O^bOTU ^mull hmvmii^ JibiJatJj THE GIFT OF XjTi. sirljd<\xuv^JCA. Az-sn^i z%lx\.k Cornell University Library D 58.H55T65 Herodotus and the empires of the East: 3 1924 027 764 772 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924027764772 THE VANDERBILT ORIENTAL SERIES EDITED BY Herbert Gushing Tolman and James Henry Stevenson HERODOTUS AND THE EMPIRES OF THE EAST BASED ON NIKEL'S HERODOT UND DIE KEILSCHRIFTFORSCHUNG BY HERBERT GUSHING TOLMAN, Ph. D. AND '' JAMES HENRY STEVENSON, Ph. D. Professors in Vanderbilt University NEW YORK : CINCINNATI : CHICAGO : AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY GOPYRtGHT, 1899, BY Herbert Gushing Tolman AND James Henry Stevenson TO avhpl ayadiS TtTpaytovio, avev ij/oyov TeTvyjXfvio PREFACE. The aim of the present work is to furnish the clas- sical student such material as will enable him to appre- ciate the fascinating narrative of Herodotus respecting the nations of Western Asia. Herodotus has been criticised unjustly, we think, by some modern scholars. A well-known Assyriologist has even gone so far as to call Herodotus a mere XoyoTTouK, who "pilfered freely and without acknowl- edgment," who " assumed a knowledge he did not possess," who "professed to derive information from personal experience and eyewitnesses which really came from the very sources he seeks to disparage and supersede," and who "lays claim to extensive travels which are as mythical as those of the early philoso- phers." Such extreme views are as harmful as they are unfair. While we do not profess to claim for He- rodotus absolute historical accuracy, yet we are con- vinced that recent investigations in the native literature of the Eastern nations have confirmed the trustworthi- ness of many statements which were formerly regard- (5) O HERODOTUS. ed as absurd, and have established on a firmer basis the reputation of the great historian. If this volume can add to the charm of the simple style of Herodotus an appreciation of the historical value of his statements, the purpose of the editors will be fulfilled. Herbert Gushing Tolman, James Henry Stevenson. December 24, 1898. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction. Page The Greek Sources of the Assyro-Babylonian His- tory 9 The Grebk Writings in the Light of Assyriology. . ii Topography. The Fruitfulness of Babylonia 12 Geography of Babylonia 17 The Size of Babylon 20 The Basin of Sippara 34. The Citadel and " Temple of Zeus Belos " 36 History of the Empires of Western Asia. Semiramis and Nitocris 43 The Duration of the Assyrian Power in Western Asia 52 The Founding and Duration of the Median Empire. 58 Sennacherib's Expedition against Egypt 70 The Fall of Nineveh 71 The Genealogy and the National Descent of Cyrus. 73 The Decline of the Median Power 79 The Fall of Babylon 81 Darius 86 (7) 8 herodotus. Customs, Religion, and Language. ' ' Page Worship of Ishtar 90 Babylonian Dress 9° The Woman Market 9i Commerce on the Euphrates 92 The Seals of the Babylonians 92 The Religious Tolerance of Cyrus and Cambyses. . . 93 The Language of the Persians 95 The Customs of the Persians 97 INTRODUCTION. The Greek Sources of the Assyro-Babylonian History. The history of one of the oldest civilized nations — viz., the Assyro-Babylonian — was, until quite recently, known only in meager and fragmentary accounts. The extensive native literature of this people, of which scarcely any one had a suspicion, lay buried under- neath rubbish and ashes until the middle of the present century. Even the location of the sites of civilization in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys — &• g-, Ur, Larsam, Eridu, Erech, Ashur, Calah, Nineveh — was undeter- mined. Before the discovery and decipherment of the cunei- form documents, the information respecting the Assyro- Babylonian history was derived from two sources, the Old Testament and several Greek authors. Chief among the writings of the Old Testament are : the second book of Kings, the books of Chronicles, the books of the prophets Isaiah, Nahum, Jeremiah, Eze- kiel, and Daniel. Of the writings of the Greek au- thors, the most important is the work (Baj8vXv. With the exception of Babylon, Herodotus mentions only two towns of Babylonia : Is ("Is, I., 179) and Arderikka {'AphcpiKKa, I., 185). He places the former on a stream of the same name, tribu- tary to the Euphrates, eight days' journey from Babylon. Of this stream Herodotus says : " Is carries down many lumps of bitumen in its current, whence the bitumen was brought to Babylon for the construction of its walls." This town, which is situated some two hundred kilo- meters north of Babylon, a distance which corresponds with the estimate of Herodotus, is generally identified with the modern Hit, concerning which a recent trav- eler says : " Hit has been inhabited since the natives of Babylon learned to use pitch, or bitumen, as mortar, and from that time to this it has been the principal source of supply of that product. As already stated, the chief bitumen springs lie close behind the modern town. Beyond, and around these, stretches a dismal black plain, fetid with the smell of sulphureted hy- drogen. . . . Bitter streams trickle downward to the Euphrates. The rock which crops out here and there beneath your feet and the cliffs that border the plain are seamed with pitchy deposits. Above the town hangs a cloud of smoke from the burning bitu- men in the furnaces of the shipwrights and the ovens of the housewives. Strings of women pass by on their way to and from the river, and the vessels bal- anced on their heads are made of wickerwork or por- ous earthenware smeared over with bitumen. In their belts the men carry short clubs, with round balls of bitumen for heads. You enter the town and meet a TOPOGRAPHY. 19 man in the narrow streets hastening homeward with a vessel full of hot bitumen, to make or mend some household utensils. The roofs of the houses above your head are smeared with bitumen, but on the streets beneath your feet it is rarely used."^ This use of bi- tumen for mortar in the buildings and quays of Baby- lon furnishes an interesting commentary on the Tower of Babel story in the eleventh chapter of Genesis : " And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime [bitumen] had they for mor- tar." (Gen. xi. 3.) Herodotus places Arderikka on the Euphrates, some distance above Babylon. In this vicinity it is said the Babylonian queen, Nitocris, turned the course of the Euphrates, through artificial canals, so that the stream had to touch Arderikka three times in its course. He- rodotus says: "Those who go from this sea (Mediter- ranean) to Babylon, and sail down the Euphrates, must come to this village three times in three days." (I., 185.) The situation of Arderikka is to-day hard to deter- mine. Since the buildings ascribed to Nitocris (as will be discussed later), were very probably the work of Nebuchadrezar, we may naturally recall in this description one of the canal structures erected by that king. In all probability Nebuchadrezar had to dig a new bed for the Euphrates with great curves, so as to regulate the course of the stream. He then di- verted the current of the stream to the great basin 1 " Explorations and Adventures on the Euphrates,'' Vol. I., i6o fg. Peters. 20 HERODOTUS. built by him adjoining Sippara, so that in the threat- ened overflow the waters might be collected therein. Accordingly, Arderikka must have been situated above Sippara. The river Euphrates, according to Herodo- tus, extends to the Red Sea (ek ttjv 'EpvOpriv ®aXaJ eral smaller places in the vicinity. Hillah, which stands on tlie site of Babylon, is also built out of this old material, and even to this day a lively trade is car- ried on in the bricks that lie in the debris. Only a few rising ruins remind us of the history of the former me- tropolis of the world. The topographical accounts of the Greek writers and of the Babylonian documents make it possible to reconstruct the plan of the town and bring its picture before our eyes. In the description of Babylon which Herodotus fur- nishes, the accounts of the extent of the city are of special interest. " It is situated," says he, " in a great plain and is a quadrangle each side of which is 120 stades. The number of stades in the circumference of the town amount in all to 480." (I., 178.) According to a further description, the Euphrates flows from north to south right through the middle of the city. On each bank runs a wall, so that the town consists of two parts separated by the river and inclosed on all sides by fortifications. Since each side of this great rectangle, according to Herodotus, was 120 stades, the city must have covered an area of about two hun- dred square miles. Even if we accept the statements of Ctesias, we must infer that Babylon was built on a plan different from that of modern towns. Great parts of the land inclosed by the walls were certainly used for gardens, fruit trees, and palm groves ; several por- tions were probably reserved for the cultivation of grain. The account of Herodotus differs essentially from those of other writers of antiquity. Ctesias^ puts the 1 Diodorus, II., 7, § 3. 28 HERODOTUS. circumference at 360 stades ; Strabo,i at 385 ; Clitarch,^ at 365; Curtius,3 at 368. Simply to imagine, as Brull* does, that Herodotus exaggerated is not a sufficient explanation of these differences. We must remember that Herodotus is an eyewitness, and the oldest eyewitness of the Greek writers. Even if the walls had suffered great injury in his day, yet their ruins remained, and from these an observer could ob- tain quite an accurate estimate. It is hard to believe that Herodotus, in a superficial reckoning, could have erred a quarter of the whole amount. We might rath- er suppose that he had not seen the whole ruins of the walls, and that his voucher, a Persian, had exagger- ated. To show the accuracy of the accounts of He- rodotus we have to-day at our disposal two means, the ruins of Babylon and the cuneiform inscriptions. The ruins of Babylon were first investigated by Rich, who published an account of his researches under the title : " Narrative of a Journey to the Site of Babylon in 181 1." We learn that he made a subsequent visit to the same place from a second memoir on Babylon pub- lished at London in 18 18. Investigations were also made by Ker Porter in 1818, by Loftus and Taylor under the direction of Rawlinson (1849-1855), by the French expedition under Jules Oppert (1851—54), by Layard in 1851, by George Smith in 1876, by Rassam in three expeditions (1877-78, 1878-79, 1880-81). As soon as Oppert had examined the ruins of Baby- 1 Strabo, XVI., c. i., § 5. 2Diodorus, II., 7, §3. ' Curtius Vita Alexandri Magni, V., i. * Herodots babylonische Nachrichten, I., p. 13. TOPOGRAPHY. 29 Ion he believed he had determined the position and cir- cumference of the two walls, Imgur-Bel and Nimitti- Bel, as well as the east wall constructed by Nebuchad- rezar. He based his belief on the claim that the mounds of ruins contained the remnants of the old walls. According to his chart, the modern Hillah marked the center of old Babylon. The city itself, with its walls, formed a quadrangle sloping toward the northeast, of which the Euphrates was the diago- nal (from northwest to southeast). According to Op- pert's estimate, the outer fortification walls embraced an area of five hundred and thirteen square kilometers — i. e., about two hundred square miles. Therefore the length of each side of the square was fourteen miles and its circuit fifty-six miles — four hundred and eighty Stades. By this estimate Oppert thinks he has proved the correctness of the statements of Herodotus. He ex- plains the difference between the figures of Herodotus and those of later authors on the hypothesis that He- rodotus meant the outer fortifications, while the three hundred and sixty stades of Ctesias may refer to the length of the inner wall. It is clear that in the time of Herodotus the two lines must have been apparent, for he expressly declares : " This wall is like a coat of mail, but a second wall within makes a circuit not much weaker than the outer wall, but smaller in circumfer- ence." (I., 181.) The figures of Herodotus, as ha himself says, refer to the outer wall, but doubtless Ctesias and the later writers also intended to give the length of the outer limit. It may be possible, but not probable, that they mistook the inner for the outer wall, which might have been no longer recognized. Oppert's plans and charts have been verified by later go HERODOTUS. investigators, in so far as Rawlinson, as well as Jones and Shelby, declare that they have found a trace of the great wall. But the mounds of ruins which formed the basis of Oppert's conjectures cannot justify his delinea- tion. It must seem strange that no trace of the walls of Babylon remains to-day, after the work of Nebu- chadrezar. In several places, in the report of his building operations, he specially emphasizes the fact that he built the foundation of bitumen and brick im- mediately over the subterranean water (mihrat me^). At another time he says he has laid the foundations " on the breast of the lower world " (ina irat kigallu''). It must be remembered that since the days of the Persian power the walls, in so far as they were not torn down, were left to decay, and that, as remarked above, the existing material was appropriated for other structures. We are not sure, in spite of repeated excavations, that the remains of the old fortifications are not extant. Smith complains that the work of excavation in Baby- lon has been conducted very carelessly. The existing ruins furnish us no accurate conclu- sion concerning the circumference of the town or the extent of the fortification wall which we can use to verify the accounts of Herodotus. Further assistance is furnished by the cuneiform text. It is fortunate that the baked bricks of the time of Nebuchadrezar bear his royal stamp.' In the midst of the heap of IE. I. H., VII., 6i. 2 E. I. H., VIII., 60. 5 George Rawlinson, ■' Egypt and Babylon," says that nine- tenths of the bricks of Mesopotamia are stamped with the name of Nebuchadrezar. Peters, " Nippur," etc., mentions finding at Bagdad, as well as at many other localities, bricks bearing the stamp of Nebuchadrezar. TOPOGRAPHY. 3I ruins which to-day bears the name " Kasr " (fortress) are found limestone tablets with the inscription : " Great palace of Nebuchadrezar, king of Babylon, the son of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, who increased the honor of the gods Nabfi and Marduk, his lords." Therefore we can at least decide which of the ruins existing to-day go back to the times of Nebuchad- rezar. There is, however, no inscription extant from which we can directly decide the length of Imgur-Bel and Nimitti-Bel. If we wish, then, to verify the correctness of Herod- otus' figures, we must measure the extreme distances of the remaining ruins from one another. The ruins of Babylon begin fourteen kilometers north of the present town of Hillah, and extend ten kilometers south of the town. Their breadth — that is, their extension from east to west — amounts to nineteen or twenty kil- ometers. The area covered by these ruins is divided into two unequal parts by the Euphrates. The greater part lies on the east side ; the most northerly heap of ruins, called by the inhabitants Babil, lies on the east bank of the Euphrates, some ten kilometers distant from Hillah. These ruins, which form an extended hill, probably contain the remains of the "hanging gardens," and once lay within the wall of Babylon ; the stones bear the name of Nebuchadrezar. The most southern ruin, called Birs Nimroud, situated about ten kilometers southwest of Hillah, marks the remains of the Nebo temple of Borsippa, especially the terraced tower, or ziggurat. Borsippa did not lie within the walls of Babylon, but had its own walls, which are mentioned by Nebuchadrezar. This town was situated southwest of Babylon, on the west bank 32 HERODOTUS. of the Euphrates, and was joined to the city by a festal road. The outer fortification walls of Babylon could not have been very far from Birs Nimroud. The dis- tance is twenty kilometers — i. e., about fourteen miles. Since the old wall of Babylon ran north from Babil, we can safely estimate the extent of the town from north to south at fourteen miles. The ruins also extend in the direction of west to east about twenty kilometers. Ac- cordingly we can reckon, without difficulty, a circum- ference of fifty-six miles (four hundred and eighty stades). Against the statements of Herodotus no valid arguments can be brought. The difference between Herodotus and the later Greek writers can be explained in several ways. The remains of the outer fortification may have been extant in the time of Herodotus ; but if later writers failed to recog- nize these, they would consequently underestimate the circuit of the town. Again it is possible that Herodotus might have taken his measurements from the eastern part of Babylon, which, on account of the east wall con- structed by Nebuchadrezar, had a greater extent than the western part, on which the later writers may have based their figures. Doubtless the extent of the town from west to east, owing to the east wall of Nebuchad- rezar, was greater than from north to south. Herodo- tus, assuming a quadrangular area, had perhaps meas- ured only one side ; the later writers may also have measured only one side, but in a different direction. The most probable explanation is that Herodotus in- cluded Borsippa with Babylon, and consequently had greater dimensions as the basis of his measurement than those writers who took into their account only Baby- lon proper. That Herodotus reckoned Borsippa as a TOPOGRAPHY. 33 part of Babylon will be clear when we show later that he regards the Nebo temple of Borsippa as situated in the midst of Babylon. If this be true, we are not war- ranted in supposing that the accounts of Herodotus about the size of Babylon are exaggerations. Herod- otus gives the height of the walls as two hundred cu- bits, and their breadth fifty cubits. (I., 178.) He further adds that the "royal cubit," of which he speaks, is broader by three fingers than the ordinary one ; hence their height would be about three hundred and eighty-five feet and their width eighty-five feet, Di- odorus Siculus, on the authority of Ctesias, says that the height of the walls amounted to two hundred cu- bits (three hundred feet) ; but he remarks that, accord- ing to later writers, their height is only fifty cubits (seventy-five feet). Pliny (Hist. Nat., VI., 26) speaks of two hundred and thirty-five feet, while Strabo esti- mates but fifty cubits (seventy-five feet). These dif- ferences may be explained by the rapid dilapidation of the walls. Herodotus had not seen their former height, for he himself states that Darius had torn down the walls of the town and removed all the gates. (III., 159.) He says nothing of their rebuilding in later times ; however it is possible that their destruc- tion by Darius was not complete, and that remains were still standing in several places on which he, and later writers, based their estimates. In that case, the dif- ference might be explained by dilapidation. Oppert (Exp^d. I., 235) would apply the height given by Herodotus only to certain parts of the walls — viz., the towers, while H, C. Rawlinson ("Herodotus," Lon- don, 1853, Note to I., 178, G. Rawlinson) remarks that, according to his view, the height of the circuit wall 3 34 HERODOTUS. of Babylon did not exceed sixty to seventy feet. But we must distinguish the simple circuit wall (Nimitti- Bel) from the higher inner wall (Imgur-Bel). If Herodotus had followed his voucher, it may be conjectured that the latter, being of Persian descent, was guilty of exaggeration, since only scanty remains of the walls were extant. The Persians, who had con- quered Babylon under Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes, were inclined to represent the town as a strong fortification. But w^e must remember it was more than mere boasting which led Nebuchadrezar to characterize the walls he had built by the epithet "mountain high" (Sadanis^^). The accounts of Herodotus, concerning the material of the walls and the gates, correspond in general to those of the inscriptions. That bitumen was used as mortar in the construction of the walls is shown in sev- eral places in the building inscriptions of Nebuchad- rezar — e. £"., "with bitumen and brick" (ina kupri u agguri^). Furthermore, that the gates were bronze is proved by the cuneiform documents, according to which they were made of cedar and overlaid with copper.' The Basin of Sippara. Herodotus relates that the "queen, Nitocris," dug a basin above Babylon, near to the stream, " water deep " (/. e., down to subterranean water). The circuit of the basin amounted to four hundred and twenty stades. "And when this was dug she brought stones and sur- rounded it with a wall." (I., 185.) This basin must have lain on the east bank of the Euphrates, for He- i E. I. H., VI., 34; VIII., 51; IX., 21. 2E. I. H., VI., 31; VIII., 56, IX., 20. 3 E. I. H., VI., 37. TOPOGRAPHY. 35 rodotus remarks : " She constructed this work in that portion of the country where the passes were and the shortest ways from Media, in order that the Medes might not have communication with her land and spy out her affairs." (I., 185.) Abydenos ^ also speaks of this basin, but he puts the circumference at forty para- sangs (z. e., twelve hundred stades). Meyer ^ suggests that we substitute the number fourteen for forty. In that case the figures correspond with the four hundred and twenty stades of Herodotus. Diodorus Siculus, who compiles only from older sources, estimates the length of each side at three hundred stades (z. e., ten parasangs). We have every reason to believe that the figures of Herodotus are correct, smce the circuit wall of the basin was visible in his day. Later, by neglect of the canals and dikes, the neighborhood became, by degrees, a great swamp, so that the boundary line of the artificial basin disappeared more and more. The statement that the basin was dug as a protection against the Medes points to the time of Nebuchad- rezar, the first Babylonian king, who proposed a de- fense against Median invasion. The inscriptions of Nebuchadrezar give proof of building such a basin. The passage reads as follows : " In order that the ene- my may not encroach upon Babylon, I have surrounded the land with mighty waters as with the swells of the sea; and in order that their overflow, like the overflow of the great sea (lit., rolling sea), . . might not break through their banks, I constructed a strong dam against them, and with a wall of brick I surrounded it." ^ 1 C/. Eusebius, "Praepar Evang.," IX., 41. 2 " Geschichte des Altertums," I., 590. 3 E. I. H., VI., 39-52. 36 herodotus. The Citadel and " Temple of Zeus Belos." Herodotus says little about the buildings and streets of Babylon. " The town itself," he states, " which is full of houses three and four stories high, is intersected by streets which run in straight lines; not only the principal streets, but also the cross streets which lead to the river." (I., 180.) According to this descrip- tion, we must believe that the principal streets ran from north to south, or parallel to the river. Such a principal street, which divides the town from one end to the other, is mentioned in the inscriptions of Nebu- chadrezar under the name of A-a-ibur-sabft ; ^ it con- sisted of an elevated terrace structure built by the king, and served as a festal road of the god Merodach (Masdahabeli rabi Marduk^). Of the many prominent structures of Babylon, He- rodotus mentions only two—/, e., the royal palace and the temple of " Zeus Belos." He speaks of them as follows : " In one half of the city was built the royal palace, surrounded by a great and strong circuit wall, and in the other half stood the sanctuary of Zeus Belos with bronze gates, this being in existence even in my time. It is two stades in each direction, and is a rec- tangl2. In the midst of the sanctuary is built a solid tower a stade long and a stade broad, and on this tower is built another tower, and another tower upon this, up to the number of eight towers. Winding about these towers on the outside is an ascent; and when one reaches the middle of this ascent he finds a resting place and seats where those who ascend may sit and IE. I. H., Col. v., 15. 2E. I. H.,V., 19. TOPOGRAPHY. 37 rest. On the last tower is a great temple. . . . There is also another temple below, within the sanctuary at Babylon, w^here there is a great golden image of Zeus seated, and before it is a great golden table, and the footstool and throne are of gold." (I., 181, fg.) Let us endeavor to identify these two structures with the buildings known from the cuneiform documents. Herodotus places the citadel on a different bank of the Euphrates from the "temple of Zeus Belos." From the inscriptions and the extant ruins of Babylon we are convinced that the royal palace of Nabopolassar, as well as the new structure of Nebuchadrezar, was situated in the eastern portion of the town. Nabopolassar had built a palace in Babylon near the old temple Esagila. This lay in the extreme north of the town on the east- ern bank of the Euphrates, and was bounded by Imgur- Bel, the East Canal, the Euphrates, and the festal road A-a-ibur-sdbu. Esagila stood in close union with this palace. (E. I. H., VII. 36 fg.) Since the existing edifice was not sufficient, and its extension impossible because of its surroundings, Nebuchadrezar laid out a definite area between Imgur-Bel and Nimitti-Bel, erected thereon a terrace and surrounded it by a strong wall. Within this wall, the one which Herodotus mentions (I., 181), Nebuchadrezar built a new palace. The king designates it by the epithet " elevated ; " con- sequently it must have seemed to dominate the town like an acropolis. The new structure was joined in some way with the old palace. This great complex structure, erected by Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezar, is doubtless to be identified with the " royal palace " of our historian. It is possible that in the time of Herod- otus royal edifices were also extant on the west bank, 38 HERODOTUS. perhaps even the palace of the predecessors of Nabo- polassar. Since these buildings after the time of Na- bopolassar no longer served their original purpose, and were consequently insignificant as compared with the new palace, we must feel certain that in the time of Herodotus the palace of Nebuchadrezar was called the " royal palace " far excellence. V/e cannot accept the theory of Rawlinson, which declares that Herodotus must have found the palace of Nebuchadrezar de- stroyed, and consequently speaks of a palace of Neri- glissar (Nergal-sar-usur) on the west bank ; for Neri- glissar, a successor of Nebuchadrezar, restored the pal- ace of his illustrious predecessor.^ The place where the palace of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezar stood is shown to-day by those ruins in vi'hich bricks are found stamped with the name of Nebuchadrezar. The most northerly of the ruins v^rhich rise out of the extended debris is called Babil (also Murklubeh or Mudschelibeh). Owing to the remains of aqueducts we judge that these ruins mark the site of the " hanging gardens " which Nebuchadrezar erected to please his Median wife, Amytis. The heap of ruins immediately south of Babil, which to-day bears the name El Kasr (the for- tress), probably contains the remains of the new palace of Nebuchadrezar. Again, the hill, Tel Amran, which lies still farther South, may mark the site of the old palace of Nabopolassar. If the " royal palace " mentioned by Herodotus can be thus identified with the complex structure erected by Nebuchadrezar and his predecessor, then the "temple of Zeus Belos " can be no other than the Nebo temple ^Cf. inscription of cylinder at Cambridge, Col. II., 15-30. TOPOGRAPHY, 39 of Borsippa, which is called in the inscriptions Ezida. Next to Esagila, the temple of Pel-Merodach, Ezida of Borsippa was the greatest sanctuary of the land. It is with pride that the Babylonian and Assyrian kings, when they became lords of Babylon, called themselves " restorers " or " builders " of Esagila and Ezida. Nebuchadrezar frequently mentions (e. g.^ E. I. H., III., 1 8 fg.) this great sanctuary, which, like Esagi- la, was composed of numerous structures. Further mention is found in an inscription relating to the building of the bank-walls of Babylon and Borsippa (V. R., 34, Col. I., 50), but especially in the so-called Borsippa Inscription (I. R., 51, No. i). The king narrates here how he restored the terrace-tower of Borsippa (Zikiirat), called E-ur-imin-an-ki ("house of the seven spheres of heaven and earth"), which a former king had left incomplete and which had been injured by the storms. The cuneiform document which contains this report was found by H. Rawlin- son in 1854 in the ruins of Birs Nimroud in the third story of what was originally the seven-terraced tower. Consequently we are sure that Birs Nimroud, the most remarkable ruins on Babylonian soil, represents the remains of the former Nebo temple at Borsippa. That Herodotus had in mind the Nebo temple at Borsippa, when he speaks of the temple of Zeus Belos, is shown by the situation of Birs Nimroud. Accord- ing to him the temple of Zeus Belos was situated on one bank of the Euphrates and the royal palace on the other. Since the royal palace, as we have already shown, was in the eastern part of the town, the temple of Zeus Belos must have stood on the western bank ; but Ezida lay here, if not the only, at least by far the 40 HERODOTUS. most important temple of Borsippa. If Herodotus mentioned any edifices of Babylon, he surely must have referred to that temple, whose ruins, even at this day, remind us of the splendors of the old metropolis. Later investigations point to the identification of the ruins at Birs Nimroud with this temple. When we consider the system of building at Birs Nimroud, we find the same arrangements in stories that Herodotus describes. Of the first four stories we can get somewhat accurate dimensions. Moreover the relative size of the present ruins agrees with the state- ment of Herodotus, according to which the circumfer- ence of the terrace-tower at the base amounts to four stades (seven hundred and forty meters), and the length of either side of the quadrangle one stade (one hundred and eighty-five meters). Rich, who exam- ined Birs Nimroud, estimated the circumference of the ruins, near the base, at about six hundred and ninety meters ; Oppert, seven hundred or seven hundred and ten meters. H. Rawlinson differs from these esti- mates, but the difference may be explained on the supposition that Herodotus (followed by Rich, Oppert, Ker Porter, Layard) based his figures on the terrace- structure, while the smaller estimate of Rawlinson was based on the dimensions of the first story. Some have urged as an objection against identifying the Nebo temple at Borsippa with the "temple of Zeus Belos " that the god to whom Ezida was dedicated was called Nebo. The name "temple of Zeus Belos" seems to apply to Esagila, since Merodach, to whom that temple w^as dedicated, was generally called Bel far excellence — e. g.^ Imgur-Bel and Nimitti-Bel. But we must remember that the word Bel, in a general TOPOGRAPHY, 41 sense, was used also of the other gods — e. g,, of Samas, the sun god ; and of Sin, the moon god. Furthermore, Merodach, as the chief tutelary deity of Babylon, was also called Lord — /. e., Bel — of Ezida and other tem- ples. Finally, it is well known what confusion there is in Greek representations of Oriental proper names. Another objection has been raised — viz., that, accord- ing to Herodotus, the temple of Zeus Belos was situ- ated in the middle (kv /xlcria) of one part of the town, and the citadel in the middle of another part ; but Ezida was in Borsippa. This objection can be met as fol- lows : The citadel of Nebuchadrezar was situated, it is true, not exactly in the middle of the eastern half of the town, but to the north of the same ; we are not, how- ever, required to hold Herodotus to exact mathematical statements. After the time of Darius I. the walls of Babylon, and probably those of Borsippa, were de- molished. In that case Herodotus could easily have supposed that Babylon and Borsippa formed one town. The western half of Babylon might have had close connection w^ith Borsippa, which lay immediately to the south, so that both localities to a stranger might appear as the western part of the town. If Herodotus had reckoned Borsippa as a part of Babylon, then, in his judgment, the Nebo temple would have been in the western part of the town, since the western half of Babylon proper lay to the north of Ezida; and Bor- sippa, or at least a great portion of it, lay to the south. This hypothesis furnishes an explanation for the high estimate that Herodotus gives of the circuit of Baby- lon. Oppert is wrong when he states that Nimitti- Bel once inclosed Babylon and Borsippa; yet both towns were so near each other that Borsippa served 43 HERODOTUS. as the sister town of Babylon. In the vocabulary K. 4309, obv. 24, Borsippa is designated Tin-tir II. kan-ki — i. e., second Babylon. ^ In the Talmud Bor- sippa is frequently identified with Babel. ^ Cf. Delitzsch " Wo lag das Paradies?" p. 216. Note. — The zikftrat (zikkurratu) or terrace tower is one of the most interesting features in connection with the temples of Babylonia. Every student of the Bible knows how promi- nently "high places" figured in the worship of the various re- ligious cults of Palestine. The prophet Hosea complains that the Israelites "sacrifice on the top of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills." Inasmuch as Babylonia was devoid of these natural elevations, so common in Palestine, its inhabit- ants were obliged to imitate them by artificial mounds. Jas- trow (" Religion of Babylonia," etc.) is no doubt correct in con- necting these earth structures with the primitive superstition which regarded a mountain as the home of the gods. The zikflrat was built in imitation of a mountain, and the small room at the top was regarded as the dwelling place of the deity. It is instructive to note in this connection that the temple of Bel at Nippur was called E-Kur — z. e., " mountain house." These solid quadrangular structures were generally three or four sto- ries high, though in more ambitious times there were seven stories, dedicated, so the Babylonians said, to the sun, moon, Ishtar, Marduk, Ninib, Nergal, and Nabu, respectively. As the term zikfirat indicates, the purpose was to make the temple conspicuous, and one cannot help recalling here the Biblical account of the building of the tower of Babel. "And they said. Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven." (Gen. xi. 4.) HISTORY OF THE EMPIRES OF WESTERN ASIA. Semiramis and Nitocris. Herodotus mentions two queens of Babylonia, Se- miramis and Nitocris, whose names he associates with the building of Babylon. Semiramis, he says, ruled over Babylon five generations before Nitocris, and con- structed dikes through the plains to prevent the over- flowing of the Euphrates. Although this work was very useful, yet Nitocris, the other queen, is spoken of several lines later as the "wiser," avvcTwrepij. (I., 185.) Herodotus is the first Greek writer to mention Semir- amis. According to Ctesias (Diodorus II., 4 fg.) this queen was the wife of the half-mythical Assyrian king Ninos, the legendary builder of Nineveh. After the death of her husband Semiramis built the city of Babylon, and made numerous expeditions into Asia and Egypt. Ctesias brings out prominently, as the special characteristic of this queen, her exceeding prof- ligacy. Berossus, according to Josephus (c. Apion I., 20), opposes the view of Greek writers who make Semiramis the founder of Babylon. Yet, even in his judgment, she is a historical personage, for he men- tions her name after the enumeration of the fifth (the fourth so-called historical) dynasty of the Arabians, which represents nine kings and tv/o hundred and forty- five years. (Eusebius, Chron. ed. Schoene I., 26).^ ' Post quos annos etiam ipsam Semiramidem in Assyrios dominatam esse tradit. (43) 44 HERODOTUS. Strabo speaks in three places of the strongholds and towers, mountain roads and aqueducts, bridges and ca- nals, which Semiramis constructed in Asia. (80, 529, 736.) Lucian attributes the old temples of Syria to Semiramis ; Polyaenus also, and the Armenian Moses of Chorene mention this half-historical queen. It is re- markable that among the Jewish rabbis she figured as the wife of Nebuchadrezar. Even to-day in Armenia two names recall the memory of this Assyrian heroine : Samiramgert (citadel of Semiramis), Samiramsue (ca- nal of Semiramis). How far can we recognize a histoiical germ in the legends of Semiramis .' We are not quite sure whether Herodotus regarded her as an Assyrian or a Babylo- nian queen, since, according to I., 184, she might have " ruled over Babylon " from Nineveh. Yet we infer that because Herodotus regarded Nitocris as a Baby- lonian he would assign the same nationality to Se- miramis. The later Greek version, however, regards her as an Assyrian. The statements of Ctesias, that this queen built Babylon, give no evidence as to her date, for the founding of the city dates from the half- historic period before Hammurabi. Moreover it is im- possible that she should have built Babylon and have been, at the same time, the wife of the founder of Nin- eveh ; for the latter was built by Babylonian colonists many centuries after the founding of the former. The w^orthlessness of the statements of Ctesias concerning Semiramis finds a suitable illustration in the fact that he attributes the Behistan Inscription of Darius to the work of this queen. Much more definite is the statement of our historian that Semiramis lived five generations before Nitocris. THE EMPIRES OF WESTERN ASIA. 45 Now since the buildings of Nitocris, as we sliall show, are to be identified with those of Nebuchadrezar, there- fore Semiramis must have lived about the year 800 B. C. But has thci-e been found in Assyrian or Baby- lonian history a queen who corresponds with the state- ments of Herodotus, and w^ho furnishes the solution of the problems contained in the accounts of the Greek writers? In the cuneiform inscriptions we meet an Assyrian queen, Sammuramat. She lived during the reign of King Ramman-nirari III. (813—783), and was either his wife or his mother. One of the most re- markable events of this king's reign was the introduc- tion of the purely Babylonian Nebo cult into Assyria. The inscription on a Nebo statue, prepared by a high Assyrian official, reads : " To him who dwells at Ezida, the great lord, his master, has Bel-tarsi-ilu-ma, the gov- ernor of Kalah, etc., erected in the midst of Kalah (this statue), to perpetuate the life of Ramman-nirari, the king of Assyi'ia, his lord, and to perpetuate the life of Sammuramat, the queen of the palace (assat ekalli), his mistress, in order that he may live long,"^ etc. The government lists show that the Nebo temple at Kalah was begun in the year 789, and was dedicated in 787, the twenty-fifth year of the reign of Ramman-nirari. We know further that the Nebo cult had not hitherto extended into Assyria. This fact, especially when we consider that the women of royal family were not mentioned in the historical documents of the As- syrian kings, compels us to conclude that Sammura- mat, the mother or wife of the ruling monarch, was a Babylonian, who possessed such influence as to intro- 1 1. R. 3S, No. 2, 7-10. 46 HERODOTUS. duce the cult of her own home into Assyria. Since Ramman-nirari III., as a genealogical inscription shows, came to the throne in his childhood, we may- suppose that Sammuramat was the mother of the king, and administered affairs during his minority. In this way we can explain her remarkable influence. With what energy the Assyrian government was con- ducted during the minority of the king is shown by the fact that from 812 to 800, the first twelve years of the reign, three expeditions w^ere made against Media, two against Manna (between Media and Armenia), two against the land of the Hatti (Hittites), and two against the "west land" (Phcenicia and Palestine). Doubtless the energy of this queen regent was equally manifest in the administration of the internal affairs of the gov- ernment, as is proved by the introduction of the Nebo cult into Assyria. The statement of Herodotus that the "queen" con- tributed to the welfare of her subjects by the construc- tion of dikes corresponds very closely to the picture of Semiramis in the cuneiform documents. A regent who displayed such energy and statesmanship must have lived long in the remembrance of the people. Later centuries not only attribute to this ruler many achievements whose authors were forgotten, but also surround her picttire with a wreath of legends. Sev- eral of these Semiramis legends, as told by the Greeks, are hard to reconcile \vith the portrait of the Assyrian ruler. Mythological elements of Semitic origin, as it seems, were united through the free play of poetic fancy with the person of the historical Semiramis. Ctesias narrates that Semiramis w^as the daughter of a Syrian and the Derceto who threw herself into the sea THE EMPIRES OF WESTERN ASIA. 47 at Ascalon and later was worshiped as a goddess in that locality. (Diodorus II., 4.) Exposed in infancy, Semiramis was miraculously nurtured by the doves of the goddess Derceto. Through her beauty, wisdom, and energy she attained to the Assyrian throne. Her reign was characterized by uninterrupted victorious expeditions as far as India. She built Babylon, its mighty walls, and its citadels ; but her sensual nature forms a striking contrast to her warlike disposition. In her later life she was enamored of all beautiful youth, but finally killed those to whom she had been devoted. Her end was as miraciilous as her birth and early years : she was metamorphosed, and took her flight to heaven amid a flock of doves. Max Duncker has shown that Ctesias drew this story from Medo-Persian sources.^ We cannot, how- ever, accept his hypothesis that the Medo-Persian bards changed the myth of a goddess, who was wor- shiped in Assyria and whose service flourished in Syr- ia, into a heroine who founded the Assyrian power. Duncker regards the prehistorical references to Se- miramis as a later secondary element. But rather is the reverse true; the historical Semiramis forms the nucleus of the mythical narrative. Of course, as Duncker says, "the Assyrians served Ishtar-Belit, a female divinity, who w^as goddess of war as well as goddess of love." Ishtar, the goddess of the planet Venus, has a double character : as goddess of the morning star she is a war goddess, for the morning star calls men to activity and battle ; as the evening star she is the goddess of sensual love, for the evening l"Geschichte des Altertums," 5 Aufl., Leipzig, 1878, II., p. 13 fg. 48 HERODOTUS. star invites men to rest. But we are not sure of any identity between Ishtar and the Assyrian goddess Der- ceto. Duncker's theory is rendered all the more im- probable when we consider that Semiramis occurs in the Old Testament as a masculine proper name, (i Chron. XV. 18, 20; xvi. 5; 2 Chron. xvii. 8.) The wonderful events in the childhood of Semira- mis find a parallel in various hero legends — e. g., Cy- rus, Romulus and Remus. Bauer has shown from Roman, German, Persian, and Indian analogies that it is customary in the legends of renowned monarchs, particularly founders of new dynasties, to represent them as having enjoyed from childhood especial divine favor. Furthermore, the statements about the excesses of this Assyrian queen can be explained by the desire of the poet to exaggerate her weaknesses. The following historical facts are assured : ( i ) That there was an Assyrian ruler by the name of Semiramis ; (2) that she played a conspicuous part in political af- fairs ; (3) that the date given to this queen by He- rodotus is confirmed by the cuneiform records. There- fore we can conclude that the foundation for the leg- ends of Semiramis is that historical personage called Sammuramat in the cuneiform inscriptions. The successes which were gained in Media in the time of Ramman-nirari III. easily explain why the later Greeks attributed to Semiramis the great works of the Median monarchs, the building of the citadel in Ecba- tana, and even the Beliistan Inscription. In this great Assyrian queen the Median poets saw a worthy ob- ject of glorification. From the Medes and Persians these descriptions reached the Greeks, and Semiramis then became the half -historical, half-mythical portrait THE EMPIRES OF WESTERN ASIA. 49 of all the legendary fortunes, habits, and achievements of the Assyro-Babylonian rulers, from Sargon I. and Hammurabi to the fall of Babylon. The second "Babylonian" queen whom Herodotus mentions is Nitocris. He attributes to her three works : The windings of the Euphrates at Arderikka, the great basin above Babylon for the reception of the water of the Euphrates (probably the Basin of Sippara), and the building at Babylon of a bridge over the Euphra- tes. The husband and the son of Nitocris are both called Labynetos by Herodotus. It was in the reign of the younger Labynetos that Babylon fell at the hands of Cyrus. Herodotus gives the reason for the construction of the works at Arderikka as follows : " Because she (Nitocris) saw how formidable the power of the Medes had grown, and how they were never at peace, but had conquered Ninos, with many other towns, she took every precaution to defend herself against them." (I., 185.) From the time of Nebuchadrezar the grow- ing might of the Medes was a source of apprehension to the Babylonians. That king constructed fortifica- tions, especially the new east wall, to meet this threat- ening danger. The cuneiform records show that the basin at Sip- para was begun in the reign of Nebuchadrezar. (E. I. H., VI., 39-46.) The building of the bridge across the Euphrates was probably necessitated by the mag- nitude and importance of Babylon at this same period. The western portion of the town needed a better con- nection with the eastern portion ; besides, the traffic over the Euphrates was especially great at the festival held 4 50 HERODOTUS. in honor of the god Nebo at Borsippa.^ All these facts point to the hypothesis that by Nitocris we must understand Nebuchadrezar.^ The difficulties which meet this supposition ought not to be overlooked. Nitocris is the mother of Labynetos the younger, in whose reign Cyrus destroyed Babylon. It is univer- sally admitted that this Labynetos is identical with the Nab7ror£ ) , Cyprian ■^ " if " (Att. eav for •7 av) Indo-European. * dkwos * ^kwom C * ^kwosyo ( * ^kwesyo C * 6kw6d ( * ekwed C * ^kw^oi C * dkwei C * ^kwd f * 6kwe Persian, bar ("bear") ; Indo-European, bher ; San- skrit, bhar ; Greek, epov £<^epe(T) Indo -European. * ^-bhero-m * ^-bhere-s * ^-bhere-t The Customs of the Persians, Herodotus states that it is not the practice of the Persians to erect statues, temples, or altars to their gods. (I., 131.) But Darius tells us in the Behistan Inscription (I., 14) that he restored the sanctuaries which Gaumata destroyed. This passage, the inter- pretation of which is somewhat doubtful, ought proba- bly to read : " I restored the places of prayer which Gaumata the Magian destroyed ; I preserved the aqueducts (?) for the people, the possessions, the dwelling places, and whatever else Gaumata the Ma- gian had taken from them with the help of his clans- men (vithibishi)." On the tomb of Darius at Naqshi-Rustam, opposite the standing form of the king, is carved an altar, upon ^Cf. Foy, "Kuhn's Zeitschrift," XXXIII., p. 425: "Spiegel, Bang und Tolman soUten ubrigens auch bei ihren iibersetzung- en besser vithaibish als vithibish." The latter (vithin) is literal- ly " belonging to a clan." 7 98 HERODOTUS. ■which the sacred fire is burning, while above is a disk, probably the representation of the sun, of which the fire blazing at the shrine is the symbol. Over all is the image of the supreme god Auramazda. Again Herodotus erroneously confused Mitra with Aphrodite. Mitra, or Mithra, was the personification of the sun, while Anaitis corresponds to the Greek Aphrodite. Both names occur in the inscription of Artaxerxes Mnemon at Susa : " Let Auramazda, Ana- hita, and Mithra protect me." ([A(h)uramazda] Ana- h[i]ta ut[a Mi]thra [mam patuv].) The following selection from the Mihir Yasht of the Avesta will serve as a specimen of the praise of Mithra, the all-be- holding sun : " Mithra, of far courses,^ we worship with sacrifice, a god, truth-speaking, eloquent, of a thousand ears, well-shapened, of ten thousand eyes, tall, with broad windows — i. e., as in a fortress, where one may have a broad view-^strong, sleepless, ever watchful, giving instruction as a rew^ard, lord of hosts, possessor of a thousand spies, ruler, master, all-knowing." It is to Auramazda that Darius owes his throne and his victories. He repeatedly states in his inscriptions : "By the grace of Auramazda I am king" {e. £:, Bh., I., 5) ; "Auramazda gave me the kingdom" {e. g:, Bh., I., 5 and 9) ; "By the grace of Auramazda (these coun- tries) became subject to me" {e. g., Bh., I., 7) ; "Au- ramazda bore me aid, by the grace of Auramazda my army smote that rebellious army utterly" (e. ^., Bh., I., 8). iLit., "cow-ways;" Wrongly Darmesteter, "Lord of wide pastures;" and Jackson, "having wide pastures" (Avesta Grammar, §867). CUSTOMS, RELIGION, AND LANGUAGE. 99 The Magi were guardians of the priestly mysteries, and without them, Herodotus says, it was not lawful to sacrifice. (I., 132.) The Magi may have been a Me- dian tribe of great political importance, for it was the Magian Gaumata who, under the name of Smerdis, laid claim to the throne. As the priestly class, they held a supremacy which was unique and abiding. Their dress was white ; on their head was worn a tur- ban, which, by cheek pieces (Avestan, Paitidana), protected the mouth. The sacriiicial rites, described by Herodotus, agree pretty closely with the rules pre- scribed in the Avesta. Herodotus declares it is secretly mentioned that the dead body of a Persian is never buried until it has been torn by dog or bird ; the Magi, however, practise this custom openly. (I., 140.) This is fully in accord with the requirements of the Avesta, which implicitly prescribe that the naked dead be ex- posed to birds of prey on a high structure (dakhma) outside the city. So the modern Parsis place the body on the " Tower of Silence " to be consumed by vultures. The killing of obnoxious animals is commended. Herodotus relates that the Magi kill ants, snakes, and other creeping, as well as flying, things ; but they spare the dog. (I., 140.) Vendidad XIII., of the Avesta, refers to the dog and to its treatment — e. g., the punishment for killing a dog, the duties of the dog, the proper food for the dog, the care of a diseased dog, the vices and virtues of the dog, the praise of the dog. But Vendidad XIV. sanctions the killing of snakes, ants, and worms.^ The education of the Persian youth, according to He- i Also Vendidad XVI. prescribes the killing of ants. loo HERODOTUS. rodotus, consists of three things — i, e., to ride the horse, to shoot the bow, and to speak the truth, (I., 136.) Herodotus further relates that to tell a lie is considered among them the greatest disgrace. (I., 138.) The Behistan inscription amply proves the apparent con- tempt of the Persian for deceit. "It was a lie," says Darius, "that made the provinces rebellious." (Bh., I., 10; IV., 4.) "Gaumata the Magian deceived the state." (Bh., I., ii.) So over the prostrate forms of the rebels is written : " This is A : he lied ; thus he said." (See p. 88.) KINGS OF ASSYRIA (FROM THE SECOND ASSYRIAN EMPIRE). TiGLATH-PlLESBR III 745-727- Shalmaneser IV 727-722. Sargon 722-705. Sennacherib 705-681. esar-haddon. 681-668. AsHURBANiPAL ( Sardanapalos). . 668-626. AsuR-ETiL-iLANi-UKiN, reigned at least four years. SiN-SAR-iSKUN (Sarakos), reigned at least seven years. Nineveh fell 606 or 607. KINGS OF THE NEW BABYLONIAN EMPIRE. Nabopolassar. 626-605. Nebuchadrezar. .... 605-562. Evil-Merodach 562-560. Neriglissar 560-556. Labasi-Marduk (Laborosoarchod), reigned three months. Nabonidus 556-538. Cyrus conquers Babylon 538. (101) KINGS OF LYDIA (ACCORDING TO HERODOTUS). Dynasty of the Heraclid^. Agron, son of Ninus, grandson of Belus, great- grandson of Alcseus, was the first of the Heraclidae to become king of Sardis. Myrsus, the twenty-first successor of Agron. Candaules (Myrsilus), last of the dynasty which extended five hundred and five years. Dynasty of the Mermnad^. Gyges, who reigned thirty-eight years. Ardys, who reigned forty-nine years. Sadyattes, who reigned twelve years. Alyattes, who reigned fifty-seven years. Crcesus, who reigned fourteen years ; conquered by Cyrus, KINGS OF MEDIA (ACCORDING TO HERODOTUS). Deioces (Assyrian, Daiukku). . . 699-646. Phraortes (Persian, Fravartish). . 646-624. Cyaxares (Persian, Uvakhshtra). . . 624-584. Astyages (Assyrian, Istuvegu). . 584-550. Media is brought under the power of Cyrus, the son of a vassal of Astyages, in what was then the little province of Persia. (102) KINGS OF PERSIA. Cyrus (Kurush) 559-529- Cambyses (Ka[m]bujiya). . . 529-522. GoMATES (Gaumata), the Magian, the pseudo-Smer- dis (Bardiya), reigned seven months. Darius (Darayava[h]ush). . . 521-485. Xerxes (Khshayarsha) 485-465. Artaxerxes I. ( Artakhshatra) Longimanus. 465-425- Xerxes II., murdered after a reign of forty-five days by his half brother, who was himself slain by another bastard son of Artaxerxes, who took the throne under the title of Darius II. Darius II. (Nothus). .... 424-405. Artaxerxes II. (Mnemon). . . 405-358. Artaxerxes III. (Ochus). . . . 358-338. Arses. 338-336- Darius III. (Codomannus). . . . 336-330. Conquered by Alexander. (103) ANNOUNCEMENT. THE VANDERBILT ORIENTAL SERIES. EDITED BY PROFESSORS HERBERT GUSHING TOLMAN, Ph. D., AND JAMES HENRY STEVENSON, Ph. D. INDEX TO THE CHANDOGYA UPANISHAD, By Charles Edgar Little. {In Press.) THE CHANDOGYA UPANISHAD, (Nearly Ready) Translated hy C. E. Little. THE TEXT OF THE CHANDOGYA UPANISHAD. Edited by C. E. Little. INDEX OF RITES TO THE GRIHYA SUTRAS, By H. C. ToLMAN. OUTLINE OF VEDIC MYTHOLOGY, By H. C. ToLMAN. ASSYRL\N AND BABYLONIAN CONTRACTS (with Aramaic Reference Notes) Transcribed beota. the Originals in the British Museum, with Transliteration and Translation, {Nearly Ready.) By J. H. Stevenson. HISTORY OF THE DISCOVERY AND DECIPHEFMENT OF THE CUNEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS, By J. H, Stevenson. (104) PINAL CLAUSES IN THE SEPTUAGINT, {.Nearly Ready) By John Wesley Rice. HEBREW SYNONYMS, By IsADORE Lewinthal. ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE JEWISH SYNAGOGUE By IsADORE Lewinthal. HERODOTUS AND THE EMPIRES OF THE EAST, Based on Nikels' Herodot und die KeilschriMorschung, {Ready.) By the Editors. THE BOOK OF SAMUEL, Text, Vocabulary, anu Grammatical, Syntactical, and Exegetical Notes for the Use of Intermediate Classes, By J. H. Stevenson. Further Announcements Will Follow. New York : Cincinnati : Chicago : AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY. (105) >vfff