28 (_K.B._ iii. 2, p. 27), refers principally to the palace of the
Principal Citadel, but includes also the fortification walls of the
Northern Citadel, to which we shall return later: “Because my heart did
not wish the dwelling-place of my Majesty to be in another place,
because I did not build a royal dwelling in any other place, and because
I did not consign the kingly property to all lands, my dwelling-place in
Babylon grew insufficient for the dignity of my Majesty. Because the
fear of Marduk my lord dwelt in my heart, I did not change his street in
order to widen my fortress, the seat of my royalty in Babylon. I did his
sanctuary no damage, nor did I dam up his canal, but I sought at a
distance room for myself. That no assault of battle may approach
Imgur-Bel the dûr of Babil, on the other side of Nimitti-Bel the šalḫû
of Babil, for 490 ells of land I made for a protection two mighty walls
of asphalt and burnt bricks as dûr like mountains, and built between
them a building of burnt brick (bitik agurri), and made upon it a lofty
seat for my royal dwelling of asphalt and burnt brick, and joined it to
the palace of my father. In a not unfavourable month, on a propitious
day, I grounded its foundations firmly on the bosom of the underworld,
and raised its summit high like the mountains. Within 15 days I finished
the building and made the seat of government illustrious. I caused
mighty cedars, the product of high mountains, thick asûḫu-trees, and
selected fine cypresses to be laid lengthways for its roofing. Door
leaves of mismakanna, cedar, cypress, and usû-wood and ivory inlaid with
silver and gold and adorned with copper; bronze hinges and thresholds I
fitted into its doorways, and caused its summits to be encompassed with
a blue cornice (? kilîli). A mighty dûr of asphalt and burnt brick I
caused to surround it mountains high” (trans. by Delitzsch).
By the blue cornice is meant either the frieze of lions on a blue ground
or the above-mentioned reliefs in lapis-lazuli paste. That asphalt alone
is mentioned as mortar, and not the lime that was so freely used in the
Principal Citadel, need cause no wonder in face of the usual inaccuracy
in regard to details. The statement that the palace was built and
completed in 15 days is, however, truly marvellous and scarcely
credible, and something must lie behind these words that has not yet
been correctly understood. It was believed, however, in the ancient
world without reservation. Berosus (Josephus, _Antiq. Jud._ x. 11)
apparently derived his information from the same inscription when he
says that the second palace which joined on to the ancestral palace was
finished in 15 days, notwithstanding its magnificence and size.
XXVII
THE FORTIFICATION WALLS OF THE PRINCIPAL CITADEL
The Principal Citadel, which adjoins the Arachtu wall on the south, was
protected on the east and north by two strong walls, while the western
front probably lay open until Nabonidus built his Euphrates wall here.
The southern portion of the 7–metres-thick west wall was placed on the
old wall of Nebuchadnezzar’s first projected building, which we lighted
on in the centre of the Principal Citadel. In it the main entrance to
the palace undoubtedly lay, but the wall is not yet completely
excavated. Small mud houses backed against the wall and were placed on
the upper Nebuchadnezzar pavement, but they were buried below the later
pavement that laid the Street horizontal.
On the other side of the Procession Street there ran a parallel wall
also 7 metres thick. The part that connects it with the Ishtar Gate
corresponds with the cross wall on the other side, and like it has
shallow foundations. Later a strengthening piece was added to it. It
contains two doors close to each other, and a third door lies at a short
distance from the northern end. The footing of the wall at the east was
concealed by a bank of earth piled up against it, which with its walk on
the top reached almost to the height of the Procession Street. At the
edge of this walk there is an additional slender wall which may have
been built in Persian times, and which appears to have surrounded the
whole of the northern Kasr, and to have cut through several of the older
walls that stretched eastwards. At the north both walls end in a
powerful bastion. These marked the corners at which one turned westward,
the other eastward from the Procession Street at an obtuse angle.
Transversely across the Procession Street between the bastions there are
two mud walls, each with a door in the centre, forming a gateway court,
which in conjunction with the bastions bore the appearance of an actual
fortified gateway. This gateway was destroyed when the whole length of
the Street was laid horizontal with the latest pavement of broken brick.
The wall that turned westward protected the palace of the Principal
Citadel on the north. Not far from the corner there is a gateway (Fig.
106), which was roofed over at the very moderate height of 1.5 metres
with beams of palm wood. Bricks placed upright formed the cavities for
inserting the beams, and in them the print of the wood in the asphalt
can still be seen; in the middle of the pavement, which is strongly laid
in asphalt, a well-shaft led down to the small conduit. This roofed-in
space appears to have been only a sort of underground chamber that gave
access to the well-shaft; the actual door must have been higher at about
the level of the palace. In the outside angle near the bastion
Neriglissar constructed a quadrangular well-shaft with his stamped
bricks. We have not yet followed up the wall to its western end.
[Illustration:
FIG. 106.—Doorway with drain, in the north wall of the Principal
Citadel.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 107.—Plan of the northern bastions, north-east of the Kasr.
AH Ancient wall of the Principal Citadel.
K Canal.
MH Wall of the Principal Citadel in the north.
MN Wall of the Northern Citadel.
ÖH Eastern wing of wall of Principal Citadel.
ÖN Eastern wing of wall of Northern Citadel.
PS Procession Street.
T Ascent by steps or ramps.
]
We have, on the contrary, followed the wall that turns to the east up to
the end (Fig. 107). It has a length of about 250 metres, guarded by
towers placed closely together, and a door in each mesopyrgion. It
represents therefore a site admirably adapted for sorties. The gateway
embrasures lie exclusively on the north. At the east the wall turns to
the south and joins with one leading from the Procession Street that has
not yet been examined in detail. All these eastern walls have been
destroyed from the point where they were cut through by the Persian
advanced wall down to a great depth, so that it is only with difficulty
that a few brick courses could be found above water-level. Above the
ruins there lies silt which was evidently formed by water passing over
it at some time. On this and immediately below the present level there
are remains of later houses either of mud brick or of burnt brick. A
little above the ruins, in the line of the northern wall, there was an
anthropoid clay coffin (see Fig. 200), the face represented with an
Egyptian beard. I believe that the Euphrates, as in Persian times it
worked its channel eastwards, thus placing the Kasr on the right bank,
first ruined these eastern walls and then formed a muddy peninsula with
their ruins, while the actual river flowed still farther east. This is,
however, not yet proved.
The position of the double walls that flanked the Procession Street is
described in the inscription on a great cylinder that we found on the
eastern slope of the Amran hill. It had been used there for some
technical purpose, and is much worn. The part that refers to our site
runs thus: “At that time I bethought myself to strengthen the stronghold
of Babylon. 360 ells of the land the sides (_or_ of the sides) of
Nimitti-Bel, the šalḫû of Babylon, I built as a protection from the
banks of the Euphrates to the left threshold of the Ištar Gate two
mighty walls of asphalt and burnt brick for a dûru like a mountain.
Between them I erected a terrace of burnt brick, and upon it a great
castle (?) as a dwelling-place of my kingdom. Of asphalt and burnt brick
I built high, joined (it) with the palace, which (lay) within the city,
and caused the dwelling of my lordship to be glorious. Besides, from the
right threshold of the Ištar Gate to the lower turru of Nimitti-Bel in
the east 360 ells broadside, (measured) from Nimitti-Bel, for
protection, a mighty dûru of asphalt and burnt brick I built mountain
high. The stronghold I strengthened with skill. The city of Babylon I
protected” (trans. by Weissbach).
As we have seen, the Ishtar Gate had a central door and two side ones.
These last are evidently intended for the left- and right-hand
thresholds of the Ishtar Gate. The distance from the wall at the
threshold to the north side of the bastion on the eastern wall is 192
metres, and on the western wall 196 metres. This gives as measure for
Nebuchadnezzar’s ells .533 or .544 metres. These measurements must,
however, be taken again more accurately on the completion of the
excavations. The length of 490 ells, which is quoted for the same area
in the great _Steinplatten_ inscription, includes the northern extension
of the wall, to which we shall soon turn.
XXVIII
THE NORTHERN CITADEL
The Northern Citadel, as we call the part of the Kasr north of the
square 6, is still in process of excavation. Various results have
already been gained from it which admit of description, though with some
reservations. The work has been on the eastern part, the prolongation of
the Procession Street and its termination at the north.
The site, so far as it has been opened up, is on the whole a repetition
of what we have seen in the previous chapter. Both the measurements and
directions of the walls are entirely analogous with those of the earlier
ones. Here again are the two walls flanking the Procession Street,
ending in bastions, and then turning off east and west.
Here also we have followed the eastern wall to the end, where it turns
southwards until it joins the corner of the earlier wall. There is some
indication that the architect intended at least a continuation of this
plan towards the east, and in fact at the east end of the inner and
older wall there was a groove in the brickwork that points to such an
intention. We, however, have not found the slightest trace of any such
wall, although we have carefully searched for it both close to the angle
of the wall, and also farther east. Nothing has been found in the
trenches made for this purpose except the ruins of later houses above
and mud with a complete absence of buildings below. Thus from ancient
days till its downfall this site remained without any prolongation to
the east.
[Illustration:
FIG. 108.—Ascent to the Acropolis. Homera in the background.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 109.—Stone wall of the Northern Citadel, from west looking east.
]
At the angle of the bastions near the Street smaller towers were added,
which strengthened the fortifications that guarded this main entrance to
the Acropolis, while the later Persian outer wall appears to have
narrowed and thus strengthened the entrance.
An ascent is added at the inner corner of the eastern bastion (Fig. 108)
which united the low-lying area between the two parallel walls with the
Procession Street, and actually with the crown of the wall and the
plateau of the bastion. It was a winding path, which ran round a newel
wall, but whether or not it had steps we do not know. In front of the
gate that faced eastward there was another defensive building with two
exits.
[Illustration:
FIG. 110.—Stone wall of Northern Citadel with inscription.
]
We have excavated the western wall at its junction with the bastion. Its
farther course is marked in a deep valley which extends almost as far as
the Euphrates on the west (Fig. 109). In the north, immediately in front
of the bastion, without any intermediate space, there is a stone wall
formed of immense blocks of limestone bound together with dove-tailed
wooden clamps laid in asphalt. Four courses of this have so far been
laid open above water-level (Fig. 110). In the upper courses a wall of
burnt brick overlaps the stone masonry. In the third course of masonry
from the top each block has an inscription chiselled out in large Old
Babylonian characters (Fig. 111): “Nebuchadnezzar, etc., am I. The dûru
of the palace of Babylon I have made with stones of the mountain
(followed by a prayer).” With this statement we will compare that part
of the great _Steinplatten_ inscription (9, 22) where it says, “Beyond
the dûr of burnt brick I built a great dûr of mighty stones, the
production of the great mountains, and raised its summit high as a
mountain.” Thus it is clear that the previous mention of the Principal
Citadel included the Northern Citadel, and in consequence the length
there assigned to the wall of 490 ells covers the entire stretch from
the Ishtar Gate to the north front of the northern bastion. According to
our provisional measurement, this length consisted of 251 metres, which
would make an ell of .512 metres. If this result does not agree exactly
with that quoted above (p. 174) the reason is probably that we do not
know accurately the points to which Nebuchadnezzar measured.
[Illustration:
FIG. 111.—Inscription on the stone wall of the Northern Citadel.
]
Close to the bastion a gateway led through the western wall, which is
exactly similar both in plan and construction to the gateway in the wall
of the Principal Citadel. The canal that passes through the gateway must
certainly have been connected with the canal in the wall of the
Principal Citadel. The construction is very plain here; so far as it
lies in the burnt brick wall it is covered in with corbelled tiles, and
in the stone masonry with large blocks of limestone laid flat (Fig.
112).
In front of the wall to the north there was water, the moat of the
fortress, a part of the Euphrates or of the Arachtu. A sudden assault on
the fortress by water might easily be accomplished by means of these
canals, and to guard against this huge gratings formed of stone blocks
were placed across the channel below the water, thus closing the
passage. Every part of the defences, wherever they are intersected by a
water-channel, is carefully guarded by gratings either of stone or of
burnt brick, to safeguard them against invaders.
[Illustration:
FIG. 112.—Doorway with canal in the stone wall.
]
An assault by means of the water-channel must therefore have been feared
by the ancient architects, even if the account of the sacking of Babylon
in this manner by the Persians is legendary.
[Illustration:
FIG. 113.—Canal in front of the Northern Citadel, on the north.
]
The wall like that of the Principal Citadel was guarded by alternate
narrow and wide projecting towers. The principal wall in the north is
clad by a later strengthening wall.
The moat, which lay in front of this wall, and which we have also to
surmise in front of the eastern wall, was bridged over by a dam which
led up to the gentle ascent to the Procession Street. This dam was
flanked with sloping walls, of which we have excavated the western one.
It bites into the earth with short projecting buttresses. At the
northern end a circular cistern was inserted later.
Thus the dam led over the defensive moat, and afforded access to the
main entrance to the Acropolis. A narrow roofed-in canal led through the
dam (K in Fig. 107) and conducted the water from west to east. The roof
is laid sloping with bricks placed edgeways (Fig. 113), and like the
rubble walls of Nebuchadnezzar it is laid in mud. The technique is the
same as that of the canal on the south of the Kasr. Close to the place
where the canal turned off from the principal one a brick with the
Arachtu stamp of Nabopolassar has been inserted. The canal itself can
scarcely be recognised as Arachtu, but we may perhaps conclude from the
reverential reuse of the ancient brick that the channel from which this
canal branched off bore the name.
* * * * *
If these descriptions will enable the reader to picture to himself the
accumulation of masses of towered defensive walls that guarded the
entrance to the Citadel, he will realise that it could hardly have been
possible to construct a more imposing approach to this ancient gateway
than this one, with its gradual ascent between the walls of the
Procession Street, decorated with the long multi-coloured rows of lions,
up to the Ishtar Gate and through that to the actual Bab-ilani.
XXIX
RETROSPECT OF THE KASR
The gradual raising of the buildings on the Kasr and their development
into the Acropolis of Babylon may be classified in their principal
features under the following periods:
1. The wall of the river bank built by Sargon. Imgur-Bel and
Nimitti-Bel, the walls connected with it, no longer exist.
2. Nabopolassar’s palace of mud brick on a foundation of burnt brick,
surrounded by an enclosing wall which included the _irṣit Babil_ and to
which the arched door belongs. Building of the Arachtu walls in three
successive periods.
3. Nebuchadnezzar replaced the mud brick of his father by walls of burnt
brick, restored the enclosing wall, built the older moat wall, and
renewed the Ninmach temple of Sardanapalus.
4. Building of the two mud walls, which may prove to be Imgur-Bel and
Nimitti-Bel, and in which stood the ancient Ishtar Gate, which no longer
exists.
5. Building of the east part of the Southern Citadel. Raising of the
enclosing wall, of the Ninmach temple, and of the Procession Street.
6. Rebuilding of the Ishtar Gate with the brick reliefs, and heightening
of the two mud-brick walls.
7. Construction of the moat wall of Imgur-Bel. Raising of the
Nabopolassar palace.
8. Extension of the palace to the west. The whole Southern Citadel now
lay on the higher level. Completion of the southern water arm
(Libil-ḫigalla?), which also encircled the Southern Citadel in the east.
9. Project for an advanced building in the north, of which the
17–metres-thick wall in the Principal Citadel is part.
10. Building of the Principal Citadel, with the two parallel walls that
flank the Procession Street and the two wall lengths that turn east and
west. Raising of the Procession Street and stone pavement, of the Ishtar
Gate with the enamel reliefs, and of the Ninmach temple.
11. Lengthening of the parallel walls to the north. Building of the
flanking walls and the stone wall.
12. Neriglissar’s and Nabonidus’ restorations, of which there are scanty
traces.
13. Uniting of the entire Kasr by means of the Persian advanced wall of
the Acropolis, after the Euphrates had removed its channel to the east
side. Building of a palace on the western Southern Citadel by Artaxerxes
Mnemon.
14. In the Parthian period the downfall and demolition began. Houses of
burnt brick and brick graves among the ruins. The Euphrates returned to
its ancient bed.
15. A large necropolis of late Parthian or Sassanide times in the
principal court of the Southern Citadel.
It must be admitted that these epochs cannot be always clearly
differentiated. They form only an approximate sketch of the development
so far as it has hitherto been possible to recognise it, and for some
time to come will require emendation and amplification.
XXX
THE PERIBOLOS OF ETEMENANKI
The route from the south-west corner of the Kasr to Amran leads first to
a small mound which we have named the south-west building. It consists
largely of mud-brick masonry that belongs to the later Parthian (?)
period. So far we have done little excavation here. We next pass the
long low-lying stretch that now represents a water-channel that once lay
here. We then ascend a range of mounds that also extends from east to
west. A cross-cut has shown that it consists of the ruins of Babylonian
houses of crude brick, lying one above another, as we shall find them
later in Merkes. This was the town site of the common people.
On the other side of this range of mounds a somewhat considerable plain
of remarkable uniformity stretches away to the hill of Amran Ibn Ali,
cut through diagonally by the road that leads from our village of
Kweiresh to Hilleh. It is called Sachn, literally “the pan,” a term
which in modern days is applied to the open space enclosed by arcades
that surrounds the great pilgrimage mosques, such as those of Kerbela or
Nedjef. Our Sachn, however, is no other than the modern representation
of the ancient sacred precinct in which stood the zikurrat Etemenanki,
“the foundation stone of heaven and earth,” the tower of Babylon,
surrounded by an enclosing wall against which lay all manner of
buildings connected with the cult (Fig. 114).
This enclosing wall forms almost a square, divided by cross walls into
separate parts, three of which we have already recognised. All the
buildings consisted largely of crude brick, and only, as an exception,
the very considerable crude-brick core of the tower in the south-west
corner was enclosed in a thick wall of burnt brick, which has been
removed deep down by brick robbers. Now only their deep and broad
trenches are to be seen, but these enable us to recognise the site of a
great open stairway which led up to the tower from the south. The ruin
is not yet excavated.
[Illustration:
FIG. 114.—Plan of Esagila and Etemenanki.
AE Ancient bed of Euphrates.
AR Arachtu wall.
Ä Earlier building.
B Bridge over the Euphrates.
ES E-Sagila, the temple of Marduk.
ET E-Temenanki, the tower of Babylon.
HH Principal Citadel.
N Nabonidus wall.
NH Northern court.
NR Nebuchadnezzar wall.
ÖA Eastern annex.
P Procession Street of Marduk.
S Later Parthian (?) buildings.
U Urash(?) Gate.
WH Western court.
1–12. The doorways in the peribolos of Etemenanki.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 115.—East side of the peribolos of Etemenanki.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 116.—Esarhaddon’s Etemenanki inscription.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 117.—Sardanapalus’ Etemenanki inscription.
]
Many additions and restorations were carried out in connection with
these buildings, and they can clearly be distinguished, especially in
the enclosing wall itself. The east end of the northern front is very
instructive in this respect. We can distinguish the original building
and a strengthening wall, the kisu, in front of it. Here it is of crude
brick, but on the west front, like the kisu of Emach, it is of burnt
brick. On the original building three periods lie superposed, as also on
the kisu. Of each of these building periods slightly projecting towers
are placed on the walls close together, and differently distributed,
which considerably aids us in distinguishing the periods, as the
mud-brick courses are frequently placed immediately over each other
(Fig. 115). Inside the lowest kisu, somewhat farther to the west, there
is a vertical gutter of the kind we have already observed in the inner
city walls. In this were inscribed bricks of Esarhaddon (Fig. 116), with
the statement that he built the zikurrat of Etemenanki. The two upper
portions of the kisu must therefore belong to a later period, and the
lower part of the main building to an earlier period, than that of
Esarhaddon. The other excavations have produced in addition 12 stamped
bricks of Sardanapalus (Fig. 117) and 4 inscribed bricks of
Nebuchadnezzar (Fig. 118), all of which refer to the building of
Etemenanki. Even if these bricks were not intended for the peribolos,
but for the tower itself, their occasional use for the former is in no
way surprising. All that we have been able to excavate so far is
connected with the original building, of which the later repairing and
rebuilding carefully follow the ancient line of wall. We need not
therefore lay too much stress on the various periods.
[Illustration:
FIG. 118.—Nebuchadnezzar’s Etemenanki inscription.
]
The surrounding wall is for the greater part a double wall, in which
uniform broad chambers are constructed by means of cross walls. The
ornamental towers on the inner walls are always placed between two doors
of these chambers, while on the outside, where the two ornamental
grooves that used to decorate both the towers and the intermediate
spaces still exist in places, both towers and spaces are of the same
breadth.