Impoverished and decayed as Thebes had now long since become, the

nations whom she had afflicted so sorely in the days of her glory had

retained for her feelings of respect and almost of awe: the rumour

of her fall, spread through the Eastern world, filled them with

astonishment and pity. The Hebrews saw in it the chastisement inflicted

by their God on the tyrant who had oppressed their ancestors, and their

prophets used it to impress upon the minds of their contemporaries the

vanity of human prosperity. Half a century later, when Nineveh, menaced

in her turn, was desperately arming herself to repel the barbarians,

Nahum the Elkoshite demanded of her, amid his fierce denunciations,

whether she vaunted herself to be better than “No-amon (city of Amon),

that was situate among the rivers, that had the waters round about her;

whose rampart was the sea, and her wall was of the sea? Ethiopia and

Egypt were her strength, and it was infinite. Put and Lubim (Libya and

the Nubians) came to her succour. Yet was she carried away, she went

into captivity: her young children also were dashed in pieces at the top

of all the streets: and they cast lots for her honourable men, and all

her great men were bound in chains.” Assur-bani-pal, lord of Egypt and

conqueror of Ethiopia, might reasonably consider himself invincible;

it would have been well for the princes who trembled at the name of

Assur-bani-pal, if they had taken this lesson to heart, and had learned

from the downfall of Tanuata-manu what fate awaited them in the event

of their daring to arouse the wrath of Assyria by any kind of intrigue.

Unfortunately, many of them either failed to see the warning or refused

to profit by it. The Mannai had quickly recovered from the defeat

inflicted on them by Esarhaddon, and their king, Akhsheri, in spite of

his advancing years, believed that his own energy and resources were

sufficient to warrant him in anticipating a speedy revenge. Perhaps

a further insight into the real character of Assur-bani-pal may have

induced him to venture on hostilities. For the king’s contemporaries had

begun to realise that, beneath his apparent bravery and ostentation,

he was by nature indolent, impatient of restraint, and fond of ease and

luxury. When not absorbed in the routine of the court and the pleasures

of the harem, he spent his leisure in hunting on the Mesopotamian

plains, or in the extensive parks which had been laid out by himself or

his predecessors in the vicinity of their summer palaces. Urus-stalking

had become merely a memory of the past: these animals had been so

persistently hunted for centuries that the species had almost become

extinct; solitary specimens only were occasionally met with in remote

parts of the forest or in out-of-the-way marshes. The wild ass was still

to be found in large numbers, as well as the goat, the ostrich, and

small game, but the lion was now rarely met with, and the beaters were

no longer sure of finding him in his ancient haunts. Specimens had to be

sought by the royal gamekeepers in the provinces, and when successfully

trapped were forthwith despatched to one or other of the king’s country

seats. The beast was often kept for several days in a cage while

preparations were made for a fête, at which he was destined to form one

of the chief attractions, and when the time came he was taken to the

appointed place and let loose; the sovereign pursued him either in a

chariot or on horseback, and did not desist from the chase till he had

pierced his quarry with arrows or lance.

[Illustration: 198.jpg A LION ISSUING FROM ITS CAGE]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph taken from the

original in the British Museum.

Frequently the beast would be turned loose in the park, and left there

till accustomed to his surroundings, so that later on he might be

run down under conditions somewhat resembling his native freedom.

Assur-bani-pal did not shun a personal encounter with an infuriated

lion; he displayed in this hazardous sport a bravery and skill which

rivalled that of his ancestors, and he never relegated to another

the task of leading the attack or dealing the final death-blow. This,

however, was not the case when it was a question of starting on some

warlike expedition; he would then leave to his Tartans, or to the

Eabshakeh, or to some other chosen officer, the entire conduct of all

operations.*

* We have seen, for example, that after the death of

Esarhaddon, the Egyptian campaign was conducted by one of

the Tartans and the Eabshakeh.

This did not preclude the king from taking an interest in what was

passing beyond the frontier, nor did he fail in his performance of the

various religious duties which custom imposed on an Assyrian sovereign:

he consulted the oracles of Shamash or Ishtar, he offered sacrifices, he

fasted and humbled himself in the temples to obtain the success of his

troops, and when they returned laden with spoil from the campaign, he

attributed their victories no less to his prayers than to their courage

or to the skill of their leaders. His generals, thoroughly equipped for

their task, and well supported by their troops, had no need of the royal

presence to ensure their triumph over any foe they might encounter;

indeed, in the absence of the king they experienced a liberty of action

and boldness in pressing their victories to the uttermost which they

would not have enjoyed had he been in command. Foreigners, accustomed to

see the sovereigns of Nineveh conduct their armies in person, as long

as they were not incapacitated by age, thought that the indolence of

Assur-bani-pal was the unconscious expression of weariness or of his

feeble control of the empire, and Akhsheri determined to be one of the

first to take advantage of it. Events proved that he was mistaken in his

calculations. No sooner had his intentions become known, than a division

of Assyrian troops appeared on his frontier, and prepared to attack him.

Resolving to take the initiative, he fell one night unexpectedly upon

the Assyrian camp, but fortune declared against him: he was driven back,

and his broken ranks were closely pursued for a distance of twenty-three

miles. Eight of his strongholds fell one after the other, and he was at

length forced to abandon his capital of Izirtu, and flee precipitately

to his fortress of Adrana in the heart of the mountains. Even there

he did not find the security he desired, for the conqueror pursued him

thither, methodically devastating by the way the districts through

which he passed: he carried off everything--men, slaves, and herds of

cattle--and he never retired from a city or village without previously

setting it on fire. Paddir, Arsiyanîsh, and Eristiana were thus

laid waste, after which the Assyrians returned to their camp, having

re-established the authority of their master over several districts

which had been lost to them for some generations previously. Akhsheri

had shown no sign of yielding, but his people, weary of a hopeless

resistance, put him to death, and hurling his corpse over the wall of

Adrana, proclaimed his son Ualli as king. The new sovereign hastened to

conclude a treaty with the Assyrians on reasonable terms: he gave up his

eldest son, Erisinni, and one of his daughters as hostages, and promised

to pay the former tribute augmented by an annual present of thirty

horses; peace was not again disturbed on this side except by some

unimportant skirmishes. In one of these, a Median chieftain, named

Biriz-khadri, made an alliance with two princes of the people of the

Sakhi, Sarâti, and Parikhia, sons of Gâgu,* to ravage the marches of

the Greater Zab; but their territory was raided in return, and they

themselves taken prisoners.

* The name of Biriz-khadri has an Iranian appearance. The

first element _Biriz_ recalls the Zend _bereza, berez_,

“tall, large;” the second, which appears in the names Bisi-

khadir and Khali-khadri, is of uncertain derivation, and has

been connected with _atar_, “fire,” or with _Ichwathra_,

“brilliance.” Gâgu, which is found as the name of a people

(Gagâti) in the Tel-el-Amarna tablets, has been identified

from the first with the name of Gog, prince of Rosh,

Meshech, and Tubal (Ezek. xxxviii. 2, 3; xxxix.) The name

of the country of Sakhi, which has not been met with

elsewhere, has been compared with that of the Sacaj, which

seems to have existed not only in the name of the province

of Sakascnô mentioned by the classical geographers, but in

that of Shake known to the old Armenian geographers; the

country itself, however, as it seems to me, cannot be sought

in the direction of Sakasenô, and consequently the proposed

identification cannot hold good.

A little later, Andaria, prince of Lubdi, forgetful of his oath of

allegiance to the aged Esarhad-don, made a night attack on the towns of

Kullimir and Ubbumî: the inhabitants armed in haste, and he was not

only defeated, but was taken captive, and his head cut off to be sent

to Nineveh. The garrisons and military colonies along the north-east

frontier were constantly required to be on the alert; but they usually

had sufficient available resources to meet any emergency, and the

enemies who molested them were rarely dangerous enough to necessitate

the mobilisation of a regular army.

This was not the case, however, in the south-west, where Tiummân,

counting on the military strength of Elam, made continual hostile

demonstrations. He was scarcely settled on his throne before he hastened

to form alliances with those Aramæan states which had so often invoked

the aid of his predecessors against the ancestors of Assur-bani-pal. The

Kaldâ rejected his proposals, as did most of the tribes of the littoral;

but the Gambulâ yielded to his solicitations, and their king, Dunânu,

son of Bel-ikîsha, entered into an offensive and defensive alliance

with Elam. Their defection left the eastern frontier of Karduniash

unprotected, and, by opening to the Elamite the fords of the Tigris,

permitted him to advance on Babylon unhindered by any serious obstacle.

As soon as the compact was sealed, Tiummân massed his battalions on the

middle course of the Uknu, and, before crossing the frontier, sent two

of his generals, the Susian Khumba-darà and the Chaldean Nabu-damîq, as

the bearers of an insolent ultimatum to the court of Nineveh: he offered

the king the choice between immediate hostilities, or the extradition of

the sons of Urtaku and Khumbân-khaldash, as well as of their partisans

who had taken refuge in Assyria. To surrender the exiles would have been

an open confession of inferiority, and such a humiliating acknowledgment

of weakness promptly reported throughout the Eastern world might

shortly have excited a general revolt: hence Assur-bani-pal disdainfully

rejected the proposal of the Elamite sovereign, which had been made

rather as a matter of form than with any hope of its acceptance, but the

issue of a serious war with Susa was so uncertain that his refusal was

accompanied with serious misgivings. It needed many favourable omens

from the gods to encourage him to believe in his future success. The

moon-god Sin was the first to utter his prediction: he suffered eclipse

in the month of Tammuz, and for three successive days, at nightfall,

showed himself in the sky surrounded by strange appearances which

heralded the death of a king in Elam, and foretold calamity to that

country. Then Assur and Ishtar struck Tiummân with violent convulsions;

they caused his lips and eyes to be horribly distorted, but he despised

their warning, and as soon as his seizure had passed, set out to assume

command of his army. The news of his action reached Nineveh in the month

of Ab, on the morning of the solemn festival of Ishtar. Assur-bani-pal

was at Arbela, celebrating the rites in honour of the goddess, when the

messenger appeared before him and repeated, together with the terms of

the declaration of war, the scornful words which Tiummân had uttered

against him and his patroness: “This prince whose wits have been crazed

by Ishtar--I will let him escape no more, when once I have gone forth

and measured my strength against him!” This blasphemy filled the

Assyrian king with horror. That very evening he betook himself to the

sanctuary, and there, prostrate before the image of the goddess,

he poured forth prayers mingled with tears: “Lady of Arbela, I am

Assur-bani-pal, King of Assyria, the creature of thy hands, the

offspring of a father whom thou didst create! Behold now, this Tiummân,

the King of Elam, who despises the gods of Assyria, hath sent forth his

host and prepared himself for the conflict; he hath called for his arms

to rush to attack Assyria. Do thou, O archer of the gods, like a bolt

falling in the midst of the battle, overthrow him, and let loose upon

him a tempest, and an evil wind!” Ishtar heard his prayer, and her voice

sounded through the gloom: “Fear not,” said she, comforting him: “since

thou hast raised thy hands to me in supplication, and thine eyes are

bedewed with tears grant thee a boon!” Towards the end of that night,

a seer slept in the temple and was visited by a dream. Ishtar of Arbela

appeared to him, with a quiver on either side, a bow in one hand and a

drawn sword in the other. She advanced towards the king, and spoke to

him as if she had been his mother: “Make war boldly! whichever way thou

turnest thy countenance, there will I go!” And the king replied to

her, “Where thou goest, will I go with thee, sovereign lady!” But she

answered, “Stay thou here. Dwell in this home of Nebo, eat thy food and

drink thy wine, listen to joyful songs and honour my divinity, until I

have gone and accomplished this work. Let not thy countenance grow pale,

nor thy feet fail under thee, and expose not thyself to the danger of

battle.” “And then, O king,” added the seer, “she hid thee in her bosom

as a mother, and protected thy image. A flame shall spring forth before

her, and shall spread abroad to destroy thine enemies: against Tiummân,

King of Elam, who has angered her, has she set her face!” Like Mînephtah

of old, in the days of the Libyan invasions of Egypt, Assur-bani-pal

allowed himself to be readily convinced by the decision of the gods;

he did not quit Arbela, but gave orders to his troops to proceed to the

front. His generals opened the campaign in the month of Em, and directed

the main body of their forces against the fortress of Durîlu, at the

point on the frontier nearest to Susa. Tiummân was not expecting such

a prompt and direct attack: he had reckoned doubtless on uniting his

forces with those of Dunânu with a view to invading Karduniash, and

suddenly realised that his adversary had forestalled him and was

advancing on the heart of his empire. He slowly withdrew his advanced

guard, and concentrated his forces round the town of Tullîz, a few

leagues on this side of Susa, and there awaited the enemy’s attack.*

* The site of Tullîz is unknown. Billerbock considers, and

with reason, I think, that the battle took place to the

south of Susa, on the river Shavur, which would correspond

to the Ulaî, on the lowest spurs of the ridge of hills

bordering the alluvial plain of Susiana.

His position was a strong one, flanked on the right by a wood and on the

left by the Ulaî, while the flower of the Elamite nobility was ranged

around him. The equipment of his soldiers was simpler than that of the

enemy: consisting of a low helmet, devoid of any crest, but furnished

with a large pendant tress of horsehair to shade the neck; a shield of

moderate dimensions; a small bow, which, however, was quite as deadly a

weapon as that of the Assyrians, when wielded by skilful hands; a lance,

a mace, and a dagger. He had only a small body of cavalry, but the

chariotry formed an important force, and presented several original

features. The chariot did not follow the classic model, rounded in front

and open at the back; it was a kind of light car, consisting of a square

footboard placed flat on the axle of the wheels, and furnished with

triangular side-pieces on two sides only, the vehicle being drawn by a

pair of horses. Such chariots were easier to manage, better adapted for

rapid motion, and must have been more convenient for a reconnaissance

or for skirmishes with infantry; but when thrown in a mass against

the heavy chariotry of the peoples of the Euphrates, they were far too

slightly built to overthrow the latter, and at close quarters were of

necessity crushed by the superior weight of the adversary.

[Illustration: 206.jpg ITUNI BREAKS HIS BOW WITH A BLOW OF HIS SWORD,

AND GIVES HIMSELF UP TO THE EXECUTIONER]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph taken from the original

in the British Museum.

[Illustration: 206b.jpg THE BATTLE OF TULLIZ]

Tiummân had not succeeded in collecting all his forces before the first

columns of the Assyrian army advanced to engage his front line, but

as he was expecting reinforcements, he endeavoured to gain time by

despatching Ituni, one of his generals, with orders to negotiate a

truce.

The Assyrian commander, suspecting a ruse, would not listen to any

proposals, but ordered the envoy to be decapitated on the spot: Ituni

broke his bow with a blow of his sword, and stoically yielded his

neck to the executioner. The issue of the battle was for a long time

undecided, but the victory finally remained with the heavy regiments of

Assyria. The left wing of the Susians, driven into the Ulaî, perished by

drowning, and the river was choked with the corpses of men and horses,

and the débris of arms and broken chariots. The right wing took to

flight under cover of a wood, and the survivors tried to reach the

mountains.

[Illustration: 209.jpg URTAKU COUSIN OF TIUMMÂN, SURRENDERING TO AN

ASSYRIAN]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph of the original in the

British Museum.

Urtaku, the cousin of Tiummân, was wounded by an arrow; perceiving

an Assyrian soldier coming up to him, he told him who he was, and

recommended him to carry his head to the general: “He will pay you

handsomely for it,” he added. Tiummân had led in person several charges

of his body-guard; and on being wounded, his son Tammaritu had succeeded

in rescuing him from the thick of the fight: both seated together in a

chariot, were in full flight, when one of the wheels caught against a

tree and was shattered, the shock flinging the occupants to the ground.

A large body of Assyrians were in close pursuit, led by one of the

exiled Susian princes, a second Tam-maritu, son of Urtaku.

[Illustration: 210.jpg THE LAST ARROW OF TIUMMÂN AND HIS SON]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph taken in the British

Museum.

At the first discharge an arrow wounded Tiummân in the right side, and

brought him to his knee. He felt that all was over, and desiring at

all events to be revenged, he pointed out the deserter prince to his

companion, crying indignantly, “Let fly at him.” The arrow missed its

mark, and a flight of hostile darts stretched the young man on the

ground: the traitor Tammaritu dealt the son his death-blow with his

mace, while an Assyrian decapitated the father. The corpses were left on

the field, but the head of the king, after being taken to the general

in command, was carried through the camp on one of the chariots captured

during the action, and was eventually sent to the palace of Arbela by

the hand of a well-mounted courier.

[Illustration: 211.jpg DEATH OF TIUMMÂN AND HIS SON]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph taken in the British

Museum.

The day concluded with the making of an inventory of the spoil, and by

an enumeration of the heads of the slain: prisoners from the rank

and file were beaten to death according to custom, and several of the

principal officers had their tongues torn out or were flayed alive.

The news of the disaster was brought to Susa towards evening by the

fugitives, and produced a revolution in the city. The partisans of the

exiled princes, seizing the adherents of Tiummân, put them in chains,

and delivered them up to the conqueror. The shattered remnants of the

army rallied round them, and a throng of men and women in festal garb

issued forth along the banks of the Ulai to meet the Assyrians. The

priests and sacred singers marched to the sound of music, marking the

rhythm with their feet, and filling the air with the noise of their

harps and double flutes, while behind them came a choir of children,

chanting a hymn under the direction of the consecrated eunuchs.

The Tartan met them, and, acting in accordance with the orders of

Assur-bani-pal, presented to the multitude Khumbân-igash, the eldest son

of Urtaku, as their king. The people joyfully hailed the new sovereign,

and the Assyrians, after exacting tribute from him and conferring the

fief of Khaîdalu on his brother Tammaritu, withdrew, leaving to the new

princes the task of establishing their authority outside the walls of

Susa and Madaktu. As they returned, they attacked the Gambulâ, speedily

reducing them to submission. Dunânu, besieged in his stronghold of

Shapîbel, surrendered at discretion, and was carried away captive with

all his family.

[Illustration: 212.jpg Khumbân-igash Proclaimed King]

Thus Assur-bani-pal had scrupulously obeyed the orders of Ishtar. While

his generals were winning his victories he had been eating and drinking,

hunting, dallying with his wives, and living in the open air. He was

taking his pleasure with the queen in the palace garden when the head of

Tiummân was brought to him: he caused it to be suspended from the

branch of a pine tree in full view of the whole court, and continued his

banquet to the sound of harps and singing. Rusas III., King of Urartu,

died about this time, and his successor, Sharduris III., thought it

incumbent on him to announce his accession at Nineveh. Assur-bani-pal

received the embassy at Arbela, with the graciousness befitting a

suzerain whom a faithful vassal honours by his dutiful homage, and in

order to impress the Urartians still further with an idea of his power,

he showed them the two Elamite delegates, Khumba-darâ and Nabu-damîq, in

chains at his feet.*

* Belck and Lehmann have very ingeniously connected the

embassy, mentioned in the Assyrian documents, with the fact

of the accession of the king who sent it.

[Illustration: 215.jpg THE HEAD OF THUMMAN SENT TO NINEVEH]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph taken in the British

Museum. The chariot speeding along at a gallop in the

topmost series of pictures carries a soldier bearing the

head of Tiumraân in his hand; behind him, under a tent,

scribes are registering the heads which are brought in. In

the two lower bas-reliefs are displayed the closing scenes

of the battle.

These wretched men had a more cruel ordeal yet in store for them: when

the Assyrian army re-entered Nineveh, Assur-bani-pal placed them on the

route along which the cortège had to pass, and made them realise to the

full the humiliation of their country. Dunânu walked at the head of the

band of captive chiefs, with the head of Tiummân, taken from its tree,

suspended round his neck. When the delegates perceived it, they gave way

to despair:

Khumba-darâ tore out his beard by handfuls, and Nabu-damîq, unsheathing

the dagger which hung from his belt, plunged it into his own breast.

[Illustration: 216.jpg ASSUR-BANI-PAL BANQUETING WITH HIS QUEEN]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph of the original in the

British Museum The head of Tiummân hangs on the second tree

on the left-hand side.

The triumphal entry was followed by the usual tortures. The head of

Tiummân was fixed over the gate of Nineveh, to rot before the eyes of

the multitude. Dunânu was slowly flayed alive, and then bled like a

lamb; his brother Shamgunu had his throat cut, and his body was divided

into pieces, which were distributed over the country as a warning. Even

the dead were not spared: the bones of Nabu-shumirîsh were disinterred

and transported to Assyria, where his sons were forced to bray them in a

mortar.* We may estimate the extent of the alarm which had been felt at

Nineveh by the outburst of brutal joy with which the victory was hailed.

* The fullest text of all those which narrate the campaign

against Tiummân and Dunânu is that on _Cylinder B of the

British Museum_. It pretends, as usual, that the king led

the army in person, but the words which the seer places in

the mouth of Ishtar prove that the king remained at Arbela

by divine command, and the inscription on one of the bas-

reliefs, as well as _Tablet K 2674_, mentions, without

giving his name, the general who was sent against Susa.

[Illustration: 217.jpg TWO ELAMITE CHIEFS FLAYED ALIVE AFTER THE BATTLE

OF TULLÎZ]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph taken in the British

Museum.

The experience of the past showed what a terrible enemy Assyria had

in Elam, and how slight was the chance of a successful issue in a war

against her. Her kings had often invaded Chaldæa, and had more than once

brought it directly under their sway; they had ravaged its cities and

pillaged its temples, and the sanctuary of Susa were filled with statues

of the gods or with bas-reliefs which they had dedicated after their

campaigns on the Euphrates. Although they had not been successful

against Assyria to the same extent, they had at least always

victoriously repelled her attacks: they had held their own against

Sargon, given much trouble to Sennacherib, and defied the power of

Esarhaddon with impunity. Never till now had an Assyrian army gained

such an important victory over Elam, and though it was by no means

decisive, we can easily believe that Assur-bani-pal was filled with

pride and delight, since it was the first time that a king of Nineveh

had imposed on Elam a sovereign of his own choice.

Since homage was voluntarily rendered him by the rulers of foreign

nations, Assur-bani-pal doubtless believed that he might exact it

without hesitation from the vassal princes dependent on the empire; and

not from the weaker only like those who were still to be found in Syria,

but also from the more powerful, not excepting the lord of Karduniash.

Shamash-shumukîn had fully risen to his position as King of Babylon, and

the unbroken peace which he had enjoyed since the death of Urtaku had

enabled him almost to complete the restoration of the kingdom begun

under Esarhaddon. He had finished the rebuilding of the walls of

Babylon, and had fortified the approaches to the city, thus rendering

it capable of withstanding a long siege; he had repaired the temple of

Sippara, which had never recovered from the Elamite invasion; and while

unstintingly lavishing his treasures in honour of the gods and for the

safety of his capital, he watched with jealous care over the interests

of his subjects. He obtained for them the privilege of being treated

on the same footing as the Assyrians throughout his father’s ancestral

domains; they consequently enjoyed the right of trading without

restriction throughout the empire, and met with the same degree of

protection from the officials of Nineveh as from the magistrates of

their own country. Assur-bani-pal had at the outset furthered the wishes

of his brother to the utmost of his power: he had granted the privileges

demanded, and whenever a Chaldæan of noble birth arrived at his court,

he received him with special marks of favour. The two states enjoyed

a nearly absolute equality during the opening years of his reign, and

though the will of Esarhaddon had made Babylon dependent on Assyria, the

yoke of vassalage was far from heavy. The suzerain reserved to himself

the honour of dedicating the mighty works begun by his father, the

restoration of the temple of Bel-Marduk and of the double wall of

fortification; he claimed, in his inscriptions, the whole merit of the

work, but he none the less respected his brother’s rights, and in no

way interfered in the affairs of the city except in state ceremonies

in which the assertion of his superior rank was indispensable. But with

success his moderation gradually gave place to arrogance. In proportion

as his military renown increased, he accentuated his supremacy, and

accustomed himself to treat Babylon more and more as a vassal state.

After the conquest of Elam his infatuated pride knew no bounds, and the

little consideration he still retained for Shamash-shumukîn vanished

completely. He thenceforward refused to regard him as being more than

a prefect bearing a somewhat higher title than his fellows, a viceroy

owing his crown, not to the will of their common father, but to the

friendship of his brother, and liable to be deprived of it at any moment

through the caprice of the sovereign. He affected to consider all that

took place at Babylon as his own doing, and his brother as being merely

his docile instrument, not deserving mention any more than the ordinary

agents who carried out his designs; and if, indeed, he condescended to

mention him, it was with an assumption of disdainful superiority. It is

a question whether Shamash-Shumukîn at this juncture believed that his

brother was meditating a design to snatch the reins of government from

his hand, or whether he merely yielded to the impulse of wounded vanity

in resolving to shake off a yoke which had become intolerable. Knowing

that his power was not equal to that of Assur-bani-pal, he sought to

enter into relations with foreign allies who shared the same fears, or

nursed a similar feeling of bitterness. The nobles and priests of the

ancient Sumerian and Accadian cities were already on his side, but the

Aramaeans had shown themselves hostile at his accession, and had brought

down on him the forces of Elam. He found means, however, to conciliate

them, together with the tribes which dwelt on the Tigris and the Uknu,

as well as those of the lower Euphrates and the Arabian desert. He won

over to his projects Nabu-bêlzikri, the chief of the Kaldâ--grandson of

that Merodach-baladan who had cherished invincible hatred against Sargon

and Sennacherib--besides the lords of the Bit-Dakkuri and Bît-Amukkâni,

and the sheikh of the Pukudu. Khumbân-igash ought to have remained

loyal to the friend to whom he owed his kingdom, but he chafed at the

patronage of Assyria, and Assur-bani-pal had just formulated a demand to

which he, not unreasonably, hesitated to accede. The archaic statue of

Nana, stolen from Uruk by Kutur-nakhunta sixteen centuries before,

and placed by that prince in one of the temples of Susa, had become so

naturalised in its new abode that the kings of Elam, not content with

rendering it an official cult, were wont to send presents to Babylonia,

to the image which had replaced it in its original sanctuary.

Assur-bani-pal now required Khumbân-igash to give back the original

statue, but the Elamite could not obey this mandate without imperilling

both his throne and his person: he would thereby have risked incurring

the displeasure both of the nobles, whose pride would have suffered at

the loss of so precious a trophy, and of the common people, who would

have thus been deprived of one of their most venerable objects of

devotion. The messengers of Shamash-shumukîn, arriving at the moment

when this question was agitating the court of Susa, found the way

already prepared for a mutual understanding. Besides, they held in their

hands an irresistible argument, the treasures of Bel-Marduk of Babylon,

of Nebo of Borsippa, and of Nergal of Kuta, which had been confided to

them by the priests with a view to purchasing, if necessary, the support

of Elam. Khumbân-igash thereupon promised to send a detachment of troops

to Karduniash, and to invade the provinces of Assyria the moment war

should be declared. The tribes of Guti were easily won over, and were

followed by the kings of Phoenicia and the Bedâwin of Melukhkha, and

perhaps Egypt itself was implicated in the plot. The Prince of Kedar,

Amuladdin, undertook to effect a diversion on the frontiers of Syria,

and Uatê, son of Layali, one of the Arab kings who had paid homage to

Esarhaddon, was not behindhand in furnishing his contingent of horsemen

and wild native infantry. The coalition already extended from the

shores of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea to the Persian Gulf before

Assur-bani-pal became aware of its existence. An unforeseen occurrence

suddenly broke in upon his peace and revealed the extent of the peril

which threatened him.*

* The chronology of this war has been determined by G. Smith

from the dates attached to the documents in the British

Museum, which give the names of three _limmi_, Assur-

durnzur, Zagabbu, and Bel-kharrân-shadua: these he assigned

respectively to the years 650, 649, and 648 B.C. Tiele has

shown that these three _limmi_ must be assigned to the years

652-650 B.C. Though these dates seem in the highest degree

probable, we must wait before we can consider them as

absolutely certain till chance restores to us the missing

parts of the Canon.

Kudur, the Assyrian prefect of Uruk, learnt from Sin-tabnî-uzur,

the governor of Uru, that certain emissaries of Shamash-shumukîn had

surreptitiously entered that city and were secretly fomenting rebellion

among the people. Sin-tabnî-uzur himself had been solicited to join the

movement, but had absolutely refused to do so, and considering himself

powerless to repress the disaffection with the few soldiers at his

disposal, he had demanded reinforcements. Kudur first furnished him

with five hundred men of his own troops, and subsequently sent some

battalions which were under the command of the governors of Arrapkha

and Amidi, but which were, for some unknown reason, encamped in the

neighbourhood. It would appear that Shamash-shumukîn, finding his

projects interfered with by this premature exposure, tried to counteract

its effects by protestations of friendship: a special embassy was

despatched to his brother to renew the assurances of his devotion, and

he thus gained the time necessary to complete his armaments. As soon as

he felt himself fully prepared, he gave up further dissimulation, and,

throwing away the mask, proclaimed himself independent of Assyria, while

at the same moment Khumbân-igash despatched his army to the frontier and

declared war on his former protector. Assur-bani-pal was touched to the

quick by what he truly considered the ingratitude of the Babylonians.

“As for the children of Babylon, I had set them upon seats of honour,

I had clothed them in robes of many colours, I had placed rings of gold

upon their fingers; the children of Babylon had been established in

Assyria, and were admitted into my presence. But Shamash-shumukîn, the

false brother, he has not observed my ordinances, but has raised against

me the peoples of Akkad, the Kaldâ, the Aramaeans, the peoples of the

country of the sea, from Akabah to Bab-salimêti!” Nineveh was at first

in a state of trepidation at this unexpected blow; the sacred oracles

gave obscure replies, and presaged evil four times out of five. At last,

one day, a seer slept and dreamed a dream, in which he saw this

sentence written on the ground in the temple of Sin: “All those who are

meditating evil against Assur-bani-pal, King of Assyria, and who

are preparing themselves to fight with him, I will inflict on them

a terrible death: by the swift sword, by flinging them into fire, by

famine and by pestilence, will I destroy their lives!” The courage

of the people being revived by this prophecy, Assur-bani-pal issued a

proclamation to the Babylonians, in which he denounced his brother’s

treason, and commanded them to remain quiet as they valued their lives,

and, having done this, he boldly assumed the offensive (652 B.C.).*

* The proclamation is dated in the eponymous year of Assur-

duruzur, corresponding to 652 B.C.; the events which

immediately preceded the proclamation ought, very probably,

to be assigned to the same year.

The only real danger came from the side of Elam; this state alone was

in a condition to oppose him with as numerous and determined an army as

that which he himself could put into the field; if Blam were disabled,

it would be impossible for Babylon to be victorious, and its fall would

be a mere question of time. The opening of the campaign was a difficult

matter. Khumbân-igash, having sold his support dearly, had at all events

spared no pains to satisfy his employer, and had furnished him with the

flower of his nobility, comprising Undashi, one of the sons of Tiumman;

Zazaz, prefect of Billatê; Parru, chief of Khilmu; Attamîtu, commanding

the archers; and Nesu, commander-in-chief of his forces. In order to

induce Undashi to serve under him, he had not hesitated to recall to his

memory the sad fate of Tiumman: “Go, and avenge upon Assyria the murder

of the father who begat thee!” The two opposing forces continued to

watch one another’s movements without any serious engagement taking

place during the greater part of the year 651 B.C.; though the Assyrians

won some slight advantages, killing Attamîtu in a skirmish and sending

his head to Nineveh, some serious reverses soon counterbalanced these

preliminary successes. Nabo-bel-shumi had arrived on the scene with his

Aramæan forces, and had compelled the troops engaged in the defence

of Uruk and Uru to lay down their arms: their leaders, including

Sin-tabni-uzur himself, had been forced to renounce the supremacy of

Assyria, and had been enrolled in the rebel ranks.*

* The official accounts say nothing of the intervention of

Nabo-bel-shumi at this juncture, but the information

furnished by _Tablet K 159_ in the British Museum makes up

for their silence. The objection raised by Tielo to the

interpretation given by G. Smith that this passage cannot

refer to Assyrian deserters, falls to the ground if one

admits that the Assyrian troops led into Elam at a

subsequent period by Nabo-bel-shumi, were none other than

the garrisons of the Lower Euphrates which were obliged to

side with the insurgents in 651 B.C. The two despatches, _K

4696_ and _K 28_ in the British Museum, which refer to the

defection of Sin-tabni-uzur, are dated the 8th and 11th Abu

in the eponymous year of Zagabbu, corresponding to the year

651 B.C., as indicated by Tiele with very good reason.

Operations seemed likely to be indefinitely prolonged, and

Assur-bani-pal, anxious as to the issue, importunately besought the

gods to intervene on his behalf, when discords breaking out in the royal

family of Elam caused the scales of fortune once more to turn in his

favour. The energy with which Khumbân-igash had entered on the present

struggle had not succeeded in effacing the disagreeable impression left

on the minds of the majority of his subjects, by the fact that he had

returned to his country in the chariots of the stranger and had been

enthroned by the decree of an Assyrian general. Tammaritu, of Khaîdalu,

who had then fought at his side in the ranks of the invaders, was

now one of those who reproached him most bitterly for his conduct. He

frankly confessed that his hand had cut off the head of Tiummân, but

denied that he did so in obedience to the hereditary enemies of

his country; he had but avenged his personal injuries, whereas

Khumbân-igash, following the promptings of ambition, had kissed the

ground at the feet of a slave of Assur-bani-pal and had received the

crown as a recompense for his baseness. Putting his rival to death,

Tammaritu seized the throne, and in order to prove that he was neither

consciously nor unconsciously an instrument of Ninevite policy, he at

once sent reinforcements to the help of Babylon without exacting

in return any fresh subsidy. The Assyrians, taking advantage of the

isolated position of Shamash-shumukîn, had pressed forward one of their

divisions as far as the districts on the sea coast, which they had

recovered from the power of Nabo-bel-shumi, and had placed under the

administration of Belibni, a person of high rank. The arrival of the

Elamite force was on the point of further compromising the situation,

and rekindling the flames of war more fiercely than ever, when a

second revolution broke out, which shattered for ever the hopes of

Shamash-shumukîn. Assur-bani-pal naturally looked upon this event as the

result of his supplications and sacrifices; Assur and Ishtar, in answer

to his entreaties, raised up Indabigash, one of the most powerful feudal

lords of the kingdom of Susa, and incited him to revolt. Tarnmaritu fled

to the marshes which bordered the Nâr-marratum, and seizing a vessel,

put out to sea with his brothers, his cousins, seventeen princes of

royal blood, and eighty-four faithful followers: the ship, driven by

the wind on to the Assyrian shore, foundered, and the dethroned monarch,

demoralised by sea-sickness, would have perished in the confusion had

not one of his followers taken him on his back and carried him safely to

land across the mud. Belibni sent him prisoner to Nineveh with all his

suite, and Assur-bani-pal, after allowing him to humble himself before

him, raised him from the ground, embraced him, and assigned to him

apartments in the palace and a train of attendants befitting the dignity

which he had enjoyed for a short time at Susa. Indabigash was too fully

occupied with his own affairs to interfere again in the quarrel between

the two brothers: his country, disorganised by the successive shocks

it had sustained, had need of repose, for some years at least, before

re-entering the lists, except at a disadvantage. He concluded no direct

treaty with the Assyrian king, but he at once withdrew the troops which

had entered Karduniash, and abstained from all hostile demonstrations

against the garrisons of the border provinces: for the moment, indeed,

this was all that was required of him (650 B.C.).

Deprived of the support of Elam, Babylon was doomed to fall. The

Aramaeans deserted her cause, and Nabu-bel-shumi, grandson of

Merodach-baladan, despairing of ever recovering the heritage of his

family, withdrew to his haunts among the reed beds of the Uknu, taking

back with him as hostages the Assyrians whom he had forced to join his

army at the beginning of the campaign. Shamash-shumukîn, however, was

not disconcerted: he probably hoped that his distant allies might

yet effect a diversion in his favour, and thus oblige his brother to

withdraw half of the forces employed against him. Indeed, after the

blockade had already begun, a band of Arabs under the two sheikhs

Abiyatê and Aamu forced a way through the besieging lines and entered

the city. This was the last succour which reached Babylon from without:

for many long months all communication between her citizens and the

outer world was completely cut off. The Assyrians laid waste the

surrounding country with ruthless and systematic cruelty, burning the

villages, razing to the ground isolated houses, destroying the trees,

breaking down the dykes, and filling up the canals. The year 649 B.C.

was spent in useless skirmishes; the city offered an energetic and

obstinate resistance, and as the walls were thick and the garrison

determined, it would not have succumbed had not the supply of provisions

finally failed. Famine raged in the city, and the inhabitants devoured

even their own children, while pestilence spreading among them mowed

them down by thousands.

[Illustration: 228.jpg THE EASTERN WORLD IN THE REIGN OF ASSUR-BANI-PAL]

The Arab auxiliaries at this juncture deserted the cause of the

defenders, and their sheikhs surrendered to Assur-bani-pal, who received

and pardoned them; but the Babylonians themselves, knowing that they

could expect no mercy, held out some time longer: at length, their

courage and their strength exhausted, they rose against their chiefs,

whose ambition or patriotic pride had brought them to such a pass, and

determined to capitulate on any terms. Shamash-shumukm, not wishing to

fall alive into the hands of his brother, shut himself up in his

palace, and there immolated himself on a funeral pyre with his wives

his children, his slaves, and his treasures at the moment when his

conquerors were breaking down the gates and penetrating into the palace

precincts.*

* G. Smith thought that the Babylonians, rendered furious by

their sufferings, had seized Shamash-shumukîn and burnt him

to death. It is, however, certain that Shamash-shumukîn

killed himself, according to the Eastern custom, to escape

the tortures which awaited him if he fell alive into the

hands of his enemies. The memory of this event, transferred

by the popular imagination to Assur-bani-pal, appears lu the

concluding portion of the legendary history of Sardanapalus.

The city presented a terrible spectacle, and shocked even the Assyrians,

accustomed as they were to horrors of this sort. Most of the numerous

victims to pestilence or famine lay about the streets or in the public

squares, a prey to the dogs and swine; such of the inhabitants and of

the soldiery as were comparatively strong had endeavoured to escape into

the country, and only those remained who had not sufficient strength

left to drag themselves beyond the walls. Assur-bani-pal pursued the

fugitives, and, having captured nearly all of them, vented on them the

full fury of his vengeance. He caused, the tongues of the soldiers to

be torn out, and then had them clubbed to death. He massacred the common

folk in front of the great winged bulls which had already witnessed

a similar butchery half a century before, under his grandfather

Sennacherib; the corpses of his victims remained long unburied, a prey

to all unclean beasts and birds. When the executioners and the king

himself were weary of the slaughter, the survivors were pardoned; the

remains of the victims were collected and piled up in specified

places, the streets were cleansed, and the temples, purified by solemn

lustrations, were reopened for worship.* Assur-hani-pal proclaimed

himself king in his brother’s room: he took the hands of Bel, and,

according to custom, his Babylonian subjects gave him a new name, that

of Kandalanu, by which he was henceforth known among them.**

* The date of 648-647 B.C. for the taking of Babylon and the

death of Shamash-shumukîn is corroborated by the Canon of

Ptolemy and the fragments of Berosus, both of which

attribute twenty or twenty-one years to the reign of

Saosdukhm (Sammughes). Lehmann points out a document dated

in the XXth year of Shamash-shumukîn, which confirms the

exactitude of the information furnished by the Greek

chronologists.

** The Canon of Ptolemy gives as the successor of Saosdukhm

a certain Kinêladan, who corresponds to Kandalanu, whose

date has been fixed by contemporary documents. The identity

of Kinêladan with Assur-bani-pal was known from the Greek

chronologists, for whereas Ptolemy puts Kinêladan after

Saosdukhm, the fragments of Berosus state that the successor

of Sammughes was his _brother_; that is to say, Sardanapalus

or Assur-bani-pal. This identification had been proposed by

G. Smith, who tried to find the origin of the form Kinêladan

in the name of Sinidinabal, which seems to be borne by

Assur-bani-pal in _Tablet K 195 of the British Museum_, and

which is really the name of his elder brother; it found

numerous supporters as soon as Pinches had discovered the

tablets dated in the reign of Kandalanu, and the majority of

Assyriologists and historians hold that Kandalanu and Assur-

bani-pal are one and the same person.

Had he been wise, he would have completed the work begun by famine,

pestilence, and the sword, and, far from creating, a new Babylon, he

would have completed the destruction of the ancient city. The same

religious veneration which had disarmed so many of his predecessors

probably withheld him from giving free rein to his resentment, and

not daring to follow the example of Sennacherib, he fell back on the

expedient adopted by Tiglath-pileser III. and Sargon, adhering to their

idea of two capitals for two distinct states, but endeavouring to unite

in his own person the two irreconcilable sovereignties of Marduk

and Assur. He delegated the administration of Babylonian affairs to

Shamash-danâni, one of his high officers of State,* and re-entered

Nineveh with an amount of spoil almost equalling that taken from Egypt

after the sack of Thebes.

* Tin’s Shamash-danâni, who was _limmu_ in 644 B.C., was

called at that date prefect of Akkad, that is to say, of

Babylon. He probably entered on this office immediately

after the taking of the city.

Kuta, Sippara, and Borsippa, the vassal states of Babylon, which had

shared the misfortune of their mistress, were, like her, cleared of

their ruins, rebuilt and repeopled, and were placed under the authority

of Shamash-danâni: such was their inherent vitality that in the short

space of ten or a dozen years they had repaired their losses and

reattained their wonted prosperity. Soon no effect of their disaster

remained except an additional incentive for hating Nineveh, and a

determination more relentless than ever not to spare her when the day of

her overthrow should come and they should have her in their power.

It was impossible for so violent and so prolonged a crisis to take place

without in some degree injuring the prestige of the empire. Subjects

and allies of long standing remained loyal, but those only recently

subjugated by conquest, as well as the neighbouring independent

kingdoms, without hesitation threw off the yoke of suzerainty or of

obligatory friendship under which they had chafed. Egypt freed herself

from foreign domination as soon as the possibilities of war with Elam

had shown themselves, and it was Psammetichus of Sais, son of Necho, one

of the princes most favoured by the court of Nineveh, who set on foot

this campaign against his former patron. He expelled the Assyrian

garrisons, reduced the petty native princes to submission, and once

more set up the kingdom of the Pharaohs from Elephantine to the Syrian

desert, without Assur-bani-pal having been able to spare a single

soldier to prevent him, or to bring him back to a sense of his duty. The

details of his proceedings are unknown to us: we learn only that he owed

his success to mercenaries imported from Asia Minor, and the Assyrian

chroniclers, unaccustomed to discriminate between the different peoples

dwelling on the shores of the Ægean, believed that these auxiliaries

were supplied to the Pharaoh by the only sovereign with whom they had

had any dealings, namely, Gyges, King of Lydia. That Gyges had had

negotiations with Psammetichus and procured assistance for him has not

yet been proved, but to assert that he was incapable of conceiving and

executing such a design is quite a different matter. On the contrary,

all the information we possess concerning his reign shows that he was

daring in his political undertakings, and anxious to court

alliances with the most distant countries. The man who tried to draw

Assur-bani-pal into a joint enterprise against the Cimmerians would not

have hesitated to ally himself with Psammetichus if he hoped to gain

the least profit from so doing. Constant intercourse by sea took place

between Ionia or Caria and Egypt, and no event of any importance

could occur in the Delta without being promptly reported in Ephesus or

Miletus. Before this time the Heraclid rulers of Sardes had lived on

excellent terms with most of the Æolian or Ionian colonies: during the

anxious years which followed his accession Gyges went still further, and

entered into direct relations with the nations of Greece itself. It was

no longer to the gods of Asia, to Zeus of Telmissos, that he addressed

himself in order to legitimatise his new sovereignty, but, like Midas

of Phrygia, he applied to the prophetic god of Hellas, to the Delphian

Apollo and his priests.

[Illustration: 235.jpg PSAMMETICHUS I.]

Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph.

He recompensed them lavishly for pronouncing judgment in his favour:

beside the silver offerings with which he endowed the temple at Delphi,

he presented to it a number of golden vases, and, among others, six

craters weighing thirty talents each, which, placed by the side of the

throne of Midas, were still objects of admiration in the treasury of the

Corinthians in the time of Herodotus. To these he added at various times

such valuable gifts that the Pythian priestess, who had hitherto been

poor, was in later times accounted to have owed to him her wealth.

Having made sure of the good will of the immortals, Gyges endeavoured to

extend his influence among the Greek colonies along the coast, and if he

did not in every case gain a footing amongst them, his failure seems to

have been due, not to his incapacity, but to the force of circumstances

or to the ambiguous position which he happened to occupy with regard to

these colonies. Ambition naturally incited him to annex them and make

them into Lydian cities, but the bold disposition of their inhabitants

and their impatience of constraint never allowed any foreign rule to

be established over them: conquest, to be permanent, would have to be

preceded by a long period of alliance on equal terms, and of discreet

patronage which might insensibly accustom them to recognise in their

former friend, first a protector, and then a suzerain imbued with

respect for their laws and constitution. Gyges endeavoured to conciliate

them severally, and to attach them to himself by treaties favourable

to their interests or flattering to their vanity, and by timely and

generous assistance in their internecine quarrels; and thus, secretly

fostering their mutual jealousies, he was able to reduce some by force

of arms without causing too much offence to the rest. He took Colophon,

and also, after several fruitless campaigns, the Magnesia which lay

near Sardes, Magnesia of Sipylos, tradition subsequently adorning

this fortunate episode in his history with various amusing anecdotes.

According to one account he had a favourite in a youth of marvellous

beauty called Magnes, whom the Magnesians, as an act of defiance to

Gryges, had mutilated till he was past recognition; and it was related

that the king appealed to the fortune of war to avenge the affront. By

a bold stroke he seized the lower quarters of Smyrna, but was unable to

take the citadel,* and while engaged in the struggle with this city, he

entered into a friendly understanding with Ephesus and Miletus.

* Herodotus mentions this war without entering into any

details. We know from Pausanias that the people of Smyrna

defended themselves bravely, and that the poet Mimnermus

composed an elegy on this episode in their history.

Ephesus, situated at the mouth of the river Oayster, was the natural

port of Sardes, the market in which the gold of Lydia, and the

commodities imported from the East by the caravans which traversed the

royal route, might be exchanged for the products of Hellas and of the

countries of the West visited by the Greek mariners. The city was at

this time under the control of a family of rich shipowners, of whom the

head was called Melas: Gryges gave him his daughter in marriage, and

by this union gained free access to the seaboard for himself and his

successors. The reason for his not pushing his advantages further in

this direction is not hard to discover; since the fall of the kingdom

of Phrygia had left his eastern frontier unprotected, the attacks of the

Cimmerians had obliged him to concentrate his forces in the interior,

and though he had always successfully repulsed them, the obstinacy with

which these inroads were renewed year after year prevented him from

further occupying himself with the Greek cities. He had carefully

fortified his vast domains in the basin of the Ehyndakos, he had

reconquered the Troad, and though he had been unable to expel the

barbarians from Adramyttium, he prevented them from having any inland

communications. Miletus rendered vigorous assistance in this work of

consolidating his power, for she was interested in maintaining a buffer

state between herself and the marauders who had already robbed her

of Sinope; and it was for this reason that Gyges, after mercilessly

harassing her at the beginning of his reign, now preferred to enter into

an alliance with her. He had given the Milesians permission to establish

colonies along the Hellespont and the Propontid at the principal

points where communication took place between Europe and Asia; Abydos,

Lampsacus, Parium, and Cyzicus, founded successively by Milesian

admirals, prevented the tribes which remained in Thrace from crossing

over to reinforce their kinsfolk who were devastating Phrygia.

Gryges had hoped that his act of deference would have obtained for him

the active support of Assur-bani-pal, and during the following years he

perseveringly continued at intervals to send envoys to Nineveh: on one

occasion he despatched with the embassy two Cimmerian chiefs taken in

battle, and whom he offered in token of homage to the gods of Assyria.

Experience, however, soon convinced him that his expectations were vain;

the Assyrians, far from creating a diversion in his favour, were

careful to avoid every undertaking which might draw the attention of

the barbarians on themselves. As soon as Gyges fully understood their

policy, he broke off all connection with them, and thenceforth relied on

himself alone for the protection of his interests. The disappointment he

thus experienced probably stirred up his anger against Assyria, and

if he actually came to the aid of Psammetichus, the desire of giving

expression to a secret feeling of rancour no doubt contributed to his

decision. Assur-bani-pal deeply resented this conduct, but Lydia was too

far off for him to wreak his vengeance on it in a direct manner, and he

could only beseech the gods to revenge what he was pleased to consider

as base ingratitude: he therefore prayed Assur and Ishtar that “his

corpse might lie outstretched before his enemies, and his bones be

scattered far and wide.” A certain Tugdami was at that time reigning

over the Cimmerians, and seems to have given to their hitherto

undisciplined hordes some degree of cohesion and guidance.*; He gathered

under his standard not only the Trêres, the Thracian kinsfolk of the

Cimmerians, but some of the Asianic tribes, such as the Lycians,** who

were beginning to feel uneasy at the growing prosperity of Gyges, and

let them loose upon their Lydian quarry.

* The name Tugdami, mentioned in the hymn published by

Strong, has been identified by Sayce with the Cimmerian

chief mentioned by Strabo under the name of Lygdamis. The

opinion of Sayce has been adopted by other Assyriologists.

The inscription makes Tugdami a king of the Manda, and thus

overthrows the hypothesis that Lygdamis or Dygdamis was a

Lycian chief who managed to discipline the barbarian hordes.

** The alliance of the Lycians with the Cimmerians and

Trêres is known from the evidence of Callisthenes preserved

for us by Strabo. It is probable that many of the marauding

tribes of the Taurus--Isaurians, Lycaonians, and

Painphylians--similarly joined the Cimmerians.

Their heavy cavalry, with metal helmets and long steel swords, overran

the peninsula from end to end, treading down everything under their

horses’ hoofs. Gyges did his best to stand up against the storm, but

his lancers quailed beneath the shock and fled in confusion: he himself

perished in the flight, and his corpse remained in the enemy’s hands

(652 B.C.). The whole of Lydia was mercilessly ravaged, and the lower

town of Sardes was taken by storm.*

* Strabo states definitely that it was Lygdamis who took the

city. The account given by the same author of a double

destruction of Sardes in 652 and 682 B.C. is due to an

unfortunate borrowing from the work of Caliisthenes.

[Illustration: 240.jpg BATTLE OF THE CIMMERIANS AGAINST THE GREEKS

ACCOMPANIED BY THEIR DOGS]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the sarcophagus of Clazomenæ.

Ardys, who had succeeded his father on the throne, was able, however,

to save the citadel: he rallied around him the remnants of his army and

once more took the field. The cities of Ionia made common cause with

him; their hoplites issued victorious from more than one engagement, and

their dogs, trained to harry fearlessly the horses of the enemy, often

took an active part in the battle. City after city was attacked by the

barbarians, and the suburbs plundered. Ephesus, on account of the wealth

it contained, formed their chief attraction, but their forces dashed

themselves fruitlessly against its walls; they avenged themselves for

their failure by setting on fire the temple of Artemis which stood

in the outskirts. This act of sacrilege profoundly stirred the whole

Hellenic world, and when the first fury of pillage was exhausted, the

barbarians themselves seemed to have been struck with superstitious

horror at their crime: deadly fevers contracted in the marshes near the

city thinned their ranks, and in the scourge which struck down their

forces they recognised the chastisement of the goddess.*

* The invasion of Ionia by the Cimmerians is indicated in

general terms by Herodotus; the details of the attack on

Ephesus and the destruction of the temple of Artemis are

preserved in a passage of Callimachus, and in the fragments

quoted by Hesychius.

The survivors abandoned the siege and withdrew in disorder towards the

mountains of the interior. On their way they surprised Magnesia on the

Mæander and entirely destroyed it, but this constituted their sole

military success: elsewhere, they contented themselves with devastating

the fields without venturing to attack the fortified towns. Scarcely had

Ardys freed himself from their unwelcome presence, than, like his father

before him, he tried to win the support of Assyria. He sent an envoy to

Nineveh with a letter couched in very humble terms: “The king whom

the gods acknowledge, art thou; for as soon as thou hadst pronounced

imprecations against my father, misfortune overtook him. I am thy

trembling servant; receive my homage graciously, and I will bear thy

yoke!” Assur-bani-pal did not harden his heart to this suppliant who

confessed his fault so piteously, and circumstances shortly constrained

him to give a more efficacious proof of his favour to Ardys than he had

done in the days of Gyges. On quitting Lydia, Tugdami, with his hordes,

had turned eastwards, bent upon renewing in the provinces of the Taurus

and the Euphrates the same destructive raids which he had made among

the peoples of the Ægean seaboard; but in the gorges of Cilicia he came

into contact with forces much superior to his own, and fell fighting

against them about the year 645 B.C. His son Sanda-khshatru led the

survivors of this disaster back towards the centre of the peninsula, but

the conflict had been so sanguinary that the Cimmerian power never fully

recovered from it. Assur-bani-pal celebrated the victory won by

his generals with a solemn thanksgiving to Marduk, accompanied by

substantial offerings of gold and objects of great value.*

* Strabo was aware, perhaps from Xanthus of Lyclia, that

Lygdamis had fallen in battle in Cilicia. The hymn to

Marduk, published by Strong, informs us that the Cimmerian

chief fell upon the Assyrians, and that his son Sanda-

khshatru carried on hostilities some time longer. Sanda-

khshatru is an Iranian name of the same type as that of the

Median king Uva-khshatra or Cyaxares.

The tranquillity of the north-west frontier was thus for a time secured,

and this success most opportunely afforded the king leisure to turn

his attention to those of his vassals who, having thrown off their

allegiance during the war against Shamash-shumukîn, had not yet returned

to their obedience. Among these were the Arabs and the petty princes of

Egypt. The contingents furnished by Yauta, son of Hazael, had behaved

valiantly during the siege of Babylon, and when they thought the end

was approaching, their leaders, Abiyatê and Aamu, had tried to cut a

way through the Assyrian lines: being repulsed, they had laid down their

arms on condition of their lives being spared. There now remained the

bulk of the Arab tribes to be reduced to submission, and the recent

experiences of Esarhaddon had shown the difficulties attending this

task. Assur-bani-pal entrusted its accomplishment to his subjects in

Edom, Moab, Ammon, the Haurân, and Damascus, since, dwelling on the

very borders of the desert, they were familiar with the routes and the

methods of warfare best suited to the country. They proved victorious

all along the line. Yauta, betrayed by his own subjects, took refuge

with the Nabatæans; but their king, Nadanu, although he did not

actually deliver him up to the Assyrians, refused to grant him an

asylum, and the unhappy man was finally obliged to surrender to his

pursuers. His cousin Uatê, son of Birdadda, was made chief in his place

by the Assyrians, and Yauta was sent to Nineveh, where he was exposed

at one of the city gates, chained in a niche beside the watch-dogs.

Amuladdin, the leading prince of Kedar, met with no better fate: he was

overcome, in spite of the assistance rendered him by Adîya, the queen

of a neighbouring tribe, and was also carried away into captivity. His

defeat completed the discouragement of the tribes who still remained

unsubdued. They implored mercy, which Assur-bani-pal granted to them,

although he deposed most of their sheikhs, and appointed as their

ruler that Abiyatê who had dwelt at his court since the capitulation of

Babylon. Abiyatê took the oath of fidelity, and was sent back to Kedar,

where he was proclaimed king of all the Arab tribes under the suzerainty

of Assyria.*

* The _Cylinder B of the Brit. Mus._ attributes to the reign

of Assur-bani-pala whole series of events, comprising the

first submission of Yauta and the restitution of the statues

of Atarsamain, which had taken place under Esarhaddon. The

Assyrian annalists do not seem to have always clearly

distinguished between Yauta, son of Hazael, and Uatè, son of

Birdadda.

Of all the countries which had thrown off their allegiance during the

late troubles, Egypt alone remained unpunished, and it now seemed as

if its turn had come to suffer chastisement for its rebellion. It was,

indeed, not to be tolerated that so rich and so recently acquired

a province should slip from the grasp of the very sovereign who had

completed its conquest, without his making an effort on the first

opportunity to reduce it once more to submission. Such inaction on his

part would be a confession of impotence, of which the other vassals of

the empire would quickly take advantage: Tyre, Judah, Moab, the petty

kings of the Taurus, and the chiefs of Media, would follow the example

of Pharaoh, and the whole work of the last three centuries would have to

be done over again. There can be no doubt that Assur-bani-pal cherished

the secret hope of recovering Egypt in a short campaign, and that he

hoped to attach it to the empire by more permanent bonds than before,

but as a preliminary to executing this purpose it was necessary to

close and settle if possible the account still open against Elam. Recent

events had left the two rival powers in such a position that neither

peace nor even a truce of long duration could possibly exist between

them. Elam, injured, humiliated, and banished from the plains of the

Lower Euphrates, over which she had claimed at all times an almost

exclusive right of pillage, was yet not sufficiently enfeebled by her

disasters to be convinced of her decided inferiority to Assyria. Only

one portion of her forces, and that perhaps the smallest, had taken the

field and sustained serious reverses: she had still at her disposal,

besides the peoples of the plain and the marshes who had suffered

the most, those almost inexhaustible reserves of warlike and hardy

mountaineers, whose tribes were ranged on the heights which bounded the

horizon, occupying the elevated valleys of the Uknu, the Ulaî, and their

nameless affluents, on the western or southern slopes or in the enclosed

basins of the Iranian table-land. Here Elam had at her command at least

as many men as her adversaries could muster against her, and though

these barbarian contingents lacked discipline and systematic training,

their bravery compensated for the imperfection of their military

education. Elam not only refused to admit herself conquered, but she

believed herself sure of final victory, and, as a matter of fact, it

is not at all certain that Assur-bani-pal’s generals would ever have

completely triumphed over her, if internal discords and treason had

not too often paralysed her powers. The partisans of Khumbân-igash were

largely responsible for bringing about the catastrophe in which Tiummân

had perished, and those who sided with Tammaritu had not feared to

provoke a revolt at the moment when Khumbân-igash was occupied in

Chaldæa; Indabigash in his turn had risen in rebellion in the rear of

Tammaritu, and his intervention had enabled the Assyrians to deal their

final blow at Shamash-shumukîn. The one idea of the non-reigning members

of the royal house was to depose the reigning sovereign, and they

considered all means to this end as justifiable, whether assassination,

revolt, desertion to the enemy, or defection on the very field of

battle. As soon as one of them had dethroned another, hatred of the

foreigner again reigned supreme in his breast, and he donned his armour

with a firm determination to bring the struggle to an end, but the

course he had pursued towards his predecessor was now adopted by one of

his relatives towards himself; the enemy meanwhile was still under arms,

and each of these revolutions brought him a step nearer to the goal of

his endeavours, the complete overthrow of the Elamite kingdom and its

annexation to the empire of Nineveh. Even before the struggle with

Babylon was concluded, Assur-bani-pal had demanded of Indabigash the

release of the Assyrians whom Nabo-bel-shumu had carried off in his

train, besides the extradition of that personage himself. Indabigash

had no desire for war at this juncture, but hesitated to surrender

the Kaldâ, who had always served him faithfully: he entered into

negotiations which were interminably prolonged, neither of the two

parties being anxious to bring them to a close. After the fall of

Babylon, Assur-bani-pal, who was tenacious in his hatred, summoned the

Elamite ambassadors, and sent them back to their master with a message

conceived in the following menacing terms: “If thou dost not surrender

those men, I will go and destroy thy cities, and lead into captivity the

inhabitants of Susa, Madaktu, and Khaidalu. I will hurl thee from

thy throne, and will set up another thereon: as aforetime I destroyed

Tiummân, so will I destroy thee.” A detachment of troops was sent to

enforce the message of defiance, but when the messengers had reached the

frontier town of Deri, Indabigash was no longer there: his nobles

had assassinated him, and had elected Khumbân-khaldash, the son of

Atta-mêtush, king in his stead. The opportunity was a favourable one to

sow the seeds of division in the Elamite camp, before the usurper should

have time to consolidate his power: Assur-bani-pal therefore threw

himself into the cause of Tammaritu, supporting him with an army to

which many malcontents speedily rallied. The Aramæans and the cities

of the marsh-lands on the littoral, Khilmu, Billatê, Dummuku, Sulâa,

Lakhiru, and Dibirîna, submitted without a struggle, and the invaders

met with no resistance till they reached Bît-Imbi. This town had

formerly been conquered by Sennacherib, but it had afterwards returned

to the rule of its ancient masters, who had strongly fortified it. It

now offered a determined resistance, but without success: its population

was decimated, and the survivors mutilated and sent as captives into

Assyria--among them the commander of the garrison, Imbappi, son-in-law

of Khumbân-khaldash, together with the harem of Tiummân, with his sons

and daughters, and all the members of his family whom his successors had

left under guard in the citadel. The siege had been pushed forward so

rapidly that the king had not been able to make any attempt to relieve

the defenders: besides this, a pretender had risen up against him, one

Umbakhabua, who had been accepted as king by the important district of

Bubîlu. The fall of Bît-Imbi filled the two competitors with fear: they

abandoned their homes and fled, the one to the mountains, the other to

the lowlands on the shores of the Nar-Marratum. Tammaritu entered Susa

in triumph and was enthroned afresh; but the insolence and rapacity of

his auxiliaries was so ruthlessly manifested, that at the end of some

days he resolved to rid himself of them by the sword. A traitor having

revealed the design, Tammaritu was seized, stripped of his royal

apparel, and cast into prison. The generals of Assur-bani-pal had no one

whom they could proclaim king in his stead, and furthermore, the season

being well advanced, the Elamites, who had recovered from their first

alarm, were returning in a body, and threatened to cut off the Assyrian

retreat: they therefore evacuated Susa, and regained Assyria with

their booty. They burnt all the towns along the route whose walls were

insufficient to protect them against a sudden escalade or an attack of

a few hours’ duration, and the country between the capital and the

frontier soon contained nothing but heaps of smoking ruins (647 e.g.).*

* The difficulty we experience in locating on the map most

of the names of Elamite towns is the reason why we cannot

determine with any certainty the whole itinerary followed by

the Assyrian army.

The campaign, which had been so successful at the outset, had not

produced all the results expected from it. The Assyrians had hoped

henceforth to maintain control of Elam through Tammaritu, but in a short

time they had been obliged to throw aside the instrument with which

they counted on effecting the complete humiliation of the nation:

Khumbân-khaldash had reoccupied Susa, following on the heels of the

last Assyrian detachment, and he reigned as king once more without

surrendering Nabo-bel-shumi, or restoring the statue of Nana, or

fulfilling any of the conditions which had been the price of a title

to the throne. Assur-bani-pal was not inclined to bear patiently this

partial reverse; as soon as spring returned he again demanded the

surrender of the Chaldæan and the goddess, under pain of immediate

invasion. Khumbân-khaldash offered to expel Nabo-bel-shumi from Lakhiru

where he had entrenched himself, and to thrust him towards the Assyrian

frontier, where the king’s troops would be able to capture him. His

offer was not accepted, and a second embassy, headed by Tammaritu, who

was once more in favour, arrived to propose more trenchant terms.

The Elamite might have gone so far as to grant the extradition of

Nabo-bel-shumi, but if he had yielded the point concerning Nana, a

rebellion would have broken out in the streets of Susa: he preferred

war, and prepared in desperation to carry it on to the bitter end. The

conflict was long and sanguinary, and the result disastrous for

Elam. Bît-Imbi opened its gates, the district of Kashi surrendered at

discretion, followed by the city of Khamanu and its environs, and the

Assyrians approached Madaktu: Khumbân-khaldash evacuated the place

before they reached it, and withdrew beneath the walls of Dur-Undasi,

on the western bank of the Ididi. His enemies pursued him thither, but

the stream was swift and swollen by rain, so that for two days they

encamped on its bank without daring to cross, and were perhaps growing

discouraged, when Ishtar of Arbela once more came to the rescue.

Appearing in a dream to one of her seers, she said, “I myself go

before Assur-bani-pal, the king whom my hands have created;” the army,

emboldened by this revelation, overcame the obstacle by a vigorous

effort, and dashed impetuously over regions as yet unvisited by any

conqueror. The Assyrians burnt down fourteen royal cities, numberless

small towns, and destroyed the cornfields, the vines, and the orchards;

Khumbàn-khaldash, utterly exhausted, fled to the mountains “like a young

dog.” Banunu and the districts of Tasarra, twenty cities in the country

of Khumir, Khaîdalu, and Bashimu, succumbed one after another, and when

the invaders at length decided to retrace their steps to the frontier,

Susa, deserted by her soldiers and deprived of her leaders, lay before

them an easy prey. It was not the first time in the last quarter of a

century that the Assyrians had had the city at their mercy. They had

made some stay in it after the battle of Tullîz, and also after the

taking of Bît-Imbi in the preceding year; but on those occasions they

had visited it as allies, to enthrone a king owing allegiance to their

own sovereign, and political exigencies had obliged them to repress

their pillaging instincts and their long-standing hatred. Now that

they had come as enemies, they were restrained by no considerations of

diplomacy: the city was systematically pillaged, and the booty found

in it was so immense that the sack lasted an entire month. The royal

treasury was emptied of its gold and silver, its metals and the valuable

objects which had been brought to it from Sumir, Accad, and Karduniash

at successive periods from the most remote ages down to that day, in

the course of the successful invasions conducted by the princes of Susa

beyond the Tigris; among them, the riches of the Babylonian temples,

which Shamash-shumukîn had lavished on Tiumman to purchase his support,

being easily distinguishable. The furniture of the palace was sent to

Nineveh in a long procession; it comprised beds and chairs of ivory, and

chariots encrusted with enamel and precious stones, the horses of

which were caparisoned with gold. The soldiers made their way into the

ziggurât, tore down the plates of ruddy copper, violated the sanctuary,

and desecrated the prophetic statues of the gods who dwelt within it,

shrouded in the sacred gloom, and whose names were only uttered by their

devotees with trembling lips. Shumudu, Lagamar, Partikira, Ammankasibar,

Udurân, Sapak, Aîpaksina, Bilala, Panintimri, and Kindakarpu, were now

brought forth to the light, and made ready to be carried into exile

together with their belongings and their priests.

[Illustration: 251.jpg STATUES OF THE GODS CARRIED OFF BY ASSYRIAN

SOLDIERY]

Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Layard, _The Monuments of

Nineveh_.

Thirty-two statues of the kings, both ancient and modern, in silver,

gold, bronze, and marble, escorted the gods on their exodus, among their

number being those of Khumbânigash, son of Umbadarâ, Shutruk-nakhunta,

and Tammaritu II., the sovereigns who had treated Assyria with

the greatest indignity. The effigy of Khalludush was subjected to

humiliating outrage: “his mouth, with its menacing smile, was mutilated;

his lips, which breathed forth defiance, were slit; his hands, which

had brandished the bow against Assur, were cut off,” to avenge, though

tardily, the ill success of Sennacherib. The sacred groves shared the

fate of the temples, and all the riches collected in them by generations

of victors were carried off in cartloads. They contained, amongst

other edifices, the tombs of the ancient heroes of Elam, who had feared

neither Assur nor Ishtar, and who had often brought trouble on the

ancestors of Assur-bani-pal. Their sepulchres were violated, their

coffins broken open, their bones collected and despatched to Nineveh, to

crumble finally into dust in the land of exile: their souls, chained to

their mortal bodies, shared their captivity, and if they were

provided with the necessary sustenance and libations to keep them from

annihilation, it was not from any motives of compassion or pity, but

from a refinement of vengeance, in order that they might the longer

taste the humiliation of captivity.

[Illustration: 252.jpg THE TUMULUS OF SUZA]

The image of Nana was found among those of the native gods: it was now

separated from them, and after having been cleansed from pollution by

the prescribed ceremonies, it was conducted to Uruk, which it entered in

triumph on the 1st of the month Kislev. It was reinstated in the temple

it had inhabited of old: sixteen hundred and thirty-five years had

passed since it had been carried off, in the reign of Kutur-nakhunta, to

dwell as a prisoner in Susa.

Assur-bani-pal had no intention of preserving the city of Susa from

destruction, or of making it the capital of a province which should

comprise the plain of Elam. Possibly it appeared to him too difficult to

defend as long as the mountain tribes remained unsubdued, or perhaps the

Elamites themselves were not so completely demoralised as he was pleased

to describe them in his inscriptions, and the attacks of their irregular

troops would have rendered the prolonged sojourn of the Assyrian

garrison difficult, if not impossible. Whatever the reason, as soon as

the work of pillage was fully accomplished, the army continued its

march towards the frontier, carrying with it the customary spoil of the

captured towns, and their whole population, or all, at least, who had

not fled at the approach of the enemy. The king reserved for himself

the archers and pikemen, whom he incorporated into his own bodyguard,

as well as the artisans, smelters, sculptors, and stonemasons, whose

talents he turned to account in the construction and decoration of his

palaces; the remainder of the inhabitants he apportioned, like so many

sheep, to the cities and the temples, governors of provinces, officers

of state, military chiefs, and private soldiers. Khumbân-khaldash

reoccupied Susa after the Assyrians had quitted it, but the misery there

was so great that he could not endure it: he therefore transferred his

court to Madaktu, one of the royal cities which had suffered least from

the invasion, and he there tried to establish a regular government.

Rival claimants to the throne had sprung up, but he overcame them

without much difficulty: one of them, named Paê, took refuge in Assyria,

joining Tammaritn and that little band of dethroned kings or pretenders

to the throne of Susa, of whom Assur-bani-pal had so adroitly made

use to divide the forces of his adversary. Khumbân-khaldash might well

believe that the transportation of the statue of Nana and the sack of

Susa had satisfied the vengeance of the Assyrians, at least for a time,

and that they would afford him a respite, however short; but he had

reckoned without taking into consideration the hatred which had pursued

Nabo-bel-shumi during so many years: an envoy followed him as far as

Madaktu, and offered Khumbân-khaldash once more the choice between the

extradition of the Chaldean or the immediate reopening of hostilities.

He seems to have had a moment’s hesitation, but when Nabo-bel-shumi was

informed of the terms offered by the envoy, “life had no more value in

his eyes: he desired death.” He ordered his shield-bearer to slay him,

and when the man refused to do so, declaring that he could not live

without his master, they stabbed each other simultaneously, and

perished, as they had lived, together. Khumbân-khaldash, delivered by

this suicide from his embarrassments, had the corpse of the master and

the head of the faithful shield-bearer duly embalmed, and sent them to

Nineveh. Assur-bani-pal mutilated the wretched body in order to render

the conditions of life in the other world harder for the soul: he cut

off its head, and forbade the burial of the remains, or the rendering to

the dead of the most simple offerings.

[Illustration: 256.jpg Prayer in the Desert After Painting by Gerome]

About this time the inhabitants of Bît-Imbi, of Til-Khumba, and a

dozen other small towns, who had fled for refuge to the woods of Mount

Saladri, came forth from their hiding-places and cast themselves on

the mercy of the conqueror: he deigned to receive them graciously, and

enrolled them in his guard, together with the prisoners taken in the

last campaign. He was contented to leave Elam to itself for the moment,

as he was disquieted at the turn affairs were taking in Arabia. Abiyatê,

scarcely seated on the throne, had refused to pay tribute, and had

persuaded Uatê and Nadanu to join him in his contumacy; several cities

along the Phoenician seaboard, led away by his example, shut their gates

and declared themselves independent. Assur-bani-pal had borne all

this patiently, while the mass of his troops were engaged against

Khumbân-khaldash; but after the destruction of Susa, he determined to

revenge himself. His forces left Nineveh in the spring of 642 B.C.,

crossed the Euphrates, and the line of wooded hills which bordered the

course of the river towards the west, provisioned themselves with water

at the halting-place of Laribda, and plunged into the desert in search

of the rebels. The Assyrians overran the country of Mash, from the town

of Iarki to Azalla, where “there dwell no beasts of the field, where

no bird of the sky builds its nest,” and then, after filling their

water-skins at the cisterns of Azalla, they advanced boldly into the

thirsty lands which extend towards Qurazite; they next crossed the

territory of Kedar, cutting down the trees, filling up the wells,

burning the tents, and reached Damascus from the north-east side,

bringing in their train innumerable flocks of asses, sheep, camels,

and slaves. The Bedâwin of the north had remained passive, but the

Nabathæans, encouraged by the remoteness of their country and the

difficulty of access to it, persisted in their rebellion. The Assyrian

generals did not waste much time in celebrating their victory in the

Syrian capital: on the 3rd of Ab, forty days after leaving the Chaldsean

frontier, they started from Damascus towards the south, and seized

the stronghold of Khalkhuliti, at the foot of the basaltic plateau

overlooked by the mountains of the Haurân; they then destroyed all the

fortresses of the country one after another, driving the inhabitants

to take shelter in the rugged range of volcanic rocks, where they were

blockaded, and finally reduced by famine: Abiyatê capitulated, Nadanu

ransomed himself by a promise of tribute, and the whole desert between

Syria and the Euphrates fell once more into the condition of an Assyrian

province. Before returning to Nineveh, Assur-bani-pal’s generals

inflicted chastisement on Akko and Ushu, the two chief Tyrian cities

which had revolted, and this vigorous action confirmed the fidelity of

the Assyrian vassals in Palestine. Uate’s life was spared, but his lip

and cheek were pierced by the hand of the king himself, and he was led

by a cord passed through the wounds, as if he had been a wild beast

intended for domestication; a dog’s collar was riveted round his neck,

and he was exposed in a cage at one of the gates of Nineveh. Aamu, the

brother of Abiyatê, was less fortunate, for he was flayed alive before

the eyes of the mob. Assyria was glutted with the spoil: the king, as

was customary, reserved for his own service the able-bodied men for the

purpose of recruiting his battalions, distributing the remainder among

his officers and soldiers. The camels captured were so numerous that

their market-value was for a long time much reduced; they were offered

in the open market, like sheep, for a half-shekel of silver apiece, and

the vendor thought himself fortunate to find a purchaser even at this

price.

The final ruin of Elam followed swiftly on the subjugation of Arabia.

While one division of the army was scouring the desert, the remainder

were searching the upland valleys of the Ulaî and the Uknu, and

relentlessly pursuing Khumbân-khaldash. The wretched monarch was now in

command of merely a few bands of tattered followers, and could no longer

take the field; the approach of the enemy obliged him to flee from

Madaktu, and entrench himself on the heights. Famine, misery, and

probably also the treachery of his last adherents, soon drove him from

his position, and, despairing of his cause, he surrendered himself to

the officers who were in pursuit of him. He was the third king of Elam

whom fate had cast alive into the hands of the conqueror: his arrival at

Nineveh afforded the haughty Assur-bani-pal an occasion for celebrating

one of those triumphal processions in which his proud soul delighted,

and of going in solemn state to thank the gods for the overthrow of

his most formidable enemy. On the day when he went to prostrate

himself before Assur and Ishtar, he sent for Tammaritu, Paê, and

Khumbân-khaldash, and adding to them Uatê, who was taken out of his cage

for the occasion, he harnessed all four to his chariot of state, and

caused himself to be drawn through Nineveh by this team of fallen

sovereigns to the gate of the temple of Emashmash. And, indeed, at

that moment, he might reasonably consider himself as having reached the

zenith of his power. Egypt, it is true, still remained unpunished, and

its renewed vitality under the influence of the Saïte Pharaohs allowed

no hope of its being speedily brought back into subjection, but its

intrigues no longer exerted any influence over Syria, and Tyre itself

appeared to be resigned to the loss of its possessions on the mainland.

Lydia under the rule of Ardys continued to maintain intermittent

intercourse with its distant protector. The provinces of the Taurus,

delivered from the terror inspired by the Cimmerians, desired peace

above all things, and the Mannai had remained quiet since the defeat of

Akhsheri. Babylon was rapidly recovering from the ills she had endured.

She consoled herself for her actual servitude by her habitual simulation

of independence; she called Assur-bani-pal Kandalanu, and this new name

allowed her to fancy she had a separate king, distinct from the King

of Assyria. Elam no longer existed. Its plains and marsh lands were

doubtless occupied by Assyrian garrisons, and formed an ill-defined

annexation to Nineveh; the mountain tribes retained their autonomy, and

although still a source of annoyance to their neighbours by their raids

or sudden incursions, they no longer constituted a real danger to the

state: if there still remained some independent Elamite states, Elam

itself, the most ancient, except Babylon, of all the Asiatic kingdoms,

was erased from the map of the world. The memories of her actual history

were soon effaced, or were relegated to the region of legend, where the

fabulous Memnon supplanted in the memory of men those lines of hardy

conquerors who had levied tribute from Syria in the day when Nineveh was

still an obscure provincial town. Assyria alone remained, enthroned on

the ruins of the past, and her dominion seemed established for all time;

yet, on closer investigation, indications were not wanting of the cruel

sufferings that she also had endured. Once again, as after the wars of

Tiglath-pileser I. and those of Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser III.,

her chiefs had overtaxed her powers by a long series of unremitting wars

against vigorous foes. Doubtless the countries comprised within her

wide empire furnished her with a more ample revenue and less restricted

resources than had been at the command of the little province of ancient

days, which had been bounded by the Khabur and the Zab, and lay on the

two banks of the middle course of the Tigris; but, on the other hand,

the adversaries against whom she had measured her forces, and whom she

had overthrown, were more important and of far greater strength than

her former rivals. She had paid dearly for humiliating Egypt and laying

Babylon in the dust. As soon as Babylon was overthrown, she had, without

pausing to take breath, joined issue with Elam, and had only succeeded

in triumphing over it by drawing upon her resources to the utmost during

many years: when the struggle was over, she realised to what an extent

she had been weakened by so lavish an outpouring of the blood of her

citizens. The Babylonian and Elamite recruits whom she incorporated

into her army after each of her military expeditions, more or less

compensated for the void which victory itself had caused in her

population and her troops; but the fidelity of these vanquished foes of

yesterday, still smarting from their defeat, could not be relied on, and

the entire assimilation of their children to their conquerors was the

work of at least one or two generations. Assyria, therefore, was on the

eve of one of those periods of exhaustion which had so often enfeebled

her national vitality and imperilled her very existence. On each

previous occasion she had, it is true, recovered after a more or less

protracted crisis, and the brilliancy of her prospects, though obscured

for a moment, appeared to be increased by their temporary eclipse. There

was, therefore, good reason to hope that she would recover from her

latest phase of depression; and the only danger to be apprehended was

that some foreign power, profiting by her momentary weakness, might rise

up and force her, while still suffering from the effects of her heroic

labours, to take the field once more.