ing the hiftorian of falfhood and forgery? Or who can perufe his hiftory of Semiramis; her mighty valour and heroic deeds at the age of twenty, or thereabouts; her two millions of men employed in the building of Babylon; her three hundred thousand fkins of black oxen, made up in the form of elephants, and other things of this nature; and not conclude, that what contained it was no genuine history, but a moft barefaced romance? In a word, his Affyrian history, as it ftands in the next fection, is most evidently calculated to astonish and amaze, and to strain credulity beyond all possible bounds.

What particularly argues his lift of the Affyrian kings of the groffeft forgery, is, that it is a medley of Greek, Perfian, Egyptian, and other names. Sphærus, Lamprides, Laofthenes, Dercylus, are Greek names, and very common. Amyntas is the name of a king of Macedon; Arius is the name of a king of Sparta. Piritiades is regularly, as fhould feem, formed from pyritis, a medicinal herb, which Ctefias, as a phyfician, muft have been well acquainted with. Xerxes, Armamithres, Mithræus, are Perfian names. Sofarmus, according to himself, is the name of a king of the Medes, which how it fhould have happened, may not be fo very unaccountable, confidering the empire paffed from the Affyrians to the Medes; but how Sethos, the name of an Egyptian king, fhould also have been the name of an Affyrian, is what we are wholly at a lofs to comprehend. Nothing is more obvious to thofe who have dipt into genuine hiftory, than the wide differ, ence between the Affyrian and the Perfian names; and the ftill wider difference between both and the Greek; fo that nothing can be faid in his behalf, except that he tranflated fome of the original names; though this is abfolutely falfe, as he is confeffedly fo ignorant in this particular, that he had even no knowlege of the Affyrian names, how they were pronounced, or uttered; fo far was he from knowing how they were compounded, and whence they were formed; a moft glaring inftance of which will be feen in the fequel.

The great antiquity of the Affyrian empire may also be urged against Ctefias, and particularly as he writes in direct oppofition to the Scripture. Ninus, according to him, must have reigned before the days of Abraham, and conquered Perfia, Media, Egypt, Affyria, and all Afia; and his wife Semiramis, his immediate fucceffor, adds Libya and Ethiopia to her dominions. But he brings no VOL. III. collateral

Z

The fecond table.

collateral proofs of all thefe events; and the books of Mofes fay not a word of the matter. According to Scripture, the Canaanites were under their own kings or patriarchs many ages after Abraham; the Moabites, the Ammonites, the Midianites, the Edomites, the Amalekites, the Philistines, were fubject to no foreign yoke, and free from ftrange lords, till they began to be perfecuted by the fword of Ifrael. Egypt feemingly enjoyed a profound peace, apprehenfive of no danger from without, till Sennacherib, bent upon establishing and enlarging his empire, moved towards Egypt with design to invade it. In proof of all this, we need only refer to the hiftories of these nations in the former part of this work. It appears then, that no Affyrian enemy was in these parts for many ages after the pretended dates of Ninus and Semiramis; and that all Syria and Mefopotamia were free alfo from any fubjection to Affyria, may be as plainly proved.

Having endeavoured to deftroy the credit of Ctefias, and therewith the first table of the Affyrian kings from Eufebius and Syncellus, we will proceed to fettle the chronology of the Affyrian empire, by taking into confideration the fecond table. By the hiftory of Syria, and the neighbouring countries, it appears, the Affyrians had no power in the western parts of Afia till the reign of Pul, who made his firft appearance on this fide the Euphrates, in the decline of the kingdom of Damafcus; what they had before that time done in the Eaft, does no where appear; but that the foundations of the monarchy were laid by Pul, or fome near predeceffor of his, by conqueste nearer home, is not to be doubted. The Affyrian monarchy cannot be dated much farther back than the days of Menahem; and this pofition is not only to be demonftrated by Scripture, and Ptolemy's Aftronomical Canon ; but alfo by feveral of the moft unexceptionable profane.

writers.

Herodotus, that venerable and much injured hiftorian, obferves, that the Affyrians had been mafters of the Upper Afia five hundred and twenty years, when the Medes threw off their yoke; and that the empire of the latter fubfifted no longer than one hundred and fifty years, inclufive of the twenty-eight years, during which the Scythians ruled Afia. Thefe two fums, added together, amount to fix hundred and feventy years, for the whole duration of the two monarchies of the Affyrians and Medes; which being added to the epoch of Cyrus before

Christ,

Chrift, which is univerfally stated at five hundred and fifty-nine years, will make one thousand two hundred and twenty-nine, the whole interval between the firft rife of the Affyrian monarchy and the birth of Chrift, which cuts off about a thousand years from the common profane accounts: though it will exceed the æra of Nabonaffar by four hundred and fifty-eight years; and therefore Herodotus's numbers, as they ftand with us, are doubtlefs too long, though so much short of thofe of Ctefias, and his followers. But, by the way, we would add, that Herodotus's computation is not above two hundred years later than the days of Chufhan-Rishathaim, king of Mefopotamia, or Aram-Naharaim, who kept the children of Ifrael in fubjection for the space of eight years, till they were delivered from him by Othniel. In what fenfe this ChushanRishathaim may have been confidered as an Affyrian, we take not upon us to fay; but it is certain that he was not, properly speaking, of that nation, because he is in Scripture called a Mefopotamian; and therefore we might with equal juftice call Chedorlaomer an Affyrian, though he is exprefly faid to have been an Elamite or Perfian; and this care in the hiftorian, thus to diftinguish the men, who from the beginning, made inroads upon the countries on this fide the Euphrates, exprefly saying the firft was an Elamite, the fecond a Mefopotamian, and calling Pul an Affyrian, leaves us no room to imagine, that the two former were kings of Affyria.

We cannot pretend to fix the exact era of the Affyrian Rife of the monarchy, except we do it relatively to ourselves in the Allyrian western parts; and in that cafe we must compute from the monarchy. year of Pul's first appearance on this fide of the Euphrates, which was about the fecond year of Menahem, twentyfour years before the æra of Nabonaflar, one thousand five hundred and feventy-feven years after the flood, and feven hundred and feventy-one years before Chrift.

Thus far it is no difficult matter to ascertain the beginning of this empire. Its end may perhaps be more nearly fixed, though that is what we cannot fettle beyond all poffibility of difpute. The texts of Scripture, which give us fo near a profpect of its beginning, and relates fome of the remarkable tranfactions of five of its most potent princes, drop us on a fudden; fo that we are obliged to refort to the Apocrypha, and Ptolemy's Canon, for the fucceffors of the great Efar-Haddon. The book of Judith corresponds fo exactly with Herodotus, in what he fays of the war between

Z 24

between the declining Affyrians, and the rifing Medes, that we think ourselves fufficiently warranted to credit his narration; and feeing the reign of Nabuchadonofor most naturally coincides with that of Saofducheus, we have ventured to pronounce them to have been one and the fame king as for Sarac, which name we borrow from Polyhiftor, and whom we alfo call Chyniladon and Sardanapalus, from a fimilitude of his story and unhappy end in the fame hiftorian, with what is related thereof by Ctefias, we muft confefs ourfelves in the dark, as we may note hereafter in the body of our Affyrian history. In the mean time it may be objected to us, that Polyhiftor is a follower of Ctefias, and as fuch we have confidered him ; but we answer, with Sir Ifaac Newton', that there may be fomething of truth at the bottom of the Ctefian hiftory, as there is fometimes in romances; as that Nineveh was destroyed by the Medes and Babylonians. But whence it is, that we have no fuch name as Sarac in the Nabonaffaran Canon, we fhall here forbear to enquire, as we may have a more convenient opportunity of offering our conjectures concerning him, when we come to the hiftory of his reign; and therefore, fince nothing pofitive can be afcertained, as to this laft ftage of the Affyrian monarchy, we here conclude this fection.

The Hiftory of Affyria, according to Ctefias of Cnidos, and his Followers.

ALTHOUGH we have condemned Ctefias's hiftory of this country as forgery and falfhood, yet, as it has been fo long received for truth, by moft of the wifeft and most fagacious hiftorians and chronologers, and, as we may fay, from all antiquity admitted into the body of history, we are under an indifpenfable obligation of producing it here, as it is with great folemnity, and all poffible confidence, handed down to us. Ninus, a prince of martial genius, and immense ambition, resolved to make a conqueft of the nations round about, and erect an empire over them with this view he affembled together the most

x Apud Syncellus. amended, page 267.

y Chronol, of Antient Kingdoms robuft

obuft of the youth in his dominions, diligently trained them up to the exercise of arms, inured them to hardship and labour, and fitted them for war 2.

Being now in a condition to execute his ambitious defign, but apprehending he might be stopped in his career by the Arabians, whom alone he dreaded, as a bold and refolute people, jealous and tenacious of their liberty, he entered into a league with Ariæus their king; whereby, if he did not obtain his immediate affiftance, he might, at leaft, fecure his neutrality and connivance. But Ariæus joined him, and marched with him into Babylonia. The city of Babylon, fo famous fince, was not at that time in being; though the province itself abounded in cities, whofe inhabitants, unfkilled in the arts of defence, fell an cafy prey to the afpiring Ninus, who impofed on them. an annual tribute; and carried away their king, and all his children, whom he afterwards put to death. He then fell upon Armenia with irrefiftible force, bore down all before him, and ftruck fuch terror into the hearts of the inhabitants, that their king Barzanes himfelf waited on the conqueror with rich gifts, and made fubmiffion to him; which had this effect, that Ninus courteously left him in poffeffion of his kingdom of Armenia; but upon this condition, that he fhould be his vaflal, and ferve him in his wars, whenever called upon for that purpofe. Encouraged thus to proceed, he made an attempt upon Media, and attacked its king Pharnus, though at the head of a powerful army, which he defeated, and cut in pieces, taking the king himself prifoner, together with his wife and seven children, whom he crucified.

And now he refolved to make himself mafter of all Afia between the Tanais and the Nile: that he might, with the more fafety, enter upon this enterprize, he committed to an intimate friend the government of his new conqueft, Media, while he himself marched against the other provinces of Afia, which, in feventeen years time, he reduced, Bactria and India excepted. The number of the nations he fubdued, are no where specified, nor the battles he fought by any one defcribed and enumerated; but we are told, that he made himself mafler of the fea-coafts, as well as of the inland parts, conquering His conEgypt, Phoenice, Coelefyria, Cilicia, Pamphilia, Lycia, quefts. Caria, Phrygia, Myfia, Lydia, Troas, and Phrygia upon

z Apud Diod. Sicul. Bibliot. Hiftor. lib. ii. p. 90-95.