The Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Macedonians and Grecians (Vol. 1 of 6)
author: Charles Rollin
edition published: April 11, 2009
language: en; la; el; he
availability: This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License online at www.gutenberg.org/license

The

Ancient History

Of The

Egyptians, Carthaginians,

Assyrians, Babylonians,

Medes and Persians,

Macedonians and Grecians

By

Charles Rollin

Late Principal of the University of Paris

Professor of Eloquence in The Royal College

And Member of the Royal Academy

Of Inscriptions and Belles Letters

Translated From The French

In Six Volumes

Vol. I.

New Edition

Illustrated With Maps and Other Engravings

London

Printed for Longman And Co., J. M. Richardson,

Hamilton And Co., Hatchard And Son, Simpkin And Co.,

Rivingtons, Whittaker And Co., Allen And Co.,

Nisbet And Co., J. Bain, T. And W. Boone, E. Hodgson,

T. Bumpus, Smith, Elder, And Co., J. Capes, L. Booth,

Bigg And Son, Houlston And Co., H. Washbourne,

Bickets And Bush, Waller And Son, Cambridge,

Wilson And Sons, York, G. And J. Robinson, Liverpool,

And A. And C. Black, Edinburgh

1850

Contents

[Charles Rollin. Born 1661. Died 1741. Illustration: Portrait of Charles Rollin.]

[Transcriber's Note: The French original of this work was published 1730-38. The translation was done by Robert Lynam.]

A Letter written by the Right Reverend Dr. Francis Atterbury, late Lord Bishop of Rochester, to M. Rollin, in commendation of this Work.

Reverende atque Eruditissime Vir,

Cum, monente amico quodam, qui juxta ædes tuas habitat, scirem te Parisios revertisse; statui salutatum te ire, ut primùm per valetudinem liceret. Id officii, ex pedum infirmitate aliquandiu dilatum, cùm tandem me impleturum sperarem, frustrà fui; domi non eras. Restat, ut quod coràm exequi non potui, scriptis saltem literis præstem; tibique ob ea omnia, quibus à te auctus sum, beneficia, grates agam, quas habeo certè, et semper habiturus sum, maximas.

Reverà munera ilia librorum nuperis à te annis editorum egregia ac perhonorifica mihi visa sunt. Multi enim facio, et te, vir præstantissime, et tua omnia quæcunque in isto literarum genere perpolita sunt; in quo quidem Te cæteris omnibus ejusmodi scriptoribus facilè antecellere, atque esse eundem et dicendi et sentiendi magistrum optimum, prorsùs existimo; cùmque in excolendis his studiis aliquantulum ipse et operæ et temporis posuerim, liberè tamen profiteor me, tua cum legam ac relegam, ea edoctum esse à te, non solùm quæ nesciebam prorsus, sed etiam quæ anteà didicisse mihi visus sum. Modestè itaque nimiùm de opere tuo sentis, cùm juventuti tantùm instituendæ elaboratum id esse contendis. Ea certè scribis, quæ à viris istiusmodi rerum haud imperitis, cum voluptate et fructu legi possunt. Vetera quidem et satis cognita revocas in memoriam; sed ita revocas, ut illustres, ut ornes; ut aliquid vetustis adjicias quod novum sit, alienis quod omnino tuum: bonasque picturas bonâ in luce collocando efficis, ut etiam iis, à quibus sæpissimè conspectæ sunt, elegantiores tamen solito appareant, et placeant magis.

Certè, dum Xenophontem sæpiùs versas, ab illo et ea quæ à te plurimis in locis narrantur, et ipsum ubique narrandi modum videris traxisse, stylique Xenophontei nitorem ac venustam simplicitatem non imitari tantùm, sed planè assequi: ita ut si Gallicè scisset Xenophon, non aliis ilium, in eo argumento quod tractas, verbis usurum, non alio prorsùs more scripturum judicem.

Hæc ego, haud assentandi causâ, (quod vitium procul à me abest,) sed verè ex animi sententiâ dico. Cùm enim pulchris à te donis ditatus sim, quibus in eodem, aut in alio quopiam doctrinæ genere referendis imparem me sentio, volui tamen propensi erga te animi gratique testimonium proferre, et te aliquo saltem munusculo, etsi perquam dissimili, remunerari.

Perge, vir docte admodùm et venerande, de bonis literis, quæ nunc neglectæ passim et spretæ jacent, benè mereri: perge juventatem Gallicam (quando illi solummodò te utilem esse vis) optimis et præceptis et exemplis informare.

Quod ut facias, annis ætatis tuæ elapsis multos adjiciat Deus! iisque decurrentibus sanum te præstet atque incolumem. Hoc ex animo optat ac vovet

Tui observantissimus Franciscus Roffensis.

Pransurum te mecum post festa dixit mihi amicus ille noster qui tibi vicinus est. Cùm statueris tecum quo die adfuturus es, id illi significabis. Me certè annis malisque debilitatum, quandocunque veneris, domi invenies.

6° Kal. Jan. 1731.

A Letter written by the Right Reverend Dr. Francis Atterbury, late Lord Bishop of Rochester, to M. Rollin, in commendation of this Work.

Reverend and most Learned Sir,

When I was informed by a friend who lives near you, that you were returned to Paris, I resolved to wait on you, as soon as my health would admit. After having been prevented by the gout for some time, I was in hopes at length of paying my respects to you at your house, and went thither, but found you not at home. It is incumbent on me therefore to do that in writing, which I could not in person, and to return you my acknowledgments for all the favours you have been pleased to confer upon me, of which I beg you will be assured, that I shall always retain the most grateful sense.

And indeed I esteem the books you have lately published, as presents of exceeding value, and such as do me very great honour. For I have the highest regard, most excellent Sir, both for you, and for every thing that comes from so masterly a hand as yours, in the kind of learning you treat; in which I must believe that you not only excel all other writers, but are at the same time the best master of speaking and thinking well; and I freely confess that, though I had applied some time and pains in cultivating these studies, when I read your volumes over and over again, I was instructed in things by you, of which I was not only entirely ignorant, but seemed to myself to have learnt before. You have therefore too modest an opinion of your work, when you declare it composed solely for the instruction of youth. What you write may undoubtedly be read with pleasure and improvement by persons not unacquainted with learning of the same kind. For whilst you call to mind ancient facts and things sufficiently known, you do it in such a manner, that you illustrate, you embellish them; still adding something new to the old, something entirely your own to the labours of others: by placing good pictures in a good light, you make them appear with unusual elegance and more exalted beauties, even to those who have seen and studied them most.

In your frequent correspondence with Xenophon, you have certainly extracted from him, both what you relate in many places, and every where his very manner of relating; you seem not only to have imitated, but attained the shining elegance and beautiful simplicity of that author's style: so that had Xenophon excelled in the French language, in my judgment he would have used no other words, nor written in any other method, upon the subject you treat, than you have done.

I do not say this out of flattery, (which is far from being my vice,) but from my real sentiments and opinion. As you have enriched me with your fine presents, which I know how incapable I am of repaying either in the same or in any other kind of learning, I was willing to testify my gratitude and affection for you, and at least to make you some small, though exceedingly unequal, return.

Go on, most learned and venerable Sir, to deserve well of sound literature, which now lies universally neglected and despised. Go on, in forming the youth of France (since you will have their utility to be your sole view) upon the best precepts and examples.

Which that you may effect, may it please God to add many years to your life, and during the course of them to preserve you in health and safety. This is the earnest wish and prayer of

Your most obedient Servant, Francis Roffen.

P.S.—Our friend, your neighbour, tells me you intend to dine with me after the holidays. When you have fixed upon the day, be pleased to let him know it. Whenever you come, you will be sure to find one so weak with age and ills as I am, at home.

December 26, 1731.

Preface.

The Usefulness of Profane History, especially with regard to Religion.

The study of profane history would little deserve to have a serious attention, and a considerable length of time bestowed upon it, if it were confined to the bare knowledge of ancient transactions, and an uninteresting inquiry into the æras when each of them happened. It little concerns us to know, that there were once such men as Alexander, Cæsar, Aristides, or Cato, and that they lived in this or that period; that the empire of the Assyrians made way for that of the Babylonians, and the latter for the empire of the Medes and Persians, who were themselves subjected by the Macedonians, as these were afterwards by the Romans.

But it highly concerns us to know, by what methods those empires were founded; by what steps they rose to that exalted pitch of grandeur which we so much admire; what it was that constituted their true glory and felicity; and what were the causes of their declension and fall.

It is of no less importance to study attentively the manners of different nations; their genius, laws, and customs; and especially to acquaint ourselves with the character and disposition, the talents, virtues, and even vices of those by whom they were governed; and whose good or bad qualities contributed to the grandeur or decay of the states over which they presided.

Such are the great objects which ancient history presents; causing to pass, as it were, in review before us, all the kingdoms and empires of the world; and at the same time, all the great men who were any ways conspicuous; thereby instructing us, by example rather than precept, in the arts of empire and war, the principles of government, the rules of policy, the maxims of civil society, and the conduct of life that suits all ages and conditions.

We acquire, at the same time, another knowledge, which cannot but excite the attention of all persons who have a taste and inclination for polite learning; I mean the manner in which arts and sciences were invented, cultivated, and improved. We there discover, and trace as it were with the eye, their origin and progress; and perceive, with admiration, that the nearer we approach those countries which were once inhabited by the sons of Noah, in the greater perfection we find the arts and sciences; whereas they seem to be either neglected or forgotten, in proportion to the remoteness of nations from them; so that, when men attempted to revive those arts and sciences, they were obliged to go back to the source from whence they originally flowed.

I give only a transient view of these objects, though so very important, in this place, because I have already treated them at some length elsewhere.[^1]

[^1: Of the Method of Teaching and Studying the Belles Lettres, &c. vol. iii. and iv.—Trans.]

But another object of infinitely greater importance, claims our attention. For although profane history treats only of nations who had imbibed all the absurdities of a superstitious worship; and abandoned themselves to all the irregularities of which human nature, after the fall of the first man, became capable; it nevertheless proclaims universally the greatness of the Almighty, his power, his justice, and above all, the admirable wisdom with which his providence governs the universe.

If the inherent conviction of this last truth raised, according to Cicero's observation,[^2] the Romans above all other nations; we may, in like manner, affirm, that nothing gives history a greater superiority to many other branches of literature, than to see in a manner imprinted, in almost every page of it, the precious footsteps and shining proofs of this great truth, viz. that God disposes all events as supreme Lord and Sovereign; that he alone determines the fate of kings and the duration of empires; and that he transfers the government of kingdoms from one nation to another, because of the unrighteous dealing and wickedness committed therein.[^3]

[^2: Pietate ac religione, atque hâc unâ sapientiâ quòd deorum immortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus. Orat. de Arusp. resp. n. 19.—Trans.]

[^3: Ecclus. x. 8]

We discover this important truth in going back to the most remote antiquity, and the origin of profane history; I mean, to the dispersion of the posterity of Noah into the several countries of the earth where they settled. Liberty, chance, views of interest, a love for certain countries, and similar motives, were, in outward appearance, the only causes of the different choice which men made in these various migrations. But the Scriptures inform us, that amidst the trouble and confusion that followed the sudden change in the language of Noah's descendants, God presided invisibly over all their counsels and deliberations; that nothing was transacted but by the Almighty's appointment; and that he alone guided[^4] and settled all mankind, agreeably to the dictates of his mercy and justice: “The Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of the earth.”[^5]

[^4: The ancients themselves, according to Pindar, (Olymp. Od. vii.) had retained some idea, that the dispersion of men was not the effect of chance, but that they had been settled in different countries by the appointment of Providence.—Trans.]

[^5: Gen. xi. 8, 9.]

It is true indeed that God, even in those early ages, had a peculiar regard for that people, whom he was one day to consider as his own. He pointed out the country which he designed for them; he caused it to be possessed by another laborious nation, who applied themselves to cultivate and adorn it; and to improve the future inheritance of the Israelites. He then fixed, in that country, the like number of families, as were to be settled in it, when the sons of Israel should, at the appointed time, take possession of it; and did not suffer any of the nations, which were not subject to the curse pronounced by Noah against Canaan, to enter upon an inheritance that was to be given up entirely to the Israelites. Quando dividebat Altissimus gentes, quando separabat filios Adam, constituit terminos populorum juxta numerum filiorum Israel.[^6] But this peculiar regard of God to his future people, does not interfere with that which he had for the rest of the nations of the earth, as is evident from the many passages of Scripture, which teach us, that the entire succession of ages is present to him; that nothing is transacted in the whole universe, but by his appointment; and that he directs the several events of it from age to age. Tu es Deus conspector seculorum. A seculo usque in seculum respicis.[^7]

[^6: “When the Most High divided the nations, and separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel” (whom he had in view.) This is one of the interpretations (which appears very natural) that is given to this passage. Deut. xxxii. 8.—Trans.]

[^7: Ecclus. xxxvi. 17, xxxix. 19.]

We must therefore consider, as an indisputable principle, and as the basis and foundation of the study of profane history, that the providence of the Almighty has, from all eternity, appointed the establishment, duration, and destruction of kingdoms and empires, as well in regard to the general plan of the whole universe, known only to God, who constitutes the order and wonderful harmony of its several parts; as particularly with respect to the people of Israel, and still more with regard to the Messiah, and the establishment of the church, which is his great work, the end and design of all his other works, and ever present to his sight; Notum à seculo est Domino opus suum.[^8]

[^8: Acts xv. 18.]

God has vouchsafed to discover to us, in holy Scripture, a part of the relation of the several nations of the earth to his own people; and the little so discovered, diffuses great light over the history of those nations, of whom we shall have but a very imperfect idea, unless we have recourse to the inspired writers. They alone display, and bring to light, the secret thoughts of princes, their incoherent projects, their foolish pride, their impious and cruel ambition: they reveal the true causes and hidden springs of victories and overthrows; of the grandeur and declension of nations; the rise and ruin of states; and teach us, what indeed is the principal benefit to be derived from history, the judgment which the Almighty forms both of princes and empires, and consequently, what idea we ourselves ought to entertain of them.

Not to mention Egypt, that served at first as the cradle (if I may be allowed the expression) of the holy nation; and which afterwards was a severe prison, and a fiery furnace to it[^9]; and, at last, the scene of the most astonishing miracles that God ever wrought in favour of Israel: not to mention, I say, Egypt, the mighty empires of Nineveh and Babylon furnish a thousand proofs of the truth here advanced.

[^9: I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage. Exod. vi. 6. Out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt. Deut. iv. 20.—Trans.]

Their most powerful monarchs, Tiglath-Pileser, Shalmanezer, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, and many more, were, in God's hand, as so many instruments, which he employed to punish the transgressions of his people. “He lifted up an ensign to the nations from far, and hissed unto them from the end of the earth, to come and receive his orders.”[^10] He himself put the sword into their hands, and appointed their marches daily. He breathed courage and ardour into their soldiers; made their armies indefatigable in labour, and invincible in battle; and spread terror and consternation wherever they directed their steps.

[^10: Isaiah v. 26, 30, x. 28, 34, xiii. 4, 5.]

The rapidity of their conquests ought to have enabled them to discern the invisible hand which conducted them. But, says one of these kings[^11] in the name of the rest, “By the strength of my hand I have done it, and by my wisdom; for I am prudent: And I have removed the bounds of the people and have robbed their treasures, and I have put down the inhabitants like a valiant man. And my hand hath found as a nest the riches of the people: and as one gathereth eggs that are left, have I gathered all the earth, and there was none that moved the wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.”[^12]

[^11: Sennacherib.—Trans.]

[^12: Ibid. x. 13, 14.]

But this monarch, so august and wise in his own eye, how did he appear in that of the Almighty? Only as a subaltern agent, a servant sent by his master: “The rod of his anger, and the staff in his hand.”[^13] God's design was to chastise, not to extirpate his children. But Sennacherib “had it in his heart to destroy and cut off all nations.”[^14] What then will be the issue of this kind of contest between the designs of God, and those of this prince?[^15] At the time that he fancied himself already possessed of Jerusalem, the Lord, with a single blast, disperses all his proud hopes; destroys, in one night, an hundred four score and five thousand of his forces; and putting “a hook in his nose, and a bridle in his lips”,[^16] (as though he had been a wild beast,) he leads him back to his own dominions, covered with infamy, through the midst of those nations, who, but a little before, had beheld him in all his pride and haughtiness.

[^13: Isaiah x. 5.]

[^14: Ibid. ver. 7.]

[^15: Ibid. ver. 12.]

[^16: Because thy rage against me, and thy tumult is come up into mine ears, therefore I will put my hook into thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest. 2 Kings xix. 28.—Trans.]

Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, appears still more visibly governed by a Providence, to which he himself is an entire stranger, but which presides over all his deliberations, and determines all his actions.

Being come at the head of his army to two highways, the one of which led to Jerusalem, and the other to Rabbah, the chief city of the Ammonites, this king, not knowing which of them it would be best for him to strike into, debates for some time with himself, and at last casts lots. God makes the lot fall on Jerusalem, to fulfil the menaces he had pronounced against that city, viz. to destroy it, to burn the temple, and lead its inhabitants into captivity.[^17]

[^17: Ezek. xxi. 19, 23.]

One would imagine, at first sight, that this king had been prompted to besiege Tyre, merely from a political view, viz. that he might not leave behind him so powerful and well-fortified a city; nevertheless, a superior will had decreed the siege of Tyre.[^18] God designed, on one side, to humble the pride of Ithobal its king, who fancying himself wiser than Daniel, whose fame was spread over the whole East; and ascribing entirely to his rare and uncommon prudence the extent of his dominions, and the greatness of his riches, persuaded himself that he was “a god, and sat in the seat of God.”[^19] On the other side, he also designed to chastise the luxury, the voluptuousness, and the pride of those haughty merchants, who thought themselves kings of the sea, and sovereigns over crowned heads; and especially, that inhuman joy of the Tyrians, who looked upon the fall of Jerusalem (the rival of Tyre) as their own aggrandizement. These were the motives which prompted God himself to lead Nebuchadnezzar to Tyre; and to make him execute, though unknowingly, his commands. Idcirco ecce ego adducam ad Tyrum Nabuchodonosor.

[^18: Ibid. xxvi. xxvii. xxviii.]

[^19: Ezek. xxviii. 2.]

To recompense this monarch, whose army the Almighty had caused “to serve a great service against Tyre”[^20] (these are God's own words;) and to compensate the Babylonish troops, for the grievous toils they had sustained during a thirteen years' siege; “I will give,”[^21] saith the Lord God, “the land of Egypt unto Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon; and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey, and it shall be the wages for his army.”[^22]

[^20: Ibid. xxix. 18, 20.]

[^21: Dan. iv. 1-34.]

[^22: This incident is related more at large in the history of the Egyptians, under the reign of Amasis.—Trans.]

The same Nebuchadnezzar, eager to immortalize his name by the grandeur of his exploits, was determined to heighten the glory of his conquests by his splendour and magnificence, in embellishing the capital of his empire with pompous edifices, and the most sumptuous ornaments. But whilst a set of adulating courtiers, on whom he lavished the highest honours and immense riches, make all places resound with his name, an august senate of watchful spirits is formed, who weigh, in the balance of truth, the actions of kings, and pronounce upon them a sentence from which there lies no appeal. The king of Babylon is cited before this tribunal, in which there presides the Supreme Judge, who, to a vigilance which nothing can elude, adds a holiness that will not allow of the least irregularity. Vigil et sanctus. In this tribunal all Nebuchadnezzar's actions, which were the admiration and wonder of the public, are examined with rigour; and a search is made into the inward recesses of his heart, to discover his most hidden thoughts. How will this formidable inquiry end? At the instant that Nebuchadnezzar, walking in his palace, and revolving, with a secret complacency, his exploits, his grandeur and magnificence, is saying to himself, “Is not this great Babylon that I built for the house of the kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?”[^23] in this very instant, when, by vainly flattering himself that he held his power and kingdom from himself alone, he usurped the seat of the Almighty: a voice from heaven pronounces his sentence, and declares to him, that “his kingdom was departed from him, that he should be driven from men, and his dwelling be with the beasts of the field, until he knew that the Most High ruled in the kingdoms of men, and gave them to whomsoever he would.”[^24]

[^23: Ibid. iv. 30.]

[^24: Dan. iv. 31, 32.]

This tribunal, which is for ever assembled, though invisible to mortal eyes, pronounced the like sentence on those famous conquerors, on those heroes of the pagan world, who, like Nebuchadnezzar, considered themselves as the sole authors of their exalted fortune; as independent on authority of every kind, and as not holding of a superior power.

As God appointed some princes to be the instruments of his vengeance, he made others the dispensers of his goodness. He ordained Cyrus to be the deliverer of his people; and, to enable him to support with dignity so glorious a function, he endued him with all the qualities which constitute the greatest captains and princes: and caused that excellent education to be given him, which the heathens so much admired, though they neither knew the author nor true cause of it.

We see in profane history the extent and swiftness of his conquests, the intrepidity of his courage, the wisdom of his views and designs; his greatness of soul, his noble generosity; his truly paternal affection for his subjects; and, on their part, the grateful returns of love and tenderness, which made them consider him rather as their protector and father, than as their lord and sovereign. We find, I say, all these particulars in profane history; but we do not perceive the secret principle of so many exalted qualities, nor the hidden spring which set them in motion.

But Isaiah discloses them, and delivers himself in words suitable to the greatness and majesty of the God who inspired him, He represents this all-powerful God of armies as leading Cyrus by the hand, marching before him, conducting him from city to city, and from province to province; “subduing nations before him, loosening the loins of kings, breaking in pieces gates of brass, cutting in sunder the bars of iron,” throwing down the walls and bulwarks of cities, and putting him in possession “of the treasures of darkness, and the hidden riches of secret places.”[^25]

[^25: Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him and I will loose the loins of kings to open before him the two-leaved gates, and the gates shall not be shut.

I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron.

And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know, that I the Lord which shall call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel. Isa. xlv. 1-3.—Trans.]

The prophet also tells us the cause and motive of all these wonderful events.[^26] It was in order to punish Babylon, and to deliver Judah, that the Almighty conducts Cyrus, step by step, and gives success to all his enterprises. “I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways.—For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect.”[^27] But this prince is so blind and ungrateful, that he does not know his master, nor remember his benefactor. “I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.—I girded thee, though thou hast not known me.”[^28]

[^26: Isa. xlv. 13, 14.]

[^27: Ibid. 13, 4.]

[^28: Ibid. 4, 5.]

Men seldom form to themselves a right judgment of true glory, and the duties essential to regal power. The Scripture alone gives us a just idea of them, and this it does in a wonderful manner, under the image of a very large and strong tree, whose top reaches to heaven, and whose branches extend to the extremities of the earth.[^29] As its foliage is very abundant, and it is bowed down with fruit, it constitutes the ornament and felicity of the plains around it. It supplies a grateful shade, and a secure retreat to beasts of every kind: animals, both wild and tame, are safely lodged beneath it, the birds of heaven dwell in its branches, and it supplies food to all living creatures.

[^29: Dan. iv. 7, 9.]

Can there be a more just or more instructive idea of the kingly office, whose true grandeur and solid glory does not consist in that splendour, pomp, and magnificence which surround it; nor in that reverence and exterior homage which are paid to it by subjects, and which are justly due to it; but in the real services and solid advantages it procures to nations, whose support, defence, security, and asylum it forms, (both from its nature and institution,) at the same time that it is the fruitful source of blessings of every kind; especially with regard to the poor and weak, who ought to find beneath the shade and protection of royalty, a sweet peace and tranquillity, not to be interrupted or disturbed; whilst the monarch himself sacrifices his ease, and experiences alone those storms and tempests from which he shelters all others?

I think that I observe this noble image, and the execution of this great plan (religion only excepted) realized in the government of Cyrus, of which Xenophon has given us a picture, in his beautiful preface to the history of that prince. He has there specified a great number of nations, which, though separated from each other by vast tracts of country, and still more widely by the diversity of their manners, customs, and language, were however all united, by the same sentiments of esteem, reverence, and love for a prince, whose government they wished, if possible, to have continued for ever, so much happiness and tranquillity did they enjoy under it.[^30]

[^30: Ἐδυνήθη ἐπιθυμίαν ἐμβαλεῖν τοσαύτην τοῦ πάντας αὐτῷ χαριζεσθαι, ὤσι ἀεὶ τ᾽ αὐτοῦ γνώμη ἀξιοῦν κυβερνᾶσθαι.—Trans.]

To this amiable and salutary government, let us oppose the idea which the sacred writings give us of those monarchs and conquerors so much boasted by antiquity, who, instead of making the happiness of mankind the sole object of their care, were prompted by no other motives than those of interest and ambition. The Holy Spirit represents them under the symbols of monsters generated from the agitation of the sea, from the tumult, confusion, and dashing of the waves one against the other; and under the image of cruel wild beasts, which spread terror and desolation universally, and are for ever gorging themselves with blood and slaughter; bears, lions, tigers, and leopards.[^31] How strong and expressive is this colouring!

[^31: Dan. vii.]

Nevertheless, it is often from such destructive models, that the rules and maxims of the education generally bestowed on the children of the great are borrowed; and it is these ravagers of nations, these scourges of mankind, they propose to make them resemble. By inspiring them with the sentiments of a boundless ambition, and the love of false glory, they become (to borrow an expression from Scripture) “young lions; they learn to catch the prey, and devour men—to lay waste cities, to turn lands and their fatness into desolation by the noise of their roaring.”[^32] And when this young lion is grown up, God tells us, that the noise of his exploits, and the renown of his victories, are nothing but a frightful roaring, which fills all places with terror and desolation.

[^32: Ezek. xix. 3, 7.]

The examples I have hitherto mentioned, extracted from the history of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians, prove sufficiently the supreme power exercised by God over all empires; and the relation he has thought fit to establish between the rest of the nations of the earth and his own peculiar people. The same truth appears as conspicuously under the kings of Syria and Egypt, successors of Alexander the Great: between whose history, and that of the Jews under the Maccabees, every body knows the close connection.

To these incidents I cannot forbear adding another, which though universally known, is not therefore the less remarkable; I mean the taking of Jerusalem by Titus. When he had entered that city, and viewed all the fortifications of it, this prince, though a heathen, owned the all-powerful arm of the God of Israel; and, in a rapture of admiration, cried out, “It is manifest that the Almighty has fought for us, and has driven the Jews from those towers; since neither the utmost human force, nor that of all the engines in the world, could have effected it.”[^33]

[^33: Joseph. 1. iii. c. 46.]

Besides the visible and sensible connection of sacred and profane history, there is another more secret and more distinct relation with respect to the Messiah, for whose coming the Almighty, whose work was ever present to his sight, prepared mankind from far, even by the state of ignorance and dissoluteness in which he suffered them to be immersed during four thousand years. It was to make mankind sensible of the necessity of our having a Mediator, that God permitted the nations to walk after their own ways; while neither the light of reason, nor the dictates of philosophy, could dispel the clouds of error, or reform their depraved inclinations.

When we take a view of the grandeur of empires, the majesty of princes, the glorious actions of great men, the order of civil societies, and the harmony of the different members of which they are composed, the wisdom of legislators, and the learning of philosophers, the earth seems to exhibit nothing to the eye of man but what is great and resplendent; nevertheless, in the eye of God it was equally barren and uncultivated, as at the first instant of the creation. “The earth was without form and void.”[^34] This is saying but little: it was wholly polluted and impure, (the reader will observe that I speak here of the heathens), and appeared to God only as the haunt and retreat of ungrateful and perfidious men, as it did at the time of the flood. “The earth was corrupt before God, and was filled with iniquity.”[^35]

[^34: Gen. i. 2.]

[^35: Ibid. vi. 11.]

Nevertheless the Sovereign Arbiter of the universe, who, pursuant to the dictates of his wisdom, dispenses both light and darkness, and knows how to check the impetuous torrent of human passions, would not permit mankind, though abandoned to the utmost corruptions, to degenerate into absolute barbarity, and brutalize themselves, in a manner, by the extinction of the first principles of the law of nature, as is seen in several savage nations. Such an obstacle would have too much retarded the rapid progress, promised by him to the first preachers of the doctrine of his Son.

He darted from far, into the minds of men, the rays of several great truths, to dispose them for the reception of others more important. He prepared them for the instructions of the Gospel, by those of philosophers; and it was with this view that God permitted the heathen professors to examine, in their schools, several questions, and establish several principles, which are nearly allied to religion; and to engage the attention of mankind, by the brilliancy of their disputations. It is well known, that the philosophers inculcate, in every part of their writings, the existence of a God, the necessity of a Providence that presides over the government of the world, the immortality of the soul, the ultimate end of man, the reward of the good and punishment of the wicked, the nature of those duties which constitute the band of society, the character of the virtues that are the basis of morality, as prudence, justice, fortitude, temperance, and other similar truths, which, though incapable of guiding men to righteousness, were yet of use to scatter certain clouds, and to dispel certain obscurities.

It is by an effect of the same providence, which prepared, from far, the ways of the gospel, that, when the Messiah revealed himself in the flesh, God had united together almost all nations, by the Greek and Latin tongues; and had subjected to one monarch, from the ocean to the Euphrates, all the people not united by language, in order to give a more free course to the preaching of the apostles. The study of profane history, when entered upon with judgment and maturity, must lead us to these reflections, and point out to us the manner in which the Almighty makes the empires of the earth subservient to the establishment of the kingdom of his Son.

It ought likewise to teach us how to appreciate all that glitters most in the eye of the world, and is most capable of dazzling it. Valour, fortitude, skill in government, profound policy, merit in magistracy, capacity for the most abstruse sciences, beauty of genius, delicacy of taste, and perfection in all arts: These are the objects which profane history exhibits to us, which excite our admiration, and often our envy. But at the same time this very history ought to remind us, that the Almighty, ever since the creation, has indulged to his enemies all those shining qualities which the world esteems, and on which it frequently bestows the highest eulogiums; while, on the contrary, he often refuses them to his most faithful servants, whom he endues with talents of an infinitely superior nature, though men neither know their value, nor are desirous of them. “Happy is that people that is in such a case: Yea, happy is that people, whose God is the Lord.”[^36]

[^36: Psal. cxliv. 15.]

I shall conclude this first part of my preface with a reflection which results naturally from what has been said. Since it is certain, that all these great men, who are so much boasted of in profane history, were so unhappy as not to know the true God, and to displease him; we should therefore be cautious and circumspect in the praises which we bestow upon them. St. Austin, in his Retractions, repents his having lavished so many encomiums on Plato, and the followers of his philosophy; “because these,” says he, “were impious men, whose doctrine, in many points, was contrary to that of Jesus Christ.”[^37]

[^37: Laus ipsa, quâ Platonem vel Platonicos seu Academicos philosophos tantùm extuli, quantùm impios homines non oportuit, non immeritò mihi displicuit; præsertim quorum contra errores magnes defendenda est Christiana doctrina. Retract. 1. i. c. 1.—Trans.]

However, we are not to imagine, that St. Austin supposes it to be unlawful for us to admire and praise whatever is either beautiful in the actions, or true in the maxims, of the heathens. He only advises us to correct whatever is erroneous, and to approve whatever is conformable to rectitude and justice in them.[^38] He applauds the Romans on many occasions, and particularly in his books De Civitate Dei,[^39] which is one of the last and finest of his works. He there shows, that the Almighty raised them to be victorious over nations, and sovereigns of a great part of the earth, because of the gentleness and equity of their government (alluding to the happy ages of the Republic); thus bestowing on virtues, that were merely human, rewards of the same kind, with which that people, blind on this subject, though so enlightened on others, were so unhappy as to content themselves. St. Austin, therefore, does not condemn the encomiums which are bestowed on the heathens, but only the excess of them.

[^38: Id in quoque corrigendum, quod pravum est; quod autem rectum est, approbandum. De Bapt. cont. Donat. 1. vii. c. 16.—Trans.]

[^39: Lib. v. c. 19, 21, &c.]

Students ought to take care, and especially we, who by the duties of our profession are obliged to be perpetually conversant with heathen authors, not to enter too far into the spirit of them; not to imbibe, unperceived, their sentiments, by lavishing too great applauses on their heroes; nor to give into excesses which the heathens indeed did not consider as such, because they were not acquainted with virtues of a purer kind. Some persons, whose friendship I esteem as I ought, and for whose learning and judgment I have the highest regard, have found this defect in some parts of my work, on the Method of Teaching and Studying the Belles Lettres, &c.; and are of opinion, that I have gone too great lengths in the encomiums which I bestow on the illustrious men of paganism. I indeed own, that the expressions on those occasions are sometimes too strong and too unguarded: however, I imagined that I had supplied a proper corrective to this, by the hints which I have interspersed in those four volumes; and, therefore, that it would be only losing time to repeat them; not to mention my having laid down, in different places, the principles which the Fathers of the Church establish on this head, declaring, with St. Austin, that without true piety, that is, without a sincere worship of the true God, there can be no true virtue; and that no virtue can be such, whose object is worldly glory; a truth, says this Father, acknowledged universally by those who are inspired with real and solid piety. Illud constat inter omnes veraciter pios, neminem sine verâ pietate, id est, veri Dei vero cultu, veram posse habere virtutem; nec eam veram esse, quando gloriæ servit humanæ.[^40]

[^40: De Civitate Dei, 1. v. c. 19.]

When I observed that Perseus had not resolution enough to kill himself,[^41] I do not thereby pretend to justify the practice of the heathens, who looked upon suicide as lawful; but simply to relate an incident, and the judgment which Paulus Æmilius passed on it. Had I barely hinted a word or two against that custom, it would have obviated all mistake, and left no room for censure.

[^41: Vol. iv. p. 385.]

The ostracism, employed in Athens against persons of the greatest merit; theft connived at, as it appears, by Lycurgus in Sparta; an equality of goods established in the same city, by the authority of the state, and things of a like nature, may admit of some difficulty. However, I shall pay a more immediate attention to these particulars,[^42] when the course of the history brings me to them; and shall avail myself with pleasure of such lights as the learned and unprejudiced may favour me by communicating.

[^42: This Mr Rollin has done admirably in the several volumes of his Ancient History.—Trans.]

In a work like that I now offer the public, intended more immediately for the instruction of youth, it were heartily to be wished, that not one single thought or expression might occur that could contribute to inculcate false or dangerous principles. When I first set about writing the present history, I proposed this for my maxim, the importance of which I perfectly conceive, but am far from imagining that I have always observed it, though it was my intention to do so; and therefore on this, as on many other occasions, I shall stand in need of the reader's indulgence.

As I write principally for young persons, and for those who do not intend to make very deep researches into ancient history, I shall not burthen this Work with a sort of erudition, that might have been naturally introduced into it, but does not suit my purpose. My design is, in giving a continued series of ancient history, to extract from the Greek and Latin authors all that I shall judge most useful and entertaining with respect to the transactions, and most instructive with regard to the reflections.

I should wish to be able to avoid, at the same time, the dry sterility of epitomes, which convey no distinct idea to the mind; and the tedious accuracy of long histories, which tire the reader's patience. I am sensible that it is difficult to steer exactly between the two extremes; and although, in the two parts of history of which this first volume consists, I have retrenched a great part of what we meet with in ancient authors, they may still be thought too long: but I was afraid of spoiling the incidents, by being too studious of brevity. However, the taste of the public shall be my guide, to which I shall endeavour to conform hereafter.

I was so happy as not to displease the public in my first attempt.[^43] I wish the present Work may be equally successful, but dare not raise my hopes so high. The subjects I there treated, viz. polite literature, poetry, eloquence, and curious and detached pieces of history, gave me an opportunity of introducing into it from ancient and modern authors, whatever is most beautiful, affecting, delicate, and just, with regard both to thought and expression. The beauty and justness of the things themselves which I offered the reader, made him more indulgent to the manner in which they were presented to him; and besides, the variety of the subjects supplied the want of those graces which might have been expected from the style and composition.

[^43: The Method of Teaching and Studying the Belles Lettres, &c. The English translation (in four volumes) of this excellent piece of criticism, was first printed for A. Bettesworth and C. Hitch, in Paternoster-Row.—Trans.]

But I have not the same advantage in the present work, the choice of the subjects not being entirely at my discretion. In a connected history, an author is often obliged to relate a great many things that are not always very interesting, especially with regard to the origin and rise of empires; and these parts are generally overrun with thorns, and offer very few flowers. However, the sequel will furnish matter of a more pleasing nature, and events that engage more strongly the reader's attention; and I shall take care to make use of the valuable materials which the best authors will supply. In the mean time, I must entreat the reader to remember that in a wide-extended and beautiful region, the eye does not everywhere meet with golden harvests, smiling meads, and fruitful orchards; but sees, at different intervals, wild and less cultivated tracts of land. And, to use another comparison, furnished by Pliny,[^44] some trees in the spring emulously shoot forth a numberless multitude of blossoms, which by this rich dress (the splendour and vivacity of whose colours charm the eye) proclaim a happy abundance in a more advanced season: while other trees,[^45] of a less gay appearance, though they bear good fruits, have not however the fragrance and beauty of blossoms, nor seem to share in the joy of reviving nature. The reader will easily apply this image to the composition of history.

[^44: Arborum flos, est pleni veris indicium, et anni renascentis; flos gaudium arborum. Tunc se novas, aliasque quàm sunt, ostendunt, tunc variis colorum picturis in certamen usque luxuriant. Sed hoc negatum plerisque. Non enim omnes florent, et sunt tristes quædam, quæque non sentiant guadia annorum; nec ullo flore exhilarantur, natalesve pomorum recursus annuos versicolori nuntio promittunt. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xvi. c. 25.—Trans.]

[^45: As the fig-trees.—Trans.]

To adorn and enrich my own, I will be so ingenuous as to confess, that I do not scruple, nor am ashamed, to rifle from all quarters, and that I often do not cite the authors from whom I transcribe, because of the liberty I occasionally take to make some slight alterations. I have made the best use in my power of the solid reflections that occur in the second and third parts of the bishop of Meaux's[^46] Universal History, which is one of the most beautiful and most useful books in our language. I have also received great assistance from the learned Dean Prideaux's Connection of the Old and New Testament, in which he has traced and cleared up, in an admirable manner, the particulars relating to ancient history. I shall take the same liberty with whatever comes in my way, that may suit my design, and contribute to the perfection of my Work.

[^46: Mons. Bossuet.—Trans.]

I am very sensible, that it is not so much for a person's reputation, thus to make use of other men's labours, and that it is in a manner renouncing the name and quality of author. But I am not over fond of that title; and shall be extremely well pleased, and think myself very happy, if I can but deserve the name of a good compiler, and supply my readers with a tolerable history; who will not be over solicitous to inquire whether it be an original composition of my own, or not, provided they are but pleased with it.

I cannot determine the exact number of volumes which this Work will make; but am persuaded there will be no less than ten or twelve.[^47] Students, with a very moderate application, may easily go through this course of history in a year, without interrupting their other studies. According to my plan, my Work should be given to the highest form but one. Youths in this class are capable of pleasure and improvement from this history; and I would not have them enter upon that of the Romans till they study rhetoric.

[^47: Former editions of this Work were printed in ten volumes.—Trans.]

It would have been useful, and even necessary, to have given some idea of the ancient authors from whence I have extracted the facts which I here relate. But the course itself of the history will naturally give me an opportunity of mentioning them.

In the mean time, it may not be improper to take notice of the superstitious credulity with which most of these authors are reproached, on the subject of auguries, auspices, prodigies, dreams, and oracles. And indeed, we are shocked to see writers, so judicious in all other respects, lay it down as a kind of law, to relate these particulars with a scrupulous accuracy; and to dwell gravely on a tedious detail of trifling and ridiculous ceremonies, such as the flight of birds to the right or left hand, signs discovered in the smoking entrails of beasts, the greater or less greediness of chickens in pecking corn, and a thousand similar absurdities.

It must be confessed, that a sensible reader cannot, without astonishment, see persons among the ancients in the highest repute for wisdom and knowledge; generals who were the least liable to be influenced by popular opinions, and most sensible how necessary it is to take advantage of auspicious moments; the wisest councils of princes perfectly well skilled in the arts of government; the most august assemblies of grave senators; in a word, the most powerful and most learned nations in all ages; to see, I say, all these so unaccountably weak, as to make to depend on these trifling practices and absurd observances, the decision of the greatest affairs, such as the declaring of war, the giving battle, or pursuing a victory, deliberations that were of the utmost importance, and on which the fate and welfare of kingdoms frequently depended.

But, at the same time, we must be so just as to own, that their manners, customs, and laws, would not permit men, in these ages, to dispense with the observation of these practices: that education, hereditary tradition transmitted from immemorial time, the universal belief and consent of different nations, the precepts, and even examples of philosophers; that all these, I say, made the practices in question appear venerable in their eyes: and that these ceremonies, how absurd soever they may appear to us, and are really so in themselves, constituted part of the religion and public worship of the ancients.

This religion was false, and this worship mistaken; yet the principle of it was laudable, and founded in nature; the stream was corrupted, but the fountain was pure. Man, assisted only by his own light, sees nothing beyond the present moment. Futurity is to him an abyss invisible to the most keen, the most piercing sagacity, and exhibits nothing on which he may with certainty fix his views, or form his resolutions. He is equally feeble and impotent with regard to the execution of his designs. He is sensible, that he is dependent entirely on a Supreme Power, that disposes all events with absolute authority, and which, in spite of his utmost efforts, and of the wisdom of the best concerted schemes, by raising only the smallest obstacles and slightest disappointments, renders it impossible for him to execute his measures.

This obscurity and weakness oblige him to have recourse to a superior knowledge and power: he is forced, both by his immediate wants, and the strong desire he has to succeed in all his undertakings, to address that Being who he is sensible has reserved to himself alone the knowledge of futurity, and the power of disposing it as he sees fitting. He accordingly directs prayers, makes vows, and offers sacrifices, to prevail, if possible, with the Deity, to reveal himself, either in dreams, in oracles, or other signs which may manifest his will; fully convinced that nothing can happen but by the divine appointment; and that it is a man's greatest interest to know this supreme will, in order to conform his actions to it.

This religious principle of dependence on, and veneration of, the Supreme Being, is natural to man: it is imprinted deep in his heart; he is reminded of it, by the inward sense of his extreme indigence, and by all the objects which surround him; and it may be affirmed, that this perpetual recourse to the Deity, is one of the principal foundations of religion and the strongest band by which man is united to his Creator.

Those who were so happy as to know the true God, and were chosen to be his peculiar people, never failed to address him in all their wants and doubts, in order to obtain his succour, and to know his will. He accordingly vouchsafed to reveal himself to them; to conduct them by apparitions, dreams, oracles, and prophecies; and to protect them by miracles of the most astonishing kind.

But those who were so blind as to substitute falsehood in the place of truth, directed themselves, for the like aid, to fictitious and deceitful deities, who were not able to answer their expectations, nor recompense the homage that mortals paid them, any otherwise than by error and illusion, and a fraudulent imitation of the conduct of the true God.

Hence arose the vain observation of dreams, which, from a superstitious credulity, they mistook for salutary warnings from Heaven; those obscure and equivocal answers of oracles, beneath whose veil the spirits of darkness concealed their ignorance; and, by a studied ambiguity, reserved to themselves an evasion or subterfuge, whatever might be the event. To this are owing the prognostics with regard to futurity, which men fancied they should find in the entrails of beasts, in the flight and singing of birds, in the aspect of the planets, in fortuitous accidents, and in the caprice of chance; those dreadful prodigies that filled a whole nation with terror, and which, it was believed, nothing could expiate but mournful ceremonies, and even sometimes the effusion of human blood: in fine, those black inventions of magic, those delusions, enchantments, sorceries, invocations of ghosts, and many other kinds of divination.

All I have here related was a received usage, observed by the heathen nations in general; and this usage was founded on the principles of that religion of which I have given a short account. We have a signal proof of this in that passage of the Cyropædia,[^48] where Cambyses, the father of Cyrus, gives that young prince such noble instructions; instructions admirably well adapted to form the great captain, and great king. He exhorts him, above all things, to pay the highest reverence to the gods; and not to undertake any enterprise, whether important or inconsiderable, without first calling upon and consulting them; he enjoins him to honour the priests and augurs, as being their ministers and the interpreters of their will, but yet not to trust or abandon himself so implicitly and blindly to them, as not, by his own application, to learn every thing relating to the science of divination, of auguries and auspices. The reason which he gives for the subordination and dependence in which kings ought to live with regard to the gods, and the benefit derived from consulting them in all things, is this: How clear-sighted soever mankind may be in the ordinary course of affairs, their views are always very narrow and bounded with regard to futurity; whereas the Deity, at a single glance, takes in all ages and events. “As the gods,” says Cambyses to his son, “are eternal, they know equally all things, past, present, and to come. With regard to the mortals who address them, they give salutary counsels to those whom they are pleased to favour, that they may not be ignorant of what things they ought, or ought not, to undertake. If it is observed, that the deities do not give the like counsels to all men; we are not to wonder at it, since no necessity obliges them to attend to the welfare of those persons on whom they do not vouchsafe to confer their favour.”

[^48: Xenoph. in Cyrop. 1. i. p. 25, 27.—Trans.]

Such was the doctrine of the most learned and most enlightened nations, with respect to the different kinds of divination; and it is no wonder that the authors who wrote the history of those nations, thought it incumbent on them to give an exact detail of such particulars as constituted part of their religion and worship, and was frequently in a manner the soul of their deliberations, and the standard of their conduct. I therefore was of opinion, for the same reason, that it would not be proper for me to omit entirely, in the ensuing history, what relates to this subject, though I have however retrenched a great part of it.

Archbishop Usher is my usual guide in chronology. In the history of the Carthaginians I commonly set down four æras: The year from the creation of the world, which, for brevity's sake, I mark thus, A.M.; those of the foundation of Carthage and Rome; and lastly, the year before the birth of our Saviour, which I suppose to be the 4004th year of the world; wherein I follow Usher and others, though they suppose it to be four years earlier.

We shall now proceed to give the reader the proper preliminary information concerning this Work, according to the order in which it is executed.

To know in what manner the states and kingdoms were founded, that have divided the universe; the steps whereby they rose to that pitch of grandeur related in history; by what ties families and cities were united, in order to constitute one body or society, and to live together under the same laws and a common authority; it will be necessary to trace things back, in a manner, to the infancy of the world, and to those ages in which mankind, being dispersed into different regions, (after the confusion of tongues,) began to people the earth.

In these early ages every father was the supreme head of his family; the arbiter and judge of whatever contests and divisions might arise within it; the natural legislator over his little society; the defender and protector of those, who, by their birth, education, and weakness, were under his protection and safeguard, and whose interests paternal tenderness rendered equally dear to him as his own.

But although these masters enjoyed an independent authority, they made a mild and paternal use of it. So far from being jealous of their power, they neither governed with haughtiness, nor decided with tyranny. As they were obliged by necessity to associate their family in their domestic labours, they also summoned them together, and asked their opinion in matters of importance. In this manner all affairs were transacted in concert, and for the common good.

The laws which paternal vigilance established in this little domestic senate, being dictated with no other view than to promote the general welfare; concerted with such children as were come to years of maturity, and accepted by the inferiors with a full and free consent; were religiously kept and preserved in families as an hereditary polity, to which they owed their peace and security.

But different motives gave rise to different laws. One man, overjoyed at the birth of a first-born son, resolved to distinguish him from his future children, by bestowing on him a more considerable share of his possessions, and giving him a greater authority in his family. Another, more attentive to the interest of a beloved wife, or darling daughter whom he wanted to settle in the world, thought it incumbent on him to secure their rights and increase their advantages. The solitary and cheerless state to which a wife would be reduced in case she should become a widow, affected more intimately another man, and made him provide beforehand, for the subsistence and comfort of a woman who formed his felicity. From these different views, and others of the like nature, arose the different customs of nations, as well as their rights, which are infinitely various.

In proportion as every family increased, by the birth of children, and their marrying into other families, they extended their little domain, and formed, by insensible degrees, towns and cities.

These societies growing, in process of time, very numerous; and the families being divided into various branches, each of which had its head, whose different interests and characters might interrupt the general tranquillity; it was necessary to intrust one person with the government of the whole, in order to unite all these chiefs or heads under a single authority, and to maintain the public peace by an uniform administration. The idea which men still retained of the paternal government, and the happy effects they had experienced from it, prompted them to choose from among their wisest and most virtuous men, him in whom they had observed the tenderest and most fatherly disposition. Neither ambition nor cabal had the least share in this choice; probity alone, and the reputation of virtue and equity, decided on these occasions, and gave the preference to the most worthy.[^49]

[^49: Quos ad fastigium nujus majestatis non ambitio popularis, sed spectata inter bonos moderatio provebebat. Justin, 1. i. c. 1.—Trans.]

To heighten the lustre of their newly-acquired dignity, and enable them the better to put the laws in execution, as well as to devote themselves entirely to the public good; to defend the state against the invasions of their neighbours, and the factions of discontented citizens; the title of king was bestowed upon them, a throne was erected, and a sceptre put into their hands; homage was paid them, officers were assigned, and guards appointed for the security of their persons; tributes were granted; they were invested with full powers to administer justice, and for this purpose were armed with a sword, in order to restrain injustice, and punish crimes.

At first, every city had its particular king, who being more solicitous to preserve his dominion than to enlarge it, confined his ambition within the limits of his native country.[^50] But the almost unavoidable feuds which break out between neighbours; jealousy against a more powerful king; a turbulent and restless spirit; a martial disposition, or thirst of aggrandizement; or the display of abilities; gave rise to wars, which frequently ended in the entire subjection of the vanquished, whose cities were possessed by the victor, and increased insensibly his dominions. Thus, a first victory paving the way to a second, and making a prince more powerful and enterprising, several cities and provinces were united under one monarch, and formed kingdoms of a greater or less extent, according to the degree of ardour with which the victor had pushed his conquests.[^51]

[^50: Fines imperii tueri magis quàm proferre mos erat. Intra suam cuique patriam regna finiebantur. Justin, 1. i. c. 1.—Trans.]

[^51: Domitis proximis, cum accessione virium fortior ad alios transiret, et proxima quæque victoria instrumentum sequentis esset, totius orientis populos subegit. Justin, 1. i. c. 1.—Trans.]

But among these princes were found some, whose ambition being too vast to confine itself within a single kingdom, broke over all bounds, and spread universally like a torrent, or the ocean; swallowed up kingdoms and nations; and fancied that glory consisted in depriving princes of their dominions, who had not done them the least injury; in carrying fire and sword into the most remote countries, and in leaving every where bloody traces of their progress! Such was the origin of those famous empires which included a great part of the world.

Princes made a various use of victory, according to the diversity of their dispositions or interests. Some, considering themselves as absolute masters of the conquered, and imagining they were sufficiently indulged in sparing their lives, bereaved them, as well as their children, of their possessions, their country, and their liberty; subjected them to a most severe captivity; employed them in those arts which are necessary for the support of life, in the lowest and most servile offices of the house, in the painful toils of the field; and frequently forced them, by the most inhuman treatment, to dig in mines, and ransack the bowels of the earth, merely to satiate their avarice; and hence mankind were divided into freemen and slaves, masters and bondmen.

Others introduced the custom of transporting whole nations into new countries, where they settled them, and gave them lands to cultivate.

Other princes again, of more gentle dispositions, contented themselves with only obliging the vanquished nations to purchase their liberties, and the enjoyment of their laws and privileges by annual tributes laid on them for that purpose; and sometimes they would suffer kings to sit peaceably on their thrones, upon condition of their paying them some kind of homage.

But such of these monarchs as were the wisest and ablest politicians, thought it glorious to establish a kind of equality betwixt the nations newly conquered and their other subjects; granting the former almost all the rights and privileges which the others enjoyed: and by this means a great number of nations, that were spread over different and far distant countries, constituted, in some measure, but one city, at least but one people.

Thus I have given a general and concise idea of mankind, from the earliest monuments which history has preserved on this subject; the particulars whereof I shall endeavour to relate, in treating of each empire and nation. I shall not touch upon the history of the Jews, nor that of the Romans.

The history of the Carthaginians, that of the Assyrians, and the Lydians, which occurs in the second volume, is supported by the best authorities; but it is highly necessary to review the geography, the manners, and customs of the different nations here treated of; and first with regard to the religion, manners, and institutions of the Persians and Grecians; because these show their genius and character, which we may call, in some measure, the soul of history. For to take notice only of facts and dates, and confine our curiosity and researches to them, would be imitating the imprudence of a traveller, who, in visiting many countries, should content himself with knowing their exact distance from each other, and consider only the situation of the several places, their buildings, and the dresses of the people; without giving himself the least trouble to converse with the inhabitants, in order to inform himself of their genius, manners, disposition, laws, and government. Homer, whose design was to give, in the person of Ulysses, a model of a wise and intelligent traveller, tells us, at the very opening of his Odyssey, that his hero informed himself very exactly of the manners and customs of the several people whose cities he visited; in which he ought to be imitated by every person who applies himself to the study of history.

As Asia will hereafter be the principal scene of the history we are now entering upon, it may not be improper to give the reader such a general idea of it, as may at least make him acquainted with its most considerable provinces and cities.

The northern and eastern parts of Asia are less known in ancient history.

To the north are Asiatic Sarmatia and Asiatic Scythia, which answer to Tartary.

Sarmatia is situated between the river Tanais, which separates Europe and Asia, and the river Rha, or Volga. Scythia is divided into two parts; the one on this, the other on the other side of mount Imaus. The nations of Scythia best known to us are the Sacæ and the Massagetæ.

The most eastern parts are, Serica, Cathay; Sinarum regio, China; and India. This last country was better known anciently than the two former. It was divided into two parts; the one on this side the Ganges, included between that river and the Indus, which now composes the dominions of the Great Mogul; the other part was that on the other side of the Ganges.

The remaining part of Asia, of which much greater mention is made in history, may be divided into five or six parts, taking it from east to west.

I. Upper Asia, which begins at the river Indus. The chief provinces are Gedrosia, Carmania, Arachosia, Drangiana, Bactriana, the capital of which was Bactra; Sogdiana, Margiana, Hyrcania, near the Caspian sea; Parthia, Media, its chief city Ecbatana; Persia, the cities of Persepolis and Elymais; Susiana, the city of Susa; Assyria, the city of Nineveh, situated on the river Tigris; Mesopotamia, between the Euphrates and Tigris; Babylonia, the city of Babylon on the river Euphrates.

II. Asia between the Pontus Euxinus and the Caspian Sea. Therein we may distinguish four provinces. 1. Colchis, the river Phasis, and mount Caucasus. 2. Iberia. 3. Albania; which two last-mentioned provinces now form part of Georgia. 4. The greater Armenia. This is separated from the lesser by the Euphrates; from Mesopotamia by mount Taurus; and from Assyria by mount Niphates. Its cities are Artaxata and Tigranocerta, and the river Araxes runs through it.

III. Asia Minor. This may be divided into four or five parts, according to the different situation of its provinces.

1. Northward, on the shore of the Pontus Euxinus; Pontus, under three different names. Its cities are, Trapezus, not far from which are the people called Chalybes or Chaldæi; Themiscyra, a city on the river Thermodon, and famous for having been the abode of the Amazons. Paphlagonia, Bithynia; the cities of which are, Nicæa, Prusa, Nicomedia, Chalcedon opposite to Constantinople, and Heraclea.

2. Westward, going down by the shores of the Ægean sea; Mysia, of which there are two. The Lesser, in which stood Cyzicus, Lampsacus, Parium, Abydos opposite to Sestos, from which it is separated only by the Dardanelles; Dardanum, Sigæum, Ilion, or Troy; and almost on the opposite side, the little island of Tenedos. The rivers are, the Æsepus, the Granicus, and the Simois. Mount Ida. This region is sometimes called Phrygia Minor, of which Troas is part.

The Greater Mysia. Antandros, Trajanopolis, Adramyttium, Pergamus. Opposite to this Mysia is the island of Lesbos; the cities of which are, Methymna, where the celebrated Arion was born; and Mitylene, which has given to the whole island its modern name Metelin.

Æolia. Elea, Cumæ, Phocæa.

Ionia. Smyrna, Clazomenæ, Teos, Lebedus, Colophon, Ephesus, Priene, Miletus.

Caria. Laodicea, Antiochia, Magnesia, Alabanda. The river Mæander.

Doris. Halicarnassus, Cnidos.

Opposite to these four last countries, are the islands Chios, Samos, Pathmos, Cos; and lower, towards the south, Rhodes.

3. Southward, along the Mediterranean;

Lycia, the cities of which are, Telmessus, Patara. The river Xanthus. Here begins mount Taurus, which runs the whole length of Asia, and assumes different names, according to the several countries through which it passes.

Pamphylia. Perga, Aspendus, Sida.

Cilicia. Seleucia, Corycium, Tarsus, on the river Cydnus. Opposite to Cilicia is the island of Cyprus. The cities are, Salamis, Amathus, and Paphos.

4. Along the banks of the Euphrates, going up northward;

The Lesser Armenia. Comana, Arabyza, Melitene, Satala. The river Melas, which empties itself into the Euphrates.

5. Inland:

Cappadocia; the cities whereof are, Neocæsarea, Comana Pontica, Sebastia, Sebastopolis, Diocæsarea, Cæsarea, otherwise called Mazaca, and Tyana.

Lycaonia and Isauria. Iconium, Isauria.

Pisidia. Seleucia and Antiochia of Pisidia.

Lydia. Its cities are, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia. The rivers are, Caystrus and Hermus, into which the Pactolus empties itself. Mount Sipylus and Tmolus.

Phrygia Major. Synnada, Apamia.

IV. Syria, now named Suria, called under the Roman emperors the East, the chief provinces of which are,

1. Palestine, by which name is sometimes understood all Judea. Its cities are, Jerusalem, Samaria, and Cæsarea Palestina. The river Jordan waters it. The name of Palestine is also given to the land of Canaan, which extended along the Mediterranean; the chief cities of which were, Gaza, Ascalon, Azotus, Accaron, and Gath.

2. Phœnicia, whose cities are, Ptolemais, Tyre, Sidon, and Berytus. Its mountains, Libanus and Antilibanus.

3. Syria, properly so called, or Antiochena; the cities whereof are, Antiochia, Apamia, Laodicea, and Seleucia.

4. Comagena. The city of Samosata.

5. Cœlesyria. The cities are, Zeugma, Thapsacus, Palmyra, and Damascus.

V. Arabia Petræa. Its cities are, Petra, and Bostra. Mount Casius. Deserta. Felix.

Of Religion.

It is observable, that in all ages and in every country, the several nations of the world, however various and opposite in their characters, inclinations and manners, have always united in one essential point; the inherent opinion of an adoration due to a Supreme Being, and of external forms calculated to evince such a belief. Into whatever country we cast our eyes, we find priests, altars, sacrifices, festivals, religious ceremonies, temples, or places consecrated to religious worship. Among every people we discover a reverence and awe of the Divinity; an homage and honour paid to him; and an open profession of an entire dependence upon him in all their undertakings, in all their necessities, in all their adversities and dangers. Incapable of themselves to penetrate into futurity and to ensure success, we find them careful to consult the Divinity by oracles, and by other methods of a like nature; and to merit his protection by prayers, vows, and offerings. It is by the same supreme authority they believe the most solemn treaties are rendered inviolable. It is that which gives sanction to their oaths; and to it by imprecations is referred the punishment of such crimes and enormities as escape the knowledge and power of men. On all their private concerns, voyages, journeys, marriages, diseases, the Divinity is still invoked. With him their every repast begins and ends. No war is declared, no battle fought, no enterprise formed, without his aid being first implored; to which the glory of the success is constantly ascribed by public acts of thanksgiving, and by the oblation of the most precious of the spoils, which they never fail to set apart as appertaining by right to the Divinity.

No variety of opinion is discernible in regard to the foundation of this belief. If some few persons, depraved by false philosophy, presume from time to time to rise up against this doctrine, they are immediately disclaimed by the public voice. They continue singular and alone, without making parties, or forming sects: the whole weight of the public authority falls upon them; a price is set upon their heads; whilst they are universally regarded as execrable persons, the bane of civil society, with whom it is criminal to have any kind of commerce.

So general, so uniform, so perpetual a consent of all the nations of the universe, which neither the prejudice of the passions, the false reasoning of some philosophers, nor the authority and example of certain princes, have ever been able to weaken or vary, can proceed only from a first principle, which forms a part of the nature of man; from an inward sentiment implanted in his heart by the Author of his being; and from an original tradition as ancient as the world itself.

Such were the source and origin of the religion of the ancients; truly worthy of man, had he been capable of persisting in the purity and simplicity of these first principles: but the errors of the mind, and the vices of the heart, those sad effects of the corruption of human nature, have strangely disfigured their original beauty. There are still some faint rays, some brilliant sparks of light, which a general depravity has not been able to extinguish utterly; but they are incapable of dispelling the profound darkness of the gloom which prevails almost universally, and presents nothing to view but absurdities, follies, extravagancies, licentiousness, and disorder; in a word, a hideous chaos of frantic excesses and enormous vices.

Can any thing be more admirable than these principles laid down by Cicero?[^52] That we ought above all things to be convinced that there is a Supreme Being, who presides over all the events of the world, and disposes every thing as sovereign lord and arbiter: that it is to him mankind are indebted for all the good they enjoy: that he penetrates into, and is conscious of, whatever passes in the most secret recesses of our hearts: that he treats the just and the impious according to their respective merits: that the true means of acquiring his favour, and of being pleasing in his sight, is not by employing of riches and magnificence in the worship that is paid to him, but by presenting him with a heart pure and blameless, and by adoring him with an unfeigned and profound veneration.

[^52: Sit hoc jam à principio persuasum civibus: dominos esse omnium rerum ac moderatores deos, eaque quæ geruntur eorum geri judicio ac numine; eosdemque optimè de genere hominum mereri; et, qualis quisque sit, quid agat, quid in se admittat, quâ mente, quâ pietate religiones colat, intueri; piorumque et impiorem habere rationem—Ad divos adeunto castè. Pietatem adhibento, opes amovento. Cic. de leg. l. ii. n. 15, 19.—Trans.]

Sentiments so sublime and religious were the result of the reflections of some few who employed themselves in the study of the heart of man, and had recourse to the first principles of his institution, of which they still retained some valuable relics. But the whole system of their religion, the tendency of their public feasts and ceremonies, the essence of the Pagan theology, of which the poets were the only teachers and professors, the very example of the gods, whose violent passions, scandalous adventures, and abominable crimes, were celebrated in their hymns or odes, and proposed in some measure to the imitation, as well as adoration, of the people; these were certainly very unfit means to enlighten the minds of men, and to form them to virtue and morality.

It is remarkable, that in the greatest solemnities of the Pagan religion, and in their most sacred and venerable mysteries, far from perceiving any thing which can recommend virtue, piety, or the practice of the most essential duties of ordinary life, we find the authority of laws, the imperious power of custom, the presence of magistrates, the assembly of all orders of the state, the example of fathers and mothers, all conspire to train up a whole nation from their infancy in an impure and sacrilegious worship, under the name, and in a manner under the sanction, of religion itself; as we shall soon see in the sequel.

After these general reflections upon Paganism, it is time to proceed to a particular account of the religion of the Greeks. I shall reduce this subject, though infinite in itself, to four articles, which are, 1. The feasts. 2. The oracles, auguries, and divinations. 3. The games and combats. 4. The public shows and representations of the theatre. In each of these articles, I shall treat only of what appears most worthy of the reader's curiosity, and has most relation to this history. I omit saying any thing of sacrifices, having given a sufficient idea of them elsewhere.[^53]

[^53: Manner of Teaching, &c. vol. i.—Trans.]

Of the Feasts.

An infinite number of feasts were celebrated in the several cities of Greece, and especially at Athens, of which I shall describe only three of the most famous, the Panathenea, the feasts of Bacchus, and those of Eleusis.

The Panathenea.

This feast was celebrated at Athens in honour of Minerva, the tutelary goddess of that city, to which she gave her name,[^54] as well as to the feast of which we are speaking. Its institution was ancient, and it was called at first the Athenea; but after Theseus had united the several towns of Attica into one city, it took the name of Panathenea. These feasts were of two kinds, the great and the less, which were solemnized with almost the same ceremonies; the less annually, and the great upon the expiration of every fourth year.

[^54: Ἀθήνη.—Trans.]

In these feasts were exhibited racing, the gymnastic combats, and the contentions for the prizes of music and poetry. Ten commissaries, elected from the ten tribes, presided on this occasion, to regulate the forms, and distribute the rewards to the victors. This festival continued several days.

In the morning of the first day a race was run on foot, in which each of the runners carried a lighted torch in his hand, which they exchanged continually with each other without interrupting their race. They started from the Ceramicus, one of the suburbs of Athens, and crossed the whole city. The first that came to the goal, without having put out his torch, carried the prize. In the afternoon they ran the same course on horseback.

The gymnastic or athletic combats followed the races. The place for that exercise was upon the banks of the Ilissus, a small river, which runs through Athens, and empties itself into the sea at the Piræus.

Pericles first instituted the prize of music. In this dispute were sung the praises of Harmodius and Aristogiton who, at the expense of their lives, delivered Athens from the tyranny of the Pisistratidæ; to which was afterwards added the eulogium of Thrasybulus, who expelled the thirty tyrants. The prize was warmly disputed, not only amongst the musicians, but still more so amongst the poets; and it was highly glorious to be declared victor in this contest. Æschylus is reported to have died with grief upon seeing the prize adjudged to Sophocles, who was much younger than himself.

These exercises were followed by a general procession, wherein was carried, with great pomp and ceremony, a sail, embroidered with gold, on which were curiously delineated the warlike actions of Pallas against the Titans and Giants. This sail was affixed to a vessel which bore the name of the goddess. The vessel, equipped with sails, and with a thousand oars, was conducted from the Ceramicus to the temple of Eleusis, not by horses or beasts of draught, but by machines concealed in the bottom of it, which put the oars in motion, and made the vessel glide along.

The march was solemn and majestic. At the head of it were old men, who carried olive-branches in their hands, θαλλοφόροι, and these were chosen for the symmetry of their shape, and the vigour of their complexion. Athenian matrons, of great age, also accompanied them in the same equipage.

The grown and robust men formed the second class. They were armed at all points, and had bucklers and lances. After them came the strangers that inhabited Athens, carrying mattocks, instruments proper for tillage. Next followed the Athenian women of the same age, attended by the foreigners of their own sex, carrying vessels in their hands for the drawing of water.

The third class was composed of the young persons of both sexes, selected from the best families in the city. The young men wore vests, with crowns upon their heads, and sang a peculiar hymn in honour of the goddess. The maids carried baskets, κανηφόροι, in which were placed the sacred utensils proper to the ceremony, covered with veils to keep them from the sight of the spectators. The person, to whose care those sacred things were intrusted, was bound to observe a strict continence for several days before he touched them, or distributed them to the Athenian virgins;[^55] or rather, as Demosthenes says, his whole life and conduct ought to have been a perfect model of virtue and purity. It was a high honour for a young woman to be chosen for so noble and august an office, and an insupportable affront to be deemed unworthy of it. We shall see that Hipparchus offered this indignity to the sister of Harmodius, which extremely incensed the conspirators against the Pisistratidæ. These Athenian virgins were followed by the foreign young women, who carried umbrellas and seats for them.

[^55: Οὐχὶ προειρημένον ἡμερῶν ἀριθμὸν ἁγνεύειν μόνον, ἀλλὰ τὸν βιον ὅλον ἡγνευκέναι. Demost. in extrema Aristocratia.—Trans.]

The children of both sexes closed the pomp of the procession.

In this august ceremony, the ῥαψωδοι were appointed to sing certain verses of Homer; a manifest proof of the estimation in which the works of that poet were held, even with regard to religion. Hipparchus, son of Pisistratus, first introduced that custom.

I have observed elsewhere,[^56] that in the gymnastic games of this feast a herald proclaimed, that the people of Athens had conferred a crown of gold upon the celebrated physician Hippocrates, in gratitude for the signal services which he had rendered the state during the pestilence.

[^56: Vol. ii. c. 3. § 2.—Trans.]

In this festival the people of Athens put themselves, and the whole republic, under the protection of Minerva, the tutelary goddess of their city, and implored of her all kind of prosperity. From the time of the battle of Marathon, in these public acts of worship, express mention was made of the Platæans, and they were joined in all things with the people of Athens.

Feasts of Bacchus.

The worship of Bacchus had been brought out of Egypt to Athens, where several feasts had been established in honour of that god; two particularly more remarkable than all the rest, called the great and the less feasts of Bacchus. The latter were a kind of preparation for the former, and were celebrated in the open field about autumn. They were named Lenea, from a Greek word[^57] that signifies a wine-press. The great feasts were commonly called Dionysia, from one of the names of that god,[^58] and were solemnized in the spring within the city.

[^57: Ληνός.]

[^58: Dionysius.]

In each of these feasts the public were entertained with games, shows, and dramatic representations, which were attended with a vast concourse of people, and exceeding magnificence, as will be seen hereafter: at the same time the poets disputed the prize of poetry, submitting to the judgment of arbitrators, expressly chosen for that purpose, their pieces, whether tragic or comic, which were then represented before the people.

These feasts continued many days. Those who were initiated, mimicked whatever the poets had thought fit to feign of the god Bacchus. They covered themselves with the skins of wild beasts, carried a thyrsus in their hands, a kind of pike with ivy-leaves twisted round it; had drums, horns, pipes, and other instruments calculated to make a great noise; and wore upon their heads wreaths of ivy and vine-branches, and of other trees sacred to Bacchus. Some represented Silenus, some Pan, others the Satyrs, all drest in suitable masquerade. Many of them were mounted on asses; others dragged goats[^59] along for sacrifices. Men and women, ridiculously dressed in this manner, appeared night and day in public; and imitating drunkenness, and dancing with the most indecent gestures, ran in throngs about the mountains and forests, screaming and howling furiously; the women especially seemed more outrageous than the men; and, quite out of their senses, in their furious[^60] transports invoked the god, whose feast they celebrated, with loud cries; εὐοῖ Βάκχε, or ὦ Ἴακχε, or Ἰόβακχε, or Ἰὼ Βάκχε.

[^59: Goats were sacrificed, because they spoiled the vines.—Trans.]

[^60: From this fury of the Bacchanalians these feasts were distinguished by the name of Orgia, Ὀργὴ, ira, furor.—Trans.]

This troop of Bacchanalians was followed by the virgins of the noblest families in the city, who were called κανηφόροι, from carrying baskets on their heads, covered with vine leaves and ivy.

To these ceremonies others were added, obscene to the last excess, and worthy of the god who chose to be honoured in such a manner. The spectators gave into the prevailing humour, and were seized with the same frantic spirit. Nothing was seen but dancing, drunkenness, debauchery, and all that the most abandoned licentiousness can conceive of gross and abominable. And this an entire people, reputed the wisest of all Greece, not only suffered, but admired and practised. I say an entire people; for Plato, speaking of the Bacchanalia, says in direct terms, that he had seen the whole city of Athens drunk at once.[^61]

[^61: Πάσαν ἐθεασάμην τὴν πόλιν περὶ τὰ Διονύσια μεθύουσαν. Lib. i. de leg. p. 637.—Trans.]

Livy informs us,[^62] that this licentiousness of the Bacchanalia having secretly crept into Rome, the most horrid disorders were committed there under cover of the night, and the inviolable secresy which all persons, who were initiated into these impure and abominable mysteries, were obliged, under the most horrid imprecations, to observe. The senate, being apprized of the affair, put a stop to those sacrilegious feasts by the most severe penalties; and first banished the practisers of them from Rome, and afterwards from Italy. These examples inform us, how far a mistaken sense of religion, that covers the greatest crimes with the sacred name of the Divinity, is capable of misleading the mind of man.[^63]

[^62: Liv. 1. xxxix. n. 8, 18.]

[^63: Nihil in speciem fallacius est quàm prava religio, ubi deorum numen prætenditur sceleribus. Liv. xxxix. n. 16.—Trans.]

The Feast of Eleusis.

There is nothing in all Pagan antiquity more celebrated than the feast of Ceres Eleusina. The ceremonies of this festival were called, by way of eminence, “the mysteries,” from being, according to Pausanias, as much above all others, as the gods are above men. Their origin and institution are attributed to Ceres herself, who, in the reign of Erechtheus, coming to Eleusis, a small town of Attica, in search of her daughter Proserpine, whom Pluto had carried away, and finding the country afflicted with a famine, invented corn as a remedy for that evil, with which she rewarded the inhabitants. She not only taught them the use of corn, but instructed them in the principles of probity, charity, civility, and humanity;[^64] from whence her mysteries were called Θεσμοφόρια, and Initia. To these first happy lessons fabulous antiquity ascribed the courtesy, politeness, and urbanity, so remarkable amongst the Athenians.

[^64: Multa eximia divinaque videntur Athenæ tuæ peperisse, atque in vitam hominum attulisse; tum nihil melius illis mysteriis, quibus ex agresti immanique vitâ, exculti ad humanitatem et mitigati sumus, initiaque ut appellautur, ita re vera principia vitæ cognovimus. Cic. 1. ii. de leg. n. 36.

Teque Ceres, et Libera, quarum sacra, sicut opiniones hominum ac religiones ferunt, longè maximis atque occultissimis ceremoniis continentur: à quibus initia vitæ atque victùs, legum, morum, mansuetudinis, humanitatis exempla hominibus et civitatibus data ac dispertita esse dicuntur. Cic. in Verr. de supplic. n. 186.—Trans.]

These mysteries were divided into the less and the greater; of which the former served as a preparation for the latter. The less were solemnized in the month Anthesterion, which answers to our November; the great in the month Boëdromion, which corresponds to August. Only Athenians were admitted to these mysteries; but of them, each sex, age, and condition, had a right to be received. All strangers were absolutely excluded, so that Hercules, Castor, and Pollux, were obliged to be adopted as Athenians in order to their admission; which, however, extended only to the lesser mysteries. I shall consider principally the great, which were celebrated at Eleusis.

Those who demanded to be initiated into them, were obliged, before their reception, to purify themselves in the lesser mysteries, by bathing in the river Ilissus, by saying certain prayers, offering sacrifices, and, above all, by living in strict continence during a certain interval of time prescribed them. That time was employed in instructing them in the principles and elements of the sacred doctrine of the great mysteries.

When the time for their initiation arrived, they were brought into the temple; and to inspire the greater reverence and terror, the ceremony was performed in the night. Wonderful things took place upon this occasion. Visions were seen, and voices heard of an extraordinary kind. A sudden splendour dispelled the darkness of the place, and, disappearing immediately, added new horrors to the gloom. Apparitions, claps of thunder, earthquakes, heightened the terror and amazement; whilst the person to be admitted, overwhelmed with dread, and sweating through fear, heard, trembling, the mysterious volumes read to him, if in such a condition he was capable of hearing at all. These nocturnal rites gave birth to many disorders, which the severe law of silence, imposed on the persons initiated, prevented from coming to light, as St. Gregory Nazianzen observes.[^65] What cannot superstition effect upon the mind of man, when once his imagination is heated? The president in this ceremony was called Hierophantes. He wore a peculiar habit, and was not permitted to marry. The first who served in this function, and whom Ceres herself instructed, was Eumolpus; from whom his successors were called Eumolpidæ. He had three colleagues; one who carried a torch;[^66] another a herald,[^67] whose office was to pronounce certain mysterious words; and a third to attend at the altar.

[^65: Οἴδεν Ἐλευσὶν ταῦτα, καὶ οἱ τῶν σιωπωένων καὶ σιωπῆς; ὄντων ἀξιον ἐτόπται. Orat de sacr. lumin.—Trans.]

[^66: Δαδοῦχος.]

[^67: Κῆρυξ.]

Besides these officers, one of the principal magistrates of the city was appointed to take care that all the ceremonies of this feast were exactly observed. He was called the king,[^68] and was one of the nine Archons. His business was to offer prayers and sacrifices. The people gave him four assistants,[^69] one chosen from the family of the Eumolpidæ, a second from that of the Ceryces, and the two last from two other families. He had besides ten other ministers to assist him in the discharge of his duty, and particularly in offering sacrifices, from whence they derived their name.[^70]

[^68: Βασιλεὺς]

[^69: Ἐπιμελήται]

[^70: Ἱεροποιοὶ.]

The Athenians initiated their children of both sexes very early into these mysteries, and would have thought it criminal to have let them die without such an advantage. It was their general opinion, that this ceremony was an engagement to lead a more virtuous and regular life; that it recommended them to the peculiar protection of the goddesses (Ceres and Proserpine,) to whose service they devoted themselves; and procured to them a more perfect and certain happiness in the other world: whilst, on the contrary, such as had not been initiated, besides the evils they had to apprehend in this life, were doomed, after their descent to the shades below, to wallow eternally in dirt, filth, and excrement. Diogenes the Cynic believed nothing of the matter,[^71] and when his friends endeavoured to persuade him to avoid such a misfortune, by being initiated before his death—“What,” said he, “shall Agesilaus and Epaminondas lie amongst mud and dung, whilst the vilest Athenians, because they have been initiated, possess the most distinguished places in the regions of the blessed?” Socrates was not more credulous; he would not be initiated into these mysteries, which was perhaps one reason that rendered his religion suspected.

[^71: Diogen. Laërt. l. vi. p. 389.]

Without this qualification none were admitted to enter the temple of Ceres;[^72] and Livy informs us of two Acarnanians, who, having followed the crowd into it upon one of the feast-days, although out of mistake and with no ill design, were both put to death without mercy. It was also a capital crime to divulge the secrets and mysteries of this feast. Upon this account Diagoras the Melian was proscribed, and had a reward set upon his head. It very nearly cost the poet Æschylus his life, for speaking too freely of it in some of his tragedies. The disgrace of Alcibiades proceeded from the same cause. Whoever had violated this secresy, was avoided as a wretch accursed and excommunicated.[^73] Pausanias, in several passages, wherein he mentions the temple of Eleusis, and the ceremonies practised there, stops short, and declares he cannot proceed, because he had been forbidden by a dream or vision.[^74]

[^72: Liv. l. xxxi. n. 14.]

[^73: Est et fideli tuta silentio Merces. Vetabo, qui Cereris sacrum Vulgârit arcana, sub iisdem Sit trabibus, fragilemque mecum Solvat phaselum.

Hor. Od. 2. l. iii.

Safe is the silent tongue, which none can blame The faithful secret merit fame; Beneath one roof ne'er let him rest with me, Who “Ceres' mysteries” reveals; In one frail bark ne'er let us put to sea, Nor tempt the jarring winds with spreading sails.

—Trans.]

[^74: Lib. i. p. 26, 71.]

This feast, the most celebrated of profane antiquity, was of nine days' continuance. It began the fifteenth of the month Boëdromion. After some previous ceremonies and sacrifices on the first three days, upon the fourth in the evening began the procession of “the Basket;” which was laid upon an open chariot slowly drawn by oxen,[^75] and followed by a long train of the Athenian women. They all carried mysterious baskets in their hands, filled with several things, which they took great care to conceal, and covered with a veil of purple. This ceremony represented the basket into which Proserpine put the flowers she was gathering when Pluto seized and carried her off.

[^75: Tardaque Eleusinæ matris volventia plaustra.

Virg. Georg. l. i. ver. 163.

The Eleusinian mother's mystic car Slow rolling——

—Trans.]

The fifth day was called the day of “the Torches:” because at night the men and women ran about with them in imitation of Ceres, who having lighted a torch at the fire at mount Ætna, wandered about from place to place in search of her daughter.

The sixth was the most famous day of all. It was called Iacchus, which is the same as Bacchus, the son of Jupiter and Ceres, whose statue was then brought out with great ceremony, crowned with myrtle, and holding a torch in its hand. The procession began at the Ceramicus, and passing through the principal places of the city, continued to Eleusis. The way leading to it was called “the sacred way,” and lay across a bridge over the river Cephisus. This procession was very numerous, and generally consisted of thirty thousand persons.[^76] The temple of Eleusis, where it ended, was large enough to contain the whole of this multitude; and Strabo says, its extent was equal to that of the theatres, which every body knows were capable of holding a much greater number of people.[^77] The whole way reechoed with the sound of trumpets, clarions, and other musical instruments. Hymns were sung in honour of the goddesses, accompanied with dancing, and other extraordinary marks of rejoicing. The route before mentioned, through the sacred way, and over the Cephisus, was the usual one: but after the Lacedæmonians, in the Peloponnesian war, had fortified Decelia, the Athenians were obliged to make their procession by sea, till Alcibiades reestablished the ancient custom.

[^76: Herod. l. viii. c. 65.]

[^77: Lib. ix. p. 305.]

The seventh day was solemnized by games, and the gymnastic combats, in which the victor was rewarded with a measure of barley; without doubt because it was at Eleusis the goddess first taught the method of raising that grain, and the use of it. The two following days were employed in some particular ceremonies, neither important nor remarkable.

During this festival it was prohibited, under very great penalties, to arrest any person whatsoever, in order to their being imprisoned, or to present any bill of complaint to the judges. It was regularly celebrated every fifth year, that is, after a revolution of four years: and history does not mention that it was ever interrupted, except upon the taking of Thebes by Alexander the Great.[^78] The Athenians, who were then upon the point of celebrating the great mysteries, were so much affected with the ruin of that city, that they could not resolve, in so general an affliction, to solemnize a festival which breathed nothing but merriment and rejoicing. It was continued down to the time of the Christian emperors.[^79] Valentinian would have abolished it, if Prætextatus, the proconsul of Greece, had not represented, in the most lively and affecting terms, the universal sorrow which the abrogation of that feast would occasion among the people; upon which it was suffered to subsist. It is supposed to have been finally suppressed by Theodosius the Great; as were all the rest of the Pagan solemnities.

[^78: Plut. in vit. Alex. p. 671.]

[^79: Zosim. Hist. l. iv.]

Of Auguries, Oracles, &c.

Nothing is more frequently mentioned in ancient history, than oracles, auguries, and divinations. No war was made, or colony settled; nothing of consequence was undertaken, either public or private, without having first consulted the gods. This was a custom universally established amongst the Egyptian, Assyrian, Grecian, and Roman nations; which is no doubt a proof, as has been already observed, that it was derived from ancient tradition, and that it had its origin in the religion and worship of the true God. It is not indeed to be questioned, but that God, before the deluge, did manifest his will to mankind in different methods, as he has since done to his people, sometimes in his own person and vivá voce, sometimes by the ministry of angels or of prophets inspired by himself, and at other times by apparitions or in dreams. When the descendants of Noah dispersed themselves into different regions, they carried this tradition along with them, which was every where retained, though altered and corrupted by the darkness and ignorance of idolatry. None of the ancients have insisted more upon the necessity of consulting the gods on all occasions by auguries and oracles than Xenophon; and he founds that necessity, as I have more than once observed elsewhere, upon a principle deduced from the most refined reason and discernment. He represents, in several places, that man of himself is very frequently ignorant of what is advantageous or pernicious to him; that, far from being capable of penetrating the future, the present itself escapes him; so narrow and short-sighted is he in all his views, that the slightest obstacles can frustrate his greatest designs; that the Divinity alone, to whom all ages are present, can impart a certain knowledge of the future to him: that no other being has power to facilitate the success of his enterprises; and that it is reasonable to believe he will enlighten and protect those, who adore him with the purest affection, who invoke him at all times with greatest constancy and fidelity, and consult him with most sincerity and integrity.

Of Auguries.

What a reproach is it to human reason, that so luminous a principle should have given birth to the absurd reasonings, and wretched notions, in favour of the science of augurs and soothsayers, and been the occasion of espousing, with blind devotion, the most ridiculous puerilities: should have made the most important affairs of state depend upon a bird's happening to sing upon the right or left hand; upon the greediness of chickens in pecking their grain; the inspection of the entrails of beasts; the liver's being entire and in good condition, which, according to them, did sometimes entirely disappear, without leaving any trace or mark of its having ever subsisted! To these superstitious observances may be added, accidental rencounters, words spoken by chance, and afterwards turned into good or bad presages; forebodings, prodigies, monsters, eclipses, comets; every extraordinary phenomenon, every unforeseen accident, with an infinity of chimeras of the like nature.

Whence could it happen, that so many great men, illustrious generals, able politicians, and even learned philosophers, have actually given into such absurd imaginations? Plutarch, in particular, so estimable in other respects, is to be pitied for his servile observance of the senseless customs of the Pagan idolatry, and his ridiculous credulity in dreams, signs, and prodigies. He tells us in his works, that he abstained a great while from eating eggs, upon account of a dream, with which he has not thought fit to make us further acquainted.[^80]

[^80: Sympos. l. ii. quæst. 3. p. 635.]

The wisest of the Pagans knew well how to appreciate the art of divination, and often spoke of it to each other, and even in public, with the utmost contempt, and in a manner best adapted to expose its absurdity. The grave censor Cato was of opinion, that one soothsayer could not look at another without laughing. Hannibal was amazed at the simplicity of Prusias, whom he had advised to give battle, upon his being diverted from it by the inspection of the entrails of a victim. “What,” said he, “have you more confidence in the liver of a beast, than in so old and experienced a captain as I am?” Marcellus, who had been five times consul, and was augur, said, that he had discovered a method of not being put to a stand by the sinister flight of birds, which was, to keep himself close shut up in his litter.

Cicero explains himself upon the subject of auguries without ambiguity or reserve. Nobody was more capable of speaking pertinently upon it than himself, (as M. Morin observes in his dissertation upon the same subject.) As he was adopted into the college of augurs, he had made himself acquainted with their most abstruse secrets, and had all possible opportunity of informing himself fully in their science. That he did so, sufficiently appears from the two books he has left us upon divination, in which, it may be said, he has exhausted the subject. In the second, wherein he refutes his brother Quintus, who had espoused the cause of the augurs, he combats and defeats his false reasonings with a force, and at the same time with so refined and delicate a raillery, as leaves us nothing to wish; and he demonstrates by proofs, each more convincing than the other, the falsity, contrariety, and impossibility of that art. But what is very surprising, in the midst of all his arguments, he takes occasion to blame the generals and magistrates, who on important conjunctures had contemned the prognostics; and maintains, that the use of them, as great an abuse as it was in his own opinion, ought nevertheless to be respected, out of regard to religion, and the prejudices of the people.[^81]

[^81: Errabat multis in rebus antiquitas: quam vel usu jam, vel doctrinâ, vel vetustate immutatam videmus. Retinetur autem et ad opinionem vulgi, et ad magnas utilitates reip. mos, religio, disciplina, jus augurum, collegii auctoritas. Nec verò non omni supplicio digni P. Claudius, L. Junius consules, qui contra auspicia navigârunt. Parendum enim fuit religioni, nec patrius mos tam contumaciter repudiandus Divin. l. ii. n. 70, 71.—Trans.]

All that I have hitherto said tends to prove, that Paganism was divided into two sects, almost equally enemies of religion; the one by their superstitious and blind regard for auguries, the other by their irreligious contempt and derision of them.

The principle of the first, founded on one side upon the ignorance and weakness of man in the affairs of life, and on the other upon the prescience of the Divinity and his almighty providence, was true; but the consequence deduced from it in favour of auguries, false and absurd. They ought to have proved that it was certain, that the Divinity himself had established these external signs to denote his intentions, and that he had obliged himself to a punctual conformity to them upon all occasions: but they had nothing of this in their system. These auguries and divinations therefore were the effect and invention of the ignorance, rashness, curiosity, and blind passions of man, who presumed to interrogate God, and to oblige him to give answers upon every idle imagination and unjust enterprise.

The others, who gave no real credit to any thing enjoined by the science of augury, did not fail, however, to observe its trivial ceremonies through policy, in order the better to subject the minds of the people to themselves, and to reconcile them to their own purposes, by the assistance of superstition: but by their contempt for auguries, and their inward conviction of their falsity, they were led into a disbelief of the Divine Providence, and to despise religion itself; conceiving it inseparable from the numerous absurdities of this kind, which rendered it ridiculous, and consequently unworthy a man of sense.

Both the one and the other behaved in this manner, because, having mistaken the Creator, and abused the light of nature, which might have taught them to know and to adore him, they were deservedly abandoned to their own darkness, and to a reprobate mind; and, if we had not been enlightened by the true religion, we, even at this day, should give ourselves up to the same superstitions.

Of Oracles

No country was ever richer in, or more productive of oracles, than Greece. I shall confine myself to those which were the most noted.

The oracle of Dodona, a city of the Molossians, in Epirus, was much celebrated; where Jupiter gave answers either by vocal oaks,[^82] or doves, which had also their language, or by resounding basins of brass, or by the mouths of priests and priestesses.

[^82: Certain instruments were fastened to the tops of oaks, which, being shaken by the wind, or by some other means, gave a confused sound. Servius observes, that the same word, in the Thessalian language, signifies dove and prophetess, which had given room for the fabulous tradition of doves that spoke. It was easy to make those brazen basins sound by some secret means, and to give what signification they pleased to a confused and inarticulate note.—Trans.]

The oracle of Trophonius in Bœotia, though he was nothing more than a hero, was in great reputation.[^83] After many preliminary ceremonies, as washing in the river, offering sacrifices, drinking a water called Lethe, from its quality of making people forget every thing, the votaries went down into his cave, by small ladders, through a very narrow passage. At the bottom was another little cavern, the entrance of which was also exceeding small. There they lay down upon the ground, with a certain composition of honey in each hand, which they were indispensably obliged to carry with them. Their feet were placed within the opening of the little cave; which was no sooner done, than they perceived themselves borne into it with great force and velocity. Futurity was there revealed to them; but not to all in the same manner. Some saw, others heard, wonders. From thence they returned quite stupified, and out of their senses, and were placed in the chair of Mnemosyne, the goddess of memory; not without great need of her assistance to recover their remembrance, after their great fatigue, of what they had seen and heard; admitting they had seen or heard any thing at all. Pausanias, who had consulted that oracle himself, and gone through all these ceremonies, has left a most ample description of it; to which Plutarch adds some particular circumstances,[^84] which I omit, to avoid a tedious prolixity.

[^83: Pausan. l. ix. p. 602, 604.]

[^84: Plut. de gen. Socr. p. 590.]

The temple and oracle of the Branchidæ, in the neighbourhood of Miletus, so called from Branchus, the son of Apollo, was very ancient, and in great esteem with all the Ionians and Dorians of Asia.[^85] Xerxes, in his return from Greece, burnt this temple, after the priests had delivered its treasures to him. That prince, in return, granted them an establishment in the remotest parts of Asia, to secure them against the vengeance of the Greeks. After the war was over, the Milesians reestablished that temple with a magnificence which, according to Strabo, surpassed that of all the other temples of Greece. When Alexander the Great had overthrown Darius, he utterly destroyed the city where the priests Branchidæ had settled, of which their descendants were at that time in actual possession, punishing in the children the sacrilegious perfidy of their fathers.

[^85: Herod, l. i. c. 157. Strab. l. xiv p. 634.]

Tacitus relates something very singular, though not very probable, of the oracle of Claros, a town of Ionia, in Asia Minor, near Colophon.[^86] “Germanicus,” says he, “went to consult Apollo at Claros. It is not a woman that gives the answers there, as at Delphi, but a man, chosen out of certain families, and almost always of Miletus. It is sufficient to let him know the number and names of those who come to consult him. After which he retires into a cave, and having drunk of the waters of a spring within it, he delivers answers in verse upon what the persons have in their thoughts, though he is often ignorant, and knows nothing of composing in measure. It is said, that he foretold to Germanicus his sudden death, but in dark and ambiguous terms, according to the custom of oracles.”

[^86: Tacit. Annal. l. ii. c. 54.]

I omit a great number of other oracles, to proceed to the most famous of them all. It is very obvious that I mean the oracle of Apollo at Delphi. He was worshipped there under the name of the Pythian, a title derived from the serpent Python, which he had killed, or from a Greek word, that signifies to inquire, πυθέσθαι, because people came thither to consult him. From thence the Delphic priestess was called Pythia, and the games there celebrated, the Pythian games.

Delphi was an ancient city of Phocis in Achaia. It stood upon the declivity, and about the middle, of the mountain Parnassus, built upon a small extent of even ground, and surrounded with precipices, that fortified it without the help of art.

Diodorus says,[^87] that there was a cavity upon Parnassus, from whence an exhalation rose, which made the goats dance and skip about, and intoxicated the brain. A shepherd having approached it, out of a desire to know the causes of so extraordinary an effect, was immediately seized with violent agitations of body, and pronounced words, which, without doubt, he did not understand himself; but which, however, foretold futurity. Others made the same experiment, and it was soon rumoured throughout the neighbouring countries. The cavity was no longer approached without reverence. The exhalation was concluded to have something divine in it. A priestess was appointed for the reception of its effects, and a tripod placed upon the vent, called by the Latins Cortina, perhaps from the skin[^88] that covered it. From thence she gave her oracles. The city of Delphi rose insensibly round about this cave; and a temple was erected, which, at length, became very magnificent. The reputation of this oracle almost effaced, or at least very much exceeded, that of all others.

[^87: Lib. xiv. p. 427, 428.]

[^88: Corium.]

At first a single Pythia sufficed to answer those who came to consult the oracle, as they did not yet amount to any great number: but in process of time, when it grew into universal repute, a second was appointed to mount the tripod alternately with the first, and a third chosen to succeed in case of death, or disease. There were other assistants besides these to attend the Pythia in the sanctuary, of whom the most considerable were called prophets;[^89] it was their business to take care of the sacrifices, and to inspect them. To these the demands of the inquirers were delivered by word of mouth, or in writing; and they returned the answers, as we shall see in the sequel.

[^89: Προφήται.]

We must not confound the Pythia with the Sibyl of Delphi. The ancients represent the latter as a woman that roved from country to country, venting her predictions. She was at the same time the Sibyl of Delphi, Erythræ, Babylon, Cumæ, and many other places, from her having resided in them all.

The Pythia could not prophesy till she was intoxicated by the exhalation from the sanctuary of Apollo. This miraculous vapour had not that effect at all times and upon all occasions. The god was not always in the inspiring humour. At first he imparted himself only once a year, but at length he was prevailed upon to visit the Pythia every month. All days were not proper, and upon some it was not permitted to consult the oracle. These unfortunate days occasioned an oracle's being given to Alexander the Great worthy of remark. He went to Delphi to consult the god, at a time when the priestess pretended it was forbidden to ask him any questions, and would not enter the temple. Alexander, who was always warm and tenacious, took hold of her by the arm to force her into it, when she cried out, “Ah, my son, you are not to be resisted!” or, “My son, you are invincible!”[^90] Upon which words he declared he would have no other oracle, and was contented with that he had received.

[^90: Ἀνίκητος εἶ, ὦ παῖ.—Trans.]

The Pythia, before she ascended the tripod, was a long time preparing for it by sacrifices, purifications, a fast of three days, and many other ceremonies. The god denoted his approach by the moving of a laurel, that stood before the gate of the temple, which shook also to its very foundations.

As soon as the divine vapour,[^91] like a penetrating fire, had diffused itself through the entrails of the priestess, her hair stood upright upon her head, her looks grew wild, she foamed at the mouth, a sudden and violent trembling seized her whole body, with all the symptoms of distraction and frenzy.[^92] She uttered, at intervals, some words almost inarticulate, which the prophets carefully collected, and arranged with a certain degree of order and connection. After she had been a certain time upon the tripod, she was reconducted to her cell, where she generally continued many days to recover from her fatigue; and, as Lucan says,[^93] a sudden death was often either the reward or punishment of her enthusiasm:

[^91: ——Cui talia fanti Ante fores, subitò non vultus, non color unus, Non comptæ mansere comæ: sed pectus anhelum, Et rabie fera corda tument; majorque videri, Nec mortale sonans: afflata est numine quando Jam propiore dei.

Virg. Æn. l. vi. v. 46-51.—Trans.]

[^92: Among the various marks which God has given us in the Scriptures to distinguish his oracles from those of the devil, the fury or madness, attributed by Virgil to the Pythia, et rabie fera corda tument, is one. It is I, saith God, that show the falsehood of the diviners' predictions, and give to such as divine, the motions of fury and madness; or according to Isa. xliv. 25, “That frustrateth the tokens of the liar, and maketh diviners mad.” Instead of which, the prophets of the true God constantly gave the divine answers in an equal and calm tone of voice, and with a noble tranquillity of behaviour. Another distinguishing mark is, that the dæmons gave their oracles in secret places, by-ways, and in the obscurity of caves; whereas God gave his in open day, and before all the world. “I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth,” Isa. xlv. 19. “I have not spoken in secret from the beginning,” Isa. xlviii. 16. So that God did not permit the devil to imitate his oracles, without imposing such conditions upon him, as might distinguish between the true and false inspiration.—Trans.]

[^93: Lib. v.]

Numinis aut pœna est mors immatura recepti,
Aut pretium.

The prophets had poets under them, who made the oracles into verses, which were often bad enough, and gave occasion to remark that, it was very surprising that Apollo, who presided over the choir of the muses, should inspire his priestess no better. But Plutarch informs us, that it was not the god who composed the verses of the oracle. He inflamed the Pythia's imagination, and kindled in her soul that living light, which unveiled all futurity to her. The words she uttered in the heat of her enthusiasm, having neither method nor connection, and coming only by starts, if that expression may be used, from the bottom of her stomach, or rather[^94] from her belly, were collected with care by the prophets, who gave them afterwards to the poets to be turned into verse. These Apollo left to their own genius and natural talents; as we may suppose he did the Pythia when she herself composed verses, which, though not often, happened sometimes. The substance of the oracle was inspired by Apollo, the manner of expressing it was the priestess's own: the oracles were however often given in prose.

[^94: Ἐγγαστρίμυθος.]

The general characteristics of oracles were ambiguity,[^95] obscurity, and convertibility, (if I may use that expression,) so that one answer would agree with several various, and sometimes directly opposite, events. By the help of this artifice, the dæmons, who of themselves are not capable of knowing futurity, concealed their ignorance, and amused the credulity of the Pagan world. When Crœsus was upon the point of invading the Medes, he consulted the oracle of Delphi upon the success of that war, and was answered, that by passing the river Halys, he would ruin a great empire. What empire, his own, or that of his enemies? He was to guess that; but whatever the event might be, the oracle could not fail of being in the right. As much may be said upon the same god's answer to Pyrrhus:

[^95: Quòd si aliquis dixerit multa ab idolis esse prædicta; hoc sciendum, quòd semper mendacium junxerint veritati, et sic sententias temperârint, ut, seu boni seu mali quid accidisset, utrumque possit intelligi. Hieronym. in cap. xlii. Isaiæ. He cites the two examples of Crœsus and Pyrrhus.—Trans.]

Aio te, Æacida, Romanos vincere posse.

I repeat it in Latin, because the equivocality, which equally implies, that Pyrrhus could conquer the Romans, and the Romans Pyrrhus, will not subsist in a translation. Under the cover of such ambiguities, the god eluded all difficulties, and was never in the wrong.

It must, however, be confessed, that sometimes the answer of the oracle was clear and circumstantial. I have related, in the history of Crœsus, the stratagem he made use of to assure himself of the veracity of the oracle, which was, to demand of it, by his ambassador, what he was doing at a certain time prefixed. The oracle of Delphi replied, in verse, that he was causing a tortoise and a lamb to be drest in a vessel of brass, which was really the case. The emperor Trajan made a similar trial of the god at Heliopolis, by sending him a letter sealed up,[^96] to which he demanded an answer.[^97] The oracle made no other return, than to command a blank paper, well folded and sealed, to be delivered to him. Trajan, upon the receipt of it, was struck with amazement to see an answer so correspondent with his own letter, in which he knew he had written nothing. The wonderful facility with which dæmons can transfer themselves almost in an instant from place to place, made it not impossible for them to give the two answers, which I have last mentioned, and to foretell in one country, what they had seen in another; this is Tertullian's opinion.[^98]

[^96: One method of consulting the oracle was by sealed letters, which were laid upon the altar of the god unopened.—Trans.]

[^97: Macrob. l. i. Saturnal. c. 23.]

[^98: Omnis spiritus ales. Hoc et angeli et dæmones. Igitur momento ubique sunt; totus orbis illis locus unus est: quid ubi geratur tam facilè sciunt, quàm enuntiant. Velocitas divinitas creditur, quia substantia ignoratur.—Cæterùm testudinem decoqui cum carnibus pecudis Pythius eo modo renunciavit, quo suprà diximus. Momento apud Lydiam fuerat. Tertul in Apolog.—Trans.]

Admitting it to be true, that some oracles have been followed precisely by the events foretold, we may believe that God, to punish the blind and sacrilegious credulity of the Pagans, has sometimes permitted the dæmons to have a knowledge of things to come, and to foretell them distinctly enough. Which conduct of God, though very much above human comprehension, is frequently attested in the Holy Scriptures.

It has been questioned, whether the oracles, mentioned in profane history, should be ascribed to the operations of dæmons, or only to the wickedness and imposture of men. Van dale, a Dutch physician, has maintained the latter opinion, and Monsieur Fontenelle, when a young man, adopted it, in the persuasion (to use his own words) that it was indifferent, as to the truth of Christianity, whether the oracles were the effect of the agency of spirits, or a series of impostures. Father Baltus, the Jesuit, professor of the Holy Scriptures in the university of Strasburgh, has refuted them both in a very solid treatise, wherein he demonstrates, invincibly, from the unanimous authority of the Fathers, that dæmons were the real agents in the oracles. He attacks, with equal force and success, the rashness and presumption of the Anabaptist physician; who, calling in question the capacity and discernment of those holy doctors, secretly endeavoured to efface the high idea all true believers should entertain of those great leaders of the Church, and to depreciate their venerable authority, which is so great a difficulty to all who deviate from the principles of ancient tradition. Now, if that was ever certain and uniform in any thing, it is so in this point; for all the Fathers of the Church, and ecclesiastical writers of all ages, maintain, and attest, that the devil was the author of idolatry in general, and of oracles in particular.

This opinion does not hinder our believing that the priests and priestesses were frequently guilty of fraud and imposture in the answers of the oracles. For is not the devil the father and prince of lies? In the Grecian history, we have seen more than once the Delphic priestess suffer herself to be corrupted by presents. It was from that motive, she persuaded the Lacedæmonians to assist the people of Athens in the expulsion of the thirty tyrants; that she caused Demaratus to be divested of the royal dignity, to make way for Cleomenes; and drest up an oracle to support the imposture of Lysander, when he endeavoured to change the succession to the throne of Sparta. And I am apt to believe that Themistocles, who well knew the importance of acting against the Persians by sea, inspired the god with the answer he gave, “to defend themselves with wooden walls.” Demosthenes, convinced that the oracles were frequently suggested by passion or interest, and suspecting, with reason, that Philip had instructed them to speak in his favour, boldly declared,[^99] that the Pythia “philippized;” and bade the Athenians and Thebans remember that Pericles and Epaminondas, instead of listening to, and amusing themselves with, the frivolous answers of the oracle, those idle bugbears of the base and cowardly, consulted only reason in the choice and execution of their measures.

[^99: Plut. in Demosth. p. 854.]

The same father Baltus examines, with equal success, a second point in dispute, namely, the cessation of oracles. Mr. Vandale, to oppose with some advantage a truth so glorious to Jesus Christ, the subverter of idolatry, had falsified the sense of the Fathers, by making them say, “that oracles ceased precisely at the moment of Christ's birth.” The learned apologist for the Fathers shows, that they all allege that oracles ceased after our Saviour's birth, and the preaching of his Gospel; not on a sudden, but in proportion as his salutary doctrines became known to mankind, and gained ground in the world. This unanimous opinion of the Fathers is confirmed by the unexceptionable evidence of great numbers of the Pagans, who agree with them as to the time when the oracles ceased.

What an honour to the Christian religion was this silence imposed upon the oracles by the victory of Jesus Christ! Every Christian had this power. Tertullian, in one of his Apologies,[^100] challenges the Pagans to make the experiment, and consents that a Christian should be put to death, if he did not oblige these givers of oracles to confess themselves devils. Lactantius informs us, that every Christian could silence them by only the sign of the cross.[^101] And all the world knows, that when Julian the Apostate was at Daphne, a suburb of Antioch, to consult Apollo, the god, notwithstanding all the sacrifices offered to him, continued mute, and only recovered his speech to answer those who inquired the cause of his silence, that they must ascribe it to the interment of certain bodies in the neighbourhood. Those were the bodies of Christian martyrs, amongst which was that of St. Babylas.

[^100: Tertull. in Apolog.]

[^101: Lib. de verà sapient., c. 27.]

This triumph of the Christian religion ought to give us a due sense of our obligations to Jesus Christ, and, at the same time, of the darkness to which all mankind were abandoned before his coming. We have seen amongst the Carthaginians, fathers and mothers, more cruel than wild beasts, inhumanly giving up their children, and annually depopulating their cities, by destroying the most vigorous of their youth, in obedience to the bloody dictates of their oracles and false gods.[^102] The victims were chosen without any regard to rank, sex, age, or condition. Such bloody executions were honoured with the name of sacrifices, and designed to make the gods propitious. “What greater evil,” cries Lactantius, “could they inflict in their most violent displeasure, than thus to deprive their adorers of all sense of humanity, to make them cut the throats of their own children, and pollute their sacrilegious hands with such execrable parricides?”

[^102: Tam barbaros, tam immanes fuisse homines, ut parricidium suum, id est tetrum atque execrabib humano generi facinus, sacrificium vocarent. Cùm teneras atque innocentes animas, quæ maximè est ætas parentibus dulcior, sine ullo respectu pietatis extinguerunt, immanitatemque omnium bestiarum, quæ tamen fœtus suos amant, seritate superarent. O dementiam insanabilem! Quid illis isti dii ampliùs facere possent si essent iratissimi, quàm faciunt propitii? Cùm suos cultores parricidiis inquinant, orbitatibus mactant, humanis sensibus spoliant. Lactant. l. i. c. 21.—Trans.]

A thousand frauds and impostures, openly detected at Delphi, and every where else, had not opened men's eyes, nor in the least diminished the credit of the oracles; which subsisted upwards of two thousand years, and was carried to an inconceivable height, even in the minds of the greatest men, the most profound philosophers, the most powerful princes, and generally among the most civilized nations, and such as valued themselves most upon their wisdom and policy. The estimation they were in, may be judged from the magnificence of the temple of Delphi, and the immense riches amassed in it through the superstitious credulity of nations and monarchs.

The temple of Delphi having been burnt about the fifty-eighth Olympiad, the Amphictyons, those celebrated judges of Greece, took upon themselves the care of rebuilding it.[^103] They agreed with an architect for three hundred talents, which amounts to nine hundred thousand livres.[^104] The cities of Greece were to furnish that sum. The inhabitants of Delphi were taxed a fourth part of it, and collected contributions in all parts, even in foreign nations, for that service. Amasis, at that time king of Egypt, and the Grecian inhabitants of his country, contributed considerable sums towards it. The Alcmæonidæ, a potent family of Athens, took upon themselves the conduct of the building, and made it more magnificent, by considerable additions of their own, than had been proposed in the model.

[^103: Herod l. ii. c 180; l. v. c. 62.]

[^104: About 44,428l. sterling.—Trans.]

Gyges, king of Lydia, and Crœsus, one of his successors, enriched the temple of Delphi with an incredible number of presents. Many other princes, cities, and private persons, by their example, in a kind of emulation of each other, had heaped up in it tripods, vases, tables, shields, crowns, chariots, and statues of gold and silver of all sizes, equally infinite in number and value. The presents of gold which Crœsus alone made to this temple, amounted, according to Herodotus,[^105] to upwards of 254 talents; that is, about 762,000 French livres;[^106] and perhaps those of silver to as much. Most of these presents were in being in the time of Herodotus. Diodorus Siculus,[^107] adding those of other princes to them, makes their amount ten thousand talents, or thirty millions of livres.[^108]

[^105: Ibid. l. i. c. 50, 51.]

[^106: About 33,500l. sterling.—Trans.]

[^107: Diod. l. xvi p. 453.]

[^108: About 1,300,000l.—Trans.]

Amongst the statues of gold, consecrated by Crœsus in the temple of Delphi, was placed that of his female baker, the occasion of which was this:[^109] Alyattes, Crœsus's father, having married a second wife, by whom he had children, she laid a plan to get rid of her son-in-law, that the crown might descend to her own issue. For this purpose she engaged the female baker to put poison into a loaf, that was to be served at the young prince's table. The woman, who was struck with horror at the crime, (in which she ought to have had no part at all,) gave Crœsus notice of it. The poisoned loaf was served to the queen's own children, and their death secured the crown to the lawful successor. When he ascended the throne, in gratitude to his benefactress, he erected a statue to her in the temple of Delphi. But, it may be said, could a person of so mean a condition deserve so great an honour? Plutarch answers in the affirmative; and with a much better title, he says, than many of the so-much-vaunted conquerors and heroes, who have acquired their fame only by murder and devastation.

[^109: Plut. de Pyth. orac. p. 401.]

It is not to be wondered at, that such immense riches should have tempted the avarice of mankind, and exposed Delphi to being frequently pillaged. Without mentioning more ancient times, Xerxes, who invaded Greece with a million of men, endeavoured to seize upon the spoils of this temple. Above an hundred years after, the Phoceans, near neighbours of Delphi, plundered it at several times. The same rich booty was the sole motive of the irruption of the Gauls into Greece under Brennus. The guardian god of Delphi, if we may believe historians, sometimes defended this temple by surprising prodigies; and at others, either from impotence or want of presence of mind, suffered himself to be plundered. When Nero made this temple, so famous throughout the universe, a visit, and found in it five hundred fine brass statues of illustrious men and gods to his liking, which had been consecrated to Apollo, (those of gold and silver having undoubtedly disappeared upon his approach,) he ordered them to be taken down, and shipping them on board his vessels, carried them with him to Rome.

Those who are desirous of more particular information concerning the oracles and riches of the temple of Delphi, may consult some dissertations upon this subject, printed in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres,[^110] of which I have made good use, according to my custom.

[^110: Vol. iii.]

Of the Games and Combats.

Games and combats made a part of the religion, and had a share in almost all the festivals of the ancients; and for that reason it is proper that they should find a place in this Work. Whether we consider their origin, or the design of their institution, we shall not be surprised at their being so prevalent in the best governed states.

Hercules, Theseus, Castor and Pollux, and the greatest heroes of antiquity, were not only the institutors or restorers of them, but thought it glorious to share in the exercise of them, and meritorious to succeed therein. These subduers of monsters, and of the common enemies of mankind, thought it no disgrace to them, to aspire to the victories in these combats; nor that the new wreaths with which their brows were encircled in the solemnization of these games, detracted from the lustre of those they had before acquired. Hence the most famous poets made these combats the subject of their verses; the beauty of whose poetry, whilst it immortalized themselves, seemed to promise an eternity of fame to those whose victories it celebrated. Hence arose that uncommon ardour which animated all Greece, to tread in the steps of those ancient heroes, and like them, to signalize themselves in the public combats.

A reason more solid, and originating in the very nature of these combats, and of the people who used them, may be given for their prevalence. The Greeks, by nature warlike, and equally intent upon forming the bodies and minds of their youth, introduced these exercises, and annexed honours to them, in order to prepare the younger sort for the profession of arms, to confirm their health, to render them stronger and more robust, to inure them to fatigues, and to make them intrepid in close fight, in which, the use of fire-arms being then unknown, strength of body generally decided the victory. These athletic exercises supplied the place of those in use amongst our nobility, as dancing, fencing, riding the great horse, &c.; but they did not confine themselves to a graceful mien, nor to the beauties of a shape and face; they were for joining strength to the charms of person.

It is true, these exercises, so illustrious by their founders, and so useful in the ends at first proposed from them, introduced public masters, who taught them to young persons, and from practising them with success, made public show and ostentation of their skill. This sort of men applied themselves solely to the practice of this art, and carrying it to an excess, they formed it into a kind of science, by the addition of rules and refinements; often challenging each other out of a vain emulation, till at length they degenerated into a profession of people, who, without any other employment or merit, exhibited themselves as a sight for the diversion of the public. Our dancing-masters are not unlike them in this respect, whose natural and original designation was to teach youth a graceful manner of walking, and a good address; but now we see them mount the stage, and perform ballets in the garb of comedians, capering, jumping, skipping, and making variety of strange unnatural motions. We shall see in the sequel, what opinion the wiser among the ancients had of their professed combatants and wrestling-masters.

There were four games solemnized in Greece. The Olympic, so called from Olympia, otherwise Pisa, a town of Elis in Peloponnesus, near which they were celebrated, after the expiration of every four years, in honour of Jupiter Olympicus. The Pythian, sacred to Apollo Pythius,[^111] so called from the serpent Python, killed by him; they were celebrated at Delphi every four years. The Nemæan, which took their name from Nemæa, a city and forest of Peloponnesus, and were either instituted or restored by Hercules, after he had slain the lion of the Nemæan forest. They were solemnized every two years. And lastly, the Isthmian, celebrated upon the isthmus of Corinth, every four years, in honour of Neptune. Theseus[^112] was the restorer of them, and they continued even after the ruin of Corinth. That persons might be present at these public sports with greater quiet and security, there was a general suspension of arms, and cessation of hostilities throughout all Greece, during the time of their celebration.

[^111: Several reasons are given for this name.—Trans.]

[^112: Pausan. l. ii. p. 88.]

In these games, which were solemnized with incredible magnificence, and drew together a prodigious concourse of spectators and combatants from all parts, a simple wreath was all the reward of the victors. In the Olympic games, it was composed of wild olive. In the Pythian, of laurel. In the Nemæan, of green parsley;[^113] and in the Isthmian, of the same herb dried. The institutors of these games wished that it should be implied from hence, that honour alone, and not mean and sordid interest, ought to be the motive of great actions. Of what were men not capable, accustomed to act solely from so glorious a principle! We have seen in the Persian war,[^114] that Tigranes, one of the most considerable captains in the army of Xerxes, having heard the prizes in the Grecian games described, cried out with astonishment, addressing himself to Mardonius, who commanded in chief, “Heavens! against what men are you leading us? Insensible to interest, they combat only for glory!”[^115] Which exclamation, though looked upon by Xerxes as an effect of abject fear, abounds with sense and judgment.

[^113: Apium.]

[^114: Herod. l. viii. c. 26.]

[^115: Παπαὶ, Μαρδόνιε, κόιους ἐπ᾽ ἄνδρας ἤγαγες μαχησομένους ἡμέας, οἵ οὐ περ᾽ χρημάσων τὸν αγῶνα ποιεῦνται, ἀλλά περὶ ἀρετῆς.—Trans.]

It was from the same principle that the Romans, whilst they bestowed upon other occasions crowns of gold of great value, persisted always in giving only a wreath of oaken leaves to him who had saved the life of a citizen.[^116] “O manners, worthy of eternal remembrance!” cried Pliny, in relating this laudable custom, “O grandeur, truly Roman, that would assign no other reward but honour, for the preservation of a citizen! a service, indeed, above all reward; thereby sufficiently evincing their opinion, that it was criminal to save a man's life from the motive of lucre and interest!” O mores æternos, qui tanta opera honore solo donaverint; et cùm reliquas coronas auro commendarent, salutem civis in pretio esse noluerint, clarâ professione servari quidem hominem nefus esse lucri causâ!

[^116: Plin. l. xvi. c. 4.]

Amongst all the Grecian games, the Olympic held undeniably the first rank, and that for three reasons. They were sacred to Jupiter, the greatest of the gods; instituted by Hercules, the first of the heroes; and celebrated with more pomp and magnificence, amidst a greater concourse of spectators attracted from all parts, than any of the rest.

If Pausanias may be believed,[^117] women were prohibited to be present at them upon pain of death; and during their continuance, it was ordained, that no woman should approach the place where the games were celebrated, or pass on that side of the river Alpheus. One only was so bold as to violate this law, and slipt in disguise amongst those who were training the wrestlers. She was tried for the offence, and would have suffered the penalty enacted by the law, if the judges, in regard to her father, her brother, and her son, who had all been victors in the Olympic games, had not pardoned her offence, and saved her life.

[^117: Pausan. l. v. p. 297.]

This law was very conformable with the manners of the Greeks, amongst whom the ladies were very reserved, seldom appeared in public, had separate apartments, called Gynæcea, and never ate at table with the men when strangers were present. It was certainly inconsistent with decency to admit them at some of the games, as those of wrestling and the Pancratium, in which the combatants fought naked.

The same Pausanias tells us in another place,[^118] that the priestess of Ceres had an honourable seat in these games, and that virgins were not denied the liberty of being present at them. For my part, I cannot conceive the reason of such inconsistency, which indeed seems incredible.

[^118: Pausan. l. vi. p. 382.]

The Greeks thought nothing comparable to the victory in these games. They looked upon it as the perfection of glory, and did not believe it permitted to mortals to desire any thing beyond it. Cicero assures us,[^119] that with them it was no less honourable than the consular dignity in its original splendour with the ancient Romans. And in another place he says,[^120] that to conquer at Olympia, was almost, in the estimation of the Grecians, more great and glorious, than to receive the honour of a triumph at Rome. Horace speaks in still stronger terms of this kind of victory. He is not afraid to say,[^121] that “it exalts the victor above human nature; they were no longer men but gods.”

[^119: Olympiorum victoria, Græcis consulatus ille antiquus videbatur. Tuscul. Quæst. l. ii. n. 41.—Trans.]

[^120: Olympionicam esse apud Græcos propè majus fuit et gloriosius quàm Romæ triumphâsse. Pro Flacco, n. 31.—Trans.]

[^121: ——Palmaque nobilis Terrarum dominos evehit ad deos.

Od. i. l. i.

Sive quos Elea domum reducit Palma cœlestes

Od. ii. l. i.—Trans.]

We shall see hereafter what extraordinary honours were paid the victor, of which one of the most affecting was, to date the year with his name. Nothing could more effectually stimulate their endeavours, and make them regardless of expenses, than the assurance of immortalizing their names, which, through all future ages would be enrolled in their annals, and stand in the front of all laws made in the same year with the victory. To this motive may be added the joy of knowing, that their praises would be celebrated by the most famous poets, and form the subject of conversation in the most illustrious assemblies; for these odes were sung in every house, and formed a part in every entertainment. What could be a more powerful incentive to a people, who had no other object and aim than that of human glory?

I shall confine myself upon this head to the Olympic games, which continued five days; and shall describe, in as brief a manner as possible, the several kinds of combats of which they were composed. M. Burette has treated this subject in several dissertations, printed in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres; wherein purity, perspicuity, and elegance of style are united with profound erudition. I make no scruple in appropriating to my use the riches of my brethren; and, in what I have already said upon the Olympic games, have made very free with the late Abbé Massieu's remarks upon the Odes of Pindar.

The combats which had the greatest share in the solemnity of the public games, were boxing, wrestling, the pancratium, the discus or quoit, and racing. To these may be added the exercises of leaping, throwing the dart, and that of the trochus or wheel; but as these were neither important nor of any great reputation, I shall content myself with having only mentioned them in this place. For the better methodizing the particulars of these games and exercises, it will be necessary to begin with an account of the Athletæ, or combatants.

Of the Athletæ, or Combatants.

The term Athletæ is derived from the Greek word ἆθλος, which signifies labour, combat. This name was given to those who exercised themselves with an intention to dispute the prizes in the public games. The art by which they formed themselves for these encounters, was called Gymnastic, from the Athletæ's practising naked.

Those who were designed for this profession frequented, from their most tender age, the Gymnasia or Palæstræ, which were a kind of academies maintained for that purpose at the public expense. In these places, such young people were under the direction of different masters, who employed the most effectual methods to inure their bodies for the fatigues of the public games, and to train them for the combats. The regimen they were under was very hard and severe. At first they had no other nourishment than dried figs, nuts, soft cheese, and a coarse heavy sort of bread, called μάζα. They were absolutely forbidden the use of wine, and enjoined continence; which Horace expresses thus:[^122]

[^122: Art. Poet. v. 412.]

Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam
Multa tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit,
Abstinuit venere et vino.

Who in th' Olympic race the prize would gain,
Has borne from early youth fatigue and pain,
Excess of heat and cold has often try'd,
Love's softness banish'd, and the glass deny'd.

St. Paul, by a comparison drawn from the Athletæ, exhorts the Corinthians, near whose city the Isthmian games were celebrated, to a sober and penitent life. “Those who strive,” says he, “for the mastery, are temperate in all things: Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible.” Tertullian uses the same thought to encourage the martyrs.[^123] He makes a comparison from what the hopes of victory made the Athletæ endure. He repeats the severe and painful exercises they were obliged to undergo; the continual denial and constraint, in which they passed the best years of their lives; and the voluntary privation which they imposed upon themselves, of all that was most pleasing and grateful to their passions. It is true, the Athletæ did not always observe so severe a regimen, but at length substituted in its stead a voracity and indolence extremely remote from it.

[^123: Nempe enim et Athletæ segregantur ad strictiorem disciplinam, ut robori ædificando vacent; continentui à luxuriâ, à cibis lætioribus, à potu jucundiore; coguntur, cruciantur, fatigantur. Tertul. ad Martyr.—Trans.]

The Athletæ, before their exercises,[^124] were rubbed with oils and ointments to make their bodies more supple and vigorous. At first they made use of a belt, with an apron or scarf fastened to it, for their more decent appearance in the combats; but one of the combatants happening to lose the victory by this covering's falling off, that accident was the occasion of sacrificing modesty to convenience, and retrenching the apron for the future. The Athletæ were naked only in some exercises, as wrestling, boxing, the pancratium, and the foot-race. They practised a kind of novitiate in the Gymnasia for ten months, to accomplish themselves in the several exercises by assiduous application; and this they did in the presence of such, as curiosity or idleness conducted to look on. But when the celebration of the Olympic games drew nigh, the Athletæ who were to appear in them were kept to double exercise.

[^124: The persons employed in this office were called Aliptæ.—Trans.]

Before they were admitted to combat, other proofs were required; as to birth, none but Greeks were to be received. It was also necessary, that their manners should be unexceptionable, and their condition free. No foreigner was admitted to combat in the Olympic games; and when Alexander, the son of Amyntas, king of Macedon, presented himself to dispute the prize, his competitors, without any regard to the royal dignity, opposed his reception as a Macedonian, and consequently a barbarian and a stranger; nor could the judges be prevailed upon to admit him, till he had proved in due form his family originally descended from the Argives.

The persons who presided in the games were called Agonothetæ, Athlothetæ, and Hellanodicæ: they registered the name and country of each champion; and upon the opening of the games a herald proclaimed the names of the combatants. They were then made to take an oath, that they would religiously observe the several laws prescribed in each kind of combat, and do nothing contrary to the established orders and regulations of the games. Fraud, artifice, and excessive violence, were absolutely prohibited; and the maxim so generally received elsewhere,[^125] that it is indifferent whether an enemy is conquered by deceit or valour, was banished from these combats. The address of a combatant, expert in all the niceties of his art, who knows how to shift and ward dexterously, to put the change upon his adversary with art and subtlety, and to improve the least advantages, must not be confounded here with the cowardly and knavish cunning of one who, without regard to the laws prescribed, employs the most unfair means to vanquish his competitor. Those who disputed the prize in the several kinds of combats, drew lots for their precedency in them.

[^125: Dolus an virtus, quis in noste requirat?—Trans.]

It is time to bring our champions to blows, and to run over the different kinds of combats, in which they exercised themselves.

Of Wrestling.

Wrestling is one of the most ancient exercises of which we have any knowledge, having been practised in the time of the patriarchs, as the wrestling of the angel with Jacob proves.[^126] Jacob supported the angel's attack so vigorously, that the latter, perceiving he could not throw so rough a wrestler, was reduced to make him lame by touching the sinew of his thigh, which immediately shrunk up.

[^126: Gen. xxxii. 24.]

Wrestling, among the Greeks, as well as other nations, was practised at first with simplicity, little art, and in a natural manner; the weight of the body, and the strength of the muscles, having more share in it than address and skill. Theseus was the first that reduced it to method, and refined it by the rules of art. He was also the first who established the public schools, called Palæstræ, where the young people had masters to instruct them in it.

The wrestlers, before they began the combat, were rubbed all over in a rough manner, and afterwards anointed with oils, which added to the strength and flexibility of their limbs. But as this unction, by making the skin too slippery, rendered it difficult for them to take good hold of each other, they remedied that inconvenience, sometimes by rolling themselves in the dust of the Palæstra, sometimes by throwing a fine sand upon each other, kept for that purpose in the Xystæ, or porticoes of the Gymnasia.

Thus prepared, the wrestlers began their combat. They were matched two against two, and sometimes several couples contended at the same time. In this combat, the whole aim and design of the wrestlers was to throw their adversary upon the ground. Both strength and art were employed for this purpose: they seized each other by the arms, drew forwards, pushed backwards, used many distortions and twistings of the body; locking their limbs into each other's, seizing by the neck, throttling, pressing in their arms, struggling, plying on all sides, lifting from the ground, dashing their heads together like rams, and twisting one another's necks. The most considerable advantage in the wrestler's art, was to make himself master of his adversary's legs, of which a fall was the immediate consequence. From whence Plautus says in his Pseudolus, speaking of wine, “He is a dangerous wrestler, he presently trips up the heels.”[^127] The Greek terms υποσκελίζειν and πτερνίζειν, and the Latin word supplantare, seem to imply, that one of these arts consisted in stooping down to seize the antagonist under the soles of his feet, and in raising them up to give him a fall.

[^127: Captat pedes primùm, luctator dolosus est.—Trans.]

In this manner the Athletæ wrestled standing, the combat ending with the fall of one of the competitors. But when it happened that the wrestler who was down, drew his adversary along with him, either by art or accident, the combat continued upon the sand, the antagonists tumbling and twining with each other in a thousand different ways, till one of them got uppermost, and compelled the other to ask quarter, and confess himself vanquished. There was a third sort of wrestling, called Ἀκροχειρισμὸς, from the Athletæ's using only their hands in it, without taking hold of the body, as in the other kinds; and this exercise served as a prelude to the greater combat. It consisted in intermingling their fingers, and in squeezing them with all their force; in pushing one another, by joining the palms of their hands together; in twisting their fingers, wrists, and other joints of the arm, without the assistance of any other member; and the victory was his, who obliged his opponent to ask quarter.

The combatants were to fight three times successively, and to throw their antagonists at least twice, before the prize could be adjudged to them.

Homer describes the wrestling of Ajax and Ulysses; Ovid, that of Hercules and Achelous; Lucan, of Hercules and Antæus; and Statius, in his Thebaid, that of Tydeus and Agylleus.[^128]

[^128: Iliad. l. xxiii v. 708, &c. Ovid. Metam. l. ix. v. 31, &c. Phars. l. iv. v. 612. Stat. l. vi. v. 847.]

The wrestlers of greatest reputation amongst the Greeks, were Milo of Crotona, whose history I have related elsewhere at large, and Polydamas. The latter, alone and without arms, killed a furious lion upon mount Olympus, in imitation of Hercules, whom he proposed to himself as a model in this action. Another time having seized a bull by one of his hinder legs, the beast could not get loose without leaving his hoof in his hands. He could hold a chariot behind, while the coachman whipt his horses in vain to make them go forward. Darius Nothus, king of Persia, hearing of his prodigious strength, was desirous of seeing him, and invited him to Susa. Three soldiers of that Prince's guard, and of that band which the Persians called “immortal,” esteemed the most warlike of their troops, were ordered to fall upon him. Our champion fought and killed them all three.

Of Boxing, or the Cestus.

Boxing is a combat at blows with the fist, from whence it derives its name. The combatants covered their fists with a kind of offensive arms, called Cestus, and their heads with a sort of leather cap, to defend their temples and ears, which were most exposed to blows, and to deaden their violence. The Cestus was a kind of gauntlet, or glove, made of straps of leather, and plated with brass, lead or iron. Their use was to strengthen the hands of the combatants, and to add violence to their blows.

Sometimes the Athletæ came immediately to the most violent blows, and began their onset in the most furious manner. Sometimes whole hours passed in harassing and fatiguing each other, by a continual extension of their arms, rendering each other's blows ineffectual, and endeavouring by that sparring to keep off their adversary. But when they fought with the utmost fury, they aimed chiefly at the head and face, which parts they were most careful to defend, by either avoiding or parrying the blows made at them. When a combatant came on to throw himself with all his force and vigour upon another, they had a surprising address in avoiding the attack, by a nimble turn of the body, which threw the imprudent adversary down, and deprived him of the victory.

However fierce the combatants were against each other, their being exhausted by the length of the combat, would frequently reduce them to the necessity of making a truce; upon which the battle was suspended by mutual consent for some minutes, that were employed in recovering their fatigue, and rubbing off the sweat in which they were bathed: after which they renewed the fight, till one of them, by letting fall his arms through weakness and faintness, explained that he could no longer support the pain or fatigue, and desired quarter; which was confessing himself vanquished.

Boxing was one of the roughest and most dangerous of the gymnastic combats; because, besides the danger of being crippled, the combatants ran the hazard of their lives. They sometimes fell down dead, or dying upon the sand; though that seldom happened, except the vanquished person persisted too long in not acknowledging his defeat: yet it was common for them to quit the fight with a countenance so disfigured, that it was not easy to know them afterwards; carrying away with them the sad marks of their vigorous resistance, such as bruises and contusions in the face, the loss of an eye, their teeth knocked out, their jaws broken, or some more considerable fracture.

We find in the poets, both Latin and Greek, several descriptions of this kind of combat. In Homer, that of Epeus and Euryalus; in Theocritus, of Pollux and Amycus; in Apollonius Rhodius, the same battle of Pollux and Amycus; in Virgil, that of Dares and Entellus; and in Statius, and Valerius Flaccus, of several other combatants.[^129]

[^129: Dioscoi. Idyl. xxii. Argonautic, l. ii. Æneid. l. v. Thebaid. l. vii. Argonaut. l. iv.]

Of the Pancratium.

The Pancratium was so called from two Greek words,[^130] which signify that the whole force of the body was necessary for succeeding in it. It united boxing and wrestling in the same fight, borrowing from one its manner of struggling and flinging, and from the other, the art of dealing blows and of avoiding them with success. In wrestling it was not permitted to strike with the hand, nor in boxing to seize each other in the manner of the wrestlers; but in the Pancratium, it was not only allowed to make use of all the gripes and artifices of wrestling, but the hands and feet, and even the teeth and nails, might be employed to conquer an antagonist.

[^130: Πᾶν κράτος.]

This combat was the most rough and dangerous. A Pancratiast in the Olympic games (called Arrichion, or Arrachion,) perceiving himself almost suffocated by his adversary, who had got fast hold of him by the throat, at the same time that he held him by the foot, broke one of his enemy's toes, the extreme anguish of which obliged him to ask quarter at the very instant that Arrichion himself expired. The Agonothetæ crowned Arrichion, though dead, and proclaimed him victor. Philostratus has left us a very lively description of a painting, which represented this combat.

Of the Discus, or Quoit.

The Discus was a kind of quoit of a round form, made sometimes of wood, but more frequently of stone, lead, or other metal; as iron or brass. Those who used this exercise were called Discoboli, that is, flingers of the Discus. The epithet κατωμάδιος, which signifies “borne upon the shoulders,” given to this instrument by Homer, sufficiently shows, that it was of too great a weight to be carried from place to place in the hands only, and that the shoulders were necessary for the support of such a burden for any length of time.

The intent of this exercise, as of almost all the others, was to invigorate the body, and to make men more capable of supporting the weight and use of arms. In war they were often obliged to carry such loads, as appear excessive in these days, either of provisions, fascines, palisades; or in scaling of walls, when, to equal the height of them, several of the besiegers mounted upon the shoulders of each other.

The Athletæ, in hurling the Discus, put themselves into the posture best adapted to add force to their cast; that is, they advanced one foot, upon which they leaned the whole weight of their bodies. They then poised the Discus in their hands, and whirling it round several times almost horizontally, to add force to its motion, they threw it off with the joint strength of hands, arms, and body, which had all a share in the vigour of the discharge. He that flung the Discus farthest was the victor.

The most famous painters and sculptors of antiquity, in their endeavours to represent naturally the attitudes of the Discoboli, have left to posterity many masterpieces in their several arts. Quintilian exceedingly extols a statue of that kind, which had been finished with infinite care and application by the celebrated Myron: “What can be more finished,” says he, “or express more happily the muscular distortions of the body in the exercise of the Discus, than the Discobolus of Myron?”[^131]

[^131: Quid tam distortum et elaboratum, quàm est ille Discobolos Myronis? Quintil. l. ii. c. 13.—Trans.]

Of the Pentathlum.

The Greeks gave this name to an exercise composed of five others. It is the common opinion, that those five exercises were wrestling, running, leaping, throwing the dart, and the Discus. It is believed that this sort of combat was decided in one day, and sometimes the same morning: and that to obtain the prize, which was single, it was required that a combatant should be the victor in all those exercises.

The exercise of leaping, and throwing the javelin, of which the first consisted in leaping a certain length, and the other in hitting a mark with a javelin at a certain distance, contributed to the forming of a soldier, by making him nimble and active in battle, and expert in flinging the spear and dart.

Of Races.

Of all the exercises which the Athletæ cultivated with so much pains and industry to enable them to appear in the public games, running held the foremost rank. The Olympic games generally opened with races, and were solemnized at first with no other exercise.

The place where the Athletæ exercised themselves in running was generally called the Stadium by the Greeks; as was that wherein they disputed in earnest for the prize. As the lists or course for these games was at first but one Stadium[^132] in length, it took its name from its measure, and was called the Stadium, whether precisely of that extent, or of a much greater. Under that denomination was included not only the space in which the Athletæ ran, but also that which contained the spectators of the gymnastic games. The place where the Athletæ contended was called Scamma, from its lying lower than the rest of the Stadium, on each side of which, and at the extremity ran an ascent or kind of terrace, covered with seats and benches, upon which the spectators were seated. The most remarkable parts of the Stadium were its entrance, middle, and extremity.

[^132: The Stadium was a measure of distance among the Greeks, and was, according to Herodotus, l. ii. c. 149, six hundred feet in length. Pliny says, l. ii. c. 23, that it was six hundred and twenty-five. Those two authors may be reconciled by considering the difference between the Greek and Roman foot; besides which, the length of the Stadium varies, according to the difference of times and places.—Trans.]

The entrance of the course, from whence the competitors started, was marked at first only by a line drawn on the sand from side to side of the Stadium. To that at length was substituted a kind of barrier, which was only a cord strained tight in the front of the horses or men that were to run. It was sometimes a rail of wood. The opening of this barrier was the signal for the racers to start.

The middle of the Stadium was remarkable only by the circumstance of having the prizes allotted to the victors set up there. St. Chrysostom[^133] draws a fine comparison from this custom. “As the judges,” says he, “in the races and other games, expose in the midst of the Stadium, to the view of the champions, the crowns which they are to receive; in like manner the Lord, by the mouth of his prophets, has placed in the midst of the course, the prizes which he designs for those who have the courage to contend for them.”

[^133: Hom. lv. in Matth. c. 16.—Trans.]

At the extremity of the Stadium was a goal, where the footraces ended, but in those of chariots and horses they were to run several times round it without stopping, and afterwards conclude the race by regaining the other extremity of the lists, from whence they started.

There were three kinds of races, the chariot, the horse, and the footrace. I shall begin with the last, as the most simple, natural, and ancient.

1. Of the Foot-race.

The runners, of whatever number they were, ranged themselves in a line, after having drawn lots for their places. Whilst they waited the signal to start, they practised, by way of prelude, various motions to awaken their activity, and to keep their limbs pliable and in a right temper.[^134] They kept themselves in wind by small leaps, and making little excursions, that were a kind of trial of their speed and agility. Upon the signal being given they flew towards the goal, with a rapidity scarce to be followed by the eye, which was solely to decide the victory. For the Agonistic laws prohibited, under the penalty of infamy, the attaining it by any foul method.

[^134: ——Tunc ritè citatos Explorant, acuuntque gradus, variasque per artes Instimulant docto languentia membra tumultu. Poplite nunc flexo sidunt, nunc lubrica forti Pectora collidunt plausu; nunc ignea tollunt Crura, brevemque fugam nec opino fine reponunt.

Stat. Theb. l. vi v. 587, &c.

They try, they rouse their speed, with various arts; Their languid limbs they prompt to act their parts. Now with bent hams, amidst the practis'd crowd, They sit; now strain their lungs, and shout aloud Now a short flight with fiery steps they trace, And with a sudden stop abridge the mimic race.

—Trans.]

In the simple race the extent of the Stadium was run but once, at the end of which the prize attended the victor, that is, he who came in first. In the race called Δίαυλος, the competitors ran twice that length; that is, after having arrived at the goal, they returned to the barrier. To these may be added a third sort, called Δολιχὸς, which was the longest of all, as its name implies, and was composed of several Diauli. Sometimes it consisted of twenty-four Stadia backwards and forwards, turning twelve times round the goal.

There were some runners in ancient times, as well among the Greeks as Romans, who have been much celebrated for their swiftness. Pliny tells us,[^135] that it was thought prodigious in Phidippides to run eleven hundred and forty Stadia[^136] between Athens and Lacedæmon in the space of two days, till Anystis of the latter place, and Philonides, the runner of Alexander the Great, went twelve hundred Stadia[^137] in one day, from Sicyon to Elis. These runners were denominated ἡμεροδρόμους as we find in that passage of Herodotus, which mentions Phidippides.[^138] In the consulate of Fonteius and Vipsanus, in the reign of Nero, a boy of nine years old ran seventy-five thousand paces[^139] between noon and night. Pliny adds, that in his time there were runners, who ran one hundred and sixty thousand paces[^140] in the circus. Our wonder at such a prodigious speed will increase, (continues he,)[^141] if we reflect, that when Tiberius went to Germany to his brother Drusius, then at the point of death, he could not arrive there in less than four-and-twenty hours, though the distance was but two hundred thousand paces,[^142] and he changed his carriage three times,[^143] and went with the utmost diligence.

[^135: Plin. l. vii. c. 20.]

[^136: 57 leagues.]

[^137: 60 leagues.]

[^138: Herod. l. vi. c. 106.]

[^139: 30 leagues.]

[^140: More than 53 leagues.]

[^141: Val. Max. l. v. c. 5.]

[^142: 67 leagues.]

[^143: He had only a guide and one officer with him.—Trans.]

2. Of the Horse-races.

The race of a single horse with a rider was less celebrated among the ancients, yet it had its favourers amongst the most considerable persons, and even kings themselves, and was attended with uncommon glory to the victor. Pindar, in his first ode, celebrates a victory of this kind, obtained by Hiero, king of Syracuse, to whom he gives the title of Κέλης, that is, “Victor in the horse-race;” which name was given to the horses carrying only a single rider, Κέλητες. Sometimes the rider led another horse by the bridle, and then the horses were called Desultorii, and their riders Desultores; because, after a number of turns in the Stadium, they changed horses, by dexterously vaulting from one to the other. A surprising address was necessary upon this occasion, especially in an age unacquainted with the use of stirrups, and when the horses had no saddles, which made the leap still more difficult. Among the African troops there were also cavalry,[^144] called Desultores, who vaulted from one horse to another, as occasion required; and these were generally Numidians.

[^144: Nec omnes Numidæ in dextro locati cornu, sed quibus desultorum in modum binos trahentibus equos, inter acerrimam sæpe pugnam, in recentem equum ex fesso armatis transultare mos erat; tanta velocitas ipsis, tamque docile equorum genus est. Liv. l. xxiii.—Trans.]

3. Of the Chariot-races.

This kind of race was the most renowned of all the exercises used in the games of the ancients, and that from whence most honour redounded to the victors; which is not to be wondered at, if we consider whence it arose. It is plain that it was derived from the constant custom of princes, heroes, and great men, of fighting in battle upon chariots. Homer has an infinity of examples of this kind. This custom being admitted, it is natural to suppose it very agreeable to these heroes, to have their charioteers as expert as possible in driving, as their success depended, in a very great measure, upon the address of their drivers. It was anciently, therefore, only to persons of the first consideration that this office was confided. Hence arose a laudable emulation to excel others in the art of guiding a chariot, and a kind of necessity to practise it very much, in order to succeed. The high rank of the persons who made use of chariots ennobled, as it always happens, an exercise peculiar to them. The other exercises were adapted to private soldiers and horsemen, as wrestling, running, and the single horse-race; but the use of chariots in the field was always reserved to princes, and generals of armies.

Hence it was, that all those who presented themselves in the Olympic games to dispute the prize in the chariot-races, were persons considerable either for their riches, their birth, their employments, or great actions. Kings themselves eagerly aspired to this glory, from the belief that the title of victor in these games was scarce inferior to that of conqueror, and that the Olympic palm added new dignity to the splendours of a throne. Pindar's odes inform us, that Gelon and Hiero, kings of Syracuse, were of that opinion. Dionysius, who reigned there long after them, carried the same ambition much higher. Philip of Macedon had these victories stampt upon his coins, and seemed as much gratified with them as with those obtained against the enemies of his state. All the world knows the answer of Alexander the Great on this subject.[^145] When his friends asked him whether he would not dispute the prize of the races in these games? “Yes,” said he, “if kings were to be my antagonists.” Which shows, that he would not have disdained these contests, if there had been competitors in them worthy of him.

[^145: Plut. in Alex. p. 666.]

The chariots were generally drawn by two or four horses, ranged abreast; bigæ, quadrigæ. Sometimes mules supplied the place of horses, and then the chariot was called ἀπήνη. Pindar, in the fifth ode of his first book, celebrates one Psaumis, who had obtained a triple victory; one by a chariot drawn by four horses, τεθρίππῳ; another by one drawn by mules, ἀπήνη; and the third by a single horse, κέλητι, which the title of the ode expresses.

These chariots, upon a signal given, started together from a place called Carceres. Their places were regulated by lot, which was not an indifferent circumstance as to the victory; for as they were to turn round a boundary, the chariot on the left was nearer than those on the right, which consequently had a greater compass to take. It appears from several passages in Pindar, and especially from one in Sophocles, which I shall cite very soon, that they ran twelve times round the Stadium. He that came in first the twelfth round was victor. The chief art consisted in taking the best ground at the turning of the boundary: for if the charioteer drove too near it, he was in danger of dashing the chariot to pieces; and if he kept too wide of it, his nearest antagonist might cut between him, and get foremost.

It is obvious that these chariot-races could not be run without some danger; for as the motion[^146] of the wheels was very rapid, and it was requisite to graze against the boundary in turning, the least error in driving would have broken the chariot in pieces, and might have dangerously wounded the charioteer. An example of which we find in the Electra of Sophocles, who gives an admirable description of a chariot-race run by ten competitors. The pretended Orestes, at the twelfth and last round, which was to decide the victory, having only one antagonist, the rest having been thrown out, was so unfortunate as to break one of his wheels against the boundary, and falling out of his seat entangled in the reins, the horses dragged him violently forwards along with them, and tore him to pieces. But this very seldom happened. To avoid such danger, Nestor gave the following directions to his son Antilochus, who was going to dispute the prize in the chariot-race.[^147] “My son,” says he, “drive your horses as near as possible to the boundary; for which reason, always inclining your body over your chariot, get the left of your competitors, and encouraging the horse on the right, give him the rein, whilst the near horse, hard held, turns the boundary so close that the nave of the wheel seems to graze upon it; but have a care of running against the stone, lest you wound your horses, and dash the chariot in pieces.”

[^146: Metaque fervidis Evitata rotis. Horat. Od. i. 1. i.

The goal shunn'd by the burning wheels.

—Trans.]

[^147: Hom. Il. l. xxiii. v. 334, &c.]

Father Montfaucon mentions a difficulty, in his opinion of much consequence, in regard to the places of those who contended for the prize in the chariot-race. They all started indeed from the same line, and at the same time, and so far had no advantage of each other; but he, whose lot gave him the first place, being nearest the boundary at the end of the career, and having but a small compass to describe in turning about it, had less way to make than the second, third, fourth, &c. especially when the chariots were drawn by four horses, which took up a greater space between the first and the others, and obliged them to make a larger circle in coming round. This advantage twelve times together, as must happen, admitting the Stadium was to be run round twelve times, gave such a superiority to the first, as seemed to assure him infallibly of the victory against all his competitors. To me it seems, that the fleetness of the horses, joined with the address of the driver, might countervail this odds; either by getting before the first, or by taking his place; if not in the first, at least in some of the subsequent rounds; for it is not to be supposed, that in the progress of the race the antagonists always continued in the same order in which they started. They often changed places in a short interval of time, and in that variety and vicissitude consisted all the diversion of the spectators.

It was not required, that those who aspired to the victory should enter the lists, and drive their chariots in person. Their being spectators of the games, or even sending their horses thither, was sufficient; but in either case, it was previously necessary to register the names of the persons for whom the horses were to run, either in the chariot or single horse-races.

At the time that the city of Potidæa surrendered to Philip, three couriers brought him advices; the first, that the Illyrians had been defeated in a great battle by his general Parmenio; the second, that he had carried the prize of the horse-race in the Olympic games; and the third, that the queen was delivered of a son. Plutarch seems to insinuate, that Philip was equally delighted with each of these circumstances.[^148]

[^148: Plut. in Alex. p. 666.]

Hiero sent horses to Olympia, to run for the prize, and caused a magnificent pavilion to be erected for them.[^149] Upon this occasion Themistocles harangued the Greeks, to persuade them to pull down the tyrant's pavilion, who had refused his aid against the common enemy, and to hinder his horses from running with the rest. It does not appear that any regard was had to this remonstrance; for we find, by one of Pindar's odes, composed in honour of Hiero, that he won the prize in the equestrian races.

[^149: Ibid. in Themist. p. 124.]

No one ever carried the ambition of making a great figure in the public games of Greece so far as Alcibiades,[^150] in which he distinguished himself in the most splendid manner, by the great number of horses and chariots which he kept only for the races. There never was either private person or king that sent, as he did, seven chariots at once to the Olympic games, wherein he carried the first, second, and third prizes; an honour no one ever had before him. The famous poet Euripides celebrated these victories in an ode, of which Plutarch has preserved a fragment. The victor, after having made a sumptuous sacrifice to Jupiter, gave a magnificent feast to the innumerable multitude of spectators at the games. It is not easy to comprehend, how the wealth of a private person should suffice for so enormous an expense: but Antisthenes, the scholar of Socrates, who relates what he saw, informs us, that many cities of the allies, in emulation of each other, supplied Alcibiades with all things necessary for the support of such incredible magnificence; equipages, horses, tents, sacrifices, the most exquisite provisions, the most delicate wines; in a word, all that was necessary to the support of his table or train. The passage is remarkable; for the same author assures us, that this was not only done when Alcibiades went to the Olympic games, but in all his military expeditions and journeys by land or sea. “Wherever,” says he, “Alcibiades travelled, he made use of four of the allied cities as his servants. Ephesus furnished him with tents, as magnificent as those of the Persians; Chios took care to provide for his horses; Cyzicum supplied him with sacrifices, and provisions for his table; and Lesbos gave him wine, with whatever else was requisite for his house.”

[^150: Ibid. in Alcib. p. 196.]

I must not omit, in speaking of the Olympic games, that the ladies were admitted to dispute the prize in them as well as the men; and that many of them obtained it. Cynisca, sister of Agesilaus, king of Sparta, first opened this new path of glory to her sex, and was proclaimed conqueror in the race of chariots with four horses.[^151] This victory, of which till then there had been no example, did not fail of being celebrated with all possible splendour.[^152] A magnificent monument was erected at Sparta in honour of Cynisca;[^153] and the Lacedæmonians, though otherwise very little sensible to the charms of poetry, appointed a poet to transmit this new triumph to posterity, and to immortalize its memory by an inscription in verse. She herself dedicated a chariot of brass, drawn by four horses, in the temple of Delphi;[^154] in which the charioteer was also represented; a certain proof that she did not drive it herself. In process of time, the picture of Cynisca, drawn by the famous Apelles, was annexed to it, and the whole adorned with many inscriptions in honour of that Spartan heroine.[^155]

[^151: Pausan. l. iii. p. 172.]

[^152: Ibid. p. 188.]

[^153: Ibid. p. 172.]

[^154: Ibid. l. v. p. 309.]

[^155: Pausan. l. vi. p. 344.]

Of the honours and rewards granted to the victors.

These honours and rewards were of several kinds. The acclamations of the spectators in honour of the victors were only a prelude to the prizes designed them. These prizes were different wreaths of wild olive, pine, parsley, or laurel, according to the different places where the games were celebrated. Those crowns were always attended with branches of palm, that the victors carried in their right hands; which custom, according to Plutarch,[^156] arose (perhaps) from a property of the palm-tree, which displays new vigour the more endeavours are used to crush or bend it, and is a symbol of the courage and resistance of the champion who had obtained the prize. As he might be victor more than once in the same games, and sometimes on the same day, he might also receive several crowns and palms.

[^156: Sympos. l. viii. quæst. 4.]

When the victor had received the crown and palm, a herald, preceded by a trumpet, conducted him through the Stadium, and proclaimed aloud the name and country of the successful champion, who passed in that kind of review before the people, whilst they redoubled their acclamations and applauses at the sight of him.

When he returned to his own country, the people came out in a body to meet him, and conducted him into the city, adorned with all the marks of his victory, and riding upon a chariot drawn by four horses. He made his entry not through the gates, but through a breach purposely made in the walls. Lighted torches were carried before him, and a numerous train followed to do honour to the procession.

The athletic triumph almost always concluded with feasts made for the victors, their relations, and friends, either at the expense of the public, or by private individuals, who regaled not only their families and friends, but often a great part of the spectators. Alcibiades,[^157] after having sacrificed to the Olympian Jupiter, which was always the first care of the victor, treated the whole assembly. Leophron did the same, as Athenæus reports;[^158] who adds, that Empedocles of Agrigentum, having conquered in the same games, and not having it in his power, being a Pythagorean, to regale the people with flesh or fish, caused an ox to be made of a paste, composed of myrrh, incense, and all sorts of spices, of which pieces were given to all who were present.

[^157: Plut. in Alcib. p. 196.]

[^158: Lib. i. p. 3.]

One of the most honourable privileges granted to the Athletic victors, was the right of precedency at the public games. At Sparta it was a custom for the king to take them with him in military expeditions, to fight near his person, and to be his guard; which, with reason, was judged very honourable. Another privilege, in which advantage was united with honour, was that of being maintained for the rest of their lives at the expense of their country. That this expense might not become too chargeable to the state, Solon[^159] reduced the pension of a victor in the Olympic games to five hundred drachmas;[^160] in the Isthmian to a hundred;[^161] and in the rest in proportion. The victor and his country considered this pension, less as a relief of the champion's indigence, than as a mark of honour and distinction. They were also exempted from all civil offices and employments.

[^159: Diog. Laërt. in Solon, p. 37.]

[^160: About 11l.]

[^161: About 2l.]

The celebration of the games being over, one of the first cares of the magistrates, who presided in them, was to inscribe, in the public register, the name and country of the Athletæ who had carried the prizes, and to annex the species of combat in which they had been victorious. The chariot-race had the preference to all other games. Hence the historians, who date occurrences by the Olympiads, as Thucydides, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Diodorus Siculus, and Pausanias, almost always express the Olympiad by the name and country of the victors in that race.

The praises of the victorious Athletæ were amongst the Greeks one of the principal subjects of their lyric poetry. We find, that all the odes of the four books of Pindar turn upon it, each of which takes its title from the games in which the combatants signalized themselves, whose victories those poems celebrate. The poet, indeed, frequently enriches his matter, by calling in to the champion's assistance, incapable alone of inspiring all the enthusiasm necessary, the aid of the gods, heroes, and princes, who have any relation to his subject; and to support the flights of imagination, to which he abandons himself. Before Pindar, the poet Simonides practised the same manner of writing, intermingling the praises of the gods and heroes with those of the champions, whose victories he sang. It is related upon this head,[^162] that one of the victors in boxing, called Scopas, having agreed with Simonides for a poem upon his victory, the poet, according to custom, after having given the highest praises to the champion, expatiated in a long digression to the honour of Castor and Pollux. Scopas, satisfied in appearance with the performance of Simonides, paid him however only the third part of the sum agreed on, referring him for the remainder to the Tyndaridæ, whom he had celebrated so well. And in fact he was well paid by them, if we may believe the sequel; for, at the feast given by the champion, whilst the guests were at table, a servant came to Simonides, and told him, that two men, covered with dust and sweat, were at the door, and desired to speak with him in all haste. He had scarce set his foot out of the chamber, in order to go to them, when the roof fell in, and crushed the champion, with all his guests, to death.

[^162: Cic. de Orat. l. ii. n. 352, 353. Phæd. l. ii. fab. 24. Quintil. l. xi. c 2.]

Sculpture united with poetry to perpetuate the fame of the champions. Statues were erected to the victors, especially in the Olympic games, in the very place where they had been crowned, and sometimes in that of their birth also; which was commonly done at the expense of their country. Amongst the statues which adorned Olympia, were those of several children of ten or twelve years old, who had obtained the prize at that age in the Olympic games. They did not only raise such monuments to the champions, but to the very horses, to whose swiftness they were indebted for the Agonistic crown: and Pausanias[^163] mentions one, which was erected in honour of a mare, called Aura, whose history is worth repeating. Phidolas her rider, having fallen off in the beginning of the race, the mare continued to run in the same manner as if he had been upon her back. She outstripped all the rest; and upon the sound of the trumpets, which was usual toward the end of the race to animate the competitors, she redoubled her vigour and courage, turned round the goal; and, as if she had been sensible that she had gained the victory, presented herself before the judges of the games. The Eleans declared Phidolas victor, with permission to erect a monument to himself and the mare, that had served him so well.

[^163: Lib. vi. p. 368.]

The different Taste of the Greeks and Romans, in regard to Public Shows.

Before I make an end of these remarks upon the combats and games so much in estimation amongst the Greeks, I beg the reader's permission to make a reflection, that may serve to explain the difference of character between the Greeks and Romans, with regard to this subject.

The most common entertainment of the latter, at which the fair sex, by nature tender and compassionate, were present in throngs, was the combat of the gladiators, and of men with bears and lions; in which the cries of the wounded and dying, and the abundant effusion of human blood, supplied a grateful spectacle for a whole people, who feasted their cruel eyes with the savage pleasure of seeing men murder one another in cool blood; and in the times of the persecutions, with the tearing in pieces of old men and infants, of women and tender virgins, whose age and weakness are apt to excite compassion in the hardest hearts.

In Greece these combats were absolutely unknown, and were only introduced into some cities, after their subjection to the Roman people. The Athenians, however, whose distinguishing characteristics were benevolence and humanity, never admitted them into their city;[^164] and when it was proposed to introduce the combats of the gladiators, that they might not be outdone by the Corinthians in that point, “First throw down,” cried out an Athenian[^165] from the midst of the assembly, “throw down the altar, erected above a thousand years ago by our ancestors to Mercy.”

[^164: Lucian. in vit. Demonact. p. 1014.]

[^165: It was Demonax, a celebrated philosopher, whose disciple Lucian had been. He flourished in the reign of Marcus Aurelius.—Trans.]

It must be allowed that in this respect the conduct and wisdom of the Greeks were infinitely superior to that of the Romans. I speak of the wisdom of Pagans. Convinced that the multitude, too much governed by the objects of sense to be sufficiently amused and entertained with the pleasures of the understanding, could be delighted only with sensible objects, both nations were studious to divert them with games and shows, and such external contrivances, as were proper to affect the senses; in the institution of which, each evinced and followed its peculiar inclination and disposition.

The Romans, educated in war, and accustomed to battles, always retained, notwithstanding the politeness upon which they piqued themselves, something of their ancient ferocity; and hence it was, that the effusion of blood, and the murders exhibited in their public shows, far from inspiring them with horror, formed a grateful entertainment to them.

The insolent pomp of triumphs flowed from the same source, and argued no less inhumanity. To obtain this honour, it was necessary to prove, that eight or ten thousand men had been killed in battle. The spoils, which were carried with so much ostentation, proclaimed, that an infinity of worthy families had been reduced to the utmost misery. The innumerable troop of captives had been free persons a few days before, and were often distinguishable for honour, merit, and virtue. The representation of the towns that had been taken in the war, explained that they had sacked, plundered, and burnt the most opulent cities; and had either destroyed or enslaved their inhabitants. In short, nothing was more inhuman, than to drag kings and princes in chains before the chariot of a Roman citizen, and to insult their misfortunes and humiliation in that public manner.

The triumphal arches, erected under the emperors, where the enemies appeared with chains upon their hands and legs, could proceed only from a haughty fierceness of disposition, and an inhuman pride, that took delight in immortalizing the shame and sorrow of subjected nations.

The joy of the Greeks after a victory was far more modest.[^166] They erected trophies indeed, but of wood, a substance of no long duration, which time would soon consume; and these it was prohibited to renew. Plutarch's reason for this is admirable.[^167] After time had destroyed and obliterated the marks of dissension and enmity that had divided nations, it would have been the excess of odious and barbarous animosity, to have thought of reestablishing them, to perpetuate the remembrance of ancient quarrels, which could not be buried too soon in silence and oblivion. He adds, that the trophies of stone and brass, since substituted to those of wood, reflect no honour upon those who introduced the custom.

[^166: Plut. in Quæst. Rom. p. 273.]

[^167: Ὅτι τοῦ χρόνου τἀ σεμεῖα τῆς πρὸς τοὺς πολεμίους διαφορᾶς ἀμαυροῦντος, αὐτοὺς ἀν λαμβάνειν καὶ καινοποιεῖν ἐπιφθονόν ἐστι καὶ φιλαπεχθῆμον.—Trans.]

I am pleased with the grief depicted on Agesilaus's countenance,[^168] after a considerable victory, wherein a great number of his enemies, that is to say, of Greeks, were left upon the field, and to hear him utter with sighs and groans, these words, so full of moderation and humanity: “Oh unhappy Greece, to deprive thyself of so many brave citizens, and to destroy those who had been sufficient to have conquered all the Barbarians!”

[^168: Plut. in Lacon. Apophthegm. p. 211.]

The same spirit of moderation and humanity prevailed in the public shows of the Greeks. Their festivals had nothing mournful or afflictive in them. Every thing in those feasts tended to delight, friendship, and harmony: and in that consisted one of the greatest advantages which resulted to Greece, from the solemnization of these games. The republics, separated by distance of country, and diversity of interests, having the opportunity of meeting from time to time, in the same place, and in the midst of rejoicing and festivity, allied themselves more strictly with one another, stimulated each other against the Barbarians and the common enemies of their liberty, and made up their differences by the mediation of some neutral state in alliance with them. The same language, manners, sacrifices, exercises, and worship, all conspired to unite the several little states of Greece into one great and formidable nation; and to preserve amongst them the same disposition, the same principles, the same zeal for their liberty, and the same fondness for the arts and sciences.

Of the Prizes of Wit, and the Shows and Representations of the Theatre.

I have reserved for the conclusion of this head another kind of competition, which does not at all depend upon the strength, activity, and address of the body, and may be called with reason the combat of the mind; wherein the orators, historians, and poets, made trial of their capacities, and submitted their productions to the censure and judgment of the public. The emulation in this sort of dispute was so much the more lively and ardent, as the victory in question might justly be deemed to be infinitely superior to all others, because it affects the man more nearly, is founded on his personal and internal qualities, and decides upon the merit of his intellectual capacity; which are advantages we are apt to aspire after with the utmost vivacity and passion, and of which we are least of all inclined to renounce the glory to others.

It was a great honour, and at the same time a most sensible pleasure, for writers, who are generally fond of fame and applause, to have known how to unite in their favour the suffrages of so numerous and select an assembly as that of the Olympic games; in which were present all the finest geniuses of Greece, and all who were most capable of judging of the excellency of a work. This theatre was equally open to history, eloquence, and poetry.

Herodotus read his history[^169] at the Olympic games to all Greece, assembled at them, and was heard with such applause, that the names of the nine Muses were given to the nine books which compose his work, and the people cried out wherever he passed, “That is he, who has written our history, and celebrated our glorious successes against the Barbarians so excellently.”

[^169: Lucian. in Herod. p. 622.]

All who had been present at the games, caused afterwards every part of Greece to resound with the name and glory of this illustrious historian.

Lucian, who writes the fact which I have related, adds, that after the example of Herodotus, many of the sophists and rhetoricians went to Olympia, to read the harangues of their composing; finding that the shortest and most certain method of acquiring a great reputation in a little time.

Plutarch observes,[^170] that Lysias, the famous Athenian orator, contemporary with Herodotus, pronounced a speech in the Olympic games, wherein he congratulated the Greeks upon their reconciliation with each other, and their having united to reduce the power of Dionysius the Tyrant, as upon the greatest action they had ever done.

[^170: Plut. de vit Orat. p. 836.]

We may judge of the eagerness of the poets to signalize themselves in these solemn games, from that of Dionysius himself.[^171] That prince, who had the foolish vanity to believe himself the most excellent poet of his time, appointed readers, called in Greek, ῥαψωδοὶ (Rhapsodists,) to read several pieces of his composing at Olympia. When they began to pronounce the verses of the royal poet, the strong and harmonious voices of the readers occasioned a profound silence, and they were heard at first with the greatest attention, which continually decreased as they went on, and turned at last into downright horse-laughs and hooting; so miserable did the verses appear. He comforted himself for this disgrace by a victory he gained some time after in the feast of Bacchus at Athens, in which he caused a tragedy of his composition to be represented.[^172]

[^171: Diod. l. xiv. p. 318.]

[^172: Ibid. l. xv. p. 384.]

The disputes of the poets in the Olympic games were nothing, in comparison with the ardour and emulation that prevailed at Athens; which is what remains to be said upon this subject, and therefore I shall conclude with it: taking occasion to give my readers, at the same time, a short view of the shows and representations of the theatre of the ancients.

Those who would be more fully informed on this subject, will find it treated at large in a work lately made public by the reverend father Brumoi the Jesuit; a work which abounds with profound knowledge and erudition, and with reflections entirely new, deduced from the nature of the poems of which it treats. I shall make considerable use of that piece, and often without citing it; which is not uncommon with me.

Extraordinary Fondness of the Athenians for the Entertainments of the Stage. Emulation of the Poets in disputing the Prizes in those Representations. A short Idea of Dramatic Poetry.

No people ever expressed so much ardour and eagerness for the entertainments of the theatre as the Greeks, and especially the Athenians. The reason is obvious: as no people ever demonstrated such extent of genius, nor carried so far the love of eloquence and poesy, taste for the sciences, justness of sentiments, elegance of ear, and delicacy in all the refinements of language. A poor woman, who sold herbs at Athens, discovered Theophrastus to be a stranger, by a single word which he affectedly made use of in expressing himself.[^173] The common people got the tragedies of Euripides by heart. The genius of every nation expresses itself in the people's manner of passing their time, and in their pleasures. The great employment and delight of the Athenians were to amuse themselves with works of wit, and to judge of the dramatic pieces, that were acted by public authority several times a year, especially at the feasts of Bacchus, when the tragic and comic poets disputed for the prize. The former used to present four of their pieces at a time; except Sophocles, who did not think fit to continue so laborious an exercise, and confined himself to one performance, when he disputed the prize.

[^173: Attica anus Theophrastum, hominem alioqui disertissimum, annotatâ unius affectatione verbi, hospitem dixit. Quint. l. viii. c. 1.—Trans.]

The state appointed judges, to determine upon the merit of the tragic or comic pieces, before they were represented in the festivals. They were acted before them in the presence of the people; but undoubtedly with no great preparation. The judges gave their suffrages, and that performance, which had the most voices, was declared victorious, received the crown as such, and was represented with all possible pomp at the expense of the republic. This did not, however, exclude such pieces, as were only in the second or third class. The best had not always the preference; for what times have been exempt from party, caprice, ignorance, and prejudice? Ælian[^174] is very angry with the judges, who, in one of these disputes, gave only the second place to Euripides. He accuses them of judging either without capacity, or of suffering themselves to be bribed. It is easy to conceive the warmth and emulation, which these disputes and public rewards excited amongst the poets, and how much they contributed to the perfection, to which Greece carried dramatic performances.

[^174: Ælian, l ii. c. 8.]

The dramatic poem introduces the persons themselves, speaking and acting upon the stage: in the epic, on the contrary, the poet only relates the different adventures of his characters. It is natural to be delighted with fine descriptions of events, in which illustrious persons and whole nations are interested; and hence the epic poem had its origin. But we are quite differently affected with hearing those persons themselves, with being the confidents of their most secret sentiments, and auditors and spectators of their resolutions, enterprises, and the happy or unhappy events attending them. To read and see an action, are quite different things; we are infinitely more moved with what is acted, than with what we merely read. Our eyes as well as our minds are addressed at the same time. The spectator, agreeably deceived by an imitation so nearly approaching life, mistakes the picture for the original, and thinks the object real. This gave birth to dramatic poetry, which includes tragedy and comedy.

To these may be added the satiric poem, which derives its name from the satyrs, rural gods, who were always the chief characters in it; and not from the “satire,” a kind of abusive poetry, which has no resemblance to this, and is of a much later date. The satiric poem was neither tragedy nor comedy, but something between both, participating of the character of each. The poets, who disputed the prize, generally added one of these pieces to their tragedies, to allay the gravity and solemnity of the one, with the mirth and pleasantry of the other. There is but one example of this ancient poem come down to us, which is the Cyclops of Euripides.

I shall confine myself upon this head to tragedy and comedy; both which had their origin amongst the Greeks, who looked upon them as fruits of their own growth, of which they could never have enough. Athens was remarkable for an extraordinary appetite of this kind. These two poems, which were for a long time comprised under the general name of tragedy, received there by degrees such improvements, as at length raised them to their highest perfection.

The Origin and Progress of Tragedy. Poets who excelled in it at Athens; Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides.

There had been many tragic and comic poets before Thespis; but as they had made no alterations in the original rude form of this poem, and as Thespis was the first that made any improvement in it, he was generally esteemed its inventor. Before him, tragedy was no more than a jumble of buffoon tales in the comic style, intermixed with the singing of a chorus in praise of Bacchus; for it is to the feasts of that god, celebrated at the time of the vintage, that tragedy owes its birth.

La tragédie, informe et grossière en na'ssant,
N'étoit qu'un simple chœur, où chacun en dansant,
Et du dieu des raisins entonnant les louanges,
S'éfforçoit d'attirer de fertiles vendanges.
Là, le vin et la joie éveillant les esprits,
Du plus habile chantre un bouc étoit le prix.

Formless and gross did tragedy arise,
A simple chorus, rather mad than wise;
For fruitful vintages the dancing throng
Roar'd to the god of grapes a drunken song:
Wild mirth and wine sustain'd the frantic note,
And the best singer had the prize, a goat.[^175]

[^175: Boileau, Art. Poët. chant. iii.]

Thespis made several alterations in it, which Horace describes after Aristotle, in his Art of Poetry. The first[^176] was to carry his actors about in a cart, whereas before they used to sing in the streets, wherever chance led them. Another was to have their faces smeared over with wine-lees, instead of acting without disguise, as at first. He also introduced a character among the chorus, who, to give the actors time to rest themselves and to take breath, repeated the adventures of some illustrious person; which recital, at length, gave place to the subjects of tragedy.

[^176: Ignotum tragicæ genus invenisse camœnæ Dicitur, et plaustris vexisse poëmata Thespis, Quæ canerent agerentque peruncti fæcibus ora.

Hor. de Art. Poët.

When Thespis first expos'd the tragic Muse, Rude were the actors, and a cart the scene, Where ghastly faces, smear'd with lees of wine, Frighted the children, and amus'd the crowd.

Roscom. Art of Poet.

—Trans.]

Thespis fut le premier, qui barbouillé de lie,
Promena par les bourgs cette heureuse folie,
Et d'acteurs mal oinés chargeant un tombereau,
Amusa les passans d'un spectacle nouveau.[^177]

First Thespis, smear'd with lees, and void of art,
The grateful folly vented from a cart;
And as his tawdry actors drove about,
The sight was new, and charm'd the gaping rout.

[^177: Boileau, Art. Poet. chant. iii.]

[^178] Thespis lived in the time of Solon.[^179] That wise legislator, upon seeing his pieces performed, expressed his dislike, by striking his staff against the ground; apprehending that these poetical fictions and idle stories, from mere theatrical representations, would soon become matters of importance, and have too great a share in all public and private affairs.

[^178: A.M. 3440. Ant. J.C. 564.]

[^179: Plut. in Solon p. 95.]

[^180] It is not so easy to invent, as to improve the inventions of others. The alterations Thespis made in tragedy, gave room for Æschylus to make new and more considerable of his own. He was born at Athens, in the first year of the sixtieth Olympiad. He took upon him the profession of arms, at a time when the Athenians reckoned almost as many heroes as citizens. He was at the battles of Marathon, Salamis, and Platæa, where he did his duty.[^181] But his disposition called him elsewhere, and put him upon entering into another course, where no less glory was to be acquired; and where he was soon without any competitors. As a superior genius, he took upon him to reform, or rather to create tragedy anew; of which he has, in consequence, been always acknowledged the inventor and father. Father Brumoi, in a dissertation which abounds with wit and good sense, explains the manner in which Æschylus conceived the true idea of tragedy from Homer's epic poems. The poet himself used to say, that his works were the remnants of the feasts given by Homer in the Iliad and Odyssey.

[^180: A.M. 3464. Ant. J.C. 540.]

[^181: A.M. 3514. Ant. J.C. 490.]

Tragedy therefore took a new form under him. He gave masks[^182] to his actors, adorned them with robes and trains, and made them wear buskins. Instead of a cart, he erected a theatre of a moderate elevation, and entirely changed their style; which from being merry and burlesque, as at first, became majestic and serious.

[^182: Post hunc personæ pallæque repertor honestæ Æschylus, et modicis instravit pulpita tignis, Et docuit magnumque loqui, nitique cothurno.

Hor. de Art. Poët.

This, Æschylus (with indignation) saw, And built a stage, found out a decent dress, Brought vizards in (a civiler disguise), And taught men how to speak and how to act.

Roscom. Art of Poet.—Trans.]

Eschyle dans le chœur jetta les personages:
D'un masque plus honnête habilla les visages:
Sur les ais d'un théâtre en public exhaussé
Fit paroître l'acteur d'un brodequin chaussé.[^183]

From Æschylus the chorus learnt new grace:
He veil'd with decent masks the actor's face,
Taught him in buskins first to tread the stage,
And rais'd a theatre to please the age.

[^183: Boileau, Art. Poet.]

But that was only the external part or body of tragedy. Its soul, which was the most important and essential addition of Æschylus, consisted in the vivacity and spirit of the action, sustained by the dialogue of the persons of the drama introduced by him; in the artful working up of the stronger passions, especially of terror and pity, which, by alternately afflicting and agitating the soul with mournful or terrible objects, produce a grateful pleasure and delight from that very trouble and emotion; in the choice of a subject, great, noble, interesting, and contained within due bounds by the unity of time, place, and action: in short, it is the conduct and disposition of the whole piece, which, by the order and harmony of its parts, and the happy connection of its incidents and intrigues, holds the mind of the spectator in suspense till the catastrophe, and then restores him his tranquillity, and dismisses him with satisfaction.

The chorus had been established before Æschylus, as it composed alone, or next to alone, what was then called tragedy. He did not therefore exclude it, but, on the contrary, thought fit to incorporate it, to sing as chorus between the acts. Thus it supplied the interval of resting, and was a kind of person of the drama, employed either[^184] in giving useful advice and salutary instructions, in espousing the party of innocence and virtue, in being the depository of secrets, and the avenger of violated religion, or in sustaining all those characters at the same time according to Horace. The coryphæus, or principal person of the chorus, spoke for the rest.

[^184: Actoris partes chorus officiumque virile Defendat, neu quid medios intercinat actus, Quod non proposito conducat, et hæreat apté. Ille bonis faveatque, et concilietur amicis, Et regat iratos, et amet peccare timentes. Ille dapes laudet mensæ brevis; ille salubrem Justitiam, legesque, et apertis otia portis. Ille tegat commissa, deosque precetur et oret, Ut redeat miseris, abeat fortuna superbis.

Hor. de Art. Poët.

The chorus should supply what action wants, And hath a generous and manly part; Bridles wild rage, loves rigid honesty, And strict observance of impartial laws, Sobriety, security, and peace, And begs the gods to turn blind Fortune's wheel, To raise the wretched, and pull down the proud; But nothing must be sung between the acts, But what someway conduces to the plot.

Roscom. Art of Poet. translat.—Trans.]

In one of Æschylus's pieces, called the Eumenides, the poet represents Orestes at the bottom of the stage, surrounded by the Furies, laid asleep by Apollo. Their figure must have been extremely horrible, as it is related, that upon their waking and appearing tumultuously on the theatre, where they were to act as a chorus, some women miscarried with the surprise, and several children died of the fright. The chorus at that time consisted of fifty actors. After this accident, it was reduced to fifteen by an express law, and at length to twelve.

I have observed, that one of the alterations made by Æschylus in tragedy, was the mask worn by his actors. These dramatic masks had no resemblance to ours, which only cover the face, but were a kind of case for the whole head, and which, besides the features, represented the beard, the hair, the ears, and even the ornaments used by women in their head-dresses. These masks varied according to the different pieces that were acted. The subject is treated at large in a dissertation of M. Boindin's, inserted in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres.[^185]

[^185: Vol. iv.]

I could never comprehend, as I have observed elsewhere,[^186] in speaking of pronunciation, how masks came to continue so long upon the stage of the ancients; for certainly they could not be used, without considerably deadening the spirit of the action, which is principally expressed in the countenance, the seat and mirror of what passes in the soul. Does it not often happen, that the blood, according as it is put in motion by different passions, sometimes covers the face with a sudden and modest blush, sometimes enflames it with the heat of rage and fury, sometimes retires, leaving it pale with fear, and at others diffuses a calm and amiable serenity over it? All these affections are strongly imaged and distinguished in the lineaments of the face. The mask deprives the features of this energetic language, and of that life and soul, by which it is the faithful interpreter of all the sentiments of the heart. I do not wonder, therefore, at Cicero's remark upon the action of Roscius.[^187] Our ancestors,' says he, “were better judges than we are. They could not wholly approve even Roscius himself, whilst he performed in a mask.”

[^186: Manner of Teaching, &c. vol. iv.]

[^187: Quo meliùs nostri illi senes, qui personatum, ne Roscium quidem, magnoperé laudabant. Lib. iii. de Orat. n. 221.—Trans.]

[^188] Æschylus was in the sole possession of the glory of the stage, with almost every voice in his favour, when a young rival made his appearance to dispute the palm with him. This was Sophocles. He was born at Colonos, a town in Attica, in the second year of the seventy-first Olympiad. His father was a blacksmith, or one who kept people of that trade to work for him. His first essay was a masterpiece.[^189] When, upon the occasion of Cimon's having found the bones of Theseus, and their being brought to Athens, a dispute between the tragic poets was appointed, Sophocles entered the lists with Æschylus, and carried the prize against him. The ancient victor, laden till then with the wreaths he had acquired, believed them all lost by failing of the last, and withdrew in disgust into Sicily to king Hiero, the protector and patron of all the learned in disgrace at Athens. He died there soon after in a very singular manner, if we may believe Suidas. As he lay asleep in the fields, with his head bare, an eagle, taking his bald crown for a stone, let a tortoise fall upon it, which killed him. Of ninety, or at least seventy, tragedies, composed by him, only seven are now extant.

[^188: A.M. 3509. Ant. J.C. 495.]

[^189: A.M. 3534. Ant. J.C. 470.]

Nor have those of Sophocles escaped the injury of time better, though one hundred and seventeen in number, and according to some one hundred and thirty. He retained to extreme old age all the force and vigour of his genius, as appears from a circumstance in his history. His children, unworthy of so great a father, upon pretence that he had lost his senses, summoned him before the judges, in order to obtain a decree, that his estate might be taken from him, and put into their hands. He made no other defence, than to read a tragedy he was at that time composing, called Œdipus at Colonos, with which the judges were so charmed, that he carried his cause unanimously; and his children, detested by the whole assembly, got nothing by their suit, but the shame and infamy due to so flagrant ingratitude. He was twenty times crowned victor. Some say he expired in repeating his Antigone, for want of power to recover his breath, after a violent endeavour to pronounce a long period to the end; others, that he died of joy upon his being declared victor, contrary to his expectation. The figure of a hive was placed upon his tomb, to perpetuate the name of Bee, which had been given him, from the sweetness of his verses: whence, it is probable, the notion was derived, of the bees having settled upon his lips when in his cradle.[^190] He died in his ninetieth year, the fourth of the ninety-third Olympiad, after having survived Euripides six years, who was not so old as himself.

[^190: A.M. 3599. Ant. J.C. 405.]

[^191] The latter was born in the first year of the seventy-fifth Olympiad, at Salamis, whither his father Mnesarchus and mother Clito had retired when Xerxes was preparing for his great expedition against Greece. He applied himself at first to philosophy, and, amongst others, had the celebrated Anaxagoras for his master. But the danger incurred by that great man, who was very near being made the victim of his philosophical tenets, inclined him to the study of poetry. He discovered in himself a genius for the drama, unknown to him at first; and employed it with such success, that he entered the lists with the great masters of whom we have been speaking. His works[^192] sufficiently denote his profound application to philosophy. They abound with excellent maxims of morality; and it is in that view that Socrates in his time, and Cicero long after him,[^193] set so high a value upon Euripides.

[^191: A.M. 3524. Ant. J.C. 480.]

[^192: Sententiis densus, et in iis quæ à sapientibus sunt, penè ipsis est par. Quintil. l. x. c. 1.—Trans.]

[^193: Cui (Euripidi) tu quantum credas nescio; ego certè singulos ejus versus singula testimonia puto. Epist. viii. l. 14. ad Famil.—Trans.]

One cannot sufficiently admire the extreme delicacy expressed by the Athenian audience on certain occasions, and their solicitude to preserve the reverence due to morality, virtue, decency, and justice. It is surprising to observe the warmth with which they unanimously reproved whatever seemed inconsistent with them, and called the poet to an account for it, notwithstanding his having a well-founded excuse, as he had given such sentiments only to persons notoriously vicious, and actuated by the most unjust passions.

Euripides had put into the mouth of Bellerophon a pompous panegyric upon riches, which concluded with this thought: “Riches are the supreme good of the human race, and with reason excite the admiration of the gods and men.” The whole theatre cried out against these expressions; and he would have been banished directly, if he had not desired the sentence to be respited till the conclusion of the piece, in which the advocate for riches perished miserably.

He was in danger of incurring serious inconveniences from an answer he puts into the mouth of Hippolytus. Phædra's nurse represented to him, that he had engaged himself under an inviolable oath to keep her secret. “My tongue, it is true, pronounced that oath,” replied he, “but my heart gave no consent to it.” This frivolous distinction appeared to the whole people, as an express contempt of the religion and sanctity of an oath, that tended to banish all sincerity and good faith from society and the intercourse of life.

Another maxim[^194] advanced by Eteocles in the tragedy called the Phœnicians, and which Cæsar had always in his mouth, is no less pernicious: “If justice may be violated at all, it is when a throne is in question; in other respects, let it be duly revered.” It is highly criminal in Eteocles, or rather in Euripides, says Cicero, to make an exception in that very point, wherein such violation is the highest crime that can be committed. Eteocles is a tyrant, and speaks like a tyrant, who vindicates his unjust conduct by a false maxim; and it is not strange that Cæsar, who was a tyrant by nature, and equally unjust, should lay great stress upon the sentiments of a prince whom he so much resembled. But what is remarkable in Cicero, is his falling upon the poet himself, and imputing to him as a crime the having advanced so pernicious a principle upon the stage.

[^194: Ipse autem socer (Cæsar) in ore semper Græcos versus Euripidis de Phœnissis habebat, quos dicam ut potero, inconditè fortasse, sed tamen ut res possit intelligi:

Nam, si violandum est jus, regnandi gratià Violandum est; aliis rebus pietatem colas.

Capitalis Eteocles, vel potiùs Euripides, qui id unum, quod omnium sceleratissimum fuerat, exceperit. Offic. l. iii. n. 82.—Trans.]

Lycurgus, the orator,[^195] who lived in the time of Philip and Alexander the Great, to reanimate the spirit of the tragic poets, caused three statues of brass to be erected, in the name of the people, to Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides; and having ordered their works to be transcribed, he appointed them to be carefully preserved amongst the public archives, from whence they were taken from time to time to be read; the players not being permitted to represent them on the stage.

[^195: Plut. in vit. x. orat. p. 841.]

The reader expects, no doubt, after what has been said relating to the three poets, who invented, improved, and carried tragedy to its perfection, that I should point out the peculiar excellencies of their style and character. For that I must refer to father Brumoi, who will do it much better than it is in my power. After having laid down, as an undoubted principle, that the epic poem, that is to say Homer, pointed out the way for the tragic poets; and having demonstrated, by reflections drawn from human nature, upon what principles and by what degrees this happy imitation was conducted to its end, he goes on to describe the three poets above mentioned, in the most lively and brilliant colours.

Tragedy took at first from Æschylus its inventor, a much more lofty style than the Iliad; that is, the magnum loqui mentioned by Horace. Perhaps Æschylus, who had a full conception of the grandeur of the language of tragedy, carried it too high. It is not Homer's trumpet, but something more. His pompous, swelling, gigantic diction, resembles rather the beating of drums and the shouts of battle, than the noble harmony of the trumpets. The elevation and grandeur of his genius would not permit him to speak the language of other men, so that his Muse seemed rather to walk in stilts, than in the buskins of his own invention.

Sophocles understood much better the true excellence of the dramatic style: he therefore copies Homer more closely, and blends in his diction that honeyed sweetness, from whence he was denominated “the Bee,” with a gravity that gives his tragedy the modest air of a matron, compelled to appear in public with dignity, as Horace expresses it.

The style of Euripides, though noble, is less removed from the familiar; and he seems to have affected rather the pathetic and the elegant, than the nervous and the lofty.

As Corneille, says father Brumoi in another place, after having opened to himself a path entirely new and unknown to the ancients, seems like an eagle towering in the clouds, from the sublimity, force, unbroken progress, and rapidity of his flight; and, as Racine, in copying the ancients in a manner entirely his own, imitates the swan, that sometimes floats upon the air, sometimes rises, then falls again with an elegance of motion, and a grace peculiar to herself; so Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, have each of them a particular characteristic and method. The first, as the inventor and father of tragedy, is like a torrent rolling impetuously over rocks, forests, and precipices; the second resembles a canal,[^196] which flows gently through delicious gardens; and the third a river, that does not follow its course in a continued line, but loves to turn and wind his silver wave through flowery meads and rural scenes.

[^196: I know not whether the idea of “a canal, that flows gently through delicious gardens,” is well adapted to designate the character of Sophocles, which is peculiarly distinguished by nobleness, grandeur, and elevation. That of an impetuous and rapid stream, whose waves, from the violence of their motion, are loud, and to be heard afar off, seems to me a more suitable image of that poet.—Trans.]

This is the character which father Brumoi gives of the three poets, to whom the Athenian stage was indebted for its perfection in tragedy. Æschylus[^197] drew it out of its original chaos and confusion, and made it appear in some degree of lustre; but it still retained the rude unfinished air of things in their beginning, which are generally defective in point of art and method. Sophocles and Euripides added infinitely to the dignity of tragedy. The style of the first, as has been observed, is more noble and majestic; of the latter, more tender and pathetic; each perfect in their way. In this diversity of character, it is difficult to decide which is most excellent. The learned have always been divided upon this head; as we are at this day, with respect to the two poets of our own nation,[^198] whose tragedies have made our stage illustrious, and not inferior to that of Athens.

[^197: Tragædias primus in lucem Æschylus protulit: sublimis et gravis, et grandiloquus sæpe usque ad vitium; sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus. Quintil. l. x. c. 1.—Trans.]

[^198: Corneille and Racine.—Trans.]

I have observed, that the tender and pathetic distinguishes the compositions of Euripides, of which Alexander of Pheræ, the most cruel of tyrants, was a proof. That barbarous man, upon seeing the Troades of Euripides acted, found himself so moved with it, that he quitted the theatre before the conclusion of the play, professing that he was ashamed to be seen in tears for the distress of Hecuba and Andromache, who had never shown the least compassion for his own citizens, of whom he had butchered such numbers.

When I speak of the tender and pathetic, I would not be understood to mean a passion that softens the heart into effeminacy, and which, to our reproach, is almost alone, or at least more than any other passion received upon our stage, though rejected by the ancients, and condemned by the nations around us of greatest reputation for their genius, and taste for the sciences and polite learning. The two great principles for moving the passions amongst the ancients, were terror and pity.[^199] And, indeed, as we naturally refer every thing to ourselves, or our own particular interest, when we see persons of exalted rank or virtue sinking under great evils, the fear of the like misfortunes, with which we know that human life is on all sides invested, seizes upon us, and from a secret impulse of self-love we find ourselves sensibly affected with the distresses of others: besides which, the sharing a common nature[^200] with the rest of our species, makes us sensible to whatever befalls them. Upon a close and attentive inquiry into those two passions, they will be found the most deeply inherent, active, extensive, and general affections of the soul; including all orders of men, great and small, rich and poor, of whatever age or condition. Hence the ancients, accustomed to consult nature, and to take her for their guide in all things, with reason conceived terror and compassion to be the soul of tragedy; and that those affections ought to prevail in it. The passion of love was in no estimation amongst them, and had seldom any share in their dramatic pieces; though with us it is a received opinion, that they cannot be supported without it.

[^199: Φόβος καὶ ἔλεος.]

[^200: Homo sum: humani nihil à me alienum puto. Ter.—Trans.]

It is worth our trouble to examine briefly in what manner this passion, which has always been deemed a weakness and a blemish in the greatest characters, got such footing upon our stage. Corneille, who was the first who brought the French tragedy to any perfection, and whom all the rest have followed, found the whole nation enamoured with the perusal of romances, and little disposed to admire any thing not resembling them. From the desire of pleasing his audience, who were at the same time his judges, he endeavoured to move them in the manner they had been accustomed to be affected; and, by introducing love in his scenes, to bring them the nearer to the predominant taste of the age for romance. From the same source arose that multiplicity of incidents, episodes, and adventures, with which our tragic pieces are crowded and obscured; so contrary to probability, which will not admit such a number of extraordinary and surprising events in the short space of four-and-twenty hours; so contrary to the simplicity of ancient tragedy; and so adapted to conceal, by the assemblage of so many different objects, the sterility of the genius of a poet, more intent upon the marvellous, than upon the probable and natural.

Both the Greeks and Romans have preferred the iambic to the heroic verse in their tragedies; not only because the first has a kind of dignity better adapted to the stage, but, whilst it approaches nearer to prose, retains sufficiently the air of poetry to please the ear; and yet has too little of it to put the audience in mind of the poet, who ought not to appear at all in representations, where other persons are supposed to speak and act. Monsieur Dacier makes a very just reflection on this subject. He says, that it is the misfortune of our tragedy to have almost no other verse than what it has in common with epic poetry, elegy, pastoral, satire, and comedy; whereas the learned languages have a great variety of versification.

This inconvenience is highly obvious in our tragedy; which consequently is obliged to lose sight of nature and probability, as it obliges heroes, princes, kings, and queens, to express themselves in a pompous strain in their familiar conversation, which it would be ridiculous to attempt in real life. The giving utterance to the most impetuous passions in an uniform cadence, and by hemistichs and rhymes, would undoubtedly be tedious and offensive to the ear, if the charms of poetry, the elegance of expression, and the spirit of the sentiments, and perhaps, more than all of them, the resistless force of custom, had not in a manner subjected our reason, and spread a veil before our judgment.

It was not chance, therefore, which suggested to the Greeks the use of iambics in their tragedy. Nature itself seems to have dictated that kind of verse to them. Instructed by the same unerring guide, they made choice of a different versification for the chorus, better adapted to the motions of the dance, and the variations of the song; because it was necessary for poetry here to shine out in all its lustre, whilst the mere conversation between the real actors was suspended. The chorus was an embellishment of the representation, and a relaxation to the audience, and therefore required more exalted poetry and numbers to support it, when united with music and dancing.

Of the Old, Middle, and New Comedy.

Whilst tragedy was thus rising to perfection at Athens, comedy, the second species of dramatic poetry, and which, till then, had been much neglected, began to be cultivated with more attention. Nature was the common parent of both. We are sensibly affected with the dangers, distresses, misfortunes, and, in a word, with whatever relates to the lives and conduct of illustrious persons; and this gave birth to tragedy. And we are as curious to know the adventures, conduct, and defects of our equals; which supply us with occasions of laughing, and being merry at the expense of others. Hence comedy derives itself; which is properly an image of private life. Its design is to expose defects and vices upon the stage, and, by affixing ridicule to them, to make them contemptible; and, consequently, to instruct by diverting. Ridicule, therefore, (or, to express the same word by another, pleasantry,) ought to prevail in comedy.

This species of entertainment took at different times three different forms at Athens, as well from the genius of the poets, as from the influence of the government, which occasioned various alterations in it.

The old comedy, so called by Horace,[^201] and which he dates after the time of Æschylus, retained something of its original rudeness, and the liberty it had been used to take of throwing out coarse jests and reviling the spectators from the cart of Thespis. Though it was become regular in its plan, and worthy of a great theatre, it had not learnt to be more reserved. It represented real transactions, with the names, dress, gestures, and likeness, in masks, of whomsoever it thought fit to sacrifice to the public derision. In a state where it was held good policy to unmask whatever carried the air of ambition, singularity, or knavery, comedy assumed the privilege to harangue, reform, and advise the people upon their most important interests. No one was spared in a city of so much liberty, or rather licentiousness, as Athens was at that time. Generals, magistrates, government, the very gods were abandoned to the poet's satirical vein; and all was well received, provided the comedy was diverting, and the Attic salt not wanting.

[^201: Successit vetus his comœdia non sinc multâ Laude. Hor. in Art. Poët.—Trans.]

In one of these comedies,[^202] not only the priest of Jupiter determines to quit his service, because no more sacrifices are offered to the god; but Mercury himself comes, in a starving condition, to seek his fortune amongst mankind, and offers to serve as a porter, sutler, bailiff, guide, door-keeper; in short, in any capacity, rather than return to heaven. In another,[^203] the same gods, reduced to the extremity of famine, from the birds having built a city in the air, whereby their provisions are cut off, and the smoke of incense and sacrifices prevented from ascending to heaven, depute three ambassadors in the name of Jupiter to conclude a treaty of accommodation with the birds, upon such conditions as they shall approve. The chamber of audience, where the three famished gods are received, is a kitchen well stored with excellent game of all sorts. Here Hercules, deeply smitten with the smell of roast meat, which he apprehends to be more exquisite and nutritious than that of incense, begs leave to make his abode, and to turn the spit, and assist the cook upon occasion. The other pieces of Aristophanes abound with strokes still more satirical and severe upon the principal divinities.

[^202: Plutus.]

[^203: The Birds.]

I am not much surprised at the poet's insulting the gods, and treating them with the utmost contempt, as from them he had nothing fear; but I cannot help wondering at his having brought the most illustrious and powerful persons of Athens upon the stage, and presuming to attack the government itself, without any manner of respect or reserve.

Cleon having returned triumphant, contrary to the general expectation, from the expedition against Sphacteria, was looked upon by the people as the greatest captain of that age. Aristophanes, to set that bad man in a true light, who was the son of a tanner, and a tanner himself, and whose rise was owing solely to his temerity and impudence, was so bold as to make him the subject of a comedy,[^204] without being awed by his power and influence: but he was obliged to play the part of Cleon himself, and appeared for the first time upon the stage in that character; not one of the comedians daring to represent it, nor to expose himself to the resentment of so formidable an enemy. His face was smeared over with wine-lees; because no workman could be found, that would venture to make a mask resembling Cleon, as was usual when persons were brought upon the stage. In this piece he reproaches him with embezzling the public treasures, with a violent passion for bribes and presents, with craft in seducing the people, and denies him the glory of the action at Sphacteria, which he attributes chiefly to the share his colleague had in it.

[^204: The Knights.]

In the Acharnians, he accuses Lamachus of having been made general, rather by bribery than merit. He imputes to him his youth, inexperience, and idleness; at the same time that he, and many others, whom he covertly designates, convert to their own use the rewards due only to valour and real services. He reproaches the republic with their preference of the younger citizens to the elder, in the government of the state, and the command of their armies. He tells them plainly, that when peace shall be concluded, neither Cleonymus, Hyperbolus, nor many other such knaves, all mentioned by name, shall have any share in the public affairs; they being always ready to accuse their fellow-citizens of crimes, and to enrich themselves by such informations.

In his comedy called the Wasps, imitated by Racine in his Plaideurs, he exposes the mad passion of the people for prosecutions and trials at law, and the enormous injustice frequently committed in passing sentence and giving judgment.

The poet,[^205] concerned to see the republic obstinately bent upon the unhappy expedition to Sicily, endeavours to excite in the people a thorough disgust for so ruinous a war, and to inspire them with the desire of a peace, as much the interest of the victors as the vanquished, after a war of several years' duration, equally pernicious to each party, and capable of involving all Greece in ruin.

[^205: The Peace.]

None of Aristophanes's pieces explains better his boldness, in speaking upon the most delicate affairs of the state in the crowded theatre, than his comedy called Lysistrata. One of the principal magistrates of Athens had a wife of that name, who is supposed to have taken it into her head to compel Greece to conclude a peace. She relates, how, during the war, the women inquiring of their husbands the result of their counsels, and whether they had not resolved to make peace with Sparta, received no answers but imperious looks, and orders to mind their own business: that, however, they perceived plainly to what a low condition the government was declined: that they took the liberty to remonstrate mildly to their husbands upon the sad consequences of their rash determinations, but that their humble representations had no other effect than to offend and enrage them: that, at length, being confirmed by the general opinion of all Attica, that there were no longer any men in the state, nor heads for the administration of affairs, their patience being quite exhausted, the women had thought it proper and advisable to take the government upon themselves, and preserve Greece, whether it would or no, from the folly and madness of its resolves. “For her part, she declares, that she has taken possession of the city and treasury, in order,” says she, “to prevent Pisander and his confederates, the four hundred administrators, from exciting troubles, according to their custom, and from robbing the public as usual.” (Was ever any thing so bold?) She goes on to prove, that the women only are capable of retrieving affairs by this burlesque argument; that admitting things to be in such a state of perplexity and confusion, the sex, accustomed to untangling their threads, were the only persons to set them right again, as being best qualified with the necessary address, patience, and moderation. The Athenian politics are thus made inferior to those of the women, who are only represented in a ridiculous light, to turn the derision upon their husbands, who were engaged in the administration of the government.

These extracts from Aristophanes, taken almost word for word from father Brumoi, seemed to me very proper to give an insight into that poet's character, and the genius of the ancient comedy, which was, as we see, a satire of the most poignant and severe kind, that had assumed to itself an independency from respect to persons, and to which nothing was sacred. It is no wonder that Cicero condemns so licentious and uncurbed a liberty. It might, he says,[^206] have been tolerable, had it attacked only bad citizens, and seditious orators, who endeavoured to raise commotions in the state, such as Cleon, Cleophon, and Hyperbolus; but when a Pericles, who for many years had governed the commonwealth both in war and peace with equal wisdom and authority (he might have added, and a Socrates, declared by Apollo the wisest of mankind) is brought upon the stage to be laughed at by the public, it is as if our Plautus or Nævius had attacked the Scipios, or Cæcilius had dared to revile Marcus Cato in his plays.

[^206: Quem illa non attigit, vel potiùs quem non vexavit? Esto, populares homines, improbos, in remp. seditiosos, Cleonem, Cleophontem, Hyperbolum læsit: patiamur—Sed Periclem, cùm jam suæ civitati maximâ auctoritate plurimos annos domi et belli præfuisset, violari versibus, et eos agi in scenâ, non plùs decuit, quam si Plautus noster voluisset, aut Nævius, P. et Cn. Scipioni, aut Cæcilius M. Catoni maledicere. Ex fragm. Cic. de Rep. l. iv.—Trans.]

That liberty is still more offensive to us, who are born, and live under a monarchical government, which is far from being favourable to licentiousness. But without intending to justify the conduct of Aristophanes, which is certainly inexcusable, I think, to judge properly of it, it would be necessary to lay aside the prejudices of birth, nations, and times, and to imagine we live in those remote ages in a state purely democratical. We must not fancy Aristophanes to have been a person of little consequence in his republic, as the comic writers generally are in our days. The king of Persia had a very different idea of him.[^207] It is a known story, that in an audience of the Greek ambassadors, his first inquiry was after a certain comic poet (meaning Aristophanes) that put all Greece in motion, and gave such effectual counsels against him. Aristophanes did that upon the stage, which Demosthenes did afterwards in the public assemblies. The poet's reproaches were no less animated than the orator's. In his comedies he uttered the same sentiments as he had a right to deliver from the public rostrum. They were addressed to the same people, upon the same occasions of the state, the same means of success, and the same obstacles to their measures. In Athens the whole people were the sovereign, and each of them had an equal share in the supreme authority. Upon this they were continually intent, were fond of discoursing upon it themselves, and of hearing the sentiments of others. The public affairs were the business of every individual, on which they were desirous of being fully informed, that they might know how to conduct themselves on every occasion of war or peace, which frequently offered, and to decide upon their own, as well as upon the destiny of their allies or enemies. Hence rose the liberty taken by the comic poets, of discussing affairs of the state in their performances. The people were so far from being offended at it, or at the manner in which those writers treated the principal persons of the state, that they conceived their liberty in some measure to consist in it.

[^207: Aristophan. in Acharn.]

Three poets[^208] particularly excelled in the old comedy; Eupolis, Cratinus, and Aristophanes. The last is the only one of them, whose pieces have come down to us entire; and, out of the great number which he composed, eleven are all that remain. He flourished in an age when Greece abounded with great men, and was contemporary with Socrates and Euripides, whom he survived. During the Peloponnesian war, he made his greatest figure; less as a writer to amuse the people with his comedies, than as a censor of the government, retained to reform the state, and to be almost the arbiter of his country.

[^208: Eupolis, atque Cratinus, Aristophanesque poëtæ, Atque alii, quorum comœdia prisca virorum est, Si quis erat dignus describi, quòd malus, aut fur, Quòd mœchus foret, aut sicarius, aut alioqui Famosus; multâ cum libertate notabant.

Hor. Sat. iv. l. i.

With Aristophanes' satiric rage, When ancient comedy amus'd the age, Or Eupolis's or Cratinus' wit, And others that all-licens'd poem writ; None, worthy to be shown, escap'd the scene, No public knave, or thief of lofty mien; The loose adult'rer was drawn forth to sight; The secret murd'rer trembling lurk'd the night; Vice play'd itself, and each ambitious spark; All boldly branded with the poet's mark.

—Trans.]

He is admired for an elegance, poignancy, and happiness of expression, or, in a word, that Attic salt and spirit, to which the Roman language could never attain, and for which Aristophanes[^209] is more remarkable than any other of the Greek authors. His particular excellence was raillery. None ever touched what was ridiculous in the characters whom he wished to expose with such success, or knew better how to convey it in all its full force to others. But it would be necessary to have lived in his times, to be qualified to judge of this. The subtle salt and spirit of the ancient raillery, according to father Brumoi, is evaporated through length of time, and what remains of it is become flat and insipid to us; though the sharpest part will retain its vigour throughout all ages.

[^209: Antiqua comœdia sinceram illam sermonis Attici gratiam propè sola retinet. Quintil.—Trans.]

Two considerable defects are justly imputed to this poet, which very much obscure, if not entirely efface, his glory. These are, low buffoonery, and gross obscenity; and it has in vain been attempted to offer, in excuse for the first of these faults, the character of his audience; the bulk of which generally consisted of the poor, the ignorant, and dregs of the people, whom, however, it was as necessary to please, as the learned and the rich. The depraved taste of the lower order of people, which once banished Cratinus and his company, because his scenes were not grossly comic enough for them, is no excuse for Aristophanes, as Menander could find out the art of changing that grovelling taste, by introducing a species of comedy, not altogether so modest as Plutarch seems to insinuate, yet much less licentious than any before his time.

The gross obscenities, with which all Aristophanes's comedies abound, have no excuse; they only denote to what a pitch the libertinism of the spectators, and the depravity of the poet, had proceeded. Had he even impregnated them with the utmost wit, which however is not the case, the privilege of laughing himself, or of making others laugh, would have been too dearly purchased at the expense of decency and good manners.[^210] And in this case it may well be said, that it were better to have no wit at all, than to make so ill a use of it.[^211] F. Brumoi is very much to be commended for having taken care, in giving a general idea of Aristophanes's writings, to throw a veil over those parts of them that might have given offence to modesty. Though such behaviour be the indispensable rule of religion, it is not always observed by those who pique themselves most on their erudition, and sometimes prefer the title of scholar to that of Christian.

[^210: Nimium risûs pretium est, si probitatis impendio constat. Quintil. l. vi. c. 3.—Trans.]

[^211: Non pejus duxerim tardi ingenii esse, quàm mali. Quintil. l. i. c. 3.—Trans.]

The old comedy subsisted till Lysander's time; who, upon having made himself master of Athens, changed the form or the government, and put it into the hands of thirty of the principal citizens. The satirical liberty of the theatre was offensive to them, and therefore they thought fit to put a stop to it. The reason of this alteration is evident, and confirms the reflection made before upon the privilege which the poets possessed of criticizing with impunity the persons at the head of the state. The whole authority of Athens was then invested in tyrants. The democracy was abolished. The people had no longer any share in the government. They were no more the prince; their sovereignty had expired. The right of giving their opinions and suffrages upon affairs of state was at an end; nor dared they, either in their own persons or by the poets, presume to censure the sentiments and conduct of their masters. The calling persons by their names upon the stage was prohibited: but poetical ill-nature soon found the secret of eluding the intention of the law, and of making itself amends for the restraint which was imposed upon it by the necessity of using feigned names. It then applied itself to discover what was ridiculous in known characters, which it copied to the life, and from thence acquired the double advantage of gratifying the vanity of the poets, and the malice of the audience, in a more refined manner: the one had the delicate pleasure of putting the spectators upon guessing their meaning, and the other of not being mistaken in their suppositions, and of affixing the right name to the characters represented. Such was the comedy, since called the Middle Comedy, of which there are some instances in Aristophanes.

It continued till the time of Alexander the Great, who, having entirely assured himself of the empire of Greece by the defeat of the Thebans, caused a check to be put upon the licentiousness of the poets, which increased daily. From thence the New Comedy took its birth, which was only an imitation of private life, and brought nothing upon the stage but feigned names, and fictitious adventures.

Chacun peint avec art dans ce nouveau miroir,
S'y vit avec plaisir, ou crut ne s'y pas voir.
L'avare des premiers rit du tableau fidèle
D'un avare souvent tracé sur son modèle;
Et mille fois un fat, finement exprimé,
Méconnut le portrait sur lui-mème formé.

In this new glass, whilst each himself survey'd,
He sat with pleasure, though himself was play'd:
The miser grinn'd whilst avarice was drawn,
Nor thought the faithful likeness was his own;
His own dear self no imag'd fool could find,
But saw a thousand other fops design'd.[^212]

[^212: Boileau, Art. Poet., chant. iii.]

This may properly be called fine comedy, and is that of Menander. Of one hundred and eighty, or rather eighty plays, according to Suidas, composed by him, all of which Terence is said to have translated, there remain only a few fragments. We may form a judgment of the merit of the originals from the excellence of the copy. Quintilian, in speaking of Menander, is not afraid to say,[^213] that with the beauty of his works, and the height of his reputation, he obscured, or rather obliterated, the fame of all other writers in the same way. He observes in another passage,[^214] that his own times were not so just to his merit as they ought to have been, which has been the fate of many others; but that he was sufficiently made amends by the favourable opinion of posterity. And indeed Philemon, a comic poet, who flourished about the same period, though older than Menander, was preferred before him.

[^213: Atque ille quidem omnibus ejusdem operis auctoribus abstulit nomen, et fulgore quodam suæ claritatis tenebras obduxit. Quintil. l. x. c. 1.—Trans.]

[^214: Quidam, sicut Menander, justiora posterorum quàm suæ ætatis, judicia sunt consecuti. Quintil. l. iii. c. 6.—Trans.]

The Theatre of the Ancients described.

I have already observed, that Æschylus was the first founder of a fixed and durable theatre adorned with suitable decorations. It was at first, as well as the amphitheatres, composed of wooden planks, the seats in which rose one above another; but those having one day broke down, by having too great a weight upon them, the Athenians, excessively enamoured of dramatic representations, were induced by that accident to erect those superb structures, which were imitated afterwards with so much splendour by the Roman magnificence. What I shall say of them, has almost as much relation to the Roman as the Athenian theatres; and is extracted entirely from M. Boindin's learned dissertation upon the theatre of the ancients,[^215] who has treated the subject in its fullest extent.

[^215: Memoirs of the Acad. of Inscript. &c. vol i. p. 136, &c.]

The theatre of the ancients was divided into three principal parts; each of which had its peculiar appellation. The division for the actors was called in general the scene, or stage; that for the spectators was particularly termed the theatre, which must have been of vast extent,[^216] as at Athens it was capable of containing above thirty thousand persons; and the orchestra, which amongst the Greeks was the place assigned for the pantomimes and dancers, though at Rome it was appropriated to the senators and vestal virgins.

[^216: Strab. l. ix. p. 395. Herod. l. viii. c. 65.]

The theatre was of a semicircular form on one side, and square on the other. The space contained within the semicircle was allotted to the spectators, and had seats placed one above another to the top of the building. The square part in the front of it was appropriated to the actors; and in the interval, between both, was the orchestra.

The great theatres had three rows of porticoes, raised one upon another, which formed the body of the edifice, and at the same time three different stories for the seats. From the highest of those porticoes the women saw the representation, sheltered from the weather. The rest of the theatre was uncovered, and all the business of the stage was performed in the open air.

Each of these stories consisted of nine rows of seats, including the landing-place, which divided them from each other, and served as a passage from side to side. But as this landing-place and passage took up the space of two benches, there were only seven to sit upon, and consequently in each story there were seven rows of seats. They were from fifteen to eighteen inches in height, and twice as much in breadth; so that the spectators had room to sit at their ease, and without being incommoded by the legs of the people above them, no foot-boards being provided for them.

Each of these stories of benches were divided in two different manners; in their height by the landing-places, called by the Romans Præcinctiones, and in their circumferences by several staircases, peculiar to each story, which intersecting them in right lines, tending towards the centre of the theatre, gave the form of wedges to the quantity of seats between them, from whence they were called Cunei.

Behind these stories of seats were covered galleries, through which the people thronged into the theatre by great square openings, contrived for that purpose in the walls next the seats. Those openings were called Vomitoria, from the multitude of people crowding through them into their places.

As the actors could not be heard to the extremity of the theatre, the Greeks contrived a means to supply that defect, and to augment the force of the voice, and make it more distinct and articulate. For that purpose they invented a kind of large vessels of copper, which were disposed under the seats of the theatre, in such a manner, as made all sounds strike upon the ear with more force and distinctness.

The orchestra being situated, as I have observed, between the two other parts of the theatre, of which one was circular, and the other square, it participated of the form of each, and occupied the space between both. It was divided into three parts.

The first and most considerable was more particularly called the orchestra, from a Greek word[^217] that signifies to dance. It was appropriated to the pantomimes and dancers, and to all such subaltern actors as played between the acts, and at the end of the representations.

[^217: Ὀρχεῖσθαι.]

The second was named θυλέλη, from its being square, in the form of an altar. Here the chorus was generally placed.

And in the third the Greeks disposed their band of music. They called it ὑποσκήνιον, from its being situate at the bottom of the principal part of the theatre, to which they gave the general name of the scene.

I shall describe here this third part of the theatre, called the scene; which was also subdivided into three different parts.

The first and most considerable was properly called the scene, and gave its name to this whole division. It occupied the whole front of the building from side to side, and was the place allotted for the decorations. This front had two small wings at its extremity, from which hung a large curtain, that was let down to open the scene, and drawn up between the acts, when any thing in the representation made it necessary.

The second, called by the Greeks indifferently προσκήνιον, and λοτεῖον and by the Romans proscenium, and pulpitum, was a large open space in front of the scene, in which the actors performed their parts, and which, by the help of the decorations, represented either a public square or forum, a common street, or the country; but the place so represented was always in the open air.

The third division was a part reserved behind the scenes, and called by the Greeks παρασκήνιον. Here the actors dressed themselves, and the decorations were locked up. In the same place were also kept the machines, of which the ancients had abundance in their theatres.

As only the porticoes and the building of the scene were roofed, it was necessary to draw sails, fastened with cords to masts, over the rest of the theatre, to screen the audience from the heat of the sun. But as this contrivance did not prevent the heat, occasioned by the perspiration and breath of so numerous an assembly, the ancients took care to allay it by a kind of rain; conveying the water for that use above the porticoes, which falling again in form of dew through an infinity of small pores concealed in the statues, with which the theatre abounded, did not only diffuse a grateful coolness all around, but the most fragrant exhalations along with it; for this dew was always perfumed. Whenever the representations were interrupted by storms, the spectators retired into the porticoes behind the seats of the theatre.

The fondness of the Athenians for representations of this kind cannot be expressed. Their eyes, their ears, their imagination, their understanding, all shared in the satisfaction. Nothing gave them so sensible a pleasure in dramatic performances, either tragic or comic, as the strokes which were aimed at the affairs of the public; whether pure chance occasioned the application, or the address of the poets, who knew how to reconcile the most remote subjects with the transactions of the republic. They entered by that means into the interests of the people, took occasion to soothe their passions, authorize their pretensions, justify, and sometimes condemn, their conduct, entertain them with agreeable hopes, instruct them in their duty in certain nice conjunctures; in consequence of which they often not only acquired the applauses of the spectators, but credit and influence in the public affairs and counsels: hence the theatre became so grateful and so interesting to the people. It was in this manner, according to some authors, that Euripides artfully adapted his tragedy of Palamedes[^218] to the sentence passed against Socrates; and pointed out, by an illustrious example of antiquity, the innocence of a philosopher, oppressed by malignity supported by power and faction.

[^218: It is not certain whether this piece was prior or posterior to the death of Socrates.—Trans.]

Accident was often the occasion of sudden and unforeseen applications, which from their appositeness were very agreeable to the people. Upon this verse of Æschylus, in praise of Amphiaraus,

—— 'Tis his desire
Not to appear, but be the great and good,

the whole audience rose up, and unanimously applied it to Aristides.[^219] The same thing happened to Philopœmen at the Nemæan games. At the instant he entered the theatre, these verses were singing upon the stage:

[^219: Plut. in Aristid. p. 320.]

—— He comes, to whom we owe
Our liberty, the noblest good below.

All the Greeks cast their eyes upon Philopœmen,[^220] and with clapping of hands and acclamations of joy expressed their veneration for the hero.

[^220: Plut. in Philipœm. p. 362.]

In the same manner at Rome, during the banishment of Cicero,[^221] when some verses of Accius,[^222] which reproached the Greeks with their ingratitude in suffering the banishment of Telamon, were repeated by Æsop, the best actor of his time, they drew tears from the eyes of the whole assembly.

[^221: Cic. in Orat. pro. Sext. n. 120, 123.]

[^222: O ingratifici Argivi, inanes Graii, immemores beneficii, Exulare sivistis, sivistis pelli, pulsum patimini.

—Trans.]

Upon another, though very different, occasion, the Roman people applied to Pompey the Great some verses to this effect:

'Tis our unhappiness has made thee great;[^223]

[^223: Cic. ad Attic. l. ii. Epist. 19. Val. Max. l. vi. c. 2.]

and then addressing the people;

The time shall come when you shall late deplore
So great a power confided to such hands;

the spectators obliged the actor to repeat these verses several times.

Fondness for Theatrical Representations one of the principal Causes of the Decline, Degeneracy, and Corruption of the Athenian State.

When we compare the happy times of Greece, in which Europe and Asia resounded with nothing but the fame of the Athenian victories, with the later ages, when the power of Philip and Alexander the Great had in a manner reduced it to slavery, we shall be surprised at the strange alteration in that republic. But what is most material, is the investigation of the causes and progress of this declension; and these M. de Tourreil has discussed in an admirable manner in the elegant preface to his translation of Demosthenes's orations.

There were no longer, he observes, at Athens any traces of that manly and vigorous policy, equally capable of planning good and retrieving bad success. Instead of that, there remained only an inconsistent loftiness, apt to evaporate in pompous decrees. They were no more those Athenians, who, when menaced by a deluge of barbarians, demolished their houses to build ships with the timber, and whose women stoned the abject wretch to death that proposed to appease the great king by tribute or homage. The love of ease and pleasure had almost entirely extinguished that of glory, liberty, and independence.

Pericles, that great man, so absolute, that those who envied him treated him as a second Pisistratus, was the first author of this degeneracy and corruption. With the design of conciliating the favour of the people, he ordained that upon such days as games or sacrifices were celebrated, a certain number of oboli should be distributed amongst them; and that in the assemblies in which affairs of state were to be discussed, every individual should receive a certain pecuniary gratification in right of being present. Thus the members of the republic were seen for the first time to sell their care in the administration of the government, and to rank amongst servile employments the most noble functions of the sovereign power.

It was not difficult to foresee where so excessive an abuse would end: and to remedy it, it was proposed to establish a fund for the support of the war, and to make it a capital crime to advise, upon any account whatsoever, the application of it to other uses: but, notwithstanding, the abuse always subsisted. At first it seemed tolerable, whilst the citizen, who was supported at the public expense, endeavoured to deserve it by doing his duty in the field for nine months together. Every one was to serve in his turn, and whoever failed was treated as a deserter without distinction: but at length the number of the transgressors carried it against the law; and impunity, as it commonly happens, multiplied their number. People accustomed to the delightful abode of a city, where feasts and games were perpetually taking place, conceived an invincible repugnance for labour and fatigue, which they looked upon as unworthy of free-born men.

It was therefore necessary to find amusement for this indolent people, to fill up the great void of an unactive, useless life. Hence arose principally their fondness, or rather frenzy, for public shows. The death of Epaminondas, which seemed to promise them the greatest advantage, gave the final stroke to their ruin and destruction. “Their courage,” says Justin,[^224] “did not survive that illustrious Theban. Freed from a rival, who kept their emulation alive, they sunk into a lethargic sloth and effeminacy. The funds for armaments by land and sea were soon lavished upon games and feasts. The seaman's and soldier's pay was distributed to the idle citizen. An indolent and luxurious mode of life enervated every breast. The representations of the theatre were preferred to the exercises of the camp. Valour and military knowledge were entirely disregarded. Great captains were in no estimation; whilst good poets and excellent comedians engrossed the universal applause.”

[^224: Justin, l. vi. c. 9.]

Extravagance of this kind makes it easy to comprehend in what multitudes the people thronged to the dramatic performances. As no expense was spared in embellishing them, exorbitant sums were sunk in the service of the theatre. “If,” says Plutarch,[^225] “an accurate calculation were to be made what each representation of the dramatic pieces cost the Athenians, it would appear, that their expenses in playing the Bacchanalians, the Phœnicians, Œdipus, Antigone, Medea, and Electra, (tragedies written either by Sophocles or Euripides,) were greater than those which had been employed against the Barbarians, in defence of the liberty and for the preservation of Greece.” This gave a Spartan just reason to exclaim, on seeing an estimate of the enormous sums laid out in these contests of the tragic poets, and the extraordinary pains taken by the magistrates who presided in them,[^226] “that a people must be void of sense to apply themselves in so warm and serious a manner to things so frivolous. For,” added he, “games should be only games; and nothing is more unreasonable than to purchase a short and trivial amusement at so great a price. Pleasures of this kind agree only with public rejoicings and seasons of festivity, and were designed to divert people at their leisure hours; but should by no means interfere with the affairs of the public, nor the necessary expenses of the government.”

[^225: Plut. de glor. Athen. p. 349.]

[^226: Plut. Sympos. l. vii. quæst. vii. p. 719.]

After all, says Plutarch, in the passage which I have already cited, of what utility have these tragedies been to Athens, though so much boasted by the people, and admired by the rest of the world? I find that the prudence of Themistocles enclosed the city with strong walls; that the fine taste and magnificence of Pericles improved and adorned it; that the noble fortitude of Miltiades preserved its liberty; and that the moderate conduct of Cimon acquired it the empire and government of all Greece. If the wise and learned poetry of Euripides, the sublime diction of Sophocles, the lofty buskin of Æschylus, have obtained equal advantages for the city of Athens, by delivering it from impending calamities, or by adding to its glory, I am willing (he goes on) that dramatic pieces should be placed in competition with trophies of victory, the poetic theatre with the field of battle, and the compositions of the poets with the great exploits of the generals. But what a comparison would this be? On the one side would be seen a few writers, crowned with wreaths of ivy, and dragging a goat or an ox after them, the rewards and victims assigned them for excelling in tragic poetry: on the other, a train of illustrious captains, surrounded by the colonies which they founded, the cities which they captured, and the nations which they subjected. It is not to perpetuate the victories of Æschylus and Sophocles, but in remembrance of the glorious battles of Marathon, Salamis, Eurymedon, and many others, that so many feasts are celebrated every month with such pomp by the Grecians.

The inference which Plutarch draws from hence, in which we ought to agree with him, is,[^227] that it was the highest imprudence in the Athenians thus to prefer pleasure to duty, fondness for the theatre to the love of their country, trivial shows to application to public business, and to consume, in useless expenses and dramatic entertainments, the funds intended for the support of fleets and armies. Macedon, till then obscure and inconsiderable, well knew how to take advantage of the Athenian indolence and effeminacy;[^228] and Philip, instructed by the Greeks themselves, amongst whom he had for several years applied himself successfully to the art of war, was not long before he gave Greece a master, and subjected it to the yoke, as we shall see in the sequel.

[^227: Ἀμαρτάνουσιν Ἀθηναῖοι μεγάλα. τὴν σπουδὴν εὶς τὴν παιδιὰν καταναλίσκοντες, τουτεστι μεγάλων ἀποστόλων δαπάνας καὶ στρατευμάτων ἐφύδια καταχορηγοῦντες εἰς τὸ θέατρον.—Trans.]

[^228: Quibus rebus effectum est, ut inter otia Græecorum, sordidum et obscurum antea Macedonum nomen emergeret; et Philippus, obses triennio Thebis habitus, Epaminondæ et Pelopidæ virtutibus eruditus, regnum Macedoniæ, Græciæ et Asiæ cervicibus, velut jugum servitutis, imponeret. Just. l. vi. c. 9.—Trans.]

I am now to open an entirely new scene to the reader's view, not unworthy his curiosity and attention. We have seen two states of no great consideration, Media and Persia, extend themselves far and wide, under the conduct of Cyrus, like a torrent or a conflagration; and, with amazing rapidity, conquer and subdue many provinces and kingdoms. We shall see now that vast empire setting the nations under its dominion in motion, the Persians, Medes, Phœnicians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Indians, and many others; and falling, with all the forces of Asia and the East upon a little country, of very small extent, and destitute of all foreign assistance; I mean Greece. When, on the one hand, we behold so many nations united together, such preparations of war made for several years with so much diligence; innumerable armies by sea and land, and such fleets as the sea could hardly contain; and, on the other hand, two weak cities, Athens and Lacedæmon, abandoned by all their allies, and left almost entirely to themselves; have we not reason to believe, that these two little cities are going to be utterly destroyed and swallowed up by so formidable an enemy; and that no footsteps of them will be left remaining? And yet we shall find that they will prove victorious; and by their invincible courage, and the several battles they gain, both by sea and land, will make the Persian empire lay aside all thoughts of ever again turning their arms against Greece.

The history of the war between the Persians and the Greeks will illustrate the truth of this maxim, that it is not the number, but the valour of the troops, and the conduct of the generals, on which depends the success of military expeditions. The reader will admire the surprising courage and intrepidity of the great men at the head of the Grecian affairs, whom neither all the world in motion against them could deject, nor the greatest misfortunes disconcert; who undertook, with an handful of men, to make head against innumerable armies; who, notwithstanding such a prodigious inequality of forces, dared to hope for success; who even compelled victory to declare on the side of merit and virtue; and taught all succeeding generations what infinite resources are to be found in prudence, valour, and experience; in a zeal for liberty and our country; in the love of our duty; and in all the sentiments of noble and generous souls.

This war of the Persians against the Grecians will be followed by another amongst the Greeks themselves, but of a very different kind from the former. In the latter, there will scarce be any actions, but what in appearance are of little consequence, and seemingly unworthy of a reader's curiosity who is fond of great events; in this he will meet with little besides private quarrels between certain cities, or some small commonwealths; some inconsiderable sieges, (excepting that of Syracuse, one of the most important related in ancient history,) though several of these sieges were of no short duration; some battles between armies, where the numbers were small, and but little blood shed. What is it, then, that has rendered these wars so famous in history? Sallust informs us in these words: “The actions of the Athenians doubtless were great; and yet I believe they were somewhat less than fame will have us conceive of them. But because Athens abounded in noble writers, the acts of that republic are celebrated throughout the whole world as most glorious; and the gallantry of those heroes who performed them, has had the good fortune to be thought as transcendent as the eloquence of those who have described them.”[^229]

[^229: Atheniensium res gestæ, sicuti ego existimo, satis amplæ magnificæque fuerunt verùm aliquanto minores tamen, quàm famâ feruntur. Sed quia provenere ibi scriptorum magna ingenia, per terrarum orbem Atheniensiam facta pro maximis celeorantur. Ita eorum, quæ fecere, virtus tanta habetur, quantum eam verbis potuere extollere præclara ingenia. Sallust. in Bell. Catilin.—Trans.]

Sallust, though jealous enough of the glory the Romans had acquired by a series of distinguished actions, with which their history abounds, yet does justice in this passage to the Grecians, by acknowledging, that their exploits were truly great and illustrious, though somewhat inferior, in his opinion, to their fame. What is then this foreign and borrowed lustre, which the Athenian actions have derived from the eloquence of their historians? It is, that the whole universe agrees in looking upon them as the greatest and most glorious that ever were performed: Per terrarum orbem Atheniensium facta pro maximis celebrantur. All nations, seduced and enchanted as it were with the beauties of the Greek authors, think that people's exploits superior to any thing that was ever done by any other nation. This, according to Sallust, is the service which the Greek authors have done the Athenians, by their excellent manner of describing their actions; and very unhappy it is for us, that our history, for want of similar assistance, has left a thousand brilliant actions and fine sayings unrecorded, which would have been put in the strongest light by the writers of antiquity, and have done great honour to our country.

But, be this as it may, it must be confessed, that we are not always to judge of the value of an action, or the merit of the persons who shared in it, by the importance of the event. It is rather in such sieges and engagements as we find recorded in the history of the Peloponnesian war, that the conduct and abilities of a general are truly conspicuous. Accordingly, it is observed, that it was chiefly at the head of small armies, and in countries of no great extent, that our best generals of the last age displayed their great capacity, and showed themselves not inferior to the most celebrated captains of antiquity. In actions of this sort chance has no share, and does not cover any oversights that are committed. Every thing is conducted and carried on by the prudence of the general. He is truly the soul of the forces, which neither act nor move but by his direction. He sees every thing, and is present every where. Nothing escapes his vigilance and attention. Orders are seasonably given, and seasonably executed. Contrivances, stratagems, false marches, real or feigned attacks, encampments, decampments; in a word, every thing depends upon him alone.

On this account, the reading of the Greek historians, such as Thucydides, Xenophon, and Polybius, is of infinite service to young officers; because those historians, who were also excellent commanders, enter into all the particulars of the events which they relate, and lead the readers, as it were by the hand, through all the sieges and battles they describe; showing them, by the example of the greatest generals of antiquity, and by a kind of anticipated experience, in what manner war is to be carried on.

Nor is it only with regard to military exploits, that the Grecian history affords us such excellent models. We shall there find celebrated legislators, able politicians, magistrates born for government, men that have excelled in all arts and sciences, philosophers that carried their inquiries as far as was possible in those early ages, and who have left us such maxims of morality, as might put many Christians to the blush.

If the virtues of those who are celebrated in history may serve us for models in the conduct of our lives; their vices and failings, on the other hand, are no less proper to caution and instruct us; and the strict regard which an historian is obliged to pay to truth will not allow him to dissemble the latter, through fear of eclipsing the lustre of the former. Nor does what I here advance contradict the rule laid down by Plutarch, on the same subject, in his preface to the life of Cimon.[^230] He requires, that the illustrious actions of great men be represented in their full light; but as to the faults, which may sometimes escape them through passion or surprise, or into which they may be drawn by the necessity of affairs, considering them rather as a certain degree of perfection wanting to their virtue,[^231] than as vices or crimes that proceed from any corruption of the heart; such imperfections as these, he would have the historian, out of compassion to the weakness of human nature, which produces nothing entirely perfect, content himself with touching very lightly; in the same manner as an able painter, when he has a fine face to draw, in which he finds some little blemish or defect, does neither entirely suppress it, nor think himself obliged to represent it with a strict exactness, because the one would spoil the beauty of the picture, and the other would destroy the likeness. The very comparison Plutarch uses, shows, that he speaks only of slight and excusable faults. But as to actions of injustice, violence, and brutality, they ought not to be concealed or disguised on any pretence; nor can we suppose, that the same privilege should be allowed in history as is in painting, which invented the profile, to represent the side-face of a prince who had lost an eye, and by that means ingeniously concealed so disagreeable a deformity.[^232] History, the most essential rule of which is sincerity, will by no means admit of such indulgences, as indeed would deprive it of its greatest advantage.

[^230: In Cim. p. 479, 480.]

[^231: Ἐλλείμματα μᾶλλον ἀρετῆς τινος ἢ κακίας πόνηρεύματα.—Trans.]

[^232: Habet in picturâ speciem tota facies. Apelles tamen imaginem Antigoni latere tantùm altero ostendit, ut amissi oculi deformitas lateret. Quintil. l. ii. c. 13.—Trans.]

Shame, reproach, infamy, hatred, and the execrations of the public, which are the inseparable attendants on criminal and brutal actions, are no less proper to excite a horror for vice, than the glory, which perpetually attends good actions, is to inspire us with the love of virtue. And these, according to Tacitus, are the two ends which every historian ought to propose to himself, by making a judicious choice of what is most extraordinary both in good and evil, in order to occasion that public homage to be paid to virtue, which is justly due to it, and to create the greater abhorrence for vice, on account of that eternal infamy that attends it.[^233]

[^233: Exequi sententias haud institui, nisi insignes per honestum, aut notabili dedecore: quod præcipuum munus annalium reor, ne virtutes sileantur, utque pravis dictis factisque ex posteritate et infamiâ motus sit. Tacit. Annal. l. iii. c. 65.—Trans.]

The history which I am writing furnishes but too many examples of the latter sort. With respect to the Persians, it will appear, by what is said of their kings, that those princes, whose power has no other bounds than those of their will, often abandon themselves to all their passions; that nothing is more difficult than to resist the illusions of a man's own greatness, and the flatteries of those that surround him; that the liberty of gratifying all one's desires, and of doing evil with impunity, is a dangerous situation; that the best dispositions can hardly withstand such a temptation; that even after having begun their career favourably, they are insensibly corrupted by softness and effeminacy, by pride, and their aversion to sincere counsels; and that it rarely happens they are wise enough to consider, that, when they find themselves exalted above all laws and restraints, they stand then most in need of moderation and wisdom, both in regard to themselves and others; and that in such a situation they ought to be doubly wise, and doubly strong, in order to set bounds within, by their reason, to a power that has none without.

With respect to the Grecians, the Peloponnesian war will show the miserable effects of their intestine divisions, and the fatal excesses into which they were led by their thirst of dominion: scenes of injustice, ingratitude, and perfidy, together with the open violation of treaties, or mean artifices and unworthy tricks to elude their execution. It will show, how scandalously the Lacedæmonians and Athenians debased themselves to the barbarians, in order to beg aids of money from them: how shamefully the great deliverers of Greece renounced the glory of all their past labours and exploits, by stooping and making their court to haughty and insolent satrapæ, and by going successively, with a kind of emulation, to implore the protection of the common enemy, whom they had so often conquered; and in what manner they employed the succours they obtained from them, in oppressing their ancient allies, and extending their own territories by unjust and violent methods.

On both sides, and sometimes in the same person, we shall find a surprising mixture of good and bad, of virtues and vices, of glorious actions and mean sentiments; and sometimes, perhaps, we shall be ready to ask ourselves, whether these can be the same persons and the same people, of whom such different things are related: and whether it be possible, that such a bright and shining light, and such thick clouds of smoke and darkness, can proceed from the same source?

The Persian history includes the space of one hundred and seventeen years, during the reigns of six kings of Persia: Darius, the first of the name, the son of Hystaspes; Xerxes the first; Artaxerxes, surnamed Longimanus; Xerxes the second; Sogdianus (these two last reigned but a very little time); and Darius the second, commonly called Darius Nothus. This history begins at the year of the world 3483, and extends to the year 3600. As this whole period naturally divides itself into two parts, I shall also divide it into two distinct books.

The first part, which consists of ninety years, extends from the beginning of the reign of Darius the first, to the forty-second year of Artaxerxes, the same year in which the Peloponnesian war began; that is, from the year of the world 3483, to the year 3573. This part chiefly contains the different enterprises and expeditions of the Persians against Greece, which never produced more great men and great events, nor ever displayed more conspicuous or more solid virtues. Here will be seen the famous battles of Marathon, Thermopylæ, Artemisium, Salamis, Platææ, Mycale, Eurymedon, &c. Here the most eminent commanders of Greece signalized their courage; Miltiades, Leonidas, Themistocles, Aristides, Cimon, Pausanias, Pericles, Thucydides, &c.

To enable the reader the more easily to recollect what passed within this space of time among the Jews, and also among the Romans, the history of both which nations is entirely foreign to that of the Persians and Greeks, I shall here set down in few words the principal epochas relating to them.

Epochas of the Jewish History.

The people of God were at this time returned from their Babylonish captivity to Jerusalem, under the conduct of Zorobabel. Usher is of opinion, that the history of Esther ought to be placed in the reign of Darius. The Israelites, under the shadow of this prince's protection, and animated by the earnest exhortations of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, did at last finish the building of the temple, which had been interrupted for many years by the cabals of their enemies. Artaxerxes was no less favourable to the Jews than Darius: he first of all sent Ezra to Jerusalem, who restored the public worship, and the observation of the law; then Nehemiah, who caused walls to be built round the city, and fortified it against the attacks of their neighbours, who were jealous of its reviving greatness. It is thought that Malachi, the last of the prophets, was contemporary with Nehemiah, or that he prophesied not long after him.

This interval of the sacred history extends from the reign of Darius I. to the beginning of the reign of Darius Nothus; that is to say, from the year of the world 3485, to the year 3581. After which the Scripture is entirely silent, till the time of the Maccabees.

Epochas of the Roman History.

The first year of Darius I. was the 233d of the building of Rome. Tarquin the Proud was then on the throne, and about ten years afterwards was expelled, when the consular government was substituted to that of the kings. In the succeeding part of this period happened the war against Porsenna; the creation of the tribunes of the people; Coriolanus's retreat among the Volsci, and the war that ensued thereupon; the wars of the Romans against the Latins, the Veientes, the Volsci, and other neighbouring nations; the death of Virginia under the Decemvirate; the disputes between the people and senate about marriages and the consulship, which occasioned the creating of military tribunes instead of consuls. This period of time terminates in the 323d year from the foundation of Rome.

The second part, which consists of twenty-seven years, extends from the 43d year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, to the death of Darius Nothus; that is, from the year of the world 3573, to the year 3600. It contains the first nineteen years of the Peloponnesian war, which continued twenty-seven, of which Greece and Sicily were the seat, and wherein the Greeks, who had before triumphed over the barbarians, turned their arms against each other. Among the Athenians, Pericles, Nicias, and Alcibiades; among the Lacedæmonians, Brasidas, Gylippus, and Lysander, distinguished themselves in the most extraordinary manner.

Rome continues to be agitated by different disputes between the senate and the people. Towards the end of this period, and about the 350th year of Rome, the Romans formed the siege of Veji, which lasted ten years.

[^234] I have already observed, that eighty years after the taking of Troy, the Heraclidæ, that is, the descendants of Hercules, returned into the Peloponnesus, and made themselves masters of Lacedæmon, where two brothers, Eurysthenes and Procles, sons of Aristodemus, reigned jointly together.

[^234: A.M. 2900. Ant. J.C. 1104.]

Herodotus observes,[^235] that these two brothers were, during their whole lives, at variance; and that almost all their descendants inherited the like disposition of mutual hatred and antipathy; so true it is, that the sovereign power will admit of no partnership, and that two kings will always be too many for one kingdom! However, after the death of these two, the descendants of both still continued to sway the sceptre jointly: and, what is very remarkable, these two branches subsisted for near nine hundred years, from the return of the Heraclidæ into the Peloponnesus, to the death of Cleomenes, and supplied Sparta with kings without interruption, and that generally in a regular succession from father to son, especially in the elder branch of the family.

[^235: Lib. vi. c. 52.]

The Origin and Condition of the Elotæ, or Helots.

When the Lacedæmonians first began to settle in Peloponnesus, they met with great opposition from the inhabitants of the country, whom they were obliged to subdue one after another by force of arms, or receive into their alliance on easy and equitable terms, with the imposition of a small tribute. Strabo[^236] speaks of a city, called Elos, not far from Sparta, which, after having submitted to the yoke, as others had done, revolted openly, and refused to pay the tribute. Agis, the son of Eurysthenes, newly settled in the throne, was sensible of the dangerous tendency of this first revolt, and therefore immediately marched with an army against them, together with Soüs, his colleague. They laid siege to the city, which, after a pretty long resistance, was forced to surrender at discretion. This prince thought it proper to make such an example of them as should intimidate all their neighbours, and deter them from the like attempts, and yet not alienate their minds by too cruel a treatment; for which reason he put none to death. He spared the lives of all the inhabitants, but at the same time deprived them of their liberty, and reduced them all to a state of slavery. From thenceforward they were employed in all mean and servile offices, and treated with extreme rigour. These were the people who were called Elotæ, or Helots. The number of them exceedingly increased in process of time, the Lacedæmonians giving undoubtedly the same name to all the people whom they reduced to the same condition of servitude. As they themselves were averse to labour, and entirely addicted to war, they left the cultivation of their lands to these slaves, assigning every one of them a certain portion of ground, the produce of which they were obliged to carry every year to their respective masters, who endeavoured, by all sorts of ill usage, to make their yoke more grievous and insupportable. This was certainly very bad policy, and could only tend to breed a vast number of dangerous enemies in the very heart of the state, who were always ready to take arms and revolt on every occasion. The Romans acted more prudently; for they incorporated the conquered nations into their state, by associating them into the freedom of their city, and thereby converted them from enemies, into brethren and fellow-citizens.

[^236: Lib. viii. p. 365. Plut. in Lycurg. p. 40.]

Lycurgus, the Lacedæmonian Lawgiver

Eurytion, or Eurypon, as he is named by others, succeeded Soüs.[^237] In order to gain the affection of his people, and render his government agreeable, he thought fit to recede in some points from the absolute power exercised by the kings his predecessors: this rendered his name so dear to his subjects, that all his descendants were, from him, called Eurytionidæ. But this relaxation gave birth to horrible confusion, and an unbounded licentiousness in Sparta; and for a long time occasioned infinite mischiefs. The people became so insolent, that nothing could restrain them. If Eurytion's successors attempted to recover their authority by force, they became odious; and if, through complaisance or weakness, they chose to dissemble, their mildness served only to render them contemptible; so that order in a manner was abolished, and the laws no longer regarded. These confusions hastened the death of Lycurgus's father, whose name was Eunomus, and who was killed in an insurrection. Polydectes, his eldest son and successor, dying soon after without children, every body expected Lycurgus would have been king. And indeed he was so in effect, as long as the pregnancy of his brother's wife was uncertain; but as soon as that was manifest, he declared, that the kingdom belonged to her child, in case it proved a son: and from that moment he took upon himself the administration of the government, as guardian to his unborn nephew, under the title of Prodicos, which was the name given by the Lacedæmonians to the guardians of their kings. When the child was born, Lycurgus took him in his arms, and cried out to the company that was present, Behold, my lords of Sparta, your new-born king! and, at the same time, he put the infant into the king's seat, and named him Charilaus, because of the joy the people expressed upon occasion of his birth. The reader will find, in the second volume of this history, all that relates to the history of Lycurgus, the reformation he made, and the excellent laws he established in Sparta. Agesilaus was at this time king in the elder branch of the family.

[^237: Plut. in Lycurg. p. 40.]

War between the Argives and the Lacedæmonians.

Some time after this, in the reign of Theopompus, a war broke out between the Argives and Lacedæmonians, on account of a little country, called Thyrea, that lay upon the confines of the two states, and to which each of them pretended a right.[^238] When the two armies were ready to engage, it was agreed on both sides, in order to spare the effusion of blood, that the quarrel should be decided by three hundred of the bravest men chosen from their respective armies; and that the land in question should become the property of the victorious party. To leave the combatants more room to engage, the two armies retired to some distance. Those generous champions then, who had all the courage of two mighty armies, boldly advanced towards each other, and fought with so much resolution and fury, that the whole number, except three men, two on the side of the Argives, and one on that of the Lacedæmonians, lay dead upon the spot; and only the night parted them. The two Argives, looking upon themselves as the conquerors, made what haste they could to Argos to carry the news; the single Lacedæmonian, Othryades by name, instead of retiring, stripped the dead bodies of the Argives, and carrying their arms into the Lacedæmonian camp, continued in his post. The next day the two armies returned to the field of battle. Both sides laid equal claim to the victory: the Argives, because they had more of their champions left alive than the enemy had; the Lacedæmonians, because the two Argives that remained alive had fled; whereas their single soldier had remained master of the field of battle, and had carried off the spoils of the enemy: in short, they could not determine the dispute without coming to another engagement. Here fortune declared in favour of the Lacedæmonians, and the little territory of Thyrea was the prize of their victory. But Othryades, not able to bear the thoughts of surviving his brave companions, or of enduring the sight of Sparta after their death, killed himself on the same field of battle where they had fought, resolving to have one fate and tomb with them.

[^238: Herod. l. i. c. 82.]

Wars between the Messenians and Lacedæmonians.

There were no less than three several wars between the Messenians and the Lacedæmonians, all of them very fierce and bloody. Messenia was a country in Peloponnesus, towards the west, and not far from Sparta: it was of considerable strength, and was governed by its own kings.

The First Messenian War.

[^239] The first Messenian war lasted twenty years, and broke out the second year of the ninth Olympiad.[^240] The Lacedæmonians pretended to have received several considerable injuries from the Messenians, and among others, that of having had their daughters ravished by the inhabitants of Messenia, when they went, according to custom, to a temple, that stood on the borders of the two nations; as also that of the murder of Telecles, their king, which was a consequence of the former outrage. Probably a desire of extending their dominion, and of seizing a territory which lay so convenient for them, might be the true cause of the war. But be that as it may, the war broke out in the reign of Polydorus and Theopompus, kings of Sparta, at the time when the office of archon at Athens was still decennial.

[^239: A.M. 3261. Ant. J.C. 743.]

[^240: Pausan. l. iv. p. 216-242. Justin, l. iii. c. 4.]

Euphaes, the thirteenth descendant from Hercules, was then king of Messenia.[^241] He gave the command of his army to Cleonnis. The Lacedæmonians opened the campaign with the siege of Amphea, a small, inconsiderable city, which, however, they thought would suit them very well as a place for military stores. The town was taken by storm, and all the inhabitants put to the sword. This first blow served only to animate the Messenians, by showing them what they were to expect from the enemy, if they did not defend themselves with vigour. The Lacedæmonians, on their part, bound themselves by an oath not to lay down their arms, nor to return to Sparta, till they had made themselves masters of all the cities and lands belonging to the Messenians: so much did they rely upon their strength and valour.

[^241: Pausan. l. iv. p. 225, 226.]

Two battles were fought, wherein the loss was nearly equal on both sides.[^242] But after the second, the Messenians suffered extremely through the want of provisions, which occasioned a great desertion in their troops, and at last brought a pestilence among them.

[^242: Ibid. l. iv. 227-234.]

Hereupon they consulted the oracle of Delphi, which directed them, in order to appease the wrath of the gods, to offer up a virgin of the royal blood in sacrifice. Aristomenes, who was of the race of the Epytides, offered his own daughter. The Messenians then considering, that if they left garrisons in all their towns they should extremely weaken their army, resolved to abandon them all, except Ithome, a little place seated on the top of a hill of the same name, about which they encamped and fortified themselves. In this situation were seven years spent, during which nothing passed but slight skirmishes on both sides; the Lacedæmonians not daring in all that time to force the enemy to a battle.

Indeed, they almost despaired of being able to reduce them: nor was there any thing but the obligation of the oath, by which they had bound themselves, that made them continue so burthensome a war. What gave them the greatest uneasiness was, their apprehension, lest their absence from their wives for so many years, an absence which might still continue many more, should destroy their families at home, and leave Sparta destitute of citizens.[^243] To prevent this misfortune, they sent home such of their soldiers as were come to the army since the forementioned oath had been taken, and made no scruple of prostituting their wives to their embraces. The children that sprung from this unlawful intercourse were called Partheniæ, a name given them to denote the infamy of their birth. As soon as they were grown up, not being able to endure such an opprobrious distinction, they banished themselves from Sparta with one consent, and, under the conduct of Phalantus, went and settled at Tarentum in Italy, after driving out the ancient inhabitants.[^244]

[^243: Diod. l. xv. p. 378.]

[^244: Et regnata petam Laconi rura Phalanto. Hor. Od. vi. l. 2.—Trans.]

At last, in the eighth year of the war, which was the thirteenth of Euphaes's reign, a fierce and bloody battle was fought near Ithome.[^245] Euphaes pierced through the battalions of Theopompus with too much heat and precipitation for a king. He there received a multitude of wounds, several of which were mortal. He fell, and seemed to give up the ghost. Whereupon, wonderful efforts of courage were exerted on both sides; by the one, to carry off the king; by the other, to save him. Cleonnis killed eight Spartans, who were dragging him along, and spoiled them of their arms, which he committed to the custody of some of his soldiers. He himself received several wounds, all in the fore part of his body, which was a certain proof that he had never turned his back upon his enemies. Aristomenes, fighting on the same occasion, and for the same end, killed five Lacedæmonians, whose spoils he likewise carried off, without receiving any wound. In short, the king was saved and carried off by the Messenians; and, all mangled and bloody as he was, he expressed great joy that he had not been worsted. Aristomenes, after the battle was over, met Cleonnis, who, by reason of his wounds, could neither walk by himself, nor with the assistance of those that lent him their hands. He therefore took him upon his shoulders, without quitting his arms, and carried him to the camp.

[^245: Pausan. l. iv. p. 234, 235. Diod. in Frag.]

As soon as they had applied the first dressing to the wounds of the king of Messenia and of his officers, there arose a new contention among the Messenians, that was pursued with as much warmth as the former, but was of a very different kind, and yet the consequence of the other. The affair in question was the adjudging the prize of glory to him that had signalized his valour most in the late engagement. It was a custom among them, which had long been established, publicly to proclaim, after a battle, the name of the man that had showed the greatest courage. Nothing could be more proper to animate the officers and soldiers, to inspire them with resolution and intrepidity, and to stifle the natural apprehension of death and danger. Two illustrious champions entered the lists on this occasion, namely, Cleonnis and Aristomenes.

The king, notwithstanding his weak condition, attended by the principal officers of his army, presided in the council, where this important dispute was to be decided. Each competitor pleaded his own cause. Cleonnis founded his pretensions upon the great number of the enemies he had slain, and upon the multitude of wounds he had received in the action, which were so many undoubted testimonies of the courage with which he had faced both death and danger; whereas, the condition in which Aristomenes came out of the engagement, without hurt and without wound, seemed to show, that he had been very careful of his own person, or, at most, could only prove that he had been more fortunate, but not more brave or courageous, than himself. And as to his having carried him on his shoulders into the camp, that action indeed might serve to prove the strength of his body, but nothing farther; and the thing in dispute at this time, says he, is not strength, but valour.

The only thing Aristomenes was reproached for, was his not being wounded; therefore he confined himself to that point: “I am,” says he, “called fortunate because I have escaped from the battle without wounds. If that were owing to my cowardice, I should deserve another epithet than that of fortunate; and, instead of being admitted to dispute the prize, ought to undergo the rigour of the laws that punish cowards. But what is objected to me as a crime, is in truth my greatest glory. For, if my enemies, astonished at my valour, durst not venture to attack or oppose me, it is no small degree of merit that I made them fear me; or, if whilst they engaged me, I had at the same time strength to cut them in pieces, and skill to guard against their attacks, I must then have been at once both valiant and prudent. For whoever, in the midst of an engagement, can expose himself to dangers with caution and security, shows that he excels at the same time both in the virtues of the mind and the body. As for courage, no man living can reproach Cleonnis with any want of it; but, for his honour's sake, I am sorry that he should appear to want gratitude.”

After the conclusion of these harangues, the question was put to the vote. The whole army is in suspense, and impatiently waits for the decision. No dispute could be so warm and interesting as this. It is not a competition for gold or silver, but solely for honour. The proper reward of virtue is pure disinterested glory. Here the judges are unsuspected. The actions of the competitors still speak for them. It is the king himself, surrounded with his officers, who presides and adjudges. A whole army are the witnesses. The field of battle is a tribunal without partiality and cabal. In short, all the votes concurred in favour of Aristomenes, and adjudged him the prize.

Euphaes died not many days after the decision of this affair.[^246] He had reigned thirteen years, and during all that time had been engaged in war with the Lacedæmonians. As he died without children, he left the Messenians at liberty to choose his successor. Cleonnis and Damis were candidates in opposition to Aristomenes; but he was elected king in preference to them. When he was on the throne, he did not scruple to confer on his two rivals the principal offices of the state; all strongly attached to the public good, even more than to their own glory; competitors, but not enemies, these great men were actuated by a zeal for their country, and were neither friends nor adversaries to one another, but for its preservation.

[^246: Pausan. l. iv. p. 235, 241.]

In this relation, I have followed the opinion of the late Monsieur Boivin, the elder,[^247] and have made use of his learned dissertation upon a fragment of Diodorus Siculus, which the world was little acquainted with. He supposes, and proves in it, that the king, spoken of in that fragment, is Euphaes; and that Aristomenes is the same that Pausanias calls Aristodemus, according to the custom of the ancients, who were often called by two different names.

[^247: Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions, vol. ii. p. 84-113.—Trans.]

Aristomenes, otherwise called Aristodemus, reigned near seven years, and was equally esteemed and beloved by his subjects. The war still continued all this time.[^248] Towards the end of his reign he beat the Lacedæmonians, took their king Theopompus, and, in honour of Jupiter of Ithome, sacrificed three hundred of them, among whom their king was the principal victim. Shortly after, Aristodemus sacrificed himself upon the tomb of his daughter, in conformity to the answer of an oracle. Damis was his successor, but without taking upon him the title of king.

[^248: Clem. Alex. in Protrep. p. 20. Euseb. in Prœp. l. iv. c. 16.]

After his death, the Messenians never had any success in their affairs, but found themselves in a very wretched and hopeless condition.[^249] Being reduced to the last extremity, and utterly destitute of provisions, they abandoned Ithome, and fled to such of their allies as were nearest to them. The city was immediately razed, and the other part of the country submitted. They were made to engage by oath never to forsake the party of the Lacedæmonians, and never to revolt from them: a very useless precaution, only proper to make them add the guilt of perjury to their rebellion. Their new masters imposed no tribute upon them; but contented themselves with obliging them to bring to the Spartan market one half of the corn they should reap every harvest. It was likewise stipulated, that the Messenians, both men and women, should attend, in mourning, the funerals of the kings and chief citizens of Sparta; which the Lacedæmonians probably looked upon as a mark of dependence, and as a kind of homage paid to their nation.[^250] Thus ended the first Messenian war, after having lasted twenty years.

[^249: Pausan. l. iv. p. 241-242.]

[^250: A.M. 3281. Ant. J.C. 723.]

The Second Messenian War.

The lenity with which the Lacedæmonians treated the Messenians at first, was of no long duration.[^251] When once they found the whole country had submitted, and thought the people incapable of giving them any further trouble, they returned to their natural character of insolence and haughtiness, that often degenerated into cruelty, and sometimes even into ferocity. Instead of treating the vanquished with kindness, as friends and allies, and endeavouring by gentle methods to win those whom they had subdued by force, they seemed intent upon nothing but aggravating their yoke, and making them feel the whole weight of subjection. They laid heavy taxes upon them, delivered them up to the avarice of the collectors of those taxes, gave no ear to their complaints, rendered them no justice, treated them with contempt like vile slaves, and committed the most heinous outrages against them.

[^251: Ibid. p. 242, 261. Justin, l. iii. c. 5.]

Man, who is born for liberty, can never reconcile himself to servitude: the most gentle slavery exasperates, and provokes him to rebel. What could be expected then from so cruel a one, as that under which the Messenians groaned? After having endured it with great uneasiness[^252] near forty years, they resolved to throw off the yoke, and to recover their ancient liberty.[^253] This was in the fourth year of the twenty-third Olympiad: the office of archon at Athens was then made annual; and Anaxander and Anaxidamus reigned at Sparta.

[^252: Cùm per complures annos gravia servitutis verbera, plerumque ac vincula, cæteraque captivitatis mala perpessi essent, post longam pænarum patientiam bellum instaurant. Justin, l. iii. c. 5.—Trans.]

[^253: A.M. 3320. Ant. J.C. 684.]

The Messenians' first care was to strengthen themselves by the alliance of the neighbouring nations. These they found well inclined to enter into their views, as very agreeable to their own interests. For it was not without jealousy and apprehensions, that they saw so powerful a city rising up in the midst of them, which manifestly seemed to aim at extending her dominion over all the rest. The people therefore of Elis, the Argives and Sicyonians, declared for the Messenians. But before their forces were joined, a battle was fought between the Lacedæmonians and Messenians. Aristomenes, the second of that name,[^254] was at the head of the latter. He was a commander of intrepid courage, and of great abilities in war. The Lacedæmonians were beaten in this engagement. Aristomenes, to give the enemy at first an advantageous opinion of his bravery, knowing what influence it has on the success of future enterprises, boldly ventured to enter into Sparta by night, and upon the gate of the temple of Minerva, surnamed Chalcioecos, to hang up a shield, on which was an inscription, signifying, that it was a present offered by Aristomenes to the goddess, out of the spoils of the Lacedæmonians.

[^254: According to several historians, there was another Aristomenes in the first Messenian war. Diod. l. xv. p. 378.—Trans.]

This bravado did in reality astonish the Lacedæmonians. But they were still more alarmed at the formidable league that was formed against them. The Delphic oracle, which they consulted, in order to know by what means they should be successful in this war, directed them to send to Athens for a commander, and to submit to his counsel and conduct. This was a very mortifying step to so haughty a city as Sparta. But the fear of incurring the god's displeasure by a direct disobedience prevailed over all other considerations. They sent an embassy therefore to the Athenians. The people of Athens were somewhat perplexed at the request. On the one hand, they were not sorry to see the Lacedæmonians at war with their neighbours, and were far from desiring to furnish them with a good general: on the other, they were afraid also of disobeying the god. To extricate themselves out of this difficulty, they offered the Lacedæmonians Tyrtæus. He was a poet by profession, and had something original in the turn of his mind, and disagreeable in his person; for he was lame. Notwithstanding these defects, the Lacedæmonians received him as a general, sent them by Heaven itself. Their success did not at first answer their expectation, for they lost three battles successively.

The kings of Sparta, discouraged by so many disappointments, and out of all hopes of better success for the future, were absolutely bent upon returning to Sparta, and marching home again with their forces. Tyrtæus opposed this design very warmly, and at length brought them over to his opinion. He addressed the troops, and repeated to them some verses he had made with that intention, and on which he had bestowed great pains and application. He first endeavoured to comfort them for their past losses, which he imputed to no fault of theirs, but only to ill fortune, or to fate, which no human wisdom can surmount. He then represented to them, how shameful it would be for Spartans to fly from an enemy; and how glorious it would be for them rather to perish sword in hand, if it was so decreed by fate, in fighting for their country. Then, as if all danger was vanished, and the gods, fully satisfied and appeased with their late calamities, were entirely turned to their side, he set victory before their eyes as present and certain, and as if she herself were inviting them to battle. All the ancient authors,[^255] who have made any mention of the style and character of Tyrtæus's poetry, observe, that it was full of a certain fire, ardour, and enthusiasm, that inflamed the minds of men, that exalted them above themselves, that inspired them with something generous and martial, that extinguished all fear and apprehension of danger or death, and made them wholly intent upon the preservation of their country and their own glory.[^256] Tyrtæus's verses had really this effect on the soldiers upon this occasion. They all desired, with one voice, to march against the enemy. Being become indifferent as to their lives, they had no thoughts but to secure themselves the honour of a burial. To this end they all tied strings round their right arms, on which were inscribed their own and their fathers' names, that, if they chanced to be killed in the battle, and to have their faces so altered through time, or accidents, as not to be distinguishable, it might certainly be known who each of them was by these marks. Soldiers determined to die are very valiant. This appeared in the battle that ensued. It was very bloody, the victory being a long time disputed on both sides; but at last the Messenians gave way. When Tyrtæus went afterwards to Sparta, he was received with the greatest marks of distinction, and incorporated into the body of citizens.

[^255: Plat. l. i. de Legib. p. 629. Plut. in Agid. et Cleom. p. 805.]

[^256: Tyrtæusque mares animos in martia bella Versibus exacuit.

Hor. in Art. Poët.—Trans.]

The gaining of this battle did not put an end to the war, which had already lasted three years. Aristomenes, having assembled the remains of his army, retired to the top of a mountain, of difficult access, which was called Ira. The conquerors attempted to carry the place by assault, but that brave prince defended himself there for the space of eleven years, and performed the most extraordinary actions of valour. He was at last obliged to quit it, only by surprise and treachery, after having defended it like a lion. Such of the Messenians as fell into the hands of the Lacedæmonians on this occasion were reduced to the condition of the Helots. The rest, seeing their country ruined, went and settled at Zancle, a city in Sicily, which afterwards took its name from this people, and was called Messana; the same place as is called at this day Messina. Aristomenes, after having conducted one of his daughters to Rhodes, whom he had given in marriage to the tyrant of that place, thought of passing on to Sardis, to remain with Ardys, king of the Lydians, or to Ecbatana, with Phraortes, king of the Medes; but death prevented the execution of all his designs.

[^257] The second Messenian war was of fourteen years' duration, and ended the first year of the twenty-seventh Olympiad.

[^257: A.M. 3334. Ant. J.C. 670.]

There was a third war between these people and the Lacedæmonians, which began both at the time and on the occasion of a great earthquake that happened at Sparta. We shall speak of this war in its place.

The history, of which it remains for me to treat in this work, is that of the successors of Alexander, and comprehends the space of two hundred and ninety-three years; from the death of that monarch, and the commencement of the reign of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, in Egypt, to the death of Cleopatra, when that kingdom became a Roman province, under the emperor Augustus.

The history will present to our view a series of all the crimes which usually arise from inordinate ambition; scenes of jealousy and perfidy, treason, ingratitude, and flagrant abuses of sovereign power; cruelty, impiety, an utter oblivion of the natural sentiments of probity and honour, with the violation of all laws human and divine, will rise before us. We shall behold nothing but fatal dissensions, destructive wars, and dreadful revolutions. Men, originally friends, brought up together, and natives of the same country, companions in the same dangers, and instruments in the accomplishment of the same exploits and victories, will conspire to tear in pieces the empire they had all concurred to form at the expense of their blood. We shall see the captains of Alexander sacrifice the mother, the wives, the brother, the sisters, of that prince, to their own ambition; without sparing even those to whom they themselves either owed or gave life. We shall no longer behold those glorious times of Greece, that were once so productive of great men and great examples; or, if we should happen to discover some traces and remains of them, they will only resemble the gleams of lightning that shoot along in a rapid track, and attract attention only in consequence of the profound darkness that precedes and follows them.

I acknowledge myself to be sufficiently sensible how much a writer is to be pitied, for being obliged to represent human nature in such colours and lineaments as dishonour her, and which cannot fail of inspiring disgust and a secret affliction in the minds of those who are made spectators of such a picture. History loses whatever is most interesting and most capable of conveying pleasure and instruction, when she can only produce those effects, by inspiring the mind with horror for criminal actions, and by a representation of the calamities which usually succeed them, and are to be considered as their just punishment. It is difficult to engage the attention of a reader, for any considerable time, on objects which only raise his indignation, and it would be affronting him, to seem desirous of dissuading him from the excess of inordinate passions, of which he conceives himself incapable.

How is it possible to diffuse any interest through a narration, which has nothing to offer but an uniform series of vices and great crimes; and which makes it necessary to enter into a particular detail of the actions and characters of men born for the calamity of the human race, and whose very name should not be transmitted to posterity? It may even be thought dangerous, to familiarize the minds of the generality of mankind to uninterrupted scenes of too successful iniquity and to be particular in describing the unjust success which waited on those illustrious criminals, the long duration of whose prosperity being frequently attended with the privileges and rewards of virtue, may be thought an imputation on Providence by persons of weak understandings.

This history, which seems likely to prove very disagreeable, from the reasons I have just mentioned, will become more so from the obscurity and confusion in which the several transactions will be involved, and which it will be difficult, if not impossible, to remedy. Ten or twelve of Alexander's captains were engaged in a course of hostilities against each other, for the partition of his empire after his death; and to secure to themselves some portion, greater or less, of that vast body. Sometimes feigned friends, sometimes declared enemies, they are continually forming different parties and leagues, which are to subsist no longer than is consistent with the interest of each individual. Macedonia changed its master five or six times in a very short space; by what means then can order and perspicuity be preserved, in so prodigious a variety of events that are perpetually crossing and breaking in upon each other?

Besides which, I am no longer supported by any ancient authors capable of conducting me through this darkness and confusion. Diodorus will entirely abandon me, after having been my guide for some time; and no other historian will appear to take his place. No proper series of affairs will remain; the several events are not to be disposed into any regular connection with each other; nor will it be possible to point out, either the motives to the resolutions formed, or the proper character of the principal actors in this scene of obscurity. I think myself happy when Polybius, or Plutarch, lend me their assistance. In my account of Alexander's successors, whose transactions are, perhaps, the most complicated and perplexed part of ancient history, Usher, Prideaux, and Vaillant, will be my usual guides; and, on many occasions, I shall only transcribe from Prideaux; but, with all these aids, I shall not promise to throw so much light upon this history as I could desire.

After a war of more than twenty years, the number of the principal competitors was reduced to four; Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucus, and Lysimachus; the empire of Alexander was divided into four fixed kingdoms, agreeably to the prediction of Daniel, by a solemn treaty concluded between the parties. Three of these kingdoms, Egypt, Macedonia, Syria, or Asia, will have a regular succession of monarchs, sufficiently clear and distinct; but the fourth, which comprehended Thrace, with part of the Lesser Asia, and some neighbouring provinces, will suffer a number of variations.

As the kingdom of Egypt was that which was subject to the fewest changes, because Ptolemy, who was established there as governor, at the death of Alexander, retained the possession of it ever after, and left it to his posterity: we shall, therefore, consider this prince as the basis of our chronology, and our several epochas shall be fixed from him.

The fourth volume contains the events for the space of one hundred and twenty years, under the first four kings of Egypt, viz. Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, who reigned thirty-eight years; Ptolemy Philadelphus, who reigned forty; Ptolemy Euergetes, who reigned twenty-five; and Ptolemy Philopator, whose reign continued seventeen.

In order to throw some light upon the history contained therein, I shall, in the first place, give the principal events of it, in a chronological abridgement.

Introductory to which, I must desire the reader to accompany me in some reflections, which have not escaped Monsieur Bossuet, with relation to Alexander. This prince, who was the most renowned and illustrious conqueror in all history, was the last monarch of his race. Macedonia, his ancient kingdom, which his ancestors had governed for so many ages, was invaded from all quarters, as a vacant succession; and after it had long been a prey to the strongest, it was at last transferred to another family. If Alexander had continued peaceably in Macedonia, the grandeur of his empire would not have excited the ambition of his captains; and he might have transmitted the sceptre of his progenitors to his own descendants; but, as he had not prescribed any bounds to his power, he was instrumental in the destruction of his house, and we shall behold the extermination of his family, without the least remaining traces of them in history. His conquests occasioned a vast effusion of blood, and furnished his captains with a pretext for murdering one another. These were the effects that flowed from the boasted bravery of Alexander, or rather from that brutality, which, under the specious names of ambition and glory, spread desolation, and carried fire and sword through whole provinces, without the least provocation, and shed the blood of multitudes who had never injured him.

We are not to imagine, however, that Providence abandoned these events to chance; but, as it was then preparing all things for the approaching appearance of the Messiah, it was vigilant to unite all the nations that were to be first enlightened with the Gospel, by the use of one and the same language, which was that of Greece: and the same Providence made it necessary for them to learn this foreign tongue, by subjecting them to such masters as spoke no other. The Deity, therefore, by the agency of this language, which became more common and universal than any other, facilitated the preaching of the apostles, and rendered it more uniform.

The partition of the empire of Alexander the Great, among the generals of that prince, immediately after his death, did not subsist for any length of time, and hardly took place, if we except Egypt, where Ptolemy had first established himself, and on the throne of which he always maintained himself without acknowledging any superior.

[^258] It was not till after the battle of Ipsus in Phrygia, wherein Antigonus, and his son Demetrius, surnamed Poliorcetes, were defeated, and the former lost his life, that this partition was fully regulated and fixed. The empire of Alexander was then divided into four kingdoms, by a solemn treaty, as had been foretold by Daniel. Ptolemy had Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Cœlesyria, and Palestine. Cassander, the son of Antipater, obtained Macedonia and Greece. Lysimachus acquired Thrace, Bithynia, and some other provinces on the other side of the Hellespont and the Bosphorus. And Seleucus had Syria, and all that part of the greater Asia which extended to the other side of the Euphrates, and as far as the river Indus.

[^258: A.M. 3704. Ant. J.C. 300.]

Of these four kingdoms, those of Egypt and Syria subsisted, almost without any interruption, in the same families, through a long succession of princes. The kingdom of Macedonia had several masters of different families successively. That of Thrace was at last divided into several branches, and no longer constituted one entire body, by which means all traces of regular succession ceased to subsist.

I. The Kingdom of Egypt.

The kingdom of Egypt had fourteen monarchs, including Cleopatra, after whose death, those dominions became a province of the Roman empire. All these princes had the common name of Ptolemy, but each of them was likewise distinguished by a peculiar surname. They had also the appellation of Lagides, from Lagus the father of that Ptolemy who reigned the first in Egypt. The fourth and fifth volumes contain the histories of six of these kings, and I shall give their names a place here, with the duration of their reigns, the first of which commenced immediately upon the death of Alexander the Great.

[^259] Ptolemy Soter. He reigned thirty-eight years and some months.

[^259: A.M. 3680.]

[^260] Ptolemy Philadelphus. He reigned forty years including the two years of his reign in the lifetime of his father.

[^260: A.M. 3718.]

[^261] Ptolemy Euergetes, twenty-five years.

[^261: 3758.]

[^262] Ptolemy Philopator, seventeen.

[^262: 3783.]

[^263] Ptolemy Epiphanes, twenty-four.

[^263: 3800.]

[^264] Ptolemy Philometor, thirty-four.

[^264: 3824.]

II. The Kingdom of Syria.

The kingdom of Syria had twenty-seven kings; which makes it evident, that their reigns were often very short: and indeed several of these princes waded to the throne through the blood of their predecessors.

They are usually called the Seleucidæ, from Seleucus, who reigned the first in Syria. History reckons up six kings of this name, and thirteen who are called by that of Antiochus; but they are all distinguished by different surnames. Others of them assumed different names, and the last, Antiochus XIII., was surnamed Epiphanes, Asiaticus, and Commagenus. In his reign Pompey reduced Syria into a Roman province, after it had been governed by kings for the space of two hundred and fifty years, according to Eusebius.

The kings of Syria, the transactions of whose reigns are contained in the fourth and fifth volumes, are eight in number.

[^265] Seleucus Nicator. He reigned twenty years.

[^265: A.M. 3704.]

[^266] Antiochus Soter, nineteen.

[^266: 3724.]

[^267] Antiochus Theos, fifteen.

[^267: 3743.]

[^268] Seleucus Callinicus, twenty.

[^268: 3758.]

[^269] Seleucus Ceraunus, three.

[^269: 3778.]

[^270] Antiochus the Great, thirty-six.

[^270: 3781.]

[^271] Seleucus Philopator, twelve.

[^271: 3817.]

[^272] Antiochus Epiphanes, brother of Seleucus Philopator, eleven.

[^272: 3829.]

III. The Kingdom of Macedonia.

[^273] Macedonia frequently changed its masters, after the solemn partition had been made between the four princes. Cassander died three or four years after that partition, and left three sons. Philip, the eldest, died shortly after his father. The other two contended for the crown without enjoying it, both dying soon after without issue.

[^273: A.M. 3707.]

[^274] Demetrius Poliorcetes, Pyrrhus, and Lysimachus, made themselves masters of all, or the greatest part of Macedonia; sometimes in conjunction, and at other times separately.

[^274: 3710.]

[^275] After the death of Lysimachus, Seleucus possessed himself of Macedonia, but did not long enjoy it.

[^275: A.M. 3723.]

[^276] Ptolemy Ceraunus having slain the preceding prince, seized the kingdom, and possessed it but a very short time, having lost his life in a battle with the Gauls, who had made an irruption into that country.

[^276: 3724.]

[^277] Sosthenes, who defeated the Gauls, reigned but a short time in Macedonia.

[^277: 3726.]

[^278] Antigonus Gonatas, the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, at length obtained the peaceable possession of the kingdom of Macedonia, and transmitted it to his descendants, after he had reigned thirty-four years.

[^278: 3728.]

[^279] He was succeeded by his son Demetrius, who reigned ten years, and then died, leaving a son named Philip, who was but two years old.

[^279: 3762.]

[^280] Antigonus Doson reigned twelve years in the quality of guardian to the young prince.

[^280: 3772.]

[^281] Philip, after the death of Antigonus, ascended the throne at the age of fourteen years, and reigned something more than forty.

[^281: 3784.]

[^282] His son Perseus succeeded him, and reigned about eleven years. He was defeated and taken prisoner by Paulus Emilius; and Macedonia, in consequence of that victory, was added to the provinces of the Roman empire.

[^282: 3824.]

IV. The Kingdom of Thrace, and Bithynia, &c.

This fourth kingdom, composed of several separate provinces very remote from one another, had not any succession of princes, and did not long subsist in its first condition; Lysimachus, who first obtained it, having been killed in a battle after a reign of twenty years, and all his family being exterminated by assassinations, his dominions were dismembered, and no longer constituted one kingdom.

Beside the provinces which were divided among the captains of Alexander, there were others which had been either formed before, or were then erected into different states, independent of the Greeks, whose power greatly increased in process of time.

Kings of Bithynia

[^283] Whilst Alexander was extending his conquests in the east, Zypethes had laid the foundations of the kingdom of Bithynia. It is not certain who this Zypethes was, unless that Pausanias,[^284] from his name, conjectures that he was a Thracian. His successors, however, are better known.

[^283: 3686.]

[^284: Lib. v. p. 310.—Trans.]

[^285] Nicomedes I. This prince invited the Gauls to assist him against his brother, with whom he was engaged in a war.

[^285: A.M. 3726.]

Prusias I.

[^286] Prusias II., surnamed the Hunter, in whose court Hannibal took refuge, and assisted him with his counsels, in his war against Eumenes II. king of Pergamus.

[^286: 3820.]

Nicomedes II. was killed by his son Socrates.

Nicomedes III. was assisted by the Romans in his wars with Mithridates, and bequeathed to them at his death the kingdom of Bithynia, as a testimonial of his gratitude to them; by which means these territories became a Roman province.

Kings of Pergamus

This kingdom at first comprehended only one of the smallest provinces of Mysia, on the coast of the Ægean sea, over-against the island of Lesbos.

[^287] It was founded by Philetærus, an eunuch, who had served under Docimus, a commander of the troops of Antigonus. Lysimachus confided to him the treasures he had deposited in the castle of the city of Pergamus, and he became master both of these and the city after the death of that prince. He governed this little sovereignty for the space of twenty years, and then left it to Eumenes his nephew.

[^287: A.M. 3721. Ant. J.C. 283.]

[^288] Eumenes I. enlarged his principality, by the addition of several cities, which he took from the kings of Syria, having defeated Antiochus, the son of Seleucus, in a battle. He reigned twenty-two years.

[^288: A.M. 3741. Ant. J.C. 263.]

[^289] He was succeeded by Attalus I., his cousin-german, who assumed the title of king, after he had conquered the Galatians; and transmitted it to his posterity, who enjoyed it to the third generation. He assisted the Romans in their war with Philip, and died after a reign of forty-three years. He left four sons.

[^289: A.M. 3763. Ant. J.C. 241.]

[^290] His successor was Eumenes II., his eldest son, who founded the famous library of Pergamus. He reigned thirty-nine years, and left the crown to his brother Attalus, in the quality of guardian to one of his sons, whom he had by Stratonice, the sister of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia. The Romans enlarged his dominions considerably, after the victory they obtained over Antiochus the Great.

[^290: A.M. 3807. Ant. J.C. 197.]

[^291] Attalus II. espoused Stratonice his brother's widow, and took extraordinary care of his nephew, to whom he left the crown, after he had worn it twenty-one years.

[^291: A.M. 3845. Ant. J.C. 159.]

[^292] Attalus III., surnamed Philometor, distinguished himself by his barbarous and extravagant conduct. He died after he had reigned five years, and bequeathed his riches and dominions to the Romans.

[^292: A.M. 3866. Ant. J.C. 138.]

[^293] Aristonicus, who claimed the succession, endeavoured to defend his pretensions against the Romans; but the kingdom of Pergamus was reduced after a war of four years, into a Roman province.

[^293: A.M. 3871. Ant. J.C. 133.]

Kings of Pontus.

[^294] The kingdom of Pontus in Asia Minor was anciently dismembered from the monarchy of Persia, by Darius the son of Hystaspes, in favour of Artabazus, who is said, by some historians, to have been the son of one of those Persian lords who conspired against the Magi.

[^294: A.M. 3490. Ant. J.C. 514.]

Pontus is a region of Asia Minor, situated partly along the coast of the Euxine sea (Pontus Euxinus), from which it derives its name. It extends from the river Halys, as far as Colchis. Several princes reigned in that country since Artabazus.

[^295] The sixth monarch was Mithridates I., who is properly considered as the founder of the kingdom of Pontus, and his name was assumed by the generality of his successors.

[^295: A.M. 3600. Ant. J.C. 404.]

[^296] He was succeeded by his son Ariobarzanes, who had governed Phrygia under Artaxerxes Mnemon: he reigned twenty-six years.

[^296: A.M. 3641. Ant. J.C. 363.]

[^297] His successor was Mithridates II. Antigonus suspecting, in consequence of a dream, that he favoured Cassander, had determined to destroy him, but he eluded the danger by flight. This prince was called Κτισὴς, or the Founder, and reigned thirty-five years.

[^297: A.M. 3667. Ant. J.C. 337.]

[^298] Mithridates III., who succeeded him, added Cappadocia and Paphlagonia to his dominions, and reigned thirty-six years.

[^298: A.M. 3702. Ant. J.C. 302.]

After the reigns of two other kings, Mithridates IV., the great grandfather of Mithridates the Great, ascended the throne, and espoused a daughter of Seleucus Callinicus, king of Syria, by whom he had Laodice, who was married to Antiochus the Great.

[^299] He was succeeded by his son Pharnaces, who had some disagreement with the kings of Pergamus. He made himself master of Sinope, which afterwards became the capital of the kingdom of Pontus.

[^299: A.M. 3819. Ant. J.C. 185.]

After him reigned Mithridates V., surnamed Euergetes, the first who was called the friend of the Romans, because he had assisted them against the Carthaginians in the third Punic war.

[^300] He was succeeded by his son Mithridates VI., surnamed Eupator. This is the great Mithridates who sustained so long a war with the Romans: he reigned sixty-six years.

[^300: A.M. 3880. Ant. J.C. 124.]

Kings of Cappadocia.

Strabo informs us,[^301] that Cappadocia was divided into two satrapies, or governments, under the Persians, as it also was under the Macedonians. The maritime part of Cappadocia formed the kingdom of Pontus: the other tracts constituted Cappadocia properly so called, or Cappadocia Major, which extended along mount Taurus, and to a great distance beyond it.

[^301: Strab. l. xii. p. 534.]

[^302] When Alexander's captains divided the provinces of his empire among themselves, Cappadocia was governed by a prince named Ariarathes. Perdiccas attacked and defeated him, after which he caused him to be slain.

[^302: A.M. 3682. Ant. J.C. 322.]

His son Ariarathes re-entered the kingdom of his father some time after this event, and established himself so effectually, that he left it to his posterity.

The generality of his successors assumed the same name, and will have their place in the series of the history.

Cappadocia, after the death of Archelaus, the last of its kings, became a province of the Roman empire, as the rest of Asia also did much about the same time.

Kings of Armenia.

Armenia, a vast country of Asia, extending on each side of the Euphrates, was conquered by the Persians; after which it was transferred, with the rest of the empire, to the Macedonians, and at last fell to the share of the Romans. It was governed for a great length of time by its own kings, the most considerable of whom was Tigranes, who espoused the daughter of the great Mithridates king of Pontus, and was also engaged in a long war with the Romans. This kingdom supported itself many years, between the Roman and Parthian empires, sometimes depending on the one, and sometimes on the other, till at last the Romans became its masters.

Kings of Epirus.

Epirus is a province of Greece, separated from Thessaly and Macedonia by mount Pindus. The most powerful people of this country were the Molossians.

The kings of Epirus pretended to derive their descent from Pyrrhus the son of Achilles, who established himself in that country, and called themselves Æacides, from Æacus the grandfather of Achilles.

The genealogy of the latter kings, who were the only sovereigns of this country of whom any accounts remain, is variously related by authors, and consequently must be doubtful and obscure.[^303]

[^303: Diod. l. xvi. p. 465. Justin, l. viii. c. 6. Plut. in Pyrrho.]

Arymbas ascended the throne, after a long succession of kings; and as he was then very young, the states of Epirus, who were sensible that the welfare of the people depends on the proper education of their princes, sent him to Athens, which was the residence and centre of all the arts and sciences, in order to cultivate, in that excellent school, such knowledge as was necessary to form the mind of a king. He there learned the art of reigning, and as he surpassed all his ancestors in ability and knowledge, he was in consequence infinitely more esteemed and beloved by his people than they had been.[^304] When he returned from Athens, he made laws, established a senate and magistracy, and regulated the form of the government.

[^304: Quanto doctior majoribus, tanto et gratioi populo fuit. Justin, l. xvii. c. 3.—Trans.]

Neoptolemus, whose daughter Olympias had espoused Philip king of Macedon, attained an equal share in the regal government with Arymbas his elder brother, by the influence of his son-in-law. After the death of Arymbas, Æacides his son ought to have been his successor; but Philip had still sufficient influence to procure his expulsion from the kingdom by the Molossians, who established Alexander the son of Neoptolemus sole monarch of Epirus.

Alexander espoused Cleopatra the daughter of Philip, and marched with an army into Italy, where he lost his life in the country of the Brutians.

Æacides then ascended the throne, and reigned without any associate in Epirus. He espoused Phthia, the daughter of Menon the Thessalian, by whom he had two daughters, Deidamia and Troias, and one son, the celebrated Pyrrhus.

As he was marching to the assistance of Olympias, his troops mutinied against him, condemned him to exile, and slaughtered most of his friends. Pyrrhus, who was then an infant, happily escaped this massacre.

Neoptolemus, a prince of the blood, but whose particular extraction is little known, was placed on the throne by the people of Epirus.

Pyrrhus, being recalled by his subjects at the age of twelve years, first shared the sovereignty with Neoptolemus; but having afterwards divested him of his dignity, he reigned alone.

[^305] This history will treat of the various adventures of this prince. He died in the city of Argos, in an attack to make himself master of it.

[^305: A.M. 3733. Ant. J.C. 271.]

Helenus his son reigned after him for some time in Epirus, which was afterwards united to the Roman empire.

Tyrants of Heraclea.

Heraclea is a city of Pontus, anciently founded by the Bœotians, who sent a colony into that country by the order of an oracle.

When the Athenians, having conquered the Persians, had imposed a tribute on the cities of Greece and Asia Minor, for the fitting out and support of a fleet intended for the defence of the common liberty, the inhabitants of Heraclea, in consequence of their attachment to the Persians, were the only people who refused to acquiesce in so just a contribution.[^306] Lamachus was therefore sent against them, and he ravaged their territories; but a violent tempest having destroyed his whole fleet, he beheld himself abandoned to the mercy of that people, whose innate ferocity might naturally have been increased by the severe treatment they had lately received. But they had recourse to no other vengeance than kindness;[^307] they furnished him with provisions and troops for his return, and were willing to consider the depredations which had been committed in their country as advantageous to them, if at that price they could convert the enmity of the Athenians into friendship.

[^306: Justin, l. xvi. c. 3-5. Diod. l. xv. p. 390.]

[^307: Heraclienses honestiorem beneficii, quàm ultionis occasionem rati, instructos commeatibus auxiliisque aimittunt; bene agrorum suorum populationem impensam existimantes, si, quos hostes habuerant, amicos reddidissent. Justin.—Trans.]

[^308] Some time after this event, the populace of Heraclea excited a violent commotion against the rich citizens and senators, who having implored assistance to no effect, first from Timotheus the Athenian, and afterwards from Epaminondas the Theban, were necessitated to recall Clearchus, a senator, to their defence, whom themselves had banished; but his exile had neither improved his morals nor rendered him a better citizen than he was before. He therefore made the troubles, in which he found the city involved, subservient to his design of subjecting it to his own power. With this view he openly declared for the people, caused himself to be invested with the highest office in the magistracy, and assumed a sovereign authority in a short time. Being thus become a professed tyrant, there were no kinds of violence to which he had not recourse against the rich, and the senators, to satiate his avarice and cruelty. He proposed for his model Dionysius the Tyrant, who had established his power over the Syracusans at the same time.

[^308: A.M. 3640. Ant. J.C. 364.]

After a hard and inhuman servitude of twelve years, two young citizens, who were Plato's disciples, and had been instructed in his maxims, formed a conspiracy against Clearchus, and slew him; but, though they delivered their country from the tyrant, the tyranny still subsisted.

[^309] Timotheus, the son of Clearchus, assumed his place, and pursued his conduct for the space of fifteen years.[^310]

[^309: A.M. 3652. Ant. J.C. 352.]

[^310: l. xvi. p. 435.]

[^311] He was succeeded by his brother Dionysius, who was in danger of being dispossessed of his authority by Perdiccas; but as this last was soon destroyed, Dionysius contracted a friendship with Antigonus, whom he assisted against Ptolemy in the Cyprian war.[^312]

[^311: A.M. 3667. Ant. J.C. 337.]

[^312: Ibid. p. 478.]

He espoused Amastris, the widow of Craterus, and daughter of Oxiathres, the brother of Darius. This alliance inspired him with so much courage, that he assumed the title of king, and enlarged his dominions by the addition of several places, which he seized, on the confines of Heraclea.

[^313] He died two or three years before the battle of Ipsus, after a reign of thirty-three years, leaving two sons and a daughter under the tutelage and regency of Amastris.

[^313: A.M. 3700. Ant. J.C. 304.]

This princess was rendered happy in her administration, by the affection Antigonus entertained for her. She founded a city, and called it by her own name; into which she transplanted the inhabitants of three other cities, and espoused Lysimachus, after the death of Antigonus.[^314]

[^314: Diod. l. xx. p. 833.]

Kings of Syracuse.

[^315] Hiero, and his son Hieronymus, reigned at Syracuse; the first fifty-four years, the second but one year.

[^315: A.M. 3735. Ant. J.C. 269.]

[^316] Syracuse recovered its liberty by the death of the last, but continued in the interest of the Carthaginians, which Hieronymus had caused it to espouse.[^317] His conduct obliged Marcellus to form the siege of that city, which he took the following year. I shall enlarge upon the history of these two kings in another place.

[^316: A.M. 3789. Ant. J.C. 215.]

[^317: A.M. 3791. Ant. J.C. 213.]

Other Kings.

Several kings likewise reigned in the Cimmerian Bosphorus, as also in Thrace, Cyrene in Africa, Paphlagonia, Colchis, Iberia, Albania, and a variety of other places; but their history is very uncertain, and their successions have but little regularity.

These circumstances are very different with respect to the kingdom of the Parthians, who formed themselves, as we shall see in the sequel, into such a powerful monarchy, as became formidable even to the Roman empire. That of the Bactrians received its original about the same period: I shall treat of each in their proper places.

Catalogue of the Editions of the principal Greek Authors cited in this Work.

Herodotus. Francof. An. 1608.

Thucydides. Apud Henricum Stephanum, An. 1588.

Xenophon. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, apud Societatem Græcarum Editionum, An. 1625.

Polybius. Parisiis, An. 1609.

Diodorus Siculus. Hanoviæ, Typis Wechelianis, An 1604.

Plutarchus. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, apud Societatem Græcanum Editionum, An. 1624.

Strabo. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, Typis regiis, An. 1620.

Athenæus. Lugdani, An. 1612.

Pausanias. Hanoviæ, Typis Wechelianis, An. 1613.

Appianus Alexander. Apud Henric. Stephan. An. 1592.

Plato. Ex novâ Joannis Serrani interpretatione. Apud Henricum Stephanum, An. 1578.

Aristoteles. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, apud Societatem Græcarum Editionum, An. 1619.

Isocrates. Apud Paulum Stephanum, An. 1604.

Diogenes Laertius. Apud Henricum Stepnanum, An. 1594.

Demosthenes. Francof. An. 1604.

Arrianus. Lugd. Batav. An. 1704.

Book The First. The Ancient History Of The Egyptians.

Part The First. Description of Egypt: with an Account of whatever is most curious and remarkable in that Country.

Egypt comprehended anciently, within limits of no very great extent, a prodigious number of cities,[^318] and an incredible multitude of inhabitants.

[^318: It is related, that under Amasis there were twenty thousand inhabited cities in Egypt. Herod 1. ii c. 177.—Trans.]

It is bounded on the east by the Red-Sea and the Isthmus of Suez; on the south by Ethiopia, on the west by Libya, and on the north by the Mediterranean. The Nile runs from south to north, through the whole country, about two hundred leagues in length. This country is enclosed on each side with a ridge of mountains, which very often leave, between the foot of the hills and the river Nile, a tract of ground, of not above half a day's journey in length,[^319] and sometimes less.

[^319: A day's journey is twenty-four eastern, or thirty-three English miles and a quarter.—Trans.]

On the west side, the plain grows wider in some places, and extends to twenty-five or thirty leagues. The greatest breadth of Egypt is from Alexandria to Damietta, being about fifty leagues.

Ancient Egypt may be divided into three principal parts: Upper Egypt, otherwise called Thebais, which was the most southern part; Middle Egypt, or Heptanomis, so called from the seven Nomi or districts it contained; Lower Egypt, which included what the Greeks call Delta, and all the country as far as the Red-Sea, and along the Mediterranean to Rhinocolura, or Mount Casius. Under Sesostris, all Egypt became one kingdom, and was divided into thirty-six governments, or Nomi; ten in Thebais, ten in Delta, and sixteen in the country between both.[^320]

[^320: Strabo, 1 xvii. p. 787.]

The cities of Syene and Elephantina divided Egypt from Ethiopia; and in the days of Augustus were the boundaries of the Roman empire: Claustra olim Romani Imperii, Tacit. Annal. Lib. ii. cap. 61.

Chapter I. Thebais.

Thebes, from whence Thebais had its name, might vie with the noblest cities in the universe. Its hundred gates, celebrated by Homer,[^321] are universally known; and acquired it the surname of Hecatompylos, to distinguish it from the other Thebes in Bœotia. Its population was proportionate to its extent; and, according to History, it could send out at once two hundred chariots, and ten thousand fighting men at each of its gates.[^322] The Greeks and Romans have celebrated its magnificence and grandeur, though they saw it only in its ruins; so august were the remains of this city.[^323]

[^321: Hom. Il. i. ver. 381.]

[^322: Strab. 1. xvii. p. 816.]

[^323: Tacit. Ann. 1. ii. c. 60.]

In the Thebaid, now called Said, have been discovered temples and palaces which are still almost entire, adorned with innumerable columns and statues.[^324] One palace especially is admired, the remains whereof seem to have existed purely to eclipse the glory of the most pompous edifices. Four walks extending farther than the eye can see, and bounded on each side with sphinxes, composed of materials as rare and extraordinary as their size is remarkable, serve as avenues to four porticos, whose height is amazing to behold. And even they who have given us the description of this wonderful edifice, had not time to go round it; and are not sure that they saw above half: however, what they had a sight of was astonishing. A hall, which, in all appearance, stood in the middle of this stately palace, was supported by a hundred-and-twenty pillars, six fathoms round, of a proportionable height, and intermixed with obelisks, which so many ages have not been able to demolish. Painting had displayed all her art and magnificence in this edifice. The colours themselves, which soonest feel the injury of time, still remain amidst the ruins of this wonderful structure, and preserve their beauty and lustre; so happily could the Egyptians imprint a character of immortality on all their works. Strabo, who was on the spot, describes a temple he saw in Egypt, very much resembling that of which I have been speaking.[^325]

[^324: Thevenot's Travels.]

[^325: Lib. xvii. p. 805.]

The same author, describing the curiosities of Thebais,[^326] speaks of a very famous statue of Memnon, the remains whereof he had seen. It is said that this statue, when the beams of the rising sun first shone upon it in the morning, uttered an articulate sound.[^327] And, indeed, Strabo himself was an ear-witness of this; but then he doubts whether the sound came from the statue.

[^326: P. 816.]

[^327: Germanicus alus quoque miraculis intendit animum, quorum præcipua fuere Memnonis saxea effigies, ubi radiis solis icta est, vocalem sonum reddens, &c. Tacit Annal. 1. ii. c. 61.—Trans.]

Chapter II. Middle Egypt, or Heptanomis.

Memphis was the capital of this part of Egypt. In this city were to be seen many stately temples, among them that of the god Apis, who was honoured here after a peculiar manner. I shall speak of it hereafter, as well as of the pyramids which stood in the neighbourhood of this place, and rendered it so famous. Memphis was situated on the west side of the Nile.

Grand Cairo, which seems to have succeeded Memphis, is built on the other side of that river.[^328] The castle of Cairo is one of the greatest curiosities in Egypt. It stands on a hill without the city, has a rock for its foundation, and is surrounded with walls of a vast height and solidity. You go up to the castle by a way hewn out of the rock, and which is so easy of ascent, that loaded horses and camels get up without difficulty. The greatest rarity in this castle is Joseph's well, so called, either because the Egyptians are pleased with ascribing what is most remarkable among them to that great man, or because such a tradition has been preserved in the country. This is a proof, at least, that the work in question is very ancient; and it is certainly worthy the magnificence of the most powerful kings of Egypt. This well has, as it were, two stories, cut out of the solid rock to a prodigious depth. The descent to the reservoir of water, between the two wells, is by a staircase seven or eight feet broad, consisting of two hundred and twenty steps, and so contrived, that the oxen employed to throw up the water, go down with all imaginable ease, the descent being scarcely perceptible. The well is supplied from a spring, which is almost the only one in the whole country. The oxen are continually turning a wheel with a rope, to which a number of buckets are fastened. The water thus drawn from the first and lower-most well, is conveyed by a little canal into a reservoir, which forms the second well; from whence it is drawn to the top in the same manner, and then conveyed by pipes to all parts of the castle. As this well is supposed by the inhabitants of the country to be of great antiquity, and has, indeed, much of the antique manner of the Egyptians, I thought it might deserve a place among the curiosities of ancient Egypt.

[^328: Thevenot.]

Strabo speaks of a similar engine, which, by wheels and pulleys, threw up the water of the Nile to the top of a very high hill; with this difference, that, instead of oxen, a hundred and fifty slaves were employed to turn these wheels.[^329]

[^329: L. xvii. p. 807.]

The part of Egypt of which we now speak, is famous for several rarities, each of which deserves a particular examination. I shall mention only the principal, such as the obelisks, the pyramids, the labyrinth, the lake of Mœris, and the Nile.

Sect. I. The Obelisks.—Egypt seemed to place its chief glory in raising monuments for posterity. Its obelisks form at this day, on account of their beauty as well as height, the principal ornament of Rome; and the Roman power, despairing to equal the Egyptians, thought it honour enough to borrow the monuments of their kings.

An obelisk is a quadrangular, taper, high spire or pyramid, raised perpendicularly, and terminating in a point, to serve as an ornament to some open square; and is very often covered with inscriptions or hieroglyphics, that is, with mystical characters or symbols used by the Egyptians to conceal and disguise their sacred things, and the mysteries of their theology.

Sesostris erected in the city of Heliopolis two obelisks of extreme hard stone, brought from the quarries of Syene, at the extremity of Egypt.[^330] They were each one hundred-and-twenty cubits high, that is, thirty fathoms, or one hundred and eighty feet.[^331] The emperor Augustus, having made Egypt a province of the empire, caused these two obelisks to be transported to Rome, one whereof was afterwards broken to pieces. He dared not venture to make the same attempt upon a third, which was of a monstrous size.[^332] It was made in the reign of Rameses: it is said that twenty thousand men were employed in the cutting of it. Constantius, more daring than Augustus, caused it to be removed to Rome. Two of these obelisks are still to be seen there, as well as another a hundred cubits, or twenty-five fathoms high, and eight cubits, or two fathoms, in diameter. Caius Cæsar had it brought from Egypt in a ship of so odd a form, that, according to Pliny, the like had never been seen.[^333]

[^330: Diod. lib. i. p. 37.]

[^331: It is proper to observe, once for all, that an Egyptian cubit, according to Mr. Greaves, was one foot nine inches, and about 3/4 of our measure.—Trans.]

[^332: Plin. l. xxxvi. c. 8, 9.]

[^333: Plin. l. xxxvi c. 9.]

Every part of Egypt abounded with this kind of obelisks; they were for the most part cut in the quarries of Upper Egypt, where some are now to be seen half finished. But the most wonderful circumstance is, that the ancient Egyptians should have had the art and contrivance to dig even in the very quarry a canal, through which the water of the Nile ran in the time of its inundation; from whence they afterwards raised up the columns, obelisks, and statues on rafts,[^334] proportioned to their weight, in order to convey them into Lower Egypt. And as the country was intersected every where with canals, there were few places to which those huge bodies might not be carried with ease; although their weight would have broken every other kind of engine.

[^334: Rafts are pieces of flat timber put together to carry goods on rivers.—Trans.]

Sect. II. The Pyramids.—A Pyramid is a solid or hollow body, having a large, and generally a square base, and terminating in a point.[^335]

[^335: Herod. l. ii c. 124, &c. Diod. l. i. p. 39-41. Plin. lib. xxxvi. c. 12.]

There were three pyramids in Egypt more famous than the rest, one whereof was justly ranked among the seven wonders of the world; they stood not very far from the city of Memphis. I shall take notice here only of the largest of the three. This pyramid, like the rest, was built on a rock, having a square base, cut on the outside as so many steps, and decreasing gradually quite to the summit. It was built with stones of a prodigious size, the least of which were thirty feet, wrought with wonderful art, and covered with hieroglyphics. According to several ancient authors, each side was eight hundred feet broad, and as many high. The summit of the pyramid, which to those who viewed it from below seemed a point, was a fine platform, composed of ten or twelve massy stones, and each side of that platform sixteen or eighteen feet long.

M. de Chazelles, of the Academy of Sciences, who went purposely to the spot in 1693, gives us the following dimensions:

The side of the square base 110 fathoms; the fronts are equilateral triangles, and therefore the superficies of the base is 12100 square fathoms; the perpendicular height, 77-3/4 fathoms; the solid contents, 313590 cubical fathoms. A hundred thousand men were constantly employed about this work, and were relieved every three months by the same number. Ten complete years were spent in hewing out the stones, either in Arabia or Ethiopia, and in conveying them to Egypt; and twenty years more in building this immense edifice, the inside of which contained numberless rooms and apartments. There were expressed on the pyramid, in Egyptian characters, the sums it cost only for garlic, leeks, onions, and other vegetables of this description, for the workmen; and the whole amounted to sixteen hundred talents of silver,[^336] that is, four millions five hundred thousand French livres; from whence it was easy to conjecture what a vast sum the whole expense must have amounted to.

[^336: About 200,000l. sterl.—Trans.]

Such were the famous Egyptian pyramids, which by their figure, as well as size, have triumphed over the injuries of time and the Barbarians. But what efforts soever men may make, their nothingness will always appear. These pyramids were tombs; and there is still to be seen, in the middle of the largest, an empty sepulchre, cut out of one entire stone, about three feet deep and broad, and a little above six feet long.[^337] Thus all this bustle, all this expense, and all the labours of so many thousand men for so many years, ended in procuring for a prince, in this vast and almost boundless pile of building, a little vault six feet in length. Besides, the kings who built these pyramids, had it not in their power to be buried in them; and so did not enjoy the sepulchre they had built. The public hatred which they incurred, by reason of their unheard-of cruelties to their subjects, in laying such heavy tasks upon them, occasioned their being interred in some obscure place, to prevent their bodies from being exposed to the fury and vengeance of the populace.

[^337: Strabo mentions the sepulchre, lib. xvii. p. 808.—Trans.]

This last circumstance, which historians have taken particular notice of, teaches us what judgment we ought to pass on these edifices, so much boasted of by the ancients.[^338] It is but just to remark and esteem the noble genius which the Egyptians had for architecture; a genius that prompted them from the earliest times, and before they could have any models to imitate, to aim in all things at the grand and magnificent; and to be intent on real beauties, without deviating in the least from a noble simplicity, in which the highest perfection of the art consists. But what idea ought we to form of those princes, who considered as something grand, the raising by a multitude of hands, and by the help of money, immense structures, with the sole view of rendering their names immortal; and who did not scruple to destroy thousands of their subjects to satisfy their vain glory! They differed very much from the Romans, who sought to immortalize themselves by works of a magnificent kind, but, at the same time, of public utility.

[^338: Diod. lib. i. p. 40.]

Pliny gives us, in few words,[^339] a just idea of these pyramids, when he calls them a foolish and useless ostentation of the wealth of the Egyptian kings; Regum pecuniæ otiosa ac stulta ostentatio. And adds, that by a just punishment their memory is buried in oblivion; the historians not agreeing among themselves about the names of those who first raised those vain monuments: Inter eos non constat à quibus factæ sint, justissimo casu obliteratis tantæ vanitatis auctoribus. In a word, according to the judicious remark of Diodorus, the industry of the architects of those pyramids is no less valuable and praiseworthy, than the design of the Egyptian kings is contemptible and ridiculous.

[^339: Lib. xxxvi. c. 12.]

But what we should most admire in these ancient monuments, is, the true and standing evidence they give of the skill of the Egyptians in astronomy; that is, in a science which seems incapable of being brought to perfection, but by a long series of years, and a great number of observations. M. de Chazelles, when he measured the great pyramid in question, found that the four sides of it were turned exactly to the four quarters of the world; and, consequently, showed the true meridian of that place. Now, as so exact a situation was, in all probability, purposely pitched upon by those who piled up this huge mass of stones, above three thousand years ago, it follows, that during so long a space of time, there has been no alteration in the heavens in that respect, or (which amounts to the same thing) in the poles of the earth or the meridians. This is M. de Fontenelle's remark in his eulogium of M. de Chazelles.

Sect. III. The Labyrinth.—What has been said concerning the judgment we ought to form of the pyramids, may also be applied to the labyrinth, which Herodotus, who saw it, assures us, was still more surprising than the pyramids.[^340] It was built at the southern extremity of the lake of Mœris, whereof mention will be made presently, near the town of Crocodiles, the same with Arsinoë. It was not so much one single palace, as a magnificent pile composed of twelve palaces, regularly disposed, which had a communication with each other. Fifteen hundred rooms, interspersed with terraces, were ranged round twelve halls, and discovered no outlet to such as went to see them. There was the like number of buildings under ground. These subterraneous structures were designed for the burying-place of the kings, and also (who can speak this without confusion, and without deploring the blindness of man!) for keeping the sacred crocodiles, which a nation, so wise in other respects, worshipped as gods.

[^340: Herod. l. ii. c. 148. Diod. l. i. p. 42. Plin. l. xxxvi. c. 13. Strab. l. xvii. p. 811.]

In order to visit the rooms and halls of the labyrinth, it was necessary, as the reader will naturally suppose, for people to take the same precaution as Ariadne made Theseus use, when he was obliged to go and fight the Minotaur in the labyrinth of Crete. Virgil describes it in this manner:—

Ut quondam Cretâ fertur labyrinthus in altâ
Parietibus textum cæcis iter ancipitémque
Mille viis habuisse dolum, quà signa sequendi
Falleret indeprensus et irremeabilis error.[^341]
Híc labor ille domûs, et inextricabilis error.
Dædalus, ipse dolos tecti ambagésque resolvit,
Cæca regens filo vestigia.[^342]

And as the Cretan labyrinth of old,
With wand'ring ways, and many a winding fold,
Involv'd the weary feet without redress,
In a round error, which deny'd recess:
Not far from thence he grav'd the wond'rous maze;
A thousand doors, a thousand winding ways

[^341: Æneid, l. v. ver. 588, &c.]

[^342: l. vi. ver. 27, &c.]

Sect. IV. The Lake of Mœris.—The noblest and most wonderful of all the structures or works of the kings of Egypt, was the lake of Mœris: accordingly, Herodotus considers it as vastly superior to the pyramids and labyrinth.[^343] As Egypt was more or less fruitful in proportion to the inundations of the Nile; and as in these floods, the too great or too little rise of the waters was equally fatal to the lands, king Mœris, to prevent these two inconveniences, and to correct, as far as lay in his power, the irregularities of the Nile, thought proper to call art to the assistance of nature; and so caused the lake to be dug, which afterwards went by his name. This lake was in circumference about three thousand six hundred stadia, that is, about one hundred and eighty French leagues, and three hundred feet deep.[^344] Two pyramids, on each of which was placed a colossal statue, seated on a throne, raised their heads to the height of three hundred feet, in the midst of the lake, whilst their foundations took up the same space under the water; a proof that they were erected before the cavity was filled, and a demonstration that a lake of such vast extent was the work of man's hands, in one prince's reign. This is what several historians have related concerning the lake Mœris, on the testimony of the inhabitants of the country. And M. Bossuet, the bishop of Meaux, in his discourse on universal history, relates the whole as fact. For my part, I will confess that I do not see the least probability in it. Is it possible to conceive, that a lake of a hundred and eighty leagues in circumference, could have been dug in the reign of one prince? In what manner, and where, could the earth taken from it be conveyed? What should prompt the Egyptians to lose the surface of so much land? By what arts could they fill this vast tract with the superfluous waters of the Nile? Many other objections might be made. In my opinion, therefore, we ought to follow Pomponius Mela, an ancient geographer; especially as his account is confirmed by several modern travellers. According to that author, this lake is but twenty thousand paces; that is, seven or eight French leagues in circumference. Mœris, aliquando campus, nunc lacus, viginti millia passuum in circuitu patens.[^345]

[^343: Herod. l. ii. c. 140. Strab. l. xvii. p. 787. Diod. l. i p. 47. Plin. l. v. c. 9. Pomp. Mela, l. i.]

[^344: Vide Herod. et Diod. Pliny agrees almost with them.—Trans.]

[^345: Mela, l. i.]

This lake had a communication with the Nile, by a great canal, more than four leagues long,[^346] and fifty feet broad. Great sluices either opened or shut the canal and lake, as there was occasion.

[^346: Eighty-five stadia.—Trans.]

The charge of opening or shutting them amounted to fifty talents, that is, fifty thousand French crowns.[^347] The fishing of this lake brought the monarch immense sums; but its chief utility related to the overflowing of the Nile. When it rose too high, and was like to be attended with fatal consequences, the sluices were opened; and the waters, having a free passage into the lake, covered the lands no longer than was necessary to enrich them. On the contrary, when the inundation was too low, and threatened a famine, a sufficient quantity of water, by the help of drains, was let out of the lake, to water the lands. In this manner the irregularities of the Nile were corrected; and Strabo remarks, that, in his time, under Petronius, a governor of Egypt, when the inundation of the Nile was twelve cubits, a very great plenty ensued; and even when it rose but to eight cubits, the dearth was scarce felt in the country; doubtless because the waters of the lake made up for those of the inundation, by the help of canals and drains.

[^347: 11,250l. sterling.—Trans.]

Sect. V. The Inundations of the Nile.—The Nile is the greatest wonder of Egypt. As it seldom rains there, this river, which waters the whole country by its regular inundations, supplies that defect, by bringing, as a yearly tribute, the rains of other countries; which made a poet say ingeniously, “the Egyptian pastures, how great soever the drought may be, never implore Jupiter for rain:”

Te propter nullos tellus tua postulat imbres,
Arida nec pluvio supplicat herba Jovi.[^348]

[^348: Seneca (Nat. Quæst. l. iv. c. 2.) ascribes these verses to Ovid, but they are Tibullus's.—Trans.]

To multiply so beneficent a river, Egypt was cut into numberless canals, of a length and breadth proportioned to the different situations and wants of the lands. The Nile brought fertility every where with its salutary streams; united cities one with another, and the Mediterranean with the Red-Sea; maintained trade at home and abroad, and fortified the kingdom against the enemy; so that it was at once the nourisher and protector of Egypt.

The fields were delivered up to it; but the cities that were raised with immense labour, and stood like islands in the midst of the waters, looked down with joy on the plains which were overflowed, and at the same time enriched, by the Nile.

This is a general idea of the nature and effects of this river, so famous among the ancients. But a wonder so astonishing in itself, and which has been the object of the curiosity and admiration of the learned in all ages, seems to require a more particular description, in which I shall be as concise as possible.

1. The Sources of the Nile.—The ancients placed the sources of the Nile in the mountains of the moon (as they are commonly called), in the 10th degree of south latitude. But our modern travellers have discovered that they lie in the 12th degree of north latitude; and by that means they cut off about four or five hundred leagues of the course which the ancients gave that river. It rises at the foot of a great mountain in the kingdom of Gojam in Abyssinia, from two springs, or eyes, to speak in the language of the country, the same word in Arabic signifying eye and fountain. These springs are thirty paces from one another, each as large as one of our wells or a coach-wheel. The Nile is increased with many rivulets which run into it; and after passing through Ethiopia in a very winding course, flows at last into Egypt.

2. The Cataracts of the Nile.—This name is given to some parts of the Nile, where the water falls down from the steep rocks.[^349] This river, which at first glided smoothly along the vast deserts of Ethiopia, before it enters Egypt, passes by the cataracts. Then growing on a sudden, contrary to its nature, raging and violent in those places where it is pent up and restrained; after having, at last, broken through all obstacles in its way, it precipitates itself from the top of some rocks to the bottom, with so loud a noise, that it is heard three leagues off.

[^349: Excipiunt eum (Nilum) cataractæ, nobilis insigni spectaculo locus.—Illic excitatis primùm aquis, quas sine tumultu leni alveo duxerat, violentus et toriens per malignos transitus prosilit, dissimilis sibi—tandemque eluctatus obstantia, in vastam altitudinem subito destitutus cadit, cum ingenti circumjacentium regionum strepitu; quem perferre gens ibi à Persis collocata non potuit, obtusis assiduo fragore auribus, et ob hoc sedibus ad quietiora translatis. Inter miracula fluminis incredibilem incolarum audaciam accepi. Bini parvula navigia conscendunt, quorum alter navem regit, alter exhaurit. Deinde multùm inter rapidam insaniam Nili et reciprocos fluctus volutati, tandem tenuissimos canales tenent, per quos angusta rupium effugiunt: et cum toto flumine effusi navigium ruens manu temperant, magnoque spectantium metu in caput nixi, cum jam adploraveris, mersosque atque obrutos tantâ mole credideris, longè ab eo in quem ceciderant loco navigant, tormenti modo missi. Nec mergit cadens unda, sed planis aquis tradit. Senec. Nat. Quæst. l. iv. c. 2.—Trans.]

The inhabitants of the country, accustomed by long practice to this sport, exhibit here a spectacle to travellers that is more terrifying than diverting. Two of them go into a little boat; the one to guide it, the other to throw out the water. After having long sustained the violence of the raging waves, by managing their little boat very dexterously, they suffer themselves to be carried away with the impetuous torrent as swift as an arrow. The affrighted spectator imagines they are going to be swallowed up in the precipice down which they fall; when the Nile, restored to its natural course, discovers them again, at a considerable distance, on its smooth and calm waters. This is Seneca's account, which is confirmed by our modern travellers.

3. Causes of the Inundations of the Nile.—The ancients have invented many subtle reasons for the Nile's great increase, as may be seen in Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, and Seneca.[^350] But it is now no longer a matter of dispute, it being almost universally allowed, that the inundations of the Nile are owing to the great rains which fall in Ethiopia, from whence this river flows. These rains swell it to such a degree, that Ethiopia first, and then Egypt, are overflowed; and that which at first was but a large river, rises like a sea, and overspreads the whole country.

[^350: Herod. l. ii. c. 19-27. Diod. l. i. p. 35-39. Senec. Nat. Quæst. l. iv. 1 & 2.]

Strabo observes,[^351] that the ancients only guessed that the inundations of the Nile were owing to the rains which fall in great abundance in Ethiopia; but adds, that several travellers have since been eye-witnesses of it; Ptolemy Philadelphus, who was very curious in all things relating to arts and sciences, having sent thither able persons, purposely to examine this matter, and to ascertain the cause of so uncommon and remarkable an effect.

[^351: Lib. xvii. p. 789.]

4. The Time and Continuance of the Inundations.—Herodotus, and after him Diodorus Siculus, and several other authors, declare, that the Nile begins to swell in Egypt at the summer solstice, that is, about the end of June, and continues to rise till the end of September; and then decreases gradually during the months of October and November; after which it returns to its channel, and resumes its wonted course.[^352] This account agrees very nearly with the relations of all the moderns, and is founded in reality on the natural cause of the inundation, viz. the rains which fall in Ethiopia. Now, according to the constant testimony of those who have been on the spot, these rains begin to fall in the month of April, and continue, during five months, till the end of August and beginning of September. The Nile's increase in Egypt must, consequently, begin three weeks or a month after the rains have begun to fall in Abyssinia; and accordingly travellers observe, that the Nile begins to rise in the month of May, but so slowly at the first, that it probably does not yet overflow its banks. The inundation happens not till about the end of June, and lasts the three following months, according to Herodotus.

[^352: Herod. l. ii. c. 19. Diod. l. i. p 32.]

I must point out to such as consult the originals, a contradiction in this place between Herodotus and Diodorus on one side; and between Strabo, Pliny, and Solinus, on the other. These last shorten very much the continuance of the inundation; and suppose the Nile to draw off from the lands in three months or a hundred days. And what adds to the difficulty, is, that Pliny seems to ground his opinion on the testimony of Herodotus: In totum autem revocatur Nilus intra ripas in Librá, ut tradit Herodotus, centesimo die. I leave to the learned the reconciling of this contradiction.

5. The Height of the Inundations.—The just height of the inundation, according to Pliny, is sixteen cubits.[^353] When it rises but to twelve or thirteen, a famine is threatened; and when it exceeds sixteen, there is danger. It must be remembered, that a cubit is a foot and a half. The emperor Julian takes notice, in a letter to Ecdicius, prefect of Egypt,[^354] that the height of the Nile's overflowing was fifteen cubits, the 20th of September, in 362. The ancients do not agree entirely with one another, nor with the moderns, with regard to the height of the inundation; but the difference is not very considerable, and may proceed, 1. from the disparity between the ancient and modern measures, which it is hard to estimate on a fixed and certain foot; 2. from the carelessness of the observers and historians; 3. from the real difference of the Nile's increase, which was not so great the nearer it approached the sea.

[^353: Justum incrementum est cubitorum xvi. Minores aquæ non omnia rigant: ampliores detinent tardiùs recedendo. Hæ serendi tempora absumunt solo madente: illæ non dant sitiente. Utrumque reputat provincia. In duodecim cubitis famem sentit, in tredecim etiamnum esurit: quatuordecim cubita hilaritatem afferunt, quindecim securitatem, sexdecim delicias. Plin. l. v. c. 9.—Trans.]

[^354: Jul. Epist. 50.]

As the riches of Egypt depended on the inundation of the Nile, all the circumstances and different degrees of its increase had been carefully considered; and by a long series of regular observations, made during many years, the inundation itself discovered what kind of harvest the ensuing year was likely to produce.[^355] The kings had placed at Memphis a measure on which these different increases were marked; and from thence notice was given to all the rest of Egypt, the inhabitants of which knew, by that means, beforehand, what they might fear or promise themselves from the harvest. Strabo speaks of a well on the banks of the Nile near the town of Syene, made for that purpose.[^356]

[^355: Diod. l. i. p 33.]

[^356: Lib. xvii. p. 817.]

The same custom is observed to this day at Grand Cairo. In the court of a mosque there stands a pillar, on which are marked the degrees of the Nile's increase; and common criers every day proclaim, in all parts of the city, how high it is risen. The tribute paid to the Grand Signior for the lands, is regulated by the inundation. The day on which it rises to a certain height, is kept as a grand festival, and solemnized with fire-works, feastings, and all the demonstrations of public rejoicing; and in the remotest ages, the overflowing of the Nile was always attended with an universal joy throughout all Egypt, that being the fountain of its happiness.

The heathens ascribed the inundation of the Nile to their god Serapis; and the pillar on which was marked the increase, was preserved religiously in the temple of that idol.[^357] The emperor Constantine having ordered it to be removed into the church of Alexandria, the Egyptians spread a report, that the Nile would rise no more by reason of the wrath of Serapis; but the river overflowed and increased as usual the following years. Julian the apostate, a zealous protector of idolatry, caused this pillar to be replaced in the same temple, out of which it was again removed by the command of Theodosius.

[^357: Socrat. l. i. c. 18. Sozom. l. v. c. 3.]

6. The Canals of the Nile and Spiral Pumps.—Divine Providence, in giving so beneficent a river to Egypt, did not thereby intend that the inhabitants of it should be idle, and enjoy so great a blessing without taking any pains. One may naturally suppose, that as the Nile could not of itself cover the whole country, great labour was to be used to facilitate the overflowing of the lands; and numberless canals cut, in order to convey the waters to all parts. The villages, which stand very thick on the banks of the Nile on eminences, have each their canals, which are opened at proper times, to let the water into the country. The more distant villages have theirs also, even to the extremities of the kingdom. Thus the waters are successively conveyed to the most remote places. Persons are not permitted to cut the trenches to receive the waters, till the river is at a certain height; nor to open them all at once; because otherwise some lands would be too much overflowed, and others not covered enough. They begin with opening them in Upper, and afterwards in Lower Egypt, according to the rules prescribed in a roll or book, in which all the measures are exactly set down. By this means the water is husbanded with such care, that it spreads itself over all the lands. The countries overflowed by the Nile are so extensive, and lie so low, and the number of canals so great, that of all the waters which flow into Egypt during the months of June, July, and August, it is believed that not a tenth part of them reaches the sea.

But as, notwithstanding all these canals, there are still abundance of high lands which cannot receive the benefit of the Nile's overflowing; this want is supplied by spiral pumps, which are turned by oxen, in order to bring the water into pipes, which convey it to these lands. Diodorus speaks of a similar engine invented by Archimedes in his travels into Egypt, which is called Cochlea Ægyptia.[^358]

[^358: Lib. i. p. 30. & lib. v. p. 313.]

7. The Fertility caused by the Nile.—There is no country in the world where the soil is more fruitful than in Egypt; which is owing entirely to the Nile. For whereas other rivers, when they overflow lands, wash away and exhaust their vivific moisture; the Nile, on the contrary, by the excellent slime it brings along with it, fattens and enriches them in such a manner, as sufficiently compensates for what the foregoing harvest had impaired.[^359] The husbandman, in this country, never tires himself with holding the plough, or breaking the clods of earth. As soon as the Nile retires, he has nothing to do but to turn up the earth, and temper it with a little sand, in order to lessen its rankness; after which he sows it with great ease, and with little or no expense. Two months after, it is covered with all sorts of corn and pulse. The Egyptians generally sow in October and November, according as the waters draw off; and their harvest is in March and April.

[^359: Cùm cæteri amnes abluant terras et eviscerent; Nilus adeò nihil exedit nec abradit, ut contrà adjiciat vires.—Ita juvat agros duabus ex causis, et quòd inundat, et quòd oblimat. Senec. Nat. Quæst. l. iv. c. 2.—Trans.]

The same land bears, in one year, three or four different kinds of crops. Lettuces and cucumbers are sown first; then corn; and, after harvest, several sorts of pulse which are peculiar to Egypt. As the sun is extremely hot in this country, and rains fall very seldom in it, it is natural to suppose that the earth would soon be parched, and the corn and pulse burnt up by so scorching a heat, were it not for the canals and reservoirs with which Egypt abounds; and which, by the drains from thence, amply supply wherewith to water and refresh the fields and gardens.

The Nile contributes no less to the nourishment of cattle, which is another source of wealth to Egypt. The Egyptians begin to turn them out to grass in November, and they graze till the end of March. Words could never express how rich their pastures are; and how fat the flocks and herds (which, by reason of the mildness of the air, are out night and day) grow in a very little time. During the inundation of the Nile, they are fed with hay and cut straw, barley and beans, which are their common food.

A man cannot, says Corneille de Bruyn in his Travels,[^360] help observing the admirable providence of God towards this country, who sends at a fixed season such great quantities of rain in Ethiopia, in order to water Egypt, where a shower of rain scarce ever falls; and who, by that means, causes the driest and most sandy soil to become the richest and most fruitful country in the universe.

[^360: Vol. ii.]

Another thing to be observed here is, that (as the inhabitants say) in the beginning of June, and the four following months, the north-east winds blow constantly, in order to keep back the waters, which otherwise would draw off too fast; and to hinder them from discharging themselves into the sea, the entrance to which these winds bar up, as it were, from them. The ancients have not omitted this circumstance.

The same Providence, whose ways are wonderful and infinitely various, displayed itself after a quite different manner in Palestine, in rendering it exceeding fruitful;[^361] not by rains, which fall during the course of the year, as is usual in other places; nor by a peculiar inundation like that of the Nile in Egypt; but by sending fixed rains at two seasons, when his people were obedient to him, to make them more sensible of their continual dependence upon him. God himself commands them, by his servant Moses, to make this reflection: “The land whither thou goest in to possess it, is not as the land of Egypt, from whence ye came out, where thou sowedst thy seed, and wateredst it with thy foot, as a garden of herbs: but the land whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven.”[^362] After this, God promises to give his people, so long as they shall continue obedient to him, “the former” and “the latter rain:” the first in autumn, to bring up the corn; and the second in the spring and summer, to make it grow and ripen.

[^361: Multiformis sapientia. Eph. iii. 10.]

[^362: Deut. xi. 10-13.]

8. The different Prospects exhibited by the Nile.—There cannot be a finer sight than Egypt at two seasons of the year. For if a man ascends some mountain, or one of the largest pyramids of Grand Cairo, in the months of July and August, he beholds a vast sea, in which numberless towns and villages appear, with several causeys leading from place to place; the whole interspersed with groves and fruit trees, whose tops only are visible; all which forms a delightful prospect.[^363] This view is bounded by mountains and woods, which terminate, at the utmost distance the eye can discover, the most beautiful horizon that can be imagined. On the contrary, in winter, that is to say, in the months of January and February, the whole country is like one continued scene of beautiful meadows, whose verdure, enamelled with flowers, charms the eye. The spectator beholds, on every side, flocks and herds dispersed over all the plains, with infinite numbers of husbandmen and gardeners. The air is then perfumed by the great quantity of blossoms on the orange, lemon, and other trees; and is so pure, that a wholesomer or more agreeable is not found in the world; so that nature, being then dead, as it were, in all other climates, seems to be alive only for so delightful an abode.

[^363: Illa facies pulcherrima est, cùm jam se in agros Nilus ingessit. Latent campi, opertæque sunt valles: oppida insularum modo extant. Nullum in mediterraneis, nisi per navigia, commercium est: majorque est lætitia in gentibus, quo minus terrarum suarum vident. Senec. Nat. Quæst. l. iv. c. 2.—Trans.]

9. The Canal formed by the Nile, by which a communication in made between the two Seas.—The canal, by which a communication was made between the Red-Sea and the Mediterranean, ought to have a place here, as it was not one of the least advantages which the Nile procured to Egypt.[^364] Sesostris, or, according to others, Psammetichus, first projected the design, and began this work. Necho, successor to the last prince, laid out immense sums upon it, and employed a prodigious number of men. It is said, that above six score thousand Egyptians perished in the undertaking. He gave it over, terrified by an oracle, which told him that he would thereby open a door for Barbarians (for by this name they called all foreigners) to enter Egypt. The work was continued by Darius, the first of that name; but he also desisted from it, upon his being told, that as the Red-Sea lay higher than Egypt, it would drown the whole country. But it was at last finished under the Ptolemies, who, by the help of sluices, opened or shut the canal as there was occasion. It began not far from the Delta, near the town of Bubastus. It was a hundred cubits, that is, twenty-five fathoms broad, so that two vessels might pass with ease; it had depth enough to carry the largest ships; and was about a thousand stadia, that is, above fifty leagues long. This canal was of great service to the trade of Egypt. But it is now almost filled up, and there are scarce any remains of it to be seen.

[^364: Herod. l. ii. c. 158. Strab. l. xvii. p. 804. Plin l. vi. c. 29. Diod. l. i p. 29.]

Chapter III. Lower Egypt.

I am now to speak of Lower Egypt. Its shape, which resembles a triangle, or Delta, Δ, gave occasion to its bearing the latter name, which is that of one of the Greek letters. Lower Egypt forms a kind of island; it begins at a place where the Nile is divided into two large canals, through which it empties itself into the Mediterranean: the mouth on the right hand is called the Pelusian, and the other the Canopic, from two cities in their neighbourhood, Pelusium and Canopus, now called Damietta and Rosetta. Between these two large branches, there are five others of less note. This island is the best cultivated, the most fruitful, and the richest part of Egypt. Its chief cities (very anciently) were Heliopolis, Heracleopolis, Naucratis, Sais, Tanis, Canopus, Pelusium; and, in latter times, Alexandria, Nicopolis, &c. It was in the country of Tanis that the Israelites dwelt.

There was at Sais,[^365] a temple dedicated to Minerva, who is supposed to be the same as Isis, with the following inscription: “I am whatever hath been, and is, and shall be; and no mortal hath yet pierced through the veil that shrouds me.”

[^365: Plutar. de Isid. p. 354.]

Heliopolis, that is, the city of the sun, was so called from a magnificent temple there dedicated to that planet.[^366] Herodotus, and other authors after him, relate some particulars concerning the Phœnix and this temple, which, if true, would indeed be very wonderful. Of this kind of birds, if we may believe the ancients, there is never but one at a time in the world. He is brought forth in Arabia, lives five or six hundred years, and is of the size of an eagle. His head is adorned with a shining and most beautiful crest; the feathers of his neck are of a gold colour, and the rest of a purple; his tail is white, intermixed with red, and his eyes sparkling like stars. When he is old, and finds his end approaching, he builds a nest with wood and aromatic spices, and then dies. Of his bones and marrow, a worm is produced, out of which another Phœnix is formed. His first care is to solemnize his parent's obsequies, for which purpose he makes up a ball in the shape of an egg, with abundance of perfumes of myrrh, as heavy as he can carry, which he often essays beforehand; then he makes a hole in it, where he deposits his parent's body, and closes it carefully with myrrh and other perfumes. After this he takes up the precious load on his shoulders, and flying to the altar of the sun, in the city of Heliopolis, he there burns it.

[^366: Strab. l. xvii. p. 805. Herod l. ii. c. 73. Plin. l. x. c. 2. Tacit. Ann. l. vi. c. 28.]

Herodotus and Tacitus dispute the truth of some of the circumstances of this account, but seem to suppose it true in general. Pliny, on the contrary, in the very beginning of his account of it, insinuates plainly enough, that he looks upon the whole as fabulous; and this is the opinion of all modern authors.

This ancient tradition, though grounded on an evident falsehood, hath yet introduced into almost all languages, the custom of giving the name of phœnix to whatever is singular and uncommon in its kind: Rara avis in terris, says Juvenal,[^367] speaking of the difficulty of finding an accomplished woman in all respects. And Seneca observes the same of a good man.[^368]

[^367: Sat. vi.]

[^368: Vir bonus tam citò nec fieri potest, nec intelligi—tanquam Phœnix, semel anno quingentesimo nascitur. Ep. 40.—Trans.]

What is reported of swans, viz. that they never sing but in their expiring moments, and that then they warble very melodiously, is likewise grounded merely on a vulgar error; and yet it is used, not only by the poets, but also by the orators, and even the philosophers. O mutis quoque piscibus donatura cycni, si libeat, sonum,[^369] says Horace to Melpomene. Cicero compares the excellent discourse which Crassus made in the Senate, a few days before his death, to the melodious singing of a dying swan: Illa tanquam cycnea fuit divini hominis vox et oratio. De Orat. l. iii. n. 6. And Socrates used to say, that good men ought to imitate swans, who, perceiving by a secret instinct, and a sort of divination, what advantage there is in death, die singing and with joy: Providentes quid in morte boni sit, cum cantu et voluptate moriuntur. Tusc. Qu. l. i. n. 73. I thought this short digression might be of service to youth; and return now to my subject.

[^369: Od. iii. l. iv.]

It was in Heliopolis, that an ox, under the name of Mnevis, was worshipped as a god.[^370] Cambyses, king of Persia, exercised his sacrilegious rage on this city; burning the temples, demolishing the palaces, and destroying the most precious monuments of antiquity in it. There are still to be seen some obelisks which escaped his fury; and others were brought from thence to Rome, to which city they are an ornament even at this day.

[^370: Strab. l. xvii. p. 805.]

Alexandria, built by Alexander the Great, from whom it had its name, vied almost in magnificence with the ancient cities in Egypt. It stands four days' journey from Cairo, and was formerly the chief mart of all the trade of the East. The merchandises were unloaded at Portus Murius,[^371] a town on the western coast of the Red-Sea;[^372] from whence they were brought upon camels to a town of Thebais, called Copht, and afterwards conveyed down the Nile to Alexandria, whither merchants resorted from all parts.

[^371: Or Myos Hormos.—Trans.]

[^372: Strab. l. xvi p. 781.]

It is well known that the trade of the East hath, at all times, enriched those who carried it on. This was the chief source of the vast treasures that Solomon amassed, and which enabled him to build the magnificent temple of Jerusalem. David, by conquering Idumæa, became master of Elath and Esiongeber, two towns situated on the eastern shore of the Red-Sea.[^373] From these two ports,[^374] Solomon sent fleets to Ophir and Tarshish, which always brought back immense riches.[^375] This traffic, after having been enjoyed some time by the Syrians, who regained Idumæa, passed from them into the hands of the Tyrians. These got all their merchandise conveyed, by the way of Rhinocolura (a sea-port town lying between the confines of Egypt and Palestine) to Tyre, from whence they distributed them all over the western world.[^376] Hereby the Tyrians enriched themselves exceedingly, under the Persian empire, by the favour and protection of whose monarchs they had the full possession of this trade. But when the Ptolemies had made themselves masters of Egypt, they soon drew all this trade into their kingdom, by building Berenice and other ports on the western side of the Red-Sea, belonging to Egypt; and fixed their chief mart at Alexandria, which thereby rose to be the city of the greatest trade in the world. There it continued for a great many centuries after; and all the traffic which the western parts of the world from that time had with Persia, India, Arabia, and the eastern coasts of Africa, was wholly carried on through the Red-Sea and the mouth of the Nile, till a way was discovered, a little above two hundred years since, of sailing to those parts by the Cape of Good Hope. After this, the Portuguese for some time were masters of this trade; but now it is in a manner engrossed wholly by the English and Dutch. This short account of the East-India trade, from Solomon's time, to the present age, is extracted from Dr. Prideaux.[^377]

[^373: 2 Sam. viii. 14.]

[^374: 1 Kings ix. 26.]

[^375: He got in one voyage 450 talents of gold, 2 Chron. viii. 18, which amounts to three millions two hundred and forty thousand pounds sterling. Prid. Connect., vol. i. ad ann. 740, not.—Trans.]

[^376: Strab. l. xvi. p. 481.]

[^377: Part I. i. p. 9.]

For the convenience of trade, there was built near Alexandria, in an island called Pharos, a tower which bore the same name.[^378] At the top of this tower was kept a fire, to light such ships as sailed by night near those dangerous coasts, which were full of sands and shelves, from whence all other towers, designed for the same use, have derived their name, as, Pharo di Messina, &c. The famous architect Sostratus built it by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, who expended eight hundred talents upon it.[^379] It was reckoned one of the seven wonders of the world. Some, through a mistake, have commended that prince, for permitting the architect to put his name in the inscription, which was fixed on the tower, instead of his own.[^380] It was very short and plain, according to the manner of the ancients. Sostratus Cnidius Dexiphanis F. Diis Servatoribus pro navigantibus: i.e. Sostratus the Cnidian, son of Dexiphanes, to the protecting deities, for the use of sea-faring people. But certainly Ptolemy must have very much undervalued that kind of immortality which princes are generally so fond of, to suffer, that his name should not be so much as mentioned in the inscription of an edifice so capable of immortalizing him. What we read in Lucian concerning this matter, deprives Ptolemy of a modesty, which indeed would be very ill placed here.[^381] This author informs us that Sostratus, to engross in after-times the whole glory of that noble structure to himself, caused the inscription with his own name to be carved in the marble, which he afterwards covered with lime, and thereon put the king's name. The lime soon mouldered away; and by that means, instead of procuring the architect the honour with which he had flattered himself, served only to discover to future ages his mean fraud and ridiculous vanity.

[^378: Strab. l. xvii. p. 791. Plin. l. xxxvi. c. 12.]

[^379: Eight hundred thousand crowns, or 180,000l. sterling.—Trans.]

[^380: Magno animo Ptolemæi regis, quòd in eà permiserit Sostrati Cnidii architecti structuræ nomen inscribi. Plin.—Trans.]

[^381: De scribend. Hist. p. 706.]

Riches failed not to bring into this city, as they usually do in all places, luxury and licentiousness; so that the Alexandrian voluptuousness became a proverb.[^382] In this city arts and sciences were also industriously cultivated, witness that stately edifice, surnamed the Museum, where the literati used to meet, and were maintained at the public expense; and the famous library, which was augmented considerably by Ptolemy Philadelphus; and which, by the magnificence of the kings his successors, at last contained seven hundred thousand volumes. In Cæsar's wars with the Alexandrians, part of this library, (situate in the Bruchion,[^383]) which consisted of four hundred thousand volumes, was unhappily consumed by fire.[^384]

[^382: Ne Alexandrinis quidem permittenda deliciis. Quintil.—Trans.]

[^383: A quarter or division of the city of Alexandria.—Trans.]

[^384: Plut. in Cæs. p. 731. Seneca, de Tranquill. Amm. c. 9.]

Part The Second. Of the Manners and Customs of the Egyptians.

Egypt was ever considered, by all the ancients, as the most renowned school for wisdom and politics, and the source from whence most arts and sciences were derived. This kingdom bestowed its noblest labours and finest arts on the improvement of mankind; and Greece was so sensible of this, that its most illustrious men, as Homer, Pythagoras, Plato; even its great legislators, Lycurgus and Solon, with many more whom it is needless to mention, travelled into Egypt, to complete their studies, and draw from that fountain whatever was most rare and valuable in every kind of learning. God himself has given this kingdom a glorious testimony, when praising Moses, he says of him, that “He was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.”[^385]

[^385: Acts vii. 22.]

To give some idea of the manners and customs of Egypt, I shall confine myself principally to these particulars: its kings and government; priests and religion; soldiers and war; sciences, arts, and trades.

The reader must not be surprised if he sometimes finds, in the customs I take notice of, a kind of contradiction. This circumstance is owing either to the difference of countries and nations, which did not always follow the same usages; or to the different way of thinking of the historians whom I copy.

Chapter I. Concerning The Kings And Government.

The Egyptians were the first people who rightly understood the rules of government. A nation so grave and serious immediately perceived, that the true end of politics is, to make life easy, and a people happy.

The kingdom was hereditary; but, according to Diodorus,[^386] the Egyptian princes conducted themselves in a different manner from what is usually seen in other monarchies, where the prince acknowledges no other rule of his actions than his own arbitrary will and pleasure. But here, kings were under greater restraint from the laws than their subjects. They had some particular ones digested by a former monarch, that composed part of what the Egyptians called the sacred books. Thus every thing being settled by ancient custom, they never sought to live in a different way from their ancestors.

[^386: Diod. l. i. p. 63, &c.]

No slave nor foreigner was admitted into the immediate service of the prince; such a post was too important to be intrusted to any persons, except those who were the most distinguished by their birth, and had received the most excellent education; to the end that, as they had the liberty of approaching the king's person day and night, he might, from men so qualified, hear nothing which was unbecoming the royal majesty; nor have any sentiments instilled into him but such as were of a noble and generous kind. For, adds Diodorus, it is very rarely seen that kings fly out into any vicious excess, unless those who approach them approve their irregularities, or serve as instruments to their passions.

The kings of Egypt freely permitted, not only the quality and proportion of what they ate and drank to be prescribed them, (a thing customary in Egypt, whose inhabitants were all sober, and whose air inspired frugality,) but even that all their hours, and almost every action, should be under the regulation of the laws.

In the morning at day break, when the head is clearest, and the thoughts most unperplexed, they read the several letters they received; to form a more just and distinct idea of the affairs which were to come under their consideration that day.

As soon as they were dressed, they went to the daily sacrifice performed in the temple; where, surrounded with their whole court, and the victims placed before the altar, they assisted at the prayer pronounced aloud by the high priest, in which he asked of the gods, health and all other blessings for the king, because he governed his people with clemency and justice, and made the laws of his kingdom the rule and standard of his actions. The high priest entered into a long detail of his royal virtues; observing, that he was religious to the gods, affable to men, moderate, just, magnanimous, sincere; an enemy to falsehood; liberal; master of his passions; punishing crimes with the utmost lenity, but boundless in rewarding merit. He next spoke of the faults which kings might be guilty of; but supposed at the same time that they never committed any, except by surprise or ignorance; and loaded with imprecations such of their ministers as gave them ill council, and suppressed or disguised the truth. Such were the methods of conveying instruction to their kings. It was thought that reproaches would only sour their tempers; and that the most effectual method to inspire them with virtue, would be to point out to them their duty in praises conformable to the sense of the laws, and pronounced in a solemn manner before the gods. After the prayers and sacrifices were ended, the councils and actions of great men were read to the king out of the sacred books, in order that he might govern his dominions according to their maxims, and maintain the laws which had made his predecessors and their subjects so happy.

I have already observed, that the quantity as well as quality of what he ate or drank were prescribed, by the laws, to the king: his table was covered with nothing but the most common food; because eating in Egypt was designed, not to tickle the palate, but to satisfy the cravings of nature. One would have concluded, (observes the historian,) that these rules had been laid down by some able physician, who was attentive only to the health of the prince, rather than by a legislator. The same simplicity was seen in all other things; and we read in Plutarch of a temple in Thebes, which had one of its pillars inscribed with imprecations against that king who first introduced profusion and luxury into Egypt.[^387]

[^387: De Isid. et Osir. p. 354.]

The principal duty of kings, and their most essential function, is the administering justice to their subjects. Accordingly the kings of Egypt cultivated more immediately this duty; convinced that on this depended not only the ease and comfort of individuals, but the happiness of the state; which would be a herd of robbers rather than a kingdom, should the weak be unprotected, and the powerful enabled by their riches and influence to commit crimes with impunity.

Thirty judges were selected out of the principal cities, to form a body for dispensing justice through the whole kingdom. The prince, in filling these vacancies, chose such as were most renowned for their honesty; and put at their head, him who was most distinguished for his knowledge and love of the laws, and was had in the most universal esteem. They had revenues assigned them, to the end that, being freed from domestic cares, they might devote their whole time to the execution of the laws. Thus honourably maintained by the generosity of the prince, they administered gratuitously to the people, that justice to which they have a natural right, and which ought to be equally open to all; and, in some sense, to the poor more than the rich, because the latter find a support within themselves; whereas the very condition of the former exposes them more to injuries, and therefore calls louder for the protection of the laws. To guard against surprise, affairs were transacted by writing in the assemblies of these judges. That false eloquence was dreaded, which dazzles the mind, and moves the passions. Truth could not be expressed with too much plainness, as it alone was to have the sway in judgments; because in that alone the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, the learned and the ignorant, were to find relief and security. The president of this senate wore a collar of gold set with precious stones, at which hung a figure represented blind, this being called the emblem of truth. When the president put this collar on, it was understood as a signal to enter upon business. He touched the party with it who was to gain his cause, and this was the form of passing sentence.

The most excellent circumstance in the laws of the Egyptians, was, that every individual, from his infancy, was nurtured in the strictest observance of them. A new custom in Egypt was a kind of miracle.[^388] All things there ran in the old channel; and the exactness with which little matters were adhered to, preserved those of more importance; and consequently no nation ever retained their laws and customs longer than the Egyptians.

[^388: Plat. in Tim. p. 656.]

Wilful murder was punished with death,[^389] whatever might be the condition of the murdered person, whether he was free-born or otherwise. In this the humanity and equity of the Egyptians were superior to that of the Romans, who gave the master an absolute power of life and death over his slave. The emperor Adrian, indeed, abolished this law; from an opinion, that an abuse of this nature ought to be reformed, let its antiquity or authority be ever so great.

[^389: Diod. l. i. p. 70.]

Perjury was also punished with death,[^390] because that crime attacks both the gods, whose majesty is trampled upon by invoking their name to a false oath, and men, by breaking the strongest tie of human society, viz. sincerity and veracity.

[^390: Pag. 69.]

The false accuser was condemned to undergo the punishment which the person accused was to have suffered, had the accusation been proved.[^391]

[^391: Ibid.]

He who had neglected or refused to save a man's life when attacked, if it was in his power to assist him, was punished as rigorously as the assassin:[^392] but if the unfortunate person could not be succoured, the offender was at least to be impeached; and penalties were decreed for any neglect of this kind. Thus the subjects were a guard and protection to one another; and the whole body of the community united against the designs of the bad.

[^392: Ibid.]

No man was allowed to be useless to the state;[^393] but every one was obliged to enter his name and place of abode in a public register, that remained in the hands of the magistrate, and to describe his profession, and his means of support. If he gave a false account of himself, he was immediately put to death.

[^393: Ibid.]

To prevent borrowing of money, the parent of sloth, frauds, and chicane, king Asychis made a very judicious law.[^394] The wisest and best regulated states, as Athens and Rome, ever found insuperable difficulties, in contriving a just medium, to restrain, on one hand, the cruelty of the creditor in the exaction of his loan; and on the other, the knavery of the debtor, who refused or neglected to pay his debts. Now Egypt took a wise course on this occasion; and, without doing any injury to the personal liberty of its inhabitants, or ruining their families, pursued the debtor with incessant fears of infamy in case he were dishonest. No man was permitted to borrow money without pawning to the creditor the body of his father, which every Egyptian embalmed with great care; and kept reverentially in his house, (as will be observed in the sequel,) and therefore might be easily moved from one place to another. But it was equally impious and infamous not to redeem soon so precious a pledge; and he who died without having discharged this duty, was deprived of the customary honours paid to the dead.[^395]

[^394: Herod. l. ii. c. 136]

[^395: This law put the whole sepulchre of the debtor into the power of the creditor, who removed to his own house the body of the father: the debtor refusing to discharge his obligation, was to be deprived of burial, either in his father's sepulchre or any other; and whilst he lived, he was not permitted to bury any person descended from him. Μηδὲ αὐτῷ ἐκείνῳ τελευτήσαντι εἶναι ταφῆς κυρῆσαι—μήτ᾽ ἄλλον μηδένα τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἀπὸ γενόμενον θάψαι. Herod.—Trans.]

Diodorus remarks an error committed by some of the Grecian legislators.[^396] They forbid, for instance, the taking away (to satisfy debts) the horses, ploughs, and other implements of husbandry employed by peasants; judging it inhuman to reduce, by this security, these poor men to an impossibility of discharging their debts, and getting their bread: but, at the same time, they permitted the creditor to imprison the peasants themselves, who alone were capable of using these implements, which exposed them to the same inconveniences, and at the same time deprived the government of persons who belong, and are necessary, to it; who labour for the public emolument, and over whose person no private man has any right.

[^396: Diod. l. i. p. 71.]

Polygamy was allowed in Egypt, except to the priests, who could marry but one woman.[^397] Whatever was the condition of the woman, whether she was free or a slave, her children were deemed free and legitimate.

[^397: Ibid. p. 72.]

One custom that was practised in Egypt, shows the profound darkness into which such nations as were most celebrated for their wisdom have been plunged; and this is the marriage of brothers with their sisters, which was not only authorized by the laws, but even, in some measure, originated from their religion, from the example and practice of such of their gods as had been the most anciently and universally adored in Egypt, that is, Osiris and Isis.[^398]

[^398: Diod. l. i. p. 22.]

A very great respect was there paid to old age.[^399] The young were obliged to rise up for the old; and on every occasion, to resign to them the most honourable seat. The Spartans borrowed this law from the Egyptians.

[^399: Herod. l. ii. c. 20.]

The virtue in the highest esteem among the Egyptians, was gratitude. The glory which has been given them of being the most grateful of all men, shows that they were the best formed of any nation for social life. Benefits are the band of concord, both public and private. He who acknowledges favours, loves to confer them; and in banishing ingratitude, the pleasure of doing good remains so pure and engaging, that it is impossible for a man to be insensible of it. But it was particularly towards their kings that the Egyptians prided themselves on evincing their gratitude. They honoured them whilst living, as so many visible representations of the Deity; and after their death lamented for them as the fathers of their country. These sentiments of respect and tenderness proceeded from a strong persuasion, that the Divinity himself had placed them upon the throne, as he distinguished them so greatly from all other mortals; and that kings bore the most noble characteristics of the Supreme Being, as the power and will of doing good to others were united in their persons.

Chapter II. Concerning the Priests And Religion Of The Egyptians.

Priests, in Egypt, held the second rank to kings. They had great privileges and revenues; their lands were exempted from all imposts; of which some traces are seen in Genesis, where it is said, “Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part, except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh's.”[^400]

[^400: Gen. xlvii. 26.]

The prince usually honoured them with a large share in his confidence and government, because they, of all his subjects, had received the best education, had acquired the greatest knowledge, and were most strongly attached to the king's person and the good of the public. They were at one and the same time the depositaries of religion and of the sciences; and to this circumstance was owing the great respect which was paid them by the natives as well as foreigners, by whom they were alike consulted upon the most sacred things relating to the mysteries of religion, and the most profound subjects in the several sciences.

The Egyptians pretend to be the first institutors of festivals and processions in honour of the gods.[^401] One festival was celebrated in the city of Bubastus, whither persons resorted from all parts of Egypt, and upwards of seventy thousand, besides children, were seen at it. Another, surnamed the feast of the lights, was solemnized at Sais. All persons, throughout Egypt, who did not go to Sais, were obliged to illuminate their windows.

[^401: Herod. l. ii. c. 60.]

Different animals were sacrificed in different countries, but one common and general ceremony was observed in all sacrifices, viz. the laying of hands upon the head of the victim, loading it at the same time with imprecations; and praying the gods to divert upon that victim all the calamities which might threaten Egypt.[^402]

[^402: Ibid. c. 39.]

It is to Egypt that Pythagoras owed his favourite doctrine of the Metempsychosis or transmigration of souls.[^403] The Egyptians believed, that at the death of men their souls transmigrated into other human bodies; and that, if they had been vicious, they were imprisoned in the bodies of unclean or ill-conditioned beasts, to expiate in them their past transgressions; and that after a revolution of some centuries they again animated other human bodies.

[^403: Diod. l. i. p. 88.]

The priests had the possession of the sacred books, which contained, at large, the principles of government, as well as the mysteries of divine worship. Both were uncommonly involved in symbols and enigmas, which, under these veils, made truth more venerable, and excited more strongly the curiosity of men.[^404] The figure of Harpocrates, in the Egyptian sanctuaries, with his finger upon his mouth, seemed to intimate, that mysteries were there enclosed, the knowledge of which was revealed to very few. The sphinxes, placed at the entrance of all temples, implied the same. It is very well known that pyramids, obelisks, pillars, statues, in a word, all public monuments, were usually adorned with hieroglyphics; that is, with symbolical writings; whether these were characters unknown to the vulgar, or figures of animals, under which was couched a hidden and parabolical meaning. Thus, by a hare, was signified a lively and piercing attention, because this creature has a very delicate sense of hearing.[^405] The statue of a judge without hands, and with eyes fixed upon the ground, symbolized the duties of those who were to exercise the judiciary functions.[^406]

[^404: Plut. de Isid. et Osir. p. 354.]

[^405: Plut. Sympos. l. iv. p. 670]

[^406: Id. de Isid. p. 355.]

It would require a volume to treat fully of the religion of the Egyptians. But I shall confine myself to two articles, which form the principal part of it; and these are the worship of the different deities, and the ceremonies relating to funerals.

Sect. I. The Worship of the various Deities.—Never were any people more superstitious than the Egyptians; they had a great number of gods, of different orders and degrees, which I shall omit, because they belong more to fable than to history. Among the rest, two were universally adored in that country, and these were Osiris and Isis, which are thought to be the sun and moon; and, indeed, the worship of those planets gave rise to idolatry.

Besides these gods, the Egyptians worshipped a great number of beasts; as the ox, the dog, the wolf, the hawk, the crocodile, the ibis,[^407] the cat, &c. Many of these beasts were the objects of the superstition only of some particular cities; and whilst one people worshipped one species of animals as gods, their neighbours held the same animals in abomination. This was the source of the continual wars which were carried on between one city and another; and this was owing to the false policy of one of their kings, who, to deprive them of the opportunity and means of conspiring against the state, endeavoured to draw off their attention, by engaging them in religious contests. I call this a false and mistaken policy; because it directly thwarts the true spirit of government, the aim of which is, to unite all its members in the strictest ties, and to make all its strength consist in the perfect harmony of its several parts.

[^407: Or Egyptian stork.—Trans.]

Every nation had a great zeal for their gods. “Among us,” says Cicero,[^408] “it is very common to see temples robbed, and statues carried off, but it was never known that any person in Egypt ever abused a crocodile, an ibis, a cat; for its inhabitants would have suffered the most, extreme torments, rather than be guilty of such sacrilege.” It was death for any person to kill one of these animals voluntarily; and even a punishment was decreed against him who should have killed an ibis, or cat, with or without design.[^409] Diodorus relates an incident,[^410] to which he himself was an eye-witness during his stay in Egypt. A Roman having inadvertently, and without design, killed a cat, the exasperated populace ran to his house; and neither the authority of the king, who immediately detached a body of his guards, nor the terror of the Roman name, could rescue the unfortunate criminal. And such was the reverence which the Egyptians had for these animals, that in an extreme famine they chose to eat one another, rather than feed upon their imagined deities.

[^408: De Nat. Deor. l. i. n. 82. Tusc. Quæst. l. v. n. 78.]

[^409: Herod. l. ii. c. 65.]

[^410: Diod. l. i. p. 74. 75.]

Of all these animals, the bull Apis, called Epaphus by the Greeks, was the most famous.[^411] Magnificent temples were erected to him; extraordinary honours were paid him while he lived, and still greater after his death. Egypt went then into a general mourning. His obsequies were solemnized with such a pomp as is hardly credible. In the reign of Ptolemy Lagus, the bull Apis dying of old age,[^412] the funeral pomp, besides the ordinary expenses, amounted to upwards of fifty thousand French crowns.[^413] After the last honours had been paid to the deceased god, the next care was to provide him a successor; and all Egypt was sought through for that purpose. He was known by certain signs, which distinguished him from all other animals of that species; upon his forehead was to be a white spot, in form of a crescent; on his back, the figure of an eagle; upon his tongue, that of a beetle. As soon as he was found, mourning gave place to joy; and nothing was heard, in all parts of Egypt, but festivals and rejoicings. The new god was brought to Memphis, to take possession of his dignity, and there installed with a great number of ceremonies. The reader will find hereafter, that Cambyses, at his return from his unfortunate expedition against Ethiopia, finding all the Egyptians in transports of joy for the discovery of their new god Apis, and imagining that this was intended as an insult upon his misfortunes, killed, in the first impulse of his fury, the young bull, who, by that means, had but a short enjoyment of his divinity.

[^411: Herod. l. iii. c. 27, &c. Diod. l. i. p. 76. Plin. l. viii. c. 46.]

[^412: Pliny affirms, that he was not allowed to exceed a certain term of years; and was drowned in the priests' well. Non est fas eum certos vitæ excedere annos, mersumque in sacerdotum fonte enecant. Nat. Hist. l. viii. c. 46.—Trans.]

[^413: Above 11,250l. sterling.—Trans.]

It is plain, that the golden calf set up near mount Sinai by the Israelites, was owing to their abode in Egypt, and an imitation of the god Apis; as well as those which were afterwards set up by Jeroboam (who had resided a considerable time in Egypt) in the two extremities of the kingdom of Israel.

The Egyptians, not contented with offering incense to animals, carried their folly to such an excess, as to ascribe a divinity to the pulse and roots of their gardens. For this they are ingeniously reproached by the satirist:

Who has not heard where Egypt's realms are nam'd,
What monster-gods her frantic sons have fram'd?
Here Ibis gorg'd with well-grown serpents, there
The Crocodile commands religious fear:
Where Memnon's statue magic strings inspire
With vocal sounds, that emulate the lyre;
And Thebes, such, Fate, are thy disastrous turns!
Now prostrate o'er her pompous ruins mourns;
A monkey-god, prodigious to be told!
Strikes the beholder's eye with burnish'd gold:
To godship here blue Triton's scaly herd,
The river-progeny is there preferr'd:
Through towns Diana's power neglected lies,
Where to her dogs aspiring temples rise:
And should you leeks or onions eat, no time
Would expiate the sacrilegious crime
Religious nations sure, and blest abodes,
Where ev'ry orchard is o'errun with gods.[^414]

[^414: Quis nescit, Volusi Bithynice, qualia demens Ægyptus portenta colat? Crocodilon adorat Pars hæc: illa pavet saturam serpentibus Ibin. Effigies sacri nitet aurea Cercopitheci, Dimidio magicæ resonant ubi Memnone chordæ, Atque vetus Thebe centum jacet obruta portis. Illic cœruleos, hic piscem fluminis, illic Oppida tota canem venerantur, nemo Dianam. Porrum et cœpe nefas violare, ac frangere morsu. O sanctas gentes, quibus hæc nascuntur in hortis Numina!

Juven. Sat. xv.—Trans.]

It is astonishing to see a nation, which boasted its superiority above all others with regard to wisdom and learning, thus blindly abandon itself to the most gross and ridiculous superstitions. Indeed, to read of animals and vile insects, honoured with religious worship, placed in temples, and maintained with great care, and at an extravagant expense;[^415] to read, that those who murdered them were punished with death; and that these animals were embalmed, and solemnly deposited in tombs assigned them by the public; to hear that this extravagance was carried to such lengths, as that leeks and onions were acknowledged as deities; were invoked in necessity, and depended upon for succour and protection; are absurdities which we, at this distance of time, can scarce believe; and yet they have the evidence of all antiquity. “You enter,” says Lucian,[^416] “into a magnificent temple, every part of which glitters with gold and silver. You there look attentively for a god, and are cheated with a stork, an ape, or a cat;” “a just emblem,” adds that author, “of too many palaces, the masters of which are far from being the brightest ornaments of them.”

[^415: Diodorus affirms, that in his time, the expense amounted to no less than one hundred thousand crowns, or 22,500l. sterling. Lib. i. p. 76.—Trans.]

[^416: Imag.]

Several reasons are assigned for the worship paid to animals by the Egyptians.[^417]

[^417: Diod. l. i. p. 77, &c.]

The first is drawn from fabulous history. It is pretended that the gods, in a rebellion made against them by men, fled into Egypt, and there concealed themselves under the form of different animals; and that this gave birth to the worship which was afterwards paid to those animals.

The second is taken from the benefit which these several animals procure to mankind:[^418] oxen by their labour; sheep by their wool and milk; dogs by their service in hunting, and guarding houses, whence the god Anubis was represented with a dog's head: the ibis, a bird very much resembling a stork, was worshipped, because he put to flight the winged serpents, with which Egypt would otherwise have been grievously infested; the crocodile, an amphibious creature, that is, living alike upon land and water, of a surprising strength and size,[^419] was worshipped, because he defended Egypt from the incursions of the wild Arabs; the ichneumon was adored, because he prevented the too great increase of crocodiles, which might have proved destructive to Egypt. Now the little animal in question does this service to the country two ways. First, it watches the time when the crocodile is absent, and breaks his eggs, but does not eat them. Secondly, when the crocodile is asleep upon the banks of the Nile, (and he always sleeps with his mouth open,) the ichneumon, which lies concealed in the mud, leaps at once into his mouth; gets down to his entrails, which he gnaws; then piercing his belly, the skin of which is very tender, he escapes with safety; and thus, by his address and subtilty, returns victorious over so terrible an animal.

[^418: Ipsi qui irridentur Ægyptii, nullam belluam nisi ob aliquam utilitatem, quam ex eâ caperent, consecraverunt. Cic. lib. i. De Nat. Deor. n. 101.—Trans.]

[^419: Which, according to Herodotus, is more than 17 cubits in length: l. ii. c. 68.—Trans.]

Philosophers, not satisfied with reasons which were too trifling to account for such strange absurdities as dishonoured the heathen system, and at which themselves secretly blushed, have, since the establishment of Christianity, supposed a third reason for the worship which the Egyptians paid to animals, and declared, that it was not offered to the animals themselves, but to the gods, of whom they are symbols. Plutarch, in his treatise where he examines professedly the pretensions of Isis and Osiris, the two most famous deities of the Egyptians, says as follows:[^420] “Philosophers honour the image of God wherever they find it, even in inanimate beings, and consequently more in those which have life. We are therefore to approve, not the worshippers of these animals, but those who, by their means, ascend to the Deity; they are to be considered as so many mirrors, which nature holds forth, and in which the Supreme Being displays himself in a wonderful manner; or, as so many instruments, which he makes use of to manifest outwardly his incomprehensible wisdom. Should men therefore, for the embellishing of statues, amass together all the gold and precious stones in the world; the worship must not be referred to the statues, for the Deity does not exist in colours artfully disposed, nor in frail matter destitute of sense and motion.” Plutarch says in the same treatise,[^421] “that as the sun and moon, heaven, earth, and the sea, are common to all men, but have different names, according to the difference of nations and languages; in like manner, though there is but one Deity, and one providence which governs the universe, and which has several subaltern ministers under it; men give to the Deity, which is the same, different names, and pay it different honours, according to the laws and customs of every country.”

[^420: P. 382.]

[^421: P. 377 and 378.]

But were these reflections, which offer the most rational vindication that can be suggested of idolatrous worship, sufficient to cover the absurdity of it; could it be called a raising of the divine attributes in a suitable manner, to direct the worshipper to admire and seek for the image of them in beasts of the most vile and contemptible kinds, as crocodiles, serpents, and cats? Was not this rather degrading and debasing the Deity, of whom even the most stupid usually entertain a much greater and more august idea?

And even these philosophers were not always so just, as to ascend from sensible beings to their invisible Author. The Scriptures tell us, that these pretended sages deserved, on account of their pride and ingratitude, to be “given over to a reprobate mind; and whilst they professed themselves wise, to become fools, for having changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.”[^422] To show what man is when left to himself, God permitted that very nation, which had carried human wisdom to its greatest height, to be the theatre in which the most ridiculous and absurd idolatry was acted. And, on the other side, to display the almighty power of his grace, he converted the frightful deserts of Egypt into a terrestrial paradise; by peopling them, in the time appointed by his providence, with numberless multitudes of illustrious hermits, whose fervent piety and rigorous penance have done so much honour to the Christian religion. I cannot not forbear giving here a famous instance of it; and I hope the reader will excuse this kind of digression.

[^422: Rom. i. ver. 22, 25.]

“The great wonder of Lower Egypt,” says Abbé Fleury, in his Ecclesiastical History,[^423] “was the city of Oxyrinchus, peopled with monks, both within and without, so that they were more numerous than its other inhabitants. The public edifices and idol temples had been converted into monasteries, and these likewise were more in number than the private houses. The monks lodged even over the gates and in the towers. The people had twelve churches to assemble in, exclusive of the oratories belonging to the monasteries. There were twenty thousand virgins and ten thousand monks in this city, every part of which echoed night and day with the praises of God. By order of the magistrates, sentinels were posted at the gates, to take notice of all strangers and poor who came into the city; and the inhabitants vied with each other who should first receive them, in order to have an opportunity of exercising their hospitality towards them.”

[^423: Tom. v. pp. 25, 26.]

Sect. II. The Ceremonies of the Egyptian Funerals.—I shall now give a concise account of the funeral ceremonies of the Egyptians.

The honours which have been paid in all ages and nations to the bodies of the dead, and the religious care which has always been taken of sepulchres, seem to insinuate an universal persuasion, that bodies were lodged in sepulchres merely as a deposit or trust.

We have already observed, in our mention of the pyramids, with what magnificence sepulchres were built in Egypt for, besides that they were erected as so many sacred monuments, destined to transmit to future times the memory of great princes; they were likewise considered as the mansions where the body was to remain during a long succession of ages: whereas common houses were called inns, in which men were to abide only as travellers, and that during the course of a life which was too short to engage their affections.

When any person in a family died, all the kindred and friends quitted their usual habits, and put on mourning, and abstained from baths, wine, and dainties of every kind. This mourning continued forty or seventy days, probably according to the quality of the person.

Bodies were embalmed three different ways.[^424] The most magnificent was bestowed on persons of distinguished rank, and the expense amounted to a talent of silver, or three thousand French livres.[^425]

[^424: Herod. l. ii. c. 85, &c.]

[^425: About 137l. 10s. sterling.—Trans.]

Many hands were employed in this ceremony.[^426] Some drew the brain through the nostrils, by an instrument made for that purpose. Others emptied the bowels and intestines, by cutting a hole in the side, with an Ethiopian stone that was as sharp as a razor; after which the cavities were filled with perfumes and various odoriferous drugs. As this evacuation (which was necessarily attended with some dissections) seemed in some measure cruel and inhuman, the persons employed fled as soon as the operation was over, and were pursued with stones by the standers-by. But those who embalmed the body were honourably treated. They filled it with myrrh, cinnamon, and all sorts of spices. After a certain time, the body was swathed in lawn fillets, which were glued together with a kind of very thin gum, and then crusted over with the most exquisite perfumes. By this means, it is said, that the entire figure of the body, the very lineaments of the face, and even the hairs on the lids and eye-brows were preserved in their natural perfection. The body, thus embalmed, was delivered to the relations, who shut it up in a kind of open chest, fitted exactly to the size of the corpse; then they placed it upright against the wall, either in their sepulchres (if they had any) or in their houses. These embalmed bodies are what we now call Mummies, which are still brought from Egypt, and are found in the cabinets of the curious. This shows the care which the Egyptians took of their dead. Their gratitude to their deceased relations was immortal. Children, by seeing the bodies of their ancestors thus preserved, recalled to mind those virtues for which the public had honoured them; and were excited to a love of those laws which such excellent persons had left for their security. We find that part of these ceremonies were performed in the funeral honours paid to Joseph in Egypt.

[^426: Diod. l. i. p. 81.]

I have said that the public recognised the virtues of deceased persons, because that, before they could be admitted into the sacred asylum of the tomb, they underwent a solemn trial. And this circumstance in the Egyptian funerals, is one of the most remarkable to be found in ancient history.

It was a consolation among the heathens, to a dying man, to leave a good name behind him; and they imagined that this is the only human blessing of which death cannot deprive us. But the Egyptians would not suffer praises to be bestowed indiscriminately on all deceased persons. This honour was to be obtained only from the public voice. The assembly of the judges met on the other side of a lake, which they crossed in a boat. He who sat at the helm was called Charon, in the Egyptian language; and this first gave the hint to Orpheus, who had been in Egypt, and after him, to the other Greeks, to invent the fiction of Charon's boat. As soon as a man was dead, he was brought to his trial. The public accuser was heard. If he proved that the deceased had led a bad life, his memory was condemned, and he was deprived of burial. The people admired the power of the laws, which extended even beyond the grave; and every one, struck with the disgrace inflicted on the dead person, was afraid to reflect dishonour on his own memory, and his family. But if the deceased person was not convicted of any crime, he was interred in an honourable manner.

A still more astonishing circumstance, in this public inquest upon the dead, was, that the throne itself was no protection from it. Kings were spared during their lives, because the public peace was concerned in this forbearance; but their quality did not exempt them from the judgment passed upon the dead, and even some of them were deprived of sepulture. This custom was imitated by the Israelites. We see, in Scripture, that bad kings were not interred in the monuments of their ancestors. This practice suggested to princes, that if their majesty placed them out of the reach of men's judgment while they were alive, they would at last be liable to it when death should reduce them to a level with their subjects.

When therefore a favourable judgment was pronounced on a deceased person, the next thing was to proceed to the ceremonies of interment. In his panegyric, no mention was made of his birth, because every Egyptian was deemed noble. No praises were considered as just or true, but such as related to the personal merit of the deceased. He was applauded for having received an excellent education in his younger years; and in his more advanced age, for having cultivated piety towards the gods, justice towards men, gentleness, modesty, moderation, and all other virtues which constitute the good man. Then all the people besought the gods to receive the deceased into the assembly of the just, and to admit him as a partaker with them of their everlasting felicity.

To conclude this article of the ceremonies of funerals, it may not be amiss to observe to young pupils the different manners in which the bodies of the dead were treated by the ancients. Some, as we observed of the Egyptians, exposed them to view after they had been embalmed, and thus preserved them to after-ages. Others, as the Romans, burnt them on a funeral pile; and others again, laid them in the earth.

The care to preserve bodies without lodging them in tombs, appears injurious to human nature in general, and to those persons in particular to whom respect is designed to be shown by this custom; because it exposes too visibly their wretched state and deformity; since, whatever care may be taken, spectators see nothing but the melancholy and frightful remains of what they once were. The custom of burning dead bodies has something in it cruel and barbarous, in destroying so hastily the remains of persons once dear to us. That of interment is certainly the most ancient and religious. It restores to the earth what had been taken from it; and prepares our belief of a second restitution of our bodies, from that dust of which they were at first formed.

Chapter III. Of The Egyptian Soldiers And War.

The profession of arms was in great repute among the Egyptians. After the sacerdotal families, the most illustrious, as with us, were those devoted to a military life. They were not only distinguished by honours, but by ample liberalities. Every soldier was allowed twelve Arouræ, that is, a piece of arable land very near answering to half a French acre,[^427] exempt from all tax or tribute. Besides this privilege, each soldier received a daily allowance of five pounds of bread, two of flesh, and a quart of wine.[^428] This allowance was sufficient to support part of their family. Such an indulgence made them more affectionate to the person of their prince, and the interests of their country, and more resolute in their defence of both; and as Diodorus observes,[^429] it was thought inconsistent with good policy, and even common sense, to commit the defence of a country to men who had no interest in its preservation.

[^427: Twelve Arouræ. An Egyptian Aroura was 10,000 square cubits, equal to three roods, two perches, 55-1/4 square feet of our measure.—Trans.]

[^428: The Greek is, οἴνου τέσσαρες ἀρυστῆρες, which some have made to signify a determinate quantity of wine, or any other liquid: others, regarding the etymology of the word ἀρυστὴρ, have translated it by haustrum, a bucket, as Lucretius, lib. v. 51, others by haustus, a draught or sup. Herodotus says, this allowance was given only to the two thousand guards who attended annually on the kings. Lib. ii. c. 168.—Trans.]

[^429: Lib. i. p. 67.]

Four hundred thousand soldiers were kept in continual pay;[^430] all natives of Egypt, and trained up in the exactest discipline. They were inured to the fatigues of war, by a severe and rigorous education. There is an art of forming the body as well as the mind. This art, lost by our sloth, was well known to the ancients, and especially to the Egyptians. Foot, horse, and chariot races, were performed in Egypt with wonderful agility, and the world could not show better horsemen than the Egyptians. The Scripture in several places speaks advantageously of their cavalry.[^431]

[^430: Herod. l. ii. c. 164, 168.]

[^431: Cant. i. 8. Isa. xxxvi. 9.]

Military laws were easily preserved in Egypt, because sons received them from their fathers; the profession of war, as all others, being transmitted from father to son. Those who fled in battle, or discovered any signs of cowardice, were only distinguished by some particular mark of ignominy; it being thought more advisable to restrain them by motives of honour, than by the terrors of punishment.[^432]

[^432: Diod. p. 76.]

But notwithstanding this, I will not pretend to say, that the Egyptians were a warlike people. It is of little advantage to have regular and well-paid troops; to have armies exercised in peace, and employed only in mock fights; it is war alone, and real combats, which form the soldier. Egypt loved peace, because it loved justice, and maintained soldiers only for its security. Its inhabitants, content with a country which abounded in all things, had no ambitious dreams of conquest. The Egyptians extended their reputation in a very different manner, by sending colonies into all parts of the world, and with them laws and politeness. They triumphed by the wisdom of their counsels, and the superiority of their knowledge; and this empire of the mind appeared more noble and glorious to them, than that which is achieved by arms and conquest. But, nevertheless, Egypt has given birth to illustrious conquerors, as will be observed hereafter, when we come to treat of its kings.

Chapter IV. Of Their Arts And Sciences.

The Egyptians had an inventive genius, but directed it only to useful projects. Their Mercuries filled Egypt with wonderful inventions, and left it scarcely ignorant of any thing which could contribute to accomplish the mind, or procure ease and happiness. The discoverers of any useful invention received, both living and dead, rewards worthy of their profitable labours. It is this which consecrated the books of their two Mercuries, and stamped them with a divine authority. The first libraries were in Egypt; and the titles they bore inspired an eager desire to enter them, and dive into the secrets they contained. They were called the remedy for the diseases of the soul,[^433] and that very justly, because the soul was there cured of ignorance, the most dangerous, and the parent of all other maladies.

[^433: Ψυχῆς ἰατρεῖον.—Trans.]

As their country was level, and the sky always serene and unclouded, the Egyptians were among the first who observed the courses of the planets. These observations led them to regulate the year[^434] from the course of the sun; for as Diodorus observes, their year, from the most remote antiquity, was composed of three hundred sixty-five days and six hours. To adjust the property of their lands, which were every year covered by the overflowing of the Nile, they were obliged to have recourse to surveys; and this first taught them geometry. They were great observers of nature, which, in a climate so serene, and under so intense a sun, was vigorous and fruitful.

[^434: It will not seem surprising that the Egyptians, who were the most ancient observers of the celestial motions, should have arrived to this knowledge, when it is considered, that the lunar year, made use of by the Greeks and Romans, though it appears so inconvenient and irregular, supposed nevertheless a knowledge of the solar year, such as Diodorus Siculus ascribes to the Egyptians. It will appear at first sight, by calculating their intercalations, that those who first divided the year in this manner, were not ignorant, that, to three hundred sixty-five days, some hours were to be added, to keep pace with the sun. Their only error lay in the supposition, that only six hours were wanting; whereas an addition of almost eleven minutes more was requisite.—Trans.]

By this study and application they invented or improved the science of physic. The sick were not abandoned to the arbitrary will and caprice of the physician. He was obliged to follow fixed rules, which were the observations of old and experienced practitioners, and written in the sacred books. While these rules were observed, the physician was not answerable for the success; otherwise, a miscarriage cost him his life. This law checked, indeed, the temerity of empirics; but then it might prevent new discoveries, and keep the art from attaining to its just perfection. Every physician, if Herodotus may be credited,[^435] confined his practice to the cure of one disease only; one was for the eyes, another for the teeth, and so on.

[^435: Lib. ii. c. 84.]

What we have said of the pyramids, the labyrinth, and that infinite number of obelisks, temples, and palaces, whose precious remains still strike the beholder with admiration, and in which the magnificence of the princes who raised them, the skill of the workmen, the riches of the ornaments diffused over every part of them, and the just proportion and beautiful symmetry of the parts, in which their greatest beauty consisted, seemed to vie with each other; works, in many of which the liveliness of the colours remains to this day, in spite of the rude hand of time, which commonly deadens or destroys them: all this, I say, shows the perfection to which architecture, painting, sculpture, and all other arts, had arrived in Egypt.

The Egyptians entertained but a mean opinion of those gymnastic exercises, which did not contribute to invigorate the body, or improve health;[^436] as well as of music, which they considered as a diversion not only useless but dangerous, and only fit to enervate the mind.[^437]

[^436: Diod. l. i. p. 73.]

[^437: Τὴν δὲ μουσικὴν νομίζουειν οὐ μόνον ἄχρηστον ὑπάρχειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ βλαβερὰν, ὡς ἄι ἐκθηλύνουσαν τὰς τῶν ἀνδρῶν ψυχάς.—Trans.]

Chapter V. Of Their Husbandmen, Shepherds, and Artificers.

Husbandmen, shepherds, and artificers, formed the three classes of lower life in Egypt, but were nevertheless had in very great esteem, particularly husbandmen and shepherds.[^438] The body politic requires a superiority and subordination of its several members; for as in the natural body, the eye may be said to hold the first rank, yet its lustre does not dart contempt upon the feet, the hands, or even on those parts which are less honourable. In like manner, among the Egyptians, the priests, soldiers, and scholars were distinguished by particular honours; but all professions, to the meanest, had their share in the public esteem, because the despising any man, whose labours, however mean, were useful to the state, was thought a crime.

[^438: Diod. l. i. pp. 67, 68.]

A better reason than the foregoing might have inspired them at the first with these sentiments of equity and moderation, which they so long preserved. As they all descended from Cham,[^439] their common father, the memory of their still recent origin occurring to the minds of all in those first ages, established among them a kind of equality, and stamped, in their opinion, a nobility on every person derived from the common stock. Indeed the difference of conditions, and the contempt with which persons of the lowest rank are treated, are owing merely to the distance from the common root; which makes us forget that the meanest plebeian, when his descent is traced back to the source, is equally noble with those of the most elevated rank and titles.

[^439: Or Ham.—Trans.]

Be that as it will, no profession in Egypt was considered as grovelling or sordid. By this means arts were raised to their highest perfection. The honour which cherished them mixed with every thought and care for their improvement. Every man had his way of life assigned him by the laws, and it was perpetuated from father to son. Two professions at one time, or a change of that which a man was born to, were never allowed. By this means, men became more able and expert in employments which they had always exercised from their infancy; and every man, adding his own experience to that of his ancestors, was more capable of attaining perfection in his particular art. Besides, this wholesome institution, which had been established anciently throughout Egypt, extinguished all irregular ambition, and taught every man to sit down contented with his condition, without aspiring to one more elevated, from interest, vain-glory, or levity.

From this source flowed numberless inventions for the improvement of all the arts, and for rendering life more commodious, and trade more easy. I once could not believe that Diodorus was in earnest, in what he relates concerning the Egyptian industry,[^440] viz. that this people had found out a way, by an artificial fecundity, to hatch eggs without the sitting of the hen; but all modern travellers declare it to be a fact, which certainly is worthy our investigation, and is said to be practised also in Europe. Their relations inform us, that the Egyptians stow eggs in ovens, which are heated to such a temperament, and with such just proportion to the natural warmth of the hen, that the chickens produced by these means are as strong as those which are hatched the natural way. The season of the year proper for this operation is, from the end of December to the end of April; the heat in Egypt being too violent in the other months. During these four months, upwards of three hundred thousand eggs are laid in these ovens, which, though they are not all successful, nevertheless produce vast numbers of fowls at an easy rate. The art lies in giving the ovens a due degree of heat, which must not exceed a fixed proportion. About ten days are bestowed in heating these ovens, and very near as much time in hatching the eggs. It is very entertaining, say these travellers, to observe the hatching of these chickens, some of which show at first nothing but their heads, others but half their bodies, and others again come quite out of the egg: these last, the moment they are hatched, make their way over the unhatched eggs, and form a diverting spectacle. Corneille le Bruyn, in his Travels,[^441] has collected the observations of other travellers on this subject. Pliny likewise mentions it;[^442] but it appears from him, that the Egyptians, anciently, employed warm dung, not ovens, to hatch eggs.

[^440: Diod. l. i. p. 67.]

[^441: Tom. ii. p. 64.]

[^442: Lib. x. c. 54.]

I have said, that husbandmen particularly, and those who took care of flocks, were in great esteem in Egypt, some parts of it excepted, where the latter were not suffered.[^443] It was, indeed, to these two professions that Egypt owed its riches and plenty. It is astonishing to reflect what advantages the Egyptians, by their art and labour, drew from a country of no great extent, but whose soil was made wonderfully fruitful by the inundations of the Nile, and the laborious industry of the inhabitants.

[^443: Swineherds, in particular, had a general ill name throughout Egypt, as they had the care of so impure an animal. Herodotus (l. ii. c. 47.) tells us, that they were not permitted to enter the Egyptian Temples, nor would any man give them his daughter in marriage.—Trans.]

It will be always so with every kingdom whose governors direct all their actions to the public welfare. The culture of lands, and the breeding of cattle, will be an inexhaustible fund of wealth in all countries, where, as in Egypt, these profitable callings are supported and encouraged by maxims of state and policy: and we may consider it as a misfortune, that they are at present fallen into so general a disesteem; though it is from them that the most elevated ranks (as we esteem them) are furnished, not only with the necessaries, but even the luxuries of life. “For,” says Abbé Fleury, in his admirable work, Of the manners of the Israelites, where the subject I am upon is thoroughly examined, “it is the peasant who feeds the citizen, the magistrate, the gentleman, the ecclesiastic: and whatever artifice and craft may be used to convert money into commodities, and these back again into money; yet all must ultimately be owned to be received from the products of the earth, and the animals which it sustains and nourishes. Nevertheless, when we compare men's different stations of life together, we give the lowest place to the husbandman: and with many people a wealthy citizen, enervated with sloth, useless to the public, and void of all merit, has the preference, merely because he has more money, and lives a more easy and delightful life.”

“But let us imagine to ourselves a country where so great a difference is not made between the several conditions; where the life of a nobleman is not made to consist in idleness and doing nothing, but in a careful preservation of his liberty; that is, in a due subjection to the laws and the constitution; by a man's subsisting upon his estate without a dependence on any one, and being contented to enjoy a little with liberty, rather than a great deal at the price of mean and base compliances: a country, where sloth, effeminacy, and the ignorance of things necessary for life, are held in just contempt; and where pleasure is less valued than health and bodily strength: in such a country, it will be much more for a man's reputation to plough, and keep flocks, than to waste all his hours in sauntering from place to place, in gaming and expensive diversions.”

But we need not have recourse to Plato's commonwealth, for instances of men who have led these useful lives. It was thus that the greatest part of mankind lived during near four thousand years; and that not only the Israelites, but the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Romans, that is to say, nations the most civilized, and most renowned for arms and wisdom. They all inculcate the regard which ought to be paid to agriculture, and the breeding of cattle: one of which (without saying any thing of hemp and flax so necessary for our clothing) supplies us by corn, fruits, and pulse, with not only a plentiful but delicious nourishment; and the other, besides its supply of exquisite meats to cover our tables, almost alone gives life to manufactures and trade, by the skins and stuffs it furnishes.

Princes are commonly desirous, and their interest certainly requires it, that the peasant who, in a literal sense, sustains the heat and burden of the day, and pays so great a proportion of the national taxes, should meet with favour and encouragement. But the kind and good intentions of princes are too often defeated by the insatiable and merciless avarice of those who are appointed to collect their revenues. History has transmitted to us a fine saying of Tiberius on this head. A prefect of Egypt having augmented the annual tribute of the province, and, doubtless, with the view of making his court to the emperor, remitted to him a much larger sum than was customary; that prince, who, in the beginning of his reign, thought, or at least spoke justly, answered, “that it was his design not to flay, but to shear his sheep.”[^444]

[^444: Xiphilin. in Apophthegm. Tib. Cæs. Κείρεσθαί μου τὰ πρόβατα, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀπαξύρεσθαι βούλομκι.]

Chapter VI. Of The Fertility Of Egypt.

Under this head, I shall treat only of some plants peculiar to Egypt, and of the abundance of corn which it produced.

Papyrus. This is a plant, from the root of which shoot out a great many triangular stalks, to the height of six or seven cubits. The ancients writ at first upon palm leaves;[^445] next, on the inside of the bark of trees, from whence the word liber, or book, is derived; after that, upon tables covered over with wax, on which the characters were impressed with an instrument called Stylus, sharp-pointed at one end to write with, and flat at the other, to efface what had been written; which gave occasion to the following expression of Horace:

[^445: Plin. l. xiii. c. 11.]

Sæpe stylum vertas, iterum quæ digna legi sint
Scripturus:

Sat. lib. i. x. ver. 72.

Oft turn your style, if you desire to write
Things that will bear a second reading——

The meaning of which is, that a good performance is not to be expected without many erasures and corrections. At last the use of paper[^446] was introduced, and this was made of the bark of Papyrus, divided into thin flakes or leaves, which were very proper for writing; and this Papyrus was likewise called Byblus.

[^446: The Papyrus was divided into thin flakes, (into which it naturally parted,) which being laid on a table, and moistened with the glutinous waters of the Nile, were afterwards pressed together, and dried in the sun.—Trans.]

Nondum flumineas Memphis contexere byblos
Noverat.

Lucan.

Memphis as yet knew not to form in leaves
The wat'ry Byblos.

Pliny calls it a wonderful invention,[^447] so useful to life, that it preserves the memory of great actions, and immortalizes those who achieved them. Varro ascribes this invention to Alexander the Great, when he built Alexandria; but he had only the merit of making paper more common, for the invention was of much greater antiquity. The same Pliny adds, that Eumenes, king of Pergamus, substituted parchment instead of paper, in emulation of Ptolemy, king of Egypt, whose library he was ambitious to excel by this invention, which had the advantage over paper. Parchment is the skin of a sheep dressed and made fit to write upon. It was called Pergamenum from Pergamus, whose kings had the honour of the invention. All the ancient manuscripts are either upon parchment, or vellum, which is calf-skin, and a great deal finer than the common parchment. It is very curious to see white fine paper wrought out of filthy rags picked up in the streets. The plant Papyrus was useful likewise for sails, tackling, clothes, coverlets, &c.[^448]

[^447: Posteà promiscuè patuit usus rei, quâ cons ... immortalitas hominum.—Chartæ ... maxime humanitas constat in memoriâ.—Trans.]

[^448: Plin. l. xix. c. 1.]

Linum. Flax is a plant whose bark, full of fibres or strings, is useful in making fine linen. The method of making this linen in Egypt was wonderful, and carried to such perfection, that the threads which were drawn out of them, were almost too small for the observation of the sharpest eye. Priests were always habited in linen, and never in woollen; and all persons of distinction generally wore linen clothes. This flax formed a considerable branch of the Egyptian trade, and great quantities of it were exported into foreign countries. The manufacture of flax employed a great number of hands in Egypt, especially of the women, as appears from that passage of Isaiah, in which the prophet menaces Egypt with a drought of so terrible a nature, that it should interrupt every kind of labour. “Moreover, they that work in fine flax, and they that weave network, shall be confounded.”[^449] We likewise find in Scripture, that one effect of the plague of hail, called down by Moses upon Egypt, was the destruction of all the flax which was then bolled.[^450] This storm was in March.

[^449: Isa. xiv. 9.]

[^450: Exod. ix. 31.]

Byssus. This was another kind of flax extremely fine and delicate, which often received a purple dye.[^451] It was very dear; and none but rich and wealthy persons could afford to wear it. Pliny, who gives the first place to the Asbeston or Asbestinum, (i.e. the incombustible flax,) places the Byssus in the next rank; and says, “that the dress and ornaments of the ladies were made of it.”[^452] It appears from the Holy Scriptures, that it was chiefly from Egypt that cloth made of this fine flax was brought: “fine linen with broidered work from Egypt.”[^453]

[^451: Plin. lib. xix. c. 1.]

[^452: Proximus Byssino mulierum maximè deliciis genito: inventum jam est etiam [scilicet Linum] quod ignibus non absumetur, vivum id vocant, ardentesque in focis conviviorum ex eo vidimus mappas, sordibus exustis splendescentes igni magis, quàm possent aquis: i.e. A flax is now found out, which is proof against the violence of fire; it is called living flax; and we have seen table napkins of it glowing in the fires of our dining rooms; and receiving a lustre and a cleanness from flames, which no water could have given it.—Trans.]

[^453: Ezek. xxvii. 7.]

I take no notice of the Lotus, a very common plant, and in great request among the Egyptians, of whose berries, in former times, they made bread. There was another Lotus in Africa, which gave its name to the Lotophagi or Lotus-eaters; because they lived upon the fruit of this tree, which had so delicious a taste, if Homer may be credited, that it made those who ate it forget all the sweets of their native country,[^454] as Ulysses found to his cost in his return from Troy.

[^454: Των δ οστις λωτοιο φαγοι μελιηδεα καρπον, Ουκ ετ απαγγειλαι παλιν ηθελεν, ουδε νεεσθαι. Μη πω τις λωτοιο φαγων, νοστοιο λαθηται.

Odyss. ix. ver. 94, 95, 102.

—Trans.]

In general, it may be said, that the Egyptian pulse and fruits were excellent; and might, as Pliny observes,[^455] have sufficed singly for the nourishment of the inhabitants, such was their excellent quality, and so great their plenty. And, indeed, working men lived then almost upon nothing else, as appears from those who were employed in building the pyramids.

[^455: Ægyptus frugum quidem fertilissima, sed ut propè sola iis carere possit, tanta est ciborum ex herbis abundantia. Plin. l. xxi. c. 15.—Trans.]

Besides these rural riches, the Nile, from its fish, and the fatness it gave to the soil for the feeding of cattle, furnished the tables of the Egyptians with the most exquisite fish of every kind, and the most succulent flesh. This it was which made the Israelites so deeply regret the loss of Egypt, when they found themselves in the wilderness: “Who,” say they, in a plaintive, and at the same time, seditious tone, “shall give us flesh to eat? We remember the flesh which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers and melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick.[^456] We sat by the flesh-pots, and we did eat bread to the full.”[^457]

[^456: Numb. xi. 4, 5.]

[^457: Exod. xvi. 3.]

But the great and matchless wealth of Egypt arose from its corn, which, even in an almost universal famine, enabled it to support all the neighbouring nations, as it particularly did under Joseph's administration. In later ages, it was the resource and most certain granary of Rome and Constantinople. It is a well-known story, how a calumny raised against St. Athanasius, viz. of his having threatened to prevent in future the importation of corn into Constantinople from Alexandria, incensed the emperor Constantine against that holy bishop, because he knew that his capital city could not subsist without the corn which was brought to it from Egypt. The same reason induced all the emperors of Rome to take so great a care of Egypt, which they considered as the nursing mother of the world's metropolis.

Nevertheless, the same river which enabled this province to subsist the two most populous cities in the world, sometimes reduced even Egypt itself to the most terrible famine: and it is astonishing that Joseph's wise foresight, which in fruitful years had made provision for seasons of sterility, should not have taught these so much boasted politicians, to adopt similar precautions against the changes and inconstancy of the Nile. Pliny, in his panegyric upon Trajan, paints with wonderful strength the extremity to which that country was reduced by a famine under that prince's reign, and his generous relief of it. The reader will not be displeased to read here an extract of it, in which a greater regard will be had to Pliny's thoughts, than to his expressions.

“The Egyptians,” says Pliny, “who gloried that they needed neither rain nor sun to produce their corn, and who believed they might confidently contest the prize of plenty with the most fruitful countries of the world, were condemned to an unexpected drought, and a fatal sterility; from the greatest part of their territories being deserted and left unwatered by the Nile, whose inundation is the source and sure standard of their abundance. ‘They then implored that assistance from their prince which they had been accustomed to expect only from their river.’[^458] The delay of their relief was no longer than that which employed a courier to bring the melancholy news to Rome; and one would have imagined, that this misfortune had befallen them only to display with greater lustre the generosity and goodness of Cæsar. It was an ancient and general opinion, that our city could not subsist without provisions drawn from Egypt.[^459] This vain and proud nation boasted, that though conquered, they nevertheless fed their conquerors; that, by means of their river, either abundance or scarcity were entirely in their own disposal. But we now have returned the Nile his own harvests, and given him back the provisions he sent us. Let the Egyptians be then convinced, by their own experience, that they are not necessary to us, and are only our vassals. Let them know that their ships do not so much bring us the provision we stand in need of, as the tribute which they owe us. And let them never forget that we can do without them, but that they can never do without us. This most fruitful province had been ruined, had it not worn the Roman chains. The Egyptians, in their sovereign, found a deliverer, and a father. Astonished at the sight of their granaries, filled without any labour of their own, they were at a loss to know to whom they owed this foreign and gratuitous plenty. The famine of a people, though at such a distance from us, yet so speedily stopped, served only to let them feel the advantage of living under our empire. The Nile may, in other times, have diffused more plenty on Egypt, but never more glory upon us.[^460] May Heaven, content with this proof of the people's patience, and the prince's generosity, restore for ever back to Egypt its ancient fertility!”

[^458: Inundatione, id est, ubertate regio fraudata, sic opem Cæsaris invocavit, ut solet amnem suum.—Trans.]

[^459: Percrebuerat antiquitùs urbem nostram nisi opibus Ægypti ali sustentarique non posse. Superbiebat ventosa et insolens natio, quòd victorem quidem populum pasceret tamen, quòdque in suo flumine, in suis manibus, vel abundantia nostra vel fames esset. Refudimus Nilo suas copias. Recepit frumenta quæ miserat, deportatasque messes revexit.—Trans.]

[^460: Nilus Ægypto quidem sæpe. sed gloriæ nostræ nuaquam largior fluxit.—Trans.]

Pliny's reproach to the Egyptians, for their vain and foolish pride with regard to the inundations of the Nile, points out one of their most peculiar characteristics, and recalls to my mind a fine passage of Ezekiel, where God thus speaks to Pharaoh, one of their kings, “Behold I am against thee, Pharaoh, king of Egypt, the great Dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is my own, and I have made it for myself.”[^461] God perceived an insupportable pride in the heart of this prince: a sense of security and confidence in the inundations of the Nile, independent entirely on the influences of heaven; as though the happy effects of this inundation had been owing to nothing but his own care and labour, or those of his predecessors: “the river is mine, and I have made it.”

[^461: Ezek. xxix. 3, 9.]

Before I conclude this second part, which treats of the manners of the Egyptians, I think it incumbent on me to bespeak the attention of my readers to different passages scattered in the history of Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses, which confirm and illustrate part of what we meet with in profane authors upon this subject. They will there observe the perfect polity which reigned in Egypt, both in the court and the rest of the kingdom; the vigilance of the prince, who was informed of all transactions, had a regular council, a chosen number of ministers, armies ever well maintained and disciplined, both of horse, foot, and armed chariots; intendants in all the provinces; overseers or guardians of the public granaries; wise and exact dispensers of the corn lodged in them; a court composed of great officers of the crown, a captain of his guards, a chief cup-bearer, a master of his pantry; in a word, all things that compose a prince's household, and constitute a magnificent court. But above all these, the readers will admire the fear in which the threatenings of God were held, the inspector of all actions, and the judge of kings themselves; and the horror the Egyptians had for adultery, which was acknowledged to be a crime of so heinous a nature, that it alone was capable of bringing destruction on a nation.[^462]

[^462: Gen. xii. 10-26.]

Part The Third. The History of the Kings of Egypt.

No part of ancient history is more obscure or uncertain, than that of the first kings of Egypt. This proud nation, fondly conceited of its antiquity and nobility, thought it glorious to lose itself in an abyss of infinite ages, which seemed to carry its pretensions backward to eternity. According to its own historians,[^463] first, gods, and afterwards demigods or heroes, governed it successively, through a series of more than twenty thousand years. But the absurdity of this vain and fabulous claim is easily discovered.

[^463: Diod. l. i. p. 41.]

To gods and demigods, men succeeded as rulers or kings in Egypt, of whom Manetho has left us thirty dynasties or principalities. This Manetho was an Egyptian high priest, and keeper of the sacred archives of Egypt, and had been instructed in the Grecian learning: he wrote a history of Egypt, which he pretended to have extracted from the writings of Mercurius, and other ancient memoirs, preserved in the archives of the Egyptian temples. He drew up this history under the reign, and at the command of Ptolemy Philadelphus. If his thirty dynasties are allowed to be successive, they make up a series of time, of more than five thousand three hundred years, to the reign of Alexander the Great; but this is a manifest forgery. Besides, we find in Eratosthenes,[^464] who was invited to Alexandria by Ptolemy Euergetes, a catalogue of thirty-eight kings of Thebes, all different from those of Manetho. The clearing up of these difficulties has put the learned to a great deal of trouble and labour. The most effectual way to reconcile such contradictions, is to suppose, with almost all the modern writers upon this subject, that the kings of these different dynasties did not reign successively after one another, but many of them at the same time, and in different countries of Egypt. There were in Egypt four principal dynasties, that of Thebes, of Thin, of Memphis, and of Tanis. I shall not here give my readers a list of the kings who have reigned in Egypt, of most of whom we have only the names transmitted to us. I shall only take notice of what seems to me most proper, to give youth the necessary light into this part of history, for whose sake principally I engaged in this undertaking; and I shall confine myself chiefly to the memoirs left us by Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus, concerning the Egyptian kings, without even scrupulously preserving the exactness of succession, at least in the early part of the monarchy, which is very obscure; and without pretending to reconcile these two historians. Their design, especially that of Herodotus, was not to lay before us an exact series of the kings of Egypt, but only to point out those princes whose history appeared to them most important and instructive. I shall follow the same plan, and hope to be forgiven, for not having involved either myself or my readers in a labyrinth of almost inextricable difficulties, from which the most able can scarce disengage themselves, when they pretend to follow the series of history, and reduce it to fixed and certain dates. The curious may consult the learned pieces,[^465] in which this subject is treated in all its extent.

[^464: An historian of Cyrene.—Trans.]

[^465: Sir John Marsham's Canon Chronic. Father Pezron; the Dissertations of F. Tournemine, and Abbé Sevin, &c.—Trans.]

I am to premise, that Herodotus, upon the credit of the Egyptian priests, whom he had consulted, gives us a great number of oracles and singular incidents, all which, though he relates them as so many facts, the judicious reader will easily discover to be what they really are—I mean, fictions.

The ancient history of Egypt comprehends 2158 years, and is naturally divided into three periods.

The first begins with the establishment of the Egyptian monarchy, by Menes or Misraim, the son of Cham,[^466] in the year of the world 1816; and ends with the destruction of that monarchy by Cambyses, king of Persia, in the year of the world 3479. This first period contains 1663 years.

[^466: Or Ham.]

The second period is intermixed with the Persian and Grecian history, and extends to the death of Alexander the Great, which happened in the year 3681, and consequently includes 202 years.

The third period is that in which a new monarchy was formed in Egypt by the Lagidæ, or Ptolemies, descendants from Lagus, to the death of Cleopatra, the last queen of Egypt, in 3974; and this last comprehends 293 years.

I shall now treat only of the first period, reserving the two others for the Æras to which they belong.

[^467] The Kings of Egypt.—Menes. Historians are unanimously agreed, that Menes was the first king of Egypt. It is pretended, and not without foundation, that he is the same with Misraïm, the son of Cham.

[^467: A.M. 1816. Ant. J.C. 2188.]

Cham was the second son of Noah. When the family of the latter, after the extravagant attempt of building the tower of Babel, dispersed themselves into different countries, Cham retired to Africa; and it doubtless was he who afterwards was worshipped as a god, under the name of Jupiter Ammon. He had four children, Chus,[^468] Misraïm, Phut, and Canaan. Chus settled in Ethiopia, Misraïm in Egypt, which generally is called in Scripture after his name, and by that of Cham,[^469] his father; Phut took possession of that part of Africa which lies westward of Egypt; and Canaan, of the country which afterwards bore his name. The Canaanites are certainly the same people who are called almost always Phœnicians by the Greeks, of which foreign name no reason can be given, any more than of the oblivion of the true one.

[^468: Or Cush, Gen. x. 6.]

[^469: The footsteps of its old name (Mesraim) remain to this day among the Arabians, who call it Mesre; by the testimony of Plutarch, it was called χημία, Chemia, by an easy corruption of Chamia, and this for Cham or Ham.—Trans.]

I return to Misraïm.[^470] He is allowed to be the same with Menes, whom all historians declare to be the first king of Egypt, the institutor of the worship of the gods, and of the ceremonies of the sacrifices.

[^470: Herod. l. ii. p. 99. Diod. l. i. p. 42.]

Busiris, some ages after him, built the famous city of Thebes, and made it the seat of his empire. We have elsewhere taken notice of the wealth and magnificence of this city. This prince is not to be confounded with Busiris, so infamous for his cruelties.

Osymandyas. Diodorus gives a very particular description of many magnificent edifices raised by this king;[^471] one of which was adorned with sculptures and paintings of exquisite beauty, representing his expedition against the Bactrians, a people of Asia, whom he had invaded with four hundred thousand foot and twenty thousand horse. In another part of the edifice was exhibited an assembly of the judges, whose president wore, on his breast, a picture of Truth, with her eyes shut, and himself was surrounded with books—an emphatic emblem, denoting that judges ought to be perfectly versed in the laws, and impartial in the administration of them.

[^471: Diod. l. i. pp. 44, 45.]

The king likewise was painted here, offering to the gods gold and silver, which he drew every year from the mines of Egypt, amounting to the sum of sixteen millions.[^472]

[^472: Three thousand two hundred myriads of Minæ.—Trans.]

Not far from hence was seen a magnificent library, the oldest mentioned in history. Its title or inscription on the front was, The office, or treasury, of remedies for the diseases of the soul. Near it were placed statues, representing all the Egyptian gods, to each of whom the king made suitable offerings; by which he seemed to be desirous of informing posterity that his life and reign had been crowned with piety to the gods, and justice to men.

His mausoleum displayed uncommon magnificence; it was encompassed with a circle of gold, a cubit in breadth, and 365 cubits in circumference; each of which showed the rising and setting of the sun, moon, and the rest of the planets. For so early as this king's reign, the Egyptians divided the year into twelve months, each consisting of thirty days; to which they added every year five days and six hours.[^473] The spectator did not know which to admire most in this stately monument, whether the richness of its materials, or the genius and industry of the artists.

[^473: See Sir Isaac Newton's Chronology, p. 30.]

Uchoreus, one of the successors of Osymandyas, built the city of Memphis.[^474] This city was 150 furlongs, or more than seven leagues in circumference, and stood at the point of the Delta, in that part where the Nile divides itself into several branches or streams. Southward from the city, he raised a lofty mole. On the right and left he dug very deep moats to receive the river. These were faced with stone, and raised, near the city, by strong causeys; the whole designed to secure the city from the inundations of the Nile, and the incursions of the enemy. A city so advantageously situated, and so strongly fortified, that it was almost the key of the Nile, and by this means commanded the whole country, became soon the usual residence of the Egyptian kings. It kept possession of this honour till Alexandria was built by Alexander the Great.

[^474: Diod. p. 46.]

Mœris. This king made the famous lake, which went by his name, and whereof mention has been already made,

[^475] Egypt had long been governed by its native princes, when strangers, called Shepherd-kings, (Hycsos in the Egyptian language,) from Arabia or Phœnicia, invaded and seized a great part of Lower Egypt, and Memphis itself; but Upper Egypt remained unconquered, and the kingdom of Thebes existed till the reign of Sesostris. These foreign princes governed about 260 years.

[^475: A.M. 1920. Ant. J.C. 2084.]

[^476] Under one of these princes, called Pharaoh in Scripture,[^477] (a name common to all the kings of Egypt,) Abraham arrived there with his wife Sarah, who was exposed to great hazard, on account of her exquisite beauty, which reaching the prince's ear, she was by him taken from Abraham, upon the supposition that she was not his wife, but only his sister.

[^476: A.M. 2084. Ant. J.C. 1920.]

[^477: Gen. xii. 10-20.]

[^478] Thethmosis, or Amosis, having expelled the Shepherd-kings, reigned in Lower Egypt.

[^478: A.M. 2179. Ant. J.C. 1825.]

[^479] Long after his reign, Joseph was brought a slave into Egypt, by some Ishmaelitish merchants; sold to Potiphar; and, by a series of wonderful events, enjoyed the supreme authority, by his being raised to the chief employment of the kingdom. I shall pass over his history, as it is so universally known. But I must take notice of a remark of Justin, (the epitomizer of Trogus Pompeius,[^480] an excellent historian of the Augustan age,) viz. that Joseph, the youngest of Jacob's children, whom his brethren, through envy, had sold to foreign merchants, being endowed from heaven[^481] with the interpretation of dreams, and a knowledge of futurity, preserved, by his uncommon prudence, Egypt from the famine with which it was menaced, and was extremely caressed by the king.

[^479: A.M. 2276. Ant. J.C. 1728.]

[^480: Lib. xxxvi. c. 2.]

[^481: Justin ascribes this gift of heaven to Joseph's skill in magical arts: Cùm magicas ibi artes (Egypto) solerti ingenio percepisset, &c.—Trans.]

[^482] Jacob also went into Egypt with his whole family, which met with the kindest treatment from the Egyptians, whilst Joseph's important services were fresh in their memories. But after his death, say the Scriptures,[^483] “there arose up a new king, which knew not Joseph.”

[^482: A.M. 2298. Ant. J.C. 1706.]

[^483: Exod. i. 8.]

[^484] Rameses-miamun, according to archbishop Usher, was the name of this king, who is called Pharaoh in Scripture. He reigned sixty-six years, and oppressed the Israelites in a most grievous manner. “He set over them task-masters, to afflict them with their burdens, and they built for Pharaoh treasure-cities,[^485] Pithom and Raamses—and the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour, and they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field; all their service wherein they made them serve, was with rigour.”[^486] This king had two sons, Amenophis and Busiris.

[^484: A.M. 2427. Ant. J.C. 1577.]

[^485: Heb. urbes thesaurorum. LXX. urbes munitas. These cities were appointed to preserve, as in a storehouse, the corn, oil, and other products of Egypt. Vatab.—Trans.]

[^486: Exod. i. 11, 13, 14.]

[^487] Amenophis, the eldest, succeeded him. He was the Pharaoh, under whose reign the Israelites departed out of Egypt, and was drowned in passing the Red-Sea.

[^487: A.M. 2494. Ant. J.C. 1510.]

[^488] Father Tournemine makes Sesostris, of whom we shall speak immediately, the Pharaoh who raised the persecution against the Israelites, and oppressed them with the most painful toils. This is exactly agreeable to the account given by Diodorus of this prince, who employed in his Egyptian works only foreigners; so that we may place the memorable event of the passage of the Red-Sea, under his son Pheron;[^489] and the characteristic of impiety ascribed to him by Herodotus, greatly strengthens the probability of this conjecture. The plan I have proposed to follow in this history, excuses me from entering into chronological discussions.

[^488: A.M. 2513. Ant. J.C. 1491.]

[^489: This name bears a great resemblance to Pharaoh, which was common to the Egyptian kings.—Trans.]

Diodorus, speaking of the Red-Sea,[^490] has made one remark very worthy our observation; a tradition (says that historian) has been transmitted through the whole nation, from father to son, for many ages, that once an extraordinary ebb dried up the sea, so that its bottom was seen; and that a violent flow immediately after brought back the waters to their former channel. It is evident, that the miraculous passage of Moses over the Red-Sea is here hinted at; and I make this remark, purposely to admonish young students, not to slip over, in their perusal of authors, these precious remains of antiquity; especially when they bear, like this passage, any relation to religion.

[^490: Lib. iii. p. 74.]

Archbishop Usher says, that Amenophis left two sons, one called Sesothis or Sesostris, and the other Armais. The Greeks call him Belus, and his two sons Egyptus and Danaus.

Sesostris[^491] was not only one of the most powerful kings of Egypt, but one of the greatest conquerors that antiquity boasts of. His father, whether by inspiration, caprice, or, as the Egyptians say, by the authority of an oracle, formed a design of making his son a conqueror. This he set about after the Egyptian manner, that is, in a great and noble way. All the male children, born the same day with Sesostris, were, by the king's order, brought to court. Here they were educated as if they had been his own children, with the same care bestowed on Sesostris, with whom they were brought up. He could not possibly have given him more faithful ministers, nor officers who more zealously desired the success of his arms. The chief part of their education was, the enuring them, from their infancy, to a hard and laborious life, in order that they might one day be capable of sustaining with ease the toils of war. They were never suffered to eat, till they had run, on foot or horseback, a considerable race. Hunting was their most common exercise.

[^491: Herod. l. ii. c. 102, 110. Diod. l. i. pp. 48, 54.]

Ælian remarks[^492] that Sesostris was taught by Mercury, who instructed him in politics, and the art of government. This Mercury is he whom the Greeks called Trismegistus, i.e. thrice great. Egypt, his native country, owes to him the invention of almost every art. The two books, which go under his name, bear such evident characters of novelty, that the forgery is no longer doubted. There was another Mercury who also was very famous amongst the Egyptians for his rare knowledge; and of much greater antiquity than he of whom we have been speaking. Jamblicus, a priest of Egypt, affirms, that it was customary with the Egyptians, to affix the name of Hermes or Mercury to all the new books or inventions that were offered to the public.

[^492: Τὰ νοήματα ἐκμενσώθηναι, lib. xii. c. 4.]

When Sesostris was more advanced in years, his father sent him against the Arabians, in order to acquire military knowledge. Here the young prince learned to bear hunger and thirst; and subdued a nation which till then had never been conquered. The youths educated with him attended him in all his campaigns.

Accustomed by this conquest to martial toils, he was next sent by his father to try his fortune westward. He invaded Libya, and subdued the greatest part of that vast country.

[^493] Sesostris. During this expedition his father died, and left him capable of attempting the greatest enterprises. He formed no less a design than that of the conquest of the world. But before he left his kingdom, he provided for his domestic security, in winning the hearts of his subjects by his generosity, justice, and a popular and obliging behaviour. He was no less studious to gain the affection of his officers and soldiers, whom he wished to be ever ready to shed the last drop of their blood in his service; persuaded that his enterprises would all be unsuccessful, unless his army should be attached to his person, by all the ties of esteem, affection, and interest. He divided the country into thirty-six governments (called Nomi,) and bestowed them on persons of merit, and the most approved fidelity.

[^493: A.M. 2513. Ant. J.C. 1491.]

In the mean time he made the requisite preparations, levied forces, and headed them with officers of the greatest bravery and reputation, and these were taken chiefly from among the youths who had been educated with him. He had seventeen hundred of these officers, who were all capable of inspiring his troops with resolution, a love of discipline, and a zeal for the service of their prince. His army consisted of six hundred thousand foot, and twenty-four thousand horse, besides twenty-seven thousand armed chariots.

He began his expedition by invading Æthiopia, situated to the south of Egypt. He made it tributary, and obliged the nations of it to furnish him annually with a certain quantity of ebony, ivory, and gold.

He had fitted out a fleet of four hundred sail, and ordering it to advance to the Red-Sea, made himself master of the isles and cities lying on the coasts of that sea. He himself heading his land army, overran and subdued Asia with amazing rapidity, and advanced farther into India than Hercules, Bacchus, and in after-times Alexander himself, had ever done; for he subdued the countries beyond the Ganges, and advanced as far as the Ocean. One may judge from hence how unable the more neighbouring countries were to resist him. The Scythians, as far as the river Tanais, as well as Armenia, and Cappadocia, were conquered. He left a colony in the ancient kingdom of Colchos, situated to the east of the Black Sea, where the Egyptian customs and manners have been ever since retained. Herodotus saw in Asia Minor, from one sea to the other, monuments of his victories. In several countries was read the following inscription engraven on pillars: “Sesostris, king of kings, and lord of lords, subdued this country by the power of his arms.” Such pillars were found even in Thrace, and his empire extended from the Ganges to the Danube. In his expeditions, some nations bravely defended their liberties, and others yielded them up without making the least resistance. This disparity was denoted by him in hieroglyphical figures, on the monuments erected to perpetuate the remembrance of his victories, agreeably to the Egyptian practice.

The scarcity of provisions in Thrace stopped the progress of his conquests, and prevented his advancing farther in Europe. One remarkable circumstance is observed in this conqueror, who never once thought, as others had done, of preserving his acquisitions; but contenting himself with the glory of having subdued and despoiled so many nations; after having made wild havoc up and down the world for nine years, he confined himself almost within the ancient limits of Egypt, a few neighbouring provinces excepted; for we do not find any traces or footsteps of this new empire, either under himself or his successors.

He returned therefore laden with the spoils of the vanquished nations, dragging after him a numberless multitude of captives, and covered with greater glory than any of his predecessors; that glory, I mean, which employs so many tongues and pens in its praise; which consists in invading a great number of provinces in a hostile way, and is often productive of numberless calamities. He rewarded his officers and soldiers with a truly royal magnificence, in proportion to their rank and merit. He made it both his pleasure and duty, to put the companions of his victory in such a condition as might enable them to enjoy, during the remainder of their days, a calm and easy repose, the just reward of their past toils.

With regard to himself, for ever careful of his own reputation, and still more of making his power advantageous to his subjects, he employed the repose which peace allowed him, in raising works that might contribute more to the enriching of Egypt, than the immortalizing his name; works, in which the art and industry of the workman were more admired, than the immense sums which had been expended on them.

A hundred famous temples, raised as so many monuments of gratitude to the tutelar gods of all the cities, were the first, as well as the most illustrious, testimonies of his victories; and he took care to publish in the inscriptions on them, that these mighty works had been completed without burdening any of his subjects. He made it his glory to be tender of them, and to employ only captives in these monuments of his conquests. The Scriptures take notice of something like this, where they speak of the buildings of Solomon.[^494] But he prided himself particularly in adorning and enriching the temple of Vulcan at Pelusium, in acknowledgment of the protection which he fancied that god had bestowed on him, when, on his return from his expeditions, his brother had a design of destroying him in that city, with his wife and children, by setting fire to the apartment where he then lay.

[^494: 2 Chron. viii. 9. But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no servants for his work.—Trans.]

His great work was, the raising, in every part of Egypt, a considerable number of high banks or moles, on which new cities were built, in order that these might be a security for men and beasts during the inundations of the Nile.

From Memphis, as far as the sea, he cut, on both sides of the river, a great number of canals, for the conveniency of trade, and the conveying of provisions, and for the settling an easy correspondence between such cities as were most distant from one another. Besides the advantages of traffic, Egypt was, by these canals, made inaccessible to the cavalry of its enemies, which before had so often harassed it by repeated incursions.

He did still more. To secure Egypt from the inroads of its nearer neighbours, the Syrians and Arabians, he fortified all the eastern coast from Pelusium to Heliopolis, that is, for upwards of seven leagues.[^495]

[^495: 150 stadia, about 18 miles English.—Trans.]

Sesostris might have been considered as one of the most illustrious and most boasted heroes of antiquity, had not the lustre of his warlike actions, as well as his pacific virtues, been tarnished by a thirst of glory, and a blind fondness for his own grandeur, which made him forget that he was a man. The kings and chiefs of the conquered nations came, at stated times, to do homage to their victor, and pay him the appointed tribute. On every other occasion, he treated them with sufficient humanity and generosity. But when he went to the temple, or entered his capital, he caused these princes to be harnessed to his car, four abreast, instead of horses; and valued himself upon his being thus drawn by the lords and sovereigns of other nations. What I am most surprised at, is, that Diodorus should rank this foolish and inhuman vanity among the most shining actions of this prince.

Being grown blind in his old age, he died by his own hands, after having reigned thirty-three years, and left his kingdom infinitely rich. His empire, nevertheless, did not reach beyond the fourth generation. But there still remained, so low as the reign of Tiberius, magnificent monuments, which showed the extent of Egypt under Sesostris,[^496] and the immense tributes which were paid to it.[^497]

[^496: Tacit. Ann. l. ii. c. 60.]

[^497: Legebantur indicta gentibus tributa—haud minùs magnifica quàm nunc vi Parthorum aut potentiâ Romanâ jubentur—Inscribed on pillars, were read the tributes imposed on vanquished nations, which were not inferior to those now paid to the Parthian and Roman powers.—Trans.]

I now go back to some facts which took place in this period, but which were omitted, in order that I might not break the thread of the history, and now I shall but barely mention them.

[^498] About the æra in question, the Egyptians settled themselves in divers parts of the earth. The colony, which Cecrops led out of Egypt, built twelve cities, or rather as many towns, of which he composed the kingdom of Athens.

[^498: A.M. 2448.]

[^499] We observed, that the brother of Sesostris, called by the Greeks Danaus, had formed a design to murder him, on his return to Egypt, after his conquest. But being defeated in his horrid project, he was obliged to fly. He thereupon retired to Peloponnesus, where he seized upon the kingdom of Argos, which had been founded about four hundred years before, by Inachus.

[^499: A.M. 2530.]

[^500] Busiris, brother of Amenophis, so infamous among the ancients for his cruelties, exercised his tyranny at that time on the banks of the Nile; and barbarously murdered all foreigners who landed in his country: this was probably during the absence of Sesostris.

[^500: A.M. 2533.]

[^501] About the same time, Cadmus brought from Syria into Greece the invention of letters. Some pretend, that these characters or letters were Egyptian, and that Cadmus himself was a native of Egypt, and not of Phœnicia; and the Egyptians, who ascribe to themselves the invention of every art, and boast a greater antiquity than any other nation, give to their Mercury the honour of inventing letters. Most of the learned agree,[^502] that Cadmus carried the Phœnician or Syrian letters into Greece, and that those letters were the same as the Hebraic; the Hebrews, who formed but a small nation, being comprehended under the general name of Syrians. Joseph Scaliger, in his notes on the Chronicon of Eusebius, proves, that the Greek letters, and those of the Latin alphabet formed from them, derive their original from the ancient Phœnician letters, which are the same with the Samaritan, and were used by the Jews before the Babylonish captivity. Cadmus carried only sixteen letters[^503] into Greece, eight others being added afterwards.

[^501: A.M. 2549.]

[^502: The reader may consult, on this subject, two learned dissertations of Abbé Renaudot, inserted in the second volume of The History of the Academy of Inscriptions.—Trans.]

[^503: The sixteen letters brought by Cadmus into Greece, are α, β, γ, δ, ε, ι, κ, λ, μ, ν, ο, π, ρ, σ, τ, υ. Palamedes, at the siege of Troy, i.e. upwards of two hundred and fifty years lower than Cadmus, added the four following, ξ, θ, φ, χ; and Simonides, a long time after, invented the four others, namely, η, ω, ζ, ψ.—Trans.]

I return to the history of the Egyptian kings, whom I shall hereafter rank in the same order as Herodotus has assigned to them.

[^504] Pheron succeeded Sesostris in his kingdom, but not in his glory. Herodotus[^505] relates but one action of his, which shows how greatly he had degenerated from the religious sentiments of his father. In an extraordinary inundation of the Nile, which exceeded eighteen cubits, this prince, enraged at the wild havoc which was made by it, threw a javelin at the river, as if he intended thereby to chastise its insolence; but was himself immediately punished for his impiety, if the historian may be credited, with the loss of sight.

[^504: A.M. 2517. Ant. J.C. 1547.]

[^505: Herod. l. ii. c. 111. Diod. l. i. p. 54.]

[^506] Proteus.[^507] He was of Memphis, where, in Herodotus's time,[^508] his temple was still standing, in which was a chapel dedicated to Venus the Stranger. It is conjectured that this Venus was Helen. For, in the reign of this monarch, Paris the Trojan, returning home with Helen whom he had stolen, was driven by a storm into one of the mouths of the Nile, called Canopic; and from thence was conducted to Proteus at Memphis, who reproached him in the strongest terms for his base perfidy and guilt, in stealing the wife of his host, and with her all the effects in his house. He added, that the only reason why he did not punish him with death (as his crime deserved) was, because the Egyptians were careful not to imbrue their hands in the blood of strangers: that he would keep Helen, with all the riches that were brought with her, in order to restore them to their lawful owner: that as for himself, (Paris,) he must either quit his dominions in three days, or expect to be treated as an enemy. The king's order was obeyed. Paris continued his voyage, and arrived at Troy, whither he was closely pursued by the Grecian army. The Greeks summoned the Trojans to surrender Helen, and with her all the treasures of which her husband had been plundered. The Trojans answered, that neither Helen, nor her treasures, were in their city. And, indeed, was it at all likely, says Herodotus, that Priam, who was so wise an old prince, should choose to see his children and country destroyed before his eyes, rather than give the Greeks the just and reasonable satisfaction they desired? But it was to no purpose for them to affirm with an oath, that Helen was not in their city; the Greeks, being firmly persuaded that they were trifled with, persisted obstinately in their unbelief: the deity, continues the same historian, being resolved that the Trojans, by the total destruction of their city and empire, should teach the affrighted world this lesson:[^509]—That great crimes are attended with as great and signal punishments from the offended gods. Menelaus, on his return from Troy, called at the court of king Proteus, who restored him Helen, with all her treasure. Herodotus proves, from some passages in Homer, that the voyage of Paris to Egypt was not unknown to this poet.

[^506: A.M. 2800. Ant. J.C. 1204.]

[^507: I do not think myself obliged to enter here into a discussion, which would be attended with very perplexing difficulties, should I pretend to reconcile the series, or succession of the kings, as given by Herodotus, with the opinion of archbishop Usher. This last supposes, with many other learned men, that Sesostris is the son of that Egyptian king who was drowned in the Red-Sea, whose reign must consequently have begun in the year of the world 2513, and continued till the year 2547, since it lasted thirty-three years. Should we allow fifty years to the reign of Pheron his son, there would still be an interval of above two hundred years between Pheron and Proteus, who, according to Herodotus, was the immediate successor of the former; since Proteus lived at the time of the siege of Troy, which, according to Usher, was taken An. Mun. 2820. I know not whether his almost total silence on the Egyptian kings after Sesostris, was owing to his sense of this difficulty. I suppose a long interval to have occurred between Pheron and Proteus; accordingly, Diodorus (lib. i. p. liv.) fills it up with a great many kings; and the same must be said of some of the following kings.—Trans.]

[^508: Herod. l. ii. c. 112, 120.]

[^509: Ὡς τῶν μεγαλων ἀδικημάτον μεγάλαι εἰσὶ καὶ αἱ τιμωρὶαι παρὰ τῶν Θεῶν.—Trans.]

Rhampsinitus. What is related by Herodotus[^510] concerning the treasury built by this king, who was the richest of all his predecessors, and his descent into hell, has so much the air of romance and fiction, as to deserve no mention here.

[^510: L. ii. c. 121, 123.]

Till the reign of this king, there had been some shadow, at least, of justice and moderation in Egypt; but in the two following reigns, violence and cruelty usurped their place.

Cheops and Cephren.[^511] These two princes, who were truly brothers by the similitude of their manners, seem to have vied with each other which of them should distinguish himself most, by a barefaced impiety towards the gods, and a barbarous inhumanity to men. Cheops reigned fifty years, and his brother Cephren fifty-six years after him. They kept the temples shut during the whole time of their long reigns; and forbid the offering of sacrifices under the severest penalties. On the other hand, they oppressed their subjects by employing them in the most grievous and useless works; and sacrificed the lives of numberless multitudes of men, merely to gratify a senseless ambition of immortalizing their names by edifices of an enormous magnitude, and a boundless expense. It is remarkable, that those stately pyramids, which have so long been the admiration of the whole world, were the effect of the irreligion and merciless cruelty of those princes.

[^511: Herod. l. ii. c. 124, 128. Diod. l. i. p. 57.]

Mycerinus.[^512] He was the son of Cheops, but of a character opposite to that of his father. So far from walking in his steps, he detested his conduct, and pursued quite different measures. He again opened the temples of the gods, restored the sacrifices, did all that lay in his power to comfort his subjects, and make them forget their past miseries; and believed himself set over them for no other purpose but to exercise justice, and to make them taste all the blessings of an equitable and peaceful administration. He heard their complaints, dried their tears, alleviated their misery, and thought himself not so much the master as the father of his people. This procured him the love of them all. Egypt resounded with his praises, and his name commanded veneration in all places.

[^512: Herod. l. ii. p. 139. 140. Diod. p. 58.]

One would naturally conclude, that so prudent and humane a conduct must have drawn down on Mycerinus the protection of the gods. But it happened far otherwise. His misfortunes began from the death of a darling and only daughter, in whom his whole felicity consisted. He ordered extraordinary honours to be paid to her memory, which were still continued in Herodotus's time. This historian informs us, that in the city of Saïs, exquisite odours were burnt, in the day-time, at the tomb of this princess; and that during the night, a lamp was kept constantly burning.

He was told by an oracle, that his reign would continue but seven years. And as he complained of this to the gods, and inquired the reason why so long and prosperous a reign had been granted to his father and uncle, who were equally cruel and impious, whilst his own, which he had endeavoured so carefully to render as equitable and mild as it was possible for him to do, should be so short and unhappy; he was answered, that these were the very causes of it, it being the will of the gods, to oppress and afflict Egypt during the space of one hundred and fifty years, as a punishment for its crimes; and that his reign, which was to have been like those of the preceding monarchs, of fifty years' continuance, was shortened on account of his too great lenity. Mycerinus likewise built a pyramid, but much inferior in dimensions to that of his father.

Asychis.[^513] He enacted the law relating to loans, which forbade a son to borrow money, without giving the dead body of his father by way of security for it. The law added, that in case the son took no care to redeem his father's body by restoring the loan, both himself and his children should be deprived for ever of the rights of sepulture.

[^513: Herod. l. ii. c. 136.]

He valued himself for having surpassed all his predecessors, by the building a pyramid of brick, more magnificent, if this king was to be credited, than any hitherto seen. The following inscription, by its founder's order, was engraved upon it. Compare me not with pyramids built of stone; which I as much excel as jupiter does all the other gods.[^514]

[^514: The remainder of the inscription, as we find it in Herodotus, is—for men plunging long poles down to the bottom of the lake, drew bricks (πλίνθος εἴρυσαν) out of the mud which stuck to them, and gave me this form.—Trans.]

If we suppose the six preceding reigns (the exact duration of some of which is not fixed by Herodotus) to comprise one hundred and seventy years, there will remain an interval of near three hundred years, to the reign of Sabachus the Ethiopian. In this interval, I place a few circumstances related in Holy Scripture.

[^515] Pharaoh, king of Egypt, gave his daughter in marriage to Solomon king of Israel; who received her in that part of Jerusalem called the city of David, till he had built her a palace.[^516]

[^515: A.M. 2991. Ant. J.C. 1013.]

[^516: 1 Kings iii. 1.]

Sesach or Shishak, otherwise called Sesonchis.[^517] It was to him that Jeroboam fled, to avoid the wrath of Solomon, who intended to kill him.[^518] He abode in Egypt till Solomon's death, and then returned to Jerusalem, when, putting himself at the head of the rebels, he won from Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, ten tribes, over whom he declared himself king.

[^517: A.M. 3026. Ant. J.C. 978.]

[^518: 1 Kings xi. 40. and xii.]

[^519] This Sesach, in the fifth year of the reign of Rehoboam, marched against Jerusalem, because the Jews had transgressed against the Lord. He came with twelve hundred chariots of war, and sixty thousand horse.[^520] He had brought numberless multitudes of people, who were all Libyans,[^521] Troglodytes, and Ethiopians. He made himself master of all the strongest cities of Judah, and advanced as far as Jerusalem. Then the king, and the princes of Israel, having humbled themselves, and implored the protection of the God of Israel; God told them, by his prophet Shemaiah, that, because they humbled themselves, he would not utterly destroy them as they had deserved; but that they should be the servants of Sesach: in order “that they might know the difference of his service, and the service of the kingdoms of the country.”[^522] Sesach retired from Jerusalem, after having plundered the treasures of the house of the Lord, and of the king's house; he carried off every thing with him, “and even also the three hundred shields of gold which Solomon had made.”

[^519: A.M. 3033. Ant. J.C. 971.]

[^520: 2 Chron. xii. 1-9.]

[^521: The English version of the Bible says, The Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians.—Trans.]

[^522: Or, of the kingdoms of the earth.—Trans.]

[^523] Zerah, king of Ethiopia, and doubtless of Egypt at the same time, made war upon Asa king of Judah.[^524] His army consisted of a million of men, and three hundred chariots of war. Asa marched against him, and drawing up his army in order of battle, in full reliance on the God whom he served: “Lord,” says he, “it is nothing for thee to help whether with many, or with them that have no power. Help us, O Lord our God, for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude; O Lord, thou art our God, let not man prevail against thee.” A prayer offered up with such strong faith was heard. God struck the Ethiopians with terror; they fled, and all were irrevocably defeated, being “destroyed before the Lord, and before his host.”

[^523: A.M. 3063. Ant. J.C. 941.]

[^524: 2 Chron. xiv. 9-13.]

Anysis.[^525] He was blind, and under his reign Sabachus, king of Ethiopia, being encouraged by an oracle, entered Egypt with a numerous army, and possessed himself of it. He reigned with great clemency and justice. Instead of putting to death such criminals as had been sentenced to die by the judges, he made them repair the causeys, on which the respective cities to which they belonged were situated. He built several magnificent temples, and among the rest, one in the city of Bubastus, of which Herodotus gives a long and elegant description. After a reign of fifty years, which was the time appointed by the oracle, he retired voluntarily to his old kingdom of Ethiopia, and left the throne of Egypt to Anysis, who, during this time, had concealed himself in the fens.

[^525: Herod. l. ii. c. 137. Diod, l. i. p. 59.]

[^526] It is believed that this Sabachus was the same with So, whose aid was implored by Hoshea, king of Israel, against Shalmanezer, king of Assyria.[^527]

[^526: A.M. 3279. Ant. J.C. 725.]

[^527: 2 Kings xvii. 4.]

Sethon. He reigned fourteen years.

[^528] He is the same with Sevechus, the son of Sabacon, or So, the Ethiopian, who reigned so long over Egypt. This prince, so far from discharging the functions of a king, was ambitious of those of a priest; causing himself to be consecrated high-priest of Vulcan. Abandoning himself entirely to superstition, he neglected to defend his kingdom by force of arms; paying no regard to military men, from a firm persuasion that he should never have occasion for their assistance; he, therefore, was so far from endeavouring to gain their affections, that he deprived them of their privileges, and even dispossessed them of their revenues of such lands as his predecessors had given them.

[^528: A.M. 3285. Ant. J.C. 719.]

He was soon made sensible of their resentment in a war that broke out suddenly, and from which he delivered himself solely by a miraculous protection, if Herodotus may be credited, who intermixes his account of this war with a great many fabulous particulars. Sanacharib (so Herodotus calls this prince) king of the Arabians and Assyrians, having entered Egypt with a numerous army, the Egyptian officers and soldiers refused to march against him. The high priest of Vulcan, being thus reduced to the greatest extremity, had recourse to his god, who bid him not despond, but march courageously against the enemy with the few soldiers he could raise. Sethon obeyed. A small number of merchants, artificers, and others who were the dregs of the populace, joined him; and with this handful of men, he marched to Pelusium, where Sanacharib had pitched his camp. The night following, a prodigious multitude of rats entered the camp of the Assyrians, and gnawing to pieces all their bowstrings, and the thongs of their shields, rendered them incapable of making the least defence. Being disarmed in this manner, they were obliged to fly; and they retreated with the loss of a great part of their forces. Sethon, when he returned home, ordered a statue of himself to be set up in the temple of Vulcan, holding in his right hand a rat, and these words to be inscribed thereon:—Let the man who beholds me learn to reverence the gods.[^529]

[^529: Ἐς ἐμέ τις ὁρέων. εὐσεβης ἔστω—Trans.]

It is very obvious that this story, as related here from Herodotus, is an alteration of that which is told in the second book of Kings. We there see,[^530] that Sennacherib, king of the Assyrians, having subdued all the neighbouring nations, and made himself master of all the other cities of Judah, resolved to besiege Hezekiah in Jerusalem, his capital city. The ministers of this holy king, in spite of his opposition, and the remonstrances of the prophet Isaiah, who promised them, in God's name, a sure and certain protection, provided they would trust in him only, sent secretly to the Egyptians and Ethiopians for succour. Their armies, being united, marched to the relief of Jerusalem at the time appointed, and were met and vanquished by the Assyrian in a pitched battle. He pursued them into Egypt and entirely laid waste the country. At his return from thence, the very night before he was to have given a general assault to Jerusalem, which then seemed lost to all hopes, the destroying angel made dreadful havoc in the camp of the Assyrians; destroyed a hundred fourscore and five thousand men by fire and sword; and proved evidently, that they had great reason to rely, as Hezekiah had done, on the promise of the God of Israel.

[^530: Chap. xvii.]

This is the real fact. But as it was no ways honourable to the Egyptians, they endeavoured to turn it to their own advantage, by disguising and corrupting the circumstances of it. Nevertheless, the footsteps of this history, though so much defaced, ought yet to be highly valued, as coming from an historian of so great antiquity and authority as Herodotus.

The prophet Isaiah had foretold, at several times, that this expedition of the Egyptians, which had been concerted, seemingly, with such prudence, conducted with the greatest skill, and in which the forces of two powerful empires were united, in order to relieve the Jews, would not only be of no service to Jerusalem, but even destructive to Egypt itself, whose strongest cities would be taken, its territories plundered, and its inhabitants of all ages and sexes led into captivity. See the 18th, 19th, 20th, 30th, 31st, &c. chapters of his prophecy.

Archbishop Usher and Dean Prideaux suppose that it was at this period that the ruin of the famous city No-Amon,[^531] spoken of by the prophet Nahum, happened. That prophet says,[^532] that “she was carried away—that her young children were dashed in pieces at the top of all the streets—that the enemy cast lots for her honourable men, and that all her great men were bound in chains.” He observes, that all these misfortunes befell that city, when Egypt and Ethiopia were her strength; which seems to refer clearly enough to the time of which we are here speaking, when Tharaca and Sethon had united their forces. However, this opinion is not without some difficulties, and is contradicted by some learned men. It is sufficient for me to have hinted it to the reader.

[^531: The Vulgate calls that city Alexandria, to which the Hebrew gives the name of No-Amon, because Alexandria was afterwards built in the place where this stood. Dean Prideaux, after Bochart, thinks that it was Thebes, surnamed Diospolis. Indeed, the Egyptian Amon is the same with Jupiter. But Thebes is not the place where Alexandria was since built. Perhaps there was another city there, which also was called No-Amon.—Trans.]

[^532: Nahum iii. 8, 10.]

Till the reign of Sethon, the Egyptian priests computed three hundred and forty-one generations of men;[^533] which make eleven thousand three hundred and forty years; allowing three generations to a hundred years. They counted the like number of priests and kings. The latter, whether gods or men, had succeeded one another without interruption, under the name of Piromis, an Egyptian word signifying good and virtuous. The Egyptian priests showed Herodotus three hundred and forty-one wooden colossal statues of these Piromis, all ranged in order in a great hall. Such was the folly of the Egyptians, to lose themselves as it were in a remote antiquity, to which no other people could dare to pretend.

[^533: Herod. l. ii. c. 142.]

[^534] Tharaca. He it was who joined Sethon, with an Ethiopian army, to relieve Jerusalem.[^535] After the death of Sethon, who had sitten fourteen years on the throne, Tharaca ascended it, and reigned eighteen years. He was the last Ethiopian king who reigned in Egypt.

[^534: A.M. 3299. Ant. J.C. 705.]

[^535: Afric. apud Syncel. p. 74. Diod l. i. p. 59.]

After his death, the Egyptians, not being able to agree about the succession, were two years in a state of anarchy, during which there were great disorders and confusions among them.

[^536] At last,[^537] twelve of the principal noblemen, conspiring together, seized upon the kingdom, and divided it amongst themselves into as many parts. It was agreed by them, that each should govern his own district with equal power and authority, and that no one should attempt to invade or seize the dominions of another. They thought it necessary to make this agreement, and to bind it with the most dreadful oaths, to elude the prediction of an oracle, which had foretold, that he among them who should offer his libation to Vulcan out of a brazen bowl, should gain the sovereignty of Egypt. They reigned together fifteen years in the utmost harmony: and to leave a famous monument of their concord to posterity, they jointly, and at a common expense, built the famous labyrinth, which was a pile of building consisting of twelve large palaces, with as many edifices underground as appeared above it. I have spoken elsewhere of this labyrinth.

[^536: A.M. 3319. Ant. J.C. 685.]

[^537: Herod. l. ii. c. 147, 152.]

One day, as the twelve kings were assisting at a solemn and periodical sacrifice offered in the temple of Vulcan, the priests, having presented each of them a golden bowl for the libation, one was wanting; when Psammetichus,[^538] without any design, supplied the want of this bowl with his brazen helmet, (for each wore one,) and with it performed the ceremony of the libation. This accident struck the rest of the kings, and recalled to their memory the prediction of the oracle above mentioned. They thought it therefore necessary to secure themselves from his attempts, and therefore, with one consent, banished him into the fenny parts of Egypt.

[^538: He was one of the twelve.—Trans.]

After Psammetichus had passed some years there, waiting a favourable opportunity to revenge himself for the affront which had been put upon him, a courier brought him advice, that brazen men were landed in Egypt. These were Grecian soldiers, Carians and Ionians, who had been cast upon the coasts of Egypt by a storm, and were completely covered with helmets, cuirasses, and other arms of brass. Psammetichus immediately called to mind the oracle, which had answered him, that he should be succoured by brazen men from the sea-coast. He did not doubt but the prediction was now fulfilled. He therefore made a league with these strangers; engaged them with great promises to stay with him; privately levied other forces; and put these Greeks at their head; when giving battle to the eleven kings, he defeated them, and remained sole possessor of Egypt.

[^539] Psammetichus. As this prince owed his preservation to the Ionians and Carians, he settled them in Egypt, (from which all foreigners hitherto had been excluded;) and, by assigning them sufficient lands and fixed revenues, he made them forget their native country.[^540] By his order, Egyptian children were put under their care to learn the Greek tongue; and on this occasion, and by this means, the Egyptians began to have a correspondence with the Greeks; and from that æra, the Egyptian history, which, till then, had been intermixed with pompous fables, by the artifice of the priests, begins, according to Herodotus, to speak with greater truth and certainty.

[^539: A.M. 3334. Ant. J.C. 670.]

[^540: Herod. l. ii. c. 153, 154.]

As soon as Psammetichus was settled on the throne, he engaged in war against the king of Assyria, on the subject of the boundaries of the two empires. This war was of long continuance. Ever since Syria had been conquered by the Assyrians, Palestine, being the only country that separated the two kingdoms, was the subject of continual discord; as afterwards it was between the Ptolemies and the Seleucidæ. They were eternally contending for it, and it was alternately won by the stronger. Psammetichus, seeing himself the peaceable possessor of all Egypt, and having restored the ancient form of government,[^541] thought it high time for him to look to his frontiers, and to secure them against the Assyrian, his neighbour, whose power increased daily. For this purpose, he entered Palestine at the head of an army.

[^541: This revolution happened about seven years after the captivity of Manasseh, king of Judah.—Trans.]

Perhaps we are to refer to the beginning of this war, an incident related by Diodorus;[^542] that the Egyptians, provoked to see the Greeks posted on the right wing by the king himself, in preference to them, quitted the service, to the number of upwards of two hundred thousand men, and retired into Ethiopia, where they met with an advantageous settlement.

[^542: Lib. i. p. 61.]

Be this as it will, Psammetichus entered Palestine,[^543] where his career was stopped by Azotus, one of the principal cities of the country, which gave him so much trouble, that he was forced to besiege it twenty-nine years before he could take it. This is the longest siege mentioned in ancient history.

[^543: Herod. l. ii. c. 157.]

This was anciently one of the five capital cities of the Philistines. The Egyptians, having seized it some time before, had fortified it with such care, that it was their strongest bulwark on that side. Nor could Sennacherib enter Egypt, till he had first made himself master of this city,[^544] which was taken by Tartan, one of his generals. The Assyrians had possessed it hitherto; and it was not till after the long siege just now mentioned, that the Egyptians recovered it.

[^544: Isa. xx. 1.]

In this period,[^545] the Scythians, leaving the banks of the Palus Mæotis, made an inroad into Media, defeated Cyaxares, the king of that country, and deprived him of all Upper Asia, of which they kept possession during twenty-eight years. They pushed their conquests in Syria as far as to the frontiers of Egypt. But Psammetichus marching out to meet them, prevailed so far, by his presents and entreaties, that they advanced no farther, and by that means delivered his kingdom from these dangerous enemies.

[^545: Herod. l. i. c. 105.]

Till his reign,[^546] the Egyptians had imagined themselves to be the most ancient nation upon earth. Psammetichus was desirous to prove this himself, and he employed a very extraordinary experiment for this purpose. He commanded (if we may credit the relation) two children, newly born of poor parents, to be brought up (in the country) in a hovel, that was to be kept continually shut. They were committed to the care of a shepherd, (others say, of nurses, whose tongues were cut out,) who was to feed them with the milk of goats; and was commanded not to suffer any person to enter into this hut, nor himself to speak even a single word in the hearing of these children. At the expiration of two years, as the shepherd was one day coming into the hut to feed these children, they both cried out, with hands extended towards their foster-father, beccos, beccos. The shepherd, surprised to hear a language that was quite new to him, but which they repeated frequently afterwards, sent advice of this to the king, who ordered the children to be brought before him, in order that he himself might be a witness to the truth of what was told him; and accordingly both of them began, in his presence, to stammer out the sounds above mentioned. Nothing now was wanting but to ascertain what nation it was that used this word; and it was found that the Phrygians called bread by this name. From this time they were allowed the honour of antiquity, or rather of priority, which the Egyptians themselves, notwithstanding their jealousy of it, and the many ages they had possessed this glory, were obliged to resign to them. As goats were brought to these children, in order that they might feed upon their milk, and historians do not say that they were deaf, some are of opinion that they might have learnt the word bec, or beccos, by mimicking the cry of those creatures.

[^546: Herod. l. ii. c. 2, 3.]

Psammetichus died in the 24th year of Josias, king of Judah, and was succeeded by his son Nechao.

[^547] Nechao.[^548] This prince is often mentioned in Scripture under the name of Pharaoh-Necho.[^549]

[^547: A.M. 3388. Ant. J.C. 616.]

[^548: He is called Necho in the English version of the Scriptures.—Trans.]

[^549: Herod. l. ii. c. 158.]

He attempted to join the Nile to the Red-Sea, by cutting a canal from one to the other. The distance which separates them is at least a thousand stadia.[^550] After a hundred and twenty thousand workmen had lost their lives in this attempt, Nechao was obliged to desist; the oracle which had been consulted by him, having answered, that this new canal would open a passage to the Barbarians (for so the Egyptians called all other nations) to invade Egypt.

[^550: Allowing 625 feet (or 125 geometrical paces) to each stadium, the distance will be 118 English miles, and a little above one-third of a mile. Herodotus says, that this design was afterwards put in execution by Darius the Persian, b. ii. c. 158.—Trans.]

Nechao was more successful in another enterprise.[^551] Skilful Phœnician mariners, whom he had taken into his service, having sailed from the Red-Sea in order to discover the coasts of Africa, went successfully round it; and the third year after their setting out, returned to Egypt through the Straits of Gibraltar. This was a very extraordinary voyage, in an age when the compass was not known. It was made twenty-one centuries before Vasco de Gama, a Portuguese, (by discovering the Cape of Good Hope, in the year 1497,) found out the very same way to sail to the Indies, by which these Phœnicians had come from thence into the Mediterranean.

[^551: Herod. l. iv. c. 42.]

The Babylonians and Medes, having destroyed Nineveh, and with it the empire of the Assyrians, were thereby become so formidable, that they drew upon themselves the jealousy of all their neighbours.[^552] Nechao, alarmed at the danger, advanced to the Euphrates, at the head of a powerful army, in order to check their progress. Josiah, king of Judah, so famous for his uncommon piety, observing that he took his route through Judea, resolved to oppose his passage. With this view, he raised all the forces of his kingdom, and posted himself in the valley of Megiddo, (a city on this side Jordan, belonging to the tribe of Manasseh, and called Magdolus by Herodotus.) Nechao informed him, by a herald, that his enterprise was not designed against him; that he had other enemies in view, and that he had undertaken this war in the name of God, who was with him; that for this reason he advised Josiah not to concern himself with this war, for fear lest it otherwise should turn to his disadvantage. However, Josiah was not moved by these reasons: he was sensible that the bare march of so powerful an army through Judea, would entirely ruin it. And besides, he feared that the victor, after the defeat of the Babylonians, would fall upon him, and dispossess him of part of his dominions. He therefore marched to engage Nechao; and was not only overthrown by him, but unfortunately received a wound, of which he died at Jerusalem, whither he had ordered himself to be carried.

[^552: Joseph. Antiq. l. x. c. 6. 2 Kings, xxiii. 29, 30. 2 Chron. xxxv. 20-25.]

Nechao, animated by this victory, continued his march, and advanced towards the Euphrates. He defeated the Babylonians; took Carchemish, a large city in that country; and securing to himself the possession of it by a strong garrison, returned to his own kingdom, after having been absent from it three months.

Being informed in his march homeward, that Jehoahaz had caused himself to be proclaimed king at Jerusalem, without first asking his consent, he commanded him to meet him at Riblah in Syria.[^553] The unhappy prince was no sooner arrived there, than he was put in chains by Nechao's order, and sent prisoner to Egypt, where he died. From thence, pursuing his march, he came to Jerusalem, where he placed Eliakim, (called by him Jehoiakim,) another of Josiah's sons, upon the throne, in the room of his brother: and imposed an annual tribute on the land, of a hundred talents of silver, and one talent of gold.[^554] This being done, he returned in triumph to Egypt.

[^553: 2 Kings xxiii. 33, 35. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1, 4.]

[^554: The Hebrew silver talent, according to Dr. Cumberland, is equivalent to 353l. 11s. 10-1/2d. so that 100 talents, English money, make £35,359 7s. 6d. The gold talent, according to the same source, is 5075l. 15s. 7-1/2d., so the amount of the whole tribute was 40,435l. 3s. 1-1/2d.—Trans.]

Herodotus, mentioning this king's expedition,[^555] and the victory gained by him at Magdolus,[^556] (as he calls it,) says, that he afterwards took the city Cadytis, which he represents as situated in the mountains of Palestine, and equal in extent to Sardis, the capital at that time not only of Lydia, but of all Asia Minor: this description can suit only Jerusalem, which was situated in the manner above described, and was then the only city in those parts that could be compared to Sardis. It appears besides from Scripture, that Nechao, after his victory, made himself master of this capital of Judea; for he was there in person, when he gave the crown to Jehoiakim. The very name Cadytis, which in Hebrew signifies the Holy, clearly denotes the city of Jerusalem, as is proved by the learned Dean Prideaux.[^557]

[^555: Lib. ii c. 159.]

[^556: Megiddo.—Trans.]

[^557: From the time that Solomon, by means of his temple, had made Jerusalem the common place of worship to all Israel, it was distinguished from the rest of the cities by the epithet Holy, and in the Old Testament was called Air Hakkodesh, i.e. the city of holiness, or the holy city. It bore this title upon the coins, and the shekel was inscribed Jerusalem Kedusha, i.e. Jerusalem the holy. At length Jerusalem, for brevity's sake, was omitted, and only Kedusha reserved. The Syriac being the prevailing language in Herodotus's time, Kedusha, by a change in that dialect of sh into th, was made Kedutha; and Herodotus giving it a Greek termination, it was writ Κάδυτις or Cadytis. Prideaux's Connection of the Old and New Testament, ol. i. part i. p. 80, 81. 8vo. Edit.—Trans.]

[^558] Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, observing that, since the taking of Carchemish by Nechao, all Syria and Palestine had shaken off their allegiance to him, and that his years and infirmities would not permit him to march against the rebels in person, he therefore associated his son Nabuchodonosor, or Nebuchadnezzar, with him in the empire, and sent him at the head of an army into those countries. This young prince vanquished the army of Nechao near the river Euphrates, recovered Carchemish, and reduced the revolted provinces to their allegiance, as Jeremiah had foretold.[^559] Thus he dispossessed the Egyptians of all that belonged to them,[^560] from the little river[^561][^562] of Egypt to the Euphrates, which comprehended all Syria and Palestine.

[^558: A.M. 3397. Ant. J.C. 607.]

[^559: Jer. xlvi. 2.]

[^560: 2 Kings, xxiv. 7.]

[^561: A rivo Ægypti.]

[^562: This little river of Egypt, so often mentioned in Scripture as the boundary of Palestine towards Egypt, was not the Nile, but a small river, which, running through the desert that lay betwixt those two nations, was anciently the common boundary of both. So far the land, which had been promised to the posterity of Abraham, and divided among them by lot, extended. Gen. xv. 18. Josh. xv. 4.—Trans.]

Nechao dying after he had reigned sixteen years, left the kingdom to his son.

[^563] Psammis. His reign was but of six years' duration; and history has left us nothing memorable concerning him, except that he made an expedition into Ethiopia.[^564]

[^563: A.M. 3404. Ant. J.C. 600.]

[^564: Herod. l. ii. c. 160.]

It was to this prince that the Eleans sent a splendid embassy, after having instituted the Olympic games. They had established all the regulations, and arranged every circumstance relating to them, with such care, that, in their opinion, nothing seemed wanting to their perfection, and envy itself could not find any fault with them. However, they did not desire so much to have the opinion, as to gain the approbation of the Egyptians, who were looked upon as the wisest and most judicious people in the world.[^565] Accordingly, the king assembled the sages of his nation. After every thing had been heard which could be said in favour of this institution, the Eleans were asked, whether citizens and foreigners were admitted indifferently to these games; to which answer was made, that they were open to every one. To this the Egyptians replied, that the rules of justice would have been more strictly observed, had foreigners only been admitted to these combats; because it was very difficult for the judges, in their award of the victory and the prize, not to be prejudiced in favour of their fellow citizens.

[^565: Herod. c. 160.]

[^566] Apries. In Scripture he is called Pharaoh-Hophra. He succeeded his father Psammis, and reigned twenty-five years.[^567]

[^566: A.M. 3410. Ant. J.C. 594.]

[^567: Jer. xliv. 30.]

During the first years of his reign, he was as fortunate as any of his predecessors. He turned his arms against the island of Cyprus; besieged the city of Sidon by sea and land; took it, and made himself master of all Phœnicia and Palestine.[^568]

[^568: Herod. l. ii. c. 161. Diod. l. i. p. 62.]

So rapid a success elated his heart to a prodigious degree, and, as Herodotus informs us, swelled him with so much pride and infatuation, that he boasted, it was not in the power of the gods themselves to dethrone him; so great was the idea he had formed to himself of the firm establishment of his own power. It was with a view to these arrogant notions, that Ezekiel put the vain and impious words following into his mouth: “My river is mine own, and I have made it for myself.”[^569] But the true God proved to him afterwards that he had a master, and that he was a mere man; and he had threatened him long before, by his prophets, with all the calamities he was resolved to bring upon him, in order to punish him for his pride.

[^569: Ezek. xxix. 3.]

Shortly after Hophra had ascended the throne, Zedekiah, king of Judah, sent an embassy, and concluded an alliance with him; and the year following, breaking the oath of fidelity which he had taken to the king of Babylon, he rebelled openly against him.[^570]

[^570: Ezek. xvii. 15.]

Notwithstanding God had so often forbidden his people to have recourse to the Egyptians, or to put any confidence in that people; notwithstanding the repeated calamities which had ensued upon the various attempts which they had made to procure assistance from them; they still thought this nation their most sure refuge in danger, and accordingly could not forbear applying to it. This they had already done in the reign of the holy king Hezekiah; which gave occasion to God's message to his people, by the mouth of his prophet Isaiah: “Wo to them that go down to Egypt for help, and stay on horses and trust in chariots, because they are many; but they look not unto the holy One of Israel, neither seek the Lord. The Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, not spirit: when the Lord shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they shall fail together.”[^571] But neither the prophet nor the king were heard; and nothing but the most fatal experience could open their eyes, and make them see evidently the truth of God's threatenings.

[^571: Isa. xxxi. 1, 3.]

The Jews behaved in the very same manner on this occasion. Zedekiah, notwithstanding all the remonstrances of Jeremiah to the contrary, resolved to conclude an alliance with the Egyptian monarch; who, puffed up with the success of his arms, and confident that nothing could resist his power, declared himself the protector of Israel, and promised to deliver it from the tyranny of Nabuchodonosor. But God, offended that a mortal had dared to intrude himself into his place, thus declared himself to another prophet: “Son of man, set thy face against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and against all Egypt. Speak and say, Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I am against thee, Pharaoh, king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is my own, and I have made it for myself. But I will put hooks in thy jaws,”[^572] &c. God, after comparing him to a reed, which breaks under the man who leans upon it, and wounds his hand, adds, “Behold, I will bring a sword upon thee, and cut off man and beast out of thee; the land of Egypt shall be desolate, and they shall know that I am the Lord, because he hath said, The river is mine, and I have made it.”[^573] The same prophet, in several succeeding chapters, continues to foretell the calamities with which Egypt was going to be overwhelmed.[^574]

[^572: Ezek. xxix. 2, 3, 4.]

[^573: Ezek. xxix. 8, 9.]

[^574: Chap. xxix. xxx. xxxi. xxxii.]

Zedekiah was far from giving credit to these predictions. When he heard of the approach of the Egyptian army, and saw Nabuchodonosor raise the siege of Jerusalem, he fancied that his deliverance was completed, and anticipated a triumph. His joy, however, was but of short duration; for the Egyptians seeing the Chaldeans advancing, did not dare to encounter so numerous and well-disciplined an army.[^575] They therefore marched back into their own country, and left the unfortunate Zedekiah exposed to all the dangers of a war in which they themselves had involved him.[^576] Nabuchodonosor again sat down before Jerusalem, took and burnt it, as Jeremiah had prophesied.

[^575: A.M. 3416. Ant. J.C. 588.]

[^576: Jer. xxxvii. 6, 7.]

[^577] Many years after, the chastisements with which God had threatened Apries (Pharaoh-Hophra) began to fall upon him.[^578] For the Cyrenians, a Greek colony, which had settled in Africa, between Libya and Egypt, having seized upon, and divided among themselves, a great part of the country belonging to the Libyans, forced these nations, who were thus dispossessed by violence, to throw themselves into the arms of this prince, and implore his protection. Immediately Apries sent a mighty army into Libya to oppose the Cyrenians; but this army being defeated and almost cut to pieces, the Egyptians imagined that Apries had sent it into Libya, only to get it destroyed; and by that means to attain the power of governing his subjects without check or control. This reflection prompted the Egyptians to shake off the yoke of a prince, whom they now considered as their enemy. But Apries, hearing of the rebellion, despatched Amasis, one of his officers, to suppress it, and force the rebels to return to their allegiance. But the moment Amasis began to address them, they placed a helmet upon his head, in token of the exalted dignity to which they intended to raise him, and proclaimed him king. Amasis having accepted the crown, staid with the mutineers, and confirmed them in their rebellion.

[^577: A.M. 3430. Ant. J.C. 574.]

[^578: Herod. l. ii. c. 161, &c. Diod. l. i. p. 62.]

Apries, more exasperated than ever at this news, sent Patarbemis, another of his great officers, and one of the principal lords of his court, to put Amasis under an arrest, and bring him before him; but Patarbemis not being able to carry off Amasis from the midst of the rebel army, by which he was surrounded, was treated by Apries, at his return, in the most ignominious and inhuman manner; for his nose and ears were cut off by the command of that prince, who never considered, that only his want of power had prevented his executing his commission. So barbarous an outrage, committed upon a person of such high distinction, exasperated the Egyptians so much, that the greatest part of them joined the rebels, and the insurrection became general. Apries was now forced to retire into Upper Egypt, where he supported himself some years, during which Amasis made himself master of the rest of his dominions.

The troubles which thus distracted Egypt, afforded Nabuchodonosor a favourable opportunity to invade that kingdom; and it was God himself who inspired him with the resolution. This prince, who was the instrument of God's wrath (though he did not know himself to be so) against a people whom he was resolved to chastise, had just before taken Tyre, where himself and his army had laboured under incredible difficulties. To recompense their toils, God abandoned Egypt to their arms. It is wonderful to hear the Creator himself revealing his designs on this subject. There are few passages in Scripture more remarkable than this, or which give a clearer idea of the supreme authority which God exercises over all the princes and kingdoms of the earth: “Son of man, (says the Almighty to his prophet Ezekiel,) Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, caused his army to serve a great service against Tyrus: every head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled:[^579] yet had he no wages, nor his army,[^580] for the service he had served against it. Therefore, thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I will give the land of Egypt unto Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey, and it shall be the wages for his army. I have given him the land of Egypt for his labour, wherewith he served against it, because they wrought for me, saith the Lord God.”[^581] Says another prophet: “He shall array himself with the land of Egypt, as a shepherd putteth on his garment, and he shall go forth from thence in peace.”[^582] Thus shall he load himself with booty, and thus cover his own shoulders, and those of his fold, with all the spoils of Egypt. Noble expressions! which show the ease with which all the power and riches of a kingdom are carried away, when God appoints the revolution; and shift, like a garment, to a new owner, who has no more to do but to take it, and clothe himself with it.

[^579: The baldness of the heads of the Babylonians was owing to the pressure of their helmets; and their peeled shoulders to their carrying baskets of earth, and large pieces of timber, to join Tyre to the continent. Baldness was itself a badge of slavery; and joined to the peeled shoulders, shows that the conqueror's army sustained even the most servile labours in this memorable siege.—Trans.]

[^580: For the better understanding of this passage, we are to know that Nabuchodonosor sustained incredible hardships at the siege of Tyre; and that when the Tyrians saw themselves closely attacked, the nobles conveyed themselves and their richest effects on shipboard, and retired into other islands. So that when Nabuchodonosor took the city, he found nothing to recompense the toil which he had undergone in this siege. S. Jerom.—Trans.]

[^581: Chap. xxix. 18, 19, 20.]

[^582: Jerem. xliii. 12.]

The king of Babylon, taking advantage, therefore, of the intestine divisions which the rebellion of Amasis had occasioned in that kingdom, marched thither at the head of his army. He subdued Egypt from Migdol or Magdol, a town on the frontiers of the kingdom, as far as Syene, in the opposite extremity where it borders on Ethiopia. He made a horrible devastation wherever he came; killed a great number of the inhabitants, and made such dreadful havoc in the country, that the damage could not be repaired in forty years. Nabuchodonosor, having loaded his army with spoils, and conquered the whole kingdom, came to an accommodation with Amasis; and leaving him as his viceroy there, returned to Babylon.

Apries (Pharaoh-Hophra) now leaving the place where he had concealed himself, advanced towards the sea-coast, (probably on the side of Libya;) and hiring an army of Carians, Ionians, and other foreigners, he marched against Amasis, to whom he gave battle near Memphis; but being overcome, Apries was taken prisoner, carried to the city of Sais, and there strangled in his own palace.[^583]

[^583: Herod. l. ii. c. 163, 169. Diod. l. i. p. 62.]

The Almighty had given, by the mouth of his prophets, an astonishing relation of the several circumstances of this mighty event. It was He who had broken the power of Apries, which was once so formidable; and put the sword into the hand of Nabuchodonosor, in order that he might chastise and humble that haughty prince. “I am,” said he, “against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and will break his arms, which were strong, but now are broken; and I will cause the sword to fall out of his hand.”[^584]—“But I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword into his hand.”[^585]—“And they shall know that I am the Lord.”[^586]

[^584: Ezek. xxx. 22.]

[^585: Ezek. xxx. 24.]

[^586: Ezek. xxx. 25.]

He enumerates the towns which were to fall a prey to the victors; Pathros, Zoan, No, (called in the Vulgate Alexandria,) Sin, Aven, Phibeseth, &c.[^587][^588]

[^587: Ver. 14, 17.]

[^588: I have given the names of these towns as they stand in our English version. In the margin are printed against Zoan, Tanis; against Sin, Pelusium; against Aven, Heliopolis; against Phibeseth, Pubastum, (Bubastus;) and by these last names they are mentioned in the original French of M. Rollin.—Trans.]

He takes notice particularly of the unhappy end of the king, who was to be delivered up to his enemies. Thus saith the Lord; “Behold, I will give Pharaoh-Hophra, the king of Egypt, into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life.”[^589]

[^589: Jerem. xliv. 30.]

Lastly, he declares, that during forty years the Egyptians shall be oppressed with every species of calamity, and be reduced to so deplorable a state, “That there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt.”[^590] The event verified this prophecy, which was gradually accomplished. Soon after the expiration of these forty years, Egypt was made a province of the Persian empire, to which its kings, though natives of the country, were tributary, and thus the accomplishment of the prediction began. It was completely fulfilled on the death of Nectanebus, the last king of Egyptian extraction, A.M. 3654.

[^590: Ezek. xxx. 13]

Since that time, Egypt has constantly been governed by foreigners. For since the ruin of the Persian monarchy, it has been subject, successively, to the Macedonians, the Romans, the Saracens, the Mamalukes, and lastly, to the Turks, who possess it to this day.

God was not less punctual in the accomplishment of his prophecies, with regard to such of his own people as had retired, contrary to his prohibition, into Egypt, after the taking of Jerusalem; and had forced Jeremiah along with them.[^591] The instant they had reached Egypt, and were arrived at Tahpanhes, (or Tanis,) the prophet, after having hid in their presence (by God's command) stones in a grotto, which was near the king's palace, declared to them, that Nabuchodonosor should soon arrive in Egypt, and that God would establish his throne in that very place; that this prince would lay waste the whole kingdom, and carry fire and sword into all places; that themselves should fall into the hand of these cruel enemies, when one part of them would be massacred, and the rest led captive to Babylon; that only a very small number should escape the common desolation, and be at last restored to their country. All these prophecies had their accomplishment in the appointed time.

[^591: Jerem ch. xliii. xliv.]

[^592] Amasis. After the death of Apries, Amasis became peaceable possessor of Egypt, and reigned over it forty years. He was, according to Plato, a native of the city of Sais.[^593]

[^592: A.M. 3435. Ant. J.C. 569.]

[^593: In Tim.]

As he was but of mean extraction, he met with no respect in the beginning of his reign, but was only contemned by his subjects:[^594] he was not insensible of this; but, nevertheless, thought it his interest to subdue their tempers by management and address, and win their affections by gentleness and reason. He had a golden cistern, in which himself and those persons who were admitted to his table, used to wash their feet: he melted it down, and had it cast into a statue, and then exposed the new god to public worship. The people hasted in crowds to pay their adoration to the statue. The king having assembled the people, informed them of the vile uses to which this statue had once been put, which, nevertheless, was now the object of their religious prostrations: the application was easy, and had the desired success; the people thenceforward paid the king all the respect that is due to majesty.

[^594: Herod. l. ii. c. 172.]

He always used to devote the whole morning to public business, to receive petitions, give audience, pronounce sentence, and hold his councils: the rest of the day was given to pleasure: and as Amasis, in hours of diversion, was extremely gay, and seemed to carry his mirth beyond due bounds, his courtiers took the liberty to represent to him the unsuitableness of such a behaviour; when he answered, that it was as impossible for the mind to be always serious and intent upon business, as for a bow to continue always bent.[^595]

[^595: Herod. l. ii. c. 73.]

It was this king who obliged the inhabitants of every town to enter their names in a book, kept by the magistrate for that purpose, with their profession, and manner of living. Solon inserted this custom among his laws.

He built many magnificent temples, especially at Sais, the place of his birth. Herodotus admired especially a chapel there formed of one single stone, which was twenty-one cubits[^596] in front, fourteen in depth, and eight in height; its dimensions within were not quite so large; it had been brought from Elephantina, and two thousand men had employed three years in conveying it along the Nile.

[^596: The cubit is one foot and almost ten inches. Vide supra.—Trans.]

Amasis had a great esteem for the Greeks. He granted them large privileges; and permitted such of them as were desirous of settling in Egypt, to live in the city of Naucratis, so famous for its harbour. When the rebuilding of the temple of Delphi, which had been burnt, was debated on, and the expense was computed at three hundred talents,[^597] Amasis furnished the Delphians with a very considerable sum towards discharging their quota, which was the fourth part of the whole charge.

[^597: Or, 58,125l. sterling.—Trans.]

He made an alliance with the Cyrenians, and married a wife from among them.

He is the only king of Egypt who conquered the island of Cyprus, and made it tributary.

Under his reign Pythagoras came into Egypt, being recommended to that monarch by the famous Polycrates, tyrant of Samos, who had contracted a friendship with Amasis, and will be mentioned hereafter. Pythagoras, during his stay in Egypt, was initiated in all the mysteries of the country; and instructed by the priests in whatever was most abstruse and important in their religion. It was here he imbibed his doctrine of the Metempsychosis, or transmigration of souls.

In the expedition in which Cyrus conquered so great a part of the world, Egypt doubtless was subdued, like the rest of the provinces; and Xenophon positively declares this in the beginning of his Cyropædia, or institution of that prince.[^598] Probably, after that the forty years of desolation, which had been foretold by the prophet, were expired, Egypt beginning gradually to regain strength, Amasis shook off the yoke, and recovered his liberty.

[^598: Ἐπῆρξε δὲ καὶ Ἑλλήνων τῶν ἐν τῆ Ἀσίᾳ, καταβὰς δὲ ἐπὶ Θάλατταν, καὶ Κυπρίωι καὶ Αἰγυπτίων, p. 5. edit. Hutchinsoni.—Trans.]

Accordingly, we find, that one of the first cares of Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, after he had ascended the throne, was to carry his arms into Egypt. On his arrival there, Amasis was just dead, and succeeded by his son Psammenitus.

[^599] Psammenitus. Cambyses, after having gained a battle, pursued the enemy to Memphis; besieged the city, and soon took it: however, he treated the king with clemency, granted him his life, and assigned him an honourable pension; but being informed that he was secretly concerting measures to reascend his throne, he put him to death. Psammenitus reigned but six months: all Egypt submitted immediately to the victor. The particulars of this history will be related more at large, when I come to that of Cambyses.

[^599: A.M. 3479. Ant. J.C. 525.]

Here ends the succession of the Egyptian kings. From this æra the history of this nation, as was before observed, will be blended with that of the Persians and Greeks, till the death of Alexander. At that period, a new monarchy will arise in Egypt, founded by Ptolemy the son of Lagus, which will continue to Cleopatra, that is, for about three hundred years. I shall treat each of these subjects, in the several periods to which they belong.

Book The Second. The History Of The Carthaginians.

Part The First. Character, Manners, Religion, And Government Of The Carthaginians.

Sect. I. Carthage formed after the Model of Tyre, of which that City was a Colony. The Carthaginians were indebted to the Tyrians, not only for their origin, but for their manners, language, customs, laws, religion, and their great application to commerce, as will appear from every part of the sequel. They spoke the same language with the Tyrians, and these the same with the Canaanites and Israelites, that is, the Hebrew tongue, or at least a language which was entirely derived from it. Their names had commonly some particular meaning:[^600] thus Hanno signified gracious, bountiful; Dido, amiable, or well-beloved; Sophonisba, one who keeps faithfully her husband's secrets. From a spirit of religion, they likewise joined the name of God to their own, conformably to the genius of the Hebrews. Hannibal, which answers to Hananias, signifies Baal, [or the Lord] has been gracious to me. Asdrubal, answering to Azarias, implies, the Lord will be our succour. It is the same with other names, Adherbal, Maharbal, Mastanabal, &c. The word Pœni, from which Punic is derived, is the same with Phœni, or Phœnicians, because they came originally from Phœnicia. In the Pœnulus of Plautus, is a scene written in the Punic tongue, which has very much exercised the learned.[^601]

[^600: Bochart, part II. l. ii. c. 16.]

[^601: The first scene of the fifth act, translated into Latin by Petit, in the second book of his Miscellanies.—Trans.]

But the strict union which always subsisted between the Phœnicians and Carthaginians, is still more remarkable. When Cambyses had resolved to make war upon the latter, the Phœnicians, who formed the chief strength of his fleet, told him plainly that they could not serve him against their countrymen; and this declaration obliged that prince to lay aside his design.[^602] The Carthaginians, on their side, were never forgetful of the country from whence they came, and to which they owed their origin. They sent regularly every year to Tyre a ship freighted with presents, as a quit-rent, or acknowledgment paid to their ancient country; and an annual sacrifice was offered to the tutelar gods of Tyre, by the Carthaginians, who considered them as their protectors likewise.[^603] They never failed to send thither the first fruits of their revenues, nor the tithe of the spoils taken from their enemies, as offerings to Hercules, one of the principal gods of Tyre and Carthage. The Tyrians, to secure from Alexander (who was then besieging their city) what they valued above all things, I mean their wives and children, sent them to Carthage, where, though at a time when the inhabitants of the latter were involved in a furious war, they were received and entertained with such a kindness and generosity as might be expected from the most tender and opulent parents. Such uninterrupted testimonies of a warm and sincere gratitude, do a nation more honour, than the greatest conquests and the most glorious victories.

[^602: Herod. l. iii. c. 17-19.]

[^603: Polyb. 944. Q. Curt. l. iv. c. 2, 3.]

Sect. II. The Religion of the Carthaginians.—It appears from several passages of the history of Carthage, that its generals looked upon it as an indispensable duty, to begin and end all their enterprises with the worship of the gods. Hamilcar, father of the great Hannibal, before he entered Spain in a hostile manner, offered up a sacrifice to the gods; and his son, treading in his steps, before he left Spain, and marched against Rome, went as far as Cadiz, in order to pay the vows which he had made to Hercules, and to offer up new ones, in case that god should be propitious to him.[^604] After the battle of Cannæ, when he acquainted the Carthaginians with the joyful news, he recommended to them, above all things, the offering up a solemn thanksgiving to the immortal gods, for the several victories he had obtained.[^605] Pro his tantis totque victoriis verum esse grates diis immortalibus agi haberique.

[^604: Liv. l. xxi. n. 1. Ibid. n. 21.]

[^605: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 1.]

Neither did individuals alone pride themselves upon displaying, on every occasion, this religious care to honour the deity; but it evidently was the genius and disposition of the whole nation.

Polybius has transmitted to us a treaty of peace concluded between Philip, son of Demetrius, king of Macedon, and the Carthaginians, in which the great respect and veneration of the latter for the deity, and their inherent persuasion that the gods engage in, and preside over, human affairs, and particularly over the solemn treaties made in their name and presence, are strongly displayed.[^606] Mention is therein made of five or six different orders of deities; and this enumeration appears very extraordinary in a public instrument, such as a treaty of peace concluded between two nations. I will here present my reader with the very words of the historian, as it will give some idea of the Carthaginian theology. “This treaty was concluded in the presence of Jupiter, Juno, and Apollo; in the presence of the dæmon or genius (δαίμονος) of the Carthaginians, of Hercules and Iolaus; in the presence of Mars, Triton, and Neptune; in the presence of all the confederate gods of the Carthaginians; and of the sun, the moon, and the earth; in the presence of the rivers, meads, and waters; in the presence of all those gods who possess Carthage:” what should we now say to an instrument of this kind, in which the tutelar angels and saints of a kingdom should be introduced?

[^606: Lib. vii. p. 502.]

The Carthaginians had two deities to whom they paid a more particular worship, and who deserve to have some mention made of them in this place.

The first was the goddess Cœlestis, called likewise Urania, the same with the moon, who was invoked in great calamities, and particularly in droughts, in order to obtain rain: that very virgin Cœlestis, says Tertullian,[^607] the promiser of rain, Ista ipsa Virgo Cœlestis pluviarum pollicitatrix. Tertullian, speaking of this goddess and of Æsculapius, makes the heathens of that age a challenge, which is bold indeed, but at the same time very glorious to the cause of Christianity; declaring, that any Christian who may first come, shall oblige these false gods to confess publicly, that they are but devils; and consenting that this Christian shall be immediately killed, if he does not extort such a confession from the mouth of these gods. Nisi se dæmones confessi fuerint Christiano mentiri non audentes, ibidem illius Christiani procacissimi sanguinem fundite. St. Austin likewise makes frequent mention of this deity. “What is now,” says he,[^608] “become of Cœlestis, whose empire was once so great in Carthage?” This was doubtless the same deity whom Jeremiah calls the queen of heaven;[^609] and who was held in so much reverence by the Jewish women, that they addressed their vows, burnt incense, poured out drink-offerings, and made cakes for her with their own hands, ut faciant placentas reginæ cœli; and from whom they boasted their having received all manner of blessings, whilst they regularly paid her this worship; whereas, since they had failed in it, they had been oppressed with misfortunes of every kind.

[^607: Apolog. c. 23.]

[^608: In Psalm xcviii.]

[^609: Jer. vii. 18. and xliv. 17-25.]

The second deity particularly adored by the Carthaginians, and in whose honour human sacrifices were offered, was Saturn, known in Scripture by the name of Moloch; and this worship had passed from Tyre to Carthage. Philo quotes a passage from Sanchoniathon, which shows that the kings of Tyre, in great dangers, used to sacrifice their sons to appease the anger of the gods; and that one of them, by this action, procured himself divine honours, and was worshipped as a god, under the name of the planet Saturn; to this doubtless was owing the fable of Saturn's devouring his own children. Private persons, when they were desirous of averting any great calamity, took the same method; and, in imitation of their princes, were so very superstitious, that such as had no children, purchased those of the poor, in order that they might not be deprived of the merit of such a sacrifice. This custom prevailed long among the Phœnicians and Canaanites, from whom the Israelites borrowed it, though forbidden expressly by heaven. At first, these children were inhumanly burnt, either in a fiery furnace, like those in the valley of Hinnon, so often mentioned in Scripture, or enclosed in a flaming statue of Saturn. The cries of these unhappy victims were drowned by the uninterrupted noise of drums and trumpets.[^610] Mothers[^611] made it a merit, and a part of their religion, to view this barbarous spectacle with dry eyes, and without so much as a groan; and, if a tear or a sigh stole from them, the sacrifice was less acceptable to the deity, and all the effects of it were entirely lost. This strength of mind, or rather savage barbarity, was carried to such excess, that even mothers would endeavour, with embraces and kisses, to hush the cries of their children;[^612] lest, had the victim been offered with an unbecoming grace, and in the midst of tears, it should be displeasing to the god: Blanditiis et osculis comprimebant vagitum, ne flebilis hostia immolaretur.[^613] They afterwards contented themselves with making their children pass through the fire; as appears from several passages of Scripture, in which they frequently perished.

[^610: Plut. de Superstit. p. 171.]

[^611: Παρειστήκει δὲ ἡ μήτηρ ἄτεγκτος καὶ ἀστένακτος, &c. The cruel and pitiless mother stood by as an unconcerned spectator; a groan or a tear falling from her, “would have been punished by a fine;” and still the child must have been sacrificed. Plut. de Superstitione.—Trans.]

[^612: Tertul. in Apolog.]

[^613: Minut. Felix.]

The Carthaginians retained the barbarous custom of offering human sacrifices to their gods,[^614] till the ruin of their city:[^615] an action which ought to have been called a sacrilege rather than a sacrifice. Sacrilegium veriùs quàm sacrum. It was suspended only for some years, from the fear they were under of drawing upon themselves the indignation and arms of Darius I. king of Persia, who forbade them the offering up of human sacrifices, and the eating the flesh of dogs: but they soon resumed this horrid practice, since, in the reign of Xerxes, the successor to Darius, Gelon the tyrant of Syracuse, having gained a considerable victory over the Carthaginians in Sicily, among other conditions of peace which he enjoined them, inserted this article:[^616] viz. “That no more human sacrifices should be offered to Saturn.” And, doubtless, the practice of the Carthaginians, on this very occasion, made Gelon use this precaution. For during the whole engagement, which lasted from morning till night, Hamilcar, the son of Hanno their general, was perpetually offering up to the gods sacrifices of living men, who were thrown in great numbers on a flaming pile; and seeing his troops routed and put to flight, he himself rushed into it, in order that he might not survive his own disgrace, and to extinguish, says St. Ambrose speaking of this action, with his own blood this sacrilegious fire, when he found that it had not proved of service to him.[^617][^618]

[^614: Q. Curt. l. iv. c. 5.]

[^615: It appears from Tertullian's Apology, that this barbarous custom prevailed in Africa long after the ruin of Carthage. Infantes penès Africam Saturno immolabantur palàm usque ad proconsulatum Tiberii, qui eosdem sacerdotes in eisdem arboribus templi sui obumbratricibus scelerum votivis crucibus exposuit, teste militiâ patriæ nostræ, quæ id ipsum munus illi proconsuli functa est, i.e. Children were publicly sacrificed to Saturn, down to the proconsulship of Tiberius, who hanged the sacrificing priests themselves on the trees which shaded their temple, as on so many crosses, raised to expiate their crimes, of which the militia of our country are witnesses, who were the actors of this execution at the command of this proconsul. Tertul. Apolog. c. 9. Two learned men are at variance about the proconsul, and the time of his government. Salmasius confesses his ignorance of both; but rejects the authority of Scaliger, who, for proconsulatum, reads proconsulem Tiberii, and thinks Tertullian, when he writ his Apology, had forgot his name. However this be, it is certain that the memory of the incident here related by Tertullian was then recent, and probably the witnesses of it had not been long dead.—Trans.]

[^616: Plut. de serâ vindic. deorum, p. 552.]

[^617: Herod. l. vii. c. 167.]

[^618: In ipsos quos adolebat sese præcipitavit ignes, ut eos vel cruore suo extingueret, quos sibi nihil profuisse cognoverat. S. Amb.—Trans.]

In times of pestilence[^619] they used to sacrifice a great number of children to their gods, unmoved with pity for a tender age, which excites compassion in the most cruel enemies; thus seeking a remedy for their evils in guilt itself; and endeavouring to appease the gods by the most shocking barbarity.

[^619: Cûm peste laborarent, cruentâ sacrorum religione et scelere pro remedio usi sunt. Quippe homines ut victimas immolabant, et impuberes (quæ ætas etiam hostium misericordiam provocat) aris admovebant, pacem deorum sanguine eorum exposcentes, pro quorum vitâ dii maximè rogari solent. Justin, l. xviii. c. 6. The Gauls as well as Germans used to sacrifice men, if Dionysius and Tacitus may be credited.—Trans.]

Diodorus relates[^620] an instance of this cruelty which strikes the reader with horror. At the time that Agathocles was just going to besiege Carthage, its inhabitants, seeing the extremity to which they were reduced, imputed all their misfortunes to the just anger of Saturn, because that, instead of offering up children nobly born, who were usually sacrificed to him, there had been fraudulently substituted in their stead the children of slaves and foreigners. To atone for this crime, two hundred children of the best families in Carthage were sacrificed to Saturn; besides which, upwards of three hundred citizens, from a sense of their guilt of this pretended crime, voluntarily sacrificed themselves. Diodorus adds, that there was a brazen statue of Saturn, the hands of which were turned downward; so that when a child was laid on them, it dropped immediately into a hollow, where was a fiery furnace.

[^620: Lib. xx. p. 756.]

Can this, says Plutarch,[^621] be called worshipping the gods? Can we be said to entertain an honourable idea of them, if we suppose that they are pleased with slaughter, thirsty of human blood, and capable of requiring or accepting such offerings? Religion, says this judicious author,[^622] is placed between two rocks, that are equally dangerous to man, and injurious to the deity, I mean impiety and superstition. The one, from an affectation of free-thinking, believes nothing; and the other, from a blind weakness, believes all things. Impiety, to rid itself of a terror which galls it, denies the very existence of the gods: whilst superstition, to calm its fears, capriciously forges gods, which it makes not only the friends, but protectors and models, of crimes. Had it not been better, says he further,[^623] for the Carthaginians to have had originally a Critias, or a Diagoras, who were open and undisguised atheists, for their lawgivers, than to have established so frantic and wicked a religion? Could the Typhons and the giants, (the avowed enemies of the gods,) had they gained a victory over them, have established more abominable sacrifices?

[^621: De Superstitione, p. 169-171.]

[^622: Idem. in Camill. p. 132.]

[^623: De Superstitione.]

Such were the sentiments which a heathen entertained of this part of the Carthaginian worship. One would indeed scarce believe that mankind were capable of such madness and frenzy. Men do not generally of themselves entertain ideas so destructive of all that nature considers as most sacred, as to sacrifice, to murder, their children with their own hands, and to throw them in cool blood into fiery furnaces! Sentiments so unnatural and barbarous, and yet adopted by whole nations, and even by the most civilized, by the Phœnicians, Carthaginians, Gauls, Scythians, and even the Greeks and Romans, and consecrated by custom during a long series of ages, can have been inspired by him only who was a murderer from the beginning; and who delights in nothing but the humiliation, misery, and perdition of man.

Sect. III. Form of the Government of Carthage.—The government of Carthage was founded upon principles of the most consummate wisdom; and it is with reason that Aristotle[^624] ranks this republic in the number of those that were had in the greatest esteem by the ancients, and which were fit to serve as a model for others. He grounds his opinion on a reflection, which does great honour to Carthage, by remarking, that, from its foundation to his time, (that is, upwards of five hundred years,) no considerable sedition had disturbed the peace, nor any tyrant oppressed the liberty of that state. Indeed, mixed governments, such as that of Carthage, where the power was divided betwixt the nobles and the people, are subject to two inconveniences; either of degenerating into an abuse of liberty by the seditions of the populace, as frequently happened in Athens, and in all the Grecian republics; or into the oppression of the public liberty by the tyranny of the nobles, as in Athens, Syracuse, Corinth, Thebes, and Rome itself under Sylla and Cæsar. It is, therefore, giving Carthage the highest praise, to observe, that it had found out the art, by the wisdom of its laws, and the harmony of the different parts of its government, to shun, during so long a series of years, two rocks that are so dangerous, and on which others so often split.

[^624: De Rep. l. ii. c. 11.]

It were to be wished, that some ancient author had left us an accurate and regular description of the customs and laws of this famous republic. For want of such assistance, we can only give our readers a confused and imperfect idea of them, by collecting the several passages which lie scattered up and down in authors. Christopher Hendrich has obliged the learned world in this particular, and his work[^625] has been of great service to me.

[^625: It is entitled, Carthago, sive Carthaginensium Respublica, &c. Francofurti ad Oderam, ann. 1664.—Trans.]

The government of Carthage,[^626] like that of Sparta and Rome, united three different authorities, which counterpoised and gave mutual assistance to one another. These authorities were, that of the two supreme magistrates, called Suffetes;[^627] that of the Senate; and that of the people. There afterwards was added the tribunal of One Hundred, which had great credit and influence in the republic.

[^626: Polyb. l. iv. p. 493.]

[^627: This name is derived from a word, which, with the Hebrews and Phœnicians, signifies judges. Shophetim.—Trans.]

The Suffetes.—The power of the Suffetes was only annual, and their authority in Carthage answered to that of the consuls at Rome.[^628] In authors they are frequently called kings, dictators, consuls, because they exercised the functions of all three. History does not inform us of the manner of their election. They were empowered to assemble the senate;[^629] in which they presided, proposed subjects for deliberation, and collected the votes;[^630] and they likewise presided in all debates on matters of importance. Their authority was not limited to the city, nor confined to civil affairs: they sometimes had the command of the armies. We find, that when their employment of Suffetes expired, they were made prætors, which was a considerable office, since, besides conferring upon them the privilege of presiding in some causes, it also empowered them to propose and enact new laws, and call to account the receivers of the public revenues, as appears from what Livy relates[^631] concerning Hannibal on this head, and which I shall take notice of in the sequel.

[^628: Ut Romæ consules, sic Carthagine quotannis annui bini reges creabantur. Corn Nep. in vitâ Annibalis, c. 7. The great Hannibal was one of the Suffetes.—Trans.]

[^629: Senatum itaque Suffetes, quod velut consulare imperium apud eos erat, voca verunt. Liv. l. xxx. n. 7.—Trans.]

[^630: Cum Suffetes ad jus dicendum consedissent. Id. l. xxxiv. n. 62.—Trans.]

[^631: Lib. xxxiii. n. 46, 47.]

The Senate.—The Senate, composed of persons who were venerable on account of their age, their experience, their birth, their riches, and especially their merit, formed the council of state; and were, if I may use that expression, the soul of the public deliberations. Their number is not exactly known: it must, however, have been very great, since a hundred were selected from it to form a separate assembly, of which I shall immediately have occasion to speak. In the senate, all affairs of consequence were debated, the letters from generals read, the complaints of provinces heard, ambassadors admitted to audience, and peace or war determined, as is seen on many occasions.

When the sentiments and votes were unanimous, the senate decided supremely, and there lay no appeal from it.[^632] When there was a division, and the senate could not be brought to an agreement, the affair was then laid before the people, on whom the power of deciding thereby devolved. The reader will easily perceive the great wisdom of this regulation: and how happily it was adapted to crush factions, to produce harmony, and to enforce and corroborate good counsels; such an assembly being extremely jealous of its authority, and not easily prevailed upon to let it pass into other hands. Of this we have a memorable instance in Polybius.[^633] When after the loss of the battle fought in Africa, at the end of the second Punic war, the conditions of peace offered by the victor were read in the senate; Hannibal, observing that one of the senators opposed them, represented in the strongest terms, that as the safety of the republic lay at stake, it was of the utmost importance for the senators to be unanimous in their resolutions, to prevent such a debate from coming before the people; and he carried his point. This, doubtless, laid the foundation, in the infancy of the republic, of the senate's power, and raised its authority to so great a height. And the same author observes, in another place,[^634] that whilst the senate had the administration of affairs, the state was governed with great wisdom, and was successful in all its enterprises.

[^632: Arist. loc. cit.]

[^633: Lib. xv. p. 706, 707.]

[^634: Polyb. l. vi. p. 494]

The People.—It appears from every thing related hitherto, that even so low as Aristotle's time, who gives so beautiful a picture, and bestows so noble an eulogium on the government of Carthage, the people spontaneously left the care of public affairs, and the chief administration of them, to the senate: and this it was which made the republic so powerful. But things changed afterwards. For the people, grown insolent by their wealth and conquests, and forgetting that they owed these blessings to the prudent conduct of the senate, were desirous of having a share in the government, and arrogated to themselves almost the whole power. From that period, the public affairs were transacted wholly by cabals and factions: and this Polybius assigns as one of the chief causes of the ruin of Carthage.

The Tribunal of the Hundred.—This was a body composed of a hundred and four persons; though often, for brevity's sake, they are called only, the Hundred. These, according to Aristotle, were the same in Carthage, as the Ephori in Sparta; whence it appears, that they were instituted to balance the power of the nobles and senate: but with this difference, that the Ephori were but five in number, and continued in office but a year; whereas these were perpetual, and were upwards of a hundred.[^635] It is believed, that these Centumviri are the same with the hundred judges mentioned by Justin,[^636] who were taken out of the senate, and appointed to inquire into the conduct of their generals. The exorbitant power of Mago's family, which, by its engrossing the chief employments both of the state and the army, had thereby the sole direction and management of all affairs, gave occasion to this establishment. It was intended as a curb to the authority of their generals, which, whilst the armies were in the field, was almost boundless and absolute; but, by this institution, it became subject to the laws, by the obligation their generals were under, of giving an account of their actions before these judges on their return from the campaign: Ut hoc metu ita in bello imperia cogitarent, ut domi judicia legesque respicerent.[^637] Of these hundred and four judges, five had a particular jurisdiction superior to that of the rest; but it is not known how long their authority lasted. This council of five was like the council of ten in the Venetian senate. A vacancy in their number could be filled by none but themselves. They also had the power of choosing those who composed the council of the hundred. Their authority was very great, and for that reason none were elected into this office but persons of uncommon merit; and it was not judged proper to annex any salary or reward to it; the single motive of the public good, being thought a tie sufficient to engage honest men to a conscientious and faithful discharge of their duty. Polybius, in his account of the taking of New Carthage by Scipio,[^638] distinguishes clearly two orders of magistrates established in Old Carthage; for he says, that among the prisoners taken at New Carthage, were two magistrates belonging to the body or assembly of old men, ἐκ τῆς Γερουσίας: so he calls the council of the hundred; and fifteen of the senate, ἐκ τῆς Συγκλήτου. Livy mentions[^639] only the fifteen of the senators; but, in another place, he names the old men; and tells us, that they formed the most venerable council of the government, and had great authority in the senate. Carthaginenses—Oratores ad pacem petendam mittunt triginta seniorum principes. Id erat sanctius apud illos concilium, maximaque ad ipsum senatum regendum vis.[^640]

[^635: A.M. 3609. A. Carth. 487.]

[^636: Lib. ix. c. 2.]

[^637: Justin l. xix.]

[^638: Lib. x. p. 824 edit Gionov.]

[^639: Lib. xxvi. n. 51. Lib xxx. n. 16.]

[^640: M. Rollin might have taken notice of some civil officers who were established at Carthage, with a power like that of the censors of Rome, to inspect the manners of the citizens. The chief of these officers took from Hamilcar, the father of Hannibal, a beautiful youth, named Asdrubal, on a report that Hamilcar was more familiar with this youth than was consistent with modesty. Erat prætereà cum eo [Amilcare] adolescens illustiis et formosus Hasdrubal, quem nonnulli diligi turpiùs quàm par erat, ab Amilcare, loquebantur.—Quo factum est ut à præfecto morum Hasdrubal cum eo vetaretur esse. Corn. Nep. in vitâ Amalcaris.—Trans.]

Establishments, though constituted with the greatest wisdom and the justest harmony of parts, degenerate, however insensibly, into disorder and the most destructive licentiousness. These judges, who by the lawful execution of their power were a terror to transgressors, and the great pillars of justice, abusing their almost unlimited authority, became so many petty tyrants.[^641] We shall see this verified in the history of the great Hannibal, who during his prætorship, after his return to Africa, employed all his influence to reform so horrid an abuse; and made the authority of these judges, which before was perpetual, only annual, about two hundred years from the first founding the tribunal of the One Hundred.

[^641: A.M. 3082. A. Carth. 682.]

Defects in the Government of Carthage.—Aristotle, among other reflections made by him on the government of Carthage, remarks two great defects in it, both which, in his opinion, are repugnant to the views of a wise lawgiver and the maxims of sound policy.

The first of these defects was, the investing the same person with different employments, which was considered at Carthage as a proof of uncommon merit. But Aristotle thinks this practice highly prejudicial to the public welfare. For, says this author, a man possessed but of one employment, is much more capable of acquitting himself well in the execution of it; because affairs are then examined with greater care, and sooner despatched. We never see, continues our author, either by sea or land, the same officer commanding two different bodies, or the same pilot steering two ships. Besides, the welfare of the state requires that places and preferments should be divided, in order to excite an emulation among men of merit: whereas the bestowing of them on one man, too often dazzles him by so distinguishing a preference, and always fills others with jealousy, discontent, and murmurs.

The second defect taken notice of by Aristotle in the government of Carthage, was, that in order for a man to attain the first posts, a certain income was required (besides merit and noble birth.) By which means, poverty might exclude persons of the most exalted merit, which he considers as a great evil in a government. For then, says he, as virtue is wholly disregarded, and money is all-powerful, because all things are attained by it, the admiration and desire of riches seize and corrupt the whole community. Add to this, that when magistrates and judges are obliged to pay large sums for their employments, they seem to have a right to reimburse themselves.'

There is not, I believe, one instance in all antiquity, to show that employments, either in the state or the courts of justice, were sold. The expense, therefore, which Aristotle talks of here to raise men to preferments in Carthage, must doubtless be understood of the presents that were given in order to procure the votes of the electors: a practice, as Polybius observes, very common at Carthage, where no kind of gain was judged a disgrace.[^642] It is, therefore, no wonder, that Aristotle should condemn a practice whose consequences, it is very plain, may prove fatal to a government.

[^642: Παρὰ Καρχηδονίοις οὐδὲν αἰσχρὸν τῶν ἀνηκόντων πρὸς κέρδας. Polyb. l. vi. p. 497.—Trans.]

But in case he pretended that the chief employments of a state ought to be equally accessible to the rich and the poor, as he seems to insinuate, his opinion is refuted by the general practice of the wisest republics; for these, without any way demeaning or aspersing poverty, have thought that, on this occasion, the preference ought to be given to riches; because it is to be presumed that the wealthy have received a better education, have nobler sentiments, are more out of the reach of corruption, and less liable to commit base actions; and that even the state of their affairs makes them more affectionate to the government, more disposed to maintain peace and order in it, and more interested in suppressing whatever may tend to sedition and rebellion.

Aristotle, in concluding his reflections on the republic of Carthage, is much pleased with a custom that prevailed there: viz. of sending from time to time colonies into different countries; and in this manner procuring its citizens commodious settlements. This provided for the necessities of the poor, who, equally with the rich, are members of the state: and it disburdened Carthage of multitudes of lazy, indolent people, who were its disgrace, and often proved dangerous to it: it prevented commotions and insurrections, by thus removing such persons as commonly occasion them; and who being ever discontented under their present circumstances, are always ready for innovations and tumults.

Sect. IV. Trade of Carthage, the first Source of its Wealth and Power.—Commerce, strictly speaking, was the occupation of Carthage, the particular object of its industry, and its peculiar and predominant characteristic. It formed the greatest strength and the chief support of that commonwealth. In a word, we may affirm that the power, the conquests, the credit, and glory of the Carthaginians, all flowed from their commerce. Situated in the centre of the Mediterranean, and stretching out their arms eastward and westward, the extent of their commerce took in all the known world, and wafted it to the coast of Spain, of Mauritania, of Gaul, and beyond the straits and pillars of Hercules. They sailed to all countries, in order to buy at a cheap rate the superfluities of every nation; which, by the wants of others, became necessaries; and these they sold to them at the dearest rates. From Egypt the Carthaginians fetched fine flax, paper, corn, sails and cables for ships; from the coast of the Red-Sea, spices, frankincense, perfumes, gold, pearls, and precious stones; from Tyre and Phoenicia, purple and scarlet, rich stuffs, tapestry, costly furniture, and divers curious and exquisite works of art: in a word, they fetched, from various countries, all things that can supply the necessities, or are capable of contributing to the convenience, the luxury, and the delights of life. They brought back from the western parts of the world, in return for the articles carried thither, iron, tin, lead, and copper: by the sale of these various commodities, they enriched themselves at the expense of all nations; and put them under a kind of contribution, which was so much the surer as it was spontaneous.

In thus becoming the factors and agents of all nations, they had made themselves lords of the sea; the band which held the east, the west, and south together; and the necessary channel of their communication: so that Carthage rose to be the common city, and the centre of the trade, of all those nations which the sea separated from one another.

The most considerable personages of the city were not ashamed of engaging in trade. They applied themselves to it as industriously as the meanest citizens; and their great wealth did not make them less in love with the diligence, patience, and labour, which are necessary to augment it. To this they owed their empire of the sea, the splendour of their republic; their being able to dispute for the superiority with Rome itself; and their exalted pitch of power, which forced the Romans to carry on a bloody and doubtful war, for upwards of forty years, in order to humble and subdue this haughty rival. In short, Rome, even when triumphant, thought Carthage was not to be entirely reduced any other way, than by depriving that city of the resources which it might still derive from its commerce, by which it had so long been enabled to resist the whole strength of that mighty republic.

However, it is no wonder that, as Carthage came in a manner out of the greatest school of traffic in the world, I mean Tyre, she should have been crowned with such rapid and uninterrupted success. The very vessels on which its founders had been conveyed into Africa, were afterwards employed by them in their trade. They began to make settlements upon the coasts of Spain, in those ports where they unloaded their goods. The ease with which they had founded these settlements, and the conveniences they met with, inspired them with the design of conquering those vast regions; and some time after, Nova Carthago, or New Carthage, gave the Carthaginians an empire in that country, almost equal to that which they enjoyed in Africa.

Sect. V. The Mines of Spain, the second Source of the Riches and Power of Carthage.—Diodorus justly remarks,[^643] that the gold and silver mines found by the Carthaginians in Spain, were an inexhaustible fund of wealth, that enabled them to sustain such long wars against the Romans. The natives had long been ignorant of these treasures that lay concealed in the bowels of the earth, at least of their use and value. The Phœnicians took advantage of this ignorance; and, by bartering some wares of little value for this precious metal, they amassed infinite wealth. When the Carthaginians had made themselves masters of the country, they dug much deeper into the earth than the old inhabitants of Spain had done, who probably were content with what they could collect on the surface; and the Romans, when they had dispossessed the Carthaginians of Spain, profited by their example, and drew an immense revenue from these mines of gold and silver.

[^643: Lib. iv. p. 312, &c.]

The labour employed to come at these mines, and to dig the gold and silver out of them, was incredible.[^644] For the veins of these metals rarely appeared on the surface; they were to be sought for and traced through frightful depths, where very often floods of water stopped the miners, and seemed to defeat all future pursuits. But avarice is no less patient in undergoing fatigues, than ingenious in finding expedients. By pumps, which Archimedes had invented when in Egypt, the Romans afterwards threw up the water out of these pits, and quite drained them. Numberless multitudes of slaves perished in these mines, which were dug to enrich their masters; who treated them with the utmost barbarity, forced them by heavy stripes to labour, and gave them no respite either day or night.

[^644: Diod. l. iv. p. 312, &c.]

Polybius, as quoted by Strabo,[^645] says, that, in his time, upwards of forty thousand men were employed in the mines near Nova Carthago; and furnished the Romans every day with twenty-five thousand drachmas, or eight hundred fifty-nine pounds seven shillings and sixpence.[^646]

[^645: Lib. iii. p. 147]

[^646: 25,000 drachmas.—An Attic drachma, according to Dr. Bernard=8-1/4d. English money, consequently 25,000=859l. 7s. 6d.—Trans.]

We must not be surprised to see the Carthaginians, soon after the greatest defeats, sending fresh and numerous armies again into the field; fitting out mighty fleets, and supporting, at a great expense, for many years, wars carried on by them in far-distant countries. But it must appear surprising to us that the Romans should be capable of doing the same; they whose revenues were very inconsiderable before those great conquests which subjected to them the most powerful nations; and who had no resources, either from trade, to which they were absolute strangers, or from gold or silver mines, which were very rarely found in Italy, in case there were any; and the expenses of which must, for that very reason, have swallowed up all the profit. The Romans, in the frugal and simple life they led, in their zeal for the public welfare, and their love for their country, possessed funds which were not less ready or secure than those of Carthage, but at the same time were far more honourable to their nation.

Sect. VI. War.—Carthage must be considered as a trading, and, at the same time, a warlike republic. Its genius and the nature of its government led it to traffic; and it became warlike, first, from the necessity the Carthaginians were under of defending themselves against the neighbouring nations, and afterwards from a desire of extending their commerce and empire. This double idea gives us, in my opinion, the true plan and character of the Carthaginian republic. We have already spoken of its commerce.

The military power of the Carthaginians consisted in their alliances with kings; in tributary nations, from which they drew both men and money; in some troops raised from among their own citizens; and in mercenary soldiers purchased of neighbouring states, without being themselves obliged to levy or exercise them, because they were already well disciplined and inured to the fatigues of war; they making choice, in every country, of such troops as had the greatest merit and reputation. They drew from Numidia a light, bold, impetuous, and indefatigable cavalry, which formed the principal strength of their armies; from the Balearic isles, the most expert slingers in the world; from Spain, a steady and invincible infantry; from the coasts of Genoa and Gaul, troops of acknowledged valour; and from Greece itself, soldiers fit for all the various operations of war, for the field or the garrisons, for besieging or defending cities.

In this manner the Carthaginians sent out at once powerful armies, composed of soldiers which were the flower of all the armies in the universe, without depopulating either their fields or cities by new levies; without suspending their manufactures, or disturbing the peaceful artificer; without interrupting their commerce, or weakening their navy. By venal blood they possessed themselves of provinces and kingdoms; and made other nations the instruments of their grandeur and glory, with no other expense of their own than their money; and even this furnished from the traffic they carried on with foreign nations.

If the Carthaginians, in the course of a war, sustained some losses, these were but as so many foreign accidents, which only grazed, as it were, over the body of the state, but did not make a deep wound in the bowels or heart of the republic. These losses were speedily repaired, by sums arising out of a flourishing commerce, as from a perpetual sinew of war, by which the government was continually reinforced with new supplies for the purchase of mercenary forces, who were ready at the first summons. And from the vast extent of the coasts which the Carthaginians possessed, it was easy for them to levy, in a very little time, a sufficient number of sailors and rowers for the working of their fleets, and to procure able pilots and experienced captains to conduct them.

But as these parts were fortuitously brought together, they did not adhere by any natural, intimate, or necessary tie. No common and reciprocal interest united them in such a manner, as to form a solid and unalterable body. Not one individual in these mercenary armies, was sincerely interested in the success of measures, or in the prosperity of the state. They did not act with the same zeal, nor expose themselves to dangers with equal resolution, for a republic which they considered as foreign, and which consequently was indifferent to them, as they would have done for their native country, whose happiness constitutes that of the several members who compose it.

In great reverses of fortune, the kings in alliance with the Carthaginians[^647] might easily be detached from their interest, either by that jealousy which the grandeur of a more powerful neighbour naturally excites; or by the hopes of reaping greater advantages from a new friend; or by the fear of being involved in the misfortunes of an old ally.

[^647: As Syphax and Masinissa.]

The tributary nations, impatient under the weight and disgrace of a yoke which had been forced upon their necks, generally flattered themselves with the hopes of finding one less galling in changing their masters; or, in case servitude was unavoidable, the choice was indifferent to them, as will appear from many instances in the course of this history.

The mercenary forces, accustomed to measure their fidelity by the largeness or continuance of their pay, were ever ready, on the least discontent, or the slightest expectation of a more considerable stipend, to desert to the enemy with whom they had just before fought, and to turn their arms against those who had invited them to their assistance.

Thus the grandeur of the Carthaginians being sustained only by these foreign supports, was shaken to the very foundation when they were once taken away. And if to this there happened to be added an interruption of their commerce, (which was their sole resource,) arising from the loss of a naval engagement, they imagined themselves to be on the brink of ruin, and abandoned themselves to despondency and despair, as was evidently seen at the end of the first Punic war.

Aristotle, in the treatise where he shows the advantages and defects of the government of Carthage, finds no fault with its keeping up none but foreign forces; it is therefore probable, that the Carthaginians did not fall into this practice till a long time after. But the rebellions which harassed Carthage in its later years, out to have taught its citizens, that no miseries are comparable to those of a government which is supported only by foreigners; since neither zeal, security, nor obedience, can be expected from them.

But this was not the case with the republic of Rome. As the Romans had neither trade nor money, they were not able to hire forces to push on their conquests with the same rapidity as the Carthaginians: but then, as they procured every thing from within themselves; and as all the parts of the state were intimately united; they had surer resources in great misfortunes than the Carthaginians. And for this reason they never once thought of suing for peace after the battle of Cannæ, as the Carthaginians had done in a less imminent danger.

The Carthaginians had, besides, a body of troops (which was not very numerous) levied from among their own citizens; and this was a kind of school, in which the flower of their nobility, and those whose talents and ambition prompted them to aspire to the first dignities, learned the rudiments of the art of war. From among these were selected all the general officers, who were put at the head of the different bodies of their forces, and had the chief command in the armies. This nation was too jealous and suspicious to employ foreign generals. But they were not so distrustful of their own citizens as Rome and Athens; for the Carthaginians, at the same time that they invested them with great power, did not guard against the abuse they might make of it in order to oppress their country. The command of armies was neither annual, nor limited to any time, as in the two republics above-mentioned. Many generals held their commissions for a great number of years, either till the war or their lives ended; though they were still accountable to the commonwealth for their conduct; and liable to be recalled, whenever a real fault, a misfortune, or the superior interest of a cabal, furnished an opportunity for it.

Sect. VII. Arts and Sciences.—It cannot be said that the Carthaginians renounced entirely the glory which results from study and knowledge. The sending of Masinissa, son of a powerful king,[^648] thither for education, gives us room to believe that Carthage was provided with an excellent school. The great Hannibal,[^649] who in all respects was an ornament to that city, was not unacquainted with polite literature, as will be seen hereafter. Mago,[^650] another very celebrated general, did as much honour to Carthage by his pen as by his victories. He wrote twenty-eight volumes upon husbandry, which the Roman senate had in such esteem, that after the taking of Carthage, when they presented the African princes with the libraries found there, (another proof that learning was not entirely banished from Carthage,) they gave orders to have these books translated into Latin,[^651] though Cato had before written his books on that subject. There is still extant a Greek version of a treatise drawn up by Hanno in the Punic tongue,[^652] relating to a voyage he made (by order of the senate) with a considerable fleet round Africa, for the settling of different colonies in that part of the world. This Hanno is believed to be more ancient than that person of the same name who lived in the time of Agathocles.

[^648: King of the Massylians in Africa.—Trans.]

[^649: Nepos, in vitâ Annibalis.]

[^650: Cic. l. i. De Orat. n. 249. Plin. l. xviii. c. 3.]

[^651: These books were written by Mago in the Punic language, and translated into Greek by Cassius Dionysius of Utica, from whose version, we may probably suppose, the Latin was made.—Trans.]

[^652: Voss. de Hist. Gr. l. iv.]

Clitomachus, called in the Punic language Asdrubal, was a great philosopher.[^653] He succeeded the famous Carneades, whose disciple he had been; and maintained in Athens the honour of the Academic sect. Cicero says,[^654] that he was a more sensible man, and fonder of study, than the Carthaginians generally are. He wrote several books;[^655] in one of which he composed a piece to console the unhappy citizens of Carthage, who, by the ruin of their city, were reduced to slavery.

[^653: Plut. de fort. Alex. p. 328. Diog. Laërt. in Clitom.]

[^654: Clitomachus, homo et acutus ut Pœnus et valdè studiosus ac diligens. Academ. Quæst. l. iv. n. 98.—Trans.]

[^655: Tusc. Quæst. l. lii. n. 54.]

I might rank among, or rather place at the head of, the writers who have adorned Africa, the celebrated Terence; himself singly being capable of reflecting infinite honour on his country by the fame of his productions, if, on this account, Carthage, the place of his birth, ought not to be less considered as his country than Rome, where he was educated, and acquired that purity of style, that delicacy and elegance, which have gained him the admiration of all succeeding ages. It is supposed,[^656] that he was carried off when an infant, or at least very young, by the Numidians in their incursions into the Carthaginian territories, during the war carried on between these two nations, from the conclusion of the second, to the beginning of the third Punic war. He was sold for a slave to Terentius Lucanus, a Roman senator; who, after giving him an excellent education, gave him his liberty, and called him by his own name, as was then the custom. He was united in a very strict friendship with the second Scipio Africanus, and Lælius; and it was a common report at Rome, that he had the assistance of these two great men in composing his pieces. The poet, so far from endeavouring to stifle a report so advantageous to him, made a merit of it. Only six of his comedies are extant. Some authors, on the authority of Suetonius, (the writer of his life,) say, that in his return from Greece, whither he had made a voyage, he lost a hundred and eight comedies, which he had translated from Menander, and could not survive an accident which must naturally afflict him in a sensible manner; but this incident is not very well founded. Be this as it may, he died in the year of Rome 594, under the consulship of Cneius Cornelius Dolabella, and M. Fulvius, at the age of thirty-five years, and consequently he was born anno 560.

[^656: Suet. in vit. Terent.]

It must yet be confessed, notwithstanding all we have said, that there ever was a great scarcity of learned men in Carthage, since it hardly furnished three or four writers of reputation in upwards of seven hundred years. Although the Carthaginians held a correspondence with Greece and the most civilized nations, yet this did not excite them to borrow their learning, as being foreign to their views of trade and commerce. Eloquence, poetry, history, seem to have been little known among them. A Carthaginian philosopher was considered as a sort of prodigy by the learned. What then would an astronomer or a geometrician have been thought? I know not in what esteem physic, which is so highly useful to life, was held at Carthage; or jurisprudence, so necessary to society.

As works of wit were generally had in so much disregard, the education of youth must necessarily have been very imperfect and unpolished. In Carthage, the study and knowledge of youth were for the most part confined to writing, arithmetic, book-keeping, and the buying and selling goods; in a word, to whatever related to traffic. But polite learning, history, and philosophy, were in little repute among them. These were, in later years, even prohibited by the laws, which expressly forbade any Carthaginian to learn the Greek tongue, lest it might qualify them for carrying on a dangerous correspondence with the enemy, either by letter or word of mouth.[^657]

[^657: Factum senatûs consultum ne quis postea Carthaginensis aut literis Græcis aut sermoni studeret; ne aut loqui cum hoste, aut scribere sine interprete posset. Justin, l. xx. c. 5. Justin ascribes the reason of this law to a treasonable correspondence between one Suniatus, a powerful Carthaginian, and Dionysius the tyrant of Sicily; the former, by letters written in Greek, (which afterwards fell into the hands of the Carthaginians,) having informed the tyrant of the war designed against him by his country, out of hatred to Hanno the general, to whom he was an enemy.—Trans.]

Now what could be expected from such a cast of mind? Accordingly there was never seen among them that elegance of behaviour, that ease and complacency of manners, and those sentiments of virtue, which are generally the fruits of a liberal education in all civilized nations. The small number of great men which this nation has produced, must therefore have owed their merit to the felicity of their genius, to the singularity of their talents, and a long experience, without any great assistance from cultivation and instruction. Hence it was, that the merit of the greatest men of Carthage was sullied by great failings, low vices, and cruel passions; and it is rare to meet with any conspicuous virtue among them without some blemish; with any virtue of a noble, generous, and amiable kind, and supported by enlightened and steady principles, such as is every where found among the Greeks and Romans. The reader will perceive that I here speak only of the heathen virtues, and agreeably to the idea which the Pagans entertained of them.

I meet with as few monuments of their skill in arts of a less noble and necessary kind, as painting and sculpture. I find, indeed, that they had plundered the conquered nations of a great many works in both these kinds; but it does not appear that they themselves had produced many.

From what has been said, one cannot help concluding, that traffic was the predominant inclination, and the peculiar characteristic of the Carthaginians; that it formed, in a manner, the basis of the state, the soul of the commonwealth, and the grand spring which gave motion to all their enterprises. The Carthaginians, in general, were skilful merchants; employed wholly in traffic; excited strongly by the desire of gain, and esteeming nothing but riches; directing all their talents, and placing their chief glory, in amassing them; though at the same time they scarce knew the purpose for which they were designed, or how to use them in a noble or worthy manner.

Sect. VIII. The Character, Manners, and Qualities of the Carthaginians.—In the enumeration of the various qualities which Cicero[^658] assigns to different nations, as their distinguishing characteristics, he declares that of the Carthaginians to be craft, skill, address, industry, cunning, calliditas; which doubtless appeared in war, but was still more conspicuous in the rest of their conduct; and this was joined to another quality that bears a very near relation to it, and is still less reputable. Craft and cunning lead naturally to lying, duplicity, and breach of faith; and these, by accustoming the mind insensibly to be less scrupulous with regard to the choice of the means for compassing its designs, prepare it for the basest frauds and the most perfidious actions. This was also one of the characteristics of the Carthaginians;[^659] and it was so notorious, that to signify any remarkable dishonesty, it was usual to call it Punic faith, fides Punica; and to denote a knavish, deceitful disposition, no expression was thought more proper and emphatical than this, a Carthaginian disposition, Punicum ingenium.

[^658: Quàm volumus licèt ipsi nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Pœnes, &c. sed pietate ac religione, &c. omnes gentes nationesque superavimus. De Arusp. Resp. n. 19.—Trans.]

[^659: Carthaginenses fraudulenti et mendaces—multis et variis mercatorum advenarumque sermonibus ad studium fallendi quæstûs cupiditate vocabantur. Cic. Orat. ii. in Rull. n. 94.—Trans.]

An excessive thirst for amassing wealth, and an inordinate love of gain, generally gave occasion in Carthage to the committing base and unjust actions. One single example will prove this. During a truce, granted by Scipio to the earnest entreaties of the Carthaginians, some Roman vessels, being driven by a storm on the coasts of Carthage, were seized by order of the senate and people,[^660] who could not suffer so tempting a prey to escape them. They were resolved to get money, though the manner of acquiring it were ever so scandalous.[^661] The inhabitants of Carthage, even in St. Austin's time, (as that Father informs us,) showed on a particular occasion, that they still retained part of this characteristic.

[^660: Magistratus senatum vocare, populus in curiæ vestibulo fremere, ne tanta ex oculis manibusque amitteretur præda. Consensum est ut, &c. Liv. l. xxx. n. 24.—Trans.]

[^661: A mountebank had promised the citizens of Carthage to discover to them their most secret thoughts, in case they would come, on a day appointed, to hear him. Being all met, he told them, they were desirous to buy cheap and sell dear. Every man's conscience pleaded guilty to the charge; and the mountebank was dismissed with applause and laughter. Vili vultis emere, et carè vendere; in quo dicto levissimi scenici omnes tamen conscientias invenerunt suas, eique vera et tamen improvisa dicenti admirabili favore plauserunt. S. August. l. xiii. de Trinit. c. 3.—Trans.]

But these were not the only blemishes and faults of the Carthaginians.[^662] They had something austere and savage in their disposition and genius, a haughty and imperious air, a sort of ferocity, which, in the first transports of passion, was deaf to both reason and remonstrances, and plunged brutally into the utmost excesses of violence. The people, cowardly and grovelling under apprehensions, were proud and cruel in their transports; at the same time that they trembled under their magistrates, they were dreaded in their turn by their miserable vassals. In this we see the difference which education makes between one nation and another. The Athenians, whose city was always considered as the centre of learning, were naturally jealous of their authority, and difficult to govern; but still, a fund of good nature and humanity made them compassionate the misfortunes of others, and be indulgent to the errors of their leaders. Cleon one day desired the assembly, in which he presided, to break up, because, as he told them, he had a sacrifice to offer, and friends to entertain. The people only laughed at the request, and immediately separated. Such a liberty, says Plutarch, at Carthage, would have cost a man his life.

[^662: Plut. de gen. Rep. p. 799.]

Livy makes a like reflection with regard to Terentius Varro.[^663] That general on his return to Rome after the battle of Cannæ, which had been lost by his ill conduct, was met by persons of all orders of the state, at some distance from Rome; and thanked by them, for his not having despaired of the commonwealth; who, says the historian, had he been a general of the Carthaginians, must have expected the most severe punishment: Cui, si Carthaginensium ductor fuisset, nihil recusandum supplicii foret. Indeed, a court was established at Carthage, where the generals were obliged to give an account of their conduct; and they all were made responsible for the events of the war. Ill success was punished there as a crime against the state; and whenever a general lost a battle, he was almost sure, at his return, of ending his life upon a gibbet. Such was the furious, cruel, and barbarous disposition of the Carthaginians, who were always ready to shed the blood of their citizens as well as of foreigners. The unheard-of tortures which they made Regulus suffer, are a manifest proof of this assertion; and their history will furnish us with such instances of it, as are not to be read without horror.

[^663: Lib. xxii. n. 61.]

Part The Second. The History of the Carthaginians.

The interval of time between the foundation of Carthage and its ruin, included seven hundred years, and may be divided into two parts. The first, which is much the longest and the least known, (as is ordinary with the beginnings of all states,) extends to the first Punic war, and takes up five hundred and eighty-two years. The second, which ends at the destruction of Carthage, contains but a hundred and eighteen years.

Chapter I. The Foundation of Carthage and its Aggrandizement till the Time of the first Punic War.

Carthage in Africa was a colony from Tyre, the most renowned city at that time for commerce in the world. Tyre had long before transplanted into that country another colony, which built Utica,[^664] made famous by the death of the second Cato, who, for this reason, is generally called Cato Uticensis.

[^664: Utica et Carthago, ambæ inclytæ, ambæ à Phoenicibus conditæ; illa fato Catonis insignis, hæc suo. Pompon. Mel. c. 67. Utica and Carthage, both famous, and both built by Phoenicians; the first renowned by Cato's fate, the last by its own.—Trans.]

Authors disagree very much with regard to the æra of the foundation of Carthage.[^665] It is a difficult matter, and not very material, to reconcile them; at least, agreeably to the plan laid down by me, it is sufficient to know, within a few years, the time in which that city was built.

[^665: Our countryman Howel endeavours to reconcile the three different accounts of the foundation of Carthage, in the following manner. He says, that the town consisted of three parts, viz. Cothon, or the port and buildings adjoining to it, which he supposes to have been first built; Megara, built next, and in respect of Cothon, called the New Town, or Karthada; and Byrsa, or the citadel, built last of all, and probably by Dido.

Cothon, to agree with Appian, was built fifty years before the taking of Troy; Megara, to correspond with Eusebius, was built a hundred ninety-four years later; Byrsa, to agree with Menander, (cited by Josephus,) was built a hundred sixty-six years after Megara.—Trans.]

Carthage existed a little above seven hundred years.[^666] It was destroyed under the consulate of Cn. Lentulus, and L. Mummius, the 603d year of Rome, 3859th of the world, and 145 before Christ. The foundation of it may therefore be fixed in the year of the world 3158, when Joash was king of Judah, 98 years before the building of Rome, and 846 before our Saviour.

[^666: Liv. Epit. l. ii.]

The foundation of Carthage is ascribed to Elisa, a Tyrian princess, better known by the name of Dido.[^667] Ithobal, king of Tyre, and father of the famous Jezebel, called in Scripture Ethbaal, was her great-grandfather. She married her near relation Acerbas, called otherwise Sicharbas and Sichæus, an extremely rich prince, and Pygmalion, king of Tyre, was her brother. This prince having put Sichæus to death, in order that he might have an opportunity of seizing his immense wealth, Dido eluded the cruel avarice of her brother, by withdrawing secretly with all her dead husband's treasures. After having long wandered, she at last landed on the coast of the Mediterranean, in the gulf where Utica stood, and in the country of Africa, properly so called, distant almost fifteen[^668] miles from Tunis, so famous at this time for its corsairs; and there settled with her few followers, after having purchased some lands from the inhabitants of the country.[^669]

[^667: Justin, l. xviii. c. 4-6. App. de bello Pun. p. 1. Strab. l. xvii. p. 832. Paterc. l. i. c. 6.]

[^668: 120 Stadia. Strab. l. xiv. p. 687.—Trans.]

[^669: Some authors say, that Dido put a trick on the natives, by desiring to purchase of them, for her intended settlement, only so much land as an ox's hide would encompass. The request was thought too moderate to be denied. She then cut the hide into the smallest thongs; and, with them, encompassed a large tract of ground, on which she built a citadel called Byrsa, from the hide. But this tale of the hide is generally exploded by the learned; who observe that the Hebrew word Bosra, which signifies a fortification, gave rise to the Greek word Byrsa, which is the name of the citadel of Carthage.—Trans.]

Many of the neighbouring people, invited by the prospect of lucre, repaired thither to sell these new comers the necessaries of life; and shortly after incorporated themselves with them. These inhabitants, who had been thus gathered from different places, soon grew very numerous. The citizens of Utica, considering them as their countrymen, and as descended from the same common stock, deputed envoys with very considerable presents, and exhorted them to build a city in the place where they had first settled. The natives of the country, from the esteem and respect frequently shown to strangers, did as much on their part. Thus all things conspiring with Dido's views, she built her city, which was charged with the payment of an annual tribute to the Africans for the ground it stood upon; and called Carthada,[^670] or Carthage, a name that, in the Phoenician and Hebrew tongues, (which have a great affinity,) signifies the New City. It is said, that when the foundations were dug, a horse's head was found, which was thought a good omen, and a presage of the future warlike genius of that people.[^671]

[^670: Kartha Hadath or Hadtha.—Trans.]

[^671: Effodêre loco signum, quod regia Juno Monstrârat, caput acris equi; nam sic fore bello Egregiam, et facilem victu per secula gentem.

Virg. Æn. l. i. ver. 447.

The Tyrians landing near this holy ground, And digging here, a prosp'rous omen found: From under earth a courser's head they drew, Their growth and future fortune to foreshew: This fated sign their foundress Juno gave, Of a soil fruitful, and a people brave.

Dryden.—Trans.]

This princess was afterwards courted by Iarbas king of Getulia, and threatened with a war in case of refusal. Dido, who had bound herself by an oath not to consent to a second marriage, being incapable of violating the faith she had sworn to Sichæus, desired time for deliberation, and for appeasing the manes of her first husband by sacrifice. Having therefore ordered a pile to be raised, she ascended it; and drawing out a dagger which she had concealed under her robe, stabbed herself with it.[^672]

[^672: The story, as it is told more at large in Justin, (l. xviii. c. 6.) is this—Iarbas, king of the Mauritanians, sending for ten of the principal Carthaginians, demanded Dido in marriage, threatening to declare war against her in case of a refusal: the ambassadors being afraid to deliver the message of Iarbas, told her, (with Punic honesty,) “that he wanted to have some person sent him, who was capable of civilizing and polishing himself and his Africans; but that there was no possibility of finding any Carthaginian, who would be willing to quit his native place and kindred, for the conversation of Barbarians, who were as savage as the wildest beasts.” Here the queen, with indignation, interrupting them, and asking, “if they were not ashamed to refuse living in any manner which might be beneficial to their country, to which they owed even their lives?” they then delivered the king's message; and bid her “set them a pattern, and sacrifice herself to her country's welfare.” Dido being thus ensnared, called on Sichæus with tears and lamentations, and answered, “that she would go where the fate of her city called her.” At the expiration of three months, she ascended the fatal pile; and with her last breath told the spectators, that she was going to her husband, as they had ordered her.—Trans.]

Virgil has made a great alteration in this history, by supposing that Æneas, his hero, was contemporary with Dido, though there was an interval of near three centuries between the one and the other; Carthage being built three hundred years after the destruction of Troy. This liberty is very excusable in a poet, who is not tied to the scrupulous accuracy of an historian; and we admire, with great reason, the judgment which he has shown in his plan, when, to interest the Romans (for whom he wrote) in his subject, he has the art of introducing into it the implacable hatred which subsisted between Carthage and Rome, and ingeniously deduces the original of it from the very remote foundation of those two rival cities.

Carthage, whose beginnings, as we have observed, were very weak at first, grew larger by insensible degrees, in the country where it was founded. But its dominion was not long confined to Africa. This ambitious city extended her conquests into Europe, invaded Sardinia, made herself mistress of a great part of Sicily, and reduced to her subjection almost the whole of Spain; and having sent out powerful colonies into all quarters, enjoyed the empire of the seas for more than six hundred years; and formed a state which was able to dispute preeminence with the greatest empires of the world, by her wealth, her commerce, her numerous armies, her formidable fleets, and, above all, by the courage and ability of her captains. The dates and circumstances of many of these conquests are little known. I shall take but a transient notice of them, in order to enable my readers to form some idea of the countries, which will be often mentioned in the course of this history.

Conquests of the Carthaginians in Africa.—The first wars made by the Carthaginians were to free themselves from the annual tribute which they had engaged to pay the Africans, for the territory which had been ceded to them.[^673] This conduct does them no honour, as the settlement was granted them upon condition of their paying a tribute. One would be apt to imagine, that they were desirous of covering the obscurity of their original, by abolishing this proof of it. But they were not successful on this occasion. The Africans had justice on their side, and they prospered accordingly; the war being terminated by the payment of the tribute.

[^673: Justin, l. xix. c. 1.]

The Carthaginians afterwards carried their arms against the Moors and Numidians, and gained many conquests over both.[^674] Being now emboldened by these happy successes, they shook off entirely the tribute which gave them so much uneasiness,[^675] and possessed themselves of a great part of Africa.

[^674: Justin, l. xix. c. 2.]

[^675: Afri compulsi stipendium urbis conditæ Carthageniensibus remittere. Justin, l. xix. c 2.—Trans.]

About this time there arose a great dispute between Carthage and Cyrene, on the subject of their respective limits. Cyrene was a very powerful city, situated on the Mediterranean, towards the greater Syrtis, and had been built by Battus the Lacedæmonian.[^676]

[^676: Sallust. de bello Jugurth. n. 77. Valer. Max. l. v. c. 6.]

It was agreed on each side, that two young men should set out at the same time, from either city; and that the place of their meeting should be the common boundary of both states. The Carthaginians (these were two brothers named Philæni) made the most haste; and their antagonists pretending that foul play had been used, and that the two brothers had set out before the time appointed, refused to stand to the agreement unless the two brothers (to remove all suspicion of unfair dealing) would consent to be buried alive in the place where they had met. They acquiesced with the proposal; and the Carthaginians erected, on that spot, two altars to their memories, and paid them divine honours in their city; and from that time the place was called the altars of the Philæni, Aræ Philænorum,[^677] and served as the boundary of the Carthaginian empire, which extended from thence to the pillars of Hercules.

[^677: These altars were not standing in Strabo's time. Some geographers think Arcadia to be the city which was anciently called Philænorum Aræ; but others believe it was Naina or Tain, situated a little west of Arcadia, in the gulf of Sidra.—Trans.]

Conquests of the Carthaginians in Sardinia, &c.—History does not inform us exactly, either of the time when the Carthaginians entered Sardinia, or of the manner in which they got possession of it. This island was of great use to them; and during all their wars supplied them abundantly with provisions.[^678] It is separated from Corsica only by a strait of about three leagues in breadth. The metropolis of the southern and most fertile part of it, was Caralis or Calaris, now called Cagliari. On the arrival of the Carthaginians, the natives withdrew to the mountains in the northern parts of the island, which are almost inaccessible, and whence the enemy could not dislodge them.

[^678: Strab. l. v. p. 224. Diod. l. v. p. 296.]

The Carthaginians seized likewise on the Balearic isles, now called Majorca and Minorca. Port Mahon, (Portus Magonis,) in the latter island, was so called from Mago, a Carthaginian general, who first made use of, and fortified it. It is not known who this Mago was; but it is very probable that he was Hannibal's brother.[^679] This harbour is, at this day, one of the most considerable in the Mediterranean.

[^679: Liv. l. xxviii. n. 37.]

These isles furnished the Carthaginians with the most expert slingers in the world, who did them great service in battles and sieges.[^680] They slang large stones of above a pound weight; and sometimes threw leaden bullets,[^681] with so much violence, that they would pierce even the strongest helmets, shields, and cuirasses; and were so dexterous in their aim, that they scarce ever missed the mark. The inhabitants of these islands were accustomed, from their infancy, to handle the sling; for which purpose their mothers placed on the bough of a high tree, the piece of bread designed for their children's breakfast, who were not allowed a morsel till they had brought it down with their slings. From this practice, these islands were called Baleares and Gymnasiæ, by the Greeks,[^682] because the inhabitants used to exercise themselves so early in slinging of stones.[^683]

[^680: Diod. l. v. p. 298. and l. xix. p. 742. Liv. loco citato.]

[^681: Liquescit excussa glans fundâ, et attritu aeris, velut igne, distillat. i.e. The ball, when thrown from the sling, dissolves; and, by the friction of the air, runs as if it was melted by fire. Senec. Nat. Quæst. l. ii. c. 57.—Trans.]

[^682: Strab. l. iii. p. 167.]

[^683: Bochart derives the name of these islands from two Phoenician words, Baal-jare, or master of the art of slinging. This strengthens the authority of Strabo, viz. that the inhabitants learnt their art from the Phœnicians, who were once their masters. Σφενδονῆται ἄριστοι λέγονται—ἐξότε Φοίνικες κατέσχον τὰς νήσες. And this is still more probable, when we consider that both the Hebrews and Phœnicians excelled in this art. The Balearian slings would annoy an enemy either near at hand, or at a distance. Every slinger carried three of them in war. One hung from the neck, a second from the waist, and a third was carried in the hand. To this, give me leave to add two more observations, (foreign indeed to the present purpose, but relating to these islands,) which I hope will not be unentertaining to the reader. The first is, that these islands were once so infested with rabbits, that the inhabitants of it applied to Rome, either for aid against them, or otherwise desired new habitations, ἐκβάλλεσθαι γὰρ ὑπὸ τῶν ζώων τέτων, those creatures having ejected them out of their old ones. Vide Strab. Plin. l. viii. c. 55. The second observation is, that these islanders were not only expert slingers, but likewise excellent swimmers, which they are to this day, by the testimony of our countryman Biddulph, who, in his Travels, informs us, that being becalmed near these islands, a woman swam to him out of one of them, with a basket of fruit to sell.—Trans.]

Conquests of the Carthaginians in Spain.—Before I enter on the relation of these conquests, I think it proper to give my readers some idea of Spain.

Spain is divided into three parts, Bœtica, Lusitania, Tarraconensis.[^684]

[^684: Cluver, l. ii. c. 2.]

Bœtica, so called from the river Bœtis,[^685] was the southern division of it, and comprehended the present kingdom of Granada, Andalusia, part of New Castile, and Estremadura. Cadiz, called by the ancients Gades and Gadira, is a town situated in a small island of the same name, on the western coast of Andalusia, about nine leagues from Gibraltar. It is well known that Hercules, having extended his conquests to this place, halted, from the supposition that he was come to the extremity of the world.[^686] He here erected two pillars, as monuments of his victories, pursuant to the custom of that age. The place has always retained the name, though time has quite destroyed these pillars. Authors are divided in opinion, with regard to the place where these pillars were erected. Bœtica was the most fruitful, the wealthiest, and most populous part of Spain.[^687] It contained two hundred cities, and was inhabited by the Turdetani, or Turduli. On the banks of the Bœtis stood three large cities, Castulo towards the source, Corduba lower down, the native place of Lucan and the two Senecas, lastly, Hispalis.[^688]

[^685: Guadalquivir.]

[^686: Strab. l. iii. p. 171.]

[^687: Strab. l. iii. p. 139-142.]

[^688: Seville.]

Lusitania is bounded on the west by the Ocean, on the north by the river Durius,[^689] and on the south by the river Anas.[^690] Between these two rivers is the Tagus. Lusitania was what is now called Portugal, with part of Old and New Castile.

[^689: Duero.]

[^690: Guadiana.]

Tarraconensis comprehended the rest of Spain, that is, the kingdoms of Murcia and Valentia, Catalonia, Arragon, Navarre, Biscay, the Asturias, Gallicia, the kingdom of Leon, and the greatest part of the two Castiles. Tarraco,[^691] a very considerable city, gave its name to this part of Spain. Pretty near it lay Barcino.[^692] Its name gives rise to the conjecture, that it was built by Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, father of the great Hannibal. The most renowned nations of Tarraconensis were the Celtiberi, beyond the river Iberus;[^693] the Cantabri, where Biscay now lies; the Carpetani, whose capital was Toledo; the Oretani, &c.

[^691: Tarragona.]

[^692: Barcelona.]

[^693: Ebro.]

Spain, abounding with mines of gold and silver, and peopled with a martial race of men, had sufficient to excite both the avarice and ambition of the Carthaginians, who were more of a mercantile than of a warlike disposition, from the very genius and constitution of their republic. They doubtless knew that their Phœnician ancestors, (as Diodorus relates,)[^694] taking advantage of the happy ignorance of the Spaniards, with regard to the immense riches which were hid in the bowels of their lands, first took from them these precious treasures, in exchange for commodities of little value. They likewise foresaw, that if they could once subdue this country, it would furnish them abundantly with well-disciplined troops for the conquest of other nations, as actually happened.

[^694: Lib. v. p. 312.]

The occasion of the Carthaginians first landing in Spain, was to assist the inhabitants of Cadiz, who were invaded by the Spaniards.[^695] That city was a colony from Tyre, as well as Utica and Carthage, and even more ancient than either of them. The Tyrians having built it, established there the worship of Hercules, and erected, in his honour, a magnificent temple, which became famous in after ages. The success of this first expedition of the Carthaginians made them desirous of carrying their arms into Spain.

[^695: Justin, l. xliv. c. 5. Diod. l. v. p. 300.]

It is not exactly known in what period they entered Spain, nor how far they extended their first conquests. It is probable that these were slow in the beginning, as the Carthaginians had to do with very warlike nations, who defended themselves with great resolution and courage. Nor could they ever have accomplished their design, as Strabo observes,[^696] had the Spaniards (united in a body) formed but one state, and mutually assisted one another. But as every district, every people, were entirely detached from their neighbours, and had not the least correspondence nor connection with them, the Carthaginians were forced to subdue them one after another. This circumstance occasioned, on one hand, the loss of Spain; but on the other, protracted the war, and made the conquest of the country much more difficult.[^697] Accordingly it has been observed, that though Spain was the first province which the Romans invaded on the continent, it was the last they subdued;[^698] and was not entirely subjected to their power, till after having made a vigorous opposition for upwards of 200 years.

[^696: Lib. iii. p. 158.]

[^697: Such a division of Britain retarded, and at the same time facilitated, the conquest of it to the Romans. Dum singuli pugnant universi vincuntur. Tacit.—Trans.]

[^698: Hispania, prima Romanis inita Provinciarum quæ quidem continentis sint, postrema omnium perdomita est. Liv. l. xxviii. p. 12.—Trans.]

It appears from the accounts given by Polybius and Livy, of the wars of Hamilcar, Asdrubal, and Hannibal in Spain, which will soon be mentioned, that the arms of the Carthaginians had not made any considerable progress in that country before that period, and that the greatest part of Spain was then unconquered. But in twenty years' time they completed the conquest of almost the whole country.

At the time that Hannibal set out for Italy, all the coast of Africa, from the Philænorum Aræ, by the great Syrtis, to the pillars of Hercules, was subject to the Carthaginians.[^699] Passing through the straits, they had conquered all the western coast of Spain, along the ocean, as far as the Pyrenean hills. The coast, which lies on the Mediterranean, had been almost wholly subdued by them; and it was there they had built Carthagena; and they were masters of all the country, as far as the river Iberus, which bounded their dominions. Such was, at that time, the extent of their empire. In the centre of the country, some nations had indeed held out against all their efforts, and could not be subdued by them.

[^699: Polyb. l. iii. p. 192. l. i. p. 9.]

Conquests of the Carthaginians in Sicily.—The wars which the Carthaginians carried on in Sicily are more known. I shall here relate those which were waged from the reign of Xerxes, who first prompted the Carthaginians to carry their arms into Sicily, till the first Punic war. This period includes near two hundred and twenty years; viz. from the year of the world 3520 to 3738. At the breaking out of these wars, Syracuse, the most considerable as well as most powerful city of Sicily, had invested Gelon, Hiero, and Thrasybulus, (three brothers who succeeded one another,) with the sovereign power. After their deaths, a democracy or popular government was established in that city, and subsisted above sixty years. From this time, the two Dionysius's, Timoleon, and Agathocles, bore the sway in Syracuse. Pyrrhus was afterwards invited into Sicily, but he kept possession of it only a few years. Such was the government of Sicily during the wars of which I am going to treat. They will give us great light with regard to the power of the Carthaginians, at the time that they began to be engaged in war with the Romans.

Sicily is the largest and most considerable island in the Mediterranean. It is of a triangular form, and for that reason was called Trinacria and Triquetra. The eastern side, which faces the Ionian or Grecian sea, extends from Cape Pachynum[^700] to Pelorum.[^701] The most celebrated cities on this coast are Syracuse, Tauromenium, and Messana. The northern coast, which looks towards Italy, reaches from Cape Pelorum to Cape Lilybæum.[^702] The most noted cities on this coast are Mylæ, Hymera, Panormus, Eryx, Motya, Lilybæum. The southern coast, which lies opposite to Africa, extends from Cape Lilybæum to Pachynum. The most remarkable cities on this coast are Selinus, Agrigentum, Gela, and Camarina. This island is separated from Italy by a strait, which is not more than a mile and a half over, and called the Faro or strait of Messina, from its contiguity to that city. The passage from Lilybæum to Africa is but 1500 furlongs,[^703] that is, about seventy-five leagues.[^704]

[^700: Passaro.]

[^701: Il Faro.]

[^702: Cape Boéo.]

[^703: Strab. l. vi. p. 267.]

[^704: This is Strabo's calculation; but there must be a mistake in the numeral characters, and what he immediately subjoins, is a proof of this mistake. He says, that a man, whose eye-sight was good, might, from the coast of Sicily, count the vessels that came out of the port of Carthage. Is it possible that the eye can carry so far as 60 or 75 leagues? This passage of Strabo, therefore, must be thus corrected. The passage from Lilybæum to Africa, is only 25 leagues.—Trans.]

[^705] The period in which the Carthaginians first carried their arms into Sicily is not exactly known.[^706] All we are certain of is, that they were already possessed of some part of it, at the time that they entered into a treaty with the Romans; the same year that the kings were expelled, and consuls appointed in their room, viz. twenty-eight years before Xerxes invaded Greece. This treaty, which is the first we find mentioned to have been made between these two nations, speaks of Africa and Sardinia as possessed by the Carthaginians; whereas the conventions with regard to Sicily, relate only to those parts of the island which were subject to them. By this treaty it is expressly stipulated, that neither the Romans nor their allies shall sail beyond the Fair Promontory,[^707] which was very near Carthage; and that such merchants, as shall resort to this city for traffic, shall pay only certain duties which are settled in it.[^708]

[^705: A.M. 3501. A. Carth. 343. Rome, 245. Ant. J.C. 503.]

[^706: Polyb. l iii. p. 245, et seq. edit. Gronov.]

[^707: The reason of this restraint, according to Polybius, was, the unwillingness of the Carthaginians to let the Romans have any knowledge of the countries which lay more to the south, in order that this enterprising people might not hear of their futility. Polyb. l. iii. p. 247. edit. Gronov.—Trans.]

[^708: Idem, p. 246.]

It appears by the same treaty, that the Carthaginians were particularly careful to exclude the Romans from all the countries subject to them; as well as from the knowledge of what was transacting in them; as though the Carthaginians, even at that time, had taken umbrage at the rising power of the Romans; and already harboured in their breasts the secret seeds of that jealousy and distrust, that were one day to burst out in long and cruel wars, and a mutual hatred and animosity, which nothing could extinguish but the ruin of one of the contending powers.

[^709] Some years after the conclusion of this first treaty, the Carthaginians made an alliance with Xerxes king of Persia.[^710] This prince, who aimed at nothing less than the total extirpation of the Greeks, whom he considered as his irreconcilable enemies, thought it would be impossible for him to succeed in his enterprise without the assistance of Carthage, whose power was formidable even at that time. The Carthaginians, who always kept in view the design they entertained of seizing upon the remainder of Sicily, greedily snatched the favourable opportunity which now presented itself for their completing the reduction of it. A treaty was therefore concluded; wherein it was agreed that the Carthaginians were to invade, with all their forces, those Greeks who were settled in Sicily and Italy, while Xerxes should march in person against Greece itself.

[^709: A.M. 3520. Ant. J.C. 484.]

[^710: Diod. l. xi. p. 1, 16, & 22.]

The preparations for this war lasted three years. The land army amounted to no less than three hundred thousand men. The fleet consisted of two thousand ships of war, and upwards of three thousand small vessels of burden. Hamilcar, the most experienced captain of his age, sailed from Carthage with this formidable army. He landed at Palermo;[^711] and, after refreshing his troops, he marched against Hymera, a city not far distant from Palermo, and laid siege to it. Theron, who commanded in it, seeing himself very much straitened, sent to Gelon, who had possessed himself of Syracuse. He flew immediately to his relief, with fifty thousand foot, and five thousand horse. His arrival infused new courage into the besieged, who, from that time, made a very vigorous defence.

[^711: This city is called in Latin Panormus.—Trans.]

Gelon was an able warrior, and excelled in stratagems. A courier was brought to him, who had been despatched from Selinus, a city of Sicily, with a letter for Hamilcar, to inform him of the day when he might expect the cavalry which he had demanded of them. Gelon drew out an equal number of his own troops, and sent them from his camp about the time agreed on. These being admitted into the enemy's camp, as coming from Selinus, rushed upon Hamilcar, killed him, and set fire to his ships. In this critical conjuncture, Gelon attacked, with all his forces, the Carthaginians, who at first made a gallant resistance. But when the news of their general's death was brought them, and they saw their fleet in a blaze, their courage failed them, and they fled. And now a dreadful slaughter ensued; upwards of a hundred and fifty thousand being slain. The rest of the army, having retired to a place where they were in want of every thing, could not make a long defence, and were forced to surrender at discretion. This battle was fought the very day of the famous action of Thermopylæ, in which three hundred Spartans,[^712] with the sacrifice of their lives, disputed Xerxes's entrance into Greece.

[^712: Besides the 300 Spartans, the Thespians, a people of Bœotia, to the number of 700, fought and died with Leonidas in this memorable battle. Herod. l. vii. c. 202-222.—Trans.]

When the sad news was brought to Carthage of the entire defeat of the army, consternation, grief, and despair, threw the whole city into such a confusion and alarm as are not to be expressed. It was imagined that the enemy was already at the gates. The Carthaginians, in great reverses of fortune, always lost their courage, and sunk into the opposite extreme. Immediately they sent a deputation to Gelon, by which they desired peace upon any terms. He heard their envoys with great humanity. The complete victory he had gained, so far from making him haughty and untractable, had only increased his modesty and clemency even towards the enemy. He therefore granted them a peace, without any other condition, than their paying two thousand[^713] talents towards the expense of the war. He likewise required them to build two temples, where the treaty of this peace should be deposited, and exposed at all times to public view. The Carthaginians did not think this a dear purchase of a peace, that was so absolutely necessary to their affairs, and which they hardly durst hope for. Gisgo, the son of Hamilcar, pursuant to the unjust custom of the Carthaginians, of ascribing to the general the ill success of a war, and making him bear the blame of it, was punished for his father's misfortune, and sent into banishment. He passed the remainder of his days at Selinus, a city of Sicily.

[^713: An Attic silver talent, according to Dr. Bernard, is 206l. 5s., consequently 2000 talents is 412,500l.—Trans.]

Gelon, on his return to Syracuse, convened the people, and invited all the citizens to appear under arms. He himself entered the assembly, unarmed and without his guards, and there gave an account of the whole conduct of his life. His speech met with no other interruption, than the public testimonies which were given him of gratitude and admiration. So far from being treated as a tyrant, and the oppressor of his country's liberty, he was considered as its benefactor and deliverer; all, with an unanimous voice, proclaimed him king; and the crown was bestowed, after his death, on his two brothers.

[^714] After the memorable defeat of the Athenians before Syracuse, where Nicias perished with his whole fleet;[^715] the Segestans, who had declared in favour of the Athenians against the Syracusans, fearing the resentment of their enemies, and being attacked by the inhabitants of Selinus, implored the aid of the Carthaginians, and put themselves and city under their protection. At Carthage the people debated some time, what course it would be proper for them to take, the affair meeting with great difficulties. On one hand, the Carthaginians were very desirous to possess themselves of a city which lay so convenient for them; on the other, they dreaded the power and forces of Syracuse, which had so lately cut to pieces a numerous army of the Athenians; and become, by so shining a victory, more formidable than ever. At last, the lust of empire prevailed, and the Segestans were promised succours.

[^714: A.M. 3592. A. Carth. 434. A. Rom. 336. Ant. J.C. 412.]

[^715: Diod. l. xiii. p. 169-171. 179-186.]

The conduct of this war was committed to Hannibal, who at that time was invested with the highest dignity of the state, being one of the Suffetes. He was grandson to Hamilcar, who had been defeated by Gelon, and killed before Himera; and son to Gisgo, who had been condemned to exile. He left Carthage, animated with an ardent desire of revenging his family and country, and of wiping away the disgrace of the last defeat. He had a very great army as well as fleet under his command. He landed at a place called the Well of Lilybæum, which gave its name to a city afterwards built on the same spot. His first enterprise was the siege of Selinus. The attack and defence were equally vigorous, the very women showing a resolution and bravery above their sex. The city, after making a long resistance, was taken by storm, and the plunder of it abandoned to the soldiers. The victor exercised the most horrid cruelties, without showing the least regard to either age or sex. He permitted such inhabitants as had fled, to continue in the city after it had been dismantled; and to till the lands, on condition of their paying a tribute to the Carthaginians. This city had been built two hundred and forty-two years.

Himera, which he next besieged and took likewise by storm, after being more cruelly treated than Selinus, was entirely razed, two hundred and forty years after its foundation. He forced three thousand prisoners to undergo every kind of ignominious punishments; and at last murdered them all on the very spot where his grandfather had been killed by Gelon's cavalry, to appease and satisfy his manes by the blood of these unhappy victims.

These expeditions being ended, Hannibal returned to Carthage, on which occasion the whole city came out to meet him, and received him amidst the most joyful acclamations.

These successes reinflamed the desire, and revived the design, which the Carthaginians had ever entertained, of making themselves masters of the whole of Sicily.[^716] Three years after, they appointed Hannibal their general a second time; and on his pleading his great age, and refusing the command of this war, they gave him for lieutenant, Imilcon, son of Hanno, of the same family. The preparations for this war were proportioned to the great design which the Carthaginians had formed. The fleet and army were soon ready, and set out for Sicily. The number of their forces, according to Timæus, amounted to above six-score thousand; and, according to Ephorus, to three hundred thousand men. The enemy, on their side, were prepared to give the Carthaginians a warm reception. The Syracusans had sent to all their allies, in order to levy forces among them; and to all the cities of Sicily, to exhort them to exert themselves vigorously in defence of their liberties.

[^716: Diod. l. xiii. p. 201-203. 206-211. 226-231.]

Agrigentum expected to feel the first fury of the enemy. This city was prodigiously rich,[^717] and strongly fortified. It was situated, as was also Selinus, on that coast of Sicily which faces Africa. Accordingly, Hannibal opened the campaign with the siege of this city. Imagining that it was impregnable except on one side, he directed his whole force to that quarter. He threw up banks and terraces as high as the walls: and made use, on this occasion, of the rubbish and fragments of the tombs standing round the city, which he had demolished for that purpose. Soon after, the plague infected the army, and swept away a great number of the soldiers, and the general himself. The Carthaginians interpreted this disaster as a punishment inflicted by the gods, who revenged in this manner the injuries done to the dead, whose ghosts many fancied they had seen stalking before them in the night. No more tombs were therefore demolished, prayers were ordered to be made according to the practice of Carthage; a child was sacrificed to Saturn, in compliance with a most inhuman superstitious custom; and many victims were thrown into the sea in honour of Neptune.

[^717: The very sepulchral monuments showed the magnificence and luxury of this city, being adorned with statues of birds and horses. But the wealth and boundless generosity of Gellias, one of its inhabitants, is almost incredible. He entertained the people with spectacles and feasts; and, during a famine, prevented the citizens from dying with hunger: he gave portions to poor maidens, and rescued the unfortunate from want and despair: he had built houses in the city and the country purposely for the accommodation of strangers, whom he usually dismissed with handsome presents. Five hundred shipwrecked citizens of Gela, applying to him, were bountifully relieved; and every man supplied with a cloak and a coat out of his wardrobe. Diod. l. xiii. Valer. Max. l. iv. c. ult. Empedocles the philosopher, born in Agrigentum, has a memorable saying concerning his fellow citizens: That the Agrigentines squandered their money so excessively every day, as if they expected it could never be exhausted; and built with such solidity and magnificence, as if they thought they should live for ever.—Trans.]

The besieged, who at first had gained several advantages, were at last so pressed by famine, that all hopes of relief seeming desperate, they resolved to abandon the city. The following night was fixed on for this purpose. The reader will naturally image to himself the grief with which these miserable people must be seized, on their being forced to leave their houses, their rich possessions, and their country; but life was still dearer to them than all these. Never was a more melancholy spectacle seen. To omit the rest, a crowd of women, bathed in tears, were seen dragging after them their helpless infants, in order to secure them from the brutal fury of the victor. But the most grievous circumstance was, the necessity they were under of leaving behind them the aged and sick, who were unable either to fly or to make the least resistance. The unhappy exiles arrived at Gela, which was the nearest city, and there received all the comforts they could expect in the deplorable condition to which they were reduced.

In the mean time, Imilcon entered the city, and murdered all who were found in it. The plunder was immensely rich, and such as might be expected from one of the most opulent cities of Sicily, which contained two hundred thousand inhabitants, and had never been besieged, nor consequently plundered, before. A numberless multitude of pictures, vases, and statues of all kinds, were found here; the citizens having an exquisite taste for the polite arts. Among other curiosities was the famous bull[^718] of Phalaris, which was sent to Carthage.

[^718: This bull, with other spoils here taken, was afterwards restored to the Agrigentines by Scipio, when he took Carthage in the third Punic war. Cic. Orat. iv. in Verrem. c. 33.—Trans.]

The siege of Agrigentum had lasted eight months. Imilcon made his forces take up their winter-quarters in it, to give them the necessary refreshment; and left this city (after laying it entirely in ruins) in the beginning of the spring. He afterwards besieged Gela, and took it, notwithstanding the succours which were brought by Dionysius the Tyrant, who had seized upon the government of Syracuse. Imilcon ended the war by a treaty with Dionysius. The conditions of it were, that the Carthaginians, besides their ancient acquisitions in Sicily, should still possess the country of the Sicanians,[^719] Selinus, Agrigentum, and Himera; as likewise that of Gela and Camarina, with leave for the inhabitants to reside in their respective dismantled cities, on condition of their paying a tribute to Carthage; that the Leontines, the Messenians, and all the Sicilians, should retain their own laws, and preserve their liberty and independence: lastly, that the Syracusans should still continue subject to Dionysius. After this treaty was concluded, Imilcon returned to Carthage, where the plague still made dreadful havoc.

[^719: The Sicanians and Sicilians were anciently two distinct people.—Trans.]

[^720] Dionysius had concluded the late peace with the Carthaginians with no other view than to get time to establish his new authority, and make the necessary preparations for the war which he meditated against them.[^721] As he was very sensible how formidable the power of this state was, he used his utmost endeavours to enable himself to invade them with success; and his design was wonderfully well seconded by the zeal of his subjects. The fame of this prince, the strong desire he had to distinguish himself, the charms of gain, and the prospect of the rewards which he promised those who should show the greatest industry; invited, from all quarters, into Sicily, the most able artists and workmen at that time in the world. All Syracuse now became in a manner an immense workshop, in every part of which men were seen making swords, helmets, shields, and military engines; and preparing all things necessary for building ships and fitting out fleets. The invention of vessels with five benches of oars (or Quinqueremes) was at that time very recent; for, till then, those with three alone[^722] had been used. Dionysius animated the workmen by his presence, and by the applauses he gave, and the bounty which he bestowed seasonably; but chiefly by his popular and engaging behaviour, which excited, more strongly than any other conduct, the industry and ardour of the workmen;[^723] and he frequently allowed those of them who most excelled in their respective arts the honour to dine with him.

[^720: A.M. 3600. A. Carth. 412. A. Rom. 344. Ant. J.C. 404.]

[^721: Diod. l. xiv. p. 268-278.]

[^722: Triremes.]

[^723: Honos alit artes.]

When all things were ready, and a great number of forces had been levied in different countries, he called the Syracusans together, laid his design before them, and represented to them that the Carthaginians were the professed enemies to the Greeks; that they had no less in view than the invasion of all Sicily; the subjecting all the Grecian cities; and that, in case their progress was not checked, the Syracusans themselves would soon be attacked: that the reason why the Carthaginians did not attempt any enterprise, and continued unactive, was owing entirely to the dreadful havoc made by the plague among them; which (he observed) was a favourable opportunity, of which the Syracusans ought to take advantage. Though the tyranny and the tyrant were equally odious to Syracuse, yet the hatred the people bore to the Carthaginians prevailed over all other considerations; and every one, guided more by the views of an interested policy than by the dictates of justice, received the speech with applause. Upon this, without the least complaint made, or any declaration of war, Dionysius gave up to the fury of the populace the persons and possessions of the Carthaginians. Great numbers of them resided at that time in Syracuse, and traded there on the faith of treaties. The common people ran to their houses, plundered their effects, and pretended they were sufficiently authorized to exercise every ignominy, and inflict every kind of punishment on them, for the cruelties they had exercised against the natives of the country. And this horrid example of perfidy and inhumanity was followed throughout the whole island of Sicily. This was the bloody signal of the war which was declared against them. Dionysius having thus begun to do himself justice, (in his way,) sent deputies to Carthage, to require them to restore all the Sicilian cities to their liberties; and that otherwise, all the Carthaginians found in them should be treated as enemies. This news spread a general alarm in Carthage, especially when they reflected on the sad condition to which they were reduced.

Dionysius opened the campaign with the siege of Motya, which was the magazine of the Carthaginians in Sicily; and he pushed on the siege with so much vigour, that it was impossible for Imilcon, the Carthaginian admiral, to relieve it. He brought forward his engines, battered the place with his battering-rams, advanced to the wall towers, six stories high (rolled upon wheels,) and of an equal height with their houses; and from these he greatly annoyed the besieged, with his Catapultæ, an engine[^724] then recently invented, which hurled, with great violence, numerous volleys of arrows and stones against the enemy. At last, the city, after a long and vigorous defence, was taken by storm, and all the inhabitants of it put to the sword, those excepted who took sanctuary in the temples. The plunder of it was abandoned to the soldiers, and Dionysius, leaving a strong garrison and a trusty governor in it, returned to Syracuse.

[^724: The curious reader will find a very particular account of it in book xxii. art. ii. sect. ii.—Trans.]

The following year Imilcon being appointed one of the Suffetes, returned to Sicily with a far greater army than before.[^725] He landed at Palermo,[^726] recovered Motya by force, and took several other cities. Animated by these successes, he advanced towards Syracuse, with design to besiege it; marching his infantry by land, whilst his fleet, under the command of Mago, sailed along the coast.

[^725: Diod. l. xiv. p. 279-295. Justin, l. xix. c. 2, 3.]

[^726: Panormus.—Trans.]

The arrival of Imilcon threw the Syracusans into great consternation. Above two hundred ships laden with the spoils of the enemy, and advancing in good order, entered in a kind of triumph the great harbour, being followed by five hundred barks. At the same time, the land army, consisting, according to some authors, of three hundred thousand foot,[^727] and three thousand horse, was seen marching forward on the other side of the city. Imilcon pitched his tent in the very temple of Jupiter; and the rest of the army encamped at twelve furlongs, or about a mile and a half from the city. Marching up to it, Imilcon offered battle to the inhabitants, who did not care to accept the challenge. Imilcon, satisfied at his having extorted from the Syracusans this confession of their own weakness and his superiority, returned to his camp; not doubting but he should soon be master of the city, considering it already as a certain prey which could not possibly escape him. For thirty days together, he laid waste the neighbourhood about Syracuse, and ruined the whole country. He possessed himself of the suburb of Acradina, and plundered the temples of Ceres and Proserpine. To fortify his camp, he beat down the tombs which stood round the city; and, among others, that of Gelon and his wife Demarata, which was prodigiously magnificent.

[^727: Some authors say but thirty thousand foot, which is the more probable account, as the fleet which blocked up the town by sea was so formidable.—Trans.]

But these successes were not lasting. All the splendour of this anticipated triumph vanished in a moment, and taught mankind, says the historian,[^728] that the proudest mortal, blasted sooner or later by a superior power, shall be forced to confess his own weakness. Whilst Imilcon, now master of almost all the cities of Sicily, expected to crown his conquests by the reduction of Syracuse, a contagious distemper seized his army, and made dreadful havoc in it. It was now the midst of summer, and the heat that year was excessive. The infection began among the Africans, multitudes of whom died, without any possibility of their being relieved. At first, care was taken to inter the dead; but the number increasing daily, and the infection spreading very fast, the dead lay unburied, and the sick could have no assistance. This plague was attended with very uncommon symptoms, such as violent dysenteries, raging fevers, burning entrails, acute pains in every part of the body. The infected were even seized with madness and fury, so that they would fall upon any persons that came in their way, and tear them to pieces.

[^728: Diodorus.]

Dionysius did not suffer to escape so favourable an opportunity for attacking the enemy. Being more than half conquered by the plague, they made but a feeble resistance. The Carthaginian ships were almost all either taken or burnt. The inhabitants in general of Syracuse, old men, women, and children, came pouring out of the city to behold an event which to them appeared miraculous. With hands lifted up to heaven, they thanked the tutelar gods of their city, for having avenged the sanctity of the temples and tombs, which had been so brutally violated by these barbarians. Night coming on, both parties retired; when Imilcon, taking the opportunity of this short suspension of hostilities, sent to Dionysius, requesting leave to carry back with him the small remains of his shattered army, with an offer of three hundred talents,[^729] which was all the specie he had then left. But this permission could only be obtained for the Carthaginians, with whom Imilcon stole away in the night, and left the rest to the mercy of the conqueror.

[^729: About 61,800l. English money.—Trans.]

Such was the condition in which this Carthaginian general, who a few days before had been so proud and haughty, retired from Syracuse. Bitterly bewailing his own fate, and still more that of his country, he, with the most insolent fury, accused the gods as the sole authors of his misfortunes. “The enemy,” continued he, “may indeed rejoice at our misery, but have no reason to glory in it. We return victorious over the Syracusans, and are defeated by the plague alone.” His greatest subject of grief, and that which most keenly distressed him, was his having survived so many gallant soldiers, who had died in arms. “But,” added he, “the sequel shall make it appear, whether it is through fear of death, or from the desire of leading back to their native country the miserable remains of my fellow-citizens, that I have survived the loss of so many brave comrades.” And in fact, on his arrival at Carthage, which he found overwhelmed with grief and despair, he entered his house, shut his doors against the citizens, and even his own children; and then gave himself the fatal stroke, in compliance with a practice to which the heathens falsely gave the name of courage, though it was, in reality, no other than a cowardly despair.

But the calamities of this unhappy city did not stop here; for the Africans, who had ever borne an implacable hatred to the Carthaginians, but were now exasperated to fury, because their countrymen had been left behind, and exposed to the murdering sword of the Syracusans, assemble in the most frantic manner, sound the alarm, take up arms, and, after seizing upon Tunis, march directly to Carthage, to the number of more than two hundred thousand men. The citizens now gave themselves up for lost. This new incident was considered by them as the sad effect of the wrath of the gods, which pursued the guilty wretches even to Carthage. As its inhabitants, especially in all public calamities, carried their superstition to the greatest excess, their first care was to appease the offended gods. Ceres and Proserpine were deities who, till that time, had never been heard of in Africa. But now, to atone for the outrage which had been done them in the plundering of their temples, magnificent statues were erected to their honour; priests were selected from among the most distinguished families of the city; sacrifices and victims, according to the Greek ritual, (if I may use that expression,) were offered up to them; in a word, nothing was omitted which could be thought conducive in any manner to appease and propitiate the angry goddesses. After this, the defence of the city was the next object of their care. Happily for the Carthaginians, this numerous army had no leader, but was like a body uninformed with a soul; no provisions nor military engines; no discipline nor subordination, was seen among them: every man setting himself up for a general, or claiming an independence on the rest. Divisions therefore arising in this rabble of an army, and the famine increasing daily, the individuals of it withdrew to their respective homes, and delivered Carthage from a dreadful alarm.

The Carthaginians were not discouraged by their late disaster, but continued their enterprises on Sicily. Mago, their general, and one of the Suffetes, lost a great battle, in which he was slain. The Carthaginian chiefs demanded a peace, which was granted, on condition of their evacuating all Sicily, and defraying the expenses of the war. They pretended to accept the terms; but representing that it was not in their power to deliver up the cities, without first obtaining an order from their republic, they obtained so long a truce, as gave them time sufficient for sending to Carthage. They took advantage of this interval, to raise and discipline new troops, over which Mago, son of him who had been lately killed, was appointed general. He was very young, but of great abilities and reputation. As soon as he arrived in Sicily, at the expiration of the truce, he gave Dionysius battle; in which Leptines,[^730] one of the generals of the latter, was killed, and upwards of fourteen thousand Syracusans left dead in the field. By this victory the Carthaginians obtained an honourable peace, which left them in the possession of all they had in Sicily, with even the addition of some strong-holds; besides a thousand talents,[^731] which were paid to them towards defraying the expenses of the war.

[^730: This Leptines was brother to Dionysius.—Trans.]

[^731: About 206,000l.—Trans.]

About this time a law was enacted at Carthage, by which its inhabitants were forbid to learn to write or speak the Greek language;[^732] in order to deprive them of the means of corresponding with the enemy, either by word of mouth, or in writing. This was occasioned by the treachery of a Carthaginian, who had written in Greek to Dionysius, to give him advice of the departure of the army from Carthage.

[^732: Justin, l. xx. c. 5.]

Carthage had, soon after, another calamity to struggle with.[^733] The plague spread in the city, and made terrible havoc. Panic terrors, and violent fits of frenzy, seized on a sudden the unhappy sufferers; who sallying, sword in hand, out of their houses, as if the enemy had taken the city, killed or wounded all who came in their way. The Africans and Sardinians would very willingly have taken this opportunity to shake off a yoke which was so hateful to them; but both were subjected, and reduced to their allegiance. Dionysius formed at this time an enterprise, in Sicily, with the same views, which was equally unsuccessful. He died[^734] some time after, and was succeeded by his son of the same name.

[^733: Diod. l. xv. p. 344.]

[^734: This is the Dionysius who invited Plato to his court; and who, being afterwards offended with his freedom, sold him for a slave. Some philosophers came from Greece to Syracuse in order to redeem their brother, which having done, they sent him home with this useful lesson: That philosophers ought very rarely, or very obligingly, to converse with tyrants. This prince had learning, and affected to pass for a poet: but could not gain that name at the Olympic games, whither he had sent his verses, to be repeated by his brother Thearides. It had been happy for Dionysus, had the Athenians entertained no better an opinion of his poetry; for on their pronouncing him victor, when his poems were repeated in their city, he was raised to such a transport of joy and intemperance, that both together killed him; and thus, perhaps, was verified the prediction of the oracle, viz. that he should die when he had overcome his betters.—Trans.]

We have already taken notice of the first treaty which the Carthaginians concluded with the Romans. There was another, which, according to Orosius, was concluded in the 402d year of the foundation of Rome, and consequently about the time we are now speaking of. This second treaty was very near the same with the first, except that the inhabitants of Tyre and Utica were expressly comprehended in it, and joined with the Carthaginians.

[^735] After the death of the elder Dionysius, Syracuse was involved in great troubles.[^736] Dionysius the younger, who had been expelled, restored himself by force of arms, and exercised great cruelties there. One part of the citizens implored the aid of Icetes, tyrant of the Leontines, and by descent a Syracusan. This seemed a very favourable opportunity for the Carthaginians to seize upon all Sicily, and accordingly they sent a mighty fleet thither. In this extremity, such of the Syracusans as loved their country best, had recourse to the Corinthians, who had often assisted them in their dangers; and were, besides, of all the Grecian nations, the most professed enemies of tyranny, and the most avowed and most generous assertors of liberty. Accordingly, the Corinthians sent over Timoleon, a man of great merit, who had signalized his zeal for the public welfare, by freeing his country from tyranny, at the expense of his own family. He set sail with only ten ships, and arriving at Rhegium, he eluded, by a happy stratagem, the vigilance of the Carthaginians; who having been informed, by Icetes, of his voyage and design, wanted to intercept him in his passage to Sicily.

[^735: A.M. 3656. A. Carth. 498. A. Rom. 400. Ant. J.C. 348.]

[^736: Diod. l. xvi. p. 459-472. Polyb. l. iii. p. 178. Plut. in Timol.]

Timoleon had scarce above a thousand soldiers under his command; and yet, with this handful of men, he marched boldly to the relief of Syracuse. His small army increased in proportion as he advanced. The Syracusans were now in a desperate condition, and quite hopeless. They saw the Carthaginians masters of the port; Icetes of the city; and Dionysius of the citadel. Happily, on Timoleon's arrival, Dionysius having no refuge left, put the citadel into his hands, with all the forces, arms, and ammunition in it, and escaped, by his assistance, to Corinth.[^737] Timoleon had, by his emissaries, artfully represented to the foreign soldiers, who (by that error in the constitution of Carthage, which we have before taken notice of) formed the principal strength of Mago's army, and the greatest part of whom were Greeks; that it was astonishing to see Greeks using their endeavours to make barbarians masters of Sicily, from whence they, in a very little time, would pass over into Greece. For could they imagine, that the Carthaginians were come so far, with no other view than to establish Icetes tyrant of Syracuse? Such discourses being spread among Mago's soldiers, gave this general very great uneasiness; and, as he wanted only a pretence to retire, he was glad to have it believed, that his forces were going to betray and desert him; and upon this, he sailed with his fleet out of the harbour, and steered for Carthage. Icetes, after his departure, could not hold out long against the Corinthians; so that they now got entire possession of the whole city.

[^737: Here he preserved some resemblance of his former tyranny, by turning schoolmaster; and exercising a discipline over boys, when he could no longer tyrannize over men. He had learning, and was once a scholar to Plato, whom he caused to come again into Sicily, notwithstanding the unworthy treatment he had met with from Dionysius's father. Philip, king of Macedon, meeting him in the streets of Corinth, and asking him how he came to lose so considerable a principality as had been left him by his father; he answered, that his father had indeed left him the inheritance, but not the fortune which had preserved both himself and that.—However, fortune did him no great injury in replacing him on the dunghill, from which she had raised his father.—Trans.]

Mago, on his arrival at Carthage, was impeached, but he prevented the execution of the sentence passed upon him, by a voluntary death. His body was hung upon a gallows, and exposed as a public spectacle to the people. New forces were levied at Carthage, and a greater and more powerful fleet than the former was sent to Sicily.[^738] It consisted of two hundred ships of war, besides a thousand transports; and the army amounted to upwards of seventy thousand men. They landed at Lilybæum, under the command of Hamilcar and Hannibal, and resolved to attack the Corinthians first. Timoleon did not wait for, but marched out to meet them. But such was the consternation of Syracuse, that, of all the forces which were in that city, only three thousand Syracusans and four thousand mercenaries followed him; and even of these latter a thousand deserted upon the march, through fear of the danger they were going to encounter. Timoleon, however, was not discouraged; but exhorting the remainder of his forces to exert themselves courageously for the safety and liberties of their allies, he led them against the enemy, whose rendezvous he had been informed was on the banks of the little river Crimisus. It appeared, at the first reflection, madness to attack an army so numerous as that of the enemy, with only four or five thousand foot, and a thousand horse; but Timoleon, who knew that bravery, conducted by prudence, is superior to number, relied on the courage of his soldiers, who seemed resolved to die rather than yield, and with ardour demanded to be led against the enemy. The event justified his views and hopes. A battle was fought; the Carthaginians were routed, and upwards of ten thousand of them slain, full three thousand of whom were Carthaginian citizens, which filled their city with mourning and the greatest consternation. Their camp was taken, and with it immense riches, and a great number of prisoners.

[^738: Plut. p. 248-250.]

Timoleon, at the same time that he despatched the news of this victory to Corinth, sent thither the finest arms found among the plunder.[^739] For he was desirous of having his city applauded and admired by all men, when they should see that Corinth alone, among all the Grecian cities, adorned its finest temples, not with the spoils of Greece, and offerings dyed in the blood of its citizens, the sight of which could tend only to preserve the sad remembrance of their losses, but with those of barbarians, which, by fine inscriptions, displayed at once the courage and religious gratitude of those who had won them. For these inscriptions imported, “That the Corinthians, and Timoleon their general, after having freed the Greeks, settled in Sicily, from the Carthaginian yoke, had hung up these arms in their temples, as an eternal acknowledgment of the favour and goodness of the gods.”

[^739: Plut. p. 248-250.]

After this, Timoleon, leaving the mercenary troops in the Carthaginian territories to waste and destroy them, returned to Syracuse. On his arrival there, he banished the thousand soldiers who had deserted him; and took no other revenge than the commanding them to leave Syracuse before sun-set.

This victory gained by the Corinthians was followed by the capture of a great many cities, which obliged the Carthaginians to sue for peace.

In proportion as the appearance of success made the Carthaginians vigorously exert themselves to raise powerful armies both by land and sea, and prosperity led them to make an insolent and cruel use of victory; so their courage would sink in unforeseen adversities, their hopes of new resources vanish, and their grovelling souls condescend to ask quarter of the most inconsiderable enemy, and without sense of shame accept the hardest and most mortifying conditions. Those now imposed were, that they should possess only the lands lying beyond the river Halycus;[^740] that they should give all the natives free liberty to retire to Syracuse with their families and effects; and that they should neither continue in the alliance, nor hold any correspondence with the tyrants of that city.

[^740: This river is not far from Agrigentum. It is called Lycus, by Diodorus and Plutarch; but this is thought a mistake.—Trans.]

About this time, in all probability, there happened at Carthage a memorable incident, related by Justin.[^741] Hanno, one of its most powerful citizens, formed a design of seizing upon the republic, by destroying the whole senate. He chose, for the execution of this bloody plan, the day on which his daughter was to be married, on which occasion he designed to invite the senators to an entertainment, and there poison them all. The conspiracy was discovered; but Hanno had such influence, that the government did not dare to punish so execrable a crime; the magistrates contented themselves with only preventing it, by an order which forbade, in general, too great a magnificence at weddings, and limited the expense on those occasions. Hanno, seeing his stratagem defeated, resolved to employ open force, and for that purpose armed all the slaves. However, he was again discovered; and, to escape punishment, retired, with twenty thousand armed slaves, to a castle that was very strongly fortified, and there endeavoured, but without success, to engage in his rebellion the Africans and the king of Mauritania. He afterwards was taken prisoner, and carried to Carthage; where, after being whipped, his eyes were put out, his arms and thighs broken; he was put to death in presence of the people, and his body, all torn with stripes, was hung on a gibbet. His children and all his relations, though they had not joined in his guilt, shared in his punishment. They were all sentenced to die, in order that not a single person of his family might be left, either to imitate his crime, or revenge his death. Such was the temper of the Carthaginians; ever severe and violent in their punishments, they carried them to the extremes of rigour, and made them extend even to the innocent, without showing the least regard to equity, moderation, or gratitude.

[^741: Justin, l. xvi. c. 4.]

I come now to the wars sustained by the Carthaginians, in Africa itself as well as in Sicily, against Agathocles, which exercised their arms during several years.[^742]

[^742: Diod. l. xix. p. 651-656-710-712-737-743-760. Justin, l. ii. c. 1-6.]

[^743] This Agathocles was a Sicilian, of obscure birth and low fortune.[^744] Supported at first by the forces of the Carthaginians, he had invaded the sovereignty of Syracuse, and made himself tyrant over it. In the infancy of his power, the Carthaginians kept him within bounds; and Hamilcar, their chief, forced him to agree to a treaty, which restored tranquillity to Sicily. But he soon infringed the articles of it, and declared war against the Carthaginians themselves; who, under the conduct of Hamilcar, obtained a signal victory over him,[^745] and forced him to shut himself up in Syracuse. The Carthaginians pursued him thither, and laid siege to that important city, the capture of which would have given them possession of all Sicily.

[^743: A.M. 3685. A. Carth. 527. A. Rom. 429. Ant. J.C. 319.]

[^744: He was, according to most historians, the son of a potter; but all allow him to have worked at the trade. From the obscurity of his birth and condition, Polybius raises an argument to prove his capacity and talents, in opposition to the slanders of Timæus. But his greatest eulogium was the praise of Scipio. That illustrious Roman being asked who, in his opinion, were the most prudent in the conduct of their affairs, and most judiciously bold in the execution of their designs; answered, Agathocles and Dionysius. Polyb. l. xv. p. 1003. edit. Gronov. However, let his capacity have been ever so great, it was exceeded by his cruelties.—Trans.]

[^745: The battle was fought near the river and city of Himera.—Trans.]

Agathocles, whose forces were greatly inferior to theirs, and who moreover saw himself deserted by all his allies, from their detestation of his horrid cruelties, meditated a design of so daring, and, to all appearance, so impracticable a nature, that, even after being happily carried into execution, it yet appears almost incredible. This design was no less than to make Africa the seat of war, and to besiege Carthage, at a time when he could neither defend himself in Sicily, nor sustain the siege of Syracuse. His profound secresy in the execution is as astonishing as the design itself. He communicated his thoughts on this affair to no person whatsoever, but contented himself with declaring, that he had found out an infallible way to free the Syracusans from the danger that surrounded them; that they had only to endure with patience, for a short time, the inconveniences of a siege; but that those who could not bring themselves to this resolution, might freely depart the city. Only sixteen hundred persons quitted it. He left his brother Antander there, with forces and provisions sufficient for him to make a stout defence. He set at liberty all slaves who were of age to bear arms, and, after obliging them to take an oath, joined them to his forces. He carried with him only fifty talents,[^746] to supply his present wants, well assured that he should find in the enemy's country whatever was necessary to his subsistence. He therefore set sail with two of his sons, Archagathus and Heraclides, without letting any one person know whither he intended to direct his course. All who were on board his fleet believed that they were to be conducted either to Italy or Sardinia, in order to plunder those countries, or to lay waste those coasts of Sicily which belonged to the enemy. The Carthaginians, surprised at so unexpected a departure, endeavoured to prevent it; but Agathocles eluded their pursuit, and made for the main ocean.

[^746: 50,000 French crowns, or 11,250l. sterling.—Trans.]

He did not discover his design till he had landed in Africa. There, assembling his troops, he told them, in few words, the motives which had prompted him to this expedition. He represented, that the only way to free their country, was to carry the war into the territories of their enemies: that he led them who were enured to war, and of intrepid dispositions, against a parcel of enemies who were softened and enervated by ease and luxury: that the natives of the country, oppressed with the yoke of a servitude equally cruel and ignominious, would run in crowds to join them on the first news of their arrival: that the boldness of their attempt would alone disconcert the Carthaginians, who had no expectation of seeing an enemy at their gates: in short, that no enterprise could possibly be more advantageous or honourable than this; since the whole wealth of Carthage would become the prey of the victors, whose courage would be praised and admired by latest posterity. The soldiers fancied themselves already masters of Carthage, and received his speech with applauses and acclamations. One circumstance alone gave them uneasiness, and that was an eclipse of the sun, which happened just as they were setting sail. In these ages, even the most civilized nations understood very little the reason of these extraordinary phenomena of nature; and used to draw from them (by their soothsayers) superstitious and arbitrary conjectures, which frequently would either suspend or hasten the more important enterprises. However, Agathocles revived the drooping courage of his soldiers, by assuring them that these eclipses always foretold some instant change: that, therefore, good fortune was taking its leave of Carthage, and coming over to them.

Finding his soldiers in the good disposition he wished them, he executed, almost at the same time, a second enterprise, which was even more daring and hazardous than his first, of carrying them over into Africa; and this was the burning every ship in his fleet. Many reasons determined him to so desperate an action. He had not one good harbour in Africa where his ships could lie in safety. As the Carthaginians were masters of the sea, they would not have failed to possess themselves immediately of his fleet, which was incapable of making the least resistance. In case he had left as many hands as were necessary to defend it, he would have weakened his army, (which was inconsiderable at the best,) and put it out of his power to gain any advantage from this unexpected diversion, the success of which depended entirely on the swiftness and vigour of the execution. Lastly, he was desirous of putting his soldiers under a necessity of conquering, by leaving them no other refuge than victory. Much courage was necessary to adopt such a resolution. He had already prepared all his officers, who were entirely devoted to his service, and received every impression he gave them. He then came suddenly into the assembly with a crown upon his head, dressed in a magnificent habit, and with the air and behaviour of a man who was going to perform some religious ceremony, and addressing himself to the assembly: “When we,” says he, “left Syracuse, and were warmly pursued by the enemy; in this fatal necessity I addressed myself to Ceres and Proserpine, the tutelar divinities of Sicily; and promised, that if they would free us from this imminent danger, I would burn all our ships in their honour, at our first landing here. Aid me therefore, O soldiers, to discharge my vow; for the goddesses can easily make us amends for this sacrifice.” At the same time, taking a flambeau in his hand, he hastily led the way on board his own ship, and set it on fire. All the officers did the like, and were cheerfully followed by the soldiers. The trumpets sounded from every quarter, and the whole army echoed with joyful shouts and acclamations. The fleet was soon consumed. The soldiers had not been allowed time to reflect on the proposal made to them. They all had been hurried on by a blind and impetuous ardour; but when they had a little recovered their reason, and, surveying in their minds the vast extent of ocean which separated them from their own country, saw themselves in that of the enemy without the least resource, or any means of escaping out of it; a sad and melancholy silence succeeded the transport of joy and acclamations, which, but a moment before, had been so general in the army.

Here again Agathocles left no time for reflection. He marched his army towards a place called the Great City, which was part of the domain of Carthage. The country through which they marched to this place, afforded the most delicious and agreeable prospect in the world. On either side were seen large meads, watered by beautiful streams, and covered with innumerable flocks of all kinds of cattle; country seats built with extraordinary magnificence; delightful avenues planted with olive and all sorts of fruit trees; gardens of a prodigious extent, and kept with a care and elegance which delighted the eye. This prospect reanimated the soldiers. They marched full of courage to the Great City, which they took sword in hand, and enriched themselves with the plunder of it, which was entirely abandoned to them. Tunis made as little resistance; and this place was not far distant from Carthage.

The Carthaginians were in prodigious alarm when it was known that the enemy was in the country, advancing by hasty marches. This arrival of Agathocles made the Carthaginians conclude, that their army before Syracuse had been defeated, and their fleet lost. The people ran in disorder to the great square of the city, whilst the senate assembled in haste and in a tumultuous manner. Immediately they deliberated on the means for preserving the city. They had no army in readiness to oppose the enemy; and their imminent danger did not permit them to wait the arrival of those forces which might be raised in the country and among the allies. It was therefore resolved, after several different opinions had been heard, to arm the citizens. The number of the forces thus levied, amounted to forty thousand foot, a thousand horse, and two thousand armed chariots. Hanno and Bomilcar, though divided betwixt themselves by some family quarrels, were however joined in the command of these troops. They marched immediately to meet the enemy; and, on sight of them, drew up their forces in order of battle. Agathocles[^747] had, at most, but thirteen or fourteen thousand men. The signal was given, and an obstinate fight ensued. Hanno, with his sacred cohort, (the flower of the Carthaginian forces,) long sustained the fury of the Greeks, and sometimes even broke their ranks; but at last, overwhelmed with a shower of stones, and covered with wounds, he fell dead on the field. Bomilcar might have changed the face of things; but he had private and personal reasons not to obtain a victory for his country. He therefore thought proper to retire with the forces under his command, and was followed by the whole army, which, by that means, was forced to leave the field to Agathocles. After pursuing the enemy some time, he returned, and plundered the Carthaginian camp. Twenty thousand pair of manacles were found in it, with which the Carthaginians had furnished themselves, in the firm persuasion of their taking many prisoners. The result of this victory was the capture of a great number of strong-holds, and the defection of many of the natives of the country, who joined the victor.

[^747: Agathocles wanting arms for many of his soldiers, provided them with such as were counterfeit, which looked well at a distance. And perceiving the discouragement his forces were under on sight of the enemy's horse, he let fly a great many owls, (privately procured for that purpose,) which his soldiers interpreted as an omen and assurance of victory. Diod. l. xx. p. 754.—Trans.]

This descent of Agathocles into Africa, doubtless gave birth to Scipio's design of making a like attempt upon the same republic, and from the same place.[^748] Wherefore, in his answer to Fabius, who ascribed to temerity his design of making Africa the seat of the war, he forgot not to mention the example of Agathocles, as an instance in favour of his enterprise; and to show, that frequently there is no other way to get rid of an enemy who presses too closely upon us, than by carrying the war into his own country; and that men are much more courageous when they act upon the offensive, than when they stand only upon the defensive.

[^748: Liv. l. xxvii. n. 43.]

While the Carthaginians were thus warmly attacked by their enemies, ambassadors arrived to them from Tyre.[^749] They came to implore their succour against Alexander the Great, who was upon the point of taking their city, which he had long besieged. The extremity to which their countrymen (for so they called them) were reduced, touched the Carthaginians as sensibly as their own danger. Though they were unable to relieve, they at least thought it their duty to comfort them; and deputed thirty of their principal citizens to express their grief that they could not spare them any troops, because of the present melancholy situation of their own affairs. The Tyrians, though disappointed of the only hope they had left, did not however despond; they committed their wives, children,[^750] and old men, to the care of these deputies; and thus, being delivered from all inquietude, with regard to persons who were dearer to them than any thing in the world, they thought alone of making a resolute defence, prepared for the worst that might happen. Carthage received this afflicted company with all possible marks of amity, and paid to guests who were so dear and worthy of compassion, all the services which they could have expected from the most affectionate and tender parents.

[^749: Diod. l. xvii. p. 519. Quint. Curt. l. iv. c. 3.]

[^750: Τῶν τέκνων καὶ γυναικῶν μέρος, some of their wives and children. Diod. l. xvii. p. 519.—Trans.]

Quintus Curtius places this embassy from Tyre to the Carthaginians at the same time that the Syracusans were ravaging Africa, and had advanced to the very gates of Carthage. But the expedition of Agathocles against Africa cannot agree in time with the siege of Tyre, which was more than twenty years before it.

At the same time, Carthage was solicitous how to extricate itself from the difficulties with which it was surrounded. The present unhappy state of the republic was considered as the effect of the wrath of the gods: and it was acknowledged to be justly deserved, particularly with regard to two deities, towards whom the Carthaginians had been remiss in the discharge of certain duties prescribed by their religion, and which had once been observed with great exactness. It was a custom (coeval with the city itself) at Carthage, to send annually to Tyre (the mother city) the tenth of all the revenues of the republic, as an offering to Hercules, the patron and protector of both cities. The domain, and consequently the revenues of Carthage, having increased considerably, the portion, on the contrary, of the god, had been lessened; and they were far from remitting the whole tenth to him. They were seized with a scruple on this point: they made an open and public confession of their insincerity and sacrilegious avarice; and, to expiate their guilt, they sent to Tyre a great number of presents, and small shrines of their deities all of gold, which amounted to a prodigious value.

Another violation of religion, which to their inhuman superstition seemed as flagrant as the former, gave them no less uneasiness. Anciently, children of the best families in Carthage used to be sacrificed to Saturn. They now reproached themselves with having failed to pay to the god the honours which they thought were due to him; and with having used fraud and dishonest dealing towards him, by having substituted, in their sacrifices, children of slaves or beggars, bought for that purpose, in the room of those nobly born. To expiate the guilt of so horrid an impiety, a sacrifice was made to this blood-thirsty god, of two hundred children of the first rank; and upwards of three hundred persons, through a sense of this terrible neglect, offered themselves voluntarily as victims, to pacify, by the effusion of their blood, the wrath of the gods.

After these expiations, expresses were despatched to Hamilcar in Sicily, with the news of what had happened in Africa, and, at the same time, to request immediate succours. He commanded the deputies to observe the strictest silence on the subject of the victory of Agathocles; and spread a contrary report, that he had been entirely defeated, his forces all cut off, and his whole fleet taken by the Carthaginians; and, in confirmation of this report, he showed the irons of the vessels pretended to be taken, which had been carefully sent to him. The truth of this report was not at all doubted in Syracuse; the majority were for capitulating;[^751] when a galley of thirty oars, built in haste by Agathocles, arrived in the port; and through great difficulties and dangers forced its way to the besieged. The news of Agathocles's victory immediately flew through the city, and restored alacrity and resolution to the inhabitants. Hamilcar made a last effort to storm the city, but was beaten off with loss. He then raised the siege, and sent five thousand men to the relief of his distressed country. Some time after,[^752] having resumed the siege, and hoping to surprise the Syracusans by attacking them in the night, his design was discovered; and falling alive into the enemy's hands, he was put to death with the most exquisite tortures.[^753] Hamilcar's head was sent immediately to Agathocles, who, advancing to the enemy's camp, threw it into a general consternation, by displaying to them the head of this general, which manifested the melancholy situation of their affairs in Sicily.

[^751: And the most forward of all the rest was Antander, the brother of Agathocles, left commander in his absence; who was so terrified with the report, that he was eager for having the city surrendered; and expelled out of it eight thousand inhabitants who were of a contrary opinion.—Trans.]

[^752: Diod. p. 767-769.]

[^753: He was cruelly tortured till he died, and so met with the fate which his fellow-citizens, offended at his conduct in Sicily, had probably allotted for him at home. He was too formidable to be attacked at the head of his army; and therefore the votes of the senate (whatever they were) being, according to custom, cast into a vessel, it was immediately closed, with an order not to uncover it, till he was returned, and had thrown up his commission. Justin, l. xxii. c. 3.—Trans.]

To these foreign enemies was joined a domestic one, which was more to be feared, as being more dangerous than the others;[^754] this was Bomilcar their general, who was then in possession of the first post in Carthage. He had long meditated the establishment of himself as tyrant at Carthage, and attaining the sovereign authority there; and imagined that the present troubles offered him the wished-for opportunity. He therefore entered the city, and being seconded by a small number of citizens, who were the accomplices of his rebellion, and a body of foreign soldiers, he proclaimed himself tyrant; and showed himself literally such, by cutting the throats of all the citizens whom he met with in the streets. A tumult arising immediately in the city, it was at first thought that the enemy had taken it by some treachery; but when it was known that Bomilcar caused all this disturbance, the young men took up arms to repel the tyrant, and from the tops of the houses discharged whole volleys of darts and stones upon the heads of his soldiers. When he saw an army marching in order against him, he retired with his troops to an eminence, with design to make a vigorous defence, and to sell his life as dear as possible. To spare the blood of the citizens, a general pardon was proclaimed for all without exception who would lay down their arms. They surrendered upon this proclamation, and all enjoyed the benefit of it, Bomilcar their chief excepted: for the Carthaginians, without regarding their oath, condemned him to death, and fastened him to a cross, where he suffered the most exquisite torments. From the cross, as from a rostrum, he harangued the people; and thought himself justly entitled to reproach them for their injustice, their ingratitude, and perfidy, which he did by enumerating many illustrious generals, whose services they had rewarded with an ignominious death. He expired on the cross whilst uttering these reproaches.[^755]

[^754: Diod. p. 779-781. Justin, l. xxii. c. 7.]

[^755: It would seem incredible that any man could so far triumph over the pains of the cross, as to talk with any coherence in his discourse; had not Seneca assured us, that some have so far despised and insulted its tortures, that they spit contemptuously upon the spectators. Quidam ex patibulo suos spectatores conspuerunt. De vitâ beatâ, c. 19.—Trans.]

Agathocles had won over to his interest a powerful king of Cyrene,[^756] named Ophellas, whose ambition he had flattered with the most splendid hopes, by leading him to understand, that, contenting himself with Sicily, he would leave to Ophellas the empire of Africa. But, as Agathocles did not scruple to commit the most horrid crimes when he thought them conducive to his interest, the credulous prince had no sooner put himself and his army in his power, than, by the blackest perfidy, he caused him to be murdered, in order that Ophellas's army might be entirely at his devotion. Many nations were now joined in alliance with Agathocles, and several strongholds were garrisoned by his forces. As he now saw the affairs of Africa in a flourishing condition, he thought it proper to look after those of Sicily; accordingly he sailed back thither, having left the command of the army to his son Archagathus. His renown, and the report of his victories, flew before him. On the news of his arrival in Sicily many towns revolted to him; but bad news soon recalled him to Africa. His absence had quite changed the face of things; and all his endeavours were incapable of restoring them to their former condition. All his strong-holds had surrendered to the enemy; the Africans had deserted him; some of his troops were lost, and the remainder were unable to make head against the Carthaginians; he had no way to transport them into Sicily, as he was destitute of ships, and the enemy were masters at sea: he could not hope for either peace or treaty with the barbarians, since he had insulted them in so outrageous a manner, by his being the first who had dared to make a descent in their country. In this extremity, he thought only of providing for his own safety. After many adventures, this base deserter of his army, and perfidious betrayer of his own children, who were left by him to the wild fury of his disappointed soldiers, stole away from the dangers which threatened him, and arrived at Syracuse with very few followers. His soldiers, seeing themselves thus betrayed, murdered his sons, and surrendered to the enemy. Himself died miserably soon after, and ended, by a cruel death,[^757] a life that had been polluted with the blackest crimes.

[^756: Diod. p. 777-779-791-802. Justin, l. xxii. c. 7, 8]

[^757: He was poisoned by one Mænon, whom he had unnaturally abused. His teeth were putrified by the violence of the poison, and his body tortured all over with the most racking pains. Mænon was excited to this deed by Archagathus, grandson of Agathocles, whom he designed to defeat of the succession, in favour of his other son Agathocles. Before his death, he restored the democracy to the people. It is observable, that Justin (or rather Trogus) and Diodorus disagree in all the material part of this tyrant's history.—Trans.]

In this period may be placed another incident related by Justin.[^758] The fame of Alexander's conquests made the Carthaginians fear, that he might think of turning his arms towards Africa. The disastrous fate of Tyre, whence they drew their origin, and which he had so lately destroyed; the building of Alexandria upon the confines of Africa and Egypt, as if he intended it as a rival city to Carthage; the uninterrupted successes of that prince, whose ambition and good fortune were boundless; all this justly alarmed the Carthaginians. To sound his inclinations, Hamilcar, surnamed Rhodanus, pretending to have been driven from his country by the cabals of his enemies, went over to the camp of Alexander, to whom he was introduced by Parmenio, and offered him his services. The king received him graciously, and had several conferences with him. Hamilcar did not fail to transmit to his country whatever discoveries he made from time to time of Alexander's designs. Nevertheless, on his return to Carthage, after Alexander's death, he was considered as a betrayer of his country to that prince; and accordingly was put to death, by a sentence which displayed equally the ingratitude and cruelty of his countrymen.

[^758: Justin, l. xxi. c. 6.]

[^759] I am now to speak of the wars of the Carthaginians in Sicily, in the time of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus.[^760] The Romans, to whom the designs of that ambitious prince were not unknown, in order to strengthen themselves against any attempts he might make upon Italy, had renewed their treaties with the Carthaginians, who, on their side, were no less afraid of his crossing into Sicily. To the articles of the preceding treaties, there was added an engagement of mutual assistance, in case either of the contracting powers should be attacked by Pyrrhus.

[^759: A.M. 3727. A. Carth. 569. A. Rom. 471. Ant. J.C. 277.]

[^760: Polyb. l. iii. p. 250. edit. Gronov.]

The foresight of the Romans was well founded: Pyrrhus turned his arms against Italy, and gained many victories.[^761] The Carthaginians, in consequence of the last treaty, thought themselves obliged to assist the Romans; and accordingly sent them a fleet of six-score sail, under the command of Mago. This general, in an audience before the senate, signified to them the interest which his superiors took in the war which they heard was carrying on against the Romans, and offered them their assistance. The senate returned thanks for the obliging offer of the Carthaginians, but at present thought fit to decline it.

[^761: Justin, l. xviii. c. 2.]

Mago,[^762] some days after, repaired to Pyrrhus, upon pretence of offering the mediation of Carthage for terminating his quarrel with the Romans; but in reality to sound him, and discover, if possible, his designs with regard to Sicily, which common fame reported he was going to invade. The Carthaginians were afraid that either Pyrrhus or the Romans would interfere in the affairs of that island, and transport forces thither for the conquest of it. And, indeed, the Syracusans, who had been besieged for some time by the Carthaginians, had sent pressingly for succour to Pyrrhus. This prince had a particular reason to espouse their interests, having married Lanassa, daughter of Agathocles, by whom he had a son named Alexander. He at last sailed from Tarentum, passed the Strait, and arrived in Sicily. His conquests at first were so rapid, that he left the Carthaginians, in the whole island, only the single town of Lilybæum. He laid siege to it, but meeting with a vigorous resistance, was obliged to raise the siege; not to mention that the urgent necessity of his affairs called him back to Italy, where his presence was absolutely necessary. Nor was it less so in Sicily, which, on his departure, returned to the obedience of its former masters. Thus he lost this island with the same rapidity that he had won it. As he was embarking, he turned his eyes back to Sicily, and exclaimed to those about him,[^763] “What a fine field of battle[^764] do we leave the Carthaginians and Romans!” His prediction was soon verified.

[^762: Idem.]

[^763: Plut. in Pyrrh. p. 398.]

[^764: Οἵαν ἀπολείπομεν, ὦ φίλοι, Καρχηδονίοις καὶ Ῥωμαίοις παλαίστραν. The Greek expression is beautiful. Indeed Sicily was a kind of Palæstra, where the Carthaginians and Romans exercised themselves in war, and for many years seemed to play the part of wrestlers with each other. The English language, as well as the French, has no word to express the Greek term.—Trans.]

After his departure, the chief magistracy of Syracuse was conferred on Hiero, who afterwards obtained the name and dignity of king, by the united suffrages of the citizens; so greatly had his government pleased. He was appointed to carry on the war against the Carthaginians, and obtained several advantages over them. But now a common interest reunited them against a new enemy, who began to appear in Sicily, and justly alarmed both: these were the Romans, who, having crushed all the enemies which had hitherto exercised their arms in Italy itself, were now powerful enough to carry them out of it; and to lay the foundation of that vast power there to which they afterwards attained, and of which it was probable they had even then formed the design. Sicily lay too commodious for them, not to form a resolution of establishing themselves in it. They therefore eagerly snatched this opportunity for crossing into it, which caused the rupture between them and the Carthaginians, and gave rise to the first Punic war. This I shall treat of more at large, by relating the causes of that war.

Chapter II. The History of Carthage from the first Punic War to its destruction.

The plan which I have laid down does not allow me to enter into an exact detail of the wars between Rome and Carthage; since that pertains rather to the Roman history, which I do not intend to touch upon, except transiently and occasionally. I shall therefore relate such facts only as may give the reader a just idea of the republic whose history lies before me; by confining myself to those particulars which relate chiefly to the Carthaginians, and to their most important transactions in Sicily, Spain, and Africa: a subject in itself sufficiently extensive.

I have already observed, that from the first Punic war to the ruin of Carthage, a hundred and eighteen years elapsed. This whole time may be divided into five parts or intervals.

I. The first Punic war lasted twenty-four years.

II. The interval betwixt the first and second Punic war is also twenty-four years.

III. The second Punic war took up seventeen years.

IV. The interval between the second and third is forty-nine years.

V. The third Punic war, terminated by the destruction of Carthage, continued but four years and some months.

Total: 118 years.

[^765] Article I. The first Punic War.—The first Punic war arose from the following cause. Some Campanian soldiers, in the service of Agathocles, the Sicilian tyrant, having entered as friends into Messina, soon after murdered part of the townsmen, drove out the rest, married their wives, seized their effects, and remained sole masters of that important city.[^766] They then assumed the name of Mamertines. In imitation of them, and by their assistance, a Roman legion treated in the same cruel manner the city of Rhegium, lying directly opposite to Messina, on the other side of the strait. These two perfidious cities, supporting one another, rendered themselves at length formidable to their neighbours; and especially Messina, which became very powerful, and gave great umbrage and uneasiness both to the Syracusans and Carthaginians, who possessed one part of Sicily. As soon as the Romans had got rid of the enemies they had so long contended with, and particularly of Pyrrhus, they began to think of punishing the crime of their citizens, who had settled themselves at Rhegium, in so cruel and treacherous a manner, nearly ten years before. Accordingly, they took the city, and killed, in the attack, the greatest part of the inhabitants, who, instigated by despair, had fought to the last gasp: three hundred only were left, who were carried to Rome, whipped, and then publicly beheaded in the forum. The view which the Romans had in making this bloody execution, was, to prove to their allies their own sincerity and innocence. Rhegium was immediately restored to its lawful possessors. The Mamertines, who were considerably weakened, as well by the ruin of their confederate city, as by the losses which they had sustained from the Syracusans, who had lately placed Hiero at their head, thought it time to provide for their own safety. But divisions arising among them, one part surrendered the citadel to the Carthaginians, whilst the other called in the Romans to their assistance, and resolved to put them in possession of their city.

[^765: A.M. 3724. A. Carth. 566. A. Rom. 468. Ant. J.C. 280.]

[^766: Polyb. l. i. p. 8. edit Gronov.]

The affair was debated in the Roman senate, where, being considered in all its lights, it appeared to have some difficulties.[^767] On one hand, it was thought base, and altogether unworthy of the Roman virtue, for them to undertake openly the defence of traitors, whose perfidy was exactly the same with that of the Rhegians, whom the Romans had recently punished with so exemplary a severity. On the other hand, it was of the utmost consequence to stop the progress of the Carthaginians, who, not satisfied with their conquests in Africa and Spain, had also made themselves masters of almost all the islands of the Sardinian and Hetrurian seas; and would certainly get all Sicily into their hands, if they should be suffered to possess themselves of Messina. From thence into Italy, the passage was very short; and it was in some manner to invite an enemy to come over, to leave the entrance open. These reasons, though so strong, could not prevail with the senate to declare in favour of the Mamertines; and accordingly, motives of honour and justice prevailed in this instance over those of interest and policy.[^768] But the people were not so scrupulous; for, in an assembly held on this subject, it was resolved that the Mamertines should be assisted.[^769] The consul Appius Claudius immediately set forward with his army, and boldly crossed the strait, after he had, by an ingenious stratagem, eluded the vigilance of the Carthaginian general. The Carthaginians, partly by art and partly by force, were driven out of the citadel; and the city was surrendered immediately to the consul. The Carthaginians hanged their general, for having given up the citadel in so cowardly a manner, and prepared to besiege the town with all their forces. Hiero joined them with his own. But the consul, having defeated them separately, raised the siege, and laid waste at pleasure the neighbouring country, the enemy not daring to face him. This was the first expedition which the Romans made out of Italy.

[^767: Polyb. l. i. p. 12-15. edit. Gronov.]

[^768: A.M. 3741. A. Carth. 583. A. Rom. 485. Ant. J.C. 263.]

[^769: Frontin.]

It is doubted[^770] whether the motives which prompted the Romans to undertake this expedition, were very upright, and exactly conformable to the rules of strict justice. Be this as it may, their passage into Sicily, and the succour they gave to the inhabitants of Messina, may be said to have been the first step by which they ascended to that height of glory and grandeur which they afterwards attained.

[^770: The Chevalier Folard examines this question in his remarks upon Polybius, l. i. p. 16.—Trans.]

[^771] Hiero, having reconciled himself to the Romans, and entered into an alliance with them, the Carthaginians bent all their thoughts on Sicily, and sent numerous armies thither.[^772] Agrigentum was their place of arms; which, being attacked by the Romans, was won by them, after they had besieged it seven months, and gained one battle.

[^771: A.M. 3743. A. Rom. 487.]

[^772: Polyb. l. i. p. 15-19.]

Notwithstanding the advantage of this victory, and the conquest of so important a city, the Romans were sensible, that whilst the Carthaginians should continue masters at sea, the maritime places in the island would always side with them, and put it out of their power ever to drive them out of Sicily.[^773] Besides, they saw with reluctance Africa enjoy a profound tranquillity, at a time that Italy was infested by the frequent incursions of its enemies. They now first formed the design of having a fleet, and of disputing the empire of the sea with the Carthaginians. The undertaking was bold, and in outward appearance rash; but it evinces the courage and magnanimity of the Romans. They were not at that time possessed of a single vessel which they could call their own; and the ships which had transported their forces into Sicily had been borrowed of their neighbours. They were unexperienced in sea affairs, had no carpenters acquainted with the building of ships, and did not know even the shape of the Quinqueremes, or galleys with five benches of oars, in which the chief strength of fleets at that time consisted. But happily, the year before, one had been taken upon the coasts of Italy, which served them as a model. They therefore applied themselves with incredible industry and ardour to the building of ships in the same form; and in the mean time they got together a set of rowers, who were taught an exercise and discipline utterly unknown to them before, in the following manner. Benches were made, on the shore, in the same order and fashion with those of galleys. The rowers were seated on these benches, and taught, as if they had been furnished with oars, to throw themselves backwards with their arms drawn to their breasts; and then to throw their bodies and arms forward in one regular motion, the instant their commanding officer gave the signal. In two months, one hundred galleys of five benches of oars, and twenty of three benches, were built; and after some time had been spent in exercising the rowers on shipboard, the fleet put to sea, and went in quest of the enemy. The consul Duillius had the command of it.

[^773: Id. p. 20.]

[^774] The Romans coming up with the Carthaginians near the coast of Myle, they prepared for an engagement.[^775] As the Roman galleys, by their being clumsily and hastily built, were neither very nimble nor easy to work; this inconvenience was supplied by a machine invented for this occasion, and afterwards known by the name of the Corvus,[^776] (Crow, or Crane,) by the help of which they grappled the enemy's ships, boarded them, and immediately came to close engagement. The signal for fighting was given. The Carthaginian fleet consisted of a hundred and thirty sail, under the command of Hannibal.[^777] He himself was on board a galley of seven benches of oars, which had once belonged to Pyrrhus. The Carthaginians, thoroughly despising enemies who were utterly unacquainted with sea affairs, imagined that their very appearance would put them to flight, and therefore came forward boldly, with little expectation of fighting; but firmly imagining they should reap the spoils, which they had already devoured with their eyes. They were nevertheless a little surprised at the sight of the above-mentioned engines, raised on the prow of every one of the enemy's ships, and which were entirely new to them. But their astonishment increased, when they saw these engines drop down at once; and being thrown forcibly into their vessels, grapple them in spite of all resistance. This changed the form of the engagement, and obliged the Carthaginians to come to close engagement with their enemies, as though they had fought them on land. They were unable to sustain the attack of the Romans: a horrible slaughter ensued, and the Carthaginians lost fourscore vessels, among which was the admiral's galley, he himself escaping with difficulty in a small boat.

[^774: A.M. 3745. A. Rom. 489.]

[^775: Polyb. l. i. p. 22.]

[^776: Polyb. l. i. p. 22.]

[^777: A different person from the great Hannibal.—Trans.]

So considerable and unexpected a victory raised the courage of the Romans, and seemed to redouble their vigour for the continuance of the war. Extraordinary honours were bestowed on the consul Duillius, who was the first Roman that had a naval triumph decreed him. A rostral pillar was erected in his honour, with a noble inscription; which pillar is yet standing in Rome.[^778]

[^778: These pillars were called Rostratæ, from the beaks of ships with which they were adorned; Rostra.—Trans.]

During the two following years, the Romans grew still stronger at sea, by their success in several engagements.[^779] But these were considered by them only as essays preparatory to the great design they meditated of carrying the war into Africa, and of combating the Carthaginians in their own country. There was nothing the latter dreaded more; and to divert so dangerous a blow, they resolved to fight the enemy, whatever might be the consequence.

[^779: Polyb. l. i. p. 24.]

[^780] The Romans had elected M. Atilius Regulus, and L. Manlius, consuls for this year.[^781] Their fleet consisted of three hundred and thirty vessels, on board of which were one hundred and forty thousand men, each vessel having three hundred rowers, and a hundred and twenty soldiers. That of the Carthaginians, commanded by Hanno and Hamilcar, had twenty vessels more than the Romans, and a greater number of men in proportion. The two fleets came in sight of each other near Ecnomus in Sicily. No man could behold two such formidable navies, or be a spectator of the extraordinary preparations they made for fighting, without being under some concern, on seeing the danger which menaced two of the most powerful states in the world. As the courage on both sides was equal, and no great disparity in the forces, the fight was obstinate, and the victory long doubtful; but at last the Carthaginians were overcome. More than sixty of their ships were taken by the enemy, and thirty sunk. The Romans lost twenty-four, not one of which fell into the enemy's hands.

[^780: A.M. 3749. A. Rom. 493.]

[^781: Polyb l. i. p. 25.]

The fruit of this victory, as the Romans had designed it, was their sailing to Africa, after having refitted their ships, and provided them with all necessaries for carrying on a long war in a foreign country.[^782] They landed happily in Africa, and began the war by taking a town called Clypea, which had a commodious haven. From thence, after having sent an express to Rome, to give advice of their landing, and to receive orders from the senate, they overran the open country, in which they made terrible havoc; bringing away whole flocks of cattle, and twenty thousand prisoners.

[^782: Id. p. 30.]

[^783] The express returned in the mean time with the orders of the senate, who decreed, that Regulus should continue to command the armies in Africa, with the title of Proconsul; and that his colleague should return with a great part of the fleet and the forces; leaving Regulus only forty vessels, fifteen thousand foot, and five hundred horse. Their leaving the latter with so few ships and troops, was a visible renunciation of the advantages which might have been expected from this descent upon Africa.

[^783: A.M. 3750. A. Rom. 494.]

The people at Rome depended greatly on the courage and abilities of Regulus; and the joy was universal, when it was known that he was continued in the command in Africa; he alone was afflicted on that account.[^784] When news was brought him of it, he wrote to Rome, and desired, in the strongest terms, that he might be appointed a successor. His chief reason was, that the death of the farmer who rented his grounds, having given one of his hirelings an opportunity of carrying off all the implements of tillage, his presence was necessary for taking care of his little spot of ground, (but seven acres,) which was all his family subsisted upon. But the senate undertook to have his lands cultivated at the public expense; to maintain his wife and children; and to indemnify him for the loss he had sustained by the robbery of his hireling. Thrice happy age! in which poverty was thus had in honour, and was united with the most rare and uncommon merit, and the highest employments of the state! Regulus thus freed from his domestic cares, bent his whole thoughts on discharging the duty of a general.

[^784: Val. Max. l. iv. c. 4.]

After taking several castles, he laid siege to Adis one of the strongest fortresses of the country.[^785] The Carthaginians, exasperated at seeing their enemies thus laying waste their lands at pleasure, at last took the field, and marched against them, to force them to raise the siege. With this view, they posted themselves on a hill, which overlooked the Roman camp, and was convenient for annoying the enemy; but, at the same time, by its situation, rendered one part of their army useless. For the strength of the Carthaginians lay chiefly in their horses and elephants, which are of no service but in plains. Regulus did not give them an opportunity of descending from the hill; but, in order to take advantage of this essential mistake of the Carthaginian generals, fell upon them in this post; and after meeting with a feeble resistance, put the enemy to flight, plundered their camp, and laid waste the adjacent country. Then, having taken Tunis,[^786] an important city, and which brought him near Carthage, he made his army encamp there.

[^785: Polyb. l. i. p. 31-36.]

[^786: In the interval betwixt the departure of Manlius and the taking of Tunis, we are to place the memorable combat of Regulus and his whole army, with a serpent of so prodigious a size, that the fabulous one of Cadmus is hardly comparable to it. The story of this serpent was elegantly written by Livy, but it is now lost. Valerius Maximus, however, partly repairs that loss; and in the last chapter of his first book, gives us this account of this monster from Livy himself.—He [Livy] says, that on the banks of Bragada (an African river) lay a serpent of so enormous a size, that it kept the whole Roman army from coming to the river. Several soldiers had been buried in the wide caverns of its belly, and many pressed to death in the spiral volumes of its tail. Its skin was impenetrable to darts: and it was with repeated endeavours that stones, slung from the military engines, at last killed it. The serpent then exhibited a sight that was more terrible to the Roman cohorts and legions than even Carthage itself. The streams of the river were dyed with its blood, and the stench of its putrified carcass infected the adjacent country, so that the Roman army was forced to decamp. Its skin, one hundred and twenty feet long, was sent to Rome: and, if Pliny may be credited, was to be seen (together with the jaw-bone of the same monster, in the temple where they were first deposited,) as late as the Numantine war.—Trans.]

The enemy were in the utmost alarm. All things had succeeded ill with them, their forces had been defeated by sea and land, and upwards of two hundred towns had surrendered to the conqueror. Besides, the Numidians made greater havoc in their territories than even the Romans. They expected every moment to see their capital besieged. And their affliction was increased by the concourse of peasants with their wives and children, who flocked from all parts to Carthage for safety: which gave them melancholy apprehensions of a famine in case of a siege. Regulus, afraid of having the glory of his victories torn from him by a successor, made some proposal of an accommodation to the vanquished enemy; but the conditions appeared so hard, that they could not listen to them. As he did not doubt his being soon master of Carthage, he would not abate any thing in his demands; but, by an infatuation which is almost inseparable from great and unexpected success, he treated them with haughtiness; and pretended, that every thing he suffered them to possess, ought to be esteemed a favour; adding this farther insult, “That they ought either to overcome like brave men, or learn to submit to the victor.”[^787] So harsh and disdainful a treatment only fired their resentment; and they resolved rather to die sword in hand, than to do any thing which might derogate from the dignity of Carthage.

[^787: Δεῖ τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς ἤ νικᾷν, ἤ εἴκειν τοῖς ὑπερέχουσιν. Diod. Eclog. l. xxiii. c. 10.—Trans.]

Reduced to this fatal extremity, they received, in the happiest juncture, a reinforcement of auxiliary troops out of Greece, with Xanthippus the Lacedæmonian at their head, who had been educated in the discipline of Sparta, and learnt the art of war in that renowned and excellent school. When he had heard the circumstances of the last battle, which were told him at his request; had clearly discerned the occasion of its being lost; and perfectly informed himself in what the strength of Carthage consisted; he declared publicly, and repeated it often, in the hearing of the rest of the officers, that the misfortunes of the Carthaginians were owing entirely to the incapacity of their generals. These discourses came at last to the ear of the public council; the members of it were struck with them, and they requested him to attend them. He enforced his opinion with such strong and convincing reasons, that the oversights committed by the generals were visible to every one; and he proved as clearly, that, by a conduct opposite to the former, they would not only secure their dominions, but drive the enemy out of them. This speech revived the courage and hopes of the Carthaginians; and Xanthippus was entreated, and, in some measure, forced, to accept the command of the army. When the Carthaginians saw, in his exercising of their forces near the city, the manner in which he drew them up in order of battle, made them advance or retreat on the first signal, file off with order and expedition; in a word, perform all the evolutions and movements of the military art; they were struck with astonishment, and owned, that the ablest generals which Carthage had hitherto produced, knew nothing in comparison of Xanthippus.

The officers, soldiers, and every one, were lost in admiration; and, what is very uncommon, jealousy gave no alloy to it; the fear of the present danger, and the love of their country, stifling, without doubt, all other sentiments. The gloomy consternation, which had before seized the whole army, was succeeded by joy and alacrity. The soldiers were urgent to be led against the enemy, in the firm assurance (as they said) of being victorious under their new leader, and of obliterating the disgrace of former defeats. Xanthippus did not suffer their ardour to cool; and the sight of the enemy only inflamed it. When he had approached within little more than twelve hundred paces of them, he thought proper to call a council of war, in order to show respect to the Carthaginian generals, by consulting them. All unanimously deferred to his opinion; upon which it was resolved to give the enemy battle the following day.

The Carthaginian army was composed of twelve thousand foot, four thousand horse, and about a hundred elephants. That of the Romans, as near as may be guessed from what goes before, (for Polybius does not mention their numbers here,) consisted of fifteen thousand foot and three hundred horse.

It must be a noble sight to see two armies like these before us, not overcharged with numbers, but composed of brave soldiers, and commanded by very able generals, engaged in battle. In those tumultuous fights, where two or three hundred thousand are engaged on both sides, confusion is inevitable; and it is difficult, amidst a thousand events, where chance generally seems to have a greater share than counsel, to discover the true merit of commanders, and the real causes of victory. But in such engagements as this before us, nothing escapes the curiosity of the reader; for he clearly sees the disposition of the two armies; imagines he almost hears the orders given out by the generals; follows all the movements of the army; can point out the faults committed on both sides; and is thereby qualified to determine, with certainty, the causes to which the victory or defeat is owing. The success of this battle, however inconsiderable it may appear from the small number of the combatants, was nevertheless to decide the fate of Carthage.

The disposition of both armies was as follows. Xanthippus drew up all his elephants in front. Behind these, at some distance, he placed the Carthaginian infantry in one body or phalanx. The foreign troops in the Carthaginian service were posted, one part of them on the right, between the phalanx and the horse; and the other, composed of light-armed soldiers, in platoons, at the head of the two wings of the cavalry.

On the side of the Romans, as they apprehended the elephants most, Regulus, to provide against them, posted his light-armed soldiers, on a line, in the front of the legions. In the rear of these, he placed the cohorts one behind another, and the horse on the wings. In thus straitening the front of his main battle, to give it more depth, he indeed took a just precaution, says Polybius, against the elephants; but he did not provide for the inequality of his cavalry, which was much inferior in numbers to that of the enemy.

The two armies being thus drawn up, waited only for the signal. Xanthippus orders the elephants to advance, to break the ranks of the enemy; and commands the two wings of the cavalry to charge the Romans in flank. At the same time, the latter, clashing their arms, and shouting after the manner of their country, advance against the enemy. Their cavalry did not stand the onset long, being so much inferior to that of the Carthaginians. The infantry in the left wing, to avoid the attack of the elephants, and show how little they feared the mercenaries who formed the enemies' right wing, attacks it, puts it to flight, and pursues it to the camp. Those in the first ranks, who were opposed to the elephants, were broken and trodden under foot, after fighting valiantly; and the rest of the main body stood firm for some time, by reason of its great depth. But when the rear, being attacked by the enemy's cavalry, was obliged to face about and receive it; and those who had broken through the elephants, met the phalanx of the Carthaginians, which had not yet engaged, and which received them in good order, the Romans were routed on all sides, and entirely defeated. The greatest part of them were crushed to death by the enormous weight of the elephants: and the remainder, standing in the ranks, were shot through and through with arrows from the enemy's horse. Only a small number fled; and as they were in an open country, the horse and elephants killed a great part of them. Five hundred, or thereabouts, who went off with Regulus, were taken prisoners with him. The Carthaginians lost in this battle eight hundred mercenaries, who were opposed to the left wing of the Romans; and of the latter only two thousand escaped, who, by their pursuing the enemy's right wing, had drawn themselves out of the engagement. All the rest, Regulus and those taken with him excepted, were left dead in the field. The two thousand, who had escaped the slaughter, retired to Clypea, and were saved in an almost miraculous manner.

The Carthaginians, after having stripped the dead, entered Carthage in triumph, dragging after them the unfortunate Regulus, and five hundred prisoners. Their joy was so much the greater, as, but a very few days before, they had seen themselves upon the brink of ruin. The men and women, old and young people, crowded the temples, to return thanks to the immortal gods; and several days were devoted wholly to festivities and rejoicings.

Xanthippus, who had contributed so much to this happy change, had the wisdom to withdraw shortly after, from the apprehension lest his glory, which had hitherto been unsullied, might, after this first blaze, insensibly fade away, and leave him exposed to the darts of envy and calumny, which are always dangerous, but most in a foreign country, when a man stands alone, unsustained by friends and relations, and destitute of all support.

Polybius tells us, that Xanthippus's departure was related in a different manner, and promises to take notice of it in another place: but that part of his history has not come down to us. We read in Appian,[^788] that the Carthaginians, excited by a mean and detestable jealousy of Xanthippus's glory, and unable to bear the thoughts that they should stand indebted to Sparta for their safety; upon pretence of conducting him and his attendants back with honour to his own country, with a numerous convoy of ships, gave private orders to have them all put to death in their passage; as if with him they could have buried in the waves for ever the memory of his services, and their horrid ingratitude to him.[^789]

[^788: De Bell. Pun. p. 30.]

[^789: This perfidious action, as it is related by Appian, may possibly be true, when we consider the character of the Carthaginians, who were certainly a cruel and treacherous people. But if it be fact, one would wonder why Polybius should reserve for another occasion, the relation of an incident which comes in most properly here, as it finishes at once the character and life of Xanthippus. His silence therefore in this place makes me think, that he intended to bring Xanthippus again upon the stage; and to exhibit him to the reader in a different light from that in which he is placed by Appian. To this let me add, that it showed no great depth of policy in the Carthaginians, to take this method of despatching him, when so many others offered which were less liable to censure. In this scheme formed for his destruction, not only himself, but all his followers, were to be murdered, without the pretence of even a storm, or loss of one single Carthaginian, to cover or excuse the perpetration of so horrid a crime.—Trans.]

“This battle,” says Polybius,[^790] “though not so considerable as many others, may yet furnish very salutary instructions; which,” adds that author, “is the greatest benefit that can be reaped from the study of history.”

[^790: Lib. i. p. 36, 37.]

First, ought any man to put a great confidence in his good fortune, after he has considered the fate of Regulus? That general, insolent with victory, inexorable to the conquered, scarcely deigning to listen to them, saw himself a few days after vanquished by them, and made their prisoner. Hannibal suggested the same reflection to Scipio, when he exhorted him not to be dazzled with the success of his arms. Regulus, said he, would have been recorded as one of the most uncommon instances of valour and felicity, had he, after the victory obtained in this very country, granted our fathers the peace which they sued for. But putting no bounds to his ambition and the insolence of success, the greater his prosperity, the more ignominious was his fall.[^791]

[^791: Inter pauca felicitatis virtutisque exempla M. Atilius quondam in hâc eâdem terrâ fuisset, si victor pacem petentibus dedisset patribus nostris. Sed non statuendo tandem felicitati modum, nec cohibendo efferentem se fortunam, quanto altiùs elatus erat, eo fœdiùs corruit. Liv. l. xxx. n. 30.—Trans.]

In the second place, the truth of the saying of Euripides is here seen in its full extent, “That one wise head is worth a great many hands.”[^792] A single man here changes the whole face of affairs. On one hand, he defeats troops which were thought invincible; on the other, he revives the courage of a city and an army, whom he had found in consternation and despair.

[^792: Ὡς ἕν σοφὸν βούλευμα τὰς πολλὰς χεῖρας νικᾶ. It may not be improper to take notice in this place (as it was forgotten before) of a mistake of the learned Casaubon, in his translation of a passage of Polybius concerning Xanthippus. The passage is this, Ἐν οἷς καὶ Ξάνθιππόν τινα Λακεδαιμόνιον ἄνδρα τὴς Λακωνικῆς ἀγωγῆς μετεχηκότα, καὶ τριβὴν ἐν τοῖς πολεμικοῖς ἔχοντα σύμμετρον. Which is thus rendered by Casaubon: In queis [militibus sc. Græciâ allatis] Xanthippus quidam fuit Lacedæmonius, vir disciplinà Laconicâ imbutus, et qui rei militaris usum mediocrem habebat. Whereas, agreeably with the whole character and conduct of Xanthippus, I take the sense of this passage to be, “a man formed by the Spartan discipline, and proportionably [not moderately] skilful in military affairs.”—Trans.]

Such, as Polybius observes, is the use which ought to be made of the study of history. For there being two ways of acquiring improvement and instruction, first by one's own experience, and secondly by that of other men; it is much more wise and useful to improve by other men's miscarriages than by our own.

I return to Regulus, that I may here finish what relates to him; Polybius, to our great disappointment, taking no further notice of that general.[^793]

[^793: This silence of Polybius has prejudiced a great many learned men against many of the stories told of Regulus's barbarous treatment, after he was taken by the Carthaginians. M. Rollin speaks no further of this matter; and therefore I shall give my reader the substance of what is brought against the general belief of the Roman writers, (as well historians as poets,) and of Appian on this subject. First, it is urged, that Polybius was very sensible that the story of these cruelties was false; and therefore, that he might not disoblige the Romans, by contradicting so general a belief, he chose rather to be silent concerning Regulus after he was taken prisoner, than to violate the truth of history, of which he was so strict an observer. This opinion is further strengthened (say the adversaries of this belief) by a fragment of Diodorus, which says, that the wife of Regulus, exasperated at the death of her husband in Carthage, occasioned, as she imagined, by barbarous usage, persuaded her sons to revenge the fate of their father, by the cruel treatment of two Carthaginian captives (thought to be Bostar and Hamilcar) taken in the sea-fight against Sicily, after the misfortune of Regulus, and put into her hands for the redemption of her husband. One of these died by the severity of his imprisonment; and the other, by the care of the senate, who detested the cruelty, survived, and was recovered to health. This treatment of the captives, and the resentment of the senate on that account, form a third argument or presumption against the truth of this story of Regulus, which is thus argued. Regulus dying in his captivity by the usual course of nature, his wife, thus frustrated of her hopes of redeeming him by the exchange of her captives, treated them with the utmost barbarity in consequence of her belief of the ill usage which Regulus had received. The senate being angry with her for it, to give some colour to her cruelties, she gave out among her acquaintance and kindred, that her husband died in the way generally related. This, like all other reports, increased gradually; and, from the national hatred betwixt the Carthaginians and Romans, was easily and generally believed by the latter. How far this is conclusive against the testimonies of two such weighty authors as Cicero and Seneca (to say nothing of the poets) is left to the judgment of the reader.—Trans.]

[^794] After being kept some years in prison, he was sent to Rome to propose an exchange of prisoners.[^795] He had been obliged to take an oath, that he would return in case he proved unsuccessful. He then acquainted the senate with the subject of his voyage; and being invited by them to give his opinion freely, he answered, that he could no longer do it as a senator, having lost both this quality, and that of a Roman citizen, from the time that he had fallen into the hands of his enemies; but he did not refuse to offer his thoughts as a private person. This was a very delicate affair. Every one was touched with the misfortunes of so great a man. “He needed only,” says Cicero, “to have spoken one word, and it would have restored him to his liberty, his estate, his dignity, his wife, his children, and his country;” but that word appeared to him contrary to the honour and welfare of the state. He therefore plainly declared, that an exchange of prisoners ought not to be so much as thought of: that such an example would be of fatal consequence to the republic: that citizens who had so basely surrendered their arms to the enemy, were unworthy of the least compassion, and incapable of serving their country; that with regard to himself, as he was so far advanced in years, his death ought to be considered as nothing; whereas they had in their hands several Carthaginian generals, in the flower of their age, and capable of doing their country great services for many years. It was with difficulty that the senate complied with so generous and unexampled a counsel. The illustrious exile therefore left Rome, in order to return to Carthage, unmoved either with the deep affliction of his friends, or the tears of his wife and children, although he knew but too well the grievous torments which were prepared for him.[^796] And indeed, the moment his enemies saw him returned without having obtained the exchange of prisoners, they put him to every kind of torture their barbarous cruelty could invent. They imprisoned him for a long time in a dismal dungeon, whence (after cutting off his eye-lids) they drew him at once into the sun, when its beams darted the strongest heat. They next put him into a kind of chest stuck full of nails, whose points wounding him did not allow him a moment's ease either day or night. Lastly, after having been long tormented by being kept for ever awake in this dreadful torture, his merciless enemies nailed him to a cross, their usual punishment, and left him to expire on it. Such was the end of this great man. His enemies, by depriving him of some days, perhaps years, of life, brought eternal infamy on themselves.

[^794: A.M. 3755. A. Rom. 499.]

[^795: Appian, de Bella Pun. p. 2, 3. Cic. de Off. l. iii. n. 99, 100. Aul. Gel. l. vi. c. 4. Senec. Ep. 99.]

[^796: Horat. l. iii. Od. 3.]

The blow which the Romans had received in Africa did not discourage them.[^797] They made greater preparations than before, to retrieve their loss; and put to sea, the following campaign, three hundred and sixty vessels. The Carthaginians sailed out to meet them with two hundred; but were beaten in an engagement fought on the coasts of Sicily, and a hundred and fourteen of their ships were taken by the Romans. The latter sailed into Africa to take in the few soldiers who had escaped the pursuit of the enemy, after the defeat of Regulus; and had defended themselves vigorously in Clupea,[^798] where they had been unsuccessfully besieged.

[^797: Polyb. l. i. p. 37.]

[^798: Or Clypea.—Trans.]

Here again we are astonished that the Romans, after so considerable a victory, and with so large a fleet, should sail into Africa, only to bring from thence a small garrison; whereas they might have attempted the conquest of it, since Regulus, with much fewer forces, had almost completed it.

The Romans, on their return, were overtaken by a storm, which almost destroyed their whole fleet.[^799] The like misfortune befell them also the following year.[^800] However, they consoled themselves for this double loss, by a victory which they gained over Asdrubal, from whom they took near a hundred and forty elephants. This news being brought to Rome, filled the whole city with joy; not only because the strength of the enemy's army was considerably diminished by the loss of their elephants, but chiefly because this victory had inspired the land forces with fresh courage; who, since the defeat of Regulus, had not dared to venture upon an engagement; so great was the terror with which those formidable animals had filled the minds of all the soldiers. It was therefore judged proper to make a greater effort than ever, in order to finish, if possible, a war which had continued fourteen years. The two consuls set sail with a fleet of two hundred ships, and arriving in Sicily, formed the bold design of besieging Lilybæum. This was the strongest town which the Carthaginians possessed, and the loss of it would be attended with that of every part of the island and open to the Romans a free passage into Africa.

[^799: Polyb. l. i. p. 38-40.]

[^800: P. 41, 42.]

The reader will suppose, that the utmost ardour was shown, both in the assault and defence of the place.[^801] Imilcon was governor there, with ten thousand regular forces, exclusive of the inhabitants; and Hannibal, the son of Hamilcar, soon brought him as many more from Carthage; he having, with the most intrepid courage, forced his way through the enemy's fleet, and arrived happily in the port.

[^801: Ibid. l. i. p. 44-50.]

The Romans had not lost any time. Having brought forward their engines, they beat down several towers with their battering rams; and gaining ground daily, they made such progress, as gave the besieged, who now were closely pressed, some fears. The governor saw plainly that there was no other way left to save the city, but by firing the engines of the besiegers. Having therefore prepared his forces for this enterprise, he sent them out at daybreak with torches in their hands, tow, and all kind of combustible matters; and at the same time attacked all the engines. The Romans exerted their utmost efforts to repel them, and the engagement was very bloody. Every man, assailant as well as defendant, stood to his post, and chose to die rather than quit it. At last, after a long resistance and dreadful slaughter, the besieged sounded a retreat, and left the Romans in possession of their works. This conflict being over, Hannibal embarked in the night, and concealing his departure from the enemy, sailed for Drepanum, where Adherbal commanded for the Carthaginians. Drepanum was advantageously situated; having a commodious port, and lying about a hundred and twenty furlongs from Lilybæum; and the Carthaginians had been always very desirous of preserving it.

The Romans, animated by their late success, renewed the attack with greater vigour than ever; the besieged not daring to make a second attempt to burn their machines, so much were they disheartened by the ill success of the former. But a furious wind rising suddenly, some mercenary soldiers represented to the governor, that now was the favourable opportunity for them to fire the engines of the besiegers, especially as the wind blew full against them; and they offered themselves for the enterprise. The offer was accepted, and accordingly they were furnished with every thing necessary. In a moment the fire caught all the engines; and the Romans could not possibly extinguish it, because the flames being spread instantly every where, the wind carried the sparks and smoke full in their eyes, so that they could not see where to apply relief; whereas their enemies saw clearly where to aim their strokes, and throw their fire. This accident made the Romans lose all hopes of being ever able to carry the place by force. They therefore turned the siege into a blockade; raised a strong line of contravallation round the town; and, dispersing their army in every part of the neighbourhood, resolved to effect by time, what they found themselves absolutely unable to perform any other way.

When the transactions of the siege of Lilybæum, and the loss of part of the forces, were known at Rome, the citizens, so far from desponding at this ill news, seemed to be fired with new vigour.[^802] Every man strove to be foremost in the muster roll; so that, in a very little time, an army of ten thousand men was raised, who, crossing the strait, marched by land to join the besiegers.

[^802: Polyb. p. 50.]

[^803] At the same time, P. Claudius Pulcher, the consul, formed a design of attacking Adherbal in Drepanum.[^804] He thought himself sure of surprising him, because, after the loss lately sustained by the Romans at Lilybæum, the enemy could not imagine that they would venture out again at sea. Flushed with these hopes, he sailed out with his fleet in the night, the better to conceal his design. But he had to do with an active general, whose vigilance he could not elude, and who did not even give him time to draw up his ships in line of battle, but fell vigorously upon him whilst his fleet was in disorder and confusion. The Carthaginians gained a complete victory. Of the Roman fleet, only thirty vessels got off, which being in company with the consul, fled with him, and got away in the best manner they could along the coast. All the rest, amounting to fourscore and thirteen, with the men on board them, were taken by the Carthaginians; a few soldiers excepted, who had escaped from the wreck of their vessels. This victory displayed as much the prudence and valour of Adherbal, as it reflected shame and ignominy on the Roman consul.

[^803: A.M. 3756. A. Rom. 500.]

[^804: Ibid. p. 51.]

Junius, his colleague, was neither more prudent nor more fortunate than himself, but lost his whole fleet by his ill conduct.[^805] Endeavouring to atone for his misfortune by some considerable action, he held a secret correspondence with the inhabitants of Eryx,[^806] and by that means got the city surrendered to him. On the summit of the mountain stood the temple of Venus Erycina, which was certainly the most beautiful as well as the richest of all the Sicilian temples. The city stood a little below the summit of this mountain, and the only access to it was by a road very long and very rugged. Junius posted one part of his troops upon the top, and the remainder at the foot of the mountain, imagining that he now had nothing to fear; but Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, father of the famous Hannibal, found means to get into the city, which lay between the two camps of the enemy, and there fortified himself. From this advantageous post he harassed the Romans incessantly for two years. One can scarce conceive how it was possible for the Carthaginians to defend themselves, when thus attacked from both the summit and foot of the mountain; and unable to get provisions, but from a little port, which was the only one open to them. By such enterprises as these, the abilities and prudent courage of a general, are as well, or perhaps better discovered, than by the winning of a battle.

[^805: Ibid. p. 54-59.]

[^806: A city and mountain of Sicily.—Trans.]

For five years, nothing memorable was performed on either side.[^807] The Romans had imagined that their land forces would alone be capable of finishing the siege of Lilybæum: but as they saw it protracted beyond their expectation, they returned to their first plan, and made extraordinary efforts to fit out a new fleet. The public treasury was at a low ebb; but this want was supplied by the zeal of individuals; so ardent was the love which the Romans bore their country. Every man, according to his circumstances, contributed to the common expense; and, upon public security, advanced money, without the least scruple, for an expedition on which the glory and safety of Rome depended. One man fitted out a ship at his own charge; another was equipped by the contributions of two or three; so that, in a very little time, two hundred were ready for sailing.[^808] The command was given to Lutatius the consul, who immediately put to sea. The enemy's fleet had retired into Africa: the consul therefore easily seized upon all the advantageous posts in the neighbourhood of Lilybæum; and foreseeing that he should soon be forced to fight, he omitted no precautions to ensure success; and employed the interval in exercising his soldiers and seamen at sea.

[^807: Polyb. l. i. p. 59-62.]

[^808: A.M. 3763. A. Rom. 507.]

He was soon informed that the Carthaginian fleet drew near, under the command of Hanno, who landed in a small island called Hiera, opposite to Drepanum. His design was to reach Eryx undiscovered by the Romans, in order to supply the army there; to reinforce his troops, and take Barca on board to assist him in the expected engagement. But the consul, suspecting his intention, was beforehand with him; and having assembled all his best forces, sailed for the small island Ægusa,[^809] which lay near the other. He acquainted his officers with the design he had of attacking the enemy on the morrow. Accordingly, at daybreak, he prepared to engage: unfortunately the wind was favourable for the enemy, which made him hesitate whether he should give him battle. But considering that the Carthaginian fleet, when unloaded of its provisions, would become lighter and more fit for action; and, besides, would be considerably strengthened by the forces and presence of Barca he came to a resolution at once; and, notwithstanding the foul weather, made directly to the enemy. The consul had choice forces, able seamen, and excellent ships, built after the model of a galley that had been lately taken from the enemy; and which was the completest in its kind that had ever been seen. The Carthaginians, on the other hand, were destitute of all these advantages. As they had been the entire masters at sea for some years, and the Romans did not once dare to face them, they held them in the highest contempt, and looked upon themselves as invincible. On the first report of the enemy being in motion, the Carthaginians had put to sea a fleet fitted out in haste, as appeared from every circumstance of it: the soldiers and seamen being all mercenaries, newly levied, without the least experience, resolution, or zeal, since it was not for their own country they were going to fight. This soon appeared in the engagement. They could not sustain the first attack. Fifty of their vessels were sunk, and seventy taken, with their whole crews. The rest, favoured by a wind which rose very seasonably for them, made the best of their way to the little island from whence they had sailed. There were upwards of ten thousand taken prisoners. The consul sailed immediately for Lilybæum, and joined his forces to those of the besiegers.

[^809: These islands are also called Ægates.—Trans.]

When the news of this defeat arrived at Carthage, it occasioned so much the greater surprise and terror, as it was less expected. The senate, however, did not lose their courage, though they saw themselves quite unable to continue the war. As the Romans were now masters of the sea, it was not possible for the Carthaginians to send either provisions, or reinforcements, to the armies in Sicily. An express was therefore immediately despatched to Barca, the general there, empowering him to act as he should think proper. Barca, so long as he had room to entertain the least hopes, had done every thing that could be expected from the most intrepid courage and the most consummate wisdom. But having now no resource left, he sent a deputation to the consul, in order to treat about a peace. “Prudence,” says Polybius, “consists in knowing how to resist and yield at a seasonable juncture.” Lutatius was not insensible how tired the Romans were grown of a war, which had exhausted them both of men and money; and the dreadful consequences which had attended on Regulus's inexorable and imprudent obstinacy, were fresh in his memory. He therefore complied without difficulty, and dictated the following treaty.

There shall be peace between Rome and Carthage (in case the Roman people approve of it) on the following conditions: The Carthaginians shall evacuate all Sicily; shall no longer make war upon Hiero, the Syracusans, or their allies: They shall restore to the Romans, without ransom, all the prisoners which they have taken from them; and pay them, within twenty years, two thousand two hundred Euboic talents of silver.[^810] It is worth the reader's remarking, by the way, the simple, exact, and clear terms in which this treaty is expressed; that, in so short a compass, adjusts the interests of two powerful republics and their allies, both by sea and land.

[^810: This sum amounts to near six millions one hundred and eighty thousand French livres, or 515,000l. English money.]

When these conditions were brought to Rome, the people, not approving of them, sent ten commissioners to Sicily, to terminate the affair. These made no alteration as to the substance of the treaty;[^811] only shortening the time appointed for the payment, reducing it to ten years: a thousand talents were added to the sum that had been stipulated, which were to be paid immediately; and the Carthaginians were required to depart out of all the islands situated between Italy and Sicily. Sardinia was not comprehended in this treaty; but they gave it up by another treaty which was made some years afterwards.

[^811: Polyb. l. iii. p. 182.]

[^812] Such was the conclusion of a war, one of the longest mentioned in history, since it continued twenty-four years without intermission. The obstinacy, in disputing for empire, was equal on either side: the same resolution, the same greatness of soul, in forming as well as in executing of projects, being conspicuous on both sides. The Carthaginians had the superiority in their acquaintance with naval affairs; in their skill in the construction of their vessels; the working of them; the experience and capacity of their pilots; the knowledge of coasts, shallows, roads, and winds; and in the inexhaustible fund of wealth, which furnished all the expenses of so long and obstinate a war. The Romans had none of these advantages; but their courage, zeal for the public good, love of their country, and a noble emulation of glory, supplied all other deficiencies. We are astonished to see a nation, so raw and inexperienced in naval affairs, not only making head against a people who were better skilled in them, and more powerful than any that had ever been before; but even gaining several victories over them at sea. No difficulties or calamities could discourage them. They certainly would not have thought of peace, in the circumstances under which the Carthaginians demanded it. One unfortunate campaign dispirits the latter; whereas the Romans are not shaken by a succession of them.

[^812: A.M. 3763. A. Carth. 605. A. Rom. 507. Ant. J.C. 241.]

As to soldiers, there was no comparison between those of Rome and Carthage, the former being infinitely superior in point of courage. Among the generals who commanded in this war, Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, was, doubtless, the most conspicuous for his bravery and prudence.

The Libyan War; or against the Mercenaries.[^813]—The war which the Carthaginians waged against the Romans, was succeeded immediately by another,[^814] which, though of much shorter continuance, was infinitely more dangerous; as it was carried on in the very heart of the republic, and attended with such cruelty and barbarity, as is scarce to be paralleled in history; I mean the war which the Carthaginians were obliged to sustain against their mercenary troops, who had served under them in Sicily, and which is commonly called the African or Libyan war.[^815] It continued only three years and a half, but was a very bloody one. The occasion of it was this:

[^813: Polyb. l. i. p. 65-89.]

[^814: The same year that the first Punic war ended.—Trans.]

[^815: And sometimes ξενικὸν, or the war with the mercenaries.—Trans.]

As soon as the treaty was concluded with the Romans,[^816] Hamilcar, having carried to Lilybæum the forces which were in Eryx, resigned his commission; and left to Gisgo, governor of the place, the care of transporting these forces into Africa. Gisgo, as though he had foreseen what would happen, did not ship them all off at once, but in small and separate parties, in order that those who came first might be paid off, and sent home, before the arrival of the rest. This conduct evinced great forecast and wisdom, but was not seconded equally at Carthage. As the republic had been exhausted by the expense of a long war, and the payment of near one hundred and thirty thousand pounds to the Romans on signing the peace, the forces were not paid off in proportion as they arrived; but it was thought proper to wait for the rest, in the hopes of obtaining from them (when they should be all together) a remission of some part of their arrears. This was the first oversight.

[^816: Ibid. p. 66.]

Here we discover the genius of a state composed of merchants, who know the full value of money, but are little acquainted with that of the services of soldiers; who bargain for blood, as though it were an article of trade, and always go to the cheapest market. In such a republic, when an exigency is once answered, the merit of services is no longer remembered.

These soldiers, most of whom came to Carthage, having been long accustomed to a licentious life, caused great disturbances in the city; to remedy which, it was proposed to their officers, to march them all to a little neighbouring town called Sicca, and there supply them with whatever was necessary for their subsistence, till the arrival of the rest of their companions; and that then they should all be paid off, and sent home. This was a second oversight.

A third was, the refusing to let them leave their baggage, their wives, and children in Carthage, as they desired; and the forcing them to remove these to Sicca; whereas, had they staid in Carthage, they would have been in a manner so many hostages.

Being all met together at Sicca, they began (having little else to do) to compute the arrears of their pay, which they made amount to much more than was really due to them. To this computation, they added the mighty promises which had been made them, at different times, as an encouragement for them to do their duty; and pretended that these likewise ought to be brought into the account. Hanno, who was then governor of Africa, and had been sent to them from the magistrates of Carthage, proposed to them to consent to some abatement of their arrears; and to content themselves with receiving a part, in consideration of the great distress to which the commonwealth was reduced, and its present unhappy circumstances. The reader will easily guess how such a proposal was received. Complaints, murmurs, seditious and insolent clamours, were every where heard. These troops being composed of different nations, who were strangers to one another's language, were incapable of hearing reason when they once mutinied. Spaniards, Gauls, Ligurians; inhabitants of the Balearic isles; Greeks, the greatest part of them slaves or deserters, and a very great number of Africans, composed these mercenary forces. Transported with rage, they immediately break up, march towards Carthage, (being upwards of twenty thousand,) and encamp at Tunis, not far from that metropolis.

The Carthaginians discovered too late their error. There was no compliance, how grovelling soever, to which they did not stoop, to soothe these exasperated soldiers: who, on their side, practised every knavish art which could be thought of, in order to extort money from them. When one point was gained, they immediately had recourse to a new artifice, on which to ground some new demand. Was their pay settled beyond the agreement made with them, they still would be reimbursed for the losses which they pretended to have sustained, either by the death of their horses, by the excessive price which, at certain times, they had paid for bread-corn; and still insisted on the recompense which had been promised them. As nothing could be fixed, the Carthaginians, with great difficulty, prevailed on them to refer themselves to the opinion of some general who had commanded in Sicily. Accordingly they pitched upon Gisgo, who had always been very acceptable to them. This general harangued them in a mild and insinuating manner; recalled to their memories the long time they had been in the Carthaginian service; the considerable sums they had received from the republic; and granted almost all their demands.

The treaty was upon the point of being concluded, when two mutineers occasioned a tumult in every part of the camp. One of those was Spendius a Capuan, who had been a slave at Rome, and had fled to the Carthaginians. He was tall and bold. The fear he was under, of falling into the hands of his former master, by whom he was sure to be hanged, (as was the custom,) prompted him to break off the agreement. He was seconded by one Matho,[^817] who had been very active in forming the conspiracy. These two represented to the Africans, that the instant after their companions should be discharged and sent home, they, being thus left alone in their own country, would fall a sacrifice to the rage of the Carthaginians, who would take vengeance upon them for the common rebellion. This was sufficient to raise them to fury. They immediately made choice of Spendius and Matho for their chiefs. No remonstrances were heard; and whoever offered to make any, was immediately put to death. They ran to Gisgo's tent, plundered it of the money designed for the payment of the forces: dragged that general himself to prison, with all his attendants; after having treated them with the utmost indignities. All the cities of Africa, to whom they had sent deputies to exhort them to recover their liberty, came over to them, Utica and Hippacra excepted, which they therefore immediately besieged.

[^817: Matho was an African, and free born; but as he had been active in raising the rebellion, an accommodation would have ruined him. He, therefore, despairing of a pardon, embraced the interests of Spendius with more zeal than any of the rebels; and first insinuated to the Africans the danger of concluding a peace, as this would leave them alone, and exposed to the rage of their old masters. Polyb. p. 98. edit. Gronov.—Trans.]

Carthage had never been before exposed to such imminent danger. The citizens individually drew each his subsistence from the rents or revenues of their lands, and the public expenses from the tribute paid by Africa. But all this was stopped at once; and (a much worse circumstance) was turned against them. They found themselves destitute of arms and forces, either for sea or land; of all necessary preparations either for the sustaining of a siege, or the equipping of a fleet; and, to complete their misfortunes, without any hopes of foreign assistance, either from their friends or allies.

They might, in some sense, impute to themselves the distress to which they were reduced. During the last war, they had treated the African nations with the utmost rigour, by imposing excessive tributes on them, in the exaction of which no allowance was made for poverty and extreme misery; and governors, such as Hanno, were treated with the greater respect, the more severe they had been in levying those tributes. So that no great efforts were necessary to prevail upon the Africans to engage in this rebellion. At the very first signal that was made, it broke out, and in a moment became general. The women, who had often, with the deepest affliction, seen their husbands and fathers dragged to prison for non-payment, were more exasperated than the men; and with pleasure gave up all their ornaments towards the expenses of the war; so that the chiefs of the rebels, after paying all they had promised the soldiers, found themselves still in the midst of plenty: an instructive lesson, says Polybius, to ministers, how a people should be treated; as it teaches them to look, not only to the present occasion, but to extend their views to futurity.

The Carthaginians, notwithstanding their present distress, did not despond, but made the most extraordinary efforts. The command of the army was given to Hanno. Troops were levied by land and sea; horse as well as foot. All citizens, capable of bearing arms, were mustered; mercenaries were invited from all parts; and all the ships which the republic had left were refitted.

The rebels discovered no less ardour. We related before, that they had formed the siege of the two only cities which refused to join them. Their army was now increased to seventy thousand men. After detachments had been drawn from it to carry on those sieges, they pitched their camp at Tunis; and thereby held Carthage in a kind of blockade, filling it with perpetual alarms, and frequently advancing up to its very walls by day as well as by night.

Hanno had marched to the relief of Utica, and gained a considerable advantage, which, had he made a proper use of it, might have proved decisive: but entering the city, and only diverting himself there, the mercenaries, who had retreated to a neighbouring hill covered with trees, hearing how careless the enemy were, poured down upon them; found the soldiers straggling in all parts; took and plundered the camp, and seized upon all the supplies that had been brought from Carthage for the relief of the besieged. Nor was this the only error committed by Hanno; and errors, in such critical junctures, are much the most fatal. Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, was therefore appointed to succeed him. This general answered the idea which had been entertained of him; and his first success was the obliging the rebels to raise the siege of Utica. He then marched against their army which was encamped near Carthage; defeated part of it, and seized almost all their advantageous posts. These successes revived the courage of the Carthaginians.

The arrival of a young Numidian nobleman, Naravasus by name, who, out of esteem for the person and merit of Barca, joined him with two thousand Numidians, was of great service to that general. Animated by this reinforcement, he fell upon the rebels, who had cooped him up in a valley; killed ten thousand of them, and took four thousand prisoners. The young Numidian distinguished himself greatly in this battle. Barca took into his troops as many of the prisoners as were desirous of being enlisted, and gave the rest free liberty to go wherever they pleased, on condition that they should never take up arms any more against the Carthaginians; otherwise, that every man of them, if taken, should be put to death. This conduct proves the wisdom of that general. He thought this a better expedient than extreme severity. And indeed where a multitude of mutineers are concerned, the greatest part of whom have been drawn in by the persuasions of the most hotheaded, or through fear of the most furious, clemency seldom fails of being successful.

Spendius, the chief of the rebels, fearing that this affected lenity of Barca might occasion a defection among his troops, thought the only expedient left him to prevent it, would be, to strike some signal blow, which would deprive them of all hopes of being ever reconciled to the enemy. With this view, after having read to them some fictitious letters, by which advice was given him, of a secret design concerted betwixt some of their comrades and Gisgo for rescuing him out of prison, where he had been so long detained; he brought them to the barbarous resolution of murdering him and all the rest of the prisoners; and any man, who durst offer any milder counsel, was immediately sacrificed to their fury. Accordingly, this unfortunate general, and seven hundred prisoners who were confined with him, were brought out to the front of the camp, where Gisgo fell the first sacrifice, and afterwards all the rest. Their hands were cut off, their thighs broken, and their bodies, still breathing, were thrown into a hole. The Carthaginians sent a herald to demand their remains, in order to pay them the last sad office, but were refused; and the herald was further told, that whoever presumed to come upon the like errand, should meet with Gisgo's fate. And, indeed, the rebels immediately came to the unanimous resolution, of treating all such Carthaginians as should fall into their hands in the same barbarous manner; and decreed farther, that if any of their allies were taken, they should, after their hands were cut off, be sent back to Carthage. This bloody resolution was but too punctually executed.

The Carthaginians were now just beginning to breathe, as it were, and recover their spirits, when a number of unlucky accidents plunged them again into fresh dangers. A division arose among their generals; and the provisions, of which they were in extreme necessity, coming to them by sea, were all cast away in a storm. But the misfortune which they most keenly felt, was, the sudden defection of the two only cities which till then had preserved their allegiance, and in all times adhered inviolably to the commonwealth. These were Utica and Hippacra. These cities, without the least reason, or even so much as a pretence, went over at once to the rebels; and, transported with the like rage and fury, murdered the governor, with the garrison sent to their relief; and carried their inhumanity so far, as to refuse their dead bodies to the Carthaginians, who demanded them back in order for burial.

The rebels, animated by so much success, laid siege to Carthage, but were obliged immediately to raise it. They nevertheless continued the war. Having drawn together, into one body, all their own troops and those of the allies, (making upwards of fifty thousand men in all,) they watched the motions of Hamilcar's army, but carefully kept their own on the hills; and avoided coming down into the plains, because the enemy would there have had too great an advantage over them, on account of their elephants and cavalry. Hamilcar, more skilful in the art of war than they, never exposed himself to any of their attacks; but taking advantage of their oversights, often dispossessed them of their posts, if their soldiers straggled but ever so little; and harassed them a thousand ways. Such of them as fell into his hands, were thrown to wild beasts. At last, he surprised them at a time when they least expected it, and shut them up in a post which was so situated, that it was impossible for them to get out of it. Not daring to venture a battle, and being unable to get off, they began to fortify their camp, and surrounded it with ditches and intrenchments. But an enemy among themselves, and which was much more formidable, had reduced them to the greatest extremity: this was hunger, which was so raging, that they at last ate one another; Divine Providence, says Polybius, thus revenging upon themselves the barbarous cruelty they had exercised on others. They now had no resource left; and knew but too well the punishments which would be inflicted on them, in case they should fall alive into the hands of the enemy. After such bloody scenes as had been acted by them, they did not so much as think of peace, or of coming to an accommodation. They had sent to their forces encamped at Tunis for assistance, but with no success. In the mean time the famine increased daily. They had first eaten their prisoners, then their slaves; and now their fellow-citizens only were left. Their chiefs, now no longer able to resist the complaints and cries of the multitude, who threatened to massacre them if they did not surrender, went themselves to Hamilcar, after having obtained a safe conduct from him. The conditions of the treaty were, that the Carthaginians should select any ten of the rebels, to treat them as they should think fit, and that the rest should be dismissed with only one suit of clothes for each. When the treaty was signed, the chiefs themselves were arrested and detained by the Carthaginians, who plainly showed, on this occasion, that they did not pride themselves upon their good faith and sincerity. The rebels, hearing that their chiefs were seized, and knowing nothing of the convention, suspected that they were betrayed, and thereupon immediately took up arms. But Hamilcar, having surrounded them, brought forward his elephants; and either trod them all under foot, or cut them to pieces, they being upwards of forty thousand.

The consequence of this victory was, the reduction of almost all the cities of Africa, which immediately returned to their allegiance. Hamilcar, without loss of time, marched against Tunis, which, ever since the beginning of the war, had been the asylum of the rebels, and their place of arms. He invested it on one side, whilst Hannibal, who was joined in the command with him, besieged it on the other. Then advancing near the walls, and ordering crosses to be set up, he hung Spendius on one of them, and his companions who had been seized with him on the rest, where they all expired. Matho, the other chief, who commanded in the city, saw plainly by this what he himself might expect; and for that reason was much more attentive to his own defence. Perceiving that Hannibal, as being confident of success, was very negligent in all his motions, he made a sally, attacked his quarters, killed many of his men, took several prisoners, among whom was Hannibal himself, and plundered his camp. Then taking Spendius from the cross, he put Hannibal in his place, after having made him suffer inexpressible torments; and sacrificed round the body of Spendius thirty citizens of the first quality in Carthage, as so many victims of his vengeance. One would conclude, that there had been a mutual emulation betwixt the contending parties, which of them should outdo the other in acts of the most barbarous cruelty.

Barca being at that time at a distance, it was long before the news of his colleague's misfortune reached him; and besides, the road lying betwixt the two camps being impassable, it was impossible for him to advance hastily to his assistance. This disastrous accident caused a great consternation in Carthage. The reader may have observed, in the course of this war, a continual vicissitude of prosperity and adversity, of security and fear, of joy and grief; so various and inconstant were the events on either side.

In Carthage it was thought advisable to make one bold effort. Accordingly, all the youth capable of bearing arms were pressed into the service. Hanno was sent to join Hamilcar; and thirty senators were deputed to conjure those generals, in the name of the republic, to forget past quarrels, and sacrifice their resentments to their country's welfare. This was immediately complied with; they mutually embraced, and were reconciled sincerely to one another.

From this time, the Carthaginians were successful in all things; and Matho, who in every attempt after this came off with disadvantage, at last thought himself obliged to hazard a battle; and this was just what the Carthaginians wanted. The leaders on both sides animated their troops, as going to fight a battle which would for ever decide their fate. An engagement ensued. Victory was not long in suspense; for the rebels every where giving ground, the Africans were almost all slain, and the rest surrendered. Matho was taken alive and carried to Carthage. All Africa returned immediately to its allegiance, except the two perfidious cities which had lately revolted; however, they were soon forced to surrender at discretion.

And now the victorious army returned to Carthage, and was there received with shouts of joy, and the congratulations of the whole city. Matho and his soldiers, after having adorned the public triumph, were led to execution; and finished, by a painful and ignominious death, a life that had been polluted with the blackest treasons and unparalleled barbarities. Such was the conclusion of the war against the mercenaries, after having lasted three years and four months. It furnished, says Polybius, an ever-memorable lesson to all nations, not to employ in their armies a greater number of mercenaries than citizens; nor to rely, for the defence of their state, on a body of men who are not attached to it either by interest or affection.

I have hitherto purposely deferred taking notice of such transactions in Sardinia, as passed at the time I have been speaking of, and which were, in some measure, dependent on, and resulting from, the war waged in Africa against the mercenaries. They exhibit the same violent methods to promote rebellion; the same excesses of cruelty; as if the wind had carried the same spirit of discord and fury from Africa into Sardinia.

When the news was brought there of what Spendius and Matho were doing in Africa, the mercenaries in that island also shook off the yoke, in imitation of these incendiaries. They began by the murder of Bostar their general, and of all the Carthaginians under him. A successor was sent; but all the forces which he carried with him went over to the rebels; hung the general on a cross; and, throughout the whole island, put all the Carthaginians to the sword, after having made them suffer inexpressible torments. They then besieged all the cities one after another, and soon got possession of the whole country. But feuds arising between them and the natives, the mercenaries were driven entirely out of the island, and took refuge in Italy. Thus the Carthaginians lost Sardinia, an island of great importance to them, on account of its extent, its fertility, and the great number of its inhabitants.

The Romans, ever since their treaty with the Carthaginians, had behaved towards them with great justice and moderation. A slight quarrel, on account of some Roman merchants who were seized at Carthage for having supplied the enemy with provisions, had embroiled them a little. But these merchants being restored on the first complaint made to the senate of Carthage; the Romans, who prided themselves upon their justice and generosity on all occasions, made the Carthaginians a return of their former friendship; served them to the utmost of their power; forbade their merchants to furnish any other nation with provisions; and even refused to listen to the proposals made by the Sardinian rebels, when invited by them to take possession of the island.

But these scruples and delicacy wore off by degrees; and Cæsar's advantageous testimony (in Sallust) of their honesty and plain-dealing, could not with any propriety be applied here:[^818] “Although,” says he, “in all the Punic wars, the Carthaginians, both in peace and during truces, had committed a number of detestable actions, the Romans could never (how inviting soever the opportunity might be) be prevailed upon to retaliate such usage; being more attentive to their own glory, than to the revenge they might have justly taken on such perfidious enemies.”

[^818: Bellis Punicis omnibus, cum sæpe Carthaginenses et in pace et per inducias multa nefanda facinora fecissent, nunquam ipsi per occasionem talia fecere: magis quod se dignum foret, quàm quod in illos jure fieri posset, quærebant. Sallust. in Bell. Gatilin.—Trans.]

[^819] The mercenaries, who, as was observed, had retired into Italy, brought the Romans at last to the resolution of sailing over into Sardinia, to render themselves masters of it. The Carthaginians were deeply afflicted at the news, upon pretence that they had a more just title to Sardinia than the Romans; they therefore put themselves in a posture to take a speedy and just revenge on those who had excited the people of that island to take up arms against them. But the Romans, pretending that these preparations were made not against Sardinia but their state, declared war against the Carthaginians. The latter, quite exhausted in every respect, and scarce beginning to breathe, were in no condition to sustain a war. The necessity of the times was therefore to be complied with, and they were forced to yield to a more powerful rival. A fresh treaty was thereupon made, by which they gave up Sardinia to the Romans; and obliged themselves to a new payment of twelve hundred talents, to keep off the war with which they were menaced. This injustice of the Romans was the true cause of the second Punic war, as will appear in the sequel.

[^819: A.M. 3767. A. Carth. 609. A. Rom. 511. Ant. J.C. 237.]

The second Punic War.[^820]—The second Punic war, which I am now going to relate, is one of the most memorable recorded in history, and most worthy the attention of an inquisitive reader; whether we consider the boldness of the enterprises; the wisdom employed in the execution; the obstinate efforts of two rival nations, and the ready resources they found in their lowest ebb of fortune; the variety of uncommon events, and the uncertain issue of so long and bloody a war; or lastly, the assemblage of the most perfect models in every kind of merit; and the most instructive lessons that occur in history, either with regard to war, policy, or government. Never did two more powerful, or at least more warlike, states or nations make war against each other; and never had these in question seen themselves raised to a more exalted pitch of power and glory. Rome and Carthage were, doubtless, at that time, the two first states of the world. Having already tried their strength in the first Punic war, and thereby made an essay of each other's power, they knew perfectly well what either could do. In this second war, the fate of arms was so equally balanced, and the success so intermixed with vicissitudes and varieties, that that party triumphed which had been most in danger of being ruined. Great as the forces of these two nations were, it may almost be said, that their mutual hatred was still greater. The Romans, on one side, could not without indignation see the vanquished presuming to attack them; and the Carthaginians, on the other, were exasperated at the equally rapacious and harsh treatment which they pretended to have received from the victor.

[^820: Liv. l. xxi. n. 1.]

The plan which I have laid down does not permit me to enter into an exact detail of this war, whereof Italy, Sicily, Spain, and Africa, were the several seats; and which has a still closer connection with the Roman history than with that I am now writing. I shall confine myself therefore, principally, to such transactions as relate to the Carthaginians: and endeavour, as far as I am able, to give my reader an idea of the genius and character of Hannibal, who perhaps was the greatest warrior that antiquity has to boast of.

The remote and more immediate Causes of the second Punic War.—Before I come to speak of the declaration of war betwixt the Romans and Carthaginians, I think it necessary to explain the true causes of it; and to point out by what steps this rupture, betwixt these two nations, was so long preparing, before it openly broke out.

That man would be grossly mistaken, says Polybius,[^821] who should look upon the taking of Saguntum by Hannibal as the true cause of the second Punic war. The regret of the Carthaginians for having so tamely given up Sicily, by the treaty which terminated the first Punic war; the injustice and violence of the Romans, who took advantage of the troubles excited in Africa, to dispossess the Carthaginians of Sardinia, and to impose a new tribute on them; and the success and conquests of the latter in Spain; these were the true causes of the violation of the treaty, as Livy[^822] (agreeing here with Polybius) insinuates in few words, in the beginning of his history of the second Punic war.

[^821: Lib. iii. p. 162-168.]

[^822: Angebant ingentis spiritûs virum Sicilia Sardiniaque amissæ: Nam et Siciliam nimis celeri desperatione rerum concessam; et Sardiniam inter motum Africæ fraude Romanorum, stipendio etiam superimposito, interceptam. Liv. l. xxi. n. 1.—Trans.]

And indeed Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, was highly exasperated on account of the last treaty, which the necessity of the times had compelled the Carthaginians to submit to; and he therefore meditated the design of taking just, though distant measures, for breaking it on the first favourable opportunity that should offer.

When the troubles of Africa were appeased, he was sent upon an expedition against the Numidians;[^823] in which, giving fresh proofs of his courage and abilities, his merit raised him to the command of the army which was to act in Spain. Hannibal, his son, at that time but nine years of age, begged with the utmost importunity to attend him on this occasion;[^824] and for that purpose employed all the soothing arts so common to children of his age, and which have so much power over a tender father. Hamilcar could not refuse him; and after having made him swear upon the altars, that he would declare himself an enemy to the Romans as soon as age would allow him to do it, he took his son with him.

[^823: Polyb. l. ii. p. 90.]

[^824: Polyb. l. iii. p. 167. Liv. l. xxi. n. 1.]

Hamilcar possessed all the qualities which constitute the great general. To an invincible courage, and the most consummate prudence, he added a most engaging and insinuating behaviour. He subdued, in a very short time, the greatest part of the nations of Spain, either by the terror of his arms or his engaging conduct; and after enjoying the command there nine years, came to an end worthy his exalted character, dying gloriously in arms for the cause of his country.

[^825] The Carthaginians appointed Asdrubal, his son-in-law, to succeed him.[^826] This general, to strengthen his footing in the country, built a city, which, by the advantage of its situation, the commodiousness of its harbour, its fortifications, and opulence occasioned by its great commerce, became one of the most considerable cities in the world. It was called New Carthage, and is at this day known by the name of Carthagena.

[^825: A.M. 3776. A. Rom. 520.]

[^826: Polyb. l. ii. p. 101.]

From the several steps of these two great generals, it was easy to perceive that they were meditating some mighty design which they had always in view, and laid their schemes at a great distance for the putting it in execution. The Romans were sensible of this, and reproached themselves for their indolence and torpor, which had thrown them into a kind of lethargy; at a time that the enemy were rapidly pursuing their victories in Spain, which might one day be turned against them. They would have been very well pleased to attack them by open force, and to wrest their conquests out of their hands; but the fear of another (not less formidable) enemy, the Gauls, whom they expected shortly to see at their very gates, kept them from showing their resentment. They therefore had recourse to negotiations; and concluded a treaty with Asdrubal, in which, without taking any notice of the rest of Spain, they contented themselves with introducing an article, by which the Carthaginians were not allowed to make any conquests beyond the Iberus.

Asdrubal, in the mean time, still pushed on his conquests;[^827] still, however, taking care not to pass beyond the limits stipulated by the treaty; but by sparing no endeavours to win the chiefs of the several nations by a courteous and engaging behaviour, he furthered the interests of Carthage still more by persuasive methods than force of arms. But unhappily, after having governed Spain eight years, he was treacherously murdered by a Gaul, who took so barbarous a revenge for a private grudge he bore him.[^828]

[^827: Polyb. l. ii. p. 123. Liv. l. xxi. n. 2.]

[^828: The murder was an effect of the extraordinary fidelity of this Gaul, whose master had fallen by the hand of Asdrubal. It was perpetrated in public; and the murderer being seized by the guards, and put to the torture, expressed so strong a satisfaction in the thoughts of his having executed his revenge so successfully, that he seemed to ridicule all the terror of his torments. Eo fuit habitu oris, ut superante lætitià dolores, ridentis etiam speciem præbuerit. Liv. l. xxi. n. 1.—Trans.]

[^829] Three years before his death, he had written to Carthage, to desire that Hannibal, then twenty-two years of age, might be sent to him.[^830] The proposal met with some difficulty, as the senate was divided betwixt two powerful factions, which, from Hamilcar's time, had began to follow opposite views in the administration and affairs of the state. One faction was headed by Hanno, whose birth, merit, and zeal for the public welfare, gave him great influence in the public deliberations. This faction proposed, on every occasion, the concluding of a safe peace, and the preserving the conquests in Spain, as being preferable to the uncertain events of an expensive war, which they foresaw would one day occasion the ruin of Carthage. The other, called the Barcinian faction, because it supported the interests of Barca and his family, had, to the credit and influence which it had long enjoyed in the city, added the reputation which the signal exploits of Hamilcar and Asdrubal had given it; and declared openly for war. When therefore Asdrubal's demand came to be debated in the senate, Hanno represented the danger of sending so early into the field a young man, who already possessed all the haughtiness and imperious temper of his father; and who ought, therefore, rather to be kept a long time, and very carefully, under the eye of the magistrates and the power of the laws, that he might learn obedience, and a modesty which should teach him not to think himself superior to all other men. He concluded with saying, that he feared this spark, which was then kindling, would one day rise to a conflagration. His remonstrances were not heard, so that the Barcinian faction had the superiority, and Hannibal set out for Spain.

[^829: A.M. 3783. A. Rom. 530.]

[^830: Liv. l. xxi. n. 3, 4.]

The moment of his arrival there, he drew upon himself the eyes of the whole army, who fancied they saw Hamilcar his father revive in him. He seemed to dart the same fire from his eyes; the same martial vigour displayed itself in the air of his countenance, with the same features and engaging carriage. But his personal qualities endeared him still more. He possessed almost every talent that constitutes the great man. His patience in labour was invincible, his temperance was surprising, his courage in the greatest dangers intrepid, and his presence of mind in the heat of battle admirable; and, a still more wonderful circumstance, his disposition and cast of mind were so flexible, that nature had formed him equally for commanding or obeying; so that it was doubtful whether he was dearer to the soldiers or the generals. He served three campaigns under Asdrubal.

[^831] Upon the death of that general, the suffrages of both the army and people concurred in raising Hannibal to the supreme command.[^832] I know not whether it was not even then, or about that time, that the republic, to heighten his influence and authority, appointed him one of its Suffetes, the first dignity of the state, which was sometimes conferred upon generals. It is from Cornelius Nepos[^833] that we have borrowed this circumstance of his life, who, speaking of the prætorship bestowed on Hannibal, upon his return to Carthage, and the conclusion of the peace, says, that this was twenty-two years after he had been nominated king.[^834]

[^831: A.M. 3784. A. Carth. 626. A. Rom. 528.]

[^832: Polyb. l. iii. p. 168, 169. Liv. l. xxi. n. 3-5.]

[^833: In vit. Annib. c. 7.]

[^834: Hic, ut rediit, Prætor factus est, postquam rex fuerat anno secundo et vigesimo.—Trans.]

The moment he was created general, Hannibal, as if Italy had been allotted to him, and he had even then been appointed to make war upon the Romans, turned secretly his whole views on that side; and lost no time, for fear of being prevented by death, as his father and brother-in-law had been. In Spain he took several strong towns, and conquered many nations: and although the Spaniards greatly exceeded him in the number of forces, (their army amounting to upwards of a hundred thousand men,) yet he chose his time and posts so judiciously, that he entirely defeated them. After this victory, every thing submitted to his arms. But he still forbore laying siege to Saguntum,[^835] carefully avoiding every occasion of a rupture with the Romans, till he should have taken every step which he judged necessary for so important an enterprise, pursuant to the advice given him by his father. He applied himself particularly to engage the affections of the citizens and allies, and to gain their confidence, by generously allotting them a large share of the plunder taken from the enemy, and by scrupulously paying them all their arrears:[^836] a wise step, which never fails of producing its advantage at a proper season.

[^835: This city lay on the Carthaginian side of the Iberus, very near the mouth of that river, and in a country where the Carthaginians were allowed to make war, but Saguntum, as an ally of the Romans, was excepted from all hostilities, by virtue of the late treaty.—Trans.]

[^836: Ibi largè partiendo prædam, stipendia præterita cum fide exsolvendo, cunctos civium sociorumque animos in se firmavit. Liv. l xxi. n. 5.—Trans.]

The Saguntines, on their side, sensible of the danger with which they were threatened, informed the Romans of the progress of Hannibal's conquests.[^837] Upon this, deputies were nominated by the latter, and ordered to go and acquaint themselves with the state of affairs upon the spot; they commanded them also to lay their complaints before Hannibal, if it should be thought proper; and in case he should refuse to do justice, that then they should go directly to Carthage, and make the same complaints.

[^837: Polyb. l. iii. p. 170-173. Liv. l. xxi. n. 6-15.]

In the mean time Hannibal laid siege to Saguntum, foreseeing that great advantages would accrue from the taking of this city. He was persuaded, that this would deprive the Romans of all hopes of carrying on the war in Spain; that this new conquest would secure those he had already made; that as no enemy would be left behind him, his march would be more secure and unmolested; that he should find money enough in it for the execution of his designs; that the plunder of the city would inspire his soldiers with greater ardour, and make them follow him with greater cheerfulness; that, lastly, the spoils which he should send to Carthage, would gain him the favour of the citizens. Animated by these motives, he carried on the siege with the utmost vigour. He himself set an example to his troops, was present at all the works, and exposed himself to the greatest dangers.

News was soon carried to Rome that Saguntum was besieged. But the Romans, instead of flying to its relief, lost their time in fruitless debates, and in deputations equally fruitless. Hannibal sent word to the Roman deputies, that he was not at leisure to hear them; they therefore repaired to Carthage, but met with no better reception, the Barcinian faction having prevailed over the complaints of the Romans, and all the remonstrances of Hanno.

During all these voyages and negotiations, the siege was carried on with great vigour. The Saguntines were now reduced to the last extremity, and in want of all things. An accommodation was thereupon proposed; but the conditions on which it was offered appeared so harsh, that the Saguntines could not prevail upon themselves to accept them. Before they gave their final answer, the principal senators, bringing their gold and silver, and that of the public treasury, into the market-place, threw both into a fire lighted for that purpose, and afterwards rushed headlong into it themselves. At the same time, a tower, which had been long assaulted by the battering rams, falling with a dreadful noise, the Carthaginians entered the city by the breach, soon made themselves masters of it, and cut to pieces all the inhabitants who were of age to bear arms. But notwithstanding the fire, the Carthaginians got a very great booty. Hannibal did not reserve to himself any part of the spoils gained by his victories, but applied them solely to the carrying on his enterprises. Accordingly, Polybius remarks, that the taking of Saguntum was of service to him, as it awakened the ardour of his soldiers, by the sight of the rich booty which they had just obtained, and by the hopes of more; and it reconciled all the principal persons of Carthage to Hannibal, by the large presents he made to them out of the spoils.

Words could never express the grief and consternation with which the melancholy news of the capture and cruel fate of Saguntum was received at Rome.[^838] Compassion for this unfortunate city, shame for having failed to succour such faithful allies, a just indignation against the Carthaginians, the authors of all these calamities; a strong alarm raised by the successes of Hannibal, whom the Romans fancied they saw already at their gates; all these sentiments caused so violent an emotion, that during the first moments of their agitation, the Romans were unable to come to any resolution, or do any thing but give way to the torrent of their passion, and sacrifice floods of tears to the memory of a city which fell the victim of its inviolable fidelity[^839] to the Romans, and had been betrayed by their unaccountable indolence and imprudent delays. When they were a little recovered, an assembly of the people was called, and war was decreed unanimously against the Carthaginians.

[^838: Polyb. p. 174, 175. Liv. l. xxi. n. 16, 17.]

[^839: Sanctitate disciplinæ, quâ fidem socialem usque ad perniciem suam coluerunt. Liv. l. xxi. n. 7.—Trans.]

War proclaimed.—That no ceremony might be wanting, deputies were sent to Carthage, to inquire whether Saguntum had been besieged by order of the republic, and if so, to declare war; or, in case this siege had been undertaken solely by the authority of Hannibal, to require that he should be delivered up to the Romans.[^840] The deputies perceiving that the senate gave no direct answer to their demands, one of them taking up the folded lappet of his robe, “I bring here,” says he, in a haughty tone, “either peace or war; the choice is left to yourselves.” The senate answering, that they left the choice to him: “I give you war then,” says he, unfolding his robe. “And we,” replied the Carthaginians, with the same haughtiness, “as heartily accept it, and are resolved to prosecute it with the same cheerfulness.” Such was the beginning of the second Punic war.

[^840: Polyb. p. 187. Liv. l. xxi. n. 18, 19.]

If the cause of this war should be ascribed to the taking of Saguntum, the whole blame, says Polybius,[^841] lies upon the Carthaginians, who could not, with any colourable pretence, besiege a city that was in alliance with Rome, and, as such, comprehended in the treaty, which forbade either party to make war upon the allies of the other. But, should the origin of this war be traced higher, and carried back to the time when the Carthaginians were dispossessed of Sardinia by the Romans, and a new tribute was so unreasonably imposed on them; it must be confessed, continues Polybius, that the conduct of the Romans is entirely unjustifiable on these two points, as being founded merely on violence and injustice; and that, had the Carthaginians, without having recourse to ambiguous and frivolous pretences, plainly demanded satisfaction upon these two grievances, and, upon their being refused it, had declared war against Rome, in that case, reason and justice had been entirely on their side.

[^841: Polyb. l. iii. p. 184, 185.]

The interval between the conclusion of the first, and the beginning of the second Punic war, was twenty-four years.

[^842] The Beginning of the Second Punic War.—When war was resolved upon, and proclaimed on both sides, Hannibal, who then was twenty-six or twenty-seven years of age, before he discovered his grand design, thought it incumbent on him to provide for the security of Spain and Africa.[^843] With this view, he marched the forces out of the one into the other, so that the Africans served in Spain and the Spaniards in Africa. He was prompted to this from a persuasion, that these soldiers, being thus at a distance from their respective countries, would be fitter for service; and more firmly attached to him, as they would be a kind of hostages for each other's fidelity. The forces which he left in Africa amounted to about forty thousand men, twelve hundred whereof were cavalry. Those of Spain were something above fifteen thousand, of which two thousand five hundred and fifty were horse. He left the command of the Spanish forces to his brother Asdrubal, with a fleet of about sixty ships to guard the coasts; and, at the same time, gave him the wisest directions for his conduct, whether with regard to the Spaniards or the Romans, in case they should attack him.

[^842: A.M. 3787. A. Carth. 629. A. Rom. 531. Ant. J.C. 217.]

[^843: Polyb. l. iii. p. 187. Liv. l. xxi. n. 21, 22.]

Livy observes, that Hannibal, before he set forward on this expedition, went to Cadiz to discharge some vows which he had made to Hercules; and that he engaged himself by new ones, in order to obtain success in the war he was entering upon. Polybius gives us,[^844] in few words, a very clear idea of the distance of the several places through which Hannibal was to march in his way to Italy. From New Carthage, whence he set out to the Iberus, were computed two thousand two hundred furlongs.[^845][^846] From the Iberus to Emporium, a small maritime town, which separates Spain from the Gauls, according to Strabo,[^847] were sixteen hundred furlongs.[^848] From Emporium to the pass of the Rhone, the like space of sixteen hundred furlongs.[^849] From the pass of the Rhone to the Alps, fourteen hundred furlongs.[^850] From the Alps to the plains of Italy, twelve hundred furlongs.[^851] Thus from New Carthage to the plains of Italy, were eight thousand furlongs.[^852]

[^844: Lib. iii. p. 192, 193.]

[^845: 275 miles.]

[^846: Polybius makes the distance from New Carthage to be 2600 furlongs; consequently, the whole number of furlongs will be 8400, or (allowing 625 feet to the furlong) 944 English miles, and almost one-third. See Polybius, edit. Gronov. p. 267.—Trans.]

[^847: Lib. iii. p. 199.]

[^848: 200 miles.]

[^849: 200 miles.]

[^850: 175 miles.]

[^851: 150 miles.]

[^852: 1000 miles.]

Hannibal had long before taken the prudent precaution of acquainting himself with the nature and situation of the places through which he was to pass;[^853] of sounding how the Gauls stood affected to the Romans; of winning over their chiefs, whom he knew to be very greedy of gold, by his bounty to them;[^854] and of securing to himself the affection and fidelity of one part of the nations through whose country his march lay. He was not ignorant that the passage of the Alps would be attended with great difficulties; but he knew they were not unsurmountable, and that was enough for his purpose.

[^853: Polyb. l. iii. p. 188, 189.]

[^854: Audierunt præoccupatos jam ab Annibale Gallorum animos esse: sed ne illi quidem ipsi satis mitem gentem fore, ni subinde anro, cujus avidissima gens est, principum animi concilientur. Liv. l. xxi. n. 20.—Trans.]

Hannibal began his march early in the spring, from New Carthage, where he had wintered.[^855] His army then consisted of above a hundred thousand men, of which twelve thousand were cavalry, and he had near forty elephants. Having crossed the Iberus, he soon subdued the several nations which opposed him in his march; and lost a considerable part of his army in this expedition. He left Hanno to command all the country lying between the Iberus and the Pyrenean hills, with eleven thousand men, who were appointed to guard the baggage of those that were to follow him. He dismissed the like number, sending them back to their respective countries; thus securing to himself their affection when he should want recruits, and affording to the rest a sure hope that they should be allowed to return whenever they should desire it. He passed the Pyrenean hills, and advanced as far as the banks of the Rhone, at the head of fifty thousand foot, and nine thousand horse; a formidable army, but less so from the number than from the valour of the troops that composed it; troops who had served several years in Spain, and learned the art of war, under the ablest captains that Carthage could ever boast.

[^855: Polyb. p. 189, 190. Liv. l. xxi. n. 22-24.]

Passage of the Rhone.—Hannibal, being arrived within about four days' march from the mouth of the Rhone,[^856] attempted to cross it, because the river in this place took up only the breadth of its channel.[^857] He bought up all the ship-boats and little vessels he could meet with, of which the inhabitants had a great number, because of their commerce. He likewise built, with great diligence, a prodigious number of boats, little vessels, and rafts. On his arrival, he found the Gauls encamped on the opposite bank, and prepared to dispute the passage. There was no possibility of his attacking them in front. He therefore ordered a considerable detachment of his forces, under the command of Hanno, the son of Bomilcar, to pass the river higher up; and in order to conceal his march, and the design he had in view, from the enemy, he obliged them to set out in the night. All things succeeded as he had planned; and they passed the river[^858] the next day without the least opposition.

[^856: A little above Avignon.—Trans.]

[^857: Polyb. l. iii. p. 270-274. edit. Gronov. Liv. l. xxi. ii. 26-28.]

[^858: It is thought this was betwixt Roquemaure and Pont St. Esprit.—Trans.]

They passed the rest of the day in refreshing themselves, and in the night they advanced silently towards the enemy. In the morning, when the signals agreed upon had been given, Hannibal prepared to attempt the passage. Part of his horses, completely harnessed, were put into boats, that their riders might, on landing, immediately charge the enemy. The rest of the horses swam over on both sides of the boats, from which one single man held the bridles of three or four. The infantry crossed the river, either on rafts, or in small boats, and in a kind of gondolas, which were only the trunks of trees, which they themselves had made hollow. The great boats were drawn up in a line at the top of the channel, in order to break the force of the waves, and facilitate the passage to the rest of the small fleet. When the Gauls saw it advancing on the river, they, according to their custom, uttered dreadful cries and howlings; and clashing their bucklers over their heads, one against the other, let fly a shower of darts. But they were prodigiously astonished, when they heard a great noise behind them, perceived their tents on fire, and saw themselves attacked both in front and rear. They now had no way left to save themselves but by flight, and accordingly retreated to their respective villages. After this, the rest of the troops crossed the river quietly, and without any opposition.

The elephants alone occasioned a great deal of trouble. They were wafted over the next day in the following manner. From the bank of the river was thrown a raft, two hundred feet in length, and fifty in breadth; this was fixed strongly to the banks by large ropes, and quite covered over with earth; so that the elephants, deceived by its appearance, thought themselves upon firm ground. From this first raft they proceeded to a second, which was built in the same form, but only a hundred feet long, and fastened to the former by chains that were easily loosened. The female elephants were put upon the first raft, and the males followed after; and when they were got upon the second raft, it was loosened from the first, and, by the help of small boats, towed to the opposite shore. After this, it was sent back to fetch those which were behind. Some fell into the water, but they at last got safe to shore, and not a single elephant was drowned.

The March after the Battle of the Rhone.—The two Roman consuls had, in the beginning of the spring, set out for their respective provinces;[^859] P. Scipio for Spain with sixty ships, two Roman legions, fourteen thousand foot, and twelve hundred horse of the allies; Tiberius Sempronius for Sicily, with a hundred and sixty ships, two legions, sixteen thousand foot, and eighteen hundred horse of the allies. The Roman legion consisted, at that time, of four thousand foot and three hundred horse. Sempronius had made extraordinary preparations at Lilybæum, a seaport town in Sicily, with the design of crossing over directly into Africa. Scipio was equally confident that he should find Hannibal still in Spain, and make that country the seat of war. But he was greatly astonished, when, on his arrival at Marseilles, advice was brought him, that Hannibal was upon the banks of the Rhone, and preparing to cross it. He then detached three hundred horse, to view the posture of the enemy; and Hannibal detached five hundred Numidian horse for the same purpose; during which, some of his soldiers were employed in wafting over the elephants.

[^859: Polyb. l. iii. p. 200-202, &c. Liv. l. xxi. n. 31, 32.]

At the same time he gave audience, in the presence of his whole army, to one of the princes of that part of Gaul which is situated near the Po, who assured him, by an interpreter, in the name of his subjects, that his arrival was impatiently expected; that the Gauls were ready to join him, and march against the Romans, and he himself offered to conduct his army through places where they should meet with a plentiful supply of provisions. When the prince was withdrawn, Hannibal, in a speech to his troops, magnified extremely this deputation from the Gauls; extolled, with just praises, the bravery which his forces had shown hitherto; and exhorted them to sustain, to the last, their reputation and glory. The soldiers inspired with fresh ardour and courage, all at once raised their hands, and declared their readiness to follow whithersoever he should lead the way. Accordingly, he appointed the next day for his march; and, after offering up vows, and making supplications to the gods for the safety of his troops, he dismissed them; desiring, at the same time, that they would take the necessary refreshments.

Whilst this was doing, the Numidians returned. They had met with, and charged, the Roman detachment: the conflict was very obstinate, and the slaughter great, considering the small number of the combatants. A hundred and sixty of the Romans were left dead upon the spot, and more than two hundred of their enemies. But the honour of this skirmish fell to the Romans; the Numidians having retired and left them the field of battle. This first action was interpreted as an omen[^860] of the fate of the whole war, and seemed to promise success to the Romans, but which, at the same time, would be dearly bought, and strongly contested. On both sides, those who had survived this engagement, and who had been engaged in reconnoitring, returned to inform their respective generals of what they had discovered.

[^860: Hoc principium simulque omen belli, ut summâ rerum prosperum eventum, ita haud sanè incruentam ancipitisque certaminis victoriam Romanis portendit. Liv. l. xxi. n. 29.—Trans.]

Hannibal, as he had declared, decamped the next day, and crossed through the midst of Gaul, advancing northward; not that this was the shortest way to the Alps, but only, as by leading him from the sea, it prevented his meeting Scipio; and, by that means, favoured the design he had, of marching all his forces into Italy, without having weakened them by a battle.

Though Scipio marched with the utmost expedition, he did not reach the place where Hannibal had passed the Rhone, till three days after he had set out from it. Despairing therefore to overtake him, he returned to his fleet, and reimbarked, fully resolved to wait for Hannibal at the foot of the Alps. But, in order that he might not leave Spain defenceless, he sent his brother Cneius thither, with the greatest part of his army, to make head against Asdrubal; and himself set forward immediately for Genoa, with intention to oppose the army which was in Gaul, near the Po, to that of Hannibal.

The latter, after four days' march, arrived at a kind of island, formed by the conflux[^861] of two rivers, which unite their streams in this place. Here he was chosen umpire between two brothers, who disputed their right to the kingdom. He to whom Hannibal decreed it, furnished his whole army with provisions, clothes, and arms. This was the country of the Allobroges, by which name the people were called, who now inhabit the district of Geneva,[^862] Vienne, and Grenoble. His march was not much interrupted till he arrived at the Durance, and from thence he reached the foot of the Alps without any opposition.

[^861: The text of Polybius, as it has been transmitted to us, and that of Livy, place this island at the meeting of the Saone and the Rhone, that is, in that part where the city of Lyons stands. But this is a manifest error. It was Σκώρας in the Greek, instead of which ὁ Ἄραρος has been substituted. J. Gronovius says, that he had read, in a manuscript of Livy, Bisarar, which shows, that we are to read Isara Rhodanusque amnes, instead of Arar Rhodanusque; and, that the island in question is formed by the conflux of the Isere and the Rhone. The situation of the Allobroges, here spoken of, proves this evidently.—Trans.]

[^862: In Dauphiné.—Trans.]

The Passage of the Alps.—The sight of these mountains, whose tops seemed to touch the skies, and were covered with snow, and where nothing appeared to the eye but a few pitiful cottages, scattered here and there, on the sharp tops of inaccessible rocks; nothing but meagre flocks, almost perished with cold, and hairy men of a savage and fierce aspect; this spectacle, I say, renewed the terror which the distant prospect had raised, and chilled with fear the hearts of the soldiers.[^863] When they began to climb up, they perceived the mountaineers, who had seized upon the highest cliffs, and were prepared to oppose their passage. They therefore were forced to halt. Had the mountaineers, says Polybius, only lain in ambuscade, and after having suffered Hannibal's troops to entangle themselves in some difficult passage, had then charged them on a sudden, the Carthaginian army would have been irrecoverably lost. Hannibal, being informed that they kept those posts only in the daytime, and quitted them in the evening, possessed himself of them by night. The Gauls returning early in the morning, were very much surprised to find their posts in the enemy's hand: but still they were not disheartened. Being used to climb up those rocks, they attacked the Carthaginians who were upon their march, and harassed them on all sides. The latter were obliged, at one and the same time, to engage with the enemy, and struggle with the ruggedness of the paths of the mountains, where they could hardly stand. But the greatest disorder was caused by the horses and beasts of burden laden with the baggage; who being frighted by the cries and howling of the Gauls, which echoed dreadfully among the mountains, and being sometimes wounded by the mountaineers, came tumbling on the soldiers, and dragged them headlong with them down the precipices which skirted the road. Hannibal, being sensible that the loss of his baggage alone was enough to destroy his army, ran to the assistance of his troops, who were thus embarrassed; and having put the enemy to flight, continued his march without molestation or danger, and came to a castle, which was the most important fortress in the whole country. He possessed himself of it, and of all the neighbouring villages, in which he found a large quantity of corn, and cattle sufficient to subsist his army three days.

[^863: Polyb. l. iii. p. 203-208. Liv. l. xxi. n. 32-37.]

After a pretty quiet march, the Carthaginians were to encounter a new danger. The Gauls, feigning to take advantage of the misfortunes of their neighbours, who had suffered for opposing the passage of Hannibal's troops, came to pay their respects to that general, brought him provisions, offered to be his guides; and left him hostages, as pledges of their fidelity. However, Hannibal placed no great confidence in them. The elephants and horses marched in the front, whilst himself followed with the main body of his foot, keeping a vigilant eye over all. They came at length to a very narrow and rugged pass, which was commanded by an eminence where the Gauls had placed an ambuscade. These rushing out on a sudden, assailed the Carthaginians on every side, rolling down stones upon them of a prodigious size. The army would have been entirely routed, had not Hannibal exerted himself in an extraordinary manner to extricate them out of this difficulty.

At last, on the ninth day, they reached the summit of the Alps. Here the army halted two days, to rest and refresh themselves after their fatigue, after which they continued their march. As it was now autumn, a great quantity of snow had lately fallen, and covered all the roads, which caused a consternation among the troops, and disheartened them very much. Hannibal perceived it, and halting on a hill from whence there was a prospect of all Italy, he showed them the fruitful plains[^864] watered by the river Po, to which they were almost come; adding, that they had but one effort more to make, before they arrived at them. He represented to them, that a battle or two would put a glorious period to their toils, and enrich them for ever, by giving them possession of the capital of the Roman empire. This speech, filled with such pleasing hopes, and enforced by the sight of Italy, inspired the dejected soldiers with fresh vigour and alacrity. They therefore pursued their march. But still the road was more craggy and troublesome than ever; and as they were now on a descent, the difficulty and danger increased. For the ways were narrow, steep, and slippery, in most places; so that the soldiers could neither keep upon their feet as they marched, nor recover themselves when they made a false step, but stumbled, and beat down one another.

[^864: Of Piedmont.—Trans.]

They were now come to a worse place than any they had yet met with. This was a path naturally very rugged and craggy, which having been made more so by the late falling in of the earth, terminated in a frightful precipice above a thousand feet deep. Here the cavalry stopped short. Hannibal, wondering at this sudden halt, ran to the place, and saw that it really would be impossible for the troops to advance. He therefore was for making a circuitous route, but this also was found impracticable. As, upon the old snow, which was grown hard by lying, there was some newly fallen that was of no great depth, the feet, at first, by their sinking into it, found a firm support; but this snow being soon dissolved, by the treading of the foremost troops and beasts of burden, the soldiers marched on nothing but ice, which was so slippery, that they had no firm footing; and where, if they made the least false step, or endeavoured to save themselves with their hands or knees, there were no boughs or roots to catch hold of. Besides this difficulty, the horses, striking their feet forcibly into the ice to keep themselves from falling, could not draw them out again, but were caught as in a gin. They therefore were forced to seek some other expedient.

Hannibal resolved to pitch his camp, and to give his troops some days' rest on the summit of this hill, which was of a considerable extent; after they should have cleared the ground, and removed all the old as well as the new fallen snow, which was a work of immense labour. He afterwards ordered a path to be cut into the rock itself, and this was carried on with amazing patience and ardour. To open and enlarge this path, all the trees thereabouts were cut down, and piled round the rock; after which fire was set to them. The wind, by good fortune, blowing hard, a fierce flame soon broke out, so that the rock glowed like the very coals with which it was surrounded. Then Hannibal, if Livy may be credited, (for Polybius says nothing of this matter,) caused a great quantity of vinegar to be poured on the rock,[^865] which piercing into the veins of it, that were now cracked by the intense heat of the fire, calcined and softened it. In this manner, taking a large compass about, in order that the descent might be easier, they cut away along the rock, which opened a free passage to the forces, the baggage, and even to the elephants. Four days were employed in this work, during which the beasts of burden were dying with hunger; there being no food for them on these mountains buried under eternal snows. At last they came into cultivated and fruitful spots, which yielded plenty of forage for the horses, and all kinds of food for the soldiers.

[^865: Many reject this incident as fictitious. Pliny takes notice of a remarkable quality in vinegar; viz. its being able to break rocks and stones. Saxa rumpit infusum, quæ non ruperit ignis antecedens, l. xxiii. c. 1. He therefore calls it, Succus rerum domitor, l. xxxiii. c 2. Dion, speaking of the siege of Eleutheræ, says, that the walls of it were made to fall by the force of vinegar, l. xxxvi. p. 8. Probably, the circumstance that seems improbable on this occasion, is, the difficulty of Hannibal's procuring, in those mountains, a quantity of vinegar sufficient for this purpose.—Trans.]

Hannibal enters Italy.—When Hannibal entered into Italy, his army was not near so numerous as when he left Spain, where we have seen it amounted to near sixty thousand men.[^866] It had sustained great losses during the march, either in the battles it was forced to fight, or in the passage of rivers. At his departure from the Rhone, it still consisted of thirty-eight thousand foot, and above eight thousand horse. The march over the Alps destroyed near half this number; so that Hannibal had now remaining only twelve thousand Africans, eight thousand Spanish foot, and six thousand horse. This account he himself caused to be engraved on a pillar near the promontory called Lacinium. It was five months and a half since his first setting out from New Carthage, including the fortnight he employed in marching over the Alps, when he set up his standards in the plains of the Po, at the entrance of Piedmont. It might then be September.

[^866: Polyb. l. iii. p. 209 & 212-214. Liv. l. xxi. c. 39.]

His first care was to give his troops some rest, which they very much wanted. When he perceived that they were fit for action, the inhabitants of the territories of Turin[^867] refusing to conclude an alliance with him, he marched and encamped before their chief city; carried it in three days, and put all who had opposed him to the sword. This expedition struck the barbarians with so much dread, that they all came voluntarily, and surrendered at discretion. The rest of the Gauls would have done the same, had they not been awed by the terror of the Roman arms, which were now approaching. Hannibal thought therefore that he had no time to lose; that it was his interest to march up into the country, and attempt some great exploit; such as might inspire those who should have an inclination to join him with confidence.

[^867: Taurini.—Trans.]

The rapid progress which Hannibal had made, greatly alarmed Rome, and caused the utmost consternation throughout the city. Sempronius was ordered to leave Sicily, and hasten to the relief of his country; and P. Scipio, the other consul, advanced by forced marches towards the enemy, crossed the Po, and pitched his camp near the Ticinus.[^868]

[^868: A small river (now called Tesino) in Lombardy.—Trans.]

Battle of the Cavalry near the Ticinus.—The armies being now in sight, the generals on each side made a speech to their soldiers before they engaged.[^869] Scipio, after having represented to his forces the glory of their country, the achievements of their ancestors, observed to them, that victory was in their hands, since they were to combat only with Carthaginians, a people who had been so often defeated by them, as well as forced to be their tributaries for twenty years, and long accustomed to be almost their slaves: that the advantage they had gained over the flower of the Carthaginian horse, was a sure omen of their success during the rest of the war: that Hannibal, in his march over the Alps, had just before lost the best part of his army; and that those who survived were exhausted by hunger, cold, and fatigue: that the bare sight of the Romans was sufficient to put to flight a parcel of soldiers, who had the aspects of ghosts rather than of men: in a word, that victory was become necessary, not only to secure Italy, but to save Rome itself, whose fate the present battle would decide, as that city had no other army wherewith to oppose the enemy.

[^869: Polyb. l. iii. p. 214-218. Liv. l. xxi. n. 39-47.]

Hannibal, that his words might make the stronger impression on the rude minds of his soldiers, speaks to their eyes, before he addresses their ears; and does not attempt to persuade them by arguments, till he has first moved them by the following spectacle. He arms some of the prisoners whom he had taken in the mountains, and obliges them to fight, two and two, in sight of his army; promising to reward the conquerors with their liberty and rich presents. The alacrity wherewith these barbarians engaged upon these motives, gives Hannibal an occasion of exhibiting to his soldiers a lively image of their present condition; which, by depriving them of all means of returning back, puts them under an absolute necessity either of conquering or dying, in order to avoid the endless evils prepared for those that should be so base and cowardly as to submit to the Romans. He displays to them the greatness of their reward, viz. the conquest of all Italy; the plunder of the rich and wealthy city of Rome; an illustrious victory, and immortal glory. He speaks contemptibly of the Roman power, the false lustre of which (he observed) ought not to dazzle such warriors as themselves, who had marched from the pillars of Hercules, through the fiercest nations, into the very centre of Italy. As for his own part, he scorns to compare himself with Scipio, a general of but six months' standing: himself, who was almost born, at least brought up, in the tent of Hamilcar his father; the conqueror of Spain, of Gaul, of the inhabitants of the Alps, and what is still more, conqueror of the Alps themselves. He rouses their indignation against the insolence of the Romans, who had dared to demand that himself, and the rest who had taken Saguntum, should be delivered up to them; and excites their jealousy against the intolerable pride of those imperious masters, who imagined that all things ought to obey them, and that they had a right to give laws to the whole world.

After these speeches, both sides prepare for battle. Scipio, having thrown a bridge across the Ticinus, marched his troops over it. Two ill omens[^870] had filled his army with consternation and dread. As for the Carthaginians, they were inspired with the boldest courage. Hannibal animates them with fresh promises; and cleaving with a stone the skull of the lamb he was sacrificing, he prays Jupiter to dash to pieces his head in like manner, in case he did not give his soldiers the rewards he had promised them.

[^870: These two ill omens were, first, a wolf had stolen into the camp of the Romans, and cruelly mangled some of the soldiers, without receiving the least harm from those who endeavoured to kill it: and secondly, a swarm of bees had pitched upon a tree near the Prætorium or general's tent. Liv. l. xxi. c. 46.—Trans.]

Scipio posts, in the first line, the troops armed with missive weapons, and the Gaulish horse; and forming his second line of the flower of the confederate cavalry, he advances slowly. Hannibal advanced with his whole cavalry, in the centre of which he had posted the troopers who rid with bridles, and the Numidian horsemen on[^871] the wings, in order to surround the enemy. The officers and cavalry being eager to engage, a charge ensues. At the first onset, Scipio's light-armed soldiers had scarcely discharged their darts, when, frighted at the Carthaginian cavalry, which came pouring upon them, and fearing lest they should be trampled under the horses' feet, they gave way, and retired through the intervals of the squadrons. The fight continued a long time with equal success. Many troopers on both sides dismounted, so that the battle was carried on between infantry as well as cavalry. In the mean time, the Numidians surround the enemy, and charge the rear of the light-armed troops, who at first had escaped the attack of the cavalry, and tread them under their horses' feet. The centre of the Roman forces had hitherto fought with great bravery. Many were killed on both sides, and even more on that of the Carthaginians. But the Roman troops were put into disorder by the Numidians, who attacked them in the rear; and especially by a wound the consul received, which disabled him from continuing the combat. However, this general was rescued out of the enemy's hands by the bravery of his son, then but seventeen years old; and who afterwards was honoured with the surname of Africanus, for having put a glorious period to this war.

[^871: The Numidians used to ride without saddle or bridle.—Trans.]

The consul, though dangerously wounded, retreated in good order, and was conveyed to his camp by a body of horse, who covered him with their arms and bodies: the rest of the army followed him thither. He hastened to the Po, which he crossed with his army, and then broke down the bridge, whereby he prevented Hannibal from overtaking him.

It is agreed, that Hannibal owed this first victory to his cavalry; and it was judged from thenceforth that the main strength of his army consisted in his horse; and therefore, that it would be proper for the Romans to avoid large open plains, such as are those between the Po and the Alps.

Immediately after the battle of the Ticinus, all the neighbouring Gauls seemed to contend who should submit themselves first to Hannibal, furnish him with ammunition, and enlist in his army. And this, as Polybius has observed, was what chiefly induced that wise and skilful general, notwithstanding the small number and weakness of his troops, to hazard a battle; which he indeed was now obliged to venture, from the impossibility of marching back whenever he should desire to do it; because nothing but a battle would oblige the Gauls to declare for him, whose assistance was the only refuge he then had left.

Battle of the Trebia.—Sempronius the consul, upon the orders he had received from the senate, was returned from Sicily to Ariminum.[^872] From thence he marched towards the Trebia, a small river of Lombardy, which falls into the Po a little above Placentia, where he joined his forces to those of Scipio. Hannibal advanced towards the camp of the Romans, from which he was separated only by that small river. The armies lying so near one another, gave occasion to frequent skirmishes, in one of which Sempronius, at the head of a body of horse, gained some advantage over a party of Carthaginians, very trifling indeed, but which nevertheless very much increased the good opinion this general naturally entertained of his own merit.

[^872: Polyb. l. iii. p. 220-227. Liv. l. xxi. n. 51-56.]

This inconsiderable success seemed to him a complete victory. He boasted his having vanquished the enemy in the same kind of fight in which his colleague had been defeated, and that he thereby had revived the courage of the dejected Romans. Being now resolutely bent to come, as soon as possible, to a decisive battle, he thought it proper, for decency's sake, to consult Scipio, whom he found of a quite different opinion from himself. Scipio represented, that in case time should be allowed for disciplining the new levies during the winter, they would be much fitter for service in the ensuing campaign; that the Gauls, who were naturally fickle and inconstant, would disengage themselves insensibly from Hannibal; that as soon as his wounds should be healed, his presence might be of some use in an affair of such general concern: in a word, he besought him earnestly not to proceed any further.

These reasons, though so just, made no impression upon Sempronius. He saw himself at the head of sixteen thousand Romans, and twenty thousand allies, exclusive of cavalry, (a number which, in those ages, formed a complete army,) when both consuls joined their forces. The troops of the enemy amounted to near the same number. He thought the juncture extremely favourable for him. He declared publicly, that all the officers and soldiers were desirous of a battle, except his colleague, whose mind (he observed) being more affected by his wound than his body, could not, for that reason, bear to hear of an engagement. But still, continued Sempronius, is it just to let the whole army droop and languish with him? What could Scipio expect more? Did he flatter himself with the hopes that a third consul, and a new army, would come to his assistance? Such were the expressions he employed both among the soldiers, and even about Scipio's tent. The time for the election of new generals drawing near, Sempronius was afraid a successor would be sent before he had put an end to the war; and therefore it was his opinion, that he ought to take advantage of his colleague's illness, to secure the whole honour of the victory to himself. As he had no regard, says Polybius, to the time proper for action, and only to that which he thought suited his own interest, he could not fail of taking wrong measures. He therefore ordered his army to prepare for battle.

This was the very thing Hannibal desired; as he held it for a maxim, that a general who has entered a foreign country, or one possessed by the enemy, and has formed some great design, has no other refuge left, than continually to raise the expectations of his allies by some fresh exploits. Besides, knowing that he should have to deal only with new-levied and unexperienced troops, he was desirous of taking advantage of the ardour of the Gauls, who were extremely desirous of fighting; and of Scipio's absence, who, by reason of his wound, could not be present in the battle. Mago was therefore ordered to lie in ambush with two thousand men, consisting of horse and foot, on the steep banks of a small rivulet which ran between the two camps, and to conceal himself among the bushes that were very thick there. An ambuscade is often safer in a smooth open country, but full of thickets, as this was, than in woods, because such a spot is less apt to be suspected. He afterwards caused a detachment of Numidian cavalry to cross the Trebia with orders to advance at break of day as far as the very barriers of the enemy's camp, in order to provoke them to fight; and then to retreat and repass the river, in order to draw the Romans after them. What he had foreseen, came directly to pass. The fiery Sempronius immediately detached his whole cavalry against the Numidians, and then six thousand light-armed troops, who were soon followed by all the rest of the army. The Numidians fled designedly; upon which the Romans pursued them with great eagerness, and crossed the Trebia without resistance, but not without great difficulty, being forced to wade up to their very arm-pits through the rivulet, which was swoln with the torrents that had fallen in the night from the neighbouring mountains. It was then about the winter-solstice, that is, in December. It happened to snow that day, and the cold was excessively piercing. The Romans had left their camp fasting, and without having taken the least precaution; whereas the Carthaginians had, by Hannibal's order, eaten and drunk plentifully in their tents; had got their horses in readiness, rubbed themselves with oil, and put on their armour by the fire-side.

They were thus prepared when the fight began. The Romans defended themselves valiantly for a considerable time, though they were half spent with hunger, fatigue, and cold; but their cavalry was at last broken and put to flight by that of the Carthaginians, which much exceeded theirs in numbers and strength. The infantry also were soon in great disorder. The soldiers in ambuscade sallying out at a proper time, rushed on a sudden upon their rear, and completed the overthrow. A body of above ten thousand men resolutely fought their way through the Gauls and Africans, of whom they made a dreadful slaughter; but as they could neither assist their friends, nor return to the camp, the way to it being cut off by the Numidian horse, the river, and the rain, they retreated in good order to Placentia. Most of the rest lost their lives on the banks of the river, being trampled to pieces by the elephants and horses. Those who escaped, went and joined the body above mentioned. The next night Scipio retired also to Placentia. The Carthaginians gained a complete victory, and their loss was inconsiderable, except that a great number of their horses were destroyed by the cold, the rain, and the snow; and that, of all their elephants, they saved but one only.

In Spain, the Romans had better success in this and the following campaign;[^873] for Cn. Scipio extended his conquests as far as the river Iberus,[^874] defeated Hanno, and took him prisoner.

[^873: Polyb. l. iii. pp. 228, 229. Liv. l. xxi. n. 60, 61.]

[^874: Or Ebro.—Trans.]

Hannibal took the opportunity, whilst he was in winter quarters, to refresh his troops, and gain the affection of the natives.[^875] For this purpose, after having declared to the prisoners whom he had taken from the allies of the Romans, that he was not come with the view of making war upon them, but of restoring the Italians to their liberty, and protecting them against the Romans, he sent them all home to their own countries, without requiring the least ransom.

[^875: Polyb. p. 229.]

The winter was no sooner over, than he set out towards Tuscany,[^876] whither he hastened his march for two important reasons: first, to avoid the ill effects which would arise from the ill will of the Gauls, who were tired with the long stay of the Carthaginian army in their territories; and were impatient of bearing the whole burden of a war, in which they had engaged with no other view than to carry it into the country of their common enemy: secondly, that he might increase, by some bold exploit, the reputation of his arms in the minds of all the inhabitants of Italy, by carrying the war to the very gates of Rome; and at the same time reanimate his troops, and the Gauls his allies, by the plunder of the enemy's lands. But in his march over the Apennines, he was overtaken by a dreadful storm, which destroyed great numbers of his men. The cold, the rain, the wind and hail, seemed to conspire his ruin; so that the fatigues which the Carthaginians had undergone in crossing the Alps, seemed less dreadful than those they now suffered. He therefore marched back to Placentia, where he again fought Sempronius, who was returned from Rome. The loss on both sides was very nearly equal.

[^876: Liv. l. xxi. n. 58.]

Whilst Hannibal was in these winter quarters, he hit upon a true Carthaginian stratagem.[^877] He was surrounded with fickle and inconstant nations: the friendship he had contracted with them was but of recent date. He had reason to apprehend a change in their disposition, and, consequently, that attempts would be made upon his life. To secure himself, therefore, he got perukes made, and clothes suited to every age. Of these he sometimes wore one, sometimes another; and disguised himself so often, that not merely such as saw him only transiently, but even his intimate acquaintance, could scarce know him.

[^877: Polyb. l. iii. p. 229. Liv. l. xxii. n. 1. Appian. in Bell. Annib. p. 316.]

[^878] At Rome, Cn. Servilius and C. Flaminius had been appointed consuls.[^879] Hannibal having advice that the latter was advanced already as far as Arretium, a town of Tuscany, resolved to go and engage him as soon as possible. Two ways being shown him, he chose the shortest, though the most troublesome, nay, almost impassable, by reason of a fen which he was forced to go through. Here the army suffered incredible hardships. During four days and three nights they marched halfway up the leg in water, and, consequently, could not get a moment's sleep. Hannibal himself, who rode upon the only elephant he had left, could hardly get through. His long want of sleep, and the thick vapours which exhaled from that marshy place, together with the unhealthiness of the season, cost him one of his eyes.

[^878: A.M. 3788. A. Rom. 532.]

[^879: Polyb. pp. 230, 231. Liv. l. xxii. n. 2.]

Battle of Thrasymenus.[^880]—Hannibal being thus got, almost unexpectedly, out of this dangerous situation, and having refreshed his troops, marched and pitched his camp between Arretium and Fesulæ, in the richest and most fruitful part of Tuscany. His first endeavours were, to discover the disposition of Flaminius, in order that he might take advantage of his weak side, which, according to Polybius, ought to be the chief study of a general. He was told, that Flaminius was greatly conceited of his own merit, bold, enterprising, rash, and fond of glory. To plunge him the deeper into these excesses, to which he was naturally prone,[^881] he inflamed his impetuous spirit, by laying waste and burning the whole country in his sight.

[^880: Polyb. l. iii. p. 231-238. Liv. l. xxii. n. 3-8.]

[^881: Apparebat ferociter omnia ac præpioperè acturum. Quóque pronior esset in sua vitia, agitare eum atque irritare Pœnus parat. Liv. l. xxii. n. 3.—Trans.]

Flaminius was not of a temper to continue inactive in his camp, even if Hannibal had lain still. But when he saw the territories of his allies laid waste before his eyes, he thought it would reflect dishonour upon him, should he suffer Hannibal to ransack Italy without control, and even advance to the very walls of Rome without meeting any resistance. He rejected with scorn the prudent counsels of those who advised him to wait the arrival of his colleague, and to be satisfied, for the present, with putting a stop to the devastation of the enemy.

In the mean time, Hannibal was still advancing towards Rome, having Cortona on the left hand, and the lake Thrasymenus on his right. When he saw that the consul followed close after him, with design to give him battle, in order to stop him in his march; having observed that the ground was convenient for an engagement, he thought only of making preparations for it. The lake Thrasymenus and the mountains of Cortona form a very narrow defile, which leads into a large valley, lined on both sides with hills of a considerable height, and closed, at the outlet, by a steep hill of difficult access. On this hill, Hannibal, after having crossed the valley, came and encamped with the main body of his army; posting his light-armed infantry in ambuscade upon the hills on the right, and part of his cavalry behind those on the left, as far almost as the entrance of the defile, through which Flaminius was obliged to pass. Accordingly, this general, who followed him very eagerly with the resolution to fight him, being come to the defile near the lake, was forced to halt, because night was coming on; but he entered it the next morning at daybreak.

Hannibal having permitted him to advance, with all his forces, above half way through the valley, and seeing the Roman van-guard pretty near him, gave the signal for the battle, and commanded his troops to come out of their ambuscade, in order that he might attack the enemy at the same time from all quarters. The reader may guess at the consternation with which the Romans were seized.

They were not yet drawn up in order of battle, neither had they got their arms in readiness, when they found themselves attacked in front, in rear, and in flank. In a moment, all the ranks were put into disorder. Flaminius, alone undaunted in so universal a consternation, animates his soldiers both with his hand and voice, and exhorts them to cut themselves a passage with their swords through the midst of the enemy. But the tumult which reigned every where, the dreadful shouts of the enemy, and a fog that was risen, prevented his being seen or heard. However, when the Romans saw themselves surrounded on all sides, either by the enemy or the lake, the impossibility of saving their lives by flight roused their courage, and both parties began the fight with astonishing animosity. Their fury was so great, that not a soldier in either army perceived an earthquake which happened in that country, and buried whole cities in ruins. In this confusion, Flaminius being slain by one of the Insubrian Gauls, the Romans began to give ground, and at last fairly fled. Great numbers, endeavouring to save themselves, leaped into the lake; whilst others, directing their course towards the mountains, fell into the enemy's hands whom they strove to avoid. Six thousand only cut their way through the conquerors, and retreated to a place of safety; but the next day they were taken prisoners. In this battle fifteen thousand Romans were killed, and about ten thousand escaped to Rome by different roads. Hannibal sent back the Latins, who were allies of the Romans, into their own country, without demanding the least ransom. He commanded search to be made for the body of Flaminius, in order to give it burial; but it could not be found. He afterwards put his troops into quarters of refreshment, and solemnized the funerals of thirty of his chief officers who were killed in the battle. He lost in all but fifteen hundred men, most of whom were Gauls.

Immediately after, Hannibal despatched a courier to Carthage, with the news of his good success hitherto in Italy. This caused the greatest joy for the present, gave birth to the most promising hopes with regard to the future, and revived the courage of all the citizens. They now prepared, with incredible ardour, to send into Italy and Spain all necessary succours.

Rome, on the contrary, was filled with universal grief and alarm, as soon as the prætor had pronounced from the rostra the following words, “We have lost a great battle.” The senate, studious of nothing but the public welfare, thought that in so great a calamity and so imminent a danger, recourse must be had to extraordinary remedies. They therefore appointed Quintus Fabius dictator, a person as conspicuous for his wisdom as his birth. It was the custom at Rome, that the moment a dictator was nominated, all authority ceased, that of the tribunes of the people excepted. M. Minucius was appointed his general of horse. We are now in the second year of the war.

Hannibal's Conduct with respect to Fabius.[^882]—Hannibal, after the battle of Thrasymenus, not thinking it yet proper to march directly to Rome, contented himself, in the mean time, with laying waste the country. He crossed Umbria and Picenum; and after ten days' march, arrived in the territory of Adria.[^883] He got a very considerable booty in this march. Out of his implacable enmity to the Romans, he commanded, that all who were able to bear arms, should be put to the sword; and meeting no obstacle any where, he advanced as far as Apulia; plundering the countries which lay in his way, and carrying desolation wherever he came, in order to compel the nations to disengage themselves from their alliance with the Romans; and to show all Italy, that Rome itself, now quite dispirited, yielded him the victory.

[^882: Polyb. l. iii. p. 239-255. Liv. l. xxii. n. 9-30.]

[^883: A small town, which gave its name to the Adriatic sea.—Trans.]

Fabius, followed by Minucius and four legions, had marched from Rome in quest of the enemy, but with a firm resolution not to let him take the least advantage, nor to advance one step till he had first reconnoitred every place; nor hazard a battle till he should be sure of success.

As soon as both armies were in sight, Hannibal, to terrify the Roman forces, offered them battle, by advancing almost to the very entrenchments of their camp. But finding every thing quiet there, he retired; blaming, in appearance, the cowardice of the enemy, whom he upbraided with having at last lost that valour so natural to their ancestors; but fretted inwardly, to find he had to do with a general of so different a disposition from Sempronius and Flaminius; and that the Romans, instructed by their defeat, had at last made choice of a commander capable of opposing Hannibal.

From this moment he perceived that the dictator would not be formidable to him by the boldness of his attacks, but by the prudence and regularity of his conduct, which might perplex and embarrass him very much. The only circumstance he now wanted to know, was, whether the new general had firmness enough to pursue steadily the plan he seemed to have laid down. He endeavoured, therefore, to shake his resolution by the different movements which he made, by laying waste the lands, plundering the cities, and burning the villages and towns. He, at one time, would raise his camp with the utmost precipitation; and, at another, stop short in some valley out of the common route, to try whether he could not surprise him in the plain. However, Fabius still kept his troops on the hills, but without losing sight of Hannibal; never approaching near enough to come to an engagement; nor yet keeping at such a distance, as might give him an opportunity of escaping him. He never suffered his soldiers to stir out of the camp, except to forage, nor ever on those occasions without a numerous convoy. If ever he engaged, it was only in slight skirmishes, and so very cautiously, that his troops had always the advantage. By this conduct he revived, by insensible degrees, the courage of the soldiers, which the loss of three battles had entirely damped; and enabled them to rely, as they had formerly done, on their valour and good fortune.

Hannibal, having got an immense booty in Campania, where he had resided a considerable time, left that country, in order that he might not consume the provisions he had laid up, and which he reserved for the winter season. Besides, he could no longer continue in a country of gardens and vineyards, which were more agreeable to the eye than useful for the subsistence of an army; a country where he would have been forced to take up his winter quarters among marshes, rocks, and sands; while the Romans would have drawn plentiful supplies from Capua, and the richest parts of Italy. He therefore resolved to settle elsewhere.

Fabius naturally supposed, that Hannibal would be obliged to return the same way he came, and that he might easily annoy him during his march. He began by throwing a considerable body of troops into Casilinum, and thereby securing that small town, situated on the Vulturnus, which separated the territories of Falernum from those of Capua: he afterwards detached four thousand men, to seize the only pass through which Hannibal could come out; and then, according to his usual custom, posted himself with the remainder of the army on the hills adjoining to the road.

The Carthaginians arrive, and encamp in the plain at the foot of the mountains. And now the crafty Carthaginian falls into the same snare he had laid for Flaminius at the defile of Thrasymenus; and it seemed impossible for him ever to extricate himself out of this difficulty, there being but one outlet, of which the Romans were possessed. Fabius, fancying himself sure of his prey, was only contriving how to seize it. He flattered himself, and not without the appearance of probability, with the hopes of putting an end to the war by this single battle. Nevertheless, he thought fit to defer the attack till the next day.

Hannibal perceived, that his own artifices were now employed against him.[^884] It is in such junctures as these, that a general has need of unusual presence of mind and fortitude, to view danger in its utmost extent, without being dismayed; and to find out sure and instant expedients without deliberating. Immediately, the Carthaginian general caused two thousand oxen to be got together, and ordered small bundles of vine-branches to be tied to their horns. Towards the dead of night, having commanded the branches to be set on fire, he caused the oxen to be driven with violence to the top of the hills where the Romans were encamped. As soon as these creatures felt the flame, the pain rendering them furious, they flew up and down on all sides, and set fire to the shrubs and bushes they met in their way. This squadron, of a new kind, was sustained by a good number of light-armed soldiers, who had orders to seize upon the summit of the mountain, and to charge the enemy, in case they should meet them. All things happened as Hannibal had foreseen. The Romans who guarded the defile, seeing the fires spread over the hills which were above them, and imagining that it was Hannibal making his escape by torch-light, quit their post, and run up to the mountains to oppose his passage. The main body of the army not knowing what to think of all this tumult, and Fabius himself not daring to stir, while it was dark, for fear of a surprise, wait for the return of the day. Hannibal seizes this opportunity, marches his troops and the spoils through the defile, which was now unguarded, and rescues his army out of a snare in which, had Fabius been but a little more vigorous, it would either have been destroyed, or at least very much weakened. It is glorious for a man to turn his very errors to his advantage, and make them subservient to his reputation.

[^884: Nec Annibalem lefellit suis se artibus peti. Liv.—Trans.]

The Carthaginian army returned to Apulia, still pursued and harassed by the Romans. The dictator, being obliged to take a journey to Rome on account of some religious ceremonies, earnestly entreated his general of horse, before his departure, not to fight during his absence. However, Minucius did not regard either his advice or his entreaties; but the very first opportunity he had, whilst part of Hannibal's troops were foraging, he charged the rest, and gained some advantage. He immediately sent advice of this to Rome, as if he had obtained a considerable victory. The news of this, with what had just before happened at the passage of the defile, raised complaints and murmurs against the slow and timorous circumspection of Fabius. In a word, matters were carried so far, that the Roman people gave his general of horse an equal authority with him; a thing unheard-of before. The dictator was upon the road when he received advice of this: for he had left Rome, in order that he might not be an eye-witness of what was contriving against him. His constancy, however, was not shaken. He was very sensible, that though his authority in the command was divided, yet his skill in the art of war was not so.[^885] This soon became manifest.

[^885: Satis fidens haudquaquam cum imperii jure artem imperandi æquatam. Liv. l. xxii. n. 26.—Trans.]

Minucius, grown arrogant at the advantage he had gained over his colleague, proposed that each should command a day alternately, or even a longer time. But Fabius rejected this proposal, as it would have exposed the whole army to danger whilst under the command of Minucius. He therefore chose to divide the troops, in order that it might be in his power to preserve, at least, that part which should fall to his share.

Hannibal, fully informed of all that passed in the Roman camp, was overjoyed to hear of this dissension between the two commanders. He therefore laid a snare for the rash Minucius, who accordingly plunged headlong into it; and engaged the enemy on an eminence, in which an ambuscade was concealed. But his troops being soon put into disorder, were just upon the point of being cut to pieces, when Fabius, alarmed by the sudden outcries of the wounded, called aloud to his soldiers: “Let us hasten to the assistance of Minucius: let us fly and snatch the victory from the enemy, and extort from our fellow-citizens a confession of their fault.” This succour was very seasonable, and compelled Hannibal to sound a retreat. The latter, as he was retiring, said, “That the cloud which had been long hovering on the summit of the mountain, had at last burst with a loud crack, and caused a mighty storm.” So important and seasonable a service done by the dictator, opened the eyes of Minucius. He accordingly acknowledged his error, returned immediately to his duty and obedience, and showed, that it is sometimes more glorious to know how to atone for a fault, than not to have committed it.

The state of Affairs in Spain.[^886]—In the beginning of this campaign, Cn. Scipio, having suddenly attacked the Carthaginian fleet, commanded by Hamilcar, defeated it, and took twenty-five ships, with a great quantity of rich spoils. This victory made the Romans sensible, that they ought to be particularly attentive to the affairs of Spain, because Hannibal could draw considerable supplies both of men and money from that country. Accordingly, they sent a fleet thither, the command whereof was given to P. Scipio, who, after his arrival in Spain, having joined his brother, did the commonwealth very great service. Till that time the Romans had never ventured beyond the Ebro. They had been satisfied with having gained the friendship of the nations situated between that river and Italy, and confirming it by alliances: but under Publius, they crossed the Ebro, and carried their arms much further up into the country.

[^886: Polyb. l. iii. p. 245-250. Liv. l. xxii. n. 19-22.]

The circumstance which contributed most to promote their affairs, was, the treachery of a Spaniard in Saguntum. Hannibal had left there the children of the most distinguished families in Spain, whom he had taken as hostages. Abelox, for so this Spaniard was called, persuaded Bostar, the governor of the city, to send back these young men into their country, in order, by that means, to attach the inhabitants more firmly to the Carthaginian interest. He himself was charged with this commission. But he carried them to the Romans, who afterwards delivered them to their relations, and, by so acceptable a present, acquired their amity.

[^887] The Battle of Cannæ.[^888]—The next spring, C. Terentius Varro and L. Æmilius Paulus were chosen consuls at Rome. In this campaign, which was the third of the second Punic war, the Romans did what had never been practised before, that is, they composed the army of eight legions, each consisting of five thousand men, exclusive of the allies. For, as we have already observed, the Romans never raised but four legions, each of which consisted of about four thousand foot, and three hundred horse.[^889] They never, except on the most important occasions, made them consist of five thousand of the one, and four hundred of the other. As for the troops of the allies, their infantry was equal to that of the legions, but they had three times as many horse. Each of the consuls had commonly half the troops of the allies, with two legions, in order for them to act separately; and it was very seldom that all these forces were used at the same time, and in the same expedition. Here the Romans had not only four, but eight legions, so important did the affair appear to them. The senate even thought fit, that the two consuls of the foregoing year, Servilius and Attilius, should serve in the army as proconsuls; but the latter could not go into the field, by reason of his great age.

[^887: A.M. 3789. A. Rom. 533.]

[^888: Polyb. l. iii. p. 255-268. Liv. l. xxii. n. 34-54.]

[^889: Polybius supposes only two hundred horse in each legion: but J. Lipsius thinks that this is a mistake either of the author or transcriber.—Trans.]

Varro, at his setting out from Rome, had declared openly, that he would fall upon the enemy the very first opportunity, and put an end to the war; adding, that it would never be terminated, so long as men such as Fabius should be at the head of the Roman armies. An advantage which he gained over the Carthaginians, of whom near seventeen hundred were killed, greatly increased his boldness and arrogance. As for Hannibal, he considered this loss as a real advantage; being persuaded that it would serve as a bait to the consul's rashness, and prompt him on to a battles which he wanted extremely. It was afterwards known, that Hannibal was reduced to such a scarcity of provisions, that he could not possibly have subsisted ten days longer. The Spaniards were already meditating to leave him. So that there would have been an end of Hannibal and his army, if his good fortune had not thrown a Varro in in his way.

Both armies, having often removed from place to place, came in sight of each other near Cannæ, a little town in Apulia, situated on the river Aufidus. As Hannibal was encamped in a level open country, and his cavalry much superior to that of the Romans, Æmilius did not think proper to engage in such a place. He wished to draw the enemy into a spot, where the infantry might have the greatest share in the action. But his colleague, who was unexperienced, was of a contrary opinion. Such is the inconveniency of a divided command; jealousy, a disparity of tempers, or a diversity of views, seldom failing to create a dissension between the two generals.

The troops on each side were, for some time, contented with slight skirmishes. But, at last, one day, when Varro had the command, (for the two consuls took it by turns,) preparations were made on both sides for battle. Æmilius had not been consulted; yet, though he extremely disapproved the conduct of his colleague, as it was not in his power to prevent it, he seconded him to the utmost.

Hannibal, after having made his soldiers observe, that, being superior in cavalry, they could not possibly have pitched upon a better spot for fighting, had it been left to their choice: “Return, then,” says he, “thanks to the gods for having brought the enemy hither, that you may triumph over them; and thank me also, for having reduced the Romans to a necessity of coming to an engagement. After three great successive victories, is not the remembrance of your own actions sufficient to inspire you with courage? By the former battles, you are become masters of the open country; but this will put you in possession of all the cities, and, I presume to say it, of all the riches and power of the Romans. It is not words that we want, but action. I trust in the gods, that you shall soon see my promises verified.”

The two armies were very unequal in number. That of the Romans, including the allies, amounted to fourscore thousand foot, and a little above six thousand horse; and that of the Carthaginians consisted but of forty thousand foot, all well disciplined, and of ten thousand horse. Æmilius commanded the right wing of the Romans, Varro the left, and Servilius, one of the consuls of the last year, was posted in the centre. Hannibal, who had the art of turning every incident to advantage, had posted himself, so as that the wind Vulturnus,[^890] which rises at certain stated times, should blow directly in the faces of the Romans during the fight, and cover them with dust; then keeping the river Aufidus on his left, and posting his cavalry in the wings, he formed his main body of the Spanish and Gaulish infantry, which he posted in the centre, with half the African heavy-armed foot on their right, and half on their left, on the same line with the cavalry. His army being thus drawn up, he put himself at the head of the Spanish and Gaulish infantry; and having drawn them out of the line, advanced to give battle, rounding his front as he drew nearer the enemy; and extending his flanks in the shape of a half moon, in order that he might leave no interval between his main body and the rest of the line, which consisted of the heavy-armed infantry, who had not moved from their posts.

[^890: A violent burning wind, blowing south-south-east, which, in this flat and sandy country, raised clouds of hot dust, and blinded and choked the Romans.—Trans.]

The fight soon began, and the Roman legions that were in the wings, seeing their centre warmly attacked, advanced to charge the enemy in flank. Hannibal's main body, after a brave resistance, finding themselves furiously attacked on all sides, gave way, being overpowered by numbers; and retired through the interval they had left in the centre of the line. The Romans having pursued them thither with eager confusion, the two wings of the African infantry, which were fresh, well armed, and in good order, wheeled about on a sudden towards that void space in which the Romans, who were already fatigued, had thrown themselves in disorder; and attacked them vigorously on both sides, without allowing them time to recover themselves, or leaving them ground to draw up. In the mean time, the two wings of the cavalry, having defeated those of the Romans, which were much inferior to them, and having left in the pursuit of the broken and scattered squadrons, only as many forces as were necessary to keep them from rallying, advanced and charged the rear of the Roman infantry, which being surrounded at once on every side by the enemy's horse and foot was all cut to pieces, after having fought with unparalleled bravery. Æmilius being covered with the wounds he had received in the fight, was afterwards killed by a body of the enemy to whom he was not known; and with him two quæstors; one and twenty military tribunes; many who had been either consuls or prætors; Servilius, one of the last year's consuls; Minucius, the late general of horse to Fabius; and fourscore senators. Above seventy thousand men fell in this battle;[^891] and the Carthaginians, so great was their fury,[^892] did not give over the slaughter, till Hannibal, in the very heat of it, called out to them several times; “Stop, soldiers, spare the vanquished.” Ten thousand men, who had been left to guard the camp, surrendered themselves prisoners of war after the battle. Varro the consul retired to Venusia, with only seventy horse; and about four thousand men escaped into the neighbouring cities. Thus Hannibal remained master of the field, he being chiefly indebted for this, as well as for his former victories, to the superiority of his cavalry over that of the Romans. He lost four thousand Gauls, fifteen hundred Spaniards and Africans, and two hundred horse.

[^891: Livy lessens very much the number of the slain, making them amount but to about forty-three thousand. But Polybius ought rather to be believed.—Trans.]

[^892: Duo maximi exercitus cæsi ad hostium satietatem, donec Annibal diceret militi suo: Parce ferro. Flor. l. 1. c. 6.—Trans.]

Maharbal, one of the Carthaginian generals, advised Hannibal to march without loss of time directly to Rome, promising him, that within five days they should sup in the Capitol. Hannibal answering, that it was an affair which required mature deliberation; “I see,” replies Maharbal, “that the gods have not endowed the same man with all talents. You, Hannibal, know how to conquer, but not to make the best use of a victory.”[^893]

[^893: Tum Maharbal: Non omnia nimirum eidem Dii dedêre. Vincere scis, Annibal, victoriâ uti nescis. Liv. l. xxii. n. 51.—Trans.]

It is pretended that this delay saved Rome and the empire. Many authors, and among the rest Livy, charge Hannibal, on this occasion, as being guilty of a capital error. But others, more reserved, are not for condemning, without evident proofs, so renowned a general, who in the rest of his conduct was never wanting, either in prudence to make choice of the best expedients, or in readiness to put his designs in execution. They, besides, are inclined to judge favourably of him, from the authority, or at least the silence, of Polybius, who, speaking of the memorable consequences of this celebrated battle, says, that the Carthaginians were firmly persuaded, that they should possess themselves of Rome at the first assault; but then he does not mention how this could possibly have been effected, as that city was very populous, warlike, strongly fortified, and defended with a garrison of two legions; nor does he any where give the least hint that such a project was feasible, or that Hannibal did wrong in not attempting to put it in execution.

And indeed, if we examine matters more narrowly, we shall find, that according to the common maxims of war it could not be undertaken. It is certain, that Hannibal's whole infantry, before the battle, amounted but to forty thousand men; and, as six thousand of these had been slain in the action, and doubtless, many more wounded and disabled, there could remain but six or seven and twenty thousand foot fit for service; now this number was not sufficient to invest so large a city as Rome, which had a river running through it; nor to attack it in form, because they had neither engines, ammunition, nor any other things necessary for carrying on a siege. For want of these, Hannibal, even after his victory at Thrasymenus, miscarried in his attempt upon Spoletum;[^894] and soon after the battle of Cannæ, was forced to raise the siege of a little city,[^895] of no note, and of no great strength. It cannot be denied, but that had he miscarried on the present occasion, nothing less could have been expected but that he must have been irrecoverably lost. However, to form a just judgment of this matter, a man ought to be a soldier, and a soldier, perhaps, of those times. This is an old dispute, on which none but those who are perfectly well skilled in the art of war should pretend to give their opinion.

[^894: Liv. l. xxii. n. 9. Ibid. l. xxiii. n. 18.]

[^895: Casilinum.—Trans.]

Soon after the battle of Cannæ, Hannibal had despatched his brother Mago to Carthage, with the news of his victory, and at the same time to demand succours, in order that he might be enabled to put an end to the war.[^896] Mago, on his arrival, made, in full senate, a lofty speech, in which he extolled his brother's exploits, and displayed the great advantages he had gained over the Romans. And, to give a more lively idea of the greatness of the victory, by speaking in some measure to the eye, he poured out, in the middle of the senate, a bushel[^897] of gold rings, which had been taken from the fingers of such of the Roman nobility as had fallen in the battle of Cannæ. He concluded with demanding money, provisions, and fresh troops. All the spectators were struck with an extraordinary joy; upon which Imilcon, a great stickler for Hannibal, fancying he had now a fair opportunity to insult Hanno, the chief of the contrary faction, asked him, whether he was still dissatisfied with the war they were carrying on against the Romans, and was for having Hannibal delivered up to them? Hanno, without discovering the least emotion, replied, that he was still of the same mind; and that the victories of which they so much boasted (supposing them real) could not give him joy, but only in proportion as they should be made subservient to an advantageous peace: he then undertook to prove, that the mighty exploits, on which they insisted so much, were wholly chimerical and imaginary. “I have cut to pieces,” says he (continuing Mago's speech,) “the Roman armies: send me some troops.—What more could you ask had you been conquered? I have twice seized upon the enemy's camp, full (no doubt) of provisions of every kind.—Send me provisions and money.—Could you have talked otherwise had you lost your camp?” He then asked Mago, whether any of the Latin nations had come over to Hannibal, and whether the Romans had made him any proposals of peace? To this Mago answering in the negative: “I then perceive,” replied Hanno, “that we are no farther advanced, than when Hannibal first landed in Italy.” The inference he drew from hence was, that neither men nor money ought to be sent. But Hannibal's faction prevailing at that time, no regard was paid to Hanno's remonstrances, which were considered merely as the effect of prejudice and jealousy; and, accordingly, orders were given for levying, without delay, the supplies of men and money which Hannibal required. Mago set out immediately for Spain, to raise twenty-four thousand foot, and four thousand horse in that country; but these levies were afterwards stopped, and sent to another quarter; so eager was the contrary faction to oppose the designs of a general whom they utterly abhorred. While in Rome, a consul,[^898] who had fled, was thanked because he had not despaired of the commonwealth; at Carthage, people were almost angry with Hannibal, for being victorious. But Hanno could never forgive him the advantages he had gained in this war, because he had undertaken it in opposition to his counsel. Thus being more jealous for the honour of his own opinions than for the good of his country, and a greater enemy to the Carthaginian general than to the Romans, he did all that lay in his power to prevent future success, and to render of no avail that which had been already gained.

[^896: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 11-14.]

[^897: Pliny, l. xxxiii. c. 1, says, that there were three bushels sent to Carthage. Livy observes, that some authors make them amount to three bushels and a half; but he thinks it most probable that there was but one, l. xxxiii. n. 12. Florus, l. ii. c. 16, makes it two bushels.—Trans.]

[^898: De St. Evremond.]

Hannibal takes up his Winter Quarters in Capua.[^899]—The battle of Cannæ subjected the most powerful nations of Italy to Hannibal, drew over to his interest Græcia Magna,[^900] with the city of Tarentum; and thus wrested from the Romans their most ancient allies, among whom the Capuans held the first rank. This city, by the fertility of its soil, its advantageous situation, and the blessings of a long peace, had risen to great wealth and power. Luxury, and a fondness for pleasure, (the usual attendants on wealth,) had corrupted the minds of all its citizens, who, from their natural inclination, were but too much inclined to voluptuousness and excess.

[^899: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 4-18.]

[^900: Cæterùm quum Græci omnem ferè oram maritimam Coloniis suis, è Græciâ deductis, obsiderent, &c. But after the Greeks had, by their colonies, possessed themselves of almost all the maritime coast, this very country (together with Sicily) was called Græcia Magna, &c. Cluver. Geograph. l. iii. c. 30.—Trans.]

Hannibal[^901] made choice of this city for his winter quarters. Here it was that those soldiers, who had sustained the most grievous toils, and braved the most formidable dangers, were overthrown by abundance and a profusion of luxuries, into which they plunged with the greater eagerness, as they, till then, had been strangers to them. Their courage was so greatly enervated in this bewitching retirement, that all their after efforts were owing rather to the fame and splendour of their former victories than to their present strength. When Hannibal marched his forces out of the city, one would have taken them for other men, and the reverse of those who had so lately marched into it. Accustomed, during the winter season, to commodious lodgings, to ease and plenty, they were no longer able to bear hunger, thirst, long marches, watchings, and the other toils of war; not to mention that all obedience, all discipline, were entirely laid aside.

[^901: Ibi partem majorem hiemis exercitum in tectis habuit; adversùs omnia humana mala sæpe ac diu durantem, bonis inexpertum atque insuetum. Itaque quos nulla mali vicerat vis, perdidere nimia bona ac voluptates immodicæ, et eo impensiùs quo avidiùs ex insolentiâ ineas se merserant. Liv. l. xxiii. n. 18.—Trans.]

I only transcribe on this occasion from Livy. If we are to adopt his opinion on this subject, Hannibal's stay at Capua was a capital blemish in his conduct; and he pretends, that this general was guilty of an infinitely greater error, than when he neglected to march directly to Rome after the battle of Cannæ. For this delay,[^902] says Livy, might seem only to have retarded his victory; whereas this last misconduct rendered him absolutely incapable of ever defeating the enemy. In a word, as Marcellus observed judiciously afterwards, Capua was to the Carthaginians and their general, what Cannæ[^903] had been to the Romans. There their martial genius, their love of discipline, were lost: there their former fame, and their almost certain hopes of future glory, vanished at once. And, indeed, from thenceforth the affairs of Hannibal advanced to their decline by swift steps; fortune declared in favour of prudence, and victory seemed now reconciled to the Romans.

[^902: Illa enim cunctatio distulisse modò victoriam videri potuit, hic error vires ademisse ad vincendum. Liv. l. xxiii. n. 18.—Trans.]

[^903: Capuam Annibali Cannas fuisse: ibi virtutem bellicam, ibi militarem disciplinam, ibi præteriti temporis famam, ibi spem futuri extinctam. Liv. l. xxiii. n. 45.—Trans.]

I know not whether Livy has just ground to impute all these fatal consequences to the delicious abode of Capua. If we examine carefully all the circumstances of this history, we shall scarce be able to persuade ourselves, that the little progress which was afterwards made by the arms of Hannibal, ought to be ascribed to his wintering at Capua. It might, indeed, have been one cause, but a very inconsiderable one: and the bravery with which the forces of Hannibal afterwards defeated the armies of consuls and prætors; the towns they took even in sight of the Romans; their maintaining their conquests so vigorously, and staying fourteen years after this in Italy, in spite of the Romans: all these circumstances may induce us to believe, that Livy lays too great a stress on the delights of Capua.

The real cause of the decline of Hannibal's affairs, was owing to his want of necessary recruits and succours from Carthage. After Mago's speech, the Carthaginian senate had judged it necessary,[^904] in order for the carrying on the conquests in Italy, to send thither a considerable reinforcement of Numidian horse, forty elephants, and a thousand talents; and to hire, in Spain, twenty thousand foot, and four thousand horse, to reinforce their armies in Spain and Italy. Nevertheless, Mago could obtain an order but for twelve thousand foot, and two thousand five hundred horse:[^905] and even when he was just going to march to Italy with this reinforcement, so much inferior to that which had been promised him, he was countermanded and sent to Spain. So that Hannibal, after these mighty promises, had neither infantry, cavalry, elephants, nor money sent him; but was left to depend upon his own personal resources. His army was now reduced to twenty-six thousand foot, and nine thousand horse. How could it be possible for him, with so inconsiderable an army, to seize, in an enemy's country, on all the advantageous posts; to awe his new allies; to preserve his old conquests and form new ones; and to keep the field, with advantage, against two armies of the Romans which were recruited every year? This was the true cause of the declension of Hannibal's affairs, and of the ruin of those of Carthage. Was the part where Polybius treated this subject extant, we doubtless should find, that he lays a greater stress on this cause, than on the luxurious delights of Capua.

[^904: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 13.]

[^905: Ibid. n. 32.]

[^906] Transactions relating to Spain and Sardinia.[^907]—The two Scipios still continued in the command of Spain, and their arms were making a considerable progress there, when Asdrubal, who alone seemed able to cope with them, received orders from Carthage to march into Italy to the relief of his brother. Before he left Spain, he writ to the senate, to convince them of the absolute necessity of their sending a general in his stead, who was capable of making head against the Romans. Imilcon was therefore sent thither with an army; and Asdrubal set out upon his march with his, in order to go and join his brother. The news of his departure was no sooner known, than the greatest part of Spain was subjected by the Scipios. These two generals, animated by such signal success, resolved to prevent him, if possible, from leaving Spain. They considered the danger to which the Romans would be exposed, if, being scarce able to resist Hannibal alone, they should be attacked by the two brothers, at the head of two powerful armies. They therefore pursued Asdrubal, and, coming up with that general, forced him to fight against his inclination. Asdrubal was overcome; and, so far from being able to continue his march for Italy, he found that it would be impossible for him to continue with any safety in Spain.

[^906: A.M. 3790. A. Rom. 534.]

[^907: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 26-30. and n. 32, 40, 41.]

The Carthaginians had no better success in Sardinia. Designing to take advantage of some rebellions which they had fomented in that country, they lost twelve thousand men in a battle fought against the Romans, who took a still greater number of prisoners, among whom were Asdrubal, surnamed Calvus, Hanno, and Mago,[^908] who were distinguished by their birth as well as military exploits.

[^908: Not Hannibal's brother.—Trans.]

[^909] The ill Success of Hannibal. The Sieges of Capua and Rome.[^910]—From the time of Hannibal's abode in Capua, the Carthaginian affairs in Italy no longer supported their former reputation. M. Marcellus, first as prætor, and afterwards as consul, had contributed very much to this revolution. He harassed Hannibal's army on every occasion, seized upon his quarters, forced him to raise sieges, and even defeated him in several engagements; so that he was called the Sword of Rome, as Fabius had before been named its Buckler.

[^909: A.M. 3791. A. Rom. 535.]

[^910: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 41-46. l. xxv. n. 22. l. xxvi. n. 5-16.]

[^911] But what most affected the Carthaginian general, was, to see Capua besieged by the Romans. In order, therefore, to preserve his reputation among his allies, by a vigorous support of those who held the chief rank as such, he flew to the relief of that city, brought forward his forces, attacked the Romans, and fought several battles to oblige them to raise the siege.[^912] At last, seeing all his measures defeated, he marched hastily towards Rome, in order to make a powerful diversion. He was not without hope of being able, in case he could have an opportunity, in the first consternation, to storm some part of the city, of drawing the Roman generals with all their forces from the siege of Capua, to the relief of their capital; at least he flattered himself, that if, for the sake of continuing the siege, they should divide their forces, their weakness might then offer an occasion, either to the Capuans or himself, of engaging and defeating them. Rome was surprised, but not confounded. A proposal being made by one of the senators, to recall all the armies to succour Rome; Fabius[^913] declared, that it would be shameful in them to be terrified, and forced to change their measures upon every motion of Hannibal. They therefore contented themselves with only recalling part of the army, and one of the generals, Q. Fulvius the proconsul, from the siege. Hannibal, after making some devastations, drew up his army in order of battle before the city, and the consul did the same. Both sides were preparing to signalize themselves in a battle, of which Rome was to be the recompense, when a violent storm obliged them to separate. They were no sooner returned to their respective camps, than the face of the heavens grew calm and serene. The same incident happened frequently afterwards; insomuch that Hannibal, believing that there was something supernatural in the event, said, according to Livy, that sometimes[^914] his own will, and sometimes fortune, would not suffer him to take Rome.

[^911: A.M. 3793. A. Rom 537.]

[^912: A.M. 3794. A. Rom. 538.]

[^913: Flagitiosum esse terreri ac circumagi ad omnes Annibalis comminationes. Liv. l. xxvi. n. 8.—Trans.]

[^914: Audita vox Annibalis fertur, Potiundæ sibi urbis Romæ, modò mentem non dari, modò fortunam. Liv. l. xxvi. n. 11.—Trans.]

But the circumstance which most surprised and intimidated him, was the news, that, whilst he lay encamped at one of the gates of Rome, the Romans had sent out recruits for the army in Spain at another gate; and that the ground, whereon his camp was pitched, had been sold, notwithstanding that circumstance, for its full value. So barefaced a contempt stung Hannibal to the quick; he, therefore, on the other side, put up to auction the shops of the goldsmiths round the Forum. After this bravado he retired, and, in his march, plundered the rich temple of the goddess Feronia.[^915]

[^915: Feronia was the goddess of groves, and there was one, with a temple in it, dedicated to her, at the foot of the mountain Soracte. Strabo, speaking of the grove where the goddess was worshipped, says, that a sacrifice was offered annually to her in it; and that her votaries, inspired by this goddess, walked unhurt over burning coals. There are still extant some medals of Augustus, in which this goddess is represented with a crown on her head.—Trans.]

Capua, thus left to itself, held out but very little longer. After that such of its senators as had the chief hand in the revolt, and consequently could not expect any quarter from the Romans, had put themselves to a truly tragical death,[^916] the city surrendered at discretion. The success of this siege, which, by the happy consequences wherewith it was attended, proved decisive, and fully restored to the Romans their superiority over the Carthaginians; displayed, at the same time, how formidable the power of the Romans was,[^917] when they undertook to punish their perfidious allies; and the feeble protection which Hannibal could afford his friends at a time when they most wanted it.

[^916: Vilius Virius, the chief of this conspiracy, after having represented to the Capuan senate, the severe treatment which his country might expect from the Romans, prevailed with twenty-seven senators to go with him to his own house, where, after eating a plentiful dinner, and heating themselves with wine, they all drank poison. Then taking their last farewell, some withdrew to their own houses, others staid with Virius; and all expired before the gates were opened to the Romans. Liv. l. xxvi. n. 13, 14.—Trans.]

[^917: Confessio expressa hosti, quanta vis in Romanis ad expetendas pœnas ab infidelibus sociis, et quàm nihil in Annibale auxilii ad receptos in fidem tuendos esset. Liv. l. xxvi. n. 16.—Trans.]

[^918] The Defeat and Death of the two Scipios in Spain.[^919]—The face of affairs was very much changed in Spain. The Carthaginians had three armies in that country; one commanded by Asdrubal, the son of Gisgo; the second by Asdrubal, son of Hamilcar; and a third under Mago, who had joined the first Asdrubal. The two Scipios, Cneus and Publius, were for dividing their forces, and attacking the enemy separately, which was the cause of their ruin. They agreed that Cneus, with a small number of Romans, and thirty thousand Celtiberians, should march against Asdrubal, the son of Hamilcar; whilst Publius, with the remainder of the forces, composed of Romans and the Italian allies, should advance against the other two generals.

[^918: A.M. 3793. A. Rom. 537.]

[^919: Liv. xxv. n. 32-39.]

Publius was vanquished first. To the two leaders whom he had to oppose, Masinissa, elate with the victories he had lately gained over Syphax, joined himself; and was to be soon followed by Indibilis, a powerful Spanish prince. The armies came to an engagement. The Romans, being thus attacked on all sides at once, made a brave resistance as long as they had their general at their head; but the moment he fell, the few troops which had escaped the slaughter, secured themselves by flight.

The three victorious armies marched immediately in quest of Cneus, in order to put an end to the war by his defeat. He was already more than half vanquished by the desertion of his allies, who all forsook him; and left to the Roman generals this important instruction;[^920] viz. never to let their own forces be exceeded in number by those of foreigners. He guessed that his brother was slain, and his army defeated, upon seeing such great bodies of the enemy arrive. He survived him but a short time, being killed in the engagement. These two great men were equally lamented by their citizens and allies; and Spain deeply felt their loss, because of the justice and moderation of their conduct.

[^920: Id quidem cavendum semper Romanis ducibus erit, exemplaque hæc verè pro documentis habenda. Ne ita externis credant auxiliis, ut non plus sui roboris suarumque propriè virium in castris habeant. Liv. n. 33.—Trans.]

These extensive countries seemed now inevitably lost; but the valour of L. Marcius,[^921] a private officer of the equestrian order, preserved them to the Romans. Shortly after this, the younger Scipio was sent thither, who severely revenged the death of his father and uncle, and restored the affairs of the Romans in Spain to their former flourishing condition.

[^921: He attacked the Carthaginians, who had divided themselves into two camps, and were secure, as they thought, from any immediate attempt of the Romans; killed thirty-seven thousand of them; took one thousand eight hundred prisoners and brought off immense plunder. Liv. l. xxv. n. 39.—Trans.]

[^922] The Defeat and Death of Asdrubal.[^923]—One unforeseen defeat ruined all the measures, and blasted all the hopes of Hannibal with regard to Italy. The consuls of this year, which was the eleventh of the second Punic war, (for I pass over several events for brevity's sake,) were C. Claudius Nero, and M. Livius. The latter had, for his province, the Cisalpine Gaul, where he was to oppose Asdrubal, who, it was reported, was preparing to pass the Alps. The former commanded in the country of the Brutians, and in Lucania, that is, in the opposite extremity of Italy, and was there making head against Hannibal.

[^922: A.M. 3798. A. Rom. 542.]

[^923: Polyb. l. xi. p. 622-625. Liv. l. xxvii. p. 35-51.]

The passage of the Alps gave Asdrubal very little trouble, because his brother had cleared the way for him, and all the nations were disposed to receive him. Some time after this, he despatched couriers to Hannibal, but they were intercepted. Nero found by their letters, that Asdrubal was hastening to join his brother in Umbria. In a conjuncture of so important a nature as this, when the safety of Rome lay at stake, he thought himself at liberty to dispense with the established rules[^924] of his duty, for the welfare of his country. In consequence of this, it was his opinion, that such a bold and unexpected blow ought to be struck, as might be capable of striking terror into the enemy; by marching to join his colleague, in order that they might charge Asdrubal unexpectedly with their united forces. This design, if the several circumstances of it are thoroughly examined, should not be hastily charged with imprudence. To prevent the two brothers from joining their armies, was to save the state. Very little would be hazarded, even though Hannibal should be informed of the absence of the consul. From his army, which consisted of forty-two thousand men, he drew out but seven thousand for his own detachment, which indeed were the flower of his troops, but, at the same time, a very inconsiderable part of them. The rest remained in the camp, which was advantageously situated, and strongly fortified. Now could it be supposed that Hannibal would attack, and force a strong camp defended by thirty-five thousand men?

[^924: No general was allowed to leave his own province, to go into that of another.—Trans.]

Nero set out without giving his soldiers the least notice of his design. When he had advanced so far, as that it might be communicated without any danger, he told them, that he was leading them to certain victory: that, in war, all things depended upon reputation; that the bare rumour of their arrival would disconcert all the measures of the Carthaginians; and that the whole honour of this battle would fall to them.

They marched with extraordinary diligence, and joined the other consul in the night, but did not pitch separate camps, the better to impose upon the enemy. The troops which were newly arrived joined those of Livius. The army of Porcius the prætor was encamped near that of the consul, and in the morning a council of war was held. Livius was of opinion, that it would be better to allow the troops some days to refresh themselves; but Nero besought him not to ruin, by delay, an enterprise to which despatch only could give success; and to take advantage of the error of the enemy, as well absent as present. This advice was complied with, and accordingly the signal for battle was given. Asdrubal, advancing to his foremost ranks, discovered, by several circumstances, that fresh troops were arrived; and he did not doubt but that they belonged to the other consul. This made him conjecture, that his brother had sustained a considerable loss, and, at the same time, fear, that he was come too late to his assistance.

After making these reflections, he caused a retreat to be sounded, and his army began to march in great disorder. Night overtaking him, and his guides deserting, he was uncertain what way to go. He marched at random, along the banks of the river Metaurus,[^925] and was preparing to cross it, when the three armies of the enemy came up with him. In this extremity, he saw it would be impossible for him to avoid coming to an engagement; and therefore did every thing which could be expected from the presence of mind and valour of a great captain. He seized an advantageous post, and drew up his forces on a narrow spot, which gave him an opportunity of posting his left wing (the weakest part of his army) in such a manner, that it could neither be attacked in front, nor charged in flank; and of giving to his main battle and right wing a greater depth than front. After this hasty disposition of his forces, he posted himself in the centre, and was the first to march to attack the enemy's left wing; well knowing that all was at stake, and that he must either conquer or die. The battle lasted a long time, and was obstinately disputed by both parties. Asdrubal, especially, signalized himself in this engagement, and added new glory to that he had already acquired by a series of shining actions. He led on his soldiers, trembling and quite dispirited, against an enemy superior to them both in numbers and resolution. He animated them by his words, supported them by his example, and, with entreaties and menaces, endeavoured to bring back those who fled; till, at last, seeing that victory declared for the Romans, and being unable to survive the loss of so many thousand men, who had quitted their country to follow his fortune, he rushed at once into the midst of a Roman cohort, and there died in a manner worthy the son of Hamilcar, and the brother of Hannibal.

[^925: Now called Metaro.—Trans.]

This was the most bloody battle the Carthaginians had fought during this war: and, whether we consider the death of the general, or the slaughter made of the Carthaginian forces, it may be looked upon as a reprisal for the battle of Cannæ. The Carthaginians lost fifty-five thousand men,[^926] and six thousand were taken prisoners. The Romans lost eight thousand. These were so weary of killing, that some person telling Livius, that he might very easily cut to pieces a body of the enemy who were flying: “It is fit,” says he, “that some should survive, in order that they may carry the news of this defeat to the Carthaginians.”

[^926: According to Polybius, the loss amounted but to ten thousand men, and that of the Romans to two thousand, l. xi. p. 870, edit. Gronov.—Trans.]

Nero set out upon his march, on the very night which followed the engagement. Through every place where he passed, in his return, shouts of joy and loud acclamations welcomed him, instead of those fears and uneasiness which his coming had occasioned. He arrived in his camp the sixth day. Asdrubal's head being thrown into the camp of the Carthaginians, informed Hannibal of his brother's unhappy fate. Hannibal perceived, by this cruel stroke, the fortune of Carthage: “All is over,” says he,[^927] “I shall no longer send triumphant messages to Carthage. In losing Asdrubal, I have lost at once all my hope, all my good fortune.” He afterwards retired to the extremities of the country of the Brutians, where he assembled all his forces, who found it a very difficult matter to subsist there, as no provisions were sent them from Carthage.

[^927: Horace makes him speak thus, in the beautiful ode where this defeat is described:

Carthagini jam non ego nuntios Mittara superbos. Occidit, occidit Spes omnis, et fortuna nostri Nominis, Asdrubale interempto. Lib. iv. Od. 4.—Trans.]

[^928] Scipio conquers all Spain. Is appointed Consul, and sails into Africa. Hannibal is recalled.[^929]—The fate of arms was not more propitious to the Carthaginians in Spain. The prudent vivacity of young Scipio had restored the Roman affairs in that country to their former flourishing state, as the courageous slowness of Fabius had before done in Italy. The three Carthaginian generals in Spain, Asdrubal son of Gisco, Hanno, and Mago, having been defeated with their numerous armies by the Romans in several engagements, Scipio at last possessed himself of Spain, and subjected it entirely to the Roman power. It was at this time that Masinissa, a very powerful African prince, went over to the Romans, and Syphax, on the contrary, to the Carthaginians.

[^928: A.M. 3799. A. Rom. 543.]

[^929: Polyb. l. xi. p. 650. & l. xiv. p. 677-687. & l. xv. p. 689-694. Liv. l. xxviii. n. 1-4. 16. 38. 40-46. l. xxix. n. 24-36. l. xxx. n. 20-28.]

[^930] Scipio, at his return to Rome, was declared consul, being then thirty years of age. He had P. Licinius Crassus for his colleague. Sicily was allotted to Scipio, with permission for him to cross into Africa, if he found it convenient. He set out with all imaginable expedition for his province; whilst his colleague was to command in the country whither Hannibal was retired.

[^930: A.M. 3800. A. Rom. 544.]

The taking of New Carthage, where Scipio had displayed all the prudence, the courage, and capacity which could have been expected from the greatest generals, and the conquest of all Spain, were more than sufficient to immortalize his name: but he had considered these only as so many steps by which he was to climb to a nobler enterprise: this was the conquest of Africa. Accordingly, he crossed over thither, and made it the seat of the war.

The devastation of the country, the siege of Utica, one of the strongest cities of Africa; the entire defeat of the two armies under Syphax and Asdrubal, whose camp was burnt by Scipio; and afterwards the taking Syphax himself prisoner, who was the most powerful resource the Carthaginians had left; all these things forced them at last to turn their thoughts to peace. For this purpose they deputed thirty of their principal senators, who were selected from that powerful body at Carthage, called the council of the hundred. Being introduced into the Roman general's tent, they all threw themselves prostrate on the earth, (such was the custom of their country,) spoke to him in terms of great submission, accusing Hannibal as the author of all their calamities, and promising, in the name of the senate, an implicit obedience to whatever the Romans should please to ordain. Scipio answered, that though he was come into Africa not for peace, but conquest, he would however grant them a peace, upon condition that they should deliver up all the prisoners and deserters to the Romans; that they should recall their armies out of Italy and Gaul; should never set foot again in Spain; should retire out of all the islands between Italy and Africa; should deliver up all their ships, twenty excepted, to the victor; should give to the Romans five hundred thousand bushels of wheat, three hundred thousand of barley, and pay fifteen thousand talents: that in case they were pleased with these conditions, they then, he said, might send ambassadors to the senate. The Carthaginians feigned a compliance, but this was only to gain time, till Hannibal should be returned. A truce was then granted to the Carthaginians, who immediately sent deputies to Rome, and at the same time an express to Hannibal, to order his return into Africa.

[^931] He was then, as was observed before, in the extremity of Italy. Here he received the orders from Carthage, which he could not listen to without groans, and almost shedding tears; and was exasperated almost to madness, to see himself thus forced to quit his prey. Never banished man[^932] showed so much regret at leaving his native country, as Hannibal did in going out of that of an enemy. He often turned his eyes wishfully to Italy, accusing gods and men of his misfortunes, and calling down a thousand curses, says[^933] Livy, upon himself, for not having marched his soldiers directly to Rome, after the battle of Cannæ, whilst they were still reeking with the blood of its citizens.

[^931: A.M. 3802. A. Rom. 516.]

[^932: Rarò quenquam alium patriam exilii causâ relinquentem magis mœstum abiisse ferunt, quàm Annibalem hostium terrà excedentem. Respexisse sæpe Italiæ littora, et deos hominesque accusantem, in se quoque ac suum ipsius caput execratum. Quòd non cruentum ab Cannensi victorià militem Romam duxisset. Liv. l. xxx. n. 20.—Trans.]

[^933: Livy supposes, however, that this delay was a capital error in Hannibal, which he himself afterwards regretted.—Trans.]

At Rome, the senate, greatly dissatisfied with the excuses made by the Carthaginian deputies, in justification of their republic, and the ridiculous offer which they made, in its name, of adhering to the treaty of Lutatius; thought proper to refer the decision of the whole to Scipio, who, being on the spot, could best judge what conditions the welfare of the state required.

About the same time, Octavius the prætor sailing from Sicily into Africa with two hundred vessels of burden, was attacked near Carthage by a furious storm, which dispersed all his fleet. The citizens, not bearing to see so rich a prey escape them, demanded importunately that the Carthaginian fleet might sail out and seize it. The senate, after a faint resistance, complied. Asdrubal, sailing out of the harbour, seized the greatest part of the Roman ships, and brought them to Carthage, although the truce was still subsisting.

Scipio sent deputies to the Carthaginian senate, to complain of this, but they were little regarded. Hannibal's approach had revived their courage, and filled them with great hopes. The deputies were even in great danger of being ill treated by the populace. They therefore demanded a convoy, which was granted, and accordingly two ships of the republic attended them. But the magistrates, who were absolutely against peace, and determined to renew the war, gave private orders to Asdrubal, (who was with the fleet near Utica,) to attack the Roman galley when it should arrive in the river Bagrada near the Roman camp, where the convoy was ordered to leave them. He obeyed the order, and sent out two galleys against the ambassadors, who nevertheless made their escape, but with difficulty and danger.

This was a fresh subject for a war between the two nations, who now were more animated, or rather more exasperated, one against the other, than ever: the Romans, from a desire of taking vengeance for so black a perfidy; and the Carthaginians, from a persuasion that they were not now to expect a peace.

At the same time, Lælius and Fulvius, who carried the full powers with which the senate and people of Rome had invested Scipio, arrived in the camp, accompanied by the deputies of Carthage. As the Carthaginians had not only infringed the truce, but violated the law of nations, in the person of the Roman ambassadors, it might naturally be expected that they should order the Carthaginian deputies to be seized by way of reprisal. However, Scipio,[^934] more attentive to what was required by the Roman generosity, than by the perfidy of the Carthaginians, in order not to deviate from the principles and maxims of his own countrymen, nor his own character, dismissed the deputies, without offering them the least injury. So astonishing an instance of moderation, and at such a juncture, terrified the Carthaginians, and even put them to the blush; and made Hannibal himself entertain a still higher idea of a general, who, to the dishonourable practices of his enemies, opposed only a rectitude and greatness of soul, that was still more worthy of admiration than all his military virtues.

[^934: Ἐσκοπεῖτο παρ᾽ αὐτῷ συλλογιζόμενος, οὐχ οὕτω τί δέον παθεῖν Καρχηδονίους, ὡς τί δέον ἦν πράξει Ῥωμαίους. Polyb. l. xv. p. 965. edit. Gronov.

Quibus Scipio. Etsi nou induciarum modò fides, sed etiam jus gentium in legatis violatum esset; tamen se nihil nec institutis populi Romani nec suis moribus indignum in iis facturum esse. Liv. l. xxx. n. 25.—Trans.]

In the mean time, Hannibal, being strongly importuned by his fellow-citizens, advanced forward into the country; and arriving at Zama, which is five days' march from Carthage, he there pitched his camp. He thence sent out spies to observe the position of the Romans. Scipio having seized these, so far from punishing them, only commanded them to be led about the Roman camp, in order that they might take an exact survey of it, and then sent them back to Hannibal. The latter knew very well whence so noble an assurance flowed. After the strange reverses he had met with, he no longer expected that fortune would again be propitious. Whilst every one was exciting him to give battle, himself only meditated a peace. He flattered himself that the conditions of it would be more honourable, as he was at the head of an army, and as the fate of arms might still appear uncertain. He, therefore, sent to desire an interview with Scipio, which accordingly was agreed to, and the time and place fixed.

[^935] The Interview between Hannibal and Scipio in Africa, followed by a Battle.[^936]—These two generals, who were not only the most illustrious of their own age, but worthy of being ranked with the most renowned princes and warriors that had ever lived, having met at the place appointed, continued for some time in a deep silence, as though they were astonished, and struck with a mutual admiration at the sight of each other. At last Hannibal spoke, and after having praised Scipio in the most artful and delicate manner, he gave a very lively description of the ravages of the war, and the calamities in which it had involved both the victors and the vanquished. He conjured him not to suffer himself to be dazzled by the splendour of his victories. He represented to him, that how successful soever he might have hitherto been, he ought, however, to be aware of the inconstancy of fortune: that without going far back for examples, he himself, who was then speaking to him, was a glaring proof of this: that Scipio was at that time what Hannibal had been at Thrasymenus and Cannæ: that he ought to make a better use of opportunity than himself had done, by consenting to a peace, now it was in his power to propose the conditions of it. He concluded with declaring, that the Carthaginians would willingly resign Sicily, Sardinia, Spain, and all the islands between Africa and Italy, to the Romans: that they must be forced, since such was the will of the gods, to confine themselves to Africa; whilst they should see the Romans extending their conquests to the most remote regions, and obliging all nations to pay obedience to their laws.

[^935: A.M. 3803. A. Rom. 547.]

[^936: Polyb l. xv. p. 694-703. Liv. l. xxx. n. 29-35.]

Scipio answered in few words, but not with less dignity. He reproached the Carthaginians for their perfidy, in plundering the Roman galleys before the truce was expired. He imputed to them alone, and to their injustice, all the calamities with which the two wars had been attended. After thanking Hannibal for the admonition he had given him, with regard to the uncertainty of human events, he concluded with desiring him to prepare for battle, unless he chose rather to accept of the conditions that had been already proposed; to which (he observed) some others would be added, in order to punish the Carthaginians for their having violated the truce.

Hannibal could not prevail with himself to accept these conditions, and the generals left one another, with the resolution to decide the fate of Carthage by a general battle. Each commander exhorted his troops to fight valiantly. Hannibal enumerated the victories he had gained over the Romans, the generals he had slain, the armies he had cut to pieces. Scipio represented to his soldiers, the conquest of both the Spains, his successes in Africa, and the confession the enemies themselves made of their weakness, by thus coming to sue for peace. All this he spoke[^937] with the tone and air of a conqueror. Never were motives more powerful to prompt troops to behave gallantly. This day was to complete the glory of the one or the other of the generals; and to decide whether Rome or Carthage was to prescribe laws to all other nations.

[^937: Celsus hæc corpore, vultuque ita læto, ut vicisse jam crederes, dicebat. Liv. l. xxx. n. 32.—Trans.]

I shall not undertake to describe the order of the battle, nor the valour of the forces on both sides. The reader will naturally suppose, that two such experienced generals did not forget any circumstance which could contribute to the victory. The Carthaginians, after a very obstinate fight, were obliged to fly, leaving twenty thousand men on the field of battle, and the like number of prisoners were taken by the Romans. Hannibal escaped in the tumult, and entering Carthage, owned that he was irrecoverably overthrown, and that the citizens had no other choice left than to accept of peace on any conditions. Scipio bestowed great eulogiums on Hannibal, chiefly with regard to his ability in taking advantages, his manner of drawing up his army, and giving out his orders in the engagement; and he affirmed, that Hannibal had this day surpassed himself, although the success had not answered his valour and conduct.

With regard to himself, he well knew how to make a proper advantage of the victory, and the consternation with which he had filled the enemy. He commanded one of his lieutenants to march his land army to Carthage, whilst himself prepared to conduct the fleet thither.

He was not far from the city, when he met a vessel covered with streamers and olive-branches, bringing ten of the most considerable persons of the state, as ambassadors to implore his clemency. However, he dismissed them without making any answer, and bade them come to him at Tunis, where he should halt. The deputies of Carthage, thirty in number, came to him at the place appointed, and sued for peace in the most submissive terms. He then called a council there, the majority of which were for rasing Carthage, and treating the inhabitants with the utmost severity. But the consideration of the time which must necessarily be employed before so strongly fortified a city could be taken; and Scipio's fear lest a successor might be appointed him whilst he should be employed in the siege, made him incline to clemency.

A Peace concluded between the Carthaginians and the Romans. The End of the Second Punic War.[^938]—The conditions of the peace dictated by Scipio to the Carthaginians were, That the Carthaginians should continue free, and preserve their laws, their territories, and the cities they possessed in Africa before the war—That they should deliver up to the Romans all deserters, slaves, and prisoners belonging to them; all their ships, except ten triremes; all the elephants which they then had, and that they should not train up any more for war—That they should not make war out of Africa, nor even in that country, without first obtaining leave for that purpose from the Roman people—Should restore to Masinissa every thing of which they had dispossessed either him or his ancestors—Should furnish money and corn to the Roman auxiliaries, till their ambassadors should be returned from Rome—Should pay to the Romans ten thousand Euboic talents[^939] of silver in fifty annual payments; and give a hundred hostages, who should be nominated by Scipio. And in order that they might have time to send to Rome, he agreed to grant them a truce, upon condition that they should restore the ships taken during the former, without which they were not to expect either a truce or peace.

[^938: Polyb. l. xv. p. 704-707. Liv. l. xxx. n. 36-44.]

[^939: Ten thousand Attic talents make thirty millions French money. Ten thousand Euboic talents make something more than twenty-eight millions, thirty-three thousand livres; because, according to Budæus, the Euboic talent is equivalent but to fifty-six minæ and something more, whereas the Attic talent is worth sixty minæ.

Or otherwise thus calculated in English money:

According to Budæus, the Euboic talent is 56 Minæ 56 Minæ reduced to English money is 175l. Consequently, 10,000 Euboic talents make 1,750,000l. So that the Carthaginians paid annually 35,000l.

This calculation is as near the truth as it can well be brought; the Euboic talent being something more than 56 minæ.—Trans.]

When the deputies were returned to Carthage, they laid before the senate the conditions dictated by Scipio. But they appeared so intolerable to Gisgo, that rising up, he made a speech, in order to dissuade his citizens from accepting a peace on such shameful terms. Hannibal, provoked at the calmness with which such an orator was heard, took Gisgo by the arm, and dragged him from his seat. A behaviour so outrageous, and so remote from the manners of a free city like Carthage, raised an universal murmur. Hannibal himself was vexed when he reflected on what he had done, and immediately made an apology for it. “As I left,” says he, “your city at nine years of age, and did not return to it till after thirty-six years' absence, I had full leisure to learn the arts of war, and flatter myself that I have made some improvement in them. As for your laws and customs, it is no wonder I am ignorant of them, and I therefore desire you to instruct me in them.” He then expatiated on the indispensable necessity they were under of concluding a peace. He added, that they ought to thank the gods for having prompted the Romans to grant them a peace even on these conditions. He pointed out to them the great importance of their uniting in opinion; and of not giving an opportunity, by their divisions, for the people to take an affair of this nature under their cognizance. The whole city came over to his opinion; and accordingly the peace was accepted. The senate made Scipio satisfaction with regard to the ships reclaimed by him; and, after obtaining a truce for three months, they sent ambassadors to Rome.

These Carthaginians, who were all venerable for their years and dignity, were admitted immediately to an audience. Asdrubal, surnamed Hœdus, who was still an irreconcileable enemy to Hannibal and his faction, spoke first; and after having excused, to the best of his power, the people of Carthage, by imputing the rupture to the ambition of some particular persons, he added, that had the Carthaginians listened to his counsels and those of Hanno, they would have been able to grant the Romans the peace for which they now were obliged to sue. “But,”[^940] continued he, “wisdom and prosperity are very rarely found together. The Romans are invincible, because they never suffer themselves to be blinded by good fortune. And it would be surprising should they act otherwise. Success dazzles those only to whom it is new and unusual; whereas the Romans are so much accustomed to conquer, that they are almost insensible to the charms of victory; and it may be said to their glory, that they have extended their empire, in some measure, more by the humanity they have shown to the conquered, than by the conquest itself.” The other ambassadors spoke with a more plaintive tone of voice, and represented the calamitous state to which Carthage was going to be reduced, and the grandeur and power from which it was fallen.

[^940: Rarò simul hominibus bonam fortunam bonamque mentem dari. Populum Romanum eo invictum esse, quòd in secundis rebus sapere et consulere meminerit. Et herclè mirandum fuisse si aliter facerent. Ex insolentiâ, quibus nova bona fortuna sit, impotentes lætitiæ insanire: populo Romano usitata ac propè obsoleta ex victoriâ gaudia esse; ac plus penè parcendo victis, quàm vincendo, imnerium auxisse. Liv. l. xxx n. 42.—Trans.]

The senate and people being equally inclined to peace, sent full power to Scipio to conclude it; left the conditions to that general, and permitted him to march back his army, after the treaty should be concluded.

The ambassadors desired leave to enter the city, to redeem some of their prisoners, and they found about two hundred whom they desired to ransom. But the senate sent them to Scipio, with orders that they should be restored without any pecuniary consideration, in case a peace should be concluded.

The Carthaginians, on the return of their ambassadors, concluded a peace with Scipio, on the terms he himself had prescribed. They then delivered up to him more than five hundred ships, all which he burnt in sight of Carthage; a lamentable spectacle to the inhabitants of that ill-fated city! He struck off the heads of the allies of the Latin name, and hanged all the Roman citizens who were surrendered up to him, as deserters.

When the time for the payment of the first tribute imposed by the treaty was expired, as the funds of the government were exhausted by this long and expensive war; the difficulty of levying so great a sum, threw the senate into deep affliction, and many could not refrain even from tears. Hannibal on this occasion is said to have laughed; and when he was reproached by Asdrubal Hœdus, for thus insulting his country in the affliction which he had brought upon it, “Were it possible,” says Hannibal, “for my heart to be seen, and that as clearly as my countenance; you would then find that this laughter which offends so much, flows not from an intemperate joy, but from a mind almost distracted with the public calamities. But is this laughter more unseasonable than your unbecoming tears? Then, then, ought you to have wept, when your arms were ingloriously taken from you, your ships burnt, and you were forbidden to engage in any foreign wars. This was the mortal blow which laid us prostrate.—We are sensible of the public calamity, so far only as we have a personal concern in it; and the loss of our money gives us the most pungent sorrow. Hence it was, that when our city was made the spoil of the victor; when it was left disarmed and defenceless amidst so many powerful nations of Africa, who had at that time taken the field, not a groan, not a sigh was heard. But now, when you are called on to contribute individually to the tax imposed upon the state, you bewail and lament as if all were lost. Alas! I only wish that the subject of this day's grief does not soon appear to you the least of your misfortunes.”

Scipio, after all things were concluded, embarked, in order to return to Italy. He arrived at Rome, through crowds of people, whom curiosity had drawn together to behold his march. The most magnificent triumph that Rome had ever seen was decreed him, and the surname of Africanus was bestowed upon this great man; an honour till then unknown, no person before him having assumed the name of a vanquished nation. Such was the conclusion of the second Punic war, after having lasted seventeen years.

[^941] A short Reflection on the Government of Carthage in the time of the Second Punic War.—I shall conclude the particulars which relate to the second Punic war, with a reflection of Polybius,[^942] which will show the difference between the two commonwealths of Rome and Carthage. It may be affirmed, in some measure, that at the beginning of the second Punic war, and in Hannibal's time, Carthage was in its decline. The flower of its youth, and its sprightly vigour were already diminished. It had begun to fall from its exalted pitch of power, and was inclining towards its ruin; whereas Rome was then, as it were, in its bloom and prime of life, and swiftly advancing to the conquest of the universe. The reason of the declension of the one, and the rise of the other, is deduced, by Polybius, from the different form of government established in these commonwealths, at the time we are now speaking of. At Carthage, the common people had seized upon the sovereign authority with regard to public affairs, and the advice of their ancient men or magistrates was no longer listened to; all affairs were transacted by intrigue and cabal. To take no notice of the artifices which the faction adverse to Hannibal employed, during the whole time of his command, to perplex him; the single instance of burning the Roman vessels during a truce, a perfidious action to which the common people compelled the senate to lend their name and assistance, is a proof of Polybius's assertion. On the contrary, at this very time, the Romans paid the highest regard to their senate, that is, to a body composed of the greatest sages; and their old men were listened to and revered as oracles. It is well known that the Roman people were exceedingly jealous of their authority, and especially in whatever related to the election of magistrates. A century of young men, who by lot were to give the first vote, which generally directed all the rest, had nominated two consuls.[^943] On the bare remonstrance of Fabius,[^944] who represented to the people, that in a tempest, like that with which Rome was then struggling, the ablest pilots ought to be chosen to steer the vessel of the state, the century returned to their suffrages, and nominated other consuls. Polybius infers, that a people, thus guided by the prudence of old men, could not fail of prevailing over a state which was governed wholly by the giddy multitude. And indeed, the Romans, under the guidance of the wise counsels of their senate, gained at last the superiority with regard to the war considered in general, though they were defeated in several particular engagements; and established their power and grandeur on the ruin of their rivals.

[^941: A.M. 3804. A. Carth. 646. A. Rom. 548. Ant. J.C. 200.]

[^942: Lib. vi. p. 493, 494.]

[^943: Liv. l. xxiv. n. 8, 9.]

[^944: Quilibet nautarum rectorumque tranquillo mari gubernare potest: Ubi sæva orta tempestas est, ac turbato mari rapitur vento navis, tum viro et gubernatore opus est. Non tranquillo navigamus, sed jam aliquot procellis submersi penè sumus. Itaque quis ad gubernacula sedeat, summâ curâ providendum ac præcavendum nubis est.—Trans.]

The interval between the Second and Third Punic War.—This interval, though considerable enough with regard to its duration, since it took up above fifty years, is very little remarkable as to the events which relate to Carthage. They may be reduced to two heads; of which the one relates to the person of Hannibal, and the other to some particular differences between the Carthaginians and Masinissa king of the Numidians. We shall treat both separately, but at no great length.

Sect. I. Continuation of the History of Hannibal.—When the second Punic war was ended, by the treaty of peace concluded with Scipio, Hannibal, as he himself observed in the Carthaginian senate, was forty-five years of age. What we have farther to say of this great man, includes the space of twenty-five years.

Hannibal undertakes and completes the Reformation of the Courts of Justice, and the Treasury of Carthage.—After the conclusion of the peace, Hannibal, at least at first, was greatly respected at Carthage, where he filled the first employments of the state with honour and applause. He headed the Carthaginian forces in some wars against the Africans:[^945] but the Romans, to whom the very name of Hannibal gave uneasiness, not being able to see him in arms without displeasure, made complaints on that account, and accordingly he was recalled to Carthage.

[^945: Corn. Nep. in Annib. c. 7.]

On his return he was appointed prætor, which seems to have been a very considerable employment, and to have conferred great authority. Carthage is therefore going to be, with regard to him, a new theatre, as it were, on which he will display virtues and qualities of a quite different nature from those we have hitherto admired in him, and which will finish the picture of this illustrious man.

Eagerly desirous of restoring the affairs of his afflicted country to their former happy condition, he was persuaded, that the two most powerful methods to make a state flourish, were, an exact and equal distribution of justice to all its subjects in general, and a scrupulous fidelity in the management of the public finances. The former, by preserving an equality among the citizens, and making them enjoy such a delightful, undisturbed liberty under the protection of the laws, as fully secures their honour, their lives, and properties; unites the individuals of the commonwealth more closely together, and attaches them more firmly to the state, to which they owe the preservation of all that is most dear and valuable to them. The latter, by a faithful administration of the public revenues, supplies punctually the several wants and necessities of the state; keeps in reserve a never failing resource for sudden emergencies, and prevents the people from being burthened with new taxes, which are rendered necessary by extravagant profusion, and which chiefly contribute to make men harbour an aversion for the government.

Hannibal saw, with great concern, the irregularities which had crept equally into the administration of justice, and the management of the finances. Upon his being nominated prætor, as his love for regularity and order made him uneasy at every deviation from it, and prompted him to use his utmost endeavours to restore it; he had the courage to attempt the reformation of this double abuse, which drew after it a numberless multitude of others, without dreading, either the animosity of the old faction that opposed him, or the new enmity which his zeal for the republic must necessarily draw upon him.

The judges exercised the most flagrant extortion with impunity.[^946] They were so many petty tyrants, who disposed, in an arbitrary manner, of the lives and fortunes of the citizens; without there being the least possibility of putting a stop to their injustice, because they held their commissions for life, and mutually supported one another. Hannibal, as prætor, summoned before his tribunal an officer belonging to the bench of judges, who openly abused his power. Livy tells us that he was a questor. This officer, who was of the opposite faction to Hannibal, and had already assumed all the pride and haughtiness of the judges, among whom he was to be admitted at the expiration of his present office, insolently refused to obey the summons. Hannibal was not of a disposition to suffer an affront of this nature tamely. Accordingly, he caused him to be seized by a lictor, and brought him before an assembly of the people. There, not satisfied with directing his resentment against this single officer, he impeached the whole bench of judges; whose insupportable and tyrannical pride was not restrained, either by the fear of the laws, or a reverence for the magistrates. And, as Hannibal perceived that he was heard with pleasure, and that the lowest and most inconsiderable of the people discovered, on this occasion, that they were no longer able to bear the insolent pride of these judges, who seemed to have a design upon their liberties; he proposed a law, (which accordingly passed,) by which it was enacted, that new judges should be chosen annually; with a clause, that none should continue in office beyond that term. This law, at the same time that it acquired him the friendship and esteem of the people, drew upon him, proportionably, the hatred of the greatest part of the grandees and nobility.

[^946: Liv. l. xxxiii. n. 46.]

He attempted another reformation, which created him new enemies, but gained him great honour.[^947] The public revenues were either squandered away by the negligence of those who had the management of them, or were plundered by the chief men of the city and the magistrates; so that, money being wanting to pay the annual tribute due to the Romans, the Carthaginians were going to levy it upon the people in general. Hannibal, entering into a large detail of the public revenues, ordered an exact estimate of them to be laid before him; inquired in what manner they had been applied; the employments and ordinary expenses of the state; and having discovered, by this inquiry, that the public funds had been in a great measure embezzled by the fraud of the officers who had the management of them, he declared and promised, in a full assembly of the people, that, without laying any new taxes upon private men, the republic should hereafter be enabled to pay the tribute to the Romans; and he was as good as his word. The farmers of the revenues, whose plunder and rapine he had publicly detected, having accustomed themselves hitherto to fatten upon the spoils of their country, exclaimed[^948] vehemently against these regulations, as if their own property had been forced out of their hands, and not the sums they had plundered from the public.

[^947: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 46, 47.]

[^948: Tum verò isti quos paverat per aliquot annos publicus peculatus, velut bonis ereptis, non furto eorum manibus extorto, infensi et irati, Romanos in Annibaleim, et ipsos causam odii quærentes, instigabant. Liv.—Trans.]

The Retreat and Death of Hannibal.[^949]—This double reformation of abuses raised great clamours against Hannibal. His enemies were writing incessantly to the chief men, or their friends, at Rome, to inform them, that he was carrying on a secret intelligence with Antiochus king of Syria; that he frequently received couriers from him; and that this prince had privately despatched agents to Hannibal, to concert with him the measures for carrying on the war he was meditating: that as some animals are so extremely fierce, that it is impossible ever to tame them; in like manner this man was of so turbulent and implacable a spirit, that he could not brook ease, and therefore would, sooner or later, break out again. These informations were listened to at Rome; and as the transactions of the preceding war had been begun and carried on almost solely by Hannibal, they appeared more probable. However, Scipio strongly opposed the violent measures which the senate were going to take on their receiving this intelligence, by representing it as derogatory to the dignity of the Roman people, to countenance the hatred and accusations of Hannibal's enemies; to support, with their authority, their unjust passions; and obstinately to persecute him even in the very heart of his country; as though the Romans had not humbled him sufficiently, in driving him out of the field, and forcing him to lay down his arms.

[^949: Liv. l. xxiii. n. 45-49.]

But notwithstanding these prudent remonstrances, the senate appointed three commissioners to go and make their complaints to Carthage, and to demand that Hannibal should be delivered up to them. On their arrival in that city, though other motives were speciously pretended, yet Hannibal was perfectly sensible that himself only was aimed at. The evening being come, he conveyed himself on board a ship, which he had secretly provided for that purpose; on which occasion he bewailed his country's fate more than his own. Sæpiùs patriæ quàm suorum[^950] eventus miseratus. This was the eighth year after the conclusion of the peace. The first place he landed at was Tyre, where he was received as in his second country, and had all the honours paid him which were due to his exalted merit.[^951] After staying some days here, he set out for Antioch, which the king had lately left, and from thence waited upon him at Ephesus. The arrival of so renowned a general gave great pleasure to the king; and did not a little contribute to determine him to engage in war against Rome; for hitherto he had appeared wavering and uncertain on that head. In this city, a philosopher, who was looked upon as the greatest orator of Asia, had the imprudence to make a long harangue before Hannibal, on the duties of a general, and the rules of the art-military.[^952] The speech charmed the whole audience. But Hannibal being asked his opinion of it, “I have seen,” says he, “many old dotards in my life, but this exceeds them all.”[^953]

[^950: It is probable that we should read suos.—Trans.]

[^951: A.M. 3812. A. Rom. 556.]

[^952: Cic. de Orat. l. ii. n. 75, 76.]

[^953: Hìc Pœnus liberè respondisse fertur, multos se deliros senes sæpe vidisse: Sed qui magis quàm Phormio deliraret vidisse neminem. Stobæus, Serm. lii. gives the following account of this matter: Ἀννίβας ἀκούσας Στοικοῦ τίνος ἐπιχειροῦντος, ὅτι ὁ σοφὸς μόνος στρατηγὸς ἐστὶν, ἐγέλασε, νομίζων ἀδύνατον εἶναι ἐκτὸς τῆς δι᾽ ἔργων ἐμπειρίας τὴν ἐν τούτοις ἑπιστήμην ἔχειν. i.e. Hannibal hearing a Stoic philosopher undertake to prove that the wise man was the only general, laughed, as thinking it impossible for a man to have any skill in war without having long practised it.—Trans.]

The Carthaginians, justly fearing that Hannibal's escape would certainly draw upon them the arms of the Romans, sent them advice that Hannibal was withdrawn to Antiochus.[^954] The Romans were very much disturbed at this news; and the king might have turned it extremely to his advantage, had he known how to make a proper use of it.

[^954: They did more, for they sent two ships to pursue Hannibal, and bring him back; they sold off his goods, rased his house; and, by a public decree, declared him an exile. Such was the gratitude the Carthaginians showed to the greatest general they ever had. Corn. Nep. in vitâ Hannib. c. 7.—Trans.]

The first advice that Hannibal gave him at this time, and which he frequently repeated afterwards, was, to make Italy the seat of the war.[^955] He required an hundred ships, eleven or twelve thousand land forces, and offered to take upon himself the command of the fleet; to cross into Africa, in order to engage the Carthaginians in the war; and afterwards to make a descent upon Italy, during which the king himself should remain in Greece with his army, holding himself constantly in readiness to cross over into Italy, whenever it should be thought convenient. This was the only thing proper to be done, and the king very much approved the proposal at first.

[^955: Liv. l. xxxiv. n. 60.]

Hannibal thought it would be expedient to prepare his friends at Carthage, in order to engage them the more strongly in his views.[^956] The transmitting of information by letters, is not only unsafe, but they can give only an imperfect idea of things, and are never sufficiently particular. He therefore despatched a trusty person with ample instructions to Carthage. This man was scarce arrived in the city, but his business was suspected. Accordingly, he was watched and followed: and, at last, orders were issued for his being seized. However, he prevented the vigilance of his enemies, and escaped in the night; after having fixed, in several public places, papers, which fully declared the occasion of his journey. The senate immediately sent advice of this to the Romans.

[^956: Ib. n. 61.]

[^957] Villius, one of the deputies who had been sent into Asia, to inquire into the state of affairs there, and, if possible, to discover the real designs of Antiochus, found Hannibal in Ephesus.[^958] He had many conferences with him, paid him several visits, and speciously affected to show a particular esteem for him on all occasions. But his chief aim, by all this designing behaviour, was to make him be suspected, and to lessen his credit with the king, in which he succeeded but too well.[^959]

[^957: A.M. 3813. A. Rom. 557.]

[^958: Liv. l. xxxv. n. 14. Polyb. l. iii. p. 166, 167.]

[^959: Polybius represents this application of Villius to Hannibal, as a premeditated design, in order to render him suspected to Antiochus, because of his intimacy with a Roman. Livy owns, that the affair succeeded as if it had been designed; but, at the same time, he gives, for a very obvious reason, another turn to this conversation, and says, that no more was intended by it, than to sound Hannibal, and to remove any fears or apprehensions he might be under from the Romans.—Trans.]

Some authors affirm, that Scipio was joined in this embassy;[^960] and they even relate the conversation which that general had with Hannibal. They tell us, that the Roman having asked him, who, in his opinion, was the greatest captain that had ever lived; he answered, Alexander the Great, because, with a handful of Macedonians, he had defeated numberless armies, and carried his conquests into countries so very remote, that it seemed scarce possible for any man only to travel so far. Being afterwards asked, to whom he gave the second rank; he answered, to Pyrrhus: Because this king was the first who understood the art of pitching a camp to advantage; no commander ever made a more judicious choice of his posts, was better skilled in drawing up his forces, or was more dexterous in winning the affection of foreign soldiers; insomuch that even the people of Italy were more desirous to have him for their governor, though a foreigner, than the Romans themselves, who had so long been settled in their country. Scipio proceeding, asked him next, whom he looked upon as the third: on which Hannibal made no scruple to assign that rank to himself. Here Scipio could not forbear laughing: “But what would you have said,” continued Scipio, “had you conquered me?” “I would,” replied Hannibal, “have ranked myself above Alexander, Pyrrhus, and all the generals the world ever produced.” Scipio was not insensible of so refined and delicate a flattery, which he no ways expected; and which, by giving him no rival, seemed to insinuate, that no captain was worthy of being put in comparison with him.

[^960: Liv. l. xxxv. n. 14. Plut. in vitâ Flamin. &c.]

The answer, as told by Plutarch,[^961] is less witty, and not so probable. In this author, Hannibal gives Pyrrhus the first place, Scipio the second, and himself the third.

[^961: Plut. in Pyrrho, p. 687.]

Hannibal, sensible of the coldness with which Antiochus received him, ever since his conferences with Villius or Scipio, took no notice of it for some time, and seemed insensible of it.[^962] But at last he thought it advisable to come to an explanation with the king, and to open his mind freely to him. “The hatred (says he) which I bear to the Romans, is known to the whole world. I bound myself to it by an oath, from my most tender infancy. It is this hatred that made me draw the sword against Rome during thirty-six years. It is that, which, even in times of peace, has caused me to be driven from my native country, and forced me to seek an asylum in your dominions. For ever guided and fired by the same passion, should my hopes be frustrated here, I will fly to every part of the globe, and rouse up all nations against the Romans. I hate them, and will hate them eternally; and know that they bear me no less animosity. So long as you shall continue in the resolution to take up arms against them, you may rank Hannibal in the number of your best friends. But if other counsels incline you to peace, I declare to you, once for all, address yourself to others for advice, and not to me.” Such a speech, which came from his heart, and expressed the greatest sincerity, struck the king, and seemed to remove all his suspicions; so that he now resolved to give Hannibal the command of part of his fleet.

[^962: Liv. l. xxxv. n. 19.]

But what havoc is not flattery capable of making in courts and in the minds of princes![^963] Antiochus was told, “that it was imprudent in him to put so much confidence in Hannibal, an exile, a Carthaginian, whose fortune or genius might suggest to him, in one day, a thousand different projects: that besides, this very fame which Hannibal had acquired in war, and which he considered as his peculiar inheritance, was too great for a man who fought only under the ensigns of another: that none but the king ought to be the general and conductor of the war, and that it was incumbent on him to draw upon himself alone the eyes and attention of all men; whereas, should Hannibal be employed, he (a foreigner) would have the glory of all the successes ascribed to him.” “No minds,”[^964] says Livy, on this occasion, “are more susceptible of envy, than those whose merit is below their birth and dignity; such persons always abhorring virtue and worth in others, for this reason alone, because they are strange and foreign to themselves.” This observation was fully verified on this occasion. Antiochus had been taken on his weak side; a low and sordid jealousy, which is the defect and characteristic of little minds, extinguished every generous sentiment in that monarch. Hannibal was now slighted and laid aside: however, he was greatly revenged on Antiochus, by the ill success this prince met with; and showed how unfortunate that king is whose soul is accessible to envy, and his ears open to the poisonous insinuation of flatterers.

[^963: Liv. l. xxxv. n. 42, 43.]

[^964: Nulla ingenia tam prona ad invidiam sunt, quàm eorum qui genus ac fortunam suam animis non æquant: Quia virtutem et bonum alienum oderunt. Methinks it is better to read ut bonum alienum.—Trans.]

In a council held some time after, to which Hannibal, for form sake, was admitted, he, when it came to his turn to speak, endeavoured chiefly to prove, that Philip of Macedon ought, on any terms, to be engaged to form an alliance with Antiochus, which was not so difficult as might be imagined.[^965] “With regard,” says Hannibal, “to the operations of the war, I adhere immovably to my first opinion; and had my counsels been listened to before, Tuscany and Liguria would now be all in a flame: and Hannibal (a name that strikes terror into the Romans) in Italy. Though I should not be very well skilled as to other matters, yet the good and ill success I have met with must necessarily have taught me sufficiently how to carry on a war against the Romans. I have nothing now in my power, but to give you my counsel, and offer you my service. May the gods give success to all your undertakings!” Hannibal's speech was received with applause, but not one of his counsels was put in execution.

[^965: Ib. l. xxxvi. n. 7.]

Antiochus, imposed upon and lulled asleep by his flatterers, remained quiet at Ephesus, after the Romans had driven him out of Greece;[^966] not once imagining that they would ever invade his dominions. Hannibal, who was now restored to favour, was for ever assuring him, that the war would soon be removed into Asia, and that he would soon see the enemy at his gates: that he must resolve, either to abdicate his throne, or oppose vigorously a people who grasped at the empire of the world. This discourse awakened, in some little measure, the king out of his lethargy, and prompted him to make some weak efforts. But, as his conduct was unsteady, after sustaining a great many considerable losses, he was forced to terminate the war by an ignominious peace; one of the articles of which was, that he should deliver up Hannibal to the Romans. However, the latter did not give him opportunity to put it in execution, but retired to the island of Crete, to consider there what course it would be best for him to take.

[^966: Liv. l. xxxvi. n. 41.]

The riches he had brought along with him, of which the people of the island got some notice, had like to have proved his ruin.[^967] Hannibal was never wanting in stratagems, and he had occasion to employ them now, to save both himself and his treasure. He filled several vessels with molten lead, the tops of which he just covered over with gold and silver. These he deposited in the temple of Diana, in presence of several Cretans, to whose honesty, he said, he confided all his treasure. A strong guard was then posted round the temple, and Hannibal left at full liberty, from a supposition that his riches were secured.[^968] But he had concealed them in hollow statues of brass,[^969] which he always carried along with him. And then, embracing a favourable opportunity to make his escape, he fled to the court of Prusias, king of Bithynia.[^970]

[^967: Corn. Nep. in Annib. c. 9, 10. Justin, l. xxxii. c. 4.]

[^968: A.M. 3820. A. Rom. 564.]

[^969: These statues were thrown out by him, in a place of public resort, as things of little value. Corn. Nep.—Trans.]

[^970: Corn. Nep. in Annib. c. 10, 11. Justin, l. xxxiii c. 4.]

It appears from history, that he made some stay in the court of this prince, who soon engaged in war with Eumenes, king of Pergamus, a professed friend to the Romans. By means of Hannibal, the troops of Prusias gained several victories both by land and sea.

He employed a stratagem of an extraordinary kind, in a sea-fight.[^971] As the enemy's fleet consisted of more ships than his, he had recourse to artifice. He put into earthen vessels all kinds of serpents, and ordered these vessels to be thrown into the enemy's ships. His chief aim was to destroy Eumenes; and for that purpose it was necessary for him to find out which ship he was on board of. This Hannibal discovered by sending out a boat, upon pretence of conveying a letter to him. Having gained his point thus far, he ordered the commanders of the respective vessels to direct their attack principally against Eumenes's ship. They obeyed, and would have taken it, had he not outsailed his pursuers. The rest of the ships of Pergamus sustained the fight with great vigour, till the earthen vessels had been thrown into them. At first they only laughed at this, and were very much surprised to find such weapons employed against them. But when they saw themselves surrounded with the serpents, which darted out of these vessels when they flew to pieces, they were seized with dread, retired in disorder, and yielded the victory to the enemy.

[^971: Justin, l. xxxii. c. 4. Corn. Nep. in vit. Annib.]

[^972] Services of so important a nature seemed to secure for ever to Hannibal an undisturbed asylum at that prince's court.[^973] However, the Romans would not suffer him to be easy there, but deputed Q. Flamininus to Prusias, to complain of the protection he gave Hannibal. The latter easily guessed the motive of this embassy, and therefore did not wait till his enemies had an opportunity of delivering him up. At first he attempted to secure himself by flight; but perceiving that the seven secret outlets, which he had contrived in his palace, were all seized by the soldiers of Prusias, who, by perfidiously betraying his guest, was desirous of making his court to the Romans; he ordered the poison, which he had long kept for this melancholy occasion, to be brought him; and taking it in his hand, “Let us,” said he, “free the Romans from the disquiet with which they have so long been tortured, since they have not patience to wait for an old man's death. The victory which Flamininus gains over a man disarmed and betrayed will not do him much honour. This single day will be a lasting testimony of the great degeneracy of the Romans. Their fathers sent notice to Pyrrhus, to desire he would beware of a traitor who intended to poison him, and that at a time when this prince was at war with them in the very centre of Italy; but their sons have deputed a person of consular dignity to spirit up Prusias, impiously to murder one who is not only his friend, but his guest.” After calling down curses upon Prusias, and having invoked the gods, the protectors and avengers of the sacred rights of hospitality, he swallowed the poison,[^974] and died at seventy years of age.

[^972: A.M. 3882. A. Rom. 566.]

[^973: Liv. l. xxxix. n. 51.]

[^974: Plutarch, according to his custom, assigns him three different deaths. Some, says he, relate, “that having wrapped his cloak about his neck, he ordered his servant to fix his knees against his buttocks, and not to leave twisting till he had strangled him.” Others say, that, in imitation of Themistocles and Midas, he drank bull's blood. Livy tells us, that Hannibal drank a poison which he always carried about him; and taking the cup into his hands, cried, “Let us free,” &c. In vitâ Flaminini.—Trans.]

This year was remarkable for the death of three great men, Hannibal, Philopœmen, and Scipio, who had this in common, that they all died out of their native countries, by a death little correspondent to the glory of their actions. The two first died by poison: Hannibal being betrayed by his host; and Philopœmen being taken prisoner in a battle against the Messenians, and thrown into a dungeon, was forced to swallow poison. As to Scipio, he banished himself, to avoid an unjust prosecution which was carrying on against him at Rome, and ended his days in a kind of obscurity.

The Character and Eulogium of Hannibal.—This would be the proper place for representing the excellent qualities of Hannibal, who reflected so much glory on Carthage. But as I have attempted to draw his character elsewhere,[^975] and to give a just idea of him, by making a comparison between him and Scipio, I think myself dispensed from giving his eulogium at large in this place.

[^975: Of the Method of Studying and Teaching the Belles Lettres, vol. ii.—Trans.]

Persons who devote themselves to the profession of arms, cannot spend too much time in the study of this great man, who is looked upon, by the best judges, as the most complete general, in almost every respect, that ever the world produced.

During the whole seventeen years that the war lasted, two errors only are objected to him: first, his not marching, immediately after the battle of Cannæ, his victorious army to Rome, in order to besiege that city: secondly, his suffering their courage to be softened and enervated during their winter-quarters in Capua: errors, which only show that great men are not so in all things;[^976] summi enim sunt, homine tamen; and which, perhaps, may be partly excused.

[^976: Quintil.—Trans.]

But then, for these two errors, what a multitude of shining qualities appear in Hannibal! How extensive were his views and designs, even in his most tender years! What greatness of soul! What intrepidity! What presence of mind must he have possessed, to be able, even in the fire and heat of action, to turn every thing to advantage! With what surprising address must he have managed the minds of men, that, amidst so great a variety of nations which composed his army, who often were in want both of money and provisions, his camp was not once disturbed with any insurrection, either against himself or any of his generals! With what equity, what moderation must he have behaved towards his new allies, to have prevailed so far as to attach them inviolably to his service, though he was reduced to the necessity of making them sustain almost the whole burthen of the war, by quartering his army upon them, and levying contributions in their several countries! In short, how fruitful must he have been in expedients, to be able to carry on, for so many years, a war in a remote country, in spite of the violent opposition made by a powerful faction at home, which refused him supplies of every kind, and thwarted him on all occasions; it may be affirmed, that Hannibal, during the whole series of this war, seemed the only prop of the state, and the soul of every part of the empire of the Carthaginians, who could never believe themselves conquered, till Hannibal confessed that he himself was so.

But our acquaintance with Hannibal will be very imperfect, if we consider him only at the head of armies. The particulars we learn from history, concerning the secret intelligence he held with Philip of Macedon; the wise counsels he gave to Antiochus, king of Syria; the double reformation he introduced in Carthage, with regard to the management of the public revenues and the administration of justice, prove, that he was a great statesman in every respect. So superior and universal was his genius, that it took in all parts of government; and so great were his natural abilities, that he was capable of acquitting himself in all the various functions of it with glory. Hannibal shone as conspicuously in the cabinet as in the field; equally able to fill the civil as the military employments. In a word, he united in his own person the different talents and merits of all professions, the sword, the gown, and the finances.

He had some learning, and though he was so much employed in military labours, and engaged in so many wars, he, however, found some leisure to devote to literature.[^977] Several smart repartees of Hannibal, which have been transmitted to us, show that he had a great fund of natural wit; and this he improved by the most polite education that could be bestowed at that time, and in such a republic as Carthage. He spoke Greek tolerably well, and even wrote some books in that language. His preceptor was a Lacedæmonian, named Sosilus, who, with Philenius, another Lacedæmonian, accompanied him in all his expeditions. Both these undertook to write the history of this renowned warrior.

[^977: Atque hic tantus vir, tantisque bellis districtus, nonnibil temporis tribuit litteris, &c. Corn. Nep in vitá Annib. cap. 13.—Trans.]

With regard to his religion and moral conduct, he was not altogether so profligate and wicked as he is represented by Livy:[^978] “cruel even to inhumanity, more perfidious than a Carthaginian; regardless of truth, of probity, of the sacred ties of oaths; fearless of the gods, and utterly void of religion.” Inhumana crudelitas, perfida plusquam Punica; nihil veri, nihil sancti, nullus deúm metus, nullum jusjurandum, nulla religio. According to Polybius,[^979] he rejected a barbarous proposal that was made him before he entered Italy, which was, to eat human flesh, at a time when his army was in absolute want of provisions. Some years after, so far from treating with barbarity, as he was advised to do, the dead body of Sempronius Gracchus, which Mago had sent him, he caused his funeral obsequies to be solemnized in presence of the whole army.[^980] We have seen him, on many occasions, evince the highest reverence for the gods; and Justin,[^981] who copied Trogus Pompeius, an author worthy of credit, observes, that he always showed uncommon moderation and continence, with regard to the great number of women taken by him during the course of so long a war; insomuch that no one would have imagined he had been born in Africa, where incontinence is the predominant vice of the country. Pudicitiamque eum tantam inter tot captivas habuisse, ut in Africa natum quivis negaret.

[^978: Lib. xxi. n, 4.]

[^979: Excerpt. è Polyb. p. 33.]

[^980: Excerpt. è Diod. p. 282. Liv. l. xxv. n. 17.]

[^981: Lib. xxxii. c. 4.]

His disregard of wealth, at a time when he had so many opportunities to enrich himself by the plunder of the cities he stormed, and the nations he subdued, shows that he knew the true and genuine use which a general ought to make of riches, viz. to gain the affection of his soldiers, and to attach his allies to his interest, by diffusing his beneficence on proper occasions, and not being sparing in his rewards: a quality very essential, and at the same time as uncommon, in a commander. The only use Hannibal made of money was to purchase success; firmly persuaded, that a man who is at the head of affairs is sufficiently recompensed by the glory derived from victory.

He always led a very regular, austere life;[^982] and even in times of peace, and in the midst of Carthage, when he was invested with the first dignity of the city, we are told that he never used to recline himself on a bed at meals, as was the custom in those ages, and that he drank but very little wine. So regular and uniform a life may serve as an illustrious example to our commanders, who often include, among the privileges of war and the duty of officers, the keeping of splendid tables, and living luxuriously.

[^982: Cibi potionisque, desiderio naturali, non voluptate, modus finitus. Liv. l. xxi. n. 4.

Constat Annibalem, nec tum cùm Romano tonantem bello Italia contremuit, nec cùm reversus Carthaginem summum imperium tenuit, aut cubantem cœnâsse, aut plus quàm sextario vini indulsisse. Justin, l. xxxii. c. 4.—Trans.]

I do not, however, pretend altogether to exculpate Hannibal from all the errors with which he is charged. Though he possessed an assemblage of the most exalted qualities, it cannot be denied but that he had some little tincture of the vices of his country; and that it would be difficult to excuse some actions and circumstances of his life. Polybius observes,[^983] that Hannibal was accused of avarice in Carthage, and of cruelty in Rome. He adds, on the same occasion, that people were very much divided in opinion concerning him; and it would be no wonder, as he had made himself so many enemies in both cities, that they should have drawn him in disadvantageous colours. But Polybius is of opinion, that though it should be taken for granted, that all the defects with which he is charged are true; yet that they were not so much owing to his nature and disposition, as to the difficulties with which he was surrounded, in the course of so long and laborious a war; and to the complacency he was obliged to show to the general officers, whose assistance he absolutely wanted, for the execution of his various enterprises; and whom he was not always able to restrain, any more than he could the soldiers who fought under them.

[^983: Except é Polyb. p. 34 & 37.]

Sect. II. Dissensions between the Carthaginians and Masinissa, King of Numidia.—Among the conditions of the peace granted to the Carthaginians, there was one which enacted, that they should restore to Masinissa all the territories and cities he possessed before the war; and further, Scipio, to reward the zeal and fidelity which that monarch had shown towards the Romans, had added to his dominions those of Syphax. This present afterwards gave rise to disputes and quarrels between the Carthaginians and Numidians.

These two princes, Syphax and Masinissa, were both kings in Numidia, but reigned over different nations. The subjects of Syphax were called Masæsuli, and their capital was Cirtha. Those of Masinissa were the Massyli: but they are better known by the name of Numidians, which was common to them both. Their principal strength consisted in their cavalry. They always rode without saddles, and some even without bridles, whence Virgil[^984] calls them Numidæ infræni.

[^984: Æn. l. iv. ver. 41.—Trans.]

In the beginning of the second Punic war,[^985] Syphax siding with the Romans, Gala, the father of Masinissa, to check the career of so powerful a neighbour, thought it his interest to join the Carthaginians, and accordingly sent out against Syphax a powerful army under the conduct of his son, at that time but seventeen years of age. Syphax, being overcome in a battle, in which it is said he lost thirty thousand men, escaped into Mauritania. However, the face of things was afterwards greatly changed.

[^985: Liv. l. xxiv. n. 48, 49.]

Masinissa, after his father's death, was often reduced to the brink of ruin;[^986] being driven from his kingdom by an usurper; pursued warmly by Syphax; in danger every instant of falling into the hands of his enemies; destitute of forces, money, and of every resource. He was at that time in alliance with the Romans, and the friend of Scipio, with whom he had had an interview in Spain. His misfortunes would not permit him to bring great succours to that general. When Lælius arrived in Africa, Masinissa joined him with a few horse, and from that time continued inviolably attached to the Roman interest. Syphax, on the contrary, having married the famous Sophonisba, daughter of Asdrubal, went over to the Carthaginians.[^987]

[^986: Id. l. xxix. n. 29-34.]

[^987: Id. l. xxix. n. 23.]

The fate of these two princes again changed, but the change was now final.[^988] Syphax lost a great battle, and was taken alive by the enemy. Masinissa, the victor, besieged Cirtha, his capital, and took it. But he met with a greater danger in that city than he had faced in the field, and this was Sophonisba, whose charms and endearments he was unable to resist. To secure this princess to himself, he married her, but a few days after, he was obliged to send her a dose of poison, as her nuptial present; this being the only way that he could devise to keep his promise with his queen, and preserve her from the power of the Romans.

[^988: Id. l. xxx n. 11, 12.]

This was a considerable error in itself, and one that could not fail to disoblige a nation that was so jealous of its authority: but this young prince gloriously made amends for his fault, by the signal services he afterwards rendered to Scipio. We observed, that after the defeat and capture of Syphax, the dominions of this prince were bestowed upon him;[^989] and that the Carthaginians were forced to restore all he possessed before. This gave rise to the divisions which we are now going to relate.

[^989: Liv. l. xxx. n. 44.]

A territory situated towards the sea-side, near the lesser Syrtis, was the subject of the dispute.[^990] The country was very rich, and the soil extremely fruitful; a proof of which is, that the city of Leptis alone, which belonged to that territory, paid daily a talent to the Carthaginians, by way of tribute. Masinissa had seized part of this territory. Each side despatched deputies to Rome, to plead the cause of their respective superiors before the senate. This assembly thought proper to send Scipio Africanus, with two other commissioners, to examine the controversy upon the spot. However, they returned without coming to any decision, and left the business in the same uncertain state in which they had found it. Possibly they acted in this manner by order of the senate, and had received private instructions to favour Masinissa, who was then possessed of the district in question.

[^990: Id. l. xxxiv. n. 62.]

[^991] Ten years after, new commissioners having been appointed to examine the same affair, they acted as the former had done, and left the whole undetermined.[^992]

[^991: A.M. 3823. A. Rom. 567.]

[^992: Id. l. xl. n. 17.]

[^993] After the like distance of time, the Carthaginians again brought their complaint before the senate, but with greater importunity than before.[^994] They represented, that besides the lands at first contested, Masinissa had, during the two preceding years, dispossessed them of upwards of seventy towns and castles: their hands were bound up by that article of the last treaty, which forbade their making war upon any of the allies of the Romans: that they could no longer bear the insolence, the avarice, and cruelty of that prince: that they were deputed to Rome with three requests, (one of which they desired might be immediately complied with,) viz. either that the affair might be examined and decided by the senate; or, secondly, that they might be permitted to repel force by force, and defend themselves by arms; or, lastly, that, if favour was to prevail over justice, they then entreated the Romans to specify once for all, which of the Carthaginian lands they were desirous should be given up to Masinissa, that they, by this means, might hereafter know what they had to depend on, and that the Roman people would show some moderation in their behalf, at a time that this prince set no other bounds to his pretensions, than his insatiable avarice. The deputies concluded with beseeching the Romans, that if they had any cause of complaint against the Carthaginians since the conclusion of the last peace, that they themselves would punish them; and not to give them up to the wild caprice of a prince, by whom their liberties were made precarious, and their lives insupportable. After ending their speech, being pierced with grief, shedding floods of tears, they fell prostrate upon the earth; a spectacle that moved all who were present to compassion, and raised a violent hatred against Masinissa. Gulussa, his son, who was then present, being asked what he had to reply, he answered, that his father had not given him any instructions, not knowing that any thing would be laid to his charge. He only desired the senate to reflect, that the circumstance which drew all this hatred upon him from the Carthaginians, was, the inviolable fidelity with which he had always been attached to the side of the Romans. The senate, after hearing both sides, answered, that they were inclined to do justice to either party to whom it might be due: that Gulussa should set out immediately with their orders to his father, who was thereby commanded to send immediately deputies with those of Carthage; that they would do all that lay in their power to serve him, but not to the prejudice of the Carthaginians: that it was but just the ancient limits should be preserved; and that it was far from being the intention of the Romans, to have the Carthaginians dispossessed, during the peace, of those territories and cities which had been left them by the treaty. The deputies of both powers were then dismissed with the usual presents.

[^993: A.M. 3833. A. Rom. 577.]

[^994: Id. l. xlii. n. 23, 24.]

But all these assurances were but mere words.[^995] It is plain that the Romans did not once endeavour to satisfy the Carthaginians, or do them the least justice; and that they protracted the business, on purpose to give Masinissa time to establish himself in his usurpation, and weaken his enemies.

[^995: Polyb. p. 951.]

[^996] A new deputation was sent to examine the affair upon the spot, and Cato was one of the commissioners.[^997] On their arrival, they asked the parties if they were willing to abide by their determination. Masinissa readily complied. The Carthaginians answered, that they had fixed a rule to which they adhered, and that this was the treaty which had been concluded by Scipio, and desired that their cause might be examined with all possible rigour. They therefore could not come to any decision. The deputies visited all the country, and found it in a very good condition, especially the city of Carthage: and they were surprised to see it, after having been involved in such a calamity, so soon again raised to so exalted a pitch of power and grandeur. The deputies, on their return, did not fail to acquaint the senate with this circumstance; and declared, Rome could never be in safety, so long as Carthage should subsist. From this time, whatever affair was debated in the senate, Cato always added the following words to his opinion, “and I conclude that Carthage ought to be destroyed.” This grave senator did not give himself the trouble to prove, that bare jealousy of the growing power of a neighbouring state, is a warrant sufficient for destroying a city, contrary to the faith of treaties. Scipio Nasica on the other hand, was of opinion, that the ruin of this city would draw after it that of their commonwealth; because that the Romans, having then no rival to fear, would quit the ancient severity of their manners, and abandon themselves to luxury and pleasures, the never-failing subverters of the most flourishing empires.

[^996: A.M. 3848. A. Rom. 592.]

[^997: App. de bell. Pun. p. 37.]

In the mean time, divisions broke out in Carthage.[^998] The popular faction, being now become superior to that of the grandees and senators, sent forty citizens into banishment; and bound the people by an oath, never to suffer the least mention to be made of recalling those exiles. They withdrew to the court of Masinissa, who despatched Gulussa and Micipsa, his two sons, to Carthage, to solicit their recall. However, the gates of the city were shut against them, and one of them was closely pursued by Hamilcar, one of the generals of the republic. This gave occasion to a new war, and accordingly armies were levied on both sides. A battle was fought; and the younger Scipio, who afterwards ruined Carthage, was spectator of it. He had been sent from Lucullus, who was then carrying on war in Spain, and under whom Scipio then served, to Masinissa, to desire some elephants from that monarch. During the whole engagement, he stood upon a neighbouring hill; and was surprised to see Masinissa, then upwards of eighty years of age, mounted (agreeably to the custom of his country) on a horse without a saddle; flying from rank to rank like a young officer, and sustaining the most arduous toils. The fight was very obstinate, and continued from morning till night, but at last the Carthaginians gave way. Scipio used to say afterwards, that he had been present at many battles, but at none with so much pleasure as at this; having never before beheld so formidable an army engage, without any danger or trouble to himself. And being very conversant in the writings of Homer, he added, that till his time, there were but two more who had had the pleasure of being spectators of such an action, viz. Jupiter from mount Ida, and Neptune from Samothrace, when the Greeks and Trojans fought before Troy. I know not whether the sight of a hundred thousand men (for so many there were) butchering one another, can administer a real pleasure; or whether such a pleasure is consistent with the sentiments of humanity, so natural to mankind.

[^998: App. p. 38.]

The Carthaginians, after the battle was over, entreated Scipio to terminate their contests with Masinissa.[^999] Accordingly, he heard both parties, and the Carthaginians consented to yield up the territory of Emporium,[^1000] which had been the first cause of the dispute, to pay Masinissa two hundred talents of silver down, and eight hundred more, at such times as should be agreed. But Masinissa insisting on the return of the exiles, and the Carthaginians being unwilling to agree to this proposition, they did not come to any decision. Scipio, after having paid his compliments, and returned thanks to Masinissa, set out with the elephants for which he had been sent.

[^999: App. de bell. Pun. 40.]

[^1000: Emporium, or Emporia, was a country of Africa, on the Lesser Syrtis, in which Leptis stood. No part of the Carthaginian dominions was more fruitful than this. Polybius, l. i. says, that the revenue that arose from this place was so considerable, that all their hopes were almost founded on it, ἐν ἁῖς (viz. their revenues from Emporia) εἶχον τὰς μεγίστας ἔλπιδας. To this was owing their care and state-jealousy above mentioned, lest the Romans should sail beyond the Fair Promontory, that lay before Carthage; and become acquainted with a country which might induce them to attempt the conquest of it.—Trans.]

The king, immediately after the battle was over, had blocked up the enemy's camp, which was pitched upon a hill, whither neither troops nor provisions could come to them.[^1001] During this interval, there arrived deputies from Rome, with orders from the senate to decide the quarrel, in case the king should be defeated; otherwise, to leave it undetermined, and to give the king the strongest assurances of the continuation of their friendship; and they complied with the latter injunction. In the mean time, the famine daily increased in the enemy's camp; and to add to their calamity, it was followed by a plague, which made dreadful havoc. Being now reduced to the last extremity, they surrendered to Masinissa, promising to deliver up the deserters, to pay him five thousand talents of silver in fifty years, and restore the exiles, notwithstanding their oaths to the contrary. They all submitted to the ignominious ceremony of passing under the yoke,[^1002] and were dismissed, with only one suit of clothes for each. Gulussa, to satiate his vengeance for the ill treatment which, as we before observed, he had met with, sent out against them a body of cavalry, whom, from their great weakness, they could neither escape nor resist. So that of fifty-eight thousand men, very few returned to Carthage.

[^1001: App. de bell. Pun. 40.]

[^1002: Ils furent tous passés sous le joug: Sub jugum missi; a kind of gallows (made by two forked sticks, standing upright) was erected, and a spear laid across, under which vanquished enemies were obliged to pass. Festus.—Trans.]

[^1003] The Third Punic War.—The third Punic war, which was less considerable than either of the two former, with regard to the number and greatness of the battles, and its continuance, which was only four years, was still more remarkable with respect to the success and event of it, as it ended in the total ruin and destruction of Carthage.

[^1003: A.M. 3855. A. Carth. 697. A. Rom. 599. Ant. J.C. 149.]

The inhabitants of this city, from their last defeat, knew what they had to fear from the Romans, who had uniformly displayed great ill-will towards them, as often as they had addressed them upon their disputes with Masinissa.[^1004] To prevent the consequences of it, the Carthaginians, by a decree of the senate, impeached Asdrubal, general of the army, and Carthalo, commander of the auxiliary[^1005] forces, as guilty of high treason, for being the authors of the war against the king of Numidia. They then sent a deputation to Rome, to inquire what opinion that republic entertained of their late proceedings, and what was desired of them. The deputies were coldly answered, that it was the business of the senate and people of Carthage to know what satisfaction was due to the Romans. A second deputation bringing them no clearer answer, they fell into the greatest dejection; and being seized with the strongest terrors, from the recollection of their past sufferings, they fancied the enemy was already at their gates, and imagined to themselves all the dismal consequences of a long siege, and of a city taken sword in hand.

[^1004: Appian, p. 41, 42.]

[^1005: The foreign forces were commanded by leaders of their respective nations, who were all under the command of a Carthaginian officer, called by Appian Βοήθαρχος.—Trans.]

In the mean time, the senate debated at Rome on the measures it would be proper for them to take; and the disputes between Cato the elder and Scipio Nasica, who entertained totally different opinions on this subject, were renewed.[^1006] The former, on his return from Africa, had declared, in the strongest terms, that he had found Carthage, not as the Romans supposed it to be, exhausted of men or money, or in a weak and humble state; but, on the contrary, that it was crowded with vigorous young men, abounded with immense quantities of gold and silver, and prodigious magazines of arms and all warlike stores; and was so haughty and confident on account of this force, that their hopes and ambition had no bounds. It is farther said, that after he had ended his speech, he threw, out of the lappet of his robe, in the midst of the senate, some African figs; and, as the senators admired their beauty and size, “Know,” says he, “that it is but three days since these figs were gathered. Such is the distance between the enemy and us.”[^1007]

[^1006: Plut. in vit. Cat. p. 352.]

[^1007: Plin. l. xv. c. 18.]

Cato and Nasica had each of them their reasons for voting as they did.[^1008] Nasica, observing that the people had risen to such a height of insolence, as led them into excesses of every kind; that their prosperity had swelled them with a pride which the senate itself was not able to check; and that their power was become so enormous, that they were able to draw the city, by force, into every mad design they might undertake; Nasica, I say, observing this, was desirous that they should continue in fear of Carthage, in order that this might serve as a curb to restrain and check their audacious conduct. For it was his opinion, that the Carthaginians were too weak to subdue the Romans; and at the same time too strong to be considered by them in a contemptible light. With regard to Cato, he thought that as his countrymen were become haughty and insolent by success, and plunged headlong into profligacy of every kind; nothing could be more dangerous, than for them to have for a rival and an enemy, a city that till now had been powerful, but was become, even by its misfortunes, more wise and provident than ever; and not to remove the fears of the inhabitants entirely with regard to a foreign power; since they had, within their own walls, all the opportunities of indulging themselves in excesses of every kind.

[^1008: Plut. ibid. in vitâ Cat.]

To lay aside, for one instant, the laws of equity, I leave the reader to determine which of these two great men reasoned most justly, according to the maxims of sound policy, and the true interest of a state. One undoubted circumstance is, that all historians have observed that there was a sensible change in the conduct and government of the Romans, immediately after the ruin of Carthage:[^1009] that vice no longer made its way into Rome with a timorous pace, and as it were by stealth, but appeared barefaced, and seized, with astonishing rapidity, upon all orders of the republic: that the senators, plebeians, in a word, all conditions, abandoned themselves to luxury and voluptuousness, without moderation or sense of decency, which occasioned, as it must necessarily, the ruin of the state. “The first Scipio,”[^1010] says Paterculus, speaking of the Romans, “had laid the foundations of their future grandeur; and the last, by his conquests, opened a door to all manner of luxury and dissoluteness. For, after Carthage, which obliged Rome to stand for ever on its guard, by disputing empire with that city, had been totally destroyed, the depravity of manners was no longer slow in its progress, but swelled at once into the utmost excess of corruption.”

[^1009: Ubi Carthago, et æmula imperii Romani ab stirpe interiit, Fortuna sævire ac miscere omnia cœpit. Sallust. in bell. Catilin.

Ante Carthaginem deletam populus et senatus Romanus placidè modestéque inter se Remp. tractabant.—Metus hostilis in bonis artibus civitatem retinebat. Sed ubi formido illa mentibus decessit, illicet ea, quæ secundæ res amant, lascivia atquæ superbia incessere. Idem in bello Jugurthino.—Trans.]

[^1010: Potentiæ Romanorum prior Scipio viam aperuerat, luxuriæ posterior aperuit. Quippe remoto Carthaginis metu, sublatàque imperii æmulà, non gradu, sed præcipiti cursu à virtute descitum, ad vitia transcursum. Vel. Paterc. l. ii. c. 1.—Trans.]

Be this as it may, the senate resolved to declare war against the Carthaginians; and the reasons or pretences urged for it were, their having maintained ships contrary to the tenour of the treaty; their having sent an army out of their territories, against a prince who was in alliance with Rome, and whose son they had treated ill, at the time that he was accompanied by a Roman ambassador.[^1011]

[^1011: App. p. 42.]

[^1012] An event, that chance occasioned to happen very fortunately, at the time that the senate of Rome was debating on the affair of Carthage, doubtless contributed very much to make them take that resolution.[^1013] This was the arrival of deputies from Utica, who came to surrender up themselves, their effects, their lands, and their city, into the hands of the Romans. Nothing could have happened more seasonably. Utica was the second city of Africa, vastly rich, and had a port equally spacious and commodious; it stood within sixty furlongs of Carthage, so that it might serve as a place of arms in the attack of that city. The Romans now hesitated no longer, but formally proclaimed war. M. Manilius, and L. Marcius Censorinus, the two consuls, were desired to set out as soon as possible. They had secret orders from the senate, not to end the war but by the destruction of Carthage. The consuls immediately left Rome, and stopped at Lilybæum in Sicily. They had a considerable fleet, on board of which were fourscore thousand foot, and about four thousand horse.

[^1012: A.M. 3856. A. Rom. 600.]

[^1013: Ibid.]

The Carthaginians were not yet acquainted with the resolutions which had been taken at Rome.[^1014] The answer brought back by their deputies, had only increased their fears, viz. “It was the business of the Carthaginians to consider what satisfaction was due to them.”[^1015] This made them not know what course to take. At last they sent new deputies, whom they invested with full powers to act as they should see fitting; and even (what the former wars could never make them stoop to) to declare, that the Carthaginians gave up themselves, and all they possessed, to the will and pleasure of the Romans. This, according to the import of the clause, se suaque eorum arbitrio permittere, was submitting themselves, without reserve, to the power of the Romans, and acknowledging themselves their vassals. Nevertheless, they did not expect any great success from this condescension, though so very mortifying; because, as the Uticans had been beforehand with them on that occasion, this circumstance had deprived them of the merit of a ready and voluntary submission.

[^1014: Polyb. excerpt. legat.. p. 972]

[^1015: To the Romans.—Trans.]

The deputies, on their arrival at Rome, were informed that war had been proclaimed, and that the army was set out. The Romans had despatched a courier to Carthage, with the decree of the senate; and to inform that city, that the Roman fleet had sailed. The deputies had therefore no time for deliberation, but delivered up themselves, and all they possessed, to the Romans. In consequence of this behaviour, they were answered, that since they had at last taken a right step, the senate granted them their liberty, the enjoyment of their laws, and all their territories and other possessions, whether public or private, provided that, within the space of thirty days, they should send, as hostages, to Lilybæum, three hundred young Carthaginians of the first distinction, and comply with the orders of the consuls. This last condition filled them with inexpressible anxiety: but the concern they were under would not allow them to make the least reply, or to demand an explanation; nor, indeed, would it have been to any purpose. They therefore set out for Carthage, and there gave an account of their embassy.

All the articles of the treaty were extremely severe with regard to the Carthaginians; but the silence of the Romans, with respect to the cities of which no notice was taken in the concessions which that people was willing to make, perplexed them exceedingly.[^1016] But all they had to do was to obey. After the many former and recent losses which the Carthaginians had sustained, they were by no means in a condition to resist such an enemy, since they had not been able to oppose Masinissa. Troops, provisions, ships, allies, in a word, every thing was wanting, and hope and vigour more than all the rest.

[^1016: Polyb. excerpt. legat. p. 972.]

They did not think it proper to wait till the thirty days, which had been allowed them, were expired, but immediately sent their hostages, in hopes of softening the enemy by the readiness of their obedience, though they dared not flatter themselves with the expectation of meeting with favour on this occasion. These hostages were the flower, and the only hopes, of the noblest families of Carthage. Never was any spectacle more moving; nothing was now heard but cries, nothing seen but tears, and all places echoed with groans and lamentations. But above all, the disconsolate mothers, bathed in tears, tore their dishevelled hair, beat their breasts, and, as if grief and despair had distracted them, they yelled in such a manner as might have moved the most savage breasts to compassion. But the scene was much more mournful, when the fatal moment of their separation was come; when, after having accompanied their dear children to the ship, they bid them a long last farewell, persuaded that they should never see them more; bathed them with their tears; embraced them with the utmost fondness; clasped them eagerly in their arms; could not be prevailed upon to part with them, till they were forced away, which was more grievous and afflicting than if their hearts had been torn out of their breasts. The hostages being arrived in Sicily, were carried from thence to Rome; and the consuls told the deputies, that when they should arrive at Utica, they would acquaint them with the orders of the republic.

In such a situation of affairs, nothing can be more grievous than a state of uncertainty, which, without descending to particulars, gives occasion to the mind to image to itself every misery.[^1017] As soon as it was known that the fleet was arrived at Utica, the deputies repaired to the Roman camp; signifying, that they were come in the name of their republic, in order to receive their commands, which they were ready to obey. The consul, after praising their good disposition and compliance, commanded them to deliver up to him, without fraud or delay, all their arms. This they consented to, but besought him to reflect on the sad condition to which he was reducing them, at a time when Asdrubal, whose quarrel against them was owing to no other cause than their perfect submission to the orders of the Romans, was advanced almost to their gates, with an army of twenty thousand men. The answer returned them was, that the Romans would set that matter right.

[^1017: Polyb. p. 975. Appian, p. 44-46.]

This order was immediately put in execution.[^1018] There arrived in the camp a long train of waggons, loaded with all the preparations of war, taken out of Carthage: two hundred thousand complete sets of armour, a numberless multitude of darts and javelins, with two thousand engines for shooting darts and stones.[^1019] Then followed the deputies of Carthage, accompanied by the most venerable senators and priests, who came purposely to try to move the Romans to compassion in this critical moment, when their sentence was going to be pronounced, and their fate would be irreversible. Censorinus, the consul, for it was he who had all along spoken, rose up for a moment at their coming, and expressed some kindness and affection for them; but suddenly assuming a grave and severe countenance: “I cannot,” says he, “but commend the readiness with which you execute the orders of the senate. They have commanded me to tell you, that it is their absolute will and pleasure that you depart out of Carthage, which they have resolved to destroy; and that you remove into any other part of your dominions which you shall think proper, provided it be at the distance of eighty stadia[^1020] from the sea.”

[^1018: Appian, p. 46.]

[^1019: Balistæ or Catapultæ.—Trans.]

[^1020: Four leagues, or twelve miles.—Trans.]

The instant the consul had pronounced this fulminating decree, nothing was heard among the Carthaginians but lamentable shrieks and howlings.[^1021] Being now in a manner thunderstruck, they neither knew where they were, nor what they did; but rolled themselves in the dust, tearing their clothes, and unable to vent their grief any otherwise, than by broken sighs and deep groans. Being afterwards a little recovered, they lifted up their hands with the air of suppliants one moment towards the gods, and the next towards the Romans, imploring their mercy and justice towards a people, who would soon be reduced to the extremes of despair. But as both the gods and men were deaf to their fervent prayers, they soon changed them into reproaches and imprecations; bidding the Romans call to mind, that there were such beings as avenging deities, whose severe eyes were for ever open on guilt and treachery. The Romans themselves could not refrain from tears at so moving a spectacle, but their resolution was fixed. The deputies could not even prevail so far, as to get the execution of this order suspended, till they should have an opportunity of presenting themselves again before the senate, to attempt, if possible, to get it revoked. They were forced to set out immediately, and carry the answer to Carthage.

[^1021: Appian, p. 46-53.]

The people waited for their return with such an impatience and terror, as words could never express.[^1022] It was scarce possible for them to break through the crowd that flocked round them, to hear the answer, which was but too strongly painted in their faces. When they were come into the senate, and had declared the barbarous orders of the Romans, a general shriek informed the people of their fate; and from that instant, nothing was seen and heard in every part of the city, but howling and despair, madness and fury.

[^1022: Appian, p. 53, 54.]

The reader will here give me leave to interrupt the course of the history for a moment, to reflect on the conduct of the Romans. It is great pity that the fragment of Polybius, where an account is given of this deputation, should end exactly in the most interesting part of this narrative. I should set a much higher value on one short reflection of so judicious an author, than on the long harangues which Appian ascribes to the deputies and the consul. I can never believe, that so rational, judicious, and just a man as Polybius, could have approved the proceedings of the Romans on the present occasion. We do not here discover, in my opinion, any of the characteristics which distinguished them anciently; that greatness of soul, that rectitude, that utter abhorrence of all mean artifices, frauds, and impostures, which, as is somewhere said, formed no part of the Roman disposition; Minimè Romanis artibus. Why did not the Romans attack the Carthaginians by open force? Why should they declare expressly in a treaty (a most solemn and sacred thing) that they allowed them the full enjoyment of their liberties and laws; and understand, at the same time, certain private conditions, which proved the entire ruin of both? Why should they conceal, under the scandalous omission of the word city in this treaty, the perfidious design of destroying Carthage? as if, beneath the cover of such an equivocation, they might destroy it with justice. In short, why did the Romans not make their last declaration, till after they had extorted from the Carthaginians, at different times, their hostages and arms, that is, till they had absolutely rendered them incapable of disobeying their most arbitrary commands? Is it not manifest, that Carthage, notwithstanding all its defeats and losses, though it was weakened and almost exhausted, was still a terror to the Romans, and that they were persuaded they were not able to conquer it by force of arms? It is very dangerous to be possessed of so much power, as to be able to commit injustice with impunity, and with a prospect of being a gainer by it. The experience of all ages shows, that states seldom scruple to commit injustice, when they think it will conduce to their advantage.

The noble character which Polybius gives of the Achæans, differs widely from what was practised here.[^1023] That people, says he, far from using artifice and deceit towards their allies, in order to enlarge their power, did not think themselves allowed to employ them even against their enemies, considering only those victories as solid and glorious, which were obtained sword in hand, by dint of courage and bravery. He owns, in the same place, that there then remained among the Romans but very faint traces of the ancient generosity of their ancestors; and he thinks it incumbent on him (as he declares) to make this remark, in opposition to a maxim which was grown very common in his time among persons in the administration of the government, who imagined, that sincerity is inconsistent with good policy; and that it is impossible to succeed in the administration of state affairs, either in war or peace, without using fraud and deceit on some occasions.

[^1023: Polyb. l. xiii. p. 671, 672.]

I now return to my subject.[^1024] The consuls made no great haste to march against Carthage, not suspecting they had any thing to fear from that city, as it was now disarmed. The inhabitants took the opportunity of this delay to put themselves in a posture of defence, being all unanimously resolved not to quit the city. They appointed as general, without the walls, Asdrubal, who was at the head of twenty thousand men; and to whom deputies were sent accordingly, to entreat him to forget, for his country's sake, the injustice which had been done him, from the dread they were under of the Romans. The command of the troops, within the walls, was given to another Asdrubal, grandson of Masinissa. They then applied themselves to the making arms with incredible expedition. The temples, the palaces, the open markets and squares, were all changed into so many arsenals, where men and women worked day and night. Every day were made a hundred and and forty shields, three hundred swords, five hundred pikes or javelins, a thousand arrows, and a great number of engines to discharge them; and because they wanted materials to make ropes, the women cut off their hair, and abundantly supplied their wants on this occasion.

[^1024: Appian, p. 55. Strabo, l. xvii. p. 833.]

Masinissa was very much disgusted at the Romans, because, after he had extremely weakened the Carthaginians, they came and reaped the fruits of his victory, without acquainting him in any manner with their design, which circumstance caused some coldness between them.[^1025]

[^1025: Appian, p. 55.]

During this interval, the consuls were advancing towards the city, in order to besiege it.[^1026] As they expected nothing less than a vigorous resistance, the incredible resolution and courage of the besieged filled them with the utmost astonishment.

[^1026: Appian, p. 55-63.]

The Carthaginians were for ever making the boldest sallies, in order to repulse the besiegers, to burn their engines, and harass their foragers. Censorinus attacked the city on one side, and Manilius on the other. Scipio, afterwards surnamed Africanus, served then as tribune in the army; and distinguished himself above the rest of the officers, no less by his prudence than by his bravery. The consul, under whom he fought, committed many oversights, by having refused to follow his advice. This young officer extricated the troops from several dangers, into which the imprudence of their leaders had plunged them. A renowned officer, Phamæas by name, who was general of the enemy's cavalry, and continually harassed the foragers, did not dare ever to keep the field, when it was Scipio's turn to support them; so capable was he of keeping his troops in good order, and posting himself to advantage. So great and universal a reputation excited some envy against him at first; but as he behaved, in all respects, with the utmost modesty and reserve, that envy was soon changed into admiration; so that when the senate sent deputies to the camp, to inquire into the state of the siege, the whole army gave him unanimously the highest commendations; the soldiers, as well as officers, nay, the very generals, with one voice extolled the merit of young Scipio: so necessary is it for a man to deaden, if I may be allowed the expression, the splendour of his rising glory, by a sweet and modest carriage; and not to excite jealousy, by haughty and self-sufficient behaviour, as this naturally awakens pride in others, and makes even virtue itself odious!

[^1027] About the same time, Masinissa, finding his end approach, sent to desire a visit from Scipio, in order that he might invest him with full powers to dispose, as he should see proper, of his kingdom and property, in behalf of his children.[^1028] But, on Scipio's arrival, he found that monarch dead. Masinissa had commanded them, with his dying breath, to follow implicitly the directions of Scipio, whom he appointed to be a kind of father and guardian to them. I shall give no farther account here of the family and posterity of Masinissa, because that would interrupt too much the history of Carthage.

[^1027: A.M. 3857. A. Rom. 601.]

[^1028: Appian, p. 63.]

The high esteem which Phamæas had entertained for Scipio induced him to forsake the Carthaginians, and go over to the Romans.[^1029] Accordingly, he joined them with above two thousand horse, and was afterwards of great service at the siege.

[^1029: Appian, p. 65.]

Calpurnius Piso, the consul, and L. Mancinus, his lieutenant, arrived in Africa in the beginning of the spring.[^1030] Nothing remarkable was transacted during this campaign. The Romans were even defeated on several occasions, and carried on the siege of Carthage but slowly. The besieged, on the contrary, had recovered their spirits. Their troops were considerably increased; they daily got new allies; and even sent an express as far as Macedonia, to the counterfeit Philip,[^1031] who pretended to be the son of Perseus, and was then engaged in a war with the Romans; to exhort him to carry it on with vigour, and promising to furnish him with money and ships.

[^1030: Page 66.]

[^1031: Andriscus.—Trans.]

This news occasioned some uneasiness at Rome.[^1032] The people began to doubt the success of a war, which grew daily more uncertain, and was more important, than had at first been imagined. As much as they were dissatisfied with the dilatoriness of the generals, and exclaimed against their conduct, so much did they unanimously agree in applauding young Scipio, and extolling his rare and uncommon virtues. He was come to Rome, in order to stand candidate for the edileship. The instant he appeared in the assembly, his name, his countenance, his reputation, a general persuasion that he was designed by the gods to end the third Punic war, as the first Scipio, his grandfather by adoption, had terminated the second; these several circumstances made a very strong impression on the people, and though it was contrary to law, and therefore opposed by the ancient men, instead of the edileship which[^1033] he sued for, the people, disregarding for once the laws, conferred the consulship upon him, and assigned him Africa for his province, without casting lots for the provinces, as usual, and as Drusus his colleague demanded.

[^1032: Page 68.]

[^1033: A.M. 3858. A. Rom. 602.]

As soon as Scipio had completed his recruits, he set out for Sicily, and arrived soon after in Utica.[^1034] He came very seasonably for Mancinus, Piso's lieutenant, who had rashly fixed himself in a post where he was surrounded by the enemy; and would have been cut to pieces that very morning, had not the new consul, who, on his arrival, heard of the danger he was in, reembarked his troops in the night, and sailed with the utmost speed to his assistance.

[^1034: Appian, p. 69.]

Scipio's first care, after his arrival, was to revive discipline among the troops, which he found had been entirely neglected.[^1035] There was not the least regularity, subordination, or obedience. Nothing was attended to but rapine, feasting, and diversions. He drove from the camp all useless persons, settled the quality of the provisions he would have brought in by the sutlers, and allowed of none but what were plain and fit for soldiers, studiously banishing all dainties and luxuries.

[^1035: Page 70.]

After he had made these regulations, which cost him but little time and pains, because he himself first set the example, he was persuaded that those under him were soldiers, and thereupon he prepared to carry on the siege with vigour. Having ordered his troops to provide themselves with axes, levers, and scaling-ladders, he led them in the dead of the night, and without the least noise, to a district of the city, called Megara; when ordering them to give a sudden and general shout, he attacked it with great vigour. The enemy, who did not expect to be attacked in the night, were at first in the utmost terror; however, they defended themselves so courageously, that Scipio could not scale the walls. But perceiving a tower that was forsaken, and which stood without the city, very near the walls, he detached thither a party of intrepid and resolute soldiers, who, by the help of pontons,[^1036] got from the tower on the walls, and from thence into Megara, the gates of which they broke down. Scipio entered it immediately after, and drove the enemies out of that post; who, terrified at this unexpected assault, and imagining that the whole city was taken, fled into the citadel, whither they were followed even by those forces that were encamped without the city, who abandoned their camp to the Romans, and thought it necessary for them to fly to a place of security.

[^1036: A sort of movable bridge.—Trans.]

Before I proceed further, it will be proper to give some account of the situation and dimensions of Carthage, which, in the beginning of the war against the Romans, contained seven hundred thousand inhabitants.[^1037] It stood at the bottom of a gulf, surrounded by the sea, and in the form of a peninsula, whose neck, that is, the isthmus which joined it to the continent, was twenty-five stadia, or a league and a quarter in breadth. The peninsula was three hundred and sixty stadia, or eighteen leagues round. On the west side there projected from it a long neck of land, half a stadium, or twelve fathoms broad; which, advancing into the sea, divided it from a morass, and was fenced on all sides with rocks and a single wall. On the south side, towards the continent, where stood the citadel called Byrsa, the city was surrounded with a triple wall, thirty cubits high, exclusive of the parapets and towers, with which it was flanked all round at equal distances, each interval being fourscore fathoms. Every tower was four stories high, and the stalls but two; they were arched, and in the lower part were walls to hold three hundred elephants with their fodder, and over these were stables for four thousand horses, and lofts for their food. There likewise was room enough to lodge twenty thousand foot, and four thousand horse. All these were contained within the walls alone. In one place only the walls were weak and low; and that was a neglected angle, which began at the neck of land above-mentioned, and extended as far as the harbours, which were on the west side. Of these there were two, which communicated with each other, but had only one entrance, seventy feet broad, shut up with chains. The first was appropriated for the merchants, and had several distinct habitations for the seamen. The second, or inner harbour, was for the ships of war, in the midst of which stood an island called Cothon, lined, as the harbour was, with large quays, in which were distinct receptacles[^1038] for sheltering from the weather two hundred and twenty ships; over these were magazines or storehouses, wherein was lodged whatever is necessary for arming and equipping fleets. The entrance into each of these receptacles was adorned with two marble pillars of the Ionic order. So that both the harbour and the island represented on each side two magnificent galleries. In this island was the admiral's palace; and, as it stood opposite to the mouth of the harbour, he could from thence discover whatever was doing at sea, though no one, from thence, could see what was transacting in the inward part of the harbour. The merchants, in like manner, had no prospect of the men of war; the two ports being separated by a double wall, each having its particular gate, that led to the city, without passing through the other harbour. So that Carthage may be divided into three parts:[^1039] the harbour, which was double, and called sometimes Cothon, from the little island of that name: the citadel, named Byrsa: the city properly so called, where the inhabitants dwelt, which lay round the citadel, and was called Megara.

[^1037: Appian, p. 56, 57. Strabo, l. xvii. p. 832.]

[^1038: Νεωσοίκους, Strabo.—Trans.]

[^1039: Boch. in Phal. p. 512.]

At daybreak,[^1040] Asdrubal[^1041] perceiving the ignominious defeat of his troops, in order that he might be revenged on the Romans, and, at the same time, deprive the inhabitants of all hopes of accommodation and pardon, brought all the Roman prisoners he had taken, upon the walls, in sight of the whole army. There he put them to the most exquisite torture; putting out their eyes, cutting off their noses, ears, and fingers; tearing their skin from their body with iron rakes or harrows, and then threw them headlong from the top of the battlements. So inhuman a treatment filled the Carthaginians with horror: however, he did not spare even them; but murdered many senators who had ventured to oppose his tyranny.

[^1040: Appian, p. 72.]

[^1041: It was he who had first commanded without the city, but having caused the other Asdrubal, Masinissa's grandson, to be put to death, he got the command of the troops within the walls.—Trans.]

Scipio,[^1042] finding himself absolute master of the isthmus, burnt the camp, which the enemy had deserted, and built a new one for his troops. It was of a square form, surrounded with large and deep intrenchments, and fenced with strong palisades. On the side which faced the Carthaginians, he built a wall twelve feet high, flanked at proper distances with towers and redoubts; and on the middle tower, he erected a very high wooden fort, from whence could be seen whatever was doing in the city. This wall was equal to the whole breadth of the isthmus, that is, twenty-five stadia.[^1043] The enemy, who were within bow-shot of it, employed their utmost efforts to put a stop to this work; but, as the whole army were employed upon it day and night, without intermission, it was finished in twenty-four days. Scipio reaped a double advantage from this work: first, his forces were lodged more safely and commodiously than before: secondly, he cut off all provisions from the besieged, to whom none could now be brought but by sea; which was attended with many difficulties, both because the sea is frequently very tempestuous in that place, and because the Roman fleet kept a strict guard. This proved one of the chief causes of the famine which raged soon after in the city. Besides, Asdrubal distributed the corn that was brought, only among the thirty thousand men who served under him, caring very little what became of the rest of the inhabitants.

[^1042: Page 73.]

[^1043: Four miles and three quarters.—Trans.]

To distress them still more by the want of provisions, Scipio attempted to stop up the mouth of the haven by a mole, beginning at the above-mentioned neck of land, which was near the harbour.[^1044] The besieged, at first, looked upon this attempt as ridiculous, and accordingly they insulted the workmen: but, at last, seeing them make an astonishing progress every day, they began to be afraid; and to take such measures as might, if possible, render the attempt unsuccessful. Every one, to the women and children, fell to work, but so privately, that all that Scipio could learn from the prisoners, was, that they had heard a great noise in the harbour, but did not know the occasion of it. At last, all things being ready, the Carthaginians opened, on a sudden, a new outlet on the other side of the haven; and appeared at sea with a numerous fleet, which they had just then built with the old materials found in their magazines. It is generally allowed, that had they attacked the Roman fleet directly, they must infallibly have taken it; because, as no such attempt was expected, and every man was elsewhere employed, the Carthaginians would have found it without rowers, soldiers, or officers. But the ruin of Carthage, says the historian, was decreed. Having therefore only offered a kind of insult or bravado to the Romans, they returned into the harbour.

[^1044: Appian, p. 74.]

Two days after, they brought forward their ships, with a resolution to fight in good earnest, and found the enemy ready for them.[^1045] This battle was to determine the fate of both parties. The conflict was long and obstinate, each exerting themselves to the utmost; the one to save their country, now reduced to the last extremity, and the other to complete their victory. During the fight, the Carthaginian brigantines running along under the large Roman ships, broke to pieces sometimes their sterns, and at other times their rudders and oars; and, when briskly attacked, retreated with surprising swiftness, and returned immediately to the charge. At last, after the two armies had fought with equal success till sunset, the Carthaginians thought proper to retire; not that they believed themselves overcome, but in order to begin the fight again on the morrow. Part of their ships, not being able to run swiftly enough into the harbour, because the mouth of it was too narrow, took shelter under a very spacious terrace, which had been thrown up against the walls to unload goods, on the side of which a small rampart had been raised during this war, to prevent the enemy from possessing themselves of it. Here the fight was again renewed with more vigour than ever, and lasted till late at night. The Carthaginians suffered very much, and the few ships which got off, sailed for refuge to the city. Morning being come, Scipio attacked the terrace, and carried it, though with great difficulty; after which he made a lodgement there, and fortified himself on it, and built a brick-wall close to those of the city, and of the same height. When it was finished, he commanded four thousand men to get on the top of it, and to discharge from it a perpetual shower of darts and arrows upon the enemy, which did great execution; because, as the two walls were of equal height, almost every dart took effect. Thus ended this campaign.

[^1045: Appian, p. 75.]

During the winter quarters, Scipio endeavoured to overpower the enemy's troops without the city,[^1046] who very much harassed the convoys that brought his provisions, and protected such as were sent to the besieged. For this purpose he attacked a neighbouring fort, called Nepheris, where they used to shelter themselves. In the last action, above seventy thousand of the enemy, as well soldiers as peasants, who had been enlisted, were cut to pieces; and the fort was carried with great difficulty, after sustaining a siege of two and twenty days. The seizure of this fort was followed by the surrender of almost all the strong-holds in Africa; and contributed very much to the taking of Carthage itself, into which, from that time, it was almost impossible to bring any provisions.

[^1046: Ibid. p. 78.]

[^1047] Early in the spring, Scipio attacked, at one and the same time, the harbour called Cothon, and the citadel.[^1048] Having possessed himself of the wall which surrounded this port, he threw himself into the great square of the city that was near it, from whence was an ascent to the citadel, up three streets, on each side of which were houses, from the tops whereof a shower of darts was discharged upon the Romans, who were obliged, before they could advance farther, to force the houses they came first to, and post themselves in them, in order to dislodge from thence the enemy who fought from the neighbouring houses. The combat, which was carried on from the tops, and in every part of the houses, continued six days, during which a dreadful slaughter was made. To clear the streets, and make way for the troops, the Romans dragged aside, with hooks, the bodies of such of the inhabitants as had been slain, or precipitated headlong from the houses, and threw them into pits, the greatest part of them being still alive and panting. In this toil, which lasted six days and as many nights, the soldiers were relieved from time to time by fresh ones, without which they would have been quite spent. Scipio was the only person who did not take a wink of sleep all this time; giving orders in all places, and scarce allowing himself leisure to take the least refreshment.

[^1047: A.M. 3859. A. Rom. 603.]

[^1048: Appian, p. 79.]

There was every reason to believe, that the siege would last much longer, and occasion a great effusion of blood.[^1049] But on the seventh day, there appeared a company of men in the posture and habit of suppliants, who desired no other conditions, than that the Romans would please to spare the lives of all those who should be willing to leave the citadel: which request was granted them, only the deserters were excepted. Accordingly, there came out fifty thousand men and women, who were sent into the fields under a strong guard. The deserters, who were about nine hundred, finding they would not be allowed quarter, fortified themselves in the temple of Æsculapius, with Asdrubal, his wife, and two children; where, though their number was but small, they might have held out a long time, because the temple stood on a very high hill, upon rocks, the ascent to which was by sixty steps. But at last, exhausted by hunger and watching, oppressed with fear, and seeing their destruction at hand, they lost all patience; and abandoning the lower part of the temple, they retired to the uppermost story, resolved not to quit it but with their lives.

[^1049: Ibid. p. 81.]

In the mean time, Asdrubal, being desirous of saving his own life, came down privately to Scipio, carrying an olive branch in his hand, and threw himself at his feet. Scipio showed him immediately to the deserters, who, transported with rage and fury at the sight, vented millions of imprecations against him, and set fire to the temple. Whilst it was kindling, we are told, that Asdrubal's wife, dressing herself as splendidly as possible, and placing herself with her two children in sight of Scipio, addressed him with a loud voice: “I call not down,” says she, “curses upon thy head, O Roman; for thou only takest the privilege allowed by the laws of war: but may the gods of Carthage, and thou in concert with them, punish, according to his deserts, the false wretch, who has betrayed his country, his gods, his wife, his children!” Then directing herself to Asdrubal, “Perfidious wretch,” says she, “thou basest of men! this fire will presently consume both me and my children; but as to thee, unworthy general of Carthage, go—adorn the gay triumph of thy conqueror—suffer, in the sight of all Rome, the tortures thou so justly deservest!” She had no sooner pronounced these words, than, seizing her children, she cut their throats, threw them into the flames, and afterwards rushed into them herself; in which she was imitated by all the deserters.

With regard to Scipio,[^1050] when he saw this famous city, which had been so flourishing for seven hundred years, and might have been compared to the greatest empires, on account of the extent of its dominions both by sea and land; its mighty armies; its fleets, elephants, and riches; while the Carthaginians were even superior to other nations, by their courage and greatness of soul; as, notwithstanding their being deprived of arms and ships, they had sustained, for three whole years, all the hardships and calamities of a long siege; seeing, I say, this city entirely ruined, historians relate, that he could not refuse his tears to the unhappy fate of Carthage. He reflected, that cities, nations, and empires, are liable to revolutions no less than private men; that the like sad fate had befallen Troy anciently so powerful; and, in later times, the Assyrians, Medes, and Persians, whose dominions were once of so great an extent; and very recently, the Macedonians, whose empire had been so glorious throughout the world. Full of these mournful ideas, he repeated the following verses of Homer:

[^1050: Appian, p. 82.]

Ἔσσεται ἦμαρ, ὄταν ποτ᾽ ὀλώλη Ἴλιος ἱρὴ,
Καὶ Πρίαμος, καὶ λαὸς εὐμμελίω Πριάμοιο.

Il. δ. 164, 165.

The day shall come, that great avenging day.
Which Troy's proud glories in the dust shall lay,
When Priam's pow'rs and Priam's self shall fall,
And one prodigious ruin swallow all.

Pope.

thereby denouncing the future destiny of Rome, as he himself confessed to Polybius, who desired Scipio to explain himself on that occasion.

Had the truth enlightened his soul, he would have discovered what we are taught in the Scriptures, that “because of unrighteous dealings, injuries, and riches got by deceit, a kingdom is translated from one people to another.”[^1051] Carthage is destroyed, because its avarice, perfidiousness, and cruelty, have attained their utmost height. The like fate will attend Rome, when its luxury, ambition, pride, and unjust usurpations, concealed beneath a specious and delusive show of justice and virtue, shall have compelled the sovereign Lord, the disposer of empires, to give the universe an important lesson in its fall.

[^1051: Ecclus, x. 8.]

[^1052] Carthage being taken in this manner, Scipio gave the plunder of it (the gold, silver, statues, and other offerings which should be found in the temples, excepted) to his soldiers for some days.[^1053] He afterwards bestowed several military rewards on them, as well as on the officers, two of whom had particularly distinguished themselves, viz. Tib. Gracchus, and Caius Fannius, who first scaled the walls. After this, adorning a small ship (an excellent sailer) with the enemy's spoils, he sent it to Rome with the news of the victory.

[^1052: A.M. 3859. A. Carth. 701. A. Rom. 603. Ant. J.C. 145.]

[^1053: Appian, p. 83.]

At the same time he invited the inhabitants of Sicily to come and take possession of the pictures and statues which the Carthaginians had plundered them of in the former wars.[^1054] When he restored to the citizens of Agrigentum, Phalaris's famous bull,[^1055] he told them that this bull, which was, at one and the same time, a monument of the cruelty of their ancient kings, and of the lenity of their present sovereigns, ought to make them sensible which would be most advantageous for them, to live under the yoke of Sicilians, or the government of the Romans.

[^1054: Ibid.]

[^1055: Quem taurum Scipio cùm redderet Agrigentinis, dixisse dicitur, æquum esse illos cogitare utrum esset Siculis utilius, suisne servire, au populo R. obtemperare, cùm idem monumentum et domesticæ crudelitatis, et nostræ mansuetudinis haberent. Cicer. Verr. vi. n. 73.—Trans.]

Having exposed to sale part of the spoils of Carthage, he commanded, on the most severe penalties, his family not to take or even buy any of them; so careful was he to remove from himself, and all belonging to him, the least suspicion of avarice.

When the news of the taking of Carthage was brought to Rome, the people abandoned themselves to the most immoderate transports of joy, as if the public tranquillity had not been secured till that instant.[^1056] They revolved in their minds, all the calamities which the Carthaginians had brought upon them, in Sicily, in Spain, and even in Italy, for sixteen years together; during which, Hannibal had plundered four hundred towns, destroyed, in different engagements, three hundred thousand men, and reduced Rome itself to the utmost extremity. Amidst the remembrance of these past evils, the people in Rome would ask one another, whether it were really true that Carthage was in ashes. All ranks and degrees of men emulously strove who should show the greatest gratitude towards the gods; and the citizens were, for many days, employed wholly in solemn sacrifices, in public prayers, games, and spectacles.

[^1056: Ibid.]

After these religious duties were ended, the senate sent ten commissioners into Africa, to regulate, in conjunction with Scipio, the fate and condition of that country for the time to come.[^1057] Their first care was, to demolish whatever was still remaining of Carthage.[^1058] Rome,[^1059] though mistress of almost the whole world, could not believe herself safe as long as even the name of Carthage was in being. So true it is, that an inveterate hatred, fomented by long and bloody wars, lasts even beyond the time when all cause of fear is removed; and does not cease, till the object that occasions it is no more. Orders were given, in the name of the Romans, that it should never be inhabited again; and dreadful imprecations were denounced against those, who, contrary to this prohibition, should attempt to rebuild any parts of it, especially those called Byrsa and Megara. In the mean time, every one who desired it, was admitted to see Carthage: Scipio being well pleased, to have people view the sad ruins of a city which had dared to contend with Rome for empire.[^1060] The commissioners decreed farther, that those cities which, during this war, had joined with the enemy, should all be rased, and their territories be given to the Roman allies; they particularly made a grant to the citizens of Utica, of the whole country lying between Carthage and Hippo. All the rest they made tributary, and reduced it into a Roman province, whither a prætor was sent annually.

[^1057: Appian, p. 84.]

[^1058: We may guess at the dimensions of this famous city, by what Florus says, viz. that it was seventeen days on fire, before it could be all consumed. Quanta urbs deleta sit, ut de cæteris taceam, vel ignium morâ probari potest: quippe per continuos decem et septem dies vix potuit incendium extingui. Lib. ii. c. 15.—Trans.]

[^1059: Neque se Roma, jam terrarum orbe superato, securam speravit fore, si nomen usquam maneret Carthaginis. Adeo odium certaminibus ortum, ultra metum durat, et ne in victis quidem deponitur, neque antè invisum esse desinit, quàm esse desiit. Vel. Paterc. l. i. c. 12.—Trans.]

[^1060: Ut ipse locus eorum, qui cum hâc urbe de imperio certârunt, vestigia calamitatis ostenderet. Cic. Agrar. ii. n. 50.—Trans.]

All matters being thus settled, Scipio returned to Rome, where he made his entry in triumph.[^1061] So magnificent a one had never been seen before; the whole exhibiting nothing but statues, rare, invaluable pictures, and other curiosities, which the Carthaginians had, for many years, been collecting in other countries; not to mention the money carried into the public treasury, which amounted to immense sums.

[^1061: Ibid.]

Notwithstanding the great precautions which were taken to hinder Carthage from being ever rebuilt, in less than thirty years after, and even in Scipio's lifetime, one of the Gracchi, to ingratiate himself with the people, undertook to found it anew, and conducted thither a colony consisting of six thousand citizens for that purpose.[^1062] The senate, hearing that the workmen had been terrified by many unlucky omens, at the time they were tracing the limits, and laying the foundations of the new city, would have suspended the attempt; but the tribune, not being over scrupulous in religious matters, carried on the work, notwithstanding all these bad presages, and finished it in a few days. This was the first Roman colony that was ever sent out of Italy.

[^1062: Appian, p. 85. Plut. in vit. Gracch p. 839.]

It is probable, that only a kind of huts were built there, since we are told,[^1063] that when Marius retired hither, in his flight to Africa, he lived in a mean and poor condition amid the ruins of Carthage, consoling himself by the sight of so astonishing a spectacle; himself serving, in some measure, as a consolation to that ill-fated city.

[^1063: Marius cursum in Africam direxit, inopemque vitam in tugurio ruinarum Carthaginensium toleravit: cùm Marius aspiciens Carthaginem, illa intuens Marium, alter alteri possent esse solatio. Vel. Paterc. l. ii c. 19.—Trans.]

Appian relates,[^1064] that Julius Cæsar, after the death of Pompey, having crossed into Africa, saw, in a dream, an army composed of a prodigious number of soldiers, who, with tears in their eyes, called him; and that, struck with the vision, he writ down in his pocket-book the design which he formed on this occasion, of rebuilding Carthage and Corinth: but that having been murdered soon after by the conspirators, Augustus Cæsar, his adopted son, who found this memorandum among his papers, rebuilt Carthage near the spot where it stood formerly, in order that the imprecations which had been vented, at the time of its destruction, against those who should presume to rebuild it, might not fall upon him.

[^1064: Appian, p. 85.]

I know not what foundation Appian has for this story; but we read in Strabo,[^1065] that Carthage and Corinth were rebuilt at the same time by Cæsar, to whom he gives the name of god, by which title, a little before, he had plainly intended Julius Cæsar;[^1066] and Plutarch,[^1067] in the life of that emperor, ascribes expressly to him the establishment of these two colonies; and observes, that one remarkable circumstance in these two cities is, that as both had been taken and destroyed at the same time, they likewise were at the same time rebuilt and repeopled. However this be, Strabo affirms, that in his time Carthage was as populous as any city in Africa; and it rose to be the capital of Africa, under the succeeding emperors. It existed for about seven hundred years after, in splendour, but at last was so completely destroyed by the Saracens, in the beginning of the seventh century, that neither its name, nor the least footsteps of it, are known at this time in the country.

[^1065: Strabo, l. xvii. p. 833.]

[^1066: Ibid. 831.]

[^1067: Page 733.]

A Digression on the Manners and Character of the second Scipio Africanus.—Scipio, the destroyer of Carthage, was son to the famous Paulus Æmilius, who conquered Perseus, the last king of Macedon; and consequently grandson to that Paulus Æmilius who lost his life in the battle of Cannæ. He was adopted by the son of the great Scipio Africanus, and called Scipio Æmilianus; the names of the two families being so united, pursuant to the law of adoptions. He supported, with equal lustre, the dignity of both houses, by all the qualities that can confer honour on the sword and gown.[^1068] The whole tenour of his life, says an historian, whether with regard to his actions, his thoughts, or words, was deserving of the highest praise. He distinguished himself particularly (an eulogium that, at present, can seldom be applied to persons of the military profession) by his exquisite taste for polite literature, and all the sciences, as well as by the uncommon regard he showed to learned men. It is universally known, that he was reported to be the author of Terence's comedies, the most polite and elegant writings which the Romans could boast. We are told of Scipio,[^1069] that no man could blend more happily repose and action, nor employ his leisure hours with greater delicacy and taste: thus was he divided between arms and books, between the military labours of the camp, and the peaceful employment of the cabinet; in which he either exercised his body in toils of war, or his mind in the study of the sciences. By this he showed, that nothing does greater honour to a person of distinction, of what quality or profession soever he be, than the adorning his mind with knowledge. Cicero, speaking of Scipio, says,[^1070] that he always had Xenophon's works in his hands, which are so famous for the solid and excellent instructions they contain, both in regard to war and policy.

[^1068: Scipio Æmilianus, vir avitis P. Africani paternisque L. Pauli virtutibus simillimus, omnibus belli ac togæ dotibus, ingeniique ac studiorum eminentissimus seculi sui, qui nihil in vitâ nisi laudandum aut fecit aut dixit aut seusit. Vel. Paterc. l. i. c. 12.—Trans.]

[^1069: Neque enim quisquam hoc Scipione elegantiùs intervalla negotiorum otio dispunxit: semperque aut belli aut pacis serviit artibus, semper inter arma ac studia versatus, aut corpus periculis, aut animum disciplinis exercuit. Vel. Paterc. l. i. c. 13.—Trans.]

[^1070: Africanus semper Socraticum Xenophontem in manibus habebat. Tusc. Quæst. l. ii. n. 62.—Trans.]

He owed this exquisite taste for polite learning and the sciences, to the excellent education which Paulus Æmilius bestowed on his children.[^1071] He had put them under the ablest masters in every art; and did not spare any expense on that occasion, though his circumstances were very narrow: P. Æmilius himself was present at all their lessons, as often as the affairs of the state would permit; becoming, by this means, their chief preceptor.

[^1071: Plut. in vit. Æmil. Paul. p. 258.]

The intimate union between Polybius and Scipio put the finishing stroke to the exalted qualities which, by the superiority of his genius and disposition, and the excellency of his education, were already the subject of admiration.[^1072] Polybius, with a great number of Achæans, whose fidelity the Romans suspected during the war with Perseus, was detained in Rome, where his merit soon caused his company to be coveted by all persons of the highest quality in that city. Scipio, when scarce eighteen, devoted himself entirely to Polybius: and considered as the greatest felicity of his life, the opportunity he had of being instructed by so great a master, whose society he preferred to all the vain and idle amusements which are generally so alluring to young persons.

[^1072: Excerpt. è Polyb. p. 147-163.]

Polybius's first care was to inspire Scipio with an aversion for those equally dangerous and ignominious pleasures, to which the Roman youth were so strongly addicted; the greatest part of them being already depraved and corrupted by the luxury and licentiousness which riches and new conquests had introduced in Rome. Scipio, during the first five years that he continued in so excellent a school, made the greatest improvement in it; and, despising the ridicule, as well as the pernicious examples, of persons of the same age with himself, he was looked upon, even at that time, as a model of discretion and wisdom.

From hence, the transition was easy and natural to generosity, to a noble disregard of riches, and to a laudable use of them; all virtues so requisite in persons of illustrious birth, and which Scipio carried to the most exalted pitch, as appears from some instances of this kind related by Polybius, which are highly worthy our admiration.

Æmilia,[^1073] wife of the first Scipio Africanus, and mother of him who had adopted the Scipio mentioned here by Polybius, had bequeathed, at her death, a great estate to the latter. This lady, besides the diamonds and jewels which are worn by women of her high rank, possessed a great number of gold and silver vessels used in sacrifices, together with several splendid equipages, and a considerable number of slaves of both sexes; the whole suited to the opulence of the august house into which she had married. At her death, Scipio made over all those rich possessions to Papiria his mother, who, having been divorced a considerable time before by Paulus Æmilius, and not being in circumstances to support the dignity of her birth, lived in great obscurity, and never appeared in the assemblies or public ceremonies. But when she again frequented them with a magnificent train, this noble generosity of Scipio did him great honour, especially in the minds of the ladies, who expatiated on it in all their conversations, and in a city whose inhabitants, says Polybius, were not easily prevailed upon to part with their money.

[^1073: She was sister of Paulus Æmilius, father of the second Scipio Africanus.—Trans.]

Scipio was no less admired on another occasion. He was bound, in consequence of the estate that had fallen to him by the death of his grandmother, to pay, at three different times, to the two daughters of Scipio, his grandfather by adoption, half their portions, which amounted to 50,000 French crowns.[^1074] The time for the payment of the first sum being expired, Scipio put the whole money into the hands of a banker. Tiberius Gracchus, and Scipio Nasica, who had married the two sisters, imagining that Scipio had made a mistake, went to him, and observed, that the laws allowed him three years to pay this sum in, and at three different times. Young Scipio answered, that he knew very well what the laws directed on this occasion; that they might indeed be executed in their greatest rigour towards strangers, but that friends and relations ought to treat one another with a more generous simplicity; and therefore desired them to receive the whole sum. They were struck with such admiration at the generosity of their kinsman, that in their return home, they reproached[^1075] themselves for their narrow way of thinking, at a time when they made the greatest figure, and had the highest regard paid to them, of any family in Rome. This generous action, says Polybius, was the more admired, because no person in Rome, so far from consenting to pay 50,000 crowns before they were due, would pay even a thousand before the time for payment was elapsed.

[^1074: Or, 11,250l. sterling.—Trans.]

[^1075: Κατεγνωκότες τῆς αὐτῶν μικρολογίας.—Trans.]

It was from the same noble spirit that, two years after, Paulus Æmilius his father being dead, he made over to his brother Fabius, who was not so wealthy as himself, the part of their father's estate, which was his (Scipio's) due, (amounting to above threescore thousand crowns,[^1076]) in order that there might not be so great a disparity between his fortune and that of his brother.

[^1076: Or, 13,500l. sterling.—Trans.]

This Fabius being desirous to exhibit a show of gladiators after his father's decease, in honour of his memory, (as was the custom in that age,) and not being able to defray the expenses on this occasion, which amounted to a very heavy sum, Scipio made him a present of fifteen thousand[^1077] crowns, in order to defray at least half the charges of it.

[^1077: Or, 5375l. sterling.—Trans.]

The splendid presents which Scipio had made his mother Papiria, reverted to him, by law as well as equity, after her demise; and his sisters, according to the custom of those times had not the least claim to them. Nevertheless, Scipio thought it would have been dishonourable in him, had he taken them back again. He therefore made over to his sisters whatever he had presented to their mother, which amounted to a very considerable sum; and by this fresh proof of his glorious disregard of wealth, and the tender friendship he had for his family, acquired the applause of the whole city.

These different benefactions, which amounted all together to a prodigious sum, seem to have received a brighter lustre from the age in which he bestowed them, he being still very young; and yet more from the circumstances of the time when they were presented, as well as the kind and obliging carriage he assumed on those occasions.

The incidents I have here related are so repugnant to the maxims of this age, that there might be reason to fear the reader would consider them merely as the rhetorical flourishes of an historian who was prejudiced in favour of his hero; if it was not well known, that the predominant characteristic of Polybius, by whom they are related, is a sincere love for truth, and an utter aversion to adulation of every kind. In the very passage whence this relation is extracted, he has thought it necessary for him to be a little guarded, where he expatiates on the virtuous actions and rare qualities of Scipio; and he observes, that as his writings were to be perused by the Romans, who were perfectly well acquainted with all the particulars of this great man's life, he could not fail of being convicted by them, should he venture to advance any falsehood; an affront, to which it is not probable that an author, who has ever so little regard for his reputation, would expose himself, especially if no advantage was to accrue to him from it.

We have already observed, that Scipio had never given into the fashionable debaucheries and excesses to which the young people at Rome so generally abandoned themselves. But he was sufficiently compensated for this self-denial of all destructive pleasures, by the vigorous health he enjoyed all the rest of his life, which enabled him to taste pleasure of a much purer and more exalted kind, and to perform the great actions that reflected so much glory upon him.

Hunting, which was his darling exercise, contributed also very much to invigorate his constitution, and enabled him also to endure the hardest toils. Macedonia, whither he followed his father, gave him an opportunity of indulging to the utmost of his desire his passion in this respect; for the chase, which was the usual diversion of the Macedonian monarchs, having been laid aside for some years on account of the wars, Scipio found there an incredible quantity of game of every kind. Paulus Æmilius, studious of procuring his son virtuous pleasures of every kind, in order to divert his mind from those which reason prohibits, gave him full liberty to indulge himself in his favourite sport, during all the time that the Roman forces continued in that country, after the victory he had gained over Perseus. The illustrious youth employed his leisure hours in an exercise which suited so well his age and inclination; and was as successful in this innocent war against the beasts of Macedonia, as his father had been in that which he had carried on against the inhabitants of the country.

It was at Scipio's return from Macedon, that he met with Polybius in Rome; and contracted the strict friendship with him, which was afterwards so beneficial to our young Roman, and did him almost as much honour in after-ages as all his conquests. We find, from history, that Polybius lived with the two brothers. One day, when himself and Scipio were alone, the latter unbosomed himself freely to him, and complained, but in the mildest and most gentle terms, that he, in their conversations at table, always directed himself to his brother Fabius, and never to him. “I am sensible,” says he, “that this indifference arises from your supposing, with all our citizens, that I am a heedless young man, and wholly averse to the taste which now prevails in Rome, because I do not devote myself to the studies of the bar, nor cultivate the graces of elocution. But how should I do this? I am told perpetually, that the Romans expect a general, and not an orator, from the house of the Scipios. I will confess to you, (pardon the sincerity with which I reveal my thoughts,) that your coldness and indifference grieve me exceedingly.” Polybius, surprised at this unexpected address, made Scipio the kindest answer; and assured the illustrious youth, that though he generally directed himself to his brother, yet this was not out of disrespect to him, but only because Fabius was the elder; not to mention (continued Polybius) that, knowing you possessed but one soul, I conceived that I addressed both when I spoke to either of you. He then assured Scipio, that he was entirely at his command: that with regard to the sciences, for which he discovered the happiest genius, he would have opportunities sufficient to improve himself in them, from the great number of learned Grecians who resorted daily to Rome; but that, as to the art of war, which was properly his profession, and his favourite study, he (Polybius) might be of some little service to him. He had no sooner spoke these words, than Scipio, grasping his hand in a kind of rapture: “Oh! when,” says he, “shall I see the happy day, when, disengaged from all other avocations, and living with me, you will be so much my friend, as to direct your endeavours to improve my understanding and regulate my affections? It is then I shall think myself worthy of my illustrious ancestors.” From that time Polybius, overjoyed to see so young a man breathe such noble sentiments, devoted himself particularly to our Scipio, who ever after paid him as much reverence as if he had been his father.

However, Scipio did not esteem Polybius only as an excellent historian, but valued him much more, and reaped much greater advantages from him, as an able warrior and a profound politician. Accordingly, he consulted him on every occasion, and always took his advice even when he was at the head of his army; concerting in private with Polybius all the operations of the campaign, all the movements of the forces, all enterprises against the enemy, and the several measures proper for rendering them successful.

In a word, it was the common report,[^1078] that our illustrious Roman did not perform any great or good action without being under some obligation to Polybius; nor even commit an error, except when he acted without consulting him.

[^1078: Pausan. in Arcad. l. xiii. p. 505.]

I request the reader to excuse this long digression, which may be thought foreign to my subject, as I am not writing the Roman history. However, it appeared to me so well adapted to the general design I propose to myself, in this work, viz. the cultivating and improving the minds of youth, that I could not forbear introducing it here, though I was sensible this is not directly its proper place. And indeed, these examples show, how important it is that young people should receive a liberal and virtuous education; and the great benefit they reap, by frequenting and corresponding early with persons of merit; for these were the foundations whereon were built the fame and glory which have rendered Scipio immortal. But above all, how noble a model for our age (in which the most inconsiderable and even trifling concerns often create feuds and animosities between brothers and sisters, and disturb the peace of families,) is the generous disinterestedness of Scipio; who, whenever he had an opportunity of serving his relations, thought lightly of bestowing the largest sums upon them! This excellent passage of Polybius had escaped me, by its not being inserted in the folio edition of his works. It belongs indeed naturally to that book, where, treating of the taste for solid glory, I mentioned the contempt in which the ancients held riches, and the excellent use they made of them. I therefore thought myself indispensably obliged to restore, on this occasion, to young students, what I could not but blame myself for omitting elsewhere.

The History of the Family and Posterity of Masinissa.—I promised, after finishing what related to the republic of Carthage, to return to the family and posterity of Masinissa. This piece of history forms a considerable part of that of Africa, and therefore is not quite foreign to my subject.

[^1079] From the time that Masinissa had declared for the Romans under the first Scipio, he had always adhered to that honourable alliance, with an almost unparalleled zeal and fidelity.[^1080] Finding his end approaching, he wrote to the proconsul of Africa, under whose standards the younger Scipio then fought, to desire that Roman might be sent to him; adding, that he should die with satisfaction, if he could but expire in his arms, after having made him executor to his will. But believing that he should be dead, before it could be possible for him to receive this consolation, he sent for his wife and children, and spoke to them as follows: “I know no other nation but the Romans, and, among this nation, no other family but that of the Scipios. I now, in my expiring moments, empower Scipio Æmilianus to dispose, in an absolute manner, of all my possessions, and to divide my kingdom among my children. I require, that whatever Scipio may decree, shall be executed as punctually as if I myself had appointed it by my will.” After saying these words, he breathed his last, being upwards of ninety years of age.

[^1079: A.M. 3857. A. Rom. 601.]

[^1080: Appian, p. 65. Val. Max. l. v. c. 2.]

This prince, during his youth, had met with strange reverses of fortune, having been dispossessed of his kingdom, obliged to fly from province to province, and a thousand times in danger of his life.[^1081] Being supported, says the historian, by the divine protection, he was afterwards favoured, till his death, with a perpetual series of prosperity, unruffled by any sinister accident: for he not only recovered his own kingdom, but added to it that of Syphax his enemy; and extending his dominions from Mauritania, as far as Cyrene, he became the most powerful prince of all Africa. He was blessed, till he left the world, with the greatest health and vigour, which doubtless was owing to his extreme temperance, and the care he had taken to inure himself to fatigue. Though ninety years of age, he performed all the exercises used by young men,[^1082] and always rode without a saddle; and Polybius observes, (a circumstance preserved by Plutarch,[^1083]) that the day after a great victory over the Carthaginians, Masinissa was seen, sitting at the door of his tent, eating a piece of brown bread.

[^1081: Appian, p. 65.]

[^1082: Cicero introduces Cato, speaking as follows of Masinissa's vigorous constitution: Arbitror te audire, Scipio, hospes tuus Masinissa quæ faciat hodie nonaginta annos natus; cùm ingressus iter pedibus sit, in equum omnino non ascendere; cùm equo, ex equo non descendere; nullo imbre, nullo frigore adduci, ut capite operto sit; summam esse in eo corporis siccitatem. Itaque exequi omnia regis officia et munera. De Senectute.—Trans.]

[^1083: An seni gerenda sit Resp. p. 791.]

He left fifty-four sons, of whom three only were legitimate, viz. Micipsa, Gulussa, and Mastanabal.[^1084] Scipio divided the kingdom between these three, and gave considerable possessions to the rest: but the two last dying soon after, Micipsa became sole possessor of these extensive dominions. He had two sons, Adherbal and Hiempsal, and with them he educated in his palace Jugurtha his nephew, Mastanabal's son, and took as much care of him as he did of his own children.[^1085] This last-mentioned prince possessed several eminent qualities, which gained him universal esteem. Jugurtha, who was finely shaped, and very handsome, of the most delicate wit, and the most solid judgment, did not devote himself, as young men commonly do, to a life of luxury and pleasure. He used to exercise himself with persons of his own age, in running, riding, and throwing the javelin; and though he surpassed all his companions, there was not one of them but loved him. The chase was his only delight; but it was that of lions and other savage beasts. To finish his character, he excelled in all things, and spoke very little of himself: Plurimum facere, et mininum ipse de se loqui.

[^1084: Appian ibid. Val. Max. l. v. c. 2.]

[^1085: All this history of Jugurtha is extracted from Sallust.—Trans.]

Merit so conspicuous, and so generally acknowledged, began to excite some anxiety in Micipsa. He saw himself in the decline of life, and his children very young. He knew the prodigious lengths which ambition is capable of going, when a crown is in view: and that a man, with talents much inferior to those of Jugurtha, might be dazzled by so glittering a temptation, especially when united with such favourable circumstances.[^1086] In order therefore to remove a competitor so dangerous with regard to his children, he gave Jugurtha the command of the forces which he sent to the assistance of the Romans, who, at that time, were besieging Numantia, under the conduct of Scipio. Knowing Jugurtha was actuated by the most heroic bravery, he flattered himself, that he probably would rush upon danger, and lose his life. However, he was mistaken. This young prince joined to an undaunted courage, the utmost presence of mind; and, a circumstance very rarely found in persons of his age, he preserved a just medium between a timorous foresight and an impetuous rashness.[^1087] In this campaign, he won the esteem and friendship of the whole army. Scipio sent him back to his uncle with letters of recommendation, and the most advantageous testimonials of his conduct, after having given him very prudent advice with regard to the course which he ought to pursue; for knowing mankind so well, he, in all probability, had discovered certain sparks of ambition in that prince, which he feared would one day break out into a flame.

[^1086: Terrebat eum natura mortalium avida imperii, et præceps ad explendam animi cupidinem: præterea opportunitas suæ liberorumque ætatis, quæ etiam mediocres viros spe prædæ transversos agit. Sallust.—Trans.]

[^1087: Ac sanè, quod difficillimum imprimis est, et prælio strenuus erat, et bonus consilio: quorum alterum ex providentiâ timorem, alterum ex audacià temeritatem adferre plerumque solet.—Trans.]

Micipsa, pleased with the high character that was sent him of his nephew, changed his behaviour towards him, and resolved, if possible, to win his affection by kindness. Accordingly he adopted him; and by his will, made him joint-heir with his two sons. When he found his end approaching, he sent for all three, and bid them draw near his bed, where, in presence of the whole court he put Jugurtha in mind of all his kindness to him; conjuring him, in the name of the gods, to defend and protect, on all occasions, his children; who, being before related to him by the ties of blood, were now become his brethren, by his (Micipsa's) bounty. He told him,[^1088] that neither arms nor treasure constitute the strength of a kingdom, but friends, who are not won by arms nor gold, but by real services and inviolable fidelity. Now where (says he) can we find better friends than our brothers? And how can that man, who becomes an enemy to his relations, repose any confidence in, or depend on, strangers? He exhorted his sons to pay the highest reverence to Jugurtha; and to dispute no otherwise with him, than by their endeavour to equal, and, if possible, to surpass his exalted merit. He concluded with entreating them to observe for ever an inviolable attachment towards the Romans; and to consider them as their benefactor, their patron, and master. A few days after this, Micipsa expired.

[^1088: Non exercitus, neque thesauri, præsidia regni sunt, verùm amici: Quos neque armis cogere, neque auro parare queas; officio et fide pariuntur. Quis autem amicior quàm frater fratri? aut quem alienum fidum invenies, si tuis hostis fueris?—Trans.]

[^1089] Jugurtha soon threw off the mask, and began by ridding himself of Hiempsal, who had expressed himself to him with great freedom, and therefore he caused him to be murdered. This bloody action proved but too evidently to Adherbal what he himself might naturally fear.[^1090] Numidia is now divided, and sides severally with the two brothers. Mighty armies are raised by each party. Adherbal, after losing the greatest part of his fortresses, is vanquished in battle, and forced to make Rome his asylum. However, this gave Jugurtha no very great uneasiness, as he knew that money was all-powerful in that city. He therefore sent deputies thither, with orders for them to bribe the chief senators. In the first audience to which they were introduced, Adherbal represented the unhappy condition to which he was reduced, the injustice and barbarity of Jugurtha, the murder of his brother, the loss of almost all his fortresses; but the circumstance on which he laid the greatest stress was, the commands of his dying father, viz. to put his whole confidence in the Romans; declaring, that the friendship of this people would be a stronger support both to himself and his kingdom, than all the troops and treasures in the universe. His speech was of a great length, and extremely pathetic. Jugurtha's deputies made only the following answer: that Hiempsal had been killed by the Numidians, because of his great cruelty; that Adherbal was the aggressor, and yet, after having been vanquished, was come to make complaints, because he had not committed all the excesses he desired; that their sovereign entreated the senate to form a judgment of his behaviour and conduct in Africa, from that he had shown at Numantia; and to lay a greater stress on his actions, than on the accusations of his enemies. But these ambassadors had secretly employed an eloquence much more prevalent than that of words, which had not proved ineffectual. The whole assembly was for Jugurtha, a few senators excepted, who were not so void of honour as to be corrupted by money. The senate came to this resolution, that commissioners should be sent from Rome, to divide the provinces equally upon the spot between the two brothers. The reader will naturally suppose, that Jugurtha was not sparing of his treasure on this occasion; the division was made to his advantage; and yet a specious appearance of equity was preserved.

[^1089: A.M. 3887. A. Rom. 631.]

[^1090: A.M. 3888. A. Rom. 632.]

This first success of Jugurtha augmented his courage, and increased his boldness. Accordingly, he attacked his brother by open force; and whilst the latter loses his time in sending deputations to the Romans, he storms several fortresses, carries on his conquests; and, after defeating Adherbal, besieges him in Cirtha, the capital of his kingdom. During this interval ambassadors arrived from Rome, with orders, in the name of the senate and people, to the two kings, to lay down their arms, and cease all hostilities. Jugurtha, after protesting that he would obey, with the most profound reverence and submission, the commands of the Roman people, added, that he did not believe it was their intention to hinder him from defending his own life against the treacherous snares which his brother had laid for it. He concluded with saying, that he would send ambassadors forthwith to Rome, to inform the senate of his conduct. By this vague answer he eluded their orders, and would not even permit the deputies to wait upon Adherbal.

Though the latter was so closely blocked up in his capital, he yet[^1091] found means to send to Rome, to implore the assistance of the Romans against his brother, who had besieged him five months, and intended to take away his life. Some senators were of opinion, that war ought to be proclaimed immediately against Jugurtha; but still his influence prevailed, and the Romans only ordered an embassy to be sent, composed of senators of the highest distinction, among whom was Æmilius Scaurus, a factious man, who had a great ascendant over the nobility, and concealed the blackest vices under the specious appearance of virtue. Jugurtha was terrified at first; but he again found an opportunity to elude their demands, and accordingly sent them back without coming to any conclusion. Upon this, Adherbal, who had lost all hopes, surrendered upon condition of having his life spared; nevertheless, he was immediately murdered with a great number of Numidians.

[^1091: He chose two of the nimblest of those who had followed him into Cirtha; and these, induced by the great rewards he promised them, and pitying his unhappy circumstances, undertook to pass through the enemy's camp, in the night, to the neighbouring shore, and from thence to Rome. Ex iis qui unâ Cirtam profugerant, duos maximè impigros delegit: eos, multa pollicendo, ac miserando casum suum, confirmat, ubi per hostium munitiones noctu ad proximum mare, dein Romam pergerent. Sallust.—Trans.]

But though the greatest part of the people at Rome were struck with horror at this news, Jugurtha's money again obtained him defenders in the senate. However, C. Memmius, the tribune of the people, an active man, and one who hated the nobility, prevailed with the people not to suffer so horrid[^1092] a crime to go unpunished; and, accordingly, war being proclaimed against Jugurtha, Calpurnius Bestia, the consul, was appointed to carry it on.[^1093] He was endued with excellent qualities, but they were all depraved and rendered useless by his avarice. Scaurus set out with him. They at first took several towns; but Jugurtha's bribes checked the progress of these conquests; and Scaurus[^1094] himself, who till now had expressed the strongest animosity against this prince, could not resist so powerful an attack. A treaty was therefore concluded; Jugurtha feigned to submit to the Romans, and thirty elephants, some horses, with a very inconsiderable sum of money, were delivered to the quæstor.

[^1092: A.M. 3894. A. Rom. 683. Ant. J.C. 110.]

[^1093: Multæ bonæque artes animi et corporis erant, quas omnes avaritia præpediebat.—Trans.]

[^1094: Magnitudine pecuniæ à bono honestoque in pravum abstractus est.—Trans.]

But now the indignation of the people in general at Rome displayed itself in the strongest manner. Memmius the tribune inflamed them by his speeches. He caused Cassius, who was prætor, to be appointed to attend Jugurtha; and to engage him to come to Rome, under the guarantee of the Romans, in order that an inquiry might be made in his presence, who those persons were that had taken bribes. Accordingly, Jugurtha was forced to come to Rome. The sight of him raised the anger of the people still higher; but a tribune having been bribed, he prolonged the session, and at last dissolved it. A Numidian prince, grandson of Masinissa, called Massiva, being at that time in the city, was advised to solicit for Jugurtha's kingdom; which coming to the ears of the latter, he caused him to be assassinated in the midst of Rome. The murderer was seized, and delivered up to the civil magistrate, and Jugurtha was commanded to depart Italy. Upon leaving the city, he cast back his eyes several times towards it, and said, “Rome would sell itself could it meet with a purchaser; and were one to be found, it were inevitably ruined.”[^1095]

[^1095: Postquam Româ egressus est, fertur sæpe tacitus eò respiciens, postremò dixisse. Urbem venalem et maturè perituram, si emptorem invenerit.—Trans.]

And now the war broke out anew. At first the indolence, or perhaps connivance, of Albinus the consul, made it go on very slowly; but afterwards, when he returned to Rome to hold the public assemblies,[^1096] the Roman army, by the unskilfulness of his brother Aulus, having marched into a defile from whence there was no getting out, surrendered ignominiously to the enemy, who forced the Romans to submit to the ceremony of passing under the yoke, and made them engage to leave Numidia in ten days.

[^1096: For electing magistrates. Sal.—Trans.]

The reader will naturally imagine in what light so shameful a peace, concluded without the authority of the people, was considered at Rome. They could not flatter themselves with the hope of being successful in this war, till the conduct of it was given to L. Metellus the consul.[^1097] To all the rest of the virtues which constitute the great captain, he added a perfect disregard of wealth; a quality most essentially requisite against such an enemy as Jugurtha, who hitherto had always been victorious, rather by money than his sword. But the African monarch found Metellus as invincible in this, as in all other respects. He therefore was forced to venture his life, and exert his utmost bravery, through the defect of an expedient which now began to fail him. Accordingly, he signalized himself in a surprising manner; and showed in this campaign, all that could be expected from the courage, abilities, and attention of an illustrious general, to whom despair adds new vigour, and suggests new lights: he was, however, unsuccessful, because opposed by a consul, who did not suffer the most inconsiderable error to escape him, nor ever let slip an opportunity of taking advantage of the enemy.

[^1097: In Numidiam proficiscitur, magmâ spe civium, cùm propter artes bonas, tum maximè quòd adversùm divitias invictum animum gerebat.—Trans.]

Jugurtha's greatest concern was, how to secure himself from traitors. From the time he had been told that Bomilcar, in whom he reposed the utmost confidence, had a design upon his life, he enjoyed no peace. He did not believe himself safe any where; but all things, by day as well as by night, the citizen as well as the foreigner, were suspected by him; and the blackest terrors sat for ever brooding over his mind. He never got a wink of sleep, except by stealth; and often changed his bed in a manner unbecoming his rank. Starting sometimes from his slumbers, he would snatch his sword, and utter loud cries; so strongly was he haunted by fear, which almost drove him to frenzy.

Marius was Metellus's lieutenant. His boundless ambition induced him to endeavour to lessen his general's character secretly in the minds of his soldiers; and becoming soon his professed enemy and slanderer, he at last, by the most grovelling and perfidious arts, prevailed so far as to supplant Metellus, and get himself nominated in his room, to carry on the war against Jugurtha.[^1098] With what strength of mind soever Metellus might be endued on other occasions, he was totally dejected by this unforeseen blow, which even forced tears from his eyes, and compelled him to utter such expressions as were altogether unworthy so great a man. There was something very dark and vile in Marius's conduct, that displays ambition in its native and genuine colours, and shows that it extinguishes, in those who abandon themselves to it, all sense of honour and integrity.[^1099] Metellus, having anxiously endeavoured to avoid a man whose sight he could not bear, arrived in Rome, and was received there with universal acclamations. A triumph was decreed him, and the surname of Numidicus conferred upon him.

[^1098: Quibus rebus supra bonum atque honestum perculsus, neque lacrymas tenere, neque moderari linguam: vir egregius in aliis artibus, nimis molliter ægritudinem pati.—Trans.]

[^1099: A.M. 3898. A. Rom. 642.]

I thought it would be proper to reserve for the Roman history, a particular account of the events that happened in Africa, under Metellus and Marius, all which are very circumstantially described by Sallust, in his admirable history of Jugurtha. I therefore hasten to the conclusion of this war.

Jugurtha being greatly distressed in his affairs, had recourse to Bocchus king of Mauritania, whose daughter he had married. This country extends from Numidia, as far as beyond the shores of the Mediterranean opposite to Spain.[^1100] The Roman name was scarce known in it, and the people were absolutely unknown to the Romans. Jugurtha insinuated to his father-in-law, that should he suffer Numidia to be conquered, his kingdom would doubtless be involved in its ruin; especially as the Romans, who were sworn enemies to monarchy, seemed to have vowed the destruction of all the thrones in the universe. He, therefore, prevailed with Bocchus to enter into a league with him; and accordingly received, on different occasions, very considerable succours from that king.

[^1100: Now comprehending Fez, Morocco, &c.—Trans.]

This confederacy, which was cemented on either side by no other tie than that of interest, had never been strong; and a last defeat which Jugurtha met with, broke at once all the bands of it. Bocchus now meditated the dark design of delivering up his son-in-law to the Romans. For this purpose he had desired Marius to send him a trusty person. Sylla, who was an officer of uncommon merit, and served under him as quæstor, was thought every way qualified for this negotiation. He was not afraid to put himself into the hands of the barbarian king; and accordingly set out for his court. Being arrived, Bocchus, who, like the rest of his countrymen, did not pride himself on sincerity, and was for ever projecting new designs, debated within himself, whether it would not be his interest to deliver up Sylla to Jugurtha. He was a long time fluctuating in this uncertainty, and conflicting with a contrariety of sentiments: and the sudden changes which displayed themselves in his countenance, in his air, and in his whole person, showed evidently how strongly his mind was affected. At length, returning to his first design, he made his terms with Sylla, and delivered up Jugurtha into his hands, who was sent immediately to Marius.

Sylla, says Plutarch,[^1101][^1102] acted, on this occasion, like a young man fired with a strong thirst of glory, the sweets of which he had just begun to taste. Instead of ascribing to the general under whom he fought all the honour of this event, as his duty required, and which ought to be an inviolable maxim, he reserved the greatest part of it to himself, and had a ring made, which he always wore, wherein he was represented receiving Jugurtha from the hands of Bocchus; and this ring he used ever after as his signet. But Marius was so highly exasperated at this kind of insult, that he could never forgive him; and this circumstance gave rise to the implacable hatred between these two Romans, which afterwards broke out with so much fury, and cost the republic so much blood.

[^1101: Plut. in vit. Marii.]

[^1102: Οἶα νέος φιλότιμος, ἄρτι δόξης γεγευμένος, οὐκ ἤνεγκε μετρίως τό εὐτύχημα. Plut. Præcept. reip. gerend. p. 806.—Trans.]

[^1103] Marius entered Rome in triumph,[^1104] exhibiting such a spectacle to the Romans, as they could scarce believe they saw, when it passed before their eyes; I mean, Jugurtha in chains; that so formidable an enemy, during whose life they had not dared to flatter themselves with the hopes of being able to put an end to this war; so well was his courage sustained by stratagem and artifice, and his genius so fruitful in finding new expedients, even when his affairs were most desperate. We are told, that Jugurtha ran distracted, as he was walking in the triumph; that after the ceremony was ended, he was thrown into prison; and that the lictors were so eager to seize his robe, that they rent it in several pieces, and tore away the tips of his ears, to get the rich jewels with which they were adorned. In this condition he was cast, quite naked, and in the utmost terrors, into a deep dungeon, where he spent six days in struggling with hunger and the fear of death, retaining a strong desire of life to his last gasp; an end, continues Plutarch, worthy of his wicked deeds, Jugurtha having been always of opinion, that the greatest crimes might be committed to satiate his ambition; ingratitude, perfidy, black treachery, and inhuman barbarity.

[^1103: A.M. 3901. A. Rom. 615. Ant. J.C. 103.]

[^1104: Plut. in vit. Marii.]

Juba, king of Mauritania, reflected so much honour on polite literature and the sciences, that I could not, without impropriety, omit him in the history of the family of Masinissa, to whom his father, who also was named Juba, was great grandson, and grandson of Gulussa. The elder Juba signalized himself in the war between Cæsar and Pompey, by his inviolable attachment to the party of the latter.[^1105] He slew himself after the battle of Thapsus, in which his forces and those of Scipio were entirely defeated. Juba, his son, then a child, was delivered up to the conqueror, and was one of the most conspicuous ornaments of his triumph. It appears from history, that a noble education was bestowed upon Juba in Rome, where he imbibed such a variety of knowledge, as afterwards equalled him to the most learned among[^1106] the Grecians. He did not leave that city till he went to take possession of his father's dominions. Augustus restored them to him, when, by the death of Mark Antony, the provinces of the empire were absolutely at his disposal. Juba, by the lenity of his government, gained the hearts of all his subjects; who, out of a grateful sense of the felicity they had enjoyed during his reign, ranked him in the number of their gods. Pausanias speaks of a statue which the Athenians erected in his honour. It was, indeed just, that a city, which had been consecrated in all ages to the Muses, should give public testimonies of its esteem for a king who made so bright a figure among the learned. Suidas ascribes[^1107] several works to this prince, of which only the fragments are now extant. He had written the history of Arabia; the antiquities of Assyria, and those of the Romans; the history of theatres, of painting and painters; of the nature and properties of different animals, of grammar, and similar subjects; a catalogue of all which is given in Abbé Sevin's short dissertation on the life and works of the younger Juba,[^1108] whence I have extracted these few particulars.

[^1105: A.M. 3959. A. Rom. 703.]

[^1106: A.M. 3974. A. Rom. 719. Ant. J.C. 30.]

[^1107: In voce Ἰόβας.—Trans.]

[^1108: Vol. IV of the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, p. 457.—Trans.]

Book the Third. The History of the Assyrians.

Chapter I. The First Empire of the Assyrians.

Sect. I. Duration of that Empire.—The Assyrian empire was undoubtedly one of the most powerful in the world. With respect to its duration, two opinions have chiefly prevailed. Some authors, as Ctesias, whose opinion is followed by Justin, give it a duration of thirteen hundred years: others reduce it to five hundred and twenty, of which number is Herodotus. The diminution, or probably the interruption of power, which happened in this vast empire, might possibly give occasion to this difference of opinions, and may perhaps serve in some measure to reconcile them.

The history of those early times is so obscure, the monuments which convey it down to us so contrary to each other, and the systems of the moderns[^1109] upon that matter so different, that it is difficult to lay down any opinion about it, as certain and incontestable. But where certainty is not to be had, I suppose a reasonable person will be satisfied with probability; and, in my opinion, a man can hardly be deceived, if he makes the Assyrian empire equal in antiquity with the city of Babylon, its capital. Now we learn from the holy Scripture, that this was built by Nimrod, who certainly was a great conqueror, and in all probability the first and most ancient of all those who have ever aspired after that denomination.

[^1109: They that are curious to make deeper researches into this matter, may read the dissertations of Abbé Banier and M. Freret upon the Assyrian empire, in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres; for the first, see tome 3, and for the other, tome 5; as also what Father Tournemine has written upon this subject in his edition of Menochius.—Trans.]

The Babylonians, as Callisthenes, a philosopher in Alexander's retinue, wrote to Aristotle,[^1110] reckoned themselves to be at least of 1903 years' standing, when that prince entered triumphant into Babylon; which makes their origin reach back to the year of the world 1771, that is to say, 115 years after the deluge. This computation comes within a few years of the time in which we suppose Nimrod to have founded that city. Indeed, this testimony of Callisthenes, as it does not agree with any other accounts of that empire, is not esteemed authentic by the learned; but the conformity we find between it and the holy Scriptures should make us regard it.

[^1110: Porphyr. apud Simplic. in l. ii. de cœlo.]

Upon these grounds, I think we may allow Nimrod to have been the founder of the first Assyrian empire, which subsisted with more or less extent and glory upwards of 1450 years,[^1111] from the time of Nimrod to that of Sardanapalus, the last king, that is to say, from the year of the world 1800 to the year 3257.

[^1111: Here I depart from the opinion of Archbishop Usher, my ordinary guide, with respect to the duration of the Assyrian empire, which he supposes, with Herodotus, to have lasted but 520 years; but the time when Nimrod lived and Sardanapalus died I take from him.—Trans.]

[^1112] Nimrod. He is the same with Belus,[^1113] who was afterwards worshipped as a god under that appellation.

[^1112: Nimrod. A.M. 1800. Ant. J.C. 2204.]

[^1113: Belus or Baal signifies Lord.—Trans.]

He was the son of Chus, grandson of Ham, and great grandson of Noah. He was, says the Scripture, “a mighty hunter before the Lord.”[^1114] In applying himself to this laborious and dangerous exercise, he had two things in view; the first was, to gain the people's affection by delivering them from the fury and dread of wild beasts; the next was, to train up numbers of young people by this exercise of hunting to endure labour and hardship, to form them to the use of arms, to inure them to a kind of discipline and obedience, that at a proper time, after they had been accustomed to his orders and seasoned in arms, he might make use of them for other purposes more serious than hunting.

[^1114: Gen. x. 9.]

In ancient history we find some footsteps remaining of this artifice of Nimrod, whom the writers have confounded with Ninus, his son: for Diodorus has these words:[^1115] “Ninus, the most ancient of the Assyrian kings mentioned in history, performed great actions. Being naturally of a warlike disposition, and ambitious of the glory that results from valour, he armed a considerable number of young men, that were brave and vigorous like himself; trained them up a long time in laborious exercises and hardships, and by that means accustomed them to bear the fatigues of war patiently, and to face dangers with courage and intrepidity.”

[^1115: Lib. ii. p. 90.]

What the same author adds,[^1116] that Ninus entered into an alliance with the king of the Arabs, and joined forces with him, is a piece of ancient tradition, which informs us, that the sons of Chus, and by consequence, the brothers of Nimrod, all settled themselves in Arabia, along the Persian gulf, from Havilah to the Ocean; and lived near enough to their brother to lend him succours, or to receive them from him. And what the same historian further says of Ninus, that he was the first king of the Assyrians, agrees exactly with what the Scripture says of Nimrod, “that he began to be mighty upon the earth;” that is, he procured himself settlements, built cities, subdued his neighbours, united different people under one and the same authority, by the band of the same polity and the same laws, and formed them into one state; which, for those early times, was of a considerable extent, though bounded by the rivers Euphrates and Tigris; and which, in succeeding ages, made new acquisitions by degrees, and at length extended its conquests very far.

[^1116: Ibid.]

“The capital city of his kingdom,” says the Scripture,[^1117] “was Babylon.” Most of the profane historians ascribe the founding of Babylon to Semiramis,[^1118] others to Belus. It is evident, that both the one and the other are mistaken, if they speak of the first founder of that city; for it owes its beginning neither to Semiramis nor to Nimrod, but to the foolish vanity of those persons mentioned in Scripture,[^1119] who desired to build a tower and a city, that should render their memory immortal.

[^1117: Gen. x. 10.]

[^1118: Semiramis eam condiderat, vel, ut plerique tradidere, Belus, enjus regia ostenditar. Q. Curt. l. v. c. 1.—Trans.]

[^1119: Gen. xi. 4.]

Josephus relates,[^1120] upon the testimony of a Sibyl, (who must have been very ancient, and whose fictions cannot be imputed to the indiscreet zeal of any Christians,) that the gods threw down the tower by an impetuous wind, or a violent hurricane. Had this been the case, Nimrod's temerity must have been still greater, to rebuild a city and a tower which God himself had overthrown with such marks of his displeasure. But the Scripture says no such thing; and it is very probable, the building remained in the condition it was, when God put an end to the work by the confusion of languages; and that the tower consecrated to Belus, which is described by Herodotus,[^1121] was this very tower, which the sons of men pretended to raise to the clouds.

[^1120: Hist. Jud. l. i. c. 4.]

[^1121: Lib. i. c. 181.]

It is further probable, that this ridiculous design having been defeated by such an astonishing prodigy, as none could be the author of but God himself, every body abandoned the place, which had given Him offence; and that Nimrod was the first who encompassed it afterwards with walls, settled therein his friends and confederates, and subdued those that lived round about it, beginning his empire in that place, but not confining it to so narrow a compass: Fuit principium regni ejus Babylon. The other cities, which the Scripture speaks of in the same place, were in the land of Shinar, which was certainly the province of which Babylon became the metropolis.

From this country he went into that which has the name of Assyria, and there built Nineveh: De terrâ illâ egressus est Assur, et ædificavit Nineven.[^1122] This is the sense in which many learned men understand the word Assur, looking upon it as the name of a province, and not of the first man who possessed it, as if it were, egressus est in Assur, in Assyriam. And this seems to be the most natural construction, for many reasons not necessary to be recited in this place. The country of Assyria is described, in one of the prophets,[^1123] by the particular character of being the land of Nimrod: Et pascent terram Assur in gladio, et terram, Nimrod in lanceis ejus; et liberabit ab Assur, cùm venerit in terram nostram. It derived its name from Assur the son of Shem, who, without doubt, had settled himself and family there, and was probably driven out, or brought under subjection, by the usurper Nimrod.

[^1122: Gen. x. 11.]

[^1123: Mic. v. 6.]

This conqueror having possessed himself of the provinces of Assur,[^1124] did not ravage them like a tyrant, but filled them with cities, and made himself as much beloved by his new subjects as he was by his old ones; so that the historians,[^1125] who have not examined into the bottom of this affair, have thought that he made use of the Assyrians to conquer the Babylonians. Among other cities, he built one more large and magnificent than the rest, which he called Nineveh, from the name of his son Ninus, in order to immortalize his memory. The son, in his turn, out of veneration for his father, was willing that they who had served him as their king should adore him as their god, and induce other nations to render him the same worship. For it appears evident, that Nimrod is the famous Belus of the Babylonians, the first king whom the people deified for his great actions, and who showed others the way to that sort of immortality which human acquirements are supposed capable of bestowing.

[^1124: Gen. x. 11, 12.]

[^1125: Diod. l. ii. p. 90.]

I intend to speak of the mighty strength and greatness of the cities of Babylon and Nineveh, under the kings to whom their building is ascribed by profane authors, because the Scripture says little or nothing on that subject. This silence of Scripture, so little satisfactory to our curiosity, may become an instructive lesson to our piety. The holy penman has placed Nimrod and Abraham, as it were, in one view before us; and seems to have put them so near together on purpose, that we should see an example in the former of what is admired and coveted by men, and in the latter of what is acceptable and well-pleasing to God. These two persons,[^1126] so unlike one another, are the first two and chief citizens of two different cities, built on different motives, and with different principles; the one, self-love, and a desire of temporal advantages, carried even to the contemning of the Deity; the other, the love of God, even to the contemning of one's self.

[^1126: Fecerunt civitates duas amores duo: terrenam scilicet amor sui usque ad contemptum Dei; cœlestem verò amor Dei usque ad contemptum sui. S. Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. xiv. c. 28.—Trans.]

[^1127] Ninus. I have already observed, that most of the profane authors look upon him as the first founder of the Assyrian empire, and for that reason ascribe to him a great part of his father Nimrod's or Belus's actions.

[^1127: Ninus.]

Having a design to enlarge his conquests, the first thing he did was to prepare troops and officers capable of promoting his designs.[^1128] And having received powerful succours from the Arabians his neighbours, he took the field, and in the space of seventeen years conquered a vast extent of country, from Egypt as far as India and Bactriana, which he did not then venture to attack.

[^1128: Diod. l. ii. p. 90-95.]

At his return, before he entered upon any new conquests, he conceived the design of immortalizing his name by the building of a city answerable to the greatness of his power; he called it Nineveh, and built it on the eastern banks of the Tigris.[^1129] Possibly he did no more than finish the work his father had begun. His design, says Diodorus, was to make Nineveh the largest and noblest city in the world, and to put it out of the power of those that came after him ever to build or hope to build such another. Nor was he deceived in his view; for never did any city come up to the greatness and magnificence of this: it was one hundred and fifty stadia (or eighteen miles three quarters) in length, and ninety stadia (or eleven miles and one quarter) in breadth; and consequently was an oblong square. Its circumference was four hundred and eighty stadia, or sixty miles. For this reason we find it said in the prophet Jonah, “That Nineveh was an exceeding great city, of three days' journey;”[^1130] which is to be understood of the whole circuit, or compass of the city.[^1131] The walls of it were a hundred feet high, and of so considerable a thickness, that three chariots might go abreast upon them with ease. They were fortified, and adorned with fifteen hundred towers two hundred feet high.

[^1129: Diodorus says it was on the bank of the Euphrates, and speaks of it as if it was so, in many places; but he is mistaken.—Trans.]

[^1130: Jon. iii. 3.]

[^1131: It is hard to believe that Diodorus does not speak of the extent of Nineveh with some exaggeration; therefore some learned men have reduced the stadium to little more than one half, and reckon fifteen of them to the Roman mile instead of eight, the usual computation.—Trans.]

After he had finished this prodigious work, he resumed his expedition against the Bactrians. His army, according to the relation of Ctesias, consisted of seventeen hundred thousand foot, two hundred thousand horse, and about sixteen thousand chariots armed with scythes. Diodorus adds, that this ought not to appear incredible, since, not to mention the innumerable armies of Darius and Xerxes, the city of Syracuse alone, in the time of Dionysius the Tyrant, furnished one hundred and twenty thousand foot and twelve thousand horse, besides four hundred vessels well equipped and provided. And a little before Hannibal's time, Italy, including the citizens and allies, was able to send into the field near a million of men. Ninus made himself master of a great number of cities, and at last laid siege to Bactria, the capital of the country. Here he would probably have seen all his attempts miscarry, had it not been for the diligence and assistance of Semiramis, wife to one of his chief officers, a woman of an uncommon courage, and peculiarly exempt from the weakness of her sex. She was born at Ascalon, a city of Syria. I think it needless to recite the account Diodorus gives of her birth, and of the miraculous manner of her being nursed and brought up by pigeons, since that historian himself looks upon it only as a fabulous story. It was Semiramis that directed Ninus how to attack the citadel, and by her means he took it, and thus became master of the city, in which he found an immense treasure. The husband of Semiramis having killed himself, to prevent the effects of the king's threats and indignation, who had conceived a violent passion for his wife, Ninus married her.

After his return to Nineveh, he had a son by her, whom he called Ninyas. Not long after this he died, and left the queen the government of the kingdom. She, in honour of his memory, erected a magnificent monument, which remained a long time after the ruin of Nineveh.

I find no appearance of truth in what some authors relate concerning the manner of Semiramis's coming to the throne.[^1132] According to them, having secured the chief men of the state, and attached them to her interest by her benefactions and promises, she solicited the king with great importunity to put the sovereign power into her hands for the space of five days. He yielded to her entreaties, and all the provinces of the empire were commanded to obey Semiramis. These orders were executed but too exactly for the unfortunate Ninus, who was put to death, either immediately or after some years' imprisonment.

[^1132: Plut. in Mor. p. 753.]

[^1133] Semiramis. This princess applied all her thoughts to immortalize her name, and to cover the meanness of her extraction by the greatness of her enterprises.[^1134] She proposed to herself to surpass all her predecessors in magnificence, and to that end she undertook the building of the mighty Babylon,[^1135] in which work she employed two millions of men, which were collected out of all the provinces of her vast empire. Some of her successors endeavoured to adorn that city with new works and embellishments. I shall here speak of them all together, in order to give the reader a more clear and distinct idea of that stupendous city.

[^1133: Semiramis.]

[^1134: Diod. l. ii. p. 95.]

[^1135: We are not to wonder, if we find the founding of a city ascribed to different persons. It is common, even among the profane writers, to say, Such a prince built such a city, whether he was the person that first founded it, or that only embellished or enlarged it.—Trans.]

The principal works which rendered Babylon so famous, are the walls of the city; the quays and the bridge; the lake, banks, and canals, made for the draining of the river; the palaces, hanging gardens, and the temple of Belus; works of such a surprising magnificence, as is scarce to be comprehended. Dr. Prideaux having treated this subject with great extent and learning, I have only to copy, or rather abridge him.

I. The Walls.—Babylon stood on a large plain, in a very fat and rich soil.[^1136] The Avails were every way prodigious. They were in thickness eighty-seven feet, in height three hundred and fifty, and in compass four hundred and eighty furlongs, which make sixty of our miles. These walls were drawn round the city in the form of an exact square, each side of which was one hundred and twenty furlongs,[^1137] or fifteen miles, in length, and all built of large bricks cemented together with bitumen, a glutinous slime arising out of the earth in that country, which binds much stronger and firmer than mortar, and soon grows much harder than the bricks or stones themselves which it cements together.

[^1136: Herod. l. i. c. 178, 180. Diod. l. ii. p. 95, 96. Q. Curt. l. v. c. 1.]

[^1137: I relate things as I find them in the ancient authors, which Dean Prideaux has also done; but I cannot help believing that great abatements are to be made in what they say as to the immense extent of Babylon and Nineveh.—Trans.]

These walls were surrounded on the outside with a vast ditch, full of water, and lined with bricks on both sides. The earth that was dug out of it made the bricks wherewith the walls were built; and therefore, from the vast height and breadth of the walls may be inferred the greatness of the ditch.

In every side of this great square were twenty-five gates, that is, a hundred in all, which were all made of solid brass; and hence it is, that when God promises to Cyrus the conquest of Babylon, he tells him,[^1138] that he would break in pieces before him the gates of brass. Between every two of these gates were three towers, and four more at the four corners of this great square, and three between each of these corners and the next gate on either side; every one of these towers was ten feet higher than the walls. But this is to be understood only of those parts of the wall where there was need of towers.

[^1138: Isa. xlv. 2.]

From the twenty-five gates in each side of this great square went twenty-five streets, in straight lines to the gates, which were directly over-against them, in the opposite side; so that the whole number of the streets was fifty, each fifteen miles long, whereof twenty-five went one way, and twenty-five the other, directly crossing each other at right angles. And besides these, there were also four half streets, which had houses only on one side, and the wall on the other; these went round the four sides of the city next the walls, and were each of them two hundred feet broad; the rest were about a hundred and fifty. By these streets thus crossing each other, the whole city was cut out into six hundred and seventy-six squares, each of which was four furlongs and a half on every side, that is, two miles and a quarter in circumference. Round these squares, on every side towards the street, stood the houses (which were not contiguous, but had void spaces between them,) all built three or four stories high, and beautified with all manner of ornaments towards the streets.[^1139] The space within in the middle of each square, was likewise all void ground, employed for yards, gardens, and other such uses; so that Babylon was greater in appearance than reality, near one half of the city being taken up in gardens and other cultivated lands, as we are told by Q. Curtius.

[^1139: Quint. Curt. l. v. c. 1.]

II. The Quays and Bridge.—A branch of the river Euphrates ran quite cross the city, from the north to the south side;[^1140] on each side of the river was a quay, and a high wall built of brick and bitumen, of the same thickness as the walls that went round the city. In these walls, over-against every street that led to the river, were gates of brass, and from them descents by steps to the river, for the conveniency of the inhabitants, who used to pass over from one side to the other in boats, having no other way of crossing the river before the building of the bridge. The brazen gates were always open in the daytime, and shut in the night.

[^1140: Herod. l. i. c. 180 and 186. Diod. l. ii. p. 96.]

The bridge was not inferior to any of the other buildings, either in beauty or magnificence; it was a furlong in length,[^1141] and thirty feet in breadth, built with wonderful art, to supply the defect of a foundation in the bottom of the river, which was all sandy. The arches were made of huge stones, fastened together with chains of iron and melted lead. Before they began to build the bridge, they turned the course of the river, and laid its channel dry, having another view in so doing, besides that of laying the foundations more commodiously, as I shall explain hereafter. And as every thing was prepared beforehand, both the bridge and the quays, which I have already described, were built in that interval.

[^1141: Diodorus says, this bridge was five furlongs in length, which can hardly be true, since the Euphrates was but one furlong broad. Strab. l. xvi. p 738.—Trans.]

III. The Lake, Ditches, and Canals, made for the draining of the River.—These works, objects of admiration for the skilful in all ages, were still more useful than magnificent.[^1142] In the beginning of the summer, on the sun's melting the snow on the mountains of Armenia, there arises a vast increase of waters, which, running into the Euphrates in the months of June, July, and August, makes it overflow its banks, and occasion such another inundation as the Nile does in Egypt. To prevent the damage which both the city and country received from these inundations, at a very considerable distance above the town two artificial canals were cut, which turned the course of these waters into the Tigris, before they reached Babylon.[^1143] And to secure the country yet more from the danger of inundations, and to keep the river within its channel, they raised prodigious banks on both sides the river, built with brick cemented with bitumen, which began at the head of the artificial canals, and extended below the city.[^1144]

[^1142: Strab. l. xvi. p. 740. Plin. l. v. c. 26.]

[^1143: Abyd. ap Eus. Prœp. Evang. l. ix.]

[^1144: Abyd. ib. Herod. l. i. c. 185.]

To facilitate the making of these works, it was necessary to turn the course of the river, for which purpose, to the west of Babylon, was dug a prodigious artificial lake, forty miles square,[^1145] one hundred and sixty in compass, and thirty-five feet deep, according to Herodotus, and seventy-five, according to Megasthenes. Into this lake was the whole river turned, by an artificial canal cut from the west side of it, till the whole work was finished, when it was made to flow in its former channel. But that the Euphrates, in the time of its increase, might not overflow the city, through the gates on its sides, this lake, with the canal from the river, was still preserved. The water received into the lake at the time of these overflowings was kept there all the year, as in a common reservoir, for the benefit of the country, to be let out by sluices, at convenient times for the watering of the lands below it. The lake, therefore, was equally useful in defending the country from inundations, and making it fertile. I relate the wonders of Babylon as they are delivered down to us by the ancients; but there are some of them which are scarce to be comprehended or believed, of which number is the vast extent of the lake which I have just described.

[^1145: The author follows Herodotus, who makes it four hundred and twenty furlongs, or fifty-two miles square; but I choose to follow Dean Prideaux, who prefers the account of Megasthenes.—Trans.]

Berosus, Megasthenes, and Abydenus, quoted by Josephus and Eusebius, make Nebuchadnezzar the author of most of these works; but Herodotus ascribes the bridge, the two quays of the river, and the lake, to Nitocris, the daughter-in-law of that monarch. Perhaps Nitocris might finish what her father left imperfect at his death, on which account that historian might give her the honour of the whole undertaking.

IV. The Palaces, and Hanging Gardens.[^1146]—At the two ends of the bridge were two palaces, which had a communication with each other by a vault, built under the channel of the river, at the time of its being dry. The old palace, which stood on the east side of the river, was thirty furlongs (or three miles and three quarters) in compass; near which stood the temple of Belus, of which we shall soon speak. The new palace, which stood on the west side of the river, opposite to the other, was sixty furlongs (or seven miles and a half) in compass. It was surrounded with three walls, one within another, with considerable spaces between them. These walls, as also those of the other palace, were embellished with an infinite variety of sculptures, representing all kinds of animals, to the life. Amongst the rest was a curious hunting-piece, in which Semiramis on horseback was throwing her javelin at a leopard, and her husband Ninus piercing a lion.

[^1146: Diod. l. ii. p. 96, 97.]

In this last palace, were the hanging gardens, so celebrated among the Greeks.[^1147] They contained a square of four hundred feet on every side, and were carried up in the manner of several large terraces, one above another, till the height equalled that of the walls of the city. The ascent was from terrace to terrace, by stairs ten feet wide. The whole pile was sustained by vast arches, raised upon other arches, one above another, and strengthened by a wall, surrounding it on every side, of twenty-two feet in thickness. On the top of the arches were first laid large flat stones, sixteen feet long, and four broad; over these was a layer of reeds, mixed with a great quantity of bitumen, upon which were two rows of bricks, closely cemented together with plaster. The whole was covered with thick sheets of lead, upon which lay the mould of the garden. And all this floorage was contrived to keep the moisture of the mould from running away through the arches. The earth laid hereon was so deep, that the greatest trees might take root in it; and with such the terraces were covered, as well as with all other plants and flowers, that were proper to adorn a pleasure-garden. In the upper terrace there was an engine, or kind of pump, by which water was drawn up out of the river, and from thence the whole garden was watered. In the spaces between the several arches, upon which this whole structure rested, were large and magnificent apartments, that were very light, and had the advantage of a beautiful prospect.

[^1147: Ibid. p. 98, 99. Strab. l. xvi. p. 738. Quint. Curt. l. v. c. 1.]

Amytis, the wife of Nebuchadnezzar, having been bred in Media, (for she was the daughter of Astyages, the king of that country,) had been much delighted with the mountains and woody parts of that country.[^1148] And as she desired to have something like it in Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, to gratify her, caused this prodigious edifice to be erected: Diodoras gives much the same account of the matter, but without naming the persons.

[^1148: Beros. ap. Jos. cont. App. l. i. c. 6.]

V. The Temple of Belus.[^1149]—Another of the great works at Babylon was the temple of Belus, which stood, as I have mentioned already, near the old palace. It was most remarkable for a prodigious tower, that stood in the middle of it. At the foundation, according to Herodotus, it was a square of a furlong on each side, that is, half a mile in the whole compass, and (according to Strabo) it was also a furlong in height. It consisted of eight towers, built one above the other, decreasing regularly to the top, for which reason Strabo calls the whole a pyramid. It is not only asserted, but proved, that this tower much exceeded the greatest of the pyramids of Egypt in height. Therefore we have good reason to believe, as Bochart asserts,[^1150] that this is the very same tower which was built there at the confusion of languages; and the rather, because it is attested by several profane authors, that this tower was all built of bricks and bitumen, as the Scriptures tell us the tower of Babel was. The ascent to the top was by stairs on the outside round it; that is, perhaps, there was an easy sloping ascent in the side of the outer wall, which, turning by very slow degrees in a spiral line eight times round the tower from the bottom to the top, had the same appearance as if there had been eight towers placed upon one another. In these different stories were many large rooms, with arched roofs supported by pillars. Over the whole, on the top of the tower, was an observatory, by the benefit of which the Babylonians became more expert in astronomy than all other nations, and made, in a short time, the great progress in it ascribed to them in history.

[^1149: Herod. l. i. c. 181. Diod. l. ii. p. 98. Strab. l. xvi. p. 738.]

[^1150: Phal part. 1 l. i. c. 9.]

But the chief use to which this tower was designed, was the worship of the god Belus or Baal, as also that of several other deities; for which reason there was a multitude of chapels in different parts of the tower. The riches of this temple in statues, tables, censers, cups, and other sacred vessels, all of massy gold, were immense. Among other images, there was one forty feet high, which weighed a thousand Babylonish talents. The Babylonish talent, according to Pollux in his Onomasticon, contained seven thousand Attic drachmas, and consequently was a sixth part more than the Attic talent, which contains but six thousand drachmas.

According to the calculation which Diodorus makes of the riches contained in this temple, the sum total amounts to six thousand three hundred Babylonish talents of gold.

The sixth part of six thousand three hundred is one thousand and fifty; consequently six thousand three hundred Babylonish talents of gold are equivalent to seven thousand three hundred and fifty Attic talents of gold.

Now seven thousand three hundred and fifty Attic talents of silver are worth upwards of two millions and one hundred thousand pounds sterling. The proportion between gold and silver among the ancients we reckon as ten to one; therefore seven thousand three hundred and fifty Attic talents of gold amount to above one and twenty millions sterling.

This temple stood till the time of Xerxes;[^1151] but he, on his return from his Grecian expedition, demolished it entirely, after having first plundered it of all its immense riches. Alexander, on his return to Babylon from his Indian expedition, purposed to have rebuilt it; and in order thereto, set ten thousand men to work, to rid the place of its rubbish; but, after they had laboured herein two months, Alexander died, and that put an end to the undertaking.

[^1151: Herod. l. i. c. 183. Strab. l. xvi. p. 738. Arrian, l. vii. p. 480.]

Such were the chief works which rendered Babylon so famous; the greater part of them are ascribed by profane authors to Semiramis, to whose history it is now time to return.

When she had finished all these great undertakings, she thought fit to make a progress through the several parts of her empire;[^1152] and, wherever she came, left monuments of her magnificence by many noble structures which she erected, either for the conveniency or ornament of her cities; she was particularly careful to have water brought by aqueducts to such places as wanted it, and to make the highways easy, by cutting through mountains, and filling up valleys. In the time of Diodorus, there were still monuments to be seen in many places, with her name inscribed upon them.

[^1152: Diod. l. ii. p. 100-108.]

The authority this queen had over her people seems very extraordinary, since we find her presence alone capable of appeasing a sedition.[^1153] One day, as she was dressing herself, word was brought her of a tumult in the city. Whereupon she went out immediately, with her head half dressed, and did not return till the disturbance was entirely appeased. A statue was erected in remembrance of this action, representing her in that very attitude and undress, which had not hindered her from flying to her duty.

[^1153: Val. Max. l. ix. c. 3.]

Not satisfied with the vast extent of dominions left her by her husband, she enlarged them by the conquest of a great part of Æthiopia. Whilst she was in that country, she had the curiosity to visit the temple of Jupiter Ammon, to inquire of the oracle how long she had to live. According to Diodorus, the answer she received was, that she should not die till her son Ninyas conspired against her, and that after her death one part of Asia would pay her divine honours.

Her greatest and last expedition was against India; on this occasion she raised an innumerable army out of all the provinces of her empire, and appointed Bactra for the rendezvous. As the strength of the Indians consisted chiefly in their great number of elephants, she caused a multitude of camels to be accoutred in the form of elephants, in hopes of deceiving the enemy. It is said that Perseus long after used the same stratagem against the Romans; but neither of them succeeded in this artifice. The Indian king having notice of her approach, sent ambassadors to ask her who she was, and with what right, having never received any injury from him, she came out of wantonness to attack his dominions; adding, that her boldness should soon meet with the punishment it deserved. Tell your master (replied the queen) that in a little time I myself will let him know who I am. She advanced immediately towards the river[^1154] from which the country takes its name; and having prepared a sufficient number of boats, she attempted to pass it with her army. Their passage was a long time disputed, but after a bloody battle she put her enemies to flight. Above a thousand of their boats were sunk, and above a hundred thousand of their men taken prisoners. Encouraged by this success, she advanced directly into the country, leaving sixty thousand men behind to guard the bridge of boats, which she had built over the river. This was just what the king desired, who fled on purpose to bring her to an engagement in the heart of his country. As soon as he thought her far enough advanced, he faced about, and a second engagement ensued, more bloody than the first. The counterfeit elephants could not long sustain the shock of the real ones: these routed her army, crushing whatever came in their way. Semiramis did all that lay in her power to rally and encourage her troops, but in vain. The king, perceiving her engaged in the fight, advanced towards her, and wounded her in two places, but not mortally. The swiftness of her horse soon carried her beyond the reach of her enemies. As her men crowded to the bridge, to repass the river, great numbers of them perished, through the disorder and confusion unavoidable on such occasions. When those that could save themselves were safely over, she destroyed the bridge, and by that means stopt the enemy; and the king likewise, in obedience to an oracle, had given orders to his troops not to pass the river, nor pursue Semiramis any farther. The queen, having made an exchange of prisoners at Bactra, returned to her own dominions with scarce one-third of her army, which (according to Ctesias) consisted of three million foot, and five hundred thousand horse, besides the camels and chariots armed for war, of which she had a very considerable number. I have no doubt that this account is highly exaggerated, or that there is some mistake in the numeral characters. She, and Alexander after her, were the only persons that ever ventured to carry the war beyond the river Indus.

[^1154: Indus.—Trans.]

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, and such immense treasures of gold and silver; all which seem to be of a later date. The same thing may likewise be said of the magnificence of the buildings, ascribed to them. It is probable, the Greek historians, who came so many ages afterwards, deceived by the similarity of names, by their ignorance in chronology, and the resemblance of one event with another, may have ascribed such things to more ancient princes, as belonged to those of a later date; or may have attributed a number of exploits and enterprises to one, which ought to be divided amongst a series of them, succeeding one another.

Semiramis, some time after her return, discovered that her son was plotting against her, and one of her principal officers had offered him his assistance. She then called to mind the oracle of Jupiter Ammon; and believing that her end approached, without inflicting any punishment on the officer, who was taken into custody, she voluntarily abdicated the throne, put the government into the hands of her son, and withdrew from the sight of men, hoping speedily to have divine honours paid to her according to the promise of the oracle. And indeed we are told, she was worshipped by the Assyrians, under the form of a dove. She lived sixty-two years, of which she reigned forty-two.

There are in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres[^1155] two learned dissertations upon the Assyrian empire, and particularly on the reign and actions of Semiramis.

[^1155: Vol. iii. p. 343, &c.]

What Justin[^1156] says of Semiramis, namely, that after her husband's decease, not daring either to commit the government to her son, who was then too young, or openly to take it upon herself, she governed under the name and habit of Ninyas, and that, after having reigned in that manner above forty years, falling passionately in love with her own son, she endeavoured to induce him to comply with her criminal desires, and was slain by him: all this, I say, is so void of all appearance of truth, that to go about to confute it would be but losing time. It must however be owned, that almost all the authors who have spoken of Semiramis, give us but a disadvantageous idea of her chastity.

[^1156: Lib. i. c. 2.]

I do not know but that the glorious reign of this queen might partly induce Plato to maintain, in his Commonwealth,[^1157] that women as well as men ought to be admitted into the management of public affairs, the conducting of armies, and the government of states; and, by necessary consequence, ought to be trained up in the same exercises as men, as well for the forming of the body as the mind. Nor does he so much as except those exercises, wherein it was customary to fight stark naked, alleging[^1158] that the virtue of the sex would be a sufficient covering for them.

[^1157: Lib. v. de Rep. 451-457.]

[^1158: Ἐπείτερ ἀρετὴν ἀντὶ ἱματίων ἁμφιέσονται.]

It is just matter of surprise to find a philosopher so judicious in other respects, openly combating the most common and most natural maxims of modesty and decency, virtues which are the principal ornament of the female sex, and insisting so strongly upon a principle, sufficiently confuted by the constant practice of all ages, and of almost all nations in the world.

Aristotle, wiser in this than his master Plato, without doing the least injustice to the real merit and essential qualities of the sex, has with great judgment marked[^1159] out the different ends to which man and woman are ordained, from the different qualities of body and mind, wherewith they are endowed by the Author of nature, who has given the one strength of body and intrepidity of mind to enable him to undergo the greatest hardships, and face the most imminent dangers; whilst the other, on the contrary, is of a weak and delicate constitution, accompanied with a natural softness and modest timidity, which render her more fit for a sedentary life, and dispose her to keep within the precincts of the house, and to employ herself in the concerns of prudent and industrious economy.

[^1159: De cura rei fam. l. i. c. 3.]

Xenophon is of the same opinion with Aristotle;[^1160] and in order to set off the occupation of the wife, who confines herself within her house, agreeably compares her to the mother-bee, commonly called the queen-bee, who alone governs and has the superintendence of the whole hive, who distributes all their employments, encourages their industry, presides over the building of their little cells, takes care of the nourishment and subsistence of her numerous family; regulates the quantity of honey appointed for that purpose, and at fixed and proper seasons sends abroad the new swarms in colonies, to ease and disburthen the hive of its superfluous inhabitants. He remarks, with Aristotle, the difference of constitution and inclinations, designedly made by the Author of nature between man and woman, to point out to each of them their proper and peculiar offices and functions.

[^1160: De administr. dom. p. 839.]

This allotment, far from degrading or lessening the woman, is really for her advantage and honour, in confiding to her a kind of domestic empire and government, administered only by gentleness, reason, equity, and good nature; and in giving her frequent occasions of concealing the most valuable and excellent qualities under the inestimable veil of modesty and submission. For it must ingenuously be owned, that at all times, and in all conditions, there have been women, who by a real and solid merit have distinguished themselves above their sex; as there have been innumerable instances of men, who by their defects have dishonoured theirs. But these are only particular cases, which form no rule, and which ought not to prevail against an establishment founded in nature, and prescribed by the Creator himself.

[^1161] Ninyas.[^1162] This prince was in no respect like those from whom he received his birth, and to whose throne he succeeded. Wholly intent upon his pleasures, he kept himself shut up in his palace, and seldom showed himself to his people. To keep them in their duty, he had always at Nineveh a certain number of regular troops, furnished every year from the several provinces of his empire, at the expiration of which term they were succeeded by the like number of other troops on the same conditions; the king putting a commander at the head of them, on whose fidelity he could depend. He made use of this method, that the officers might not have time to gain the affections of the soldiers, and so form any conspiracies against him.

[^1161: Ninyas.]

[^1162: Diod. l. ii. p. 108.]

His successors for thirty generations followed his example and even surpassed him in indolence. Their history is absolutely unknown, there remaining no footsteps of it.

[^1163] In Abraham's time the Scripture speaks of Amraphael, king of Shinar, the country where Babylon was situated, who with two other princes followed Chedorlaomer, king of the Elamites, whose tributary he probably was, in the war carried on by the latter against five kings of the land of Canaan.

[^1163: A.M. 2092. Ant. J.C. 1912.]

[^1164] It was under the government of these inactive princes, that Sesostris, king of Egypt, extended his conquests so far in the East. But as his power was of a short duration, and not supported by his successors, the Assyrian empire soon returned to its former state.

[^1164: A.M. 2513. Ant. J.C. 1491.]

[^1165] Plato, a curious observer of antiquities, makes the kingdom of Troy, in the time of Priam, dependent on the Assyrian empire.[^1166] And Ctesias says, that Teutamus, the twentieth king after Ninyas, sent a considerable body of troops to the assistance of the Trojans, under the conduct of Memnon, the son of Tithonus, at a time when the Assyrian empire had subsisted above a thousand years; which agrees exactly with the time, wherein I have placed the foundation of that empire. But the silence of Homer concerning so mighty a people, and one which must needs have been well known, renders this fact exceeding doubtful. And it must be owned, that whatever relates to the times of the ancient history of the Assyrians, is attended with great difficulties, into which my plan does not permit me to enter.

[^1165: A.M. 2820. Ant. J.C. 1184.]

[^1166: De Leg. l. iii. p 685.]

[^1167] Pul. The Scripture informs us, that Pul, king of Assyria, being come into the land of Israel, had a thousand talents of silver given him by Menahem, king of the ten tribes, to engage him to lend him assistance, and secure him on his throne.[^1168]

[^1167: Pul. A.M. 3233. Ant. J.C. 771.]

[^1168: 2 Kings xv. 19.]

This Pul is supposed to be the king of Nineveh, who repented, with all his people, at the preaching of Jonah.

He is also thought to be the father of Sardanapalus, the last king of the Assyrians, called, according to the custom of the eastern nations, Sardanpul, that is to say, Sardan, the son of Pul.

[^1169] Sardanapalus. This prince surpassed all his predecessors in effeminacy, luxury, and cowardice.[^1170] He never went out of his palace, but spent all his time amongst a company of women, dressed and painted like them, and employed like them at the distaff. He placed all his happiness and glory in the possession of immense treasures, in feasting and rioting, and indulging himself in all the most infamous and criminal pleasures. He ordered two verses to be put upon his tomb, which imported, that he carried away with him all that he had eaten, and all the pleasures he had enjoyed, but left all the rest behind him.

[^1169: Sardanapalus.]

[^1170: Diod. l. ii. p. 109-115. Athen. l. xii. p. 529, 530. Just. l. i. c. 3.]

Hæc habeo quæ edi, quæque exaturata libido
Hausit: at illa jacent multa et præclara relicta.[^1171]

[^1171: Κεῖν᾽ ἔχω ὅσσ᾽ ἔφαγον, καὶ ἐφύβρισα, καὶ μετ᾽ ἔρωτος Τέρπν᾽ ἔπαθον; τὰ δὲ πολλὰ καὶ ὄλβια πάντα λέλειπται.

Quid aliud, inquit Aristoteles, in bovis, non in regis sepulchro, inscriberes? Hæc habere se mortuum dicit, quæ ne vivus quidem diutiùs habebat, quàm fruebatur. Cic. Tusc. Quæst. l. v. n. 101.—Trans.]

An epitaph, says Aristotle, fit for a hog.

Arbaces, governor of Media, having found means to get into the palace, and having with his own eyes seen Sardanapalus in the midst of his infamous seraglio; enraged at such a spectacle, and not able to endure that so many brave men should be subject to a prince more soft and effeminate than the women themselves, immediately formed a conspiracy against him. Belesis, governor of Babylon, and several others, entered into it. On the first rumour of this revolt, the king hid himself in the inmost part of his palace. Being obliged afterwards to take the field with some forces which he had assembled, he at first gained three successive victories over the enemy, but was afterwards overcome, and pursued to the gates of Nineveh; wherein he shut himself, in hopes the rebels would never be able to take a city so well fortified, and stored with provisions for a considerable time: the siege proved indeed of very great length. It had been declared by an ancient oracle, that Nineveh could never be taken, unless the river became an enemy to the city. These words buoyed up Sardanapalus, because he looked upon the thing as impossible. But when he saw that the Tigris, by a violent inundation, had thrown down twenty stadia[^1172] of the city wall, and by that means opened a passage to the enemy, he understood the meaning of the oracle, and thought himself lost.[^1173] He resolved, however, to die in such a manner, as, according to his opinion, should cover the infamy of his scandalous and effeminate life. He ordered a pile of wood to be made in his palace, and setting fire to it, burnt himself, his eunuchs, his women, and his treasures. Athenæus makes these treasures amount to a thousand myriads of talents of gold,[^1174] and ten times as many talents of silver, which, without reckoning any thing else, is a sum that exceeds all credibility. A myriad contains ten thousand; and one single myriad of talents of silver is worth thirty millions of French money, or about one million four hundred thousand pounds sterling. A man is lost, if he attempts to sum up the whole value; which induces me to believe, that Athenæus must have very much exaggerated in his computation; however, we may be assured, from his account, that the treasures were immensely great.

[^1172: Two miles and a half.—Trans.]

[^1173: A.M. 3257. Ant. J.C. 747.]

[^1174: About fourteen hundred millions sterling.—Trans.]

Plutarch, in his second treatise,[^1175] dedicated to the praise of Alexander the Great, wherein he examines in what the true greatness of princes consists, after having shown that it can arise from nothing but their own personal merit, confirms it by two very different examples, taken from the history of the Assyrians, in which we are now engaged. Semiramis and Sardanapalus (says he) both governed the same kingdom; both had the same people, the same extent of country, the same revenues, the same forces and number of troops; but they had not the same dispositions, nor the same views. Semiramis, raising herself above her sex, built magnificent cities, equipped fleets, armed legions, subdued neighbouring nations, penetrated into Arabia and Ethiopia, and carried her victorious arms to the extremities of Asia, spreading consternation and terror everywhere. Whereas Sardanapalus, as if he had entirely renounced his sex, spent all his time in the heart of his palace, perpetually surrounded with a company of women, whose dress and even manners he had adopted, applying himself with them to the spindle and the distaff, neither understanding nor doing any other thing than spinning, eating and drinking, and wallowing in all manner of infamous pleasure. Accordingly, a statue was erected to him, after his death, which represented him in the posture of a dancer, with an inscription upon it, in which he addressed himself to the spectator in these words: Eat, drink, and be merry; every thing else is nothing: an inscription very suitable to the epitaph he himself had ordered to be put upon his monument.[^1176]

[^1175: Pag. 335, 336.]

[^1176: Ἔσθις, πῖνε, ἀφροδισίαζε; τ᾽ ἄλλα δὲ ἐδέν.]

Plutarch in this place judges of Semiramis, as almost all the profane historians do of the glory of conquerors. But, if we would make a true judgment of things, was the unbounded ambition of that queen much less blamable, than the dissolute effeminacy of Sardanapalus? Which of the two vices did most mischief to mankind?

We are not to wonder that the Assyrian empire should fall under such a prince; but undoubtedly it was not till after having passed through various augmentations, diminutions, and revolutions, common to all states, even to the greatest, during the course of several ages. This empire had subsisted above 1450 years.

Of the ruins of this vast empire were formed three considerable kingdoms; that of the Medes, which Arbaces, the principal head of the conspiracy, restored to its liberty; that of the Assyrians of Babylon, which was given to Belesis, governor of that city; and that of the Assyrians of Nineveh, the first king whereof took the name of Ninus the younger.

In order to understand the history of the second Assyrian empire, which is very obscure, and of which little is said by historians, it is proper, and even absolutely necessary, to compare what is said of it by profane authors with what we are informed concerning it by holy Scripture; that by the help of that double light we may have the clearer idea of the two empires of Nineveh and Babylon, which for some time were separate and distinct, and afterwards united and confounded together. I shall first treat of this second Assyrian empire, and then return to the kingdom of the Medes.

Chapter II. The Second Assyrian Empire, both of Nineveh and Babylon.

This second Assyrian empire continued two hundred and ten years, reckoning to the year in which Cyrus, who was become absolute master of the East by the death of his father Cambyses and his father-in-law Cyaxares, published the famous edict, whereby the Jews were permitted to return into their own country, after a seventy years' captivity at Babylon.

[^1177] Kings of Babylon.[^1178]—Belesis. He is the same as Nabonassar, from whose reign began the famous astronomical epocha at Babylon, called from his name the Æra of Nabonassar. In the holy Scriptures he is called Baladan. He reigned but twelve years, and was succeeded by his son:

[^1177: Belesis. A.M. 3257. Ant. J.C. 747.]

[^1178: 2 Kings xx. 12.]

[^1179] Merodach-Baladan. This is the prince who sent ambassadors to king Hezekiah, to congratulate him on the recovery of his health, of which we shall speak hereafter.[^1180] After him there reigned several other kings of Babylon,[^1181] with whose story we are entirely unacquainted. I shall therefore proceed to the kings of Nineveh.

[^1179: Merodach-Baladan.]

[^1180: Ibid.]

[^1181: Can. Ptol.]

[^1182] Kings of Nineveh.—Tiglath-Pileser. This is the name given by the holy Scripture to the king, who is supposed to be the first that reigned at Nineveh, after the destruction of the ancient Assyrian empire. He is called Thilgamus, by Ælian.[^1183] He is said to have taken the name of Ninus the younger, in order to honour and distinguish his reign by the name of so ancient and illustrious a prince.

[^1182: Tiglath-Pileser. A.M. 3257. Ant. J.C. 747.]

[^1183: Lib. xii. hist. anim. c. 21. Castor apud Euseb. Chron. p. 49.]

Ahaz, king of Judah,[^1184] whose incorrigible impiety could not be reclaimed, either by the divine favours or chastisements, finding himself attacked at the same time by the kings of Syria and Israel, robbed the temple of part of its gold and silver, and sent it to Tiglath-Pileser, to purchase his assistance; promising him besides to become his vassal, and to pay him tribute. The king of Assyria finding so favourable an opportunity of adding Syria and Palestine to his empire, readily accepted the proposal. Advancing that way with a numerous army, he beat Rezin, took Damascus, and put an end to the kingdom erected there by the Syrians, as God had foretold by his prophets Isaiah and Amos[^1185]. From thence he marched against Pekah, and took all that belonged to the kingdom of Israel beyond Jordan, as well as all Galilee. But he made Ahaz pay very dear for his protection, still exacting of him such exorbitant sums of money, that for the payment of them he was obliged not only to exhaust his own treasures, but to take all the gold and silver of the temple. Thus this alliance served only to drain the kingdom of Judah, and to bring into its neighbourhood the powerful kings of Nineveh; who afterwards became so many instruments in the hand of God for the chastisement of his people.

[^1184: 2 Kings xvi. 7, &c.]

[^1185: Is. viii. 4. Am. i. 5.]

[^1186] Shalmanezer. Sabacus, the Ethiopian, whom the Scripture calls So, having made himself master of Egypt, Hoshea, king of Samaria, entered into an alliance with him, hoping by that means to shake off the Assyrian yoke.[^1187] To this end he withdrew from his dependence upon Shalmanezer, refusing to pay him any further tribute, or make him the usual presents.

[^1186: Shalmanezer. A.M. 3276. Ant. J.C. 728.]

[^1187: 2 Kings xvii.]

Shalmanezer, to punish him for his presumption, marched against him with a powerful army; and after having subdued all the plain country, shut him up in Samaria, where he kept him closely besieged for three years; at the end of which he took the city, loaded Hoshea with chains, and threw him into prison for the rest of his days; carried away the people captive, and planted them in Halah and Habor, cities of the Medes. And thus was the kingdom of Israel, or of the ten tribes, destroyed, as God had often threatened by his prophets. This kingdom, from the time of its separation from that of Judah, lasted about two hundred and fifty years.

It was at this time that Tobit, with Anna his wife, and his son Tobias, was carried captive into Assyria, where he became one of the principal officers of king Shalmanezer.[^1188]

[^1188: Tob. 1.]

Shalmanezer died, after having reigned fourteen years, and was succeeded by his son:

[^1189] Sennacherib. He is also called Sargon in Scripture.[^1190]

[^1189: Sennacherib. A.M. 3287. Ant. J.C. 717.]

[^1190: Is. xx. 1. 2 Kings xviii. and xix.]

As soon as this prince was settled on the throne, he renewed the demand of the tribute exacted by his father from Hezekiah. Upon his refusal he declared war against him, and entered into Judea with a mighty army. Hezekiah, grieved to see his kingdom pillaged, sent ambassadors to him, to desire peace upon any terms he would prescribe. Sennacherib, seemingly mollified, entered into treaty with him, and demanded a very great sum of gold and silver. The holy king exhausted both the treasures of the temple, and his own coffers, to pay it. The Assyrian, regarding neither the sanction of oaths nor treaties, still continued the war, and pushed on his conquests more vigorously than ever. Nothing was able to withstand his power, and of all the strong places of Judah, none remained untaken but Jerusalem, which was likewise reduced to the utmost extremity. At this very juncture,[^1191] Sennacherib was informed, that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, who had joined his forces with those of the king of Egypt, was coming up to succour the besieged city. Now it was contrary to the express command of God, as well as the remonstrances of Isaiah and Hezekiah, that the chief men at Jerusalem had required any foreign assistance. The Assyrian prince marched immediately to meet the approaching enemy, after having written a letter to Hezekiah, full of blasphemy against the God of Israel, whom he insolently boasted he would speedily vanquish, as he had done all the gods of the other nations round about him. In short, he discomfited the Ægyptians, and pursued them even into their own country, which he ravaged, and returned laden with spoil.

[^1191: 2 Kings xix. 9.]

It was probably during Sennacherib's absence, which was pretty long, or at least some little time before, that Hezekiah fell sick, and was cured in a miraculous manner;[^1192] and that (as a sign of God's fulfilling the promise he had made him of curing him so perfectly, that within three days he should be able to go to the temple,) the shadow of the sun went ten degrees backwards upon the dial of the palace. Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylon, being informed of the miraculous cure of king Hezekiah, sent ambassadors to him with letters and presents, to congratulate him upon that occasion, and to acquaint themselves with the miracle that had happened in the land at this juncture, with respect to the sun's retrogradation ten degrees. Hezekiah was extremely sensible of the honour done him by that prince, and very forward to show his ambassadors the riches and treasures he possessed, and to let them see the whole magnificence of his palace. Humanly speaking, there was nothing in this proceeding but what was allowable and commendable; but in the eyes of the supreme Judge, which are infinitely more piercing and delicate than ours, this action discovered a lurking pride, and secret vanity, with which his righteousness was offended. Accordingly, he instantly informed the king by his prophet Isaiah, that the riches and treasures which he had been showing to those ambassadors with so much ostentation, should one day be transported to Babylon; and that his children should be carried thither, to become servants in the palace of that monarch. This was then utterly improbable; for Babylon, at the time we are speaking of, was in friendship and alliance with Jerusalem, as appears by her having sent ambassadors thither: nor did Jerusalem then seem to have any thing to fear, but from Nineveh; whose power was at that time formidable, and who had entirely declared against her. But the fortune of those two cities was to change, and the word of God was literally accomplished.

[^1192: 2 Kings xx. 2 Chron. xxxii. 24-31]

But to return to Sennacherib.[^1193] After he had ravaged Egypt, and taken a vast number of prisoners, he came back with his victorious army, encamped before Jerusalem, and besieged it anew. The city seemed to be inevitably lost: it was without resource, and without hope from the hands of men; but had a powerful protector in Heaven, whose jealous ears had heard the impious blasphemies uttered by the king of Nineveh against His sacred name. In one single night a hundred and eighty-five thousand men of his army perished by the sword of the destroying angel. After so terrible a blow this pretended king of kings, (for so he called himself,) this triumpher over nations, and conqueror even of gods, was obliged to return to his own country with the miserable remnant of his army, covered with shame and confusion: nor did he survive his defeat more than a few months, only to make a kind of open confession of his crime to God, whose supreme majesty he had presumed to insult, and who now, to use the Scripture terms, having “put a ring into his nose, and a bridle into his mouth,” as a wild beast, made him return in that humbled, afflicted condition, through those very countries, which a little before had beheld him so haughty and imperious.

[^1193: 2 Kings xix. 35-57.]

Upon his return to Nineveh, being enraged at his disgrace, he treated his subjects in the most cruel and tyrannical manner. The effects of his fury fell more heavily upon the Jews and Israelites, of whom he caused great numbers to be massacred every day, ordering their bodies to be left exposed in the streets, and suffering no man to give them burial.[^1194] Tobit, to avoid his cruelty, was obliged to conceal himself for some time, and suffer all his effects to be confiscated. In short, the king's savage temper rendered him so insupportable to his own family, that his two eldest sons conspired against him, and killed him in the temple,[^1195] in the presence of his god Nisroch, as he lay prostrate before him. But these two princes, being obliged after this parricide to fly into Armenia, left the kingdom to Esarhaddon, their youngest brother.

[^1194: Tobit i. 18-24]

[^1195: 2 Kings xix. 37.]

[^1196] Esarhaddon. We have already observed, that after Merodach-Baladan there was a succession of kings at Babylon, of whom history has transmitted nothing but the names.[^1197] The royal family becoming extinct, there was an eight years' interregnum, full of troubles and commotions. Esarhaddon, taking advantage of this juncture, made himself master of Babylon, and annexing it to his former dominions, reigned over the two united empires thirteen years.

[^1196: Esarhaddon. A.M. 3294. Ant. J.C. 710.]

[^1197: Can. Ptol.]

After having reunited to the Assyrian empire Syria and Palestine, which had been rent from it in the preceding reign, he entered the land of Israel, where he took captive as many as were left there, and carried them into Assyria, except an inconsiderable number that escaped his pursuit. But that the country might not become a desert, he sent colonies of idolatrous people, taken out of the countries beyond the Euphrates, to dwell in the cities of Samaria. The prediction of Isaiah was then fulfilled;[^1198] within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be no more a people. This was exactly the space of time which elapsed between the prediction and the event: and the people of Israel did then truly cease to be a visible nation, what was left of them being altogether mixed and confounded with other nations.

[^1198: Is. vii. 8.]

This prince, having possessed himself of the land of Israel, sent some of his generals with part of his army into Judea, to reduce that country likewise under his subjection.[^1199] These generals defeated Manasseh, and having taken him prisoner, brought him to Esarhaddon, who put him in chains, and carried him with him to Babylon. But Manasseh, having afterwards appeased the wrath of God by a sincere and lively repentance, obtained his liberty, and returned to Jerusalem.

[^1199: 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, 13.]

Meantime the colonies, that had been sent into Samaria, in the room of its ancient inhabitants, were grievously infested with lions.[^1200] The king of Babylon being told that the cause of this calamity was their not worshipping the God of the country, ordered an Israelitish priest to be sent to them, from among the captives brought from that country, to teach them the worship of the God of Israel. But these idolaters did no more than admit the true God amongst their ancient divinities, and worshipped him jointly with their false deities. This corrupt worship continued afterwards, and was the primary source of the aversion entertained by the Jews against the Samaritans.

[^1200: 2 Kings xvii. 25-41.]

Esarhaddon, after a prosperous reign of thirty-nine years over the Assyrians, and thirteen over the Babylonians, was succeeded by his son:

[^1201] Saosduchinus. This prince is called in Scripture Nabuchodonosor, which name was common to the kings of Babylon. To distinguish this from the others, he is called Nabuchodonosor the First.

[^1201: Saosduchinus. A.M. 3335. Ant. J.C. 669.]

Tobit was still alive at this time, and dwelt among other captives at Nineveh.[^1202] Perceiving his end approaching, he foretold to his children the sudden destruction of that city; of which at that time there was not the least appearance. He advised them to quit the city, before its ruin came on, and to depart as soon as they had buried him and his wife.

[^1202: Tobit xiv. 5-13.]

“The ruin of Nineveh is at hand,” says the good old man, “abide no longer here, for I perceive the wickedness of the city will occasion its destruction.” These last words are very remarkable, “the wickedness of the city will occasion its destruction.” Men will be apt to impute the ruin of Nineveh to any other reason, but we are taught by the Holy Ghost, that her unrighteousness was the true cause of it, as it will be with other states that imitate her crimes.

Nabuchodonosor defeated the king of the Medes in a pitched battle,[^1203] fought the twelfth year of his reign, upon the plain of Ragau, took Ecbatana, the capital of his kingdom, and returned triumphant to Nineveh. When we come to treat of the history of the Medes, we shall give a more particular account of this victory.

[^1203: Judith i. 5, 6.]

It was immediately after this expedition, that Bethulia was besieged by Holofernes, one of Nabuchodonosor's generals; and that the famous enterprise of Judith was accomplished.

[^1204] Saracus, otherwise called Chynaladanus. This prince succeeded Saosduchinus;[^1205] and having rendered himself contemptible to his subjects, by his effeminacy, and the little care he took of his dominions, Nabopolassar, a Babylonian by birth, and general of his army, usurped that part of the Assyrian empire, and reigned over it one and twenty years.

[^1204: Saracus. A.M. 3356. Ant. J.C. 648.]

[^1205: Alex. Polyhist.]

[^1206] Nabopolassar. This prince, the better to maintain his usurped sovereignty, made an alliance with Cyaxares, king of the Medes. With their joint forces they besieged and took Nineveh, killed Saracus, and utterly destroyed that great city. We shall speak more largely of this great event, when we come to the history of the Medes. From this time forwards the city of Babylon became the only capital of the Assyrian empire.

[^1206: Nabopolassar. A.M. 3378. Ant. J.C. 626.]

The Babylonians and the Medes, having destroyed Nineveh, became so formidable, that they drew upon themselves the jealousy of all their neighbours. Necho, king of Egypt, was so alarmed at their power, that to stop their progress he marched towards the Euphrates at the head of a powerful army, and made several considerable conquests. See the history of the Egyptians[^1207] for what relates to this expedition, and the consequences that attended it.

[^1207: Pag. 70.]

Nabopolassar finding,[^1208] that after the taking of Carchemish by Necho, all Syria and Palestine had revolted from him, and neither his age nor infirmities permitting him to go in person to recover them, he made his son Nabuchodonosor partner with him in the empire, and sent him with an army to reduce those countries to their former subjection.

[^1208: Beros. apud Joseph. Antiq. l. x. c. 11. & con. Ap. l. i.]

[^1209] From this time the Jews begin to reckon the years of Nabuchodonosor, viz. from the end of the third year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, or rather from the beginning of the fourth. But the Babylonians compute the reign of this prince only from the death of his father, which happened two years later.

[^1209: A.M. 3398. Ant. J.C. 606.]

[^1210] Nabuchodonosor II. This prince defeated Necho's army, near the Euphrates, and retook Carchemish.[^1211] From thence he marched towards Syria and Palestine, and reunited those provinces to his dominions.

[^1210: Nabuchodonosor II.]

[^1211: Jer. xlvi. 2. 2 Kings xxiv. 7.]

He likewise entered Judea, besieged Jerusalem, and took it:[^1212] he caused Jehoiakim to be put in chains, with a design to have him carried to Babylon; but being moved with his repentance and affliction, he restored him to the throne. Great numbers of the Jews, and, among the rest, some children of the royal family, were carried captive to Babylon, whither all the treasures of the king's palace, and a part of the sacred vessels of the temple, were likewise transported. Thus was the judgment which God had denounced by the prophet Isaiah to king Hezekiah accomplished. From this famous epocha, which was the fourth year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, we are to date the captivity of the Jews at Babylon, so often foretold by Jeremiah. Daniel, then but twelve years old,[^1213] was carried captive among the rest; and Ezekiel some time afterwards.

[^1212: Dan. i. 1-7. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 6, 7.]

[^1213: Some imagine him to have been eighteen years of age at this time.—Trans.]

Towards the end of the fifth year of Jehoiakim died Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, after having reigned one and twenty years.[^1214] As soon as his son Nabuchodonosor had news of his death, he set out with all expedition for Babylon, taking the nearest way through the desert, attended only with a small retinue, leaving the bulk of his army with his generals, to be conducted to Babylon with the captives and spoils. On his arrival, he received the government from the hands of those that had carefully preserved it for him, and so succeeded to all the dominions of his father, which comprehended Chaldea, Assyria, Arabia, Syria, and Palestine, over which, according to Ptolemy, he reigned forty-three years.

[^1214: Can. Ptol. Beros. apud Joseph. Antiq. l. x. c. 11. & con. Ap. l. x.]

[^1215] In the fourth year of his reign he had a dream,[^1216] at which he was greatly terrified, though he could not call it again to mind. He thereupon consulted the wise men and soothsayers of his kingdom, requiring of them to make known to him the substance of his dream. They all answered, that it was beyond the reach of their art to discover it; and that the utmost they could do, was to give the interpretation of his dream, when he had made it known to them. As absolute princes are not accustomed to meet with opposition, but will be obeyed in all things, Nabuchodonosor, imagining they dealt insincerely with him, fell into a violent rage, and condemned them all to die. Now Daniel and his three companions were included in the sentence, as being ranked among the wise men. But Daniel, having first invoked his God, desired to be introduced to the king, to whom he revealed the whole substance of his dream. “The thing thou sawest,” says he to him, “was an image of an enormous size, and a terrible countenance. The head thereof was of gold, the breast and arms of silver, the belly and thighs of brass, and the feet part of iron and part of clay. And as the king was attentively looking upon that vision, behold a stone was cut out of a mountain without hands, and the stone smote the image upon his feet, and brake them to pieces; the whole image was ground as small as dust, and the stone became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.” When Daniel had related the dream, he gave the king likewise the interpretation thereof, showing him how it signified the three great empires, which were to succeed that of the Assyrians, namely, the Persian, the Grecian, and the Roman, or (according to some,) that of the successors of Alexander the Great. “After these kingdoms (continued Daniel) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; and this kingdom shall not be left to other people, but shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and shall stand for ever.” By which Daniel plainly foretold the kingdom of Jesus Christ. The king, ravished with admiration and astonishment, after having acknowledged and loudly declared, that the God of the Israelites was truly the God of gods, advanced Daniel to the highest offices in the kingdom, made him chief of the governors over all the wise men, ruler of the whole province of Babylon, and one of the principal lords of the council, that always attended the court. His three friends were also promoted to honours and dignities.

[^1215: A.M. 3401. Ant. J.C. 603.]

[^1216: Dan. ii.]

At this time Jehoiakim revolted from the king of Babylon, whose generals, that were still in Judea, marched against him, and committed all kinds of hostilities upon this country.[^1217] “He slept with his fathers,” is all the Scripture says of his death. Jeremiah had prophesied, that he should neither be regretted nor lamented; but should “be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem:” this was no doubt fulfilled, though it is not known in what manner.

[^1217: 2 Kings xxiv. 1, 2.]

Jechonias[^1218] succeeded both to the throne and iniquity of his father. Nabuchodonosor's lieutenants continuing the blockade of Jerusalem, in three months' time he himself came at the head of his army, and made himself master of the city. He plundered both the temple and the king's palace of all their treasures, and sent them away to Babylon, together with all the golden vessels remaining, which Solomon had made for the use of the temple: he carried away likewise a vast number of captives, amongst whom was king Jechonias, his mother, his wives, with all the chief officers and great men of his kingdom. In the room of Jechonias, he set upon the throne his uncle Mattaniah, who was otherwise called Zedekiah.

[^1218: Al. Jehoiakim. 2 Kings xxiv. 6-18.—Trans.]

This prince had as little religion and prosperity as his forefathers.[^1219] Having made an alliance with Pharaoh, king of Egypt, he broke the oath of fidelity he had taken to the king of Babylon. The latter soon chastised him for it, and immediately laid siege to Jerusalem. The king of Egypt's arrival at the head of an army gave the besieged a gleam of hope; but their joy was very short-lived; the Egyptians were defeated, and the conqueror returned against Jerusalem, and renewed the siege, which lasted near a twelvemonth.[^1220] At last the city was taken by storm, and a terrible slaughter ensued. Zedekiah's two sons were, by Nabuchodonosor's orders, killed before their father's face, with all the nobles and principal men of Judah. Zedekiah himself had both his eyes put out, was loaded with fetters, and carried to Babylon, where he was confined in prison as long as he lived. The city and temple were pillaged and burnt, and all their fortifications demolished.

[^1219: 2 Kings xxiv. 17-20. and xxv. 1-10.]

[^1220: A.M. 3415. Ant. J.C. 589.]

Upon Nabuchodonosor's return to Babylon, after his successful war against Judea, he ordered a golden statue to be made,[^1221] sixty[^1222] cubits high, assembled all the great men of the kingdom to celebrate the dedication of it, and commanded all his subjects to worship it, threatening to cast those that should refuse into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. Upon this occasion it was that the three young Hebrews, Ananias, Misael, and Azarias, who with an invincible courage refused to comply with the king's impious ordinance, were preserved after a miraculous manner in the midst of the flames. The king, himself a witness of this astonishing miracle, published an edict, whereby all persons whatsoever were forbidden, upon pain of death, to speak any thing amiss against the God of Ananias, Misael, and Azarias. He likewise promoted these three young men to the highest honours and employments.

[^1221: Dan. iii.]

[^1222: Ninety feet.—Trans.]

Nabuchodonosor, in the twenty-first year of his reign, and the fourth after the destruction of Jerusalem, marched again into Syria, and besieged Tyre, at the time when Ithobal was king thereof. Tyre was a strong and opulent city, which had never been subject to any foreign power, and was then in great repute for its commerce: by which many of its citizens were become like so many princes in wealth and magnificence.[^1223] It had been built by the Sidonians two hundred and forty years before the temple of Jerusalem. For Sidon being taken by the Philistines of Ascalon, many of its inhabitants made their escape in ships, and founded the city of Tyre. And for this reason we find it called in Isaiah “the daughter of Sidon.”[^1224] But the daughter soon surpassed the mother in grandeur, riches, and power. Accordingly, at the time we are speaking of, she was in a condition to resist, thirteen years together, a monarch, to whose yoke all the rest of the East had submitted.

[^1223: Ezek. xxvi. and xxvii. Is. xxiii. 8. Just. l. xviii. c. 3.]

[^1224: Is. xxiii. 12.]

It was not till after so long an interval, that Nabuchodonosor made himself master of Tyre.[^1225] His troops suffered incredible hardships before it; so that, according to the prophet's expression, “every head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled.”[^1226] Before the city was reduced to the last extremity, its inhabitants retired, with the greatest part of their effects, into a neighbouring isle, half a mile from the shore, where they built a new city; the name and glory whereof extinguished the remembrance of the old one, which from thenceforward became a mere village, retaining the name of ancient Tyre.

[^1225: Jos. Ant. l. x. c. 11 & con. Ap. l. i.]

[^1226: Ezek. xxix. 18, 19.]

Nabuchodonosor and his army having undergone the utmost fatigues during so long and difficult a siege,[^1227] and having found nothing in the place to requite them for the service they had rendered Almighty God (it is the expression of the prophet) in executing his vengeance upon that city, to make them amends, God was pleased to promise by the mouth of Ezekiel, that he would give them the spoils of Egypt. And indeed they soon after conquered that country, as I have more fully related in the history of the Egyptians.[^1228]

[^1227: Ibid. 18-20.]

[^1228: Page 84.]

When this prince had happily finished all his wars, and was in a state of perfect peace and tranquillity, he employed himself in putting the last hand to the building, or rather to the embellishing of Babylon. The reader may see in Josephus[^1229] an account of the magnificent structures ascribed to this monarch by several writers. I have mentioned a great part of them in the description already given of that stately city.

[^1229: Antiq. l. x. 11.]

Whilst nothing seemed wanting to complete this prince's happiness, a frightful dream disturbed his repose, and filled him with great anxiety.[^1230] “He saw a tree in the midst of the earth, whose height was great: the tree grew, and was strong, and the height of it reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of the earth. The leaves were fair, and the fruit much; and in it was meat for all: the beasts of the field had shadow under it, and the fowls of the heaven dwelt in the boughs thereof; and all flesh was fed of it. Then a watcher and a holy one came down from heaven, and cried; Hew down the tree, and cut off his branches, shake off his leaves, and scatter his fruit; let the beasts get away from under it, and the fowls from his branches. Nevertheless leave the stump of his roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts in the grass of the earth. Let his heart be changed from man's; and let a beast's heart be given unto him; and let seven times pass over him. This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones; to the intent that the living may know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.”

[^1230: Dan. iv.]

The king, justly terrified at this dreadful dream, consulted all his wise men and magicians, but to no purpose. He was obliged to have recourse to Daniel, who expounded the dream, and applied it to the king himself, plainly declaring to him, “That he should be driven from the company of men for seven years, should be reduced to the condition and fellowship of the beasts of the field, and feed upon grass like an ox; that his kingdom nevertheless should be preserved for him, and he should repossess his throne, when he should have learnt to know and acknowledge, that all power is from above, and cometh from Heaven. After this he exhorted him to break off his sins by righteousness, and his iniquities by showing mercy to the poor.”

All these things came to pass upon Nabuchodonosor, as the prophet had foretold. At the end of twelve months, as he was walking in his palace, and admiring the beauty and magnificence of his buildings, he said: “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the house of the kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?” Would a secret impulse of complacency and vanity in a prince, at the sight of such noble structures erected by himself, appear to us so very criminal? And yet, hardly were the words out of his mouth, when a voice came down from Heaven, and pronounced his sentence: “In the same hour his understanding went from him; he was driven from men, and did eat grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of Heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws.”

After the expiration of the appointed time, he recovered his senses, and the use of his understanding: “He lifted up his eyes unto Heaven (says the Scripture) and blessed the Most High; he praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation:” Confessing, “That all the inhabitants of the earth are as nothing before him, and that he doeth according to his will, in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?” Now he recovered his former countenance and form. His courtiers went out to seek him; he was restored to his throne, and became greater and more powerful than ever. Penetrated with the heartiest gratitude, he caused, by a solemn edict, to be published through the whole extent of his dominions, what astonishing and miraculous things God had wrought in his person.

One year after this he died, having reigned forty-three years, reckoning from the death of his father. He was one of the greatest monarchs that ever reigned in the East. He was succeeded by his son:

[^1231] Evil-Merodach. As soon as he was settled in the throne, he released Jechonias, king of Judah, out of prison, where he had been confined near seven and thirty years.[^1232]

[^1231: Evil-Merodach. A.M. 3441. Ant. J.C. 563.]

[^1232: 2 Kings xxv. 27-30.]

In the reign of this Evil-Merodach, which lasted but two years, the learned place Daniel's detection of the fraud practised by the priests of Bel; the innocent artifice by which he contrived to destroy the dragon, which was worshipped as a god; and the miraculous deliverance of the same prophet out of the den of lions, where he had victuals brought him by the prophet Habakkuk.

Evil-Merodach rendered himself so odious by his debauchery and other extravagancies, that his own relations conspired against him, and put him to death.[^1233]

[^1233: Beros. Megasthen.]

[^1234] Neriglissor, his sister's husband, and one of the chief conspirators, reigned in his stead.

[^1234: Neriglissor. A.M. 3444. Ant. J.C. 560.]

Immediately on his accession to the crown, he made great preparations for war against the Medes,[^1235] which made Cyaxares send for Cyrus out of Persia, to his assistance. This story will be more particularly related by and by, where we shall find that this prince was slain in battle in the fourth year of his reign.

[^1235: Cyrop. l. i.]

[^1236] Laborosoarchod, his son, succeeded to the throne. This was a very wicked prince. Being born with the most vicious inclinations, he indulged them without restraint when he came to the crown; as if he had been invested with sovereign power, only to have the privilege of committing with impunity the most infamous and barbarous actions. He reigned but nine months; his own subjects conspiring against him, put him to death. His successor was:

[^1236: Laborosoarchod. A.M. 3448. Ant. J.C. 556.]

[^1237] Labynitus, or Nabonidus. This prince had likewise other names, and in Scripture that of Belshazzar. It is on good grounds supposed that he was the son of Evil-Merodach, by his wife Nitocris, and consequently grandson to Nabuchodonosor, to whom, according to Jeremiah's prophecy, the nations of the East were to be subject, as also to his son, and his grandson after him: “All nations shall serve him, and his son, and his son's son, until the very time of his land shall come.”[^1238]

[^1237: Labynitus, or Nabonidus. A.M. 3449. Ant. J.C. 555.]

[^1238: Jer. xxvii. 7.]

Nitocris is that queen who raised so many noble edifices in Babylon.[^1239] She caused her own monument to be placed over one of the most remarkable gates of the city, with an inscription, dissuading her successors from touching the treasures laid up in it, without the most urgent and indispensable necessity. The tomb remained closed till the reign of Darius, who, upon his breaking it open, instead of those immense treasures he had flattered himself with discovering, found nothing but the following inscription:

[^1239: Herod. l. i. c. 185, &c.]

if thou hadst not an insatiable thirst after money, and a most sordid, avaricious soul, thou wouldst never have broken open the monuments of the dead.

In the first year of Belshazzar's reign, Daniel had the vision of the four beasts, which represented the four great monarchies, and the kingdom of the Messiah, which was to succeed them.[^1240] In the third year of the same reign he had the vision of the ram and the he-goat, which prefigured the destruction of the Persian empire by Alexander the Great, and the persecution which Antiochus Epiphanes, king of Syria, should bring upon the Jews.[^1241] I shall hereafter make some reflections upon these prophecies, and give a larger account of them.

[^1240: Dan. vii.]

[^1241: Ibid. viii.]

Belshazzar, whilst his enemies were besieging Babylon, gave a great entertainment to his whole court, upon a certain festival, which was annually celebrated with great rejoicing.[^1242] The joy of this feast was greatly disturbed by a vision, and still more so by the explication which Daniel gave of it to the king. The sentence written upon the wall imported, that his kingdom was taken from him, and given to the Medes and Persians. That very night the city was taken, and Belshazzar killed.

[^1242: Ibid. v.]

[^1243] Thus ended the Babylonian empire, after having subsisted two hundred and ten years from the destruction of the great Assyrian empire.

[^1243: A.M. 3468. Ant. J.C. 536.]

The particular circumstances of the siege, and the taking of Babylon, shall be related in the history of Cyrus.

Chapter III. The History of the Kingdom of the Medes.

[^1244] I took notice, in speaking of the destruction of the ancient Assyrian empire, that Arbaces, general of the Median army, was one of the chief authors of the conspiracy against Sardanapalus: and several writers believe, that he then immediately became sovereign master of Media and many other provinces, and assumed the title of king. Herodotus is not of this opinion. I shall relate what that celebrated historian says upon the subject.

[^1244: A.M. 3257. Ant. J.C. 747.]

The Assyrians, who had for many ages held the empire of Asia, began to decline in their power by the revolt of several nations.[^1245] The Medes first threw off their yoke, and maintained for some time the liberty they had acquired by their valour: but that liberty degenerating into licentiousness, and their government not being well established, they fell into a kind of anarchy, worse than their former subjection. Injustice, violence, and rapine, prevailed everywhere, because there was nobody that had either power enough to restrain them, or sufficient authority to punish the offenders. But all these disorders at length induced the people to settle a form of government, which rendered the state more flourishing than ever it was before.

[^1245: Herod. l. i. c. 95.]

The nation of the Medes was then divided into six tribes. Almost all the people dwelt in villages, when Dejoces, the son of Phraortes, a Mede by birth, erected the state into a monarchy. This person, seeing the great disorders that prevailed throughout all Media, resolved to take advantage of those troubles, and make them serve to exalt him to the royal dignity. He had a great reputation in his own country, and passed for a man, not only regular in his own conduct, but possessed of all the prudence and equity necessary to govern others.

As soon as he had formed the design of obtaining the throne, he laboured to make the good qualities that had been observed in him more conspicuous than ever: he succeeded so well, that the inhabitants of the village where he lived made him their judge. In this office he acquitted himself with great prudence; and his cares had all the success that had been expected from them; for he brought the people of that village to a sober and regular life. The inhabitants of other villages, whom perpetual disorders suffered not to live in quiet, observing the good order Dejoces had introduced in the place where he presided as judge, began to apply to him, and make him arbitrator of their differences. The fame of his equity daily increasing, all such as had any affair of consequence, brought it before him, expecting to find that equity in Dejoces, which they could meet with nowhere else.

When he found himself thus far advanced in his designs, he judged it a proper time to set his last engines to work for the compassing his point. He, therefore, retired from business, pretending to be over-fatigued with the multitude of people that resorted to him from all quarters; and would not exercise the office of judge any longer, notwithstanding all the importunity of such as wished well to the public tranquillity. Whenever any persons addressed themselves to him, he told them, that his own domestic affairs would not allow him to attend to those of other people.

The licentiousness which had been for some time restrained by the judicious management of Dejoces, began to prevail more than ever, as soon as he had withdrawn himself from the administration of affairs; and the evil increased to such a degree, that the Medes were obliged to assemble, and deliberate upon the means of putting a stop to the public disorder.

There are different sorts of ambition: some violent and impetuous, carrying every thing as it were by storm, hesitating at no kind of cruelty or murder: another sort, more gentle, like that we are speaking of, puts on an appearance of moderation and justice, working under ground, (if I may use that expression,) and yet arrives at her point as surely as the other.

Dejoces, who saw things succeeding according to his wish, sent his emissaries to the assembly, after having instructed them in the part they were to act. When expedients for stopping the course of the public evils came to be proposed, these emissaries, speaking in their turn, represented, that unless the face of the republic was entirely changed, their country would become uninhabitable; that the only means to remedy the present disorders was to elect a king, who should have authority to restrain violence, and make laws for the government of the nation. Then every man could prosecute his own affairs in peace and safety; whereas the injustice that now reigned in all parts, would quickly force the people to abandon the country. This opinion was generally approved; and the whole company was convinced, that no expedient could be devised more effectual for curing the present evil, than that of converting the state into a monarchy. The only thing then to be done, was to choose a king; and about this their deliberations were not long. They all agreed there was not a man in Media so capable of governing as Dejoces; so that he was immediately with common consent elected king.

If we reflect in the least on the first establishment of kingdoms, in any age or country whatsoever, we shall find, that the maintenance of order, and the care of the public good, was the original design of monarchy. Indeed there would be no possibility of establishing order and peace, if all men were resolved to be independent, and would not submit to an authority which takes from them a part of their liberty, in order to preserve the rest. Mankind must be perpetually at war, if they will always be striving for dominion over others, or refuse to submit to the strongest. For the sake of their own peace and safety, they must have a master, and must consent to obey him. This is the human origin of government. And the Scripture teacheth us, that the Divine Providence has not only allowed of the project, and the execution of it, but consecrated it likewise by an immediate communication of his own power.[^1246]

[^1246: Rom. xiii. 1, 2.]

There is nothing certainly nobler or greater than to see a private person, eminent for his merit and virtue, and fitted by his excellent talents for the highest employments, and yet through inclination and modesty preferring a life of obscurity and retirement: than to see such a man sincerely refuse the offer made to him, of reigning over a whole nation, and at last consent to undergo the toil of government, from no other motive than that of being serviceable to his fellow-citizens. His first disposition, by which he declares that he is acquainted with the duties, and consequently with the dangers annexed to a sovereign power, shows him to have a soul more elevated and great than greatness itself; or, to speak more justly, a soul superior to all ambition: nothing can show him so perfectly worthy of that important charge, as the opinion he has of his not being so, and his fears of being unequal to it. But when he generously sacrifices his own quiet and satisfaction to the welfare and tranquillity of the public, it is plain he understands what that sovereign power has in it really good, or truly valuable; which is, that it puts a man in a condition of becoming the defender of his country, of procuring it many advantages, and of redressing various evils; of causing law and justice to flourish, of bringing virtue and probity into reputation, and of establishing peace and plenty: and he comforts himself for the cares and troubles to which he is exposed, by the prospect of the many benefits resulting from them to the public. Such a governor was Numa, at Rome; and such have been some other emperors, whom the people found it necessary to compel to accept the supreme power.

It must be owned (I cannot help repeating it) that there is nothing nobler or greater than such a disposition. But to put on the mask of modesty and virtue, in order to satisfy one's ambition, as Dejoces did; to affect to appear outwardly what a man is not inwardly; to refuse for a time, and then accept with a seeming repugnancy, what a man earnestly desires, and what he has been labouring by secret, underhand practices to obtain; this double-dealing has so much meanness in it, that it necessarily lessens our opinion of the person, and extremely sullies the lustre of those good qualities, which in other respects, he possesses.

[^1247] Dejoces reigned fifty-three years.[^1248] When he had ascended the throne, he endeavoured to convince the people, that they were not mistaken in the choice they had made of him, for restoring of order. At first he resolved to have his dignity of king attended with all the marks that could inspire an awe and respect for his person. He obliged his subjects to build him a magnificent palace in the place he appointed. This palace he strongly fortified, and chose out from among his people such persons as he judged fittest to be his guards, from their attachment to his interests, and his reliance on their fidelity.

[^1247: Dejoces. A.M. 3294. Ant. J.C. 710.]

[^1248: Herod. l. i. c. 96-101.]

After having thus provided for his own security, he applied himself to polish and civilize his subjects, who, having been accustomed to live in the country and in villages, almost without laws and without polity, had contracted the disposition and manners of savages. To this end he commanded them to build a city, marking out himself the place and circumference of the walls. This city was compassed about with seven distinct walls, all disposed in such a manner, that the outermost did not hinder the parapet of the second from being seen, nor the second that of the third, and so of all the rest. The situation of the place was extremely favourable for such a design, for it was a regular hill, whose ascent was equal on every side. Within the last and smallest enclosure stood the king's palace, with all his treasures: in the sixth, which was next to that, there were several apartments for lodging the officers of his household; and the intermediate spaces, between the other walls, were appointed for the habitation of the people: the first and largest enclosure was about the bigness of Athens. The name of this city was Ecbatana.

The prospect of it was magnificent and beautiful; for, besides the disposition of the walls, which formed a kind of amphitheatre, the different colours wherewith the several parapets were painted formed a delightful variety.

After the city was finished, and Dejoces had obliged part of the Medes to settle in it, he turned all his thoughts to composing of laws for the good of the state. But being persuaded, that the majesty of kings is most respected afar off[^1249] he began to keep himself at a distance from his people; was almost inaccessible, and, as it were, invisible to his subjects, not suffering them to speak, or communicate their affairs to him, but only by petitions, and the interposition of his officers. And even those that had the privilege of approaching him, might neither laugh nor spit in his presence.

[^1249: major ex longinquo reverentia, Tacit.]

This able statesman acted in this manner, in order the better to secure to himself the possession of the crown. For, having to deal with men yet uncivilized, and no very good judges of true merit, he was afraid, that too great a familiarity with him might induce contempt, and occasion plots and conspiracies against a growing power, which is generally looked upon with invidious and discontented eyes. But by keeping himself thus concealed from the eyes of the people, and making himself known only by the wise laws he made, and the strict justice he took care to administer to every one, he acquired the respect and esteem of all his subjects.

It is said, that from the innermost part of his palace he saw every thing that was done in his dominions, by means of his emissaries, who brought him accounts, and informed him of all transactions. By this means no crime escaped either the knowledge of the prince, or the rigour of the law; and the punishment treading upon the heels of the offence, kept the wicked in awe, and stopped the course of violence and injustice.

Things might possibly pass in this manner to a certain degree during his administration: but there is nothing more obvious than the great inconveniencies necessarily resulting from the custom introduced by Dejoces, and wherein he has been imitated by the rest of the Eastern potentates; the custom, I mean, of living concealed in his palace, of governing by spies dispersed throughout his kingdom, of relying solely upon their sincerity for the truth of facts; of not suffering truth, the complaints of the oppressed, and the just reasons of innocent persons, to be conveyed to him any other way, than through foreign channels, that is, by men liable to be prejudiced or corrupted; men that stopped up all avenues to remonstrances, or the reparation of injuries, and that were capable of doing the greatest injustice themselves, with so much the more ease and assurance, as their iniquity remained undiscovered, and consequently unpunished. But besides all this, methinks, that very affectation in princes of making themselves invisible, shows them to be conscious of their slender merit, which shuns the light, and dares not stand the test of a near examination.

Dejoces was so wholly taken up in humanizing and softening the manners, and in making laws for the good government of his people, that he never engaged in any enterprise against his neighbours, though his reign was very long, for he did not die till after having reigned fifty-three years.

[^1250] Phraortes reigned twenty-two years.[^1251] After the death of Dejoces, his son Phraortes, called otherwise Aphraartes,[^1252] succeeded. The affinity between these two names would alone make one believe that this is the king called in Scripture Arphaxad: but that opinion has many other substantial reasons to support it, as may be seen in father Montfaucon's learned dissertation, of which I have here made great use. The passage in Judith, That Arphaxad built a very strong city, and called it Ecbatana,[^1253] has deceived most authors, and made them believe, that Arphaxad must be Dejoces, who was certainly the founder of that city. But the Greek text of Judith, which the Vulgate translation renders ædificavit, says only, That Arphaxad added new buildings to Ecbatana.[^1254] And what can be more natural, than that, the father not having entirely perfected so considerable a work, the son should put the last hand to it, and make such additions as were wanting?

[^1250: Pharaortes. A.M. 3347. Ant. J.C. 657.]

[^1251: Herod. c. 102.]

[^1252: He is called so by Eusebius, Chron. Græc and by Geor. Syncel.—Trans.]

[^1253: Judith, i. 1.]

[^1254: Ἐπωκοδόμησε ἐπὶ Ἐκβατάνοις. Judith, text Gr.]

Phraortes, being of a very warlike temper, and not contented with the kingdom of Media, left him by his father, attacked the Persians;[^1255] and defeating them in a decisive battle, brought them under subjection to his empire. Then strengthened by the accession of their troops, he attacked other neighbouring nations, one after another, till he made himself master of almost all the Upper Asia, which comprehends all that lies north of mount Taurus, from Media as far as the river Halys. Elate with this good success, he ventured to turn his arms against the Assyrians, at that time indeed weakened through the revolt of several nations, but yet very powerful in themselves. Nabuchodonosor, their king, otherwise called Saosduchinus, raised a great army in his own country, and sent ambassadors to several other nations of the East,[^1256] to require their assistance. They all refused him with contempt, and ignominiously treated his ambassadors, letting him see, that they no longer dreaded that empire, which had formerly kept the greatest part of them in a slavish subjection.

[^1255: Herod. l. i. c. 102.]

[^1256: The Greek text places these embassies before the battle.—Trans.]

The king, highly enraged at such insolent treatment, swore by his throne and his reign, that he would be revenged of all those nations, and put them every one to the sword. He then prepared for battle, with what forces he had, in the plain of Ragau. A great battle ensued there, which proved fatal to Phraortes. He was defeated, his cavalry fled, his chariots were overturned and put into disorder, and Nabuchodonosor gained a complete victory. Then taking advantage of the defeat and confusion of the Medes, he entered their country, took their cities, pushed on his conquests even to Ecbatana, forced the towers and the walls by storm, and gave the city to be pillaged by his soldiers, who plundered it, and stripped it of all its ornaments.

The unfortunate Phraortes, who had escaped into the mountains of Ragau, fell at last into the hands of Nabuchodonosor, who cruelly caused him to be shot to death with darts. After that, he returned to Nineveh with all his army, which was still very numerous, and for four months together did nothing but feast and divert himself with those that had accompanied him in this expedition.

In Judith, we read that the king of Assyria sent Holophernes with a powerful army, to revenge himself of those that had refused him succours; the progress and cruelty of that commander, the general consternation of all the people, the courageous resolution of the Israelites to withstand him, in assurance that their God would defend them, the extremity to which Bethulia and the whole nation was reduced, the miraculous deliverance of that city by the courage and conduct of the brave Judith, and the complete overthrow of the Assyrian army, are all related in the same book.

[^1257] Cyaxares I. reigned forty years.[^1258] This prince succeeded to the throne immediately after his father's death. He was a very brave, enterprising prince, and knew how to make his advantage of the late overthrow of the Assyrian army. He first settled himself well in his kingdom of Media, and then conquered all Upper Asia. But what he had most at heart was, to go and attack Nineveh, to revenge the death of his father by the destruction of that great city.

[^1257: Cyaxares I. A.M. 3869. Ant. J.C. 635.]

[^1258: Herod. l. i. c. 103-106.]

The Assyrians came out to meet him, having only the remains of that great army, which was destroyed before Bethulia. A battle ensued, wherein the Assyrians were defeated, and driven back to Nineveh. Cyaxares, pursuing his victory, laid siege to the city, which was upon the point of falling inevitably into his hands, but the time was not yet come when God designed to punish that city for her crimes, and for the calamities she had brought upon his people, as well as other nations. It was delivered from its present danger in the following manner.

A formidable army of Scythians, from the neighbourhood of the Palus Mæotis, had driven the Cimmerians out of Europe, and was still marching under the conduct of king Madyes in pursuit of them. The Cimmerians had found means to escape from the Scythians, who had advanced as far as Media. Cyaxares, hearing of this irruption, raised the siege from before Nineveh, and marched with all his forces against that mighty army, which, like an impetuous torrent, was going to overrun all Asia. The two armies engaged, and the Medes were vanquished. The Barbarians, finding no other obstacle in their way, overspread not only Media, but almost all Asia. After that, they marched towards Egypt, from whence Psammiticus diverted their course by presents. They then returned into Palestine, where some of them plundered the temple of Venus at Ascalon, the most ancient of the temples dedicated to that goddess. Some of the Scythians settled at Bethshan, a city in the tribe of Manasseh, on this side Jordan, which from them was afterwards called Scythopolis.

The Scythians for the space of twenty-eight years were masters of the Upper Asia, namely, the two Armenias, Cappadocia, Pontus, Colchis, and Iberia; during which time they spread desolation wherever they came. The Medes had no way of getting rid of them, but by a dangerous stratagem. Under pretence of cultivating and strengthening the alliance they had made together, they invited the greatest part of them to a general feast, which was made in every family. Each master of the feast made his guests drunk, and in that condition were the Scythians massacred. The Medes then repossessed themselves of the provinces they had lost, and once more extended their empire to the banks of the Halys, which was their ancient boundary westward.

The remaining Scythians, who were not at this feast, having heard of the massacre of their countrymen, fled into Lydia to king Halyattes, who received them with great humanity.[^1259] This occasioned a war between the two princes. Cyaxares immediately led his troops to the frontiers of Lydia. Many battles were fought during the space of five years, with almost equal advantage on both sides. But the battle fought in the sixth year was very remarkable on account of an eclipse of the sun, which happened during the engagement, when on a sudden the day was turned into a dark night. Thales, the Milesian, had foretold this eclipse. The Medes and Lydians, who were then in the heat of the battle, equally terrified with this unforeseen event, which they looked upon as a sign of the anger of the gods, immediately retreated on both sides, and made peace. Syennesis, king of Cilicia, and Nabuchodonosor,[^1260] king of Babylon, were the mediators. To render it more firm and inviolable, the two princes were willing to strengthen it by the tie of marriage, and agreed, that Halyattes should give his daughter Aryenis to Astyages, eldest son of Cyaxares.

[^1259: Herod. l. i. c. 74.]

[^1260: In Herodotus he is called Labynetus.—Trans.]

The manner these people had of contracting an alliance with one another, is very remarkable. Besides other ceremonies, which they had in common with the Greeks, they had this in particular; the two contracting parties made incisions in their own arms, and licked one another's blood.

[^1261] Cyaxares's first care, as soon as he found himself again in peace, was to resume the siege of Nineveh, which the irruption of the Scythians had obliged him to raise.[^1262] Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, with whom he had lately contracted a particular alliance, joined with him in a league against the Assyrians. Having therefore united their forces, they besieged Nineveh, took it, killed Saracus the king, and utterly destroyed that mighty city.

[^1261: A.M. 3378. Ant. J.C. 626.]

[^1262: Herod. l. i. c. 106.]

God had foretold by his prophets above a hundred years before, that he would bring vengeance upon that impious city for the blood of his servants, wherewith the kings thereof had gorged themselves, like ravenous lions; that he himself would march at the head of the troops that should come to besiege it; that he would cause consternation and terror to go before them; that he would deliver the old men, the mothers, and their children, into the merciless hands of the soldiers; that all the treasures of the city should fall into the hands of rapacious and insatiable plunderers; and that the city itself should be so totally and utterly destroyed, that not so much as a vestige of it should be left; and that the people should ask hereafter, Where did the proud city of Nineveh stand?

But let us hear the language of the prophets themselves: Woe unto the bloody city, (cries Nahum,) it is all full of lies and robbery:[^1263] he that dasheth in pieces is come up before thy face.[^1264] The Lord cometh to avenge the cruelties done to Jacob and to Israel. I hear already the noise of the whip, and the noise of the rattling of the wheels, and of the prancing horses, and of the bounding chariots.[^1265] The horseman lifteth up both the bright sword, and the glittering spear. The shield of his mighty men is made red; the valiant men are in scarlet.[^1266] They shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightning. God is jealous; the Lord revengeth, and is furious.[^1267] The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burnt at his presence: who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? Behold, I am against thee, saith the Lord of hosts: I will strip thee of all thy ornaments.[^1268] Take ye the spoil of silver, take the spoil of gold; for there is no end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant furniture.[^1269] She is empty, and void, and waste. Nineveh is destroyed; she is overthrown; she is desolate. The gates of the rivers shall be opened, and the palace[^1270] shall be dissolved.[^1271] And Huzzab shall be led away captive; she shall be brought up, and her maids shall lead her as with the voice of doves tabring upon their breasts. I see a multitude of slain, and a great number of carcasses; and there is no end of their corpses; they stumble upon their corpses.[^1272] Where is the dwelling of the lions, and the feeding places of the young lions, where the lion, even the old lion, walked, and the lion's whelp, and none made them afraid: where the lion did tear in pieces enough for his whelps, and strangled for his lionesses, and filled his holes with prey, and his dens with rapine:[^1273][^1274] The Lord shall destroy Assur.[^1275] He shall depopulate that city, which was so beautiful, and turn it into a land where no man cometh, and into a desert. It shall be a dwelling place for wild beasts, and the birds of night shall lurk therein. Behold, shall it be said, see that proud city, which was so stately, and so exalted; which said in her heart, I am the only city, and besides me there is no other. All they that pass by her shall scoff at her, and shall insult her with hissings and contemptuous gestures.

[^1263: Nahum iii. 1.]

[^1264: ii. 1, 2.]

[^1265: iii. 2, 3.]

[^1266: ii. 3, 4.]

[^1267: i. 2, 5, 6.]

[^1268: Nahum, iii. 5.]

[^1269: ii. 9, 10.]

[^1270: The author in this place renders it, Her temple is destroyed to the foundations. But I have chosen to follow our English Bible, though in the Latin it is camplum.—Trans.]

[^1271: ii. 6.]

[^1272: iii. 3.]

[^1273: ii. 11, 12.]

[^1274: This is a noble image of the cruel avarice of the Assyrian kings, who pillaged and plundered all their neighbouring nations, especially Judea, and carried away the spoils of them to Nineveh.—Trans.]

[^1275: Zephan. ii. 13-15.]

The two armies enriched themselves with the spoils of Nineveh; and Cyaxares, prosecuting his victories, made himself master of all the cities of the kingdom of Assyria, except Babylon and Chaldea, which belonged to Nabopolassar.

After this expedition Cyaxares died, and left his dominions to his son Astyages.

Astyages reigned thirty-five years. This prince is called in[^1276] Scripture Ahasuerus. Though his reign was very long, no less than thirty-five years, yet have we no particulars recorded of it in history. He had two children, whose names are famous, namely, Cyaxares, by his wife Aryenis, and Mandane, by a former marriage. In his father's lifetime he married Mandane to Cambyses, the son of Achemenes, king of Persia: from this marriage sprung Cyrus, who was born but one year after the birth of his uncle Cyaxares. The latter succeeded his father in the kingdom of the Medes.

[^1276: Astyages. A.M. 3409. Ant. J.C. 595.]

Cyaxares II. This is the prince whom the Scripture calls Darius the Mede.

Cyrus, having taken Babylon, in conjunction with his uncle Cyaxares, left it under his government. After the death of his uncle, and his father Cambyses, he united the kingdom of the Medes and the Persians into one: in the sequel, therefore, they will be considered only as one empire. I shall begin the history of that empire with the reign of Cyrus; which will include also what is known of the reigns of his two predecessors, Cyaxares and Astyages. But I shall previously give some account of the kingdom of Lydia, because Crœsus, its king, has a considerable share in the events of which I am to speak.

Chapter IV. The History of the Lydians.

The kings who first reigned over the Lydians, are by Herodotus called Atyadæ, that is, descendants from Atys.[^1277] These, he tells us, derived their origin from Lydus, the son of Atys; and Lydus gave the name of Lydians to that people, who before this time were called Mœonians.

[^1277: Herod. l. i. c. 7-13.]

These Atyadæ were succeeded by the Heraclidæ, or descendants of Hercules, who possessed this kingdom for the space of five hundred and five years.

[^1278] Argo, great grandson of Alcæus, son of Hercules, was the first of the Heraclidæ who reigned in Lydia.

[^1278: A.M. 2781. Ant. J.C. 1223.]

[^1279] The last was Candaules. This prince was married to a lady of exquisite beauty; and, being infatuated by his passion for her, was perpetually boasting of her charms to others. Nothing would serve him, but that Gyges, one of his chief officers, should see, and judge of them by his own eyes; as if the husband's own knowledge of them was not sufficient for his happiness, or the beauty of his wife would have been impaired by his silence.[^1280] The king to this end placed Gyges secretly in a convenient place; but notwithstanding that precaution, the queen perceived him when he retired, yet took no manner of notice of it. Judging, as the historian represents it, that the most valuable treasure of a woman is her modesty, she studied a signal revenge for the injury she had received; and, to punish the fault of her husband, committed a still greater crime. Possibly, a secret passion for Gyges had as great a share in that action, as her resentment for the dishonour done her. Be that as it will, she sent for Gyges, and obliged him to expiate his crime, either by his own death, or the king's, at his own option. After some remonstrances to no purpose, he resolved upon the latter, and by the murder of Candaules became master of his queen and his throne.[^1281] By this means the kingdom passed from the family of the Heraclidæ into that of the Mermnadæ.

[^1279: Candaules.]

[^1280: Non contentus voluptatum suarum tacitâ conscientiâ—proisus quasi silentium damnum pulchritudinis esset. Justin, l. i. c. 7.—Trans.]

[^1281: A.M. 3286. Ant. J.C. 718.]

Archilochus, the poet, lived at this time, and, as Herodotus informs us, spoke of this adventure of Gyges in his poems.

I cannot forbear mentioning in this place what is related by Herodotus, that amongst the Lydians, and almost all other Barbarians, it was reckoned shameful and infamous even for a man to appear naked. These footsteps of modesty, which are met with amongst pagans, ought to be reckoned valuable.[^1282] We are assured, that among the Romans, a son, who was come to the age of maturity, never went into the baths with his father, nor even a son-in-law with his father-in-law; and this modesty and decency were looked upon by them as enjoined by the law of nature, the violation whereof was criminal. It is astonishing, that amongst us our magistrates take no care to prevent this disorder, which, in the midst of Paris, at the season of bathing, is openly committed with impunity; a disorder so visibly contrary to the rules of common decency, so dangerous to young persons of both sexes, and so severely condemned by paganism itself.

[^1282: Nostro quidem more cum parentibus puberes filii, cum soceris generi, non lavantur. Retinenda est igitur hujus generis verecundia, præsertim naturâ ipsâ magistrâ et duce. Cic. l. i. de offic. n. 129.

Nadare se nefas esse credebatur. Val. Max. l. ii. c. 1.—Trans.]

Plato relates the story of Gyges in a different manner from Herodotus.[^1283] He tells us that Gyges wore a ring, the stone of which, when turned towards him, rendered him invisible; so that he had the advantage of seeing others, without being seen himself; and that by means of this ring, with the concurrence of the queen, he deprived Candaules of his life and throne. This probably signifies, that in order to compass his criminal design, he used all the tricks and stratagems, which the world calls subtle and refined policy, which penetrates into the most secret purposes of others, without making the least discovery of its own. The story, thus explained, carries in it a greater appearance of truth, than what we read in Herodotus.

[^1283: Plato de Rep. l. ii. p. 359.]

Cicero, after having related this fable of Gyges's famous ring, adds, that if a wise man had such a ring, he would not use it to any wicked purpose; because virtue considers what is honourable and just, and has no occasion for darkness.[^1284]

[^1284: Hunc ipsum annulum si habeat sapiens, nihilo plus sibi licere putet peccare, quàm si non haberet. Honesta enim bonis viris, non occulta quæruntur. Lib. iii, de offic. n. 38.—Trans.]

[^1285] Gyges reigned thirty-eight years.[^1286] The murder of Candaules raised a sedition among the Lydians. The two parties, instead of coming to blows, agreed to refer the matter to the decision of the Delphic oracle, which declared in favour of Gyges. The king made large presents to the temple of Delphi, which undoubtedly preceded, and had no little influence upon, the oracle's answer. Among other things of value, Herodotus mentions six golden cups, weighing thirty talents, amounting to near a million of French money, which is about forty-eight thousand pounds sterling.

[^1285: Gyges. A.M. 3286. Ant. J.C. 718.]

[^1286: Herod. l. i. c. 13, 14.]

As soon as he was in peaceable possession of the throne, he made war against Miletus, Smyrna, and Colophon, three powerful cities belonging to the neighbouring states.

After he had reigned thirty-eight years, he died, and was succeeded by his son

Ardys, who reigned forty-nine years.[^1287] It was in the reign of[^1288] this prince, that the Cimmerians, driven out of their country by the Scythæ Nomades, went into Asia, and took the city of Sardis, with the exception of the citadel.

[^1287: Ibid. l. i. c. 15.]

[^1288: Ardys. A.M. 3334. Ant. J.C. 680.]

[^1289] Sadyattes reigned twelve years.[^1290] This prince declared war against the Milesians, and laid siege to their city. In those days the sieges, which were generally nothing more than blockades, were carried on very slowly, and lasted many years. This king died before he had finished that of Miletus, and was succeeded by his son.

[^1289: Sadyattes. A.M. 3373. Ant. J.C. 631.]

[^1290: Herod. l. i. c. 16, 22.]

[^1291] Halyattes reigned fifty-seven years.[^1292] This is the prince who made war against Cyaxares, king of Media. He likewise drove the Cimmerians out of Asia. He attacked and took the cities of Smyrna and Clazomenæ. He vigorously prosecuted the war against the Milesians, begun by his father; and continued the siege of their city, which had lasted six years under his father, and continued as many under him. It ended at length in the following manner: Halyattes, upon an answer he received from the Delphic oracle, had sent an ambassador into the city, to propose a truce for some months. Thrasybulus, Tyrant of Miletus, having notice of his coming, ordered all the corn, and other provisions, assembled by him and his subjects for their support, to be brought into the public market; and commanded the citizens, at the sight of a signal that should be given, to be all in a general humour of feasting and jollity. The thing was executed according to his orders. The Lydian ambassador at his arrival was in the utmost surprise to see such plenty in the market, and such cheerfulness in the city. His master, to whom he gave an account of what he had seen, concluding that his project of reducing the place by famine would never succeed, preferred peace to so apparently fruitless a war, and immediately raised the siege.

[^1291: Halyattes. A.M. 3385. Ant. J.C. 619.]

[^1292: Ibid. c. 21, 22.]

[^1293] Crœsus. His very name, which is become a proverb, conveys an idea of immense riches. The wealth of this prince, to judge of it only by the presents he made to the temple of Delphi, must have been excessively great. Most of those presents were still to be seen in the time of Herodotus, and were worth several millions. We may partly account for the treasures of this prince, from certain mines that he had, situate, according to Strabo, between Pergamus and Atarna;[^1294] as also from the little river Pactolus, the sand of which was gold. But in Strabo's time this river had no longer the same advantage.

[^1293: Crœsus. A.M. 3442. Ant. J.C. 562.]

[^1294: Strab. l. xiii. p. 625. & l. xiv. p. 680.]

What is very extraordinary, this affluence did not enervate or soften the courage of Crœsus.[^1295] He thought it unworthy of a prince to spend his time in idleness and pleasure. For his part, he was perpetually in arms, made several conquests, and enlarged his dominions by the addition of all the contiguous provinces, as Phrygia, Mysia, Paphlagonia, Bithynia, Pamphylia, and all the country of the Carians, Ionians, Dorians, and Æolians. Herodotus observes, that he was the first conqueror of the Greeks, who till then had never been subject to a foreign power. Doubtless he must mean the Greeks settled in Asia Minor.

[^1295: Herod. l. i. c. 26-28.]

But what is still more extraordinary in this prince, though he was so immensely rich, and so great a warrior, yet his chief delight was in literature and the sciences. His court was the ordinary residence of those famous learned men, so revered by antiquity, and distinguished by the name of the Seven Wise Men of Greece.

Solon, one of the most celebrated amongst them, after having established new laws at Athens, thought he might absent himself for some years, and improve that time by travelling.[^1296] He went to Sardis, where he was received in a manner suitable to the reputation of so great a man. The king, attended with a numerous court, appeared in all his regal pomp and splendour, dressed in the most magnificent apparel, which was all over enriched with gold, and glittered with diamonds. Notwithstanding the novelty of this spectacle to Solon, it did not appear that he was the least moved at it, nor did he utter a word which discovered the least surprise or admiration; on the contrary, people of sense might sufficiently discern from his behaviour, that he looked upon all this outward pomp, as an indication of a little mind, which knows not in what true greatness and dignity consist. This coldness and indifference in Solon's first approach, gave the king no favourable opinion of his new guest.

[^1296: Ibid. l. i. c. 29-33. Plut. in Sol. p. 93, 94.]

He afterwards ordered that all his treasures, his magnificent apartments, and costly furniture, should be showed him; as if he expected, by the multitude of his fine vessels, jewels, statues, and paintings, to conquer the philosopher's indifference. But these things were not the king; and it was the king that Solon was come to visit, and not the walls and chambers of his palace. He had no notion of making a judgment of the king, or an estimate of his worth, by these outward appendages, but by himself and his own personal qualities. Were we to judge at present by the same rule, we should find many of our great men wretchedly naked and desolate.

When Solon had seen all, he was brought back to the king. Crœsus then asked him, which of mankind in all his travels he had found the most truly happy? “One Tellus,” replied Solon, “a citizen of Athens, a very honest and good man, who, after having lived all his days without indigence, having always seen his country in a flourishing condition, has left children that are universally esteemed, has had the satisfaction of seeing those children's children, and at last died gloriously in fighting for his country.”

Such an answer as this, in which gold and silver were accounted as nothing, seemed to Crœsus to denote a strange ignorance and stupidity. However, as he flattered himself that he should be ranked at least in the second degree of happiness, he asked him, “Who, of all those he had seen, was the next in felicity to Tellus?” Solon answered, “Cleobis and Biton, of Argos, two brothers,[^1297] who had left behind them a perfect pattern of fraternal affection, and of the respect due from children to their parents. Upon a solemn festival, when their mother, a priestess of Juno, was to go to the temple, the oxen that were to draw her not being ready, the two sons put themselves to the yoke, and drew their mother's chariot thither, which was above five miles distant. All the mothers of the place, ravished with admiration, congratulated the priestess on being the mother of such sons. She, in the transports of her joy and thankfulness, earnestly entreated the goddess to reward her children with the best thing that heaven can give to man. Her prayers were heard. When the sacrifice was over, her two sons fell asleep in the very temple, and there died[^1298] in a soft and peaceful slumber. In honour of their piety, the people of Argos consecrated statues to them in the temple of Delphi.”

[^1297: Φιλαδελφοὺς καὶ φιλομήτορας διαφερόντως ἄνδρας.—Trans.]

[^1298: The fatigue of drawing the chariot might be the cause of it.—Trans.]

“What then,” says Crœsus, in a tone that showed his discontent, “you do not reckon me in the number of the happy?” Solon, who was not willing either to flatter or exasperate him any further, replied calmly: “King of Lydia, besides many other advantages, the gods have given us Grecians a spirit of moderation and reserve, which has produced amongst us a plain, popular kind of philosophy, accompanied with a certain generous freedom, void of pride or ostentation, and therefore not well suited to the courts of kings: this philosophy, considering what an infinite number of vicissitudes and accidents the life of man is liable to, does not allow us either to glory in any prosperity we enjoy ourselves, or to admire happiness in others, which perhaps may prove only transient, or superficial.” From hence he took occasion to represent to him further, “That the life of man seldom exceeds seventy years, which make up in all six thousand two hundred and fifty days, of which no two are exactly alike; so that the time to come is nothing but a series of various accidents, which cannot be foreseen. Therefore, in our opinion,” continued he, “no man can be esteemed happy, but he whose happiness God continues to the end of his life: as for others, who are perpetually exposed to a thousand dangers, we account their happiness as uncertain as the crown is to a person that is still engaged in battle, and has not yet obtained the victory.” Solon retired, when he had spoken these words,[^1299] which served only to mortify Crœsus, but not to reform him.

[^1299: Λυπήσας μὲν, οὐ νουθετήσας δὲ τὸν Κροίσον.—Trans.]

Æsop, the author of the Fables, was then at the court of this prince, by whom he was very kindly entertained. He was concerned at the unhandsome treatment Solon received, and said to him by way of advice: “Solon, we must either not come near princes at all, or speak things that are agreeable to them.” “Say rather,” replied Solon, “that we should either never come near them at all, or else speak such things as may be for their good.”[^1300]

[^1300: Ὦ Σόλων (ἔφη) τοῖς βασιλεῦσι δεῖ ὡς ἥκιστα ἤ ὡς ἥδιστα ὁμιλεῖν. Καὶ ό Σόλων, Μὴ Δί (εἶπεν) ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἥκιστα ἥ ὡς ἄριστα. The jingle of the words ὡς ἥκιστα ἥ ὡς ἄριστα, which is a beauty in the original, because it is founded in the sense, cannot be rendered into any other language.—Trans.]

In Plutarch's time some of the learned were of opinion, that this interview between Solon and Crœsus did not agree with the dates of chronology. But as those dates are very uncertain, that judicious author did not think this objection ought to prevail against the authority of several credible writers, by whom this story is attested.

What we have now related of Crœsus is a very natural picture of the behaviour of kings and great men, who for the most part are seduced by flattery; and shows us at the same time the two sources from whence that blindness generally proceeds. The one is, a secret inclination which all men have, but especially the great, of receiving praise without any precaution, and of judging favourably of all that admire them, and show an unlimited submission and complaisance to their humours. The other is, the great resemblance there is between flattery and a sincere affection, or a reasonable respect; which is sometimes counterfeited so exactly, that the wisest may be deceived, if they are not very much upon their guard.

Crœsus, if we judge of him by the character he bears in history, was a very good prince, and worthy of esteem in many respects. He had a great deal of good-nature, affability, and humanity. His palace was a receptacle for men of wit and learning, which shows that he himself was a person of learning, and had a taste for the sciences. His weakness was, that he laid too great stress upon riches and magnificence, thought himself great and happy in proportion to his possessions, mistook regal pomp and splendour for true and solid greatness, and fed his vanity with the excessive submissions of those that stood in a kind of adoration before him.

Those learned men, those wits and other courtiers, that surrounded this prince, ate at his table, partook of his pleasures, shared his confidence, and enriched themselves by his bounty and liberality, took care not to thwart the prince's taste, and never thought of undeceiving him with respect to his errors or false ideas. On the contrary, they made it their business to cherish and fortify them in him, extolling him perpetually as the most opulent prince of his age, and never speaking of his wealth, or the magnificence of his palace, but in terms of admiration and rapture; because they knew this was the sure way to please him, and to secure his favour. For flattery is nothing else but a commerce of falsehood and lying, founded upon interest on one side, and vanity on the other. The flatterer desirous to advance himself, and make his fortune; the prince to be praised and admired, because he is his own first flatterer, and carries within himself a more subtile and better prepared poison than any adulation gives him.

That maxim of Æsop, who had formerly been a slave, and still retained somewhat of the spirit and character of slavery, though he had varnished it over with the address of an artful courtier; that maxim of his, I say, which recommended to Solon, “That we should either not come near kings, or say what is agreeable to them,” shows us with what kind of men Crœsus had filled his court, and by what means he had banished all sincerity, integrity, and duty, from his presence. In consequence of which, we see he could not bear that noble and generous freedom in the philosopher, upon which he ought to have set an infinite value; as he would have done, had he but understood the worth of a friend, who, attaching himself to the person, and not to the fortune of a prince, has the courage to tell him disagreeable truths; truths unpalatable, and bitter to self-love at the present, but that may prove very salutary and serviceable for the future. Dic illis, non quod volunt audire, sed quod audisse semper volent. These are Seneca's own words, where he is endeavouring to show of what great use a faithful and sincere friend may be to a prince; and what he adds further seems to be written on purpose for Crœsus: “Give him,”[^1301] says he, “wholesome advice. Let a word of truth once reach those ears, which are perpetually fed and entertained with flattery. You will ask me, what service can be done to a person arrived at the highest pitch of felicity? That of teaching him not to trust in his prosperity; of removing that vain confidence he has in his power and greatness, as if they were to endure for ever; of making him understand, that every thing which belongs to and depends upon fortune, is as unstable as herself; and that there is often but the space of a moment between the highest elevation and the most unhappy downfall.”

[^1301: Plenas aures adulationibus aliquando vera vox intret: da consilium utile. Quæris, quid felici præstare possis? Effice, ne felicitati suæ credat. Parum in illum contuleris, si illi semel stultam fiduciam permansuræ semper potentiæ excusseris, docuerisque mobilia esse quæ dedit casus; ac sæpe inter fortunam maximam et ultimam nihil interesse. Sen. de benef. l. vi. c. 33.—Trans.]

It was not long before Crœsus experienced the truth of what Solon had told him.[^1302] He had two sons, one of which, being dumb, was a perpetual subject of affliction to him; the other, named Atys, was distinguished by every good quality, and his great consolation and delight. The father one night had a dream, which made a great impression upon his mind, that this beloved son of his was to perish by iron. This became a new source of anxiety and trouble, and care is taken to remove out of the young prince's way every thing made of iron, as partisans, lances, javelins, &c. No mention is made of armies, wars, or sieges, before him. But one day there was to be an extraordinary hunting-match, for the killing of a wild boar, which had committed great ravage in the neighbourhood. All the young lords of the court were to be at this hunting. Atys very earnestly importuned his father that he would give him leave to be present, at least as a spectator. The king could not refuse him that request, but intrusted him to the care of a discreet young prince, who had taken refuge in his court, and was named Adrastus. And this very Adrastus, as he was aiming his javelin at the boar, unfortunately killed Atys. It is impossible to express either the affliction of the father, when he heard of this fatal accident, or of the unhappy prince, the innocent author of the murder, who expiated his fault with his blood, stabbing himself in the breast with his own sword, upon the funeral pile of the unfortunate Atys.

[^1302: Herod. l. i. c. 34-45.]

Two years were spent on this occasion in deep mourning,[^1303] the afflicted father's thoughts being wholly taken up with the loss he had sustained. But the growing reputation, and great qualities of Cyrus, who began to make himself known, roused him out of his lethargy. He thought it behoved him to put a stop to the power of the Persians, which was enlarging itself every day. As he was very religious in his way, he would never enter upon any enterprise without consulting the gods. But, that he might not act blindly, and in order to be able to form a certain judgment on the answers he should receive, he was willing to assure himself beforehand of the truth of the oracles. For which purpose, he sent messengers to all the most celebrated oracles both of Greece and Africa, with orders to inquire, every one at his respective oracle, what Crœsus was doing on such a day, and such an hour, before agreed on. His orders were punctually observed; and of all the oracles none gave a true answer but that of Delphi. The answer was given in Greek hexameter verses, and was in substance as follows: “I know the number of the grains of sand on the sea-shore, and the measure of the ocean's vast extent. I can hear the dumb, and him that has not yet learnt to speak. A strong smell of a tortoise boiled in brass, together with sheep's flesh, has reached my nostrils, brass beneath, brass above.” And indeed the king, thinking to invent something that could not possibly be guessed at, had employed himself on the day and hour set down, in boiling a tortoise and a lamb in a brass pot, which had a brass cover. St. Austin observes in several places, that God, to punish the blindness of the Pagans, sometimes permitted the devils to give answers conformable to the truth.

[^1303: Ibid. 46-50.]

Crœsus, thus assured of the veracity of the god whom he designed to consult, offered three thousand victims to his honour, and ordered an infinite number of vessels, tripods, and golden tables, to be melted down, and converted into ingots of gold, to the number of a hundred and seventeen, to augment the treasures of the temple of Delphi. Each of these ingots weighed at least two talents; besides which, he made several other presents: amongst others Herodotus mentions a golden lion, weighing ten talents, and two vessels of an extraordinary size, one of gold, which weighed eight talents and a half and twelve minæ; the other of silver, which contained six hundred of the measures called amphoræ. All these presents, and many more, which for brevity's sake I omit, were to be seen in the time of Herodotus.

The messengers were ordered to consult the god upon two points: first, whether Crœsus should undertake a war against the Persians; secondly, if he did, whether he should require the succour of any auxiliary troops. The oracle answered, upon the first article, that if he carried his arms against the Persians, he would subvert a great empire; upon the second, that he would do well to make alliances with the most powerful states of Greece. He consulted the oracle again, to know how long the duration of his empire would be. The answer was, that it should subsist till a mule came to possess the throne of Media; which he considered as an assurance of the perpetual duration of his kingdom.

Pursuant to the direction of the oracle, Crœsus entered into alliance with the Athenians, who at that time had Pisistratus at their head, and with the Lacedæmonians, who were indisputably the two most powerful states of Greece.

A certain Lydian, much esteemed for his prudence, gave Crœsus, on this occasion, very judicious advice.[^1304] “O prince, (says he to him,) why do you think of turning your arms against such a people as the Persians, who, being born in a wild, rugged country, are inured from their infancy to every kind of hardship and fatigue, who, being coarsely clad, and coarsely fed, can content themselves with bread and water; who are absolute strangers to all the delicacies and conveniencies of life; who, in a word, have nothing to lose if you conquer them, and every thing to gain if they conquer you; and whom it would be difficult to drive out of our country, if they should once come to taste the sweets and advantages of it? So far therefore from thinking of beginning a war against them, it is my opinion we ought to thank the gods that they have never put it into the heads of the Persians to come and attack the Lydians.” But Crœsus had taken his resolution and would not be diverted from it.

[^1304: Herod. l. i. c. 71.]

What remains of the history of Crœsus will be found in that of Cyrus, which I am now going to begin.

Maps.

[Plate I, part A. Map: The World.]

[Plate I, part B. Map: The World.]

[Plate II, part A. Map: Egypt with Lybia.]

[Plate II, part B. Map: Egypt with Lybia.]

[Plate III, part A. Map: The Carthaginian Empire in Africa.]

[Plate III, part B. Map: The Carthaginian Empire in Africa.]

[Plate III, part C. Map: The Carthaginian Empire in Africa.]

[Plate IV, part A. Map: The Expedition of Hannibal.]

[Plate IV, part B. Map: The Expedition of Hannibal.]

[Plate IV, part B. Map: The Expedition of Hannibal.]

[Plate V, part A. Map: The Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians.]

[Plate V, part B. Map: The Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians.]

Footnotes