Chapter XVII: Geuzna. Fever Epidemic in Mersina (2)

The Asiatic provinces of Turkey, then, are inhabited by a population, poor and unenterprising, but sober, peaceful, hospitable, religious, loyal even to a fault—and this last virtue is one of the greatest obstacles to their progress. The Padshàh is not only the head of the State, but the head of their religion also. What is done in his name is accepted with implicit submission. They may suffer, but they submit! Of late, however, the abuses of the Government are beginning to wear out even their patience, and in conversation with some of the more intelligent, I have heard the opinion freely expressed that the only persons who benefited by the present state of things were some few thousand officials and others at Stamboul. But I never heard the least complaint against the Sultan personally. “The Padshàh is good!” “The Padshàh does not know all this.” “If only the Padshàh knew,” &c., &c. Such are the excuses made for the head of the Government. We may smile at this unreasoning loyalty, but there it is, a great fact, unfortunately, for the well-being of the people themselves. It must not be supposed that they are wanting in spirit, but their religion teaches them to look upon the Sultan as the vicegerent of Allah, and this is really the great obstacle to revolution. Were they subject to a Christian Government to which their religion did not bind them to yield passive obedience, they would certainly never submit to similar treatment.

Much has been made of the supposed fanaticism of the Muslim population, and certainly there are districts of the empire where, owing to the opposition of races, the fiercest bigotry is at times displayed, as, e.g., in Damascus, and some other portions of Northern Syria. Amongst certain of the official class also, and the well-to-do tradesmen and merchants, there is much of the old jealousy and hatred of Christians, but this sentiment is far from common. It may exist, but it is dormant, if not dying out.

It is true that neither the people nor the Government approve of conversions from Islam to Christianity, and in fact they are exceedingly uncommon (while on the other hand conversions to Islam are not uncommon, though due almost always to some bad or mean motive); but is it such an unheard-of thing, even in Europe, that converts should suffer in some respects when they change their profession of faith? But further, even as compared with many of the Christian Governments of Europe, the Turkish Government is singularly tolerant. Every sect is allowed the free and unrestrained exercise of its public worship, and may possess property and administer its internal affairs without hindrance or interference from the Government, unless internal dissensions render such interference necessary. Even such bodies as the Protestant communities throughout the empire are gradually obtaining an official recognition, which has only been delayed hitherto because the Government requires that every religious community should have a recognized official head, and the Porte could not at first comprehend a Church without a patriarch or some such ecclesiastical chief.

Amidst the many grievous defects and faults of the Ottoman Government, let us at least give it credit for its toleration in religious matters. It is not so very long ago since we ourselves passed the Catholic Emancipation Act; and as compared with Russia, Spain—even with France—the Government of the Sultan has no reason to be ashamed of its legislation and practice in matters ecclesiastical.

The principal taxes of the Turkish empire are—(1) The dîme, or tithe of the crops (really 12½ per cent.). (2) The “vergui” or “salyan,” a kind of property tax, which, being arbitrary, and arranged between the Government officials and the leading members of the village council, is often the means of much oppression. (3) The sheep tax, of 2½ piastres (about 6_d._) per annum for each head of sheep or goats, in return for which they have the right of pasturage on the Government lands. (4) The “timùttaa,” an income tax of 3 per cent. on the annual gains or revenue of each person; even the poorest is obliged to pay this. This tax is estimated by the town council. The lowest amount accepted is 7½ piastres; but it is usually fixed at a very low rate. (5) “Imlak,” a property tax on houses, magazines, &c., founded on the saleable value of the property. This is fixed by the Government through the town council. A man who occupies his own house pays only 4 piastres per cent. on the value. If the property be let, the percentage is much higher; the valuation is, however, low, and of course there are ways of arranging matters. (6) “Import and export duties,” respectively 8 and 1 per cent. on the value of the merchandise. Usually the estimate of value is low. (7) The tobacco duty, which is fast destroying the culture of tobacco. Several of the villagers who used to grow large quantities of tobacco have told me that, so great was the annoyance and loss caused by the arbitrary method of levying the tax, that they intended to abandon the cultivation. The farmers of the tax examine the growing crop, make an estimate of the probable produce, and on this the amount of the tax is fixed. Often the crop falls short of the estimate, yet the amount is exacted. Endless, in short, are the vexations connected with this tax. (8) The “bedeliyeh,” or exemption tax from military service—established after the Crimean war in place of the “kharaj,” or capitation tax—paid only by Christians, and amounting to from 5_s._ to 10_s._ per annum.

Of all these taxes, two only—the dîme and the “vergui”—much affect the peasant. The import duties scarcely touch him; so few are his wants, that hardly anything foreign is consumed by him except coffee and calico. His clothing is mostly of home manufacture, and in many districts the women spin a coarse but durable cotton cloth. His household furniture is simple even to bareness—no chairs, no tables, no knives and forks, no crockery, no glass. A few cushions stuffed with cotton, and some quilted coverlets, form his bedding. He sits, sleeps, and eats upon the floor. His plates and dishes are of copper, and last a lifetime. The few and simple agricultural implements he employs are of home manufacture; his plough is of wood, for he never ploughs more than a few inches deep. Nearly every article of iron work that he uses is manufactured in the country; and some of the towns in the interior (e.g. Marash) turn out very good work in iron, and in native cloth; others excel in leather work, and the current prices of these articles are surprisingly low. Scarcely any machinery is imported. Production is slow and cumbrous, for nearly everything is made by hand; yet some special articles are of an excellence and finish not to be attained in Europe.

The frugality of his diet is unexampled. His drink is water or coffee; wine or spirits he would not touch, even had he the opportunity. His chief food is unleavened bread of rye, barley, or mixed wheat and barley. Meat he does not eat once in twelve months. Whilst he had a flock, milk formed the chief item of his food; but since the loss of the flocks even that has been cut off in great part. In short, the Turkish peasant has reduced the expense of living to a minimum; it would not be possible to live at all on less!

Much has been said and written touching the resources of Turkey, and the chief items indicated are the mines of the country, its forests, and its waste lands.

As to the last, I have before said that the waste lands which can be utilized are, after all, less extensive than would be supposed; and even of them the best portion is unsuited to the European. But whence could the requisite skill and capital come, except from Europe? from what other quarter can immigration be looked for?

No doubt the mines are valuable, but mines are chiefly of value as supplying materials for manufacturing industry. Mines that can only be worked by foreigners cannot add very materially to the wealth of a country. Moreover, European mining enterprises in Turkey have not often succeeded.

Last, as to the forests, no doubt it would be easy, and very profitable for the moment, to sell or lease the forests to foreign companies; but when the mountains had been bared of their wood—which would soon be brought about—the effect both upon the climate and the population could not fail to be disastrous. Nor would much be gained by clearing the land. The great mountain ranges of the south are covered with forest that extends almost without a break from Adana nearly to Smyrna, and again eastwards round the great plain of Cilicia almost to Alexandretta; but the soil is rocky—only a small portion of it could ever be cultivated—much of it, indeed, is covered with three or four feet of snow for a large part of the year.

The great resource of Turkey, after all, is her agriculture, and the mainstay of her agriculture is the Muslim peasant. The essential point, therefore, is to improve the condition of the poor down-stricken agriculturists of the interior, by urging economy at Constantinople, by helping to open up the country through roads and railways—above all, by ceasing to advance loans, which even now would probably be only squandered, and can but increase the burdens and miseries of a population that is already almost crushed to the very earth.

(Since writing the above, two articles have appeared in the
‘Nineteenth Century Review’ for August and October, 1878—viz.
“The People of India” and “The Bankruptcy of India.” If the
statements in them be correct—which I presume there is no
reason to doubt—it is evident that a very sad state of things
exists in one of our own dependencies, and that even our own
Government is not quite blameless as regards its treatment of
the millions of Indian cultivators under its sway.)

THE ARMENIAN KINGS OF CILICIA.

The commencement of the Roupenian line of kings who ruled Lesser Armenia, comprising Cilicia and portions of the neighbouring provinces of Cappadocia and Isauria, dates from A.D. 1080. Gagik, the last king of Armenia Major, was assassinated in the fortress of Kizistra by the Byzantines. Roupen or Reuben, one of his relatives, escaped to Cilicia, and being aided by the Armenians who were settled there, began to make war upon the Greeks. In 1086 the Greeks were driven out of Armenia by Malik, Shah of Persia. He treated the Armenians well, but upon his death the Persians began to oppress them, and many emigrated to Cilicia. Roupen was succeeded by

CONSTANTINE I. (1095 A.D.). His reign was a continual series of wars with the Byzantines. The first Crusade took place in A.D. 1096. Constantine assisted the Crusaders, and after the capture of Antioch, was made by them a knight and marquis. Constantine was succeeded by his son

TOROS I. (A.D. 1100). Attacked in turns by all his powerful neighbours, Toros maintained the independence of his country. He captured Anazarba from the Byzantines, and made it his capital. In 1108 the Persians invaded Cilicia, but were repulsed. In 1110 the Tartars also invaded Cilicia, but without success. Toros captured and punished the murderers of Gagik. He was succeeded by his brother

LEO I. (A.D. 1123), who also made war on the Byzantines and captured “Mamestu” (Mopsuestia). In 1130 Leo was treacherously taken prisoner by Baldwin of Antioch, and obliged to surrender Mamestu, Adana, and the fortress “Sarwand,” and to pay a ransom of 60,000 gold pieces. On his release, however, he made war on the Latins and recovered his cities. A peace was at last mediated by Jocelyn of Edessa.

In consequence of Leo’s encroachments on Isauria, the Greek emperor, John Comnenus Porphyrogenitus, invaded Cilicia with a great army, before which Leo was forced to retreat. The Greeks captured Tarsus, Adana, and Mamestu. They laid siege to Anazarba, and after thirty-seven days captured it by assault, but they suffered fearful losses, and the garrison cut their way out. Vahkah, a fortress to the north of Sis, and which had been the first seat of the Roupenian thakavors, was captured. Leo at last was blockaded in the mountains, and forced to surrender. He was sent to Constantinople, and imprisoned with his wife and sons. The Armenian troops were driven from Cilicia, and 12,000 Greek troops left in it in 1137. The captives were well treated by the emperor, and released from prison for a season, but Leo was again imprisoned, and died in confinement. Thereupon Toros was released and kept near the emperor.

John Comnenus died in 1142, and was succeeded by Manuel Comnenus. Upon this Toros secretly fled to Cilicia, and concealed himself in the mountains.

TOROS II. (1142 A.D.) headed a revolt of the Armenians against the Greeks. Captured Vahkah, Amuda, Adana, Sis, and Anazarba. The Emperor Manuel then sent Andronicus, his general, with a great army under orders to extirpate the Armenians. But the Greek army suffered a terrible defeat, in one of the passes of Mount Taurus.

About this time the Tartars began to attack the Armenians of Cilicia, but were on several occasions repulsed. A long desultory war continued between the Greeks and Armenians. Toros died in A.D. 1167, and was succeeded by his brother

MILEH I. as regent to the young son of Toros. At the end of the first year of his regency he dethroned the son of Toros, but after a reign of five years he was killed by his own troops. He was succeeded by the nephew of Toros,

ROUPEN II. (1172 A.D.). The war between the Greeks and Armenians continued, and Roupen recovered Tarsus and Amuda, which had again fallen into the hands of the Byzantines. In 1183 Roupen was treacherously captured by Bohemond of Antioch, but released, and after a reign of eleven years he abdicated, and was succeeded by his brother

LEO II. (A.D. 1183). He extended his dominion beyond the Taurus. This king rebuilt Sis and made it his capital, but he resided alternately at Sis and Tarsus. The Sultan of Iconium having attacked him, he defeated the Seljouks, invaded and conquered great part of Isauria, and attacked Syria.

In 1189 occurred the Crusade of the German Emperor Frederic Barbarossa. The Crusaders were assisted by the Armenians, but the Emperor Frederic was drowned in the Calycadnus at Seleucia (Selefke). The emperor had promised to crown Leo; and Henry, son of Frederic Barbarossa, performed the promise, by inducing Pope Celestine to send a crown, and Conrad, Archbishop of Moguntia (Mayence), to perform the ceremony. The emperor also sent to Leo a standard, on which was represented a “lion rampant.” Henceforward the kings of Armenia bore this as their device instead of the ancient device, “the eagle, dove, and dragon.” A close connection with the Latins ensued, and the king married successively two Latin princesses. He continued to resist successfully the Iconians and the Muslims of Aleppo under Kaikayuz and the son of the Sultan Nour-ed-din. In 1207, however, dissensions arose between Leo and the Latins, and in consequence he expelled all Latins from Cilicia. Leo died in 1219, and was buried at Sis. He was succeeded by his daughter

ZABEL, who had married a Latin, Philip; but the latter was divorced, and the queen dethroned, and married to

HETHOUM I. The reign of this king was one long series of sufferings and disasters. The great inroads of Zengis Khan caused vast disturbances over the whole East. Jellal-ed-din, Sultan of Persia, had been driven from Persia by the Tartars, and on the death of Zengis, Jellal-ed-din made a successful attack on Iconium, but all the Seljouk and Turkman chiefs of Asia Minor, combined against him and defeated him. The Tartars invaded Armenia and Cilicia, and the Iconians again attacked Hethoum, but were repulsed.

In 1260 the sultans of Egypt began to attack Palestine, and many people of Palestine fled into Cilicia. Hethoum, fearing to be attacked, made his submission to the Tartar chiefs Mango Khan and Houlagou, and allied himself with them, but this did not save him from the vengeance of the Egyptians, and in 1265 Cilicia was invaded by the terrible Beybars Bundoukdar. The Armenian army was defeated, Toros, younger son of the king, was killed; Leo, the elder, taken prisoner, and the Egyptians laid waste the entire country, but they were unable to capture the fortresses. Leo was kindly treated by Beybars, and eventually released by him. In 1269 Hethoum abdicated, and was succeeded by his son

LEO III., an amiable but unfortunate king. Beybars again invaded Cilicia and captured Tarsus. But he was defeated by a sudden attack of Leo. Next the Iconians and Muslim chiefs of Lycaonia invaded Cilicia; Leo repulsed them, and in his turn invaded Lycaonia. Leo died in 1289, and was succeeded by his son

HETHOUM II. (1289 A.D.), a very devout prince. Cilicia was invaded by Melik el Ashraf, Sultan of Egypt, but he was forced to return by a revolt in Egypt. Kaitbey, his successor, made peace with Hethoum, who abdicated in favour of his brother

TOROS III. (A.D. 1293). He also abdicated, and persuaded Hethoum to reign again. The two brothers paid a visit to their sister Mary, who was married at Constantinople, to Michael, son of the Emperor Andronicus. Their brother Sempad, who had been left regent during the absence of the king, revolted, and the two brothers on their return from Constantinople were driven out by Sempad, and forced to take refuge with a Tartar khan, Gazan, who slew Toros and blinded Hethoum. Constantine, another brother, revolted against Sempad, dethroned and imprisoned him, and released Hethoum, who after two years recovered his sight; Constantine acting in the interim as regent. Hethoum was again obliged to reign, but Constantine having begun to raise revolt, he and Sempad were sent to Constantinople and imprisoned for life by the Greek emperor. The Egyptians and Syrians of Damascus attacked Hethoum, but were repulsed. Hethoum adopted his nephew, Leo, and abdicated in his favour.

LEO IV. (A.D. 1305). Dissensions arose amongst the Armenians about Church ceremonies and theological matters. The disaffected party persuaded Bilargu, a Tartar chief, who had 1000 Tartar troops garrisoning Anazarba for Hethoum, to kill both him and Leo. The Tartars, however, were expelled from Cilicia. Leo was succeeded by

AUCHIN I., youngest brother of Hethoum (A.D. 1308). The Sultan of Egypt, El Melek en Nasr, invaded Cilicia, but was defeated. Auchin died in 1320, and was succeeded by his young son

LEO V. (1320 A.D.), under the regency of Auchin Païl. The regent captured Tyre, and imprisoned the sister of the late king, who was widow of the Count of Tyre. The Sultan En-Nasr again invaded Cilicia, and laid siege to Baias or Aias; but the Egyptians were defeated. They laid siege a second time to Baias, and captured it. Cilicia was laid waste by the Egyptians and Iconians. On the retirement of the Egyptian army, help was asked from the Latins, and in revenge En-Nasr determined to extirpate the Armenians. This, the third great invasion of the Egyptians, was the most terrible of all. The very tombs were opened, and the dead bodies cast forth, and the whole face of the land devastated in the most awful manner. Adana and other cities were captured, and 20,000 Armenians carried prisoners to Egypt. No help could be obtained from the Pope or the Europeans, but aid was promised by the Tartar khan, Abou Said, upon which En-Nasr made peace. Leo put to death Auchin Païl, and his brother Constantine. In 1334, on report of another Crusade, the Egyptian sultan determined to attack the Armenians again; but as there was a truce between him and Leo for fifteen years, En-Nasr sent the Emir of Aleppo into Cilicia, who in 1335 again laid the country waste. Leo, unable to resist, shut himself up in the fortresses. In 1337 another inroad of the Egyptians took place, but En-Nasr made peace on condition Leo should never again ask help from the Europeans. Leo, however, broke his oath, and the Egyptians once more attacked him, but the bishops and chiefs insisted on all intercourse with Europeans being abandoned. Leo died in 1342, and was succeeded by his cousin Johannes, who took the title of

CONSTANTINE, a man of a dissolute character and violent temper. He quarrelled with the chiefs, and endeavoured to make the Armenian Church conform to the Roman Church. After a reign of one year, he was killed by his troops, who had mutinied. He was succeeded by his brother Guido, who became king in 1343.

GUIDO (1343). The dissensions of the Armenians rendered them an easy prey to the Egyptians, who plundered and ravaged the country almost without resistance. Guido gave all power and office to Latins, he chose all the governors of his fortresses from them, and endeavoured to force the Armenian Church into conformity with the Roman Church. But in 1345 a conspiracy was formed against him, and he was killed. He was succeeded by another Constantine, not of the Roupenian line.

CONSTANTINE II. (1345). He had some communications with the Pope and the western Europeans, and thereupon the Egyptians determined to extirpate the Armenians, so as to prevent all further trouble from Europe. But though the king repulsed them, the country was reduced to a miserable condition of distress and anarchy. The king died in 1363, and the Pope exhorted the Armenians to union, and recommended them to elect for their king, Leo Lucian, a relation of King Guido.

LEO LUCIAN (A.D. 1366), a good king, but fallen on very evil times. As was always the case, the dissensions of the Armenians laid Cilicia open to the attacks of the Egyptians. In 1371 they invaded the country, and their ravages caused so terrible a famine, that in Sis a bushel of corn cost 500 pieces of silver. In consequence of a revolution in Egypt, El Ashraf Shaban became sultan, and he sent an army to attack Cilicia. After a siege of two months, Sis was captured, the tombs of the Armenian kings were opened, and their bodies burnt; the country was changed into a complete wilderness; and the Egyptians committed the most horrible cruelties. Leo was blockaded in the mountain fortress of Gaban, and after nine months forced by famine to surrender. The captives were carried to Cairo, their lives were spared, and even liberty offered to them on condition of embracing El Islam, but this they refused to do, and were therefore imprisoned.

The successor of El Ashraf, the Sultan Melik Mansour, made the same offer, but the captives refused, and remained seven years in prison.

With the capture of Leo in 1375, the Armenian monarchy in Cilicia came to an end. The country remained in possession of the Egyptians for some time, and then passed into the hands of the Ottomans. On the death of Melik Mansour, his brother Melik Saleh, a child of six years old, succeeded, and Juan, king of Spain, by means of presents and ambassadors, persuaded the council of the young sultan to release the Armenian royal family in 1382; pledging himself that no future trouble to the Egyptians should be given by them. Leo with his family being released, went to Jerusalem to return thanks, and to visit the Holy Sepulchre. Thence they went to Rome to visit the Pope, Urban VI.; afterwards they went to Spain. During the war between France and England, Leo was sent with the Papal legates to mediate. He tried to obtain help from the kings of France and England, in order to recover Cilicia from the Mohammedans, but in vain. He died at Paris in 1393, and was buried in the convent of the Celestins. His queen, Mary, died at Jerusalem in 1405. From the capture of their royal family by the Egyptians, the Armenians have been a wandering and inglorious people, annihilated as a nation, and the fame of their old renown is only known to the few who care to study their annals!

HISTORICAL SUMMARY.

Mersina occupies the site of an ancient town, the name of which is not known. The coast line along all this part of Karamania is full of ancient ruins, attesting its former prosperity and populousness. Between the present town and the river, to the west, is a wide space full of ancient remains, fragments of pottery, bricks, bits of marble, &c. Texier says Mersina is on the site of the ancient Zephyrium, but Forbiger[28] calls Zephyrium “a tongue of land.”

Ritter[29] says: “Mersina is a small coast town, like Alexandretta, but more picturesquely situated, and surrounded by orange gardens and mulberry plantations. Near the quarantine station are some pretty country houses of well-to-do people, especially of the Consuls at Tarsus. As the commerce of the place has become more active, the open roadstead is visited by many ships, especially French, although the sea-breeze sometimes renders landing difficult, and even impossible, for several days together. The marshy lowland exposes the inhabitants to dangerous fevers, which are said to be generally cured by the application of leeches. These are exported thence in great numbers to Europe. In order to escape from the danger of the damp ground, people build themselves airy wooden structures, resting on poles. Some Druses, driven away from the Lebanon, have established here village settlements. A very good carriage-road leads from this place to Tarsus.”

F. A. Neale, ‘Eight years in Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor’[30]: “The passage from Alexandretta to Mersine, the seaport of Tarsous, usually occupies twenty-four hours. Mersine is a small village somewhat similar in size to Alexandretta, though infinitely more picturesque. It abounds with orange and mulberry trees, and herein consists its superiority over Alexandretta; for in the latter place there is but one solitary palm-tree to be seen. There is a neatly-built lazaretto, and close by are three or four pretty summer houses, the property of gentlemen residing at Tarsous, who resort hither during the hot weather. Mersine, though but an open roadstead, is much frequented during the summer months by French vessels, though even then, so soon as the sea breeze sets in, such a surf gets up that frequently all landing operations have to be suspended for a day or two. The town is twelve miles from Tarsous, but the road is so excellent and level that one might easily drive all the way in a carriage. Mersine is famous as a resort of the little bird called the francolin, which is never disturbed except during two months of the year.”

SOLI, or POMPEIOPOLIS.—The ruins of Pompeiopolis are on the west side of the little river Liparis (at present without a name); the site of Soli is on the east side of the stream. According to some ancient authors, Soli was founded by Argive colonists, who came to it from Cyprus. Afterwards a Rhodian colony, and still later an Athenian colony, settled there, and some of the coins of Soli bear the image of Athene, with an owl on the reverse. Under the government of the satraps, placed there by the kings of Persia, Soli became a very flourishing place.

During the invasion of Persia, Soli seems at first to have been severely treated by Alexander: “Having recovered his health, Alexander sent Pannemion to occupy the defiles which separate Cilicia from Syria. He himself marched from Tarsus in one day to Anchialon. Thence he went on to Soles, placed a garrison in the town, and, taking with him all his cavalry and his light troops, he attacked the Cilicians of the mountains, reduced them, either by force or arrangement, in the space of seven days, and returned to Soles.”[31]

A little further on he again mentions Soli: “Alexander, having been detained successively at Tarsus by his sickness, at Soles by the games which he caused to be celebrated there when he heard of the success of Asandros and Ptolemy in Caria, and in the mountains of Cilicia by his expedition against the barbarians,” &c.

After describing the battle of Issus, he continues: “After the victory at Issus, Balacros, son of Nicanor, was named Satrap of Cilicia; the town of Soles obtained a remission of the fifty talents, which still remained of the sum it had to pay, and its hostages were restored to it.[32]

“Soles showed itself grateful. During the siege of Tyre, three galleys of Soles and of Mallus joined the fleet of Alexander.”[33]

Scarcely anything is known of the history of Soli under the Seleucidæ.

Tigranes, king of Armenia, in his wars against the last Seleucids, ravaged Soli, and removed its inhabitants to his new capital, Tigranocerta.

It was one of the penitentiary colonies in which Pompeius Magnus placed such of the Cilician pirates as he thought fit to spare. The town had decayed, probably in consequence of the Mithridatic war.[34]

Its port and colonnade (once consisting of 200 columns) are said to have been constructed by Pompeius Magnus; but the architecture of the colonnade marks a time of decadence, and rather resembles the style usual in the age of the Antonines. Pompeiopolis was much injured by an earthquake in the reign of Justinian, A.D. 528, and was restored by that emperor.

Sir F. Beaufort, in his ‘Karamania,’ says:—

“At length the elevated theatre and tall columns of Soli, or Pompeiopolis, rose above the horizon into view, and appeared to justify the representation which the pilots had given of its magnificence. We were not altogether disappointed. The first object that presented itself on landing was a beautiful harbour or basin, with parallel sides and circular ends. It is entirely artificial, being formed by surrounding walls or moles, which are fifty feet in thickness and seven in height. They are constructed of rubble, bedded in a strong cement, but faced and covered with blocks of yellowish, shelly limestone, which have been clamped together with iron dovetails.

“Opposite to the entrance of the harbour a portico rises from the surrounding quay, and opens to a double row of 200 columns, which, crossing the town, communicates with the principal gate towards the country, and from the outside of that gate a paved road continues in the same line to a bridge over a small river. At the end next the harbour there are indications of the two rows of columns having been united by arches; and possibly the whole colonnade was once a covered street, which, with the avenue, the portico, and the harbour, must have formed a noble spectacle. Even in its present state of wreck the effect of the whole was so imposing, that the most illiterate seaman in the ship could not behold it without emotion. The columns, however, taken singly, do not appear to much advantage.

“As there are no inhabitants within the walls of Pompeiopolis, we found great difficulty in ascertaining its proper modern appellation. Three different names were collected.... ‘Mezetlu,’ however, united the greatest number of suffrages.”

TARSUS.—One of the most ancient cities in the world. It is mentioned in the list of Asiatic cities conquered by Rhamses III. (nineteenth dynasty). The traditions of its foundation mount to the mythological ages of Greek history, but its real founders were probably Assyrian. One tradition assigns its foundation to Triptolemus, who had been sent by the Pelasgic king, Inachus, to search for his daughter, Io. Ammian says: “Ciliciam vero, quæ Cydno amne exsultat, Tarsus nobilitat, urbs perspicabilis (hanc condidisse Perseus memoratur, Jovis filius et Danäes—vel certe ex Ethiopia profectus SANDAN quidem nomine, vir opulentus et nobilis),” &c.[35]

Two derivations of the name “Tarsus” have been given: (1) From the verb τερσομαι, “to become dry,” ταρσός, “dry.” (2) ταρσός, “any flat surface,” “the flat part of a foot,” “the flat of a wing.” The latter derivation refers to the feather from the wing of Pegasus, or to the hoof of Pegasus, which was broken by his alighting. But the former derivation seems preferable; and, indeed, the plain around Tarsus has evidently, at some former period, been a great marsh.

The latest settlement at Tarsus was of an Argive colony, and with this is connected the mythical hero Perseus. The presence of an Assyrian colony is indicated by the tradition which marks out the curious monument called the “Dunuk Tash” as the tomb of Sardanapalus, an Assyrian king. (It is, however, just possible—at least, judging from the passage in Ammian quoted above—that this mysterious monument may have had a non-Assyrian origin.) However this may be, no satisfactory account of its origin has as yet been given, nor has it been possible satisfactorily to establish any connection between the founder of the monument and any one of the Assyrian kings known under the name “Sardanapalus,” although M. L’Anglois has a long dissertation on it in his ‘Cilicie.’ Texier writes thus: “Les historiens Grecs et Latins qui ont fait mention de la fondation de Tarse, citent une inscription célèbre qui était (croyaient-ils) placée sur le tombeau de Sardanapale. ‘Sardanapale, fils d’Anaxynderax, a bâti Tarse et Anchiale en un jour. Passant, mange, bois, ris; le reste ne vaut rien.’” (The translation of Texier is in some parts erroneous, e.g. of “παίζε.”)

This inscription is mentioned by Strabo, xiv. 672; Arrian, ‘Exped. Alexandri,’ ii. 5; Cicero, ‘Tuscul.’ v. 35.

It is possible that some light may be thrown on the point by future Assyrian discoveries.

The late G. Smith’s curious and learned work, ‘History of Assurbanipal,’ does not help to clear up the riddle of the so-called tomb of Sardanapalus. Mr. Smith arrives at the conclusion that Assurbanipal is _not_ that Sardanapalus under whom the Assyrian empire was overthrown. He says (p. 324): “Assurbanipal reigned forty-two years and died in the year B.C. 626, when he was succeeded by his son ‘Assur-ebil-ili,’ or ‘Assur-ebil-ili-Kainni,’ of whose history we know nothing. It is generally supposed that under him the Assyrian empire was overthrown.”

History is completely silent as to the fortunes of Tarsus under its dynasty of Assyrian or native kings. But like all Western Asia, it fell under the power of the Persian monarchy. Perhaps Cilicia rendered only a partial obedience to the Great king, for it seems to have been governed sometimes by kings, at other times by Persian satraps, and, as many medals of these rulers are extant, we must conclude that it enjoyed a certain degree of independence, for the kings of Persia always regarded with the utmost jealousy the privilege of coining money (e.g. the history of Aryandes Satrap of Egypt, as given by Herodotus).

At the time of the expedition of Cyrus, the king of Cilicia was Syennesis. Incapable of resisting the invader, he sent his queen, Epyaxa, to meet Cyrus. She accompanied the army till it reached Iconium, in Lycaonia. Thence the queen was sent back by the shortest route into Cilicia (probably by one of the passes to the west of the Pylæ Ciliciæ). Cyrus himself seems to have entered Cilicia by this latter pass. According to Xenophon, near Dana (Tyana), a rich city of Cappadocia, the defiles which led into Cilicia were held by Syennesis; but he retired on the approach of Cyrus, who reached the summit of the pass without resistance. Thence he could see the camp of the Cilicians, and descended into a vast and fertile plain surrounded by mountains. Xenophon describes the plain as “vast and fertile, well watered, full of vines and all kinds of trees, and producing much wheat, barley, sesamum, and millet.” Across this plain he marched in one day to Tarsus. The entire march from Tyana to Tarsus occupied four days, and was twenty-five parasangs in length, equal to about seventy-five miles English. Epyaxa had reached Tarsus five days earlier, and Syennesis was persuaded to help Cyrus. Accordingly he gave him his son and some troops, but at the same time he sent off secretly another of his sons to the king of Persia (Artaxerxes Mnemon) to explain that he had only joined Cyrus under constraint. He sent also information about the forces of Cyrus, and promised to abandon him on the first favourable opportunity. The army remained twenty days at Tarsus, and here a mutiny broke out amongst the Greek troops, who began to suspect the real object of the expedition. It was appeased by a donation of money, which seems to have been raised by plundering Tarsus.

Many ancient medals of cities in Cilicia are extant bearing the names of various satraps or semi-independent kings. The obverse of these medals is a figure of one of the principal divinities worshipped in Cilicia: Minerva, Apollo, Hercules, but, more commonly, Baal (Baaltars) seated. On the reverse is a lion, or a lion killing a steer.

The Duc de Luynes, in his work ‘Numismatique des Satrapies,’ &c., pp. 29, 30, mentions eight coins by Abdsohar, prince “of the plain” (as distinguished from the mountainous part of Cilicia), “one of those princes who have left numerous medals, and no record in history. The style of his coins and the inscriptions upon them, connect them beyond doubt with Cilicia and the mint of Tarsus. They are of very perfect workmanship, and clearly belong to the time of Artaxerxes Mnemon. The reverse of these medals is composed in accordance with the religious ideas of the Persians. A lion is represented devouring a bull, as in all the mystic groups so common upon the monuments of Asia.”

Further on he says: “This region [Cilicia] was divided into two provinces—the one mountainous, called τραχειῶτις, extended from the western slopes of the Taurus—from Isaura and the Homonadians—as far as Pisidia. The other province, named ‘plain or level’ (πεδιὰς), extended from Soli to Issus.[36] It would appear that these two Cilicias formed distinct satrapies, for Camissares and Datames, his son, governed for the king of Persia that part of Cilicia which was near Cappadocia, and was inhabited by the Leuco Syri.[37] It was perhaps the neighbourhood of these satraps, who were certainly contemporaries of Abdsohar, which induced the latter to distinguish (in the inscriptions on his coins) the province which he himself governed, by the Phœnician term, equivalent to ‘πεδιὰς.’”

The Duc de Luynes translates the inscription on these coins thus: (numisma) crassum leone (signatum) purum (cusum) ad (manum) Abdsohar (satrapæ) Campi Ciliciæ; i.e. “a full lion dollar of pure metal of Abdsohar of Lower Cilicia.” “Is the name ‘Sohar’ here the name of a person, or of the star of Venus? a divinity both male and female among the Persians. I should incline towards the former opinion.”

De Luynes mentions also coins of Syennesis “roi et satrape,” pp. 11-14; Dernès, pp. 15-21; Dernès et Syennesis, pp. 21-25; Abdsohar, pp. 26-30, all rulers of Tarsus. At Tarsus also were struck coins of Gaos, six of which are extant, pp. 31-33. Gaos, however, was not a satrap, but held Tarsus for two years as a rebel against the king of Persia. Similarly Ariæus, pp. 34, 35.

During his invasion of Persia Alexander the Great remained awhile at Tarsus. A bath in the cold waters of the Cydnus nearly proved fatal to him by bringing on a violent fever.

After the battle of Issus, Darius III. escaped by a pass lying to the N.E. of the Pylæ Cilicia (probably up the ravines of the Pyramus), as all the passes to the south were in the possession of the Macedonians. M. T. Cicero, when Prefect of Cilicia, became acquainted with this pass during his campaign against the brigands in the Amanus. In the ‘Ep. ad Familiares,’ xv. 4, he says: “Duo sunt enim aditus in Ciliciam ex Syria, quorum uterque parvis præsidiis propter angustias intercludi potest,” &c. It was probably at the eastern issue of the more northern of these passes that the Khalif Haroun er Rasheed, in 801, had the little fortress constructed, which, from his name, was called Harounji, whilst his wife Zobeyde, at the eastern entrance of the Beylan Pass at Bagras, through which then lay the principal route from Syria into Asia Minor, built a great khan, then the first and only building of the kind in that part of Syria. Harounji lies S.W. of Marash. The pass was here closed by iron gates, a double wall, and a ditch.

On the partition of the Macedonian empire, Tarsus was held by the Greek kings of Syria (Seleucidæ). It preserved its privileges as a free city, but shared all the varying fortunes of that dynasty. In 171 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes made an expedition into Cilicia to reduce Tarsus and Mallus, which had revolted because the king had given them as a present to his concubine Antiochis.

The suppression of the great piratic confederacy of Cilicia brought Tarsus into closer relations with Rome. In the second of the great civil wars of Rome it took the side of Julius Cæsar, and remained so faithfully attached to him, and afterwards to his nephew Octavius,[38] that the latter gave it the name Juliopolis. It suffered much from the republican troops under Brutus and Cassius, for it was pillaged and heavily fined. It was the scene of the famous meeting between Antonius and Cleopatra, and was much favoured by Antonius; yet the attachment of its people to the Julian family remained unshaken.

Octavius did much for it, and under the earlier Roman emperors it became a very flourishing place, vieing in its schools and universities, even with Athens and Alexandria. Tarsus doubtless experienced the benefits of Adrian, and of the emperors of the Antonine family, equally with the other cities of Cilicia, and under these rulers it constantly preserved its privileges. It was the capital of the Cilician Community (Κοινὸν Κιλικίας), and every year great games were celebrated here in honour of the emperors.

At Tarsus were the tombs of Maximian Daza, and of the Emperor Julian; but neither remains, and even their site is unknown. Zosimus gives the inscription on Julian’s tomb, supposed to have been the composition of the sophist Libanius:—

Ἰουλιανὸς μετὰ Τίγριν ἀγάῤῥοον ἐνθάδε κεῖται
ἀμφότερον βασιλεὺς τ’ ἀγαθος κρατερός τ’ ἀιχμητής.

Julian, returned from Tigris’ mighty flood,
Here lies—a warrior brave, a monarch good.

The Emperor Justinian was a great benefactor at Tarsus. Amongst the other public works he caused to be executed there, was a broad canal which traversed the city, in order to relieve the main channel of the Cydnus during inundations. The city had been much damaged by floods.

On the conquest of Cilicia by the Saracens, the Khalifeh Haroun er Rasheed made it the capital of the province, and strongly fortified it. The whole territory as far as Tarsus had come into possession of the Muslims, and Haroun strongly fortified Adana, Tarsus, and Mopsuestia (Messis), besides securing the passes through the Amanus by means of forts. His son and successor, El Maamoun, further strengthened Tarsus to such an extent that, “it might have resisted the Christians for centuries.” El Maamoun was buried at Tarsus, but his tomb does not now exist.

For a short period during the brilliant reigns of Nicephorus Phocas and John Zimisces, Cilicia was recovered by the Greeks. In A.D. 963, Zimisces gained a great victory over the Saracens near Adana, and the former captured Adana and Anazarba, and the next year Mopsuestia and Tarsus. But in A.D. 969, Phocas was assassinated, through the intrigues of Zimisces and the Empress Theophanon. Zimisces succeeded to the throne. He continued the war against the Saracens, gained great victories over them, and hoped to recover Syria and Mesopotamia, and to free Jerusalem. But in 976 he was poisoned, and all these great hopes perished.

Although Tarsus was the prey of every successive race of invaders, ravaged again and again by the barbarous mountaineers of Cilicia, Isaurians, and others, destroyed by the western nations who directed crusades against its Muslim possessors, it still maintained a certain amount of prosperity throughout the middle ages.

It shared the vicissitudes of the long wars between Greeks, Armenians, and the various Muslim races who disputed with them the possession of Cilicia; but there is a blank in its history for nearly 600 years. Of late years it has revived considerably, but so great have been the changes it has undergone, topographical and other, that it is impossible to recognize the once celebrated city in the filthy and miserable modern Tersoùs.

Tarsus can scarcely be considered a Turkish city, the great majority of its inhabitants are either Armenians, or yet more Syrians, whose language is Arabic, a large proportion of the latter belonging to the Nusairi, a mysterious sect and people not to be confounded either with the Ishmaliens, or with the Druses (on whose habits, dwelling places in the mountains of Northern Syria, and their obscure tenets—supposed to be a strange mixture of Islam and Christianity—see Ritter, ‘Erdkunde,’ vol. xvii. pp. 975-95).

“Their physiognomy and religious opinions” (says the Rev. S. Lyde, speaking of the Nusairiyeh) “prove them to be a race different from the other populations of Syria. They are supposed to be aborigines whose home is in the mountainous territory lying between Mount Kasius and the Lebanon, and to have maintained themselves there whilst successive migrations of nations in the lower districts have pushed aside the other autochthones, or replaced them by a new population.”

ADANA.—The foundation of this city also mounts to mythical ages. Steph. Byzan. (sub voce Adana) says that the two brothers, Adanus and Sarus, who were sons of Ge and Ouranus, after having defeated the Tarsiots, founded the city. One gave his name to the town, the other to the river.

Beyond this obscure reference, there seems to be absolutely no notice of Adana in history till the time of Pompeius Magnus, and it seems to have been of very little importance even then. Appian[39] says that “in Mallus and Adana and Epiphaneia, and any other town of Cilicia Tracheia (_sic._), which was deserted or lacking population, Pompeius settled those of the pirates who seemed to have practised piracy, not from viciousness, but rather in consequence of the distress caused by the Mithridatic war.”

The first great benefactor of Adana was the Emperor Adrian. He gave his name to the town, as is proved by the legend on some of its coins, “Αδριανων Αδανεων.” Of the edifices constructed by this emperor, nothing exists except perhaps the last arch of the bridge on the west side. The first bridge was constructed by his order, and an inscription containing the emperor’s name existed on the present bridge about forty-five years ago, but has now disappeared. In gratitude for certain favours conferred by Maximian, Adana, with permission of the emperor and senate, assumed the title of Μαξιμιανων Αδανεων. During the fourth and fifth centuries Adana, in common with the rest of Cilicia, suffered immensely from the Isaurians. Adana owed much to Justinian. This emperor restored the bridge which had fallen into a state of dangerous dilapidation.

Procopius[40] gives a very verbose account of this great work, from which it appears that the entire structure threatened to fall into the river owing to the decay of the piers on which its huge arches rested, that the emperor caused a new channel to be dug into which the river was diverted. He then caused the ruinous piers to be taken down and rebuilt, after which the river was turned back into its former channel. Besides the bridge, the emperor caused an aqueduct or canal on arches to be constructed, and built great dykes along the sides of the stream.

This aqueduct seems to have been still in existence at the time of Paul Lucas’ visit to Adana, in 1705, but it has since disappeared. The emperor’s engineer for these works was a certain Auxentius. There is still extant on the high altar of the Greek Church at Adana an inscription which Paul Lucas saw on the aqueduct.

Of the porticus mentioned by Otter[41] and Kinneir[42] not a trace remains, and the little that still existed of the fort at the west end of the bridge, mentioned by Lucas[43] and Kinneir[44], has been lately removed. In 1385, Sultan Bayazid captured it, and afterwards repaired it; in 1388 it was again besieged and captured by the Sultan of Egypt.

Adana owed much to the Abasside khalifehs, especially to Haroun er Rasheed, but Cilicia was constantly the scene of war between the khalifehs and the Byzantine emperors. Two only of the Greek emperors appear to have been successful against the Saracens, viz. Nicephorus Phocas and John Zimisces, but after the death of the latter, Cilicia was soon lost to the Byzantines.

At the time of the first Crusade, Adana was a very flourishing city. Raoul de Caen[45] calls it “urbs munita turribus, populis capax, armis referta.” Guilliaume de Tyr[46] calls it “urbem qui nomen habet Adana, auro et argento, gregibus et frumentis, vino et oleo et omni commoditate abundantem.” The Crusades probably enabled the Byzantines to recover Cilicia, but in the course of the twelfth century the Armenians, under their Roupenian kings, after long warfare, expelled the Greeks, who were never again able to recover the country.

The Armenians were exposed to constant attacks from the Muslims of Koniah and Karaman, varied by occasional inroads of Tartars. But after the disastrous Crusade of Louis IX. against Egypt, a far more formidable enemy appeared. The terrible Beybars Bundoukdar, Sultan of Egypt, invaded Cilicia, and from this time forward, the Armenians of Cilicia were exposed to continual attacks from the Egyptian Sultans; one of them, “El Melik en Nasr,” devastated the country repeatedly in the most fearful manner (A.D. 1320-1337). He succeeded in capturing Adana, but could not reduce the great rock fortresses of Cilicia.

These invasions were renewed at intervals from 1343-1375, when the Armenian monarchy was destroyed, and their last king captured and carried away into Egypt by the Sultan El Ashraf.

Paul Lucas writes of Adana as follows (translation): “Adana appears to me to possess the most agreeable climate in the world. During the winter its air is excellent, and the days there, at that season are more beautiful than in many other places in spring time. All the year round fruits are grown there which other countries only produce at certain seasons, as, for instance, water melons, common melons, cucumbers, pomegranates, and all kinds of vegetables and herbs. During the summer, however, there does not seem to be so much enjoyment, for in proportion as it approaches, this fine town sees its inhabitants retire. From the month of April, the heats are so overpowering that the citizens are forced to take refuge in the mountains which are called ‘Laiassi’ [these are the ‘Yailas,’ summer retreats in the mountains], and which I think are the dependencies of Mount Taurus. There they stay for about six months in the year. But I am told that there also the life they pass is perfectly delicious, and that during these six months the prettiest imaginable towns are constructed on these heights, which are planted with forest and abound in grottoes and springs of water.

“At the extremity of Adana on the south, and at the foot of the walls, a river flows, as large as the Seine, called the Chaquet. On its banks is the citadel of the town; it is small, but built upon the natural rock, and of considerable strength. As I was one day passing by it, the Aga who is in command of it, ordered me to be called, and asked me if I was not the Frank Physician. I told him that I was. Then he begged me to enter, and to take a cup of coffee with him. In course of conversation he paid me an infinite number of compliments on the cures which I had effected in the town.... Finally he asked me if I wished to see the castle, and ordered one of his people to show me everything in it. After passing the outer wall, which is flanked by a number of towers, we entered by a gate as old as the citadel itself. It is made of great bars of iron, covered with great iron horse-shoes, three fingers thick, three-quarters of a foot long and half a foot wide, and secured with rivets, the heads of which are as large as a tennis ball, and cut into facets.... Then we walked round the walls. There I saw only a single piece of cannon ... and in the whole castle I found nothing worthy of notice, except a frightful prison, the very look of which was enough to make one shudder. It is of a round form like a well, and may be about sixty feet in circumference and forty in depth. It contained at that time some sixty prisoners, almost trampling one upon the other, and whose miserable condition could not fail to excite compassion.

“In this prison was placed Stephen, the Patriarch of the Syrians, with three of his Bishops, who professed the Roman Catholic faith. The schismatic Syrians (i.e. of the Greek Church), after having caused them to suffer an infinity of persecutions and grievous fines, obtained by means of bribery a firman of the grand signor against them. In consequence of that order they were loaded with chains, brought from Aleppo, and cast into this frightful dungeon. The unhappy patriarch died there, professing, even to his last breath, the Catholic faith. Several others followed his example there shortly after, and the Christians of the country assured me that they all died like veritable saints. This little fortress is only about three hundred paces in circumference.