[225] Ibid. p. 35.
[226] Layard found this type near Bagdad (Discoveries, p. 477), and Loftus encountered a great number of examples in his explorations at Susa (Travels, &c., p. 379). Those brought by him to London are quite similar to the statuette in the Louvre that we have chosen for reproduction (Heuzey, Catalogue, p. 32).
[227] In the case of the Caillou Michaux, this has been clearly established by M. Oppert (Expédition scientifique, vol. i. pp. 253, 254). He remarks that the betrothed of the person who had caused the stone to be cut, is spoken of as a “native of the town of Sargon;” so that the stone must be later than the end of the eighth century, B.C. And all the monuments belonging to this class bear such a strong mutual resemblance, that their dates cannot be very widely separated. They are reproduced on a large scale, both texts and figures, in the Cuneiform inscriptions of Western Asia, vol. iii. plates 41–45, and vol. iv. plates 41–43. We have reproduced two, in vol. i. fig. 10, and above, fig. 43.
[228] According to Millin, who was the first to draw attention to this monument, its material is a black marble; it would be a mistake to call it basalt (Monuments antique inedits, vol. i. p. 60, note 6). The inscription on the Caillou Michaux has been translated by Oppert (Chronologie des Assyriens et des Babylonians, p. 40), and by Fox Talbot in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xviii. pp. 53–75. [There is a cast of this Caillou in the Assyrian Side Room at the British Museum.—Ed.]
[229] The weight of these objects was in itself sufficient to prevent them being easily removed. The Caillou Michaux weighs rather more than 70 lbs.
[230] Heuzey, Catalogue, p. 32.
[231] Ἔστι δὲ τοῦ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι ἱροῦ καὶ ἄλλος κάτω νηός, ἔνθα ἄγαλμα μέγα τοῦ Διὸς ἔνι κατήμενον χρύσεον (i. 183).
[232] Ἐπ’ ἄκρας τῆς ἀναβάσεως τρία κατέσκευασεν ἀγάλματα χρυσὰ σφυρήλατα, Διός, Ἥρας, Ῥέας. Diodorus, ii. ix. 5–8.
[233] The Five Great Monarchies, &c., vol. ii. p. 79.
[234] See ante.