HERODOTUS'DESCRIPTION OF BABYLON
John MacGinnis
Introductionr
The purposeof this article is to re-examinethe accountHerodotusgives towards the end of
Book I of Babylon and Babylonia,and in the light of this to resolvewhetheror not he actually
went there.
As early as Rawlinson(1880)and Sayce(1883,104and 107)scholarshavedoubtedwhether
Herodotus visited Babylon.2 The argument is confused by an inconsistencyin Herodotus
himself: in two placeshe refers to material which seemsnot to have come down to us - in
i.106 to an accountof the fall of Nineveh,and in i.184 to the 'AssyrioiLogoi'. which heremust
meana work different from the chaptersof i.178-200which constitutehis writing on Babylonia
as we have it. Drews, 1970, lists the various theoriesput forward over the last century: of
theseRawlinson (1880, 27) thought the Logoi must have been a separatework; Powell (1939,
18) that it was originally included but deletedto accommodatethe SamianLogos; Maddalena
(Drews, 1970, n.3) that i.178-200 representsa trimmed version of the original work.3 But
unlesstheseLogoi were simply lists of namesand datesof 'the many kings of Babylon' (i.184),
reproducingcuneiformking-lists of the type so well known (for instanceANET, 265,27l; 564,
566) and thereforenot exceptionallyinterestingto his readership,a I think it most unlikely that
Herodotus would have deliberatelydeleted the material. If, as Jacoby (1913) thought, the
Logoi formed a separatework publishedearlier, it is surpiisingthat our only other knowledge
of it is a single manuscript variation in reading 'Herodotus' for 'Hesiod' in a referenceby
Aristotle to a work on the fall of Nineveh (Hist. An.8.18.3; Huxley, 1965). Apart from this the
Logoi are nowherequoted in extant ancientliterature(Drews, 1973,191n.194). The question
cannotyet be resolved,but the fact that other logoi are preservedin the Histories(the Egyptian,
Libyan, Samianand Scythian),and that they all form self-containedunits, would favour most
of all the view of Drews: note in particular the future tenses 'deloso' (I shall show) and
'poiesomai'(I shall make) of i.106 and 184, which might suggestthat as each logos was
finished it was incorporatedinto an updated'completeworks' of Herodotus.
The Geography'
The settingof Babylon on the Euphrates,in the plain of the Tigris and Euphratesleadingdown
to the Erytrian Sea,which receiveslittle rain and in which many other large cities also lie, is
I I would like to expressmy thanks to Mr J. V. Kinnier Wilson and Mr J. N. Postgatefor their untiring assistance
while I was writing this article. I would also like to thank Rupert Macey-Dareand Aubrey de Grey for technical
advice. Abbreviationsused are those of AHW, plus BSA = Bulletin on SumerianAgriculture and Handbook =
The Admiralty Handbook for lraq (1944). For non-Assyriologists,note OB = Old Babylonian, NB = Neo-
Babylonian,LB = Late Babylonian,NA = Neo-Assyrran.
2 Anticipated however by Ctesias' accusationof lying (Konig, 1972, l); Baumgartner,rin. l4 and 36. summartses
previous literatureon Herodotus' Babylonianpassages;the most important works are his own, and that of Ravn.
and of Wetzel, 1944.
3 Drews himself concludesthat the two referencesare to a work planned by Herodotusbut not yet Written (1970.
1 90 : 19 73 .135) .
a Thus Diodorus2.21.1expresslystatesthat he will not recordnamesand ciatesof the kings since they would not be
of sufficient interest. Note that EusebiusconsideredHerodotus an authority on Assyrian kin! lists along with
Ktesiasand Hellanikos(Huxley, 2 12).
6l
6tl Brcs33(1e86)
colrect. The confusion of Babylonia with Assyria is common to all classicalwriters except
ClaudiusPtolemaeus(Holzhey, 27),though it is surprisingto find it here,given the distinction
still preservedin the Behistuninscriptionof Darius.
Outside Babylon, Herodotusmentions only a few featuresof the land. A village called
Ardericcasis said to be passedthree times by the Euphrates(i.185.2), but we know of none
such otherwise- certainly the explanationsof Rawlinson (1861), that it was connectedwith
the Aqar Quf lake system,and of How and Wells (ad loc.), that it may be the same as the
Idikara of Ptol. V.xvii.l9 about 50 miles North of Sippar, lack support. Any eventual
clarification must also accountfor the samename being given to the village in Susianawhere
the deportedEretriansweresettled(vi.119).6
In i.200 the'three clans ... living entirelyoff fish'may well referto the marsh-dwellers in
the South.T If so, it is noteworthy that no descriptionof the marshesaccompanies,probably
becausethis was informationtold to Herodotusratherthan seenfor himself.
Thirdly in i.179.4 we learn of 'Is, eight days' joumey from Babylon, on a small river of the
samename,tributary to the Euphrates,in which lumps of bitumen are found in great quantity'.
Is (modern Hit) is 125 miles North of Babylon (so an acceptable16 miles a day over eight
days), and is famous for its bitumen right up to today, the first mention being in the annals of
Tukulti-Ninurta II, 'the springs of bitumen, place of ushmetu-stone,where the gods speak'
(ARAB I409). Herodotusis wrong in placing Hit on a tributary of the Euphrates.
Lastly thereis the'Lake of Nitocris'(i.185.3-7),400stades(i.e.47 miles) in circumference
with embankmentsof earth lined with stone. This must be the work of Nebuchadnezzar
referredto in VAB IV no.l9.vi, two walls, one 50 km. long from Babylon to Kish, one 54 km.
from Sipparto Opis on the Tigris. This is the Median Wall of Xenophon;the standardwork is
Bamett, 1963,his identification(18) now confirmedby Killick's excavation(lraq46 (1984)).
Killick points out that it could not have served as a flood embankment(though the ancient
engineersmay still have plannedit as such: Lane (321-2) calculatedthe combinedcapacityof
the Habba and Abu Dibis depressionsNorth of Babylon at 6 billion tons of water, and flooding
to defend a city is recordedby Sargonin ARAB II 39). This type of wall to excludeincursors
goesback at leastto the Muriq-Tidnim of Shulgi's fourth year,that is, about2090 BC.
Architectural Features8
The Walls
Herodotus(118.2-3;179.3;180.2;180.4-l8l.l) tellsof walls forminga square,eachside 120
stades (14 miles) long,50 cubits wide and 200 high, surroundedby a moat and with pairs of
guard rooms facing eachother on top acrossa way wide enoughfor a four-horsechariot.e
The walls of Babylonroare first mentionedby Sumu-Abum (l9th century BC), but the ones
seen by Herodotus must have been essentially those rebuilt by Nabopolassar and
Nebuchadnezzar (seventhand sixth centuriesBC) after the destructionby Sennacherib.rrThey
constructedthe walls on the East going down to the river and an extensionof these on the
s Saggs,1969,suggests
an Aramic etymologymeaning'landof the marsh-village'.
6 And which, if either.would be the Urdaliku notedby Oppert ZA III (1888),422.
7 Strabo,16. l 20, saysso explicitly.
8 SeeKoldewey,1914,l8l, for a summaryof NB construction in Babylon.
e Diodorus.2.3.3,sayssimilarly of the walls of the city foundedby Ninos that they could take threechariotsabreast.
r{)SeeWetzel.1930.Ravn. l6ff.
rr The VerseAccount of Nabonidushas Cyrus restoringthe walls: S. Smith, BabylonianHistorical Te,tts(1924),90,
vi.tt-I l. But accordingto Berossos(Burstein,28, III 4. l) Cyrusdemolishedthe walls.
J. MACCINNIS
Westernbank (Wetzel,1930,63.1911,53:VAB IV Nebuch.15.v.7)and thena secondouter
wall on thc EastextendingNor-thto includethe SummcrPalace. The main wall was in fact a
doublewall of which thc oLltcronc (3.7 m. thick) was callcdNemetti-Enli/('Pedestalof En1i1')
and the inner (6.-5m. thick) Intgur-Enlil ('Enlil is lavourable').r They both had towers,the
formerat 20 ni. andlhe latterat 18 m. intervals.Therewasa spaceof 7.2 m. bctweenthem.
The secondrnain wall built by Nebuchadnezzar on the Eastwas also double.the inner ring
being 7 m. wide of unbakedbrick. the outer 7.8 m. ol baked. They were separated by l2 m.,
andon the outersidewas a moatof bakeclbrick set in asphalt.'r
To Herodotusthe innerdouble-wallwas his innerwall and it was as he saidthe thinnerof the
two (corrbinedwidth of 17.4m. viz-a-viz26.8m.). His width of 50 cubits(aboutl3 m.) is a
fair approximation.
But whilst the l2 rn. spacein the outerwall would havebeenenoughfor thc chariot,thcre is
no reasonto think as Koldewey (accordingto Wetzel. 1944,55 6) that it was filled up to thc
top. As fbr the guard-rooms. Ravn (35) notedhow the towersof the two walls of the inner wall
woulcl give the appearancefrom below of rooms facing cach other, though not at exactly
similar intervals.But hereinlics a surprisc:WetzelassumedHerodotusdid not know the inner
walls.and this mustbe refutedbecausethe wall on the Wcst specificallymentionedin i. 180
was a continlrxlionof the innerpair. It thenemergesthat Herodotus'walls are a conflation.
assumingthe towersof the innerpair and the moat of the outer.
The moat was pafily excavatedby Koldewey. Its outerrevetmentcould not be traceddue to
bein,sunder cultivation.but the inner one was indeed,as expectedand describedalso in the
royal inscriptions.
madeof bakedbrick set in bitumen.rr
The lengthsof the walls givenby Herodotusandthe otherclassicalhistoriansareas follows:
LENGTH HEIGHT
Herodotus 4tl0 Srades(56 miles) 335 feet
Strabo 385 Stades 75 t'eet
Ctesias 360 Stades 300 feet
Cleitarchus 36.5Stades
Q. Curtius 368 Stades
Theselengthsare all of the sameorderand exaggerated.The completccircuit of the inner wall
was 11.,1km. (E - 1.65.N - 2.65.W - 1.5.S - 2.6)antleventhe outerwall was only l0 miles
long. Flerodotus'figure must be rejected,as too the apologiesof Koldewey that Helodotus
misunderstood thc lcngthof tlie whole told to him for the lengthof one side.and ol Oppertthat
the walls encompasscd Borsippaand Kish as well. There is no evidencelbr this. nor is it
plausible.
The heightof 200 cubits is alsoexaggerated:the rule of height- threetimes width
-reneral
wouldallow l2 18m. Only Strabo's7-5ft. is sensible. andaccordswell with the 72 11.(i.e. 170
courses)ol Sennacherib's wall at Nineveh(ARAB II 366).
The quay walls along both banks describedby Herodotuscould reltr either to revetment
walls, in which casehe would be right. or to fortificalions. If the latter. he was probably
mistaken: Nabonidusconstructeda tbrtificationwall along the East bank (known from his
Berossus(Burstein.28. lll.iv.l) and the excavations)and this did indecd have
inscriptior.rs.
towcrs, gates and stairs (Ravn. 29). but therc is no suggestionof a counterpartalong the
rl Thesenanrcsare lir\t allestedin lhe latc Kassileperiod{George.1985.l,+1.
IAgo ocl nra pof t he ! r alls is W et z el.194, 1. . 18.
rr WcIzcl. 19:1.1.
5J. clnimsliorr his own inspccrionrhdlIhc oulcr'fcvetnlcnlwlll \\'iis,o/ of brkad bricki.
70 Blaj -l-r( 191t6)
Wesrembank. The c1ua1'wall rvasincleecl
pielccdby gatesuith loaclsleadingLrp10thcm..jusl
ls Hcrodolussn1'srnd WetzeJ'sstatcnrcntthatthe galeswould havebeendestrol,edby the tinre
( 1944.55).
of Hcrodotusis r.rnlbunded
The (iatcs
ln i.179.3HeroclotLrs tellsol l(X)tlonze gates.na:ringtive of thenrin iii.l56 as thoseo1'Bel.
Niucvch.Senriramis anclthc Cissianand Chalcican.In additionto an unknownnumberol'
snrller ones' theleu,ereei-rhtnrajorgatcs- thoseo1'Marduk(or GishshulanclZababain the
East.Ulash anclEnlil in the South.Aclatlrnd Sharnashon thc West and Sin and Ishtarin the
Nofih (sccplan in Wiscnran.l9li-5..16). " Blumga ner identil-ietl HerodolLrs'gate ol Bel witlr
thc BabyloniilnMarclukGatc.thc Senrilanris witlr the IshtalGrte. the Clrllcleanwith the Enlil
Gutc (both lucccisoulhwurds:Wclzcl notcsthat it coulclthcretbrchave beenthe f.irashCjate)
aDdllrc Cissiar1i.c.Kish)with thc ZababaGate. This is probablycorrect.NotethatIlelodotus
knou,sallcrnutivcnurrrcslirL lll thc gatcs: thescwe[e doubtlessthe populatas opposedto the
ollicial (r'eligious -
) nanres.
Hcroclolussa)'s thcy wele ol bLonzc.and indecd thc NB inscr-iptions frcqucntly nrakc
lurentionof bronzegates.so]nclirreslunhcr $'ith bronzc br.rllsand dragorrs. Thc latter were
probabll'cnststatues.[]u1thc referenceis othelwisccerlainlyto the bronzecladdingol'thc door
Icuvcs.examples ol whichhavebeenexclvaled.nolablyal tsalarvat (King. l9l5).r'
The Gateol Senrirtmisoli.luT is L)fspecialinlcrcst.In the colrrscol thc storyol lhctomb
which it contains. I-leroclolussaysthat it (a) was 'lcopholon'ancl (b) borean inscription.11has
becnsug-rrcstcd rlreaclvby Koldeu.'cy (l9ltl. 53: lolloweclby' Baunrganner) thal 'lcophoron'-
uhich hc translatcd 'ldwentragend'(bcaringlions) must ref'erto lhe cramcllcd blick
dccoralionof thc gatc. UntbltrLnrtely.tllis lhcory rnLlstbe aliscountedils the trLreelynolos)' oi'
'lcophoron'is 'pcoplc(nol lion) bealing'as its usagcc]scwhcfc(right up to rroderntiDres)
shows(Powcll. 1938.s.r'.).though ol coLLrsc this cloesnot mean that Herodotus'gltc cilnnol
still be the lshlarGalc. On thc otherhanclit is ccrtainlypossiblethat the inscriptionmenlioncd
by Helo.lolusna1'be the vcry onc found by the excavalionsand restoredprorrinentlyhigh up
on the gate (Kolclewe1,. l9lU. 39-.11anclAbb.l). It is strangconly that this has not becn
sug-gcstcd bcti)rc.
'I'he Ziggurrat (1.| 8 l-2)
TIre ziggurrat" Elemenarki'"was sct ir il vitst court with sidesmeasuring'1-57m. (S). 409 m.
(E) and :ll3 rrl.(W) (Wetzcl.1938.I4 i2). The bascof thc zig-tunatmeasures 9l m. squarc
but llreserenrainsrray be OB (Bcrgamini.l\4cso1totuntfu 12.lbllowing on 1'romhis calculltliolls
of the NB waterlcvel,which wts tl i1snonral heightI n.. and at high tlood 3 m.. abovct hc
lcvcl of the remainsltlrrrd by KOlclewel').Xcrxcs is saidto ]ravedestroyedit. andAlexanderto
havecleareclawiiy thc rubbleas a prcliminlrl'to the plannedlebuildingwhich was cut shortby
5Blu nr lx nnc f ( 75) puls t heli i( on t heif n u n l b c fr l l 0
- 1 0b u l u i t h o u l \ i r ! i n g $ h ) .
r" _lhc positionrol the lrlcs hi!\c bccrlli\cd throughlhcif tr\e l\ relererlce lolnl\ rrrr.irl e\rirr-'conlr.lcl\'
r Sce \'liglus. 71. lgltl. li)r lhcchxngingol rrlurlc\ in A\sur-.
-/-.1 lnlc
r'\jakers of iron cloor: rrc|c cnplol'cd lt PcAcpolis(Crlrlcrorr.lc).1i1. no.l8)i Isaiahxlv.l talks ol galcsof brass
ilnd door\ of iron-.
'' Scc Koldc$c\ . l 1)| l . rn.l Iu!n. -l5ll.
:" Thc rurnc ir not attestedbt'lirr'cEsr lilddon.itn(lthc/igsutrdlisonlyrclcrrcd
SodcntiF i ( 1971)).
Eli\h Vl . nd thc Epic ol Effr { \'Ln'r
J. MACGINNIS 1t
his dealh.rrHerodotusis light in his approxirrationof 2 stades(about40{)m.) lbr the lengthol
theperiboloswalls.br-rt lwicc too big in his I stade(200m.) lor thc bascofthe ziggurrat.
Herodotus'clescriptiot.r of a tou'erof ci-tht stageswith a spiralasccntand sh:-ineon the top
has been nuch clebatcd.Thc problem is that we do know o1'spiralzi-tgurrats(tbr instance
Klrorsabad:seealso tlrc Whitc Obelisk.illustratedby Sollbcrgerlruq 36 (.1914))but that the
otherevidenceis againstlhis: thc excavalionsrevealetla main stlircasc9 m. wiilc and 5'1m.
long perpenclicular 1rlthc Southside.lntl lwo stnalleroncs slartingin thc SE and SW corners
and mcctirrgat the middle. Now whilst theseremainsmusl be earlierthan NB (sccabovc).and
do not in any casealignat right anglcswith the NB temenoswall (Wiseman.I985.6tj).this is
ex.rctlythe conl-!gu|ationof the NB ziggurratat Ur (UE lX).'r Thesethreestaircascs probabll'
met at the secondstage(accordingto thc rule that the lcngth of a stairseclualsits hcighl).
Bcyond this Dontbar-t(Dcl ultc Orient 2912.1930)follorvs Heroclotusby placing five spilal
stageson fwo squarelower ones.Busink (De BuhtlonischcTortltcltoren.19.19)sinrilarlybul
with thc uppef stagesalso sqLlare.Wetzel (1938) ignoresHeroclotuscompietelyanclhas the
main llight ol'stairsgoing strliglrt to the top.I Our cvidenceis not yet conclusive.but I wottlcl
suggestthat one reasonagainsta rrmp winding the wholc way round a ziggunat the size of
Etemenankiis that in pian this wor-rldcovet a horizontaldistanceof l5 l2 m. (4 x i9u + 7u + fi)
+ 5l + 42 + 33 + 2,+l)as againstthe 33 m. (.15-12) of Wetzel'sdircctstatrclte.meaninqthrtt
anyoneascendingwoulcihavchad to walk,+6timesas lar.
One pieceof evidenccthat clearsaway someof the doubt is thc celebrated'EsagilTabletof
Anu-Belshunu'r'of299 BC.ri It sivesthe dimensionsof the ziggr:natas fbllorvs:
STAGE LENGTH WIDTH HEIGHT
I l5 GAR (90 m.) I5 GAR 5 l/2 GAR
2 I3 GAR (7u m.) I3 GAR 3 GAR
3 l0 GAR (60 m.) IO GAR IGAR
4. It.5GAR (5 I m.) 8..5GAR I GAR
5 7 GAR (42 m.) 7 GAR I GAR
(6) 15.5GAR (33 m.) -5.5GAR I GAR]
7 4 GAR (2,1m.) 3.5 GAR (21 m.) 2.5 GAR
Most cditorsrnrestorelhe 6th stage thus. but Herodotus' ti (not 7) stagesslill: posc a
ploblem. This is easilyresolved. not, as Ungcr(17 and 199).by supposing that an invisible
fbundationlevel was included.bul either as Lawtence\utl ltr.) b.t
nragical(i.e. non-existent.)
assumingthatthc grouncllevelr.vas countedin: as Drews(1973.180n.188)that as Herodotus
will not have beenallowed into lhe enclosure}hc could not seethtt the lowest sta-se.almosl
rL Ar|ian 7. 17. 3. l6: Suilbo 16. L5: Diorlor-us
17.I I l; CT,19 nos..1ii d 6.
rr ADd so apparcnilyon thc Assyian reliefdepictinga zigguf|atiCldd..ltrrrrrsrr/ lr.rrrrr/.no Tl p 106)
lr Thcscarc all illustratedin Rirrn. platesXIV-XV.
l Re ,ed iledby Ungelon pp. 137. 19( r c v ic wc cWe
l i s s b l c h .l 9 l l ) . i l n d n o \ r i g a i n b ) C ! - o . g c .1 9 8 5 : P o t e l l . l 9 f l l . . Z - l
7l ti)f nretfologicirl
rotcs-
ri Thoughcopicdfiorr an originullionr Bo|sippa. onl) fi)f thc initiate(rll{/r/) loscc r Weidnetpubli\h.d I \i rihl
tablclof NA datein AFO 20 (1963).
ll'Nol. horvcvcr.Schott.von Sodcnor Wctzel(\ee Rr!n..19).
rr The rablert}om Bnb)'lonpublishcdby Wircmen. l97l (.lnd 1985.71 5). is lhc pli]l]ol ii \nrallef7igllurfiLliln.l hrls
fivc complclcslagesal]d one brokcn.bul thc proporlionsirle \uch thrl a screnthis cerllin to bL-rl-\lofcd. It i\
particularl)unfbrtun.it..lhilt thc top is mi\si g. xs this ighl hir\'c sivcn tl1orcinlbnrelior ilbout lhc lcntplr-.
Judging b) thc words /x1-ri sh -bdt /In.\/rdrl . thfi is. oppositethe \hfinc oi Assur'. this \it\ rl dillir-crrI
ziggunal.but il i\ (]1in any caseclear\\icthcr lhe ldblelrcpresenls a rell or imaginrr) building{wiscmrn. 1971.
t.tl ).
l* Oppenheirr.1964.I08 (andn.38).holdsthat the connnonrnancould rlol enlerthe lcnlplc
72 B/CS33 (1986)
twice as thick as the second,was only one; or by assumingthat he was counting in the temple
at the top - in my view most likely. The belief that Herodotus was describing a tower
different from Etemenanki seemsunnecessaryand certainly there is no reason to think the
ziggurratof Borsippaa bettercandidate(Moberg, 762,Delitzsch,98).
It is noteworthythat Herodotusmakesno mention of colours;we know that other ziggurrats
were coloured such as those of Borsippa2e and Khorsabad,30 but in the caseof Etemenankiwe
can only be sure that the top was clad in blue tiles (VAB IV Nebuch. 14.i.42;cf. also such a
claddingon the ziggurratof Susaaccordingto Ashurbanipal(ARAB II 810) and the tiles found
fallen from the top from the NB ziggunat at Ur, UE V p 133). This cladding is the hitlupu
(GIR1'clothed' of the Esagil tablet 1.42. lt is possiblethat the coloursof the sevenwalls of
Ecbatana(i.98.5) were confused by Herodotus for the stagesof the ziggunat - certainly
nobody suggeststhat Herodotus himself went there - but such a confusion would be
extraordinary. It may simply be that the ziggurrat at Babylon was not coloured: Wetzel,
indeed,hasthe lower six stageswhite-washed (1938,84).
The Upper Temple(I.181.5-182.7)
Herodotussaysthere was a large temple on the top (neosepestimegas)containinga couch and
a golden table. It has been denied that this was so,3rbut given the dimensionsof the Esagil
tablet for the uppermoststage,24 x 2l m., thereis no reasonwhy not. In fact Nebuchadnezzar
claims 'kissu ellu ... ina reshi-shinaepush', that is, 'I built a holy shrine on top of them' (the
plural refers to the ziggurratsof Babylon and Borsippa; Pallis, 106), the Esagil tablet talks of
'AN.TA VII-u2 sha-hu-ru', that is, 'Upper (Cella), 7th (Stage),High Temple'. Nebuchadnezzat
also mentionsan uppertemple,in VAB IV Nebuch, 14.i.42.
Ravn takesthe sectionof the Esagil tablet,lines 25-36, to be an accountof the temple on the
top,32with its two courts (kisallu) and six shrines(papahu) 'of the Nuhar' .33Its inclusion of a
bedroom (bit ershi)3a coroborates Herodotus,though this need not imply, as Cook (16), that
Herodotusactually ascendedthe ziggurrat. According to Herodotus,this was usedfor the god
to come down and sleepwith a priestess;and this brings us into the controversialterritory of
the SacredMarriage.
There were three sortsof SacredMarriagerite:35
(a) betweena god and a goddess
(b) betweena goddessand the king
(c) betweena god and a priestess.
The first of theseis attestedbetweenNingirsu and Baba in the time of Gudea,and also between
(i) Marduk and Sarpanitumand (ii) Nabu and Tashmetumin NAA'{B times; the secondunder
Shulgi and ldin-Dagan of Isin. The third, which most closely matches Herodotus,is van
Buren's interpretationof the role of the entu-priestessof Nannar/Sinat Ur, and would range
2eAccording to Rawlinson, 1861, though Koldewey ( 1911, 58) found no trace.
30Frankfort, 1979,149.
rr Schmid (134) is of the opinion that the upper parts of the ziggurrat were in ruins following Xerxes' destruction,
but Herodotuswould have beenable to seethat part and his accountgives the oppositeimpression.
32Unger (RLA 'Babylon', 99b) makes it part of Esagil, but as both the precedingand following sectionsdeal with
the ziggunat this is unlikely.
rrThe meaningof nuhor has been discussedby Weissbach,ZA 41,285f, who cites two lexical entriesequatingthe
nuhar with ziggurrat.
3aAnd the bit re-'-a-me,'room of love-making',of Unger,111 no.13.
3sSeeKramer. 1969.RLA.'HeilieeHochzeit',Pallis,197-200.
J. MACGINNIS 73
OrientaliaNS 13 (1944),
fromatleastthetimeof SargonofAkkadtoNabonidus(vanBuren,
67 -1)\
In NB times the evidence is chiefly for a union between a god and his divine spouse,
particularlybetweenNabu and Tashmetum,36 but this only involves the bringing togetherof the
two statuesin the sanctuaryand not a union of humansrepresentingthe gods. It is a matter of
debate whether a Sacred Marriage formed part of the NB New Year's Festival,3Tbut it is
important to realisethat the argumentsfor this in the NB period are not strong,being basedon
the Ur IIIiOB texts of Shulgi and Idin-Dagan,the hearsayof Herodotus,1,500yearslater and a
post-Frazeriandeterminationto work it in somehow. But there is no evidencefor any union
conceminghumansin a sacredmarriagein NB times: the text describingthe ritual of the New
Year'sFestivalat Babylon(ANET,33l-334)makesno mentionof such.38
At one time scholars,led by Langdon, believed that the New Year Festival incorporateda
ceremonyin which the death and resurrectionof Bel was enacted. Vod Soden (ZA 51) has
however convincingly demonstratedthat the text in questionrecordsnot the actual belief and
practicein Babylon, but a work of propagandacreatedby Sennacheribto justify his destruction
of the city. The real motive of the Festival seemsrather to have involved the renewal of the
fertility of the land, and with this, perhaps,a renewalof the kingship.3e
Herodotussays that there was no statuein the Upper Temple, but the record of offerings
made 'to Marduk and Erua (a by-name of Sarpanitum)of Etemenanki' (Unger, 260 1 l8)
would suggestthe contrary. Diodorus 2.9.5 makes them three golden statues,of Zeus, Hera
and Rhea,describedin detail that we cannotverify.
The Lower Temple (I.183)
Herodotusalso describesa lower temple containing a sitting figure of Bel on a throne on a
stand,with a table beside,all of gold. He doesnot enterinto the architecture.
The seriesTIN.TIRki= Ba-bi-lu lists 53 main templesin Babylon (in additionto 55 shrinesof
Marduk, 300 of the Igigi, 600 of the Anunnaki, and 180 each of Ishtar and Adad (new edition
in George, 1985)), but there can be no doubt that Herodotusmeant Esagil, the huge temple
complex of Marduk.a0Esagil was in existenceby the OB period (von Soden,UF 3,255;
George, 1985,456), but had also been destroyedby Sennacherib,restoredby Esarhaddonand
Ashurbanipal,and then been the object of the lavish attentionof the NB kings. It was then
further looted by Xerxes, probably after the revolt of 482.a1But it was clearly restoredand is
still mentionedin texts of the Seleucidand Arsacid periods (George,1985,456). Pliny asserts
that it was still standingin his day amid the otherwisedesertedBabylon (NH 6.30.12I).
36Postgate,Sumer30; Oppenheim,1964, 102, 193 and 359 n.30.
37For this are Falkensteinin the J. Friedrich Festschrift(1959),162;Black, Religion I I (1981),48; Frankfort, 1948,
3 18 an d33 0- 331.
38Forinstance,(Bel)'ihish ana hadashshulrl','hastened to the marriage',in the text quotedby Pallis, 198 (VAT
663).
3eSee especiallyKramer, 1969, Frankfort, 1948, 296, 3I7 and 330-331 on this, and the view that the ceremony
evolvedfrom one celebratingthe union of Ishtar and Dumuzi.
a0Bel is attestedas a by-nameof Marduk from the last Kassiteperiod (von Soden,ZA 51, 163) and was common in
NB and Achaemenidtimes. With Nabu he was the dominant Babylonian deity - compare the frequencywith
which the two appearin personal names and their symbols on seals- and the two are often quoted as such as the
BeI and Nebo of the later OT.
ar Cf. Bohl in Bi. Or. 19 (1962).
74 B/CS33(1986)
It was surroundedby a huge courtyardwith nearly I ,000 towers (Koldewey, 1914, 187) and
its gatesl2were indeed adomed with bronze,as Herodotussays,and Nebuchadnezzarrecords
(VAB IV Nebuch.5.i.24;7.ii.8;13.i.59;14.i.42).
Herodotussays that in addition to the sitting statuethere had been a standingone, also of
gold, until taken off by Xerxes. We do not possessthe statuesfrom Esagil, but fragmentsof
their adomment- lapis lazuli, shell and onyx inlays- were found by Koldewey (1914,222,
1911,47 and Abb. 78-9) as well as tracesof a throneof wood and gold (ibid. 42; Wetzel, 1938,
pll. 36-9).43
Neverthelesswe can be ceftain that the statuewas made of at leastgold on wood if not solid
gold.aaFurthermoreit is likely that both standingand seatedimagesexisted,if the depictionsof
Marduk on cylinder sealsfrom the Akkadian period onwardsa5 or on the grand seal of Marduk
presentedby Marduk-Nadin-Shumia6 representthe god as commonly envisaged,including
therefore the form of the statue.
The Palace(I.181.2)1?
Herodotussaysthat the palacewas acrossthe river from the main temple and, as a glanceat the
plan showsthat the NB palaces(i.e. the main palaceand the Norlhem palace)were on the same
(Eastern)side as Esagil, this has normally been explainedby referenceto the changeof course
of the river documentedin the excavationsby the washing away of a tract of road South and
East of the main palace,and by a 100 m. wide gap in the quay wall further South filled with
alluvium (Ravn,59). The new courseis mappedin Wetzel, 1944,48. But note that Diodorus
2.8.3-7 also speaksof two palacesconnectedby a bridge, so that it is possiblethat there was
anotherpalaceon the West side of the city not found by the excavators.It it true that we do not
know exactly up to what time each of the palaces (the Main Palace,Northern Palace and
Summer Palace)was in use, but that no descriptionis given of any suggeslsthat Herodotus
penetratednone.
The Houses(I.180.3)'8
The laying out of streetsat right-anglesdoes seemto be approximatelycorrect,to judge from
the plan of the excavationsof the NB residential area on Merkes (Reuther, 1926,77-122;
Koldewey, 1914,241-2),though it must be stressedthat this representsonly a small areaof the
NB city.
Herodotus' other point - that each house was'triorophon kai tetrorophon' - occasioned
doubt so long as this was translated'with threeor fotx floors'. In fact as Wetzel (1944,61) and
Ravn (79) have pointed out, it really meanswith three or four roofs, and so could refer to the
main room of the househaving a higher roof level than the rest (for it was true of many of the
housesthat the walls of the principal room were thicker than the rest), with awnings further
stretchedout on top of these,and/orthe further discontinuityin the sky-line due to the constant
ar Discussed
by George,1985,138f.
ar Ashurbanipaldedicateda throne to Marduk, giving its measurementsas I 213 x 1 213 x 3 1/3 cubits (ARAB II
1 01 2) .
aaBaruch vi
Qrassrn)speaksof statuesof gold and silver on wood, with a crown, sceptre,daggerand axe and purple
garrnents.
a5For instance,Frankfort^1939,PlatesXXVI k, XXVIII m and n.
'o We is s bac h,1903,l6- 17; Unger ,210.
a7SeeKoldewey,193 I -2, and Wiseman,1985,53ff.
ar On theseseeReutherand Ravn. 66ff.
J. MACGINNIS /)
rebuilding at different times of adjacenthouseson the tell. There is no proof that this is right,
but it is certainlythe bestexplanationyet.
The Bridge (I.186)
The bridge of stone connectingthe two halves of the city can only be the EuphratesBridge
excavatedby Koldewey (Wetzel, 1930, 54-7; Ravn, 74ff). It is not mentionedin the texts
(Wetzel, l93A, rc6-7) and was dated to the time of Nebuchadnezzar chiefly on the brick size.
It had eight piers with stonefacingaeand was 123m.long. According to Diodorus 2.8.2 it was
floored with cedar,cypressand palm, and slots for timbers were found by Koldewey (1914,
197). It there is any rruth in the story of the flooring being taken up at night, it is not, as How
and Wells, a result of Herodotus being 'unconsciousof the rivalry between Babylon and
Borsippa'(ad loc.),but, as Wetzel(1944,66),to allow the passageof ships.
Customs
Brick-Making (I. 179)50
The method of building a water-resistantwall out of kiln-baked mud bricks with bitumen and
layers of reed matting between the courses in i.179 is exactly right. The only point of
differenceis that whereasHerodotushas this matting every thirty courses,it is more usual to
see it every 5-13 courses,if not (as rarely) betweenevery one (Koldewey, 1914, 80; Wetzel,
1944, 54; UE V , 131). Note that Herodotusdoes not explicitly mention the unbakedbrick of
which virtually everything was built: perhapsbecauseit was too well understoodto need
explaining.
Waters of the PersianKing (I.188)
Although we have no cuneiform evidence confirming that these were drawn from the
Choaspes,this is confirmed by Ctesias(Ktinig, 1972, I29) and Pliny (Rawlinson, 1880, 308
n.7). Other writers, however, record different traditions: Dino the Nile (Lawrencead loc.),
Strabothe Eulaeusand Chalymon(Rawlinsonad loc.).
Clothes(195.1-2)
Herodotus' accountdoes not match exactly the dresswe seeon boundarystonessror Assyrian
reliefs depictingBabylonians,52 though the main element,a tunic (kithon)reachingto the feet, is
correct. The extra woollen one and the cloak (chlanidion) on top of that are unexpected,
suggestingthat Herodotuswas in Babylon at a cold time of year'
As far as we know, the Babyloniansdid not wear pointed shoes(embas)but wore sandalsor
went barefoot(Salonen,1969;King, 1915,pi.LXIV)'
We know nothing of the head-bands(mitra; not necessarily 'turbans' as sometimes
translated)- though these might be connectedwith the karballatu of the Cimmerians (s'v' in
the dictionaries)- nor of the perfumesin everydaylife,53though there is no reasonto doubt
their use and it may well be that here Herodotusis a valid sourcein our ignorance.
aeParts of which were found where they had fallen through decay (Wetzel ,1944,66).
s0SeeespeciallySalonen,1972,'Die Ziegeleiim alten Mesopotamien'.
51 SeeKin g, 1912.
52SeeHrouda,39.
53ThoughAssyrian perfume recipesare known (Ebeling, Orientalia 17-19 (1948-50)) and perfumers(muraqqitu)
are aitested in the LB period. The monarchs were characterised by their use by Classical authors - thus
Ashurbanipal(Diodorus2.23.t) andAlexandercaptudngthe perfumechestof Darius II (Cook, 140).
/o B/CS33 (1986)
Reliefs do picture men of rank holding staff.s5a ending in a shapedform: most usually a
simple knob, perhapsHerodotus' 'apple',5sthough rosettes(Herodotus'rose),56tulip-like
blossoms(= Herodotus'lily?),s?and a 'melon-shape's8 are also found. The correspondence
between Herodotus' staffs and those depicted is thus good, with only the eagle design
otherwiseunattested.In the pasthowever it has been suggested(for instanceBaumgartner,79)
that thesedesignsreally derived from seals,also mentionedin the same sentence. This can
safely be dismissed,as we know that the sealsof the Achaemenidperiod were predominantly
engravedwith scenesof a single or fighting animal or of men on horseback(Zettler,"rNES38
(1979)). Likewise, the assertionhitherto that cylinder-sealswere meant (for instanceHow and
Wells arl /ac.; Ravn, 89) is incorrect, as these had been replacedby stamp seals in the NB
period. Moreover, the fact that Herodotus does nol describe the shape of the seal surely
suggests that it was that familiarto his Greekaudience,viz. the stamp.5e
The Boats(I.194)
It has long beenrealisedthat Herodotushas fused elementsof two different craft still used on
the Euphratesearlierthis centuryand attestedin antiquity.60Theseare the kelek,a raft normally
16-l8ft.x 14-16ft.of plankslashedtogetherandfloatedon30orsoinflatedgoatskins,6rand
the guffa, a round willow frame with hides stretchedover and sealedwith bitumen on the
bottom. of diameter3 ft. 8 ins.-l5 ft.62 In Herodotus,the elementsof a wooden-framedcraft
floated down from the North and broken up to be sold in Babylonia derive from the kelek, the
circular shape,hide coveringand carrying of a donkeyo3from the guffa.6a
Auctioning Girls (I. 196)
Nothing is known of this from cuneiforrn sources,whilst the marriage contractsmake clear
both the influence of the family in arranginga match, and also the stresswhich is often placed
upon virginity (Baumgartner,82). This custom hardly seems probable. Both Strabo and
Nicolaus Damascenus,however,say that the practicewas still in use in their time, and the only
remotely connected parallels are those of parents selling their children in time of siege
(Oppenheim,Iraq l7) or dedicatingthem to a deity (Dougheny, 'The Sherkutuof Babyionian
Deities'), in both instancesthe principal aim being to ensurethat the childrenwould be fed.
Medicine(L197)
We know nothing of the custom here recorded of laying out the sick in the market place,
though Baumgartnerpoints out that this is so in Mark vi.56, also bringing to attention the
saKing, 1912,pI.LXXIY; passimapudHrotda.
55For instance,Hrouda.pI.32nos.l-8; alsothe pomegranate
(no.9).
5 61 bid .nos . 10- l l.
51lbid. no.l7.
58On the onyx staff excavatedat Babylon (Wetzel, 1951, p1.421.
5eOne could otherwisehave tried ro treat'sphregida ... kai skeptroncheiropoieton'as hendiadysfor a 'seal actually
(= kai) wrought (in the form ofl a rod'.
60Chesney,vol.Il. ch.XX, is a good sourceon the craft of the Tigris and Euphrates.
6r Chesney,vol. II, 635; kalakku occurshapar (Salonen,1939,66), and the craft once too in the reliefs (ibid. p1.23).
6r Chesney,vol.Il, 639-40; cf. the hapar quppu (Salonen,71); the reliefs showing them are reproducedibid. p11.21
and 22.
6: This dont ey forms the subjectof part of Aristarchus'commentaryon HerodotusBook l - seeGrenfell and Hunt,
TheAnt her s Pap,
t - r i,Pt . I I ( 1901) , 3.
6aWetzel'sview (19214, 6l) that a guff'aalonewasdescribedis not correct.
.71
J. MACGINNIS
Caucasianfolk-tale in which a sick prince goesto the bazaarto seek(successfully)a cure after
his doctorshavefailedhim (80-81).
Our knowledge of Babylonian medicine is confined largely to the scholarly side. This
comprised both magical and physical treatment (see especially Ritter, AS 16), the latter
including chemicalprescriptionsfor intemal treatment,poulticesand bathings,and surgery(cf.
CH, 215-225,and Oppenheim,Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied SciencesXY
(1960)). Wiseman (1985, 106) is surely right in refuting Oppenheim'sview that formal
medicine had fallen out of the curriculum in the NB period (see now the indices under
'medical' in Leichty's new cataloguesof the Sippar Collection in the British Museum), but it
may well be that our sourcesdo not reflect the treatmentavailableto the common man. On the
presentpoint, we have no reasonto doubt Herodotus'statement.
Burial (L198)
In the NB period burial was normally by direct interment(often wrappedin a mat) or crouched
up inside two large jars (RLA, 'Grab'). Herodotus' 'taphai de sphi en meliti', that is 'burying
them in honey', could mean either smearingor immersion in honey,65and investigationdoes
reveal some confirmation. Further classicalevidenceis the record that Alexander inspecteda
romb in Babylon containinga body floating in oil (Ctesias(Konig, 1912, pJA no.21); Aelian
Var.Hist.xii.3) and the tradition in the Pseudo-CallisthenesLife of Alexander (chapter 283,
preservedonly in the Armenian; see Budge, The History of Alexander the Great (1889, repr.
1916),141,III.xxii) that the corpseof Alexanderhimself was preservedin oil, honey,incense
and a1oe.66
Beyond this, there is also some cuneiform witness to burial in oil. This includes the text
publishedin Ebeling, Tod und Leben,56, in which a NA king 'laid my father in royal oil'
(shamansharri),61and on two occasionsNabonidussimilarly'... his corpse in sweet (=
scented?)oil', though in eachplace the verb is broken off.68The differenceto note is of course
that the cuneiform evidencespeaksof oil or 'good oil' (= perfume?)and not honey. It is thus
not clear whetherthis can be identified with the customrecordedby Herodotusor not.
This practice is also known from Egypt in late antiquity, a recent casebeing the body of a
child found preservedin honey in a jar neat Giza (Leca, I17).
Temple Prostitution (I. 199)
This passagehas causedmuch controversy. It was at first thoughtthat the name Mylissa6ewas,
*muallid(a)/tt, 'she who
if at all correct, a comrption of Belitu (see Tallqvist, 1938, 276) or
causesto give birth' (Baumgartner,82), as a title of Ishtar or Sarpanitu,though it is now certain
that Herodotus was right, Mylissa representingMul(l)is(s)u, the Babylonian form of the
EME.SALIIversion of UMUN.LIL for NIN.LIL (Parpola,1980,Mesopotamia8 (Copenhagen),
65Strabo 16.I.20, 'thaptousid' en meliti keroi periplasantes', Ihat is, 'they bury in honey, smearingwith wax', might
suggestboth.
66Curtius 10.10.13has him embalmedin perfume. Outside Babylon, Plutarchhas Agesilaosembalmedin honey'
and Tacitus Poppaeain oil (Leca, 267), whilst Herodotushimself recordsthat the Persianssmearedtheir dead in
wax (i.140).
67The signs I3.GISHwere'corrected'by von Sodenin his review of Ebeling (ZA 43, 1936,255 n.1) to KISAL. but
without examiningthe tablet. My collation,confirmedby J. N. Postgate,revealsthat I3,GISH is certainlycorrect.
68 u2-[...]. vAB IV p.294
4.GISH DuG3 AD6-su [...] , Anat.St. 8 p.52, H 1 B 1.15;\.GISH DLIG3 shal-mar-su
f .iii.28.
6eAlso mentionedin i.l 31
70A dialect of the Sumerian language.
78 Blcs 33(1986)
177 n.2l; Dalley, RA 73, 1979).11This raisesanotherproblem, as the Babyloniangoddessof
sexuallove is normally thought to be Ishtar,not Ninlil. One of Ninlil's aspectsis as a Mother
(ummu: Tallqvist, 1938, 412), but it is Ishtar who assumesthe specifically sexualrole as the
Prostitute(harimtu) and Mistressof Love-making (belet ru'ame: ihid. 344). There are various
temple employeeswho may have been prostitutes- the qadishtu,kezertu,harimtu, shamhatu
and kulmashitu (see Renger,ZA 58 (.1967)for the OB period; he concludesthat at least the
qadishtu andkulmashituhada sexualrole). Theseare most often connectedwith Ishtar,thus it
is Ishtar's city of Uruk that is describedas'al kezreti shamhati u harimati', that is, 'city of
courtesans(?), prostitutesand harlots' (EnaIY.52; also GilgameshVI.i65, BWL 218 1.6-7).
In Assyria at any rate Ishtar and Ninlil were confusedor mergedin late times (Menzel, vol.Il,
95* n.1254). Wiseman (1985, 106) associatesthe coins in Herodotus' accountwith the lead
disks found in the Ishtar Temple as Assur, but even if this is right it is hardly that Herodotus
had 'confusedBabylonian and Assyrian customs', as there is no evidenceat all that he visited
Assyria, nor that the Assyrian templescontinuedfunctioning after the fall of Assyria in 612,
well over a centurybeforeHerodotus'travels.
But whilst cuneiform evidence is equivocal, there is interesting corroboration from the
Apocryphal Letter of Jeremias(= Baruch VI; Charles(1963 repr. from 1913),The Apocrypha
and Pseudepigraphaof the Old 'festament,606) where it is describedhow in the Temple of
Babylon women sit with a cord round the headbuming bran, waiting to be drawn off to lie with
men. This accordsexactly with Herodotus(only the bran being added),and as it is not possible
that we are dealing with a borrowing from Herodotus,it seemsthat a genuine tradition is
recorded.T2
Historical Traditions
Semiramis(I.184)
Semiramis,originally Sammu-ramat,the wife of Shamshi-AdadV, once thought to have been
an independentregent of Assyria,Trgrew to be a great figure of folk-lore in the Middle East
right up to todayTa and Herodotusis one of the earliestwitnessesto this. Thus, whilst nothing
of what he says of her is true (apart,perhaps,from the naming of the gate, though again we
have no cuneiform record of this), he must be reproducinga genuineBabylonian tale. It is
interestingto note that Berossusin two placestried to correct this, reminding the Greeksthat
she was a queenof Assyria (not Babylon) and chiding them for the belief that shehad built that
city (Burstein,22, I 4.9: 28, III 3.3).
Nitocris(I.185-187)
Nitocris, similarly, is as such a fictitious character. She has been identified as Nebuchadnezzar
(Delitzsch, i915; Baumgartner,961' Bergamini, 136), his wife (Ravn, 38), Nabonidus
(Dougherty, 1929), his mother Adad-Guppi (Rollig, 'Nitocris von Babylon', apud R. Stiehl
(1969 ed.), Beitrcigezur alten Geschichteund daren Nachleben)and Naqi'a (Zakutu) a wife of
Sennacherib(Lewy,.rNES 11 (1952)). None of thesecan be completelycorrect as, at the
simplest,Nitocris is creditedwith works of Nebuchadnezzar (the basin and the bridge: i.185-6),
though also made the mother of Nabonidus(i.188). So it is clear that the figure representsa
7r This is sraredexplicitly from ar leastthe OB period: 'dNin-tiu = [dna]u-li1-tu'in AKF II p.9, line 4.
72Sacredprostitutionis recordedfor Phoeniciaby Augustin (Civ. Dei tv.70).
73Finally disprovedby Schramm,Historia 2l (1972).
7j SeeEilers,Semiromisll9'71).
J. MACGINNIS 79
conflation (Legrand's 'personneimaginaire' is closest to the mark, 1932, ad loc.), and the
questionis whether this is the fault of Herodotus(through misunderstandingdue to language
difficulties) or his sources.I would think the latter more likely, but note that this is an excellent
examplewhere our conclusionmight well havebeenalteredwere the Assyrioi Logoi preserved.
Labynetus (I.74-7and 188.1)
Labynetus too contains contradictory elements. Nobody doubts that the name represents
Nabonidus(Nabu-na'id),the last of the NB kings, only the genealogywhich makeshim the son
of anotherLabynetusmentionedin i.74-7 as the mediator betweenthe Medes and Lydians is
wrong. The real father of Nabu-na'id was Nabu-balassu-iqbi.Dougherty made LabynetusI
Nabonidus,and Labynetus II his son and regent Belshazzar(1929), and this is universally
rejected. Others make LabynetusI Nebuchadnezzar(Ravn, 38; Baumgartner,95). The best
suggestionis that of Melkman (110, followed by Wiseman,1985,9) making them both the
same,LabynetusI representingNabonidusbefore he becameking. It is true that Nabonidus
was of high rank before accession(he is attestedas a burgrave(sha eli ali') from the eighth year
of Nebuchadnezzar - Dougherty,1929,31), so that perhapshe really did act as mediator,but
clever though the suggestionis, it is not proven. At any rate, Herodotus' historical facts are
againconfused.Ts
The Capture of Babylon (I.190-1)
Herodotustells how the Babylonianswere first defeatedoutside their walls and the city then
capturedduring a festivalT6by Cyrus' ruse of lowering the watersof the river. The Babylonian
Chronicle is well preservedin the poftions describingCyrus' capture of Babylon (Grayson,
ABC Chr.7, col.iii), and inasmuchas he did first defeatthe Babylonian army (though at Opis
- it is not clear whether Herodotusis referring to this or to a separatebattle/sortieoutside
Babylon) and then take the town, Herodotus is quite correct. In fact, of all the historical
material,this accountdeviatesleastfrom what we know from cuneiform sources,and it may be
that some truth lurks behind the story of the lowering of the Euphrates.TT Wetzel (1930, 53)
was of this opinion. In one respect,however,Herodotusmust be corrected: the chronicledoes
not allow for a prolongedsiege.
Lastly, here, the fragment of narrative involving Sennacheribtoid in the Egyptian logos
(ii.141) throws back to that monarch's Palestiniancampaign of 701 BC and the battle of
Altaqu, known from his annals as well as the (slightly errant) summary in II Kings xix.35
(Baumgartner,Sg-92). The tale of the tunnel dug in the time of Sardanapalus (ii.150) is another
exampleof pure folk-tale attachedto a famousfigure.
Agriculture
The Crops (1.193.3-4)
Herodotusgives the main crops as wheat,barley, millet, sesameand dates,saying also that no
figs, grapes,olives or any other fruit are grown. He is right about thosethat are grown,tsand
that olives were not grown in Babylonia (thoughthey were in Assyria), and almost right about
75Sack, RA 7'7 (1983), summarises the evolution of the legends which grew up around Nabonidus and
Nebuchadnezzar.
76Thus too in Daniel v and Xenophon,Cyrop. 7 .5.7-31. Seealso Jeremiah1i.
77Wiseman (1985,62 n.101) seemsto think that the lowering of the Euphratesis recountedin the Cyrus Cylinder,
but this is not the case.
78Seearticlesby Renfrew and M. P. Charlesin BSA I ( 1984).
80 BICS33 (1986)
the figs and vines: thesewere grown in Babylonia, but the extremesof temperaturemean that
they do not thrive, and most wine was in fact importedTe (seedictionariesunder serdu,karanu
and tittu; also C. C. Townsend and E. Guest, Flora rf lraq, vol. IV/1 (1980), 87, for
ficoculture). All three are still grown today (Handbook,463).80Furthermore,other fruit trees
certainlydid exist.8r
He is right about the extensiveuse of sesameoilE2but his estimatesof grain yields of 200- or
300-foldE3are rnuch too large. Calculating yields from the cuneiform sources is greatly
hamperedby the use of differing metrologiesand baffling scribal practices(see articles by
Postgateand Maekawa in BSA I). It seemsthat a yield of 16 xis attestedfrom the ED period,
but even the standard30 x of Ur III has beencriticisedas being far too high (for instance,Butz,
RLA,' Landwirtschaft' ).
Another point treatedwith scepticismis the enorrnousheight to which the millet grew (such
that he refrainedfrom recording it exactly, as 'no-one who has not been to Babylonia would
ever believeme' (i.193.4)). But here our author is right on the mark: the speciesGiant Millet
still growsin Iraq,reachingheightsof 4 m. or more (Townsend,544,Handbook,46l).8a
The Date-Palm(I. 193.4-5)
It is scarcelypossibleto over-estimatethe importanceof the palm in the agriculturaleconomy
of Iraq.ssThis was just as true in ancienttimes and Herodotusis exactly right in drawing this
out. He notes that the tree suppliedfood, wine86and honey, though there are many other by-
productsin addition: charcoaland fodder from the stones,s7 rope from the fibre, timber, fuel
and laddersfrom the trunk, fuel, roofing and fencing from the fronds,chairs,baskets,bedsand
cagesfrom the mid-ribs, arejust a few.
Herodotusis however confusedin his descriptionof the fertilisation: the method used for
figs is not employedfor the palm, which is fertilised by cutting open the female inflorescence
and insertingit into the male spathe,or dustingpollen over it.
The Keloneion(L193.1)
This is certainly the shadouf,which consistsof a bucket on a pole 13-15ft. long pivoted on an
upright pole 3-4 ft. long. It is depicted on a relief of Sennacherib(Salonen,Agricultura
Mesopotamic'a(1968), pl.IX) and on an Akkadian cylinder seal(ibid. Pl.IVa) and is still in use
today.
7eSeeW. F. Leemans,ForeignTradein tke OB Period(1960),102-107,127and 136.
80There were of coursea host of lesserfruits and vegetables.
ErDowson, 1921,lists a largenumber of varietiesthat are plantedamongstdate-grovestoday.
8r Though there has been much debate whether the Akkadian shamashshammu,though etymologically the word
'sesame',actuallydenotedlinseed;J. Renfrewapud BSAII (1985)for the lateston this.
ErStrabo15.3.11 ascribes100-to 200-fo1dto Susiana,
EaPerhapswe rhus also acceptAshurbanipal'sboast that in his reign the grain grew 5 cubits high (ARAB lI'769),
though the word here is she'u ('barley', but alsomore generally'grain') not duhnu (millet).
85Seein particularDowson, 1921,and Landsberger'sThe Date-Palmand its By-products(1961).
E6Date-wineis alsomentionedby Xenophon,Anab.2.3.1.4.
8r Mentionedin Strabo( 16.l.l4), one of the few placeswhere his parallelaccountmateriallyexpandson Herodotus.
J. MACGINNIS 81
Conclusion
Let us now bring all this togetherto ask: did Herodotusvisit Babylonia? There have been
great scholars on both sides of the question;88though the trend is clearly swinging in
Herodotus' favour as time strides on and cuneiform studiesand Mesopotamianarchaeology
matures. It has been claimed that in the 5th century BC it would have been difficult to reach
Babylon from the Greek world,Eeand whilst the Akkadian cylinder sealsfrom Cyprus and the
OB onesfrom Crete may be taken as raritiese0 there is evidenceof almost routine contactwith
the Greek West - Cyprus (Iadnanu)and Ionia (Iamanu)- from the time of SargonII.er In
fact there were thriving foreign communitiesin Babylonia in the Persianperiod (Oppenheim,
1985, 579; Cook, 203) as well as imports from Ionia (oppenheim,JCS 21 (1967)). These
would have come via Phoenicia,and as (Assyria and) Babylonia were in close contact with
Phoeniciain the first millennium,e2and as Herodotusspecifically sayshe went to Tyre (ii.44)'
therecan be no problem aboutthe route he took'
But let his descriptionof Babyion and Babylonia speakfor itself; we shall tabulatethe results
of our researches as follows:
ASSESSMENTOF HERODOTUS' DESCRIPTION
RIGHT WRONG OBSCUREruNCERTAIN
General Geography Length of walls 3 or 4-roofedHouses
Rainfall Height of walls Burial in Honey
Hir Assyria = Babylonia Stairway of the Ziggtmat
Canals History Temple Prostitution
Shadouf Palm Fertilisation Auctioning Girls
Main Crops Laying out the Sick
Date-Palm Ardericca
Boats Fish-eaters
Double Walls
Quay Wall
Gates
Brick-making
Ziggunat Tower
Upper Temple
Lower Temple
Worship of Bel
Streets
Bridge
Wall
Nebuchadnezzar's'Median'
Seals
88Summarisedby Baumgartner,6gf: againstHerodotushaving gone are Rawlinson, Sayce,Delitzsch,Weissbach'
Meissner and blmstead; for him are King, Oppenheim,Lehmann, Ravn (86) and Wetzel (1944, 68); note that
Wetzel (1950, 5l-2) believesthat neitherStrabonor Diodorus nor Curtius Rufus went to Babylon.
8oSo L iste r .lS7q.84.
e0Also the (OB) inscription of Naram-Sin of Eshnunnafrom Kythera, which could have been brought there at a
much later date (Weidner, 1939,JHS 59).
ersee arriclesby Rollig in the RLA under'Griechen'and 'Ionier', also Astour, JNES23 (1964);therewas heavy
Greek contactwith Egypt from the 7th centuryonwards(Lloyd' 1975' 1;?-60)
e2From as early as Lugalzagesi(about2300 BC) comesthe boastofthe monarchto have ruled from the Upper to the
Lower Sea.
82 B/CS33 (1986)
Staffs
Clothes(?)
Watersof the King
Gnomonand Polos(ii.109)
As mentioned,althoughsomefigs and vines were grown in Babylonia,the climate was really
unsuitableand the amountsare not likely to have been large. Everything labelled 'obscure'
could derive from some genuine practice, and of the 'wrong' the history that he records is
easily explained as from some source who did not have accessto the official records: and
though his dimensionsfor the height and length of the walls are undoubtedlyincorrect,it is
absurd to condemn him on this if his measurementsare his own rough estimate,or again
derived from folk tradition. As mentioned above there is only one classical writer who
consistentlyand conectlydistinguishesAssyriaandBabylon(ia).
The Date and Season
If, then, Herodotusdid go to Babylon, it will be of interestto see if we can determinewhen.
The date is most closely fixed by associationwith the visit to Egypt: scholarsdisagreeas to
whetherthis preceded(Powell, 1939,28;'Lloyd, 1975,66),or followed (Ravn,59; Lister, 83)
or whetherwe cannottell (Jacoby,1913,col. 265f). Fortunatelythis cannotaffect the dating of
the stay in Babylonby more than a year or two. Lloyd (1975,61) points out that the visit to
Egypt must have been after the battle of Papremis (459 BC), the site of which Herodotus
describesin 1ii.12;that moreover it is not likely to have been before the Peaceof Callias in
44918as Egypt had been at the centre of Athenian-Persianconflict; and that the referencein
Sophocles'Antigone904ff implies that Herodotusmust havebeenin Athens by 443 BC.r3
The seasonshouldbe determinedby the vegetation,ea and the decisivepiece of evidencemust
be that he saw the millet just beforeharvest(i.193.4): millet is a summercrop, cut from July to
October(Handbook,461-2;CharlesinBSA I (1984),3l; Townsend,486,502,544). This is
supportedby the fact that sesametoo is a summercrop (Handbook,461). As the Euphratesis
navigable all through the year by small craft (Chesney,vol.I, 45; Handbook, 26-35; though
with difficulty during the flooding which reachesits height in May), Herodotus' note on the
river-craft is not relevant here, and Ravn (59) need not be right in assumingthat because
Herodotuscalls the Euphrates'swift'(i.180.1)he was there during the floods, and so before
June. It is worth noting that the three layers of clothing recordedby Herodotusin i. 195 might
mean that he was there during winter. This all addsup to a late time during the millet harvest,
so most likely October.e5
At any rate, Ravn must surely be right (95) in thinking that the brevity of Herodotus'
description (par-ticularlyin comparison with Egypt or Scythia) must mean that he was in
Babylon for only a short while.
er Powell ( 1939,38) also datesthe compositionof the Historlesto 448-442;W
erzel (1944,48) reckonson 470-460,
but withoutquotingevidence.Jacoby(1913,coll. 265-7)optsfor 448-7. SeealsoForrest,1984.
eaThough be cautionedhow Lloyd (1975,72) has proved that Sourdille's conclusions
on the seasonof the visit to
Egypt are invalid simply becausehe fails to distinguish between what he actuatly saw and what he is merely
reporting.
e5ContraSaggs(RLA under'Herodot'),andJacoby(1913,col. 263),who opr for April-May.
J. MACGINNIS 83
Herodotus' Sources
Herodotushimself acknowledgeshis debt to the so-called'Ionic Logographers'e6 (for instance,
ii.3, 15, 16,20-23;iv.45) suchas Dionysusof Miletus,Charonof Lampascusand Hellanicusof
Lesbos,and Drews (1969) has demonstratedthat Herodotusused a predecessoron chronology,
mildly suggestingDionysus of Miletus (n.36). In particular, however, it is Hecataeusof
Miletus, whose wider importancein relation to the Histories is not in doubt,eT who may have
beena sourcefor Herodotus'description of Babylon. This view was held by Jacoby ( l9l3 col.
426), specificallywith respectto i.180.1,i.189.1and i.196.1-2,none of which is convincing)
and Saggs (RLA 'Herodot', 332), but as Hecataeuswould primarily have been a source for
geography,while his 9th Satrapy(Babylon and Assyria) is the only one not to be describedin
detailin his PeriodosGes (Jacoby,1912,col.2725; text in Klausen,214,ch.88),it camot be
supported.
Lehmann (1898) argued that the many passagesin Strabo similar to ones in Herodotus
derivednot from the former borrowing from the latter, but from both using a common source.e8
However, examinationshows that all the differences,where not trivial, can best be explained
by the suggestionthat Strabowas using anothersource(s)in additionto Herodotus.
As to the sourcesin Babylon, it is first importantto wam that any conclusionswe reach will
necessarilybe tentative,becauseof the fact that we do not possessthe Assyrioi Logoi in their
entirety (see above), so that our perceptionwill be distorted. Rawlinson (1880, 62) already
noted that Herodotusdoesnot reflect the greatlearningof the priestsee but it is just this detail of
literature,history, scienceand religious practice that we would expect to have comprisedthe
Logoi. But thereare other clues.
Firstly, hitherto unnoticed,the promiseto tell of 'the many kings of Babylon who helped to
forttfi the city and embellishits temples'(i.184) suggeststhat he was read out texts of precisely
the nature of most of the NB royal inscriptions (see VAB IV). These would have been
accessibleonly in the temple or palacearchives,and as we shall seeit is clear that Herodotus
did not penetratethe palace(seebelow).100
Secondly,on severaloccasionsHerodotusquoteshis sources(i.181.5;182.1;183.1-3),and
each time it is the 'Chaldeans'. These were properly a people from SouthemBabylonia that
producedthe dynastyof Nabopolassar,iol but in view of the later Greek (and Roman)belief that
the Chaldeanswere astrologers(Strabo 16.1.6,Pliny, NH 6l2Iff; Rochberg-Halton,.INES43
(198a);this sensealso in Daniel ii.4) and the fact that astrologicalscholarswere probablybased
in the temple,rO2 one assumesthat by 'Chaldeans'Herodotusmust mean temple staff, whether
e6SeeOppenheim,
"INES 19 (1960), 146, for a suggestionthat these may have arisen out of the tradition that
producednarrativesuchas that of Sargon'sEighth Campaign.
e7As acknowledgedby Herodotus;Jacoby (1912, col.2744) demonstratedhow Herodotusmade use of Hecataeus'
'Genealogiai'. Seealso Lloyd, 1975, 127f; Myres, 23; andGriffiths, JNES25 (1966).
e8Followed by Lawrencein his noteson i.198 nos. 1 and 2, and Baumgafiner,i01.
eeAn exceptionto this may be his statementin ii.109 that the gnomon and polos originatedin Babylon. Cooks's
statement(16) that this was due to Herodotusonly having accessto the lower ranks of the priesthoodis illogical,
sincethe informationavailableto priestsof all rank would have beenidentical.
100SoHuxley,211: '(Herodotus) took the opportunity to discusschronological matters with the keeper of the
archives.'
r01For the peopleseeBrinkman, 1968,260-267.
102Wiseman (1985, 99) associatesastrologywith Esagil; otherwiseEzida, the temple of Nabu, comesto mind with
its library, to judge by the contents of the Ezida temples in Nimrud, Nineveh and Khorsabad;the scholars
responsiblefor astrologicalomina (primarily the seriesEnuma Anu Enlil) were also expert in the seriesShumma
Alu and ShummaIzbu (Oppenheim,Centaurus 14 (1969),99; and Kinnier Wilson, 1972, 2I). They were not
necessarilypriests (and this is denied by Landsberger- see for example his Brief des Bischofs t'on Esagila
84 B1C,t33 (r986)
ornottheywere,orhethoughtthemtobe,priests. ThisistheconclusionalsoofJacoby(1913,
col.262)and Orthmann(RLA,'Kaldu',VI.2), deniedby Drews(1913,181,n.124),but surely
confirmedby the fact that all the mattersfor which they are quotedas the source- the woman
in the Upper Temple and the entry therein of the god; the weight of the golden statuein the
Lower Temple; the earlier existence of a second statue - bear on temple matters.
Furthermore, Diodorus describesthe Chaldeansas temple staff specialising in divination
(2.29.2);Berossosclaims that he was a 'Chaldean,a priest of Bel' (Burstein,13 n.2); and
Curtius Rufus (5.1.22) places them betweenthe Magi and the prophetsin the lists of people
greetingAlexander'sentry into Babylon. So it seemsacceptableto proposethat they were the
divination-priests.Less certainwould be the suggestionthat as the Chaldeanlanguagereferred
to by Berossus(Burstein,14,I.2.2) was Babylonian,that thesedivination(and other?)priests
stlll spokeBabylonian(as opposedto Aramaic).r03
Lastly, note that Drews has shown (1969) that Herodotushad accessto at leastsomePersian
sources;perhaps,as Wells (1907),the Zophyruswhom Herodotuscould have met in 44I10.'u
Wetzel (1944,49-50) wonders why he does not describethe Ishtar Gate or the Hanging
Gardens,but the fcrmer may have fallen into decay (and may in any case be the Semiramis
Gate) whilst the latter was part of the royal palace,ro5 and, as we have already seen, it is
probablethat he did not penetratethe palaces. Similarly, Wetzel's point that Herodotusdid not
describeeither the New Year Festival or the Bit Akiti is invalid if we are correctin placing his
visit at the end of the summer(seeabove). In short we may be astonishedat the accuracy'06 of
'I
the account; and when noting also that Herotodus' saying in i.193.4, shall not record the
height to which the sesameand millet grows ... becauseno-onewho has not beento Batrylonia
would ever believeme', is a vifiual acknowledgementthat he had beenthere,I find no possible
remainingreasonto doubt that he did.107
Trinity College,Cambridge
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BarnettR. D., 'Xenophonand the Walls of Media',JHS 83 (1963).
BaumgartnerW., 'Herodotsbabylonischeund assyrischeNachrichten',Archiv Orientalni 18/1
( 1950).
BergaminiG., 'Levelsof BabylonReconsidered', Mesopotamia12 (1977).
Brinkman J., A PoliticctlHistory of Post-Cassite
Babylonia (1968).
Bum A. R., Persia and the Greeks(1962).
(1965), 312 n.8). though note that severalofthose sendingreports to the Assyrian king were mashmashshuor
A'alrr(Oppenheim,op. r'it., 100) and that in SeleucidUruk the chief-priest,sheshgallu,was often an astrologer,
tupsharEnumaAnu Enlil, as well (McEwan, 1981,'Priestand Temple in HellenisticBabylonia',16 and 198).
Wiseman ( 198-5,73) is of the opinion that the ziggurratwas usedfor astronomy.
r03Nevertheless, Wiseman(1985,88) holds that the 'Chaldeanastrologers lived in a specialquarterolthe city and
were distinguishedfrom the tribe of the samename', but doesnot quote his evidencefor the statement.
roaThough it is difficult to gaugethe plausibility of Zophyrus carrying round the recordsthat provided the basisfor
the Tribute List in Book III, the detailsof the Royal Road in V and the Army-Role in VII.
105For the lateston the Hanging Gardens,seeWiseman, 1985,56ff.
106Especially if he took no notes(Spiegelberg,3T; Ravn,93; Moberg, 162;Fehling,17,1;Baumgartner, T9), though
there is no evidencefor that, even if Herodotuswas no more than a casualvisitor (Baumgartner's'interessierter
Globetrotter',p. 105) ratherthan on a mission specificto collectingmaterialsfor the Histories. I may as well add
here that it seemsto me just as probablethat his plan to write the Historieswas conceivedafter and becauseof his
travels.
107Andso oisagreewith the astonishingstatmentof Sayce(108 n.3) - and evenmore astonishing concurrence of
Ravn (92) that 'we neednot regretthe lossof his AssyrianHistory'.
J. MACGINNIS 85
BursteinS. M., TheBabyloniacaof Berossas(1978).
CameronG., PersepolisTreasuryTablets(1948).
ChesneyF. R., The Expeditionfor the Survey of the Rivers Euphrates and Tigris (2 vols.)
(1850).
Cook J. M.,The PersianEmpire (1983).
DelitzschK. (apud SachauFestschrift),'Zu HerodotusbabylonischenNachrichten'(1915).
DoughertyR. P., Nabonidusand Belshazzar(1929).
Dowson V. H. W.. Dates and Date Cultivation in the Iraq (3 vols.) (1921-3).
DrewsR., 'Assyriain ClassicalUniversalHistories',Historia 14 (1965).
Drews R., 'The Fall of Astyages: Herodotus' Chronology of EasternKingdoms', Historia l8
(1969).
DrewsR., 'Herodotus'OtherLogoi', AJP 362 (1910).
Drews R., The GreekAccountsof EasternHistory (1973).
Drews R., 'Sargon,Cyrus and MesopotamianFolk History' , JNES 33 (I9'14).
Drews R., 'The BabylonianChronologyof Berossos', Iraq 31 (1915).
Fehling D., Die Quellenangabebei Herodot (1911).
ForrestW. G., 'Herodotusand Athens',Phoenix38 (1984).
Frankfort H., Cylinder Seals (1939).
Frankfort H., Kingship and the Gods (1948) (repr. 1978).
Frankfort H., The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient (1979) (Pelican 4th paperback
revision).
George A. R., Babylonian Topographical Texts (1985) (unpublished dissertation of the
University of Birmingham,England).
Handbook: Iraq and the Persian Gulf (Admiralty Handbook)(1944).
Holzhey K., Asssurund Babel in der Kenntnissder Griechisch-Romischen Welt (1921).
How W. W. and Wells J., A Commentaryon Herodotus(1912).
Hrouda B., Die KulturgeschichtedesassyrischenFlachbildes(1965).
Huxley G., 'A Fragmentof the AssyrioiLogoi of Herodotus',GRBS6 (1965).
Jacoby,F., 'Herodot'in Pauly-Wissowasupplement II (1912).
JacobyF., 'Hekataios'in Pauly-Wissowa VII.2 (1913).
King L. W., BabylonianBoundaryStones(1912).
King L. W., BronzeReliefsfrom the Gate of ShalmaneserIII (1915).
Kinnier Wilson J.Y.,The NimrudWine Lists(1972).
KlausenR. H., HecataeiMilesii Fragmenta(1831).
KoldeweyR., 'Die Tempelnvon Babylonund Borsippa',WVDOG 15 (1911).
KoldeweyR.,The Excavationsat Babylon(1914)(trans.from the Germanof 1913).
KoldeweyR., 'Das Ischtar-Torin Babylon',WVDOG32 (1918).
Koldewey R., 'Die Konigsburgenvon Babylon I + II', WVDOG 54+55(1931-2).
Konig F. W., 'Die PersicadesKtesiasvon Knidas', AfO Beiheft 18 (1972).
Kramer S. N., Z/zeSacredMarriage Rite (1969).
Lane W. H., BabylonianProblems(1923).
LawrenceA. W., Herodotus(1935).
LecaA. P.,The Cult of theImmortal(1980)(from the Frenchof 1976).
LegrandPh- E., Herodote (1932).
LehmannC.F. (apudH. KiepertFestschrift),'Zu Herodotund Hecataeus'(1898).
Lister R. P., The Travelsof Herodotus(1979).
Llovd A. B." HerodotusBook II: Introduction (1975).
86 BICS 33 (1986)
Lloyd A. B., Commentaryon HerodotusII 1-98(19'16).
MelkmanJ., 'Labynetus',Mnemosyna9 (3rd Series)(I94I).
Menzel8., Das assyrischeTempel(1981).
Moberg A., 'Herodotusand Modem reconstructionsof the Tower of Babel', Monde Oriental
2-5(1931).
Myres J., Herodotusthe Father rf History (1953).
OlmsteadA. T., H istory of the PersianEmpire ( 1948).
OppenheimA.L., AncientMesopotamia(1964).
OppenheimA. L., CambridgeHistory of Iran II (1985) ch. 10, 'The BabylonianEvidenceof
AchaemenidRule in Mesopotamia'.
PallisS. A.,The Babl,lonianAkitu Festival(1926).
ParrotA., Ziggurrats et Tour de Babel (1949).
PowellJ.8.. A Leric:onto Herodotus(1938).
PowellJ. E., TheHisroriesof Herodotus( 1939).
Ravn O., Herodotus' Descriptionof Babylon (1942).
RawlinsonG., 'On the Birs Nimrud, or the GreatTempleof Borsippa',-IRAS18 (1861).
RawlinsonG.,The Historiesof Herodotus,3rd edition(1880).
ReutherO., 'Die Innenstadtvon Babylon',WVDOG41 (1926).
SaggsH. W. C., Assyriologyand the Studyof the Old Testamenr(1969).
SalonenA., Die Wasserfahrzeuge in Babylonien(1939).
A.,
Salonen Die Fussbekleidung der alten Mesopotamier(1969).
SayceA. H., TheEmpiresof rheEast ( 1883).
Schmid H., 'Ergebnisseeiner Grabungam Kernmassender Zikkurrat in Babylon', Baghdader
Mirteilungen12 (198l).
SpiegelbergW ., The Credibility of Herodotus'Account of Egypt (1927).
Tallqvist K., AkkadischeGotterepithetd(1938).
TownsendC. C. and GuestE., Flora of lra4IX (Gramina)(1968).
Unger E., Babylon die heilige Stadt (1931).
WeissbachF. H., 'BabylonischeMiscellen',WVDOG4 (1903).
WeissbachF. H.,'Reviewof Unger,1931',ZA4l (1933).
Wells J., 'The PersianFriendsof Herodotus',-IHS 2l (190'7).
WetzelF., 'Die Stadtmauem von Babylon',WVDOG48 (1930).
WetzelF., 'Das Hauptheiligtumin Babylon,Esagilaund Etemenanki',WVDOG59 (1938).
WetzelF., 'Babylonzur Zeit Herodots',ZA 48 (NF 14) (1944).
WetzelF., iBabylonbei den klassischen SchriftstellemausserHerodot',MDOG 82 (1950).
WerzelF., Schmidtand Mallwitz, 'Das Babylonder Sp2itzeit',WVDOG 62 (1957).
WisemanD. J., 'A BabylonianArchitect?',AnatolianStudies22 (1972)
WisemanD. J., N ebuchadrezzar and Babylon( I 985).
Wood H.,The Historiesof Herodotus(1912).
