are composed with ranges of horizontal circles, and look like an assemblage of bundles of rods tied together at intervals. The only difference among those columns which are circular and plain is in their having hieroglyphics, or not. Of the second sort there are many varieties, of which we here present three specimens (fig. 57.). They have the appearance of being bound together by hoops, like barrels. These are usually in three rows with four or five divisions in each; but these arrangements seem to have been subject to no certain laws. The species of columns in question is certainly curious, and appears based upon the imitation of stems of trees bound together, so as out of a number to form one strong post. It seems scarcely possible that they could have had their origin in mere whim or caprice. Many polygonal columns are to be found in Egypt. Some square specimens are to be seen in the grottos at Thebes cut out of the rock itself. Similar examples occur at the entrance of the sanctuary of a temple in the same city. Hexagonal ones are described by Norden, and Pocock mentions one of a form triangular on the plan. We do not at present remember any fluted specimen, except in the tombs of Beni-Hassan, of which a representation will be given in the section on Grecian architecture. Their character is shortness and thickness. They vary from three to eleven feet in diameter, the last dimension being the largest diameter that Pocock observed, as in height the tallest was forty feet. Such were some of those he measured at Carnac and Luxor, but this he gives only as an approximation from the circumstance of so much of them being buried in the earth.

Fig. 56.

COLUMNS

78. Pilasters, properly so called, are not found in Egyptian architecture. The base of the column, when it appears, is extremely simple in its form. Among the representations in Denon's work is one in which the base is in the shape of an inverted ogee. It belongs to a column of one of the buildings at Tentyris.

79. In their capitals, the Egyptians exhibited great variety of form. They may, however, be reduced to three species, the square, the vase-formed, and the swelled. The first (fig. 58.) is nothing more than a simple abacus, merely placed on the top of the shaft of the column, to which it is not joined by the intervention of any moulding. This abacus is, however, sometimes high enough to admit of a head being sculptured thereon, as in the annexed block. It does not appear, as in Grecian architecture, that in that of Egypt differently proportioned and formed columns had different capitals assigned to them. The notion of imparting expression to architecture by a choice of forms of different nature, and more or less complicated according to the character of an order, was unknown in Egypt. It was an architectural language which the people knew not. The vase-shaped capital (fig. 59.) Fig. 58. CAPITAL. is variously modified: sometimes it occurs quite plain; in other cases it is differently decorated, of which we here give two examples. It certainly has all the appear

ance of having afforded the first hint for the bell of the Corinthian capital. The third or swelled capital is also found in many varieties; but if the form be not founded on that of the bud of a tree, we scarcely know wherein its original type is to be

sought. Two examples of it are here appended.

80. The entablature, for such (however unlike it be to the same thing in the architecture

of Greece) we suppose we must call the massive loading placed on the walls and columns of ancient Egypt, is very little subdivided. The upper part of it, which we may call the cornice, projects considerably, having a large concave member, in some cases consisting of ornaments representing a series of reeds parallel to each other from top to bottom; in other cases in groups of three or six in a group, the intervals between them being sculptured with winged globes, as on the portico of the temple at Tentyris, given in fig. 60. Sculptures of animals, winged globes, and scarabæi, are the almost constant decorations placed on what may be called the architrave of the Egyptian temple. Of the winged globe, usually found on the centre of it, as also of the great concave cornice, fig. 61. is a representation.

Fig. 60.

ENTABLATURE.

Fig. 61.

WINGED GLOBK

We close our observations on the cornices of the Egyptian temple by requesting the reader, if he have the smallest doubt on the common origin of the archi

The

tectures of Egypt and Persepolis, to refer to fig. 26., where he will find a precisely similar use of the great cavetto which crowned the buildings of both countries. writer who, in the Description Abrégée des Monumens de la Haute Egypt, has found that this great curve is borrowed from the bending leaves of the palm tree, has mistaken the elements of decoration for substantial constructive art, and has forgotten that the first object follows long after the latter. But we doubt if he really meant what his words import. The ceilings of Egypt are invariably monotonous. The non-use of the arch, whereon we have touched in a preceding page, and the blocks of stone which the country afforded, allowed little scope for display of varied form. In the colonnades of the country, architraves of stone rest on the columns (see fig. 54.), on which transversely are placed those which actually form the ceilings, just like the floor boards of a modern economical English building. On them are often found some of the most interesting representations that are in existence: we allude to those of the zodiacal constellations disposed circularly about the centre of the apartments in which they are placed. Though nothing has been deduced from these to satisfy us on the date of their continent buildings, they are not the less unworthy of further investigation, which, however, it is not our province here to pursue. 81. The gates and portals of the Egyptian temples were either placed, as at Carnac

and Luxor (figs. 62. and 63.), in masses of masonry, or between columns, as already noticed, inclined upwards, having generally a reed moulding round them, and the whole crowned with a large cavetto. They were plentifully covered with hieroglyphics; frequently fronted by a pair of obelisks; and on their sides were placed staircases of very simple construction, leading to platforms on their summits. It is now difficult to account for the extraordinary labour bestowed on these masses of masonry. More than pictorial effect must have been the motive. The reader will, by turning back to fig. 52., be equally surprised with ourselves when he contemplates, in the gateway at the Temple of Apollinopolis Magna, such The masses in these are always pyramidal, and bear great resemblance to the gates of modern fortifications. Sometimes they are extremely simple, and do not rise so high as the adjacent buildings which flank them. Their thickness is enormous, some of them extending to the extraordinary depth of fifty feet.

vast efforts developed on so apparently minor a point.

Fig. 63.

82. Windows were not frequently used. When they occur they are long small parallelograms, rarely ornamented, but splayed inside. Many of the apartments were without windows at all.

83. We have, in a previous page, alluded to the Pyramids; to which we here add, that, whatever might have been their purpose, it is certain that the form adopted in them -one that, among other people, was devoted to the purposes of sepulture-was of all architectural forms that calculated to ensure durability, and was, moreover, well suited to the views of a nation which took extraordinary means to preserve the body after life, and expended large sums on their tombs.

84. ORNAMENT or DECORATION may be considered under two heads, that which consists in objects foreign to the forms of the edifices themselves, such as statues, obelisks, &c.; and that which is actually affixed to them, such as the carving on the friezes, basreliefs, &c.

85. The former of these are remarkable for the size and beauty of the materials whereof they are composed. First for notice are their statues of colossal dimensions, which are mostly, if not always, in a sitting attitude. The two here given (fig. 64.) are from the Memnonium.

They are generally isolated, and placed on simple pedestals. The use of Caryatides, as

they are called, perhaps improperly, in Egyptian architecture, if we may judge from remains, does not appear to have been very frequent. In the tomb of Osymandyas, we find, according to Diodorus, that there was a peristylium, 400 feet square, supported by animals 16 cubits high, each in one stone, instead of columns. The same author (vol. i. f. 56. ed. Wesseling), speaking of Psammeticus, says, Having now obtained the whole kingdom, he built a propylæum, on the east side of the temple, to the God at Memphis; which temple he encircled with a wall; and in this propylæum, instead of columns, substituted colossal statues 12 cubits in height." Statues of sphinxes in allies or avenues were used for ornamenting the dromos of their temples. Of this species of ornament the ruins of Thebes present a magnificent example. They were placed on plinths facing one another, and about ten feet apart. Examples of lions also occur. form of the Egyptian obelisks is too well known to need a description here. They have been alleged to be monuments consecrated to the sun. From the situation they often occupy, it is clear they were used neither as gnomons nor solar quadrants.

Fig. 64.

Fig. 65.

COLOSSAL STATUES FROM THE MEMNONIUM.

The

86. Amongst the ornaments affixed to their buildings, or rather forming a part of them, the most frequent are hieroglyphics and bas-reliefs. The custom of cutting the former upon almost every building was, as we now find, for the purpose of record; but it is nevertheless to be considered as ornamental in effect. The figures that are sculptured on the walls of the temples are mostly in low relief, and are destitute of proportion; and, when in groups, are devoid of sentiment. Painting was another mode of decoration. The grottoes of the Thebaid, and other subterranean apartments, abound with pictures, not only of hieroglyphics, but of other subjects. the taste of all these, either in drawing, colouring, or composition, is not better than that of their sculpture. (See an example in fig. 65.) Yet in both these arts, from the precision with which they are cut and the uniformity of line and proportion they exhibit, a certain effect is produced which is not altogether displeasing.

But

87. The nymphæa lotus, or water lily, seems to have been the type of much of the ornament used for the purpose of decoration. The leaf of the palm tree was another object of imitation, and is constantly found in the capitals of their columns. The use of the palm leaf in this situation may have been derived from a popular notion mentioned by Plutarch, (Symposiac. lib. vi. cap. 4.), that the palm tree rose under any weight that was placed upon it, and even in proportion to the degree of depression it experienced. This supposed peculiarity is also mentioned by Aulus Gellius (lib. iii. cap. 6.). The reed of the Nile, with its head, enters into some combinations of ornament; the former, indeed, collected in bundles, seems to have been the type of some of the species of their columns. In their entablatures and elsewhere, animals of all sorts occasionally find a place as ornaments, even down to fishes, which occur in a frieze at Assouan; and, as we have before observed, there are few buildings of importance in which the winged globe does not appear as an orna

ment.

88. Some observations on the taste, style, and character of Egyptian architecture, will conclude this section. If the type was, as we imagine, derived from the early subterranean edifices of the people, whose customs allowed of no change or improvement, we cannot be surprised at the great monotony that exists in all their monuments. The absence of variety in their profiles, by means of projecting and re-entering parts, of the use of the arch, of the inclined roof, and of all deviation from those shades of different developments, which impart character to a work of art, generated the monotony, the subject of our complaint. It cannot be denied that in those arts which have nature for their model, the artists of Egypt never sought excellence in true representation. Now architecture is so allied to the other arts, that the principles by which they were guided in these latter were carried through in

the former.

It was impossible that the abstract imitation of nature, which constitutes almost the essence of architecture, which is founded upon the most refined observations of the impressions of different objects on our senses, which indicates numberless experiments and successive trials, and which therefore requires the independence of the artist, could be developed in a country where the restrictions of religion and the spirit of routine became the dominant genius of all the arts. In positive imitation, whose existence and principles have been already traced from grottoes and hollowed subterranean apartments, the types of Egyptian architecture were unsusceptible of variety, and very remote from that which characterises invention. The monotony thence resulting was attended by another effect, — that of endeavouring to correct it by a profusion of hieroglyphics. As to the other ornaments employed, they seem to have flowed from caprice, both in selection and employment, resting on no fixed principles of necessity or fitness, nor subject to any laws but those of chance. The original forms, indeed, of Egyptian architecture, unfounded, like those of Greece, on a construction with timber, would not suggest the use of ornament. Nothing seemed fixed, nothing determined by natural types. We must, however, except some of their columns, which do appear to have been formed with some regard to imitation.

89. In the architecture of Egypt we find great want of proportion, or that suitable ratio which the different parts of a body should bear to each other and to the whole. In all organised beings, their parts so correspond, that, if the size of a single part be known, the whole is known. Nature has thus formed them for the sake of dependence on and aid to each other. In works of art, the nearer we approach a similar formation, the more refined and elegant will be its productions. Solidity is abused in the works of the Egyptians; the means employed always seem greater than were necessary. This discovers another cause of their monotony. The masses of material which the country produced measured their efforts and conceptions, and their invention was exhausted by a very restricted number of combinations. Their monuments are doubtless admirable for their grandeur and solidity; but the preponderance of the latter, when carried beyond certain bounds, becomes clumsiness; art then disappears, and character becomes caricature. Though we think it useful thus to analyse Egyptian art, it must not be supposed that we are insensible to its imposing, and often picturesque, effect. It can never be revived, and our observations upon it must be understood as in comparison with Greek art, which has proved so susceptible of modification that it is not likely to be abandoned in any part of the world where civilisation has appeared.

90. Though the private dwellings of the Egyptians were not comparable with their public edifices, they were not altogether devoid of splendour. Examples of them from sculptures may be seen in Mr. Wilkinson's work above quoted. In the towns they of course varied in size and plan. The streets were narrow and laid out with regularity; and the mixture, as frequently met with in eastern towns, of large houses with low hovels, appears to have been avoided. In Thebes, the number of stories were, according to Diodorus, in some cases as much as four and five. Houses of small size were usually connected together, rarely exceeding two stories. They were regular in plan, the rooms usually occupying three sides of a court-yard, separated by a wall from the street; or on each side of a long passage from a similar entrance court. The court was sometimes common to several houses. Large mansions were detached, having often different entrances on their several sides, with portals very similar in form to those of their temples. These portals were about 12 or 15 ft. high, and on each side was a smaller door. Entering through the porch, the passage was into an open court wherein was a receiving room for visitors, and this was supported by columns, and closed in the lower part by intercolumnal panels. On the opposite side of the court was another door, by which the receiving room was entered from the interior. Three doors led from this court to another of larger dimensions, ornamented with trees, communicating on the right and left with the interior parts of the building, and having a back entrance. The arrangement of the interior was the same on each side of the court; six or more chambers, whose doors faced each other, opened on a corridor supported by columns on the right and left of the area, which was shaded by a double row of trees. A sitting room was placed at the upper end of one of these areas, opposite the door leading to the great court; and over this and the chambers were the apartments of the upper story. On each side of the sitting-room was a door opening on to the street. Of course there were houses on other plans, which are given by Wilkinson; but the above conveys a sufficient idea of their general distribution. On the tops of the houses were terraces, serving as well for repose as exercise. The walls and ceilings were richly painted, and the latter were formed into compartments with appropriate borders. Some of their villas were on a very large scale, and were laid out with spacious gardens, watered by canals communicating with the Nile.

91. We close this section with a list of the principal ancient edifices of Egypt (for which we are indebted to the work of Mr. Wilkinson), whose situations are marked on the accompanying map (fig. 66.). At Heliopolis (modern name Matarieh) (No. 1.), a little to the north of Cairo, the obelisk of Osirtasen I., and the remains of walls and houses. Near