as has been commonly supposed. His idea is, that although some of those mounds might have been remains of channels by which the more distant parts of the city received the waters of the Euphrates, yet by far the greater number are the ruins of streets-and his reasons for this supposition are plausible enough. Their appearance is that of masses of ruined buildings originally disposed in streets, which crossed each other at right angles (a thing inconceivable for canals) with immense spaces of open and level ground on each side of them-the more distant and prominent of these 'presented many proofs of their having been such; because the heaps which were always double, or in parallel lines, were 'much higher and wider on each side than they could have been "if formed only by the earth thrown up from the excavated hollow, each being wider than the space intervening between 'them, which varied from fifteen to thirty feet,-and each ex'ceeding twenty feet in height, while the level of the central space (the supposed bed of the canal) was itself higher than 'the surrounding soil, and the mounds were intersected by cross passages, in such a manner as to place beyond a doubt the fact of their being rows of houses or streets fallen to decay. There 'were also in some places two hollow channels, and three 'mounds, running parallel to each other for a considerable dis'tance, the central mound being in such cases a broader and 'flatter mass than the other two, as if there had been two streets 'going parallel to each other, the central range of houses which 'divided them being twice the size of the others, from their 'double residences, with a front and door of entrance to face ' each avenue. The same peculiarities of level, size, and direc'tion, were observed here as in other parts of the ruins nearer the river; and all these could be easily reconciled to the sup'position of being remains of streets and houses, but could not have belonged to canals; independently of their number and 'direction rendering it highly improbable that they were ever ' used as such.'-Buckingham, vol. ii. pp. 298, 299. Upon this hypothesis, we do not offer any opinion, as nothing can be decided, without knowing of what materials the mounds are composed.

6

There is another conjecture which Mr Buckingham throws out, that appears to us extremely probable. It is, that the circular mound which extends from the Mujillebé to the southern extremity of the palace, enclosing an area of two miles and a half in diameter, is the same which St Jerome describes as the wall of the city. It is much more likely that this wall, which was probably perfect fifteen centuries ago, should have been the boundary of the park in which the Parthian kings hunted, than the city wall of forty-four miles in extent.

We come now to the ruins on the west of the Euphrates. This side is flat like the eastern bank, and like it, is intersected by canals and mounds. Near the river there are no remains, except two mounds, each about three hundred feet in extent, and lying opposite the ruins of the palace. Mr Rich describes them as overgrown with grass, and of no importance-but he does not appear to have examined them, so as to ascertain whether burnt bricks enter into their composition. Many parts of the plain exhibit appearances of saline incrustment, usually found where buildings have formerly stood. (See Sir R. K. Porter's Travels in Babylonia, ii. 307.) But with the exception of some broken mounds, which may be either the remains of canals or of streets, there is nothing worthy of remark, until we arrive. at the mightiest ruin of all,-the Tower of Babel, or Temple of Belus-and called at this day the Birs Nemroud,* after the name of the supposed founder.

This ruin is situated at between five and six miles to the southwest of Hillah. Its shape is oblong, having the appearance of a fallen or decayed pyramid, the sides facing the cardinal points; -it is two thousand two hundred and eighty-six feet in compass at the base-and, on the west side, it rises conically to the height of one hundred and ninety-eight feet. This, which is the highest part of the mound, is surmounted by a pile of solid brick-work, apparently the angle of a stage of the building, which extended over the whole summit. Very near the tower, and parallel with its eastern face, is an oblong mound, about as high as the Kasr. A quadrangular enclosure, now broken into hillocks, may be traced round the whole, containing an area of very considerable extent. Neither Mr Rich, nor the other travellers, give the dimensions of this mound, or of the building which is contiguous to the tower. There can be little doubt, however, that it is the outer enclosure mentioned by Herodotus. The whole mound is channelled by rain, and strewed with huge masses of brick-work, -some of which are burnt quite black,-pieces of marble, and broken layers of furnace-baked bricks.

Beginning with the eastern face,-which is about five hundred feet in extent,-two stages of building are visible. The lowest is sixty feet high, and is broken in the middle by a deep ravine, and intersected on all sides by channels made by the winter rains. The summit of this first stage is no longer flat, its margin having crumbled down, so as to give this side the appearance of a cone. The second stage rises above the first, also

* Byrsam, (quod est 77, munitio) arcem,' &c. Perizonius, 151.

in a conical form, but much more steep, the summit being marked by a perpendicular fragment of brick-work; which is probably the base of the third stage. The height of the second stage is not given either by Rich or Porter. Throughout the whole of the eastern face, which presents the appearance of decomposed brick, layers of unburnt brick are visible-but there is no appearance of reeds.

On the western side, the entire mass rises at once from the plain like a vast pyramid-the face being broken in different directions, partly by the torrents, and partly by what seems to have been some convulsion of nature. The appearance of successive stages is less apparent on this side, probably, as Mr Rich conjectures, from the effect of the winds from the desert, which prevail from this point of the compass. At the foot of the northern side, vast masses of firm and solid brick-work are scattered over the rubbish, evidently fragments of the original facing of the lower stages of the tower.

The southern side is the most perfect. At the base, there is a step, scarcely elevated above the plain, projecting by several feet beyond the true base of the building-somewhat, as we conceive, after the manner of the Stylobate in a Grecian temple. Within this, the tower itself rises by high and distinct stages, receding one within another, in proportion to their respective elevations. The lowest is built of sun-dried bricks and cemented with bitumen, but without reeds-the whole being faced with furnace-baked bricks, also laid in bitumen. The second stage recedes within the first, in proportion to the height of the first from the ground, and showing its termination at the eastern extremity, by an angle of burnt brick-work. Above this rises a third stage, receding in the same proportion as the second recedes within the first. The fourth, or highest stage, is marked by the brick wall already mentioned, which stands on the edge of the western summit, thirty-seven feet high from its base, twenty-eight feet long, and fifteen feet thick. Its upper edges are broken and irregular, showing that the top of the building did not terminate here. It is rent from the top, nearly half way to the bottom, unquestionably by some great convulsion of nature: on the north and south sides, the walls are broken down-on the east, the fallen masses which composed the wall, forming the southeast angle, still remain, bedded in the rubbish at the foot of the wall. On its south and west sides, lay several immense masses of firm brick work-some entirely changed to a state of the hardest vitrification, others only partially so-exhibiting that variegated hue seen in vitrified matter lying about a glass manufactory. The base of the standing wall, contiguous to those

substances, is totally free from any similar change, and is evidently quite in its original state. Hence, the vitrified masses must have fallen from some higher stage, having been displaced by the action of fire from above. The furnace-baked bricks, used in the upper part of the pile, are very thin, and of the finest texture-lower down on the northern face, they are a foot square by three inches and a quarter thick, of a pale red colour, and laid in lime cement one quarter of an inch thick. Lower down still, the bricks are twelve inches long, and three quarters square, by four and a quarter thick-are of a coarser texture, and laid in lime cement one inch thick. In the upper parts of the building, there are no traces of bitumen-whereas, towards the foundations, and in the large brick ruins, at the base of the tower, it is found to be the only cement used;* thus confirming, in the strongest manner, the reading we have given of the passage in Herodotus, ο διὰ τριηκοντα δόμων πλίνθου, &c.

'The masonry,' says Mr Rich, speaking of the upper part of the pile, ' is infinitely superior to any thing of the kind I have ever seen; and leaving out of the question any conjecture relative to the original destination of this ruin, the impression made by a sight of it, is, that it was a solid pile, composed in the interior of sun-burnt brick, and perhaps of earth or rubbish; that it was constructed in receding stages, and faced with fine burnt bricks having inscriptions on them, laid in a very thin layer of lime cement; and that it was reduced by violence to its present ruinous condition. The upper stories have been forcibly broken down, and fire has been employed as an instrument of destruction, though it is not easy to say precisely how or why. The facing of fine bricks has been partly removed, and partly covered by the falling down of the mass which it supported and kept together. I speak with greater confidence of the different stages of this pile, from my own observations having been recently confirmed and extended by an intelligent traveller, (Mr Buckingham,) who is of opinion that the traces of four stages are clearly discernible.'-Second Memoir, p. 33.

The circumstance of the different stages, is also abundantly corroborated, both by Sir R. K. Porter and Major Keppel.

Here then is a ruin, corresponding in a most surprising degree with the Tower of Belus, as described by Herodotus. The total circumference of the base is two thousand two hundred and eighty-six feet, instead of nineteen hundred and sixty, the square of a stadium. The east and west sides remain of the original breadth nearly, (460 feet according to Porter,)-and a greater portion of rubbish from the top having crumbled down upon

Travels in Babylonia, by Sir Robert Ker Porter, ii. 308, et seq. Buckingham, vol. ii. Keppel, i. 107, et seq.

their sides, the north and south are thereby elongated; the present height of the ruin, to the top of the wall, is two hundred and thirty-five feet-less than one-half the original heightconsequently the débris round the base might be expected to be much more considerable, so as to make the circumference of the base greater than it appears to be. But it must be remembered, that Alexander the Great, when he took possession of Babylon, after the defeat of Darius, employed ten thousand men for two months, in removing the rubbish, preparatory to repairing the tower;* it is probable they had only cleared the south side, before the work was abandoned; which would account for the south face being more perfect than any of the others. If we add to this, that vast quantities of the bricks have been taken away by the natives of the country, for building modern towns, the circumstance that the base so little exceeds the dimensions given by Herodotus, will no longer appear unaccountable.

To the top of the third stage is one hundred and ninety-eight feet; consequently the height of sixty feet given by Porter to the lowest stage, is either erroneous, or the top of the first stage is lower than in its original state, owing to the decay of the material. If we take the height of the lowest stage at seventy feet, and diminish each successive stage, making the fourth sixty, and the eighth fifty-two, we shall have the height to the summit of the third stage equal to two hundred feet, to the fourth two hundred and sixty, (that is, twenty-five feet higher than the ruin as it now exists,) and the total height of the tower four hundred and eighty feet. Not only do the dimensions agree, but the mode of building is precisely that described by Herodotus; for there can be little doubt that the Babylonians constructed all their great buildings upon a similar plan; accordingly, we find here that bitumen is used only in the foundation and lowest stage of the building. In addition to this, there are the remains of the temple inhabited by the priests, and adjoining the tower, and of the enclosing mound which encircles the whole; and yet, notwithstanding all these coincidences; notwithstanding the minute description given by Mr Rich, from ocular inspection; notwithstanding the singular appearance exhibited by this most remarkable building, Major Rennell, upon his own authority, because its situation does not happen to suit his preconceived ideas of the extent and position of Babylon, or that he may confirm a crotchet he has taken up, that the Temple of

Justin. iii. c. 16.