Page:A History of Art in Chaldæa & Assyria Vol 1.djvu/25

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
SITUATION AND BOUNDARIES OF CHALDÆA AND ASSYRIA
5

valley; and both probability and history point to it as the actual boundary between Chaldæa and her northern neighbour."[1]

Whether the two States had independent and separate life, or whether, as in after years, one of the two had, by its political and military superiority reduced the other to the condition of a vassal, the line of demarcation was constant, a line traced in the first instance by nature and rendered more rigid and ineffaceable by historical developments. Even when Chaldæa became nominally a mere province of Assyria, the two nationalities remained distinct. Chaldæa was older than Assyria. The centres of her civil life were the cities built upon the alluvial lands between the thirty-first and thirty-third degree of latitude. The most famous of these cities was Babylon. Those whom we call Assyrians, a people who rose to power and glory at a much more recent date, drew the seeds of their civilization from their more precocious neighbour.

These expressions, Assyria and Chaldæa, are now employed in a sense far more precise than they ever had in antiquity. For Herodotus Babylonia was a mere district of Assyria;[2] in his time both States were comprised in the Persian Empire, and had no distinct existence of their own. Pliny calls the whole of Mesopotamia Assyria.[3] Strabo carries the western frontier of Assyria as far as Syria.[4] To us these variations are of small importance. The geographical and historical nomenclature of the ancients was never clearly defined. It was always more or less of a floating quantity, especially for those countries which to Herodotus or Diodorus, to Pliny or to Tacitus, were dimly perceptible on the extreme limits of their horizon.

It would, however, be easy to show that in assigning a more definite value to the terms in question a proceeding in which we have the countenance of nearly every modern historian we do not detach them from their original acceptation; at most we give them more constancy and precision than the colloquial language of the Greeks and Romans demanded.[5] The expressions

  1. RAWLINSON. The Five Great Monarchies, &c., vol. i., pp. 1-4. As to the name and boundaries of Chaldæa, see also GUIGNAUT, La Chaldée et les Chaldéens, in the Encyclopedic Moderne, vol. viii.
  2. HERODOTUS, i. 106, 192; iii. 92.
  3. PLINY, Nat. Hist. vi. 26.
  4. 4 STRABO, xvi. i.§ I.
  5. Genesis xi. 28 and 31; Isaiah xlvii. i; xiii. 19, &c.; DIODORUS ii. 17; PLINY, Nat. Hist. vi. 26; the Greek translators of the Bible rendered the Hebrew term Khasdim by χαλδαίοι; both forms seem to be derived from the same primitive word.