who thereupon assumed the
title of Lord of the four Houses of the World, and united under a single
empire the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates. But this state of things
lasted for a few years only; Merodach-nadin-akhi once more took courage,
and, supported by the Chaldaean nobility, succeeded in expelling the
intruders from Sumir and Akkad. The Assyrians, however, did not allow
themselves to be driven out without a struggle, but fortune turned
against them; they were beaten, and the conqueror inflicted on the
Assyrian gods the humiliation to which they had so often subjected those
of other nations. He took the statues of Eamman and Shala from Ekallati,
carried them to Babylon, and triumphantly set them up within the temple
of Bel. There they remained in captivity for 418 years.* Tiglath-pileser
did not long survive this disaster, for he died about the year 1100
B.C.,** and two of his sons succeeded him on the throne. The elder,
Assur-belkala,*** had neither sufficient energy nor resources to resume
the offensive, and remained a passive spectator of the revolutions which
distracted Babylon.
* We know this fact from the inscription of Bavian, in which
Sennacherib boasts of having brought back these statues to
Assyria after they had been 418 years in the possession of
the enemy. I have followed the commonly received opinion,
which places the defeat of Tiglath-pileser after the taking
of Babylon; others think that it preceded the decisive
victory of the Assyrians. It is improbable that, if the loss
of the statues preceded the decisive victory, the Assyrian
conquerors should have left their gods prisoners in a
Babylonian temple, and should not have brought them back
immediately to Ekallati.
** The death of Tiglath-pileser must have followed quickly
on the victory of Babylon; the contents of the inscription
of Bavian permit us to fix the taking of Ekallati by the
Chaldaeans about the year 1108-1106 B.C. We shall not be far
wrong in supposing Tiglath-pileser to have reigned six or
eight years after his defeat.
*** I followed the usually received classification. It is,
however, possible that we must reverse the order of the
sovereigns.
Merodach-nadin-akhi had been followed by his son Merodach-shapik-zirim,*
but this prince was soon dethroned by the people, and Bamman-abaliddin,
a man of base extraction, seized the c
|