Discoveries among the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon Part 22

With the exception of a few rudely engraved gems and enamelled bricks, this was the only relic I obtained from the Mujelibe.

Excavations were carried on for some days in the smaller mounds scattered over the plain between Babel and the ruin last described, but without any results, except the discovery of the remains of brick masonry, of a few earthen vases, and of some fragments of gla.s.s.

The last ruin I examined was a mound of great extent, sometimes called by the Arabs Jumjuma, from a neighbouring village of that name, and sometimes, as stated by Rich, Amran ben Ali, from a Koubbe, or small domed tomb, of a Mohammedan saint on its summit. No masonry is here seen as in the Mujelibe. All remains of buildings, if there be any still existing, are deeply buried beneath the loose nitrous earth. It is traversed by innumerable ravines, and its form and level are equally irregular. I opened trenches in various parts, but could find no traces of an edifice of any kind. Some small objects of considerable interest, were, however, discovered. Although not of the true Babylonian epoch, they are, on more than one account, highly important.

The mound of Amran, as well as nearly all those in Babylonia, had been used as a place of burial for the dead long after the destruction of the great edifices whose ruins it covers. Some specimens of gla.s.s, and several terracotta figures, lamps, and jars, dug out of it, are evidently of the time of the Seleucidae or of the Greek occupation. With these relics were five cups or bowls of earthenware, and fragments of others, covered on the inner surface with letters written in a kind of ink. Similar objects had already been found in other Babylonian ruins. Two from the collection of the late Mr. Stewart had been deposited in the British Museum, and amongst the antiquities recently purchased by the Trustees from Colonel Rawlinson are eight specimens, obtained at Baghdad, where they are sometimes offered for sale by the Arabs; but it is not known from what sites they were brought. The characters upon them are in form not unlike the Hebrew, and on some they resembled the Sabaean and Syriac. These bowls had not attracted notice, nor had the inscriptions upon them been fully examined before they were placed in the hands of Mr. Thomas Ellis, of the ma.n.u.script department in the British Museum, a gentleman of great learning and ingenuity as a Hebrew scholar. Mr. E. has succeeded, after much labor, in deciphering the inscriptions.[206]

Little doubt can, I think, exist as to the Jewish origin of these bowls: and such being the case, there is no reason to question their having belonged to the descendants of those Jews who were carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon and the surrounding cities. These strangers appear to have clung with a tenacity peculiar to their race to the land of their exile. We can trace them about Babylon from almost the time of their deportation down to the twelfth century of the Christian era, when the Hebrew traveller, Benjamin of Tudela, wandered over the regions of the East and among the cities of the captivity to seek the remnant of his ancient nation. During the Persian dominion in Mesopotamia we find them enduring tortures and persecutions rather than help to rebuild a temple dedicated to a false G.o.d.[207] In the time of the Roman supremacy in the East they appear to have been a turbulent race, rebelling against their rulers and waging civil war amongst themselves. They had celebrated schools in many cities of a.s.syria and Chaldaea.

As early as the third century Hebrew travellers visited Babylon, and some of them have left records of the state of their countrymen. The Babylonian Talmud, compiled in the beginning of the sixth century, contains many valuable notices of the condition of the Jewish colonies in Babylonia, and enumerates more than two hundred Babylonian towns then under the Persian rule, inhabited by Jewish families. In ma.n.u.scripts of the eighth and ninth centuries we have further mention of these colonies.

In the twelfth century, Benjamin of Tudela found no less than twenty thousand Jews dwelling within twenty miles of Babylon, and worshipping in the synagogue, built, according to tradition, by the prophet Daniel himself. In Hillah alone were ten thousand persons and four synagogues, and he gives the number of families and of their places of worship, in every town he visited, keeping during his journey an exact daily itinerary, which includes nearly all the stations on the modern caravan routes. Allowing for some exaggeration on the part of this traveller, it is still evident that a very considerable Jewish population lived in the cities of Babylonia. It has greatly diminished, and in some places has entirely disappeared. A few families still linger at Hillah, and in Baghdad the princ.i.p.al native trade and money transactions are carried on by Jews, who are the bankers and brokers of the governors of the city, as they no doubt anciently were of the Aba.s.side Caliphs.

According to their own tradition these Hebrew families were descended from the Jews of the captivity. They still preserved their pedigrees, and traced their lineage to the princes and prophets of Judah. Their chief resided at Baghdad, and his t.i.tle was "Lord Prince of the Captivity." He was lineally descended, according to his people, from king David himself.

Even Mohammedans acknowledged his claim to this n.o.ble birth, and called him "Our Lord, the Son of David." His authority extended over the countries of the East as far as Thibet and Hisdostan. He was treated on all occasions with the greatest honor and respect, and when he appeared in public he wore robes of embroidered silk, and a white turban encircled by a diadem of gold.[208]

We may then safely conclude, that these earthen bowls belonged to Jews of Babylonia and Chaldaea. Similar relics have been found as I have stated in many ruins near Babylon. I discovered an entire bowl, as well as many fragments, at Niffer. Nearly at the same time, several were dug out of a mound about half-way between Baghdad and Hillah, but they were unfortunately dispersed or destroyed before I could obtain possession of them. On all these sites during the first centuries of the Christian era, dwelt Jewish families.

As no date whatever is found in the inscriptions, it is difficult to determine the exact time when they were written. We must endeavour to form some opinion upon such internal evidence as they may afford. Mr. Ellis remarks, that, "as this is the first time anything of the kind has been examined in Europe, he can only hazard a conjecture from the forms of the letters, which are, certainly, the most ancient known specimens of the Chaldaean, and appear to have been invented for the purpose of writing the cuneiform character in a more cursive and expeditious manner."[209] In support of this conjecture he cites the language of the a.s.syrian inscriptions as closely resembling that on the bowls. The relics, however, are evidently of different dates. The most ancient might be referred to the second or third century before Christ, but may be of a later period.

Others are undoubtedly of a more recent date, and might even have been written as late as the fifth century of our era. The Syriac characters on the latter bowl appear to have marks of a Sabaean or Mendean origin, and on a bowl from Mr. Stewart's collection there is an inscription, unfortunately almost destroyed and no longer decipherable, in that peculiar character still used by the Sabaeans of Susiana.

In the forms of expression and in the names of the angels, these inscriptions bear a striking a.n.a.logy to the apocryphal book of Enoch, which is supposed to have been written by a Jew of the captivity, shortly before the Christian era. That singular rhapsody also mentions the "sorceries, incantations, and dividing of roots and trees," which appear to have been practised by the Jews at that period, and to be alluded to on the bowls.[210]

As to the original use of these vessels it is not improbable, as conjectured by Mr. Ellis, that the writing was to be dissolved in water, to be drank as a cure against disease, or a precaution against the arts of witchcraft and magic. Similar remedies are still resorted to in the East in cases of obstinate illness, and there are Mullahs who make the preparation of such charms their peculiar profession. The modern inscriptions generally consist of sentences from the Koran, interspersed with various mystic signs and letters. But if such was their object, it is evident that they could not have been used for that purpose, as the writing upon them is perfectly fresh, and it is essential that it should be entirely washed into the water to make the remedy efficacious. As they were found at a considerable depth beneath the surface in mounds which had undoubtedly been used as places of sepulture, I am rather inclined to believe that they were charms buried with the dead, or employed for some purpose at funeral ceremonies, and afterwards placed in the grave.

CHAPTER XXIII.

STATE OF THE RUINS OF BABYLON.--CAUSE OF THE DISAPPEARANCE OF BUILDINGS.--NATURE OF ORIGINAL EDIFICES.--BABYLONIAN BRICKS.--THE HISTORY OF BABYLON.--ITS FALL.--ITS REMARKABLE POSITION.--COMMERCE.--Ca.n.a.lS AND ROADS.--SKILL OF BABYLONIANS IN THE ARTS.--ENGRAVED GEMS.--CORRUPTION OF MANNERS, AND CONSEQUENT FALL OF THE CITY.--THE MECCA PILGRIMAGE.--SHEIKH IBN RESHID.--THE GEBEL SHAMMAR.--THE MOUNDS OF EL HYMER.--OF ANANA.

Such then were the discoveries amongst the ruins of ancient Babylon. They were far less numerous and important than I could have antic.i.p.ated, nor did they tend to prove that there were remains beneath the heaps of earth and rubbish which would reward more extensive excavations. It was not even possible to trace the general plan of any one edifice; only shapeless piles of masonry, and isolated walls and piers, were brought to light--giving no clue whatever to the original form of the buildings to which they belonged. If the tradition be true that Xerxes, to punish the Babylonians and humiliate their priests, ordered them utterly to destroy their temples and other great public edifices, and that Alexander the Great employed 10,000 men in vain to clear away the rubbish from the temple of Belus alone,[211] it is not surprising that with a small band of Arabs little progress should have been made in uncovering any part of the ancient buildings.

No sculptures or inscribed slabs, the panelling of the walls of palaces, have been discovered amongst the ruins of Babylon as in those of Nineveh.

Scarcely a detached figure in stone, or a solitary tablet, has been dug out of the vast heaps of rubbish. "Babylon is fallen, is fallen; and all the graven images of her G.o.ds he hath broken unto the ground."[212]

The complete absence of such remains is to be explained by the nature of the materials used in the erection of even the most costly edifices. In the immediate vicinity of Babylon there were no quarries of alabaster, or of limestone, such as existed near Nineveh. The city was built in the midst of an alluvial country, far removed from the hills. Consequently stone for building purposes could only be obtained from a distance. The black basalt, a favorite material amongst the Babylonians for carving detached figures, and for architectural ornaments, as appears from numerous fragments found amongst the ruins, came from the Kurdish mountains, or from the north of Mesopotamia. It was probably floated down the Euphrates and Tigris on rafts from those districts. The a.s.syrian alabaster could have been brought from Nineveh, and the water communication by the rivers and ca.n.a.ls offered great facilities for transport; yet enormous labor and expense would have been required to supply such materials in sufficient quant.i.ties to construct an entire edifice, or even to panel the walls of its chambers.

The Babylonians were, therefore, content to avail themselves of the building materials which they found on the spot. With the tenacious mud of their alluvial plains, mixed with chopped straw, they made bricks, whilst bitumen and other substances collected from the immediate neighborhood furnished them with an excellent cement. A knowledge of the art of manufacturing glaze, and of compounding colors, enabled them to cover their bricks with a rich enamel, thereby rendering them equally ornamental for the exterior and interior of their edifices. The walls of their palaces and temples were also coated, as we learn from several pa.s.sages in the Bible, with mortar and plaster, which, judging from their cement, must have been of very fine quality. The fingers of the man's hand wrote the words of condemnation of the Babylonian empire "upon the plaster of the wall of the king's palace."[213] Upon those walls were painted historical and religious subjects, and various ornaments, and, according to Diodorus Siculus, the bricks were enamelled with the figures of men and animals.

Images of stone were no doubt introduced into the buildings. We learn from the Bible that figures of the G.o.ds in this material, as well as in metal, were kept in the Babylonian temples. But such sculptures were not common, otherwise more remains of them must have been discovered in the ruins.

On one of the most important Babylonian relics brought to this country we have some highly curious notices of the architecture of the Babylonians.

They are contained in tablets inscribed upon a black stone, and divided into ten columns. The inscription commences according to Dr. Hincks, with the name and t.i.tles of Nebuchadnezzar the Great, whose reign began, it may be inferred from Ptolemy's Canon, B. C. 604. He is called "Nabukudurruchur, king of Babylon, son of Nabubaluchun, king of Babylon."

We may infer that his grandfather was not a king from the omission of his name. The subsequent part of the inscription contains no notice of any foreign conquests, but speaks of the building of various temples and palaces in addition to the walls of Babylon and Borsippa. If the tablets could be completely deciphered, and the meaning of many doubtful words accurately ascertained, much information would be obtained relating to Babylonian architecture. The walls were built of burned bricks and bitumen lined with gypsum and other materials. Some seem to have been wainscotted.

Over these walls was woodwork, and on the top an awning sustained by poles, like "the white, green, and blue hangings, fastened with cords of fine linen and purple to silver rings, and pillars of marble," in Ahasuerus' palace at Shushan.[214] Some of the woodwork is said to have been gilt, other parts silvered: and a large portion of it was brought from Lebanon.

Marduk appears in this inscription as the princ.i.p.al deity of Babylon, holding the place that Ashur does on the monuments of Nineveh. He is called "the great Lord," "Lord of Lord," "Elder of the G.o.ds," &c. Nebu seems to hold the second rank. The king offers him thanksgiving for what he has already done, and prays for his blessing on himself and his house.[215]

It may be conjectured that in their general plan the Babylonian palaces and temples resembled those of a.s.syria. We know that the arts, the religion, the customs, and the laws of the two kindred people were nearly identical. They spoke, also, the same language, and used, very nearly, the same written characters. One appears to have borrowed from the other; and, without attempting to decide the question of priority of independent existence as a nation and of civilisation, it can be admitted that they had to a certain extent a common origin, and that they maintained for many centuries an intimate connection. We find no remains of columns at Babylon, as none have been found at Nineveh. If such architectural ornaments were used, they must have been either of wood or of brick. The ma.s.sy pillars, with Egyptian-like capitals, usually chosen by artists for the restoration of Belshazzar's palaces and temples, are the mere creations of fancy, and are not warranted by any existing remains whatever. The Babylonian column more probably resembled, in form and proportions, that of Nineveh and Persepolis. It may have been a modification of the a.s.syrian which afterwards gave birth to the Persian, for it was through Babylon that the arts appear to have penetrated partly, if not entirely, into Persia.

Although the building materials thus used in the great edifices of Babylon may seem extremely mean when compared with those employed in the stupendous palace temples of Egypt, and even in the less ma.s.sive edifices of a.s.syria, yet the Babylonians appear to have raised, with them alone, structures which excited the wonder and admiration of the most famous travellers of antiquity. The profuse use of color, and the taste displayed in its combination, and in the ornamental designs, together with the solidity and vastness of the immense substructure upon which the buildings proudly stood, may have chiefly contributed to produce this effect upon the minds of strangers. The palaces and temples, like those of Nineveh, were erected upon lofty platforms of brickwork. The origin of a.s.syrian architecture, which I have elsewhere described,[216] was especially that of Babylon. The bricks, as in a.s.syria, were either simply baked in the sun, or were burnt in the kiln. The latter are of more than one shape and quality. Some are square; others are oblong.[217] Those from the Birs Nimroud are generally of a dark red color, whilst those from the Mujelibe are mostly of a light yellow. Specimens have been frequently brought to this country, and are to be found in many public and private collections.

The Babylonian inscribed bricks long excited the curiosity of the learned, and gave rise to a variety of ingenious speculations as to their use and meaning. By some they were believed to be public doc.u.ments; others saw in the writing dedications to the G.o.ds, or registers of gifts to temples. The question has now been entirely set at rest by the discovery made by Dr.

Hincks, that almost every brick hitherto obtained from the ruins of Babylon bears the same inscription, with the exception of one or two unimportant words, and that they record the building of the city of Nebuchadnezzar the son of Nabubaluchun (?)

A few inscribed tablets of stone and baked clay, figures in bronze and terracotta, metal objects of various kinds, and engraved cylinders and gems, have been almost the only undoubted Babylonian antiquities. .h.i.therto brought to Europe. Such relics are preserved in many cabinets. The small original collection in the British Museum belonged partly to Sir Robert Ker Porter, and partly to Mr. Rich.

It may not be out of place to add a few remarks upon the history of Babylon. The time of the foundation of this celebrated city is still a question which does not admit of a satisfactory determination, and into which I will not enter. Some believe it to have taken place at a comparatively recent date; but if, as Egyptian scholars a.s.sert, the name of Babylon is found on monuments of the eighteenth Egyptian dynasty, we have positive evidence of its existence at least in the fifteenth century before Christ.[218] After the rise of the a.s.syrian empire, it appears to have been at one time under the direct rule of the kings of Nineveh, and at another to have been governed by its own independent chiefs.

Expeditions against Babylonia are recorded in the earliest inscriptions yet discovered in a.s.syria; and, as it has been seen, even in the time of Sennacherib and his immediate predecessors, large armies were still frequently sent against its rebellious inhabitants. The Babylonian kingdom was, however, almost absorbed in that of a.s.syria, the dominant power of the East. When this great empire began to decline, Babylon rose for the last time. Media and Persia were equally ready to throw off the a.s.syrian yoke, and at length the allied armies of Cyaxares and the father of Nebuchadnezzar captured and destroyed the capital of the Eastern world.

Babylon now rapidly succeeded to that proud position so long held by Nineveh. Under Nebuchadnezzar she acquired the power forfeited by her rival. The bounds of the city were extended; buildings of extraordinary size and magnificence were erected; her victorious armies conquered Syria and Palestine, and penetrated into Egypt. Her commerce, too, had now spread far and wide, from the east to the west, and she became "a land of traffic and a city of merchants."[219]

But her greatness as an independent nation was short-lived. The neighbouring kingdoms of Media and Persia, united under one monarch, had profited, no less than Babylon, by the ruin of the a.s.syrian empire, and were ready to dispute with her the dominion of Asia. Scarcely half a century had elapsed from the fall of Nineveh, when "Belshazzar, the king of the Chaldaeeans, was slain, and Darius, the Median, took the kingdom."[220] From that time Babylonia sank into a mere province of Persia.

After the defeat of Darius and the overthrow of the Persian supremacy, Babylon opened its gates to Alexander, who deemed the city not unworthy to become the capital of his mighty empire. On his return from India he wished to rebuild the temple of Belus, which had fallen into ruins, and in that great work he had intended to employ his army, now no longer needed for war. The priests, however, who had appropriated the revenues of this sacred shrine, and feared lest they would have again to apply them to their rightful purposes, appear to have prevented him from carrying out his design.[221]

The last blow to the prosperity and even existence of Babylon was given by Seleucus when he laid the foundation of his new capital on the banks of the Tigris (B. C. 322). Already Patrocles, his general, had compelled a large number of the inhabitants to abandon their homes, and to take refuge in the Desert, and in the province of Susiana. The city, exhausted by the neighbourhood of Seleucia, returned to its ancient solitude. According to some authors, neither the walls nor the temple of Belus existed any longer, and only a few Chaldaeans continued to dwell around the ruins of their sacred edifices.

Still, however, a part of the population appears to have returned to their former seats, for in the early part of the second century of the Christian era we find the Parthian king, Evemerus, sending numerous families from Babylon into Media to be sold as slaves, and burning many great and beautiful edifices still standing in the city.

In the time of Augustus, the city is said to have been entirely deserted, except by a few Jews who still lingered amongst the ruins. St. Cyril, of Alexandria, declares, that in his day, about the beginning of the fifth century, in consequence of the choking up of the great ca.n.a.ls derived from the Euphrates, Babylon had become a vast marsh: and fifty years later the river is described as having changed its course, leaving only a small channel to mark its ancient bed. Then were verified the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah, that the mighty Babylon should be but "pools of water," "that the sea should come upon her, and that she should be covered with the mult.i.tude of the waves thereof."[222]

In the beginning of the seventh century, at the time of the Arab invasion, the ancient cities of Babylonia were "a desolation, a dry land, and a wilderness." Amidst the heaps that marked the site of Babylon herself there rose the small town of Hillah.[223]

Long before Babylon had overcome her rival Nineveh she was famous for the extent and importance of her commerce. No position could have then been more favourable than hers for carrying on a trade with all the regions of the known world. Even only moderate skill and enterprise could scarcely fail to make Babylon, not only the emporium of the Eastern world, but the main link of commercial intercourse between the East and the West.

The inhabitants did not neglect the advantages bestowed upon them by nature. A system of navigable ca.n.a.ls that may excite the admiration of even the modern engineer, connected together the Euphrates and Tigris, those great arteries of her commerce. With a skill, showing no common knowledge of the art of surveying, and of the principles of hydraulics, the Babylonians took advantage of the different levels in the plains, and of the periodical rises in the two rivers, to complete the water communication between all parts of the province, and to fertilise by artificial irrigation an otherwise barren and unproductive soil.

Alexander, after he had transferred the seat of his empire to the East, so fully understood the importance of these great works, that he ordered them to be cleansed and repaired, and superintended the work in person, steering his boat with his own hand through the channels.

High-roads and causeways across the Desert united Syria and Palestine with Babylonia. Fortified stations protected the merchant from the wandering tribes of Arabia, walled cities served as resting-places and store-houses, and wells at regular intervals gave an abundant supply of water during the hottest season of the year. One of those highways was carried through the centre of Mesopotamia, and crossing the Euphrates near the town of Anthemusia led into central Syria. A second appears to have left Babylon by the western quarter of the city, and entered Idumaea, after pa.s.sing through the country of the Nabathaeans. Others branched off to Tadmor, and to cities which were built in the midst of the Desert almost solely for purposes of trade.

To the east of Babylonia was the celebrated military and commercial road described by Herodotus. It led from Sardis to Susa in ninety days journey, and was furnished, at intervals of about fifteen miles, with stations and public hostelries, probably resembling the modern caravanserais of Persia.

Merchandise and travellers descended the rivers upon rafts of skins, as well as in boats built of reeds coated with bitumen, or of more solid materials. The land trade was no doubt princ.i.p.ally carried on, as at the present day, by caravans of merchants, who loaded their goods on the backs of camels, horses, and a.s.ses.

It is difficult to determine to how far the Babylonians may have navigated in vessels the Indian Ocean. Of the various articles of merchandise stored in Babylon, the produce of the islands and sh.o.r.es of the Persian Gulf, and even of India, formed no inconsiderable part. Pearls, from the fisheries of Bahrein, which still supply Arabia, Persia, and Turkey, and perhaps even from Ceylon; cotton, spices, frankincense, precious stones, ivory, ebony, silks, and dyes, were amongst the objects of trade brought to her markets. They could only have been obtained from the southern coasts of Arabia, and directly or indirectly from the Indian peninsula. We learn from the Kouyunjik inscriptions that the people inhabiting the country at the mouths of the united waters of the Tigris and Euphrates possessed vessels in which, when defeated by the a.s.syrians, they took refuge on the sea. The prophet Isaiah also alludes to the ships of the Chaldaeans.[224] Timber for shipbuilding could have been floated with ease from the mountains of Armenia to the very quays of Babylon, or to her ports at the head of the Persian Gulf.

A race of dogs, much prized by the Babylonians, was brought from India. A satrap of Babylon is declared to have devoted the revenues of four cities, to the support of a number of these animals. On a small terracotta tablet in the British Museum, from Col. Rawlinson's collection, obtained, I believe, at Baghdad, but probably found in some ancient ruin in the neighbourhood, is the figure of a man leading a large and powerful dog, which has been identified with a species still existing in Thibet.

Tin, cedar-wood, and various articles, were brought from Phoenicia and other parts of Syria, which were in return supplied with the produce of India and the Persian Gulf, through Babylon.[225]

Whilst the Babylonians thus imported the produce of the East and West, they also supplied foreign countries with many valuable articles of trade. Corn, which according to tradition first grew wild in Mesopotamia, and was there first eaten by man, was cultivated to a great extent, and was sent to distant provinces. The Babylonian carpets, silks, and woollen fabrics, woven or embroidered with figures of mythic animals and with exquisite designs, were not less famous for the beauty of their texture and workmanship, than for the richness and variety of their colors. The much-prized Sindones, or flowing garments, were the work of the looms of Babylon even long after she had ceased to be a city.[226]

The engraved gems and cylinders discovered in the ruins bear ample witness to the skill of the Babylonian lapidaries. Many of these relics exist in European collections, and, during my residence at Hillah, I was able to obtain several interesting specimens from the Arabs, who usually pick them up on the mounds after rain. The most remarkable of them is a cylinder of spotted sienite, upon which are incised seven figures, and a few Babylonian characters. The letters of the inscription are rudely formed, and have not yet been deciphered.

Another interesting gem obtained by me at Babylon is an agate cone, upon the base of which is engraved a winged priest or deity, standing in an att.i.tude of prayer before a c.o.c.k on an altar. Above this group is the crescent moon. The Hebrew commentators conjecture that Nergal, the idol of the men of Cuth, had the form of a c.o.c.k.[227]