'Narrative of a journey to the site of Babylon in 1811, now first published: memoir on the ruins; with engravings from the original sketches by the author: remarks on the topography of ancient Babylon, by Major Rennell; in reference to the memoir: second memoir on the ruins; in reference to Major Rennell's remarks: with narrative of a journey to Persepolis: now first printed, with hitherto unpublished cuneiform inscriptions copied at Persepolis: by the late Claudius James Rich, Esq., formerly the Resident of the Hon. East India Company at Bagdad. Edited by his widow.' [‎149] (237/474)

RUINS OF BABYLON.
149
establishment, not recorded in history, and perhaps
of a date previous to the Mahometan Conquest."
(p. 110.) To this assumption I object.
1. The mounds or ruins rejected by Major
Rennell differ in no respect from those he admits;
they appear to form a part of the plan which they
help to explain; they are connected with, or de
pendent on, the primitive mounds; and no sort of
evidence can be drawn from their appearance or
composition to call in question their being of equal
antiquity.
2. It is granted by all, that the mounds of the
Kasr and Amran, with some others among them,
are a part of ancient Babylon. It appears very
improbable that any one should attempt to build on
such masses of decayed edifices, even in their present
state, when they have doubtless diminished, and
subsided into much greater solidity than at the
period Major R. assigns to his city. If ever a town
existed in this neighbourhood, it certainly would
not have been among or upon these heaps of rubbish.
The only mound which could have undergone a
revolution of this nature is the Mujelibe, which,
whatever it may have been, certainly now bears a
striking resemblance to fortified artificial mounts,
like the castles of Kerkook, Arbil, and many other
places in these countries;—it might even now be
restored to its castellated state. I am clearly ot
opinion, as I think every one must be who has
visited the spot, that either the whole of the eastern