(4) Decline. But the valor, hardihood, and discipline which had gained the dominion, and which, as the length of several reigns in the suc cession shows, had sustained it with a firm and effectual hand. were almost at an end. having been succeeded by the effeminacy, the luxurious ness, and the vices which had caused the dissolu tion of earlier Asiatic dynasties, and among them that of the Medes, which the Persians had set aside. When this relaxation of morals has once taken place, a dynasty or a nation only waits for a conqueror. In this case one soon appeared in the person of Alexander, misnained the Great, who assailing Darius on several occasions, finally over came him at Arbela, and so put a period to the Persian monarchy after it had existed for 219 years. On this the country shared the fate that befell the other parts of the world which the Macedonian madman had overrun; but, more for tunate than that of other eastern nations, the name of Persia and of Persians has been pre served even to the present day, as the representa tive of a people and a government.
(5) Recapitulation. The events which tran spired during this succession of Persian kings, so far as they are connected with the Biblical history, may be thus briefly narrated: Cyrus, having conquered Babylon, permitted the Jews to quit their captivity and return into Palestine, af fording them aid for the reconstruction of their national house of worship. Under Cambyses, who invaded Egypt and became master of the land, adversaries of the Jews tried to render them objects of suspicion at the court ; which intrigues, however, had full effect only in the reign of his successor, Smerdis, who issued a decree expressly commanding the building of the temple to cease (Ezra iv :2t); in which prohibition Smerdis, as he. was of the Magian tribe, and therefore of the priestly caste, may have been influenced by re ligious considerations. A milder and more lib eral policy ensued. Darius, having by search in the national records ascertained what Cyrus had done towards the Jews. took off the prohibition, and promoted the rebuilding of the temple. Darius Hystaspis was distinguished for great enterprises, as well as liberal ideas. He carried the renown of the Persian arms to India, Libya, and Europe, and began the Persian attempt to subjugate Greece. What Xerxes undertook, and what suc cess he had in his warlike undertakings against Greece, is known to all. His conduct towards the Jews, as well as his OWIl despotism and lux uriousness, are exhibited in the book of Esther with great force as well as truth. Artaxerxes Longimanus led an army into Egypt, which had rebelled against its Persian masters. He was compelled to make peace with the Greeks. Pal estine must have suffered much by the passage of troops through its borders on their way from Persia to Egypt; the new colony at Jerusalem began to sink, when the monarch permitted Nehe miah to proceed with full powers to the Jewish capital, in order to strengthen the hands of his brethren. Darius Nothus had to fight on all sides of his kingdom, and made Phoenicia the scene of a war against the combined forces of Egypt and Arabia. Even Artaxerxes Mnemon, though long busied with his arms in other parts, did not lose sight of Egypt, which had thrown off his yoke, and sent new Persian armies into the vicinity of Palestine. In consequence, the Jews had much to endure from the insolence of a Persian gen eral, namely, Bagoses, who polluted the temple, and 'punished the Jews seven years' (Joseph.
Antiq. xi, 7, 1). Ochus followed the plan of his father, subdued the revolted Phoenicians, and again fell upon Egypt. The remaining period of the Persian dominion over the Jews passed away peaceably (Joseph. Antiq. lib. xi; Jahn, Archeol. ii, 1, 231-312).
The Biblical books, Daniel, Esther, Nehemiah, and Ezra, combine to present a true as well as high idea of the Persian court and government.
(6) The Empire. The extent of the govern ment was from India to Ethiopia, including one hundred and twenty-seven provinces. The em pire was under the control of vassal princes and nobles, 'the power of Persia and Media; under whom were governors of various ranks, and offi cers for every species of duty. It was specially the duty of seven ministers of state Cchamber lains') to serve in the immediate presence of the monarch. Other officers, however high in rank. were admitted to the royal person only through the barriers of a strictly-observed ceremonial. Even the prime minister himself, and the favored concubine who was honored with the title of queen, durst come no nearer than the outer court, unless, on making their appearance. the king ex tended towards them his scepter of gold. The gorgeousness of the court dazzles the mind, and surpasses imagination. Though the monarch was despotic, he was not strictly arbitrary. Aided by a council, controlled by a priesthood, guided by the past as well as influenced by the present, the king, much as he may have been given up to his personal pleasures, must yet have had a difficult office to fill, and heavy duties to discharge. Rulers are generally insecure in proportion to the degree of their despotism; and so we find, from the plot against the life of Ahasuerus (Xerxes, B. C. 485-465), which Mordecai discovered and made known, that even the recesses of a palace did not protect the kings of Persia from the at tempts of the assassin. In the punishment, how ever, which fell upon the wicked Haman, we see the summary means which the Persian monarchs employed for avenging or defending themselves, as well as the unshared and unqualified power which they held over the life of their subjects even in the highest grades. Indeed it is not possible to read the book of Esther without fancy ing more than once that you are in the midst of the court of the Grand Seignior. Not least among the causes of this illusion is what is narrated in regard to the harem of Xerxes. The women, it seems, had a palace of their own, and dwelt there apart from the king, who paid them visits of cere mony.
The greatness of the power of the chief viziers of the Persian monarchy is illustrated in the re corded acts of Haman and Mordecai. The mode of delegating power was by presenting to the en trusted person the royal signet, which appears to have licensed him to do what he would, by such means as he pleased.
Xenophon presents us with the fullest mate rials, namely, in his Anabasis, his Hellenica, and especially in his CyroPcedia, which is an imag inary picture of a perfect prince, according to Oriental conceptions, drawn in the person of Cy rus the elder. (Hutchinson, Two Years in Per sia; Markham, Hist. of Pers.; Rawlinson, An cient Monarchies, vol. iii.) J. R. B.