Ḳubûr ej Jebel, 62
Kûfah, Mohammadan town, 142, 160;
mosque of, 164
Ḳuleib, 41
Küpek Euren, 343 _and note_^{1}
Kurd Keui, 340
Kurdistân, mountain chains of, 265, 284, 285, 286
Kuro, island of, 99
Ḳuṣeir el Ḥallâbât, 121 _note_^{2}
Ḳusheir, the, 50
Ḳûyûnjik, mound of, 261-62
Lekweir, 240
Levandi Chai, 340
Levandiler, village of, 340
Levent, 340
Lubbâd, island of, 94, 96, 111, 114
Madaḳḳ eṭ Ṭabl, Sâmarrâ, 211
Madâin, 182
Ma’den Chai, the, 328 _note_^{1}, 329
Madlûbeh, ruin of, 106-107
Mahalech, peak of, 358
Maḥall es Ṣafṣâf, 48
Maḥârîz, 52
Maḥawîl, village and canal, 167
Maḥmûd Ghâzî, Castle of, 345 _and note_^{2}
Maḥmûdîyeh, 177
Ma’lathâyâ (Malthai), 287 _note_^{2}
Malaṭiyeh, 327;
the modern city, 335 _and note_^{1-36};
Old Malaṭiyeh, 337-38
Malthai, the Assyrian reliefs, 283-84
Malwîyeh, the, Sâmarrâ, 209 _and note_^{1}, 210
Ma’mûreh, asphalt beds and minaret, 106;
ruins, 127
Ma’mûret el ’Azîz, vilayet of, 330
Manbij [Hierapolis], 18, 19;
ancient churches, 21, 22 _note_^{1};
history, 24-25
Mangâbeh, 26
Mangûb, 227
Manṣûr, founder of Kafiḳah, 54;
Round City of, 187 _and note_^{1-88};
mosque of, Baghdâd, 235 _note_^{2}
Mâr Ahudânî, Church of, 257
Mâr Augen, monastery of, 302 _note_^{1}, 310-12
Mâr ’Azîzîyeh at Kefr Zeh, 315, 317-18
Mâr Barsauma, 316 _note_^{2}
Mâr Behnâm, 262 _and note_^{1-63}, 263 _note_^{2}, 268 _and note_^{1}
Mâr Cosmo, 324 _note_^{1}
Mâr Dodo, 304-5
Mâr Gabriel of Kartmîn, 262 _note_^{1}, 314-16
Mâr Girjis, 258
Mâr Hôbel, 316 _note_^{2}
Mâr Ibrahîm, 316 _note_^{2}
Mâr Kyriakos at Arnâs, 317-18
Mâr Mattai, monastery of, 266;
story of Mâr Mattai, 267-68
Mâr Melko, 313 _and note_^{1-14}
Mâr Musa el Habashi, 316 _note_^{2}
Mâr Philoxenos, 316-17
Mâr Shim’ûn, Bâ Sebrîna, 303-4
Mâr Shim’ûn, 218, 259;
Ḳaraḳôsh, 264-65
Mâr Shim’ûn, Midyâd, 316 _note_^{2}
Mâr Sobo, 319
Mâr Tûmâ, 258 _and note_^{1-59}, 259 _note_^{1}, 260, 263 _note_^{2}
Mâr Yâ’ḳûb, Church of, Ṣalâḥ, 316-19
Mâr Yâ’ḳûb, monastery of, 272, 283
Marde, 301
Mardîn, 218, 301, 311, 353 _and note_^{2}
Mascas, the, 82
Ma’shûk, the, _see_ ’Ashiḳ, the
Masius Mount, 301
Masnik, 335 _note_^{2}
Mas’ûdîyeh, 41
Maxentius, basilica of, 180
Mazâr of Sultan ’Abdullah, 49 _note_^{1}
Mazâr of Sultan Selîm, 49 _note_^{1}
Mdawwî, mounds, 202
Mecca, 158;
the well Zemzem, 277
Medâin, 181 _note_^{2}
Medina, 158
Meiḍa, 62
Melekjân, 333 _note_^{1}
Melitene, 337 _and note_^{1}
Merrhan, 111, 113
Meskeneh, 24 _note_^{2};
the ferry, 47
Mesopotamia, antiquities of, 11;
fortified khâns, 121 _and note_^{2-22};
history, 156
Mespila-Nineveh, 287 _note_^{2}
Mezîzakh, 316 _note_^{1}
Mezreh, 330 _and note_^{2}, 331, _note_^{1}
Middo, 303 _note_^{1}
Midyâd, Mâr Philoxenos, 316-17
Midyâd, Ḳâimmaḳâm of the, 321
Môṣul, 70, 185, 206, 230-31, 265, 302;
the modern bridge, 237;
the situation in, 247-49;
the affair of 1st January 1909, 249-50;
murder of Sheikh Sayyid, 249-50;
the League of Mohammad formed, 250-51;
fall of ’Abdu’l Hamîd, 251-54;
the Church in, 254-57;
Church of Mâr Ahudânî, 257;
first recorded mosque, 259;
tomb of the Imâm Yaḥyâ, 259, 260;
the Ḳal’at Lûlû, 260;
the Sinjâr Gate, 260;
the Jews of, 260-61, 261 _note_^{1};
the high road, 284, 286, 287 _note_^{1}
Mshatta, Palace of, 152, 153
Mu’aẓẓam, village of, 188
Mudawwarah, ruin of, 48
Mügdeh, 341 _note_^{2}
Mughârah, 30, 35
Muḥammad ’Alî, tomb of, at Wâneh, 203
Mukbil, village of, 271
Mullah ’Alî Shehr, 341 _note_^{1}
Munbayah, mound of, 43-44;
basalt mills, 63
Munga’rah, Ḳishlâ el, 69
Murad Su, the, 335
Murrât, ruin of, 135
Museiyib, village of, 164, 166-67
Musheidah, 200;
the khân of, 199;
the Senîyeh, 201-2
Mustanṣirîyeh College, Baghdâd, 191-92
Mutawakkil, mosque of, Sâmarrâ, 209;
Palace of, 213
Nabagath on the Aburas, 109, 111, 112
Nahr el Ḳâim, the, 206-8
Nahrawân canal, 213 _and note_^{1}
Nahrwân, bridge of, 182
Naṣrîyeh canal, the, 167
Natârîyeh, 90-92
Nebî Ḥâshil, ziyârah of, 17
Nebî Yûnus, mound of, 262
Nebuchadnezzar, Palace of, work of excavation, 168-71
Nejd, 86, 217
Nejef, ruins, 160, 162
Neshabah tower, the, 49 _and note_^{1}
Nicephorium, 54, 62, 109, 110, 111
Nigdeh, Seljuk mosques, 356
Nimrûd, 224, 227;
mound of, 228-29
Nineveh, ruins of, 261-66;
story of Mâr Mattai, 267
Ninmala, island of, 85
Nisîbîn, 301
Nisibis, 301
Nu’mân ibn Mundhir, the castle of, 141, 142
Nûr ed Din, 262
Nurshak Dâgh, 342
Obbanes, 24 _note_^{2}
Olabus, 100 _note_^{1}, 111, 114
Old Meskeneh, 47
Opis, 200 _and note_^{1}, 204 _and note_^{5}
Ordasu, 336
Osdara, 339 _note_^{1}
Osherîyeh, 27
Osmândedelî, 339 _note_^{1}, 342 _and note_^{1}, 343 _and note_^{1}
Osrhœne, 23
Ozan, 339 _note_^{1};
tomb at, 340-41, 341 _note_^{1}
Palanga, 341 _note_^{1}
Palmyra, tower tombs of, 37
Parenk, 343 _note_^{1}
Parux Malkha, 102 _note_^{1}
Pehlevî, 305 _note_^{1}
Persia, justice in, 163-64
Persian Gulf, gun-running, 285
Phaliga, 109, 110, 111, 112
Phaliscum, 111, 112
Phathusa, 114
Phœnice-Finik, 296 _note_^{1}, 299
Physcus, the (Xenophon), 204 _note_^{5}
Polat Ushagha, 341 _note_^{1}
Pünoz, Khân of, 330 _note_^{1}
Rabâṭ, village of, 85
Rabbân Hormuzd, monastery of, 255, 281-82
Râfiḳah, history of, 54-55, 57
Raḥbah, 74
Raḥḥâlîyeh, oasis of, 134, 138;
water of, 136
Raḥḥâlîyeh-Shetâteh road, the, 136
Raḳḳah, 41, 46, 53, 65, 68, 111;
the ferry, 47;
history, 54-55, 158;
the modern Raḳḳah, 55;
shrines, 56 _and note_^{2};
Raḳḳah ware, 59-60, 75-76;
distances, 108-10;
the Baghdâd Gate, 135 _note_^{2}, 156
Ramâdî, 123, 176, 177
Rawâ, 86-87, 90-92, 94, 114
Retâjah (Ḳal’at Bulâḳ), 88
Rhabdium, 307, 309 _note_^{1}
Risür Chai, 297
Round City, Baghdâd, 187 _and note_^{1-88}
Rumeileh, 41
Sadîr, 141
Sagr, ruin, 202
Saiḥûn, the, 342, 348
St. Simeon Stylites, Church of, 11
Sajûr river, the, 23, 31;
the valley, 27
Ṣalâḥ, 314, 316-19
Salakûn, 303 _note_^{1}
Ṣâliḥîyeh, 78, 80, 82
Salonica, 4, 6, 227, 359;
the committee, 251;
the accession of Muḥammad V, 281
Saman, 340
Saman Keui, 338 _note_^{1}
Sâmarrâ, the mosque of, 58, 231-35, 243 _and note_^{1-46}, 246 _note_^{1};
ruins, 158, 188 _note_^{1};
Mohammadan ware, 204;
the Malwîyeh, 206, 209 _and note_^{1}, 210;
the choice of Mu’taṣim, 207 _note_^{2}, 209-10;
the bazaars, 208;
decline of, 208-9;
the minaret, 211, 235;
Madaḳḳ eṭ Ṭabl, 211;
the Kâs i Fir’aun, 235;
the palace of the ’Ashiḳ, 235 _and note_^{4-39}, 242;
Ṣlebîyeh, 237, 239, 242;
ruins of Ḥuweiṣilât, 239, 242;
Beit el Khalîfah, 240 _and note_^{1-42};
the Tell ’Alîj, 242-43;
Sâmarrâ ware, 243
Samosata, 33
Sapha, 296 _note_^{1}
Saphe, 296 _note_^{1}
Sapolar, 333 _note_^{1}
Sargon temple, Khorsabâd, 223
Sâreh, village of, 305;
the Church, 305-6
Sarî Khân, 353 _and note_^{2}
Sarifah (Chesney), 99 _note_^{1}
Sarvistân, 156
Sayyid Aḥmed ibn Hâshim, shrine of, 135
Sayyid Muḥammad, Mazâr of, 205
Scaphe (Ptolemy), 200 _note_^{1}
Scenæ, 22
Scenitæ, country of the, 22
Sefînet Nebî Nûh, 291-95
Seleucia on the Tigris, 10, 22, 109, 110, 179, 181 _note_^{1};
mounds of, 178
Semiramidis Fossa, 110, 111, 112
Serbes, 17
Serrîn, tower tombs of, 36-39
Shabyan, 330 _note_^{1}
Shahr, 346;
the temple-mausoleum, 348;
story of the massacre, 349-50
Shakh, village of, 296
Shammar, village of, 17
Sham’ûn, castle of, 139
Shandokh, 293, 295
Shawa Keui, 328 _note_^{1}
Shefâthâ (’Ain et Tamr), 156
Shehna Khân, 338 _note_^{1}
Sheikh ’Adî, shrine of, 269, 272;
description, 274-78;
account of the Saint, 278-79;
Yezîdî practices, 279-80
Sheikh Khuḍr, shrine of, 118
Sheikh Najar, 17
Sheikh Sîn, hill of, 43
Sheikh Ziyâd, 17
Shems ed Dîn, 43
Sheramîyeh, 220
Shetâteh, 86, 140;
Assyrian remains, 134, 135;
palms of, 139;
distances from, 142;
Bedouin of, 143
Shilbeh, 327 _note_^{1}
Shnâs, 212
Ṣiffîn, battlefield of, 50
Sinjâr Gate, Môṣul, 260
Sisara, _see_ Sisaurana
Sisaurana (Procopius), 309 _note_^{1}
Sitace, 200 _and note_^{1};
position, 204 _note_^{5}
Sitha, 111
Sitt Zobeideh, tomb of, 100, 190 _and note_^{2}, 215
Sivâs, 329, 342
Ṣlebîyeh, 237, 239, 242
Sophene, 331 _note_^{2}
Stambûl, 96, 230
Suleimânîyeh, 249, 250
Sumeikhah, village of, 203 _and note_^{1}
Sûs, ruins at, 99
Suvagen, 347
Syria, fortified khâns, 121 _and note_^{2}
Takhtalî, 345 _note_^{1}
Talas, 353 _note_^{2}, 355
Tarandah, 341 _note_^{3}
Tarmûr, village of, 327 _and note_^{1}
Tarsus, American College, 349
Tâṣir, 202
Taurus Mountains, 325, 327, 328
Tekrît, Ḥmeidî Beg ibn Farḥân, 216-17;
the road to Môṣul, 216-17;
the castle, 239
Telin, 342
Tell ’Abd ’Alî, 53
Tell Abu Thor, 98
Tell Aḥmar, 23, 24 _note_^{1}, 26-28, 34, 44;
the Hittite stela, 29-30
Tell ’Alîj, 242-43
Tell ’Arîḍ, 283
Tell Bada’ah, 28 _note_^{1}
Tell Batnân, 17
Tell Bshairah, 202
Tell ech Cha’bî, 80
Tell edh Dhahab, 204, 205
Tell el ’Abr, 31
Tell el Afrai, 48-49
Tell el Banât, 41
Tell el Ghânah, 28 _note_^{1}
Tell el Ga’rah, 43
Tell el Hajîn, 81
Tell el Ḥâl, 17
Tell el Kraḥ, 78
Tell el Kumluk, 31
Tell esh Sha’ir, 65, 79
Tell eẓ Ẓahir, 43
Tell Gayârah, 226, 227
Tell Ghazab, 204
Tell Hir, 204
Tell Jifneh, 47
Tell Kobbîn, mound and village, 289
Tell Maḥmûd, 333 _note_^{1}
Tell Manjûr, 204
Tell Meraish, 54
Tell Murraibet, 47, 63
Tell Sheikh ’Arûd, 44
Tell Sheikh Ḥassan, 44
Tell Simbal, 81
Thamânîn (Heshtan), 293 _and note_^{1}
Thapsacus on the Euphrates, 18, 22, 24, 33, 47
Thelailah, 302 _note_^{3}
Thelda, 111, 113
Themail, castle of, 86;
mound of, 129-30
Thilaticomum, 23
Thillada Mirrhada, 110, 111, 112
Thilutha, island Castle of, 98
Tigris, the, junction with the Euphrates, 164;
in flood, 178, 226;
the guffahs, 179;
bridges on, 183-84;
the ṣidd, 198-99;
the old bed, 201, 204;
the Dujeil, 201;
the Khawîjeh, 205;
the Jezîreh, 205;
the ferry, 205-6, 302 _note_^{3};
the keleks, 206;
the Nahr el Ḳâim, 206-7;
the bazaars of Sâmarrâ, 208;
bridge piers near Jezîret ibn ’Umar, 297;
castles of Finik, 297-99;
crossing at the Ṭûr ’Abdîn, 300-301;
source, 329
Tikmin, 342
Tilbês, island of, 98
Tîmûr, 316
Tîrhân district, the, 209
Tiyâna, village of, 79
Tiyârî, peaks of, 293
Tokat, 329
Tokhma Su, the, 339 _note_^{1}, 340, 341 _note_^{2}, 342-43
Tolek village, 327 _note_^{1}
Tomarza, 345
Tomisa-Iz Oglu, 339 _note_^{1}
Tozeli, 341 _note_^{1}
Tripoli (African) tower tombs, 37
Tsamandos, 345 _and note_^{2}
Tuba, 121 _note_^{3}
Tulkhum, 328 _note_^{1}
Ṭûr ’Abdîn, 262 _note_^{1}, 299, 300-302;
absence of streams, 303;
Mar Shim’ûn, 303-4;
construction in, 304-5;
monasteries of the, 310-17
Turkey, use of the vote in, 19-20
Tutli Keui, 333 _note_^{1}
Uch Keui, 327 _note_^{1}
’Uglet Ḥaurân, 101-2
’Ukâẓ, 129
’Ukbarâ, 201 _note_^{1};
mounds of, 202 _and note_^{1};
position, 203 _note_^{1}
Ukheiḍir, the journey to, 86, 88, 100, 131, 140, 141, 142;
the Benî Ḥassan, 107;
a first sight of, 140-41;
water supply, 142, 150;
architecture, 143-44, 219;
inhabitants of, 144-45;
Palace of ---- plans, 146-47;
architecture, 147-54;
decoration, 154-55;
date of the building, 155-58
Ulu Jâmi’, Diyârbekr, 325-26
Ulu Jâmi’, Malaṭiyah, 338
Umm Rejeibah, 67, 70, 111, 112
Urfah, 23, 32;
caves at, 40
Useden (Kiepert), 306
Useh Dereh, 306, 308, 309, 310, 313
Vân, 3, 255
Vân, Lake, 218, 293
Wâdî ’Ain Sifneh, the, 271
Wâdî Aswad (Chem Resh), valley of, 270
Wâdî Burdân, 131-32
Wâdî el ’Asibîyeh, 133
Wâdî Fâḍîyeh, 101
Wâdî Ḥajlân, the, 101
Wâdî Ḥaurân, 118, 131
Wâdî Lebai’ah, 131, 141, 142, 150
Wâdî Mâliḥ, 66, 67
Wâdî Muḥammadî, 124, 125
Wâdî Themail, 129
Wâneh, village of, tomb of Muḥammad ’Alî, 203 _and note_^{1}
Wardâna, village of, 26
Wâsiṭ, 159
Weldeh Country, the, 43, 47, 51
Werdî, 78, 81-83, 85
Werdî-Irzî, 113
Werdîyeh, the, 82
White Palace of Chosroes, 181 _and note_^{3}
Wîzeh, 132
Yaḥyâ el Barmakî, tomb of, 56
Yamachlî, 353 _note_^{2}
Yazi Keui, 341, 342
Yeni Khân, 355
Yezîdî villages, 269
Za’ferân, 286
Zâkhô, position, 286-87, 287 _note_^{2};
grave of the Dominican Soldini, 287-88
Za’khurân, 321-22
Zamantî Su, the, 344
Zeitha, 79, 111-13
Zeitha-Jemma, 113
Zelebîyeh, fortress of, 67-68, 110, 111, 112
Zemzem, the well, at Mecca, 277
Zenobia, fortress of, 68
Zeugma (Birejik), the, 109, 110
Ziyârah of Uweis el Ḳaranî, 56
_Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, London and Bungay._
* * * * *
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It is dated in the year 545 A.H., _i. e._ A.D. 1150.
[2] The Persian influence had probably filtered through Egypt, for
similar leaf motives are to be found in Cairo, for example in a fine
bit of woodwork in the Museum: Herz Bey, _Catalogue Raisonné_, fig.
24. The prototype must be looked for in the plaster decorations of Ibn
Ṭûlûn.
[3] M. Saladin believes this entrelac to be of Damascene origin.
_Manuel d’Art Musulman_, i. p. 115.
[4] Ed. Reinaud, p. 267. He wrote in A.D. 1321.
[5] Anabasis, Bk. I. ch. iv, 10.
[6] _Zur antiken Topographie der Palmyrene_, p. 31.
[7] Mr. Hogarth also noticed that Bâb is marked out of its true place:
_Annual of the British School at Athens_, XIV. p. 185.
[8] Plutarch: _In Crass_.
[9] Sachau saw it: _Reise in Syrien und Mesopotamien_, p. 148.
[10] Ed. de Goeje, p. 162. He wrote in A.D. 864.
[11] Manbij is the name used in literary Arabic, but it is noticeable
that in the colloquial the word approaches more nearly to the earliest
form, being pronounced Bumbuj.
[12] Eskî Serûj according to Chapot: _La frontière de l’Euphrate_, p.
306.
[13] _Geography_, Bk. XVI. ch. i. 27.
[14] Ritter: _Erdkunde_, Vol. VII. p. 961.
[15] Procopius makes the same observation: _De Bell. Per._, II. 20.
[16] It is so given in the Antonine Itinerary:
Hierapoli--Thilaticomum--Bathnas--Edissa.
[17] Ammianus Marcellinus, Bk. XXIII. ch. ii. 7.
[18] Chapot, _op. cit._ p. 281.
[19] Chapot believes that the passage was effected at a point north of
Cæciliana, which would fit in with Tell Aḥmar: _op. cit._ p. 254, note
5.
[20] Mr. Hogarth suggests that the Abbess Ætheria crossed at Tell
Aḥmar on her way to Edessa: _loc. cit._ p. 183.
[21] Birejik and the Tell Aḥmar passage (whatever may have been its
ancient name) and Thapsacus do not exhaust the number of recorded
routes, for Chosroes, in his first expedition against Justinian,
crossed at Obbanes, somewhere about the modern Meskeneh, and on his
third expedition he built a bridge of boats near Europus, which
is perhaps the modern Jerâblus. (Mr. Hogarth doubts the accepted
identification of Jerâblus with Europus: _Annals of Arch. and
Anthrop._, Vol. II. p. 169.) During the Mohammedan period other
points are mentioned. Ibn Khurdâdhbeh, writing in the ninth century,
makes the road from Aleppo to Babylon cross at Bâlis, the ancient
Barbalissos (ed. de Goeje, p. 74), but Iṣṭakhrî, a hundred years
later, says that Bâlis, though it was once the Syrian port on the
Euphrates, had fallen into decay since the days of Seif ed Dauleh, and
was little used by merchants (ed. de Goeje, p. 62). In the twelfth
century, and perhaps earlier, its place had been taken by Ḳal’at en
Nejm, where Nûr ed Dîn, who died in 1145, built a great fortress,
famous during the wars against the Crusaders. The bridge there was
called Jisr Manbij (“the bridge of Manbij”), but it cannot have been
constructed by Nûr ed Dîn, for Ibn Jubeir, writing about the year
1185 a description of his journey from Ḥarrân (Carrhae) to Manbij,
says that he “crossed the river in small boats, lying ready, to a
new castle called Ḳal’at en Nejm” (Gibb Memorial edition, p. 248).
In Yâḳût’s day (circa 1225) the caravans from Ḥarrân to Syria always
crossed here.
[22] Ammianus Marcellinus, Bk. XXIII. ch. ii. 6.
[23] _The Buildings of Justinian_ (Palest. Pilgrims’ Text Society), p.
66.
[24] A few of these may have preserved a certain importance in a
later age: Tell el Ghânah, directly to the east of Tell Aḥmar, has
been conjectured to be Thilaticomum (possibly incorrectly: Regling,
_Beiträge zur alten Geschichte_, 1902, Vol. I. p. 474) and Tell
Bada’ah to be Aniana, the first being mentioned in the Antonine
Itinerary and the second by Ptolemy.
[25] Mr. Hogarth (at whose request I visited Tell Aḥmar) has published
the carved slabs and the stela in the _Annals of Archæology and
Anthropology_, Vol. II. No. 4. He saw them when he was at Tell Aḥmar
in 1908.
[26] Jerâblus or Jerâbîs, the names are used indiscriminately.
The former is thought by Nöldeke to be an Arabic plural of Jirbâs
(mentioned by Yâḳût as opposite Ḳinnesrin, Dictionary, Vol. II. p.
688) and the latter as Arabicized from Europus.
[27] The inscription is given by Pognon: _Inscriptions de la
Mésopotamie_, p. 17. The tomb was visited by Oppenheim, and is
mentioned by him in _Tell Halaf_ (1st number, 10th year of Der alte
Orient), and in his _Griechische und lateinische Inschriften_.
(_Byzantinische Zeitschrift_, 1905, p. 7.)
[28] Oppenheim thought it was the end of a sarcophagus, but Pognon’s
guide climbed into the upper chamber and found it to be nothing but a
block of stone closing the entrance.
[29] For the cyborium tomb, see Heisenburg: _Grabeskirche und
Apostelkirche_, Vol. I. ch. xvi.
[30] A photograph of the fourth, the Ziareh of Khoros at Cyrrhus, was
published by Chapot in _Le Tour du Monde_, April 8, 1905, p. 162.
[31] Mylasa: published by the Dilettanti Society; Tripoli: _Nouvelles
Archives des Missions_, Tome XII. fas. 1; Dana: De Vogüé, _La Syrie
Centrale_, plate 78.
[32] Tomb of Absalom, Jerusalem.
[33] Gereme: Rott, _Kleinasiatische Denkmäler_, p. 171; El Bârah: De
Vogüé, _op. cit._ pl. 75.
[34] M. Cumont’s monuments are of this type and I have seen a fine
example at Barâd in N. Syria, also as yet unpublished except for a
photograph given by me in _The Desert and the Sown_, p. 287.
[35] Maden Sheher: published by Sir W. Ramsay and myself in _The
Thousand and One Churches_, p. 230.
[36] The name which has been suggested for the site is Baisampse, a
place mentioned by Ptolemy. There are a considerable number of cut
stones on the mound near the village.
[37] It was re-copied by Pognon and published by him in _Inscrip. de
la Mésopotamie_, p. 82. The similarity between some of the characters
in the two inscriptions is striking.
[38] It appears in the extreme right-hand top corner of his Fig. 22,
_Inschrif. aus Syrien und Mesopot_.
[39] I could not reconcile the topography here with Kiepert’s map. He
marks a northern tower, which he calls Nesheib (doubtless my Neshabah)
and places there the Mazâr of Sultan ’Abdullah. He has a second
tower further to the south-east, and finally the castle itself. The
second tower is non-existent, or else it represents the minaret in
the castle. The only mazâr which I saw or heard mentioned is that of
Sultan Selîm, a small modern building between Neshabah and the castle.
[40] It resembles the tower tombs at Irzî, which will be described
later.
[41] This is Abu’l Fidâ’s account, ed. Reinaud, p. 277. He wrote in
A.D. 1321. Yâḳût, a century earlier, gives the same story.
[42] Quoted by Ritter, _Erdkunde_, Vol. X. p. 241.
[43] Ainsworth believed this to be the site of Benjamin of Tudela’s
Jewish settlement (_Euphrates Expedition_, Vol. I. p. 269), and he
speaks of a monastic ruin here.
[44] It is so described in his map.
[45] Sachau thought that Ḥaraglah was of Hellenistic origin (_Reise
in Syrien und Mesopotamien_, p. 245); Sarre believes that it may be
Parthian, and the circular outer fortification gives colour to the
suggestion (_Zeitschr. der Gesell. für Erdkunde zu Berlin_, 1909, No.
7).
[46] Sachau (_op. cit._ p. 243) gives the inscription, and my copy
tallied with his.
[47] Just as the first mosque in Cairo, that of ’Amr, was built
entirely on columns taken from earlier buildings, Muḳaddasî describes
one of the Raḳḳah mosques as [Illustration: Arabic script]; it would
be satisfactory to imagine that he referred to the columned arcades of
the mosque round the square minaret, but the phrase cannot reasonably
be twisted into that or any other meaning. The square minaret is
the ancient Syrian tower type; Thiersch has recently published an
exhaustive study of it in his _Pharos_.
[48] I saw traces of two such arcades on the E., N. and W. sides of
the court, and, judging from the vestiges that remain, the arcades
must have been three deep to the south. The bricks of the vanished
arcades have been dug out and carried away for building purposes. The
outer walls are so much ruined that I could not determine the position
of the gates with certainty.
[49] Professor van Berchem has published the inscription in his
_Arabische Inschriften_, a chapter appended to the work of Professor
Sarre and Dr. Herzfeld entitled _Reise in Euphrat-und Tigris-Gebiet_.
But the publication has appeared too late for me to do more than refer
to it.
[50] M. Viollet has published a short description of these ruins
(_Publications de l’Académie des Inscrip. et Belles-Lettres_, 1909,
Vol. XII. part 2). He believes the palace to have been erected by
Hârûn er Rashîd.
[51] I expect that this is Sachau’s Bergland Tulaba--see Kiepert’s map.
[52] Bk. XXIII. ch. iii. 8.
[53] It was visited and planned by Sarre and Herzfeld in 1907; Sarre,
_Reise in Mesopotamien_, in the _Zeitschrift der Gesch. für Erdkunde
zu Berlin_, 1909, No. 7, p. 429. Sarre pronounces the greater part of
the ruins to date from the time of Justinian.
[54] Ibn Ḥauḳal is, I think, the first to speak of it. Idrîsî says
that it had busy markets and that much traffic went through it. They
wrote respectively in the tenth and twelfth centuries.
[55] _Zur antiken Topographie der Palmyrene_, p. 39.
[56] The reference is not, however, certain: Moritz, _op. cit._ p. 35.
[57] Sachau travelled up the left bank of the Khâbûr, and should
therefore have crossed the course of the canal, but he makes no
mention of it.
[58] I should conjecture that on the Euphrates as on the Tigris the
disappearance of the settled population dates from the terrible
disaster of the Mongol invasion.
[59] I looked carefully for any trace of a big canal opposite
Ṣâliḥîyeh and saw none.
[60] _Anabasis_, Bk. I. ch. 5, 9.
[61] With the doubtful contribution made by Ammianus Marcellinus to
the question, I have dealt in the Appendix to this chapter.
[62] _Amm. Mar._, Bk. XXIV. ch. i. 6.
[63] Ed. de Goeje, p. 233.
[64] Ed. Reinaud, p. 286.
[65] Quoted by Ritter, Vol. XI. p. 717.
[66] De Beylié: _Prome et Samarra_, p. 68. See, too, Viollet’s memoir
presented to the Acad. des Inscrip. et B.-Lettres, quoted above.
He, too, was shown the fragment of Assyrian relief and gives an
illustration of it, for which reason I do not trouble to publish my
photograph.
[67] Pognon: _Inscriptions mandaïtes des coupes de Khouabir_.
[68] Chesney notices that the ruins of the old town lie on the left
bank below the present ’Ânah. Quoted by Ritter, Vol. XI. p. 724.
[69] It is, I suppose, Chesney’s Sarifah, which has been conjectured
to be the Kolosina of Ptolemy: Ritter, Vol. XI. p. 730.
[70] These ruins give additional weight to Ritter’s suggestion that
Ḥadîthah was the Parthian station of Olabus: Vol. XI. p. 731. The Arab
town of Ḥadîthah is first mentioned by Ibn Khurdâdhbeh, ed. de Goeje,
p. 74.
[71] Julian crossed the Euphrates at Parux Malkha, which cannot be far
from Baghdâdî, and captured the castle of Diacira. This castle must
have stood at the southern end of the great bend made by the Euphrates
below Baghdâdî. Chesney saw the ruins of a fortress there. It is
perhaps Ptolemy’s Idicara and the Izannesopolis of Isidorus: Ritter,
Vol. XI. p. 737.
[72] Herodotus mentions the bitumen wells and calls the town Is. It
has been identified with the Ihi of the Babylonian inscriptions, the
Ahava of Ezra, and with the Ist from which a tribute of bitumen was
brought to Thothmes III, according to an inscription at Karnak.
[73] Yâḳût mentions Kebeisah as the oasis four miles from Hît upon
the desert road. There are, he says, a number of villages there, the
inhabitants of which live in the extreme of poverty and misery, by
reason of the aridity of the surrounding waste.
[74] The central division wall in the long south chamber is a later
addition.
[75] Described by Choisy: _L’Art de bâtir chez les Byzantins_, p. 31.
[76] For example Ḳasṭal (Brünnow and Domaszewski: _Provincia Arabia_,
Vol. II. pl. xliv.); Ḳaṣr el Abyaḍ (de Vogüé: _La Syrie Centrale_,
Vol. I. p. 69); Deir el Kahf, founded in A.D. 306 (Butler: _Ancient
Architecture in Syria_, Section A, Part II. p. 146); Ḳuṣeir el
Ḥallâbât, dated A.D. 213 (ditto, p. 72); barracks at Anderîn, dated
A.D. 558 (ditto, Section B, Part II. pl. viii.).
[77] Ṭuba with a triple court (Musil: _Ḳuṣeir ’Amra_, Vol. I. p. 13);
Kharânî (ditto, p. 97); Khân ez Zebîb (_Provincia Arabia_, Vol. II. p.
78).
[78] The whole area of ruins is known as Kherâb = ruin.
[79] It is not necessarily so late, for the Baghdâd Gate at Raḳḳah has
the same arch, and it is certainly earlier.
[80] See Rothstein: _Die Dynastie der Lakhmiden in al Ḥîra_, p. 25. He
gives reasons for believing that the art of writing Arabic was first
practised at Ḥîrah. The population was largely Christian (the ’Ibâd of
the Arab historians); Ḥîrah was the seat of a bishopric, and frequent
allusion is made to churches and monasteries in and near the town.
[81] Meissner: “Ḥîra und Khawarnaḳ”, _Sendschriften der D. Orient
Gesell._, No. 2.
[82] I have already published the plan in the _Hellenic Journal_ for
1910, Part I., p. 69, in an article on the vaulting system of the
palace. Ukheiḍir was visited in the year 1907 by M. Massignon, though
this fact was unknown to me until I returned to England in July 1909.
He has published an account of it, together with a sketch plan made
under circumstances of great difficulty, in the _Bulletin de l’Acad.
des Inscr. et Belles-Lettres_ of March 1909, in the _Gazette des Beaux
Arts_ of April 1909, and in the _Mémoires de l’Institut français
du Caire_, vol. xxviii. (The last named has not yet appeared, but
he has been so kind as to let me see an advance copy.) Neither to
M. Massignon nor to me belongs the honour of discovery; an unknown
Englishman had visited the palace in the eighteenth century, and his
brief report is given by Niebuhr (_Reisebeschreibung_, vol. ii., p.
225, note): “Ich habe in dem Tagebuch eines Engländers, der von Haleb
nach Basra gereist war, gefunden, dass er 44 Stunden Südfost nach
Osten von Hit, eine ganz verlassene Stadt in der Wüste angetroffen
habe, wovon die Mauer 50 Fuss hoch und 40 Fuss dick war. Jede der
vier Seiten hatte 700 Fuss, und in der Mauer waren Thürme. In dieser
Stadt oder grossem Castell, findet man noch ein kleines Castell. Von
eben dieser verlassenen Stadt hörte ich nachher, dass sie von den
Arabern El Khader genannt werde, und nur 10 bis 12 Stunden von Meshed
Ali entfernt sei.” I cannot feel any doubt that the “forsaken town”
referred to in the diary, the existence of which was confirmed by
the Arabs, who spoke of it to Niebuhr under the name of Khader, is
our Ukheiḍir. So far as I have been able to discover, the nameless
Englishman was the first modern traveller to visit the site.
[83] I wish to call special attention to the presence of this
construction at Ctesiphon because Dr. Herzfeld has stated erroneously
that it does not exist in Sassanian buildings. (_Der Islâm_, vol. i.
part ii. p. 111.)
[84] The name Ukeidir can have no connection with the name Ukheiḍir.
The two words are differently spelt in Arabic.
[85] The history of Mesopotamian rivers is exceedingly complicated
owing to the frequency with which they change their beds. Mr. Le
Strange (_Lands of the Eastern Caliphate_, p. 70 _et seq._) believes
that the Nahr Hindîyeh, which is probably identical with the ’Alḳâmî
of Ḳudâmah and Mas’ûdî, was considered in the tenth century to be the
main stream of the Euphrates, though even at that time it was not so
broad as the Ḥilleh branch. Writing in 1905 Mr. Le Strange speaks
of the Ḥilleh branch as being undoubtedly the main stream in modern
times, but in 1909 nearly all the water, as I shall describe, flowed
down the Kûfah branch (the Hindîyeh canal) and the Ḥilleh branch
lay dry all the winter. This, however, will, it is to be hoped, be
rectified by the new irrigation schemes on which Sir William Willcocks
is at present engaged.
[86] It is known as the ’Amalîyeh Mukallifeh.
[87] This applies, I believe, only to lands leased from the State,
arḍîyeh amîrîyeh.
[88] The foundations were, however, traced by Dieulafoy, who has
indicated them in his plan: _L’Art ancien de la Perse_, Vol. V. When
he first visited Ctesiphon, the east wall of both wings and all the
vault of the hall were perfect.
[89] It was founded by Anushirwân the Just after he had taken Antioch
of Syria in 540. He transported the inhabitants of Antioch to the
Tigris and settled them opposite Seleucia in a new city which is said
to have been built on the plan of Antioch. Le Strange: _Lands of the
Eastern Caliphate_, p. 33.
[90] _Sûrah_, XIV. vs. 46. The Arabs called the double town Medâin,
the cities, but Ṭabarî uses the name for the eastern city and
describes the western as Bahurasîr. I have abridged Ṭabarî’s account
of the siege from the text of de Goeje’s edition, Vol. V., Prima
Series, under the years 15 and 16 A.H.
[91] The White Palace is not represented by the existing ruin on the
east bank, which was known to the Arabs as Aywân Kisrâ, the hall of
Chosroes. The White Palace was also on the left bank, but about a mile
higher up. It had disappeared by the beginning of the tenth century.
Le Strange, _op. cit._, p. 34.
[92] Bricks stamped with Nebuchadnezzar’s name have been found along
the quays, and there was a flourishing Persian Baghdâd on the west
bank of the Tigris towards the end of the Sassanian period. The chief
authority for the history of Baghdâd is Mr. Le Strange’s admirable
book, _Baghdâd during the Abbâsid Caliphate_, which has made it
possible to understand the very complicated topography of the town.
[93] It is perhaps unnecessary to explain that the Shî’ahs regard ’Alî
ibn abî Tâlib, who lies buried at Nejef, as the only lawful khalif.
He and his eleven immediate heirs are known as the Twelve Imâms, the
twelfth being Muḥammad III al Mahdî, who is credited with having been
concealed in a cave at Sâmarrâ whence he will emerge at the end of
days and re-establish the true faith.
[94] The whole argument is given by Le Strange, _Baghdâd_, p. 160 _et
seq._, and pp. 351-2.
[95] From its relation to similar buildings (for instance at Ḥadîthah
on the Euphrates and at Dûr on the Tigris) in places which probably
flourished until the time of the Mongol invasion, _i.e._ towards the
end of the thirteenth century, I should, however, place the tomb of
Sitt Zobeideh earlier than 1200.
[96] See de Beylié: _Prome et Samara_, p. 34.
[97] Mr. Le Strange gives good reasons for believing that Mustanṣir
did not found the mosque to which this minaret belongs, but that it is
no other than the Jâmi’ el Ḳaṣr, built by the Khalif el Muktafî (A.D.
902) as a Friday Mosque adjoining the palace of his father Mu’taḍid.
The palace was known as the Ḳaṣr et Tâj, the Palace of the Crown:
_Baghdâd_, p. 269.
[98] These are exactly copied in the domes over the carrefours in the
bazaars, which are certainly much later in date.
[99] I have been able to give an illustration of this system from Khân
Khernîna; the chambers at Baghdâd were so dark that photography was
almost impossible.
[100] Some admirable photographs of it are given by De Beylié, _op.
cit._, p. 33 _et seq._
[101] A good photograph has been given by Viollet: _Le Palais
de Al-Moutasim, Mémoires présentés à l’Acad. des Inscrip. et
Belles-Lettres_, Vol. XII. Part II. Viollet believes it to have come
from a church. See too Herzfeld: “Die Genesis der islamischen Kunst,”
in _Der Islâm_, Vol. I. Part I.
[102] De Beylié, _op. cit._, p. 30. He gives several illustrations.
[103] Kiepert calls it Khân eṭ Ṭarniyeh.
[104] Sitace cannot be placed with certainty. Ritter (Vol. X. p. 21)
conjectures that the bridge must have lain about four hours above
Baghdâd. After the battle of Cunaxa, a field of which the site is not
determined, the Greeks pursued the Persians to a village on a mound
where they passed the night. Here they learnt that Cyrus was dead.
Next day they joined Ariæus and marched in one day to some unnamed
Babylonian villages. They then marched through fertile country for
a space of time not specified, probably a day, to well-supplied
villages, where they stayed twenty-three days. In three days from
these villages they reached the Median Wall, under the guidance of
Tissaphernes, who must have led them by a tortuous course across
Mesopotamia, and in two days more they came to Sitace, which was a
populous city lying on an island formed by the Tigris and a canal.
Sitace is perhaps Pliny’s Sittace (Bk. VI. ch. xxxi.), though his
confused statement would seem to place it on the left bank of the
Tigris. Ptolemy mentions a place called Scaphe, which Müller is
inclined to connect with the Sablis of the Tab. Peut., but it appears
to have been some distance to the east of the Tigris (_Ptolemy_, ed.
Müller, p. 1006). The placing of Sitace depends upon the position of
Opis, which is not satisfactorily determined.
[105] There was an earlier Dujeil which started from the Euphrates
a little below Hît, crossed Mesopotamia and joined the Tigris above
Baghdâd, but by the tenth century its eastern end had silted up. The
later Dujeil was a loop canal from the Tigris; it left the river
opposite Ḳâdisîyah and rejoined it at ’Ukbarâ. These complicated
questions may easily be understood by referring to the first map in
Mr. Le Strange’s _Baghdâd_.
[106] The term is the equivalent of the northern Chiflik. The latter
is a Turkish word signifying merely farm, but it designates especially
a farm belonging to the Sultan.
[107] ’Ukbarâ was a well-known place in the days of the Khalifate.
Muḳaddasî (ed. de Goeje, p. 122.) It lay on the east bank of the
Tigris, _i.e._ on the east bank of the old channel. Le Strange, _Lands
of the Eastern Caliphate_, p. 50.
[108] Kiepert marks Wâneh to the south of ’Ukbarâ, whereas I should
place it a little to the north. We rode to Sumeikhah in about an hour
from the Imâm Muḥammad ’Alî, which would have been impossible from
Kiepert’s Wâneh, or for that matter from his ’Ukbarâ. I am relying,
however, for the names upon the not too certain testimony of Ḳâsim.
Both ’Ukbarâ and Wâneh are mentioned by Muḳaddasî, but he gives no
indication of their relative position. He provides us with no more
information about Wâneh than its name (ed. de Goeje, pp. 54 and 115),
which he spells Aiwanâ. The customary mediæval spelling is Awânâ, and
other authorities place the town on the west bank of the old Tigris
bed, while ’Ukbarâ lay opposite to it on the east bank (Streck: _Die
alte Landschaft Babylonien_, p. 227). This would correspond fairly
well with my itinerary. I rode from ’Ukbarâ in a north-westerly
direction and reached Wâneh in forty-five minutes.
[109] _Journal of the Geog. Soc._, Vol. XI. p. 124.
[110] _Anabasis_, Bk. II. ch. iv. 25.
[111] Bk. I. 189.
[112] Bk. XVI. ch. i. 9.
[113] Bk. VI. ch. xxxi. Though I believe that the ruins on the east
bank seen by Ross and the extensive ruin field on what is now the west
bank of the Tigris must represent Opis, the locating of the city is
complicated by the fact that Xenophon took four days to reach Opis
from Sitace. Now if Sitace is anywhere near Baghdâd it is strange
that the Greeks should have marched four days and got no further
than a town situated immediately to the north of the ’Aḍêm. The
Physcus, which Xenophon crossed by a bridge of boats before coming
to Opis, may be the ’Aḍêm, but some have supposed it to be the great
Ḳâṭûl-Nahrawân, a loop canal on the east bank of the Tigris. I do
not know, however, that there is any record of a canal here before
the Sassanian period (Le Strange: _Lands of the Eastern Caliphate_,
p. 57). Chesney tried to solve the difficulty of Xenophon’s march by
placing Opis higher up the river at Ḳadsîyeh, but that would leave
the great ruin field lower down unidentified, and would, besides,
leave too long a time for the march from Opis to the Great Zâb, which
occupied the Greeks eleven days. For the site of the Babylonian Opis,
see King: _Sumer and Akkad_, p. 11.
[114] It is probably one of the districts which were ruined by the
Mongol invasion.
[115] _i.e._ “raids and so forth”; the second word is merely a
repetition of the first with the initial letter _r_ changed to _m_.
This convenient form is very common in Turkish.
[116] This Ḳâdisîyah must not be confounded with the battlefield near
Ḥirah where Khâlid ibn u’l Walîd overthrew the Sassanians.
[117] Sarre thinks it was empty, and holds that the town was never
finished or inhabited. He would therefore place here Ḳâṭûl, the site
first fixed upon for his capital by the Khalif Mu’taṣim when he left
Baghdâd. Finding Sâmarrâ to be better placed, he abandoned Ḳâṭûl
before the work there was completed: _Ya’ḳûbî_, ed. de Goeje, p. 256.
Sarre: _Reise in Mesop. Zeitsch. der Gesell. fûr Erdkunde zu Berlin_,
1909, No. 7, p. 437. Schwartz, however, suggests that Ḳâṭûl may have
lain to the north of Sâmarrâ: _Die Abbâsiden-Residenz Sâmarrâ_, p. 5.
Ross thought that Ḳâdisîyah was Sassanian, but I am persuaded that he
was in error. (A Journey from Baghdâd to Opis, _Journal of the Geog.
Soc._, Vol. XI. p. 127.) Jones gives a plan: _Memoirs_, p. 8.
[118] The Malwîyeh can scarcely be any other than the minaret
described by Balâdhurî among Mutawakkil’s buildings: _Futûḥ ul
Buldân_, p. 306, Cairo edition of 1901. The ruins of Sâmarrâ have not
yet received the detailed study which they deserve, but Professor
Sarre and Dr. Herzfeld are about to begin an exhaustive examination
of the site. Sketch plans have been published by De Beylié (_Prome et
Samarra_), and at about the same time Herzfeld brought out a small
monograph entitled Sâmarrâ. I had this monograph with me, and finding
the plans to be incorrect and the drawings inexact (for example,
the ornament drawn in fig. 5 gives little idea of the original), I
measured and photographed all the ruins over again. Meantime Viollet
has published a short account of his journey in Mesopotamia, in which
he has given plans of the ruins of Sâmarrâ: _Le Palais de Al Moutasim,
etc., Mémoires of the Acad. des Inscrip. et Belles-Lettres_, Vol. XII.
Part II. His attempt to reconstruct the ground plan of the palace of
which the Beit el Khalîfah forms part, is of great interest.
[119] Ed. de Goeje, p. 256.
[120] _Lands of the Eastern Califate_, p. 53. Am. Mar., Bk. XXV. ch.
vi. 4.
[121] This is marked in Viollet’s plan.
[122] Herzfeld, _Sâmarra_, p. 61, places the old quarter of Karkh
at Shnâs and Dûr ’Arabâyâ at Eskî Baghdâd. Karkh is the Charcha of
Ammianus Marcellinus.
[123] Mutawakkil began a new canal from the Tigris to the Nahrawân,
the latter having silted up by the ninth century, but the labour of
cutting through the hard conglomerate was found to be too great and
the work was abandoned. I do not know whether the canal I crossed was
of his making, but I fancy it was the Nahrawân itself, perhaps cleared
and deepened by him. Ross (_op. cit._, p. 129) speaks of bridge
foundations formed of large “artificial stones” (concrete?) “joined
together by iron clamps and melted lead.” I saw nothing but brick,
but Ross’s bridge may well be, as he conjectured, earlier than the
Mohammadan period, since it probably spanned the Sassanian canal. I
thought the artificial mound to be pre-Mohammadan.
[124] There is some doubt about this inscription. Professor Sarre
copied it without noticing the date, which was covered with whitewash;
he gave it to Professor van Berchem, who decided that the shape of
the letters pointed indubitably to the ninth century. Professor van
Berchem’s authority in such matters is not to be questioned, but the
date must be accounted for. Perhaps it was a later addition, put in
when the shrine was repaired.
[125] _A Residence in Koordistan_, Vol. II. p. 147. The book was
published in 1836.
[126] Kal’at Abu Rayâsh, which is marked in Kiepert’s map, has almost
disappeared, the high ground on which it stands having fallen away and
carried the walls and towers with it.
[127] Khân Khernîna is not mentioned by Ibn Jubeir nor by Ibn Baṭûṭah,
who both travelled by this side of the Tigris from Tekrît to Môṣul,
the one at the end of the twelfth century, and the other in the middle
of the fourteenth century.
[128] Not, I believe, by Layard, who was always careful to cover what
he did not remove.
[129] Dr. Herzfeld has been so good as to send me the chapter of his
forthcoming work (written in conjunction with Professor Sarre), in
which he gives a further account of Sâmarrâ. When it reached me my
description of the ruins was already printed, and I can do no more
than acknowledge, with gratitude, his kindness.
[130] Viollet puts them ten deep to the south, four deep to the north
and five deep to east and west.
[131] In Manṣûr’s mosque at Baghdâd, the roof was borne by wooden
columns. See Le Strange, _Baghdâd_, p. 34.
[132] _Lands of the Eastern Califate_, p. 56.
[133] Its original name is doubtful. In the twelfth century it was
called the Ma’shûk, for Ibn Jubeir alludes to it under that name in
the twelfth century, and so does Ibn Baṭûṭah in the fourteenth century.
[134] Viollet has given a section of them, pl. xviii.
[135] Viollet’s plan, pl. xvii, is here more complete than mine.
[136] I give a plan of the three vaulted halls, but Viollet has made
a sketch plan of the ground behind which furnishes indications of the
whole scheme of the palace. The Beit el Khalîfah is perhaps the Dâr
el ’Ammeh, the first palace built by Mu’taṣim upon the site of the
monastery: Herzfeld, _Sâmarrâ_, p. 63.
[137] Ross distinguished in 1834 a substructure of “arches” (_op.
cit._, p. 129) by which he must mean vaults like those at the ’Ashiḳ.
[138] An account of it, together with a sketch plan, was given by
Ross, _op. cit._, p. 130.
[139] Viollet has given a plan of Abu Dulâf. Herzfeld did not publish
it in his _Sâmarrâ_, for he had not at that time visited it, but he
has since published a plan: _Zeitschr. für Gesch. der Erdkunde zu
Berlin_, 1909, No. 7, pl. viii. My plan differs considerably from his,
but only a re-examination of the mosque can prove which of us is right.
[140] This vestibule is present opposite the south gate of the Sâmarrâ
mosque. Herzfeld has made an attempt to reconstruct the vestibule of
Abu Dulâf. Viollet has given a bare indication of it, and this is all
that exists. Viollet has also marked the line of an outer wall, which,
as at Sâmarrâ, enclosed the precincts of the mosque.
[141] Abu Dulâf was probably built by Mutawakkil when he erected a
whole new quarter three farsakhs north of Shnâs: Ya’ḳûbî, ed. de
Goeje, p. 266.
[142] The spiral tower occurs also in Sassanian architecture, witness
the Atesh Gah of Jur, Dieulafoy: _L’Art ancien de la Perse_, Vol. IV.
p. 79.
[143] Thiersch has indicated the true relation of Ibn Ṭûlûn’s minaret
both to the zigurrat of Mesopotamia and to the pharos of Alexandria.
His objections to Herzfeld’s theory that the Cairo minaret is purely
Hellenistic in origin are conclusive. Thiersch: _Pharos_, p. 112.
[144] I believe it is generally admitted by the learned in these
matters that Nestorius was not guilty of the heresies for which he was
condemned in 431, at the second œcumenical council held at Ephesus.
I remember to have heard a distinguished English Catholic, who was
also an acute historian, express his definite opinion that Nestorius
was in the right, for all his expulsion beyond the pale of western
Christianity. An excellent account of the rise of the Eastern Churches
is contained in Wigram’s recently published book, _The Assyrian
Church_.
[145] I am relying upon local tradition, upon comparison with churches
in the country districts, and upon the character of the ornament
compared with Moslem ornament in Môṣul which can be dated with
tolerable accuracy.
[146] The barn church is more fully defined in _The Thousand and One
Churches_, published by Sir W. Ramsay and myself, p. 309.
[147] There is a description of Mâr Tûmâ in Rich: _Residence in
Koordistan_, Vol. II. p. 118.
[148] All the doors in the atrium of Mâr Tûmâ look as if they had been
patched together out of older materials, but I suspect that these
materials came from the church itself and that the patching is due to
repair.
[149] Badr ed Dîn Lûlû, 1233-1259, according to Lane Poole:
_Mohammadan Dynasties_, p. 163; Ritter, following Desguignes, makes
him regent from 1213-1222, and an independent sovereign from 1222-1259.
[150] Le Strange: _Lands of the Eastern Caliphate_, p. 89.
[151] Oppenheim, _Vom Mittelmeere zum persischen Golf_, Vol. II. p.
176, gives a short description of it.
[152] De Beylié has given a good photograph of the general view:
_Prome et Samarra_, p. 49.
[153] This decoration is curiously akin to some of the Buddhist
Græco-Bactrian work.
[154] In the middle ages it was more numerous. Benjamin of Tudela
found a colony of 7,000 Jews at Môṣul: Ritter, Vol. X. p. 254.
[155] An account of Mâr Behnâm has been published by Pognon:
_Inscriptions de la Mésopotamie_, p. 132. He believes that the
existing church is due to a reconstruction that took place in the
twelfth century, but its original form seems to him to be the same
as that of Mâr Gabriel of Kartmîn in the Ṭûr ’Abdîn, a church which
I should date not later than the sixth century. The history of Mâr
Behnâm would therefore offer an exact analogy to that of the churches
of Môṣul, according to my theory; it is a mediæval building following
the lines of a very early structure. Pognon gives a good illustration
of the altar niche in the tomb (Pl. VIII), which is dated the year
of the Seleucid era corresponding to 1306 A.D. The superstructure he
takes to have been a baptistery.
[156] They must be dated before 1550, according to Pognon’s
reasoning. He speaks of them with great contempt, and they are not
very remarkable works of art, though they seemed to me to be of
considerable interest. The Moslems call the monastery Deir el Khiḍr,
Khiḍr being the Mohammadan counterpart of St. George. The village
close at hand is known as El Khiḍr.
[157] The following notes on the decorations of the church are perhaps
worth recording. S.W. door in porch: on lintel, a pair of birds on
either side of a cross; over lintel, two snakes, tail to tail, with
open jaws turned to what looks like a piled-up cup; in the corners,
lions with tails ending in the head of a snake; band of entrelac and
round it a band of Syriac inscriptions surrounding the door. N.W. door
in porch: on lintel, an angel on either side of a cross; over lintel,
small crosses with a boss between, two circles with a star in each;
at either corner the figure of a saint; entrelac and inscriptions.
Door from nave into apse; on lintel, a lion’s head forming a central
boss, on either side St. George and the Dragon. Door into S.E. chapel:
on lintel a cross; round door, small niches formed by an interlacing
rope (_cf._ the sanctuary door of Mâr Tûmâ at Môṣul), the niches
alternately filled with a saint and a decorated cross; above the door
two of the niches are filled with representations of: (1) the baptism
in Jordan; (2) the entry into Jerusalem, with an ass and palms in the
background. The spandrils between the upper niches are filled in with
dragons’ heads with open jaws.
[158] Pognon found inscriptions of the thirteenth, fifteenth, and
sixteenth centuries at Ḳaraḳôsh (_op. cit._, p. 129), but the
inscriptions inside the churches have not, so far as I know, been
recorded.
[159] The bishop had not perhaps retained a clear memory of his
facts--if facts they can be called; but Rich seems to have found the
history of Mâr Mattai and Mâr Behnâm scarcely less involved than I
did: _Residence in Koordistan_, Vol. II. p. 75. See, too, Pognon, _op.
cit._, p. 132, note 1.
[160] I fancy that ’Abdullah’s explanation was not far from the truth.
Layard, who is the best of all authorities on this country, makes the
following remarks about the Shabbak: “Though strange and mysterious
rites are as usual attributed to them” (_i.e._ as is usual with regard
to a secret creed), “I suspect they are simply the descendants of
Kurds who emigrated at some distant period from the Persian slopes
of the mountains, and who still profess Sheeite doctrines. They may,
however, be tainted with Ali-Illahism, which consists mainly in the
belief that there have been successive incarnations of the Deity, the
principal having been in the person of Ali, the celebrated son-in-law
of the prophet Mohammad. The name usually given, Ali-Illahi, means
‘believers that Ali is God.’ Various abominable rites have been
attributed to them, as to the Yezidis, Ansyris, and all sects whose
doctrines are not known to the surrounding Mussulman and Christian
population.” _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 216.
[161] A full description of the reliefs is contained in Layard’s
_Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 207. Mr. King is so kind as to inform
me that the smaller panels at Baviân were carved in the reign of
Sennacherib, between the dates 689 B.C. and 681 B.C. The larger
sculptures are to be assigned to Shalmaneser II (860-825 B.C.).
[162] It has been described and drawn by Layard: _Nineveh and
Babylon_, p. 48.
[163] In the photograph ’Alî Beg is seated and the ḳawwâl stands to
the right of him. The figure on the left is the Christian secretary,
and the close-shaven man behind the beg is Fattûḥ.
[164] Layard mentions that the oil for the lamps is provided out of
the funds of the shrine: _Nineveh and its Remains_, Vol. I. p. 291.
[165] Layard pointed out the connection between the white bull offered
annually to the Yezîdî solar saint and a similar sacrifice in the
Assyrian ritual: _Nineveh and its Remains_, Vol. I. p. 290.
[166] This doctrine is, however, older than the Sûfîs; it was held by
the Mandæans and is a part of the Asiatic heritage of religious ideas
out of which the Yezîdî creed has been formed. The transmigration of
souls, another Mandæan tenet, is also professed by the Yezîdîs.
[167] This, too, is an article of the Mandæan faith.
[168] The late Lord Percy, who visited Sheikh ’Adî in 1897, found
nothing but the outer shell and the roof intact. It had been wrecked
by a Turkish general who had made a resolute attempt to convert or
exterminate (the two expressions are practically synonymous) the
Yezîdîs: _Notes from a Diary_, p. 184.
[169] _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 83.
[170] _Nineveh and its Remains_, Vol. I. p. 280, and _Nineveh and
Babylon_, p. 81.
[171] _Residence in Koordistan_, Vol. II. p. 91.
[172] Layard: _Nineveh and its Remains_, Vol. I. p. 230. See, too,
Perrot and Chipiez: _Histoire de l’Art_, Vol. II. p. 642.
[173] _Travels in the Track_, p. 144.
[174] Zâkhô must be the place known to the Arab geographers as
Ḥasanîyeh (I see that Hartmann comes to the same conclusion: _Bohtân,
Mitt. der Vorderas. Gesell._, 1896, II. p. 39), but their information
is, as usual, exceedingly meagre and the castle is mentioned by none.
Muḳaddasî, in the tenth century, says that it is a day’s journey from
Ma’lathâyâ (Malthai) to Ḥasanîyeh (ed. de Goeje, p. 149), and notes
the bridge over the Khâbûr above the town (p. 139). Yâḳût, in the
thirteenth century, observes that it is two days from Môṣul on the
road to Jezîret ibn ’Umar. Ainsworth conjectures it to be the spot
described by Xenophon as “a kind of palace with several villages
round it,” which was reached by the Greeks in five days’ march from
Mespila-Nineveh, but it must be admitted that Xenophon’s description
is not exactly suited to Zâkhô. Ritter thinks that a memory of the
people called by Strabo Saccopodes may be retained in the name Zâkhô
(Vol. IX. p. 705). With regard to the name Ḥasanîyeh it is perhaps
preserved in Ḥasanah, a small village on the opposite side of the
Khâbûr valley.
[175] Ainsworth thinks that it may mark the site of the village at
which the Greeks camped on the second day from Zâkhô: _Travels in the
Track_, p. 146. Xenophon mentions neither the Khâbûr nor the Ḥeizil.
[176] Mr. King, who has visited Jûdî Dâgh, tells me that all the
reliefs are of Sennacherib and were carved in the year 699 B.C.
[177] Ritter, Vol. XI. p. 154.
[178] So said Kas Mattai, but the Arab geographers would seem to place
it to the south of Jûdî Dâgh, not to the north. For example, Muḳaddasî
says that Thamânîn, the village of the eighty who were saved from the
flood, stand on the river Ghazil (the Ḥeizil Sû), a day’s march from
Ḥasanîyeh (Zâkhô), ed. de Goeje, pp. 139 and 149. Sachau, however,
speaks of Bêtmanîn as being behind Jûdî Dâgh, _i.e._ he bears out my
information: _Reise_, p. 376.
[179] It has been identified with the Bezabde of Ammianus Marcellinus,
the Saphe of Ptolemy (ed. Müller, p. 1005), and the Sapha of the
Peutinger Tables. Ammianus Marcellinus is generally supposed to have
confused Bezabde-Jezîreh with Phœnice-Finik, saying that the two
names are applied to the same place. In his account of the capture of
Bezabde by Sapor II, in A.D. 360, his description applies better to
Finik than to Jezîreh (Bk. XX. ch. vii. 1. See, however, Hartmann:
_Bohtân_, Part II. p. 98). He relates further that Constantius
attempted in vain to re-capture Bezabde (Bk. XX. ch. xi.), but in this
passage he must mean Jezîreh. I can find little in the history of
Jezîreh except the mention of sieges: by Tîmûr for example (Ritter,
Vol. IX. p. 709), and by the emirs of Bohtân (Rich: _op. cit._, Vol.
I. p. 106). When Moltke visited it in 1838 it was a heap of ruins
(_Briefe aus der Turkei_, Berlin, 1893, p. 251), and it was not much
more when I saw it.
[180] Sachau notices these reliefs. In his opinion the inscriptions
are of no great age: _Reise_, p. 379.
[181] Ibn Baṭûṭah, in the fourteenth century, mentions an old mosque
in the market place, which is probably the same as the one I saw,
though it has undergone many alterations and reparations since his day.
[182] _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 55.
[183] The caves are carefully excavated and I should say that they
are ancient. Layard (_Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 54) speaks of them as
tombs and some may have been intended as burial-places, but I do not
doubt that many were from all time used by the living. The troglodyte
habits of the dwellers in these mountains are still strongly marked.
Above Bâ’adrî I saw an underground village; at Ḥiṣn Keif, higher up
the Tigris, the people live in rock-hewn chambers.
[184] _Anabasis_, Bk. IV. ch. i.
[185] Ammianus Marcellinus, when he speaks of Izala, evidently intends
the name to cover the whole Ṭûr ’Abdîn: Bk. XVIII. ch. vi. 11, and Bk.
XIX. ch. ix. 4.
[186] The Jacobites and the Syrians (_i.e._ Jacobites who have
submitted to Rome) have now ousted the Nestorians, who must have been
the first to occupy the Ṭûr ’Abdîn. When this change took place I do
not know, but the Nestorians were in possession of the monastery of
Mâr Augen as late as 1505: Pognon, _op. cit._, p. 109.
[187] Pognon’s account of the churches, and his publication of the
inscriptions, is the best work on the subject (_Inscriptions de la
Mésopotamie_); Parry (_Six Months in a Syrian Monastery_) gives a
short description of the churches and some sketch plans.
[188] Tigris ferry 9.25; Handak (Christian) 9.45; Thelailah (Moslem)
10.40; Kôdakh--marked in Kiepert--we saw at 12.15, a little to the
south of our route.
[189] Our itinerary was as follows: 5.30 Azakh; 6.30 a ruined site
(marked in Kiepert); 7.5 Salakûn (Kiepert: Salekon Kharabe), a small
Moslem village; 8 Middo (marked in Kiepert), a Christian village on
the further side of a deep gorge (here we got into the oak woods); 9
Irmez, about a mile to the south of our road; 9.25 Arba’, a Christian
village also about a mile south; 9.45-10.45 Deir Mâr Shim’ûn, a ruined
monastery; 11.30 Deir Bar Sauma, the first monastery of Bâ Sebrîna.
[190] Monasteria clericorum. See _The Thousand and One Churches_, p.
461.
[191] Pognon: _op. cit._, p. 108. The stela has not, as Pognon
feared, been destroyed. The script is in an unknown alphabet, which
Pognon believes to be the prototype of Pehlevî. He gives excellent
photographs of the two inscriptions; my photograph shows the relief on
the third side. The fourth side is much weather-worn.
[192] I sent the photograph to Professor van Berchem. The inscription
is merely a date: 630 (= A.D. 1232-3), or possibly 639.
[193] The name itself is unintelligible.
[194] _The Buildings of Justinian_ (Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society),
p. 51.
[195] I would suggest that Ḳal’at ej Jedîd may occupy the site of the
Sisaurana of Procopius, which was destroyed by Belisarius. Sisaurana,
however, lay three miles from Rhabdium, and even as the crow flies the
distance between Ḳ. Ḥâtim Ṭâi and Ḳ. ej Jedîd must be greater. But the
important position of Ḳ. ej Jedîd on one of the few passes up from
the plain suggests that the spot must have been fortified in ancient
times. Sisaurana is no doubt the Sisara of Ammianus Marcellinus: see
Ritter, Vol. XI. p. 150 and pp. 400-401.
[196] Though tradition links these foundations with Egypt, it is quite
possible that they may have had a yet closer connection with Syria,
where in the fourth century monasticism and the solitary life had
already taken a strong hold. Duchesne: _Histoire de l’Eglise_, Vol.
II. p. 516.
[197] Kiepert marks a “Gr. Cœnobium von Izala,” which is, I imagine,
intended for Mâr Augen, but its position relatively to Ḳ. ej Jedîd
and Useh Dereh, as marked in the map, cannot be correct. Mâr Yuhannâ,
which lies to the east of Mâr Augen, approaches more nearly to
Kiepert’s site. I have published a short account of these and other
monasteries and churches of the Ṭûr ’Abdîn in _Amida_ (Strzygowski and
Van Berchem).
[198] Kiepert places Mâr Melko too far from Useh Dereh. My itinerary
was as follows: Useh Dereh to Mâr Melko, 1 hr.; Mâr Melko to Kharabah
’Aleh, 30 min.; Kharabah ’Aleh to Kernaz, 2 hrs. 15 min.; Kernaz to
Deir el ’Amr, 1 hr. 15 min. All these places are marked in the map.
[199] Niebuhr heard that Mâr Melko was famed for the curing of
epilepsy: _Reisebericht_, Vol. II. p. 388. Not having penetrated into
the Ṭûr ’Abdîn, he thought that the report that there were seventy
monasteries in the hills must be an exaggeration, but I expect that it
was not far from the truth.
[200] Deir ’Umar, 5.30; Mezîzakh, 8.15; Midyâd, 9.15.
[201] I visited inside the town Mâr Shim’ûn, which is in process of
being rebuilt, and Mâr Barsauma, which has been completely rebuilt.
Outside the town is the monastery of Mâr Ibrahîm and Mâr Hôbel. It
has recently been repaired, but much of the masonry is ancient. The
two churches, dedicated to the two patron saints, belong to the
monastic type of Mâr Gabriel; the mouldings round the doors, and the
cyma cornice are old. There is also a small chapel, dedicated to the
Virgin; it is square in plan and covered by a dome on squinches, but
it appeared to me to be of later date. I was shown in this monastery
a very remarkable silken vestment. The ground is of green satin
covered with a repeated pattern in gold, silver and coloured silks,
representing a woman in a red robe seated in a howdah upon the back
of a camel. A man naked to the waist is seated upon the ground with
his head bowed upon his hands. A variety of animals and floral motives
are scattered round the principal figures. The subject is no doubt
taken from the story of Leila and Majnûn. The date of this brocade is
probably somewhere between 1560 and 1660. A fragment showing a like
pattern is in the possession of Dr. Sarre. The monastery possesses
besides a small bronze thurible, of which I succeeded in procuring a
counterpart. A similar thurible exists in the British Museum (No. 540
in the catalogue of Early Christian and Byzantine Antiquities); it
is said to have come from Mâr Musa el Habashi, between Damascus and
Palmyra. The Kaiser Friedrich Museum has obtained several in Cairo and
Trebizond (Wulff: _Altchristliche Bildwerke_, Teil I, nos. 967-970).
These are ascribed to the sixth and seventh centuries. Mr. Dalton, to
whom I owe this information, gives me references to two others, one in
the Bargello collection at Florence (No. 241 in the catalogue of the
Carraud Collection, published in 1898) and one published in the _Echos
d’Orient_, VII., 1904, p. 148.
[202] I have published photographs and plans of the Jacobite church of
the Virgin and the Greek Orthodox church of Mâr Cosmo in _Amida_: Van
Berchem and Strzygowski.
[203] The Yeni Kapu differs in plan from the other three. It has
square bastions, whereas they are protected on either side by massive
round towers. The round towers extend all along the northern parts of
the wall; on the other sides the towers are rectangular.
[204] A sketch plan, made by De Beylié, is published in _Amida_.
[205] His phrase “under the citadel but in the very heart of Amida” is
difficult to understand. It does not seem to imply a spring outside
the walls, yet there is no place “under the citadel” and within the
walls.
[206] One is known by inscriptions to have been erected by the Ortoḳid
Sultan Malek Shah in the year A.D. 1208-1209, and the other must
belong to the same period. The inscriptions have been published by
Van Berchem, see Lehmann-Haupt: _Materialen zur älteren Geschichte
Armeniens und Mesopotamiens_, p. 140. They are more fully published
in _Amida_, but that work has not appeared in time for me to make any
accurate reference to it.
[207] Our itinerary was as follows: Diyârbekr, 7; Shilbeh, 8; Uch
Keui, 9.5; Dereh Gechid Chai, a deep valley once noted for brigands,
10.45; Tolek, a village on the opposite side of this valley, 11. Here
followed 35 minutes’ halt during which the caravan caught us up and
passed us, but we came up with it again before we reached Ḳara Khân
Chai, a small river, at 1 o’clock. We got to Tarmûr at 2.45. I give
these hours since Kiepert’s map is frequently mistaken as to relative
distances.
[208] The day’s march was Tarmûr, 6; Kayden Keui, 6.30; Shawa Keui,
6.50 (both these villages lay about three-quarters of an hour to the
right of the road); Tulkhum, a mile to the left of the road by a big
mound, 7.10; we climbed a low ridge and dropped into a little plain in
which we crossed a stream at 8.15; Kadi Keui to the right, 8.30; road
up to Arghana, 9; monastery, 10.10-10.55; crossed the Ma’den Chai by
Kalender Koprüsi at 1; Khan above Arghana Ma’den, 3; the caravan had
arrived a few minutes before us.
[209] The day’s march was as follows: Khân of Arghana Ma’den, 6.20;
Khân of Pünoz, at upper end of gorge, 9.40 (the village of Pünoz lies
up a rocky valley to the right); Ḳâsim Khân, at further side of plain,
10.55-11.30--there is no village here; Göljik, 11.55; Shabyan, a small
village near the water parting, 1.40; Keghvank, 4.
[210] Mezreh is perhaps Ptolemy’s Mazara (ed. Müller, p. 945), and it
bears the same name in the Peutinger Tables.
[211] The garrison consisted of 65 men and 80 beautiful ladies, a
proportion of the sexes which may have contributed to Balak’s victory.
[212] Kharpût has been identified with Carcathicerta, which was the
royal city of Sophene, according to Strabo.
[213] Since the outbreak of 1895 a Christian governor has been
appointed in all vilayets which contain a large proportion of
Armenians. The Mu’âvin Vâlîs are nominally co-rulers with their Moslem
colleagues, but report, I know not with how much justice, credits them
with little influence and less initiative.
[214] Mezreh, 6.5; Khân Keui, 9.25; Tell Maḥmûd, left of road, 9.45;
Chaghullah, left of road, 9.55; Sapolar (left), 10.5; Harnik (right),
10.20; Melekjân (about a mile to the right), 10.35; Cholak Ushagî,
where there is a khân, 11-11.45. Here we crossed a ridge into a valley
which runs down to the Euphrates. Tutli Keui (left), 2.5; over another
ridge and down to Kömür Khân at 3.35; Iz Oglu, 5.45.
[215] It is probably the ancient caravan road from Cæsarea and Ephesus
to Babylon.
[216] Iz Oglu (on the west bank of the Murad Su), 8; Masnik, 10.15; a
big chiflik of which I do not know the name, 12-12.30; we climbed a
long hill, reaching the summit at 2.15, and got to Malaṭiyah at 2.45.
[217] They had been published, but not very satisfactorily. I gave
my photographs to Mr. Hogarth, who published them in the _Annals of
Archæology and Anthropology_, Vol. II. No. 4.
[218] Melitene does not appear to have been in existence in Strabo’s
time, for he says that there were no towns in the fruitful plain,
but only strongholds upon the mountains (Bk. XII. ii. 6). Procopius
states that it was raised by Trajan to the dignity of a city, whereas
before it had been nothing but a square fortification on low ground
(Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society Edition, p. 82). Diocletian made it
the capital of Armenia Secunda (Ramsay: _Historical Geography_, p.
313); it was the centre of the military roads guarding the frontiers
of the Roman empire towards the Euphrates, and the standing camp
of the XII Legion, Fulminata (_id._ p. 55). With this increase of
importance it outgrew, according to Procopius, its former limits, so
that the people built over the plain “their churches, the dwellings
of their magistrates, the market-place and the shops of their
merchants, the streets, porticoes, baths and theatres, and all the
other ornaments of a large city.” Melitene was thus composed mostly
of suburbs until Justinian surrounded it with a wall. There must,
however, have been cities in the plain, of which Strabo knew nothing,
long before Trajan’s time, as is proved by existing mounds, and Pliny
seems to have preserved a dim memory of these when he speaks of
Melitene as having been founded by Semiramis (Bk. VI. ch. iii.).
[219] Malaṭiyah Eskishehr, 9.45; Khâtûnyeh (a quarter of a mile to
the left), 10.20; a chiflik (name unknown), 11.45-12.15; Saman Keui,
a village near a big mound, 12.55. In a graveyard near here I noticed
two fragments of round columns. At 1.25 we crossed a deep valley
and saw the village of Shehna Khân about half-a-mile to the right;
Elemenjik, 3.10. Not all these villages are marked in Kiepert and some
are wrongly placed. There is cultivation round each village, but the
plain between is usually untilled.
[220] Arga has been identified with Arca, where there was a Roman
station (Arca was also the seat of a bishopric: Ramsay, _Hist. Geog._,
p. 314), and with Ptolemy’s Arcala (ed. Müller, p. 888). The great
road mentioned by Strabo which led from Babylon to Ephesus, crossing
the Euphrates at Tomisa-Iz Oglu, passed through Arca (according to
Sir W. Ramsay’s suggestion, _op. cit._, p. 273) and ran through
Dandaxina and Osdara to Arabissus and thence through the mountains
to Cæsarea. Kiepert places Dandaxina immediately to the south of the
Tokhma Su and Osdara in the same latitude; Ramsay puts both places
further south, and Sterritt’s evidence supports Ramsay’s conclusions.
Between Arga and Ekrek my route did not touch the Roman road as laid
down by Ramsay, but ran further to the north, and where I crossed
the mountains, between Osmandedeli and ’Azîzîyeh, I saw no trace of
an ancient road, nor can I think that wheeled traffic can ever have
followed that line. Ainsworth travelled down the Tokhma Su from Görün
to Derendeh, but he came over the Akcheh Dâgh between Derendeh and
Arga, whereas I crossed it further east from Arga to Ozan. Ainsworth
observes that there were never more than two roads from Derendeh to
Malaṭiyah, one following the line he took, and one the valley of the
Tokhma Su down to the plain (_Travels and Researches_, Vol. I. p.
247). I do not feel inclined to dispute that opinion, for though I
found a third way from Malaṭiyah to Derendeh, it cannot be called a
road. The mouldings and capitals which I saw at Arga pointed to a date
not later than the sixth century.
[221] Ozan, 10.30; Mullah ’Alî Shehr, 11.5-40; Polat Ushagha, 12.35;
Tozeli, some distance to the left, 12.55; a ruined khân marked by
Kiepert, 1.20. Here we saw up a valley to the north the village of
Palanga, marked by Kiepert. Above the khân the river flows through a
gorge, and on the rocks above it are the ruins of a small fort, which
we reached at 2.20; Kötü Ḳal’ah village, 2.45.
[222] We passed upon the way only one village, Mügdeh, where we
crossed the Tokhma Su. Kiepert has suggested that Derendeh may
represent the site of ancient Dalanda; for objections to this view,
see Ramsay, _op. cit._, p. 309.
[223] The existing ruins are probably mediæval. Ainsworth (_Travels
and Researches_, Vol. I. p. 246) reports an illegible inscription,
presumably Arabic or Turkish, over the gate. I do not remember to have
seen it. The fortress of Ṭarandah is mentioned as early as the year
A.D. 702, when it was in the hands of a Moslem garrison. In the ninth
century it was held by the Paulicians, a sect of Eastern Christians
whose beliefs were mingled with Manichæanism. (Le Strange: _Lands of
the Eastern Caliphate_, p. 120.)
[224] Görün, 12; summit of hill, 1.15 (but we had ridden considerably
faster than our usual pace); Kevak Euren, to the left, 3.10; chiflik,
4.30; Osmândedelî, 5.
[225] Osmândedelî, 6.25; Kaindîjeh, 7.10; there is a better road from
here, but it makes a long circuit by Günesh and Parenk, and I declined
to take it. Küpek Euren, 8.20; Bey Punar, 9.45; water parting, 11.10;
Boran Dereh Keui, 5.10.
[226] ’Azîzîyeh is the ancient Ariarathia and its foundation dates
from the second or third century B.C.: Ramsay, _op. cit._, p. 310.
[227] ’Azîzîyeh, 10; Emergal, an Avshar village on the left, 12;
Takhtalî, on the right across the river, 12.20; Ḳizil Khân, 1.35. (See
Ramsay, _op. cit._, p. 298. It is perhaps Strabo’s Erpa “on the road
to Melitene.”) Bazaar Euren, 2.25. Between Ḳizil Khân and Bazaar Euren
there is a small khân with ruins near to it, among them a carved door
jamb. Ekrek, 5.
[228] Ramsay, _op. cit._, p. 289, places Tsamandos at ’Azîzîyeh, but
he had not seen Maḥmûd Ghâzî when he wrote.
[229] The Armenians of this district are Muhâjir, immigrants, no
less than the Circassians, though their coming dates from an earlier
time. They were forced out of northern Armenia in the tenth century
by the Seljuks, who drove them southward into what was then still the
Byzantine empire.
[230] Kavak was the name I heard given to the site of the church;
Rott has published it under the name of the Panagia of Busluk Ferek
(_Keinasiatische Denkmäler_, p. 188). He has also published Tomarza,
p. 183.
[231] In the low ground there are remains of a theatre, a fine bit of
stone wall decorated with good mouldings, and part of a vaulted brick
building, possibly a gymnasium. All these are upon the left bank of
the stream. The temple upon the bluff was converted at an early date
into a church, which has long since fallen into decay, though it has
been patched up in recent times by the Armenians (Fig. 228). Along
the edge of the bluff there are remains of a columned portico. In the
ruined bazaar I saw a couple of beautiful funnel capitals, cracked
and broken by fire. They should probably be dated in the early sixth
century. At the entrance of the valley that leads up to the Kara Bel
are the ruins of a small temple with a finely carved doorway (Fig.
223).
Mr. Hogarth sends me the following note:--
Miss Bell has submitted to me five inscriptions found on a temple site
at Comana Capp. They are, she thinks, unpublished, and certainly were
not seen by me on either of my visits to Comana in 1890 or 1891. Miss
Bell sent me good photographs of nos. 1 and 2; but for the others, I
have only her hand-copies to go upon.
No. 1 is a commonplace epitaph, intended to be hexametrical; but the
necessary proper names would not accommodate themselves to the metre,
and the versifier has had to leave ll. 1 and 3 partly prose. In l. 2
he or the lapicide has made the mistake of leaving the ε before ἡδ
unelided. The most interesting point in the inscription, the second
name of the dedicator, is, unfortunately, obscured by a breakage of
the surface. The lettering is very clear on the photograph except on
the right edge.
No. 2 is broken top and right, and the names of the son and mother
cannot be restored.
No. 3, the epitaph of a slave set up by his master, offers an instance
of the distinction of slaves by the name of the master with a Roman
gentile prefix. Either Αὐρ. or Αἰλι. is concealed in Miss Bell’s copy
of l. 2. Another slave seems to have appropriated the grave afterwards
for his wife, and added a note to that effect.
No. 4 is without points of interest. No. 5 adds to other Oriental
names found at Comana _Pharnaces_ and the name of his father, which,
in Miss Bell’s copy, reads _Giris_.
1. Altar-stela with wreaths in relief on the front and sides. The
inscription is in careful lettering of about the 4th cent. A.D. Words
are in some cases divided by points. Square and round forms are used
indifferently, and ligature is frequent. Worn badly on right edge:--
[Illustration: Greek]
2. Altar-stela with wreath in relief below the inscription. Broken top
and right top. Finely-cut lettering of 3rd cent. A.D.:--
[Illustration: Greek]
Ἀσύνκριτος: for the use of this epithet at Comana see _J. H. S._
xviii. p. 318, no. 29, and also no. 4 below.
3. Altar-stela:--
[Illustration] The lines 6-8 may conceal the name Βαιβία borne by
the wife of Aur. Heliodorus in an epitaph of Comana published by
Waddington from copies by Clayton and Ramsay, _Bull. Corr. Hell._,
vii. p. 137, no. 19.
4. On the rock inside tomb:--
[Illustration: Greek]
5. On a small stone with rude pediment:--
[Illustration: Greek]
[232] “Their houses are circular,” says Marco Polo of the Tartars
of inner Asia, “and are made of wands covered with felts”: Yule’s
edition, Vol. I. p. 252.
[233] Mârdin, 6.30; Yamachlî, to right, 7.30; Sarî Khân, 8.45;
Ispileh, to right, 10.30; Talas, 11.30.
[234] The plateau is here about 3,500 feet above sea level.
[235] It has been well published by Rott: _Kleinasiatische Denkmäler_,
p. 103.
[236] ’Ala ed Din reigned from 1219 to 1236, but the tomb is dated by
an inscription in the year 1344.
[237] It was built in 1381-2 by the wife of ’Ala ed Dîn, Prince of
Ḳaramân. See Sarre: _Denkmäler Persischer Baukunst_, p. 135.
End of Project Gutenberg's Amurath to Amurath, by Gertrude Lowthian Bell