Full Text Archive logoFull Text Archive — Free Classic E-books

History of Phoenicia

Part 6 out of 9

Adobe PDF icon
Download this document as a .pdf
File size: 0.9 MB
What's this? light bulb idea Many people prefer to read off-line or to print out text and read from the real printed page. Others want to carry documents around with them on their mobile phones and read while they are on the move. We have created .pdf files of all out documents to accommodate all these groups of people. We recommend that you download .pdfs onto your mobile phone when it is connected to a WiFi connection for reading off-line.

the contest which was to decide whether Egypt or Babylon should be the
great power of the East, appears to have reached the height of her
strength, wealth, and prosperity. It is now that Ezekial says of her--
"O Tyrus, thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I
sit in the seat of God in the midst of the seas--Behold, thou art
wiser than Daniel, there is no secret that they can hide from thee:
from thy wisdom and with thine understanding hast thou gotten thee
riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: by thy
great wisdom and by thy traffick thou hast increased thy riches, and
thy heart is lifted up because of thy riches"[196]; and again, "O thou
that are situated at the entry of the sea, which art the merchant of
the peoples unto many isles, thus saith the Lord God, Thou, O Tyre,
hast said, I am perfect in beauty. Thy borders are in the heart of the
sea; thy builders have perfected thy beauty. They have made all thy
planks of fir-trees from Senir; they have taken from Lebanon cedars to
make masts for thee; of the oaks of Bashan have they made thine oars;
they have made thy benches of ivory, inlaid in boxwood, from the isles
of Kittim . . . The ships of Tarshish were thy caravans for thy
merchandise; and thou wast replenished, and made very glorious in the
heart of the sea."[197]

The first to strike of the two great antagonists was Egypt. Psamatik
I., who was advanced in years at the time of Assyria's downfall,[198]
died about B.C. 610, and was succeeded by a son still in the full
vigour of life, the brave and enterprising Neco. Neco, in B.C. 608,
having made all due preparations, led a great expedition into
Palestine,[199] with the object of bringing under his dominion the
entire tract between the River of Egypt (Wady el Arish) and the Middle
Euphrates. Already possessed of Ashdod[200] and perhaps also of
Gaza[201] and Askelon,[202] he held the keys of Syria, and could have
no difficulty in penetrating along the coast route, through the rich
plain of Sharon, to the first of the mountain barriers which are
interposed between the Nile and the Mesopotamian region. His famous
fleet[203] would support him along the shore, at any rate as far
Carmel; and Dor and Accho would probably be seized, and made into
depts for his stores and provisions. The powerful Egyptian monarch
marching northward with his numerous and well-disciplined army, partly
composed of native troops, partly of mercenaries from Asia Minor,
Greeks and Carians, probably did not look to meet with any opposition,
till, somewhere in Northern Syria, he should encounter the forces of
Babylonia, which would of course be moved westward to meet him. What
then must have been his surprise when he found the ridge connecting
Carmel with the highland of Samaria occupied by a strong body of
troops, and his further progress barred by a foe who had appeared to
him too insignificant to be taken into account? Josiah, the Jewish
monarch of the time, grandson of Manasseh and great-grandson of
Hezekiah, who, in the unsettled state of Western Asia, had united
under his dominion the entire country of the twelve tribes,[204] had
quitted Jerusalem, and thrown himself across the would-be conqueror's
path in the strong and well-known position of Megiddo. Here, in remote
times, had the great Thothmes met and defeated the whole force of
Syria and Mesopotamia under the king of Kadesh;[205] here had Deborah
and Barak, the son of Abinoam, utterly destroyed the mighty army of
Jabin, king of Canaan, under Sisera.[206] Here now the gallant, if
rash, Judan king elected to take his stand, moved either by a sense
of duty, because he regarded himself as a Babylonian feudatory, or
simply determined to defend the Holy Land against any heathen army
that, without permission, trespassed on it. In vain did Neco seek to
induce Josiah to retire and leave the way open, by assuring him that
he had no hostile intentions against Juda, but was marching on
Carchemish by the Euphrates, there to contend with the
Babylonians.[207] The Jewish king persisted in his rash enterprise,
and Neco was forced to brush him from his path. His seasoned and
disciplined troops easily overcame the hasty levies of Josiah; and
Josiah himself fell in the battle.

We have no details with respect to the remainder of the expedition.
Neco, no doubt, pressed forward through Galilee and Cle-Syria towards
the Euphrates. Whether he had to fight any further battles we are not
informed. It is certain that he occupied Carchemish,[208] and made it
his headquarters, but whether it submitted to him, or was besieged and
taken, is unknown. All Syria, Phnicia, and Palestine were overrun,
and became temporarily Egyptian possessions.[209] But Phnicia does
not appear to have been subdued by force. Tyrian prosperity continued,
and the terms on which Phnicia stood towards Egypt during the
remainder of Neco's reign were friendly. Phnicians at Neco's request
accomplished the circumnavigation of Africa;[210] and we may suspect
that it was Neco who granted to Tyre the extraordinary favour of
settling a colony in the Egyptian capital, Memphis.[211] Probably
Phnicia accepted at the hands of Neco the same sort of position which
she had at first occupied under Assyria, a position, as already
explained, satisfactory to both parties.

But the glory and prosperity which Egypt had thus acquired were very
short-lived. Within three years Babylonia asserted herself. In B.C.
605, the crown prince, Nebuchadnezzar, acting on behalf of his father,
Nabopolassar, who was aged and infirm,[212] led the forces of Babylon
against the audacious Pharaoh, who had dared to affront the "King of
kings," "the Lord of Sumir and Accad," had taken him off his guard,
and deprived him of some of his fairest provinces. Babylonia, under
Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, was no unworthy successor of the
mighty power which for seven hundred years had held the supremacy of
Western Asia. Her citizens were as brave; her armies as well
disciplined; her rulers as bold, as sagacious, and as unsparing.
Habakkuk's description of a Babylonian army belongs to about this
date, and is probably drawn from the life--"Lo, I raise up the
Chaldans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the
breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling-places that are not
theirs. They are terrible and dreadful; from them shall proceed
judgment and captivity; their horses are swifter than leopards, and
are more fierce than the evening wolves; and their horsemen shall
spread themselves, and their horsemen shall come from far; they shall
fly as the eagle that hasteth to eat. They shall come all for
violence; their faces shall sup as the east wind, and they shall
gather the captivity as the sand. And they shall scoff at kings, and
princes shall be a scorn unto them; they shall derive every
stronghold; for they shall heap dust, and take it."[213] Early in the
year B.C. 605 the host of Nebuchadnezzar appeared on the right bank of
the Euphrates, moving steadily along its reaches, and day by day
approaching nearer and nearer to the great fortress in and behind
which lay the army of Neco, well ordered with shield and buckler, its
horses harnessed, and its horsemen armed with spears that had been
just furbished, and protected by helmets and brigandines.[214] One of
the "decisive battles of the world" was impending. If Egypt conquered,
Oriental civilisation would take the heavy immovable Egyptian type;
change, advance, progress would be hindered; sacerdotalism in
religion, conventionalism in art, pure unmitigated despotism in
government would generally prevail; all the throbbing life of Asia
would receive a sudden and violent check; Semitism would be thrust
back; Aryanism, just pushing itself to the front, would shrink away;
the monotonous Egyptian tone of thought and life would spread, like a
lava stream, over the manifold and varied forms of Asiatic culture;
crushing them out, concealing them, making them as though they had
never been. The victory of Babylon, on the other hand, would mean room
for Semitism to develop itself, and for Aryanism to follow in its
wake; fresh stirs of population and of thought in Asia; further
advances in the arts; variety, freshness, growth; the continuance of
the varied lines of Oriental study and investigation until such time
as would enable Grecian intellect to take hold of them, sift them, and
assimilate whatever in them was true, valuable, and capable of

We have no historical account of the great battle of Carchemish.
Jeremiah, however, beholds it in vision. He sees the Egyptians
"dismayed and turned away back--their mighty ones are beaten down, and
are fled apace, and look not back, since fear is round about
them."[215] He sees the "swift flee away," and the "mighty men"
attempting to "escape;" but they "stumble and fall toward the north by
the river Euphrates."[216] "For this is the day of the Lord God of
hosts, a day of vengeance, that He may avenge Him of His adversaries;
and the sword devours, and it is satiate and made drunk with their
blood, for the Lord God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country
by the river Euphrates."[217] The "valiant men" are "swept away"--
"many fall--yea, one falls upon another, and they say, Arise and let
us go again to our own people, and to the land of our nativity from
the oppressing sword."[218] Nor do the mercenaries escape. "Her hired
men are in the midst of her, like fatted bullocks; for they also are
turned back, and are fled away together; they did not stand because
the day of their calamity was come upon them, and the time of their
visitation."[219] The defeat was, beyond a doubt, complete,
overwhelming. The shock of it was felt all over the Delta, at Memphis,
and even at distant Thebes.[220] The hasty flight of the entire
Egyptian host left the whole country open to the invading army. "Like
a whirlwind, like a torrent, it swept on. The terrified inhabitants
retired into the fortified cities,"[221] where for the time they were
safe. Nebuchadnezzar did not stop to commence any siege. He pursued
Neco up to the very frontier of Egypt, and would have continued his
victorious career into the Nile valley, had not important intelligence
arrested his steps. His aged father had died at Babylon while he was
engaged in his conquests, and his immediate return to the capital was
necessary, if he would avoid a disputed succession.[222] Thus matters
in Syria had to be left in a confused and unsettled state, until such
time as the Great King could revisit the scene of his conquests, and
place them upon some definite and satisfactory footing.

On the whole, the campaign had, apparently, the effect of drawing
closer the links which united Phnicia with Egypt.[223] Babylon had
shown herself a fierce and formidable enemy, but had disgusted men
more than she had terrified them. It was clear enough that she would
be a hard mistress, a second and crueller Assyria. There was thus, on
Nebuchadnezzar's departure, a general gravitation of the Syrian and
Palestinian states towards Egypt, since they saw in her the only
possible protector against Babylon, and dreaded her less than they did
the "bitter and hasty nation."[224] Neco, no doubt, encouraged the
movement which tended at once to strengthen himself and weaken his
antagonist; and the result was that, in the course of a few years,
both Juda and Phnicia revolted from Nebuchadnezzar, and declared
themselves independent. Phnicia was still under the hegemony of Tyre,
and Tyre had at its head an enterprising prince, a second
Ithobal,[225] who had developed its resources to the uttermost, and
was warmly supported by the other cities.[226] His revolt appears to
have taken place in the year B.C. 598, the seventh year of
Nebuchadnezzar.[227] Nebuchadnezzar at once marched against him in
person. The sieges of Tyre, Sidon, and Jerusalem were formed.
Jerusalem submitted almost immediately.[228] Sidon was taken after
losing half her defenders by pestilence;[229] but Tyre continued to
resist for the long space of thirteen years.[230] The continental city
was probably taken first. Against this Nebuchadnezzar could freely
employ his whole force--his "horses, his chariots, his companies, and
his much people"--he could bring moveable forts close up to the walls,
and cast up banks against them, and batter them with his engines, or
undermine them with spade and mattock. When a breach was effected, he
could pour his horse into the streets, and ride down all opposition.
It is the capture of the continental city which Ezekiel describes when
he says:[231] "Thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I will bring upon
Tyrus Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the
north, with horses and with chariots, and with horsemen, and
companies, and much people. He shall slay with the sword thy daughters
in the field; and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount
against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee. And he shall set
engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break
down thy towers. By reason of the abundance of his horses, their dust
shall cover thee; thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horseman,
and of the wheels and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy
gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach. With the
hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay
thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the
ground. And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of
thy merchandise; and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy
pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy
dust in the midst of the water." But the island city did not escape.
When continental Phnicia was reduced, it was easy to impress a fleet
from maritime towns; to man it, in part with Phnicians, in part with
Babylonians, no mean sailors,[232] and then to establish a blockade of
the isle. Tyre may more than once have crippled and dispersed the
blockading squadron; but by a moderate expenditure fresh fleets could
be supplied, while Tyre, cut off from Lebanon, would find it difficult
to increase or renew her navy. There has been much question whether
the island city was ultimately captured by Nebuchadnezzar or no; but
even writers who take the negative view[233] admit that it must have
submitted and owned the suzerainty of its assailant. The date of the
submission was B.C. 585.

Thus Tyre, in B.C. 585, "fell from her high estate." Ezekiel's
prophecies were fulfilled. Ithobal II., the "prince of Tyrus" of those
prophecies,[234] whose "head had been lifted up," and who had said in
his heart, "I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the
waters," who deemed himself "wiser than Daniel," and thought that no
secret was hid from him, was "brought down to the pit," "cast to the
ground," "brought to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them
that beheld him."[235] Tyre herself was "broken in the midst of the
seas."[236] A blight fell upon her. For many years, Sidon, rather than
Tyre, became once more the leading city of Phnicia, was regarded as
pre-eminent in naval skill,[237] and is placed before Tyre when the
two are mentioned together.[238] Internal convulsion, moreover,
followed upon external decline. Within ten years of the death of
Ithobal, the monarchy came to an end by a revolution,[239] which
substituted for Kings Suffetes or Shophetim, "judges," officers of an
inferior status, whose tenure of office was not very assured. Ecnibal,
the son of Baslach, the first judge, held the position for no more
than two months; Chelbes, the son of Abdus, who followed him, ruled
for ten months; Abbarus, a high priest, probably of Melkarth, for
three months. Then, apparently to weaken the office, it was shared
between two, as at Carthage, and Mytgon (perhaps Mattan), together
with Ger-ashtoreth, the son of Abd-elim, judged Tyre for six years.
But the partisans of monarchy were now recovering strength; and the
reign of a king, Balator, was intruded at some point in the course of
the six years' judgeship. Judges were then abolished by a popular
movement, and kings of the old stock restored. The Tyrians sent to
Babylon for a certain Merbal, who must have been either a refugee or a
hostage at the court of Neriglissar. He was allowed to return to Tyre,
and, being confirmed in the sovereignty, reigned four years. His
brother, Eirom, or Hiram, succeeded him, and was still upon the throne
when the Empire of Babylon came to an end by the victory of Cyrus over
Nabonidus (B.C. 538).

Phnicia under the Babylonian rule was exceptionally weak. She had to
submit to attacks from Egypt under Apries, which fell probably in the
reign of Baal over Tyre, about B.C. 565. She had also to submit to the
loss of Cyprus under Amasis,[240] probably about B.C. 540, or a little
earlier, when the power of Babylon was rapidly declining. She had
been, from first to last, an unwilling tributary of the Great Empire
on the Lower Euphrates, and was perhaps not sorry to see that empire
go down before the rising power of Persia. Under the circumstances she
would view any chance as likely to advance her interests, and times of
disturbance and unsettlement gave her the best chance of obtaining a
temporary independence. From B.C. 538 to B.C. 528 or 527 she seems to
have enjoyed one of these rare intervals of autonomy. Egypt, content
with having annexed Cyprus, did not trouble her; Persia, engaged in
wars in the far East,[241] made as yet no claim to her allegiance. In
peace and tranquillity she pursued her commercial career, covered the
seas with her merchant vessels, and the land-routes of trade with her
caravans, repaired the damages inflicted by Nebuchadnezzar on her
cities; maintained, if she did not even increase, her naval strength,
and waited patiently to see what course events would take now that
Babylon was destroyed, and a new and hitherto unknown power was about
to assume the first position among the nations of the earth.

5. Phnicia under the Persians
(B.C. 528-333)

Phnicia not claimed by Cyrus--Submits willingly to Cambyses--
Takes part in his invasion of Egypt--Refuses to proceed against
Carthage--Exceptional privileges enjoyed by the Phnicians under
the Persians--Government system of Darius advantageous to them--
Their conduct in the Ionian revolt--In the expeditions of
Mardonius and Datis--In the great expedition of Xerxes--
Interruption of the friendly relations between Phnicia and Persia
--Renewal of amity--Services rendered to Persia between B.C. 465
and 392--Amicable relations with Athens--Phnicia joins in revolt
of Evagoras--Supports Tachos, king of Egypt--Declares herself
independent under Tennes--Conquered and treated with great
severity of Ochus--Sidonian dynasty of the Esmunazars.

The conquest of Babylon by Cyrus gave him, according to Oriental
notions generally, a claim to succeed to the inheritance of the entire
Babylonian empire; but the claim would remain dormant until it was
enforced. The straggling character of the territory, which was shaped
like a Greek {L}, ascending from Babylon along the course of the
Euphrates to the Armenian mountains, and then descending along the
line of the Mediterranean coast as far as Gaza or Raphia, rendered the
enforcement of the claim a work of difficulty, more especially in the
remote West, which was distant fifteen hundred miles from Persia
Proper, and more than a thousand miles from Babylon. Cyrus, moreover,
was prevented, first by wars in his immediate neighbourhood,[242] and
later on by a danger upon his north-eastern frontier,[243] from taking
the steps usually taken by a conqueror to establish his dominion in a
newly-annexed region, and thus he neither occupied Syria with troops,
nor placed it under the administration of Persian governors. The only
step which, so far as we know, he took, implying that his authority
reached so far, was the commission which he gave to Zerubbabel and the
other chiefs of the Jewish nation to proceed from Babylonia to Juda,
and re-establish themselves, if they could, on the site of the
destroyed Jerusalem.[244] The return from the Captivity which followed
was in some sense the occupation of a portion of the extreme West by a
Persian garrison, and may be viewed as a step intended to be
"preparatory towards obtaining possession of the entire sea-
coast;"[245] but it appears to have been an isolated movement,
effected without active Persian support, and one whereby the
neighbouring countries were only slightly affected.

That Phnicia retained her independence until the reign of Cambyses is
distinctly implied, if not actually asserted, by Herodotus.[246] She
saw without any displeasure the re-establishment in her neighbourhood
of a nation with which her intercourse had always been friendly, and
sometimes close and cordial. Tyre and Sidon vied with each other in
their readiness to supply the returned exiles with the timber which
they needed for the rebuilding of their temple and city; and once
more, as in the days of Solomon, the Jewish axes were heard amid the
groves of Lebanon, and the magnificent cedars of that favoured region
were cut down, conveyed to the coast, and made into floats or rafts,
which Phnician mariners transported by sea to Joppa, the nearest
seaport to Jerusalem.[247] In return, the Jews willingly rendered to
the Phnicians such an amount of corn, wine, and oil as was equivalent
in value to the timber received from them,[248] and thus the relations
between the two peoples were replaced on a footing which recalled the
time of their closest friendship, nearly five hundred years

On the death of Cyrus, and the accession of his son Cambyses, B.C.
529, the tranquillity which South-western Asia had enjoyed since the
time of the wars of Nebuchadnezzar came to an end. Cyrus had, it is
said, designed an expedition against Egypt,[249] as necessary to round
off his conquests, and Cambyses naturally inherited his father's
projects. He had no sooner mounted the throne than he commenced
preparations for an attack upon the ancient kingdom of the Pharaohs,
which, under the dynasty of the Psamatiks, had risen to something of
its early greatness, and had been especially wealthy and prosperous
under the usurper Amasis.[250] It was impossible to allow an
independent and rival monarchy so close upon his borders, and equally
impossible to shrink from an enterprise which had been carried to a
successful issue both by Assyria and by Babylon. Persian prestige
required the subjugation and absorption of a country which, though
belonging geographically to Africa, was politically and commercially
an integral part of that Western Asia over which Persia claimed a
complete and absolute supremacy.

The march upon Egypt implied and required the occupation of the
Mediterranean seaboard. No armies of any considerable size have ever
attempted to traverse the almost waterless desert which separates the
Lower Euphrates valley from the delta of the Nile. Light /corps
d'arme/ have no doubt occasionally passed from Circesium by way of
Tadmor to Damascus, and /vice vers/;[251] but the ordinary line of
route pursued by conquerors follows the course of the Euphrates to
Carchemish, then strikes across the chalky upland in the middle of
which stands the city of Aleppo, and finally descends upon Egypt by
way of the Orontes, the Cle-Syrian valley, and the plains of Sharon
and Philistia.[252] This was undoubtedly the line followed by
Cambyses,[253] and it necessarily brought him into contact with the
Phnicians. The contact was not an hostile one. It would have been
madness on the part of the Phnicians to have attempted any resistance
to the vast host with which Cambyses, we may be sure, made his
invasion, and it would have been folly on the part of Cambyses to
employ force when he could better obtain his object by persuasion. It
must have been a very special object with him to obtain the hearty
co-operation of the Phnician naval forces in the attack which he was
meditating, since he would otherwise have had no fleet at all capable
of coping with the fleet of Egypt. Neco had made Egypt a strong naval
power;[254] Apries had contented for naval supremacy in the Eastern
Mediterranean with Tyre;[255] Amasis had made an expedition by sea
against Cyprus, had crushed whatever resistance the Cyprians were able
to offer, had permanently occupied the island,[256] and added the
Cyprian fleet to his own. Cambyses had as yet no ships, except such as
he could procure from the Greek cities of Asia Minor, which were not
likely to be very zealous in his service, since they had friends
engaged upon the other side.[257] Accordingly, the Persian monarch
seems to have made friendly overtures to the Phnician states, which
were received with favour, and led to an arrangement satisfactory to
both parties. Phnicia surrendered the independence which it was
impossible for her to maintain, and placed her fleet at the disposal
of Persia.[258] Persia spared her cities any occupation, imposed on
her a light tribute, and allowed her that qualified independence which
is implied in the retention of her native princes. From first to last
under the Persian /rgime/, Phnician monarchs bear rule in the
Phnician cities,[259] and command the contingents which the cities
furnish to any combined Persian fleet.

The friendly arrangement concluded between Phnicia and Persia was
followed, very naturally, by a further accession to the Persian power.
Cyprus, whose population was in great part Phnician, had for
centuries been connected politically in the closest manner with the
Phnician towns on the Asiatic mainland, especially with Tyre and
Sidon. Her enslavement by Amasis must have been hateful to her, and
she must have been only too glad to see an opportunity of shaking off
the Egyptian yoke. Accordingly, no sooner did the Phnicians of the
mainland conclude the arrangement by which they became part and parcel
of the Persian Empire than the Cyprians followed their example, and,
revolting from Egypt, offered themselves of their own free will to
Persia.[260] Cambyses, it is needless to say, readily accepted them as
his subjects.

The invasion of Egypt could now be taken in hand with every prospect
of a successful issue. The march of the land army along the shore
would be supported by a parallel movement on the part of a powerful
fleet, which would carry its provisions and its water, explore the
country in front, and give notice of the movements of the enemy, and
of the place where they proposed to make a stand in force. When Egypt
was reached the fleet would command all the navigable mouths of the
Nile, would easily establish a blockade of all ports, and might even
mount the Nile and take a part in the siege of Memphis. It would seem
that all these services were rendered to the Persian monarch by the
great fleet which he had collected, of which the Phnician ships were
recognised as the main strength. The rapid conquest of Egypt was in
this way much facilitated, and Cambyses within a twelvemonth found
himself in possession of the entire country within its recognised
limits of the Mediterranean and "the tower of Syn."[261]

But the Great King was not satisfied with a single, albeit a
magnificent, achievement. He had accomplished in one short campaign
what it took the Assyrians ten years, and Nebuchadnezzar eighteen
years, to effect. But he now set his heart on further conquests. "He
designed," says Herodotus,[262] "three great expeditions. One was to
be against the Carthaginians, another against the Ammonians, and a
third against the long-lived Ethopians, who dwelt in that part of
Lybia which borders upon the southern sea." The expedition against the
Carthaginians is the only one of the three which here concerns us: it
was to be entrusted to the fleet. Instead of conducting, or sending, a
land force along the seaboard of North Africa, which was probably
known to be for the most part barren and waterless, Cambyses judged
that it would be sufficient to dispatch his powerful navy against the
Liby-Phnician colony, which he supposed would submit or else be
subjugated. But on broaching this plan to the leaders of the fleet he
was met with a determined opposition. The Phnicians positively
refused to proceed against their own colonists. They urged that they
were bound to the Carthaginians by most solemn oaths, and that it
would be as wicked and unnatural for them to execute the king's orders
as for parents to destroy their own children.[263] It was a bold act
to run counter to the will of a despotic monarch, especially of one so
headstrong and impetuous as Cambyses. But the Phnicians were firm,
and the monarch yielded. "He did not like," Herodotus says, "to force
the war upon the Phnicians, because they had surrendered themselves
to the Persians, and because on the Phnicians his entire sea-service
depended." He therefore allowed their opposition to prevail, and
desisted from his proposed undertaking.[264]

This acquiescence in their wishes on the part of the Great King, and
his abstinence from any attempt at compulsion, would seem to have
paved the way for that thoroughly good understanding between the
suzerain power and her dependency which characterises the relations of
the two for the next century and a half, with the single exception of
one short interval. "The navy of Phnicia became a regular and very
important part of the public power"[265] of the Persian state.
Complete confidence was felt by their Persian masters in the fidelity,
attachment, and hearty good-will of the Phnician people. Exceptional
favour was shown them. Not only were they allowed to maintain their
native kings, their municipal administration, their national laws and
religion, but they were granted exceptional honours and exceptional
privileges and immunities. The Great King maintained a park and royal
residence in some portion of Phnicia,[266] probably in the vicinity
of Sidon,[267] and no doubt allowed his faithful subjects to bask
occasionally in the sunshine of his presence. When the internal
organisation of the empire was taken in hand, and something
approaching to a uniform system of government established for revenue
purposes, though Phnicia could not be excused from contributing to
the taxation of the empire, yet the burden laid upon her seems to have
been exceptionally light. United in a satrapy--the fifth--with Syria,
Cyprus, and Palestine, and taxed according to her population rather
than according to her wealth, she paid a share--probably not more than
a third or a fourth--of 350 talents,[268] or an annual contribution to
the needs of the empire amounting to no less than 30,000l. Persia,
moreover, encouraged Phnicia to establish an internal organisation of
her own, and, under her suzerainty, Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus were
united by federal bonds, and had a common council, which met at
Tripolis, probably of three hundred members.[269] This council debated
matters in which Phnicia generally was interested, and, in times of
disturbance, decided questions of peace and war.

The reign of Darius Hystaspis (B.C. 521-486), the successor of
Cambyses upon the Persian throne, introduced several changes into the
Persian governmental system which were of advantage to the Phnicians.
Darius united the most distant parts of his empire by postal routes,
along which at moderate intervals were maintained post-houses, with
relays of horses,[270] primarily for the use of the government, but at
the service of the traveller or private trader when not needed for
business of state. Phnician commerce must have been much helped by
these arrangements, which facilitated rapid communication, gave
security to lines of route which had been previously infested with
robbers, and provided resting-places for the companies of merchants
and traders, not unlike the caravanserai of modern Turkey and Persia.

Darius also established throughout his vast empire a uniform coinage,
based apparently on that which had previously prevailed in Lydia. His
"darics," as they were called by the Greeks, were, in the first
instance, gold coins of a rude type, a little heavier than our
sovereigns, weighing between 123 and 124 grains troy.[271] They bore
the figure of an archer on the obverse, and on the reverse a very
rough and primitive /quadratum incusum/. Darius must have coined them
in vast abundance, since early in the reign of his successor a single
individual of no great eminence had accumulated as many as 3,993,000
of them.[272] Subsequently to the introduction of the gold darics, a
silver coinage was issued, originally (we are told) in Egypt by a
Persian satrap called Aryandes,[273] but afterwards by the central
government. The name of "daric" was extended to these coins also,
which, however, were much larger and heavier than the gold coins,
weighing as much as 235 grains, and corresponding to the Greek
tetradrachm, and (nearly) to the Hebrew shekel. The establishment of
this excellent circulating medium, and the wide extension which it
almost immediately attained, must have given an enormous stimulus to
trade, and have been found of the greatest convenience by the
Phnician merchants, who had no longer to carry with them the precious
metal in bars or ingots, and to weigh their gold and silver in the
balance in connection with every purchase that they made, but could
effect both sales and purchases in the simple and commodious manner
still in use among all civilised nations at the present day.

Under these circumstances we can well understand that the Phnicians
were thoroughly satisfied with the position which they occupied under
the earlier Persian kings, and strove zealously to maintain and extend
the empire to which they owed so much. Their fidelity was put to a
crucial test after they had been subjects of Darius Hystaspis for a
little more than twenty years, and had had about fourteen or fifteen
years' experience of the advantages of his governmental system.
Aristagoras of Miletus, finding himself in a position of difficulty,
had lighted up the flames of war in Asia Minor, and brought about a
general revolt of the Greeks in those parts against the Persian power
--a revolt which spread on from the Greeks to the native Asiatics, and
in a short time embraced, not only Ionia and olis, but Caria, Caunus,
and almost the whole of Cyprus.[274] The bulk of the Cyprian cities
were Phnician colonies, and the political connection between these
cities and Phnicia was so close and of such ancient date that the
Phnicians can scarcely have failed to be moved by their example and
by their danger. A wave of sympathy might have been expected to sweep
across the excitable people, and it would not have been surprising had
they rushed headlong into rebellion with the same impetuosity as their
Cyprian brethren. Had they done so the danger to Persia would have
been very great, and the course of the world's history might perhaps
have been differently shaped. The junction of the Phnician fleet with
the navies of Cyprus, Ionia, Caria, and olis would have transferred
the complete sovereignty of the Eastern Mediterranean to the side of
the rebels.[275] The contagion of revolt would probably have spread.
Lycia and Cilicia, always eager for independence,[276] would probably
have joined the malcontents; Pamphylia, which lay between them, would
have followed their example; the entire seaboard of Asia Minor and
Syria would have been lost; Egypt would, most likely, have seen in the
crisis her opportunity, and have avenged the cruelties and insults of
Cambyses[277] by the massacre of her Persian garrison. Persia's
prosperity would have received a sudden check, from which it might
never have recovered; Greece would have escaped the ordeal of the
invasion of Xerxes; and the character of the struggle between Europe
and Asia would have been completely altered.

But the view which the Phnicians took of their duties, or of their
interests, led them to act differently. When the Persians, anxious to
recover Cyprus, applied to the Phnician cities for a naval force, to
transport their army from Cilica to the island, and otherwise help
them in the war, their request was at once complied with. Ships were
sent to the Cilician coast without any delay;[278] the Persian land
force was conveyed in safety across the strait and landed on the
opposite shore; the ships then rounded Cape St. Andreas and anchored
in the bay opposite Salamis, where the Ionian fleet was drawn up in
defence of the town.[279] An engagement followed--the first, so far as
we know, between Phnicians and Greeks--wholly to the advantage of the
latter.[280] No complaint, however, is made of any lukewarmness, or
want of zeal, on the part of the Phnicians, who seem to have been
beaten in fair fight by an enemy whom they had perhaps despised. Their
ill fortune did not lead to any very serious result, since the
Persian land force defeated the Cyprians, and thus Persia once more
obtained possession of the island.

A year or two later the Phnicians recovered their lost laurels. In
B.C. 495 the Persians, having trampled out the flames of revolt in
Cyprus, Caria, and Caunus, resolved on a great effort to bring the war
to a close by attacking the Ionian Greeks in their own country, and
crushing the head and front of the rebellion, which was the great and
flourishing city of Miletus. Miletus lay on the southern shore of a
deep bay--the Sinus Latmicus--which penetrated the western coast of
Asia Minor in about Lat. 37 30, but which the deposits of the
Mander have now filled up.[281] North-west of the town, at the
distance of about a mile, was the small island of Lad, now a mere
hillock on the flat alluvial plain. While the Persian land force
advanced along the shore, and invested Milestus on the side towards
the continent, a combined fleet of six hundred vessels[282] proceeded
to block the entrance to the bay, and to threaten the doomed city from
the sea. This fleet was drawn from four only of the countries subject
to Persia--viz. Phnicia, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Egypt--whereof
Phnicia, we are told, "showed the greatest zeal,"[283] and we may
presume furnished by far the larger number of ships. On their arrival
in Milesian waters the captains found a strong naval force collected
to meet them, which rested upon the island of Lad, and guarded the
approaches to the town. Miletus had summoned to her aid the
contingents of her various allies--Chios, Lesbos, Samos, Teos, Priene,
Erythr, Phoca, Myus--and had succeeded in gathering together a fleet
amounting to above three hundred and fifty vessels.[284] This time
Phnicia did not despise her foe. Before engaging, every effort was
made to sow discord and dissension among the confederates, and induce
the Greek captains to withdraw their squadrons, or at any rate to
remain neutral in the battle.[285] Considerable effect was produced by
these machinations; and when at last the attack was made, two of the
principal of the Greek allies[286] drew off, and sailed homewards,
leaving the rest of the confederates to their fate. Yet,
notwithstanding this defection, the battle was stoutly contested by
the ships which remained, especially those of the Chians,[287] and
though a very decisive and complete victory was ultimately gained by
the Phnicians and their allies, the cost of the victory was great.
Persia regained her naval supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean;
Phnicia re-established her claim to be considered the great sea power
of the time; but she lost a large number of her best vessels and
seamen, and she was taught the lesson that, to cope with Greeks, she
must have a vast superiority of force upon her side--a superiority of
not much less than three to one.

Miletus soon fell after the victory of Lad, and the Phnician fleet
was then employed for some time in chastising the islanders who had
taken part in the revolt, and in reducing various towns upon the
European shores of the Hellespont, the Propontis, and the Bosphorus,
including Perinthus, Selymbria, and Byzantium.[288] Miltiades, the
destined hero of Marathon, narrowly escaped capture at the hands of
the Phnicians at this time, as he fled from his government in the
Thracian Chersonese to Athens. The vessel which bore him just escaped
into the harbour of Imbrus; but his son, Metiochus, who was on board a
worse sailer, was less fortunate. The Phnicians captured him, and,
learning who he was, conveyed him to Darius at Susa, where he was well
treated and became a naturalised Persian.[289]

After the Ionian revolt had been completely put down and avenged, the
states subject to Persia, and the Phnicians among them, enjoyed a
brief period of repose. But soon the restless spirit which possessed
all the earlier Persian monarchs incited Darius to carry his warlike
enterprises into "fresh fields and pastures new." From the eastern
coast of the gean Sea he looked out towards a land possessing every
attraction that soil or clime could offer, fertile, rich in minerals,
and with many excellent harbours, well watered, abounding in corn and
wine and oil, in wooded hillsides, and in productive plains. According
to Herodotus,[290] he had already explored the strength and weakness
of the region by means of a commission of Persian nobles, who had
surveyed all the shores of Greece from the decks of Phnician ships.
The result was that he coveted the possession of the land thus made
known to him, and came to a fixed resolution that he would add it to
his territories.

There were two modes by which Greece might be approached from Asia.
Bridges of boats could be thrown across the Bosphorus or the
Hellespont, mere salt rivers, scarcely more formidable than the
streams of the Euphrates and the Tigris. In this way Europe could be
invaded in force, and the army sent across the straits, could pursue
its way along the shore till it reached the rich plains of Thessaly,
and from Thessaly passed into Btia, Attica, and the Peloponnese. Or a
fleet, with a land force on board, might proceed from Asia Minor
across the gean, where the numerous islands, scattered at short
intervals, seemed to have been arranged by nature as stepping-stones,
whereby the adventurous denizens of either continent might cross
easily into the other; and a landing might be suddenly effected near
the very heart of Greece without a tenth part of the trouble that must
be taken if the other line of route were pursued. In either case the
attendance of a fleet would be necessary. If the more circuitous route
were pursued, a powerful squadron must attend the march of the army
along the shore, to convey its supplies; if the direct route were
preferred, a still larger fleet would be necessary for the conveyance,
not only of the supplies, but of the army itself. Darius gave a trial
to each of the two plans. In the year B.C. 492 he sent a fleet and
army under Mardonius by way of the Hellespont and the European coast;
but this expedition met with severe disasters, the fleet being
shattered by a storm off Mount Athos, and the land force greatly
damaged by a night attack on the part of the Thracians.[291] Two years
later he dispatched the famous expedition under Datis and Artaphernes,
which took its course through the islands, and landed perhaps 200,000
men on the plain of Marathon,[292] but being there defeated by
Miltiades, returned hastily to Asia by the sea route. The fleets
employed on both these occasions were numerous,[293] and appear to
have been collected from several of the Persian maritime states;[294]
the proportion which the several contingents bore one to another is
not stated, but there can be little doubt that the Phnicians
contributed the greater number. We have no details of the conduct of
the Phnicians on either occasion, beyond a casual notice that in the
expedition of Datis and Artaphernes one of their vessels plundered the
temple of Delium on the Botian coast opposite Chalcis, carrying off
from it an image of Apollo plated with gold.[295] The superstition of
Datis deprived them of this valuable booty; but we may safely conclude
from the anecdote that, while rendering service to Persia, the keen-
witted mariners took care not to neglect their own material interests.

In the third and greatest of the expeditions conducted by Persia
against Greece, the Phnicians are found to have played a very
important and prominent part. Even before the expedition commenced, a
call was made upon them in connection with it for services of an
unusual character. The loss of the fleet of Mardonius off Mount Athos
induced Xerxes to determine on cutting a ship-canal through the
isthmus which joins Athos to the mainland; and his passion for great
and striking achievements caused him to project the construction of a
double bridge of boats across the Hellespont. Phnician technical
skill was invoked for the furtherance of both objects. At Athos they
worked in conjunction with the maritime states generally, but showed
an amount of engineering knowledge far in advance of their fellow-
labourers. The others attempted to give perpendicular sides to their
portions of the excavation, but found the sides continually fall in,
and so (as Herodotus observes) "had double labour."[296] The
Phnicians alone knew that the sides must be sloped at an angle, and,
calculating the proper slope aright, performed their share of the task
without mishap. At the Hellespont the Phnicians had for co-partners
the Egyptians only, and the two nations appear to have displayed an
equal ability.[297] Cables were passed from shore to shore, made taut
by capstans and supported by an almost continuous line of boats;
planks were then laid upon the cables, and covered with brushwood,
while a thick layer of earth was placed upon the top. A solid causeway
was thus formed, which was guarded on either side by bulwarks of such
a height that the horses which crossed the bridge could not see over
them; and thus the cavalry and the sumpter beasts passed from one
continent to the other without a suspicion that they had ever had
anything but /terra firma/ under them. The structure served its
purpose, but was not found strong enough to defy even for a year the
forces of the winds and waves. Before the return of Xerxes, towards
the close of B.C. 480, the autumnal gales had broken it up; and the
army which accompanied him had to re-cross the strait in a number of
separate ships.[298]

The fleet which Xerxes collected to accompany his land army and take
part in his great expedition amounted, it is said, to a total of 1207
vessels.[299] Of these the Phnician triremes were at once the most
numerous and the best. While Egypt furnished 200 ships, Cyprus 150,
Cilicia, Ionia, and the Hellespontine Greeks 100 each, and the other
maritime nations, all together, 257, Phnicia singly contributed no
fewer than 300.[300] The superiority of the Phnician vessels was
sufficiently shown, first by the regatta at Abydos, which was won by a
Sidonian trireme;[301] next, by the preference of Xerxes for Phnician
over other vessels;[302] and, thirdly, by the position assigned them
at Salamis, where care was taken to pit them against the
Athenians,[303] who were recognised as superior at sea to all the
other Greeks. If the Phnician prowess and naval skill did not succeed
in averting defeat from the Persians, we must ascribe it first to the
narrowness of the seas in which they had to engage the enemy; and,
secondly, to the still greater prowess and skill of their principal
antagonists, the Athenians, the Eginetans, and the Corinthians.

In the naval combats at Artemisium, the Egyptians, according to
Herodotus,[304] were considered to have borne off the palm on the
Persian side; but Diodorus assigns that honour to the Sidonians.[305]
At Salamis the brunt of the conflict fell on the Phnician contingent,
which began the battle,[306] and for some time forced the Athenian
squadron to beat a retreat, but was ultimately overpowered and forced
to take to flight, after suffering great losses. A large number of the
ships were sunk; several were taken by the Greeks; comparatively few
escaped from the battle without serious injury.[307] Xerxes, however,
who from his silver-footed throne on Mount galeos surveyed the
scene,[308] but, amid the general turmoil and confusion, could ill
distinguish the conduct of the several contingents, enraged at the
loss of the battle, and regarding the Phnicians as answerable for the
unhappy result, since they formed the nucleus and chief strength of
the fleet, laid the whole blame of the failure upon them, and, on some
of the captains appearing before him to excuse themselves, had them
beheaded upon the spot.[309] At the same time he also threatened the
other Phnician commanders with his vengeance, and so alarmed them
that, according to Diodorus,[310] they quitted the fleet and sailed
away to Asia.

This harsh and unjust treatment seems to have led to an estrangement
between the Persians and the foremost of the naval nations subject to
them, which lasted for fifteen years. The Persians naturally
distrusted those whom they had injured, and were unwilling to call
them in to their aid. The Phnicians probably brooded over their
wrongs, and abstained from volunteering an assistance which they were
not asked to furnish. The war between Persia and Greece continued, and
was transferred from Europe to Asia, but no Phnicians are mentioned
as taking part in it. The Phnician ships retired from Samos on the
approach of the Greek fleet under Leotychides.[311] No Phnicians
fought at Mycale. None are heard of as engaged at Sestos, or
Byzantium, or Eon, or Doriscus, or even Phaselis. It was not until--
in B.C. 465--the war passed from the gean to the southern coast of
Asia Minor, and their dependency, Cyprus, was threatened, that the
Phnicians again appeared upon the scene, and mustered in strength to
the support of their Persian suzerain.

The Persian fleet which fought at the Eurymedon is said to have
consisted of three hundred and forty vessels, drawn from the three
subject nations of the Phnicians, the Cyprians, and the
Cilicians.[312] It was under the command of Tithraustes, a son of
Xerxes. Cimon, who led the fleet of the Athenians and their allies,
attacked it with a force of 250 triremes, of which Athens had
furnished the greater number. The battle was contested with extreme
obstinacy on both sides; but at length the Athenians prevailed, and
besides destroying a large number of the enemy's vessels, took as many
as a hundred with their crews on board. At the same time a land
victory was gained over the Persian troops. The double exploit was
regarded as one of the most glorious in the annals of Greece, and was
commemorated at Delos by a tablet with the following

Since first the sea Europe from Asia severed,
And Mars to rage 'mid humankind began,
Never was such a blow as this delivered
On land and sea at once by mortal man.
These heroes did to death a host of Medes
Near Cyprus, and then captured with their crews
Five score Phnician vessels; at the news
All Asia groaned, hard hit by such brave deeds.

It is scarcely necessary to follow further in detail the services
which Phnicia rendered to Persia as her submissive and attached ally.
For the space of about seventy-five years from the date of the
engagement at the Eurymedon (B.C. 465-390), the Phnicians continued
to hold the first place among the Persian naval states, and to render
their mistress effective help in all her naval enterprises. They
protected Cyprus and Egypt from the Athenian attacks, bore their part
in the war with Amyrtus and Inaros, and more than once inflicted
severe blows upon the Athenian navy.[314] It was his command of a
Phnician fleet amounting to nearly a hundred and fifty triremes which
enabled Tissaphernes to play so influential a part in Asia Minor
during the later years of the Peloponnesian war. It was the presence
of their ships at Cnidus which, in B.C. 394, turned the scale between
Athens and Sparta, enabling the Athenians to recover the naval
supremacy which they had lost at gos-Potami. It was the appearance of
a Phnician fleet in Greek waters[315] which, in the following year,
gave an opportunity to the Athenians to rebuild their "Long Walls,"
alarmed Sparta for her own safety, and extorted from her fears--in
B.C. 387--the agreement known as "the Peace of Antalcidas." Persia
owed to her Phnician subjects the glory of recovering complete
possession of Asia Minor, and of being accepted as a sort of final
arbiter in the quarrels of the Grecian states. From B.C. 465 to B.C.
392 Phnicia served Persia with rare fidelity, never hesitating to
lend her aid, and never showing the least inclination to revolt.

It was probably under these circumstances, when Athens owed the
recovery of her greatness in no small measure to the Phnicians, that
those relations of friendship and intimacy were established between
the two peoples of which we have evidence in several inscriptions.
Phnicians settled in Attica, particularly at Phalerum and the Pirus,
and had their own places of worship and interment. Six sepulchral
inscriptions have been found, either in Athens itself or at the
Pirus,[316] five of them bilingual,[317] which mark the interment in
Attic soil of persons whose nationality was Phnician. They had
monuments erected over them, generally of some pretension, which must
have obtained as much respect as the native tombstones, since
otherwise they could not have endured to our day. There is also at the
Pirus an altar,[318] which a Phnician must have erected and
dedicated to a Phnician god, whom he worshipped on Attic soil
apparently without let or hindrance. The god's name is given as
"Askum-Adar," a form which does not elsewhere recur, but which is
thought to designate the god elsewhere called Sakon, who corresponded
to the Grecian Hermes.[319] Moreover, there is evidence of the
Phnicians having worshipped two other deities in their Attic abodes,
one a god who corresponded to the Greek Poseidon and the Roman
Neptune, the other the Babylonian and Assyrian Nergal. Among the lost
orations of Deniarchus was one delivered by that orator on the
occasion of the suit between the people of Phalerum and the Phnician
inhabitants of the place with respect to the priesthood of
Poseidon;[320] and a sepulchral monument at the Pirus was erected to
Asepta, daughter of Esmun-sillem, of Sidon, by Itten-bel, son of
Esmun-sibbeh, high priest of the god Nergal.[321] It appears further
from the Greek inscription, edited by Bckh,[322] that about this time
(B.C. 390-370) a decree was promulgated by the Council {bonle} of
Athens whereby the relation of Proxenia was established between Strato
(Abd-astartus), king of Sidon, and the Athenian people, and all
Sidonians sojourning in Attica were exempted from the tax usually
charged upon foreign settlers, from the obligation of the Choregia,
and from all other contributions to the state.

The power of Persia began about this time to decline, and the
Phnicians seem to have wavered in their allegiance. In B.C. 406 or
405 Egypt shook off the Persian yoke, and established her independence
under a native sovereign.[323] Soon afterwards, probably in B.C. 392
or 391, Evagoras, a Cypriot Greek, who claimed descent from Teucer,
inaugurated a revolution at Salamis in Cyprus, where he slew the
Phnician monarch, Abdemon, who held his throne under Persia, and,
himself mounting the throne, proceeded to reduce to subjection the
whole island.[324] Vast efforts were made to crush him, but for ten
years he defied the power of Persia, and maintained himself as an
independent monarch.[325] Even when finally he made his submission, it
was under an express stipulation that he should retain his royal
dignity, and be simply bound to pay his tribute regularly, and to
render such obedience as subject kings commonly paid to their

In the course of his resistance to Persia, it is beyond question that
Evagoras received a certain amount of support from Phnicia; but the
circumstances under which the support was given was doubtful.
According to Isocrates,[327] he equipped a large fleet, and attacked
the Phnicians on the mainland with so much vigour as even to take the
great city of Tyre by assault; but Diodorus says nothing of the
attack, and it is conjectured that the contagion of revolt, which
certainly affected, more or less, Cyprus, Cilicia, Caria, and some of
the Syrian Arabs,[328] spread also thus early to Phnicia, and that
"the surrender of Tyre was a voluntary defection."[329] In that case,
we must view Phnicia, or at any rate a portion of it, as having
detached itself from Persia, about B.C. 390, sixty years before the
final break-up of the Empire.

But the disaffection of Phnicia does not become open and patent until
about thirty years later. The decline of Persia had continued. In B.C.
375 an attempt to recover Egypt, for which a vast armament had been
collected under Pharnabazus and Iphicrates, completely failed.[330]
Nine years afterwards, in B.C. 366, the revolt of the satraps began.
First Ariobarzanes, satrap of Phrygia, renounced his allegiance, and
defended himself with success against Autophradutes, satrap of Lydia,
and Mausolus, native king of Caria under Persia. Then Aspis, who held
a part of Cappadocia, revolted and maintained himself by the help of
the Pisidians, until he was overpowered by Datames. Next Datames
himself, satrap of the rest of Cappadocia, understanding that the mind
of the Persian king was poisoned against him, made a treaty with
Ariobarzanes, and assumed an independent attitude in his own province.
Finally, in B.C. 362, there seems to have been something like a
general revolt of the western provinces, in which the satraps of
Mysia, Phrygia, and Lydia, Mausolus prince of Caria, and the peoples
of Lycia, Pisidia, Pamphylia, Cilicia, and Syria participated.[331]
Then, if not earlier, Phnicia openly threw in her lot with the
disaffected;[332] refused her tribute like the others, and joined her
forces with theirs. Nor, when the rebellion collapsed, did she at once
return to her allegiance. When Tachos, native king of Egypt, in B.C.
361, having secured the services of Agesilaus and Chabrias, advanced
boldly into Syria, with the object of enlarging his own dominions at
the expense of Persia, he was received with favour by the Phnicians,
who were quite willing to form a portion of his empire. But the
rebellion of Nectanebo forced Tachos to relinquish his projects,[333]
and the dominion over the Phnician cities seems to have reverted to
Persia without any effort on her part.

In this condition matters remained till about the year B.C. 351, when
Sidon, feeling herself aggrieved by the conduct of the Persian
authorities at Tripolis,[334] where the general assembly of the
Phnicians held its meetings, boldly raised the standard of revolt
against Persia under Tennes, or Tabnit II., and induced the Phnicians
generally to declare themselves independent. Alliance was at once
formed with the Egyptian king, Nekht-nebf, or Nectanebo II., who sent
a body of 4,000 Greek mercenaries, under Mentor the Rhodian, to the
aid of Tennes.[335] Hostilities commenced by the Phnicians expelling
or massacring the Persian garrisons, devastating the royal park or
paradise, and burning the stores of forage collected for the use of
the Persian cavalry.[336] An attempt made by two satraps--Belesys of
Syria and Mazus of Cilicia--to crush the revolt was completely
defeated by Tennes, with the aid of Mentor and his Greeks, who gained
a decisive victory over the satraps, and drove the Persians out of
Phnicia.[337] Cyprus then joined the rebels. The nine principal
cities made common cause, expelled the Persians, and declared
themselves free states, under their respective native kings.[338]
Ochus, the Persian king, was at last roused to exert himself.
Collecting an army of 300,000 foot and 30,000 horse, supported by 300
triremes and 500 transports or provision-ships,[339] he proceeded to
the west in person, determined to inflict condign punishment on the
rebels, and to recover to the empire, not only Cyprus and Phnicia,
but also the long-lost Egypt.

Tennes, on his part, had done his best in the way of preparations for
defence. He had collected a fleet of above a hundred ships--triremes
and quinqueremes,[340] the latter now heard of for the first time in
Asiatic warfare. He had strengthened the fortifications of Sidon,
surrounding the town with a triple ditch of great width and depth, and
considerably raising the height of the walls.[341] He had hired Greek
mercenaries to the number of six thousand, raising thus the number in
his service to ten thousand in all, had armed and drilled the most
active and athletic of the citizens, and had collected vast stores of
provisions, armour, and weapons. But the advance of the Persian
monarch at the head of so large a force filled Tennes with dismay and
despair. Successful resistance was, he thought, impossible; and with a
selfishness and a cowardice that must ever make him rank among the
most infamous of men, he resolved, if possible, to purchase his own
pardon of the King by delivering to his vengeance the entire body of
his fellow-countrymen. Accordingly, after handing over to him a
hundred of the principal citizens, who were immediately transfixed
with javelins, he concerted measures with Mentor for receiving the
Persians within the walls. While the arrangements were proceeding,
five hundred of the remaining citizens issued forth from one of the
gates of the town, with boughs of supplication, as a deputation to
implore the mercy of Ochus, but only to suffer the same fate as their
fellow-townsmen. The Persians were then received within the walls; but
the citizens, understanding what their fate was to be, resolved to
anticipate it. They had already burnt their ships, to prevent any
desertion. Now they shut themselves up, with their wives and children,
in their houses, and applying the torch to their dwellings lighted up
a general conflagration. More than forty thousand persons perished in
the flames. Ochus sold the ruins at a high price to speculators, who
calculated on reimbursing themselves by the treasures which they might
dig out from among the ashes. As for Tennes, it is satisfactory to
find that a just vengeance overtook him. The treachery which he had
employed towards others was shown also to himself. Ochus, who had
given him a solemn promise that he would spare his life, no sooner
found that there was nothing more to be gained by letting him live,
than he relentlessly put him to death.[342]

No further resistance was made by the Phnician cities. Ochus marched
on against Egypt and effected its reconquest.[343] The Cyprian revolt
was put down by the Prince of Caria, Istricus.[344] A calm, prelude to
the coming storm, settled down upon Persia; and Phnicia participated
in the general tranquillity. The various communities, exhausted by
their recent efforts, and disappointed with the result, laid aside
their political aspirations, and fell back upon their commercial
instincts. Trade once more flourished. Sidon rose again from her
ashes, and recovered a certain amount of prosperity. She held the
coast from Leontopolis to Ornithonpolis, and possessed also the
dependency of Dor;[345] but she had lost Sarepta to Tyre,[346] which
stepped into the foremost place among the cities on her fall, and
retained it until destroyed by Alexander. The other towns which still
continued to be of some importance were Aradus, and Gebal or Byblus.
These cities, like Tyre and Sidon, retained their native kings,[347]
who ruled their several states with little interference from the
Persians. The line of monarchs may be traced at Sidon for five
generations, from the first Esmunazar, who probably reigned about B.C.
460-440, through three generations and four kings, to the second
Strato, the contemporary of Alexander.[348] The first Esmunazar was
succeeded by his son, Tabnit, about B.C. 440. Tabnit married his
sister, Am-Ashtoreth, priestess of Ashtoreth, and had issue, two sons,
Esmunazar II., whose tomb was found near Sidon by M. de Vog in the
year 1855, and Strato I. Esmunazar II. is thought to have died about
B.C. 400, and to have been succeeded by his brother Strato, the
Proxenus of Athens, who reigned till B.C. 361. On Strato's death, his
son, the second Tabnit--known to the Greeks as Tennes--mounted the
throne, and reigned till B.C. 345, when he was put to death by Ochus.
A second Strato, the son of Tennes, then became king, and retained his
sovereignty till after the battle of Issus[349] (B.C. 333).

6. Phnicia in the time of Alexander the Great
(B.C. 333-323)

Alexander's invasion of Asia--Preparations made to resist it,
insufficient--What should have been done--Movements of Memnon in
B.C. 333--His death--Paralysis of the Persian fleet--Attack on
Phnicia after Issus--Submission of all the cities but Tyre--Siege
of Tyre--Fall of the city--Cruel treatment of the inhabitants.

The invasion of Asia by Alexander the Great, though it found the
Persians unready, was by no means of the nature of a surprise. The
design had been openly proclaimed by Philip in the year B.C. 338, when
he forced the Grecian States to appoint him generalissimo of their
armies, which he promised to lead to the conquest of the East.[350]
Darius Codomannus had thus ample warning of what he had to expect, and
abundant opportunity to make the fullest preparations for defence.
During the years B.C. 338 and 337, while Philip was still alive, he
did do something towards organising defensive measures, collected
troops and ships, and tried to foment discontent and encourage anti-
Macedonian movements in Greece.[351] But the death of Philip by the
dagger of Pausanias caused him most imprudently to relax his efforts,
to consider the danger past, and to suspend the operations, which he
had commenced, until he should see whether Alexander had either the
will or the power to carry into effect his father's projects. The
events of the years B.C. 336 and 335, the successes of Alexander in
Thrace, Illyria, and Botia,[352] woke him from his fool's paradise to
some sense of the realities of the situation. In B.C. 335 the
preparations for defence were resumed. Orders were issued to the
satraps of Phrygia and Lydia to draw together their troops towards the
north-western corner of Asia Minor, and to take the offensive against
the Macedonian force which had crossed the straits before Philip's
death. The Persian garrisons in this quarter were strongly reinforced
with troops of a good quality, drawn from the remoter provinces of the
empire, as from Persia Proper, Media, Hyrcania, and Bactria. Notice
was given to the Phnicians to prepare a considerable fleet, and hold
it in readiness for active service. Above all, Memnon the Rhodian was
given a command on the Asiatic seaboard, and entrusted with a body of
five thousand Greek mercenaries, which he was empowered to use at his

But these steps, though in the right direction, were quite inadequate
under the circumstances. Everything that was possible should have been
done to prevent Alexander from crossing to Asia in force. The fleet
should not only have been commanded to hold itself in readiness, but
should have been brought up. Four hundred or five hundred
vessels,[354] from Phnicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Lycia, and Cilicia, should
have been moved into the northern Egean and the Propontis, and have
kept watch on every Grecian port. Alexander was unable to muster for
the transport of his army across the Straits a larger number than 160
triremes.[355] Persia should have met them with a fleet three times as
large. Had Memnon been given from the first a free hand at sea,
instead of satrapial power on land, it is quite conceivable that the
invasion of Asia by Alexander might have proved as abortive an
enterprise as the contemplated invasion of England by Napoleon.

As it was, the fleet of Persia, composed mainly of Phnician vessels,
did not appear in the northern Egean waters until some weeks after
Alexander had transported his grand army into Asia, and fought at the
Granicus, so that when it arrived it was of comparatively little
service. Too late even to save Miletus, it had to be a tame spectator
of the siege and capture of that important town.[356] It was then
withdrawn to Halicarnassus, where its presence greatly helped the
defence, but not to the extent of wholly baffling the besiegers.
Halicarnassus fell, like Miletus, after a while, being entered from
the land side; but the fleet saved the troops, the stores, and the

During the early part of the ensuing year, B.C. 333, while Alexander
was engaged in conquering the interior of Asia Minor, the Persian
fleet under Memnon at last took the aggressive, and, advancing
northwards, employed itself in establishing Persian influence over the
whole of the Egean, and especially in reducing the important islands
of Chios and Lesbos.[358] Memnon was now in full command. Fortune
smiled on him; and it seemed more than probable that the war would be,
at least partially, transferred into Greece, where the Spartans only
waited for Memnon's appearance to commence an anti-Macedonian
movement. The presence of a powerful fleet in Greek waters, and
Memnon's almost unlimited command of Persian gold, might in a short
time have raised such a flame in Greece as to necessitate Alexander's
return in order to extinguish it.[359] The invasion of Asia might have
been arrested in mid course; Alexander might have proved as powerless
as Agesilaus to effect any great change in the relations of the two
continents; but, at the critical moment, the sudden and unexpected
death of the Rhodian chief cast all these hopes to the ground,[360]
and deprived Persia of her last chance of baffling the invader.

Thus, first by mismanagement and then by an unhappy accident, the
Phnicians were precluded from rendering Persia any effective service
in the time of her great necessity. Wiser than Napoleon, Alexander
would not contest the sovereignty of the seas with the great naval
power of the day, and he even, when he once felt himself strongly
lodged in Asia, disbanded his naval force,[361] that so it might be
impossible for disaster at sea to tarnish his prestige. He was
convinced that Asia could be won by the land force which he had been
permitted to disembark on its shores, and probably anticipated the
transfer of naval supremacy which almost immediately followed on the
victory of Issus. The complete defeat of the great army of Codomannus,
and its retirement on the Euphrates,[362] left the entire seaboard of
Syria and Phnicia open to him. He resolved at once to take advantage
of the opportunity, and to detach from Persia the three countries of
Phnicia, Egypt, and Cyprus. If he could transfer to himself the
navies of these powers, his maritime supremacy would be incontestable.
He would render his communications with Macedonia absolutely secure.
He would have nothing to fear from revolt or disturbance at home,
however deeply he might plunge into the Asiatic continent. If the
worst happened to him in Asia, he would have assured himself a safe

Accordingly, no sooner was the retreat of Darius upon the line of the
Euphrates, and his abandonment of Syria, ascertained, than Alexander,
after despatching a detachment of his army to Damascus, marched in
person into Phnicia.[363] The Phnicians were placed between two
dangers. On the one hand, Alexander might ravage their territory,
capture and pillage their cities, massacre or sell for slaves the
greater portion of their citizens, and destroy their very existence as
a people; on the other hand, Darius held as hostages for their
fidelity the crews and captains of their triremes, which formed a
portion of his fleet, and had on board a large number of their chief
men, and even some of their kings.[364] It was impossible, however, to
temporise; a choice had necessarily to be made; and when Alexander
entered Phnicia, the cities, in almost every case, decided on
submitting to him. First Strato, the son of Ger-astartus, king of
Aradus, who was serving on board the Phnician contingent to the
Persian fleet, went out to meet Alexander, and surrendered into his
hands the four cities of Aradus, Marathus, Sigon, and Mariamme.[365]
Then Byblus, whose king was also absent with the fleet, opened its
gates to the Macedonians.[366] Next Sidon, mindful of her recent
wrongs, sent envoys to invite Alexander's approach, and joyfully
embraced his cause.[367] Even Tyre nominally made submission, and
declared itself ready to obey Alexander's commands;[368] and the
transfer of Phnicia to the side of Alexander might have been made
without bloodshed, had the Macedonian monarch been content to leave
their island city, which was their true capital, and their pride and
glory, unmolested. But Alexander could not brook anything that in any
degree savoured of opposition to his will. When therefore, on his
expressing a wish to sacrifice to Melkarth in their island town, the
Tyrians declined to receive him within the walls, and suggested that
his pious design might be sufficiently accomplished by his making his
intended offering in Pal-Tyrus, where there was a temple of the same
god, which was older (they said) and more venerable than their own,
Alexander's pride was touched, and he became violently enraged.[369]
Dismissing the envoys with angry threats, he at once began
preparations for an attack upon the town.

The Tyrians have been accused of extreme rashness and folly in not
making an unqualified submission to the demands preferred by
Alexander,[370] but the reproach scarcely appears to be deserved. They
had on previous occasions resisted for years the entire power of
Assyria, and of Babylon; they naturally deemed themselves only
assailable by sea; their fortifications were of immense strength; and
they possessed a navy much superior to any of which Alexander could
boast at the time when he threatened them. Their own vessels were
eighty in number; those of their kinsmen upon the continent were
likewise eighty; Cyprus, which for centuries had been closely allied
with them, and which was more than half Phnician in blood, could
furnish a hundred and twenty; Carthage, if she chose, could send to
their aid, without any difficulty, as many as two hundred.[371]
Alexander had never been able to collect from the Greek states which
owned his sway a fleet of more than one hundred and sixty sail; and,
having disbanded this fleet, he could not readily have mustered from
the cities and countries accessible to him, exclusive of Cyprus and
Phnicia, so many as a hundred.[372] The Tyrians, when they took their
resolution to oppose Alexander, had a right to expect that their
kindred would either assist them, or at any rate not serve against
them, and that thus they would be sure to maintain their supremacy at
sea. As for Alexander's design to join the island Tyre to the
continent by means of a mole, they cannot have had the slightest
suspicion of it, since no work of the kind had ever previously been
accomplished, or even attempted; for the demonstration of Xerxes
against Salamis was not seriously intended.[373] They naturally
counted on the struggle being entirely by sea, and may well have
thought that on their own element they would not be worsted. Even if
the continental towns forsook them and went over to the enemy, why
might they not do as they had done in Shalmaneser's time, defeat their
unnatural countrymen, and retain their naval supremacy? Moreover, if
they made a gallant fight, might not Persia be expected to second
their efforts? Would she not attack Alexander from the flanks of
Lebanon, intercept his supplies, cut off his foragers, and make his
position untenable; the Tyrians could scarcely anticipate that Persia
would sit with folded hands, a calm spectator of a seven months'
siege, and do absolutely nothing.

Having determined on resistance to the demands of Alexander, the
Tyrians lost no time in placing their city in a position to resist
attack. They summoned their king, Azemilcus, from the Persian fleet,
and required him to hasten home with the entire squadron which he
commanded.[374] They collected triremes and lighter vessels from
various quarters. They distributed along the walls of the city upon
every side a number of engines of war, constructed to hurl darts and
stones, and amply provided them with missiles.[375] The skilled
workmen and engineers resident in the town were called upon not merely
to furnish additional engines of the old type, but to exercise their
ingenuity in devising new and unheard of structures.[376] They armed
all the young and vigorous among the people, and appointed them their
several stations at the walls. Finally, to diminish the number of
mouths to be fed, and to save themselves from distracting cares, they
sent away to Carthage a number of their aged men, their women, and
their children, who were readily received and supported by the rich
and friendly colonists.[377]

Meantime Alexander had taken his resolution. Either recollecting what
Xerxes had threatened to do at Salamis, or prompted merely by his own
inventive genius, he determined on the construction of a great mole,
or embankment, which should be carried out from the Asiatic mainland
across the half-mile of channel to the very walls of the recalcitrant
city, and should thus join the island to the Syrian shore. The width
of the embankment he fixed at two plethra, or nearly seventy
yards.[378] Material for the construction was abundant. The great city
of Pal-Tyrus was close at hand, partly in ruins, and with many of the
houses deserted by their inhabitants. Its walls would furnish
abundance of stone, mortar, and rubble. Behind Pal-Tyrus lay the
flanks of Lebanon, cultivated in orchards, while beyond were its dense
and inexhaustible forests of fir, pine, and cedar. Human labour could
be obtained to almost any extent, for the neighbourhood was populous,
and Alexander's authority acknowledged by all. Accordingly the work,
once commenced, for a while made fair progress. Piles were cut in the
mountain, which were driven with much ease into the soft mud of the
channel, which was shallow near the shore,[379] and completely under
the control of the Macedonians, since the Tyrian vessels could not
approach it for fear of sticking in the ooze. Between the piles,
towards the edge of the mole, were sunk stones, trunks of trees, and
material of the more solid character, while the central part was
filled up with rubble and rubbish of every sort and kind. Still, the
operation was toilsome and tedious, even from the first, while the
further that the mole was advanced into the sea, the more difficult
and dangerous became its construction. The channel deepened gradually
from a few feet towards the shore to eighteen or twenty,[380] as it
approached the island. The Tyrians in their vessels were soon able to
act. In small boats at first, and afterwards in their triremes, they
attacked and annoyed the workmen, perpetually hindered their work, and
occasionally destroyed portions of it.[381] Damage was also inflicted
by the wind and waves; and the rate of progress became, in
consequence, exceedingly slow. A strong current set through the
channel, and this was continually working its way among the
interstices of the mole, washing holes in its sides and face, and
loosening the interior of the structure. When a storm arose, the surf
broke over the top of the work, and did even greater damage, carrying
portions of the outer casing into the sea.

To meet the assaults of the Tyrian ships upon the work, the
Macedonians constructed two movable towers, well protected against
torches and weapons by curtains made of raw hides,[382] and advancing
these upon the surface of the mole to the points most threatened,
discharged from the engines which the towers contained darts and
stones of a large size against the Tyrian sailors. Thus protected, the
workmen were able to make sensible progress, and the Tyrians began to
fear that, unless they could destroy the towers, the mole would ere
long be completed. For the accomplishment of their purpose, they
resolved to employ a fire-ship.[383] Selecting one of the largest of
their horse-transports, they stowed the hold with dry brushwood and
other combustible materials; and erecting on the prow two masters,
each with a projecting arm, attached to either a cauldron, filled with
bitumen and sulphur, and with every sort of material apt to kindle and
nourish flame. By loading the stern of the transport with stones of a
large size, they succeeded in depressing it and correspondingly
elevating the prow, which was thus prepared to glide over the smooth
surface of the mole and bring itself into contact with the towers. In
the fore part of the ship were deposited a quantity of torches, resin,
and other combustibles. Watching an opportunity when the wind blew
strongly from the seaward straight upon the mole, they towed the
vessel at their best speed in the direction of the towers, set it on
fire, and then, loosing their hawsers, allowed it to dash itself upon
the work. The prow slid over the top a certain distance and then
stopped. The arms projecting from the masts broke off at the sudden
check,[384] and scattered the contents of the cauldrons around. The
towers caught fire and were at once in a blaze. The Macedonians found
it impossible to extinguish the flames, since the Tyrian triremes,
drawing close to the mole, prevented approach by flights of arrows and
other missiles. "At the same time, the full naval force of the city,
both ships and little boats, was sent forth to land men at once on all
parts of the mole. So successful was this attack, that all the
Macedonian engines were burnt--the outer woodwork which kept the mole
together was torn up in many places--and a large part of the structure
came to pieces."[385] A heavy sea, moreover, accompanied the gale of
wind which had favoured the conflagration, and penetrating the
loosened work, carried the whole into deep waters.[386]

Alexander had now seriously to consider what course he should take.
Hitherto his attempt had proved an entire failure. Should he
relinquish it? To do so would be to acknowledge himself baffled and
defeated, to tarnish the prestige which he held so dear, and to
cripple the plans that he had formed against Persia. It was simply
impossible that Alexander, being the man he was, should so act. No--he
must persevere--he must confront and overcome his difficulties--he
must repair the damages that he had suffered, restore his lost works,
and carry them out on a larger scale, and with more skill than before.
He gave orders therefore for an enlargement and alteration of the
mole, which he no longer carried across the strait in a direct line,
but inclined to the south-west,[387] so that it might meet the force
of the prevalent wind, instead of exposing its flank to the violent
gusts. He also commanded the construction of fresh towers and fresh
engines, stronger and more in number than the former ones.[388] But
this alone would not, he felt, be enough. His designs had been
frustrated hitherto solely from the fact that the Tyrians were masters
of the sea; and it was plain to him that, so long as this state of
things remained unaltered, it was next to impossible that he should
succeed. The great desideratum--the one condition of success--was the
possession of a powerful fleet. Such a fleet must be either built or
collected. Leaving therefore the restoration of the mole and the
engines to his generals, Alexander went in person to Sidon, and there
set himself to gather together as large a fleet as he could. Most
opportunely it happened that, either shortly before Alexander's
arrival or immediately afterwards, the ships of Sidon, Aradus, and
Byblus, which had been serving with the Persian naval force in the
gean, had been required by their respective commanders to proceed
homewards, and, to the number of eighty, had sailed into the harbour
of Sidon.[389] The kings had, in fact, deserted the Persian cause on
hearing that their cities had submitted to Alexander, and readily
placed their respective squadrons at his disposal. Further contingents
were received from other quarters--from Rhodes ten triremes, from the
seaports of Lycia the same number, from Soli and Mallus three, from
Macedonia a single penteconter.[390] The number of the vessels was
thus brought up to one hundred and four; but even with such a fleet it
would have been rash to engage the Tyrian navy; and Alexander would
probably have had to build an additional squadron had he not received,
suddenly and unexpectedly, the adhesion of the princes of Cyprus.
Cyprus, being an island, was as yet in no danger, and might have been
expected at least to remain neutral until the fate of Tyre was
decided; but, for reasons that history has not recorded, the petty
kings of the island about this time--some months after the battle of
Issus--resolved to desert Persia, to detach themselves wholly from
Tyre, and to place their navy at the disposal of the Macedonians.[391]
The number of their triremes amounted to 120; and Alexander, having
now under his command a fleet of 224 sail, could no longer feel any
doubt of being able to wrest the supremacy at sea from the unfortunate

Accordingly, after allowing his ships a period of eleven days for
nautical practice, and placing on board a number of his bravest
soldiers,[392] Alexander sailed out from Sidon at the head of his
entire fleet, and made straight for Tyre in order of battle. He
himself in person commanded the right wing, the post of danger, since
it held the open sea, and had under him the bulk of the Cyprian ships,
with their commanders. Pnytagoras of Salamis and Craterus led the left
wing, which was composed mainly of the vessels furnished by the
Phnician towns upon the mainland, and held its course at no great
distance from the shore. The Tyrians, who had received no intelligence
from without, saw with astonishment the great fleet, nearly three
times as large as their own,[393] bearing down upon them in orderly
array, and challenging them to the combat. They had not now the spirit
of ancient times, when no disparity of force dismayed them. Surprised
and alarmed, they resolved to decline a battle, to remain within their
ports, and to use their ships for blocking the entrances. Alexander,
advancing from the north, when he saw the mouth of the Sidonian
harbour, which faced northwards, strongly guarded, did not attempt to
force it, but anchored his vessels outside, and established a
blockade, the maintenance of which he entrusted to the Cyprian
squadron. The next day he ordered the Phnician ships to proceed
southwards, and similarly block and watch the southern or Egyptian
harbour.[394] For himself, he landed upon the mole, and pitching his
tent near the south-western corner, there established himself.[395]

The mole had not advanced very much during his absence. Vast efforts
had been made to re-establish it, but they had not been attended with
any great success.[396] Whole trees, torn up by the roots, and with
their branches still adhering to them, had been dragged to the water's
edge, and then precipitated into the strait;[397] a layer of stones
and mud had been placed upon them, to solidify them into a mass; on
the top of this other trees had been placed, and the former process
repeated. But the Tyrians had met the new tactics with new methods.
They had employed divers to attach hooks to the boughs where they
projected into the sea, and by sheer force had dragged the trees out
from the superincumbent mass, bringing down in this way large portions
of the structure.[398] But with Alexander's coming, and the retirement
of the Tyrian fleet, all this was altered. Alexander's workmen were no
longer impeded, except from the town, and in a short time the mole was
completed across the channel and carried up to the very foot of the
defences. The new towers, which had replaced the burnt ones, were
brought up close to the walls, and plied the new machines which
Cyprian and Phnician engineers had constructed for their new
master.[399] The battering of the wall began. Engines moreover of a
large size were placed on horse-transports furnished by Sidon, and on
the heavier and clumsier of the triremes, and with these attacks were
made upon the town in various places, all round the circuit of the
walls, which, if they did nothing else, served to distract the
attention of the defenders. To meet such assailants the Tyrians had
let down huge blocks of stone into the sea, which prevented the
approach of the ships, and hindered those on board from using the
battering ram. These blocks the Macedonians endeavoured to weigh up
and remove by means of cranes; but their vessels were too unsteady for
the purpose, whereupon they proceeded to anchor them. The Tyrians went
out in boats well protected, and passing under the stems and sterns of
the vessels, cut the cables, whereupon the Macedonians kept an armed
watch upon the cables in boats of their own, which the Tyrians did not
venture to attack. They were not, however, without resource even yet,
since they contrived still to cut the cables by means of divers. At
last the Macedonians bethought themselves of using chains for cables
instead of ropes; these could not be cut, and the result was that at
length they succeeded in dragging the stones away and obtaining access
to the foot of the walls wherever they pleased.[400]

Under these circumstances, threatened on every side, and feeling
almost at the last gasp, the Tyrians resolved on a final desperate
effort. They would make a bold attempt to recover the command of the
sea. As the Macedonian fleet was divided, part watching the Sidonian
and part the Egyptian harbour, they could freely select to contend
with which portion they preferred. Their choice fell upon the Cyprian
contingent, which was stationed to the north of the mole, keeping
guard on the "Portus Sidonius." This they determined to attack, and to
take, if possible, by surprise. Long previously they had spread sails
along the mouth of the harbour, to prevent their proceedings inside it
from being overlooked.[401] They now prepared a select squadron of
thirteen ships--three of them quinqueremes, three quadriremes, and
seven triremes--and silently placing on board their best sailors and
the best and bravest of their men-at-arms, waited till the hour of
noon, when the Cyprian crews would be taking their mid-day meal, and
Alexander might be expected, according to his general habit, to have
retired to his tent on the opposite side of the mole. When noon came,
still in deep silence, they issued from the harbour in single file,
each crew rowing gently without noise or splash, or a word spoken,
either by the boatswains or by anyone else. In this way they came
almost close to the Cyprians without being perceived: then suddenly
the boatswains gave out their cry, and the men cheered, and all pulled
as hard as they could, and with splash and dash they drove their ships
against the enemy's, which were inert, lying at anchor, some empty,
others hurriedly taking their crews on board. The ships of three
Cyprian kings--Pnytagoras, king of Salamis, Androcles, king of
Amathus, and Pasicrates, king of Curium[402]--were at once run down
and sunk.[403] Many others were disabled; the rest fled, pursued by
the Tyrians, and sought to reach the shore. All would probably have
been lost, had not Alexander returned from his tent earlier than
usual, and witnessed the Tyrian attack. With his usual promptitude, he
at once formed his plan. As only a portion of the Cyprian fleet had
maintained the blockade, while the remainder of their ships were lying
off the north shore of the mole with their crews disembarked, he set
to work to man these, and sent them off, as each was got ready, to
station themselves at the mouth of the harbour, and prevent any more
of the Tyrian vessels from sallying forth. He then hurried to the
southern side of the mole, where the Greco-Phnician squadron kept
guard, and manning a certain number of the vessels,[404] sailed with
them round the western shore of the island into the northern bay,
where the Tyrians and the remnant of the Cyprian fleet were still
contending. Those in the city perceived the movement, and made every
effort to signal it to their sailors, but in vain. The noise and
uproar of the battle prevented them from hearing until it was too
late. It was not till Alexander had entered the northern bay that they
understood, and turned and fled, pursued by his ships, which captured
or disabled the greater number. The crews, however, and the men-at-
arms, escaped, since they threw themselves overboard, and easily swam
into the harbour.[405]

This was the last attempt of the Tyrians by sea. They were now
invested on every side, and hopelessly shut up within their defences.
Still, however, they made a desperate resistance. On the side of the
mole the Macedonians, having brought up their towers and battering-ram
close to the wall, attacked it with much vigour, hurling against it
great masses of stone, and by constant flights of darts and arrows
driving the defenders from the battlements.[406] At the same time the
battering-rams were actively plied, and every effort made to effect a
breach. But the Tyrians deadened the blows of the rams and the force
of the stones by letting down from the walls leathern bags filled with
sea-weed at the points assailed;[407] while, by wheels which were set
in rapid motion, they intercepted the darts and javelins wherewith
they were attacked, and broke them or diverted them from their
intended courses.[408] When boarding-bridges were thrown from the
towers to the top of the walls, and an attempt was made to pass troops
into the town across them, they flung grappling hooks among the
soldiers on the bridges, which caught in their bodies and lacerated
them, or dragged their shields from their hands, or sometimes hauled
them bodily into the air, and then dashed them against the wall or
against the ground.[409] Further, they made ready masses of red-hot
metal, and hurled them against the towers and the scaling-
parties.[410] They also heated sand over fires and poured it from the
battlements on all who approached the foot of the wall; this,
penetrating between the armour and the skin, inflicted such
intolerable pain that the sufferers were forced to tear off their
coats of mail, whereupon they were easily transfixed by arrows or long
lances.[411] With scythes they cut the ropes and thongs by means of
which the rams were worked;[412] and at last, armed with hatchets,
they sprang from the battlements upon the Macedonian boarding-bridges,
and in a hand-to-hand combat defeated and drove back their
assailants.[413] Finally, when, despite of all their efforts, the
outer wall began to give way, they constructed an inner wall to take
its place, broader and stronger than the other.[414]

Alexander, after a time, became convinced that his endeavours to take
the city from the mole were hopeless, and turned his attention to the
sea defences, north and south of the mole, which were far less strong
than those which he had hitherto been attacking.[415] He placed his
best engines and his boarding-bridges upon ships, and proceeded to
batter the sea walls in various places. On the south side, near the
Egyptian harbour, he found a weak place, and concentrating his efforts
upon it, he succeeded in effecting a large breach.[416] He then gave
orders for a general assault.[417] The two fleets were commanded to
force simultaneously the entrances to the two harbours; other vessels
to make demonstrations against the walls at all approachable points;
the army collected on the mole to renew its assaults; while he
himself, with his trustiest soldiers, delivered the main attack at the
southern breach.[418] Two vessels were selected for the purpose. On
one, which was that of Cnus, he embarked a portion of the phalanx; on
the other, which was commanded by Admetus, he placed his bodyguard,
himself accompanying it. The struggle was short when once the
boarding-bridges were thrown across and rested on the battered wall.
Fighting under the eye of their king, the Macedonians carried all
before them, though not without important losses. Admetus himself, who
was the first to step on to the wall, received a spear thrust, and was
slain.[419] But the soldiers who were following close behind him
maintained their footing, and in a little time got possession of
several towers, with the spaces between them. Alexander was among the
foremost of those who mounted the breach,[420] and was for a while
hotly engaged in a hand-to-hand fight with the enemy. When those who
resisted him were slain or driven off, he directed his troops to seize
the royal palace, which abutted on the southern wall, and through it
make their entrance into the town.[421]

Meanwhile, the Greco-Phnician fleet on the south side of the mole had
burst the boom and other obstacles by which the Egyptian harbour was
closed, and, attacking the ships within, had disabled some, and driven
the rest ashore, thus gaining possession of the southern port and a
ready access to the adjacent portion of the city.[422] The Cyprians,
moreover, on the north, had forced their way into the Sidonian
harbour, which had no boom, and obtained an entrance into the town on
that quarter.[423] The defences were broken through in three places,
and it might have been expected that resistance would have ceased. But
the gallant defenders still would not yield. A large body assembled at
the Agenorium, or temple of Agenor, and there made a determined stand,
which continued till Alexander himself attacked them with his
bodyguard, and slew almost the entire number. Others, mounting upon
the roofs of the houses, flung down stones and missiles of all kinds
upon the Macedonians in the street. A portion shut themselves up in
their homes and perished by their own hands. In the streets and
squares there was a terrible carnage. The Macedonians were infuriated
by the length of the siege, the stubbornness of the resistance, and
the fact that the Tyrians had in the course of the siege publicly
executed, probably by way of sacrifice, a number of their prisoners
upon the walls. Those who died with arms in their hands are reckoned
at eight thousand;[424] two thousand more, who had been made
prisoners, were barbarously crucified by command of Alexander round
the walls of the city.[425] None of the adult free males were spared,
except the few who had taken refuge with Azemilcus the king in the
temple of Melkarth, which Alexander professed greatly to revere, and a
certain number whom the Sidonians, touched at last with pity,
concealed on board their triremes. The women, the children, and the
slaves, to the number of thirty thousand,[426] were sold to the
highest bidder.

Having worked his will, and struck terror, as he hoped, into the
hearts of all who might be thinking of resisting him, Alexander
concluded the Tyrian episode of his career by a religious
ceremony.[427] Entering the city from the mole in a grand procession,
accompanied by his entire force of soldiers, fully armed and arrayed,
while his fleet also played its part in the scene, he proceeded to the
temple of Melkarth in the middle of the town, and offered his much
desired sacrifice to Hercules. A gymnastic contest and a torch race
formed a portion of the display. To commemorate his victory, he
dedicated and left in the temple the battering-ram which had made the
first impression on the southern wall, together with a Tyrian vessel,
used in the service of the god, which he had captured when he bore
down upon the city from Sidon with his fleet. Over the charred and
half-ruined remnants of the city, into which he had introduced a
certain number of colonists, chiefly Carians,[428] he placed as ruler
a member of a decayed branch of the royal family, a certain
Abd-elonim, whom the Greeks called Ballonymos.[429]

7. Phnicia under the Greeks
(B.C. 323-65)

The Phnicians faithful subjects of Alexander--At his death
Phnicia falls, first to Laomedon, then to Ptolemy Lagi--Is held
by the Ptolemies for seventy years--Passes willingly, B.C. 198,
under the Seleucid--Relations with the Seleucid princes and with
the Jews--Hellenisation of Phnicia--Continued devotion of the
Phnicians generally to trade and commerce--Material prosperity of

Phnicia continued faithful to Alexander during the remainder of his
career. Phnician vessels were sent across the gean to the coast of
the Peloponnese to maintain the Macedonian interest in that
quarter.[430] Large numbers of the mercantile class accompanied the
march of his army for the purposes of traffic. A portion of these,
when Alexander reached the Hydaspes and determined to sail down the
course of the Indus to the sea, were drafted into the vessels which he
caused to be built,[431] descended the river, and accompanied Nearchus
in his voyage from Patala to the Persian Gulf. Others still remained
with the land force, and marched with Alexander himself across the
frightful deserts of Beloochistan, where they collected the nard and
myrrh, which were almost its only products, and which were produced in
such abundance as to scent the entire region.[432] On Alexander's
return to Babylon, Phnicia was required to supply him with additional
vessels, and readily complied with the demand. A fleet of forty-eight
ships--two of them quinqueremes, four quadriremes, twelve triremes,
and thirty pentaconters, or fifty-oared galleys--was constructed on
the Phnician coast, carried in fragments to Thapsacus on the
Euphrates, and there put together and launched on the stream of the
Euphrates, down which it sailed to Babylon.[433] Seafaring men from
Phnicia and Syria were at the same time enlisted in considerable
numbers, and brought to Alexander at his new capital to man the ships
which he was building there, and also to supply colonists for the
coasts of the Persian Gulf and the islands scattered over its
surface.[434] Alexander, among his many projects, nourished an
intention of adding to his dominions, at any rate, the seaboard of
Arabia, and understood that for this purpose he must establish in the
Persian Gulf a great naval power, such as Phnicia alone out of all
the countries under his dominion was able to furnish. His untimely
death brought all these schemes to an end, and plunged the East into a
sea of troubles.

In the division of Alexander's empire, which followed upon his death,
Phnicia was at first assigned, together with Syria, to Laemedon, and
the two formed together a separate satrapy.[435] But, after the
arrangement of Triparadisus (B.C. 320), Ptolemy Lagi almost
immediately attacked Laemedon, dispossessed him of his government, and
attached it to his own satrapy of Egypt.[436] Six years later (B.C.
314), attacked in his turn by Antigonus, Ptolemy was forced to
relinquish his conquests,[437] none of which offered much resistance
excepting Tyre. Tyre, though no more than eighteen years had elapsed
since its desolation by Alexander, had, like the fabled phnix, risen
again from its ruins, and through the recuperative energy of commerce
had attained almost to its previous wealth and prosperity.[438] Its
walls had been repaired, and it was defended by its Egyptian garrison
with pertinacity. Antigonus, who was master of the Phnician mainland,
established dockyards at Sidon, Byblus, and Tripolis, set eight
thousand sawyers and labourers to cut down timber in Lebanon, and
called upon the kings of the coast towns to build him a fleet with the
least possible delay.[439] His orders were carried out, and Tyre was
blockaded by sea and land for the space of fifteen months, when the
provisions failed and the town was forced to surrender itself.[440]
The garrison marched out with the honours of war, and Phnicia became
an appendage of the empire (for such it was) of Antigonus.

From Antigonus Phnicia passed to his son Demetrius, who maintained
his hold on it, with some vicissitudes of fortune, till B.C. 287, when
it once more passed under the dominion of Ptolemy Lagi.[441] From this
time it was an Egyptian dependency for nearly seventy years, and
flourished commercially, if it not distinguish itself by warlike
exploits. The early Ptolemies were mild and wise rulers. They
encouraged commerce, literature, and art. So far as was possible they
protected their dominions from external attack, put down brigandage,
and ruled with equity and moderation. It was not until the fourth
prince of the house of Lagus, Philopator, mounted the throne (B.C.
222) that the character of their rule changed for the worse, and their
subjects began to have reason to complain of them. The weakness and
profligacy of Philopater[442] tempted Antiochus III. to assume the
aggressive, and to disturb the peace which had now for some time
subsisted between Syria and Egypt, the Lagid and the Seleucid. In
B.C. 219 he drove the Egyptians out of Seleucia, the port of
Antioch,[443] and being joined by Theodotus, the Egyptian governor of
the Clesyrian province, invaded that country and Phnicia, took
possession of Tyre and Accho, which was now called Ptolemas, and
threatened Egypt with subjugation.[444] Phnicia once more became the
battle-field between two great powers, and for the next twenty years
the cities were frequently taken and re-taken. At last, in B.C. 198,
by the victory of Antiochus over Scopas,[445] and the surrender of
Sidon, Phnicia passed, with Clesyria, into the permanent possession
of the Seleucid, and, though frequently reclaimed by Egypt, was never

The change of rulers was, on the whole, in consonance with the wishes
and feelings of the Phnicians. Though Alexandria may not have been
founded with the definite intention of depressing Tyre, and raising up
a commercial rival to her on the southern shore of the
Mediterranean;[446] yet the advantages of the situation, and the
interests of the Lagid princes, constituted her in a short time an
actual rival, and an object of Phnician jealousy. Phnicia had been
from a remote antiquity[447] down to the time of Alexander, the main,
if not the sole, dispenser of Egyptian products to Syria, Asia Minor,
and Europe. With the foundation of Alexandria this traffic passed out
of her hands. It may be true that what she lost in this way was "more
than compensated by the new channels of eastern traffic which
Alexander's conquests opened to her, by the security given to
commercial intercourse by the establishment of a Greek monarchy in the
ancient dominions of the Persian kings, and by the closer union which
now prevailed between all parts of the civilised world."[448] But the
balance of advantage and disadvantage does not even now always
reconcile traders to a definite and tangible loss; and in the ruder
times of which we are writing it was not to be expected that arguments
of so refined and recondite a character should be very sensibly felt.
Tyre and Sidon recognised in Alexandria a rival from the first, and
grew more and more jealous of her as time went on. She monopolised the
trade in Egyptian commodities from her foundation. In a short time she
drew to herself, not only the direct Egyptian traffic, but that which
her rulers diverted from other quarters, and drew to Egypt by the
construction of harbours, and roads with stations and watering
places.[449] Much of the wealth that had previously flowed into
Phnicia was, in point of fact, diverted to Egypt, and especially to
Alexandria, by the judicious arrangements of the earlier Lagid
princes. Phnicia, therefore, in attaching herself to the Seleucid,
felt that she was avenging a wrong, and though materially she might
not be the gainer, was gratified by the change in her position.

The Seleucid princes on their part regarded the Phnicians with
favour, and made a point of conciliating their affections by personal
intercourse with them, and by the grant of privileges. At the
quinquennial festival instituted by Alexander ere he quitted Tyre,
which was celebrated in the Greek fashion with gymnastic and musical
contests, the Syrian kings were often present in person, and took part
in the festivities.[450] They seem also to have visited the principal
cities at other times, and to have held their court in them for many
days together.[451] With their consent and permission, the towns
severally issued their own coins, which bore commonly legends both in
Greek and in Phnician, and had sometimes Greek, sometimes Phnician
emblems.[452] Both Aradus and Tyre were allowed the privilege of being
asylums,[453] from which political refugees could not be demanded by
the sovereign.

The Phnicians in return served zealously on board the Syro-Macedonian
fleet, and showed their masters all due respect and honour.[454] They
were not afraid, however, of asserting an independence of thought and
judgment, even in matters where the kings were personally concerned.
On one occasion, when Antiochus Epiphanes was holding his court at
Tyre, a cause of the greatest importance was brought before him for
decision by the authorities at Jerusalem. The high-priest of the time,
Menelaus, who had bought the office from the Syrian king, was accused
of having plundered the Temple of a number of its holy vessels, and of
having sold them for his own private advantage. The Sanhedrim, who
prosecuted Menelaus, sent three representatives to Tyre, to conduct
the case, and press the charges against him. The evidence was so clear
that the High Priest saw no chance of an acquittal, except by private
interest. He therefore bribed an influential courtier, named Ptolemy,
the son of a certain Dorymenes, to intercede with Antiochus on his
behalf, and, if possible, obtain his acquittal. The affair was not one
of much difficulty. Justice was commonly bought and sold at the Syro-
Macedonian Court, and Antiochus readily came into the views of
Ptolemy, and pronounced the High Priest innocent. He thought, however,
that in so grave a matter some one must be punished, and, as he had
acquitted Menelaus, he could only condemn his accusers. These
unfortunates suffered death at his hands, whereon the Tyrians,
compassionating their fate, and to mark their sense of the iniquity of
the sentence, decreed to give them an honourable burial. The historian
who relates the circumstance evidently feels that it was a bold and
courageous act, very creditable to the Tyrian people.[455]

It is not always, however, that we can justly praise the conduct of
the Phnicians at this period. Within six years of the time when the
Tyrians showed themselves at once so courageous and so compassionate,
the nation generally was guilty of complicity in a most unjust and
iniquitous design. Epiphanes, having driven the Jews into rebellion by
a most cruel religious persecution, and having more than once suffered
defeat at their hands, resolved to revenge himself by utterly
destroying the people which had provoked his resentment.[456] Called
away to the eastern provinces by a pressing need, he left instructions
with his general, Lysias, to invade Juda with an overwhelming force,
and, after crushing all resistance, to sell the surviving population--
men, women, and children--for slaves. Lysias, in B.C. 165, marched
into Juda, accompanied by a large army, with the full intention of
carrying out to the letter his master's commands. In order to attract
purchasers for the multitude whom he would have to sell, he made
proclamation that the rate of sale should be a talent for ninety, or
less than 3l. a head,[457] while at the same he invited the attendance
of the merchants from all "the cities of the sea-coast," who must have
been mainly, if not wholly, Phnicians. The temptation was greater
than Phnician virtue could resist. The historian tells us that "the
merchants of the country, hearing the fame of the Syrians, took silver
and gold very much, with servants, and came into the Syrian camp to
buy the children of Israel for money."[458] The result was a well-
deserved disappointment. The Syrian army suffered complete defeat at
the hands of the Jews, and had to beat a hasty retreat; the merchants
barely escaped with their lives. As for the money which they had
brought with them for the purchase of the captives, it fell into the
hands of the victorious Jews, and formed no inconsiderable part of the
booty which rewarded their valour.[459]

After this, we hear but little of any separate action on the part of
the Phnicians, or of any Phnician city, during the Seleucid period.
Phnicia became rapidly Hellenised; and except that they still
remained devoted to commercial pursuits, the cities had scarcely any
distinctive character, or anything that marked them out as belonging
to a separate nationality. Greek legends became more frequent upon the
coins; Greek names were more and more affected, especially by the
upper classes; the men of letters discarded Phnician as a literary
language, and composed the works, whereby they sought to immortalize
their names, in Greek. Greek philosophy was studied in the schools of
Sidon;[460] and at Byblus Phnician mythology was recast upon a Greek
type. At the same time Phnician art conformed itself more and more
closely to Greek models, until all that was rude in it, or archaic, or
peculiar, died out, and the productions of Phnician artists became
mere feeble imitations of second-rate Greek patterns.

The nation gave itself mainly to the pursuit of wealth. The old trades
were diligently plied. Tyre retained its pre-eminence in the
manufacture of the purple dye; and Sidon was still unrivalled in the
production of glass. Commerce continued to enrich the merchant
princes, while at the same time it provided a fairly lucrative
employment for the mass of the people. A new source of profit arose
from the custom, introduced by the Syro-Macedonians, of farming the
revenue. In Phnicia, as in Syria generally, the taxes of each city
were let out year by year to some of the wealthiest men of the
place,[461] who collected them with extreme strictness, and made over
but a small proportion of the amount to the Crown. Large fortunes were
made in this way, though occasionally foreigners would step in, and
outbid the Phnician speculators,[462] who were not content unless
they gained above a hundred per cent. on each transaction. Altogether,
Phnicia may be pronounced to have enjoyed much material prosperity
under the Seleucid princes, though, in the course of the civil wars
between the different pretenders to the Crown, most of the cities had,
from time to time, to endure sieges. Accho especially, which had
received from the Lagid princes the name of Ptolemas, and was now the
most important and flourishing of the Phnician towns, had frequently
to resist attack, and was more than once taken by storm.[463]

8. Phnicia under the Romans
(B.C. 65-A.D. 650)

Syria made a Roman province, B.C. 65--Privileges granted by Rome
to the Phnician cities--Phnicia profits by the Roman suppression
of piracy, but suffers from Parthian ravages--The Phnicians
offend Augustus and lose their favoured position, but recover it
under later emperors--Mention of the Phnician cities in the New
Testament--Phnicia accepts Christianity--Phnician bishops at the
early Councils--Phnician literature at this date--Works of
Antipater, Apollonius, Philo, Hermippus, Marinus, Maximus, and
Porphyry--School of law at Berytus--Survival of the Phnician
commercial spirit--Survival of the religion--Summary.

The kingdom of the Seleucid came to an end through its own internal
weakness and corruption. In B.C. 83 their subjects, whether native
Asiatics or Syro-Macedonians, were so weary of the perpetual series of
revolts, civil wars, and assassinations that they invited Tigranes,
the king of the neighbouring Armenia, to step in and undertake the
government of the country.[464] Tigranes ruled from B.C. 83 till B.C.
69, when he was attacked by the Romans, to whom he had given just
cause of offence by his conduct in the Mithridatic struggle. Compelled
by Lucullus to relinquish Syria, he retired to his own dominions, and
was succeeded by the last Seleucid prince, Antiochus Asiaticus, who
reigned from B.C. 69 to B.C. 65. Rome then at length came forward, and
took the inheritance to which she had become entitled a century and a
quarter earlier by the battle of Magnesia, and which she could have
occupied at any moment during the interval, had it suited her purpose.
The combat with Mithridates had forced her to become an Asiatic power;
and having once overcome her repugnance to being entangled in Asiatic
politics, she allowed her instinct of self-aggrandizement to have full
play, and reduced the kingdom of the Seleucid into the form of a
Roman province.[465]

The province, which retained the name of Syria, and was placed under a
proconsul,[466] whose title was "Prses Syri," extended from the
flanks of Amanus and Taurus to Carmel and the sources of the Jordan,
and thus included Phnicia. The towns, however, of Tripolis, Sidon,
and Tyre were allowed the position of "free cities," which secured
them an independent municipal government, under their own freely
elected council and chief magistates. These privileges, conferred by
Pompey, were not withdrawn by Julius Csar, when he became master of
the Roman world; and hence we find him addressing a communication
respecting Hyrcanus to the "Magistates, Council, and People of
Sidon."[467] A similar regard was shown for Phnician vested rights by
Anthony, who in B.C. 36, when his infatuation for Cleopatra was at its
height, and he agreed to make over to her the government of Palestine
and of Clesyria, as far as the river Eleutherus, especially exempted
from her control, despite her earnest entreaties, the cities of Tyre
and Sidon.[468] Anthony also wrote more than one letter to the
"Magistates, Council, and People of Tyre," in which he recognised them
as "allies" of the Roman people rather than subjects.[469]

So far the Phnicians would seem to have gained rather than lost by
exchanging the dominion of Syria for that of Rome. They gained also
greatly by the strictness with which Rome kept the police of the
Eastern Mediterranean. For many years previously to B.C. 67 their
commerce had been preyed upon to an enormous extent by the piratical
fleets, which, issuing from the creeks and harbours of Western Cilicia
and Pamphylia, spread terror on every side,[470] and made the
navigation of the Levant and gean as dangerous as it had been in the
days anterior to Minos.[471] Pompey, in that year, completely
destroyed the piratical fleets, attacked the pirates in their lairs,
and cleared them out from every spot where they had established
themselves. Voyages by sea became once more as safe as travels by
land; and a vigilant watch being kept on all the coasts and islands,
piracy was never again permitted to gather strength, or become a
serious evil. The Phnician merchants could once more launch their
trading vessels on the Mediterranean waters without fear of their
suffering capture, and were able to insure their cargoes at a moderate

But their connection with Rome exposed the Phnicians to some fresh,
and terrible, perils. The great attack of Crassus on Parthia in the
year B.C. 53 had bitterly exasperated that savage and powerful
kingdom, which was quite strong enough to retaliate, under favourable
circumstances, upon the mighty mistress of the West, and to inflict
severe sufferings upon Rome's allies, subjects, and dependencies.
After a preliminary trial of strength[472] in the years B.C. 522 and
51, Pacorus, the son of Orodes, in B.C. 40, crossed the Euphrates in
force, defeated the Romans under Decidius Saxa, and carried fire and
sword over the whole of the Syrian presidency.[473] Having taken
Apamea and Antioch, he marched into Phnicia, ravaged the open
country, and compelled all the towns, except Tyre, to surrender. Tyre,
notwithstanding the mole constructed by Alexander, which joined it to
the continent, was still regarded as impregnable, unless invested both
by sea and land; on which account Pacorus, as he had no naval force,
relinquished the idea of capturing it.[474] But all the other cities
either gave themselves up or were taken, and the conquest of Phnicia
being completed, the Parthian prince proceeded to occupy Palestine.
Jerusalem fell into his hands, and for three years the entire tract
between the Taurus range and Egypt was lost to Rome, and formed a
portion of the Parthian Empire. What hardships, what insults, what
outrages the Phnicians had to endure during this interval we do not
know, and can only conjecture; but the conduct of the Parthians at
Jerusalem[475] makes it probable that the inhabitants of the conquered
districts generally had much cause for complaint. However, the time of
endurance did not last very long; in the third year from the
commencement of the invasion the fortune of war turned against the
assailants. Rome, under Ventidius, recovered her lost laurels. Syria
was reoccupied, and the Parthians driven across the Euphrates, never
again to pass it.[476]

In the struggle (which soon followed these events) between Antony and
Augustus, Phnicia had the misfortune to give offence to the latter.
The terms on which they stood with Antony, and the protection which he
had afforded to their cities against the greed of Cleopatra, naturally
led them to embrace his cause; and it should scarcely have been
regarded as a crime in them that they did so with ardour. But
Augustus, who was certainly not clement by nature, chose to profess
himself deeply aggrieved by the preference which they had shown for
his rival, and, when he personally visited the East in B.C. 20,
inflicted a severe punishment on two at least of the cities. Dio
Cassius can scarcely be mistaken when he says that Tyre and Sidon were
"enslaved"--i.e. deprived of freedom--by Augustus,[477] who must
certainly have revoked the privilege originally granted by Pompey.
Whether the privilege was afterwards restored is somewhat uncertain;
but there is distinct evidence that more than one of the later
emperors was favourably disposed to Rome's Phnician subjects.
Claudius granted to Accho the title and status of a Roman colony;[478]
while Hadrian allowed Tyre to call herself a "metropolis."[479]

Two important events have caused Tyre and Sidon to be mentioned in the
New Testament. Jesus Christ, in the second year of his ministry,
"arose and went" from Galilee "into the borders of Tyre and Sidon,"
and there wrought a miracle at the earnest request of a "Syro-
Phnician woman."[480] And Herod Agrippa, the grandson of Herod the
Great, when at Csarea in A.D. 44, received an embassy from "them of
Tyre and Sidon," with whom he was highly offended, and "made an
oration" to the ambassadors.[481] In this latter place the continued
semi-independence of Tyre and Sidon seems to be implied. Agrippa is
threatening them with war, while they "desire peace." "Their country"
is spoken of as if it were distinct from all other countries. We
cannot suppose that the Judan prince would have ventured to take up
this attitude if the Phnician cities had been fully incorporated into
the Roman State, since in that case quarrelling with them would have
been quarrelling with Rome, a step on which even Agrippa, with all his
pride and all his rashness, would scarcely have ventured. It is
probable, therefore, that either Tiberius or Claudius had revoked the
decree of Augustus, and re-invested the Phnician cities with the
privilege whereof the first of the emperors had deprived them.

Not long after this, about A.D. 57, we have evidence that the great
religious and social movement of the age had swept the Phnician
cities within its vortex, and that, in some of them at any rate,
Christian communities had been formed, which were not ashamed openly
to profess the new religion. The Gospel was preached in Phnicia[482]
as early as A.D. 41. Sixteen years later, when St. Paul, on his return
from his third missionary journey, landed at Tyre, and proceeded
thence to Ptolemas, he found at both places "churches," or
congregations of Christians, who received him kindly, ministered to
his wants, prayed with him, and showed a warm interest in his
welfare.[483] These communities afterwards expanded. By the end of the
second century after Christ Tyre was the seat of a bishopric, which
held an important place among the Syrian Sees. Several Tyrian bishops
of the second, third, and fourth centuries are known to us, as Cassius
(ab. A.D. 198), Marinus (A.D. 253), Methodius (A.D. 267-305),
Tyrannion (A.D. 310), and Paulinus (A.D. 328). Early in the fourth
century (B.C. 335) Tyre was the seat of a synod or council, called to
consider charges made against the great Athanasius,[484] who was taxed
with cruelty, impiety, and the use of magical arts. As the bishops who
assembled belonged chiefly to the party of Arius, the judgment of the
council condemned Athanasius, and deprived him of his see. On appeal
the decision was reversed; Athanasius was reinstated,[485] and
advanced; the cause with which he had identified himself triumphed;
and the Synod of Tyre being pronounced unorthodox, the Tyrian church,
like that of Antioch, sank in the estimation of the Church at large.

Tyre also made herself obnoxious to the Christian world in another
way. In the middle of the third century she produced the celebrated
philosopher, Porphyry,[486] who, of all the literary opponents of
Christianity, was the most vigorous and the most successful. Porphyry
appears to have been a Phnician by descent. His original name was
Malchus--i.e. Melek or Malik, "king." To disguise his Asiatic origin,
and ingratiate himself with the literary class of the day, who were
chiefly Greeks or Grecised Romans, he took the Hellenic and far more
sonorous appellation of Porphyrius, which he regarded as a sort of
synonym, since purple was the /royal/ colour. He early gave himself to
the study of philosophy, and was indefatigable in his efforts to
acquire knowledge and learning of every kind. In Asia, probably at
Tyre itself, he attended the lectures of Origen; at Athens he studied
under Apollonius and Longinus; in Rome, whereto he ultimately
gravitated, he attached himself to the Neo-Platonic school of
Plotinus. His literary labours, which were enormous, had for their
general object the establishment of that eclectic system which
Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Jamblichus, and others had elaborated, and
were endeavouring to impose upon the world as constituting at once
true religion and true philosophy. He was of a constructive rather
than a destructive turn of mind. Still, he thought it of great

Book of the day: