Saïd-Hassan, ii. 174.
Samarah, i. 3.
Samas, i. 83;
tablet of Sippara, 200; ii. 90, 193, 266.
Samas-Vul II., stele of, ii. 209, 354.
Sammouramit (? Semiramis), ii. 217.
Samsibin, i. 39.
Sandals, in the reliefs, ii. 247.
Sarbistan, i. 169, 186.
Sardanapalus, i. 43;
the Greek myth, 52, 187; ii. 59.
Sargon, i. 43, 105;
stele of, found near Larnaca, ii. 219.
Saryoukin, _see_ Sargon.
Sarzec, M. de, his discoveries at Tello, i. 24, 279;
quoted, 382; ii. 33, 141.
Sassanids, successors of the Parthians, i. 57.
Sayce, A. H., quoted, i. 33, 69; ii. 263, 346.
Scabbard, ii. 164, 345.
Sceptres, how coloured in the reliefs, ii. 247.
Schenafieh, ii. 176.
Schlumberger, G., his fragments of the Balawat gates, i. 242;
ii. 213.
Schulze, ii. 232.
Screw of Archimedes, its asserted use at Babylon, ii. 31.
Sculpture, absence of women from the reliefs, i. 111;
practically confined to war and hunting, 111;
its principal themes, ii. 78;
its fondness for fantastic animals, 79;
treatment of the nude, 92;
the absence of nude figures from the reliefs, 98;
documentary character of Assyrian sculpture, 101;
epic or newspaper? 103;
want of variety in the composition of the reliefs, 104;
its appearance of improvisation, 105;
materials used, 109;
use of clay, 113;
terra-cotta statuettes, 114;
its principal conventions, 125;
statue of Nebo, 126;
of Assurnazirpal, 126;
the principles of the bas-reliefs, 128;
peculiarities of Assyrian statues and figures in relief, 130;
the Assyrian type, 135;
are the Assyrian statues Iconic? 138;
representations of animals, 142;
proportions of early Assyrian figures, 203;
its power of selection, 207;
in the reign of Sargon, 219;
picturesque details introduced in the time of Sennacherib, 223;
Egyptian and Assyrian contrasted, 281;
_do._ 385.
Scythians, their invasion of Western Asia, i. 49.
Seal, in universal use in Babylonia, ii. 251.
Seistan, i. 2.
Sekhet, i. 78.
Seleucia, i. 54, 93, 223.
Seleucidæ, i. 5, 157.
Seleucus Nicator, i. 54.
Seljukian period, carved lions from, i. 262.
Semi-domes, i. 173.
Semiramis, i. 33;
represented on the walls of Babylon according to Ctesias, 283,
361;
her palaces, ii. 34, 217.
Semnat, ii. 394.
Senkereh (or Larsam), i. 38.
Sennacherib, i. 43;
his death, 103, 105;
state of sculpture during his reign, ii. 223;
his appearance in the Bavian sculptures, ii. 229.
Seraglio, at Khorsabad, ii. 16.
Serdabs, i. 139, 383.
Sesostris, i. 33.
Seti, ii. 395.
Sewers, system of, in palaces, i. 227.
Sexagesimal system, the, of the Babylonians, ii. 398.
_Shah-Nameh_, the, i. 20.
Shalmaneser II., i. 43, 105;
the gates made for him, 242; ii. 40;
his obelisk, ii. 110.
Sharezer, i. 103.
Shat-el-Arab, i. 7.
Shat-el-Hai, ii. 174.
Shem, i. 15.
Shield, votive, from Lake Van, ii. 347.
Shinar, i. 14, 18.
Sidon, i. 16.
Silius Italicus, ii. 364.
Sills, i. 239.
Silver, i. 299.
Simplicius, his statement as to Babylonian astronomy, i. 71.
Sin, Assyrian god, i. 201.
Sinjar, i. 178; ii. 110.
Sippara, i. 38, 53, 200; ii. 90.
Sirtella, _see_ Tello.
Sittacenia, i. 177.
Smith, George, quoted, i. 36;
his recognition of the true characters of the Cypriot alphabet,
44;
translator of texts from Assurbanipal’s library, 48, 71;
his discovery of limestone bases in the palace of Assurbanipal,
220, 237, 276;
enamelled brick found by him at Nimroud, 293;
his discovery of an account of Istar’s descent into limbo, 344;
his explorations, ii. 7;
_résumé_ of the monumental history of Calah (Nimroud), 37;
his description of the site of Arbela, 48;
his discovery of a small model bull at Nimroud, 115.
Sockets, granite, &c., for the door-pivots, i. 242;
from Balawat, 243.
Sodom, i. 199.
Soldi, E., ii. 253;
his description of the process of gem engraving quoted, 259.
Somalis, ii. 373.
Sorcery, Chaldæan belief in, i. 65.
Soury, ii. 397.
Spoons, metal, ii. 351.
Staged-towers, difficulty of restoring them accurately, i. 364;
their monotonous appearance, 366;
their resemblance to a stepped pyramid, 366;
description of temple of Bel by Herodotus, 366;
their various types restored, 370–382;
their ruins discussed, 382–391.
Staircases, i. 189–192.
Steatite, ii. 190.
Steles, their characteristic forms, i. 236;
fluted S. with palmette, 258;
rock-cut S. at Kouyundjik, 259.
Stone, no dressed S. to be found at Babylon, i. 120;
bridge at B. said to have been built of stone, 120.
Strabo, quoted by RAWLINSON, i. 4;
carries western frontier of Assyria up to Syria, 5, 54;
height of temple of Bel, 130;
ruined state of the temple in his time, 137;
his statement as to the prevalence of vaults in Babylon, 169,
176; ii. 251.
Stylus, for cutting the wedges, i. 28.
Styx, i. 354.
Sully-Prudhomme, his lines to the Venus of Milo quoted, ii. 249.
Sumer, i. 21, 59.
Sumerian system, the, i. 29.
Surface decoration in Chaldæa, i. 245.
Susa, date of its capture by Assurbanipal, i. 36, 52;
its palace intrigues, 96.
Susiana, i. 17.
Sybel, L. von, ii. 285.
Syene, i. 94.
Syllabaries, Assyrian, i. 23.
Syncellus, Georgius, i. 51.
Syria, ii. 172.
Syriac, the dominant language in the early centuries of our era,
i. 18.
T
Tablets of gold, silver, antimony, copper, and lead, found at
Khorsabad, i. 319.
Tacitus, i. 5.
Tadmor, _see_ Palmyra.
_Takht-i-Khosro_, i. 170, 185.
Tammouz, i. 344.
Tardieu, Amédée, i. 177.
_Tartan_, or Grand Vizer, i. 96.
Tauthé, i. 83.
Taylor, J. E., quoted, i. 39, 118, 155;
his explorations of the mounds near the Persian Gulf, 158, 200,
222, 279, 281;
his explorations at Abou-Sharein, 371; ii. 256.
Teheran, i. 289.
Tell-Amran (or, Tell-Amran-ibn-Ali), ii. 35.
Tello, i. 24, 279, 312;
angle-stones and foundation talismans found at T., i. 316, 383;
ii. 33, 163;
the discoveries made by M. de Sarzec described, 174;
subjects of the reliefs, 177.
_Temenos_, i. 128.
Temple, subordinate types of, i. 391–6.
(_see_ also staged towers).
Tents, their forms, i. 175.
_Teradas_, i. 10.
Terah, i. 15.
Terra-cotta statuettes, early Chaldæan, ii. 195.
_Tête-de-pont_, on the Balawat gates, ii. 214.
Texier quoted, i. 122;
description of the great mosque at Ispahan, 287.
Textiles, ii. 363.
Thapsacus, ii. 374.
Thebes, i. 56.
Thomas, Felix, his opinion on the roofing question, i. 163, 224.
Thothmes III., ii. 284.
Thresholds, i. 239;
sometimes of metal, 241.
Thunderbolt, origin of the classic form of, i. 75.
Tidjaris, ii. 312.
Tiele, his _Manuel des Religions_ quoted, i. 60, 86, 89.
Tiglath-Pileser I., i. 39; ii. 203.
Tiglath-Pileser II., i. 43; ii. 101, 218.
Tigris, its inundations, i. 9.
Tiles, glazed; the manufacture not extinct in India (note by
editor), i. 287;
with central boss, 294.
Toilet, articles of, ii. 349.
Tomb, comparison between the Egyptian and Mesopotamian T., i. 336;
absence of funerary inscriptions, 336;
no Assyrian tombs yet discovered, 336;
conjectures as to how the Assyrians disposed of their dead, 337;
Loftus’s explanation perhaps the best, 338;
the principle of the Chaldæan tomb similar to that of the
Mastaba, 355;
its shape, 356–360;
its situation, 360–364.
Transliteration, difficulties of, i. 17.
Trees, how indicated in the reliefs, ii. 207, 223.
_Tree of Life_, i. 212.
Tripods, ii. 323.
_Tunica talaria_, ii. 94.
Turanians, said to form part of the early population of Chaldæa,
i. 19;
etymology of the word, 20, 22.
Turkish compared to the tongue of early Chaldæa, i. 19.
Turks, their bad administration, i. 11.
Tyre, i. 16.
U
Ulbar, temple of, its angle-stone, i. 315.
Unicorn, the, in Assyrian sculpture, ii. 164.
Ur, i. 1, 15, 38, 47; ii. 265.
Uroukh (or Erech), i. 38;
the stones worshipped in its chief temple, 62.
V
Van, Lake, i. 395; ii. 213;
remains of furniture found there, 314.
Vaults, their common use in Mesopotamia, i. 144;
their construction without centres, 167;
their prevalence in Babylon according to Strabo, 169;
at Firouz-Abad, 169;
at Sarbistan, 169;
of Sargon’s gateways, 224.
Vegetation, marsh, ii. 223.
Ventilating pipes in Chaldæan buildings, i. 157.
Virgil quoted, i. 64.
Vitruvius quoted, i. 116.
Voguë, de M., ii. 314.
Volcanoes in the valley of the Khabour, i. 121.
Volutes, i. 205, 209.
Vulnirari III., ii. 40.
Vulush III., ii. 217.
W
Walls, construction of, i. 147;
height of W. at Khorsabad, 151;
ornamentation of W. at Khorsabad, 151;
of Babylon, as described by Diodorus after Ctesias, 282;
of Dour-Saryoukin, their good preservation, 282;
height of the W. of Babylon, ii. 63.
Warka (the ancient Erech), i. 24, 38, 245, 272;
palace at, ii. 33, 256, 306, 308.
Wedges, the, i. 21;
compared with the hieroglyphs and Chinese characters, 21;
original constitution of, 23;
originally perhaps cut on bark of trees, 27;
terra-cotta peculiarly well adapted for them, 28;
their ideographic origin, 29.
Weights, Mesopotamian, ii. 220.
Wheat, the origin of its cultivation, ii. 399.
Windows, i. 236.
Winged bulls, their height, i. 268;
small model bull from Nimroud, ii. 113.
Wuswas, i. 245, 272, 371; ii. 33.
X
Xenephon, i. 112, 151;
his _Anabasis_ quoted, ii. 59.
Xerxes, ii. 201.
Xisouthros, the Chaldæan Noah, i. 36, 315.
Y
Yang-tse-kiang, ii. 375.
Yezidis, their houses, i. 178;
their religious beliefs, _ib._; ii. 71.
Z
Zab, the great, i. 6; ii. 225.
Zagros, i. 6, 39.
_Zalalu_, i. 345.
Zarpanitu, _see_ Istar.
Zebu, ii. 373.
Zend, the study of, a preparation for deciphering the wedges,
ii. 4.
Zephaniah, quoted, i. 302.
Zeus, i. 369, 374.
_Zigguratt_, _see_ Staged towers.
Zodiac, signs of, origin of, i. 70.
THE END.
LONDON: R. CLAY, SONS, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] RAWLINSON _The Five Great Monarchies_, &c., (4th edition), vol. i.
p. 278.
[2] MILLIN, _Monuments inedits_, vol. i. plates 8 and 9.
[3] _Rheinisches Museum_, 1829, p. 41. This passage will be found in
a note appended by the illustrious historian to a paper by OTTFRIED
MÜLLER, entitled _Sandon und Sardanapal_.
[4] Traces of the excitement caused by these discoveries may be found
in an article written by M. de Longperier in 1845, in which, before
having seen the monuments, he points out the interest and importance of
the discoveries with rare sagacity. The paper in question is entitled
_Ninive et Khorsabad_. It has lately been reprinted in the first volume
(page 34) of his collected works (A. DE LONGPERIER, _Œuvres_, 5 vols.
8vo. Leroux). This first volume bears for sub-title: _Archéologie
orientale: Monuments arabes_.
[5] _Lettre à M. Isidore de Lowenstern sur les Inscriptions cunéiformes
de l’Assyrie_ (_Œuvres_, vol. i. p. 109). M. de Lowenstern had already
by a kind of happy intuition hit upon the name, but without being able
to give a reason for his transliteration.
[6] This latter hypothesis was sustained, with more erudition, perhaps,
than tact or taste, by Dr. Hœfer. A skilful historian of chemistry, he
was by no means an archæologist. He had no feeling for the differences
between one style and another. See the _Memoires sur les Ruines de
Ninive, addressés à l’Académie des Inscriptions, par_ FERD. HŒFER [20th
February and 24th May, 1850]; see especially the second paper: _De
l’Âge et du Caractère des Monuments découverts à Khorsabad, à Nimroud,
à Kouioundjik, à Karamles et à Kaleh-Shergat_, Paris, Didot, 1850. His
assertions were refuted by de Longperier in the first part of his paper
entitled: _Antiquités assyriénnes_, published in 1850, in the _Revue
archéologique_, (_Œuvrcs_, vol. i. p. 139).
[7] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. chapter xi. § 2.
[8] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 38, Esarhaddon was the chief offender
in this respect.
[9] See G. PERROT, _Souvenirs d’un Voyage en Asia Mineure_, p. 50.
[10] This preconceived notion explains the erroneous title he gave to
his great work: _Monument de Ninive, découvert et décrit par_ P. E.
BOTTA, _mesuré et dessiné par_ E. FLANDIN, published at the expense of
the state at the _Imprimerie nationale_, Paris, 1849, 5 vols, folio (1
volume of text, 4 of plates).
[11] The palace platform was not quite in the centre of the
north-western face. The Assyrians were no fonder of a rigid symmetry
than the Egyptians.
[12] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. iii. plate 7.
[13] In this plan the darkest parts are those discovered by M. Botta;
the more lightly shaded lines show the rooms and courts excavated by
his successor.
[14] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. iii. plate 18 _bis._
[15] RAWLINSON (_The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 286), and
LENORMANT (_Historie ancienne_, vol. ii. p. 196) make the two parts of
the platform--the arms of the T and its shank--different in height.
In doing so they have borrowed a mistake from Botta. The mistake is
easily understood in the case of Rawlinson, whose fourth edition,
although published in 1879, reproduces the plans compiled by Fergusson
after Botta. We are more surprised at Lenormant falling into the same
error, as he gives an excellent _résumé_ of Place’s discoveries. Botta
seems to have thought the two parts of the palace had different levels
in consequence of an inequality in the distribution of the fallen
materials. In the neighbourhood of the latter buildings, such as the
so-called _Observatory_, and where the open spaces were fewer and less
ample, there was, of course, a thicker bed of rubbish than where the
buildings were lower and the walls farther apart. But wherever the
original surface of the mound was reached, Place ascertained that its
level never varied. In none of his plans is there the slightest trace
of any slope or staircase leading from one level to the other, so far
as the summit of the platform is concerned.
[16] LAYARD, _Monuments_, 2nd series, plates 14 and 15.
[17] Thomas placed this ramp at the south-east rather than at the
south-west because it seemed better to make it lead direct to H, the
forecourt of the sélamlik, than to break in upon the privacy of the
harem at the opposite corner.
[18] This court was about 206 feet wide, by 366 feet long.
[19] The letters on our plan signify courts, or rooms--like some of
those in the harem--that were only partially roofed in.
[20] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 57.
[21] LENORMANT, _Manuel d’Histoire ancienne_, vol. ii. p.
197.
[22] See Vol. I. page 392.
[23] OPPERT, _Expédition scientitique_, vol. ii. p. 242.
[24] The doorway beside which these artificial palms are raised is that
which leads from the court U to the hall marked Y on the plan. As to
the elements made use of in our restoration, see PLACE, vol. i. pp.
114–127, and vol. ii. p. 35. We have already noticed the discovery of
the metal-sheathed poles (p. 202, and fig. 72).
[25] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. iii. plate 25, fig. 4.
[26] See the _Book of Esther_.
[27] This room corresponds to the apartment in the richer houses of
Mossoul and Bagdad, that goes by the name of _iwan_ or _pichkaneh_.
It is a kind of summer hall, open on one side (OPPERT, _Expédition
scientifique_, vol. i. p. 90).
[28] A minute description of all these offices will be found in PLACE
(_Ninive_, vol. iii. pp. 76–105).
[29] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. pp. 99 and 274.
[30] OPPERT, _Les Inscriptions des Sargonides_, p. 52.
[31] So far as I know, PLACE alone has given this problem a moment’s
attention (_Ninive_, vol. i. p. 279), but nothing could be more
improbable than the hypothesis by which he attempts to solve it. He
suggests that one of the drains of which we have already spoken may
have been a conduit or siphon in communication with some subterranean
reservoir and provided with pumping apparatus at its summit. We have no
evidence whatever that the principle of the suction-pump was known to
the Assyrians.
[32] STRABO (xvi. i. 5) pretends that the hanging gardens of Babylon
were watered by means of the _screw of Archimedes_ (κοχλίας or κόχλος).
If it be true that this invention was known to the Chaldæans, it may
also have been used to raise water to the platforms of the Assyrian
palaces. The discovery, however, is usually attributed to the Sicilian
mathematician, and STRABO’S evidence is too isolated and too recent to
allow us to accept it without question.
[33] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 197.
[34] LOFTUS, _Travels and Researches_, chapter xvi. and especially page
179.
[35] DIODORUS, ii. viii. 3–4.
[36] DIODORUS, ii. viii. 7.
[37] OPPERT, _Expédition scientifique de Mésopotamie_, vol. i. p. 150.
See also LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 508, upon the tradition of the Arabs
relating to the tall tamarisk, the only tree that grows on the summit
of the mound.
[38] J. MÉNANT, _Babylon et la Chaldée_ (1 vol. 8vo. 1875), p. 181.
[39] DIODORUS (ii. 10), speaks of λίθιναι δοκοί, or stone beams, to
which he attributes a length of sixteen feet, and a width of four;
STRABO (xvii. i. 5) makes use of the expression, ψαλιδώματα καμαρωτά,
which means _vaulted arcades_. Both writers agree that there were
several terraces one above another. Diodorus says that the whole--as
seen from the Euphrates no doubt--looked like a theatre. Both give the
same measurements to these hanging gardens; they tell us they made a
square of from three to four plethra each way (410 feet). The mound of
Tell-Amran is much larger than this, and if it really be on the site
of the famous gardens, it must include the ruins of other buildings
besides, pleasure houses, chapels and kiosks, like those figured in the
reliefs, to which we have already had frequent occasion to allude.
[40] LAYARD believes himself to have ascertained that the buildings on
one part of the Nimroud mound were ruined and covered with earth, when
those upon another part of the platform were founded. The paved floor
of the north-western palace is on a level with the upper part of the
walls of the north-eastern and central palaces (_Nineveh_, vol. iii. p.
202).
[41] George SMITH, _Assyrian Discoveries_, (pp. 71–73), gives the
following _résumé_ of the monumental history of Calah, from the
inscriptions found at Nimroud. “A city was built on this spot by
Shalmaneser I., King of Assyria, B.C. 1300, but this afterwards fell
into decay, and was destroyed during the subsequent troubles which
came on the Assyrian Empire. Assurnazirpal, who ascended the Assyrian
throne B.C. 885, resolved to rebuild the city; and bringing numbers
of captives taken during his wars, he set them to work to rebuild
Calah, and then settled there to inhabit it. The north-west palace
and the temples near the tower were the work of this king, and from
these came most of the fine Nimroud sculptures in the British Museum.
Shalmaneser II., King of Assyria, succeeded his father Assurnazirpal,
B.C. 860. He built the centre palace, and the base at least of the
south-eastern palace. Vulnirari III., his grandson, B.C. 812, built
the upper chambers and the temple of Nebo; and Tiglath-pileser II.,
B.C. 745, rebuilt the centre palace. Sargon, King of Assyria, B.C. 722,
restored the north-west palace, and his grandson, Esarhaddon, B.C.
681, built the south-west palace. Lastly the grandson of Esarhaddon,
Assur-ebil-ili, the last King of Assyria, rebuilt the temple of
Nebo just before the destruction of the Assyrian Empire.” A general
description of the platform and the buildings upon it will be found in
LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 653–656.
[42] This idea is favoured by LAYARD (_Discoveries_, p. 654).
[43] The central palace was partly destroyed even in the days of the
Assyrians, by a king who wished to make use of its materials. LAYARD
(_Nineveh_, ii. p. 19) found more than a hundred sculptured slabs
stacked against each other, as if in a warehouse. The architect of
Esarhaddon, the author of this spoliation, had not finished his work
when it was suddenly interrupted. For a full account of the discoveries
in the south-eastern palace, see LAYARD, _Nineveh_, ii. pp. 38–40.
[44] Especially from the central palace (LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p.
656). The small rectangles shown on our plan at each side of the wall
dividing the rooms marked 2 and 3 from each other, represent slabs
lying on the ground at the foot of the wall for whose decoration they
were intended. They were never put in place. The bases of circular
pedestals, standing very slightly above the ground, are also marked.
Sir H. Layard could not divine their use.
[45] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 25, 26, and 29.
[46] For an account of the excavations see LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. i.
pp. 34, 39, 46, 59–62, 347–350; vol. ii. pp. 25–36.
[47] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 14–16.
[48] All the passages by ancient writers bearing on the subject will be
found collected in the first of those articles of HŒFER, of which we
have already had occasion to speak. Its title is: _Textes anciens sur
l’Histoire et la Position de Ninive_. It is certain that even in the
Roman period its site was not positively known. Lucian, who was born
at Samosata, less than a hundred leagues from Nineveh, says: “Nineveh
has perished; no trace of it remains, and we cannot say where it stood”
(_Charon_, c. xxiii).
[49] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 137.
[50] The plan in which LAYARD shows the results of his two digging
campaigns will be found in the _Discoveries_, facing page 67. For the
excavations at Kouyundjik see also his _Nineveh_, vol. ii. chapter
xiv, and _Discoveries_, pp. 67–76, 102–120, 135–161, 228–233, 337–347,
438–463, 582–588, and 645–652. Layard attempts to give a general idea
of the palace and of its decorations. There is also much detailed
information regarding this building in RAWLINSON’S _Five Great
Monarchies_, vol. ii. pp. 178–133.
[51] The only details that have been given, so far as we know, of the
discovery and exhumation of Assurbanipal’s palace, are to be found in
an article by Mr. Rassam entitled: _Excavations and Discoveries in
Assyria_ (_Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archæology_, vol.
vii. pp. 37–58). This paper contains a plan of the northern palace (p.
40).
[52] “Ervil is the site of the Assyrian city of Arbela, and in the
plains outside it was fought the great battle between Alexander and
Darius. I had no time to examine the place, but I saw in passing that
there were mounds rivalling in size those of the Assyrian capital. Over
the principal mound a Turkish fortress is built, which would make it
difficult to excavate here; but as Arbela was a great city, much may
be expected here whenever it is explored.” GEORGE SMITH, _Assyrian
Discoveries_, p. 67.
[53] See the article by Mr. Rassam quoted on the last page. The plan
(p. 52) he gives does not tell us much.
[54] See LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 45–63; and _Discoveries_, p.
581.
[55] See PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 169.
[56] It is in chapters xi. to xiv. of his second work (_Discoveries_,
&c.) that LAYARD tells the story of his discoveries in that valley of
the Chaboras from which the writings of Ezekiel were dated.
[57] See page 145.
[58] We have noticed at pages 176 and 177 of our first volume the two
passages in which Strabo discusses the houses of Susiana and Chaldæa.
As to the villages in the Euphrates valley, in which domes are still
used, see OPPERT, _Expédition scientifique_, vol. i. p. 46.
[59] HERODOTUS, i. 180.
[60] DIODORUS, ii. viii. 4, 5.
[61] G. SMITH, _Assyrian Discoveries_, pp. 55, 56. M. OPPERT also
admits that this is the only city that has left traces that cannot
easily be mistaken. (_Expedition scientifique_, vol. i. pp. 194, 195.)
[62] HERODOTUS, i. 178.
[63] DIODORUS, ii. vii. 3. The following passage has been quoted
from ARISTOTLE’S _Politics_ (iii. 1), as supporting the assertion
of Diodorus: “It is obvious that a town is not made by a wall; one
might, if that were so, make the Peloponnesus into a town, Babylon,
perhaps, and some other towns belong to this class, their _enceinte_
inclosing towns rather than cities.” The text of Aristotle seems to me
to prove nothing more than that the philosopher was acquainted with
the descriptions of Diodorus and Ctesias. He says nothing as to their
exactness; he merely borrows an illustration from them, by which he
attempts to make his thought more clear, and to explain the difference
between a real city with an organic life of its own, and a mere space
surrounded by walls, in which men might live in close neighbourhood
with each other, but with nothing that could be called civic life. All
the texts relating to the ancient boundaries of Babylon will be found
united in M. OPPERT’S examination of this question.
[64] Even now the wall of the Royal City stands up more than thirty
feet above the level of the plain.
[65] HERODOTUS says nothing of the tunnel; DIODORUS alone mentions it
(ii. ix. 2). See OPPERT on this subject. He believes in its existence
(_Expédition scientifique_, vol. i. p. 193).
[66] HERODOTUS, i. 186; DIODORUS, ii. viii. 2. Diodorus, following
Ctesias, greatly exaggerates the length of the bridge when he puts it
at fifty-five stades (3,032 feet). Even if we admit that the Euphrates,
which in ancient times lost less of its waters in the adjoining marshes
than it does now, was then considerably wider than at present, we can
hardly account for such a difference. On the subject of this bridge see
OPPERT, _Expédition_ &c., vol. i. pp. 191–193.
[67] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 489.
[68] See OPPERT, _Expédition_ &c., vol. i. pp. 184, 185. HERODOTUS
mentions these quays (ii. 180, 186). DIODORUS (ii. viii. 3), gives
them a length of 160 stades (nearly 18½ miles), which seems a great
exaggeration.
[69] HERODOTUS, i. 180.
[70] And this makes us think that the streets were narrow, a conjecture
confirmed by the words of Herodotus. In speaking of the doors above
mentioned by which the river was reached, he does not use the word
πύλαι, but πυλίδες, its diminutive. If these doors were so small, the
streets must have been lanes.
[71] This we gather from more than one phrase of the historian (ii. 183
and 196).
[72] DIODORUS, ii. viii, 3
[73] All that he says is that it was on the Tigris (i. 193), that it
had a king called Sardanapalus (ii. 150), and that it was taken by the
Medes (i. 103, 106).
[74] _Anabasis_, iii. 4.
[75] DIODORUS, ii. iii. 2, 3.
[76] Line 35 of the _Cylinder of Bellino_, after Pongnon
(_l’Inscription de Bavian_, p. 25, in the _Bibliothèque de l’École des
Hautes-Études_).
[77] M. OPPERT also considers the evidence of Ctesias as worthless
(_Expédition scientifique_, vol. i. p. 292). Sir HENRY LAYARD on the
other hand believes in the great Nineveh of that writer (_Nineveh_,
vol. ii. p. 243). He is chiefly influenced by the often quoted verses
of the Book of Jonah, in which it is declared: “Now Nineveh was an
exceeding great city of three days’ journey,” and that there were in it
“more than six-score thousand persons that cannot discern between their
right hand and their left hand,” which, with the ordinary proportion of
children to adults, would give a total population of about 800,000. We
shall not waste time in explaining that all these expressions are but
poetic ways of saying that Nineveh was a great city. It is a singular
idea to look for topographical and statistical information in a book
which makes a prophet sail from Joppa for Spain and, immediately
afterwards, without any preparation, speaks of him as preaching in the
streets of Nineveh. Add to this that, according to the most recent
criticism, the Book of Jonah is not older than the sixth century before
our era, so that it must have been written long after the fall of
Nineveh, and when its power was no more than a memory (see NŒLDEKE,
_Histoire littéraire de l’Ancien Testament_, p. 116). [In Sir H.
Layard’s latest published remarks on the extent of Nineveh, he rejects
the statements of Diodorus for much the same reasons as those given by
M. Perrot (article on _Nineveh_ in Smith’s _Dictionary of the Bible_,
1863 edition).--ED.]
[78] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, vol. v. p. 21. OPPERT, _Expédition_,
vol. i. p. 292. LAYARD, vol. ii. p. 243. The English explorers have
found traces of some external works and of a ditch which is now
filled with the waters of the Khausser. RAWLINSON, _The Five Great
Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 259–261.
[79] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 120–122.
[80] It has no scale.
[81] HERODOTUS, i. 178.
[82] HERODOTUS, i. 179. Herodotus says that the Chaldæans _constructed
buildings of a single chamber along each parapet of the wall, leaving
room between them_ for a four-horse chariot to turn. His words are:
ὲπάνω δὲ τοῦ τείχεος παρὰ τὰ ἔσχατα, οἰκήματα μουνόκωλα ἔδειμαν,
τετραμμένα ἐς ἄλληλα· τὸ μέσον δὲ τῶν οἰκημάτων ἔλιπον τεθρίππῳ
περιέλασιν.--ED.
[83] DIODORUS, ii. vii. 4.
[84] In many carved pictures of sieges we see soldiers who appear to
be digging mines (LAYARD, _Monuments_, series i. plates 19, 20, 66.
RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 473).
[85] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 165; vol. ii. p. 11.
[86] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. pp. 197–198.
[87] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, Vol. I. p. 342.
[88] See Vol. I. Page 242, and Fig. 97.
[89] All these details are taken from PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. pp.
169–182.
[90] _Genesis_ xix. 1.
[91] _Genesis_ xxiii. 10.
[92] _Ruth_ iv. 1 and 2.
[93] See also 2 Kings vii. 1.--ED.
[94] _Esther_ ii. 21.
[95] _Esther_ iii. 2, 3, iv. 2, 6.
[96] At Semil, to the north of Mossoul, Layard saw the Yezidi chief,
“Abde Agha, seated in the gate, a vaulted entrance with deep recesses
on both sides, used as places of assembly for business during the day,
and as places of rest for guests during the night.”--_Discoveries_, p.
57.
[97] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 186.
[98] It is even believed that the Assyrians used a machine for
launching great stones, like the Roman catapult. The representations
in the bas-reliefs are not, however, very clear. RAWLINSON, _The Five
Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 472.
[99] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 196. Causeways of this kind may be
noticed stretching away from the tower in our Fig. 29. See also LAYARD,
_Monuments_, 2nd series, plates 18 and 21.
[100] A few terra-cotta statuettes have certainly been found, but these
seem to be idols rather than images of the defunct.
[101] The ordinary and principal office of the human-headed bull,
was to guard the doors of temples and palaces, but in his _rôle_ of
protecting genius, other functions were included. Thus, in a bas-relief
representing Sargon’s campaigns in Phœnicia, we find a bull that seems
to be walking on the sea. With Anon, Oannes, or Dagon, the fish-god, he
presides over the journeys of the ships that bring cargoes of wood from
Lebanon (BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plate 32).
[102] M. LENORMANT has collected these texts in his _Origines de
l’Histoire_, vol. i. p. 115.
[103] This must represent one of the favourite rites of the
Chaldæo-Assyrian religion, allusion to it is made in the passage given
as a letter of Jeremiah (BARUCH vi. 25): “Now shall ye see in Babylon
gods of silver, and of gold, and of wood, borne upon shoulders, which
cause the nations to fear.”
[104] CHABOUILLET (_Catalogue général des Camées de la Bibliothèque
nationale_, No. 754) proposes to recognize in the scene here
represented the offering of his nightly spouse to Bel in his temple
at Babylon (HERODOTUS, i. 181). M. LENORMANT agrees with this
interpretation (_Essai de commentaire des Fragments de Bérose_, p.
374). MÉNANT, on the other hand, thinks it as little justified as
that which finds the early scenes of Genesis--the temptation of Eve,
and the eating of the forbidden fruit--reproduced upon the cylinders
(_Remarques sur un cylindre du Musée Britannique, in the Comptes rendus
de l’Académie des Inscriptions_, 1879, pp. 270–286).
[105] In the great stone torso of which we shall speak presently (p.
98), these details seem to have been omitted; at least no trace of them
is to be found on the stone; but they may have been added in paint. In
figures of men the Assyrians very rarely indicated the male organs. One
of the personages sculptured on the Balawat gates affords an exception
to this general practice, but he is a prisoner about to be put to
death, and the detail in question is a kind of indignity meant by the
sculptor to show that the man in question was a savage who fought in
_puris naturalibus_.
[106] Among the Lydians, says Herodotus, in his account of the
adventure of Gyges (i. 10), “As among nearly all barbarous nations, it
was a great indignity, even for a man, to be seen naked.” Conf. PLATO,
_Republic_, 452, c; THUCYDIDES, i. 6; XENOPHON, _Hellenica_, iii. iv.
19.
[107] HERODOTUS, i. 195; “As for their dress they wore a linen tunic
coming down to their feet, and, over that, a woollen tunic. Finally
they wrapped themselves in a short white cloak.”
[108] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. fig. 98.
[109] HEUZEV, _Les fouilles de Chaldée_, p. 13.
[110] See _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. fig. 255; vol. ii. figs. 247,
259, &c.
[111] _Ibid._ vol. ii. plate facing p. 334, and figs. 268, 269.
[112] See LAYARD, _Monuments_, 1st series, plates 15 and 16.
[113] In one relief the figures of these swimmers are no more than
fourteen inches long (British Museum, Assyrian Basement room, No. 56).
[114] LAYARD, _Monuments_, 1st series, plate 57; 2nd series, plates 25
and 28.
[115] _Ibid._ (1st series), plate 63; _Discoveries_, p. 457.
[116] We have refrained from giving a reproduction of this fragment on
account of its bad condition. Its surface is rough; it lacks the head,
the forearms and the foreparts of the feet. The material is a coarse
limestone. The height of the fragment is thirty-eight inches.
[117] No people that have ever lived have been more solicitous than
the Assyrians to transmit the remembrance of their exploits to
posterity. We thus find that many of their sculptured slabs had their
posterior faces, those that were turned to the wall, also covered with
inscriptions.
[118] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 437.
[119] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 448.
[120] British Museum. The whole series is illustrated in LAYARD,
_Monuments_, 2nd series, plates 20–24.
[121] Sir H. LAYARD’S translation is different (_Discoveries_, p. 152).
That quoted in the text has been kindly furnished to us by M. Oppert.
[122] Sir H. LAYARD, who has seen more Assyrian sculptures in
place than any one else, seems to have been much struck by these
incongruities. “It is rare,” he says, “to find an entire (Assyrian)
bas-relief equally well executed in all its parts” (_Nineveh_, vol. ii.
p. 78).
[123] This impression is still more strongly felt on glancing through
the plates in which Sir H. LAYARD has reproduced in their entirety the
series of sculptures which we can only show in fragmentary fashion.
Compare, for example, the Panathenaic _cortége_ with two processions
taken from the palace of Sennacherib, the grooms leading horses, and
servants carrying fruits and other comestibles (_Monuments_, 2nd
series, plates 7–9), and the triumphal march of the Assyrian army with
its chariots (_ib._ plates 47–49).
[124] LAYARD, _Monuments_, 2nd series, plates 45 and 46.
[125] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 302–314.
[126] At Nimroud, in the palace of Esarhaddon, the lions and bulls
of the gateways are of a grey and rather coarse limestone, while the
bas-reliefs are of alabaster (LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 26 and
163). The same mixture occurs in the palace of Assurnazirpal. Several
of the bulls in that building are of a fine yellow limestone which must
have been brought from the hills of Kurdistan (LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol.
ii. p. 315).
[127] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 316; _Discoveries_, pp. 307, 308,
309, &c.
[128] Each side of the original has five reliefs. We have been
compelled to suppress one in order to give our figures sufficient scale.
[129] The obelisk reliefs should be studied in horizontal bands, and
not by taking the whole of a face at a time. A translation of the
accompanying texts will be found in OPPERT’S _Expédition_, vol. i;
and reproductions of all the four faces in LAYARD’S _Monuments_, 1st
series, plates 53–56.
[130] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i, p. 150, and vol. iii. plate 48, fig. 3.
[131] HEUZEY, _Catalogue des figurines en terre cuite du musée du
Louvre_, vol. i. p. 26.
[132] HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, &c., p. 18.
[133] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 375.
[134] Both the British Museum and the Louvre possess examples of this
kind of work in which the handling shows the greatest freedom.
[135] The slab numbered 107 contains, perhaps, the nearest approach to
a reproduction of the group in question.
[136] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 197–203, and figs. 179 and
180.
[137] This was the opinion of M. DE LONGPÉRIER (_Musée Napoléon III._,
description of plate 1).
[138] See vol. i. page 242.
[139] See also plate xii.
[140] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 563.
[141] DE LONGPÉRIER, _Notice des antiquités assyriennes du Musée du
Louvre_, 3rd edition, 1854.
[142] We take this transcription from a note sent by Dr. BIRCH to the
_Athenæum_ (14 July, 1877), when the ivory in question, together with
many more objects, was stolen from the British Museum. It was offered
by the thief, in the first place, to M. de Longpérier, who thought it
a forgery, and afterwards to the keeper of the Hague Museum, who, put
on his guard by the publicity which by that time had been given to the
theft, detained the piece and restored it to its legitimate owners.
[143] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 293–295.
[144] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 361. The same characteristics may be
recognized in the alabaster statues found by PLACE in one of the harem
courts at Khorsabad (_Ninive_, vol. i. pp. 122–125, and vol. iii. plate
31, _bis_.). They are shown on a small scale in our fig. 197 (vol. i.).
We may see that they were set with their backs against a wall, and that
they carried a cushion on their heads, on which we have placed a vase
of flowers. These statues were drowned in the Tigris!
[145] We may also quote the following monuments as examples of Assyrian
statues: 1. The fragment of a seated statue found at Kaleh-Shergat,
which we figure on page 127 (LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 51–52).
2. The head of a statue of Istar, discovered at Kouyundjik (SMITH,
_Assyrian Discoveries_, pp. 248 and 430). This head is about nine
inches high. 3. Fragment of a colossal statue of shelly limestone,
found in the same place by the same explorer (_ibid._ p. 430). It
consists only of a part of the left shoulder. There is an inscription
on the back tracing the descent of Assurbanipal from Sargon.
[146] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 284–288; vol. i. fig. 173,
and vol. ii. fig. 240.
[147] E. GUILLAUME, in his _Considérations sur les Principes de
l’Histoire du Bas-relief_, which was read at the annual public meeting
of the five Academies in Paris on the 14th August, 1866, (Didot, 4to.).
[148] Vol. I. page 266.
[149] In this particular, the two large bulls from Khorsabad in the
British Museum are better placed than the pair in the Louvre. Their
position at the entrance to the Khorsabad Transept (?), gives an exact
idea of their original arrangement.--ED.
[150] It must not be thought, however, that its employment was
universal. In the palace of Sennacherib, at Kouyundjik, and in one of
the palaces at Nimroud, the bulls had only four legs.
[151] See PERROT and GUILLAUME, _Expédition archéologique de la
Galatie_, vol. i. pp. 345, 346, and vol. ii. plate 57.
[152] This contrivance may also be seen on the small limestone stele,
covered with writing, which represents Assurbanipal carrying a basket
on his head, and preparing to make an offering to the gods (British
Museum, Assyrian Side Room).
[153] Look for instance at the last figure but one, on the right, in
PLACE, vol. iii. plate 60, fig. 4. It is that of a man turning to speak
to one who follows him. The feet are turned in one direction, and the
head in one diametrically opposite to it. Nothing more ungraceful could
be conceived.
[154] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. fig. 98; vol. ii. figs. 250, 254,
255, &c.
[155] _Ibid._ p. 294.
[156] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 185–196, plates ix. x. xi.
and figs. 172, 173, 174, 178, 183, 198, 199, 205, 208, 213, 214, 215,
216, 223, &c.
[157] _Ibid._ figs. 273–275.
[158] _Ibid._ p. 192.
[159] An almost unique exception to this rule occurs in those
bas-reliefs in the British Museum which represent the great hunts of
Assurbanipal. We there see a company of beardless individuals marching,
bare-headed, dressed in a short tunic and armed with lance and buckler.
But this is an apparent rather than a real exception. The chase is
not war. These men are not soldiers, but attendants on the hunt, an
inferior kind of _shikarrie_. In the battle pieces we sometimes see the
eunuchs attached to the king’s person fighting at his elbow.
[160] We have no reason to believe that the Egyptian fashion of wearing
wigs obtained in Assyria (LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 327, 378).
HERODOTUS tells us that in his time the Chaldæans wore long hair (i.
195).
[161] This is the opinion of M. LENORMANT (_Gazette des Beaux Arts_,
vol. xxv. pp. 218–225), and M. MÉNANT has upheld the same thesis in a
paper read before the Académie des Inscriptions (_Remarques sur des
Portraits des Rois Assyro-Chaldéens_, in the _Comptes Rendus_ for 1881,
pp. 254–267).
[162] On this point again I regret to be unable to agree with M.
MÉNANT; I am unable to perceive any of the differences of which he
speaks (see p. 258 of his paper).
[163] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. ii. p. 500.
[164] Upon the discovery of these figures and their nature, see LAYARD,
_Discoveries_, p. 230.
[165] Layard, _Nineveh_, vol. i. pp. 126–127. The English explorer
himself remarks in speaking of this relief, that the features of the
men show nothing of the special type which the artist endeavoured to
suggest by this clumsy expedient.
[166] This is what M. MÉNANT sees in this Babylonian stele: “It
represents a race with a short, thickset body, a short neck buried
between the shoulders, a flat nose and thick lips” (p. 259 of his
paper).
[167] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 537.
[168] HERODOTUS, i. 192.
[169] LOFTUS gives a poor reproduction of this monument, which he found
at Sinkara (_Travels_, &c., p. 258). We have not reproduced it, because
it is in much worse condition than the terra-cotta dog.
[170] HERODOTUS, i. 193.
[171] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 234. Upon
each of these figures appears the dog’s name, which always bears some
relation to the qualities he displayed in the performance of his duties.
[172] This relief is figured in RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_,
vol. i. p. 356.
[173] W. HOUGHTON, _On the Mammalia of the Assyrian Sculptures_ in
the _Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archæology_, vol. v. pp.
33–64, and 579–583.
[174] We are tempted to believe that these animals were exterminated
before the days of the Sargonids by the unrelenting pursuit to
which they were subjected; they are not to be found in the pictures
of Assurbanipal’s hunts. On the other hand, in the palace of
Assurnazirpal, which dates from two centuries earlier, they were
figured with peculiar insistence and in great detail (LAYARD,
_Monuments_, first series, plates 11, 12, 32, 43–44, 46, 48 and 49).
[175] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 351; LAYARD,
_Monuments_, first series, plate 58. Second series, plates 26 and 29.
[176] LAYARD, _Monuments_, first series, plates 58 and 60.
[177] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 233.
[178] Among the reliefs in which the Assyrian horse may be best
studied, are the slabs from the palace of Sennacherib, in which a
string of horses led by grooms are shown (LAYARD, _Monuments_, second
series, plate 7). They have no trappings or clothing of any kind to
hide their form.
[179] Other incidents, figured with no less spirit, will be found in
RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 355, 356; 516, 517.
[180] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 21, _Monuments_, first series,
plate 61; second series, plate 50. BOTTA (_Monuments de Ninive_, plate
128), reproduces a group of camels sketched with a light hand, but with
much truth and judgment.
[181] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 433. All four faces of this
obelisk are reproduced on plates 53–56 of the first series of LAYARD’S
_Monuments_.
[182] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 40 and 350;
and LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 109.
[183] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 434, 435.
[184] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 436. The Assyrians seem to
have been much struck with these apes when they first appeared at
Calah. This is shown by the care expended upon them by the sculptor
of Shalmaneser’s obelisk; he has reproduced the bas-relief of
Assurnazirpal on a smaller scale (LAYARD, _Monuments_, first series,
Plate 55).
[185] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 437.
[186] LAYARD, _Monuments_, series ii. plates 32 (Khorsabad), and 40
(Kouyundjik).
[187] A lion hunt is to be found in the bas-reliefs of Assurnazirpal,
dating from the ninth century, B.C. (LAYARD, _Monuments_, first series,
plates 10 and 31); but it is especially in those of Assurbanipal (7th
century), that the animal becomes so conspicuous.
[188] On the subject of these great hunts and their arrangements,
see RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 505–512. The
custom is still kept up in Eastern countries, and their _personnel_ is
pretty much the same as it was in antiquity. See CHARDIN, _Voyage en
Perse_ (Langles’ edition), vol. iii. p. 399; and ROUSSELET, _L’Inde des
Rajahs_, pp. 202, 464, 468.
[189] These caged lions are only found in the bas-reliefs of
Assurbanipal. The number of lions killed between the eleventh and
seventh centuries B.C. must have been something extraordinary.
Tiglath-Pileser I. boasts in one of his inscriptions of having done
eight hundred lions to death. In time they must have become rare in
Assyria. They must then have been brought from Chaldæa or Susiana,
where they have always been more abundant, and transported to the north
in carts, cages and all, there to afford sport for the king. In our day
lions are hardly to be found higher up the Tigris than Bagdad; but on
the Euphrates they occur much farther north, as far as Bir and all over
the valley of the Khabour (LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 48). They are
most numerous in the marshes of the lower Euphrates, where they were
hunted in boats by the kings of Assyria (RAWLINSON, _The Five Great
Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 361 and 508). Most of the lions of Mesopotamia
have very little mane, but a few have been encountered here and there
in which that feature is largely developed. These seem to have been
chosen as models by the Assyrian artists.
[190] In one single series of these reliefs, there are eleven lions
killed and seven terribly wounded.
[191] The king sometimes found himself engaged with a lion at
the closest quarters. In an inscription on one of these reliefs,
Assurbanipal thus expresses himself. “I, Assurbanipal, king of the
nations, king of Assyria, fighting on foot in my great courage with a
lion of terrifying size, I seized him by the ear(!), and, in the name
of Assur and Istar, goddess of war, I put an end to his life with the
lance I held in my hand.” (FOX TALBOT in the _Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society_, vol. xix. p. 272).
[192] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 487. As to the part played by the
lion in the ceremonies of the present court of Abyssinia, see GEORGES
PERROT, _Les Fouilles de M. de Sarzec en Chaldée_, pp. 532, 534, of the
_Revue des deux Mondes_ for October 1, 1882.
[193] The same rock may be identified in the fragments from Tello.
There is a kind of cylindrical base in the Louvre, which appears to
have been cut from a material differing in no respect from that of the
object figured above. Lions’ heads appear upon it also.
[194] Upon the employment of the head and paws of the lion as an
ornament, see also LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 301.
[195] In the inventory this monument is described as acquired in Syria,
that is to say it was bought from M. Peretié, at Beyrout. M. Peretié
was a well-known collector, and objects found in Mesopotamia were
continually brought to him from Mossoul, Bagdad, and Bassorah. There
can be no doubt as to the origin of this little monument; the execution
is certainly Chaldæan or Assyrian. The same monster, rampant, is to
be found on the Assyrian cylinder described by M. Lenormant under
the title, _Le Dieu-lune délivré de l’Attaque des mauvais Esprits_
(_Gazette archéologique_, 1878, p. 20).
[196] As to where this colossus was found, see LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol.
i. p. 68.
[197] DE LONGPERIER, _Deux bronzes Antiques de Van_ (in his _Œuvres_,
vol. i. pp. 275–278).
[198] In de Longperier’s reproduction of one of these figures, the ring
attached to its back is shown.
[199] G. PERROT, _Les Fouilles de M. de Sarzec en Chaldée_, in the
_Revue des deux Mondes_, for October 1, 1882. A methodical account of
the whole enterprise will be found in a forthcoming work, which will
bear for title: _Découvertes en Chaldée_, par M. E. DE SARZEC, _ouvrage
publié par les soins de la conservation des antiquités orientales au
Musée du Louvre_. Its quarto size will make it a more convenient work
than those of Botta and Place. The illustrations will be produced by
the Dujardin heliogravure process.
[200] Saïd-Hassan and Chatra, of which we have made use to give some
approximate idea as to where Tello is situated, are marked upon the map
given by LOFTUS (_Travels and Researches_, &c.).
[201] Vol. I. Chap. I. § 4.
[202] M. OPPERT believes that he has discovered in the inscriptions
of Gudea, proof that the stone he employed came from Egypt. We cannot
attempt to discuss the phrases which seem to him to bear that sense.
We have some difficulty, however, in believing either that they took
the trouble to transport such ponderous blocks across the desert, or
that they sent them on a voyage round the whole peninsula of Arabia,
a voyage that must have lasted some months, and that when similar
materials were within reach. See what Mr. TAYLOR says about the
district which is called _Hedjra_ (heap of stones, from _Hadjar_,
stone), from the numerous masses of black granite that may be found
there. This district is almost opposite _Schenafieh_, not far from
_Bahr-ul-nejef_ (_Notes on Abou-Sharein_, p. 404, of vol. xv, of the
Royal Asiatic Society’s _Journal_).
[203] HEUZEY, _Les Fouilles de la Chaldée_, p. 16 (extracted from the
_Revue archéologique_ for January, 1881).
[204] Perhaps we should rather give the Chaldæan artist the credit
of having produced a not untruthful bird’s-eye view. The bodies in
the sepulchre are evidently stretched side by side, and they diminish
in size from front to back, as their distance from the eye of the
spectator increases. The two living men are mounting upon the edge, or
wall, of the grave, an edge such as the tomb figured on p. 358 of Vol.
I. (Fig. 164) must have had before its lid was put on. In these two
figures there is an unmistakable attempt to give the effect of distance
in varying their size. A curious detail in this relief is the post with
a rope knotted round it that appears in the lower left hand corner.--Ed.
[205] It has been thought that the inscriptions contain proof, that,
during the period, to which this primitive art belongs, Sirtella was
the capital of a small independent kingdom, while the title of Gudea
(_patési_, or governor) would seem to show that in his time it formed
part of a larger state. Gudea can only have been a great feudatory; his
position must have been similar to the nome princes in Egypt. HEUZEY,
in the _Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions_ for 18 August,
1882.
[206] A tenth statue of Gudea, very much mutilated, is not yet
exhibited. There is also the lower part of a small seated statue,
without inscription.
[207] The great seated statue that occupies the middle of the room is
five feet three inches in height, and has no head. One of the standing
statues is four feet eight inches high. The one figured in our Plate
VI. is only four feet two inches. The small statue called the architect
(Fig. 96) is three feet one inch. It will be seen that some of these
figures are over, and some under, life-size; one only, if we allow for
the head, will correspond with what we may call the height of a man.
[208] Letter from M. de Sarzec read to the Académie des Inscriptions on
the 2nd December, 1881 (reprinted in HEUZEY, _Fouilles de Chaldée_).
[209] On the knees of these seated figures we find the scale, the
stylus and the plan of a fortified city that we explained on pages 327
and 328 of our first volume.
[210] HEUZEY, _Les Fouilles de Chaldée_, p. 12.
[211] Some may be inclined to think that the bald head may once have
been protected by a covering cut from a separate block. This idea was
suggested to us by the existence in the British Museum of a kind of
wig of black stone (Nimroud Gallery, case H). It is carved to imitate
hair, and, in front, has a kind of crest, the whole being cut from one
piece of stone. It may have been used to surmount a limestone figure,
and the contrast between the light colour of the one material, and
the blackness of the other would be neither unpleasant nor unfitting.
In another case (A) of the same gallery, we find beards and wigs made
some of glass, others of a sandy frit imitating lapis-lazuli. The use
of these disconnected pieces must then have been very widespread. But
we doubt whether the Tello head ever had such a covering, because that
part of its surface which would in such a case have been hidden from
sight, is finished with the same care as all the rest. If the artist
had included a wig in his calculations, would he have taken the pains
he did with the modelling and polishing of the cranium?
[212] In the sculptures representing the erection of Sennacherib’s
palace, many of the workmen have their heads protected from the sun
by a turban resembling that of the Tello statue. This can hardly be
clearly seen in small scale reproductions (Vol. I. Figs. 151 and 152),
but LAYARD gives two of these heads on the original scale, for the
express purpose of calling attention to their singular head-dress
(_Monuments_, series ii. plate 16).
[213] Here M. HEUZEY answers M. Ménant, who thought he could discover
in these two heads that the sculptor’s models had not been Semites,
but belonged to the primitive race, of Turanians, no doubt, by whom
the Chaldæan civilization was founded (_Les Fouilles de M. de Sarzec
en Mesopotamia_, in the number for December, 1880, of the _Gazette des
Beaux-Arts_).
[214] HEUZEY, _Les Fouilles_, &c., p. ii.
[215] HEUZEY, _Les Fouilles de Chaldée_, pp. 13, 14.
[216] DE LONGPÉRIER, _Musée Napoléon III._, plate 2.
[217] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. fig. 271.
[218] HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, p. 32.
[219] HEUZEY, _Les Fouilles de la Chaldée_, p. 15.
[220] We may give as an instance the very small fragment of a relief in
white stone, representing the Indian humped bull, the _zebu_, which has
also been met with in the Assyrian bas-reliefs. The treatment is very
fine.
[221] See DE LONGPERIER, _Monuments antiques de la Chaldée decouverts
et rapportés par M. de Sarzec_ (_Œuvres_, vol. i. p. 335). The learned
archæologist, of whom the writing of this paper was one of the last
occupations, saw in this fragment evidence of worship rendered to the
great rivers that watered and fertilized Mesopotamia; the double stream
of water is the symbol of _Naharaim_, or “the two rivers,” a symbol
whose presence in other objects from the same region he points out.
[222] LOFTUS (_Travels_, p. 116), describes a statue of black granite
that he found at Hammam in lower Chaldæa. So far as we can tell from
his short description, it must bear no slight resemblance to the Tello
statues. The right shoulder was bare and had an inscription engraved
upon it. The rest of the figure was clothed, and the hands were crossed
upon the knees. The head was missing. At Warka the same traveller saw
a bas-relief representing a man striking an animal; it was of basalt
and was broken into several pieces. Among the objects acquired in 1877
by the British Museum, I find mentioned “a fragment of black granite
or basalt, which seems to belong to a statue of Hammourabi, king of
Babylon about 1,500 years before our era.” (_Account of the Income and
Expenditure of the British Museum for 1878._) Is not this the broken
statue which now figures in the gallery under the name of Gudea? At
the first moment the inscription may not have been readily deciphered;
the summary report presented to Parliament seems, indeed, to name
Hammourabi with some hesitation.
[223] This type comes from Tello. Among the statuettes found there by
M. de Sarzec, there were some in which it was reproduced, but they were
all inferior to the example figured above. LAYARD found statuettes
inspired by the same motive in a mound near Bagdad (_Discoveries_, p.
477).
[224] HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, p. 30.
[225] _Ibid._ p. 35.
[226] LAYARD found this type near Bagdad (_Discoveries_, p. 477), and
LOFTUS encountered a great number of examples in his explorations at
Susa (_Travels_, &c., p. 379). Those brought by him to London are
quite similar to the statuette in the Louvre that we have chosen for
reproduction (HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, p. 32).
[227] In the case of the _Caillou Michaux_, this has been clearly
established by M. OPPERT (_Expédition scientifique_, vol. i. pp. 253,
254). He remarks that the betrothed of the person who had caused the
stone to be cut, is spoken of as a “native of the town of Sargon;” so
that the stone must be later than the end of the eighth century, B.C.
And all the monuments belonging to this class bear such a strong mutual
resemblance, that their dates cannot be very widely separated. They are
reproduced on a large scale, both texts and figures, in the _Cuneiform
inscriptions of Western Asia_, vol. iii. plates 41–45, and vol. iv.
plates 41–43. We have reproduced two, in vol. i. fig. 10, and above,
fig. 43.
[228] According to MILLIN, who was the first to draw attention to this
monument, its material is a black marble; it would be a mistake to
call it basalt (_Monuments antique inedits_, vol. i. p. 60, note 6).
The inscription on the _Caillou Michaux_ has been translated by OPPERT
(_Chronologie des Assyriens et des Babylonians_, p. 40), and by FOX
TALBOT in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_, vol. xviii. pp.
53–75. [There is a cast of this _Caillou_ in the Assyrian Side Room at
the British Museum.--ED.]
[229] The weight of these objects was in itself sufficient to prevent
them being easily removed. The _Caillou Michaux_ weighs rather more
than 70 lbs.
[230] HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, p. 32.
[231] Ἔστι δὲ τοῦ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι ἱροῦ καὶ ἄλλος κάτω νηός, ἔνθα ἄγαλμα
μέγα τοῦ Διὸς ἔνι κατήμενον χρύσεον (i. 183).
[232] Ἐπ’ ἄκρας τῆς ἀναβάσεως τρία κατέσκευασεν ἀγάλματα χρυσὰ
σφυρήλατα, Διός, Ἥρας, Ῥέας. DIODORUS, ii. ix. 5–8.
[233] _The Five Great Monarchies_, &c., vol. ii. p. 79.
[234] See _ante_.
[235] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 5.
[236] For the reasons which led him to take this step, see the
Introduction to the first series of plates published in the _Monuments_.
[237] The original arrangement of these things is shown in the second
series of LAYARD’S _Monuments_, plate 4.
[238] We have round-headed steles of Assurnazirpal, of Shalmaneser II.,
of Samas-vul II., and of Sargon. Those of other princes are figured in
the reliefs. In the Balawat gates we find Shalmaneser erecting them
wherever his conquests led him (plate 12).
[239] We have not copied the uniform dark green tint forced upon the
English publication by the necessity for printing in one colour. We
have borrowed from the fragments in the possession of M. Schlumberger
the broken hues of the patina deposited upon the bronze by age, a
patina which has, perhaps, been too much removed by the cleaning to
which the pieces in London have been subjected.
[240] In page 3 of his Introduction, Mr. PINCHES speaks of a “crocodile
and a young hippopotamus.” I do not think that either of those animals
can ever have lived in the cold waters of Lake Van, which receives, in
the spring, such a large quantity of melted snow.
On the other hand, the argument applied by M. Perrot to architectural
forms (see vol. i. pp. 139 (note 2) and 395), may here be invoked by
Mr. Pinches. It is more likely that the artist introduced such animals
as were to be found in the rivers and meres of Mesopotamia, than that
he ascertained how Lake Van was peopled before he began his work.--ED.
[241] In order that we might give two interesting subjects on a single
page, we have here brought together two divisions that do not belong to
the same band in the original.
[242] HERODOTUS, i. 184.
[243] In repeating this hypothesis we have followed Professor RAWLINSON
(_The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. ii. pp. 119–121); to us it appears
worthy of extreme respect.
[244] See above, page 40.
[245] See also LAYARD, _Monuments_, first series, plates 57–67.
[246] Among the reliefs in which the transport of the materials for
Sargon’s palace is represented, there is one which shows timber
being dragged down to the Phœnician coast. Here the sea is no longer
indicated merely by sinuous lines and a few fishes as in most of the
earlier reliefs; there are all kinds of animals, shells, turtles,
crabs, frogs, and even sea-serpents (BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_,
plate 34). In one place we find a wooded hill, with trees still of
indeterminate form (plate 78). In another we may recognize pines in
the forest traversed by the Assyrian cavalry (plates 108–113); birds
fly among the branches and several among them fall pierced with the
arrows of the hunters. Other trees bear fruit (plate 114). Partridges
run upon the slopes of the hill. See also in the basalt reliefs from
the building we have called a temple, a coniferous tree of some kind,
probably a cypress, the general form of which is very well rendered
(PLACE, _Ninive_, plate 48).
[247] This stele now belongs to the Berlin Museum. It has recently been
the subject of an important work by a learned German Assyriologist,
Herr SCHRADER (_Die Sargonstele des Berliner Museums_, in the
_Abhandlungen_ of the Berlin Academy for 1881). He gives a translation
of the inscription, with a commentary, showing the date of the stele to
be 707, or the fifteenth year of Sargon’s reign.
[248] These lions are figured by LAYARD, Monuments, first series, vol.
i. p. 128. Their inscriptions are brought together in a single plate in
the _Discoveries_, p. 601. The Aramaic texts will be published in the
_Corpus inscriptionum Semiticorum_, in the first instalment of the part
devoted to Aramaic inscriptions.
These lions of Khorsabad and Nimroud may be compared, both for type and
use, to the bronze lion found at Abydos, on the Hellespont, in 1860.
M. DE VOGUÉ has made us acquainted with the latter in the pages of the
_Revue archéologique_ for January, 1862. His article, which contains a
reproduction both of the monument as a whole and of its inscription,
and an explanation of the latter, has been reprinted in the _Mélanges
d’archéologie orientale_ (8vo. 1868, pp. 179–196). Mr. NORRIS has
published a special study of the weights in the British Museum (_On the
Assyrian and Babylonian Weights_, in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society_, vol. xvi. p. 215).
[249] Botanists are of opinion that the conventional representations of
the marsh vegetation suggests the horse-grass, or shave-grass (prêle),
rather than the _arundo-donax_, in which the leaves are longer and
thinner.
[250] See LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plates 12 and 13.
[251] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plates 14, 15.
[252] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 17.
[253] Sennacherib caused his sculptors to celebrate the campaign in
which he subdued the peoples of Lower Chaldæa. Like the Arab of to-day,
they took refuge when pursued among the marshes in the neighbourhood of
the Persian Gulf (LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 25). The
light, flat-bottomed boats, with their sharp prows, are shown pushing
through the reeds, and bending them down into the water to clear a
passage.
[254] The slabs taken from this corridor are now in the _Kouyundjik
Gallery_ of the British Museum, and numbered from 37 to 43. See also
LAYARD’S _Monuments_, second series, plates 7–9.
[255] See LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plates 47–49. &c.
[256] These sculptures were discovered and described for the first time
by M. ROUET, the immediate successor of M. BOTTA, at Mossoul (_Journal
Asiatique_, 1846, pp. 280–290). More detailed descriptions will be
found in LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 207–216, and in PLACE, _Ninive_,
vol. ii. pp. 161–164. The latest and most complete translation of
the Bavian inscriptions, or rather of the one inscription that is
repeated in three different places, has been given by M. POGNON, under
the following title: _L’Inscription de Bavian, texte, Traduction et
Commentaire philologique avec trois Appendices et un Glossaire_, 1 vol.
8vo. in two parts, 1879 and 1880 (in the _Bibliothèque de l’École des
Hautes-Études_).
[257] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 216.
[258] LAYARD tells us that near the entrance to the gorge, and under
the alluvial earth carried down by the stream, he found the remains of
carefully-built stone walls, but he is silent as to the character of
the building to which they may have belonged. (_Discoveries_, p. 215.)
[259] See the vignette on page 214 of LAYARD’S _Discoveries_.
[260] PERROT and GUILLAUME, _Exploration archéologique de la Galatie_,
vol. i. pp. 367–373, and vol. ii. plates 72–80.
[261] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 210.
[262] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 211.
[263] Mr. LAYARD intended to give accurate and complete drawings of
all the bas-reliefs at Bavian. For that purpose he despatched to the
valley a young artist named Bell, who had been sent out to him by
the authorities of the British Museum. Unhappily, this young man was
drowned while bathing in the torrent, in July, 1851. Before his death
he seems only to have copied the great relief; hence, in LAYARD’S great
work Bavian is represented only by the plate we have copied. In the
_Discoveries_ a few additional sketches are given.
[264] Page 203.
[265] In the valley of the Nahr-el-Kelb, there are five or six Assyrian
reliefs mingled with those of Egyptian origin. They may at once be
distinguished from the works of the Rameses by their arched tops.
The only one of which the inscriptions are still legible, is that of
Esarhaddon (see _Monuments inédits de l’Institut de Correspondance
archéologique_, 1858, plate 51, fig. F, and especially LEPSIUS,
_Ægyptische Denkmæler_, part iii. plate 197, fig. D). Judging from
their style and the historical information we possess, these steles
may be attributed to Tiglath-Pilezer, Assurnazirpal, Shalmaneser II.,
and Sennacherib. The remaining figures must be referred to other
princes. Quite lately Mr. BOSCAWEN has published an interesting article
(_The Monuments and Inscriptions on the Rocks at Nahr-el-Kelb_) in
the seventh volume of the _Transactions of the Society of Biblical
Archæology_ (pp. 331–352). It is accompanied by a general view of the
site, and a very careful plan of that part of the valley in which the
Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions are to be found. Professor LORTET
has also paid a recent visit to the valley. We are indebted to one of
his photographs for our fig. 122 (_Tour du Monde_, 1882, p. 415). We
should have expected to find traces of these Assyrian rock-sculptures
on the shores of Lake Van, where the princes of Nineveh so often
appeared as conquerors: so far, however, nothing beyond cuneiform
inscriptions has been found. There are no royal effigies (SCHULZE,
_Mémoire sur le Lac de Van_, in the _Journal Asiatique_ for April-June,
1840, and LAYARD, _Discoveries_, chapter xviii.).
[266] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 369.
[267] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 154.
[268] See vol. i. page 75, and fig. 13.
[269] The bas-reliefs of Malthaï have been described by LAYARD
(_Nineveh_, vol. i. pp. 230, 231), and, with greater minuteness, by
PLACE (_Ninive_, vol. ii. pp. 153–160). The latter alone gives a
reproduction of them, made from photographs. Between the two accounts
there is one considerable discrepancy: Layard speaks of four groups of
nine figures each, Place of three only.
[270] Other cylinders belonging to the same group will be found
reproduced in LAYARD _Recherches sur le Culte de Vénus_, notably in
plate iv. figs. 9–12.
[271] French National Library, No. 710.
[272] Florence Museum.
[273] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. pp. 120–122.
[274] FLANDIN published in the _Revue des deux Mondes_ (15 June,
and 1 July, 1845), two papers under the general title of _Voyage
archéologique à Ninive_, and headed severally _L’Architecture
assyrienne_, and _La Sculpture assyrienne_. The assertion to which we
have alluded will be found in the second of the two articles, at page
106.
[275] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, vol. v. p. 178.
[276] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. pp. 82, 83.
[277] _Ibid._ vol. iii. plate 46, No. 4.
[278] BOTTA (_Monument de Ninive_, vol. v. p. 178.) LAYARD, _Nineveh_,
vol. ii. p. 310.
[279] Upon this question of polychromy in the reliefs, a very precise
note of LAYARD’S may be consulted with profit (_Nineveh_, vol. ii.
p. 312). The discussion has also been very judiciously summed up by
RAWLINSON (_The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 357–365). One of
the plates from which we may gather the best idea of how this sculpture
must have looked when its colouring was intact, is that in which LAYARD
gives a reproduction of one of the winged bulls as it appeared when
first uncovered (_Monuments_, first series, plate 92).
[280] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plates 12 and 14.
[281] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 58.
[282] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plate 113.
[283] _Ibid._ plates 43 and 53.
[284] BOTTA, _Monument_, &c. plate 62.
[285] _Ibid._ plates 61 and 76, and vol. v. p. 124.
[286] See especially at the south end of the _Nimroud Gallery_, the
upper part of a male figure, numbered 17 _a_. The black of the hair and
beard has preserved much of its strength.
[287] “At Kouyunjik there were no traces whatever of colour.”
_Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 310.
[288] HEUZEY, _Catalogue des Figurines en terre cuite du Musée du
Louvre_, p. 18.
[289] HEUZEY, _Catalogue_, &c. p. 19.
[290] _Ibid._ p. 20. LAYARD also found many of these blue statuettes at
Khorsabad (_Discoveries_, p. 357).
[291] These fragments were found by LAYARD in one of the small temples
at Nimroud (_Discoveries_, pp. 357, 358).
[292] M. SULLY PRUDHOMME has lately embodied this idea in his verses
addressed to the Venus of the Louvre (_Devant la Vénus de Milo in the
Revue politique_ for 6 January, 1883):--
“Dans les lignes du marbre où plus rien ne subsiste
De l’éphémère éclat des modèles de chair,
Le ciseau de sculpteur, incorruptible artiste,
En isolant le Beau, nous le rend chaste et clair.
Si tendre à voir que soit la couleur d’un sein rose,
C’est dans le contour seul, presque immatériel,
Que le souffle divin se relève et dépose
La grâce qui l’exprime et ravit l’âme au ciel.
* * * * *
Saluons donc cet art qui, trop haut pour la foule.
Abandonne des corps les éléments charnels.
Et, pur, du genre humain ne garde que le moule,
N’en daigne consacrer que les traits éternels!
[293] HERODOTUS, i. 195. STRABO says the same thing, but in a passage
(xvi. i. 20), in which he borrows from Herodotus without acknowledgment.
[294] There are fine series of these seals, or cylinders, both in
the Louvre and in the _Cabinet des Antiques_ of the French National
Library. But the collection of the British Museum is the richest of
all. It possesses about 660 examples, against the 500 of the _Cabinet
des Antiquités_, and the 300 of the Louvre. The cabinet at the Hague
has 150. A single French collector, M. de Clercq, possesses more than
400, most of them in very fine condition and of great interest. He
is preparing to publish a descriptive catalogue of his treasures,
accompanied by photogravure facsimiles of every cylinder. According
to M. Ménant, the total number of these cylinders now in European
galleries can fall very little short of three thousand.
[295] M. Fr. LENORMANT explains this talismanic value of the cylinders
very clearly in his _Étude sur la Signification des Sujets de quelques
Cylindres babyloniens et assyriens_ (_Gazette archéologique_, 1879, p.
249).
[296] We have derived most of the information contained in this
chapter from the works of M. MÉNANT, who, for many years past has
given more study to these cylinders than any other savant. We have
found his _Essai sur les Pierres gravées de l’Asie occidentale_ of
special value, but we have also made use of the various reports he
has published in the _Archives des Missions_, relating to the foreign
collections visited by him, and of his papers read before the Académie
des Inscriptions. We have, moreover, consulted the following works,
not, we hope, without profit: DE GOBINEAU, _Catalogue d’une Collection
d’Intailles asiatiques_ (_Revue archéologique_, new series, vol.
xxvii.); E. SOLDI, _Les Cylindres babyloniens, leur Usage et leur
Classification_ (_ibid._ vol. xxviii.); and _Les Arts méconnus_, by the
same author (1 vol. 8vo. Leroux, 1881), chapter i., _Les Camées et les
Pierres gravées_.
[297] The thickest cylinders are found among those that appear the most
ancient. I measured one, in the _Cabinet des Antiquités_, that was
barely less than an inch in diameter. On the other hand, there are some
very small ones in existence.
[298] MÉNANT, _Essai sur les Pierres gravées de l’Asie occidentale_,
Introduction, p. 19. In the British Museum M. Ménant made a careful
examination of a tablet on which these successive impressions from a
cylinder allowed the whole of the scene with which it was engraved
to be studied (_Rapport sur les Cylindres Assyro-Chaldéens du Musée
britannique_, p. 95, in the _Archives des Missions scientifiques_,
1879). Even as late as 1854, a fine connoisseur like DE LONGPERIER
could think that the cylinders were purely amulets and were never used
as seals (_Notice des Antiquités assyriennes exposées dans les Galeries
du Louvre_, 3rd edition, p. 87). No such assertion could be made now.
Hundreds of impressions are to be found on the terra-cotta tablets from
Mesopotamia, and moreover, we find this formula in the inscription
borne by many of the cylinders: “Seal (kunuku) of so-and-so, son of
so-and-so.” In Assyrian the word _kunuku_ meant, as the word _seal_
with us, both the instrument used and the impression it gave (MÉNANT,
_Essai_, Introduction, p. 17). Some of these impressions are figured in
LAYARD, _Discoveries_, chapters vi and xxv. See also his _Monuments_,
second series, plate 69.
[299] The Louvre possesses a cylinder mounted in this fashion. It was
found by Place in the foundations of the Khorsabad palace. See DE
LONGPERIER, _Notice_, p. 98, (No. 469 in the _Catalogue_).
[300] TAYLOR, _Notes on the Ruins of Mugeyer_, p. 270 (in the Journal
of the _Royal Asiatic Society_, vol. xv.).
[301] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 563.
[302] A few cylinders of fine stone dating apparently from the early
monarchy, are exceptions to this rule. M. MÉNANT quotes a cylinder
of sapphirine chalcedony, which he ascribes to the reign of Dungi,
the son of Ourkam (_Essai sur les Pierres gravées_, pp. 141–143);
elsewhere he mentions an onyx cylinder in the _Cabinet des Antiques_
(No. 870), which bears an inscription proving it to have been the seal
of the scribe or secretary who served the son of Karigalzu, whom he
places at the end of the fifteenth century B.C. We also find jasper
cylinders that appear, so far as their execution and the costume of
the figures engraved on them may show, to have come from the same
workshops (_ibid._ p. 123) as those of the softer materials. This,
we acknowledge, is a difficulty. But in the first place they may
have now and then succeeded, even in the early years of the art, in
fashioning materials harder than those with which they were familiar,
by redoubling the patience and time spent upon the work; and, secondly,
several kings separated from each other by centuries must have borne
the same name, and it is perhaps a little bold to determine the age of
a monument from the fact that it is engraved with this or that royal
name. Who can say that none of these little monuments were reworked in
the time of Nebuchadnezzar? Archaism was then in fashion. The writing
of the early monarchy was imitated in official documents. Is it not
probable enough that, while they were in the vein, they copied the
seals of the old and almost legendary kings? They would reproduce them
in their entirety, both images and texts, but in obedience to the taste
of the day, they would execute the copies in those harder and more
precious materials which his increased skill permitted the workman to
attack. In spite of a few doubtful instances, we may repeat the general
rule we have laid down: That the great majority of those cylinders that
bear incontestable marks of a high antiquity, are cut from materials
inferior in hardness to the precious stones, or even to the quartzes.
[303] E. SOLDI, _Les Cylindres babyloniens_ (_Revue archéologique_,
vol. xxviii. p. 147).
[304] _Ibid._ p. 149.
[305] The three pages in which M. SOLDI sums up the result of his
inquiries, may be studied with advantage (_Les Arts méconnus_, pp.
62–64).
[306] See J. MÉNANT, _Observations sur trois Cylindres orientaux_
(_Gazette des Beaux-Arts_, December, 1879).
[307] Or, more correctly, Dioscurides (Διοσκουρίδης), according to the
texts.--ED.
[308] As to the connection of the Greek Heracles with Izdubar, see a
passage quoted from SAYCE by Mansell (_Gazette archéologique_, 1879,
pp. 116, 117?). The New York cylinder is only 1.52 inches high. It has
been slightly enlarged in our woodcut, so that its workmanship might be
better shown.
[309] Upon the exploits of these two individuals, and the place they
occupy upon the cylinders, see MÉNANT, _Essai_, &c., pp. 66, _et seq._
[310] MÉNANT, _Essai sur les Pierres gravées_, Fig. 86.
[311] _Ibid._ p. 138.
[312] DE LONGPÉRIER, _Œuvres_, vol. i. p. 335. Compare our Fig. 17,
Vol. i., and M. MÉNANT’S observations upon the double-faced individual
in whom the original androgynous type of the human race has been
recognised by some (_Essai_, &c., pp. 111–120). We are inclined to
agree with him in supposing the double profile to be no more than a
convention, whose strangeness is diminished when we remember that it
occurred upon the convex sides of a cylinder, where the eye of the
spectator did not grasp it all at once, as upon the flat impression.
In choosing such an arrangement, the artist seems to have desired to
connect the figure both with the seated god and the figures on the
other side; it is an expedient of the same nature as the five legs of
the Ninevite bulls.
[313] MÉNANT, _Essai_, &c., p. 166. M. Ménant mentions some other
myths, with which this scene may be connected. The true explanation
cannot be decided, however, until the Chaldee mythology is better known
than at present.
[314] _Ibid._ p. 153.
[315] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, Vol. i. Fig. 85.
[316] MÉNANT, _Essai_, &c., pp. 61–96.
[317] MÉNANT, _Essai_, p. 94. Izdubar contends not only with monsters;
he pursues, for his own pleasure, all the beasts of the desert and
mountain; like the Nimrod of Genesis, he is a “mighty hunter before
the Lord.” See the cylinders figured and explained by S. HAFFNER (_La
Chasse de l’Hercule assyrien_, in the _Gazette archéologique_, 1879, p.
178–184).
[318] MÉNANT, _Essai_, p. 91.
[319] See above, page 144, and Fig. 70.
[320] MÉNANT, _Essai_, pp. 55–62.
[321] BEROSUS, fragment 1, § 4, in vol. ii. of the _Fragmenta
historicorum Græcorum_ of Ch. Müller.
[322] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, vol. v. p. 2. LAYARD, _Discoveries_,
p. 605.
[323] These two cylinders are respectively numbered 937 and 942 in the
_Cabinet des Antiques_.
[324] MÉNANT, _Catalogue des Cylindres orientaux du Cabinet royal des
Médailles de La Haye_ (The Hague, 4to.), No. 135.
[325] Upon these types see MÉNANT, _Archives des Missions_, 1879, pp.
128–9. The signet figured above belonged to a member of the tribe
called _Egibi_, a group of merchants and bankers who seem to have
held the highest rank upon the market of Babylon, both under the last
national kings, and under the Achæmenidæ.
[326] _Archives des Missions_, 1879, p. 115.
[327] The charging animal seems rather to be a wild boar. The shape
of its head and body, the ridge of hair along the spine, the shape of
the legs and feet, and its action in charging, all suggest a boar, a
suggestion confirmed by the action of the hunter, who receives the
rush of the animal on a kind of scarf or cloak, while he buries his
boar-spear in its back.--ED.
[328] The cylinder published by LAYARD, _Introduction à l’Étude du
Culte public et des Mystères de Mithra_, plate xxv. No. 4. See on the
subject of the inscription upon it, LEVY, _Siegel und Gemmen_, plate 1,
No. 15. A certain number of intaglios with Aramaic characters, which
belong to the same class, have been studied and described by M. DE
VOGUÉ, in his _Mélanges d’Archéologie orientale_, pp. 120–130.
[329] National Library, Paris; No. 1086.
[330] National Library, No. 978.
[331] MÉNANT, _Empreintes de Cachets assyro-chaldéens relevées au Musée
britannique_ (_Archives des Missions_, 1882, p. 375), fig. 5.
[332] _Ibid._ fig. 25.
[333] A kneeling figure occurs on a contract dated from the seventh
century, MÉNANT, _ibid._ p. 376, fig. 7. Several impressions in the
London collection show us personages in the modern attitude of prayer
before the figure of a god overshadowed by huge wings. _Ibid._ figs. 26
and 27.
[334] MÉNANT, _Empreinte de Cachets_, &c. fig. 65.
[335] De Luynes collection, No. 188. Diameter 1 inch.
[336] No. 986.
[337] _Ibid._ figs. 20–24, 27, 30, 31, 41–44.
[338] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 290, 291.
[339] MÉNANT, _Rapport sur les Cylindres du Musée britannique_, p. 127.
[340] SOLDI, _Les Cylindres babyloniens_ (_Revue archéologique_, vol.
xxviii.), p. 153.
[341] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. i. fig. 85.
[342] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 281. A scarab of Amenophis III. has
also been found. Layard also tells us that he found several scarabæi
of Egyptian manufacture, while excavating at Nimroud, and others were
brought to him which had been found in different parts of Mesopotamia.
[343] _Account of the income and expenditure of the British Museum for
1878._
[344] In a recently published work (_Kritik des Ægyptischen Ornaments,
archäologische_ _Studie_, with two lithographic plates, Marburg, 8vo,
1883) Herr Ludwig von Sybel has investigated the influence exercised
by what he calls _Asiatic ornament_ upon Egyptian art, after the
commencement of the second Theban empire. The impression left by his
inquiry--which is conducted with much order and critical acumen--is
that Egypt, by the intermediary of the Phœnicians, received more
from Assyria and Chaldæa than she gave. This influence was exercised
chiefly by the numerous metal objects imported into the Nile valley
from western Asia, where metallurgy was more advanced and more active
than in Egypt. We may have doubts as to some of Herr von Sybel’s
comparisons, and may think he sometimes exaggerates the Asiatic
influence, but none the less may his work be read both with profit and
interest.
[345] See above, page 98.
[346] Layard, _Monuments_, first series, plate 7.
[347] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. chapter iv. § 1.
[348] Vol. I. Chapter II. § 7.
[349] The ornament reproduced in our Plate XIII. is borrowed from a
plate of LAYARD’S _Monuments_ (first series, plate 80), and the two
subjects brought together in Plate XIV. are taken from plate 55 of the
second series. Our Plate XV. brings together, on a smaller scale, the
figures which occupy plates 29, 30 and 31 of PLACE’S _Ninive_.
[350] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 311.
[351] PLACE, _Ninive_, plate 32.
[352] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 166, note.
[353] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. pp. 251, 252.
[354] LEPSIUS, _Les Métaux dans les Inscriptions egyptiennes_.
Translated into French by W. Berend, and with additions by the author,
1877.
[355] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 166.
[356] _Ibid._ p. 166.
[357] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 313.
[358] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 166.
[359] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 252.
[360] DIODORUS, ii. viii. 4.
[361] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 91, 92. We
borrow figs. 163–8 from Professor Rawlinson. Some of these, he tells
us, are from drawings by Mr. Churchill, the artist who accompanied
Loftus into Chaldæa and Susiana; the rest are taken from objects now in
the British Museum.
[362] We borrow the figures numbered 183, 184, 186 and 187, from the
plate accompanying a remarkable paper by M. HELBIG, in which he points
out the similarities that exist between this Ninevite pottery, and
the oldest pottery of Attica and the Ægæan islands (_Osservazioni
sopra la provenienza della decorazione geometrica_, in the _Annales
de l’Institut de Correspondance archéologique_, 1875, p. 221). The
tracings reproduced by M. Helbig (_tavola d’aggiunta_, H), were made by
Mr. Murray. Our figures 182, 185, and 188 were taken from drawings made
by myself in the British Museum.
[363] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 150.
[364] BIRCH, _History of Ancient Pottery_, 2nd edition, 1873, p. 91.
[365] BIRCH, _History of Ancient Pottery_, 2nd edition, 1873, p. 104.
[366] The British Museum possesses some fine examples of these coffins;
they were transported to England by Loftus, who had some difficulty
in bringing them home intact. See LOFTUS, _Travels and Researches_,
&c., p. 204; LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 558–561; and BIRCH, _History
of Ancient Pottery_, pp. 105–107. In the upper parts of the mounds at
Warka and Niffer, where these slipper-shaped coffins were packed in
thousands, fragments of glazed earthenware, plates and vases, were also
found; they seemed to date from the same period.
[367] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. p. 375.
[368] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, vol. v. p. 173. RAWLINSON, _The Five
Great Monarchies_, vol. i. pp. 389–391.
[369] On this subject see a note by Sir David BREWSTER (?), appended to
LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 674–676.
[370] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 197.
[371] LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. i. p. 421; _Discoveries_, p. 197.
[372] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 574.
[373] A detailed description of this curious object will be found in
a note supplied to Layard by Sir David BREWSTER, who made a careful
examination of the lens (_Discoveries_, p. 197).
[374] See RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, &c., vol. i. pp.
95–97.
[375] On the richness of the metalliferous deposits about the
head-waters of the Tigris and Euphrates, see vol. i. pp. 124, 125.
[376] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 98.
[377] _Ibid._
[378] _Ibid._
[379] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. ii. p. 263.
[380] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 303–305 and 379.
[381] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. pp. 84–89, and plates 70, 71.
[382] A certain number of iron implements are exhibited in the British
Museum (Kouyundjik Gallery, case E); they were found for the most part
at Nimroud, by Sir H. LAYARD (_Discoveries_, pp. 174 and 194). Among
objects particularly mentioned by him are feet of chairs, tables,
&c., mattocks and hammers, the heads of arrows and lances, and a
double-handled saw 62 inches long.
[383] PLACE, _Ninive_, vol. i. p. 264 and plate 71; figs. 5, 6 and 7.
[384] This is formally stated by Dr. PERCY, who furnished Layard with a
long note upon the composition of the Assyrian bronzes (_Discoveries_,
p. 670). At Nimroud, the latter found helmets and cuirasses of iron
with surface ornaments of bronze (_Nineveh_, vol. i. p. 341). He
speaks of this proceeding as characteristic of Assyrian metal-work
(_Discoveries_, p. 191).
[385] To the evidence of Layard, which we have already had occasion to
quote on this point, we may add that of RICH (_Kurdistan_, vol. i. pp.
176 and 222).
[386] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, chapter viii.
[387] See Dr. PERCY’S note, at the end of the _Discoveries_, p. 670.
[388] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 176–178.
[389] NAHUM, ii. 9.
[390] E. FLANDIN, _Voyage archéologique_.
[391] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 198, 199.
[392] In 1882 these fragments were in the _Nimroud central saloon_. In
the _Assyrian side room_, close to the door, there is another throne
whose bronze casing might be restored almost in its entirety. Its
decoration is less rich, however, than that of the thrones of which we
have been speaking. A poor drawing of it may be found in George SMITH’S
_Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 432.
[393] This is not complete; about a third of it seems to be missing.
[394] Reasoning from the analogy of the ivories above mentioned,
it might be thought that this fragmentary column belonged to the
balustrade of a window. M. Dieulafoy, who first drew our attention
to the fragment, provided us with a photograph of it, and is of that
opinion.
[395] In BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plate 164, a bronze bull’s head
is figured which must have been used as the arm of a chair.
[396] This motive was by no means rare. Some more examples will be
found reproduced in LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. p. 301. At Malthaï
there are human figures between the uprights of the throne on which the
second deity is seated. They may be seen more clearly in Place’s large
plate (No. 45), than in our necessarily small engraving.
[397] _1 Kings_ x. 18.
[398] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 198; SMITH, _Assyrian Discoveries_, pp.
431, 432.
[399] George SMITH, _Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 432.
[400] As soon as these ivories arrived at the British Museum, the
learned keeper of the Oriental Antiquities was struck by their Egyptian
character. A paper which he published at the time may be consulted with
profit (BIRCH, _Observations on two Egyptian cartouches, and some other
ivory ornaments found at Nimroud, in the Transactions of the Royal
Society of Literature_, second series, vol. iii. pp. 151–177.)
[401] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 195.
[402] LAYARD, _Monuments_, first series, plate 24.
[403] _Ibid._ plates 55 and 56. In the second stage of reliefs,
counting from the bottom.
[404] Among the ivories in case C of the _Nimroud Gallery_ there is
a kind of blackish ivory egg, which may have served as the knob of
a sceptre. In an oval crowned by the uræus between two feathers,
we find an inscription which appears to be Phœnician. It has been
read as the name of a king of Cyprus. LOFTUS, in a letter addressed
to the _Athenæum_ (1855, p. 351), speaks of other ivories from the
south-western palace at Nimroud. They are the remains of a throne, and
were found in a deposit of wood ashes. He says there was a shaft formed
by figures placed back to back and surmounted by a capital shaped like
a flower. There was also, according to the same authority, a Phœnician
inscription.
[405] See Vol. I., pp. 299–302.
[406] My researches were not confined to the ivories in the cases. I
also went through the thousands of pieces in the closed drawers which
are not shown, in some instances because of their broken condition, in
others because they are merely duplicates of better specimens in the
selection exhibited.
[407] The feet found by Sir H. LAYARD at Nimroud must, as he
conjectured, have belonged to one of these tripods (_Discoveries_, pp.
178–179).
[408] We should also mention another vase, shaped like the muzzle of
a lion, which was used to take liquids out of a large crater set upon
a stand (BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, vol. i. plate 76. See also M.
Botta’s plate 162, where the chief examples from the bas-reliefs are
figured).
[409] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 197.
[410] In the eighth chapter of the _Discoveries_, LAYARD gives a sort
of inventory, rather desultory in form, perhaps, but nevertheless
very instructive and valuable, of the principal objects found in
the magazines--we have borrowed largely from these pages. The most
important of the cups are reproduced, in whole or in part, in the
plates numbered from 57 to 68 of the _Monuments_, second series. A
complete and accurate study of the cups and other objects of the same
kind discovered in Western Asia will be found in M. ALBERT DUMONT’S
_Les Céramiques de la Grèce propre_ (pp. 112–129).
[411] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 68.
[412] This platter is figured in LAYARD’S _Monuments_, plate 63, but
our drawing was made from the original.
[413] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 87–89.
[414] It is numbered 619 in the museum inventory. It bears an
inscription in Aramaic characters.
[415] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. figs. 280, 281.
[416] Inscriptions of this kind have been found on five or six of the
bronze platters in the British Museum. They are about to be printed
in the _Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum_, part ii., _Inscriptiones
Aramæa_, vol. i.
[417] Thus, according to M. de Vogüé, who has examined the inscriptions
upon the cups recently cleaned, three of the cups from Nimroud bear
respectively the names of _Baalazar_ (Baal protects him), _Elselah_ (El
pardons him) and _Beharel_ (El has chosen him). Baalazar was a scribe.
[418] See above, p. 220, note 2.
[419] See PRISSE, _Histoire de l’Art egyptien_, vol. ii. plate entitled
_Le Pharaon Khouenaten servi par la reine_. The kind of saucer held by
the queen is more like the Assyrian pateræ in shape.
[420] See in PRISSE’S _Histoire_, the plates classed under the head
_Arts industriels_, and especially the four entitled _Vases en Or
émaillé et cloisonné_. In all these I can only find one patera, in the
plate called _Collection de Vases du Règne de Ramesés III._ There is
nothing to show that the vases here figured were not earthenware.
[421] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. figs. 287, 288. See also the
great vultures on the ceilings (_ibid._ fig. 282), and winged females
(_ibid._ fig. 287).
[422] PRISSE, _Histoire de l’Art egyptien_, vol. ii., the plate
entitled _Types de Sphinx_.
[423] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. fig. 239, and PRISSE, in the
plate above quoted.
[424] A cursory glance through the pages dedicated by Prisse to the
industrial arts is conclusive on this point, the heads of snakes
and horses, the figures of negroes and prisoners of war are almost
invariably placed back to back on the objects they are used to adorn.
Examples of this abound, but in order to understand what we may call
the principle of this ornamentation it will suffice to refer to figs.
314, 327, and 328 of the second volume of our _History of Art in
Ancient Egypt_.
[425] In PRISSE’S plate entitled _Choix de Bijoux de diverses Époques_,
there is a bracelet with a central motive recalling that of our cup.
It shows us two griffins separated by a palmette from which rises a
tall stem of papyrus between several pairs of volutes. This object is,
however, almost unique of its kind, and we do not exactly know to what
epoch it belongs. May it not belong to a period when Egyptian art began
to be affected by that of Mesopotamia, an influence that is betrayed
in more than one particular? According to Herr VON SYBEL, who has
studied Egyptian ornament with so much care, this motive of two animals
facing each other did not appear before the nineteenth dynasty, and he
looks upon it as purely Asiatic in its origin (_Kritik des Ægyptischen
Ornaments_, pp. 37, 38). We may also quote a small box of Egyptian
faïence inscribed with the oval of Ahmes II, the Amasis of Herodotus.
It bears two griffins quite similar to those of our group, separated
by a cypress. But Dr. Birch, who was the first to publish this
monument, recognizes that, in spite of the cartouch, its physiognomy
is more Assyrian than Egyptian (_Transactions of the Royal Society of
Literature_, Series II. p. 177).
[426] See on this subject an ingenious and learned paper to
which we shall more than once have occasion to refer, namely, M.
CLERMONT-GANNEAU’S _Étude d’Archéologie orientale, l’Imagerie
phénicienne et la Mythologie iconologique chez les Grecs_. First part:
_La Coupe phénicienne de Palestina_ (1880, 8vo, 8 plates).
[427] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 66.
[428] HOUGHTON, _On the Mammalia of Assyrian Sculptures_, p. 382.
[429] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 67.
[430] LAYARD, _Monuments_, second series, plate 62, B.
[431] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. chapter vii.;
LAYARD, _Nineveh_, vol. ii. pp. 338–348.
[432] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, &c., vol. i. pp. 408–410.
[433] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plate 159. In this plate the chief
types of weapons figured in the reliefs at Khorsabad are brought
together.
[434] BOSCAWEN, _Notes on an Ancient Assyrian Bronze Sword bearing a
Cuneiform Inscription_ (in the _Transactions of the Society of Biblical
Archæology_, vol. iv. p. 347. with one plate).
[435] BOTTA, _Monument de Ninive_, plate 160.
[436] SAYCE, _The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van_, in the _Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society_, vol. xiv. p. 653. Mr. Pinches tells me that
there is a similar text on the hollow border of the shield reproduced
in our Fig. 225. Nothing is now to be distinguished, however, but
characters that may be read, “Great king, king of ----”.
[437] See vol. i. page 394.
[438] We cannot too often thank the keepers of the Oriental antiquities
in the British Museum for the trouble they took in enabling us to give
a figure of this hitherto unpublished monument. The fragments, which
had not yet been pieced together or exhibited in the galleries, were
arranged expressly for our draughtsman.
[439] Nos. 385–391 in DE LONGPÉRIER’S catalogue. These objects came
from the collection of Clot-Bey, which was formed in Egypt but
contained many things of Syrian origin. DE LONGPÉRIER did not hesitate,
on the evidence of their style, to class these objects as Assyrian, and
any one who examines the motives of their decoration will be of his
opinion. See his _Œuvres_, vol. i. p. 166.
[440] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 394–395, and figs. 257,
329–331.
[441] DE LONGPÉRIER, _Notice des Antiquités assyriennes du Musée du
Louvre_, third edition, No. 212.
[442] Many more varieties of the same type will be found in the
plate on which BOTTA reproduced the principal jewels figured in the
Khorsabad reliefs (_Monument de Ninive_, plate 161). See also LAYARD,
_Discoveries_, p. 597.
[443] The Arab jewellers still make use of similar moulds (LAYARD,
_Discoveries_, p. 595).
[444] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, pp. 177–178.
[445] LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 597. The oldest mention of the pearl
fisheries of the Persian Gulf is to be found in those fragments of
NEARCHUS that have been preserved in the pages of ARRIAN (_Indica_,
xxxviii. 7); but it is probable that the search for pearl oysters began
in those waters many centuries before. The Assyrians, as we have seen,
made use both of pearl and mother-of-pearl.
[446] J. OPPERT, _L’Ambre jaune chez les Assyriens_ (in the _Recueil
des Travaux relatifs à la Philologie et à l’Archéologie egyptiennes et
assyriennes_, vol. ii, pp. 34 _et seq._) M. Oppert’s rendering of the
paraphrase which he believes to specify amber is not accepted by all
Assyriologists.
[447] In the inventory, compiled with so much care by de Longpérier,
of all the little objects in the Assyrian collection of the Louvre,
and especially of those necklaces found by Botta in the sand under the
great threshold at Khorsabad (from No. 295 to No. 380), there is not
the slightest mention of amber. MM. Birch and Pinches tell me that the
oriental department of their museum contains no trace of amber, with
the exception of a few beads brought from Egypt, to which they have
no means of assigning a date. They have never heard that any of the
Mesopotamian excavations have brought the smallest vestige of this
substance to light.
[448] ARRIAN, _Expedition d’Alexandre_, vi. 29.
[449] The reputation enjoyed by Chaldæan textiles all over western
Asia is shown by a curious text in the book of JOSHUA (vii. 21). After
the taking of Jericho, Achan, one of the Israelites, disobeyed orders
and secreted a part of the spoil, consisting of two hundred shekels of
silver, a wedge of gold, and “a goodly Babylonish garment.”
[450] “Pictas vestes apud Homerum fuisse (accipio), unde triumphales
natæ. Acu acere id Phryges invenerunt, ideoque Phrygioniæ appellatæ
sunt. Aurum intexere in eadem Asia invenit Attalus rex: unde nomen
Attalicis. Colores diversos picturæ intexere Babylon maxime celebravit
et nomen imposuit.” PLINY, _Nat. Hist._ viii. § 74. _Acu pingere_, and
for short, _pingere_, here meant _to embroider_. _Picta_ or _picturata
vestis_ was a robe covered with embroideries.
[451] See PLINY, l. c. LUCRETIUS, iv. 1026. PLAUTUS, _Stichus_, Act ii,
Scene ii, v. 54. SILIUS ITALICUS, xiv. 658. MARTIAL, _Epigr._ xiv. 150.
I borrow these citations from the first chapter of M. EUGÈNE MÜNTZ’S
_Histoire de la Tapisserie_ in the _Bibliothèque de l’Enseignement des
Beaux-Arts_.
[452] See Vol. I. pp. 305–307.
[453] NAHUM iii. 16.
[454] EZEKIEL xvii. 4. ISAIAH also alludes to the commerce of Babylon
(xlvii. 15).
[455] See on this subject, François LENORMANT’S _La Monnaie dans
l’Antiquité_, vol. i. _Prolégomènes_, cap. iii. and especially pp.
113–122.
[456] RAWLINSON, _The Five Great Monarchies_, vol. i. p. 108. MÉNANT,
_Essai sur les Pierres gravées_, p. 128.
[457] “... the Chaldeans whose cry is in the ships,” ISAIAH xliii. 14.
[458] TAYLOR, _Notes on the Ruins of Mugeyer_ (_Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society_, vol. xv. p. 264).
[459] STRABO speaks of a Chaldæan settlement on the Arabian coast of
the Persian Gulf; he calls it Gerrha (xvi. iii. 3). All the products
of Arabia, he says, were there brought together. Thence they were
transported to Chaldæa by sea, and carried up the Euphrates as far as
Thapsacus.
[460] The juxtaposition on the black obelisk of Shalmaneser II. of the
rhinoceros, the small-eared or Indian elephant, and the Bactrian camel
seems to point to this route. The monkeys in the same reliefs appear
to belong to an Indian species (HOUGHTON, _Mammalia of the Assyrian
Sculptures_, pp. 319, 320).
[461] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. figs. 257, 330 and 331.
[462] _Art in Ancient Egypt_, vol. ii. pp. 176–179.
[463] SOURY, _Théories naturalistes du Monde et de la Vie dans
l’Antiquité_, cap. i. and ii.
[464] _Ibid._ cap. iii.
[465] Fr. LENORMANT, _Manuel d’Histoire ancienne_, vol. ii. page 176.
[466] SOURY, _Théories naturalistes_, p. 65.
[467] A. DE CANDOLLE, _Origine des Plantes cultivées_, pp. 285, _et
seq._
Transcriber’s Notes:
1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
corrected silently.
2. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
been retained as in the original.
3. Where hyphenation is in doubt, it has been retained as in the
original.
4. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r. or
X^{xx}.
5. Italics are shown as _xxx_.
6. Bold print is shown as =xxx=.