Part 13

So much connection is generally placed between some of the prophetic writings of the Bible and the destruction of the city of Babylon, that we have deemed it necessary to quote in the preceding siege considerably from an established historian on that point. But we must remember that the Scriptures, though intended for the blessing of mankind, are Hebrew books, and that the Jews of the time of the Prophets principally adduced, could not be expected to speak otherwise than they have done against their masters the Babylonians. That the ruin of this great city was not so sudden or so complete is proved by its being able to sustain the siege of which we are about to speak.

Babylon endured with great impatience the yoke of the Persians, and made a strong effort to break its chains, in the reign of Darius, son of Hystaspes. After four years of secret necessary preparation, the Babylonians raised the standard of revolt and provisioned their city. In order to economize their food, they adopted the barbarous precaution of exterminating all useless mouths; they strangled both the women and the children, only permitting the citizens to preserve such of their wives as they were most attached to, and a single maid-servant. From the height of their walls, the besieged, proud of the strength of their ramparts and their murderous magazines, insulted the Persians in the most opprobrious manner. During eighteen months, every art of war, with the valour of a warlike nation, were vainly employed against the revolted city. Darius was beginning to despair of success, when Zopyrus, one of the greatest nobles of Persia, presented himself before him, covered with blood, and with his nose and ears cut off. “Who has treated you thus?” exclaimed the king. “Yourself, my lord,” replied Zopyrus, “and my desire to serve you.” He then explained his design to him, and the plan he had formed to deliver up Babylon to him. Filled with surprise and admiration, Darius gave him liberty to pursue his own course, with a promise to second him. Zopyrus proceeded towards the city, and, on gaining the walls, entreated refuge for one of the victims of the cruelty of Darius, exhibited his wounds, and solicited permission to avenge himself upon an enemy with whose designs he was fully acquainted. His blood and his wounds removed all suspicion; the citizens confided in his word, his courage, and what he termed his misfortunes, and they put him in command of as many troops as he demanded. In the first sortie, he and his band killed a thousand Persians; some days after, two thousand; a third, four thousand strewed the field of battle. Babylon resounded with the praises of Zopyrus; he was termed the preserver of the city. He was made generalissimo of the troops, and the guarding of the walls was intrusted to him. At the time agreed upon, Darius drew close to Babylon; the faithful Zopyrus opened its gates to his master, and placed in his hands a city which he might never have obtained by famine or force. The king loaded Zopyrus with honours, and gave him, for life, the revenue of the city his stratagem had been the means of subduing. When contemplating the physical deficiencies his devotion had created, the grateful monarch was accustomed to say he would rather miss the taking of ten Babylons than permit so faithful a servant to mutilate himself in that manner. In order to prevent similar revolts, great part of the walls were destroyed, and the hundred gates were removed.

Of the importance Babylon retained nearly two hundred years after the above event, we may judge by the splendour of Alexander’s triumphal entrance into that city. Babylon was given up to the Macedonian conqueror immediately after the battle of Arbela, without the trouble of drawing a sword. The reputation of his victories gained him many such bloodless conquests. As it is not a siege, it does not come within our plan to relate more concerning the surrender of this city; but we are sure our younger readers will excuse our departure from our course, to describe the above-named triumph.

Alexander entered the city at the head of his whole army, as if he had been marching to a battle. The walls of Babylon were lined with people, notwithstanding the greatest part of the citizens were gone out to meet him, from the impatience they had to see their new sovereign, whose renown had outstripped his march. Bazophanes, governor of the fortress and guardian of the treasures, strewed the streets with flowers, and raised on both sides of the way silver altars, which smoked not only with frankincense, but the most fragrant perfumes of every kind. Last of all came the presents which were to be made to the king; consisting of herds of cattle, a great many horses, with lions and panthers in iron cages. After these the Magi walked, singing hymns in the manner of their country; then the Chaldeans, accompanied by Babylonian soothsayers and musicians; the latter being accustomed to sing the praises of their kings to their instruments, and the Chaldeans to observe the motions of the planets and the vicissitudes of the seasons. The rear was brought up by the Babylonish cavalry, of which both men and horses were so sumptuous that imagination can scarcely conceive their magnificence. The king commanded the people to walk after his infantry, whilst he, surrounded by his guards, and seated on a chariot, entered the city, and rode to the palace in a kind of triumph. The next day he took a view of all Darius’s money and moveables, and divided the immense wealth he found, with a liberal hand, amongst his army; both leaders and the meanest foot-soldiers shared in the rich prize, which only made them the more anxious to follow their great captain to new conquests.

Of the nearly fatal effects of the luxury of Babylon upon Alexander and his army it is not our province to speak.

CORIOLI.

A.C. 493.

Although we cannot undertake to notice every siege of the cities of Italy which assisted the regular but rapid rise of the Roman power, we shall make it a point not to pass by such as have any interesting association attached to them; and what English youth, with a Shakespeare in his father’s library, is not familiar with Coriolanus in Corioli?

The Volscians tormented the Romans by continual attacks. In order to punish them, the siege of Corioli was resolved upon. It was one of their strongest places. In a sortie, the besiegers repulsed the Romans, and drove them back to their own camp. Furious at such a defeat, Marcius, a young patrician, with a handful of brave companions, returned to the charge, made the Volscians give way in their turn, penetrated with them into the city, and gave it up to pillage. That was the age when military talents were sure of their reward. After the taking of the city, the consul Cominius, before the whole army, ordered Caius Marcius to take a tenth of the booty, before any division was made of the rest, besides presenting him with a fine horse and noble trappings as a reward for his valour. The army expressed their approval of this by their acclamations; but Marcius, stepping forward, said, “That he accepted of the horse, and was happy in the consul’s approbation; but as for the rest, he considered it rather as a pecuniary reward than as a mark of honour, and therefore desired to be excused receiving it, as he was quite satisfied with his proper share of the booty. One favour only in particular I desire,” continued he, “and I beg I may be indulged in it. I have a friend among the Volscians, bound with me in the sacred rites of hospitality, who is a man of virtue and honour. He is now among the prisoners, and from easy and opulent circumstances is reduced to servitude. Of the many misfortunes under which he labours, I should be glad to rescue him from one, which is that of being sold for a slave.” His request, of course, was granted, and his friend was liberated. Here we cannot refrain from noting an error in one whom it is our pride to think almost faultless. Whilst giving one of the most faithful delineations of an historical character in Coriolanus that ever was exhibited on a stage, Shakespeare makes him say, when asked for the name of the friend he wished to serve,--

“By Jupiter, forgot.-- I am weary; yea, my memory is tired.-- Have we no wine here?”

Now, this is not Coriolanus, nor consistent with the hero, who did not forget gratitude in the hour of triumph: he who remembered the friend would not have forgotten his name so lightly. We have seen John Kemble, as he pitched his shield to his armourer, produce great effect by this little speech; but stage effect is a poor compensation for the violation of truth of character.

VEII.

A.C. 371.

The Veientes were the most powerful of the twelve peoples who inhabited Etruria. Their capital, Veii, situated on a steep rock, was only twelve miles from Rome; and the inhabitants were, for more than three hundred and fifty years, the most persevering enemies of the growing republic.

The Romans, tired of seeing their projects constantly thwarted by the Veientes, declared war against them, after a truce of twenty years; and in order the better to carry out that great design, resolved to lay siege to their capital. Situated upon a steep rock, abundantly provided with everything, famine alone could reduce it. The task was a long one, but it did not terrify the Romans. It became necessary to defend the soldier from the rigours of winter, and tents made of skins were erected, which proved as good as houses to them. This being an innovation, the tribunes of the people opposed it strongly, but a check soon silenced their vain clamours. The Veientes, in a sortie, took the besiegers by surprise, burnt their machines, and destroyed most of their works. All orders of the Romans swore not to leave the camp till the city was taken. The horsemen, whom the republic was bound to supply with horses, offered to find them at their own expense. The senate, only anxious for the glory and interest of the state, charmed with this unanimous zeal, assigned for the first time a pay to the horsemen, and to all the volunteers who would repair to the siege. The works were quickly re-established, with the addition of much more considerable new ones. Rome was beginning to look for the most favourable results, when the hatred of the military tribunes, L. Virginius and M. Sergius, who commanded the army, almost annihilated their hopes. The Capenates and the Falerii, neighbours of the Veientes, armed secretly, and surprised and attacked the camp of the Romans. The two tribunes carried their quarrel so far as to separate and divide the army into two parts. Whilst in this state, the enemy fell upon Sergius. The besieged, in concert with them, made a sortie and attacked him on their side. The astonished Romans fought feebly, and soon sought safety in flight. All were in disorder, and the rout became general. Virginius might have saved his colleague, but he preferred enjoying the spectacle of his defeat. The exasperated senate obliged them both to abdicate their commands; they were brought to trial, and very heavily fined for so great a crime. The Falerii returned to the charge, but they were repulsed with great loss. In the mean time, the siege did not advance, and the efforts of the Roman armies terminated in ravaging the lands of their enemies. The following year, the war was still more unsuccessful. Under vain pretences of religion, the military tribunes, with whom the Romans were dissatisfied, were deposed, and a dictator was chosen, as was the custom on all the pressing emergencies of the republic. M. Furius Camillus, whose rare valour and high capacity had been displayed more than once in command, was raised to this supreme dignity. The presence of this great man soon restored the military discipline, which had been weakened by the disunion of the leaders, and brought good fortune back to the standards of Rome. The city was pressed more closely, and the forts which the besieged had destroyed were reconstructed. Camillus defeated the Falerii and the Capenates, and after that victory, he pushed on the attack with additional ardour. At length, despairing of succeeding by force, he had recourse to sapping and mining. His soldiers, by dint of hard labour, opened for themselves a subterraneous passage into the castle; thence, dispersing themselves about the city, whilst the general amused the besieged by an assault, some charged those who defended the walls, whilst others broke down the gates, and let the army into the place in crowds. The terrified citizens knew not which way to fly; all issues were occupied by their enemies. Some were crushed beneath the ruins of the houses, others were consumed by the flames; the image of death was everywhere. The furious soldiery immolated all that came in their way; nothing was heard but cries and lamentations. The dictator put an end to the carnage, and disarmed the prisoners, but in accordance with his promise, gave the city up to the pillage of his victorious troops. The republic received the news of this victory with transports of the liveliest joy, and all orders of the state vied with each other in doing honour to the triumph of Camillus.--And yet they afterwards banished him.

FALERII.

A.C. 394.

The Romans and the Falerii were at war. Camillus being named dictator, attacked these people and besieged their capital. Before the circumvallation of the place was completed, a schoolmaster came out of the city and placed all his pupils in the hands of the Romans, as the readiest means of inducing the inhabitants to surrender. The indignant dictator ordered the perfidious master to be stripped, had his hands tied behind him, and, arming the boys with rods, commanded them to flog the treacherous pedagogue back to the city. Plutarch says that Camillus was much shocked at this action of the schoolmaster, and said to those around them,--“War at best is a savage thing, and wades through a sea of violence and injustice; yet even war itself has its laws, which men of honour will not depart from; nor do they pursue victory so as to avail themselves of acts of villany and baseness. A great general should rely upon his own virtue, and not upon the treachery of others.”

It is said that the magistrates of the place were so affected by the magnanimity of the dictator, that they brought him the keys of the city.

PLATÆÆ.

A.C. 431.

When we compare the intestine wars of the Greeks with the sweeping conquests of the East, we are struck with the vast disproportion in the numbers of combatants engaged, and we are brought to the conviction that acts of heroism, devotedness, and patriotism seem more common and more brilliant where men are but few, than when they are in great masses. The siege of Platææ was carried on on both sides by such a small number of combatants, that the issue might be supposed to have but very little interest; and yet, what a charm there is about everything that relates to Greece! Its feuds are the most important wars in history; its warriors and statesmen the most renowned in the universe, although the territories in question would not equal in revenue those of great English nobles or millionnaires, and the men in fact were not above influential burgesses.

The Peloponnesian war began by the Thebans attacking Platææ, a city of Bœotia, in alliance with the Athenians. Some traitors opened the gates to them. The citizens of Platææ, attacking them in the night, killed them all, with the exception of two hundred whom they made prisoners. The Athenians being informed of what had taken place at Platææ, immediately sent thither both men and provisions. Two or three years after, the Lacedæmonians laid siege to Platææ, under the command of Archidamus, their king. He began by inclosing the city within a circumvallation formed of great trees, the branches of which were intertwined; then he erected a platform or cavalier to arrange his batteries on, in the hope of soon carrying the place, on account of the small number of the besieged. They were but four hundred, but all determined to die rather than submit to the law of a conqueror. When the Platæans saw the enormous lines begin to rise, they built up a wall of wood upon the top of the walls of the city opposite the platform, in order to maintain a superiority over the besiegers. The crevices in this wall were filled up with wood and bricks taken from the demolition of the neighbouring houses; then they mined the platform. The Lacedæmonians, perceiving this, abandoned that project, and contented themselves with constructing another rampart in the form of a crescent, to serve as a retreat when the first wall should be forced, and to oblige the enemy to undertake a second labour. The besiegers having set up their machines, gave a violent shock to the fortifications. The Platæans used every exertion to weaken the effect of these batteries: they broke the stroke of the ram with cords, which turned aside the blow by seizing the ram by the head and throwing it up by main strength. They made use, likewise, of another artifice,--fastening by the two ends a huge beam with long iron chains which were fixed to two large pieces of wood, which extended on one side and were supported upon the wall; when the machine began to play, they raised this beam, and letting it fall crosswise upon the point of the ram, it broke its force and rendered it harmless. At length the Lacedæmonians, astonished at such a resistance, despaired of forcing the place, and, after having vainly attempted to set fire to it, they converted the siege into a blockade, and surrounded the city with a wall of brick, covered both within and without by a deep ditch, and strengthened at regular distances with high and well-defended towers. During the winter, the besieged, seeing no hopes of succour and being short of provisions, formed the resolution of cutting their way through the enemy’s troops; but half of them, confounded at the extent of the peril, lost courage at the moment of undertaking it. The rest, amounting to two hundred and eighty soldiers, persisted in their design, and had the good fortune to succeed. These intrepid warriors commenced by ascertaining the height of the walls by counting the rows of bricks, which was done at several times and by various persons, to avoid mistake; they then made their ladders in proportion. All precautionary measures being taken, the besieged chose a dark, stormy, and rainy night for their attempt. After having passed the first ditch, they drew near the walls without being discovered. They marched at a short distance from each other, to avoid the clashing of their arms, which were very light, in order to allow them to be more active; and they only wore one shoe, to prevent their slipping in the mud. A great number of them succeeded in mounting the wall, armed only with a cuirass and dagger, but as they were advancing toward the towers, a tile which one of them accidentally threw down, betrayed them. A loud cry was immediately given from the tops of the towers, and the whole camp rushed towards the walls, ignorant, from the darkness of the night, of what could be the matter. Those who remained in the city gave an alarm in another direction, to create a diversion; so that the enemy, in doubt, knew not which way to take. They, however, lighted torches on the side towards Thebes, to show that the danger was in that direction. The inhabitants, to render this signal useless, lighted others at the same time in various places. The Platæans who were upon the walls got possession of the two towers, defended the approach to them with arrows and darts, and thus favoured the passage of their companions. They descended the last, and hastened to the ditch, to pass as the others had done. At this moment, a body of three hundred men came out to meet them. The bold fugitives contrived to elude them, and even killed several: they all reached Athens in safety, with the exception of one archer, who was taken at the side of the ditch. Those who were left in the city defended themselves for a considerable time with courage; but at length, after having endured all the evils of a long siege, exhausted rather than vanquished, they surrendered at discretion. They were slaughtered without pity, and their wives were reduced to slavery. The following year, the city was completely razed to the ground.

BYBLOS.

A.C. 454.

We should have passed by this siege as unimportant, had we not been struck by the great disproportion of the parties engaged, and consequently, by the fact of the superiority of a few brave well-disciplined troops over an unmanageable multitude.

Inarus, a prince of Libya, favoured by the Athenians, proclaimed himself king of Egypt, at the time that country was under the subjection of Artaxerxes Longimanus, king of Persia. Irritated at the revolt, Artaxerxes sent three hundred thousand men to quell it. He gave the command of this army to Megabyzus. Inarus could not resist such an inundation, and he at once abandoned Egypt and shut himself up, with a few of his countrymen and six thousand Athenians, in Byblos, a city of the isle of Prosopitis. This city, surrounded by the waters of the Nile, was constantly revictualled by the Athenians, and for a year and a half the Persians made useless efforts to gain possession of it. Tired of such protracted labours, the Persians formed the plan of turning, by numerous cuttings, the arm of the Nile in which the Athenian fleet lay. They succeeded; and Inarus, terrified at the probable consequences, surrendered upon composition; but the bold bearing of the Athenians, their admirable discipline, and the order of their battalions, made the host of Persians afraid to attack them. They were offered an honourable capitulation; they accepted it, gave up Byblos, and returned to Greece, proud of having been thought invincible by a multitude of barbarians.

ATHENS.

A.C. 480.

During the invasion of Xerxes, all the Grecian cities in his passage were subdued or felt the disastrous effects of his vengeance. The Athenians, too proud to submit, and too weak to defend themselves alone by land, sent to consult the oracle at Delphi. The god replied: “_It is only within walls of wood the city will find safety_.” Themistocles persuaded the people that Apollo ordered them to instantly quit their city, and embark on board a good fleet, after having provided places of security for their wives and children. In consequence of this advice, they embarked, after having sent their aged, their women, and their children, to Trozene, in the Peloponnesus. We cannot imagine a more affecting spectacle than the departure of this fleet; the unfortunate inhabitants kept their eyes, bathed in tears, fixed upon their abandoned homes till distance or darkness rendered them invisible. The very animals shared the common grief, running along the shore, and seeming to call back their masters by their cries. It is said that a dog belonging to Xantippus, the father of Pericles, threw himself into the sea, and swam by the side of his vessel till it reached Salamis, where it sunk exhausted upon the beach and died. This imaginative people erected a monument to this faithful dog, called “The Grave of the Dog.” In the mean time, the Persian army entered Athens, forced the citadel, defended to the last by a small number of self-devoted men, and reduced the superb city to ashes.

SECOND SIEGE, A.C. 404.