"سرد لرحلة إلى موقع مدينة بابل في ١٨١١، طُبعت الآن لأول مرة: مذكرات على الأطلال؛ مع نقوش من الخرائط المدبئية للمؤلف: ملاحظات على طبوغرافية بابل القديمة،بقلم الرائد رينيل؛ في إشارة إلى المذكرات: مذكرات ثانية على الأطلال؛ في إشارة إلى ملاحظات الرائد رينيل: مع سرد لرحلة إلى برسبوليس: طُبعت الآن لأول مرة، مع كتابات مسمارية نسخت في برسبوليس ولم تُنشر من قبل: كتبها الراحل كلوديوس جيمس ريتش، المحترم، المقيم البريطاني السابق لشركة الهند الشرقية في بغداد. حررته أرملته." [‎١‎٥‎٣] (٤٧٤/٢٤١)

RUINS OF BABYLON.
153
pretended to refer every ruin which remains of
ancient Babylon to the age of Nebuchadnezzar) ;
and if they are condemned, the mound itself, con
sequently, and all the mounds or heaps attached to
it, cannot be admitted to be a part of ancient Baby
lon.—I shall in the sequel have occasion to return to
this subject.
As Major Rennell appears generally inclined to
receive so literally the statements of the ancients,
even of Diodorus, it is a little surprising that he has
not adverted to the dimensions assigned by that
writer to the palaces: he would have seen, that so
far from warranting the belief of the eastern ruins
comprising the remains of all the public edifices of
Babylon (viz., the new palace of 60 stades in cir
cumference, the old one of 30 stades, and the Temple
of Belus of 8 stades), it is evident that they will only
answer to the new palace, with its Acropolis. It is
true, Diodorus places his largest palace on the west;
but an author who confounds the Tigris with the
Euphrates may without injustice be suspected of a
topographical inaccuracy of this nature. (C) In
deed, whether we do or do not admit the authority of
Diodorus, the best conclusion to be drawn trom the
appearance and plan of these ruins is, that they re
present the whole of the royal precincts, including
the hanging gardens.* The ruins of the palace of
* We should form a very incorrect notion of the residence of an
eastern monarch, if we imagined it was one building which in its
decay would leave a single mound, or mass of ruins. Such esta-