MRS. WOODHULL’S THIRD LETTER.
Nearly all historians who have written since Josephus have endeavored to reconcile sacred and profane history. This task Rollin attempts regarding the origin of the Assyrian empire. Diodorus says that “Ninus, the most ancient Assyrian king, performed great actions. Being naturally of a warlike disposition, and ambitious of glory which results from valor, he armed a considerable number of young men that were brave and vigorous, like himself, and trained them to all manner of hardships.” This Ninus, Rollin endeavors to make it appear, was the Nimrod of the Scriptures, and the Belus who was afterward worshiped as a god. Calisthenes, a philosopher, who was one of the retinue of Alexander the Great, says the Babylonians reckoned their origin back some 115 years after the Deluge, which would be about 2,250 years B. C. The conflict of authority upon the origin of this empire, renders it competent for our purpose to assume this date, and that Nimrod was the first historic king of Assyria.
Assyria is supposed to have derived its name from Asshur, the son of Shem, who, the Scripture says, settled this country. Nimrod possessed himself of the province, introduced his own subjects into it, built cities and made himself generally beloved. It is said he built Nineveh, more grand and magnificent than all the rest, and named it after his son Ninus, who, on his accession to the throne, conceived the design of extending his conquests, and began to prepare troops and officers capable of carrying it out. In seventeen years he conquered all the country between Egypt, India and Bactriana, which last country he did not think himself strong enough to attack with success.
While preparing for further and greater conquests he also determined to immortalize his name by making of Nineveh a city at once commensurate with his power and wealth. His design, says Diodorus, was “to make it the largest and noblest city in the world, and to put it beyond the power of others who might come after him to ever build another such. Nor,” as Rollin adds, “was he deceived in this; for never did any city come up to the greatness and magnificence of this.” It was eighteen miles and three-quarters long and eleven miles and one-quarter broad, and was surrounded by a wall one hundred feet high.
Having completed Nineveh he pursued his intended campaign against the Bactrians, into whose country he marched an army of 1,700,000 foot, 200,000 horse and 20,000 chariots, armed with scythes. With this vast array he quickly overran the whole country and finally laid siege to its capital. This city was strongly fortified and stoutly defended, so much so that Ninus began to despair of reducing it, when the wife of one of his officers advised him how to attack its citadels so as to capture them, and by them the city. This woman was the afterward celebrated Semiramis. Ninus made use of her advice, and the city fell into his hands with but little loss to him.
Ninus, finding a woman possessed of such remarkable capacity to aid him in his ambitious designs, at once conceived for Semiramis the most violent passion. Her husband, upon hearing this, killed himself to escape the fury of Ninus. Having married her, he not long after died—some assert by her connivance—and left the kingdom to her.
It was Semiramis who undertook the building of the mighty Babylon, in which work she employed two million men. Dr. Prideaux tells us the walls around Babylon were three hundred and fifty feet high and eighty feet thick, and that it contained six hundred and seventy-six squares two miles and a quarter in circumference. His description of the walls, the quays and bridges, lakes, ditches, canals, palaces, hanging-gardens and temple of Belus presents a picture of grandeur and magnificence unknown in this age. Diodorus also says even in his time there were many monuments of grandeur still standing bearing the name of Semiramis.
This beautiful and extraordinary woman possessed the most marvelous control over all she came in contact with. Her simple presence was sufficient to quell any tumult or mutinous proceeding. Not satisfied with the immense possessions left her by Ninus, she conquered Ethiopia and the larger part of Africa. Not yet content, she determined upon the subjugation of India, against which she set out with 3,000,000 foot, 500,000 horse and a multitude of camels, with which she thought to make head against the Indian elephants. After she had successfully crossed the river Indus the Indian King fell upon her army, with his elephants, with such fury that it was utterly routed. Semiramis was by this defeat compelled to give over the conquest of India. Having reigned forty-two years she resigned the throne to Ninyas, her son, whom she discovered was plotting against her life, as the Jupiter Ammon of Egypt had told her years before he would. She retired from the sight of men, hoping speedily to have divine honors granted her name, which was also prophesied for her by the Egyptian god.
Of these vast armies, which predicate still more vast population, Rollin remarks: “I must own I am somewhat puzzled with a difficulty which may be raised against the extraordinary things related of Ninus and Semiramis, as they do not seem to agree with the times so near the deluge; I mean such vast armies; such a numerous cavalry; so many chariots armed with scythes; such immense treasures of silver and gold, and the magnificence of the buildings. The temple of Belus alone contained more than twenty millions pounds sterling hoarded treasure.” Rollin argues that the Greek historians, from whom he compiled, must have fallen into some grave errors, since, that such things should have occurred so soon after the deluge, presupposes what must have been beyond the range of possibility.
The Assyrian empire, having attained the zenith of power and magnificence under Semiramis, began to sink into a gradual decay, the kings themselves setting the example of indolence and dissipation. This process of decay continued until the time of Sardanapalus, about 700 years B. C. He surpassed all his predecessors in effeminacy, cowardice and licentious luxury, and abandoned himself completely to pleasure, wine and women; even dressing and painting his cheeks as the women did. It seems strange that a people so used to glory and conquest should not have sooner revolted against such debauchery and dissoluteness. This was left for one Arbaces to do; he obtained entrance to the King’s palace, and with his own eyes witnessed the truth of the reports about the King. Arbaces at once began to incite rebellion; by his reports he gained over the governors of several provinces, who raised an army and marched against the King, whom they succeeded in shutting up in the city of Nineveh. The King considered Nineveh impregnable, but the river Tigris suddenly rose to a great height and broke down some portions of the walls of the city, which admitted the troops of the rebellious governors. Sardanapalus then proceeded to burn himself, his women and treasure, which latter, according to Atheneus, amounted to “a thousand myriads of talents of gold and ten times as much silver, each myriad of which was of the value of $7,000,000.” Such treasure we in this age know nothing of. After the death of Sardanapalus the empire was dismembered, and the kingdoms of Babylon, Nineveh and Medea formed from its ruins. Between these there was constant warfare waged. During the time of Cyazares a horde of Scythian barbarians devastated the three kingdoms, remaining their masters until the people disposed of them by a general stratagem—slaughtering them while drunk with wine, at feasts to which, by concert, each family of Assyrians had invited them upon an agreed day. Such as escaped this, fled the country. Cyazares, after repeated efforts, succeeded in utterly destroying Nineveh, the last city that held out against him, and with the aid of his nephew, Cyrus, united the three kingdoms again under one government, which was the beginning of the famous empire of the Medes and Persians.
Crœsus, King of Lydia, is here entitled to a slight digressive reference on account of the influence he at this time exercised. Vast riches in most kingdoms had led to indolence, effeminacy and licentiousness; but Crœsus thought it unworthy for any person, much less a king, to surrender himself to these. Not only was he vastly rich, and an extraordinary conqueror, but his chief delight consisted in literature and science; he patronized the learned and wise of all nations; so much so that they all made particular effort to visit his dominions to receive his assistance. His court was the ordinary residence of the seven wise men of Greece. It was with him that Æsop, the author of the Fables, flourished. The possession of these characteristics entitle Crœsus to most honorable mention and memory, and he should be regarded as a representative king.
It will be remembered that Cyrus was the first king of Persia, which by conquest he enlarged until it comprised all the territory between the Tigris and Indus, the Caspian Sea and Indian Ocean. His uncle, Cyazares, retained Medea. He, finding himself involved in a terrible war with the kings of several provinces—among whom was Crœsus of Lidya—sent to Cyrus for aid, who set out at once with an army. The vast preparations made on both sides culminated in the battle of Thimbra—one of the most remarkable events of ancient times—which decided the empire of Asia against the Assyrians and in favor of the Persians. This battle has always been the study of great commanders, because the military genius there displayed by Cyrus makes him rank as one of the greatest of generals. After reducing all the smaller nations of Asia Minor, Cyrus turned his whole power against Babylon, which he determined upon destroying. He accomplished its capture by emptying the river Euphrates into the vast ditches prepared by Semiramis, and marching his army over its dry bed into the city at night, while its inhabitants were engaged in some general entertainment. Thus the mighty city built by Semiramis fell, and the destruction ceased not, until not even its walls remained to tell the story of its grandeur.
With the reunion of what constituted the first Assyrian empire, the conquests of Cyrus seem to have ceased. He turned his whole attention to perfecting a system of government for the vast country he had acquired. This he accomplished most wisely. All historians agree that in this task he was greatly aided by the wisdom and counsel of Daniel the Prophet, who obtained a position of great power and influence. It was no doubt he who obtained from Cyrus the famous decree regarding the Babylonish captivity of the Jews. So prosperous and happy did the empire become under the reign of Cyrus, that historians affirm “that after his death he was universally regarded as the common father of the people.” Having reigned seventy years he died 529 years B. C., leaving the empire to Cambyses, his son, who was as great in crime as his father had been in virtue. He caused the death of his only brother, Smerdis, married his youngest sister (who was very beautiful), and afterward killed her because she lamented the death of Smerdis. Happily his reign was cut short by death, having lasted less than eight years.
It was not generally known that Cambyses had caused the death of his brother Smerdis, which made it possible for Smerdis the magician to usurp the throne, giving out that he was the true Smerdis. He was exposed by one of his wives, at the instance of a nobleman named Darius, who managed to slay him, and was then unanimously named king, by his brother noblemen, for having done so. Soon after becoming king, Darius, with an army of 1,000,000 men, marched into Europe to chastise the Scythians for having overrun Assyria in the time of Cyazares. The expedition resulted disastrously to Darius, who could not even bring the Scythians to battle. They continually retired before him, and left him to be defeated by the scarcity of provisions, from which cause Darius came near losing his whole army, and was obliged to beat a hasty retreat to his own country. Darius then determined upon the conquest of India, which he accomplished. Of the particulars of this campaign no records are left, though it is known that India remained a Persian province many years, and paid annual tributes of £50,0000 sterling. Darius was the only conqueror who ever subjugated India sufficiently to reduce it to a tributary province; it made the twentieth that had been added to Persia.
During the reign of Darius, the Ionians revolted against Persian control, and succeeded in involving the Athenians with them; they furnished the Ionians twenty ships, by the aid of which Sardis was captured and burned. This so enraged Darius that he formed a solemn resolve to destroy Greece. Thus began that implacable strife of the Persians against the Grecians, by which Persian power was almost destroyed, and in which the Greeks performed the most remarkable exploits known in military history. These, coming more properly under Grecian summary, it will only be remarked here that Miltiades on the plains of Marathon, Leonidas at Thermopylæ, Themistocles at Salamis, Aristides at Plateæ, Leotychides at Mycale, and Simon at Eurymedon, taught the Persian monarchs that they were not to be subdued by them, though they should expend their mightiest power in their attempts.
So exhausted was the empire from the Grecian wars, that when the Egyptians revolted during the reign of Darius II. he found himself unable to subdue them. The superb empire made and left by Cyrus the Great under such admirable government was now becoming thoroughly corrupted and debauched, and was given to all species of licentiousness. Its former glory rapidly departed, and the elements of destruction were actively at work preparing it for the blow Alexander of Macedon was soon to deal it, from which it was destined never to recover.
After the dismemberment of the Macedonian Empire, Persia in part recovered, but became the field for constant barbarian inroads, which kept the kingdom in poverty and misery. Under Chosron, about the year 600, the empire again extended from the Indus to the Mediterranean. Justinian I. waged a successful war against Chosron, and compelled a disadvantageous peace. This was annulled by Chosron II., who again raised Persia to her former greatness by conquering Egypt, Ethiopia, Lydia and Yemen. These sudden conquests were soon lost, and the partially resuscitated empire passed into a rapid decline. At no time since has Persia exerted any considerable influence upon surrounding nations. Under Timour, in the fourteenth century, and the Turks in the fifteenth, it decayed rapidly; in the sixteenth century it became nearly extinct, and, as a nation, it remains virtually so to this day.
THE TENDENCIES OF GOVERNMENT.
[Revised from the New York Herald of May 9, 1870.]