Nebuchadnezzar died B.C. 561, having reigned 43 years, and was succeeded by Evil-Merodach, his son, who is called in the Canon Illoarudamus. This prince, who, "in the year that he began to reign, did lift up the head of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, out of pris- on" (2 Kings xxv, 27), was murdered, after having held the crown for two years onhr, by Neriglissar, his brother-in-law. See Evil-Merodach. Neriglissar — the Nerigassolassar of the Canon — is (apparently) identical with the " Nergal-shar-ezer, Bab-Mag" of Jeremiah (xxxix, 3, 13, 14). He bears this title, which has been translated "chief of the Magi" (Gesenius), or " chief priest" (Col. Rawlinson), in the inscriptions, and calls himself the son of a "king of Babylon." Some writers have considered him identical with "Da- rius the Mede" (Larcher, Conringius, Bouhier); but this is improbable [see Darius the Mede], and he must rather be regarded as a Babylonian of high rank, who, having married a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, raised his thoughts to the crown, and finding Evil- Merodach unpopular with his subjects, murdered him, and became his successor. Neriglissar built the pal- ace at Babylon, which seems to have been placed originally on the west bank of tho river. He was probably advanced in life at his accession, and thus reigned but four years, though he died a natural death, and left the crown to his son Laborosoarchod. This prince, though a mere lad at tho time of his father's decease, was allowed to ascend the throne without difficulty; but when ho had reigned nine months he became the victim of a conspiracy among his friends and connections, who, professing to detect in him symptoms of a bad disposition, seized him, and tor- tured him to death. Nabonidus (or Labynetus), one of the conspirators, succeeded ; he is called by Bcrosus "a certain Nabonidus, a Babylonian" (ap. Joseph. Ap. i, 21), by which it would appear that lie was not a member of the royal family; and tins is likewise evi- dent from Ids inscriptions, in which he only claims for his father the rank of " Rab-Mag." Herodotus seems to have been mistaken in supposing him (i, 188) the son of a great queen, Nitocris, and (apparently) of a former king, Labynetus (Nebuchadnezzar?). Indeed, it may be doubted whether the Babylonian Nitocris of Herodotus is really a historical personage. His authority is the sole argument for her existence, which it is difficult to credit against the silence of Scripture, Berosus, the Canon, and the Babylonian monuments. She may perhaps have been the wife of Nebuchadnez- zar, but in that case she must have been wholly un-
connected with Nabonidus, who certainly bore no re- lation to that monarch.
Nabonidus, or Labynetus (as he was called by the Greeks), mounted the throne in the year B.C. 555, very shortly before the war broke out between Cyrus and Croesus. He entered into alliance with the latter of these monarchs against the former, and, had the struggle been prolonged, would have sent a contingent into Asia Minor. Events proceeded too rapidly to al- low of this ; but Nabonidus had provoked the hostility of Cyrus by the mere fact of the alliance, and felt at once that sooner or later he would have to resist the attack of an avenging army. He probably employed his long and peaceful reign of 17 years in preparations against the dreaded foe, executing the defensive works which Herodotus ascribes to his mother (i, 185), and accumulating in the town abundant stores of provisions (ib. c. 190). In the year B.C. 539 the attack came. Cyrus advanced at the head of his irresistible hordes, but wintered upon the Diyaleh or Gyndes, making his final approaches in the ensuing spring. Nabonidus appears by the inscriptions to have shortly before this associated with him in the government of the king- dom his son, Bel-shar-ezer or Belshazzar ; on the ap- proach of Cyrus, therefore, he took the field himself at the head of his army, leaving his son to command in the city. In this way, by help of a recent discovery, the accounts of Berosus and the book of Daniel — hith- erto regarded as hopelessly conflicting — may be recon- ciled. See Belshazzar. Nabonidus engaged the army of Cyrus, but was defeated and forced to shut himself up in the neighboring town of Borsippa (mark- ed now by the Birs-Ximrud), where he continued till after the fall of Babylon (Beros. ap. Joseph. Ap. i, 21). Belshazzar guarded the city, but, over-confident in its strength, kept insufficient watch, and recklessly in- dulging in untimehr and impious festivities (Dan. v), allowed the enemy to enter the town by the channel of the river (Herod, i, 191 ; Xen. Cyrop. vii, 7). Baby- lon was thus taken by a surprise, as Jeremiah had prophesied (li, 31) — by an army of Medes and Persians, as intimated 170 years earlier by Isaiah (xxi, 1-9), and, as Jeremiah had also foreshown (li, 39), during a festival. In the carnage which ensued upon the tak- ing of the town, Belshazzar was slain (Dan. v, 30). Nabonidus, on receiving the intelligence, submitted, and was treated kindly by the conqueror, who not only spared his life, but gave him estates in Carmania (Beros. id sup. ; comp. Abyd. Fragm. 9).
Such is the general outline of the siege and capture of Babylon by Cyrus, as derivable from the fragments of Berosus, illustrated by the account in Daniel, and reduced to harmony by aid of the important fact, ob- tained recently from the monuments, of the relation- ship between Belshazzar and Nabonidus. It is scarce- ly necessary to remark that it differs in many points from the accounts of Herodotus and Xcnophon ; but the latter of these two writers is in his Cr/ropwdia a mere romancer, and the former is very imperfectly ac- quainted with the history of the Babylonians. The native writer, whose information was drawn from authentic and contemporary documents, is far better authority than cither of the Greek authors, the earlier of whom visited Babylon nearly a century after its capture by Cyrus, when the tradition had doubtless become in many respects corrupted.