'Diary of a Tour in the Persian Gulf and in Turkish Arabia December 1906, by Lieutenant-Colonel Malleson Assistant Quarter Master General, Intelligence Branch, Division of the Chief of the Staff.' [‎17v] (34/46)

28
an important city at Babylon. We know
that about 689 B.C. such a place was
destroyed by Sennacherib, and that it
was on its ashes that the Babylon of
Nebuchadnezzar * arose. This in turn
was destroyed by Cyrus in 539 B.C.,
again reduced by Darius, and was
little more than a glorified ruin when
Alexander the Great, who afterwards died
there, captured it. In the first century
of our era it was deserted, and though its
materials had been utilized for the building ^ ^
of Seleucia and Ctesiphon, its very site Seleucia.
remained for centuries lost in obscurity.
What the Germans have done in their eight
years’ work is the excavation of El Kasr,
or the palace of Nebuchadnezzar, built
over the earlier remains of the palace
of his father Nabopolassar. They have
also made a few experimental cuttings in
the mound of Babel, not to be confused
with the mythical tower of that name,
but the probable site of the temple of
Belus, in which, amongst other horrid
rites, every Babylonian woman, no matter
of what rank, had to prostitute herself.
As to the tower of Babel, its site has not The tower of Babel:
yet been actually determined. There are
two or three spots in the vicinity of Baby
lon for which claims have been put forward.
But one thing is certain, that the height
of that structure, however stupendous
it might seem to the early inhabitants of
the earth, the majority of whom had prob
ably never seen anything bigger than a
mud hut or a shanty made of reeds, would
not now-a-days strike one as in any way
remarkable. The reason is simple. The
whole soil of Mesopotamia is alluvial silt.
There is no stone within many hundreds of
miles of Babylon, nor are there remains of
such or any records of its extensive use.
Nebuchadnezzar, as doubtless those who
preceded him, were confined, therefore, to
the use of brick, except for some small
quantities of marble and similar decorative
stone imported at great cost for purposes
of internal embellishment. This restricts
the architect to the height of a big factory An East India Company trading post. its possible dimensions,
chimney, or to a building similar, say
to the tower of the new Roman Catholic
cathedral in Westminster. To go con
siderably beyond such a height would ^
involve reaching the crushing strain of
brick and your edifice would crumble
to pieces. It is true that by adopting a
pyrimidal form, and so spreading your
weight over a greater area, you could
build to a greater height. But this would
not mean a tower. It is this want of stone,
indeed, and its corresponding necessity
* Chuldacan dynasty, G05—5G1 B.C.