BOOK III.

Ancient States and Empires

For Colleges And Schools

By

John Lord LL.D.

Author of the “Old Roman World”

“Modern History” &c.

New York

Charles Scribner & Company

1869

CONTENTS

PREFACE.

BOOK I. ANCIENT ORIENTAL NATIONS.

CHAPTER I. THE ANTEDILUVIAN WORLD.

CHAPTER II. POSTDILUVIAN HISTORY TO THE CALL OF ABRAHAM.—THE

PATRIARCHAL CONSTITUTION, AND THE DIVISION OF NATIONS.

CHAPTER III. THE HEBREW RACE FROM ABRAHAM TO THE SALE OF JOSEPH.

CHAPTER IV. EGYPT AND THE PHARAOHS.

CHAPTER V. THE JEWS UNTIL THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN.

CHAPTER VI. THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE KINGDOM

OF DAVID.

CHAPTER VII. THE JEWISH MONARCHY.

CHAPTER VIII. THE OLD CHALDEAN AND ASSYRIAN MONARCHIES.

CHAPTER IX. THE EMPIRE OF THE MEDES AND PERSIANS.

CHAPTER X. ASIA MINOR AND PHŒNICIA.

CHAPTER XI. JEWISH HISTORY FROM THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY TO THE BIRTH

OF CHRIST.—THE HIGH PRIESTS AND THE ASMONEAN AND IDUMEAN KINGS.

CHAPTER XII. THE ROMAN GOVERNORS.

BOOK II. THE GRECIAN STATES.

CHAPTER XIII. THE GEOGRAPHY OF ANCIENT GREECE AND ITS EARLY

INHABITANTS.

CHAPTER XIV. THE LEGENDS OF ANCIENT GREECE.

CHAPTER XV. THE GRECIAN STATES AND COLONIES TO THE PERSIAN WARS.

CHAPTER XVI. GRECIAN CIVILIZATION BEFORE THE PERSIAN WARS.

CHAPTER XVII. THE PERSIAN WAR.

CHAPTER XVIII. THE AGE OF PERICLES.

CHAPTER XIX. THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR.

CHAPTER XX. MARCH OF CYRUS AND RETREAT OF THE TEN THOUSAND GREEKS.

CHAPTER XXI. THE LACEDÆMONIAN EMPIRE.

CHAPTER XXII. THE REPUBLIC OF THEBES.

CHAPTER XXIII. DIONYSIUS AND SICILY.

CHAPTER XXIV. PHILIP OF MACEDON.

CHAPTER XXV. ALEXANDER THE GREAT.

BOOK III. THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

CHAPTER XXVI. ROME IN ITS INFANCY, UNDER KINGS.

CHAPTER XXVII. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC TILL THE INVASION OF THE GAULS.

CHAPTER XXVIII. THE CONQUEST OF ITALY.

CHAPTER XXIX. THE FIRST PUNIC WAR.

CHAPTER XXX. THE SECOND PUNIC OR HANNIBALIC WAR.

CHAPTER XXXI. THE MACEDONIAN AND ASIATIC WARS.

CHAPTER XXXII. THE THIRD PUNIC WAR.

CHAPTER XXXIII. ROMAN CONQUESTS FROM THE FALL OF CARTHAGE TO THE TIMES

OF THE GRACCHI.

CHAPTER XXXIV. ROMAN CIVILIZATION AT THE CLOSE OF THE THIRD PUNIC WAR,

AND THE FALL OF GREECE.

CHAPTER XXXV. THE REFORM MOVEMENT OF THE GRACCHI.

CHAPTER XXXVI. THE WARS WITH JUGURTHA AND THE CIMBRI.—MARIUS.

CHAPTER XXXVII. THE REVOLT OF ITALY, AND THE SOCIAL WAR.—MARIUS AND

SULLA.

CHAPTER XXXVIII. THE MITHRIDATIC AND CIVIL WARS.—MARIUS AND SULLA.

CHAPTER XXXIX. ROME FROM THE DEATH OF SULLA TO THE GREAT CIVIL WARS OF

CÆSAR AND POMPEY.—CICERO, POMPEY, AND CÆSAR.

CHAPTER XL. THE CIVIL WARS BETWEEN CÆSAR AND POMPEY.

CHAPTER XLI. THE CIVIL WARS FOLLOWING THE DEATH OF

CÆSAR.—ANTONIUS.—AUGUSTUS.

CHAPTER XLII. THE ROMAN EMPIRE ON THE ACCESSION OF AUGUSTUS.

CHAPTER XLIII. THE SIX CÆSARS OF THE JULIAN LINE.

CHAPTER XLIV. THE CLIMAX OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

CHAPTER XLV. THE DECLINE OF THE EMPIRE.

CHAPTER XLVI. THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE.

Advertisements.

Footnotes

PREFACE.

This work is designed chiefly for educational purposes, since there is

still felt the need of some book, which, within moderate limits, shall

give a connected history of the ancient world.

The author lays no claim to original investigation in so broad a field. He

simply has aimed to present the salient points—the most important events

and characters of four thousand years, in a connected narrative, without

theories or comments, and without encumbering the book with details of

comparatively little interest. Most of the ancient histories for schools,

have omitted to notice those great movements to which the Scriptures

refer; but these are here briefly presented, since their connection with

the Oriental world is intimate and impressive, and ought not to be

omitted, even on secular grounds. What is history without a Divine

Providence?

In the preparation of this work, the author has been contented with the

last standard authorities, which he has merely simplified, abridged, and

condensed, being most indebted to Rawlinson, Grote, Thirlwall, Niebuhr,

Mommsen, and Merivale,—following out the general plan of Philip Smith,

whose admirable digest, in three large octavos, is too extensive for

schools.

Although the author has felt warranted in making a free use of his

materials, it will be seen that the style, arrangement, and reflections

are his own. If the book prove useful, his object will be attained.

STAMFORD _October, 1869_.

BOOK I.

ANCIENT ORIENTAL NATIONS.

CHAPTER I.

THE ANTEDILUVIAN WORLD.

(M1) The history of this world begins, according to the chronology of

Archbishop Ussher, which is generally received as convenient rather than

probable, in the year 4004 before Christ. In six days God created light

and darkness, day and night, the firmament and the continents in the midst

of the waters, fruits, grain, and herbs, moon and stars, fowl and fish,

living creatures upon the face of the earth, and finally man, with

dominion “over the fish of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and cattle,

and all the earth, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”

He created man in his own image, and blessed him with universal dominion.

He formed him from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life. On the seventh day, God rested from this vast work of

creation, and blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, as we suppose,

for a day of solemn observance for all generations.

(M2) He there planted a garden eastward in Eden, with every tree pleasant

to the sight and good for food, and there placed man to dress and keep it.

The original occupation of man, and his destined happiness, were thus

centered in agricultural labor.

(M3) But man was alone; so God caused a deep sleep to fall upon him, and

took one of his ribs and made a woman. And Adam said, “this woman,” which

the Lord had brought unto him, “is bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh;

therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto

his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Thus marriage was instituted. We

observe three divine institutions while man yet remained in a state of

innocence and bliss—the Sabbath; agricultural employment; and marriage.

(M4) Adam and his wife lived, we know not how long, in the garden of Eden,

with perfect innocence, bliss, and dominion. They did not even know what

sin was. There were no other conditions imposed upon them than they were

not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which

was in the midst of the garden—a preeminently goodly tree, “pleasant to

the eyes, and one to be desired.”

(M5) Where was this garden—this paradise—located? This is a mooted

question—difficult to be answered. It lay, thus far as we know, at the

head waters of four rivers, two of which were the Euphrates and the

Tigris. We infer thence, that it was situated among the mountains of

Armenia, south of the Caucasus, subsequently the cradle of the noblest

races of men,—a temperate region, in the latitude of Greece and Italy.

(M6) We suppose that the garden was beautiful and fruitful, beyond all

subsequent experience—watered by mists from the earth, and not by rains

from the clouds, ever fresh and green, while its two noble occupants lived

upon its produce, directly communing with God, in whose image they were

made, moral and spiritual—free from all sin and misery, and, as we may

conjecture, conversant with truth in its loftiest forms.

But sin entered into the beautiful world that was made, and death by sin.

This is the first recorded fact in human history, next to primeval

innocence and happiness.

(M7) The progenitors of the race were tempted, and did not resist the

temptation. The form of it may have been allegorical and symbolic; but, as

recorded by Moses, was yet a stupendous reality, especially in view of its

consequences.

(M8) The tempter was the devil—the antagonist of God—the evil power of the

world—the principle of evil—a Satanic agency which Scripture, and all

nations, in some form, have recognized. When rebellion against God began,

we do not know; but it certainly existed when Adam was placed in Eden.

(M9) The form which Satanic power assumed was a serpent—then the most

subtle of the beasts of the field, and we may reasonably suppose, not

merely subtle, but attractive, graceful, beautiful, bewitching.

(M10) The first to feel its evil fascination was the woman, and she was

induced to disobey what she knew to be a direct command, by the desire of

knowledge as well as enjoyment of the appetite. She put trust in the

serpent. She believed a lie. She was beguiled.

(M11) The man was not directly beguiled by the serpent. Why the serpent

assailed woman rather than man, the Scriptures do not say. The man yielded

to his wife. “She gave him the fruit, and he did eat.”

(M12) Immediately a great change came over both. Their eyes were opened.

They felt shame and remorse, for they had sinned. They hid themselves from

the presence of the Lord, and were afraid.

(M13) God pronounced the penalty—unto the woman, the pains and sorrows

attending childbirth, and subserviency to her husband; unto the man labor,

toil, sorrow—the curse of the ground which he was to till—thorns and

thistles—no rest, and food obtained only by the sweat of the brow; and all

these pains and labors were inflicted upon both until they should return

to the dust from whence they were taken—an eternal decree, never

abrogated, to last as long as man should till the earth, or woman bring

forth children.

(M14) Thus came sin into the world, through the temptations of

introduction Satan and the weakness of man, with the penalty of labour,

pain, sorrow, and death.

(M15) Man was expelled from Paradise, and precluded from re-entering it by

the flaming sword of cherubim, until the locality of Eden, by thorns and

briars, and the deluge, was obliterated forever. And man and woman were

sent out into the world to reap the fruit of their folly and sin, and to

gain their subsistence in severe toil, and amid, the accumulated evils

which sin introduced.

(M16) The only mitigation of the sentence was the eternal enmity between

the seed of the woman and the seed of the Serpent, in which the final

victory should be given to the former. The rite of sacrifice was

introduced as a type of the satisfaction for sin by the death of a

substitute for the sinner; and thus a hope of final forgiveness held out

for sin, Meanwhile the miseries of life were alleviated by the fruits of

labor, by industry.

(M17) Industry, then, became, on the expulsion from Eden, one of the final

laws of human happiness on earth, while the sacrifice held out hopes of

eternal life by the substitution which the sacrifice typified—the Saviour

who was in due time to appear.

With the expulsion from Eden came the sad conflicts of the race—conflicts

with external wickedness—conflicts with the earth—conflicts with evil

passions in a man’s own soul.

(M18) The first conflict was between Cain, the husbandman, and Abel, the

shepherd; the representatives of two great divisions of the human family

in the early ages. Cain killed Abel because the offering of the latter was

preferred to that of the former. The virtue of Abel was faith: the sin of

Cain was jealousy, pride, resentment, and despair. The punishment of Cain

was expulsion from his father’s house, the further curse of the land for

_him_, and the hatred of the human family. He relinquished his occupation,

became a wanderer, and gained a precarious support, while his descendants

invented arts and built cities.

(M19) Eve bear another son—Seth, among whose descendants the worship of

God was preserved for a long time; but the descendants of Seth

intermarried finally with the descendants of Cain, from whom sprung a race

of lawless men, so that the earth was filled with violence. The material

civilization which the descendants of Cain introduced did not preserve

them from moral degeneracy. So great was the increasing wickedness, with

the growth of the race, that “it repented the Lord that he had made man,”

and he resolved to destroy the whole race, with the exception of one

religious family, and change the whole surface of the earth by a mighty

flood, which should involve in destruction all animals and fowls of the

air—all the antediluvian works of man.

(M20) It is of no consequence to inquire whether the Deluge was universal

or partial—whether it covered the whole earth or the existing habitations

of men. All were destroyed by it, except Noah, and his wife, and his three

sons, with their wives. The authenticity of the fact rests with Moses, and

with him we are willing to leave it.

(M21) This dreadful catastrophe took place in the 600th year of Noah’s

life, and 2349 years before Christ, when world was 1655 years old,

according to Usshur, but much older according to Hale and other

authorities—when more time had elapsed than from the Deluge to the reign

of Solomon. And hence there were more people destroyed, in all

probability, than existed on the earth in the time of Solomon. And as men

lived longer in those primeval times than subsequently, and were larger

and stronger, “for there were giants in those days,” and early invented

tents, the harp, the organ, and were artificers in brass and iron, and

built cities—as they were full of inventions as well as imaginations, it

is not unreasonable to infer, though we can not know with certainty, that

the antediluvian world was more splendid and luxurious than the world in

the time of Solomon and Homer—the era of the Pyramids of Egypt.

(M22) The art of building was certainly then carried to considerable

perfection, for the ark, which Noah built, was four hundred and fifty feet

long, seventy-five wide, and forty-five deep; and was constructed so

curiously as to hold specimens of all known animals and birds, with

provisions for them for more than ten months.

(M23) This sacred ark or ship, built of gopher wood, floated on the

world’s waves, until, in the seventh month, it rested upon the mountains

of Ararat. It was nearly a year before Noah ventured from the ark. His

first act, after he issued forth, was to build an altar and offer

sacrifice to the God who had preserved him and his family alone, of the

human race. And the Lord was well pleased, and made a covenant with him

that he would never again send a like destruction upon the earth, and as a

sign and seal of the covenant which he made with all flesh, he set his bow

in the cloud. We hence infer that the primeval world was watered by mists

from the earth, like the garden of Eden, and not by rains.

(M24) “The memory of the Deluge is preserved in the traditions of nearly

all nations, as well as in the narrative of Moses; and most heathen

mythologies have some kind of sacred ark.” Moreover, there are various

geological phenomena in all parts of the world, which can not be accounted

for on any other ground than some violent disruption produced by a

universal Deluge. The Deluge itself can not be explained, although there

are many ingenious theories to show it might be in accordance with natural

causes. The Scriptures allude to it as a supernatural event, for an

express end. When the supernatural power of God can be disproved, then it

will be time to explain the Deluge by natural causes, or deny it

altogether. The Christian world now accepts it as Moses narrates it.

CHAPTER II.

POSTDILUVIAN HISTORY TO THE CALL OF ABRAHAM.—THE PATRIARCHAL CONSTITUTION,

AND THE DIVISION OF NATIONS.

(M25) When Noah and his family issued from the ark, they were blessed by

God. They were promised a vast posterity, dominion over nature, and all

animals for food, as well as the fruits of the earth. But new laws were

imposed, against murder, and against the eating of blood. An authority was

given to the magistrate to punish murder. “Whosoever sheddeth man’s blood,

by man shall _his_ blood be shed.” This was not merely a penalty, but a

prediction. The sacredness of life, and the punishment for murder are

equally asserted, and asserted with peculiar emphasis. This may be said to

be the Noachic Code, afterward extended by Moses. From that day to this,

murder has been accounted the greatest human crime, and has been the most

severely punished. On the whole, this crime has been the rarest in the

subsequent history of the world, although committed with awful frequency,

but seldom till other crimes are exhausted. The sacredness of life is the

greatest of human privileges.

(M26) The government was patriarchal. The head of a family had almost

unlimited power. And this government was religious as well as civil. The

head of the family was both priest and king. He erected altars and divided

inheritances. He ruled his sons, even if they had wives and children. And

as the old patriarchs lived to a great age, their authority extended over

several generations and great numbers of people.

Noah pursued the life of a husbandman, and planted vines, probably like

the antediluvians. Nor did he escape the shame of drunkenness, though we

have no evidence it was an habitual sin.

(M27) From this sin and shame great consequences followed. Noah was

indecently exposed. The second son made light of it; the two others

covered up the nakedness of their father. For this levity Ham was cursed

in his children. Canaan, his son, was decreed to be a servant of

servants—the ancestor of the races afterward exterminated by the Jews. To

Shem, for his piety, was given a special religious blessing. Through him

all the nations of the earth were blessed. To Japhet was promised especial

temporal prosperity, and a participation of the blessing of Shem, The

European races are now reaping this prosperity, and the religious

privileges of Christianity.

(M28) Four generations passed without any signal event. They all spoke the

same language, and pursued the same avocations. They lived in Armenia, but

gradually spread over the surrounding countries and especially toward the

west and south. They journeyed to the land of Shinar, and dwelt on its

fertile plains. This was the great level of Lower Mesopotamia, or Chaldea,

watered by the Euphrates.

(M29) Here they built a city, and aspired to build a tower which should

reach unto the heavens. It was vanity and pride which incited them,—also

fear lest they should be scattered.

(M30) We read that Nimrod—one of the descendants of Ham—a mighty hunter,

had migrated to this plain, and set up a kingdom at Babel—perhaps a revolt

against patriarchal authority. Here was a great settlement—perhaps the

central seat of the descendants of Noah, where Nimrod—the strongest man of

his times—usurped dominion. Under his auspices the city was built—a

stronghold from which he would defy all other powers. Perhaps here he

instituted idolatry, since a tower was also a temple. But, whether fear or

ambition or idolatry prompted the building of Babel, it displeased the

Lord.

(M31) The punishment which he inflicted upon the builders was confusion of

tongues. The people could not understand each other, and were obliged to

disperse. The tower was left unfinished. The Lord “scattered the people

abroad upon the face of all the earth.” Probably some remained at Babel,

on the Euphrates—the forefathers of the Israelites when they dwelt in

Chaldea. It is not probable that every man spoke a different language, but

that there was a great division of language, corresponding with the great

division of families, so that the posterity of Shem took one course, that

of Japhet another, and that of Ham the third—dividing themselves into

three separate nations, each speaking substantially the same tongue,

afterward divided into different dialects from their peculiar

circumstances.

(M32) Much learning and ingenuity have been expended in tracing the

different races and languages of the earth to the grand confusion of

Babel. But the subject is too complicated, and in the present state of

science, too unsatisfactory to make it expedient to pursue ethnological

and philological inquiries in a work so limited as this. We refer students

to Max Muller, and other authorities.

(M33) But that there was a great tripartite division of the human family

can not be doubted. The descendants of Japhet occupied a great zone

running from the high lands of Armenia to the southeast, into the

table-lands of Iran, and to Northern India, and to the west into Thrace,

the Grecian peninsula, and Western Europe. And all the nations which

subsequently sprung from the children of Japhet, spoke languages the roots

of which bear a striking affinity. This can be proved. The descendants of

Japhet, supposed to be the oldest son of Noah, possessed the fairest lands

of the world—most favorable to development and progress—most favorable to

ultimate supremacy. They composed the great Caucasian race, which spread

over Northern and Western Asia, and over Europe—superior to other races in

personal beauty and strength, and also intellectual force. From the times

of the Greek and Romans this race has held the supremacy of the world, as

was predicted to Noah. “God shall enlarge Japhet, and he shall dwell in

the tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant.” The conquest of the

descendants of Ham by the Greeks and Romans, and their slavery, attest the

truth of Scripture.

(M34) The descendants of Shem occupied another belt or zone. It extended

from the southeastern part of Asia Minor to the Persian Gulf and the

peninsula of Arabia. The people lived in tents, were not ambitious of

conquest, were religious and contemplative. The great theogonies of the

East came from this people. They studied the stars. They meditated on God

and theological questions. They were a chosen race with whom sacred

history dwells. They had, compared with other races, a small territory

between the possessions of Japhet on the north, and that of Ham on the

south. Their destiny was not to spread over the world, but to exhibit the

dealings of God’s providence. From this race came the Jews and the

Messiah. The most enterprising of the descendants of Shem were the

Phœnicians, who pursued commerce on a narrow strip of the eastern shore of

the Mediterranean, and who colonized Carthage and North Africa, but were

not powerful enough to contend successfully with the Romans in political

power.

(M35) The most powerful of the posterity of Noah were the descendants of

Ham, for more than two thousand years, since they erected great

monarchies, and were warlike, aggressive, and unscrupulous. They lived in

Egypt, Ethiopia, Palestine, and the countries around the Red Sea. They

commenced their empire in Babel, on the great plain of Babylonia, and

extended it northward into the land of Asshur (Assyria). They built the

great cities of Antioch, Rehoboth, Calah and Resen. Their empire was the

oldest in the world—that established by a Cushite dynasty on the plains of

Babylon, and in the highlands of Persia. They cast off the patriarchal

law, and indulged in a restless passion for dominion. And they were the

most civilized of the ancient nations in arts and material life. They

built cities and monuments of power. These temples, their palaces, their

pyramids were the wonders of the ancient world. Their grand and somber

architecture lasted for centuries. They were the wickedest of the nations

of the earth, and effeminacy, pride and sensuality followed naturally from

their material civilization unhallowed by high religious ideas. They were

hateful conquerors and tyrants, and yet slaves. They were permitted to

prosper until their vices wrought out their own destruction, and they

became finally subservient to the posterity of Japhet. But among some of

the descendants of Ham civilization never advanced. The negro race of

Africa ever has been degraded and enslaved. It has done nothing to advance

human society. None of these races, even the most successful, have left

durable monuments of intellect or virtue: they have left gloomy monuments

of tyrannical and physical power. The Babylonians and Egyptians laid the

foundation of some of the sciences and arts, but nothing remains at the

present day which civilization values.

How impressive and august the ancient prophecy to Noah! How strikingly

have all the predictions been fulfilled! These give to history an

imperishable interest and grandeur.

CHAPTER III.

THE HEBREW RACE FROM ABRAHAM TO THE SALE OF JOSEPH.

(M36) We postpone the narrative of the settlements and empires which grew

up on the banks of the Euphrates and the Nile, the oldest monarchies,

until we have contemplated the early history of the Jews—descended from

one of the children of Shem. This is not in chronological order, but in

accordance with the inimitable history of Moses. The Jews did not become a

nation until four hundred and thirty years after the call of Abram—and

Abram was of the tenth generation from Noah. When he was born, great

cities existed in Babylon, Canaan, and Egypt, and the descendants of Ham

were the great potentates of earth. The children of Shem were quietly

living in tents, occupied with agriculture and the raising of cattle.

Those of Japhet were exploring all countries with zealous enterprise, and

founding distant settlements—adventurers in quest of genial climates and

fruitful fields.

Abram was born in Ur, a city of the Chaldeans, in the year 1996 before

Christ—supposed by some to be the Edessa of the Greeks, and by others to

be a great maritime city on the right bank of the Euphrates near its

confluence with the Tigris.

From this city his father Terah removed with his children and kindred to

Haran, and dwelt there. It was in Mesopotamia—a rich district, fruitful in

pasturage. Here Abram remained until he was 75, and had become rich.

(M37) While sojourning in this fruitful plain the Lord said unto him, “get

thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s

house, unto a land which I will show thee.” “And I will make thee a great

nation, and will bless thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a

blessing. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that

curseth thee. And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”

So Abram departed with Lot, his nephew, and Sarai, his wife, with all his

cattle and substance, to the land of Canaan, then occupied by that Hamite

race which had probably proved unfriendly to his family in Chaldea. We do

not know by what route he passed the Syrian desert, but he halted at

Shechem, situated in a fruitful valley, one of the passes of the hills

from Damascus to Canaan. He then built an altar to the Lord, probably

among an idolatrous people. From want of pasturage, or some cause not

explained, he removed from thence into a mountain on the east of Bethel,

between that city and Hai, or Ai, when he again erected an altar, and

called upon the living God. But here he did not long remain, being driven

by a famine to the fertile land of Egypt, then ruled by the Pharaohs,

whose unscrupulous character he feared, and which tempted him to practice

an unworthy deception, yet in accordance with profound worldly sagacity.

It was the dictate of expediency rather than faith. He pretended that

Sarai was his sister, and was well treated on her account by the princes

of Egypt, and not killed, as he feared he would be if she was known to be

his wife. The king, afflicted by great plagues in consequence of his

attentions to this beautiful woman, sent Abram away, after a stern rebuke

for the story he had told, with all his possessions.

(M38) The patriarch returned to Canaan, enriched by the princes of Egypt,

and resumed his old encampment near Bethel. But there was not enough

pasturage for his flocks, united with those of Lot. So, with magnanimous

generosity, disinclined to strife or greed, he gave his nephew the choice

of lands, but insisted on a division. “Is not the whole land before thee,”

said he: “Separate thyself, I pray thee: if thou wilt take the left hand,

I will go to the right, and if thou depart to the right hand, then I will

go to the left.” The children of Ham and of Japhet would have quarreled,

and one would have got the ascendency over the other. Not so with the just

and generous Shemite—the reproachless model of all oriental virtues, if we

may forget the eclipse of his fair name in Egypt.

(M39) Lot chose, as was natural, the lower valley of the Jordan, a fertile

and well-watered plain, but near the wicked cities of the Canaanites,

which lay in the track of the commerce between Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and

the East. The worst vices of antiquity prevailed among them, and Lot

subsequently realized, by a painful experience, the folly of seeking, for

immediate good, such an accursed neighborhood.

Abram was contented with less advantages among the hills, and after a

renewed blessing from the Lord, removed his tents to the plain of Mamre,

near Hebron, one of the oldest cities of the world.

(M40) The first battle that we read of in history was fought between the

Chaldean monarch and the kings of the five cities of Canaan, near to the

plain which Lot had selected. The kings were vanquished, and, in the

spoliation which ensued, Lot himself and his cattle were carried away by

Chederlaomer.

(M41) The news reached Abram in time for him to pursue the Chaldean king

with his trained servants, three hundred and eighteen in number. In a

midnight attack the Chaldeans were routed, since a panic was created, and

Lot was rescued, with all his goods, from which we infer that Abram was a

powerful chieftain, and was also assisted directly by God, as Joshua

subsequently was in his unequal contest with the Canaanites.

(M42) The king of Sodom, in gratitude, went out to meet him on his return

from the successful encounter, and also the king of Salem, Melchizedek,

with bread and wine. This latter was probably of the posterity of Shem,

since he was also a priest of the most high God, He blessed Abram, and

gave him tithes, which Abram accepted.

(M43) But Abram would accept nothing from the king of Sodom—not even to a

shoe-latchet—from patriarchal pride, or disinclination to have any

intercourse with idolators. But he did not prevent his young warriors from

eating his bread in their hunger. It was not the Sodomites he wished to

rescue, but Lot, his kinsman and friend.

(M44) Abram, now a powerful chieftain and a rich man, well advanced in

years, had no children, in spite of the promise of God that he should be

the father of nations. His apparent heir was his chief servant, or

steward, Elizur, of Damascus. He then reminds the Lord of the promise, and

the Lord renewed the covenant, and Abram rested in faith.

(M45) Not so his wife Sarai. Skeptical that from herself should come the

promised seed, she besought Abram to make a concubine or wife of her

Egyptian maid, Hagar. Abram listens to her, and grants her request. Sarai

is then despised by the woman, and lays her complaint before her husband.

Abram delivers the concubine into the hands of the jealous and offended

wife, who dealt hardly with her, so that she fled to the wilderness.

Thirsty and miserable, she was found by an angel, near to a fountain of

water, who encouraged her by the promise that her child should be the

father of a numerous nation, but counseled her to return to Sarai, and

submit herself to her rule. In due time the child was born, and was called

Ishmael—destined to be a wild man, with whom the world should be at

enmity. Abram was now eighty-six years of age.

(M46) Fourteen years later the Lord again renewed his covenant that he

should be the father of many nations, who should possess forever the land

of Canaan. His name was changed to Abraham (father of a multitude), and

Sarai’s was changed to Sarah. The Lord promised that from Sarah should

come the predicted blessing. The patriarch is still incredulous, and

laughs within himself; but God renews the promise, and henceforth Abraham

believes, and, as a test of his faith, he institutes, by divine direction,

the rite of circumcision to Ishmael and all the servants and slaves of his

family—even those “bought with money of the stranger.”

(M47) In due time, according to prediction, Sarah gave birth to Isaac, who

was circumcised on the eighth day, when Abraham was 100 years old.

Ishmael, now a boy of fifteen, made a mockery of the event, whereupon

Sarah demanded that the son of the bondwoman, her slave, should be

expelled from the house, with his mother. Abraham was grieved also, and,

by divine counsel, they were both sent away, with some bread and a bottle

of water. The water was soon expended in the wilderness of Beersheba, and

Hagar sat down in despair and wept. God heard her lamentations, and she

opened her eyes and saw that she was seated near a well. The child was

preserved, and dwelt in the wilderness of Paran, pursuing the occupation

of an archer, or huntsman, and his mother found for him a wife out of the

land of Egypt. He is the ancestor of the twelve tribes of Bedouin Arabs,

among whom the Hamite blood predominated.

(M48) Meanwhile, as Abraham dwelt on the plains of Mamre, the destruction

of Sodom and Gomorrah took place, because not ten righteous persons could

be found therein. But Lot was rescued by angels, and afterward dwelt in a

cave, for fear, his wife being turned into a pillar of salt for daring to

look back on the burning cities. He lived with his two daughters, who

became the guilty mothers of the Moabites and the Ammonites, who settled

on the hills to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea.

(M49) Before the birth of Isaac, Abraham removed to the South, and dwelt

in Gerah, a city of the Philistines, and probably for the same reason that

he had before sought the land of Egypt. But here the same difficulty

occurred as in Egypt. The king, Abimelech, sent and took Sarah, supposing

she was merely Abraham’s sister; and Abraham equivocated and deceived in

this instance to save his own life. But the king, warned by God in a

dream, restored unto Abraham his wife, and gave him sheep, oxen, men

servants and women servants, and one thousand pieces of silver, for he

knew he was a prophet. In return Abraham prayed for him, and removed from

him and his house all impediments for the growth of his family. The king,

seeing how Abraham was prospered, made a covenant with him, so that the

patriarch lived long among the Philistines, worshiping “the everlasting

God.”

(M50) Then followed the great trial of his faith, when requested to

sacrifice Isaac. And when he was obedient to the call, and did not

withhold his son, his only son, from the sacrificial knife, having faith

that his seed should still possess the land of Canaan, he was again

blessed, and in the most emphatic language. After this he dwelt in

Beersheba.

(M51) At the age of 120 Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased of

Ephron the Hittite, the cave of Machpelah, with a field near Mamre, for

four hundred shekels of silver, in which he buried his wife.

(M52) Shortly after, he sought a wife for Isaac. But he would not accept

any of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom he dwelt, but sent his

eldest and most trusted servant to Mesopotamia, with ten loaded camels, to

secure one of his own people. Rebekah, the grand-daughter of Nahor, the

brother of Abraham, was the favored damsel whom the Lord provided. Her

father and brother accepted the proposal of Abraham’s servant, and loaded

with presents, jewels of silver and jewels of gold, and raiment, the

Mesopotamian lady departed from her country and her father’s house, with

the benediction of the whole family. “Be thou the mother of thousands of

millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.”

Thus was “Isaac comforted after his mother’s death.”

(M53) Abraham married again, and had five sons by Keturah; but, in his

life-time, he gave all he had unto Isaac, except some gifts to his other

children, whom he sent away, that they might not dispute the inheritance

with Isaac. He died at a good old age, 175 years, and was buried by his

sons, Isaac and Ishmael, in the cave of Machpelah, which had been

purchased of the sons of Heth. Isaac thus became the head of the house,

with princely possessions, living near a well.

(M54) But a famine arose, as in the days of his father, and he went to

Gerar, and not to Egypt. He, however, was afraid to call Rebekah his wife,

for the same reason that Abraham called Sarah his sister. But the king

happening from his window to see Isaac “sporting with Rebekah,” knew he

had been deceived, yet abstained from taking her, and even loaded Isaac

with new favors, so that he became very great and rich—so much so that the

Philistines envied him, and maliciously filled up the wells which Abraham

had dug. Here again he was befriended by Abimelech, who saw that the Lord

was with him, and a solemn covenant of peace was made between them, and

new wells were dug.

(M55) Isaac, it seems, led a quiet and peaceful life—averse to all strife

with the Canaanites, and gradually grew very rich. He gave no evidence of

remarkable strength of mind, and was easily deceived. His greatest

affliction was the marriage of his eldest and favorite son Esau with a

Hittite woman, and it was probably this mistake and folly which confirmed

the superior fortunes of Jacob.

(M56) Esau was a hunter. On returning one day from hunting he was faint

from hunger, and cast a greedy eye on some pottage that Jacob had

prepared. But Jacob would not give his hungry brother the food until he

had promised, by a solemn oath, to surrender his birthright to him. The

clever man of enterprise, impulsive and passionate, thought more, for the

moment, of the pangs of hunger than of his future prospects, and the

quiet, plain, and cunning man of tents availed himself of his brother’s

rashness.

(M57) But the birthright was not secure to Jacob without his father’s

blessing. So he, with his mother’s contrivance, for he was _her_ favorite,

deceived his father, and appeared to be Esau. Isaac, old and dim and

credulous, supposing that Jacob, clothed in Esau’s vestments as a hunter,

and his hands covered with skins, was his eldest son, blessed him. The old

man still had doubts, but Jacob falsely declared that he was Esau, and

obtained what he wanted. When Esau returned from the hunt he saw what

Jacob had done, and his grief was bitter and profound. He cried out in his

agony, “Bless me even me, also, O my father.” And Isaac said: “Thy brother

came with subtilty, and hath taken away thy blessing.” And Esau said, “Is

he not rightly named Jacob—that is, a supplanter—for he hath supplanted me

these two times: he took away my birthright, and behold now he hath taken

away my blessing.” “And he lifted up his voice and wept.” Isaac, then

moved, declared that his dwelling should be the fatness of the earth, even

though he should serve his brother,—that he should live by the sword, and

finally break the yoke from off his neck. This was all Esau could wring

from his father. He hated Jacob with ill-concealed resentment, as was to

be expected, and threatened to kill him on his father’s death. Rebekah

advised Jacob to flee to his uncle, giving as an excuse to Isaac, that he

sought a wife in Mesopotamia. This pleased Isaac, who regarded a marriage

with a Canaanite as the greatest calamity. So he again gave him his

blessing, and advised him to select one of the daughters of Laban for his

wife. And Jacob departed from his father’s house, and escaped the wrath of

Esau. But Esau, seeing that his Hittite wife was offensive to his father,

married also one of the daughters of Ishmael, his cousin.

(M58) Jacob meanwhile pursued his journey. Arriving at a certain place

after sunset, he lay down to sleep, with stones for his pillow, and he

dreamed that a ladder set up on the earth reached the heavens, on which

the angels of God ascended and descended, and above it was the Lord

himself, the God of his father, who renewed all the promises that had been

made to Abraham of the future prosperity of his house. He then continued

his journey till he arrived in Haran, by the side of a well. Thither

Rachel, the daughter of Laban, came to draw water for the sheep she

tended. Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, and

watered her flock, and kissed her, and wept, for he had found in his

cousin his bride. He then told her who he was, and she ran and told her

father that his nephew had come, Isaac’s son, and Laban was filled with

joy, and kissed Jacob and brought him to his house, where he dwelt a month

as a guest.

(M59) An agreement was then made that Jacob should serve Laban seven

years, and receive in return for his services his youngest daughter

Rachel, whom he loved. But Laban deceived him, and gave him Leah instead,

and Jacob was compelled to serve another seven years before he obtained

her. Thus he had two wives, the one tender-eyed, the other beautiful. But

he loved Rachel and hated Leah.

(M60) Jacob continued to serve Laban until he was the father of eleven

sons and a daughter, and then desired to return to his own country. But

Laban, unwilling to lose so profitable a son-in-law, raised obstacles.

Jacob, in the mean time, became rich, although his flocks and herds were

obtained by a sharp bargain, which he turned to his own account. The envy

of Laban’s sons was the result. Laban also was alienated, whereupon Jacob

fled, with his wives and children and cattle. Laban pursued, overtook him,

and after an angry altercation, in which Jacob recounted his wrongs during

twenty years of servitude, and Laban claimed every thing as his—daughters,

children and cattle, they made a covenant on a heap of stones not to pass

either across it for the other’s harm, and Laban returned to his home and

Jacob went on his way.

(M61) But Esau, apprised of the return of his brother, came out of Edom

against him with four hundred men. Jacob was afraid, and sought to

approach Esau with presents. The brothers met, but whether from fraternal

impulse or by the aid of God, they met affectionately, and fell into each

other’s arms and wept. Jacob offered his presents, which Esau at first

magnanimously refused to take, but finally accepted: peace was restored,

and Jacob continued his journey till he arrived in Thalcom—a city of

Shechem, in the land of Canaan, where he pitched his tent and erected an

altar.

Here he was soon brought into collision with the people of Shechem, whose

prince had inflicted a great wrong. Levi and Simeon avenged it, and the

city was spoiled.

(M62) Jacob, perhaps in fear of the other Amorites, retreated to Bethel,

purged his household of all idolatry, and built an altar, and God again

appeared to him, blessed him and changed his name to Israel.

(M63) Soon after, Rachel died, on the birth of her son, Benjamin, and

Jacob came to see his father in Mamre, now 180 years of age, and about to

die. Esau and Jacob buried him in the cave of Machpelah.

Esau dwelt in Edom, the progenitor of a long line of dukes or princes. The

seat of his sovereignty was Mount Seir.

(M64) Jacob continued to live in Hebron—a patriarchal prince, rich in

cattle, and feared by his neighbors. His favorite son was Joseph, and his

father’s partiality excited the envy of the other sons. They conspired to

kill him, but changed their purpose through the influence of Reuben, and

cast him into a pit in the wilderness. While he lay there, a troop of

Ishmaelites appeared, and to them, at the advice of Judah, they sold him

as a slave, but pretended to their father that he was slain by wild

beasts, and produced, in attestation, his lacerated coat of colors. The

Ishmaelites carried Joseph to Egypt, and sold him to Potaphar, captain of

Pharaoh’s guard. Before we follow his fortunes, we will turn our attention

to the land whence he was carried.

CHAPTER IV.

EGYPT AND THE PHARAOHS.

(M65) The first country to which Moses refers, in connection with the

Hebrew history, is Egypt. This favored land was the seat of one of the

oldest monarchies of the world. Although it would seem that Assyria was

first peopled, historians claim for Egypt a more remote antiquity. Whether

this claim can be substantiated or not, it is certain that Egypt was one

of the primeval seats of the race of Ham. Mizraim, the Scripture name for

the country, indicates that it was settled by a son of Ham. But if this is

true even, the tide of emigration from Armenia probably passed to the

southeast through Syria and Palestine, and hence the descendants of Ham

had probably occupied the land of Canaan before they crossed the desert

between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. I doubt if Egypt had older

cities than Damascus, Hebron, Zoar, and Tyre.

But Egypt certainly was a more powerful monarchy than any existing on the

earth in the time of Abraham.

(M66) Its language, traditions, and monuments alike point to a high

antiquity. It was probably inhabited by a mixed race, Shemitic as well as

Hamite; though the latter had the supremacy. The distinction of castes

indicates a mixed population, so that the ancients doubted whether Egypt

belonged to Asia or Africa. The people were not black, but of a reddish

color, with thick lips, straight black hair, and elongated eye, and sunk

in the degraded superstitions of the African race.

(M67) The geographical position indicates not only a high antiquity, but a

state favorable to great national wealth and power. The river Nile,

issuing from a great lake under the equator, runs 3,000 miles nearly due

north to the Mediterranean. Its annual inundations covered the valley with

a rich soil brought down from the mountains of Abyssinia, making it the

most fertile in the world. The country, thus so favored by a great river,

with its rich alluvial deposits, is about 500 miles in length, with an

area of 115,000 square miles, of which 9,600 are subject to the

fertilizing inundation. But, in ancient times, a great part of the country

was irrigated, and abounded in orchards, gardens, and vineyards. Every

kind of vegetable was cultivated, and grain was raised in the greatest

abundance, so that the people lived in luxury and plenty while other

nations were subject to occasional famines.

(M68) Among the fruits, were dates, grapes, figs, pomegranates, apricots,

peaches, oranges, citrons, lemons, limes, bananas, melons, mulberries,

olives. Among vegetables, if we infer from what exist at present, were

beans, peas, lentils, luprins, spinach, leeks, onions, garlic, celery,

chiccory, radishes, carrots, turnips, lettuce, cabbage, fennel, gourds,

cucumbers, tomatoes, egg-plant. What a variety for the sustenance of man,

to say nothing of the various kinds of grain,—barley, oats, maize, rice,

and especially wheat, which grows to the greatest perfection.

In old times the horses were famous, as well as cattle, and sheep, and

poultry. Quails were abundant, while the marshes afforded every kind of

web-footed fowl. Fish, too, abounded in the Nile, and in the lakes. Bees

were kept, and honey was produced, though inferior to that of Greece.

(M69) The climate also of this fruitful land was salubrious without being

enervating. The soil was capable of supporting a large population, which

amounted, in the time of Herodotus, to seven millions. On the banks of the

Nile were great cities, whose ruins still astonish travelers. The land,

except that owned by the priests, belonged to the king, who was supreme

and unlimited in power. The people were divided into castes, the highest

being priests, and the lowest husbandmen. The kings were hereditary, but

belonged to the priesthood, and their duties and labors were arduous. The

priests were the real governing body, and were treated with the most

respectful homage. They were councilors of the king, judges of the land,

and guardians of all great interests. The soldiers were also numerous, and

formed a distinct caste.

(M70) When Abram visited Egypt, impelled by the famine in Canaan, it was

already a powerful monarchy. This was about 1921 years before Christ,

according to the received chronology, when the kings of the 15th dynasty

reigned. These dynasties of ancient kings are difficult to be settled, and

rest upon traditions rather than well defined historical grounds,—or

rather on the authority of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who lived nearly

300 years before Christ. His list of dynasties has been confirmed, to a

great extent, by the hieroglyphic inscriptions which are still to be found

on ancient monuments, but they give us only a barren catalogue of names

without any vital historical truths. Therefore these old dynasties, before

Abraham, are only interesting to antiquarians, and not satisfactory to

them, since so little is known or can be known. These, if correct, would

give a much greater antiquity to Egypt than can be reconciled with Mosaic

history. But all authorities agree in ascribing to Menes the commencement

of the first dynasty, 2712 years before Christ, according to Hales, but

3893 according to Lepsius, and 2700 according to Lane. Neither Menes nor

his successors of the first dynasty left any monuments. It is probable,

however, that Memphis was built by them, and possibly hieroglyphics were

invented during their reigns.

But here a chronological difficulty arises. The Scriptures ascribe ten

generations from Shem to Abram. Either the generations were made longer

than in our times, or the seventeen dynasties, usually supposed to have

reigned when Abram came to Egypt, could not have existed; for, according

to the received chronology, he was born 1996, B.C., and the Deluge took

place 2349, before Christ, leaving but 353 years from the Deluge to the

birth of Abraham. How could seventeen dynasties have reigned in Egypt in

that time, even supposing that Egypt was settled immediately after the

Flood, unless either more than ten generations existed from Noah to Abram,

or that these generations extended over seven or eight hundred years?

Until science shall reconcile the various chronologies with the one

usually received, there is but little satisfaction in the study of

Egyptian history prior to Abram. Nor is it easy to settle when the

Pyramids were constructed. If they existed in the time of Abram a most

rapid advance had been made in the arts, unless a much longer period

elapsed from Noah to Abraham than Scripture seems to represent.

(M71) Nothing of interest occurs in Egyptian history until the fourth

dynasty of kings, when the pyramids of Ghizeh, were supposed to have been

built—a period more remote than Scripture ascribes to the Flood itself,

according to our received chronology. These were the tombs of the Memphian

kings, who believed in the immortality of the soul, and its final reunion

with the body after various forms of transmigration. Hence the solicitude

to preserve the body in some enduring monument, and by elaborate

embalment. What more durable monument than these great masses of granite,

built to defy the ravages of time, and the spoliations of conquerors! The

largest of these pyramids, towering above other pyramids, and the lesser

sepulchres of the rich, was built upon a square of 756 feet, and the

height of it was 489 feet 9 inches, covering an area of 571,536 feet, or

more than thirteen acres. The whole mass contained 90,000,000 cubic feet

of masonry, weighing 6,316,000 tons. Nearly in the centre of this pile of

stone, reached by a narrow passage, were the chambers where the royal

sarcophagi were deposited. At whatever period these vast monuments were

actually built, they at least go back into remote antiquity, and probably

before the time of Abram.

(M72) The first great name of the early Egyptian kings was Sesertesen, or

Osirtasin I., the founder of the twelfth dynasty of kings, B.C. 2080. He

was a great conqueror, and tradition confounds him with the Sesostris of

the Greeks, which gathered up stories about him as the Middle Ages did of

Charlemagne and his paladins. The real Sesostris was Ramenes the Great, of

the nineteenth dynasty. By the kings of this dynasty (the twelfth)

Ethiopia was conquered, the Labyrinth was built, and Lake Moevis dug, to

control the inundations. Under them Thebes became a great city. The

dynasty lasted 100 years, but became subject to the Shepherd kings. These

early Egyptian monarchs wore fond of peace, and their subjects enjoyed

repose and prosperity.

(M73) The Shepherd kings, who ruled 400 years, were supposed by Manetho to

be Arabs, but leaves us to infer that they were Phœnicians—as is

probable—a roving body of conquerors, who easily subdued the peaceful

Egyptians. They have left no monumental history. They were alien to the

conquered race in language and habits, and probably settled in Lower Egypt

where the land was most fertile, and where conquests would be most easily

retained.

It was under their rule that Abram probably visited Egypt when driven by a

famine from Canaan. And they were not expelled till the time of Joseph, by

the first of the eighteenth dynasty. The descendants of the old kings, we

suppose, lived in Thebes, and were tributary princes for 400 years, but

gained sufficient strength, finally, to expel the Shemite invaders, even

as the Gothic nations of Spain, in the Middle Ages, expelled their

conquerors, the Moors.

(M74) But it was under the Shepherd kings that the relations between Egypt

and the Hebrew patriarchs took place. We infer this fact from the friendly

intercourse and absence of national prejudices. The Phœnicians belonged to

the same Shemitic stock from which Abraham came. They built no temples.

They did not advance a material civilization. They loaded Abram and Joseph

with presents, and accepted the latter as a minister and governor. We read

of no great repulsion of races, and see a great similarity in pursuits.

(M75) Meanwhile, the older dynasties under whom Thebes was built, probably

B.C. 2200, gathered strength in misfortune and subjection. They reigned,

during five dynasties, in a subordinate relation, tributary and oppressed.

The first king of the eighteenth dynasty seems to have been a remarkable

man—the deliverer of his nation. His name was Aah-mes, or Amo-sis, and he

expelled the shepherds from the greater part of Egypt, B.C. 1525. In his

reign we see on the monuments chariots and horses. He built temples both

in Thebes and Memphis, and established a navy. This was probably the king

who knew not Joseph. His successors continued the work of conquest, and

extended their dominion from Ethiopia to Mesopotamia, and obtained that

part of Western Asia formerly held by the Chaldeans. They built the temple

of Karnak, the “Vocal Memnon,” and the avenue of Sphinxes in Thebes.

(M76) The grandest period of Egyptian history begins with the nineteenth

dynasty, founded by Sethee I., or Sethos, B.C. 1340. He built the famous

“Hall of Columns,” in the temple of Karnak, and the finest of the tombs of

the Theban kings. On the walls of this great temple are depicted his

conquests, especially over the Hittites. But the glories of the monarchy,

now decidedly military, culminated in Ramesis II.—the Sesostris of the

Greeks. He extended his dominion as far as Scythia and Thrace, while his

naval expeditions penetrated to the Erythræan Sea. The captives which he

brought from his wars were employed in digging canals, which intersected

the country, for purposes of irrigation, and especially that great canal

which united the Mediterranean with the Red Sea. He added to the temple of

Karnak, built the Memnonium on the western side of the Nile, opposite to

Thebes, and enlarged the temple of Ptah, at Memphis, which he adorned by a

beautiful colossal statue, the fist of which is (now in the British

Museum) thirty inches wide across the knuckles. But the Rameseum, or

Memnonium, was his greatest architectural work, approached by an avenue of

sphinxes and obelisks, in the centre of which was the great statue of

Ramesis himself, sixty feet high, carved from a single stone of the red

granite of Syene.

(M77) The twentieth dynasty was founded by Sethee II., B.C. 1220 (or 1232

B.C., according to Wilkinson), when Gideon ruled the Israelites and

Theseus reigned at Athens and Priam at Troy. The third king of this

dynasty—Ramesis III.—built palaces and tombs scarcely inferior to any of

the Theban kings, but under his successors the Theban power declined.

Under the twenty-first dynasty, which began B.C. 1085, Lower Egypt had a

new capital, Zoan, and gradually extended its power over Upper Egypt. It

had a strong Shemetic element in its population, and strengthened itself

by alliances with the Assyrians.

The twenty-second dynasty was probably Assyrian, and began about 1009 B.C.

It was hostile to the Jews, and took and sacked Jerusalem.

(M78) From this period the history of Egypt is obscure. Ruled by

Assyrians, and then by Ethiopians, the grandeur of the old Theban monarchy

had passed away. On the rise of the Babylonian kingdom, over the ruins of

the old Assyrian Empire, Egypt was greatly prostrated as a military power.

Babylon became the great monarchy of the East, and gained possession of

all the territories of the Theban kings, from the Euphrates to the Nile.

Leaving, then, the obscure and uninteresting history of Egypt, which

presents nothing of especial interest until its conquest by Alexander,

B.C. 332, with no great kings even, with the exception of Necho, of the

twenty-sixth dynasty, B.C. 611, we will present briefly the religion,

manners, customs, and attainments of the ancient Egyptians.

(M79) Their religion was idolatrous. They worshiped various divinities:

Num, the soul of the universe; Amen, the generative principle; Khom, by

whom the productiveness of nature was emblematized; Ptah, or the creator

of the universe; Ra, the sun; Thoth, the patron of letters; Athor, the

goddess of beauty; Mu, physical light; Mat, moral light; Munt, the god of

war; Osiris, the personification of good; Isis, who presided over funeral

rites; Set, the personification of evil; Anup, who judged the souls of the

departed.

(M80) These were principal deities, and were worshiped through sacred

animals, as emblems of divinity. Among them were the bulls, Apis, at

Memphis, and Muenis, at Heliopolis, both sacred to Osiris. The crocodile

was sacred to Lebak, whose offices are unknown; the asp to Num; the cat to

Pasht, whose offices were also unknown; the beetle to Ptah. The worship of

these and of other animals was conducted with great ceremony, and

sacrifices were made to them of other animals, fruits and vegetables.

Man was held accountable for his actions, and to be judged, according to

them. He was to be brought before Osiris, and receive from him future

rewards or punishments.

(M81) The penal laws of the Egyptians were severe. Murder was punished

with death. Adultery was punished by the man being beaten with a thousand

rods. The woman had her nose cut off. Theft was punished with less

severity—with a beating by a stick. Usury was not permitted beyond double

of the debt, and the debtor was not imprisoned.

(M82) The government was a monarchy, only limited by the priesthood, into

whose order he was received, and was administered by men appointed by the

king. On the whole, it was mild and paternal, and exercised for the good

of the people.

(M83) Polygamy was not common, though concubines were allowed. In the

upper classes women were treated with great respect, and were regarded as

the equals of men. They ruled their households. The rich were hospitable,

and delighted to give feasts, at which were dancers and musicians. They

possessed chariots and horses, and were indolent and pleasure-seeking. The

poor people toiled, with scanty clothing and poor fare.

(M84) Hieroglyphic writing prevailed from a remote antiquity. The papyrus

was also used for hieratic writing, and numerous papyri have been

discovered, which show some advance in literature. Astronomy was

cultivated by the priests, and was carried to the highest point it could

attain without modern instruments. Geometry also reached considerable

perfection. Mechanics must have been carried to a great extent, when we

remember that vast blocks of stone were transported 500 miles and elevated

to enormous heights. Chemistry was made subservient to many arts, such as

the working of metals and the tempering of steel. But architecture was the

great art in which the Egyptians excelled, as we infer from the ruins of

temples and palaces; and these wonderful fabrics were ornamented with

paintings which have preserved their color to this day. Architecture was

massive, grand, and imposing. Magical arts were in high estimation, and

chiefly exercised by the priests. The industrial arts reached great

excellence, especially in the weaving of linen, pottery, and household

furniture. The Egyptians were great musicians, using harps, flutes,

cymbals, and drums. They were also great gardeners. In their dress they

were simple, frugal in diet, though given to occasional excess; fond of

war, but not cruel like the Assyrians; hospitable among themselves, shy of

strangers, patriotic in feeling, and contemplative in character.

CHAPTER V.

THE JEWS UNTIL THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN.

(M85) When Joseph was sold by the Midianites to Potiphar, Egypt was

probably ruled by the Shepherd kings, who were called Pharaoh, like all

the other kings, by the Jewish writers. Pitiphar (Pet-Pha, dedicated to

the sun) was probably the second person in the kingdom. Joseph, the Hebrew

slave, found favor in his sight, and was gradually promoted to the

oversight of his great household. Cast into prison, from the intrigues of

Potiphar’s wife, whose disgraceful overtures he had virtuously and

honorably rejected, he found favor with the keeper of the prison, who

intrusted him with the sole care of the prisoners, although himself a

prisoner,—a striking proof of his transparent virtue. In process of time

two other high officers of the king, having offended him, were cast into

the same prison. They had strange dreams. Joseph interpreted them,

indicating the speedy return of the one to favor, and of the other to as

sudden an execution. These things came to pass. After two years the king

himself had a singular dream, and none of the professional magicians or

priests of Egypt could interpret it. It then occurred to the chief butler

that Joseph, whom he had forgotten and neglected, could interpret the

royal dream which troubled him. He told the king of his own dream in

prison, and the explanation of it by the Hebrew slave. Whereupon Joseph

was sent for, shaven and washed, and clothed with clean raiment to appear

in the royal palace, and he interpreted the king’s dream, which not only

led to his promotion to be governor over Egypt, with the State chariots

for his use, and all the emblems of sovereignty about his person—a viceroy

whose power was limited only by that of the king—but he was also

instrumental in rescuing Egypt from the evils of that terrible famine

which for seven years afflicted Western Asia. He was then thirty years of

age, 1715 B.C., and his elevation had been earned by the noblest

qualities—fidelity to his trusts, patience, and high principle—all of

which had doubtless been recounted to the king.

(M86) The course which Joseph pursued toward the Egyptians was apparently

hard. The hoarded grain of seven years’ unexampled plenty was at first

sold to the famishing people, and when they had no longer money to buy it,

it was only obtained by the surrender of their cattle, and then by the

alienation of their land, so that the king became possessed of all the

property of the realm, personal as well as real, except that of the

priests. But he surrendered the land back again to the people

subsequently, on condition of the payment of one-fifth of the produce

annually (which remained to the time of Moses)—a large tax, but not so

great as was exacted of the peasantry of France by their feudal and royal

lords. This proceeding undoubtedly strengthened the power of the Shepherd

kings, and prevented insurrections.

(M87) The severity of the famine compels the brothers of Joseph to seek

corn in Egypt. Their arrival of course, is known to the governor, who has

unlimited rule. They appear before him, and bowed themselves before him,

as was predicted by Joseph’s dreams. But clothed in the vesture of

princes, with a gold chain around his neck, and surrounded by the pomp of

power, they did not know him, while he knows them. He speaks to them,

through an interpreter, harshly and proudly, accuses them of being spies,

obtains all the information he wanted, and learns that his father and

Benjamin are alive. He even imprisons them for three days. He releases

them on the condition that they verify their statement; as a proof of

which, he demands the appearance of Benjamin himself.

(M88) They return to Canaan with their sacks filled with corn, and the

money which they had brought to purchase it, secretly restored, leaving

Simeon as surety for the appearance of Benjamin. To this Jacob will not

assent. But starvation drives them again to Egypt, the next year, and

Jacob, reluctantly is compelled to allow Benjamin to go with them. The

unexpected feast which Joseph made for them, sitting himself at another

table—the greater portions given to Benjamin, the deception played upon

them by the secretion of Joseph’s silver cup in Benjamin’s sack, as if he

were a thief, the distress of all the sons of Jacob, the eloquent

pleadings of Judah, the restrained tears of Joseph, the discovery of

himself to them, the generosity of Pharaoh, the return of Jacob’s children

laden not only with corn but presents, the final migration of the whole

family, to the land of Goshen, in the royal chariots, and the consummation

of Joseph’s triumphs, and happiness of Jacob—all these facts and incidents

are told by Moses in the most fascinating and affecting narrative ever

penned by man. It is absolutely transcendent, showing not only the highest

dramatic skill, but revealing the Providence of God—that overruling power

which causes good to come from evil, which is the most impressive lesson

of all history, in every age. That single episode is worth more to

civilization than all the glories of ancient Egypt; nor is there anything

in the history of the ancient monarchies so valuable to all generations as

the record by Moses of the early relations between God and his chosen

people. And that is the reason why I propose to give them, in this work,

their proper place, even if it be not after the fashion with historians.

The supposed familiarity with Jewish history ought not to preclude the

narration of these great events, and the substitution for them of the less

important and obscure annals of the Pagans.

(M89) Joseph remained the favored viceroy of Egypt until he died, having

the supreme satisfaction of seeing the prosperity of his father’s house,

and their rapid increase in the land of Goshen, on the eastern frontier of

the Delta of the Nile,—a land favorable for herds and flocks. The capital

of this district was On—afterward Heliopolis, the sacred City of the Sun,

a place with which Joseph was especially connected by his marriage with

the daughter of the high priest of On. Separated from the Egyptians by

their position as shepherds, the children of Jacob retained their

patriarchal constitution. In 215 years, they became exceedingly numerous,

but were doomed, on the change of dynasty which placed Ramesis on the

throne, to oppressive labors. Joseph died at the age of 110—eighty years

after he had become governor of Egypt. In his latter years the change in

the Egyptian dynasty took place. The oppression of his people lasted

eighty years; and this was consummated by the cruel edict which doomed to

death the infants of Israel; made, probably, in fear and jealousy from the

rapid increase of the Israelites. The great crimes of our world, it would

seem, are instigated by these passions, rather than hatred and malignity,

like the massacre of St. Bartholomew and the atrocities of the French

Revolution.

(M90) But a deliverer was raised up by God in the person of Moses, the

greatest man in human annals, when we consider his marvelous intellectual

gifts, his great work of legislation, his heroic qualities, his moral

excellence, and his executive talents. His genius is more powerfully

stamped upon civilization than that of any other one man—not merely on the

Jews, but even Christian nations. He was born B.C. 1571, sixty-four years

after the death of Joseph. Hidden in his birth, to escape the sanguinary

decree of Pharaoh he was adopted by the daughter of the king, and taught

by the priests in all the learning of the Egyptians. He was also a great

warrior, and gained great victories over the Ethiopians. But seeing the

afflictions of his brethren, he preferred to share their lot than enjoy

all the advantages of his elevated rank in the palace of the king—an act

of self-renunciation unparalleled in history. Seeing an Egyptian smite a

Hebrew, he slew him in a burst of indignation, and was compelled to fly.

He fled to Jethro, an Arab chieftain, among the Midianites. He was now

forty years of age, in the prime of his life, and in the full maturity of

his powers. The next forty years were devoted to a life of contemplation,

the best preparation for his future duties. In the most secret places of

the wilderness of Sinai, at Horeb, he communed with God, who appeared in

the burning bush, and revealed the magnificent mission which he was

destined to fulfill. He was called to deliver his brethren from bondage;

but forty years of quiet contemplation, while tending the flocks of

Jethro, whose daughter he married, had made him timid and modest. God

renewed the covenant made to Abraham and Jacob, and Moses returned to

Egypt to fulfill his mission. He joined himself with Aaron, his brother,

and the two went and gathered together all the elders of the children of

Israel, and after securing their confidence by signs and wonders, revealed

their mission.

(M91) They then went to Pharaoh, a new king, and entreated of him

permission to allow the people of Israel to go into the wilderness and

hold a feast in obedience to the command of God. But Pharaoh said, who is

the Lord that I should obey his voice. I know not the Lord—_your God_. The

result was, the anger of the king and the increased burdens of the

Israelites, which tended to make them indifferent to the voice of Moses,

from the excess of their anguish.

(M92) Then followed the ten plagues which afflicted the Egyptians, and the

obstinacy of the monarch, resolved to suffer any evil rather than permit

the Israelites to go free. But the last plague was greater than the king

could bear—the destruction of all the first-born in his land—and he

hastily summoned Moses and Aaron in the night, under the impulse of a

mighty fear, and bade them to depart with all their hosts and all their

possessions. The Egyptians seconded the command, anxious to be relieved

from further evils, and the Israelites, after spoiling the Egyptians,

departed in the night—“a night to be much observed” for all generations,

marching by the line of the ancient canal from Rameses, not far from

Heliopolis, toward the southern frontier of Palestine. But Moses,

instructed not to conduct his people at once to a conflict with the

warlike inhabitants of Canaan, for which they were unprepared, having just

issued from slavery, brought them round by a sudden turn to the south and

east, upon an arm or gulf of the Red Sea. To the eyes of the Egyptians,

who repented that they had suffered them to depart, and who now pursued

them with a great army, they were caught in a trap. Their miraculous

deliverance, one of the great events of their history, and the ruin of the

Egyptian hosts, and their three months’ march and countermarch in the

wilderness need not be enlarged upon.

(M93) The exodus took place 430 years from the call of Abraham, after a

sojourn in Egypt of 215 years, the greater part of which had been passed

in abject slavery and misery. There were 600,000 men, besides women and

children and strangers.

(M94) It was during their various wanderings in the wilderness of

Sinai—forty years of discipline—that Moses gave to the Hebrews the rules

they were to observe during all their generations, until a new

dispensation should come. These form that great system of original

jurisprudence that has entered, more or less, into the codes of all

nations, and by which the genius of the lawgiver is especially manifested;

although it is not to be forgotten he framed his laws by divine direction.

Let us examine briefly the nature and character of these laws. They have

been ably expounded by Bishop Warburton, Prof. Wines and others.

(M95) The great fundamental principle of the Jewish code was to establish

the doctrine of the unity of God. Idolatry had crept into the religious

system of all the other nations of the world, and a degrading polytheism

was everywhere prevalent. The Israelites had not probably escaped the

contagion of bad example, and the suggestions of evil powers. The most

necessary truth to impress upon the nation was the God of Abraham, and

Isaac, and Jacob. Jehovah was made the supreme head of the Jewish state,

whom the Hebrews were required, first and last, to recognize, and whose

laws they were required to obey. And this right to give laws to the

Hebrews was deduced, not only because he was the supreme creator and

preserver, but because he had also signally and especially laid the

foundation of the state by signs and miracles. He had spoken to the

patriarchs, he had brought them into the land of Egypt, he had delivered

them when oppressed. Hence, they were to have no other gods than this God

of Abraham—this supreme, personal, benevolent God. The violation of this

fundamental law was to be attended with the severest penalties. Hence

Moses institutes the worship of the Supreme Deity. It was indeed

ritualistic, and blended with sacrifices and ceremonies; but the idea—the

spiritual idea of God as the supreme object of all obedience and faith,

was impressed first of all upon the minds of the Israelites, and engraven

on the tables of stone—“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

Having established the idea and the worship of God, Moses then instituted

the various rites of the service, and laid down the principles of civil

government, as the dictation of this Supreme Deity, under whose supreme

guidance they were to be ruled.

(M96) But before the details of the laws were given to guide the

Israelites in their civil polity, or to regulate the worship of Jehovah,

Moses, it would seem, first spake the word of God, amid the thunders and

lightnings of Sinai, to the assembled people, and delivered the ten

fundamental commandments which were to bind them and all succeeding

generations. Whether these were those which were afterward written on the

two tables of stone, or not, we do not know. We know only that these great

obligations were declared soon after the Israelites had encamped around

Sinai, and to the whole people orally.

And, with these, God directed Moses more particularly to declare also the

laws relating to man-servants, and to manslaughter, to injury to women, to

stealing, to damage, to the treatment of strangers, to usury, to slander,

to the observance of the Sabbath, to the reverence due to magistrates, and

sundry other things, which seem to be included in the ten commandments.

(M97) After this, if we rightly interpret the book of Exodus, Moses went

up into the mountain of Sinai, and there abode forty days and forty

nights, receiving the commandments of God. Then followed the directions

respecting the ark, and the tabernacle, and the mercy-seat, and the

cherubim. And then were ordained the priesthood of Aaron and his

vestments, and the garments for Aaron’s sons, and the ceremonies which

pertained to the consecration of priests, and the altar of incense, and

the brazen laver.

(M98) After renewed injunctions to observe the Sabbath, Moses received of

the Lord the two tables of stone, “written with the finger of God.” But as

he descended the mountain with these tables, after forty days, and came

near the camp, he perceived the golden calf which Aaron had made of the

Egyptian ear-rings and jewelry,—made to please the murmuring people, so

soon did they forget the true God who brought them out of Egypt. And Moses

in anger, cast down the tables and brake them, and destroyed the calf, and

caused the slaughter of three thousand of the people by the hands of the

children of Levi.

(M99) But God forgave the iniquity and renewed the tables, and made a new

covenant with Moses, enjoining upon him the utter destruction of the

Canaanites, and the complete extirpation of idolatry. He again gathered

together the people of Israel, and renewed the injunction to observe the

Sabbath, and then prepared for the building of the tabernacle, as the Lord

directed, and also for the making of the sacred vessels and holy garments,

and the various ritualistic form of worship. He then established the

sacrificial rites, consecrated Aaron and his sons as priests, laid down

the law for them in their sacred functions, and made other divers laws for

the nation, in their social and political relations.

(M100) The substance of these civil laws was the political equality of the

people; the distribution of the public domains among the free citizens

which were to remain inalienable and perpetual in the families to which

they were given, thus making absolute poverty or overgrown riches

impossible; the establishment of a year of jubilee, once every fifty

years, when there should be a release of all servitude, and all debts, and

all the social inequalities which half a century produced; a magistracy

chosen by the people, and its responsibility to the people; a speedy and

impartial administration of justice; the absence of a standing army and

the prohibition of cavalry, thus indicating a peaceful policy, and the

preservation of political equality; the establishment of agriculture as

the basis of national prosperity; universal industry, inviolability of

private property, and the sacredness of family relations. These were

fundamental principles. Moses also renewed the Noahmic ideas of the

sacredness of human life. He further instituted rules for the education of

the people, that “sons may be as plants grown up in their youth, and

daughters as corner stones polished after the similitude of a palace.”

Such were the elemental ideas of the Hebrew commonwealth, which have

entered, more or less, into all Christian civilizations. I can not enter

upon a minute detail of these primary laws. Each of the tribes formed a

separate state, and had a local administration of justice, but all alike

recognized the theocracy as the supreme and organic law. To the tribe of

Levi were assigned the duties of the priesthood, and the general oversight

of education and the laws. The members of this favored tribe were thus

priests, lawyers, teachers, and popular orators—a literary aristocracy

devoted to the cultivation of the sciences. The chief magistrate of the

united tribes was not prescribed, but Moses remained the highest

magistrate until his death, when the command was given to Joshua. Both

Moses and Joshua convened the states general, presided over their

deliberations, commanded the army, and decided all appeals in civil

questions. The office of chief magistrate was elective, and was held for

life, no salary was attached to it, no revenues were appropriated to it,

no tribute was raised for it. The chief ruler had no outward badges of

authority; he did not wear a diadem; he was not surrounded with a court.

His power was great as commander of the armies and president of the

assemblies, but he did not make laws or impose taxes. He was assisted by a

body of seventy elders—a council or senate, whose decisions, however, were

submitted to the congregation, or general body of citizens, for

confirmation. These senators were elected; the office was not hereditary;

neither was a salary attached to it.

(M101) The great congregation—or assembly of the people, in which lay the

supreme power, so far as any human power could be supreme in a

theocracy,—was probably a delegated body chosen by the people in their

tribes. They were representatives of the people, acting for the general

good, without receiving instructions from their constituents. It was

impossible for the elders, or for Moses, to address two million of people.

They spoke to a select assembly. It was this assembly which made or

ratified the laws, and which the executioner carried out into execution.

(M102) The oracle of Jehovah formed an essential part of the constitution,

since it was God who ruled the nation. The oracle, in the form of a pillar

of cloud, directed the wanderings of the people in the wilderness. This

appeared amid the thunders of Sinai. This oracle decided all final

questions and difficult points of justice. It could not be interrogated by

private persons, only by the High Priest himself, clad in his pontifical

vestments, and with the sacred insignia of his office, by “urim and

thummim.” Within the most sacred recesses of the tabernacle, in the Holy

of Holies, the Deity made known his will to the most sacred personage of

the nation, in order that no rash resolution of the people, or senate, or

judge might be executed. And this response, given in an audible voice, was

final and supreme, and not like the Grecian oracles, venal and mendacious.

This oracle of the Hebrew God “was a wise provision to preserve a

continual sense of the principal design of their constitution—to keep the

Hebrews from idolatry, and to the worship of the only true God as their

immediate protector; and that their security and prosperity rested upon

adhering to his counsels and commands.”

(M103) The designation and institution of high priest belonged not to the

council of priests—although he was of the tribe of Levi, but to the

Senate, and received the confirmation of the people through their

deputies. “But the priests belonged to the tribe of Levi, which was set

apart to God—the king of the commonwealth.” “They were thus, not merely a

sacerdotal body, appointed to the service of the altar, but also a

temporal magistracy having important civil and political functions,

especially to teach the people the laws.” The high priest, as head of the

hierarchy, and supreme interpreter of the laws, had his seat in the

capital of the nation, while the priests of his tribe were scattered among

the other tribes, and were hereditary. The Hebrew priests simply

interpreted the laws; the priests of Egypt made them. Their power was

chiefly judicial. They had no means of usurpation, neither from property,

nor military command. They were simply the expositors of laws which they

did not make, which they could not change, and which they themselves were

bound to obey. The income of a Levite was about five times as great as an

ordinary man, and this, of course, was derived from the tithes. But a

greater part of the soil paid no tithes. The taxes to the leading class,

as the Levites were, can not be called ruinous when compared with what the

Egyptian priesthood received, especially when we remember that all the

expenses connected with sacrifice and worship were taken from the tithes.

The treasures which flowed into the sacerdotal treasury belonged to the

Lord, and of these the priests were trustees rather than possessors.

(M104) Such, in general terms, briefly presented, was the Hebrew

constitution framed by Moses, by the direction of God. It was eminently

republican in spirit, and the power of the people through their

representatives, was great and controlling. The rights of property were

most sacredly guarded, and crime was severely and rigidly punished. Every

citizen was eligible to the highest offices. That the people were the

source of all power is proven by their voluntary change of government,

against the advice of Samuel, against the oracle, and against the council

of elders. We look in vain to the ancient constitutions of Greece and Rome

for the wisdom we see in the Mosaic code. Under no ancient government were

men so free or the laws so just. It is not easy to say how much the

Puritans derived from the Hebrew constitution in erecting their new

empire, but in many aspects there is a striking resemblance between the

republican organization of New England and the Jewish commonwealth.

The Mosaic code was framed in the first year after the exodus, while the

Israelites were encamped near Sinai. When the Tabernacle was erected, the

camp was broken up, and the wandering in the desert recommenced. This was

continued for forty years—not as a punishment, but as a discipline, to

enable the Jews to become indoctrinated into the principles of their

constitution, and to gain strength and organization, so as more

successfully to contend with the people they were commanded to expel from

Canaan. In this wilderness they had few enemies, and some friends, and

these were wandering Arab tribes.

(M105) We can not point out all the details of the wanderings under the

leadership of Moses, guided by the pillar of fire and the cloud. After

forty years, they reached the broad valley which runs from the eastern

gulf of the Red Sea, along the foot of Mount Seir, to the valley of the

Dead Sea. Diverted from a direct entrance into Canaan by hostile Edomites,

they marched to the hilly country to the east of Jordan, inhabited by the

Amorites. In a conflict with this nation, they gained possession of their

whole territory, from Mount Hermon to the river Anton, which runs into the

Dead Sea. The hills south of this river were inhabited by pastoral

Moabites—descendants of Lot, and beyond them to the Great Desert were the

Ammonites, also descendants of Lot. That nation formed an alliance with

the Midianites, hoping to expel the invaders then encamped on the plains

of Moab. Here Moses delivered his farewell instructions, appointed his

successor, and passed away on Mount Pisgah, from which he could see the

promised land, but which he was not permitted to conquer. That task was

reserved for Joshua, but the complete conquest of the Canaanites did not

take place till the reign of David.

CHAPTER VI.

THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF DAVID.

The only survivors of the generation that had escaped from Egypt were

Caleb and Joshua. All the rest had offended God by murmurings, rebellion,

idolatries, and sundry offenses, by which they were not deemed worthy to

enter the promised land. Even Moses and Aaron had sinned against the Lord.

(M106) So after forty years’ wanderings, and the children of Israel were

encamped on the plains of Moab, Moses finally addressed them, forbidding

all intercourse with Jews with other nations, enjoining obedience to God,

requiring the utter extirpation of idolatry, and rehearsing in general,

the laws which he had previously given them, and which form the substance

of the Jewish code, all of which he also committed to writing, and then

ascended to the top of Pisgah, over against Jericho, from which he

surveyed, all the land of Judah and Napthali, and Manasseh and Gilead unto

Dan—the greater part of the land promised unto Abraham. He then died, at

the age of 120, B.C. 1451 and no man knew the place of his burial.

(M107) The Lord then encouraged Joshua his successor, and the conquest of

the country began—by the passage over the Jordan and the fall of Jericho.

The manna, with which the Israelites for forty years had been miraculously

fed, now was no longer to be had, and supplies of food were obtained from

the enemy’s country. None of the inhabitants of Jericho were spared except

Rahab the harlot, and her father’s household, in reward for her secretion

of the spy which Joshua had sent into the city. At the city of Ai, the

three thousand men sent to take it were repulsed, in punishment for the

sin of Achan, who had taken at the spoil of Jericho, a Babylonian garment

and three hundred sheckels of silver and a wedge of gold. After he had

expiated this crime, the city of Ai was taken, and all its inhabitants

were put to death. The spoil of the city was reserved for the nation.

(M108) The fall of these two cities alarmed the Hamite nations of

Palestine west of the Jordan, and five kings of the Amorites entered into

a confederation to resist the invaders. The Gibeonites made a separate

peace with the Israelites. Their lives were consequently spared, but they

were made slaves forever. Thus was fulfilled the prophecy that Canaan

should serve Shem.

Meantime the confederate kings—more incensed with the Gibeonites than with

the Israelites, since they were traitors to the general cause, marched

against Gibeon, one of the strongest cities of the land. It invoked the

aid of Joshua, who came up from Gilgal, and a great battle was fought, and

resulted in the total discomfiture of the five Canaanite kings. The cities

of Makkedah, Libnah, Gizu, Eglon, Hebron, successively fell into the hands

of Joshua, as the result of their victory.

(M109) The following year a confederation of the Northern kings, a vast

host with horses and chariots, was arrayed against the Israelites; but the

forces of the Canaanites were defeated at the “Waters of Merom,” a small

lake, formerly the Upper Jordan. This victory was followed by the fall of

Hazor, and the conquest of the whole land from Mount Halak to the Valley

of Lebanon. Thirty-one kings were smitten “in the mountains, in the

plains, in the wilderness, in the south country: the Hittites, the

Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.”

There only remained the Philistines, whose power was formidable. The

conquered country was divided among the different tribes, half of which

were settled on the west of Jordan. The tabernacle was now removed to

Shiloh, in the central hill country between Jordan and the Mediterranean,

which had been assigned, to the tribe of Ephraim. Jacob had prophetically

declared the ultimate settlements of the twelve tribes in the various

sections of the conquered country. The pre-eminence was given to Judah,

whose territory was the most considerable, including Jerusalem, the future

capital, then in the hands of the Jebusites. The hilly country first fell

into the hands of the invaders, while the low lands were held tenaciously

by the old inhabitants where their cavalry and war chariots were of most

avail.

(M110) The Israelites then entered, by conquest, into a fruitful land,

well irrigated, whose material civilization was already established, with

orchards and vineyards, and a cultivated face of nature, with strong

cities and fortifications.

(M111) Joshua, the great captain of the nation, died about the year 1426

B.C., and Shechem, the old abode of Abraham and Jacob, remained the chief

city until the fall of Jerusalem. Here the bones of Joseph were deposited,

with those of his ancestors.

(M112) The nation was ruled by Judges from the death of Joshua for about

330 years—a period of turbulence and of conquest. The theocracy was in

full force, administered by the high priests and the council of elders.

The people, however, were not perfectly cured of the sin of idolatry, and

paid religious veneration to the gods of Phœnicia and Moab. The tribes

enjoyed a virtual independence, and central authority was weak. In

consequence, there were frequent dissensions and jealousies and

encroachments.

(M113) The most powerful external enemies of this period were the kings of

Mesopotamia, of Moab, and of Hazor, the Midianites, the Amalekites, the

Ammonites, and the Philistines. The great heroes of the Israelites in

their contests with these people were Othnie, Ehud, Barak, Gideon,

Jepthna, and Samson. After the victories of Gideon over the Midianites,

and of Jepthna over the Ammonites, the northern and eastern tribes enjoyed

comparative repose, and when tranquillity was restored Eli seems to have

exercised the office of high priest with extraordinary dignity, but his

sons were a disgrace and scandal, whose profligacy led the way to the

temporary subjection of the Israelites for forty years to the Philistines,

who obtained possession of the sacred ark.

(M114) A deliverer of the country was raised up in the person of Samuel,

the prophet, who obtained an ascendancy over the nation by his purity and

moral wisdom. He founded the “School of the Prophets” in Kamah, and to him

the people came for advice. He seems to have exercised the office of

judge. Under his guidance the Israelites recovered their sacred ark, which

the Philistines, grievously tormented by God, sent back in an impulse of

superstitious fear. Moreover, these people were so completely overthrown

by the Israelites that they troubled them no longer for many years.

(M115) Samuel, when old, made his sons judges, but their rule was venal

and corrupt. In disgust, the people of Israel then desired a king. Samuel

warned them of the consequences of such a step, and foretold the

oppression to which they would be necessarily subject; but they were bent

on having a king, like other nations—a man who should lead them on to

conquest and dominion. Samuel then, by divine command, granted their

request, and selected Saul, of the tribe of Benjamin, as a fit captain to

lead the people against the Philistines—the most powerful foe which had

afflicted Israel.

(M116) After he had anointed the future king he assembled the whole nation

together, through their deputies, at Mizpeh, who confirmed the divine

appointment. Saul, who appeared reluctant to accept the high dignity, was

fair and tall, and noble in appearance, patriotic, warlike, generous,

affectionate—the type of an ancient hero, but vacillating, jealous, moody,

and passionate. He was a man to make conquests, but not to elevate the

dignity of the nation. Samuel retired into private life, and Saul reigned

over the whole people.

(M117) His first care was to select a chosen band of experienced warriors,

and there was need, for the Philistines gathered together a great army,

with 30,000 chariots and 6,000 horsemen, and encamped at Michmash. The

Israelites, in view of this overwhelming force, hid themselves from fear,

in caves and amid the rocks of the mountain fastnesses. In their trouble

it was found necessary to offer burnt sacrifices; but Saul, impulsive and

assuming, would not wait to have the rites performed according to the

divine direction, but offered the sacrifices himself. By this act he

disobeyed the fundamental laws which Moses had given, violated, as it

were, the constitution; and, as a penalty for this foolish and rash act,

Samuel pronounced his future deposition; but God confounded, nevertheless,

the armies of the Philistines, and they were routed and scattered. Saul

then turned against the Amalekites, and took their king, whom he spared in

an impulse of generosity, even though he utterly destroyed his people.

Samuel reproved him for this leniency against the divine command, Saul

attempted to justify himself by the sacrifice of all the enemies’ goods

and oxen, to which Samuel said, “Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt

sacrifices and offerings as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold! to

obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams; for

rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness as iniquity and

idolatry.” Most memorable words! thus setting virtue and obedience over

all rites and ceremonies—a final answer to all ritualism and phariseeism.

(M118) The remainder of the life of Saul was embittered by the

consciousness that the kingdom would depart from his house; and by his

jealousy of David, and his unmanly persecution of him; in whom he saw his

successor. He was slain, with three of his sons, at the battle of Gilboa,

when the Philistines gained a great victory—B.C. 1056.

(M119) David, meanwhile had been secretly anointed by Samuel as king over

Israel. Nothing could exceed his grief when he heard of the death of Saul,

and of Jonathan, whom he loved, and who returned his love with a love

passing that of women, and who had protected him against the wrath and

enmity of his father.

(M120) David, of the tribe of Judah, after his encounter with Goliath, was

the favorite of the people, and was rewarded by a marriage with the

daughter of Saul—Michal, who admired his gallantry and heroism. Saul too

had dissembled his jealousy, and heaped honors on the man he was

determined to destroy. By the aid of his wife, and of Jonathan, and

especially protected by God, the young warrior escaped all the snares laid

for his destruction, and even spared the life of Saul when he was in his

power in the cave of Engedi. He continued loyal to his king, patiently

waiting for his future exaltation.

(M121) On the death of Saul, he was anointed king over Judah, at Hebron;

but the other tribes still adhered to the house of Saul. A civil war

ensued, during which Abner, the captain-general of the late king, was

treacherously murdered, and also Ishboseth, the feeble successor of Saul.

The war lasted seven and a half years, when all the tribes gave their

allegiance to David, who then fixed his seat at Jerusalem, which he had

wrested from the Jebusites, and his illustrious reign began, when he was

thirty years of age, B.C. 1048, after several years of adversity and

trial.

CHAPTER VII.

THE JEWISH MONARCHY.

(M122) We can not enter upon a detail of the conquests of David, the

greatest warrior that his nation has produced. In successive campaigns,

extending over thirty years, he reduced the various Canaanite nations that

remained unconquered—the Amalekites, the Moabites, the Philistines, the

Edomites, and the Syrians of Tobah. Hiram, king of Tyre, was his ally. His

kingdom extended from the borders of Egypt to the Euphrates, and from the

valley of Cœlo-Syria to the eastern gulf of the Red Sea. But his reign, if

glorious and successful, was marked by troubles. He was continually at

war; his kingdom was afflicted with a plague as the punishment for his

vanity in numbering the people; his son Amnon disgraced him; Absalom, his

favorite son, revolted and was slain; he himself was expelled for a time

from his capital.

(M123) But David is memorable for his character, and his poetry, his

romantic vicissitudes of life, and as the founder of a dynasty rather than

for his conquests over the neighboring nations. His magnificent virtues

blended with faults; his piety in spite of his sins, his allegiance to

God, and his faith in his promises invest his character with singular

interest. In his Psalms he lives through all the generations of men. He

reigned thirty-three years at Jerusalem, and seven at Hebron, and

transmitted his throne to Solomon—his youngest child, a youth ten years of

age, precocious in wisdom and culture.

(M124) The reign of Solomon is most distinguished for the magnificent

Temple he erected in Jerusalem, after the designs furnished by his father,

aided by the friendship of the Phœnicians. This edifice, “beautiful for

situation—the joy of the whole earth,” was the wonder of those times, and

though small compared with subsequent Grecian temples, was probably more

profusely ornamented with gold, silver, and precious woods, than any

building of ancient times. We have no means of knowing its architectural

appearance, in the absence of all plans and all ruins, and much ingenuity

has been expended in conjectures, which are far from satisfactory. It most

probably resembled an Egyptian temple, modified by Phœnician artists. It

had an outer court for worshipers and their sacrifices, and an inner court

for the ark and the throne of Jehovah, into which the high priest alone

entered, and only once a year. It was erected upon a solid platform of

stone, having a resemblance to the temples of Paestum. The portico, as

rebuilt, in the time of Herod, was 180 feet high, and the temple itself

was entered by nine gates thickly coated with silver and gold. The inner

sanctuary was covered on all sides by plates of gold, and was dazzling to

the eye. It was connected with various courts and porticoes which gave to

it an imposing appearance. Its consecration by Solomon, amid the cloud of

glories in which Jehovah took possession of it, and the immense body of

musicians and singers, was probably the grandest religious service ever

performed. That 30,000 men were employed by Solomon, in hewing timber on

Mount Lebanon, and 70,000 more in hewing stones, would indicate a very

extensive and costly edifice. The stones which composed the foundation

were of extraordinary size, and rivaled the greatest works of the

Egyptians. The whole temple was overlaid with gold—a proof of its

extraordinary splendor, and it took seven years to build it.

(M125) The palace of Solomon must also have been of great magnificence, on

which the resources of his kingdom were employed for thirteen years. He

moreover built a palace for his wife, the daughter of Pharaoh, composed of

costly stones, the foundation-stones of which were fifteen feet in length,

surrounded with beautiful columns. But these palaces did not include all

his works, for the courts of the temple were ornamented with brazen

pillars, with elaborate capitals, brazen seas standing upon bronze oxen,

brazen bases ornamented with figures of various animals, brazen layers,

one of which contained forty baths, altars of gold, tables, candelabras,

basins, censers and other sacred vessels of pure gold,—all of which

together were of enormous expense and great beauty.

(M126) During the execution of these splendid works, which occupied

thirteen years or more, Solomon gave extraordinary indications of wisdom,

as well as signs of great temporal prosperity. His kingdom was the most

powerful of Western Asia, and he enjoyed peace with other nations. His

fame spread through the East, and the Queen of Sheba, among others, came

to visit him, and witness his wealth and prosperity. She was amazed and

astonished at the splendor of his life, the magnificence of his court, and

the brilliancy of his conversation, and she burst out in the most

unbounded panegyrics. “The half was not told me.” She departed leaving a

present of one hundred and twenty talents of gold, besides spices and

precious stones; and he gave, in return, all she asked. We may judge of

the wealth of Solomon from the fact that in one year six hundred and

sixty-six talents of gold flowed into his treasury, besides the spices,

and the precious stones, and ivory, and rare curiosities which were

brought to him from Arabia and India. The voyages of his ships occupied

three years, and it is supposed that they doubled the Cape of Good Hope.

All his banqueting cups and dishes were of pure gold, and “he exceeded all

the kings of the earth for riches and wisdom,” who made their

contributions with royal munificence. In his army were 1,400 chariots and

12,000 horses, which it would seem were purchased in Egypt.

(M127) Intoxicated by this splendor, and enervated by luxury, Solomon

forgot his higher duties, and yielded to the fascination of oriental

courts. In his harem were 700 wives, princesses, and 300 concubines, who

turned his heart to idolatry. In punishment for his apostasy, God declared

that his kingdom should be divided, and that his son should reign only

over the single tribe of Judah, which was spared him for the sake of his

father David. In his latter days he was disturbed in his delusions by

various adversaries who rose up against him—by Hadad, a prince of Edom,

and Rezon, king of Damascus, and Jeroboam, one of his principal officers,

who afterward became king of the ten revolted tribes. Solomon continued,

however, to reign over the united tribes for forty years, when he was

gathered to his fathers.

(M128) The apostasy of Solomon is the most mournful fall recorded in

history, thereby showing that no intellectual power can rescue a man from

the indulgence of his passions and the sins of pride and vainglory. How

immeasurably superior to him in self-control was Marcus Aurelius, who had

the whole world at his feet! It was women who had estranged him from

allegiance to God—the princesses of idolatrous nations. Although no

mention is made of his repentance, the heart of the world will not accept

his final impenitence; and we infer from the book of Ecclesiastes, written

when all his delusions were dispelled—that sad and bitter and cynical

composition,—that he was at least finally persuaded that the fear of the

Lord constitutes the beginning and the end of all wisdom in this

probationary state. And we can not but feel that he who urged this wisdom

upon the young with so much reason and eloquence at last was made to feel

its power upon his own soul.

(M129) The government of Solomon, nevertheless had proved arbitrary, and

his public works oppressive. The monarch whom he most resembled, in his

taste for magnificence, in the splendor of his reign, and in the vexations

and humiliations of his latter days, was Louis XIV. of France, who sowed

the seeds of future revolutions. So Solomon prepared the way for

rebellion, by his grievous exactions. Under his son Rehoboam, a vain and

frivolous, and obstinate young man, who ascended the throne B.C. 975, the

revolt took place. He would not listen to his father’s councillors, and

increased rather than mitigated the burdens of the people. And this revolt

was successful: ten tribes joined the standard of Jeroboam, with 800,000

fighting men. Judah remained faithful to Rehoboam, and the tribe of

Benjamin subsequently joined it, and from its geographical situation, it

remained nearly as powerful as the other tribes, having 500,000 fighting

men. But the area of territory was only quarter as large.

(M130) The Jewish nation is now divided. The descendants of David reign at

Jerusalem; the usurper and rebel Jeroboam reigns over the ten tribes, at

Shechem.

For the sake of clearness of representation we will first present the

fortunes of the legitimate kings who reigned over the tribe of Judah.

(M131) Rehoboam reigned forty-one years at Jerusalem, but did evil in the

sight of the Lord. In the fifth year of his reign his capital was rifled

by the king of Egypt, who took away the treasures which Solomon had

accumulated. He was also at war with Jeroboam all his days. He was

succeeded by his son Abijam, whose reign was evil and unfortunate, during

which the country was afflicted with wars which lasted for ninety years

between Judah and Israel. But his reign was short, lasting only three

years, and he was succeeded by Asa, his son, an upright and warlike

prince, who removed the idols which his father had set up. He also formed

a league with Ben-Hadad, king of Syria, and, with a large bribe, induced

him to break with Baasha, king of Israel. His reign lasted forty years,

and he was succeeded by his son Jehoshaphat, B.C. 954. Under this prince

the long wars between Judah and Israel terminated, probably on account of

the marriage of Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat, with the daughter of Ahab,

king of Israel—an unfortunate alliance on moral, if not political grounds.

Jehoshaphat reigned thirty-five years, prosperously and virtuously, and

his ships visited Ophir for gold as in the time of Solomon, being in

alliance with the Phœnicians. His son Jehoram succeeded him, and reigned

eight years, but was disgraced by the idolatries which Ahab encouraged. It

was about this time that Elijah and Elisha were prophets of the Lord,

whose field of duties lay chiefly among the idolatrous people of the ten

tribes. During the reign of Jehoram, Edom revolted from Judah, and

succeeded in maintaining its independence, according to the predictions

made to Esau, that his posterity, after serving Israel, should finally

break their yoke.

(M132) His son Ahaziah succeeded him at Jerusalem B.C. 885, but formed an

alliance with Jehoram, king of Israel, and after a brief and wicked reign

of one year, he was slain by Jehu, the great instrument of divine

vengeance on the idolaters. Of his numerous sons, the infant Joash alone

was spared by Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, who usurped

authority in the name of the infant king, until she was overthrown by the

high priest Jehoiada. The usurpations of this queen have furnished a

subject for one of the finest tragedies of Racine. Jehoiada restored the

temple worship, and instituted many other reforms, having supreme power,

like Dunstan over the Saxon kings, when they were ruled by priests. His

death left Judah under the dominion of the patriarchal rulers (the princes

of Judah), who opposed all reforms, and even slew the son of Jehoida,

Zechariah the prophet, between the altar and the temple. It would seem

that Joash ruled wisely and benignantly during the life of Jehoiada, by

whom he was influenced—a venerable old man of 130 years of age when he

died. After his death Joash gave occasion for reproach, by permitting or

commanding the assassination of Zechariah, who had reproved the people for

their sins, and his country was invaded by the Syrians under Hazaal, and

they sent the spoil of Jerusalem to Damascus. Joash reigned in all forty

years, and was assassinated by his servants.

(M133) His son Amaziah succeeded him B.C. 839, and reigned twenty-nine

years. He was on the whole a good and able prince, and gained great

victories over the Edomites whom he attempted to reconquer. He punished

also the murderers of his father, and spared their sons, according to the

merciful provision of the laws of Moses. But he worshiped the gods of the

Edomites, and was filled with vainglory from his successes over them. It

was then he rashly challenged the king of Israel, who replied haughtily:

“The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon,

saying, give thy daughter to my son to wife, and there passed by a wild

beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle.” “So thou hast

smitten the Edomites, and thine heart lifteth thee up to boast. Abide now

at home; why shouldst thou meddle to thine hurt, that thou shouldst fall,

even thou and Judah with thee.” But Amaziah would not heed, and the two

kings encountered each other in battle, and Judah suffered a disastrous

defeat, and Joash, the king of Israel, came to Jerusalem and took all the

gold and silver and all the sacred vessels of the temple and the treasures

of the royal palace, and returned to Samaria. After this humiliation

Amaziah reigned, probably wisely, more than fifteen years, until falling

into evil courses, he was slain in a conspiracy, B.C. 810, and his son

Uzziah or Azariah, a boy of sixteen, was made king by the people of Judah.

(M134) This monarch enjoyed a long and prosperous reign of fifty-two

years. He reorganized the army and refortified his capital. He conquered

the Philistines, and also the Arabs, on his borders: received tribute from

the Ammonites, and spread his name unto Egypt. During his reign the

kingdom of Judah and Benjamin had great prosperity and power. The army

numbered 307,500 men well equipped and armed, with military engines to

shoot arrows and stones from the towers and walls. He also built castles

in the desert, and digged wells for his troops stationed there. He

developed the resources of his country, and devoted himself especially to

the arts of agriculture and the cultivation of the vine, and the raising

of cattle. But he could not stand prosperity, and in his presumption,

attempted even to force himself in the sacred part of the temple to offer

sacrifices, which was permitted to the priests alone; for which violation

of the sacred laws of the realm, he was smitten with leprosy—the most

loathsome of all the diseases which afflict the East. As a leper, he

remained isolated the rest of his life, not even being permitted by the

laws to enter the precincts of the temple to worship, or administer his

kingdom. It was during his reign that the Assyrians laid Samaria under

contribution.

(M135) He was succeeded by Jotham, his son, B.C. 758, who carried on his

father’s reforms and wars, and was therefore prospered. It is worthy of

notice that the kings of Judah, who were good, and abstained from

idolatry, enjoyed great temporal prosperity. Jotham reigned sixteen years,

receiving tribute from the Ammonites, and was succeeded by Ahaz, who

walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and restored idolatrous and

superstitious rites. Besieged in Jerusalem by the forces of Rezin, king of

Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, and afflicted by the Edomites and

Philistines, he invoked the aid of Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria,

offering him the treasure of the temple and his royal palace. The Assyrian

monarch responded, and took Damascus, and slew its king. Ahaz, in his

distress, yet sinned still more against the Lord by sacrificing to the

gods of Damascus whither he went to meet the Assyrian king. He died in the

year B.C. 726, after a reign of sixteen years, and Hezekiah, his son,

reigned in his stead.

(M136) This prince was one of the best and greatest of the kings of Judah.

He carried his zeal against idolatry so far as to break in pieces the

brazen serpent of Moses, which had become an object of superstitious

homage. He proclaimed a solemn passover, which was held in Jerusalem with

extraordinary ceremony, and at which 2,000 bullocks and 17,000 sheep were

slaughtered. No such day of national jubilee had been seen since the reign

of Solomon. He cut down the groves in which idolatrous priests performed

their mysterious rites, and overthrew their altars throughout the land.

The temple was purified, and the courses of the priests were restored.

Under his encouragement the people brought in joyfully their tithes to the

priests and levites, and offerings for the temple.

(M137) In all his reforms he was ably supported by Isaiah, the most

remarkable of all the prophets who flourished during the latter days of

the Hebrew monarchy. Under his direction he made war successfully against

the Philistines, and sought to recover the independence of Judah. In the

fourteenth year of his reign, Sennacherib invaded Palestine. Hezekiah

purchased his favor by a present of three hundred talents of silver and

thirty talents of gold, which stripped his palace and the temple of all

their treasure. But whether he neglected to pay further tribute or not, he

offended the king of Assyria, who marched upon Jerusalem, but was arrested

in his purpose by the miraculous destruction of his army, which caused him

to retreat with shame into his own country. After this his reign was

peaceful and splendid, and he accumulated treasures greater than had been

seen in Jerusalem since the time of Solomon. He also built cities, and

diverted the course of the river Gihar to the western side of his capital,

and made pools and conduits. It was in these years of prosperity that he

received the embassadors of the king of Babylon, and showed unto them his

riches, which led to his rebuke by Isaiah, and the prophecy of the future

captivity of his people.

(M138) He was succeeded by his son, Manasseh, B.C. 698, who reigned

fifty-five years; but he did not follow out the policy of his father, or

imitate his virtues. He restored idolatry, and “worshiped all the hosts of

heaven,” and built altars to them, as Ahab had done in Samaria. He was

also cruel and tyrannical, and shed much innocent blood; wherefore, for

these and other infamous sins, the Lord, through the mouth of the

prophets, declared that “he would wipe Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish,”

and would deliver the people into the hands of their enemies.

(M139) His son, Amon, followed in the steps of his father, but after a

brief reign of two years, was killed by his servants, B.C. 639, and was

buried in the sepulchre of his family, in the garden of Uzza.

(M140) Then followed the noble reign of Josiah—the last independent king

of Judah—whose piety and zeal in destroying idolatry, and great reforms,

have made him the most memorable of all the successors of David. He

repaired the temple, and utterly destroyed every vestige of idolatry,

assisted by the high priest Hilkiah, who seems to have been his prime

minister. He kept the great feast of the passover with more grandeur than

had ever been known, either in the days of the judges, or of the kings,

his ancestors; nor did any king ever equal him in his fidelity to the laws

of Moses. But notwithstanding all his piety and zeal, God was not to be

turned from chastising Judah for the sins of Manasseh, and the repeated

idolatries of his people; and all that Josiah could secure was a promise

from the Lord that the calamities of his country should not happen in his

day.

(M141) In the thirty-first year of his reign, Necho, the king of Egypt,

made war against the king of Babylon, who had now established his empire

on the banks of the Euphrates, over the ruins of the old Assyrian

monarchy. Josiah rashly embarked in the contest, either with a view of

giving his aid to the king of Babylon, or to prevent the march of Necho,

which lay through the great plain of Esdrælon. Josiah, heedless of all

warnings, ventured in person against the Egyptian army, though in

disguise, and was slain by an arrow. His dead body was brought to

Jerusalem, and was buried in one of the sepulchres of his fathers; and all

Judah and Israel mourned for the loss of one of the greatest, and

certainly the best of their kings.

The prophet Jeremiah pronounced his eulogy, and led the lamentations of

the people for this great calamity, B.C. 608.

(M142) The people proclaimed one of his sons, Shallum, to be king, under

the name of Jehoahaz, but the Egyptian conqueror deposed him and set up

his brother Jehoiakim as a tributary vassal. He reigned ingloriously for

eleven years—an idolator and a tyrant.

(M143) In his days Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came up against him,

having driven the Egyptians out of Palestine. Jehoiakim made his

submission to the conqueror of Egypt, who now reigned over the whole

Assyrian empire, but did not escape captivity in Babylon, with many other

of the first men of the nation, including Daniel, and the spoil of

Jerusalem. He was restored to the throne, on promise of paying a large

tribute. He served the king of Babylon three years and then rebelled,

hoping to secure the assistance of Egypt. But he leaned on a broken reed.

A Chaldean army laid siege to Jerusalem, and Jehoiakim was killed in a

sally, B.C. 597. His son Jehoiachin had reigned only three months when

Nebuchadnezzar, a great general, came to carry on the siege in person. The

city fell, the king was carried into captivity, with 10,000 of his

subjects, among whom were Ezekiel and Mordecai, and only the poorer class

remained behind. Over these people Nebuchadnezzar set up Zedekiah, the

youngest son of Josiah, as tributary king. Yet even in this state of

degradation and humiliation the Jews, wrought upon by false prophets,

expected deliverance, against the solemn warnings of Jeremiah, who

remained at Jerusalem. Zedekiah, encouraged by the partial successes of

the Egyptians, rebelled, upon which the king of Babylon resolved upon the

complete conquest and utter ruin of the country. Jerusalem fell into his

hands, by assault, and was leveled with the ground, and the temple was

destroyed. Zedekiah, in attempting to escape, was taken, had his eyes put

out, and was carried captive to Babylon, together with the whole nation,

and the country was reduced to utter desolation. It was not, however,

repeopled by heathen settlers, as was Samaria. The small remnant that

remained, under the guidance of Jeremiah, recovered some civil rights, and

supported themselves by the cultivation of the land, and in their bitter

misery learned those lessons which prepared them for a renewed prosperity

after the seventy years captivity. Never afterward was idolatry practiced

by the Jews. But no nation was ever more signally humiliated and

prostrated. Can we hence wonder at the mournful strains of Jeremiah, or

the bitter tears which the captive Jews, now slaves, shed by the rivers of

Babylon when they remembered the old prosperity of Zion.

(M144) The Jewish monarchy ended by the capture of Zedekiah. The kingdom

of the ten tribes had already fallen to the same foes, and even more

disastrously, because the kings of Israel were uniformly wicked, without a

single exception, and were hopelessly sunk into idolatry; whereas the

kings of Judah were good as well as evil, and some of them were

illustrious for virtues and talents. The descendants of David reigned in

Jerusalem in an unbroken dynasty for more than 500 years, while the

monarchs of Samaria were a succession of usurpers. The degenerate kings

were frequently succeeded by the captains of their guards, who in turn

gave way for other usurpers, all of whom were bad. The dynasty of David

was uninterrupted to the captivity of the nation. And the kingdom of Judah

was also more powerful and prosperous than that of the ten tribes, in

spite of their superior numbers.

(M145) But it is time to consider these ten tribes which revolted under

Jeroboam. Their history is uninteresting, and, were it not for the

beautiful episodes which relate to the prophets who were sent to reclaim

the people from idolatry, would be without significance other than that

which is drawn from the lives of wicked and idolatrous kings.

(M146) Jeroboam commenced his reign B.C. 975, by setting up for worship

two golden calves in Bethel and Dan, and thus inaugurated idolatry: for

which his dynasty was short. His son Nadah was murdered in a military

revolution, B.C. 953, and the usurper of his throne, Baasha, destroyed his

whole house. He, too, was a wicked prince, and his son Elah was slain by

Zimri, captain of his guard, who now reigned over Israel, after

exterminating the whole family of Elah, but was in his turn assassinated

after a reign of seven years, B.C. 929. Omri, the captain of the guard,

was now raised by the voice of the people to the throne; but he had a

rival in Tibni, whom he succeeded in conquering. Omri reigned twelve

years, and bought the hill of Samaria, on which he built the capital of

his kingdom. But he exceeded all his predecessors in iniquity, and was

succeeded by his son Ahab, who reigned twenty-two years. He was the most

infamous of all the kings of Israel, both for cruelty and idolatry, and

his queen, Jezebel, was also unique in crime—the Messalina and Fredigonde

of her age. It was through her influence that the worship of Baal became

the established religion, thus showing that the general influence of woman

on man is evil whenever she is not Christian. And this is perhaps the

reason that the ancients represented women as worse than men.

(M147) It was during the reign of this wicked king that God raised up the

greatest of the ancient prophets—Elijah, and sent him to Ahab with the

stern intelligence that there should be no rain until the prophet himself

should invoke it. After three years of grievous famine, during which he

sought to destroy the man who prophesied so much evil, but who was

miraculously fed in his flight by the ravens, Ahab allowed Elijah to do

his will.

(M148) Thereupon he caused the king to assemble together the whole people

of Israel, through their representatives, upon Mount Carmel, together with

the four hundred and fifty priests of Baal, and the four hundred false

prophets of the grove, whom Jezebel supported. He then invoked the people,

who, it seems, vacillated in their opinions in respect to Jehovah and

Baal, to choose finally, of these two deities, the God whom they _would_

worship. Having discomfited the priests of Baal in the trial of

sacrifices, and mocked them with the fiercest irony, thereby showing to

the people how they had been imposed upon, Elijah incited them to the

slaughter of these false prophets and foreign priests, and then set up an

altar to the true God. But all the people had not fallen into idolatry;

there still had remained seven thousand who had not bowed unto Baal.

(M149) Rain descended almost immediately, and Ahab departed, and told

Jezebel what had transpired. Hereupon, she was transported with rage and

fury, and sought the life of the prophet. He again escaped, and by divine

command went to the wilderness of Damascus and anointed Hazael to be king

over Syria, and Jehu to be king over Israel, and Elisha to be his

successor as prophet.

(M150) Soon after this, Benhadad, the king of Syria, came from Damascus

with a vast army and thirty-two allied kings, to besiege Samaria. Defeated

in a battle with Ahab, the king of Syria fled, but returned the following

year with a still larger army for the conquest of Samaria. But he was

again defeated, with the loss of one hundred thousand men in a single day,

and sought to make peace with the king of Israel. Ahab made a treaty with

him, instead of taking his life, for which the prophet of the Lord

predicted evil upon him and his people. But the anger of God was still

further increased by the slaughter of Naboth, through the wiles of

Jezebel, and the unjust possession of the vineyard which Ahab had coveted.

Elijah, after this outrage on all the fundamental laws of the Jews, met

the king for the last time, and pronounced a dreadful penalty—that his own

royal blood should be licked up by dogs in the very place where Naboth was

slain, and that his posterity should be cut off from reigning over Israel;

also, that his wicked queen should be eaten by dogs.

(M151) In three years after, while attempting to recover Ramoth, in

Gilead, from Benhadad, he lost his life, and was brought in his chariot to

Samaria to be buried. And the dogs came and licked the blood from the

chariot where it was washed. He was succeeded by Ahaziah, his son, B.C.

913, who renewed the worship of Baal, and died after a short and

inglorious reign, B.C. 896, without leaving any son, and Jehoram, his

brother, succeeded him. In reference to this king the Scripture accounts

are obscure, and he is sometimes confounded with Jehoram, the son of

Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, who married a daughter of Ahab. This accounts

for the alliance between Jehoshaphat and Ahab, and also between the two

Jehorams, since they were brothers-in-law, which brought to an end the

long wars of seventy years, which had wasted both Israel and Judah.

Jehoram did evil in the sight of the Lord, but was not disgraced by

idolatry. In his reign the Moabites, who paid a tribute of one hundred

thousand sheep and one hundred thousand lambs, revolted. Jehoram, assisted

by the kings of Judah, and of Edom, marched against them, and routed them,

and destroyed their cities, and filled up their wells, and felled all

their good trees, and covered their good land with stones.

(M152) Meanwhile, it happened that there was a grievous famine in Samaria,

so that an ass’s head sold for eighty pieces of silver. Benhadad, in this

time of national distress, came with mighty host and besieged the city;

but in the night, in his camp was heard a mighty sound of chariots and

horses, and a panic ensued, and the Syrians fled, leaving every thing

behind them. The spoil of their camp furnished the starving Samaritans

with food.

(M153) After this, Jehoram was engaged in war with the Syrians, now ruled

by Hazael, one of the generals of Benhadad, who had murdered his master.

In this war, Jehoram, or Joram, was wounded, and went to be healed of his

wounds at Jezreel, where he was visited by his kinsman, Ahaziah, who had

succeeded to the throne of Judah. While he lay sick in this place, Jehu,

one of his generals, conspired against him, and drew a bow against him,

and the arrow pierced him so that he died, and his body was cast into

Naboth’s vineyard. Thus was the sin against Naboth again avenged. Jehu

prosecuted the work of vengeance assigned to him, and slew Ahaziah, the

king of Judah, also, and then caused Jezebel, the queen mother, to be

thrown from a window, and the dogs devoured her body. He then slew the

seventy sons of Ahab, and all his great men, and his kinsfolk, and his

priests, so that none remained of the house of Ahab, as Elijah had

predicted. His zeal did not stop here, but he collected together, by

artifice, all the priests of Baal, and smote them, and brake their images.

(M154) But Jehu, now king of Israel, though he had destroyed the priests

of Baal, fell into the idolatry of Jehoram, and was therefore inflicted

with another invasion of the Syrians, who devastated his country, and

decimated his people. He died, after a reign of twenty-eight years, B.C.

856, and was succeeded by his son, Jehoahaz.

(M155) This king also did evil in the sight of the Lord, so that he was

made subject to Hazael, king of Syria, all his days, who ground down and

oppressed Israel, as the prophet had predicted. He reigned seventeen

years, in sorrow and humiliation, and was succeeded by his son Johash, who

followed the wicked course of his predecessors. His reign lasted sixteen

years, during which Elisha died. There is nothing in the Scriptures more

impressive than the stern messages which this prophet, as well as Elijah,

sent to the kings of Israel, and the bold rebukes with which he reproached

them. Nor is anything more beautiful than those episodes which pertain to

the cure of Naaman, the Syrian, and the restoration to life of the son of

the Shunamite woman, in reward for her hospitality, and the interview with

Hazael before he became king. All his predictions came to pass. He seems

to have lived an isolated and ascetic life, though he had great influence

with the people and the king, like other prophets of the Lord.

(M156) Jeroboam II. succeeded Johash, B.C. 825, and reigned successfully,

and received all the territory which the Syrians had gained, but he did

not depart from the idolatry of the golden calves. His son and successor,

Zachariah, followed his evil courses, and was slain by Shallum, after a

brief reign of six mouths, and the dynasty of Jehu came to an end, B.C.

772.

(M157) Shallum was murdered one month afterward by Menahem, who reigned

ingloriously ten years. It was during his reign that Pul, king of Assyria,

invaded his territories, but was induced to retire for a sum of one

thousand talents of silver, which he exacted from his subjects. He was

succeeded by Pekaiah, a bad prince, who was assassinated at the end of two

years by Pekah, one of his captains, who seized his throne. During his

reign, which lasted twenty years, Tiglath-Pilaser, king of Assyria, made

war against him, by invitation of Ahaz, and took his principal cities, and

carried their inhabitants captive to Nineveh. He was assassinated by

Hosea, who reigned in his stead. He also was a bad prince, and became

subject to Shalmanezer, king of Assyria, who came up against him. In the

ninth year of his reign, having proved treacherous to Shalmanezer, the

king of Assyria besieged Samaria, and carried him captive to his own

capital. Thus ended the kingdom of the ten tribes, who were now carried

into captivity beyond the Euphrates, and who settled in the eastern

provinces of Assyria, and probably relapsed hopelessly into idolatry,

without ever revisiting their native laud. In all probability most of them

were absorbed among the nations which composed the Assyrian empire, B.C.

721.

(M158) Nineteen sovereigns thus reigned over the children of Israel in

Samaria—a period of two hundred and fifty-four years; not one of them was

obedient to the laws of God, and most of whom perished by assassination,

or in battle. There is no record in history of more inglorious kings.

There was not a great man nor a good man among them all. They were, with

one or two exceptions, disgraced by the idolatry of Jeroboam, in whose

steps they followed. Nor was their kingdom ever raised to any considerable

height of political power. The history of the revolted and idolatrous

tribes is gloomy and disgraceful, only relieved by the stern lives of

Elijah and Elisha, the only men of note who remained true to the God of

their fathers, and who sought to turn the people from their sins.

“Whereupon the Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of

his sight.”

CHAPTER VIII.

THE OLD CHALDEAN AND ASSYRIAN MONARCHIES.

(M159) On a great plain, four hundred miles in length and one hundred

miles in width, forming the valley of the Euphrates, bounded on the north

by Mesopotamia, on the east by the Tigris, on the south by the Persian

Gulf, and on the west by the Syrian Desert, was established, at a very

early period, the Babylonian monarchy. This plain, or valley, contains

about twenty-three thousand square miles, equal to the Grecian

territories. It was destitute of all striking natural features—furnishing

an unbroken horizon. The only interruptions to the view on this level

plain were sand-hills and the embankments of the river. The river, like

the Nile, is subject to inundations, though less regular than the Nile,

and this, of course, deposits a rich alluvial soil. The climate in summer

is intensely hot, and in winter mild and genial. Wheat here is indigenous,

and the vine and other fruits abound in rich luxuriance. The land was as

rich as the valley of the Nile, and was favorable to flocks and herds. The

river was stocked with fish, and every means of an easy subsistence was

afforded.

(M160) Into this goodly land a migration from Armenia—the primeval seat of

man—came at a period when history begins. Nimrod and his hunters then

gained an ascendency over the old settlers, and supplanted them—Cushites,

of the family of Ham, and not the descendants of Shem. The beginning of

the kingdom of Nimrod was Babel, a tower, or temple, modeled after the one

which was left unfinished, or was destroyed. This was erected, probably,

B.C. 2334. It was square, and arose with successive stories, each one

smaller than the one below, presenting an analogy to the pyramidical form.

The highest stage supported the sacred ark. The temple was built of burnt

brick. Thus the race of Ham led the way in the arts in Chaldea as in

Egypt, and soon fell into idolatry. We know nothing, with certainty, of

this ancient monarchy, which lasted, it is supposed, two hundred and

fifty-eight years, from B.C. 2234 to 1976. It was not established until

after the dispersion of the races. The dynasty of which Nimrod was the

founder came to an end during the early years of Abraham.

(M161) The first king of the new dynasty is supposed to be Chedorlaomer,

though Josephus represents him as a general of the Chaldean king who

extended the Chaldean conquests to Palestine. His encounters with the

kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, and others in the vale of Siddim, tributary

princes, and his slaughter by Abraham’s servants, are recounted in the

fourteenth chapter of Genesis, and put an end to Chaldean conquests beyond

the Syrian desert. From his alliance, however, with the Tidal, king of

nations; Amrapher, king of Shinar; and Arioch, king of Ellasar, we infer

that other races, besides the Hamite, composed the population of Chaldea,

of which the subjects of Chedorlaomer were pre-eminent.

His empire was subverted by Arabs from the desert, B.C. 1518; and an

Arabian dynasty is supposed to have reigned for two hundred and forty-five

years.

(M162) This came to an end in consequence of a grand irruption of

Assyrians—of Semitic origin. “Asshur (Gen. 10, 11), the son of Shem, built

Nineveh,” which was on the Tigris. The name Assyria came to be extended to

the whole of Upper Mesopotamia, from the Euphrates to the Tagros

mountains. This country consisted of undulating pastures, diversified by

woodlands, and watered by streams running into the Tigris. Its valleys

were rich, its hills were beautiful, and its climate was cooler than the

Chaldean plain.

(M163) It would seem from the traditions preserved by the Greeks, that

Nineveh was ruled by a viceroy of the Babylonian king. This corresponds

with the book of Genesis, which makes the dynasty Chaldean, while the

people were Semitic, since the kingdom of Asshur was derived from that of

Nimrod. “Ninus, the viceroy,” says Smith, “having revolted from the king

of Babylon, overruns Armenia, Asia Minor, and the shores of the Euxine, as

far as Tanais, subdues the Medes and Persians, and makes war upon the

Bactrians. Semiramis, the wife of one of the chief nobles, coming to the

camp before Bactria, takes the city by a bold stroke. Her courage wins the

love of Ninus, and she becomes his wife. On his death she succeeds to the

throne, and undertakes the conquest of India, but is defeated.” These two

sovereigns built Nineveh on a grand scale, as well as added to the

edifices of Babylon.

This king was the founder of the northwest palace of Nineveh, three

hundred and sixty feet long and three hundred wide, standing on a raised

platform overlooking the Tigris, with a grand facade to the north fronting

the town, and another to the west commanding the river. It was built of

hewn stone, and its central hall was one hundred and twenty feet long and

ninety wide. The ceilings were of cedar brought from Lebanon. The walls

were paneled with slabs of marble ornamented with bas-reliefs. The floors

were paved with stone. (See Rawlinson’s Herodotus.)

(M164) All this is tradition, but recent discoveries in cuneiform

literature shed light upon it. From these, compared with the fragments of

Berosus, a priest of Babylon in the third century before Christ, and the

scattered notices of Scripture history, we infer that the dynasty which

Belus founded reigned more than five hundred years, from 1272 to 747

before Christ. Of these kings, Sardanapalus, the most famous, added

Babylonia to the Assyrian empire, and built vast architectural works. He

employed three hundred and sixty thousand men in the construction of this

palace, some of whom were employed in making brick, and others in cutting

timber on Mount Hermon. It covered an area of eight acres. The palaces of

Nineveh were of great splendor, and the scenes portrayed on the walls, as

discovered by Mr. Layard, lately disinterred from the mounds of earth,

represent the king as of colossal stature, fighting battles, and clothed

with symbolic attributes. He appears as a great warrior, leading captives,

and storming cities, and also in the chase, piercing the lion, and

pursuing the wild ass. This monarch should not be confounded with the

Sardanapalus of the Greeks, the last of the preceding dynasty. His son,

Shalmanezer, was also a great prince, and added to the dominion of the

Assyrian empire. Distant nations paid tribute to him, the Phœnicians, the

Syrians, the Jews, and the Medians beyond the Tagros mountains. He

defeated Benhadad and routed Hazael. His reign ended, it is supposed, B.C.

850. Two other kings succeeded him, who extended their conquests to the

west, the last of whom is identified by Smith with Pul, the reigning

monarch when Jonah visited Nineveh, B.C. 770.

The next dynasty commences with Tiglath-Pileser II., who carried on wars

against Babylon and Syria and Israel. This was in the time of Ahaz, B.C.

729.

(M165) His son, Shalmanezer, made Hosea, king of Israel, his vassal, and

reduced the country of the ten tribes to a province of his empire, and

carried the people away into captivity. Hezekiah was also, for a time, his

vassal. He was succeeded by Sargon, B.C. 721, according to Smith, but 715

B.C., according to others. He reigned, as Geseneus thinks, but two or

three years; but fifteen according to Rawlinson, and built that splendid

palace, the ruins of which, at Khorsabad, have supplied the Louvre with

its choicest remains of Assyrian antiquity. He was one of the greatest of

the Assyrian conquerors. He invaded Babylon and drove away its kings; he

defeated the Philistines, took Ashdod and Tyre, received tribute from the

Greeks at Cyprus, invaded even Egypt, whose king paid him tribute, and

conquered Media.

(M166) His son, Sennacherib, who came to the throne, B.C. 702, is an

interesting historical personage, and under him the Assyrian empire

reached its culminating point. He added to the palace of Nineveh, and

built one which exceeded all that had existed before him. No monarch

surpassed this one in the magnificence of his buildings. He erected no

less than thirty temples, shining with silver and gold. One of the halls

of his palace was two hundred and twenty feet long, and one hundred and

one wide. He made use of Syrian, Greek, and Phœnician artists. It is from

the ruins of this palace at _Koyunjik_ that Mr. Layard made those valuable

discoveries which have enriched the British Museum. He subdued Babylonia,

Upper Mesopotamia, Syria, Phœnicia, Philistia, Idumaen, and a part of

Egypt, which, with Media, a part of Armenia, and the old Assyrian

territory, formed his vast empire—by far greater than the Egyptian

monarchy at any period. He chastised also the Jews for encouraging a

revolt among the Philistines, and carried away captive two hundred

thousand people, and only abstained from laying siege to Jerusalem by a

present from Hezekiah of three hundred talents of silver and thirty of

gold. The destruction of his host, as recorded by Scripture, is thought by

some to have occurred in a subsequent invasion of Judea, when it was in

alliance with Egypt. That “he returned to Nineveh and dwelt there” is

asserted by Scripture, but only to be assassinated by his sons, B.C. 680.

His son Esar-Haddon succeeded him, a warlike monarch, who fought the

Egyptians, and colonized Samaria with Babylonian settlers. He also built

the palace of Nimrod, and cultivated art.

(M167) The civilization of the Assyrians shows a laborious and patient

people. Its chief glory was in architecture. Sculpture was imitated from

nature, but had neither the grace nor the ideality of the Greeks. War was

the grand business of kings, and hunting their pleasure. The people were

ground down by the double tyranny of kings and priests. There is little of

interest in the Assyrian annals, and what little we know of their life and

manners is chiefly drawn by inductions from the monuments excavated by

Botta and Layard. The learned treatise of Rawlinson sheds a light on the

annals of the monarchy, which, before the discoveries of Layard, were

exceedingly obscure, and this treatise has been most judiciously abridged,

by Smith, whom I have followed. It would be interesting to consider the

mythology of the Assyrians, but it is too complicated for a work like

this.

(M168) Under his successors, the empire rapidly declined. Though it

nominally included the whole of Western Asia, from the Mediterranean to

the desert of Iran, and from the Caspian Sea and the mountains of Armenia

to the Persian Gulf, it was wanting in unity. It embraced various

kingdoms, and cities, and tribes, which simply paid tribute, limited by

the power of the king to enforce it. The Assyrian armies, which committed

so great devastations, did not occupy the country they chastised, as the

Romans and Greeks did. Their conquests were like those of Tamerlane. As

the monarchs became effeminated, new powers sprung up, especially Media,

which ultimately completed the ruin of Assyria, under Cyaxares. The last

of the monarchs was probably the Sardanapalus of the Greeks.

(M169) The decline of this great monarchy was so rapid and complete, that

even Nineveh, the capital city, was blotted out of existence. No traces of

it remained in the time of Herodotus, and it is only from recent

excavations that its site is known. Still, it must have been a great city.

The eastern wall of it, as it now appears from the excavations, is fifteen

thousand nine hundred feet (about three miles); but the city probably

included vast suburbs, with fortified towers, so as to have been equal to

four hundred and eighty stadias in circumference, or sixty miles—the three

days’ journey of Jonah. It is supposed, with the suburbs, to have

contained five hundred thousand people. The palaces of the great were

large and magnificent; but the dwellings of the people were mean, built of

brick dried in the sun. The palaces consisted of a large number of

chambers around a central hall, open to the sky, since no pillars are

found necessary to support a roof. No traces of windows are found in the

walls, which were lined with slabs of coarse marble, with cuneiform

inscriptions. The façade of the palaces we know little about, except that

the entrances to them were lined by groups of colossal bulls. These are

sculptured with considerable spirit, but _art_, in the sense that the

Greeks understood it, did not exist. In the ordinary appliances of life

the Assyrians were probably on a par with the Egyptians; but they were

debased by savage passions and degrading superstitions. They have left

nothing for subsequent ages to use. Nothing which has contributed to

civilization remains of their existence. They have furnished no _models_

of literature, art, or government.

(M170) While Nineveh was rising to greatness, Babylon was under an

eclipse, and thus lasted six hundred and fifty years. It was in the year

1273 that this eclipse began. But a great change took place in the era of

Narbonassar, B.C. 747, when Babylon threatened to secure its independence,

and which subsequently compelled Esar-Haddon, the Assyrian monarch, to

assume, in his own person, the government of Babylon, B.C. 680.

(M171) In 625 B.C. the old Chaldeans recovered their political importance,

probably by an alliance with the Medes, and Nabopolassar obtained

undisputed possession of Babylon, and founded a short but brilliant

dynasty. He obtained a share of the captives of Nineveh, and increased the

population of his capital. His son, Nebuchadnezzar, was sent as general

against the Egyptians, and defeated their king, Neko, reconquered all the

lands bordering on Egypt, and received the submission of Jehoiakim, of

Jerusalem. The death of Nabopolassar recalled his son to Babylon, and his

great reign began B.C. 604.

(M172) It was he who enlarged the capital to so great an extent that he

may almost be said to have built it. It was in the form of a square, on

both banks of the Euphrates, forty-eight miles in circuit, according to

Herodotus, with an area of two hundred square miles—large enough to

support a considerable population by agriculture alone. The walls of this

city, if we accept the testimony of Herodotus, were three hundred and

fifty feet high, and eighty-seven feet thick, and were strengthened by two

hundred and fifty towers, and pierced with one hundred gates of brass. The

river was lined by quays, and the two parts of the city were united by a

stone bridge, at each end of which was a fortified palace. The greatest

work of the royal architect was the new palace, with the adjoining hanging

garden—a series of terraces to resemble hills, to please his Median queen.

This palace, with the garden, was eight miles in circumference, and

splendidly decorated with statues of men and animals. Here the mighty

monarch, after his great military expeditions, solaced himself, and

dreamed of omnipotence, until a sudden stroke of madness—that form which

causes a man to mistake himself for a brute animal—sent him from his

luxurious halls into the gardens he had planted. His madness lasted seven

years, and he died, after a reign of forty-three years, B.C. 561, and

Evil-Merodach, his son, reigned in his stead.

(M173) He was put to death two years after, for lawlessness and

intemperance, and was succeeded by his brother-in-law and murderer,

Neriglissar. So rapid was the decline of the monarchy, that after a few

brief reigns Babylon was entered by the army of Cyrus, and the last king,

Bil-shar-utzur, or Bilshassar, associated with his father Nabonadius, was

slain, B.C. 538. Thus ended the Chaldean monarchy, seventeen hundred and

ninety-six years after the building of Babel by Nimrod, according to the

chronology it is most convenient to assume.

CHAPTER IX.

THE EMPIRE OF THE MEDES AND PERSIANS.

(M174) The third of the great Oriental monarchies brought in contact with

the Jews was that of the Medes and Persians, which arose on the

dissolution of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires. The nations we have

hitherto alluded to were either Hamite or Shemite. But our attention is

now directed to a different race, the descendants of Japhet. Madai, the

third son of Japhet, was the progenitor of the Medes, whose territory

extended from the Caspian Sea on the north, to the mountains of Persia on

the south, and from the highlands of Armenia and the chain of Tagros on

the west, to the great desert of Iran on the east. It comprised a great

variety of climate, and was intersected by mountains whose valleys were

fruitful in corn and fruits. “The finest part of the country is an

elevated region inclosed by the offshoots of the Armenian mountains, and

surrounding the basin of the great lake Urumizu, four thousand two hundred

feet above the sea, and the valleys of the ancient Mardus and the Araxes,

the northern boundary of the land. In this mountain region stands Tabris,

the delightful summer seat of the modern Persian shahs. The slopes of the

Tagros furnish excellent pasture; and here were reared the famous horses

which the ancients called Nisæan. The eastern districts are flat and

pestilential, where they sink down to the shores of the Caspian Sea;

rugged and sterile where they adjoin the desert of Iran.” The people who

inhabited this country were hardy and bold, and were remarkable for their

horsemanship. They were the greatest warriors of the ancient world, until

the time of the Greeks. They were called Aryans by Herodotus. They had

spread over the highlands of Western Asia in the primeval ages, and formed

various tribes. The first notice of this Aryan (or Arian) race, appears in

the inscriptions on the black obelisk of Nimrod, B.C. 880, from which it

would appear that this was about the period of the immigration into Media,

and they were then exposed to the aggressions of the Assyrians. “The first

king who menaced their independence was the monarch whose victories are

recorded on the black obelisk in the British Museum.” He made a raid into,

rather than a conquest of, the Median country. Sargon, the third monarch

of the Lower Empire, effected something like a conquest, and peopled the

cities which he founded with Jewish captives from Samaria, B.C. 710. Media

thus became the most eastern province of his empire, but the conquest of

it was doubtless incomplete. The Median princes paid tribute to the kings

of Nineveh, or withheld it, according to their circumstances.

(M175) According to Ctesias, the Median monarchy commenced B.C. 875; but

Herodotus, with greater probable accuracy, places the beginning of it B.C.

708. The revolt of Media from Assyria was followed by the election of

Deioces, who reigned fifty-three years. The history of this king is drawn

through Grecian sources, and can not much be depended upon. According to

the legends, the seven tribes of the Medes, scattered over separate

villages, suffered all the evils of anarchy, till the reputation of

Deioces made him the arbiter of their disputes. He then retired into

private life; anarchy returned, a king was called for, and Deioces was

elected. He organized a despotic power, which had its central seat in

Ecbatana, which he made his capital, built upon a hill, on the summit of

which was the royal palace, where the king reigned in seclusion,

transacting all business through spies, informers, petitions, and decrees.

Such is the account which Rawlinson gives, and which Smith follows.

(M176) The great Median kingdom really began with Cyaxares, about the year

B.C. 633, when the Assyrian empire was waning. He emerges from the

obscurity like Attila and Gengis Khan, and other eastern conquerors, at

the head of irresistible hordes, sweeps all away before him, and builds up

an enormous power. This period was distinguished by a great movement among

the Turanian races (Cimmerians), living north of the Danube, which,

according to Herodotus, made a great irruption into Asia Minor, where some

of the tribes effected a permanent settlement; while the Scythians, from

Central Asia, overran Media, crossed the Zagros mountains, entered

Mesopotamia, passed through Syria to Egypt, and held the dominion of

Western Asia, till expelled by Cyaxares. He only established his new

kingdom after a severe conflict between the Scythian and Aryan races,

which had hitherto shared the possession of the tablelands of Media.

(M177) From age to age the Turanian races have pressed forward to occupy

the South, and it was one of these great movements which Cyaxares opposed,

and opposed successfully—the first recorded in history. These nomads of

Tartary, or Scythian tribes, which overran Western Asia in the seventh

century before Christ, under the new names of Huns, Avari, Bulgarians,

Magyars, Turks, Mongols, devastated Europe and Asia for fifteen successive

centuries. They have been the scourge of the race, and they commenced

their incursions before Grecian history begins.

(M178) Learning from these Scythian invaders many arts, not before

practiced in war, such as archery and cavalry movements, Cyaxares was

prepared to extend his empire to the west over Armenia and Asia Minor, as

far as the river Halys. He made war in Lydia with the father of Crœsus.

But before these conquests were made, he probably captured Nineveh and

destroyed it, B.C. 625. He was here assisted by the whole force of the

Babylonians, under Nabopolassar, an old general of the Assyrians, but who

had rebelled. In reward he obtained for his son, Nebuchadnezzar, the hand

of the daughter of Cyaxares. The last of the Assyrian monarchs, whom the

Greeks have called Sardanapalus, burned himself in his palace rather than

fall into the hands of the Median conqueror.

(M179) The fall of Nineveh led to the independence of Babylon, and its

wonderful growth, and also to the conquests of the Medes as far as Lydia

to the west. The war with Lydia lasted six years, and was carried on with

various success, until peace was restored by the mediation of a Babylonian

prince. The reason that peace was made was an eclipse of the sun, which

happened in the midst of a great battle, which struck both armies with

superstitious fears. On the conclusion of peace, the son of the Median

king, Astyages, married the daughter of the Lydian monarch, Alyattes, and

an alliance was formed between Media and Lydia.

(M180) At this time Lydia comprised nearly all of Asia Minor, west of the

Halys. The early history of this country is involved in obscurity. The

dynasty on the throne, when invaded by the Medes, was founded by Gyges,

B.C. 724, who began those aggressions on the Grecian colonies which were

consummated by Crœsus. Under the reign of Ardys, his successor, Asia Minor

was devastated by the Cimmerians, a people who came from the regions north

of the Black Sea, between the Danube and the Sea of Azov, being driven

away by an inundation of Scythians, like that which afterward desolated

Media. These Cimmerians, having burned the great temple of Diana, at

Ephesus, and destroyed the capital city of Sardis, were expelled from

Lydia by Alyattes, the monarch against whom Cyaxares had made war.

(M181) Cyaxares reigned forty years, and was succeeded by Astyages, B.C.

593, whose history is a total blank, till near the close of his long reign

of thirty-five years, when the Persians under Cyrus arose to power. He

seems to have resigned himself to the ordinary condition of Oriental

kings—to effeminacy and luxury—brought about by the prosperity which he

inherited. He was contemporary with Crœsus, the famous king of Lydia,

whose life has been invested with so much romantic interest by

Herodotus—the first of the Asiatic kings who commenced hostile aggression

on the Greeks. After making himself master of all the Greek States of Asia

Minor, he combated a power which was destined to overturn the older

monarchies of the East—that of the Persians—a race closely connected with

the Medes in race, language, and religion.

(M182) The Persians first appear in history as a hardy, warlike people,

simple in manners and scornful of luxury. They were uncultivated in art

and science, but possessed great wit, and a poetical imagination. They

lived in the mountainous region on the southwest of Iran, where the great

plain descends to the Persian Gulf. The sea-coast is hot and arid, as well

as the eastern region where the mountains pass into the table-land of

Iran. Between these tracts, resembling the Arabian desert, lie the high

lands at the extremity of the Zagros chain. These rugged regions, rich in

fruitful valleys, are favorable to the cultivation of corn, of the grape,

and fruits, and afford excellent pasturage for flocks. In the northern

part is the beautiful plain of Shiraz, which forms the favorite residence

of the modern shahs. In the valley of Bend-amir was the old capital of

Persepolis, whose ruins attest the magnificent palaces of Darius and

Xerxes. Persia proper was a small country, three hundred miles from north

to south, and two hundred and eighty from east to west, inhabited by an

Aryan race, who brought with them, from the country beyond the Indus, a

distinctive religion, language, and political institutions. Their language

was closely connected with the Aryan dialects of India, and the tongues of

modern Europe. Hence the Persians were noble types of the great

Indo-European family, whose civilization has spread throughout the world.

Their religion was the least corrupted of the ancient races, and was

marked by a keen desire to arrive at truth, and entered, in the time of

the Gnostics, into the speculations of the Christian fathers, of whom

Origen was the type. Their teachers were the Magi, a wise and learned

caste, some of whom came to Jerusalem in the time of Herod, guided by the

star in the East, to institute inquiries as to the birth of Christ. They

attempted to solve the mysteries of creation, but their elemental

principle of religion was worship of all the elements, especially of fire.

But the Persians also believed in the two principles of good and evil,

which were called the principle of dualism, and which they brought from

India. It is thought by Rawlinson that the Persians differed in their

religion from the primeval people of India, whose Vedas, or sacred books,

were based on monotheism, in its spiritual and personal form, and that,

for the heresy of “dualism,” they were compelled to migrate to the West.

The Medes, with whom they subsequently became associated, were inclined to

the old elemental worship of nature, which they learned from the Turanian

or Scythic population.

(M183) The great man among the Persians was Zoroaster—or Zerdusht, born,

probably, B.C. 589. He is immortal, not from his personal history, the

details of which we are ignorant, but from his ideas, which became the

basis of the faith of the Persians. He stamped his mind on the nation, as

Mohammed subsequently did upon Arabia. His central principle was

“dualism”—the two powers of good and evil—the former of which was destined

ultimately to conquer. But with this dualistic creed of the old Persian,

he also blended a reformed Magian worship of the elements, which had

gained a footing among the Chaldean priests, and which originally came

from the Scythic invaders. Magism could not have come from the Semitic

races, whose original religion was theism, like that of Melchisedek and

Abraham; nor from the Japhetic races, or Indo-European, whose worship was

polytheism—that of personal gods under distinct names, like Jupiter, Juno,

and Minerva. The first to yield to this Magism were the Medes, who adopted

the religion of older settlers,—the Scythic tribes, their subjects,—and

which faith superseded the old Aryan religion.

(M184) The Persians, the flower of the Aryan races, were peculiarly

military in all their habits and aspirations. Their nobles, mounted on a

famous breed of horses, composed the finest cavalry in the world. Nor was

their infantry inferior, armed with lances, shields, and bows. Their

military spirit was kept alive by their mountain life and simple habits

and strict discipline.

(M185) Astyages, we have seen, was the last of the Median kings. He

married his daughter, according to Herodotus, to Cambyses, a Persian

noble, preferring him to a higher alliance among the Median princes, in

order that a dream might not be fulfilled that her offspring should

conquer Asia. On the return of the dream he sought to destroy the child

she was about to bear, but it was preserved by a herdsman; and when the

child was ten years of age he was chosen by his playfellows on the

mountains to be their king. As such he caused the son of a noble Median to

be scourged for disobedience, who carried his complaint to Astyages. The

Median monarch finds out his pedigree from the herdsman, and his officer,

Harpagns, to whom he had intrusted the commission for his destruction. He

invites, in suppressed anger, this noble to a feast, at which he serves up

the flesh of his own son. Harpagus, in revenge, conspires with some

discontented nobles, and invites Cyrus, this boy-king, now the bravest of

the youths of his age and country, to a revolt. Cyrus leads his troops

against Astyages, and gains a victory, and also the person of the

sovereign, and his great reign began, B.C. 558.

(M186) The dethronement of Astyages caused a war between Lydia and Persia.

Crœsus hastens to attack the usurper and defend his father-in-law. He

forms a league with Babylonia and Egypt. Thus the three most powerful

monarchs of the world are arrayed against Cyrus, who is prepared to meet

the confederation. Crœsus is defeated, and retreats to his capital,

Sardis; and the next spring, while summoning his allies, is attacked

unexpectedly by Cyrus, and is again defeated. He now retires to Sardia,

which is strongly fortified, and the city is besieged, by the Persians,

and falls after a brief siege. Crœsus himself is spared, and in his

adversity gives wise counsel to his conqueror.

(M187) Cyrus leaves a Lydian in command of the captured city, and departs

for home. A revolt ensues, which leads to a collision between Persia and

the Greek colonies, and the subjection of the Grecian cities by Harpagus,

the general of Cyrus. Then followed the conquest of Asia Minor, which

required several years, and was conducted by the generals of Cyrus. He was

required in Media, to consolidate his power. He then extended his

conquests to the East, and subdued the whole plateau of Iran, to the

mountains which divided it from the Indus. Thus fifteen years of splendid

military successes passed before he laid siege to Babylon, B.C. 538.

(M188) On the fall of that great city Cyrus took up his residence in it,

as the imperial capital of his vast dominion. Here he issued his decree

for the return of the Jews to their ancient territory, and for the

rebuilding of their temple, after seventy years’ captivity. This decree

was dictated by the sound military policy of maintaining the frontier

territory of Palestine against his enemies in Asia Minor, which he knew

the Jews would do their best to preserve, and this policy he carried out

with noble generosity, and returned to the Jews the captured vessels of

silver and gold which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away; and for more than

two centuries Persia had no warmer friends and allies than the obedient

and loyal subjects of Judea.

(M189) Cyrus fell in battle while fighting a tribe of Scythians at the

east of the Caspian Sea, B.C. 529, He was the greatest general that the

Oriental world ever produced, and well may rank with Alexander himself.

His reign of twenty-nine years was one constant succession of wars, in

which he was uniformly successful, and in which success was only equaled

by his magnanimity. His empire extended from the Indus to the Hellespont

and the Syrian coast, far greater than that of either Assyria or

Babylonia.

(M190) The result of the Persian conquest on the conquerors themselves was

to produce habits of excessive luxury, a wide and vast departure from

their original mode of life, which enfeebled the empire, and prepared the

way for a rapid decline.

(M191) Cambyses, however, the son and successor of Cyrus, carried out his

policy and conquests. He was, unlike his father, a tyrant and a

sensualist, but possessed considerable military genius. He conquered

Phœnicia, and thus became master of the sea as well as of the land. He

then quarreled with Amasis, the king of Egypt, and subdued his kingdom.

(M192) Like an eastern despot, he had, while in Egypt, in an hour of

madness and caprice, killed his brother, Smerdis. It happened there was a

Magian who bore a striking resemblance to the murdered prince. With the

help of his brother, whom the king had left governor of his household,

this Magian usurped the throne of Persia, while Cambyses was absent, the

death of the true Smerdis having been carefully concealed.

(M193) The news of the usurpation reached Cambyses while returning from an

expedition to Syria. An accidental wound from the point of his sword

proved mortal, B.C. 522. But Cambyses, about to die, called his nobles

around him, and revealed the murder of his brother, and exhorted them to

prevent the kingdom falling into the hands of the Medes. He left no

children.

(M194) The usurper proved a tyrant. A conspiracy of Persians followed,

headed by the descendants of Cyrus; and Darius, the chief of these—the son

of Hystaspes, became king of Persia, after Smerdis had reigned seven

months. But this reign, brief as it was, had restored the old Magian

priests to power, who had, by their magical arts, great popularity with

the people, not only Medes, but Persians.

(M195) Darius restored the temples and the worship which the Magian

priests had overthrown, and established the religion of Zoroaster. The

early years of his reign were disturbed by rebellions in Babylonia and

Media, but these were suppressed, and Darius prosecuted the conquests

which Cyrus had begun. He invaded both India and Scythia, while his

general, Megabazus, subdued Thrace and the Greek cities of the Hellespont.

(M196) The king of Macedonia acknowledged the supremacy of the great

monarch of Asia, and gave the customary present of earth and water. Darius

returned at length to Susa to enjoy the fruit of his victories, and the

pleasures which his great empire afforded. For twenty years his glories

were unparalleled in the East, and his life was tranquil.

(M197) But in the year B.C. 500, a great revolt of the Ionian cities took

place. It was suppressed, at first, but the Atticans, at Marathon,

defeated the Persian warriors, B.C. 490, and the great victory changed the

whole course of Asiatic conquest. Darius made vast preparations for a new

invasion of Greece, but died before they were completed, after a reign of

thirty-six years, B.C. 485, leaving a name greater than that of any

Oriental sovereign, except Cyrus.

(M198) Unfortunately for him and his dynasty, he challenged the spirit of

western liberty, then at its height among the cities of Greece. His

successor, Xerxes, inherited his power, but not his genius, and rashly

provoked Europe by new invasions, while he lived ingloriously in his

seraglio. He was murdered in his palace, the fate of the great tyrants of

eastern monarchies, for in no other way than by the assassin’s dagger

could a change of administration take place—a poor remedy, perhaps, but

not worse than the disease itself. This tyrant was the Ahasuerus of the

Scriptures.

(M199) We need not follow the fortunes of the imbecile princes who

succeeded Xerxes, for the Persian monarchy was now degenerate and

weakened, and easily fell under the dominion of Alexander, who finally

overthrew the power of Persia, B.C. 330.

(M200) And this was well. The Persian monarchy was an absolute despotism,

like that of Turkey, and the monarch not only controlled the actions of

his subjects, but was the owner even of their soil. He delegated his power

to satraps, who ruled during his pleasure, but whose rule was disgraced by

every form of extortion—sometimes punished, however, when it became

outrageous and notorious. The satraps, like pashas, were virtually

independent princes, and exercised all the rights of sovereigns so long as

they secured the confidence of the supreme monarch, and regularly remitted

to him the tribute which was imposed. The satrapies were generally given

to members of the royal family, or to great nobles connected with it by

marriage. The monarch governed by no council, and the laws centered in the

principle that the will of the king was supreme. The only check which he

feared was assassination, and he generally spent his life in the

retirement of his seraglio, at Susa, Babylon, or Ecbatana.

The Persian empire was the last of the great monarchies of the Oriental

world, and these flourished for a period of two thousand years. When

nations became wicked or extended over a large territory, the patriarchal

rule of the primitive ages no longer proved an efficient government. Men

must be ruled, however, in some way, and the irresponsible despotism of

the East, over all the different races, Semitic, Hamite, and Japhetic, was

the government which Providence provided, in a state of general rudeness,

or pastoral simplicity, or oligarchal usurpations. The last great monarchy

was the best; it was that which was exercised by the descendants of

Japhet, according to the prediction that he should dwell in the tents of

Shem, and Canaan should be his servant.

Before we follow the progress of the descendants of Japhet in Greece,

among whom a new civilization arose, designed to improve the condition of

society by the free agency displayed in art, science, literature, and

government—the rise, in short, of free institutions—we will glance at the

nations in Asia Minor which were brought in contact with the powers we

have so briefly considered.

CHAPTER X.

ASIA MINOR AND PHŒNICIA.

(M201) Concerning the original inhabitants of Asia Minor our information

is very scanty. The works of Strabo shed an indefinite light, and the

author of the Iliad seems to have been but imperfectly acquainted with

either the geography or the people of that extensive country. According to

Herodotus, the river Halys was the most important geographical limit; nor

does he mention the great chain of Taurus, which begins from the southern

coast of Lycia, and strikes northeastward as far as Armenia—the most

important boundary line in the time of the Romans. Northward of Mount

Taurus, on the upper portion of the river Halys, was situated the spacious

plain of Asia Minor. The northeast and south of this plain was

mountainous, and was bounded by the Euxine, the Ægean, and the Pamphylian

seas. The northwestern part included the mountainous region of Ida,

Temnus, and Olympus. The peninsula was fruitful in grains, wine, fruit,

cattle, and oil.

(M202) Along the western shores of this great peninsula were Pelasgians,

Mysians, Bythinians, Phrygians, Lydians, and other nations, before the

Greeks established their colonies. Further eastward were Lycians,

Pisidians, Phrygians, Cappadocians, Paphlagonians, and others. The

Phrygians, Mysians, and Teucrians were on the northwest. These various

nations were not formed into large kingdoms or confederacies, nor even

into large cities, but were inconsiderable tribes, that presented no

formidable resistance to external enemies. The most powerful people were

the Lydians, whose capital was Sardis, who were ruled by Gyges, 700 B.C.

This monarchy extinguished the independence of the Greek cities on the

coast, without impeding their development in wealth and civilization. All

the nations west of the river Halys were kindred in language and habits.

East of the Halys dwelt Semitic races, Assyrians, Syrians, Cappadocians,

and Cilicians. Along the coast of the Euxine dwelt Bythinians,

Marandynians, and Paphlagonians—branches of the Thracian race. Along the

southern coast of the Propontis were the Doliones and Pelasgians. In the

region of Mount Ida were the Teucrians and Mysians. All these races had a

certain affinity with the Thracians, and all modified the institutions of

the Greeks who settled on the coast for purposes of traffic or

colonization. The music of the Greeks was borrowed from the Phrygians and

Lydians. The flute is known to have been invented, or used by the

Phrygians, and from them to have passed to Greek composers.

(M203) The ancient Phrygians were celebrated chiefly for their flocks and

agricultural produce, while the Lydians, dwelling in cities, possessed

much gold and and silver. But there are few great historical facts

connected with either nation. There is an interesting legend connected

with the Phrygian town of Gordium. The primitive king, Gordius, was

originally a poor husbandman, upon the yoke of whose team, as he tilled

the field, an eagle perched. He consulted the augurs to explain the

curious portent, and was told that the kingdom was destined for his

family. His son was Midas, offspring of a maiden of prophetic family. Soon

after, dissensions breaking out among the Phrygians, they were directed by

an oracle to choose a king, whom they should first see approaching in a

wagon. Gordius and his son Midas were the first they saw approaching the

town, and the crown was conferred upon them. The wagon was consecrated,

and became celebrated for a knot which no one could untie. Whosoever

should untie that knot was promised the kingdom of Asia. It remained

untied until Alexander the Great cut it with his sword.

(M204) The Lydians became celebrated for their music, of which the chief

instruments were the flute and the harp. Their capital, Sardis, was

situated on a precipitous rock, and was deemed impregnable. Among their

kings was Crœsus, whose great wealth was derived from the gold found in

the sands of the river Pactolus, which flowed toward the Hermus from Mount

Tmolus, and also from the industry of his subjects. They were the first on

record to coin gold and silver. The antiquity of the Lydian monarchy is

very great, and was traced to Heracles. The Heracleid dynasty lasted five

hundred and five years, and ended with Myrsus, or Kandaules. His wife was

of exceeding beauty, and the vanity of her husband led him to expose her

person to Gyges, commander of his guard. The affronted wife, in revenge,

caused her husband to be assassinated, and married Gyges. A strong party

opposed his ascent to the throne, and a civil war ensued, which was

terminated by a consultation of the oracle, which decided in favor of

Gyges, the first historical king of Lydia, about the year 715 B.C.

(M205) With this king commenced the aggressions from Sardis on the Asiatic

Greeks, which ended in their subjection. How far the Lydian kingdom of

Sardis extended during the reign of Gyges is not known, but probably over

the whole Troad, to Abydus, on the Hellespont. Gyges reigned thirty-eight

years, and was succeeded by his son Ardys, during whose reign was an

extensive invasion of the Cimmerians, and a collision between the

inhabitants of Lydia and those of Upper Asia, under the Median kings, who

first acquired importance about the year 656 B.C. under a king called, by

the Greeks, Phraortes, son of Deioces, who built the city of Ecbatana.

(M206) Phraortes greatly extended the empire of the Medes, and conquered

the Persians, but was defeated and slain by the Assyrians of Nineveh. His

son, Cyaxares (636-595 B.C.) continued the Median conquests to the river

Halys, which was the boundary between the Lydian and Median kingdoms. A

war between these two powers was terminated by the marriage of the

daughter of the Lydian king with the son of the Median monarch, Cyaxares,

who shortly after laid siege to Nineveh, but was obliged to desist by a

sudden inroad of Scythians.

(M207) This inroad of the Scythians in Media took place about the same

time that the Cimmerians invaded Lydia, a nomad race which probably

inhabited the Tauric Chersonessus (Crimea), and had once before desolated

Asia Minor before the time of Homer. The Cimmerians may have been urged

forward into Asia Minor by an invasion of the Scythians themselves, a

nomadic people who neither planted nor reaped, but lived on food derived

from animals—prototypes of the Huns, and also progenitors—a formidable

race of barbarians, in the northern section of Central Asia, east of the

Caspian Sea. The Cimmerians fled before this more warlike race, abandoned

their country on the northern coast of the Euxine, and invaded Asia Minor.

They occupied Sardis, and threatened Ephesus, and finally were overwhelmed

in the mountainous regions of Cilicia. Some, however, effected a

settlement in the territory where the Greek city of Sinope was afterward

built.

(M208) Ardys was succeeded by his son Tadyattes, who reigned twelve years;

and his son and successor, Alyattes, expelled the Cimmerians from Asia

Minor. But the Scythians, who invaded Media, defeated the king, Cyaxares,

and became masters of the country, and spread as far as Palestine, and

enjoyed their dominion twenty-eight years, until they were finally driven

away by Cyaxares. These nomadic tribes from Tartary were the precursors of

Huns, Avars, Bulgarians, Magyars, Turks, Mongols, and Tartars, who, at

different periods, invaded the civilized portions of Asia and Europe, and

established a dominion more or less durable.

(M209) Cyaxares, after the expulsion of the Scythians, took Nineveh, and

reduced the Assyrian empire, while Alyattes, the king of Lydia, after the

Cimmerians were subdued, made war on the Greet city of Miletus, and

reduced the Milesians to great distress, and also took Smyrna. He reigned

fifty-seven years with great prosperity, and transmitted his kingdom to

Crœsus, his son by an Ionian wife. His tomb was one of the architectural

wonders of that day, and only surpassed by the edifices of Egypt and

Babylon.

(M210) Crœsus made war on the Asiatic Greeks, and as the twelve Ionian

cities did not co-operate with any effect, they were subdued. He extended

his conquests over Asia Minor, until he had conquered the Phrygians,

Mysians, and other nations, and created a great empire, of which Sardia

was the capital. The treasures lie amassed exceeded any thing before known

to the Greeks, though inferior to the treasures accumulated at Susa and

other Persian capitals when Alexander conquered the East.

But the Lydian monarchy under Crœsus was soon absorbed in the Persian

empire, together with the cities of the Ionian Greeks, as has been

narrated.

(M211) But there was another power intimately connected with the kingdom

of Judea,—the Phœnician, which furnished Solomon artists and timber for

his famous temple. We close this chapter with a brief notice of the

greatest merchants of the ancient world, the Phœnicians.

(M212) They belonged, as well as the Assyrians, to the Semitic or

Syro-Arabian family, comprising, besides, the Syrians, Jews, Arabians, and

in part the Abyssinians. They were at a very early period a trading and

mercantile nation, and the variegated robes and golden ornaments

fabricated at Sidon were prized by the Homeric heroes. They habitually

traversed the Ægean Sea, and formed settlements on its islands.

(M213) The Phœnician towns occupied a narrow slip of the coast of Syria

and Palestine, about one hundred and twenty miles in length, and generally

about twenty in breadth—between Mount Libanus and the sea, Aradus was the

northernmost, and Tyre the southernmost city. Between these were situated

Sidon, Berytus, Tripolis, and Byblus. Within this confined territory was

concentrated a greater degree of commercial wealth and enterprise, also of

manufacturing skill, than could be found in the other parts of the world

at the time. Each town was an independent community, having its own

surrounding territory, and political constitution and hereditary prince.

Tyre was a sort of presiding city, having a controlling political power

over the other cities. Mount Libanus, or Lebanon, touched the sea along

the Phœnician coast, and furnished abundant supplies for ship-building.

(M214) The great Phœnician deity was Melkarth, whom the Greeks called

Hercules, to whom a splendid temple was erected at Tyre, coeval, perhaps,

with the foundation of the city two thousand three hundred years before

the time of Herodotus. In the year 700 B.C., the Phœnicians seemed to have

reached their culminating power, and they had colonies in Africa, Sicily,

Sardinia, and Spain. Carthage, Utica, and Gades were all flourishing

cities before the first Olympiad. The commerce of the Phœnicians extended

through the Red Sea and the coast of Arabia in the time of Solomon. They

furnished the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Persians with the varied

productions of other countries at a very remote period.

(M215) The most ancient colonies were Utica and Carthage, built in what is

now called the gulf of Tunis; and Cades, now Cadiz, was prosperous one

thousand years before the Christian era. The enterprising mariners of Tyre

coasted beyond the pillars of Hercules without ever losing sight of land.

The extreme productiveness of the southern region of Spain in the precious

metals tempted the merchants to that distant country. But Carthage was by

far the most important centre for Tyrian trade, and became the mistress of

a large number of dependent cities.

When Psammetichus relaxed the jealous exclusion of ships from the mouth of

the Nile, the incitements to traffic were greatly increased, and the

Phœnicians, as well as Ionian merchants, visited Egypt. But the Phœnicians

were jealous of rivals in profitable commerce, and concealed their tracks,

and magnified the dangers of the sea. About the year 600 B.C., they had

circumnavigated Africa, starting from the Red Sea, and going round the

Cape of Good Hope to Gades, and from thence returning by the Nile.

(M216) It would seem that Nechos, king of Egypt, anxious to procure a

water communication between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, began

digging a canal from one to the other. In the prosecution of this project

he dispatched Phœnicians on an experimental voyage round Libya, which was

accomplished, in three years. The mariners landed in the autumn, and

remained long enough to plant corn and raise a crop for their supplies.

They reached Egypt through the Straits of Gibraltar, and recounted a tale,

which, says Herodotus, “others may believe it if they choose, but I can

not believe, that in sailing round Libya, they had the sun on their right

and—to the north.” In going round Africa they had no occasion to lose

sight of land, and their vessels were amply stored. The voyage, however,

was regarded as desperate and unprofitable, and was not repeated.

Besides the trade which the Phœnicians carried on along the coasts, they

had an extensive commerce in the interior of Asia. But we do not read of

any great characters who arrested the attention of their own age or

succeeding ages, Phœnician history is barren in political changes and

great historical characters, as is that of Carthage till the Roman wars.

(M217) Between the years 700 and 530 B.C., there was a great decline of

Phœnician power, which was succeeded by the rise of the Greek maritime

cities. Nebuchadnezzar reduced the Phœnician cities to the same dependence

that the Ionian cities were reduced by Crœsus and Cyrus. The opening of

the Nile to the Grecian commerce contributed to the decline of Phœnicia.

But to this country the Greeks owed the alphabet and the first standard of

weights and measures.

(M218) Carthage, founded 819 B.C., by Dido, had a flourishing commerce in

the sixth century before Christ, and also commenced, at this time, their

encroachments in Sicily, which led to wars for two hundred and fifty years

with the Greek settlements. It contained, it is said, at one time, seven

hundred thousand people. But a further notice of their great city is

reserved until allusion is made to the Punic wars which the Romans waged

with this powerful State.

CHAPTER XI.

JEWISH HISTORY FROM THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY TO THE BIRTH OF CHRIST.—THE

HIGH PRIESTS AND THE ASMONEAN AND IDUMEAN KINGS.

(M219) We have seen how the ten tribes were carried captive to Assyria, on

the fall of Samaria, by Shalmanezer, B.C., 721. From that time history

loses sight of the ten tribes, as a distinct people. They were probably

absorbed with the nations among whom they settled, although imagination

has loved to follow them into inaccessible regions where they await their

final restoration. But there are no reliable facts which justify this

conclusion. They may have been the ancestors of the Christian converts

afterward found among the Nestorians. They may have retained in the East,

to a certain extent, some of their old institutions. But nothing is known

with certainty. All is vain conjecture respecting their ultimate fortunes.

(M220) The Jews of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin never entirely

departed from their ancient faith, and their monarchs reigned in regular

succession till the captivity of the family of David. They were not

carried to Babylon for one hundred and twenty-three years after the

dispersion of the ten tribes, B.C. 598.

(M221) During the captivity, the Jews still remained a separate people,

governed by their own law and religion. It is supposed that they were

rather colonists than captives, and were allowed to dwell together in

considerable bodies—that they were not sold as slaves, and by degrees

became possessed of considerable wealth. What region, from time

immemorial, has not witnessed their thrift and their love of money? Well

may a Jew say, as well as a Greek, “_Quæ __ regio in terris nostri non

plena laboris._” Taking the advice of Jeremiah they built houses, planted

gardens, and submitted to their fate, even if they bewailed it “by the

rivers of Babylon,” in such sad contrast to their old mountain homes. They

had the free enjoyment of their religion, and were subjected to no general

and grievous religious persecutions. And some of their noble youth, like

Daniel, were treated with great distinction during the captivity. Daniel

had been transported to Babylon before Jerusalem fell, as a hostage, among

others, of the fidelity of their king. These young men, from the highest

Jewish families, were educated in all the knowledge of the Babylonians, as

Joseph had been in Egyptian wisdom. They were the equals of the Chaldean

priests in knowledge of astronomy, divination, and the interpretation of

dreams. And though these young hostages were maintained at the public

expense, and perhaps in the royal palaces, they remembered their

distressed countrymen, and lived on the simplest fare. It was as an

interpreter of dreams that Daniel maintained his influence in the

Babylonian court. Twice was he summoned by Nebuchadnezzar, and once by

Belshazzar to interpret the handwriting on the wall. And under the Persian

monarch, when Babylon fell, Daniel became a vizier, or satrap, with great

dignity and power.

(M222) When the seventy years’ captivity, which Jeremiah had predicted,

came to an end, the empire of the Medes and Persians was in the hands of

Cyrus, under whose sway he enjoyed the same favor and rank that he did

under Darius, or any of the Babylonian princes. The miraculous deliverance

of this great man from the lion’s den, into which he had been thrown from

the intrigues of his enemies and the unalterable law of the Medes,

resulted in a renewed exaltation. Josephus ascribes to Daniel one of the

noblest and most interesting characters in Jewish history, a great skill

in architecture, and it is to him that the splendid mausoleum at Ecbatana

is attributed. But Daniel, with all his honors, was not corrupted, and it

was probably through his influence, as a grand vizier, that the exiled

Jews obtained from Cyrus the decree which restored them to their beloved

land.

(M223) The number of the returned Jews, under Zerubbabel, a descendant of

the kings of Judah, were forty-two thousand three hundred and sixty men—a

great and joyful caravan—but small in number compared with the Israelites

who departed from Egypt with Moses. On their arrival in their native land,

they were joined by great numbers of the common people who had remained.

They bore with them the sacred vessels of the temple, which Cyrus

generously restored. They arrived in the spring of the year B.C. 536, and

immediately made preparations for the restoration of the temple; not under

those circumstances which enabled Solomon to concentrate the wealth of

Western Asia, but under great discouragements and the pressure of poverty.

The temple was built on the old foundation, but was not completed till the

sixth year of Darius Hystaspes, B.C. 515, and then without the ancient

splendor.

(M224) It was dedicated with great joy and magnificence, but the sacrifice

of one hundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs, and twelve

goats, formed a sad contrast to the hecatombs which Solomon had offered.

Nothing else of importance marked the history of the dependent,

impoverished, and humiliated Jews, who had returned to the country of

their ancestors during the reign of Darius Hystaspes.

(M225) It was under his successor, Xerxes, he who commanded the Hellespont

to be scourged—that mad, luxurious, effeminated monarch, who is called in

Scripture Ahasuerus,—that Mordecai figured in the court of Persia, and

Esther was exalted to the throne itself. It was in the seventh year of his

reign that this inglorious king returned, discomfited, from the invasion

of Greece. Abandoning himself to the pleasures of his harem, he marries

the Jewess maiden, who is the instrument, under Providence, of averting

the greatest calamity with which the Jews were ever threatened. Haman, a

descendant of the Amalekitish kings, is the favorite minister and grand

vizier of the Persian monarch. Offended with Mordecai, his rival in

imperial favor, the cousin of the queen, he intrigues for the wholesale

slaughter of the Jews wherever they were to be found, promising the king

ten thousand talents of silver from the confiscation of Jewish property,

and which the king needed, impoverished by his unsuccessful expedition

into Greece. He thus obtains a decree from Ahasuerus for the general

massacre of the Jewish nation, in all the provinces of the empire, of

which Judea was one. The Jews are in the utmost consternation, and look to

Mordecai. His hope is based on Esther, the queen, who might soften, by her

fascinations, the heart of the king. She assumes the responsibility of

saving her nation at the peril of her own life—a deed of not extraordinary

self-devotion, but requiring extraordinary tact. What anxiety must have

pressed the soul of that Jewish woman in the task she undertook! What a

responsibility on her unaided shoulders? But she dissembles her grief, her

fear, her anxiety, and appears before the king radiant in beauty and

loveliness. The golden sceptre is extended to her by her weak and cruel

husband, though arrayed in the pomp and power of an Oriental monarch,

before whom all bent the knee, and to whom, even in his folly, he appears

as demigod. She does not venture to tell the king her wishes. The stake is

too great. She merely invites him to a grand banquet, with his minister

Haman. Both king and minister are ensnared by the cautious queen, and the

result is the disgrace of Haman, the elevation of Mordecai, and the

deliverance of the Jews from the fatal sentence—not a perfect deliverance,

for the decree could not be changed, but the Jews were warned and allowed

to defend themselves, and they slew seventy-five thousand of their

enemies. The act of vengeance was followed by the execution of the ten

sons of Haman, and Mordecai became the real governor of Persia. We see in

this story the caprice which governed the actions, in general, of Oriental

kings, and their own slavery to their favorite wives. The charms of a

woman effect, for evil or good, what conscience, and reason, and policy,

and wisdom united can not do. Esther is justly a favorite with the

Christian and Jewish world; but Vashti, the proud queen who, with true

woman’s dignity, refuses to grace with her presence the saturnalia of an

intoxicated monarch, is also entitled to our esteem, although she paid the

penalty of disobedience; and the foolish edict which the king promulgated,

that all women should implicitly obey their husbands, seems to indicate

that unconditional obedience was not the custom of the Persian women.

(M226) The reign of Artaxerxes, the successor of Xerxes, was favorable to

the Jews, for Judea was a province of the Persian empire. In the seventh

year of his reign, B.C. 458, a new migration of Jews from Babylonia took

place, headed by Ezra, a man of high rank at the Persian court. He was

empowered to make a collection among the Jews of Babylonia for the

adornment of the temple, and he came to Jerusalem laden with treasures. He

was, however, affected by the sight of a custom which had grown up, of

intermarriage of the Jews with adjacent tribes. He succeeded in causing

the foreign wives to be repudiated, and the old laws to be enforced which

separated the Jews from all other nations. And it is probably this stern

law, which prevents the Jews from marriage with foreigners, that has

preserved their nationality, in all their wanderings and misfortunes, more

than any other one cause.

(M227) A renewed commission granted to Nehemiah, B.C. 445, resulted in a

fresh immigration of Jews to Palestine, in spite of all the opposition

which the Samaritan and other nations made. Nehemiah was cup-bearer to the

Persian king, and devoted to the Persian interests. At that time Persia

had suffered a fatal blow at the battle of Cindus, and among the

humiliating articles of peace with the Athenian admiral was the

stipulation that the Persians should not advance within three days’

journey of the sea. Jerusalem being at this distance, was an important

post to hold, and the Persian court saw the wisdom of intrusting its

defense to faithful allies. In spite of all obstacles, Nehemiah succeeded,

in fifty-two days, in restoring the old walls and fortifications; the

whole population, of every rank and order having devoted themselves to the

work. Moreover, contributions for the temple continued to flow into the

treasury of a once opulent, but now impoverished and decimated people.

After providing for the security of the capital and the adornment of the

temple, the leaders of the nation turned their attention to the

compilation of the sacred books and the restoration of religion. Many

important literary works had been lost during their captivity, including

the work of Solomon on national history, and the ancient book of Jasher.

But the books on the law, the historical books, the prophetic writings,

the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Songs of Solomon, were

collected and copied. The law, revised and corrected, was publicly read by

Ezra; the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated with considerable splendor;

and a renewed covenant was made by the people to keep the law, to observe

the Sabbath, to avoid idolatry, and abstain from intermarriage with

strangers. The Jewish constitution was restored, and Nehemiah, a Persian

satrap in reality, lived in a state of considerable magnificence,

entertaining the chief leaders of the nation, and reforming all disorders.

Jerusalem gradually regained political importance, while the country of

the ten tribes, though filled with people, continued to be the seat of

idolaters.

(M228) On the death of Nehemiah, B.C. 415, the history of the Jews becomes

obscure, and we catch only scattered glimpses of the state of the country,

till the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes, B.C. 175, when the Syrian

monarch had erected a new kingdom on the ruins of the Persian empire. For

more than two centuries, when the Greeks and Romans flourished, Jewish

history is a blank, with here and there some scattered notices and

traditions which Josephus has recorded. The Jews, living in vassalage to

the successors of Alexander during this interval, had become animated by a

martial spirit, and the Maccabaic wars elevated them into sufficient

importance to become allies of Rome—the new conquering power, destined to

subdue the world. During this period the Jewish character assumed the

hard, stubborn, exclusive cast which it has ever since maintained—an

intense hostility to polytheism and all Gentile influences. The Jewish

Scriptures took their present shape, and the Apocryphal books came to

light. The sects of the Jews arose, like Pharisees and Sadducees, and

religious and political parties exhibited an unwonted fierceness and

intolerance. While the Greeks and Romans were absorbed in wars, the Jews

perfected their peculiar economy, and grew again into political

importance. The country, by means of irrigation and cultivation, became

populous and fertile, and poetry and the arts regained their sway. The

people took but little interest in the political convulsions of

neighboring nations, and devoted themselves quietly to the development of

their own resources. The captivity had cured them of war, of idolatry, and

warlike expeditions.

(M229) During this two hundred years of obscurity, but real growth,

unnoticed and unknown by other nations, a new capital had arisen in Egypt;

Alexandria became a great mart of commerce, and the seat of revived

Grecian learning. The sway of the Ptolemaic kings, Grecian in origin, was

favorable to letters, and to arts. The Jews settled in their magnificent

city, translated their Scriptures into Greek, and cultivated the Greek

philosophy.

(M230) Meanwhile the internal government of the Jews fell into the hands

of the high priests—the Persian governors exercising only a general

superintendence. At length the country, once again favored, was subjected

to the invasion of Alexander. After the fall of Tyre, the conqueror

advanced to Gaza, and totally destroyed it. He then approached Jerusalem,

in fealty to Persia. The high priest made no resistance, but went forth in

his pontifical robes, followed by the people in white garments, to meet

the mighty warrior. Alexander, probably encouraged by the prophesies of

Daniel, as explained by the high priest, did no harm to the city or

nation, but offered gifts, and, as tradition asserts, even worshiped the

God of the Jews. On the conquest of Persia, Judea came into the possession

of Laomedon, one of the generals of Alexander, B.C. 321. On his defeat by

Ptolemy, another general, to whom Egypt had fallen as his share, one

hundred thousand Jews were carried captive to Alexandria, where they

settled and learned the Greek language. The country continued to be

convulsed by the wars between the generals of Alexander, and fell into the

hands, alternately, of the Syrian and Egyptian kings—successors of the

generals of the great conqueror.

(M231) On the establishment of the Syro-Grecian kingdom by Seleucus,

Antioch, the capital, became a great city, and the rival of Alexandria.

Syria, no longer a satrapy of Persia, became a powerful monarchy, and

Judea became a prey to the armies of this ambitious State in its warfare

with Egypt, and was alternately the vassal of each—Syria and Egypt. Under

the government of the first three Ptolemies—those enlightened and

magnificent princes, Soter, Philadelphus, and Evergetes, the Jews were

protected, both at home and in Alexandria, and their country enjoyed peace

and prosperity, until the ambition of Antiochus the Great again plunged

the nation in difficulties. He had seized Judea, which was then a province

of the Egyptian kings, but was defeated by Ptolemy Philopator. This

monarch made sumptuous presents to the temple, and even ventured to enter

the sanctuary, but was prevented by the high priest. Although filled with

fear in view of the tumult which this act provoked, he henceforth hated

and persecuted the Jews. Under his successor, Judea was again invaded by

Antiochus, and again was Jerusalem wrested from his grasp by Scopas, the

Egyptian general. Defeated, however, near the source of the Jordan, the

country fell into the hands of Antiochus, who was regarded as a deliverer.

And it continued to be subject to the kings of Syria, until, with

Jerusalem, it suffered calamities scarcely inferior to those inflicted by

the Babylonians.

(M232) It is difficult to trace, with any satisfaction, the internal

government of the Jews during the two hundred years when the chief power

was in the hands of the high priests—this period marked by the wars

between Syria and Egypt, or rather between the successors of the generals

of Alexander. The government of the high priests at Jerusalem was not

exempt from those disgraceful outrages which occasionally have marked all

the governments of the world—whether in the hands of kings, or in an

oligarchy of nobles and priests. Nehemiah had expelled from Jerusalem,

Manasseh, the son of Jehoiada, who succeeded Eliashib in the high

priesthood, on account of his unlawful marriage with a stranger. Manasseh,

invited to Samaria by the father of the woman he had married, became high

priest of the temple on Mount Gerizim, and thus perpetuated the schism

between the two nations. Before the conquests of Alexander, while the

country was under the dominion of Persia, a high priest by the name of

John murdered his brother Jesus within the precincts of the sanctuary,

which crime was punished by the Persian governor, by a heavy fine imposed

upon the whole nation. Jaddua was the high priest in the time of

Alexander, and by his dignity and tact won over the conqueror of Asia.

Onias succeeded Jaddua, and ruled for twenty-one years, and he was

succeeded by Simon the Just, a pontiff on whose administration Jewish

tradition dwells with delight. Simon was succeeded by his uncles, Eleazar

and Manasseh, and they by Onias II., son of Simon, through whose

misconduct, or indolence, in omitting the customary tribute to the

Egyptian king, came near involving the country in fresh

calamities—averted, however, by his nephew Joseph, who pacified the

Egyptian court, and obtained the former generalship of the revenues of

Judea, Samaria, and Phœnicia, which he enjoyed to the time of Antiochus

the Great. Onias II. was succeeded by his son Simon, under whose

pontificate the Egyptian monarch was prevented from entering the temple,

and he by Onias III., under whose rule a feud took place with the sons of

Joseph, disgraced by murders, which called for the interposition of the

Syrian king, who then possessed Judea. Joshua, or Jason, by bribery,

obtained the pontificate, but he allowed the temple worship to fall into

disuse, and was even alienated from the Jewish faith by his intimacy with

the Syrian court. He was outbidden in his high office by Onias, his

brother, who was disgraced by savage passions, and who robbed the temple

of its golden vessels. The people, indignant, rose in a tumult, and slew

his brother, Lysimachus. Meanwhile, Jason, the dispossessed high priest,

recovered his authority, and shut up Onias, or Menelaus, as he called

himself, in a castle. This was interpreted by Antiochus as an

insurrection, and he visited on Jerusalem a terrible penalty—slaughtering

forty thousand of the people, and seizing as many more for slaves. He then

abolished the temple services, seized all the sacred vessels, collected

spoil to the amount of eighteen hundred talents, defiled the altar by the

sacrifice of a sow, and suppressed every sign of Jewish independence. He

meditated the complete extirpation of the Jewish religion, dismantled the

capitol, harassed the country people, and inflicted unprecedented

barbarities. The temple itself was dedicated to Jupiter Olympius, and the

reluctant and miserable Jews were forced to join in all the rites of pagan

worship, including the bacchanalia, which mocked the virtue of the older

Romans.

(M233) From this degradation and slavery the Jews were rescued by a line

of heroes whom God raised up—the Asmoneans, or Maccabees. The head of this

heroic family was Mattathias, a man of priestly origin, living in the town

of Modin, commanding a view of the sea—an old man of wealth and influence

who refused to depart from the faith of his fathers, while most of the

nation had relapsed into the paganism of the Greeks. He slew with his own

hand an apostate Jew, who offered sacrifice to a pagan deity, and then

killed the royal commissioner, Apelles, whom Antiochus had sent to enforce

his edicts. The heroic old man, who resembled William Tell, in his mission

and character, summoned his countrymen, who adhered to the old faith, and

intrenched himself in the mountains, and headed a vigorous revolt against

the Syrian power, even fighting on the Sabbath day. The ranks of the

insurrectionists were gradually filled with those who were still zealous

for the law, or inspired with patriotic desires for independence.

Mattathias was prospered, making successful raids from his mountain

fastnesses, destroying heathen altars, and punishing apostate Jews. Two

sects joined his standard with peculiar ardor—the Zadikim, who observed

the written law of Moses, from whom the Sadducees of later times sprang,

and the more zealous and austere Chasidim, who added to the law the

traditions of the elders, from whom the Pharisees came.

Old men are ill suited to conduct military expeditions when great fatigue

and privation are required, and the aged Mattathias sank under the weight

which he had so nobly supported, and bequeathed his power to Judas, the

most valiant of his sons.

(M234) This remarkable man, scarcely inferior to Joshua and David in

military genius and heroic qualities, added prudence and discretion to

personal bravery. When his followers had gained experience and courage by

various gallant adventures, he led them openly against his enemies. The

governor of Samaria, Apollonius, was the first whom he encountered, and

whom he routed and slew. Seron, the deputy governor of Cœlesyria, sought

to redeem the disgrace of the Syrian arms; but he also was defeated at the

pass of Bethoron. At the urgent solicitation of Philip, governor of

Jerusalem, Antiochus then sent a strong force of forty thousand foot and

seven thousand horse to subdue the insurgents, under the command of

Ptolemy Macron. Judas, to resist these forces, had six thousand men; but

he relied on the God of Israel, as his fathers had done in the early ages

of Jewish history, and in a sudden attack he totally routed a large

detachment of the main army, under Gorgias, and spoiled their camp. He

then defeated another force beyond the Jordan, and the general fled in the

disguise of a slave, to Antioch. Thus closed a triumphant campaign.

(M235) The next year, Lysias, the lieutenant-general of Antiochus, invaded

Judea with a large force of sixty-five thousand men. Judas met it with ten

thousand, and gained a brilliant victory, which proved decisive, and which

led to the re-establishment of the Jewish power at Jerusalem. Judas

fortified the city and the temple, and assumed the offensive, and

recovered, one after another, the cities which had fallen under the

dominion of Syria. In the mean time, Antiochus, the bitterest enemy which

the Jews ever had, died miserably in Persia—the most powerful of all the

Syrian kings.

(M236) On the accession of Antiochus Eupater, Lysias again attempted the

subjugation of Judea, This time he advanced with one hundred thousand

foot, twenty thousand horse, and thirty-two elephants. But this large

force wasted away in an unsuccessful attack on Jerusalem, harassed by the

soldiers of the Maccabees. A treaty of peace was concluded, by which full

liberty of worship was granted to the Jews, with permission to be ruled by

their own laws.

(M237) Demetrius, the lawful heir of Antiochus the Great, had been

detained at Rome as a hostage, in consequence of which Antiochus Eupater

had usurped his throne. Escaping from Rome, he overpowered his enemies and

recovered his kingdom. But he was even more hostile to the Jews than his

predecessor, and succeeded in imposing a high priest on the nation

friendly to his interests. His cruelties and crimes once more aroused the

Jews to resistance, and Judas gained another decisive victory, and

Nicanor, the Syrian general, was slain.

(M238) Judas then adopted a policy which was pregnant with important

consequences. He formed a league with the Romans, then bent on the

conquest of the East. The Roman senate readily entered into a coalition

with the weaker State, in accordance with its uniform custom of protecting

those whom they ultimately absorbed in their vast empire: but scarcely was

the treaty ratified when the gallant Judas died, leaving the defense of

his country to his brothers, B.C. 161.

(M239) Jonathan, on whom the leadership fell, found the forces under his

control disheartened by the tyranny of the high priest, Alcimus, whom the

nation had accepted. Leagued with Bacchides, the Syrian general, the high

priest had every thing his own way, until Jonathan, emerging from his

retreat, delivered his countrymen once again, and another peace was made.

Several years then passed in tranquillity, Jonathan being master of Judea.

A revolution in Syria added to his power, and his brother Simon was made

captain-general of all the country from Tyre to Egypt. Jonathan,

unfortunately, was taken in siege, and the leadership of the nation

devolved upon Simon, the last of this heroic family. He ruled with great

wisdom, consolidated his power, strengthened his alliance with Rome,

repaired Jerusalem, and restored the peace of the country. He was, on a

present of one thousand pounds of gold to the Romans, decreed to be prince

of Judea, and taken under the protection of his powerful ally. But the

peace with Syria, from the new complications to which that kingdom was

subjected from rival aspirants to the throne, was broken in the old age of

Simon, and he was treacherously murdered, with his oldest son, Judas, at a

banquet in Jerusalem. The youngest son, John Hyrcanus, inherited the vigor

of his family, and was declared high priest, and sought to revenge the

murder of his father and brother. Still, a Syrian army overran the

country, and John Hyrcanus, shut up in Jerusalem, was reduced to great

extremities. A peace was finally made between him and the Syrian monarch,

Antiochus, by which Judea submitted to vassalage to the king of Syria. An

unfortunate expedition of Antiochus into Parthia enabled Hyrcanus once

again to throw off the Syrian yoke, and Judea regained its independence,

which it maintained until compelled to acknowledge the Roman power.

Hyrcanus was prospered in his reign, and destroyed the rival temple on

Mount Gerizim, while the temple of Jerusalem resumed its ancient dignity

and splendor.

(M240) At this period the Jews, who had settled in Alexandria, devoted

themselves to literature and philosophy in that liberal and elegant city,

and were allowed liberty of worship. But they became entangled in the

mazes of Grecian speculation, and lost much of their ancient spirit. By

compliance with the opinions and customs of the Greeks, they reached great

honors and distinction, and even high posts in the army.

(M241) Hyrcanus, supreme in Judea, now reduced Samaria and Idumea, and was

only troubled by the conflicting parties of Pharisees and Sadducees, whose

quarrels agitated the State. He joined the party of the Sadducees, who

asserted free will, and denied the more orthodox doctrines of the

Pharisees, a kind of epicureans, opposed to severities and the authority

of traditions. It is one proof of the advance of the Hebrew mind over the

simplicity of former ages, that the State could be agitated by theological

and philosophical questions, like the States of Greece in their highest

development.

(M242) Hyrcanus reigned twenty-nine years, and was succeeded by his son,

Aristobulus, B.C. 106. His brief and inglorious reign was disgraced by his

starving to death his mother in a dungeon, and imprisoning his three

brothers, and assassinating a fourth, Antigonus, who was a victorious

general. This prince died in an agony of remorse and horror on the spot

where his brother was assassinated.

Alexander Jannaus succeeded to the throne of the Asmonean princes, who

possessed the whole region of Palestine, except the port of Ptolemais, and

the city of Gaza. In an attempt to recover the former he was signally

defeated, and came near losing his throne. He was more successful in his

attack on Gaza, which finally surrendered, after Alexander had incurred

immense losses.

(M243) While this priest-king was celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles, a

meeting, incited by the Pharisaic party, broke out, which resulted in the

slaughter of ten thousand people. While invading the country to the east

of the Jordan, the rebellion was renewed, and the nation, for six years,

suffered all the evils of civil war. Routed in a battle with the Syrian

monarch, whose aid the insurgents had invoked, he was obliged to flee to

the mountains; but recovering his authority, at the head of sixty thousand

men,—which shows the power of Judea at this period,—he marched upon

Jerusalem, and inflicted a terrible vengeance, eight hundred men being

publicly crucified, and eight thousand more forced to abandon the city.

Under his iron sway, the country recovered its political importance, for

his kingdom comprised the greater part of Palestine. He died, after a

turbulent reign of twenty-seven years, B.C. 77, invoking his queen to

throw herself into the arms of the Pharisaic party, which advice she

followed, as it was the most powerful and popular.

(M244) The high priesthood devolved on his eldest son, Hyrcanus II., while

the reins of government were held by his queen, Alexandra. She reigned

vigorously and prosperously for nine years, punishing the murderers of the

eight hundred Pharisees who had been executed.

Hyrcanus was not equal to his task amid the bitterness of party strife.

His brother Aristobulus, belonging to the party of the Sadducees, and who

had taken Damascus, was popular with the people, and compelled his elder

brother to abdicate in his favor, and an end came to Pharisaic rule.

(M245) But now another family appears upon the stage, which ultimately

wrested the crown from the Asmodean princes. Antipater, a noble Idumean,

was the chief minister of the feeble Hyrcanus. He incited, from motives of

ambition, the deposed prince to reassert his rights, and influenced by his

counsels, he fled to Aretas, the king of Arabia, whose capital, Petra, had

become a great commercial emporium. Aretas, Antipater, and Hyrcanus,

marched with an army of fifty thousand men against Aristobulus, who was

defeated, and fled to Jerusalem.

(M246) At this time Pompey was pursuing his career of conquests in the

East, and both parties invoked his interference, and both offered enormous

bribes. This powerful Roman was then at Damascus, receiving the homage and

tribute of Oriental kings. The Egyptian monarch sent as a present a crown

worth four thousand pieces of gold. Aristobulus, in command of the riches

of the temple, sent a golden vine worth five hundred talents. Pompey,

intent on the conquest of Arabia, made no decision; but, having succeeded

in his object, assumed a tone of haughtiness irreconcilable with the

independence of Judea. Aristobulus, patriotic yet vacillating,—“too

high-minded to yield, too weak to resist,”—fled to Jerusalem and prepared

for resistance.

(M247) Pompey approached the capital, weakened by those everlasting

divisions to which the latter Jews were subjected by the zeal of their

religious disputes. The city fell, after a brave defense of three months,

and might not have fallen had the Jews been willing to abate from the

rigid observance of the Sabbath, during which the Romans prepared for

assault. Pompey demolished the fortifications of the city, and exacted

tribute, but spared the treasures of the temple which he profaned by his

heathen presence. He nominated Hyrcanus to the priesthood, but withheld

the royal diadem, and limited the dominions of Hyrcanus to Judea. He took

Aristobulus to Rome to grace his triumph.

(M248) But he contrived to escape, and, with his son Alexander, again

renewed the civil strife; but taken prisoner, he was again sent as a

captive to the “eternal city.” Gabinius, the Roman general—for Hyrcanus

had invoked the aid of the Romans—now deprived the high priest of the

royal authority, and reorganized the whole government of Judea;

establishing five independent Sanhedrims in the principal cities, after

the form of the great Sanhedrim, which had existed since the captivity.

This form lasted until Julius Cæsar reinvested Hyrcanus with the supreme

dignity.

(M249) Jerusalem was now exposed to the rapacity of the Roman generals who

really governed the country. Crassus plundered all that Pompey spared. He

took from the temple ten thousand talents—about ten million dollars when

gold and silver had vastly greater value than in our times. These vast

sums had been accumulated from the contributions of Jews scattered over

the world—some of whom were immensely wealthy.

(M250) Aristobulus and his son Alexander were assassinated during the

great civil war between the partisans of Cæsar and Pompey. After the fall

of the latter. Cæsar confirmed Hyrcanus in the high priesthood, and

allowed him to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. But Antipater, presuming on

the incapacity of Hyrcanus, renewed his ambitious intrigues, and contrived

to make his son, Phasael, governor of Jerusalem, and Herod, a second son,

governor of Galilee.

(M251) Herod developed great talents, and waited for his time. After the

battle of Philippi Herod made acceptable offerings to the conquering

party, and received the crown of Judea, which had been recently ravaged by

the Parthians, through the intrigues of Antigonas, the surviving son of

Aristobulus. By his marriage with Mariamne, of the royal line of the

Asmoneans, he cemented the power he had won by the sword and the favor of

Rome. He was the last of the independent sovereigns of Palestine. He

reigned tyrannically, and was guilty of great crimes, having caused the

death of the aged Hyrcanus, and the imprisonment and execution of his wife

on a foul suspicion. He paid the same court to Augustus that he did to

Antony, and was confirmed in the possession of his kingdom. The last of

the line of the Asmonæans had perished on the scaffold, beautiful,

innocent, and proud, the object of a boundless passion to a tyrant who

sacrificed her to a still greater one—suspicion. Alternating between his

love and resentment, Herod sank into a violent fit of remorse, for he had

more or less concern in the murder of the father, the grandfather, the

brother, and the uncle of his beautiful and imperious wife. At all times,

even amid the glories of his palace, he was haunted with the image of the

wife he had destroyed, and loved with passionate ardor. He burst forth in

tears, he tried every diversion, banquets and revels, solitude and

labor—still the murdered Mariamne is ever present to his excited

imagination. He settles down in a fixed and indelible gloom, and his stern

nature sought cruelty and bloodshed. His public administration was, on the

whole, favorable to the peace and happiness of the country, although he

introduced the games and the theatres in which the Romans sought their

greatest pleasures. For these innovations he was exposed to incessant

dangers; but he surmounted them all by his vigilance and energy. He

rebuilt Samaria, and erected palaces. But his greatest work was the

building of Cæsarea—a city of palaces and theatres. His policy of reducing

Judea to a mere province of Rome was not pleasing to his subjects, and he

was suspected of a design of heathenizing the nation. Neither his

munificence nor severities could suppress the murmurs of an indignant

people. The undisguised hostility of the nation prompted him to an act of

policy by which he hoped to conciliate it forever. The pride and glory of

the Jews was their temple. This Herod determined to rebuild with

extraordinary splendor, so as to approach its magnificence in the time of

Solomon. He removed the old structure, dilapidated by the sieges, and

violence, and wear of five hundred years; and the new edifice gradually

arose, glittering with gold, and imposing with marble pinnacles.

(M252) But in spite of all his magnificent public works, whether to

gratify the pride of his people, or his own vanity—in spite of his efforts

to develop the resources of the country over which he ruled by the favor

of Rome—in spite of his talents and energies—one of the most able of the

monarchs who had sat on the throne of Judea, he was obnoxious to his

subjects for his cruelties, and his sympathy with paganism, and he was

visited in his latter days by a terrible disorder which racked his body

with pain, and inflamed his soul with suspicions, while his court was

distracted with cabals from his own family, which poisoned his life, and

led him to perpetrate unnatural cruelties. He had already executed two

favorite sons, by Mariamne whom he loved, all from court intrigues and

jealousy, and he then executed his son and heir, by Doris, his first wife,

whom he had divorced to marry Mariamne, and under circumstances so cruel

that Augustus remarked that he had rather be one of his swine than one of

his sons. Among other atrocities, he had ordered the massacre of the

Innocents to prevent any one to be born “as king of the Jews.” His last

act was to give the fatal mandate for the execution of his son Antipater,

whom he hoped to make his heir, and then almost immediately expired in

agonies, detested by the nation, and leaving a name as infamous as that of

Ahab, B.C. 4.

(M253) Herod had married ten wives, and left a numerous family. By his

will, he designated the sons of Malthace, his sixth wife, and a Samaritan,

as his successors. These were Archelaus, Antipas, and Olympias. The first

inherited Idumea, Samaria, and Judea; to the second were assigned Galilee

and Peræa. Archelaus at once assumed the government at Jerusalem; and

after he had given his father a magnificent funeral, and the people a

funeral banquet, he entered the temple, seated himself on a golden throne,

and made, as is usual with monarchs, a conciliatory speech, promising

reform and alleviations from taxes and oppression. But even this did not

prevent one of those disgraceful seditions which have ever marked the

people of Jerusalem, in which three thousand were slain, caused by

religious animosities. After quelling the tumult by the military, he set

out for Rome, to secure his confirmation to the throne. He encountered

opposition from various intrigues by his own family, and the caprice of

the emperor. His younger brother, Antipas, also went to Rome to support

his claim to the throne by virtue of a former will. While the cause of the

royal litigants was being settled in the supreme tribunal of the civilized

world, new disturbances broke out in Judea, caused by the rapacities of

Sabinus, the Roman procurator of Syria. The whole country was in a state

of anarchy, and adventurers flocked from all quarters to assert their

claims in a nation that ardently looked forward to national independence,

or the rise of some conqueror who should restore the predicted glory of

the land now rent with civil feuds, and stained with fratricidal blood.

Varus, the prefect of Syria, attempted to restore order, and crucified

some two thousand ringleaders of the tumults. Five hundred Jews went to

Rome to petition for the restoration of their ancient constitution, and

the abolition of kingly rule.

(M254) At length the imperial edict confirmed the will of Herod, and

Archelaus was appointed to the sovereignty of Jerusalem, Idumea, and

Samaria, under the title of ethnarch; Herod Antipas obtained Galilee and

Peræa; Philip, the son of Herod and Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was made

tetrarch of Ituræa. Archelaus governed his dominions with such injustice

and cruelty, that he was deposed by the emperor, and Judea became a Roman

province. The sceptre departed finally from the family of David, of the

Asmonæans, and of Herod, and the kingdom sank into a district dependent on

the prefecture of Syria, though administered by a Roman governor.

CHAPTER XII.

THE ROMAN GOVERNORS.

(M255) The history of the Jews after the death of Herod is marked by the

greatest event in human annals. In four years after he expired in agonies

of pain and remorse, Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem, whose teachings

have changed the whole condition of the world, and will continue to change

all institutions and governments until the seed of the woman shall have

completely triumphed over all the wiles of the serpent. We can not,

however, enter upon the life or mission of the Saviour, or the feeble

beginnings of the early and persecuted Church which he founded, and which

is destined to go on from conquering to conquer. We return to the more

direct history of the Jewish nation until their capital fell into the

hands of Titus, and their political existence was annihilated.

(M256) They were now to be ruled by Roman governors—or by mere vassal

kings whom the Romans tolerated and protected. The first of these rulers

was P. Sulpicius Quirinus—a man of consular rank, who, as proconsul of

Syria, was responsible for the government of Judea, which was intrusted to

Coponius. He was succeeded by M. Ambivius, and he again by Annius Rufus. A

rapid succession of governors took place till Tiberius appointed Valerius

Gratus, who was kept in power eleven years, on the principle that a rapid

succession of rulers increased the oppression of the people, since every

new governor sought to be enriched. Tiberius was a tyrant, but a wise

emperor, and the affairs of the Roman world were never better administered

than during his reign. These provincial governors, like the Herodian

kings, appointed and removed the high priests, and left the internal

management of the city of Jerusalem to them. They generally resided

themselves at Cæsarea, to avoid the disputes of the Jewish sects, and the

tumults of the people.

(M257) Pontius Pilate succeeded Gratus A.D. 27,—under whose memorable rule

Jesus Christ was crucified and slain—a man cruel, stern, and reckless of

human life, but regardful of the peace and tranquillity of the province.

He sought to transfer the innocent criminal to the tribunal of Herod, to

whose jurisdiction he belonged as a Galilean, but yielded to the

importunities of the people, and left him at the mercy of the Jewish

priesthood.

The vigilant jealousy of popular commotion, and the reckless disregard of

human life, led to the recall of Pilate; but during the forty years which

had elapsed since the death of Herod, his sons had quietly reigned over

their respective provinces. Antipas at Sepphoris, the capital of Galilee,

and Philip beyond the Jordan. The latter prince was humane and just, and

died without issue, and his territory was annexed to Syria.

(M258) Herod Antipas was a different man. He seduced and married his niece

Herodias, wife of Herod Philip, daughter of Aristobolus, and granddaughter

of Mariamne, whom Herod the Great had sacrificed in jealousy—the last

scion of the Asmonæan princes. It was for her that John the Baptist was

put to death. But this marriage proved unfortunate, since it involved him

in difficulties with Aretas, king of Arabia, father of his first and

repudiated wife. He ended his days in exile at Lyons, having provoked the

jealousy or enmity of Caligula, the Roman emperor, through the intrigues

of Herod Agrippa, the brother of Herodias, and consequently, a grandson of

Herod the Great and Mariamne. The Herodian family, of Idumean origin,

never was free from disgraceful quarrels and jealousies and rivalries.

(M259) The dominions of Herod Antipas were transferred to Herod Agrippa,

who had already obtained from Caligula the tetrarchate of Ituræa, on the

death of Philip, with the title of king. The fortunes of this prince, in

whose veins flowed the blood of the Asmonæans and the Herodians, surpassed

in romance and vicissitude any recorded of Eastern princes; alternately a

fugitive and a favorite, a vagabond and a courtier, a pauper and a

spendthrift—according to the varied hatred and favor of the imperial

family at Rome. He had the good luck to be a friend of Caligula before the

death of Tiberius. When he ascended the throne of the Roman world, he took

his friend from prison and disgrace, and gave him a royal title and part

of the dominions of his ancestors.

(M260) Agrippa did all he could to avert the mad designs of Caligula of

securing religious worship as a deity from the Jews, and he was moderate

in his government and policy. On the death of the Roman tyrant, he

received from his successor Claudius the investiture of all the dominions

which belonged to Herod the Great. He reigned in great splendor,

respecting the national religion, observing the Mosaic law with great

exactness, and aiming at the favor of the people. He inherited the taste

of his great progenitor for palace building, and theatrical

representations. He greatly improved Jerusalem, and strengthened its

fortifications, and yet he was only a vassal king. He reigned by the favor

of Rome, on whom he was dependent, and whom he feared, like other kings

and princes of the earth, for the emperor was alone supreme.

(M261) Agrippa sullied his fair fame by being a persecutor of the

Christians, and died in the forty-fourth year of his age, having reigned

seven years over part of his dominions, and three over the whole of

Palestine. He died in extreme agony from internal pains, being “eaten of

worms.” He left one son, Agrippa, and three daughters, Drusilla, Berenice,

and Mariamne, the two first of whom married princes.

(M262) On his death Judea relapsed into a Roman province, his son,

Agrippa, being only seventeen years of age, and too young to manage such a

turbulent, unreasonable, and stiff-necked people as the Jews, rent by

perpetual feuds and party animosities, and which seem to have

characterized them ever since the captivity, when they renounced idolatry

forever.

(M263) What were these parties? For their opinions and struggles and

quarrels form no inconsiderable part of the internal history of the Jews,

both under the Asmonæan and Idumean dynasties.

(M264) The most powerful and numerous were the Pharisees, and most popular

with the nation. The origin of this famous sect is involved in obscurity,

but probably arose not long after the captivity. They were the orthodox

party. They clung to the Law of Moses in its most minute observances, and

to all the traditions of their religion. They were earnest, fierce,

intolerant, and proud. They believed in angels, and in immortality. They

were bold and heroic in war, and intractable and domineering in peace.

They were great zealots, devoted to proselytism. They were austere in

life, and despised all who were not. They were learned and decorous, and

pragmatical. Their dogmatism knew no respite or palliation. They were

predestinarians, and believed in the servitude of the will. They were seen

in public with ostentatious piety. They made long prayers, fasted with

rigor, scrupulously observed the Sabbath, and paid tithes to the cheapest

herbs. They assumed superiority in social circles, and always took the

uppermost seats in the synagogue. They displayed on their foreheads and

the hem of their garments, slips of parchment inscribed with sentences

from the law. They were regarded as models of virtue and excellence, but

were hypocrites in the observance of the weightier matters of justice and

equity. They were, of course, the most bitter adversaries of the faith

which Christ revealed, and were ever in the ranks of persecution. They

resembled the most austere of the Dominican monks in the Middle Ages. They

were the favorite teachers and guides of the people, whom they incited in

their various seditions. They were theologians who stood at the summit of

legal Judaism. “They fenced round their law hedges whereby its precepts

were guarded against any possible infringement.” And they contrived, by an

artful and technical interpretation, to find statutes which favored their

ends. They wrought out asceticism into a system, and observed the most

painful ceremonials—the ancestors of rigid monks; and they united a

specious casuistry, not unlike the Jesuits, to excuse the violation of the

_spirit_ of the law. They were a hierarchical caste, whose ambition was to

govern, and to govern by legal technicalities. They were utterly deficient

in the virtues of humility and toleration, and as such, peculiarly

offensive to the Great Teacher when he propounded the higher code of love

and forgiveness. Outwardly, however, they were the most respectable as

well as honorable men of the nation—dignified, decorous, and studious of

appearances.

(M265) The next great party was that of the Sadducees, who aimed to

restore the original Mosaic religion in its purity, and expunge every

thing which had been added by tradition. But they were deficient in a

profound sense of religion, denied the doctrine of immortality, and hence

all punishment in a future life. They made up for their denial of the

future by a rigid punishment of all crimes. They inculcated a belief of

Divine Providence by whom all crime was supposed to be avenged in this

world. The party was not so popular as that of their rivals, but embraced

men of high rank. In common with the Pharisees, they maintained the

strictness of the Jewish code, and professed great uprightness of morals.

They had, however, no true, deep religious life, and were cold and

heartless in their dispositions. They were mostly men of ease and wealth,

and satisfied with earthly enjoyments, and inclined to the epicureanism

which marked many of the Greek philosophers. Nor did they escape the

hypocrisy which disgraced the Pharisees, and their bitter opposition to

the truths of Christianity.

(M266) In addition to these two great parties which controlled the people,

were the Essenes. But they lived apart from men, in the deserts round the

Dead Sea, and dreaded cities as nurseries of vice. They allowed no women

to come within their settlements. They were recruited by strangers and

proselytes, who thought all pleasure to be a sin. They established a

community of goods, and prosecuted the desire of riches. They were clothed

in white garments which they never changed, and regulated their lives by

the severest forms. They abstained from animal food, and lived on roots

and bread. They worked and ate in silence, and observed the Sabbath with

great precision. They were great students, and were rigid in morals, and

believed in immortality. They abhorred oaths, and slavery, and idolatry.

They embraced the philosophy of the Orientals, and supposed that matter

was evil, and that mind was divine. They were mystics who reveled in the

pleasures of abstract contemplation. Their theosophy was sublime, but

Brahminical. Practically they were industrious, ascetic, and devout—the

precursors of those monks who fled from the abodes of man, and filled the

solitudes of Upper Egypt and Arabia and Palestine, the loftiest and most

misguided of the Christian sects in the second and third centuries, But

the Essenes had no direct influence over the people of Judea like the

Pharisees and Sadducees, except in encouraging obedience and charity.

(M267) All these sects were in a flourishing state on the death of

Agrippa. Judea was henceforth to be ruled directly by Roman governors.

Cuspius Fadus, Tiberius Alexander, Ventidius Cumanus, Felix Portius,

Festus Albinus, and Gessius Florus successively administered the affairs

of a discontented province. Their brief administrations were marked by

famines and tumults. King Agrippa, meanwhile, with mere nominal power,

resided in Jerusalem, in the palace of the Asmonæan princes, which stood

on Mount Zion, toward the temple. Robbers infested the country, and

murders and robbery were of constant occurrence. High priests were set up,

and dethroned. The people were oppressed by taxation and irritated by

pillage. Prodigies, wild and awful, filled the land with dread of

approaching calamities. Fanatics alarmed the people. The Christians

predicted the ruin of the State. Never was a population of three millions

of people more discontented and oppressed. Outrage, and injustice, and

tumults, and insurrections, marked the doomed people. The governors were

insulted, and massacred the people in retaliation. Florus, at one time,

destroyed three thousand six hundred people, A.D. 66. Open war was

apparent to the more discerning, Agrippa in vain counseled moderation and

reconciliation, showing the people how vain resistance would be to the

overwhelming power of Rome, which had subdued the world; and that the

refusal of tribute, and the demolition of Roman fortifications, were overt

acts of war. But he talked to people doomed. Every day new causes of

discord arose. Some of the higher orders were disposed to be prudent, but

the people generally were filled with bigotry and fanaticism. Some of the

boldest of the war party one day seized the fortress of Masada, near the

Dead Sea, built by Jonathan the Maccabean, and fortified by Herod. The

Roman garrison was put to the sword, and the banner of revolt was

unfolded. In the city of Jerusalem, the blinded people refused to receive,

as was customary, the gifts and sacrifices of foreign potentates offered

in the temple to the God of the Jews. This was an insult and a declaration

of war, which the chief priests and Pharisees attempted in vain to

prevent. The insurgents, urged by zealots and assassins, even set fire to

the palace of the high priest and of Agrippa and Berenice, and also to the

public archives, where the bonds of creditors were deposited, which

destroyed the power of the rich. They then carried the important citadel

of Antonia, and stormed the palace. A fanatic, by the name of Manahem, son

of Judas of Galilee, openly proclaimed the doctrine that it was impious to

own any king but God, and treason to pay tribute to Cæsar. He became the

leader of the war party because he was the most unscrupulous and zealous,

as is always the case in times of excitement and passion. He entered the

city, in the pomp of a conqueror, and became the captain of the forces,

which took the palace and killed the defenders. The high priest, Ananias,

striving to secure order, was stoned. Then followed dissensions between

the insurgents themselves, during which Manahem was killed. Eleazar,

another chieftain, pressed the siege of the towers, defended by Roman

soldiers, which were taken, and the defenders massacred. Meanwhile, twenty

thousand Jews were slain by the Greeks in Cæsarea, which drove the nation

to madness, and led to a general insurrection in Syria, and a bloody

strife between the Greco-Syrians and Jews, There were commotions in all

quarters—wars and rumors of wars, so that men fled to the mountains,

Wherever the Jews had settled were commotions and massacres, especially at

Alexandria, when fifty thousand bodies were heaped up for burial.

(M268) Nero was now on the imperial throne, and stringent measures were

adopted to suppress the revolt of the Jews, now goaded to desperation by

the remembrance of their oppressions, and the conviction that every man’s

hand was against them. Certius, the prefect of Syria, advanced with ten

thousand Roman troops and thirteen hundred allies, and desperate war

seemed now inevitable. Agrippa, knowing how fatal it would be to the

Jewish nation, attempted to avert it. He argued to infatuated men. Certius

undertook to storm Jerusalem, the head-quarters of the insurrection, but

failed, and was obliged to retreat, with loss of a great part of his

army—a defeat such as the Romans had not received since Varus was

overpowered in the forests of Germany.

(M269) Judea was now in open rebellion against the whole power of Rome—a

mad and desperate revolt, which could not end but in the political ruin of

the nation. Great preparations were made for the approaching contest, in

which the Jews were to fight single-handed and unassisted by allies. The

fortified posts were in the hands of the insurgents, but they had no

organized and disciplined forces, and were divided among themselves.

Agrippa, the representative of the Herodian kings, openly espoused the

cause of Rome. The only hope of the Jews was in their stern fanaticism,

their stubborn patience, and their daring valor. They were to be justified

for their insurrection by all those principles which animate oppressed

people striving to be free, and they had glorious precedents in the

victories of the Maccabees; but it was their misfortune to contend against

the armies of the masters of the world. They were not strong enough for

revolt.

(M270) The news of the insurrection, and the defeat of a Roman prefect,

made a profound sensation at Rome. Although Nero affected to treat the

affair with levity, he selected, however, the ablest general of the

empire, Vespasian, and sent him to Syria. The storm broke out in Galilee,

whose mountain fastnesses were intrusted by the Jews to Joseph, the son of

Matthias—lineally descended from an illustrious priestly family, with the

blood of the Asmonæan running in his veins—a man of culture and learning—a

Pharisee who had at first opposed the insurrection, but drawn into it

after the defeat of Certius. He is better known to us as the historian

Josephus. His measures of defence were prudent and vigorous, and he

endeavored to unite the various parties in the contest which he knew was

desperate. He raised an army of one hundred thousand men, and introduced

the Roman discipline, but was impeded in his measures by party dissensions

and by treachery. In the city of Jerusalem, Ananias, the high priest, took

the lead, but had to contend with fanatics and secret enemies.

(M271) The first memorable event of the war was the unsuccessful

expedition against Ascalon, sixty-five miles from Jerusalem, in which

Roman discipline prevailed against numbers. This was soon followed by the

advance of Vespasian to Ptolemais, while Titus, his lieutenant and son,

sailed from Alexandria to join him. Vespasian had an army of sixty

thousand veterans. Josephus could not openly contend against this force,

but strengthened his fortified cities. Vespasian advanced cautiously in

battle array, and halted on the frontiers of Galilee. The Jews, under

Josephus, fled in despair. Gabaia was the first city which fell, and its

inhabitants were put to the sword—a stern vengeance which the Romans often

exercised, to awe their insurgent enemies. Josephus retired to Tiberius,

hopeless and discouraged, and exhorted the people of Jerusalem either to

re-enforce him with a powerful army, or make submission to the Romans.

They did neither. He then threw himself into Jotaphata, where the

strongest of the Galilean warriors had intrenched themselves. Vespasian

advanced against the city with his whole army, and drew a line of

circumvallation around it, and then commenced the attack. The city stood

on the top of a lofty hill, and was difficult of access, and well supplied

with provisions. As the works of the Romans arose around the city, its

walls were raised thirty-five feet by the defenders, while they issued out

in sallies and fought with the courage of despair. The city could not be

taken by assault, and the siege was converted into a blockade. The

besieged, supplied with provisions, issued out from behind their

fortifications, and destroyed the works of the Romans. The fearful

battering-rams of the besiegers were destroyed by the arts and inventions

of the besieged. The catapults and scorpions swept the walls, and the huge

stones began to tell upon the turrets and the towers. The whole city was

surrounded by triple lines of heavy armed soldiers, ready for assault. The

Jews resorted to all kinds of expedients, even to the pouring of boiling

oil on the heads of their assailants. The Roman general was exasperated at

the obstinate resistance, and proceeded by more cautious measures. He

raised the embankments, and fortified them with towers, in which he placed

slingers and archers, whose missiles told with terrible effect on those

who defended the walls. Forty-seven days did the gallant defenders resist

all the resources of Vespasian, But they were at length exhausted, and

their ranks were thinned, Once again a furious assault was made by the

whole army, and Titus scaled the walls. The city fell with the loss of

forty thousand men on both sides, and Josephus surrendered to the will of

God, but was himself spared by the victors by adroit flatteries, in which

he predicted the elevation of Vespasian to the throne of Nero.

(M272) It would be interesting to detail the progress of the war, but our

limits forbid. The reader is referred to Josephus. City after city

gradually fell into the hands of Vespasian, who now established himself in

Cæsarea. Joppa shared the fate of Jotaphata; the city was razed, but the

citadel was fortified by the Romans.

(M273) The intelligence of these disasters filled Jerusalem with

consternation and mourning, for scarcely a family had not to deplore the

loss of some of its members. Tiberius and Tarichea, on the banks of the

beautiful lake of Galilee, were the next which fell, followed by atrocious

massacres, after the fashion of war in those days. Galilee stood appalled,

and all its cities but three surrendered. Of these Gamala, the capital,

was the strongest, and more inaccessible than Jotaphata. It was built upon

a precipice, and was crowded with fugitives, and well provisioned. But it

was finally taken, as well as Gischala and Itabyriun, and all Galilee was

in the hands of the Romans.

(M274) Jerusalem, meanwhile, was the scene of factions and dissensions. It

might have re-enforced the strongholds of Galilee, but gave itself up to

party animosities, which weakened its strength. Had the Jews been united,

they might have offered a more successful resistance. But their fate was

sealed. I can not describe the various intrigues and factions which

paralyzed the national arm, and forewarned the inhabitants of their doom.

Meanwhile, Nero was assassinated, and Vespasian was elevated to the

imperial throne. He sent his son Titus to complete the subjugation which

had hitherto resisted his conquering legions.

(M275) Jerusalem, in those days of danger and anxiety, was still rent by

factions, and neglected her last chance of organizing her forces to resist

the common enemy. Never was a city more insensible of its doom. Three

distinct parties were at war with each other, shedding each others’ blood,

reckless of all consequences, callous, fierce, desperate. At length the

army of Titus advanced to the siege of the sacred city, still strong and

well provisioned. Four legions, with mercenary troops and allies, burning

to avenge the past, encamped beneath the walls, destroying the orchards

and olive-grounds and gardens which everywhere gladdened the beautiful

environs. The city was fortified with three walls where not surrounded by

impassable ravines, not one within the other, but inclosing distinct

quarters; and these were of great strength, the stones of which were in

some parts thirty-five feet long, and so thick that even the heaviest

battering-rams could make no impression. One hundred and sixty-four towers

surmounted these heavy walls, one of which was one hundred and forty feet

high, and forty-three feet square; another, of white marble, seventy-six

feet in height, was built of stones thirty-five feet long, and seventeen

and a half wide, and eight and a half high, joined together with the most

perfect masonry. Within these walls and towers was the royal palace,

surrounded by walls and towers of equal strength. The fortress of Antonia,

seventy feet high, stood on a rock of ninety feet elevation, with

precipitous sides. High above all these towers and hills, and fortresses,

stood the temple, on an esplanade covering a square of a furlong on each

side. The walls which surrounded this fortress-temple were built of vast

stones, and were of great height; and within these walls, on each side,

was a spacious double portico fifty-two and a half feet broad, with a

ceiling of cedar exquisitely carved, supported by marble columns

forty-three and three-quarters feet high, hewn out of single stones. There

were one hundred and sixty-two of these beautiful columns. Within this

quadrangle was an inner wall, seventy feet in height, inclosing the inner

court, around which, in the interior, was another still more splendid

portico, entered by brazen gates adorned with gold. These doors, or gates,

were fifty-two and a half feet high and twenty-six and a quarter wide.

Each gateway had two lofty pillars, twenty-one feet in circumference. The

gate called Beautiful was eighty-seven and a half feet high, made of

Corinthian brass, and plated with gold. The quadrangle, entered by nine of

these gates, inclosed still another, within which was the temple itself,

with its glittering façade. This third and inner quadrangle was entered by

a gateway tower one hundred and thirty-two and a half feet high and

forty-three and a half wide. “At a distance the temple looked like a

mountain of snow fretted with golden pinnacles.” With what emotions Titus

must have surveyed this glorious edifice, as the sun rising above Mount

Moriah gilded its gates and pinnacles—soon to be so utterly demolished

that not one stone should be left upon another.

(M276) Around the devoted city Titus erected towers which overlooked the

walls, from which he discharged his destructive missiles, while the

battering-rams played against the walls, where they were weakest. The

first wall was soon abandoned, and five days after the second was

penetrated, after a furious combat, and Titus took possession of the lower

city, where most of the people lived.

The precipitous heights of Zion, the tower of Antonia and the temple still

remained, and although the cause was hopeless, the Jews would hear of no

terms of surrender. Titus used every means. So did Josephus, who harangued

the people at a safe distance. The most obstinate fury was added to

presumptuous, vain confidence, perhaps allied with utter distrust of the

promises of enemies whom they had offended past forgiveness.

(M277) At length famine pressed. No grain was to be bought. The wealthy

secreted their food. All kind feelings were lost in the general misery.

Wives snatched the last morsel from their family and weary husbands, and

children from their parents. The houses were full of dying and the dead, a

heavy silence oppressed every one, yet no complaints were made. They

suffered in sullen gloom, and despair. From the 14th of April to the 19th

of July, A.D. 70, from one hundred thousand to five hundred thousand,

according to different estimates, were buried or thrown from the walls. A

measure of wheat sold for a talent, and the dunghills were raked for

subsistence.

(M278) When all was ready, the assault on the places which remained

commenced. On the 5th of July the fortress of Antonia was taken, and the

siege of the temple was pressed. Titus made one more attempt to persuade

its defenders to surrender, wishing to save the sacred edifice, but they

were deaf and obstinate. They continued to fight, inch by inch, exhausted

by famine, and reduced to despair. They gnawed their leathern belts, and

ate their very children. On the 8th of August the wall inclosing the

portico, or cloisters, was scaled. On the 10th the temple itself, a

powerful fortress, fell, with all its treasures, into the hands of the

victors. The soldiers gazed with admiration on the plates of gold, and the

curious workmanship of the sacred vessels. All that could be destroyed by

fire was burned, and all who guarded the precincts were killed.

(M279) Still the palace and the upper city held out. Titus promised to

spare the lives of the defenders if they would instantly surrender. But

they still demanded terms. Titus, in a fury, swore that the whole

surviving population should be exterminated. It was not till the 7th of

September that this last bulwark was captured, so obstinately did the

starving Jews defend themselves. A miscellaneous slaughter commenced, till

the Romans were weary of their work of vengeance. During the whole siege

one million one hundred thousand were killed, and ninety-seven thousand

made prisoners, since a large part of the population of Judea had taken

refuge within the walls. During the whole war one million three hundred

and fifty-six thousand were killed.

Thus fell Jerusalem, after a siege of five months, the most desperate

defense of a capital in the history of war. It fell never to rise again as

a Jewish metropolis. Never had a city greater misfortunes. Never was

heroism accompanied with greater fanaticism. Never was a prophecy more

signally fulfilled.

(M280) The fall of Jerusalem was succeeded by bloody combats before the

whole country was finally subdued. With the final conquest the Jews were

dispersed among the nations, and their nationality was at an end. Their

political existence was annihilated. The capital was destroyed, the temple

demolished, and the royal house extinguished, and the high priesthood

buried amid the ruins of the sacred places.

With the occupation of Palestine by strangers, and the final dispersion of

the Jews over all nations, who, without a country, and without friends,

maintained their institutions, their religion, their name, their

peculiarities, and their associations, we leave the subject—so full of

mournful interest, and of impressive lessons. The student of history

should see in their prosperity and misfortunes the overruling Providence

vindicating his promises, and the awful majesty of eternal laws.

BOOK II.

THE GRECIAN STATES.

CHAPTER XIII.

THE GEOGRAPHY OF ANCIENT GREECE AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS.

(M281) We have seen that the Oriental-world, so favored by nature, so rich

in fields, in flocks, and fruits, failed to realize the higher destiny of

man. In spite of all the advantages of nature, he was degraded by debasing

superstitions, and by the degeneracy which wealth and ease produced. He

was enslaved by vices and by despots. The Assyrian and Babylonian kingdom,

that “head of gold,” as seen in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, became inferior to

the “breast and arms of silver,” as represented by the Persian Empire, and

this, in turn, became subject to the Grecian States, “the belly and the

thighs of brass.” It is the nobler Hellenic race, with its original

genius, its enterprise, its stern and rugged nature, strengthened by toil,

and enterprise, and war, that we are now to contemplate. It is Greece—the

land of song, of art, of philosophy—the land of heroes and freemen, to

which we now turn our eyes—the most interesting, and the most famous of

the countries of antiquity.

(M282) Let us first survey that country in all its stern ruggedness and

picturesque beauty. It was small compared with Assyria or Persia. Its

original name was Hellas, designated by a little district of Thessaly,

which lay on the southeast verge of Europe, and extended in length from

the thirty-sixth to the fortieth degree of latitude. It contained, with

its islands, only twenty-one thousand two hundred and ninety square

miles—less than Portugal or Ireland, but its coasts exceeded the whole

Pyrenean peninsula. Hellas is itself a peninsula, bounded on the north by

the Cambunian and Ceraunian mountains, which separated it from Macedonia;

on the east by the Ægean Sea, (Archipelago), which separated it from Asia

Minor; on the south by the Cretan Sea, and on the west by the Ionian Sea.

(M283) The northern part of this country of the Hellenes is traversed by a

range of mountains, commencing at Acra Ceraunia, on the Adriatic, and

tending southeast above Dodona, in Epirus, till they join the Cambunian

mountains, near Mount Olympus, which run along the coast of the Ægean till

they terminate in the southeastern part of Thessaly, under the names of

Ossa, Pelion, and Tisæus. The great range of Pindus enters Greece at the

sources of the Peneus, where it crosses the Cambunian mountains, and

extends at first south, and then east to the sea, nearly inclosing

Thessaly, and dividing it from the rest of Greece. After throwing out the

various spurs of Othrys, Œta, and Corax, it loses itself in those famous

haunts of the Muses—the heights of Parnassus and Helicon, in Phocis and

Bœotia, In the southern part of Greece are the mountains which intersect

the Peloponnesus in almost every part, the principal of which are Scollis,

Aroanii, and Taygetus. We can not enumerate the names of all these

mountains; it is enough to say that no part of Europe, except Switzerland,

is so covered with mountains as Greece, some of which attain the altitude

of perpetual snow. Only a small part of the country is level.

(M284) The rivers, again, are numerous, but more famous for associations

than for navigable importance. The Peneus which empties itself into the

Ægean, a little below Tempe; the Achelous, which flows into the Ionian

Sea; the Alpheus, flowing into the Ionian Sea; and the Eurotas, which

enters the Laconican Gulf, are among the most considerable. The lakes are

numerous, but not large. The coasts are lined by bays and promontories,

favorable to navigation in its infancy, and for fishing. The adjacent seas

are full of islands, memorable in Grecian history, some of which are of

considerable size.

(M285) Thus intersected in all parts with mountains, and deeply indented

by the sea, Greece was both mountainous and maritime. The mountains, the

rivers, the valleys, the sea, the islands contributed to make the people

enterprising and poetical, and as each State was divided from every other

State by mountains, or valleys, or gulfs, political liberty was

engendered. The difficulties of cultivating a barren soil on the highlands

inured the inhabitants to industry and economy, as in Scotland and New

England, while the configuration of the country strengthened the powers of

defense, and shut the people up from those invasions which have so often

subjugated a plain and level country. These natural divisions also kept

the States from political union, and fostered a principle of repulsion,

and led to an indefinite multiplication of self-governing towns, and to

great individuality of character.

(M286) Situated in the same parallels of latitude as Asia Minor, and the

south of Italy and Spain, Greece produced wheat, barley, flax, wine, oil,

in the earliest times. The cultivation of the vine and the olive was

peculiarly careful. Barley cakes were more eaten than wheaten. All

vegetables and fish were abundant and cheap. But little fresh meat was

eaten. Corn also was imported in considerable quantities by the maritime

States in exchange for figs, olives, and oil. The climate, clear and

beautiful to modern Europeans, was less genial than that of Asia Minor,

but more bracing and variable. It also varied in various sections.

These various sections, or provinces, or states, into which Greece was

divided, claim a short notice.

(M287) The largest and most northerly State was Epirus, containing four

thousand two hundred and sixty square miles, bounded on the north by

Macedonia, on the east by Thessaly, on the south by Acarnania, and on the

west by the Ionian Sea. Though mountainous, it was fertile, and produced

excellent cattle and horses. Of the interesting places of Epirus,

memorable in history, ranks first Dodona, celebrated for its oracle, the

most ancient in Greece, and only inferior to that of Delphi. It was

founded by the Pelasgi before the Trojan war and was dedicated to Jupiter.

The temple was surrounded by a grove of oak, but the oracles were latterly

delivered by the murmuring of fountains. On the west of Epirus is the

island of Corcyra (Corfu), famous for the shipwreck of Ulysses, and for

the gardens of Aleinous, and for having given rise to the Peloponnesian

war. Epirus is also distinguished as the country over which Pyrrhus ruled.

The Acheron, supposed to communicate with the infernal regions, was one of

its rivers.

(M288) West of Epirus was Thessaly, and next to it in size, containing

four thousand two hundred and sixty square miles. It was a plain inclosed

by mountains; next to Bœotia, the most fertile of all the States of

Greece, abounding in oil, wine, and corn, and yet one of the weakest and

most insignificant politically. The people were rich, but perfidious. The

river Peneus flowed through the entire extent of the country, and near its

mouth was the vale of Tempe, the most beautiful valley in Greece, guarded

by four strong fortresses.

(M289) At some distance from the mouth of the Peneus was Larissa, the city

of Achilles, and the general capital of the Pelasgi. At the southern

extremity of the lake Cælas, the largest in Thessaly, was Pheræ, one of

the most ancient cities in Greece, and near it was the fountain of

Hyperia. In the southern part of Thessaly was Pharsalia, the battle-ground

between Cæsar and Pompey, and near it was Pyrrha, formerly called Hellas,

where was the tomb of Hellen, son of Deucalion, whose descendants, Æolus,

Dorus and Ion, are said to have given name to the three nations, Æolians,

Dorians, and Ionians, Still further south, between the inaccessible cliffs

of Mount Œta and the marshes which skirt the Maliaeus Bay, were the

defiles of Thermopylæ, where Leonidas and three hundred heroes died

defending the pass, against the army of Xerxes, and which in one place was

only twenty-five feet wide, so that, in so narrow a defile, the Spartans

were able to withstand for three days the whole power of Persia. In this

famous pass the Amphictyonic council met annually to deliberate on the

common affairs of all the States.

(M290) South of Epirus, on the Ionian Sea, and west of Ætolia, was

Acarnania, occupied by a barbarous people before the Pelasgi settled in

it. It had no historic fame, except as furnishing on its waters a place

for the decisive battle which Augustus gained over Antony, at Actium, and

for the islands on the coast, one of which, Ithaca, a rugged and

mountainous island, was the residence of Ulysses.

(M291) Ætolia, to the east of Acarnania, and south of Thessaly, and

separated from Achaia by the Corinthian Gulf, contained nine hundred and

thirty square miles. Its principal city was Thermon, considered

impregnable, at which were held splendid games and festivals. The Ætolians

were little known in the palmy days of Athens and Sparta, except as a

hardy race, but covetous and faithless.

(M292) Doris was a small tract to the east of Ætolia, inhabited by one of

the most ancient of the Greek tribes—the Dorians, called so from Dorus,

son of Deucalion, and originally inhabited that part of Thessaly in which

were the mountains of Olympus and Ossa. From this section they were driven

by the Cadmeans. Doris was the abode of the Heraclidæ when exiled from the

Peloponnesus, and which was given to Hyllas, the son of Hercules, in

gratitude by Ægiminius, the king, who was reinstated by the hero in his

dispossessed dominion.

(M293) Locri Ozolæ was another small State, south of Doris, from which it

is separated by the range of the Parnassus situated on the Corinthian

Gulf, the most important city of which was Salona, surrounded on all sides

by hills. Naupactus was also a considerable place, known in the Middle

Ages as Lepanto, where was fought one of the decisive naval battles of the

world, in which the Turks were defeated by the Venetians. It contained

three hundred and fifty square miles.

(M294) Phocis was directly to the east, bounded on the north by Doris and

the Locri Epicnemidii, and south by the Corinthian Gulf. This State

embraced six hundred and ten square miles. The Phocians are known in

history from the sacred or Phocian war, which broke out in 357 B.C., in

consequence of refusing to pay a fine imposed by the Amphictyonic council.

The Thebans and Locrians carried on this war successfully, joined by

Philip of Macedon, who thus paved the way for the sovereignty of Greece.

One among the most noted places was Crissa, famed for the Pythian games,

and Delphi, renowned for its oracle sacred to Apollo. The priestess,

Pythia, sat on a sacred tripod over the mouth of a cave, and pronounced

her oracles in verse or prose. Those who consulted her made rich presents,

from which Delphi became vastly enriched. Above Delphi towers Parnassus,

the highest mountain in central Greece, near whose summit was the supposed

residence of Deucalion.

(M295) Bœotia was the richest State in Greece, so far as fertility of soil

can make a State rich. It was bounded on the north by the territory of the

Locri, on the west by Phocis, on the south by Attica, and on the east by

the Eubœan Sea. It contained about one thousand square miles. Its

inhabitants were famed for their stolidity, and yet it furnished Hesiod,

Pindar, Corinna, and Plutarch to the immortal catalogue of names. Its men,

if stupid, were brave, and its women were handsome. It was originally

inhabited by barbarous tribes, all connected with the Leleges. In its

southwestern part was the famous Helicon, famed as the seat of Apollo and

the Muses, and on the southern border was Mount Cithæron, to the north of

which was Platea, where the Persians were defeated by the confederate

Greeks under Pausanias. Bœotia contained the largest lake in

Greece—Copaias, famed for eels. On the borders of this lake was Coronea,

where the Thebans were defeated by the Spartans. To the north of Coronea

was Chæronea, where was fought the great battle with Philip, which

subverted the liberties of Greece. To the north of the river Æsopus, a

sluggish stream, was Thebes, the capital of Bœotia, founded by Cadmus,

whose great generals, Epaminondas and Pelopidas, made it, for a time, one

of the great powers of Greece.

(M296) The most famous province of Greece was Attica, bounded on the north

by the mountains Cithæron and Parnes, on the west by the bay of Saronicus,

on the east by the Myrtoum Sea. It contained but seven hundred square

miles. It derived its name from Atthis, a daughter of Cranaus; but its

earliest name was Cecropia, from its king, Cecrops. It was divided, in the

time of Cecrops, into four tribes. On its western extremity, on the shores

of the Saronic Gulf, stood Eleusis, the scene of the Eleusinian mysteries,

the most famous of all the religious ceremonials of Greece, sacred to

Ceres, and celebrated every four years, and lasting for nine days.

Opposite to Eleusis was Salamis, the birthplace of Ajax, Teucer, and

Solon. There the Persian fleet of Xerxes was defeated by the Athenians.

The capital, Athens, founded by Cecrops, 1556 B.C., received its name from

the goddess Neith, an Egyptian deity, known by the Greeks as Athena, or

Minerva. Its population, in the time of Pericles, was one hundred and

twenty thousand. The southernmost point of Attica was Sunium, sacred to

Minerva; Marathon, the scene of the most brilliant victory which the

Athenians ever fought, was in the eastern part of Attica. To the southeast

of Athens was Mount Hymettus, celebrated for its flowers and honey.

Between Hymettus and Marathon was Mount Pentelicus, famed for its marbles.

(M297) Megaris, another small State, was at the west of Attica, between

the Corinthian and the Saronican gulfs. Its chief city, Megara, was a

considerable place, defended by two citadels on the hills above it. It was

celebrated as the seat of the Megaric school of philosophy, founded by

Euclid.

(M298) The largest of the Grecian States was the famous peninsula known as

the Peloponnesus, entirely surrounded by water, except the isthmus of

Corinth, four geographical miles wide. On the west was the Ionian Sea; on

the east the Saronic Gulf and the Myrtoum Sea; on the north the Corinthian

Gulf. It contained six thousand seven hundred and forty-five square miles.

It was divided into several States. It was said to be left by Hercules on

his death to the Heraclidæ, which they, with the assistance of the

Dorians, ultimately succeeded in regaining, about eighty years after the

Trojan war.

Of the six States into which the Peloponnesus was divided, Achaia was the

northernmost, and was celebrated for the Achæan league, composed of its

principal cities, as well us Corinth, Sicyon, Phlius, Arcadia, Argolis,

Laconia, Megaris, and other cities and States.

(M299) Southwest of Achaia was Elis, on the Ionian Sea, in which stood

Olympia, where the Olympic games were celebrated every four years,

instituted by Hercules.

(M300) Arcadia occupied the centre of the Peloponnesus, surrounded on all

sides by lofty mountains—a rich and pastoral country, producing fine

horses and asses. It was the favorite residence of Pan, the god of

shepherds, and its people were famed for their love of liberty and music.

(M301) Argolis was the eastern portion of the Peloponnesus, watered by the

Saronic Gulf, whose original inhabitants were Pelasgi. It boasted of the

cities of Argos and Mycenæ, the former of which was the oldest city of

Greece. Agamemnon reigned at Mycenæ, the most powerful of the kings of

Greece during the Trojan war.

(M302) Laconia, at the southeastern extremity of the peninsula, was the

largest and most important of the States of the Peloponnesus. It was

rugged and mountainous, but its people were brave and noble. Its largest

city, Sparta, for several generations controlled the fortune of Greece,

the most warlike of the Grecian cities.

(M303) Messenia was the southwestern part of the peninsula—mountainous,

but well watered, and abounding in pasture. It was early coveted by the

Lacedæmonians, inhabitants of Laconia, and was subjugated in a series of

famous wars, called the Messenian.

Such were the principal States of Greece. But in connection with these

were the islands in the seas which surrounded it, and these are nearly as

famous as the States on the main land.

(M304) The most important of these was Crete, at the southern extremity of

the Ægean Sea. It was the fabled birthplace of Jupiter. To the south of

Thrace were Thasos, remarkable for fertility, and for mines of gold and

silver; Samothrace, celebrated for the mysteries of Cybele; Imbros, sacred

to Ceres and Mercury. Lemnos, in latitude forty, equidistant from Mount

Athos and the Hellespont, rendered infamous by the massacre of all the

male inhabitants of the island by the women. The island of Eubœa stretched

along the coast of Attica, Locris, and Bœotia, and was exceedingly

fertile, and from this island the Athenians drew large supplies of

corn—the largest island in the Archipelago, next to Crete. Its principal

city was Chalcis, one of the strongest in Greece.

(M305) To the southeast of Eubœa are the Cyclades—a group of islands of

which Delos, Andros, Tenos, Myeonos, Naxos, Paros, Olearos, Siphnos,

Melos, and Syros, were the most important. All these islands are famous

for temples and the birthplace of celebrated men.

(M306) The islands called the Sporades lie to the south and east of the

Cyclades, among which are Amorgo, Ios, Sicinos, Thera, and Anaphe—some of

which are barren, and others favorable to the vine.

(M307) Besides these islands, which belong to the continent of Europe, are

those which belong to Asia—Tenedos, small but fertile; Lesbos, celebrated

for wine, the fourth in size of all the islands of the Ægean; Chios, also

famed for wine; Samos, famous for the worship of Juno, and the birthplace

of Pythagoras; Patmos, used as a place of banishment; Cos, the birthplace

of Apelles and Hippocrates, exceedingly fertile; and south of all, Rhodes,

the largest island of the Ægean, after Crete and Eubœa. It was famous for

the brazen and colossal statue of the sun, seventy cubits high. Its people

were great navigators, and their maritime laws were ultimately adopted by

all the Greeks and Romans. It was also famous for its schools of art.

Such were the States and islands of Greece, mountainous, in many parts

sterile, but filled with a hardy, bold, and adventurous race, whose

exploits and arts were the glory of the ancient world.

(M308) The various tribes and nations all belonged to that branch of the

Indo-European race to which ethnographers have given the name of

Pelasgian. They were a people of savage manners, but sufficiently

civilised to till the earth, and build walled cities. Their religion was

polytheistic—a personification of the elemental powers and the heavenly

bodies. The Pelasgians occupied insulated points, but were generally

diffused throughout Greece; and they were probably a wandering people

before they settled in Greece. The Greek traditions about their migration

rests on no certain ground. Besides this race, concerning which we have no

authentic history, were the Leleges and Carians. But all of them were

barbarous, and have left no written records. Argos and Sicyon are said to

be Pelasgian cities, founded as far back as one thousand eight hundred and

fifty-six years before Christ. It is also thought that Oriental elements

entered into the early population of Greece. Cecrops imported into Attica

Egyptian arts. Cadmus, the Phœnician, colonized Bœotia, and introduced

weights and measures. Danaus, driven out of Egypt, gave his name to the

warlike Danai, and instructed the Pelasgian women of Argos in the mystic

rites of Demetus. Pelope is supposed to have passed from Asia into Greece,

with great treasures, and his descendants occupied the throne of Argos.

(M309) At a period before written history commences, the early inhabitants

of Greece, whatever may have been their origin, which is involved in

obscurity, were driven from their settlements by a warlike race, akin,

however, to the Pelasgians. These conquerors were the Hellenes, who were

believed to have issued from the district of Thessaly, north of Mount

Othrys. They gave their name ultimately to the whole country. Divided into

small settlements, they yet were bound together by language and customs,

and cherished the idea of national unity. There were four chief divisions

of this nation, the Dorians, Æolians, Achæans, and Ionians, traditionally

supposed to be descended from the three sons of Hellen, the son of

Deucalion, Dorus, Æolus, and Xuthus, the last the father of Achæus, and

Jon. So the Greek poets represented the origin of the Hellenes—a people

fond of adventure, and endowed by nature with vast capacities,

subsequently developed by education.

(M310) Of these four divisions of the Hellenic race, the Æolians spread

over northern Greece, and also occupied the western coast of the

Peloponnesus and the Ionian islands. It continued, to the latest times, to

occupy the greater part of Greece. The Achæans were the most celebrated in

epic poetry, their name being used by Homer to denote all the Hellenic

tribes which fought at Troy. They were the dominant people of the

Peloponnesus, occupying the south and east, and the Arcadians the centre.

The Dorians and Ionians were of later celebrity; the former occupying a

small patch of territory on the slopes of Mount Œta, north of Delphi; the

latter living on a narrow slip of the country along the northern coast of

the Peloponnesus, and extending eastward into Attica.

(M311) The principal settlements of the Æolians lay around the Pagasæan

Gulf, and were blended with the Minyans, a race of Pelasgian adventurers

known in the Argonautic expedition, under Æolian leaders. In the north of

Bœotia arose the city of Orchomenus, whose treasures were compared by

Homer to those of the Egyptian Thebes. Another seat of the Æolians was

Ephyra, afterward known as Corinth, where the “wily Sisyphus” ruled. He

was the father of Phocus, who gave his name to Phocis. The descendants of

Æolus led also a colony to Elis, and another to Pylus. In general, the

Æolians sought maritime settlements in northern Greece, and the western

side of the Peloponnesus.

(M312) The Achæans were the dominant race, in very early times, of the

south of Thessaly, and the eastern side of the Peloponnesus, whose chief

seats were Phthia, where Achilles reigned, and Argolis. Thirlwall seems to

think they were a Pelasgian, rather than an Hellenic people. The ancient

traditions represent the sons of Achæus as migrating to Argos, where they

married the daughters of Danaus the king, but did not mount the throne.

(M313) The early fortunes of the Dorians are involved in great obscurity,

nor is there much that is satisfactory in the early history of any of the

Hellenic tribes. Our information is chiefly traditional, derived from the

poets. Dorus, the son of Deucalion, occupied the country over against

Peloponnesus, on the opposite side of the Corinthian Gulf, comprising

Ætolia, Phocis, and the Ozolian Locrians. Nor can the conquests of the

Dorians on the Peloponnesus be reconciled upon any other ground than that

they occupied a considerable tract of country.

(M314) The early history of the Ionians is still more obscure. Ion, the

son of Xuthus, is supposed to have led his followers from Thessaly to

Attica, and to have conquered the Pelasgians, or effected peaceable

settlements with them. Then follows a series of legends which have more

poetical than historical interest, but which will be briefly noticed in

the next chapter.

CHAPTER XIV.

THE LEGENDS OF ANCIENT GREECE.

(M315) The Greeks possessed no authentic written history of that period

which included the first appearance of the Hellenes in Thessaly to the

first Olympiad, B.C. 776. This is called the heroic age, and is known to

us only by legends and traditions, called myths. They pertain both to gods

and men, and are connected with what we call mythology, which possesses no

historical importance, although it is full of interest for its poetic

life. And as mythology is interwoven with the literature and the art of

the ancients, furnishing inexhaustible subjects for poets, painters, and

sculptors, it can not be omitted wholly in the history of that classic

people, whose songs and arts have been the admiration of the world.

(M316) We have space, however, only for those legends which are of

universal interest, and will first allude to those which pertain to gods,

such as appear most prominent in the poems of Hesiod and Homer.

(M317) Zeus, or Jupiter, is the most important personage in the mythology

of Greece. Although, chronologically, he comes after Kronos and Uranos, he

was called the “father of gods and men,” whose power it was impossible to

resist, and which power was universal. He was supposed to be the

superintending providence, whose seat was on Mount Olympus, enthroned in

majesty and might, to whom the lesser deities were obedient. With his two

brothers, Poseidon, or Neptune, and Hades, or Pluto, he reigned over the

heavens, the earth, the sea, and hell. Mythology represents him as born in

Crete; and when he had gained sufficient mental and bodily force, he

summoned the gods to Mount Olympus, and resolved to wrest the supreme

power from his father, Kronos, and the Titans. Ten years were spent in the

mighty combat, in which all nature was convulsed, before victory was

obtained, and the Titans hurled into Tartarus. With Zeus now began a

different order of beings. He is represented as having many wives and a

numerous offspring. From his own head came Athene, fully armed, the

goddess of wisdom, the patron deity of Athens. By Themis he begat the

Horæ; by Eurynome, the three Graces; by Mnemosyne, the Muses; by Leto

(Latona), Apollo, and Artemis (Diana); by Demeter (Ceres), Persephone; by

Here (Juno), Hebe, Ares (Mars), and Eileithyia; by Maia, Hermes (Mercury).

(M318) Under the presidency of Zeus were the twelve great gods and

goddesses of Olympus—Poseidon (Neptune), who presided over the sea;

Apollo, who was the patron of art; Ares, the god of war; Hephaestos

(Vulcan), who forged the thunderbolts; Hermes, who was the messenger of

omnipotence and the protector of merchants; Here, the queen of heaven, and

general protector of the female sex; Athene (Minerva), the goddess of

wisdom and letters; Artemis (Diana), the protectress of hunters and

shepherds; Aphrodite (Venus), the goddess of beauty and love; Hertia

(Vesta), the goddess of the hearth and altar, whose fire never went out;

Demeter (Ceres), mother earth, the goddess of agriculture.

Scarcely inferior to these Olympian deities were Hades (Pluto), who

presided over the infernal regions; Helios, the sun; Hecate, the goddess

of expiation; Dionysus (Bacchus), the god of the vine; Leto (Latona), the

goddess of the concealed powers; Eos (Aurora), goddess of the morn;

Nemesis, god of vengeance; Æolus, the god of winds; Harmonia; the Graces,

the Muses, the Nymphs, the Nereids, marine nymphs—these were all invested

with great power and dignity.

Besides these were deities who performed special services to the greater

gods, like the Horæ; and monsters, offspring of gods, like the gorgons,

chimera, the dragon of the Hesperides, the Lernæan hydra, the Nemean lion,

Scylla and Charybdis, the centaurs, the sphinx, and others.

(M319) It will be seen that these gods and goddesses represent the powers

of nature, and the great attributes of wisdom, purity, courage, fidelity,

truth, which belong to man’s higher nature, and which are associated with

the divine. It was these powers and attributes which were

worshiped—superhuman and adorable. Homer and Hesiod are the great

authorities of the theogonies of the pagan world, and we can not tell how

much of this was of their invention, and how much was implanted in the

common mind of the Greeks, at an age earlier than 700 B.C. The Orphic

theogony belongs to a later date, but acquired even greater popular

veneration than the Hesiodic.

(M320) The worship of these divinities was attended by rites more or less

elevated, but sometimes by impurities and follies, like those of Bacchus

and Venus. Sometimes this worship was veiled in mysteries, like those of

Eleusis. To all these deities temples were erected, and offerings made,

sometimes of fruits and flowers, and then of animals. Of all these deities

there were legends—sometimes absurd, and these were interwoven with

literature and religious solemnities. The details of these fill many a

large dictionary, and are to be read in dictionaries, or in poems. Those

which pertain to Ceres, to Apollo, to Juno, to Venus, to Minerva, to

Mercury, are full of poetic beauty and fascination. They arose in an age

of fertile imagination and ardent feeling, and became the faith of the

people.

(M321) Besides the legends pertaining to gods and goddesses, are those

which relate the heroic actions of men. Grote describes the different

races of men as they appear in the Hesiodic theogony—the offspring of

gods. First, the golden race: first created, good and happy, like the gods

themselves, and honored after death by being made the unseen guardians of

men—“terrestrial demons.” Second, the silver race, inferior in body and

mind, was next created, and being disobedient, are buried in the earth.

Third, the brazen race, hard, pugnacious, terrible, strong, which was

continually at war, and ultimately destroyed itself, and descended into

Hades, unhonored and without privilege. Fourth, the race of heroes, or

demigods, such as fought at Thebes and Troy, virtuous but warlike, which

also perished in battle, but were removed to a happier state. And finally,

the iron race, doomed to perpetual guilt, care, toil, suffering—unjust,

dishonest, ungrateful, thoughtless—such is the present race of men, with a

small admixture of good, which will also end in due time. Such are the

races which Hesiod describes in his poem of the “Works and

Days,”—penetrated with a profound sense of the wickedness and degeneracy

of human life, yet of the ultimate rewards of virtue and truth. His demons

are not gods, nor men, but intermediate agents, essentially good—angels,

whose province was to guard and to benefit the world. But the notions of

demons gradually changed, until they were regarded as both good and bad,

as viewed by Plato, and finally they were regarded as the causes of evil,

as in the time of the Christian writers. Hesiod, who lived, it is

supposed, four hundred years before Herodotus, is a great ethical poet,

and embodied the views of his age respecting the great mysteries of nature

and life.

The legends which Hesiod, Homer, and other poets made so attractive by

their genius, have a perpetual interest, since they are invested with all

the fascinations of song and romance. We will not enter upon those which

relate to gods, but confine ourselves to those which relate to men—the

early heroes of the classic land and age; nor can we allude to all—only a

few—those which are most memorable and impressive.

(M322) Among the most ancient was the legend relating to the Danaides,

which invest the early history of Argos with peculiar interest. Inachus,

who reigned 1986 B.C., according to ancient chronology, is also the name

of the river flowing beneath the walls of the ancient city, situated in

the eastern part of the Peloponnesus. In the reign of Krotopos, one of his

descendants, Danaus came with his fifty daughters from Egypt to Argos in a

vessel of fifty oars, in order to escape the solicitations of the fifty

sons of Ægyptos, his brother, who wished to make them their wives. Ægyptos

and the sons followed in pursuit, and Danaus was compelled to assent to

their desires, but furnished each of his daughters with a dagger, on the

wedding night, who thus slew their husbands, except one, whose husband,

Lynceus, ultimately became king of Argos. From Danaus was derived the name

of Danai, applied to the people of the Argeian territory, and to the

Homeric Greeks generally. We hence infer that Argos—one of the oldest

cities of Greece, was settled in part by Egyptians, probably in the era of

the shepherd kings, who introduced not only the arts, but the religious

rites of that ancient country. Among the regal descendants of Lynceus was

Danae, whose son Perseus performed marvelous deeds, by the special favor

of Athene, among which he brought from Libya the terrific head of the

Gorgon Medusa, which had the marvelous property of turning every one to

stone who looked at her. Stung with remorse for the accidental murder of

his grandfather, the king, he retired from Argos, and founded the city of

Mycenæ, the ruins of whose massive walls are still to be seen—Cyclopean

works, which seem to show that the old Pelasgians derived their

architectural ideas from the Egyptian Danauns. The Perseids of Mycenæ thus

boasted of an illustrious descent, which continued down to the last

sovereign of Sparta.

(M323) The grand-daughter of Perseus was Alcmena, whom mythology

represents as the mother of Hercules by Jupiter. The labors of Hercules

are among the most interesting legends of pagan antiquity, since they are

types of the endless toils of a noble soul, doomed to labor for others,

and obey the commands of worthless persecutors. But the hero is finally

rewarded by admission to the family of the gods, and his descendants are

ultimately restored to the inheritance from which they were deprived by

the wrath and jealousy of Juno. A younger branch of the Perseid family

reigned in Lacedæmon—Eurystheus, to whom Hercules was subject; but he,

with all his sons, lost their lives in battle, so that the Perseid family

was represented only by the sons of Hercules—the Heracleids, or Heraclidæ.

They endeavored to regain their possessions, and invaded the Peloponnesus,

from which they had been expelled. Hyllos, the oldest son, proposed to the

army of Ionians, Achæans, and Arcadians, which met them in defense, that

the combat should be decided between himself and any champion of the

invading army, and that, if he were victorious, the Heracleids should be

restored to their sovereignty, but if defeated, should forego their claim

for three generations. Hyllos was vanquished, and the Heracleids retired

and resided with the Dorians. When the stipulated period had ended, they,

assisted by the Dorians, gained possession of the Peloponnesus. Hence the

great Dorian settlement of Argos, Sparta, and Messenia, effected by the

return of the Heracleids.

(M324) Another important legend is that which relates to Deucalion and the

deluge, as it is supposed to shed light on the different races that

colonized Greece. The wickedness of the world induced Zeus to punish it by

a deluge; a terrible rain laid the whole of Greece under water, except a

few mountain tops. Deucalion was saved in an ark, or chest, which he had

been forewarned to construct. After floating nine days, he landed on the

summit of Mount Parnassus. Issuing from his ark, he found no inhabitants,

they having been destroyed by the deluge. Instructed, however, by Zeus, he

and his wife, Pyrrha, threw stones over their heads, and those which he

threw became men, and those thrown by his wife became women. Thus does

mythology account for the new settlement of the country—a tradition

doubtless derived from the remote ages through the children of Japhet,

from whom the Greeks descended, and who, after many wanderings and

migrations, settled in Greece.

(M325) Deucalion and Pyrrha had two sons, Hellen and Amphictyon. The

eldest, Hellen, by a nymph was the father of Dorus, Æolus, and Xuthus, and

he gave his name to the nation—Hellenas. In dividing the country among his

sons, Æolus received Thessaly; Xuthus, Peloponnesus; and Dorus, the

country lying opposite, on the northern side of the Corinthian Gulf, as

has been already mentioned in the preceding chapter. Substitute Deucalion

for Noah, Greece for Armenia, and Dorus, Æolus, and Xuthus for Shem, Ham,

and Japhet, and we see a reproduction of the Mosaic account of the second

settlement of mankind.

As it is natural for men to trace their origin to illustrious progenitors,

so the Greeks, in their various settlements, cherished the legends which

represented themselves as sprung from gods and heroes—those great

benefactors, whose exploits occupy the heroic ages. As Hercules was the

Argine hero of the Peloponnesus, so Æolus was the father of heroes sacred

in the history of the Æolians, who inhabited the largest part of Greece.

Æolus reigned in Thessaly, the original seat of the Hellenes.

(M326) Among his sons was Salmoneus, whose daughter, Tyro, became enamored

of the river Eneipus, and frequenting its banks, the god Poseidon fell in

love with her. The fruits of this alliance were the twin brothers, Pelias

and Neleus, who quarreled respecting the possession of Iolchos, situated

at the foot of Mount Pelion, celebrated afterward as the residence of

Jason. Pelias prevailed, and Neleus returned into Peloponnesus and founded

the kingdom of Pylos. His beautiful daughter, Pero, was sought in marriage

by princes from all the neighboring countries, but he refused to entertain

the pretensions of any of them, declaring that she should only wed the man

who brought him the famous oxen of Iphiklos, in Thessaly. Melampus, the

nephew of Neleus, obtained the oxen for his brother Bias, who thus

obtained the hand of Pero. Of the twelve sons of Neleus, Nestor was the

most celebrated. It was he who assembled the various chieftains for the

siege of Troy, and was pre-eminent over all for wisdom.

(M327) Another descendant of Æolus was the subject of a beautiful legend.

Admetus, who married a daughter of Pelias, and whose horses were tended by

Apollo, for a time incarnated as a slave in punishment for the murder of

the Cyclopes. Apollo, in gratitude, obtained from the Fates the privilege

that the life of Admetus should be prolonged if any one could be found to

die voluntarily for him. His wife, Alkestes, made the sacrifice, but was

released from the grasp of death (Thanatos) by Hercules, the ancient

friend of Admetus.

(M328) But a still more beautiful legend is associated with Jason, a great

grandson of Æolus. Pelias, still reigning at Iolchos, was informed by the

oracle to beware of the man who should appear before him with only one

sandal. He was celebrating a festival in honor of Poseidon when Jason

appeared, having lost one of his sandals in crossing a river. As a means

of averting the danger, he imposed upon Jason the task, deemed desperate,

of bringing back to Iolchos the “Golden Fleece.” The result was the

memorable Argonautic expedition of the ship Argo, to the distant land of

Colchis, on the eastern coast of the Black Sea. Jason invited the noblest

youth of Greece to join him in this voyage of danger and glory. Fifty

illustrious persons joined him, including Hercules and Theseus, Castor and

Pollux, Mopsus, and Orpheus. They proceeded along the coast of Thrace, up

the Hellespont, past the southern coast of the Propontis, through the

Bosphorus, onward past Bithynia and Pontus, and arrived at the river

Phasis, south of the Caucasian mountains, where dwelt Æetes, whom they

sought. But he refused to surrender the golden fleece except on conditions

which were almost impossible. Medea, however, his daughter, fell in love

with Jason, and by her means, assisted by Hecate, he succeeded in yoking

the ferocious bulls and plowing the field, and sowing it with dragons’

teeth. Still Æetes refused the reward, and meditated the murder of the

Argonauts; but Medea lulled to sleep the dragon which guarded the fleece,

and fled with her lover and his companions on board the Argo. The

adventurers returned to Iolchos in safety, after innumerable perils, and

by courses irreconcilable with all geographical truths. But Jason could

avenge himself on Pelias only through the stratagem of his wife, and by

her magical arts she induced the daughters of Pelias to cut up their

father, and to cast his limbs into a cauldron, believing that by this

method he would be restored to the vigor of youth, and Jason was thus

revenged, and obtained possession of the kingdom, which he surrendered to

a son of Pelias, and retired with his wife to Corinth. Here he lived ten

years in prosperity, but repudiated Medea in order to marry Glance, the

daughter of the king of Corinth; Medea avenged the insult by the poisoned

robe she sent to Glance as a marriage present, while Jason perished, while

asleep, from a fragment of his ship Argo, which fell upon him. Such is the

legend of the Argonauts, which is typical of the naval adventures of the

maritime Greeks, and their restless enterprises.

(M329) The legend of Sisyphus is connected with the early history of

Corinth. Sisyphus was the son of Æolus, and founded this wealthy city. He

was distinguished for cunning and deceit. He detected Antolycus, the son

of Hermes, by marking his sheep under the foot, so that the arch-thief was

obliged to acknowledge the superior craft of the Æolid, and restore the

plunder. He discovered the amour of Zeus with the nymph Ægina, and told

her mother where she was carried, which so incensed the “father of gods

and men,” that he doomed Sisyphus, in Hades, to the perpetual punishment

of rolling up a hill a heavy stone, which, as soon as it reached the

summit, rolled back again in spite of all his efforts. This legend

illustrates the never ending toils and disappointments of men.

(M330) Sisyphus was the grandfather of Bellerophon, whose beauty made him

the object of a violent passion on the part of Antea, the wife of a king

of Argos. He rejected her advances, and became as violently hated. She

made false accusations, and persuaded her husband to kill him. Not wishing

to commit the murder directly, he sent him to his son-in-law, the king of

Sykia, in Asia Minor, with a folded tablet full of destructive symbols,

which required him to perform perilous undertakings, which he successfully

performed. He was then recognized as the son of a god, and married the

daughter of the king. This legend reminds us of Joseph in Egypt.

(M331) We are compelled to omit other interesting legends of the Æolids,

the sons and daughters of Æolus, among which are those which record the

feats of Atalanta, and turn to those which relate to the Pelopids, who

gave to the Peloponnesus its early poetic interest. Of this remarkable

race were Tantalus, Pelops, Atreus, Thyestes, Agamemnon, Menelaus, Helen,

and Hermione, all of whom figured in the ancient legendary genealogies.

(M332) Tantalus resided, at a remote antiquity, near Mount Sipylus, in

Lydia, and was a man of immense wealth, and pre-eminently favored both by

gods and men. Intoxicated by prosperity, he stole nectar and ambrosia from

the table of the gods, and revealed their secrets, for which he was

punished in the under world by perpetual hunger and thirst, yet placed

with fruit and water near him, which eluded his grasp when he attempted to

touch them. He had two children, Pelops and Niobe. The latter was blessed

with seven sons and seven daughters, which so inflamed her with pride that

she claimed equality with the goddesses Latona and Diana, who favored her

by their friendship. This presumption so incensed the goddesses, that they

killed all her children, and Niobe wept herself to death, and was turned

into a stone, a striking image of excessive grief.

(M333) Pelops was a Lydian king, but was expelled from Asia by Ilus, king

of Troy, for his impieties. He came to Greece, and beat Hippodamenia,

whose father was king of Pisa, near Olympia, in Elis, in a chariot race,

when death was the penalty of failure. He succeeded by the favor of

Poseidon, and married the princess, and became king of Pisa. He gave his

name to the whole peninsula, which he was enabled to do from the great

wealth he brought from Lydia, thus connecting the early settlements of the

Peloponnesus with Asia Minor. He had numerous children, who became the

sovereigns of different cities and states in Argos, Elis, Laconia, and

Arcadia. One of them, Atreus, was king of Mycenæ, who inherited the

sceptre of Zeus, and whose wealth was proverbial. The sceptre was made by

Hephæstus (Vulcan) and given to Zeus; he gave it to Hermes; Hermes

presented it to Pelops; and Pelops gave it to Atreus, the ruler of men.

Atreus and his brother, Thyestes, bequeathed it to Agamemnon, who ruled at

Mycenæ, while his brother, Menelaus, reigned at Sparta. It was the wife of

Menelaus, Helen, who was carried away by Paris, which occasioned the

Trojan war. Agamemnon was killed on his return from Troy, through the

treachery of his wife Clytemnestra, who was seduced by Ægisthus, the son

of Thyestes. His only son, Orestes, afterward avenged the murder, and

recovered Mycenæ. Hermione, the only daughter of Menelaus and Helen, was

given in marriage to the son of Achilles, Neoptolemas, who reigned in

Thessaly. Mycenæ maintained its independence to the Persian invasion, and

is rendered immortal by the Iliad and Odyssey. On the subsequent

ascendency of Sparta, the bones of Orestes were brought from Tegea, where

they had reposed for generations, in a coffin seven cubits long.

The other States of the Peloponnesus, have also their genealogical

legends, which trace their ancestors to gods and goddesses, which I omit,

and turn to those which belong to Attica.

(M334) The great Deucalian deluge, according to legend, happened during

the reign of Ogyges, 1796 years B.C., and 1020 before the first Olympiad.

After a long interval, Cecrops, half man and half serpent, became king of

the country. By some he is represented as a Pelasgian, by others, as an

Egyptian. He introduced the first elements of civilized life—marriage, the

twelve political divisions of Attica, and a new form of worship,

abolishing the bloody sacrifices to Zeus. He gave to the country the name

of Cecropia. During his reign there ensued a dispute between Athenæ and

Poseidon, respecting the possession of the Acropolis. Poseidon struck the

rocks with his trident, and produced a well of salt water; Athenæ planted

an olive tree. The twelve Olympian gods decided the dispute, and awarded

to Athenæ the coveted possession, and she ever afterward remained the

protecting deity of Athens.

(M335) Among his descendants was Theseus, the great legendary hero of

Attica, who was one of the Argonauts, and also one of those who hunted the

Calidomian boar. He freed Attica from robbers and wild beasts, conquered

the celebrated Minotaur of Crete, and escaped from the labyrinth by the

aid of Ariadne, whom he carried off and abandoned. In the Iliad he is

represented as fighting against the centaurs, and in the Hesiodic poems he

is an amorous knight-errant, misguided by the beautiful Ægle. Among his

other feats, inferior only to those of Hercules, he vanquished the

Amazons—a nation of courageous and hardy women, who came from the country

about Caucasus, and whose principal seats were near the modern Trezibond.

They invaded Thrace, Asia Minor, Greece, Syria, Egypt, and the islands of

the Ægean. The foundation of several towns in Asia Minor is ascribed to

them. In the time of Theseus, this semi-mythical and semi-historical race

of female warriors invaded Attica, and even penetrated to Athens, but were

conquered by the hero king. Allusion is made to their defeat throughout

the literature of Athens. Although Theseus was a purely legendary

personage, the Athenians were accustomed to regard him as a great

political reformer and legislator, who consolidated the Athenian

commonwealth, distributing the people into three classes.

(M336) The legends pertaining to Thebes occupy a prominent place in

Grecian mythology. Cadmus, the son of Agenor, king of Phœnicia, leaves his

country in search of his sister Europa, with whom Zeus, in the form of a

bull, had fallen in love, and carried on his back to Crete. He first goes

to Thrace, and thence to Delphi, to learn tidings of Europa, but the god

directs him not to prosecute his search; he is to follow the guidance of a

cow, and to found a city where the animal should lie down. The cow stops

at the site of Thebes. He marries Harmonia, the daughter of Ares and

Aphrodite, after having killed the dragons which guarded the fountain

Allia, and sowed their teeth. From these armed men sprang up, who killed

each other, except five. From these arose the five great families of

Thebes, called Sparti. One of the Sparti marries a daughter of Cadmus,

whose issue was Pentheus, who became king. It was in his reign that

Dionysus appears as a god in Bœotia, the giver of the vine, and obtains

divine honors in Thebes. Among the descendants of Cadmus was Laius. He is

forewarned by an oracle that any son he should beget would destroy him,

and hence he caused the infant Œdipus to be exposed on Mount Cithanon.

Here the herdsmen of Polybus, king of Corinth, find him, and convey him to

their lord who brings him up as his own child. Distressed by the taunts of

companions as to his unknown parentage, he goes to Delphi, to inquire the

name of his real father. He is told not to return to his own country, for

it was his destiny to kill his father and become the husband of his

mother. Knowing no country but Corinth, he pursues his way to Bœotia, and

meets Laius in a chariot drawn by mules. A quarrel ensues from the

insolence of attendants, and Œdipus kills Laius. The brother of Laius,

Creon, succeeds to the throne of Thebes. The country around is vexed with

a terrible monster, with the face of a woman, the wings of a bird, and the

tail of a lion, called the Sphinx, who has learned from the Muses a

riddle, which she proposed to the Thebans, and on every failure to resolve

it one of them was devoured. But no person can solve the riddle. The king

offers his crown and his sister Jocasta, wife of Laius, in marriage to any

one who would explain the riddle. Œdipus solves it, and is made king of

Thebes, and marries Jocasta. A fatal curse rests upon him. Jocasta,

informed by the gods of her relationship, hangs herself in agony. Œdipus

endures great miseries, as well as his children, whom he curses, and who

quarrel about their inheritance, which quarrel leads to the siege of

Thebes by Adrastus, king of Argos, who seeks to restore Polynices—one of

the sons of Œdipus, to the throne of which he was dispossessed. The

Argetan chieftains readily enter into the enterprise, assisted by numerous

auxiliaries from Arcadia and Messenia. The Cadmeans, assisted by the

Phocians, march out to resist the invaders, who are repulsed, in

consequence of the magnanimity of a generous youth, who offers himself a

victim to Ares. Eteocles then proposed to his brother, Polynices, the

rival claimants, to decide the quarrel by single combat. It resulted in

the death of both, and then in the renewal of the general contest, and the

destruction of the Argeian chiefs, and Adrastus’s return to Argos in shame

and woe.

(M337) But Creon, the father of the self-sacrificing Menæceus, succeeds on

the death of the rival brothers, to the administration of Thebes. A second

siege takes place, conducted by Adrastus, and the sons of those who had

been slain. Thebes now falls, and Thereander, the son of Polynices, is

made king. The legends of Thebes have furnished the great tragedians

Sophocles and Euripides, with their finest subjects. In the fable of the

Sphinx we trace a connection between Thebes and ancient Egypt.

But all the legends of ancient Greece yield in interest to that of Troy,

which Homer chose as the subject of his immortal epic.

(M338) Dardanus, a son of Zeus, is the primitive ancestor of the Trojan

kings, whose seat of power was Mount Ida. His son, Erichthonius, became

the richest of mankind, and had in his pastures three thousand mares. His

son, Tros, was the father of Ilus, Assarcus, and Ganymede. The latter was

stolen by Zeus to be his cup-bearer.

(M339) Ilus was the father of Laomedon, under whom Apollo and Poseidon, in

mortal form, went through a temporary servitude—the former tending his

flocks, the latter building the walls of Ilium. Laomedon was killed by

Hercules, in punishment for his perfidy in giving him mortal horses for

his destruction of a sea monster, instead of the immortal horses, as he

had promised, the gift of Zeus to Tros.

(M340) Among the sons of Laomedon was Priam, who was placed upon the

throne. He was the father of illustrious sons, among whom were Hector and

Paris. The latter was exposed on Mount Ida, to avoid the fulfillment of an

evil prophecy, but grew up beautiful and active among the flocks and

herds. It was to him that the three goddesses, Here, Athenæ, and Aphrodite

(Juno, Minerva, and Venus), presented their respective claims to beauty,

which he awarded to Aphrodite, and by whom he was promised, in recompense,

Helen, wife of the Spartan king, Menelaus, and daughter of Zeus. Aphrodite

caused ships to be built for him, and he safely arrived in Sparta, and was

hospitably entertained by the unsuspecting monarch. In the absence of

Menelaus in Crete, Paris carries away to Troy both Helen, and a large sum

of money belonging to the king. Menelaus hastens home, informed of the

perfidy, and consults his brother, Agamemnon, and the venerable Nestor.

They interest the Argeian chieftains, who resolve to recover Helen. Ten

years are spent in preparations, consisting of one thousand one hundred

and eighty-six ships, and one hundred thousand men, comprised of heroes

from all parts of Greece, among whom are Ajax, Diomedes, Achilles, and

Odysseus. The heroes set sail from Aulis, and after various mistakes,

reach Asia.

(M341) Meanwhile the Trojans assemble, with a large body of allies, to

resist the invaders, who demand the redress of a great wrong. The Trojans

are routed in battle, and return within their walls. After various

fortunes, the city is taken, at the end of ten years, by stratagem, and

the Grecian chieftains who were not killed seek to return to their own

country, with Helen among the spoils. They meet with many misfortunes,

from the anger of the gods, for not having spared the altars of Troy.

Their chieftains quarrel among themselves, and even Agamemnon and Menelaus

lose their fraternal friendship. After long wanderings, and bitter

disappointments, and protracted hopes, the heroes return to their

homes—such as war had spared—to recount their adventures and sufferings,

and reconstruct their shattered States, and mend their broken fortunes—a

type of war in all the ages, calamitous even to conquerors. The wanderings

of Ulysses have a peculiar fascination, since they form the subject of the

Odyssey, one of the noblest poems of antiquity. Nor are the adventures of

Æneas scarcely less interesting, as presented by Virgil, who traces the

first Settlement of Latium to the Trojan exiles. We should like to dwell

on the siege of Troy, and its great results, but the subject is too

extensive and complicated. The student of the great event, whether

historical or mystical, must read the detailed accounts in the immortal

epics of Homer. We have only space for the grand outlines, which can be

scarcely more than allusions.

(M342) Scarcely inferior to the legend of Troy, is that which recounts the

return of the descendants of Hercules to the ancient inheritance on the

Peloponnesus, which, it is supposed, took place three or four hundred

years before authentic history begins, or eighty years after the Trojan

war.

We have briefly described the geographical position of the most important

part of ancient Greece—the Peloponnesus—almost an island, separated from

the continent only by a narrow gulf, resembling in shape a palm-tree,

indented on all sides by bays, and intersected with mountains, and

inhabited by a simple and warlike race.

We have seen that the descendants of Perseus, who was a descendant of

Danaus, reigned at Mycenæ in Argolis—among whom was Amphitryon, who fled

to Thebes, on the murder of his uncle, with Alemena his wife. Then

Hercules, to whom the throne of Mycenæ legitimately belonged, was born,

but deprived of his inheritance by Eurystheus—a younger branch of the

Perseids—in consequence of the anger and jealousy of Juno, and to whom, by

the fates, Hercules was made subject. We have seen how the sons of

Hercules, under Hyllos, attempted to regain their kingdom, but were

defeated, and retreated among the Dorians.

(M343) After three generations, the Heraclidæ set out to regain their

inheritance, assisted by the Dorians. They at length, after five

expeditions, gained possession of the country, and divided it, among the

various chieftains, who established their dominion in Argos, Mycenæ, and

Sparta, which, at the time of the Trojan war, was ruled by Agamemnon and

Menelaus, descendants of Pelops. In the next generation, Corinth was

conquered by the Dorians, under an Heraclide prince.

(M344) The Achæans, thus expelled by the Dorians from the south and east

of the Peloponnesus, fell back upon the northwest coast, and drove away

the Ionians, and formed a confederacy of twelve cities, which in later

times became of considerable importance. The dispossessed Ionians joined

their brethren of the same race in Attica, but the rugged peninsula was

unequal to support the increased population, and a great migration took

place to the Cyclades and the coasts of Lydia. The colonists there built

twelve cities, about one hundred and forty years after the Trojan war.

Another body of Achæans, driven out of the Peloponnesus by the Dorians,

first settled in Bœotia, and afterward, with Æolians, sailed to the isle

of Lesbos, where they founded six cities, and then to the opposite

mainland. At the foot of Mount Ida they founded the twelve Æolian cities,

of which Smyrna was the principal.

(M345) Crete was founded by a body of Dorians and conquered Achæans.

Rhodes received a similar colony. So did the island of Cos. The cities of

Lindus, Ialysus, Camirus, Cos, with Cnidus and Halicarnassus, on the

mainland, formed the Dorian Hexapolis of Caria, inferior, however, to the

Ionian and Æolian colonies.

(M346) At the beginning of the mythical age the dominant Hellenic races

were the Achæans and Æolians; at the close, the Ionians and Dorians were

predominant. The Ionians extended their maritime possessions from Attica

to the Asiatic colonies across the Ægean, and gradually took the lead of

the Asiatic Æolians, and formed a great maritime empire under the

supremacy of Athens. The Hellenic world ultimately was divided and

convulsed by the great contest for supremacy between the Dorians and

Ionians, until the common danger from the Persian invasion united them

together for a time.

(M347) Thus far we have only legend to guide us in the early history of

Greece. The historical period begins with the First Olympiad, B.C. 776.

Before this all is uncertain, yet as probable as the events of English

history in the mythical period between the departure of the Romans and the

establishment of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom. The history is not all myth;

neither is it clearly authenticated.

(M348) The various Hellenic tribes, though separated by political

ambition, were yet kindred in language and institutions. They formed great

leagues, or associations, of neighboring cities, for the performance of

religious rites. The Amphictyonic Council, which became subsequently so

famous, was made up of Thessalians, Bœotians, Dorians, Ionians, Achæans,

Locrians, and Phocians—all Hellenic in race. Their great centre was the

temple of Apollo at Delphi. The different tribes or nations also came

together regularly to take part in the four great religious festivals or

games—the Olympic, Pythian, Isthmian, and Nemæan—the two former of which

were celebrated every four years.

(M349) In the Homeric age the dominant State was Achæa, whose capital was

Mycenæ. The next in power was Lacedæmon. After the Dorian conquest, Argos

was the first, Sparta the second, and Messenia the third State in

importance. Argos, at the head of a large confederacy of cities on the

northeast of the Peloponnesus, was governed by Phidon—an irresponsible

ruler, a descendant of Hercules, to whom is inscribed the coinage of

silver and copper money, and the introduction of weights and measures. He

flourished B.C. 747.

(M350) All these various legends, though unsupported by history, have a

great ethical importance, as well as poetic interest. The passions,

habits, and adventures of a primitive and warlike race are presented by

the poets with transcendent effect, and we read lessons of human nature as

in the dramas of Shakespeare. Hence, one of the most learned and dignified

of the English historians deems it worthy of his pen to devote to these

myths a volume of his noble work. Nor is it misplaced labor. These legends

furnished subjects to the tragic and epic poets of antiquity, as well as

to painters and sculptors, in all the ages of art. They are identified

with the development of Grecian genius, and are as imperishable as history

itself. They were to the Greeks realities, and represent all that is vital

in their associations and worship. They stimulated the poetic faculty, and

taught lessons of moral wisdom which all nations respect and venerate.

They contributed to enrich both literature and art. They make Æschylus,

Euripides, Pindar, Homer, and Hesiod great monumental pillars of the

progress of the human race. Therefore, we will not willingly let those

legends die in our memories or hearts.

(M351) They are particularly important as shedding light on the manners,

customs, and institutions of the ancient Greeks, although they give no

reliable historical facts. They are memorials of the first state of

Grecian society, essentially different from the Oriental world. We see in

them the germs of political constitutions—the rise of liberty—the

pre-eminence of families which forms the foundation for oligarchy, or the

ascendency of nobles. We see also the first beginnings of democratic

influence—the voice of the people asserting a claim to be heard in the

market-place. We see again the existence of slavery—captives taken in war

doomed to attendance in princely palaces, and ultimately to menial labor

on the land. In those primitive times a State was often nothing but a

city, with the lands surrounding it, and therefore it was possible for all

the inhabitants to assemble in the agora with the king and nobles. We

find, in the early condition of Greece, kings, nobles, citizens, and

slaves.

(M352) The king was seldom distinguished by any impassable barrier between

himself and subjects. He was rather the chief among his nobles, and his

supremacy was based on descent from illustrious ancestors. It passed

generally to the eldest son. In war he was a leader; in peace, a

protector. He offered up prayers and sacrifices for his people to the gods

in whom they all alike believed. He possessed an ample domain, and the

produce of his lands was devoted to a generous but rude hospitality. He

had a large share of the plunder taken from an enemy, and the most

alluring of the female captives. It was, however, difficult for him to

retain ascendency without great personal gifts and virtues, and especially

bravery on the field of battle, and wisdom in council. To the noblest of

these kings the legends ascribe great bodily strength and activity.

(M353) The kings were assisted by a great council of chieftains or nobles,

whose functions were deliberation and consultation; and after having

talked over their intentions with the chiefs, they announced them to the

people, who assembled in the market-place, and who were generally

submissive to the royal authority, although they were regarded as the

source of power. Then the king, and sometimes his nobles, administered

justice and heard complaints. Public speaking was favorable to eloquence,

and stimulated intellectual development, and gave dignity to tho people to

whom the speeches were addressed.

(M354) In those primitive times there was a strong religious feeling,

great reverence for the gods, whose anger was deprecated, and whose favor

was sought. The ties of families were strong. Paternal authority was

recognized and revered. Marriage was a sacred institution. The wife

occupied a position of great dignity and influence. Women were not

secluded in a harem, as were the Asiatics, but employed in useful labors.

Children were obedient, and brothers, sisters, and cousins were united

together by strong attachments. Hospitality was a cherished virtue, and

the stranger was ever cordially welcome, nor questioned even until

refreshed by the bath and the banquet. Feasts were free from extravagance

and luxury, and those who shared in them enlivened the company by a

recital of the adventures of gods and men. But passions were unrestrained,

and homicide was common. The murderer was not punished by the State, but

was left to the vengeance of kindred and friends, appeased sometimes by

costly gifts, as among the ancient Jews.

(M355) There was a rude civilization among the ancient Greeks, reminding

us of the Teutonic tribes, but it was higher than theirs. We observe the

division of the people into various trades and occupations—carpenters,

smiths, leather-dressers, leeches, prophets, bards, and fishermen,

although the main business was agriculture. Cattle were the great staple

of wealth, and the largest part of the land was devoted to pasture. The

land was tilled chiefly by slaves, and women of the servile class were

doomed to severe labor and privations. They brought the water, and they

turned the mills. Spinning and weaving were, however, the occupations of

all, and garments for men and women were alike made at home. There was

only a limited commerce, which was then monopolized by the Phœnicians, who

exaggerated the dangers of the sea. There were walled cities, palaces, and

temples. Armor was curiously wrought, and arms were well made. Rich

garments were worn by princes, and their palaces glittered with the

precious metals. Copper was hardened so as to be employed in weapons of

war. The warriors had chariots and horses, and were armed with sword,

dagger, and spear, and were protected by helmets, breastplates, and

greaves. Fortified cities were built on rocky elevations, although the

people generally lived in unfortified villages. The means of defense were

superior to those of offense, which enabled men to preserve their

acquisitions, for the ancient chieftains resembled the feudal barons of

the Middle Ages in the passion for robbery and adventure. We do not read

of coined money nor the art of writing, nor sculpture, nor ornamental

architecture among the Homeric Greeks; but they were fond of music and

poetry. Before history commences, they had their epics, which, sung by the

bards and minstrels, furnished Homer and Hesiod with materials for their

noble productions. It is supposed by Grote that the Homeric poems were

composed eight hundred and fifty years before Christ, and preserved two

hundred years without the aid of writing—of all poems the most popular and

natural, and addressed to unlettered minds.

Such were the heroic ages with their myths, their heroes, their simple

manners, their credulity, their religious faith, their rude civilization.

We have now to trace their progress through the historical epoch.

CHAPTER XV.

THE GRECIAN STATES AND COLONIES TO THE PERSIAN WARS.

We come now to consider those States which grew into importance about the

middle of the eighth century before Christ, at the close of the legendary

period.

(M356) The most important of these was Sparta, which was the leading

State. We have seen how it was conquered by Dorians, under Heraclic

princes. Its first great historic name was Lycurgus, whom some historians,

however, regard as a mythical personage.

(M357) Sparta was in a state of anarchy in consequence of the Dorian

conquest, a contest between the kings, aiming at absolute power, and the

people, desirous of democratic liberty. At this juncture the king,

Polydectes, died, leaving Lycurgus, his brother, guardian of the realm,

and of the infant heir to the throne. The future lawgiver then set out on

his travels, visiting the other States of Greece, Asia Minor, Egypt, and

other countries, and returned to Sparta about the period of the first

Olympiad, B.C. 776, with a rich store of wisdom and knowledge. The State

was full of disorders, but he instituted great reforms, aided by the

authority of the Delphic oracle, and a strong party of influential men.

His great object was to convert the citizens of Sparta into warriors

united by the strongest bonds, and trained to the severest discipline,

governed by an oligarchy under the form of the ancient monarchy. In other

words, his object was to secure the ascendency of the small body of Dorian

invaders that had conquered Laconia.

(M358) The descendants of these invaders, the Spartans, alone possessed

the citizenship, and were equal in political rights. They were the

proprietors of the soil, which was tilled by Helots. The Spartans

disdained any occupation but war and government. They lived within their

city, which was a fortified camp, and ate in common at public tables, and

on the simplest fare. Every virtue and energy were concentrated on

self-discipline and sacrifice, in order to fan the fires of heroism and

self-devotion. They were a sort of stoics—hard, severe, proud, despotic,

and overbearing. They cared nothing for literature, or art, or philosophy.

Even eloquence was disdained, and the only poetry or music they cultivated

were religions hymns and heroic war songs. Commerce was forbidden by the

constitution, and all the luxuries to which it leads. Only iron was

allowed for money, and the precious metals were prohibited. Every

exercise, every motive, every law, contributed to make the Spartans

soldiers, and nothing but soldiers. Their discipline was the severest

known to the ancients. Their habits of life were austere and rigid. They

were trained to suffer any hardship without complaint.

(M359) Besides these Spartan citizens were the _Periœci_—remnants of the

old Achæan population, but mixed with an inferior class of Dorians. They

had no political power, but possessed personal freedom. They were landed

proprietors, and engaged in commerce and manufactures.

(M360) Below this class were the Helots—pure Greeks, but reduced to

dependence by conquest. They were bound to the soil, like serfs, but dwelt

with their families on the farms they tilled. They were not bought and

sold as slaves. They were the body servants of the Spartan citizens, and

were regarded as the property of the State. They were treated with great

haughtiness and injustice by their masters, which bred at last an intense

hatred.

(M361) All political power was in the hands of the citizen warriors, only

about nine thousand in number in the time of Lycurgus. From them emanated

all delegated authority, except that of kings. This assembly, or

_ecclesia_, of Spartans over thirty years of age, met at stated intervals

to decide on all important matters submitted to them, but they had no

right of amendment—only a simple approval or rejection.

(M362) The body to which the people, it would seem, delegated considerable

power, was the Senate, composed of thirty members, not under sixty years

of age, and elected for life. They were a deliberative body, and judges in

all capital charges against Spartans. They were not chosen for noble birth

or property qualifications, but for merit and wisdom.

(M363) At the head of the State, at least nominally, were two kings, who

were numbered with the thirty senators. They had scarcely more power than

the Roman consuls; they commanded the armies, and offered the public

sacrifices, and were revered as the descendants of Hercules.

(M364) The persons of most importance were the ephors, chosen annually by

the people, who exercised the chief executive power, and without

responsibility. They could even arrest kings, and bring them to trial

before the Senate. Two of the five ephors accompanied the king in war, and

were a check on his authority.

(M365) It would thus seem that the government of Sparta was a republic of

an aristocratic type. There were no others nobler than citizens, but these

citizens composed but a small part of the population. They were Spartans—a

handful of conquerors, in the midst of hostile people—a body of lords

among slaves and subjects. They sympathized with law and order, and

detested the democratical turbulence of Athens. They were trained, by

their military education, to subordination, obedience, and self-sacrifice.

They, as citizens or as soldiers, existed only for the _State_, and to the

State every thing was subordinate. In our times, the State is made for the

people; in Sparta, the people for the State. This generated an intense

patriotism and self-denial. It also permitted a greater interference of

the State in personal matters than would now be tolerated in any despotism

in Europe. It made the citizens submissive to a division of property,

which if not a perfect community of goods, was fatal to all private

fortunes. But the property which the citizens thus shared was virtually

created by the Helots, who alone tilled the ground. The wealth of nations

is in the earth, and it is its cultivation which is the ordinary source of

property. The State, not individual masters, owned the Helots; and they

toiled for the citizens. In the modern sense of liberty, there was very

little in Sparta, except that which was possessed by the aristocratic

citizens—the conquerors of the country—men, whose very occupation was war

and government, and whose very amusement were those which fostered warlike

habits. The Roman citizens did not disdain husbandry, nor the Puritan

settlers of New England, but the Spartan citizens despised both this and

all trade and manufacture. Never was a haughtier class of men than these

Spartan soldiers. They exceeded in pride the feudal chieftain.

(M366) Such an exclusive body of citizens, however, jealous of their

political privileges, constantly declined in numbers, so that, in the time

of Aristotle, there were only one thousand Spartan citizens; and this

decline continued in spite of all the laws by which the citizens were

compelled to marry, and those customs, so abhorrent to our Christian

notions, which permitted the invasion of marital rights for the sake of

healthy children.

(M367) As it was to war that the best energies of the Spartans were

directed, so their armies were the admiration of the ancient world for

discipline and effectiveness. They were the first who reduced war to a

science. The general type of their military organization was the phalanx,

a body of troops in close array, armed with a long spear and short sword.

The strength of an army was in the heavy armed infantry; and this body was

composed almost entirely of citizens, with a small mixture of Periœci.

From the age of twenty to sixty, every Spartan was liable to military

service; and all the citizens formed an army, whether congregated at

Sparta, or absent on foreign service.

Such, in general, were the social, civil, and military institutions of

Sparta, and not peculiar to her alone, but to all the Dorians, even in

Crete; from which we infer that it was not Lycurgus who shaped them, but

that they existed independent of his authority. He may have re-established

the old regulations, and gave his aid to preserve the State from

corruption and decay. And when we remember that the constitution which he

re-established resisted both the usurpations of tyrants and the advances

of democracy, by which other States were revolutionized, we can not

sufficiently admire the wisdom which so early animated the Dorian

legislators.

(M368) The Spartans became masters of the country after a long struggle,

and it was henceforth called Laconia. The more obstinate Achæans became

Helots. After the conquest, the first memorable event in Spartan history

was the reduction of Messenia, for which it took two great wars.

(M369) Messenia has already been mentioned as the southwestern part of the

Peloponnesus, and resembling Laconia in its general aspects. The river

Parnisus flows through its entire length, as Eurotas does in Laconia,

forming fertile valleys and plains, and producing various kinds of cereals

and fruits, even as it now produces oil, silk, figs, wheat, maize, cotton,

wine, and honey. The area of Messenia is one thousand one hundred and

ninety-two square miles, not so large as one of our counties. The early

inhabitants had been conquered by the Dorians, and it was against the

descendants of these conquerors that the Spartans made war. The murder of

a Spartan king, Teleclus, at a temple on the confines of Laconia and

Messenia, where sacrifices were offered in common, gave occasion for the

first war, which lasted nineteen years, B.C. 743. Other States were

involved in the quarrel—Corinth on the side of Sparta, and Sicyon and

Arcadia on the part of the Messenians. The Spartans having the superiority

in the field, the Messenians retreated to their stronghold of Ithome,

where they defended themselves fifteen years. But at last they were

compelled to abandon it, and the fortress was razed to the ground. The

conquered were reduced to the condition of Helots—compelled to cultivate

the land and pay half of its produce to their new masters. The Spartan

citizens became the absolute owners of the whole soil of Messenia.

(M370) After thirty-nine years of servitude, a hero arose among the

conquered Messenians, Aristomenes, like Judas Maccabeus, or William

Wallace, who incited his countrymen to revolt. The whole of the

Peloponnesus became involved in the new war, and only Corinth became the

ally of Sparta; the remaining States of Argos, Sicyon, Arcadia, and Pisa,

sided with the Messenians. The Athenian poet, Tyrtæus, stimulated the

Spartans by his war-songs. In the first great battle, the Spartans were

worsted; in the second, they gained a signal victory, so that the

Messenians were obliged to leave the open country and retire to the

fortress on Mount Ira. Here they maintained themselves eleven years, the

Spartans being unused to sieges, and trained only to conflict in the open

field. The fortress was finally taken by treachery, and the hero who

sought to revive the martial glories of his State fled to Rhodes. Messenia

became now, B.C. 668, a part of Laconia, and it was three hundred years

before it appeared again in history.

(M371) The Spartans, after the conquest of Messenia, turned their eyes

upon Arcadia—that land of shepherds, free and simple and brave like

themselves. The city of Tegea long withstood the arms of the Spartans, but

finally yielded to superior strength, and became a subject ally, B.C. 560.

Sparta was further increased by a part of Argos, and a great battle, B.C.

547, between the Argives and Spartans, resulted in the complete ascendency

of Sparta in the southern part of the Peloponnesus, about the time that

Cyrus overthrew the Lydian empire. The Ionian Greeks of Asia Minor invoked

their aid against the Persian power, and Sparta proudly rallied in their

defense.

(M372) Meanwhile, a great political revolution was going on in the other

States of Greece, in no condition to resist the pre-eminence of Sparta,

The patriarchal monarchies of the heroic ages had gradually been subverted

by the rising importance of the nobility, enriched by conquered lands.

Every conquest, every step to national advancement, brought the nobles

nearer to the crown, and the government passed into the hands of those

nobles who had formerly composed the council of the king. With the growing

power of nobles was a corresponding growth of the political power of the

people or citizens, in consequence of increased wealth and intelligence.

The political changes were rapid. As the nobles had usurped the power of

the kings, so the citizens usurped the power of the nobles. The

everlasting war of classes, where the people are intelligent and free, was

signally illustrated in the Grecian States, and democracy succeeded to the

oligarchy which had prostrated kings. Then, when the people had gained the

ascendency, ambitious and factious demagogues in turn, got the control,

and these adventurers, now called Tyrants, assumed arbitrary powers. Their

power was only maintained by cruelty, injustice, and unscrupulous means,

which caused them finally to be so detested that they were removed by

assassination. These natural changes, from a monarchy, primitive and just

and limited, to an oligarchy of nobles, and the gradual subversion of

their power by wealthy and enlightened citizens, and then the rise of

demagogues, who became tyrants, have been illustrated in all ages of the

world. But the rapidity of these changes in the Grecian States, with the

progress of wealth and corruption, make their history impressive on all

generations. It is these rapid and natural revolutions which give to the

political history of Greece its permanent interest and value. The age of

the Tyrants is generally fixed from B.C. 650 to B.C. 500—about one hundred

and fifty years.

(M373) No State passed through these changes of government more signally

than Corinthia, which, with Megaris, formed the isthmus which connected

the Peloponnesus with Greece Proper. It was a small territory, covered

with the ridges and the spurs of the Geranean and and Oneian mountains,

and useless for purposes of agriculture. Its principal city was Corinth;

was favorably situated for commerce, and rapidly grew in population and

wealth. It also commanded the great roads which led from Greece Proper

through the defiles of the mountains into the Peloponnesus. It rapidly

monopolized the commerce of the Ægean Sea, and the East through the

Saronic Gulf; and through the Corinthian Gulf it commanded the trade of

the Ionian and Sicilian seas.

(M374) Corinth, by some, is supposed have been a Phœnician colony. Before

authentic history begins, it was inhabited by a mixed population of

Æolians and Ionians, the former of whom were dominant. Over them reigned

Sisyphus, according to tradition, the grandfather of Bellerophon who laid

the foundation of mercantile prosperity. The first historical king was

Aletes, B.C. 1074, the leader of Dorian invaders, who subdued the Æolians,

and incorporated them with their own citizens. The descendants of Aletes

reigned twelve generations, when the nobles converted the government into

an oligarchy, under Bacchis, who greatly increased the commercial

importance of the city. In 754, B.C., Corinth began to colonize, and

fitted out a war fleet for the protection of commerce. The oligarchy was

supplanted by Cypselus, B.C. 655, a man of the people, whose mother was of

noble birth, but rejected by her family, of the ruling house of the

Bacchiadæ, on account of lameness. His son Periander reigned forty years

with cruel despotism, but made Corinth the leading commercial city of

Greece, and he subjected to her sway the colonies planted on the islands

of the Ionian Sea, one of which was Corcyra (Corfu), which gained a great

mercantile fame. It was under his reign that the poet Arion, or Lesbos,

flourished, to whom he gave his patronage. In three years after the death

of Periander, 585 B.C., the oligarchal power was restored, and Corinth

allied herself with Sparta in her schemes of aggrandizement.

(M375) The same change of government was seen in Megara, a neighboring

State, situated on the isthmus, between Corinth and Attica, and which

attained great commercial distinction. As a result of commercial opulence,

the people succeeded in overthrowing the government, an oligarchy of

Dorian conquerors, and elevating a demagogue, Theagenes, to the supreme

power, B.C. 630. He ruled tyrannically, in the name of the people, for

thirty years, but was expelled by the oligarchy, which regained power.

During his reign all kinds of popular excesses were perpetrated,

especially the confiscation of the property of the rich.

(M376) Other States are also illustrations of this change of government

from kings to oligarchies, and oligarchies to demagogues and tyrants, as

on the isle of Lesbos, where Pittacus reigned dictator, but with wisdom

and virtue—one of the seven wise men of Greece—and in Samos, where

Polycrates rivaled the fame of Periander, and adorned his capital with

beautiful buildings, and patronized literature and art. One of his friends

was Anacreon, the poet. He was murdered by the Persians, B.C. 522.

But the State which most signally illustrates the revolutions in

government was Athens.

“Where on the Ægean shore a city stands,—

Built nobly; pure the air, and light the soil:

Athena, the eye of Greece, mother of arts

And eloquence, native to famous wits.”

(M377) Every thing interesting or impressive in the history of classical

antiquity clusters round this famous city, so that without Athens there

could be no Greece. Attica, the little State of which it was the capital,

formed a triangular peninsula, of about seven hundred square miles. The

country is hilly and rocky, and unfavorable to agriculture; but such was

the salubrity of the climate, and the industry of the people, all kinds of

plants and animals flourished. The history of the country, like that of

the other States, is mythical, to the period of the first Olympiad. Ogyges

has the reputation of being the first king of a people who claimed to be

indigenous, about one hundred and fifty years before the arrival of

Cecrops, who came, it is supposed, from Egypt, and founded Athens, and

taught the simple but savage natives a new religion, and the elements of

civilized life, 1556 B.C. It received its name from the goddess Neith,

introduced by him from Egypt, under the name of Athena, or Minerva. It was

also called Cecropia, from its founder. Until the time of Theseus it was a

small town, confined to the Acropolis and Mars Hill. This hero is the

great name of ancient Athenian legend, as Hercules is to Greece generally.

He cleared the roads of robbers, and formed an aristocratical

constitution, with a king, who was only the first of his nobles. But he

himself, after having given political unity, was driven away by a

conspiracy of nobles, leaving the throne to Menesthius, a descendant of

the ancient kings. This monarch reigned twenty-four years, and lost his

life at the siege of Troy. The whole period of the monarchy lies within

the mythical age. Tradition makes Codrus the last king, who was slain

during an invasion of the Dorians, B.C. 1045. Resolving to have no future

king, the Athenians substituted the office of archon, or ruler, and made

his son, Medus, the superior magistrate. This office remained hereditary

in the family of Codrus for thirteen generations. In B.C. 752, the

duration of the office was fixed for ten years. It remained in the family

of Codrus thirty-eight years longer, when it was left open for all the

nobles. In 683 B.C. nine archons were annually elected from the nobles,

the first having superior dignity.

(M378) The first of these archons, of whom any thing of importance is

recorded, was Draco, who governed Athens in the year 624 B.C., who

promulgated written laws, exceedingly severe, inflicting capital

punishment for slight offenses. The people grew weary of him and his laws,

and he was banished to Ægina, where he died, from a conspiracy headed by

Cylon, one of the nobles, who seized the Acropolis, B.C. 612. His

insurrection, however, failed, and he was treacherously put to death by

one of the archons, which led to the expulsion of the whole body, and a

change in the constitution.

(M379) This was effected by Solon, the Athenian sage and law-giver—himself

of the race of Codrus, whom the Athenians chose as archon, with full power

to make new laws. Intrusted with absolute power, he abstained from abusing

it—a patriot in the most exalted sense, as well as a poet and philosopher.

Urged by his friends to make himself tyrant, he replied that tyranny might

be a fair country, only there was no way out of it.

(M380) When he commenced his reforms, the nobles, or Eupatridæ, were in

possession of most of the fertile land of Attica, while the poorer

citizens possessed only the sterile highlands. This created an unhappy

jealousy between the rich and poor. Besides, there was another class that

had grown rich by commerce, animated by the spirit of freedom. But their

influence tended to widen the gulf between the rich and poor. The poor got

into debt, and fell in the power of creditors, and sunk to the condition

of serfs, and many were even sold in slavery, for the laws were severe

against debtors, as in ancient Rome. Solon, like Moses in his institution

of the Year of Jubilee, set free all the estates and persons that had

fallen in the power of creditors, and ransomed such as were sold in

slavery.

(M381) Having removed the chief source of enmity between the rich and

poor, he repealed the bloody laws of Draco, and commenced to remodel the

political constitution. The fundamental principles which he adopted was a

distribution of power to all citizens according to their wealth. But the

nobles were not deprived of their ascendency, only the way was opened to

all citizens to reach political distinction, especially those who were

enriched by commerce. He made an assessment of the landed property of all

the citizens, taking as the medium a standard of value which was

equivalent to a drachma of annual produce. The first class, who had no

aristocratic titles, were called Pentacosio medimni, from possessing five

hundred medimni or upward. They alone were eligible to the archonship and

other high offices, and bore the largest share of the public burdens. The

second class was called Knights, because they were bound to serve as

cavalry. They filled the inferior offices, farmed the revenue, and had the

commerce of the country in their hands.

(M382) The third class was called Zeugitæ (yokesmen), from their ability

to keep a yoke of oxen. They were small farmers, and served in the

heavy-armed infantry, and were subject to a property-tax. All those whose

incomes fell short of two hundred medimni formed the fourth class, and

served in the light-armed troops, and were exempt from property-tax, but

disqualified for public office, and yet they had a vote in popular

elections, and in the judgment passed upon archons at the expiration of

office. “The direct responsibility of all the magistrates to the popular

assembly, was the most democratic of all the institutions of Solon; and

though the government was still in the hands of the oligarchy, Solon

clearly foresaw, if he did not purposely prepare for, the preponderance of

the popular element.” “To guard against hasty measures, he also instituted

the Senate of four hundred, chosen year by year, from the four Ionic

tribes, whose office was to prepare all business for the popular assembly,

and regulate its meetings. The Areopagus retained its ancient functions,

to which Solon added a general oversight over all the public institutions,

and over the private life of the citizens. He also enacted many other laws

for the administration of justice, the regulation of social life, the

encouragement of commerce, and the general prosperity of the State.” His

whole legislation is marked by wisdom and patriotism, and adaptation to

the circumstances of the people who intrusted to him so much power and

dignity. The laws were, however, better than the people, and his

legislative wisdom and justice place him among the great benefactors of

mankind, for who can tell the ultimate influence of his legislation on

Rome and on other nations. The most beautiful feature was the

responsibility of the chief magistrates to the people who elected them,

and from the fact that they could subsequently be punished for bad conduct

was the greatest security against tyranny and peculation.

(M383) After having given this constitution to his countrymen, the

lawgiver took his departure from Athens, for ten years, binding the people

by a solemn oath to make no alteration in his laws. He visited Egypt,

Cyprus, and Asia Minor, and returned to Athens to find his work nearly

subverted by one of his own kinsmen. Pisistratus, of noble origin, but a

demagogue, contrived, by his arts and prodigality, to secure a guard,

which he increased, and succeeded in seizing the Acropolis, B.C. 560, and

in usurping the supreme authority—so soon are good laws perverted, so

easily are constitutions overthrown, when demagogues and usurpers are

sustained by the people. A combination of the rich and poor drove him into

exile; but their divisions and hatreds favored his return. Again he was

exiled by popular dissension, and a third time he regained his power, but

only by a battle. He sustained his usurpation by means of Thracian

mercenaries, and sent the children of all he suspected as hostages to

Naxos. He veiled his despotic power under the forms of the constitution,

and even submitted himself to the judgment of the Areopagus on the charge

of murder. He kept up his popularity by generosity and affability, by

mingling freely with the citizens, by opening to them his gardens, by

adorning the city with beautiful edifices, and by a liberal patronage of

arts and letters. He founded a public library, and collected the Homeric

poems in a single volume. He ruled beneficently, as tyrants often

have,—like Cæsar, like Richelieu, like Napoleon,—identifying his own glory

with the welfare of the State. He died after a successful reign of

thirty-three years, B.C. 527, and his two sons, Hippias and Hipparchus,

succeeded him in the government, ruling, like their father, at first

wisely but despotically, cultivating art and letters and friendship of

great men. But sensual passions led to outrages which resulted in the

assassination of Hipparchus. Hippias, having punished the conspirators,

changed the spirit of the government, imposed arbitrary taxes, surrounded

himself with an armed guard, and ruled tyrannically and cruelly. After

four years of despotic government, Athens was liberated, chiefly by aid of

the Lacedæmonians, now at the highest of their power. Hippias retired to

the court of Persia, and planned and guided the attack of Darius on

Greece—a traitor of the most infamous kind, since he combined tyranny at

home with the coldest treachery to his country. His accursed family were

doomed to perpetual banishment, and never succeeded in securing a pardon.

Their power had lasted fifty years, and had been fatal to the liberties of

Athens.

(M384) The Lacedæmonians did not retire until their king Cleomenes formed

a close friendship with Isagoras, the leader of the aristocratic party—and

no people were prouder of their birth than the old Athenian nobles.

Opposed to him was Cleisthenes, of the noble family of the Alcmæonids, who

had been banished in the time of Megacles, for the murder of Cylon, who

had been treacherously enticed from the sanctuary at the altar of Athena.

Cleisthenes gained the ear of the people, and prevailed over Isagoras, and

effected another change in the constitution, by which it became still more

democratic. He remodeled the basis of citizenship, heretofore confined to

the four Ionic tribes; and divided the whole country into demes, or

parishes, each of which managed its local affairs. All freemen were

enrolled in the demes, and became members of the tribes, now ten in

number, instead of the old four Ionian tribes. He increased the members of

the senate from four to five hundred, fifty members being elected from

each tribe. To this body was committed the chief functions of executive

government. It sat in permanence, and was divided into ten sections, one

for each tribe, and each section or committee, called _prytany_, had the

presidency of the senate and ecclesia during its term. Each prytany of

fifty members was subdivided into committees of ten, each of which held

the presidency for seven days, and out of these a chairman was chosen by

lot every day, to preside in the senate and assembly, and to keep the keys

of the Acropolis and treasury, and public seal. Nothing shows jealousy of

power more than the brief term of office which the president exercised.

(M385) The ecclesia, or assembly of the people, was the arena for the

debate of all public measures. The archons were chosen according to the

regulations of Solon, but were stripped of their power, which was

transferred to the senate and ecclesia. The generals were elected by the

people annually, one from each tribe. They were called strategi, and had

also the direction of foreign affairs. It was as first strategus that

Pericles governed—“prime minister of the people.”

(M386) In order to guard against the ascendency of tyrants—the great evil

of the ancient States, Cleisthenes devised the institution of _ostracism_,

by which a suspected or obnoxious citizen could be removed from the city

for ten years, though practically abridged to five. It simply involved an

exclusion from political power, without casting a stigma on the character.

It was virtually a retirement, during which his property and rights

remained intact, and attended with no disgrace. The citizens, after the

senate had decreed the vote was needful, were required to write a name in

an oyster shell, and he who had less than six thousand votes was obliged

to withdraw within ten days from the city. The wisdom of this measure is

proved in the fact that no tyrannical usurpation occurred at Athens after

that of Pisistratus. This revolution which Cleisthenes effected was purely

democratic, to which the aristocrats did not submit without a struggle.

The aristocrats called to their aid the Spartans, but without other effect

than creating that long rivalry which existed between democracy and

oligarchy in Greece, in which Sparta and Athens were the representatives.

About this time began the dominion of Athens over the islands of the Ægean

and the system of colonizing conquered States, This was the period which

immediately preceded the Persian wars, when Athens reached the climax of

political glory.

(M387) Next in importance to the States which have been briefly mentioned

was Bœotia, which contained fourteen cities, united in a confederacy, of

which Thebes took the lead. They were governed by magistrates, called

bœtarchs, elected annually. In these cities aristocratic institutions

prevailed. The people were chiefly of Æolian descent, with a strong

mixture of the Dorian element, and were dull and heavy, owing, probably,

to the easy facilities of support, in consequence of the richness of the

soil.

(M388) At the west of Bœotia, Phocis, with its small territory, gained

great consideration from the possession of the Delphic oracle; but its

people thus far, of Achæan origin, played no important part in the

politics of Greece.

(M389) North of the isthmus lay the extensive plains of Thessaly, inclosed

by lofty mountains. Nature favored this State more than any other in

Greece for political pre-eminence, but inhabitants of Æolian origin were

any thing but famous. At first they were governed by kings, but

subsequently an aristocratic government prevailed. They were represented

in the Amphictyonic Council.

(M390) The history of Macedonia is obscure till the time of the Persian

wars; but its kings claimed an Heraclid origin. The Doric dialect

predominated in a rude form.

(M391) Epirus, west of Thessaly and Macedonia, was inhabited by various

tribes, under their own princes, until the kings of Molossus, claiming

descent from Achilles, founded the dynasty which was so powerful under

Pyrrus.

There is but little interest connected with the States of Greece, before

the Persian wars, except Sparta, Athens, and Corinth; and hence a very

brief notice is all that is needed.

(M392) But the Grecian colonies are of more importance. They were numerous

in the islands of the Ægean Sea, in Epirus, and in Asia Minor, and even

extended into Italy, Sicily, and Gaul. They were said to be planted as

early as the Trojan war by the heroes who lived to return—by Agamemnon on

the coast of Asia; by the sons of Theseus in Thrace; by Ialmenus on the

Euxine; by Diomed and others in Italy. But colonization, to any extent,

did not take place until the Æolians invaded Bœotia, and the Dorians, the

Peloponnesus. The Achæans, driven from their homes by the Dorians, sought

new seats in the East, under chieftains who claimed descent from Agamemnon

and other heroes who went to the siege of Troy. They settled, first, on

the Isle of Lesbos, where they founded six cities. Others made settlements

on the mainland, from the Hermes to Mount Ida. But the greatest migration

was made by the Ionians, who, dislodged by Achæans, went first to Attica,

and thence to the Cyclades and the coasts of Asia, afterward called Ionia.

Twelve independent States were gradually formed of divers elements, and

assumed the Ionian name. Among those twelve cities, or States, were

Sarnos, Chios, Miletus, Ephesus, Colophon, and Phocæa. The purest Ionian

blood was found at Miletus, the seat of Neleus. These cities were probably

inhabited by other races before the Ionians came. To these another was

subsequently added—Smyrna, which still retains its ancient name. The

southwest corner of the Asiatic peninsula, about the same time, was

colonized by a body of Dorians, accompanied by conquered Achæans, the

chief seat of which was Halicarnassus. Crete, Rhodes, Cos, and Cnidus,

were colonized also by the same people; but Rhodes is the parent of the

Greek colonies on the south coast of Asia Minor. A century afterward,

Cyprus was founded, and then Sicily was colonized, and then the south of

Italy. They were successively colonized by different Grecian tribes,

Achæan or Æolian, Dorian, and Ionian. But all the colonists had to contend

with races previously established, Iberians, Phœnicians, Sicanians; and

Sicels. Among the Greek cities in Sicily, Syracuse, founded by Dorians,

was the most important, and became, in turn, the founder of other cities.

Sybaris and Croton, in the south of Italy, were of Achæan origin. The

Greeks even penetrated to the northern part of Africa, and founded Cyrene;

while, on the Euxine, along the north coast of Asia Minor, Cyzicus and

Sinope arose. These migrations were generally undertaken with the

approbation and encouragement of the mother States. There was no colonial

jealousy, and no dependence. The colonists, straitened for room at home,

carried the benedictions of their fathers, and were emancipated from their

control. Sometimes the colony became more powerful than the parent State,

but both colonies and parent States were bound together by strong ties of

religion, language, customs, and interests. The colonists uniformly became

conquerors where they settled, but ever retained their connection with the

mother country. And they grew more rapidly than the States from which they

came, and their institutions were more democratic. The Asiatic colonies

especially, made great advances in civilization by their contact with the

East. Music, poetry, and art were cultivated with great enthusiasm. The

Ionians took the lead, and their principal city, Miletus, is said to have

planted no less than eighty colonies. The greatness of Ephesus was of a

later date, owing, in part, to the splendid temple of Artemis, to which

Asiatics as well as Greeks made contributions. One of the most remarkable

of the Greek colonies was Cyrene, on the coast of Africa, which was of

peculiar beauty, and was famous for eight hundred years.

(M393) So the Greeks, although they occupied a small territory, yet, by

their numerous colonies in all those parts watered by the Mediterranean,

formed, if not politically, at least socially, a powerful empire, and

exercised a vast influence on the civilized world. From Cyprus to

Marseilles—from the Crimea to Cyrene, numerous States spoke the same

language, and practiced the same rites, which were observed in Athens and

Sparta. Hence the great extent of country in Asia and Europe to which the

Greek language was familiar, and still more the arts which made Athens the

centre of a new civilization. Some of the most noted philosophers and

artists of antiquity were born in these colonies. The power of Hellas was

not a centralized empire, like Persia, or even Rome, but a domain in the

heart and mind of the world. It was Hellas which worked out, in its

various States and colonies, great problems of government, as well as

social life. Hellas was the parent of arts, of poetry, of philosophy, and

of all æsthetic culture—the pattern of new forms of life, and new modes of

cultivation. It is this Grecian civilization which appeared in full

development as early as five hundred years before the Christian era, which

we now propose, in a short chapter, to present—the era which immediately

preceded the Persian wars.

CHAPTER XVI.

GRECIAN CIVILIZATION BEFORE THE PERSIAN WARS.

Early civilization. We understand by civilization the progress which

nations have made in art, literature, material strength, social culture,

and political institutions, by which habits are softened, the mind

enlarged, the soul elevated, and a wise government, by laws established,

protecting the weak, punishing the wicked, and developing wealth and

national resources.

Such a civilization did exist to a remarkable degree among the Greeks,

which was not only the admiration of their own times, but a wonder to all

succeeding ages, since it was established by the unaided powers of man,

and affected the relations of all the nations of Europe and Asia which

fell under its influence.

It is this which we propose briefly to present in this chapter, not the

highest developments of Grecian culture and genius, but such as existed in

the period immediately preceding the Persian wars.

(M394) One important feature in the civilization of Greece was the

progress made in legislation by Lycurmis and Solon, But as this has been

alluded to, we pass on to consider first those institutions which were

more national and universal.

(M395) The peculiar situations of the various States, independent of each

other, warlike, encroaching, and ambitious, led naturally to numerous

wars, which would have been civil wars had all these petty States been

united under a common government. But incessant wars, growing out of

endless causes of irritation, would have soon ruined these States, and

they could have had no proper development. Something was needed to

restrain passion and heal dissensions without a resort to arms, ever

attended by dire calamities. And something was needed to unite these

various States, in which the same language was spoken, and the same

religion and customs prevailed. This union was partially effected by the

Amphictyonic Council. It was a congress, composed of deputies from the

different States, and deliberating according to rules established from

time immemorial. Its meetings were held in two different places, and were

convened twice a year, once in the spring, at Delphi, the other in the

autumn, near the pass of Thermopylæ. Delphi was probably the original

place of meeting, and was, therefore, in one important sense, the capital

of Greece. Originally, this council or congress was composed of deputies

from twelve States, or tribes—Thessalians, Bœotians, Dorians, Ionians,

Perrhæbians, Magnetes, Locrians, Octæans, Phthiots, Achæans, Melians, and

Phocians. These tribes assembled together before authentic history

commences, before the return of the Heracleids. There were other States

which were not represented in this league—Arcadia, Elis, Æolia, and

Acarnania; but the league was sufficiently powerful to make its decisions

respected by the greater part of Greece. Each tribe, whether powerful or

weak, had two votes in the assembly. Beside those members who had the

exclusive power of voting, there were others, and more numerous, who had

the privilege of deliberation. The object of the council was more for

religious purposes than political, although, on rare occasions and

national crises, subjects of a political nature were discussed. The

council laid down the rules of war, by which each State that was

represented was guaranteed against complete subjection, and the supplies

of war were protected. There was no confederacy against foreign powers.

The functions of the league were confined to matters purely domestic; the

object of the league was the protection of temples against sacrilege. But

the council had no common army to execute its decrees, which were often

disregarded. In particular, the protection of the Delphic oracle, it acted

with dignity and effect, whose responses were universally respected.

(M396) As the Delphic oracle was the object which engrossed the most

important duties of the council, and the responses of this oracle in early

times was a sacred law, the deliberations of the league had considerable

influence, and were often directed to political purposes. But the

immediate management of the oracle was in the hands of the citizens of

Delphi. In process of time the responses of the oracle, by the mouth of a

woman, which were thus controlled by the Delphians, lost much of their

prestige, in consequence of the presents or bribery by which favorable

responses were gained.

(M397) More powerful than this council, as an institution, were the

Olympic games, solemnized every four years, in which all the states of

Greece took part. These games lasted four days, and were of engrossing

interest. They were supposed to be founded by Hercules, and were of very

ancient date. During these celebrations there was a universal truce, and

also during the time it was necessary for the people to assemble and

retire to their homes. Elis, in whose territory Olympia was situated, had

the whole regulation of the festival, the immediate object of which were

various trials of strength and skill. They included chariot races, foot

races, horse races, wrestling, boxing, and leaping. They were open to all,

even to the poorest Greeks; no accidents of birth or condition affected

these honorable contests. The palm of honor was given to the men who had

real merit. A simple garland of leaves was the prize, but this was

sufficient to call out all the energies and ambition of the whole nation.

There were, however, incidental advantages to successful combatants. At

Athens, the citizen who gained a prize was rewarded by five hundred

drachmas, and was entitled to a seat at the table of the magistrates, and

had a conspicuous part on the field of battle. The victors had statues

erected to them, and called forth the praises of the poets, and thus these

primitive sports incidentally gave an impulse to art and poetry. In later

times, poets and historians recited their compositions, and were rewarded

with the garland of leaves. The victors of these games thus acquired a

social pre-eminence, and were held in especial honor, like those heroes in

the Middle Ages who obtained the honor of tournaments and tilts, and, in

modern times, those who receive decoration at the hands of kings.

(M398) The celebrity of the Olympic games, which drew spectators from Asia

as well as all the States of Greece, led to similar institutions or

festivals in other places. The Pythian games, in honor of Apollo, were

celebrated near Delphi every third Olympic year; and various musical

contests, exercises in poetry, exhibitions of works of art were added to

gymnastic exercises and chariot and horse races. The sacrifices,

processions, and other solemnities, resemble those at Olympia in honor of

Zeus. They lasted as long as the Olympic games, down to A.D. 394. Wherever

the worship of Apollo was introduced, there were imitations of these

Pythian games in all the States of Greece.

(M399) The Nemæan and Ithmian games were celebrated each twice in every

Olympiad, the former on the plain of Nemæa, in Argolis; the latter in the

Corinthian Isthmus, under the presidency of Corinth. These also claimed a

high antiquity, and at these were celebrated the same feats of strength as

at Olympia. But the Olympic festival was the representation of all the

rest, and transcended all the rest in national importance. It was viewed

with so much interest, that the Greeks measured time itself by them. It

was Olympiads, and not years, by which the date of all events was

determined. The Romans reckoned their years from the foundation of their

city; modern Christian nations, by the birth of Christ; Mohammedans, by

the flight of the prophet to Medina; and the Greeks, from the first

recorded Olympiad, B.C. 776.

(M400) It was in these festivals, at which no foreigner, however eminent,

was allowed to contend for prizes, that the Greeks buried their quarrels,

and incited each other to heroism. The places in which they were

celebrated became marts of commerce like the mediæval fairs of Germany;

and the vast assemblage of spectators favored that communication of news,

and inventions, and improvements which has been produced by our modern

exhibitions. These games answered all the purposes of our races, our

industrial exhibitions, and our anniversaries, religious, political,

educational, and literary, and thus had a most decided influence on the

development of Grecian thought and enterprise. The exhibition of sculpture

and painting alone made them attractive and intellectual, while the

athletic exercises amused ordinary minds. They were not demoralizing, like

the sports of the amphitheatre, or a modern bull-fight, or even

fashionable races. They were more like tournaments in the martial ages of

Europe, but superior to them vastly, since no woman was allowed to be

present at the Olympic games under pain of death.

(M401) It has already been shown that the form of government in the States

of Ancient Greece, in the Homeric ages, was monarchical. In two or three

hundred years after the Trojan war, the authority of kings had greatly

diminished. The great immigration and convulsions destroyed the line of

the ancient royal houses. The abolition of royalty was in substance rather

than name. First, it was divided among several persons, then it was made

elective, first for life, afterward for a definite period. The nobles or

chieftains gained increasing power with the decline of royalty, and the

government became, in many States, aristocratic. But the nobles abused

their power by making an oligarchy, which is a perverted aristocracy. This

aroused hatred and opposition on the part of the people, especially in the

maritime cities, where the increase of wealth by commerce and the arts

raised up a body of powerful citizens. Then followed popular revolutions

under leaders or demagogues. These leaders in turn became tyrants, and

their exactions gave rise to more hatred than that produced by the

government of powerful families. They gained power by stratagem, and

perverted it by violence. But to amuse the people whom they oppressed, or

to please them, they built temples, theatres, and other public buildings,

in which a liberal patronage was extended to the arts. Thus Athens and

Corinth, before the Persian wars, were beautiful cities, from the lavish

expenditure of the public treasury by the tyrants or despots who had

gained ascendency. In the mean time, those who were most eminent for

wealth, or power, or virtue, were persecuted, for fear they would effect a

revolution. But the parties which the tyrants had trampled upon were

rather exasperated than ruined, and they seized every opportunity to rally

the people under their standard, and effect an overthrow of the tyrants.

Sparta, whose constitution remained aristocratic, generally was ready to

assist any State in throwing off the yoke of the usurpers. In some States,

like Athens, every change favored the rise of the people, who gradually

obtained the ascendency. They instituted the principle of legal equality,

by which every freeman was supposed to exercise the attributes of

sovereignty. But democracy invariably led to the ascendency of factions,

and became itself a tyranny. It became jealous of all who were

distinguished for birth, or wealth, or talents. It encouraged flatterers

and sycophants. It was insatiable in its demands on the property of the

rich, and listened to charges which exposed them to exile and their

estates to confiscation. It increased the public burdens by unwise

expenditures to please the men of the lower classes who possessed

political franchise.

(M402) But different forms of government existed in different States. In

Sparta there was an oligarchy of nobles which made royalty a shadow, and

which kept the people in slavery and degradation. In Athens the democratic

principle prevailed. In Argos kings reigned down to the Persian wars. In

Corinth the government went through mutations as at Athens. In all the

States and cities experiments in the various forms of government were

perpetually made and perpetually failed. They existed for a time, and were

in turn supplanted. The most permanent government was that of Sparta; the

most unstable was that of Athens. The former promoted a lofty patriotism

and public morality and the national virtues; the latter inequalities of

wealth, the rise of obscure individuals, and the progress of arts.

(M403) The fall of the ancient monarchies and aristocracies was closely

connected with commercial enterprise and the increase of a wealthy class

of citizens. In the beginning of the seventh century before Christ, a

great improvement in the art of ship-building was made, especially at

Corinth. Colonial settlements kept pace with maritime enterprise; and both

of these fostered commerce and wealth. The Euxine lost its terrors to

navigators, and the Ægean Sea was filled with ships and colonists. The

Adriatic Sea was penetrated, and all the seas connected with the

Mediterranean. From the mouth of the Po was brought amber, which was

highly valued by the ancients. A great number of people were drawn to

Egypt, by the liberal offers of its kings, who went there for the pursuit

of knowledge and of wealth, and from which they brought back the papyrus

as a cheap material for writing. The productions of Greece were exchanged

for the rich fabrics which only Asia furnished, and the cities to which

these were brought, like Athens and Corinth, rapidly grew rich, like

Venice and Genoa in the Middle Ages.

(M404) Wealth of course introduced art. The origin of art may have been in

religious ideas—in temples and the statues of the gods—in tombs and

monuments of great men. But wealth immeasurably increased the facilities

both for architecture and sculpture. Artists in old times, as in these,

sought a pecuniary reward—patrons who could afford to buy their

productions, and stimulate their genius. Art was cultivated more rapidly

in the Asiatic colonies than in the mother country, both on account of

their wealth, and the objects of interest around them. The Ionian cities,

especially, were distinguished for luxury and refinement. Corinth took the

lead in the early patronage of art, as the most wealthy and luxurious of

the Grecian cities.

(M405) The first great impulse was given to architecture. The Pelasgi had

erected Cyclopean structures fifteen hundred years before Christ. The

Dorians built temples on the severest principles of beauty, and the Doric

column arose, massive and elegant. Long before the Persian wars the

temples were numerous and grand, yet simple and harmonious. The temple of

Here, at Samos, was begun in the eighth century, B.C., and built in the

Doric style, and, soon after, beautiful structures ornamented Athens.

(M406) Sculpture rapidly followed architecture, and passed from the

stiffness of ancient times to that beauty which afterward distinguished

Phidias and Polynotus. Schools of art, in the sixth century, flourished in

all the Grecian cities. We can not enter upon the details, from the use of

wood to brass and marble. The temples were filled with groups from

celebrated masters, and their deep recesses were peopled with colossal

forms. Gold, silver, and ivory were used as well as marble and brass. The

statues of heroes adorned every public place. Art, before the Persian

wars, did not indeed reach the refinement which it subsequently boasted,

but a great progress was made in it, in all its forms. Engraving was also

known, and imperfect pictures were painted. But this art, and indeed any

of the arts, did not culminate until after the Persian wars.

(M407) Literature made equal if not greater progress in the early ages of

Grecian history. Hesiod lived B.C. 735; and lyric poetry flourished in the

sixth and seventh centuries before Christ, especially the elegiac form, or

songs for the dead. Epic poetry was of still earlier date, as seen in the

Homeric poems. The Æolian and Ionic Greeks of Asia were early noted for

celebrated poets. Alcæus and Sappho lived on the Isle of Lesbos, and were

surrounded with admirers. Anacreon of Teos was courted by the rulers of

Athens.

(M408) Even philosophy was cultivated at this early age. Thales of Miletus

flourished in the middle of the seventh century, and Anaximander, born

B.C. 610—one of the great original mathematicians of the world, speculated

like Thales, on the origin of things. Pythagoras, born in Samos, B.C.

580—a still greater name, grave and majestic, taught the harmony of the

spheres long before the Ionian revolt.

But neither art, nor literature, nor philosophy reached their full

development till a later era. It is enough for our purpose to say that,

before the Persian wars, civilization was by no means contemptible, in all

those departments which subsequently made Greece the teacher and the glory

of the world.

CHAPTER XVII.

THE PERSIAN WAR.

We come now to the most important and interesting of Grecian history—the

great contest with Persia—the age of heroes and of battle-fields, when

military glory was the master passion of a noble race. What inspiration

have all ages gained from that noble contest in behalf of liberty!

(M409) We have seen how Asiatic cities were colonized by Greeks, among

whom the Ionians were pre-eminent. The cities were governed by tyrants,

who were sustained in their usurpation by the power of Persia, then the

great power of the world. Darius, then king, had absurdly invaded Scythia,

with an immense army of six hundred thousand men, to punish the people for

their inroad upon Western Asia, subject to his sway, about a century

before. He was followed by his allies, the tyrants of the Ionian cities,

to whom he intrusted the guardianship of the bridge of boats by which he

had crossed the Danube, B.C. 510. As he did not return within the time

specified—sixty days—the Greeks were left at liberty to return. A body of

Scythians then appeared, who urged the Greeks to destroy the bridge, as

Darius was in full retreat, and thus secure the destruction of the Persian

army and the recovery of their own liberty. Miltiades, who ruled the

Chersonese—the future hero of Marathon, seconded the wise proposal of the

Scythians, but Histiæus, tyrant of Miletus, feared that such an act would

recoil upon themselves, and favor another inroad of Scythians—a fierce

nation of barbarians. The result was that the bridge was not destroyed,

but the further end of it was severed from the shore. Night arrived, and

the Persian hosts appeared upon the banks of the river, but finding no

trace of it, Darius ordered an Egyptian who had a trumpet-voice to summon

to his aid Histiæus, the Milesian. He came forward with a fleet and

restored the bridge, and Darius and his army were saved, and the

opportunity was lost to the Ionians for emancipating themselves from the

Persians. The bridge was preserved, not from honorable fidelity to fulfill

a trust, but selfish regard in the despot of Miletus to maintain his

power. For this service he was rewarded with a principality on the

Strymon. Exciting, however, the suspicion of Darius, by his intrigues, he

was carried captive to the Persian court, but with every mark of honor.

Darius left his brother Artaphernes as governor of all the cities in

Western Asia Minor.

(M410) A few years after this unsuccessful invasion of Scythia by Darius,

a political conflict broke out in Naxos, an island of the Cyclades, B.C.

502, which had not submitted to the Persian yoke, and the oligarchy, which

ruled the island, were expelled. They applied for aid to Aristagoras, the

tyrant of Miletus, the largest of the Ionian cities, who persuaded the

Persian satrap to send an expedition against the island. The expedition

failed, which ruined the credit of Aristagoras, son-in-law to Histiæus,

who was himself incensed at his detention in Susa, and who sent a trusty

slave with a message urging the Ionians to revolt. Aristagoras, as a means

of success, conciliated popular favor throughout Asiatic Greece, by

putting down the various tyrants—the instruments of Persian ascendency.

The flames of revolt were kindled, the despots were expelled, the revolted

towns were put in a state of defense, and Aristagoras visited Sparta to

invoke its aid, inflaming the mind of the king with the untold wealth of

Asia, which would become his spoil. Sparta was then at war with her

neighbors, and unwilling to become involved in so uncertain a contest.

Rejected at Sparta, Aristagoras proceeded to Athens, then the second power

in Greece, and was favorably received, for the Athenians had a powerful

sympathy with the revolted Ionians; they agreed to send a fleet of twenty

ships. When Aristagoras returned, the Persians had commenced the siege of

Miletus. The twenty ships soon crossed the Ægean, and were joined by five

Eretrian ships coming to the succor of Miletus. An unsuccessful attempt of

Aristagoras on Sardis disgusted the Athenians, who abandoned the alliance.

But the accidental burning of the city, including the temple of the

goddess Cybele, encouraged the revolters, and incensed the Persians. Other

Greek cities on the coast took part in the revolt, including the island of

Cyprus. The revolt now assumed a serious character. The Persians rallied

their allies, among whom were the Phœnicians. An armament of Persians and

Phœnicians sailed against Cyprus, and a victory on the land gave the

Persians the control of the island. A large army of Persians and their

allies collected at Sardis, and, under different divisions reconquered all

their principal Ionian cities, except Miletus; but the Ionian fleet kept

its ascendency at sea. Aristagoras as the Persians advanced, lost courage

and fled to Myrkinus, where he shortly afterward perished.

(M411) Meanwhile Histiæus presented himself at the gates of Miletus,

having procured the consent of Darius to proceed thither to quell the

revolt. He was, however, suspected by the satrap, Artaphernes, and fled to

Chios, whose people he gained over, and who carried him back to Miletus.

On his arrival, he found the citizens averse to his reception, and was

obliged to return to Chios, and then to Lesbos, where he abandoned himself

to piracy.

(M412) A vast Persian host, however, had been concentrated near Miletus,

and with the assistance of the Phœnicians, invested the city by sea and

land. The entire force of the confederated cities abandoned the Milesians

to their fate, and took to their ships, three hundred and fifty-three in

number, with a view of fighting the Phœnicians, who had six hundred ships.

But there was a want of union among the Ionian commanders, and the sailors

abandoned themselves to disorder and carelessness; upon which Dionysius,

of Phocæa, which furnished but three ships, rebuked the Ionians for their

neglect of discipline. His rebuke was not thrown away, and the Ionians

having their comfortable tents on shore, submitted themselves to the

nautical labors imposed by Dionysius. At last, after seven days of work,

the Ionian sailors broke out in open mutiny, and refused longer to be

under the discipline of a man whose State furnished the smallest number of

ships. They left their ships, and resumed their pleasures on the shore,

unwilling to endure the discipline so necessary in so great a crisis.

Their camp became a scene of disunion and mistrust. The Samians, in

particular, were discontented, and on the day of battle, which was to

decide the fortunes of Ionia, they deserted with sixty ships, and other

Ionians followed their example. The ships of Chios, one hundred in number,

fought with great fidelity and resolution, and Dionysius captured, with

his three ships, three of the Phœnicians’. But these exceptional examples

of bravery did not compensate the treachery and cowardice of the rest, and

the consequence was a complete defeat of the Ionians at Lade. Dionysius,

seeing the ruin of the Ionian camp, did not return to his own city, and

set sail for the Phœnician coast, doing all he could as a pirate.

(M413) This victory of Lade enabled the Persians to attack Miletus by sea

as well as land; the siege was prosecuted with vigor, and the city shortly

fell. The adult male population was slain, while the women and children

were sent as slaves to Susa. The Milesian territory was devastated and

stripped of its inhabitants. The other States hastened to make their

submission, and the revolt was crushed, B.C. 496, five years after its

commencement. The Persian forces reconquered all the Asiatic Greeks,

insular and continental, and the Athenian Miltiades escaped with

difficulty from his command in the Chersonese, to his native city. All the

threats which were made by the Persians were realized. The most beautiful

virgins were distributed among the Persian nobles; the cities were

destroyed; and Samos alone remained, as a reward for desertion at the

battle of Lade.

(M414) The reconquest of Ionia being completed, the satrap proceeded to

organize the future government, the inhabitants now being composed of a

great number of Persians. Meanwhile, Darius made preparations for the

complete conquest of Greece. The wisdom of the advice of Miltiades, to

destroy the bridge over the Danube, when Darius and his army would have

been annihilated by the Scythians, was now apparent. Mardonius was sent

with a large army into Ionia, who deposed the despots in the various

cities, whom Artaphernes had reinstated, and left the people to govern

themselves, subject to the Persian dominion and tribute. He did not remain

long in Ionia, but passed with his fleet to the Hellespont, and joined his

land forces. He transported his army to Europe, and began his march

through Thrace. Thence marched into Macedonia, and subdued a part of its

inhabitants. He then sent his fleet around Mount Athos, with a view of

joining it with his army at the Gulf of Therma. But a storm overtook his

fleet near Athos, and destroyed three hundred ships, and drowned twenty

thousand men. This disaster compelled a retreat, and he recrossed the

Hellespont with the shame of failure. He was employed no more by the

Persian king.

(M415) Darius, incited by the traitor Hippias, made new preparation for

the invasion of Greece. He sent his heralds in every direction, demanding

the customary token of submission—earth and water. Many of the continental

cities sent in their submission, including the Thebans, Thessalians, and

the island of Ægina, which was on bad terms with Athens. The heralds of

Darius were put to death at Athens and Sparta, which can only be explained

from the fiercest resentment and rage. These two powers made common cause,

and armed all the other States over which they had influence, to resist

the Persian domination. Hellas, headed by Sparta, now resolved to put

forth all its energies, and embarked, in desperate hostility. A war which

Sparta had been waging for several years against Argos crippled that

ancient State, and she was no longer the leading power. The only rival

which Sparta feared was weakened, and full scope was given, for the

prosecution of the Persian war. Ægina, which had submitted to Darius, was

visited by Cleomenes, king of Sparta, and hostages were sent to Athens for

the neutrality of that island. Athens and Sparta suspended their political

jealousies, and acted in concert to resist the common danger.

(M416) By the spring of 490 B.C. the preparations of Darius were

completed, and a vast army collected on a plain upon the Cilician shore. A

fleet of six hundred ships convoyed it to the rendezvous at Samos. The

exiled tyrant Hippias was present to guide the forces to the attack of

Attica. The Mede Datis, and Artaphernes, son of the satrap of Sardis,

nephew to Darius, were the Persian generals. They had orders from Darius

to bring the inhabitants of Athens as slaves to his presence.

(M417) The Persian fleet, fearing a similar disaster as happened near

Mount Athos, struck directly across the Ægean, from Samos to Eubœa,

attacking on the way the intermediate islands. Naxos thus was invaded and

easily subdued. From Naxos, Datis sent his fleet round the other Cyclades

Islands, demanding reinforcements and hostages from all he visited, and

reached the southern extremity of Eubœa in safety. Etruria was first

subdued, unable to resist. After halting a few days at this city, he

crossed to Attica, and landed in the bay of Marathon, on the eastern

coast. The despot Hippias, son of Pisistratus, twenty years after his

expulsion from Athens, pointed out the way.

(M418) But a great change had taken place at Athens since his expulsion.

The city was now under democratic rule, in its best estate. The ten tribes

had become identified with the government and institutions of the city.

The senate of the areopagus, renovated by the annual archons, was in

sympathy with the people. Great men had arisen under the amazing stimulus

of liberty, among whom Miltiades, Themistocles, and Aristides were the

most distinguished. Miltiades, after an absence of six years in the

Chersonesus of Thrace, returned to the city full of patriotic ardor. He

was brought to trial before the popular assembly on the charge of having

misgoverned the Chersonese; but he was honorably acquitted, and was chosen

one of the ten generals of the republic annually elected. He was not,

however, a politician of the democratic stamp, like Themistocles and

Aristides, being a descendant of an illustrious race, which traced their

lineage to the gods; but he was patriotic, brave, and decided. His advice

to burn the bridge over the Danube illustrates his character—bold and

far-seeing. Moreover, he was peculiarly hostile to Darius, whom he had so

grievously offended.

(M419) Themistocles was a man of great native genius and sagacity. He

comprehended all the embarrassments and dangers of the political crisis in

which his city was placed, and saw at a glance the true course to be

pursued. He was also bold and daring. He was not favored by the accidents

of birth, and owed very little to education. He had an unbounded passion

for glory and for display. He had great tact in the management of party,

and was intent on the aggrandizement of his country. His morality was

reckless, but his intelligence was great—a sort of Mirabeau: with his

passion, his eloquence, and his talents. His unfortunate end—a traitor and

an exile—shows how little intellectual pre-eminence will avail, in the

long run, without virtue, although such talents as he exhibited will be

found useful in a crisis.

(M420) Aristides was inferior to both Alcibiades and Themistocles in

genius, in resource, in boldness, and in energy; but superior in virtue,

in public fidelity, and moral elevation. He pursued a consistent course,

was no demagogue, unflinching in the discharge of trusts, just, upright,

unspotted. Such a man, of course, in a corrupt society, would be exposed

to many enmities and jealousies. But he was, on the whole, appreciated,

and died, in a period of war and revolution, a poor man, with unbounded

means of becoming rich—one of the few examples which our world affords of

a man who believed in virtue, in God, and a judgment to come, and who

preferred the future and spiritual to the present and material—a fool in

the eyes of the sordid and bad—a wise man according to the eternal

standards.

(M421) Aristides, Miltiades, and perhaps Themistocles, were elected among

the ten generals, by the ten tribes, in the year that Datis led his

expedition to Marathon. Each of the ten generals had the supreme command

of the army for a day. Great alarm was felt at Athens as tidings reached

the city of the advancing and conquering Persians. Couriers were sent in

hot haste to the other cities, especially Sparta, and one was found to

make the journey to Sparta on foot—one hundred and fifty miles—in

forty-eight hours. The Spartans agreed to march, without delay, after the

last quarter of the moon, which custom and superstition dictated. This

delay was fraught with danger, but was insisted upon by the Spartans.

(M422) Meanwhile the dangers multiplied and thickened, that not a moment

should be lost in bringing the Persians into action. Five of the generals

counseled delay. The polemarch, Calimachus, who then had the casting vote,

decided for immediate action. Themistocles and Aristides had seconded the

advice of Miltiades, to whom the other generals surrendered their days of

command—a rare example of patriotic disinterestedness. The Athenians

marched at once to Marathon to meet their foes, and were joined by the

Platæans, one thousand warriors, from a little city—the whole armed

population, which had a great moral effect.

(M423) The Athenians had only ten thousand hoplites, including the one

thousand from Platæa. The Persian army is variously estimated at from one

hundred and ten thousand to six hundred thousand. The Greeks were encamped

upon the higher ground overlooking the plain which their enemies occupied.

The fleet was ranged along the beach. The Greeks advanced to the combat in

rapid movement, urged on by the war-cry, which ever animated their

charges. The wings of the Persian army were put to flight by the audacity

of the charge, but the centre, where the best troops were posted, resisted

the attack until Miltiades returned from the pursuit of the retreating

soldiers on the wings. The defeat of the Persians was the result. They

fled to their ships, and became involved in the marshes. Six thousand four

hundred men fell on the Persian side, and only one hundred and ninety-two

on the Athenian. The Persians, though defeated, still retained their

ships, and sailed toward Cape Sunium, with a view of another descent upon

Attica. Miltiades, the victor in the most glorious battle ever till then

fought in Greece, penetrated the designs of the Persians, and rapidly

retreated to Athens on the very day of battle. Datis arrived at the port

of Phalerum to discover that his plans were baffled, and that the

Athenians were still ready to oppose him. The energy and promptness of

Miltiades had saved the city. Datis, discouraged, set sail, without

landing, to the Cyclades.

(M424) The battle of Marathon, B.C. 490, must be regarded as one of the

great decisive battles of the world, and the first which raised the

political importance of the Greeks in the eyes of foreign powers. It was

fought by Athens twenty years after the expulsion of the tyrants, and as a

democratic State. On the Athenians rest the glory forever. It was not

important for the number of men who fell on either side, but for giving

the first great check to the Persian domination, and preventing their

conquest of Europe. And its moral effect was greater than its political.

It freed the Greeks from that fear of the Persians which was so fatal and

universal, for the tide of Persian conquest had been hitherto

uninterrupted. It animated the Greeks with fresh courage, for the bravery

of the Athenians had been unexampled, as had been the generalship of

Miltiades. Athens was delivered by the almost supernatural bravery of its

warriors, and was then prepared to make those sacrifices which were

necessary in the more desperate struggles which were to come. And it

inspired the people with patriotic ardor, and upheld the new civil

constitution. It gave force and dignity to the democracy, and prepared it

for future and exalted triumphs. It also gave force to the religious

sentiments of the people, for such a victory was regarded as owing to the

special favor of the gods.

The Spartans did not arrive until after the battle had been fought, and

Datis had returned with his Etrurian prisoners to Asia.

(M425) The victory of Marathon raised the military fame of Miltiades to

the most exalted height, and there were no bounds to the enthusiasm of the

Athenians. But the victory turned his head, and he lost both prudence and

patriotism. He persuaded his countrymen, in the full tide of his

popularity, to intrust him with seventy ships, with an adequate force,

with powers to direct an expedition according to his pleasure. The

armament was cheerfully granted. But he disgracefully failed in an attack

on the island of Paros, to gratify a private vindictive animosity. He lost

all his _éclat_ and was impeached. He appealed, wounded and disabled from

a fall he had received, to his previous services. He was found guilty, but

escaped the penalty of death, but not of a fine of fifty talents. He did

not live to pay it, or redeem his fame, but died of the injury he had

received. Thus this great man fell from a pinnacle of glory to the deepest

disgrace and ruin—a fate deserved, for he was not true to himself or

country. The Athenians were not to blame, but judged him rightly. It was

not fickleness, but a change in their opinions, founded on sufficient

grounds, from the deep disappointment in finding that their hero was

unworthy of their regards. No man who had rendered a favor has a claim to

pursue a course of selfishness and unlawful ambition. No services can

offset crimes. The Athenians, in their unbounded admiration, had given

unbounded trust, and that trust was abused. And as the greatest despots

who had mounted to power had earned their success by early services, so

had they abused their power by imposing fetters, and the Athenians, just

escaped from the tyranny of these despots, felt a natural jealousy and a

deep repugnance, in spite of their previous admiration. The Athenians, in

their treatment of Miltiades, were neither ungrateful nor fickle, but

acted from a high sense of public morality, and in a stern regard to

justice, without which the new constitution would soon have been

subverted. On the death of Miltiades Themistocles and Aristides became the

two leading men of Athens, and their rivalries composed the domestic

history of the city, until the renewed and vast preparations of the

Persians caused all dissensions to be suspended for the public good.

(M426) But the jealousies and rivalries of these great men were not

altogether personal. They were both patriotic, but each had different

views respecting the course which Athens should adopt in the greatness of

the dangers which impended. The policy of Aristides was to strengthen the

army—that of Themistocles, the navy. Both foresaw the national dangers,

but Themistocles felt that the hopes of Greece rested on ships rather than

armies to resist the Persians. And his policy was adopted. As the world

can not have two suns, so Athens could not be prospered by the presence of

two such great men, each advocating different views. One or the other must

succumb to the general good, and Aristides was banished by the power of

ostracism.

(M427) The wrath of Darius—a man of great force of character, but haughty

and self-sufficient, was tremendous when he learned the defeat of Datis,

and his retreat into Asia. He resolved to bring the whole force of the

Persian empire together to subdue the Athenians, from whom he had suffered

so great a disgrace. Three years were spent in active preparations for a

new expedition which should be overwhelming. All the allies of Persia were

called upon for men and supplies. Nor was he deterred by a revolt of

Egypt, which broke out about this time, and he was on the point of

carrying two gigantic enterprises—one for the reconquest of Egypt, and the

other for the conquest of Greece—when he died, after a reign of thirty-six

years, B.C. 485.

(M428) He was succeeded by his son Xerxes, who was animated by the

animosities, but not the genius of his father. Though beautiful and tall,

he was faint-hearted, vain, blinded by a sense of power, and enslaved by

women. Yet he continued the preparations which Darius projected. Egypt was

first subdued by his generals, and he then turned his undivided attention

to Greece. He convoked the dignitaries of his empire—the princes and

governors of provinces, and announced his resolution to bridge over the

Hellespont and march to the conquest of Europe. Artabanus, his uncle,

dissuaded him from the enterprise, setting forth especially the

probability that the Greeks, if victorious at sea, would destroy the

bridge, and thus prevent his safe return. Mardonius advised differently,

urging ambition and revenge, motives not lost on the Persian monarch. For

four years the preparations went forward from all parts of the empire,

including even the islands in the Ægean. In the autumn of 481 B.C., the

largest army this world has ever seen assembled at Sardis. Besides this, a

powerful fleet of one thousand two hundred and seven ships of war, besides

transports, was collected at the Hellespont. Large magazines of provisions

were formed along the coast of Asia Minor. A double bridge of boats,

extending from Abydos to Sestos—a mile in length across the Hellespont,

was constructed by Phœnicians and Egyptians; but this was destroyed by a

storm. Xerxes, in a transport of fury, caused the heads of the engineers

to be cut off, and the sea itself scourged with three hundred lashes. This

insane wrath being expended, the monarch caused the work to be at once

reconstructed, this time by the aid of Greek engineers. Two bridges were

built side by side upon more than six hundred large ships, moored with

strong anchors, with their heads toward the Ægean. Over each bridge were

sketched six vast cables, which held the ships together, and over these

were laid planks of wood, upon which a causeway was formed of wood and

earth, with a high palisade on each side. To facilitate his march, Xerxes

also constructed a canal across the isthmus which connects Mount Athos

with the main land, on which were employed Phœnician engineers. The men

employed in digging the canal worked under the whip. Bridges were also

thrown across the river Strymon.

(M429) These works were completed while Xerxes wintered at Sardis. From

that city he dispatched heralds to all the cities of Greece, except Sparta

and Athens, to demand the usual tokens of submission—earth and water. He

also sent orders to the maritime cities of Thrace and Macedonia to prepare

dinner for himself and hosts, as they passed through. Greece was struck

with consternation as the news reached the various cities of the vast

forces which were on the march to subdue them. The army proceeded from

Sardis, in the spring, in two grand columns, between which was the king

and guards and select troops—all native Persians, ten thousand foot and

ten thousand horse. From Sardis the hosts of Xerxes proceeded to Abydos,

through Ilium, where his two bridges across the Hellespont awaited him.

From a marble throne the proud and vainglorious monarch saw his vast army

defile over the bridges, perfumed with frankincense and strewed with

myrtle boughs. One bridge was devoted to the troops, the other to the

beasts and baggage. The first to cross were the ten thousand household

troops, called Immortals, wearing garlands on their heads; then followed

Xerxes himself in his gilded chariot, and then the rest of the army. It

occupied seven days for the vast hosts to cross the bridge. Xerxes then

directed his march to Doriscus, in Thrace, near the mouth of the Hebrus,

where he joined his fleet. There he took a general review, and never,

probably, was so great an army marshaled before or since, and composed of

so many various nations. There were assembled nations from the Indus, from

the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, the Levant, the Ægean and the

Euxine—Egyptian, Ethiopian, and Lybian. Forty-six nations were

represented—all that were tributary to Persia. From the estimates made by

Herodotus, there were one million seven hundred thousand foot, eighty

thousand horse, besides a large number of chariots. With the men who

manned the fleet and those he pressed into his service on the march, the

aggregate of his forces was two million six hundred and forty thousand.

Scarcely an inferior number attended the soldiers as slaves, sutlers, and

other persons, swelling the amount of the males to five million two

hundred and eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty—the whole

available force of the Eastern world—Asia against Europe: as in mediæval

times it was Europe against Asia. It is, however, impossible for us to

believe in so large a force, since it could not have been supplied with

provisions. But with every deduction, it was still the largest army the

world ever saw.

(M430) After the grand enumeration of forces, Xerxes passed in his chariot

to survey separately each body of contingents, to which he put questions.

He then embarked in a gilded galley, and sailed past the prows of the

twelve hundred ships moored four hundred feet from the shore. That such a

vast force could be resisted was not even supposed to be conceivable by

the blinded monarch. But Demaratus, the exiled king of Sparta, told him he

would be resisted unto death, a statement which was received with

derision.

(M431) After the review, the grand army pursued its course westward in

three divisions and roads along Thrace, levying enormous contributions on

all the Grecian towns, which submitted as the Persian monarch marched

along, for how could they resist? The mere provisioning this great host

for a single day impoverished the country. But there was no help, for to

mortal eyes the success of Xerxes was certain. At Acanthus, Xerxes

separated from his fleet, which was directed to sail round Mount Athos,

while he pursued his march through Pæonia and Crestonia, and rejoin him at

Therma, on the Thermaic Gulf, in Macedonia, within sight of Mount Olympus.

(M432) Meanwhile, the Athenians, fully alive to their danger, strained

every nerve to make preparations to resist the enemy; fortunately, there

was in the treasury a large sum derived from the Lamian mines, and this

they applied, on the urgent representations of Themistocles, to building

ships and refitting their navy. A Panhellenic congress, under the

presidency of Athens and Sparta, assembled at the Isthmus of Corinth.—the

first great league since the Trojan war. The representatives of the

various States buried their dissensions, the most prominent of which were

between Athens and Ægina. In reconciling these feuds, Themistocles took a

pre-eminent part. Indeed, there was need, for the political existence of

Hellas was threatened, and despair was seen in most every city. Even the

Delphic oracle gave out replies discouraging and terrible; intimating,

however, that the safety of Athens lay in the wooden wall, which, with

extraordinary tact, was interpreted by Themistocles to mean that the true

defense lay in the navy. Salamis was the place designated by the oracle

for the retreat, which was now imperative, and thither the Athenians fled,

with their wives and children, guarded by their fleet. It was decided by

the congress that Sparta should command the land forces, and Athens the

united navy of the Greeks; but many States, in deadly fear of the

Persians, persisted in neutrality, among which were Argos, Cretes,

Corcyra. The chief glory of the defense lay with Sparta and Athens. The

united army was sent into Thessaly to defend the defile of Tempe, but

discovering that they were unable to do this, since another pass over

Mount Olympus was open in the summer, they retreated to the isthmus of

Corinth, and left all Greece north of Mount Citheron and the Megarid

territory without defense. Had the Greeks been able to maintain the passes

of Olympus and Ossa, all the northern States would probably have joined in

the confederation against Persia; but, as they were left defenseless, we

can not wonder that they submitted, including even the Achæans, Borotians,

and Dorians.

(M433) The Pass of Thermopylæ was now fixed upon as the most convenient

place of resistance, next to the vale of Tempe. Here the main land was

separated from the island of Eubœa by a narrow strait two miles wide. On

the northern part of the island, near the town of Histiæa, the coast was

called Artemisium, and here the fleet was mustered, to co-operate with the

land forces, and oppose, in a narrow strait, the progress of the Persian

fleet. The defile of Thermopylæ itself, at the south of Thessaly, was

between Mount Œta and an impassable morass on the Maliac Gulf. Nature had

thus provided a double position of defense—a narrow defile on the land,

and a narrow strait on the water, through which the army and the fleet

must need pass if they would co-operate.

(M434) While the congress resolved to avail themselves of the double

position, by sea and land, the Olympic games, and the great Dorian, of the

Carneia, were at hand. These could not be dispensed with, even in the most

extraordinary crisis to which the nation could be exposed. While,

therefore, the Greeks assembled to keep the national festivals, probably

from religious and superstitious motives, auguring no good if they were

disregarded, Leonidas, king of Sparta, with three hundred Spartans, two

thousand one hundred and twenty Arcadians, four hundred Corinthians, two

hundred men from Philius, and eighty from Mycenæ—in all three thousand one

hundred hoplites, besides Helots and light troops, was sent to defend the

pass against the Persian hosts. On the march through Bœotia one thousand

men from Thebes and Thespiæ joined them, though on the point of submission

to Xerxes. The Athenians sent their whole force on board their ships,

joined by the Platæans.

(M435) It was in the summer of 480 B.C. when Xerxes reached Therma, about

which time the Greeks arrived at their allotted posts. Leonidas took his

position in the middle of the Pass—a mile in length, with two narrow

openings. He then repaired the old wall built across the Pass by the

Phocians, and awaited the coming of the enemy, for it was supposed his

force was sufficient to hold it till the games were over. It was also

thought that this narrow pass was the only means of access possible to the

invading army; but it was soon discovered that there was also a narrow

mountain path from the Phocian territory to Thermopylæ. The Phocians

agreed to guard this path, and leave the defense of the main pass to the

Peloponnesian troops. But Leonidas painfully felt that his men were

insufficient in number, and found it necessary to send envoys to the

different States for immediate re-enforcements.

(M436) The Greek fleet, assembled at Artemisium, was composed of two

hundred and seventy-one triremes and nine penteconters, commanded by

Themistocles, but furnished by the different States. A disaster happened

to the Greeks very early; three triremes were captured by the Persians,

which caused great discouragement, and in a panic the Greeks abandoned

their strong naval position, and sailed up the Eubœan Strait to Chalcis.

This was a great misfortune, since the rear of the army of Leonidas was no

longer protected by the fleet. But a destructive storm dispersed the fleet

of the Persians at this imminent crisis, so that it was impossible to lend

aid to their army now arrived at Thermopylæ. Four hundred ships of war,

together with a vast number of transports, were thus destroyed. The storm

lasted three days. After this disaster to the Persians, the Greek fleet

returned to Artemisium. Xerxes encamped within sight of Thermopylæ four

days, without making an attack, on account of the dangers to which his

fleet were exposed. On the fifth day he became wroth at the impudence and

boldness of the petty force which quietly remained to dispute his passage,

for the Spartans amused themselves with athletic sports and combing their

hair. Nor was it altogether presumption on the part of the Greeks, for

there were four or five thousand heavily-armed men, the bravest in the

land, to defend a passage scarcely wider than a carriage-road—with a wall

and other defenses in front.

(M437) The first attack on the Greeks was made by the Medea—the bravest of

the Persian army, but their arrows and short spears were of little avail

against the phalanx which opposed, armed with long spears, and protected

by shields. For two days the attack continued, and was constantly

repulsed, for only a small detachment of Greeks fought at a time. Even the

“Immortals”—the chosen band of Xerxes—were repulsed with a great loss, to

the agony and shame of Xerxes.

(M438) On the third day, a Malian revealed to the Persian king the fact

that a narrow path, leading over the mountains, was defended only by

Phocians, and that this path led to the rear of the Spartans. A strong

detachment of Persians was sent in the night to secure this path, and the

Phocian guardians fled. The Persians descended the path, and attacked the

Greeks in their rear. Leonidas soon became apprised of his danger, but in

time to send away his army. It was now clear that Thermopylæ could no

longer be defended, but the heroic and self-sacrificing general resolved

to remain, and sell his life as dearly as possible, and retard, if he

could not resist, the march of the enemy. Three hundred Spartans, with

seven hundred Thespians and four hundred Thebans joined him, while the

rest retired to fight another day. It required all the efforts of the

Persian generals, assisted by the whip, to force the men to attack this

devoted band. The Greeks fought with the most desperate bravery, till

their spears were broken, and no weapons remained but their swords and

daggers. At last, exhausted, they died, surrounded by vast forces, after

having made the most heroic defence in the history of the war. Only one

man, Aristodemus, returned to his home of all the three hundred Spartans,

but only to receive scorn and infamy. The Theban band alone yielded to the

Persians, but only at the last hour.

(M439) Nothing could exceed the blended anger and admiration of Xerxes as

he beheld this memorable resistance. He now saw, for the first time, the

difficulty of subduing such a people as the Greeks, resolved to resist

unto death. His mind was perplexed, and he did not know what course to

adopt. Had he accepted the advice of Demaratus, to make war on the

southern coast of Laconia, and thus distract the Spartans and prevent

their co-operation with Athens, he would have probably succeeded.

(M440) But he followed other councils. Meanwhile, the Persian fleet

rallied after the storm, and was still formidable, in spite of losses. The

Greeks were disposed to retire and leave the strait open to the enemy. The

Eubœans, seeing the evil which would happen to them if their island was

unprotected, sent to Themistocles a present of thirty talents, if he would

keep his position. This money he spent in bribing the different commanders

who wished to retire, and it was resolved to remain. The Persians,

confident of an easy victory, sent round the island of Eubœa a detachment

of two hundred ships, to cut off all hopes of escape to the ships which

they expected to capture. A deserter revealed the intelligence to

Themistocles, and it was resolved to fight the Persians, thus weakened, at

once, but at the close of the day, so that the battle would not be

decisive. The battle of Artemisium was a sort of skirmish, to accustom the

Greeks to the Phœnician mode of fighting. It was, however, successful, and

thirty ships of the Persians were taken or disabled.

(M441) But the Greeks derived a greater succor than ships and men. Another

storm overtook the Persians, damaged their fleet, and destroyed the

squadron sent round the island of Eubœa. Another sea-fight was the result,

since the Greeks were not only aided by the storm, but new

re-enforcements; but this second fight was indecisive. Themistocles now

felt he could not hold the strait against superior numbers, and the

disaster of Thermopylæ being also now known, he resolved to retreat

farther into Greece, and sailed for Salamis.

(M442) At this period the Greeks generally were filled with consternation

and disappointment. Neither the Pass of Thermopylæ, nor the strait which

connected the Malicas Gulf with the Ægean, had been successfully defended.

The army of Xerxes was advancing through Phocis and Bœotia to the Isthmus

of Corinth, while the navy sailed unobstructed through the Eubœan Sea. On

the part of the Greeks there had been no preparations commensurate with

the greatness of the crisis, while, had they rallied to Thermopylæ,

instead of wasting time at the festivals, they would have saved the pass,

and the army of Xerxes, strained for provisions, would have been compelled

to retreat. The, Lacedæmonians, aroused by the death of their king, at

last made vigorous efforts to fortify the Isthmus of Corinth, too late,

however, to defend Bœotia and Attica. The situation of Athens was now

hopeless, and it was seen what a fatal mistake had been made not to

defend, with the whole force of Greece, the Pass of Thermopylæ. There was

no help from the Spartans, for they had all flocked to the Isthmus of

Corinth, as the last chance of protecting the Peloponnesus. In despair,

the Athenians resolved to abandon Athens, with their families, and take

shelter at Salamis. Themistocles alone was undismayed, and sought to

encourage his countrymen that the “wooden wall” would still be their

salvation. The Athenians, if dismayed, did not lose their energies. The

recall of the exiles was decreed by Themistocles’ suggestion. With

incredible efforts the whole population of Attica was removed to Salamis,

and the hopes of all were centered in the ships. Xerxes took possession of

the deserted city, but found but five hundred captives. He ravaged the

country, and a detachment of Persians even penetrated to Delphi, to rob

the shrine, but were defeated. Athens was, however, sacked.

(M443) The combined fleet of the Greeks now numbered three hundred and

sixty-six ships, more than half of which were Athenian. Many wished to

retreat to the Isthmus of Corinth, and co-operate with the Spartans.

Dissensions came near wrecking the last hopes of Greece, and Themistocles

only prevailed by threatening to withdraw the Athenian ships unless a

battle were at once fought. He resorted to stratagem to compel the fleet

to remain together, with no outlet of escape if conquered. Aristides came

in the night from Ægina, and informed the Greeks that their whole fleet

was surrounded by the Persians—just what Themistocles desired. There was

nothing then left but to fight with desperation, for on the issue of the

battle depended the fortunes of Greece. Both fleets were stationed in the

strait between the bay of Eleusis and the Saronic Gulf, on the west of the

island of Salamis.

(M444) Xerxes, seated upon a throne upon one of the declivities of Mount

Ægaleos, surveyed the armaments and the coming battle. Both parties fought

with bravery; but the space was too narrow for the Persians to engage

their whole fleet, and they had not the discipline of the Greeks, schooled

by severe experience. The Persian fleet became unmanageable, and the

victory was gained by the Greeks. Two hundred ships fell into the hands of

the victors. But a sufficient number remained to the Persians to renew the

battle with better hopes. Xerxes, however, was intimidated, and in a

transport of rage, disappointment, and fear, gave the order to retreat. He

distrusted the fidelity of the allies, and feared for his own personal

safety; he feared that the victors would sail to the Hellespont, and

destroy the bridges. Themistocles, on the retreat of the Persians,

employed his fleet in levying fines and contributions upon the islands

which had supported the Persians, while Xerxes made his way back to the

Hellespont, and crossed to Asia, leaving Mardonius in Thessaly, with a

large army, to pursue the conquest on land.

(M445) Thus Greece was saved by the battle of Salamis, and the

distinguished services of Themistocles, which can not be too highly

estimated. The terrific cloud was dispersed, the Greeks abandoned

themselves to joy. Unparalleled honors were bestowed upon the victor,

especially in Sparta, and his influence, like that of Alcibiades, after

the battle of Marathon, was unbounded. No man ever merited greater reward.

(M446) Though the Persians now abandoned all hopes of any farther maritime

attack, yet still great success was anticipated from the immense army

which Mardonius commanded. The Greeks in the northern parts still adhered

to him, and Thessaly was prostrate at his feet. He sent Alexander, of

Macedon, to Athens to offer honorable terms of peace, which were nobly

rejected, and he was sent back with this message: “Tell Mardonius that as

long as the sun shall continue in his present path we will never contract

alliance with a foe who has shown no reverence to our gods and heroes, and

who has burned their statues and houses.” The league was renewed with

Sparta for mutual defense and offense, in spite of seductive offers from

Mardonius; but the Spartans displayed both indifference and selfishness to

any interests outside the Peloponnesus. They fortified the Isthmus of

Corinth, but left Attica undefended. Mardonius accordingly marched to

Athens, and again the city was the spoil of the Persians. The Athenians

again retreated to Salamis, with bitter feelings against Sparta for her

selfishness and ingratitude. Again Mardonius sought to conciliate the

Athenians, and again his overtures were rejected with wrath and defiance.

The Athenians, distressed, sent envoys to Sparta to remonstrate against

her slackness and selfishness, not without effect, for, at last, a large

Spartan force was collected under Pausanias. Meanwhile Mardonius ravaged

Attica and Bœotia, and then fortified his camp near Platæa, ten furlongs

square. Platæa was a plain favorable to the action of the cavalry, not far

from Thebes; but his army was discouraged after so many disasters—in

modern military language, demoralized—while Artabazus, the second in

command, was filled with jealousy. Nor could much be hoped from the

Grecian allies, who secretly were hostile to the invaders. The Thebans and

Bœotians appeared to be zealous, but were governed by fear merely of a

superior power, and hence were unreliable. It can not be supposed that the

Thebans, who sided with the Persians, by compulsion, preferred their cause

to that of their countrymen, great as may have been national jealousy and

rivalries.

(M447) The total number of Lacedæmonians, Corinthians, Athenians, and

other Greeks, assembled to meet the Persian army, B.C. 479, was

thirty-eight thousand seven hundred men, heavily armed, and seventy-one

thousand three hundred light armed, without defensive armor; but most of

these were simply in attendance on the hoplites. The Persians, about three

hundred thousand in number, occupied the line of the river Asopus, on a

plain; the Greeks stationed themselves on the mountain declivity near

Erythæ. The Persian cavalry charged, to dislodge the Greeks, unwilling to

contend on the plain; but the ground was unfavorable for cavalry

operations, and after a brief success, was driven back, while the general,

Masistias, who commanded it, was slain. His death, and the repulse of the

cavalry, so much encouraged Pausanias, the Spartan general, that he

quitted his ground on the mountain declivity, and took position on the

plain beneath. The Lacedæmonians composed the right wing; the Athenians,

the left; and various other allies, the centre. Mardonius then slightly

changed his position, crossing the Asopus, nearer his own camp, and took

post on the left wing, opposite the right wing of the Greeks, commanded by

Pausanias. Both armies then offered sacrifices to the gods, but Mardonius

was able to give constant annoyance to the Greeks by his cavalry, and the

Thebans gave great assistance. Ten days were thus spent by the two armies,

without coming into general action, until Mardonius, on becoming

impatient, against the advice of Artabazus, second in command, resolved to

commence the attack. The Greeks were forewarned of his intention, by

Alexander of Macedon, who came secretly to the Greek camp at night—a proof

that he, as well as others, were impatient of the Persian yoke. The

Lacedæmonians, posted in the right wing, against the Persians, changed

places with the Athenians, who were more accustomed to Persian warfare;

but this manœuvre being detected, Mardonius made a corresponding change in

his own army—upon which Pausanias led back again his troops to the right

wing, and a second movement of Mardonius placed the armies in the original

position.

(M448) A vigorous attack of the Persian cavalry now followed, which so

annoyed the Greeks, that Pausanias in the night resolved to change once

again his position, and retreated to the hilly ground, north of Platæa,

about twenty furlongs distant, not without confusion and mistrust on the

part of the Athenians. Mardonias, astonished at this movement, pursued,

and a general engagement followed. Both armies fought with desperate

courage, but discipline was on the side of the Greeks, and Mardonius was

slain, fighting gallantly with his guard. Artabazus, with the forty

thousand Persians under his immediate command, had not taken part, and now

gave orders to retreat, and retired from Greece. The main body, however,

of the defeated Persians retired to their fortified camp. This was

attacked by the Lacedæmonians, and carried with immense slaughter, so that

only three thousand men survived out of the army of Mardonius, save the

forty thousand which Artabazus—a more able captain—had led away. The

defeat of the Persians was complete, and the spoils which fell to the

victors was immense—gold and silver, arms, carpets, clothing, horses,

camels, and even the rich tent of Xerxes himself, left with Mardonius. The

booty was distributed among the different contingents of the army. The

real victors were the Lacedæmonians, Athenians, and Tegeans; the

Corinthians did not reach the field till the battle was ended, and thus

missed their share of the spoil.

(M449) There was one ally of the Persians which Pausanias resolved to

punish—the city of Thebes when a merited chastisement was inflicted, and

the customary solemnities were observed, and honors decreed for the

greatest and most decisive victory which the Greeks had ever gained. A

confederacy was held at Platæa, in which a permanent league was made

between the leading Grecian States, not to separate until the common foe

was driven back to Asia.

(M450) While these great events were transpiring in Bœotia, the fleet of

the Greeks, after the battle of Salamis, undertook to rescue Samos from

the Persians, and secure the independence of the Ionian cities in Asia.

The Persian fleet, now disheartened, abandoned Samos and retired to

Mycale, in Ionia. The Greek fleet followed, but the Persians abandoned or

dismissed their fleet, and joined their forces with those of Tigranes,

who, with an army of sixty thousand men, guarded Ionia. The Greeks

disembarked, and prepared to attack the enemy just as the news reached

them of the battle of Platæa. This attack was successful, partly in

consequence of the revolt of the Ionians in the Persian camp, although the

Persians fought with great bravery. The battle of Mycale was as complete

as that of Platæa and Marathon, and the remnants of the Persian army

retired to Sardis. The Ionian cities were thus, for the time, delivered of

the Persians, as well as Greece itself chiefly by means of the Athenians

and Corinthians. The Spartans, with inconceivable narrowness, were

reluctant to receive the continental Ionians as allies, and proposed to

transport them across the Ægean into Western Greece, which proposal was

most honorably rejected by the Athenians. In every thing, except the

defense of Greece Proper, and especially the Peloponnesus, the Spartans

showed themselves inferior to the Athenians in magnanimity and enlarged

views. After the capture of Sestos, B.C. 478, which relieved the Thracian

Chersonese from the Persians, the fleet of Athens returned home. The

capture of this city concludes the narration of Herodotus, which ended

virtually the Persian war, although hostilities were continued in Asia.

The battle of Marathon had given the first effective resistance to Persian

conquests, and created confidence among the Greeks. The battle of Salamis

had destroyed the power of Persia on the sea, and prevented any

co-operation of land and naval forces. The battle of Platæa freed Greece

altogether of the invaders. The battle of Mycale rescued the Ionian

cities.

(M451) Athens had, on the whole, most distinguished herself in this great

and glorious contest, and now stood forth as the guardian of Hellenic

interests on the sea and the leader of the Ionian race. Sparta continued

to take the lead of the military States, to which Athens had generously

submitted. But a serious rivalry now was seen between these leading

States, chiefly through the jealousy of Sparta, which ultimately proved

fatal to that supremacy which the Greeks might have maintained overall the

powers of the world. Sparta wished that Athens might remain unfortified,

in common with all the cities of Northern Greece, while the isthmus should

be the centre of all the works of defense. But Athens, under the sagacious

and crafty management of Themistocles, amused the Spartans by delays,

while the whole population were employed upon restoring its

fortifications.

(M452) Although the war against the Persians was virtually concluded by

the capture of Sestos, an expedition was fitted out by Sparta, under

Pausanias, the hero of Platæa, to prosecute hostilities on the shores of

Asia. After liberating most of the cities of Cyprus, and wresting

Byzantium from the Persians, which thus left the Euxine free to Athenian

ships, from which the Greeks derived their chief supplies of foreign corn,

Pausanias, giddy with his victories, unaccountably began a treasonably

correspondence with Xerxes, whose daughter he wished to marry, promising

to bring all Greece again under his sway. He was recalled to Sparta,

before this correspondence was known, having given offense by adopting the

Persian dress, and surrounding himself with Persian and Median guards.

When his treason was at last detected, he attempted to raise a rebellion

among the Helots, but failed, and died miserably by hunger in the temple

in which he had taken sanctuary.

(M453) A fall scarcely less melancholy came to the illustrious

Themistocles. In spite of his great services, his popularity began to

decline. He was hated by the Spartans for the part he took in the

fortification of the city, who brought all their influence against him. He

gave umbrage to the citizens by his personal vanity, continually boasting

of his services. He erected a private chapel in honor of Artemis. He

prostituted his great influence for arbitrary and corrupt purposes. He

accepted bribes without scruple, to the detriment of the State, and in

violation of justice and right. And as the Persians could offer the

highest bribes, he was suspected of secretly favoring their interests. The

old rivalries between him and Aristides were renewed; and as Aristides was

no longer opposed to the policy which Athens adopted, of giving its

supreme attention to naval defenses, and, moreover, constantly had gained

the respect of the city by his integrity and patriotism, especially by his

admirable management at Delos, where he cemented the confederacy of the

maritime States, his influence was perhaps greater than that of

Themistocles, stained with the imputation of _Medism_. Cimon, the son of

Miltiades, also became a strong opponent. Though acquitted of accepting

bribes from Persia, Themistocles was banished by a vote of ostracism, as

Aristides had been before—a kind of exile which was not dishonorable, but

resorted to from regard to public interests, and to which men who became

unpopular were often subjected, whatever may have been their services or

merits. He retired to Argos, and while there the treason of Pausanias was

discovered. Themistocles was involved in it, since the designs of

Pausanias were known by him. Joint envoys from Sparta and Athens were sent

to arrest him, which, when known, he fled to Corcyra, and thence to

Admetus, king of the Molossians. The Epirotic prince shielded him in spite

of his former hostility, and furnished him with guides to Pydna, across

the mountains, from which he succeeded in reaching Ephesus, and then

repaired to the Persian court. At Athens he was proclaimed a traitor, and

his property, amounting to one hundred talents, accumulated by the war,

was confiscated. In Persia, he represented himself as a deserter, and

subsequently acquired influence with Artaxerxes, and devoted his talents

to laying out schemes for the subjugation of Greece. He received the large

sum of fifty talents yearly, and died at sixty-five years of age, with a

blighted reputation, such as no previous services could redeem from

infamy.

(M454) Aristides died four years after the ostracism of Themistocles,

universally respected, and he died so poor as not to have enough for his

funeral expenses. Nor did any of his descendants ever become rich.

(M455) Xerxes himself, the Ahasuerus of the Scriptures, who commanded the

largest expedition ever recorded in human annals, reached Sardis, eight

months after he had left it, disgusted with active enterprise, and buried

himself amid the intrigues of his court and seraglio, in Susa, as recorded

in the book of Esther. He was not deficient in generous impulses, but

deficient in all those qualities which make men victorious in war. He died

fifteen years after, the victim of a conspiracy, in his palace, B.C.

465—six years after Themistocles had sought his protection.

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE AGE OF PERICLES.

(M456) With the defeat of the Persian armies, Athens and Sparta became,

respectively, the leaders of two great parties in Greece. Athens advocated

maritime interests and democratic institutions; Sparta, was the champion

of the continental and oligarchal powers. The one was Ionian, and

organized the league of Delos, under the management of Aristides; the

other was Dorian, and chief of the Peloponnesian confederacy. The

rivalries between these leading States involved a strife between those

ideas and interests of which each was the recognized representative. Those

States which previously had been severed from each other by geographical

position and diversity of interests, now rallied under the guidance either

of Athens or Sparta. The intrigues of Themistocles and Pausanias had

prevented that Panhellenic union, so necessary for the full development of

political power, and which was for a time promoted by the Persian war.

Athens, in particular, gradually came to regard herself as a pre-eminent

power, to which the other States were to be tributary. Her empire, based

on maritime supremacy, became a tyranny to which it was hard for the old

allies to submit.

(M457) But the rivalry between Sparta and Athens was still more marked.

Sparta had thus far taken the lead among the Grecian States, and Athens

had submitted to it in the Persian invasion. But the consciousness of new

powers, which naval warfare developed, the _éclat_ of the battles of

Marathon and Salamis, and the confederacy of Delos, changed the relative

position of the two States. Moreover, to Athens the highest glory of

resisting the Persians was due, while her patriotic and enlarged spirit

favorably contrasted with the narrow and selfish policy of Sparta.

(M458) And this policy was seen in nothing more signally than in the

oppositions he made to the new fortifications of Athens, so that

Themistocles was obliged to go to Sparta, and cover up by deceit and

falsehood the fact that the Athenians were really repairing their walls,

which they had an undoubted right to do, but which Ægina beheld with fear

and Sparta with jealousy. And this unreasonable meanness and injustice on

the part of Sparta, again reacted on the Athenians, and created great

bitterness and acrimony.

(M459) But in spite of the opposition of Sparta, the new fortifications

arose, to which all citizens, rich and poor, lent their aid, and on a

scale which was not unworthy of the grandeur of a future capital. The

circuit of the walls was fifty stadia or seven miles, and they were of

sufficient strength and height to protect the city against external

enemies. And when they were completed Themistocles—a man of great

foresight and genius, persuaded the citizens to fortify also their harbor,

as a means of securing the ascendency of the city in future maritime

conflicts. He foresaw that the political ascendency of Athens was based on

those “wooden walls” which the Delphic oracle had declared to be her hope

in the Persian invasion. The victory at Salamis had confirmed the wisdom

of the prediction, and given to Athens an imperishable glory. Themistocles

persuaded his countrymen that the open roadstead of Phalerum was insecure,

and induced them to inclose the more spacious harbors of Peireus and

Munychia, by a wall as long as that which encircled Athens itself,—so

thick and high that all assault should be hopeless, while within its

fortifications the combined fleets of Greece could safely he anchored, and

to which the citizens of Athens could also retire in extreme danger.

Peireus accordingly was inclosed at vast expense and labor by a wall

fourteen feet in thickness, which served not merely for a harbor, but a

dock-yard and arsenal. Thither resorted metics or resident foreigners, and

much of the trade of Athens was in their hands, since they were less

frequently employed in foreign service. They became a thrifty population

of traders and handy craftsmen identified with the prosperity of Athens.

These various works, absorbed much of the Athenian force and capital, yet

enough remained to build annually twenty new triremes—equivalent to our

modern ships of the line. Athens now became the acknowledged head and

leader of the allied States, instead of Sparta, whose authority as a

presiding State was now openly renunciated by the Athenians. The

Panhellenic union under Sparta was now broken forever, and two rival

States disputed the supremacy,—the maritime States adhering to Athens, and

the land States, which furnished the larger part of the army at Platæa,

adhering to Sparta. It was then that the confederacy of Delos was formed,

under the presidency of Athens, which Aristides directed. His assessment

was so just and equitable that no jealousies were excited, and the four

hundred and sixty talents which were collected from the maritime States

were kept at Delos for the common benefit of the league, managed by a

board of Athenian officers. It was a common fear which led to this great

contribution, for the Phœnician fleet might at any time reappear, and,

co-operating with a Persian land force, destroy the liberties of Greece.

Although Athens reaped the chief benefit of this league, it was

essentially national. It was afterward indeed turned to aggrandize Athens,

but, when it was originally made, was a means of common defense against a

power as yet unconquered though repulsed.

(M460) During all the time that the fortifications of Athens and the

Peireus were being made, Themistocles was the ruling spirit at Athens,

while Aristides commanded the fleet and organized the confederacy of

Delos. It was thus several years before he became false to his Countrymen,

and the change was only gradually wrought in his character, owing chiefly

to his extravagant habits and the arrogance which so often attends

success.

(M461) During this period, a change was also made in the civil

constitution of Athens. All citizens were rendered admissible to office.

The State became still more democratic. The archons were withdrawn from

military duties, and confined to civil functions. The stategi or generals

gained greater power with the extending political relations, and upon them

was placed the duty of superintending foreign affairs. Athens became more

democratical and more military at the same time.

(M462) From this time, 479 B.C., we date the commencement of the Athenian

empire. It gradually was cemented by circumstances rather than a

long-sighted and calculating ambition. At the head of the confederacy of

Delos, opportunities were constantly presented of centralizing power,

while its rapid increase of population and wealth favored the schemes

which political leaders advanced for its aggrandizement. The first ten

years of the Athenian hegemony or headship were years of active warfare

against the Persians. The capture of Eion, on the Strymon, with its

Persian garrison, by Cimonon, led to the settlement of Amphipolis by the

Athenians; and the fall of the cities which the Persians had occupied in

Thrace and in the various islands of the Ægean increased the power of

Athens.

(M463) The confederate States at last grew weary of personal military

service, and prevailed upon the Athenians to provide ships and men in

their place, for which they imposed upon themselves a suitable

money-payment. They thus gradually sunk to the condition of tributary

allies, unwarlike and averse to privation, while the Athenians, stimulated

by new and expanding ambition, became more and more enterprising and

powerful.

(M464) But with the growth of Athens was also the increase of jealousies.

Athens became unpopular, not only because she made the different maritime

States her tributaries, but because she embarked in war against them to

secure a still greater aggrandizement. Naxos revolted, but was conquered,

B.C. 467. The confederate State was stripped of its navy, and its

fortifications were razed to the ground. Next year the island of Thasos

likewise seceded from the alliance, and was subdued with difficulty, and

came near involving Athens in a war with Sparta. The Thasians invoked the

aid of Sparta, which was promised though not fulfilled, which imbittered

the relations between the two leading Grecian States.

(M465) During this period, from the formation of the league at Delos, and

the fall of Thasos, about thirteen years, Athens was occupied in

maintaining expeditions against Persia, being left free from

embarrassments in Attica. The towns of Platæa and Thespiæ were restored

and repeopled under Athenian influence.

(M466) The jealousy of Sparta, in view of the growing power of Athens, at

last gave vent in giving aid to Thebes, against the old policy of the

State, to enable that city to maintain supremacy over the lesser Bœotian

towns. The Spartans even aided in enlarging her circuit and improving her

fortifications, which aid made Thebes a vehement partisan of Sparta. Soon

after, a terrible earthquake happened in Sparta, 464 B.C., which calamity

was seized upon by the Helots as a fitting occasion for revolt. Defeated,

but not subdued, the insurgents retreated to Ithome, the ancient citadel

of their Messenian ancestors, and there intrenched themselves. The

Spartans spent two years in an unsuccessful siege, and were forced to

appeal to their allies for assistance. But even the increased force made

no impression on the fortified hill, so ignorant were the Greeks, at this

period, of the art of attacking walls. And when the Athenians, under

Cimon, still numbered among the allies of Sparta, were not more

successful, their impatience degenerated to mistrust and suspicion, and

summarily dismissed the Athenian contingent. This ungracious and jealous

treatment exasperated the Athenians, whose feelings were worked upon by

Pericles who had opposed the policy of sending troops at all to Laconia.

Cimon here was antagonistic to Pericles, and wished to cement the more

complete union of Greece against Persia, and maintain the union with

Sparta. Cimon, moreover, disliked the democratic policy of Pericles. But

the Athenians rallied under Pericles, and Cimon lost his influence, which

had been paramount since the disgrace of Themistocles. A formal resolution

was passed at Athens to renounce the alliance with Sparta against the

Persians, and to seek alliance with Argos, which had been neutral during

the Persian invasion, but which had regained something of its ancient

prestige and power by the conquest of Mycenæ and other small towns. The

Thessalians became members of this new alliance which was intended to be

antagonistic to Sparta. Megara, shortly after, renounced the protection of

the Peloponnesian capital, and was enrolled among the allies of Athens,—a

great acquisition to Athenian power, since this city secured the passes of

Mount Gerania, so that Attica was protected from invasion by the Isthmus

of Corinth. But the alliance of Megara and Athens gave deep umbrage to

Corinth as well as Sparta, and a war with Corinth was the result, in which

Ægina was involved as the ally of Sparta and Corinth.

(M467) The Athenians were at first defeated on the land; but this defeat

was more than overbalanced by a naval victory over the Dorian seamen, off

the island of Ægina, by which the naval force of _Ægina_ hitherto great,

was forever prostrated. The Athenians captured seventy ships and commenced

the siege of the city itself. Sparta would have come to the rescue, but

was preoccupied in suppressing the insurrection of the Helots. Corinth

sent three hundred hoplites to Ægina and attacked Megara. But the

Athenians prevailed both at Ægina and Megara, which was a great blow to

Corinth.

(M468) Fearing, however, a renewed attack from Corinth and the

Peloponnesian States, now full of rivalry and enmity, the Athenians, under

the leadership of Pericles, resolved to connect their city with the harbor

of Peireus by a long wall—a stupendous undertaking at that time. It

excited the greatest alarm among the enemies of Athens, and was a subject

of contention among different parties in the city. The party which Cimon,

now ostracised, had headed, wished to cement the various Grecian States in

a grand alliance against the Persians, and dreaded to see this long wall

arise as a standing menace against the united power of the Peloponnesus.

Moreover, the aristocrats of Athens disliked a closer amalgamation with

the maritime people of the Peireus, as well as the burdens and taxes which

this undertaking involved. These fortifications doubtless increased the

power of Athens, but weakened the unity of Hellenic patriotism; and

increased those jealousies which ultimately proved the political ruin of

Greece.

(M469) Under the influence of these rivalries and jealousies the

Lacedæmonians, although the Helots wore not subdued, undertook a hostile

expedition out of the Peloponnesus, with eleven thousand five hundred men,

ostensibly to protect Doris against the Phœcians, but really to prevent

the further aggrandizement of Athens, and this was supposed to be most

easily effected by strengthening Thebes and securing the obedience of the

Bœotian cities. But there was yet another design, to prevent the building

of the long walls, to which the aristocratical party of Athens was

opposed, but which Pericles, with long-sighted views, defended.

(M470) This extraordinary man, with whom the glory and greatness of Athens

are so intimately associated, now had the ascendency over all his rivals.

He is considered the ablest of all the statesmen which Greece produced. He

was of illustrious descent, and spent the early part of his life in

retirement and study, and when he emerged from obscurity his rise was

rapid, until he gained the control of his countrymen, which he retained

until his death. He took the side of the democracy, and, in one sense, was

a demagogue, as well as a statesman, since he appealed to popular passions

and interests. He was very eloquent, and was the idol of the party which

was dominant in the State. His rank and fortune enabled him to avail

himself of every mode of culture and self-improvement known in his day. He

loved music, philosophy, poetry, and art. The great Anaxagoras gave a

noble direction to his studies, so that he became imbued with the

sublimest ideas of Grecian wisdom. And his eloquence is said to have been

of the most lofty kind. His manners partook of the same exalted and

dignified bearing as his philosophy. He never lost his temper, and

maintained the severest self-control. His voice was sweet, and his figure

was graceful and commanding. He early distinguished himself as a soldier,

and so gained upon his countrymen that, when Themistocles and Aristides

were dead, and Cimon engaged in military expeditions, he supplanted all

who had gone before him in popular favor. All his sympathies were with the

democratic party, while his manners and habits and tastes and associations

were those of the aristocracy. His political career lasted forty years

from the year 469 B.C. He was unremitting in his public duties, and was

never seen in the streets unless on his way to the assembly or senate. He

was not fond of convivial pleasures, and was, though affable, reserved and

dignified. He won the favor of the people by a series of measures which

provided the poor with amusement and means of subsistence. He caused those

who served in the courts to be paid for their attendance and services. He

weakened the power of the court of the Areopagus, which was opposed to

popular measures. Assured of his own popularity, he even contrived to

secure the pardon of Cimon, his great rival, when publicly impeached.

(M471) Pericles was thus the leading citizen of his country, when he

advocated the junction of the Peireus with Athens by the long walls which

have been alluded to, and when the Spartan army in Bœotia threatened to

sustain the oligarchal party in the city. The Athenians, in view of this

danger, took decisive measures. They took the field at once against their

old allies, the Lacedæmonians. The unfortunate battle of Tanagra was

decided in favor of the Spartans, chiefly through the desertion of the

Thessalian horse.

(M472) Cimon, though ostracised, appeared in the field of battle, and

requested permission to fight in the ranks. Though the request was

refused, he used all his influence with his friends to fight with bravery

and fidelity to his country’s cause, which noble conduct allayed the

existing jealousies, and through the influence of Pericles, his banishment

of ten years was revoked. He returned to Athens, reconciled with the party

which had defeated him, and so great was the admiration of his magnanimity

that all parties generously united in the common cause. Another battle

with the enemy was fought in Bœotia, this time attended with success, the

result of which was the complete ascendency of the Athenians over all

Bœotia. They became masters of Thebes and all the neighboring towns, and

reversed all the acts of the Spartans, and established democratic

governments, and forced the aristocratical leaders into exile. Phocis and

Locris were added to the list of dependent allies, and the victory

cemented their power from the Corinthian Gulf to the strait of Thermopylæ.

(M473) Then followed the completion of the long walls, B.C. 455, and the

conquest of Ægina. Athens was now mistress of the sea, and her admiral

displayed his strength by sailing round the Peloponnesus, and taking

possession of many cities in the Gulf of Corinth. But the Athenians were

unsuccessful in an expedition into Thessaly, and sustained many losses in

Egypt in the great warfare with Persia.

(M474) After the success of the Lacedæmonians at Tanagra they made no

expeditions out of the Peloponnesus for several years, and allowed Bœotia

and Phocis to be absorbed in the Athenian empire. They even extended the

truce with Athens for five years longer, and this was promoted by Cimon,

who wished to resume offensive operations against the Persians. Cimon was

allowed to equip a fleet of two hundred triremes and set sail to Cyprus,

where he died. The expedition failed under his successor, and this closed

all further aggressive war with the Persians.

(M475) The death of Cimon, whose interest it was to fight the Persians,

and thus by the spoils and honors of war keep up his influence at home,

left Pericles without rivals, and with opportunities to develop his policy

of internal improvements, and the development of national resources, to

enable Athens to maintain her ascendency over the States of Greece. So he

gladly concluded peace with the Persians, by the terms of which they were

excluded from the coasts of Asia Minor and the islands of the Ægean; while

Athens stipulated to make no further aggression on Cyprus, Phœnicia,

Cilicia, and Egypt.

(M476) Athens, at peace with all her enemies, with a large empire of

tributary allies, a great fleet, and large accumulations of treasure,

sought now to make herself supreme in Greece. The fund of the confederacy

of Delos was transferred to the Acropolis. New allies sought her alliance.

It is said the tributary cities amounted to one thousand. She was not only

mistress of the sea, but she was the equal of Sparta on the land. Beside

this political power, a vast treasure was accumulated in the Acropolis.

Such rapid aggrandizement was bitterly felt by Corinth, Sicyon, and

Sparta, and the feeling of enmity expanded until it exploded in the

Peloponnesian war.

(M477) It was while Athena was at this height of power and renown that

further changes were made in the constitution by Pericles. Great authority

was still in the hands of the court of the Areopagus, which was composed

exclusively of ex-archons, sitting for life, and hence of very

aristocratic sentiments. It was indeed a judicial body, but its functions

were mixed; it decided all disputes, inquired into crimes, and inflicted

punishments. And it was enabled to enforce its own mandates, which were

without appeal, and led to great injustice and oppression. The

magistrates, serving without pay, were generally wealthy, and though their

offices were eligible to all the citizens, still, practically, only the

rich became magistrates, as is the case with the British House of Commons.

Hence, magistrates possessing large powers, and the senate sitting for

life, all belonging to the wealthy class, were animated by aristocratic

sympathies. But a rapidly increasing democracy succeeded in securing the

selection of archons by lot, in place of election. This threw more popular

elements into the court of Areopagus. The innovations which Pericles

effected, of causing the jury courts, or Dikasteries, to be regularly

paid, again threw into public life the poorer citizens. But the great

change which he effected was in transferring to the numerous dikasts,

selected from the citizens, a new judicial power, heretofore exercised by

the magistrates, and the senate of the Areopagus. The magistrate, instead

of deciding causes and inflicting punishment beyond the imposition of a

small fine, was constrained to impanel a jury to try the cause. In fact,

the ten dikasts became the leading judicial tribunals, and as these were

composed, each, of five hundred citizens, judgments were virtually made by

the people, instead of the old court. The pay of each man serving as a

juror was determined and punctually paid. The importance of this

revolution will be seen when these dikasts thus became the exclusive

assemblies, of course popular, in which all cases, civil and criminal,

were tried. The magistrates were thus deprived of the judicial functions

which they once enjoyed, and were confined to purely administrative

matters. The commanding functions of the archon were destroyed, and he

only retained power to hear complaints, and fix the day of trial, and

preside over the dikastic assembly. The senate of the Areopagus, which had

exercised an inquisitorial power over the lives and habits of the

citizens, and supervised the meetings of the assembly—a power uncertain

but immense, and sustained by ancient customs,—now became a mere nominal

tribunal. And this change was called for, since the members of the court

were open to bribery and corruption, and had abused their powers, little

short of paternal despotism. And when the great public improvements, the

growth of a new population, the rising importance of the Penæus, the

introduction of nautical people, and the active duties of Athens as the

head of the Delian confederacy—all, together, gave force to the democratic

elements of society, the old and conservative court became stricter, and

more oppressive, instead of more popular and conciliatory.

(M478) But beside this great change in the constitution, Pericles effected

others also. Under his influence, a general power of supervision, over the

magistrates and the assembly, was intrusted to seven men called

Nomophylakes, or Law Guardians, changed every year, who sat with the

president in the senate and assembly, and interposed when any step was

taken contrary to existing laws. Other changes were also effected with a

view to the enforcement of laws, upon which we can not enter. It is enough

to say that it was by means of Pericles that the magistrates were stripped

of judicial power, and the Areopagus of all its jurisdiction, except in

cases of homicide, and numerous and paid and popular dikasts were

substituted to decide judicial cases, and repeal and enact laws; this,

says Grote, was the consummation of the Athenian democracy. And thus it

remained until the time of Demosthenes.

(M479) But the influence of Pericles is still more memorable from the

impulse he gave to the improvements of Athens and his patronage of art and

letters. He conceived the idea of investing his city with intellectual

glory, which is more permanent than any conquests of territory. And since

he could not make Athens the centre of political power, owing to the

jealousies of other States, he resolved to make her the great attraction

to all scholars, artists, and strangers. And his countrymen were prepared

to second his glorious objects, and were in a condition to do so, enriched

by commerce, rendered independent by successes over the Persians, and

jealous Grecian rivals, and stimulated by the poets and philosophers who

flourished in that glorious age. The age of Pericles is justly regarded as

the epoch of the highest creation genius ever exhibited, and gave to

Athens an intellectual supremacy which no military genius could have

secured.

(M480) The Persian war despoiled and depopulated Athens. The city was

rebuilt on a more extensive plan, and the streets were made more regular.

The long walls to the Peiræus were completed—a double wall, as it were,

with a space between them large enough to secure the communication between

the city and the port, in case an enemy should gain a footing in the wide

space between the Peiræan and Thaleric walls. The port itself was

ornamented with beautiful public buildings, of which the Agora was the

most considerable. The theatre, called the Odeon, was erected in Athens

for musical and poetical contests. The Acropolis, with its temples, was

rebuilt, and the splendid Propylæa, of Doric architecture, formed a

magnificent approach to them. The temple of Athenæ—the famous

Parthenon—was built of white marble, and adorned with sculptures in the

pediments and frieze by the greatest artists of antiquity, while Phidias

constructed the statue of the goddess of ivory and gold. No Doric temple

ever equaled the severe proportions and chaste beauty of the Parthenon,

and its ruins still are one of the wonders of the world. The Odeon and

Parthenon were finished during the first seven years of the administration

of Pericles, and many other temples were constructed in various parts of

Attica. The genius of Phidias is seen in the numerous sculptures which

ornamented the city, and the general impulse he gave to art. Other great

artists labored in generous competition,—sculptors, painters, and

architects,—to make Athens the most beautiful city in the world.

(M481) “It was under the administration of Pericles that Greek literature

reached its culminating height in the Attic drama, a form of poetry which

Aristotle justly considers as the most perfect; and it shone with

undiminished splendor to the close of the century. It was this branch of

literature which peculiarly marked the age of Pericles—the period between

the Persian and Peloponnesian wars. The first regular comedies were

produced by Epicharmus, who was born in Cos, B.C. 540, and exhibited at

Syracuse. Comedy arose before tragedy, and was at first at the celebration

of Dionysus by rustic revelers in the season of the vintage, in the form

of songs and dances. But these were not so appropriate in cities, and the

songs of the revelers were gradually molded into the regular choral

dithyramb, while the performers still preserved the wild dress and

gestures of the satyrs—half goat and half man—who accompanied Dionysus.”

The prevalence of tales of crime and fate and suffering naturally

impressed spectators with tragic sentiments, and tragedy was thus born and

separated from comedy. Both forms received their earliest development in

the Dorian States, and were particularly cultivated by the Megarians.

“Thespis, a native of Icaria, first gave to tragedy its dramatic

character, in the time of Pisistratus, B.C. 535. He introduced the

dialogue, relieved by choral performances, and the recitation of

mythological and heroic adventures. He traveled about Attica in a wagon,

which served him for a stage; but the art soon found its way to Athens,

where dramatic contests for prizes were established in connection with the

festivals of Dionysus. These became State institutions. Chœrilus, B.C.

523, and Phrynichus followed Thespis, and these ventured from the regions

of mythology to contemporaneous history.”

(M482) It was at this time that Æschylus, the father of tragedy, exhibited

his dramas at Athens, B.C. 500. He added a second actor, and made the

choral odes subordinate to the action. The actors now made use of masks,

and wore lofty head-dresses and magnificent robes. Scenes were painted

according to the rules of perspective, and an elaborate mechanism was

introduced upon the stage. New figures were invented for the dancers of

the chorus. Sophocles still further improved tragedy by adding the third

actor, and snatched from Æschylus the tragic prize. He was not equal to

Æschylus in the boldness and originality of his characters, or the

loftiness of his sentiments, or the colossal grandeur of his figures; but

in the harmony of his composition, and the grace and vigor displayed in

all the parts—the severe unity, the classic elegance of his style, and the

charm of his expressions he is his superior. These two men carried tragedy

to a degree of perfection never afterward attained in Greece. It was not

merely a spectacle to the people, but was applied to moral and religious

purposes. The heroes of Æschylus are raised above the sphere of real life,

and often they are the sport of destiny, or victims of a struggle between

superior beings. The characters of Sophocles are rarely removed beyond the

sphere of mortal sympathy, and they are made to rebuke injustice and give

impressive warnings.

(M483) Comedy also made a great stride during the administration of

Pericles; but it was not till his great ascendency was at its height that

Aristophanes was born, B.C. 444. The comedians of the time were allowed

great license, which they carried even into politics, and which was

directed against Pericles himself.

(M484) The Athenian stage at this epoch was the chief means by which

national life and liberty were sustained. It answered the functions of the

press and the pulpit in our day, and quickened the perceptions of the

people. The great audiences which assembled at the theatres were kindled

into patriotic glow, and were moved by the noble thoughts, and withering

sarcasm, and inexhaustible wit of the poets. “The gods and goddesses who

swept majestically over the tragic stage were the objects of religious and

national faith, real beings, whose actions and sufferings claimed their

deepest sympathy, and whose heroic fortitude served for an example, or

their terrific fate for a warning. So, too, in the old comedy, the

persons, habits, manners, principles held up to ridicule were all familiar

to the audience in their daily lives; and the poet might exhibit in a

humorous light objects which to attack seriously would have been a treason

or a sacrilege, and might recommend measures which he could only have

proposed in the popular assembly with a halter round his neck.” This

susceptibility of the people to grand impressions, and the toleration of

rulers, alike show a great degree of popular intelligence and a great

practical liberty in social life.

(M485) The age of Pericles was also adorned by great historians and

philosophers. Herodotus and Thucydides have never been surpassed as

historians, while the Sophists who succeeded the more earnest philosophers

of a previous age, gave to Athenian youth a severe intellectual training.

Rhetoric, mathematics and natural history supplanted speculation, led to

the practice of eloquence as an art, and gave to society polish and

culture. The Sophists can not indeed be compared with those great men who

preceded or succeeded them in philosophical wisdom, but their influence in

educating the Grecian mind, and creating polished men of society, can not

be disproved. Politics became a profession in the democratic State, which

demanded the highest culture, and an extensive acquaintance with the

principles of moral and political science. This was the age of lectures,

when students voluntarily assembled to learn from the great masters of

thought that knowledge which would enable them to rise in a State where

the common mind was well instructed.

(M486) But it must also be admitted that while the age of Pericles

furnished an extraordinary stimulus to the people, in art, in literature,

in political science, and in popular institutions, the great teachers of

the day inculcated a selfish morality, and sought an æsthetic enjoyment

irrespective of high moral improvement, and the inevitable result was the

rapid degeneracy of Athens, and the decline even in political influence,

and strength, as was seen in the superior power of Sparta in the great

contest to which the two leading States of Greece were hurried by their

jealousies and animosities. The prosperity was delusive and outside; for

no intellectual triumph, no glories of art, no fascinations of literature,

can balance the moral forces which are generated in self-denial and lofty

public virtue.

(M487) It was while the power and glory of Pericles were at their height

that he formed that memorable attachment to Aspasia, a Milesian woman,

which furnished a fruitful subject for the attacks of the comic poets. She

was the most brilliant and intellectual woman of the age, and her house

was the resort of the literary men and philosophers and artists of Athens

until the death of Pericles. He formed as close a union with her as the

law allowed, and her influence in creating a sympathy with intellectual

excellence can not be questioned. But she was charged with pandering to

the vices of Pericles, and corrupting society by her example and

influence.

(M488) The latter years of Pericles were marked by the outbreak of that

great war with Sparta, which crippled the power of Athens and tarnished

her glories. He also was afflicted by the death of his children by the

plague which devastated Athens in the early part of the Peloponnesian war,

to which attention is now directed. The probity of Pericles is attested by

the fact that during his long administration he added nothing to his

patrimonial estate. His policy was ambitious, and if it could have been

carried out, it would have been wise. He sought first to develop the

resources of his country—the true aim of all enlightened statesmen—and

then to make Athens the centre of Grecian civilization and political

power, to which all other Stales would be secondary and subservient. But

the rivalries of the Grecian States and inextinguishable jealousies would

not allow this. He made Athens, indeed, the centre of cultivated life; he

could not make it the centre of national unity. In attempting this he

failed, and a disastrous war was the consequence.

Pericles lived long enough to see the commencement of the contest which

ultimately resulted in the political ruin of Athens, and which we now

present.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR.

(M489) The great and disastrous war between the two leading States of

Greece broke out about two years and a half before the death of Pericles,

but the causes of the war can be traced to a period shortly after the

Persians were driven out of the Ionian cities. It arose primarily from the

rapid growth and power of Athens, when, as the leader of the maritime

States, it excited the envy of Sparta and other republics. A thirty years’

truce was made between Athens and Sparta, B.C. 445, after the revolution

in Bœotia, when the ascendency of Pericles was undisputed, which forced

his rival, Thucydides, a kinsman of Cimon, to go into temporary exile. The

continuance of the truce is identical with the palmy days of Athens, and

the glory of Pericles, during which the vast improvements to the city were

made, and art and literature flourished to a degree unprecedented in the

history of the ancient world.

(M490) After the conquest of Samos the jealousy of Sparta reached a point

which made it obvious that the truce could not much longer be maintained,

though both powers shrunk from open hostilities, foreseeing the calamities

which would result. The storm burst out in an unexpected quarter. The city

of Epidamnus had been founded by colonists from Corcyra, on the eastern

side of the Adriatic. It was, however, the prey of domestic factions, and

in a domestic revolution a part of the inhabitants became exiles. These

appealed to the neighboring barbarians, who invested the city by sea and

land. The city, in distress, invoked the aid of Corcyra, the parent State,

which aid being disregarded, the city transferred its allegiance to

Corinth. The Corinthians, indulging a hatred of Corcyra, took the

distressed city under their protection. This led to a war between Corcyra

and Corinth, in which the Corinthians were defeated. But Corinth, burning

to revenge the disaster, fitted out a still larger force against Corcyra.

The Corcyræans, in alarm, then sent envoys to Athens to come to their

assistance. The Corinthians also sent ambassadors to frustrate their

proposal. Two assemblies were held in Athens in reference to the subject.

The delegates of Corcyra argued that peace could not long be maintained

with Sparta, and that in the coming contest the Corcyræans would prove

useful allies. The envoys of Corinth, on the other hand, maintained that

Athens could not lend aid to Corcyra without violating the treaty with

Corinth. The Athenians decided to assist Corcyra, and ten ships were sent,

under the command of Lacedæmonieus, the son of Cimon. This was considered

a breach of faith by the Corinthians, and a war resulted between Corinth

and Athens. The Corinthians then invited the Lacedæmonians to join them

and make common cause against an aggressive and powerful enemy, that aimed

at the supremacy of Greece. In spite of the influence of Athenian envoys

in Sparta, who attempted to justify the course their countrymen had taken,

the feeling against Athens was bitter and universally hostile. Instant

hostilities were demanded in defense of the allies of Sparta, and war was

decided upon.

Thus commenced the Peloponnesian war, which led to such disastrous

consequences, and which was thus brought about by the Corinthians, B.C.

433, sixteen years before the conclusion of the truce.

(M491) To Athens the coming war was any thing but agreeable. It had no

hopes of gain, and the certainty of prodigious loss. But the Spartans were

not then prepared for the contest, and hostilities did not immediately

commence. They contented themselves, at first, with sending envoys to

Athens to multiply demands and enlarge the grounds of quarrel. The

offensive was plainly with Sparta. The first requisition which Sparta made

was the expulsion of the Alcmæonidæ from Athens, to which family Pericles

belonged—a mere political manœuvre to get rid of so commanding a

statesman. The enemies of Pericles, especially the comic actors at Athens,

seized this occasion to make public attacks upon him, and it was then that

the persecution of Aspasia took place, as well as that against Anaxagoras,

the philosopher, the teacher, and friend of Pericles. He was also accused

of peculation in complicity with Phidias. But he was acquitted of the

various charges made by his enemies. Nor could his services be well

dispensed with in the great crisis of public affairs, even had he been

guilty, as was exceedingly doubtful.

(M492) The reluctance on the part of the Athenians to go to war was very

great, but Pericles strenuously urged his countrymen to resent the

outrageous demands of Sparta, which were nothing less than the virtual

extinction of the Athenian empire. He showed that the Spartans, though

all-powerful on the Peloponnesus, had no means of carrying on an

aggressive war at a distance, neither leaders nor money, nor habits of

concert with allies; while Athens was mistress of the sea, and was

impregnable in defense; that great calamities would indeed happen in

Attica, but even if overrun by Spartan armies, there were other

territories and islands from which a support could be derived. “Mourn not

for the loss of land,” said the orator, “but reserve your mourning for the

men that acquire land.” His eloquence and patriotism prevailed with a

majority of the assembly, and answer was made to Sparta that the Athenians

were prepared to discuss all grounds of complaint pursuant to the truce,

by arbitration, but that they would yield nothing to authoritative

command. This closed the negotiations, which Pericles foresaw would be

vain and useless, since the Spartans were obstinately bent on war. The

first imperious blow was struck by the Thebans—allies of Sparta. They

surprised Platæa in the night. The gates were opened by the oligarchal

party; a party of Thebans were admitted into the agora; but the people

rallied, and the party was overwhelmed. Meanwhile another detachment of

Thebans arrived in the morning, and, discovering what had happened, they

laid waste the Platæan territory without the walls. The Platæans

retaliated by slaughtering their prisoners. Messengers left the city, on

the entrance of the Thebans, to carry the news to Athens, and the

Athenians issued orders to seize all the Bœotians who could be found in

Attica, and sent re-enforcements to Platæa. This aggression of the Thebans

silenced the opponents of Pericles, who now saw that the war had actually

begun, and that active preparations should be made. Athens immediately

sent messengers to her allies, tributary as well as free, and

contributions flowed in from all parts of the Athenian empire. Athens had

soon three hundred triremes fit for service, twelve hundred horsemen,

sixteen hundred bowmen, and twenty-nine thousand hoplites. The Acropolis

was filled with the treasure which had long been accumulating, not less

than six thousand talents—about $7,000,000 of our money—an immense sum at

that time, when gold and silver were worth twenty or thirty times as much

as at present. Moreover, the various temples were rich in votive

offerings, in deposits, plate, and sacred vessels, while the great statue

of the goddess, lately set up in the Parthenon by Phidias, composed of

gold and ivory, was itself valued at four hundred talents. The

contributions of allies swelled the resources of Athens to one thousand

talents, or over $11,000,000.

(M493) Sparta, on the other hand, had but few ships, no funds, and no

powers of combination, and it would seem that success would be on the side

of Athens, with her unrivaled maritime skill, and the unanimity of the

citizens. Pericles did not promise successful engagements on the land, but

a successful resistance, and the maintenance of the empire. His policy was

purely defensive. But if Sparta was weak in money and ships, she was rich

in allies. The entire strength of the Peloponnesus was brought out,

assisted by Megarians, Bœotians, Phocians, Locrians, and other States.

Corinth, Megara, Sicyon, Elis, and other maritime cities furnished ships

while Bœotians, Phocians, and Locrians furnished cavalry. Not even to

resist the Persian hosts was so large a land force collected, as was now

assembled to destroy the supremacy of Athens. And this great force was

animated with savage hopes, while the Athenians were not without

desponding anticipations, for there was little hope of resisting the

Spartans and their allies on the field. The Spartans, moreover, resolved,

by means of their allies, to send a fleet able to cope with that of

Athens, and even were so transported with enmity and jealousy as to lay

schemes for invoking the aid of Persia.

(M494) The invasion of Attica was the primary object of Sparta and her

allies; and at the appointed time the Lacedæmonian forces were mustered on

the Isthmus of Corinth, under the command of Archidamus. Envoys were sent

to Athens to summon a surrender, but Pericles would not receive them, nor

allow them to enter the city, upon which the Lacedæmonian army commenced

its march to Attica. It required all the eloquence and tact of Pericles to

induce the proprietors of Attica to submit to the devastation of their

cultivated territory, and fly with their families and movable property to

Athens or the neighboring islands, without making an effort to resist the

invaders. But this was the policy of Pericles. He knew he could not

contend with superior forces on the land. It was hard for the people to

submit to the cruel necessity of seeing their farms devastated without

opposition. But they made the sacrifice, and intrenched themselves behind

the fortifications of Athens. Then was seen the wisdom of the long walls

which connected Athens with the Piræus.

(M495) Meanwhile the Spartan forces—sixty thousand hoplites, advanced

through Attica, burning and plundering every thing on their way, and

reached Acharnæ, within seven miles of Athens. The Athenians, pent up

behind their walls, and seeing the destruction of their property, were

eager to go forth and fight, but were dissuaded by Pericles. Then came to

him the trying hour. He was denounced as the cause of the existing

sufferings, and was reviled as a coward. But nothing disturbed his

equanimity, and he refused even to convene the assembly. As one of the ten

generals he had this power; but it was a remarkable thing that the people

should have respected the democratic constitution so far as to submit,

when their assembly would have been justified by the exigency of the

crisis. But while the Athenians remained inactive behind their walls, the

cavalry was sent out on skirmishing expeditions, and a large fleet was

sent to the Peloponnesus with orders to devastate the country in

retaliation. The Spartans, after having spent thirty or forty days in

Attica, retired for want of provisions. Ægina was also invaded, and the

inhabitants were expelled and sent to the Peloponnesus. Megara was soon

after invaded by an army under Pericles himself, and its territory was

devastated—a retribution well deserved, for both Megara and Ægina had been

zealous in kindling the war.

(M496) Expecting a prolonged struggle, the Athenians now made arrangements

for putting Attica in permanent defense, both by sea and land, and set

apart one thousand talents, out of the treasure of the Acropolis, which

was not to be used except in certain dangers previously prescribed, and a

law was passed making it a capital offense for any citizen to propose its

use for any other purpose.

(M497) The first year of the war closed without decisive successes on

either side. The Athenians made a more powerful resistance than was

anticipated. It was supposed they could not hold out against the superior

forces of their enemies more than a year. They had the misfortune to see

their territory wasted, and their treasures spent in a war which they

would gladly have avoided. But, on the other hand, they inflicted nearly

equal damages upon the Peloponnesus, and still remained masters of the

sea. Pericles pronounced a funeral oration on those who had fallen and

stimulated his countrymen to continued resistance, and excited their

patriotic sentiments. Thus far the anticipations of the statesman and

orator had been more than realized.

(M498) The second year of the war opened with another invasion of Attica

by the Spartans and their allies. They inflicted even more injury than in

the preceding year, but they found the territory deserted, all the

population having retired within the defenses of Athens.

(M499) But a new and unforeseen calamity now fell upon the Athenians, and

against which they could not guard. A great pestilence broke out in the

city, which had already overrun Western Asia. Its progress was rapid and

destructive, and the overcrowded city was but too favorable for its

ravages. Thucydides has left a graphic and mournful account of this

pestilence, analogous to the plague of modern times. The victims generally

perished on the seventh or ninth day, and no treatment was efficacious.

The sufferings and miseries of the people were intense, and the calamity

by many was regarded as resulting from the anger of the gods. The

pestilence demoralized the population, who lost courage and fortitude. The

sick were left to take care of themselves. The utmost lawlessness

prevailed. The bonds of law and morality were relaxed, and the thoughtless

people abandoned themselves to every species of folly and excess, seeking,

in their despair, to seize some brief moments of joy before the hand of

destiny should fall upon them. For three years did this calamity desolate

Athens, and the loss of life was deplorable, both in the army and among

private citizens. Pericles lost both his children and his sister; four

thousand four hundred hoplites died, and a greater part of the horsemen.

(M500) And yet, amid the devastation which the pestilence inflicted,

Pericles led another expedition against the coasts of the Peloponnesus.

But the soldiers carried infection with them, and a greater part of them

died of the disease at the siege or blockade of Potidæa. The Athenians

were nearly distracted by the double ravages of pestilence and war, and

became incensed against Pericles, and sent messengers to Sparta to

negotiate peace. But the Spartans turned a deaf ear, which added to the

bitterness against their heroic leader, whose fortitude and firmness were

never more effectively manifested. He was accused, and condemned to pay a

fine, and excluded from re-election. Though he was restored to power and

confidence, his affliction bore heavily upon his exalted nature, and he

died, B.C. 430, in the early period of the war. He had, indeed, many

enemies, and was hunted down by the comic writers, whose trade it was to

deride all political characters, yet his wisdom, patriotism, eloquence,

and great services are indisputable, and he died, leaving on the whole,

the greatest name which had ever ennobled the Athenians.

(M501) The war, of course, languished during the prevalence of the

epidemic, and much injury was done to Athenian commerce by Peloponnesian

privateers, who put to death all their prisoners. It was then that Sparta

sent envoys to Persia to solicit money and troops against Athens, which

shows that no warfare is so bitter as civil strife, and that no expedients

are too disgraceful not to be made use of, in order to gratify malignant

passions. But the envoys were seized in Thrace by the allies of Athens,

and delivered up to the Athenians, and by them were put to death.

(M502) In January, B.C. 429, Potidæa surrendered to the Athenian generals,

upon favorable terms, after enduring all the miseries of famine. The fall

of this city cost Athens two thousand talents. The Lacedæmonians, after

two years, had accomplished nothing. They had not even relieved Potidæa.

(M503) On the third year, the Lacedæmonians, instead of ravaging Attica,

marched to the attack of Platæa. The inhabitants resolved to withstand the

whole force of the enemies. Archidemus, the Lacedæmonian general,

commenced the siege, defended only by four hundred native citizens and

eighty Athenians. So unskilled were the Greeks in the attack of fortified

cities, that the besiegers made no progress, and were obliged to resort to

blockade. A wall of circumvallation was built around the city, which was

now left to the operations of famine.

(M504) At the same time the siege was pressed, an Athenian armament was

sent to Thrace, which was defeated; but in the western part of Greece the

Athenian arms were more successful. The Spartans and their allies suffered

a repulse at Stratus, and their fleet was defeated by Phormio, the

Athenian admiral. Nothing could exceed the rage of the Lacedæmonians at

these two disasters. They collected a still larger fleet, and were again

defeated with severe loss near Naupactus, by inferior forces. But the

defeated Lacedæmonians, under the persuasion of the Megarians, undertook

the bold enterprise of surprising the Piræus, during the absence of the

Athenian fleet; but the courage of the assailants failed at the critical

hour, and the port of Athens was saved. The Athenians then had the

precaution to extend a chain across the mouth of the harbor, to guard

against such surprises in the future.

(M505) Athens, during the summer, had secured the alliance of the

Odrysians, a barbarous but powerful nation in Thrace. Their king,

Sitalces, with an army of fifteen thousand men, attacked Perdiccas, the

king of Macedonia, and overran his country, and only retired from the

severity of the season and the want of Athenian co-operation. Such were

the chief enterprises and events of the third campaign, and Athens was

still powerful and unhumbled.

(M506) The fourth year of the war was marked by a renewed invasion of

Attica, without any other results than such as had happened before. But it

was a more serious calamity to the Athenians to learn that Mitylene and

most of Lesbos had revolted—one of the most powerful of the Athenian

allies. Nothing was left to Athens but to subjugate the city. A large

force was sent for this purpose, but the inhabitants of Mitylene appealed

to the Spartans for aid, and prepared for a vigorous resistance. But the

treasures of Athens were now nearly consumed, and the Athenians were

obliged to resort to contributions to force the siege, which they did with

vigor. The Lacedæmonians promised succor, and the Mitylenæans held out

till their provisions were exhausted, when they surrendered to the

Athenians. The Lacedæmonians advanced to relieve their allies, but were

too late. The Athenian admiral pursued them, and they returned to the

Peloponnesus without having done any thing. Paches, the Athenian general,

sent home one thousand Mitylenæan prisoners, while it was decreed to

slaughter the whole remaining population—about six thousand—able to carry

arms, and makes slaves of the women and children. This severe measure was

prompted by Cleon. But the Athenians repented, and a second decree of the

assembly, through the influence of Diodotus, prevented the barbarous

revenge; but the Athenians put to death the prisoners which Paches had

sent, razed the fortifications of Mitylene, took possession of all her

ships of war, and confiscated all the land of the island except that which

belonged to one town that had been faithful. So severe was ancient

warfare, even among the most civilized of the Greeks.

(M507) The surrender of Platæa to the Lacedæmonians took place not long

after; but not until one-half of the garrison had sallied from the city,

scaled the wall of circumvallation, and escaped safely to Athens. The

Platæans were sentenced to death by the Spartan judges, and barbarously

slain. The captured women were sold as slaves, and the town and territory

were handed over to the Thebans.

(M508) Scenes not less bloody took place in the western part of Greece, in

the island of Corcyra, before which a naval battle was fought between the

Lacedæmonians and the Athenians. The island had been governed by

oligarchies, under the protection of Sparta, but the retirement of the

Lacedæmonian fleet enabled the Athenian general to wreak his vengeance on

the party which had held supremacy, which was exterminated in the most

cruel manner, which produced a profound sensation, and furnished

Thucydides a theme for the most profound reflections on the acerbity and

ferocity of the political parties, which, it seems, then divided Greece,

and were among the exciting causes of the war itself—the struggle between

the advocates of democratic and aristocratic institutions.

(M509) A new character now appears upon the stage at Athens—Nicias—one of

the ten generals who, in rank and wealth, was the equal of Pericles. He

belonged to the oligarchal party, and succeeded Cimon and Thucydides in

the control of it. But he was moderate in his conduct, and so won the

esteem of his countrymen, that he retained power until his death, although

opposed to the party which had the ascendency. He was incorruptible as to

pecuniary gains, and adopted the conservative views of Pericles, avoiding

new acquisitions at a distance, or creating new enemies. He surrounded

himself, not as Pericles did, with philosophers, but religions men,

avoided all scandals, and employed his large fortune in securing

popularity. Pericles disdained to win the people by such means, cultivated

art, and patronized the wits who surrounded Aspasia. Nicias was zealous in

the worship of the gods, was careful to make no enemies, and conciliated

the poor by presents. Yet he increased his private fortune, so far as he

could, by honorable means, and united thrift and sagacity with honesty and

piety. He was not a man of commanding genius, but his character was above

reproach, and was never assailed by the comic writers. He was the great

opponent of Alcibiades, the oracle of the democracy—one of those memorable

demagogues who made use of the people to forward his ambitious projects.

He was also the opponent of Cleon, whose office it was to supervise

official men for the public conduct—a man of great eloquence, but

fault-finding and denunciatory.

(M510) The fifth year of the war was not signalized by the usual invasion

of Attica, which gave the Athenians leisure to send an expedition under

Nicias against the island of Melos, inhabited by ancient colonists from

Sparta. Demosthenes, another general, was sent around the Peloponnesus to

attack Acarnania, and he ravaged the whole territory of Leueas. He also

attacked Ætolia, but was completely beaten, and obliged to retire with

loss; but this defeat was counterbalanced by a great victory, the next

year, over the enemy at Olpæ, when the Lacedæmonian general was slain. He

returned in triumph to Athens with considerable spoil. The attention of

the Athenians was now directed to Delos, the island sacred to Apollo, and

a complete purification of the island was made, and the old Delian

festivals renewed with peculiar splendor.

(M511) The war had now lasted six years, without any grand or decisive

results on either side. The expeditions of both parties were of the nature

of raids—destructive, cruel, irritating, but without bringing any grand

triumphs. Though the seventh year was marked by the usual enterprise on

the part of the Lacedæmonians—the invasion of Attica—Corcyra promised to

be the principal scene of military operations. Both an Athenian and

Spartan fleet was sent thither. But an unforeseen incident gave a new

character to the war. In the course of the voyage to Corcyra, Demosthenes,

the Athenian general, stopped at Pylus, with the intention of erecting a

fort on the uninhabited promontory, since it protected the spacious basin

now known as the bay of Navarino, and was itself easily defended.

Eurymedon, the admiral, insisted on going directly to Corcyra, but the

fleet was driven by a storm into the very harbor which Demosthenes

proposed to defend. The place was accordingly fortified by Demosthenes,

where he himself remained with a garrison, while the fleet proceeded to

Corcyra. Intelligence of this insult to Sparta—the attempt to plant a

hostile fort on its territory—induced the Lacedæmonians to send their

fleet to Pylus, instead of Corcyra. Forty-three triremes, under

Thrasymelidas, and a powerful land force, advanced to attack Demosthenes,

intrenched with his small army on the rocky promontory. When the news of

this new diversion reached the Athenian fleet at Corcyra, it returned to

Pylus, to succor Demosthenes. Here a naval battle took place, in which the

Lacedæmonians were defeated. This defeat jeopardized the situation of the

Spartan army which had occupied the island of Shacteria, cut off from

supplies from the main land, as well as the existence of the fleet. So

great was this exigency, that the ephors came from Sparta to consult on

operations. They took a desponding view, and sent a herald to the Athenian

generals to propose an armistice, in order to allow time for envoys to go

to Athens and treat for peace. But Athens demanded now her own terms,

elated by the success. Cleon, the organ of the popular mind, excited and

sanguine, gave utterance to the feelings of the people, and insisted on

the restoration of all the territory they had lost during the war. The

Lacedæmonian envoys, unable to resist a vehement speaker like Cleon, which

required qualities they did not possess, and which could only be acquired

from skill in managing popular assemblies, to which they were unused,

returned to Pylus. And it was the object of Cleon to prevent a hearing of

the envoys by a select committee (what they desired) for fear that Nicias

and other conservative politicians would accede to their proposals. Thus

the best opportunity that could be presented for making an honorable peace

and reuniting Greece was lost by the arts of a demagogue, who inflamed and

shared the popular passions. Had Pericles been alive, the treaty would

probably have been made, but Nicias had not sufficient influence to secure

it.

(M512) War therefore recommenced, with fresh irritation. The Athenian

fleet blockaded the island where the Spartan hoplites were posted, and

found in the attempt, which they thought so easy, unexpected obstacles.

Provisions clandestinely continually reached the besieged. Week after week

passed without the expected surrender. Demosthenes, baffled for want of

provisions and water for his own fleet, sent urgently to Athens for

re-enforcements, which caused infinite mortification. The people now began

to regret that they had listened to Cleon, and not to the voice of wisdom.

Cleon himself was sent with the re-enforcements demanded, against his

will, although he was not one of the ten generals. The island of

Sphacteria now contained the bravest of the Lacedæmonian troops—from the

first families of Sparta—a prey which Cleon and Demosthenes were eager to

grasp. They attacked the island with a force double of that of the

defenders, altogether ten thousand men, eight hundred of whom were

hoplites. The besieged could not resist this overwhelming force, and

retreated to their last redoubt, but were surrounded and taken prisoners.

This surrender caused astonishment throughout Greece, since it was

supposed the Spartan hoplites would die, as they did at Thermopylæ, rather

than allow themselves to be taken alive, and this calamity diminished

greatly the lustre of the Spartan arms. A modern army, surrounded with an

overwhelming force, against which all resistance was madness, would have

done the same as the Spartans. But it was a sad blow to them. Cleon,

within twenty days of his departure, arrived at Athens with his three

hundred Lacedæmonian prisoners, amid universal shouts of joy, for it was

the most triumphant success which the Athenians had yet obtained. The war

was prosecuted with renewed vigor, and the Lacedæmonians again made

advances for peace, but without effect. The flushed victors would hear of

no terms but what were disgraceful to the Spartans. The chances were now

most favorable to Athens. Nicias invaded the Corinthian territory with

eighty triremes, two thousand hoplites, and two hundred horsemen, to say

nothing of the large number which supported these, and committed the same

ravages that the Spartans and their allies had inflicted upon Attica.

Among other events, the Athenians this year captured the Persian

ambassador, Artaphernes, on his way to Sparta. He was brought to Athens,

and his dispatches were translated and made public. He was sent back to

Ephesus, with Athenian envoys, to the great king, to counteract the

influence of the Spartans, but Artaerxes had died when they reached Susa.

(M513) The capture of Sphacteria, and the surrender of the whole

Lacedæmonian fleet, not only placed Athens, on the opening of the eighth

year of the war, in a situation more commanding than she had previously

enjoyed, but stimulated her to renewed operations on a grander scale, not

merely against Sparta, but to recover the ascendency in Bœotia, which was

held before the thirty years’ truce. The Lacedæmonians, in concert with

the revolted Chalcidic allies of Athens in Thrace, and Perdiccas, king of

Macedonia, also made great preparations for more decisive measures. The

war had dragged out seven years, and nothing was accomplished which

seriously weakened either of the contending parties.

(M514) The first movement was made by the Athenians on the Laconian coast.

The island of Cythera was captured by an expedition led by Nicias, of

sixty triremes and two thousand hoplites, beside other forces, and the

coast was ravaged. Then Thyrea, an Æginetan settlement, between Laconia

and Argolis, fell into the hands of the Athenians, and all the Æginetans

were either killed in the assault, or put to death as prisoners. These

successive disasters alarmed the Lacedæmonians, and they now began to fear

repeated assaults on their own territory, with a discontented population

of Helots. This fear prompted an act of cruelty and treachery which had no

parallel in the history of the war. Two thousand of the bravest Helots

were entrapped, as if especial honors were to be bestowed upon them, and

barbarously slain. None but the five ephors knew the bloody details. There

was even no public examination of this savage inhumanity, which shows that

Sparta was governed, as Venice was in the Middle Ages, by a small but

exceedingly powerful oligarchy.

After this cruelty was consummated, envoys came from Perdiccas and the

Chalcidians of Thrace, invoking aid against Athens. It was joyfully

granted, and Brasidas, at the request of Perdiccas and the Chalcidians,

was sent with a large force of Peloponnesian hoplites.

(M515) Meanwhile the Athenians formed plans to attack Megara, whose

inhabitants had stimulated the war, and had been the greatest sufferers by

it. A force was sent under Hippocrates and Demosthenes to surprise the

place, and also Nisæa. The long walls of Megara, similar to those of

Athens, were taken by surprise, and the Athenians found themselves at the

gates of the city, which came near falling into their hands by treachery.

Baffled for the moment, the Athenians attacked Clisæa, which lay behind

it, and succeeded.

(M516) But Brasidas, the Lacedæmonian general, learning that the long

walls had fallen into the hands of the Athenians, got together a large

force of six thousand hoplites and six hundred cavalry, and relieved

Megara, and the Athenians were obliged to retire. Ultimately the Megarians

regained possession of the long walls, and instituted an oligarchal

government.

(M517) The Athenians, disappointed in getting possession of Megara, which

failed by one of those accidents ever recurring in war, organized a large

force for the attack of Bœotia, on three sides, under Hippocrates and

Demosthenes. The attack was first made at Siphae, by Demosthenes, on the

Corinthian Gulf, but failed. In spite of this failure by sea, Hippocrates

marched with a land force to Delium, with seven thousand hoplites, and

twenty-five thousand other troops, and occupied the place, which was a

temple consecrated to Apollo, and strongly fortified it. When the work of

fortification was completed, the army prepared to return to Athens.

(M518) Forces from all parts of Bœotia rallied, and met the Athenians.

Among the forces of the Bœotians was the famous Theban band of three

hundred select warriors, accustomed to fight in pairs, each man attached

to his companion by peculiar ties of friendship. At Delium was fought the

great battle of the war, in which the Athenians were routed, and the

general, Hippocrates, with a thousand hoplites, were slain. The victors

refused the Athenians the sacred right of burying their dead, unless they

retired altogether from Delium—the post they had fortified on Bœotian

territory. To this the Athenians refused to submit, the consequence of

which was the siege and capture of Delium.

Among the hoplites who fought in this unfortunate battle, which was a

great discouragement to the Athenian cause, was the philosopher Socrates.

The famous Alcibiades also served in the cavalry, and helped to protect

Socrates in his retreat, after having bravely fought.

(M519) The disasters of the Athenians in Thrace were yet more

considerable. Brasidas, with a large force, including seventeen hundred

hoplites, rapidly marched through Thrace and Thessaly, and arrived in

Macedonia safely, and attacked Acanthus, an ally of Athens. It fell into

his hands, as well as Stageirus, and he was thus enabled to lay plans for

the acquisition of Amphipolis, which was founded by Athenian colonists. He

soon became master of the surrounding territory. He then offered favorable

terms of capitulation to the citizens of the town, which were accepted,

and the city surrendered—the most important of all the foreign possessions

of Athens. The bridge over the Strymon was also opened, by which all the

eastern allies of Athena were approachable by land. This great reverse

sent dismay into the hearts of the Athenians, greater than had before been

felt. The bloody victory at Delium, and the conquests of Brasidas, more

than balanced the capture of Sphacteria. Sparta, under the victorious

banner of Brasidas, a general of great probity, good faith, and

moderation, now proclaimed herself liberator of Greece. Athens,

discouraged and baffled, lost all the prestige she had gained.

(M520) But Amphipolis was lost by the negligence of the Athenian

commanders. Encles and Thucydides, the historian, to whom the defense of

the place was intrusted, had means ample to prevent the capture had they

employed ordinary precaution. The Athenians, indignant, banished

Thucydides for twenty years, and probably Eucles also—a just sentence,

since they did not keep the bridge over the Strymon properly guarded, nor

retained the Athenian squadron at Eion. The banishment of Thucydides gave

him leisure to write the history on which his great fame rests—the most

able and philosophical of all the historical works of antiquity.

(M521) Brasidas, after the fall of Amphipolis, extended his military

operations with success. He took Torone, Lecythus, and other places, and

then went into winter quarters. The campaign had been disastrous to the

Athenians, and a truce of one year was agreed upon by the belligerent

parties—Athens of the one party, and Sparta, Corinth, Sicyon, Epidaurus,

and Megara, of the other.

(M522) The conditions of this truce stipulated that Delphi might be

visited by all Greeks, without distinction; that all violations of the

property of the Delphian god should be promptly punished; that the

Athenian garrisons at Pylus, Cythera, Nisæa, and Methana, should remain

unmolested; that the Lacedæmonians should be free to use the sea for

trading purposes; and that neither side should receive deserters from the

other—important to both parties, since Athens feared the revolt of subject

allies, and Sparta the desertion of Helots.

But two days had elapsed after the treaty was made before Scione in Thrace

revolted to Brasidas—a great cause of exasperation to the Athenians,

although the revolt took place before the treaty was known. Mendes, a

neighboring town, also revolted. Brasidas sent the inhabitants a garrison

to protect themselves, and departed with his forces for an expedition into

the interior of Macedonia, but was soon compelled to retreat before the

Illyrians.

(M523) An Athenian force, under Nicias and Nicostratus, however, proceeded

to Thrace to recover the revolted cities. Everywhere else the truce was

observed. It was intended to give terms for more complete negotiations.

This was the policy of Nicias. But Cleon and his party, the democracy, was

opposed to peace, and wished to prosecute the war vigorously in Thrace.

Brasidas, on his part, was equally in favor of continued hostilities. And

this was the great question of the day in Greece.

(M524) The war party triumphed, and Cleon, by no means an able general,

was sent with an expedition to recover Amphipolis, B.C. 422. He succeeded

in taking Torone, but Amphipolis, built on a hill in the peninsula formed

by the river Strymon, as it passes from the Strymonic Gulf to Lake

Kerkernilis, was a strongly fortified place in which Brasidas intrenched.

He was obliged to remain inactive at Eion, at the mouth of the river,

three miles distant from Amphipolis, which excited great discontent in his

army, but which was the wiser course, until his auxiliaries arrived. But

the murmur of the hoplites compelled him to some sort of action, and while

he was reconnoitering, he was attacked by Brasidas. Cleon was killed, and

his army totally defeated. Brasidas, the ablest general of the day,

however, was also mortally wounded, and carried from the field. This

unsuccessful battle compelled the Athenians to return home, deeply

disgusted with their generals. But they embarked in the enterprise

reluctantly, and with no faith in their leader, and this was one cause of

their defeat. The death of Brasidas, however, converted the defeat into a

substantial victory, since there remained no Spartan with sufficient

ability to secure the confidence of the allies. Brasidas, when he died,

was the first man in Greece, and universally admired for his valor,

intelligence, probity, and magnanimity.

(M525) The battle of Amphipolis was decisive; it led to a peace between

the contending parties. It is called the peace of Nicias, made in March,

B.C. 421. By the provisions of this treaty of peace, which was made for

fifty years, Amphipolis was restored to the Athenians, all persons had

full liberty to visit the public temples of Greece, the Athenians restored

the captive Spartans, and the various towns taken during the war were

restored on both sides. This peace was concluded after a ten years’ war,

when the resources of both parties were exhausted. It was a war of

ambition and jealousy, without sufficient reasons, and its consequences

were disastrous to the general welfare of Greece. In some respects it must

be considered, not merely as a war between Sparta and Athens to gain

supremacy, but a war between the partisans of aristocratic and democratic

institutions throughout the various States.

(M526) The peace made by Nicias between Athens and Sparta for fifty years

was not of long continuance. It was a truce rather than a treaty, since

neither party was overthrown—but merely crippled—like Rome and Carthage

after the first Punic war. The same causes which provoked the contest

still remained—an unextinguishable jealousy between States nearly equal in

power, and the desire of ascendency at any cost. But we do not perceive in

either party that persistent and self-sacrificing spirit which marked the

Romans in their conquest of Italy. The Romans abandoned every thing which

interfered with their aggressive policy: the Grecian States were diverted

from political aggrandizement by other objects of pursuit—pleasure, art,

wealth.

(M527) There was needed only a commanding demagogue, popular, brilliant,

and unprincipled, to embroil Greece once more in war, and such a man was

Alcibiades, who appeared upon the stage at the death of Cleon. And

hostilities were easily kindled, since the allies on both sides were

averse to the treaty which had been made, and the conditions of the peace

were not fulfilled. Athens returned the captive Spartans she had held

since the battle of Sphacteria, but Amphipolis was not restored, from the

continued enmity of the Thracian cities. Both parties were full of

intrigues, and new combinations were constantly being formed. Argos became

the centre of a new Peloponnesian alliance. A change of ephors at Sparta

favored hostile measures, and an alliance was made between the Bœotians

and Lacedæmonians. The Athenians, on their side, captured Scione, and put

to death the prisoners.

(M528) It was in this unsettled state of things, when all the late

contending States were insincere and vacillating, that Alcibiades stood

forth as a party leader. He was thirty-one years of age, belonged to an

ancient and powerful family, possessed vast wealth, had great personal

beauty and attractive manners, but above all, was unboundedly ambitious,

and grossly immoral—the most insolent, unprincipled, licentious, and

selfish man that had thus far scandalized and adorned Athenian society.

The only redeeming feature in his character was his friendship for

Socrates, who, it seems, fascinated him by his talk, and sought to improve

his morals. He had those brilliant qualities, and luxurious habits, and

ostentatious prodigality, which so often dazzle superficial people,

especially young men of fashion and wealth, but more even than they, the

idolatrous rabble. So great was his popularity and social prestige, that

no injured person ever dared to bring him to trial, and he even rescued

his own wife from the hands of the law when she sought to procure a

divorce—a proof that even in democratic Athens all bowed down to the

insolence of wealth and high social position.

(M529) Alcibiades, though luxurious and profligate, saw that a severe

intellectual training was necessary to him if he would take rank as a

politician, for a politician who can not make a speech stands a poor

chance of popular favor. So he sought the instructions of Socrates,

Prodicus, Protagoras, and others—not for love of learning, but as means of

success, although it may be supposed that the intellectual excitement,

which the discourse, cross-examination, and ironical sallies of Socrates

produced, was not without its force on so bright a mind.

(M530) Alcibiades commenced his public life with a sullied reputation, and

with numerous enemies created by his unbearable insolence, but with a

flexibility of character which enabled him to adapt himself to whatever

habits circumstances required. He inspired no confidence, and his

extravagant mode of life was sure to end in ruin, unless he reimbursed

himself out of the public funds; and yet he fascinated the people who

mistrusted and hated him. The great comic poet, Aristophanes, said of him

to the Athenians: “You ought not to keep a lion’s whelp in your city at

all, but if you choose to keep him, you must submit to his behavior.”

(M531) Alcibiades, in commencing his political life, departed from his

family traditions; for he was a relative of Pericles, and became a

partisan of the oligarchal party. But he soon changed his polities, on

receiving a repulse from the Spartans, who despised him, and he became a

violent democrat. His first memorable effort was to bring Argos, then in

league with Sparta, into alliance with Athens, in which he was successful.

He then cheated the Lacedæmonian envoys who were sent to protest against

the alliance and make other terms, and put them in a false position, and

made them appear deceitful, and thus arrayed against them the wrath of the

Athenians. As Alcibiades had prevailed upon these envoys, by false

promises and advice, to act a part different from what they were sent to

perform, Nicias was sent to Sparta to clear up embarrassments, but failed

in his object, upon which Athens concluded an alliance with Argos, Elis,

and Mantinea, which only tended to complicate existing difficulties.

(M532) Shortly after this alliance was concluded, the Olympic games were

celebrated with unusual interest, from which the Athenians had been

excluded during the war. Here Alcibiades appeared with seven chariots,

each with four horses, when the richest Greeks had hitherto possessed but

one, and gained two prizes. He celebrated his success by a magnificent

banquet more stately and expensive than those given by kings. But while

the Athenians thus appeared at the ninetieth Olympiad, the Lacedæmonians

were excluded by the Eleians, who controlled the festival, from an alleged

violation of the Olympic truce, but really from the intrigues of

Alcibiades.

(M533) The subsequent attack of Argos and Athens on Epidaurus proved that

the peace between Athens and Sparta existed only in name. It was

distinctly violated by the attack of Argos by the Lacedæmonians, Bœotians,

and Corinthians, and the battle of Mantinea opened again the war. This was

decided in favor of the Lacedæmonians, with a great loss to the Athenians

and their allies, including both their generals, Laches and Nicostratus.

(M534) The moral effect of the battle of Mantinea, B.C. 418, was

overwhelming throughout Greece, and re-established the military prestige

of Sparta. It was lost by the withdrawal of three thousand Eleians before

the battle, illustrating the remark of Pericles that numerous and equal

allies could never be kept in harmonious co-operation. One effect of the

battle was a renewed alliance between Sparta and Argos, and the

re-establishment of an oligarchal government in the latter city. Mantinea

submitted to Sparta, and the Achaian towns were obliged to submit to a

remodeling of their political institutions, according to the views of

Sparta. The people of Argos, however, took the first occasion which was

presented for regaining their power, assisted by an Athenian force under

Alcibiades, and Argos once again became an ally of Athens.

(M535) The next important operation of the war was the siege and conquest

of Melos, a Dorian island, by the Athenians, B.C. 416. The inhabitants

were killed, and the women and children were sold as slaves, and an

Athenian colony was settled on the island. But this massacre, exceeding

even the customary cruelty of war in those times, raised a general

indignation among the allies of Sparta.

(M536) But an expedition of far greater importance was now undertaken by

the Athenians—the most gigantic effort which they ever made, but which

terminated disastrously, and led to the ruin and subjugation of their

proud and warlike city, as a political power. This was the invasion of

Sicily and siege of Syracuse.

Before we present this unfortunate expedition, some brief notice is

necessary of the Grecian colonies in Sicily.

(M537) In the eighth century before Christ Sicily was inhabited by two

distinct races of barbarians—the Sikels and Sikans—besides Phœnician

colonies, for purposes of trade. The Sikans were an Iberian tribe, and

were immigrants of an earlier date than the Sikels, by whom they were

invaded. The earliest Grecian colony was (B.C. 735) at Naxos, on the

eastern coast of the island, between the Straits of Messina and Mount

Ætna, founded by Theocles, a Chalcidian mariner, who was cast by storms

upon the coast, and built a fort on a hill called Taurus, to defend

himself against the Sikels, who were in possession of the larger half of

the island. Other colonists followed, chiefly from the Peloponnesus. In

the year following that Naxos was founded, a body of settlers from Corinth

landed on the islet Ortygia, expelled the Sikel inhabitants, and laid the

foundation of Syracuse. Successive settlements were made forty-five years

after at Gela, in the southwestern part of the island. Other settlements

continued to be made, not only from Greece, but from the colonies

themselves; so that the old inhabitants were gradually Hellenized and

merged with Greek colonists, while the Greeks, in their turn, adopted many

of the habits and customs of the Sikels and Sikans. The various races

lived on terms of amity, for the native population was not numerous enough

to become formidable to the Grecian colonists.

(M538) Five hundred years before Christ the most powerful Grecian cities

in Sicily were Agrigentum and Gela, on the south side of the island. The

former, within a few years of its foundation, B.C. 570, fell under the

dominion of one of its rich citizens, Phalasaris, who proved a cruel

despot, but after a reign of sixteen years he was killed in an

insurrection, and an oligarchal government was established, such as then

existed in most of the Grecian cities. Syracuse was governed in this way

by the descendants of the original settlers. Gela was, on the other hand,

ruled by a despot called Gelo, the most powerful man on the island. He got

possession of Syracuse, B.C. 485, and transferred the seat of his power to

this city, by bringing thither the leading people and making slaves of the

rest. Under Gelo Syracuse became the first city on the island, to which

other towns were tributary. When the Greeks confederated against Xerxes,

they sent to solicit his aid as the imperial leader of Sicily, and he

could command, according to Herodotus, twenty thousand hoplites, two

hundred triremes, two thousand cavalry, two thousand archers, and two

thousand light-armed horse. So great was then the power of this despot,

who now sought to expel the Carthaginians and unite all the Hellenic

colonies in Sicily under his sway. But the aid was not given, probably on

account of a Carthaginian invasion simultaneous with the expedition of the

Persian king. The Carthaginians, according to the historian, arrived at

Panormus B.C. 480, with a fleet of three thousand ships and a land force

of three hundred thousand men, besides chariots and horses, under

Hamilcar—a mercenary army, composed of various African nations. Gelo

marched against him with fifty thousand foot and five thousand horse, and

gained a complete victory, so that one hundred and fifty thousand, on the

side of the Carthaginians, were slain, together with their general. The

number of the combatants is doubtless exaggerated, but we may believe that

the force was very great. Gelo was now supreme in Sicily, and the victory

of Himera, which he had gained, enabled him to distribute a large body of

prisoners, as slaves, in all the Grecian colonies. It appears that he was

much respected, but he died shortly after his victory, leaving an infant

son to the guardianship of two of his brothers, Polyzelus and Hiero, who

became the supreme governors of the island. A victory gained by Hiero over

the tyrant of Agrigentum gave him the same supremacy which Gelo had

enjoyed. On his death, B.C. 467, the succession was disputed between his

brother, Thrasybulus, and his nephew, the son of Gelo; but Thrasybulus

contrived to make away with his nephew, and reigned alone, cruelly and

despotically, until a revolution took place, which resulted in his

expulsion and the fall of the Gelonian dynasty. Popular governments were

now established in all the Sicilian cities, but these were distracted by

disputes and confusions. Syracuse became isolated from the other cities,

and a government whose powers were limited by the city. The expulsion of

the Gelonian dynasty left the Grecian cities to reorganize free and

constitutional governments; but Syracuse maintained a proud pre-eminence,

and her power was increased from time to time by conquests in the interior

over the old population. Agrigentum was next in power, and scarcely

inferior in wealth. The temple of Zeus, in this city, was one of the most

magnificent in the world. The population was large, and many were the rich

men who kept chariots and competed at the Olympic games. In these Sicilian

cities the intellectual improvement kept pace with the material, and the

little town of Elea supported the two greatest speculative philosophers of

Greece—Parmenides and Zeno. Empedocles, of Agrigentum, was scarcely less

famous.

(M539) Such was the state of the Sicilian cities on the outbreak of the

Peloponnesian war. Being generally of Dorian origin, they sympathized with

Sparta, and great expectations were formed by the Lacedæmonians of

assistance from their Sicilian allies. The cities of Sicily could not

behold the contest between Athens and Sparta without being drawn into the

quarrel, and the result was that the Dorian cities made war on the Ionian

cities, which, of course, sympathized with Athens. As these cities were

weaker than the Dorian, they solicited aid from Athens, and an expedition

was sent to Sicily under Laches, B.C. 426. Another one, under Polydorus,

followed, but without decisive results. The next year still another and

larger expedition, under Eurymedon and Sophocles, arrived in Sicily, while

Athens was jubilant by the possession of the Spartan prisoners, and the

possession of Pylus and Cythera. The Sicilian cities now fearing that

their domestic strife would endanger their independence and make them

subject to Athens, the most ambitious and powerful State in Greece, made a

common league with each other. Eurymedon acceded to the peace and returned

to Athens, much to the displeasure of the war party, which embraced most

of the people, and he and his colleague were banished.

(M540) But wars between the Sicilian cities again led to the intervention

of Athens. Egesta especially sent envoys for help in her struggle against

Selinus, which was assisted by Syracuse. Alcibiades warmly seconded these

envoys, and inflamed the people with his ambitious projects. He, more than

any other man, was the cause of the great Sicilian expedition which proved

the ruin of his country. He was opposed by Nicias, who foretold all the

miserable consequences of so distant an expedition, when so little could

be gained and so much would be jeopardized, and when, on the first

reverse, the enemies of Athens would rally against her. He particularly

cautioned his countrymen not only against the expedition, but against

intrusting the command of it to an unprincipled and selfish man who

squandered his own patrimony in chariot races and other extravagances, and

would be wasteful of the public property—a man without the experience

which became a leader in so great an enterprise. Alcibiades, in reply,

justified his extravagance at the Olympic games, where he contested with

seven chariots, as a means to impress Sparta with the wealth and power of

Athens, after a ten years’ war. He inflamed the ambition of the assembly,

held out specious hopes of a glorious conquest which would add to Athenian

power, and make her not merely pre-eminent, but dominant in Greece. The

assembly, eager for war and glory, sided with the youthful and magnificent

demagogue, and disregarded the counsels of the old patriot, whose wisdom

and experience were second to none in the city.

(M541) Consequently the expedition was fitted out for the attack of

Syracuse—the largest and most powerful which Athens ever sent against an

enemy; for all classes, maddened by military glory, or tempted by love of

gain, eagerly embarked in the enterprise. Nicias, finding he could not

prevent the expedition, demanded more than he thought the people would be

willing to grant. He proposed a gigantic force. But in proposing this

force, he hoped he might thus discourage the Athenians altogether by the

very greatness of the armament which he deemed necessary. But so popular

was the enterprise, that the large force he suggested was voted.

Alcibiades had flattered the people that their city was mistress of the

sea, and entitled to dominion over all the islands, and could easily

prevail over any naval enemy.

(M542) Three years had now elapsed since the peace of Nicias, and Athens

had ample means. The treasury was full, and triremes had accumulated in

the harbor. The confidence of the Athenians was as unbounded as was that

of Xerxes when he crossed the Hellespont, and hence there had been great

zeal and forwardness in preparation.

(M543) When the expedition was at last ready, an event occurred which

filled the city with gloom and anxious forebodings. The half statues of

the god Hermes were distributed in great numbers in Athens in the most

conspicuous situations, beside the doors of private houses and temples,

and in the agora, so that the people were accustomed to regard the god as

domiciled among them for their protection. In one night, at the end of

May, B.C. 415, these statues were nearly all mutilated. The heads, necks,

and busts were all destroyed, leaving the lower part of them—mere

quadrangular pillars, without arms, or legs, or body—alone standing. The

sacrilege sent universal dismay into the city, and was regarded as a most

depressing omen, and was done, doubtless, with a view of ruining

Alcibiades and frustrating the expedition. But all efforts were vain to

discover the guilty parties.

(M544) And this was not the only means adopted to break down the power of

a man whom the more discerning perceived was the evil genius of Athens.

Alcibiades was publicly accused of having profaned and divulged the

Eleusinian mysteries. The charge was denied by Alcibiades, who demanded an

immediate trial. It was eluded by his enemies, who preferred to have the

charge hanging over his head, in case of the failure of the enterprise

which he had projected.

(M545) So the fleet sailed from Piræus amid mingled sentiments of anxiety

and popular enthusiasm. It consisted of one hundred triremes, with a large

body of hoplites. It made straight for Corcyra, where the contingents of

the allies were assembled, which nearly doubled its force. The Syracusans

were well informed as to its destination, and made great exertions to meet

this great armament, under Nicias, Alcibiades, and Lamachus. The latter

commander recommended an immediate attack of Syracuse, as unprepared and

dismayed.

(M546) Alcibiades wished first to open negotiations with the Sikels, of

the interior, to detach them from the aid of Syracuse. His plan was

followed, but before he could carry it into operation he was summoned home

to take his trial. Fearing the result of the accusations against him, for,

in his absence, the popular feeling had changed respecting him—fear and

reason had triumphed over the power of his personal fascination—Alcibiades

made his escape to the Peloponnesus.

(M547) The master spirit of the expedition was now removed, and its

operations were languid and undecided, for Nicias had no heart in it. The

delays which occurred gave the Syracusans time to prepare, and more

confidence in their means of defense. So that when the forces of the

Athenians were landed in the great harbor, they found a powerful army

ready to resist them. In spite of a victory which Nicias gained near

Olympeion, the Syracusans were not dejected, and the Athenian fleet was

obliged to seek winter quarters at Catana, and also send for additional

re-enforcements. Nicias unwisely delayed, but his inexcusable apathy

afforded the enemy leisure to enlarge their fortifications. The Syracusans

constructed an entirely new wall around the inner and outer city, and

which also extended across the whole space from the outer sea to the great

harbor, so that it would be difficult for the Athenians, in the coming

siege, to draw lines of circumvallation around the city. Syracuse also

sent envoys to Corinth and Sparta for aid, while Alcibiades, filled now

with intense hatred of Athens, encouraged the Lacedæmonians to send a

force to the Sicilian capital. He admitted that it was the design of

Athens first to conquer the Sicilian Greeks, and then the Italian Greeks;

then to make an attempt on Carthage, and then, if that was successful, to

bring together all the forces of the subjected States and attack the

Peloponnesus itself, and create a great empire, of which Athens was to be

the capital. Such an avowal was doubtless the aim of the ambitious

Alcibiades when he first stimulated the enterprise, which, if successful,

would have made him the most powerful man in Greece; but he was thwarted

by his enemies at home, and so he turned all his energies against his

native State. His address made a powerful effect on the Lacedæmonians,

who, impelled by hatred and jealousy, now resolved to make use of the

services of the traitor, and send an auxiliary force to Syracuse.

(M548) That city then consisted of two parts—an inner and an outer city.

The outer city was defended on two sides by the sea, and a sea wall. On

the land side a long wall extended from the sea to the fortified high land

of Achradina, so that the city could only be taken by a wall of

circumvallation, so as to cut off supplies by land; at the same time it

was blockaded by sea. But the delay of Nicias had enabled the Syracusans

to construct a new wall, covering both the outer and inner city, and

extending from the great port to the high land near the bay of Magnesi, so

that any attack, except from a single point, was difficult, unless the

wall of circumvallation was made much larger than was originally intended.

Amid incredible difficulties the Athenians constructed their works, and in

an assault from the cliff of Epipolæ, where they were intrenched, their

general, Lamachus, was slain. But the Athenians had gained an advantage,

and the siege was being successfully prosecuted. It was then that the

Lacedæmonians arrived under Gylippus, who was unable to render succor. But

Nicias, despising him, allowed him to land at Himera, from whence he

marched across Sicily to Syracuse. A Corinthian fleet, under Gorgylus,

arrived only just in time to prevent the city from capitulating, and

Gylippus entered Syracuse unopposed. The inaction of Nicias, who could

have prevented this, is unaccountable. But the arrival of Gylippus turned

the scale, and he immediately prosecuted vigorous and aggressive measures.

He surprised an Athenian fort, and began to construct a third counter-wall

on the north side of the Athenian circle. The Athenians, now shut up

within their lines, were obliged to accept battle, and were defeated, and

even forced to seek shelter within their fortified lines. Under this

discouragement, Nicias sent to Athens for another armament, and the

Athenians responded to his call. But Sparta also resolved to send

re-enforcements, and invade Attica besides. Sicilian forces also marched

in aid of Syracuse. The result of all these gathering forces, in which the

whole strength of Greece was employed, was the total defeat of the

Athenian fleet in the Great Harbor, in spite of the powerful fleet which

had sailed from Athens under Demosthenes. The Syracusans pursued their

advantage by blocking up the harbor, and inclosing the whole Athenian

fleet. The Athenians resolved then to force their way out, which led to

another general engagement, in which the Athenians were totally defeated.

Nicias once again attempted to force his way out, with the remainder of

his defeated fleet, but the armament was too much discouraged to obey, and

the Athenians sought to retreat by land. But all the roads were blockaded.

The miserable army, nevertheless, began its hopeless march completely

demoralized, and compelled to abandon the sick and wounded. The retreating

army was harassed on every side, no progress could be made, and the

discouraged army sought in the night to retreat by a different route. The

rear division, under Demosthenes, was overtaken and forced to surrender,

and were carried captives to Syracuse—some six thousand in number. The

next day, the first division, under Nicias, also was overtaken and made

prisoners. No less than forty thousand who had started from the Athenian

camp, six days before, were either killed or made prisoners, with the two

generals who commanded them. The prisoners at first were subjected to the

most cruel and inhuman treatment, and then sold as slaves. Both Nicias and

Demosthenes were put to death, B.C. 413.

(M549) Such was the disastrous close of the Sicilian expedition. Our

limits prevent an extended notice. We can only give the barren outline.

But never in Grecian history had so large a force been arrayed against a

foreign power, and never was ruin more complete. The enterprise was

started at the instance of Alcibiades. It was he who brought this disaster

on his country. But it would have been better to have left the expedition

to his management. Nicias was a lofty and religious man, but was no

general. He grossly mismanaged from first to last. The confidence of the

Athenians was misplaced; and he, after having spent his life in

inculcating a conservative policy, which was the wiser, yet became the

unwilling instrument of untold and unparalleled calamities. His fault was

over-confidence. He was personally brave, religious, incorruptible,

munificent, affable—in all respects honorable and respectable, but he had

no military genius.

(M550) The Lacedæmonians, at the suggestion of Alcibiades, had permanently

occupied Decelea—a fortified post within fifteen miles of Athens, and

instead of spending a few weeks in ravaging Attica, now intrenched

themselves, and issued out in excursions until they had destroyed all that

was valuable in the neighborhood of Athens. The great calamities which the

Athenians had suffered prevented them from expelling the invaders, and the

city itself was now in the condition of a post besieged. All the

accumulations in her treasury were exhausted, and she was compelled to

dismiss even her Thracian mercenaries. They were sent back to their own

country under Dotrephes; but after inflicting great atrocities in Bœotia,

were driven back by the Thebans.

(M551) The Athenian navy was now so crippled that it could no longer

maintain the supremacy of the sea. The Corinthians were formidable rivals

and enemies. A naval battle at Naupactus, at the mouth of the Corinthian

Gulf, between the Athenians and Corinthians, though indecisive, yet really

was to the advantage of the latter.

(M552) The full effects of the terrible catastrophe at Syracuse were not

at first made known to the Athenians, but gradually a settled despair

overspread the public mind. The supremacy of Athens in Greece was at an

end, and the city itself was endangered. The inhabitants now put forth all

the energies that a forlorn hope allowed. The distant garrisons were

recalled; all expenses were curtailed; timber was collected for new ships,

and Capo Sunium was fortified. But the enemies of Athens were also

stimulated to renewed exertions, and subject-allies were induced to

revolt. Persia sent envoys to Sparta. The Eubœans and Chians applied to

the same power for aid in shaking off the yoke of Athens now broken and

defenseless. Although a Peloponnesian fleet was defeated by the Athenians

on its way to assist Chios in revolt, yet new dangers multiplied. The

infamous Alcibiades crossed with a squadron to Chios, and the Athenians

were obliged to make use of their reserved fund of one thousand talents,

which Pericles had set aside for the last extremity, in order to equip a

fleet, under the command of Strombichides. Alcibiades passed over to

Miletus, and induced this city also to revolt. A shameful treaty was made

between Sparta and Persia to carry on war against Athens; and the first

step in the execution of the treaty was to hand Miletus over to a Persian

general. Ionia now became the seat of war, and a victory was gained near

Miletus by the Athenians, but this was balanced by the capture of Iasus by

the Lacedæmonians. The Athenians rallied at Samos, which remained

faithful, and still controlled one hundred and twenty-eight triremes at

this island. Alternate successes and defeats happened to the contending

parties, with no decided result.

(M553) The want of success on the coast of Asia led the Lacedæmonians to

suspect Alcibiades of treachery. Moreover, his intrigue with the wife of

Agis made the king of Sparta his relentless enemy. Agis accordingly

procured a decision of the ephors to send out instructions for his death.

He was warned in time, and made his escape to the satrap Tissaphernes, who

commanded the forces of Persia. He persuaded the Persian not to give a

decisive superiority to either of the contending parties, who followed his

advice, and kept the Peloponnesian fleet inactive, and bribed the Spartan

general. Having now gratified his revenge against Athens and lost the

support of Sparta, Alcibiades now looked to his native country as the best

field for his unprincipled ambition. “He opened negotiations with the

Athenian commanders at Samos, and offered the alliance of Persia as the

price of his restoration, but proposed as a further condition the

overthrow of the democratic government at Athens.”

(M554) Then followed the political revolution which Alcibiades had

planned, in conjunction with oligarchal conspirators. The rally of the

city, threatened with complete ruin, had been energetic and astonishing,

and she was now, a year after the disaster at Syracuse, able to carry on a

purely defensive system, though with crippled resources. But for this

revolution Athens might have secured her independence.

(M555) The proposal of Alcibiades to change the constitution was listened

to by the rich men, on whom the chief burden of the war had fallen. With

the treasures of Persia to help them, they hoped to carry on the war

against Sparta without cost to themselves. It was hence resolved at Samos,

among the Athenians congregated there, to send a deputation to Athens,

under Pisander, to carry out their designs. But they had no other security

than the word of Alcibiades, that restless and unpatriotic schemer, that

they would secure the assistance of Persia. And it is astonishing that

such a man—so faithless—could be believed.

(M556) One of the generals of the fleet at Samos, Phrynichus, strongly

opposed this movement, and gave good reasons; but the tide of opinion

among the oligarchal conspirators ran so violently against him, that

Pisander was at once dispatched to Athens. He laid before the public

assembly the terms which Alcibiades proposed. The people, eager at any

cost to gain the Persian king as an ally, in their extremity listened to

the proposal, though unwilling, and voted to relinquish their political

power. Pisander made them believe it was a choice between utter ruin and

the relinquishment of political privileges, since the Lacedæmonians had an

overwhelming force against them. It was while Chios seemed likely to be

recovered by the Athenians, and while the Peloponnesian fleet was

paralyzed at Rhodes by Persian intrigues, that Pisander returned to Ionia

to open negotiations with Alcibiades and Tissaphernes. But Alcibiades had

promised too much, the satrap having no idea of lending aid to Athens, and

yet he extricated himself by such exaggerated demands, which he knew the

Athenians would never concede to Persia, that negotiations were broken

off, and a reconciliation was made between Persia and Sparta. The

oligarchal conspirators had, however, gone so far that a retreat was

impossible. The democracy of Athens was now subverted. Instead of the

Senate of Five Hundred and the assembled people, an oligarchy of Four

Hundred sat in the Senate house, and all except five thousand were

disfranchised—and these were not convened. The oligarchy was in full power

when Pisander returned to Athens. All democratic magistrates had been

removed, and no civil functionaries were paid. The Four Hundred had

complete control. Thus perished, through the intrigues of Alcibiades, the

democracy of Athens. He had organized the unfortunate expedition to

Sicily; he had served the bitterest enemies of his country; and now, he

had succeeded in overturning the constitution which had lasted one hundred

years, during which Athens had won all her glories. Why should the

Athenians receive back to their confidence so bad a man? But whom God

wishes to destroy, he first makes mad, and Alcibiades, it would seem, was

the instrument by which Athens was humiliated and ruined as a political

power. The revolution was effected in an hour of despair, and by delusive

promises. The character and conduct of the insidious and unscrupulous

intriguer were forgotten in his promises. The Athenians were simply

cheated.

(M557) The Four Hundred, installed in power, solemnized their installation

by prayer and sacrifice, put to death some political enemies, imprisoned

and banished others, and ruled with great rigor and strictness. They then

sought to make peace with Sparta, which was declined. The army at Samos

heard of these changes with exceeding wrath, especially the cruelties

which were inflicted on all citizens who spoke against the new tyranny. A

democratic demonstration took place at Samos, by which the Samians and the

army were united in the strongest ties, for the Samians had successfully

resisted a like revolution on their island. The army at Samos refused to

obey any orders from the oligarchy, and constituted a democracy by

themselves. Yet the man who had been instrumental in creating this

oligarchy, with characteristic versatility and impudence, joined the

democracy at Samos. He came to Samos by invitation of the armament, and

pledged himself to secure Persian aid, and he was believed and again

trusted. He then launched into a new career, and professed to take up

again the interests of the democracy at Athens. The envoys of the Four

Hundred which were sent to Samos were indignantly sent back, and the

general indignation against the oligarchy was intensified. Envoys from

Argos also appeared at Samos, offering aid to the Athenian democracy.

There was now a strong and organized resistance to the Four Hundred, and

their own divisions placed them further in a precarious situation.

Theramenes demanded that the Five Thousand, which body had been thus far

nominal, should be made a reality. The Four Hundred again solicited aid

from Sparta, and constructed a fort for the admission of a Spartan

garrison, while a Lacedæmonian fleet hovered near the Piræus.

(M558) The long-suppressed energies of the people at length burst forth. A

body of soldiers seized the fortress the oligarchy were constructing for a

Spartan garrison, and demolished it. The Four Hundred made important

concessions, and agreed to renew the public assembly. While these events

occurred a naval battle took place near Eretria between the Lacedæmonians

and the Athenians, in which the latter were defeated. The victory, if they

had pushed their success, would have completed the ruin of Athens, since

her home fleet was destroyed, and that at Samos was detained by

Alcibiades. When it was seen the hostile fleet did not enter the harbor,

the Athenians recovered their dismay and prosecuted their domestic

revolution by deposing the Four Hundred and placing the whole government

in the hands of the Five Thousand, and this body was soon enlarged to that

of universal citizenship. The old constitution was restored, except that

part of it which allowed pay to the judges. Most of the oligarchal leaders

fled, and a few of them were tried and executed—those who had sought

Spartan aid. Thus this selfish movement terminated, after the oligarchy

had enjoyed a brief reign of only a few months.

(M559) While Athens was distracted by changes of government, the war was

conducted on the coasts of Asia between the belligerents with alternate

success and defeat. Abydos, connected with Miletus by colonial ties,

revolted from Athens, and Lampsacus, a neighboring town, followed its

example two days afterward. Byzantium also went over to the Lacedæmonians,

which enabled them to command the strait. Alcibiades pursued still his

double game with Persia and Athens. An Athenian fleet was sent to the

Hellespont to contend with the Lacedæmonian squadron, and gained an

incomplete victory at Cynossema, whose only effect was to encourage the

Athenians. The Persians gave substantial aid to the Lacedæmonians,

withheld for a time by the intrigues of Alcibiades, who returned to Samos,

but was shortly after seized by Tissaphernes and sent to Sardis, from

which he contrived to escape. He partially redeemed his infamy by a

victory over the Peloponnesian fleet at Cyzicus, and captured it entirely,

which disaster induced the Spartans to make overtures of peace, which were

rejected through the influence of Cleophon, the demagogue.

(M560) The Athenian fleet now reigned alone in the Propontis, the

Bosphorus, and the Hellespont, and levied toll on all the ships passing

through the straits, while Chrysopolis, opposite to Byzantium, was

occupied by Alcibiades. Athens now once more became hopeful and energetic.

Thrasyllus was sent with a large force to Ionia, and joined his forces

with the fleet which Alcibiades commanded at Sestos, but the conjoined

forces were unable to retake Abydos, which was relieved by Pharnabazus,

the Persian satrap.

(M561) The absence of the fleet from Athens encouraged the Lacedæmonians,

who retook Pylus, B.C. 409, while the Athenians captured Chalcedon, and

the following year Byzantium itself. Such was the state of the contending

parties when Cyrus the younger was sent by his father Darius as satrap of

Lydia, Phrygia, and Cappadocia, and whose command in Asia Minor was

attended by important consequences. Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus were

still left in command of the coast.

(M562) Cyrus, a man of great ambition and self-control, came to Asia Minor

with a fixed purpose of putting down the Athenian power, which for sixty

years had humbled the pride of the Persian kings. He formed a hearty and

cordial alliance with Lysander, the Spartan admiral, and the most eminent

man, after Brasidas, whom the Lacedæmonians had produced during the war.

He was a man of severe Spartan discipline and virtue, but ambitious and

cruel. He visited Cyrus at Sardis, was welcomed with every mark of favor,

and induced Cyrus to grant additional pay to every Spartan seaman.

(M563) Meanwhile Alcibiades re-entered his native city in triumph, after

eight years’ exile, and was welcomed by all parties as the only man who

had sufficient capacity to restore the fallen fortunes of Athens. His

confiscated property was restored, and he was made captain-general with

ample powers, while all his treasons were apparently forgotten, which had

proved so fatal to his country—the sending of Gylippus to Syracuse, the

revolt of Chios and Miletus, and the conspiracy of the Four Hundred. The

effect of this treatment, so much better than what he deserved,

intoxicated this wayward and unprincipled, but exceedingly able man. His

first exploit was to sail to Andros, now under a Lacedæmonian garrison,

whose fields he devastated, but was unable to take the town. He then went

to Samos, and there learned that all his intrigues with Persia had failed,

and that Persia was allied still more strongly with the Lacedæmonians

under Lysander.

(M564) This great general, now at Ephesus, pursued a cautious policy, and

refused to give battle to the Athenian forces under Alcibiades, who then

retired to Phocæa, leaving his fleet under the command of Antiochus, his

favorite pilot. Antiochus, in the absence of his general, engaged the

Lacedæmonian fleet, but was defeated and slain at Notium. The conduct of

Alcibiades produced great disaffection at Athens. He had sailed with a

fleet not inferior to that which he commanded at Syracuse, and had made

great promises of future achievements, yet in three months he had not

gained a single success. He was therefore dismissed from his command,

which was given to ten generals, of whom Conon was the most eminent, while

he retired to the Chersonese. Lysander, at the same time, was superseded

in the command of the Lacedæmonians by Callicratidas, in accordance with

Spartan custom, his term being expired.

(M565) Callicratidas was not welcomed by Cyrus, and he was also left

without funds by Lysander, who returned to the Persians the sums he had

received. This conduct so much enraged the Spartan admiral that he sailed

with his whole fleet—the largest which had been assembled during the war,

one hundred and forty triremes, of which only ten were Lacedæmonian—the

rest being furnished by allies—to Lesbos, and liberated the Athenian

captives and garrison at Methymna, and seemed animated by that old

Panhellenic patriotism which had united the Greeks half a century before

against the Persian invaders, declaring that not a single Greek should be

reduced to slavery if he could help it. But while he was thus actuated by

these noble sentiments, he also prosecuted the war of his country, which

had been intrusted to him to conduct. He blocked up the Athenian fleet at

Mitylene, which had no provisions to sustain a siege. The Athenians now

made prodigious efforts to relieve Conon, and one hundred and ten triremes

were sent from the Piræus, and sailed to Samos. Callicratidas, apprised of

the approach of the large fleet, went out to meet it. At Arginusæ was

fought a great battle, in which the Spartan admiral was killed, and his

forces completely defeated. Sixty-nine Lacedæmonian ships were destroyed;

the Athenians lost twenty-five, a severe loss to Greece, since, if

Callicratidas had gained the victory, he would, according to Grote, have

closed the Peloponnesian war, and united the Greeks once more against

Persia.

The battle of Arginusæ now gave the Athenians the control of the Asiatic

seas, and so discouraged were the Lacedæmonians, that they were induced to

make proposals of peace. This is doubted, indeed, by Grote, since no

positive results accrued to Athens.

(M566) The Chians and other allies of Sparta, in conjunction with Cyrus,

now sent envoys to the ephors, to request the restoration of Lysander to

the command of the fleet. They acceded to the request substantially, and

Lysander reached Ephesus, B.C. 405, to renovate the Lacedæmonian power and

turn the fortunes of war.

(M567) The victorious Athenian fleet was now at Ægospotami, in the

Hellespont, opposite Lampsacus, having been inactive for nearly a year.

There the fleet was exposed to imminent danger, which was even seen by

Alcibiades, in his forts opposite, on the Chersonese. He expostulated with

the Athenian admirals, but to no purpose, and urged them to retire to

Sestos. As he feared, the Athenian fleet was surprised, at anchor, on this

open shore, while the crews were on shore in quest of a meal. One hundred

and seventy triremes were thus ingloriously captured, without the loss of

a man—the greatest calamity which had happened to Athens since the

beginning of the war, and decisive as to its result. The captive generals

were slaughtered, together with four thousand Athenian prisoners. Conon,

however, made his escape. So disgraceful and unnecessary was this great

calamity, that it is supposed the fleet was betrayed by its own

commanders; and this supposition is strengthened by its inactivity since

the battle of Arginusæ. This crowning disaster happened in September, B.C.

405, and caused a dismay at Athens such as had never before been felt—not

even when the Persians were marching through Attica. Nothing was now left

to the miserable city but to make what preparation it could for the siege,

which everybody foresaw would soon take place. The walls were put in the

best defense it was possible, and two of the three ports were blocked up.

Not only was Athens deprived of her maritime power, but her very existence

was now jeopardized.

(M568) Lysander was in no haste to march upon Athens, since he knew that

no corn ships could reach the city from the Euxine, and that a famine

would soon set in. The Athenian empire was annihilated, and nothing