and has been laid out with its streets straight,
notably those which run at right angles, that is, those which
lead to the river. Each road runs to a small gate in the brick
river-wall: there are as many gates as lanes.'[9]

[9] Hdt. i. 180 [Greek: To de astu auto, eon pleres ohikieon
triorhofon te kai tetrorofon, katatetmetai tas hodous itheas,
tas te aggas kai tas epikarsias, tas epi ton potamon echousas].
Apparently [Greek: epikarsias] means, as Stein says, those at
right angles to the general course of the river, but this nearly
= at right angles to the other roads. The course of the river
appears to have been straighter then than it is now.

In each part of the city (that is, on either bank of the Euphrates)
were specially large buildings, in one part the royal palaces, in the
other the temple of Zeus Belos, bronze-gated, square in outline, 400
yards in breadth and length.

So far, in brief, Herodotus. Clearly his words suggest town-planning.
The streets that ran straight and the others that ran at right angles
are significant enough, even though we may doubt exactly what is meant
by these other streets and what they met or cut at right angles. But
his account cannot be accepted as it stands. Whatever he saw and
whatever his accuracy of observation and memory, not all of his story
can be true. His Babylon covers nearly 200 square miles; its walls are
over 50 miles long and 30 yds. thick and all but 120 yds. high; its
gates are a mile and a half apart. The area of London to-day is no
more than 130 square miles, and the topmost point of St. Paul's is
barely 130 yds. high. Nanking is the largest city-site in China and
its walls are the work of an Empire greater than Babylon; but they
measure less than 24 miles in circuit, and they are or were little
more than 30 ft. thick and 70 ft. high.[10] Moreover, Herodotus's
account of the walls has to be set beside a statement which he makes
elsewhere, that they had been razed by Darius sixty or seventy years
before his visit.[11] The destruction can hardly have been complete.
But in any case Herodotus can only have seen fragments, easily
misinterpreted, easily explained by local _ciceroni_ as relics of
something quite unlike the facts.

[10] L. Gaillard, _Varietes sinologiques_, xvi (plan) and xxiii.
pp. 8, 235 (Chang-hai, 1898, 1903). Others give the figures a
little differently, but not so as to affect the argument.

[