_NATURAL DECORATION_
Though it might be supposed that the imitation of natural forms would be
the earliest form of decoration, yet this is not the case. On the
contrary, we find the geometrical forms of wave lines, and chequers
copied from weaving, and the varieties of the spiral, were the first
ornaments of importance in Egypt; while the natural forms of feathers
and flowers were not generally imitated till a later time.
One source of simple pattern that has been little noticed is the
feather, and the variety of its forms. Fortunately we have these
different forms shown unmistakably as feathers on the coffins of the
Antefs in the XIth dynasty, before we find them in common use elsewhere.
Hence we can have little doubt as to their real origin. On these coffins
the royal mummies are figured as swathed around in protecting wings,
representing those of Isis at the sides and of the vulture of Mut on the
head. The feathers have different forms according to the part of the
wing which they occupy. Thus on one coffin we find all of the following
types of feathers:—
[Illustration: Fig. 90.]
[Illustration: Fig. 91.]
[Illustration: Fig. 92.]
[Illustration: Fig. 93.]
[Illustration: Fig. 94.]
Now when we have thus been shown the conventional types which were used
to represent feathers, we can identify these again in many other places,
where probably the original idea of feather work was entirely lost; and
we have a new light on some representations not yet understood.
[Illustration: 95.—Amenhotep I. R.S. xxix.]
[Illustration: 96.—Amenhotep II. R.S. xxxvii.]
On the kings of the XVIIIth-XXth dynasty we often see a wide belt
covering the whole stomach, which is decorated with what is commonly
called scale pattern. But this occurs in scenes which are not at all
warlike, and where no defensive scale armour is likely to be
shown—Amenhotep I. is seated as a god receiving adoration after his
death; Amenhotep II. is represented adoring Ra. And in the second case
the pattern is identical with the feathers on the Antef coffin. The only
conclusion is that these represent belts of feather work worn around the
body to prevent chill, like the voluminous waist shawl of modern
Orientals. Such a feather belt would be admirable for lightness and
warmth, but that it is not scale armour is seen from the absence of it
in fighting scenes. On the contrary, in the royal campaigning dress
another form of feather work is seen in the large wings of feathers
which encircle the shoulders (Ramessu II., R.S. lxxxi.).
This feather pattern is also very usual on the sides of thrones, from
the XVIIIth dynasty down to the latest times. Here again it is evident
that it cannot be scale armour; and a feather rug thrown across the
seat, in place of the fur rug otherwise used, is a very likely thing to
find in such a position.
We may, then, take this pattern, when used on dress or on thrones, to
represent feather work. But in later times it is also used on very
incongruous objects. As early as the XVIIIth dynasty the feather pattern
occurs around columns as an architectural ornament (Tell el Amarna), and
with the characteristic marking also about the XIXth dynasty (P. 79);
also on metal work (vase, P. 97), where it must be purely an artificial
marking.
[Illustration: 97.—P. 79.]
[Illustration: 98.—P.R. lix.]
[Illustration: 99.—R.S. lxxix.]
It became elaborated under Seti I., with markings upon it, both on a
dress of a god and on a throne-cover. And it became degraded into an
unintelligible pattern under Ramessu II., when it appears as the dress
of the god Amen.
In later times the same pattern was used on columns at Philæ, in an
inverted and very corrupt form.
[Illustration: 100.—L.D. I. 108.]
The other forms of feather pattern shown on the Antef coffin were also
found later. But they merge so readily into mere line patterns that it
is not likely that they were regarded as feathers in their later use.
The V pattern is found on the columns at Tell el Amarna, on belts of the
kings (L.D. III. 1), on painted wooden columns (P. 73), on the harps of
Ramessu III. (P. 114), and many other places.
The use of flowers for ornament is so natural that their occurrence in
the earliest times is what might be expected. Yet but few flowers were
adopted for decoration. The lotus is far the commonest, after that the
papyrus, the daisy, and the convolvulus, together with the vine and
palm, almost complete the material of vegetable designs. There is also,
however, what may be called a generic flower ornament—the rosette—which
is treated so conventionally that it can hardly receive any precise
name. Sometimes in the XVIIIth dynasty it is clearly a daisy, very
seldom has it the pointed petals of the lotus; and it fluctuates between
the geometrical and the natural so as to defy details. One cause of this
is the evident effect of leather work. The coloured leather funereal
tent of Isiemkheb, found at Deir el Bahri, opens our eyes to a great
deal. We there see an elaborate design, descending to long inscriptions
of small hieroglyphs, all worked by cutting and stitching of leather.
After this we can see in many of the Egyptian designs the influence of
leather work; and nowhere is this plainer than in the rosettes. The
earliest rosettes we know, those on the head-band of Nefert, at the very
beginning of monumental history, are plain discs of colour divided into
segments by white lines across them. These are discs of leather secured
by radiating threads; and the same are seen in the XVIIIth dynasty, more
varied by concentric circles of colours, probably successive superposed
discs stitched down one over the other.
[Illustration: 101.—P. 81.]
[Illustration: 102.—P. 116.]
[Illustration: 103.—P. 116.]
Another stitch ornament is seen on the stuffs used for covering thrones
in the XXth dynasty. There star and cross patterns are used which are
evidently stitch work or embroidery; and in the spaces are discs of
colour with white spots around, probably pieces sewn on by stitches
round the edge. On a dress of Ramessu II. also are little six-pointed
stars, which were doubtless stitch work.
[Illustration: 104.—R.S. lxxxiii.]
[Illustration: Fig. 105.]
There can be no doubt of the effect that stitching has had on the use of
rosettes, but other varieties are probably independent of that. The
great series of rosettes is in the moulded glazed ware of Tell el
Amarna; there several dozen varieties are found, varying from four
petals to thirty-two. The more elaborate of these have an unmistakable
daisy centre of yellow in the midst of white petals, and this indicates
what was probably the flower in mind for most of them.
The rosette is found in varied use. On metal vases it is very general,
and may either be a separate ornament of beaten work riveted on, like
the rosettes on the silver ox head at Mykenae, or else embossed
_repoussé_ in the metal. Carved in wood or ivory, rosettes decorated the
furniture; and they are constantly found as centre ornaments in square
patterns, and along borders with the lotus or other subject.
[Illustration: 106.—L.D. II. 130.]
[Illustration: 107.—P. 84.]
In patterns a frequent form is only four petals, or a cruciform flower,
as at Benihasan in the XIIth dynasty; and this is varied by alternations
of square and diagonal arrangement.
[Illustration: 108.—P. 84.]
A graceful, simple form, which again recalls leather _appliquée_, is
yellow on a blue ground.
[Illustration: Fig. 109.]
[Illustration: Fig. 110—P. 81.]
[Illustration: Fig. 111.]
An allied pattern is the disc surrounded by spots. This is very usual on
early Greek pottery, and is found on the Aegean pottery also. This is
very rarely seen in pure Egyptian design, and only in the XVIIIth
dynasty, when Mykenaean influence was strongest. On Neferhotep’s ceiling
two forms are found, put between the horns of the bulls’ heads, like the
rosette on the Mykenaean ox head. Elsewhere it is usually seen on the
scarves of the negroes as a characteristic decoration, and on the dress
of the Amu (C.M. cclviii.). Hence it appears to be distinctly a foreign
ornament, like the other spot pattern on a zigzag line. Only three
examples are published from Egyptian decoration, and those may well be
due to foreign influence.
We now reach the largest and most complex growth of Egyptian ornament in
the lotus, so widely spread that some have seen in it the source of all
ornament. Without going so far, we shall find plenty in it to tax our
reasoning and imagination. If I prefer, in dealing with this, to ignore
the developments of it seen outside of Egypt as aids to understanding
it, this is only because those foreign examples are so much later that
they are a reflex of various Egyptian periods, and cannot show anything
certainly as to the long anterior course of development in Egypt itself.
The debated question of lotus and papyrus disappears at once when we
look at the feathery head of minute flowers which the papyrus bears.
That some flower, such as a _nelumbium_, was confused with the lotus
seems, however, very likely. There is no doubt that in ornament
different flowers were sometimes confused, and their details mixed;
hence it is of no use for us to be too particular in trying to separate
them. We shall therefore use the name lotus in general without
necessarily entering on botanical reasons for and against it on each
occasion.
[Illustration: 112.—L.D. II. 33; I. 27.]
[Illustration: 113.—L.D. III. 68. XVIIIth dyn.]
The oldest use of the lotus was in groups of two flowers tied together
by the stalks; such are found on the prehistoric pottery at Koptos, and
on the earliest tombs. But in later times this became corrupted, and the
origin apparently forgotten, by the XVIIIth dynasty.
[Illustration: Fig. 114.]
[Illustration: 115.—L.D. II. 52. P. 74.]
[Illustration: Fig. 116.]
[Illustration: 117.—P. 79.]
[Illustration: 118.—P. 21. L.D. III. 76.]
The plain flower was also used very early, as we see on the head-band of
Nefert at the beginning of the IVth dynasty. And as architectural
ornament it appears as a capital in wood of the Vth dynasty in the tomb
of Imery. At Karnak there is a celebrated pair of granite pillars, one
with the papyrus, the other with the lotus; and this form, with the
sepals turned over at the end, became the more usual in the Empire and
later times.
The variety of lotus capital is very great. The bud capital and the
opened flower are both shown in the XVIIIth dynasty (tomb of Khaemhat);
and many composite, complicated, and impossible combinations were piled
together in the decadent age of the Ramessides.
[Illustration: 119.—P. Mon. L.]
[Illustration: 120.—R.C. lviii.]
[Illustration: 121.—P. 88.]
[Illustration: 122.—R.C. lxx.]
The lotus was also much used in repetition as a border pattern, but not
apparently before the XVIIIth dynasty; and usually it is in alternation
with buds, which fit harmoniously into the curves between the flowers.
This line of flowers and buds was varied as flowers and grapes, and
appears very often in the XVIIIth dynasty.
The flower and bud was further developed in a mechanical fashion, and we
can trace a continuous series of forms beginning in a flower and bud
pattern and modifying the intermediate member, until on reversing the
line we find that something has been evolved which is indistinguishable
from the Greek palmetto alternating with the lotus. The isolated
anthemion, which is so much like this, has probably a different origin,
as we shall soon see.
[Illustration: 123.—P. 89. 8.]
[Illustration: Fig. 124. 89. 9. 90. 4.]
[Illustration: Fig. 125. 90. 5. 90. 6.]
[Illustration: 126.—P. 90. 5.]
Beside using the separate flowers, the whole plant was also a favourite
subject as a group. In the earliest days we find it entwined around the
hieroglyph of union, as we shall notice in considering the hieroglyphs.
In the XIIth dynasty the plant appears as a recurrent group in surface
decoration; though from the varying form of the flower it might be
intended for lotus or papyrus.
[Illustration: 127.—R.C. xciii.]
[Illustration: 128.—L.D. III. 109.]
In the XVIIIth dynasty it is more free, as might be expected in the time
of Akhenaten.
[Illustration: 129.—R.S. lxxxiii.]
It is also seen as a foreign ornament on the dress of a Syrian slain by
Ramessu II. at Abu Simbel, but in this case perhaps the tufted papyrus
is intended. And in place of the rounded group which is usual in the
XVIIIth-XIXth dynasties we find a different treatment on the throne of
Ramessu III., in which it is kept more as a parallel pattern. This
parallelism became general in later times, and the Ptolemaic walls are
ruled over with stiff friezes of lotus and bud.
[Illustration: 130.—P. 115.]
[Illustration: 131.—L.D. II. 35.]
[Illustration: 132.—L.D. II. 64.]
These wall basements are preceded by groups of flower and bud in scenes,
which are of the same style, as early as the IVth dynasty, on the tomb
of Debuhen. Here it may be the papyrus; but in the Vth dynasty, on a
basket-work screen, the lotus and bud is clearly shown. This pattern,
however, is very seldom found as a general architectural ornament until
we come down to the dull sterility of the Ptolemaic and Roman age. Then
the lower part of each wall is uniformly ruled with an endless series of
flowers and buds on long stems in monotonous order.
[Illustration: 133.—P. 88. L.D. iv. 84.]
We now come to the ornamental development of the flower into a
monstrosity, which is only decorative and not natural, and which
requires some thought and comparison to understand its origin.
[Illustration: 134.—P. 79.]
First there is the _fleur-de-lys_ type, with curled-over sides and a
middle projection. This has not been yet explained satisfactorily; but a
principle which was first clearly formulated by Borchardt (A.Z. xxxi. 1)
will show the origin of this as well as of the succeeding forms. The
Egyptian, it seems, consistently drew the interior or top view of an
object above the side view. In short, they suppose things to be seen in
a bird’s-eye view, and expressed that by drawing—for instance, a cup—in
side view and partly in top view above that. A dish would be drawn in
side view, and a top view of its compartments and contents placed over
it, and the bunch of flowers that lay on it is again placed over the top
view. Now on this principle we can see that the projection in the midst
of the lotus flower is the third sepal at the back of the flower, the
fourth, in front, being so foreshortened as to disappear altogether.
[Illustration: 135.—T.A. I.]
[Illustration: 136.—T.A. 368.]
[Illustration: 137.—T.A. 381.]
[Illustration: 138.—T.A. 388.]
This view is further complicated by showing not only some of the four
outer sepals, but also some of the petals, usually three. Here the near
sepal is shown rising in front, and then above these everted sepals are
three of the inner petals of the flower. These might be increased to
five or seven, but were generally an odd number; and they were at last
evolved to a fan of petals, in which the treatment of the dish of fruit
just shown is exactly reproduced, a side view of the flower being
crowned by a top view of it showing the radiating petals in the
interior.
[Illustration: 139.—T.A. 375.]
[Illustration: 140.—T.A. 374.]
So far we are on clear ground. Now we come to a more complex form, which
has also not yet been explained. In the XVIIIth dynasty (from which we
must mainly draw, as we have the long series of varieties in the glazed
ornaments of Tell el Amarna) a strange form appears, with reversed
curling arms above the calyx. Now we have seen that a third sepal is
shown from the back of the flower, and the fourth is omitted which lay
in front. But this was an imperfect flower, and so a diagonal point of
view was taken, in which two sepals lay nearest and were seen in side
view, and the two behind them were seen over them. Sometimes they are
curled alike, but more generally they are curled different ways, the
nearer ones downwards, the further ones upwards. Hence we get this very
mechanical form, which was greatly developed in Assyrian and Greek types
of the pattern. If it can be proved that the Assyrian tree pattern is
earlier than this development, we could then grant what seems a likely
influence on the development of this pattern. It was so far removed from
a natural view that it soon became greatly varied and amplified, as on a
bracelet in the Louvre.
[Illustration: 141.—P. 113.]
[Illustration: 142.—P. and C. Ass. 127.]
[Illustration: 143.—Tanis II. xxxi.]
[Illustration: 144.—Goodyear. 75.]
In Assyria this became a staple design, in which the top was greatly
increased at the expense of the lotus sepals below; but still the four
sepals, two front and two back, are shown. In the Greek designs, however
barbarous they may seem in comparison, owing to their hopeless
divergence from any rational type, yet the same elements remain, and the
four sepals can be traced below the view of the petals in the flower.
Thus the anthemion with its double curves is fully accounted for, the
lower and upper sepals being still distinguishable in the two spirals on
each side at the base of it. The later changes of this necessarily
belong to Greek art, and we cannot here follow them out.
[Illustration: Fig. 145.]
A late development of the lotus in Ptolemaic Egypt was with a central
spike through the face of petals. As this spike rises from the base, it
appears to be the front sepal rising before the petals.
[Illustration: 146.—P. 111.]
Another variety in this pattern remains to be noticed. On very many
compound lotus patterns there is a pendant from each end of the side
sepals. This does not appear until the XVIIIth dynasty on the monuments:
it is then sometimes single and sometimes double. But here, as in the
spirals, the scarab type is an earlier stage than the architectural. On
the architecture it is quite unintelligible, and a mere conventional
monstrosity; while on a scarab of green jasper—which from the style and
material seems certainly to be before the XVIIIth dynasty, and probably
of the XIIth—there is an already conventionalised lotus group, with the
four sepals and inner petals already developed into a sort of “tree
pattern,” and the lower two sepals have a pendant, partly worn away, but
clearly showing a triply-branching line like a small lotus flower. This
is the earlier stage of this conventional pendant; but even here,
although the pendant itself is rational, the position of it is hard to
explain. Probably we must wait for some early scarab to clear up the
real origin of this curious and puzzling form.
[Illustration: 147.—F.P. coll.]
We have now traced the evolution of the various forms of the lotus
pattern in Egypt, and seen how the main Assyrian and Greek types of the
palmetto and the anthemion arose, which were confounded together owing
to their similarity.
Other plants were often confounded with the lotus in decoration, by the
ancients as well as by moderns. We have noticed some examples of this;
and it is well shown in the group of boat-builders, to whom, apparently,
bundles of papyrus with lotus flowers are being brought, in the IVth
dynasty tomb of Shepseskau (L.D. II. 12).
Much use was made of papyrus in the floral work of Tell el Amarna. On
the painted pavement groups of papyrus with large red fluffy heads of
seed vessels are figured; and on the coloured tiles the landscape view
of the papyrus plant in strictly natural treatment is a frequent
subject. But these belong rather to artistic than to ornamental work.
[Illustration: Fig. 148.]
[Illustration: Fig. 149.]
In architecture the lotus and papyrus were largely used, in fact they
form the basis of columnar decoration as distinct from that of pillars.
The earliest figure of a column that is known is as far back as any
dated monument we possess at the beginning of the IVth dynasty; and
there it is fashioned as a stem and flower, probably carved in wood. The
contracting connection with the tenon above, in a bell form, on the top
of the flower, is the same as columns of the VIth dynasty (L.D. II.
111); and is the source of the much later columns of Tahutmes III. at
Karnak, which otherwise seems to be an unaccountable “sport.”
[Illustration: Fig. 150.]
[Illustration: Fig. 151.]
[Illustration: Fig. 152.]
In the figures of wooden columns in the Vth and VIth dynasties, the
lotus form prevails, as we have already noticed, and here repeat.
In the Vth dynasty, in the tomb of Ptahshepses at Abusir the clustered
papyrus stems are a new feature; at Benihasan they are well developed;
and they continued in use to the XVIIIth dynasty. But a different type
then arose into predominance in the wide bell-topped lotus capitals, and
with long sheath-leaves around the root; and this continued for several
dynasties. But this was displaced by the elaborate composite capitals of
Ptolemaic and Roman age, which were made up of varied elements of
incongruity.
[Illustration: Fig. 153.]
The palm, though the most important tree of the country, has had but
little effect on the architecture. There is not a single example of
columns copied from a palm stem; and the only instances of the imitation
of the stem are in two or three instances of copies of roofing beams.
The branches are not copied on columns until other subjects were well
used. In the XIIth dynasty the imitation of a bundle of palm branches
was made in the capitals, and it became common in the XVIIIth. Perhaps,
however, as we shall see in considering the hieroglyphs, the palm column
originates with a bundle of palm-sticks bound together. It is strange
that the simple element of grouping branches round a post should not
have been a very usual early motive. Was the palm really common in early
Egypt? It does not enter into the hieroglyphs, and it is seldom shown on
monuments till the XVIIIth dynasty; while grapes, figs, and pomegranates
all seem to have been commoner than dates.
In late times not only the branches but the fruit was sculptured; and at
Esneh and other Roman temples the bunches of dates are carefully
rendered.
The vine is one of the oldest cultivated plants in Egypt, and all the
designs copied from it are based on the idea of its climbing and
trailing over the houses. It appears mainly in the florid work of the
XVIIIth dynasty. The ceiling was often painted of a golden yellow, with
vine leaves and bunches of grapes hanging from a trellis pattern which
covers it. At Tell el Amarna some fragments found were very free and
natural, but in the XXth dynasty it became a stiff and formal affair.
(Tomb of Aimadua, Ramessu X.).
[Illustration: 154.—P. 86.]
Bunches of grapes also formed favourite pendants; as such they are
painted in rows hanging from architraves of wooden buildings (tomb of
Ra, Amenhotep II.); and frequently in blue glazed ware bunches of grapes
are found of varying sizes, with half of the upper part cut away so as
to affix them by a peg-hole to a square wooden beam of the ceiling.
[Illustration: 155.—P. 79.]
[Illustration: Fig. 156.]
In the Greco-Roman decoration of capitals the vine and grapes also
appears, and is often very beautifully treated, as at Esneh, though
essentially as a mere surface decoration, and not as an organic element.
The convolvulus has scarcely, if at all, been acknowledged as an
Egyptian ornament. Yet it often occurs during the XVIIIth and XIXth
dynasties. On a coffin in the Ghizeh Museum a long trail of convolvulus
is beautifully modelled and painted; and during the tide of naturalism
under Akhenaten the wild flowing stems were a favourite element of
decoration.
[Illustration: 157.—P. 91.]
Subsequently the convolvulus is often shown as a climber on the lotus or
papyrus stems in bouquets; and though its leaves then have been
miscalled lotus buds, or “tabs,” yet they are clearly intended for a
natural leaf of this climber, which is so common in the Egyptian fields.
[Illustration: 158.—P. 91.]
Another field plant which played a great part in the glazed decorations
was the thistle. This is naturally painted on the glazed tiles; and the
glazed pendants of necklaces and wall decoration showed an abundance of
thistles with green calices and purple petals. But this, like the
convolvulus, was rarely used except during the beautiful period of
naturalism which was most developed by Akhenaten.
Artificial combinations of flowers also became used decoratively. We
have just instanced two examples from the great bouquets or staves of
flowers which the Egyptians used in ceremonies.
The garlands of flower petals which are seen on the heads of women, or
as collars, in the XVIIIth-XXth dynasties were also placed around the
water-jars; and hence a painted pattern of garlands came to be used on
those jars.
[Illustration: Fig. 159.]
In architecture also the garland came into use, sometimes carved on the
stone around the columns, sometimes made in coloured glaze and inlaid in
the surface.
[Illustration: 160.—T.A. ix.]
Wreaths of lotus flowers and buds were also represented around the
columns at Tell el Amarna.
The great pectorals, or breast-plates, of successive strings of flowers
and leaves were prominent in the personal and religious decoration. The
sacred barks of the gods were adorned with large and complex
breast-plates, probably made of bronze, gilded and inlaid (L.D. III.
235).
[Illustration: 161.—P. Mon. xlix. 2.]
A small example of such we have in London, with the details all inlaid
in gold. These pectorals were also represented on the later vases as a
complete whole.
[Illustration: 162.—L.D. III. 76.]
Turning now to the men and animals shown in decoration, in the period of
the Empire we constantly see figures of captives introduced to emphasise
the power of the king. These first appear in the great change which
overcame Egyptian art consequent upon the Asiatic conquests. Before
Tahutmes III. the character and style of work continually recalls that
of the XIIth dynasty; but within one or two generations a profound
difference changed for ever the nature of the art, and this is reflected
in the national handwriting, which shows a similar break. Amenhotep II.
appears on his nurse’s knee with an emblematic group of foreigners under
his feet, while he grasps cords tied to their necks; and in the same
spirit he is shown, when grown up, as smiting at one blow a whole bunch
of captives whom he holds in his left hand (L.D. III. 62; L.D. III. 61).
Tahutmes IV. similarly is seen seated on his tutor’s knee, with his feet
on a footstool ornamented with prostrate captives (L.D. III. 69).
Amenhotep III. appears with figures of a negro and a Syrian bound to the
_sam_ sign on the sides of his throne, and henceforward the abasement of
captives was an essential idea to Egyptians. But it should be remembered
that common as the notion was in late times, it is originally Asiatic
and not Egyptian; the king trampling on the nations and making foes a
footstool are ideas not found in Egypt until the Semitic conquests of
Tahutmes III., though the earliest figure of a sphinx trampling on a
captive is under the XIIth dynasty.
[Illustration: Fig. 163.]
Under Akhenaten six various races are represented on the sides of his
great balcony (L.D. III. 109), and the alternate negroes and Syrians are
painted on the passage floors of his palace, or carved in blocks of
alabaster to be trodden under foot. Down the various ages this symbolism
recurs in decoration until in Ptolemaic and Roman times every decent
Egyptian had captives painted on the soles of his sandals in which he
was buried, so that for all eternity he might tread down the Gentiles.
[Illustration: Fig. 164.]
Among animals a favourite in decoration was the ibex, but it was not
introduced till the XVIIIth dynasty. It often appears on the
finger-rings of Akhenaten’s time, and later upon the funeral tent of
Isiemkheb, ingeniously adapted to fill a square space.
The bull or young calf was more frequently introduced; on the wooden
boxes and trays it is shown as bounding in the meadows, and it is
continually used in the groups of the painted pavement at Tell el
Amarna.
Birds are also a common subject for decoration, though only dating from
the same period as the other animals. Besides the symbolic or sacred use
of the hawk and vulture, the very secular duck was a favourite bird. On
the great pavements of Akhenaten it appears above every group of plants.
[Illustration: Fig. 165.]
On rings it is often engraved fluttering above its nest; and in the
decadence of Egyptian art in the XXth dynasty the incongruous idea was
adopted of birds, eggs, and nests all upon a ceiling.
The natural ceiling pattern adopted from the early days of Egyptian art
was of golden stars on a deep blue ground; not a dark daylight blue, as
in modern imitations, but a black night blue. These are always
five-pointed stars, with a circular spot, usually of red, in the centre.
[Illustration: Fig. 166.]
It is noticeable that the Egyptian views a star as surrounded by long
streamers of light; because to a long-sighted person, or any one with
proper spectacles, the stars appear as points of light without
radiations. Hence it seems as if the Egyptians were short-sighted people
from the early ages.
[Illustration: Fig. 167.—L.D. II. 19.]
[Illustration: Fig. 168.]
Lastly we may notice the base imitation of nature in copying the grain
of wood, which we find done in the earliest times of the IVth dynasty,
and continued down to the period of the Empire. Stones were also
imitated by painting, and red granite is frequently copied in the
earlier days, on the recessed doorways of tombs. In later times vases of
valuable stone were imitated by painting over a pottery vase, and such
cheap substitutes were commonly placed in the tombs.
These base imitations are of æsthetic interest as showing in what a
different manner the Egyptian viewed his materials from that of our
standpoint. He stuccoed and painted over his hard stone statues; it was
enough for him to know that the stone was hard and imperishable—he did
not need to see it always exposed. The imitation of nature was the
standpoint from which he started, and he had no objection to carry out
that imitation with paint or otherwise; our abstract standpoint of an
artistic effect which must never involve falsity, but which may have
little or nothing to do with nature, was altogether outside of his
æsthetic.