The remains of Egyptian architecture with which we are acquainted
indicate four distinct periods of great architectural activity:
(1) the period of the fourth dynasty, when the great pyramids were
erected (probably 3500 to 3000 B. C.); (2) the period of the twelfth
dynasty, to which belong the remains at Beni-Hassan; (3) the period
of the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties, when Thebes was in its
glory, which is attested by the ruins of Luxor and Karnak; and (4) the
Ptolemaic period, of which there are the remains at Denderah, Edfou,
and Philæ. The monuments that remain are almost exclusively tombs and
temples. The tombs are, generally speaking, all met with on the east
or right bank of the Nile: among them must be classed those grandest
and oldest monuments of Egyptian skill, the pyramids, which appear
to have been all designed as royal burying-places. A large number of
pyramids have been discovered, but those of Gizeh, near Cairo, are
the largest and the best known, and also probably the oldest which
can be authenticated. The three largest pyramids are those of Cheops,
Cephren, and Mycerinus at Gizeh. These monarchs all belonged to the
fourth dynasty, and the most probable date to be assigned to them is
about 3000 B. C. The pyramid of Cheops is the largest, and is the one
familiarly known as the Great Pyramid; it has a square base, the side
of which is 760 feet long,[J] a height of 484 feet, and an area of
577,600 square feet. In this pyramid the angle of inclination of the
sloping sides to the base is 51° 51′, but in no two pyramids is this
angle the same. There can be no doubt that these huge monuments were
erected each as the tomb of an individual king, whose efforts were
directed toward making it everlasting, and the greatest pains were
taken to render the access to the burial chamber extremely hard to
discover. This accounts for the vast disproportion between the lavish
amount of material used for the pyramid and the smallness of the cavity
enclosed in it.
The material employed was limestone cased with syenite (granite from
Syene), and the internal passages were lined with granite. The granite
of the casing has entirely disappeared, but that employed as linings
is still in its place, and so skilfully worked that it would not be
possible to introduce even a sheet of paper between the joints.
In the neighborhood of the pyramids are found a large number of
tombs which are supposed to be those of private persons. Their form
is generally that of a _mastaba_ or truncated pyramid with sloping
walls, and their construction is evidently copied from a fashion of
wooden architecture previously existing. The same idea of making an
everlasting habitation for the body prevailed as in the case of the
pyramids, and stone was therefore the material employed; but the
builders seem to have desired to indulge in a decorative style, and as
they were totally unable to originate a legitimate stone architecture,
we find carved in stone, rounded beams as lintels, grooved posts,
and—most curious of all—roofs that are an almost exact copy of the
early timber huts when unsquared baulks of timber were laid across side
by side to form a covering.
When we come to the series of remains of the twelfth dynasty at
Beni-Hassan, in middle Egypt, we meet with the earliest known examples
of that most interesting feature of all subsequent styles—the
column. Whether the idea of columnar architecture originated with
the necessities of quarrying—square piers being left at intervals to
support the superincumbent mass of rock as the quarry was gradually
driven in—or whether the earliest stone piers were imitations of
brickwork or of timber posts, we shall probably never be able to
determine accurately, though the former supposition seems the more
likely. We have here monuments of a date fourteen hundred years
anterior to the earliest known Greek examples, with splendid columns,
both exterior and interior, which no reasonable person can doubt are
the prototypes of the Greek doric order.
Egyptian temples can be generally classed under two heads: (1) the
large principal temples, and (2) the small subsidiary ones called
Typhonia or Mammisi. Both kinds of temple vary little, if at all, in
plan from the time of the twelfth dynasty down to the Roman dominion.
The large temples consist almost invariably of an entrance gate flanked
on either side by a large mass of masonry, called a pylon, in the
shape of a truncated pyramid. The axis of the ground-plan of these
pylons is frequently obliquely inclined to the axis of the plan of the
temple itself; and indeed one of the most striking features of Egyptian
temples is the lack of regularity and symmetry in their construction.
The entrance gives access to a large courtyard, generally ornamented
with columns: beyond this, and occasionally approached by steps, is
another court, smaller than the first, but much more splendidly adorned
with columns and colossi; beyond this again, in the finest examples,
occurs what is called the hypostyle hall, _i. e._, a hall with two rows
of lofty columns down the center, and at the sides other rows, more
or less in number, of lower columns; the object of this arrangement
being that the central portion might be lighted by a kind of clerestory
above the roof of the side portions. This hypostyle hall stood with
its greatest length transverse to the general axis of the temple, so
that it was entered from the side. Beyond it were other chambers, all
of small size, the innermost being generally the sanctuary, while
the others were probably used as residences by the priests. Homer’s
hundred-gated Thebes, which was for so long the capital of Egypt,
offers at Karnak and Luxor the finest remains of temples; what is left
of the former evidently showing that it must have been one of the most
magnificent buildings ever erected in any country.
It must not be imagined that this temple of Karnak, together with the
series of connected temples is the result of one clearly conceived
plan; on the contrary, just as has been frequently the case with our
own cathedrals and baronial halls, alterations were made here and
additions there by successive kings one after another without much
regard to connection or congruity, the only feeling that probably
influenced them being that of emulation to excel in size and grandeur
the erections of their predecessors, as the largest buildings were
almost always of latest date. The original sanctuary, or nucleus of
the temple, was built by Usertesen I., the second or third king of the
twelfth dynasty.
Extensive remains of temples exist at Luxor, Edfou, and Philæ. It
should be noticed that all these large temples have the mastaba form,
_i. e._, the outer walls are not perpendicular on the outside, but
slope inward as they rise, thus giving the buildings an air of great
solidity.
The Mammisi exhibit quite a different form of temple from those
previously described, and are generally found in close proximity to
the large temples. They are generally erected on a raised terrace,
rectangular in plan and nearly twice as long as it was wide, approached
by a flight of steps opposite the entrance; they consist of oblong
buildings, usually divided by a wall into two chambers, and surrounded
on all sides by a colonnade composed of circular columns or square
piers placed at intervals, and the whole is roofed in. A dwarf wall is
frequently found between the piers and columns, about half the height
of the shaft. These temples differ from the larger ones in having the
outer walls perpendicular.
The constructional system pursued by the Egyptians, which consisted
in roofing over spaces with large horizontal blocks of stone, led
of necessity to a columnar arrangement in the interiors, as it was
impossible to cover large areas without frequent upright supports.
Hence the column became the chief means of obtaining effect, and the
varieties of form which it exhibits are very numerous. The sculptors
appear to have imitated as closely as possible the forms of the
plant-world around them. In one they represent a bundle of reeds or
lotus stalks. The stalks are bound round with several belts, and the
capital is formed by the slightly bulging unopened bud of the flower,
above which is a small abacus with the architrave resting upon it:
the base is nothing but a low circular plinth. The square piers also
have frequently a lotus bud carved on them. At the bottom of the shaft
is frequently found a decoration imitated from the sheath of leaves
from which the plant springs. As a further development of this capital
we have the opened lotus flower of a very graceful bell-like shape,
ornamented with a similar sheath-like decoration to that at the base of
the shaft. This decoration was originally painted only, not sculptured,
but at a later period we find these sheaths and buds worked in stone.
Even more graceful is the palm capital, which also had its leading
lines of decoration painted on it at first, and afterward sculptured.
At a later period of the style we find the plant forms abandoned, and
capitals were formed of a fantastic combination of the head of Isis
with a pylon resting upon it. In one part of the temple at Karnak is
found a very curious capital resembling the open lotus flower inverted.
The proportion which the height of Egyptian columns bears to their
diameter differs so much in various cases that there was evidently no
regular standard adhered to, but as a general rule they have a heavy
and massive character. The wall-paintings of the Egyptian buildings
show many curious forms of columns, but we have no reason for thinking
that these fantastic shapes were really executed in stone.
Almost the only sculptured ornaments worked on the exteriors of
buildings were the curious astragal or bead at all the angles, and the
cornice, which consisted of a very large cavetto, or hollow moulding,
surmounted by a fillet. These features are almost invariable from the
earliest to the latest period of the style. This cavetto was generally
enriched, over the doorways, with an ornament representing a circular
boss with a wing at each side of it.
One other feature of Egyptian architecture which was peculiar to it
must be mentioned, namely, the obelisk. Obelisks were nearly always
erected in pairs in front of the pylons of the temples, and added to
the dignity of the entrance. They were invariably monoliths, slightly
tapering in outline, carved with the most perfect accuracy; they must
have existed originally in very large numbers. Not a few of these have
been transported to Europe, and at least twelve are standing in Rome,
one is in Paris and one in London.