I come now, with the same view, to consider the _destination_ of their
famous “Pyramids.”[187] In this pursuit the first thing that strikes us is
the uniform precision and systematic design apparent in their
architecture. They all have their sides accurately adapted to the four
cardinal points, as the four apertures near the summit of most of ours
indicate a similar regard to fidelity to the compass. In six of them which
have been opened, the principal passage preserves the same inclination of
26° to the horizon, being directed towards the polar star. And I doubt
not, were the ground _within_ and _around all_ of _ours_ sufficiently
explored, there would be found, in some at least, regular vistas to
correspond with this description. Their obliquity too being so adjusted as
to make the north side coincide with the obliquity of the sun’s rays at
the summer’s solstice, has, combined with the former particulars, led some
to suppose they were solely intended for astronomical uses; and
certainly, if not altogether true, it bespeaks, at all events, an intimate
acquaintance with _astronomical rules_,[188] as well as a due regard to
the principles of _geometry_.[189]
No one, I believe, has ever questioned the latter fact. Some, induced
thereby, have thought them to be erected for the purpose of establishing
the exact measure of the cubit; of which they happen to contain both in
breadth and height a certain number of multiples. But as they were
evidently constructed by persons well versed in all the niceties of exact
measurement, and who consequently had no occasion for such colossal
reference to refresh their memories, like the Lancasterian apparatus, it
is ridiculous to suppose them erected with this view, nor should I have
alluded to it but to expose its weakness. Others have fancied them
intended for sepulchres; and as the Egyptians, _taught by their ancient
Chaldean victors_, connected _astronomy_ with their _funereal_ and
_religious ceremonies_, they seem not in this to be far astray, if we but
extend the application to their _sacred bulls_ and _other animals_, and
not merely to their _kings_, as Herodotus would have us suppose.
The immense sarcophagus lying in the interior of the first or Great
Pyramid, with the _bone_ found by the Earl of Munster[190] in the second,
must put this question beyond the possibility of doubt; as Sir Everard
Home, after a laborious examination of the properties of this relic, found
it accurately to agree with the lower extremity of the thigh-bone of an
ox, while it corresponded with that of no other animal.
In conformity with this conclusion were the discoveries of Belzoni some
time before, in Upper Egypt, which abounds in specimens of the most
splendid antiquities, in a catacomb amongst which, called “Bîban el
Moluk,” that is “the gates of the king”--meaning thereby the _universal
king of the ancients_, the generating principle of vegetation and life, of
which _Apis_ and _Mnevis_, _Osiris_ and _Typhon_, were but the
representatives among the Egyptians, as other nations had adopted
equivalent forms and names, according to the genius of their climes and
languages--I mean the Sun--well, in one of the numerous chambers of this
catacomb, Belzoni discovered an exquisitely beautiful sarcophagus of
alabaster, 9 feet 5 inches long, by 3 feet 9 inches wide, and 2 feet 1
inch high, covered within and without with hieroglyphics, and figures in
intaglio, nearly in a perfect state, sounding like a bell, and as
transparent as glass: from the extraordinary magnificence of which, he
conceives, it must have been the depository of the remains of Apis; in
which idea he is the more confirmed by having found the carcass of a
_bull_ embalmed with asphaltum, in the innermost chamber.
The passage in Herodotus, to which I before referred, appears to throw
some light on the intricate subject which we are now pursuing. In lib. ii.
p. 124, etc., “the father of historians” tells us that the two kings, who
succeeded each other on the throne of Egypt, after the happy reign of
Rhampsinitus and his predecessors, and to whom the building of those
pyramids was reputedly ascribed, had shown themselves indeed _brothers_,
not more by affinity of blood than by the similar outlines of their
cruelty and intolerance. No species of oppression was by them left
unattempted; no extreme of rigour or rapacious plunder by them unenforced:
but what peculiarly characterised the hardship of their tyranny was the
restraint they put upon the _religion_ and pious exercises of their
subjects; closing the portals of the _temples_ where they were wont to
adore, and preventing the oblation of their usual sacrifices.
Though Herodotus has been justly honoured with the designation of “Father
of Historians,” he has also, perhaps, not so very justly been called “the
Father of Errors”; and, as he himself admitted his incapability of
obtaining any satisfactory insight into the original of those structures,
may we not fairly conclude that, in the extract now cited, he either
confounds those princes with the _foreign dynasty_ which we have already
established, or else, from the ignorance _superinduced_ to obliterate
their memory, mistakes the erection of some of the _minor_ and _later_
ones, which this “par nobile fratrum” may, indeed, have devised, in
imitation of the three “_mountains_” built by the Uksi. What he states,
however, is of value, as it points to a _previous form of worship_, and a
_system of government_ by an alien house. The prohibition of sacrifices
and the closing the temple doors make this as clear as words can delineate
anything. All we want, then, is to be informed what the particular temples
alluded to were: and that they were the _pyramids_, will, I think, be
conceded by everyone who has carefully perused the arguments here set
down, and who has not his judgment warped by favourite plans of literary
systems and speculative hypotheses.
This conclusion receives additional force from the conversation which
Wilford, in his “Dissertation upon Egypt and the Nile,”[191] tells us he
had with several learned Brahmins, when, upon describing to them the form
and bearings of the great Egyptian pyramid, one of them asked if _it had
not a communication under ground with the river Cali_? Being answered that
such communication was spoken of as having once existed, and that a _well_
was still to be seen, they unanimously agreed that it was a _temple_
appropriated to the worship of _Padma-devi_, and that the supposed _tomb_
was a _trough_, which, on certain festivals, her priests used to fill with
the sacred water and lotos-flowers.
Mr. Davison, British Consul to Algiers, when accompanying Mr. Wortley
Montague to Egypt, in 1763, discovered here a chamber, before unnoticed,
and descended, to a depth of 155 feet, the three successive reservoirs.
The principal oblique passage has, since then, been traced by the very
enterprising master of a merchant vessel, Captain Caviglia, 200 feet
farther down than by any former explorer, and found to communicate with
the bottom of the well, which is now filled with rubbish. A circulation of
air being thus procured, he was emboldened to proceed 28 feet farther,
which brought him to a spacious hall, 66 feet by 27 feet, unequal in
altitude, and directly under the centre of the pyramid. In no instance yet
recorded has any appearance presented itself of human remains within those
apartments, nor indeed was there any possibility of conveying such
thither, unless placed there before the erection of the pile itself; for
the _extremities_ of the gallery, which leads into the _great chamber_,
are so _narrow_ and _circumscribed_, that it is _with difficulty_ one can
effect an _entrance into it, even by creeping upon his belly_.
The _symbolical anatomy_ prefigured in this contrivance, and which equally
exhibits itself in all the temples of the ancients, as well _under_ as
_over ground_, is such as almost to have tempted me to make _this_ the
occasion on which I should uncover another secret of their mystic code.
But a more _concentrated_ opportunity will occur as we advance, and for
which this intimation will answer as a prelude; meanwhile, I would have
the reader soberly to bethink himself, what possible use could _dead
bodies have of wells of water_? Is not _such_ the _type_, as it is also
the _accompaniment_, of _life_ and activity? And does not _this_, of
itself, subvert the absurdity of those temples having been erected as mere
mausoleums for kings?
I have already hinted my confident belief _that if the ground all, within,
and around our pyramids were sufficiently examined_, there would not be
wanting indications of subterraneous passages. I am the more confirmed in
this, my belief, from the appearances that presented themselves on the
demolition of _that_ at Downpatrick, in 1790, “to make room for the
rebuilding of that part of the old cathedral next which it stood, and from
which it was distant about forty feet. When the tower was thrown down,”
continues Dubourdieu, in his _Statistical Survey_ of the county, “and
cleared away to the foundation, another foundation was discovered under
it, and running directly across the site of the tower, which appeared to
be a continuation of the church wall, which, at some period prior to the
building of the tower, seemed to have extended considerably beyond it.”
With great deference, however, to the authority of so respectable a
writer, I hesitate not to proclaim that the second foundation so
discovered was _not_ a “continuation of the church wall,” but the remnant
of some _pagan_ structure, appertaining to the tower itself--in fact a
_Vihâr_, or college for its priests--or else the vestige of some larger
temple, and connected therewith, previously existing on the same locality.
That this announcement is correct will be apparent, from the _superiority
of masonic skill_ exhibited in this _foundation_, as well as in its having
been upon a larger scale and ampler dimensions than what the Christian
“cathedral” had ever occupied; “in the walls of which,” says my authority,
“there are many pieces of cut stone that have evidently been used in some
former building. The same circumstance may also be observed in several of
the ruined churches at Clonmacnoise.”[192]
Nor ought this relic of an ancient pagan edifice to excite our surprise,
when we are told that the temple of the “Syrian goddess,” which existed
in the days of Lucian, was not that which was originally erected by
Deucalion, but one built _many ages_ after, on the _same site_, by Attis,
Bacchus, or Semiramis.
With the church, therefore, or other Christian edifice, this “foundation”
had no relation. St. Patrick was the first who erected one in that
vicinity, to which he gave the name of Sgibol Phadruig, or Patrick’s
Granary; having been built on the identical spot on which Dichu, son of
Trichem, of the tribe of the Dalfiatachs, and lord of the territory of
Lecale, had a granary constructed to preserve his corn, before that his
gratitude for the saint, by whom he was just converted, induced him to
consecrate the place where that event occurred, by raising thereon a house
to the God of nature and of harvests.
Its situation, be it observed, was “two miles from the city of Down”;[193]
different, therefore, from that of the cathedral, as was also its _form_:
having been built from north to south, at the solicitation of Dichu
himself, agreeably to the plan of the former storehouse.
This took place in 433-34; and though, for concession’ sake, I may
admit,--_what yet is far from being my conviction_,--that _some_ of our
Round Towers may have been erected _subsequently_ to the Christian era,
yet positive I must be that _no one_ of them _was after the successful
mission_ of the Apostle of Ireland; and the explosion of the doctrines
with which even the _most modern of them_ may happen to be
associated,--while the majority, and the _real ones_, I shall prove,
belong to an infinitely earlier date.
As a further inducement to explore for cavities beneath, and connected
with, our Round Towers, I beg leave to bring under review what Maundrel
relates of two Round Pillars, which he met with in his journey from Aleppo
to Jerusalem, on the sea-coast, a little to the south of Aradus, in the
neighbourhood of Tripoli. He describes one of them as thirty-three feet
high, composed of a pedestal, ten high and fifteen square, surmounted with
a tall cylindrical stone, and capped with another in the form of a
_pyramid_. The second was not quite so high--thirty feet two inches--its
pedestal, which was supported by four lions, rudely carved at each corner,
was in height six feet, being sixteen feet six inches square; the
superstructure upon which was one single stone cut in the shape of a
_hemisphere_. Each of these pillars, of which he gives accurate drawings,
has under it several catacombs or sepulchral chambers, the entrances to
which lie on the south side. He pronounces a third which he met with, as
“a very ancient structure, and probably a place of sepulchre.”[194]
With the opinion of this judicious traveller I altogether concur, provided
only, as said before, in reference to the pyramids, that the application
be extended to the sacred bulls and crocodiles, serpents, dragons, and
heifers, with the whole train of _bestial_ divinities, which both Indians
and Egyptians, and all the other polished nations of antiquity, thought
proper to adopt as objects of their regard, and treat with the
homage--though only _commemorative_, as they will tell you--of the One
Great Supreme.[195]
This extension of the use will at once afford a solution of the otherwise
unaccountable and unnecessary _size_ of those cavities, and is further
supported by Savary’s remark, made on occasion of his searching for the
Egyptian Labyrinth, viz. that “amidst the ruins of the towns of Caroun,
the attention is particularly fixed by several narrow, low, and very long
cells, which seem to have had no other use than that of containing the
bodies of the sacred crocodiles; these remains can only correspond with
the labyrinth.” While Herodotus’s declaration, of his not being allowed to
enter its vaults, on the score of their “containing within them the bodies
of the fifteen kings, together with the _sacred crocodiles_,” should
afford it a determination no longer liable to doubt.
Archer, also, when mentioning a very ancient Hindoo temple, at the south
end of the fort of Gualior, resembling in shape those on the Coromandel
coast, and decorated with much carving, says that “there was a
subterranean communication with the plain at the north end, but the
passage has been so long neglected as to be impassable.”
Am I not justified, therefore, in the conviction, from what I have already
intimated, as to the _complicated_ design of those sacred piles, that _our
Round Towers_ would be found similarly furnished with subterranean
chambers? I do respectfully urge that such is my _firm belief_, and that
it would be well worth the while of the learned community to investigate
the accuracy of the surmise here put forward.