Procession Street (cf. Fig. 44). It is guarded by cavalier towers placed
at short intervals, and the principal entrance is a doorway inserted in
a shallow recess and flanked as usual by two towers. The recess is
shallower on the north than on the south side. The wall itself does not
run exactly north to south, which is the direction of the greater part
of the palace, and care has evidently been taken to render this
deviation as little noticeable as possible. This doorway is perhaps that
of Beltis (_Steinplatten_ inscription, col. 5, 17).
[Illustration:
FIG. 45.—Arched doorway in Southern Citadel.
]
To the south near this gateway is an older piece of wall which in many
respects is different from the rest. The bricks are smaller (31.5 × 31.5
× 7.5), the joints are formed of asphalt and reeds, the asphalt is laid
flush with the face of the wall and has oozed out over it, giving it a
blackish appearance, in marked contrast with the neighbouring wall of
Nebuchadnezzar’s time, which is lighter in colour, as the asphalt does
not show on the surface. This piece of wall contains an arched gateway
(Fig. 45), with a threshold that lies about 6 metres below the street
pavement. This gate, which is generally known as the arched doorway, was
blocked up with mud bricks during the general raising of the ground. It
seems, however, that during a later period a door of secondary
importance was placed here, of which a small part of the frame still
exists. It must have led into the palace that lay behind it. It had two
doors, one directly behind the other, as we may infer from the rebates
that project by one brick both on the inner and outer sides of the wall.
The inner door could only be opened by any one who wished to enter after
he had entered the small chamber and had closed the outer door behind
him. The outer door could be fastened by a large wooden bolt which
pushed backwards and forwards in a cavity in the northern wall.
Very interesting, and very characteristic both of this time and of its
art, is the construction and the external appearance of this arch. It
consisted of a series of three ring courses one above another, each of
them covered by a flat course. The lower ring of the outside is
destroyed and has disappeared completely. The bricks of our arch are of
the usual form, not wedge-shaped. The laying is so slightly radial that
at the vertex an actual three-cornered gap remains filled in with
chopped brick. The central bricks were covered with asphalt before being
laid, the lower ones are laid in mud and asphalt. The inner imposts are
bound together by clamps made of poplar wood soaked in asphalt on a
system which can no longer be clearly worked out. The lower ring alone
formed an actual arch, each of the two higher rings begin some courses
higher than the last and follow only a part of the semicircle, thus
forming a segment. They begin nevertheless with a brick laid horizontal
and not sloping. It is obvious that the planning of this arch
construction is very faulty and inconsistent in comparison with Roman
stone vaulting.
The wall stands throughout on a level foundation bed. On the outside it
is perpendicular, but on the inside the courses recede a little one
behind the other, causing a slight slope and rendering the walls
somewhat thicker below than they are above. This batter of the walls
never occurs in buildings that are indisputably of the time of
Nebuchadnezzar.
On to this old piece of wall, with its three towers to the north and the
south, the later walls are built with grooved and tongued expansion
joints (see p. 36), for which purpose the old wall was hacked out as far
as necessary. The later wall is plain; it formed, however, only a
foundation for the now destroyed upper part, which certainly must have
been furnished with towers. By this new building the old wall appears to
have been strengthened within as by a Kisu, to which the palace walls
are closely fitted by means of plain expansion joints.
The lower part of the long northern portion with its seven towers is
similar both in age and style of building to the arched door. The upper
part is contemporary with the Citadel Gate, and of course the tongued
expansion joints are employed throughout, and a powerful strengthening
is added on the inside; according to the principles of the ancient
architects it was not permissible to rest the footings of this inner
strengthening on the lowest level of the foundations, and accordingly
there remained in the mesopyrgia narrow spaces that were filled up by
small independent walls only one brick thick. Nebuchadnezzar’s
architects were very consistent on these points. The gate on the north
corresponds with the arched door and is closed with later brickwork. The
door in the angle abutting on the Ishtar Gate afforded the entrance to
the area enclosed by the two mud walls of the Ishtar Gate. In order to
leave this door clear the Citadel wall here in the corner is set back.
The other sides of the Citadel wall we will observe later. The palace
must now be studied in detail.
XII
THE EASTERN COURT OF THE SOUTHERN CITADEL
Through the Beltis door we first enter the usual gateway court, out of
which open two rooms with large doorways. These are well adapted for the
use of the castle guard and afford access to the court. Two other
chambers close by may be regarded as waiting-rooms.
To the north and south of the eastern court (Fig. 46, O), accessible by
passages or alleys, were the houses of the officials employed here,
similar to those found in other courts. Here they are of smaller
dimensions than in the other courts, where they are clearly built in
accordance with their degree of importance. The largest dwellings are
always placed on the south side of the courts. The chambers of these
houses are invariably grouped round a small court, which can easily be
distinguished from the chambers by its square ground-plan. The smaller
houses have only one court, while the larger ones have two or more. Thus
1, 2, 3, 6, 10 have only one court; 4 with 5, 8 with 9, and 11 with 12
have two. Owing to the curtailed space below the wall the latter is
slightly out of the square. It appears that a royal manufacture of
flasks was established here. A very large number of those graceful
vases, which in Greek art are called alabastra (Fig. 47), were found
here, especially waste products of the manufacture. For the purpose of
hollowing them out a crown-bit was used first of all, which cut out a
cylindrical piece and afforded room for other boring instruments. Masses
of these cylindrical cores were found here.
[Illustration:
FIG. 46.—Eastern part of Southern Citadel.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 47.—An Alabastron.
]
The house 8 with 9 had two large rooms which opened on the great court
(O), but had no direct communication with the other rooms. They thus
possess the characteristics of offices open to the public from the great
court, while the official could enter them by a small passage from the
open court in front of his own rooms. As in all the great courts the
largest buildings lay to the south, so in each of these houses the
principal chamber lay on the south side of the court; and this must have
been the pleasantest part of the whole house, as it lay in shadow almost
all day. Owing to the peculiar climate of Babylon it is obvious that in
laying out a house, only the summer and the heat would be taken into
consideration. The summer lasts 8 months, from the middle of March to
the middle of November, and during June, July, and August the
temperature is at times abnormally high. We have observed a maximum of
49½ grades Celsius in the shade, and 66 in the sun, and the heat lasts
for many hours of the day. It begins in the morning by 9 o’clock, and
only at 9 o’clock in the evening does it begin to abate: the minimum
heat is in the early hours of the morning after sunrise. The months of
December and February correspond on the whole with our autumn and
spring. The only cold weather is in January, if the sun does not shine,
and sometimes there are night frosts. Frosty days can be counted on the
fingers of one hand, and the unaccustomed body feels these cold days
very keenly. Rain is very scanty. I believe if all the hours in the
whole year in which there were more than a few drops of rain were
reckoned up, they would barely amount to 7 or 8 days. The annual
downfall has been registered by Buddensieg at 7 centimetres, in North
Germany Herr Hellmann informs me it is 64, and in places in India 1150
centimetres. Naturally there are exceptional years. The winter of 1898
was severe and long, the thorn bushes of the desert were thickly frosted
over, and the breath of a rider froze as he rode. In 1906 hundreds of
palms were frozen in the neighbourhood of Babylon, and in 1911 the snow
lay ankle deep all over the plain between Babylon and Bagdad for a whole
week. But these are exceptions, and then people usually pretend that
such a thing has not happened for 100 years. The result of this fine
climate is that for the greater part of the year all business is carried
on in the open air, in the courts, or at any rate with open doors.
Windows do not appear to have existed. None have ever been found, and
the evidence of the ground-plans bears out this presumption. The
evenings and nights were spent on the flat roofs. Thus the chambers were
used very much as refuges or store chambers, with the exception of the
principal rooms, where in any case as a matter of business the official
must have installed himself. He may, however, have often done his
business in the court in front of his office.
In the south-east corner of the Kasr the earliest brick stamps of
Nebuchadnezzar occur, and the king appears to have begun his new
building here. These stamps have six lines of inscription, ending with
the words “am I,” _anaku_ (Figs. 48, 51). In general the legends on
these different varieties of stamps are the same: “Nebuchadnezzar, King
of Babylon, fosterer of Esagila and Ezida, son of Nabopolassar, King of
Babylon.” There are 6–lined, 4–lined, 3–lined, and 7–lined stamps, and
one single specimen is 5–lined. The 4–, 3–, and 7–lined stamps
substitute for the old simple “son,” _maru_, the more detailed
“first-born son,” _aplu ašaridu_, after which the name of the father
that follows is introduced with _ša_, which does not occur on the
6–lined stamps.
[Illustration:
FIG. 48.—Brick stamps of Nebuchadnezzar.
]
We can distinguish three methods by which the working stamps were
produced. In the first the original inscription was produced in
terra-cotta, in which the signs were most carefully and beautifully
written, and the strokes show the regular three-cornered section. From
this original inscription the working stamp could then be struck in clay
and baked. These we call “pottery stamps.” In them the rows of cuneiform
writing are separated from each other by ruled lines. In the second sort
the signs were cut out separately in wood, joined together in one block,
and then moulded in sand. From this mould the working stamp was
apparently cast in bronze. The strokes of these are of roundish section.
Of this “metal stamp” the impressions are fine and deep, but, on the
other hand, the ground between the strokes easily becomes clogged during
the stamping, and thus on the bricks the signs frequently appear only in
outline, while the wedges are confused and flattened. Lines between the
rows of writing in these metal stamps are rare, and it is possible there
was some difficulty in producing them. With the third method the
original inscription is produced in stone, undoubtedly by grinding. In
this way the wedges acquire a scratched appearance, as is more
especially the case with the stone objects bearing votive inscriptions
of the time of the Kassite kings. The working stamp made from this may
have been taken either in bronze or in pottery. We have found no actual
working stamp, but this is not surprising, considering that in the
course of our excavations we have not yet met with a brick-kiln, and it
is of course possible that the method of production was very different
from what I have suggested. In the meantime it is important to describe
the technical characteristics of the different kinds of stamps as they
exist, and to give a concise name to each of them. The 6– and 7–lined
stamps occur both as pottery and metal stamps, never as “Kassite,” the
4–lined are almost exclusively pottery, and the 3–lined are never metal,
but either pottery or “Kassite.”
[Illustration:
FIG. 49.—Stamped brick of Nebuchadnezzar, omitting his father’s name.
]
The orthographical differences also arrange themselves with the same
distinctness in clearly defined groups. On the 6–lined stamps _Ba-bi-lu_
or _Ba-bi-i-lu_ is written for Babylon, while on the 7–, 4–, and 3–lined
stamps it is exclusively called _Ka-dingir-ra_. The term _Tin-tir_,
which is by far the most usual on stone inscriptions, only occurs once
on a 3–line and once on a 4–line stamp on bricks. Very rare is a 4–line
stamp on which the father’s name is omitted (Fig. 49), and as a
curiosity 7–line metal stamps occur on which the order of the lines has
been reversed. What elsewhere is the 7th line is here the 1st. We have
no wish to decide whether this is mere carelessness. We must, however,
remember in this connection that we have Assyriologists of repute who
read the cuneiform writing from above downwards, with which its
historical development certainly agrees. The literature of the tablets
for the ordinary right-handed man was written from left to right, but
were the scribe left-handed he would be forced to write from above
downwards, and many of the archaic stone inscriptions indeed convey the
impression that they should be read in this fashion. All will agree that
the later writings must be read from left to right. It is quite possible
that Nebuchadnezzar, who so greatly preferred the archaic characters
which were so highly decorative, also made an attempt to employ the
ancient method of arranging them vertically. The stamps are all
inscribed with these monumental, early Babylonian characters.
[Illustration:
FIG. 50.—Brick stamp of Evil-Merodach.
]
The 6–lined stamp gives _Nabu-ku-dur-ru-u-ṣur_ or _Nabu-ku-dur-ri-uṣur_,
the 7–lined gives either the latter or _Nabu-ku-du-ur-ri-uṣur_. The
4–lined is exclusively characterised by the use of _ap-lam_ instead of
_tur-uš_, which is universally used elsewhere.
[Illustration:
FIG. 51.—Brick stamps of Nebuchadnezzar (E, F), of Neriglissar (G),
and Nabonidus (H).
]
It may be advisable at this juncture to consider the stamps used by
Nebuchadnezzar’s successors. Of Evil-Merodach we have found only two
examples (Fig. 50), one of 3 lines, exactly analogous to the stamps of
Nebuchadnezzar. Neriglissar (Fig. 51 G) has 3– and 4–lined stamps, with
the text, “Neriglissar, King of Babylon, fosterer of Esagila and Ezida,
who accomplishes good deeds.” Of Nabonidus (Fig. 51 H) are 3– and
6–lined stamps, with the text, “Nabonidus, King of Babylon, the chosen
one of Nabu and Marduk, son of Nabubalatsuikbi, the wise prince, am I,”
and “Nabonidus, King of Babylon, fosterer of Esagila and Ezida, son of
Nabubalatsuikbi, the wise prince.” So far no stamp has been found of
Labashi-Marduk. All these stamps bear general texts, applicable to any
building. In contrast to them are the special stamps, which like the
inscribed bricks refer to individual buildings, for which they were
exclusively intended. We have such of Nabopolassar, Sardanapalus,
Esarhaddon, Sennacherib, and Sargon, and shall speak of them when we
come to the buildings to which they refer.
[Illustration:
FIG. 52.—Aramaic addition on Nebuchadnezzar brick.
]
In addition, a fair number of stamps are found in Aramaic, either alone
or in conjunction with cuneiform (Fig. 52). Of these no convincing
translation has yet reached me; they appear to be names sometimes
abbreviated. The name of Nabonidus is easily recognised, as it often
occurs in Aramaic in conjunction with his cuneiform stamp.
[Illustration1] (Fig. 53) appears to be an abbreviation of the canal
name Libil-ḫigalla, and in [Illustration2] we may recognise the initial
letters of Nimitti-Bel.
Among other signs more symbolic in character are the lion, the double
axe, and the symbol of Marduk, a triangle on a shaft, either alone or
combined with other stamps.
The manufacture of these bricks was carried on as it is with us at the
present day. The fairly pure clay was well kneaded and pressed into a
rectangular wooden frame laid on a rough reed matting. Nebuchadnezzar’s
bricks almost invariably show the impress of the matting on one side,
while the bricks of the other monarchs appear to have been made without
this underlay. The frames were frequently grooved on one or more of
their inner sides, which caused corresponding ridges on the narrow edges
of the bricks. We can thus distinguish bricks with 1, 2 (see Fig. 71),
or even 7 of these ridges. In Nebuchadnezzar’s first building period the
bricks had no ridges, then only one, while in his latest buildings, such
as the Principal Citadel, there are seven. It thus happens that no
7–ridged brick has a 6–line stamp, as by that time they were disused.
Besides their number, the ridges vary in breadth, depth, and position.
The sign of early manufacture is that they are placed in the centre of
the side, and are of greater breadth, while later they are placed near
the corners. Thus we have ample material for dividing them, not only
according to the places where they were made but also as to their age.
In the course of the 43 years’ reign of Nebuchadnezzar, it is obvious
that with the gradual multiplication of brick factories the necessity of
being able to distinguish between their several productions increased in
like measure. The bricks are not always accurately separated from each
other in the buildings, according to their marks, but on the whole the
stamps, in addition to the ridges on the sides, enable us to distinguish
the relative ages of the various walls.
[Illustration:
FIG. 53.—Aramaic addition on Nebuchadnezzar brick.
]
It is evident from the bricks themselves that the burning was done in
ovens, which can scarcely have differed materially from the brick-kilns
used to-day both here and in Bagdad. They are built outside the town,
where the clay is good and fuel—the low bushes of the desert—is
abundant. They form great fantastic groups of buildings, to which the
people attach tales of horror. With the Persians it was a favourite
method of execution to throw persons into these heated ovens, and when
one sees the flickering glare from their mouths rising up against the
evening sky of Babylon, one is unconsciously reminded of the striking
account in the third chapter of Daniel of the three men, Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego, in the fiery furnace. Herodotus states that the
manufacture of bricks for the town walls was always carried on close to
the site where they were to be used. This may have been done in
exceptional cases, but ordinarily the ovens were certainly farther
outside.
The whole of the walls of the Southern Citadel have been pillaged by
brick robbers even below the pavement, the level to which our
excavations usually extend (Fig. 54). Everywhere we have laid the walls
bare as far as the bricks still remain in position. Here in the
south-east corner we have gone still deeper and have dug down to the
foundation fillings, reaching nearly to water-level. The fillings
consist almost exclusively of sand and clayey earth, river settlement
with occasional patches of ancient building material, rubbish, charcoal
and ashes, bones and some broken pottery. Possibly the sediment was
taken from the watercourse that flowed past the southern side of the
Citadel, and which would then be considerably deepened and widened. The
footings are carried down almost to water-level, of the same even
thickness without any broadening. At this depth the soil is interspersed
with the remains of a very ancient settlement, characterised, as in
other quarters of the city, by pipe wells and much pottery. Thus in the
foundations everything is avoided that could prevent the settlement of
the walls, and they are perfectly free to sink vertically. In laying the
foundations the doorways were left open. Hence there are separate blocks
of buildings, which doubtless even before the floor-level was reached
settled independently of each other during the course of erection. In
order to bind these blocks together across the door spaces, beams of
poplar wood soaked in tar were inserted at intervals and fixed in the
wall head with short transverse pieces, thus forming huge ├──┤-rivets.
[Illustration:
FIG. 54.—Excavations in Southern Citadel, from the north.
]
The jointing of the brick courses can be clearly observed at this point.
It is very simple, owing to the square shape of the bricks that
necessitates two-handed manipulation. The cross-joints run straight
through the walls, and if in one course a whole brick—a binder—lies at
one corner, the next course has a half brick—a stretcher. At the edges
and in the corners the sequence of the series changes. When on occasion
the change does not occur owing to some irregularity, a quarter brick
was employed at the edge, and in the corner a whole brick with its
corner cut out was used, or one wall penetrated to the depth of half a
brick into the adjoining wall, with a vertical joint extending from top
to bottom. This is to be seen at this part of the Citadel. The care
bestowed on applying these building regulations sometimes leaves much to
be desired. The vertical joints are of uneven thickness, the walls were
patched with inserted fragments, and in thick walls the regularity is
frequently broken by small channels that extend transversely or
lengthways through the wall, of the height and breadth of a course, and
are only closed on the outer surface by an inserted fragment; they
appear to have been constructed to secure the dryness of the building.
In the Arachtu wall of Nabopolassar, and in his palace, as well as in
the ascent on the north-east angle of the Kasr (_t_ 4), an exceptional
feature occurs, a border series in which, within the same course, a half
brick laid behind a whole one is regularly alternated with a whole brick
laid behind a half one, so that the whole mass of the wall is joggled
together by this border series. This is another instance of the false
principles of construction which are found throughout antiquity far more
frequently than enthusiastic admirers would credit.
[Illustration:
FIG. 55.—The six-lined Lebanon inscription from Southern Citadel.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 56.—The eight-lined standard inscription from Southern Citadel.
]