TEMPLE OF BELUS. 297 of the peirseeus by Hippodamus, near the time of the Pelopon- ncsian war, were well calculated to heighten the astonishment raised by the whole spectacle in a visitor like Herodotus. The royal palace, with its memorable terraces or hanging gardens, formed the central and commanding edifice in one half of the city, the temple of Belus in the other half. That celebrated temple, standing upon a basis of one square radium, and inclosed in a precinct of two square stadia in di- mension, was composed of eight solid towers, built one above the other, and is alleged by Strabo to have been as much as a stadium or furlong high (the height is not specified ty Herodotus) : l it was full of costly decorations, and possessed an extensive landed property. Along the banks of the river, in its passage through the city, were built spacious quays, and a bridge on stone piles, for the placing of which as Herodotus was told Semiramis had caused the river Euphrates to be drained off into the large side reservoir and lake constructed higher up its course. 2 1 Ilerodot i, 178, Strabo, xiv, p. 738; Arrian, E. A. vii, 17, 7. Strabo does not say that it was a stadium in perpendicular height : we may suppose that the stadium represents the entire distance in upward march from the bottom to the top. He as well as Arrian say that Xerxes destroyed both the temple of Belus and all the other temples at Babylon (Kadtlhev, /care- wa^ev, iii, 16, 6; vii, 17, 4)-, he talks of the intention of Alexander to rebuild it, and of his directions given to level new foundations, carrying away the loose earth and ruins. This cannot be reconciled with the narra- tive of Herodotus, nor with the statement of Pliny (vi, 30), nor do I believe it to be true. Xerxes plundered the temple of much of its wealth and ornaments, but that he knocked down the vast building and the other Babylonian temples, is incredible. Babylon always continued one of the chief cities of the Persian empire. 2 What is stated in the text respecting Babylon, is taken almost entirely from Herodotus : I have given briefly the most prominent points in hij interesting narrative (i, 178-193), which well deserves to be read at length. Herodotus is in fact our only original witness, speaking from his own observation and going into details, respecting the marvels of Babylon. Ktesias, if his work had remained, would have been another original witness ; but we have only a few extracts from him by Diodorus. Strabo seems not to have visited Babylon, nor can it be affirmed that Kleitarchus did so Arrian had Aristobulus to copy, and is valuable as far as he goes; but he docs not enter into many particulars respecting the magnitude of the city or its appurtenances. Berosus also, if we possessed his book, would have been an eye-witness of the state of Babylon more than a century and a half lato 13*
