the capital of the ancient kingdom of Babylonia or Chaldea, and supposed to have stood in E. Long. 44.0. N. Lat. 32.0. Semiramis is said by some, and Belus by others, to have founded this city. But, by whomsoever it was founded, Nebuchadnezzar was the person who put the last hand to it, and made it one of the wonders of the world. The most famous works in and about it were the walls of the city, the temple of Belus, Nebuchadnezzar's palace, the hanging gardens, the banks of the river, the artificial lake, and canals.

The city was surrounded with walls, in thickness 87 feet, in height 350 feet, and in compass 480 furlongs or 60 of our miles. Thus Herodotus, who was himself at Babylon; and though some disagree with him in these dimensions, yet most writers give us the same, or nearly the same, as he does. Diodorus Siculus diminishes the circumference of these walls very considerably, and takes somewhat from the height of them, as in Herodotus; though he seems to add to their breadth, by saying, that six chariots might drive abreast theron: while the former writes, that one chariot only might turn upon them; but then he places buildings on each side of the top of these walls, which, according to him, were but one story high; which may pretty well reconcile them together in this respect. It is observed, that those who give the height of these walls but at 50 cubits, speak of them only as they were after the time of Darius Hystaspis, who caused them to be beaten down to that level. These walls formed an exact square, each side of which was 120 furlongs, or 15 miles, in length; and were all built of large bricks cemented together with bitumen, which in a short time grows harder than the very brick and stone which it cements. The Babylon city was encompassed, without the walls, with a vast ditch filled with water, and lined with bricks on both sides; and as the earth that was dug out of it served to make the bricks, we may judge of the depth and largeness of the ditch from the height and thickness of the walls. In the whole compass of the wall there were 100 gates, that is, 25 on each of the four sides, all made of solid braks. Between every two of these gates, at proper distances, were three towers, and four more at the four corners of this great square, and three between each of these corners and the next gate on either side, and each of these towers was ten feet higher than the walls. But this is to be understood only of those parts of the walls where towers were needful for defence. For some parts of them being upon a morass, and inaccessible by an enemy, there the labour and cost was spared, which, though it must have spoiled the symmetry of the whole, must be allowed to have favoured of good economy; though that is what one would not have expected from a prince who had been so determined, as Nebuchadnezzar must have been, to make the city complete both for strength and beauty. The whole number, then, of these towers amounted to no more than 250; whereas a much greater number would have been necessary to have made the uniformity complete all round. From each of the 25 gates on each side of the square, there was a straight street, extending to the corresponding gate in the opposite wall; whence the whole number of the streets must have been but 50; but then they were each about 15 miles long, 25 of them crossing the other 25 exactly at right angles. Besides these whole streets, we must reckon four half streets, which were but rows of houses facing the four inner sides of the walls. These four half streets were properly the four sides of the city within the walls, and were each of them 200 feet broad, the whole streets being about 150 of the fame. By this intersection of the 50 streets, the city was divided into 676 squares, each of four furlongs and a half on each side, or two miles and a quarter in compass. Round these squares, on every side towards the streets, stood the houses, all of three or four stories in height, and beautified with all manner of ornaments; and the space within each of these squares was all void, and taken up by yards, or gardens, and the like, either for pleasure or convenience.

A branch of the Euphrates divided the city into two, running through the midst of it, from north to south; over which, in the very middle of the city, was a bridge, a furlong in length, or rather more; and indeed much more, if we hearken to others, who say it was no less than five stades or furlongs in length, though but 30 feet broad, a difference we shall never be able to decide. This bridge, however, is said to have been built with wonderful art, to supply a defect in the bottom of the river, which was all sandy. At each end of this bridge were two palaces: the old palace on the east side, the new one on the west side of the river; the former of which took up four of the squares above-mentioned, and the latter nine. The temple of Belus, which stood next to the old palace, took up another of the same squares.

The whole city stood in a large flat or plain, in a very fat and deep foil; that part or half of it on the Babylon. east side of the river was the old city, and the other on the west was added by Nebuchadnezzar, both being included within the vast square bounded by the walls aforesaid. The form of the whole was seemingly borrowed from Nineveh, which was also 480 furlongs; but though it was equal in dimensions to this city, it was less with respect to its form, which was a parallelogram, whereas that of Babylon was an exact square. It is supposed, that Nebuchadnezzar, who had destroyed that old seat of the Assyrian empire, proposed that this new one should rather exceed it; and that it was in order to fill it with inhabitants, that he transported such numbers of the captives from other countries hither; though that is what may be disputed, seeing he therein only followed the constant practice of the kings of Assyria, who thought this the most certain means of ensuring their conquests either to themselves or their posterity.

But it plainly appears, that it was never wholly inhabited; so that, even in the meridian of its glory, it may be compared with the flower of the field, which flourishes to-day, and to-morrow is no more. It never had time to grow up to what Nebuchadnezzar visibly intended to have made it; for, Cyrus removing the feet of the empire soon after to Shushan, Babylon fell by degrees to utter decay: yet it must be owned, that no country was better able to support so vast and populous a city, had it been completed up to its first design. But so far was it from being finished according to its original design, that, when Alexander came to Babylon, Q. Curtius tells us, "No more than 90 furlongs of it were then built:" which can be no otherwise understood than of so much in length; and, if we allow the breadth to be as much as the length (which is the utmost that can be allowed), it will follow, that no more than 8100 square furlongs were then built upon: but the whole space within the walls contained 14,400 square furlongs; and therefore there must have been 6300 square furlongs remaining unbuilt, which, Curtius tells us, were ploughed and sown. And, besides this, the houses were not contiguous, but all built with a void space on each side, between house and house.

The next great work of Nebuchadnezzar was the temple of Belus. The wonderful tower, however, that stood in the middle of it, was not his work, but was built many ages before; that, and the famous tower of Babel, being, as is commonly supposed, one and the same structure. This tower is said to have been composed of eight pyramidal ones raised above one another, and by Herodotus said to have been a furlong in height; but as there is an ambiguity in his expression, it has been disputed whether each of the towers was a furlong in height, or the whole of them taken together. On the latter supposition, which is the most probable, this tower must have exceeded the height of the Egyptian pyramids by 179 feet, though it fell short of its breadth at the basis by 33. The way to go up was by stairs on the outside round it; whence it seems most likely, that the whole ascent was, by the benching in, drawn in a sloping line from the bottom to the top eight times round it; and that this made the appearance of eight towers, one above the other. Till the times of Nebuchadnezzar, it is thought this tower was all the temple of Belus; but as he did by the other ancient buildings of the city, so he did by this, making great additions thereto, by vast edifices erected round it, in a square of two furlongs on every side, and just a mile in circumference, which exceeded the square at the temple of Jerusalem by 1800 feet. On the outside of these buildings was a wall which enclosed the whole; and, in consideration of the regularity wherewith this city was to all appearance marked out, it is supposed, that this wall was equal to the square of the city wherein it flood, and so is concluded to have been two miles and a half in circumference. In this wall were several gates leading into the temple, and all of solid brass; which it is thought may have been made out of the brazen sea, and brazen pillars, and other vessels and ornaments of the kind, which Nebuchadnezzar had transported from Jerusalem; for in this temple he is said to have dedicated his spoils from that of Jerusalem.

In this temple were several images or idols of masy idols of gold, and one of them, as we have seen, 40 feet in gold, &c. height; the fame, as supposed, with that which Nebuchadnezzar consecrated in the plains of Dura. For though this last is said to have been 60 cubits, or 90 feet high, these dimensions appear so incredible, that it has been attempted to reconcile them into one, by supposing, that in the 90 feet the height of the pedestal is included, and that the 40 feet are for the height of the statue without the pedestal; and being said to have weighed 1000 talents of Babylon, it is thence computed, that it was worth three millions and a half of our money. In a word, the whole weight of the statues and decorations, in Diodorus Siculus, amounting to 5000 and odd talents in gold, the whole is estimated at above 21,000,000l. of our money; and a sum about equal to the fame, in treasure, utensils, and ornaments, not mentioned, is allowed for.

Next to this temple, on the east side of the river, stood the old palace of the kings of Babylon, being four miles in circumference. Exactly opposite to it, on the other side of the river, was the new palace built by Nebuchadnezzar, eight miles in circumference, and consequently four times as big as the old one.

But nothing was more wonderful at Babylon than the hanging-gardens, which Nebuchadnezzar made in gardens complaisance to his wife Amyte; who, being a Mede, and retaining a strong inclination for the mountains and forests of her own country, was desirous of having something like them at Babylon. They are said to have contained a square of four plethra, or 400 feet, on each side; and to have consisted of terraces one above another, carried up to the height of the wall of the city, the ascent from terrace to terrace being by steps ten feet wide. The whole pile consisted of substantial arches upon arches, and was strengthened by a wall surrounding it on every side, 22 feet thick; and the floors on each of them were laid in this order: First, on the tops of the arches was laid a bed or pavement of stones 16 feet long, and four feet broad; over this was a layer of reed mixed with a great quantity of bitumen; and over this two courses of brick, closely cemented together with plaster; and over all these were thick sheets of lead, and on these the earth or mould of the garden. This floorage was designed to retain the moisture of the mould; which was so deep, as to give root to the greatest trees which were planted up- on every terrace, together with great variety of other vegetables pleasing to the eye. Upon the uppermost of these terraces was a reservoir, supplied by a certain engine with water from the river, from whence the gardens on the other terraces were supplied.

The other works attributed to Nebuchadnezzar by Berosus and Abydenus, were the banks of the river, the artificial canals, and the great artificial lake said to have been sunk by Semiramis. The canals were cut out on the east side of the Euphrates, to convey the water of the river, when it overflowed its banks, into the Tigris, before they reached Babylon. The lake was on the west side of Babylon; and, according to the lowest computation, 40 miles square, 160 in compass, and in depth 35 feet, as we read in Herodotus, or 75, as Megasthenes will have it; the former, perhaps, measured from the surface of the tides, and the latter from the tops of the banks that were cast up upon them. This lake was dug to receive the waters of the river, while the banks were building on each side of it. But both the lake, and the canal which led to it, were preserved after that work was completed, being found of great use, not only to prevent all overflows, but to keep water all the year, as in a common reservoir, to be let out, on proper occasions, by sluices, for the improvement of the land.

The banks were built of brick and bitumen, on both sides of the river, to keep it within its channel; and extended on each side throughout the whole length of the city, and even farther, according to some, who reckon they extended 160 furlongs, or twenty miles; whence it is concluded they must have begun two miles and a half above the city, and have been continued an equal distance below it, the length of the city being no more than 15 miles. Within the city they were built from the bottom of the river, and of the same thickness with the walls of the city itself. Opposite to each street, on either side of the river, was a brazen gate in the said wall, with stairs leading down from it to the river; these gates were open by day, and shut by night.

Berosus, Megasthenes, and Abydenus, attribute all these works to Nebuchadnezzar; but Herodotus tells us, the bridge, the banks, and the lake, were the work of a queen after him, called Nitocris, who may have finished what Nebuchadnezzar left imperfect, and thence have had the honour this historian gives her of the whole.

The tower or temple stood till the time of Xerxes. But that prince, on his return from the Grecian expedition, having first plundered it of its immense wealth, demolished the whole, and laid it in ruins. Alexander, on his return to Babylon from his Indian expedition, proposed to rebuild it, and accordingly set 10,000 men to work to clear away the rubbish. But his death happening soon after, a stop was put to all further proceedings in that design. After the death of that conqueror, the city of Babylon began to decline apace; which was chiefly owing to the neighbourhood of Seleucia built by Seleucus Nicator, as is said, out of spite to the Babylonians, and peopled with 500,000 persons drawn from Babylon, which by that means continued declining till the very people of the country were at a loss to tell where it had stood.

Such is the description we have by ancient historians of the grandeur of this city; which, if these accounts are not exaggerated, must have exceeded every piece of human grandeur that hath yet appeared. Many of the moderns, however, are of opinion that these magnificent descriptions are very far from being true; although it is certain that few other arguments can be brought against the reality of them, than that we do not see things of a similar kind executed in our own days. The following are the arguments used on this subject by Goguet.

"Authors have greatly extolled the public works and edifices which once rendered Babylon one of the wonders of the world. We may reduce all these objects to five principal heads: 1. The height of its walls; 2. The temple of Belus; 3. The hanging gardens; 4. relation. The bridge built over the river Euphrates, and the quays which lined the river; 5. The lake and canals dug by the hand of man to distribute the waters of the Euphrates.

"All these works, so marvellous in the judgment of antiquity, appear to me to have been extremely exaggerated by the authors who have spoke of them. How can we conceive, in effect, that the walls of Babylon could have been 318 feet high, and 81 in thickness, in a compass of near ten leagues?

"I shall say the fame of that square building, known under the name of the temple of Belus. It was composed of eight towers placed one above another, diminishing always as they went up. Herodotus does not tell us what was the height of this monument. Diodorus says, that it surpassed all belief. Strabo fixes it to one stadium, a measure which answers nearly to 600 of our feet: For in the time of this geographer, the stadia were much more considerable than in the first ages. The entire mass of this building ought to have been answerable to its excessive height; and this is also the idea that the ancients designed to give us of it. We may judge by the following fact. Xerxes had entirely demolished this temple. Alexander undertook to rebuild it. He designed to begin by clearing the place and removing the ruins. Ten thousand workmen who were employed two months in this work, were not, say they, able to finish it.

"The riches enclosed in the temple of Belus were proportioned to its immensity. Without speaking of the tables and censers, the cups and other sacred vases, of maffy gold, there was a statue 40 feet high, which alone weighed 1000 Babylonish talents. In short, according to the inventory that the ancients have given us of the riches contained in this temple, the total sum would amount to two hundred and twenty millions and a half of French livres. Exaggerations like these destroy themselves.

"As to the hanging gardens, according to all appearance they never existed. The silence of Herodotus on a work so singular and so remarkable, determines one to place in the rank of fables all that the other writers have delivered upon this pretended wonder. Herodotus had carefully visited Babylon. He enters into such details as prove that he has omitted none of the rarities of that city. Can we presume that he would have passed over in silence such a work as the hanging gardens? All the authors who have spoken of it are of much later date than this great historian. None of them except Berosus speaks on his own testimony. Babylon, mony. It is always on the report of others. Diodorus Babylonia had extracted from Ctesias what he says of these famous gardens. There is also great appearance that Strabo had drawn from the same source. In a word, the manner in which Quintus Curtius expresses himself, sufficiently shows how much the existence of these gardens appeared to him suspicious. He judged they owed the greatest part of it to the imagination of the Greeks.

"Let us now speak of the bridge of Babylon, which the ancients have placed in the number of the most marvellous works of the east. It was near 100 fathoms in length, and almost four in breadth. We cannot deny but that a great deal of art and labour was necessary to lay the foundations, which it could not be easy to settle in the bed of an extremely deep and rapid river, which also rolls along a prodigious quantity of mud, and whose bottom is entirely sandy. They had therefore taken many precautions to secure the piers of the bridge of Babylon. They were built of stones joined and fastened together with cramps of iron, and their joints filled with melted lead. The front of the piers, turned towards the current of the Euphrates, was defended by buttresses extremely advanced, which diminished the weight and force of the water, by cutting it at a great distance. Such was the bridge of Babylon.

"While we do justice to the skill of the Babylonians in constructing these works, we cannot help remarking the bad taste which at all times reigned in the works of the eastern nations. The bridge of Babylon furnishes a striking instance of it. This edifice was absolutely without grace, or any air of majesty. The breadth of it was in no sort of proportion to its length. The distance between the piers was also very ill contrived. They were distant from each other only 11 feet and a half. Finally, this bridge was not arched. We may judge of its effect on the view.

"The Babylonians, however, were not the only people who were ignorant of the art of turning an arch. This secret, as far as I can find, was unknown to all the people of remote antiquity, who, generally speaking, do not appear to have been very skilful in stone-cutting.

"As for the quays which lined the Euphrates, we may believe that they were grand and magnificent; but I shall not easily believe that they surpassed those which we have daily under our eyes. In this respect, I believe Paris may dispute it for magnificence, and for the extent of the work, with all the cities of the universe."

a town of Egypt near the eastmost branch of the river Nile, now supposed to be Grand Cairo, or this city to stand near its ruins. E. Long. 31 12. N. Lat. 30 5.