Sennacherib's Palace at Nineveh: The Primary Sources for Layard's Second Campaign

Sennacherib's Palace at Nineveh: The Primary Sources for Layard's Second CampaignAuthor(s): Geoffrey TurnerSource: Iraq, Vol. 65 (2003), pp. 175-220Published by: British Institute for the Study of IraqStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200540 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 21:59

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

British Institute for the Study of Iraq is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toIraq.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.55 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 21:59:55 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bisi

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200540?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


175

SENNACHERIB'S PALACE AT NINEVEH: THE PRIMARY SOURCES FOR LAYARD'S SECOND CAMPAIGN

By GEOFFREY TURNER

During his second expedition to Assyria, October 1849 to April 1851, Layard excavated extensively at both Nimrud and Nineveh, as in his first campaign of November 1845 to June 1847, but now principally in Sennacherib's palace on Kuyunjik. The two London institutions, the British Museum and the British Library, house a rich corpus of primary material, in the form of drawings, sketches, plans, notebooks, diaries and journals, letters and other manuscript documents, which not only add much information and detail to our knowledge of Layard's achievements, as published in his second book, Nineveh and Babylon (1853), but also give a vivid and colourful picture and almost day-by-day account of his excavations. These sources are here described and discussed, and in a subsequent article will be used to trace the course of Layard's second campaign at Sennacherib's palace on Kuyunjik.

Since this article deals for the most part with the primary sources and only secondarily with Layard's published account, Nineveh and Babylon, the rooms and courtyards of Sennacherib's palace are here referred to as Chamber A, etc., as found in these sources and also in Nineveh and its Remains (1849). It was only in Nineveh and Babylon that Layard changed to the system of designating rooms by Roman numerals (Fig. 1). Concordances for converting the chamber or room letters to numbers and vice versa will be found on p. 213.

The British Library, Department of Manuscripts Layard's widow Enid, who died in 1912, bequeathed her husband's papers to the British

Museum (Waterfield, pp. 5-7). This extensive collection of documents, the Layard Papers (SWPS, pp. 8-9), was deposited in the Manuscript Room of the Museum's library, sorted and bound in 234 volumes, and catalogued as Additional Manuscripts 38.931-39.164 (Add.MSS., Vol. 19 (1911-1915) A, catalogue, pp. 334-60). To these were added later acquisitions (Add.MSS. 40.637, 45.360, 46.153-46.170, 50.149, 50.182, 58.149-58.202, and 58.222-3), making a total of 312 volumes in all, plus a roll of three plans by Loftus (Add.MS. 21.258). By act of Parliament in 1972, the British Museum's library became an independent body, the British Library, and in 1997 finally moved to a specially designed building some twenty minutes' walk to the northeast, next door to the Gothic splendours of Sir Gilbert Scott's St Pancras Station.

Of these 312 volumes, fewer than ten are pertinent to the scientific study of Layard's second campaign at Sennacherib's palace, the principal ones being:

Add.MSS. 38.942-3 Copies made by Layard of his "official" letters, 20 August 1849-11 November 1852, in particular those to Sir Henry Ellis, the Principal Librarian of the British Museum. Add.MSS. 38.979-80 Layard's correspondence, July 1849-March 1852. Almost all these letters were written to Layard, but there are also some copies made by him of his own letters, in particular to Sir Henry Ellis. Add.MS. 39.077 "Miscellaneous papers and accompts relating to A. H. Layard's excavations for the Trustees of the British Museum, circ. 1846-1851." For Layard's second campaign at Kuyunjik the most important document in this collection is ff. 75-79, "Description of Excavations at Kouyunjik", the fair copy of his field notes LN 2C and 2E, and here referred to as LN 3. See pp. 189-90. Also included are notes made by Hincks, Birch, Hawkins and others on objects and inscriptions found at Kuyunjik and Nimrud, which Layard used in Nineveh and Babylon (ff. 50-69 and 71-74); copies of cuneiform inscriptions (ff. 39-49), drawings and sketches (ff. 1, 70, 80-82), contents of cases for shipping (ff. 27-28, 88-89, 92-93) and accounts for such shipments (ff. 118-120, 154-155), and excavation accounts (ff. 90-91, 96-98, 101, 121-124, 140-143, 158-159), et alia. Add.MS. 39.089 Eight pocket notebooks (A-H) used by Layard during his second expedition, containing his field notes LN 2C and 2E, sketch plans, diary entries, survey notes, etc. See pp. 176-7.

Iraq LXV (2003 )



176 GEOFFREY TURNER

Add.MS. 39.096 The fair copy of Layard's journal or diary, 28 August 1849-15 May 1850. See p. 189.

Add. MS 39.089 (A-H), or LN 2 The most important of these primary sources is Add.MS. 39.089, a set of eight small pocket

notebooks which contain a mass of material from Layard's second expedition, mostly at Kuyunjik but also at Nimrud and elsewhere. For Sennacherib's palace the principal records are Layard's two sets of field notes, LN 2C and LN 2E, and seven pages of sketch plans. In addition, there are diary entries covering much of this second expedition and thus including his journeys to the Khabour, Wan (modern Van), Baghdad and the south; notes on his work at Nimrud; survey notes and sketches of Nineveh and Nimrud; rough copies of cuneiform texts; packing lists of sculptures and other antiquities to be sent to England; geodesic and barometric readings; other memoranda, observations, notes, sketches and jottings, et alia. Only the diary entries and three sets of barometric readings are dated.

The eight matching notebooks, Add.MS. 39.089, are of oblong format, similar to a modern shorthand notebook and known, in the nineteenth century and still in archivist terms, as a memorandum book, with original green leather binding and metal clasp. Each originally contained 75 folios or leaves of paper, 7.6 x 12.7 cm (3 x 5 inches), plus the two end-leaves pasted to the boards of the binding, in total 152 pages to each notebook. Five, A, B, E, G and H, are complete, but of C there are now eleven folios missing, and four folios are missing from each of D and F. Layard wrote along the short axis of the notebooks, not across the length of the open page, mostly in pencil but also in ink, and in parts the pencil notes were later inked over. He did not number either the individual notebooks or their pages. When Add.MS. 39.089 was registered in the British Museum library, the notebooks were given the letters A to H, and those folios and end-leaves which had been written upon or otherwise marked were numbered consecutively in pencil, but with the blank folios left unnumbered. In the registration of manuscripts, each folio or sheet of paper is numbered, not the individual page or side of the sheet, and the obverse and reverse of a folio are the recto and verso, thus f. lr and f. lv etc. In each volume of Add.MS. 39.089 there was added a colophon in pencil, giving the number of folios registered, that is including the end-leaves where apposite, and dated November 1919.

In seven of the notebooks, A-G, Layard made entries from both ends, turning the notebook over and then writing from the back. Since the folios are numbered consecutively throughout the length of each notebook and not in these cases from the two ends, references to entries made from the back of the notebook are in the reversed order of the folio numbers, as shown by the listed contents of Add.MS. 39.089 E below, with ff. 41v-36r following and not preceding f. 42, which in turn follows f. 43. In no notebook did Layard use every folio, leaving varying numbers of blank folios between the separate entries and sets of notes, and thus in notebooks A-G the number of folios registered is between 14 and 66. Also, and this must be stressed, the contents of each notebook rarely follow a logical order, and similarly the actual notebooks are not in any sequence. The diary entries and the likely dates when the field notes were written up show that the four notebooks A, B, C and F, or certainly parts of these, were all probably in use at the same time, with E covering the period between December 1850 and late April 1851 when Layard finally left Mosul, and D containing the diary and other notes of his return journey from Mosul as far as Cologne. Notebook G has details of work at Nimrud, and in H there are only brief undated geodesic details on three folios, ff. lr-3r, with f. 3v and the rest of the notebook unused. Excluding the diary entries, notebooks A, C and E contain excavation notes and/or sketch plans of Sennacherib's palace. The first two were probably used simultaneously, at least in part, and E covers Layard's final seven weeks in Mosul, March and April 1851. None, however, deals exclus- ively with Kuyunjik, as evidently is the case of G for Nimrud. As an example, the contents of notebook Add.MS. 39.089 E are:

Colophon in pencil and dated Nov 1919: 43 folios, i.e. 41 leaves and the two end-leaves have been used. The notebook is complete with 75 leaves and the two end-leaves, but most of f. 2 has been torn out, and between if. 27 and 28 a folio has been cut out leaving only a short stub.



SENNACHERIB S PALACE AT NINEVEH 177

Contents: f. I end-leaf sketches of heads

(Fig. 2 a) sum or addition of money, totalling ?2.500;1 list of chambers, etc., probably Nimrud, mostly crossed through - probably an aide- memoire of what had to be finished at Nimrud before returning to England

2 most torn off, only short length remaining 2r sketch of head in profile, wearing top hat 2v blank 3r list of equipment, tents, etc. 3v notes for journey to the south, including Wurka (Warka) 4-28 diary 5 December 1850-26 April 1851 ("Abde Pasha arrives" [Layard,

1853a, p. 662]), including on f. 27v a sketch plan of the Treasure Chamber, Nimrud (Fig. 2b); one folio cut out between ff. 27 and 28

30 blank folios 29-43 written from the other end, and so to be read with the folio numbers reversed: 43 end-leaf sketches and jottings, including Arabic 42v list with costs of journey 42r cuneiform text 41-36 barometric readings, 31 December 1850-7 April 18512

3 blank folios 35v list of packing cases, including the bull and lion colossi for the Guests

at Canford Manor (Russell, 1997, p. 70) notes on three parts of Sennacherib's palace, probably for the artist Bell (see pp. 203-4)

35r blank 34v-29v LN 2 E, field notes SWPS, pp. 14-15 (see p. 178) 29r blank

Layard'sfield notes, LN 2C and LN 2E The first set of field notes, LN2C Add.MS. 39.089 C, ff. 5v-12r (transcription SWPS,

pp. 12-14) contains entries for Chambers I-Y, in alphabetical sequence, and at the end for Chambers E and DD, the last miswritten FF. There is no entry for Chamber Z, nor for the Grand Entrance into Throneroom B. LN 2C is written in pencil. The first two entries have the captions Ch I and Ch J-, but for Chambers K-Y there are only the letters, without Ch. All these captions are written in the centre of the page, above each entry. Four entries, T, U, W and X, were left blank. After Y, Layard left a short space and then the final entries, E and FF [in fact DD], with the letters for these two chambers at the beginning of the first line of each entry, as in LN2E, but not as for the preceding I-Y.

On the first page of LN 2C, f. 5v, in effect a frontispiece to the field notes, there is a very rough sketch plan of Chambers I-S, in pencil (SWPS, PI. 18b). This has the outlines of Court I and the adjacent rooms, showing their relationship and relative proportions, but with no attempt at drawing them to scale or in their correct proportions. Thus I is very small, almost minute, and M and 0 are over-large, but the plan does show the relative outlines and positions of the rooms on three sides of Court I. Below are listed Chambers T-Y, each with a brief description or epithet, in pencil later inked over.

The chambers described in LN 2C fall into three groups: I-S, as on the sketch plan f. 5v and excavated by Layard before he left for the Khabour on 20 March 1850; T-Y, of which four entries are blank and two, V and Y, very brief, rooms which Layard worked on between 11 May and 11 July, and also in part, in the case of Sloping Passage T probably and certainly of Court U, after his return from Van on 31 August 1850; and thirdly E and DD, also sometime after the last date. Chamber E had been first discovered in 1847, and was again investigated in the latter part

I Possibly connected with the grant of ?3,500, of which Sir Henry Ellis wrote to Layard 27 February 1851 (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 29r, and also Russell, 1997, p.72).

2On 26 March 1851 Dr. Hyslop of the Residency in Baghdad wrote to Layard of the arrival for him of "a box ... said to contain Scientific Instruments", which Hyslop

presumed to be a new barometer (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 40r). Together with Kemble and Hector, Hyslop went up to Mosul to visit Layard on 8 April 1851 (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 27r), but no barometric readings survive after 7 April 1851.



178 GEOFFREY TURNER

of the second expedition when Layard excavated the suite of rooms to the north of Court U, Chambers II-LL, E being the southeast corner of KK.

The second set of field notes, LN 2E Add.MS. 39.089 E, if. 34v-29v (transcription SWPS, pp. 14-15) contains entries for 25 chambers between GG-YY and AAA-OOO, ordered by groups or suites of rooms and not in alphabetical sequence, and not including the complete run of chambers. Not described are AA-FF, of which DD is the final entry in LN2C, HH, NN-RR, XX, ZZ, and BBB-CCC. Chambers XX and ZZ were excavated in the first part of Layard's second campaign, but although referred to in his diaries, are not in the field notes; neither is the Grand Entrance into Throneroom B. On the other hand, LN2E does include Chamber AAA, whereas logically one would expect it to have been excavated at the same time as P and Q of LN 2C. There is no reference to this room in either Layard's diaries or Nineveh and Babylon, nor to BBB and CCC which lay a little to the west. LN 2E is written in pencil, later struck through, and from the reversed end of the notebook, and thus with the folio numbers reversed. The letter references for each chamber are at the beginning of the first line of the entry, as with E and FF/DD in LN 2C. From Layard's entries on the preceding folios - if. 41-36, barometric readings 31 December 1850-7 April 1851, and f. 35v, a list of packing cases and notes on Sennacherib's palace for the artist Bell (above p. 177) - it may be deduced that Layard wrote up LN 2E in his final two and a half weeks at Mosul, between 7 and 28 April 1851. Except for a short gap between the entries of Chambers KK and LL (f. 3 1v), possibly intended for a reference to Chamber E to be added from LN 2C, LN 2E appears as a continuous composition, probably written as a whole in one session.

Layard made the field notes LN 2C and 2E, as also the sketch plans, on the actual site of the excavations of Sennacherib's palace on Kuyunjik, in the poorly lit tunnels in which the walls had been traced. He wrote in pencil, in a scrawled and often hurried hand, which in many cases is difficult to decipher and sometimes almost totally illegible, as with the tantalizing entry of Chamber E at the end of LN 2C. The correct reading and consequent interpretation of these notes frequently remain open to misunderstanding, as marked -? or [?] in the S WPS transcriptions. It is often necessary to check and recheck the original text in the British Library, avoiding the temptation of "reading" badly written entries to correspond to misconceived ideas. For example, in some cases it is difficult to distinguish between Layard's writing of Walls and Bulls, two words of similar appearance but very different meaning and connotation, as in LN 2C, f. 7v, the opening word of the entry for Chamber J. Layard did not write up the field notes on a daily or regular basis, but when a group of rooms had been excavated or at a convenient time, and after drawings had been made of the less damaged slabs. The entries in LN 2C were probably made in two or three sessions, and all of LN 2E in one session just before Layard left Mosul at the end of April 1851. In his diary for 27 June 1850 Layard records, "Writing up journal describing excav"' at Kouyunjik", and for 28 and 30 June, "Writing up journal" (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 5r), probably referring to LN 2C. A day-by-day report of the excavations is to be found in Layard's diaries, especially for the periods 30 September 1849-18 March 1850, 10 May-l I July 1850, and 31 August-16 October 1850; but for the final seven or so weeks at Mosul, 8 March-28 April 1851, the diary entries are very brief. The field notes contain only the basic details of the chambers excavated, with brief descriptions of the undrawn slabs and entrance figures, and only in two instances are there measurements. The LN 2E entry for the ascending passage W includes, "Entce. to left lined by low alabaster slab about 31/2 feet", and for Chamber TT, "Entce. probably to N - 16 feet from S.E corner of SS" (SWPS, p. 14).

Sketch plans In Add.MS. 39.089 there are two sets of sketch plans: A, ff. 59v-58r and 57r and C, f. 22v and

r, and in the diary entry for 12 April 1851 a plan of the Treasure Chamber at Nimrud, on E, f. 27v. The sketch plans in notebooks A and C were drawn with the notebook reversed, and thus the references to the folio numbers are also reversed.

Layard drew the sketch plans in pencil, very roughly and with little regard to scale, but most importantly with the widths of the slabs and of some doorways in feet, inches and fractions of inches, and in many cases with sums of the total widths on a particular wall or on a section of a




wall or fa9ade. These measurements were summarily written and are sometimes difficult to decipher. For example, on A, f. 57r Layard first misread his own figures, crossed the incorrect numbers through, and made a second addition. The second set of sketch plans, on C, f. 22v and r, were drawn with even less care and attention to scale than those in notebook A. The sketch plans in notebooks A and C are on seven pages, with from one to three plans per page. On each of A, ff. 59r and 58v and C, f. 22v there is one plan; on A, ff. 59v and 57r two clearly distinct plans, and on C, f. 22r probably also two, but almost "running into" each other and less easy to distinguish; and on A, f. 58r three separate plans or sections of walls, one drawn in two parts. On C, f. 22v Layard also noted details of the reliefs and of the stonework. On none of the sketch plans in notebooks A and C is there any mark of reference, such as the room letters or a caption.

A, f. 59v (a) probably Nimrud, Small Temple C, of Ishtar (b) Chamber X

59r Sloping Passage T, south wall 58v Chamber W, "Archive Chamber" 58r (a) Chambers V and Y, parts thereof

(b) Chamber Y, east wall (c) Court U, west faqade, drawn in two sections

57v marks on packing cases 57r (left) as yet unidentified

(right) Gallery 0, west end of north wall C, f. 22v Sloping Passage T, west end

22r (right) Chambers Z, AA/CC and MM, parts thereof (left) possibly Sloping Passage T, east side of continuation to the north

E, f. 27v Nimrud, Northwest Palace, Rooms AB and SA

A, f 59v (a) (SWPS, Pl. 17d)3 - probably Nimrud, Small Temple C, Temple of Ishtar. In Senna- cherib's palace the only entrance to correspond at all closely to this drawing is entrance k from Court I into Chamber J, but with disparate measurements. The sketch plan's 12 ft. 6 in. for the length of the colossi and 7 ft. 10 in. for the width of the doorway are comparable to the 12 ft. and 8 ft. for entrance k, as drawn on Layard's MS Plan, but the width of the buttress at 9 ft. 8 in. on the sketch plan is not at all close to the approximate 17 ft. of those flanking entrance k. However, in his description of Temple C at Nimrud Layard gives the width of the "gateway" as about 8 ft. and the length of the lion colossi as about 13 ft. (Layard, 1853a, p. 359), and on the plan the buttresses are of similar measurements to those in the sketch plan (Layard, 1853a, Plan 2 facing p. 123). The outer facade of Temple C was faced with glazed bricks, shown as baked bricks (but without the enamelled decoration) on Cooper's drawing of the entrance (Layard, 1853a, p. 360). On the sketch plan the buttress has double lines, as with the colossi lining the doorway, giving the impression of stone slabs, whereas this doubtless represents the baked brick dado.

A, f S9v (b) (SWPS, Pl. 17d) Chamber X. On the MS Plan the north and the greater part of the west wall, which are not shown here, are drawn with plain double lines, the slabs not delineated.

A, f 59r (SWPS, Pl. 17b) Sloping Passage T, south wall and slab 13 of the north wall. All slabs are measured, except Nos. 13 and 29 on the north and south walls of the midway buttress, both of which Layard had removed and shipped to London (SWPS, Nos. 568b and 576a, pp. 124-5 and Pls. 439 and 443). As described below, the continuation to the west of Sloping Passage T is on sketch plan C, f. 22v, and to the north possibly on C, f. 22r (left). This passage was entered by a doorway at the far end of Gallery 0, in its north wall, descending at a gradient of approximately 10? parallel to Gallery 0, and then with a right-angled turn to the north, as drawn on sketch plan C, f. 22v, down to a postern or side-entrance to the palace, probably on the main level of the citadel below (SWPS, pp. 32-4). Layard continued tunnelling here for "a considerable distance" (LN 3; Russell, 1995, p. 80); but "I lost all further traces of it, as the workmen were

3 In SWPS, p. 19 and P1. 17, A, f. 59v is wrongly identified as f. 60. In SWPS it was originally intended that the short descriptions of the sketch plans would appear as subtitles

on the plates, but, somewhat incongruously and inconveni- ently, they are in fact on p. 19. Also sketch plans C, f. 22v and r were inadvertently omitted.



180 GEOFFREY TURNER

unable, at that time, to carry on the tunnel beneath an accumulated mass of earth and rubbish about forty feet thick", or approximately 12 m (Layard, 1853a, p. 340). The reliefs on the south or left side of Sloping Passage T were carved with a string of fourteen colts or young stallions, thoroughbreds from the royal stables, being led down the passage, each with a groom and with a head groom at intervals. On the facing north wall, a procession of servants moved in the opposite direction up the passage and thence into Gallery 0 and the main body of the palace, carrying provisions for a banquet. The slabs at the east or upper end of Sloping Passage T were totally destroyed. Cooper made drawings of eight slabs on the south wall and of sixteen on the north, but drew them as on a horizontal or straight level, and not at an angle (SWPS, P1. 432). Seven slabs from the south wall were shipped to London, but only three from the north wall (SWPS, pp. 124-5).

In his diary Layard recorded that he first worked on the site of Sloping Passage T on 11 March 1850, "Ali opens Karkhaneh4 on the West side of the Mound" (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 50v). He had already tunnelled along a short length of Gallery 0 soon after returning to Kuyunjik in autumn 1849: 22 October, "bas reliefs representing the removal of an obelisk in the rough uncovered" (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 25r). These were slabs 2-4 at the eastern end of this long and wide gallery, but some 40 m from the entrance to Sloping Passage T, which lay towards the western end of Gallery 0. Work evidently now stopped here for some time, as Layard does not refer to Gallery O again until some five months later, on 10 March 1850, "Remains of a series of bas reliefs in the Karkhaneh near the West edge of the Tell, representing the removal of bulls & obelisks . . ." (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 50r and v), that is the broken reliefs which had fallen from the south wall (Layard, 1853a, p. 104 and SWPS, p. 120, Nos. 532-534 and Pls. 415-17). On the following day he had Ali start on the new site of the Sloping Passage T, as quoted above, and a week later Layard left for his seven week excursion to the Khabour. On his return, he rode over to Kuyunjik on 11 May 1850 and found "many interesting discoveries - the long descending passage (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 87v); and two days later he wrote to his mother, "Some of the bas reliefs in Kouyunjik are quite new in subject and really most interesting" (Add.MS 58.150, f. 135r). These reliefs of a different type are doubtless those of Sloping Passage T, which do not illustrate Sennacherib's military or building accomplishments, but his prized steeds and the preparations for a feast. Layard's diary for 17 May has, "figures leading horses in inclined passage" (Add.MS. 39.089 F, f. 41r).

The reason for Layard's decision to dig on this particular spot, some 40 m to the west of his main excavations, is to be seen on Glascott's survey plan of Kuyunjik (SWPS, P1. 2). On this are marked various areas of excavation, for the most part made between June 1847 when Layard returned to England at the close of his first expedition and before 27 April 1849 when Glascott completed his plan. On the southwest side of the mound there are three such areas. The largest, to the east, is evidently made up of various trenches and tunnels, and probably represents Col. W. F. Williams' western & detached galleries. To the west of this is an irregular L-shaped plot, and to the north a long straight cutting, some 60 ft. or just under 20 m in length, extending to the very edge of the mound. The siting of the last corresponds to the line of Sloping Passage T (Turner, 2001, p. 126 and Figs. 1 and 7). When Layard returned to Kuyunjik in late September 1849, one of the first areas of Sennacherib's palace that he investigated was on the southwest side, the western & detached galleries, where his friend H. J. Ross had supervised the excavation of Toma Shishman in Layard's absence between January and May 1848, and which were reopened by Williams in March and April the following year, six months before Layard's return (Turner, 2001, pp.1 6-17 and 123-4). Layard spent little time examining these old excavations, Chamber ZZ/Rooms LI-LIII, soon realising from the terrible damage wrought by fire to both the stone slabs and the libn brickwork that this site did not merit further time or expense, added to which the instable state of Ross' trenches and especially of his tunnels made these investigations dangerous.

4Layard used Karkhaneh in two ways: firstly, and more often, of a gang of workmen, and secondly, but more correctly, of the site or place of work, i.e. trench or tunnel,

as here. J. Van Ess, The Spoken Arabic of Iraq (2nd and revised edition, 1961), p. 141, has the more modem and prosaic "factory".




In January 1850 Layard examined another set of the excavations marked on Glascott's survey plan, two long parallel trenches to the south of the Throneroom Suite, finding here Chamber XX, which he subsequently planned on the east side of Court U (Turner, 2001, p. 128 and Layard, 1853a, p. 438 n). His diary for 26 January 1850 has, "In a new Karkhaneh near an old trench [my italics] on the S. of recent excavations several remains of bas-reliefs discovered, one with horses crossing river in a boat" (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 37v, and Layard, 1853a, pp. 230-3), that is SWPS, No. 307a, P1. 224, as drawn by Cooper. Work in Chamber XX continued for some two months, and is last mentioned in Layard's diary on 10 March 1850, a long entry with details of discoveries in several rooms of Sennacherib's palace (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 50r and v). Layard had just returned from two weeks in Nimrud and in another nine days was leaving for the Khabour, and was now intent on organising everything in readiness for his departure, both on Kuyunjik, at the Shamash Gate and elsewhere in Nineveh. This included starting work on the site of Sloping Passage T, the third and most fruitful of the old excavations marked on Glascott's plan to be investigated by Layard.

On the MS plan, limited by the size of the two sheets of paper on which it was drawn, Layard had to plot Sloping Passage T in two sections. The east or upper half, down to and including the midway buttress, is in its correct position, opening off and parallel to Gallery 0, but the lower or west section is drawn as a detached unit, on the right side of the plan (see pp. 209-10). Thus when he transferred the details of sketch plan A, f. 59r to the MS Plan, Layard drew the first section of the south wall, from entrance b at the east and down to the midway buttress, as leading off and parallel to Gallery 0, with the slabs delineated and measured as on the sketch plan; later, when back in London, he numbered the slabs 22-7, that on the buttress 29, and those on the two projecting returns of the buttress 28 and 30. On sketch plan A, f. 59r, the lower or west half of the descending passage has seven slabs, the widths totalling 34 ft. 31/4 in. as on Layard's addition of these measurements in the upper left corner of the page, but on the MS plan he delineated eight slabs, which he later numbered 30-7. When Layard added the lower half of Sloping Passage T as a detached unit on the MS Plan, he would have used both sketch plan A, f. 59r and also Cooper's drawings of the reliefs on this section of the wall (SWPS, Nos. 575-583, P1. 432). Cooper drew a total of eight slabs, in two groups on one sheet of paper, but the first slab, carved with a "staff-bearer, or chamberlain" (Layard 1853a, p. 340) or head groom, was against the short end wall of the midway buttress, and thus at right-angles to and not on the actual south wall. This slab, 1 ft. 101/2 in. or 57.15 cm wide according to the sketch plan, is in fact No. 30 of the eastern or upper half of Sloping Passage T on the MS Plan, and on the detached plan of the western or lower section, No. 30 is also used, but here for the first slab on the south wall proper, west of and abutting the buttress. This second slab, an inch narrower at 1 ft. 91/2 in. or 54.61 cm wide, is carved with a horse's hind parts and is now in the British Museum (SWPS, No. 577b (slab 28), p. 125, Pls. 442-3). Layard was misled by Cooper's drawing, and presumed that all eight slabs made up one straight frieze on the south wall, and correspondingly delineated them incorrectly on the MS Plan, and later misnumbered them as 30-37.

Layard's confusion on the number and numbering of the slabs on the lower part of the south wall of Sloping Passage T continued when he had returned to London and was annotating the drawing of this series of reliefs. On Or. Dr. IV, 71 the annotation reads, Nos. 29 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Ch. LI Kouyunjik, but only No. 29 is in Layard's hand, the rest having been rubbed out and rewritten at least once, the final version definitely not by Layard. There is a short gap after 29, and Ch. LI, which in fact is written very much as II, demonstrates that in its final form this annotation was made when the notation of the rooms in Sennacherib's palace had been changed from letters to Roman numerals, whereas Layard's annotations on all the other original drawings were made according to the first system (see p. 209). Furthermore, ten slabs are enumer- ated on the annotation, but Cooper drew only eight. The Description of the Plates, on p. 2 in Layard, 1853b, has "They are numbered 29 to 38, in No. LI., plan I.", presumably written by Layard. As already pointed out by Gadd 65 years ago, the first figure on Cooper's drawing, slab 30, a head groom or officer, is on the western end wall or return of the midway buttress, and that in the British Museum, slab 28, from the east (Gadd, pp.168-9). Also on the British Museum slab there is a revetment on the upper edge, but not on that drawn by Cooper, in contrast to



182 GEOFFREY TURNER

almost all the other slabs drawn from Sloping Passage T, which do have an overhanging revetment (SWPS, Pis. 432 and 442-3). On SWPS, P1. 432, the slab numbers should read: 575 (s 30) to 583 (s 37) consecutively, as correctly drawn by Ann Searight on the key plan of Sloping Passage T on this plate, and as here shown on Fig. 4. These slab numbers are also to be altered accordingly in SWPS, pp. 124-5 and Pis. 442-7.

Layard also removed from the south wall of Sloping Passage T two other slabs not drawn by Cooper, SWPS, No. 584, p. 125, P1. 448. By matching the widths of these slabs and those marked on sketch plan A f. 59r, they are probably to be identified as slabs 26 and 27. Also in LN 3 and Nineveh and Babylon, Layard writes that there were fourteen horses on this wall (Russell, 1995, p. 80; Layard, 1853a, p. 340); again, by matching the total length of slabs 22-27, which were not drawn by Cooper, with slabs 33-37 which were, it can be estimated that there were five horses and their grooms on these slabs, thus making a total of fourteen animals on slabs 22-40.

A, f 58v (SWPS, Pl. 17c)5 - Chamber W, 'Archive Chamber". Along the east wall Layard noted "destroyed", with only one slab delineated; it is similarly drawn on the MS Plan, on which the main length of this wall is indicated with plain double lines, without slab divisions. A watercolour by S. C. Malan shows this room from the east, with damaged reliefs on the west and north walls, the tunnelled doorway into Chamber X in the background, behind a heap of broken slabs and rubble (SWPS, P1. 368).

A, f 58r (a) (SWPS, Pl. 17a) - Chambers V and Y The western end of V with slabs 4-15 is delineated, and the south wall of Y.

A, f 58r (b) (SWPS, PL 17a) - Chamber Y. The east wall, with slabs delineated as on the MS Plan, but with one shown as a gap or doorway into Chamber X, but on the MS Plan drawn as an unbroken wall. This and the preceding sketch plan are marked with alignment crosses, showing that they were drawn at the same time.

A, f 58r (c) (SWPS, Pl. 17a) - Court U, west faVade. Drawn in two sections with, above, the central entrance h with colossi, "Large Bulls", and slabs 12-16 delineated. Below, slabs 17-19, with the length of wall between slabs 16 and 17 measured as 12 ft. 1 in., and the distance between the southwest corner of the courtyard and the north edge of the buttress at the corner formed by slab 18 as 21 ft. 4 in. The width of the first slab on the south wall, which Layard did not number, is 5 ft. 1 in., but on the MS Plan it is drawn slightly wider.

A, f 57r (left) (SWPS, Pl. 18a) - as yet unidentified. The "reading" of the photograph of this page, especially the left edge, is much hampered by ink smudges which have seeped through the paper from the preceding side, f. 57v. Even after examining the original manuscript on several occasions, it has not yet been possible to make a definite identification of the left hand sketch plan. Down the left side of the page, for approximately two thirds of its length, is drawn a wall in a series of interrupted sections and with measurements, with at the bottom a right-angled turn to the left. To the right and parallel is a fainter and more cursory line, obviously to mark this sketch plan as distinct from the smaller one to the right. At the upper end of the wall are delineated three slabs, their widths given as 5 ft. 6 in., 7 ft. 81/2 in. and 3 ft. 1/2 in., a total of 16 ft. 3 in. or 4.95 m. Below is a gap with four question marks and the length 9 ft. 5 in. or 2.87 m, and then an incomplete slab partly cut by a short line projecting to the left, and to the right the measurement "about 12 [ft.]" or 3.66 m., followed by a dot or point level with the stroke projecting from the incomplete slab. Below, after a considerable gap, the wall continues, but now drawn with a single line and with no slabs delineated, and the length "abt 10 [ft.]" or 3.05 m, and finally the turn to the left. The measurements on this sketch plan come to a total of 47 ft. 8 in. or 14.53 m.

Sketch plan A, f. 57r (left) is thus of an L-shaped length of wall, which when excavated had evidently suffered much damage, including the gap of 9 ft. 5 in. or 2.87 m marked by Layard with

'SWPS, p. 19 and PI. 17, wrongly identified as f. 59v.



SENNACHERIB 3S PALACE AT NINEVEH 183

a series of question marks. The direction in which the measurements are written against the wall indicates that its outer face was to the right, and therefore that the turn to the left at the lower end of the sketch was not the corner of a room, but the reveal or one side of an entrance. It is possible that Layard had already started to draw this plan on a previous page (A, f. 58r) on which there is an L-shaped wall in the upper right corner, drawn with double lines to indicate slabs, but this has been crossed through or cancelled with wavy lines (SWPS, P1. 17a). On first sight this cancelled wall appears to belong to sketch plan A, f. 58r (a), which is of the west end of Chamber V and part of Chamber Y (p. 182); however, the turn to the left on this L-shaped wall does not correspond to entrance d between Chambers V and MM, and thus the cancelled plan cannot be the continuation of the south wall of Chamber V towards the east. It is possible, therefore, that Layard first started to draw this sketch plan of an L-shaped wall on A, f. 58r, but then decided to redraw it on a larger scale on A, f. 57r, which was in fact the next available page of the notebook, the intervening A, f. 57v having already been used for a list of packing cases.

Layard probably drew sketch plan A, f. 57r (left) in early July 1850, yet it remains impossible to match it with certainty to any part of the palace that had been recently excavated at that time. The outlines can be compared with the section of the north wall of Court U between entrances b and c towards the courtyard's northwest corner, which may have been investigated at about this time; however, the details on the sketch plan do not correspond well with this fragmentary wall as drawn on the MS Plan, and the total length of 47 ft. 8 in. or 14.53 m is too great. Parts of the sketch plan can also be compared with slabs 15-21 on the north wall of Sloping Passage T. The measurements marked on the sketch plan, minus the final "abt 10 [ft.]", total 37 ft. 8 in. or 11.48 m, which corresponds to the length of slabs 15-21 on the MS Plan, and the widths of the three delineated slabs, 16 ft. 3 in. or 4.95 m, correspond to the width of slabs 19-21. However the "about 12 [ft.]", the partly-drawn slab and the question marks on sketch plan A, f. 57r (left) are not at all compatible with Cooper's drawing of slabs 15-17 of the passage (SWPS, Pls. 440-1), especially as the partly-drawn slab should correspond to slab 17. The second sketch plan on A, f. 57r is probably of the west end of the north wall of Gallery 0, and it is possible that the plan on the left side of this page may be of a wall in the nearby western & detached galleries. These were first excavated by Ross in 1848 and partly reinvestigated by Layard soon after his return to Kuyunjik in autumn 1849, but in June or July 1850 he probably excavated again in this area, as he records that he reached Ross' discoveries by cutting a tunnel through the south wall of Gallery O towards its west end (Layard, 1853a, p. 103). Unfortunately sketch plan A, f. 57r (left) corresponds neither to Chamber ZZ on the MS Plan, nor to Rooms LI-LIII on that in Nineveh and Babylon.

A, f 57r (SWPS, Pl. 18a) - Gallery 0, west end of north wall. The north wall is drawn from the doorway into Sloping Passage T up to the northwest corner of the Gallery, with five slabs marked and measured, totalling 36 ft. 101/2 in. Of the west short wall, the first section is drawn, 15 ft. 2 in. long, but the slabs are not delineated, with the north reveal of an entrance to the west. By the doorway into T Layard noted "descend", indicating the Sloping Passage. These lengths of walls are reproduced on the MS Plan with the same measurements, but without the five slabs on the north wall delineated. In the lower right corner Layard made an addition of the widths of the five slabs, first listing them 6, 8.7, 5.8, 5.01/2, 7-, but then, realising that he had misread his own figures, he rewrote them correctly 6, 8., 7.5, 8.51/2, 7, total 36.101/2.

C, f 22v (Fig. 3a) - Sloping Passage T, west end. This sketch plan is an extension of A, f. 59r, with the extreme western end of Sloping Passage T and its continuation to the north, including slabs 38-46. On A, f. 59r slabs 38 and 39 are delineated as two separate orthostats, I ft. 71/2 in. and 4 ft. 4 in. wide, but on C, f. 22v no division is made, with an overall width given of 6 ft. 1/2 in., one inch wider. On A, f. 59r the width of slab 40 on the end buttress is not given, but on C, f. 22v it is 8 ft. 4 in. or 2.54 m, and drawn as one long slab, as reproduced on the MS Plan. On the west wall, where the descending passage now continued towards the north, slabs 41-46 are delineated, with 45 and 46 on a second buttress, a counterpart probably to be restored on the opposite east wall. Along the walls on C, f. 22v, Layard noted the figures represented on the reliefs: with "led



184 GEOFFREY TURNER

horse", that is horse and groom, on the two adjacent slabs 38 and 39, on the wide slab 40, and across the two slabs 45 and 46; and "footman - two led horses" across slabs 41-44, that is a head groom or officer and two horses each with a groom, similar to slabs 30-33 on the south wall. Between the buttress with slab 40 and the southwest corner of the passage, Layard noted the length of this stretch of wall, 10 ft. 8 in., and also "masonry", which he described in LN 3 as "the panelling of slabs is replaced by a solid wall of undressed stone" (Russell, 1995, p. 80). The short end walls or returns of the buttress to the north, which was lined with slabs 45 and 46, are measured 1 ft. 3 in. and 1 ft. 53/4 in., but there is no note as to whether the slabs were carved or plain.

C, f 22r (right) (Fig. 3b) - Chamber Z, AA/CC and MM, entrances j, k, and m. The central feature of this sketch plan is the recessed side entrance k between Chambers Z and MM, with to the left the wide opening j between Z and AA, and to the right the east jamb of entrance m between MM and CC. When excavated these walls were badly destroyed, and although more slabs are shown on the MS Plan, only three are delineated here, two on entrance k and one on m. In LN2E Layard noted, "E ent[ran]ce [i.e. k] common stone - S Ent[ran]ce [i.e. m] Fish God - opposite side destroyed" (SWPS, p. 14, Chamber PP but in fact MM). The same measurements, both of the wall lengths and of the widths of entrances k and j, were then reproduced on the MS Plan. A little below entrance k Layard noted "open into entrance", referring to entrance I between Chambers Z and MM.

C, f 22r (left) (Fig. 3b) possibly Sloping Passage T, east side of continuation to the north. Initially this sketch plan would appear to be connected to that on the right, C, f. 22r (right), the horizontal line on top being the north reveal of side-entrance i between Chamber Z and Court U. However the measurement above this line, "abt 22 [ft.]", does not correspond to the width or depth of this doorway, and the irregular stepped outline of the vertical line below and the various lengths marked on it in no way match the west wall of Chamber Z between entrances i and h. In addition there is a roughly drawn inverted L-shaped line across this sketch, thus separating it from the plan to the right.

The inverted irregular L-shaped outline on sketch plan C, f. 22r (left), which is smaller and more cursory than that to the right, is drawn in single lines with no indication of slabs, and is marked with measurements and somewhat cryptic notes. The upper arm is a short horizontal line, with "abt 22 [ft.]" above, and with an irregular stepped line at right-angles below and down the length of the page. The first interval is marked by a bold projecting stroke with a short return to the left, and with below two wider steps to the right. This line or wall is marked with a degression of lengths: ab' 21, abt 16 [beside and partly over: abt-?- which has been crossed through], abt 11, 10 -?-, and a final note which it is difficult to decipher. The reading of "ab"' as "about" is confirmed by comparison with sketch plan A, f. 57r (left). Just above the short bold projecting stroke, almost halfway down this stepped outline or wall, is a longer note or legend which has caused considerable problems, both in the reading and, in consequence, in the identification of this sketch plan. The main word appears to be "Bull" or "Bulls", but all attempts to locate a bull colossus which would fit in with such a plan have proved fruitless and time consuming. Eventually, after yet again examining the original plan in notebook C, I realized that the squiggle following "Bull" or "Bulls" may in fact be Layard's double-S, and that this legend is probably to be read "gr[eat] Buttress", with the final note below the bottom short line as the abbreviation "Bss." for Buttress.

In manner of drawing, uncertain details and the measurements of "abt xx [ft.]", sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) is very similar to A, f. 57r (left), and the two may be connected. The "abt 22 [ft.]" on the upper arm on C, f. 22r (left) is possibly to be equated with the two measurements on the lower half of A, f. 57r (left), "abt 10" and "about 12", or about 22 in total. In this case, C, f. 22r (left) would "fit onto" the bottom of A, f. 57r (left), with the two almost equal lengths marked on the two sketch plans at right angles to each other, but with each wall facing outwards and not forming the corner of a room or courtyard. If these two sketch plans are of a part of Sennacherib's palace, for some reason Layard transferred these details neither to the MS Plan, nor to that in




Nineveh and Babylon. However, the two plans may be of a totally different building, either elsewhere at Nineveh or at Nimrud.

Alternatively sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) may represent the outlines of the east side of the continuation of Sloping Passage T as it descended to the north, an identification which would be especially plausible if the reading of Layard's cryptic note as "gr[eat] Buttress" is correct. In this case it is to be considered in conjunction with sketch plan C, f. 22v on the preceding page of the notebook, as shown in the reconstructed drawing on Fig. 5, with above and to the right the details of C, f. 22v (Fig. 3a), and to the left the outlines of C, f. 22r (left) (Fig. 3b). Thus reading sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) from the top, the horizontal line or wall of about 22 ft. or 6.70 m would correspond to slabs 1-6 on the north wall of Sloping Passage T up to the projecting slab 7, and drawn approximately this length on the MS Plan. The first section of the vertical line on C, f. 22r (left) would be the east wall of the continuation of the passage as it descended down to the north, the upper part parallel to slabs 45 and 46 on the buttress on C, f. 22v, measuring about 21 ft. or 6.40 m. Then the short projecting stroke drawn with heavier pressure on the pencil and the note "gr[eat] Buttress" possibly marks a strengthening buttress or revetment for about 16 ft. or 4.90 m. If this legend is read correctly as buttress, then Layard here used this term in its basic sense of a strengthening support built against a wall, in the case of Sloping Passage T probably a revetment either of masonry, as on the south end wall between slabs 40 and 41 on sketch plan C, f. 22v, or less probably of baked brick. Below, the passage turned to the west for about 11 ft. or 3.35 m, and then north again for the shorter length of presumably 10 ft. or 3.05 m, and finally turned a second time to the west, again with a strengthening buttress or revetment, marked "B[uttre]ss". Thus as Sloping Passage T descended to a postern gate in the outer wall of the palace, it made more right-angled turns with shorter lengths between each turn, not unlike a modern spiral staircase, the increasing depth of and the imposing weight on the passageway necessitating stronger walls, most probably of solid masonry. On sketch plan C, f. 22r (left), unlike C, f. 22v, Layard does not mark any relief carving; after the short bold projecting stroke and the note "Great Buttress", it is well possible that the walls were of either plain baked brick or undressed masonry, as between slabs 40 and 41 on the south end wall. In LN 3 Layard records, "At Nos. 1 and 48 the wall ceases the continuation has not been found although excavations have been carried on to a considerable distance" (Russell, 1995, p. 80), and in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 340, "At its western end the gallery turned abruptly to the north, its walls being there built of solid stone- masonry. I lost all further trace of it, as the workmen were unable, at that time, to carry on the tunnel beneath an accumulated mass of earth and rubbish about forty feet thick [c. 12 m]".

If sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) is of this extension to Sloping Passage T, Layard did not transfer the outlines to the MS Plan, or at least not onto the west or lower section of Sloping Passage T which was drawn as a detached unit on this plan. However at the western end of the upper or east section of this passage on the MS Plan, a wall is drawn in dotted lines, running north by south from a right-angled corner at approximately the western edge of slab 11. This double dotted line continues for about 29 ft. (c. 8.84 m) and then turns to the west for about 12 ft. (c. 3.65m), and finally runs as a single dotted line almost parallel with the edge of the sheet of paper up to and meeting the fragmentary west wall of Chamber KKK, in the northwest corner of the palace. The first length of the double dotted line is crossed by two vertical strokes, at approximately 8 ft. and 12 ft. (c. 2.43 m and 3.65 m) from its south corner with Sloping Passage T (see also p. 210). Although the measurements by no means tally, these dotted lines may possibly have been added by Layard to the MS Plan based on sketch plan C, f. 22r (left), the first length of the double dotted lines representing the "abt 21" and "abt 16" lines of the sketch plan, with the two vertical strokes marking the buttress, and the 12 ft east-west double dotted wall of the MS Plan the "abt 11" line of the sketch plan. If so, Layard may possibly have incorrectly transferred these outlines just before he hurriedly and in feverous health left for Baghdad on 16 October 1850 (p. 187); against this proposal is the certainty that the single dotted line continuing up to Chamber KKK could only have been added to the MS Plan in March or April 1851 at the earliest, as this wing of the palace had not been excavated before, or even when Layard was back in London and finishing off the MS Plan. However at whatever date these dotted lines were added to the MS Plan between the east or upper section of Sloping Passage T and Chamber KKK to the northwest,



186 GEOFFREY TURNER

this remains an incorrect and impossible reconstruction, as the continuation of Sloping Passage T down to the main level of the citadel mound would have been considerably below the floor level of Chambers DDD-KKK.

E, f 27v (Fig. 2b) -Nimrud, Northwest Palace, Rooms AB and SA.6 This plan is included in Layard's diary entry for 12 April 1851, his last visit to Nimrud before finally leaving Mosul for England on 28 April. It is orientated with the four points of the compass set at 900 to the right, that is with north due right, and shows the Treasure Chamber (which is captioned as such), that is Room AB, with the well set in a niche in the east wall close to the northwest corner, and parts of adjoining rooms to the south, with several lengths of wall marked.

The Treasure Chamber had in fact been excavated over a year earlier, Layard first referring to it in his diary on 31 December 1849, and then in considerable detail until 23 February 1850 (Add.MS 39.096, ff. 34v-45r). Room SA to the south is mentioned on 7 March 1850 (Add.MS 39.096, f. 50r), and with more details added here, 12 April 1851. On this, his last visit to Nimrud, Layard now brought his excavation notes up to date.

Raison d'etre and date of the sketch plans The sketch plans of Sennacherib's palace in effect replace the blank entries for the four chambers

T, U, W and X in Layard's field notes LN 2C, and also the very brief entries for V and Y. Layard would have used these sketch plans, together with the drawings made by both Cooper and himself of the reliefs in Chambers T, U and V, when plotting these chambers on the MS Plan. Later in London he used a combination of these sources and other notes, such as his diary entries, and also in some cases details he remembered without the help of notes as, for example, the reliefs in Chamber Y. With these he compiled LN 3, the fair copy of his field notes, and probably at the same time added the slab numbers both to the MS Plan and to the Original Drawings. For the LN 3 entry of Chamber W he also had a watercolour by S. C. Malan of this room, which clearly shows the reliefs on the fragmentary slabs on the east and north walls, unfortunately not drawn by Cooper (Russell, 1995, p. 80, and SWPS, P1. 368).

The sketch plans from Sennacherib's palace are of three groups of rooms: U-Y; T and 0; and thirdly Z, AA/CC and MM. Those in notebook A are preceded on ff. 60v-r and on the upper part of f. 59v by a list of English addresses, in the main of a group of visitors to Mosul, including the amateur artist S. C. Malan who was there between 10 and 20 June 1850 and F. Walpole who first stayed with the vice-consul Christian Rassam and then moved over to camp on Kuyunjik with Layard on 14 June. The upper sketch plan on A, f. 59v of the Ishtar Temple at Nimrud is drawn partly across the last two addresses, of Walpole and of Dr John Lindley, a botanist of the Horticultural Society.7 In his diary Layard records that when at Nimrud between 20 and 23 May and between 25 May and 5 June 1850, he was mostly copying inscriptions in the Ninurta and Ishtar temples, and that he returned again briefly on 25-6 June together with Walpole.8 It was probably on one of these visits to Nimrud that he made sketch plan A, f. 59v (a). Notebook A, f. 57v, which follows the first four pages of sketch plans and precedes the final one (A, f. 57r), has "Marks on boxes sent home", a list of packing cases to be sent to London. This short list, which includes slabs from Courts I and U of Sennacherib's palace and also the "hunting scene" in dark grey alabaster from Khorsabad,9 was part of a larger consignment to be loaded onto a raft on 8 July and dispatched down the Tigris the following day (Add.MS. 39.089 A, ff. 4r-5v).

6Layard, 1853a, pp. 176-200, Cooper's sketch on p. 176, and Plan No. 3 facing p. 653; M. E. L. Mallowan, Iraq 16 (1954), pp. 94-110, and Nimrud and its Remains, 1966, 1, pp. 151-63; S. M. Paley and P. Sobelewski, The Recon- struction of the Relief Representations and their Positions in the Northwest-Palace at Kalhu (Nimrud) II, Mainz 1987, Plans 1 and 2.

7Layard, 1853a, pp. 37 and 665-7. Lindley, who was Professor of Botany at London University, probably did not actually go to Mosul, his address being given to Layard by one of the English visitors, possibly the Hon. F. Walpole, whose address is immediately above. Layard would have

sent his botanical specimens to Lindley in London. There are no letters from Lindley in the Layard Papers.

8 Add.MS. 39.089 A, ff. 2r-3v. Layard returned to Mosul for the one day, 24 May, to celebrate the Queen's (Victoria's) birthday with the Rolands and other English friends there.

9Court I - SWPS, Nos. 11 3a and 184; Court U - slabs 10-12 and the fragmentary slabs 17-19, SWPS, Nos. 277b, 282b-283b, and 284b; and Khorsabad - ANE 118829 (1851-9-2, 34), Layard, 1853a, p. 130. This list will be discussed in greater detail in my article on Layard's second campaign.




Sketch plans A, if. 59v-58r, therefore, were made between mid-June and the beginning of July 1850, and those on A, f. 57r shortly afterwards, just before Layard left for the Kurdish highlands on 11 July. In his diary for 21 June Layard has, "In trench drawing & measuring" (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 4r), the "drawing" being of the reliefs and the "measuring" probably referring to one or more of the sketch plans.

The sketch plans in notebook C, f. 22v and r were probably made after Layard had returned to Mosul from the north at the end of August 1850. The "distressed" condition of this notebook shows that Layard used it extensively, first on the excavations at Kuyunjik, for his field notes LN2C, and later on his journey down the Tigris and during his first three weeks in Baghdad, with his diary 17 October-13 November 1850 and barometric readings 18-28 October 1850. On the two folios 24 and 23 preceding the sketch plans, Layard listed some 170 or so packing cases and their marks, which he had loaded on two rafts and sent down the Tigris, the first leaving on 1 October and the second on 18 October 1850, Layard and Rassam accompanying the latter. Layard therefore drew the sketch plans on C, f. 22v and r sometime between 2 September, when he started work again on Kuyunjik following his return, and 16 October, the first day of Bairam, when he rode "to Mound to give final directions" (Add.MS 39.089 A, ff. 49r and 52v). He would have started to list the packing cases before he made the sketch plans, but the list was certainly made over a length of time, the 1 October consignment before that of 18 October. The fourth page of the list, C, f. 23r, has only "* cv" in the upper left corner and the rest of the page left blank, showing that the latter part of the list and the sketch plans were probably made simultaneously. Otherwise Layard would have made the first plan also on this page, as in the case of notebook A, f. 59v (a), across the address of Dr Lindley. Layard's diary from the beginning of September until 16 October 1850 shows that he was fully occupied at Kuyunjik, with only one short excursion to Nimrud, 7-10 September, and there is no indication as to when he made these hurried sketch plans (Add.MS 39.089 A, ff. 48v-52v).

Chamber Y the reliefs. On sketch plan A, f. 58r (a) Layard drew the southwest section of Chamber V, with slabs 4-15 delineated, entrance i into Chamber Y, and the south wall and one slab on the west wall of Chamber Y, and on sketch plan A, f. 58r (b) the east wall of the inner Chamber Y. In LN 2C there are only short entries for V and Y, with for the first Layard's rough copy of an epigraph and descriptions of the figures at entrances d and g or i'0 (SWPS, p. 14). In LN 3 he added that most slabs had been drawn and that the epigraph was on fragnentary slab 17 or 18, but otherwise this is only a fuller and more literary version of LN 2C (Russell, 1995, p. 80). For Chamber Y, LN 2C has, "West side return archers - row of chariots, apparently [added above the line] horsemen - N side gone - also West" (SWPS, p. 14), but the entry in LN 3 is much longer, with several additional features not found elsewhere in Layard's notes. "On the west side a large interior of castle with tents and horses - persons occupied as in other similar representations - horses feeding, etc. The castle in a mountainous country wooded with high trees (?) firs. Without the castle archers and slingers. On the south side rows of chariots and horsemen. North and east sides gone." (Russell, 1995, pp. 80-1). Thus on the west wall there was a typical Assyrian fortified camp, and then evidently a second "castle", in fact probably a besieged city, as identified in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 374. On the south wall were chariots and horsemen, and on both the north and east walls the reliefs were lost.

The "West side return" of LN 2C refers to the two wide slabs on sketch plan A, f. 58r (a), one on the south wall and the other on the west wall of Chamber Y, to either side of the southwest comer, which were carved with archers, chariots and apparently horsemen; this corresponds to the south wall of LN 3, with chariots and horsemen. LN 3 has the north and east walls as lost, but LN 2C has the north and west. This disparity was probably brought about by Layard misreading his own indistinct writing of west in LN 2C, which initially could easily be mistaken for east; it is very similar, if not almost identical, to the first word of this entry in LN 2C which

"0In SWPS, p.14, the "Ent[ran]ce to North Chamber Fishgods" is identified as entrance g into the Archive Chamber W, but it could equally be i into Y, both having

Fishgod figures. Those of i were drawn by both Cooper and Malan (SWPS, Pis. 360-1), suggesting that this is the more probable.



188 GEOFFREY TURNER

definitely is west. On sketch plan A, f. 58r (a) only one slab is drawn on the west side of Chamber Y, that against the southwest corner, the rest of the wall not being marked; however, sketch plan A, f. 58r (b) has the complete east wall of Y with the slabs delineated, as also on the MS Plan. As a result of misreading the final west of LN 2C as east, Layard further confused the, orientation of Chamber Y in LN 3 by assigning the fortified camp and the besieged town to the west wall, which was for the greater part lost, and not to the relatively well preserved east wall, the reliefs of which doubtless illustrated these scenes.

The LN 3 description of Chamber Y is important and of significance by reason of Layard's introduction of the fortified camp with its occupants and their horses, also of a castle or besieged town in a hilly and wooded setting, and thirdly of slingers as well as archers in the Assyrian army. No mention of these is made in any of Layard's notebooks, diaries or letters, and no drawings were made of the slabs, nor sketches or watercolours of the excavations; thus Layard was here most probably describing the reliefs in Chamber Y based on his memory of these details. By comparison, for Chamber X to the east, sketch plan A, f. 59v has the slabs of half the room delineated and measured, but LN 3 reads "All the slabs almost completely destroyed" (Russell, 1995, p. 80), for Chamber NNN on the southeast edge of Layard's excavations, both LN 2E and LN 3 have "destroyed" (SWPS, p. 15; Russell, 1995, p. 84). On the other hand in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 347, which Layard probably wrote some months after he compiled LN 3 in the autumn of 1851, of Chamber Y he only mentions the besieged city in a landscape with fir trees and the army with infantry, cavalry and chariots, but not, for some reason, any mountains or a fortified camp, nor does he specify archers and slingers. Yet he does add here that there was no epigraph to identify the enemy town, and that the inhabitants did not wear a distinctive costume, observations not made earlier in LN 3.

Diary entries There are six sets of diary entries, covering all but three weeks of Layard's second expedition.

The first, 28 August 1849-21 February 1850, is in Add.MS. 39.090 C, and the other five in notebooks Add.MS. 39.089. Add.MS. 39.090 C is a small memorandum notebook of the same format as Add.MS. 39.089 A-H, but not from the same set. Layard started this first set of entries on his departure from Therapia, Sir Stratford Canning's summer residence on the Bosphorus, 28 August 1849, up to 21 February 1850. On 22 February he left for Nimrud and then to Shomamok for a two-week excursion, a convenient date to start the second set of entries. There is no diary for the three weeks from 14 November until 4 December 1850, when he was staying at the British Residency in Baghdad, and the account of this period in Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 474-7 is correspondingly very brief. On 5 December 1850 Layard left for Hillah, and on this date the fifth set of diary entries starts. Again when he returned to Baghdad from the south, there is a gap in this new diary of almost three weeks, 6-26 February 1851, with but the simple note "(III with fever during my stay at Baghdad)" (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 22v), the entries resuming on 27 February when Layard left Baghdad to return to Mosul (Layard, 1853a, p. 576). The chronological order of the six sets of diary entries is:

1. Add.MS. 39.090 C, ff. 3-26 28 August 1849-21 February 1850 (including Layard's journey from Constantinople to Mosul)

2. Add.MS. 39.089 F, ff. 7-41 22 February-19 May 1850 (including the seven week excursion to the Khabour)

3. Add.MS. 39.089 A, ff. 2-52 20 May-16 October 1850 (including the summer excursion to Kurdestan and Van)

4. Add.MS. 39.089 C, ff. 19-17 17 October-13 November 1850 (to Baghdad and Layard's first 21/2 weeks in Baghdad) No diary 14 November-4 December 1850

5. Add.MS. 39.089 E, ff. 4-28 5 December 1850-26 April 1851 (including Babylonia and the South, the return to Mosul and Layard's final 7 weeks in the north, but minus 6-26 February when indisposed in Baghdad)

6. Add.MS. 39.089 D, ff. 3-11 28 April-24 June 1851 (return journey from Mosul as far as Cologne)

Twhere are also three sets of barometric readings: 1. Add.MS. 39.089 B, if. 2-61 12 June-16 October 1850




2. Add.MS. 39.089 C, ff. 12-15 18-28 October 1850 3. Add.MS. 39.089 E, ff. 41-36 31 December 1850-7 April 1851.

Of the notebook diary entries for the first eight and a half months of his second expedition, Layard made a fair copy version, Add.MS. 39.096, writing in a fuller narrative style and in a more legible hand. The journal covers the period 28 August 1849-15 May 1850, based on the first set of entries, Add.MS.39.090 C, ff. 3-26, and almost all of the second set, Add.MS.39.089 F, ff. 7-41r. For entries from the first set, Layard in places expanded his original text with additional details, but for the three months covered by the second set, the contents are basically the same. The quarto notebook is in its original half leather binding with marbled boards, but is much worn and the metal clasp is missing. These definite signs of travel and use show that Layard wrote it in the course of his expedition and not after his return to England, unlike LN 3, the fair copy of his field notes. The last entry, for 15 May 1850, ends abruptly, but the notebook is still more than half empty, and so Layard probably discontinued the fair copy at this date because of pressure of work and the resulting lack of time. The journal is written on ff. 1-88, followed by many blank folios; then on f. 89v Layard listed bearings from various locations, including Khorsabad, Nebi Yunus and Mosul; another four blank folios; and finally on ff. 90v-96v there are various barometric entries made in the course of his journey from Constantinople to Mosul, 28 August-29 September 1849. Add.MS. 39.096 was supplied by the stationers E. Baxter of the Strand, price ten shillings. Layard probably compiled this fair copy having suffered difficulties deciphering his notebook diary entries from his first expedition when preparing Nineveh and its Remains (1849), and he now decided it more prudent to rewrite the present set of entries whilst the details were still fresh in his memory, and not to wait till his return to England at an as yet unknown date.

Layard's journal and diary entries cover all four periods that he was at Kuyunjik: 30 September 1849-18 March 1850, 10 May-11 July 1850, 31 August-16 October 1850, and finally 7 March- 28 April 1851. Those covering the first period are the most detailed, but after his return from the Khabour on 10 May 1850, the combination of work, heat and fever left less time for him to supplement his field notes, sketch plans and, in the autumn of 1850, the drawing of reliefs. For the final seven weeks at Kuyunjik and Nimrud, 7 March-28 April 1851, Layard's diary entries are exceptionally scant.11

Add.MS 39.077, ff 75-79 - LN3. This is the amplified "fair copy" of Layard's field notes, written in ink on both recto and verso of five loose sheets of paper,'2 with entries for the complete sequence of Chambers I to 000, but excluding the Grand Entrance from Forecourt H into Throneroom B, which is also not in LN 2C or 2E. Layard almost certainly compiled LN 3 after his return to England, probably in the autumn of 1851, for the most part based on his field notes LN 2C and 2E, and on the Original Drawings of the reliefs by himself, Cooper and Bell, as a preliminary step in the preparation of Nineveh and Babylon. After the final entry, for Chamber 000, the remaining third of f. 79v was left blank, showing that Layard had completed the account. On the MS Plan the area to the west of Chamber R is marked PPP, but Layard does not refer to such a chamber either in his notebooks or in Nineveh and Babylon, nor is it marked on the published plan.

LN 3 was written in two stages, I-S and T-OOO, as demonstrated by the marked difference in the shade of ink between the two sections. Also, the first entry has the caption Great Hall, or Chamber I, followed by Chamber J to Chamber S, but the subsequent entries have only T to 000, without Chamber. The caption DD is not underlined, Layard probably here being confused by this entry in his field notes, where it is added at the end of LN 2C and not included in LN 2E, as would logicaily be expected, and in addition in LN 2C he had wrongly headed the entry FF

" In this article I am discussing only Layard's primary sources for Sennacherib's palace on Kuyunjik; but his diary entries and other notes do contain invaluable information on other sites, especially Nimrud and particularly on the Treasure Chamber or Room AB of the Northwest Palace.

l2 Add.MS. 39.077, ff. 80-82 are also on the same paper. On f. 80r are the fair copies of drawings from Add.MS.

39.089 G, ff. 4v and 12v, of bronzes from the Treasure Chamber at Nimrud; f. 81r is the fair copy of Add.MS. 39.089 G, f. 2r, the section of the Nimrud ziggurat, Layard, 1853a, Plan 2 facing p. 123; and f. 82r is the tomb at Van, Layard, 1853a, p. 396. Add.MS. 39.077, ff. 85-89, 96, 97 and 101 are on very similar paper, but probably from another source.



190 GEOFFREY TURNER

(SWPS, p. 14). Also in LN 2C, following Chamber S, the entries for T-Y are either blank or very short. When writing the first group of entries I-S in LN 3, Layard simply rearranged the abbrevi- ated texts of LN 2C, adding details of the slabs drawn by Cooper, but for T-Y he had to make up the descriptions from scratch. For Chambers T, U and V these are based in part on the drawings of the reliefs, and for Chamber W he also had Malan's watercolour illustrating the damaged slabs, and his memory of the reliefs in Chamber Y. Otherwise the sketch plans in notebooks A and C here replaced the blank and brief entries in LN2C. Furthermore from Chamber T onward in LN3, Layard now numbered the slabs and entrances in the entries of many of the chambers;'3 it was probably also at this time that he added these numbers on the MS Plan14 and the slab numbers on the Original Drawings (see pp. 194, 209).

When he published LN 3, Russell reproduced Layard's text "as literally as I could manage" (Russell, 1995, p. 71 and n. 1). To illustrate the difficulty and problems of transcribing Layard's notebooks and other hand-written documents, the entry for Chamber LLL is reproduced here, first as written by Layard and second as published by Russell.

Add.MS. 39.077, f. 79v: Between ent' 9 & 10 warriors bringing heads & leading captives by the beard & beneath them river & M.' with trees - Ent.ce 9 two figures facing West - first winged figure 2d. Lion legged. Ent.' 10 Lions Russell, 1995, p. 84: Between Entrances 9 and 10 warriors bringing heads and leading captives by the beard. Beneath them river and mountains with trees. Entrance 9 two figures facing west first winged figure, second lion- legged. Entrance 10 Lions.

To add to these difficulties, the printed form of the written symbol for and is always the ampersand: &. However, Layard very rarely used this formal version, preferring the mathematical plus sign or its cursive version, as in the first line of the LN 3 extract just quoted and in Fig. 2b, line 1: "Ride to Kouyunjik + round". Also he very rarely used the punctuation mark of full-stop or period, but used a simple dash, and this of varying length, as the mood took his pen or pencil.

The British Museum, Department of the Ancient Near East (formerly Western Asiatic Antiquities) The most important documents in the British Museum for the study of Sennacherib's palace

are the Original Drawings, Vols. I-VI. These include almost a hundred drawings of the reliefs and other sculpture executed in the course of Layard's second campaign at Kuyunjik, by Layard himself and by the two artists sent out by the British Museum, Cooper and Bell, and also drawings of antiquities by Cooper, and sketches and watercolours of the excavations, local landscapes and buildings and of local life, mostly also made by Cooper. Secondly there is Layard's MS Plan, with those parts of Sennacherib's palace excavated during his second campaign, and MS C and D with his copies of cuneiform inscriptions, including some from Sennacherib's palace.

The drawings, MS Plan and most of the other excavation records were brought back to England by Hormuzd Rassam. He and Layard left Mosul on 28 April 1851, travelling together as far as Alexandretta or Scanderoon, the modern port of Iskenderun. They then took different routes to England, Layard continuing via Alexandria to Marseilles, and thence overland through Europe, whilst Rassam sailed directly to Liverpool, having in his charge not only the drawings, but also the smaller antiquities which had not been sent down the Tigris to Basrah, including the important bronzes and ivories from the Treasure Chamber at Nimrud.'5 Rassam docked at Liverpool in early July 1851 (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 73), and after customs clearance he and his baggage continued to London, where the latter was duly deposited in the British Museum.

The Original Drawings. A general description of the Original Drawings is given in S WPS, pp. 9-10, and the observations added here are principally on the drawings executed in the course of Layard's

131 In LN 3 slab numbers are given in the entries of Chambers T-V, DD-GG, II, KK, LL, WW, EEE-GGG, and KKK; Arabic numerals are also used for identifying the entrances of Chambers U, V, GG, II, MM, DDD, EEE, GGG, III, KKK, LLL and 000.

14 Later, in Layard, 1853a, the entrance numbers were

changed to small letters, and the alphabetical references to the chambers were changed to Roman numerals.

" Add.MS. 39.089 F, ff. 52v-45r has a list of 84 boxes of small antiquities, mostly from the Treasure Chamber at Nimrud.




second expedition to Kuyunjik. It is to be stressed that this is not intended as a definitive catalogue or description of the Original Drawings as such, but it would certainly be worthwhile for such a catalogue raisonne to be made, not necessarily for publication but as a guide to those wishing to consult the Original Drawings. The present observations are also in the main on the contents or composition of each volume and on the various annotations or notes added to the drawings, but rarely on the actual drawings as such. The last is for the simple but fundamental reason that I do not have the all important "eye" which is necessary for such a critical study, nor have I had the training and education of an art historian.

Of the seven volumes of Original Drawings, Vol. VII was added in 1964 and contains Boutcher's drawings and photographs of the North Palace at Kuyunjik, and thus does not concern the present study. The contents of Vols. I-IV are for the most part drawings of the reliefs and other sculptures excavated by Layard at Nimrud and Kuyunjik, 1845-7 and 1849-51, together with some drawings later made by Hodder of reliefs from Sennacherib's palace, and one or two sketches by Boutcher. Vols. V and VI contain drawings made by Hodder and Boutcher between 1852 and 1855, mainly of reliefs from both Sennacherib's palace and the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Kuyunjik, with some later additions at the end of Vol. VI.

Vols. I-VI were compiled and bound up in their present form in the mid-1850s, but in no volume is there a colophon or other note recording the actual year when this was done. Exploration in Assyria was seriously affected in 1854, when Great Britain and France finally ended centuries of enmity and formed an alliance against Russia, declaring war on 28 March 1854 and with actual hostilities in the Crimea breaking out in July. Already by this time interest in the Assyrian excavations had faded, with attention deflected to the immense collection of cuneiform tablets and inscriptions also discovered. It was believed that there probably remained no more important palaces to find and, more to the point, the British Museum now already had a large and impressive assemblage of Assyrian sculptures, and the Trustees decided against making a further application to the Treasury. In fact, when the final shipment reached London in June 1856, there was no space left in the exhibition halls and the newly arrived reliefs were consigned to the cellars. In the Spring of 1855 Rawlinson resigned from his post at the Residency in Baghdad, and in May of the same year the Council of the Royal Asiatic Society in London recorded that Loftus was on his way back to England, bringing with him the Nimrud ivories and other small finds, together with Boutcher's drawings. Boutcher was himself the last to leave Assyria, returning in early 1856 (Gadd, p. 119 et passim). This was a fitting time to assemble the various drawings, sketches and watercolours in a permanent format, finely bound in richly tooled leather.

Richard Barnett commented, "The arrangement of the drawings does not follow a consistent chronological order, volume III being the earliest in date, followed by IV, parts of I and II, and then V and VI" (SWPS, p. 9). This is not only true of the order of the volumes, especially I-IV, but also of the drawings in each volume, the arrangement of which is in several cases not only inconsistent, but also illogical and unintelligible. Drawings of the reliefs and other sculptures form the main bulk of the collection, but there are also sketches and panoramas, watercolours of wall- paintings and glazed bricks, illustrations of small finds, such as bronzes and ivories, details of reliefs, and a few plans. These miscellanea are found in all of Vols. I-IV: for example Or. Dr. I, 1; II, 23-36 and 44-55; III, the final three pages (plans); and IV, 80-4 and much of Misc. 1-21.

The Original Drawings were almost certainly sorted into provisional groups and kept in separate portfolios before they were eventually bound, probably in 1856. Vols. I and II include drawings and sketches by Hodder and Boutcher, indicating that they were compiled in their final form as late as 1855/6, whilst Vols. III and IV have works only by Layard, Cooper and Bell, and thus may have already been put together when Layard was preparing Nineveh and Babylon, or shortly after he had completed it in late 1852. Vols. V and VI are restricted to the works of Hodder and Boutcher, and were thus made up in late 1855, or more probably in 1856 following Boutcher's return to England.

In the front of each volume there is a list of contents, on ruled foolscap and inserted after the fly-leaf. That in Vol. I is headed "CONTENTS of Vol. I of Original Drawings from Slabs. &c. found at Nineveh Note. The plates referred to will be found in 'Monuments of Nineveh.' Vols. I. II. folio". This is followed by a list of the drawings, 1-73, with a concise description of each.



192 GEOFFREY TURNER

Or. Dr. I, 1 is a watercolour of Bavian, Nos. la-31 are of Nimrud, No. 32 the Nergal Gate at Nineveh, and Nos. 33-73 are all of Kuyunjik, with the exception of No. 54, entrance 2 of the Ninurta temple at Nimrud. Nos. 32-73 are all from Layard's second expedition, by Layard, Cooper and Bell.

The list in Vol. II is headed, "Index to Vol. II of Origl. Drawings by Mr. Layard, Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Hodder from Assyrian Slabs, &c", with a note similar to that in Vol. I referring to Mon. Nin. II, and followed by the list of drawings, 1-75. Most drawings are of Sennacherib's palace, with Nos. 2-6 by Layard of Chamber BB, Nos. 37-43, 56-64 and 66-75 by Churchill, and Nos. 7-22 Hodder's "key sketches" of Chambers FF and 00. There are also two drawings by Cooper: No. 1 of Chamber XX, which Cooper records making in his diary on 9 March 1850 (see p. 198), and No. 65 which is sandwiched between Churchill's drawings and which is the only drawing from Sennacherib's palace signed by Cooper (SWPS, No. 136b, p. 65). Or. Dr. II, 23-36 and 44-55 are various drawings and watercolours, mostly of Nimrud and Kuyunjik and most of which can be attributed to Cooper, but also with five scenes of Bavian and Maltai most probably by Bell (Nos. 24-8), five sketches signed by Hodder (Nos. 29-32 and 34) and one initialled by Boutcher (No. 33).

Vol. III contains drawings of Nimrud, ordered in a totally different manner, with the contents captioned, "List of Drawings by A. H. Layard, Esq.re of Slabs, &c. found at Nimroud", with a note regarding references to Mon. Nin. I and II. The actual drawings are under six headings: (i) "High Pyramid Mound", that is the ziggurat, Nos. 1-25; (ii) "North-West Palace", Nos. 1-85; (iii) "Centre Palace", Nos. 1-29; (iv) "South-East Edifice - View of the excavation", a watercolour; (v) "South-West Palace", Nos. 1-20; and (vi) "Drawing of General Plan of Excavation at Nimroud. Printed copy of same, . . .", mounted on three unnumbered pages. The manuscript general plan of Nimrud is in pencil and unsigned, and was used for Layard, 1849, I, Plan I facing p. 332. On the following page is the printed version of this, together with op. cit., Plans II and III, and on the third page op. cit., map of Layard's journeys at the end of Vol. I.

The list of contents of Vol. IV has a caption similar to Vol. III, "List of Drawings principally by A. H. Layard, Esq.re of Slabs, &c. found at Kouyunjik." There is no note regarding Mon. Nin. I and II, as in Vols. I-III, but where appropriate these references are on the drawings. Nos. 1-79 are of Sennacherib's palace, from both campaigns and by Cooper and Bell as well as by Layard. In Or. Dr. I the list of contents does not name the artists whose works are included, and although Cooper's drawings are in Vols. II-IV and Bell's in Vols. II and IV, neither has been credited as such. This may have been due to there being only one drawing signed by Cooper, Or. Dr. II, 65, and two by Bell, Or. Dr. IV, 10 and 32, whereas with but one or two exceptions Layard signed all his work. The strained relations between Layard and Cooper may also have affected recognition of the latter. Layard's name was also added to the spines of Vols. III and IV when bound.

Or. Dr. IV, 80 is a detail of two situlae, as carried by guardian figures, probably a design for a woodcut but not used, similar to Layard, 1849, II, p. 305. Nos. 81 and 82 are watercolour panoramas of Kuyunjik looking to the west and of Mosul, both unsigned but probably by Cooper. No 83 is a plan of Rooms A-H of Sennacherib's palace as excavated by Layard in 1847, unsigned and in ink, similar to his later MS Plan of the palace from his second campaign (see pp. 208-1 1). The printed version, Layard 1849, II, facing p. 124, is on the following page, No. 84. The latter is numbered, but without annotation, and the contents of Vol. IV have for No. 83, "Plan of excavated ruins at Kouyunjik - Printed copy of same, belonging to 'Nineveh and its remains,' Vol. II.", but without actually listing No. 84.

On the last ten pages of Vol. IV are mounted 21 "Miscellaneous" drawings which, although listed separately, are an integral and original part of this volume, and were not added later as a supplement. Their contents are listed on a second folded double foolscap sheet, headed "Miscellaneous", Nos. 1-21, but the actual drawings are marked "I. Miscellaneous", etc., as followed in SWPS, p. 150 et passim. In this article, these drawings and sketches are referred to simply as Or. Dr. IV, Misc. 1, etc. Nos. 5, 8, 11, 20 and 21 of "Miscellaneous" are of Sennacherib's palace, and Nos. 6 and 7 are sketches of the excavations on Kuyunjik. Nos 1, 3, 4, 9, 10 and 12 are of sculptures and details of reliefs, probably all from Nimrud; seven others illustrate sculptures from Kalah Shergat (No. 13), Arban (Nos. 14-16), Bavian (Nos. 17-18) and Khorsabad (No. 19).




No. 2 is of a pottery scarcophagus, but with no provenance given. Probably all of Or. Dr. IV, Misc. 1-21 date from Layard's second expedition, with No. 11 probably by Bell and most of the others by Cooper.

In Vols. V and VI, which were probably assembled in early 1856 after Boutcher's return to England, the list of contents have similarly worded captions: Vol. V, ". . . (chiefly from the Northern Palace) by Mr. W. Boutcher." Vol. VI consists of ". . . of Assyrian Slabs from Kouyunjik by Mr. W. Boutcher and others." In Vol. V there are 61 pages, eight of which were left blank, and in Vol. VI, 59 pages, including four blanks. In SWPS, p. 150, Or. Dr. V, 51-7 are listed as of Sennacherib's palace and in the Catologue of Sculptures they are attributed to Hodder. Four of these are of threshold or pavement slabs, and three of relief fragments found in the Kubba or Tomb on the eastern part of Kuyunjik. Of Or. Dr. VI, 44 drawings can be attributed to Hodder, with only some fifteen by Boutcher, not as somewhat misleadingly noted on the list of contents. Of these, thirty-four are of slabs from the main part of Sennacherib's palace and ten of slabs from the passage between that building and the adjacent Ishtar Temple.

The final page of Vol. VI, No. 59, was originally also blank, but at some later date a small drawing was pasted on the upper part, SWPS, No. 700a, p. 139, P1. 506. This is in pencil on tracing paper, of a fragmentary slab from Chamber D, which was excavated in 1847 and sent to London. Of this relief, however, Layard did not make a drawing, and Or. Dr. VI, 59 was obviously traced from Paterson's illustration of a photograph of the slab (A. Paterson, Assyrian Sculptures -

Palace of Sinacherib (1915), PI. 96 No. 11). It is marked in ink, "Fragment of a slab in gypsum from Kouyunjik in the B.M.", and on the list of contents at the front of the volume has been added, "59. Assyrian Warriors leading horses - tracing (Kouyunjik)" (see Gadd, pp. 164-5, and LN 1, SWPS, p. 11 - Chamber D).

In 1954 three other small drawings were added to Or. Dr. VI, p. 59 - SWPS, p. 97, Nos. 384b-386b, with the pencilled annotation, "Three drawings presented by Miss Layard, 1954, (by her great uncle AHL)"; these have since been detached and reglued onto the following p. 60, but without a new annotation. This last page, however, is not original to Vol. VI but, together with a new fly-leaf, was added relatively recently, doubtless to strengthen and clean up the binding. These three drawings, which were not added to the list of contents, were designs for woodcuts for Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 455, 457 and 458. Although Layard made the original drawings of the slabs from which these scenes were taken (SWPS, Nos. 384a-386a, p. 97 and Pls. 300, 304 and 308), it is highly improbable that he was also responsible for these copies, which would have been executed in London in the latter part of 1851 or in 1852, when Nineveh and Babylon was being prepared. Furthermore, before giving them away, Layard neither added a note of their provenance nor a dedication, nor had them mounted.

Each original drawing, or the page on which it has been mounted, is numbered in the upper right corner. The actual drawings were first given Roman numerals, but when Vols. I-IV were assembled in their final form, the Arabic notation was introduced, as in the list of contents at the front of each volume. In Vols. V and VI the lists of contents have Arabic figures, but the pages or mounts Roman. In Vols. III and IV, which were probably put together at the same time, the Arabic numbers refer to the individual drawings and not to the pages onto which they had later been mounted. Thus, for example, in Vols. IV Nos. 4 and 5 are on the same page, and similarly Nos. 27, 28 and 29. However in Vols. I-II and V-VI the final pagination refers to the page and not to the drawing. Where there is more than one drawing per page, these are "upper" and "lower" or, less frequently, "right" and "left". In the list of contents of Vols. V and VI there is the note: "The numbers refer to the mounts, and not to the Drawings".

In Vol. I several drawings are also marked in the lower left corner with a second sequence of numbers in the Roman notation, as can be seen on SWPS, P1. 354 (Or. Dr. I, 40) - VII, P1. 356 (Or. Dr. I, 41) - VIII, and P1. 424 (Or. Dr. I, 51) - XX. These probably date from a preliminary ordering of the drawings.

Annotations and compilers. On almost every drawing in Vols. I-VI there are one or more annotations or notes, and on the drawings and sketches from Layard's second campaign at Kuyunjik these annotations are of three types. Unless otherwise stated, all annotations are in pencil:



194 GEOFFREY TURNER

(i) those made at Kuyunjik (ii) those added by Layard in London when preparing Nineveh and Babylon

(iii) those added by members of the staff, or "officers", of the British Museum, probably for the most part when compiling and putting together the Original Drawings.

Annotations made at Kuyunjik. Of the three artists responsible for the drawings, Layard regularly signed his work, whilst Bell signed two of his drawings, and Cooper only one (see pp. 197, 201). Forty-six of the ninety-six drawings were given a relative or proportionate scale, in fractions and multiples of an inch to one foot, varying from 1/2 in. (elevation of Chamber W - Or. Dr. I, 48), 1 in. (twice and also once by Layard in 1847 - SWPS, No. 80a, p. 59, Or. Dr. IV, 22), 1'/4 in. (seven times), 1%/2 in. (thirteen times), 13/4 in. (four times), 2 in. (six times), 3 in. (twelve times, mostly by Bell), and once the unusual fraction of 17/16 in. to 1 ft. (Or. Dr. I, 39, SWPS, Nos. 291a-294a, p. 83). On nine drawings there is a ruled scale in the lower margin, almost along the edge of the paper: Or. Dr. I, 48 and 52; IV, 65, 66, 69, 71, 74, 76, and Misc. 8. In each case these are marked off in units of twelve (inches) and then varying numbers of feet, on some drawings numbered but on others not. These ruled scales were to help the artist to draw in better proportion and with more accuracy. Other drawings may also have been similarly marked, but with the ruled scale later erased or simply cut off. For instance on Or. Dr. IV, 74 the scale is along the very edge of the sheet of paper, which could easily have been removed without affecting the actual drawing, and on this and Or. Dr. IV, 65 the pencilling of the scale is extremely light and faint.

There are also other notes, some rubbed out, which had evidently been written at Kuyunjik, either by Cooper when making the drawing, or added by Layard. The most interesting is on Or. Dr. I, 41 (SWPS, p. 106 No. 444a), of Chamber V slabs 6-7: "Note the stones on each side of the river take-?-?-?-", the lower line rubbed out and very difficult to read. This refers to the mountain scales or "stones" which, as well as the trees, are on both sides of a river and were carved inverted, to give the impression of a bird's eye view or perspective (Layard, 1853a, p. 342). In the right margin of the same drawing there are also faint traces of other notes and sums. Likewise on Or. Dr. I, 59, in the bottom left corner, an erased note is visible. Other drawings have lightly pencilled lists of figures, probably sums, in the right margin, for example Or. Dr. I, 44 and 45, doubtless made by the artist to help him draw the relief more accurately.

Annotations added by Layard in London. The most important annotations are those of Layard, giving the room and slab number(s), for example Or. Dr. IV, 50 (SWPS, No. 148a, p. 67) Kouyunjik No 61 - Hall I, or Or. Dr. IV, 63 (SWPS, No. 536a, p. 121), Kouyunjik Chamber 0 Nos. 5.6. 7. Layard made these annotations after he had returned to London and was now working on Nineveh and Babylon, probably in the autumn of 1851, at the same time as he compiled the fair copy of his field notes, LN 3, and added the slab numbers to the MS Plan (pp. 190, 209). In comparison, the annotations on his drawings from the first season at Kuyunjik are both neater and more precise, whilst those from the second expedition are more cursive and hurried. Layard added no notes to Churchill's drawings, nor to those by Cooper which do not illustrate sculptures from Sennacherib's palace, as for example Or. Dr. IV, Misc. 3 (SWPS, No. 682, p. 138, PI. 500). In a few cases he also pencilled directions to those making the lithographs for Mon. Nin. II, for example Or. Dr. IV, 37 (SWPS, No. 347a-349a, p. 90).

Annotations added by officers of the British Museum. Layard expressed his thanks to "Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Birch, Mr. Vaux, and other officers of the British Museum"'6 for their help in preparing Nineveh and Babylon (Layard, 1853a, preface p. x); presumably one or more of these assembled

16Edward Hawkins, was Keeper of Antiquities in the British Museum, and wrote a note on the duck weight found in the Northwest Palace, Nimrud (Add.MS. 39.077, f. 63; Layard, 1853a, p. 600). Samuel Birch was the Egyptologist in the Department of Antiquities (Layard, 1853a, pp. 156 and 280). W. S. W. Vaux contributed notes on metallurgy and on a Roman coin (Layard, 1853a, pp. 673-4 and p. 592 n.); his published works include,

Niniveh and Persepolis (1850), of which he sent a copy to Layard in Mosul in June 1850 (Add.MS 38.979, ff. 248-249), and Handbook to the Sculptures in the British Museum: being a description of the remains of Greek, Assyrian, Egyptian, and Etruscan Art preserved there [1851]). In July 1851 John Doubleday was also a member of the Department of Antiquities (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 73).




the Original Drawings in their present form some three years later. In view of his publication, Nineveh and Persepolis (1850), W. S. W. Vaux probably undertook the main responsibility of this task. Layard himself was in London at this time, but very much involved as a new Member of Parliament in the Crimean crisis. With his experience and interest in Ottoman affairs, Layard had thrown himself totally into the political bull-ring, and it is unlikely that he could spare much time to advise or help those in the British Museum who were now compiling the Original Drawings. As guidelines there were Layard's annotations on the drawings and also his publications, especially Mon. Nin. I and II.

In the ordering of the drawings of Sennacherib's palace, those by Churchill and Hodder were grouped together in Vol. II, and likewise those from Layard's first campaign in Vol. IV. For the drawings from Layard's second expedition, the compilers in some cases ordered them by room or courtyard, following Layard's annotations; for example, Chamber V in Vol. I, 40-5, together with 39 and 46-7 where Layard's annotations have U miswritten as V, and Court I in Vol. IV, where 44-52 have been placed together with 43, Layard's drawing of slab 1 of that courtyard, but from his first expedition in 1847. In other cases the compilers followed the order of Mon. Nin. II, as for example Vol. I, 55-62 which correspond to Pls. 13-15 and 20-24; and 64-73 or Pls. 31, 33-8 and 42-3; and Vol. II, 1-6 or Pls. 44-9. However in other instances there is no apparent or logical order, as for example Vol. I, 33-9, which illustrate reliefs from Chambers H, K, L, M, S and U; and Vol. IV, 57-68 with slabs from Chambers K, L, M, 0, Q, R and S, although in both these cases the order of the drawings does follow the sequence of the room letters.

When compiling the Original Drawings, all but a few drawings and sketches were given a title or a short description of the subject of the relief or of the form of the sculpture, and on most, but not all, where apposite, the corresponding plate reference in Mon. Nin. I and II; for example Or. Dr. I, 56 (SWPS, Nos. 156a-158a, p. 68), "Assyrians building a mound for the erection of a palace (Vol. II. plate 14)". These titles are in two or three hands, in large flowing script, and in most cases are on the actual drawing, but for some on the page or mount on which the drawing is pasted. In Vols. I and II, which were probably put together at the same time, but not in Vol. IV, on the drawings of slabs from Sennacherib's palace there was also added a short annotation in ink, very similar to those of Layard, giving the chamber and slab numbers. However these ink labels also have the plate reference in Mon. Nin. II, and differ from Layard's annotations in two other respects: firstly the spelling Koyunjik and not Kouyunjik, and secondly the form of the capital letter N in No. or Nos., Layard's being cursive but those in ink of a rounded or arched form.

The photographs used for the plates in SWPS are naturally of the actual drawing, rather than of the complete document or page, and thus in most cases do not include all the various annotations and added notes. One of the few more complete photographs is SWPS, No. 193 on P1. 128 (Or. Dr. 1, 63). In the lower right corner, just below the ground-line of the drawing, is the scale, Scale 1 in 14 to a foot, and below this Layard's annotation, Kouyunjik Chamber R. Nos. 12. 13. 14. To the centre of the lower margin, just below the ground-line, is the ink label, Koyunjik. Chamber R Nos. 12. 13. 14. Pl. XXIX, and below that the compiler's title, Triumph of the Assyrian King. Vol. II. Plate 29, with the plate number of Mon. Nin. II again in the lower left corner, pl. 29. Other complete examples are SWPS, Nos. 44la-443a, P1. 354 (Or. Dr. I, 40) and SWPS, No. 444a, P1. 356 (Or. Dr. I, 41).

Other annotations or numerals are also found, of which in some cases the function or reason is relatively clear, but in others less easy to fathom. For example Or. Dr. I, 51 (SWPS, Nos. 552a-554a, p. 122) there is evidently a signature lightly written in the lower right corner, "R.S.T.-?-?-", most probably of the artist who made the woodcut of the left hand slab (No. 552a), illustrated in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 68. Alternatively on Or. Dr. I, 56 (SWPS, Nos. 156a-158a, p. 68, P1. 117) there is the small number "196" in the lower right corner, within the lower border of the right hand slab (No. 1 58a), which does not appear to correspond to any scheme or sequence.

Concordance B of SWPS (pp. 149-51) lists the original drawings of the reliefs and other sculptures discovered in Sennacherib's Southwest Palace, together with a few sketches and watercolours of the excavations, 237 in total, to which is to be added Or. Dr. II, 42, a drawing by Churchill of entrance k between Court I and Chamber J (Turner, 2001, Fig. 4). These are fully described and discussed in the Catalogue of Sculptures (SWPS, pp. 47-143), beginning with Forecourt H and its Grand Entrance into the Throneroom, and then from the latter hall, Room



196 GEOFFREY TURNER

I (Chamber B), in numerical sequence to Room LXXI (Chamber HHH), plus Chambers NNN and YY, the Passage to the Ishtar Temple, and finally unattributed drawings, et alia.

There are thirty drawings by Layard from his first season of May and June, 1847: Or. Dr. IV, 3-9, 11-29, 39-41 and 43;17 thirty-one made by Churchill in March and April 1849: Or. Dr. II, 37-43, 56-64 and 66-75 (Turner, 2001, pp. 107-17); and sixty-seven drawings later made by Hodder and/or Boutcher: Or. Dr. II, 7-22; V, 51-7; and VI, 1-29, 33-6, 38-9 and 43-6. From Layard's second campaign at Kuyunjik, there are ninety-four drawings which are "original" in the strict sense of the word, that is executed on the spot, and neither a sketch nor a preliminary or unfinished study: Or. Dr. I, 33-47, 49-52, 55-73; II, 1-6; and IV, 1-2, 30-8, 42, 44-54, 56-79 and Misc. 5. To these are to be added two other drawings made during Layard's second expedition: Or. Dr. IV, 10 - Bell's signed drawing of the threshold slab in entrance a between Chamber C and Court I (SWPS, No. 61d, p. 57, P1. 58); and Or. Dr. I, 48-the elevation of the ascending passage Chamber W, probably also by Bell (SWPS, p. 32 and P1. 19).

The artists responsible for the Original Drawings (see Appendix with attribution of drawings, pp. 218-20; SWPS, pp. 16-17)

The drawings of Sennacherib's palace from Layard's second expedition were made by Layard himself and by the two professional artists sent out by the British Museum, Cooper and Bell. Of these only Layard regularly signed his work, and in his diaries he also noted specifically the days on which he made drawings. By following the course of the excavations, area by area and room by room, it is possible to attribute with certainty almost all the drawings (Appendix, pp. 218-20). Of these, more than half, or about sixty per cent, were by Cooper, some twenty-five per cent by Layard and the remainder by Bell, but the last was at Kuyunjik for only seven weeks before Layard returned to England at the end of April 1851. In addition there are twelve watercolour sketches by the Rev. S. C. Malan, which also contribute greatly to our knowledge and interpretation of Layard's excavations.

A. H. Layard. Although he received no formal training as an artist, and in effect very little of any such education, Layard was fortunately a most competent, faithful and accurate artist and draughtsman. As a young boy he had been given drawing lessons in Florence, and his father, who was both a connoisseur of Italian Old Masters and whose circle of friends included contemporary Italian painters, instilled in the young Layard an interest in and affinity with art, which continued into his final years when he and his wife retired to live in Venice (Waterfield, pp. 13, 468-71 et passim).

On his first expedition Layard made all the drawings at both Nimrud and Nineveh, but in 1849 the British Museum employed the services of the artist F. C. Cooper, who joined Layard in Constantinople, and they then travelled together to Mosul, where Cooper was immediately set to work on Kuyunjik, and later at Nimrud. However by early June 1850, some eight months later, Cooper's health, which was weak at the best of times, was inevitably hit both by the heat and by pressure of work. In his diary Layard noted of four days in June, 16 and 19 to 21, when he took both bearings and measurements, and also made drawings (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 4r). These were probably of slabs in Court U, and one of Malan's sketches, dated 19 June 1850, shows Layard drawing slabs 15-16 of that courtyard (SWPS, P1. 200). In the following weeks Cooper managed to return to work and continued making drawings until he left Kuyunjik for Sheikh Matti and the north on 10 July. Nevertheless even here he failed to recover his health, and Layard was forced to send him back to England direct from Van in August 1850. Thus when Layard himself returned to Mosul in late August, he was without an artist until Bell replaced Cooper in March 1851. In the following six weeks before he left for Baghdad and the south, Layard recorded that, as well as supervising the excavations and the packing of slabs to be sent by raft down to Basrah, he also made drawings on almost every day that he was on the mound at Kuyunjik (Add.MS.

17Layard also made a drawing of Chamber C slab 41 which "has not survived" (SWPS, p. 59 No. 76a). However a woodcut was made of this drawing (Layard, 1849, II, p. 469); in those cases where a woodcut was made, the

original drawing or sketch was not returned to the British Museum. The original was returned to the museum in those cases where an engraving was made for Mon. Nin. I and II.




39.089 A, ff. 49r-52v). For 30 September he wrote, "At mound - raft loaded - too much to draw - pack small objects in house" (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 51v). The main part of this work was recording the reliefs excavated in the rooms on the west side of Court U, from Sennacherib's Lachish Room, Chamber 00, the six slabs of Ashurbanipal from Chamber BB with intricate scenes of his defeat of the Elamites at the battle on the river Ulai, and from the adjacent rooms DD, EE and FF, the last with Ashurbanipal's campaign in the marshes. Of these Layard made eighteen drawings, illustrating a total of thirty-six slabs (SWPS, pp. 88-104). In a letter to Sir Henry Ellis, dated 1 October 1850, he reported that he had drawn "about thirty of the most important basreliefs discovered since Mr. Cooper's departure" (Add.MS. 38.943, f. 4v). Also at this time Layard made drawings of three slabs from the north wall of Court I, Nos. 53, 61 and 62? (SWPS, Nos. 143a, 148a and 150a, pp. 65-7). Slab 61, which includes a sow with her young and three deer in "a jungle of high reeds" (SWPS, P1. 108), was drawn on 14 October, the same day as "all boxes packed", which were loaded on a raft on 15 October and shortly afterwards sent down the Tigris to Basrah, accompanied by Layard and Hormuzd Rassam, "quite green - myself very feverish & unwell", as far as Baghdad (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 52v). When Layard returned to Mosul on 7 March of the following year, Cooper's replacement as artist to the expedition, T. S. Bell, had arrived just a few days earlier, and thus Layard had no need now to make further drawings before returning to England at the end of April 1851.

The twenty-three sheets of drawings which Layard made at Kuyunjik during his second expedition illustrate forty-three slabs or parts thereof, and of these all but three were signed, either in full or with his initials."8

F. C Cooper. Cooper arrived at Mosul together with Layard on 29 September 1849, and remained there until 10 July 1850, when Layard sent him to Sheikh Matti for health reasons, one day before his own departure for the north. During this period Cooper was mainly employed at Kuyunjik, with short excursions to Khorsabad and more frequently to Nimrud, and also to the Khabour for just over seven weeks with Layard, 21 March-5 May 1850, or thereabout.19 At Kuyunjik he made 55 sheets of drawings, totalling 147 or more probably 148 slabs or parts of slabs,20 these including the two bull colossi and the Gilgamesh figure of the Grand Entrance into Throneroom B (SWPS, No. 8a, p. 48, P1. 24). On 18 March 1850, just before leaving for the Khabour, Layard wrote to Sir Henry Ellis of the British Museum that Cooper had already made about sixty drawings at Kuyunjik and Nimrud (Add.MS. 38.942, f. 24r), of which some thirty-five were at Kuyunjik, of the facade of the Grand Entrance and of Chambers I, K-M, Q-S, XX and ZZ. At this time Cooper also drew the outer fa9ade of the Nergal Gate at Nineveh (Or. Dr. I, 32). The remaining twenty drawings, of Court U and Chambers 0, T and V, were executed after his return from the Khabour in early May and before his departure to the north two months later, on 10 July 1850, with several interruptions caused by ill health.

There is only one drawing signed by Cooper, SWPS, No. 136b (p. 65, PI. 101),21 but most probably this was not made at Kuyunjik itself, but either in the house rented by Layard in Mosul, or in London almost two years later, when Cooper spent a month "finishing off" drawings in the British Museum, in the autumn of 1851. This is a reconstruction of Court I slab 46, together with part of slab 45 and the edge of slab 47, showing the bull colossus or lamassu standing upright on its sledge and about to be installed in its final position in the palace. When excavated, the upper part of the bull was lost, but Cooper has restored it here as complete. To mark the divisions of the slabs, Cooper did not draw vertical lines, but cut the paper with a razor or other sharp blade. This reconstructed composition, however, is not in all details a faithful copy of Cooper's original drawing of the relief, nor is the division of the slabs correctly placed (SWPS, Pls. 97 and 100).

"8Not signed: SWPS, pp. 102-4, Nos. 428a-429a, 432a-434a and 435a-436a, all from Chamber 00.

19Layard recorded that he left for the Khabour on 20 March and returned on 10 May (Add.MS. 39.096, ff. 51r and 87v), whereas Cooper's diary has 21 March and 5 May.

20 SWpS, p. 71, No. 190a illustrates either slabs 10 and 11, or more probably 7, 8 and 9.

21SWPS, Nos. 200a-201a and 277a (pp. 16, 72 and 81) are not signed. Cooper also initialled his "sketch" of entrance 2 of the Ninurta Temple at Nimrud, Or. Dr. III, High Pyramid Mound 2, which is reproduced as a lithograph in Nineveh and Babylon, facing p. 351.



198 GEOFFREY TURNER

Later, an engraving of this reconstruction was made by George Scharf the younger, and reproduced in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 113.22

As well as drawings of the reliefs and other sculptures from Kuyunjik and Nimrud, Cooper also made drawings and sketches of the smaller antiquities excavated there, especially of the bronzes from the Treasure Chamber or Room AB of the Northwest Palace at Nimrud. Many of these were illustrated with lithographs in Mon. Nin. II and with woodcuts in Nineveh and Babylon. He also made watercolours and sketches of the excavations, and of scenic views and local life, both in and around Nineveh and Nimrud and elsewhere on his travels with Layard, such as in the Khabour, at Sheikh Adi and Van. Again many of these were reproduced in Nineveh and Babylon as woodcuts, either full-page or as vignettes and often engraved by George Scharf, or as full-page lithographs. The drawings from which the lithographs in Mon. Nin. were made are still in the Original Drawings, but the originals for the woodcuts were not returned to the British Museum, nor do the Original Drawings include any of Cooper's sketches and watercolours from his travels, except those of Nineveh and Nimrud. In the Original Drawings there are a number of drawings and sketches almost certainly by Cooper, but which were not used in either Mon. Nin. II or Nineveh and Babylon, for example, Or. Dr. II, 44-8, and Or. Dr. IV, Misc. 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10 and 13-18.

In 1988 a descendant of Cooper's presented to the British Museum his diary of 1 January-22 August 1850, which also contains copies of some letters he wrote to his wife from Mosul (SWPS, p. 19 n. 10; the diary has since been rebound, but the pages are not numbered). From this Cooper appears to have been somewhat similar to Charles Pooter, created by the Grossmith brothers forty years later (George and Weedon Grossmith, The Diary of a Nobody, 1892). From a different social level to Layard and with contrary mores and ethical standards, he strongly disapproved of the latter's close friendship with Mrs Rolland (SWPS, p. 6) and of his lack of respect for the Sabbath. Nevertheless Cooper's diary has many interesting accounts and observations on the excavations at Kuyunjik and especially at Nimrud, where he enjoyed his visits far more than in the dust-filled tunnels and amidst the turmoil of the workmen in Sennacherib's palace. In the second half of May 1850 he spent two weeks at Nimrud, and recorded in his diary many details of daily life there and of the drawings and sketches he made. In contrast, the only relief from Sennacherib's palace which he specifically mentions is Chamber XX slab 10 (SWPS, No. 312a, p. 85), ". . . drawing of some curious figures with their headdresses ornamented with feathers and carrying spears and shields" (9 March). "Drawings" were of slabs or reliefs, and "sketches" of a scene or view of the excavations. It would seem that on average Cooper could draw a slab in one day: "commenced and finished a small drawing consisting of a single slab" (19 January), and "spent the day at the Tel. made a drawing." (12 March). And on sketching at Nimrud, "went early to the mound and made three sketches" (30 January), and ".... made a sketch of one of the entrances to the south west palace. consisting of the remains of two crouching lions between two bas reliefs representing lions standing" (4 February - Barnett and Falkner, p. 23 and P1. CVIII; Or. Dr. III, South-West Palace, No. 1). For 18 February he wrote, "Remained at home all day finishing up my drawings"; that is, he spent the day in the house rented by Layard in Mosul, adding the final touches and details to drawings made on Kuyunjik.

The entries for June 1850 reflect Cooper's deteriorating health, starting on 4 June, " very unwell took medicine"; 8 June, Sunday and so not on Kuyunjik, "The doctor [Sandwith] prescribed leeches for me but none even to be got. ... [after dinner] I went to bed and the doctor bled me in the nose"; 10 June, "began to draw made slow work of it. The Doctor now had come to stay with me and gave me medicine"; 11, 12 and 13 June, "Remained in the tent [on Kuyunjik] being too unwell to draw", and also on the 13th, "The Doctor left for Mosul to procure medicine"; 15-19 June, blank with no entries; but on 20 June, "Draw all day at the Tel." Nineveh was now hit by terrible storms, and simultaneously Cooper's health recovered. Other than noting on 2 July that he applied leeches to his right foot, which was strained and swollen, he wrote that now both

22This omits Cooper's signature, but does have Scharf's initials, together with the initials of another "artist" involved in the production of the plate. Cooper's division of the slabs is also not marked on the illustration. In Or. Dr. 11,

65 Layard did not add an annotation to this drawing. In SWPS, the slab numbers for No. 136 should read 45 + 46 + edge of 47.




Layard and Rassam were hit by fever, and that on 9 July Layard feared that Cooper would also go down with it, and advised him to leave Mosul and join the Badgers at Sheikh Matti, which he did the following day. Cooper spent much of the next month travelling with Layard in Kurdistan and the area around Van, but as both he and Sandwith had still not recovered from their various ailments, Layard now advised them to return direct to England from Van, whilst he and Rassam continued alone back to Mosul (Layard, 1853a, p. 41 1).

When Layard returned to England in July 1851, he almost immediately began work on Nineveh and Babylon and Mon. Nin. II, and had Cooper "tidy up" some of the unfinished drawings from Kuyunjik. In October Cooper sent the British Museum a claim for this work, and Layard wrote to Ellis, "The outlines of these drawings were made on the spot but owing to ill health Mr. Cooper was obliged to leave them unfinished. On my return to England I requested Mr. Cooper to complete them, under the impression that they were to form part of the collection which he had already been remunerated for making. He has since represented to me that they had occupied much of his time, and that it was certainly owing to extreme indisposition brought about in the service of the Trustees that they were not finished on the spot. The state of Mr. Cooper's health during the latter part of his residence in Assyria was certainly such as to interfere greatly with his labours, and to it I attribute the unfinished state of his drawings" (Add.MS. 38.943, f. 45r). A few days later, Ellis replied that the Trustees had agreed to Cooper's request for one month's pay (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 141). At this time Layard and Cooper must also have discussed which of Cooper's sketches were to be included in Nineveh and Babylon23 but their relationship remained strained. Layard wrote to Ellis, "I have already communicated my opinion on the subject of Mr. Cooper" (Add.MS. 38.943, f. 46r); a year earlier Dr Sandwith, who appears in general to have been of a mild and easy manner, wrote to Layard from Erzurum, "We left Mr. Walpole at Van, he really was unaccountably cool towards Cooper, so that we could never have travelled together pleasantly" (Add.MS. 38.979, f. 288v). Whether Walpole was influenced by Layard's opinion of Cooper or had formed his own, we do not know, but Cooper's personality was evidently not to every taste.

T S. Bell. Bell was sent out by the British Museum in November 1850 as Cooper's replacement. He left London in mid-November, travelling by steamer from Southampton to Alexandria, changing there to another boat for Alexandretta or Scanderoon (Iskenderun), "thence to Aleppo, and from Aleppo onwards by the Government Post to Moosul. You will be furnished with letters of introduction to Her Majesty's Consuls at all these places." He finally arrived at Mosul in the first week of March 1851, some three and a half months later.24 Bell's itinerary was included in a letter of detailed instructions from Sir Henry Ellis (Add.MS. 38.979, ff. 353-360),25 in which Ellis also noted that Bell would receive the salary of ?200 for the twelve months of his employment, "commencing upon the day of your quitting England", plus board and lodging, and travel expenses. This was evidently the British Museum's standard fee to temporary staff, as also paid to Cooper and Dr Sandwith in 1849 (Waterfield, p. 196). In 1855 Boutcher, when employed by the Assyrian Excavations Fund and Messrs Dickenson Brothers of New Bond Street, was given

23Layard to Ellis, "I feel much obliged to the Trustees for their kind compliance with my request for the use of the drawings made by Mr. Cooper, Mr. Bell & myself" (Add.MS. 38.943, f. 46r). In late 1850, J. Ferguson also had contact with Cooper, but does not write that the artist said anything of his drawings (The Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored, 1851, p. x).

24Hodder, who replaced Bell two years later, sailed via Malta to Beirut, and thence to Aleppo and Mosul (Gadd, p. 79).

25This is made up of: (i) if. 353-354 Ellis to Layard, 16 November 1850, principally concerning Bell; (ii) ff. 359-360 Ellis to Layard, 18 November 1850, when Bell had just left, enclosing copies of other letters: (a) ff. 355-356 copy of i, and (b) ff. 357-358 copy of Ellis to Bell, 9 November 1850, with instructions, itinerary, etc., as quoted here. Ellis' letter of contract to Cooper was far

briefer: of his salary of ?200, half was to be paid direct to Cooper's wife Louisa in England, and Layard had authority to pay Cooper the other half; all drawings, plans and copies of inscriptions were the property of the Museum, but no mention is made of "sketches", etc. (Add.MS. 38.979, ff. 19-20, 16 July 1849). In contrast, Canning's contract with instructions to Layard, 9 October 1845, is very formal and signed only with his initials, and with no covering letter (Add.MS. 38.976, ff. 231-233), but in a "normal" letter of 6 December 1845 he wrote with longer instructions (see Add.MS. 38.976, ff. 265-268 et passim for Canning's replies to Layard's reports on discoveries at Nimrud). A year later, 21 September 1846, Canning transferred the responsibility of the Assyrian excavations to the British Museum, with the details set out in a lengthy document (Add.MS. 39. 077, ff. 14-17, a copy Canning sent to Layard).



200 GEOFFREY TURNER

only ?80 plus expenses, but when the British Museum assumed responsibility for these final excavations at Kuyunjik, this was then increased to the same ?200 per annum (Gadd, p. 111; Barnett, 1976, p. 11).

Sir Henry Ellis' letter to Bell also gives a list of articles supplied to the young artist for his journey and period of employment in Mosul:

Saddle and Holsters. 3 foot Rule. 2 measuring tapes. Case of German Silver Instruments. Six under Vests. 4 pairs of Drawers. Map of Turkey in Case. Waterproof Coat. Flexible Hat. Over shoes. Leggings. Pair Holster pistols, Flask, Rod, brush, percussion Caps, Powder &c. 2 Solid leather portmanteau with Straps &c. Box of moist colours, Drawing pencils, sketching Umbrella Stand. Compass. Evening Dress. Telescope. Talbotype. Quinine. Scales.

The last four items, telescope, Talbotype, quinine and scales, are marked "to be considered as the property of the Trustees, and at the disposal of Mr. Layard." The Talbotype was one of the latest photographic apparatuses, a variant of the Frenchman Daguerre's calotype process, developed by W. H. Fox Talbot, who was also involved in the decipherment of cuneiform (Barnett, 1976, p. xi n. 2). Presumably Bell was instructed in the use of the Talbotype before he left London, but there is no record of his using it at Kuyunjik, Nimrud or elsewhere, and if in fact he did so, the results do not seem to have survived. There is nothing in Layard's field notes or diaries, and his only reference to photography is to an article in the periodical Athenaeum of 15 March 1851, in the notebook used during his return journey to England, 28 April-24 June 1851 (Add.MS. 39.089 D, f. 2v). On reading or hearing of this article, Layard probably intended to check the details when in London, and send any further information back to Bell in Mosul. The earliest surviving photographs from an Assyrian excavation are those taken by Victor Place at Khorsabad, 1852-3 (M. Pillet, Khorsabad: Les decouvertes de V Place en Assyrie (1918); id., Un pionnier de I'Assyriologie: Victor Place (1962)), but shortly after this, in 1854, Bell's Talbotype was certainly put into action, by William Boutcher in Ashurbanipal's North Palace on Kuyunjik. In 1855 four photographs, now very faded, were sent back to London, where they were first kept at the Royal Asiatic Society, but in 1964 they were transferred to the British Museum (Or. Dr. VII, 3, 5, 33 and 34; Barnett, 1976, Pls. XX, XXXVI, and p. 17 n. 5, a letter of 25 September 1854 from the Rev. Lobdell mentioning "photographic" records from the North Palace; J. E. Reade, Iraq 26 (1964), pp. 2 and 12). However Boutcher was not satisfied with these results, and sent to Paris for a more up-to-date French instrument, but this never reached Mosul, Boutcher finding it still "in transit" at Alexandretta/Scanderoon on his way home in early 1856 (Gadd, pp. 111-12).

Having sailed from Southampton in mid-November 1850, Bell eventually reached Mosul at the beginning of March 1851, together with the Talbotype, flexible hat, pistols and other equipment and clothing. A few days later Layard, returning from his protracted journey to Baghdad and Babylonia, "Galloped into Mosul" early on 7 March (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 26r, and Layard, 1853a, p. 582). For the final seven or so weeks of his second expedition, Layard's diary is extremely brief and short of detail, filling a little less than five pages of one of his small pocket notebooks (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 26r-28v). He was mainly occupied with finishing off and clearing up loose ends at both Kuyunjik and Nimrud, as well as in Mosul itself, and believing that he had now unearthed the most important monuments, especially at Nimrud, he neither expected nor intended to return to Assyria for a third campaign. Half of this short time Layard spent at Nimrud, closing down the excavations and arranging for the dispatch of the bull and lion colossi from the




Northwest Palace to the Guests at Canford Manor, the raft being sent off to Basrah on 19 April (Russell, 1997, pp. 67-72). He was further distracted by the visit of three Englishmen from Baghdad for a week in April, Captain Kemball and Dr Hyslop of the British Residency and the merchant or businessman, Alexander Hector. Only recently Layard had stayed at the Residency for several weeks, in the autumn of 1850 and again in February of the present year, and he now repaid their hospitality, giving a guided tour of the excavations on Kuyunjik and around the walls of Nineveh, and then on to Nimrud for a few days. Bell accompanied them to Nimrud, and on 15 April the three Englishmen returned thence direct to Baghdad. However, the same day Layard and Bell were joined at Nimrud by the American Presbyterian missionary, D. W. Marsh, who only a month later conducted the funerary rites of the ill-fated Bell.

Almost immediately after they had first met in Mosul on 7 March, Layard took Bell over to Kuyunjik the same day and showed him round the excavations, and with the exception of the few days at Nimrud in mid-April, Bell was left very much to his own devices. Presumably he made experiments at photography with the Talbotype, but almost all the excavations on Kuyunjik were underground in badly lit tunnels, and his attempts may not have been successful. Bell made fifteen sheets of drawings, totalling thirty-one slabs, from Chambers II, KK, LL, EEE-GGG and III. His first attempt was probably of Chamber II slab 1, SWPS, No. 493b. This was certainly not finished, and also does not include the leading two deportees on the right of the slab. Bell then took a larger sheet of paper, Nos. 493a-494a, redrawing the scene but to a smaller scale and now including the complete length of slab 1 and also the fragmentary slab 2 (SWPS, p. 114, P1. 388). Of these drawings, Bell only signed one, that of slabs 1-3 of Chamber EEE, and dated it March 15th (SWPS, Nos. 606a-608a, p. 128).

A second drawing signed by Bell is not of a wall relief or orthostat, but has two details of a threshold or pavement slab, SWPS, No. 61d, p. 57, P1. 58. Layard annotated this, "Ornament. Kouyunjik between winged Bulls Chamber C". This entrance, from Chamber C of the Throneroom Suite into Court I, had been excavated in 1847, but Layard does not refer to a threshold slab either in LN I (SWPS, p. 11) nor in Nineveh and its Remains II, p. 132:26 "The winged bulls, forming the entrance into the hall to the west [I], were also in a very dilapidated condition, and the heads were wanting. Between them I discovered a lion-headed human figure, raising a sword or staff in one hand. It was sculptured on a small slab. Half the figure had been destroyed." This lion-demon is also not mentioned in LN 1 but Layard did make a drawing of it, with the annotation, "Fragment. Kouyunjik. between winged bulls. Ch. C" (SWPS, No. 61c, p. 57, P1. 58).27 In his second campaign at Kuyunjik, Layard excavated along the east wall of Court I in December 1849 and early January 1850 (Add.MS. 39.096, ff. 30r, 31r and 35r), and the last slab of this fa9ade drawn by Cooper was No. 68, some 5 m to the north of entrance a. In 1847 Layard had found that the orthostats on either side of this doorway were badly damaged (Layard, 1849, II p.134), but in view of the important series of reliefs that he now discovered in 1849/50 along the north and east walls of Court I, he may well have continued tunnelling as far as entrance a in the hope of finding more. If so, however, the slabs were evidently too fragmentary to record, let alone draw. In 1847 another threshold slab had been discovered in Chamber C, but in entrance e on the east side of the room, connecting it to Throneroom B (SWPS, No. 22, p. 56);28 with this in mind, Layard may have instructed Bell in 1851 to investigate entrance a more fully. That drawing No. 61d is signed by Bell29 demonstrates that it was executed at this time, and the wording of

' In Layard, 1849, II, this entrance is referred to as b, but in Layard, 1853a, as a. In SWPS and the present article, a is followed.

27 Compare the lion-demon found in Chamber 0 in June 1850, which at the time of the destruction of the palace had also been broken off at knee-level and was found lying loose and not in situ (SWPS, No. 531, p. 120 and Pi. 416, and especially Malan's watercolour, P1. 415). The lion- demon from Chamber C, entrance a, was evidently a small, or half-slab figure, but that from Chamber 0 of which two- thirds or three-quarters survives is 178.5 cm in height.

28LN I (SWPS, p. 10) and Layard, 1849, II, p. 126, re- excavated by Madhloom (Sumer 21 (1965), pp. 4-6; Russell,

1991, pp. 18-19 and Fig. 13). The drawing of this slab (SWPS, No. 676, p. 137 and P1. 498) is not by Layard, as suggested by Russell (Russell, 1998, p. 221), but is most probably to be attributed to Boutcher. It is of the same quality and precision as Or. Dr. V, 59 and 60, both pavement slabs from the North Palace and both signed by Boutcher. In drawing No. 676 from Sennacherib's palace the central band has been left blank, but is in fact inscribed (Russell, 1991, pp. 18-19; 1998, Pls. 28-9; 1999, pp. 132-3), but Layard does not mention this inscription (Layard, 1849, II, p. 126).

29The signature on No. 61d is certainly that of Bell, as is verified by comparison with that on No. 606a-608a and on his letter to Layard, Add.MS. 38.980, f. 52r.



202 GEOFFREY TURNER

Layard's annotation, which is almost identical to that on the earlier drawing No. 61c of the lion- demon, shows that he was certain of its find-spot. In his recent study of Sennacherib's Throneroom Suite Russell does not mention any trace of a pavement slab here, but his photograph, taken in 1989, suggests that it might still be possible to "scratch around" and check this (Russell, 1998, p. 239 and P1. 194).

From Layard's second expedition there is also a drawing of a corner section of the pavement slab in the extremely wide opening between Chambers GG and LLL (SWPS, No. 329a, p. 87, P1. 232). Layard annotated this, "Pavement slab between Lions Ch.T- Kouyunjik", but did not include the letter of the chamber.30 In Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 437-42, Layard states that Chamber GG was excavated in the summer of 1850 whilst he was in the north, but there is no reference to it in his diary entries, and it is also possible that it was excavated when he was on his journey to the south, 18 October 1850-7 March 1851. LN 2E and LN 3 both include the lion colossi of this entrance without mentioning the pavement slab, but it is described in Nineveh and Babylon (Layard, 1853a, p. 442; SWPS, p. 14; Russell, 1995, pp. 81 and 84). This entrance was certainly excavated after Cooper had been sent back to England in August 1850, and since drawing SWPS, No. 329a was not signed and thus most probably not by Layard, but in both style and execution is very close to SWPS, No. 61d which was signed by Bell, it also was probably by him. Likewise, a third drawing of a pavement slab may be attributed to Bell (SWPS, No. 679, p. 137, P1. 499). The style and technique of this drawing are very close to both SWPS, Nos. 61d and 329a, and it also shows only a section of the threshold. Layard did not annotate Or. Dr. I, 53 (SWPS, No. 679), but it is bound up in Or. Dr. I following No. 52 (SWPS, No. 329a), and was not included in Or. Dr. V or VI with the drawings of Hodder and Boutcher. This indicates that the British Museum compilers of the Original Drawings were of the belief that SWPS, No. 679 also originated from Layard's second expedition.

Drawings SWPS, Nos. 61d and 329a were both illustrated in Mon. Nin. II, P1. 56 (Fig. 6), but with alterations and adaptations. When compared with SWPS, Pls. 58 and 232, it is seen that No. 329a has been turned 180? and redrawn in a different format, and similarly No. 61d, with the border detail now above and the quatrefoil below. Furthermore, the border lotus garland or fringe has intervening buds, whereas on No. 61d these are cones. However, as Albenda has already remarked, the third pavement slab drawing, No. 679, also has empty, un-chequered buds (P. Albenda, Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 10 (1978), p.14). The lithographs for Mon. Nin. II were engraved by Ludwig Gruner, who also worked for the Guests at Canford Manor (Russell, 1997, pp. 85-90 et passim), but we do not know whether he took this "artistic licence" on his own initiative or by Layard's direction. No such notes of instruction to this effect were made by Layard on these drawings, as he did in other cases, for example SWPS, Nos. 432a-434a and 437a-439a, pp. 103-4. Mon. Nin. II, P1. 56 has the title "Sculptured Pavement, (Kouyunjik.)", and in the Description of the Plates, p. 7, is added, "In alabaster; between the winged Bulls at entrance c of Chamber XXIV. Many of the entrances at Kouyunjik had similar pavement slabs." In other words, the three illustrated sections should be of one and the same pavement slab, that of entrance c of Room XXIV/Chamber GG, which was furnished with winged bulls. Parts of this description are unfortunate errors. In both LN 2E and LN 3, in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 442, and in the annotation on drawing SWPS, No. 329a, Layard identifies the colossi of this entrance as lions, and furthermore the three illustrated details could not be part of a single pavement slab, as there are two types of both quatrefoil and garland.

The key phrases of Layard's annotations on drawings SWPS, Nos. 61d and 329a are "between winged Bulls" and "between Lions", and the first drawing he identified as of Chamber C, but for some reason he was not certain about the second, and just made a stroke or dash after Chr. Later in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 442, he wrote that, "an enormous alabaster pavement slab, sculptured in relief, with a very elegant design, consisting of a border of alternate tulips or lotus flowers and cones, inclosing similar ornaments arranged in squares and surrounded by rosettes" had been

300n Or. Dr. I, 52, "Chr" is written slightly higher than the main line of the annotation. The British Museum compilers misread Layard's annotation, and the inked title has "Pavement Slab between Lion's Chamber", omitting

Layard's stroke after Ch' where the identifying letter was to have been added. When he annotated this drawing, Layard was obviously uncertain as to which room the pavement slab belonged.




found in the entrance between Chambers GG and LLL, and identified it as that illustrated in Mon. Nin. II, P1. 56. Although Layard did not add the chamber reference to drawing SWPS, No. 329a, he doubtless associated it with Chamber GG by reason of the lion guardian figures. Most such portal colossi in Sennacherib's palace were bulls, and the lion or sphinx counterparts have been identified at only four, or possibly five entrances (H. D. Galter, L. D. Levine and J. E. Reade, Annual Review of the Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia Project 4 (1986), pp. 27-32). As well as in entrance c between Chambers GG and LLL, they were found in Chamber XX, between Chambers AA/CC and BB, Court EEE and Chamber DDD, and possibly also between Chambers MM and 00. For the last entrance, LN 3 identifies the colossi as lions (Russell, 1995, p. 82, in the entries for both MM and 00), but in Nineveh and Babylon they are bulls, similar to those in the preceding two entrances, from Court U into Chamber Z, and thence into MM (Layard, 1853a, p. 445).

On folio 35v of his notebook, Add.MS. 39.089 E, on the upper part of the page, Layard first wrote a list of packing cases from Nimrud, which he probably made at that site between 12 and 17 April 1851 (p. 206); below are three locations in Sennacherib's palace, where he probably wanted Bell to make further drawings or investigations: "Ent[ran]ce into Chambers at back of Bulls near S edge of Mound - Chamber [or Chambers ?] with common stone near abandoned Karkhaneh - See Chamber to S of 00". Of these, the first evidently refers to entrance c of Chamber GG, which lay behind entrance 1 with its bull colossi between Court U and Chamber GG, on the southern edge of Kuyunjik. This, therefore, confirms the attribution of drawing SWPS, No. 329a to Bell.

The second location in this list, "Chamber[s?] with common stone near abandoned Karkhaneh", is less easy to place. By "common stone" Layard implies limestone, and not alabaster or gypsum, and in his account identifies this stone in several rooms, used both for the entrance figures and for the orthostats, only in Chamber BB were the limestone slabs carved, not by Sennacherib, but by his grandson Ashurbanipal (SWPS, pp. 94 ff.). Layard describes the limestone used in Chambers Z, AA/CC, BB and for the entrance figures of Chamber MM as "fossiliferous", but the carved slabs of the last room were of alabaster (Layard, 1853a, pp. 445-6). On fossiliferous limestone, Akkadian pindu, he elaborated, "harder and more difficult to work than the usual alabaster or gypsum, yet it admits of high finish" (Layard, 1853a, p. 446), and Sennacherib clearly considered the exceptional quality of this stone sufficient in itself without further decoration, and only later did Ashurbanipal decide to carve the orthostats of Chamber BB with scenes of his important victory over the Elamites. In LN 3 Layard notes that in four other rooms the orthostats were also of limestone, but also not carved: QQ and RR "very fine white limestone", and BBB and CCC, simply "limestone" (Russell, 1995, pp. 82-3); in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 69, the plain slabs of Room LIII, in the western & detached galleries adjacent to Room LI/Chamber ZZ, are of "compact limestone". In Chamber XX the "colossal human-headed lions" were of "coarse limestone", but of the slabs of this room Layard only says that they were "equally mutilated", without giving the material, but presumably this was the usual alabaster (Layard, 1853a, p. 230).

In addition to this list of three locations in Sennacherib's palace, Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 35v, Layard only uses the term "common stone" in his field notes in the same notebook, LN 2E, of the bull colossi in the central entrance between Chambers MM and Z (SWPS, p. 14). In the list on f. 35v he also specifies "near abandoned Karkhaneh", but in April 1851 there was no such abandoned Karkhaneh within the vicinity of Chamber MM; however, Room LIII with its "compact limestone" formed part of the western & detached galleries, in the trenches and tunnels excavated in 1848 by Ross, and Chamber XX was similarly discovered "near an old trench" (above p. 181). The reliefs found in Chamber XX were in a fragmentary state, but of unusual scenes, and a number had been drawn by Cooper in January-March 1850 (SWPS, pp. 84-5). Now, a year later, Layard may well have considered it worthwhile, if Bell had the time and opportunity, to reinvestigate this room and make drawings of any additional slabs found here; however Bell evidently did not do so, for there are no drawings from Chamber XX that can be attributed to him.

The third area or room in Sennacherib's palace listed in notebook B, f. 35v, was to the south of Chamber 00, probably the "inclined or ascending passage" VV, of which there is an unsigned



204 GEOFFREY TURNER

drawing of the "Elevation of the East Wall" (Layard, 1853a, pp. 460-2; Or. Dr. I, 48; SWPS, pp. 32, 127 and P1. 19). Layard wrote that this ramp or stairwell was excavated in July or August 1850 whilst he was in Kurdistan and eastern Anatolia, but it is also possible that it was investigated later that year or in early 1851 when he was away again in Babylonia and the south, as also may have been the case of Chamber GG (p. 202). There is no reference to Chamber W or the adjacent rooms in Layard's diaries, and in the brief entry for W in LN 2E, Layard notes the low alabaster slabs in the section or passage to the left of the entrance and to the south of the central solid pier, the four apotropaic figures at the entrance, and the floor of lime plaster (SWPS, p. 14). There is no mention here of the inclined ramp and elaborate brickwork of the walls, nor of the clay bullae found in W, all of which are described in detail in Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 153-4 and 460-2. The drawing of the elevation of Chamber VV was unsigned, and thus most probably not by Layard, but can be attributed to Bell by reason of the "See Chamber to S of 00" in notebook E, f. 35v. This drawing was first made in pencil, and then later inked over, with the lines of the brickwork picked out in white and the ramp done in a brown wash, and in this final state is to be compared to Cooper's drawing of the elevations of the Nimrud ziggurat (Or. Dr. III, High Pyramid, No. 4; Layard's diary 22 January 1850, Add.MS. 39.096, f. 37r and v). Both drawings were probably "finished off" in London by Cooper in autumn 1851, when the woodcuts or engravings were being prepared (Layard, 1853a, pp. 127 and 461, and above p. 199).

Although he did not finally leave Mosul until 28 April 1851, Layard closed down the main excavations on Kuyunjik on 19 April, leaving three Karkhanehs or groups of workmen at Bell's disposal, principally to safeguard the British Museum's tenure of the mound. On the same day, according to his diary, "Go round excavations with Mr. Bell" (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 28 v); two days later, 21 April, he set down his instructions in a letter to Bell, who would have expected to remain at Mosul for at least another three months. The British Museum had engaged Bell for an initial period of one year, as from the day of his departure from England in mid-November 1850; allowing for three months or so for his return journey, he had now until the end of July to occupy himself. In his letter (Add.MS. 38.943, ff. 35-36) Layard leaves Bell in the hands of the vice- consul, Christian Rassam, for everyday and local matters, such as finance; however, the ultimate authority naturally remained with Sir Henry Ellis and the Trustees of the Museum. On Kuyunjik Layard wrote: "By reference to the plan you will perceive what parts of the Edifice now being excavated require exploring. I may, however, observe what [sic] it would be very desirable to ascertain, if possible, the connexion between the grand entrances, of which remains have been found to the East & west of the Palace & any inclined way, or flight of steps, leading up from the plain, and that architectural & ornamental details should be carefully measured, noted, & drawn. You will of course make careful drawings of all the sculptures discovered and add to the plan such chambers as are explored - You are at liberty to make experiments in any other part of the mound of [which] you think it desirable to do so. Great care should be taken to collect all small objects of interest such as inscribed tablets impressions of seals &c".

Layard's instructions are very much those to be expected, but with the addition of his important and interesting suggestion that Bell investigate a Grand Entrance to the west, that is from the southwest terrace platform into Room LIV, as drawn on his final plan in Nineveh and Babylon. In a short account of this Grand Entrance in Iraq 63 (2001), pp. 127-8, regrettably I failed to refer to this letter of Layard's to Bell, which would appear to be his only mention of this feature, except for that in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 645. Such a Grand Entrance from the west is not drawn on Layard's MS Plan, but as will be seen below, pp. 209-10, the two sheets of paper used for this plan were not large enough to include all those parts of the palace excavated by Layard, and some were drawn as detached units and out of context, as indeed was the Grand Entrance from the east into Throneroom B. If Layard had, in fact, discovered part of a second Grand Entrance from the west, as shown on the Nineveh and Babylon plan, he would not have been able to draw it in its true position on the main sheet of the MS Plan, but nor did he include it here as a detached unit. However, by the upper left corner of this sheet of the MS Plan, there are a row of short vertical strokes in ink, which would coincide almost exactly with the position of such a Grand Entrance. Alternatively, if not more probably, these small marks may have some totally unconnected significance, if indeed any at all.




Layard proposed that Bell should investigate the Grand Entrance in the hope of tracing a ramp or flight of steps from the outer town up to the palace on the citadel mound, obviously thinking of the twin staircases at Persepolis which lead up to the Gate-House of Xerxes. In June 1850, W. S. W. Vaux of the Department of Antiquities in the British Museum had sent Layard a copy of his recently published Nineveh and Persepolis (Add.MS. 38.979, ff. 248-249). Two months later James Ferguson also wrote to Layard (Add.MS. 38.979, ff. 281-282, 1 August 1850), and when Layard was back in England, Ferguson and he became close friends and collaborators. Ferguson's The Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored was issued in 1851, two years before Nineveh and Babylon, but for the frontispiece of the latter Ferguson drew a grandiose design of the entrance to Sennacherib's palace from the northeast, based on Persepolis. On the general plan of Nimrud in Nineveh and Babylon (facing p. 653), Layard restored seven such staircases leading up to the citadel, which were not on the earlier plan (Layard, 1849, I, facing p. 332), and in this final description of Kuyunjik he proposed that there might have been a similar flight of steps or an inclined ramp leading up from the Tigris (Layard, 1853a, p. 645), but he did not restore this on the plan.

Three days after Layard had left Mosul, Bell wrote to him on 1 May 1851 that he himself was about to leave on his ill-fated trip to Bavian (Add.MS. 38.980, ff. 51-52), where he was drowned in the Gomel in the evening of 13 May (Gadd, pp. 70-1).31 Of Kuyunjik, Bell reported the discovery of one or two small seals, some fragments of tablets and a pottery jar of which he made a small sketch, closely following Layard's instructions, "Great care should be taken to collect all small objects of interest such as inscribed tablets impressions of seals &c". He also made a copy of Sennacherib's standard epigraph, but transcribed upside down. This was inscribed on the reverse of a slab "representing a sea fight", probably either Court EEE slab 5 (SWPS, No. 61 la, p. 129, P1. 454) or Chamber GGG slab 1 (SWPS, No. 643a, p. 131, P1. 463), both of which illustrate a battle in the southern marshes and both drawn by Bell. Of the two, the first is the more likely, as Layard illustrated it in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 585 (see also p. 207).

Layard's visitors at Nimrud, April 1851 In the second week of April 1851, Layard received three visitors from Baghdad, Capt. A. B.

Kemball and Dr J. M. Hyslop of the British Residency32 and the businessman or merchant, Alexander Hector (Add.MS. 39.089 E, ff. 27r-28r, 8 April et passim). When in Baghdad the previous autumn and in February 1851, Layard had stayed at the Residency33 where Kemball was acting Resident in Rawlinson's absence, and where he would also have seen much of Hyslop, who administered professionally to the fevered Layard. As recently as 26 March 1851 Hyslop had written to Layard now back in Mosul, "Kemball and I have been talking seriously of going up to Mosul but I put no faith in it" (Add.MS. 39.980, f. 40v). During their week's stay in the north, Layard showed the three Englishmen around Kuyunjik and the walls of Niveveh, and then they all travelled to Nimrud by raft, together with Bell. On 15 April Kemball and his two companions continued down the Tigris to Baghdad, and later that day Layard and Bell were joined at Nimrud by the American Presbyterian missionary, D. W. Marsh.

Layard makes no reference to the subject in his diary, but during this visit of the three Englishmen to Mosul, they certainly discussed the distribution of "specimens" of reliefs from

31 Layard, 1853a, p. 214 n., gives the date of Bell's death as July 1851. Before his death Bell made drawings at Maltai and Bavian, which Christian Rassam later sent off to Layard. However the same Ottoman mail was transporting a large consignment of money, and was attacked and successfully robbed by "Arabs", who also carried off the package for Layard with Bell's drawings, as reported by Matilda Rassam to Layard, 7 July 1851 (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 74r). Two weeks later her husband wrote, but with better news, "and notwithstanding all my endeavours to recover it I have succeeded" (op. cit., f. 82r); and the drawings were now dispatched safely to London = Or. Dr. II, 24-5 (Bavian) and 26-8 (Maltayiah/Maltai). Gadd, understand- ably, misinterpreted Christian Rassam's wording of the

good news, and believed that the drawings had been destroyed by the "Arabs", and not recovered (Gadd, p. 71).

32Arnold Burrows Kemball, later Major-Gen. Sir, East India Co., was attached to the Baghdad Residency as political agent in the Persian Gulf (letters to Layard: Add.MS. 38.942 and 38.979). In both his notebooks and in Nineveh and Babylon, Layard spells the name Kemball in various ways. James McAdam Hyslop was Assistant- Surgeon, East India Co.

33 For two photographs of the British Residency see Iraq 55 (1993), p. 45 Fig. 8, taken by Hyslop in the mid-1850s, possibly with Bell's Talbotype (also on the Baghdad Residency see Waterfield, pp. 45 If.; J. Ussher, A Journey from London to Persepolis ( 1865), pp. 440-1).



206 GEOFFREY TURNER

Nimrud, and possibly also from Kuyunjik. The list of packing cases of sculpture from Nimrud in Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 35v, which Layard made at this time, has:

8 for Guest & one box Marked I G 2 for S.C. marked S C 2 Pieces for Kemball I for Dr. 1 for Keliluti[?]

The eight pieces for Sir John and Lady Charlotte Guest were the bull and lion colossi, each now sawn into four pieces for transport and moving purposes; Layard noted in his diary that the raft loaded with these left Nimrud on 19 April (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 28v), presumably also with the other boxes listed here. The second box marked "S C" was for Sir Stratford Canning, the third with two fragments for Captain Kemball, the fourth with only one piece for a doctor, probably Dr Hyslop, and the fifth was for an as yet unidentified recipient.

Layard may already have discussed the matter of the disposal of the reliefs and sculptures with Rawlinson, when the latter passed through Mosul on his way to England in October 1849 (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 25r, 20-3 October). Less than a month later, on 12 November 1849, Layard wrote to G. T. Clark that he was waiting to hear from Lady Charlotte Guest as to her wishes for fresh sculptures for Canford (Russell, 1997, p. 67). As previously mentioned, when he was in Baghdad in the autumn of 1850 and in February 1851, Layard was laid low for much of his stay with fever; but doubtless he still managed to check on the shipping to England of the large consignments of sculpture which had already been sent down from the north. Kemball, as acting Resident, would have been very much involved in this.34 Layard would also have conferred with Thomas Lynch, of the family shipping firm Stephen Lynch & Co., who had visited Layard in Mosul in early January 1850 (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 35, 2-4 January), and also with the Hector brothers, Alexander and George.

Layard had met the Hectors during his first expedition to Mesopotamia in the early 1840s, and the elder brother Alexander, "a gentleman from Baghdad", had visited him at Nimrud soon after he had started work there in late 1845. They had then travelled down the Tigris together, arriving at Baghdad just in time for Christmas (Add.MS. 39.090 B, f. 3, and Layard, 1849, I, p. 50). In 1847 Hector sold the British Museum a group of reliefs from Khorsabad, which he had removed himself after Botta had concluded the Louvre's excavations there (Gadd, pp. 160-3). When Layard was in Baghdad in the autumn of 1850 and again in February 1851, as well as arranging for the transport of the recent consignments from Kuyunjik to England,35 they doubtless discussed the possibility of Hector acquiring another collection of reliefs for himself. Hector then travelled up to Mosul in early April with Kemball and Hyslop, and a selection was made when they visited Nimrud, 12-15 April, but unfortunately Hector never received these reliefs. On 21 May 1851, Christian Rassam wrote to Layard, who was then at Alexandretta on his return journey to England, to inform him of Bell's sudden death, and ". . . I assure you that I am quite at a lose [sic] what is to be done at the Mound. What cases are to be sent to England, & those that are to go to Baghdad for Mr. Hector who says that you gave him 10 large sculptures. Mr. Marsh has taken 3 large figures from Nimrood, according to your directions." (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 56). Three weeks later Matilda Rassam, Christian's British wife, took up the correspondence, "13 Cases of Sculptures are now ready to be sent on to Baghdad.... Behnan [the stone-cutter] is down there [Nimrud] & has been for the last month preparing the Slabs which you gave to Ml' Hector & Marsh" (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 74v). Then on 21 July 1851 Christian Rassam wrote again that fourteen cases had been sent down to Baghdad, but the raft had been attacked and sunk just below Shergat, and all was lost (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 82r). The fourteenth box contained a large pottery vase, which had been presented to Layard by "the Patriarch", but Rassam does not specify of which church.36

34As in a letter from Kemball to Alexander Hector, 8 November 1850 (Add.MS. 38.979, f. 345).

35 The Layard Papers include letters from Alexander Hector, 1842-63, and also from his younger brother George, 1844-51, mostly concerning the transport of sculp-

tures to the British Museum (Add.MS. Vol. 19 (1911-15) B, Index).

36 Rassam was a Chaldaean, but Layard also had contact with the leading clerics of other churches, such as the Armenians, as for example in the course of his July and




Following the disaster Alexander Hector wrote to Layard in England, but not until 16 October 1851, some three months later: "I must now tell you about the unfortunate loss of all my slabs you were kind enough to give me, part of them were destroyed & sunk in the river near Shirgat by the Arabs along with a lot belonging to you & one or two pieces that were left buried on the bank of the river at Nimroud they dug up & broke to pieces I really wish you could assist in obtaining permission for me from the Trustees to take one or two of the same kind, there are lots left; I want them for myself & not for any public purpose & if I do get permission the Trustees shall have the refusal of any of the slabs they might take a fancy to -The loss of a little money one might forget but these slabs I never shall if I do not get them replaced I some time ago told Mr Stirling to communicate with you about this & I have no doubt you will do what you can for me" (Add.MS. 38.980, f. 148).

The thirteen cases of sculpture lost near Shergat37 were presumably made up of ten boxes with Alexander Hector's large slabs from Nimrud, and the remaining three for Layard to dispose of. Layard doubtless gave Hector his group in recognition of help in arranging the recent shipments of antiquities to England. We do not know what Layard intended to do with his share, "a lot" according to Hector, whether they were destined for the British Museum, for the Guests at Canford, or elsewhere. In Nineveh and Babylon, p. 441, Layard identifies slabs 20-22 of Court U as part of this consignment. Already in late June 1850 he had removed six slabs from the west facade of this courtyard, Nos. 10-12 and 17-19 (SWPS, Nos. 277b, 282b-283b, and 284b, Pls. 195, 197, 207, 209 and 211, and above p. 186), but the drawings of slabs 20-23, which Layard himself had made (SWPS, Pls. 189-92), show them to have been more fragmentary and of less interest than the first six. However, after Layard had left Mosul and was on his way back to England, Bell wrote that he had removed a slab "representing a sea fight" and it has been proposed above that this was either Court EEE slab 5 or Chamber GGG slab 1 (p. 205). If, in fact, Bell was referring to a relief from Court U, it would have been slab 20, which illustrated a group of Assyrian soldiers crossing a river afloat inflated skins (SWPS, PI. 192), but it is difficult to believe that Bell would have described this scene as a "sea fight". Either Bell had misunderstood Layard's instructions, which were delivered verbally on Kuyunjik on 19 April 1851 and not in his letter of 21 April (Add.MS. 39.089 E, f. 28v, and 38.943, ff. 35-36), and had moved the wrong slab or, when Layard added this footnote in Nineveh and Babylon, probably in the latter part of 1852, he had forgotten exactly which slabs he had asked Bell to ship, and transposed Court U slabs 20-22 for Court EEE slab 5 or Chamber GGG slab 1. There is no record as to whichever sculptures were in Layard's three cases lost at Shergat, not even whether they were all from Kuyunjik, or also from Nimrud. Nor evidently did Layard follow up Hector's request, that he seek the permission of the Trustees for Hector's loss to be made up with fresh pieces from Nimrud; but by this time Rawlinson had returned to Baghdad after his two years' absence, and doubtless Hector would have now turned to him for assistance.

Layard's American visitor at Nimrud on 15 and 16 April 1851 was D. W. Marsh, a Presbyterian minister who lived in Mosul for the ten years 1850-60. Marsh met Layard soon after his arrival in Mosul and became engrossed in the discoveries at Kuyunjik and Nimrud, especially by reason of their Biblical significance (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 4v, 24 June 1850); although Layard does not mention it, it was doubtless during Marsh's visit to Nimrud in April 1851 that Layard offered him two or three large slabs from the Northwest Palace. As seen above, Christian Rassam wrote to Layard in May 1851 that Marsh had taken "3 large figures from Nimroud, according to your directions", which his wife Matilda noted had been removed by the stone-cutter Behnan at the same time as the ten slabs for Hector. Marsh subsequently presented two of these slabs to his old college in Williamstown, Massachusetts, and these were probably the first Assyrian reliefs to reach

August 1850 excursion to the north (Layard, 1853a, pp. 392, 412 et passim), but nowhere does he mention being presented with a large pottery vessel by a patriarch. This lost gift to Layard may be connected in some way with a relief fragment from the Northwest Palace at Nimrud, Throneroom B slab 6, which in the mid-19th century was acquired by a member of the Armenian church, taken to the Armenian Monastery of the Mechitharisten in Vienna by Father

Clemens Mekerditsh Siblilian (1824-78), and recently sold at Sotheby's New York, 17 December 1998, lot 213 (E. Bleibtreu, WZKM 69 (1977), pp. 41 ff.).

37 Gadd, p. 72, mistakenly has the consignment as of 15 cases, but Matilda Rassam definitely wrote that there were 13 boxes of sculpture, plus the Patriarch's pot, that is a total of 14.



208 GEOFFREY TURNER

America (J. B. Steam, Reliefs from the Palace of Ashur-Nasir-Pal (AfO Beiheft 15), 1961, pp. 2-4 and 7-8). Doubtless alarmed by the attack on the raft at Shergat, Marsh had his sculptures transported overland, to Alexandretta/Scanderoon and shipped thence to America.

S. C. Malan In the course of a three month tour of the Near East, the Rev. S. C. Malan stayed in Mosul

for ten days, 10-20 June 1850, and in this short time made a series of watercolour sketches at Kuyunjik and Nimrud. These, now in the British Library,38 are contained in an album of 274 sketches made on this tour, with thirteen of Sennacherib's palace, eleven of Nimrud, and two panoramas of greater Nineveh (Gadd, Iraq 5 (1938), pp. 118-22). Twelve of the Kuyunjik watercolours are illustrated in SWPS (list on p. 10), and the thirteenth is a sketch of the lion- demon from Chamber 0, which Malan incorporated in his composition of the tunnelled excavations of this passage (Add.MS. 45.360, f. 54 right = SWPS, No. 531; SWPS, No. 531b, P1. 415, reproduced in Layard, 1853a, p. 104).

Malan's aim was not to make accurate drawings of the reliefs as "scientific" records, as was that of Layard and of the two British Museum artists, Cooper and Bell; he simply sketched the excavations then in progress. Nevertheless, these are invaluable and important evidence of what had been discovered by June 1850, and of the aspect and condition of the excavations and tunnels. When back in England, Layard renewed his contact with Malan, whose parish was at Broadwindsor in Dorset, just under 40 miles or 60 km to the west of Canford, where the manor was now being enlarged and enriched with Assyrian sculptures by Layard's cousin, Lady Charlotte Guest (Russell, 1997, p.85). Four of Malan's watercolours were reproduced as lithographs in Nineveh and Babylon (Layard 1853a, facing pp. 104, 340, 343 and 345), and a dozen or so of his sketches of local life and scenes appear as woodcuts (Layard, 1853a, p. I et passim; p. 363: ". .. the Rev. Mr. Malan, to whom I am indebted for many beautiful sketches, and of whose kindness in affording me these valuable illustrations").

MS Plan The MS Plan (SWPS, p. 18 and Pls. 6-7) was Layard's site plan from his second campaign at

Kuyunjik, on which he drew almost all those parts of Sennacherib's palace excavated between October 1849 and April 1851, but not Chambers A-H which had been discovered in the first short season of 1847. In his diary entry for 27 October 1849 Layard records "At the Mound taking measurements of chambers uncovered" (Add.MS. 39.096, f. 25r), probably marking his first work on the plan.

The MS Plan is made up of three separate sheets of paper, but at some stage as yet unknown the two first original sheets were glued together, and it is on this double or main sheet that the greater part of the palace was drawn. Later, probably in early autumn 1850 after returning to Mosul from his summer excursion in the north, Layard had to take a third, smaller sheet of paper to include the new discoveries now being made to the south, along the edge of the mound overlooking the River Khosr. When Layard began his second campaign in October 1849, Toma Shishman had already uncovered the complete south side of Court I, together with Chamber K and parts of J and L to the southwest. In 1847 Layard had excavated part of the west fa9ade of Forecourt H leading into Throneroom B, which he believed to be the outer wall of the palace on the east side. In 1848 Ross had investigated the western & detached galleries along the southwest edge of the mound, overlooking the Tigris. Layard thus took Court I, "the Great Hall", to be the central element of the palace, and accordingly set it towards the centre of his new site plan, although at this time the MS Plan was still made up of two loose sheets of paper not as yet stuck

38 Add.MS. 45.360. The album is entitled "Syria: Assyria, & Armenia - Sketches from nature, taken from May 1st to July 29th. 1850." It is numbered Vol. IV, but the compan- ion volumes were not presented to the Library. The album has since been cut up and the drawings remounted. In SWPS, p. 143 two watercolours of excavations at Nineveh contained in the Original Drawings (Or. Dr. IV, Misc. 6 and 7), Nos. 781-782, Pls. 518-19, have also been tentat-

ively attributed to Malan, but in fact were most probably by Cooper. On the reverse of one of his watercolours (SWPS, p. 107, No. 447b), Malan wrote that Layard was free to publish his drawings and sketches, but must return the originals afterwards to Malan, whereas SWPS, Nos. 781-782 have remained in the British Museum. Compare Williams' note to Layard regarding Churchill's drawings (Turner, 2001, p. 117).




together. This would have allowed sufficient space for Chambers A-H to the east on the lower part of the plan, and above for Ross' discoveries to the west. When the two loose sheets of paper were glued together, a perfect join was not effected, and not only is the overlap marked by a dirty edge, but on the upper north side of Court I the two corresponding halves of slab 45 are badly aligned, giving the erroneous impression of two slabs (SWPS, P1. 97). At a later date, again unknown but probably sometime after the MS Plan had been deposited in the British Museum in July 1851, this double sheet was sliced into four segments or parts, with such sharply cut edges as to form almost perfect joins, with two main pieces each 51 x 66 cm or 20 x 24 in. and two margin strips along the right or northern side, each 51 x 6.4 cm or 20 x 211/2 in.

More recently the double or main sheet of the MS Plan, which is made up of the two original sheets now glued together, and the third smaller sheet have been mounted side by side, as reproduced in SWPS, Pls. 6 and 7. This is misleading as, in fact, the two sheets overlap and were not drawn in juxtaposition. On the larger or double sheet Layard was just able to draw the total outlines of Chamber 00, as well as the three central doorways connecting Court U and Chambers Z, MM and 00. However, on the smaller sheet only the southern half of 00 is shown, the slabs were not delineated, and only the south side of the doorway into 00 from MM was indicated, although with both reveals of the central entrances between U, Z and MM (SWPS, P1. 7). On the smaller sheet of paper, the outlines of the southern half of QQ and part of the north wall of RR are also sketched in pencil, as further guides for aligning the two sheets.

The MS Plan was first drawn in pencil and later inked over, the latter so accurately that on much of the plan the pencilled lines are barely visible. Similarly the capital letters used for the chambers and the Arabic numerals for the doorways and entrances were first in pencil and subsequently inked over. On the MS Plan the rooms and courtyards are referred to by the alphabetical sequence, I-Z, AA-ZZ, and AAA-PPP, and similarly so in Layard's diaries, field notes LN 2C and 2E, and in LN 3. In Nineveh and Babylon this notation was replaced by Roman numerals, but not in the actual text, the room numbers being used only in footnotes. The location PPP on the MS Plan, to the north of P and west of R and S, is neither marked nor mentioned elsewhere. Doorways and entrances are signified by Arabic numbers. In LN2C and 2E, when specifying an entrance, Layard referred either to the "West Ent[ran]ce", "E Ent[ran]ce", or "First Ent[ran]ce", etc., and likewise in the first part of LN 3, but from Chamber U onwards in LN 3, he used Arabic numerals for the entrances and doorways, as on the MS Plan. In Nineveh and Babylon these were replaced by letters in lower case, with every entrance and doorway marked, whereas on the MS Plan not all were numbered; for example in Court I only the three central entrances were numbered 1, 2 and 3, while on the Nineveh and Babylon plan they are d, g and k.

On the MS Plan, slabs are either delineated and, where appropriate, numbered as later on the Nineveh and Babylon plan, or they are indicated by double lines but without the individual slabs marked. In his diaries and field notes LN 2C and 2E Layard did not yet use the slab numbers. In LN 2C the entry for Chamber DD has, "1st slab ent[ran]ce large 2 led horses ... 3 D[itt]o . . .", etc. (SWPS, p. 14), but not, "No.1 ... No. 2 ... No. 3 .. .". In LN3 the slab numbers were introduced from Chamber T onwards, Layard making this fair copy of the field notes when back in London, probably at the same time as he also now added the slab numbers to his MS Plan and on the Original Drawings. These slab numbers are on the Nineveh and Babylon plan and in Mon. Nin. II, but not in the text of Nineveh and Babylon. In Nineveh and its Remains Layard does use both the room letters and the slab numbers, but in Nineveh and Babylon the dimensions of rooms and courtyards are in the text itself, with the room numbers appearing only in the footnotes, and the slab numbers on the plan. Possibly Layard now believed that the narrative flowed more fluently and easily without these unliterary references.

Due to the limited size of the sheets of paper used for the MS Plan, five sections of excavations were drawn as detached units, "out of context", and not connected to the main body of the palace. Four are on the larger double sheet: the Grand Entrance to Throneroom B and Chamber XX on the lower part, with the extension to Sloping Passage T and Chambers GGG-III above in the empty space below Court EEE; Chambers MMM-OOO are on the smaller sheet. Layard first started to draw the Grand Entrance in its correct or near correct position, towards the lower edge of the sheet, but then redrew it in full, some distance above but now out of context, rubbing



210 GEOFFREY TURNER

out the earlier pencilled lines. No description, directions or alignment marks were added by the Grand Entrance; nor is there any indication as to why Layard first drew it in its true position in relation to Court I, but then placed it out of context further to the west. Possibly he had originally intended to include all of the Throneroom Suite, Chambers A-C and G, but then changed his mind, either finding it impracticable to incorporate his earlier discoveries with the new, or deciding that it would be expedient to keep this space empty, in case he needed it for other detached parts of the palace. About this time or shortly afterwards, Layard drew Chamber XX towards the lower right corner of the MS Plan, with the pencilled directions, "detached chamber to be added to left of Hall I".39

For the detached unit Chambers GGG-III, part of FFF was also drawn, with the mark 00 as an alignment guide with the complete plan of FFF above, and for MMM-OOO the alignment symbol xxx was used. For the extension of Sloping Passage T there is the mark x on the detached unit, but Layard failed to put its counterpart on the corresponding eastern section of the passage. On the main part of the MS Plan there is a dotted and stepped line connecting the eastern section of Sloping Passage T to Chamber KKK, which has already been discussed in some detail above, pp. 285-6. It has been suggested that Layard may possibly have drawn the double part of this dotted line when incorrectly transferring the outlines of sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) onto the MS Plan, but the single dotted line was certainly added at a later date, as Chamber KKK and the group of rooms in the northwest corner of the palace were excavated well after Layard had made this sketch plan in September or October 1850, and would not have been drawn on the MS Plan until March or April 1851. Another note, "old Karkhaneh", is pencilled by the eastern extremity of Chamber KK, beside slab 12. This marks the position of Layard's trenches from his 1847 season and the doorway between Chambers E and D.

On the MS Plan a number of walls are restored in pencil, sketched freehand and not ruled, which were probably added by Layard in London when preparing the final version of the plan for Nineveh and Babylon. At the same time he added a few pencilled outlines and directions on Glascott's Survey of Kuyunjik, with the position of Court LXIV (EEE) and other details (SWPS, P1. 2), and this was then used as an inset on the published plan. The pencilled restorations on the MS Plan are only faintly visible in SWPS, Pls. 6-7:

Grand Entrance: south side-entrance b. Court I: (i) entrance a into Chamber C on east facade.

(ii) Room XVII (no letter reference) in southeast corner, a "cross-roads" of four doorways, not adopted on the published plan.

(iii) side-entrance d between Chambers P and Q, but in ink. Court U: (i) north faqade into Chamber KK.

(ii) east faiade, including entrance n into Chamber 000. (iii) northern half of "XX(?)". Layard' s use of the question mark in brackets stresses his

uncertainty as to the exact position of Chamber XX (SWPS, p. 21).

Along the lower edge of the main sheet of the MS Plan is Layard's inked title, "Plan of Excavated Chambers at Kouyunjik", and below in pencil "Campbell Thompson & Hutchinson Plan (other side up)". By the left corner in ink is, "Run of Walls . . .", the final words crossed out, and with very faint pencil notes below, probably referring to the orientation of the palace. By the right corner is inked "Scale 3/4 in. = 12 feet", that is 1:192, and beside this an earlier and incorrect scale in pencil "150 ft. to 1 inch", or 1:1800, which was subsequently crossed through. The second scale must have been a mistake for "15 ft. to 1 inch", or 1:180, relatively closer to the correct 1:192. There is also a ruled scale, in pencil, with twelve I in. units and eight 12 ft. units, totalling 12 in. or 1 ft., plus 96 ft., with the line of the scale continuing to the edge of the sheet of paper, but with no further units marked. On the upper edge of the main sheet, by the left corner, there are a series of short vertical strokes in ink. The significance of these, if any, is not known, but as noted above (p. 204), they may mark the position of a Grand Entrance on the southwest terrace platform.

39 In his diary Layard first mentions the Grand Entrance on 14 November 1849, with further references on 20 November, I and 7 December 1849 and 12 January 1850, and finally on 11 March 1850 "finished copying

inscription at Grand Entrance" (Add.MS. 39.096, ff. 27v, 28r, 29v, 30r, 36v and 50v). He refers to Chamber XX on 26 January, 3 and 15 February, and 10 March 1850 (Add.MS. 39.096, ff. 37v, 39v, 43v and 50v).




The notes on the lower edge of the MS Plan are all written with the plan orientated as in the published versions in Nineveh and its Remains II and Nineveh and Babylon, whereas the inked alphabetical notation of the chambers is reversed by 180?, orientated with north to the left and east above. However the pencilled chamber letters are written in whatever direction was most convenient or easiest when leaning over the drawing-board to make them, with no fixed standard. When Layard inked in the alphabetical system of notation on the MS Plan he probably thought it more logical to have what he believed to be the main approach to the palace, the Grand Entrance into Throneroom B, on top of the plan, but then changed his mind and reverted to the original orientation of the MS Plan and of that in Nineveh and its Remains. On the Nineveh and Babylon plan, the Arabic numbers of the entrances are on the orientation of each individual doorway, and the slab numbers circle the four walls of each room.

Layard would have drawn the MS Plan section by section, in the same way as he wrote up his field notes, that is as each group of rooms or area of the palace was excavated. The considerable soiling and other signs of handling to the MS Plan, especially of the larger double sheet, show that it was made on Kuyunjik itself, but doubtless some parts would have been added in the house in Mosul, based on the sketch plans and also on the drawings of the slabs, almost half of which were given a scale. From these it would have been possible to reconstruct the dimensions and outlines of the many of the rooms. There are very few references in Layard's diaries to taking measurements on Kuyunjik. The first, for 27 October 1849, has already been quoted. For 14 January 1850 he recorded "measure for plans at Mound", 12 March "At Mound during the day measuring chambers", and 14 May "At Kouyunjik measuring" (Add.MS. 39.096, ff. 36v, 50v and 88r). However, the last and that of 21 June "In trench drawing & measuring" (Add.MS. 39.089 A, f. 4r) may equally refer to the sketch plans. For 15 June 1850 Layard wrote "Begin survey", which is followed in the next few days by several references to taking angles and bearings (Add.MS. 39.089 A, ff. 3v-4v), but these probably all describe his work on the survey plan of the "Inclosure Walls and Ditches" of greater Nineveh.40 This is illustrated by a woodcut in Nineveh and Babylon, p. 658, and thus the original has not survived. In neither the field notes LN 2C and 2E nor elsewhere in the notebooks are there any lists of measurements or similar dimensions, which Layard may have used when making the MS Plan.

As well as the MS Plan, there was evidently at least one other field plan of Sennacherib's palace, as demonstrated by Layard's letter to Bell, 21 April 1851, "By reference to the plan you will perceive what parts of the Edifice now being excavated require exploring" (Add.MS. 38.943, f. 35v). When he wrote this, Layard had probably already packed the MS Plan together with the Original Drawings, rolled up in tin cylinders, in preparation for the journey back to England. Layard is here referring to another copy of the plan which he left in Mosul with Bell. Unfortunately this other plan no longer exists. The MS Plan probably reached the British Museum together with the Original Drawings in July 1851, but was not bound up with the drawings, doubtless due to the size of the two sheets of paper on which it was drawn.41 These were mounted side by side in the present form in the early 1960s, and the MS Plan was included in a new volume, Plans, No. 21.

MS CandD The four volumes MS A-D contain Layard's copies of cuneiform texts, of which the most

recent and comprehensive study is in Russell, 1999. I am also most grateful to John Russell for giving me further information on these, especially his unpublished notes on MS D. MS A has

40See also Add.MS. 39.089 B, ff. 65v and 64v-62r, and partly in Layard, 1853a, pp. 657-62. For 16 June 1850 Layard's diary has "Measure base & take angles in the morning", and in his notebook Add.MS. 39.089 B, f. 64 he recorded, "Measured Base 200 ft", followed by details of the readings.

41Of Layard's other plans, that of Chambers A-H of Sennacherib's palace from his first expedition of 1847 is Or. Dr. IV, 83, and the general plan of Nimrud (Layard, 1849, I, Plan 1 facing p. 332) is Or. Dr. 1II, at the end (vi). His plans of the Northwest and Southwest Palaces at Nimrud (Layard, 1849, I, Plans 2 and 3) are not in Or. Dr. His

small memorandum book, Add.MS. 39.090 B, contains notes and sketch plans from his excavations at Nimrud 1845-46, including a sketch plan of the palace in the southeast comer, which was possibly used to make the woodcut in Layard, 1849, 1I, p. 39, Plan 5 (later re-excavated by David Oates: The Assyrian building south of the Nabu Temple, Iraq 20 (1958), pp. 109-13 and Pi. XV; M. E. L. Mallowan, Nimrud and its Remains (1966), I, pp. 288-96). There are also three inked sketch plans in MS C, f. 86r, with details of buildings excavated at Nimrud during Layard's second campaign.



212 GEOFFREY TURNER

Layard's field copies from his first expedition, 1845-47; MS B is the manuscript of Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Characterfrom Assyrian Monuments (1851) based on MS A; and MS C consists of some, but not all, of the field copies from his second campaign, 1849-51. A major part of the copies in MS C are from Nimrud and only a few are from Kuyunjik, mostly epigraphs. There are also copies of texts from other sites, such as Bavian, and on f. 86 three sketch plans from Nimrud.

MS D is not a bound volume, but a box containing 44 loose folios or sheets of paper, mostly relating to Layard's second campaign and mostly copies of cuneiform inscriptions, or on related subjects. MS D f. 42 is a copy made by George Smith of Shalmaneser III's Black Obelisk text, and f. 41 is also a copy of a text, but by another hand. From Sennacherib's palace ff. 13, 17 and 19 are Layard's copies of epigraphs and, of greater interest and importance, if. 24-29 are his copies of the squeezes which Col. W. F. Williams had made in March 1849 of the bull inscriptions from entrance k between Court I and Chamber J (Russell, 1999, pp. 276-80, and Turner, 2001, pp. 113-14). Also in MS D there are two documents from Layard's second expedition, but not of a textual nature. MS D f. 36 is an account of the "High Mound - Nimroud", a description of the Small Temples of Ninurta and Ishtar at the base of the ziggurat (Layard, 1853a, pp. 348-62; J.E. Reade, Iraq 64 (2002), pp. 204-5); f. 40 is Layard's sketch plan of the Rock Tomb at Van, made in early August 1850 (Layard, 1853a, p. 396). His sketch of this tomb is in Add.MS. 39.077, f. 82.

Postscript These descriptions of the primary sources for Sennacherib's palace are basically notes and by

no means exhaustive; there almost certainly remains much to find in the various documents, particularly in the letters. When researching a specific subject, one is more likely to identify the necessary information, but when simply reading through a document, it is all too easy to miss details. There is also the ever-present problem of deciphering handwriting, especially Layard's pencilled notes, as for example the entry for Chamber E in LN 2C (Add.MS. 39.089 C, f. Ilv), or sketch plan C, f. 22r (left) (Fig. 3b).

In the Department of Manuscripts of the British Library documents cannot be photocopied. Microfilms can be made, but are often unsatisfactory if the original is in pencil, and photographs remain the best solution, as for example Figs. 2 and 3. However the cost of such photographs prohibits this being done on a large scale. For the eight notebooks, Add.MS. 39.089 Vols. A-H, 284 folios are registered, totalling some 533 pages, which at the present tariff (December 2001) would cost almost ?14,000. Even with these photographs, it is often necessary to check the original several times, and this still does not mean that one has read the text correctly.

References Add.MS.: British Library, London, Department of Manuscripts, Additional Manuscripts. Barnett, 1976: R. D. Barnett, Sculpturesfrom the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (668-627 Bc), 1976. Barnett and Falkner: R. D. Barnett and M. Falkner, The Sculptures of Assur-nasir-apli II (883-859BC),

Tiglath-pilester III ( 745-727 BC), Esarhaddon (681-669 BC) from the Central and South- West Palaces at Nimrud, 1962.

Gadd: C. J. Gadd, The Stones of Assyria, 1936. Layard, 1849: A. H. Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, 1849. Layard, 1853a: A. H. Layard, Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, 1853. Layard, 1853b: A. H. Layard, A Second Series of the Monuments of Nineveh. From Drawings made on the

Spot, 1853. LN: Layard's Notebooks, or more correctly field notes, see SWPS, pp. 10-15 Mon. Nin.: A. H. Layard, The Monuments of Nineveh 1 (1849) and 11 (1853 = Layard, 1853b). Or. Dr.: Original Drawings in the Department of the Ancient Near East (formerly Western Asiatic Antiquities),

British Museum. Russell, 1991: J. M. Russell, Sennacherib's Palace Without Rival at Nineveh, 1991. Russell, 1995: J. M. Russell, Layard's description of rooms in the Southwest Palace at Nineveh, Iraq 57

(1995), pp.71-85. Russell, 1997: J. M. Russell, From Nineveh to New York, 1997. Russell, 1998: J. M. Russell, The Final Sack of Nineveh, 1998. Russell, 1999: J. M. Russell, The Writing on the Wall, 1999.




SWPS: R. D. Barnett, E. Bleibtreu and G. Turner, Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh, 1998.

Turner, 2001: G. Turner, Sennacherib's palace at Nineveh: The drawings of H. A. Churchill and the discoveries of H. J. Ross, Iraq 63 (2001), pp. 107-38.

Waterfield: G. Waterfield, Layard of Nineveh, 1963.

Concordance of Chamber letters and Room numbers A IV X XL UU LIX B I Y XXXIX VV LXI C V Z XXIX WW LX D XLV AA XXX XX XXII E XLIII BB XXXIII YY - F XVII CC XXX ZZ LI South G III DD XXXI AAA XI H Forecourt H EE XXXII BBB LXII I VI FF XXVIII CCC LXIII J XIII GG XXIV DDD LXV K XIV HH XXV EEE LXIV L XII II XLVI FFF LXVII M XLVIII JJ XLVII GGG LXX N XLII KK XLIII HHH LXXI 0 XLIX LL XLIV III LXIX P IX MM XXXIV JJJ LXVI Q X NN XXXVII KKK LXVIII R VII 00 XXXVI LLL XXVII S VIII PP XXXV MMM XXVI T LI North QQ LV NNN - U XIX RR LVI 000 XXIII V XXXVIII SS LVII PPP - W XLI TT LVIII

Concordance of Room numbers and Chamber letters I B XXV HH XLIX 0 II - XXVI MMM L - III G (C) XXVII LLL LI North T IV A XXVIII FF LI South ZZ V C (G) XXIX Z LII _ VI I XXX AA/CC LIII - VII R XXXI DD LIV - VIII S XXXII EE LV QQ IX P XXXIII BB LVI RR X Q XXXIV MM LVII SS XI AAA XXXV PP LVIII TT XII L XXXVI 00 LIX UU XIII J XXXVII NN LX WW XIV K XXXVIII V LXI VY XV - XXXIX Y LXII BBB XVI - XL X LXIII CCC XVII F XLI W LXIV EEE XVIII - XLII N LXV DDD XIX U XLIII E/KK LXVI JJJ XX - XLIV LL LXVII FFF XXI - XLV D LXVIII KKK XXII XX XLVI II LXIX III XXIII 000 XLVII JJ LXX GGG XXIV GG XLVIII M LXXI HHH



214 GEOFFREY TURNER

I">X U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i - '- Z

LLXIXI

CW (El Li i- tIC0) LVII tiv Ll~ XXI Z(JZDZ

l {b. C XUII.LV v1

Fig1 A aadPa fSnahrbsSuhetPlc,> Kuun , Laad 1,8P.a, %"fa ing . , with m s av a

1w(0 (wEE l >,,_ '-":'. l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~II

Fig.1. . H Layrd,Pla of enncheib' Souhwet Place Kuunjk, Lyar, 153a

facing p. 67, with 50 m scale adIId((C




| S d# S4td

IA

f>*~~~14 A 4db tf+* " 444'44 4Mj/A? ? /iAr;

a b

Fig. 2. Add. MS. 39.089 E: a. f. 1, b. f. 27v (by permission of The British Library).

J4r~~.

a7 b

Fig. 3. Add. MS. 39.089C: a. f. 22v, b. f. 22r (by permission of The British Library).



216 GEOFFREY TURNER

34 35 36 37 38

39 4

37 2 1

37g 4 Fi.5 -

36 5 35 6

33 9

3210 31 11

12 2913

26 15 16

25 33 24 17

3J3 18

22 19/1 b 20

21

Fig.4 Fig.5

0 5 m

30 31 32 33 34

(575) (577) (578) (579) (580)

35 36 37

(581) (582) (583)

Fig. 4. Sloping Passage T, slabs 30-37, after SWPS, P1. 432. The small plan has been redrawn by Ann Searight.

Fig. 5. Sloping Passage T, sketch plans from notebook C, f. 22v and r, adapted by the author. The plan has been redrawn by Ann Searight.




: 4 . S S | w .,

. w_r.

_ - F- _ .. .<.

_ S -_=SG

_M t.:. _; t l I

'-ft _ i_ i s - S - l S

-- =-s-a - | N

| X S w - - - - - s Z -

E N B - m -

-

_ . . . . . . ffi -ffi-r

_DC a -E

_ _i! N _: _D_ Lex-> <s

i -P s _'

t't''"'

Fig. 6. A. H. Layard, Monuments of Nineveh II (1853), P1. 56.



218 GEOFFREY TURNER

Appendix Attribution of drawings of Sennacherib's Palace from Layard's second expedition (see

pp. 196-205).

(i) A. H. Layard (all signed except SWPS, Nos. 428a-429a, 432a-434a and 435a-436a).

Chamber I SWPS, No. 143a = slab(s) 53 148a 61 150a 62(?)

Chamber U 271a-272a 22-23 273a 20-21

Chamber BB 381a-382a 1-2 383a 3 384a 4 385a 5 386a 6

Chamber DD 362a entrance o

Chamber EE 364a-366a 1-3 369a-370a 7-8

Chamber FF 340a 2-3 341a 4-5 342a 6 344a-346a 7-9 347a-349a 10-12

Chamber 00 428a-429a 5-6 (not signed) 430a-431a 7-8 432a-434a 9-11 (not signed) 435a-436a 12-13 (not signed) 437a-439a 14-16

(ii) F. C. Cooper (only SWPS, No. 136b signed).

Forecourt H - Grand Entrance 3a 4 4a 5 8a 10-12 (8c - this is a sketch or view, looking into the entrance. Reproduced in Russell, 1998, P1. 16).

Chamber I lOOa-101a 9-10 102a-104a 11-13 108a, llOa-llla 16, 19-20 121a, 122a 14-15 129a 38-39 135a 43-44 136a 44-47 136b 45-47 (signed) - Cooper's

restored drawing, reproduced in Layard, 1853a, p. 113. See p. 197.

144a 54-56 152a-153a 63-64 156a-158a 66-68

Chamber J 231 b? entrance a into Chamber K (not reproduced in SWPS)



SENNACHEIRB S PALACE AT NINEVEH 219

Chamber K 234a-236a 4-6 238a-241a 8-11 243a-246a 13-16

Chamber L 219a-221a 5-7 226b 12-13 - a 'sketch', not a

'drawing'. 227a-229a 13-15

Chamber M 518a 1-3 522a 7, 9-10 523a-525a 11-13 529a 20

Chamber 0 531a lion-demon slab 535a 2-4 536a 5-7

ChamberQ 213a-214a 7&11

Chamber R 187a 5 190a 7-9 193a 12-14

Chamber S 195a-197a 11-13 200a-201a 3-4

Chamber T 557a-567a 1-2 & 4-12 568a-572a 13-17 575a(! sic), 577a-583a 30-37 (for the revised numbering

see pp. 181-2).

Chamber U 277a 17-19 278a 15-16 279a 14 282a-283a 11-12 284a-285a 9-10 285c, 286a-288a 6-9 291a-294a 1-4

Chamber V 44la-443a 3-5 444a 6-7 445a 8-9 446a 10-11 447a entrancei 448a 12-13 449a-450a 14-15

Chamber XX 307a 2-4 309a-310a 8-9 312a 10

Chamber ZZ 548a-551a 4 slabs, not numbered 552a-554a 3 slabs, not numbered

(iii) T. S. Bell (only SWPS, Nos. 61d and 606a-608a signed).

Chamber II 493a-494a 1-2 493b 1 - an unfinished preliminary

drawing, see p. 201 496a 4-5



220 GEOFFREY TURNER

497a-498a 6-7 500a 9-11 502a-504a 13-14

Chamber KK 473a 2 475a 4

Chamber LL 483a 1-2

Chamber EEE 606a-608a 1-3 (signed) 611a+613a 5 & 7

Chamber FFF 626a-628a 1-3

Chamber GGG 643a 1 634a-646a 3-4 648a-650a 10-12

Chamber III 637a 1-2

Pavement slabs: Chamber C 61 d (signed) Chamber GG 329a Chamber ? 679

Elevation Chamber VV P1. 19



Date post:	16-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	geoffrey-turner
View:	225 times
Download:	9 times

Sennacherib's Palace at Nineveh: The Primary Sources for Layard's Second Campaign

Documents