ranks gave their advice to the monarch without hesitation, and they were considered his friend and counsellors. The result of this conduct was, that, for many centuries, the Macedonians preserved a firm loyalty and attachment to their rulers. It is difficult to pursue a proper course of loyalty: even the Macedonians carried their affection towards their monarch too far, by making a law, or adopting it from the Persians, to the effect, that not only conspirators, but all their relations should be put to death. Alexander saw the injustice of this law, and showed his wisdom and clemency by dispensing with its rigour.

When the kings of Macedonia were sick, the whole nation united in prayers for their recovery, and exhibited all the signs of sorrow usual for their dearest relations. When they died, they were interred in the royal sepulchre, and the people mourned for them as for their parents. Such was the paternal character of the princes of Macedonia, and such the filial obedience of their subjects. They were united in one common bond of affection, and harmony prevailed between them for many a long age. According to Justin, the friends of the Macedonian kings were companions in war, and associates in the empire. They were permitted to wear purple, were entrusted with armies, to act at pleasure, and when the Macedonian greatness triumphed over nations, they were appointed governors of them with all the pomp and power of majesty.

The kings of Macedonia were rigidly strict in the educa tion of their children. Their sons were educated under the best masters in learning and science, and their daughters in the practice of every virtuous art. Alexander's speech to Sisigambis, the queen-mother of Persia, illustrates this. "Mother," said he, "the robe I have on was not only the gift of my sister, but the work of her hands." From this cause the princes of Macedonia were usually learned, or patrons of learned men. Thus, Archelaus honoured Euripides, while living, and mourned for him when he died. Philip was generous to every genius or learned man who sought his aid, deeming himself honoured thereby. Justin says, that he would pardon even the lampooner, because he would not punish genius in an enemy. So many learned men resorted to his court, that it has been said of his son, Alexander the Great, if he had not been the most active warrior in the world, he would have been the most celebrated

for wisdom. The observation is logical; for as

"Iron sharpeneth iron;

So a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."

Prov. xxvii. 17.

The associate of the learned and wise, if he be not a very churl, must become wiser for his companionship. That Alexander was not celebrated for wisdom, therefore must be attributed to his passion for war; a passion which extinguishes all the best feelings of human nature, and frequently causes the possessor to trample upon learning and science as things of little worth." War, and the din of war, is the most harmonious music to the ears of such as the world calls heroes, and the tactics of a battle field the acmé of wisdom.

The household of the kings of Macedonia was very simple in its state. They had a life guard, but it consisted only of a few members. The post, however, was one of high honour; for Oxathres, the brother of Darius, was admitted into their number. Besides these, there were other household troops, the commanders of which were men of note; and even the private men of this body were sometimes raised to honourable posts. Among the civil officers, that of secretary was reckoned the most honorable. The office of this functionary was to draw up orders, and see them executed. The royal physician, also, was a person of note in the court of Macedonia, and was treated as an intimate friend of the monarch.

It may be mentioned that although the kings of Macedonia were, in general, beloved by their subjects, it would not appear that they ruled undisturbed by jealous ambition. The reform of the government which Archelaus sought to effect, was greatly impeded by the jealous hostility of the nobles, who, in his reign, were a kind of petty princes, barely conceding to him the right of precedence. These facts would show that the government of Macedonia was not so happily constituted as ancient writers would have us believe; and that the most affectionate and right-minded conduct on the part of princes is not sufficient to exempt them from the hostility of ambition.

THE PRIESTLY POWER.

Religion and civil government are so nearly connected with each other in the history of every country, that no description can be given of one without reference to the other.

Among the Macedonians, the princes acted as occasional priests, and offered sacrifices for themselves and the people. The life of Alexander affords many illustrations of this fact: he offered sacrifices, erected altars, instituted games, and dedicated statues, in order to propitiate the imaginary deities of the Macedonians, or in gratitude for his victories.

The priests of Macedonia themselves do not appear to have had any influence in the state beyond that which their sacerdotal office gave them. Their occupation was solely to officiate in the many vain and ridiculous rites that made up the sum of the religion of the Macedonians.

What this religion was, will be found described at length in the History of the Greeks; for the religion of the Macedonians was that of the other Greeks. But it may be here mentioned, that Jupiter, Hercules, and Diana, were held in especial reverence among them: the first, as their protector; the second as the patron of the brave; and the third, as the goddess of hunting, a sport of which they were peculiarly fond. So vain had they become, like the rest of mankind, "in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened," Rom. i. 21.

THE MILITARY POWER.

The art of war was the glory of the Macedonians. Their warlike disposition exhibited itself in the earliest ages, and it kept pace with their extension of empire. It was this warlike spirit indeed, that enabled them to conquer the various tribes in their own country, and to extend their dominions. By degrees, they acquired such skill in that terrible art, that, joined with invincible courage, they became so powerful, as to overthrow the mightiest empire in existence, that of Persia.

It must not be supposed, however, that the small kingdom of Macedonia, though in itself a nursery of soldiers, supplied Alexander with troops sufficient for this enterprize. The recruits he received from thence could not repair the losses and fatigues of war, and fill the places of those veterans who were dismissed by him to their native home. The greater portion of his army must have consisted of mercenaries. Accordingly, it is said, that when at Susa, he received a reinforcement of 16,000 men, of whom 6500 only were Macedonians. It is said, also, that Greek mercenaries, to the number of 23,000 men, tired of the unceasing din of war, left

the ranks of his army immediately after his demise, in order to return home to enjoy repose.

But although the whole of Alexander's forces were not Macedonians, still the great strength of his army lay in the Macedonian phalanx, which was one of those grand military innovations, which have rewarded their inventors with power, conquest, and fame. During two centuries, this phalanx was deemed invincible, and no military tactics could avert its power. It consisted of one thousand and twenty-four files, and sixteen deep. Polybius says, that the soldiers in this phalanx stood so close to each other, that the spears of the fifth rank reached beyond the front of the battle. Those behind the fifth rank leaned their spears on the shoulders of those who were before them; and, locking them fast, pressed urgent against them when they made the charge, so that the first five ranks possessed the impetus of the whole phalanx. Hence it was that their charge was irresistible. It could not be withstood by the shorter weapons and less compact arrangement of the Greeks in general, much less by the rude and undisciplined multitude of Asiatics.

But even this phalanx was not at all times composed solely of Macedonians. Arrian says, that after the conquest of Persia, Alexander formed the three foremost ranks with Macedonians, the twelve next with Persians, and the hindmost file of Macedonians, by which intermixture, the want of skill and bravery in the Persians was compensated. It is probable they were all called Macedonians, though twelve parts out of sixteen were Persians.

Besides the phalanx described, there were two other foot divisions in the army of the Macedonians: namely, the lightarmed, and the peltastæ, or targeteer. When they were in the field of battle, the phalanx was generally drawn up in the centre, and the horse and light-armed troops in two lines on the right and left. In engagements, the phalanx took what form the king directed. Sometimes it extended itself in front, at others deepened its files, till it assumed the shape of a wedge. In these positions they fought steadily and obstinately, till the force of the enemy was broken, when the light-armed forces and the horses pursued the fleeing foe, leaving the phalanx to keep the field of battle.

As the opposing forces drew near, the Macedonian charge was sounded by trumpets, after which the king or general harangued the soldiers. When they charged, they exclaimed,

“Alala, alala,” a word which answers to the spirit-stirring English word, “ Huzza.”

With respect to the hardihood, frugality, and good order of the Macedonian troops, all authors are agreed. Through a long period of time they were much admired for the regularity of their discipline. When in the field, a place was marked out for a camp, and well fortified by a ditch and trench. Their tents were small, serving only as a covering against the inclemency of the weather. These were made of skins, and were sometimes used in fording rivers. The tent of the Macedonian monarch was pitched in the centre. This consisted of two apartments, one where the king reposed, the other where he gave audiences.

In all the wars of the Macedonians, the king was commander-in-chief. In camp, in sieges, and in battles, he went every where, and directed all movements. On these occasions, also, he fared as meanly as any of his soldiers, and far exceeded them in his labours. Livy records of the last Philip, that he trod in the steps of his ancestors, and disdained that his age should excuse him from any part of the fatigue which he required at the hands of the meanest Macedonian.

The arms of the Macedonians were both offensive and defensive. According to Arrian, they had a large shield, called, in Greek, "aspis," and a small buckler, called, "peltæ ;" the former belonging to the heavy armed troops, the latter to the targeteers. Their swords were made for pushing and cutting: the hilts of these were made in various forms. The Macedonians also made use of daggers, similar to those used by the Persians. Their spears were of two kinds, long and short. The long spear was used by the phalanx, and it was frequently twenty-one feet in length. The shorter spear was used by the light-armed troops. The head piece of the Macedonians was made of raw ox-hide. Livy speaks of horns being attached to it. It is probable that these were the wings of a double crest, one of which was struck from the headpiece of Alexander, at the battle of Granicus. The Macedonians, also, had breastplates made of quilted linen, and they wore a peculiar kind of military shoe. The horsemen wore the same defensive arms as the foot, except that their bucklers were smaller and their spears shorter.

When the Macedonians were in quarters, in order to preserve discipline, military games were instituted, wherein rewards, both honorary and lucrative, were bestowed. After a victory, their kings were wont to reward such as had distin