THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES EX LIBRIS ERNEST CARROLL MOORE . HISTORY OF ANCIENT ART HISTORY OF ANCIENT ART BY DR. FRANZ VON REBER DIRECTOR OF THE BAVARIAN ROYAL AND STATE GALLERIES OF PAINTINGS PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY AND POLYTECHNIC OF MUNICH bg tlje 2ltttl)or TRANSLATED AND AUGMENTED BY JOSEPH THACHER CLARKE WITH 310 ILLUSTRATIONS AND A GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS NEW YORK HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1882, by HARPER & BROTHERS, In the Office of the Liorarian of Congress, ac Washington,, All rights reserved. Art Library -s-g-z. THE application of the historic method to the study of the Fine Arts, be- gun with imperfect means by Winckelmann one hundred and twenty years ago, has been productive of the best results in our own days. It has intro- duced order into a subject previously confused, disclosing the natural prog- ress of the arts, and the relations of the arts of the different races by whom they have been successively practised. It has also had the more important result of securing to the fine arts their due place in the history of mankind as the chief record of various stages of civilization, and as the most trust- worthy expression of the faith, the sentiments, and the emotions of past ages, and often even of their institutions and modes of life. The recogni- tion of the significance of the fine arts in these respects is, indeed, as yet but partial, and the historical study of art does not hold the place in the scheme of liberal education which it is certain before long to attain. One reason of this fact lies in the circumstance that few of the general historical treatises on the fine arts that have been produced during the last fifty years have been works of sufficient learning or judgment to give them authority as satisfactory sources of instruction. Errors of statement and vague spec- ulations have abounded in them. The subject, moreover, has been con- fused, especially in Germany, by the intrusion of metaphysics into its do- main, in the guise of a professed but spurious science of aesthetics. Under these conditions, a history of the fine arts that should state cor- rectly what is known concerning their works, and should treat their various manifestations with intelligence and in just proportion, would be of great value to the student. Such, within its limits as a manual and for the pe- riod which it covers, is Dr. Reber's History of Ancient Art. So far as I am aware, there is no compend of information on the subject in any language so trustworthy and so judicious as this. It serves equally well as an introduc- tion to the study and as a treatise to which the advanced student may refer 8G1G91 VI with advantage to refresh his knowledge of the outlines of any part of the field. The work was originally published in 1871; but so rapid has been the progress of discovery during the last ten years that, in order to bring the book up to the requirements of the present time, a thorough revision of it was needed, together with the addition of much new matter and many new illustrations. This labor of revision and addition has been jointly per- formed by the author and the translator, the latter having had the advantage of doing the greater part of his work with the immediate assistance of Dr. Reber himself, and of bringing to it fresh resources of his own, the result of original study and investigation. The translator having been absent from the country, engaged in archaeological research, during the printing of the volume, the last revision and the correction of the text have been in the hands of Professor William R. Ware, of the School of Mines of Columbia College. CHARLES ELIOT NORTON. CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS, May, 1882. IN view of the great confusion which results from an irregular orthography of Greek proper names, a return to the original spelling of words not fully Anglicized may need an explanation, but no apology : it is only adopting a system already followed by scholars of the highest standing. The Ro- mans, until the advent of that second classical revival in which the pres- ent century is still engaged, served as mediums for all acquaintance with Hellenic civilization. They employed Greek names, with certain alter- ations agreeable to the Latin tongue, blunting and coarsening the delicate sounds of Greek speech, much in the same manner as they debased the artistic forms of Greek architecture by a mechanical system of design. The clear ov became urn, of was changed to us, a to e or *', etc. This Latinized nomenclature, like the Roman triglyph and Tuscan capital, was exclusively adopted by the early Renaissance, until, with the increasing knowledge of Greek lands and works of art, names were introduced which do not happen, to occur in the writings of Roman authors. These were either changed in, accordance with the more or less variable standard in use during the six- teenth and seventeenth centuries, or were adopted in their Greek form, withr out change, the latter method being more and more generally employed. This has gradually led to a partial revision of Greek names and their spell- ing. Zeus and Hermes, Artemis and Athene, have resumed, as Greek dei- ties, their original titles ; Suniwwz and ASSWJ have been changed to Sunion. and Assos ; while other names have only been reformed in part, as ia $h$ case of the unfortunate Polycleitos, who at times appears as Polycktos, and at times as Polycleitws. Confusion and misunderstanding cannot but result from this unreasonable triple system of Latinized, Anglicized, and Greek or- thography. Peirithoos may be sought in alphabetically classified works of reference under Per and Pir as well as under Peir. Utpyu^or, Pergamon, is written Pergamum, Pergamus, and Pergamos, in the two latter forms being Vlll naturally confused with the Cretan Utpja/uio^, Pergamos, which, in its turn, is Latinized to Pergamus. In the present book the Greek spelling of Greek names has been adopted in all those cases where the word has not been fully Anglicized ; that is to say, changed in pronunciation, when it would sound pedantic to employ its original form, as, for instance, to speak of the well-known Paestum and Lucian as Poseidonia and Loukianos. The Eng- lish alphabet provides, however, two letters for the Greek KOTTTTO, and the more familiar c has been employed, as in Corinth, acropolis, etc., except in cases where the true sound is not thereby conveyed, namely, before e, i, and y, when the k is substituted. Moreover, the final at is transformed to a, according to the universal usage of our tongue. JOSEPH THACHER CLARKE. CONTENTS. EGYPT. The Delta. The Oldest Monuments, if not the most Ancient Civilization of the World 1,2 Changeless Continuity of Life and Art 2 ARCHITECTURE. The Age, Purpose, and Architectural Significance of the Pyramids . . 3-5 The Pyramids of Gizeh .... 5-7 Variety of Pyramidal Forms . . . 8, 9 The Pyramids of Saccara, Meydoun, Dashour, Abousere, and Illahoun 9-12 Table of Dimensions . . . .12 The Younger Pyramids of Nubia. Trun- cated Pyramids . . . . .12 Rock-cut Tombs 13 Development of Column from Pier . 14 The Tombs at Beni-hassan . . 14, 15 Development of the Lotos-column 16, 17 The Invasion of the Hycsos. Restric- tion of the Prismatic Shaft. Extend- ed Application of the Floral Column in the New Theban Empire . 18, 19 The Calyx Capital . . . . 20, 2 1 Piers with Figures of Osiris and Ty- phon. Entablature . . . .21 Cavern Sepulchres 22 Temple Plan, Obelisks . . . ' . 23 Peristyle Court 25 Hypostyle Hall . . . . 26, 27 The Dwellings of Kings and Priests . 28 Peripteral Temples . . . .29 Rock-cut Temples 30 The Monuments at Abou-Simbel . 31,32 Palatial and Domestic Architecture . 33 Interiors 34 The Labyrinth 35 Unimportant Character of Secular Ar- chitecture 36 SCULPTURE. * Fundamental and Changeless Peculiari- ties 36 Conventional Types . . . -37 The Formation of the Head . . -38 Head-dresses. Conjunction of Human Trunks and Animal Heads. . . 39 The Body. Lack of Progressiveness and of History . . . . . 40 Animal Forms 41 Materials 42 Reliefs 43 Coilanaglyphics 44 The Variety and Interest of the Sub- jects Illustrated 45 PAINTING. Intimate Relation to Sculpture. Hiero- glyphics 46 Painting as an Architectural Decoration. Retrospect 47 The Traditional Age. People. CHALD^IA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. The Land and . . . . 48 Building Materials. Clay and Bitumen 49 Perishable Character of the Monuments. Hills of Rubbish Recognized as Cities . . . . . . .50 CONTENTS. ARCHITECTURE. Chaldcea. The Ruins of Mugheir, or Ur. Warka and Abou-Sharein The Principle of the Arch Political History . Babylon. The Fabulous Account of Herodotos . 54 The Temple Pyramid at Borsippa . . 56 Palace Structures. The Hanging Gar- dens of Semiramis . . . -57 Private Dwellings. Works of Engineer- ing 58 Assyria, Nineveh 59 The Discoveries of Layard and Botta . 60 The Hills of Coyundjic and Nebbi-Jo- nas .61 Royal Dwellings 62 The Palace at Kisr-Sargon . . 63-65 Terrace Pyramids 66 Lighting and Roofing ... 66, 67 The Restriction of Columnar Architect- ure 68 The Forms of Small Columns . 69-71 Vaulted Construction . . . .71 PACE The Pointed Arch . . . . .72 The General Appearance of the Palaces 73 Sacred Architecture . . . -74 Terrace Pyramids 75 The Cella 76 The Dwellings of the Priests . . -77 Altars and Obelisks . . . .78 Domestic Architecture . . . 79, 80 SCULPTURE. Little Represented in Chaldaea . . 81 Babylonian Seals and Gems . . .82 Enamelled Tiles 83 Statues . 85 Conventional Types . . . 85, 86 Cherubims ...... 87 Mural Reliefs .... 87-89 Variance from Egyptian Sculpture . 90 Historical Reliefs .... 91-93 Religious Representations . . -94 Formal Landscapes. Bronzes . 95, 96 PAINTING. Upon Tiles and Stucco . . . .96 Colors 97 The General Appearance of Assyrian Architecture, as Decorated by Reliefs and Paintings 98 PERSIA. Historical Considerations . . .99 The Artistic Poverty of the Medes. The Achaemenidae. Their Chief Cities . . 100 ARCHITECTURE. Persepolis The Characteristic Differences of sian and Mesopotamian Building The Introduction of Columns Columnar Forms . Capitals The Entablature .... Plan of the Palace of Darius . Its State of Preservation Illumination Upper Stories .... The Palace and Hall of Xerxes . The Propylaea . j . The Harem , 101, 102 Per- . 102 103 103, 104 105-107 . 108 109-113 . no 1 10, III 111-113 114 "5 116, 117 The Disposition of the Terrace . . 117 Fire Altars 118 Funeral Monuments . . . 119-121 Tomb of Cyrus 119 Tombs of the Later Achaemenidae . . 120 Tombs of Subjects 121 Domestic Architecture . . . .121 SCULPTURE. Its Dependence upon the Art of Assyria 121 Egyptian and Hellenic Influences . . 122 Mythological and Ceremonial Represen- tations 123-125 The Sculptured Decoration of Palaces and Terraces . . . . 126, 127 Rarity of Historical Scenes . . . 128 PAINTING. Chiefly Ornamental General Harmony of the Three Arts 128 129 CONTENTS. XI PHffiNICIA, PALESTINE, AND ASIA MINOR. Extensive Artistic Influence of Meso- potamia in Point of Distance as well as of Time ...... 130 The Seleucidae. The Sassanidze . 131, 132 Phoenicia. Explorations in Recent Times The Chief Cities 132, 133 133 ARCHITECTURE. Ruins at Amrith .... 134, 135 The Monuments known as El-Megha- zil 135-137 The Grotto Tombs of Central Phoenicia. Sarcophagi at Jebeil . . . . 137, 138 Domestic Architecture .... 138 SCULPTURE. Work of Driven Metal (Sphyrelaton) . 139 Bronzes 139, 140 Inlaid Work. Ivory Carvings. Glass . 140 Influence of the Sphyrelaton upon Sculptural Style ..... 141 Stone-cutting . . . . . . 142 The Decisive Influence of both Egypt and Mesopotamia .... 143 Palestine. The Dependence of the Jews in Artistic Respects upon Egypt .... 143 The Tabernacle .... 143-147 Its Disposition .... 144, 145 Its Columns. The Horns of the Altar. The Seven-armed Candlestick . 145, 146 The Holy of Holies. Cherubim . 146, 147 Solomon's Temple .... 147-156 Untrustworthiness of Biblical Accounts 147 Construction of the Building. Its Site 148 The Brazen Laver 149 " Jachin and Boaz " . . . 149-151 The Tower ..... 151, 152 Interior. Upper Story . . . 153, 154 Materials 154 Decoration. The Molten Sea. The Mercy-seat and Cherubim . . . 155 The Destruction and Rebuilding of this Temple 156 Its Architectural Character . . . 157 Rock-cut Tombs . . . . 157, 158 Cyprus and Carthage. The Rock-cut Tombs at Paphos . .160 The Temple of Aphrodite at Golgoi. Cesnola's Discoveries . . . 161, 162 The Ruins of Carthage . . . . 163 Malta, the Balearic Isles, Sardinia . . 163 Asia Minor. An Independent Art Found only in Ly- cia, Phrygia, and Lydia . . . 164 The Rock-cut Tombs of Lycia. The Tim- bered Dwelling Carved in Stone 165, 166 The Monument of the Harpies at Xan- thos 167 Lycian Sarcophagi 168 Temple Fa9ades Imitated upon Cliffs . 169 The Rock-cut Tombs of Phrygia . 171, 172 The Tumuli of Lydia . . .173,174 HELLAS. The vEgean Sea the Centre of Greek Civilization. . . . . -175 The Dorians and the lonians . . . 1 76 The Development of Poetry Earlier than that of Art 177 ARCHITECTURE. The Tholos of Atreus . . . 179-183 The Phoenician Character of its Decora- tion 183 The Grave at Menidi . . . .183 The Treasure-houses of the Pelopidae . 184 Tumuli 185 The Common Modes of Burial . . 186 Pyramids . . 186, 187 Primitive Fortifications. Tiryns . . 187 Mykenae 1 88 Gateways and Portals . . ' . 189-193 The Agora of Mykenae . . . - 192 Primitive Temple Cellas without Col- umns 192, 193 The Structure upon Mt. Ocha. Timber- ed Roofs and Ceilings. The Origin of the Doric Entablature . . 195-197 The Decorative Painting of Woodwork 197 The Doric Column. . . . i97-'99 Its Egyptian Prototype . . . .198 xu CONTENTS. The Development of the Temple-plan 199-202 The Temple in Amis .... 199 Prostyles 200 Amphiprostylos. Peripteros. . . 201 Stone Construction 202 The Entasis . . . ' . . .203 The Capital . . . . . _ . 204 The Inclination of the Columns . . 205 The Details of the Entablature . 206-209 Polychromy . . f> .. . . 210 Curvatures 211,212 The Pteroma and Ceiling . , .213 Illumination 214 Archaic Doric Temples . , ., , . 215 The Progress of this Style. Selinous .216 Corinth . . . . . . . .217 Acragas ........ 219 Olympia. JEgina . . . . . 222 The Supremacy of Athens , ,, . 223 The Theseion. . . . ... 224 The Parthenon 225 The Propylaea . . . . 226 Phigalia 227 Eleusis . . . . . . - . 228 The Ionic Style. Its Intimate Rela- tion to Oriental Architecture . 229, 230 The Capital . . " . . . 231-233 The Entablature 234 Its Want of Historical Development . 235 Phigalia . . . . . . .236 The Ionic Monuments of Asia Minor 237-240 The Ionic Monuments of Attica . 240-245 The Temple upon the Ilissos. . . 241 The Propylaea 242 The Erechtheion .... 243-245 Caryatides ...... 245 The Corinthian Capital . . . 246-249 The Temple of Olympian Zeus in Athens 249 Monumental Tombs .... 250 The Mausoleum of Halicarnassos . 251, 252 The Monument of the Nereides at Xan- thos . . . . . , 2C2 The Choragic Monument of Lysicrates. 253 The so-called Tower of the Winds at Athens .... The Stoa .... The Palaestra .... The Gymnasion The Stadion and Hippodrome The Theatre and Odeion 253 2 53-255 255 . 256 257 258-260 PAGE Domestic Architecture. Palaces . 260, 261 The Boundless Luxury of the Diadochi . 261 SCULPTURE. The Unrivalled Perfection of the Art. Its Fundamental Deviation from the Principles of Egyptian Sculpture. 264, 265 Its Dependence upon Western Asia . 266 Empaistic Work. Xoana . . . 267 Daedalos 268 The Homeric Shield of Achilles. Its Workmanship and Artistic Impor- tance 269-271 Pseudo-Hesiodic Shield of Heracles . 272 The Gate of the Lions at Mykenaa 273, 274 Schliemann's Excavations upon the Acropolis of Mykenae . . 274, 275 The Chest of Kypselos. The Throne of Apollo at Amyclae . . . 276-278 The Introduction of Bronze Casting. Marble-cutting and Chryselephantine Work 278-281 The Potter Boutades . . . .278 Glaucos. Rhoicos and Theodores . 279 Boupalos and Athenis .... 280 Dipoinos and Skyllis . . . 281, 282 The First Metopes at Selinous . 283, 284 Archaic Statues at Miletos . . . 285 Reliefs at Assos. The Apollo of Thera 286 The Stele of Aristion . . . 287,288 The Second Metopes at Selinous . . 290 Archaistic Works . . . .291, 292 The Gable Sculptures of the Temple of Mgina. 293-296 The School of yEgina : Gallon and Ona- tas 296, 297 The School of Attica : Hegias, Critios, and Nesiotes 297 Canachos 298 Agelades 299 Calamis 300 Pythagoras . . . . . .301 Myron 302, 303 The Progress of Athens after the Persian Wars ....... 303 Pheidias 304-315 The Athene Parthenos . . . 310-313 The Panathenaic Frieze . . 313-315 The Metopes 316 The Scholars of Pheidias. Agoracritos 3 16, 3 1 7 CONTENTS. Xlll The Gable Sculptures of the Temple of Olympia 317,318 The Victory of Paionios . . .319 The Scholars of Myron . . . . 320 The Phigalian Frieze . . . .321 Callimachos and Demetrios . . . 322 Polycleitos 322-326 The Third Metopes at Selinous . 327, 328 The Extent of the School of Attica and Argos. Kephisodotos . . . 329 Scopas ...... 330-333 The Niobids ..... 331, 332 Praxiteles 333 The Scholars of Scopas and Praxiteles. The Sculptures of the Mausoleum of Halicarnassos 334 The Hermes of Olympia . . 335, 336 The Venus of Melos . . . 338, 339 Silanion and Euphranor . . . 340 Lysippos . . . . . 340-344 The School of Lysippos . . . 344,345 The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Pe- riod 346,347 The Altar at Pergamon . . . 347, 348 The so-called Dying Gladiator '. 348, 349 The School of Pergamon . . 349, 350 The School of Rhodes. TheLaocoon 351-353 The Farnese Bull .... 353-355 The Apollo Belvedere . . . 356-358 The Introduction of Greek Sculpture into Rome 358-360 The Borghese Gladiator . . . 361 The Belvedere Torso . . . .362 The Hellenic Renaissance in Rome 363-366 PAINTING. Lack of all Remains .... 366 Its Early Development Fictitiously Re- lated by Pliny. Eumaros. Kimon . 367 Polygnotos 368, 369 The Scenography of Agatharchos. Of Apollodoros 370 Zeuxis 371,372 Parrhasios 373-374 Timanthes 374 The School of Sikyon : Eupompos, Pamphilos 375 Melanthios. Pausias .... 376 The School of Thebes and Athens : Ni- comachos, Aristides, Euphranor . 377,378 Nikias 378 Apelles 379-382 Protogenes 383 Antiphilos. ytion. Asclepiodoros. Theon ....... 384 Hellenistic Painting. Timomachos . 385 Trivial and Obscene Subjects. Mosaic. Sosos 386 ETRURIA. Relationship to the Arts of Greece . 387 ARCHITECTURE. The so-called Cyclopean Walls. Arched Gates 388 Vaulted Canals . ... .389 Cemeteries. Tumuli. The Tomb of Porsena 390 Imitations of Dwellings upon Tombs 391, 392 Grotto Sepulchres 392 Imitations of Temple Fagades upon Cliffs 393.394 Norchia . . . . . 394, 395 The Etruscan Temple . . . 396, 397 The Dwelling-house .... 397 Its Court 398, 399 Lack of Progressive Architectural His- tory 399,400 SCULPTURE. Museums. The Oldest or Decorative Period. Phoenician Importations . 400 The Influence of Western Asia Super- seded by that of Greece . . 401,402 The Sarcophagus of Caere . . . 402 Realism. Sculpture in Marble . . 403 The Bronze Chariot from Perugia. . 404 The Capitoline Wolf. Engraved Mirrors 405 Height of Etruscan Art. Hellenistic In- fluences . . .;.- 406 Sculptured Sarcophagi . . . 406, 407 Terra-cottas and Bronzes . . . 408 The Similarity of late Etruscan to Ro- man Sculpture .... 408, 409 PAINTING. Its Development Similar to that of XIV CONTENTS. Sculpture. The Ornamental and De- pendent Period 49 Realistic Characteristics . 409. 4 IQ The Wall - paintings of Caere and Cor- neto .... 409.410 rxGK The Influence of Greece . . .411 Artistic Manufactures . . . 411,412 Sgraffiti. The Importance of Etruscan Art 412 ROME. The Conditions of Civilization Similar to those of Etruria .... 413 ARCHITECTURE. Primitive Walls .... 4H> 415 Gates. Vaulted Canals . . . 4 l6 I Temples : their Tuscan Character. The Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus . . 417 j Hellenic Influences .... 418 Prostylos and Pseudo-peripteros . 419, 420 The Tuscan Order .... 420 The Doric Order .... 420, 421 The Ionic Order .... 421,422 The Corinthian Order . . . 423, 424 The Composite Capital .... 424 Constructive Advances. Arching and Vaulting . . ' . . . .425 Aqueducts and Sewers . . . 425, 426 Baths 426-429 The Baths of Agrippa. The Pantheon 427 The Baths of Caracalla and of Diocle- tian 428,429 The Circus, Theatre, and Amphithe- atre 430-436 The Theatre of Marcellus . . .433 The Flavian Amphitheatre (Colosseum) 436 Funeral Monuments . . . 436,437 Commemorative Columns . . . 437 Triumphal Arches . . . 438-440 Public Buildings. Basilicas . . 441-443 Dwellings <\<\<\ Private Courts of Justice the Prototypes of the Christian Basilica . . 445-447 SCULPTURE. Lack of Statues during the Earliest Period. Decorative Work . 447, 448 The Influence of Etruria . . . 448 The Influence of Greece.. . . . 449 Rise of Sculpture after the Samnite War . . . . . . 449,450 Importations of Statues from Greece . 451 Coponius 452 Portrait Sculpture .... 453-455 Iconic Statues 453 The Horses of St. Mark's . . . 454 Shortcomings of Roman Reliefs . 456,457 Historical Representations . . 457-459 Trajan's Column ..... 458 The Arch of Titus 459 The Monument of Antoninus Pius . 460 The Degeneration of Sculpture . . 461 Portraiture ..... 461, 462 The Arch of Constantine . . . 463 PAINTING. The Earliest Paintings by Greek Artists. The Temple of Ceres .... 464 Fabius Pictor 464,465 Pacuvius and Metrodoros . . . 465 Battle-scenes .... 465, 466 Panel -painting. Collections . . . 466 Wall Decorations after the Alexandrian Fashion 466-470 The Golden House of Nero . . . 467 Landscapes. Architectural Ornamenta- tion 468, 469 Mosaics 470,471 From Herculaneum and Pompeii . -471 Conclusion . . . . . 471,472 The Christian Paintings of the Cata- combs 472 GLOSSARY 473 INDEX 479 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. EGYPT. KIOUKE PACK 1. The Pyramids of Gizeh i 2. The Great Pyramid of Gizeh. Sec- tion N. and S., looking West . 6 3. Section of the Great Pyramid of Saccara 9 4. The Pyramid of Meydoun . .10 5. Southern Stone Pyramid of Dashour 1 1 6. Section of the Middle Pyramid of Abousere 13 7. Egyptian Wall-painting. Transport of a Colossus . . . .14 8. Section and Plan of the Northern- most Rock - cut Tomb at Beni- hassan . . . . . 15 9. Second Rock - cut Tomb at Beni- hassan 16 10. Pier Decoration from the Tombs of Sauiet-el-Meytin . . . .17 11. Lotos-column of Beni-hassan . . 18 12. Column from Sedinga . . 19 13. Lotos-columns from Thebes . . 20 14. Calyx Capital from Carnac . . 21 15. Capitals from Edfou. . . .22 16. Osiris Pier . * . . -23 17. Royal Grave near Thebes . . 24 1 8. Southern Temple of Carnac . . 25 PAOB 26 27 FIGURE 19. Temple of Edfou 20. Great Temple of Carnac . 21. Section of the Hypostyle Hall, Great Temple of Carnac . . 28 22. Chapel upon the Platform of the Temple of Dendera . . .29 23. Temple of Philae . . . .30 24. Faade of the Rock-cut Temple of Abou-Simbel 31 25. Hall of the Rock - cut Temple of Abou-Simbel . . . .32 26. Egyptian Wall - painting. Interior of a House . . . . -33 27. Labyrinth of the Fayoum. . . 35 28. Egyptian Profile. Greek Profile . 38 29. Husband and Wife. (Munich Glyp- tothek.) 39 30. The Schoolmaster of Boulac . . 40 31. Lion of Reddish Granite. (British Museum.) . . . . -41 32. Egyptian Wall-painting. Sculptural Work 43 33. Egyptian Wall - painting. Lance- maker 44 34. Egyptian Wall-painting. Prisoners of Different Nationalities . . 45 CHALD.EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. Corsabad. Assyrian 35. Relief from Shrines 48 36. Temple at Mugheir (Ur) . . . 49 37. Ruins of Warka . . . -51 38. Patterned Wall. Warka . .51 39. Tomb at Mugheir . . . -52 40. Bors - Nimrud. Temple - terrace at Borsippa ..... 54 41. Plan and Elevation of the Temple at Borsippa 56 42. Plan of Babylon . . . -59 43. Plan of Nineveh . . . .61 44. Plan of the Palace of Kisr-Sargon, Corsabad 63 45. Ornamented Pavement from the Northern Palace of Coyundjic . 64 XVI LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. FlOl'RE PAOB 46. Cornice of the Temple Substruct- ure at Corsabad .... 66 47. Plan of the Northwestern Palace of Nimrud 67 48. Relief from Coyundjic ... 68 49. Plan of the Palace of Esarhaddon at Nimrud 69 50. Various Capitals and Bases, from Assyrian Reliefs .... 7 51. Table, from an Assyrian Relief . 71 52. Mouth of a Tunnel under the N. E. Palace, Nimrud .... 72 53. Tunnel under the S. E. Palace, Nimrud 7 2 54. View of an Assyrian Palace, Res- toration 73 55. Terraced Pyramid, from a Relief, Coyundjic 74 56. Plan and Section of the Terraced Pyramid, Nimrud 75 57. Relief from the Northern Palace, Coyundjic ..... 7^ 58. Entrance to One of the So-called Temples, Nimrud ... 77 59. Obelisk from Nimrud ... 78 FIGURE 60. Assyrian Dwellings. Relief from Coyundjic 79 61. Tent-like Dwelling. Relief from Coyundjic 80 62. Susa, Relief from Coyundjic . 8l 63. Babylonian Seal, and its Impres- sion ...... 82 64. Wall Decoration of Enamelled Tiles 83 65. Statue of a King, from Nimrud . 84 66. Winged Lion, " . 85 67. Winged Bull, " " . 85 68. Lion, " . 86 69. King and Warrior. Relief from Corsabad 88 70. Heads. Reliefs from Nimrud . 89 71. Temple. Relief from Corsabad . 90 72. A Besieged City. Relief from Nimrud 91 73. Wounded Lioness. Relief from Coyundjic ..... 92 74. Transportation of Stone. Relief from Coyundjic . . . .'93 75. Transport of a Cherubim . . 94 76. Glazed Terra-cotta, from Nimrud. 97 PERSIA. 77. Restoration of the Palace of Darius, Persepolis 78. Plan of Persepolis .... 79. Fragment of a Base from Pasarga- dre 80. Persian Columns with Bull Capitals 81. Spiral Ornaments upon Chairs 82. Columns from the Eastern Portico of the Hall of Xerxes . 83. Rock-cut Tomb of Darius 84. Entablature of the Palace of Darius 99 101 103 104 106 107 109 85. Plan of the Palace of Darius at Persepolis 86. Persian Door-casing . 87. Relief from the Portal of the Hall of a Hundred Columns 88. Propylasa of Xerxes at Persepolis. 89. Altar Pedestals at Pasargadas 90. The Tomb of Cyrus 91. Relief from a Portal, Persepolis . 92. Relief from the Stairs of the Palace of Darius . PHOENICIA, PALESTINE, AND ASIA MINOR. 93. Rock-cut Tombs at Myra . . 130 94. Temple Cella (El-Maabed) at Am- rith . . . . . .134 95. The Monuments El-Meghazil at Amrith 136 96. Fa9ade of a Rock-cut Tomb at Je- beil 138 97. From a Relief at Saida . . . 141 98. From the Monument El-Meghazil at Amrith ..... 99. From Rock-cut Relief at Mashnaka 100. The Mosaic Tabernacle 101. Relief at Thabarieh 102. Vase Discovered in Cyprus . 103. Hypothetical Plan and Section of Solomon's Temple . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. XVll FIGURE PAGE 104. Rock-cut Tomb at Siloam . . 158 105. Rock-cut Tomb at Hinnom . . 158 106. Tomb at Paphos in Cyprus . . 160 107. Cyprian Pilaster Capitals . . 161 108. Votive Figure from Cyprus . . 162 109. Cyprian Head .... 163 no. Rock-cut Tomb at Antiphellos . 164 in. Rock-cut Tomb at Antiphellos . 165 112. Rock-cut Tomb at Myra . . 166 113. The so-called Monument of the Harpies at Xanthos . . . 167 114. Sarcophagus at Antiphellos . . 168 115. Rock-cut Tomb at Telmissos . 169 116. Details of Columns from Telmis- sos, Myra, and Antiphellos. . 170 117. The so-called Tomb of Midas . 171 1 1 8. Phrygian Rock-cut Tomb near Do- ganlu 172 119. The so-called Grave of Tantalos . 174 GREECE. 120. View of the Athenian Propylaea. Restoration .... 121. Plan and Section of the Tholos of Atreus 122. Restoration of the Tholos of Atreus. Portal .... 123. Fragments of an Engaged Column from the same .... 124. The Pyramid of Kencreae . 125. Plan of the Acropolis of Tiryns . 126. The Gate of the Lions at Mykenae 127. The Smaller Gate at Mykenae 128. Portal from Samos 129. Gateway of Phigalia 130. Portal upon Delos 131. Gate of Missolonghi 132. Gate of Messene .... 133. Gate of Thoricos .... 134. Gate of Ephesos .... 135. Interior of a Structure upon Mount Ocha, Eubcea .... 136. Elevation of the Corner of the Middle Temple, Selinous . 137. Entablature of the Parthenon 138. Scheme of the Doric Entablature. 139. Plan and Elevation of the so-called Temple of Theseus . 140. Painting over the Pteroma of the same 141. Coffered Pteroma Ceiling, Seli- nous 142. Coffered Ceilings from the Parthe- non 143. Plan of the Middle Temple, Seli- nous ...... 144. Capital from the Northern Tem- ple, Selinous .... B 175 179 180 181 1 86 1 88 189 189 190 190 191 192 9 2 193 193 194 203 206 207 208 209 213 216 145- 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152- 153- 154- 155- 156. 157- 158. 159. 1 60. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. Capital from the Middle Temple, Selinous 216 Capital from the Temple at Assos. 216 Capital from the Eastern Plateau, Selinous 217 Capital from the Temple of Zeus, Selinous ..... 217 Capital from the Temple of Hera- cles, Acragas .... 217 Capital from the Temple of The- seus, Athens .... 218 Capital from the Portico of Philip, Delos 218 Capital from the Temple of De- meter, Paestum ... . 218. Plan of the Great Temple at Paestum 219- Plan, Section, and Elevation of the Temple of Zeus, Acragas . . 220 Entablatures of the Older and of the Present Parthenon . . 221 Plan of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia 222 Plan of the Parthenon . . .225 Plan and View of the Propylaea, Athens . . . . . 226 Plan of the Temple of Apollo, Bassae 227 Plan of the Temenos at Eleusis . 228 Ionic Order of the Mausoleum at Halicarnassos .... 232 Plan of the Normal Ionic Capital 233 Plan of the Corner Ionic Capital . 233 Ceiling of the Peripteros of the Mausoleum. Restored . . 235 Base and Capital from Bassae . 236 Base from the Heraion at Samos . 237 XV111 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 167. Base from the Temple of Apollo Didymaeos, Miletos ... . 237 168. Base from the Temple of Athene, 203. Priene 237 204. 169. Base from the Propylaea, Cnidos . 237 205. 170. " " Temple of Wing- less Victory, Athens . . . 237 206. 171. Ruins of the Temple at Aphrodisias 239 207. 172. The Temple upon the Ilissos . 241 173. Plan of the Erechtheion . . 242 208. 174. Northwestern View of the Erech- theion 243 209. 175. Order of the Eastern Portico of the Erechtheion .... 244 176. Corinthian Capital from Bassae . 248 177. " " from the Tem- ple of Apollo, Miletos . . 248 178. Corinthian Capital from the Tower 212. of the Winds, Athens . . 248 179. Tomb at Mylassa. . . .251 213. 180. The Mausoleum at Halicarnassos. Restoration . . . . 252 214. 181. The Monument of the Nereides at 215. Xanthos 253 182. Plan of the Stoa Diple at Thoricos 254 216. 183. Plan of the Stadion at Messene . 256 217. 184. Plan of the Hippodrome at Olym- 218. pia 257 219. 185. Plan of the Greek Theatre, accord- ing to Vitruvius. . . . 258 186. The Theatre at Segesta. Restored 259 187. The Cover of DodwelPs Vase. (Munich.) 271 1 88. The Relief over the Gate of the 223. Lions, Mykenae .... 273 224. 189. Steles from the Acropolis of My- 225. kenae 275 190. Golden Mask from Mykenae . 276 226. 191. Figures from the Vase of Clitias and Ergotimos .... 277 192. Metope Relief from Selinous . 284 229. 193. Statues from Miletos . . . 285 230. 194. The Apollo of Thera ... 286 195. Archaic Relief from Sparta. . 287 231. 196. The Stele of Aristion . . . 288 232. 197. A Stele found at Orchomenos . 290 233. 198. Head of a Warrior, Selinous . 291 199. Archaistic Artemis, from Pompeii. 292 234. 200. Central Figures from the Western Gable, ^Egina . . . . 294 235. : PAOE Harmodios and Aristogeiton . 297 Apollo, after Canachos. . . 298 The Discos-thrower . . . 302 Statuette of the Athene Parthenos 305 Fragment Imitated from the Shield of Athene Parthenos. . . 306 Coins of Elis. .... 307 Demeter and Persephone, from the Parthenon . . . . -311 Aphrodite and Peitho, from the Parthenon 312 Fragment from the Frieze of the Cella of the Parthenon . -314 Figure from the Temple of Zeus, Olympia . . . . . 316 Figure from the Temple of Zeus, Olympia . . . . -317 Head of Apollo, from the Temple of Zeus, Olympia . . .318 Metope from the Temple of Zeus, Olympia 319 The Victory of Paionios, Olympia 320 From the Frieze of the Temple at Phigalia 321 Copy of the Doryphoros, Naples . 323 Amazon, after Polycleitos . . 325 Head of Hera, Naples . . . 326 The Ludovisi Juno, Rome . . 326 Metope from the Eastern Plateau, Selinous 328 Eirene and Ploutos, after Kephi- sodotos 329 The Apollo Kitharoidos . . 330 Niobids. (Florence.) . . .331 Head of Niobe .... 332 Fragment of the Frieze at Hali- carnassos ..... 334 Head of Eros. (Vatican.) . . 335 The Hermes of Praxiteles . . 336 The Head of the Hermes . . 337 The Venus of Melos . . . 338 Copy of the Apoxyomenos of Ly- sippos 341 The Farnese Hercules . . . 343 The Zeus of Otricoli . . . 344 Boreas, from the Tower of the Winds 346 Notos, from the Tower of the Winds 346 Coins of the Diadochi . . . 347 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. XIX FIGl'RE 236. The Dying Gladiator . 237. The Laocoon 238. The Farnese Bull . 239. The Wrestlers 240. The Apollo Belvedere . 348 352 354 356 357 241. The Artemis of Versailles . . 359 242. The Borghese Gladiator . . 361 243. The Belvedere Torso . . . 362 244. Group from the Villa Ludovisi . 364 245. The Capitoline Centaur . . 365 ETRURIA. 246. The Campana Tomb at Veii . 387 247. The Gate of Falerii . . . 388 248. Canal of the Marta . . . 389 249. Restored Plan and Elevation of the Tomb of Porsena . . 391 250. Ceiling of a Tomb at Cervetri . 392 251. Plan and Section of a Tomb at Cervetri 393 252. Interior of a Tomb at Cervetri . 394 253. Temple Tomb at Norchia . . 395 254. Elevation of the Etruscan Temple, according to Vitruvius . . 397 255. Tomb at Corneto .... 398 256. Etruscan Sarcophagus . . . 399 257. Bust from the Grotto dell' Iside in Vulci ...... 402 258. Sarcophagus of Terra-cotta from Caere . . . . . . 403 259. Etruscan Relief .... 404 260. The Capitoline Wolf . . . 405 261. Etruscan Stone Sarcophagus . 407 262. Painting from Caere . . . 410 263. The Janus Quadrifrons in the Forum Boarium. 264. Gateway in the Walls of Norba . 265. Remains of the Servian Wall 266. The Cloaca Maxima 267. Plan of the Temple of Fortuna Virilis 268. Plan of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina . . . ' . 269. Tuscan Column from the Coliseum 270. The Temple at Cori . 271. View of the Temple of Fortuna Virilis 272. Corinthian Capital from the Pan- theon 273. Composite Capital 274. Section of the Aqua MarciaTepula and Julia ..... 275. Section of the Pantheon, in its Present Condition 276. Section of the Pantheon. Resto- ration by Adler. 277. Plan of the Baths of Caracalla 278. Chief Hall of the Baths of Cara- calla ...... 270. Plan of the Circus of Romulus ROME. 280. 413 414 415 417 419 419 420 421 422 424 424 426 427 428 429 43 281. 282. 283. 284. 285. 286. 287. 288. 290. 291. 292. 293- 294. 295. Scheme of the Roman Theatre, according to Vitruvius . . 432 Theatre of Marcellus, Rome . . 433 Plan of the Flavian Amphitheatre 434 Section of the Auditorium of the Flavian Amphitheatre . . 435 Facade and Section of a Rock-cut Tomb at Petra .... 438 Triumphal Arch of Titus . . 439 " " Septimius Se- verus 440 Section of the Primitive Roman Basilica 442 Plan of the Primitive Roman Ba- silica 442 Plan of the Basilica of Maxentius. 443 Section of the House of Pansa in Pompeii ..... 444 Plan of the House of Pansa in Pompeii /H4 The Flavian Palace ... 445 Court of the Palace of Diocletian at Spalatro 446 Fragment of the Cista Praenestina. 447 Janus Bifrons upon an Ancient Roman Coin .... 448 XX LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 296. Statue of Isis. (Museum of Na- ples.) 45 297. Relief of Mithras. (In the Louvre.) 451 298. Vertumnus (Silvanus). (In Ber- lin.) 452 299. Relief ofBonus Eventus. (British Museum.) 453 300. Statue of Augustus. (In the Vat- ican.) 454 301. Equestrian Statue of Nonius Bal- bus, Jun 455 302. Relief from the Arch of Titus in Rome 458 FIOUBK PAOE 303. Relief of Trajan, from the Arch of Constantine in Rome. . . 459 304. Relief upon the Pedestal of the Column of Antoninus Pius . 460 305. Victory, from the Arch of Con- stantine 463 306. Wall-painting from the Aurea Donius of Nero. . . . 466 307. Ceres. Pompeian Wall-painting. 467 308. Wall-painting from Herculaneum. 468 309. Landscape-painting from Pompeii 469 310. Wall-painting of Decorative Ar- chitecture, Pompeii . . . 470 Fig. i. The Pyramids of Gizeh. EGYPT. IT is a curious chance that the most ancient monuments of hu- man civilization should stand upon a land which is one of the youngest geological formations of our earth. The scene of that ar- tistic activity made known to us by the oldest architectural remains of Africa and of the world was not Upper Egypt, where steep pri- meval cliffs narrow the valley of the Nile, but the alluvion of the river's delta. It would be difficult to decide whether the impulse of monumental creativeness were here first felt, or whether the mere fact of the preservation of these Egyptian works, secured by the indestructibility of their construction as well as by the un- changeableness of Egyptian art, be sufficient to explain this prior- ity to other nations of antiquity notably to Mesopotamia. Al- though no ruins have been found in Chaldaea of earlier date than the twenty-third century B.C., it is not at all impossible that re- mains of greater antiquity may yet come to light in a country which is by no means thoroughly explored. Nor should we deem the old- 2 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. est structures now preserved to be necessarily those first erected. The perishable materials of the buildings which stood in the plains of the Euphrates and Tigris, generally sun-dried bricks with asphalt cement, were not calculated to insure long duration, or to prevent their overthrow and obliteration by the continual changes in the course of these rivers, through the silting and swamping of their valleys. Yet, though tradition would incline us to assume that Chaldaean civilization and art were the more ancient, the oldest monuments known exist upon the banks of the Nile. The changeless blue of the Egyptian sky, the strictly regular return of all the natural phenomena connected with the Nile, that wonderful stream of the land's life, are entirely in accord with the fixedness of Egyptian civilization in all its branches. Though the high state of advance which we first find in Egyptian art, three thousand years before the Christian era, must necessarily have been preceded by less perfected degrees, it is wholly impossible to per- ceive such stages of development in any of the monuments known. After Egypt had attained a certain height of civilization, its histo- ry, during the thousands of years known to us, shows none of those phases of advance or decline, of development in short, to be ob- served in Europe during every century, if not during every decade. The Egyptian completed buildings and statues begun by his re- mote ancestors without the slightest striving for individual pecu- liarity. He commenced new works in the same spirit, leaving them for similar execution by his great-grandchildren. Numberless gen- erations thus dragged on without bequeathing a trace of any peculiar character and ability. It is only by the cartouches of the kings in the hieroglyphic inscriptions that it is possible to separate the dynasties, and to group into periods of a thousand years or more, works of art which seem from their style to belong to one and the same age. What gigantic revolutions have affected the civilization of Europe during the fourteen centuries elapsed since the overthrow of the Roman Empire, and how slight are the appre- ciable changes during the nearly equal number of years of the an- cient dynasties of Memphis the period of the pyramids, or again of the Theban kingdom from the seventeenth dynasty to the rule of the Ptolemies! PYRAMIDS. 3 The true age of the monuments of Lower Egypt has not long been known. When Napoleon I. fired the spirits of his troops before the Battle of the Pyramids by the well-known words " Forty centuries look down upon you from the heights of these pyramids," he must have been aware that, according to the conceptions of the archaeological science of the time, he was exag- gerating. In fact, however, he was far behind the truth. The pyra- mids of Abousere, possibly also those of Dashour, are of the third dynasty (3338 to 3124 B.C., according to Lepsius), those of Gizeh of the fourth dynasty of Manetho (3124 to 2840 B.C.). These are structures which have stood for five thousand years. The pyra- mids of Cochome, referred to the first dynasty of Manetho, are still older, dating from a time nearly coincident, according to Biblical authority, with the creation of the world itself (3761 B.C.). It is true we are still so far from chronological certainty that dates often differ astonishingly. Osburn, for instance, places the fourth and fifth dynasties as late as the period between 2228 and 2108 B.C., and notably the two kings of the fourth dynasty, Shofo and Nu-Shofo, about 2170 B.C. The first twelve dynasties of Mem- phis, dated by Lepsius about 3892 to 2167, and by Osburn as late as 1959 B.C., are now known principally by their monumental tombs. Among these, the sepulchres of the kings are prominent in like manner as the ruler in an absolute and theocratic monarchy is ele- vated above his subjects. The enslaved people labored upon the monuments of their mas- ters, often during the entire lifetime of these latter. It may be seen from contemporary wall-paintings that the discipline main- tained during the work of construction was not lacking in strict- ness, but it was certainly not that excessive oppression generally imagined. A body of over one hundred thousand workmen sorely oppressed might, even in Egypt, have been difficult to manage by a hated despot. It was principally during the annual inundations of the Nile that the kings employed and fed the poorer classes, at that time, perhaps, unable otherwise to subsist. During other seasons the rulers could not have taken the tillers of the soil from fields and flocks without great injury to their own interests. It is no mark of a selfish despotism, which builds without reference to the welfare of EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. 4 land and subjects, that the kings removed their enormous sepulchral piles from the vicinity of their residences from the valuable allu- vion of the Nile to the barren edge of the desert. They thus, as Plato recommends, occupied no place with dwellings of the dead where it would be possible for the living to find nourishment. The fertile ground of the valley was not encumbered by the colossal pyramids, which were so numerous in ancient Egypt that Lepsius found the remains of sixty-seven in the forty-eight kilometers alone between Cairo and the Fayoum, on the western bank of the river. Supposing only five score such pyramids, with an average area of one hundred ares each, two elevenths of that of the great pyramid of Gizeh, to have stood in the narrow valley of the Nile, what an enormous loss in the grain production of that most fertile but limited land would so great a reduction of arable surface have caused during the past five thousand years ! The fundamental motive of the pyramid is the funeral mound. A small upheaval above the natural level of the ground results of itself from the earth displaced by the bulk of the buried body. Our present practice of interment clearly illustrates this. Increased dimensions elevate the mound to an independent monument. Many nations, some of a high degree of civilization, have contented them- selves with such imposing hills of earth over the grave, tumuli, which, from the manner of their construction, assumed a conical form. Others placed the mound upon a low cylinder, thus bet- ter marking its distinction from accidental natural elevations. The Egyptians and the Mesopotamians rejected the cone entirely, and formed, with plane surfaces upon a square plan, the highly mon- umental pyramid. Peculiar to the former people are the inclined sides which give to the pyramid its absolute geometrical form, as opposed to the terraced structures of Chaldaea. The sand of the desert ebbed and flowed fifty centuries ago as constantly as in our time, when the sphinx, after being uncovered to its base, has been quickly hidden again to the neck. Rulers, unwilling that their gigantic tombs should be thus submerged, were obliged to secure to them great height, with inclined and unbroken sides, upon which the sand could not lodge. The typical pyramid of Gizeh. near Cairo the monument of PYRAMIDS. 5 Cheops (Shofo, Suphis), the first or second king of the fourth dy- nasty rises above the broad necropolis of Memphis, by far the largest and one of the most marvellous works of mankind. (Fig. I.) With a ground-line mean of 232.56 m., the great pyramid attained an altitude of 148.21 m., of which the entire apex is now overthrown, leaving a height of about 138 m.* The original intention of the builders was doubtless an absolutely square plan. The greatest dif- erence in the length of the ground-lines of the base is 0.45 m. The angle of the upward inclination of the sides has been found, by meas- urements at various points, to average 51 51' 43". The entire pyra- mid is solidly built of massive blocks, pierced by a few narrow passages which lead to small chambers. (Fig. 2.) Like most of these monu- ments, the entrance is situated somewhat above the ground ; it opens to a passage which descends with a gentle inclination. The shaft is covered with stones leaning against each other, so as to present the great resistance of a gable to the superimposed mass. In passing out of the masonry it is continued into the natural rock under the same angle, 26 27'. Near the point of separation it meets with another passage, which ascends with an inclination of 26 6' to the centre of the structure, sending off a nearly horizontal branch at half-way. All three shafts lead to grave-chambers, the highest being the most im- portant. As the ascent continues above the horizontal branch, its importance is emphasized by the passage being increased from 1.2 or 1.5 m. high to a corridor 8.5 m. in height, roofed by gradually project- ing blocks, and having upon its floor a slide to facilitate the trans- port of the sarcophagus. Thereupon follows a horizontal vestibule, closed most securely by four blocks of granite which fell like portcul- lises. Only three of these had been let down ; the fourth remained in its original position, the lower grooves never having been cut to allow its descent. The upper chamber, of polished granite, but other- wise not ornamented, is 10.48 m. long, 5.24 m. broad, and 5.84 m, high.f It is ceiled horizontally with nine colossal lintels of granite, * The measurements in the text are the mean of the results attained by the French acad- emicians in 1799, and by Colonel Howard Vyse in 1837. The recent measurements of Mr. Thomas Inglis make the north side 231.64 m., the south 231.49 m., the east and west sides alike 231.19 m., or an average of 231.38 m. t According to Piazzi Smyth. 6 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. a detail which seemed at first surprising, as other voids of far less width were more firmly covered, either by projecting and gradual- ly approaching stones, as in the ascending corridor; or with blocks leaned together so as to form a gable, as in the other passages, and in the middle chamber, called that of the Queen. Yet it was for the security of this upper chamber that the greatest care proved to have been taken. The weight of the half-height of the pyramid remaining above it was by no means allowed to rest upon its hori- Fig. 2. The Great Pyramid of Gizeh. Section North and South, looking West. zontal lintels. There are above them five low relieving spaces sep- arated by four stone ceilings similar to the first ; mighty blocks are inclined over all these to a gable triangle. In case of rupture the horizontal beams would of themselves have formed new triangles and prevented direct downward pressure. Cheops certainly did not need to fear the ceiling of his chamber falling in upon him. Venti- lation was provided for the room by two narrow air-channels, which, inclining upwards, took the shortest course to the outside. PYRAMIDS. 7 The perfectly geometrical form of the pyramids of Gizeh has from early times led to speculations upon their having been erected in conformity with mathematical or astronomical calculations; and endless attempts have been made to discover the fixed proportions- which they are supposed to embody, and to determine their sym- bolical or metrical significance. Too much is often assumed upon the strength of accidental coincidences, generally only approximate ; but if such proportions indeed existed, whatever may have been their intention, they are evidently beyond the true province of art. The second great pyramid, built by the successor of Cheops, Chephren (Sophris), seems not to have been so regular in its inte- rior arrangement. The third, that of Chephren's successor, My- kerinos (Menkera), is of the most beautiful execution. The une- venness of the ground was so considerable that a substructure of masonry was here necessary. The entire kernel is of rectangular courses of stone, and, with the exception of the exterior casing, is built in the form of steps. This manner of construction was em- ployed in most of the pyramids, but is here particularly noticeable. The casing of granite, highly polished, is still partly intact ; the joints of its stones are scarcely perceptible, and are not wider than the thickness of a sheet of paper. The mechanical excellence of all these pyramids is indeed won- derful; they remain as a marvellous proof of the constructive abil- ity of man in ages far anterior to known periods of the world's his- tory. Nor are. they mere piles of masonry which could have been erected by an enslaved people without the guidance of skilled and thoughtful designers. The arrangement of the passages, of the chambers and their portcullises, of the quarried stone and polished revetment, was admirably adapted to the required ends. In the third pyramid two corridors have been found, one above the other. The upper, opening within from the first chamber, at some height above the floor, does not reach the exterior surface, but ends suddenly against the unpierced outside casings. This peculiarity is explained by, and in turn gives weight to, the state- ment that this pyramid, as originally built by Mykerinos, was con- siderably smaller than it is at present, measuring, according to the end of the unfinished upper corridor, 54.86 m. on the side of the 8 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. plan, and 42.20 m. in vertical height. Nitocris, the last queen of the sixth dynasty, prepared the pyramid to serve also as her own monu- ment by adding courses of stone which increased these dimensions to 117.29 and 66.75 m - respectively. But as the original entrance, by the prolongation of its inclined line outward, would thereby have opened much too high above the ground, a new corridor be- neath the first was rendered necessary. The second chamber, which probably once contained the sarcophagus of the queen, was found entirely plundered. The third and lowest, better protected, had been opened ; but in it there still remained in position a magnifi- cent coffer of basalt. The exterior of this sarcophagus was sculpt- ured with lattice-work in imitation of a palace-like structure with portals. Fragments of the wooden coffin, with carved hieroglyph- ics, once within it, and of the mummy itself, were flung about the room. The sarcophagus, of the greatest value as illustrating the architectural forms of its time, sank in the Mediterranean with the ship which was carrying it away to England. The mummy and the lid of the coffin are in the British Museum. Hieroglyphics upon the latter designate the venerable remains as those of King Men- kera, the same Mykerinos .whom Herodotos, following traditions of the Egyptian priests, mentions as one of the best rulers of the land. The stone ceiling of the Mykerinos chamber was at first thought to be vaulted, it having the form of a low pointed arch. This peculiarity proved, however, to be due to a hollowing -out of the inclined gable blocks. Princes and princesses of these early dynasties appear to have been buried in smaller pyramids, like those which stand in groups of three near the first and third great pyramids of Gizeh. Promi- nent subjects were allowed to take a place in the royal necropolis ; but their pyramids were always truncated, in form resembling the Egyptian footstool the pyramidal point remained the peculiar privilege of the kings. It appears to have been customary to commence all these structures with a few large terraces of ma- sonry, which were not fully developed into the perfectly pyramidal structure until the last stones, the revetments, were put in place. These terraces generally had vertical sides. Occasionally this con- struction was varied by being formed with sloping sides, which PYRAMIDS. 9 repeated the obtuse ascending angle of the footstool, so that the separate steps, elsewhere with a vertical rise, were here somewhat inclined. It is not certain whether the absolute pyramidal form was always intended to be carried out upon the completion of these latter monuments. The examples of the inclined terraces which have been preserved rather seem to show that various attempts were made to develop architecturally upon the exterior the pecu- liarity of its inner construction. The arrangement and line of the kernel were more or less strictly adhered to, so that the last course of facing-stones showed the original angle of the interior masonry. Fig. 3. Section of the Great Pyramid of Saccara. The increasing of the terraces by successive courses coats, as it were seems to have been generally continued as long as the reign of a Pharaoh would permit. The layers, when inclined, were most numerous at the foot of the pyramid, decreasing in number as they ascend, that the mass might not take the proportions of a tow- er. This manner of building is displayed by the section of the first pyramid of Saccara (Fig. 3), which, if the courses had been continued in equal number, would have reached a height of at least one hun- dred and fifty meters, instead of the 57.91 m. effected by its terrace- 10 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. like contractions. The pyramid of Meydoun shows that this con- traction did not necessarily take place in regular and equal steps. (Fig. 4.) There the layers were added, without decreasing in number, to a considerable height, when the structure was quickly completed by broad and low terraces. Similar to this must have been those pyramids which ended in a platform and served as the mighty ped- estals of colossal figures, described by Herodotos as existing in Lake Moeris. A remarkable variation from these forms is finally to be noticed in the stone pyramid of Dashour. (Fig. 5.) Rising at first Fig. 4. The Pyramid of Meydoun. with steep inclination, 54 14', it changes its slant at half-height to reach, with a smaller angle, 42 59', a more rapid conclusion. This artistically unfortunate form seems to have been owing to a change of plan during the execution of the work ; it was doubtless originally designed to have been finished like the pyramid of Meydoun. It is hardly necessary to seek the origin of the double angle in the analo- gous obtuse termination of Egyptian obelisks. This pyramid of Da- shour is further remarkable on account of its magnificent revetment of polished Mocattam limestone, which is almost entirely preserved. PYRAMIDS. II There is as great a difference in the material as in the form of the pyramids. As early as the third dynasty King Asychis (Asu- chra) built a pyramid of what Herodotos terms Nile mud; that is to say, of sun-dried bricks. It is not improbable that the great pyra- mid of Dashour may be identified with this. Besides this peculiarity of material, it is of unusual construction, not having been immedi- ately built upon the natural ground, but standing' on a thick layer of sand, which, enclosed by retaining-walls, forms an excellent foun- dation. Fig. 5. Southern Stone Pyramid of Dashour. One of the group of pyramids at Abousere is built of rubble- stones, quarried from the high plateau of the desert itselfj and rough- ly cemented with Nile mud. The builder of this irregular masonry held it the more necessary to insure the ceiling of his grave-chamber with the greatest care, and three gables of stones, 10.90 m. long and 3.66 m. thick, provide a resistance as sufficient against the imposed mass as does the sixfold roofing of the King's Chamber at Gizeh. (Fig. 6.) The exterior layers were carefully constructed of blocks from the quarries of Tourah. Immense dikes, forerunners of our modern causeways, led from these quarries to the buildings at Abou- 12 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. sere. Although intended only for the conveyance of materials, they were yet so firmly built that they exist at the present time. Egyp- tian wall-paintings show in the clearest manner the transportation of colossal monolithic statues along these ways upon sledges, either moved upon rollers or dragged over an oiled slide, as in Fig. 7. The pyramid of Illahoun, like the northern pyramid of Dashour and oth- ers, is built of brick; its masonry was additionally strengthened by walls of stone, the thickest being upon the diagonals of the plan. The pyramid of Meydoun is built of alternate horizontal courses of variously quarried stone. The following are the most important pyramids still standing, with their dimensions in meters : Name of Pyramid. Original Present Height Height. Side of Plan. Angle of Ascent. I. Great pyramid of Gizeh 148.21 '39-39 104.39 '03.29 81.46 69.39 66.83 65.25 6 1. 06 137-34 136-37 99-49 97.28 39.62 68.40 20.85 32-31 27-31 47-55 49-99 61.87 27-43 57-91 232-56 2I5-09 219.28 I37-93 now, 170.69 now, 161.54 now, 137.16 116.92 now, 109.73 104.39 109.60 77.04 104.34 E. X W. 1 20.02 N. X S. 107.01 104.39 51 52' 52 21' 43 36' ( above 54 14' ( below 42 59' 74 10' 57 20' 51 42' 51 10' 51 20' 73 30' 2. Second pyramid of Gizeh 3. Northern stone pyramid of Dashour. . . . 4. Southern stone pyramid of Dashour.. . . 5. Pvramid of Illahoun 6. Pyramid of Meydoun 7. Northern pyramid of Lisht 8. Pyramid of Hovara. 9. Northern pyramid of Lisht 10. Southern brick pyramid of Dashour. . . . 1 1. Great pyramid of Abousere 12. Third pyramid of Gizeh 13. Northern brick pyramid of Dashour 14, Great pyramid of Saccara 15. Pyramid of Abou-Roash The Nubian pyramids on Mount Barkal and in Meroe, far more numerous than those of Lower Egypt, have lost much of their in- terest since investigations have shown that the civilization of Egypt and the prototypes of monumental art did not descend from Nubia, as was at first supposed, but arose in the delta and advanced up the stream. Inscriptions prove these pyramids to be some three thou- sand years younger than those of Memphis, dating them at as recent an epoch as the beginning of the Christian era. They are generally grouped in an extended necropolis, and differ from those of the ancient kingdom by a steeper angle of elevation, by a roundel-moulding upon the angles, and, above all, by much smaller dimensions. Though the truncated pyramidal form, as has been seen in a ROCK-CUT TOMBS. ^ number of tombs at Gizeh, was not excluded from the funeral archi- tecture of Egyptian subjects, it was never general. Rock-cut tombs were much more customary. The upright cliffs which border the banks of the Nile led naturally to such a formation, and in their sides are excavated caverns of very different dimensions, from the prevalent small, square chambers, with a narrow entrance high above the level of the valley, to the most extended series of rooms. Fig. 6. Section of the Middle Pyramid of Abousere. These tombs were commonly decorated by mural paintings alone, but occasionally by carved architectural details, which always repre- sent a wooden sheathing of slats or lattice-work. The larger cham- bers, even of the most primitive period, have the roof supported by square piers. It is from these piers that the Egyptian columns seem to have originated, dividing from the' outset into two classes and develop- ing in different directions. , 4 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. One class of columns arose from chamfering the corners of the square pier, this support being thus transformed into an eight-sided, and, when the proceeding was repeated, to a sixteen -sided, shaft. The first phase of change, with its octagonal plan, was simple and advantageous a predominance of vertical line was secured to the support, as well as greater room and ease .of passage to the cham- ber. The second, the sixteen-sided figure, offered but few new ad- vantages ; on the contrary, the play of light and shade between the sixteen sides and angles was lost in proportion as the edges be- came more obtuse and less visible. As the sleek rotundity of an absolutely cylindrical shaft was not desirable, the blunt angles of the sixteen-sided prism, of rather coarse stone, were emphasized to Fig. 7. Transport of a Colossus. Egyptian Wall-painting. avoid the disagreeable uncertainty which is felt when the plan is un- decided between a polygon and a circle. This was effected by chan- nelling the sides, making the arris more prominent and giving a more lively variation of vertical light and shade. The pier thus maintained, in some degree, its prismatic character while approach- ing the cylinder, and the channelled column arose. Rock-cut tombs of the twelfth dynasty (2380-2167 B.C., accord- ing to Lepsius) situated at Beni-hassan, and part of the necropolis of the ancient Nus, a city early destroyed, show the polygonal pier in the two phases of eight and sixteen sided plan. The most northern of these has the octagonal unchannelled pier in the vesti- bule, and the sixteen-sided channelled column within. Only fifteen channels are executed on the latter, the sixteenth side being left COLUMNS. 15 plane for the reception of a painted row of hieroglyphics. Both ex- terior and interior shafts have a base like a large flat millstone, which projects far beyond the lower diameter of the column, its edge being bevelled inward. A square abacus plinth is the only medium between shaft and ceiling, the two columns of the vestibule lacking even this. A full entablature did not exist in the interior, as a representative of the outer edge of roof and ceiling there would naturally have been out of place. The northernmost tomb has no distinct entablature carved upon the exterior ; but its neighbor Fig. 8. Section and Plan of the Northernmost Rock-cut Tomb at Beni-hassan. (Fig. 9) shows, cut from the solid rock, a massive horizontal epistyle above the columns, and upon this the projecting edge of the ceiling, which appears to consist of squarely hewn joists. Lattice-work was found represented upon the stone sarcophagus of Mykerinos. Here the model of a wooden ceiling is truthfully imitated upon the rock. As, in the flat coverings of rainless Egypt, roof and ceiling appear one and the same, this entablature has but two members epistyle and cornice ; while the frieze, in Greek architecture the representative of a horizontal ceiling beneath the inclined roof, does not here exist. i6 EG YPT. ARC H ITECTU RE. This order of architecture, called, because of the similarity of the shaft, the Proto-Doric, was predominant in the ancient kingdom. But at least as early as the twelfth dynasty another class of col- umns was in use which had been developed in an entirely different manner. The Proto-Doric columns originated from the mathemati- cal duplication of the prismatic sides and angles of the square pier ; these second made the same pier their model, but followed its painted ornament, not its architectural form. The primitive de- signer enriched his work with flowers, striving to preserve the quick- ly fading natural decoration by an imperishable imitation. Many of the bands of ornament customary in antiquity may be considered as rows or wreaths of leaves and flowers, although often they do rv. not betray their derivation at - first sight, because of the origi- nal imperfect representation of nature, the subsequent strict conventionalization, and final degeneracy into formalism. In Egypt, ornamental adap- tations of the lotos-flowers of the Nile appear at first in long, frieze -like rows, the blossoms being bound together by the Fig. 9. Second Rock-cut Tomb at Beni-liassan. stems in much the same ar- rangement as similar decorations in Assyria, or the better conven- tionalized anthemion friezes in Greece. When this horizontal orna- ment was transferred to the narrow vertical sides of a pier, it was necessary to place the flowers closely together, to lengthen the curled stems and bind them ; in short, to form of the wreaths, which had answered for the narrow band, a bouquet better corresponding to the tall, upright space to be filled. Such a bunch of long-stemmed lotos-buds is shown upon the pillars of the tombs near Sauiet-el-Meytin (Fig. 10), which, certain- ly of the ancient kingdom, were probably of the sixth dynasty. This bouquet may have been as customary an ornament for the pier as the garlands of lotos-flowers were for the frieze. FLORAL COLUMNS. The history of architectural decoration shows that the stone- cutter's chisel everywhere followed in the footsteps of color. The four sides of the pier bore the same painted flowers ; if these were to be sculptured, nothing could be more natural than to carry them from four-sided relief into the full round, where they offered the same face to all points of view, and transformed the painted pier into a column formed like a bunch of lotos-blossoms. This development must have taken place early in the ancient kingdom, for we find the floral column in the same tombs of the twelfth dynasty at Beni-hassan which show the so-called Proto- Doric shaft in its various phases. Form and color so work together in the floral column as to leave no doubt of the fundamental idea having been the bunch of lotos-buds painted upon the sides of the pier. Four stems of rounded profile are engaged, rising from a flat base similar to that of the polygonal column. They are tied together under the buds by fivefold ribbons of different colors. Above these the lotos - flowers spread from the stems, showing between their green leaves the opening buds in narrow slits of white. The flowers of the painted bouquet (Fig. 10) are spread apart ; but in the sculptured column they are nec- essarily united, forming the capital. Even the little blossoms with short stems, repre- Fig. TO. Pier Decoration from i ,1 ... r c- A. i n/r the Tombs of Sauiet-el-Meytin. sented upon the painting of bauiet-el-Mey- tin, are not neglected, although the calyx itself has become much smaller, owing to technical reasons of the execution. Beni-hassan proves that the two orders, the channelled polygonal shaft and the lotos-column (Fig. 1 1), had been developed as early as the twelfth dynasty ; but as columnar architecture was not general in the ancient kingdom, the examples preserved are isolated. The little temple of that age discovered by Mariette Bey near the great sphinx of Gizeh shows no trace of columns, their place being supplied i8 EG Y 1>T. A RC H ITECTU RE. by monolithic piers. The period between the twenty-second and the sixteenth century B.C., during which the Nile-land was occupied by the nomadic Hycsos, the shepherd kings, enemies to all civil- ization, was not favorable to the further application and devel- opment of architectural genius. The columns do not again ap- pear until the advent of the new Theban kingdom with the eigh- teenth dynasty (1591 B.C., according to Lepsius), when they were extensively employed, especially in temples. It was then that the typical forms of the orders were determined. The Proto-Doric, the channelled polygonal column of the tombs at Beni-hassan, fell into disuse. Its simplicity suited neither the desire for richness of form, peculiar to the later Egyptians, nor the de- light in polychromatic ornament, which found only one unchannelled strip at its disposal. The polygonal shaft received, in certain measure, a new lease of life by the invention of a necessary part, a capital in place of the meagre abacus plinth which had formerly been the insufficient medium of transition between the upright support and the horizontal entab- lature. The vegetable prototype was deserted, and a female head, or rather a fourfold mask about a cubical kernel, crowned the shaft, be- ^ ing surmounted by an ornament somewhat re- Fig, ii. Lotos- column of sembling a chapel. The column thereby be- lieni - h assan. -i TT *.-j c. came similar to a Hermes, or to a caryatid fig- ure of Janus Quadrifrons, as it were. (Fig. 12.) But the representa- tion of the deity Athor had only a limited application, and seems to have prevented the column from being generally employed. A far wider field was opened to the floral column, which in its architectural and ornamental development was removed further and further from its original model. The changes were brought about in two ways, the most direct alterations being effected by the sculptor. The four buds and stems of the lotos-columns of Beni-hassan were increased to eight ; the latter changed their round cylinders to an- gular prisms, thus giving up much of the vegetable character. The former straight and stiff shaft, rising directly from the base, was FLORAL COLUMNS. 19 curved near the bottom by a short swelling, which suddenly increased the diameter. This entasis was surrounded by a row of leaves, again characterizing the ascending bundle as stems. Leaves were also added at the foot of the buds, these being out of place and impair- ing the consequential development expressed in the column of Beni- hassan, though corresponding well enough with the treatment adopted for the similar enlargement at the foot of the shaft. The four little flowers, which were tied in by the bands of the Beni-hassan column, naturally became eight in number with the duplication of the stems and blossoms. They were before much diminished in size, but here became an entirely unorganic, rectangular ornament. The binding ribbons of the neck retained their original variegated colors ; but the painting of the capital itself put aside every likeness to the natural colors of the flower. (Fig. 13*.) An entirely picturesque transformation also af- fected the lotos -column, and led to the second phase of its development. The stone shaft was cut cylindrically, the memberings being omitted and all reminiscences of stem and bud being abandoned* The wreaths of leaves remained at the lower end of the shaft and of the capital, as did also the bind- ing ribbons with the little flowers, which were still more broadened and distorted. The rest of the column gave space for painted, or rather coilana- glyphic, representations of devotional acts, for the cartouches of the kings and for hieroglyphic in- f scriptions. (Fig. 13 b.) The capital, which had Fig. 12. Column fom before consisted of four and of eight buds, became Sedmga. consolidated to a single one ; the binding ribbon of the neck was retained without a function. It was the more natural to open the single bud to the calyx of a flower, a graceful and satisfactory solu- tion of the problem which retained its sway henceforth in Egypt much as the Corinthian capital, so nearly related in form to this Egyptian calyx, predominated over other Roman varieties. The 20 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. shaft and the ribbons remained, as in the painted column of the Memnonium. (Fig. 13 b.) So also did the row of leaves at the base of the capital ; the little flowers were entirely omitted, and the upper part of the calyx was thickly covered with royal seals painted between upright ornaments, so small that their line does not affect the com- position of the whole. (Fig. 14.) A discord resulted from the re- tention of the abacus plinth of the former bud capital in its original proportions, a defect which in some degree defeated the aesthet- ic advantages of the boldly pro- jecting calyx as a medium be- tween the vertical support and the horizontal mass above it. The calyx capital attained no typical and established form in Egyptian architecture, even as the Corinthian capital received no formal development in the Hellenic art which originated it. The decoration of the calyx continued to offer a wide field for the inventive talent of the Egyptian architect, which was here employed with most fortu- nate results. The ruined build- ings, especially of later periods, "N show hundreds of different cap- I I * i e* _ * i. _ _ i i !. ,,. , , . itals, from the simplest upright F>g- 13- Lotos-columns from Thebes. a. Sculptured Column from I*. Painted Column from the forms of the papyrUS to elabo- the Great Temple at Carnac. | Memnonium of Ramses II. rately turned and rolled leaves ; these floral ornaments being almost always composed and conven- tionalized with admirable taste. A decided advance was made by separating the upper edge of the calyx, with notches, into four large petals, although the decora- tion did not have sufficient influence to affect the column as a whole. The most satisfactory among the varieties of the floral column, and that most thoroughly carried out, was certainly the palm ; the cap- FLORAL CAPITALS. 21 ital of which was characterized as a crown of leaves, and the shaft, by an imitation of the bark, as a palm-stem. The tall leaves ren- dered a greater height of the palm capital necessary; thus increased, it most closely approached the Corinthian in beauty of outline. The division of the great calyx into eight lobes was another result of this decoration. As the palm capital was frequently placed among others, especially by the Egyptians of later periods, it naturally had the effect upon the varieties to be brought into harmony with it of lowering the necking of their shafts in the same measure as had been necessary for itself. (Fig- 15.) The slender proportions prevalent during the time of the Ptole- mies caused the abacus plinth upon the calyx to be heightened to a cube, and even increased to twice the height of the capital itself, in which case it was ornamented by the heads of Athor and Typhon, or by the entire dwarfed fig- ure of the latter. In rare cases, piers take the place of columns in the temple courts, and are masked by pig. 14. Calyx Capital from Carnac. statues of Osiris or of Ty- phon. (//-. 1 6.) These figures have of themselves no constructive function as supports, and are not to be classed with the caryatides and telamones of Greece. The great variety of form in the column and capital is not shared by the entablature. This consists, as seen at the tombs of Beni- hassan, of two members. The lower stretches from pier to pier, or from column to column, as a connecting epistyle. The upper, rep- resenting the horizontal ceiling, reposes thereupon, and is crowned by the universal cornice-moulding a boldly projecting Egyptian scotia. Between these two members there is a continuous roundlet, often characterized, by its ornament of an encircling ribbon, as a bun- dle of reeds. The cornice is sometimes marked by rows of reed- 22 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. leaves bent forward at the top, the epistyle covered with hiero- glyphics. In later times, the decoration of the entablature be- came more florid, repetitions of the uraeos serpent appearing as a cornice ornament. The columns of the new kingdom had, meanwhile, been given up in the rock-cut tombs, where they first occurred. Yet the cavern sepulchres themselves remained so much in vogue that they even served the kings of the Theban dynasties in place of pyramids. Their tendency was rather to burrow deeply into the cliff than to create large sepulchral chambers, where the support of columns would have been necessary. The principal intention of the excava- Fig. 15. Capitals from Edfou. tors to make the royal burial-place as inaccessible as possible was adverse to any monumental development of the interior. The deco- ration was restricted to paintings upon the long and repeatedly closed corridors, and sufficed only to rank these above the bare chan- nels of the pyramids. The formation of the earth on the border of the desert offered no ground for the exterior architectural treatment of these graves, and a simple portal is generally all that designates the entrance to the shafts which were the sepulchres of the Theban dynasties. The plan of that at Biban-el-Moluc is given in Fig. 17. The temples of the new kingdom with their numerous halls and courts offered, on the other hand, most ample scope for the application of columnar architecture. These extended series of TEMPLE PLAN. strangely enclosed rooms and courts, though richly decorated with paintings, would have seemed bare within and without if the col- umn had not entered into their composition, and if the building had not been expanded and ornamented by its help. With the floral orders, the temple interior became an architectural organism truly deserving of study and admiration. With exception of that portion of the structure which stood be- fore the chief portal, and cannot be considered as an integral part of the building, every Egyptian temple was divided into three principal parts, contained within an oblong enclosure : namely, the court, the hall of columns, and the holy of holies a series of cellas. (Fig. 18.) Long rows of sphinxes generally stand fac- ing the avenue which leads to the en- trance of the temple, and prepare for the sacred silence within. The door- way is flanked by two enormous tow- ers, so-called pylons, formed like steep truncated pyramids. The walls of these masses of masonry, ornamented with coilanaglyphic paintings, show slots upon the front for the reception of the high flag-poles which are represented upon contemporary wall -decorations. The towers are crovvned with the sco- tia cornice, the roundlet of which is continued down the angles. Within Fig. 16. Osiris Pier. they are pierced by stairways and small chambers, scantily lighted by narrow slits in the wall. It is probable that the summits of these pylons, without doubt the highest standpoints in the valley of the Nile, served as observatories for the Egyptian astronomers and astrologers ; a practical use was thus added to the original purpose of monumental decorative gate-ways. Two or four colossal sitting figures were generally placed before the pylons, and sometimes also two obelisks, bearing the dedicatory inscriptions of the temple. The obelisks are among the most curious and characteristic structures of Egypt. They are very comparable to the pyramids, EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. and perhaps may even be regarded as small pyramids placed as an apex upon a tall shaft. Few deviate from this type ; one of the obe- lisks of Carnac, crowned by a profile like a pointed arch, and the obelisk of Medinet-el-Fayoum with rounded end, are exceptions. The obelisks are mono- lithic. In consideration of the difficulty of procuring so large a block from the granite quarries, of transporting its enormous weight and erecting its tall mass, this peculiarity added greatly to the imposing effect of the monument. The delight of the later Roman emperors in the possession of obelisks caused many of these to be transported to Rome, where they still form prominent ornaments of the city. Most of those remaining in Egypt lie overthrown, and often deeply buried under the accumulating earth of centuries. The two before the Temple of Luxor were both erect until 1831, in which year one of them was removed to the Place de la Concorde in Paris. The removal dur- ing 1877-78 of an obelisk, and its erection in London, show what difficulties must have attended the quarrying, carving, transport, and elevation of these gigantic monuments in primitive times.* The chief portal of the temple, flanked by the two pylons, opens upon the great peristyle court. The colonnades are upon two or three of its sides, seldom towards the entrance. In the most elaborate instances, as the Temple of Luxor, the court is bordered with double rows of supports columns alternating with piers before which stand the * The fellow of this monolith, known as Cleopatra's Needle, until recently stood at Alex- andria, whither it had been moved from Heliopolis ; but having been presented by the late Khedive to the city of New York, it has been shipped across the Atlantic, and erected in the Central Park of that city. Fig. 17. Royal Grave near Thebes. TEMPLE PLAN. 25 above-mentioned figures of Osiris. Sometimes this peristyle court is duplicated, as in the great Memnonium of Ramses II. and the temples of Medinet-Abou and Luxor, the two spaces being separated either by smaller second pylons (Medinet-Abou), by a simple wall pierced by a gate (Memnonium), or by a narrow colonnade between them (Luxor). In such cases the architectural treatment of the courts differs, the second usually being more richly provided with columns and piers than the first. Smaller temples are often so built against these courts that they can be entered only from within them (Fig. 20), while they project, with the greater part of their plan, be- yond the chief enclosure. The second chief division of the building the hall of columns, the hy_p_ostv_le_. is entered from the court, either directly or through new pylons. This space, generally not so deep as the outer peri- IIIIIIIIII I II I II II I I Fig. 18. Southern Temple of Carnac. style, is entirely covered, the stone ceiling being upheld by close- standing columns, the number of which varies greatly according to the dimensions of the building. In the southern Temple of Carnac, the plan of which (Fig. 18) may be regarded as typical of the usual Egyptian arrangement, eight columns are sufficient, while the di- mensions of the hypostyle hall of Medinet-Abou render twenty-four necessary a number increased to thirty-two in Luxor, forty-eight in the Memnonium of Ramses II., and to a maximum of one hun- dred and thirty-four in the Great Temple of Carnac. Smaller halls may have received their light through the portal. The upper half of the intercolumniations of the court colonnades was also occasionally left open, as shown by Fig. 19; but, with the enormous dimensions of the hypostyle and the close ranges of shafts so frequent, a more perfect system of illumination was necessary. The light of day was procured for the hall by an eminently satisfactory arrangement. 26 EG Y PT. ARC HITECTU RE. which gives the key to the true manner of lighting any enclosed space from above the clerestory so effectively developed in later ages. The two rows of columns nearest the longitudinal axis were made half as high again as their neighbors, thus lifting their entab- lature and ceiling well above that of the remaining space. These two ceilings on different levels were connected by piers placed upon the next range of shorter columns, which supported the edge of the higher covering. The light entered between these piers, their open- Fig. 19. Temple of Edfou. ings being but little impeded by stone tracery. The central aisle was thus brilliantly lighted, and, under the cloudless sky, rays and reflections could find their way into the most remote corners of the forest of columns. As shown by Fig. 21, the larger central columns were distinguished by the broad-spreading calyx capital from the others, which retained the simpler forms of the folded bud. The effect of such a hall, especially of the great hypostyle of Carnac, must have been magnificently rich and imposing. The dimensions of the chief columns were in this instance gigantic. They were TEMPLE PLAN. 22.86 m. high. Their ca- lyx capitals were 6.10 m. in diameter, the epistyle beams 6.70 by 1.83 by 1.22 m. The entire hall was 91.44 m. in length. Walls and columns were thickly covered with carved and painted deco- rations, which were kept well subordinated to the grand forms of the archi- tecture, and were so blended by the varying light and shade that a rich and sober effect was produced by the some- what gaudy colors. One example, the Temple of Soleb, shows this second division of the building also repeat- ed : that such a duplica- tion was less common than that of the courts is explained by the far greater requirements of its construction. The last of the three chief temple divisions was reached from the hypostyle hall, either by a simple gate- way or by a third pylon portal. The Egyptian priests performed their mystic rites and guarded the sacred animals in a Fig. 20. Great Temple of Carnac. 28 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. series of chambers, the innermost of which the real temple cella was exceedingly small in proportion to the entire building, being sometimes even cut from a single stone. As the temple served the priesthood for a dwelling, a cloister- like arrangement of this third space was necessary. The long- accepted supposition that even the royal palaces were included in the temple enclosure has recently been questioned, although the hieratic character of the monarchy, and the strict religious ritual by which the life of the king in his function of high-priest was gov- erned, even to the smallest particulars, would render this of itself not improbable. The plan of the Great Temple of Carnac shows Fig. 21. Section of the Hypostyle Hall, Great Temple of Carnac. the dwelling of the priests, with its halls and smaller rooms, sep- arated by a court from the places of worship. Magnificently as the temple architecture of the Egyptians had developed since the eighteenth dynasty, its advance had mainly af- fected the interior. The temples of every other people were built with more or less reference to an imposing exterior effect, but those of Egypt generally remained the fortress-like enclosures which had become typical in the earliest ages of the land's history. The perip- teral plan, indeed, occurs in several small cellas of the ancient king- dom, but it was exceptional, and did not arrive at any systematic development. It has been seen that Egyptian architecture, though it chanced upon the channelled shaft of the Proto-Doric column, was ap- parently unable to utilize this motive, the great importance of which PERIPTERAL TEMPLES. 2 9 was not recognized in the land of the Nile. The peripteral temple plan is a similar advance, which, not fitted for the requirements and tendencies of Egyptian architecture, lay dormant for centuries. The unbroken fortress-like walls of the temple were not pierced and re- solved into the surrounding pteroma until the sceptre of Egypt had been swayed during three centuries by the semi-Hellenic Ptolemies. These rulers, warned by the example of Cambyses, were wise enough not to interfere with their Egyptian subjects in their most sensitive point of religious conceptions, rendered sacred by the traditions of thousands of years. But they did not hesitate to reintroduce into Fig. 22. Chapel upon the Platform of the Temple of Dendera. the land the exterior splendor of the peripteral plan, by that time so fully developed in Greece. The free and cheerful religious rites of the Greeks, performed before the temple, and not within it, agreed, as did the natural character of the people, with the peripteral temple, which was opened outwardly by its pteroma. It was otherwise with the mysterious and sombre precision of the Egyptian ritual, which demanded absolute seclusion. Though the peripteral temple plan was in some measure brought into vogue by the Ptolemies, it was, in Egypt, deprived of its chief characteristic the freely opened intercolumniation. The Romans, in their desire similarly to com- bine columnar architecture with entire enclosure, merely decorated 30 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. exterior walls with engaged shafts and pilasters, giving up the col- umns as supporting members of independent function, and using them only as a suggestive ornament. This merely decorative treat- ment, rare in Greece, was not adopted in Egypt until the latest times. The Egyptian preferred to place a screen -like wall, half the height of the columns, in each opening; this hid all the interior from view, even when the building was of small dimensions, as in Fig. 22, and permitted the access of light and air through the upper half of the intercolumniation. The one used as an entrance was also closed by a door-frame of greater height than the side screens. Upon the comers of the peripteral building inclined piers were often retained, as a reminiscence of the original enclosure wall as well as for greater constructional security. This is shown by the Temple of Philae. (Fig. 23.) That the arrangement of outstanding columns did not entirely supplant the closed surrounding walls is evident from the same lf ~l rflill^MM^lJ plan> where both methods occur side by side in a group of buildings of the same date. Fig. 23. Temple of Philae. -pi f There were parts of the narrow valley of the Nile where the cliffs of the desert so ad- vanced upon the river as to leave absolutely no room for the erection of temples occupying so much ground. The inhabitants here had recourse to grotto temples ; that is to say, they transferred the principal rooms of the sanctuary to an excavation in the cliff. When the space between rock and stream permitted it, the courts and pylons were built, and only the hypostyle hall and the holy of holies, reduced to the minimum necessary for the performance of the rites, were cut from the rock. This is the case in El -Cab, Redesie, Silsilis, and Girsheh. The last of these, the largest, had a court with Osiris piers upon the sides and with four columns upon the front, which seems never to have been flanked by pylons. Its largest excavated space, apparently corresponding to a second ROCK-CUT TEMPLES. 31 court, is also decorated upon the longer sides with Osiris piers. Thereupon follows a narrow hall, which but inadequately represents the hypostyle ; and, finally, as the holy of holies, a small chamber with an altar. Far more important than these are the grotto temples of Abou- Simbel, in the vicinity of the second cataract, where the portals are also cut wholly from the rock. The larger of the two even atte,mpts to approach, as well as is possible, the enormous pylons of the great Theban temples. (Fig. 24.) To this end the gentle inclina- Fig. 24. Fajacle of the Rock-cut Temple of Abou-Simbel. tion of the cliff was cut away to the talus angle of the Egyptian walls and pylons, and the cornice above, of roundlet and scotia, was worked from the rock. Four such colossal sitting figures, as are often placed before the pylons, were also cut from the cliff an effective ornament and an economy of labor thus being secured. The representation of the portal between two pylons was given up ; the whole front formed one wall in which the entrance-door was cut without further decoration. The empty space above the opening was filled by a high -relief, carved within an oblong 3 2 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. niche. (Fig- 24.) The entrance, which has now been cleared of the sand, leads in natural order to a space corresponding to the court of the free-standipg temples ; it is somewhat similar to that of Girsheh, which was also erected by Ramses II., though more imposing and of better proportions. (Fig. 25.) A following room, the ceiling of which is supported by four piers, suggests the temple hypostyle, here much dwindled in extent from the difficulty of its excavation as well as from the general restriction of this Fig. 25. Hall of the Rock-cut Temple of Abou-Simbel. space in Nubian monuments compared with those of Central Egypt. The innermost chambers of the holy of holies are not only as small as those of the free-standing temples, but are reduced in number. The second rock-cut temple of Abou-Simbel, situated near the one described, is of smaller dimensions. It has upright colossal statues upon the front, which, instead of being cut in the round, have more the effect of reliefs from the fact that they stand in niches, a difference arising from the greater steepness of the cliff at PALACES AND DWELLINGS. 33 this point. The treatment appears rational in consideration of the smaller amount of material thereby removed, though the unmonu- mental effect of the reliefs, which lean with the inclination of the wall, is an unfortunate result of this economy. The first hall, analo- gous to the temple court, has its ceiling supported by six piers, which are decorated upon the side towards the central aisle by Athor masks. Three entrances lead from this hall into a narrow space, here entirely at variance with the character of a hypostyle, and through this into the holy of holies. Notwithstanding the con- Fig. 26. Interior of a House. Egyptian Wall-painting. traction of the two inner departments, the three principal divisions of the free-standing buildings can be recognized in all rock-cut tem- ples. The existing ruins allow a comparatively clear understanding of the religious architecture of Egypt, in which class the monu- mental tombs must be reckoned as well as the various forms of temples ; but we are left almost entirely uninstructed as to the nat- ure of the private dwellings. The plan of the cloisters within the great temple of Carnac (compare Fig. 20) is indeed clear, though, be- 34 EGYPT. ARCHITECTURE. ing only a portion of a larger scheme, it had no individual or exte- rior, expression. The manner in which these spaces were roofed and lighted is not evident. The so-called royal pavilion of Medinet- Abou is a complete puzzle in its development of plan and assumed connection with other structures ; it can only be held to prove that some private buildings' were of several stories. Other peculiarities here notice- able are windows framed by lintels and jambs of enormous blocks, and rounded battlements above a projecting cornice. Egyptian sculptures and wall - paintings often represent the interiors of well-to-do private houses and of palaces ; they show the plans of dwellings and adjoining vegetable-gardens so well that the very products of the latter can be distinguished ; but, though these plans designate the separate rooms and their entrances, it is still impossible to comprehend the general arrangement of a normal house, or its exterior appearance. The views of the interiors, with their slim columns and narrow entablatures, with a system of perspec- tive which shows things above one another instead of behind one another, with their evident misrepresentations and constructive im- possibilities, must have stood in very much the same relation to the Egyptian reality as the fictitious architecture of the Pompeian wall- decorations does to the buildings of the Greeks and Romans. The architectural details introduced by the painter served only as a frame for the figures or for the contents of the store-rooms which he represented. It may be concluded that, when private dwellings were more pre- tentious than the single room necessary to provide the most impera- tive shelter, columns were not excluded from them ; and, from the absence of any remains of these supports, it is probable they were of wood. The ruins and rubbish of sun-dried bricks, which compose the overthrown cities hitherto excavated, show that the great ma- jority of dwellings were no more than low hovels. Even palaces seldom went beyond a series of small chambers, and thus did not present an important architectural problem. This is illustrated by the gigantic labyrinth, famed in so many fables of antiquity, and somewhat known by the excavations of Lepsius in the Fayoum. (Fig- 27.) A great number of small chambers are here DWELLINGS. 35 grouped in three rectangular wings around an oblong space, which was probably divided into several courts. The walls remaining do not show that geometrical regularity of arrangement described by Herodotos, Strabo, Diodoros, and Pliny, but a really labyrinthic ag- gregate of small chambers, the destination of which is not clear. The pyramid which closes the fourth side of the square is alone of monumental importance. It seems possible that, instead of one or more palaces, we have here the remains of some city. It is cer- \ Fig. 27. Labyrinth of the Fayoum. tainly wrong to connect the work with the Dodecarchia (twenty- sixth dynasty, 685 to 525 B.C.): the twelve pretenders would hardly have united to erect a common monument. In the list of Manetho, Amenophis III., the sixth king of the twelfth dynasty, is mentioned as the founder, a notice corroborated by inscriptions discovered on the site. That the private buildings were so unimportant in comparison with the religious architecture of Egypt is explained by the excessive ^6 EGYPT. SCULPTURE. subjugation of the people to a monastic ritual, and by the favorable character of the Egyptian climate. It is necessity that prompts in- vention, and Egypt, with its ever-cloudless sky and constant tempera- ture, required no protection against the inclemency of the weather ; the climate did not force man to spend his days within doors, nor did it destroy the lightest shelter. In the absence of rain, the most primitive horizontal ceiling was sufficient. According to the relig- ious conceptions of the Egyptian, it was more important for him to prepare a permanent house for his death -sleep he had more at heart the protection of his corpse than of his living body. Thus thousands of graves have been preserved, while science cannot find a single dwelling remaining to betray even the general character of Egyptian domestic architecture. To these considerations it must be added that the dwellings stood in the valley of the Nile, and have been subjected to annual inundations which have formed a consid- erable alluvial deposit, while the graves were almost without excep- tion situated upon the changeless cliffs that border on the desert. The architecture of Egypt was practised in a manner to show al- most no historical development with the sculpture this is the case in still greater degree. The most ancient carved remains, which with reasonable security may be assigned to the fifth dynasty, show the formal system, retained during the subsequent twenty centuries, as already perfected. Even at that early date the network of lines, which the Egyptian sculptors (more as mechanics .than as artists) followed down to the time of the Ptolemies, was already calculated and introduced as a canon. Besides figures of the gods, the sculpture of Egypt is rich in the images of kings, queens, and prominent subjects ; and in such por- traits the observation of the living model, of the peculiarities of character which lead to the differences of exterior appearance, would seem to be a natural consequence. But as the individual disappeared in the mass of the Egyptian people, so the appreci- ation of individuality was almost wholly lacking in the Egyptian artist. Sculptors and painters worked without the least desire for pre-eminence in ability and distinction, without thought of perpetu- ating their names, and the work they produced expressed these THE CONVENTIONAL FIGURE. 37 faults. As Brunn truly remarks, we can look upon whole rows of Egyptian sculptures without a question ever arising in our minds as to the authorship of this or that work, without observing that one is superior to the others, or that any were much above manufactures. The work became what the artist felt himself personally to be a mere link in a monotonous chain. The result of |his is that the stat- ues generally represent an entirely abstract human being not an absolute ideal, for that can hardly be said to exist in any art, but a type of the Egyptian race, well understood and unalterably repeated. As soon as the art had to a certain degree mastered the normal ap- pearance of the human body, it contented itself therewith and came to a standstill. The peculiarities in the living model or in the attrib- uted characters of the deities were rarely considered by the artist, who only distinguished by attributes what should be otherwise ex- pressed ; he did not attempt to show the effect of the mind upon the outer being, and thus to give to sculpture its true importance. The description of single Egyptian works is consequently almost the same as the consideration of the entire sculpture and painting of the land the more so as the artist not only employed generally one and the same conventional figure, but in position and move- ment mainly alternated between two types. The statues are, with a few exceptions, either sitting or in an act between standing and stepping, which does not appear to be an advance, because the feet are too near together; both soles being flat upon the ground, the centre of gravity falls between the two legs, almost more upon the one behind than upon the one before. A figure seems to move only when the body, advanced before the centre of its two supports, throws the greatest part of its weight upon the forward leg, and thus relieves the hinder foot, which, with uplifted heel, touches the ground with the toes, in readiness to be removed. Both sitting and standing statues have the arms pressed closely to the body the former with bent elbows and hands resting flat upon the knees, the latter with arms hanging straightly and stiffly, the hands holding the so-called Nile key ; or folded upon the breast, the hands grasping attributes, crook and plough or whip. Individual action is in every case excluded. If the formation of the body be more closely exam- ined, the following peculiarities are remarkable : The head, as the EGYPT. SCULPTURE. comparison of it with a Greek type at Fig. 28 shows, deviates so greatly from the normal oval that it could almost be drawn within a square, the principal line of the face being about parallel to the back of the head, as is the flat outline of the top of the skull to the line from the chin to the neck. The general directions of the eye, the mouth, and the carfare not perpendicular to the sides of the parallel- ogram, inclining too markedly upward ; the comparatively large ear is placed half as high again from the throat as it should be. These deviations are in some measure explained by the peculiarities of race characteristic of the Orientals, and especially of the Egyptians by the different formation of the skull and position of the eye. The Egyptian Profile. Fig. 28. Greek Profile. forehead is almost straight, being on a line with the upper lip ; and, as it recedes from the nose, does not project at all. It is rendered still more unimportant by the curved ridge of the brows lacking decision, and the eye itself wanting in depth. The eye has remained in the rough condition of a primitive imitation of nature thick strips surround it in place of lids, and continue, the upper overlapping the under, beyond its exterior angle towards the ear. The gently curved, round, broad nose projects but little over the upper lip, which, instead of preparing the close of the oval tow- ards the chin, is pushed forward like the lower lip, upward and out- ward. The closed, sensually broad lips are sharply outlined. The THE CONVENTIONAL FIGURE. 39 corners of the mouth, slightly drawn upward, give, with the similar inclination of the angles of the eyes, a certain expression of smiling sarcasm not intended by the designer, and consequently cold and stiff. The chin is flat and pointed in profile, the line from it to the short and thin neck almost straight. Such is the type that was retained through thousands of years, so unchangeably that even the sexes are scarcely to be distinguished by the heads. Male figures often have a kind of chin beard, cut at right angles, and bound on with ribbons which can sometimes be distinctly traced. The heads, and through them the whole figures, are characterized by head-dresses, refer- able to one fundamental form the pshent, a high cap like a tiara ; but they have been so "modified from their prototype that the Description de r Egypt c, pi. 1 1 5, shows thirty dis- tinct varieties. The deities are frequently rec- ognizable by the heads of animals of a lion, ram, cow, ape, jackal, crocodile, hawk, or ibis, as the case may be. The worship of nature, peculiar to Egypt, found a better expression in these symbols than in the monotonous representations of man, in marked contrast to the F'g- 29. Husband and Wife. (Munich Glyptothek.) incorporation of Hellenic myths, where, in the monstrous conjunction of human and animal forms,, the human head was rarely given up, it being more generally placed upon the body of an animal. The figure, as accepted by the Egyptian designer, was, to the smallest details, drawn according to a network of lines. Diodorus states it to have had 21 \ units in height, the unit being probably the length of the nose. The shoulders are drawn upward, and, like the flat breast, are broad ; the hips, on the contrary, are narrow and weakly modelled : they are girded with a cloth which appears 40 EGYPT. SCULPTURE. carefully folded and adjusted, but, with all its tightness, does not fit the forms of the body. When upon sitting figures, this cloth often stands out as stiffly and straightly as if carved of wood, giving no indication of the true nature of its material. The lean arms are muscular, dry, and hard ; the hands are rendered clumsy by the equally thick and almost equally long fingers. The legs are not powerful, and rather slim, indicating great elasticity, and, like all other parts of the body, the ability to en- dure great exertion. The knees are sharp and drawn with anatomical un- derstanding ; the feet are narrow and long, as are also the toes, which, lying in their entire length upon the ground, do not greatly differ in dimensions and form. In female figures the breasts are fully developed, the nipples being formed like a rosette ; a closely fitting gown reaches from the broad neck- ornament, common with both sexes, to the ankles, but, being represented without reference to the material and without the most necessary folds, ap- pears so elastic that its existence is only surely to be. perceived at the borders. The most ancient sculptures and the later works of Nubia are some- what heavy and full, those of the best period (the time of Ramses) more slim Fig. 3 o.-The Schoolmaster of Boulac and elast ; c After the fifth century B.C. the figures become better modelled, and a certain influence of Greek sculpture is betrayed. But the ancient type remained in, the chief characteristics unchanged until the end of the Ptolemaic dy- nasties, and even to the later ages of the Roman Empire. Those works of Greek and Roman sculptors, so popular during the age of Hadrian, which borrowed the costume and position of Egyptian ANIMAL FORMS. 4! statues while having nothing else in common with Egyptian art (such, for instance, as the numerous figures of Antinous to be found in almost all the larger museums), must not be classed with the truly national works executed in Egypt and for that country. The monotony of Egyptian sculpture was not without some ex- ceptions. Less pretentious works, where the necessity of canonic idealization seems not to have been so imperative as in the well- fed form of the so-called schoolmaster in the museum of Boulac (Fig. 30), which shows not only in the head, but in the entire body, an undeniable portrait make it questionable whether the conven- tionalized representations may not be more owing to the restraint of religious authority and tradition, to the hieratic laws which exer- cised so complete a sway over the life of the country in every re- Fig. 31. Lion of Reddish Granite. (British Museum.) spect, than to any absolute incapability of the Egyptian artist for individual characterization. Egyptian sculpture, thus under the ban of religious conservatism, always dealt more successfully with the forms of animals than with human beings and deities. In hunting scenes there is wonderful spirit and character in the drawing of the dogs, and of the animals which they attack. The artist attained an elastic and life-like force in the representation of all animal forms, even when these were compelled into monstrous combinations with human members. The most common of the latter are the androsphinxes, which differ from the Greek sphinx in being male having the head and breast of a man and the body of a crouching lion. At times the human head is supplanted by that of a ram or hawk. Rams were also 42 EGYPT. SCULPTURE. treated as sphinxes, especially before the temples of Ammon and Kneph. The most important androsphinx is the well-known colos- sus of Gizeh with the head of Thothmes IV. The heads of the sphinxes seem usually to have been portraits of kings. This gigan- tic guardian of the necropolis of Memphis, the most enormous mon- umental figure of the world, with space between the outstretched front legs for a chapel there built, is now again buried to the neck by the shifting sand of the pyramid plateau after having been ex- cavated with great labor. Its face alone is 12.2 m. long. But it is in cases where the entire lion is represented without deformation that Egyptian sculpture attains its greatest perfection. (Fig. 31.) A great majority of the Egyptian works of sculpture were cut with marvellous patience in the hardest materials, in variously col- ored granite, diorite, syenite, and basalt. Limestone and alabaster were rarely employed for colossal or life-size statues, but were used more frequently for works of smaller dimensions ; these were also burned in clay with a surface of blue or green glazing, or were cut in more valuable stones, such as agate, jasper, carnelian, and lapis- lazuli. Enamelled clay idols were manufactured in great numbers ; modern museums contain hundreds of these little figures of perfect- ly similar form. The so-called scarabaeus is also very common beetle-shaped bodies of clay, or of the above-named stones with incised figures or hieroglyphics upon their lower surface. Such amulets were perforated and worn as beads, and were placed loosely in the coffins with the mummies. The artistic manufacture of colored glass was extensive. Fine metal-work was less common, although ornaments of enamelled gold, silver, and copper of high artistic value have occasionally been found. Wood -carving was practised . upon the mummy -coffins. Although the valley of the Nile did not produce large pieces of a satisfactory material, this lack was supplied by gluing together lay- ers of palm or sycamore wood, and hiding the defects of this process by a painted priming of stucco. The coffins themselves are in so far works of sculpture as they represent upon the cover the form of the swathed body placed within them, and even show the face as exposed. The sculpture of reliefs was less developed and less correct than COILANAGLYPHIC RELIEFS. 43 of the round. As the relief was always very low, and could not ex- press the greater projections, the artist's desire to represent the hu- man body clearly and completely led to an unfortunate conflict be- tween the profile and front view of the figure. While mostly drawn in profile, and showing particularly the head and legs in side view, which is the more favorable for representation in low -relief, the shoulders and breast are developed in the other direction, and are seen as from in front. It is only in- this position that both arms are visible an important consideration to the artist, whose object was solely to represent some action or attributes. It was also felt as a difficulty that in a relief of the side view the visible shoul- der should project farther than any other part of the body, the Fig. 32. Sculptural Work. Egyptian Wall-painting. breadth of the breast and arms being more than double that of the head. The primitive designer, to avoid these objections, resorted to a forced and clumsy torsion of the body, which may be noticed in the childhood of almost every art in the Assyrian as well as in the most ancient Greek. The head, with exception of the eye, which was represented as in front, was taken in profile ; shoulders and breast from in front, but arms and hands, as well as hips, legs, and feet, in profile again. The lower the relief, the less could the sur- face be modelled, and this led to a sharp demarcation of the outline, which exaggerated the peculiar leanness of the Egyptian race to a hard angularity. The relief is a transitional stage between sculpture and painting ; it works upon a more or less flat surface, seeks its chief effect in out- 44 EGYPT. PAINTING. line, and lends itself readily to the heightening of color. The most common Egyptian relief, which has been termed coilanaglyphic, be- ing hollowed out, stands even nearer to painting than to sculpture. In real reliefs the surface is so cut away as to leave the figures em- bossed ; but here the forms do not rise above the background, and the original plane remains untouched: the sculptor contented him- self with firmly incising the outlines, and slightly rounding the forms of the body within them. This incised outline is clearly seen only by sharp side light, but it has the advantage of protecting the bor- ders of the figures and thus securing the indestructibility of the representation. In other respects the coilanaglyphics are nothing else than paintings, the space within the carved outlines being colored in the same manner as are. all Egyptian wall decora- tions. The limits of the latter art were thus greatly extended, for all temples were covered with such colored coilana- glyphics, while the stuccoed sides of rock- cut tombs and of brick masonry were richly ornamented by paintings. The number of ancient painted dec- orations which have been preserved is very great, notwithstanding their age and the perishable nature of all pig- ments exposed to air and light. The Fig. 33. Lance-maker. Wall-painting. subjects represented and often repeated are, for the greater part, religious scenes, which share the monotony of the strict Egyptian ritual, though often allowing an interesting insight into the customs of interment, the transport of mummies by the processional boat, the sacred dances and sacrifices. Representations of profane scenes are more varied and are exceedingly interesting ; the technicalities of Egyptian art are shown by the cutting of a monolithic palm-column, the polishing of a granite chapel, the painting of walls, the writing of hieroglyphics upon tablets and papyrus, the carving and painting of sphinxes and statues (Fig. 32), the transport of a colossal figure upon a sledge (Fig. 7), the making of bricks and walling of brick masonry, the interior of houses (Fig. 26), even the plans of dwellings THE EMPLOYMENT OF COLOR. 45 and gardens. Besides numerous tools and the products of manufact- uring trades, there may be recognized upon these paintings weav- ers, rope-makers, the preparers of paper and of linen cloth, ship- builders, carpenters with hand-saw and auger, and the cutters of bows and lances {Fig. 33), who employ adzes quite similar to those still in use. Commerce on land and sea is represented by wares, unpacked or in bales, by scales, various kinds of wagons and trading vessels, etc., all shown in the clearest manner possible. Ploughs, sowing and harvesting, the gathering of figs and grapes, the pressing of oil and wine, illustrate the condition of agriculture ; while the es- pecial ability of the Egyptians for animal representations is exer- cised in the hunting scenes of lions, tigers, buffaloes, jackals, and gazelles ; by the snaring of birds and fishes in nets, as well as by the Fig. 34. Prisoners of Different Nationalities. Egyptian Wall-painting. admirably characterized figures of apes, porcupines, etc. There are also historical paintings, great battle scenes, the storming of cities, and the triumph of the returning victors, who bring with them booty and prisoners, the nationality of whom is often readily dis- tinguishable by peculiarities of physiognomy and costume. (Fig. 34.) The Egyptian kings appear of superhuman size, either fighting from splendid war-chariots, or striding forward to sacrifice their kneeling enemies, a dozen of whom, seized at once by the hair, are decapi- tated at a blow. Extended and varied as these Egyptian representations were, and instructive as that which through their agency has been pre- served now is, it yet must be confessed that the painting was more a conventional picture-writing than an art. The seven colors used ^6 EGYPT. PAINTING. red, blue, brown, yellow, green, black, and white are, as a rule, applied simply, without mixture or variation, and without much ref- erence to the appearance of nature. At least, it is very rarely that any striving after natural effect is to be noticed ; that, for instance, the skin of a negress appears bluish-gray through a partially trans- parent white drapery, or that the typical red-brown complexion of an Egyptian, under similar conditions, is of a broken yellow. With- in the sharply drawn outlines the colors are flat and without any modification by light and shade, upon the changing effects of which all pictorial illusion is based. This illusion is the fundamental prin- ciple of painting, the aim of which is to render the appearance of objects. It being here entirely lacking, we cannot properly speak of an art of painting in Egypt, or, indeed, in antiquity at all, before the time of Polygnotos. Egyptian paintings are entirely of the nature of ornament ; the representation of human beings is conven- tionalized in the same manner as are floral ornaments, while imi- tated to a certain degree from nature, it is simplified according to the requirements of decorative laws. The actions shown are all without truth and life. The beauty of decoration demands a certain har- mony in the choice of colors, which is there unfettered ; in Egyptian paintings this is sought and attained at the cost of truth to nature. It was not distasteful to the Egyptian to see the same figure re- peated a dozen times in absolute similarity, for an ornament can always bear repetition. To these considerations must be added a marked peculiarity of Egyptian painting. Although the art had been restricted to the portrayal of merely exterior actions, even this end could hardly have been attained without the complement of a written explanation, which was here so adjoined as to harmonize with the figures in composition and even in color. This conjunction is far more inti- mate than is that of picture and text in an illustrated chronicle : the hieroglyphic writing and the painting are closely allied in character. It was only a step from the one to the other, and their limits are sometimes hardly distinguishable, especially in the stucco paintings of the mummy-coffins and the pen and brush drawings upon papy- rus manuscripts, where the carelessness of the execution increases the similarity. The hieroglyphic inscriptions might even be consid- DECLINE OF EGYPTIAN ART. 47 ered as the extreme consequence of the hieratically conventionalized pictures. The painting of Egypt existed unchanged for a period of more than two thousand years, with a stability unequalled in the other civilizations of the world. It was perhaps not quite so extensively employed in the ancient kingdom as in later times : paintings can be dated as far back as the third dynasty (3338 to 3124 B.C., accord- ing to Lepsius), but they were restricted to interior decoration. The walls of the pyramids were unadorned by color. After the practice of art had been greatly limited by the invasion of the Hycsos (from the thirteenth to the seventeenth dynasty, 2*136 to 1591 B.C.), it arose with new vigor at the advent of the modern kingdom, espe- cially during the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties, when the ar- chitecture which flourished at Thebes offered a wide field for painted decorations. From that time the walls lost their bareness, and rich- ly colored ornaments were employed even upon the exterior, enli- vening the dead and heavy character of Egyptian building and somewhat, supplying the deficiency of its exterior development. The art of Egypt attained its greatest elaboration not, indeed, without some loss of national character in the time of Alexander and the Ptolemies (332 to 30 B.C.), when Hellenic influence broke through the sombre massiveness of the unmembered walls and ap- plied the brilliant decoration of colored columns to the exterior. But, delightful as the island of Philae appears because of these changes, it yet marks the commencing decline of Egyptian art, with the negation of the serious and mystical peculiarities of the land. The excellence of Egyptian technical processes could only delay the utter exhaustion and extinction of their art until the time of the later Roman empire. Fig. 35- Assyrian Shrines. Relief from Corsabad. CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. THE traditional culture of the land of the Euphrates and Tigris is not younger than that of the Nile. Though the third dynas- ty (commencing, according to Berosos, with the twenty-third century B.C.) is the first of which we have monumental remains, it cannot be denied that long before that time an important people had inhab- ited the country, a nation very different from the nomadic hordes which then, as to-day, roved through the neighboring deserts. Sev- eral races of antiquity were conscious that the most primitive peo- ple of civilization had lived in the land of the two streams. The Jews considered that to have been their original home. The Patri- arch Abraham had emigrated from Chaldaean Ur to Canaan. The Greek legend of Deucalion points to the history of Mesopotamia in the same manner as does the Jewish myth of the Deluge ; the old- est Greek knowledge of astronomy, astrology, and the calculation of time seems to have been derived from the same source. The tale of the division of the nations in Babel, and their spreading over the face of the earth from that point, is certainly based upon the existence of a most ancient centre of civilization upon the banks of the Euphrates. The land offered no materials for monuments which, like those of Egypt, could stand uninjured through thousands of years. The narrow valley of the Nile is enclosed by the cliffs of the desert bor- der, which seemed directly to encourage, by the excellence of the BUILDING MATERIALS. An 49 building-stone there procured, the erection of immense and inde- structible works. The plain of Mesopotamia, on the other hand, spread far beyond the courses of the two streams, losing itself in deserts without any line of eminences as a demarcation. The remote mountains offered no quarries at all comparable to those of Egypt. The soil was of good clay for the manufacture of bricks, but fuel was lacking with which to burn and harden them. The inhabitants of the land were generally obliged to content themselves with dry- ing the clay in the sun, making up by the great thickness of the Fig. 36. Temple of Mugheir (Ur). masonry for the firmness lacking to the material. They further strengthened the massive walls with a facing, or with buttress-like piers of burnt brick, or solidified the interior with alternate courses of this harder substance. The bitumen which still flows at Hit, on the Euphrates, north of Bagdad at the southern border of the higher alluvial terrace of Assyria, was an excellent substance for cementing the bricks ; in more important works it was used alternately with lime-mortar: in common buildings, or in the interior of the thickest walls, clay kneaded with straw answered the purpose of a cement. 4 ,j CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. It is natural that little should now remain of such structures. They could only survive the thousands of years that have elapsed since their building, when an immense thickness secured at least the kernel of the wall, or when the ruins of other buildings early cov- ered and protected .them. The remains of ancient Chaldaea are generally nothing more than formless heaps of rubbish, many of which have not yet been opened. Taylor, Loftus, and their prede- cessors, Ainsworth, Chesney, and Layard, discovered the ruins of over thirty cities in the lower half of the Mesopotamia!! plain. Of these, Mugheir (the ancient Ur), Warka (Erech), Niffer (Nipur), and Abou-Sharein offered the most important remains of great age; while the ruins of Sura, Tel Sifr, Calvadha, and Ackercuf are main- ly of the later Chaldaean period. Recognizable among the rubbish -hills of Mugheir are the re- mains of a terrace which consisted of two oblong steps, the lowest measuring 60.35 by 4-54 m - m length and breadth, and about 12 m. in height, standing upon a platform raised 6 m. above the sur- rounding country. The greater part of this is overthrown and buried beneath its own material. The kernel of the solid structure is of sun-dried bricks ; the facing, which is divided by buttresses, being of burnt brick cemented with bitumen. The whole is per- forated by numerous small air-channels. The second step is only about half preserved, and that which it must once have supported has entirely disappeared. A remarkable inscription, repeated upon the four corners of the upper terrace, explained the purpose of the structure and the time of its erection. According to Sir H. Raw- linson's interpretation of the cuneiform legend, this was dedicated to the deity Sin (Hurki) as a temple, and was first founded by King Urukh (about 2230 B.C.). The name of the spot is given as Ur, a city known from Biblical tradition.. The inscriptions were not, how- ever, contemporaneous with the foundation of the building, for, af- ter giving a long line of kings, they at last name Nabonetos, the last King of Babylon, as the restorer of the temple a fact which is further attested by the bricks themselves, those of the lower terrace having the name of Urukh, those of the upper of Nabonetos. The temple remains of Warka and of Abou-Sharein unite with these ruins of Mugheir to show that the Chaldaean temple consisted of a TEMPLE TERRACES. 51 simple and massive terrace of few steps, crowned, without doubt, by a chapel, which must be supposed richly decorated with colors and gold ornaments from the fragments of agate, alabaster, and fine mar- 1 ''!', * ** bles, of gold-plating and gilded nails, found in Abou-Sharein, and from the blue enamelled clay tiles of Mugheir. The sides of the great steps were either plainly buttressed or treated with projec- CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. tions, as is the case with the terrace wall of a palace at Warka, shown by Fig. 37. There was here a complicated system of reeded projections and stepped incisions cylinders and prisms which can- not be called pilasters, as they were without capitals, and probably also without base-mouldings. Another ruin of Warka (Fig. 38) has a colored wall-facing, made by driving conical pegs of terra-cotta about o.i m. long into the clay, so that the red, black, and whitish base surfaces form different patterns. This ruin is further interest- ing as giving some insight into the private architecture of the Chal- daeans. Rooms were there found separated from one another by walls fully as thick as the enclosed spaces themselves were broad a clumsy heaviness which shows what massive masonry the poor crumbling material necessitated. The existing remains suggest so strongly the arrangement of the later Assyrian palaces that there can be but little doubt that they, in some degree, served as a model for these latter; although the pal- ace wall, with its revetment of alabaster, might be erected with less thickness. No trace of win- dow-like openings can be ob- served in the ruins of Warka or in those of Abou-Sharein. Fig- 39- Tomb of Mugheir. The principle of the arch, though not extensively employed, was well understood and occasionally introduced in Assyria. From a small grave-chamber discovered at Mugheir, we may conclude that it was not known in the ancient Chaldaean period. The roof- ing was then effected by a gradual projection of the horizontal courses of bricks until the opposite sides nearly touched each other at the top of the gable thus formed. (Fig. 39.) It may perhaps be assumed that this manner of covering by the so-called false arch and vault was only employed for very narrow spaces, while larger rooms were more naturally ceiled by wooden beams. The ruins of HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS. 53 Warka, though they do not give a very clear understanding of the fortifications of ancient Chaldaea, at least show that the city walls were not necessarily square, as had been concluded from the testi- mony of ancient writers, but, as in this case, followed the irregular outline of the city. The political history of Chaldaea was from the earliest times greatly disturbed by internal divisions. At first the city Nipur, celebrated for its worship of Bel, appears to have been the most important place, at least of Southern Chaldaea. To this followed Ur or Hur, the city worshipping Hurki or Sin, then Nisin or Carrac, and, finally, Larsa, the present Senkereh. Upper Chaldasan Baby- lon, originally Ca-dimirra, does not seem to have become the only capital until the age of King Cammurabi, about 1500 B.C. A hun- dred years later Northern Mesopotamia, Assyria, began to gain pre- dominance, and in the thirteenth century B.C. Babylon was con- quered (for the first time ?) by Tiglathi-Nin, a son of King Salma- neser of Assyria. Chaldsea soon regained its independence, but only to fall again into the power of the conqueror Tiglath-Pileser, and to remain for five centuries subjugated to Nineveh. The attempts to throw off this yoke of Assyrian authority were in vain; even the uprising under the bold Merodach-Baladan, 731 B.C., was not of long duration, and finally led to the depopulation and total destruc- tion of the prominent Chaldsean cities by Sennacherib. The As- syrian Esar-haddon rebuilt Babylon ; but it did not recover its an- cient importance until the Satrap Nabopolassar revolted from his allegiance, and, with the help of the Medes, made an end of the kingdom of Nineveh ; and until his son Nebuchadnezzar, after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C., reduced even distant Egypt to vassal- age,, thus taking into possession the full heritage of the Assyrian empire in both south and west. Though the subjugation of the land by Assyria had not been without effect upon the civilization of Chaldaea, the general char- acter of Babylonian art remained much the same through all these political changes. The last king, Nabonetos, could complete the temple of Ur, which Urukh had founded seventeen centuries be- fore, as though there had. been no interruption in the work. The terraced ruins show that there was no great difference in the ar- 54 CHALDvEA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. chitectural treatment of ages so removed. Other city ruins show such an intermixture of ancient Chaldaean and Babylonian walls that their date can be determined only by inscriptions or by stamps upon the bricks. The earlier remains are predominant in Mugheir, Warka, and Abou - Sharein ; but the later capital of the country, Babylon, the city of Nebuchadnezzar, is known almost exclusively by the imposing structures of the modern kingdom. Greek antiquity, up to the time of Alexander, was acquainted with Fig. 40. Bors-Nimrud. Temple-terrace of Borsippa. this city of wonders only by fables. Even the explicit description of Herodotos is in great degree mythical, especially his astonishing account of the city walls: 480 stadia (96.557 m.) in length, 200 ells (100 m.) high, and 50 ells (25 m.) broad. The ruins have also proved the account of the famed hundred gates of the city walls, and the square network of straight streets which ran from these, to be hyperbolical. Such immense masses of masonry would, as Layard has maintained, certainly have left heaps of rubbish ; and, in fact, the ruins of a much smaller city enclosure have been traced. The BABYLON. 55 irregular orientation of the palace plan is also incompatible with the conception that the city was divided up into squares with the regu- larity of a chess-board. The traditional account that the enormous terraced temple of Bel was built on the borders of the stream oppo- site the palace structures is certainly incorrect ; for, while these lat- ter are still represented by extensive brick ruins, there is not a trace upon the other bank, the supposed site, of massive terraces which could not possibly have so entirely disappeared. Nor could the stream have swept away so colossal a building ; for a little north of Hillah, in the immediate vicinity of the spot where Herodotos de- scribes the temple of Bel, there have been found the remains of a small Mylitta temple, which would have offered almost no resist- ance to an inundation. Yet Herodotos undoubtedly related, be- sides his fables, much that was correct about Babylon. His account of the temple of Bel seems only questionable in so far as the site is concerned ; the rest of his description agrees perfectly with ruins which have been found about eleven kilometers westward, and are known by the name Bors-Nimrud. (Fig. 40.) The temple thus could not have belonged to the city proper of Babylon ; and inscrip- tions mention the place as Borsippa, spoken of by Greek writers as a separate town, which could at best be regarded as a distant sub- urb of the extended Babylon. The immense hill of rubbish stand- ing entirely isolated in the desert has a lower circumference of 685 m. This dimension agrees tolerably well with the six stadia given by Herodotos as the measure of the first step of the terraced pyramid. The regularly diminished seven steps, the "towers" of Herodotos, 7.5 m. high, reaching altogether a total altitude of 75 m.,. rose from a square substructure with a side of two stadia (180 m.) and a height of 22.5 m. The diagonals of these different terraces were not directly above one another, the steps being. 9 m. broad in front and only 3.9 m. broad behind, while the sides were equal 6.3 m. This peculiarity of the ruin agrees with the flights of stairs described by Herodotos, which, notwithstanding the analogy of the palace temple of Kisr-Sargon, may here naturally be supposed to have been upon the front, where the terraces were sufficiently broad for this purpose. Fig. 41 is an attempt to restore the chief lines of the structure by means of the dimensions given by Oppert. CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. Upon the summit of this terraced pyramid stood the necessarily small temple, which, according to Herodotos, contained a spacious couch and a golden table, but no statue o r the deity. The sides of Fig. 41. Plan and Elevation of the Temple at Borsippa. Oppert's Measurements.) (From the terraces are directed to the cardinal points of the compass, as was the case also with the ancient Chaldaean temple of Ur; and, as .at Ur, inscribed cylinders were here walled in at the angles. These TERRACES AND HANGING GARDENS. 57 relate that Nebuchadnezzar had magnificently completed the struct- ure " the temple-pyramid of the seven spheres, the wonder of Bor- sippa," begun by a former king. Ravvlinson and Oppert have con- cluded, from the remains of glazed bricks of different colors, that each of the seven terraces was dedicated to one of the seven planets of the ancients, and was characterized by its color the upper, gold ; the second, silver; the next, red, blue, yellow, white ; and the lowest, black according to the hues assigned to the sun, the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn. The lowest terrace has a panelled architectural treatment similar to that noticed in the ruins at Warka and the palace temple at Kisr-Sargon. It is probable that these high terraces in the flat plains of Mesopotamia were elevations which served the Chaldaean astronomers for their celebrated observa- tories, as the pylons of temples upon the banks of the Nile were similarly used by the Egyptian priests. As Strabo speaks especially of an astronomical school at Borsippa, there can be little doubt that it was in some way connected with the terraced pyramid of the seven spheres. The ruins of Hillah, Casr, Mudjelibeh, and Jumjuma give even less information concerning the palace buildings than the hill of Bors-Nimrud does concerning the form of the Chaldaean temple. These masses of masonry have for centuries served as quarries, and, as far distant as Bagdad, bricks, bearing the stamp of Nebuchadnez- zar, betray that the material has been transported from the ruins of Babylon. Though the supply is by no means exhausted, this ex- cavation has rendered much unrecognizable, and has so greatly increased the destruction that Layard held it impossible to dis- cover a clew to the plan of the palace structure in the confusion of its overthrown and rifled rubbish. Oppert assumes the hill of Jumjuma, or Amran-ibn-Ali, as it is called from the Mohammedan chapel now standing upon it, to be the remains of the celebrated Hanging Gardens known as those of Semiramis, the wonder of the ancient world. But, plausible as his supposition- is, it will hardly be possible to prove by existing remains the correctness of the descrip- tion given by Diodoros of the Hanging Gardens, in itself more proba- ble than the report followed by Strabo. Diodoros speaks of the Gar- dens as a terraced structure, th. side of the- square plan being about ,j8 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. 1 20 m. in length, with separate steps which ascended from the land side, while upon the banks of the river a steep wall formed the back of the highest terrace, measuring 15 m. vertically, and closing the gardens towards the water. The steps were constructed by the help of thirteen thick parallel walls, each being higher than the one next below it. They left between them twelve narrow corridors, the ceil- ings of which, like those over Assyrian canals, were probably vault- ed, and were then covered with rushes and bitumen, burnt brick pavements and lead sheathing, so as to bear the stairways which connected the different terraces, the reservoirs for cascades and fountains, and the imposed garden - earth with large trees, etc. Pumping works in the highest of these covered corridors supplied the garden with the necessary water from the Euphrates. The ruined terraces of Mudjelibeh (Babil), avoided by the Arabs as the scene of the punishment of the fallen angels, are so complete- ly overthrown that it is not possible to determine whether the re- mains are those of a temple or of a palace. It is probable that they had some connection with the great pyramidal tomb of Belus, a structure which may be assumed to have been much like the step- ped pyramid of "Nimrud to be described below. The monument of Mudjelibeh was destroyed as early as the time of Xerxes II. It lias since served as a quarry for the neighboring cities Seleucia and Ctesiphon, and has been demolished to the lowest terrace. The enormous river embankments and dikes which protected Lower Mesopotamia from flood and drought, though now only to be traced by inconsiderable remains, are of the greatest importance and interest. The neglect of these invaluable works, and of the sluices and irrigating canals in connection with them, has reduced to a deserted and pestilential swamp that most fertile land known to Herodotos where once a harvest of two and three hundredfold was returned to the tiller of the soil. Though there are vestiges of some ancient bridges in the land, it is not possible to decide whether the account given by Diodoros of the great tunnel con- structed by Semiramis be true or fabulous. There seems to have been no reason for the erection of such tall edifices in the vastly extended Babylon as the three and four storied houses described by Herodotos, and no analogy to such a NINEVEH. 5^ peculiarity exists in the great modern cities of the Orient. It must be remembered in this connection that the crumbling bricks to which the Mesopotamians were restricted would, in such high build- ings, have demanded clumsily massive substructures and lower-story walls. Though the ruins of Babylon have only recently been thorough- ly examined, their existence has long been known. Benjamin of Tudela speaks of Bors-Nimrud as the Biblical Tower of Babel, and this local tradition has been handed down to the present day. The palace ruins of the great city have always been readily recognizable, M Fig. 42. Plan of Babylon. (According to Rich.) and the one has been called Babel, the other Casr (palace), from time immemorial. It is otherwise with the second great centre of Mesopotamia Nineveh, the famed capital of the kingdom of Assyria, in the upper land of the great streams. As early as the beginning of this cen- tury, Carsten Niebuhr expressed the conviction that the remains of the overthrown city were to be sought among the hills of rub- bish which lie opposite the present Mosul, beyond the Tigris ; but the energetic Rich, who devoted so much time and labor to the barren ruins of Babylon, paid no attention to the site. Nineveh had 60 CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. entirely disappeared, and was only traditionally known from the Book of Jonah and from the legend of Sardanapalos. It was during two visits to Mosul, in the years 1840 and 1842, that the eminent English traveller and statesman Sir A. H. Layard conceived the plan of undertaking investigations in the vicinity. He expressed his convictions at the time to the French consul, M. P. E. Botta, and in 1843 that gentleman commenced the excavation of the hill Co- yundjic, which lay next to Mosul. The natives, becoming aware of the nature of the search, directed his attention to the hill of Corsabad, situated at a distance of about twenty-five kilometers from Mosul ; the excavations were removed thither, and carried on with most gratifying results. A few days' digging laid bare a number of walls reveted with huge slabs of alabaster. The wonderful sculptures in relief upon these excited redoubled activity, and soon entire cham- bers of the palace structure were freed from the overthrown rubbish which had covered it for well-nigh three thousand years. The French government purchased the entire village of Corsabad : in M. V. Place was provided a worthy successor to M. Botta. The in- scriptions discovered have proved the ruins to be those of a palace founded by Sargon about 710 B.C. in the city Kisr-Sargon or Dur- Sargina. In the year 1845, Layard obtained, through Sir Stratford Can- ning, then ambassador to Turkey, the necessary means for the Eng- lish government to take part in the promising undertaking. He at first directed his attention to Nimrud, a hill of ruins about a day's journey south of Mosul, the great size of which promised the existence of important remains. An immense terrace platform was there found to have supported a number of palaces, several of which were excavated, the more valuable sculptures and other objects of interest being transported to the British Museum. At Nimrud were discovered the most ancient and the most modern of Assyrian buildings known namely, the northwestern palace, temple, and tow- er built by Assur-nazi-pal shortly after 885 B.C., as well as the Temple of Assur-ebil-ili, presumably the last Assyrian king, dating to about 610 B.C. Besides these, there were the southeastern and central palaces built by Shalmaneser II. after 860, the latter having b'een restored by Tiglath-pileser II., from 745 to 727, as Sargon re- COYUNDJIC AND NEBBI-JONAS. 6l built the northwestern palace after 722 ; and, finally, there was the southwestern palace of Esar-haddon, from 68 1 to 668 B.C. The city itself (Calah) corresponded in grandeur and extent with the palace terrace. It was founded by Shalmaneser, and long rivalled Nineveh, especially after its reconstruction by Assur-nazi-pal. It is now beyond a doubt that the chief capital of the country is buried beneath the hills of Coyundjic and Nebbi-Jonas, the latter so called from a Mohammedan chapel to the prophet Jonah which traditionally marks the site of Nineveh. Both these mounds of Fig. 43. Plan of Nineveh. ruins were examined by Layard. In the southwestern palace of Coyundjic, built by Assur-bani-pal, from 668 to 626 B.C., was dis- covered the most extensive among these dwellings of Oriental despots. The most elaborate of Assyrian palaces was the northern one of this site, built by Assur-bani-pal about 640 B.C., a monarch who devoted certain chambers of the southwestern palace, orig- inally erected by his grandfather, to the reception of inscribed clay tablets an inexhaustible wealth for the study of Assyrian history, of which hardly a third part seems to have been recovered intact. 6 2 CHALD/EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. In Nebbi-Jonas were found traces of the palaces of Vulnirari III., from 812 to 783 ; of Sennacherib, from 705 to 68 1 ; and of Esar-had- don, from 68 1 to 668 B.C. The line of the city walls, still recogniza- ble among the hills of rubbish, is shown by the plan at Fig. 43. These fortifications could hardly have enclosed the entire city, and it is probable that only the inner town, with the palaces and public buildings, was thus protected, and that the dwelling-houses of the many inhabitants formed suburbs which extended far around the enclosed centre, gradually losing themselves in gardens and groves of date-trees, as is the case with modern capitals of the East. The com- paratively small walls of Babylon, at variance with the report given by Herodotos, lead to the same conclusion in regard to that city. The ruins of Calah-Shergat, situated about 100 kilometers down the stream from Nineveh, are identified with Assur, the oldest cap- ital of the land, which maintained its pre-eminence until Nineveh, in the fourteenth century B.C., became the great centre of power. Reson is thought to be recognized in the ruins of Selamiyeh, lying between Nimrud and Nineveh, and Erbil in Arbola. These sites have not been sufficiently examined to be of direct importance in the history of art. It is plain from the ruins already mentioned that the dwellings of the kings took the most prominent place among the creations of Assyrian architecture. The despotic element had in Mesopotamia the same superiority as the hierarchy in Egypt : in the former coun- try the palace was as much in the foreground as was the temple in the latter. In ancient Chaldaea the two elements, and consequently the two classes of monuments, were more equally represented. Still, in most points of view, the relation of Chaldaean and Assyrian archi- tecture is very close, and the differences arose chiefly from the supe- rior material at the builders' disposal in Upper Mesopotamia. The terraces of Assyria, like those of Chaldaea, were solidly constructed of sun-dried bricks and stamped earth, but the neighboring moun- tains provided stone for the complete revetment of these masses with quarried blocks. Carefully hewn slabs existed upon the terrace platform of Sargon's palace, and upon the substructure of the pyra- mid of Nimrud, while there was rough Cyclopean stone-work em- ployed in the construction of the city walls at Kisr-Sargon. The PALACE OF KISR-SARGON. 63 facing of brightly glazed tiles and stucco-paintings, universal in Chal- daea, is restricted upon Assyrian masonry of the same brick materi- als to the upper part of the wall, the lower half being sheathed and protected by sculptured slabs of alabaster. The appearance of the whole gained greatly by this change, the revetment of reliefs in Fig. 44. Palace of Kisr-Sargon, Corsabad. place of the painted figures giving a more imposing and durable character to the walls. The palace architecture of Assyria is best exemplified by the plan of the royal dwelling of Kisr-Sargon (Fig. 44), the isolated position and clear disposition of which are adapted to show the jjeneral character of these structures. The platform 64 CHALDxEA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. terrace consisted of two divisions, the broader (P) being inside the limits of the city fortifications, while the remainder (T) projected be- yond them. A double flight of steps (A) led to the chief portal (B), ornamented by gigantic winged human-headed bulls, which here not only stood on the sides of the passage itself, as at all principal entrances, but laterally upon the front walls, within and without. These figures are among the most characteristic creations of As- syrian art ; they will be treated more in detail in the following con- sideration of the sculpture of the country. The triple gateway Fig. 45. -Ornamented Pavement from the Northern Palace of Coyuncljic. opened into the first and largest enclosed court (C). Upon the left of this, one narrow passage led to the chambers of the harem, which were ranged around six smaller courts (D to H). Upon the right of the first enclosure were the household offices (J), with eight courts and numerous halls, magazines, kitchens, cellars, stables, etc. The side opposite the chief entrance was formed by the private apart- ments of the monarch (M) and by the great hall of the palace a group of chambers not presenting its chief front to the first court (C), with which it was connected only by subordinate entrances but to PALACE OF KISR-SARGON. 5 a second enclosure of almost equal extent (K), which maybe regard- ed as the chief open space of the royal dwelling. An inclined ascent (R) led to the right wing of the inner terrace, by which the king, ap- proaching in a chariot or borne by attendants in a sedan-chair, could enter his seraglio without passing the first court (C) or the entrance to the household offices (J). The encroaching line of the city wall (P) made it impossible for the portal to the second court (S) to be arranged in the central axis of that enclosure ; but strict symmetry of plan was not adopted even when there were no such obstacles. The inner apartments of the king were entered by a magnificent triple gateway (L) from the court of the seraglio; these were, in certain measure, regularly planned, being so grouped around a smaller court (M) that oblong halls, as long as this was square, were upon three of its sides. The hall upon the south opens into a number of intricate chambers, probably used as baths, sleeping- apartments, and rooms for the immediate body-guards of the king and for the temporary families of the harem. Upon the north a wing was added to the building, projecting almost to the outer border of the terrace, and dividing this (T) into a northern and a western court. The addition was the most richly ornamented portion of the entire palace ; it was probably here that the halls of reception were placed. The walls of other parts of the seraglio were reveted upon their lower part with sculptured slabs of alabaster ; but this treat- ment was not elsewhere so freely applied, nor was it as richly deco- rated as in this northwestern wing. In the first hall, which is 35 m. long and 10 m. broad, the walls are ornamented with continuous scenes representing, as in a procession, the homage and punishment of prisoners-of-war. In other rooms and in smaller courts these reliefs, divided by a band of cuneiform inscriptions, are of smaller dimensions and less pretentious execution, though of marked inter- est as forming, with their copious inscriptions, chronicles of histor- ical events. The spacious terrace at the west has in its centre an oblong hall (N), generally supposed to be the temple or chapel of the palace, but which may with more probability be considered as a hall of state. The scanty remains of this structure make a sure determina- tion of its purpose impossible. They consist chiefly of the founda- 5 66 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. tions of solid unburnt brick masonry, faced with slabs of black basalt. The cornice of this substructure is of gray limestone, in form much resembling the characteristic scotia of Egyptian archi- tecture. (Fig. 46.) A small terraced pyramid (O) at the southwest is a more remark- able structure. Four of its steps, with their facing of white, black, orange, and blue enamelled tiles, are still remaining. These lead, from analogy with the pyramid of Borsippa, to the assumption of three further steps, tiled with the red, silver, and gold assigned to the remaining planets. The vertical panelling of the sides is somewhat similar to that of the remains at Warka ; it is not here restricted to the walls of the lower terrace, like that upon the ruins of Mugheir and Borsippa. The square platform at the top of the terraces, the side of which could have measured little more than 10 m., received either an altar or a small cella, not longer than 6 m. Ascent to the top of the pyramid was provided by an inclined plane, which wound from step to step in a rectan- gular spiral. The destination of the pyramid as the palace chapel seems reasonably certain, from its similarity Fig. 46. Cornice of the Temple to other terraced temples of Assyria. Substructure at Corsabad. ,~, , , .,, ,. 1 he palaces hitherto discovered show the greatest freedom of detailed arrangement. The variations among the plans may be illustrated by a comparison of those of the northwestern palace of Nimrud (Fig. 47), the palace of Esar- haddon (Fig. 49), and of that of Sennacherib at Coyundjic. The methods of construction adopted for their erection are more sim- ilar. All have walls built of burnt or unburnt brick and of stamped clay ; those of the larger chambers are reveted in their low- er half with slabs of alabaster or with brightly enamelled tiles, and ornamented by paintings upon stucco above. All the principal halls are so narrow in proportion to their length as to resemble corridors a peculiarity arising from technical difficulties of ceiling. The manner of lighting and roofing adopted in Assyrian palaces is not directly evident from the existing remains ; none of the walls, the highest of which reaches 9 m. above the ground, showing LIGHTING OF THE PALACES. 67 traces of any window-like openings. Some authorities assume that all the light of the interior was admitted through the doors. That this may, in some instances, have been barely possible is evident from the plan of Sargon's palace at Corsabad (Fig. 44), where the principal chambers were entered directly from the open courts, or, in exceptional instances, were preceded by narrow ante-rooms which could not greatly have interfered with the light. But it is plain from the plan of the northwestern Palace of Nimrud (Fig. 47) that twelve chambers in such unfavorable positions as those shown Fig. 47. Plan of the Northwestern Palace of Nimrud. upon its eastern side could not have received the slightest light through the two narrow passages leading from the confined court. It is futile to deny the necessity of light and air for the dwellings of man ; and theories which suppose these enormous spaces left in darkness, or unventilated and lighted artificially, are certainly un- tenable. Other scholars are of the opinion that light and air were procured through horizontal openings in the ceiling and roof; but this imperfect and unpractical arrangement is particularly ill adapted for inhabited rooms, and is rendered extremely improbable by the 68 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. fact that upon the pavements there did not exist the slightest ar- rangement for leading off the water which must have fallen upon them had the roof been an inefficient shelter. The floors were rare- ly of stone slabs, like the carved fragments shown in Fig. 45, and in other places the sun-dried bricks would have been rapidly re- duced to mud by the furious rain-storms of Mesopotamia. The present condition of the ruins, the walls of which nowhere rise to the full height of the chambers, does not, however, exclude the possibility of openings for light having existed just beneath the ceiling. The form of such orifices cannot surely be deter- mined ; high windows could not have existed, and there must have been low openings in the top of the wall, separated by piers, be- tween which stood small columns, as is evident from a relief of Co- yundjic, given in Fig. 48 to serve as an argument for this manner of illumination. Light and air could thus have been freely admitted, without inconvenience to the dwellers within. The high posi- tion of the apertures, immediate- ly under the somewhat projecting roof, prevented the entrance of rain, and shut off the interior from the view of those without, just as this same manner of lighting to-day protects the harems of the East. The small shafts, which were introduced as supports between these windows, appear to have been the only representatives of columnar architecture in the As- syrian palace. If columns had been used, in their customary func- tion, as upholders of the roof, as members which bore an important entablature, some traces of these would certainly have been pre- served ; their mate'rial could hardly have been more perishable than the sun-dried brick of the walls. The entire arrangement of plan shows that their assistance was not relied upon. The chambers were disproportionately narrow, plainly to render it possible to cover them without the introduction of intermediate supports. Fig. 48. Relief from Coyundjic. COLUMNAR ARCHITECTURE. 69 The beauty and fitness of the corridor-like spaces were so sacrificed to this narrowness that its universal appearance can be regarded only as a constructive necessity. It is well illustrated by the cramped principal hall of the palace of Esar-haddon at Nimrud (Fig. 49), where a greater width than that permitted by the span of ceiling timbers was only to be obtained by the erection of a division wall to provide a subsidiary support for the beams. So helpless a make- shift, destroying the unity and grandeur of the hall, could have been adopted only in entire ignorance of the opening and supporting ele- ment of the column, apparently never recognized in Assyria. The form of the small columns, which stood in the openings al- Fig. 49. Plan of the Palace of Esar-haddon at Nimrud. lowed for light in the upper walls, can be approximately determined from the representations upon reliefs. The shafts were cylindrical, and probably without flutings ; they had a roundlet, or at least a projecting fillet, at either end. The base consisted solely of a high tore, sometimes notched upon the top, or placed upon the back of a striding lion. (Fig- 50.) The most common form of the capitals was a peculiar conjunction of two spiral scrolls, similar to a doubled Ionic capital, with an echinos-like roundlet beneath and a stepped abacus above. It is hardly to be doubted that this was the proto- type of the Ionic capital, although it cannot be determined from the reliefs whether a lateral roll corresponded to the volute of the front, or whether the helix was repeated upon all four sides, as is - CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. the case with the capitals of Persian columns. The small scale of the representations upon reliefs, and their careless execution, do not permit a sure understanding of any part of the capitals. A table (Fig. 51) upon a relief of Coyundjic better determines the form of the volutes ; it has distinct spirals in place of the rosettes, wrongly shown by Layard's drawing.* There is reason to suppose that the double helix was not the primitive and normal form of the Assyrian Fig. 50. Various Forms of Capitals and Bases, from Assyrian Reliefs. capital, but was rather an abbreviation of the leaved calyx so fre- quently met with in Phoenicia, Palestine, and Cyprus, and that the rolled ends of the leaves, shown by two of the examples in Fig. 50, originally suggested the volutes of the capital and the various spiral forms occurring upon carved Assyrian furniture, as in Fig. 81. The question will be considered more at length in the section upon Syr- ian architecture. * Discoveries, p. 444. ROOFING AND VAULTING. The columns of Assyria were employed only in this subordi- nate position, and the dimensions and shape of larger enclosed spaces were dependent upon the limited span of the wooden ceil- ing beams. Assyrian palaces were, in these respects, unable to fulfil the demands of a monumental architecture. It can only be sur- mised how roof and ceiling were constructed in detail. The beams were naturally so placed as to require the least possible length to span the clear width; the sinking in the middle, to which the elastic trunks of palm-trees so much inclined, and the accumulation of water in the hollow thereby formed, were ^ thus avoided as well as might be. The con- structive details of the roof-platform are not surely known ; it is probable that a layer of clay and earth was placed upon the beams, being rolled down compactly after every rain. The exterior representation of roof and ceiling, the wall entablature, may have consisted of a painted wooden sheathing, bearing ornaments of the character dis- played by the pavement. (Fig- 45-) It was divided, like the Egyptian entablature, into two parts ; in neither case was there a marked distinction between roof and ceil- ing. The imitations of building-fronts upon reliefs make it probable that stepped battle- ments rose above the main cornice. The fundamental principles of vaulted construction, as of columnar architecture, were known in Assyria, but neither the column nor the arch was worthily recognized and devel- oped into an important feature capable of exercising an influence upon the extent or form of the enclosed spaces. The palace ter- races were pierced by narrow vaulted channels, still to be traced among the ruins. This was the case with the most ancient struct- ure of Assyria, the northwestern palace of Nimrud. (Fig. 52.) Though it cannot be proved that the Assyrians were the original inventors of the arch of wedge-shaped stones, there are certainly no earlier instances of this manner of building known than those of that Fig. 51. Table upon an Assyrian Relief. j2 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. country. Round arch barrel-vaults were not exclusively used for such channels ; an ogive appears upon the same terrace of Nimrud, in the somewhat later southeastern palace, (fig. 53-) Though the key-stone of the latter is undeveloped, the vault is yet built upon the principle of the Gothic pointed arch. It is not impossible that this form may have descended in uninterrupted tradition from Mes- opotamia to the Arabs, being brought by them to Europe, where, ef- fecting a change in the round Romanesque arch, it exercised a deci- sive influence in the development of mediaeval manners of building. Fig. 52. Mouth of a Channel under the Northwestern Palace, Nimrud. 53- Channel under the Southeastern Palace, Nimrud. The bricks of these vaulted Assyrian channels are carefully mould, ed to the more or less marked wedge-form determined by the size of the arch a greater refinement than is practised by modern ma- sons, who use only rectangular bricks, effecting the curve by the wedge-shape of the mortar-joint. Yet, perfected as vaulted con- struction appears in these channels, its application seems to have been almost restricted to them ; Assyrian builders hesitated to ap- ply vaulted ceilings to spaces of much greater span than gates and window apertures. Reliefs show arched portals alternating with PALACE ARCHITECTURE. 73 horizontally covered openings ; and in the fortification walls of Kisr-Sargon, the city adjoining the palace-ruins of Corsabad, traces of a barrel-vaulted entrance have been discovered where the arch, of 4.5 m. clear, rested upon the backs of the winged monsters re- ferred to as the guardians of all important gateways. A vaulted corridor, considerably less in span, will be noticed at the temple pyr- amid of Nimrud. Among the numerous palace chambers remain- ing, only a few narrow cells show traces of vaults ; the opinion of some recent investigators, that the customary horizontal ceilings Fig. 54. Restoration of an Assyrian Palace. of smaller rooms were surmounted by cupolas of beaten earth, does not appear plausible. From the chief points gained by this consideration, it is evident that the restoration given in Fig. $4, a variation of the reconstruc- tion by Layard and Fergusson, cannot greatly misrepresent the once existing structures. The Assyrian palace was, upon the whole, a more satisfactory building than the Egyptian temple. The out- lines and masses of its composition were grand ; it was richly orna- mented, perhaps even overladen, with sculptured and colored dec- 74 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. oration. The massive and unpierced walls of the lower half bore a kind of open loggia, consisting of light columns between powerful piers which were fully capable of upholding the ceiling. The entire edifice being elevated upon a terrace, upper stories were not neces- sary to secure an imposing height. The existence of one lower story alone is indicated by the ruins ; no large staircases, or other means of ascent to an upper floor, were provided. The apparent duplica- tion of the stories of houses upon reliefs is owing to a fault of per- spective common to the primitive representations of all nations : things are shown as above and upon, instead of behind and beyond, one another. The ground-chambers, of which sixty-eight have been Fig. 55. Terraced Pyramid. Relief from Coyundjic. counted in the Palace of Sennacherib at Coyundjic, and over two hun- dred in the Palace of Sargon, were surely ample in number and extent. Though the royal dwellings of Assyria chiefly attract attention in considering the architecture of the country, there are also many remains of sacred buildings in the lands of the Upper Tigris. But we are acquainted only with those places of worship which stood in immediate connection with the palaces, no traces of edifices for gen- eral and popular worship having been discovered up to the present time. Even were we without knowledge of the ruins, it would be natural to suppose the temples of Assyria similar to those of Meso- potamia ; that is to say, pyramidal terraces, with high lower stories. TERRACED PYRAMIDS, n (Compare Fig. 41.) A relief from Coyundjic, the upper portion of which is unfortunately destroyed, confirms this view, showing a ter- raced structure of three or four steps situated upon a natural eleva- tion. The lower terrace is decorated, like Chaldaean works of the kind, with pilasters in low -relief; before it are pylon towers. (Fig. 55.) This specif- ically Mesopotamian type is to be recog- nized in the most prominent ruins of Assyrian sacred ar- chitecture namely, in the terraced pyr- amid which occupied one corner of the great palace platform of Nimrud. It is also to be observed in the more fragmentary re- mains at Kileh-Sher- gat, which time has buried beneath shape- less hills of rubbish, without entirely ob- literating the original disposition. The ru- ins at this site have not been thoroughly investigated ; those Fig- 56. Plan and Section of the Terraced Pyramid of Nimrud. at Nimrud Showed 1- Vaulted Corridor. 2. Modern Shafts. 3. Revetment Wall of Cut Stone. 5. Solid Brick Masonry. 6. Great Palace Terrace. 7. Temple. the lower part of the pyramid at least to have been solidly built of bricks, reveted with a wall of quarried stones. (Fig. 56.) In the height of the main palace terrace was a shaft, the purpose of which is uncertain, as it was without entrance, and empty ; it is interesting in architectural r 76 CHALD^EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. respects from the admirably executed barrel-vault of brick masonry which formed its ceiling. The ruin, for the greater part destroyed, offered beyond this corridor but few peculiarities. The stone re- vetment has been almost entirely carried away, and every trace of the temple cella which must have surmounted these terraces, as it did those of Chaldaea, has disappeared. The better-preserved but much smaller terraced temple of the palace at Kisr-Sargon has al- ready been mentioned. Two interesting reliefs show the general form of such cellas, though in these instances the structures repre- sented are not raised upon artificial elevations. (Figs. 35 and 57.) They are small temples in antis, rectangular buildings, three sides of which are formed by walls ; while, in the open fourth, two columns rvv Fig. 57. -Relief from the Northern Palace of Coyundjic. support the entablature and roof. In one case the ends of the walls upon each side of the columns are undecorated ; in the other the pilasters, though without a base, are crowned with a member similar to the capitals of the columns. The simple entablature projects in an oblique line; it is terminated by stepped battlements, in which the Mesopotamian type of the terraced pyramid is repeated in out- line and adopted as a merely decorative detail. Such temple cellas were erected not alone upon extensive terraces, but in the plain ; perhaps, also, like the similar structures of Phoenicia, in the midst of sacred lakes. The reliefs given in the cuts show the chapels to have stood at the foot of natural elevations, as well as upon them. Another form of sanctuary, with gabled roof and lanceolate acroteria, is represented upon a relief of Corsabad. (Fig. 71.) The building TEMPLES AND OBELISKS. 77 remotely resembles a Hellenic peripteros. Its constructive pecu- liarities cannot well be understood from the relief, as these con- siderations were probably not clear to the sculptor himself. It is possible that the architectural form was one foreign to the coun- try, perhaps the imitation of a temple in Southern Asia Minor. Another variety of these palace chapels appears upon the terrace of Nimrud, the forms there differing but slightly from those of the dwelling - chambers ; the sacred cellas are distinguished only by Fig. 58. Entrance to one of the so-called Temples, Nimrud. the exclusively mythological character of the reliefs, and by the altars and offerings placed at the entrance. (Fig. 58.) . It is possi- ble, however, that these spaces were used as the dwellings of priests rather than as sanctuaries, especially as the two examples known are situated near the base of the great temple of Nimrud, being in this respect admirably adapted to the uses of the sacerdotal officers in the royal household. The forms of Assyrian altars are illustrated by reliefs. (Figs. 78 CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. 35 and 57.) The rectangular shaft, at times furrowed, rests upon a plinth, and bears a projecting slab, bordered by stepped battlements. A tripod was found before the entrance to the so-called Temple of Nimrud (Fig. 58); and upon reliefs are represented fire-altars, up- holding by a single support a basin for burnt sacrifices. These altars and the bronze tables for offerings were not treated as archi- tectural details, but more resembled the chairs and thrones various- ly represented upon reliefs. The Assyrian obelisks were of greater importance ; though they cannot be compared to the gigantic wonders of Egyptian mechani- cal skill, they yet represent the typical forms of Assyrian art as char- acteristically as do the Egyptian shafts the architecture of that land- A small specimen carved in black basalt, 2.1 m.high and 0.6 m. broad at base, was discovered in Nimrud and has been transported to the British Museum. (Fig. 59.) The gently diminished pier is crown- ed with a terraced pyramid, thus giving the principal monumental form of Mesopotamia, on a small scale, as distinctly as the termi- nation of Egyptian obelisks does the more strictly geometrical pyra- mid of the Nile land. The steps Fig- 59- Obelisk from Nimrud. and part of the shaft are carved with cuneiform inscriptions, and with reliefs which represent an act of homage the presentation to the king of various gifts, animals, etc. Rich as are the results of scientific investigations in regard to the palaces of Assyria, they are deficient in everything concerning the cities, which could have been but mean and insignificant in com- parison with the royal dwellings. Only scanty traces of the fortifica- tion walls around Coyundjic, Corsabad, and Nimrud have been pre- served. From reliefs these appear to have been provided with pro- jecting galleries for defence, with square or circular loop-holes, and with battlements of rectangular or oblique outline. As before men- DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. 79 tioned, there have been preserved at Kisr-Sargon (Corsabad) the remains of a round-arched city gate, flanked with winged lions. (A skilful restoration of this is given by Viollet-le-Duc in his Entre- tiens.) The small hills of rubbish within the city did not tempt the closer investigation of excavators, who found such inexhausti- ble rewards for their labors at the palace terraces. Private dwell- ings, which were not, like the chambers of the kings, constructed with hewn and sculptured stones as a revetment of the weak ma- sonry of unbufnt bricks, are now in so complete a state of destruc- tion that an understanding of their original form is hardly possible. The known reliefs are not adequate to convey satisfactory informa- Fig. 60. Assyrian Dwellings. Relief from Coyundjic. tion in regard to them. Among the clearest of these is a relief of Co- yundjic (Fig. 60), which shows buildings with hemispherical and oval cupolas, much like those still customary in some parts of Syria. The openings for light and air are distinctly indicated in the summit of the vaults. On the other hand, dwellings like that shown in Fig. 61, which often occur in great numbers within the enclosure of forti- fication walls, are of most perplexing construction, unless assumed to be tents. Some interior views indicate this character, and the sur- rounding walls might accordingly be considered the fortifications of an encampment. The plan-like illustrations of walled towns, where the houses are repeated in conventionalized forms, give no definite 8o CHALD^A, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. information concerning the peculiarities of Assyrian domestic archi- tecture. (Fig. 62.) They remind us rather of the topographical usage prevalent during* the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of our era, when, in similar manner, approximate representations of houses and cottages were typically employed to designate a village, a town, or a city, upon maps from which no conception of the nat- ure of the structures could be obtained. But it may be concluded from these views that a majority of the dwellings consisted of a higher and a lower division, each being provided with an indepen- dent platform. The character of Egyptian architecture was essentially influ- enced by the rich colored ornamentation which covered and en- Fig. 61. Tent-like Dwelling. Relief from Coytindjic. livened so much of the wall-surface with the coilanaglyphic paint- ings peculiar to that country. Upon the palace buildings of Mesopo- tamia painting and sculpture were something more than mere dec- orative adjuncts to the architectural construction. They may even be said to have predominated. The brick walls of Nineveh, instead of bearing ornamental slabs, were themselves upheld by the richly sculptured revetment. The works of the sculptor and the painter take a more important place in the history of Assyrian art than do those of the architect. This, however, was not the case in the earli- est ages of the Chaldaean empire, for monuments like the Temple of the Moon at Ur (Mugheir), and like the remains at Warka, appear to have been almost destitute of carved, if not of painted, ornamen- BABYLONIAN SCULPTURE. 8l tation. The simple treatment of wall-surfaces with glazed and col- ored tiles, even when laid in the variegated patterns of the Chaldaean buildings, can hardly be spoken of as painting ; and in that country no surely attested remains of sculpture have been discovered. Nor could the carving of stone flourish in the later Babylonian period. The remoteness from mountains and quarries of the great cities, and especially of the capital itself, which stood in the midst of an ex- tended alluvion, was too great to allow stone material to be readi- ly procured even for the revetment of walls. Only. one fragment of a larger relief was found by Layard among the ruins of Baby- lon,* and this was so entirely similar to the Assyrian sculptures that it would, without further question, have been regarded as the Rfrmrnfmrnmtrmmmnr Fig. 62. Susa. Assyrian Relief from Coyundjic. work of Nineveh had not the Babylonian character of the cunei- form inscriptions indicated its origin. A colossal statue of black basalt, representing a lion standing upon a human being, a work known to travellers for over a century, still lies in position, half buried in the earth ; it might convey an adequate idea of the sculpt- ure of Babylon were it not so weathered and imperfect as not to be considered worth removal. The most numerous examples of the stone-carving of Southern Mesopotamia that is to say, of Baby- lonia are given by the cylindrical seals of syenite, basalt, agate, car- r.elian, etc. These stones generally measure about 0.03 m. in length * Nineveh and Babylon, p. 508. 82 CHALD/EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. and o.oi m. in diameter; they are perforated in the line of their axis, to allow of their being strung upon a cord or fixed upon a metal wire, by which, if held as a handle, the seal could be rolled over some soft substance, such as wax, thus leaving the -impression of the figures engraved upon it. (Fig. 63.) The great variance be- tween the style of these cylinders and that of Mesopotamian re- liefs is mainly due to the totally different technical peculiarities of intaglio and relief-cutting, The seals of Babylonia and Assyria are usually so much alike that they are to be distinguish- ed only by the character of the cuneiform inscriptions, or, in some instances, by the mythological subjects represented. The origin of many of the carved cylin- ders which lack such in- dications cannot be deter- mined, the place of their discovery being of slight importance in the case of objects so easily transport- able. Numbers of these seals exist in all large European museums, being picked up by the inhabi- tants of Hillah after tor- Fig. 63. Babylonian Seal in the British Museum, and its Impression. rents of rain have furrowed the earth in which they lie concealed. The Babylonians made up for this national lack of monu- mental works of sculpture, due, as has been seen, to the difficul- ty of obtaining suitable material, by the development of another branch of decorative art. Favored by the clayey earth of the Chai- daean alluvion, they did not content themselves with the manufact- ure of admirable bricks, or with exact and durable masonry of this material, but developed a glazed decoration of their outer surfaces. The walls of chambers seem generally to have been prepared with a coating of plaster and then painted. Naturally, no traces of this ENAMELLED TILES. 83 process exist, but passages in the books of the Biblical prophets indicate it to have been customary. Exterior walls, which, on ac- count of climatic influences, could not thus be treated, were orna- mented with enamelled and variously colored tiles. Upon the steps of temple terraces this was effected by glazing the outer sides of all the bricks with a single color, but for palace walls entire compositions were so formed that each separate tile was drawn and colored in reference to the entire representation. (Fig. 64.) Remains show the glazing to have been quite thick; the col- ors, chiefly bright blue, red, 'dark yellow, white, and black, have Fig. 64. Wall Decoration of Enamelled Tiles. been perfectly preserved. A French traveller of the last century relates that a chamber with walls of colored tiles, representing, among other objects, the sun, moon, and a cow, was unearthed from the hill of Mudjelibeh, one of the mounds of ruins formed by the overthrow of the Babylonian palaces. An account given by Dio- doros, who describes a great hunting scene upon the innermost city wall, shows how extended this enamel painting must have been. Among many figures the queen, Semiramis, took a prominent part in the action, throwing a spear at a panther from her position on horseback, while the lance of the king transfixed a lion. The general character of the composition can be understood 8 4 LHALD/EA, BABYLONIA, AND ASSYRIA. from the analogy of similar scenes represented upon reliefs from Nineveh. The palace decorations naturally developed in an entirely dif- ferent manner in Northern Mesopotamia Assyria. The spurs of neighboring mountains advanced from all sides close upon Nineveh, and good building-stones, notably the most beautiful alabaster, are Fig. 65. Statue of a King, from Nimrud. (British Museum.) found in the plain, under the shallow strata of alluvial earth. The flat colored decoration of the walls with glazed bricks was super- seded by a carved revetment of lavish richness, which so generally covered the lower half of larger palace chambers with reliefs that an almost inexhaustible material is presented for elucidation of the style by the fragments discovered during the short period of twenty years. SCULPTURAL FORMS. Sculpture so concentrated itself upon this decorative field of revetment reliefs that it appears rarely to have ventured the execu- tion of independent works. Statues in the full round are extremely rare, and the few known are nearly as similar to each other as are those of Egypt. The best-preserved figure was found in the so- called temple at the foot of the terraced pyramid of Nimrud, and has been carried to the British Mu- seum. (Fig. 65.) It is about i m. in height, hewn from a hard limestone, and rep- resents a king in the garb of a priest. The round head is covered with long thick hair, which, falling somewhat over the fore- head, is not parted, but di- vided into wavy horizon- tal rows ; it ends upon the shoulders in a straight sec- tion of closely and regu- larly arranged spiral curls. The imposing beard is still more conventional- ized ; beginning in thick curls, it is arranged in al- ternate courses of rope-like twists and rows of small Fig. 66. Winged Lion from Nimrud. Museum.) Fig. 67. Winged Bull from Nimrud. Museum.) (British coils. The ends of the mustache curl into mark- ed spirals. The large eyes, of rather oblique position, are situated too low, and are consequently without expression. Their strap-like lids do not sufficiently protrude, while the thick eyebrows, exces- sively curved upward and meeting above the bridge of the nose, so interfere with the natural form of the forehead as to give to the face a gloomy and almost bestial expression. The curved Semitic nose is 86 CHAL1X