SMALL TEMPLE AT NIMROUD.
Another small temple was discovered at the north-west corner of the mound. Four of its chambers were explored, chiefly by means of tunnels carried through the enormous mass of earth and rubbish in which the ruins were buried. The great entrances were to the east. The principal portal was formed by two colossal human-headed lions, sixteen feet and a half high, and fifteen feet long. They were flanked by three small-winged figures, one above the other, and divided by an ornamental cornice, and between them was an inscribed pavement slab of alabaster. In front of each was a square stone, apparently the pedestal of an altar, and the walls on both sides were adorned with enamelled bricks.
Having dispatched another lot of very interesting sculptures to Busrah, Mr. Layard determined to set out for Babylonia. Upon the reputed site of ancient Babylon he designed to carry on extensive excavations, provided his means would permit. The remains of Babylon were found upon the banks of the Euphrates. Towering above all was the great mound of Babel. Beyond, for many an acre, were shapeless heaps of rubbish, the ridges that marked the course of canals and aqueducts. On all sides, fragments of inscribed glass, marble, and pottery were mingled with that peculiar nitrous and blanched soil, which, bred from the remains of ancient habitations, checks vegetation and renders the site of Babylon a hideous waste. Southward of Babel, for the distance of nearly three miles, there is an almost uninterrupted line of mounds, the ruins of vast edifices, the whole being inclosed by earthen ramparts. On the west of the Euphrates is the vast ruin called the Birs Nimroud, which some have conjectured to be the remains of the Temple of Belus, which, according to Herodotus, stood in one of the western divisions of Babylon. According to the united testimony of ancient authors, the city was divided by the Euphrates into two parts. The principal existing ruins are to the east of the river.
The hostility of the Arab tribes prevented Mr. Layard from making excavations at the Birs Nimroud. He visited that famous ruin, and formed an opinion in regard to the shape of the edifice, but made no discoveries worthy of notice. The excavations carried on upon the eastern bank of the river were not attended with very remarkable results. Bricks, inscribed with the name and titles of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Chaldees, were numerous. Coffins, containing skeletons that fell to pieces on exposure to the air, were discovered. No relic or ornament seemed to have been buried with the bodies. Glass bottles, glazed earthen vessels, and many other relics of a doubtful period, were found. Digging trenches into the foot of the mound of Babel, Mr. Layard came upon walls and masses of masonry, but failed to trace the plan of an edifice, or discover any remains of sculptured stone or painted plaster. The mound called Kasr was explored, and found to contain some astonishing specimens of masonry, the bricks being deeply inscribed with the name and title of Nebuchadnezzar. But the plan of an edifice could not be ascertained. The only relic of any interest discovered was a fragment of limestone, on which were parts of two figures, undoubtedly those of gods. This showed that the Babylonians portrayed their divinities in the same manner as the Assyrians. In the mound of Amran were found some bowls, on which were inscriptions in a curious character. These were deciphered by Mr. Thomas Ellis, of the British Museum, and ascertained to have been written by Jews. Mr. Layard thinks that there is no reason to doubt that the bowls belonged to the descendants of those Jews who were carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon and the surrounding cities. From the same mound were also taken some earthen or terracotta tablets. They resembled those which had been already deposited in the British Museum by Colonel Rawlinson. On one of these is the figure of a man leading a large and powerful dog, which has been identified with a species still existing in Thibet. The Babylonians prized these dogs very highly. One of their satraps is said to have devoted the revenues of four cities to the support of these animals.
TERRACOTTA TABLET FROM BABYLON.
Brick appears to have been the common material for building purposes in Babylon. But such bricks and such bricklaying were never seen elsewhere. All the bricks were enamelled and ornamented with figures of men and animals. They were joined together by the finest cement. The immense edifices erected from such materials were even more astonishing than the pyramids of Egypt or the palaces of Assyria, as these were the results of greater toil and skill.
Leaving Babylon somewhat disappointed, Mr. Layard proceeded to the mounds of Niffer, in the same district. There, however, he had no better success than at Babylon. Masses of masonry, inscribed bricks, and sarcophagi of an unknown date, were all that could be obtained by excavations. Soon afterwards, Mr. Layard returned to the site of Nineveh to superintend the removal of his sculptures, and the work of exploration was relinquished.
It now remains to sum up the results of the discoveries of Layard to chronology and history. The translators of the Assyrian inscriptions have ascertained that the earliest king, of whom they can gain any detailed account, was the builder of the north-west palace at Nimroud, the most ancient edifice hitherto discovered in Assyria. His records, however, with other inscriptions, furnish the names of five, if not seven, of his predecessors, some of whom erected palaces at Nineveh, and originally founded those which were only rebuilt by subsequent monarchs. The translators, after a careful consideration of all the evidence, fix the date of the reign of the earliest king at about 1121 B. C. Colonel Rawlinson calls him the founder of Nineveh; but this is a hasty conclusion. His name is believed to have been Ashurakbal. He carried his arms to the west of Nineveh, across Syria, to the Mediterranean, to the south into Chaldea, and to the north into Asia Minor and Armenia. Of his sons, Divanubar, was also a great conqueror. He waged war, either in person or by his generals, in Syria, Armenia, Babylonia, Chaldæa, Media, and Persia. The kings of Israel and Egypt paid him tribute, so that he was, indeed, a mighty sovereign. Divanubar seems to have had two successors, but even their names are uncertain. The next king of whom there are any actual records appears to have been the predecessor of Pul, or Tiglath-Pileser, who is mentioned in the Scriptures. His name has not yet been deciphered. He was a successful warrior, and carried his arms into Chaldea and the remotest parts of Armenia. The successor of this monarch was Sargon, the builder of the palace of Khorsobad—a king mentioned by the prophet Isaiah. He was a warlike prince, and carried his arms to the islands of the Mediterranean, and into all the neighboring countries. He made 27,280 Israelites captive in Samaria and its dependent districts. Egypt paid him tribute. From the reign of Sargon, we have a complete list of kings to the fall of the empire, or to a period not far distant from that event. He was succeeded by the mighty Sennacherib, whose history is well known. This king ascended the throne about 703 B. C. After spreading the terror of his arms in every direction, he was assassinated, and his son, Essarhaddon, ascended the throne. This king is mentioned in the Scriptures. He built the south-west palace at Nimroud, and an edifice, the ruins of which are now covered by the tomb of Jonah, opposite Mosul. In his inscriptions, he is styled king of Egypt and Ethiopia, and he appears to have been a great warrior. The son of Essarhaddon was named after the builder of the north-west palace at Nimroud. His son was the last king of the second dynasty, and, as Mr. Layard says, may have been that Sardanapalus who was conquered by the combined armies of the Medes and Babylonians under Cyaxares, 606 B. C., and who made a funeral pile of his palace, his wealth, and his wives.