A Night Of Surrender The Royal Heirs Lizabeth

Scott download

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-surrender-the-royal-
heirs-lizabeth-scott-49261794

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

A Night Of Surrender The Royal Heirs Lizabeth Scott

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-surrender-the-royal-heirs-
lizabeth-scott-48570060

A Night Of Surrender The Royal Heirs Lizabeth Scott

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-surrender-the-royal-heirs-
lizabeth-scott-48587480

A Night Of Surrender The Royal Heirs Lizabeth Scott

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-surrender-the-royal-heirs-
lizabeth-scott-52000306

A Night Of Surrender The Royal Heirs Lizabeth Scott

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-surrender-the-royal-heirs-
lizabeth-scott-49944884
A Night Of Secret Surrender Sophia James

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-secret-surrender-sophia-
james-43087394

A Night Of Revelry And Envy Vices Hedonism Mallory Fox Rosa Lee

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-revelry-and-envy-vices-
hedonism-mallory-fox-rosa-lee-48570386

A Night Of Passion With The Duke A Steamy Historical Regency Romance

Novel Maybel Bardot

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-passion-with-the-duke-a-
steamy-historical-regency-romance-novel-maybel-bardot-56908336

A Night Of Forever Bronwen Evans

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-forever-bronwen-
evans-32753576

A Night Of Sin And Corruption A Deadly Sins Anthology Vices And

Hedonism 1st Edition Indie Black

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-night-of-sin-and-corruption-a-deadly-
sins-anthology-vices-and-hedonism-1st-edition-indie-black-46383464
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
The outer city-wall, already described, dates only from the Neo-Babylonian
period, when the earlier and smaller city expanded with the prosperity
which followed the victories of Nabopolassar and his son. The eastern limits
of that earlier city, at any rate toward the close of the Assyrian domination,
did not extend beyond the inner wall, which was then the only line of
defence and was directly connected with the main citadel. The course of
the inner wall may still be traced for a length of seventeen hundred metres
by the low ridge or embankment,[35] running approximately north and
south, from a point north-east of the mound Homera.[36] It was a double
fortification, consisting of two walls of crude or unburnt brick, with a space
between of rather more than seven metres. The thicker of the walls, on the
west, which is six and a half metres in breadth, has large towers built
across it, projecting deeply on the outer side, and alternating with smaller
towers placed lengthwise along it. The outer or eastern wall has smaller
towers at regular intervals. Now along the north side of the main or
Southern Citadel run a pair of very similar walls,[37] also of crude brick, and
they are continued eastward of the citadel to a point where, in the Persian
period, the Euphrates through a change of course destroyed all further
trace of them.[38] We may confidently assume that in the time of
Nebuchadnezzar[39] they were linked up with the inner city-wall to the
north of Homeni and formed its continuation after it turned at right angles
on its way towards the river-bank. This line of fortification is of considerable
interest, as there is reason to believe it may represent the famous double-
line of Babylon's defences, which is referred to again and again in the
inscriptions.
 FIG. 6.
PLAN OF THE SOUTHERN CITADEL.
A: East Court of the Palace of Nebuchadnezzar. B: Central
Court. C: Great Court. D: Private portion of palace built over
earlier Palace of Nabopolassar. E: West extension of palace. F:
Throne Room of Nebuchadnezzar. G: Sacred Road, known as
Aibur-shabû. H: Ishtar Gate. I: Continuation of Sacred Road with
Lion Frieze. J: Temple of Ninmakh. K: Space between the two
fortification-walls of crude brick, probably Imgur-Bêl and Nimitti-
Bêl. L: Older moat-wall. M: Later moat-wall. N: Later fortification
thrown out into the bed of the Euphrates. P: Southern Canal,
probably part of the Libil-khegalla. R: Basin of canal. S: Persian
building. T: Moat, formerly the left side of the Euphrates. V:
River-side embankment of the Persian period, a: Gateway to
East Court, b: Gateway to Central Court, c: Gateway to Great
Court, d: Double Gateway to private part of palace, e, f:
Temporary ramps used during construction of palace, g:
Temporary wall of crude brick, h: Broad passage-way, leading
northwards to Vaulted Building.
(After Koldewey, Reuther and Wetzel.)

The two names the Babylonians gave these walls were suggested by their
gratitude to and confidence in Marduk, the city-god, who for them was the
"Bêl," or Lord, par excellence. To the greater of the two, the dûru or inner
wall, they gave the name Imgur-Bêl, meaning "Bêl has been gracious";
while the shaikhu, or outer one, they called Nimitti-Bêl, that is, probably,
"The foundation of Bêl," or "My foundation is Bêl."[40] The identification of
at least one of the crude-brick walls near Homera with Nimitti-Bêl, has been
definitely proved by several foundation-cylinders of Ashur-bani-pal, the
famous Assyrian king who deposed his brother Shamash-shum-ukîn from
the throne of Babylon and annexed the country as a province of Assyria.[41]
On the cylinders he states that the walls Imgur-Bêl and Nimitti-Bêl had
fallen into ruins, and he records his restoration of the latter, within the
foundation or structure of which the cylinders were originally immured.
Unfortunately they were not found in place, but among the débris in the
space between the walls, so that it is not now certain from which wall they
came. If they had been deposited in the thicker or inner wall, then Nimitti-
Bêl must have been a double line of fortification, and both walls together
must have borne the name; and in that case we must seek elsewhere for
Imgur-Bêl. But it is equally possible that they came from the narrow or
outer wall; and on this alternative Nimitti-Bêl may be the outer one and
Imgur-Bêl the broader inner-wall with the widely projecting towers. It is
true that only further excavation can settle the point; but meanwhile the
fortifications on the Ḳaṣr have supplied further evidence which seems to
support the latter view.
The extensive alterations which took
place in the old citadel's fortifications,
especially during Nebuchadnezzar's
long reign of forty-three years, led to
the continual dismantling of earlier
structures and the enlargement of the
area enclosed upon the north and west.
This is particularly apparent in its
north-west corner. Here, at a
considerable depth below the later
FIG. 7. fortification-walls, were found the
GROUND-PLAN OF QUAY-WALLS remains of four earlier walls,[42] the
AND FORTIFICATION-WALLS IN THE discovery of which has thrown
N.W. CORNER OF THE S. CITADEL.
considerable light on the topography of
A: Sargon's quay-wall. B: Older moat- this portion of Babylon. All four are
wall. C: Later moat-wall of ancient quay-walls, their northern and
Nebuchadnezzar. D: Intermediate wall.
E: South fortification-wall of crude brick, western faces sloping sharply inwards
probably Imgur-Bêl. F: North as they rise. Each represents a fresh
fortification-wall of crude brick, probably
rebuilding of the quay, as it was
Nimitti-Bêl. G: North wall of the Southern
Citadel. I: Ruins of building, possibly the gradually extended to the north and
quarters of the Captain of the Wall. J: west. Fortunately, stamped and
Palace of Nabopolassar. K: West inscribed bricks were employed in
Extension of the Southern Citadel. L: considerable quantities in their
Connecting wall. M: Later wall across
construction, so that it is possible to
channel with grid for water. N: Water,
originally the left side of the Euphrates. date the periods of rebuilding
P: Later fortification of Nebuchadnezzar accurately.
in former bed of the Euphrates. 1-3:
Nabopolassar's quay-walls. N.B. The
The earliest of the quay-walls, which is
quays and moat-walls are distinguishedalso the earliest building yet recovered
by dotting. on the Ḳaṣr, is the most massive of the
(After Koldewey.) four,[43] and is strengthened at the
angle with a projecting circular bastion.
It is the work of Sargon of Assyria,[44]
who states the object of the structure in a text inscribed upon several of its
bricks. After reciting his own name and titles, he declares that it was his
desire to rebuild Imgur-Bêl; that with this object he caused burnt-bricks to
be fashioned, and built a quay-wall with pitch and bitumen in the depth of
the water from beside the Ishtar Gate to the bank of the Euphrates; and he
adds that he "founded Imgur-Bêl and Nimitti-Bêl mountain-high upon it."
[45] The two walls of Sargon, which he here definitely names as Imgur-Bêl
and Nimitti-Bêl, were probably of crude brick, and were, no doubt,
demolished and replaced by the later structures of Nabopolassar's and
Nebuchadnezzar's reigns. But they must have occupied approximately the
same position as the two crude brick walls above the quay of Sargon,[46]
which run from the old bank of the Euphrates to the Ishtar Gate, precisely
the two points mentioned in Sargon's text. His evidence is therefore
strongly in favour of identifying these later crude-brick walls, which we have
already connected with the inner city-wall, as the direct successors of his
Imgur-Bêl and his Nimitti-Bêl, and therefore as inheritors of the ancient
names.
 FIG. 8.
SECTION OF THE QUAY-WALLS AND FORTIFICATION-WALLS
ALONG THE NORTH FRONT OF THE SOUTHERN CITADEL.
A: Sargon's quay-wall. B: Older moat-wall. O: Later moat-wall of
Nebuchadnezzar. D: Intermediate wall. E: South fortification-wall of
crude brick, probably Imgur-Bêl. F: North fortification-wall of crude
brick, probably Nimitti-Bêl. G: North wall of Southern Citadel. H:
Remains of older crude brick wall.
(After Andrae.)

We find further confirmation of this view in one of the later quay-walls,

which succeeded that of Sargon. The three narrow walls already referred
to[47] were all the work of Nabopolassar, and represent three successive
extensions of the quay westward into the bed of the stream, which in the
inscriptions upon their bricks is given the name of Arakhtu.[48] But the texts
make no mention of the city-walls. No inscriptions at all have been found in
the structure of the next extension, represented by the wall B, which, like
the latest quay-wall (C), is not rounded off in the earlier manner, but is
strengthened at the corner with a massive rectangular bastion. It was in
this latest and most substantial of all the quay-walls that further inscriptions
were found referring to Imgur-Bêl. They prove that this wall was the work
of Nebuchadnezzar, who refers in them to Nabopolassar's restoration of
Imgur-Bêl and records that he raised its banks with bitumen and burnt-
brick mountain-high. It is therefore clear that this was the quay-wall of
Imgur Bêl, which it supported in the manner of Sargon's earlier structure.
That the less important Nimitti-Bêl is not mentioned in these texts does not
necessitate our placing it elsewhere, in view of Sargon's earlier reference.
We may therefore provisionally regard the two crude-brick walls along the
Ḳaṣr's northern front[49] as a section of the famous defences of Babylon,
and picture them as running eastward till they meet the inner city-wall by
Homera. The point at which they extended westward across the Euphrates
can, as yet, only be conjectured. But it is significant that the angle of the
western walls, which may still be traced under mounds to the north of
Sinjar village,[50] is approximately in line with the north front of the Ḳaṣr
and the end of the inner wall by Homera. Including these western walls
within our scheme, the earlier Babylon would have been rectangular in
ground-plan, about a quarter of it only upon the right bank, and the portion
east of the river forming approximately a square. The Babylon of the
Kassite period and of the First Dynasty must have been smaller still, its area
covering little more than the three principal mounds; and, though part of its
street net-work has been recovered, no trace of its fortifications has
apparently survived.
The evidence relating to the city's walls and fortifications has been
summarized rather fully, as it has furnished the chief subject of controversy
in connexion with the excavations. It should be added that the view
suggested above is not shared by Dr. Koldewey, whose objections to the
proposed identification of Imgur-Bêl rest on his interpretation of two
phrases in a cylinder of Nabopolassar, which was found out of place in
débris close to the east wall of the Southern Citadel. In it Nabopolassar
records his own restoration of Imgur-Bêl, which he tells us had fallen into
decay, and he states that he "founded it in the primæval abyss," adding the
words, "I caused Babylon to be enclosed with it towards the four winds."
[51] From the reference to the abyss, Dr. Koldewey concludes that it had
deep foundations, and must therefore have been constructed of burnt, not
crude, brick; while from the second phrase he correctly infers that it must
have formed a quadrilateral closed on all sides. But that, as we have seen,
is precisely the ground-plan we obtain by including the remains of walls
west of the river. And, in view of the well-known tendency to exaggeration
in these Neo-Babylonian records, we should surely not credit any single
metaphor with the accuracy of a modern architect's specification. If a single
section of the wall had been furnished, during restoration, with a burnt-
brick substructure, it would have been enough to justify the royal claim.
The manner in which the Euphrates was utilized for the defence and water-
supply of the citadel has also been illustrated by the excavations. The
discovery of Sargon's inscriptions proved that in his day the river flowed
along the western face of his quay-wall;[52] while the inscriptions on bricks
from the three successive quay-walls of Nabopolassar[53] state, in each
case, that he used them to rebuild the wall of a channel he calls the
"Arakhtu," using the name in precisely the same way as Sargon refers to
the Euphrates. The simplest explanation is that in Nabopolassar's time the
Arakhtu was the name for that section of the Euphrates which washed the
western side of the citadel, and that its use in any case included the portion
of the citadel-moat, or canal, along its northern face, which formed a basin
opening directly upon the river.[54] The "Arakhtu" may thus have been a
general term, not only for this basin, but for the whole water-front from the
north-west corner of the citadel to some point on the left bank to the south
of it. It may perhaps have been further extended to include the river
frontage of the Tower of Babylon, since it was into the Arakhtu that
Sennacherib cast the tower on his destruction of the city. Within this stretch
of water, particularly along the northern quays, vessels and keleks would
have been moored which arrived down stream with supplies for the palace
and the garrison. The Arakhtu, in fact, may well have been the name for
the ancient harbour or dock of Babylon.
Some idea of the appearance of the quays may be gathered from the right-
hand corner of the restoration in Fig. 5.[55] It is true that the outer quay-
wall appears to have been built to replace the inner one, while in the
illustration both are shown. But since the height of the citadel and of its
walls was continually being raised, the arrangement there suggested is by
no means impossible. But in the later part of his reign Nebuchadnezzar
changed the aspect of the river-front entirely. To the west of the quay-walls,
in the bed of the river, he threw out a massive fortification with immensely
thick walls, from twenty to twenty-five metres in breadth.[56] It was
constructed entirely of burnt-brick and bitumen, and, from his reference to
it in an inscription from Sippar, it would seem that his object in building it
was to prevent the formation of sandbanks in the river, which in the past
may have caused the flooding of the left bank above E-Sagila.[57] A narrow
channel[58] was left between it and the old quay, along which the river
water continued to flow through gratings. This no doubt acted as an
overflow for the old northern moat of the citadel, since the latter fed the
supply-canal, which passed round the palace and may still be traced along
its south side.[59] It is possible that the subsequent change in the course of
the Euphrates may be traced in part to this huge river-fortification. Its
massive structure suggests that it had to withstand considerable water-
pressure, and it may well have increased any tendency of the stream to
break away eastward. However that may be, it is certain that for a
considerable time during the Persian and Seleucid periods it flowed round
to the eastward of the Ḳaṣr, close under three sides of the citadel and
rejoined its former bed to the north of Marduk's temple and the Tower of
Babylon. Its course east of the Ishtar Gate is marked by a late embankment
sloping outwards, which supported the thicker of the crude-brick walls at
the point where they suddenly break off.[60] Beyond this embankment only
mud and river sediment were found. The water-course to the south of the
citadel is probably the point where the river turned again towards the
channel it had deserted. A trench that was dug here showed that the
present soil is formed of silt deposited by water, and beyond the remains of
the earlier canal no trace of any building was recovered. This temporary
change in the river's course, which the excavations have definitely proved,
explains another puzzle presented by the classical tradition—the striking
discrepancy between the actual position of the principal ruins of Babylon in
relation to the river and their recorded position in the Persian period.
Herodotus,[61] for example, places the fortress with the palace of the kings
(that is, the Ḳaṣr), on the opposite bank to the sacred precinct of Zeus
Belus (that is, E-temen-anki, the Tower of Babylon). But we have now
obtained proof that they were separated at that time by the Euphrates,
until the river returned to its former and present bed, probably before the
close of the Seleucid period.
The greater part of the Southern Citadel is occupied by the enormous
palace on which Nebuchadnezzar lavished his energies during so many
years of his reign. On ascending the throne of Babylon, he found the
ancient fortress a very different place to the huge structure he bequeathed
to his successors. He had lived there in his father's life-time, but
Nabopolassar had been content with a comparatively modest dwelling. And
when his son, flushed with his victory over the hosts of Egypt, returned to
Babylon to take the hands of Bêl, he began to plan a palace that should be
worthy of the empire he had secured. Of the old palace of Nabopolassar, in
which at first he was obliged to dwell, very little now remains. What is left
of it constitutes the earliest building of which traces now exist within the
palace area. Nebuchadnezzar describes it, before his own building
operations, as extending from the Euphrates eastward to the Sacred Road;
and the old palace-enclosure undoubtedly occupied that site. Traces of the
old fortification-wall have been found below the east front of the later
palace, and the arched doorway which gave access to its open court,
afterwards filled up and built over by Nebuchadnezzar, has been found in a
perfect state of preservation.[62]
 III. The Throne Room in Nebuchadnezzar's palace at Babylon, showing the
recess in the back wall where the throne once stood.

The old palace itself[63] did not reach beyond the western side of
Nebuchadnezzar's great court.[64] The upper structure, as we learn
from the East India House Inscription,[65] was of crude brick, which
was demolished for the later building. But Nabopolassar, following a
custom which had survived unchanged from the time of Hammurabi,
had placed his crude-brick walls upon burnt-brick foundations. These
his son made use of, simply strengthening them before erecting his
own walls upon them. Thus this section of the new palace retained
the old ground-plan to a great extent unchanged. The strength and
size of its walls are remarkable and may in part be explained by the
crude-brick upper structure of the earlier building, which necessarily
demanded a broader base for its walls.
When Nebuchadnezzar began building he dwelt in the old palace,
while he strengthened the walls of its open court on the east and
raised its level for the solid platform on which his own palace was to
rise.[66] For a time the new and the old palace were connected by two
ramps of unburnt-brick,[67] which were afterwards filled in below the
later pavement of the great court; and we may picture the king
ascending the ramps with his architect on his daily inspection of the
work. As soon as the new palace on the east was ready he moved
into it, and, having demolished the old one, he built up his own walls
upon its foundations, and filled in the intermediate spaces with earth
and rubble until he raised its pavement to the eastern level. Still later
he built out a further extension[68] along its western side. In the
account he has left us of the palace-building the king says: "I laid firm
its foundation and raised it mountain-high with bitumen and burnt-
brick. Mighty cedars I caused to be stretched out at length for its
roofing. Door-leaves of cedar overlaid with copper, thresholds and
sockets of bronze I placed in its doorways. Silver and gold and
precious stones, all that can be imagined of costliness, splendour,
wealth, riches, all that was highly esteemed, I heaped up within it, I
stored up immense abundance of royal treasure therein."[69]
A good general idea of the palace ground-plan, in its final form, may
be obtained from Fig. 6. The main entrance was in its eastern front,
through a gate-way,[70] flanked on its outer side by towers, and
known as the Bûb Bêlti, or "Lady Gate," no doubt from its proximity to
the temple of the goddess Ninmakh.[71] The gate-house consists of
an entrance hall, with rooms opening at the sides for the use of the
palace-guard. The eastern part of the palace is built to the north and
south of three great open courts,[72] separated from each other by
gateways[73] very like that at the main entrance to the palace. It will
be noticed that, unlike the arrangement of a European dwelling, the
larger rooms are always placed on the south side of the court facing
to the north, for in the sub-tropical climate of Babylonia the heat of
the summer sun was not courted, and these chambers would have
been in the shade throughout almost the whole of the day.
Some of the larger apartments, including possibly the chambers of the
inner gateways, must have served as courts of justice, for from the
Hammurabi period onward we know that the royal palace was the
resort of litigants, whose appeals in the earlier period were settled by
the king himself,[74] and later by the judges under his supervision.
Every kind of commercial business was carried on within the palace
precincts, and not only were regular lawsuits tried, but any
transaction that required legal attestation was most conveniently
carried through there. Proof of this may be seen in the fact that so
many of the Neo-Babylonian contracts that have been recovered on
the site of Babylon are dated from the Al-Bît-shar-Bâbili, "the City of
the King of Babylon's dwelling," doubtless a general title for the
citadel and palace-area. All government business was also transacted
here, and we may provisionally assign to the higher ministers and
officials of the court the great apartment and the adjoining dwellings
on the south side of the Central Court of the palace.[75] For many of
the more important officers in the king's service were doubtless
housed on the premises; and to those of lower rank we may assign
the similar but rather smaller dwellings, which flank the three courts
on the north and the Entrance Court upon the south side as well.
Even royal manufactories were carried on within the palace, to judge
from the large number of alabaster jars, found beside their cylindrical
cores, in one room in the south-west corner by the outer palace-wall.
[76]

It will be seen from the ground-plan that these dwellings consist of

rooms built around open courts or light-wells; most of them are
separate dwellings, isolated from their neighbours, and having doors
opening on to the greater courts or into passage-ways running up
from them. No trace of any windows has been found within the
buildings, and it is probable that they were very sparsely employed.
But we must not conclude that they were never used, since no wall of
the palace has been preserved for more than a few feet in height,
and, for the greater part, their foundations only have survived. But
there is no doubt that, like the modern houses of the country, all the
dwellings, whether in palace or city, had flat roofs, which formed the
natural sleeping-place for their inhabitants during the greater part of
the year. Towards sunset, when the heat of the day was past, they
would ascend to the house-tops to enjoy the evening breeze; during
the day a window would have been merely a further inlet for the sun.
The general appearance of the palace is no doubt accurately rendered
in the sketch already given.[77]
The most interesting apartment
within the palace is one that may
be identified as Nebuchadnezzar's
Throne Room. This is the room
immediately to the south of the
Great Court.[78] It is the largest
chamber of the palace, and since
the walls on the longer sides are
six metres thick, far broader than
those at the ends, it is possible
Fig. 9.
that they supported a barrel-
vaulting. It has three entrances
PLAN OF THE THRONE ROOM OF
NEBUCHADNEZZAR from the court,[79] and in the
AND PART OF THE PRIVATE PALACE back wall opposite the centre one
C: Great Court. F: Throne Room, a: is a broad niche, doubly recessed
Recess in back-wall for throne, b-d: into the structure of the wall,
Entrances to Throne Room from Court, where we may assume the royal
e-g: Entrances from side and back. 1-3: throne once stood. During any
Open courts, surrounded by rooms for
the royal service. 4, 5: Open courts in
elaborate court ceremony the
the south-east corner of the Private king would thus have been visible
Palace. (After Koldewey.) upon his throne, not only to those
within the chamber, but also from
the central portion of the Great
Court. It was in this portion of the palace that some traces of the later
Babylonian methods of mural decoration were discovered. For, while
the inner walls of the Throne Room were merely washed over with a
plaster of white gypsum, the brickwork of the outer façade, which
faced the court, was decorated with brightly-coloured enamels.
Only fragments of the enamelled surface were discovered, but these
sufficed to restore the scheme of decoration. A series of yellow
columns with bright blue capitals, both edged with white borders,
stand out against a dark blue ground. The capitals are the most
striking feature of the composition. Each consists of two sets of
double volutes, one above the other, and a white rosette with yellow
centre comes partly into sight above them. Between each member is
a bud in sheath, forming a trefoil, and linking the volutes of the
capitals by means of light blue bands which fall in a shallow curve
from either side of it. Still higher on the wall ran a frieze of double
palmettes in similar colouring, between yellow line-borders, the
centres of the latter picked out with lozenges coloured black and
yellow, and black and white, alternately. The rich effect of this
enamelled façade of the Throne Room was enhanced by the
decoration of the court gateway, the surface of which was adorned in
a like fashion with figures of lions. So too were the gateways of the
other eastern courts, to judge from the fragments of enamel found
there, but the rest of the court-walls were left undecorated or,
perhaps, merely received a coat of plaster. The fact that the interior of
the Throne Room, like the rest of the chambers of the palace, was
without ornamentation of any sort favours the view that heat, and
light with it, was deliberately excluded by the absence of windows in
the walls.
 FIG. 10.
DESIGN IN ENAMELLED BRICK FROM THE FAÇADE OF THE
THRONE ROOM
In the drawing light and dark blue are indicated by light and heavy
horizontal shading; yellow by a dotted surface.

The chambers behind the Throne Room, reached by two doorways in

the back wall,[80] were evidently for the king's service, and are
ranged around three open courts; and in the south-west corners of
two of them, which lie immediately behind the Throne Room wall, are
wells, their positions indicated on the plan by small open circles. The
walls of each of these small chambers are carried down through the
foundations to water-level, and the intermediate space is filled in
around the wells with rubble-packing. This device was evidently
adopted to secure an absolutely pure supply of water for the royal
table. But the private part of the palace, occupied by the women and
the rest of the royal household, was evidently further to the west,
built over the earlier dwelling of Nabopolassar. It will be seen from the
ground-plan that this is quite distinct from the eastern or official
portion of the palace, from which it is separated by a substantial wall
and passage-way running, with the Great Court, the whole width of
the palace-area. The character of the gateway-building, which formed
its chief entrance and opened on the Great Court, is also significant.
[81] For the towers, flanking the gateways to the official courts, are
here entirely absent, and the pathway passes through two successive
apartments, the second smaller than the first and with a porters'
service-room opening off it. The entrance for the king's own use was
in the southern half of the passage-way, and lies immediately
between the side entrance to the Throne Room[82] and another
doorway in the passage leading to one of the small courts behind it.
[83] In two of the chambers within the private palace, both opening
on to Court 5, are two more circular wells, walled in for protection,
and here too the foundations of each chamber are carried down to
water-level and filled in with brick-rubble, as in the case of the wells
behind the Throne Room.
The same care that was taken to ensure the purity of the water-
supply may also be detected in the elaborate drainage-system, with
which the palace was provided, with the object of carrying off the
surface-water from the flat palace-roofs, the open courts, and the
fortification-walls. The larger drains were roofed with corbelled
courses; the smaller ones, of a simpler but quite effective
construction, were formed of bricks set together in the shape of a V
and closed in at the top with other bricks laid flat. The tops of the
fortifications, both in the citadel itself and on the outer and inner city-
wall, were drained by means of vertical shafts, or gutters, running
down within the solid substructures of the towers; and in the case of
crude-brick buildings these have a lining of burnt-brick. In some of
the temples, which, as we shall see, were invariably built of crude
brick,[84] this form of drainage was also adopted.

FIG. 11.
PLAN OF THE NORTH-EAST CORNER
OF THE PALACE WITH THE VAULTED
BUILDING.
A: East Court of the Palace. B: Central
Court. H: Ishtar Gate. I: Vaulted Building. J:
Southern fortification-wall of crude brick,
probably Imgur-Bêl. h: Passage-way
leading to the Vaulted Building, m, n:
Entrances to the Vaulted Building. 1-15:
Small open courts or light-wells in official
residencies.
(After Koldewey.)

One other building within the palace deserves mention, as it has been
suggested that it may represent the remains of the famous Hanging
Gardens of Babylon.[85] It is reached from the north-east corner of
the Central Court[86] along a broad passage-way,[87] from which a
branch passage turns off at right angles; and on the left side of this
narrower passage are its two entrances.[88] It must be confessed that
at first sight the ground-plan of this building does not suggest a
garden of any sort, least of all one that became famous as a wonder
of the ancient world. It will be seen that the central part, or core, of
the building is surrounded by a strong wall and within are fourteen
narrow cells or chambers, seven on each side of a central gangway.
[89] The cells were roofed in with semicircular arches, forming a barrel
vault over each; and the whole is encircled by a narrow corridor,
flanked on the north and east sides by the outer palace-wall. This part
of the building, both the vaulted chambers and the surrounding
corridor, lies completely below the level of the rest of the palace. The
small chambers, some of them long and narrow like the vaults, which
enclose the central core upon the west and south, are on the palace
level; and the subterranean portion is reached by a stairway in one of
the rooms on the south side.[90]
There are two main reasons which suggested the identification of this
building with the Hanging Gardens. The first is that hewn stone was
used in its construction, which is attested by the numerous broken
fragments discovered among its ruins. With the exception of the
Sacred Road and the bridge over the Euphrates, there is only one
other place on the whole site of Babylon where hewn stone is used in
bulk for building purposes, and that is the northern wall of the Ḳaṣr.
Now, in all the literature referring to Babylon, stone is only recorded
to have been used for buildings in two places, and those are the north
wall of the Citadel and in the Hanging Gardens, a lower layer in the
latter's roofing, below the layer of earth, being described as made of
stone. These facts certainly point to the identification of the Vaulted
Building with the Hanging Gardens.[91] Moreover, Berossus definitely
places them within the buildings by which Nebuchadnezzar enlarged
his father's palace; but this reference would apply equally to the later
Central Citadel constructed by Nebuchadnezzar immediately to the
north of his main palace. The size of the building is also far greater in
Strabo and Diodorus than that of the Vaulted Building, the side of the
quadrangle, according to these writers, measuring about four times
the latter's length. But discrepancy in figures of this sort, as we have
already seen in the case of the outer walls of the city, is easily
explicable and need not be reckoned as a serious objection.[92]
The second reason which pointed to the identification is that, in one
of the small chambers near the south-west corner of the outer fringe
of rooms on those two sides, there is a very remarkable well. It
consists of three adjoining shafts, a square one in the centre flanked
by two of oblong shape. This arrangement, unique so far as the
remains of ancient Babylon are concerned, may be most satisfactorily
explained on the assumption that we here have the water-supply for a
hydraulic machine, constructed on the principle of a chain-pump. The
buckets, attached to an endless chain, would have passed up one of
the outside wells, over a great wheel fixed above them, and, after
emptying their water into a trough as they passed, would have
descended the other outside well for refilling. The square well in the
centre obviously served as an inspection-chamber, down which an
engineer could descend to clean the well out, or to remove any
obstruction. In the modern contrivances of this sort, sometimes
employed to-day in Babylonia to raise a continuous flow of water to
the irrigation-trenches, the motive-power for turning the winch is
supplied by horses or other animals moving round in a circle. In the
Vaulted Building there would have been scarcely room for such an
arrangement, and it is probable that gangs of slaves were employed
to work a couple of heavy hand-winches. The discovery of the well
undoubtedly serves to strengthen the case for identification.
 EASTERN TOWERS OF THE ISHTAR GATE

Two alternative schemes are put forward to reconstitute the upper

structure of this building. Its massive walls suggest in any case that
they were intended to support a considerable weight, and it may be
that the core of the building, constructed over the subterranean
vaults, towered high above its surrounding chambers which are on the
palace-level. This would have been in accordance with the current
conception of a hanging garden; and, since on two sides it was
bounded by the palace-wall, its trees and vegetation would have been
visible from outside the citadel. Seen thus from the lower level of the
town, the height of the garden would have been reinforced by the
whole height of the Citadel-mound on which the palace stands, and
imagination once kindled might have played freely with its actual
measurements.
On the other hand, the semicircular arches, still preserved within the
central core, may have directly supported the thick layer of earth in
which the trees of the garden were planted. These would then have
been growing on the palace-level, as it were in a garden-court,
perhaps surrounded by a pillared colonnade with the outer chambers
opening on to it on the west and south sides. In either scheme the
subterranean vaults can only have been used as stores or magazines,
since they were entirely without light. As a matter of fact, a large
number of tablets were found in the stairway-chamber that leads
down to them; and, since the inscriptions upon them relate to grain, it
would seem that some at least were used as granaries. But this is a
use to which they could only have been put if the space above them
was not a garden, watered continuously by an irrigation-pump, as
moisture would have been bound to reach the vaults.[93]
Whichever alternative scheme we adopt, it must be confessed that
the Hanging Gardens have not justified their reputation. And if they
merely formed a garden-court, as Dr. Koldewey inclines to believe, it
is difficult to explain the adjectives [κρεμαστός] and pensilis. For the
subterranean vaults would have been completely out of sight, and,
even when known to be below the pavement-level, were not such as
to excite wonder or to suggest the idea of suspension in the air. One
cannot help suspecting that the vaulted building may really, after all,
be nothing more than the palace granary, and the triple well one of
the main water-supplies for domestic use. We may, at least for the
present, be permitted to hope that a more convincing site for the
gardens will be found in the Central Citadel after further excavation.
 FIG. 12.
BULL IN ENAMELLED BRICK FROM THE ISHTAR GATE.

In the autumn of 1901 the writer spent some time in Babylon,

stopping with Dr. Koldewey in the substantial expedition-house they
have built with fine burnt-brick from Nebuchadnezzar's palace. At that
time he had uncovered a good deal of the palace, and it was even
then possible to trace out the walls of the Throne Room and note the
recess where the throne itself had stood. But, beyond the fragments
of the enamelled façade, little of artistic interest had been found, and
on other portions of the site the results had been still more
disappointing. The deep excavation of E-sagila had already been
made, the temple of the goddess Ninmakh had been completely
excavated, and work was in full swing on that of the god Ninib. All
proved to be of unburnt brick,[94] and the principal decoration of the
walls was a thin lime-wash. Their discoverer was inclined to be
sceptical of Babylon's fabled splendour.
 FIG. 13.
DRAGON IN ENAMELLED BRICK FROM THE ISHTAR GATE.

But in the following spring he made the discovery which still remains
the most striking achievement of the expedition, and has rehabilitated
the fame of that ancient city. This was the great Ishtar Gate, which
spanned Babylon's Sacred Way, and the bulls and dragons with which
it was adorned have proved that the glyptic art of Babylonia attained
a high level of perfection during its later period. The gate was erected
at the point where the Sacred Way entered the older city. It was, in
fact, the main gate in the two walls of crude brick along the north
side of the Citadel, which we have seen reason to believe were the
famous defences, Imgur-Bêl and Nimitti-Bêl.[95] Its structure, when
rebuilt by Nebuchadnezzar, was rather elaborate.[96] It is a double
gateway consisting of two separate gate-houses,[97] each with an
outer and an inner door.[98] The reason for this is that the line of
fortification is a double one, and each of its walls has a gateway of its
own. But the gates are united into a single structure by means of
short connecting walls, which complete the enclosure of the Gateway
Court.[99]
 FIG. 14.
GROUND-PLAN OF THE ISHTAR
GATE.
The ground-plan of the gateway is
indicated in black; other walls and
buildings are hatched. A: Sacred Way to
north of gate. B: Gate of outer wall. C:
Gateway Court. D: Gate of inner wall. E:
Space between west wings. F: Space
between east wings. G: Sacred way to
south of gate. H: North-east corner of
Palace. K: Temple of the goddess
Ninmakh. S: Steps leading down from
level of Sacred Way. 1, 2: Doorways of
outer gate. 3, 4: Doorways of inner gate.
(After Koldewey.)

Dr. Koldewey considers it probable that this court was roofed in, to
protect the great pair of doors, which swung back into it, from the
weather. But if so, the whole roofing of the gateway must have been
at the same low level; whereas the thick walls of the inner gate-house
suggest that it and its arched doorways rose higher than the outer
gateway, as is suggested in the section[100] and in the reconstruction
of the Citadel.[101]
 FIG. 15.
SECTION OF THE ISHTAR GATE.
The section is conjecturally restored, looking from west to east;
the index capitals and figures correspond to those in Fig. 14. A:
Sacred Way to north of gate. B: Gate of outer wall. C: Gateway
Court. D: Gate of inner wall. G: Sacred way to south of gate. 1,
2: Doorways of outer gate. 3, 4: Doorways of inner gate, a:
Traces of pavement. 6: Level of second pavement, c: Level of
final pavement. d: Present ground-level, e: Level of ground
before excavation. It will be noticed that the portions of the gate
preserved are all below the final pavement-level.
(After Andrae.)

It thus appears more probable that the court between the two
gateways was left open, and that the two inner arches[102] rose far
higher than those of the outer gate.[103] And there is the more reason
for this, as an open court would have given far more light for viewing
the remarkable decoration of the gateway upon its inner walls.
It will be noticed in the plan that the central roadway is not the only
entrance through the gate; on each side of the two central gate-
houses a wing is thrown out, making four wings in all. These also are
constructed of burnt-brick, and they serve to connect the gate with
the two fortification-walls of unburnt brick. In each wing is a further
door, giving access to the space between the walls. Thus, in all, the
gate has three separate entrances, and no less than eight doorways,
four ranged along the central roadway, and two in each double wing.

FIG. 16.
DIAGRAM TO SHOW THE
ARRANGEMENT OF THE BEASTS OF
THE ISHTAR GATE.
The ground-plan of the gate is shown in
outline, the arrows indicating the
positions of Bulls or Dragons still in
place upon its walls. The head of each
arrow points in the same direction as the
beast to which it refers. Where no
beasts are preserved, the foundations of
the structure are indicated by a dotted
line. The index letters correspond to
those in Fig. 14.
(After Koldewey.)

The whole wall-surface of the gateway on its northern side, both

central towers and side-wings, was decorated with alternate rows of
bulls and dragons in brick relief, the rows ranged one above the other
up the surface of walls and towers. The decoration is continued over
the whole interior surface of the central gateways and may be traced
along the southern front of the inner gate-house. The beasts are
arranged in such a way that to any one entering the city they would
appear as though advancing to meet him. In the accompanying
diagram,[104] which gives the ground-plan of the gate in outline, the
arrows indicate the positions of beasts that are still in place upon the
walls, and the head of each arrow points in the direction that animal
faces. It will be noticed that along most of the walls running north
and south the beasts face northwards, while on the transverse walls
they face inwards towards the centre. One end-wall in chamber B is
preserved, and there, for the sake of symmetry, the two animals face
each other, advancing from opposite directions. It has been calculated
that at least five hundred and seventy-five of these creatures were
represented on the walls and towers of the gateway. Some of the
walls, with their successive tiers of beasts, are still standing to a
height of twelve metres. The two eastern towers of the outer gate-
house are the best preserved, and even in their present condition
they convey some idea of the former magnificence of the building.
In the greater part of the structure that still remains in place, it is
apparent that the brickwork was very roughly finished, and that the
bitumen employed as mortar has been left where it has oozed out
between the courses. The explanation is that the portions of the
gateway which still stand are really foundations of the building, and
were always intended to be buried below the pavement level. It is
clear that the height of the road-way was constantly raised while the
building of the gate was in progress, and there are traces of two
temporary pavements,[105] afterwards filled in when the final
pavement-level[106] was reached.[107] The visible portion of the gate
above the last pavement has been entirely destroyed, but among its
débris were found thousands of fragments of the same two animals,
but in enamelled brick of brilliant colouring, white and yellow against
a blue ground. Some of these have been laboriously pieced together
in Berlin, and specimens are now exhibited in the Kaiser Friedrich
Museum and in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at Constantinople.
Only one fragment of an enamelled portion of the wall was found in
place,[108] and that was below the final pavement. It shows the legs
of a bull above a band of rosettes with yellow centres.[109]
 FIG. 17.
ENAMELLED FRAGMENT OF THE ISHTAR GATE STILL IN
POSITION.
The fragment, which was the highest portion of the gate
preserved, is from the east side of the second doorway of the
outer gate; cf. Figs. 14 and 15, No. 2. It stands just below the
final pavement-level, and only the upper portion is enamelled.

The delicate modelling of the figures is to some extent obscured in

the foundation specimens, but the imperfections there visible are
entirely absent from the enamelled series. An examination of the
latter shows that the bricks were separately moulded, and, before the
process of enamelling, were burnt in the usual way. The contours of
the figures were then outlined in black with a vitreous paste, the
surfaces so defined being afterwards filled in with coloured liquid
enamels. The paste of the black outlines and the coloured enamels
themselves had evidently the same fusing point, for when fired they
have sometimes shaded off into one another, giving a softness and a
pleasing variety of tone to the composition.[110] It should be added
that the enamelled beasts, like those in plain brick, are in slight relief,
the same moulds having been employed for both.

FIG. 18.
PLAN OF THE LATER DEFENCES OF THE CITADEL
UPON THE NORTH, SHOWING THE WALLS WITH
THE LION FRIEZE AND THE ISHTAR GATE.
A: Sacred Way. B, B: Walls with Lion Frieze flanking
the Sacred Way. C: Ishtar Gate. D: North-east corner
of Palace. E: Temple of Ninmakh. F: Front wall of
Northern Citadel. G: North wall of Northern Citadel. H:
North wall of the Principal Citadel. J: Broad Canal, fed
from the Euphrates, to supply the Principal Citadel. K:
Old wall of the Principal Citadel. L, M: Moat-walls
supporting dam, over which the roadway passed; that
on the east side has not yet been excavated. N:
Eastward extension of north wall of Northern Citadel.
P: Stair-case, or ramps, ascending to roadway. R:
Eastward extension of wall of Principal Citadel. S:
South wall of eastern outworks. T, U, V: Ends of
transverse walls in Principal Citadel. Y: River-side
embankment of the Persian period. Z: Crude brick walls with doorways, forming a
temporary gateway, filled in below latest pavement. N.B.—The two arrows denote
the direction in which the lions are represented as advancing in the frieze.

Before the Neo-Babylonian period the Ishtar Gate had defended the
northern entrance to the city, and was probably a massive structure of
unburnt brick without external decoration. But, with the building of
the outer city-wall, it stood in the second line of defence. And as
Nebuchadnezzar extended the fortifications of the Citadel itself upon
the northern side, it lost still more of its strategic importance, and
from its interior position became a fit subject for the decorator's art.
The whole course of the roadway through these exterior defences he
flanked with mighty walls, seven metres thick, extending from the
gate northwards to the outermost wall and moat.[111] Their great
strength was dictated by the fact that, should an enemy penetrate the
outer city-wall, he would have to pass between them, under the
garrison's fire, to reach the citadel-gate. But these, like the gate itself,
formed a secondary or interior defence, and so, like it, were
elaborately decorated. The side of each wall facing the roadway was
adorned with a long frieze of lions, in low relief and brilliantly
enamelled, which were represented advancing southwards towards
the Ishtar Gate. The surface of each wall was broken up into panels
by a series of slightly projecting towers, each panel probably
containing two lions, while the plinth below the Lion Frieze was
decorated with rosettes. There appear to have been sixty lions along
each wall. Some were in white enamel with yellow manes, while
others were in yellow and had red manes,[112] and they stood out
against a light or dark blue ground. Leading as they did to the bulls
and dragons of the gateway, we can realize in some degree the effect
produced upon a stranger entering the inner city of Babylon for the
first time.

FIG. 19.
LION FROM THE FRIEZE OF THE SACRED WAY TO THE
NORTH OF THE ISHTAR GATE.
Such a stranger, passing within the Ishtar Gate, would have been
struck with wonder at the broad Procession Street,[113] which ran its
long course straight through the city from north to south, with the
great temples ranged on either hand. Its foundation of burnt brick
covered with bitumen is still preserved, upon which, to the south of
the gateway, rested a pavement of massive flags, the centre of fine
hard limestone, the sides of red breccia veined with white. In
inscriptions upon the edges of these paving slabs, formerly hidden by
their asphalt mortar, Nebuchadnezzar boasts that he paved the street
of Babylon for the procession of the great lord Marduk, to whom he
prays for eternal life.[114] The slabs that are still in place are polished
with hard use, but, unlike the pavements of Pompeii, show no ruts or
indentations such as we might have expected from the chariots of the
later period. It is possible that, in view of its sacred character, the use
of the road was restricted to foot passengers and beasts of burden,
except when the king and his retinue passed along it through the city.
And in any case, not counting chariots of war and state, there was
probably very little wheeled traffic in Babylonia at any time.
When clear of the citadel the road descends by a gradual slope to the
level of the plain, and preserving the same breadth, passes to the
right of the temple dedicated to Ishtar of Akkad.[115] As it continues
southward it is flanked at a little distance on the east by the streets of
private houses, whose foundations have been uncovered in the
Merkes mound;[116] and on the west side it runs close under the huge
peribolos of E-temen-anki, the Tower of Babylon.[117] As far as the
main gate of E-temen-anki[118] its foundation is laid in burnt-brick,
over which was an upper paving completely formed of breccia. The
inscription upon the slabs corresponds to that on the breccia paving-
stones opposite the citadel; but they have evidently been re-used
from an earlier pavement of Sennacherib, whose name some of them
bear upon the underside. This earlier pavement of Babylon's Sacred
Way must have been laid by that monarch before he reversed his
conciliatory policy toward the southern kingdom. At the south-east
corner of the peribolos the road turns at a right angle and running
between the peribolos and E-sagila, the great temple of the city-god,
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com