The last year of Darius ended according to Herodotus in Ol. 73. 3 B. C. 48h. The first year of Cyrus will accordingly be in his computation Ol. 55. 2 B. C. 55g, and the beginning of the period 483+223=B. C. 70% will be Ol. 17. 4 according to Herodotus, who gives only 29 years to Cyrus, but according to the general concurrence of testimonies, which assign to Cyrus 30 years and place his accession in Ol. 55. 1, the commencement of the period, as stated in the Tables, will be at Ol. 17. 3, one year higher than this computation.

Diodorus obtained his date for the beginning of the Median empire according to Herodotus by collecting the amount of the numbers which he supplied in detail; and as Diodorus himself fixed the accession of Cyrus at Ol. 55. 13, he computed the four Median reigns at 151 years, and obtained Ol. 17. 2 for their beginning, an excess of only one year above the numbers in Herodotus.

But not only is the date supplied by the present text consistent with the account of Diodorus, it is also consistent with the true period of the Median independence. For we may collect from Scripture that the Medes did not become independent till after the death of Sennacherib; and accordingly Josephus k, having related the death of this king and the miraculous recovery of Hezekiah from sickness, adds, ἐν τούτῳ τῷ χρόνῳ συνέβη τὴν τῶν ̓Ασσυρίων ἀρχὴν úπò Mýdшν xαтαλurval. But the death of Sennacherib, as will be shewn hereafter, is determined to the beginning of B. C. 711. The Median revolt, then, did not occur before B. C. 711; which refutes Conringius, who raises it to B. C. 715; and Valckenaer, who raises it to B. C. 741 and is conclusive against all innovations of the text of Herodotus which would suppose an interregnum of an additional 6 years exclusive of and prior to the 53 years ascribed to Deioces. The date, then, B. C. 7 or Ol. 17. 3, is the true date, and the numbers as they now stand are genuine.

Herodotus m indeed implies an interval of some space between the revolt of the Medes and the election of Deioces to be king. But these anni aẞaríλeuros could not have been prior to the 53 years of Deioces, since the revolt is limited by Scripture to B. C. 711. Dr. Hales", adopting this idea of an interregnum, the duration of which was six years, imagines this interregnum to have commenced at the revolt, and dates the 53 years of Deioces six years lower, and so all the succeeding reigns. But the series of reigns from Deioces to Xerxes, 223 years, is fixed and determined at both extremes. The first term of the series could not have been earlier than B. C. 711; the last could not have been later than B. C. 485. But

is evidently an error of Diodorus. The cause of
his misrepresentation of Herodotus in the period
of Median independence is not obscure. Dio-
dorus had derived his notion from Ctesias that
the Median revolt preceded the reign of Astya-
ges
282 years (as will be shewn hereafter), and,
finding only 115 years in Herodotus, he endea-
voured to reconcile the two by imagining many
generations (or 167 years) before a king was ap-
pointed. Eusebius Chron. II. anno 1197 in the
same manner accounts for the interval between
Arbaces and Deioces.

h See F. H. II. p. 247. Philolog. Mus. vol. I. p. 387.

i As Wesseling has remarked ad Diod. II. 32. tom. II. p. 436.

j See F. H. II. p. 2. k Joseph. Ant. X. 2. 1 Appendix c. 4. m I. 96. n Vol. III. "Herodotus has not ex85. p. "pressly given the length of the interregnum, "but he has furnished the data. He reckons "the Scythian dominion in Media 28 years and "the whole length of the Median dynasty 128

years more, or 156 in all. But the reigns of "the four kings amount to 150 years; which 'being subtracted from 156 years leave 6 years "for the interregnum." Conringius had before adopted the same opinion. See Wess. ad Herodot. I. 130.

the interpretation of Hales would bring down the accession of Cyrus to B. C. 554°, and of Xerxes to B. C. 480, contrary to the tenour of history. The interregnum, then, was included in the 53 years of Deioces, and was counted to his reign; nor can we supply an additional six years by supposing an interregnum exclusive of the four reigns.

A plain and natural interpretation, agreeing in the outline with Kalinsky, but without alteration of the historian's numbers, will probably solve the difficulty. The term of 156 years, which has caused so much embarrassment, is not expressed in Herodotus. He affirms that the Median dominion lasted 128 years. These 128 years terminated at the defeat of Astyages B. C. 559. They commenced, then, 559+128=B. C. 687 in the 23rd year of the independence of the Medes. He therefore considered the period to begin after the regal government was settled; perhaps after the anni àßariλUTO had expired; and to include the last 31 years of the government of Deioces. The term Taps we may interpret with Valckenaer. The Median empire lasted 128 years B. C. 687-560, excluding from the account a period of 28 years B. C. 634-607 within that interval, during which years the Scythians occupied Asia. The 53 years, then, of Deioces are divided into two portions, 22 years of his government before he was appointed king and 31 years of his reign after the kingdom was established.

This period of 22 years is confirmed by a comparison of Ctesias with Herodotus. Dr. Hales P, giving a comparative view of the Median chronology of Ctesias and Herodotus, out of which he forms his own, speaks of the interregnum as stated by Ctesias at 22 years. He observes that Ctesias interpolates four Median kings, Arbaces, Mandauces, Sosarmus, and Articas, as reigning 108 years B. C. 821-713; that in the ensuing Median dynasty, however, he nearly agrees with Herodotus, and has given correctly the length of the dynasty, 159 years. Hales then subjoins the respective lists; that of Ctesias is thus stated:

He remarks that the sameness of the persons may be fairly collected from the sameness of their reigns. Hence Phraortes, and Artynes, &c. and the last, Astyages and Astiagas, are evidently the same. He proceeds to supply the 35 years which are wanting in Ctesias, and observes that the only variation in the times between Herodotus and Ctesias lies in the interregnum and the first reign; and he reduces the excessive reign of Deioces from 53 in Herodotus to 40 in Ctesias.

This representation is far from accurate. Astyages is identified with Astiagas by Diodorus himself; and, although there is no similarity in the account of Ctesias between the two preceding reigns and the two predecessors of Astyages except in the number of years ascribed to them by each historian, yet from hence we may identify Astybaras with Cyaxares and Artynes with Phraortes. For the rest, the account of Ctesias is as follows: noìv oùv μetà tùy κατάλυσιν τῆς ̓Ασσυρίων ἡγεμονίας Μήδους προστῆναι τῆς ̓Ασίας, ̓Αρβάκου βασιλεύοντος τοῦ Σαρδανά

o See his representation of the chronology of Herodotus in vol. III. p. 85.

P Ancient Chronology vol. III. p. 84-86.
q II. 34.
r Apud Diod. II. 32—34.

παλον καταπολεμήσαντος.—τούτου δ' ἄρξαντος ἔτη δυσὶ λείποντα τῶν τριάκοντα, διαδέξασθαι τὴν βασι λείαν τὸν υἱὸν Μανδαύκην, ὃν ἄρξαι τῆς ̓Ασίας ἔτη πεντήκοντα· μετὰ δὴ τοῦτον τριάκοντα μὲν ἔτη βασιλεῦσαι Σώσαρμον πεντήκοντα δὲ ̓Αρτύκαν, δύο δὲ πρὸς τοῖς εἴκοσι τὸν προσαγορευόμενον ̓Αρβιάνην, τεσσαράκοντα δὲ ̓Αρταῖον. Ctesias then relates some unsuccessful wars of Artæus with the Cadusians, and subjoins, τῶν δὲ Μήδων βασιλεῦσαι μετὰ τὴν ̓Αρταίου τελευτὴν ̓Αρτύνην μὲν ἔτη δύο πρὸς τοῖς εἴκοσι ̓Αστιβάραν δὲ τεσσαράκοντα κ. τ. λ. The Median dynasty, then, of Ctesias is this:

This account gives 282 years down to the accession of Astyages; and B. C. 594 +282= B. C. 876. The sum therefore of the first four reigns in Ctesias is 158 years instead of 108, and they raise the date of the Median revolt to B. C. 976 instead of B. C. 821. If we supply 35 years for Astyages, the whole Median period according to Ctesias will be 317 years; called in round numbers 300 years by Agathiass: ἔτη δὲ καὶ (Μήδων) ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ διανυσάντων οὐ μεῖον ἢ τριακόσια, Κῦρος ὁ Καμβύσου τὸν ̓Αστυάγην καταπολεμήσας ἐπὶ Πέρσας τὴν ἡγεμονίαν μετήyays. The numbers which Hales ascribes to the first four reigns were in reality derived from Syncellus by Jackson', who is quoted by Hales. And Syncellus in the Median reigns follows Eusebius; the two lists being these:

The first four kings, who reigned 108 years in Eusebius, but 158 in Ctesias, if they existed at all, governed Media during the empire of the Assyrians, as we know from Scripture. In the four last reigns Eusebius agrees with Herodotus in the names and nearly in the total

s II. 25.

t Chronological Antiquities vol. I. p. 253. v Euseb. Chron. I. p. 46. Medorum reges. 1. Varbaces annis 28, &c.-Cyrus dejecto Asdahage Medorum imperium extinxit, quod quidem annis [298] viguerat. Nonnulli tamen alios re

ges Medorum in codicibus scribunt. The numbers 298 are corrupt. His list in lib. II. p. 257. differs from this both in the names and the total amount. His account of the Median kings in his Tables varies from both the others in the following manner:

amount of years, though he varies in the years of each particular reign. Ctesias inserts a ninth reign, to which he assigns 22 years; and gives the numbers of Herodotus 22 +40=62 years to the two predecessors of Astyages. That interpolated reign in Ctesias, which is made to precede Deioces*, precisely agrees with the term of 22 years obtained for the interregnum in Herodotus.

The acquisition of Media by Cyrus is represented as a forcible seizure not only by Herodotusy, but by Plato, Aristotle, Isocrates, Anaximenes, Dinon, Ctesias z, Amyntas a; and

the same is intimated by Xenophon himselfb. Strabo (following Anaximenes), Cephalion, Justin, agree with Herodotus that Astyages was conquered in war. Plutarch and Polyænusd have preserved an account to the same purpose. According to Dinon Cyrus began to reign at the age of 40, reigned 30 years, and died at the age of 70€. Herodotus followed other accounts, and reckoned Cyrus younger at his accession and his death; for he places the birth of Cyrus within the reign of Astyages; and he relates that Harpagus after the fall of Sardis commanded in Ionias. But if Harpagus had a son older than Cyrush, it is not likely that Cyrus should have been nearly sixty years of age when Harpagus was in the command of an army i.

IV.

ASSYRIAN EMPIRE.

THE Assyrian chronology of Ctesias according to Diodorusa is as follows. Ninus the first king was succeeded by Semiramis, and she by Ninyas; who was followed by thirty kings, of whom Sardanapalus was the last. These 33 reigns occupied 1306 years, which ended, as we have seen b, at B. C. 876; giving 876+1306=B. C. 2182 for the commencement of this empire ; or 1000 years before the Trojan war, which produces the same datec: μετὰ τὸν ταύτης θάνατον Νινύας ὁ Νίνου καὶ Σεμιράμιδος υἱὸς παραλαβὼν τὴν ἀρχὴν ἦρχεν εἰρηνικῶς κ. τ. λ.—στρατηγοὺς δὲ καὶ σατράπας καὶ διοικητὰς—καθ ̓ ἕκαστον ἔθνος ἀποδείξας—τὸν τοῦ ζῆν χρόνον κατέμεινεν ἐν τῇ Νίνῳ. παραπλησίως δὲ τούτῳ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ βασιλεῖς, παῖς παρὰ πατρὸς διαδεχόμενος τὴν ἀρχὴν, ἐπὶ γενεὰς τριάκοντα ἐβασίλευσαν μέχρι Σαρδαναπάλου. ἐπὶ τούτου γὰρ ἡ τῶν ̓Ασσυρίων ἡγεμονία μετέπεσεν εἰς Μήδους, ἔτη διαμείνασα πλείω τῶν χιλίων καὶ τριακοσίων, ἔτι δὲ ἕξα· καθάπερ φησὶ Κτησίας ὁ Κνίδιος ἐν τῇ δευ

b Xenoph. Anab. III. 4, 7. Λάρισσα. ᾤκουν δ ̓ αὐτὴν τὸ παλαιὸν Μῆδοι.—ταύτην βασιλεὺς ὁ Περσῶν, ὅτε παρὰ Μήδων ἐλάμβανον τὴν ἀρχὴν Πέρσαι, πολιορκών οὐδενὶ τρόπῳ ἐδύνατο ἑλεῖν· ἥλιον δὲ νεφέλη προκαλύψασα ἠφάνισε μέχρις οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἐξέλιπον, καὶ οὕτως ἐάλω. Ibid. §. 10. 11. Μέσπιλα. Μῆδοι δ ̓ αὐτήν ποτε ᾤκουν. —ἐνταῦθα ἐλέγετο Μηδία γυνὴ βασιλέως καταφυγεῖν ὅτε ἀπώλεσαν τὴν ἀρχὴν ὑπὸ Περσῶν Μῆδοι. ταύτην δὲ τὴν πόλιν πολιορκῶν ὁ Περσῶν βασιλεὺς οὐκ ἐδύνατο οὔτε χρόνῳ ἑλεῖν οὔτε βίᾳ· Ζεὺς δ ̓ ἐμβροντήτους ποιεῖ τοὺς ἐνοικοῦντας, καὶ οὕτως ἑάλω.

• Strabo XVI. p. 730. τοὺς δὲ Πασαργάδας ἐτίμησε Κῦρος ὅτι τὴν ἱστάτην μάχην ἐνίκησεν ̓Αστυάγην ἐνταῦθα τὸν Μῆδον, καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ̓Ασίας μετήνεγκεν εἰς ἑαυτόν· καὶ πόλιν ἔκτισε καὶ βασίλειον κατεσκεύασε τῆς νίκης μνημεῖον. Compare Anaximenes quoted in note z. Cephalion apud Euseb. p. 47. is quoted above in note v. Justin I. 5. 6. follows Herodotus.

d Plutarch. Virt. Mul. p. 246. Α. Πέρσας 'Αστυάγου βασιλέως καὶ Μήδων ἀποστήσας Κῦρος ηττήθη μάχη κ. τ. λ. Polyæn. VII. 45. Πέρσαι Μήδοις παρες τάσσοντο. Περσῶν Κῦρος ἡγεῖτο. Κύρου σατράπης Οιβάρης ἦρξε φυγῆς κ. τ. λ.

e Cicero Div. I. 23. See F. H. II. Ρ. 12.
f I. 108.
g I. 162.

h Conf. Herodot. I. 114-119.
i Xenophon. Cyrop. I. 2. also relates that Cy-
rus was born after Astyages began to reign. But
in the narrative of Xenophon, where historical
facts are mingled with romance, the true chro-
nology of the reign of Astyages is not observed.
Cyaxares II. is placed between the death of
Astyages and the reign of Cyrus, and Cambyses
the father of Cyrus still reigns in Persia in Xe-
nophon's account VIII. 5. after the capture of
Babylon.

a Diod. II. 1-31. The Assyrian and Median affairs occupied the first six books of the history of Ctesias : Phot. Cod. 72. p. 108. ἐν μὲν τοῖς πρώτ τοις ς' τά τε Ασσύρια διαλαμβάνει καὶ ὅσα πρὸ τῶν Περ σικῶν. At the end of his 23rd book he closed his history with a list of reigns: Phot. Ibid. p. 133. κατάλογος βασιλέων ἀπὸ Νίνου καὶ Σεμιράμεως μέχρι ̓Αρ τοξέρξου. ἐν οἷς καὶ τὸ τέλος. b See Ρ. 261.

c Diod. II. 21. 22. d In Diodorus ἔτι δ ̓ ἑξήκοντα. In Syncellus p. 359. C. ἔτη ατε'. οὕτω γὰρ λέγοντι Κτησίᾳ καὶ Διόδω