bles us
to put forward.

[Illustration: 242.jpg TABLE OF KINGS]

What were the causes of this depression, from which Babylon suffered at
almost regular intervals, as though stricken with some periodic malady?
The main reason soon becomes apparent if we consider the nature of
the country and the material conditions of its existence. Chaldaea was
neither extensive enough nor sufficiently populous to afford a solid
basis for the ambition of her princes. Since nearly every man capable
of bearing arms was enrolled in the army, the Chaktean kings had no
difficulty in raising, at a moment's notice, a force which could be
employed to repel an invasion, or make a sudden attack on some distant
territory; it was in schemes which required prolonged and sustained
effort that they felt the drawbacks of their position. In that age of
hand-to-hand combats, the mortality in battle was very high, forced
marches through forests and across mountains entailed a heavy loss of
men, and three or four consecutive campaigns against a stubborn foe soon
reduced an army to a condition of dangerous weakness. Recruits might be
obtained to fill the earlier vacancies in the ranks, but they soon grew
fewer and fewer if time was not given for recovery after the opening
victories in the struggle, and the supply eventually ceased if
operations were carried on beyond a certain period.

The total duration of the dynasty was, according to the Royal Canon, 72
years 6 months. Peiser has shown that this is a mistake, and he proposes
to correct it to 132 years 6 months, and this is accepted by most
Assyri-ologists.

A reign which began brilliantly often came to an impotent conclusion,
owing to the king having failed to economise his reserves; and the
generations which followed, compelled to adopt a strictly defensive
attitude, vegetated in a sort of anaemic condition, until the birth-rate
had brought the proportion of males up to a figure sufficiently high to
provide the material for a fresh army. When Nebuchadrezzar made war upon
Assurishishi, he was still weak from the losses he had incurred during
the campaign against Elam, and could not conduct his attack with the
same vigour as had gained him victory on the banks of the Ulai; in
the first year he only secured a few indecisive advantages, and in the
second he succumbed. Merodach-nadin-akhi was suffering from the reverses
sustained by his predecessors when Tiglath-pileser provoked him to war,
and tho