the country, under Chedorlaomer (Gen. xiv), whose representative appears as a conqueror in the inscrip- tions. Amraphel, king of Shinar, and Arioch, king of Ellasar (Larsa), would be tributary princes whom Chedorlaomer had subjected, while he himself may have become the founder of the new dynasty, which, according to Berosus, continued on the throne for above 450 years. From this point the history of Babylon is almost a blank for above twelve centuries. Except in the mention of the plundering of Job by the Chal- da;ans (Job i, 17), and of the "goodly Babylonish gar- ment" which Achan coveted (Josh, vii, 21), Scripture is silent with regard to the Balylonians from the time of Abraham to that of Hezekiah. Berosus covered this space with three dynasties ; one (which has been already mentioned) of 49 Chaldajan kings, who reigned 458 years ; another of 9 Arab kings, who reigned 245 years ; and a third of 49 Assyrian monarchs, who held dominion for 5^6 years ; but nothing be3'ond this bare outline has come down to us on his authority concern- ing the period in question. The monumental records of the country furnish a series of names, the reading of which is very uncertain, which may be arranged with a good deal of probability in chronological order, apparently belonging to the first of these three dynas- ties. Of the second no traces have been hitherto dis- covered. The third would seem to be identical with the Upper Dynasty of Assyria, of which some account has been given in the article Assyria. It would ap- pear, then, as if Babylon, after having a native Chal- drean dynasty which ruled for 224 years (Brandis, p. 17), and a second dynasty of Elamitic Chaldaeans who ruled for a further period of 458 j'ears, fell wholly under Semitic influence, becoming subject first to Ara- bia for two centuries and a half, and then to Assyria for above live centuries, and not regaining even a quali- fied independence till the time marked by the close of the Upper and the formation of the Lower Assyrian empire. This is the conclusion which seems naturally to follow from the abstract which is all that we pos- sess of Bei-osus ; and doubtless it is to a certain extent true. But the statement is too broad to be exact ; and the monuments show that Babylon was at no time ab- sorbed into Assyria, or even for very many years to- gether a submissive vassal. Assyria, which she had colonized daring the time of the second or great Chal- dnean dynasty, to which she had given letters and the arts, and which she had held in subjection for many hundred years, became in her turn (about B.C. 1270) the predominant Mesopotamian power, and the glory of Babylon in consequence suffered eclipse. But she had her native kings during the whole of the Assyrian period, and she frequently contended with her great neighbor, being sometimes even the agressor. Though much sunk from her former greatness, she continued to be the second power in Asia, and retained a vitali- ty which at a later date enabled her to become once more the head of an empire.
The line of Babylonian kings becomes exactly known to us from the j'ear B.C. 747. An astronomi- cal work of the geographer Ptolemy has preserved to us a document, the importance of which for compara- tive chronology it is scared}- possible to exaggerate. The Canon of Ptolemy, as it is called, gives us the suc- cession of Babylonian monarchs, with the exact length of the reign of each, from the year B.C. 717, when Nabonassar mounted the throne, to B.C. 331, when the last Persian king was dethroned by Alexander. This document, which, from its close accordance with the statements of Scripture, always vindicated to itself a high authority in the eyes of Christian chronologers, has recently been confirmed in so many points by the inscriptions that its authentic character is estal dished beyond all possibility of cavil or dispute. As the basis of all accurate calculation for Oriental dates previous to Cyrus, it seems proper to transcribe the earlier por- tion of it in this place. [The accessions are given ac-
BABYLONIA
604
BABYLONIA
cording to the asra of Nabonassar, and dates B.C. are added for convenience sake.]
Km:
Nabonassar
Nadiua
Chinzinus and Turns
EluLi tis
Mardocempalua
Arceanus
First interregnum...
Belibus
Aparanadins
Eegibelua
Mesesimordacua
Second interregnum .
Asaridanus
Saosduchinua
Cinneladanua
Nabopolassar
Nebuchadnezzar. . . .
Illoarudamua
XeriLrassolaaaaroa . .
Nabonadiua
Cyrua
Of Nabonassar, the first king in Ttolemy's list, nothing can be said to be known except the fact, re- ported by Berosus, that he destroyed all the annals of his predecessors for the purpose of compelling the Babylonians to date from himself (Fragm. 11 a). It has been conjectured that he was the husband or son of Semiramis, and owed to her his possession of the throne. But of this theory there is at present no proof. It rests mainly upon a synchronism obtained from Herodotus, who makes Semiramis a Babylonian queen, and places her five generations (167 years) be- fore Xitoeris, the mother of the last king. The As- syrian discoveries have shown that there was a Se- miramis about this time, but they furnish no evidence of her connection with Babylon, which still continues uncertain. The immediate successors of Nabonassar are still more obscure than himself. Absolutely noth- ing beyond the brief notation of the canon has reached us concerning Nadius (or Nabius), Chinzinus (or Chinzirus), and Porus, or Elulams, who certainly can- not be the Tyrian king of that name mentioned by Menander (ap. Joseph. Ant. is, 14, 2). Mardocem- palus, on the contrary, is a monarch to whom great interest attaches. He is undoubtedly the Merodach- Baladan, or Berodach-Baladan (q. v.) of Scripture, and was a personage of great consequence, reigning himself twice, the first time for 12 years, contempo- raneously with the Assyrian king Sargon, and the sec- ond time for six months only, during the first year of Sennacherib ; and leaving a sort of hereditary claim to his sons and grandsons, who are found to have been engaged in hostilities with Essarhaddon and his suc- cessor. His dealings with Hezekiab sufficiently indi- cate the independent position of Babylon at this period, while the interest which he felt in an astronomical phenomenon (2 Chron. xxxii, 31) harmonizes with the character of a native Ohakbean king which appears to belong to him. The Assyrian inscriptions show that after reigning 12 years Merodach-Baladan was de- prived of his crown and driven into banishment by Sargon, who appears to have placed Arceanus (his son? ) upon tli.' throne as viceroy, a position which he maintained tor five years. A time of trouble then en- sued, estimated in the canon at two years, during which various pretenders assumed the crown, among them a certain Hagisa, or Acises, who reigned for about a month, and Merodach-Baladan, who held the throne for half a year | I'olyhist. ap. Euseb.). Sen- na, herib, bent on re-establishing the influence of As- syria over Babylon, proceeded against Merodach-Bala- dan (as lie informs us) in his first year, and having de- throned him, placed an Assyrian named /;</if>, or Beli- bus, upon the thn.ne, who ruled as his viceroy for three years. At the end of this time, the party of Merodach-Baladan still giving trouble, Sennacherib descended again into Babylonia, once more overran it,