The Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Assyrians Part 12

This bravado did in reality astonish the Lacedaemonians. But they were still more alarmed at the formidable league that was formed against them.

The Delphic oracle, which they consulted, in order to know by what means they should be successful in this war, directed them to send to Athens for a commander, and to submit to his counsel and conduct. This was a very mortifying step to so haughty a city as Sparta. But the fear of incurring the G.o.d's displeasure by a direct disobedience prevailed over all other considerations. They sent an emba.s.sy therefore to the Athenians. The people of Athens were somewhat perplexed at the request. On the one hand, they were not sorry to see the Lacedaemonians at war with their neighbours, and were far from desiring to furnish them with a good general: on the other, they were afraid also of disobeying the G.o.d. To extricate themselves out of this difficulty, they offered the Lacedaemonians Tyrtaeus.

He was a poet by profession, and had something original in the turn of his mind, and disagreeable in his person; for he was lame. Notwithstanding these defects, the Lacedaemonians received him as a general, sent them by Heaven itself. Their success did not at first answer their expectation, for they lost three battles successively.

The kings of Sparta, discouraged by so many disappointments, and out of all hopes of better success for the future, were absolutely bent upon returning to Sparta, and marching home again with their forces. Tyrtaeus opposed this design very warmly, and at length brought them over to his opinion. He addressed the troops, and repeated to them some verses he had made with that intention, and on which he had bestowed great pains and application. He first endeavoured to comfort them for their past losses, which he imputed to no fault of theirs, but only to ill fortune, or to fate, which no human wisdom can surmount. He then represented to them, how shameful it would be for Spartans to fly from an enemy; and how glorious it would be for them rather to perish sword in hand, if it was so decreed by fate, in fighting for their country. Then, as if all danger was vanished, and the G.o.ds, fully satisfied and appeased with their late calamities, were entirely turned to their side, he set victory before their eyes as present and certain, and as if she herself were inviting them to battle. All the ancient authors,(244) who have made any mention of the style and character of Tyrtaeus's poetry, observe, that it was full of a certain fire, ardour, and enthusiasm, that inflamed the minds of men, that exalted them above themselves, that inspired them with something generous and martial, that extinguished all fear and apprehension of danger or death, and made them wholly intent upon the preservation of their country and their own glory.(245) Tyrtaeus's verses had really this effect on the soldiers upon this occasion. They all desired, with one voice, to march against the enemy. Being become indifferent as to their lives, they had no thoughts but to secure themselves the honour of a burial. To this end they all tied strings round their right arms, on which were inscribed their own and their fathers' names, that, if they chanced to be killed in the battle, and to have their faces so altered through time, or accidents, as not to be distinguishable, it might certainly be known who each of them was by these marks. Soldiers determined to die are very valiant. This appeared in the battle that ensued. It was very b.l.o.o.d.y, the victory being a long time disputed on both sides; but at last the Messenians gave way. When Tyrtaeus went afterwards to Sparta, he was received with the greatest marks of distinction, and incorporated into the body of citizens.

The gaining of this battle did not put an end to the war, which had already lasted three years. Aristomenes, having a.s.sembled the remains of his army, retired to the top of a mountain, of difficult access, which was called Ira. The conquerors attempted to carry the place by a.s.sault, but that brave prince defended himself there for the s.p.a.ce of eleven years, and performed the most extraordinary actions of valour. He was at last obliged to quit it, only by surprise and treachery, after having defended it like a lion. Such of the Messenians as fell into the hands of the Lacedaemonians on this occasion were reduced to the condition of the Helots. The rest, seeing their country ruined, went and settled at Zancle, a city in Sicily, which afterwards took its name from this people, and was called Messana; the same place as is called at this day Messina.

Aristomenes, after having conducted one of his daughters to Rhodes, whom he had given in marriage to the tyrant of that place, thought of pa.s.sing on to Sardis, to remain with Ardys, king of the Lydians, or to Ecbatana, with Phraortes, king of the Medes; but death prevented the execution of all his designs.

(M12) The second Messenian war was of fourteen years' duration, and ended the first year of the twenty-seventh Olympiad.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(M13) It was not till after the battle of Ipsus in Phrygia, wherein Antigonus, and his son Demetrius, surnamed Poliorcetes, were defeated, and the former lost his life, that this part.i.tion was fully regulated and fixed. The empire of Alexander was then divided into four kingdoms, by a solemn treaty, as had been foretold by Daniel. Ptolemy had Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Clesyria, and Palestine. Ca.s.sander, the son of Antipater, obtained Macedonia and Greece. Lysimachus acquired Thrace, Bithynia, and some other provinces on the other side of the h.e.l.lespont and the Bosphorus. And Seleucus had Syria, and all that part of the greater Asia which extended to the other side of the Euphrates, and as far as the river Indus.

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

I. The Kingdom of Egypt.

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

(M14) Ptolemy Soter. He reigned thirty-eight years and some months.

(M15) Ptolemy Philadelphus. He reigned forty years including the two years of his reign in the lifetime of his father.

(M16) Ptolemy Euergetes, twenty-five years.

(M17) Ptolemy Philopator, seventeen.

(M18) Ptolemy Epiphanes, twenty-four.

(M19) Ptolemy Philometor, thirty-four.

II. The Kingdom of Syria.

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

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

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

(M20) Seleucus Nicator. He reigned twenty years.

(M21) Antiochus Soter, nineteen.

(M22) Antiochus Theos, fifteen.

(M23) Seleucus Callinicus, twenty.

(M24) Seleucus Ceraunus, three.

(M25) Antiochus the Great, thirty-six.

(M26) Seleucus Philopator, twelve.

(M27) Antiochus Epiphanes, brother of Seleucus Philopator, eleven.

III. The Kingdom of Macedonia.

(M28) Macedonia frequently changed its masters, after the solemn part.i.tion had been made between the four princes. Ca.s.sander died three or four years after that part.i.tion, and left three sons. Philip, the eldest, died shortly after his father. The other two contended for the crown without enjoying it, both dying soon after without issue.