inscriptions yet read throw much light on it. The record of Temen-bar repeatedly alludes to three ranks of soldiers, "the leaders, and captains, and men of war," or as it is elsewhere expressed, "superior officers, captains, and fighting men," besides the commander-in-chief. These are, it is true, the forces of an enemy; the king of the powerful city and state of Atesh, in Syria; but probably there was not much difference between the discipline of the two armies. The proportion of the officers to the ranks is interesting; 460 superior officers, 1,121 captains, and 13,000 fighting men are enumerated.

Nothing like an array of battle, or order of march, appears in the more ancient sculptures; with the exception of the curious association of the soldiery in pairs, the one offensive the other defensive, the warriors are seen scattered promiscuously over the field, each apparently choosing his own station and mode of fighting. Probably, however, this is largely to be attributed to the taste of the artist, who doubtless wished to give as much of variety and of interest to the scene as he could. The prominence given to archery shows that the body of the army was much more depended on than it was at the siege of Troy, where Homer makes the fighting to consist of little else than a series of single combats between the heroes; and the prowess or success of some herculean chief often decides the fate of a battle.+

The array of troops on a march, in prescribed forms, is distinctly mentioned in the Laws of Menu (vii. 187).

Homer, it is true, vaunts the Grecian discipline and martial order in contrast with those of the Trojan host, which he ignominiously compares to a flock of bleating sheep answering their calling lambs without the fold.

In the later eras disciplined troops are clearly represented, and we trace something like a regular order of battle. Thus at Khorsabad (Botta, pl. 99) the front rank is composed of archers alone, evidently mercenaries or allies (their caps, pointed beards, and short coats, distinguishing them from the Assyrian troops); then follows a troop of archers, each protected by his targeteer; behind these are stationed warriors armed with the spear and round buckler; and these are succeeded by a rank of archers shielded by round buckler bearers. All the native troops in this scene are heavy-armed.

In a siege from the same palace, Assyrian soldiers with spear and shield rush to assault the battlements; the battering ram is drawn up to the wall, guarded by archers and targeteers. A band of mercenary archers, and one of Assyrian archers and targeteers in pairs, fully armed, behind the former, are stationed in the plain.

Sometimes the arrangement is different. The front rank is composed of spearmen with round bucklers, the second of archers, who kneel on one knee to shoot, and the third of archers erect, who

But it is probable this superiority existed only in the poet's partial sympathies; in either army a single chieftain could break and rout a phalanx. The arrangement of his band by the wisest of the Greeks, perhaps indicates the feebleness of the foot soldiery as an arm of war.

In his front

The charioteers, the chariots, and the steeds,

He placed, his bravest infantry behind,
And in the midst, that, back'd as by a wall,

They might perforce be brave, the tim'rous few.

Il. iv. 320.

are thus able to aim over the heads of their fellows.

The same sort of arrangement is shown in the Kouyunjik bas-reliefs, where also long lines of troops are represented in march. Cavalry appears here in large bodies for the first time, galloping in regular order over broad roads cut through mountainforests. Ranks of infantry are also introduced, one of which consists of men armed with the spear alone, another of men wielding nothing but the mace; and again, another rank armed with the spear and round shield.*

We have no evidence that the trumpet, used by the Egyptians to form the troops and lead them to the charge at the very earliest periodstwas ever so employed by the Assyrians; though the Hebrews carried the knowledge of it into Asia (Judg. i. and ii. and Sam. passim), and used it, under various forms, both in war and religion, abundantly. Homer alludes to it to construct a simile,—

As when fierce foes approach the city walls,

Shrill sounds the trumpet to alarm the town.

Il. xviii. 265.

Yet in battle he makes his heroes use their voices alone.

Among all the oriental nations of antiquity chariots were much employed in war. They

Thus Herodotus was mistaken when he asserts that Cyaxares, who finally overthrew Nineveh," was the first who divided the Asiatics into cohorts, and first arranged them into spearmen, archers, and cavalry, whereas before they had been confusedly mixed together." Herod. i. 103. Wilkinson i. 297.

form as prominent a feature in the sieges and battle scenes of Assyria as in those of Egypt. What number of war-cars the Assyrian monarch was able to bring into action, we have no means of knowing with certainty; the common proportion in the East seems to have been about one chariot to 100 horsemen. Thus Xenophon in the passage just cited (Cyrop. ii.) describes the Assyrian as bringing 20,000 horse and 200 chariots, as his own proper subsidy against Cyrus. This ratio would give for Temen-bar's great army 1,200 chariots. Solomon, in the height of his magnificence, had 1,400 chariots, but only 12,000 horsemen, whom, with the former, he bestowed in certain "chariot cities." (1 Kings x. 26.) "All the chariots of Egypt," wherewith Pharaoh pursued Israel to the Red Sea, amounted to but 600 (Exod. xiv. 7): Jabin, the powerful king of northern Canaan, had 900" chariots of iron ;" which are spoken of as a large number (Judg. iv. 3, 13): Hadarezer, the King of Zobah, had 1,000 chariots (1 Chron. xviii. 4). These are the largest numbers mentioned in Scriptum, with two exceptions (30,000 in 1 Sam. xiii. 5, and 32,000 in 1 Chron. xix. 7), in both of which cases there is probably some source of error, in the text or in the rendering.

The Assyrian chariot of the Nimroud period was a small light box, nearly square, open behind and at the top, with the posterior corner of each side rounded, and sometimes higher than the fore-part. In general form and appearance it almost exactly agreed with that of Egypt, but was panelled, instead of open, at the sides. The rim (ävτu) was

L

generally ornamented with a handsome moulding. The axle was affixed to the body at or very near the hinder margin, so as to throw the weight upon the

In

NIMROUD CHARIOT.