and to keep it there at all hazards. This narrow area was the scene of continual war, either between the armies of the two states or those of partisans, suspended from time to time by an elaborate treaty which was supposed to settle all difficulties, but, as a matter of fact, satisfied no one, and left both parties discontented with their lot and jealous of each other. The concessions made were never of sufficient importance to enable the conqueror to crush his rival and regain for himself the ancient domain of Khammurabi; his losses, on the other hand, were often considerable enough to paralyse his forces, and prevent him from extending his border in any other direction. When the Egyptians seized on Naharaim, Assyria and Babylon each adopted at the outset a different attitude towards the conquerors. Assyria, which never laid any permanent claims to the seaboard provinces of the Mediterranean, was not disposed to resent their occupation by Egypt, and desired only to make sure of their support or their neutrality. The sovereign then ruling Assyria, but of whose name we have no record, hastened to congratulate Thûtmosis III. on his victory at Megiddo, and sent him presents of precious vases, slaves, lapis-lazuli, chariots and horses, all of which the Egyptian conqueror regarded as so much tribute. Babylon, on the other hand, did not take action so promptly as Assyria; it was only towards the latter years of Thûtmosis that its king, Karaîndash, being hard pressed by the Assyrian Assurbelnishishu, at length decided to make a treaty with the intruder.* * We have no direct testimony in support of this hypothesis, but several important considerations give it probability. As no tribute from Babylon is mentioned in the _Annals of Thûtmosis III_., we must place the beginning of the relations between Egypt and Chaldæa at a later date. On the other hand, Burnaburiash II., in a letter written to Amenôthes III., cites Karaîndash as the first of _his fathers,_ who had established friendly relations with _the fathers_ of the Pharaoh, a fact which obliges us to place the interchange of presents before the time of Amenôthes III.: as the reigns of Amenôthes II. and of Thûtmosis IV. were both short, it is probable that these relations began in the latter years of Thûtmosis III.