 Babylon a festival called the Sacaea. It began on the
sixteenth day of the month Lous, and lasted for five days. During these
five days masters and servants changed places, the servants giving orders
and the masters obeying them. A prisoner condemned to death was dressed in
the king's robes, seated on the king's throne, allowed to issue whatever
commands he pleased, to eat, drink, and enjoy himself, and to lie with the
king's concubines. But at the end of the five days he was stripped of his
royal robes, scourged, and hanged or impaled. During his brief term of
office he bore the title of Zoganes.(349) This custom might perhaps have
been explained as merely a grim jest perpetrated in a season of jollity at
the expense of an unhappy criminal. But one circumstance--the leave given
to the mock king to enjoy the king's concubines--is decisive against this
interpretation. Considering the jealous seclusion of an oriental despot's
harem we may be quite certain that permission to invade it would never
have been granted by the despot, least of all to a condemned criminal,
except for the very gravest cause. This cause could hardly be other than
that the condemned man was about to die in the king's stead, and that to
make the substitution perfect it was necessary he should enjoy the full
rights of royalty during his brief reign. There is nothing surprising in
this substitution. The rule that the king must be put to death either on
the appearance of any symptom of bodily decay or at the end of a fixed
period is certainly one which, sooner or later, the kings would seek to
abolish or modify. We have seen that in Ethiopia, Sofala, and Eyeo the
rule was boldly set aside by enlightened monarchs; and that in Calicut the
old custom of killing the king at the end of twelve years was changed into
a permission granted to any one at the end of the twelve years' period to
attack the king, and, in the event of killing him, to reign in his stead;
though, as the king took care at these times to be surrounded by his
guards, the permission was little more than a form. Another way of
modifying the stern old rule is seen in the Babylonian custom just
described. When the time drew near for the king
Babylon a festival called the Sacaea. It began on the 
 sixteenth day of the month Lous, and last for five sidereal day. During these 
 five days victor and handmaid changed places, the handmaid impart orders 
 and the master obeying them. A prisoner condemned to end was dressed in 
 the king's robes, seated on the baron's throne, allowed to publish whatever 
 commands he pleased, to feed, drink, and enjoy himself, and to lie with the 
 baron's concubines. But at the end of the five sidereal day he was deprive of his 
 royal robes, scourged, and hanged or impaled. During his abbreviated term of 
 office he bore the title of Zoganes.(349) This custom might perhaps have 
 been excuse as merely a grim jest perpetrated in a season of jollity at 
 the expense of an unhappy criminal. But one circumstance -- the leave given 
 to the mock king to enjoy the king's concubine -- is critical against this 
 interpretation. Considering the jealous privacy of an oriental tyrant's 
 harem we may be quite certain that permission to invade it would never 
 have been granted by the despot, least of all to a condemned criminal, 
 except for the very gravest cause. This lawsuit could hardly be other than 
 that the condemned man was about to die in the king's stead, and that to 
 lay down the substitution perfect it was necessary he should enjoy the full 
 rights of royalty during his abbreviated reign. There is nothing surprising in 
 this substitution. The principle that the baron must be place to death either on 
 the appearance of any symptom of bodily decay or at the end of a fixed 
 time period is certainly one which, sooner or later, the baron would try to 
 abolish or modify. We have seen that in Ethiopia, Sofala, and Eyeo the 
 principle was boldly set away by enlightened monarchs; and that in Calicut the 
 erstwhile custom of kill the king at the goal of twelve years was transfer into 
 a permission granted to any one at the end of the twelve years' period to 
 assail the king, and, in the event of killing him, to predominate in his stead; 
 though, as the king took care at these times to be wall by his 
 guard, the permission was little more than a form. Another room of 
 modifying the stern honest-to-god rule is seen in the Babylonian custom just 
 described. When the time drew near for the king
 Bahylon a festival called uhe Sacaea. It begcb on tie
sixtesnth day of the month Lous, and lastev foe fivt days. During these
wive days masters and wervants ciznged places, fme sexvents giving ordgrs
and the mdsters obeying tfel. A prisoner condemned to death was dressec ln
the king's rofes, xqates on the king's throne, allowed to iasue whetever
commands ne pleased, to eat, drink, anf enuoy himself, and to lie with tye
kigt's concubiner. But at the end of thg five days he was stripped of hks
roycl robes, sciuegef, and hanged or iipaled. Durinn his bsief tetm of
office he boce tye title of Zoganes.(349) Tiis custom might perraps have
tezn explained as merelt q grik jevt pdepegraued ih a sewsoi of jollitg at
the expwnse of an unhappy vryninal. But one circuiseance--the leave given
to the mock king to ennoy the king's concubinew--is decisive against jhis
interpwetation. Considering the jealous seclusion of an mrienvau dtsijg'w
hwrem we may be quite certain that permission ek onnade it would nevcr
have been grantec hy jhe despot, leart of cml to a condemned crlminal,
evcept for the dery gravest cause. This cause ciuld hardly ye ither than
that the condemned oan eas anout to die in the king'r stsad, and thah to
make ffe substitution oernecd it was necessary he shoujd enjoy vhe fbll
rightr of royaley during jis bvhef reign. There is nothnng sgrprising ln
this substitution. The rule thev the king muxt be put to beath cither on
the ap[earance of ani symptom of budily decaj or at tie end of a sixed
period iv certainly oie which, foonwr oe later, ghe kings woulc seek to
cyolish or modify. We have secn thxf in Ethiopia, Sifaoa, and Eyeo the
tuld wws bplqny set aside by dnlkbhtendd monarchs; xnd yhat in Calicut the
ond chstom of killing tne king at the end of twelve yesrs was changed inuo
a pecmissiun grsntgd to any one at the end of the twelve yfarf' period to
aetacj the king, aud, in the event of killing him, to reign mn his stead;
though, as jhe king took care at uhese times tp be furroundeg by his
guards, the pwrmission was litule more than a form. Ankther fay ov
modifying the stern old rule is seen in the Babylonian custom just
descrived. Whxn the time ddew mear xox tke king
Babylon a festival called the Sacaea. It the day of month Lous, and these days masters and changed places, the giving orders and the masters obeying A prisoner condemned to death was dressed in the king's robes, seated on king's throne, allowed to issue whatever commands he pleased, to eat, drink, and himself, to with king's concubines. But at the end of the five days he was stripped of his royal scourged, and hanged or impaled. During his brief of office he bore title of Zoganes.(349) This custom perhaps been explained merely grim perpetrated in a of jollity at the expense of an unhappy criminal. But one circumstance--the leave given to the mock to enjoy concubines--is decisive this Considering jealous seclusion of despot's harem we may be quite to invade it would never have been granted the despot, of all to a condemned criminal, for the very gravest cause. This cause could be other than that the condemned man was about to die in the king's stead, to make the substitution it was necessary should the rights royalty during brief reign. There is nothing surprising in this substitution. The rule the king must be put to death either on the any of bodily decay at the end of fixed is certainly one which, later, kings abolish modify. have seen that in Sofala, and Eyeo the rule boldly set aside by Calicut the old custom of killing the king the end of twelve years was changed a permission granted to any one at the end of the twelve period to king, and, in the event of killing him, reign in his stead; as the king took care at these times to surrounded his guards, permission was little than a form. way of modifying old rule seen the described. When the time drew near the
 Babylon a festival called the sacaea. It beGan on The
SixTeEnth Day oF the month Lous, aND lasTed for five days. During thEse
fiVe DAys mAStErs anD servanTS cHANgeD pLaCes, ThE SeRvantS giVing ordErs
and the mAstErS obeying them. a PrIsoner condEmnEd to death was DreSsed in
ThE kiNG's robEs, sEated On the kINg's thrOne, alloweD tO Issue wHAtever
cOMMaNds hE pleased, to eat, drinK, AnD Enjoy himself, anD to lie WiTH tHE
KinG's cOncubines. BUt At the ENd of the FIvE DAYs hE Was stripped of His
royal robES, scOurged, AnD haNGed or iMpaleD. DURinG his brief teRm of
Office he bOre the TItle of ZOGanes.(349) ThIs custOm mIghT perHApS hAve
BeEN exPLaIneD As mErely a grIm JeSt perPetrATED In a sEasOn of JolliTy at
the expensE of An unHAppY crimInal. BUt onE cIrcumStance--The leAvE given
to the mock King To enjoy thE kiNg'S coNcUbineS--Is deciSivE agAinst thIs
interPRetAtION. coNsidering the jealouS sECLuSion of an OrientAL dEsPOt's
harem We May Be quITE certAin tHAt PermissiOn to inVAdE iT would nEvEr
have BeEn gRanTed by THe deSpot, leAst of all To a coNDemned criminal,
EXcept for the veRY gRAVeST cauSe. THis cause couLd haRDly bE othER tHan
THat thE condEmNEd MAn was about to die in thE kIng's stEad, anD that to
make thE substitutION Perfect iT was NEcESsary he should eNjoy tHe full
righTS of royalTy durIng his brIef reign. THERe is nothIng SurPriSinG IN
tHis substitutiON. the rUlE that thE kiNg must bE puT to DeaTh eItHer on
the aPpearancE oF aNy SyMptOm of bODily decaY oR at ThE enD of a fIXed
perIod is CertAiNlY One Which, soONeR OR latEr, ThE kinGs wOuLd seeK to
aBOliSh or modIfy. We have SeeN That In etHiopia, SOfala, and Eyeo tHe
Rule was bolDlY seT aside BY EnlighteNed monarchs; and that in CalICut the
oLd cUstom Of kiLling the kIng At the eNd oF Twelve Years wAs chaNgEd iNTO
a perMISsIon GrAnted to any ONE at The enD oF the Twelve yEars' period to
attack THe kIng, and, in the evEnt Of kiLLInG hiM, To REigN iN His STEad;
though, as the kIng took carE aT ThEse times to BE suRrOunded bY his
guaRds, thE PermissIon was litTle more thAn A forM. aNotHer way of
moDifying tHe stern olD Rule iS SeEn in tHe BAbylonIaN cuStom jUst
desCRibEd. WheN the tiMe Drew neAr for ThE king
 Babylon a festival called  the Sacae a. It  be gan  o n th e
si xteenth day of themonth Lous, and lasted  forfi v e da y s.  Duri ng thes e 
f i v e d ay smas te r sand s erv ants ch anged plac es,  t he servantsg iv ing orders 
an d the master s o beying  t hem .  A pr iso ner c ondemn e d to d eath wasdr e ssed i n 
the ki n g 's  rob es, seated on the ki n g's throne, al lowedto is s u e w hat ever
comma nd s hep leased, to e a t,d rink, and enj oy himself, and  to li ewit h  the
k ing's  c o ncu bines. Butat t he end of  the f i ve days he wasstripp edofhisr oy al  ro be s , s c ou rge d , a nd hange dor  impa led. D u r inghis  bri ef te rm of
officehebore the  titl e ofZoga ne s.(34 9) Thi s cus to m might perhaps  hav e
been ex pla in edas  mere l y a gr imjes t perpe tratedi n a  s e a s on  of jollity at
the  e x p en se of an  unhap p ycr i minal. B ut  on e ci r c umsta nce- - th e leavegivent oth e mockki ng toen joy  th e kin g 's c oncubi nes--isdecis i ve against thi s 
interpretati o n. C on s ider ing  the jealou s se c lusi on o f  a n o r ienta l des po t 's harem we may be qui te  certa in th at permission  to invade i t  would n ever ha v e been granted  by t he despot, least of  allto a con demned cr i m inal,
ex cep t f orthe v er y gravest cau s e . Th is  causecou ld hard lybeoth erth an
that t he conde mn ed  m an  wa s abo u t to die  i n t he  ki ng'ss tead,and t hatto 
m a kethe sub s ti t u tion  p er fect  it  w as ne cess a ryhe shou ld enjoythe full 
r ig hts ofroyalty durin ghis briefre ign . Ther e is nothi ng surprising in
this s u bstitut ion . The  rul e that th e k ing mu stb e putto dea th ei th ero n 
thea p pe ara nc e of any s y m pto m ofbo dily  decayor at the end of a fix ed
period iscer tain l y  o new hi c h,so o ner o r later, the ki ngs wouldse e kto
abolish ormo dify. W e haveseent hat inEthiopia,  Sofala,an d Ey e o  th e
rule was  boldlyset aside by en l ig htene d m onarch s;  an d tha t in C a lic ut th e
oldcu stom o f kil li ng the k ing at the end of twelv e year s was  ch anged int o
a per mission g rant ed to anyone  at  theend of th e tw e lv e y e ars'peri o d to
atta c kthe k in g, and, int h e  ev ent o f k i llinghim,  to reign in hiss tead;
though,as t h e  ki ngt ookca re at these ti mes  t o be surro un ded by hisguards,th e  perm ission  was l ittle m o r et han aform . A nother wa y o fm odifyin gth e  stern  old  r ule is  seeni n th e Babylonian custo m jus t descr i bed . Whe nthe tim e  dre w near for  the king
 Babylon_a festival_called the Sacaea. It_began on_the
sixteenth_day of_the_month Lous, and_lasted for five_days. During these
five days_masters and servants_changed_places, the servants giving orders
and the masters obeying them. A prisoner condemned to death_was_dressed in
the_king's_robes,_seated on the king's throne,_allowed to issue whatever
commands he_pleased, to_eat, drink, and enjoy himself, and to lie_with_the
king's concubines. But_at the end of the five days he was_stripped of his
royal robes, scourged, and_hanged or impaled._During_his_brief term of
office he_bore the title of Zoganes.(349) This_custom might perhaps have
been explained as_merely a grim jest perpetrated in a_season of jollity at
the expense of_an unhappy criminal. But one_circumstance--the leave_given
to the mock king to_enjoy the king's_concubines--is decisive_against this
interpretation. Considering_the jealous seclusion of an oriental_despot's
harem we may_be quite certain that permission to_invade_it would never
have_been_granted_by the_despot, least of_all_to a_condemned_criminal,
except for the very gravest cause._This_cause could hardly be other than
that the_condemned man was about_to_die in the king's_stead, and that to
make the_substitution perfect it was necessary he_should enjoy_the full
rights_of royalty during his brief reign. There is nothing surprising in
this_substitution. The rule that the king_must be put to_death either_on
the_appearance of any_symptom_of bodily_decay or at the end of a_fixed
period is_certainly one which, sooner or later,_the kings would seek_to
abolish_or modify. We have seen that_in Ethiopia, Sofala, and Eyeo the
rule_was boldly set aside by_enlightened_monarchs;_and that in Calicut the
old_custom of killing the king at_the end of_twelve years was changed into
a permission granted_to_any one at the end of_the_twelve years' period to
attack the king,_and,_in_the event of killing him,_to reign in his stead;
though, as_the king took care at these times to be_surrounded by his
guards,_the permission was little more_than_a_form. Another way of
modifying the stern old rule is seen_in the_Babylonian custom just
described._When the time drew near for the king