Chapter XI: Part III: , European Nations; of which only 1 volume, Greeks, has (3)

Critical examination of the accounts of the nine years' campaign, and
conquests of Sesostris. His arms were principally directed against
wealthy commercial countries; probably by land against Ethiopia, Asia
Minor, and part of Thrace; by sea against Arabia Felix, perhaps even
the Indian peninsula. Can the performance of these exploits be deemed
improbable, in an age when western Asia did not contain a single
great empire? The vast undertakings attributed to Sesostris in the
interior of his dominions; extensive buildings, canals, division of
the land, and imposition of taxes, according to a regular survey,
prove that he must have been the sovereign of all Egypt.

3. Notwithstanding the great changes that were made, the constitution still bore the same general character, that of a sacerdotal aristocracy combined with a monarchy. Although the Egyptian kings, like the Indian princes, were distinct from the priests, yet their power was limited in various ways by that caste. The high priest shared the royal authority; the king was shackled by religious ceremonies, both in public and private life; he was obliged to evince his veneration for the established worship by the erection of public monuments; and all the high offices of state were in the hands of the priests. It cannot be denied that on the personal character of the king depended much of his power; but how strong must have been this aristocracy, when even successful conquerors were obliged to conciliate its approbation!

4. It was probably about this time that the domestic relations of the people, the division into castes, was completed. The sacerdotal caste being in exclusive possession of all scientific knowledge, remained for that reason in possession of the offices of state. The caste of warriors could hardly have assumed its complete form before the country was united into one empire: in like manner that of the navigators could not have been completely established before the canals were excavated; although the origin of all may have been of a much earlier date.

Comparison of the accounts given by Herodotus and Diodorus of the
division into castes. Not only precedence in time, but likewise the
discrepancies between the two, declare in favour of Herodotus.

5. It appears, therefore, that the most prosperous period of the kingdom of the Pharaohs must be placed somewhere between B. C. 1500-900: although, according to Diodorus, even this period was interrupted by a long anarchy. The splendour of the empire was obscured towards the end. Sabaco, a foreign conqueror from Ethiopia, (probably from Meroe,) subjugated Egypt; after his departure from the country, Sethos, a priest of Phtha, contrary to all precedent, seated himself upon the throne. He was, consequently, considered an usurper; he offended the caste of warriors, and could not have escaped the dangers of an irruption threatened by the Assyrian, Sennacherib, had not a pestilence compelled the invader and his host to retreat.

The dynasty of Sabaco, Seuechus, and Tarhaco in Meroe, who as
conquerors subjected Upper Egypt, is comprised between B. C. 800-700.
Their names likewise have been already discovered on monuments; some
at Abydos in Egypt, others in Nubia.

6. The Egyptian monarchy, however, at length fell, and was replaced by an oligarchy; (or perhaps a return was only made to the division of the earlier kingdoms;) twelve princes sharing among themselves the sovereign power. A certain degree of unity seems to have existed at first in this government; but quarrels soon sprung up among the princes, and they compelled one of their number, Psammetichus of Sais, to take flight. The exiled prince, supported by Greek and Carian mercenaries, contrived to avenge his wrongs; he drove away his rivals, and became the sole ruler.

THIRD PERIOD.

_From the reign of Psammetichus as sole monarch to the Persian conquest of Egypt by Cambyses. B. C. 650-525._

Herodotus, (l. ii, c. 125, etc.) is still the principal authority
for this portion of history. His statements, however, are no longer
derived from hieroglyphics: they are purely historical. During the
reign of Psammetichus, the Greeks who had migrated into Egypt gave
rise to the caste of interpreters, [Greek: hermeneis], who acted
both as ciceroni for strangers, and as brokers between the
Egyptians and Greeks: these people were enabled to give information
respecting the history of the country. It is not, therefore,
surprising that Herodotus should assure us, that from this time the
history was authentic.--The names of the succeeding Pharaohs are
likewise found on the monuments; in the erection of which they
rivaled their predecessors.

_Contemporary_: Asia: rise and fall of the Chaldaeo-Babylonian
empire; rise of the Persian monarchy.--Rome: kings from Numa
Pompilius to Servius Tullius.--Athens: Draco; Solon;
Pisistratus.--Jews: the last period and fall of the kingdom of
Judah; Babylonish captivity.

1. From this epoch Egypt remained uninterruptedly one kingdom, the capital of which was Memphis, although Sais, in Lower Egypt, was the general residence of the royal family. Strangers, and more particularly Greeks, admitted into Egypt; partly as mercenaries, partly as merchants. Influence of this innovation upon the national character, and upon the political system in particular. A spirit of conquest gradually inherited by the Egyptian kings, is directed principally against Asia: hence the formation of a navy, and wars with the great rising monarchies of Asia. Continued, but declining influence of the sacerdotal caste, and proofs of the veneration of the kings for the priesthood deduced from the erection and embellishment of temples, particularly of that consecrated to Phtha in Memphis.

2. _Psammetichus._ He obtains sole power through the assistance of Greek and Carian mercenaries, who are continued as a standing army in the country. The caste of Egyptian warriors, taking umbrage in consequence, emigrate for the most part to Ethiopia, where they settle. The southern portico of the temple of Phtha is erected, and projects of conquest are formed against Asia.

3. _Neco_, son and successor of Psammetichus. His extensive plans of conquest. First formation of a naval power; and unsuccessful attempt to unite by a canal the Mediterranean with the Red sea. Conquests in Asia as far as the Euphrates; but quick secession of the conquered, in consequence of the loss of the battle of Circesium. Circumnavigation of Africa undertaken at his command by the Phoenicians, and successfully performed.

4. _Psammis his son and successor._ Expedition against Ethiopia, and conquests in the interior of Africa.

5. Reign of _Apries_, (the Pharaoh-hophra of the Hebrews). Plans of conquest against Asia;--siege of Sidon, and naval battle with the Tyrians;--expedition against Cyrene in Africa; its fatal result. A revolution caused thereby in Egypt, the inhabitants of which were averse to foreign wars, carried on mostly by mercenary aliens: the revolution headed by Amasis. In the civil war which Apries now wages with his mercenaries against the Egyptians commanded by Amasis, he loses both his throne and life; and with him ends the family of Psammetichus, which had reigned to this time.

6. The usurper _Amasis_ took possession of the sovereign power; and although he had to contend with a strong party, who despised him on account of his low origin, he contrived by popular measures, and by the respect he showed to the sacerdotal caste, to establish himself upon the throne.--His monuments, both at Sais and Memphis.--The Egyptians and Greeks become better acquainted and more closely connected with each other, partly in consequence of the marriage of the king with a Greek woman; but principally owing to the mouths of the Nile being opened to the Greek merchants, and the cession of Naucratis as a factory for their merchandise. Great and beneficial consequences to Egypt, which, under the long reign of Amasis, reaches its highest pitch of prosperity. This prince had already been engaged in disputes with the Persian conqueror, Cyrus, whose son and successor, Cambyses, led an expedition against Egypt, which Amasis, however, luckily for himself, escaped by a seasonable death.

7. His son Psammenitus, the last of the Egyptian Pharaohs, is attacked by Cambyses in the very first year of his reign. After a single battle, fought at Pelusium, and a short siege of Memphis, the empire of the Pharaohs is overthrown, and Egypt merges into a Persian province. The powerful caste of the priests suffered most from the hatred of the conqueror; but the persecution to which they were subjected must be attributed rather to policy than fanaticism.

8. Condition and fate of Egypt as a Persian province. After the death of Cambyses, the country received a Persian governor, and consequently became a satrapy. Immediately after the first tempest of war had blown over, Egypt was treated with mildness by the Persians. The country paid a moderate tribute, together with some royal gifts, among others the produce of the fisheries in lake Moeris; nevertheless, repeated revolts occurred, which may be principally attributed to the hatred and influence of the sacerdotal caste. The first took place under Darius Hystaspes, and was quelled by Xerxes. An increase of tribute was the consequence. The second, under king Inarus, fomented and supported by the Athenians, happened during the reign of Artaxerxes I.; it was quelled by Megabyzus. The third occurred under Darius II. and in consequence of the support which the Egyptians received from the Greeks, was of longer duration than either of the former, the throne of the Pharaoh's being in some measure restored.

This third secession of the Egyptians lasted till 354. During
this period various kings were appointed; Amyrtaeus, _d._ 408;
Psammetichus, about 400; Nephreus, about 397; Pausiris, _d._ 375;
Nectanebus I. _d._ 365; Tachos, _d._ 363; Nectanebus II. conquered
by Artaxerxes III. 354.

CARTHAGINIANS.

Sources. The first great republic which ancient records mention as
applying both to trade and war, is undoubtedly a phenomenon well
deserving the attention of the historical enquirer. Our knowledge,
however, of Carthaginian history is unfortunately very deficient,
as we possess no author who has made it the principal object of his
attention. The immediate subject of the Greek and Roman writers was
the history of their own country, and they only allude to that of
Carthage in so far as it is connected with their main topic. This
observation applies as well to Polybius and Diodorus, as to Livy
and Appian. Even the information given by Justin, the only author
who says any thing concerning the early state of Carthage, is
miserably defective, although taken from Theopompus. (Cf. _Comment.
de fontibus_ JUSTINI _in Commentat. Soc. Gotting._ vol. xv.)
Moreover, as Herodotus here fails us, we have not the writings of
any author whatever who witnessed Carthage in the days of her
prosperity: Polybius did not see that country till after the
decline of its power; the other historians, wrote long afterwards.
But although an uninterrupted history of Carthage does not exist,
we are yet able to trace the main outlines of the picture of that
state.--The modern writers on Carthage are:

HENDRICH, _de Republica Carthaginiensium_, 1664. A useful
compilation.

# _History of the Republic of Carthage_, 2 vols. Franckfort, 1781.
A mere history of the wars.

DAMPMARTIN, _Histoire de la Rivalite de Carthage et de Rome_, tom.
i, ii. Very superficial.

# W. BOETTICHER, _History of Carthage_, part i. Berlin, 1827.
The best work on the subject; in which use has been made of modern
researches.

Concerning the Carthaginians, see HEEREN'S _African Nations_,
2 vols. 8vo. Oxford, 1831.

The history of Carthage is most conveniently divided into three periods: I. From the foundation of the city to the commencement of the wars with Syracuse, B. C. 880-480. II. From the commencement of the wars with Syracuse to those with Rome, 480-264. III. From the commencement of the wars with Rome to the destruction of Carthage, 264-146.

FIRST PERIOD.

_From the foundation of Carthage to the wars with Syracuse, B. C. 880-480._

_Contemporary_: Inner Asia: kingdoms of the Assyrians, Babylonians,
and first half of the Persian monarchy. Greeks: period from
Lycurgus to Themistocles. Romans: period of the kings, and of the
commonwealth until the establishment of the tribunes of the people.

1. The foundation and primitive history of Carthage, like all very early and important events in national history, have, by long tradition, been wrapt in the veil of romance. The account given of Dido, the supposed founder of the city, cannot be reduced to the standard of pure historical truth, though it appears to justify the inference that some political commotions in the mother city, Tyre, induced a party of emigrants to proceed to the northern shores of Africa; where other Phoenician establishments had already taken place: here, by engaging to pay a yearly tribute, they purchased from the natives permission to found a city, the site of which was so happily chosen, that it only depended upon the inhabitants to raise it to that greatness which it afterwards attained.

2. It is probable that Carthage advanced at first by slow steps; yet even at the end of this first period she had reached to such a height of power, that she was mistress of a large territory in Africa, and of foreign possessions still more extensive. Establishment of the Carthaginian dominion in Africa by the subjection of the neighbouring aboriginal tribes, and the foundation of Carthaginian settlements within their territories; the natives, Liby-Phoenicians, gradually mingled with the inhabitants of those colonies, and imbibed from them a love of agriculture and fixed abodes. The inhabitants of the fertile territory extending southward as far as the lake Triton, were, without exception, Carthaginian subjects.

3. Her connection, however, with the ancient Phoenician towns along the coast, particularly Utica, was of a different nature. For although possessed a certain authority over them, she did not claim absolute dominion, but rather stood at the head of a federation; thus affording a protection which must frequently have degenerated into oppression.

4. In consequence of a treaty with the neighbouring republic of Cyrene, the whole territory extending between the two Syrtes was also ceded to the Carthaginians. The Lotophagi and Nasamones, inhabitants of this district, preserved their nomad mode of life; they must, however, from their trade with the interior parts of Africa, have been of the highest importance to Carthage.

5. System of colonization, and, as a necessary result, that of conquest without Africa. It was evidently the aim of the Carthaginians to settle on islands, and to subject them to their dominion. Those lying in the western part of the Mediterranean occupied the first place in their plan of conquest, which was completely executed in Sardinia, the Baleares, and other small islands; perhaps in Corsica; in Sicily, however, they could never succeed to the full extent of their wishes. There is also every probability that the Canary islands and Madeira were entirely in their possession. On the other hand, the Carthaginians, previous to their wars with Rome, were in the practice of establishing separate settlements on the main land, partly in Spain, and partly on the western shore of Africa. In the latter, they adopted the policy of their ancestors, the Phoenicians, making the settlements so small, and confining them within such narrow bounds, that the mother country might always ensure their dependence.

6. The glory of extending the territory of Carthage, by important conquests, belongs principally to the family of Mago, who, together with his two sons and six grandsons, established the dominion of the republic in Sicily, Sardinia, and Africa. This occurred about the same time that Cyrus, Cambyses, and Darius were laying the foundation of the Persian monarchy, with which Carthage even then entered into connection. The Carthaginians, therefore, made their first appearance, as extensive conquerors, in the fourth century from the foundation of their commonwealth; and it is at this period that mention is made of their first naval engagement, in which the Phocaeans were their adversaries. In the same period may be dated the establishment of their colonies beyond the Pillars of Hercules by Hanno and Himilco--both probably sons of Mago;--by the former on the coast of Africa, by the latter on that of Spain. To the same period likewise is referred the first commercial treaty between the Carthaginians and Romans, in which the former appear as already masters of Sardinia, Africa, and a portion of Sicily.

7. To complete these conquests, and to preserve them when completed, the formation and support of vast fleets and armies were indispensably necessary. According to the usual practice of those nations who apply both to trade and to war, the Carthaginian armies were composed for the most part of mercenaries. No nation, however, followed this plan so extensively as the Carthaginians, for to them half Africa and Europe furnished warriors.--Description of a Carthaginian army; development of the advantages and disadvantages of its organization.--Organization of their navy. The state supported very numerous fleets of war-ships, with a multitude of slaves who laboured at the oar, and were it seems public property.

8. The political constitution of Carthage, like that of all wealthy trading states, was an aristocracy composed of the noble and the opulent, though at all times combined with a certain admixture of democracy. The affairs of the state were confided to the hands of the two suffetes or kings,--who, in all probability, held their office for life--and to those of the senate ([Greek: Boule]) which contained within itself a more select council (the [Greek: gerousia]). The privilege of electing the magistrates resided with the people at large, who also shared the legislative power with the suffetes. Civil and military power was usually divided: the offices of general and magistrate not being always, as at Rome, united in the same individual,--although such an instance might not be of impossible occurrence:--to each military chief, on the contrary, was appointed a committee from the senate, on which he was more or less dependent.

9. The high state tribunal of the HUNDRED was instituted as a barrier to the constitution against the attempts of the more powerful aristocrats, particularly the military leaders; indeed the brilliancy of Mago's conquests seemed to threaten the republic with a military government; and immediately previous to his time one of the generals, Malchus, had actually made an attempt to enslave Carthage. The object of the institution was no doubt attained; but in later times the council assumed to itself a power which increased to absolute despotism. It is not improbable that this court likewise constituted the select committee (the [Greek: gerousia]) of the senate.

10. Our information respecting the financial system of the Carthaginians is extremely meagre. The following seem to have been the principal sources of the public revenue. 1. The tribute drawn from the federate cities, and their African subjects. The former paid in money, the latter for the most part in kind; this tribute was imposed at the will of the government, so that in pressing cases the taxed nations were obliged to give one half of their income. 2. The case was the same with their external provinces, particularly with Sardinia. 3. The tribute furnished by the nomad hordes, partly by those in the Regio-Syrtica, and occasionally also by those on the western side. 4. The customs, which were levied with extreme rigour, not only in Carthage, but likewise in all the colonies. 5. The products of their rich mines, particularly those of Spain. In considering the financial system of the Carthaginians, it should not be forgotten that many of the nations with whom they traded, or who served in their armies, were unacquainted with the use of money.

11. System and extent of their commerce. Their object was to secure a monopoly of the western trade; hence the practice of restricting the growth of their colonies, and of removing as much as possible all strangers from their commercial marts. Their trade was carried on partly by sea, and partly by land. Their sea trade, arising from the colonies, extended beyond the Mediterranean, certainly as far as the coasts of Britain and Guinea. Their land trade was carried on by caravans, consisting principally of the nomad tribes resident between the Syrtes: the caravans travelled eastward to Ammonium and Upper Egypt, southward to the land of the Garamantes, (Fezzan,) and even still further into the interior of Africa.

SECOND PERIOD.

_From the breaking out of the wars with Syracuse, to the commencement of those with Rome, B. C. 480-264._

1. The great object of Carthaginian policy during the whole of the above period, was to subdue Sicily; this object the nation pursued with extraordinary pertinacity, often approximating to, but never obtaining, complete success. The growing power of Syracuse, which likewise aimed at the sole possession of the island, laid the foundation of that national hatred which now arose between the Sicilian Greeks and the Carthaginians.

2. First attempt, arising out of the league formed with Xerxes I. upon his irruption into Greece. Gelon of Syracuse, in a victory more decisive even than that gained by Themistocles over the Persians at Salamis, routs the Carthaginians near Himera, and compels them to accede to a disgraceful peace.

3. This defeat was followed by a period of tranquillity lasting seventy years, during which we know little about Carthage. All that we can say with any probability is, that in the mean time the struggle for territory between Cyrene and Carthage commenced and terminated to the advantage of the latter state, whose dominion was generally extended and confirmed in Africa by wars with the aboriginal tribes.

4. But the accession of Dionysius I. to the throne of Syracuse, and the ambitious project formed by him and his successors, of subjecting to their rule all Sicily and Magna-Grecia, rekindled once more the embers of war, which had only smouldered for a short time, to burst forth with additional violence.

Repeated and bloody wars with Dionysius I. between the years
410-368. Neither party able to expel the other: terms of the last
peace; that each party should remain in possession of what he then
occupied. Second commercial treaty with Rome.

Crafty advantage taken by the Carthaginians of the internal
commotions at Syracuse during and subsequent to the reign of
Dionysius II: they endeavour to obtain their end; but are thwarted
by the heroism of Timoleon, 345-340.

A new and frightful war with Agathocles, the seat of which is
transferred from Sicily into Africa itself; it at last terminates
in favour of Carthage, 311-307.

The war with Pyrrhus, 277-275, whose ambition gave rise to an
alliance between Carthage and Rome, contributed likewise to
increase the preponderance of the Carthaginians in Sicily; and
probably the perseverance of that people, and their skill in
profiting by circumstances, would at last have enabled them to
attain their object, had not the seeds of war been thereby
scattered between Carthage and Rome.

5. What effect these Sicilian wars had upon the state we are not informed. They were probably regarded in Carthage as a beneficial channel for carrying off the popular fermentation;--nevertheless, two attempts, both unsuccessful, were made by some of the aristocratical party, to overthrow the constitution; first by Hanno, 340, and afterwards by Bomilcar, 308.--At the breaking out, however, of the war with Rome, the commonwealth was so formidable and mighty, that even the finances of the state do not appear to have been at all affected; a circumstance of the highest importance. What consequence was it to Carthage whether 100,000 barbarians more or less existed in the world, so long as there remained plenty of men willing to suffer themselves to be sold, and she possessed money to purchase them?

THIRD PERIOD.

_From the beginning of the wars with Rome, to the downfal of Carthage, B. C. 264-146._

1. The wars between Carthage and Rome were the necessary consequences of a desire of aggrandizement in two conquering nations; any one might have foreseen the struggle between the two rivals as soon as their conquests should once begin to clash. It is, therefore, a question of little importance, to enquire which was the aggressor; and although Rome may not be entirely cleared of that charge, we cannot help observing that, according to the principles of sound policy, the security of Italy was hardly compatible with the sole dominion of the Carthaginians over the island of Sicily.

First war with Rome, 264-241, (twenty-three years,) waged for the
possession of Sicily, and decided almost at its commencement by
Hiero's passing over to the Roman side. (For the history of it,
see below, in the Roman history, Book V. Period ii, parag. 2 sq.)

2. This war cost the republic, Sicily and the sovereignty of the Mediterranean, by which the fate of its other external possessions was already predetermined. But that which appeared at the first view to threaten the greatest danger, was the total exhaustion of its finances; a circumstance which will no longer surprise us, when we consider how many fleets had been destroyed and replaced, how many armies had been annihilated and renewed. Carthage had never before been engaged in such an obstinate struggle as this; and the immediate consequences were more terrific even than the war itself.

3. The impossibility of paying the mercenaries produced a mutiny among the troops, which rapidly grew into a rebellion of the subject nations, who had been most cruelly oppressed during the war. The consequence was a civil war of three years and a half, which probably would have spared the Romans the trouble of destroying Carthage, had not the state been snatched from ruin by the heroism of Hamilcar.

This war, which lasted from 240 to 237, produced lasting consequences
to the state; it gave rise to the feud between Hamilcar and Hanno the
Great, which compelled Hamilcar to seek for support against the senate
by becoming the leader of a democratic faction.

4. The revolt spread abroad; it reached Sardinia and caused the loss of that most important island, of which the Romans, flushed with power, took possession, in spite of the terms of the peace.

5. The influence of the family of the Barcas, supported in their disputes with the senate by the popular party, now got the upper hand in Carthage; and the first fruit of their power was the new and gigantic project of repairing the loss of Sicily and Sardinia by the conquest of Spain; a country where the Carthaginians already had some possessions and commercial connections. The immediate object of the Barcas was the support of their family and party; but the Spanish silver mines soon furnished the republic with the means of renewing the contest with Rome also.

6. During the nine years in which Hamilcar commanded, and in the following eight in which Hasdrubal, his son-in-law and successor, was at the head of the army, the whole of the south of Spain, as far as the Iberus, was brought under subjection to Carthage, either by negotiation or force of arms. The further progress of the Carthaginians was only arrested by a treaty with the Romans, in which the Iberus was fixed upon as a frontier line, and the freedom of Saguntum acknowledged by both powers. Hasdrubal crowned his victories as a general and as a statesman by the foundation of New Carthage, (Carthagena,) which was to be the future seat of Carthaginian power in the newly-conquered country. Hasdrubal having fallen by the hand of an assassin in the year 221, the party of the Barcas succeeded in appointing Hamilcar's son, Hannibal, a young man of one-and-twenty, for his successor. Hannibal found every thing already prepared in Spain for the furtherance of the hereditary project of his family, which was a renewal of the contest with Rome; and the vigour with which this project was pursued, clearly proves how great must have been the preponderance of the Barcine influence, at that time, in Carthage. Had the commonwealth attended to the marine with the same ardour as their great general did to the land service, the fate of Rome would perhaps have been very different.

Second war with Rome, 218-201, (seventeen years,) first in Italy
and Spain, afterwards, from 203, in Africa itself. (See the
history of this war below, in the Roman history, Book V, Period
ii, parag. 6 sqq.)

7. Until Africa became the scene of action, the second war cost the republic much less than the first; the expenses being principally defrayed by Spain and Italy. Hanno, however, was at the head of a powerful party at home, who were clamorous for peace, and who can say they were wrong? As might be expected, the family of the Barcas were for war, and their influence carried the day. That general who, with hardly any support from Carthage, was yet able to maintain a footing in the country of his powerful foes for no less than fifteen years, and that, too, as much by policy as by force of arms, must extort our admiration. It cannot, however, be denied, that during the struggle one favourable opportunity, at least, was let slip of making peace; a fatal omission, for which the hero of Cannae paid dearly enough, by the failure of his darling project.

8. By the second peace with Rome, Carthage was deprived of all her possessions out of Africa, and her fleet was delivered into the hands of the Romans. She was now to be a mere trading city under the tutelage of Rome. But Carthage found by this peace her most formidable enemy on the soil of Africa itself. Massinissa had been elevated to the dignity of king of Numidia; and his endeavours to form his nomads into an agricultural people, and to collect them into cities, must have changed the military system that Carthage had hitherto followed. Roman policy, moreover, had taken care that the article inserted in his favour in the last treaty of peace, should be so ambiguously worded, as to leave abundant openings for dispute.

9. Even after this disgraceful peace, the family of the Barcas still preserved their influence, and Hannibal was placed as supreme magistrate at the head of the republic. He attempts to reform the constitution and the finances, by destroying the oligarchy of the hundred, by whom the finances had been thrown into confusion. Complete as was the success of the first blow, it soon became apparent that aristocratic factions are not so readily annihilated as armies.

The democratic faction to which even the Barcas owed their first
elevation, was the cause of the degeneracy of the Carthaginian
constitution. By that faction the legislative authority of the
senate and magistrates was withdrawn and transferred to the _ordo
judicum_--probably the same as the high state tribunal of the
hundred--which now assumed the character of an omnipotent national
inquisition; and the members being chosen for life exercised
oppressive despotism. This tribunal was formed of those who had
served the office of ministers of finance, with whom it shared
unblushingly the revenues of the state. Hannibal destroyed this
oligarchy by a law, enacting that the members should hold their
office but for one year; whereas before they held it for life. In
the reform wrought by this law in the finances it was seen, that
after all wars and losses, the revenues of the republic were still
sufficient, not only for the usual expenditure and the payment of
tribute to Rome, but also for leaving a surplus in the public
treasury. Ten years had hardly elapsed before Carthage was enabled
to pay down at once the whole of the tribute which she had engaged
to furnish by instalments.

10. The defeated party, whose interests were now the same with those of Rome, joined the Romans, to whom they discovered Hannibal's plan of renewing the war in conjunction with Antiochus the Great, king of Syria. A Roman embassy was sent over to Africa, under some other pretext, to demand that Hannibal should be given up. The Carthaginian general secretly fled to king Antiochus, at whose court he became the chief fomenter of the war against Rome; although unsuccessful in his endeavour to implicate the Carthaginian republic in the struggle.

See hereafter the history of Syria, Book IV, Period iii, separate
kingdoms. I. Seleucidae, parag. 18; and Book V, Period ii, parag.
10 sq.

11. In consequence of the absence of Hannibal, Carthage fell once more under the dominion of the Romans, who contrived, by taking a crafty advantage of the state of parties, to give a show of generosity to the exercise of their power. Even the patriotic faction, if we may judge by the violent steps which they took more than once against Massinissa and his partisans, seem to have been but a tool in the hands of Rome.

12. Disputes with Massinissa, which led to the gradual partition of the Carthaginian territory in Africa. The manner in which this territory had been acquired, facilitated the discovery of claims upon each of the component parts; and the interference of Rome, sometimes disinterested, but oftener swayed by party feeling, ensured the possession of the territory to the Numidian.

Even in 199, a disadvantageous treaty framed with Massinissa for
fifty years: nevertheless the rich province of Emporia is lost in
193.--Loss of another province unnamed, to which Massinissa
inherited some claims from his father.--Seizure of the province of
Tysca, with fifty cities, about 174. Probable date of Cato's
embassy, who returned in disgust, because his decision had been
rejected, and became the fomenter of a project to destroy
Carthage.--New disputes about 152.--Massinissa's party is expelled
Carthage.--War breaks out in consequence, during which the king in
his ninetieth year personally defeats the Carthaginians; and what
with famine and the sword, Hasdrubal's army, which had been
surrounded by the enemy, was nearly exterminated; in the mean while
the Roman ambassadors, who had come to act as mediators, obeying
their private instructions, looked on with quiet indifference.

13. Though it is evident that the party spirit raging between Cato and Scipio Nasica had a considerable influence in hastening the destruction of Carthage; and though it is equally clear that Massinissa's late victory paved the way for the immediate execution of that project; yet it is difficult to unravel the web, by which, long before the declaration of war now about to follow, treachery prepared the final scene of this great tragedy. Was the account that Cato at his return gave of the resuscitated power of Carthage consonant to truth? Was not the sudden secession of Ariobarzanes, the grandson of Syphax, who was to have led a Numidian army to defend Carthage against Massinissa, previously arranged with Rome? Was not the turbulent Gisgo, who first incited the populace to insult the Roman ambassadors, and then opportunely rescued them from the fury of the mob, in the pay of Rome? These questions give rise to suspicions, although they cannot satisfactorily be answered. At any rate, it may be said, that the conduct of Rome, after war had broken out, corroborates the suspicion. The whole history of the last period sufficiently proves, that it was not so much the debased character of the nation, as party spirit, and the avarice of the great, which produced the fall of Carthage. Advantage was taken of that party spirit and avarice by Roman policy, which, although acting according to the dictates of blind passion, knew how to profit by dark and base intrigue.

Third war with Rome and destruction of Carthage, 150-146. See
hereafter the Roman history, Book V, Period ii, parag. 19 sq.

* * * * *

SECOND BOOK.

_History of the Persian Empire, from B. C. 560-330._

Sources. Preservation of historic records among the Persians
themselves under the form of royal annals; origin and nature of
those annals. As these have been destroyed, we are obliged to
deduce the history from foreign writers, some of whom, however,
availed themselves of the Persian annals. 1. _Greeks_: their
authority as writers, contemporary, but not always sufficiently
acquainted with the east. (_a_) CTESIAS. His court history compiled
from Persian annals, would be the principal work did we possess the
whole; we have, however, only an extract from it preserved by
Photius. (_b_) HERODOTUS: who probably availed himself of similar
sources in some portion of his work. (_c_) XENOPHON. To this period
of history belong, not only his Anabasis and Hellenica, but also
his Cyropaedia, or portraiture of a happy empire and an accomplished
ruler, according to eastern ideas, exhibited in the example of
Cyrus: of use so far as pure historic records are interwoven with
the narrative. (_d_) DIODORUS, etc. 2. _Jewish writers._ The books
of ESDRAS and NEHEMIAH; and more particularly that of ESTHER, as
containing a faithful representation of the Persian court and its
manners. 3. The accounts of the later _Persian chroniclers_,
MIRKHOND in particular, who flourished in the thirteenth century of
the christian era, can have no weight in the scale of criticism;
they are nevertheless interesting, inasmuch as they make us
acquainted with the ideas that the inhabitants of the east form of
their early history.

The modern authors on Persian history are principally those who
have written on ancient history in general: see p. 2. A treatise on
Persian history, deduced from eastern sources, will be found in the
_Ancient Universal History_, vol. iv.

BRISSONIUS, _de Regno Persarum_, 1591, 8vo. A very laborious
compilation.

The section concerning the Persians in # HEEREN, _Ideas_, etc.
vol. i, part 1.

[MALCOLM, SIR JOHN, _History of Persia_, from the earliest ages to
the present times. Lond. 1816, 4to. 2 vols. "A valuable work."]

1. State of the Persian nation previous to Cyrus; a highland people, subject to the Medes, dwelling in the mountainous parts of the province of Persis, and leading wholly, or for the most part, a nomad life. Division into ten clans, among which that of the _Pasargadae_, the noblest and ruling horde, is particularly remarkable on account of the figure it makes in subsequent history.--The result of this division was a patriarchal government, the vestiges of which remain visible in the whole of the following history of the Persians. Permanent distinction between the tribes in reference to their mode of life, observable even during the most flourishing period of the Persian state: three of the nobles or warriors, three of the husbandmen, and four of the shepherds. Argument thence deduced, that the history of the Persians as a dominant nation, _is that of the nobler clans alone, and of the_ PASARGADAE _more especially_.

2. The personal history of Cyrus, the founder of the Persian monarchy, was, even in the time of Herodotus, so obscured under the veil of romance, that it was no longer possible to detect the real truth. It is, however, evident, that the course of the revolution wrought by him was, on the whole, the same as was followed in all similar empires founded in Asia. Gengis-khan, in a later age, was placed at the head of all the Mogol hordes; in the same manner was Cyrus elected chief of all the Persian tribes, by whose assistance he became a mighty conqueror, at the time that the Babylonian and Median kingdoms of Inner Asia were on the decline, and before the Lydian empire, under Croesus, had been firmly established.

Descent of Cyrus from the family of Achaemenes, (Jamshid?). That
family belonged to the Pasargadae tribe, and therefore remained the
ruling house.

3. Rise of the Persian dominion, in consequence of the overthrow of the Medo-Bactrian empire, after the defeat of Astyages at Pasargada. Rapid extension by further conquest. Subjection of Asia Minor after the victory won by Cyrus in person over Croesus, and capture of the Greek colonies by the generals of the Persian monarch. Conquest of Babylon and all the Babylonian provinces. The Phoenician cities submit themselves of their own accord. Even in Cyrus's time, therefore, the frontiers of the Persian empire had been extended in southern Asia to the Mediterranean, to the Oxus, and to the Indus; but the campaign against the nomad races, inhabiting the steppes of Central Asia, was unsuccessful; and Cyrus himself fell in the contest.

It cannot be denied but that in the narration of the separate wars
waged by Cyrus, discrepancies are found in Herodotus and Ctesias;
those two authors, however, agree in the main facts: and, indeed,
the differences which exist between them cannot be considered always
as direct contradictions.

4. Immediate consequences of this great revolution in respect both of the conquerors and the conquered. Among the former, even in the time of Cyrus, the civilization and luxury of the Medes, their legislation and national religion, and the sacerdotal caste of the magi, who were guardians of that religion, had been introduced, and the whole system of the Persian court had been remodelled upon that of the Medes.

Description of Zoroaster's legislation, and of the magian national
religion, according to the Zend-avesta. How far the dogmas of
Zoroaster can be considered as dominant among the Persians?--Proof
that they were adopted only by the nobler tribes, more particularly
the Pasargadae. Their great and beneficial influence on agriculture.

ANQUETIL DU PERRON, _Zend-avesta, ouvrage de_ ZOROASTRE, _traduit
en Francois sur l'original Zend_. Paris, 1771. 4to. This work has
been much improved by the critical discussions added to the German
translation by J. L. KLEUKER. Compare the dissertations on
Zoroaster by MEINERS and TYCHSEN, in _Comment. Soc. Gotting._ and
HEEREN, _Ideas_, etc. vol. i.

HYDE, _De Religione veterum Persarum_; Oxon. 1700, 4to. Replete
with learned research, and the first work that excited enquiry on
the subject.

# J. S. RHODE, _Sacred Traditions of the East_; Breslau, 1821. An
excellent work for the study of the Zend-avesta, the magian religion,
and the antiquities of the Medes and Persians.

5. First political constitution of the Persian empire under Cyrus. No general new organization; but for the most part the original institutions are preserved among the conquered, who are compelled to pay tribute. Royal officers, appointed to collect the tribute, are associated with the generals, who with numerous armies keep in subjection the inhabitants of the conquered countries. For the support of the empire large standing armies are kept in pay, besides which, recourse is frequently had to the transplanting of whole nations; while, as was the case with the Jews, some who had been formerly transplanted are restored to their country. With the same view injunctions are issued, as in the case of the Lydians, to effect the enervation of warlike races by a luxurious and effeminate system of education.

6. Cyrus leaves two sons, the elder of whom, Cambyses, succeeds as king; the younger, Smerdis, (the _Tanyoxarces_ of Ctesias,) becomes independent lord of Bactria and the eastern territories; but is soon after murdered by the command of his elder brother.

7. Under Cambyses the conquering arms of the Persians are directed against Africa. Egypt becomes a Persian province, and the neighbouring Libya, together with Cyrene, assume the yoke of their own accord. But the twofold expedition against the opulent commercial establishments, Ammonium in the west, and Meroe in the south, is wholly unsuccessful; that against Carthage is arrested in its commencement by the refusal of the Tyrians to join the naval armament. A colony of six thousand Egyptians is transplanted into Susiana.

8. The cruelty with which Cambyses is accused of treating the Egyptians was directed rather against the powerful caste of the priests, than against the whole nation; and originated more in political than in religious motives. It must be observed, however, that we ought to be particularly on our guard against all the evil that is related of Cambyses, inasmuch as our information respecting that prince is derived entirely from his enemies, the Egyptian priests.

9. The usurpation of the Pseudo-Smerdis, (or _Tanyoxarces_,) was an attempt of the magi to replace a Median dynasty on the throne, by means of a plot hatched within the seraglio. It was the occasion of an accident which cost Cambyses his life, after a reign of seven years and a half: (or, according to Ctesias, of eighteen.)

10. The Pseudo-Smerdis kept his seat on the throne eight months, during which he attempted to bring over the conquered nations to his interest by a remission of all tribute for three years; but the discovery of his cheat gave rise to a conspiracy of seven of the chief Persians, who could not brook the rule of a Mede, and the usurper lost his life.

11. It could not be expected that the political organization of the kingdom should advance to completion during the reign of Cambyses, who was almost always absent in the prosecution of war; or during the brief rule of the Pseudo-Smerdis. It remained, therefore, in the same state as under Cyrus. But the introduction of the Median court-ceremonial among the ruling tribe of the Persians, and the adoption of fixed dwellings by that tribe, rendered it necessary that royal residences should be erected for the reception of the king's court; among these Persepolis, (see above, p. 20,) probably commenced by Cyrus, was completed under Darius and Xerxes.

The best drawings of the monuments of Persepolis, remarkable alike
for their architecture, their sculpture, and their inscriptions in
the arrow-headed character, are to be found in the Travels of
CHARDIN and NIEBUHR. Illustrations:

# HERDER'S _Persepolis_, in the collection of his works, vol. i.

# HEEREN, _Ideas_, etc. Part I. vol. i. Great assistance in
studying the inscriptions, is furnished by

DE SACY, _Memoires sur diverses Antiquites de la Perse_; Paris,
1793, 4to. It must be observed, however, that this work is confined
to the illustration of the later monuments, belonging to the
_Sassanidae_. The most successful attempt at deciphering the
arrow-headed inscriptions of the old Persic, since TYCHSEN,
MUENTER, and LICHTENSTEIN, will be found in

# GROTEFEND, _On the Interpretation of the Arrow-headed Characters,
particularly of the Inscriptions at Persepolis_, contained in the
appendix to HEEREN, _Ideas_, etc. vol. ii. with an accompanying Zend
alphabet.

12. After a very remarkable debate held by the seven conspirators, concerning the form of of government which should be established, Darius, the son of Hystaspes, one of the family of the Achaemenides, was raised to the throne by an oracle; this king endeavoured to strengthen his right to the sceptre by marrying two of Cyrus's daughters.

13. The reign of Darius I. which lasted thirty-six years, (according to Ctesias 31,) is remarkable for the improvements made both in the external and internal administration of the Persian empire. In the former, by the great expeditions and conquests, which extended the Persian realm to its utmost limits; in the latter, by several important institutions, established for the internal organization of the state.

14. The expeditions of the Persians under Cyrus were directed against the countries of Asia; those of Cambyses against Africa. But those undertaken by Darius I. were directed against Europe, though the Persian territory was at the same time extended in the two other quarters of the world. In the reign of this king likewise commenced those wars with the Greeks, so fatal to the Persians; constantly fomented and supported by emigrant or exile Greeks, who found an asylum in the Persian court, and there contrived to raise a party.--First example of the kind exhibited shortly after the accession of Darius, in the case of Syloson, brother to Polycrates, who had been tyrant of Samos: at his request the island was taken possession of by the Persians, and delivered up to him after the almost total destruction of the male population.

15. Great revolt in Babylon, which would not submit tamely to a foreign yoke. After a siege of twenty-one months, Darius by stratagem regains possession of the city. The power of Babylon and the importance of its situation increased the jealousy with which it was guarded by the Persian kings; so much so, that they were wont to reside there a certain portion of the year.

16. First great expedition of Darius undertaken against the Scythians inhabiting the lands north of the Black sea: the former irruption of the Scythians into Asia afforded a pretext for the war, which, therefore, was considered as a general national undertaking. Unsuccessful as the Persian arms were in this vast expedition against the Scythians, and disgraceful as was the retreat from the barren steppes of the Ukrain, yet the power of Darius was established in Thrace and Macedonia, and the Persians obtained firm footing in Europe.

Concerning the peculiar character of the Persian national wars,
or great campaigns, in which all the conquered nations were
obliged to participate, contrasted with the other wars waged by
Persian troops alone.

17. The next expedition made by Darius was more successful. It was carried on along the banks of the Indus, down which river Scylax, a Greek, had previously sailed on a voyage of discovery. The highlands north of the Indus were then subjected to the Persian dominion, and the Indus became the boundary of the kingdom. About the same time that Darius was engaged on the Danube and the Indus, Aryandes, his viceroy in Egypt, led an expedition against Barca, to avenge the murder of king Arcesilaus; a war which terminated in the destruction of the city, and the transplantation of its inhabitants into Asia.

18. However trifling the first occurrence which gave rise to the revolt of the Asiatic Greeks, it was much more important in its consequences. It was set on foot by Aristagoras, lieutenant-governor of Miletus, who was secretly supported by his relation, the offended Histiaeus, then resident at the Persian court. The share taken by the Athenians in this rebellion, which led to the burning of Sardes, was the origin of the national hatred between Persia and European Greece, and of the long series of wars that ensued. The confederates were this time defeated; but the naval battle off the island of Lada, could hardly have had such a fatal result, had not the league been previously corrupted by the craft and gold of Persia. Be that as it may, this war ended in the reduction of the Ionians, and the destruction of Miletus, their flourishing capital; a city which in those days, together with Tyre and Carthage, engrossed the trade of the world.

19. First attack upon Greece, particularly Athens. Darius, already enraged against the Athenians by the firing of Sardes, is still further instigated by the suggestions of the banished tyrant of Athens, Hippias, the son of Pisistratus. This prince, who had fled to the Persian court, was evidently the animating spirit of the whole undertaking. Although the first attempt, made under the command of Mardonius, was thwarted by a tempest, yet the mighty expedition which afterwards followed, was undertaken with so much more prudence, and conducted with so much knowledge of the country, that no one can fail to recognize the guiding hand of Hippias. Even the battle of Marathon, which seems to have been but a diversion on the side of the Persians, would not have decided the war, had not the activity of Miltiades defeated the principal design of the enemy upon Athens.

20. It may be said that Darius, by these foreign wars, debilitated the kingdom which he endeavoured to extend; this circumstance, however, it cannot be denied, increases the merit which he has of perfecting the internal organization of the empire. His reign constitutes precisely that period which must enter into the history of every nomad race that has attained to power, and is advancing towards political civilization; a period at which it becomes visible that the nation is endeavouring to obtain a constitution, however gradual the progress towards it.

21. Division of the empire into twenty _satrapies_, and the imposition of a regular tribute on each. This division at first depended solely on that of the various tributary races, but from it gradually arose a geographic division, in which the ancient distinction of countries was for the most part preserved.

Proofs that the division into satrapies was originally a mere
arrangement for the civil government and collection of taxes,
distinct from military power. Duties of the satraps. The attention
they were to pay to the cultivation and improvement of the land; to
the collection of the imposts; to the execution of the royal
commands relating to provincial affairs. An abuse of this
institution, at a later period, placed in the hands of these
satraps the command also of the troops.--Various means of keeping
the satraps in a state of dependence: royal secretaries appointed
for each, who were to be the first to receive the king's
commands.--Periodical visits paid to the provinces by commissioners
under the direct appointment of the king, or by the king himself
accompanied with an army.--Establishment of couriers in every part
of the empire, for the purpose of securing a safe and rapid
communication with the provinces, as was the case also in the
Mongol countries; (not a regular post, however, the institution
here alluded to being intended only for the court.)

22. The Persian finance continues to preserve those peculiarities which naturally result from the formation of an empire by a nomad race of conquerors, desirous of living at the expense of the conquered, and under a despotic form of government.

Collection of tribute, mostly in kind, for the support of the court
and the armies; and in precious metals, not coined, but in their
raw state. Application of the treasure thus collected towards
constituting a private chest for the king. Various other royal
imposts.--Mode of providing for the public expenditure by
assignments on the revenues of one or several places.

23. Organization of the military system, conformably to the primitive state of the nation, and the necessity now felt of keeping the conquered countries in subjection by means of standing armies.