with her head half dressed, and did not return till the disturbance was entirely appeased. A statue was erected in remembrance of this action, representing her in that very attitude and undress, which had but hindered her from flying to her duty. Not satisfied with the vast extent of dominions left her by her husband, she enlarged them by the conquest of a great part of Ethiopia. Whilst she was in that country, she had the curiosity to visit the temple of Jupiter Ammon, to inquire of the oracle how long she had to live. According to Diodorus, the answer she received was, that she should not die till her son Ninyas conspired against her, and that after her death one part of Asia would pay her divine honours. Her greatest and last expedition was against India. On this occasion she raised an innumerable army out of all the provinces of her empire, and appointed Bactra for the rendezvous. As the strength of the Indians consisted chiefly in their great number of elephants, she caused a multitude of camels to be accoutred in the form of elephants, in hopes of deceiving the enemy. It is said that Perseus long after used the same stratagem against the Romans; but neither of them succeeded in this artifice, The Indian king having notice of her approach, sent ambassadors to ask her who she was, and with what right, having never received any injury from him, she came, out of wantonness, to attack his dominions; adding, that her boldness should soon meet with the punishment it deserved. Tell your master, replied the queen, that in a little time I myself will let him know who I am. She advanced immediately towards the river,* from which the country takes its name; and having prepared a sufficient number of boats, she attempted to pass it with her army. Their passage was a long time disputed, but after a bloody battle she put her enemies to flight. Above 1000 of their boats were sunk, and above 100,000 of their men taken prisoners. Encouraged by this success, she advanced directly into the country, leaving 60,000 men behind to guard the bridge of boats which she had built over the river. This was just what the king desired, who fled on purpose to bring her to an engagement in the heart of his country. As soon as he thought her far enough advanced, he faced about, and a second engagement ensued, more bloody than the first. The counterfeit elephants could not long sustain the shock of the real ones: these routed her army, crushing whatever came in their way. Semiramis did all that lay in her power to rally and encourage her troops, but in vain. The king, perceiving her engaged in the fight, advanced towards her, and wounded her in two places, but not mortally. The swiftness of her horse soon carried her beyond the reach of her enemies. As her men crowded to the bridge to repass the river, great numbers of them perished, through the disorder and confusion unavoidable on such occasions. When those that could save themselves were safely over, she destroyed the bridge, and by that means stopped the enemy; • Indus. and the king likewise, in obedience to an oracle, had given orders to his troops not to pass the river, nor pursue Semiramis any farther. The queen, having made an exchange of prisoners at Bactra, returned to her own dominions with scarce one-third of her army, which (according to Ctesias) consisted of 3,000,000 foot and 500,000 horse, besides the camels and chariots armed for war, of which she had a very considerable number. I have no doubt that this account is highly exaggerated, or that there is some mistake in the numeral characters. She, and Alexander after her, were the only persons that ever ventured to carry the war beyond the river Indus. I must own I am somewhat puzzled with a difficulty which may be raised against the extraordinary things related of Ninus and Semiramis, as they do not seem to agree with the times so near the deluge: I mean, such vast armies, such a numerous cavalry, so many chariots armed with scythes, and such immense treasures of gold and silver; all which seem to be of a later date. The same thing may likewise be said of the magnificence of the buildings ascribed to them. It is probable the Greek historians, who came so many ages afterwards, deceived by the similarity of names, by their ignorance in chronology, and the resemblance of one event with another, may have ascribed such things to more ancient princes, as belonged to those of a later date; or may have attributed a number of exploits and enterprises to one, which ought to be divided amongst a series of them, succeeding one another. Semiramis, some time after her return, discovered that her son was plotting against her, and one of her principal officers had offered him his assistance. She then called to mind the oracle of Jupiter Ammon; and believing that her end approached, without inflicting any punishment on the officer, who was taken into custody, she voluntarily abdicated the throne, put the government into the hands of her son, and withdrew from the sight of men, hoping speedily to have divine honours paid to her, according to the promise of the oracle. And indeed, we are told, she was worshipped by the Assyrians, under the form of a dove. She lived sixty-two years, of which she reigned forty-two. There are in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres,* two learned dissertations upon the Assyrian empire, and particularly on the reign and actions of Semiramis. What Justint says of Semiramis, namely, that after her husband's decease, not daring either to commit the government to her son, who was then too young, or openly to take it upon herself, she governed -under the name and habit of Ninyas; and that, after having reigned in that manner above forty years, falling passionately in love with her own son, she endeavoured to induce him to comply with her criminal desires, and was slain by him: all this, I say, is so void of all appearance of truth, that to go about to confute it would be but losing time. It must however be owned, that almost all the authors, who have spoken of Semiramis, give us but a disadvantageous idea of her chastity. I do not know but that the glorious reign of this queen might partly induce Plato* to maintain, in his Commonwealth, that women as well as men ought to be admitted into the management of public affairs, the conducting of armies, and the government of states, and, by necessary consequence, ought to be trained up in the same exercises as men, as well for the forming of the body as the mind. Nor does he so much as except those exercises, wherein it was customary to fight stark naked, alleging,† that the virtue of the sex would be a sufficient covering for them. It is just matter of surprise to find a philosopher so judicious in other respects, openly combating the most common and most natural maxims of modesty and decency, virtues which are the principal ornament of the female sex, and insisting so strongly upon a principle, sufficiently confuted by the constant practice of all ages, and of almost all nations in the world. Aristotle, wiser in this than his master Plato, without doing the least injustice to the real merit and essential qualities of the sex, has with great judgment marked out the different ends to which man and woman are ordained, from the different qualities of body and mind, wherewith they are endowed by the Author of Nature, who has given the one strength of body and intrepidity of mind, to enable him to undergo the greatest hardships, and face the most imminent dangers: whilst the other, on the contrary, is of a weak and delicate constitution, accompanied with a natural softness and modest timidity, which render her more fit for a sedentary life, and dispose her to keep within the precincts of the house, and employ herself in the concerns of prudent and domestic economy. Xenophon is of the same opinion with Aristotle; and, in order to set off the occupation of the wife, who confines herself within her house, agreeably compares her to the mother-bee, commonly called the queen-bee, who alone governs, and has the superintendence of, the whole hive, who distributes all their employments, encourages their industry, presides over the building of their little cells, takes care of the nourishment and subsistence of her numerous family, regulates the quantity of honey appointed for that purpose, and at fixed and proper seasons sends abroad the new swarms in colonies, to ease and disburden the hive of its superfluous inhabitants. He remarks, with Aristotle, the difference of constitution and inclinations, designedly made by the Author of Nature between man and woman, to point to each of them their proper and peculiar offices and functions. This allotment, far from degrading or lessening the woman, is really for her advantage and honour, in confiding to her a kind of † Ἐπείπερ ἀρετὴν ἀντὶ ἱματίων ἀμφιέσονται De administr. dom. p. 839. * Lib. v. dc Rep. p. 451-457. De cura rei fam. I. i. c. 3. 57 domestic empire and government, administered only by gentleness, reason, equity, and good nature; and in giving her frequent occasions of concealing the most valuable and excellent qualities under the inestimable veil of modesty and submission. For it must ingenuously be owned, that at all times, and in all conditions, there have been women, who by a real solid merit have distinguished themselves above their sex; as there have been innumerable instances of men, who by their defects have dishonoured theirs. But these are only particular cases, which form no rule, and which ought not to prevail against an establishment founded in nature, and prescribed by the Creator himself. NINYAS. This prince was in no respect like those from whom he received his birth, and to whose throne he succeeded. Wholly intent upon his pleasures, he kept himself shut up in his palace, and seldom showed himself to his people. To keep them in their duty, he had always at Nineveh a certain number of regular troops, furnished every year from the several provinces of his empire, at the expiration of which term they were succeeded by the like number of other troops on the same conditions; the king putting a commander at the head of them, on whose fidelity he could depend. He made use of this method, that the officers might not have time to gain the affections of the soldiers, and so form any conspiracies against him. His successors, for thirty generations, followed his example, and Their history is absolutely uneven surpassed him in indolence. known, there remaining no footsteps of it. A. M. 2092. In Abraham's time the Scripture speaks of AmraAnt. J. C. 1912. phael, king of Shinar, the country where Babylon was situated, who with two other princes followed Chedorlaomer, king of the Elamites, whose tributary he probably was, in the war carried on by the latter against five kings of the land of Canaan. A. M. 2513. It was under the government of these inactive princes, Ant. J. C. 1491. that Sesostris, king of Egypt, extended his conquests so far in the East. But as his power was of a short duration, and not supported by his successors, the Assyrian empire soon returned to its former state. A. M. 2820. Plato,f a curious observer of antiquities, makes the Ant. J. C. 1184. kingdom of Troy, in the time of Priam, dependant on the Assyrian empire. And Ctesias says, that Teutamus, the twentieth king after Ninyas, sent a considerable body of troops to the assistance of the Trojans, under the conduct of Memnon, the son of Tithonus, at a time when the Assyrian empire had subsisted above 1000 years; which agrees exactly with the time wherein I have But the silence of Homer placed the foundation of that empire. concerning so mighty a people, and one which must needs have been well known, renders this fact exceeding doubtful. And it must be owned, that whatever relates to the times of the ancient history of * Diod. l. ii. 108. P: † De Leg. 1. iii. 685, the Assyrians, is attended with great difficulties, into which my plan does not permit me to enter. A. M. 3233. PUL.* The Scripture informs us that Pul, king of Assyria, being come into the land of Israel, had 1000 talents of silver given him by Menahem, king of the ten tribes, to engage him to lend him assistance, and secure him on his throne. Ant.J.C.771. This Pul is supposed to be the king of Nineveh who repented, with all his people, at the preaching of Jonah. He is also thought to be the father of Sardanapalus, the last king of the Assyrians, called, according to the custom of the eastern nations, Sardanpul; that is to say, Sardan, the son of Pul. SARDANAPALUS. This prince surpassed all his predecessors in effeminacy, luxury, and cowardice. He never went out of his palace, but spent all his time among a company of women, dressed and painted like them, and employed like them at the distaff. He placed all his happiness and glory in the possession of immense treasures, in feasting and rioting, and indulging himself in all the most infamous and criminal pleasures. He ordered two verses to be put upon his tomb, which imported, that he carried away with him all that he had eaten, and all the pleasures he had enjoyed, but left all the rest behind him. Hæc habeo quæ edi, quæque exsaturata libida An epitaph, says Aristotle, fit for a hog. Arbaces, governor of Media, having found means to get into the palace, and having with his own eyes seen Sardanapalus in the midst of his infamous seraglio; enraged at such a spectacle, and not able to endure that so many brave men should be subject to a prince more soft and effeminate than the women themselves, immediately formed a conspiracy against him. Belesis, governor of Babylon, and several others, entered into it. On the first rumour of this revolt, the king hid himself in the inmost part of his palace. Being obliged afterwards to take the field with some forces which he had assembled, he at first gained three successive victories over the enemy, but was afterwards overcome, and pursued to the gates of Nineveh; wherein he shut himself, in hopes the rebels would never be able to take a city so well fortified, and stored with provisions for a considerable time the siege proved indeed of very great length. It had been declared by an ancient oracle, that Nineveh could never be taken, unless the river became an enemy to the city. These words * 2 Kings, xv. 19. 1. c. 3. † Diod. 1. ii. p. 109-115. Athen. 1. xii. p. 529,530. Just. L † Κεῖν ̓ ἔχο όσσ' ἔφαγον καὶ ἐφύβρισα, καὶ μετ ̓ ἕρωτος Quid aliud, inquit Aristoteles, in bovis, non in regis sepulchro, inscriberes? Hæc habere Cic. Tuso. |