BABYLON IN THE DAYS OF NEBUCHADREZZAR. 



207 



Canon Parfit also spoke of the blue colour of the upper brickwork 

 of the temple-tower of the seven spheres at Birs (Borsippa). This 

 he described as being blue, but the fragment said to have come from 

 this structure, and sent to the British Museum by Mr. Rassam, 

 though it shows (if I retain a right impression of its appearance) 

 the traces of the vitrified brick-courses, has not a colour which can 

 be described as a genuine blue. Moreover, this seems to have 

 formed part of the second stage, whereas the blue stage was (accord- 

 ing to one scheme) the fourth or fifth. The order of the heavenly 

 bodies seems to have been as follows ; sun, moon, Mercury, Venus, 

 Mars, Saturn, Jupiter. 



It is true that, for us, and also, perhaps, for the Israelites, the most 

 important period of Babylon's history was the reign of Nebuchad- 

 rezzar, but it must not be forgotten that the States of Babylonia 

 had a past reaching back 3000 years or more, and that the founda- 

 tion of Babylon, the first beginning (apparently) of Nimrod's king- 

 dom, went back 2500 years or earlier. The fame of the Tower 

 of the confusion of tongues must have been known at a very early 

 date, and the renown of Hammu-rabi's glorious reign seems to be 

 reflected in the account of the conflict of the four kings against 

 five in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis. It was apparently the 

 power of the Assyrian empire which turned the attention of the 

 Israelites from the glories of Babylon, but when Assyria fell, Babylon, 

 under its new Chaldean rulers, at once took its place. In my 

 opinion, the Babylonians were a people of much greater capacity 

 than the Assyrians — that cruel and ruthless nation which strove — 

 and with much success — to impose its yoke on the ancient oriental 

 world. It was not Babylonia's cruelties and ambitions, but rather 

 the weakness of her rulers after Nebuchadrezzar's death, which 

 brought about her downfall. 



I am much obliged to you for the kind way in which you have 

 received my paper, and especially indebted to the scholars who 

 have taken part in the discussion. I should also like to express 

 my thanks to the proposer, the seconder, and the audience which 

 has so kindly responded to and passed the vote of thanks. I am 

 sorry that I could not read all my paper, but as you have it in print, 

 that disadvantage is greatly minimized. 



P 



