* The facts relating to the submission of Patusharra and of Partukka are contained in Cylinder A, dated from the eponymous year of Akhazilu, in 673.  Moreover, the version which this document contains seems to have been made up of two pieces placed one at the end of the other:  the first an account of events which occurred during an earlier period of the reign, and in which the exploits are classified in geographical order, from Sidon in the west the Arabs bordering on Chaldaea in the east; and the second consisting of additional campaigns carried out after the completion of the former—­which is proved by the place which these exploits occupy, out of their normal position in the geographical series—­and making mention of Partusharra and Partuhka, as well as of Belikisha.  The editor of the Broken Cylinder has tried to combine these latter elements with the former in the order adopted by the original narrator.  As far as can be seen in what is left of the columns, he has placed, after the Chaldsean events, the facts concerning Partukka, then those concerning Patusharra, and finally the campaign against Bazu, the extreme limit of Esarhaddon’s activity in the south.  Knowing that the campaign in the desert and the death of Abdimilkot took place in 676, and that we find them already alluded to in the first part of the narrative, as well as the events of 675 relating to the revolt of Dakkuri, we may conclude that the submission of Patusharra and that of Partukka occurred in 674, or at latest in the beginning of 673.

[Illustration:  131.jpg THE TOWN OF KHARKHAR WITH ITS TRIPLE RAMPART]

     Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from Flandin, in Botta.

The outcome of them was a distinct gain to Assyria, in the acquisition of several new vassals.  The recently founded kingdom of Ecbatana lacked as yet the prestige which would have enabled it to hold its own against Nineveh; besides which, Deiokes, the contemporary ruler assigned to it by tradition, was of too complaisant a nature to seek occasions of quarrel.  The Scythians, after having declared their warlike intentions, seem to have come to a more peaceable frame of mind, and to have curried favour with Nineveh; but the rulers of the capital kept a strict watch upon them, since their numbers, their intrepid character, and instinct for rapine made them formidable enemies—­the most dangerous, indeed, that the empire had encountered on its north-eastern frontier for nearly a century.

This policy of armed surveillance, which proved so successful in these regions, was also carefully maintained by Esarhaddon on his south-eastern border against Assyria’s traditional enemy, the King of Susa.  Babylon, far from exhibiting any restlessness at her present position, showed her gratitude for the favours which her suzerain had showered upon her by resigning herself to become the ally of Assyria.  She regarded her late disaster as the punishment inflicted