^{Page 2 note 1} From the ruins of a temple at the former place were obtained the cylinders of Tiglath Pileser I. (about B.C. 1120), which are now in the Brit.sh Museum. The discovery of the cylinders of Nabonidus at Mugheir is described by MrTaylor, in the last number of the Journal, vol. xv. part ii., p. 263 and 204Google Scholar.

^{Page 3 note 1} The news of this discovery of the cylinders at the Birs seems to have flown far and wide on the wings of fame, for since my return to Baghdad I have been besieged by applications to employ “the magic compass” in extracting treasures which are believed to be buried iii the court yards or concealea in the walls of the bouses; often in the very “boudoirs” of the ladies.

^{Page 5 note 1} I must here observe that Rich and Porter have both been guilty of a most singular error in describing the sides of the Birs, as facing the four cardinal points. In reality it is the four corners, which with a slight error face those points, and the titles of Ker Porter's Plates (vol. ii., plates 69 and 70) must be thus altered throughout the series, his “western face” being S.W.; southern face, S.E.; eastern face N.E.; and northern face, N.W. The N.E. face is the front ofthe temple; the S.W. the back, and the other two are the sides.

^{Page 6 note 1} See the proposed restoration in “Nineveh and Babylon,” p. 497, and Mr. Layard's ingenious suggestion that the perpendicular wall may have served the purpose of a gigantic gnomon.

^{Page 6 note 2} It is very doubtful if Porter took any independent measurements of height; his numbers throughout appear to be a mere servile copy of those given by Rich, . Compare “Porter's Travels,” vol. ii., p. 310Google Scholar, with “Babylon and Persepolis,” pp. 75 and 167.

^{page 6 note 3} At Sekheriyeh, a Babylonian ruin, one hour south of Bogheileh, and near the confluence of the ancient Zab, or Nil Canal, with the Tigris (thus nearly answering to the position of the Apameea Mesenes of the Greeks), the only material which seems to have been employed in the construction of the city is adark blue slag. The mortar and mud cement have everywhere crumbled, but the masses of slag, now lying in heaps on the desert, exhibit no sign of decomposition. The same peculiarity is also observable in the ruins of Roweijeh, near the Hye. I should now suspect that both these cities had been originally consecrated to the planet Mercury.

^{page 7 note 1} Thus Ker Porter supposes these vitrified masses “on the fire-blasted summit of the pile” to be fragments of the upper stage of the original tower of Babel, erected by Nimrud and destroyed by lightning from heaven.—Travels, vol ii. p. 319.

^{page 8 note 1} In following down the line of the trenches, it is to be observed that I number the stages from the summit, while in my subsequent attempt to restore the seven successive stages I commence the numerical series from the base.

^{page 8 note 2} This theory of progressive diminution must certainly be abandoned, as far as regards the thickness of the bricks. I have found indeed on working out all my measurements of series of layers, that no uniform scale can be adopted, the bricks varying in thickness throughout the upper stages from three to four inches.

^{page 8 note 3} It will subsequently appear from the inscription found at the Birs that the heart of the pile must have been constructed of libbin or crude brick, and that the walls accordingly through which the trenches penetvated could have only been the exterior coating. The interior core of crude brick at any ratewas never reached, and could not, I think, have existed originally above the fifth stagefrom the base.

^{page 9 note 1} Rich says that signifies “brick, of course the burnt sort from the root”—Bab. and Pers., p. 69—but I question this very much. The name was given from the white colour of the clay employed, and has nothing to do with burning. The distinction in all the inscriptions between Iibin and agur is precisely that now observed by the Arabs; and in the famous passage of Genesis, chap. xi. v. 3, I understand the meaning to be, “Let us make bricks of Iibin (or ‘white clay’), and then burn them.” If implied “burning the bricks,” what would have been the use of adding the verb ?

^{page 10 note 1} The corner of the wall exhibited something of this appearance—

^{page 10 note 2} I shall subsequently suggest a reason for the intentional destruction of the outwork on the platform by later explorers of the mound.

^{page 12 note 1} Porter remarked fragments of bitumen towards the base of the mound, and even brought away a specimen 10 inches long and 3 in thickness. (Travels, vol. ii, p. 315.)—This had probably been a part of the coating of one of the recesses of the lower wall.

^{page 13 note 1} On laying down the ground-plan of the temple, I find that the right-hand trench must have run very near the southern corner of the lower stage; and I now, therefore, regret not having continued the gallery a little farther on. To my eye, however, on the spot, the distance of the angle from the trench appeared to be greater.

^{page 13 note 2} As there is a general impression that the ordinary character of Babylonian building is a mass of crude sun-dried bricks laid in reeds, I may here observethat the employment of reeds was absolutely unknown to the Babylonians, except to prevent soft bricks from sinking into the bitumen when that material was used as a cement. Allthe ruins where the reeds are observed are Parthian, such as the upper wall of Babel (Rich's Mujellibeh) Akkerkuf, Al Hymar, Zibliyeh, and the wails of Seleucia. The baked bricks of Babylon often, however, bear the impression of reeds, from having been laid on reed matting when in a soft state.

^{page 13 note 3} M. Fresnel gives the error from the cardinal points at five or six degrees, and supposes this to be the magnetic variation of the spot (see Journ. Asiat. for July, 1853, p 59). The true magnetic variation, however, at Babylon, determined by a series of azimuths, is four degrees. The compass which I Used had an error in itself of one oegree the other way; and as my magnetic bearing was 52½ degrees for the line of the S.E. face, I thus give the true error of the tuilding at 4½ degrees east. Captain Jones, however, who is now surveying at Babylon, will be probably able to take a direct azimuth with the line of the red wall, which will determinethe error of the building astronomically, and be independent of magnetic variation and the difficulty of adjusting such rude instruments as prismatic compasses.

^{page 14 note 1} Captain Jones will certainly determine this point during his present survey of Babylon, and I may perhaps receive his measurements, obtained by the theodolite, in time to accompany the present paper.

Since writing the above, I have received from Captain Jones a note of his trigonometrical observations at the Birs. He worked upon a very carefully measured and levelled base, and employed a full-sized surveying theodolite, reversing the telescope at each observation, to insure perfect accuracy of the angles; and the result of the operation, both by protraction and calculation, was to determine the vertical distance from the water-level of the plain to the highest point of the ruin, at the summit of the mound of the Birs, at 153½ English feet. As this measurement, then, is only a few feet (2½)below the aggregate of my estimated height, I have not thought it worth while to make any further correction of the numbers I have adopted. How Mr. Rich, who was a scientific observer, could have fallen into the error of exaggerating the height of the mound by one-third, is quite inexplicable; and it is equally strange that Porter, and all succeeding travellers, should have adopted the measurement without suspecting its accuracy, or taking any painb to verify the details.

^{page 15 note 1} Rich, however, observes that the whole surface of the mound is strewed with pieces of black-stone, sandstone, and marble. (Bab. and Pen., p. 76.) Such may have been the case when he visited the mound, but I can confidently assert that at present no suoh fragments exist.

^{page 16 note 1} The outline of this vestibule is conjecturally laid down in my restorat on of the N.E. profile of the temple.

^{page 17 note 1} Observe that the numerical series now proceeds from the base, and that this order will be maintained throughout the subsequent description.

^{page 18 note 1} I may as well thus early state my impression, derived from numerous points of evidence which seem to me conclusive, that Herodotus could never have visited Babylon in person. His description of the city was, I believe, entirely drawn from the statements of Persian travellers whom he encountered in Syria and in Asia Minor; and these statements, which were probably not very clear or accurate at first, were certainly not improved by being retailed to the Greeks at second hand. It is thus far from improbable that the temple of the seven spheres at Borsippa may have supplied hints both for the description of the temple of Jupiter Belus at Babylon and for the Median Ecbatana, though in reality it had nothing whatever to do with either one locality or the other. My reasons for adopting this view, which, although already familiar to the French Academy from the advocacy of Quatremere, may seem heretical to the English reader, will be given in detail in the geographical section which I shall append to the present paper.

^{page 18 note 2} It may be remembered that I suggested, fifteen years ago, a Sabtean explanation for the parti-coloured walls of Ecbatana, in a memoir published by the Royal GeographicalSociety; (See Geograph. Journ., Vol. X., Part I., p. 127). and that I there compared the colours of Herodotus with those given by Nizami in hia poem of Heft-Peiker.

^{page 21 note 1} Porter visited Birs-i-Nimruil in 1829, and he notices that the wall of fine brick presented itself in an angular form at a short distance down the slope of the mound from the summit. See Travels, vol. ii., p. 313.

^{page 21 note 2} Rich, in describing these bricks, calls them “white, approaching more or less to a yellowish cast, like our Stourbridge or fire-brick.” Bab. & Pers., p. 99. The Arabs, too, apply the term of Biyaz, to the bricks in question.

^{page 22 note 1} Norberg, in his, Sabsean Lexicon, after noticing the burnt appearance of Mercury from the work of M. Abi Taleb, adds, “Sicut etiam solatus et perustus, cum ceteris planetis soli vicinior sit, a Poëtis fingitur. Diet. Poet. Stephan., p. 393.” But I know not to what authority he alludes; apparently to some dictionary of the poets, with which I am unacquainted. See the Onomasticon Codicis Nasaria, p. 98.

^{page 23 note 1} The Babylonian gods appear to have each had several arks or tabernacles, distinguished in the inscriptions by the old Scythic or Hamite names which they bore from the remotest antiquity. The tabernacle itself is indicated by thesame signs, which represent “a ship,” and of which the Semitic equivalent or synonym was Elippa (Chaldee ). And some of the bilingual vocabularies exhibit complete lists of the names. The name which thus occurs in the last line but one of the third column of the great East. India House inscription, in connexion with the temple of the planets of the seven spherea at Borsippa, and which is also the proper name of a river, is explained in the vocabularies as the special appellation of the ark of the god Nebo; and it may be presumed, therefore, that although the temple of Borsippa was designed and named after the seven spheres, the particular god who was worshipped there was Nebo, or Hermes, who, indeed, was supposed to have the arrangement of the heavenly bodies under his particular control.

I shall quote many notices as I proceed of the special worship of Nebo at Borsippa.

^{page 25 note 1} This was printed in copper plate at the expense of the East India Company, and the impressions are not uncommon.

^{page 25 note 2} A fac-simile of this inscription in lithograph was published by Grotefend in 1848.

^{page 25 note 3} Found by Mr. Loftus in 1854, when excavating for the Assyrian Fund Society. There are four copies of this inscription, two on cylinders and two on bricks, but they have not yet beeu published.

^{page 25 note 4} Mr. Taylor's discovery of these cylinders during his excavations at Mugheir in 1854, is described in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XV, part ii, page 263. It is to be hoped that the cuneiform text of all these documents will shortly be published by the British Museum.

^{page 26 note 1} (As these sheets are passing through the press, I have consulted another cylinder of Nebuchadnezzar's in the British Museum, from the Rich collection, which recapitulates that monarch's architectural labours at Babylon, and is of value for comparison; later still I have collated the inscription on a cylinder of. Neriglissar's which is deposited in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge. London, March, 1856.)

^{page 26 note 2} A few only of these inscriptions, Nos. 4, 6, and 8, have been as yet published; but the original slabs, cylinders, and obelisks may be consulted at the British Museum by those who are interested in the enquiry.

^{page 27 note 1} The meaning of this name is still subject to some doubt. I propose to render it “Nebo is the protector against misfortunes,” andwould thus explain the elements of which it is composed. In the old Hamite language Nebohad three names—Nabiu, Ak, and Pa (or , and ) but the Semites adopted the uniform pronunciation of Nabu () as is stated in one of the bilingual vocabularies. The second element, Kuduri, I doubtfully refer to the Arabic “to be troubled by calamity,” remarking that, as a verb, the term is constantly used in the inscriptions to denote the a “discomfiture of an enemy,” while, as a noun, it implies the “tribute” imposed on a conquered country, regarded, no doubt, as a calamity. in Heb. (Job xv, 24) applied to the troubles of war, is a kindred form. The third element is certainly a participle from the root to protect,” as the phonetic reading of is given in one of the vocabularies for the monogram or

^{page 28 note 1} I read Rihuv hinu— in the first word is often replaced by so that we may feel pretty sure the root is “to feed,” and tropically, “to govern.” Compare “a friend.” or rihuvta, or rihuta, is generally used for “government,” or “kingdom.” Kínu is from , “to establish;” but this word very often means in the inscriptions “first” or “eldest;” a synonymous phrase is irsu itpisu, “he who is made ruler.”

^{page 28 note 2} is a doubtful word. I compare it, however, with , also used in the inscriptions to denote “dependence on,” and refer the forms to a root cognate with “to obey.” In the E. I. H. Ins. Col. i, 1. i, the equivalent term is Migir, which certainly means “obeying” or “honouring,” as la magira means “disobedient.” In Samgar Nebo (Jer. xxxix, 3) we have perhaps a Shaphel form of the same root (the being used for ). The meaning is “he who is obedient to Nebo.”

^{page 28 note 3} Missakku here replaces the old Hamite form ; (Rich Cyl. Col. 1, 1. 5; and E. I. H. Ins. Col. 1, 1. 5 ); the same term Missakku occurs in Bel. Cyl. 3, 1. 1; and Mus. Cyl. 1, 1. 6. I compare the common Assyrian participle , vanassik, and refer to the root , “to kiss,” or “Pay homage to.” Ziri (often written Tziri, see Bel. Cyl. Col. 3, 1. 1; and in Assyrian Zirdti), is derived from , ziru “over, above.” (Compare or “a high place.”) This title is generally applied to the gods, but rubu ziru “the supreme chief,” is not an uncommon epithet in Assyrian for the king also. (See Tiglath Pilesar Cyl. passim.)

^{page 28 note 4} Naram, from or , requires no explanation; derivatives from this root are of very common employment in the inscriptions.

^{page 28 note 5} The title of Muda emgn is difficult. In some of Nebuchadnezzar's inscriptions emga is joined with a participle, mutaninnu stands alone. See E. I. H. Ins. Col. 1, 1. 18; and Mus. Cyl. Col. 1, 1. 11; in others, mutaninnu stands alone. See Senk. Cyl. Col. 1, 1. 2. Emga is perhaps connected with the Assyrian emuq (from , “to be deep” or “lofty”?) which is an ordinary title of the gods; but for the derivation of muda I cannot at present offer a suggestion. Muda emga is probably nearly equivalent to the better known rubu emga, which first occurs on the Naramsin vase in an inscription of the Hamite period (though apparently written in a Semitic language), and which is afterwards found on almost all the bricks of Nabonidus as the special epithet of his father. On the bricks of this king found at Senkereh the title is written Rubbu maga, so that there can be little doubt of its representing the , which in Jer. xxxix, 3, is attached to the name of Nergal-sharezer, or Neriglissor, before he ascended the throne; though I put no faith whatever in the translation ordinarily given of “chief of the Magi.”

^{page 29 note 1} The epithet thus conjecturally rendered admits of no illustration from other sources, and I abstain therefore from suggesting derivations for the obscure terms employed.

^{page 29 note 2} Sakkanasu, which is here used for the old Hamite term (E. I. H. Ins. Col. 1, 1. 11), is the Shaphel Benoni of kanas, “to obey” or “submit,” and thus signifies “he who makes submit,” or “the subduer,” being immediately cognate with the common Assyrian participle Vasaknis. However the old Hamite compound term may have been pronounced, there can be no doubt of its meaning; signified “a yoke” (nir in Semitic), and was for a root which meant “to obey,” so that prefixed to the name of a God, the epithet implied “submission to,” the verb being used in a neuter sense; while in other positions it was used actively, and meant “causing to submit to” or “subduing.” In Assyrian seems to have been pronounced ardu, the title, (Khurs. 145, 3, 12, and 151, 10, 9), being replaced by ardukanshu in'KlmiB.123,16. In Khurs. 71, 6, the equivalent is simply , “my lord, the king.” “To pay homage” is also indifferently expressed by and , the phonetic reading in both cases being epis arduti. The root apparently answers to , both in the neuter sense of “serving,” and in the active sense of “making to serve” or “dominating.” On the Senkereh cylinder, 1. 2, Nebuchadnezzar calls himself , asri kanshu, probably with the same meaning of “Lord Paramount” (asri, like sar, from , “to rule”). The words which follow shakkanshu I doubtfully read as la abkha, comparing the root

^{page 29 note 3} The initiatory particle, which is written , ená enuva, in the Assyrian legends, always appears as ninù, in the inscriptions of Babylon. It seems to be a mere expletive, and should perhaps be rendered by “verily” rather than “behold now.”

^{page 29 note 4} The verb, which I translate “established,” should probably be always read ibbaniva, although the second character is more often given as than as . These two characters, indeed, are not only liable to be comfonnded in writing, but do, I believe, actually interchange in phonetic value. In the primitive Chaldean legends a vast number of derivatives occur from this root, which furnish a most interesting proof of the connection between the Hamite and Semitic tongues.

^{page 30 note 1} “Heaven and earth” are always given phonetically on the Birs cylinders as and shami'é and irzit, instead of appearing under the old Chaldee forms of and

^{page 30 note 2} The Gispa or Gissapa, or is, I think, the mace, or sceptre, which the king holds in his hand to indicate royalty. It is spoken of in almost every inscription as being given into the king's hand by his guardian divinity when he ascends the throne; it was sometimes made of gold (Khurs. 151, 11, 11), and with it the king slays wild beasts. At one time I read the word Gvihta () and understood “a bow;” but a bow of gold seems an impossibility.

^{page 30 note 3} For a general notice of the temples of Babylon and Borsippa, see the subsequent chapter.

^{page 30 note 4} The Cuneiform name of this building is , which I conjecturally render by “Planisphere,” being explained in the Vocabularies by temin, “a platform,” and being the same word which answers to a sphere in the famous temple of Borsippa.

^{page 30 note 5} I still consider it doubtful whether by we should understand Lapis Lazuli, or Cobalt, or some other mineral pigment; all that can be said is that it was brought from Khorassan and applied to the decoration of bricks and tiles.

^{page 30 note 6} This adverb of time is usually written in the Babylonian inscriptions as ; but sometimes as or , which must, I presume, mean “to-day,” or “now.” In Assyrian the form is

^{page 30 note 7} The phrase is very important, but very doubtful. I had at one time supposed the passage to give the date of the building of the temple, explaining , which follows the numerals, as a cycle of twelve years; but I have since found reason for reading as amma, identical with the Hebrew and for referring the measurement to the height of the original temple.

^{page 31 note 1} Zunnu and rddu are constantly used both in Assyrian and Babylonian for rain and water, though I have been unable to find correspondents in other Semitic languages. Zunnu may be connected with “to be cold.”

^{page 31 note 2} The temin or leminnu, frequently mentioned in the description of tempies, is certainly the foundation platform, though I know not the etymology. The resemblance to τɛμɛνοζ is of course accidental.

^{page 31 note 3} Salmu and shega occur so frequently in Babylonian dates that they cannot possibly be the proper names of any particular month and day (compare E. I. H. Ins. Col. 8, 1. 59). I compare Salmu with “prosperity,” and shega, which is Hamite, is translated in the Vocabulary by magaru, “honour” (compare migir, “he who honours”); perhaps this is the true explanation of the Babylonian festival of the Xaicta, the five intercalary days of the year being regarded with especial honour.

^{page 31 note 4} Mikitta is a rare word. I suppose it to stand for mikinta, and compare

^{page 31 note 5} Sithir sumiya is literally “the writing of my name,” and refers, no doubt, to the inscribed cylinders, one of which is here translated. A similar expression is used in most of the Assyrian royal autographic records.

^{page 31 note 6} Remark that kishiri is here written , positive proof being thus afforded that is used for as often is for . There are many other examples also of this interchange. Kisiri, like the Hebrew , comes from the root , “to be right.”

^{page 31 note 7} These two phrases are omitted on one of the cylinders, but occur almost in the same worda in the inscriptions of Nabonidus.

^{page 32 note 1} 1 Comp. E. I. H. Ins. Col. 1,1. 33, and Col. 7, I. 28, &c, &c. In this title the singular bal, and the plural forms, abil and aplu, are used indifferently.

^{page 32 note 2} In E. I. H. Ins. Col. 4,1. 18, a monogram is used for this participle, which in other passages has the phonetic power of lakh. On the Birs Cylinder the term employed is zukkalu, which also occurs on Bel. Cyl. Col. 3,1. 12; in the latter passage, as is often the case, replacing

^{page 32 note 3} This formula of invocation, with trifling variations, is common to all the Babylonian inscriptions. The general signification is certain; but in order to identify and explain each particular word, it would be necessary to collate all the various passages one with another, and this would be too elaborate a process for a mere marginal note.

^{page 32 note 4} The epithet of “mukin puluk shami'é va irzit” refers, I believe, to Nebo, whose name, however, is omitted in the text.