, 1877-06-01


O,eorrr 81. IN uere several note l-ooks.
from one oi which the following valn-
,ble anil historical information has tcen
taken. Mr.. smith writes. "Early last
ve.r sofne Arahs discovered vanlt and
chaml,er in the ruins of Babylon. stored
~rith rome 800 cuneiform Inscriptions
These inscribed tablets were cleared q NJ
from the earth and divided among some
twenty or more persons engaged In the
ssarrh. When found tablets are
said 10 have been paeke, in jars, some
thing like the common water jars of the
country, but only one Of these jars has
come 10 my hand. and this has 4 few
cuneiform characters upon il. My own
impression is that the jar may possibly
be antique, but the characters upon Il
are forged. This find Of tablets was
kept back for some time in hopes that
should 60 to Bagdad last year, but when
l did not come q letter was written TO
Sir Henry Rawlinson, asking him TO
purchase the collection. As l was
about TO start for the East, Sir Henry
forwarded the letter to me, with the
suggestion that l should purchase the
tablets for the British Museum. and
received directions from the Trustees
to go to Bagdad on my way and buy
them.
"After 1 left England the plague
broke out in HDlah, and spread to Bag
dad and all the surrounding country,
and the people who possessed the tab
lets fed in all directions. l stayed in
or about Bagdad two months, until the
plague was almost ended, buying from
time to time part Of this collection, and
ultimately obtained the bulk of the in
scriptions. From the terms of the let
ter sent to Sir Henry Rawlinson, we had
supposed that the tablets came from
the neighborhood of the river Hye Ia
stream connecting the Tigris and Eu-
phrates), and that they belonged to the
period of the early Chaldean monarchy.
Such, however, was not the case. On
examining the relics 1 found that very
few came from this neighborhood, the
great majority being sale or contract
tablets from Babylon down to the death
of Darius Hystaspes. At first was
considerably disappointed at this, for
contract tablets, as rule, are the least
interesting of the cuneiform inscrip
tions; but it struck me afterward that,
as these tablets were so numerous, by
collecting the lot and arranging the
dates upon them might make out the
chronology of the period of the Jewish
captivity, which is at present involved
in considerable obscurity.
Historical students are well ac-
auainted with the numerous questions
still unsettled with respect to this pc
Rod, such as the date of the battle Of
Carchemish and tie commencement of
the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, the iden-
tity and history of Belshazzar. the ques-
ton as to the existence of Darius the
Mede, and the chronology of the Behis-
tun inscription Of Darius. The new
inscriptions are numerous enough, be-
lieve, to settle all these points, and by
unexceptionable evidence-namely, by
the dates attached to the documents,
which show in each case what King was
reigning at the time the inscription was
written. Most of the tablets are trade
records, belonging to a great mercan-
tile and banking family, the descend
ants OF man named Egibi, and the
outlines of the chronology can easily
be made out by noting the dates when
the successive generations took up the
business.
early in the reign of Nebuchadnez-
zar, Sula was head of the firm, but in
the fifteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar he
united himself with his son, Nabu-abi-
idin, who, in the twenty-fourth year of
that monarch, took the business. Nabu-
abi-idin continued through the rest OF
the reign of Nebuchadnezzaf, the reigns
Of Evilmerodaeh, Nergalsharezef, and
unlil the eleventh year of Nabonidas,
buthe united his son with himself in
the eighth year of that monarch; and
this son, Itti-marruduk- -baladu, sue
ceeded him through the rest of the
reign of Nabonidus and the reigns of
Cyrus, Cambyses and Bardes 1.-THE Ma
gus ending in the beginning of the reign
Of Naditabirus, the usurper, who called
himself Nebuchadnezzar, the son OF
Nabonidus. He was succeeded by his
SON Maruduk-nazir-pal, who began in
the first year of Naditabirus, and con-
tinued to the thirty ifth year Of Darius.
With this date the records cease. Other
lines of succession given on the tablets
agree with this, and prove that the or
der Of the Babylonian sovereigns, as
given in Berosus and Potolemy's canon,
ls quite correct. 1 mention this be-
cause attempts have been made to throw
doubt on this order of succession. As
my Investigations are not concluded l
can not enter into all points involved,
but thought it would be interesting
70 chronologists to have the first results
OF the new materials, leaving a more
extended account for future time. In
LlA frat vNlaoo sngort,Nkfnna
all points confirm and prove Potolemy's
dates of the Babylonian Kings, ena-
bling us all to make closer approx