We do not propose to subject the diversities to a critical investigation, believing that little, if any, good could result, at least within our narrow space. Dates, names, and dynasties may be more or less uncertain, but the facts we have given are unimpeached.
(8) Extent. The magnitude of the Median empire is another important fact equally well as certained. Being in their time the most valorous, as well as the most powerful nation of Asia, the Medes extended their power towards the east and the west beyond any strictly definable limits, though, like dominion generally in Oriental coun tries, it was of a vague, variable, and unstable kind. That they regarded the Tigris as their western boundary appears from the fact that they erected on its banks strongholds, such as Mespila and Larissa (Xenoph., Anab. iii. 4, io); but that they carried their victorious arms still farther westward, appears from both Herodotus (i. 134) and Isaiah (xiii :17, 18). The eastern limits of the empire seem to have been different at differ ent periods. Hceren inclines to the opinion that it may have reached as far as the Oxus, and even the Indus (Ideen, i. 42). Many, however, were the nations and tribes which were under the sway of its sovereigns.
(9) Government. The government was a succession of satrapies, over all of which the Medes were paramount ; but the different nations exerted a secondary dominion over each other, diminishing with the increase of distance from the center of royal power (Herod., i. r34), to which center ultimately the tribute paid by each dependent to his superior eventually and securely came. Not only were the Medes a powerful, but also a wealthy and cultivated people; indeed, be fore they sank, in consequence of their degen eracy, into the Persian empire, they were during their time the foremost people of Asia, owing their celebrity not only to their valor, but also to the position of their country, which was the great commercial highway of Asia. The sover eigns exerted absolute and unlimited dominion, exacted a rigid court-ceremonial, and displayed a great love of pomp (Heeren, Ideen, 143).
(10) Tinder Persian Rule. Under the Persian monarchs Media formed a province, or satrapy, by itself, whose limits did not correspond with in dependent Media, but cannot be accurately de fined.
To Media belonged another country, namely, Aria, which, Heeren says, took its name from the river Arius (now Heri), but which appears to contain the elements of the name (in the Zend language) which was coinmon to the two, if not to other, Eastern nations who were denominated Indians by Alexander the Great, as dwellers in or near the Indus (which he also misnamed) but who were known in their own tongue as Arians (Arii, Aria, Ariana, also the name of Persia, Iran ; see Ritter, Erdkunde, v. 458; Manu, 22; x. 45; Herod., vii. 62, who declares that the Medes were of old universally called Arii,'Aptcn). Subsequently, however, from whatever cause, the Arians were separated from the Medes, form ing a distinct satrapy in the Persian empire. Thus the name of a clan, or gens, became the name of a nation, and then of an individual tribe (Strabo, quoted by Heeren, Idcen, too).
(11) Scriptural Mention. The Medes are not mentioned in sacred Scripture till the days of Hoshea. king of Israel, about 74o B. C., when Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, brought that mon arch under his yoke, and in the ninth year of his reign took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria,placing them in Halah and in Habor, 1,v the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes. Here the Medes appear as a part of the Assyrian empire ; but at a later period Scripture exhibits them as an independent and sovereign people (Is. xiii :17 ; Jer. xxv :25; 11 r, 28). In the last passage their kings are expressly named : 'The Lord hath raised up the kings of the Medes; for his device is against Babylon to destroy it.' 'Prepare against her (Babylon) the kings of the Medes, the captains thereof, and all the rulers thereof.' It has been conjectured that soon after the time of Arbaces they again fell under the domin ion of the Assyrians; but availing themselves of the opportunity afforded by the distant expedi tions which Sennacherib undertook, they gained their freedom, and founded a new line of kings under Dejoces (Winer, Reakart.). Indeed, so sudden and rapid are the changes of government, even to the present day, in Oriental monarchies, that we need not be surprised at any difficulties which may occur in arranging the dy_nasties or the succession of kings, scarcely in any ancient history, certainly least of all in the fragmentary notices preserved regarding the kings of Media and other neighboring empires.
(12) 'Medes and Persians. According, how ever, to other historical testimony, we find the Medes and Persians united as one people in Holy Writ (Dan. v:28; vi :15 ; viii :2o; Esth. i :3, 18 ; x:2), in the days of Cyrus, who destroyed the separate sovereignty of the former. To the united kingdom Babylon was added as a province.
(13) Conquered by Alexander. After the lapse of about 200 years, Media, in junction with the entire Persian monarchy, fell under the yoke of Alexander the Great (B. C. 33o) ; but after the death of Alexander it became, under Seleucus Nicator, the Macedonian governor of Media and Babylonia, a portion of the new Syrian kingdom (I Macc. vi :56), and, after many variations of warlike fortune, passed over to the Parthian monarchy ( Macc. xiv :2 ; Strabo, xvi. p. 745).
(14) The People. The ancient Medes were a warlike people, and much feared for their skill in archery (Herod., vii. 61 ; Strabo, xi. p. 525.) They appear armed with the bow in the army of the Persians, who borrowed the use of that weapon from them (Herod., ut supra). Those who re mained in the more mountainous districts did not lose their valor ; but the inhabitants of the cities and towns which covered the plains, in becoming commercial lost their former hardy habits,together with their bravery, and, giving way to luxury, became in process of time an easy prey to new aspirants to martial fame and civil dominion. (See Grote, History of Greece, iii. pp. 3oz-312; Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies; Porter, Travels; Kinnier, Persian Empire.) (See PERSIAN.) J. R. B.