This, however, constituted merely one side of his policy, and the

negotiations which he carried on with his western neighbours were

conducted simultaneously with his wars against those of the east.

Alyattes had asserted his supremacy over the whole of the country on the

western side of the Halys, but it was of a very vague kind, having no

definite form, and devoid of practical results as far as several of the

districts in the interior were concerned. Croesus made it a reality, and

in less than ten years all the peoples contained within it, the Lycians

excepted--Mysians, Phrygians, Mariandynians, Paphlagonians, Thynians,

Bithynians, and Pamphylians--had rendered him homage. In its

constitution his empire in no way differed from those which at that time

shared the rule of Western Asia; the number of districts administered

directly by the sovereign were inconsiderable, and most of the states

comprised in it preserved their autonomy. Phrygia had its own princes,

who were descendants of Midas,* and in the same way Caria and Mysia

also retained theirs; but these vassal lords paid tribute and furnished

contingents to their liege of Sardes, and garrisons lodged in their

citadels as well as military stations or towns founded in strategic

positions, such as Prusa** in Bithynia, Cibyra, Hyda, Grimenothyræ, and

Temenothyræ,*** kept strict watch over them, securing the while free

circulation for caravans or individual merchants throughout the whole

country. Croesus had achieved his conquest just as Media was tottering

to its fall under the attacks of the Persians.

* This is proved by the history of the Prince Adrastus in

Herodotus. Herodotus probably alluded to this colonisation

by Crcesus, when he said that the Mysians of Olympus were

descendants of Lydian colonists.

** Strabo merely says that the Kibyrates were descended from

the Lydians who dwelt in Cabalia; since Croesus was, as far

as we know, the only Lydian king who ever possessed this

part of Asia, Radet, with good reason, concludes that Kibyra

was colonised by him.

*** Radet has given good reasons for believing that at least

some of these towns were enlarged and fortified by Croesus.

Their victory placed the Lydian king in a position of great perplexity,

since it annulled the treaties concluded after the eclipse of 585, and

by releasing him from the obligations then contracted, afforded him an

opportunity of extending the limits within which his father had confined

himself. Now or never was the time for crossing the Halys in order to

seize those mineral districts with which his subjects had so long had

commercial relations; on the other hand, the unexpected energy of which

the Persians had just given proof, their bravery, their desire for

conquest, and the valour of their leader, all tended to deter him from

the project: should he be victorious, Cyrus would probably not rest

contented with tke annexation of a few unimportant districts or the

imposition of a tribute, but would treat his adversary as he had

Astyages, and having dethroned him, would divide Lydia into departments

to be ruled by one or other of his partisans. Warlike ideas,

nevertheless, prevailed at the court of Sardes, and, taking all into

consideration, we cannot deny that they had reason on their side. The

fall of Ecbatana had sealed the fate of Media proper, and its immediate

dependencies had naturally shared the fortunes of the capital; but the

more distant provinces still wavered, and they would probably attempt

to take advantage of the change of rule to regain their liberty. Cyrus,

obliged to take up arms against them, would no longer have his entire

forces at his disposal, and by attacking him at that juncture it might

be possible to check his power before it became irresistible. Having

sketched out his plan of campaign, Croesus prepared to execute it with

all possible celerity. Egypt and Chaldæa, like himself, doubtless felt

themselves menaced; he experienced little difficulty in persuading them

to act in concert with him in face of the common peril, and he obtained

from both Amasis and Nabonidus promises of effective co-operation. At

the same time he had recourse to the Greek oracles, and that of

Delphi was instrumental in obtaining for him a treaty of alliance and

friendship with Sparta. Negotiations had been carried on so rapidly,

that by the end of 548 all was in readiness for a simultaneous movement;

Sparta was equipping a fleet, and merely awaited the return of the

favourable season to embark her contingent; Egypt had already despatched

hers, and her Cypriot vassals were on the point of starting, while bands

of Thracian infantry were marching to reinforce the Lydian army. These

various elements represented so considerable a force of men, that, had

they been ranged on a field of battle, Cyrus would have experienced

considerable difficulty in overcoming them. An unforeseen act of

treachery obliged the Lydians to hasten their preparations and commence

hostilities before the moment agreed on. Eurybatos, an Ephesian, to whom

the king had entrusted large sums of money for the purpose of raising

mercenaries in the Peloponnesus, fled with his gold into Persia, and

betrayed the secret of the coalition. The Achaemenian sovereign did not

hesitate to forestall the attack, and promptly assumed the offensive.

The transport of an army from Ecbatana to the middle course of the

Halys would have been a long and laborious undertaking, even had it kept

within the territory of the empire; it would have necessitated crossing

the mountain groups of Armenia at their greatest width, and that at a

time when the snow was still lying deep upon the ground and the torrents

were swollen and unfordable. The most direct route, which passed through

Assyria and the part of Mesopotamia south of the Masios, lay for the

most part in the hands of the Chaldæans, but their enfeebled condition

justified Cyrus’s choice of it, and he resolved, in the event of their

resistance, to cut his way through sword in hand. He therefore bore

down upon Arbela by the gorges of Rowandîz in the month Nisan, making as

though he were bound for Karduniash; but before the Babylonians had time

to recover from their alarm at this movement, he crossed the river not

far from Nineveh and struck into Mesopotamia. He probably skirted the

slopes of the Masios, overcoming and killing in the month Iyyâr

some petty king, probably the ruler of Armenia,* and debouched into

Cappadocia. This province was almost entirely in the power of the enemy;

Nabonidus had despatched couriers by the shortest route in order to warn

his ally, and if necessary to claim his promised help.

* Ploigl, who was the first to refer a certain passage in

the _Annals of Nabonidus_ to the expedition against Croesus,

restored Is[parda] as the name of the country mentioned, and

saw even the capture of Sardes in the events of the month

Iyyâr, in direct contradiction to the Greek tradition. The

connection between the campaign beyond the Tigris and the

Lydian war seems to me incontestable, but the Babylonian

chronicler has merely recorded the events which affected

Babylonia. Cyrus’ object was both to intimidate Nabonidus

and also to secure possession of the most direct, and at the

same time the easiest, route: by cutting across Mesopotamia,

he avoided the difficult marches in the mountainous

districts of Armenia. Perhaps we should combine, with the

information of the _Annals_, the passage of Xenophon, where

it is said that the Armenians refused tribute and service to

the King of Persia: Cyrus would have punished the rebels on

his way, after crossing the Euphrates.

Croesus, when he received them, had with him only the smaller portion of

his army, the Lydian cavalry, the contingents of his Asiatic subjects,

and a few Greek veterans, and it would probably have been wiser to defer

the attack till after the disembarkation of the Lacedaemonians; but

hesitation at so critical a moment might have discouraged his followers,

and decided his fate before any action had taken place. He therefore

collected his troops together, fell upon the right bank of the Halys,*

devastated the country, occupied Pteria and the neighbouring towns,

and exiled the inhabitants to a distance. He had just completed the

subjection of the White Syrians when he was met by an emissary from the

Persians; Cyrus offered him his life, and confirmed his authority on

condition of his pleading for mercy and taking the oath of vassalage.**

Croesus sent a proud refusal, which was followed by a brilliant

victory, after which a truce of three months was concluded between the

belligerents.***

* On this point Herodotus tells a current story of his time:

Thaïes had a trench dug behind the army, which was probably

encamped in one of the bends made by the Halys; he then

diverted the stream into this new bed, with the result that

the Lydians found themselves on the right bank of the river

without having had the trouble of crossing it.

** Nicolas of Damascus records that Cyrus, after the capture

of Sardes, for a short time contemplated making Croesus a

vassal king, or at least a satrap of Lydia.

*** We have two very different accounts of this campaign,

viz. that of Herodotus, and that of Polyonus. According to

Herodotus, Croesus gave battle only once in Pteria, with

indecisive result, and on the next day quietly retired to

his kingdom, thinking that Cyrus would not dare to pursue

him. According to Polyonus, Croesus, victorious in a first

engagement owing to a more or less plausible military

stratagem, consented to a truce, but on the day after was

completely defeated, and obliged to return to his kingdom

with a routed army. Herodotus’ account of the fall of

Croesus and of Sardes, borrowed partly from a good written

source, Xanthus or Charon of Lampsacus, partly from the

tradition of the Harpagidse, seems to have for its object

the soothing of the vanity both of the Persians and of the

Lydians, since, if the result of the war could not be

contested, the issue of the battle was at least left

uncertain. If he has given a faithful account, no one can

understand why Croesus should have retired and ceded White

Syria to a rival who had never conquered him. The account

given by Polysenus, in spite of the improbability of some of

its details, comes from a well-informed author: the defeat

of the Lydians in the second battle explains the retreat of

Crcesus, who is without excuse in Herodotus’ version of the

affair. Pompeius Trogus adopted a version similar to that of

Polysenus.

Cyrus employed the respite in attempting to win over the Greek cities

of the littoral, which he pictured to himself as nursing a bitter

hatred against the Mermnadæ; but it is to be doubted if his emissaries

succeeded even in wresting a declaration of neutrality from the

Milesians; the remainder, Ionians and Æolians, all continued faithful

to their oaths.* On the resumption of hostilities, the tide of fortune

turned, and the Lydians were crushed by the superior forces of the

Persians and the Medes; Crcesus retired under cover of night, burning

the country as he retreated, to prevent the enemy from following him,

and crossed the Halys with the remains of his battalions. The season was

already far advanced; he thought that the Persians, threatened in the

rear by the Babylonian troops, would shrink from the prospect of a

winter campaign, and he fell back upon Sardes without further lingering

in Phrygia. But Nabonidus did not feel himself called upon to show the

same devotion that his ally had evinced towards him, or perhaps the

priests who governed in his name did not permit him to fulfil his

engagements.**

* Herodotus makes the attempted corruption of the Ionians to

date from the beginning of the war, even before Cyrus took

the field.

** The author followed by Pompeius Trogus has alone

preserved the record of this treaty. The fact is important

as explaining Croesus’ behaviour after his defeat, but

Schubert goes too far when he re-establishes on this ground

an actual campaign of Cyrus against Babylon: Radet has come

back to the right view in seeing only a treaty made with

Nabonidus.

As soon as peace was proposed, he accepted terms, without once

considering the danger to which the Lydians were exposed by his

defection. The Persian king raised his camp as soon as all fear of an

attack to rearward was removed, and, falling upon defenceless Phrygia,

pushed forward to Sardes in spite of the inclemency of the season. No

movement could have been better planned, or have produced such

startling results. Croesus had disbanded the greater part of his feudal

contingents, and had kept only his body-guard about him, the remainder

of his army--natives, mercenaries, and allies--having received orders

not to reassemble till the following spring. The king hastily called

together all his available troops, both Lydians and foreigners,

and confronted his enemies for the second time. Even under these

unfavourable conditions he hoped to gain the advantage, had his cavalry,

the finest in the world, been able to take part in the engagement. But

Cyrus had placed in front of his lines a detachment of camels, and the

smell of these animals so frightened the Lydian horses that they snorted

and refused to charge.*

* Herodotus’ mention of the use of camels is confirmed, with

various readings, by Xenophon, by Polysenus, and by Ælian;

their employment does not necessarily belong to a legendary

form of the story, especially if we suppose that the camel,

unknown before in Asia Minor, was first introduced there by

the Persian army. The site of the battle is not precisely

known. According to Herodotus, the fight took place in the

great plain before Sardes, which is crossed by several small

tributaries of the Hermus, amongst others the Hyllus. Radet

recognises that the Hyllus of Herodotus is the whole or part

of the stream now called the Kusu-tchaî, and he places the

scene of action near the township of Adala, which would

correspond with Xenophon’s Thymbrara. This continues to be

the most likely hypothesis. After the battle Croesus would

have fled along the Hermus towards Sardes. Xenophon’s story

is a pure romance.

Croesus was again worsted on the confines of the plain of the Hermus,

and taking refuge in the citadel of Sardes, he despatched couriers to

his allies in Greece and Egypt to beg for succour without delay. The

Lacedaemonians hurried on the mobilisation of their troops, and their

vessels were on the point of weighing anchor, when the news arrived

that Sardes had fallen in the early days of December, and that Croesus

himself was a prisoner.* How the town came to be taken, the Greeks

themselves never knew, and their chroniclers have given several

different accounts of the event.**

* Radet gives the date of the capture of Sardes as about

November 15, 546; but the number and importance of the

events occurring between the retreat of Croesus and the

decisive catastrophe--the negotiations with Babylon, the

settling into winter quarters, the march of Cyrus across

Phrygia--must have required a longer time than Radet allots

to them in his hypothesis, and I make the date a month

later.

** Ctesias and Xenophon seem to depend on Herodotus, the

former with additional fabulous details concerning his

OEbaras, Cyrus’ counsellor, which show the probable origin

of his additions. Polysenus had at his disposal a different

story, the same probably that he used for his account of the

campaign in Cappadocia, for in it can be recognised the wish

to satisfy, within possible limits, the pride of the

Lydians: here again the decisive success is preceded by a

check given to Cyrus and a three months’ truce.

The least improbable is that found in Herodotus. The blockade had

lasted, so he tells us, fourteen days, when Cyrus announced that he

would richly reward the first man to scale the walls. Many were tempted

by his promises, but were unsuccessful in their efforts, and their

failure had discouraged all further attempts, when a Mardian soldier,

named Hyreades, on duty at the foot of the steep slopes overlooking the

Tmolus, saw a Lydian descend from rock to rock in search of his helmet

which he had lost, and regain the city by the same way without any great

difficulty. He noted carefully the exact spot, and in company with a few

comrades climbed up till he reached the ramparts; others followed, and

taking the besieged unawares, they opened the gates to the main body of

the army.*

* About three and a half centuries later Sardes was captured

in the same way by one of the generals of Antiochus the

Great.

Croesus could not bear to survive the downfall of his kingdom: he

erected a funeral pyre in the courtyard of his palace, and took up his

position on it, together with his wives, his daughters, and the noblest

youths of his court, surrounded by his most precious possessions.

He could cite the example of more than one vanquished monarch of the

ancient Asiatic world in choosing such an end, and one of the fabulous

ancestors of his race, Sandon-Herakles, had perished after this fashion

in the midst of the flames. Was the sacrifice carried out? Everything

leads us to believe that it was, but popular feeling could not be

resigned to the idea that a prince who had shown such liberality towards

the gods in his prosperity should be abandoned by them in the time

of his direst need. They came to believe that the Lydian monarch had

expiated by his own defeat the crime by the help of which his ancestor

Gyges had usurped the throne. Apollo had endeavoured to delay the

punishment till the next generation, that it might fall on the son of

his votary, but he had succeeded in obtaining from fate a respite of

three years only. Even then he had not despaired, and had warned Croesus

by the voice of the oracles. They had foretold him that, in crossing the

Halys, the Lydians ^would destroy a great empire, and that their power

would last till the day when a mule should sit upon the throne of Media.

Croesus, blinded by fate, could not see that Cyrus, who was of mixed

race, Persian by his father and Median by his mother, was the predicted

mule. He therefore crossed the Halys, and a great empire fell, but it

was his own. At all events, the god might have desired to show that to

honour his altars and adorn his temple was in itself, after all, the

best of treasures. “When Sardes, suffering the vengeance of Zeus, was

conquered by the army of the Persians, the god of the golden sword,

Apollo, was the guardian of Croesus. When the day of despair arrived,

the king could not resign himself to tears and servitude; within the

brazen-walled court he erected a funeral pyre, on which, together with

his chaste spouse and his bitterly lamenting daughters of beautiful

locks, he mounted; he raised his hands towards the depths of the ether

and cried: ‘Proud fate, where is the gratitude of the gods, where is the

prince, the child of Leto? Where is now the house of Alyattes?... The

ancient citadel of Sardes has fallen, the Pactolus of golden waves

runs red with blood; ignominiously are the women driven from their

well-decked chambers! That which was once my hated foe is now my friend,

and the sweetest thing is to die!’ Thus he spoke, and ordered the softly

moving eunuch* to set fire to the wooden structure.

* The word translated “softly moving eunuch” is here perhaps

a proper name: the slave whose duty it was to kindle the

pyre was called Abrobatas in the version of the story chosen

by Bacchylides, while that adopted by the potter whose work

is reproduced on the opposite page, calls him Euthymos.

The maidens shrieked and threw their arms around their mother, for the

death before them was that most hated by mortals. But just when the

sparkling fury of the cruel fire had spread around, Zeus, calling up a

black-flanked cloud, extinguished the yellow flame.

Nothing is incredible of that which the will of the gods has decreed:

Apollo of Delos, seizing the old man, bore him, together with his

daughters of tender feet, into the Hyperborean land as a reward for

his piety, for no mortal had sent richer offerings to the illustrious

Pythô!”

[Illustration: 075.jpg CIMESUS ON HIS PYRE]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph of the original in

the Museum of the Louvre.

This miraculous ending delighted the poets and inspired many fine

lines, but history could with difficulty accommodate itself to such a

materialistic intervention of a divine being, and sought a less

fabulous solution. The legend which appeared most probable to the worthy

Herodotus did not even admit that the Lydian king took his own life;

it was Cyrus who condemned him, either with a view of devoting the

first-fruits of his victory to the immortals, or to test whether the

immortals would save the rival whose piety had been so frequently held

up to his admiration. The edges of the pyre had already taken light,

when the Lydian king sighed and thrice repeated the name of Solon. It

was a tardy recollection of a conversation in which the Athenian sage

had stated, without being believed, that none can be accounted truly

happy while they still live. Cyrus, applying it to himself, was seized

with remorse or pity, and commanded the bystanders to quench the fire,

but their efforts were in vain. Thereupon Croesus implored the pity of

Apollo, and suddenly the sky, which up till then had been serene and

clear, became overcast; thick clouds collected, and rain fell so

heavily that the burning pile was at once extinguished.*

* The story told by Nicolas of Damascus comes down probably

from Xanthus of Lydia, but with many additions borrowed

directly from Herodotus and rhetorical developments by the

author himself. Most other writers who tell the story depend

for their information, either directly or indirectly, on

Herodotus: in later times it was supposed that the Lydian

king was preserved from the flames by the use of some

talisman such as the Ephesian letters.

Well treated by his conqueror, the Lydian king is said to have become

his friend and most loyal counsellor; he accepted from him the fief of

Barênê in Media, often accompanied him in his campaigns, and on more

than one occasion was of great service to him by the wise advice which

he gave.

We may well ask what would have taken place had he gained the decisive

victory over Cyrus that he hoped. Chaldæa possessed merely the semblance

of her former greatness and power, and if she still maintained her hold

over Mesopotamia, Syria, Phoenicia, and parts of Arabia, it was because

these provinces, impoverished by the Assyrian conquest, and entirely

laid waste by the Scythians, had lost the most energetic elements

of their populations, and felt themselves too much enfeebled to

rise against their suzerain. Egypt, like Chaldæa, was in a state of

decadence, and even though her Pharaohs attempted to compensate for the

inferiority of their native troops by employing foreign mercenaries,

their attempts at Asiatic rule always issued in defeat, and just as the

Babylonian sovereigns were unable to reduce them to servitude, so they

on their part were powerless to gain an advantage over the sovereigns of

Babylon. Hence Lydia, in her youth and vigour, would have found little

difficulty in gaining the ascendency over her two recent allies, but

beyond that she could not hope to push her success; her restricted

territory, sparse population, and outlying position would always have

debarred her from exercising any durable dominion over them, and though

absolute mistress of Asia Minor, the countries beyond the Taurus were

always destined to elude her grasp. If the Achæmenian, therefore, had

confined himself, at all events for the time being, to the ancient

limits of his kingdom, Egypt and Chaldæa would have continued to

vegetate each within their respective area, and the triumph of Croesus

would, on the whole, have caused but little change in the actual balance

of power in the East.

The downfall of Croesus, on the contrary, marked a decisive era in the

world’s history. His army was the only one, from the point of numbers

and organisation, which was a match for that of Cyrus, and from the day

of its dispersion it was evident that neither Egypt nor Chaldæa had any

chance of victory on the battle-field. The subjection of Babylon and

Harrân, of Hamath, Damascus, Tyre and Sidon, of Memphis and Thebes, now

became merely a question of time, and that not far distant; the whole of

Asia, and that part of Africa which had been the oldest cradle of human

civilisation, were now to pass into the hands of one man and form a

single empire, for the benefit of the new race which was issuing forth

in irresistible strength from the recesses of the Iranian table-land. It

was destined, from the very outset, to come into conflict with an

older, but no less vigorous race than itself, that of the Greeks, whose

colonists, after having swarmed along the coasts of the Mediterranean,

were now beginning to quit the seaboard and penetrate wherever they

could into the interior.

[Illustration: 078.jpg A PERSIAN KING FIGHTING WITH GREEKS]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from an intaglio reproduced in the

_Antiquités du Bosphore cimmérien._

They had been on friendly terms with that dynasty of the Meramadæ

who had shown reverence for the Hellenic gods; they had, as a whole,

disdained to betray Croesus, or to turn upon him when he was in

difficulties beyond the Halys; and now that he had succumbed to his

fate, they considered that the ties which had bound them to Sardes were

broken, and they were determined to preserve their independence at all

costs. This spirit of insubordination would have to be promptly dealt

with and tightly curbed, if perpetual troubles in the future were to

be avoided. The Asianic peoples soon rallied round their new

master--Phrygians, Mysians, the inhabitants on the shores of the Black

Sea, and those of the Pamphylian coast;* even Cilicia, which had held

its own against Chaldæa, Media, and Lydia, was now brought under the

rising power, and its kings were henceforward obedient to the Persian

rule.**

* None of the documents actually say this, but the general

tenor of Herodotus’ account seems to show clearly that, with

the exception of the Greek cities of the Carians and

Lycians, all the peoples who had formed part of the Lydian

dominion under Croesus submitted, without any appreciable

resistance, after the taking of Sardes.

** Herodotus mentions a second Syennesis king of Cilicia

forty years later at the time of the Ionian revolt.

The two leagues of the Ionians and Æolians had at first offered to

recognise Cyrus as their suzerain under the same conditions as those

with which Croesus had been satisfied; but he had consented to accept

it only in the case of Miletus, and had demanded from the rest an

unconditional surrender. This they had refused, and, uniting in a common

cause perhaps for the first time in their existence, they had resolved

to take up arms. As the Persians possessed no fleet, the Creeks had

nothing to fear from the side of the Ægean, and the severity of the

winter prevented any attack being made from the land side till the

following spring. They meanwhile sought the aid of their mother-country,

and despatched an embassy to the Spartans; the latter did not consider

it prudent to lend them troops, as they would have done in the case of

Croesus, but they authorised Lakrines, one of their principal citizens,

to demand of the great king that he should respect the Hellenic cities,

under pain of incurring their enmity.

[Illustration: 080.jpg THE PRESENT SITE OF MILETUS]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph.

Cyrus was fully occupied with the events then taking place in the

eastern regions of Iran; Babylon had not ventured upon any move after

having learned the news of the fall of Sardes, but the Bactrians and the

Sakæ had been in open revolt during the whole of the year that he had

been detained in the extreme west, and a still longer absence might risk

the loss of his prestige in Media, and even in Persia itself.*

* The tradition followed by Ctesias maintained that the

submission of the eastern peoples was an accomplished fact

when the Lydian war began. That adopted by Herodotus placed

this event after the fall of Croesus; at any rate, it showed

that fear of the Bactrians and the Sakæ, as well as of the

Babylonians and Egyptians was the cause that hastened Cyrus’

retreat.

The threat of the Lacedaæmonians had little effect upon him; he

inquired as to what Sparta and Greece were, and having been informed,

he ironically begged the Lacedæmonian envoy to thank his compatriots for

the good advice with which they had honoured him; “but,” he added, “take

care that I do not soon cause you to babble, not of the ills of the

Ionians, but of your own.” He confided the government of Sardes to one

of his officers, named Tabalos, and having entrusted Paktyas, one of the

Lydians who had embraced his cause, with the removal of the treasures

of Croesus to Persia, he hastily set out for Ecbatana. He had scarcely

accomplished half of his journey when a revolt broke out in his rear;

Paktyas, instead of obeying his instructions, intrigued with the

Ionians, and, with the mercenaries he had hired from them, besieged

Tabalos in the citadel of Sardes. If the place capitulated, the entire

conquest would have to be repeated; fortunately it held out, and

its resistance gave Cyrus time to send its governor reinforcements,

commanded by Mazares the Median. As soon as they approached the city,

Paktyas, conscious that he had lost the day, took refuge at Kymê. Its

inhabitants, on being summoned to deliver him up, refused, but helped

him to escape to Mytilene, where the inhabitants of the island attempted

to sell him to the enemy for a large sum of money. The Kymæans saved him

a second time, and conveyed him to the temple of Athene Poliarchos

at Chios. The citizens, however, dragged him from his retreat, and

delivered him over to the Median general in exchange for Atarneus, a

district of Mysia, the possession of which they were disputing with the

Lesbians.* Paktyas being a prisoner, the Lydians were soon recalled

to order, and Mazares was able to devote his entire energies to the

reduction of the Greek cities; but he had accomplished merely the sack

of Priênê,** and the devastation of the suburbs of Magnesia on the

æander, when he died from some illness.

* A passage which has been preserved of Charon of Lampsacus

sums up in a few words the account given by Herodotus of the

adventures of Paktyas, but without mentioning the treachery

of the islanders: he confines himself to saying Cyrus caught

the fugitive after the latter had successively left Chios

and Mytilene.

** Herodotus attributes the taking of this city to the

Persian Tabules, who is evidently the Tabalos of Herodotus.

The Median Harpagus, to whom tradition assigns so curious a part as

regards Astyages and the infant Cyrus, succeeded him as governor of the

ancient Lydian kingdom, and completed the work which he had begun.

The first two places to be besieged were Phocæa and Teos, but their

inhabitants preferred exile to slavery; the Phocæans sailed away to

found Marseilles in the western regions of the Mediterranean, and

the people of Teos settled along the coast of Thracia, near to the

gold-mines of the Pangseus, and there built Abdera on the site of an

ancient Clazomenian colony. The other Greek towns were either taken by

assault or voluntarily opened their gates, so that ere long both Ionians

and Æolians were, with the exception of the Samians, under Persian rule.

The very position of the latter rendered them safe from attack; without

a fleet they could not be approached, and the only people who could have

furnished Cyrus with vessels were the Phoenicians, who were not as yet

under his power. The rebellion having been suppressed in this quarter,

Harpagus made a descent into Caria; the natives hastened to place

themselves under the Persian yoke, and the Dorian colonies scattered

along the coast, Halicarnas-sus, Cnidos, and the islands of Cos and

Rhodes, followed their examples, but Lycia refused to yield without a

struggle.

[Illustration: 083.jpg A LYCIAN CITY UPON ITS INACCESSIBLE ROCK]

The rock and tombs of Tlôs, drawn by Boudier, from the view

in Fellows.

Its steep mountain chains, its sequestered valleys, its towns and

fortresses perched on inaccessible rocks, all rendered it easy for the

inhabitants to carry on a successful petty warfare against the enemy.

The inhabitants of Xanthos, although very inferior in numbers, issued

down into the plain and disputed the victory with the invaders for a

considerable time; at length their defeat and the capitulation of their

town induced the remainder of the Lycians to lay down arms, and brought

about the final pacification of the peninsula. It was parcelled out into

several governorships, according to its ethnographical affinities;

as for instance, the governorship of Lydia, that of Ionia, that of

Phrygia,* and others whose names are unknown to us. Harpàgus appeared

to have resided at Sardes, and exercised vice-regal functions over the

various districts, but he obtained from the king an extensive property

in Lycia and in Caria, which subsequently caused these two provinces to

be regarded as an appanage of his family.

* Herodotus calls a certain Mitrobates satrap of Daskylion;

he had perhaps been already given this office by Cyrus.

Orcetes had been made governor of Ionia and Lydia by Cyrus.

While thus consolidating his first conquest, Cyrus penetrated into the

unknown regions of the far East. Nothing would have been easier for him

than to have fallen upon Babylon and overthrown, as it were by the way,

the decadent rule of Nabonidus; but the formidable aspect which the

empire still presented, in spite of its enfeebled condition, must have

deceived him, and he was unwilling to come into conflict with it until

he had made a final reckoning with the restless and unsettled peoples

between the Caspian and the slopes on the Indian side of the table-land

of Iran. As far as we are able to judge, they were for the most part of

Iranian extraction, and had the same religion, institutions, and customs

as the Medes and Persians. Tradition had already referred the origin of

Zoroaster, and the scene of his preaching, to Bactriana, that land of

heroes whose exploits formed the theme of Persian epic song. It is not

known, as we have already had occasion to remark, by what ties it was

bound to the empire of Cyaxares, nor indeed if it ever had been actually

attached to it. We do not possess, unfortunately, more than almost

worthless scraps of information on this part of the reign of Cyrus,

perhaps the most important period of it, since then, for the first

time, peoples who had been hitherto strangers to the Asiatic world were

brought within its influence. If Ctesias is to be credited, Bactriana

was one of the first districts to be conquered. Its inhabitants were

regarded as being among the bravest of the East, and furnished the best

soldiers. They at first obtained some successes, but laid down arms on

hearing that Cyrus had married a daughter of Astyages.* This tradition

was prevalent at a time when the Achaemenians were putting forward the

theory that they, and Cyrus before them, were the legitimate successors

of the old Median sovereigns; they welcomed every legend which tended to

justify their pretensions, and this particular one was certain to please

them, since it attributed the submission of Bactriana not to a mere

display of brute force, but to the recognition of an hereditary right.

The annexation of this province entailed, as a matter of course, that

of Margiana, of the Khoramnians,** and of Sogdiana. Cyrus constructed

fortresses in all these districts, the most celebrated being that

of Kyropolis, which commanded one of the principal fords of the

Iaxartes.***

* This is the campaign which Ctesias places before the

Lydian war, but which Herodotus relegates to a date after

the capture of Sardes.

** Ctesias must have spoken of the submission of these

peoples, for a few words of a description which he gave of

the Khoramnians have been preserved to us.

*** Tomaschek identifies Kyra or Kyropolis with the present

Ura-Tepe, but distinguishes it from the Kyreskhata of

Ptolemy, to which he assigns a site near Usgent.

The steppes of Siberia arrested his course on the north, but to the

east, in the mountains of Chinese Turkestan, the Sakas, who were

renowned for their wealth and bravery, did not escape his ambitious

designs. The account which has come down to us of his campaigns against

them is a mere romance of love and adventure, in which real history

plays a very small part. He is said to have attacked and defeated

them at the first onset, taking their King Amorges prisoner; but this

capture, which Cyrus considered a decisive advantage, was supposed to

have turned the tide of fortune against him. Sparêthra, the wife of

Amorges, rallied the fugitives round her, defeated the invaders in

several engagements, and took so many of their men captive, that they

were glad to restore her husband to her in exchange for the prisoners

she had made. The struggle finally ended, however, in the subjection of

the Sakae; they engaged to pay tribute, and thenceforward constituted

the advance-guard of the Iranians against the Nomads of the East. Cyrus,

before quitting their neighbourhood, again ascended the table-land, and

reduced Ariana, Thatagus, Harauvati, Zaranka, and the country of Cabul;

and we may well ask if he found leisure to turn southwards beyond Lake

Hamun and reach the shores of the Indian Ocean. One tradition, of little

weight, relates that, like Alexander at a later date, he lost his army

in the arid deserts of Gedrosia; the one fact that remains is that the

conquest of Gedrosia was achieved, but the details of it are lost. The

period covered by his campaigns was from five to six years, from 545 to

539, but Cyrus returned from these expeditions into the unknown only to

plan fresh undertakings. There remained nothing now to hinder him from

marching against the Chaldæans, and the discord prevailing at Babylon

added to his chance of success. Nabonidus’s passion for archæology

had in no way lessened since the opening of his reign. The temple

restorations prompted by it absorbed the bulk of his revenues. He made

excavations in the sub-structures of the most ancient sanctuaries,

such as Larsam, Uruk, Uru, Sippar, and Nipur; and when his digging was

rewarded by the discovery of cylinders placed there by his predecessors,

his delight knew no bounds. Such finds constituted the great events of

his life, in comparison with which the political revolutions of Asia

and Africa diminished in importance day by day. It is difficult to tell

whether this indifference to the weighty affairs of government was as

complete as it appears to us at this distance of time. Certain facts

recorded in the official chronicles of that date go to prove that,

except in name and external pomp, the king was a nonentity. The real

power lay in the hands of the nobles and generals, and Bel-sharuzur, the

king’s son, directed affairs for them in his father’s name. Nabonidus

meanwhile resided in a state of inactivity at his palace of Tima, and it

is possible that his condition may have really been that of a prisoner,

for he never left Tima to go to Babylon, even on the days of great

festivals, and his absence prevented the celebration of the higher

rites of the national religion, with the procession of Bel and its

accompanying ceremonies, for several consecutive years. The people

suffered from these quarrels in high places; not only the native

Babylonians or Kaldâ, who were thus deprived of their accustomed

spectacles, and whose piety was scandalised by these dissensions, but

also the foreign races dispersed over Mesopotamia, from the confluence

of the Khabur to the mouths of the Euphrates. Too widely scattered or

too weak to make an open declaration of their independence, their hopes

and their apprehensions were alternately raised by the various reports

of hostilities which reached their ears. The news of the first

victories of the Persians aroused in the exiled Jews the idea of speedy

deliverance, and Cyrus clearly appeared to them as the hero chosen by

Jahveh to reinstate them in the country, of their forefathers.

The number of the Jewish exiles, which perhaps at first had not exceeded

20,000* had largely increased in the half-century of their captivity,

and even if numerically they were of no great importance, their social

condition entitled them to be considered as the _élite_ of all Israel.

* The body of exiles of 597 consisted of ten thousand

persons, of whom seven thousand belonged to the wealthy, and

one thousand to the artisan class, while the remainder

consisted of people attached to the court (2 Kings xxiv. 14-

16). In the body of 587 are reckoned three thousand and

twenty-three inhabitants of Judah, and eight hundred and

thirty-two dwellers in Jerusalem. But the body of exiles of

581 numbers only seven hundred and forty-five persons (Jer.

lii. 30). These numbers are sufficiently moderate to be

possibly exact, but they are far from being certain.

There had at first been the two kings, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, their

families, the aristocracy of Judah, the priests and pontiff of the

temple, the prophets, the most skilled of the artisan class and the

soldiery. Though distributed over Babylon and the neighbouring cities,

we know from authentic sources of only one of their settlements, that

of Tell-Abîb on the Chebar* though many of the Jewish colonies which

flourished thereabouts in Roman times could undoubtedly trace their

origin to the days of the captivity; one legend found in the Talmud

affirmed that the synagogue of Shafyâthîb, near Nehardaa, had been built

by King Jehoiachin with stones brought from the ruins of the temple at

Jerusalem. These communities enjoyed a fairly complete autonomy, and

were free to administer their own affairs as they pleased, provided that

they paid their tribute or performed their appointed labours without

complaint. The shêkhs, or elders of the family or tribe, who had played

so important a part in their native land, still held their respective

positions; the Chaldæans had permitted them to retain all the

possessions which they had been able to bring with them into exile, and

recognised them as the rulers of their people, who were responsible to

their conquerors for the obedience of those under them, leaving them

entire liberty to exercise their authority so long as they maintained

order and tranquillity among their subordinates.**

* Ezek. iii. 15. The Chebar or Kebar has been erroneously

identified with the Khabur; cuneiform documents show that it

was one of the canals near Nipur.

** Cf. the assemblies of these chiefs at the house of

Ezekiel and their action (viii. 1; xiv. 1; xx. 1).

How the latter existed, and what industries they pursued in order to

earn their daily bread, no writer of the time has left on record. The

rich plain of the Euphrates differed so widely from the soil to which

they had been accustomed in the land of Judah, with its bare or sparsely

wooded hills, slopes cultivated in terraces, narrow and ill-watered

wadys, and tortuous and parched valleys, that they must have felt

themselves much out of their element in their Chaldæan surroundings.

They had all of them, however, whether artisans, labourers, soldiers,

gold-workers, or merchants, to earn their living, and they succeeded in

doing so, following meanwhile the advice of Jeremiah, by taking every

precaution that the seed of Israel should not be diminished.* The

imagination of pious writers of a later date delighted to represent the

exiled Jews as giving way to apathy and vain regrets: “By the rivers of

Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. Upon

the willows in the midst thereof we hanged up our harps. For there

they that led us captive required of us songs, and they that wasted

us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How

shall we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land?” **

* Jer. xxix. 1-7.

** Ps. cxxxvii. 1-4.

This was true of the priests and scribes only. A blank had been made in

their existence from the moment when the conqueror had dragged them

from the routine of daily rites which their duties in the temple service

entailed upon them. The hours which had been formerly devoted to their

offices were now expended in bewailing the misfortunes of their nation,

in accusing themselves and others, and in demanding what crime had

merited this punishment, and why Jahveh, who had so often shown clemency

to their forefathers, had not extended His forgiveness to them. It

was, however, by the long-suffering of God that His prophets, and

particularly Ezekiel, were allowed to make known to them the true cause

of their downfall. The more Ezekiel in his retreat meditated upon

their lot, the more did the past appear to him as a lamentable conflict

between divine justice and Jewish iniquity. At the time of their sojourn

in Egypt, Jahveh had taken the house of Jacob under His protection,

and in consideration of His help had merely demanded of them that they

should be faithful to Him. “Cast ye away every man the abominations of

his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt: I am the

Lord your God.” The children of Israel, however, had never observed this

easy condition, and this was the root of their ills; even before

they were liberated from the yoke of Pharaoh, they had betrayed their

Protector, and He had thought to punish them: “But I wrought for My

name’s sake, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations,

among whom they were, in whose sight I made myself known unto them....

So I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them

into the wilderness. And I gave them My statutes, and showed them My

judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them. Moreover also I

gave them My sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them... but the house

of Israel rebelled against Me.” As they had acted in Egypt, so they

acted at the foot of Sinai, and again Jahveh could not bring Himself to

destroy them; He confined Himself to decreeing that none of those who

had offended Him should enter the Promised Land, and He extended His

goodness to their children. But these again showed themselves no

wiser than their fathers; scarcely had they taken possession of the

inheritance which had fallen to them, “a land flowing with milk and

honey... the glory of all lands,” than when they beheld “every high hill

and every thick tree... they offered there their sacrifices, and there

they presented the provocation of their offering, there also they made

their sweet savour, and they poured out there their drink offerings.”

Not contented with profaning their altars by impious ceremonies and

offerings, they further bowed the knee to idols, thinking in their

hearts, “We will be as the nations, as the families of the countries,

to serve wood and stone.” “As I live, saith the Lord God, surely with a

mighty hand and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out, will

I be King over you.” *

1 Ezek. xx.

However just the punishment, Bzekiel did not believe that it would last

for ever. The righteousness of God would not permit future generations

to be held responsible for ever for the sins of generations past and

present. “What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of

Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s

teeth are set on edge? As I live, saith the Lord God, ye shall not have

occasion to use this proverb any more in Israel! Behold, all souls are

Mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is Mine;

the soul that sinneth it shall die. But if a man be just... he shall

surely live, saith the Lord God.” Israel, therefore, was master of his

own destiny. If he persisted in erring from the right way, the hour

of salvation was still further removed from him; if he repented and

observed the law, the Divine anger would be turned away. “Therefore... O

house of Israel... cast away from you all your transgressions wherein

ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit; for why

will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death

of him that dieth... wherefore turn yourselves and live.” 1 There were

those who objected that it was too late to dream of regeneration and of

hope in the future: “Our bones are dried up and our hope is lost; we are

clean cut off.” The prophet replied that the Lord had carried him in the

spirit and set him down in the midst of a plain strewn with bones. “So

I prophesied... and as I prophesied there was a noise... and the bones

came together, bone to his bone. And I beheld, and lo, there were sinews

upon them, and flesh came up and skin covered them above; but there was

no breath in them. Then said (the Lord) unto me, Prophesy unto the wind,

prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God: Come

from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they

may live. So I prophesied as He commanded me, and the breath came into

them and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great

army. Then He said unto me... these bones are the whole house of

Israel.... Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up

out of your graves, O my people; and I will bring you into the land of

Israel.... And I will put My Spirit in you and ye shall live, and I

will place you in your own land; and ye shall know that I the Lord hath

spoken it and performed it, saith the Lord.”

A people raised from such depths would require a constitution, a new law

to take the place of the old, from the day when the exile should cease.

Ezekiel would willingly have dispensed with the monarchy, as it had been

tried since the time of Samuel with scarcely any good results. For every

Hezekiah or Josiah, how many kings of the type of Ahaz or Manasseh had

there been! The Jews were nevertheless still so sincerely attached to

the house of David, that the prophet judged it inopportune to exclude

it from his plan for their future government. He resolved to tolerate

a king, but a king of greater piety and with less liberty than the

compiler of the Book of Deuteronomy had pictured to himself, a servant

of the servants of God, whose principal function should be to provide

the means of worship. Indeed, the Lord Himself was the only Sovereign

whom the prophet fully accepted, though his concept of Him differed

greatly from that of his predecessors: from that, for instance, of

Amos--the Lord God who would do nothing without revealing “His secret

unto His servants the prophets;” or of Hosea--who desired “mercy, and

not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.”

The Jahveh of Ezekiel no longer admitted any intercourse with the

interpreters of His will. He held “the son of man” at a distance, and

would consent to communicate with him only by means of angels who were

His messengers. The love of His people was, indeed, acceptable to

Him, but He preferred their reverence and fear, and the smell of the

sacrifice offered according to the law was pleasing to His nostrils. The

first care of the returning exiles, therefore, would be to build Him

a house upon the holy mountain. Ezekiel called to mind the temple

of Solomon, in which the far-off years of his youth were spent, and

mentally rebuilt it on the same plan, but larger and more beautiful;

first the outer court, then the inner court and its chambers, and lastly

the sanctuary, the dimensions of which he calculates with scrupulous

care: “And the breadth of the entrance was ten cubits; and the sides

of the entrance were five cubits on the one side and five cubits on the

other side: and he measured the length thereof, forty cubits; and

the breadth, twenty cubits”--and so forth, with a wealth of technical

details often difficult to be understood. And as a building so well

proportioned should be served by a priesthood worthy of it, the sons

of Zadok only were to bear the sacerdotal office, for they alone had

preserved their faith unshaken; the other Lévites were to fill merely

secondary posts, for not only had they shared in the sins of the nation,

but they had shown a bad example in practising idolatry. The duties and

prerogatives of each one, the tithes and offerings, the sacrifices, the

solemn festivals, the preparation of the feasts,--all was foreseen and

prearranged with scrupulous exactitude. Ezekiel was, as we have seen, a

priest; the smallest details were as dear to him as the noblest offices

of his calling, and the minute ceremonial instructions as to the killing

and cooking of the sacrificial animals appeared to him as necessary to

the future prosperity of his people as the moral law. Towards the end,

however, the imagination of the seer soared above the formalism of the

sacrificing priest; he saw in a vision waters issuing out of the very

threshold of the divine house, flowing towards the Dead Sea through a

forest of fruit trees, “whose leaf shall not wither, neither shall the

fruit thereof fail.” The twelve tribes of Israel, alike those of whom

a remnant still existed as well as those which at different times

had become extinct, were to divide the regenerated land by lot among

them--Dan in the extreme north, Reuben and Judah in the south; and they

would unite to found once more, around Mount Sion, that new Jerusalem

whose name henceforth was to be Jahveh-shammah, “The Lord is there.” *

* Ezek. xlvii., xlviii. The image of the river seems to be

borrowed from the _vessel of water_ of Chaldæan mythology.

The influence of Ezekiel does not seem to have extended beyond a

restricted circle of admirers. Untouched by his preaching, many of the

exiles still persisted in their worship of the heathen gods; most of

these probably became merged in the bulk of the Chaldæan population,

and were lost, as far as Israel was concerned, as completely as were

the earlier exiles of Ephraim under Tiglath-pileser III. and Sargon. The

greater number of the Jews, however, remained faithful to their hopes of

future greatness, and applied themselves to discerning in passing events

the premonitory signs of deliverance. “Like as a woman with child, that

draweth near the time of her delivery, is in pain, and crieth out in her

pangs; so have we been before Thee, O Lord.... Come, my people, enter

thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself for

a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the

Lord cometh forth out of His place to punish the inhabitants of the

earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and

shall no more cover her slain.” * The condition of the people improved

after the death of Nebuchadrezzar. Amil-marduk took Jehoiachin out of

the prison in which he had languished for thirty years, and treated

him with honour:** this was not as yet the restoration that had been

promised, but it was the end of the persecution.

* An anonymous prophet, about 570, in Isa. xxvi. 17, 20, 21.

** 2 Kings xxv. 27-30; cf. Jer. lii. 31-34.

A period of court intrigues followed, during which the sceptre of

Nebuchadrezzar changed hands four times in less than seven years; then

came the accession of the peaceful and devout Nabonidus, the fall of

Astyages, and the first victories of Cyrus. Nothing escaped the vigilant

eye of the prophets, and they began to proclaim that the time was at

hand, then to predict the fall of Babylon, and to depict the barbarians

in revolt against her, and Israel released from the yoke by the

all-powerful will of the Persians. “Thus saith the Lord to His anointed,

to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden to subdue nations before him,

and I will loose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and

the gates shall not be shut; I will go before thee and make the rugged

places plain: I will break in pieces the doors of brass, rend in sunder

the bars of iron: and I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and

hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I am the

Lord which call thee by thy name, even the God of Israel. For Jacob My

servant’s sake, and Israel My chosen, I have called thee by thy name: I

have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known Me.” * Nothing can stand

before the victorious prince whom Jahveh leads: “Bel boweth down, Nebo

stoopeth; their idols are upon the beasts, and upon the cattle: the

things that ye carried about are made a load, a burden to the weary

beast. They stoop, they bow down together; they could not deliver the

burden, but themselves are gone into captivity.” ** “O virgin daughter

of Babylon, sit on the ground without a throne, O daughter of the

Chaldæans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. Take

the millstones and grind meal: remove thy veil, strip off the train,

uncover the leg, pass through the rivers. They nakedness shall be

uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen.... Sit thou silent, and get

thee into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldæans: for thou shalt no more

be called the lady of kingdoms.” ***

* Second Isaiah, in Isa. xlv. 1-4.

** Second Isaiah, in Isa. xlvi. 1, 2.

*** Second Isaiah, in Isa. xlvii. 1-5.

The task which Cyrus had undertaken was not so difficult as we might

imagine. Not only was he hailed with delight by the strangers who

thronged Babylonia, but the Babylonians themselves were weary of their

king, and the majority of them were ready to welcome the Persian who

would rid them of him, as in old days they hailed the Assyrian kings who

delivered them from their Chaldæan lords. It is possible that towards

the end of his reign Nabonidus partly resumed the supreme power;* but

anxious for the future, and depending but little on human help, he had

sought a more powerful aid at the hands of the gods. He had apparently

revived some of the old forgotten cults, and had applied to their use

revenues which impoverished the endowment of the prevalent worship of

his own time. As he felt the growing danger approach, he remembered

those towns of secondary grade--Uru, Uruk, Larsam, and Eridu--all

of which, lying outside Nebuchadrezzar’s scheme of defence, would be

sacrificed in the case of an invasion: he had therefore brought away

from them the most venerated statues, those in which the spirit of the

divinity was more particularly pleased to dwell, and had shut them up in

the capital, within the security of its triple rampart.**

* This seems to follow from the part which he plays in the

final crisis, as told in the _Cylinder of Cyrus_ and in the

_Annals_.

** The chronicler adds that the gods of Sippar, Kutha, and

Borsippa were not taken to Babylon; and indeed, these cities

being included within the lines of defence of the great

city, their gods were as well defended from the enemy as if

they had been in Babylon itself.

This attempt to concentrate the divine powers, accentuating as it did

the supremacy of Bel-Marduk over his compeers, was doubtless flattering

to his pride and that of his priests, but was ill received by the rest

of the sacerdotal class and by the populace. All these divine guests had

not only to be lodged, but required to be watched over, decked, fed, and

feted, together with their respective temple retinues; and the prestige

and honour of the local Bel, as well as his revenues, were likely to

suffer in consequence. The clamour of the gods in the celestial heights

soon re-echoed throughout the land; the divinities complained of their

sojourn at Babylon as of a captivity in E-sagilla; they lamented over

the suppression of their daily sacrifices, and Marduk at length took

pity on them. He looked upon the countries of Sumir and Akkad, and saw

their sanctuaries in ruins and their towns lifeless as corpses; “he cast

his eyes over the surrounding regions; he searched them with his glance

and sought out a prince, upright, after his own heart, who should take

his hands. He proclaimed by name Cyrus, King of Anshân, and he called

him by his name to universal sovereignty.” Alike for the people

of Babylon and for the exiled Jew, and also doubtless for other

stranger-colonies, Cyrus appeared as a deliverer chosen by the gods;

his speedy approach was everywhere expected, if not with the same

impatience, at least with an almost joyful resignation. His plans were

carried into action in the early months of 538, and his habitual good

fortune did not forsake him at this decisive moment of his career. The

immense citadel raised by Nebuchadrezzar in the midst of his empire, in

anticipation of an attack by the Medes, was as yet intact, and the walls

rising one behind another, the moats, and the canals and marshes which

protected it, had been so well kept up or restored since his time, that

their security was absolutely complete; a besieging army could do little

harm--it needed a whole nation in revolt to compass its downfall. A

whole nation also was required for its defence, but the Babylonians

were not inclined to second the efforts of their sovereign. Nabonidus

concentrated his troops at the point most threatened, in the angle

comprised near Opis between the Medic wall and the bend of the Tigris,

and waited in inaction the commencement of the attack. It is supposed

that Cyrus put two bodies of troops in motion: one leaving Susa under

his own command, took the usual route of all Blamite invasions in the

direction of the confluence of the Tigris and the Dîyala; the other

commanded by Gobryas, the satrap of Gutium, followed the course of

the Adhem or the Dîyala, and brought the northern contingents to the

rallying-place. From what we know of the facts as a whole, it would

appear that the besieging force chose the neighbourhood of the present

Bagdad to make a breach in the fortifications. Taking advantage of the

months when the rivers were at their lowest, they drew off the water

from the Dîyala and the Tigris till they so reduced the level that they

were able to cross on foot; they then cut their way through the ramparts

on the left bank, and rapidly transported the bulk of their forces

into the very centre of the enemy’s position. The principal body of the

Chaldæan troops were still at Opis, cut off from the capital; Cyrus

fell upon them, overcame them on the banks of the Zalzallat in the early

days of Tammuz, urging forward Gobryas meanwhile upon Babylon itself.*

On the 14th of Tammuz, Nabonidus evacuated Sippar, which at once fell

into the hands of the Persian outposts; on the 16th Gobryas entered

Babylon without striking a blow, and Nabonidus surrendered himself a

prisoner.**

* For the strategic interpretation of the events of this

campaign I have generally adopted the explanations of

Billerbeck. Herodotus’ account with regard to the river

Gyndes is probably a reminiscence of alterations made in the

river-courses at the time of the attack in the direction of

Bagdad.

** The _Cylinder of Cyrus_, 1. 17, expressly says so:

“Without combat or battle did Marduk make him enter

Babylon,” The _Annals of Nabonidus_ confirm this testimony

of the official account.

The victorious army had received orders to avoid all excesses which

would offend the people; they respected the property of the citizens and

of the temples, placed a strong detachment around Ê-sagilla to protect

it from plunder, and no armed soldier was allowed within the enclosure

until the king’ had determined on the fate of the vanquished. Cyrus

arrived after a fortnight had elapsed, on the 3rd of March-esvân, and

his first act was one of clemency. He prohibited all pillage, granted

mercy to the inhabitants, and entrusted the government of the city to

Gobryas. Bel-sharuzur, the son of Nabonidus, remained to be dealt

with, and his energetic nature might have been the cause of serious

difficulties had he been allowed an opportunity of rallying the last

partisans of the dynasty around him. Gobryas set out to attack him, and

on the 11th of March-esvân succeeded in surprising and slaying him. With

him perished the last hope of the Chaldæans, and the nobles and towns,

still hesitating on what course to pursue, now vied with each other in

their haste to tender submission. The means of securing their good

will, at all events for the moment, was clearly at hand, and it was used

without any delay: their gods were at once restored to them. This exodus

extended over nearly two months, during March-esvân and Adar, and on

its termination a proclamation of six days of mourning, up to the 3rd of

Nisân, was made for the death of Bel-sharuzur, and as an atonement for

the faults of Nabonidus, after which, on the 4th of Nisân, the notables

of the city were called together in the temple of Nebo to join in the

last expiatory ceremonies. Cyrus did not hesitate for a moment to act

as Tiglath-pileser III. and most of the Sargonids had done; he “took the

hands of Bel,” and proclaimed himself king of the country, but in order

to secure the succession, he associated his son Cambyses with himself

as King of Babylon. Mesopotamia having been restored to order, the

provinces in their turn transferred their allegiance to Persia; “the

kings enthroned in their palaces, from the Upper Sea to the Lower, those

of Syria and those who dwell in tents, brought their weighty tribute to

Babylon and kissed the feet of the suzerain.” Events had followed one

another so quickly, and had entailed so little bloodshed, that popular

imagination was quite disconcerted: it could not conceive that an

empire of such an extent and of so formidable an appearance should have

succumbed almost without a battle, and three generations had not elapsed

before an entire cycle of legends had gathered round the catastrophe.

They related how Cyrus, having set out to make war, with provisions of

all kinds for his household, and especially with his usual stores of

water from the river Choaspes, the only kind of which he deigned to

drink, had reached the banks of the Gyndes. While seeking for a ford,

one of the white horses consecrated to the sun sprang into the river,

and being overturned by the current, was drowned before it could

be rescued. Cyrus regarded this accident as a personal affront, and

interrupted his expedition to avenge it. He employed his army during one

entire summer in digging three hundred and sixty canals, and thus caused

the principal arm of the stream to run dry, and he did not resume his

march upon Babylon till the following spring, when the level of the

water was low enough to permit of a woman crossing from one bank to the

other without wetting her knees. The Babylonians at first attempted

to prevent the blockade of the place, but being repulsed in their

_sorties_, they retired within the walls, much to Cyrus’s annoyance, for

they were provisioned for several years. He therefore undertook to

turn the course of the Euphrates into the Bahr-î-Nejîf, and having

accomplished it, he crept into the centre of the city by the dry bed of

the river. If the Babylonians had kept proper guard, the Persians would

probably have been surrounded and caught like fish in a net; but on that

particular day they were keeping one of their festivals, and continued

their dancing and singing till they suddenly found the streets alive

with the enemy.

Babylon suffered in no way by her servitude, and far from its being a

source of unhappiness to her, she actually rejoiced in it; she was rid

of Nabonidus, whose sacrilegious innovations had scandalised her piety,

and she possessed in Cyrus a legitimate sovereign since he had “taken

the hands of Bel.” It pleased her to believe that she had conquered her

victor rather than been conquered by him, and she accommodated herself

to her Persian dynasty after the same fashion that she had in turn

accustomed herself to Cossæan or Elamite, Ninevite or Chaldæan dynasties

in days gone by. Nothing in or around the city was changed, and she

remained what she had been since the fall of Assyria, the real capital

of the regions situated between the Mediterranean and the Zagros. It

seems that none of her subjects--whether Syrians, Tyrians, Arabs, or

Idumæans--attempted to revolt against their new master, but passively

accepted him, and the Persian dominion extended uncontested as far as

the isthmus of Suez; Cyprus even, and such of the Phoenicians as

were still dependencies of Egypt, did homage to her without further

hesitation. The Jews alone appeared only half satisfied, for the

clemency shown by Cyrus to their oppressors disappointed their hopes

and the predictions of their prophets. They had sung in anticipation of

children killed before their fathers’ eyes, of houses pillaged, of

women violated, and Babylon, the glory of the empire and the beauty

of Chaldæan pride, utterly destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrha when

overthrown by Jahveh. “It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be

dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch

tent there; neither shall shepherds make their flocks to lie down there.

But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be

full of doleful creatures; and ostriches shall dwell there, and satyrs

shall dance there. And wolves shall cry in their castles, and jackals in

the pleasant palaces.” *

* The table of the last kings of Ptolemy and the monuments,

is given below:--

[Illustration: 105.jpg TABLE OF THE LAST KINGS OF PTOLEMY]

Cyrus, however, was seated on the throne, and the city of

Nebuchadrezzar, unlike that of Sargon and Sennacherib, still continued

to play her part in the world’s history. The revenge of Jerusalem had

not been as complete as that of Samaria, and her sons had to content

themselves with obtaining the cessation of their exile. It is impossible

to say whether they had contributed to the downfall of Nabonidus

otherwise than by the fervency of their prayers, or if they had rendered

Cyrus some service either in the course of his preparations or during

his short campaign. They may have contemplated taking up arms in his

cause, and have been unable to carry the project into execution owing

to the rapidity with which events took place. However this may be, he

desired to reward them for their good intentions, and in the same year

as his victory, he promulgated a solemn edict, in which he granted them

permission to return to Judah and to rebuild not only their city, but

the temple of their God. The inhabitants of the places where they were

living were charged to furnish them with silver, gold, materials, and

cattle, which would be needed by those among them who should claim the

benefits of the edict; they even had restored to them, by order of the

king, what remained in the Babylonian treasury of the vessels of gold

and silver which had belonged to the sanctuary of Jahveh. The heads

of the community received the favour granted to them from such high

quarters, without any enthusiasm. Now that they were free to go, they

discovered that they were well off at Babylon. They would have to

give up their houses, their fields, their business, their habits of

indifference to politics, and brave the dangers of a caravan journey of

three or four months’ duration, finally encamping in the midst of

ruins in an impoverished country, surrounded by hostile and jealous

neighbours; such a prospect was not likely to find favour with many, and

indeed it was only the priests, the Lévites, and the more ardent of

the lower classes who welcomed the idea of the return with a touching

fervour. The first detachment organised their departure in 536,

under the auspices of one of the princes of the royal house, named

Shauash-baluzur (Sheshbazzar), a son of Jehoiachin.* It comprised only a

small number of families, and contained doubtless a few of the captives

of Nebuchadrezzar who in their childhood had seen the temple standing

and had been present at its destruction.

* The name which is written Sheshbazzar in the Hebrew text

of the Book of Ezra (i. 9, 11; v. 14, 16) is rendered

Sasabalassaros in Lucian’s recension of the Septuagint, and

this latter form confirms the hypothesis of Hoonacker, which

is now universally accepted, that it corresponds to the

Babylonian Shamash-abaluzur. It is known that Shamash

becomes Shauash in Babylonian; thus Saosdukhînos comes from

Shamash-shumukîn: similarly Shamash-abaluzur has become

Shauash-abaluzur. Imbert has recognised Sheshbazzar,

Shauash-abaluzur in the Shenazzar mentioned in 1 Chron. iii.

8, as being one of the sons of Jeconiah, and this

identification has been accepted by several recent

historians of Israel. It should be remembered that Shauash-

abaluzur and Zerubbabel have long been confounded one with

the other.

The returning exiles at first settled in the small towns of Judah and

Benjamin, and it was not until seven months after their arrival that

they summoned courage to clear the sacred area in order to erect in its

midst an altar of sacrifice.*

* The history of this first return from captivity is

summarily set forth in Ezra i.; cf. v. 13-17; vi. 3-5, 15.

Its authenticity has been denied: with regard to this point

and the questions relating to Jewish history after the

exile, the modifications which have been imposed on the

original plan of this work have obliged me to suppress much

detail in the text and the whole of the bibliography in the

notes.

They formed there, in the land of their fathers, a little colony, almost

lost among the heathen nations of former times--Philistines, Idumasans,

Moabites, Ammonites, and the settlers implanted at various times in what

had been the kingdom of Israel by the sovereigns of Assyria and Chaldæa.

Grouped around the Persian governor, who alone was able to protect them

from the hatred of their rivals, they had no hope of prospering, or even

of maintaining their position, except by exhibiting an unshaken fidelity

to their deliverers. It was on this very feeling that Cyrus mainly

relied when he granted them permission to return to their native

hills, and he was actuated as much by a far-seeing policy as from the

promptings of instinctive generosity. It was with satisfaction that he

saw in that distant province, lying on the frontier of the only enemy

yet left to him in the old world, a small band, devoted perforce to his

interests, and whose very existence depended entirely on that of his

empire. He no doubt extended the same favour to the other exiles in

Chaldæa who demanded it of him, but we do not know how many of them

took advantage of the occasion to return to their native countries, and

this exodus of the Jews still remains, so far as we know, a unique

fact. The administration continued the same as it had been under the

Chaldæans; Aramæan was still the official language in the provincial

dependencies, and the only change effected was the placing of Persians

at the head of public offices, as in Asia Minor, and allowing them a

body of troops to support their authority.*

* The presence of Persian troops in Asia Minor is proved by

the passage in Herodotus where he says that Orotes had with

him 1000 Persians as his body-guard.

One great state alone remained of all those who had played a prominent

part in the history of the East. This was Egypt; and the policy which

her rulers had pursued since the development of the Iranian power

apparently rendered a struggle with it inevitable. Amasis had taken part

in all the coalitions which had as their object the perpetuation of

the balance of the powers in Western Asia; he had made a treaty with

Croesus, and it is possible that his contingents had fought in the

battles before Sardes; Lydia having fallen, he did all in his power to

encourage Nabonidus in his resistance. As soon as he found himself face

to face with Cyrus, he understood that a collision was imminent, and

did his best in preparing to meet it. Even if Cyrus had forgotten the

support which had been freely given to his rivals, the wealth of Egypt

was in itself sufficient to attract the Persian hordes to her frontiers.

A century later, the Egyptians, looking back on the past with a

melancholy retrospection, confessed that “never had the valley been

more flourishing or happier than under Amasis; never had the river

shown itself more beneficent to the soil, nor the soil more fertile

for mankind, and the inhabitated towns might be reckoned at 20,000 in

number.” The widespread activity exhibited under Psammetichus II., and

Apries, was redoubled under the usurper, and the quarries of Turah,*

Silsileh,** Assuan, and even those of Hammamât, were worked as in the

palmy days of the Theban dynasties. The island of Philæ, whose position

just below the cataract attracted to it the attention of the military

engineers, was carefully fortified and a temple built upon it, the

materials of which were used later on in the masonry of the sanctuary of

Ptolemaic times. Thebes exhibited a certain outburst of vitality under

the impulse given by Ankhnasnofiribri and by Shashonqu, the governor of

her palace;*** two small chapels, built in the centre of the town, still

witness to the queen’s devotion to Amon, of whom she was the priestess.

Wealthy private individuals did their best to emulate their sovereign’s

example, and made for themselves at Shêkh Abd-el-Gurnah and at Assassif

those rock-hewn tombs which rival those of the best periods in their

extent and the beauty of their bas-reliefs.****

* A stele of his forty-fourth year still exists in the

quarries of the Mokattam.

** According to Herodotus, it was from the quarries of

Elephantine that Amasis caused to be brought the largest

blocks which he used in the building of Sais.

*** Her tomb still exists at Deir el-Medineh, and the

sarcophagus, taken from the tomb in 1833, is now in the

British Museum.

**** The most important of these tombs is that of Petenit,

the father of Shashonqu, who was associated with

Ankhnasnofiribri in the government of Thebes.

Most of the cities of the Said were in such a state of decadence that it

was no longer possible to restore to them their former prosperity, but

Abydos occupied too important a place in the beliefs connected with the

future world, and attracted too many pilgrims, to permit of its being

neglected. The whole of its ancient necropolis had been rifled by

thieves during the preceding centuries, and the monuments were nearly as

much buried by sand as in our own times.

[Illustration: 111.jpg AN OSIRIS STRETCHED FULL LENGTH ON THE GROUND]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, after Mariette. The monument is a

statuette measuring only 15 centimetres in length; it has

been reproduced to give an idea of the probable form of the

statue seen by Herodotus.

The dismantled fortress now known as the Shunêt ez-Zebîb served as the

cemetery for the ibises of Thoth, and for the stillborn children of the

sacred singing-women, while the two Memnonia of Seti and Ramses, now

abandoned by their priests, had become mere objects of respectful

curiosity, on which devout Egyptians or passing travellers--Phoenicians,

Aramæans, Cypriots, Carians, and Greeks from Ionia and the isles--came

to carve their names.*

* The position occupied by the graffiti on certain portions

of the walls show that in these places in the temple of Seti

there was already a layer of sand varying from one to three

metres in depth.

Amasis confided the work of general restoration to one of the principal

personages of his court, Pefzââunît, Prince of Sais, who devoted his

attention chiefly to two buildings--the great sanctuary of Osiris, which

was put into good condition throughout, and the very ancient necropolis

of Omm-el-Graab, where lay hidden the _àlquhah_, one of the sepulchres

of the god; he restored the naos, the table of offerings, the barques,

and the temple furniture, and provided for the sacred patrimony by an

endowment of fields, vineyards, palm groves, and revenues, so as to

ensure to the sanctuary offerings in perpetuity. It was a complete

architectural resurrection. The nomes of Middle Egypt, which had

suffered considerably during the Ethiopian and Assyrian wars, had

some chance of prosperity now that their lords were relieved from the

necessity of constantly fighting for some fresh pretender. Horu, son

of Psam-metichus, Prince of the Oleander nome, rebuilt the ancient

sanctuary of Harshafaîtu at Heracleopolis, and endowed it with a

munificence which rivalled that of Pefzââunîfc at Abydos. The king

himself devoted his resources chiefly to works at Memphis and in the

Delta. He founded a temple of Isis at Memphis, which Herodotus

described as extending over an immense area and being well worth seeing;

unfortunately nothing now remains of it, nor of the recumbent colossus,

sixty feet in length, which the king placed before the court of Phtah,

nor of the two gigantic statues which he raised in front of the temple,

one on each side of the door.

[Illustration: 112.jpg THE TWO GODDESSES OF LAW; ANI ADORING OSIRIS] THE

TRIAL OF THE CONSCIENCE; TOTH AND THE FEATHER OF THE LAW.

Besides these architectural works, Amasis invested the funerary

ceremonies of the Apis-bulls with a magnificence rarely seen before

his time, and the official stelae which he carved to the memory of

the animals who died in his reign exhibit a perfection of style quite

unusual. His labours at Memphis, however, were eclipsed by the admirable

work which he accomplished at Sais. The propylæ which he added to the

temple of Nît “surpassed most other buildings of the same kind, as

much by their height and extent, as by the size and quality of the

materials;” he had, moreover, embellished them by a fine colonnade, and

made an approach to them by an avenue of sphinxes.

[Illustration: 113.jpg AMASIS IN ADORATION BEFORE THE BULL APIS]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph taken in the

Louvre.

In other parts of the same building were to be seen two superb obelisks,

a recumbent figure similar to that at Memphis, and a monolithic naos

of rose granite brought from the quarries of Elephantine. Amasis had a

special predilection for this kind of monument. That which he erected at

Thmuis is nearly twenty-three feet in height,* and the Louvre contains

another example, which though smaller still excites the admiration of

the modern visitor.**

* The exact measurements are 23 1/2 ft. in height, 12 ft. 9

ins. in width, and 10 ft. 6 ins. in depth. The naos of Saft

el-Hinneh must have been smaller, but it is impossible to

determine its exact dimensions.

** It measures 9 ft. 7 ins. in height, 3 ft. 1 in. in width,

and 3 ft. 8 ins.

[Illustration: 114.jpg THE NAOS OF AMASIS AT THMUIS]

Drawn by Boudier, from the sketch of Burton.

The naos of Sais, which amazed Herodotus, was much larger than either of

the two already mentioned, or, indeed, than any known example. Tradition

states that it took two thousand boatmen three years to convey it down

from the first cataract. It measured nearly thirty feet high in the

interior, twenty-four feet in depth, and twelve feet in breadth; even

when hollowed out to contain the emblem of the god, it still weighed

nearly 500,000 kilograms. It never reached its appointed place in the

sanctuary. The story goes that “the architect, at the moment when the

monument had been moved as far as a certain spot in the temple, heaved

a sigh, oppressed with the thought of the time expended on its transport

and weary of the arduous work. Amasis overheard the sigh, and taking it

as an omen, he commanded that the block should be dragged no further.

Others relate that one of the overseers in charge of the work was

crushed to death by the monument, and for this reason it was left

standing on the spot,” where for centuries succeeding generations came

to contemplate it.*

* The measurements given by Herodotus are so different from

those of any naos as yet discovered, that I follow Kenrick

in thinking that Herodotus saw the monument of Amasis lying

on its side, and that he took for the height what was really

the width in depth. It had been erected in the nome of

Athribis, and afterwards taken to Alexandria about the

Ptolemaic era; it was discovered under water in one of the

ports of the town at the beginning of this century, and

Drovetti, who recovered it, gave it to the Museum of the

Louvre in 1825.

Amasis, in devoting his revenues to such magnificent works, fully shared

the spirit of the older Pharaohs, and his labours were nattering to

the national vanity, even though many lives were sacrificed in their

accomplishment; but the glory which they reflected on Egypt did not

have the effect of removing the unpopularity in which Tie was personally

held. The revolution which overthrew Apries had been provoked by the

hatred of the native party towards the foreigners; he himself had been

the instrument by which it had been accomplished, and it would have been

only natural that, having achieved a triumph in spite of the Greeks and

the mercenaries, he should have wished to be revenged on them, and have

expelled them from his dominions. But, as a fact, nothing of the kind

took place, and Amasis, once crowned, forgot the wrongs he had suffered

as an aspirant to the royal dignity; no sooner was he firmly seated on

the throne, than he recalled the strangers, and showed that he had only

friendly intentions with regard to them. His predecessors had received

them into favour, he, in fact, showed a perfect infatuation for them,

and became as complete a Greek as it was possible for an Egyptian to be.

His first care had been to make a treaty with the Dorians of Oyrene, and

he displayed so much tact in dealing with them, that they forgave him

for the skirmish of Irasa, and invited him to act as arbitrator in their

dissensions. A certain Arkesilas II. had recently succeeded the Battos

who had defeated the Egyptian troops, but his suspicious temper had

obliged his brothers to separate themselves from him, and they had

founded further westwards the independent city of Barca. On his

threatening to evict them, they sent a body of Libyans against him.

Fighting ensued, and he was beaten close to the town of Leukon. He

lost 7000 hoplites in the engagement, and the disaster aroused so

much ill-feeling against him that Laarchos, another of his brothers,

strangled him. Laarchos succeeded him amid the acclamations of the

soldiery; but not long after, Eryxô and Polyarchos, the wife and

brother-in-law of his victim, surprised and assassinated him in his

turn. The partisans of Laarchos then had recourse to the Pharaoh, who

showed himself disposed to send them help; but his preparations were

suspended owing to the death of his mother. Polyarchos repaired to Egypt

before the royal mourning was ended, and pleaded his cause with such

urgency that he won over the king to his side; he obtained the royal

investiture for his sister’s child, who was still a minor, Battos III.,

the lame, and thus placed Oyrene in a sort of vassalage to the Egyptian

crown.*

* Herodotus narrates these events without mentioning Amasis,

and Nicolas of Damascus adopted Herodotus’ account with

certain modifications taken from other sources. The

intervention of Amasis is mentioned only by Plutarch and by

Polyaanus; but the record of it had been handed down to them

by some more ancient author--perhaps by Akesandros; or

perhaps, in the first instance, by Hellanicos of Lesbos, who

gave a somewhat detailed account of certain points in

Egyptian history. The passage of Herodotus is also found

incorporated in accounts of Cyrenian origin: his informants

were interested in recalling deeds which reflected glory on

their country, like the defeat of Apries at Irasa, but not

in the memory of events so humiliating for them as the

sovereign intervention of Pharaoh only a few years after

this victory. And besides, the merely pacific success which

Amasis achieved was not of a nature to leave a profound mark

on the Egyptian mind. It is thus easy to explain how it was

that Herodotus makes no allusion to the part played by Egypt

in this affair.

The ties which connected the two courts were subsequently drawn closer

by marriage; partly from policy and partly from a whim, Amasis espoused

a Cyrenian woman named Ladikê, the daughter, according to some, of

Arkesilas or of Battos, according to others, of a wealthy private

individual named Kritobulos.* The Greeks of Europe and Asia Minor fared

no less to their own satisfaction at his hand than their compatriots

in Africa; following the example of his ally Croesus, he entered

into relations with their oracles on several occasions, and sent them

magnificent presents. The temple of Delphi having been burnt down in

548, the Athenian family of the Alcmæonides undertook to rebuild it from

the ground for the sum of three hundred talents, of which one-fourth was

to be furnished by the Delphians. When these, being too poor to pay

the sum out of their own resources, made an appeal to the generosity of

other friendly powers, Amasis graciously offered them a thousand talents

of Egyptian alum, then esteemed the most precious of all others. Alum

was employed in dyeing, and was an expensive commodity in the markets of

Europe; the citizens of Delphi were all the more sensible of Pharaoh’s

generosity, since the united Greeks of the Nile valley contributed only

twenty _minæ_ of the same mineral as their quota. Amasis erected at

Cyrene a statue of his wife Ladikê, and another of the goddess Neît,

gilded from head to foot, and to these he added his own portrait,

probably painted on a wooden panel.**

* The very fact of the marriage is considered by Wiedemann

as a pure legend, but there is nothing against its

authenticity; the curious story of the relations of the

woman with Amasis told by the Cyrenian commentators is the

only part which need be rejected.

** The text of Herodotus can only mean a painted panel

similar to those which have been found on the mummies of the

Græco-Roman era in the Fayum.

He gave to Athene of Lindos two stone statues and a corselet of linen

of marvellous fineness;* and Hera of Samos received two wooden statues,

which a century later Herodotus found still intact. The Greeks flocked

to Egypt from all quarters of the world in such considerable numbers

that the laws relating to them had to be remodelled in order to avoid

conflicts with the natives.

* It seems that one of these statues is that which, after

being taken to Constantinople, was destroyed in a fire in

476 A.D. Fragments of the corselet still existed in the

first century of our era, but inquisitive persons used to

tear off pieces to see for themselves whether, as Herodotus

assures us, each thread was composed of three hundred and

sixty-five strands, every one visible with the naked eye.

The townships founded a century earlier along the Pelusiac arm of the

Nile had increased still further since the time of Necho, and to their

activity was attributable the remarkable prosperity of the surrounding

region. But the position which they occupied on the most exposed side

of Egypt was regarded as permanently endangering the security of the

country: her liberty would be imperilled should they revolt during a war

with the neighbouring empire, and hand over the line of defence which

was garrisoned by them to the invader. Amasis therefore dispossessed

their inhabitants, and transferred them to Memphis and its environs.

The change benefited him in two ways, for, while securing himself from

possible treason, he gained a faithful guard for himself in the event of

risings taking place in his turbulent capital. While he thus distributed

these colonists of ancient standing to his best interests, he placed

those of quite recent date in the part of the Delta furthest removed

from Asia, where surveillance was most easy, in the triangle, namely,

lying to the west of Sais, between the Canopic branch of the Nile, the

mountains, and the sea-coast. The Milesians had established here some

time previously, on a canal connected with the main arm of the river,

the factory of Naucratis, which long remained in obscurity, but suddenly

developed at the beginning of the XXVIth dynasty, when Sais became the

favourite residence of the Pharaohs. This town Amasis made over to the

Greeks so that they might make it the commercial and religious centre of

their communities in Egypt.

[Illustration: 120.jpg THE PRESENT SITE OF NAUCRATIS]

Reduced by Faucher-Gudin from the plan published by Petrie.

The site of the Hellenion is marked A, the modern Arab

village B, the temenos of Hera and Apollo E, that of the

Dioskuri F, and that of Aphrodite G.

Temples already existed there, those of Apollo and Aphrodite, together

with all the political and religious institutions indispensable to the

constitution of an Hellenic city; but the influx of immigrants was

so large and rapid, that, after the lapse of a few years, the entire

internal organism and external aspect of the city were metamorphosed.

New buildings rose from the ground with incredible speed--the little

temple of the Dioskuri, the protectors of the sailor, the temple of the

Samian Hera, that of Zeus of Ægina, and that of Athene;* ere long the

great temenos, the Hellenion, was erected at the public expense by nine

Æolian, Ionian, and Dorian towns of Asia Minor, to serve as a place of

assembly for their countrymen, as a storehouse, as a sanctuary, and,

if need be, even as a refuge and fortress, so great was its area and so

thick its walls.**

* The temple of Athene, the Nît of the Saite nome, is as yet

known only by an inscription in Pctrie.

** The site has been rediscovered by Petrie at the southern

extremity of and almost outside the town; the walls were

about 48 feet thick and 39 feet high, and the rectangular

area enclosed by them could easily contain fifty thousand

men.

It was not possible for the constitution of Naucratis to be very

homogeneous, when a score of different elements assisted in its

composition. It appears to have been a compromise between the

institutions of the Dorians and those of the Ionians. Its supreme

magistrates were called timuchi, but their length of office and

functions are alike unknown to us. The inspectors of the emporia and

markets could be elected only by the citizens of the nine towns, and it

is certain that the chief authority was not entirely in the hands either

of the timuchi or the inspectors; perhaps each quarter of the town had

its council taken from among the oldest residents. A prytanasum was open

to all comers where assemblies and banquets were held on feast-days;

here were celebrated at the public expense the festivals of Dionysos

and Apollo Komasos. Amasis made the city a free port, accessible at all

times to whoever should present themselves with peaceable intent, and

the privileges which he granted naturally brought about the closing of

all the other seaports of Egypt. When a Greek ship, pursued by pirates,

buffeted by storms, or disabled by an accident at sea, ran ashore at

some prohibited spot on the coast, the captain had to appear before the

nearest magistrate, in order to swear that he had not violated the law

wilfully, but from the force of circumstances. If his excuse appeared

reasonable, he was permitted to make his way to the mouth of the Canopic

branch of the Nile; but when the state of the wind or tide did not allow

of his departure, his cargo was transferred to boats of the locality,

and sent to the Hellenic settlement by the canals of the Delta. This

provision of the law brought prosperity to Naucratis; the whole of the

commerce of Egypt with the Greek world passed through her docks, and

in a few years she became one of the wealthiest emporia of the

Mediterranean. The inhabitants soon overflowed the surrounding country,

and covered it with villas and townships. Such merchants as refused to

submit to the rule of their own countrymen found a home in some other

part of the valley which suited them, and even Upper Egypt and the

Libyan desert were subject to their pacific inroads. The Milesians

established depots in the ancient city of Abydos;* the Cypriots and

Lesbians, and the people of Ephesus, Chios, and Samos, were scattered

over the islands formed by the network of canals and arms of the Nile,

and delighted in giving them the names of their respective countries;**

Greeks of diverse origin settled themselves at Neapolis, not far from

Panopolis; and the Samians belonging to the Æschrionian tribe penetrated

as far as the Great Oasis; in fact, there was scarcely a village where

Hellenic traders were not found, like the _bakals_ of to-day, selling

wine, perfumes, oil, and salted provisions to the natives, practising

usury in all its forms, and averse from no means of enriching themselves

as rapidly as possible.

* In Stephen of Byzantium the name of the town is said to be

derived from that of the Milesian Abydos who founded it,

probably on the testimony of Aristagoras. Letronne has seen

that the historian meant a factory established by the

Milesians probably in the reign of Amasis, at the terminus

of the route leading to the Great Oasis.

** The compiler confines himself to stating that there were

in the Nile islands called Ephesus, Chios, Samos, Lesbos,

Cyprus, and so on; the explanation I have given in the text

accounts for this curious fact quite simply.

Those who returned to their mother-country carried thither

strange tales, which aroused the curiosity and cupidity of their

fellow-citizens; and philosophers, merchants, and soldiers alike set out

for the land of wonders in pursuit of knowledge, wealth, or adventures.

Amasis, ever alert upon his Asiatic frontier, and always anxious

to strengthen himself in that quarter against a Chaldæan or Persian

invasion, welcomed them with open arms: those who remained in the

country obtained employment about his person, while such as left it not

to return, carried away with them the memory of his kindly treatment,

and secured for him in Hellas alliances of which he might one day

stand in need. The conduct of Amasis was politic, but it aroused the

ill-feeling of his subjects against him. Like the Jews under Hezekiah,

the Babylonians under Nabonidus, and all other decadent races threatened

by ruin, they attributed their decline, not to their own vices, but to

the machinations of an angry god, and they looked on favours granted to

strangers as a sacrilege. Had not the Greeks brought their divinities

with them? Did they not pervert the simple country-folk, so that they

associated the Greek religion with that of their own country? Money

was scarce; Amasis had been obliged to debit the rations and pay of

his mercenaries to the accounts of the most venerated Egyptian

temples--those of Sais, Heliopolis, Bubastis, and Memphis; and each

of these institutions had to rebate so much per cent. on their annual

revenues in favour of the barbarians, and hand over to them considerable

quantities of corn, cattle, poultry, stuffs, woods, perfumes, and

objects of all kinds. The priests were loud in their indignation, the

echo of which still rang in the ears of the faithful some centuries

later, and the lower classes making common cause with their priests, a

spirit of hatred was roused among the populace as bitter as that which

had previously caused the downfall of Apries. As the fear of the army

prevented this feeling from manifesting itself in a revolt, it found

expression in the secret calumnies which were circulated against the

king, and misrepresented the motives of all his actions. Scores of

malicious stories were repeated vilifying his character. It was stated

that before his accession he was much addicted to eating and drinking,

but that, suffering from want of money, he had not hesitated in

procuring what he wished for by all sorts of means, the most honest of

which had been secret theft. When made king, he had several times given

way to intoxication to such an extent as to be incapable of attending to

public business; his ministers were then obliged to relate moral tales

to him to bring him to a state of reason. Many persons having taunted

him with his low extraction, he had caused a statue of a divinity to be

made out of a gold basin in which he was accustomed to wash his feet,

and he had exposed it to the adoration of the faithful. When it had been

worshipped by them for some time, he revealed the origin of the idol,

and added “that it had been with himself as with the foot-pan.... If he

were a private person formerly, yet now he had come to be their king,

and so he bade them honour and reverence him.” Towards the middle and

end of his reign he was as much detested as he had been beloved at the

outset.

He had, notwithstanding, so effectively armed Egypt that the Persians

had not ventured to risk a collision with her immediately after their

conquest of Babylon. Cyrus had spent ten years in compassing the

downfall of Nabonidus, and, calculating that that of Amasis would

require no less a period of time, he set methodically to work on the

organisation of his recently acquired territory; the cities of Phoenicia

acknowledged him as their suzerain, and furnished him with what had

hitherto been a coveted acquisition, a fleet. These preliminaries

had apparently been already accomplished, when the movements of the

barbarians suddenly made his presence in the far East imperative. He

hurried thither, and was mysteriously lost to sight (529). Tradition

accounts for his death in several ways. If Xenophon is to be credited,

he died peaceably on his bed, surrounded by his children, and edifying

those present by his wisdom and his almost superhuman resignation.*

* A similar legend, but later in date, told how Cyrus, when

a hundred years old, asked one day to see his friends. He

was told that his son had had them all put to death: his

grief at the cruelty of Cambyses caused his death in a few

days.

Berosus tells us that he was killed in a campaign against the Daliæ;

Ctesias states that, living been wounded in a skirmish with the

Æerbikes, one of the savage tribes of Bactriana, he succumbed to his

injuries three days after the engagement. According to the worthy

Herodotus, he asked the hand of Tomyris, Queen of the Massagetse, in

marriage, and was refused with disdain. He declared war against her to

avenge his wounded vanity, set out to fight with her beyond the Araxes,

in the steppes of Turkestan, defeated the advance-guard of cavalry,

and took prisoner the heir to the crown, Spargapises, who thereupon ran

himself through with his sword. “Then Tomyris collected all the forces

of her kingdom, and gave him (Cyrus) battle.” Of all the combats in which

barbarians have engaged among themselves, I reckon this to have been the

fiercest. The following, as I understand, was the manner of it:--First,

the two armies stood apart and shot their arrows at each other; then,

when their quivers were empty, they closed and fought hand to hand with

lances and daggers; and thus they continued fighting for a length

of time, neither choosing to give ground. At length the Massagetse

prevailed. The greater part of the army of the Persians was destroyed.

Search was made among the slain by order of the queen for the body of

Cyrus; and when it was found, she took a skin, and, filling it full of

human blood, she dipped the head of Cyrus in the gore, saying, as she

thus insulted the corse, “I live and have conquered thee in fight, and

yet by thee am I ruined, for thou tookest my son with guile; but thus I

make good my threat, and give thee thy fill of blood.” The engagement

was not as serious as the legend would have us believe, and the growth

of the Persian power was in no way affected, by it. It cost Cyrus his

life, but his army experienced no serious disaster, and his men took

the king’s body and brought it to Pasargadæ. He had a palace there, the

remains of which can still be seen on the plain of Murgâb. The edifice

was unpretentious, built upon a rectangular plan, with two porches of

four columns on the longer sides, a lateral chamber at each of the four

angles, and a hypostyle hall in the centre, divided lengthways by two

rows of columns which supported the roof. The walls were decorated with

bas-reliefs, and wherever the inscriptions have not been destroyed,

we can read in cuneiform characters in the three languages which

thenceforward formed the official means of communication of the

empire--Persian, Medic, and Chaldæan--the name, title, and family of

the royal occupant. Cyrus himself is represented in a standing posture

on the pilasters, wearing a costume in which Egyptian and Assyrian

features are curiously combined. He is clothed from neck to ankle in the

close-fitting fringed tunic of the Babylonian and Mnevite sovereigns;

his feet are covered with laced boots, while four great wings, emblems

of the supreme power, overshadow his shoulders and loins, two of them

raised in the air, the others pointing to the earth; he wears on

his head the Egyptian skull-cap, from which rises one of the most

complicated head-dresses of the royal wardrobe of the Pharaohs. The

monarch raises his right hand with the gesture of a man speaking to an

assembled people, and as if repeating the legend traced above his image:

“I am Cyrus, the king, the Achæmenian.” He was buried not far off, in

the monumental tomb which he had probably built for himself in a square

enclosure, having a portico on three of its sides; a small chamber,

with a ridge roof, rises from a base composed of six receding steps, so

arranged as to appear of unequal height.

[Illustration: 128.jpg CYRUS THE ACHAEMENIAN]

Drawn by Boudier, from the photograph by Dieulafoy.

The doorway is narrow, and so low that a man of medium statue finds some

difficulty in entering. It is surmounted by a hollow moulding, quite

Egyptian in style, and was closed by a two-leaved stone door. The

golden coffin rested on a couch of the same metal, covered with precious

stuffs; and a circular table, laden with drinking-vessels and ornaments

enriched with precious stones, completed the furniture of the chamber.

The body of the conqueror remained undisturbed on this spot for two

centuries under the care of the priests; but while Alexander was waging

war on the Indian frontier, the Greek officers, to whom he had entrusted

the government of Persia proper, allowed themselves to be tempted by the

enormous wealth which the funerary chapel was supposed to contain.

[Illustration: 129.jpg THE TOMB OP CYRUS]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the heliogravure of Dieulafoy.

They opened the coffin, broke the couch and the table, and finding them

too heavy to carry away easily, they contented themselves with stealing

the drinking-vessels and jewels. Alexander on his return visited the

place, and caused the entrance to be closed with a slight wall of

masonry; he intended to restore the monument to its former splendour,

but he himself perished shortly after, and what remained of the

contents probably soon disappeared. After the death of Cyrus, popular

imagination, drawing on the inexhaustible materials furnished by his

adventurous career, seemed to delight in making him the ideal of all

a monarch should be; they attributed to him every virtue--gentleness,

bravery, moderation, justice, and wisdom. There is no reason to doubt

that he possessed the qualities of a good general--activity, energy, and

courage, together with the astuteness and the duplicity so necessary to

success in Asiatic conquest--but he does not appear to have possessed in

the same degree the gifts of a great administrator. He made no changes

in the system of government which from the time of Tiglath-pileser III.

onwards had obtained among all Oriental sovereigns; he placed satraps

over the towns and countries of recent acquisition, at Sardes and

Babylon, in Syria and Palestine, but without clearly defining their

functions or subjecting them to a supervision sufficiently strict to

ensure the faithful performance of their duties. He believed that he was

destined to found a single empire in which all the ancient empires were

to be merged, and he all but carried his task to a successful close:

Egypt alone remained to be conquered when he passed away.

His wife Kassandanê, a daughter of Pharnaspes, and an Achæmenian like

himself, had borne him five children; two sons, Cambyses* and Smerdis,**

and three daughters, Atossa, Roxana, and Artystonê.***

* The Persian form of the name rendered Kambyses by the

Greeks was Kâbuzîyâ or Kambuzîya. Herodotus calls him the

son of Kassandanê, and the tradition which he has preserved

is certainly authentic. Ctesias has erroneously stated that

his mother was Amytis, the daughter of Astyages, and Dinon,

also erroneously, the Egyptian women Nitêtis; Diodorus

Siculus and Strabo make him the son of Meroê.

** The original form was Bardiya or Barzîya, “the laudable,”

and the first Greek transcript known, in Æschylus, is

Mardos, or, in the scholiasts on the passage, Merdias, which

has been corrupted into Marphios by Hellanikos and into

Merges by Pompeius Trogus. The form Smerdis in Herodotus,

and in the historians who follow him, is the result of a

mistaken assimilation of the Persian name with the purely

Greek one of Smerdis or Smerdies.

*** Herodotus says that Atossa was the daughter of

Kassandanê, and the position which she held during three

reigns shows that she must have been so; Justi, however,

calls her the daughter of Amytis. A second daughter is

mentioned by Herodotus, the one whom Cambyses killed in

Egypt by a kick; he gives her no name, but she is probably

the same as the Roxana who according to Ctesias bore a

headless child. The youngest, Artystonê, was the favourite

wife of Darius. Josephus speaks of a fourth daughter of

Cyrus called Meroê, but without saying who was the mother of

this princess.