kings took the most prominent place among the creations of Assyrian
architecture. The despotic element had in Mesopotamia the same
superiority as the hierarchy in Egypt: in the former country the palace
was as much in the foreground as was the temple in the latter. In
ancient Chaldæa the two elements, and consequently the two classes of
monuments, were more equally represented. Still, in most points of view,
the relation of Chaldæan and Assyrian architecture is very close, and
the differences arose chiefly from the superior material at the
builders’ disposal in Upper Mesopotamia. The terraces of Assyria, like
those of Chaldæa, were solidly constructed of sun-dried bricks and
stamped earth, but the neighboring mountains provided stone for the
complete revetment of these masses with quarried blocks. Carefully hewn
slabs existed upon the terrace platform of Sargon’s palace, and upon the
substructure of the pyramid of Nimrud, while there was rough Cyclopean
stone-work employed in the construction of the city walls at
Kisr-Sargon. The facing of brightly glazed tiles and stucco-paintings,
universal in Chaldæa, is restricted upon Assyrian masonry of the same
brick materials to the upper part of the wall, the lower half being
sheathed and protected by sculptured slabs of alabaster. The appearance
of the whole gained greatly by this change, the revetment of reliefs in
place of the painted figures giving a more imposing and durable
character to the walls. The palace architecture of Assyria is best
exemplified by the plan of the royal dwelling of Kisr-Sargon (_Fig._
44), the isolated position and clear disposition of which are adapted to
show the general character of these structures. The platform terrace
consisted of two divisions, the broader (P) being inside the limits of
the city fortifications, while the remainder (T) projected beyond them.
A double flight of steps (A) led to the chief portal (B), ornamented by
gigantic winged human-headed bulls, which here not only stood on the
sides of the passage itself, as at all principal entrances, but
laterally upon the front walls, within and without. These figures are
among the most characteristic creations of Assyrian art; they will be
treated more in detail in the following consideration of the sculpture
of the country. The triple gateway opened into the first and largest
enclosed court (C). Upon the left of this, one narrow passage led to the
chambers of the harem, which were ranged around six smaller courts (D to
H). Upon the right of the first enclosure were the household offices
(J), with eight courts and numerous halls, magazines, kitchens, cellars,
stables, etc. The side opposite the chief entrance was formed by the
private apartments of the monarch (M) and by the great hall of the
palace--a group of chambers not presenting its chief front to the first
court (C), with which it was connected only by subordinate
entrances--but to a second enclosure of almost equal extent (K), which
may be regarded as the chief open space of the royal dwelling. An
inclined ascent (R) led to the right wing of the inner terrace, by which
the king, approaching in a chariot or borne by attendants in a
sedan-chair, could enter his seraglio without passing the first court
(C) or the entrance to the household offices (J). The encroaching line
of the city wall (P) made it impossible for the portal to the second
court (S) to be arranged in the central axis of that enclosure; but
strict symmetry of plan was not adopted even when there were no such
obstacles. The inner apartments of the king were entered by a
magnificent triple gateway (L) from the court of the seraglio; these
were, in certain measure, regularly planned, being so grouped around a
smaller court (M) that oblong halls, as long as this was square, were
upon three of its sides. The hall upon the south opens into a number of
intricate chambers, probably used as baths, sleeping-apartments, and
rooms for the immediate body-guards of the king and for the temporary
families of the harem. Upon the north a wing was added to the building,
projecting almost to the outer border of the terrace, and dividing this
(T) into a northern and a western court. The addition was the most
richly ornamented portion of the entire palace; it was probably here
that the halls of reception were placed. The walls of other parts of the
seraglio were reveted upon their lower part with sculptured slabs of
alabaster; but this treatment was not elsewhere so freely applied, nor
was it as richly decorated as in this northwestern wing. In the first
hall, which is 35 m. long and 10 m. broad, the walls are ornamented with
continuous scenes representing, as in a procession, the homage and
punishment of prisoners-of-war. In other rooms and in smaller courts
these reliefs, divided by a band of cuneiform inscriptions, are of
smaller dimensions and less pretentious execution, though of marked
interest as forming, with their copious inscriptions, chronicles of
historical events.
The spacious terrace at the west has in its centre an oblong hall (N),
generally supposed to be the temple or chapel of the palace, but which
may with more probability be considered as a hall of state. The scanty
remains of this structure make a sure determination of its purpose
impossible. They consist chiefly of the foundations of solid unburnt
brick masonry, faced with slabs of black basalt. The cornice of this
substructure is of gray limestone, in form much resembling the
characteristic scotia of Egyptian architecture. (_Fig._ 46.)
A small terraced pyramid (O) at the southwest is a more remarkable
structure. Four of its steps, with their facing of white, black, orange,
and blue enamelled tiles, are still remaining. These lead, from analogy
with the pyramid of Borsippa, to the assumption of three further steps,
tiled with the red, silver, and gold assigned to the remaining planets.
The vertical panelling of the sides is somewhat similar to that of the
remains at Warka; it is not here restricted to the walls of the lower
terrace, like that upon the ruins of Mugheir and Borsippa. The square
platform at the top of the terraces, the side of which could have
measured little more than 10 m., received either an altar or a small
cella, not longer than 6 m. Ascent to the top of the pyramid was
provided by an inclined plane, which wound from step to step in a
rectangular spiral. The destination of the pyramid as the palace chapel
seems reasonably certain, from its similarity to other terraced temples
of Assyria.
[Illustration: Fig. 46.--Cornice of the Temple Substructure at
Corsabad.]
The palaces hitherto discovered show the greatest freedom of detailed
arrangement. The variations among the plans may be illustrated by a
comparison of those of the northwestern palace of Nimrud (_Fig._ 47),
the palace of Esarhaddon (_Fig._ 49), and of that of Sennacherib at
Coyundjic. The methods of construction adopted for their erection are
more similar. All have walls built of burnt or unburnt brick and of
stamped clay; those of the larger chambers are reveted in their lower
half with slabs of alabaster or with brightly enamelled tiles, and
ornamented by paintings upon stucco above. All the principal halls are
so narrow in proportion to their length as to resemble corridors--a
peculiarity arising from technical difficulties of ceiling.
[Illustration: Fig. 47.--Plan of the Northwestern Palace of Nimrud.]
The manner of lighting and roofing adopted in Assyrian palaces is not
directly evident from the existing remains; none of the walls, the
highest of which reaches 9 m. above the ground, showing traces of any
window-like openings. Some authorities assume that all the light of the
interior was admitted through the doors. That this may, in some
instances, have been barely possible is evident from the plan of
Sargon’s palace at Corsabad (_Fig._ 44), where the principal chambers
were entered directly from the open courts, or, in exceptional
instances, were preceded by narrow ante-rooms which could not greatly
have interfered with the light. But it is plain from the plan of the
northwestern Palace of Nimrud (_Fig._ 47) that twelve chambers in such
unfavorable positions as those shown upon its eastern side could not
have received the slightest light through the two narrow passages
leading from the confined court. It is futile to deny the necessity of
light and air for the dwellings of man; and theories which suppose these
enormous spaces left in darkness, or unventilated and lighted
artificially, are certainly untenable. Other scholars are of the opinion
that light and air were procured through horizontal openings in the
ceiling and roof; but this imperfect and unpractical arrangement is
particularly ill adapted for inhabited rooms, and is rendered extremely
improbable by the fact that upon the pavements there did not exist the
slightest arrangement for leading off the water which must have fallen
upon them had the roof been an inefficient shelter. The floors were
rarely of stone slabs, like the carved fragments shown in _Fig._ 45, and
in other places the sun-dried bricks would have been rapidly reduced to
mud by the furious rain-storms of Mesopotamia.
[Illustration: Fig. 48.--Relief from Coyundjic.]
The present condition of the ruins, the walls of which nowhere rise to
the full height of the chambers, does not, however, exclude the
possibility of openings for light having existed just beneath the
ceiling. The form of such orifices cannot surely be determined; high
windows could not have existed, and there must have been low openings in
the top of the wall, separated by piers, between which stood small
columns, as is evident from a relief of Coyundjic, given in _Fig._ 48 to
serve as an argument for this manner of illumination. Light and air
could thus have been freely admitted, without inconvenience to the
dwellers within. The high position of the apertures, immediately under
the somewhat projecting roof, prevented the entrance of rain, and shut
off the interior from the view of those without, just as this same
manner of lighting to-day protects the harems of the East. The small
shafts, which were introduced as supports between these windows, appear
to have been the only representatives of columnar architecture in the
Assyrian palace. If columns had been used, in their customary function,
as upholders of the roof,--as members which bore an important
entablature,--some traces of these would certainly have been preserved;
their material could hardly have been more perishable than the sun-dried
brick of the walls. The entire arrangement of plan shows that their
assistance was not relied upon. The chambers were disproportionately
narrow, plainly to render it possible to cover them without the
introduction of intermediate supports. The beauty and fitness of the
corridor-like spaces were so sacrificed to this narrowness that its
universal appearance can be regarded only as a constructive necessity.
It is well illustrated by the cramped principal hall of the palace of
Esar-haddon at Nimrud (_Fig._ 49), where a greater width than that
permitted by the span of ceiling timbers was only to be obtained by the
erection of a division wall to provide a subsidiary support for the
beams. So helpless a make-shift, destroying the unity and grandeur of
the hall, could have been adopted only in entire ignorance of the
opening and supporting element of the column, apparently never
recognized in Assyria.
[Illustration: Fig. 49.--Plan of the Palace of Esar-haddon at Nimrud.]
[Illustration: Fig. 50.--Various Forms of Capitals and Bases, from
Assyrian Reliefs.]
The form of the small columns, which stood in the openings allowed for
light in the upper walls, can be approximately determined from the
representations upon reliefs. The shafts were cylindrical, and probably
without flutings; they had a roundlet, or at least a projecting fillet,
at either end. The base consisted solely of a high tore, sometimes
notched upon the top, or placed upon the back of a striding lion.
(_Fig._ 50.) The most common form of the capitals was a peculiar
conjunction of two spiral scrolls, similar to a doubled Ionic capital,
with an echinos-like roundlet beneath and a stepped abacus above. It is
hardly to be doubted that this was the prototype of the Ionic capital,
although it cannot be determined from the reliefs whether a lateral roll
corresponded to the volute of the front, or whether the helix was
repeated upon all four sides, as is the case with the capitals of
Persian columns. The small scale of the representations upon reliefs,
and their careless execution, do not permit a sure understanding of any
part of the capitals. A table (_Fig._ 51) upon a relief of Coyundjic
better determines the form of the volutes; it has distinct spirals in
place of the rosettes, wrongly shown by Layard’s drawing.[D] There is
reason to suppose that the double helix was not the primitive and normal
form of the Assyrian capital, but was rather an abbreviation of the
leaved calyx so frequently met with in Phœnicia, Palestine, and
Cyprus, and that the rolled ends of the leaves, shown by two of the
examples in _Fig._ 50, originally suggested the volutes of the capital
and the various spiral forms occurring upon carved Assyrian furniture,
as in _Fig._ 81. The question will be considered more at length in the
section upon Syrian architecture.
The columns of Assyria were employed only in this subordinate position,
and the dimensions and shape of larger enclosed spaces were dependent
upon the limited span of the wooden ceiling beams. Assyrian palaces
were, in these respects, unable to fulfil the demands of a monumental
architecture. It can only be surmised how roof and ceiling were
constructed in detail. The beams were naturally so placed as to require
the least possible length to span the clear width; the sinking in the
middle, to which the elastic trunks of palm-trees so much inclined, and
the accumulation of water in the hollow thereby formed, were thus
avoided as well as might be. The constructive details of the
roof-platform are not surely known; it is probable that a layer of clay
and earth was placed upon the beams, being rolled down compactly after
every rain. The exterior representation of roof and ceiling, the wall
entablature, may have consisted of a painted wooden sheathing, bearing
ornaments of the character displayed by the pavement. (_Fig._ 45.) It
was divided, like the Egyptian entablature, into two parts; in neither
case was there a marked distinction between roof and ceiling. The
imitations of building-fronts upon reliefs make it probable that stepped
battlements rose above the main cornice.
[Illustration: Fig. 51.--Table upon an Assyrian Relief.]
[Illustration: Fig. 52.--Mouth of a Channel under the Northwestern
Palace, Nimrud.]
[Illustration: Fig. 53.--Channel under the Southeastern Palace, Nimrud.]
The fundamental principles of vaulted construction, as of columnar
architecture, were known in Assyria, but neither the column nor the arch
was worthily recognized and developed into an important feature capable
of exercising an influence upon the extent or form of the enclosed
spaces. The palace terraces were pierced by narrow vaulted channels,
still to be traced among the ruins. This was the case with the most
ancient structure of Assyria, the northwestern palace of Nimrud. (_Fig._
52.) Though it cannot be proved that the Assyrians were the original
inventors of the arch of wedge-shaped stones, there are certainly no
earlier instances of this manner of building known than those of that
country. Round arch barrel-vaults were not exclusively used for such
channels; an ogive appears upon the same terrace of Nimrud, in the
somewhat later southeastern palace. (_Fig._ 53.) Though the key-stone of
the latter is undeveloped, the vault is yet built upon the principle of
the Gothic pointed arch. It is not impossible that this form may have
descended in uninterrupted tradition from Mesopotamia to the Arabs,
being brought by them to Europe, where, effecting a change in the round
Romanesque arch, it exercised a decisive influence in the development of
mediæval manners of building. The bricks of these vaulted Assyrian
channels are carefully moulded to the more or less marked wedge-form
determined by the size of the arch--a greater refinement than is
practised by modern masons, who use only rectangular bricks, effecting
the curve by the wedge-shape of the mortar-joint. Yet, perfected as
vaulted construction appears in these channels, its application seems to
have been almost restricted to them; Assyrian builders hesitated to
apply vaulted ceilings to spaces of much greater span than gates and
window apertures. Reliefs show arched portals alternating with
horizontally covered openings; and in the fortification walls of
Kisr-Sargon, the city adjoining the palace-ruins of Corsabad, traces of
a barrel-vaulted entrance have been discovered where the arch, of 4.5 m.
clear, rested upon the backs of the winged monsters referred to as the
guardians of all important gateways. A vaulted corridor, considerably
less in span, will be noticed at the temple pyramid of Nimrud. Among the
numerous palace chambers remaining, only a few narrow cells show traces
of vaults; the opinion of some recent investigators, that the customary
horizontal ceilings of smaller rooms were surmounted by cupolas of
beaten earth, does not appear plausible.
[Illustration: Fig. 54.--Restoration of an Assyrian Palace.]
From the chief points gained by this consideration, it is evident that
the restoration given in _Fig._ 54, a variation of the reconstruction by
Layard and Fergusson, cannot greatly misrepresent the once existing
structures. The Assyrian palace was, upon the whole, a more satisfactory
building than the Egyptian temple. The outlines and masses of its
composition were grand; it was richly ornamented, perhaps even
overladen, with sculptured and colored decoration. The massive and
unpierced walls of the lower half bore a kind of open loggia, consisting
of light columns between powerful piers which were fully capable of
upholding the ceiling. The entire edifice being elevated upon a terrace,
upper stories were not necessary to secure an imposing height. The
existence of one lower story alone is indicated by the ruins; no large
staircases, or other means of ascent to an upper floor, were provided.
The apparent duplication of the stories of houses upon reliefs is owing
to a fault of perspective common to the primitive representations of all
nations: things are shown as above and upon, instead of behind and
beyond, one another. The ground-chambers, of which sixty-eight have been
counted in the Palace of Sennacherib at Coyundjic, and over two hundred
in the Palace of Sargon, were surely ample in number and extent.
[Illustration: Fig. 55.--Terraced Pyramid. Relief from Coyundjic.]
[Illustration: Fig. 56.--Plan and Section of the Terraced Pyramid of
Nimrud. 1. Vaulted Corridor. 2. Modern Shafts. 3. Revetment Wall of Cut
Stone. 5. Solid Brick Masonry. 6. Great Palace Terrace. 7. Temple.]
[Illustration: Fig. 57.--Relief from the Northern Palace of Coyundjic.]
Though the royal dwellings of Assyria chiefly attract attention in
considering the architecture of the country, there are also many remains
of sacred buildings in the lands of the Upper Tigris. But we are
acquainted only with those places of worship which stood in immediate
connection with the palaces, no traces of edifices for general and
popular worship having been discovered up to the present time. Even were
we without knowledge of the ruins, it would be natural to suppose the
temples of Assyria similar to those of Mesopotamia; that is to say,
pyramidal terraces, with high lower stories. (Compare _Fig._ 41.) A
relief from Coyundjic, the upper portion of which is unfortunately
destroyed, confirms this view, showing a terraced structure of three or
four steps situated upon a natural elevation. The lower terrace is
decorated, like Chaldæan works of the kind, with pilasters in
low-relief; before it are pylon towers. (_Fig._ 55.) This specifically
Mesopotamian type is to be recognized in the most prominent ruins of
Assyrian sacred architecture--namely, in the terraced pyramid which
occupied one corner of the great palace platform of Nimrud. It is also
to be observed in the more fragmentary remains at Kileh-Shergat, which
time has buried beneath shapeless hills of rubbish, without entirely
obliterating the original disposition. The ruins at this site have not
been thoroughly investigated; those at Nimrud showed the lower part of
the pyramid at least to have been solidly built of bricks, reveted with
a wall of quarried stones. (_Fig._ 56.) In the height of the main palace
terrace was a shaft, the purpose of which is uncertain, as it was
without entrance, and empty; it is interesting in architectural
respects from the admirably executed barrel-vault of brick masonry which
formed its ceiling. The ruin, for the greater part destroyed, offered
beyond this corridor but few peculiarities. The stone revetment has been
almost entirely carried away, and every trace of the temple cella which
must have surmounted these terraces, as it did those of Chaldæa, has
disappeared. The better-preserved but much smaller terraced temple of
the palace at Kisr-Sargon has already been mentioned. Two interesting
reliefs show the general form of such cellas, though in these instances
the structures represented are not raised upon artificial elevations.
(_Figs._ 35 and 57.) They are small temples in antis, rectangular
buildings, three sides of which are formed by walls; while, in the open
fourth, two columns support the entablature and roof. In one case the
ends of the walls upon each side of the columns are undecorated; in the
other the pilasters, though without a base, are crowned with a member
similar to the capitals of the columns. The simple entablature projects
in an oblique line; it is terminated by stepped battlements, in which
the Mesopotamian type of the terraced pyramid is repeated in outline and
adopted as a merely decorative detail. Such temple cellas were erected
not alone upon extensive terraces, but in the plain; perhaps, also, like
the similar structures of Phœnicia, in the midst of sacred lakes. The
reliefs given in the cuts show the chapels to have stood at the foot of
natural elevations, as well as upon them. Another form of sanctuary,
with gabled roof and lanceolate acroteria, is represented upon a relief
of Corsabad. (_Fig._ 71.) The building remotely resembles a Hellenic
peripteros. Its constructive peculiarities cannot well be understood
from the relief, as these considerations were probably not clear to the
sculptor himself. It is possible that the architectural form was one
foreign to the country,--perhaps the imitation of a temple in Southern
Asia Minor. Another variety of these palace chapels appears upon the
terrace of Nimrud, the forms there differing but slightly from those of
the dwelling-chambers; the sacred cellas are distinguished only by the
exclusively mythological character of the reliefs, and by the altars and
offerings placed at the entrance. (_Fig._ 58.) It is possible, however,
that these spaces were used as the dwellings of priests rather than as
sanctuaries, especially as the two examples known are situated near the
base of the great temple of Nimrud, being in this respect admirably
adapted to the uses of the sacerdotal officers in the royal household.
[Illustration: Fig. 58.--Entrance to one of the so-called Temples,
Nimrud.]
The forms of Assyrian altars are illustrated by reliefs. (_Figs._ 35
and 57.) The rectangular shaft, at times furrowed, rests upon a plinth,
and bears a projecting slab, bordered by stepped battlements. A tripod
was found before the entrance to the so-called Temple of Nimrud (_Fig._
58); and upon reliefs are represented fire-altars, upholding by a single
support a basin for burnt sacrifices. These altars and the bronze tables
for offerings were not treated as architectural details, but more
resembled the chairs and thrones variously represented upon reliefs.
[Illustration: Fig. 59.--Obelisk from Nimrud.]