"That Portion Of Ancient Babylon Which Is Still Occupied Is (As We
Have Heard From Persons Of Character From Beyond
Sea) styled BALDACH,
whilst the part that lies, according to the prophecy, deserted and
pathless extends some ten miles to
The Tower of Babel The inhabited
portion called Baldach is very large and populous; and though it
should belong to the Persian monarchy it has been conceded by the
Kings of the Persians to their High Priest, whom they call the
Caliph; in order that in this also a certain analogy [quaedam
habitudo] such as has been often remarked before, should be exhibited
between Babylon and Rome. For the same (privilege) that here in the
city of Rome has been made over to our chief Pontiff by the Christian
Emperor, has there been conceded to their High Priest by the Pagan
Kings of Persia, to whom Babylonia has for a long time been subject.
But the Kings of the Persians (just as our Kings have their royal
city, like Aachen) have themselves established the seat of their
kingdom at Egbatana, which, in the Book of Judith, Arphaxat is said to
have founded, and which in their tongue is called HANI, containing as
they allege 100,000 or more fighting men, and have reserved to
themselves nothing of Babylon except the nominal dominion. Finally,
the place which is now vulgarly called Babylonia, as I have mentioned,
is not upon the Euphrates (at all) as people suppose, but on the Nile,
about 6 days' journey from Alexandria, and is the same as Memphis, to
which Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, anciently gave the name of
Babylon." - Ottonis Frising. Lib. VII. cap. 3, in Germanic Hist.
Illust. etc. Christiani Urstisii Basiliensis, Francof. 1585. - Y.
[6] Sbasalar, or "General-in-chief," = Pers. Sipahsalar. - Y.
[7] Continuatio Ann. Admutensium, in Pertz, Scriptores, IX. 580.
[8] E.g. ii. 42.
[9] St. Martin, Mem. sur l'Armenie, II. 77.
[10] ["The Keraits," says Mr. Rockhill (Rubruck, 111, note), "lived on
the Orkhon and the Tula, south-east of Lake Baikal; Abulfaraj relates
their conversion to Christianity in 1007 by the Nestorian Bishop of
Merv. Rashideddin, however, says their conversion took place in the
time of Chingis Khan. (D'Ohsson, I. 48; Chabot, Mar Jabalaha, III.
14.) D'Avezac (536) identifies, with some plausibility, I think, the
Keraits with the Ki-le (or T'ieh-le) of the early Chinese annals.
The name K'i-le was applied in the 3rd century A.D. to all the
Turkish tribes, such as the Hui-hu (Uigurs), Kieh-Ku (Kirghiz)
Alans, etc., and they are said to be the same as the Kao-ch'e, from
whom descended the Cangle of Rubruck. (T'ang shu, Bk. 217, i.;
Ma Tuan-lin, Bk. 344, 9, Bk. 347, 4.) As to the Merkits, or
Merkites, they were a nomadic people of Turkish stock, with a possible
infusion of Mongol blood. They are called by Mohammedan writers
Uduyut, and were divided into four tribes. They lived on the Lower
Selinga and its feeders.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 436 of 655
Words from 227491 to 227994
of 342071
