The History of Antiquity, Vol. 5 (of 6)Duncker, Max
History
The History of Antiquity, Vol. 5 (of 6)
Duncker, Max
History, Ancient
Herodotus expressly calls the
dominion of Deioces a tyranny. It is a fact beyond dispute that
Herodotus was influenced by such conceptions in shaping and forming the
material which came to him from tradition.
Apart from the motives which influenced him in describing the elevation
of Deioces, Herodotus wishes to show how the nations of Asia obtained
their freedom, and subsequently lost it. He begins with the statement,
that the Medes revolted from Assyria, and all the nations of Asia
followed their example. According to his dates, which have been already
mentioned, the Medes must have revolted precisely at the time when
Tiglath Pilesar II. and Sargon reigned over Assyria, _i.e._ in the
period between 745 and 705 B.C. The liberation of the remaining nations
must therefore have taken place under Sargon or his successors,
Sennacherib and Esarhaddon, _i.e._ between the year 705 and 668 B.C.
That this general liberation from the sovereignty of the Assyrians did
not take place at this period is abundantly clear from the inscriptions
of the kings and the Hebrew Scriptures. We have seen above to what an
extent Tiglath Pilesar caused the whole of Syria to feel the weight of
the Assyrian arms; he reduced Babylonia to dependence as far as the
Persian Gulf; Sargon was sovereign of Babylonia, maintained Syria, and
received the homage of the island of Cyprus, and the islands of the
Persian Gulf. His successor, Sennacherib, though unable to protect Syria
against Egypt, yet retained Babylonia and the eastern half of Asia Minor
under his dominion. Esarhaddon united the crowns of Asshur and Babel,
restored the supremacy of Assyria over Syria, subjugated a part of
Arabia and the whole of Egypt.[468] Hence it is clear, that precisely at
the time when, according to Herodotus, the rest of the nations following
the example of the Medes threw off the Assyrian yoke, that kingdom
reached a wider extent than at any previous time. If, nevertheless, we
wish to maintain the statement that the rest of the nations followed the
example which the Medes are supposed to have set about the year 736
B.C.,[469] we must place these events in the last decade of the reign of
Assurbanipal, _i.e._ in the period between 636 and 626 B.C. We must
therefore bring them down a full century, and this was a very late
result of the action of the Medes.
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