NO. XIII. – PERGAMUS
This was a city of Great Mysia, in Asia Minor, the capital of the kingdom of Pergamus, which was founded by a eunuch, named Philatera, who had been a servant to Docima, a commander of the troops of Antigonus.
Pergamus was assaulted by Philip, king of Macedon, in his war against Attalus the First, who had taken part with the Romans. All his efforts, however, being unavailing, he turned his rage and fury against the gods; and, not satisfied with burning their temples, he demolished statues, broke to pieces their altars, and even pulled up the stones from their foundations, that not the least footsteps of them might remain.
At the death of Attalus, his son Eumenes the Second succeeded; and it was during his reign and under his inspiration, – if such an expression may be allowed – that the celebrated library was collected78, which makes such a figure in literary history.
The kingdom ceased to exist at the death of Attalus the Third; since that prince left it to the Roman people.
As this event was very important to the city as well as kingdom of Pergamus, we may, with propriety, enter a little into the character of the prince, who made so extraordinary a bequeathment. Historians relate, that he was scarcely on the throne before he stained it with the blood of his nearest relatives. He caused almost all those, who had served his father and his uncle with extreme fidelity, to have their throats cut; under pretence that some of them had killed his mother, who died of a disease in a very advanced age, and others his wife, who died of an incurable distemper. He caused the destruction also of wives, children, and whole families. Having committed all these enormities, he appeared no more in the city, and ate no longer in public. He put on old clothes, let his beard grow, and did every thing which persons, accused of capital crimes, used to do in those days; as if he intended thereby to acknowledge the extent of his own atrocity. From hence he proceeded to other species of folly and iniquity. He renounced the cares of state, and retired into his garden, and applied to digging the ground himself, and sowing all sorts of poisonous as well as wholesome herbs; then poisoning the good with the juice of the bad, he sent them in that manner as presents to his friends. At length he took it into his head to practise the trade of a brass-founder; and formed the model of a monument of brass to be erected to his mother. As he was casting the metal for this purpose, one hot summer’s day, he was seized with a fever, which in a few days carried him off. The principal clause in his will was expressed in these terms: – “Let the people of Rome inherit all my fortunes.” This will having been carried to Rome, the city and kingdom of Pergamus, as we have already stated, passed into a Roman province.
Pergamus gave birth to Apollodorus, the preceptor of Augustus; and Galen, next to Hippocrates the greatest physician that ever adorned the annals of medical science. It is also remarkable for having been alluded to by Tiberius, in one of his hypocritical speeches to the Roman senate, as reported in Tacitus. “I know very well,” said he, “that many men will condemn me for suffering Asia to build me a temple, as Spain at present would do: but I will give you a reason for what I have done, and declare my resolution for the future. The divine Augustus, whose actions and words are so many inviolable laws to me, having consented that the people of Pergamus should dedicate a temple to him and the city of Rome, I thought I might follow so great an example; so much the rather, since the honour, intended me, was joined with the veneration paid to the senate. But as on the one hand it might have been too great a piece of severity to have denied it for once; so on the other, doubtless, it would be too great a vanity and folly, to suffer one’s self to be adored as a God, through all the provinces of the empire. Besides, it cannot but be a great diminution to the glory of Augustus, to communicate it indifferently to all the world. For my own part, I am mortal, and subject to human infirmities; I am contented with being a prince here, without being raised to the throne of a God. I protest to you, I desire this testimony may be given of me to posterity. It will be glory enough for me to be thought worthy of my ancestors; a vigilant prince, one who is insensible of fear, when the commonwealth is in danger. These are the temples and monuments which I desire to erect in your breasts: for works of marble and brass, raised to the glory of princes, are contemned by posterity as so many naked sepulchres, when their memory is condemned. I entreat heaven to give me a serenity of mind, and a spirit to discern and judge uprightly of the laws of God and man; and after my decease, I confide, my fellow-citizens and allies will preserve my memory with their blessings and praises.”
Mr. Turner found several ancient inscriptions at Pergamus. He ascended the ancient Acropolis, which is built on a mount of about two hundred feet height, overhanging the town: on the top are extensive remains of the walls both of the Roman and Venetian city. Part of the walls are built with large fluted columns, laid length-ways. Among the Roman ruins are several immense arched caves under ground, about sixty feet deep. At the top of the hill lay a large Corinthian capital, and half way down the hill a small marble column, on which is a Greek inscription, now illegible.
In a valley west of the Acropolis are considerable remains of a large Roman amphitheatre; near which is a gate with part of a wall. The arch of the gate is curiously inclined, being unequal; the only instance of such an irregularity Mr. Turner ever saw in an ancient building. There are also ruins of several Roman baths; in one of which was found a vase, which has excited a great deal of admiration. Mr. Turner thus describes it: – “It is of fine marble, and in good preservation, being only a little broken round the rim. The shape of it is a flattened globe; on the outside round the circumference of the centre are fifteen equestrian figures in high-relief; nine of these have their heads much broken, nine have their arms extended; the horses are all at full speed, and a race is probably the subject represented, as none of the figures bear arms. Five of the figures are clinging to their horses, and one appears to be falling. Nothing,” continues Mr. Turner, “can exceed the spirit of the execution; the very horses seem to breathe; above and below the figures a band, on which is engraved the pattern of a laurel leaf, surrounds the vase: a very correct engraving of which is given in the work of Choiseul-Gouffier. There are said to have been seven of these vases at Pergamus; six of which were taken to Constantinople.”
There are also in the neighbourhood of Bergamo, the present ruins of this city, six tumuli; three large and three small79.
NO. XIV. – PERSEPOLIS
“ – I know
The wealth,” she cries, “of every urn,
In which unnumbered rubies burn,
Beneath the pillars of Chilminar.”
Moore; —Lalla Rookh.
This city is supposed to have been founded by the famous Jemsheed, from whom it is to this day called Tuklit-e-Jemsheed; – the throne of Jemsheed; a prince, to whom Persian authors attribute the invention of many useful arts80; and to whom they refer the first great reform in the manners and usages of their countrymen. He, also, introduced the solar year; and ordered the first day of it, when the sun entered Aries, to be celebrated as a festival81.
An old Persian author has left the following description of Persepolis: – “Jemsheed built a fortified palace at the foot of a hill, which bounds the fine plain of Murdasht to the north-west. The platform, on which it was built, has three faces to the plain, and one to the mountain. It is formed of hard, black granite. The elevation from the plain is ninety feet; and every stone, used in this building, is from nine to twelve feet long, and broad in proportion. There are two great flights of stairs to this palace, so easy of ascent, that a man can ride up on horseback; and on the platform a palace has been erected, part of which still remains in its original state, and part is in ruins. The palace of Jemsheed is that, now called the Chesel-Setoon, or Forty Pillars. Each pillar is formed of a carved stone, is sixty feet high, and is ornamented in a manner so delicate, that it would seem to rival upon hard granite the sculpture of a carving upon the softest wood. There is no granite like that, of which these pillars are made, to be now found in Persia: and it is unknown from whence it is brought. Some most beautiful and extraordinary figures ornament this palace; and all the pillars, which once supported the roof (for that has fallen) are composed of three pieces of stone, joined in so exquisite a manner, as to make the beholder believe, that the whole shaft is one piece. There are several figures of Jemsheed in the sculpture; in one he has an urn in his hand, in which he burns benjamin, while he stands adoring the sun; in another, he is represented as seizing the mane of a lion with one hand, while he stabs him with another.”
The remains of this city stands in one of the finest plains of Persia; being eighteen or nineteen leagues in length, and in some places two, in some four, and in others six leagues in breadth. It is watered by the great river Araxes, and by a multitude of rivers beside. Within the compass of this plain there are between one thousand and one thousand five hundred villages, without reckoning those in the mountains, all adorned with pleasant gardens, and planted with trees. The entrance of this plain, on the west side, has received as much grandeur from nature, as the city it covered could do from industry or art.
Some authors say, that to attempt any guess of the period when the city first rose from the plain, would be useless, and that the only means, now remaining, of forming any satisfactory conjectures, in regard to its origin, can only reach to the probable era of the different remaining ruins. When in Persia, however, Mr. Francklin met with a short account of the building this palace, in MS., being part of a work, called Rouzut al Sefa, or the Garden of Purity; of which he gives this as a translation: – “It is related by historians, that King Jemsheed removed the seat of government, which was formerly in the province of Sejestaun, to Fars; and that in the neighbourhood of Shirauz, having taken in a spot of ground, of twelve furlongs in length (forty-eight English miles), he there erected such a palace, that in the seven kingdoms of the world there was nothing that could equal it. The remains of that palace, and many of the pillars of it, are visible to this day; and he caused the palace to be called Chehul Minar, or Forty Pillars. Moreover, when the sun, quitting the sign Pisces in the heavens, had entered Aries, Jemsheed, having assembled all the princes, nobles, and great men of his empire, at the foot of his imperial throne, did on that day institute a grand and solemn festival; and this day was henceforth called Noo Roze, or first day of the new year (when the foundation of Persepolis was laid), at which period he commanded, from all parts of the empire, the attendance of the peasants, husbandmen, soldiers, and others, in order to prosecute the design; requesting that all, with joyful hearts and willing hands, should lend their assistance in completing the work. This numerous assembly obeyed the command of their monarch, and the building was finished with all signs of mirth and festivity.”
To this account the Persians add, that Queen Homaie, who flourished about eight hundred years after Jemsheed, added a thousand columns.
Diodorus gives some account of the workmen, that were employed in building this palace. “Cambyses, the son of Cyrus,” says he, “conquered Egypt in the third year of the seventy-third olympiad, when he pillaged the country and burnt the temples, the treasures of which the Persians carried off into Asia; and they, also, led away with them the workmen and architects of Egypt, whom they caused to build the famous palace of Persepolis, and of several other cities.” This account appears the more probable, since, as M. le Comte de Caylus is justly of opinion, they cannot be attributed to the Persians before Cyrus; since Herodotus describes the Persians of that age as a people of great simplicity; having neither temples nor altars, but worshipping Jupiter on the summits of mountains. The account, here given, is sufficient to account for the Egyptian appearance of Persepolis. There are appearances of five different buildings united in one; and each, apparently, of a different age, after the manner of the Egyptians.
Though there are doubts as to the origin of Persepolis, there are none as to the circumstance of its being destroyed by Alexander.
As the conqueror drew near the city82, he perceived a large body of men, who presented a most lamentable picture. These were about four thousand Greeks, greatly advanced in years, who, having been taken prisoners of war, had suffered all the torments which Persian tyranny could invent. The hands of some had been cut off, the feet of others; and others again had lost their noses and ears; after which, having impressed by fire barbarous characters on their faces, the Persians had the inhumanity to keep them as so many laughing-stocks, with which they sported perpetually. They appeared like so many shadows rather than men. Alexander could not refrain from tears at this sight; and as they unanimously besought him to commiserate their condition, he bade them, with the utmost tenderness, not to despond, and assured them that they should again see their country. This, however, the Greeks did not desire; being unwilling to be seen by their former companions in the dreadful state in which they were. They prayed the king, therefore, to let them remain where they were, but to relieve their awful condition. This Alexander did; but he was so enraged at what he had seen, that he set the city on fire soon after. The other account is, that the conqueror called his generals together, and represented to them that no city in the world had been more fatal to the Greeks than Persepolis, the ancient residence of the Persian monarchs, and capital of their empire. For that it was from thence all those mighty armies poured, which had overflowed Greece; and whence Darius, and afterwards Xerxes, had carried the fire-brand of the most accursed war which had laid waste the best part of Europe; and therefore it was incumbent on them to revenge the manes of their ancestors.
Animated by this, the soldiers force their way into the city, put all the men to the sword, and rifle and carry away every man’s goods and estate; amongst which was abundance of rich and costly furniture and ornaments of all sorts. There were hurried away, here and there, vast quantities of silver, and no less of gold, great numbers of rich garments, some of purple, and others embroidered with gold; all of which, says Diodorus, became a plentiful prey to the ravenous soldiers. For though every place was full of rich spoil, yet the covetousness of the Macedonians was insatiable. They were even so eager in plundering, that they fought one another with drawn swords; and many, who were conceived to have got a larger share than the rest, were killed in the quarrel. Some things, which were of extraordinary value, they divided with their swords, and each took a share. Others, in a rage, cut off the hands of such as laid hold of a thing that was in dispute. They first ravished the women as they were in their jewels and rich attire, and then sold them for slaves. The riches are said to have amounted to no less than eighteen millions sterling!
Such is the account left us by Diodorus. He then goes on to describe the destruction of the temple or palace, burned down by Alexander. “Alexander,” says he, “made a great feast for the entertainment of his friends in commemoration of his victory, and offered magnificent sacrifices to the gods. At this feast were entertained women, who prostituted their bodies for hire; when the cups went so high to drunkenness and debauchery, that many were drunk and mad. Among the rest there was a courtesan, named Thais, an Athenian, then mistress to Ptolemy, afterwards king of Egypt, who said in a gay tone of voice, ‘That it would be a matter of inexpressible joy to her, were she permitted, masked as she then was, and in order to end the festival nobly, to burn the magnificent palace of Xerxes, who had burned Athens; and so set it on fire with her own hand, in order that it might be said in all parts of the world, that the women, who had followed Alexander in his expedition to Asia, had taken much better revenge on the Persians, for the many calamities they had brought upon the Grecians, than all the generals who had fought for them both by sea and land.’
“This spreading abroad, and coming to the ears of the young men, presently one cries out, ‘Come on; bring firebrands!’ and so incites the rest to fire the citadel, to revenge that impiety the Persians had committed in destroying the temples of the Grecians. At this, others with joy set up a shout; but said that so brave an exploit belonged only to Alexander himself to perform. The king, stirred up at these words, embraced the proposition; upon which, as many as were present left their cups and leaped upon the table, and said that they would now celebrate a victorious festival to Bacchus. Thereupon, multitudes of firebrands were presently got together; and all the women that played on musical instruments, which were at the feast, were called for; and then the king, with songs, pipes, and flutes, led the way to this expedition, contrived and managed by this courtesan, Thais, who, next after the king, threw the first firebrand into the palace. This precedent was presently followed by the rest. The fire once raised, there was no stopping it; but Alexander soon repented what was doing, and gave orders for extinguishing it; but this being too late, the palace was burned, and remains now nearly in the same state it was left at the conclusion of the fire.”
According to Arrian, Alexander burned the palace of the Persian king much against the will of Parmenio, who exhorted him to leave it untouched. To which Alexander answered, that he was resolved to revenge the ancient injuries, Greece had received from the Persians; who, when they marched into Greece, burned its temples, and committed many other barbarous devastations.
This, we think, is one reason why the building burned must have been a temple, and not a palace. The Persians had burned the temples of Greece, therefore Alexander burned the temple of the Persians. Besides, as the feast was held in the palace, it is not very likely that the master of the feast should have burned the place, in which he was not only then feasting, but in which he was to sleep on the very night of the conflagration; and that it was not destroyed is evident from the circumstance, recorded by Strabo and Arrian – that Alexander inhabited the royal palace at Persepolis after his return from India. Added to which, it is certain that there is, at this time, no appearance or marks of fire on any part of the ruins.
In respect to these ruins, it has been well observed, that magnificent columns, portals, and other architectural decorations, mark this spot as the site of a splendid “palace;” while the style of the sculptures and the inscriptions, many of them in the single-headed character, found only at this place, Nineveh, Babylon, Susa, and Ván, proves them to be of a very high antiquity. Mr. Kinneir, however, says they are generally admitted to be the remains of the “palace,” destroyed by Alexander; and the striking resemblance of the building, as it exists, to the account given of Persepolis by Diodorus, is, in his opinion, sufficient to remove any doubt, that may exist upon the subject. We confess that such is not our impression.
Those who regard the ruins as being the remains of a Persian temple, insist that the sculptured subjects, as well as the style of architecture, resemble, in many particulars, those of Egypt: among which may be mentioned the figures, divided by trees, the sphinxes, the vases and chains, the domes and architraves, the subterranean passages in the tombs, the sarcophagi and urns, and the well, twenty-five feet deep and fifteen square. The sculpture at Persepolis was also painted mostly in blue, a favourite colour in Egypt; but sometimes in black and in yellow. For these remarks we are indebted to Mr. Buckingham.
According to Arrian, it was the castle of Persepolis which Alexander burned. In Mr. Buckingham’s opinion, however, the ruins now seen correspond neither with those of a palace, nor of a castle; they were, therefore, according to him, not those of the edifice burned by Alexander at all; for on all these remains, as we have before stated, no mark of fire is to be traced, which could not be the case if this had been the principal agent used in its destruction.
The opinion, that these ruins are the remains of the palace, is not on the authority of all history, but on the assertion merely of Quintus, Curtius and Diodorus. The whole story as to the burning, is said to have been copied from a Greek writer, named Clitarchus83.
Though there are no remains of a city now at Persepolis, nor in any part of the plain in which it is situated; certain it is, that the city was not destroyed by Alexander; for it was a very important place for many centuries after.
Curtius, therefore, is guilty of an error in saying that the city was so far from being rebuilt, that unless the river Araxes ran near it, there are no signs to guess where it stood; for neither Arrian nor Strabo, nor even Diodorus, whom Curtius commonly copies, acquaint us with any thing but the burning of the palace.
The first book of Maccabees says that there was a rich temple at Persepolis; and, the second, that Antiochus Epiphanes determined to pillage it. Alexander, therefore, could not have destroyed it; for it is highly improbable, from the history of those times, that so laboured and magnificent a work should have been rebuilt and restored in the short period between Alexander and the Syrian king; viz. – 160 years. That prince formed the design of pillaging both “a temple,” and the city.
Though Persepolis long survived the palace of Jemsheed, its inhabitants are said to have regarded with unextinguishable hatred the people by whom they were conquered; and, as if inspired by those fragments of former glory, with which they were surrounded, they maintained a character for pride and courage, that was not entirely subdued, till several centuries after the Arabians first overran Persia.
Its subsequent history has been summed up by Mr. Fraser. “It was among the earliest conquests of Ardeshir Babegan; Shepoor II. made it his residence; Yesdigird I. held his court there; and Hoormuz II., who reigned at the close of the sixth century, passed two months every year in it. In the succeeding age, however, it ceased to be a royal residence; for Khoosroo Purveez bestowed the government on one of his favourites; and it was here that the last of the Sassanian kings lay concealed, when called to the throne, A. D. 632. Twelve years afterwards, it capitulated to the Mohammedans; but the people, having slain their foreign governor, were all put to the sword. The city was ultimately destroyed by Sumcaneah-u-Dowlan, and the fanatical Arabs, A. D. 982. Such,” concludes Mr. Fraser, “is the sketch of the latter days of Istakhar84, (the only name by which the city is recognised by the native Persian historians); but the question, who was its founder? and who raised the mighty fabrics, of which the ruins still astonish the traveller? yet remain unanswered.”
The authors who have described these ruins are, Garcias de Silva Figueroa, Pietra de la Valle, Sir John Chardin, Le Brun, Francklin, Niebuhr, Morier, Buckingham, Porter, Ouseley, and Fraser.
It has been truly said, that we cannot proceed a step in Persia, without encountering some monument of the cruelty of conquerors and of human vicissitudes. These ruins have been variously described; insomuch that, had travellers not agreed in respect to the latitude and longitude, one would be tempted to suspect, that they had visited different ruins. Our account will therefore be desultory: for to give a full and regular one would, without drawings, be of little available use.
“It is very difficult to give any detailed account of the ruins of this celebrated place,” says Mr. Buckingham. “There is no temple, as at Thebes, at Palmyra, or at Balbec, sufficiently predominant over all other surrounding objects to attract the chief attention, and furnish of itself sufficient matter for description and observation. Here, all is broken and detached fragments, extremely numerous, and each worthy of attention; but so scattered and disjointed, as to give no perfect idea of the whole. Its principal feature is, that it presents an assemblage of tall, slender, and isolated pillars, and separate door-ways and sanctuaries, spread over a large platform, elevated, like a fortification, from the level of the surrounding plain.”
“The works of different travellers, describing these ruins,” says Sir William Ouseley, “furnish many instances of extraordinary variation. But this discordance is not peculiar to those, who have written accounts of Persepolis. We find that, concerning the same visible and tangible objects, two, three, and even four, travellers in other countries have disagreed; – all men of considerable ingenuity, and none intending to deceive.” Sir William then refers to a passage in Sir Thomas Herbert’s Travels. “Forasmuch as the remaining figures, or images, are many and different, and so many, as in two days I was there it was impossible I could take the full of what I am assured an expert limner may very well spend twice two months in, ere he can make a fancy draught; for, to say the truth, this is a work much fitter for the pencil than the pen; the rather for that I observe how that travellers, taking a view of some rare piece together, from the variety of their fancy, they usually differ in those observations: so that when they think their notes are exact, they shall pretermit something that a third will light upon.” These observations were made by Sir Thomas among the ruins of the city, of which we now are treating.
“Nothing,” says Mr. Fraser, “can be more striking, than the appearance of those ruins on approaching them from the south-west. Placed at the base of a rugged mountain, on a terrace of mason-work that might vie with the structures of Egypt, it overlooks an immense plain, inclosed on all sides by distant but dark cliffs, and watered by the Kour Ab, which once supplied a thousand aqueducts. But the water-courses are dried up; the plain is a morass or a wilderness; for the great city, which once poured its population over the wide expanse of Merdusht, has disappeared, and the grey columns rise in solitary grandeur, to remind us, that mighty deeds were done in the days of old.”
The last account of this place we have by an Eastern writer, is that given by Mirza Jan, in the account he gives of a journey he made from Shirauz to Isfahan. “Beyond the village of Kenarch, about half a parasang, is a mountain, and at the foot of it an extraordinary place, wherein are columns and marbles, sculptured with strange devices and inscriptions, so that most persons imagine this edifice to have been constructed before the creation of man.” This is very curious; since the sculptures themselves give positive evidence of his existence.
The following account of these ruins is taken from Mr. Francklin. “They are about two days’ journey from Shiraz, on a rising ground, in a plain, surrounded by an amphitheatre of mountains. They occupy a circumference of one thousand four hundred square yards. The front is six hundred paces from north to south, and three hundred and ninety from east to west, and the height of the foundation from forty to fifty feet.
“The columns are ascended by a grand staircase of blue stone, about fifty feet high, the sides embellished with two immense sphinxes, dressed out with bead-work. At a small distance from these portals you ascend another flight of steps leading to the grand hall of columns. The sides of these stairs are charged with reliefs of figures holding vessels in their hands, camels, triumphal cars, horses, oxen, and rams. At the head of the stair is a relief of a lion seizing a bull. This stair leads to the great hall of forty or fifty pillars, in nine rows, of six each; of which fifteen remain entire, from seventy to eighty feet high; the diameter at the base twelve feet, and distance between the columns twenty-two. Their pedestals are curiously wrought, and little injured, the shafts fluted to the top, and the capitals adorned with a profusion of fret-work. East of this, are remains of a square building, entered by a door of granite; most of the doors and windows standing of black marble, highly polished. On the sides of the doors, at entering, are bas-reliefs of two figures, representing a man stabbing a goat; a common device all over the palace. Over another door of the same apartment are two men, and a domestic behind them, with an umbrella. At the south-west entrance of this apartment are two large stone pillars, carved with four figures in long garments, holding spears ten feet long. Exclusive of the ancient inscriptions, in unknown characters, interspersed over these ruins, there are others, accurately described by Niebuhr. Behind the hall of the pillars, and close under the mountains, are remains of a very large building, with two principal entrances from north-east, and south-west; the wall divided into several partitions, ornamented with sculpture, and over its twelve doors the relief of the lion and bull, as before: and besides the usual figures, one of a man in long garments, with a cap turret-formed, seated on a pillar, holding in his hand a small vessel, and wearing a girdle round his waist, projecting beyond his clothes, and under him several lions. Behind this ruin, a considerable way to the north, up the mountain Rehumut, are remains of two buildings, of three sides, cut out of the rock, forty feet high, ascended to by steps, now destroyed. Two of the sides are loaded with carvings, as of some religious ceremony, including the figure last mentioned. Former travellers have supposed these tombs to be of the kings of Persia; the natives call it Mujilis Jemsheed, or the Assembly of king Jemsheed, who resorted hither with his nobles. Under these reliefs several openings lead to a dark subterranean passage, of six feet by four, into the rock. At the foot of this mountain, to the south, are the remains of windows, like those in other parts of the palace; and, a little westward from it, a stone staircase, leading to a magnificent square court, with pediments, and corners of pillars, and on those ancient inscriptions. In several parts of the palace are stone aqueducts. These venerable ruins have suffered from time, weather, and earthquakes; and are half buried in sand, washed down from the mountains. Persian writers ascribe it to King Jemsheed; and the addition of one thousand columns more, to Queen Homaie, eight hundred years after; but there is no epoch assigned.”