1. INTRODUCTION
Herodotus is a fascinating author, not only to scholars of history, but also to a wide spectrum of scientists, such as engineers, who are not usually considered to be relevant to humanistic studies. A strong indication of the persisting interest in Herodotus is the recent proliferation of books, for example those of C. Dewald and J. MarincolaFootnote 1 and A.M. Bowie,Footnote 2 on various aspects of his work. At the same time, there is a remarkable interest in the evolution of knowledge in different scientific fields which promotes the understanding of a) the relationship between socio-economic phenomena and technological progress and b) the process of acquiring and documenting scientific knowledge. In the field of hydraulics and hydrology in particular, this interest is documented by journal papers (for example by L.W. Mays et al.Footnote 3 and D. Koutsoyiannis et al.Footnote 4), books (for example by A.K. Biswas,Footnote 5 Ö. WikanderFootnote 6), book chapters (for example by A.I. WilsonFootnote 7) and conference proceedings.
The aim of our paper is to shed new light on a Babylonian hydraulic work described by Herodotus and attributed by him to Nitocris. Our initial point of view was that his description of it could be basically accurate, though it seems to be rather obscure. While the general picture of Babylon painted by Herodotus is disputed (see for example A. KuhrtFootnote 8), our approach is justified, since researchers even in the nineteenth century, such as H. Matzat,Footnote 9 but particularly in recent decades (for example J. MacGinnis,Footnote 10 N.G.L. Hammond and L.J. RosemanFootnote 11), suggest that Herodotean descriptions of other technical works are (or at least could be) accurate. By evaluating information offered by Herodotus on hydraulic works and hydrology, we too arrived at the same conclusion.Footnote 12
2. THE TEXT OF HERODOTUS AND SOME COMMENTS
The text in question, included in the first book of Herodotus (1.185.4–6) reads:
[4] κατύπερθε δὲ πολλῷ Βαβυλῶνος ὤρυσσε ἔλυτρον λίμνηι, ὀλίγον τι παρατείνουσα ἀπὸ τοῦ ποταμοῦ, βάθος μὲν ἐς τὸ ὕδωρ αἰεὶ ὀρύσσουσα, εὖρος δὲ τὸ περίμετρον αὐτοῦ ποιεῦσα εἴκοσί τε καὶ τετρακοσίων σταδίων: τὸν δὲ ὀρυσσόμενον χοῦν ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ὀρύγματος ἀναισίμου παρὰ τὰ χείλεα τοῦ ποταμοῦ παραχέουσα. [5] ἐπείτε δέ οἱ ὀρώρυκτο, λίθους ἀγαγομένη κρηπῖδα κύκλωι περὶ αὐτὴν ἤλασε. [6] ἐποίεε δὲ ἀμϕότερα ταῦτα, τόν τε ποταμὸν σκολιὸν καὶ τὸ ὄρυγμα πᾶν ἕλος, ὡς ὅ τε ποταμὸς βραδύτερος εἴη περὶ καμπὰς πολλὰς ἀγνύμενος, καὶ οἱ πλόοι ἔωσι σκολιοὶ ἐς τὴν Βαβυλῶνα, ἔκ τε τῶν πλόων ἐκδέκηται περίοδος τῆς λίμνης μακρή.
Then a long way above Babylon she dug the basin of a lake, a little way aside from the river, digging always deep enough to find water, and making the circuit of the lake a distance of four hundred and twenty furlongs; all that was dug out of the basin she used to embank either edge of the river; and when she had it all dug, she brought stones and made therewith a coping all round the basin. Her purpose in making the river to wind and turning the basin into a marsh was this that the current might be slower by reason of the many windings that broke its force, and that the passages to Babylon might be crooked, and that next after them should come also the long circuit of the lake.
(tr. A.D. Godley)Footnote 13W.W. How and J. Wells, commenting on Herodotus, find this particular account ‘most obscure’.Footnote 14 Moreover, D. Asheri states that ‘Herodotus seems not to have understood the function of the lake’.Footnote 15
We believe that the passage deserves further consideration.
3. ENGINEERING AND PHILOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The key to the whole passage is probably the phrase ὤρυσσε ἔλυτρον λίμνηι. Whenever Herodotus wants to convey that someone constructed an artificial lake, he states it simply and directly, as in 2.101.2 and 2.150.4, which are translated by Godley in the following way:
This Moeris was remembered as having built the northern forecourt of the temple of Hephaestus, and dug a lake (λίμνην τε ὀρύξαι), of as many furlongs in circuit as I shall later show.
(2.101.2)Footnote 16This, I was told, had happened when the Egyptian lake was dug (κατὰ τὸ τῆς ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ λίμνης ὄρυγμα γενέσθαι), save only that the work went on not by night but by day. The Egyptians bore the earth dug out by them to the Nile, to be caught and scattered (as was to be thought) by the river. Thus is this lake said to have been dug (ἡ μέν νυν λίμνη αὕτη οὕτω λέγεται ὀρυχθῆναι).
(2.150.4)Footnote 17It is reasonable, then, to conclude that in 1.185.4 the phrase ὤρυσσε ἔλυτρον λίμνηι has a different meaning. Actually, this particular point seems to puzzle careful translators. Godley states ‘she dug the basin of a lake’,Footnote 18 which is not very clear, at least to an engineer.
D. Maronitis, translating the phrase into Modern Greek, writes ‘έσκαψε ένα όρυγμα για να το κάνη λίμνη’,Footnote 19 (‘she dug a hole to render it a lake’), considering that the dative case (λίμνηι) expresses purpose. Similarly, Th. Mavropoulos translates ‘έσκαψε μια μεγάλη δεξαμενή για να γίνει λίμνη’,Footnote 20 (‘she dug a large reservoir in order to become a lake’). If their approach is correct, the text is unnecessarily complicated. A. Vlachos,Footnote 21 on the other hand, translates ‘έσκαψε μια μεγάλη δεξαμενή σαν λίμνη’ (‘she dug a large reservoir like a lake’), which is not justified by the original text.
Our explanation is the following: the Babylonian ruler, called Nitocris by Herodotus,Footnote 22 did not construct a new artificial lake but laterally extended a pre-existing one. Exploiting a smaller pre-existing lake was the right thing to do from the engineering point of view, since it would allow her to achieve her goal with less expense and in a shorter period of time. Time could have been an important factor, since the Babylonians were expecting the Medes to invade their country.
The evidence presented by V. ScheilFootnote 23 that a subsequent local ruler renewed an artificial marsh, initially constructed by Hammurabi, indirectly supports this conclusion.
Going back to philological considerations, the meaning of the word ἔλυτρον, provides extra support for our explanation. According to Liddell and Scott, it generally means ‘case’Footnote 24 (from the case of a spear, as in Aristophanes, to cases of bodies of water, namely reservoirs and fountains, as in Pausanias).
In Herodotus (1.185), Nitocris constructed a ‘case’ for the pre-existing lake, by extending it in all directions. The interpretation of ἔλυτρον as ‘reservoir’ at 4.173 is of course correct (see also J.E. PowellFootnote 25).
Moreover, our interpretation provides a satisfactory explanation of the phrase ἐς τὸ ὕδωρ αἰεὶ ὀρύσσουσα. She dug down to the water level of the pre-existing lake. So, the final reservoir consisted of two parts: the external one, which was shallow like a marsh (ὄρυγμα πᾶν ἕλος, as stated in 1.185.6), and the initial lake, which was deeper and could hold more water, for different purposes. This circumjacent marsh would have been an even more difficult barrier for an invading army to cross than a navigable lake.
Given the above, the last sentence of 1.185.6 could be seen in a different light: the hydraulic work was constructed next to the crooked river passages, not allowing a quick bypass on foot, but forcing the invaders to go the long way round the extended lake. Thus the word περίοδος is literally interpreted as ‘way round’. Furthermore, in the light of this interpretation we do not have to bother about the navigability of the whole lake.
4. PROPOSED TRANSLATION
The aforementioned comments lead us to the following translation of Herodotus 1.185:
[4] Then a long way upstream of Babylon she dug a perimetric extension to a lake a little aside from the river, always digging down to the water level, and making its circumference equal to 420 furlongs; and she used all that was dug out of this hole, disposing it along the edges of the river. [5] And when she had it all dug, she brought stones and made a coping all round the lake. [6] She did both of these, namely the river to wind and the dug area to be a marsh, so that the current would be slower, its force broken by the large number of windings, and so that the passages to Babylon would be crooked and the way around the lake coming next to them would be long.
5. FINAL REMARKS
The reference to the lake of Nitocris attracted our interest, as we were trying to evaluate information on hydrological and hydraulic issues included in Herodotus’ work. The first thing that impressed us was that Herodotus used a different expression to describe its construction from that which he uses with regard to other artificial lakes. Believing that the author was accurate (until proven otherwise), we tried to find out what he actually meant. Finally, we came up with a new and, hopefully, plausible interpretation of 1.185, based both on engineering and philological evidence.
