reluctant assentto continue the march, of which the real term and object were even nownot distinctly avowed. Cyrus said he proposed to attack the army ofAbrocomas, which he believed to be posted on the Euphrates. If he didnot find it there, a fresh consultation might be held to consider anyfurther movement. 

The march now proceeded rapidly. The gates of Syria--a narrow pass onthe east coast of the Gulf of Issus, shut in, like Thermopylae, between the mountains and the sea, and strengthened moreover byfortifications--were left unguarded by Abrocomas; and the army, havingtraversed them without loss, crossed the Amanus range by the pass ofBeilan, and in twenty-nine days from Tarsus reached Thapsacus onthe Euphrates. The forces of Artaxerxes had nowhere made theirappearance--Abrocomas, though he had 300, 000 men at his disposal, hadweakly or treacherously abandoned all these strong and easily defensiblepositions; he does not seem even to have wasted the country; but, having burnt the boats at Thapsacus, he was content to fall back uponPhoenicia, and left the way to Babylon and Susa open. At Thapsacus therewas little difficulty in persuading the Greeks, who had no longer thesea before their eyes, to continue the march; they only stipulated for afurther increase of pay, which was readily promised them by the sanguineprince, who believed himself on the point of obtaining by their aid theinexhaustible treasures of the Empire. The river, which happened to beunusually low for the time of year, was easily forded. Cyrus enteredMesopotamia, and continued his march down the left bank of the Euphratesat the quickest rate that it was possible to move a hundred thousandOrientals. In thirty-three days he had accomplished above 600 miles, andhad approached within 120 miles of Babylon without seeing any tracesof an enemy. His only difficulties were from the nature of the country, which, after the Khabour is passed, becomes barren, excepting closealong the river. From want of fodder there was a great mortality amongthe baggage-animals; the price of grain rose; and the Greeks had tosubsist almost entirely upon meat. At last, when the Babylonian alluviumwas reached, with its abundance of fodder and corn, signs of the enemybegan to be observed. Artaxerxes, who after some doubts and misgivingshad finally determined to give his enemy battle in the plain, wasalready on his way from Babylon, with an army reckoned at 900, 000 menand had sent forward a body of horse, partly to reconnoitre, partlyto destroy the crops, in order to prevent Cyrus and his troops frombenefiting by them. Cyrus now advanced slowly and cautiously, at therate of about fourteen miles a day, expecting each morning to fight ageneral engagement before evening came. On the third night, believingthe battle to be imminent, he distributed the commands and laid down aplan of operations. But morning brought no appearance of the enemy, andthe whole day passed tranquilly. In the course of it, he came upon awide and deep trench cut through the plain for a distance of above fortymiles--a recent work, which Artaxerxes had intended as a barrier to stopthe progress of his enemy. But the trench was undefended and incomplete, a space of twenty feet being left between its termination and theEuphrates. Cyrus, having passed it, began to be convinced that hisbrother would not risk a battle in the plain, but would retreat to themountains and make his stand at Persepolis or Ecbatana. He thereforecontinued his march negligently. His men piled their arms on the wagonsor laid them, across the beasts of burthen; while he himself exchangedthe horse which he usually rode for a chariot, and proceeded on his wayleisurely, having about his person a small escort, which preservedtheir ranks, while all the rest of the troops were allowed to advance incomplete disarray. 

Suddenly, as the army was proceeding in this disorderly manner throughthe plain, a single horseman was perceived advancing at full gallop fromthe opposite quarter, his steed all flecked with foam. As he drew near, he shouted aloud to those whom he met, addressing some in Greek, othersin Persian, and warning them that the Great King, with his whole force, was close at hand, and rapidly approaching in order of battle. The newstook every one by surprise, and at first all was hurry and confusion. The Greeks, however, who were on the right, rapidly marshalled theirline, resting it upon the river; while Cyrus put on his armor, mountedhis horse, and arranged the ranks of his Asiatics. Ample time was givenfor completing all the necessary dispositions; since three hours, at theleast, must have elapsed from the announcement of the enemy's approachbefore he actually appeared. Then a white cloud of dust arose towardsthe verge of the horizon, below which a part of the plain began soon todarken; presently gleams of light were seen to flash out from the densemass which was advancing, the serried lines of spears came into view, and the component parts of the huge army grew to be discernible. On theextreme left was a body of horsemen with white cuirasses, commanded byTissaphernes; next came infantry, carrying the long wicker shield, or_gerrhum_ then a solid square of Egyptians, heavily armed, and bearingwooden shields that reached to the feet; then the contingents of manydifferent nations, some on foot, some on horseback, armed with bowsand other weapons. The line stretched away to the east further than theGreeks, who were stationed on the right, could see, extending (as itwould seem) more than twice the distance which was covered by thearmy of Cyrus. Artaxerxes was in the centre of his line, on horseback, surrounded by a mounted guard of 6000 Persians. In front of the line, towards the river, were drawn up at wide intervals a hundred and fiftyscythed chariots, which were designed to carry terror and confusion intothe ranks of the Greeks. 

On the other side, Cyrus had upon the extreme right a thousandPaphlagonian cavalry with the more lightly armed of the Greeks;next, the Greek heavy-armed, under Clearchus; and then his Asiatics, stretching in a line to about the middle of his adversary's army, hisown special command being in the centre; and his left wing being ledby the satrap, Ariaeus. With Ariseus was posted the great mass of thecavalry; but a band of six hundred, clad in complete armor, with theirhorses also partially armed, waited on Cyrus himself, and accompaniedhim wherever he went. As the enemy drew near, and Cyrus saw how much hewas outflanked upon the left, he made an attempt to remedy the evil byordering Clearchus to move with his troops from the extreme right tothe extreme left of the line, where he would be opposite to Artaxerxeshimself. This, no doubt, would have been a hazardous movement to make inthe face of a superior enemy; and Clearchus, feeling this, and regardingthe execution of the order as left to his discretion, declined to moveaway from the river. Cyrus, who trusted much to the Greek general'sjudgment, did not any further press the change, but prepared to fightthe battle as he stood. 

The combat began upon the right. When the enemy had approached withinsix or seven hundred yards, the impatience of the Greeks to engage couldnot be restrained. They sang the paean and started forwards at a pacewhich in a short time became a run. The Persians did not await theircharge. The drivers leaped from their chariots, the line of battlebehind them wavered, and then turned and fled without striking a blow. One Greek only was wounded by an arrow. As for the scythed chariots, they damaged their own side more than the Greeks; for the frightenedhorses in many cases, carried the vehicles into the thick of thefugitives, while the Greeks opened their ranks and gave passage to suchas charged in an opposite direction. Moderating their pace so as topreserve their tactical arrangement, but still advancing with greatrapidity, the Greeks pressed on the flying enemy, and pursued him adistance of two or three miles, never giving a thought to Cyrus, who, they supposed, would conquer those opposed to him with as much ease asthemselves. 

But the prince meanwhile was in difficulties. Finding himselfoutnumbered and outflanked, and fearing that his whole army would besurrounded, and even the victorious Greeks attacked in the rear, he setall upon one desperate cast and charged with his Six Hundred againstthe six thousand horse who protected his brother. Artagerses, theircommander, who met him with a Homeric invective, he slew with his ownhand. The six thousand were routed and took to flight; the person of theking was exposed to view; and Cyrus, transported at the sight, rushedforward shouting, "I see the man, " and hurling his javelin, struck himstraight upon the breast, with such force that the cuirass was piercedand a slight flesh-wound inflicted. The king fell from his horse; but atthe same moment Cyrus received a wound beneath the eye from the javelinof a Persian, and in the melee which followed he was slain with eight ofhis followers. The Six Hundred could lend no effectual aid, because theyhad rashly dispersed in pursuit of the flying enemy. 

As the whole contest was a personal one, the victory was now decided. Fighting, however, continued till nightfall. On learning the death oftheir leader, the Asiatic troops under Ariseus fled--first to theircamp, and then, when Artaxerxes attacked them there, to the last night'sstation. The Grecian camp was assaulted by Tissaphernes, who at thebeginning of the battle had charged through the Greek light-armed, without however, inflicting on them any loss, and had then pressed on, thinking to capture the Grecian baggage. But the guard defended theircamp with success, and slew many of the assailants. Tissaphernes andthe king drew off after a while, and retraced their steps, in order tocomplete the victory by routing the troops of Clearchus. Clearchus wasat the same time returning from his pursuit, having heard that his campwas in danger, and as the two bodies of troops approached, he foundhis right threatened by the entire host of the enemy, which might havelapped round it and attacked it in front, in flank, and in rear. Toescape this peril he was about to wheel his line and make it restalone its whole extent upon the river, when the Persians passed him andresumed the position which they had occupied at the beginning of thebattle. They were then about to attack, when once more the Greeksanticipated them and charged. The effect was again ludicrous. ThePersians would not abide the onset, but fled faster than before. TheGreeks pursued them to a village, close by which was a knoll or mound, whither the fugitives had betaken themselves. Again the Greeks made amovement in advance, and immediately the flight recommenced. The lastrays of the setting sun fell on scattered masses of Persian horse andfoot flying in all directions over the plain from the little band ofGreeks. 

The battle of Cunaxa was a double blow to the Persian power. By thedeath of Cyrus there was lost the sole chance that existed of such are-invigoration of the Empire as might have enabled it to start againon a new lease of life, with ability to held its own, and strength toresume once more the aggressive attitude of former times. The talents ofCyrus have perhaps been overrated, but he was certainly very superiorto most Orientals; and there can be no doubt that the Empire would havegreatly gained by the substitution of his rule for that of his brother. He was active, energetic, prompt indeed, ready in speech, faithful inthe observance of his engagements, brave, liberal--he had more foresightand more self-contro than most Asiatics; he knew how to deal withdifferent classes of men; he had a great power of inspiring affectionand retaining it; he was free from the folly of national prejudice, and could appreciate as they deserved both the character and theinstitutions of foreigners. It is likely that he would have proved abetter administrator and ruler than any king of Persia since DariusHystaspis. He would, therefore, undoubtedly have raised his countryto some extent. Whether he could really have arrested its decline, andenabled it to avenge the humiliations of Marathon, Salamis, and thepeace of Callias, is, however, exceedingly doubtful. For Cyrus, thoughhe had considerable merits, was not without great and grievous defects. As the Tartar is said always to underlie the Russ, so the true Orientalunderlay that coating of Grecian manners and modes of thought and act, with which a real admiration of the Hellenic race induced Cyrus toconceal his native barbarism. When he slew his cousins for an act whichhe chose to construe as disrespect, and when he executed Orontes forcontemplated desertion, secretly and silently, so that no one knewhis fate, when transported with jealous rage he rushed madly upon hisbrother, exposing to hazard the success of all his carefully formedplans, and in fact ruining his cause, the acquired habits of thePhil-Hellene gave way, and the native ferocity of the Asiatic cameto the surface. We see Cyrus under favorable circumstances, whileconciliation, tact, and self-restraint were necessities of his position, without which he could not possibly gain his ends--we do not know whateffect success and the possession of supreme power might have had uponhis temper and conduct; but from the acts above-mentioned we may at anyrate suspect that the result would have been very injurious. 

Again, intellectually, Cyrus is only great for an Asiatic. He has moremethod, more foresight, more power of combination, more breadth of mindthan the other Asiatics of his day, or than the vast mass of Asiatics ofany day. But he is not entitled to the praise of a great administratoror of a great general. His three years' administration of Asia Minorwas chiefly marked by a barbarous severity towards criminals, and by alavish expenditure of the resources of his government, which left him inactual want at the moment when he was about to commence his expedition. His generalship failed signally at the battle of Cunaxa, for the loss ofwhich he is far more to be blamed than Clearchus. As he well knew thatArtaxerxes was sure to occupy the centre of his line of battle, heshould have placed his Greeks in the middle of his own line, not atone extremity. When he saw how much his adversary outflanked him on theleft--a contingency which was so probable that it ought to have occurredto him beforehand--he should have deployed his line in that direction, instead of ordering such a movement as Clearchus, not unwisely, declinedto execute. He might have trusted the Greeks to fight in line, as theyhad fought at Marathon; and by expanding their ranks, and moving offhis Asiatics to the left, he might, have avoided the danger of beingoutflanked and surrounded. But his capital error was the wildnessand abandon of his charge with the Six Hundred--a charge which it wasprobably right to make under the circumstances, but which required acombination of coolness and courage that the Persian prince evidentlydid not possess when his feelings were excited. Had he kept hisSix Hundred well in hand, checked their pursuit, and abstained fromthrusting his own person into unnecessary danger, he might have joinedthe Greeks as they returned from their first victory and participatedin their final triumph. At the same time, Clearchus cannot but be blamedfor pushing his suit too far. If, when the enemy in his front fled, hehad at once turned against those who were engaging Cyrus, taking themon their left flank, which must have been completely uncovered, he mighthave been in time to prevent the fatal results of the rash charge madeby his leader. 

Thus the death of Cyrus, though a calamity to Persia, was scarcely thegreat loss which it has been represented. A far worse result of theCyreian expedition was the revelation which it made of the weakness ofPersia, and of the facility with which a Greek force might penetrateto the very midst of the Empire, defeat the largest army that could bebrought against it, and remain, or return, as it might think proper. Hitherto Babylon and Susa had been, even to the mind of a Greekstatesman, remote localities, which it would be the extreme of rashnessto attempt to reach by force of arms, and from which it would beutter folly to suppose that a single man could return alive except bypermission of the Great King. Henceforth these towns were looked uponas prizes quite within the legitimate scope of Greek ambition, and theirconquest came to be viewed as little more than a question of time. Theopinion of inaccessibility, which had been Persia's safeguard hitherto, was gone, and in its stead grew up a conviction that the heart of theEmpire might be reached with very little difficulty. 

It required, however, for the production of this whole change, notmerely that the advance to Cunaxa should have been safely made, and theimmeasurable superiority of Greek to Asiatic soldiers there exhibited, but also that the retreat should have been effected, as it was effected, without disaster. Had the Ten Thousand perished under the attacks of thePersian horse, or even under the weapons of the Kurds, or amid thesnows of Armenia, the opinion of Persian invulnerability would have beenstrengthened rather than weakened by the expedition. But the return toGreece of ten thousand men, who had defeated the hosts of the Great Kingin the centre of his dominions, and fought their way back to thesea without suffering more than the common casualties of war, was anevidence of weakness which could not but become generally known, and ofwhich all could feel the force. Hence the retreat was as important asthe battle. If in late autumn and mid-winter a small Greek army, withoutmaps or guides, could make its way for a thousand miles through Asia, and encounter no foe over whom it could not easily triumph, it was clearthat the fabric of Persian power was rotten, and would collapse on thefirst serious attack. 

Still, it will not be necessary to trace in detail the steps of theretreat. It was the fact of the return, rather than the mode of itsaccomplishment, which importantly affected the subsequent history ofPersia. We need only note that the retreat was successfully conducted inspite, not merely of the military power of the Empire, but of the mostbarefaced and cruel treachery--a fact which showed clearly the strongdesire that there was to hinder the invaders' escape. Persia did notset much store by her honor at this period; but she would scarcely havepledged her word and broken it, without the slightest shadow of excuse, unless she had regarded the object to be accomplished as one of vastimportance, and seen no other way which offered any prospect of thedesired result. Her failure, despite the success of her treachery, places her military weakness in the strongest possible light. TheGreeks, though deprived of their leaders, deceived, surprised, andhemmed in by superior numbers, amid terrific mountains, precipices, and snows, forced their way by sheer dogged perseverance through allobstacles, and reached Trebizond with the loss of not one fourth oftheir original number. 

There was also another discovery made during the return which partlyindicated the weakness of the Persian power, and partly accounted forit. The Greeks had believed that the whole vast space enclosed betweenthe Black Sea, Caucasus, Caspian, and Jaxartes on the one hand, and theArabian Desert, Persian Gulf, and Indian Ocean on the other, was boundtogether into one single centralized monarchy, all the resources ofwhich were wielded by a single arm. They now found that even towards theheart of the empire, on the confines of Media and Assyria, there existedindependent tribes which set the arms of Persia at defiance; whiletowards the verge of the old dominion whole provinces, once certainlyheld in subjection, had fallen away from the declining State, andsucceeded in establishing their freedom. The nineteenth satrapy ofHerodotus existed no more; in lieu of it was a mass of warlike andautonomous tribes--Chalybes, Taochi, Chaldeans, Macronians, Scythians, Colchians, Mosynoecians, Tibarenians--whose services, if he needed them, the King of Persia had to buy, while ordinarily their attitude towardshim was one of distrust and hostility. Judging of the unknown from theknown, the Greeks might reasonably conclude that in all parts ofthe Empire similar defections had occurred, and that thus boththe dimensions and the resources of the state had suffered seriousdiminution, and fell far below the conception which they had beenaccustomed to form of them. 

The immediate consequence of the Cyreian expedition was a rupturebetween Persia and Sparta. Sparta had given aid to Cyrus, and thusprovoked the hostility of the Great King. She was not inclined toapologize or to recede. On the contrary, she saw in the circumstancesof the expedition strong grounds for anticipating great advantagesto herself from a war with so weak an antagonist. Having, therefore, secured the services of the returned Ten Thousand, she undertook theprotection of the Asiatic Greeks against Persia, and carried on a warupon the continent against the satraps of Lydia and Phrygia for thespace of six years (B. C. 399 to B. C. 394). The disorganization of thePersian Empire became very manifest during this period. So jealous werethe two satraps of each other, that either was willing at any timeto make a truce with the Spartans on condition that they proceeded toattack the other; and, on one occasion, as much as thirty silver talentswas paid by a satrap on the condition that the war should be transferredfrom his own government to that, of his rival. At the same time thenative tribes were becoming more and more inclined to rebel. The Mysiansand Pisidians had for a long time been practically independent. Now theBithynians showed a disposition to shake off the Persian yoke, whilein Paphlagonia the native monarchs boldly renounced their allegiance. Agesilaus, who carried on the war in Asia Minor for three years, knewwell how to avail himself of all these advantageous circumstances;and it is not unlikely that he would have effected the separationfrom Persia of the entire peninsula, had he been able to continue thestruggle a few years longer. But the league between Argos, Thebes, andCorinth, which jealousy of Sparta caused and Persian gold promoted, proved so formidable, that Agesilaus had to be summoned home: andafter his departure, Conon, in alliance with Pharnabazus, recovered thesupremacy of the sea for Athens, and greatly weakened Spartan influencein Asia. Not content with this result, the two friends, in the year B. C. 393, sailed across the Egean, and the portentous spectacle of a Persianfleet in Greek waters was once more seen--this time in alliance withAthens! Descents were made upon the coasts of the Peloponnese, and theisland of Cythera was seized and occupied. The long walls of Athens wererebuilt with Persian money, and all the enemies of Sparta were richlysubsidized. Sparta was made to feel that if she had been able at onetime to make the Great King tremble for his provinces, or even forhis throne, the King could at another reach her across the Egean, andapproach Sparta as nearly as she had, with the Cyreians, approachedBabylon. 

The lesson of the year B. C. 393 was not thrown away on the Spartangovernment. The leading men became convinced that unless they couldsecure the neutrality of the Persians, Sparta must succumb to thehostility of her Hellenic enemies. Under these circumstances theydevised, with much skill, a scheme likely to be acceptable to thePersians, which would weaken their chief rivals in Greece--Athens andThebes--while it would leave untouched their own power. They proposeda general peace, the conditions of which should be the entirerelinquishment of Asia to the Persians, and the complete autonomy of allthe Greek States in Europe. The first attempt to procure the acceptanceof these terms failed (B. C. 393); but six years later, after Antalcidashad explained them at the Persian Court, Artaxerxes sent down anultimatum to the disputants, modifying the terms slightly as regardedAthens, extending them as regarded himself so as to include the islandsof Clazomenae and Cyprus, and requiring their acceptance by all thebelligerents, on pain of their incurring his hostility. To this threatall yielded. A Persian king may be excused if he felt it a proudachievement thus to dictate a peace to the Greeks--a peace, moreover, which annulled the treaty of Callias, and gave back absolutely intohis hands a province which had ceased to belong to his Empire more thansixty years previously. 

It was the more important to Artaxerxes that his relations with theEuropean Greeks should be put upon a peaceful footing, since all theresources of the Empire were wanted for the repression of disturbanceswhich had some years previously broken out in Cyprus. The exact dateof the Cyprian revolt under Evagoras, the Greek tyrant of Salamis, isuncertain; but there is evidence that, at least as early as B. C. 391, hewas at open war with the power of Persia, and had made an alliancewith the Athenians, who both in that year and in B. C. 388 sent him aid. Assisted also by Achoris, independent monarch of Egypt, and Hecatomnus, vassal king of Caria, he was able to take the offensive, to conquerTyre, and extend his revolt into Cilicia and Idumaea. An expeditionundertaken against him by Autophradates, satrap of Lydia, seems to havefailed. It was the first object of the Persians, after concluding the"Peace of Antalcidas, " to crush Evagoras. They collected 300 vessels, partly from the Greeks of Asia, and brought together an army of 300, 000men. The fleet of Evagoras numbered 200 triremes, and with these heventured on an attack, but was completely defeated by Tiribazus, whoshut him up in Salamis, and, after a struggle which continued for atleast six years, compelled him to submit to terms (B. C. 380 or 379). More fortunate than former rebels, he obtained not merely a promise ofpardon, which would probably have been violated, but a recognition ofhis title, and permission to remain in his government, with the singleobligation of furnishing to the Great King a certain annual tribute. 

During the continuance of this war, Artaxerxes was personally engaged inmilitary operations in another part of his dominions. The Cadusians, who inhabited the low and fertile tract between the Elburz range and theCaspian, having revolted against his authority, Artaxerxes invaded theirterritory at the head of an army which is estimated at 300, 000 foot and10, 000 horse. The land was little cultivated, rugged, and covered withconstant fogs; the men were brave and warlike, and having admitted himinto their country, seem to have waylaid and intercepted his convoys. His army was soon reduced to great straits, and forced to subsist on thecavalry horses and the baggage-animals. A most disastrous result musthave followed, had not Tiribazus, who had been recalled from Cypruson charges preferred against him by the commander of the land force, Orontes, contrived very artfully to induce the rebels to make theirsubmission. Artaxerxes was thus enabled to withdraw from the countrywithout serious disaster, having shown in his short campaign that hepossessed the qualities of a soldier, but was entirely deficient inthose of a general. 

A time of comparative tranquillity seems to have followed the Cadusiancampaign. Artaxerxes strengthened his hold upon the Asiatic Greeks byrazing some of their towns and placing garrisons in others. His satrapseven ventured to commence the absorption of the islands off the coast;and there is evidence that Sanaos, at any rate, was reduced and addedto the Empire. Cilicia, Phoenicia, and Idumaea were doubtless recoveredsoon after the great defeat of Evagoras. There remained only oneprovince in this quarter which still maintained its revolt, and enjoyed, under native monarchs, the advantages of independence. This was Egypt, which had now continued free for above thirty years, since it shook offthe yoke of Darius Nothus. Artaxerxes, anxious to recover this portionof his ancestral dominions, applied in B. C. 375 to Athens for theservices of her great general, Iphicrates. His request was granted, andin the next year a vast armament was assembled at Acre under Iphicratesand Pharnabazus, which effected a successful landing in the Delta at theMendesian mouth of the Nile, stormed the town commanding this branch ofthe river, and might have taken Memphis, could the energetic advice ofthe Athenian have stirred to action the sluggish temper of his Persiancolleague. But Pharnabazus declined to be hurried, and preferred toproceed leisurely and according to rule. The result was that the seasonfor hostilities passed and nothing had been done. The Nile rose as thesummer drew on, and flooded most of the Delta; the expedition couldeffect nothing, and had to return. Pharnabazus and Iphicrates partedamid mutual recriminations; and the reduction of Egypt was deferred forabove a quarter of a century. 

In Greece, however, the Great King still retained that position ofsupreme arbiter with which he had been invested at the "Peace ofAntalcidas. " In B. C. 372 Antalcidas was sent by Sparta a second time upto Susa, for the purpose of obtaining an imperial rescript, prescribingthe terms on which the then existing hostilities among the Greeks shouldcease. In B. C. 367 Pelopidas and Ismenias proceeded with the same objectfrom Thebes to the Persian capital. In the following year a rescript, more in their favor than former ones, was obtained by Athens. Thus everyone of the leading powers of Greece applied in turn to the Great Kingfor his royal mandate, so erecting him by common consent into a sort ofsuperior, whose decision was to be final in all cases of Greek quarrel. 

But this external acknowledgment of the imperial greatness of Persiadid not, and could not, check the internal decay and tendency todisintegration, which was gradually gaining head, and threatening thespeedy dissolution of the Empire. The long reign of Artaxerxes Mnemonwas now verging towards its close. He was advanced in years, andenfeebled in mind and body, suspicious of his sons and of his nobles, especially of such as showed more than common ability. Under thesecircumstances, revolts on the part of satraps grew frequent. FirstAriobarzanes, satrap of Phrygia, renounced his allegiance (B. C. 366), and defended himself with success against Autophradates, satrap ofLydia, and Mausolus, native king of Caria under Persia, to whom thetask of reducing him had been entrusted. Then Aspis, who held a partof Cappadocia, revolted and maintained himself by the help of thePisidians, until he was overpowered by Datames. Next Datames himself, satrap of the rest of Cappadocia, understanding that Artaxerxes' mindwas poisoned against him, made a treaty with Ariobarzanes, and assumedan independent attitude in his own province. In this position heresisted all the efforts of Autophradates to reduce him to obedience;and Artaxerxes condescended first to make terms with him and then toremove him by treachery. Finally (B. C. 362), there seems to have beensomething like a general revolt of the western provinces, in which thesatraps of Mysia, Phrygia, and Lydia, Mausolus, prince of Caria, and thepeople of Lycia, Pamphylia, Cilicia, Syria, and Phoenicia participated. Tachos, king of Egypt, fomented the disturbances, which were alsosecretly encouraged by the Spartans. A terrible conflict appeared to beimminent; but it was avoided by the ordinary resources of bribery andtreachery. Orontes, satrap of Phrygia, and Rheomithras, one of therevolted generals, yielding to the attractions of Persian gold, desertedand betrayed their confederates. The insurrection was in this wayquelled, but it had raised hopes in Egypt, which did not at oncesubside. Tachos, the native king, having secured the services ofAgesilaus as general, and of Chabrias, the Athenian, as admiral of hisfleet, boldly advanced into Syria, was well received by the Phoenicians, and commenced the siege of some of the Syrian cities. Persia mighthave suffered considerable loss in this quarter, had not the internalquarrels of the Egyptians among themselves proved a better protection toher than her own armies. Two pretenders to the throne sprang up as soonas Tachos had quitted the country, and he was compelled to return toEgypt in order to resist them. The force intended to strike a vigorousblow against the power of Artaxerxes was dissipated in civil conflicts;and Persia had once more to congratulate herself on the intestinedivisions of her adversaries. A few years after this, Artaxerxes died, having reigned forty-six years, and lived, if we may trust Plutarch, ninety-four. Like most of the later Persian kings, he was unfortunatein his domestic relations. To his original queen, Statira, he was indeedfondly attached; and she appears to have merited and returned his love, but in all other respects his private life was unhappy. Its chief cursewas Parysatis, the queen-mother. This monster of cruelty held Artaxerxesin a species of bondage during almost the whole of his long reign, andacted as if she were the real sovereign of the country. She encouragedCyrus in his treason, and brought to most horrible ends all those whohad been prominent in frustrating it. She poisoned Statira out of hatredand jealousy, because she had a certain degree of influence over herhusband. She encouraged Artaxerxes to contract an incestuous marriagewith his daughter Atossa, a marriage which proved a fertile sourceof further calamities. Artaxerxes had three sons by Statira--Darius, Ariaspes, and Ochus. Of these Darius, as the eldest, was formallydeclared the heir. But Ochus, ambitious of reigning, intrigued withAtossa, and sought to obtain the succession by her aid. So good seemedto Darius the chances of his brother's success that he took the rashstep of conspiring against the life of his father, as the only way ofsecuring the throne. His conspiracy was detected, and he was seized andexecuted, Ariaspes thereby becoming the eldest son, and so the naturalheir. Ochus then persuaded Ariaspes that he had offended his father, and was about to be put to a cruel and ignominious death, whereupon thatprince in despair committed suicide. His elder brothers thus removed, there still remained one rival, whom Ochus feared. This was Arsames, oneof his half-brothers, an illegitimate son of Artaxerxes, who stood highin his favor. Assassination was the weapon employed to get rid of thisrival. It is said that this last blow was too much for the aged andunhappy king, who died of grief on receiving intelligence of the murder. 

Artaxerxes was about the weakest of all the Persian monarchs. He wasmild in temperament, affable in demeanor, goodnatured, affectionateand well-meaning. But, possessing no strength of will, he allowed thecommission of the most atrocious acts, the most horrible cruelties, bythose about him, who were bolder and more resolute than himself. Thewife and son, whom he fondly loved, were plotted against before hiseyes; and he had neither the skill to prevent nor the courage to avengetheir fate. Incapable of resisting entreaty and importunity, he grantedboons which he ought to have refused, and condoned offences which itwould have been proper to punish. He could not maintain long the mostjust resentment, but remitted punishments even when they were far milderthan the crime deserved. He was fairly successful in the managementof his relations with foreign countries, and in the suppression ofdisturbances within his own dominions; but he was quite incapableof anything like a strenuous and prolonged effort to renovate andre-invigorate the Empire. If he held together the territories which heinherited, and bequeathed them to his successor augmented rather thandiminished, it is to be attributed more to his good fortune than to hismerits, and to the mistakes of his opponents than to his own prudence orsagacity. 

Ochus, who obtained the crown in the manner related above, was the mostcruel and sanguinary of all the Persian kings. He is indeed the onlymonarch of the Achaemenian line who appears to have been bloodthirstyby temperament. His first act on finding himself acknowledged king (B. C. 359) was to destroy, so far as he could, all the princes of the bloodroyal, in order that he might have no rival to fear. He even, if we maybelieve Justin, involved in this destruction a number of the princesses, whom any but the most ruthless of despots would have spared. Havingtaken these measures for his own security, he proceeded to show himselfmore active and enterprising than any monarch since Longimanus. It wasnow nearly half a century since one of the important provinces of theEmpire--Egypt--had successfully asserted its independence and restoredthe throne of its native kings. General after general had been employedin vain attempts to reduce the rebels to obedience. Ochus determinedto attempt the recovery of the revolted province in person. Thougha rebellion had broken out in Asia Minor, which being supported byThebes, threatened to become serious, he declined to be diverted fromhis enterprise. Levying a vast army, he marched into Egypt, and engagedNoctanebo, the king, in a contest for existence. Nectanebo, however, having obtained the services of two Greek generals, Diophantus, anAthenian, and Lamius, a citizen of Sparta, boldly met his enemy in thefield, defeated him, and completely repulsed his expedition. Hereuponthe contagion of revolt spread. Phoenicia assumed independence under theleadership of Sidon, expelled or massacred the Persian garrisons, whichheld her cities, and formed an alliance with Egypt. Her example wasfollowed by Cyprus, where the kings of the nine principal towns assumedeach a separate sovereignty. 

The chronology of this period is somewhat involved; but it seemsprobable that the attack and failure of Ochus took place about B. C. 351;that the revolts occurred in the next year, B. C. 350; while it was nottill B. C. 346, or four years later, that Ochus undertook his secondexpedition into these regions. He had, however, in the meanwhile, directed his generals or feudatories, to attack the rebels, and bringthem into subjection. The Cyprian war he had committed to Idrieus, prince of Caria, who employed on the service a body of 8000 Greekmercenaries, commanded by Phocion, the Athenian, and Evagoras, son ofthe former Evagoras, the Cyprian monarch; while he had committed toBelesys, satrap of Syria, and Mezseus, satrap of Cilicia, the task ofkeeping the Phoenicians in check. Idrieus succeeded in reducing Cyprus;but the two satraps suffered a single defeat at the hands of Tennes, theSidonian king, who was aided by 40, 000 Greek mercenaries, sent him byNectanebo, and commanded by Mentor the Rhodian. The Persian forces weredriven out of Phoenicia; and Sidon had ample time to strengthen itsdefences and make preparations for a desperate resistance. The approach, however, of Ochus, at the head of an army of 330, 000 men, shook theresolution of the Phoenician monarch, who endeavored to purchase hisown pardon by treacherously delivering up a hundred of the principalcitizens of Sidon into the hands of the Persian king, and then admittinghim within the defences of the town. Ochus, with the savage crueltywhich was his chief characteristic, caused the hundred citizens to betransfixed with javelins, and when 500 more came out as suppliants toentreat his mercy, relentlessly consigned them to the same fate. Nor didthe traitor Tennes derive any advantage from his guilty bargain. Ochus, having obtained from him all he needed, instead of rewarding hisdesertion, punished his rebellion with death. Hereupon the Sidonians, understanding that they had nothing to hope from submission, formed thedreadful resolution of destroying themselves and their town. They hadpreviously, to prevent the desertion of any of their number, burnt theirships. Now they shut themselves up in their houses, and set fire eachto his own dwelling. Forty thousand persons lost their lives in theconflagration; and the city was reduced to a heap of ruins, which Ochussold for a large sum. Thus ended the Phoenician revolt. Among its mostimportant results was the transfer of his services to the Persian kingon the part of Mentor the Rhodian, who appears to have been the ablestof the mercenary leaders of whom Greece at this time produced so many. 

The reduction of Sidon was followed closely by the invasion ofEgypt. Ochus, besides his 330, 000 Asiatics, had now a force of 14, 000Greeks--6000 furnished by the Greek cities of Asia Minor; 4000 underMentor, consisting of the troops which he had brought to the aid ofTennes from Egypt; 3000 sent by Argos; and 1000 from Thebes. He dividedhis numerous armament into three bodies, and placed at the head ofeach two generals--one Persian and one Greek. The Greek commanders wereLacrates of Thebes, Mentor of Rhodes, and Nicostratus of Argos, a manof enormous strength, who regarded himself as a second Hercules, andadopted the traditional costume of that hero--a club and a lion's skin. The Persians were Rhossaces, Aristazanes, and Bagoas, the chief of theeunuchs. Nectanebo was only able to oppose to this vast array an armyless than one third of the size. Twenty thousand, however, out of the100, 000 troops at his disposal were Greeks; he occupied the Nile andits various branches with a numerous navy the character of the country, intersected by numerous canals, and full of strongly fortified towns, was in his favor; and he might have been expected to make a prolonged, if not even a successful, resistance. But he was deficient in generals, and over-confident in his own powers of command: the Greek captainsout-manoeuvred him; and no sooner did he find one line of his defencesforced than his ill-founded confidence was exchanged for an alarmas little reasonable. He hastily fell back upon Memphis, leaving thefortified towns to the defence of their garrisons. These consisted ofmixed troops, partly Greek and partly Egyptian; between whom jealousiesand suspicions were easily sown by the Persian leaders, who by thesemeans rapidly reduced the secondary cities of Lower Egypt, and wereadvancing upon Memphis, when Nectanebo in despair quitted the countryand fled southwards to Ethiopia. All Egypt submitted to Ochus, whodemolished the walls of the cities, plundered the temples, and afteramply rewarding his mercenaries, returned to his own capital with animmense booty, and with the glory of having successfully carried througha most difficult and important enterprise. 

It has been well observed that "the reconquest of Egypt by Ochus musthave been one of the most impressive events of the age, " and that it"exalted the Persian Empire in force and credit to a point nearly ashigh as it had ever occupied before. " Ochus not only redeemed by meansof it his former failure, but elevated himself in the opinions of men toa pitch of glory such as no previous Persian king had reached, exceptingCyrus, Cambyses, and the first Darius. Henceforth we hear of no morerevolts or rebellions. Mentor and Bagoas, the two generals who had mostdistinguished themselves in the Egyptian campaign, were advanced by thegratitude of Ochus to posts of the highest importance, in which theirvigor and energy found ample room to display themselves. Mentor, who wasgovernor of the entire Asiatic sea-board, exerted himself successfullyto reduce to subjection the many chiefs who during the recent troubleshad assumed an independent authority, and in the course of a fewyears brought once more the whole coast into complete submission anddependence. Bagoas, carried with him by Ochus to the capital, becamethe soul of the internal administration, and maintained tranquillitythroughout the rest of the Empire. The last six years of the reign ofOchus form an exceptional period of vigorous and successful government, such as occurs nowhere else in the history of the later Persianmonarchy. The credit of bringing about such a state of things may be dueespecially to the king's officers, Bagoas and Mentor; but a portion ofit must reflect upon himself, as the person who selected them, assignedthem their respective tasks, and permanently maintained them in office. 

It was during this period of vigor and renewed life, when the Persianmonarchy seemed to have recovered almost its pristine force andstrength, that the attention of its rulers was called to a small cloudon the distant horizon, which some were wise enough to see portendedstorm and tempest. The growing power of Macedon, against whichDemosthenes was at this time in vain warning the careless Athenians, attracted the consideration of Ochus or of his counsellors; and orderswent forth from the Court that Persian influence was to be used to checkand depress the rising kingdom. A force was consequently despatched toassist the Thracian prince, Cersobleptes, to maintain his independence;and such effectual aid was given to the city of Perinthus that thenumerous and well-appointed army with which Philip had commenced itssiege was completely baffled and compelled to give up the attempt (B. C. 340). The battle of Chseroneia had not yet been fought, and Macedoniawas still but one of the many states which disputed for supremacy overGreece; but it is evident that she had already awakened the suspicionsof Persia, which saw a rival and a possible assailant in the rapidlygrowing monarchy. 

Greater and more systematic efforts might possibly have been made, andthe power of Macedon might perhaps have been kept within bounds, had notthe inveterate evil of conspiracy and revolution once more shown itselfat the Court, and paralyzed for a time the action of the Empire oncommunities beyond its borders. Ochus, while he was a vigorous rulerand administrator, was harsh and sanguinary. His violence and crueltyrendered him hateful to his subjects; and it is not unlikely that theycaused even those who stood highest in his favor to feel insecure. Bagoas may have feared that sooner or later he would himself be oneof the monarch's victims, and have been induced by a genuine alarmto remove the source of his terrors. In the year B. C. 338 he poisonedOchus, and placed upon the throne his youngest son, Arses, at the sametime assassinating all the brothers of the new monarch. It was evidentlyhis aim to exercise the supreme power himself, as counsellor to a princewho owed his position to him, and who was moreover little more than aboy. But Arses, though subservient for a year or two, began, as he grewolder, to show that he had a will of his own, and was even heard toutter threats against his benefactor whereupon Bagoas, accustomed now tocrime, secured himself by a fresh series of murders. He caused Arses andhis infant children to be assassinated, and selected one of his friends, Codomannus, the son of Arsanes, to fill the vacant throne. About thesame time (B. C. 336), Philip of Macedon was assassinated by the incensedPausanias; and the two new monarchs--Codomannus, who took the nameof Darius, and Alexander the Great--assumed their respective sceptresalmost simultaneously. 

Codomannus, the last of the Persian kings, might with some reason havecomplained, like Plato, that nature had brought him in the world toolate. Personally brave, as he proved himself into the Cadusian war, tall and strikingly handsome, amiable in temper, capable of considerableexertion, and not altogether devoid of military capacity, he would havebeen a fairly good ruler in ordinary times, and might, had he fallenupon such times, have held an honorable place among the Persianmonarchs. But he was unequal to the difficulties of such a position asthat in which he found himself. Raised to the throne after the victoryof Chaeroneia had placed Philip at the head of Greece, and when aportion of the Macedonian forces had already passed into Asia, he wascalled upon to grapple at once with a danger of the most formidablekind, and had but little time for preparation. It is true that Philip'sdeath soon after his own accession gave him a short breathing-space:but at the same time it threw him off his guard. The military talents ofAlexander were untried, and of course unknown; the perils which he hadto encounter were patent. Codomannus may be excused if for some monthsafter Alexander's accession he slackened his preparations for defence, uncertain whether the new monarch would maintain himself, whetherhe would overpower the combinations which were formed against him inGreece, whether he would inherit his father's genius for war, or adopthis ambitious projects. It would have been wiser, no doubt, as the eventproved, to have joined heart and soul with Alexander's European enemies, and to have carried the war at once to the other side of the Egean. Butno great blame attaches to the Persian monarch for his brief inaction. As soon as the Macedonian prince had shown by his campaigns in Thrace, Illyria, and Boeotia that he was a person to be dreaded, DariusCodomannus renewed the preparations which he had discontinued, andpushed them forward with all the speed that was possible. A fleet wasrapidly got ready: the satraps of Asia Minor were reinforced with troopsof good quality from the interior of the Empire, and were ordered toraise a strong force of mercenaries; money was sent into Greece to theLacedaemonians and others in order to induce them to create disturbancesin Europe; above all, Memnon the Rhodian, a brother of Mentor, and acommander of approved skill, was sent to the Hellespont, at the head ofa body of Greeks in Persian pay, with an authority co-ordinate to thatof the satraps. 

A certain amount of success at first attended these measures. Memnonwas able to act on the offensive in North-Western Asia. He marched uponCyzicus and was within a little of surprising it, obtaining from thelands and villas without the walls an immense booty. He forced Parmenioto raise the seige of Pitane; and when Callas, one of the Macedonianleaders, endeavored to improve the condition of things by meeting thePersian forces in the open field, he suffered a defeat and was compelledto throw himself into Rhoeteum. 

These advantages, however, were detrimental rather than serviceable tothe Persian cause; since they encouraged the Persian satraps to regardthe Macedonians as an enemy no more formidable than the various tribesof Greeks with whom they had now carried on war in Asia Minor forconsiderably more than a century. The intended invasion of Alexanderseemed to them a matter of no great moment--to be classed withexpeditions like those of Thimbron and Agesilaus, not to need, as itreally did, to be placed in a category of its own. Accordingly, theymade no efforts to dispute the passage of the Hellespont, or to opposethe landing of the expedition on the Asiatic shore. Alexander wasallowed to transport a force of 30, 000 foot and 4000 or 5000 horse fromthe Chersonese to Mysia without the slightest interference on the partof the enemy, notwithstanding that his naval power was weak and thatof the Persians very considerable. This is one of those pieces ofremissness in the Persian conduct of military matters, whereof we havealready had to note signal instances, and which constantly caused thefailure of very elaborate and judicious preparations to meet a danger. Great efforts had been made to collect and equip a numerous fleet, anda few weeks later it was all-powerful in the Egean. But it was absentexactly at the time when it was wanted. Alexander's passage and landingwere unopposed, and the Persians thus admitted within the Empire withouta struggle the enemy who was fated to destroy it. 

When the Persian commanders heard that Alexander was in Asia, theywere anxious to give him battle. One alone, the Rhodian Greek, Memnon, proposed and urged a wholly different plan of operations. Memnon advisedthat a general engagement should be avoided, that the entire countryshould be laid waste, and even the cities burnt, while the armyshould retire, cut off stragglers, and seek to bring the enemy intodifficulties. At the same time he recommended that the fleet should bebrought up, a strong land force embarked on board it, and an effort madeto transfer the war into Europe. But Memnon's colleagues, the satrapsand commandants of the north-western portion of Asia Minor, could notbring themselves to see that circumstances required a line of actionwhich they regarded as ignominious. It is not necessary to attribute tothem personal or selfish motives. They probably thought honestly thatthey were a match for Alexander with the troops at their disposal, andviewed retreat before an enemy numerically weaker than themselves asa disgrace not to be endured unless its necessity was palpable. Accordingly they determined to give the invader battle. Supposing thatAlexander, having crossed into Asia at Abydos, would proceed to attackDascyleium, the nearest satrapial capital, they took post on theGranicus, and prepared to dispute the further advance of the Macedonianarmy. They had collected a force of 20, 000 cavalry of the best qualitythat the Empire afforded, and nearly the same number of infantry, who were chiefly, if not solely, Greek mercenaries. With thesethey determined to defend the passage of the small stream abovementioned--one of the many which flow from the northern flank of Idainto the Propontis. 

The battle thus offered was eagerly accepted by the Macedonian. If hecould not defeat with ease a Persian force not greatly exceeding hisown, he had miscalculated the relative goodness of the soldiers oneither side, and might as well desist from the expedition. Accordingly, he no sooner came to the bank of the river, and saw the enemy drawn upon the other side, than, rejecting the advice of Parmenio to wait tillthe next day, he gave orders that the whole army should enter the streamand advance across it. The Granicus was in most places fordable; butthere were occasional deeper parts, which had to be avoided; and therewas thus some difficulty in reaching the opposite bank in line. Thatbank itself was generally steep and precipitous, but offered alsoseveral gentle slopes where a landing was comparatively easy. ThePersians had drawn up their cavalry along the line of the river close tothe water's edge, and had placed their infantry in the rear. Alexanderconsequently attacked with his cavalry. The engagement began upon theright. Amytas and Ptolemy, who were the first to reach the oppositebank, met with a strenuous resistance and were driven back into thestream by the forces of Memnon and his sons. The battle, however, onthis side was restored by Alexander himself, who gradually forced thePersians back after a long hand-to-hand fight, in which he receiveda slight wound, and slew with his own hand several noble Persians. Elsewhere the resistance was less determined. Parmenio crossed on theleft with comparative ease, by his advance relieving Alexander. ThePersians found the long spears of the Macedonians and their intermixtureof light-armed foot with heavy-armed cavalry irresistible. TheMacedonians seem to have received orders to strike at their adversaries'faces--a style of warfare which was as unpleasant to the Persians as itwas to the soldiers of Pompey at Pharsalia. Their line was brokenwhere it was opposed to Alexander and his immediate companions; but thecontagion of disorder rapidly spread, and the whole body of the cavalryshortly quitted the field, after having lost a thousand of their number. Only the infantry now remained. Against these the Macedonian phalanx wasbrought up in front, while the cavalry made repeated charges oneither flank with overwhelming effect. Deserted by their horse, vastlyoutnumbered, and attacked on all sides, the brave mercenaries stoodfirm, fought with desperation, and were mostly slaughtered where theystood. Two thousand out of the 20, 000--probably wounded men--were madeprisoners. The rest perished, except a few who lay concealed among theheaps of slain. 

The Persians lost by the battle 20, 000 of their best footmen, and one ortwo thousand horse. Among their slain the proportion of men of rankwas unusually large. The list included Spithridates, satrap of Lydia, Mithrobarzanes, governor of Cappadocia, Pharnaces, a brother-in-law, andMithridates, a son-in-law of Darius, Arbupales, a grandson of ArtaxerxesMnemon, Omares, the commander of the mercenaries, Niphates, Petines, and Ehoesaces, generals. The Greek loss is said to have been exceedinglysmall. Aristobulus made the total number of the slain thirty-four;Arrian gives it as one hundred and fifteen, or a little over. It hasbeen suspected that even the latter estimate is below the truth; but theanalogy furnished by the other great victories of the Greeks over thePersians tends rather to confirm Arrian's statement. 

The battle of the Granicus threw open to Alexander the whole of AsiaMinor. There was no force left in the entire country that could ventureto resist him, unless protected by walls. Accordingly, the Macedonianoperations for the next twelve months, or during nearly the wholespace that intervened between the battles of the Granicus and of Issus, consist of little more than a series of marches and sieges. The readerof Persian history will scarcely wish for an account of these operationsin detail. Suffice it to say that Alexander rapidly overran Lydia, Ionia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Pisidia, and Phrygia, besieged and tookMiletus, Halicarnassus, Marmareis, and Sagalassus, and received thesubmission of Dascyleium, Sardis, Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles, the LycianTelmisseis, Pinara, Xanthus, Patara, Phaselis, Side, Aspendus, Celaenee, and Gordium. This last city was the capital of Phrygia; and there theconqueror for the first time since his landing gave himself and his armya few months' rest during the latter part of the winter. 

With the first breath of spring his forces were again in motion. Hitherto anxious with respect to the state of things on the coast and inGreece, he had remained in the western half of Asia Minor, within callof his friends in Macedonia, at no time distant more than about 200miles from the sea. Now intelligence reached him which made him feel atliberty to advance into the interior of Asia. Memnon the Rhodian fellsick and died in the early spring of B. C. 333. It is strange that somuch should have depended on a single life; but it certainly seems thatthere was no one in the Persian service who, on Memnon's death, couldreplace him--no one fitted for the difficult task of uniting Greeks andAsiatics together, capable of influencing and managing the one while hepreserved the confidence of the other. Memnon's death disconcerted allthe plans of the Great King, who till it occurred had fully intended tocarry the war into his enemy's country. It induced Darius even to giveup the notion of maintaining a powerful fleet, and to transfer to theland service the most efficient of his naval forces. At the same time itset Alexander free to march wherever he liked, liberating him from thekeen anxiety, which he had previously felt, as to the maintenance of theMacedonian power in Europe. 

It now became the object of the Persian king to confront the daringinvader of his Western provinces with an army worthy of the Persianname and proportionate to the vastness of the Empire. He had long beencollecting troops from many of the most warlike nations, and had gottogether a force of several hundred thousand men. Forgetting the lessonsof his country's previous history, he flattered himself that the hostwhich he had brought together was irresistible, and became anxious tohurry on a general engagement. Starting from Babylon, probably about thetime that Alexander left Gordium in Phrygia, he marched up the valley ofthe Euphrates, and took up a position at Sochi, which was situated ina large open plain, not far from the modern Lake of Antioch. On hisarrival there he heard that Alexander was in Cilicia at no greatdistance; and the Greeks in his service assured him that it would notbe long before the Macedonian monarch would seek him out and accept hisoffer of battle. But a severe attack of illness detained Alexander atTarsus, and when he was a little recovered, troubles in Western Cilicia, threatening his communications with Greece, required his presence;so that Darius grew impatient, and, believing that his enemy had nointention of advancing further than Cilicia, resolved to seek him inthat country. Quitting the open plain of Sochi, he marched northwards, having the range of Amanus on his left, almost as far as thethirty-seventh parallel, when turning sharply to the west, he crossedthe chain, and descended upon Issus, in the inner recess of the gulfwhich bore the same name. Here he came upon Alexander's hospitals, andfound himself to his surprise in the rear of his adversary, who, whileDarius was proceeding northwards along the eastern flank of Amanus, hadbeen marching southwards between the western flank of the same range andthe sea. Alexander had crossed the Pylse, or narrowest portion of thepass, and had reached Myriandrus--a little beyond Iskonderum--when newsreached him that Darius had occupied Issus in his rear, and had putto death all the sick and wounded Macedonians whom he had found in thetown. At first he could not credit the intelligence; but when it wasconfirmed by scouts, whom he sent out, he prepared instantly to retracehis steps, and to fight his first great battle with the Persian kingunder circumstances which he felt to be favorable beyond anything thathe could have hoped. The tract of flat land between the base of themountains and the sea on the borders of the Gulf of Issus was nowherebroader than about a mile and a half. The range of Amanus on theeast rose up with rugged and broken hills, so that on this side theoperations of cavalry were impracticable. It would be impossible toform a line of battle containing in the front rank more than about 4000men, 1048 and difficult for either party to bring into action as many as30, 000 of their soldiers. Thus the vast superiority of numbers on thePersian side became in such a position absolutely useless, and evenAlexander had more troops than he could well employ. No wonder that theMacedonian should exclaim, that "God had declared Himself on the Grecianside by putting it into the heart of Darius to execute such a movement. "It may be that Alexander's superior generalship would have made himvictorious even on the open plain of Sochi; but in the defile of Issussuccess was certain, and generalship superfluous. 

Darius had started from Issus in pursuit of his adversary, and hadreached the banks of the Pinarus, a small stream flowing westward fromAmanus into the Mediterranean, when he heard that Alexander had hastenedto retrace his stops, and was coming to meet him. Immediately heprepared for battle. Passing a force of horse and foot across the streamin his front, to keep his adversary in check if he advanced too rapidly, he drew up his best troops along the line of the river in a continuoussolid mass, the ranks of which must have been at least twenty deep. Thirty thousand Greek mercenaries formed the centre of the line, whileon either side of them were an equal number of Asiatic "braves"--pickedprobably from the mass of the army. Twenty thousand troops of a lighterand inferior class were placed upon the rough hills on the left, theoutskirts of the Amanian range, where the nature of the ground allowedthem to encircle the Macedonian right, which, to preserve its ranksunbroken, kept the plain. The cavalry, to the number of 30, 000, wasmassed upon the other wing, near the sea. 

The battle began by certain movements of Alexander against the flankforce which menaced his right. These troops, assailed by the Macedonianlight-armed, retreated at once to higher ground, and by their manifestcowardice freed Alexander from all anxiety on their account. Leaving 300horse to keep the 20, 000 in check, he moved on his whole line at a slowpace towards the Pinarus till it came within bow-shot of the enemy, whenhe gave the order to proceed at a run. The line advanced as commanded;but before it could reach the river, the Persian horse on the extremeright, unable to restrain themselves any longer, dashed across theshallow stream, and assailed Alexander's left, where they engaged in afierce battle with the Thessalian cavalry, in which neither attained anydecided advantage. The infantry, meanwhile, came into conflict alongthe rest of the line. Alexander himself, with the right and theright-centre, charged the Asiatic troops on Darius's left, who, liketheir brethren at Cunaxa, instantly broke and fled. Parmenio, with theleft-centre, was less successful. The north bank of the Pinarus was inthis part steep and defended by stakes in places; the Greek mercenarieswere as brave as the Macedonians, and fought valiantly. It was not tillthe troops which had routed the Persian right began, to act againsttheir centre, assailing it upon the flank, while it was at the same timeengaged in front, that the mercenaries were overpowered and gave way. Seeing their defeat, the horse likewise fled, and thus the rout becamegeneral. 

It is not quite clear what part Darius took in the battle, or how farhe was answerable for its untoward result. According to Arrian, he wasstruck with a sudden panic on beholding the flight of his left wing, andgave orders to his charioteer instantly to quit the field. But Curtiusand Diodorus represent him as engaged in a long struggle againstAlexander himself, and as only flying when he was in imminent danger offalling into the enemy's hands. Justin goes further, and states thathe was actually wounded. The character gained by Darius in his earlieryears makes it improbable that he would under any circumstances haveexhibited personal cowardice. On the whole it would seem to be mostprobable that the flight of the Persian monarch occurred, not when theleft wing fled, but when the Greek mercenaries among whom he had placedhimself began to give way before the irresistible phalanx and theimpetuous charges of Alexander. Darius, not unwisely, accepted thedefeat of his best troops as the loss of the battle, and hastily retiredacross Amanus by the pass which had brought him to Issus, whencehe hurried on through Sochi to the Euphrates, anxious to place thatobstacle between himself and his victorious enemy. His multitudinoushost, entangled in the defiles of the mountains, suffered by its ownweight and size, the stronger fugitives treading down the weaker, whileat the same time it was ruthlessly slaughtered by the pursuing enemy, so long as the waning light allowed. As many as 100, 000--90, 000 foot and10, 000 horse--are said to have fallen. The ravines were in places chokedwith the dead bodies, and Ptolemy the son of Lagus related that in oneinstance he and Alexander crossed a gully on a bridge of this kind. Among the slain were Sabaces, satrap of Egypt, Bubaces, a noble of highrank, and Arsames, Rheomithres, and Atizyes, three of the commandersat the Granicus. Forty thousand prisoners were made. The whole of thePersian camp and camp-equipage fell into the enemy's hands, who found inthe royal pavilion the mother, wife, and sister of the king, aninfant son, two daughters, and a number of female attendants, wives ofnoblemen. The treasure captured amounted to 3000 silver talents. Amongthe trophies of victory were the chariot, bow, shield, and robe of theking, which he had abandoned in his hurried flight. 

The loss on the side of the Macedonians was trivial. The highestestimate places it at 450 killed, the lowest at 182. Besides these, 504 were wounded. Thus Alexander had less than 1000 men placed hors decombat. He himself received a slight wound in the thigh from a sword, which, used a little more resolutely, might have changed the fortunes ofthe world. 

The defeat of the Persians at Issus seems to have been due simply to thefact that, practically, the two adversaries engaged with almost equalnumbers, and that the troops of Alexander were of vastly superiorquality to those of Darhis. The Asiatic infantry--notwithstanding theirproud title of "braves"--proved to be worthless; the Greek mercenarieswere personally courageous, but their inferior arms and trainingrendered them incapable of coping with the Macedonian phalanx. Thecavalry was the only arm in which the Persians were not greatly at adisadvantage; and cavalry alone cannot gain, or even save a battle. When Darius put himself into a position where he lost all the advantagesderivable from superiority of numbers, he made his own defeat and hisadversary's triumph certain. 

It remained, therefore, before the Empire could be considered asentirely lost, that this error should be corrected, this false stepretrieved. All hope for Persia was not gone, so long as her full forcehad not been met and defeated in a fair and open field. When Darius fledfrom Issus, it was not simply to preserve for a few months longer hisown wretched life; it was to make an effort to redeem the past--to givehis country that last chance of maintaining her independence which shehad a right to claim at his hands--to try what the award of battlewould be under the circumstances which he had fair grounds forregarding as the most favorable possible to his own side and the mostdisadvantageous to his adversary. Before the heart of the Empirecould be reached from the West, the wide Mesopotamian plain had to betraversed--there, in those vast flats, across which the enemy must come, a position might be chosen where there would be room for the largestnumbers that even his enormous Empire could furnish--where cavalry andeven chariots would be everywhere free to act--where consequently hemight engage the puny force of his antagonist to the greatest advantage, outflank it, envelop it, and perhaps destroy it. Darius would havebeen inexcusable had he given up the contest without trying this lastchance--the chance of a battle in the open field with the full collectedforce of Persia. 

His adversary gave him ample time to prepare for this final struggle. The battle of Issus was fought in November, B. C. 333. It was not tillthe summer of B. C. 331, twenty months later that the Macedonian forceswere set in motion towards the interior of the Empire. More than a yearand a half was consumed in the reduction of Phoenicia, the siege ofGaza, and the occupation of Egypt. Alexander, apparently, was confidentof defeating Darius in a pitched battle, whenever and under whatevercircumstances they should again meet; and regarded as the onlyserious dangers which threatened him, a possible interruption of hiscommunications with Greece, and the employment of Persian gold andPersian naval force in the raising of troubles on the European side ofthe Egean. He was therefore determined, before he plunged into the depthof the Asiatic continent, to isolate Persia from Greece, to destroy hernaval power, and to cripple her pecuniary resources. The event showedthat his decision was a wise one. By detaching from Persia and bringingunder his own sway the important countries of Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, Idumsea, and Egypt, he wholly deprived Persia of her navy, and transferred to himself the complete supremacy of the sea, he greatlyincreased his own resources while he diminished those of the enemy, andhe shut out Persia altogether from communication with Greece, exceptingthrough his territories. He could therefore commence his march into theinterior with a feeling of entire security as to his communications andhis rear. No foe was left on the coast capable of causing him a moment'suneasiness. Athens and Sparta might chafe and even intrigue; but withoutthe Persian "archers, " it was impossible that any force should be raisedwhich could in the slightest degree imperil his European dominions. 

From Babylon, whither Darius proceeded straight from Issus, he appearsto have made two ineffectual attempts at negotiating with his enemy. Thefirst embassy was despatched soon after his arrival, and, accordingto Arrian, was instructed merely to make proposals for peace, and torequest the restitution of the Queen, the Queen-mother, Sisygambis, theinfant prince, and the two princesses, captured by Alexander. To thisAlexander replied, in haughty and contemptuous terms, that if Dariuswould acknowledge him as Lord of Asia, and deliver himself into hispower, he should receive back his relatives: if he intended still todispute the sovereignty, he ought to come and fight out the contest, andnot run away. 

The second embassy was sent six or eight months later, while Alexanderwas engaged in the siege of Tyre. Darius now offered, as a ransom forthe members of his family held in captivity by Alexander, the large sumof ten thousand talents (L240, 000. ), and was willing to purchase peaceby the cession of all the provinces lying west of the Euphrates, severalof which were not yet in Alexander's possession. At the same time heproposed that Alexander should marry his daughter, Statira, in orderthat the cession of territory might be represented as the bestowal of adowry. The reply of Alexander was, if possible, ruder and haughtier thanbefore. "What did Darius mean by offering money and territory? All histreasure and all his territory were Alexander's already. As for theproposed marriage, if he (Alexander) liked to marry a daughter ofDarius, he should of course do so, whether her father consented or not. If Darius wanted merciful treatment, he had better come and deliverhimself up at once. "

The terms of this reply rendered further negotiation impossible. Darius had probably not hoped much from his pacific overtures, and wastherefore not greatly concerned at their rejection. He knew that themembers of his family were honorably and even kindly treated by theircaptor, and that, so far at any rate, Alexander had proved himself amagnanimous conqueror. He can scarcely have thought that a lasting peacewas possible between himself and his young antagonist, who had only justfleshed his maiden sword, and was naturally eager to pursue his careerof conquest. Indeed, he seems from the moment of his defeat at Issus tohave looked forward to another battle as inevitable, and to have beenunremitting in his efforts to collect and arm a force which mightcontend, with a good hope of victory, against the Macedonians. Hereplaced the panoplies lost at Issus with fresh ones; he armed hisforces anew with swords and spears longer than the Persians had beenpreviously accustomed to employ, on account of the great length of theMacedonian weapons; he caused to be constructed 200 scythed chariots; heprepared spiked balls to use against his enemy's cavalry; above all, helaid under contribution for the supply of troops all the provinces, even the most remote, of his extensive Empire, and asked and obtainedimportant aid from allies situated beyond his borders. The forces whichhe collected for the final struggle comprised--besides Persians, Medes, Babylonians, and Susianians from the centre of the Empire--Syrians fromthe banks of the Orontes, Armenians from the neighborhood of Ararat, Cappadocians and Albanians from the regions bordering on the Euxine, Cadusians from the Caspian, Bactrians from the Upper Oxus, Sogdians fromthe Jaxartes, Arachosians from Cabul, Arians from Herat, Indians fromPunjab, and even Sacse from the country about Kashgar and Yarkand, onthe borders of the Great Desert of Gobi. Twenty-five nations followedthe standard of the Great King, and swelled the ranks of his vast army, which amounted (according to the best authorities) to above a million ofmen. Every available resource that the Empire possessed was broughtinto play. Besides the three arms of cavalry, infantry, and chariots, elephants were, for perhaps the first time in the history of militaryscience, marshalled in the battle-field, to which they added an unwontedelement of grotesqueness and savagery. 

The field of battle was likewise selected with great care, andartificially prepared for the encounter. Darius, it would seem, hadat last become convinced that his enemy would seek him out wherever hemight happen to be, and that consequently the choice of ground restedwholly with himself. Leaving, therefore, the direct road to Babylonby the line of the Euphrates undefended, he selected a position whichpossessed all the advantages of the Mesopotamian plain, being open, level, fertile, and well supplied with water, while its vicinity to theeastern and northern provinces, made it convenient for a rendezvous. This position was on the left or east bank of the Tigris, in the heartof the ancient Assyria, not more than thirty miles from the site ofNineveh. Here, in the region called by the Greeks Adiabene, extendedbetween the Tigris and the river Zab or Lycus, a vast plain broken byscarcely any elevations, and wholly bare of both shrubs and trees. Thefew natural inequalities which presented themselves were levelled byorder of Darius, who made the entire plain in his front practicable notonly for cavalry but for chariots. At the same time he planted, in theplaces where Alexander's cavalry was likely to charge, spiked balls todamage the feet of the horses. 

Meanwhile, Alexander had quitted Egypt, and after delaying some monthsin Syria while his preparations were being completed, had crossed theEuphrates at Thapsacus and marched through northern Mesopotamia alongthe southern flank of the Mons Masius, a district in which provisions, water, and forage were abundant, to the Tigris, which he must havereached in about lat. 36° 30', thirty or forty miles above the site ofNineveh. No resistance was made to his advance; even the passage ofthe great rivers was unopposed. Arrived on the east bank of the Tigris, Alexander found himself in Assyria Proper, with the stream upon hisright and the mountains of Gordyene Kurdistan at no great distance uponhis left. But the plain widened as he advanced, and became, as he drewnear the position of his enemy, a vast level, nowhere less than thirtymiles in breadth, between the outlying ranges of hills and the greatriver. Darius, whose headquarters had been at Arbela, south of the Zab, on learning Alexander's approach, had crossed that stream and taken poston the prepared ground to the north, in the neighborhood of a small townor village called Gaugamela. Here he drew up his forces in the orderwhich he thought best, placing the scythed chariots in front, withsupports of horse--Scythian, Bactrian, Armenian, and Cappadocian--nearto them; then, the main line of battle, divided into a centre and twowings, and composed of horse and foot intermixed; and finally a reserveof Babylonians. Sitaceni, and others, massed in heavy column in therear. His own post was, according to invariable Persian custom, inthe centre; and about him were grouped the best troops--the Householdbrigade, the Melophori or Persian foot-guards, the Mardian archers, someAlbanians and Carians, the entire body of Greek mercenaries, and theIndians with their elephants. 

Alexander, on his side, determined to leave nothing to chance. Advancingleisurely, resting his troops at intervals, carefully feeling his way bymeans of scouts, and gradually learning from the prisoners whom hetook, and the deserters who came over to him, all the dispositions andpreparations of the enemy, he arrived opposite the position of Darius onthe ninth day after his passage of the Tigris. His officers were eagerto attack at once; but with great judgment he restrained them, gave histroops a night's rest, and obtained time to reconnoitre completely thewhole position of the enemy and the arrangement which he had made of hisforces. He then formed his own dispositions. The army with which hewas to attack above a million of men consisted of 40, 300 foot and 7000horse. Alexander drew them up in three lines:

The first consisted of light-armed troops, horse and foot, of goodquality, which were especially intended to act against the enemy'schariots. The next was the main line of battle, and contained thephalanx with the rest of the heavy infantry in the centre, the heavycavalry upon the two wings. The third line consisted of light troops, chiefly horse, and was instructed to act against such of the Persians asshould outflank the Macedonian main line and so threaten their rear. As at Issus, Alexander took the command of the right wing himself, andassigned the left to Parmenio. 

As the two armies drew near, Alexander, who found himself greatlyoutflanked on both wings, and saw in front of him smooth groundcarefully prepared for the operations of chariots and cavalry, began adiagonal movement towards the right, which tended at once to place himbeyond the levelled ground, and to bring him in contact with his enemy'sleft wing rather than with his direct front. The movement greatlydisconcerted his adversary, who sought to prevent it by extending andadvancing his own left, which was soon engaged with Alexander's rightin a fierce hand-to-hand conflict. Alexander still pressed his slantingmovement, and in resisting it Darius's left became separated from hiscentre, while at the same time he was forced to give the signal forlaunching the chariots against the foe sooner than he had intended, andunder circumstances that were not favorable. The effect of the operationwas much the same as at Cunaxa. Received by the Macedonian light-armed, the chariots were mostly disabled before the enemy's main line wasreached; the drivers were dragged from the chariot-boards; and thehorses were cut to pieces. Such as escaped this fate and charged theMacedonian line, were allowed to pass through the ranks, which opened toreceive them, and were then dealt with by grooms and others in the rearof the army. 

No sooner had the chariot attack failed, and the space between the twolines of battle become clear, than Alexander, with the quick eye of atrue general, saw his opportunity: to resist his flank movement, theBactrians and Sacae with the greater part of the left wing had brokenoff from the main Persian line, and in pressing towards the lefthad made a gap between their ranks and the centre. Into this gap theMacedonian king, at the head of the "Companion" cavalry and a portion ofthe phalanx, plunged. Here he found himself in the near neighborhoodof Darius, whereupon he redoubled the vigor of his assault, knowing thegreat importance of any success gained in this quarter. The Companionsrushed on with loud cries, pressing with all their weight, and thrustingtheir spears into the faces of their antagonists--the phalanx, bristlingwith its thick array of lances, bore them down. Alexander found himselfsufficiently near Darius to hurl a spear at him, which transfixed hischarioteer. The cry arose that the king had fallen, and the ranks atonce grew unsteady. The more timid instantly began to break and fly;the contagion of fear spread; and Darius was in a little while almostdenuded of protection on one side. Seeing this, and regarding the battleas lost, since his line was broken, his centre and left wing defeated, while only his right wing remained firm, the Persian monarch yielded tohis alarm, and hastily quitting the field, made his way to Arbela. Thecentre and left fled with him. The right, which was under the commandof the Syrian satrap, Mazseus, made a firmer stand. On this side thechariots had done some damage, and the horse was more than a match forthe Thessalian cavalry. Parmenio found himself in difficulties about thetime when the Persian king fled. His messengers detained a part of thephalanx, which was about to engage in the pursuit, and even recalledAlexander, who was hastening upon the track of Darius. The carefulprince turned back, but before he could make his way through the crowdof fugitives to the side of his lieutenant, victory had declared infavor of the Macedonians in this part of the field also. Mazseus and histroops, learning that the king was fled, regarded further resistance asuseless, and quitted the field. The Persian army hurriedly recrossedthe Zab, pursued by the remorseless conquerors, who slew the unresistingfugitives till they were weary of slaughter. Arrian says that 300, 000fell, while a still larger number were taken prisoners. Other writersmake the loss considerably less. All, however, agree that the army wascompletely routed and dispersed, that it made no attempt to rally, andgave no further trouble to the conqueror. 

The conduct of Darius in this--the crisis of his fate--cannot beapproved; but it admits of palliation, and does not compel us towithdraw from him that respectful compassion which we commonly accordto great misfortunes. After Issus, it was his duty to make at least onemore effort against the invader. To this object he addressed himselfwith earnestness and diligence. The number and quality of the troopscollected at Arbela attests at once the zeal and success of hisendeavors. His choice and careful preparation of the field of battleare commendable; in his disposition of his forces there is nothing withwhich to find fault. Every arm of the service had full room to act; allwere brought into play; if Alexander conquered, it was because he was aconsummate general, while at the same time he commanded the best troopsin the world. Arbela was not, like Issus, won by mere fighting. It wasthe leader's victory, rather than the soldiers. Alexander's diagonaladvance, the confusion which it caused, the break in the Persian line, and its prompt occupation by some of the best cavalry and a portionof the phalanx, are the turning-points of the engagement. All therest followed as a matter of course. Far too much importance has beenassigned to Darius's flight, which was the effect rather than the causeof victory. When the centre of an Asiatic army is so deeply penetratedthat the person of the monarch is exposed and his near attendants beginto fall, the battle is won. Darius did not--indeed he could not--"setthe example of flight. " Hemmed in by vast masses of troops, it was notuntil their falling away from him on his left flank at once exposedhim to the enemy and gave him room to escape, that he could extricatehimself from the melee. 

No doubt it would have been nobler, finer, more heroic, had the Persianmonarch, seeing that all was lost, and that the Empire of the Persianswas over, resolved not to outlive the independence of his country. Hadhe died in the thick of the fight, a halo of glory would have surroundedhim. But, because he lacked, in common with many other great kings andcommanders, the quality of heroism, we are not justified in affixing tohis memory the stigma of personal cowardice. Like Pompey, likeNapoleon, he yielded in the crisis of his fate to the instinct ofself-preservation. He fled from the field where he had lost his crown, not to organize a new army, not to renew the contest, but to prolong fora few weeks a life which had ceased to have any public value. 

It is needless to pursue further the dissolution of the Empire. The fatal blow was struck at Arbela--all the rest was but the longdeath-agony. At Arbela the crown of Cyrua passed to the Macedonian;the Fifth Monarchy came to an end. The HE-GOAT, with the notable hornbetween his eyes, had come from the west to the ram which had two horns, and had run into him with the fury of his power. He had come close tohim, and, moved with choler, had smitten the ram and broken his twohorns--there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he hadcast him down to the ground and stamped upon him--and there was none todeliver the ram out of his hand.