Page:EB1911 - Volume 18.djvu/203

 and more prevailed. Although Aramaic inscriptions of the Assyrian period, like those of Zanjirli or that of King ZKR of Hamath, have not been found in Mesopotamia, already in the time of Shalmaneser II. mention is made of an Aramaean letter (Harper, Ass. Bab. Letters, No. 872, obv. l. 10), and Aramaic notes on cuneiform documents begin to appear. Weights with Aramaic inscriptions (the oldest from the reign of Shalmaneser IV., 727–22) were found at Calah. By the Achaemenian period Aramaic had become the international language, and was adopted officially.

How Mesopotamia was affected by the passing of Persian armies on their way to suppress revolts in Syria or Egypt, or to conquer Greece, we do not know; on the whole it probably enjoyed unwonted peace. The expedition of Cyrus the Younger, with which Xenophon has made us so familiar, only skirted the left bank of the Euphrates. The route followed by Alexander, though he also crossed at Thapsacus, took him unresisted across the northern parts; but the poor people of Mesopotamia suffered from the measures taken by their satrap Mazaeus to impede Alexander’s progress. In spite of this, where Cyrus failed Alexander succeeded.

What would have happened had Alexander lived we can only guess. Under the Seleucids Babylon was moved across the plain to Seleucia; but before long the central authority was transferred to the other side of Mesopotamia, Antioch or elsewhere—a fateful move. It is improbable that cuneiform and the Babylonian language continued to be used

in Mesopotamia during the Hellenistic period, as it did in Babylonia, where it was certainly written as late as the last century ; and may have been a learned language till the second Christian century. Unfortunately there are no native documents from the pre-Christian Hellenistic period. That the Hellenizing process went as far as it did in Syria is unlikely; and even there Aramaic remained the language of the people, even in the towns (cf. ). Still, Greek influence was considerable. This would be mainly in the towns, the growth of which was quite a feature of the Macedonian rule in Mesopotamia (Pliny, vi. 30, § 117). This is seen in the Greek names which now appear: such are Seleucia opposite Samosata, Apamea (＝Birejik) opposite Zeugma, Hierapolis (＝Membij), Europos, Nicatoris, Amphipolis (＝Thapsacus, or near it), Nicephorium (er-Rakka,) Zenodotium (stormed by Crassus), all on or by the Euphrates; (q.v.) on the upper waters of the Belikh, Ichnae (perhaps Khnés, above the junction of the Qaramuch with the Belikh). These are all in the Osroene district; but Nasibin became an Antioch, and as its district was known as Mygdonia (from Macedon) there were doubtless many other Greek settlements. To a less extent the same influences would be at work in towns called even by Western writers by their real names, such as Batnae, Carrhae (Charran), Rhesaena.

Mesopotamia naturally had its share of suffering in the struggles that disturbed the time, when Eumenes or Seleucus traversed it or wintered there. It was invaded and temporarily annexed in 245 by Ptolemy III. Euergetes in his rapid expedition to beyond the Tigris. When Molon revolted on the accession of the youthful Antiochus III. (224 ) he entered Mesopotamia from the south. Antiochus skirted the northern highlands by way of Nasibin. How far the natives of Mesopotamia shared the desire of the Greek settlers (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5, 11, § 184–186) to help Demetrius II. Nicator in checking the aggressions of the rising power of Parthia under Mithradates I. we do not know. It was in Mesopotamia that a large part of the army of Antiochus VII. Sidetes was destroyed in 130, and the Syrian kings did not again seriously attempt to assert their rule beyond the Euphrates. When Phraates II. turned the Scythians against himself, however, even Mesopotamia suffered from the plunderers (Joh. Antioch, in Müller iv. 561). The immigration of Arabs

must have been going on for long. About this time they even founded a dynasty in Aramaean Osroene (see ).

Under Mithradates II. Mesopotamia was a definite part of the Parthian empire, of which the Euphrates became the western boundary; but in 92 on that river his ambassador met Sulla, though the long duel did not begin immediately.

By this time Christianity had secured a foothold, perhaps first among the Jews (see ), and we enter upon the earliest period from which documents in the Edessan dialect of Aramaic, known as Syriac, have been preserved. Unfortunately they contain practically nothing that is not of Christian origin. On the death of Aurelius Hatra aided Niger against Septimius Severus in 194; Osroene rose against Rome, and Niṣībis was besieged and other Roman places taken; but Septimius Severus appeared in person (195), and from Niṣībis as headquarters subdued the whole country, of which he made Niṣībis metropolis, raising it to the rank of a colony, the Sinjar district, where Arabs from Yemen had settled, being incorporated. On his retiring everything was undone, only Niṣībis holding out; but on his reappearance in 198 the Parthians withdrew. Again the Euphrates bore a Roman fleet. Hatra, however, was besieged twice in vain. Peace then prevailed till Carcalla’s unprovoked attack on Parthia in 216, after he had reduced Osroene to a province. On his assassination near Carrhae (217), Macrinus was defeated at Niṣībis and had to purchase peace, though he retained Roman Mesopotamia, reinstating the princely house in Osroene.

The power of Ardashir, the Sassanian, however, was already rising, and the Parthian Artabanus died in battle in 224 (or 227); and Ardashir proposed to prove himself the successor of the Achaemenidae. Hatra resisted the first Persian attack as it