* The sequel of this history is known from the narrative of Berosus.  Its authenticity is proved by passages on the Cylinder of Nabonidus.  Messer-schmidt considers that Amil- marduk and Labashi-marduk were overthrown by the priestly faction, but a passage on the Cylinder, in which Nabonidus represents himself as inheriting the political views of Nebuchadrezzar and Nergal-sharuzur, leads me to take the opposite view.  We know what hatred Nabonidus roused in the minds of the priests of Merodach because his principles of government were opposed to theirs:  the severe judgment he passed on the rule of Amil-marduk and Labashi-marduk seems to prove that he considered them as belonging to the rival party in the state, that is, to the priestly faction.  The forms of the names and the lengths of the several reigns have been confirmed by contemporary monuments, especially by the numerous contract tablets.  The principal inscriptions belonging to the reign of Nergal-sharuzur deal only with public works and the restoration of monuments.

[Illustration:  460.jpg THE STONE LION OF BABYLON]

     Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a photograph furnished by
     Father Scheil.

As far as we are able to judge by the documents which have come down to us, two factions had arisen in the city since the fall of Nineveh, both of which aspired to power and strove to gain a controlling influence with the sovereign.  The one comprised the descendants of the Kalda who had delivered the city from the Assyrian yoke, together with those of the ancient military nobility.  The other was composed of the great priestly families and their adherents, who claimed for the gods or their representatives the right to control the affairs of the state, and to impose the will of heaven on the rulers of the kingdom.  The latter faction seems to have prevailed at first at the court of Amil-marduk, the sole surviving son and successor of Nebuchadrezzar.  This prince on his accession embraced a policy contrary to that pursued by his father:  and one of his first acts was to release Jehoiachin, King of Judah, who had been languishing in chains for twenty-seven years, and to ameliorate the condition of the other expatriated Jews.  The official history of a later date represented him as having been an unjust sovereign, but we have no information as to his misdeeds, and know only that after two years a conspiracy broke out against him, led by his own brother-in-law, Nergal-sharuzur, who assassinated him and seized the vacant throne (560 B.C.).  Nergal-sharuzur endeavoured to revive the policy of Nebuchadrezzar, and was probably supported by the military party, but his reign was a short one; he died in 556 B.C., leaving as sole heir a youth of dissipated character named Labashi-marduk, whose name is stigmatised by the chroniclers as that of a prince who knew not how to rule.  He was murdered at the end of nine months, and his place taken by a native Babylonian, a certain Nabonaid (Nabonidus), son of Nabo-balatsu-ikbi, who was not connected by birth with his immediate predecessors on the throne (556-555 B.C.).