The subjection of Egypt to Babylon, which commenced in B.C. 565, was of
that light and almost nominal character, which a nation that is not very
sensitive, or very jealous of its honour, does not care to shake off. A
small tribute was probably paid by the subject state to her suzerain,
but otherwise the yoke was unfelt There was no interference with the
internal government, or the religion of the Egyptians; no appointment of
Babylonian satraps, or tax-collectors; not even, so far as appears, any
demands for contingents of troops. Thus, although Nebuchadnezzar died
within seven years of his conquest of Egypt, and though a time of
disturbance and confusion followed his death, four kings occupying the
Babylonian throne within little more than six years, two of whom met
with a violent end, yet Amasis seems to have continued quiescent and
contented, in the enjoyment of a life somewhat more merry and amusing
than that of most monarchs, without making any effort to throw off the
Babylonian supremacy or reassert the independence of his country. It was
not till his self-indulgent apathy was intruded upon from without, and
he received an appeal from a foreign nation, to which he was compelled
to return an answer, that he looked the situation in the face, and came
to the conclusion that he might declare himself independent without much
risk. He had at this time patiently borne his subject position for the
space of above twenty years, though he might easily have reasserted
himself at the end of seven.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account