Fall of Babylon

Babylon fell in 536 BC. even before that. how other nations were able to feel the effect of the “Mosaic Law”. But his fall served as a model for the development of events many centuries later, in our twentieth century.

The fall of Babylon and the events of our day after the two world wars are so strikingly similar to each other that this similarity cannot be explained by mere chance and, on the contrary, it is not difficult to show that these events were deliberately directed. In the twentieth century, the peoples of the West, consciously or unconsciously, were not subject to their own law, but to that of the Jews, governed by the power that directed their governments.

The arrangement of characters and the final results in all three cases are exactly the same. On one side is a foreign ruler, allegedly an insulter and oppressor of the Jews (or, in our time, the Jews): in Babylon it was King Belshazzar, during the First World War - the Russian Tsar, in time the second - Hitler. The opponent of this “persecutor” is another foreign ruler, the “liberator.” In Babylon it was the Persian king Cyrus, in the second case - Lord Balfour and Co., in the third - President Truman, or any other nominal ruler of the United States.

Between the two adversaries stands the all-conquering prophet of Jehovah, a great man and wise adviser to the king, predicting the disaster that will befall the “persecutor” and his country, while he himself safely escapes unpleasant consequences. In Babylon it was Daniel, during the first and second world wars it was Chaim Weizmann, the Zionist prophet under foreign governments. These are the characters. The denouement comes in the form of Jehovah's vengeance on the "Gentiles" and Jewish triumph in the form of a symbolic "restoration." King Belshazzar learned from Daniel about the fate that threatened him and was killed “that same night,” and his kingdom went to his enemies. At the end of the First World War, Jewish security officers killed the Russian Tsar and his entire family, recording their deed with lines “inscribed on the wall” of the basement where the murder took place. After World War II, the Nazi leaders were hanged on October 16, 1946, the Jewish “day of atonement.” In other words, the outcome of the two world wars of this century exactly followed the Levitical description of the Babylonian-Persian War in the Old Testament.

There is no doubt that the peoples who fought in ancient times fought for something greater than the fate of a small Jewish tribe, and that they had their own interests and goals. However, in the narrative that has come down to our time, all this was thrown out. Only one thing mattered - the vengeance of Jehovah and the triumph of the Jews, and only this was enshrined in the memory of the peoples, and the two world wars of our century obediently followed this pattern.

In history, King Belshazzar was preserved only as a symbolic “persecutor” of the Jews: despite the fact that Jehovah himself gave the Jews into captivity as punishment for their misdeeds, the king is portrayed as their “persecutor” and is subject to brutal destruction. In the same way, the Persian king Cyrus is only an instrument in the hands of Jehovah, who promised the Jews that “all these curses” will be transferred “to your enemies” as soon as their role as “oppressors” is played out. Therefore, in himself, he is neither an oppressor nor a liberator; in fact, he is no better than Belshazzar, and his dynasty, in turn, will also be exterminated.

True history, unlike legends, presents us with Cyrus as an enlightened ruler and founder of an empire that covered the entire Western Asia. As stated in the encyclopedias, “he left the conquered peoples freedom of religion and the right of self-government,” which allowed the Jews to take advantage of the benefits of the policy impartially extended by Cyrus to all the peoples subject to him. If King Cyrus had returned to earth in our time, he would have been quite surprised to read that his only merit was the return of several thousand Jews to Jerusalem. If, however, he had attached to this event the significance which the politicians of the twentieth century apparently attach to it, he would have been flattered to see that he thereby had a greater influence on the next 2500 years of human history than any other ruler of all times and peoples. No other event of antiquity has had such serious and, moreover, such easily ascertainable consequences in our time. Already two generations Western politicians The 20th century, currying favor with the Jews, follows in the footsteps of the Persian king Cyrus. As a result, the two reconciled wars had only two significant and significant consequences: Jehovah’s revenge on the symbolic “persecutors” and a new “restoration” as the triumph of Jewry. So the legend about the Babylonian events became in the twentieth century the highest “law”, subordinating everything else, turning into a historical reality.

In itself, this legend is two-thirds a lie and today it would be called propaganda. Even Belshazzar, according to all data, was invented by the Levites. The book telling about the fall of Babylon was compiled several centuries after the event itself and was attributed to a certain “Daniel”. He was allegedly a Jewish captive in Babylon who rose to high position in the court of Nebuchadnezzar thanks to his ability to interpret dreams; He also explained to King Belshazzar the “writing on the wall.” “Belteshazzar, son of Nebuchadnezzar” is described as an insulter to the Jews, who used “gold and silver vessels” taken by his father from the Jerusalem temple at a feast with his princes, wives and concubines. A human hand appears on the wall, writing words; “mene, mene, tekel, upharsin.” Daniel, called to clarify, says: “This is the meaning of the words: God has numbered your kingdom and put an end to it; you are weighed on the scales and found very light; your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.” King Belshazzar is killed “that same night,” and the Persian conqueror comes to Siena, destined to “restore” the Jews. So the death of the king and the whole kingdom is directly caused by the insult of Judea and is presented as Jehovah’s retribution and Jewish revenge. It doesn't matter that neither Daniel nor Belshazzar ever really existed; their inclusion in the Levitical writings gives the legend the character of a legal precedent. When the Russian Tsar, his wife, four daughters and a son were killed in 1918, the words scrawled on the blood-splattered wall directly linked this murder with the Babylonian legend, and those who made this inscription openly admitted who the murderers were and declared their “legitimate "The right to kill.

If ancient legend is capable of doing such things twenty-five centuries later, it does not matter that it is fiction and not the truth, and there is no point in proving it: both politicians and the masses they govern live more in legends than in truth. From three main characters in the described version of the fall of Babylon, there was undoubtedly only one king, Cyrus. Both Belshazzar and Daniel are products of Levitical fantasy. The Jewish Encyclopedia writes that King Nebuchadnezzar did not have a son named Belshazzar, and that during Cyrus’s conquest of Babylon there was no king Belshazzar there either. stating that “at author of the book of Daniel there was no exact data at hand,” in other words, not believing that Daniel actually wrote Daniel. And in fact, if an influential Jewish favorite at court, named Daniel, really wrote this book, then he would at least know the name of the king whose death he predicted, and therefore would have “accurate data.”

Therefore, there is no doubt that the book of Daniel, like the books of the “Law” attributed to Moses, were composed by Levitical scribes who worked hard on history, adjusting it to the “Law” they had already composed. If it was possible to invent King Belshazzar for illustration and in order to create a precedent, then obviously it was also possible to invent the prophet Daniel. To today's Zionist zealots this apparently mythical Daniel is the most popular of all the prophets, and they enthusiastically quote the story of the writing on the wall, which foretold the vengeance of the Jews and their victory, seeing in it a confirmation of their "legal" right to act in the same way in all future times. The history of the present century, more than the history of any other century, strengthens their faith, and for them Daniel with his "interpretation" carried out "that same night" is a convincing and irrefutable answer to the ancient Israelite prophets with their vision of a loving God for all mankind. The fall of Babylon (in the Levitical version) serves as a practical confirmation for them of the truth and power of the “Mosaic” Law.

This whole story, however, would have ended in nothing if not for King Cyrus, the only truly real of the three main characters in the legend, who allowed several thousand Jews to return to Jerusalem (or forced them to do so). At this point, the Levitical political theory, aimed at seizing power by influencing foreign rulers, was tested in practice and seemed successful. The Persian king was the first in a long line of non-Jewish puppets directed by the ruling Jewish sect; on it they showed how you can first get into foreign governments and then subjugate them. By the twentieth century, this control over governments has become so powerful that they are all largely under one, supreme authority, and their actions ultimately always serve its interests. At the end of the book we will show how these non-Jewish puppets are controlled, how enmity between peoples is incited and how conflicts are created to achieve a certain “super-national” goal.

The reader will, however, have to look within himself to understand, if he can, why these puppets, that is, his own political leaders, so obediently submit to the will of others. The first of them was King Cyrus. Without his help, the sect that ruled the Jews would never have been able to re-establish themselves in Jerusalem, convincing the incredulous Jewish masses scattered throughout the vast expanses of the world that the racial law was strong and will completed to the last letter. A straight and clear line of cause and effect stretches from the fall of Babylon to the events of our century; After a series of successive catastrophes, the declining West can blame the first non-Jewish puppet, Cyrus, even more than the cunning and resourceful Levitical priests who guided it. Eduard Meyer (see bibliography) writes: “Judaism arose at the behest of the Persian king and with the help of his empire, with the result that the Achaemenid empire extends its influence with greater force than any other immediately to our time.” The correctness of the conclusion of this indisputable authority is difficult to deny.

500 years before the very concept of Europe appeared, the Levites established their “Law”, and King Cyrus created a precedent, showing how the destruction and death of this then unknown continent would proceed. At the time of Cyrus's conquest of Babylon, the five books of the Law had not yet been completed. The Levitical sect was still hard at work in Babylon, composing a history which, through such examples as the episode of "King Belshazzar," would give credence to the incredible and set a precedent for barbaric acts twenty-five centuries later. The masses of Jews, although they were already accustomed to religious intolerance, did not yet know anything about the law of racial intolerance that was being prepared for them. The Levitical sect was to complete the “Law” and apply it to its own people. This happened in 458 BC. during the reign of another Persian king, and since then the “dispute about Zion” has inexorably pitted the Jewish people against the rest of humanity. The umbilical cord connecting him to the outside world was completely severed. This isolated people, before whom its priests carried the legend of the fall of Babylon as a banner, was sent into the future as a compact force among foreign peoples, the destruction of which was dictated by its Law.

Babylon, excavated by Koldewey, was the capital of an empire created almost exclusively by the will of one of its last kings, Nebuchadnezzar II. The period of the so-called Neo-Babylonian kingdom lasted from 605 to 538 BC. e., and at the end of it, Babylon from the center of the civilized world turned into a dying provincial city, with few inhabitants, dilapidated and forgotten.

So what is the reason for the fall of the majestic capital?

Part of the answer is that in the age of military despots, states are only strong when their rulers are strong. In the case of Babylon VII-VI centuries. BC e. One can name only two such strong rulers who were able to turn the course of history for the benefit of their people - Nabopolassar (626-605 BC) and his son Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 BC). The kings of Babylon who ruled before and after them ended up as puppets either in the hands of foreign rulers or local priests.

When Nabopolassar came to power, Babylon, as it had been for the previous two hundred years, was still a vassal state of Assyria. During this time, Assyria conquered almost the entire then known world, taking possession of vast territories and causing the boundless wrath of the conquered peoples. The Medes were especially burdened by the Assyrian yoke, and Nabopolassar made the main bet on them in the struggle for independence. The Medes successfully repelled the attacks of the Assyrians for several centuries and became famous as skilled horsemen and brave warriors. King Cyaxares of Media, to the delight of Nabopolassar, agreed to seal the alliance by marrying his daughter Amytis to the Babylonian prince Nebuchadnezzar.

After this, both kings felt strong enough to wage an all-out war against the hated Assyrians. Apparently, the leading role in this war was played by the Medes, who besieged Nineveh for three years; Having broken through the walls, they were able to achieve their goal - to destroy the Assyrian capital, in which the Babylonians willingly helped them. After the fall of Assyria, Nabopolassar, as an ally of the victorious Indian king, received southern part former empire. Thus, Babylon gained independence and new territories not so much through military action as through the skillful diplomacy and insight of its ruler. Prince Nebuchadnezzar later became famous for his military campaigns, defeating the Egyptians at the Battle of Carchemish in 604 BC. BC, and then the Jews in the Battle of Jerusalem in 598 BC. e. and the Phoenicians in 586 BC. e.

So, thanks to the diplomatic art of Nabopolassar and military prowess Nebuchadnezzar created the Babylonian Empire, and its capital became the largest, richest and most powerful city in the then known world. Unfortunately for the subjects of this empire, the successor of its great kings was Amel-Marduk, whom the Babylonian historian Berossus describes as “the unworthy successor of his father (Nebuchadnezzar), unrestrained by law or decency”—a rather curious accusation against an Eastern monarch, especially if you remember all the atrocities of former despots. But we should not forget that the priest accused him of “intemperance,” and it was the priests who conspired to kill the king, after which they transferred power to the commander Nergal-Sharusur, or Neriglissar, who took part in the siege of Jerusalem in 597 BC. e., according to the Book of the prophet Jeremiah (39:1-3):

“In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came with all his army to Jerusalem, and besieged it.

And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, the city was taken.

And all the princes of the king of Babylon entered into it and sat in the middle gate, Nergal-Sharetzer, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsehim, the chief of the eunuchs, Nergal-Sharetzer, the chief of the magicians, and all the other princes of the king of Babylon.”

It is noteworthy to mention two Nergal-Sha-retzers at once, which is not surprising, since this name means “may Nergal protect the king.” The second of them, the chief of the magicians, was most likely a court official; the first, obviously, was the son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar, whose son, Amel-Marduk, was killed during the uprising. Little is known about this Neriglissar, except that he reigned for only three years (559-556 BC), and his son even less - eleven months. Then the priests placed another of their protege on the throne - Nabonidus, the son of a priest.

Nabonidus seems to have spent the seventeen years of his reign doing nothing but restoring the temples of his country and tracing the ancient history of his people. He traveled throughout the kingdom with a retinue of historians, archaeologists and architects, overseeing the implementation of his building program and not paying much attention to political and military issues. He founded his permanent residence in the Teima oasis, transferring the management of the empire onto the shoulders of his son Bel-Shar-Usur, that is, the biblical Belshazzar. Nabonidus called him “the firstborn, the offspring of my heart.”

As often happens - at least in official versions history - a pious, enlightened and peace-loving monarch, instead of recognition and love, receives contempt and ingratitude from his subjects. What the Babylonians themselves thought about this ruler, whose manners resembled more a professor than an emperor, we do not know. The thoughts and opinions of the ordinary Babylonian never served as a measure of the valor of the rulers ancient Mesopotamia, but we can more or less likely guess that the average person was hardly interested in the history of religion or the restoration of temples in remote provinces. The king, on the contrary, was very interested in this, and especially in the restoration of the temple of Sin, the ancient lunar deity, the son of Enlil, the god of the air, and Ki, the goddess of the earth. He so wanted to rebuild this temple in his hometown Harran that this desire gave rise to discontent among the Babylonian priests and merchants; in other words, they felt that their god and their interests were suffering due to the fault of the very man whom they had nominated for kingship.

Be that as it may, it so happened that Babylon, the most impregnable city in the world, in 538 BC. e. yielded almost without bloodshed to the onslaught of the Persian army led by Cyrus the Great. Surely this fact discouraged many contemporaries and some scientists of later times, because in that era the capture of the city was accompanied by streams of blood, destruction of houses, torture local residents, violence against women and other similar atrocities. This again contradicts what is described in the Bible and predicted in the prophecy of Jeremiah. The story about “king” Belshazzar and the writing on the wall should most likely be considered a fairy tale, for Belshazzar was the son not of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabonidus, and not a king, but a prince. And they killed him not in Babylon, but on the western bank of the Tigris during the battle with the Persian Cyrus. And he did not at all cede his kingdom to “Darius the Mede.”

In the same way, Jeremiah's terrible prophecy that Babylon would become a place of desolation and savagery was ultimately fulfilled not because Yahweh decided to punish the offenders of the Jews, but because long wars and the conquests that devastated this land for centuries. Despite all the prophecies, the great city continued to prosper under the rule of Cyrus, whose laudatory inscription partly explains what happened:

“I, Cyrus, king of the world... After I mercifully entered Babylon, with immeasurable joy I made my home in the royal palace... My numerous troops peacefully entered Babylon, and I turned my attention to the capital and its colonies, freed the Babylonians from slavery and oppression. I made their sighs quiet and softened their sorrows.”

This inscription, of course, is in in the best spirit official wartime reports, both ancient and modern, but it gives at least some insight into the siege of Babylon in 539 BC. e. - namely, that Babylon was treacherously surrendered; otherwise Nabonidus' son Belshazzar would not have had to fight outside the city. Additional details of this story are set forth by Herodotus, who may well have heard the story of the capture of the city from an eyewitness. The Greek historian writes that Cyrus besieged the city for quite a long time, but unsuccessfully because of its powerful walls. In the end, the Persians resorted to the traditional trick, taking advantage of the division of the Euphrates into several lateral branches, and the advance troops were able to enter the city along the river bed from the north and south. Herodotus notes that the city was so large that the townspeople living in the center did not know that the enemies had already occupied the outskirts, and continued to dance and have fun on the occasion of the holiday. Thus Babylon was taken.

So, Cyrus conquered the city without destroying it, which happened extremely rarely in ancient history. There is no doubt that after the Persian conquest, life in the city and the surrounding lands continued to proceed as before; In the temples, sacrifices were made daily and the usual rituals were performed, which served as the basis of public life. Cyrus turned out to be a wise enough ruler not to humiliate his new subjects. He lived in the royal palace, visited the temples, worshiped the national god Marduk, and paid due respect to the priests who still controlled the politics of the ancient empire. Into trade and commercial activities He did not interfere with the city, did not impose an unnecessarily heavy tribute on its inhabitants. After all, it was the unfair and burdensome exactions of selfish tax collectors that often served as the cause of uprisings in conquered cities.

This would have continued for quite a long time and the city would have flourished further if not for the ambitious plans of pretenders to the Babylonian throne during the reign of Cyrus' successor Darius (522-486 BC). Two of them claimed to be the sons of Nabonidus, the last of the independent kings of Babylon, although whether this was actually the case is unknown to us. The only mention of them remains in the Behistun inscription, carved by order of Darius. From it we learn that the Persian king defeated the rebels, and executed one of them, Nidintu-Bela, and crucified the other, Arakha, in Babylon. On the relief, Nidintu-Bel is depicted second, and Arakha seventh, in a row of nine conspirators tied to each other by the necks and standing in front of Darius. Nidintu-Bel is depicted as an elderly, possibly gray-bearded man with a large, fleshy nose; Arakha is represented as young and stronger. Persian texts say the following about these rebels:

“A certain Babylonian named Nidintu-Bel, son of Aniri, rebelled in Babylon; he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then all the provinces of Babylonia went over to this Nidintu-Bel, and Babylonia rebelled. He seized power in Babylonia.

So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, against this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar. Nidintu-Bel's army held the Tigris. Here they fortified themselves and built ships. Then I divided my army, putting some on camels, others on horses.

Ahuramazda helped me; by the grace of Ahuramazda we crossed the Tigris. Then I completely destroyed the fortifications of Nidintu-Bel. On the twenty-sixth day of the month of Atria (December 18), we entered into battle. So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, but before I reached it, this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, approached with an army and proposed to fight near the city of Zazana on the banks of the Euphrates... The enemies fled into the water; the water carried them away. Nidintu-Bel then fled with several horsemen to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda I took Babylon and captured this Nidintu-Bel. Then I took his life in Babylon...

So says King Darius. While I was in Persia and Media, the Babylonians raised a second revolt against me. A certain man named Arakha, an Armenian, son of Khaldit, led the uprising. In a place called Dubala, he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then the Babylonians rose up against me and went with this Arakha. He captured Babylon; he became king of Babylon.

So says King Darius. Then I sent an army to Babylon. I appointed a Persian named Vindefrana, my servant, as commander, and I spoke to them like this: “Go and defeat this Babylonian enemy who does not recognize me!” Vindefrana then went with an army to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda, Vindefrana overthrew the Babylonians...

On the twenty-second day of the month Markazanash (November 27), this Arakha, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, and his main followers were captured and chained. Then I proclaimed: “Let Arakha and his chief followers be crucified in Babylon!”

According to Herodotus, who wrote his work just fifty years after these events, the Persian king destroyed the city walls and demolished the gates, although if he stationed his troops in the palaces and houses of the city in winter, he obviously did not destroy everything. True, the matter was not limited to the destruction of the fortifications; he also ordered the crucification of three thousand of the main instigators, which gives some idea of ​​the population of Babylon in 522 BC. e. If these three thousand were representatives of the highest religious and civil leadership - say, one hundredth part of all citizens - then it turns out that the adult population was about 300 thousand, to which should be added about 300 thousand children, slaves, servants, foreigners and other inhabitants . Taking into account the population density of the cities of the Middle East, it can be argued that about a million people lived in Babylon and its environs.

Despite the destruction caused by Darius, the city continued to be the economic center of the Middle East, as it was located at the intersection of routes from north to south and from east to west. However, under the Persians it gradually lost its religious significance. After another uprising, the Persian king Xerxes (486-465 BC) ordered the destruction of not only the remains of walls and fortifications, but also the famous temple of Marduk, and the statue was taken away.

The significance of such an order is especially emphasized by the fact that, according to popular belief in the Middle East, the well-being of a people depended on the well-being of the temple of its main god. Suffice it to recall how quickly Sumerian cities fell into decay after enemies destroyed their temples and stole statues of the gods. According to the unnamed author of “Lament for the Destruction of Ur,” it was the desecration of the statues of the gods that led to such sad consequences. It says nothing about the defeat of the army, bad leadership or economic reasons defeat - what our contemporaries would say when discussing the causes of defeat. All disasters, according to the author, happened solely because the dwellings of the gods were violated.

Most famous example identification of the national deity with the fate of the people - the Old Testament story of the destruction of the Temple and the theft of the Ark, which were the culminating moment of the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel. The Ark is not just a shrine to the god Yahweh, it is a kind of symbol comparable to the eagles of the Roman legions (the loss of which was considered equivalent to the cessation of the existence of the legion). A box for storing a stone fetish, possibly from Mount Serbal on the Sinai Peninsula, was identified with the abode of Yahweh when he decided to come down to earth to people. Other Semitic peoples also had similar temples and “arks”. All of them, along with religious ones, also largely performed military functions, so that the Jewish Yahweh and the Babylonian Marduk played a similar role as a military deity. Thus, Yahweh, who in the early books of the Bible is identified with the Ark itself, leads the Israelites in battle, and is glorified in case of victory, but never blamed in case of defeat. Defeat, for example from the Philistines, is explained by the fact that during the battle the Ark was not on the battlefield. The captivity and exile to Babylon is also explained by the fact that Nebuchadnezzar took away the container of Yahweh. Now it was the turn of the Babylonians to suffer when Xerxes destroyed the sanctuary of Esagila and deprived them of the statue of Marduk.

The destruction of the central temple in such a theocratic society as Babylonian inevitably meant the end of the old order, since kings could no longer be crowned kings according to ancient customs at the Akutu festival. This ritual was so important in the state cult that it is mentioned in connection with all the victories of the state. So what was this “akutu” and why was it so necessary for the successful functioning of the Babylonian socio-political system?

First of all, it was a New Year's Eve holiday, which always played very important role in ancient societies as a symbolic meeting of spring and a period of renewal of life. On such an important occasion, Marduk left his temple and was carried at the head of a huge procession along the Processional Road. Along the way, he met the gods of distant cities, especially the former rival and now chief guest of Nabu, the patron saint of the city-state of Borsippa. Both gods were brought into the Sacred Chamber or Holy of Holies, where they held council with the other gods regarding the fate of the universe. Such was the divine, or heavenly, meaning of the New Year holiday. The earthly meaning was that God transferred power over the city to his viceroy-king, for until the king “put his hand in the hand of Marduk,” thus symbolizing succession, he could not become the legitimate spiritual and earthly king of Babylon.

In addition, the “akunu” was annual holiday all the gods, as well as their priests, priestesses and temple servants. The ceremonies to celebrate the New Year were so solemn and symbolic that not a single king of Babylon, Assyria, and at first Persia dared to refuse to attend the Assembly of the Gods. Statues of gods, kings, princes, priests and the entire population of the city dressed in special clothes for this occasion; every detail of the ritual had its own religious significance, every action was accompanied by such ceremonies that this holiday could rightfully be called the most solemn and magnificent spectacle in the entire then known world. The number and roles of the participants, the number of victims burned, the processions of ships and chariots, as well as the unusually magnificent rituals represented the quintessence of the entire religious tradition of the Babylonian state. Only by realizing all this can one understand why the desecration of the temple of the main god disrupted the structure of the Babylonian theocracy and weakened the vital forces of society. The theft of the main idol meant that no Babylonian would henceforth be able to join his hand with the hand of Marduk and declare himself an earthly king with a divine right to lead the country, and no Babylonian would be able to see the religious action that depicted the death and resurrection of Marduk.

The destruction of the “soul” of the city, of course, did not mean that it instantly turned into ruins and was abandoned by its inhabitants. Yes, many influential townspeople were crucified or tortured to death, thousands were taken into captivity, becoming slaves or warriors Persian kings, who fought against the Greek city-states. But during the time of Herodotus, who visited the city around 450 BC. e., Babylon continued to exist and even flourish, although outwardly it gradually deteriorated, since it no longer had local kings who would take care of the condition of the walls and temples. The Persian rulers had no time for this; they tried to conquer Sparta and Athens, but without success, losing troops and navy. In 311 BC. e. The Achaemenid Empire under the leadership of Darius III suffered a final defeat. Alexander the Great entered Babylon and proclaimed himself its king.

Alexander's contemporaries give an excellent description of Babylon. As some later authors, notably the Greek Flavius ​​Arrian, note, Alexander, wishing to immortalize his exploits for posterity, appointed several of his subordinates as military historians, instructing them to record the events of each day. All records were summarized in single book, which was called “Ephemerides” or “Daily Book”. Thanks to these records, as well as the stories of warriors recorded later by other authors, we have the most complete description of military campaigns, countries, peoples and conquered cities in the entire era of antiquity.

Alexander did not have to take Babylon by storm, since the ruler of the city Mazeus came out to meet him along with his wife, children and mayors. The Macedonian commander, apparently, accepted the capitulation with relief, since he did not really want to besiege this, judging by the description of the contemporary Greek historian, a very fortified city. From this we can conclude that the walls destroyed by Xerxes in 484

BC e., by 331 they were restored. The local population was not at all preparing to repel the attack, but, on the contrary, gathered to greet the Greek conqueror. Officials vied with each other to try not only to point out Darius’ treasury, but also to strew the hero’s path with flowers and garlands, erect silver altars on his way and fumigate them with incense. In short, Alexander, who had not fired a single arrow, was given such honors as were later given only to the most famous Roman generals. The Babylonians, remembering that the capture of a city is usually celebrated with executions or crucifixion of prisoners, hastened to appease the winner by providing him with herds of horses and herds of cows, which the Greek quartermasters favorably accepted. The triumphal procession was led by cages of lions and leopards, followed by priests, soothsayers and musicians; bringing up the rear were the Babylonian horsemen, a kind of guard of honor. According to the Greeks, these horsemen “submitted themselves to the demands of luxury rather than utility.” All this luxury surprised and amazed the Greek mercenaries, who were not accustomed to it; after all, their goal was extraction, not conquest of new territories. The Babylonians were superior to these, in their opinion, semi-barbarians in cunning and intelligence. And it's worth noting that in this case, they actually saved the city by avoiding battle and making the invaders fall in love with it. This is exactly what the priests, officials and horsemen in magnificent attire sought. Alexander was immediately taken to the royal chambers, showing the treasures and furniture of Darius. Alexander's generals were nearly blinded by the luxury of the accommodations provided to them; ordinary warriors were placed in more modest, but no less comfortable houses, the owners of which tried to please them in everything. As the historian writes:

“Nowhere did the morale of Alexander’s army decline so much as in Babylon. Nothing corrupts more than the customs of this city, nothing excites and awakens dissolute desires. Fathers and husbands allow their daughters and wives to give themselves to guests. Kings and their courtiers willingly organize festive drinking bouts throughout Persia; but the Babylonians were especially strongly attached to wine and devoted to the drunkenness that accompanied it. The women present at these drinking parties are dressed modestly at first, then they take off their clothes one by one and gradually strip off their modesty. And finally - let's say this out of respect for your ears - they throw away the most intimate veils from their bodies. Such shameful behavior is characteristic not only of dissolute women, but also of married mothers and spinsters who consider prostitution a courtesy. At the end of thirty-four days of such intemperance, the army that conquered Asia would undoubtedly weaken in the face of danger if it were suddenly attacked by any enemy ... "

Whether this is true or not, we must remember that these words were written by a Roman of the old school. However, they liked the reception given to Alexander’s soldiers in Babylon so much that they did not destroy the city and commit atrocities usual for that time. The Macedonian king stayed here longer than anywhere else during the entire campaign, and even gave orders to restore buildings and improve the appearance of the capital. Thousands of workers began to clear the rubble from the site of the Temple of Marduk, which was to be rebuilt. Construction continued for ten years and even two years after the death of Alexander in the same Babylon.

He died in 325 BC. e., and the circumstances of his death are quite curious, since it happened due to drinking. From his early youth - despite the upbringing given to him by Aristotle - Alexander was fond of wine and merry feasts. Once, during one such feast, at which, in addition to Alexander, his generals and local courtesans were present, one of those present set fire to the palace in Persepolis, the residence of the Persian kings, destroying in his rampage one of the most beautiful buildings Ancient world. Returning to Babylon, Alexander returned to his old ways, but his long binge ended in serious illness. Perhaps the cause of his premature death was cirrhosis of the liver.

One thing is certain - the short thirteen-year reign of this Macedonian king radically changed the cultural and political situation throughout the then known world, and especially in the Middle East. By that time, these lands had seen the rise and fall of the Sumerians, Assyrians, Medes and Babylonians. The Persian Empire also fell to a small but invincible army consisting of Macedonian cavalry and Greek mercenaries. Almost all the cities from Tire in the west to Ecbatana in the east were razed to the ground, their rulers were tortured and executed, and their inhabitants were slaughtered or sold into slavery. But Babylon managed to avoid destruction this time thanks to the fact that it wisely played on the addiction of the Macedonians and Greeks to wine and women. The great city was to survive and exist for several more centuries before it died a natural death of old age.

Alexander was given a traditionally lavish funeral, accompanied by public displays of grief, hair pulling, suicide attempts and predictions of the end of the world, for what kind of future could one talk about after the death of the deified hero? But behind all this solemn façade, generals and politicians had already begun to argue about the inheritance, since Alexander had not appointed his successor and had not left a will. True, he had a legitimate son from the Persian princess Barsina, daughter of Darius III; another heir was expected from his second wife, Roxana, princess of Bactria. Before the body of her late husband had been placed in the grave, Roxana, no doubt instigated by the courtiers, killed her rival Barsina and her young son. But she did not have to take advantage of the fruits of her cunning; Soon she too shared the fate of her rival along with her son Alexander IV. She died at the hands of the same commander Cassander, who had previously killed the mother of Alexander the Great, Queen Olympias. The Oxford Classical Dictionary describes this monster as “a merciless master of his craft,” but this is a rather modest description of a man who killed two queens and a prince in cold blood. However, Alexander’s veterans surprisingly quickly came to terms with the death of Roxana and her son, because they did not want to see a king with “mixed blood” on the throne. The Greeks did not fight for this, they said, to bow to the son of Alexander by a foreigner.

The death of two possible successors, the sons of the Persian Barsina and Roxana from Bactria, opened the way to the throne for all the ambitious commanders who crossed Asia with Alexander and participated in the legendary battles. Ultimately, their rivalry led to internecine wars, which little affected Babylon, as they were fought on the outskirts of the empire.

Therefore, we can consider that the death of Alexander marked the end of the history of Babylon as the greatest city in the world. The inhabitants themselves hardly mourned the death of the emperor much - they loved the Greeks no more than the Persians - but the Greek conquest initially promised great hope. Alexander declared that he was going to make Babylon his eastern capital and rebuild the temple of Marduk. If his plans had been implemented, Babylon would once again have become the political, commercial and religious capital of the entire East. But Alexander died suddenly, and the most far-sighted residents seemed to immediately understand that the last chance for revival was hopelessly lost. It was clear to anyone that after the death of the conqueror, chaos reigned for a long time, and yesterday’s close associates of the king squabbled among themselves over the remains of the empire. Various sons, wives, friends and associates of Alexander sought to take possession of Babylon, until finally this city fell to the commander Seleucus Nicator.

During the reign of this Greek warrior, who, like others, was forced to make his way with weapons, the city experienced several years of peace. The new ruler even intended to make it the capital of the Middle East again. The remains of the Temple of Marduk continued to be carefully dismantled, although due to the sheer volume of them, the work was never completed. This in itself was a sign of the decline of Babylon. It seemed that vitality was leaving the city; the inhabitants were overcome by a feeling of hopelessness, and they realized that their city would never regain its former greatness, that they would never rebuild the temple of Marduk, and that constant wars would finally destroy the old way of life. In 305 BC. e. Seleucus also realized the futility of his attempts and decided to found a new city, calling it after himself. Seleucia was built on the banks of the Tigris, 40 miles north of Babylon, still at the crossroads of the east-west routes, but far enough from the old capital that it became its rival. In order to finally put an end to the city that had outlived its age, Seleucus ordered all major officials to leave Babylon and move to Seleucia. Naturally, merchants and traders followed them.

The artificially created city grew quickly, satisfying the vanity of Seleucus Nicator rather than the needs of the surrounding area. Most of the population came from Babylon, and bricks and other building materials were transported from Babylon. With the support of the ruler, Seleucia quickly overtook Babylon, and at the very short term its population exceeded half a million. Agricultural land around new capital were quite fertile and were irrigated with water from a canal connecting the Tigris and Euphrates. The same canal also served as an additional trade route, so it is not surprising that two hundred years after its founding, Seleucia was considered the largest transit point in the East. Wars in that region raged almost continuously, and the city was constantly captured and plundered, until in 165 AD. e. it was not completely destroyed by the Romans. After this, the ancient Babylonian bricks were transported again and used to build the city of Ctesiphon, which in turn was sacked and destroyed during the Eastern wars.

For a long time, Babylon continued to exist next to its prosperous neighbor as a second capital and as a center of religious worship, which by that time had already become significantly outdated. The rulers of the city supported the temples of the gods, which during the Hellenistic period had fewer and fewer admirers. To the new generation of Greek philosophers, scientists, writers and artists - representatives of the elite of the civilized world - all the old gods, like Marduk and the rest of the gods of the Sumerian-Babylonian pantheon, seemed absurd and funny, like the bestial gods of Egypt. Possibly by the 2nd century. BC e. Babylon was already almost deserted, and it was visited only by lovers of antiquities, who were accidentally brought to these parts; Apart from services in temples, little happened here. The officials and merchants, having left the old capital, left behind only the priests, who continued to maintain the appearance of activity in the sanctuary of Marduk, praying for the prosperity of the ruling king and his family. The more enlightened of them probably continued to observe the planets for the purpose of predicting the future, since astrology was considered a more reliable method of divination than others, such as divination by the entrails of animals. The reputation of the Chaldean magicians was also high in Roman times, as can be seen, for example, from the Gospel of Matthew, which tells about the “magi from the East” who came to worship the born Christ. The great Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria praises Babylonian mathematicians and astrologers for their research into the nature of the universe, calling them “true magicians.”

Whether the priests of the last days of Babylon deserved such a flattering description from Philo, and at the same time from Cicero, is a moot point, for at the beginning of our era in the West they knew only one name “the greatest city the world has ever seen.” In the East, the special privileges that Babylon enjoyed made it a kind of “open city” in an era of constant wars between the various conquerors of Mesopotamia - the Greeks, Parthians, Elamites and Romans. His authority remained so great that even the most insignificant leader of a detachment who managed to temporarily capture the city considered it his duty to call himself “King of Babylon,” patronize temples and gods, dedicate gifts to them and, probably, even “put his hand in the hand of Marduk.” ", confirming his divine right to the kingdom. Whether these later monarchs believed in Marduk or not is not important, because all the pagan gods completely replaced each other. Marduk could be identified with Olympian Zeus or Jupiter-Bel - the names changed depending on the language and nationality. The main thing was considered to be the maintenance of the earthly dwelling of God in good condition so that he has somewhere to go down to meet people; as long as the cult of Marduk retained some significance and the corps of priests performed services, Babylon continued to exist.

However, in 50 BC. e. historian Diodorus Siculus wrote that great temple Marduk lies in ruins again. He states: “In essence, only a small part of the city is now inhabited, and the larger space within the walls is given over to agriculture.” But even during this period, in many ancient cities of Mesopotamia, in many dilapidated temples, services were held to the old gods - just as a thousand years later, after the Arab conquest, Christ continued to be worshiped in Egypt. The Arab historian El-Bekri gives vivid description Christian rituals performed in the city of Menas, located in the Libyan desert. Although this is not the place and time we are considering, approximately the same could be said about Babylon.

“Mina (i.e. Menas) is easily identified by its buildings, which still stand today. You can also see fortified walls around these beautiful buildings and palaces. They are mostly in the form of a covered colonnade, and some are inhabited by monks. There are several wells preserved there, but their water supply is insufficient. Next you can see the Cathedral of St. Menas, huge building, decorated with statues and beautiful mosaics. There are lamps burning inside day and night. At one end of the church there is a huge marble tomb with two camels, and above it a statue of a man standing on these camels. The dome of the church is covered with drawings that, judging by the stories, depict angels. The entire area around the city is occupied by fruit trees, which produce excellent fruit; there are also many grapes from which wine is made.”

If we replace the cathedral of St. Menas with the temple of Marduk, and the statue of the Christian saint with the dragons of Marduk, we get a description of the last days of the Babylonian sanctuary.

One inscription from the late period records a visit by a local ruler to the ruined temple of Marduk, where he sacrificed a bull and four lambs “at the gates.” Perhaps we are talking about the Ishtar Gate - a grandiose structure excavated by Koldevey, decorated with images of bulls and dragons. Time has been kind to it, and it still stands in its place, rising almost 40 feet. One bull and four lambs are a hundredth part of what was sacrificed to the gods in former times, when the kings marched along the Processional Road to the shouts of thousands of crowds.

The Greek historian and geographer Strabo (69 BC - 19 AD), a native of Pontus, may have received first-hand information about Babylon from travelers. In his Geography, he wrote that Babylon was “mostly devastated,” the ziggurat of Marduk was destroyed, and only the huge walls, one of the seven wonders of the world, testify to the former greatness of the city. The detailed testimony of Strabo, for example, he gives the exact dimensions of the city walls, contradicts the too general notes of Pliny the Elder, who in his “ Natural history", written around 50 AD. e., claimed that the temple of Marduk (Pliny calls it Jupiter-Bel) still stands, although the rest of the city is half destroyed and devastated. True, the Roman historian cannot always be trusted, since he often took unsubstantiated facts on faith. On the other hand, as an aristocrat and official, he occupied a fairly high position in society and could learn about many things first-hand. For example, during the Jewish War of 70 AD. e. he was part of the retinue of Emperor Titus and could personally talk with people who had visited Babylon. But since Strabo's statement about the state of the great ziggurat contradicts the testimony of Pliny, it remains a mystery to what extent Babylon remained a “living” city at that time. However, judging by the fact that Roman sources are mostly silent about it, we can conclude that this city no longer had absolutely no significance. The only mention of it occurs later in Pausanias (c. 150 AD), who wrote about the Middle East mainly based on his own observations; the reliability of his information has been repeatedly confirmed archaeological finds. Pausanias categorically states that the temple of Bel is still standing, although only the walls remain of Babylon itself.

Some modern historians find it difficult to agree with Pliny or Pausanias, although clay tablets found in Babylon indicate that worship and sacrifice were carried out during at least the first two decades of the Christian era. Moreover, in nearby Borsippa the pagan cult persisted until the 4th century. n. e. In other words, the ancient gods were in no hurry to die, especially among the conservative Babylonians, whose children were raised by the priests of Marduk. Beginning with the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC. e. Representatives of the Jewish community lived side by side with them, many of whom converted to the new, Nazarene faith. If this was indeed the case, then the mention in one of the letters of St. Peter about the “Church of Babylon” acquires a certain ambiguity - after all, it could be not so much an image of pagan Rome, but rather a real-life Jewish community, from among those that flourished throughout the Roman Empire, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. Nothing similar to this was found in the ruins of Babylon. Christian Church, but none of the archaeologists hoped for this. In any case, the early Christians did not have special church buildings; they met in houses or in fields and groves outside the city walls.

On the other hand, German archaeologists excavating Ctesiphon in 1928 discovered the remains of an early Christian temple (circa 5th century AD), built on the foundations of an ancient sanctuary. Thus, if in Ctesiphon before its destruction by the Arabs in 636 AD. e. If there was a Christian community, there must have been other communities scattered throughout Mesopotamia. Among them could well be the “church of Babylon”, which Peter welcomed. There is evidence that during the apostolic ministry of Peter there was no Christian community even in Rome, while in the “two Babylons” of that time - an Egyptian fortress near modern Cairo and the ancient Mesopotamian metropolis - there were Jewish communities.

At first glance it seems strange that new religion could exist next to the most ancient cults. But in the pagan tradition such tolerance was in the order of things. The pagans accepted the existence of other religions as long as they did not pose a threat to their own gods. The Near and Middle East gave birth to so many religions that against their background Christianity looked like just another cult. And this was a serious mistake by the religious and secular authorities of the pagan world, since it soon became clear that Christians, like their Jewish predecessors, sharply contrasted themselves with the rest of the world. And in fact, such opposition, which at first seemed like weakness, turned into strength. Proof of this is the fact that under the Muslims, Jews and Christians survived, and the cult of Marduk finally died out.

About whether there was a Christian community in Babylon in 363 AD. e., when Julian the Apostate, having gone to fight the Persian Shah Shapur I, invaded Mesopotamia, official historians do not tell us. But Julian was an opponent of Christianity, advocated the restoration of old temples and tried to revive paganism throughout the Roman Empire. If Marduk's ziggurat had continued to stand by that time, the emperor, on the road to Ctesiphon, would no doubt have ordered his warriors to turn towards it in order to maintain their morale. The fact that Julian's biographers do not even mention the name of Babylon indirectly indicates the complete decline of the city and the fact that all its inhabitants abandoned it. Biographers only report that on the way to Ctesiphon, Julian passed by some huge walls of the ancient city, behind which there was a park and a menagerie of the Persian rulers.

“Omne in medio spatium solitudo est,” states St. Jerome (345-420 AD) in a passage on the grim fate of Babylon. “The entire space between the walls is inhabited by a variety of wild animals.” So spoke one Christian from Elam, who visited the royal reserve on the way to the Jerusalem monastery. great empire died forever and irrevocably, which Christians and Jews accepted with satisfaction - after all, for them Babylon was a symbol of the wrath of the Lord.

Historians believe that Babylon became a victim natural laws development of society; after a thousand years of political, cultural and religious supremacy, the Babylonians had to worship new gods, in whose name invincible armies marched against them. The inhabitants of the ancient capital, with all their desire, could not have put up an army of equal value against them, and therefore Babylon fell. But he did not perish like Sodom and Gomorrah, who disappeared in fire and ashes; it simply faded away, like so many other beautiful cities in the Middle East. It seems that cities and civilizations, like everything in this world, have their beginning and their end.

Today history has more knowledge about the past than before. The amount of this knowledge is growing like a snowball: more and more every year. It would seem that, having such vast historical experience, humanity will be able to get rid of any crisis. But is this how it really works? The threat of thermonuclear, chemical, biological disasters, a constant increase in the number of hungry people around the world, an increase in the number of wars and interethnic conflicts, global atmospheric pollution - all this and much more is like a pre-Mocles sword over the heads of humanity. We are witnessing that the crisis phenomena of individual states not only do not stop, but are even more multiplying, gradually developing into a general world crisis. From various sources of information we draw knowledge that if not today, then tomorrow our world may be completely depleted of energy resources, drown in a growing wave underworld or die from an environmental explosion or epidemic.

Has our world become uncontrollable? Every single revolution of “reason,” from the Fall to the present day, has been crowned with complete defeat. The most striking example of this is the last stage French Revolution 1789, which is marked by the slogan of 1793: “Down with God! Long live reason! And the blood of innocent people flowed like a stormy river through the streets of France. The guillotine invented at that time did not have time to “do its job.” Thanks to the legalized “sacrament of adultery,” many happy families were destroyed. The best minds France fled abroad, and 7,000 nobles lost their palace titles in one day. Of course this is far from full list the consequences of the revival of the religion of atheism or, as secular minds like to call it, the religion of reason.

On the other hand, it is very remarkable that the people who remained faithful to God always had success in their righteous deeds. He did not die in the flood, nor was he destroyed in Egyptian slavery, despite Pharaoh's decree to destroy all Jewish newborn boys. God's people did not perish along with the world powers under whose rule they were, and who themselves perished during the period of their greatest prosperity. And moreover, the same Biblical God does not ambiguously promise that in the imminent complete worldwide crisis, His people not only will not perish, but will also receive eternal life simultaneously with all the resurrected righteous people of all ages.

So, let's look at the mechanism: how does the hand of God operate in world history, if at all? What traces has history itself left for us? Let's try to show the action of God's providence using the example of that part of the earth where the richest world superpower known in history, the Babylonian kingdom, was once born, flourished and died. Let us pay attention to the birth of Babylon as a piece of terrain. Let's consider what the state of Babylon was like in general. Then we will look at the birth of Babylon as a world power, under the influence of the hand of God, that is, at the emergence of the second Babylonian monarchy, the political power of which lasted only a few decades and was directly related to the name of the famous king Nebuchadnezzar. In our discussions we will place special emphasis on the fall of Babylon and its replacement by a new world state.

In our discussions we will use various sources, telling the truth about the birth, rise and fall of the Babylonian Empire. Among these sources, the Book was written before the birth of Babylon, prophetically describing this event, and continued to be written during the existence of Babylon and its destruction. This Book is the Bible. Let's take a look at the detailed commentary on the events described in the Bible - the books of E.G. White "Patriarchs and Prophets" and "Prophets and Kings". Also as additional information We use the textbook “General History of State and Law” edited by K.I. Batyr, and a monograph by Kharkov researcher A.A. Oparin "Biblical prophecies and world history."

2.1. Birth of Babylon

“The whole earth had one language and one dialect. Moving from the East, they (people, descendants of the sons of Noah) found a plain in the land of Senaar and settled there. And they said to each other: Let us make bricks and burn them with fire. And they used bricks instead of stones, and earthen resin instead of lime. And they said: Let us build ourselves a city and a tower, its height reaching to heaven; and let us make a name for ourselves, before we are scattered over the face of all the earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men were building. And the Lord said: Behold, there is one people, and they all have one language; and this is what they began to do, and they will not deviate from what they planned to do. Let us go down and confuse their language there, so that one does not understand the speech of the other. And the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth; and they stopped building the city. Therefore the name was given to it: Babylon; for there the Lord confused the language of all the earth, and from there the Lord scattered them throughout all the earth.”

This was the period when the earth had not yet been divided into continents after the great flood. All the people lived together then. But soon three great nations or races were to be formed. By the name of the three sons of Noah Shem, Ham and Japheth, three nationalities were formed: the Simts - the peoples of the East, the Aphenites - the peoples of Europe and the Hamites - the peoples of Africa.

“For some time, the descendants of Noah continued to live among the mountains where the ark stopped, but soon apostasy led the multiplied people to division. Those who wished to leave the Creator and withdraw from obedience to His law were constantly irritated by the God-fearing life of their fellows, by the instructions with which they tried to convert them; after some time they decided to separate themselves from the children of God. And they moved to the Sennar plain, located on the banks of the Euphrates. They were attracted by the excellent location of these places and the fertile soil, and they decided to settle in this valley.

They planned to build a city and a tower here - so huge that it would become a miracle of the world. All this was done in order to keep the people from scattering. God commanded people to scatter throughout the earth, to develop and populate it. But the builders of the Tower of Babel intended to create monarchical form rule in order to subsequently subjugate the whole earth. Thus, their city would become the center of the empire, its glory would evoke the universal admiration and admiration of the whole world and would bring fame to its founders. The majestic tower, rising to the skies, was supposed to become a monument to the power and wisdom of its builders, perpetuating their glory in all future generations...

The construction of the tower had the sole purpose of providing shelter in case of another flood. By erecting a tower of enormous height, which would not be afraid of the waters of the flood, people wanted to insure themselves against the coming danger. Considering it quite possible for themselves to penetrate into the transcendental spheres, they hoped to find out the causes of the flood. This was supposed to further enhance the pride of those who built the tower and distract the thoughts of future generations from God, turning them to idolatry.

Even before the tower was completely completed, part of it was set aside as housing for the builders, and the other part, luxuriously furnished and decorated, was dedicated to idols. People rejoiced at their successes and praised the silver and gold gods, thus challenging the Lord of heaven and earth. Suddenly the successfully progressing work was suddenly interrupted. Angels sent from heaven were given the task of destroying people's plans. The tower had already reached an extraordinary height, and the builders at the top could not directly contact those working below. Therefore, on all tiers of the tower there were people in various places who transmitted orders along the chain regarding the necessary material or instructions for work. When the workers communicated various instructions to each other in this way, it suddenly turned out that everyone spoke different languages. From below they sent what was not needed; instructions were often carried out the other way around. Confusion and anxiety reigned. Work has stopped. There could be no question of working together. Unable to explain the misunderstanding, people reproached each other in anger and frustration. Their common cause ended in discord and bloodshed. Heavenly lightning, as witnesses of God's wrath, destroyed top part tower, and it collapsed...

The inhabitants of Babylon wanted to establish a government independent of God. Among them, however, there were people who felt the fear of God, but they too were deceived by the feigned actions of the wicked and drawn into their plans. For the sake of these faithful ones, the Lord delayed His judgments and gave people time to discover their true aspirations.”

2.2. Babylon - a world power

A few centuries later, “...dozens of small city-states (nomes) formed between the Tigris and Euphrates. They still retain the features of primitive democracy for a long time. At the head of such a state was a ruler who bore different titles in different communities: high priest (en), building priest (ensi), big man(lugal, king). At first, the power of the ruler was not hereditary, since he was the chosen one of the people. Relying on his squad and the support of the tribal nobility, the Lugal over time concentrates more and more power in his hands and it becomes hereditary. Part of the communal land ends up in the hands of the ruler.

Already in ancient times, there was a union of Mesopotamian “nomes” with a center in Nippur (around the middle of the 3rd millennium BC). At this time, there is a struggle between individual nome centers for hegemony over the entire Mesopotamia. Such contenders were Ur, Uruk, Lagash, Ulma.

Several centuries are characterized by the alternating predominance of large states - Semitic Akkad (in the north) and Sumerian Ur. In the conditions of continuous wars, the victors enriched themselves, and the defeated cities were subjected to merciless plunder. The changeable fortunes of war brought forward one or another winner.

The first who managed to create the first " great power", covering all of Mesopotamia, was Saragon the Ancient, an humble man, but who managed to advance in military service. At first he captured the town of Akkad, and then all of Southern Mesopotamia obeyed him. The nome structure was preserved, but now the rulers of the nomes became nothing more than officials appointed by the king. Saragon introduced throughout Mesopotamia unified system measures and weights. However, the resistance of the old nomes was still strong. The confrontation between the Sumerians, who were at a higher cultural level, also had an effect. Not by chance state language the Sumerian language remained.

The state had to be reassembled again. And this share fell on the III dynasty of Ur of Sumerian origin. She considered her ancestor Gilgamesh, the legendary ruler of the city of Uruk (circa 26th century BC).

The political chaos that arose after the fall of the Ur dynasty lasted for about two centuries. Continuous wars between small kingdoms and fierce enmity between clans led to the conquest of all of Mesopotamia by the warlike tribes of the Amorites. These aliens quickly learned local language and culture.

One of the Amorite dynasties established itself in Babylon, a former village that later grew into a modest provincial town. As a result of the purposeful and flexible policy of this dynasty, Babylon at the end of the reign of King Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) became the capital of a huge kingdom, subjugating the territory from the Persian Gulf in the south to Nineveh in the north.

The main source of information about the state and law of Babylon were hundreds of thousands of inscriptions on clay tablets, stone and metal, made in cuneiform. The key to reading cuneiform texts was found only in 1802. to the German teacher Georg Friedrich Grotenfend. This amazing discovery made it possible to read many texts of laws and decrees of kings. According to the custom of that time, the main collection of laws was carved on a basalt pillar and displayed in the main square for public viewing and study. It was called the Code of King Hammurabi."

Unlike the great cities of the Ancient World, Babylon, in addition to being the largest political center, was a world spiritual center throughout its history. And if Babylon often lost political dominance and for long periods of time, it always retained religious dominance. This city was the capital of the world priesthood, where the priests of Egypt, Syria, Elam, Assyria, Tire, Persia, Sidon, Arabia, Media, Ethiopia, Libya, Asia Minor, etc. gathered, where they studied priestly science and reported secrets to the chief Priest their countries, received orders from him.

In the center of Babylon stood a huge temple complex Esagila, the seat of the chief priest and the secret center of all the then politics of the Ancient World. The central structure of Esagila was the huge temple tower of Etemenanka, founded on the site of the famous Tower of Babel and challenging everyone and everything, speaking of the eternity of Babylon. In addition to Esagila, the city had countless temples dedicated to the gods of the entire world of that time. However, the especially revered gods of Babylon were Marduk, Ishtar, Enlil, An, Utu, Nanna, Tammuz. The following story is connected with the name of the latter. The founder of Babylon, Nimrod, had a wife, Semiramus, who led an extremely riotous lifestyle, which intensified, especially after the death of Nimrod. One of her illegitimate children was Tammuz. The queen declared his birth from God and therefore, when young Tammuz accidentally died, Semiramus elevated him to the rank of gods and ordered his day to be celebrated on December 25th. And that is why today's Christmas falls on this day. For the day of the birth of the Savior of the world is unknown, but in order to satisfy a large part of society, Emperor Constantine, having adopted Christianity, ordered to celebrate Christmas on the day on which the feast of Tammuz-Mithra was previously celebrated, that is the day sun. In Babylon, the first books on astrology and fortune telling were also compiled, and techniques for summoning spirits were developed, i.e. the foundations of spiritualism were laid. The teachings of ancient Babylon quickly spread to different countries, filling their people with satanic philosophy. And today horoscopes, astrological forecasts, sorcerers, fortune tellers, and healers have again gained enormous popularity. The theses of the Babylonian priests that for a happy life both on earth and after death it is enough to donate a lot of money, are also more widespread today, not to mention the magnificent church rituals, the whole principle of which is taken from Babylon, instead of the modest Divine service that was held Christ and whose main meaning was to preach.”

But here it is very interesting to note that despite all our diligent descriptions of the beauty of Babylon, it was not a world power until God, through his chosen people, began to participate in the political life of Babylon. And this time began in 605 BC, i.e. when King Nebuchadnezzar came to power. It is about this period of time, interpreting the dream of King Nebuchadnezzar II about an idol, which “had a head of pure gold, a chest and arms of silver, a belly and thighs of copper, legs of iron, legs partly iron, partly clay,” the prophet speaks to his face to the king: “You are the king, the king of kings, to whom the God of Heaven has given kingdom, power, strength and glory; And He gave all the sons of men, wherever they lived, the beasts of the earth and the princes of heaven into your hands and made you ruler over them all, you are this golden head! After you another kingdom will arise, lower than yours...” Another prophecy compares Babylon to a lion with eagle wings. Why exactly at this and not another period of time did Babylon have global influence? Why did other powers become world powers only when God's people had a special influence on the development of these states (Examples of this are Egypt, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, Divided Europe and America)? Why did all the world powers fall, but the people of God remained the chosen people of God? If we carefully consider in more detail the description of the fall of Babylon, which even in our democratic times historians try to keep silent about, then I think we ourselves will be able to give clear answers to the questions posed.

2.3. Fall of Babylon

Even in our time, having behind us vast historical experience of the collapse of the world’s largest civilizations, we often look at today’s world powers with thoughts about what a strong state is, such as the United States of America or the Federal Republic of Germany or a number of other “superpowers” can never come to a complete crisis. But it would be foolish to doubt that this is exactly what both King Nebuchadnezzar and his grandson Belshazzar, who took the throne of the then most powerful power in 539 BC, thought about Babylon.

“From his youth, admitted to the joint government of the country, Belshazzar was proud of his power and rebelled against God.” And this despite the fact that “he knew about the expulsion of his grandfather from the society of people, which took place by God’s command, and he was aware of Nebuchadnezzar’s repentance and his miraculous return. But the love of pleasure and self-glorification erased from Belshazzar’s consciousness the lessons that he was obliged to always remember.

Shortly before all the misfortunes began. Babylon was besieged by Cyrus, the nephew of Darius of Media and the chief commander of the allied forces of Media and Persia. But being in a seemingly impregnable fortress, which had massive walls and bronze gates, was protected by the Euphrates River and had a large supply of food, the voluptuous monarch felt safe and spent his time in cheerful feasts.

Proud and arrogant, carelessly not feeling the danger, “King Belshazzar held a great feast for a thousand of his nobles and drank wine before the eyes of thousands.”... At that royal feast, among the guests were charming women and the smartest, highly educated men. Princes and dignitaries drank wine like water and had fun, intoxicated by it...

At the height of the feast, he “ordered to bring the gold and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar... brought out of the temple of Jerusalem, so that the king, his nobles, his wives and his concubines could drink from them.” The king wanted to show that for him there was nothing so sacred that he could not use it at his whim. “Then they brought golden vessels... and the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank from them, drank wine and glorified the gods of gold and silver, copper, iron, wood and stone.”

How little did Belshazzar think that the heavenly Witness was present among the guests; that the invisible Divine Guardian watched this scene of desecration, heard the noise of blasphemous revelry, saw idolatry. But soon the uninvited Guest revealed Himself... In the midst of the feast, a hand suddenly appeared and began to write letters on the wall of the palace, sparkling like fire - words incomprehensible to those gathered, but an omen of the fate awaiting the conscience-tormented king and his guests.

Instantly there was silence in the hall, and everyone, shackled in horror, watched the hand writing mysterious signs. Their whole sinful life passed before people’s eyes; It seemed to them that they were standing in the judgment of the eternal God, whose power they had just neglected. Where only a few moments ago there had been carefree fun and blasphemous jokes, now deathly pale faces were visible and cries of fear were heard...

Belshazzar was the most frightened of all. He, more than anyone else, was responsible for the rebellion against God that reached its climax that night in Babylonian kingdom. In the presence of the invisible Guardian, the representative of Him whose authority was challenged and whose name was disgraced, the king was paralyzed with fear. His conscience was awakened. “The ties of his loins loosened, and his knees began to beat against each other.” Belshazzar boldly rebelled against heavenly god and, relying on his power, he did not think that anyone would dare to ask him: “Why are you doing this?” But now he realized that he had to answer for everything he had done, for missed opportunities, for his defiant and unjustifiable behavior.

In vain the king tried to read the words burning like fire. His wild cries were heard throughout the hall, calling on astrologers, Chaldeans and fortune-tellers: “Whoever reads this written and explains to me the meaning of it,” he promised, “he will be clothed in purple, and a golden chain will be around his neck, and the third ruler will be in the kingdom." But this was not a session of occultism, as the king’s sages initially believed. Otherwise they could easily explain this phenomenon. “All the king’s wise men...could not read what was written and explain its meaning to the king.” They were also unable to read these mysterious words, just as the wise men of old had been unable to explain the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar.

“Finally, the queen mother remembered Daniel, who more than fifty years ago told Nebuchadnezzar a dream about a great image and interpreted it.” She entered the banquet hall and begged the king to call Daniel. And after some time, a venerable old man with a long beard appeared before the whole meeting. His hair was white, his face was wrinkled. but the mind was clear, as before, and faith in God did not fade. Belshazzar promised Daniel the same reward as the wise men if he told the meaning of the writing on the wall.

“Indifferent to the king’s promises, clothed with the majestic calm of the servant of the Most High, Daniel appeared before the horror-stricken crowd not for flattering speeches, but to interpret the news of death." “Let your gifts remain with you,” he said, “and give honors to someone else; and I will read what is written to the king and explain the meaning to him.”

There was silence; those gathered, straining their ears, expected to hear an important revelation. Addressing the frightened ruler, the prophet said: “King! The Most High God gave your father Nebuchadnezzar kingdom, greatness, honor and glory... But when his heart was lifted up and his spirit was hardened to the point of insolence, he was overthrown from his royal throne and deprived of his glory... until he knew that the Most High God rules over the kingdom of men and appoints over him whomever he wants. And you... Belshazzar did not humble your heart, although he knew all this; but you ascended against the Lord of heaven, and the vessels of His House were brought to you, and you and your nobles, your wives and your concubines drank wine from them, and you praised the gods of silver and gold, copper, iron, wood and stone, which no one sees, neither hear nor understand; but you have not glorified God, in whose hand is your breath and with whom are all your ways. For this reason the hand was sent from Him and this scripture was written.”

Turning to the wall on which the heavenly message was written, the prophet read: “MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN.” The hand that had written the letters was no longer visible, but these four words continued to burn with terrifying clarity, and now all the people, holding their breath, listened to the aged prophet.

“This is the meaning of the words: ME - God has numbered your kingdom and put an end to it; TEKEL - you are weighed on the scales and found very light; PERES - your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians."

More than a hundred years before this event, the Lord predicted that the “night of joy,” in which the king and advisers would compete with each other in blasphemy, would suddenly turn into a night of fear and destruction. And now the rapidly unfolding events followed one after another exactly as had been predicted in prophecies many years before the birth of the main characters of this drama.

The king was still in the palace, surrounded by those whose fate had already been decided, when the messenger informed him that “his city was taken” by enemies whom he did not fear, that “the fords were captured... and the warriors were struck with fear.” . While the king and his entourage drank wine from the sacred vessels of Jehovah and praised their gods, the Medes and Persians, having diverted the waters of the Euphrates River from its bed, made their way to the heart of the unguarded city. Now Cyrus's troops were at the walls of the palace; the city was filled with enemy soldiers “like locusts” , their triumphant cries drowned out the desperate cries of the amazed participants of the feast.

“That same night Belshazzar king of the Chaldeans was killed,” and the monarch Darius the Mede, “being sixty-two years old,” ascended the throne of world history. As predicted in the prophecy, the kingdom of the Medo-Persians is poorer than the Babylonian one, but more extensive in territory, and is represented in the form of the silver chest of the image of their dream Nebuchadnezzar or in the form of a bear with three fangs. This kingdom is just embarking on the path of its world domination. But God has already predicted in the future its fall and its replacement by copper Greece, and that, in turn, by iron Rome and divided Europe, which is now exercising its world rule. And in the place of the ancient majestic Babylon, as predicted by the biblical prophets, desolation still reigns.

Thus “Babylon, the beauty of the kingdom, the pride of the Chaldeans,” was “overthrown by God, like Sodom and Gomorrah. It will never be inhabited, and for generations there will be no inhabitants in it. The Arabian will not pitch his tent, and the shepherds and their flocks will not rest there. But the beasts of the desert will dwell in it, and the houses will be filled with eagle owls; and ostriches will settle, and shaggy ones will gallop there. Jackals will howl in their palaces, and hyenas in their houses of pleasure.” “And I will make it a land of hedgehogs and a swamp, and I will sweep it with a destroying broom, says the Lord of hosts.” .

“Having taken Babylon, Cyrus did not destroy it, and everyone thought that Babylon, the center of the world, would live forever. However, despite its favorable geographical location and more than 1,500 years of history, the city became completely extinct in less than 350 years. Under Alexander the Great and a number of other rulers, active and intensive attempts were made to restore it. However, all of them various reasons, did not succeed. Moreover, by the beginning of our era, local residents could not find out exactly the place where the city was located, because it was captured by the desert. The ancient part of the city, founded by Hammurabi (1792-1750), was completely buried under swamps and overflowing rivers. Even the inhabitants of these places, despite the passage of time, walk for many kilometers around this desert with the remains of the hills, believing that the spirits of its old inhabitants live in them.”

3. Conclusion

After conducting thorough research, we can draw some conclusions. Firstly, Babylon appeared in the place where it was built in its time Tower of Babel. From the description of the events associated with the construction, we can conclude that this construction was allowed by God in order to speed up the dispersion of people across the earth, who, instead of completing goodwill God decided to make a name for himself. That is why the Lord was forced to mix up the languages ​​of people. This is the reason for the name of the tower “Babylon”, which means “confusion”. From that time on, the Tower of Babel became a monument to apostasy from God. Secondly, the Lord allowed the creation of a majestic state on this site, which achieved its supremacy during the time of King Nebochadnezzar II. And this happened only at the moment when God began his administration of the state through God’s people, who were there in captivity, but had earned special favor from the king. As we know from history, Daniel was appointed by Nebochadnezzar as the chief manager of the palace. We also saw that Babylon fell in one day when the cup of iniquity was overflowing by King Belshazzar and his people. And it is very important to note that despite all these ups and downs of world power, God has always remained and still has His people, who were not and will never be destroyed either by glory or by sword. God still has this people today. And precisely, thanks to him, the world has not yet completely drowned in evil and has not yet brought upon itself the final judgments of God. But as it was in Ancient Babylon, when each resident could make his own clear choice: to take the side of the pious men of God and stay alive or to experience a moment of drunken pleasure and perish with the wicked, so it will be in the last time immediately before the Second Coming of Christ.

Fall of Babylon

Babylon, excavated by Koldewey, was the capital of an empire created almost exclusively by the will of one of its last kings, Nebuchadnezzar II. The period of the so-called Neo-Babylonian kingdom lasted from 605 to 538 BC. e., and at the end of it, Babylon from the center of the civilized world turned into a dying provincial city, with few inhabitants, dilapidated and forgotten.

So what is the reason for the fall of the majestic capital?

Part of the answer is that in the age of military despots, states are only strong when their rulers are strong. In the case of Babylon VII-VI centuries. BC e. One can name only two such strong rulers who were able to turn the course of history for the benefit of their people - Nabopolassar (626-605 BC) and his son Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 BC). The kings of Babylon who ruled before and after them ended up as puppets either in the hands of foreign rulers or local priests.

When Nabopolassar came to power, Babylon, as it had been for the previous two hundred years, was still a vassal state of Assyria. During this time, Assyria conquered almost the entire then known world, taking possession of vast territories and causing the boundless wrath of the conquered peoples. The Medes were especially burdened by the Assyrian yoke, and Nabopolassar made the main bet on them in the struggle for independence. The Medes successfully repelled the attacks of the Assyrians for several centuries and became famous as skilled horsemen and brave warriors. King Cyaxares of Media, to the delight of Nabopolassar, agreed to seal the alliance by marrying his daughter Amytis to the Babylonian prince Nebuchadnezzar.

After this, both kings felt strong enough to wage an all-out war against the hated Assyrians. Apparently, the leading role in this war was played by the Medes, who besieged Nineveh for three years; Having broken through the walls, they were able to achieve their goal - to destroy the Assyrian capital, in which the Babylonians willingly helped them. After the fall of Assyria, Nabopolassar, as an ally of the victorious Indian king, received the southern part of the former empire. Thus, Babylon gained independence and new territories not so much through military action as through the skillful diplomacy and insight of its ruler. Prince Nebuchadnezzar later became famous for his military campaigns, defeating the Egyptians at the Battle of Carchemish in 604 BC. BC, and then the Jews in the Battle of Jerusalem in 598 BC. e. and the Phoenicians in 586 BC. e.

Thus, thanks to the diplomatic skill of Nabopolassar and the military prowess of Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian Empire was created, and its capital became the largest, richest and most powerful city in the entire then known world. Unfortunately for the subjects of this empire, the successor of its great kings was Amel-Marduk, whom the Babylonian historian Berossus describes as “the unworthy successor of his father (Nebuchadnezzar), unrestrained by law or decency”—a rather curious accusation against an Eastern monarch, especially if you remember all the atrocities of former despots. But we should not forget that the priest accused him of “intemperance,” and it was the priests who conspired to kill the king, after which they transferred power to the commander Nergal-Sharusur, or Neriglissar, who took part in the siege of Jerusalem in 597 BC. e., according to the Book of the prophet Jeremiah (39:1-3):

“In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came with all his army to Jerusalem, and besieged it.

And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, the city was taken.

And all the princes of the king of Babylon entered into it and sat in the middle gate, Nergal-Sharetzer, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsehim, the chief of the eunuchs, Nergal-Sharetzer, the chief of the magicians, and all the other princes of the king of Babylon.”

It is noteworthy to mention two Nergal-Sha-retzers at once, which is not surprising, since this name means “may Nergal protect the king.” The second of them, the chief of the magicians, was most likely a court official; the first, obviously, was the son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar, whose son, Amel-Marduk, was killed during the uprising. Little is known about this Neriglissar, except that he reigned for only three years (559-556 BC), and his son even less - eleven months. Then the priests placed another of their protege on the throne - Nabonidus, the son of a priest.

Nabonidus seems to have spent the seventeen years of his reign doing nothing but restoring the temples of his country and tracing the ancient history of his people. He traveled throughout the kingdom with a retinue of historians, archaeologists and architects, overseeing the implementation of his building program and not paying much attention to political and military issues. He founded his permanent residence in the Teima oasis, transferring the management of the empire onto the shoulders of his son Bel-Shar-Usur, that is, the biblical Belshazzar. Nabonidus called him “the firstborn, the offspring of my heart.”

As often happens - at least in the official versions of history - a pious, enlightened and peace-loving monarch, instead of recognition and love, receives the contempt and ingratitude of his subjects. What the Babylonians themselves thought about this ruler, whose manners resembled more a professor than an emperor, we do not know. The thoughts and opinions of the average Babylonian never served as a measure of the valor of the rulers of ancient Mesopotamia, but we can more or less likely guess that the average person was hardly interested in the history of religion or the restoration of temples in distant provinces. The king, on the contrary, was very interested in this, and especially in the restoration of the temple of Sin, the ancient lunar deity, the son of Enlil, the god of the air, and Ki, the goddess of the earth. He so wanted to rebuild this temple in his hometown of Harran that this desire gave rise to discontent among the Babylonian priests and merchants; in other words, they felt that their god and their interests were suffering due to the fault of the very man whom they had nominated for kingship.

Be that as it may, it so happened that Babylon, the most impregnable city in the world, in 538 BC. e. yielded almost without bloodshed to the onslaught of the Persian army led by Cyrus the Great. Surely this fact discouraged many contemporaries and some scientists of later times, because in that era the capture of the city was accompanied by streams of blood, destruction of houses, torture of local residents, violence against women and other similar atrocities. This again contradicts what is described in the Bible and predicted in the prophecy of Jeremiah. The story about “king” Belshazzar and the writing on the wall should most likely be considered a fairy tale, for Belshazzar was the son not of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabonidus, and not a king, but a prince. And they killed him not in Babylon, but on the western bank of the Tigris during the battle with the Persian Cyrus. And he did not at all cede his kingdom to “Darius the Mede.”

Likewise, Jeremiah's terrible prophecy that Babylon would become a place of desolation and savagery was ultimately fulfilled not because Yahweh decided to punish the offenders of the Jews, but because of the prolonged wars and conquests that devastated the land over the centuries. Despite all the prophecies, the great city continued to prosper under the rule of Cyrus, whose laudatory inscription partly explains what happened:

“I, Cyrus, king of the world... After I mercifully entered Babylon, with immeasurable joy I made my home in the royal palace... My numerous troops peacefully entered Babylon, and I turned my attention to the capital and its colonies, freed the Babylonians from slavery and oppression. I made their sighs quiet and softened their sorrows.”

This inscription is, of course, in the best spirit of official wartime reports, both ancient and modern, but it gives at least some idea of ​​the siege of Babylon in 539 BC. e. - namely, that Babylon was treacherously surrendered; otherwise Nabonidus' son Belshazzar would not have had to fight outside the city. Additional details of this story are set forth by Herodotus, who may well have heard the story of the capture of the city from an eyewitness. The Greek historian writes that Cyrus besieged the city for quite a long time, but unsuccessfully because of its powerful walls. In the end, the Persians resorted to the traditional trick, taking advantage of the division of the Euphrates into several lateral branches, and the advance troops were able to enter the city along the river bed from the north and south. Herodotus notes that the city was so large that the townspeople living in the center did not know that the enemies had already occupied the outskirts, and continued to dance and have fun on the occasion of the holiday. Thus Babylon was taken.

So, Cyrus conquered the city without destroying it, which happened extremely rarely in ancient history. There is no doubt that after the Persian conquest, life in the city and the surrounding lands continued to proceed as before; In the temples, sacrifices were made daily and the usual rituals were performed, which served as the basis of public life. Cyrus turned out to be a wise enough ruler not to humiliate his new subjects. He lived in the royal palace, visited the temples, worshiped the national god Marduk, and paid due respect to the priests who still controlled the politics of the ancient empire. He did not interfere in the trade and commercial activities of the city, and did not impose an unnecessarily heavy tribute on its inhabitants. After all, it was the unfair and burdensome exactions of selfish tax collectors that often served as the cause of uprisings in conquered cities.

This would have continued for quite a long time and the city would have flourished further if not for the ambitious plans of pretenders to the Babylonian throne during the reign of Cyrus' successor Darius (522-486 BC). Two of them claimed to be the sons of Nabonidus, the last of the independent kings of Babylon, although whether this was actually the case is unknown to us. The only mention of them remains in the Behistun inscription, carved by order of Darius. From it we learn that the Persian king defeated the rebels, and executed one of them, Nidintu-Bela, and crucified the other, Arakha, in Babylon. On the relief, Nidintu-Bel is depicted second, and Arakha seventh, in a row of nine conspirators tied to each other by the necks and standing in front of Darius. Nidintu-Bel is depicted as an elderly, possibly gray-bearded man with a large, fleshy nose; Arakha is represented as young and stronger. Persian texts say the following about these rebels:

“A certain Babylonian named Nidintu-Bel, son of Aniri, rebelled in Babylon; he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then all the provinces of Babylonia went over to this Nidintu-Bel, and Babylonia rebelled. He seized power in Babylonia.

So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, against this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar. Nidintu-Bel's army held the Tigris. Here they fortified themselves and built ships. Then I divided my army, putting some on camels, others on horses.

Ahuramazda helped me; by the grace of Ahuramazda we crossed the Tigris. Then I completely destroyed the fortifications of Nidintu-Bel. On the twenty-sixth day of the month of Atria (December 18), we entered into battle. So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, but before I reached it, this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, approached with an army and proposed to fight near the city of Zazana on the banks of the Euphrates... The enemies fled into the water; the water carried them away. Nidintu-Bel then fled with several horsemen to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda I took Babylon and captured this Nidintu-Bel. Then I took his life in Babylon...

So says King Darius. While I was in Persia and Media, the Babylonians raised a second revolt against me. A certain man named Arakha, an Armenian, son of Khaldit, led the uprising. In a place called Dubala, he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then the Babylonians rose up against me and went with this Arakha. He captured Babylon; he became king of Babylon.

So says King Darius. Then I sent an army to Babylon. I appointed a Persian named Vindefrana, my servant, as commander, and I spoke to them like this: “Go and defeat this Babylonian enemy who does not recognize me!” Vindefrana then went with an army to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda, Vindefrana overthrew the Babylonians...

On the twenty-second day of the month Markazanash (November 27), this Arakha, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, and his main followers were captured and chained. Then I proclaimed: “Let Arakha and his chief followers be crucified in Babylon!”

According to Herodotus, who wrote his work just fifty years after these events, the Persian king destroyed the city walls and demolished the gates, although if he stationed his troops in the palaces and houses of the city in winter, he obviously did not destroy everything. True, the matter was not limited to the destruction of the fortifications; he also ordered the crucification of three thousand of the main instigators, which gives some idea of ​​the population of Babylon in 522 BC. e. If these three thousand were representatives of the highest religious and civil leadership - say, one hundredth part of all citizens - then it turns out that the adult population was about 300 thousand, to which should be added about 300 thousand children, slaves, servants, foreigners and other inhabitants . Taking into account the population density of the cities of the Middle East, it can be argued that about a million people lived in Babylon and its environs.

Despite the destruction caused by Darius, the city continued to be the economic center of the Middle East, as it was located at the intersection of routes from north to south and from east to west. However, under the Persians it gradually lost its religious significance. After another uprising, the Persian king Xerxes (486-465 BC) ordered the destruction of not only the remains of walls and fortifications, but also the famous temple of Marduk, and the statue was taken away.

The significance of such an order is especially emphasized by the fact that, according to popular belief in the Middle East, the well-being of a people depended on the well-being of the temple of its main god. Suffice it to recall how quickly Sumerian cities fell into decay after enemies destroyed their temples and stole statues of the gods. According to the unnamed author of “Lament for the Destruction of Ur,” it was the desecration of the statues of the gods that led to such sad consequences. It says nothing about the defeat of the army, poor leadership or economic reasons for the defeat - which our contemporaries would say when discussing the reasons for the defeat. All disasters, according to the author, happened solely because the dwellings of the gods were violated.

The most famous example of the identification of a national deity with the fate of a people is the Old Testament story of the destruction of the Temple and the theft of the Ark, which were the culminating moment of the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. The Ark is not just a shrine to the god Yahweh, it is a kind of symbol comparable to the eagles of the Roman legions (the loss of which was considered equivalent to the cessation of the existence of the legion). A box for storing a stone fetish, possibly from Mount Serbal on the Sinai Peninsula, was identified with the abode of Yahweh when he decided to come down to earth to people. Other Semitic peoples also had similar temples and “arks”. All of them, along with religious ones, also largely performed military functions, so that the Jewish Yahweh and the Babylonian Marduk played a similar role as a military deity. Thus, Yahweh, who in the early books of the Bible is identified with the Ark itself, leads the Israelites in battle, and is glorified in case of victory, but never blamed in case of defeat. Defeat, for example from the Philistines, is explained by the fact that during the battle the Ark was not on the battlefield. The captivity and exile to Babylon is also explained by the fact that Nebuchadnezzar took away the container of Yahweh. Now it was the turn of the Babylonians to suffer when Xerxes destroyed the sanctuary of Esagila and deprived them of the statue of Marduk.

The destruction of the central temple in such a theocratic society as Babylonian inevitably meant the end of the old order, since kings could no longer be crowned kings according to ancient customs at the Akutu festival. This ritual was so important in the state cult that it is mentioned in connection with all the victories of the state. So what was this “akutu” and why was it so necessary for the successful functioning of the Babylonian socio-political system?

First of all, it was a celebration of the New Year, which always played a very important role in ancient societies as a symbolic meeting of spring and a period of renewal of life. On such an important occasion, Marduk left his temple and was carried at the head of a huge procession along the Processional Road. Along the way, he met the gods of distant cities, especially the former rival and now chief guest of Nabu, the patron saint of the city-state of Borsippa. Both gods were brought into the Sacred Chamber or Holy of Holies, where they held council with the other gods regarding the fate of the universe. Such was the divine, or heavenly, meaning of the New Year holiday. The earthly meaning was that God transferred power over the city to his viceroy-king, for until the king “put his hand in the hand of Marduk,” thus symbolizing succession, he could not become the legitimate spiritual and earthly king of Babylon.

In addition, Akunu was an annual festival of all the gods, as well as their priests, priestesses and temple servants. The ceremonies to celebrate the New Year were so solemn and symbolic that not a single king of Babylon, Assyria, and at first Persia dared to refuse to attend the Assembly of the Gods. Statues of gods, kings, princes, priests and the entire population of the city dressed in special clothes for this occasion; every detail of the ritual had its own religious significance, every action was accompanied by such ceremonies that this holiday could rightfully be called the most solemn and magnificent spectacle in the entire then known world. The number and roles of the participants, the number of victims burned, the processions of ships and chariots, as well as the unusually magnificent rituals represented the quintessence of the entire religious tradition of the Babylonian state. Only by realizing all this can one understand why the desecration of the temple of the main god disrupted the structure of the Babylonian theocracy and weakened the vital forces of society. The theft of the main idol meant that no Babylonian would henceforth be able to join his hand with the hand of Marduk and declare himself an earthly king with a divine right to lead the country, and no Babylonian would be able to see the religious action that depicted the death and resurrection of Marduk.

The destruction of the “soul” of the city, of course, did not mean that it instantly turned into ruins and was abandoned by its inhabitants. Yes, many influential citizens were crucified or tortured to death, and thousands were taken into captivity, becoming slaves or soldiers of the Persian kings who fought against the Greek city-states. But during the time of Herodotus, who visited the city around 450 BC. e., Babylon continued to exist and even flourish, although outwardly it gradually deteriorated, since it no longer had local kings who would take care of the condition of the walls and temples. The Persian rulers had no time for this; they tried to conquer Sparta and Athens, but without success, losing troops and navy. In 311 BC. e. The Achaemenid Empire under the leadership of Darius III suffered a final defeat. Alexander the Great entered Babylon and proclaimed himself its king.

Alexander's contemporaries give an excellent description of Babylon. As some later authors, notably the Greek Flavius ​​Arrian, note, Alexander, wishing to immortalize his exploits for posterity, appointed several of his subordinates as military historians, instructing them to record the events of each day. All records were compiled into a single book, which was called “Ephemerides” or “Daily Book”. Thanks to these records, as well as the stories of warriors recorded later by other authors, we have the most complete description of military campaigns, countries, peoples and conquered cities in the entire era of antiquity.

Alexander did not have to take Babylon by storm, since the ruler of the city Mazeus came out to meet him along with his wife, children and mayors. The Macedonian commander, apparently, accepted the capitulation with relief, since he did not really want to besiege this, judging by the description of the contemporary Greek historian, a very fortified city. From this we can conclude that the walls destroyed by Xerxes in 484

BC e., by 331 they were restored. The local population was not at all preparing to repel the attack, but, on the contrary, gathered to greet the Greek conqueror. Officials vied with each other to try not only to point out Darius’ treasury, but also to strew the hero’s path with flowers and garlands, erect silver altars on his way and fumigate them with incense. In short, Alexander, who had not fired a single arrow, was given such honors as were later given only to the most famous Roman generals. The Babylonians, remembering that the capture of a city is usually celebrated with executions or crucifixion of prisoners, hastened to appease the winner by providing him with herds of horses and herds of cows, which the Greek quartermasters favorably accepted. The triumphal procession was led by cages of lions and leopards, followed by priests, soothsayers and musicians; bringing up the rear were Babylonian horsemen, a kind of guard of honor. According to the Greeks, these horsemen “submitted themselves to the demands of luxury rather than utility.” All this luxury surprised and amazed the Greek mercenaries, who were not accustomed to it; after all, their goal was extraction, not conquest of new territories. The Babylonians were superior to these, in their opinion, semi-barbarians in cunning and intelligence. And it's worth noting that in this case, they actually saved the city by avoiding battle and making the invaders fall in love with it. This is exactly what the priests, officials and horsemen in magnificent attire sought. Alexander was immediately taken to the royal chambers, showing the treasures and furniture of Darius. Alexander's generals were nearly blinded by the luxury of the accommodations provided to them; ordinary warriors were placed in more modest, but no less comfortable houses, the owners of which tried to please them in everything. As the historian writes:

“Nowhere did the morale of Alexander’s army decline so much as in Babylon. Nothing corrupts more than the customs of this city, nothing excites and awakens dissolute desires. Fathers and husbands allow their daughters and wives to give themselves to guests. Kings and their courtiers willingly organize festive drinking bouts throughout Persia; but the Babylonians were especially strongly attached to wine and devoted to the drunkenness that accompanied it. The women present at these drinking parties are dressed modestly at first, then they take off their clothes one by one and gradually strip off their modesty. And finally - let's say this out of respect for your ears - they throw away the most intimate veils from their bodies. Such shameful behavior is characteristic not only of dissolute women, but also of married mothers and spinsters who consider prostitution a courtesy. At the end of thirty-four days of such intemperance, the army that conquered Asia would undoubtedly weaken in the face of danger if it were suddenly attacked by any enemy ... "

Whether this is true or not, we must remember that these words were written by a Roman of the old school. However, they liked the reception given to Alexander’s soldiers in Babylon so much that they did not destroy the city and commit atrocities usual for that time. The Macedonian king stayed here longer than anywhere else during the entire campaign, and even gave orders to restore buildings and improve the appearance of the capital. Thousands of workers began to clear the rubble from the site of the Temple of Marduk, which was to be rebuilt. Construction continued for ten years and even two years after the death of Alexander in the same Babylon.

He died in 325 BC. e., and the circumstances of his death are quite curious, since it happened due to drinking. From his early youth - despite the upbringing given to him by Aristotle - Alexander was fond of wine and merry feasts. Once, during one such feast, at which, in addition to Alexander, his generals and local courtesans were present, one of those present set fire to the palace in Persepolis, the residence of the Persian kings, destroying in his rampage one of the most beautiful buildings of the Ancient World. Returning to Babylon, Alexander returned to his old ways, but his long binge ended in serious illness. Perhaps the cause of his premature death was cirrhosis of the liver.

One thing is certain - the short thirteen-year reign of this Macedonian king radically changed the cultural and political situation throughout the then known world, and especially in the Middle East. By that time, these lands had seen the rise and fall of the Sumerians, Assyrians, Medes and Babylonians. The Persian Empire also fell to a small but invincible army consisting of Macedonian cavalry and Greek mercenaries. Almost all the cities from Tire in the west to Ecbatana in the east were razed to the ground, their rulers were tortured and executed, and their inhabitants were slaughtered or sold into slavery. But Babylon managed to avoid destruction this time thanks to the fact that it wisely played on the addiction of the Macedonians and Greeks to wine and women. The great city was to survive and exist for several more centuries before it died a natural death of old age.

Alexander was given a traditionally lavish funeral, accompanied by public displays of grief, hair pulling, suicide attempts and predictions of the end of the world, for what kind of future could one talk about after the death of the deified hero? But behind all this solemn façade, generals and politicians had already begun to argue about the inheritance, since Alexander had not appointed his successor and had not left a will. True, he had a legitimate son from the Persian princess Barsina, daughter of Darius III; another heir was expected from his second wife, Roxana, princess of Bactria. Before the body of her late husband had been placed in the grave, Roxana, no doubt instigated by the courtiers, killed her rival Barsina and her young son. But she did not have to take advantage of the fruits of her cunning; Soon she too shared the fate of her rival along with her son Alexander IV. She died at the hands of the same commander Cassander, who had previously killed the mother of Alexander the Great, Queen Olympias. The Oxford Classical Dictionary describes this monster as “a merciless master of his craft,” but this is a rather modest description of a man who killed two queens and a prince in cold blood. However, Alexander’s veterans surprisingly quickly came to terms with the death of Roxana and her son, because they did not want to see a king with “mixed blood” on the throne. The Greeks did not fight for this, they said, to bow to the son of Alexander by a foreigner.

The death of two possible successors, the sons of the Persian Barsina and Roxana from Bactria, opened the way to the throne for all the ambitious commanders who crossed Asia with Alexander and participated in the legendary battles. Ultimately, their rivalry led to internecine wars, which little affected Babylon, as they were fought on the outskirts of the empire.

Therefore, we can consider that the death of Alexander marked the end of the history of Babylon as the greatest city in the world. The inhabitants themselves hardly mourned the death of the emperor much - they loved the Greeks no more than the Persians - but the Greek conquest initially promised great hope. Alexander declared that he was going to make Babylon his eastern capital and rebuild the temple of Marduk. If his plans had been implemented, Babylon would once again have become the political, commercial and religious capital of the entire East. But Alexander died suddenly, and the most far-sighted residents seemed to immediately understand that the last chance for revival was hopelessly lost. It was clear to anyone that after the death of the conqueror, chaos reigned for a long time, and yesterday’s close associates of the king squabbled among themselves over the remains of the empire. Various sons, wives, friends and associates of Alexander sought to take possession of Babylon, until finally this city fell to the commander Seleucus Nicator.

During the reign of this Greek warrior, who, like others, was forced to make his way with weapons, the city experienced several years of peace. The new ruler even intended to make it the capital of the Middle East again. The remains of the Temple of Marduk continued to be carefully dismantled, although due to the sheer volume of them, the work was never completed. This in itself was a sign of the decline of Babylon. It seemed that vitality was leaving the city; the inhabitants were overcome by a feeling of hopelessness, and they realized that their city would never regain its former greatness, that they would never rebuild the temple of Marduk, and that constant wars would finally destroy the old way of life. In 305 BC. e. Seleucus also realized the futility of his attempts and decided to found a new city, calling it after himself. Seleucia was built on the banks of the Tigris, 40 miles north of Babylon, still at the crossroads of the east-west routes, but far enough from the old capital that it became its rival. In order to finally put an end to the city that had outlived its age, Seleucus ordered all major officials to leave Babylon and move to Seleucia. Naturally, merchants and traders followed them.

The artificially created city grew quickly, satisfying the vanity of Seleucus Nicator rather than the needs of the surrounding area. Most of the population came from Babylon, and bricks and other building materials were transported from Babylon. With the support of the ruler, Seleucia quickly overtook Babylon, and in a very short time its population exceeded half a million. The agricultural lands around the new capital were quite fertile and were irrigated by water from a canal connecting the Tigris and Euphrates. The same canal also served as an additional trade route, so it is not surprising that two hundred years after its founding, Seleucia was considered the largest transit point in the East. Wars in that region raged almost continuously, and the city was constantly captured and plundered, until in 165 AD. e. it was not completely destroyed by the Romans. After this, the ancient Babylonian bricks were transported again and used to build the city of Ctesiphon, which in turn was sacked and destroyed during the Eastern wars.

For a long time, Babylon continued to exist next to its prosperous neighbor as a second capital and as a center of religious worship, which by that time had already become significantly outdated. The rulers of the city supported the temples of the gods, which during the Hellenistic period had fewer and fewer admirers. To the new generation of Greek philosophers, scientists, writers and artists - representatives of the elite of the civilized world - all the old gods, like Marduk and the rest of the gods of the Sumerian-Babylonian pantheon, seemed absurd and funny, like the bestial gods of Egypt. Possibly by the 2nd century. BC e. Babylon was already almost deserted, and it was visited only by lovers of antiquities, who were accidentally brought to these parts; Apart from services in temples, little happened here. The officials and merchants, having left the old capital, left behind only the priests, who continued to maintain the appearance of activity in the sanctuary of Marduk, praying for the prosperity of the ruling king and his family. The more enlightened of them probably continued to observe the planets for the purpose of predicting the future, since astrology was considered a more reliable method of divination than others, such as divination by the entrails of animals. The reputation of the Chaldean magicians was also high in Roman times, as can be seen, for example, from the Gospel of Matthew, which tells about the “magi from the East” who came to worship the born Christ. The great Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria praises Babylonian mathematicians and astrologers for their research into the nature of the universe, calling them “true magicians.”

Whether the priests of the last days of Babylon deserved such a flattering description from Philo, and at the same time from Cicero, is a moot point, for at the beginning of our era in the West they knew only one name “the greatest city the world has ever seen.” In the East, the special privileges that Babylon enjoyed made it a kind of “open city” in an era of constant wars between the various conquerors of Mesopotamia - the Greeks, Parthians, Elamites and Romans. His authority remained so great that even the most insignificant leader of a detachment who managed to temporarily capture the city considered it his duty to call himself “King of Babylon,” patronize temples and gods, dedicate gifts to them and, probably, even “put his hand in the hand of Marduk.” ", confirming his divine right to the kingdom. Whether these later monarchs believed in Marduk or not is not important, because all the pagan gods completely replaced each other. Marduk could be identified with Olympian Zeus or Jupiter-Bel - the names changed depending on the language and nationality. The main thing was to maintain the earthly dwelling of God in good condition, so that he would have somewhere to go down to meet people; as long as the cult of Marduk retained some significance and the corps of priests performed services, Babylon continued to exist.

However, in 50 BC. e. the historian Diodorus Siculus wrote that the great temple of Marduk lay in ruins again. He states: “In essence, only a small part of the city is now inhabited, and the larger space within the walls is given over to agriculture.” But even during this period, in many ancient cities of Mesopotamia, in many dilapidated temples, services were held to the old gods - just as a thousand years later, after the Arab conquest, Christ continued to be worshiped in Egypt. The Arab historian El-Bekri gives a vivid description of the Christian rituals performed in the city of Menas, located in the Libyan desert. Although this is not the place and time we are considering, approximately the same could be said about Babylon.

“Mina (i.e. Menas) is easily identified by its buildings, which still stand today. You can also see fortified walls around these beautiful buildings and palaces. They are mostly in the form of a covered colonnade, and some are inhabited by monks. There are several wells preserved there, but their water supply is insufficient. Next you can see the Cathedral of Saint Menas, a huge building decorated with statues and beautiful mosaics. There are lamps burning inside day and night. At one end of the church there is a huge marble tomb with two camels, and above it a statue of a man standing on these camels. The dome of the church is covered with drawings that, judging by the stories, depict angels. The entire area around the city is occupied by fruit trees, which produce excellent fruit; there are also many grapes from which wine is made.”

If we replace the cathedral of St. Menas with the temple of Marduk, and the statue of the Christian saint with the dragons of Marduk, we get a description of the last days of the Babylonian sanctuary.

One inscription from the late period records a visit by a local ruler to the ruined temple of Marduk, where he sacrificed a bull and four lambs “at the gates.” Perhaps we are talking about the Ishtar Gate - a grandiose structure excavated by Koldevey, decorated with images of bulls and dragons. Time has been kind to it, and it still stands in its place, rising almost 40 feet. One bull and four lambs are a hundredth part of what was sacrificed to the gods in former times, when the kings marched along the Processional Road to the shouts of thousands of crowds.

The Greek historian and geographer Strabo (69 BC - 19 AD), a native of Pontus, may have received first-hand information about Babylon from travelers. In his Geography, he wrote that Babylon was “mostly devastated,” the ziggurat of Marduk was destroyed, and only the huge walls, one of the seven wonders of the world, testify to the former greatness of the city. Strabo's detailed testimony, for example, he gives the exact dimensions of the city walls, contradicts the too general notes of Pliny the Elder, who in his Natural History, written around 50 AD. e., claimed that the temple of Marduk (Pliny calls it Jupiter-Bel) still stands, although the rest of the city is half destroyed and devastated. True, the Roman historian cannot always be trusted, since he often took unsubstantiated facts on faith. On the other hand, as an aristocrat and official, he occupied a fairly high position in society and could learn about many things first-hand. For example, during the Jewish War of 70 AD. e. he was part of the retinue of Emperor Titus and could personally talk with people who had visited Babylon. But since Strabo's statement about the state of the great ziggurat contradicts the testimony of Pliny, it remains a mystery to what extent Babylon remained a “living” city at that time. However, judging by the fact that Roman sources are mostly silent about it, we can conclude that this city no longer had absolutely no significance. The only mention of it occurs later in Pausanias (c. 150 AD), who wrote about the Middle East mainly based on his own observations; the reliability of his information is repeatedly confirmed by archaeological finds. Pausanias categorically states that the temple of Bel is still standing, although only the walls remain of Babylon itself.

Some modern historians find it difficult to agree with Pliny or Pausanias, although clay tablets found in Babylon indicate that worship and sacrifice were carried out during at least the first two decades of the Christian era. Moreover, in nearby Borsippa the pagan cult persisted until the 4th century. n. e. In other words, the ancient gods were in no hurry to die, especially among the conservative Babylonians, whose children were raised by the priests of Marduk. Beginning with the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC. e. Representatives of the Jewish community lived side by side with them, many of whom converted to the new, Nazarene faith. If this was indeed the case, then the mention in one of the letters of St. Peter about the “Church of Babylon” acquires a certain ambiguity - after all, it could be not so much an image of pagan Rome, but rather a real-life Jewish community, from among those that flourished throughout the Roman Empire, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. Nothing resembling a Christian church was found in the ruins of Babylon, but none of the archaeologists hoped for it. In any case, the early Christians did not have special church buildings; they met in houses or in fields and groves outside the city walls.

On the other hand, German archaeologists excavating Ctesiphon in 1928 discovered the remains of an early Christian temple (circa 5th century AD), built on the foundations of an ancient sanctuary. Thus, if in Ctesiphon before its destruction by the Arabs in 636 AD. e. If there was a Christian community, there must have been other communities scattered throughout Mesopotamia. Among them could well be the “church of Babylon”, which Peter welcomed. There is evidence that during the apostolic ministry of Peter there was no Christian community even in Rome, while in the “two Babylons” of that time - an Egyptian fortress near modern Cairo and the ancient Mesopotamian metropolis - there were Jewish communities.

At first glance, it seems strange that a new religion could exist next to the most ancient cults. But in the pagan tradition such tolerance was in the order of things. The pagans accepted the existence of other religions as long as they did not pose a threat to their own gods. The Near and Middle East gave birth to so many religions that against their background Christianity looked like just another cult. And this was a serious mistake by the religious and secular authorities of the pagan world, since it soon became clear that Christians, like their Jewish predecessors, sharply contrasted themselves with the rest of the world. And in fact, such opposition, which at first seemed like weakness, turned into strength. Proof of this is the fact that under the Muslims, Jews and Christians survived, and the cult of Marduk finally died out.

About whether there was a Christian community in Babylon in 363 AD. e., when Julian the Apostate, having gone to fight the Persian Shah Shapur I, invaded Mesopotamia, official historians do not tell us. But Julian was an opponent of Christianity, advocated the restoration of old temples and tried to revive paganism throughout the Roman Empire. If Marduk's ziggurat had continued to stand by that time, the emperor, on the road to Ctesiphon, would no doubt have ordered his warriors to turn towards it in order to maintain their morale. The fact that Julian's biographers do not even mention the name of Babylon indirectly indicates the complete decline of the city and the fact that all its inhabitants abandoned it. Biographers only report that on the way to Ctesiphon, Julian passed by some huge walls of the ancient city, behind which there was a park and a menagerie of the Persian rulers.

“Omne in medio spatium solitudo est,” states St. Jerome (345-420 AD) in a passage on the grim fate of Babylon. “The entire space between the walls is inhabited by a variety of wild animals.” So spoke one Christian from Elam, who visited the royal reserve on the way to the Jerusalem monastery. The great empire perished forever and irrevocably, which Christians and Jews accepted with satisfaction - after all, for them Babylon was a symbol of the wrath of the Lord.

Historians believe that Babylon became a victim of the natural laws of social development; after a thousand years of political, cultural and religious supremacy, the Babylonians had to worship new gods, in whose name invincible armies marched against them. The inhabitants of the ancient capital, with all their desire, could not have put up an army of equal value against them, and therefore Babylon fell. But he did not perish like Sodom and Gomorrah, who disappeared in fire and ashes; it simply faded away, like so many other beautiful cities in the Middle East. It seems that cities and civilizations, like everything in this world, have their beginning and their end.

From the book Babylon and Assyria. Life, religion, culture by Suggs Henry

From the book Aces of Espionage by Dulles Allen

Herodotus The Fall of Babylon It should be noted that misleading the enemy was practiced in ancient times, according to myths and ancient historical chronicles. As a rule, the disinformer was an imaginary deserter who allegedly fled as a result of brutal assault.

From the book Parthians [Followers of the Prophet Zarathustra] author Malcolm College

Chapter 9 The Fall of the Arsacids By the beginning of the 2nd century AD. e. dynastic struggle became commonplace for Parthian politics. Osro had been fighting for the throne of Parthia for decades by the time his last coins were minted in 128. After that he left the fight,

From the book Mycenaeans [Subjects of King Minos] by Taylor William

Chapter 7 THE RISE AND FALL OF MYCENE Archaeological finds make it possible to outline the general direction of development and fall great civilization, but do not always reveal its specific details. The main sources for them today are the Homeric epic and many legends,

From the book The Barbarossa Plan. The collapse of the Third Reich. 1941–1945 by Clark Alan

Chapter 22 THE FALL OF BERLIN Exhausted tanks crawled back to Arnswald, gathering a mass of refugees behind them. Old people and babies, the wounded, hijacked farm laborers, recruited foreign workers, deserters dressed in anything, huddled in broken carts, wandering on foot,

From the book Babylon [The Rise and Death of the City of Miracles] by Wellard James

Chapter 9 The Rise of Babylon One of the greatest difficulties encountered in studying the history of the ancient Middle East is that this territory witnessed periodic migrations of entire peoples or alliances of tribes, whose names and roots

From the book Aquarium – 3 author Kadetov Alexander

Chapter 13 The Greatness of Babylon Nineveh fell, and Babylon, which had been subject to Assyria for six hundred years, rose again to world power. Nineveh, The largest city the Euphrates valley, located on the banks of the Tigris, never lost its cultural

From the book London: a biography by Ackroyd Peter

Chapter 3 THE FALL Early on Monday morning, September 15, 1968, Dronov left his dacha for Moscow in the car of a friend from a neighboring area. It was Indian summer. The Dronov family still lived in the village; there were a lot of mushrooms in the forest, and Victor, coming on Saturday and Sunday, collected and

From the book London: a biography [with illustrations] by Ackroyd Peter

From the book World War II author Churchill Winston Spencer

Chapter 61 How many miles to Babylon? By the mid-1840s, London had acquired the reputation of the greatest city on earth - the imperial capital, an international trade and financial center, a huge international market where the whole world flocked. However, at the beginning of the 20th century, Henry Jephson,

From the book The Collapse of the Nazi Empire author Shearer William Lawrence

Chapter 17 The Fall of the Government The many disappointments and disasters that befell us during the short campaign in Norway caused great confusion in England itself, and passions raged even in the hearts of those who pre-war years was characterized by extreme apathy and

From the book London. Biography by Ackroyd Peter

Chapter 6 The Fall of Singapore Let's move on to the composition of General Percival's troops defending the island of Singapore. The 3rd Corps (General Heath) now consisted of the British 18th Division (Major General Beckwith-Smith), the main forces of which arrived on January 29, and the Anglo-Indian 11th Division

From the author's book

Chapter 3 The Fall of Mussolini Mussolini now had to bear the full brunt of the consequences of the military catastrophe into which he had plunged the country after so many years of rule. He had almost absolute power and could not shift the burden to the monarchy, to parliamentary institutions, to

From the author's book

Chapter 1. The Fall of Poland At 10 o'clock in the morning on September 5, 1939, General Halder had a conversation with General von Brauchitsch, the commander-in-chief of the German army, and General von Bock, who led Army Group North. Having considered general situation what she seemed like

From the author's book

Chapter 11 The Fall of Mussolini During the first three years of the war, the Germans retained the initiative in large-scale summer offensive operations on the European continent. Now, in 1943, the roles were reversed. In May, after the defeat of the Axis forces in Tunisia, and

From the author's book

Chapter 61 How many miles to Babylon? By the mid-1840s, London had acquired the reputation of the greatest city on earth - the imperial capital, an international trade and financial center, a huge international market where the whole world flocked. However, at the beginning of the 20th century, Henry

Fall of Babylon

Babylon, excavated by Koldewey, was the capital of an empire created almost exclusively by the will of one of its last kings, Nebuchadnezzar II. The period of the so-called Neo-Babylonian kingdom lasted from 605 to 538 BC. e., and at the end of it, Babylon from the center of the civilized world turned into a dying provincial city, with few inhabitants, dilapidated and forgotten.

So what is the reason for the fall of the majestic capital?

Part of the answer is that in the age of military despots, states are only strong when their rulers are strong. In the case of Babylon VII-VI centuries. BC e. One can name only two such strong rulers who were able to turn the course of history for the benefit of their people - Nabopolassar (626-605 BC) and his son Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 BC). The kings of Babylon who ruled before and after them ended up as puppets either in the hands of foreign rulers or local priests.

When Nabopolassar came to power, Babylon, as it had been for the previous two hundred years, was still a vassal state of Assyria. During this time, Assyria conquered almost the entire then known world, taking possession of vast territories and causing the boundless wrath of the conquered peoples. The Medes were especially burdened by the Assyrian yoke, and Nabopolassar made the main bet on them in the struggle for independence. The Medes successfully repelled the attacks of the Assyrians for several centuries and became famous as skilled horsemen and brave warriors. King Cyaxares of Media, to the delight of Nabopolassar, agreed to seal the alliance by marrying his daughter Amytis to the Babylonian prince Nebuchadnezzar.

After this, both kings felt strong enough to wage an all-out war against the hated Assyrians. Apparently, the leading role in this war was played by the Medes, who besieged Nineveh for three years; Having broken through the walls, they were able to achieve their goal - to destroy the Assyrian capital, in which the Babylonians willingly helped them. After the fall of Assyria, Nabopolassar, as an ally of the victorious Indian king, received the southern part of the former empire. Thus, Babylon gained independence and new territories not so much through military action as through the skillful diplomacy and insight of its ruler. Prince Nebuchadnezzar later became famous for his military campaigns, defeating the Egyptians at the Battle of Carchemish in 604 BC. BC, and then the Jews in the Battle of Jerusalem in 598 BC. e. and the Phoenicians in 586 BC. e.

Thus, thanks to the diplomatic skill of Nabopolassar and the military prowess of Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian Empire was created, and its capital became the largest, richest and most powerful city in the entire then known world. Unfortunately for the subjects of this empire, the successor of its great kings was Amel-Marduk, whom the Babylonian historian Berossus describes as “the unworthy successor of his father (Nebuchadnezzar), unrestrained by law or decency”—a rather curious accusation against an Eastern monarch, especially if you remember all the atrocities of former despots. But we should not forget that the priest accused him of “intemperance,” and it was the priests who conspired to kill the king, after which they transferred power to the commander Nergal-Sharusur, or Neriglissar, who took part in the siege of Jerusalem in 597 BC. e., according to the Book of the prophet Jeremiah (39:1-3):

“In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came with all his army to Jerusalem, and besieged it.

And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, the city was taken.

And all the princes of the king of Babylon entered into it and sat in the middle gate, Nergal-Sharetzer, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsehim, the chief of the eunuchs, Nergal-Sharetzer, the chief of the magicians, and all the other princes of the king of Babylon.”

It is noteworthy to mention two Nergal-Sha-retzers at once, which is not surprising, since this name means “may Nergal protect the king.” The second of them, the chief of the magicians, was most likely a court official; the first, obviously, was the son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar, whose son, Amel-Marduk, was killed during the uprising. Little is known about this Neriglissar, except that he reigned for only three years (559-556 BC), and his son even less - eleven months. Then the priests placed another of their protege on the throne - Nabonidus, the son of a priest.

Nabonidus seems to have spent the seventeen years of his reign doing nothing but restoring the temples of his country and tracing the ancient history of his people. He traveled throughout the kingdom with a retinue of historians, archaeologists and architects, overseeing the implementation of his building program and not paying much attention to political and military issues. He founded his permanent residence in the Teima oasis, transferring the management of the empire onto the shoulders of his son Bel-Shar-Usur, that is, the biblical Belshazzar. Nabonidus called him “the firstborn, the offspring of my heart.”

As often happens - at least in the official versions of history - a pious, enlightened and peace-loving monarch, instead of recognition and love, receives the contempt and ingratitude of his subjects. What the Babylonians themselves thought about this ruler, whose manners resembled more a professor than an emperor, we do not know. The thoughts and opinions of the average Babylonian never served as a measure of the valor of the rulers of ancient Mesopotamia, but we can more or less likely guess that the average person was hardly interested in the history of religion or the restoration of temples in distant provinces. The king, on the contrary, was very interested in this, and especially in the restoration of the temple of Sin, the ancient lunar deity, the son of Enlil, the god of the air, and Ki, the goddess of the earth. He so wanted to rebuild this temple in his hometown of Harran that this desire gave rise to discontent among the Babylonian priests and merchants; in other words, they felt that their god and their interests were suffering due to the fault of the very man whom they had nominated for kingship.

Be that as it may, it so happened that Babylon, the most impregnable city in the world, in 538 BC. e. yielded almost without bloodshed to the onslaught of the Persian army led by Cyrus the Great. Surely this fact discouraged many contemporaries and some scientists of later times, because in that era the capture of the city was accompanied by streams of blood, destruction of houses, torture of local residents, violence against women and other similar atrocities. This again contradicts what is described in the Bible and predicted in the prophecy of Jeremiah. The story about “king” Belshazzar and the writing on the wall should most likely be considered a fairy tale, for Belshazzar was the son not of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabonidus, and not a king, but a prince. And they killed him not in Babylon, but on the western bank of the Tigris during the battle with the Persian Cyrus. And he did not at all cede his kingdom to “Darius the Mede.”

Likewise, Jeremiah's terrible prophecy that Babylon would become a place of desolation and savagery was ultimately fulfilled not because Yahweh decided to punish the offenders of the Jews, but because of the prolonged wars and conquests that devastated the land over the centuries. Despite all the prophecies, the great city continued to prosper under the rule of Cyrus, whose laudatory inscription partly explains what happened:

“I, Cyrus, king of the world... After I mercifully entered Babylon, with immeasurable joy I made my home in the royal palace... My numerous troops peacefully entered Babylon, and I turned my attention to the capital and its colonies, freed the Babylonians from slavery and oppression. I made their sighs quiet and softened their sorrows.”

This inscription is, of course, in the best spirit of official wartime reports, both ancient and modern, but it gives at least some idea of ​​the siege of Babylon in 539 BC. e. - namely, that Babylon was treacherously surrendered; otherwise Nabonidus' son Belshazzar would not have had to fight outside the city. Additional details of this story are set forth by Herodotus, who may well have heard the story of the capture of the city from an eyewitness. The Greek historian writes that Cyrus besieged the city for quite a long time, but unsuccessfully because of its powerful walls. In the end, the Persians resorted to the traditional trick, taking advantage of the division of the Euphrates into several lateral branches, and the advance troops were able to enter the city along the river bed from the north and south. Herodotus notes that the city was so large that the townspeople living in the center did not know that the enemies had already occupied the outskirts, and continued to dance and have fun on the occasion of the holiday. Thus Babylon was taken.

So, Cyrus conquered the city without destroying it, which happened extremely rarely in ancient history. There is no doubt that after the Persian conquest, life in the city and the surrounding lands continued to proceed as before; In the temples, sacrifices were made daily and the usual rituals were performed, which served as the basis of public life. Cyrus turned out to be a wise enough ruler not to humiliate his new subjects. He lived in the royal palace, visited the temples, worshiped the national god Marduk, and paid due respect to the priests who still controlled the politics of the ancient empire. He did not interfere in the trade and commercial activities of the city, and did not impose an unnecessarily heavy tribute on its inhabitants. After all, it was the unfair and burdensome exactions of selfish tax collectors that often served as the cause of uprisings in conquered cities.

This would have continued for quite a long time and the city would have flourished further if not for the ambitious plans of pretenders to the Babylonian throne during the reign of Cyrus' successor Darius (522-486 BC). Two of them claimed to be the sons of Nabonidus, the last of the independent kings of Babylon, although whether this was actually the case is unknown to us. The only mention of them remains in the Behistun inscription, carved by order of Darius. From it we learn that the Persian king defeated the rebels, and executed one of them, Nidintu-Bela, and crucified the other, Arakha, in Babylon. On the relief, Nidintu-Bel is depicted second, and Arakha seventh, in a row of nine conspirators tied to each other by the necks and standing in front of Darius. Nidintu-Bel is depicted as an elderly, possibly gray-bearded man with a large, fleshy nose; Arakha is represented as young and stronger. Persian texts say the following about these rebels:

“A certain Babylonian named Nidintu-Bel, son of Aniri, rebelled in Babylon; he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then all the provinces of Babylonia went over to this Nidintu-Bel, and Babylonia rebelled. He seized power in Babylonia.

So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, against this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar. Nidintu-Bel's army held the Tigris. Here they fortified themselves and built ships. Then I divided my army, putting some on camels, others on horses.

Ahuramazda helped me; by the grace of Ahuramazda we crossed the Tigris. Then I completely destroyed the fortifications of Nidintu-Bel. On the twenty-sixth day of the month of Atria (December 18), we entered into battle. So says King Darius. Then I went to Babylon, but before I reached it, this Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, approached with an army and proposed to fight near the city of Zazana on the banks of the Euphrates... The enemies fled into the water; the water carried them away. Nidintu-Bel then fled with several horsemen to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda I took Babylon and captured this Nidintu-Bel. Then I took his life in Babylon...

So says King Darius. While I was in Persia and Media, the Babylonians raised a second revolt against me. A certain man named Arakha, an Armenian, son of Khaldit, led the uprising. In a place called Dubala, he lied to the people, saying, “I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.” Then the Babylonians rose up against me and went with this Arakha. He captured Babylon; he became king of Babylon.

So says King Darius. Then I sent an army to Babylon. I appointed a Persian named Vindefrana, my servant, as commander, and I spoke to them like this: “Go and defeat this Babylonian enemy who does not recognize me!” Vindefrana then went with an army to Babylon. With the favor of Ahuramazda, Vindefrana overthrew the Babylonians...

On the twenty-second day of the month Markazanash (November 27), this Arakha, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar, and his main followers were captured and chained. Then I proclaimed: “Let Arakha and his chief followers be crucified in Babylon!”

According to Herodotus, who wrote his work just fifty years after these events, the Persian king destroyed the city walls and demolished the gates, although if he stationed his troops in the palaces and houses of the city in winter, he obviously did not destroy everything. True, the matter was not limited to the destruction of the fortifications; he also ordered the crucification of three thousand of the main instigators, which gives some idea of ​​the population of Babylon in 522 BC. e. If these three thousand were representatives of the highest religious and civil leadership - say, one hundredth part of all citizens - then it turns out that the adult population was about 300 thousand, to which should be added about 300 thousand children, slaves, servants, foreigners and other inhabitants . Taking into account the population density of the cities of the Middle East, it can be argued that about a million people lived in Babylon and its environs.

Despite the destruction caused by Darius, the city continued to be the economic center of the Middle East, as it was located at the intersection of routes from north to south and from east to west. However, under the Persians it gradually lost its religious significance. After another uprising, the Persian king Xerxes (486-465 BC) ordered the destruction of not only the remains of walls and fortifications, but also the famous temple of Marduk, and the statue was taken away.

The significance of such an order is especially emphasized by the fact that, according to popular belief in the Middle East, the well-being of a people depended on the well-being of the temple of its main god. Suffice it to recall how quickly Sumerian cities fell into decay after enemies destroyed their temples and stole statues of the gods. According to the unnamed author of “Lament for the Destruction of Ur,” it was the desecration of the statues of the gods that led to such sad consequences. It says nothing about the defeat of the army, poor leadership or economic reasons for the defeat - which our contemporaries would say when discussing the reasons for the defeat. All disasters, according to the author, happened solely because the dwellings of the gods were violated.

The most famous example of the identification of a national deity with the fate of a people is the Old Testament story of the destruction of the Temple and the theft of the Ark, which were the culminating moment of the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. The Ark is not just a shrine to the god Yahweh, it is a kind of symbol comparable to the eagles of the Roman legions (the loss of which was considered equivalent to the cessation of the existence of the legion). A box for storing a stone fetish, possibly from Mount Serbal on the Sinai Peninsula, was identified with the abode of Yahweh when he decided to come down to earth to people. Other Semitic peoples also had similar temples and “arks”. All of them, along with religious ones, also largely performed military functions, so that the Jewish Yahweh and the Babylonian Marduk played a similar role as a military deity. Thus, Yahweh, who in the early books of the Bible is identified with the Ark itself, leads the Israelites in battle, and is glorified in case of victory, but never blamed in case of defeat. Defeat, for example from the Philistines, is explained by the fact that during the battle the Ark was not on the battlefield. The captivity and exile to Babylon is also explained by the fact that Nebuchadnezzar took away the container of Yahweh. Now it was the turn of the Babylonians to suffer when Xerxes destroyed the sanctuary of Esagila and deprived them of the statue of Marduk.

The destruction of the central temple in such a theocratic society as Babylonian inevitably meant the end of the old order, since kings could no longer be crowned kings according to ancient customs at the Akutu festival. This ritual was so important in the state cult that it is mentioned in connection with all the victories of the state. So what was this “akutu” and why was it so necessary for the successful functioning of the Babylonian socio-political system?

First of all, it was a celebration of the New Year, which always played a very important role in ancient societies as a symbolic meeting of spring and a period of renewal of life. On such an important occasion, Marduk left his temple and was carried at the head of a huge procession along the Processional Road. Along the way, he met the gods of distant cities, especially the former rival and now chief guest of Nabu, the patron saint of the city-state of Borsippa. Both gods were brought into the Sacred Chamber or Holy of Holies, where they held council with the other gods regarding the fate of the universe. Such was the divine, or heavenly, meaning of the New Year holiday. The earthly meaning was that God transferred power over the city to his viceroy-king, for until the king “put his hand in the hand of Marduk,” thus symbolizing succession, he could not become the legitimate spiritual and earthly king of Babylon.

In addition, Akunu was an annual festival of all the gods, as well as their priests, priestesses and temple servants. The ceremonies to celebrate the New Year were so solemn and symbolic that not a single king of Babylon, Assyria, and at first Persia dared to refuse to attend the Assembly of the Gods. Statues of gods, kings, princes, priests and the entire population of the city dressed in special clothes for this occasion; every detail of the ritual had its own religious significance, every action was accompanied by such ceremonies that this holiday could rightfully be called the most solemn and magnificent spectacle in the entire then known world. The number and roles of the participants, the number of victims burned, the processions of ships and chariots, as well as the unusually magnificent rituals represented the quintessence of the entire religious tradition of the Babylonian state. Only by realizing all this can one understand why the desecration of the temple of the main god disrupted the structure of the Babylonian theocracy and weakened the vital forces of society. The theft of the main idol meant that no Babylonian would henceforth be able to join his hand with the hand of Marduk and declare himself an earthly king with a divine right to lead the country, and no Babylonian would be able to see the religious action that depicted the death and resurrection of Marduk.

The destruction of the “soul” of the city, of course, did not mean that it instantly turned into ruins and was abandoned by its inhabitants. Yes, many influential citizens were crucified or tortured to death, and thousands were taken into captivity, becoming slaves or soldiers of the Persian kings who fought against the Greek city-states. But during the time of Herodotus, who visited the city around 450 BC. e., Babylon continued to exist and even flourish, although outwardly it gradually deteriorated, since it no longer had local kings who would take care of the condition of the walls and temples. The Persian rulers had no time for this; they tried to conquer Sparta and Athens, but without success, losing troops and navy. In 311 BC. e. The Achaemenid Empire under the leadership of Darius III suffered a final defeat. Alexander the Great entered Babylon and proclaimed himself its king.

Alexander's contemporaries give an excellent description of Babylon. As some later authors, notably the Greek Flavius ​​Arrian, note, Alexander, wishing to immortalize his exploits for posterity, appointed several of his subordinates as military historians, instructing them to record the events of each day. All records were compiled into a single book, which was called “Ephemerides” or “Daily Book”. Thanks to these records, as well as the stories of warriors recorded later by other authors, we have the most complete description of military campaigns, countries, peoples and conquered cities in the entire era of antiquity.

Alexander did not have to take Babylon by storm, since the ruler of the city Mazeus came out to meet him along with his wife, children and mayors. The Macedonian commander, apparently, accepted the capitulation with relief, since he did not really want to besiege this, judging by the description of the contemporary Greek historian, a very fortified city. From this we can conclude that the walls destroyed by Xerxes in 484

BC e., by 331 they were restored. The local population was not at all preparing to repel the attack, but, on the contrary, gathered to greet the Greek conqueror. Officials vied with each other to try not only to point out Darius’ treasury, but also to strew the hero’s path with flowers and garlands, erect silver altars on his way and fumigate them with incense. In short, Alexander, who had not fired a single arrow, was given such honors as were later given only to the most famous Roman generals. The Babylonians, remembering that the capture of a city is usually celebrated with executions or crucifixion of prisoners, hastened to appease the winner by providing him with herds of horses and herds of cows, which the Greek quartermasters favorably accepted. The triumphal procession was led by cages of lions and leopards, followed by priests, soothsayers and musicians; bringing up the rear were Babylonian horsemen, a kind of guard of honor. According to the Greeks, these horsemen “submitted themselves to the demands of luxury rather than utility.” All this luxury surprised and amazed the Greek mercenaries, who were not accustomed to it; after all, their goal was extraction, not conquest of new territories. The Babylonians were superior to these, in their opinion, semi-barbarians in cunning and intelligence. And it's worth noting that in this case, they actually saved the city by avoiding battle and making the invaders fall in love with it. This is exactly what the priests, officials and horsemen in magnificent attire sought. Alexander was immediately taken to the royal chambers, showing the treasures and furniture of Darius. Alexander's generals were nearly blinded by the luxury of the accommodations provided to them; ordinary warriors were placed in more modest, but no less comfortable houses, the owners of which tried to please them in everything. As the historian writes:

“Nowhere did the morale of Alexander’s army decline so much as in Babylon. Nothing corrupts more than the customs of this city, nothing excites and awakens dissolute desires. Fathers and husbands allow their daughters and wives to give themselves to guests. Kings and their courtiers willingly organize festive drinking bouts throughout Persia; but the Babylonians were especially strongly attached to wine and devoted to the drunkenness that accompanied it. The women present at these drinking parties are dressed modestly at first, then they take off their clothes one by one and gradually strip off their modesty. And finally - let's say this out of respect for your ears - they throw away the most intimate veils from their bodies. Such shameful behavior is characteristic not only of dissolute women, but also of married mothers and spinsters who consider prostitution a courtesy. At the end of thirty-four days of such intemperance, the army that conquered Asia would undoubtedly weaken in the face of danger if it were suddenly attacked by any enemy ... "

Whether this is true or not, we must remember that these words were written by a Roman of the old school. However, they liked the reception given to Alexander’s soldiers in Babylon so much that they did not destroy the city and commit atrocities usual for that time. The Macedonian king stayed here longer than anywhere else during the entire campaign, and even gave orders to restore buildings and improve the appearance of the capital. Thousands of workers began to clear the rubble from the site of the Temple of Marduk, which was to be rebuilt. Construction continued for ten years and even two years after the death of Alexander in the same Babylon.

He died in 325 BC. e., and the circumstances of his death are quite curious, since it happened due to drinking. From his early youth - despite the upbringing given to him by Aristotle - Alexander was fond of wine and merry feasts. Once, during one such feast, at which, in addition to Alexander, his generals and local courtesans were present, one of those present set fire to the palace in Persepolis, the residence of the Persian kings, destroying in his rampage one of the most beautiful buildings of the Ancient World. Returning to Babylon, Alexander returned to his old ways, but his long binge ended in serious illness. Perhaps the cause of his premature death was cirrhosis of the liver.

One thing is certain - the short thirteen-year reign of this Macedonian king radically changed the cultural and political situation throughout the then known world, and especially in the Middle East. By that time, these lands had seen the rise and fall of the Sumerians, Assyrians, Medes and Babylonians. The Persian Empire also fell to a small but invincible army consisting of Macedonian cavalry and Greek mercenaries. Almost all the cities from Tire in the west to Ecbatana in the east were razed to the ground, their rulers were tortured and executed, and their inhabitants were slaughtered or sold into slavery. But Babylon managed to avoid destruction this time thanks to the fact that it wisely played on the addiction of the Macedonians and Greeks to wine and women. The great city was to survive and exist for several more centuries before it died a natural death of old age.

Alexander was given a traditionally lavish funeral, accompanied by public displays of grief, hair pulling, suicide attempts and predictions of the end of the world, for what kind of future could one talk about after the death of the deified hero? But behind all this solemn façade, generals and politicians had already begun to argue about the inheritance, since Alexander had not appointed his successor and had not left a will. True, he had a legitimate son from the Persian princess Barsina, daughter of Darius III; another heir was expected from his second wife, Roxana, princess of Bactria. Before the body of her late husband had been placed in the grave, Roxana, no doubt instigated by the courtiers, killed her rival Barsina and her young son. But she did not have to take advantage of the fruits of her cunning; Soon she too shared the fate of her rival along with her son Alexander IV. She died at the hands of the same commander Cassander, who had previously killed the mother of Alexander the Great, Queen Olympias. The Oxford Classical Dictionary describes this monster as “a merciless master of his craft,” but this is a rather modest description of a man who killed two queens and a prince in cold blood. However, Alexander’s veterans surprisingly quickly came to terms with the death of Roxana and her son, because they did not want to see a king with “mixed blood” on the throne. The Greeks did not fight for this, they said, to bow to the son of Alexander by a foreigner.

The death of two possible successors, the sons of the Persian Barsina and Roxana from Bactria, opened the way to the throne for all the ambitious commanders who crossed Asia with Alexander and participated in the legendary battles. Ultimately, their rivalry led to internecine wars, which little affected Babylon, as they were fought on the outskirts of the empire.

Therefore, we can consider that the death of Alexander marked the end of the history of Babylon as the greatest city in the world. The inhabitants themselves hardly mourned the death of the emperor much - they loved the Greeks no more than the Persians - but the Greek conquest initially promised great hope. Alexander declared that he was going to make Babylon his eastern capital and rebuild the temple of Marduk. If his plans had been implemented, Babylon would once again have become the political, commercial and religious capital of the entire East. But Alexander died suddenly, and the most far-sighted residents seemed to immediately understand that the last chance for revival was hopelessly lost. It was clear to anyone that after the death of the conqueror, chaos reigned for a long time, and yesterday’s close associates of the king squabbled among themselves over the remains of the empire. Various sons, wives, friends and associates of Alexander sought to take possession of Babylon, until finally this city fell to the commander Seleucus Nicator.

During the reign of this Greek warrior, who, like others, was forced to make his way with weapons, the city experienced several years of peace. The new ruler even intended to make it the capital of the Middle East again. The remains of the Temple of Marduk continued to be carefully dismantled, although due to the sheer volume of them, the work was never completed. This in itself was a sign of the decline of Babylon. It seemed that vitality was leaving the city; the inhabitants were overcome by a feeling of hopelessness, and they realized that their city would never regain its former greatness, that they would never rebuild the temple of Marduk, and that constant wars would finally destroy the old way of life. In 305 BC. e. Seleucus also realized the futility of his attempts and decided to found a new city, calling it after himself. Seleucia was built on the banks of the Tigris, 40 miles north of Babylon, still at the crossroads of the east-west routes, but far enough from the old capital that it became its rival. In order to finally put an end to the city that had outlived its age, Seleucus ordered all major officials to leave Babylon and move to Seleucia. Naturally, merchants and traders followed them.

The artificially created city grew quickly, satisfying the vanity of Seleucus Nicator rather than the needs of the surrounding area. Most of the population came from Babylon, and bricks and other building materials were transported from Babylon. With the support of the ruler, Seleucia quickly overtook Babylon, and in a very short time its population exceeded half a million. The agricultural lands around the new capital were quite fertile and were irrigated by water from a canal connecting the Tigris and Euphrates. The same canal also served as an additional trade route, so it is not surprising that two hundred years after its founding, Seleucia was considered the largest transit point in the East. Wars in that region raged almost continuously, and the city was constantly captured and plundered, until in 165 AD. e. it was not completely destroyed by the Romans. After this, the ancient Babylonian bricks were transported again and used to build the city of Ctesiphon, which in turn was sacked and destroyed during the Eastern wars.

For a long time, Babylon continued to exist next to its prosperous neighbor as a second capital and as a center of religious worship, which by that time had already become significantly outdated. The rulers of the city supported the temples of the gods, which during the Hellenistic period had fewer and fewer admirers. To the new generation of Greek philosophers, scientists, writers and artists - representatives of the elite of the civilized world - all the old gods, like Marduk and the rest of the gods of the Sumerian-Babylonian pantheon, seemed absurd and funny, like the bestial gods of Egypt. Possibly by the 2nd century. BC e. Babylon was already almost deserted, and it was visited only by lovers of antiquities, who were accidentally brought to these parts; Apart from services in temples, little happened here. The officials and merchants, having left the old capital, left behind only the priests, who continued to maintain the appearance of activity in the sanctuary of Marduk, praying for the prosperity of the ruling king and his family. The more enlightened of them probably continued to observe the planets for the purpose of predicting the future, since astrology was considered a more reliable method of divination than others, such as divination by the entrails of animals. The reputation of the Chaldean magicians was also high in Roman times, as can be seen, for example, from the Gospel of Matthew, which tells about the “magi from the East” who came to worship the born Christ. The great Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria praises Babylonian mathematicians and astrologers for their research into the nature of the universe, calling them “true magicians.”

Whether the priests of the last days of Babylon deserved such a flattering description from Philo, and at the same time from Cicero, is a moot point, for at the beginning of our era in the West they knew only one name “the greatest city the world has ever seen.” In the East, the special privileges that Babylon enjoyed made it a kind of “open city” in an era of constant wars between the various conquerors of Mesopotamia - the Greeks, Parthians, Elamites and Romans. His authority remained so great that even the most insignificant leader of a detachment who managed to temporarily capture the city considered it his duty to call himself “King of Babylon,” patronize temples and gods, dedicate gifts to them and, probably, even “put his hand in the hand of Marduk.” ", confirming his divine right to the kingdom. Whether these later monarchs believed in Marduk or not is not important, because all the pagan gods completely replaced each other. Marduk could be identified with Olympian Zeus or Jupiter-Bel - the names changed depending on the language and nationality. The main thing was to maintain the earthly dwelling of God in good condition, so that he would have somewhere to go down to meet people; as long as the cult of Marduk retained some significance and the corps of priests performed services, Babylon continued to exist.

However, in 50 BC. e. the historian Diodorus Siculus wrote that the great temple of Marduk lay in ruins again. He states: “In essence, only a small part of the city is now inhabited, and the larger space within the walls is given over to agriculture.” But even during this period, in many ancient cities of Mesopotamia, in many dilapidated temples, services were held to the old gods - just as a thousand years later, after the Arab conquest, Christ continued to be worshiped in Egypt. The Arab historian El-Bekri gives a vivid description of the Christian rituals performed in the city of Menas, located in the Libyan desert. Although this is not the place and time we are considering, approximately the same could be said about Babylon.

“Mina (i.e. Menas) is easily identified by its buildings, which still stand today. You can also see fortified walls around these beautiful buildings and palaces. They are mostly in the form of a covered colonnade, and some are inhabited by monks. There are several wells preserved there, but their water supply is insufficient. Next you can see the Cathedral of Saint Menas, a huge building decorated with statues and beautiful mosaics. There are lamps burning inside day and night. At one end of the church there is a huge marble tomb with two camels, and above it a statue of a man standing on these camels. The dome of the church is covered with drawings that, judging by the stories, depict angels. The entire area around the city is occupied by fruit trees, which produce excellent fruit; there are also many grapes from which wine is made.”

If we replace the cathedral of St. Menas with the temple of Marduk, and the statue of the Christian saint with the dragons of Marduk, we get a description of the last days of the Babylonian sanctuary.

One inscription from the late period records a visit by a local ruler to the ruined temple of Marduk, where he sacrificed a bull and four lambs “at the gates.” Perhaps we are talking about the Ishtar Gate - a grandiose structure excavated by Koldevey, decorated with images of bulls and dragons. Time has been kind to it, and it still stands in its place, rising almost 40 feet. One bull and four lambs are a hundredth part of what was sacrificed to the gods in former times, when the kings marched along the Processional Road to the shouts of thousands of crowds.

The Greek historian and geographer Strabo (69 BC - 19 AD), a native of Pontus, may have received first-hand information about Babylon from travelers. In his Geography, he wrote that Babylon was “mostly devastated,” the ziggurat of Marduk was destroyed, and only the huge walls, one of the seven wonders of the world, testify to the former greatness of the city. Strabo's detailed testimony, for example, he gives the exact dimensions of the city walls, contradicts the too general notes of Pliny the Elder, who in his Natural History, written around 50 AD. e., claimed that the temple of Marduk (Pliny calls it Jupiter-Bel) still stands, although the rest of the city is half destroyed and devastated. True, the Roman historian cannot always be trusted, since he often took unsubstantiated facts on faith. On the other hand, as an aristocrat and official, he occupied a fairly high position in society and could learn about many things first-hand. For example, during the Jewish War of 70 AD. e. he was part of the retinue of Emperor Titus and could personally talk with people who had visited Babylon. But since Strabo's statement about the state of the great ziggurat contradicts the testimony of Pliny, it remains a mystery to what extent Babylon remained a “living” city at that time. However, judging by the fact that Roman sources are mostly silent about it, we can conclude that this city no longer had absolutely no significance. The only mention of it occurs later in Pausanias (c. 150 AD), who wrote about the Middle East mainly based on his own observations; the reliability of his information is repeatedly confirmed by archaeological finds. Pausanias categorically states that the temple of Bel is still standing, although only the walls remain of Babylon itself.

Some modern historians find it difficult to agree with Pliny or Pausanias, although clay tablets found in Babylon indicate that worship and sacrifice were carried out during at least the first two decades of the Christian era. Moreover, in nearby Borsippa the pagan cult persisted until the 4th century. n. e. In other words, the ancient gods were in no hurry to die, especially among the conservative Babylonians, whose children were raised by the priests of Marduk. Beginning with the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC. e. Representatives of the Jewish community lived side by side with them, many of whom converted to the new, Nazarene faith. If this was indeed the case, then the mention in one of the letters of St. Peter about the “Church of Babylon” acquires a certain ambiguity - after all, it could be not so much an image of pagan Rome, but rather a real-life Jewish community, from among those that flourished throughout the Roman Empire, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. Nothing resembling a Christian church was found in the ruins of Babylon, but none of the archaeologists hoped for it. In any case, the early Christians did not have special church buildings; they met in houses or in fields and groves outside the city walls.

On the other hand, German archaeologists excavating Ctesiphon in 1928 discovered the remains of an early Christian temple (circa 5th century AD), built on the foundations of an ancient sanctuary. Thus, if in Ctesiphon before its destruction by the Arabs in 636 AD. e. If there was a Christian community, there must have been other communities scattered throughout Mesopotamia. Among them could well be the “church of Babylon”, which Peter welcomed. There is evidence that during the apostolic ministry of Peter there was no Christian community even in Rome, while in the “two Babylons” of that time - an Egyptian fortress near modern Cairo and the ancient Mesopotamian metropolis - there were Jewish communities.

At first glance, it seems strange that a new religion could exist next to the most ancient cults. But in the pagan tradition such tolerance was in the order of things. The pagans accepted the existence of other religions as long as they did not pose a threat to their own gods. The Near and Middle East gave birth to so many religions that against their background Christianity looked like just another cult. And this was a serious mistake by the religious and secular authorities of the pagan world, since it soon became clear that Christians, like their Jewish predecessors, sharply contrasted themselves with the rest of the world. And in fact, such opposition, which at first seemed like weakness, turned into strength. Proof of this is the fact that under the Muslims, Jews and Christians survived, and the cult of Marduk finally died out.

About whether there was a Christian community in Babylon in 363 AD. e., when Julian the Apostate, having gone to fight the Persian Shah Shapur I, invaded Mesopotamia, official historians do not tell us. But Julian was an opponent of Christianity, advocated the restoration of old temples and tried to revive paganism throughout the Roman Empire. If Marduk's ziggurat had continued to stand by that time, the emperor, on the road to Ctesiphon, would no doubt have ordered his warriors to turn towards it in order to maintain their morale. The fact that Julian's biographers do not even mention the name of Babylon indirectly indicates the complete decline of the city and the fact that all its inhabitants abandoned it. Biographers only report that on the way to Ctesiphon, Julian passed by some huge walls of the ancient city, behind which there was a park and a menagerie of the Persian rulers.

“Omne in medio spatium solitudo est,” states St. Jerome (345-420 AD) in a passage on the grim fate of Babylon. “The entire space between the walls is inhabited by a variety of wild animals.” So spoke one Christian from Elam, who visited the royal reserve on the way to the Jerusalem monastery. The great empire perished forever and irrevocably, which Christians and Jews accepted with satisfaction - after all, for them Babylon was a symbol of the wrath of the Lord.

Historians believe that Babylon became a victim of the natural laws of social development; after a thousand years of political, cultural and religious supremacy, the Babylonians had to worship new gods, in whose name invincible armies marched against them. The inhabitants of the ancient capital, with all their desire, could not have put up an army of equal value against them, and therefore Babylon fell. But he did not perish like Sodom and Gomorrah, who disappeared in fire and ashes; it simply faded away, like so many other beautiful cities in the Middle East. It seems that cities and civilizations, like everything in this world, have their beginning and their end.