"The master-mason told me, (says M. Beauchamp,) | floor of the lowest of these was covered with boards that he found some in a spot where he was digging, about twenty years ago; which is by no means strange, as it is common enough on the banks of the Euphrates. I have myself seen it on the road from Bagdad to Juba, an Arabian village, seated on that river." The men engaged at Babel had two objects in view; (1.) to build a city, and (2.) a tower. There could be no impiety in proposing to build a city; yet it is expressly stated, that, in consequence of the divine interposition, the continuation of the city was relinquished. On the other hand, the tower was certainly intended as a place for worship, but not of the true God; yet it is no where said in Scripture that it was destroyed, or its works suspended. This is not easily explained; and the circumstance is rendered the more obscure, by the accounts of its overthrow which have been preserved in heathen writers. Eupolemus, quoted by Eusebius, (Præp. lib. ix.) says, "The city Babel was first founded, and afterwards the celebrated tower; both which were built by some of the people who had escaped the deluge. The tower was eventually ruined by the power of God." Abydenus, in his Assyrian Annals, also mentions the tower; which, he says, was carried up to heaven; but that the gods ruined it by storms and whirlwinds, frustrated the purpose for which it was designed, and overthrew it on the heads of those who were engaged in the work. The ruins of it were called Babylon. (Euseb. Chron. p. 13.) The reader will bear this in mind, as it will assist in determining our judgment on the character of the ruins still extant. somewhat decayed, and was about twenty feet square, having much the appearance of the belfry of a country church in England. A ladder of fifteen rounds conducted us to the next stage, and so on, from story to story, until we reached the top, each stage or floor diminishing gradually in size to the summit. Here our labor was most amply repaid; for never had I witnessed so beautiful and so sublime a prospect. It so far surpassed every idea I had or could have formed of its grandeur and effect, that I was almost entranced in its contemplation. I forgot all the world beside, and felt as if I could have continued on this elevated spot for ever." Modern travellers vary in their descriptions of the remains of the tower of Babel. Fabricius says, it might have been about a mile in circumference. Guion says the same. Benjamin, who is much more ancient, informs us, that the foundations were two thousand paces in length. The Sieur de la Bonlaye le Gour, a gentleman of Anjou, who says he made a long stay at Babylon, or Bagdad, declares, that about three leagues from that city, is a tower, called Megara, situated between the Tigris and Euphrates, in an open field, which is solid within, and more like a mountain than a tower. The compass of it is above five hundred paces; and as the rain and winds have very much ruined it, it cannot be more than about a hundred and thirty-eight feet high. It is built of bricks four inches thick; and between every seven courses of bricks there is a course of straw, three inches thick, mixed with pitch and bitumen; from the top to the bottom are about fifty courses. We do not find in Scripture any subsequent allusion to the tower of Babel; but there is in the LXX a remarkable variation from our Hebrew copies in Isaiah x. 9, where we read, Is not Calno as Carchemish? those translators read, "Have I not taken the region which is above Babylon and Chalane, where the tower was built?" That they re-it, in a square of two furlongs on every side, and a ferred to the ancient attempt of the sons of men cannot be doubted; and the passage is so understood by the Christian fathers, as may be seen in Bochart. The latest accounts by our travellers, especially the tract of Mr. Rich, with his plates, had raised a doubt whether the original tower of Babel were the same with that known to us by the descriptions of ancient authors as the tower of Belus, at Babylon. The same doubt had occurred to Father Kircher, (Turris Babel, lib. ii. cap. 3.) but he produces no authority in support of his conjecture, that a second tower was built by Ninus and Semiramis. Certain it is, that no ancient author mentions two towers; but if we might be allowed to admit the supposition, it would obviate almost every difficulty that at present appears insurmountable, in attempting to reconcile ancient accounts with actual appearances.-[The supposition of Calmet and others is not improbable, viz. that the tower of Belus was not the tower of Babel itself, but was rather built upon the old foundations of the latter. R. We submit here an instance of a building very similar in form and proportions to the original tower; and producing effects on the eye and mind of a British traveller analogous to what it may be presumed was intended by the priests and the builders of Rabel. It is Mr. Wathen's account of the great pagoda at Conjeveram, the Dewal, or temple of Vurdaraujah; extracted from his voyage to Madras. "The tower, or most elevated part of this building, consisted of fifteen stories, or stages; the The following particulars of the tower of Belus are from Dr. Prideaux:-"Till the time of Nebuchadnezzar, the temple of Belus contained no more than the [central] tower only, and the rooms in it served all the occasions of that idolatrous worship. that he enlarged it by vast buildings erected round mile in circumference, which was one thousand eight hundred feet more than the square at the temple of Jerusalem, for that was but three thousand feet round; whereas this was, according to this account, four thousand eight hundred; and on the outside of all these buildings, was a wall enclosing the whole, which may be supposed to have been of equal extent with the square in which it stood, that is, two miles and a half in compass, in which were several gates leading into the temple, all of solid brass; and the brazen sea, the brazen pillars, and the other brazen vessels, which were carried to Babylon, from the temple of Jerusalem, seem to have been employed in the making of them; for it is said, that Nebuchadnezzar did put all the sacred vessels, which he carried from Jerusalem, into the house of his god at Babylon, that is, into this house or temple of Bel. This temple stood till the time of Xerxes, but on his return from the Grecian expedition, he demolished the whole of it, and laid it all in rubbish, having first plundered it of its immense riches, among which were several images or statues of massy gold; and one of them is said by Diodorus Siculus to have been forty feet high, which might perchance have been that which Nebuchadnezzar consecrated in the plains of Dura." [A succinct account of the tower of Belus may be given as follows; and it will also serve as an illustration of the worship of Bel, or Baal, i. e. of the planet Jupiter. (See BAAL.) Herodotus saw this temple, still unimpaired. (Herodot. i. 181, seq.) It stood within the city, in the midst of a square area, surrounded by walls which were furnished with iron gates. It was built of burnt bricks laid in bitumen, and rose to the height of a stadium, i. e. according to Volney, (Recherches, P. iii. p. 72, seq.) about 320 feet. There were eight stages or stories; to which the ascent was by slanting stairs along the external walls. These stories gradually diminished in breadth from the base upward; thus giving to the tower the form of a pyramid. Hence Strabo also calls it a square pyramid. (xvi. 1. 5.) The upper story contained a chamber, with a bed, before which stood a golden table. In this chamber Herodotus says no one slept at night except a female, whom the god Belus, according to the Chaldeans the priests of this temple, had selected from the females of the city. Diodorus Siculus says, this chamber served also for astronomical observations. In the next story below was a chapel, with a gigantic statue of Belus, sitting upon a throne with a table before it. The image, throne, and table, throughout, were of pure gold.-Niebuhr and R. K. Porter suppose that the remains of this temple are extant in the ruin Birs Nimrood; and to this Rosenmueller also gives his assent. Bib. Geog. I. ii. p. 24. See under BABYLON. R. It is highly probable, that the remains of towers, shown in Babylonia, are only ruins of old Babylon, built by Nebuchadnezzar. See further in the next article. : "BABEL," says Ibn Haukal, " is a small village, but the most ancient spot in all Irak. The whole region is denominated Babel, from this place. The kings of Canaan resided there, and ruins of great edifices still remain. I am of opinion, that, in former times, it was a very considerable place. They say that Babel was founded by Zokah Piurasp; and there was Abraham, to whom be peace! thrown into the fire. There are two heaps, one of which is in a place called Koudi Fereik, the other Koudi Derbar in this the ashes still remain; and they say that it was the fire of Nimrod into which Abraham was cast; may peace be on him!" Now, as it is evidently impossible that a monarch of the Peishdadian, or first dynasty of the Persian kings, supposed to have reigned ante A. D. 780, should have seen Abraham, may not this tradition have some reference to the story of Shadrach, and his companions, cast into the fiery furnace, as recorded in Daniel? The circumstances of the miraculous delivery are the same, and the memory of this, so much later miracle, is more likely to have been preserved than the other. At all events, these traditions of deliverance from the power of fire, show that the memory of a history, of which that was the subject, was strongly and generally impressed on the minds of the inhabitants in neighboring countries; though they might not accurately report all the particulars of it. I. BABYLON, (derived from BABEL, which see,) the capital of Babylonia, or Chaldea, was probably built by Nimrod; but it was long before it obtained its subsequent size and splendor. It was enlarged by Belus; and Semiramis added so many and so very considerable works, that she might be called, not improperly, the foundress of it; as Constantine is called the founder of Constantinople, although that city had long been the city Byzantium. It was, long afterwards, embellished by Nebuchadnezzar; and hither a considerable portion of the Jewish captives were led by their haughty and politic conqueror. In consequence of this transportation to the chief city of the empire, the name Babylon became symbolical among the Jews for a state of suffering and calamity; and is, accordingly, used in this figurative sense in the Revelations; not for the city of Babylon in Chaldea, but for another place and state which might justly be compared to the ancient Babylon. [But see under APOCALYPSE.] The Jews carry this notion still further, and give the name of Babylon to any place, whether in Babylonia Proper, or out of it, where any division of their nation had been held in a state of captivity. Belus the Assyrian is said to have reigned at Babylon A. M. 2682, ante A. D. 1322, in the time of Shamgar, judge of Israel; and to have been succeeded by Ninus, Semiramis, Ninyas, and others: but none of these princes are noticed in Scripture, at least not under the title of kings of Babylon. Ninus, according to Herodotus (lib. i. cap. 95.) founded the Assyrian empire, which subsisted in Upper Asia 520 years. During this interval, the city and province of Babylon was under a governor appointed by the king of Assyria, till the reign of Sardanapalus, (A. M. 3257,) when Arbaces, governor of the Medes, and Belesis, or Nabonassar, governor of Babylon, are said to have revolted against him. Sardanapalus burnt himself in his palace; and the insurgents divided the monarchy; Arbaces reigning in Media, and Belesis at Babylon. (See ASSYRIA.) Nebuchadnezzar the Great, who destroyed Jerusalem, was the most magnificent king of Babylon known. Evilmerodach succeeded him, and Belshazzar succeeded Evilmerodach. (Beros. apud Joseph. lib. 1. contra Apion. p. 1045.) Darius the Mede succeeded Belshazzar, and Cyrus succeeded Darius, otherwise called Astyages. The death of Belshazzar is fixed to A. M. 3448, and the first year of Cyrus's reign at Babylon, to A. M. 3457. The successors of Cyrus are well known: the following is their order: Cambyses, the Seven Magi, Darius son of Hystaspes, Xerxes, Artaxerxes Longimanus, Xerxes II. Secundianus or Sogdianus, Ochus, or Darius Nothus, Artaxerxes Mnemon, Óchus, Arses, Darius Codomannus, who was overcome by Alexander the Great A. M. 3673, ante A. D. 331. For a fuller sketch of the history, &c. of Babylon, see the next article, BABYLONIA. Scripture often speaks of Babylon, particularly after the reign of Hezekiah, who, on his recovery, was visited by ambassadors from Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylon, 2 Kings xx. 12. Isaiah, who lived at the time, especially foretells the calamities which the Babylonians should bring upon Palestine ; the captivity of the Hebrews at Babylon, and their return; the fall of the great city, and its capture by the Medes and Persians. The prophets who lived after Isaiah, in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, and who saw the desolation of Jerusalem, and the surrounding country, enlarge still further on the grandeur of Babylon, its cruelty, and the desolation with which God would overwhelm it. Babylon is described as the greatest and most powerful city in the world-Babylon the Great. Of what other city are terms used equally haughty, equally magnificent?-the Golden City! (Isaiah xiv. 4.)-the Glory of Kingdoms!—the Beauty of the Chaldees' excellency! (xiii. 19.)—the Tender and Delicate! the Lady of Kingdoms! a Lady! a Queen for ever! who says, I am; and none else beside me! (xlvii.) These and other terms, altogether peculiar, express her beauty; and as for her power, she is called,the Hammer of the whole Earth! (Jer. 1. 23.)-the Battle Axe! the weapons of war! proper to break in pieces nations, and to destroy kingdoms, li. 20. Kingdoms and nations she did destroy; but, after a while, her turn came; and we now contemplate in her ruins a speaking instance of the vicissitude of human affairs; a most impressive evidence of the fulfilment of prophecies wherein were foretold the devastations which those ruins now witness. Herodotus, who visited Babylon, and is the most ancient author who has written upon it, has left the | following description of this celebrated city. It was square; 120 furlongs every way, i. e. fifteen miles, or five leagues square; and the whole circuit of it was 480 furlongs, or twenty leagues. The walls were built with large bricks, cemented with bitumen; and were 87 feet thick, and 350 feet high. The city was encompassed with a vast ditch, which was filled with water; and brick work was carried up on both sides. The earth which was dug out was employed in making the bricks for the walls of the city; so that one may judge of the depth and width of the ditch by the extreme height and thickness of the walls. There were a hundred gates to the city, twenty-five on each of the four sides; these gates, with their posts, &c. were of brass. Between every two of them were three towers, raised ten feet above the walls where necessary. A street answered to each gate, so that there were fifty streets in all, cutting one another in right angles; each fifteen miles in length, and 151 feet wide. Four other streets, having houses only on one side, the ramparts being on the other, made the whole compass of the city: each of these streets was 200 feet wide. As the streets of Babylon crossed one another at right angles, they formed 676 squares, each square four furlongs and a half on every side, making two miles and a quarter in circuit. The houses of these squares were three or four stories high, their fronts were adorned with embellishments, and the inner space was courts and gardens. The Euphrates divided the city into two parts, running from north to south. A bridge of admirable structure, about a furlong in length, and 60 feet wide, formed the communication over the river; at the two extremities of this bridge were two palaces, the old palace on the east side of the river, the new palace on the west; and the temple of Belus, which stood near the old palace, occupied one entire square. The city was situated in a vast plain; and to people it Nebuchadnezzar carried thither an almost infinite number of his captives of all nations. The famous hanging gardens which adorned the palace in Babylon, and which are ranked among the wonders of the world, contained four hundred feet square; and were com posed of several large terraces, the platform of the highest terrace equalling the walls of Babylon in height, i. e. 350 feet. From one terrace to that above it, was an ascent by stairs ten feet wide. This whole mass was supported by large vaults, built one upon another, and strengthened by a wall twentytwo feet thick, covered with stones, rushes, and bitumen, and plates of lead to prevent leakage. On the highest terrace was an aqueduct, said to be supplied with water from the river, by a pump, (probably the Persian wheel,) from whence the whole garden was watered. It is affirmed, that Nebuchadnezzar undertook this wonderful and famous edifice out of complaisance to his wife Amytis, daughter of Astyages; who, being a native of Media, retained strong inclinations for mountains and forests, which abounded in her native country. (Diod. Sicul. ii. Strabo, xvi. 2. Quint. Curt. v. 1.) Scripture no where notices these celebrated gardens; but it speaks of willows planted on the banks of the rivers of Babylon: "We hanged our harps on the willows in the midst thereof," says Ps. cxxxvii. 2. Isaiah, describing, in a prophetic style, the captivity of the Moabites by Nebuchadnezzar, says, "They shall be carried away to the valley of willows," xv. 7. The same prophet, (ch. xxi. 1.) describing the calamities of Babylon by Cyrus, calls this city the desert of the sea; where the word sea is applied to the river Euphrates, (comp. xxvii. 1.) as also to the Nile, Is. xix. 5; Nah. iii. 8. [See also the additions under BABYLONIA.] Jeremiah, to the same purport, says, (li. 36, 42.) “İ will dry up the sea of Babylon, and make her springs dry. The sea is come up upon her: she is covered with the multitude of the waves thereof." Megasthenes (ap. Euseb. Præp. ix. 41.) assures us, that Babylon was built in a place which had before abounded so greatly with water, that it was called the sea. But the language of the Psalmist, above quoted, suggests the idea that the city of Babylon was refreshed by a considerable number of streams; "By the rivers [streams, flowing currents] of Babylon we sat down."-"On the willows (plural) in the midst thereof we hanged our harps" (plural). There must then have been gardens visited by these streams, easily accessible to the captive Israelites; not the royal gardens, exclusively, but others less reserved. We know, also, that there was but one river at Babylon then, as there is but one now, the Euphrates; so that when these captives represent themselves as "sitting by the rivers of Babylon," in the plural, they inform us, that this river was divided into several branches, or canals; and these were, doubtless, works of art. See under BABYLONIA. From the history in Daniel, (chap. iii.) of the consecration of Nebuchadnezzar's "Golden Image," we know that Babylon [i. e. the province] contained a vast plain, capacious enough to accommodate the assembled officers of his empire, with all the pomp and preparations in the power of this mighty monarch, and, beyond all doubt, also a very great proportion of the prodigious population of Babylon. This is called the plain of Dura, ; and, deducing its name from the meaning of the root, it imports the round, or circular, enclosure. As the occasion was the consecration of a statue, it is natural to suppose that the ceremony would take place as near as might be, and, if possible, immediately before, the temple, or sacred station, in which this idol deity was to remain: it would not be dedicated in a distant place, and afterwards conveyed to its appointed residence; but the homages of its worshippers would be more appropriate on its arrival at home, and its inhabitation of its destined residence. This enables us to affix a character to a large circular enclosure, of which the remains are still visible at Babylon, and which surrounds the principal mounds, which may be those of the temple of Belus, and the royal palace. In fact, admitting this very natural supposition, [which, however, is entirely fanciful, R.] it contributes at the same time an argument, not without its use, in attempting to identify and distinguish these extensive structures. We do not find that this plain is described by ancient authors, unless it be included in what they report of the accommodations and enceinte of the palace. Diodorus says that the temple occupied the centre of the city; Herodotus says, the centre of that division of the city in which it stood; as the palace in the centre of its division. But the description of Diodorus is pointed with respect to the fact of the palace being near to the bridge, and, consequently, to the river's bank: and he is borne out by the descriptions of Strabo and Curtius, both of whom represent the hanging gardens to be very near the river; and all agree that they were within, or adjacent to, the square of the fortified palace. Great boastings have been made of the antiquity of the astronomical observations taken by the Babylonians. Josephus tells us, (c. Apion. i. p. 1044.) that Berosus, the Babylonian historian and astronomer, agreed with Moses concerning the corruption of mankind, and the deluge; and Aristotle, who was curious in examining the truth of what was reported relating to these observations, desired Calisthenes to send him the most certain accounts that he could find of this particular, among the Babylonians. Calisthenes sent him observations of the heavens, which had been made during 1903 years, computing from the origin of the Babylonish monarchy to the time of Alexander. This carries up the account as high as the one hundred and fifteenth year after the flood, which was within fifteen years after the tower of Babel was built. For the confusion of tongues, which followed immediately after the building of that tower, happened in the year in which Peleg was born, 101 years after the flood, and fourteen years before that in which these observations begin. In ancient authors much confusion is occasioned by a too general application of the name Babel: it has denoted the original tower, the original city, the subsequent tower, the palace, the later city, and we shall find it expressing the province of Babylonia in fact, it stands connected in that sense with the plain of Dura, which is said to be in the province of Babylon, and which might be placed at a distance from the city, were it not for considerations already recited. Ancient authors have raised the wonder of their readers, by allowing to the walls of Babylon dimensions and extent which confound the imagination, and rather belong to a province than to a city. But that they really were of extraordinary dimensions, should appear from references made to them by the prophet, who threatens them with destruction. Jeremiah (i. 15.) says, “Her foundations are fallen: her walls are thrown down;" and again, (li. 44.) "The very wall of Babylon shall fall:" and (verse 58.) "the broad wall of Babylon shall be utterly_broken:"-observe, the broad wall; and in verse 53. we read, "Though Babylon shall mount up to heaven, [that is, her defences,] and though she should fortify the height of her strength," [that is, her wall.] Thus we find allusions to the height, the breadth, and the strength, of the walls of Babylon: but, before we proceed to examine these passages more fully, we shall avail ourselves, in part at least, of what descriptions are afforded by heathen writers. Public belief has been staggered by the enormous dimensions allowed to Babylon by the different authors of ancient times-Herodotus, Strabo, Diodorus, Pliny, and Quintus Curtius; because, even if the most confined of those measures reported by the followers of Alexander (who viewed it at their fullest leisure) be adopted, and the stadia taken at a moderate standard, they will give an area of 72 square miles. We therefore conceive, that, with respect to the extent of the buildings and population of Babylon, we ought not to receive the above measure as a scale; from the great improbability of so vast a contiguous space having ever been built on: but that the wall might have been continued to the extent given, does not appear so improbable, for we cannot suppose that so many ancient writers could have been misled concerning this point. But, although we may extend our belief to the vastness of the enceinte, it does not follow that we are to believe that 80, or even 72 square miles, contiguous to each other, were covered with buildings. The different reports of the extent of the walls of Babylon are given as follow:-By Herodotus, at 120 stadia each side; or 480 stadia in circumference. By Pliny and Solinus, at 60 Roman miles; which, at 8 stadia to a mile, agrees with Herodotus. By Strabo, at 385 stadia. By Diodorus, from Ctesias, 360: but from Clitarchus, who accompanied Alexander, 365. And, lastly, by Curtius, at 368. It appears highly probable that 360, or 365, was the true statement of the circumference. That the area enclosed by the walls of Babylon was only partly built on, is proved by the words of Quintus Curtius, who says (lib. v. cap. 4.) that 'the buildings (in Babylon) are not contiguous to the walls, but some considerable space was left all round.... Nor do the houses join; perhaps from motives of safety. The remainder of the space is cultivated; that, in the event of a siege, the inhabitants might not be compelled to depend on supplies from without.' Thus far Curtius. Diodorus describes a vast space taken up by the palaces and public buildings. The enclosure of one of the palaces (which appears to be what is called by others the citadel) was a square of 15 stadia, or near a mile and a half; the other of five stadia: here are more than two and a half square miles occupied by the palaces alone. Besides these, there were the temple and tower of Belus, of vast extent; the hanging gardens, &c. But, after all, it is certain, and we are ready to allow, that the extent of the buildings of Babylon was great, and far beyond the ordinary size of capital cities then known in the world; which may indeed be concluded from the manner in which the ancients in general speak of it. The population of this city, during its most flourishing state, exceeded twelve hundred thousand; or perhaps a million and a quarter. The hanging gardens, (as they are called,) which had an area of about three and a half acres, had trees of a considerable size growing in them and it is not improbable that they were of a species different froin those of the natural growth of the alluvial soil of Babylonia. Curtius says, that some of them were eight cubits in the girth; and Strabo, that there was a contrivance to prevent the large roots from destroying the superstructure, by building vast hollow piers, which were filled with earth to receive them. These trees may have been perpetuated in the same spot where they grew, notwithstanding that the terraces may have subsided, by the crumbling of the piers and walls that supported them. Now, it appears that we ought to make a distinction here. That the province of Babylonia should be surrounded by a wall of immense thickness, for the purpose of a fortification, is little less than ridiculous; but that an enclosure or wall might embrace a large extent of country, is credible. Ibn Haukal speaks of villages "extending for nearly twenty farsang by twelve farsang; all about this space is a wall, and within it the people dwell winter and summer."-This may be allowed to justify the extent assigned to the walls of Babylonia, as a province; while those more proximate to the city of Babylon were certainly constructed with wonderful labor, skill, and solidity, according to the duty demanded of them in protecting a narrower space. This seems rather to militate against the sentiment of Dr. Blayney, who would keep to the singular, wall, where the term occurs; as Jer. li. 58: "The walls [plural] of Babylon; the broad [wall, singular] shall be utterly broken." It would be hazardous to insist that the prophet intended a distinction from narrower walls by using the term broad; but those who observe that in chap. 1. 15. we have also walls, in the plural-" her walls are thrown down," as the doctor himself renders, will hesitate on reducing this term in this place to the singular. relating more especially to the decline and fall of this proud city; leaving the more detailed account of the geographical character of the surrounding country, and of the history of the state, to be added under the article BABYLONIA. The original foundation of the city is referred, in the Bible, to the attempt of the descendants of Noah to build "a city and a tower;" on account of which their language was confounded and they were scattered, by the interposition of God himself, Gen. xi. 1, seq. Hence the name Babel, i. e. confusion. With this coincide the traditions related by other ancient writers, and professedly extracted from Assyrian historians. (See the extract from Abydenus, under the article BABEL, and compare the Armenian Hist. of Moses Choren. i. c. 8.—Josephus, Ant. i. 4, 3. quotes a similar tradition from the Sibylline oracles, which is found in the edition of Gallæus, lib. iii. p. 336, seq. with which compare also Gallæi Dissertat. de Sibyllis, p. 459.) Another Assyrian account, handed down by Ctesias, (Diod. Sic. ii. 7.) makes Semiramis, the queen of Ninus, to be the founder of Babylon; and a later Chaldean account, given by Megasthenes and Berosus, describes Nebuchadnezzar as its builder. (In Euseb. Præp. Evang. ix. 41. Joseph. c. Apion. i. 19.) These accounts may all be reconciled, by supposing that Semiramis rebuilt or greatly extended the ancient city; and that Nebuchadnezzar afterwards enlarged it still farther, and rendered it more strong and splendid. The description of the city itself by Herodotus, who personally visited it, has already been given above. We are now prepared to examine somewhat more closely the predictions quoted from the prophet. With regard to the first, (Jer. 1. 15.) "Her foundations are fallen," Dr. Blayney observes, very justly, that foundations cannot fall: they are already deep in the ground; they may be razed, or uprooted, but they can go no lower. He therefore renders, with the LXX, išeis, her battlements, or the turrets filled with men who fought in defence of the walls. They might be somewhat analogous to the bastions of modern fortification; but, most likely, they were raised higher than the wall itself. Another passage deserves remark, as being manifestly intended by the writer to display uncommon emphasis, (li. 58.) "The broad wall of Babylon shall be utterly broken." These last words are but a feeble resemblance of the original, which is very difficult to be rendered into English, wyn wy, in utterly razing it most utterly raze it, doubly destroy it with double destruction. And this is denounced on the broad wall of Babylon. If, therefore, traces should be found of any narrow wall of this ill-fated city, they may be allowed to possess their interest: but hitherto no in-ed dications of the broad wall have been so much as suspected by the most inquisitive, and probably no such discovery ever will be achieved. Under Nebuchadnezzar, at any rate, Babylon reachthe summit of her greatness and splendor. She was now the capital of the civilized world, and into her lap flowed, either through conquest or commerce, the wealth of almost all known lands. Justly, therefore, might the prophets call her the great, (Dan. iv. 30.) the praise of the whole earth, (Jer. li. 41.) the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, (Is. xiii. 19.) the lady of kingdoms, (Is. xlvii. 5.) but also the tender and del We have now touched on the particulars connected with Babylon, except one that has puzzled all commentators, Jer. li. 41. "How is Sheshach taken! and how is the praise of the whole earth surprised! how is Babylon become an astonishment among the na-icate, and given to pleasures, Is. xlvii. 1. 8. Indeed, tions!" On which Dr. Blayney says, "That Babylon these last epithets are gentle, in comparison with the is meant by Sheshach is certain; but why it is so real state of the case; for, in consequence of the called, is yet matter of doubt." We have this term, opulence and luxury of the inhabitants, the corruptalso, chap. xxv. 26. "And the king of Sheshach ness and licentiousness of manners and morals were shall drink-after the other kings of the earth." | carried to a frightful extreme. Herodotus assures [That it is a name for Babylon, there can be no us, (i. 199.) that the daughters even of the nobles doubt, from the first passage above; but the deriva-prostituted themselves in the temple of Mylitta, i. e. tion is extremely obscure. The Jewish commenta- the planet Venus, or Ashtaroth. Quintus Curtius tors, and Jerome, suppose it to be the name aa, gives us the following picture of the horrid profliBabel, written in the cabalistic manner called gacy and beastly indecency of the inhabitants, which Atbash, i. e. in which is put for s, for 2, etc. is quite too bad to be translated: (lib. v. 1.) "Nihil urBut even supposing, though not admitting, that this bis ejus corruptius moribus, nec ad irritandas illiciensecret mode of writing is really so ancient, there dasque immodicas voluptates instructius. Liberos seems to be no good reason why, in the very same conjugesque cum hospitibus stupro coire, modo preverse, (li. 41.) Babel should be mentioned once by tium flagitii detur, parentes maritique patiuntur.its true name, and then again by a concealed one. Feminarum convivia ineuntium in principio modesOthers suppose it to be for Shikshak, zuizinios, i. e. tus est habitus; dein summa quæque amicula exuthe city of iron plated gates. But the most apt and unt, paulatimque pudorem profanant; ad ultimum probable derivation is that of Von Bohlen, (Symbol. (honos auribus sit) ima corporum velamenta projiad Interp. S. Cod. ex Ling. Pers. p. 22.) viz. that it is ciunt: nec meretricium hoc dedecus est, sed matrothe same as the Persian Shih-Shah, or Shah-Shah, narum virginumque, apud quas comitas habetur i. e. house or court of the prince, an appellation which vulgati corporis vilitas." Well, therefore, might the could be more suitable to no city than to Babylon. R. prophets proclaim woes against her! Well might [Thus far the mingled contributions of Calmet and we expect Jehovah to bring down vengeance on her Taylor, in regard to the ancient Babylon. Before crimes! Indeed, the woes denounced against Babproceeding to give an account of the mighty ruins, ylon by the prophets, constitute some of the most which at the present day alone mark its former site, willy splendid and sublime portions of the whole it may not be improper to subjoin a few particulars Bible, Is. xiii; xlvii; Jer. 1; li. et al. sæp. Hence, |