BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN HISTORY
Different States in Babylonia.--More than one kingdom originally
existed in Babylonia. Not only were there separate kingdoms in Accad
and Sumer, or northern and southern Chaldaea, many of the great cities
also once formed separate states. The excavations at Tello, for
instance, have revealed the existence of a dynasty which had its seat
there, and the ancestral kingdom of Sargon of Accad does not seem to
have extended beyond the territory of its chief city. The smaller
states were, however, absorbed by the larger ones, and a time came when
the whole of Babylonia was united into a single monarchy, whose ruler
assumed the imperial title of 'king of Sumer and Accad.' As in Egypt,
therefore, a recollection of the original dual character of the kingdom
was preserved in the title of its kings.
It is probable that the various states of Babylonia were more than once
brought into temporary union before the final unification of the
monarchy took place. Sargon of Accad, for instance, seems to have
claimed supremacy over the rest of Chaldaea, and the dynasties which
subsequently arose at Urand other places adopted the imperial title,
although the country was not finally united under a single head until
the reign of Khammurabi. It was to this early period that the maritime
trade and civilizing influence of Eridu chiefly belongs.
The first Empire.--Sargon of Accad founded the earliest Semitic empire
of which we know. According to Nabonidos he lived more than 3,200 years
before the time of the last Babylonian king, that is to say about 3800
B.C. His father, Itti-Bel, had no royal title, and legend gathered
around his birth. His uncle, it was said, ruled in the mountains, and
his mother concealed her child in an ark of rushes, daubed with pitch,
which she entrusted to the waters of the Euphrates. Here he was found
by a peasant, who brought him up as his own son. But the goddess Istar
loved the peasant lad, and the time at last came when he was able to
declare his true character and ascend the throne of his fathers.
A copy has been preserved of the historical annals of Sargon and his
son Naram-Sin, which must have been compiled in the reign of the
latter, as they break off in the middle of it. We learn from them that
Sargon not only established his rule over Babylonia and the adjoining
districts, he also defeated the Elamites, and made four expeditions
into Syria, 'the land of the Amorites.' The last of these expeditions
occupied three years, and ended with the erection of images of the
Chaldaean king on the shores of the Mediterranean, and with the
conquest of the countries 'of the sea of the setting sun,' which he
united 'into a single empire.' His last campaign was against the
Aram-Naharaim of Scripture in north-western Mesopotamia. Babylon is
already mentioned as one of his seats of power; his capital, however,
was at Agade or Accad, where on one occasion he was unsuccessfully
besieged by his revolted subjects. Here, too, he founded a famous
library, for which the standard work on astronomy and astrology was
compiled in seventy-two books. A translation of it into Greek was made
in later days by the Chaldaean historian Berossos.
Sargon's son and successor Naram-Sin continued his father's victorious
career, and Palestine being already secured behind him, marched into
the land of Magan, by which name Midian and the Sinaitic peninsula were
known, and captured its king. A record of the conquest was engraved on
an alabaster vase discovered by the French Expedition to Babylonia, but
unfortunately lost in the Tigris. Naram-Sin, like one or two other
Babylonian monarchs of the same early epoch, received divine honours.
The monuments of Tello.--The oldest monuments found at Tello in
southern Chaldaea belong to the age of Sargon and Naram-Sin. But
whereas the court of Sargon was Semitic, that of the kings of Tello was
Sumerian. At a later date Tello lost its independence, and its rulers
became merely _patesis_ or high-priests. One of these was Gudea, whose
statue may be seen in the Louvre. In his time building-materials were
brought to Chaldaea from all parts of Western Asia; thus cedar beams
were imported from Mount Amanus, and diorite from the land of Magan. It
was out of this diorite that the statues were cut. Another of the
_patesis_ of Tello was the vassal of Dungi, king of Ur, whose father
had built or restored the great temple of the Moon-god in that city,
and had claimed sovereignty over the whole of Babylonia.
Chronology.--These early sovereigns are known to us by the bricks and
other objects which they have left behind, but we cannot arrange them
in a chronological order. Chronology begins with what is called by the
native historians 'the dynasty of Babylon.' From this time forward the
tablets have preserved the names of the Babylonian kings divided into
dynasties, together with the length of each reign as well as of each
dynasty. The sixth king of the dynasty of Babylon was Khammurabi, who
reigned fifty-five years (B.C. 2356-2301)[4], and whose reign marks an
epoch in Babylonian history.
[4] The date partly depends upon the number of years assigned
to the dynasty to which Nabonassar belonged, which unfortunately
is not stated by the native historians. Consequently, other
Assyriologists make it, sometimes a little higher, sometimes a
little lower. For the justification of my date see the _Records
of the Past_, New Series, pp. viii-xi.
The United Monarchy.--When Khammurabi ascended the throne, Babylonia
was either wholly or in part under Elamite suzerainty. That portion of
it of which Larsa was the capital was governed by Eri-Aku (probably the
Arioch of Genesis), who was a son of the Elamite prince Kudur-Mabug.
Kudur-Mabug was not himself king, but as he has the title of 'father of
the land of the Amorites' he must have held rule in Syria. Khammurabi
succeeded in overthrowing Eri-Aku and his Elamite allies and in making
himself sole king of Babylonia. Babylon, his capital, thus became, and
remained, the capital of the united kingdom. It was soon the scene of
a great literary revival. The older literature of the country was
re-edited, new authors arose, and the court of Khammurabi revived the
literary glories of that of Sargon. As his great-grandson still calls
himself 'king of the land of the Amorites' we may infer that the
conquests in Syria were not lost.
The rise of Assyria.--The dynasty of Khammurabi was followed by one
which came from Tello, whose kings bear Sumerian names. Then Babylonia
was conquered by Kassite princes who ruled over it for 576 years and
nine months (B.C. 1806-1229). While the Kassite dynasty was reigning, a
new kingdom arose in the north, that of Assyria. The high-priests of
the city of Assur became kings, the first of whom seems to have been
Bel-Kapkapu. The kingdom rapidly grew in power, and although Babylonia
exacted tribute from it, its kings began to ally themselves by marriage
with the rulers of the southern monarchy. In the fifteenth century B.C.
Assuryuballidh of Assyria, like his contemporary Burna-buryas of
Babylonia, sent letters and presents to the Egyptian Pharaoh and begged
in return for Egyptian gold, and a century later the city of Calah was
built (or restored) by Shalmaneser I. His son Tiglath-Uras in the sixth
year of his reign marched against Babylonia, captured Babylon and
governed it for seven years. He was then driven out of the country and
subsequently murdered by his own son. The Kassite dynasty, however, did
not last long after the Assyrian invasion. The Assyrian king had
entered Babylon in B.C. 1291, and in B.C. 1229 the dynasty came to an
end.
Babylon a sacred city.--From this time forward for many centuries
Assyria, and not Babylonia, occupies the chief place in the history of
western Asia. It needed a Nebuchadrezzar to make Babylonia once more a
conquering power. But Babylon itself remained the sacred city of the
cultured nations of Asia. Its old _prestige_ and hallowed associations
clung to it, and it became what Rome was to mediaeval Europe. An
Assyrian king, however powerful he might be, could not claim the
imperial title until he had 'taken the hands of Bel' and thereby been
adopted as a son by the god of Babylon. Indeed it was only in this
way that usurpers like Tiglath-pileser III and Sargon obtained any
recognition of their legitimate right to the throne. The sanction of
religion remained with Babylon, though the sword had passed to Assyria.
Tiglath-pileser I.--One of the most famous of the early Assyrian
conquerors was Tiglath-pileser I (B.C. 1100). He carried his arms in
all directions. Eastward he chastised the Kurds, northward he
penetrated into the mountains of Armenia and engraved his image at the
sources of the Tigris; and in the west he overthrew the Moschians, the
Meshech of the Bible, ravaging the land of Komagene, laying Malatiyeh
under tribute, threatening the Hittites in their stronghold at
Carchemish, and making his way to the shores of the Mediterranean. Here
he sailed over the sea in a ship of Arvad, and received presents from
the terrified Pharaoh of Egypt which comprised a crocodile and a
hippopotamus. Southward he invaded Babylonia, and though repulsed in
his first attack he avenged himself by subsequently over-running the
country and capturing Babylon. He was also mighty in the hunting-field
as well as in war, and in the neighbourhood of Harran boasts of having
slain the wild elephants which then existed there. His own capital
Assur he adorned with the spoils of his victories and restored its
temples.
The First Assyrian Empire.--We have to pass over an interval of two
centuries before we find another Assyrian monarch who emulated the
distant campaigns of Tiglath-pileser. Assur-natsir-pal (B.C. 883-858)
was the first of a line of conquerors who may be regarded as the
founders of the first Assyrian empire. From henceforth, too, Assyrian
chronology is accurately fixed. The Assyrians counted time by means
of certain officers called _limmi_, who were changed from year to
year. The name of a particular _limmu_ consequently indicated the year
during which he had held office. Lists of the _limmi_ have been
preserved which begin with the reign of Assur-natsir-pal's father
and carry us down to that of Assur-bani-pal. As the annals not only
of Tiglath-pileser I, but also of an older king, the father of
Shalmaneser I, are dated in the years of office of certain _limmi_ it
is clear that the institution went back to an early period, and that
lists of the older _limmi_ may yet be recovered, carrying us, it may
be, to the very foundation of the Assyrian kingdom.
Calah, instead of Assur, had become the royal residence, and from Calah
accordingly the Assyrian armies marched forth year after year to
conquer and spoil. The fastnesses of the Kurdish mountains were
explored, and the Kurdish tribes compelled to pay tribute to the
Assyrian king. The cities of Armenia south of Lake Van were ravaged in
repeated campaigns, one effect of which seems to have been the
introduction of Assyrian culture and writing, and the rise of the
Vannic monarchy. The merchant princes of Carchemish bought off the
Assyrian attack with rich gifts, but the states on either bank of the
Euphrates were overrun, and Assur-natsir-pal made his way across Amanus
to the Gulf of Antioch, and across Lebanon to the Mediterranean. Here
he received the tribute of the Phoenician cities, among them being Tyre
and Sidon. In imitation of Tiglath-pileser I he hunted in northern
Mesopotamia, but the elephant had disappeared from the region, and he
had to content himself with the wild bull.
Assur-natsir-pal was succeeded by his son Shalmaneser II, whose reign
ended in B.C. 823. His long reign was a series of military campaigns.
Countries previously untrodden by Assyrian feet were subdued or ravaged
with fire and sword. Assyrian armies made their way through the passes
of Kurdistan as far as Lake Urumiyeh and the land of the Minni. The
newly-founded kingdom of Ararat was shaken, the Tibareni (called Tubal
in Scripture) paid tribute, and Tarsus in Cilicia was compelled to open
its gates. The passage of the Euphrates was secured by the capture of
the Hittite fortress of Pethor at the junction of the Euphrates and the
Sajur, and the whole weight of the Assyrian power was hurled against
Syria. The Phoenician cities made their peace with the invader by
offering gifts; so too did Jehu (Yahua) of Samaria, whose ambassadors
are represented on the Black Obelisk. Hamath and Damascus, more
especially the latter, had to bear the brunt of the Assyrian attack. In
B.C. 853, thirteen years before the embassy of Jehu, Israel and Assyria
had already met in the battle-field. A league had been formed by
Hamath, Arvad, Ammon, and other states under the leadership of
Hadadezer of Damascus--the Ben-hadad of the Old Testament--to resist
the Assyrians, and one of the most important of the allies was 'Ahab of
Israel,' who brought into the field 2,000 chariots and 10,000 men. But
the confederacy was shattered at the battle of Qarqar, though
Shalmaneser's own losses were too serious to allow him to follow up the
attack. In B.C. 847 Hadadezer and his allies were again defeated, but
without any result on the Assyrian side. Seven years later Hazael
appears in the place of Hadadezer. Shalmaneser drove him from his camp
into Damascus, where he 'shut him up,' taking from him 1,121 chariots
and devastating the country as far as the Hauran. It was on this
occasion that Jehu offered homage to the conqueror. Shalmaneser had
already overrun Babylonia and sacrificed to the gods in Babylon,
Borsippa, and Cutha. The Babylonian king was put to death, and the
Assyrian troops penetrated into the salt-marshes of the Kalda in the
extreme south. For a time, therefore, the larger part of western Asia
lay at the feet of 'the great king.'
A time came, however, when Shalmaneser could no longer lead his armies
in person, but had to entrust them to the Tartan or commander-in-chief.
His own son Assur-dain-pal rebelled against him, and led the chief
cities of his kingdom, including Nineveh and Assur, into revolt (B.C.
827). The revolt lasted for more than six years, and during its
continuance the old king was succeeded by his son Samsi-Rimmon who
eventually suppressed the insurrection. Assur-dain-pal seems to have
been the original Sardanapallos of the Greeks. The campaigns of
Samsi-Rimmon were principally directed against the Kurds and Medes, but
towards the end of his reign he invaded Babylonia and defeated its
king, Merodach-balasu-iqbi, the Greek Belesys. His successor
Rimmon-nirari III (B.C. 810-781) claims to have overcome Media and
Kurdistan, Tyre, Sidon, Samaria, and Palastu, 'the land of the
Philistines,' under which title the Jews would be included. But his
chief exploit was the conquest of Damascus, whose king Marih opened its
gates to him and became an Assyrian vassal.
The older Assyrian dynasty, however, was fast coming to an end. In B.C.
753 its last representative, Assur-nirari, mounted the throne.
Insurrection had already broken out at the beginning of his
predecessor's reign, and pestilence had been added to insurrection. The
old capital Assur had led the revolt, a solar eclipse on June 15, B.C.
763 coinciding with its outbreak. The northern provinces had followed
the lead of Assur, and though the revolt was crushed for a while, the
flame of discontent still smouldered beneath the surface. The greater
part of Assur-nirari's short reign was passed in inaction, but in B.C.
746 Calah rebelled, and on the 13th of Iyyar in the following year Pulu
or Pul, who took the name of Tiglath-pileser III, after that of the
great conqueror of the older dynasty, was proclaimed king. With him
begins the history of the second Assyrian empire.
The Second Assyrian Empire.--With the second Assyrian empire a new
political idea entered the world. Most of the campaigns made by the
earlier Assyrian kings were mere raids, the object of which was booty
and captives. It is true that in some cases cities and districts were
annexed to the Assyrian kingdom and Assyrian colonists were planted in
distant localities. But this was the exception, not the rule. The
conquests made in one year by the Assyrian armies had to be made over
again in the next. The campaigns of Tiglath-pileser III and his
successors had a different object in view. They aimed at bringing the
whole civilized world under the rule of 'the great king.' A great
political organization was to be built up, which should bring the
wealth of Western Asia into the imperial treasury of Nineveh and divert
the trade of Phoenicia and Babylon into Assyrian hands. Trade interests
had much to do with the wars of the New Empire.
Accordingly, while the frontiers of the kingdom were secured from the
wild tribes on the east and north, expedition after expedition was sent
westward and southward which pushed steadily forward the Assyrian
domination. Satraps and colonists followed in the wake of the generals;
and the amount of annual tribute to be paid by each province was
defined and rigorously exacted from its governor. The latter was
appointed by the king, and held his office at the royal pleasure. At
his side were military officers, and under him a body of officials who
were responsible to the governor as he was to the king.
The New Empire was thus governed by a vast bureaucracy, at the head of
which stood the king. But the bureaucracy was military as well as
civil, and the military and civil elements formed a check one upon the
other. The military element was, however, predominant, the result of
the fact that the empire itself was based on conquest.
The army was carefully trained, well disciplined, and well armed. It
thus soon became an irresistible weapon in the hands of a competent
master. Before Tiglath-pileser's reign was half over there was no force
in western Asia which was capable of resisting it in open fight.
Tiglath-pileser reigned eighteen years (B.C. 745-727), and his
organizing abilities proved to be as great as his military skill. An
invasion of Babylonia first tested the strength of his army, and
resulted in the subjection of the Aramaean tribes in that country to
Assyrian rule. Then followed an expedition into Kurdistan. The Medes
were massacred, and the Assyrian army pushed its way far eastward to
Bikni, 'the mountain of the rising sun.' Next Tiglath-pileser turned to
the north-west. Here he was met by a powerful confederacy, at the head
of which was the king of Ararat. But the forces of the northern nations
were cut to pieces in Komagene, and Arpad, which had become the centre
of a hostile Syrian league, was captured after a siege of three years.
The league had included Hamath and Azariah of Judah, and Hamath was
consequently annexed to the Assyrian empire. The princes of the West
hastened to offer homage to the conqueror, among them being Rezon of
Damascus and Menahem of Samaria (B.C. 738). Tiglath-pileser was now
free to march against Ararat, which had extended its power at the
expense of Assyria in the later days of the old dynasty. The country
was ravaged up to the gates of its capital, and the Vannic kingdom
received a blow from which it never recovered. The Assyrian army next
turned eastward to the southern shores of the Caspian, and made its way
through Medic and other districts which neither before nor since were
trodden by Assyrian feet. The exploit struck terror into the Kurdish
tribes, and secured the Assyrian lowlands from their attack.
Meanwhile Ahaz of Judah had been threatened by Rezon of Damascus and
Pekah of Israel, and he now appealed to the Assyrian king for help.
Tiglath-pileser, nothing loth, marched against the assailants. Rezon
was blockaded in his capital, while Samaria, Ammon, Moab, and Philistia
were overrun (B.C. 734). Two years later (B.C. 732), Damascus was taken
and sacked, Rezon put to death and his kingdom placed under an Assyrian
prefect. Pekah, too, had been murdered, and Tiglath-pileser had
appointed Hosea king in his place. About the same time Tyre was
compelled to purchase peace by the payment of 150 talents.
With his empire consolidated in the west, and the road to the
Mediterranean open to Assyrian trade, Tiglath-pileser was now free to
legitimize his right to the throne by occupying Babylon and there
becoming the adopted son of Bel. It was in B.C. 731 that the Babylonian
campaign began; in B.C. 729 Tiglath-pileser, under his original name of
Pul, 'took the hands of Bel,' and two years later, in the month of
December, he died. He had introduced into history the idea of imperial
centralization.
On his death the crown was seized by Ulula, who took the name of
Shalmaneser IV. His reign lasted only five years, and when he died
(December, B.C. 722) he was pressing the siege of Samaria. The capture
of the city and its annexation to Assyria were the work of Sargon. The
upper and military classes, amounting in all to 27,280 persons, were
carried into captivity; but only fifty chariots were found in the city.
Sargon was a usurper like his two predecessors, but, more fortunate
than they, he succeeded in founding a dynasty. He was one of the best
generals that Assyria ever produced, and under him the extension and
organization of the empire went on apace. The death of Shalmaneser,
however, had been the signal for revolt in Babylonia as well as in the
west. Merodach-baladan, a Chaldaean from the sea-marshes, had seized
Babylon in conjunction with the Elamites, and there reigned as
legitimate monarch for twelve years. One of the first tasks of Sargon
was to drive the Elamite forces from the Assyrian frontier. Hamath
moreover rose in insurrection; but this too was speedily crushed. So
also was a league between the Philistines and the Egyptians; the battle
of Raphia decided, once for all, the question of Assyrian supremacy in
Palestine.
Sargon now had to face a more formidable coalition, that of the
northern nations under Ursa of Ararat. The struggle lasted for six
years and ended with the complete victory of the Assyrians. Carchemish,
the Hittite stronghold on the Euphrates, fell in B.C. 717, leaving the
road clear to the west and thus uniting Assyria with its rising empire
on the shores of the Mediterranean. In the following year the Minni (to
the east of Ararat) were overthrown, and two years later Ursa and his
allies were utterly defeated. The fortress of Muzazir near Lake
Urumiyeh was captured, thus extending the Assyrian frontier far to the
east, and Ursa, in despair, committed suicide. Media was completely
subdued in B.C. 713, and Ellip, where Ekbatana afterwards stood, became
the vassal of Nineveh. In B.C. 711 a league was formed between
Merodach-baladan and the nations of southern Syria to resist the common
foe, and to this league Egypt promised assistance. But before the
confederates were ready to act, Sargon had fallen upon them separately.
Ashdod, the centre of the Palestinian confederacy, was besieged and
taken (Isaiah xxi), and its ruler, a certain 'Greek,' who had been
raised to power by the anti-Assyrian party, fled in vain for refuge to
the Arabian desert, while Judah, Edom, and Moab were compelled to pay
tribute. In B.C. 709 Merodach-baladan was driven out of Babylonia into
his ancestral kingdom of Bit-Yagna. Sargon entered Babylon and there
'took the hands of Bel.' Henceforward he ruled by divine right as well
as by the right of the sword.
It was by the sword, however, that he perished, being murdered by a
soldier in B.C. 705. His son Sennacherib succeeded to the crown on the
12th of Ab (July). Sennacherib was a different man from his father;
boastfulness and vanity took the place of military skill, perhaps also
of courage. There seems to have been some resemblance between his
character and that of Xerxes.
Babylonia was the new king's first object of attack. Merodach-baladan,
who had re-entered Babylon on the news of Sargon's death, was driven
back to the marshes, and Bel-ibni, an Assyrian vassal, appointed king
in his place. The next campaign was against the Kassi or Kossaeans,
some of whom were forced to descend from their mountain fastnesses and
placed under an Assyrian governor. From the Kossaean mountains the
Assyrian army marched into Ellip which was wasted with fire and sword.
Then, in B.C. 701, came the campaign against Palestine where Hezekiah
of Judah, in reliance upon Egypt, had revolted from his Assyrian lord.
Elulaeus of Sidon fled to Cyprus, and Phoenicia, Ammon, Moab, and Edom
submitted to the Assyrians. Sennacherib thereupon proceeded against the
Philistines. A new king was set over Ashkelon, and Hezekiah was
compelled to restore to Ekron its former prince whom he had imprisoned
in Jerusalem on account of his faithfulness to Assyria. The priests and
nobles of Ekron who had abetted Hezekiah were impaled on stakes.
[Illustration: CAPTURE OF LACHISH BY SENNACHERIB.]
Tirhakah, the Ethiopian king of Egypt, and the king of Melukh (the
Arabian desert), who had come to the assistance of the Jewish prince,
were defeated at Eltekeh, and Hezekiah vainly endeavoured to buy off
the vengeance of his offended suzerain by rich and numerous presents,
including 30 talents of gold and 800 talents of silver. The surrender
of Jerusalem alone would content Sennacherib, who accordingly
devastated Judah, destroying its cities and carrying into captivity
200,150 of its inhabitants. Jerusalem itself was blockaded, Hezekiah
being shut up in it 'like a bird in a cage.' Then, however, came the
catastrophe which obliged Sennacherib to retire without punishing his
rebellious vassal, and of which, of course, nothing is said in the
inscriptions. But there is no further record of a campaign in the West.
In the following year Sennacherib was in Babylonia, where he drove
Merodach-baladan out of the marshes and obliged the Chaldaean prince
and his subjects to fly in ships across the Persian Gulf to the
opposite coast of Elam. Assur-nadin-suma, the son of Sennacherib, was
now made king of Babylon. Six years later he was carried off to Elam
and a new king, Nergal-yusezib, appointed in his place by the Elamite
monarch. This was in return for an unprovoked assault made by
Sennacherib on the Chaldaean colony in Elam, to which he had crossed in
boats made by Tyrian workmen, and whose inhabitants he sent captive to
Assyria.
For a time Elam was all-powerful in Babylonia, though Nergal-yusezib
had been defeated and captured in battle by the Assyrians. But in B.C.
691 Sennacherib descended with the full might of Assyria upon the
country. The Babylonians had sent the treasures of the temple of Bel to
the Elamite monarch, begging his help. The Babylonian and Elamite
forces met the army of Assyria at Khalule, and a hard-fought battle was
the result. The slaughter was great on both sides, and Sennacherib
claims a complete victory, though the Babylonian Chronicle--a cuneiform
document compiled from a Babylonian point of view--implies that such
was not altogether the case. At all events about two years were needed
for the subjugation of Babylonia. In B.C. 689 Babylon was taken, its
houses and temples destroyed, the images of its gods broken in pieces,
and the ruins of the city thrown into the Arakhtu, the canal of
Babylon. For some years Babylon lay desolate, and as there was no
longer a temple or image of Bel to legitimize the rule of the Assyrian
conqueror, Babylonia remained 'without kings.'
On the 20th day of Tebet or December, B.C. 681, Sennacherib was
murdered by two of his sons who seem to have been jealous of their
brother Esar-haddon. Esar-haddon had been given the new name of
Assur-etil-mukin-abla ('Assur the hero is the establisher of my son'),
perhaps because he had been destined for the throne, and at the time of
his father's murder he was commanding the Assyrian army in a war
against Ararat. For forty-two days the conspirators held the capital;
then they were compelled to fly to Erimenas of Ararat and seek his help
against their brother. The decisive battle was fought on the 12th of
Iyyar (April) near Malatiyeh in Kappadokia; the veterans of Assyria won
the day, and at the close of it saluted Esar-haddon as king. He
returned to Nineveh and on the 8th of Sivan (May) formally ascended the
throne.
Esar-haddon was great in counsel as well as in war, and knew how to
conciliate as well as how to conquer. At the outset of his reign he
restored Babylon, rebuilt its temples, brought back its gods and
people, and made it one of his royal residences. For twelve years he
was king alike of Babylonia and Assyria.
A revolt of Sidon, which was easily put down, next occupied his
attention. Then came a more formidable event. The Gimirra, called Gomer
in Genesis, Kimmerians by the Greeks, suddenly appeared out of the
north and menaced the civilized world. Esar-haddon met them on the
frontier of his empire, defeated their chieftain, the 'Manda' or nomad
Teuspa, and drove his hordes westward into Asia Minor. It now became
necessary to secure the Assyrian frontier on the south. The Assyrian
king accordingly marched into the very heart of Arabia, through burning
and waterless deserts, and struck terror into the Arabian tribes. The
march must have been one of the most remarkable ever made.
Esar-haddon was at last free to complete the policy of Tiglath-pileser
III by conquering the ancient kingdom of Egypt. Palestine gave no more
trouble; Manasseh of Judah was already an obedient vassal of the
Assyrian king. In B.C. 674 'the Assyrians marched into Egypt.' But two
more campaigns were needed for its subjection. In B.C. 670 Esar-haddon
drove the Egyptian forces before him in fifteen days (from the 3rd to
the 18th of Tammuz or June) all the way from the frontier to Memphis,
thrice defeating them with heavy loss and wounding Tirhakah their king.
Three days later Memphis fell, and Tirhakah fled to Ethiopia, leaving
Egypt to the conqueror. Egypt revolted two years afterwards (B.C. 668),
and while on the march to reduce it Esar-haddon fell ill, and died on
the 10th of Marchesvan or October. Assur-bani-pal, who had already
been named as his successor, became king of Assyria, his brother
Saul-suma-yukin taking Babylonia as his share. The king of Babylonia,
however, was required to admit the supremacy of the Assyrian monarch.
The Egyptian revolt was quickly suppressed and the country was again
divided into twenty satrapies, each satrapy being placed under a native
prince. But the arrangement answered badly. The satraps quarrelled
with one another, intrigued with Tirhakah, and rebelled against
Assur-bani-pal. Time after time Assyrian armies had to be sent to
reconquer the land. Once Necho, the satrap of Sais, was brought in
chains to Nineveh, there, however, to be pardoned and restored to his
city. Twice Thebes was captured, once after it had been made for a time
the seat of Tirhakah's government, a second time after the defeat of
Urdaman (Rud-Amon), the step-son and successor of Tirhakah. On this
occasion the city was utterly destroyed. Its temples and palaces were
overthrown, its statues mutilated, and an immense spoil carried away to
Nineveh. Among the spoil were two obelisks, over seventy tons in
weight. The destruction of Thebes is alluded to by the prophet Nahum
(iii. 8).
Assur-bani-pal, the Sardanapallos of the Greeks, was the 'Grand
Monarque' of Assyria, and a generous patron of literature and learning.
But he lacked the warlike instincts of his fathers, and preferred to
remain at home while his generals fought in the field. His long wars
drained the country of its fighting-men and prepared the way for its
downfall. They were waged mainly with Elam, the only civilized country
of Western Asia which still preserved its independence, and lasted for
several years. At last, however, Elam fell; its capital Shushan was
sacked and burned, and a desolated country was added to the Assyrian
dominions.
The fame of Assur-bani-pal spread far and wide. Ambassadors came to his
court from Ararat, as well as from Gyges of Lydia. At first no
interpreter could be found for the latter. Gyges wanted help against
the Kimmerians, which, however, 'the great king' does not seem to have
afforded. The tribute of Gyges was accordingly withdrawn after a time,
and he took part in the great rebellion which now shook the Assyrian
empire to its foundations.
Saul-suma-yukin put himself at its head, and proclaimed the
independence of Babylonia. Psammetikhos, the son of Necho of Sais,
imitated his example in Egypt, and with the assistance of Gyges put
down the rival satraps, shook off the Assyrian yoke and founded the
Twenty-sixth dynasty. Saul-suma-yukin was less fortunate. After a
desperate struggle he was captured and put to death by his brother, and
Babylonia was once more reduced to servitude. Punishment was also taken
upon the tribes of northern Arabia who had joined the rebels.
But the empire was terribly weakened. Egypt was lost to it for ever,
and though Elam was added instead, it proved to be a barren possession.
When Tuktamme the 'Manda' appeared upon the scene he was resisted with
difficulty. The empire was tottering to its fall.
Of its closing days we know but little from the monuments. Among the
successors of Assur-bani-pal were Assur-etil-ilani-yukin (who still
claimed rule in Babylonia), and Sin-sar-iskun. The latter has sometimes
been identified with Sarakos, said by the Greek writer Abydenos to
have been the last king of Assyria[5]. At all events the fall and
destruction of Nineveh may be placed in B.C. 606.
[5] A contract-tablet exists dated at Sippara in the second
year of Sin-sar-iskun, which shows that the rule of the king
was acknowledged in Babylonia.
The Babylonian Empire.--On its ruins rose the Babylonian empire of
Nebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabopolassar. The battle of Carchemish
placed him in possession of Syria, which the Egyptians had occupied
after the fall of Nineveh. The battle was scarcely over when
Nebuchadrezzar was recalled to Babylon by the death of his father (B.C.
605). Unlike the Assyrian kings, he cared but little about recording
his successes in war. His inscriptions are occupied with the account of
his building operations, of his gifts to the gods, and of his devotion
to Bel-Merodach. Under him Babylon became one of the most splendid
cities in the world. Its palaces, its temples, its hanging gardens and
its walls were alike on a vast and magnificent scale. The temples were
roofed with cedar of Lebanon, overlaid with gold and silver, and the
ramparts of the royal house were finished in fifteen days. The suburb
of Borsippa was included within the fortifications of the city, which
were so strong as to be practicably impregnable. At the same time the
other cities of Babylonia were not forgotten, and their temples were
enlarged and beautified.
In B.C. 568 Nebuchadrezzar marched into Egypt, defeated the Pharaoh
Amasis and occupied a part at least of the Delta. 'Phut of the Ionians'
is mentioned in connexion with this campaign. It is the only military
expedition mentioned in the texts we possess; even the monuments of
Nebuchadrezzar found in Syria (at the mouth of the Nahr el-Kelb near
Beyrout and in the Wadi Brissa near the ancient Riblah) are silent
about his wars.
He was a great organizer, a great builder, and above all a man of
genuine piety, which breathes through all his inscriptions. When he
died, B.C. 562, he was succeeded by his son Evil-Merodach, who
reigned only two years. Then the throne was usurped by a certain
Nergal-sharezer (the son of Bel-zakir-iskun) who had married the
daughter of Nebuchadrezzar. Nergal-sharezer built himself a new palace
and died B.C. 556. He was followed by his infant son who reigned only
three months, when he was murdered and the throne seized by Nabonidos
(Nabu-nahid), the son of Nebo-balasu-iqbi, who was not related to the
royal family. Nabonidos was a man of some energy, but he offended a
powerful party in Babylonia by attempting to do what Hezekiah had done
in Jerusalem--centralize the religious worship of the country and
therewith the political power in the capital. Nabonidos was also an
antiquarian and caused excavations to be made in the different temples
of Babylonia in order to discover the records of their founders.
We are now well acquainted with the history of Nabonidos and the fall
of his empire, thanks to three cuneiform documents which have been
found in Babylonia. One is an inscription of Nabonidos himself; another
an edict issued by Cyrus shortly after his conquest of the country; and
the third the annals of the reign of Nabonidos, compiled the year after
his overthrow. The empire of Nabonidos, we learn, extended as far
westward as Gaza, but the 'Manda' or 'Nomads' of whom Astyages
(Istuvegu) was king had devastated part of Western Asia and had
destroyed the temple of the Moon-god at Harran. It was not until Cyrus,
'the little servant' of Astyages, had overthrown the Manda that
Nabonidos was able to enter Harran and rebuild the ruined shrine.
Cyrus and the Fall of Babylon.--Cyrus, like his fathers, was king of
Anzan in Elam, not of Persia. Anzan had been first occupied, it would
appear, by his great-grandfather Teispes the Achaemenian. The conquest
of Astyages and of his capital Ekbatana took place in B.C. 549, and a
year or two later Cyrus obtained possession of Persia. In B.C. 538 the
population in the south of Babylonia revolted, and Cyrus entered the
country, where he was assisted by the native party which was hostile to
Nabonidos. The Babylonian army was stationed in northern Babylonia, but
it was utterly defeated at Opis in the month of Tammuz or June, and
on the 14th of the month Sippara opened its gates to the conqueror.
Gobryas, the governor of Kurdistan, was then sent by Cyrus against
Babylon, which also opened its gates 'without fighting,' and Nabonidos,
who had concealed himself, was taken prisoner. Gobryas placed the
temple of Bel under a guard, and the daily services there proceeded as
usual. The contract-tablets show that there was equally little
cessation of business among the mercantile classes. But it was not
until the 3rd of Marchesvan (October) that Cyrus himself arrived in
Babylon and proclaimed a general amnesty, which was communicated by
Gobryas to 'all the province of Babylon' of which he had been made
governor. Shortly afterwards the wife of Nabonidos died; lamentation
was made for her throughout Babylonia, and Kambyses, the son of Cyrus,
conducted her funeral in one of the Babylonian temples.
[Illustration: THE CYLINDER INSCRIPTION OF CYRUS.]
Meanwhile Cyrus had assumed the title of 'King of Babylon,' thus
claiming to be the legitimate descendant of the ancient Babylonian
kings. He announced himself as the devoted worshipper of Bel and Nebo,
who by the command of Merodach had overthrown the sacrilegious usurper
Nabonidos, and he and his son accordingly offered sacrifices to ten
times the usual amount in the Babylonian temples, and restored the
images of the gods to their ancient shrines. At the same time he
allowed the foreign populations who had been deported to Babylonia to
return to their homes along with the statues of their gods. Among these
foreign populations, as we know from the Old Testament, were the Jews.
Belshazzar.--One of the sons of Nabonidos was Belshazzar, who is
mentioned in the contract-tablets as well as by his father. He seems
to have been 'the king's son' who commanded the Babylonian army in
its camp near Sippara. If so, it would appear that he had died or
been slain before the final invasion of Babylonia by Cyrus, since
no reference is made to him on that occasion, and the pretenders
who afterwards rose against Darius in Babylonia called themselves
not Belshazzar but 'Nebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabonidos.'
Decay of Babylon.--It was after the death of Kambyses and of the
Pseudo-Smerdis that these revolts took place in B.C. 521 and 515(?).
The first was a serious one, and was suppressed only after two
engagements in the field and a siege of Babylon. The second revolt also
needed a long siege for its suppression, and at its conclusion Darius
partially destroyed the walls of the city. But in the reign of Xerxes,
during the absence of the king in Greece, Babylon revolted again under
a certain Samas-erba, who reigned for about a year. On the fall of
this champion of Babylonian independence, the temple of Bel, the
rallying-place of Babylonian nationality, was in part destroyed. From
this time forward the only kings mentioned in the cuneiform tablets are
foreigners, Persians, Greeks, and Parthians. The last dated tablet at
present known to us is almost as late as the Christian era. It is an
astrological text which is dated in the 168th year of Seleucus and the
232nd year of Arsakes, that is to say in B.C. 80.