The Assyrian empire was founded by Ashur, the son of Shem, according to some writers; but according to others, by Nimrod; and to others, by Ninus.

Ninus, according to Diodorus Siculus, is to be esteemed the most ancient of the Assyrian kings. Being of a warlike disposition, and ambitious of that glory which results from courage, says he, he armed a considerable number of young men, that were brave and vigorous like himself; trained them up in laborious exercises and hardships, and by that means accustomed them to bear the fatigues of war patiently, and to face dangers with intrepidity. What Diodorus states of Ninus, however, is much more applicable to his father, Nimrod, the son of Cush, grandson of Cham, and great-grandson of Noah; he who is signalised in scripture as having been “a mighty hunter before the Lord;” a distinction which he gained from having delivered Assyria from the fury and dread of wild animals; and from having, also, by this exercise of hunting, trained up his followers to the use of arms, that he might make use of them for other purposes more serious and extensive.

The next king of Assyria was Ninus, the son of Nimrod. This prince prepared a large army, and in the course of seventeen years conquered a vast extent of country; extending to Egypt on one side, and to India and Bactriana on the other. On his return he resolved on building the largest and noblest city in the world; so extensive and magnificent, as to leave it in the power of none, that should come after him, to build such another. It is probable, however, that Nimrod laid the foundations of this city, and that Ninus completed it: for the ancient writers often gave the name of founder to persons, who were only entitled to the appellation of restorer or improver.

This city was called Nineveh. Its form and extent are thus related by Diodorus, who states that he took his account from Ctesias the Gnidian:—“It was of a long form; for on both sides it ran out about twenty-three miles. The two lesser angles, however, were only ninety furlongs a-piece; so that the circumference of the whole was about seventy-four miles. The walls were one hundred feet in height; and so broad, that three chariots might be driven together upon it abreast; and on these walls were fifteen hundred turrets, each of which was two hundred feet high.”

When the improver had finished the city, he appointed it to be inhabited by the richest Assyrians; but gave leave, at the same time, to people of other nations (as many as would) to dwell there; and, moreover, allowed to the citizens at large a considerable territory next adjoining them.

Having finished the city, Ninus marched into Bactria; his army consisting of one million seven hundred thousand men, two hundred thousand horse, and sixteen thousand chariots armed with scythes. This number is, doubtless, greatly exaggerated. With so large a force, he could do no otherwise than conquer a great number of cities. But having, at last, laid siege to Bactria, the capital of the country, it is said that he would probably have failed in his enterprise against that city, had he not been assisted by the counsel of Semiramis, wife to one of his officers, who directed him in what manner to attack the citadel. By her means he entered the city, and becoming entire master of it, he got possession of an immense treasure. He soon after married Semiramis; her husband having destroyed himself, to prevent the effects of some threats that Ninus had thrown out against him. By Semiramis, Ninus had one son, whom he named Ninyas; and dying not long after, Semiramis became queen: who, to honour his memory, erected a magnificent monument, which is said to have remained a long time after the destruction of the city.

The history of this queen is so well known,22 that we shall not enlarge upon it; we having already done so in our account of Babylon; for she was one of the enlargers of that mighty city.

There is a very great difference of opinion, in regard to the time in which Semiramis lived. According to

Alexander’s opinion of this celebrated woman may be gathered from the following passage of his speech to his army:—“You wish to enjoy me long; and even, if it were possible, for ever; but, as to myself, I compute the length of my existence, not by years, but by glory. I might have confined my ambition within the narrow limits of Macedonia; and, contented with the kingdom my ancestors left me, have waited, in the midst of pleasures and indolence, an inglorious old age. I own that if my victories, not my years, are computed, I shall seem to have lived long; but can you imagine, that after having made Europe and Asia but one empire, after having conquered the two noblest parts of the world, in the tenth year of my reign and the thirtieth of my age, that it will become me to stop in the midst of so exalted a career, and discontinue the pursuit of glory to which I have entirely devoted myself? Know, that this glory ennobles all things, and gives a true and solid grandeur to whatever appears insignificant. In what place soever I may fight, I shall fancy myself upon the stage of the world, and in presence of all mankind. I confess that I have achieved mighty things hitherto; but the country we are now in reproaches me that a woman has done still greater. It is Semiramis I mean. How many nations did she conquer! How many cities were built by her! What magnificent and stupendous works did she finish! How shameful is it, that I should not yet have attained to so high a pitch of glory! Do but second my ardour, and I will soon surpass her. Defend me only from secret cabals and domestic treasons, by which most princes lose their lives; I take the rest upon myself, and will be answerable to you for all the events of the war.”

“This speech,” says Rollin, “gives us a perfect idea of Alexander’s character. He had no notion of true glory. He did not know either the principle, the rule, or end of it. He certainly placed it where it was not. He was strongly prejudiced in vulgar error, and cherished it. He fancied himself born merely for glory; and that none could be acquired but by unbounded, unjust, and irregular conduct. In his impetuous sallies after a mistaken glory, he followed neither reason, virtue, nor humanity; and as if his ambitious caprice ought to have been a rule and standard to all other men, he was surprised that neither his officers nor soldiers would enter into his views, and that they lent themselves very unwillingly to support his ridiculous enterprises.” These remarks are well worthy the distinguished historian who makes them.

Semiramis was succeeded by her son Ninyas; a weak and effeminate prince, who shut himself up in the city, and, seldom engaging in affairs, naturally became an object of contempt to all the inhabitants. His successors are said to have followed his example; and some of them even went beyond him in luxury and indolence. Of their history no trace remains.

At length we come to Pull, supposed to be the father of Sardanapalus; in whose reign Jonah is believed to have lived. “The word of the Lord,” says the Hebrew scripture, “came unto Jonah, the son of Amittai, saying, Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.” Jonah, instead of acting as he was commanded, went to Joppa, and thence to Tarshish. He was overtaken by a storm, swallowed by a whale, and thrown up again. Being commanded again, he arose and went to Nineveh, “an exceedingly great city of three days’ journey;” where, having warned the inhabitants, that in forty days their city should be overthrown, the people put on sackcloth, “from the greatest of them even to the least.” The king sat in ashes, and proclaimed a fast. “Let neither man nor beast,” said the edict, “herd nor flock, taste any thing; let them not feed, nor drink water; but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth; and cry mightily unto God; yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?”

On the king’s issuing this edict, the people did as they were commanded, and the ruin was delayed. On finding this, the prophet acted in a very unworthy manner. To have failed as a prophet gave him great concern; insomuch, that he desired death. “Take, I beseech thee, O Lord, my life from me; for it is better for me to die than to live.” “Shall I not spare Nineveh,” answered the Lord, “that great city, wherein are more than six-score thousand persons, that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?”

Sardanapalus was, beyond all other sovereigns recorded in history, the most effeminate and voluptuous; the most perfect specimen of sloth, luxury, cowardice, crime, and elaborate folly, that was, perhaps, ever before exhibited to the detestation of mankind. He clothed himself in women’s attire, and spun fine wool and purple amongst throngs of concubines. He painted likewise his face, and decked his whole body with other allurements. He imitated, also, a woman’s voice; and in a thousand respects disgraced his nature by the most unbounded licentiousness and depravity. He even wished to immortalise his impurities; selecting for his epitaph the following lines:—

“This epitaph,” says Aristotle, “is only fit for a hog.”23

In this dishonourable state Sardanapalus lived several years. At length the governor of Media, having gained admittance into his palace, and seen with his own eyes a king guilty of such criminal excesses; enraged at the spectacle, and not able to endure that so many brave men should be subject to a prince more soft and effeminate than the women themselves, immediately resolved to put an end to his dominion. He therefore formed a conspiracy against him; and in this he was joined by Belesis, governor of Babylon, and several others. Supporting each other for the same end, the one stirred up the Medes and Persians; the other inflamed the inhabitants of

Babylon. They gained over, also, the king of Arabia. Several battles, however, were fought, in all of which the rebels were repulsed and defeated. They became, therefore, so greatly disheartened, that at length the commanders resolved every one to return to their respective countries; and they had done so, had not Belesis entertained great faith in an astrological prediction. He was continually consulting the stars; and at length solemnly assured the confederated troops, that in five days they would be aided by a support, they were at present unable to imagine or anticipate;—the gods having given to him a decided intimation of so desirable an interference. Just as he had predicted, so it happened; for before the time he mentioned had expired, news came that the Bactrians, breaking the fetters of servitude, had sprung into the field, and were hastening to their assistance.

Sardanapalus, not knowing any thing of the revolt of the Bactrians, and puffed up by former successes, was still indulging in sloth and idleness, and preparing beasts for sacrifice, plenty of wine, and other things necessary wherewith to feast and entertain his soldiers. While the army was thus indulging itself, Arbaces, receiving intelligence, by some deserters, of the security and intemperance of the enemy, fell in upon them in the night on a sudden; and being in due order and discipline, and setting upon such as were in confusion, he being before prepared, and the other altogether unprovided, they easily broke into their camp, and made a great slaughter of some, forcing the rest into the city. Upon this, Sardanapalus committed the charge of his whole army to his wife’s brother, (Salamenes,) and took upon himself the defence of the city. But the rebels twice defeated the king’s forces; once in the open field, and the second time before the walls of the city; in which last engagement Salamenes was killed, and almost all his army lost; some being cut off in the pursuit, and the rest (save a very few) being interrupted, and prevented from entering into the city, were driven headlong into the Euphrates; and so great was the number destroyed, that the river became dyed with the blood, and retained that colour for a great distance and a long course together.

Sardanapalus, now perceiving that his kingdom was like to be lost, sent away his three sons and his three daughters, with a great deal of treasure, into Paphlagonia, to Cotta, the governor there, his most entire friend; and sent posts into all the provinces of the kingdom, in order to raise soldiers, and to make all other preparations necessary to endure a siege; being greatly encouraged to do this from an acquaintance with an ancient prophecy; viz.—that Nineveh could never be taken by force, till the river should become a foe to the city.

The enemy, on the other hand, grown more courageous by their successes, eagerly urged on the siege. They made, nevertheless, but little impression on the besieged, by reason of the strength of the walls; for balistÆ to cast stones, testudos to cast up mounts, and battering-rams, were not known in those ages. The city was also well supplied with every thing needful. The siege, therefore, lasted two years: during which time nothing to any purpose was done, save that the walls were sometimes assaulted, and the besieged penned up in the city. At length, in the third year, an unfortunate circumstance took place. This was no other than the overflowing of the Euphrates, and from continual rains, coming up into a part of the city, and tearing down thirty furlongs of the walls in length.

When the king found this—conceiving it to be no other than a fulfilment of the prophecy, on the improbability of which he had so strongly relied—he gave himself up to despair; caused a large pile of wood to be made in one of the courts of his palace; heaped together all his gold, silver, and wearing apparel; and inclosing his eunuchs and concubines in an apartment within the pile, caused it to be set on fire; when all perished in the flames in common with himself.

When the revolters heard of this, they entered through several breaches made in the walls, and took the city. They clothed Arbaces with a royal robe, proclaimed him king, and invested him with despotic authority: in gratitude for which Arbaces rewarded every one according to his deserts. He showed great clemency, also, to the inhabitants of Nineveh; for though he dispersed them into several villages, he restored every one to his estate. He, nevertheless, razed the city to the ground. The sum, found in the palace and elsewhere, appears to be incredible: for it is stated to have been no less than equivalent to 25,000,000,000 of pounds sterling. The fire lasted more than fifteen days. Thus, after a continuance of thirty generations, the Assyrian empire was overturned, in the year of the world, 3080; and before Christ 868. Thus far Diodorus; but Usher, and many other historians, amongst whom may be mentioned Herodotus, state, that the Assyrian empire, from Ninus, lasted only 520 years.

Several kings reigned after this, under what is called the second Assyrian empire. For on the fall of the former, three considerable kingdoms were generated, viz:—that of the Medes, which Arbaces, on the fall of Nineveh, restored to its liberty; that of the Assyrians of Babylon, which was given to Belesis, governor of that city; and that of the Assyrians of Nineveh.

The first king that reigned in Nineveh, after the death of Sardanapalus, is called in Scripture Tiglath-Pileser25; the second Salmanaser, in whose reign, Tobit, with Anna his wife, and his son Tobias, was carried captive into Assyria, where he became one of Salmanaser’s principal officers. That king having died after a reign of fourteen years, he was succeeded by his son Sennacherib; he, whose army was cut off in one night before the walls of Jerusalem. He had laid siege to that city some time before, but had marched against Egypt, which country having subdued, he once more sat down before the sacred city: “And it came to pass, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and four score and five thousand; and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses26.” After so terrible a blow, the pretended king of kings, as he presumed to call himself, “this triumpher over nations, and conqueror of gods,” returned to his own country, where “it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch, his god, that he was struck by his two sons27, who smote him with the sword: and Esarhaddon, his youngest son, reigned in his stead28.” The destruction that fell upon his army, has been thus described by a celebrated poet of modern times.

Esarhaddon was succeeded by Nebuchadnezzar the First, in whose reign Tobit died29. Perceiving his end approaching, that good old man called his children to him, and advised them to lose no time, after they had buried him and their mother, but to quit the city, before its ruin came on. “The ruin of Nineveh,” said he, “is at hand; the wickedness of the city will occasion its ruin.”

Nahum represents the wickedness of this city, too, in terms exceedingly vivid30: “Woe to the bloody city! It is all full of lies and robbery.” “It shall come to pass, that all they that look upon thee shall flee from thee, and say, Nineveh is laid waste; who will bemoan her?” “The gates of thy land shall be set wide open unto thine enemies; the fire shall devour thy bars.” “The sword shall cut thee off; it shall eat thee up like the canker-worm.” “Thy nobles shall dwell in the dust; thy people be scattered upon the mountains, and no man shall gather them.”

Zephaniah, also, issued similar denunciations31. “The Lord will make Nineveh a desolation, and dry like a wilderness: and flocks shall lie down in the midst of her; both the cormorant and the bittern shall lodge in it; their voice shall sing in the windows; desolation shall be in the thresholds.” “This is the rejoicing city, that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, ‘I am, and there is none beside me.’ How shall she become a desolation; a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passes by shall hiss and wag his hand.”

The ruin, predicted, came in the reign of Saracus. Cyaxares, king of the Medes, entering into an alliance with the king of Babylon, they joined their forces together, laid siege to the city, took it, slew their king, and utterly destroyed it.

“God,” says the historian, “had foretold by his prophets, that he would bring vengeance upon that impious city, for the blood of his servants, wherewith the kings thereof had gorged themselves, like ravenous lions; that he himself would march at the head of the troops that should come to besiege it; that he would cause consternation and terror to go before him; that he would deliver the old men, the mothers, and their children, into the merciless hands of the soldiers; and that all the treasures of the city should fall into the hands of rapacious and insatiable plunderers; and that the city itself should be so totally destroyed, that not so much as a footstep of it should be left; and that the people should ask hereafter, Where did the proud city of Nineveh stand?”32

This prophecy has been fulfilled only in part; the absolute completion of it remains still to be fulfilled. In the time of Hadrian, the ruins of it still existed; and at a subsequent period a great battle was fought on the space left among the ruins, between Heraclius, Emperor of Constantinople, and Rhazates, general to Chosroes, king of Persia. On that memorable day, Heraclius, on his horse Phallas, surpassed the bravest of his warriors; his hip was wounded with a spear; the steed was wounded in the thigh; but he carried his master safe and victorious through the triple phalanx of the enemy. In the heat of the action, three valiant chiefs were successively slain by the sword and lance of the emperor; amongst whom was Rhazates himself. He fell like a soldier: but the sight of his head scattered grief and despair through the fainting ranks of the Persians. In this battle, which was fiercely fought from day-break to the eleventh hour, twenty-eight standards, besides those which might be torn or broken, were taken from the Persians; the greatest part of their army was cut to pieces, and the victors, concealing their own loss, passed the night on the field. They acknowledged that on this occasion it was less difficult to kill than to discomfit the soldiers of Chosroes. The conquerors recovered three hundred Roman standards, as well as a great number of captives, of Edessa and Alexandria. Soon after this battle, Chosroes felt compelled to fly: he was afterwards deposed, thrown into a dungeon, where he was insulted, famished, tortured, and at length murdered by one of his own sons.

We have given an account of its ancient size and splendour: we must now give some account of the ruins which still remain: for though some writers insist, that even the dust of this vast city has disappeared, it is certain that some of its walls still subsist, beside the city of Mosul.

Mosul was visited by Captain Kinneir, in the years 1813-14. “About a mile before we entered Mosul,” says he, “we passed two artificial tumuli, and extensive ramparts, supposed to be the ruins of the ancient Nineveh. The first tumulus is about three quarters of a mile in circumference. It has the same appearance, and is of about the same height, as those we saw at Susa. The circumference of the other is not so considerable; but its elevation is greater, and on the top stands the tomb of Jonah, the prophet, round which has been erected a village, called Nunia.”

Captain Kinneir proceeds to state, that the Jews go in pilgrimage to this tomb; which is a small and insignificant building, crowned with a cupola. The rampart is esteemed, by some, to have been thrown up by Nadir Shah, when he besieged Mosul. Captain Kinneir, however, had no doubt that this opinion is founded in error, since they in no way resembled the field-works which an army, such as that of Nadir Shah, was likely to erect. “I cannot doubt, therefore,” says he, “that they are the vestiges of some ancient city, probably Nineveh; or that Larissa, described by Xenophon.” In regard to Mosul, he describes it as a sombre-looking town, fast dwindling into insignificance.

These ruins were subsequently visited by Mr. Rich, the East India Company’s resident at Bagdat. They lie on the eastern banks of the Tigris33. To the north are the Gara mountains, on the chain of which snow is said to lie in clefts and sheltered situations from one year to another. The Tigris is here about four hundred feet broad, its depth, for the most part, about two fathoms; and near the bridge was fought the celebrated battle between Chosroes’ troops and those of Heraclius, to which we have just now alluded. On the eastern side of this bridge many remains of antiquity have been found, consisting, for the most part, of bricks, some of which are whole and some in fragments, and pieces of gypsum, some of which are covered with inscriptions, in cruciform character34. There are also narrow ancient passages, with apertures or doors, opening one into the other, dark, narrow, and vaulted, appearing as if designed as vaults for the reception of dead bodies.

Mr. Rich afterwards rode through the area of Nineveh to the first wall of the inclosure. He found it a line of earth and gravel, out of which large hewn stones are frequently dug, as out of all the walls of the area. Beyond was a ditch still very regular; beyond which was a wall, and beyond that another wall larger than any. “The area of Nineveh,” says Mr. Rich, “is, on a rough guess, about one and a half to two miles broad, and four miles long. On the river on the west side there are only remains of one wall; and I observed the same at the north and south extremities; but on the east side there are the remains of three walls. The west one appears to have run a little in front of Nebbi Yunus. Between it and the river the ground is subject to frequent inundations and changes; but it has not interfered with the area.”

Mr. Rich did not observe at the angles of the walls any traces of towers, bastions, or any works of that kind. These walls are not more than from ten to fifteen feet high. Large masses of hewn stone are frequently dug up, and bricks are ploughed up perpetually. There is also a piece of grey stone, shaped like the capital of a column, such as at this day surmounts the wooden pillars or posts of Turkish, or rather Persian, verandahs; but there was no carving on it. Pottery, too, is often found, and other Babylonian fragments; also bits of brick adhering to them. These are found near a mound, called the Mount of Koyunjuk, the height of which is about forty-three feet, and its circumference 7691 feet. Its sides are very steep, and its top nearly flat.

Some years ago, a very large bas-relief was dug up among the ruins, representing men and animals, covering a grey stone about ten or eleven feet in height. All the town of Mosul left their houses to go and see this remarkable specimen of antiquity; but not one had the taste to endeavour to preserve it. It was in a few days, therefore, cut up or broken to pieces.

One day, as Mr. Rich was riding along on the outside of the walls, his attention was directed to an object of great antiquity. “Some people had been digging for stones,” says he, “and had dug a hole in the ground, from which they had turned up many large hewn stones with bitumen adhering to them. I examined the excavation, which was about ten feet deep, and found it consisted of huge stones, laid in layers of bitumen and lime-mortar. I brought away some specimens of them sticking together. I also saw some layers of red clay, which were very thick, and had become as indurated as burnt brick; but there was not the least appearance of reeds or straw having been used. This mass appeared to have been a foundation or superstructure. We found among the rubbish some pieces of coarse unglazed pottery. It would not have been possible to tell, from the appearance of the surface of the ground, that there had been building beneath—a watercourse full of pebbles had even passed over it. It is, therefore, very difficult to say to what extent vestiges of building may exist outside the inclosures, the area of which may have been the royal quarter; but certainly was never sufficient for the city of Nineveh.”

“Except the ruins of some large and lofty turrets,” says Mr. Morier, “like that of Babel or Belus, the cities of Babylon and Nineveh are so completely crumbled into dust, as to be wholly undistinguishable, but by a few inequalities of the surface on which they once stood. The humble tent of the Arab now occupies the spot formerly adorned with the palaces of kings; and his flocks procure but a scanty pittance of food, amidst fallen fragments of ancient magnificence. The banks of the Euphrates and Tigris, once so prolific, are now, for the most part, covered with impenetrable brushwood; and the interior of the province, which was traversed and fertilised with innumerable canals, is destitute of either inhabitants or vegetation.”

Among the ruins is a wall, and on the borders of that the peasants of the neighbourhood assemble every year, and sacrifice a sheep, with music and other festivities; a superstition far anterior to the religion they now possess. “One thing is sufficiently obvious,” says Mr. Rich, “to the most careless observer, and that is, the equality of age of all the vestiges discovered here. Whether they belonged to Nineveh or some other city, is another question; but that they are all of the same age and character does not admit of a doubt.”

Mr. Rich took measurements of the mounds, that still exist among these ruins, and did not neglect to cut her name on the wall of what is called Thisbe’s Well. “Some traveller in after times,” says he, with an agreeable enthusiasm, “when her remembrance has long been swept away by the torrent of time, may wonder, on reading the name of Mary Rich35, who the adventurous female was, who had visited the ruins of Nineveh. He will not be aware, that had her name been inscribed at every spot she had visited in the course of her weary pilgrimage, it would be found in places, compared with which, Mousul is the centre of civilisation.”

From the circumstance that from all the mounds large stones, sometimes with bitumen adhering to them, are frequently dug out, Mr. Rich was inclined to believe, that but few bricks were used in the building of this once vast city. There is, however, not much certainty as to this, or in regard to what kind of architecture it was, for the most, or, indeed, any part constructed; for though its walls may be traced in a multitude of directions, nothing now remains beside a few mounds, some bricks, and large stones, hewn into a shape which evidently prove, that they once formed the houses or the temples of a city36.