These fortified places the Assyrians attacked in three principal ways.

Sometimes they endeavored to take them by escalade, advancing for this

purpose a number of long ladders against different parts of the walls,

thus distracting the enemy’s attention and seeking to find a weak point.

Up the ladders proceeded companies of spearmen and archers in

combination, the spearmen invariably taking the lead, since their large

shields afforded them a protection which archers advancing in file up a

ladder could not have. Meanwhile from below a constant discharge was

kept up by bowmen and slingers, the former of whom were generally

protected by the _gerrhon_ or high wicker shield, held in front of them

by a comrade. The besieged endeavored to dislodge and break the ladders,

which are often represented in fragments; or, failing in this attempt,

sought by hurling down large stones, and by discharges from their bows

and slings, to precipitate and destroy their assailants. If finally they

were unable by these means to keep the Assyrians from reaching the

topmost rounds of the ladders, they had recourse to their spears, and

man to man, spear to spear, and shield to shield, they still struggled

to defend themselves. The Assyrians always represent the sieges which

they conduct as terminating successfully: but we may be tolerably sure

that in many instances the invader was beaten back, and forced to

relinquish his prey, or to try fresh methods of obtaining it.

If the escalade failed, or if it was thought unadvisable to attempt it,

the plan most commonly adopted was to try the effect of the

battering-ram. [PLATE CX., Fig. 3.] The Assyrian armies were abundantly

supplied with these engines, of which we see as many as seven engaged in

a single siege. They were variously designed and arranged. Some had a

head shaped like the point of a spear; others, one more resembling the

end of a blunderbuss. All of them were covered with a frame-work, which

was of ozier, wood, felt, or skins, for the better protection of those

who worked the implement; but some appear to have been stationary,

having their framework resting on the ground itself, while others were

moveable, being provided with wheels, which in the early times were six,

but in the later times four only. Again, sometimes, combined with the

ram and its framework was a moveable tower containing soldiers, who at

once fought the enemy on a level, and protected the engine from their

attacks. Fire was the weapon usually turned against the ram, torches,

burning tow, or other inflammable substances being cast from the walls

upon its framework, which, wherever it was of ozier or of wood, could be

easily set alight and consumed. To prevent this result, the workers of

the ram were sometimes provided with a supply of water, which they could

direct through leathern or metal pipes against the combustibles. At

other times they sought to protect themselves by suspending from a pole

in front of their engine a curtain of cloth, leather, or some other

non-inflammable substance.

Another mode of meeting the attacks of the battering-ram was by catching

the point with a chain suspended by its two ends from the walls, and

then, when the ram was worked, diverting the stroke by drawing the head

upwards. To oppose this device, the besiegers provided some of their

number with strong metal hooks, and stationed them below the ram, where

they watched for the descent of the chain. As soon as ever it caught the

head of the ram, they inserted their hooks into its links, and then

hanging upon it with their whole weight, prevented its interference with

the stroke.

Battering-rams were frequently used against the walls from the natural

ground at their foot. Sometimes, however, the besiegers raised vast

mounds against the ramparts, and advanced their engines up these, thus

bringing theirs on a level with the upper and weaker portions of the

defences. Of this nature probably were the mounds spoken of in Scripture

as employed by the Babylonians and Egyptians, as well as the Assyrians,

in their sieges of cities. The intention was not so much to pile up the

mounds till they were on a level with the top of the walls as to work

the battering-ram with greater advantage from them. A similar use was

made of mounds by the Peloponnesian Greeks, who nearly succeeded in

taking Plataea in this way. The mounds were not always composed entirely

of earth; the upper portion was often made of several layers of stone or

brick, arranged in regular order, so as to form a sort of paved road, up

which the rams might be dragged with no great difficulty. Trees, too,

were sometimes cut down and built into the mound.

Besides battering-rams, the Assyrians appear to have been acquainted

with an engine resembling the catapult, or rather the _balista_ of the

Romans. [PLATE CXI., Fig. 1.] This engine, which was of great height,

and threw stones of a large size, was protected, like the ram, by a

framework, apparently of wood, covered with canvas, felt, or hides. The

stones thrown from the engine were of irregular shape, and it was able

to discharge several at the same time. The besiegers worked it from a

mound or inclined plane, which enabled them to send their missiles to

the top of the ramparts. It had to be’ brought very close to the walls

in order to be effective--a position which gave the besieged an

opportunity of assailing it by fire. Perhaps it was this liability which

caused the infrequent use of the engine in question, which is rare upon

the earlier, and absent from the later, sculptures.

The third mode of attack employed by the Assyrians in their sieges of

fortified places was the mine. While the engines were in full play, and

the troops drawn up around the place assailed the defenders of the walls

with their slings and bows, warriors, singly, or in twos and threes,

advanced stealthily to the foot of the ramparts, and either with their

swords and the points of their spears, or with implements better suited

for the purpose, such as crowbars and pickaxes, attacked the foundations

of the walls, endeavoring to remove the stones one by one, and so to

force an entrance. While thus employed, the assailant commonly either

held his shield above him as a protection or was guarded by the shield

of a comrade; or, finally, if he carried the curved _gerrhon_, leant it

against the wall, and then placed himself under its shelter. [PLATE CX.,

Fig. 2.] Sometimes, however, he dispensed with the protection of a

shield altogether, and, trusting his helmet and coat of mail, which

covered him at all vital points, pursued his labor without paying any

attention to the weapons aimed at him by the enemy.

Occasionally the efforts of the besiegers were directed against the

gates, which they endeavored to break open with axes, or to set on fire

by an application of the torch. From this latter circumstance we may

gather that the gates were ordinarily of wood, not, like those of

Babylon and Veii, of brass. In the hot climate of Southern Asia wood

becomes so dry by exposure to the sun that the most solid doors may

readily be ignited and consumed.

[Illustration: PLATE 111]

When at last the city or castle was by some of these means reduced, and

the garrison consented to surrender itself, the work of demolition,

already begun, was completed. Generally the place was set on fire;

sometimes workmen provided with pickaxes and other tools mounted upon

the ramparts and towers, hurled down the battlements, broke breaches in

the walls, or even levelled the whole building. [PLATE CXII., Fig. 1.]

Vengeance was further taken by the destruction of the valuable trees in

the vicinity, more especially the highly prized date-palms, which were

cut with hatchets half through their stems at the distance of about two

feet from the ground, and then pulled or pushed down. [PLATE CXI., Fig.

2.] Other trees were either treated similarly, or denuded of their

branches. Occasionally the destruction was of a less wanton and vengeful

character. Timber-trees were cut down for transport to Assyria, where

they were used in the construction of the royal-palaces; and fruit-trees

were occasionally taken up by the roots, removed carefully, and planted

in the gardens and orchards of the conquerors. Meanwhile there was a

general plundering of the captured place. The temples were entered, and

the images of the gods, together, with the sacred vessels, which were

often of gold and silver, were seized and carried off in triumph.

[PLATE CXI., Fig. 4.] This was not mere cupidity. It was regarded as of

the utmost importance to show that the gods of the Assyrians were

superior to those of other countries, who were powerless to protect

either their votaries or even themselves from the irresistible might of

the servants of Asshur. The ordinary practice was to convey the images

of the foreign gods from the temples of the captured places to Assyria,

and there to offer then at the shrines of the principal Assyrian

deities. Hence the special force of the proud question, “Where _are_ the

gods of Hanath and of Arpad? _Where are_ the gods of Sepharvaim, Hena,

and Ivah? Where are they but carried captive to Assyria, prisoners and

slaves in the temples of those deities whose power they ventured to

resist?”

The houses of the city were also commonly plundered, and everything of

value in them was carried off. Long files of men, each bearing some

article of furniture out of the gate of a captured town, are frequent

upon the bas-reliefs, where we likewise often observe in the train of a

returning army carts laden with household stuff of every kind,

alternating with long strings of captives. All the spoil seems to have

been first brought by the individual plunderers to one place, where it

was carefully sorted and counted in the presence and under the

superintendence of royal scribes, who took an exact inventory of the

whole before it was carried away by its captors. [PLATE CXI., Fig. 3.]

Scales were used to determine the weight of articles made of the

precious metals, which might otherwise have been subjected to clipping.

We may conclude from these practices that a certain proportion of the

value of all private spoil was either due to the royal treasury, or

required to be paid to the gods in acknowledgment of their aid and

protection. Besides the private spoil, there was a portion which was

from the first set apart exclusively for the monarch. This consisted

especially of the public treasure of the captured city, the gold and

silver, whether in bullion, plate, or ornaments, from the palace of its

prince, and the idols, and probably the other valuables from the

temples.

The inhabitants of a captured place were usually treated with more or

less of severity. Those regarded as most responsible for the resistance

or the rebellion were seized; generally their hands were manacled either

before them or behind their backs, while sometimes fetters were attached

to their feet, and even rings passed through their lips, and in this

abject guise they were brought into the presence of the Assyrian king.

Seated on his throne in his fortified camp without the place, and

surrounded by his attendants, he received them one by one, and instantly

pronounced their doom. On some he proudly placed his foot, some he

pardoned, a few he ordered for execution, many he sentenced to be torn

from their homes and carried into slavery.

Various modes of execution seem to have been employed in the case of

condemned captives. One of them was empalement. This has always been,

and still remains, a common mode of punishment in the East; but the

manner of empaling which the Assyrians adopted was peculiar. They

pointed a stake at one end, and, having fixed the other end firmly into

the ground, placed their criminal with the pit of his stomach upon the

point, and made it enter his body just below the breastbone. This method

of empaling must have destroyed life tolerably soon, and have thus been

a far less cruel punishment than the crucifixion of the Romans. We do

not observe it very often in the Assyrian sculptures, nor do we ever see

it applied to more than a few individuals. It was probably reserved for

those who were considered the worst criminals. Another very common mode

of executing captives was by beating in their skulls with a mace. In

this case the victim commonly knelt; his two hands were placed before

him upon a block or cushion: behind him stood two executioners, one of

whom held him by a cord round the neck, while the other, seizing his

back hair in one hand, struck him a furious blow upon the head with a

mace which he held in the other. [PLATE CXI., Fig. 5.] It must have been

rarely, if ever, that a second blow was needed.

Decapitation was less frequently practised. The expression, indeed. “I

cut off their heads,” is common in the Inscriptions but in most

instances it evidently refers to the practice, already noticed, of

collecting the heads of those who had fallen in battle. Still there are

instances, both in the Inscriptions and in the sculptures, of what

appears to have been a formal execution of captives by beheading. In

these cases the criminal, it would seem, stood upright, or bending a

little forwards, and the executioner, taking him by a lock of hair with

his left hand, struck his head from his shoulders with a short sword,

which he held in his right. [PLATE CXII., Fig. 5.]

It is uncertain whether a punishment even more barbarous than these was

not occasionally resorted to. In two or three bas-reliefs executioners

are represented in the act of flaying prisoners with a knife. The bodies

are extended upon the ground or against a wall, to which they are

fastened by means of four pegs attached by strings or thongs to the two

wrists and the two ankles. The executioner leans over the victim, and

with his knife detaches the skin from the flesh. One would trust that

this operation was not performed until life was extinct. We know that it

was the practice of the Persians, and even of the barbarous Scythians,

to flay the corpses, and not the living forms, of criminals and of

enemies; we may hope, therefore, that the Assyrians removed the skin

from the dead, to use it as a trophy or as a warning, and did not

inflict so cruel a torture on the living.

Sometimes the punishment awarded to a prisoner was mutilation instead of

death. Cutting off the ears close to the head, blinding the eyes with

burning-irons, cutting off the nose, and plucking out the tongue by the

roots, have been in all ages favorite Oriental punishments. We have

distinct evidence that some at least of these cruelties were practised

by the Assyrians. Asshur-izir-pal tells us in his great Inscription that

he often cut off the noses and the ears of prisoners; while a slab of

Asshur-bani-pal, the son of Esarhaddon, shows a captive in the hands of

the torturers, one of whom holds his head firm and fast, while another

thrusts his hand into his mouth for the purpose of tearing out the

tongue.

The captives carried away by the conquerors consisted of men, women, and

children. The men were formed into bands, under the conduct of officers,

who urged theme forward on their way by blows, with small regard to

their sufferings. Commonly they were conveyed to the capital, where they

were employed by the monarchs in the lower or higher departments of

labor, according to their capacities. The skilled workmen were in

request to assist in the ornamentation of shrines and palaces, while the

great mass of the unskilled were made use of to quarry and drag stone,

to raise mounds, make bricks, and the like. Sometimes, instead of being

thus employed in task-work in or near the capital, the captives were

simply settled in new regions, where it was thought that they would

maintain the Assyrian power against native malcontents. Thus Esarhaddon

planted Babylonians, Susanchites, Dehavites, Elamites, and others in

Samaria, while Sargon settled his Samaritan captives in Gauzanitis and

in “the cities of the Medes.”

[Illustration: PLATE 112]

The women and children carried off by the conquerors were treated with

more tenderness than the men. [PLATE CXII., Fig. 2.] Sometimes on foot,

but often mounted on mules, or seated in carts drawn by bullocks or

asses, they followed in the train of their new masters, not always

perhaps unwilling to exchange the monotony of domestic life at home for

the excitement of a new and unknown condition in a fresh country. We

seldom see them exhibiting any signs of grief. The women and children

are together, and the mothers lavish on their little ones the usual

caresses and kind offices, taking them in their laps, giving then the

breast, carrying them upon their shoulders, or else leading them by the

hand. At intervals they were allowed to stop and rest; and it was not

even the practice to deprive them of such portion of their household

stuff as they might have contrived to secure before quitting their

homes. This they commonly bore in a bag or sack, which was either held

in the hand or thrown over one shoulder, When they reached Assyria, it

would seem that they were commonly assigned as wives to the soldiers of

the Assyrian army.

Together with their captives, the Assyrians carried off vast quantities

of the domesticated animals, such as oxen, sheep, goats, horses, asses,

camels, and mules. The numbers mentioned in the Inscriptions are

sometimes almost incredible. Sennacherib, for instance, says that in one

foray he bore off from the tribes on the Euphrates “7200 horses and

mares, 5230 camels, 11,000 mules, 120,000 oxen, and 800,000 sheep”!

Other kings omit particulars, but speak of the captured animals which

they led away as being “too numerous to be counted,” or “countless as

the stars of heaven.” The Assyrian sculptors are limited by the nature

of their art to comparatively small numbers, but they show us horses,

camels, and mules in the train of a returning army, together with groups

of the other animals, indicative of the vast flocks and herds

continually mentioned in the Inscriptions.

Occasionally the monarchs were not content with bringing home

domesticated animals only, but took the trouble to transport from

distant regions into Assyria wild beasts of various kinds.

Tiglath-Pileser I. informs us in general terms that, besides carrying

off the droves of the horses, cattle, and asses that he obtained from

the subjugated countries, he “took away and drove off the herds of the

wild goats and the ibexes, the wild sheep and the wild cattle;” and

another monarch mentions that in one expedition he carried off from the

middle Euphrates a drove of forty wild cattle, and also a flock of

twenty ostriches. The object seems to have been to stock Assyria with a

variety and an abundance of animals of chase.

The foes of the Assyrians would sometimes, when hard pressed, desert the

dry land, and betake themselves to the marshes, or cross the sea to

islands where they trusted that they might be secure from attack. Not

unfrequently they obtained their object by such a retreat, for the

Assyrians were not a maritime people. Sometimes, however, they were

pursued. The Assyrians would penetrate into the marshes by means of reed

boats, probably not very different from the _terradas_ at present in use

among the Arabs of the Mesopotamian marsh districts. Such boats are

represented upon the bas-reliefs as capable of holding from three to

five armed men. On these the Assyrian foot-soldiers would embark, taking

with them a single boatman to each boat, who propelled the vessel much

as a Venetian gondolier propels his gondola, i.e., with a single long

oar or paddle, which he pushed from him standing at the stern. They

would then in these boats attack the vessels of the enemy, which are

always represented as smaller than theirs, run them down or board them,

kill their crews or force them into the water, or perhaps allow them to

surrender. Meanwhile, the Assyrian cavalry was stationed round the marsh

among the tall reeds which thickly clothed its edge, ready to seize or

slay such of the fugitives as might escape from the foot.

When the refuge sought was an island, if it lay near the shore, the

Assyrians would sometimes employ the natives of the adjacent coast to

transport beams of wood and other materials by means of their boats, in

order to form a sort of bridge or mole reaching from the mainland to the

isle whereto their foes had fled. Such a design was entertained, or at

least professed, by Xerxes after the destruction of his fleet in the

battle of Salamis, and it was successfully executed by Alexander the

Great, who took in this way the new or island of Tyre. From a series of

reliefs discovered at Khorsabad wo may conclude that more than two

hundred years before the earlier of these two occasions, the Assyrians

had conceived the idea, and even succeeded in carrying out the plan, of

reducing islands near the coast by moles.

Under the Chaldaeans, whose “cry was in their ships,” the Assyrians seem

very rarely to have adventured themselves upon the deep. If their

enemies fled to islands which could not be reached by moles, or to lands

across the sea, in almost every instance they escaped. Such escapes are

represented upon the sculptures, where we see the Assyrians taking a

maritime town at one end, while at the other the natives are embarking

their women and children, and putting to sea, without any pursuit being

made after them. In none of the bas-reliefs do we observe any sea-going

vessels with Assyrians on board and history tells us of but two or three

expeditions by sea in which they took part. One of these was an

expedition by Sennacharib against the coast of the Persian Gulf, to

which his Chaldaean enemies had fled. On this occasion he brought

shipwrights from Phoenicia to Assyria, and made them build him ships

there, which were then launched upon the Tigris, and conveyed down to

the sea. With a fleet thus constructed, and probably manned, by

Phoenicians, Sennacherib crossed to the opposite coast, defeated the

refugees, and embarking his prisoners on board, returned in triumph to

the mainland. Another expedition was that of Shalmaneser IV. against the

island Tyre. Assyrians are said to have been personally engaged in it;

but here again we are told that they embarked in ships furnished to then

by the Phoenicians, and maimed chiefly by Phoenician sailors.

When a country was regarded as subjugated, the Assyrian monarch commonly

marked the establishment of his sovereignty by erecting a memorial in

some conspicuous or important situation within the territory conquered,

as an enduring sign of his having taken possession. These memorials were

either engraved on the natural rock or on solid blocks of stone cut into

the form of a broad low stele. They contained a figure of the king,

usually enclosed in an arched frame; and an inscription, of greater or

less length, setting forth his name, his titles, and some of his

exploits. More than thirty such memorials are mentioned in the extant

Inscriptions, and the researches of recent times have recovered some ten

or twelve of them. They uniformly represent the king in his sacerdotal

robes, with the sacred collar round his neck, and the emblems of the

gods above his head, raising the right hand in the act of adoration, as

if he were giving thanks to Asshur and his guardian deities on account

of his successes.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It is now time to pass from the military customs of the Assyrians to a

consideration of their habits and usages in time of peace, so far as

they are made known to us either by historical records or by the

pictorial evidence of the has reliefs. And here it may be convenient to

treat separately of the public life of the king and court, and of the

private life of the people.

In Assyria, as in most Oriental countries, the keystone of the social

arch, the central point of the system, round which all else revolved,

and on which all else depended, was the monarch. “_L’etat, c’est moi_”

might have been said with more truth by an Assyrian prince than even by

the “_Grand Monarque_,” whose dictum it is reported to have been. Alike

in the historical notices, and in the sculptures, we have the person of

the king presented to us with consistent prominence, and it is

consequently with him that we most naturally commence the present

portion of our inquiry.

The ordinary dress of the monarch in time of peace was a long flowing

robe, reaching to the ankles, elaborately patterned and fringed, over

which was worn, first, a broad belt, and then a species of open mantle,

or chasuble, very curiously contrived. [PLATE CXII., Fig. 3.] This

consisted mainly of two large flaps, both of which were commonly

rounded, though sometimes one of them was square at bottom. These fell

over the robe in front and behind, leaving the sides open, and so

exposing the under dress to view. The two flaps must have been sewn

together at the places marked with the dotted lines _a b_ and _c d_, the

space from _a_ to _c_ being left open, and the mantle passed by that

means over the head. At _d g_ there was commonly a short sleeve _(h)_,

which covered the upper part of the left arm, but the right arm was left

free, the mantle falling of either side of it. Sometimes, besides the

flaps, the mantle seems to have had two pointed wings attached to the

shoulders (_a f b_ and _c e h_ in the illustration), which were made to

fall over in front. Occasionally there was worn above the chasuble a

broad diagonal belt ornamented with a deep fringe and sometimes there

depended at the back of the dress a species of large hood.

The special royal head-dress was a tall mitre or tiara, which at first

took the shape of the head, but rose above it to a certain height in a

gracefully curved line, when it was covered in with a top, flat, like

that of a hat, but having a projection towards the centre, which rose up

into a sort of apex, or peak, not however pointed, but either rounded or

squared off. The tiara was generally ornamented with a succession of

bands, between which were commonly patterns more or less elaborate.

Ordinarily the lowest band, instead of running parallel with the others,

rose with a gentle curve towards the front, allowing room for a large

rosette over the forehead, and for other similar ornaments. If we may

trust the representations on the enamelled bricks, supported as they are

to some extent by the tinted reliefs, we may say that the tiara was of

three colors, red, yellow, and white. The red and white alternated in

broad bands; the ornaments upon them were yellow, being probably either

embroidered on the material of the head-dress in threads of gold, or

composed of thin gold plates which may have been sown on. The general

material of the tiara is likely to have been cloth or felt; it can

scarcely have been metal, if the deep crimson tint of the bricks and the

reliefs is true. [PLATE CXII., Fig. 4.]

In the early sculptures the tiara is more depressed than in the later,

and it is also less richly ornamented. It has seldom more than two

bands, viz., a narrow one at top, and at bottom a broader curved one,

rising towards the front. To this last are attached two long strings or

lappets, which fall behind the monarch’s back to a level with his elbow.

[PLATE CXIII., Fig. 1.]

[Illustration: PLATE 113]

Another head-dress which the monarch sometimes wore was a sort of band

or fillet. This was either elevated in front and ornamented with a

single rosette, like the lowest band of the tiara, or else of uniform

width and patterned along its whole course. In either case there

depended from it, on each side of the back hair, a long ribbon or

streamer, fringed at the end and sometimes ornamented with a delicate

pattern. [PLATE CXIII., Fig 2.]

The monarch’s feet were protected by sandals or shoes. In the early

sculptures sandals only appear in use, shoes being unknown (as it would

seem) until the time of Sennacherib. The sandals worn were of two kinds.

The simplest sort had a very thin sole and a small cap for the heel,

made apparently of a number of strips of leather sewn together. It was

held in place by a loop over the great-toe, attached to the fore part of

the sole, and by a string which was laced backwards and forwards across

the instep, and then tied in a bow. [PLATE CXIII., Fig. 4.]

The other kind of sandal had a very different sort of sole; it was of

considerable thickness, especially at the heel, from which it gradually

tapered to the toe. Attached to this was an upper leather which

protected the heel and the whole of the side of the foot, but left the

toes and the instep exposed. A loop fastened to the sole received the

great-toe, and at the point where the loop was inserted two straps were

also made fast, which were then carried on either side the great-toe to

the top of the foot, where they crossed each other, and, passing twice

through rings attached to the edge of the upper leather, were finally

fastened, probably by a buckle, at the top of the instep. [PLATE CXIII.,

Fig. 6.]

The shoe worn by the later kings was of a coarse and clumsy make, very

much rounded at the toe, patterned with rosettes, crescents, and the

like, and (apparently) laced in front. In this respect it differed from

the shoe of the queen, which will be represented presently, and also

from the shoes worn by the tribute-bearers. [PLATE CXIII, Fig. 5.]

The accessory portions of the royal costume were chiefly belts,

necklaces, armlets, bracelets, and earrings. Besides the belt round the

waist, in which two or three highly ornamented daggers were frequently

thrust, and the broad fringed cross-belt, of which mention was made

above, the Assyrian monarch wore a narrow cross-belt passing across his

right shoulder, from which his sword hung at his left side. This belt

was sometimes patterned with rosettes. It was worn over the front flap

of the chasuble, but under the back flap, and was crossed at right

angles by the broad fringed belt, which was passed over the right arm

and head so as to fall across the left shoulder.

The royal necklaces were of two kinds. Some consisted merely of one or

more strings of long lozenge-shaped beads slightly chased, and connected

by small links, ribbed perpendicularly. [PLATE CXIII., Fig. 7.] The

other kind was a band or collar, perhaps of gold, on which were hung a

number of sacred emblems: as the crescent or emblem of the Moon-God,

Sin; the four-rayed disk, the emblem of the Sun-God, Shamas; the

six-rayed or eight-rayed disk, the emblem of Gula, the Sun-Goddess; the

horned cap, perhaps the emblem of the king’s guardian genius; and the

double or triple bolt, which was the emblem of Vul, the god of the

atmosphere. This sacred collar was a part of the king’s civil and not

merely of his sacerdotal dress; as appears from the fact that it was

sometimes worn when the king was merely receiving prisoners. [PLATE

CXIII., Fig. 8.]

The monarch wore a variety of armlets. The most common was a plain bar

of a single twist, the ends of which slightly overlapped each other. A

more elegant kind was similar to this, except that the bar terminated in

animal heads carefully wrought, among which the heads of rams, horses,

and ducks were the most common. A third sort has the appearance of being

composed of a number of long strings or wires, confined at intervals of

less than an inch by cross bands at right angles to the wires. This sort

was carried round the arm twice, and even then its ends overlapped

considerably. It is probable that all the armlets were of metal, and

that the appearance of the last was given to it by the workman in

imitation of an earlier and ruder armlet of worsted or leather. [PLATE

CXIV., Fig. 1. ]

[Illustration: PLATE 114]

The bracelets of the king, like his armlets, were sometimes mere bars of

metal, quite plain and without ornament. More often, however, they were

ribbed and adorned with a large rosette at the centre. Sometimes,

instead of one simple rosette, we see three double rosettes, between

which project small points, shaped like the head of a spear.

Occasionally these double rosettes appear to be set on the surface of a

broad bar, which is chased so as to represent brickwork. In no case can

we see how the bracelets were fastened; perhaps they were elastic, and

were slipped over the hand. [PLATE CXIV., Fig. 3.]

Specimens of royal earrings have been already given in an earlier

chapter of this volume. The most ordinary form in the more ancient times

was a long drop, which was sometimes delicately chased Another common

kind was an incomplete Maltese cross, one arm of the four being left out

because it would have interfered with the ear. [PLATE CXIV., Fig. 2.] In

later times there was a good deal of variety in the details; but the

drop and the cross were always favorite features.

When the monarch went out to the hunt or to the battle, he laid aside

such ornaments as encumbered him, reserving however his earrings,

bracelets, and armlets, and then, stripping off his upper dress or

chasuble, appeared in the under robe which has been already described.

This robe was confined at the waist by a broad cincture or girdle,

outside of which was worn a narrowish belt wherein daggers were often

thrust. In early times this cincture seems to have been fastened by a

ribbon with long streaming ends, which are very conspicuous in the

Nimrud sculptures. At the same period the monarch often wore, when he

hunted or went out to battle, a garment which might have been called an

apron, if it had not been worn behind instead of in front. This was

generally patterned and fringed very richly, besides being ornamented

with one or more long pendent tassels. [PLATE CXIV., Fig. 4.]

The sacerdotal dress of the king, or that which he commonly wore when

engaged in the rites of his religion, differed considerably from his

ordinary costume. His inner garment, indeed, seems to have been the

usual long gown with a fringe descending to the ankles; but this was

almost entirely concealed under an ample outer robe, which was closely

wrapped round the form and kept in place by a girdle. A deep fringe,

arranged in two rows, one above the other, and carried round the robe in

curved sweeps at an angle with the horizontal line, is the most striking

feature of this dress, which is also remarkable for the manner in which

it confines and conceals the left arm, while the right is left free and

exposed to view. A representation of a king thus apparelled will be

found in an earlier part of this work, taken from a statue now in the

British Museum. It is peculiar in having the head uncovered, and in the

form of the implement borne in the right hand. It is also incomplete as

a representation, from the fact that all the front of the breast is

occupied by an inscription. Other examples show that the tiara was

commonly worn as a part of the sacerdotal costume; that the sacred

collar adorned the breast, necklaces the neck, and bracelets the two

arms; while in the belt, which was generally to some extent knotted,

were borne two or three daggers. The mace seems to have been a necessary

appendage to the costume, and was always grasped just below its head by

the left hand.

We have but one representation of an Assyrian queen. Despite the

well-known stories of Semiramis and her manifold exploits, it would seem

that the Assyrians secluded their females with as rigid and watchful a

jealousy as modern Turks or Persians. The care taken with respect to the

direction of the passages in the royal hareem has been noticed already.

It is quite in accordance with the spirit thus indicated, and with the

general tenor of Oriental habits, that neither in inscriptions nor in

sculptured representations do the Assyrians allow their women to make

more than a most rare and occasional appearance. Fortunately for us,

their jealousy was sometimes relaxed to a certain extent; and in one

scene, recovered from the _debris_ of an Assyrian palace we are enabled

to contemplate at once the domestic life of the monarch and the attire

and even the features of his consort.

It appears that in the private apartments, while the king, like the

Romans and the modern Orientals, reclined upon a couch leaning his

weight partly upon his left elbow, and having his right arm free and

disposable, her majesty the queen sat in a chair of state by the couch’s

side, near its foot, and facing her lord. [PLATE CXV., Fig. 1.] Two

eunuchs provided with large fans were in attendance upon the monarch,

and the same number waited upon the queen, standing behind her chair.

Her majesty, whose hair was arranged nearly like that of her royal

consort, wore upon her head a band or fillet having something of the

appearance of a crown of towers, such as encircles the brow of Cybele on

Greek coins and statues. Her dress was a long-sleeved gown reaching from

the neck to the feet, flounced and trimmed at the bottom in an elaborate

way, and elsewhere patterned with rosettes, over which she wore a

fringed tunic or frock descending half-way between the knees and the

feet. [PLATE CXV., Fig. 3.] In addition to these two garments, she wore

upon her back and shoulders a light cloak or cape, patterned (like the

rest of her dress) with rosettes and edged with a deep fringe. Her feet

were encased in shoes of a clumsy make, also patterned. Her ornaments,

besides the crown upon her head, were earrings, a necklace, and

bracelets. Her hair was cushioned, and adorned with a drapery which hung

over the back. Her feet rested on a handsome footstool, also cushioned.

On the slab from which this description is taken the royal pair seem to

be refreshing themselves with wine. Each supports on the thumb and

fingers of the right hand a saucer or shallow drinking-cup, probably of

some precious metal, which they raise to their lips simultaneously, as

if they were pledging one another. The scene of the entertainment is the

palace garden; for trees grow on either side of the main figures, while

over their heads, a vine hangs its festoons and its rich clusters. By

the side of the royal couch, and in front of the queen, is a table

covered with a table-cloth, on which are a small box or casket, a

species of shallow bowl which may have held incense or perfume of some

kind, and a third article frequently seen in close proximity to the

king, but of whose use it is impossible to form a conjecture. At the

couch’s head stands another curious article, a sort of tall vase

surmounted by a sugarloaf, which probably represents an altar. The king

bears in his left hand the lotus or sacred flower, while the queen holds

in hers what looks like a modern fan. All the lower part of the

monarch’s person is concealed beneath a coverlet, which is plain, except

that it has tassels at the corners and an embroidered border.

The officers in close attendance upon the monarch varied according to

his employment. In war he was accompanied by his charioteer, his

shield-bearer or shield-bearers, his groom, his quiver-bearer, his

mace-bearer, and sometimes by his parasol-bearer. In peace the

parasol-bearer is always represented as in attendance, except in hunting

expeditions, or where he is replaced by a fan-bearer. The parasol, which

exactly resembled that still in use throughout the East, was reserved

exclusively for the monarch. [PLATE CXVI., Fig. 1.] It had a tall and

thick pole, which the bearer grasped with both his hands, and in the

early times a somewhat small circular top. Under the later kings the

size of the head was considerably enlarged; and, at the same time, a

curtain or flap was attached, which, falling from the edge of the

parasol, more effectually protected the monarch from the sun’s rays. The

head of the parasol was fringed with tassels, and the upper extremity of

the pole commonly terminated in a flower or other ornament. In the later

time both the head and the curtain which depended from it were richly

patterned. If we may trust the remains of color upon the Khorsabad

sculptures, the tints preferred were red and white, which alternated in

bands upon the parasol as upon the royal tiara.

There was nothing very remarkable in the dress or quality of the royal

attendants. Except the groom, the charioteer, and the shield-bearers,

they were in the early times almost invariably eunuchs; but the later

kings seem to have preferred eunuchs for the offices of parasol-bearer

and fan-bearer only. The dress of the eunuchs is most commonly a long

fringed gown, reaching from the neck to the feet, with very short

sleeves, and a broad belt or girdle confining the gown at the waist.

Sometimes they have a cross-belt also; and occasionally both this and

the girdle round the waist are richly fringed. The eunuchs commonly wear

earrings, and sometimes armlets and bracelets; in a few instances they

have their necks adorned with necklaces, and their long dresses

elaborately patterned. Their heads are either bare, or at most encircled

with a fillet.

[Illustration: PLATE 115]

A peculiar physiognomy is assigned to this class of persons--the

forehead low, the nose small and rounded, the lips full, the chin large

and double, the cheeks bloated. [PLATE CXV., Fig. 2.] They are generally

represented as shorter and stouter than the other Assyrians. Though

placed in confidential situations about the person of the monarch, they

seem not to have held very high or important offices. The royal Vizier

is never a eunuch, and eunuchs are rarely seen among the soldiers; they

are scribes, cooks, musicians, perhaps priests; as they are

grooms-in-waiting, huntsmen, parasol-bearers, and fan-bearers; but it

cannot be said with truth that they had the same power in Assyria which

they have commonly possessed in the more degraded of the Oriental

monarchies. It is perhaps a sound interpretation of the name Rabsaris in

Scripture to understand it as titular, not appellative, and to translate

it “the Chief Eunuch” or “the Master of the Eunuchs;” and if so, we have

an instance of the employment by one Assyrian king of a person of this

class on an embassy to a petty sovereign: but the sculptures are far

from bearing out the notion that eunuchs held the same high position in

the Assyrian court as they have since held generally in the East, where

they have not only continually filled the highest offices of state, but

have even attained to sovereign power. On the contrary, their special

charge seems rather to have been the menial offices about the person of

the monarch, which imply confidence in the fidelity of those to whom

they are entrusted, but not submission to their influence in the conduct

of state affairs. And it is worthy of notice that, instead of becoming

more influential as time went on, they appear to have become less so; in

the later sculptures the royal attendants are far less generally eunuchs

than in the earlier ones; and the difference is most marked in the more

important offices.

[Illustration: PLATE 116]

It is not quite certain that the Chief Eunuch is represented upon the

sculptures. Perhaps we may recognize him in an attendant, who commonly

bears a fan, but whose special badge of office is a long fringed scarf

or band, which hangs down below his middle both before him and behind

him, being passed over the left shoulder. [PLATE CXVI., Fig. 2.] This

officer appears, in one bas-relief, alone in front of the king; in

another, he stands on the right hand of the Vizier, level with him,

facing the king as he drinks; in a third, he receives prisoners after a

battle; while in another part of the same sculpture he is in the king’s

camp preparing the table for his master’s supper. There is always a good

deal of ornamentation about his dress, which otherwise nearly resembles

that of the inferior royal attendants, consisting of a long fringed gown

or robe, a girdle fringed or plain, a cross-belt generally fringed, and

the scarf already described. His head and feet are generally bare,

though sometimes the latter are protected by sandals. He is found only

upon the sculptures of the early period.

Among the officers who have free access to the royal person, there is

one who stands out with such marked prominence from the rest that he has

been properly recognized as the Grand Vizier or prime minister at once

the chief counsellor of the monarch, and the man whose special business

it was to signify and execute his will. The dress of the Grand Vizier is

more rich than that of any other person except the monarch; and there

are certain portions of his apparel which he and the king have alone the

privilege of wearing. These are, principally, the tasselled apron and

the fringed band depending from the fillet, the former of which is found

in the early period only, while the latter belongs to no particular

time, but throughout the whole series of sculptures is the distinctive

mark of royal or quasi-royal authority. To these two may be added the

long ribbon or scarf, with double streamers at the ends, which depended

from, and perhaps fastened, the belt--a royal ornament worn also by the

Vizier in at least one representation. [PLATE CXVI., Fig. 3.]

The chief garment of the Vizier is always a long fringed robe, reaching

from the neck to the feet. This is generally trimmed with embroidery at

the top, round the sleeves, and round the bottom. It is either seen to

be confined by a broad belt round the waist, or else is covered from the

waist to the knees by two falls of a heavy and deep fringe. In this

latter case, a broad cross-belt is worn over the left shoulder, and the

upper fall of fringe hangs from the cross-belt. A fillet is worn upon

the head, which is often highly ornamented. The feet are sometimes bare,

but more often are protected by sandals, or (as in the accompanying

representation) by embroidered shoes. Earrings adorn the ears;

bracelets, sometimes accompanied by armlets, the arms. A sword is

generally worn at the left side.

The Vizier is ordinarily represented in one of two attitudes. Either he

stands with his two hands joined in front of him, the right hand in the

left, and the fingers not clasped, but left loose--the ordinary attitude

of passive and respectful attention, in which officers who carry nothing

await the orders of the king,--or he has the right arm raised, the elbow

bent, and the right hand brought to a level with his month, while the

left hand rests upon the hilt of the sword worn at his left side. [PLATE

CXVII., Fig. 1.] In this latter case it may be presumed that we have the

attitude of conversation, as in the former we have that of attentive

listening. When the Vizier assumes this energetic posture he is commonly

either introducing prisoners or bringing in spoil to the king. When he

is quiescent, he stands before the throne to receive the king’s orders,

or witnesses the ceremony with which it was usual to conclude a

successful hunting expedition.

The pre-eminent rank and dignity of this officer is shown, not only by

his participation in the insignia of royal authority, but also and very

clearly by the fact that, when he is present, no one ever intervenes

between him and the king. He has the undisputed right of precedence, so

that he is evidently the first subject of the crown, and he alone, is

seen addressing the monarch. He does not always accompany the king on

his military expeditions but when he attends them, he still maintains

his position, having a dignity greater than that of any general, and so

taking the entire direction of the prisoners and of the spoil.

The royal fan-bearers were two in number. They were invariably eunuchs.

Their ordinary position was behind the monarch, on whom they attended

alike in the retirement of private life and in religious and civil

ceremonies. On some occasions, however, one of the two was privileged to

leave his station behind the king’s chair or throne, and, advancing in

front, to perform certain functions before the face of his master. He

handed his master the sacred cup, and waited to receive it back, at the

same time diligently discharging the ordinary duties of his office by

keeping up a current of air and chasing away those plagues of the

East--the flies. The fan-bearer thus privileged wears always the long

tasselled scarf, which seems to have been a badge of office, and may not

improbably mark him for the chief Eunuch. In the absence of the Vizier,

or sometimes in subordination to him, he introduced the tribute-bearers

to the king, reading out their names and titles from a scroll or tablet

which he held in his left hand. [PLATE CXVII., Fig. 2.]

[Illustration: PLATE 117]

[Illustration: PLATE 118]

The fan carried by these attendants seems in most instances to have been

made of feathers. It had a shortish handle, which was generally mere or

less ornamented, and frequently terminated in the head of a ram or other

animal. [PLATE CXVIII., Fig. 1.] The feathers were sometimes of great

length, and bent gracefully by their own weight, as they were pointed

slantingly towards the monarch. Occasionally a comparatively short fan

was used, and the feathers were replaced by a sort of brush, which may

have been made of horse-hair, or possibly of some vegetable fibre.

The other attendants on the monarch require no special notice. With

regard to their number, however, it may be observed that, although the

sculptures generally do not represent them as very numerous, there is

reason to believe that they amounted to several hundreds. The enormous

size of the palaces can scarcely be otherwise accounted for: and in one

sculpture of an exceptional character, where the artist seems to have

aimed at representing his subject in full, we can count above seventy

attendants present with the monarch at one time. Of these less than

one-half are eunuch; and these wear the long robe with the fringed belt

and cross-belt. The other attendants wear in many cases the same

costume; sometimes, however, they are dressed in a tunic and greaves,

like the soldiers.

There can be no doubt that the court ceremonial of the Assyrians was

stately and imposing. The monarch seems indeed not to have affected that

privacy and seclusion which forms a predominant feature of the

ceremonial observed in most Oriental monarchies. He showed himself very

freely to his subjects on many occasions. He superintended in person the

accomplishment of his great works. In war and in the chase he rode in an

open chariot, never using a litter, though litters were not unknown to

the Assyrians. In his expeditions he would often descend from his

chariot, and march or fight on foot like the meanest of his subjects.

But though thus familiarizing the multitude with his features and

appearance, he was far from allowing familiarity of address. Both in

peace and war he was attended by various officers of state, and no one

had speech of him except through them. It would even seem as if two

persons only were entitled to open a conversation with him--the Vizier

and the Chief Eunuch. When he received them, he generally placed himself

upon his throne, sitting, while they stood to address him. It is

strongly indicative of the haughty pride of these sovereigns that they

carried with them in their distant expeditions the cumbrous thrones

whereon they were wont to sit when they dispensed justice or received

homage. On these thrones they sat, in or near their fortified camps,

when the battle or the siege was ended, and thus sitting they received

in state the spoil and the prisoners. Behind them on such occasions were

the two fan-bearers, while near at hand were guards, scribes, grooms,

and other attendants. In their palace halls undoubtedly the ceremonial

used was stricter, grander, and more imposing. The sculptures, however,

furnish no direct evidence on this point, for there is nothing to mark

the scene of the great processional pieces.

In the pseudo-history of Ctesias, the Assyrian kings were represented as

voluptuaries of the extremest kind, who passed their whole lives within

the palace, in the company of their concubines and their eunuchs,

indulging themselves in perpetual ease, pleasure, and luxury. We have

already seen how the warlike character of so many monarchs gives the lie

to these statements, so far as they tax the Assyrian kings with sloth

and idleness. It remains to examine the charge of over-addiction to

sensual delights, especially to those of the lowest and grossest

description. Now it is at least remarkable that, so far as we have any

real evidence, the Assyrian kings appear as monogamists. In the

inscription on the god Nebo, the artist dedicates his statue to his

“lord Vol-lush (?) and his _lady_, Sammuramit.” In the solitary

sculptured representation of the private life of the king, he is seen in

the company of one female only. Even in the very narrative of Ctesias,

Ninus has but one wife, Semiramis; and Sardanapalus, notwithstanding his

many concubines, has but five children, three sons and two daughters. It

is not intended to press these arguments to an extreme, or to assume, on

the strength of them, that the Assyrian monarchs were really faithful to

one woman. They may have had--nay, it is probable that they had--a

certain number of concubines; but there is really not the least ground

for believing that they carried concubinage to an excess, or

over-stepped in this respect the practice of the best Eastern

sovereigns. At any rate they were not the voluptuaries which Ctesias

represented them. A considerable portion of their lives was passed in

the toils and dangers of war; and their peaceful hours, instead of being

devoted to sloth and luxury in the retirement of the palace, were

chiefly employed, as we shall presently see, in active and manly

exercises in the field, which involved much exertion and no small

personal peril.

The favorite occupation of the king in peace was the chase of the lion.

In the early times he usually started on a hunting expedition in his

chariot, dressed as when he went out to war, and attended by his

charioteer, some swordsmen, and a groom holding a led horse. He carried

a bow and arrows, a sword, one or two daggers, and a spear, which last

stood in a rest made for it at the back of the chariot. Two quivers,

each containing an axe and an abundant supply of arrows, hung from the

chariot transversely across its right side, while a shield armed with

teeth was suspended behind. When a lion was found, the king pursued it

in his chariot, letting fly his arrows as he went, and especially

seeking to pierce the animal about the heart and head. Sometimes he

transfixed the beast with three or four shafts before it succumbed.

Occasionally the lion attacked him in his chariot, and was met with

spear and shield, or with a fresh arrow, according to the exigencies of

the moment, or the monarch’s preference for one or the other weapon. On

rare occasions the monarch descended to the ground, and fought on foot.

He would then engage the lion in close combat with no other weapon but a

short sword, which he strove to plunge, and often plunged, into his

heart. [PLATE CXVIII., Fig. 2.]

In the later time, though the chariot was still employed to some extent

in the lion-hunts, it appears to have been far more usual for the king

to enjoy the sport on foot. He carried a straight sword, which seems to

have been a formidable weapon; it was strong, very broad, and two feet

or a little more in length. Two attendants waited closely upon the

monarch, one of whom carried a bow and arrows, while the other was

commonly provided with one or two spears. From these attendants the king

took the bow or spear at pleasure, usually commencing the attack with

his arrows, and finally despatching the spent animal with sword or

spear, as he deemed best. Sometimes, but not very often, the spearman in

attendance carried also a shield, and held both spear and shield in

advance of his master to protect him from the animal’s spring. Generally

the monarch faced the danger with no such protection, and received the

brute on his sword, or thrust him through with his pike. [PLATE CXVIII.,

Fig. 3;] [PLATE CXIX., Fig. 1.] Perhaps the sculptures exaggerate the

danger which he affronted at such moments; but we can hardly suppose

that there was not a good deal of peril incurred in these hand-to-hand

contests.

[Illustration: PLATE 119]

Two modes of hunting the king of beasts were followed at this time.

Either he was sought in his native haunts, which were then, as now, the

reedy coverts by the side of the canals and great streams; or he was

procured beforehand, conveyed to the hunting-ground, and there turned

out before the hunters. In the former case the monarch took the field

accompanied by his huntsmen and beaters on horse and foot, these last

often holding dogs in leash, which, apparently, were used only to

discover and arouse the game, but were not slipped at it when started.

No doubt the hunt was sometimes entirely on the land, the monarch

accompanying his beaters along one or other of the two banks of a canal

or stream. But a different plan is known to have been adopted on some

occasions. Disposing his beaters to the right and left upon both banks,

the monarch with a small band of attendants would take ship, and, while

his huntsmen sought to start the game on either side, he would have

himself rowed along so as just to keep pace with them, and would find

his sport in attacking such lions as took the water. The monarch’s place

on these occasions was the middle of the boat. Before him and behind him

were guards armed with spears, who were thus ready to protect their

master, whether the beast attacked him in front or rear. The monarch

used a round bow, like that commonly carried in war, and aimed either at

the heart or at the head. The spearmen presented their weapons at the

same time, while the sides of the boat were also sufficiently high above

the water to afford a considerable protection against the animal’s

spring. An attendant immediately behind the monarch held additional

arrows ready for him; and after piercing the noble brute with three or

four of these weapons, the monarch had commonly the satisfaction of

seeing him sink down and expire. The carcass was then taken from the

water, the fore and hind legs were lashed together with string, and the

beast was suspended from the hinder part of the boat, where he hung over

the water just out of the sweep of the oars.

At other times, when it was felt that the natural chase of the animal

might afford little or no sport, the Assyrians (as above stated) called

art to their assistance, and, having obtained a supply of lions from a

distance, brought them in traps or cages to the hunting-ground, and

there turned them out before the monarch. The walls of the cage was made

of thick spars of wood, with interstices between them, through which the

lion could both see and be seen: probably the top was entirely covered

with boards, and upon these was raised a sort of low hut or sentry-box,

just large enough to contain a man, who, when the proper moment arrived,

peeped forth from his concealment and cautiously raised the front of the

trap, which was a kind of drop-door working in a groove. [PLATE CXIX.,

Fig. 2.] The trap being thus opened, the lion stole out, looking

somewhat ashamed of his confinement, but doubtless anxious to vent his

spleen on the first convenient object. The king, prepared for his

attack, saluted him, as he left his cage, with an arrow, and, as he

advanced, with others, which sometimes stretched him dead upon the

plain, sometimes merely disabled him, while now and then they only

goaded him to fury. In this case he would spring at the royal chariot,

clutch some part of it, and in his agony grind it between his teeth, or

endeavor to reach the inmates of the car from behind. If the king had

descended from the car to the plain, the infuriated beast might make his

spring at the royal person, in which case it must have required a stout

heart to stand unmoved, and aim a fresh arrow at a vital part while the

creature was in mid-air, especially if (as we sometimes see represented)

a second lion was following close upon the first, and would have to be

received within a few seconds. It would seem that the lions on some

occasions were not to be goaded into making an attack, but simply

endeavored to escape by flight. To prevent this, troops were drawn up in

a double line of spearmen and archers round the space within which the

lions were let loose, the large shields of the front or spearmen line

forming a sort of wall, and the spears a _chevaux de frise_, through

which it was almost impossible for the beasts to break. In front of the

soldiers, attendants held hounds in leashes, which either by their

baying and struggling frightened the animals back, or perhaps assisted

to despatch them. [PLATE CXIX., Fig. 3.] The king meanwhile plied his

bow, and covered the plain with carcasses, often striking a single beast

with five or six shafts.

The number of lions destroyed at these royal _battues_ is very

surprising. In one representation no fewer than eighteen are seen upon

the field, of which eleven are dead and five seriously wounded. The

introduction of trapped beasts would seem to imply that the game, which

under the earlier monarchs had been exceedingly abundant,--failed

comparatively under the later ones, who therefore imported it from a

distance. It is evident, however, that this scarcity was not allowed to

curtail the royal amusement. To gratify the monarch, hunters sought

remote and savage districts, where the beast was still plentiful, and,

trapping their prey, conveyed it many hundreds of miles to yield a

momentary pleasure to the royal sportsman.

It is instructive to contrast with the boldness shown in the lion-hunts

of this remote period the feelings and conduct of the present

inhabitants of the region. The Arabs, by whom it is in the main

possessed, are a warlike race, accustomed from infancy to arms and

inured to combat. “Their hand is against every man, and every man’s hand

is against them.” Yet they tremble if a lion is but known to be near,

and can only with the utmost difficulty be persuaded by an European to

take any part in the chase of so dangerous an animal.

The lioness, no less than the lion, appears as a beast of chase upon the

sculptures. It seems that in modern times she is quite as much feared as

her consort. Indeed, when she has laid up cubs, she is even thought to

be actually the more dangerous of the two. [PLATE CXX., Fig. 1.]

[Illustration: PLATE 120]

Next to the chase of the lion and lioness, the early Assyrian monarchs

delighted in that of the wild bull. It is not quite certain what exact

species of animal is sought to be expressed by the representations upon

the sculptures; but on the whole it is perhaps most probable that the

Aurochs or European bison (_Bos urus_ of naturalists) is the beast

intended. At any rate it was an animal of such strength and courage

that, according to the Assyrian belief, it ventured to contend with the

lion. [PLATE CXX., Fig. 2.] The Assyrian monarchs chased the wild bull

in their chariots without dogs, but with the assistance of horsemen, who

turned the animals when they fled, and brought them within the monarch’s

reach. [PLATE CXX., Fig. 3.] The king then aimed his arrows at them,

and the attendant horsemen, who were provided with bows, seem to have

been permitted to do the same. The bull seldom fell until he had

received a number of wounds; and we sometimes see as many as five arrows

still fixed in the body of one that has succumbed. It would seem that

the bull, when pushed, would, like the lion, make a rush at the king’s

chariot, in which case the monarch seized him by one of the horns and

gave him the _coup de grace_ with his sword.

The special zest with which this animal was pursued may have arisen in

part from its scarcity. The Aurochs is wild and shy; it dislikes the

neighborhood of man, and has retired before him till it is now found

only in the forests of Lithuania, Carpathia, and the Caucasus. It seems

nearly certain that, in the time of the later kings, the species of wild

cattle previously limited, whatever it was, had disappeared from Assyria

altogether; at least this is the only probable account that can be given

of its non-occurrence in the later sculptures, more especially in those

of Asshur-bani-pal, the son of Esarhaddon, which seem intended to

represent the chase under every aspect known at the time. We might

therefore presume it to have been, even in the early period, already a

somewhat rare animal. And so we find in the Inscriptions that the

animal, or animals, which appear to represent wild cattle, were only met

with in outlying districts of the empire--on the borders of Syria and in

the country about Harrah; and then in such small numbers as to imply

that even there they were not very abundant.

When the chase of the nobler animals--the lion and the wild bull--had

been conducted to a successful issue, the hunters returned in a grand

procession to the capital, carrying with then as trophies of their

prowess the bodies of the slain. These were borne aloft on the shoulders

of men, three or four being required to carry each beast. Having been

brought to an appointed spot, they were arranged side by side upon the

ground, the heads of all pointing the same way; and the monarch,

attended by several of his principal officers, as the Vizier, the Chief

Eunuch, the fan-bearers, the bow and mace bearers, and also by a number

of musicians, came to the place, and solemnly poured a libation over the

prostrate forms, first how-ever (as it would seem) raising the cup to

his own lips. It is probable that this ceremony had to some extent a

religious character. The Assyrian monarchs commonly ascribe the success

of their hunting expeditions to the gods Nin (or Ninip) and Nergal; and

we may well understand that a triumphant return would be accompanied by

a thank-offering to the great protectors under whose auspices success

had been achieved. [PLATE CXX., Fig. 4.]

Besides the wild bull and the lion, the Assyrians are known to have

hunted the following animals: the onager or wild ass, the stag, the ibex

or wild goat, the gazelle, and the hare.

The chase of the wild ass was conducted in various ways. The animal was

most commonly pursued with dogs. The large and powerful hounds of the

Assyrians, of which a certain use was made even in the chase of the

lion, have been already noticed; but it may be desirable in this place

to give a fuller account of them. They were of a type approaching to

that of our mastiff, being smooth haired, strong limbed, with a somewhat

heavy head and neck, small pointed but drooping ears, and a long tail,

which was bushy and a little inclined to curl. They seem to have been

very broad across the chest, and altogether better developed as to their

fore than as to their hind parts, though even their hind legs were

tolerably strong and sinewy. They must have been exceedingly bold, if

they really faced the hunted lion; and their pace must have been

considerable, if they were found of service in chasing the wild ass.

[Illustration: PLATE 121]

The hunters are represented as finding the wild asses in herds, among

which are seen a certain number of foals. The King and his chief

attendants pursue the game on horseback, armed with bows and arrows, and

discharging their arrows as they go. Hounds also--not now held in leash,

but free--join in the hunt, pressing on the game, and generally singling

out some one individual from the herd, either a young colt or sometimes

a full-grown animal. [PLATE CXXI., Fig. 1.] The horsemen occasionally

brought down the asses with their shafts. [PLATE CXXI.. Fig. 2.] When

their archery failed of success, the chase depended on the hounds, which

are represented as running even the full-grown animal to a stand, and

then worrying him till the hunters came up to give the last blow.

Considering the speed of the full-grown wild ass, which is now regarded

as almost impossible to take, we may perhaps conclude that the animals

thus run down by the hounds were such as the hunters had previously

wounded; for it can scarcely be supposed that such heavily-made dogs as

the Assyrian could really have caught an unwounded and full-grown wild

ass. [PLATE CXXI., Fig. 3.]

Instead of shooting the wild ass, or hunting him to the death with

hounds, an endeavor was sometimes made to take him alive. [PLATE CXXI.,

Fig. 4] A species of noose seems to have been made by means of two ropes

interlaced, which were passed--how, we cannot say--round the neck of the

animal, and held him in such a way that all his struggles to release

himself were vain. This mode of capture recalls the use of the lasso by

the South Americans and the employment of nooses by various nations, not

merely in hunting, but in warfare. It is doubtful, however, if the

Assyrian practice approached at all closely to any of these. The noose,

if it may be so called, was of a very peculiar kind. It was not formed

by means of a slip-knot at the end of a single cord, but resulted from

the interlacing of two ropes one with the other. There is great

difficulty in understanding how the ropes were got into their position.

Certainly no single throw could have placed then, round the neck of the

animal in the manner represented, nor could the capture have been

effected, according to all appearance, by a single hunter. Two persons,

at least, must have been required to combine their efforts--one before

and one behind the creature which it was designed to capture.

[Illustration: PLATE 122]

Deer, which have always abounded in Assyria were either hunted with

dogs, or driven by beaters into nets, or sometimes shot with arrows by

sportsmen. The illustration (PLATE CXXII., Fig. 1) represents a dog in

chase of a hind, and shows that the hounds which the Assyrians used for

this purpose were of the same breed as those employed in the hunt of the

lion and of the wild ass. In [PLATE CXXII., Fig. 2.] we have a stricken

stag, which may, perhaps, have been also hard pressed by hounds, in the

act of leaping from rocky ground into water. It is interesting to find

this habit of the stag, with which the modern English sportsman is so

familiar, not merely existing in Assyria, but noticed by Assyrian

sculptors, at the distance of more than twenty-five centuries from our

own time.

When deer were to be taken by nets, the sportsman began by setting in an

upright position, with the help of numerous poles and pegs, a long, low

net, like the [dikrvov] of the Greeks. [PLATE CXXII., Fig. 1.] This was

carried round in a curved line of considerable length, so as to enclose

an ample space on every side excepting one, which was left open for the

deer to enter. The meshes of the net were large and not very regular.

They were carefully secured by knots at all the angles. The net was

bordered both at top and at bottom by a rope of much greater strength

and thickness than that which formed the network; and this was fastened

to the ground at the two extremities by pegs of superior size. [PLATE

CXXIII., Fig. 2.] The general height of the net was about that of a man,

but the two ends were sloped gently to the ground. Beaters, probably

accompanied by dogs, roused the game in the coverts, which was then

driven by shouts and barkings towards the place where the net was set.

If it once entered within the two extremities of the net (_a b_, [PLATE

CXXIII., Fig. 1]), its destruction was certain; for the beaters,

following on its traces, occupied the space by which it had entered, and

the net itself was not sufficiently visible for the deer to rise at it

and clear it by a leap.

[Illustration: PLATE 123]

In the chase of the ibex or wild goat, horsemen were employed to

discover the animals, which are generally found in herds, and to drive

them towards the sportsman, who waited in ambush until the game appeared

within bowshot. [PLATE CXXIII., Fig. 3.] An arrow was then let fly at

the nearest or the choicest animal, which often fell at the first

discharge. [PLATE CXXIII., Fig. 4.] The sport was tame compared with

many other kinds, and was probably not much affected by the higher

orders.

The chase of the gazelle is not shown on the sculptures. In modern times

they are taken by the grayhound and the falcon, separately or in

conjunction, the two being often trained to hunt together. They are

somewhat difficult to run down with dogs only, except immediately after

they have drunk water in hot weather. That the Assyrians sometimes

captured them, appears by a hunting scene which Mr. Layard discovered at

Khorsabad, where an attendant is represented carrying a gazelle on his

shoulders, and holding a hare in his right hand. [PLATE CXXIV., Fig. 1.]

As gazelles are very abundant both in the Sinjar country and in the

district between the Tigris and the Zagros range, we may suppose that

the Assyrians sometimes came upon them unawares, and transfixed them

with their arrows before they could make their escape. They may also

have taken them in nets, as they were accustomed to take deer; but we

have no evidence that they did so.

[Illustration: PLATE 124]

The hare is seen very commonly in the hands of those who attend upon the

huntsmen. It is always represented as very small in proportion to the

size of the men, whence we may perhaps conclude that the full-grown

animal was less esteemed than the leveret. As the huntsmen in these

representations have neither nets nor dogs, but seem to obtain their

game solely by the bow, we must presume that they were expert enough to

strike the hare as it ran.

There is no difficulty in making such a supposition as this, since the

Assyrians have left us an evidence of their skill as marksmen which

implies even greater dexterity. The game which they principally sought

in the districts where they occasionally killed the hare and the gazelle

seems to have been the partridge; and this game they had to bring down

when upon the wing. We see the sportsmen in the sculptures aiming their

arrows at the birds as they mount into the air [PLATE CXXIV., Fig. 21,]

and in one instance we observe one of the birds in the act of falling to

the ground, transfixed by a well aimed shaft. Such skill is not uncommon

among savage hunting tribes, whose existence depends on the dexterity

with which they employ their weapons; but it is rarely that a people

which has passed out of this stage, and hunts for sport rather than

subsistence, retains its old expertness.

Hunting the hare with dogs was probably not very common, as it is only

in a single instance that the Assyrian remains exhibit a trace of it. On

one of the bronze dishes discovered by Mr. Layard at Nimrud may be seen

a series of alternate dogs and hares, which shows that coursing was not

unknown to the Assyrians. [PLATE CXXIV., Fig. 3.] The dog is of a kind

not seen elsewhere in the remains of Assyrian art. The head bears a

resemblance to that of the wolf; but the form generally is that of a

coarse grayhound, the legs and neck long, the body slim, and the tail

curved at the end; offering thus a strong contrast to the ordinary

Assyrian hound, which has been already represented more than once.

Nets may sometimes have been employed for the capture of small game,

such as hares and rabbits, since we occasionally see beaters or other

attendants carrying upon poles, which they hold over their shoulders,

nets of dimensions far too small for them to have been used in the

deer-hunts, with balls of string and pegs wherewith to extend them.

[PLATE CXXIV., Fig. 4.] The nets in this case are squared at the ends,

and seem to have been about eight or nine feet long, and less than a

foot in height. They have large meshes, and, like the deer nets, are

bordered both at top and bottom with a strong cord, to which the

net-work is attached. Like the classical [evodia], they were probably

placed across the runs of the animals, which, being baffled by then and

turned from their accustomed tracks, would grow bewildered, and fall an

easy prey to the hunters. Or, possibly, several of them may have been

joined together, and a considerable space may then have been enclosed,

within which the game may have been driven by the beaters. The ease of

these three weak and tinnier animals, the gazelle, the hare, and the

partridge, was not regarded as worthy of the monarch. When the king is

represented as present, he takes no part in it, but merely drives in his

chariot through the woods where the sportsmen are amusing themselves.

Persons, however, of a good position, as appears from their dress and

the number of their attendants, indulged in the sport, more especially

eunuchs, who were probably those of the royal household. It is not

unlikely that the special object was to supply the royal table with

game.

[Illustration: PLATE 125]

The Assyrians do not seem to have had much skill as fishermen. They

were unacquainted with the rod, and fished by means of a simple line

thrown into the water, one end of which was held in the hand. [PLATE

CXXV., Figs. 1, 2.] No float was used, and the bait must consequently

have sunk to the bottom, unless prevented from so doing by the force of

the stream. This method of fishing was likewise known and practised in

Egypt, where, however, it was far more common to angle with a rod.

Though Assyrian fish-hooks have not been found, there can be no doubt

that that invention was one with which they were acquainted, as were

both the Egyptians and the early Chaldaeans.

Fishing was carried on both in rivers and in stews or ponds. The angler

sometimes stood or squatted upon the bank; at other times, not content

with commanding the mere edge of the water, he plunged in, and is seen

mid-stream, astride upon an inflated skin, quietly pursuing his

avocation. [PLATE CXXVI., Fig. 1.] Occasionally he improved his position

by amounting upon a raft, and, seated at the stern, with his back to the

rower, threw out his line and drew the fish from the water. Now and then

the fisherman was provided with a plaited basket, made of rushes or

flags, which was fastened round his neck with a string, and hung at his

back, ready to receive the produce of his exertions.

[Illustration: PLATE 126]

It does not appear that angling was practised by the Assyrians the way

that the monuments show it to have been practised in Egypt, as an

amusement of the rich. The fishermen are always poorly clothed, and seem

to have belonged to the class which worked for its living. It is

remarkable that do not anywhere in the sculptures see nets used for

fishing; but perhaps we ought not to conclude from this that they were

never so employed in Assyria. The Assyrian sculptors represented only

occasionally the scenes of common everyday life; and we are seldom

justified in drawing a negative conclusion as to the peaceful habits of

the people on any point from the mere fact that the bas-reliefs contain

no positive evidence on the subject.

A few other animals were probably, but not certainly, chased by the

Assyrians, as especially the ostrich and the bear. The gigantic bird,

which remained in Mesopotamia as late as the time of Xenophon, was well

known to the Assyrian artists, who could scarcely have represented it

with so much success, unless its habits had been described by hunters.

The bear is much less frequent upon the remains than the ostrich; but

its occurrence and the truthfulness of its delineation where it occurs,

indicate a familiarity which may no doubt be due to other causes, but is

probably traceable to the intimate knowledge acquired by those who

hunted it. [PLATE CXXVI., Fig. 2.]

Of the other amusements and occupations of the Assyrians our knowledge

is comparatively scanty; but some pages may be here devoted to their

music, their navigation, their commerce, and their agriculture. On the

first and second of these a good deal of light is thrown by the

monuments, while some interesting facts with respect to the third and

fourth may be gathered both from this source and also from ancient

writers.

That the Babylonians, the neighbors of the Assyrians, and, in a certain

sense, the inheritors of their empire, had a passion for music, and

delighted in a great variety of musical instruments, has long been known

and admitted. The repeated mention by Daniel, in his third chapter, of

the cornet, flute, harp sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of

music--or, at any rate, of a number of instruments for which those terms

were once thought the best English equivalents--has familiarized us with

the fact that in Babylonia, as early as the sixth century B.C., musical

instruments of many different kinds were in use. It is also apparent

from the book of Psalms, that a variety of instruments were employed by

the Jews. And we know that in Egypt as many as thirteen or fourteen

different kinds were common. In Assyria, if there was not so much

variety as this, there were at any rate eight or nine quite different

sorts, some stringed, some wind, some merely instruments of percussion.

In the early sculptures, indeed, only two or three musical instruments

are represented. One is a kind of harp, held between the left arm and

the side, and played with one hand by means of a quill or _plectrum_.

[PLATE CXXVI., Fig. 3.] Another is a lyre, played by the hand; while a

third is apparently cymbal. But in the later times we see besides these

instruments--a harp of a different make played with both hands, two or

three kinds of lyre, the double pipe, the guitar or cithern, the

tambourine, a nameless instrument, and more than one kind of drum.

The harp of the early ages was a triangular instrument, consisting of a

horizontal board which seems to have been about three feet in length, an

upright bar inserted into one end of the board, commonly surmounted by

an imitation of the human hand, and a number of strings which crossed

diagonally from the board to the bar, and, passing through the latter,

hung down some way, terminating in tassels of no great size. The strings

were eight, nine, or ten in number, and (apparently) were made fast to

the board, but could be tightened or relaxed by means of a row of pegs

inserted into the upright bar, round which the strings were probably

wound. No difference is apparent in the thickness of the strings; and it

would seem therefore that variety of tone was produced solely by

difference of length. It is thought that this instrument must have been

suspended round the player’s neck. It was carried at the left side, and

was played (as already observed) with a quill or electrum held in the

right hand, while the left hand seems to have been employed in pressing

the strings so as to modify the tone, or stop the vibrations, of the

notes. The performers on this kind of harp, and indeed all other

Assyrian musicians, are universally represented as standing while they

play.

The harp of later times was constructed, held, and played differently.

It was still triangular, or nearly so; but the frame now consisted of a

rounded and evidently hollow, sounding-board, to which the strings were

attached with the help of pegs, and a plain bar whereto they were made

fast below, and from which their ends depended like a fringe. The number

of strings was greater than in the earlier harp, being sometimes as many

as seventeen. The instrument was carried in such a way that the strings

were perpendicular and the bar horizontal, while the sounding-board

projected forwards at an angle above the player’s head. It was played by

the naked hand, without a plectrum; and both hands seem to have found

their employment in pulling the strings. [PLATE CXXVII., Fig. 1.]

[Illustration: PLATE 127]

Three varieties of the lyre are seen in the Assyrian sculptures. One of

them is triangular, or nearly so, and has only four strings, which,

being carried from one side of the triangle to the other, parallel to

the base, are necessarily of very unequal length. Its frame is

apparently of wood, very simple, and entirely devoid of ornament. This

sort of lyre has been found only in the latest sculptures. [PLATE

CXXVI., Fig. 4.]

Another variety nearly resembles in its general shape the lyre of the

Egyptians. It has a large square bottom or sounding-board, which is

held, like the Egyptian, under the left elbow, two straight arms only

slightly diverging, and a plain cross-bar at top. The number of strings

visible in the least imperfect representation is eight; but judging by

the width of the instrument, we may fairly assume that the full

complement was nine or ten. The strings run from the cross-bar to the

sounding-board, and must have been of a uniform length. This lyre was

played by both hands, and for greater security was attached by a band

passing round the player’s neck. [PLATE CXXVII., Fig. 2.]