160. PLAN OF SAN VITALE AT RAVENNA. 216
161. SAN VITALE AT RAVENNA. LONGITUDINAL SECTION. 216
162. PLAN OF ST. MARK'S AT VENICE. 217
163. SCULPTURED ORNAMENT FROM THE GOLDEN DOOR OF JERUSALEM. 219
164. CHURCH AT TURMANIN IN SYRIA. 220
165. TOWER OF A RUSSIAN CHURCH. 221
166. TOWER OF EARL'S BARTON CHURCH. 223
167. CATHEDRAL AT PIACENZA. 225
168. VAULTS OF THE EXCAVATED ROMAN BATHS IN THE MUSEE
DE CLUNY, PARIS. 227
169. CHURCH OF ST. SERNIN, TOULOUSE. 228
170. NAVE ARCADE AT ST. SERNIN, TOULOUSE. 229
171. ARCHES IN RECEDING PLANES AT ST. SERNIN, TOULOUSE. 230
172. NORMAN ARCHES IN ST. PETER'S CHURCH, NORTHAMPTON. 234
173. NAVE ARCADE, PETERBOROUGH CATHEDRAL. 236
174. DECORATIVE ARCADE FROM CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL. 237
175. HEDINGHAM CASTLE. 238
176. INTERIOR OF HEDINGHAM CASTLE. 239
177. ROUNDED ARCH OF CHURCH AT GELNHAUSEN. 240
178. PLAN OF THE CHURCH OF THE APOSTLES AT COLOGNE. 241
179. SPIRE OF SPIRES CATHEDRAL. 242
180. CHURCH AT ROSHEIM. UPPER PORTION OF FACADE. 244
181. CUBIC CAPITAL. 246
182. DOORWAY AT TIND, NORWAY. 247
183. MOULDINGS OF PORTAL OF ST. JAMES'S CHURCH AT KOESFELD. 248
184. BYZANTINE BASKET WORK CAPITAL FROM SAN MICHELE IN
AFFRICISCO AT RAVENNA. 251
185. ARABIAN CAPITAL. FROM THE ALHAMBRA. 252
186. HORSE-SHOE ARCH. 254
187. EXTERIOR OF SANTA SOPHIA, CONSTANTINOPLE. SHOWING THE
MINARETS ADDED AFTER ITS CONVERSION INTO A MOSQUE. 255
188. ALHAMBRA. HALL OF THE ABENCERRAGES. 257
189. MOSQUE "EL MOYED" AT CAIRO. 259
190. ARABIAN WALL DECORATION. 260
191. PLAN OF THE SAKHRA MOSQUE AT JERUSALEM. 261
192. SECTION OF THE SAKHRA MOSQUE AT JERUSALEM. 262
193. DOORWAY IN THE ALHAMBRA. 264
194. GRAND MOSQUE AT DELHI, BUILT BY SHAH JEHAN. 267
195. ENTRANCE TO A MOORISH BAZAAR. 269
[Illustration: ROCK-CUT TOMB AT MYRA, IN LYCIA.
_Imitation of Timber Construction in Stone._]
GLOSSARY.
ABACUS, a square tablet which crowns the capital of the
column.
ACANTHUS, a plant, the foliage of which was imitated in
the ornament of the Corinthian capital.
AGORA, the place of general assembly in a Greek city.
ALAE (_Lat._ wings), recesses opening out of the atrium
of a Roman house.
ALHAMBRA, the palatial fortress of Granada (from _al
hamra_--the red).
AMBO, a fitting of early Christian churches, very
similar to a pulpit.
AMPHITHEATRE, a Roman place of public entertainment in
which combats of gladiators, &c., were exhibited.
ANTAE, narrow piers used in connection with columns in
Greek architecture, for the same purpose as pilasters in
Roman.
ARABESQUE, a style of very light ornamental decoration.
ARCHAIC, primitive, so ancient as to be rude, or at
least extremely simple.
ARCHIVOLT, the series of mouldings which is carried
round an arch.
ARENA, the space in the centre of an amphitheatre where
the combats, &c., took place.
ARRIS, a sharp edge.
ASTRAGAL, a small round moulding.
ATRIUM, the main quadrangle in a Roman dwelling-house;
also the enclosed court in front of an early Christian
basilican church.
BAPTISTERY, a building, or addition to a building,
erected for the purposes of celebrating the rite of
Christian baptism.
BASEMENT, the lowest story of a building, applied also
to the lowest part of an architectural design.
BAS-RELIEF, a piece of sculpture in low relief.
BIRD'S-BEAK, a moulding in Greek architecture, used in
the capitals of Antae.
BYZANTINE, the style of Christian architecture which
had its origin at Byzantium (Constantinople).
CARCERES, in the ancient racecourses, goals and
starting-points.
CARTOUCHE, in Egyptian buildings, a hieroglyphic
signifying the name of a king or other important person.
CARYATIDAE, human figures made to carry an entablature,
in lieu of columns in some Classic buildings.
CAVAEDIAM, another name for the atrium of a Roman house.
CAVEA, the part of an ancient theatre occupied by the
audience.
CAVETTO, in Classic architecture, a hollow moulding.
CELLA, the principal, often the only, apartment of a
Greek or Roman temple.
CHAITYA, an Indian temple, or hall of assembly.
CIRCUS, a Roman racecourse.
CLOACA, a sewer or drain.
COLUMBARIUM, literally a pigeon-house--a Roman sepulchre
built in many compartments.
COLUMNAR, made with columns.
COMPLUVIUM, the open space or the middle of the roof of
a Roman atrium.
CORONA, in the cornices of Greek and Roman architecture,
the plain unmoulded feature which is supported by the
lower part of the cornice, and on which the crowning
mouldings rest.
CORNICE, the horizontal series of mouldings crowning the
top of a building or the walls of a room.
CUNEIFORM, of letters in Assyrian inscriptions,
wedge-shaped.
CYCLOPEAN, applied to masonry constructed of vast
stones, usually not hewn or squared.
CYMA (recta, or reversa), a moulding, in Classic
architecture, of an outline partly convex and partly
concave.
DAGOBA, an Indian tomb of conical shape.
DENTIL BAND, in Classic architecture, a series of small
blocks resembling square-shaped teeth.
DOMUS (_Lat._), a house, applied usually to a detached
residence.
DWARF-WALL, a very low wall.
ECHINUS, in Greek Doric architecture, the principal
moulding of the capital placed immediately under the
abacus.
ENTABLATURE, the superstructure--comprising architrave,
frieze and cornice--above the columns in Classic
architecture.
ENTASIS, in the shaft of a column, a curved outline.
EPHEBEUM, the large hall in Roman baths in which youths
practised gymnastic exercises.
FACIA, in Classic architecture, a narrow flat band or
face.
FAUCES, the passage from the atrium to the peristyle in
a Roman house.
FLUTES, the small channels which run from top to bottom
of the shaft of most columns in Classic architecture.
FORUM, the place of general assembly in a Roman city, as
the Agora was in a Greek.
FRESCO, painting executed upon a plastered wall while
the plaster is still wet.
FRET, an ornament made up of squares and L-shaped lines,
in use in Greek architecture.
GARTH, the central space round which a cloister is
carried.
GIRDER, a beam.
GROUTED, said of masonry or brickwork, treated with
liquid mortar to fill up all crevices and interstices.
GUTTAE, small pendent features in Greek and Roman Doric
cornices, resembling rows of wooden pegs.
HEXASTYLE, of six columns.
HONEYSUCKLE ORNAMENT, a decoration constantly introduced
into Assyrian and Greek architecture, founded upon the
flower of the honeysuckle.
HORSE-SHOE ARCH, an arch more than a semicircle, and so
wider above than at its springing.
HYPOSTYLE, literally "under columns," but used to mean
filled by columns.
IMPLUVIUM, the space into which the rain fell in the
centre of the atrium of a Roman house.
INSULA, a block of building surrounded on all sides by
streets, literally an island.
INTERCOLUMNIATION, the space between two columns.
KEYED, secured closely by interlocking.
KIBLA, the most sacred part of a Mohammedan mosque.
LATS, in Indian architecture, Buddhist inscribed
pillars.
MAMMISI, small Egyptian temples.
MASTABA, the most usual form of Egyptian tomb.
MAUSOLEUM, a magnificent sepulchral monument or tomb.
From the tomb erected to Mausolus, by his wife
Artemisia, at Halicarnassus, 379 B.C.
METOPES, literally faces, the square spaces between
triglyphs in Doric architecture; occasionally applied to
the sculptures fitted into these spaces.
MINARET, a slender lofty tower, a usual appendage of a
Mohammedan mosque.
MONOLITH, of one stone.
MORTISE, a hollow in a stone or timber to receive a
corresponding projection.
MOSQUE, a Mohammedan place of worship.
MUTULE, a feature in a Classic Doric cornice, somewhat
resembling the end of a timber beam.
NARTHEX, in an early Christian church, the space next
the entrance.
OBELISK, a tapering stone pillar, a feature of Egyptian
architecture.
OPUS ALEXANDRINUM, the mosaic work used for floors in
Byzantine and Romanesque churches.
OVOLO, a moulding, the profile of which resembles the
outline of an egg, used in Classic architecture.
PENDENTIVE, a feature in Byzantine and other domed
buildings, employed to enable a circular dome to stand
over a square space.
PERISTYLAR, or PERIPTERAL, with columns all round.
PERISTYLIUM, or PERISTYLE, in a Roman house, the inner
courtyard; also any space or enclosure with columns all
round it.
PISCINA, a small basin usually executed in stone and
placed within a sculptured niche, fixed at the side of
an altar in a church, with a channel to convey away the
water poured into it.
POLYCHROMY, the use of decorative colours.
PRECINCTS, the space round a church or religious house,
usually enclosed with a wall.
PRESBYTERY, the eastern part of a church, the chancel.
PROFILE (of a moulding), the outline which it would
present if cut across at right angles to its length.
PRONAOS, the front portion or vestibule to a temple.
PROPYLAEA, in Greek architecture, a grand portal or state
entrance.
PROTHYRUM, in a Roman house, the porch or entrance.
PSEUDO-PERIPTERAL, resembling, but not really being
peristylar.
PYLON, or PRO-PYLON, the portal or front of an Egyptian
temple.
QUADRIGA, a four-horse chariot.
ROMANESQUE, the style of Christian architecture which
was founded on Roman work.
ROTUNDA, a building circular in plan.
SACRISTY, the part of a church where the treasures
belonging to the church are preserved.
SHINTO TEMPLES, temples (in Japan) devoted to the Shinto
religion.
SPAN, the space over which an arch or a roof extends.
SPINA, the central wall of a Roman racecourse.
STILTED, raised, usually applied to an arch when its
centre is above the top of the jambs from which it
springs.
STRUTS, props.
STUPA, in Indian architecture, a mound or tope.
STYLOBATE, a series of steps, usually those leading up
to a Classic temple.
TAAS, a pagoda.
TABLINUM, in a Roman house, the room between the atrium
and the peristyle.
TALAR, in Assyrian architecture, an open upper story.
TENONED, fastened with a projection or tenon.
TESSELATED, made of small squares of material, applied
to coarse mosaic work.
TETRASTYLE, with four columns.
THERMAE, the great bathing establishments of the Romans.
TOPES, in Indian architecture, artificial mounds.
TRABEATED, constructed with a beam or beams, a term
usually employed in contrast to arches.
TRICLINIUM, in a Roman house, the dining-room.
TRIGLYPH, the channelled feature in the frieze of the
Doric order.
TUMULI, mounds, usually sepulchral.
TYPHONIA, small Egyptian temples.
VELARIUM, a great awning.
VESTIBULE, the outer hall or ante-room.
VOLUTES, in Classic architecture, the curled ornaments
of the Ionic capital.
VOUSSOIRS, the wedge-shaped stones of which arches are
made.
N.B. For the explanation of other technical words found in this
volume, consult the Glossary given with the companion volume on Gothic
and Renaissance Architecture.
[Illustration: THE TEMPLE OF VESTA AT TIVOLI.]
[Illustration]
ANCIENT ARCHITECTURE.
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION.
Architecture may be described as building at its best, and when we
talk of the architecture of any city or country we mean its best,
noblest, or most beautiful buildings; and we imply by the use of the
word that these buildings possess merits which entitle them to rank as
works of art.
The architecture of the civilised world can be best understood by
considering the great buildings of each important nation separately.
The features, ornaments, and even forms of ancient buildings differed
just as the speech, or at any rate the literature, differed. Each
nation wrote in a different language, though the books may have been
devoted to the same aims; and precisely in the same way each nation
built in a style of its own, even if the buildings may have been
similar in the purposes they had to serve. The division of the subject
into the architecture of Egypt, Greece, Rome, &c., is therefore the
most natural one to follow.
But certain broad groups, rising out of peculiarities of a physical
nature, either in the buildings themselves or in the conditions under
which they were erected, can hardly fail to be suggested by a general
view of the subject. Such, for example, is the fourfold division to
which the reader's attention will now be directed.
All buildings, it will be found, can be classed under one or other of
four great divisions, each distinguished by a distinct mode of
building, and each also occupying a distinct place in history. The
first series embraces the buildings of the Egyptians, the Persians,
and the Greeks, and was brought to a pitch of the highest perfection
in Greece during the age of Pericles. All the buildings erected in
these countries during the many centuries which elapsed from the
earliest Egyptian to the latest Greek works, however they may have
differed in other respects, agree in this--that the openings, be they
doors, or be they spaces between columns, were spanned by beams of
wood or lintels of stone (Fig. 1). Hence this architecture is called
architecture of the beam, or, in more formal language, trabeated
architecture. This mode of covering spaces required that in buildings
of solid masonry, where stone or marble lintels were employed, the
supports should not be very far apart, and this circumstance led to
the frequent use of rows of columns. The architecture of this period
is accordingly sometimes called columnar, but it has no exclusive
claim to the epithet; the column survived long after the exclusive
use of the beam had been superseded, and the term columnar must
accordingly be shared with buildings forming part of the succeeding
series.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--OPENING SPANNED BY A LINTEL. ARCH OF THE
GOLDSMITHS, ROME.]
The second great group of buildings is that in which the semicircular
arch is introduced into construction, and used either together with
the beam, or, as mostly happened, instead of the beam, to span the
openings (Fig. 2). This use of the arch began with the Assyrians, and
it reappeared in the works of the early Etruscans. The round-arched
series of styles embraces the buildings of the Romans from their
earliest beginnings to their decay; it also includes the two great
schools of Christian architecture which were founded by the Western
and the Eastern Church respectively,--namely, the Romanesque, which,
originating in Rome, extended itself through Western Europe, and
lasted till the time of the Crusades, and the Byzantine, which spread
from Constantinople over all the countries in which the Eastern (or
Greek) Church flourished, and which continues to our own day.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--OPENING SPANNED BY A SEMICIRCULAR ARCH. ROMAN
TRIUMPHAL ARCH AT POLA.]
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--OPENINGS SPANNED BY POINTED ARCHES. INTERIOR
OF ST. FRONT, PERIGUEUX, FRANCE.]
The third group of buildings is that in which the pointed arch is
employed instead of the semicircular arch to span the openings (Fig.
3). It began with the rise of Mohammedan architecture in the East, and
embraces all the buildings of Western Europe, from the time of the
First Crusade to the revival of art in the fifteenth century. This
great series of buildings constitutes what is known as Pointed, or,
more commonly, as Gothic architecture.
The fourth group consists of the buildings erected during or since the
Renaissance (_i.e._ revival) period, and is marked by a return to the
styles of past ages or distant countries for the architectural
features and ornaments of buildings; and by that luxury, complexity,
and ostentation which, with other qualities, are well comprehended
under the epithet Modern. This group of buildings forms what is known
as Renaissance architecture, and extends from the epoch of the revival
of letters in the fifteenth century, to the present day.
The first two of these styles--namely, the architecture of the beam,
and that of the round arch--are treated of in this little volume. They
occupy those remote times of pagan civilisation which may be
conveniently included under the broad term Ancient; and the better
known work of the Greeks and Romans--the classic nations--and they
extend over the time of the establishment of Christianity down to the
close of that dreary period not incorrectly termed the Dark ages.
Ancient, Classic, and early Christian architecture is accordingly an
appropriate title for the main subjects of this volume, though, for
the sake of convenience, some notices of Oriental architecture have
been added. Gothic and Renaissance architecture form the subjects of
the companion volume.
It may excite surprise that what appears to be so small a difference
as that which exists between a beam, a round arch, or a pointed arch,
should be employed in order to distinguish three of the four great
divisions. But in reality this is no pedantic or arbitrary grouping.
The mode in which spaces or openings are covered lies at the root of
most of the essential differences between styles of architecture, and
the distinction thus drawn is one of a real, not of a fanciful nature.
Every building when reduced to its elements, as will be done in both
these volumes, may be considered as made up of its (1) floor or plan,
(2) walls, (3) roof, (4) openings, (5) columns, and (6) ornaments, and
as marked by its distinctive (7) character, and the student must be
prepared to find that the openings are by no means the least important
of these elements. In fact, the moment the method of covering openings
was changed, it would be easy to show, did space permit, that all the
other elements, except the ornaments, were directly affected by the
change, and the ornaments indirectly; and we thus find such a
correspondence between this index feature and the entire structure as
renders this primary division a scientific though a very broad one.
The contrast between the trabeated style and the arched style may be
well understood by comparing the illustration of the Parthenon which
forms our frontispiece, or that of the great temple of Zeus at Olympia
(Fig. 4), with the exterior of the Colosseum at Rome (Fig. 5),
introduced here for the purposes of this comparison.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--TEMPLE OF ZEUS AT OLYMPIA. RESTORED ACCORDING
TO ADLER.]
A division of buildings into such great series as these cannot,
however, supersede the more obvious historical and geographical
divisions. The architecture of every ancient country was partly the
growth of the soil, _i.e._ adapted to the climate of the country, and
the materials found there, and partly the outcome of the national
character of its inhabitants, and of such influences as race,
colonisation, commerce, or conquest brought to bear upon them. These
influences produced strong distinctions between the work of different
peoples, especially before the era of the Roman Empire. Since that
period of universal dominion all buildings and styles have been
influenced more or less by Roman art. We accordingly find the
buildings of the most ancient nations separated from each other by
strongly marked lines of demarcation, but those since the era of the
Empire showing a considerable resemblance to one another. The
circumstance that the remains of those buildings only which received
the greatest possible attention from their builders have come down to
us from any remote antiquity, has perhaps served to accentuate the
differences between different styles, for these foremost buildings
were not intended to serve the same purpose in all countries. Nothing
but tombs and temples have survived in Egypt. Palaces only have been
rescued from the decay of Assyrian and Persian cities; and temples,
theatres, and places of public assembly are the chief, almost the only
remains of architecture in Greece.
A strong contrast between the buildings of different ancient nations
rises also from the differing point of view for which they were
designed. Thus, in the tombs and, to a large extent, the temples of
the Egyptians, we find structures chiefly planned for internal effect;
that is to say, intended to be seen by those admitted to the sacred
precincts, but only to a limited extent appealing to the admiration of
those outside. The buildings of the Greeks, on the other hand, were
chiefly designed to please those who examined them from without, and
though no doubt some of them, the theatres especially, were from their
very nature planned for interior effect, by far the greatest works
which Greek art produced were the exteriors of the temples.
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--PART OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE COLOSSEUM, ROME.
(NOW IN RUINS.)]
The works of the Romans, and, following them, those of almost all
Western Christian nations, were designed to unite external and
internal effect; but in many cases external was evidently most sought
after, and, in the North of Europe, many expedients--such, for
example, as towers, high-pitched roofs, and steeples--were introduced
into architecture with the express intention of increasing external
effect. On the other hand, the Eastern styles, both Mohammedan and
Christian, especially when practised in sunny climates, show in many
cases a comparative disregard of external effect, and that their
architects lavished most of their resources on the interiors of their
buildings.
Passing allusions have been made to the influence of climate on
architecture; and the student whose attention has been once called to
this subject will find many interesting traces of this influence in
the designs of buildings erected in various countries. Where the power
of the sun is great, flat terraced roofs, which help to keep buildings
cool, and thick walls are desirable. Sufficient light is admitted by
small windows far apart. Overhanging eaves, or horizontal cornices,
are in such a climate the most effective mode of obtaining
architectural effect, and accordingly in the styles of all Southern
peoples these peculiarities appear. The architecture of Egypt, for
example, exhibited them markedly. Where the sun is still powerful, but
not so extreme, the terraced roof is generally replaced by a sloping
roof, steep enough to throw off water, and larger openings are made
for light and air; but the horizontal cornice still remains the most
appropriate means of gaining effects of light and shade. This
description will apply to the architecture of Italy and Greece. When,
however, we pass to Northern countries, where snow has to be
encountered, where light is precious, and where the sun is low in the
heavens for the greater part of the day, a complete change takes
place. Roofs become much steeper, so as to throw off snow. The
horizontal cornice is to a large extent disused, but the buttress, the
turret, and other vertical features, from which a level sun will cast
shadows, begin to appear; and windows are made numerous and spacious.
This description applies to Gothic architecture generally--in other
words, to the styles which rose in Northern Europe.
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--TIMBER ARCHITECTURE. CHURCH AT BORGUND.]
The influence of materials on architecture is also worth notice. Where
granite, which is worked with difficulty, is the material obtainable,
architecture has invariably been severe and simple; where soft stone
is obtainable, exuberance of ornament makes its appearance, in
consequence of the material lending itself readily to the carver's
chisel. Where, on the other hand, marble is abundant and good,
refinement is to be met with, for no other building material exists in
which very delicate mouldings or very slight or slender projections
may be employed with the certainty that they will be effective. Where
stone is scarce, brick buildings, with many arches, roughly
constructed cornices and pilasters, and other peculiarities both of
structure and ornamentation, make their appearance, as, for example,
in Lombardy and North Germany. Where materials of many colours abound,
as is the case, for example, in the volcanic districts of France,
polychromy is sought as a means of ornamentation. Lastly, where timber
is available, and stone and brick are both scarce, the result is an
architecture of which both the forms and the ornamentation are
entirely dissimilar to those proper to buildings of stone, marble, or
brick, as may be seen by a glance at our illustration of an early
Scandinavian church built of timber (Fig. 6), which presents forms
appropriate to a timber building as being easily constructed of wood,
but which would hardly be suitable to any other material whatever.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--EGYPTIAN CORNICE.]
CHAPTER II.
EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE.
The origin of Egyptian architecture, like that of Egyptian history, is
lost in the mists of antiquity. The remains of all, or almost all,
other styles of architecture enable us to trace their rude beginnings,
their development, their gradual progress up to a culminating point,
and thence their slow but certain decline; but the earliest remains of
the constructions of the Egyptians show their skill as builders at the
height of its perfection, their architecture highly developed, and
their sculpture at its very best, if not indeed at the commencement of
its decadence; for some of the statuary of the age of the Pyramids was
never surpassed in artistic effect by the work of a later era. It is
impossible for us to conceive of such scientific skill as is evidenced
in the construction of the great pyramids, or such artistic power as
is displayed on the walls of tombs of the same date, or in the statues
found in them, as other than the outcome of a vast accumulation of
experience, the attainment of which must imply the lapse of very long
periods of time since the nation which produced such works emerged
from barbarism. It is natural, where so remote an antiquity is in
question, that we should feel a great difficulty, if not an
impossibility, in fixing exact dates, but the whole tendency of modern
exploration and research is rather to push back than to advance the
dates of Egyptian chronology, and it is by no means impossible that
the dynasties of Manetho, after being derided as apocryphal for
centuries, may in the end be accepted as substantially correct.
Manetho was an Egyptian priest living in the third century B.C., who
wrote a history of his country, which he compiled from the archives of
the temples. His work itself is lost, but Josephus quotes extracts
from it, and Eusebius and Julius Africanus reproduced his lists, in
which the monarchs of Egypt are grouped into thirty-four dynasties.
These, however, do not agree with one another, and in many cases it is
difficult to reconcile them with the records displayed in the
monuments themselves.
The remains with which we are acquainted indicate four distinct
periods of great architectural activity in Egyptian history, viz.: (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 Philae. 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.[1] The three largest pyramids are those of Cheops,
Cephren, and Mycerinus at Gizeh (or, as the names are more correctly
written, Suphis, Sensuphis, and Moscheris or Mencheris). 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 Suphis
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,[2] 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 deg. 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 towards 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 (Fig. 8).
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.--SECTION ACROSS THE GREAT PYRAMID (OF CHEOPS
OR SUPHIS).]
The entrance D to this pyramid of Suphis was at a height of 47 ft.
6 in. above the base, and, as was almost invariably the case, on the
north face; from the entrance a passage slopes downward at an angle of
26 deg. 27' to a chamber cut in the rock at a depth of about 90 feet below
the base of the pyramid. This chamber seems to have been intended as a
blind, as it was not the place for the deposition of the corpse. From
the point in the above described passage--marked A on our illustration
of this pyramid--another gallery starts upwards, till it reaches the
point C, from which a horizontal passage leads to another small
chamber. This is called the Queen's Chamber, but no reason has been
discovered for the name. From this point C the gallery continues
upwards till, in the heart of the pyramid, the Royal Chamber, B, is
reached. The walls of these chambers and passages are lined with
masonry executed in the hardest stone (granite), and with an accuracy
of fitting and a truth of surface that can hardly be surpassed.
Extreme care seems to have been taken to prevent the great weight
overhead from crushing in the galleries and the chamber. The gallery
from C upwards is of the form shown in Fig. 9, where each layer of
stones projects slightly beyond the one underneath it. Fig. 11 is a
section of the chamber itself, and the succession of small chambers
shown one above the other was evidently formed for the purpose of
distributing the weight of the superincumbent mass. From the point C a
narrow well leads almost perpendicularly downwards to a point nearly
at the bottom of the first-mentioned gallery; and the purpose to be
served by this well was long a subject of debate. The probability is
that, after the corpse had been placed in its chamber, the workmen
completely blocked up the passage from A to C by allowing large blocks
of granite to slide down it, these blocks having been previously
prepared and deposited in the larger gallery; the men then let
themselves down the well, and by means of the lower gallery made their
exit from the pyramid. The entrances to the chamber and to the pyramid
itself were formed by huge blocks of stone which exactly fitted into
grooves prepared for them with the most beautiful mathematical
accuracy. The chief interest attaching to the pyramids lies in their
extreme antiquity, and the scientific method of their construction;
for their effect upon the spectator is by no means proportionate to
their immense mass and the labour bestowed upon them.
[Illustration: FIG. 9.--ASCENDING GALLERY IN THE GREAT PYRAMID.]
[Illustration: FIG. 10.--THE SEPULCHRAL CHAMBER IN THE PYRAMID OF
CEPHREN AT GIZEH.]
[Illustration: FIG. 11.--THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE KING'S CHAMBER IN
THE GREAT PYRAMID.]
In the neighbourhood 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. Figs. 12 and 13 show this kind of
stone-work, which is peculiar to the old dynasties, and seems to have
had little influence upon succeeding styles.
A remarkable feature of these early private tombs consists in the
paintings with which the walls are decorated, and which vividly
portray the ordinary every-day occupations carried on during his
lifetime by the person who was destined to be the inmate of the tomb.
These paintings are of immense value in enabling us to form an
accurate idea of the life of the people at this early age.
[Illustration: FIG. 12.--IMITATION OF TIMBER CONSTRUCTION IN STONE,
FROM A TOMB AT MEMPHIS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 13.--IMITATION OF TIMBER CONSTRUCTION IN STONE,
FROM A TOMB AT MEMPHIS.]
It may possibly be open to doubt whether the dignified appellation of
architecture should be applied to buildings of the kind we have just
been describing; but 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
1400 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. Fig. 14
is a plan with a section, and Fig. 15 an exterior view, of one of
these tombs, which, it will be seen, consisted of a portico, a chamber
with its roof supported by columns, and a small space at the farther
end in which is formed the opening of a sloping passage or well, at
the bottom of which the vault for the reception of the body was
constructed. The walls of the large chamber are lavishly decorated
with scenes of every-day life, and it has even been suggested that
these places were not erected originally as tombs, but as
dwelling-places, which after death were appropriated as sepulchres.
[Illustration: FIG. 14.--PLAN AND SECTION OF THE TOMB AT BENI-HASSAN.
SECTION.]
The columns are surmounted by a small square slab, technically called
an abacus, and heavy square beams or architraves span the spaces
between the columns, while the roof between the architraves has a
slightly segmental form. The tombs of the later period, viz. of the
eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties, are very different from those of
the twelfth dynasty, and present few features of architectural
interest, though they are remarkable for their vast extent and the
variety of form of their various chambers and galleries. They consist
of a series of chambers excavated in the rock, and it appears certain
that the tomb was commenced on the accession of each monarch, and was
driven farther and farther into the rock during the continuance of his
reign till his death, when all work abruptly ceased. All the chambers
are profusely decorated with paintings, but of a kind very different
from those of the earlier dynasties. Instead of depicting scenes of
ordinary life, all the paintings refer to the supposed life after
death, and are thus of very great value as a means of determining the
religious opinions of the Egyptians at this time. One of the most
remarkable of these tombs is that of Manephthah or Sethi I., at
Bab-el-Molouk, and known as Belzoni's tomb, as it was discovered by
him; from it was taken the alabaster sarcophagus now in the Soane
Museum in Lincoln's Inn Fields. To this relic a new interest is given
by the announcement, while these pages are passing through the press,
of the discovery of the mummy of this very Manephthah, with
thirty-eight other royal mummies, in the neighbourhood of Thebes.
[Illustration: FIG. 15.--ROCK-CUT FACADE OF TOMB AT BENI-HASSAN.]
Of the Ptolemaic period no tombs, except perhaps a few at Alexandria,
are known to exist.
TEMPLES.
It is very doubtful whether any remains of temples of the time of the
fourth dynasty--_i.e._ contemporaneous with the pyramids--exist. One,
constructed on a most extraordinary plan, was supposed to have been
discovered about a quarter of a century ago, and it was described by
Professor Donaldson at the Royal Institute of British Architects in
1861, but later Egyptologists rather incline to the belief that this
was a tomb and not a temple, as in one of the chambers of the interior
a number of compartments were discovered one above the other which
were apparently intended for the reception of bodies. This singular
building is close to the Great Sphinx; its plan is cruciform, and
there are in the interior a number of rectangular piers of granite
supporting very simple architraves, but there are no means of
determining what kind of roof covered it in. The walls seem to have
been faced on the interior with polished slabs of granite or
alabaster, but no sculpture or hieroglyphic inscriptions were found on
them to explain the purpose of the building. Leaving this
building--which is of a type quite unique--out of the question,
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 16.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE PALACE AT KARNAK.]
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 (Fig. 18). 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
centre, 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. Fig. 17 shows this arrangement. 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. Fig. 16 is a plan
of the temple of Karnak, which was about 1200 feet long and 348 feet
wide. A is the entrance between the two enormous pylons giving access
to a large courtyard, in which is a small detached temple, and another
larger one breaking into the courtyard obliquely. A gateway between a
second pair of pylons admits to B, the grand Hypostyle Hall, 334 feet
by 167 feet. Beyond this are additional gateways with pylons,
separated by a sort of gallery, C, in which were two gigantic
obelisks; D, another grand hall, is called the Hall of the Caryatides,
and beyond is the Hall of the eighteen columns, through which access
is gained to a number of smaller halls grouped round the central
chamber E. Beyond this is a large courtyard, in the centre of which
stood the original sanctuary, which has disappeared down to its
foundations, nothing but some broken shafts of columns remaining. At
the extreme east is another hall supported partly by columns and
partly by square piers, and a second series of pillared courts and
chambers. The pylons and buildings generally decrease in height as we
proceed from the entrance eastwards. This is due to the fact that, the
building grew by successive additions, each one more magnificent than
the last, all being added on the side from which the temple was
entered, leaving the original sanctuary unchanged and undisturbed.
[Illustration: FIG. 17.--THE HYPOSTYLE HALL AT KARNAK, SHOWING THE
CLERESTORY.]
[Illustration: FIG. 18.--ENTRANCE TO AN EGYPTIAN TEMPLE, SHOWING THE
PYLONS.]
Besides the buildings shown on the plan there were many other temples
to the north, south, and east, entered by pylons and some of them
connected together by avenues of sphinxes, obelisks, and colossi,
which altogether made up the most wonderful agglomeration of buildings
that can be conceived. 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 the other 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 are 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. Omenophis, the first king
of the Shepherd dynasties, built a temple round the sanctuary, which
has disappeared. Thothmes I. built the Hall of the Caryatides and
commenced the next Hall of the eighteen columns, which was finished by
Thothmes II. Thothmes III. built that portion surrounding the
sanctuary, and he also built the courts on the extreme east. The pylon
at C was built by Omenophis III., and formed the facade of the temple
before the erection of the grand hall. Sethi I. built the Hypostyle
Hall, which had probably been originated by Rhamses I., who commenced
the pylon west of it. Sethi II. built the small detached temple, and
Rhamses III. the intersecting temple. The Bubastites constructed the
large front court by building walls round it, and the Ptolemies
commenced the huge western pylon. The colonnade in the centre of the
court was erected by Tahraka.
Extensive remains of temples exist at Luxor, Edfou (Fig. 19), and
Philae, but it will not be necessary to give a detailed description of
them, as, if smaller in size, they are very similar in arrangement to
those already described. 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 inwards as they rise, thus
giving the buildings an air of great solidity.
[Illustration: FIG. 19.--PLAN OF THE TEMPLE AT EDFOU.]
[Illustration: FIG. 20.--PLAN OF ONE OF THE MAMMISI AT EDFOU.]
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 on 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 their outer walls perpendicular. Fig. 20 is a plan of one of
these small temples, and no one can fail to remark the striking
likeness to some of the Greek temples; there can indeed be little
doubt that this nation borrowed the peristylar form of its temples
from the Ancient Egyptians.
[Illustration: FIG. 21.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE ROCK-CUT TEMPLE AT
IPSAMBOUL.]
[Illustration: FIG. 22.--SECTION OF THE ROCK-CUT TEMPLE AT
IPSAMBOUL.]
Although no rock-cut temples have been discovered in Egypt proper,
Nubia is very rich in such remains. The arrangement of these temples
hewn out of the rock is closely analogous to that of the detached
ones. Figs. 21 and 22 show a plan and section of the largest of the
rock-cut temples at Ipsamboul, which consists of two extensive courts,
with smaller chambers beyond, all connected by galleries. The roof of
the large court is supported by eight huge piers, the faces of which
are sculptured into the form of standing colossi, and the entrance is
adorned by four splendid seated colossi, 68 ft. 6 in. high. As was the
case with the detached temples, it will be noticed that the height of
the various chambers decreases towards the extremity of the
excavation.
[Illustration: FIG. 23.--EGYPTIAN COLUMN WITH LOTUS BUD CAPITAL.
PLAN.]
[Illustration: FIG. 24.--EGYPTIAN COLUMN WITH LOTUS FLOWER CAPITAL.]
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 earliest
form is that at Beni-Hassan, which has already been noticed as the
prototype of the Doric order. Figs. 23 and 24 are views of two columns
of a type more commonly employed. In these the sculptors appear to
have imitated as closely as possible the forms of the plant-world
around them, as is shown in Fig. 23, which represents a bundle of
reeds or lotus stalks, and is the earliest type known of the lotus
column, which was afterwards developed into a number of forms, one of
which will be observed on turning to our section of the Hypostyle Hall
at Karnak (Fig. 17), as employed for the lateral columns. 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 (Fig.
24). 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 (Fig. 25), and afterwards sculptured
(Fig. 26). 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 (Fig. 27). Considerable
ingenuity was exercised in adapting the capitals of the columns to the
positions in which they were placed: thus in the hypostyle halls, the
lofty central row of columns generally had capitals of the form shown
in Fig. 24, as the light here was sufficient to illuminate thoroughly
the underside of the overhanging bell; but those columns which were
farther removed from the light had their capitals of the unopened bud
form, which was narrower at the top than at bottom. 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 (Fig. 28),
but we have no reason for thinking that these fantastic shapes were
really executed in stone.
[Illustration: FIG. 25.--PALM CAPITAL.]
[Illustration: FIG. 26.--SCULPTURED CAPITAL.]
[Illustration: FIG. 27.--ISIS CAPITAL FROM DENDERAH.]
[Illustration: FIG. 28.--FANCIFUL COLUMN FROM PAINTED DECORATION AT
THEBES.]
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 (Fig. 29).
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 29.--CROWNING CORNICE AND BEAD.]
The most striking features, and the most artistic, in the decoration
of Egyptian buildings, are the mural paintings and sculptured
pictures, which are found in the most lavish profusion, and which
exhibit the highest skill in conventionalising the human figure and
other objects.[3] Tombs and temples, columns and obelisks are
completely covered with graphic representations of peaceful home
pursuits, warlike expeditions and battle scenes, and--though not till
a late period--descriptions of ritual and mythological delineations of
the supposed spirit-world which the soul has entered after death.
These pictures, together with the hieroglyphic inscriptions--which
are in themselves a series of pictures--not only relieve the bare wall
surface, but, what is far more important, enable us to realise the
kind of existence which was led by this ancient people; and as in
nearly every case the cartouche (or symbol representing the name) of
the monarch under whose reign the building was erected was added, we
should be able to fix the dates of the buildings with exactness, were
the chronology of the kings made out beyond doubt.
The following description of the manner in which the Egyptian
paintings and sculptures were executed--from the pen of Owen
Jones--will be read with interest:--"The wall was first chiselled as
smooth as possible, the imperfections of the stone were filled up with
cement or plaster, and the whole was rubbed smooth and covered with a
coloured wash; lines were then ruled perpendicularly and horizontally
with red colour, forming squares all over the wall corresponding with
the proportions of the figure to be drawn upon it. The subjects of the
painting and of the hieroglyphics were then drawn on the wall with a
red line, most probably by the priest or chief scribe, or by some
inferior artist, from a document divided into similar squares; then
came the chief artist, who went over every figure and hieroglyphic
with a black line, and a firm and steady hand, giving expression to
each curve, deviating here and confirming there the red line. The line
thus traced was then followed by the sculptor. The next process was to
paint the figure in the prescribed colours."
Although Egyptian architecture was essentially a trabeated
style,--that is to say, a style in which beams or lintels were usually
employed to cover openings,--there is strong ground for the belief
that the builders of that time were acquainted with the nature of the
arch. Dr. Birch mentions a rudimentary arch of the time of the fifth
dynasty: at Abydos there are also remains of vaulted tombs of the
sixth dynasty; and in a tomb in the neighbourhood of the Pyramids
there is an elementary arch of three stones surmounted by a true arch
constructed in four courses. The probability is that true brick arches
were built at a very early period, but in the construction of their
tombs, where heavy masses of superincumbent masonry or rock had to be
supported, the Egyptians seem to have been afraid to risk even the
remote possibility of their arches decaying; and hence, even when they
preserved the form of the arch in masonry, they constructed it with
horizontal courses of stones projecting one over the other, and then
cut away the lower angles. One dominating idea seems to have
influenced them in the whole of their work--_esto perpetua_ was their
motto; and though they have been excelled by later peoples in grace
and beauty, it is a question whether they have ever been surpassed in
the skill with which they adapted their means to the end which they
always kept in view.
ANALYSIS OF BUILDINGS.
_Plan._
_Floor_ (technically _Plan_).--The early rock-cut tombs were, of
course, only capable of producing internal effects; their floor
presents a series of halls and galleries, varying in size and shape,
leading one out of the other, and intended by their contrast or
combination to produce architectural effect. To this was added in the
later rock-cut tombs a facade to be seen directly in front. Much the
same account can be given of the disposition of the built temples.
They possess one front, which the spectator approaches, and they are
disposed so as to produce varied and impressive interiors, but not to
give rise to external display. The supports, such as walls, columns,
piers, are all very massive and very close together, so that the only
wide open spaces are courtyards.
The circle, or octagon, or other polygonal forms do not appear in the
plans of Egyptian buildings; but though all the lines are straight,
there is a good deal of irregularity in spacing, walls which face one
another are not always parallel, and angles which appear to be right
angles very often are not so.
The later buildings extend over much space. The adjuncts to these
buildings, especially the avenues of sphinxes, are planned so as to
produce an air of stately grandeur, and in them some degree of
external effect is aimed at.
_Walls._
The walls are uniformly thick, and often of granite or of stone,
though brick is also met with; _e.g._ some of the smaller pyramids are
built entirely of brick. In all probability the walls of domestic
buildings were to a great extent of brick, and less thick than those
of the temples; hence they have all disappeared.
The surface of walls, even when of granite, was usually plastered with
a thin fine plaster, which was covered by the profuse decoration in
colour already alluded to.
The walls of the propylons tapered from the base towards the top, and
the same thing sometimes occurred in other walls. In almost all cases
the stone walls are built of very large blocks, and they show an
unrivalled skill in masonry.
_Roofs._
The roofing which remains is executed entirely in stone, but not
arched or vaulted. The rock-cut tombs, however, as has been stated,
contain ceilings of an arched shape, and in some cases forms which
seem to be an imitation of timber roofing. The roofing of the
Hypostyle Hall at Karnak provides an arrangement for admitting light
very similar to the clerestory of Gothic cathedrals.
_Openings._
The openings were all covered by a stone lintel, and consequently were
uniformly square-headed. The interspaces between columns were
similarly covered, and hence Egyptian architecture has been, and
correctly, classed as the first among the styles of trabeated
architecture. Window-openings seldom occur.
_Columns._
The columns have been already described to some extent. They are
almost always circular in plan, but the shaft is sometimes channelled.
They are for the most part of sturdy proportions, but great grace and
elegance are shown in the profile given to shafts and capitals. The
design of the capitals especially is full of variety, and admirably
adapts forms obtained from the vegetable kingdom. The general effect
of the Egyptian column, wherever it is used, is that it appears to
have, as it really has, a great deal more strength than is required.
The fact that the abacus (the square block of stone introduced between
the moulded part of the capital and what it carries) is often smaller
in width than the diameter of the column aids very much to produce
this effect.
_Ornaments._
Mouldings are very rarely employed; in fact, the large bead running up
the angles of the pylons, &c., and a heavy hollow moulding doing duty
as a cornice, are all that are usually met with. Sculpture and carving
occur occasionally, and are freely introduced in later works, where we
sometimes find statues incorporated into the design of the fronts of
temples. Decoration in colour, in the shape of hieroglyphic
inscriptions and paintings of all sorts, was profusely employed (Figs.
27-30), and is executed with a truth of drawing and a beauty of
colouring that have never been surpassed. As has been pointed out,
almost every object drawn is partly conventionalised, in the most
skilful manner, so as to make it fit its place as a piece of a
decorative system.
_Architectural Character._
This is gloomy, and to a certain extent forbidding, owing to the heavy
walls and piers and columns, and the great masses supported by them;
but when in its freshness and quite uninjured by decay or violence,
the exquisite colouring of the walls and ceilings and columns must
have added a great deal of beauty: this must have very much diminished
the oppressive effect inseparable from such massive construction and
from the gloomy darkness of many portions of the buildings. It is also
noteworthy that the expenditure of materials and labour is greater in
proportion to the effect attained than in any other style. The
pyramids are the most conspicuous example of this prodigality. Before
condemning this as a defect in the style, it must be remembered that a
stability which should defy enemies, earthquakes, and the tooth of
time, was far more aimed at than architectural character; and that,
had any mode of construction less lavish of material, and less perfect
in workmanship, been adopted, the buildings of Egypt might have all
disappeared ere this.
[Illustration: FIG. 30.--PAINTED DECORATION FROM THEBES.]
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Some Egyptologists incline to the opinion that the pyramid of
Saqqara is the most ancient, while others think it much more recent
than those of Gizeh.
[2] Strictly speaking, the base is not an exact square, the four sides
measuring, according to the Royal Engineers, north, 760 ft. 7.5 in.;
south, 761 ft. 8.5 in.; east, 760 ft. 9.5 in.; and west, 764 ft. 1 in.
[3] Conventionalising may be described as representing a part only of
the visible qualities or features of an object, omitting the remainder
or very slightly indicating them. A black silhouette portrait is an
extreme instance of convention, as it displays absolutely nothing but
the outline of a profile. For decorative purposes it is almost always
necessary to conventionalise to a greater or less extent whatever is
represented.
[Illustration: FIG. 31.--SCULPTURED ORNAMENT AT NINEVEH.]
CHAPTER III.
WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE.
The architectural styles of the ancient nations which ruled over the
countries of Western Asia watered by the Tigris and the Euphrates,
from a period about 2200 B.C. down to 330 B.C., are so intimately
connected one with another, and so dependent one upon the other, that
it is almost impossible to attempt an accurate discrimination between
the Babylonian, or ancient Chaldaean, the Assyrian and the Persian. A
more intelligible idea of the architecture of this long period will be
gained by regarding the three styles as modifications and developments
of one original style, than by endeavouring to separate them.[4] Their
sequence can, however, be accurately determined. First comes the old
Chaldaean period, next the Assyrian, during which the great city of
Nineveh was built, and finally the Persian, after Cyrus had subdued
the older monarchies; and remains exist of all these periods. As to
the origin of the Chaldaean Kingdom, however, all is obscure; and the
earliest date which can be fixed with the slightest approach to
probability is 2234 B.C., when Nimrod is supposed to have founded the
old Chaldaean dynasty. This seems to have lasted about 700 years, and
was then overthrown by a conquering nation of which no record or even
tradition remains, the next two and a half centuries being a complete
blank till the rise of the great Assyrian Monarchy about 1290 B.C.,
which lasted till its destruction by Cyrus about 538 B.C. The Persian
Monarchy then endured till the death of Alexander the Great, in 333
B.C., after which great confusion arose, the empire being broken up
among his generals and rapidly falling to pieces.
It is only within a comparatively recent period that we have had any
knowledge of the architecture of these countries; but the explorations
of M. Botta, commenced in 1843 and continued by M. Place, and those of
Mr. (now Sir A. H.) Layard in 1845, combined with the successful
attempts of Prof. Grotefend, Prof. Lassen, and Col. Rawlinson at
deciphering the cuneiform inscriptions, have disclosed a new world to
the architectural student, without which some of the developments of
Greek architecture must have remained obscure. The authentic remains
of buildings of the early Chaldaean period are too few and in too
ruinous a condition to allow of a reproduction of their architectural
features with any certainty. The buildings, whether palaces or
temples, appear to have been constructed on terraces, and to have been
several storeys in height; and in one instance, at Mugheyr, the walls
sloped inwards in a similar manner to those of Egyptian buildings, a
peculiarity which is not met with in other examples of West Asiatic
architecture. The materials employed were bricks, both sun-dried and
kiln-burnt, which seem to have been coated with a vitreous enamel for
purposes of interior decoration. Fragments of carved limestone were
discovered by Sir A. H. Layard, but the fact that the fragments found
have been so few ought not to lead us too hastily to the conclusion
that stone was not used as facing for architectural purposes, as after
the buildings became ruined the stone would eagerly be sought for and
carried away before the brickwork was touched. Bitumen seems to have
been employed as a cement. Although original buildings of this era
cannot be found, it has been shown that in all probability we have, in
a building of a later date--the Birs-i-Nimrud--a type of the old
Babylonian temple. This in its general disposition must have resembled
that of the Tomb of Cyrus, described and figured later on, though on a
vastly larger scale. The lowest storey appears to have been an exact
square of 272 ft.; each of the higher storeys was 42 ft. less
horizontally than the one below it, and was placed 30 ft. back from
the front of the storey below it, but equidistant from the two sides,
where the platforms were 21 ft. wide. The three upper storeys were
45 ft. in height altogether, the two below these were 26 ft. each, and
the height of the lowest is uncertain. The topmost storey probably had
a tower on it which enclosed the shrine of the temple. This edifice
was for a long time a bone of contention among savants, but Colonel
Rawlinson's investigations have brought to light the fact that it was
a temple dedicated to the seven heavenly spheres, viz. Saturn,
Jupiter, Mars, the Sun, Venus, Mercury, and the Moon, in the order
given, starting from the bottom. Access to the various platforms was
obtained by stairs, and the whole building was surrounded by a walled
enclosure. From remains found at Wurkha we may gather that the walls
of the buildings of this period were covered with elaborate plaster
ornaments, and that a lavish use was made of colour in their
decoration.
Of the later Assyrian period several ruins of buildings believed to be
palaces have been excavated, of which the large palace at Khorsabad,
the old name of which was Hisir-Sargon, now a small village between 10
and 11 miles north-east of Nineveh, has been the most completely
explored, and this consequently is the best adapted to explain the
general plan of an Assyrian edifice. M. Botta, when French Consul at
Mosul, and M. Victor Place conducted these explorations, and the
following details are taken from their works. Like all other Assyrian
palaces, this was reared on a huge artificial mound, the labour of
forming which must have been enormous. The reason for the construction
of these mounds is not far to seek. Just as the chiefs of a
mountainous country choose the loftiest peaks for their castles, so in
Assyria, which was a very flat country, the extra defensive strength
of elevated buildings was clearly appreciated; and as these absolute
monarchs ruled over a teeming population and had a very large number
of slaves, and only had to direct their taskmasters to impress labour
whenever they wanted it, no difficulty existed in forming elevated
platforms for their palaces. These were frequently close to a river,
and it is by no means improbable that this was turned into the
excavation from which the earth for the mound was taken, and thus
formed a lake or moat as an additional defence. A further reason for
these terraces may be found in the fact that in a hot climate
buildings erected some 20 or 30 ft. above the level of the plain
catch the breezes much more quickly than lower edifices. In the case
of Khorsabad the terrace was made of sun-dried bricks, about 15.7 in.
square and 2 in. thick. These bricks were made of the most carefully
prepared clay. The terrace was faced by a retaining wall of coursed
masonry, nearly 10 ft. in thickness. On this terrace the palace was
built, and it consisted of a series of open courts arranged
unsymmetrically, surrounded by state or private apartments,
storehouses, stables, &c. Great care seems to have been exercised in
the accurate orientation of the building, but in rather a peculiar
manner. Instead of any one facade of the building facing due north,
the corners face exactly towards the four points of the compass. The
courts were all entered by magnificent portals flanked by gigantic
figures, and were approached by flights of steps. Fig. 32 is a plan of
the palace of Khorsabad, which was placed close to the boundary of the
city; in fact it was partly outside the city wall proper, though
surrounded by a wall of its own. The grand south-east portals or
propylaea were adorned with huge human-headed bulls and gigantic
figures, and gave access to a large court, 315 ft. by 280 ft., on the
east side of which are the stables and out-houses, and on the west
side the metal stores. On the north of this court, though not
approached directly from it, was the Seraglio (not to be confounded
with the Harem), the grand entrance to which was from a second large
court, access to which was obtained from a roadway sloping up from the
city. The portals to this portion of the palace were also adorned with
human-headed bulls. From the second court a vaulted passage gave
access to the state apartments, which appear to have had a direct view
across the open country, and were quite outside the city walls. The
Harem has been excavated; it stood just outside the palace proper,
behind the metal stores. The remains of an observatory exist, and the
outlines of what is supposed to have been a temple have also been
unearthed, so that we have here a complete plan of the palace.
Altogether 31 courts and 198 chambers have been discovered.
[Illustration: FIG. 32.--PALACE OF KHORSABAD. BUILT BY KING SARGON
ABOUT 710 B.C.
A, Steps. B, Chief portal. C, Chief entrance-court. D-H, Women's
apartments (Harem). J, Centre court of building. K, Chief court
of royal residence. L, Portal with carved bulls as guards. M,
Centre court of royal residence. N, Temple (?). O, Pyramid of
steps. S, Entrance to chief court. T, Plan of terraces with wall
and towers.]
It will be noticed that great disproportion exists between the length
of the various apartments and their breadth, none being more than
40 ft. wide; and it is probable that this was owing to structural
necessities, the Assyrian builders finding it impossible, with the
materials at their disposal, to cover wider spaces than this. The walls
of this palace vary from 5 to 15 ft. in thickness, and are composed of
sun-dried bricks, faced in the principal courts and state apartments
with slabs of alabaster or Mosul gypsum to a height of from 9 to 12 ft.,
above which kiln-burnt bricks were used. The alabaster slabs were
held together by iron, copper, or wooden cramps or plugs, and were
covered with sculptured pictures representing scenes of peace and war,
from which, as was the case with the Egyptian remains, we are able to
reconstruct for ourselves the daily life of the monarchs of those early
times. Above the alabaster slabs plastered decorations were used; in
some cases painted frescoes have been found, or mosaics formed with
enamelled bricks of various colours. In the out-buildings and the more
retired rooms of the palace, the alabaster slabs were omitted, and
plaster decorations used, from the ground upwards. The researches of
MM. Botta and Place have shown that colour was used with a lavishness
quite foreign to our notions, as the alabaster statues as well as the
plaster enrichments were coloured. M. Place says that in no case were
the plain bricks allowed to face the walls of an apartment, the joint
being always concealed either by colour or plaster: in fact, he remarks
that after a time, if he found walls standing showing the brickwork
joints, he invariably searched with success among the debris of the
chamber for remains of the sculptured decorations which had been used
to face the walls.
Not the least interesting of these discoveries was that of the drains
under the palace, portions of which were in very good preservation;
and all were vaulted, so that there can be no doubt whatever that the
Assyrians were acquainted with the use of the arch. This was further
proved by the discovery by M. Place of the great arched gates of the
city itself, with an archivolt of coloured enamelled bricks forming
various patterns, with a semicircular arch springing from plain jambs.
Extreme care was taken by the Assyrian builders in laying the
pavements to ensure their being perfectly level: first a layer of
kiln-burnt bricks was laid on the ordinary sun-dried bricks forming
the terrace; then came a layer of fine sand, upon which the bricks or
slabs of the pavement proper were laid, forming in many cases an
elegant pattern (see Fig. 33).
[Illustration: FIG. 33.--PAVEMENT FROM KHOYUNJIK.]
Great difference of opinion exists as to the manner in which the
various apartments of the palace were lighted. M. Place suggests that
the rooms were all vaulted on the inside, and the spandrels filled in
with earth afterwards to form perfectly flat roofs, and he gives a
restoration of the building on such an arrangement; but if he is
correct, it is impossible to see how any light at all can have
penetrated into the interior of many of the apartments, and as these
apartments are decorated with a profusion of paintings it is very
difficult to believe that artificial light alone was used in them. M.
Place thinks, however, that in some cylindrical terra-cotta vessels
which he found he has hit upon a species of skylight which passed
completely through the vault over the rooms, and thus admitted the
light from above. This, however, can hardly be considered as settled
yet. Mr. Fergusson, on the other hand, suggests that the thick main
walls were carried to a height of about 18 or 19 ft., and that above
this were two rows of dwarf columns, one on the inner and the other on
the outer edge of the wall, these columns supporting a flat terrace
roof, and the walls thus forming galleries all round the apartments.
Then to cover the space occupied by the apartments themselves it is
necessary to assume the existence of rows of columns, the capitals of
which were at the same level as those of the dwarf columns on the
walls. Where one apartment is surrounded on all sides by others, the
roof over it may have been carried up to a higher level, forming a
sort of clerestory. This theory no doubt accounts for many things
which are very hard to explain otherwise, and derives very strong
support from the analogy of Persepolis, where slender stone columns
exist. Such columns of cedar wood would add enormously to the
magnificence and grandeur of the building; and if, as seems likely,
most of these Assyrian palaces were destroyed by fire, the absence of
the remains of columns offers no difficulty. On the other hand, in
many parts of the palace of Khorsabad no trace of fire remains, and
yet here no suggestion of detached columns can be found, and,
moreover, it is extremely difficult to arrange columns symmetrically
in the various apartments so that doorways are not interfered with.
There is also another difficulty, viz. that if the building called the
Harem at Khorsabad was built in this way, the apartments would have
been open to the view of any one ascending the lofty building called
the observatory. It is quite possible that further explorations may
tend to elucidate this difficult question of roofing, but at present
all that can be said is that none of the theories that have been put
forward is wholly satisfactory.
As no columns at all exist, we cannot say what capitals were employed,
but it is probable that those of Persepolis, which will be shortly
described, were copied from an earlier wooden form, which may have
been that used by the Assyrian builders. There is, however, capping
the terrace on which the temple was erected at Khorsabad, a good
example of an Assyrian cornice, which is very similar indeed to the
forms found in Egypt, and some of the sculptured bas-reliefs which
have been discovered depict rude copies of Assyrian buildings drawn by
the people themselves; and it is most interesting to notice that just
as we found in the Egyptian style the proto-Doric column, so in the
Assyrian we find the proto-Ionic (Figs. 34, 34a), and possibly also
the proto-Corinthian (Fig. 34b).
[Illustration: FIG. 34.--PROTO-IONIC COLUMN.]
[Illustration: FIG. 34a.--PROTO-IONIC CAPITAL FROM ASSYRIAN
SCULPTURE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 34b.--PROTO-CORINTHIAN CAPITAL FROM ASSYRIAN
SCULPTURE.]
The third branch of West Asiatic architecture is the Persian, which
was developed after Cyrus had conquered the older monarchies, and
which attained its greatest magnificence under Darius and Xerxes. The
Persians were originally a brave and hardy race inhabiting the
mountainous region south of Media, which slopes down to the Persian
Gulf. Until the time of Cyrus, who was the founder of the great
kingdom of Persia, they inhabited small towns, had no architecture,
and were simple barbarians. But after Cyrus had vanquished the wealthy
and luxurious Assyrian monarchs, and his warriors had seen and
wondered at the opulence and splendour of the Assyrian palaces, it was
natural that his successors should strive to emulate for themselves
the display of their vassals. Therefore, having no indigenous style to
fall back upon, the artisans who were summoned to build the tomb of
the founder of the monarchy and the palaces of his successors, simply
copied the forms with which they were acquainted. Fortunately, the
sites for the new palaces were in a locality where building stone was
good and abundant, and the presence of this material had a modifying
effect upon the architecture.
[Illustration: FIG. 35.--TOMB OF CYRUS.]
The best known of the remains which date as far back as the earlier
Persian dynasties is the so-called tomb of Cyrus at Pasargadae, near
Murghab (Fig. 35). This may be looked upon as a model in white marble
of an old Chaldaean temple, such as the Birs-i-Nimrud. There are the
same platforms diminishing in area as the top is approached, and on
the topmost platform is a small cella or temple with a gabled stone
roof, which probably originally contained the sarcophagus. It is,
however, at Persepolis, the real capital of the later Persian kings,
whose grandeur and wealth were such that Alexander is said to have
found there treasure to the amount of thirty millions of pounds
sterling, that we find the most magnificent series of ruins. These
were carefully measured and drawn by Baron Texier in 1835, and his
work and that of MM. Flandrin and Coste are those from which the best
information on this subject can be obtained.
[Illustration: FIG. 35a.--GENERAL PLAN OF THE BUILDINGS AT
PERSEPOLIS.]
Persepolis is about 35 miles north-east of Shiraz, close to the main
highway to Ispahan, at the foot of the mountain range which bounds the
extensive plain of Nurdusht. The modern inhabitants of the district
call the ruins Takht-i-Jamshid (or the building of Jamshid), but the
inscriptions that have been deciphered prove that Darius and Xerxes
were the chief builders. Just as was the case with the Assyrian ruins,
these stand on an immense platform which rises perpendicularly from
the plain and abuts in the rear against the mountain range. Instead,
however, of this platform being raised artificially, it was cut out of
the rock, and levelled into a series of terraces, on which the
buildings were erected. The platform, whose length from north to south
is about 1582 ft., and breadth from east to west about 938 ft., is
approached from the plain by a magnificent double staircase of black
marble, of very easy rise, not more than 4 in. each step. Its general
height above the level of the plain was originally 34 ft. 9 in. The
retaining wall of the platform is not straight, but has in it 40
breaks or set-offs of unequal dimensions. At the top of the staircase
are the remains of a building with four columns in the centre and with
large portals both back and front, each of which is adorned with
gigantic bulls, strikingly resembling those found at Khorsabad. Those
in the front have no wings, but those in the rear have wings and human
heads. It has been suggested that these are the ruins of one of those
large covered gates frequently mentioned in the Bible, under the
shelter of which business was transacted, and which probably formed
the entrance to the whole range of courts and buildings. After passing
through this gateway and turning southwards, at a distance of 177 feet
from it, another terrace is reached, 9 ft. 2 in. higher than the first
one. This terrace also is approached by four flights of steps
profusely decorated with sculptured bas-reliefs, and on it are the
remains of the Chehil Minar, the grand hexastyle Hall of Xerxes,
which must have been one of the most magnificent buildings of ancient
times. This building is marked A on the general plan. It consisted of
a central court, containing thirty-six columns, the distance from
centre to centre of the outside columns being 142 ft. 8 in. This court
was surrounded by walls, of which nothing now remains but the jambs of
three of the doorways. On three sides of this court, to the north,
east and west, were porticoes of twelve columns each, precisely in a
line with those of the central court, the distance from centre to
centre of the columns being 28 ft. 6 in. These columns, both in their
proportions and shape, suggest an imitation of timber construction. On
the south the court was probably terminated by a wall, and Mr.
Fergusson suggests that the corners between the porticoes were filled
up with small chambers. The most striking feature of this hall or
palace must have been its loftiness, the height of the columns varying
from 63 ft. 8 in. to 64 feet from bottom of base to top of capital.
The shafts were slightly tapering and had 48 flutings, and were 4 ft.
6 in. in diameter in the upper part. The bases of the columns show
hardly any variations, and consist of a series of mouldings such as is
shown in Fig. 36; the lowest part of this moulded base is enriched
with leaves, and rests on a low circular plinth at the bottom: the
total height of the base averages 5 feet. The capitals show
considerable variations. Those of the east and west porticoes
represent the heads and fore part of the bodies of two bulls[5] placed
directly on the shaft back to back, with their forelegs doubled under
them, the feet resting on the shaft and the knees projecting; the
total height of these capitals is 7 ft. 4 in. Between the necks of the
bulls rested the wooden girder which supported the cross-bearers of
the roof. In the north portico and, so far as can be ascertained, in
the central court, the shaft of the column was much shorter, and
supported a fantastic elongated capital, consisting of a sort of
inverted cup, supporting an elegant shape much resembling the Egyptian
palm-leaf capital, above which, on all the four sides, are double
spirals resembling the ornaments of the Greek Ionic capital known as
volutes, but placed perpendicularly, and not, as in the Ionic capital,
horizontally. These volutes again may have supported double bulls,
which would make the total height of the columns the same as those of
the east and west porticoes. The doorways have cornices enriched with
leaves, similar to those found at Khorsabad, which have already been
noticed as bearing a decided resemblance to the Egyptian doorways.
[Illustration: FIG. 35b.--COLUMN FROM PERSEPOLIS, EAST AND WEST
PORTICOES.]
[Illustration: FIG. 36.--COLUMN FROM PERSEPOLIS, NORTH PORTICO.]
On other terraces, slightly raised above the main platform, exist the
remains, in a more or less ruined condition, of numerous other courts
and halls, one of which has no less than one hundred columns to
support its roof, but the height of this building was much inferior to
that of the Chehil Minar. The existence of these columns leaves no
doubt that these buildings were covered with flat roofs; and that over
part of them was a raised talar or prayer-platform is rendered
probable from the introduction of such a feature into the sculptured
representation of a palace facade which forms the entrance to the
rock-tomb of Darius, which was cut out of the mountain at the back of
the terrace of Persepolis. The position of this tomb on the general
plan is marked B, and Fig. 37 is a view of the entrance, which was
probably intended as a copy of one of the halls. All the walls of the
palaces were profusely decorated with sculptured pictures, and various
indications occur which induce the belief that painting was used to
decorate those portions of the walls that were not faced with
sculptured slabs.
[Illustration: FIG. 37.--THE ROCK-CUT TOMB OF DARIUS.]
The superior lightness and elegance of the Persepolitan ruins to those
of an earlier epoch will not fail to be noticed, but there is still a
certain amount of barbaric clumsiness discernible, and it is not till
we come to Greek architecture that we see how an innate genius for art
and beauty, such as was possessed by that people, could cull from
previous styles everything capable of being used with effect, and
discard or prune off all the unnecessary exuberances of those styles
which offend a critically artistic taste.
ANALYSIS OF BUILDINGS.
_Plan._
The floor-space of a great Assyrian or Medo-Persian building was laid
out on a plan quite distinct from that of an Egyptian temple; for the
rooms are almost always grouped round quadrangles. The buildings are
also placed on terraces, and no doubt would secure external as well as
internal effects, to which the imposing flights of stairs provided
would largely contribute. We find in Assyrian palaces, halls
comparatively narrow in proportion to their great length, but still so
wide that the roofing of them must have been a serious business, and
we find them arranged side by side, often three deep. In the Persian
buildings, halls nearly square on plan, and filled by a multitude of
columns, occur frequently. In the plan of detached buildings like the
Birs-i-Nimrud, we are reminded of the pyramids of Egypt, which no
doubt suggested the idea of pyramidal monuments to all subsequent
building peoples.
_Walls._
The magnificently worked granite and stones of Egypt give place to
brick for the material of the walls, with the result that a far larger
space could be covered with buildings by a given number of men in a
given time, but of course the structures were far more liable to
decay. Accordingly, sturdy as their walls are, we find them at the
present day reduced to mere shapeless mounds, but of prodigious
extent.
_Roofs._
We can only judge of the roofs by inference, and it has already been
stated that a difference of opinion exists respecting them. It appears
most probable that a large proportion of the buildings must have been
roofed by throwing timber beams from wall to wall and forming a thick
platform of earth on them, and must have been lighted by some sort of
clerestory. At any rate the stone roofs of the Egyptians seem to have
been discarded, and with them the necessity for enormous columns and
piers placed very close together. In some bas-reliefs, buildings with
roofs of a domical shape are represented.
_Openings._
Doorways are the openings chiefly met with, and it is not often that
the superstructure, whether arch or lintel, remains, but it is clear
that in some instances, at least, openings were arched. Great
attention was paid to important doorways, and a large amount of
magnificent sculpture was employed to enrich them.
_Columns._
The columns most probably were of wood in Assyrian palaces. In some of
the Persian ones they were of marble, but of a proportion and
treatment which point to an imitation of forms suitable for wood. The
bases and capitals of these slender shafts are beautiful in
themselves, and very interesting as suggesting the source from which
some of the forms in Greek architecture were derived, and on the
bas-reliefs other architectural forms are represented which were
afterwards used by the Greeks.
_Ornaments._
Sculptured slabs, painted wall decorations, and terra-cotta
ornamentation were used as enrichments of the walls. These slabs,
which have become familiarly known through the attention roused by the
discoveries of Sir A. H. Layard and the specimens sent by him to the
British Museum, are objects of the deepest interest; so are the carved
bulls from gateways. In the smaller and more purely ornamental
decorations the honeysuckle, and other forms familiar to us from their
subsequent adoption by Greek artists, are met with constantly,
executed with great taste.
_Architectural Character._
A character of lavish and ornate magnificence is the quality most
strongly displayed by the architectural remains of Western Asia, and
could we have beheld any one of the monuments before it was reduced to
ruin, we should probably have seen this predominant to an extent of
which it is almost impossible now to form an adequate idea.
FOOTNOTES:
[4] In any such endeavour we should be met by the further difficulty,
that the writers of antiquity differ widely in the precise limits
which they give to the Assyrian Kingdom. Some make it include Babylon,
other writers say that it was bounded on the south by Babylon, and
altogether the greatest confusion exists in the accounts that have
come down to us.
[5] As a matter of fact there is a marked distinction between the
heads of the animals of the east and west porticoes: those of the west
are undoubtedly bulls, but those of the east are grotesque
mythological creatures somewhat resembling the fabled unicorn.
[Illustration: FIG. 38.--SCULPTURED ORNAMENT AT ALLAHABAD.]
CHAPTER IV.
ORIENTAL ARCHITECTURE.
_Hindu Architecture._
Hindu architecture is not only unfamiliar but uncongenial to Western
tastes; and as it has exercised no direct influence upon the later
styles of Europe, it will be noticed in far less detail than the
magnitude and importance of many Indian buildings which have been
examined and measured during the last few years would otherwise claim,
although the exuberant wealth of ornament exhibited in these buildings
denotes an artistic genius of very high order, if somewhat uncultured
and barbaric. As by far the largest number of Hindu buildings are of a
date much later than the commencement of our era, a strict adherence
to chronological sequence would scarcely allow the introduction of
this style so early in the present volume; but we know that several
centuries before Christ powerful kingdoms and wealthy cities existed
in India; and as it seems clear also that in architecture and art, as
well as in manners and customs, hardly any change[6] has occurred
from remote antiquity, it appeared allowable, as well as convenient,
that the short description we have to offer should precede rather than
follow that of the classical styles properly so called. Here, as
always when we attempt to penetrate farther back than a certain date,
all is obscure and mythical. We find lists of kings and dynasties
going back thousands of years before our era, but nothing at all to
enable us to judge how much of this may be taken as solid fact. Mr.
Fergusson believes he has discovered in one date, viz. 3101 B.C., the
first Aryan settlement; but be this as it may, it is useless to look
for any architectural remains until after the death of Gotama Buddha
in 543 B.C.; in fact, it is very doubtful whether remains can be
authenticated until the reign of King Asoka (B.C. 272 to B.C. 236),
when Buddhism had spread over almost the whole of the country, where
it remained the predominant cult until Brahmanism again asserted its
supremacy in the 14th century A.D.
The earliest, or among the earliest, architectural remains are the
inscribed pillars called Lats, which are found in numerous localities,
but have been almost always overthrown. Many of these were erected by
the above-named Asoka: they were ornamented with bands and mouldings
separating the inscriptions, and crowned by a sort of capital, which
was generally in the form of an animal. One very curious feature in
these pillars is the constant occurrence of a precise imitation of
the well-known honeysuckle ornament of the Greeks; this was probably
derived from the same source whence the Greeks obtained it, namely
Assyria. It is most probable that these pillars served to ornament the
approaches to some kind of sacred enclosure or temple, of which,
however, no remains have been found.
[Illustration: FIG. 39.--DAGOBA FROM CEYLON.]
Extremely early in date are some of the tumuli or topes which exist in
large numbers in various parts of India. These are of two kinds,--the
topes or stupas proper, which were erected to commemorate some
striking event or to mark a sacred spot; and the dagobas, which were
built to cover the relics of Buddha himself or some Buddhist saint.
These topes consist of a slightly stilted hemispherical dome
surmounting a substructure, circular in plan, which forms a sort of
terrace, access to which is obtained by steps. The domical shape was,
however, external only, as on the inside the masonry was almost
solid, a few small cavities only being left for the protection of
various jewels, &c. The dome was probably surmounted by a pinnacle, as
shown in Fig. 39. In the neighbourhood of Bhilsa, in Central India,
there are a large number of these topes, of which the largest, that of
Sanchi, measures 121 ft. in diameter and 55 ft. in height; it was
erected by King Asoka.
Two kinds of edifices which are not tombs remain, the chaityas
(temples or halls of assembly) and viharas or monasteries, which were
generally attached to the chaityas. These erections were either
detached or cut in the rock, and it is only the rock-cut ones of which
remains exist of an earlier date than the commencement of the
Christian era. The earliest specimen of a rock-cut chaitya is in the
Nigope cave, near Behar, constructed about 200 B.C. This consists of
two compartments, an outer rectangular one 32 ft. 9 in. by 19 ft.
1 in., and an inner circular one 19 ft. in diameter. The Lomas Rishi
cave is of a slightly later date: both of these rock-cut temples
exhibit in every detail a reproduction of wooden forms. In the doorway
the stone piers slope inwards, just like raking wooden struts, and the
upper part represents the ends of longitudinal rafters supporting a
roof. Later on the builders emancipated themselves to a certain extent
from this servile adhesion to older forms, and Fig. 40 gives a plan
and section of a later chaitya at Karli, near Poona. This bears a
striking resemblance to a Christian basilica:[7] there is first the
forecourt; then a rectangular space divided by columns into nave and
aisles, and terminated by a semicircular apse. The nave is 25 ft.
7 in. wide, and the aisles 10 ft. each, the total length is 126 ft.
Fifteen columns separate the nave from the aisles, and these have
bases, octagonal shafts, and rich capitals. Round the apse the columns
are replaced by piers. The side aisles have flat roofs, and the
central nave a stilted semicircular one, practically a vault, which at
the apse becomes a semicircular dome, under which is the dagoba, the
symbol of Buddhism. The screen separating the forecourt from the
temple itself is richly ornamented with sculpture.
[Illustration: FIG. 40.--CHAITYA NEAR POONA.]
The older viharas or monasteries were also cut in the rock (Figs. 41,
42), and were divided into cells or chambers; they were several
storeys in height, and it is probable that the cells were used by
devout Buddhists as habitations for the purposes of meditation.
[Illustration: FIG. 41.--THE KYLAS AT ELLORA. A ROCK-CUT MONUMENT.]
[Illustration: FIG. 42.--PLAN OF THE KYLAS AT ELLORA. A ROCK-CUT
MONUMENT.]
Among the most remarkable, and in fact almost unique features of
Hindu Architecture are the so-called rails which form enclosures
sometimes round the topes and sometimes round sacred trees.
Occasionally they are found standing alone, though when this is the
case it is probably on account of the object which was the cause of
their erection having perished. They are built of stone, carved so as
to represent a succession of perpendicular and horizontal bands or
rails, separated by a sort of pierced panels. The carving is of the
most elaborate description, both human and animal forms being
depicted with great fidelity, and representations occur of various
forms of tree worship which have been of the greatest use in
elucidating the history of this phase of religious belief.
Occasionally the junctions of the rails are carved into a series of
discs, separated by elaborate scroll-work. These rails are
frequently of very large dimensions, that at Bharhut--which is one of
the most recently discovered--measuring 275 ft. in circumference,
with a height of 22 ft. 6 in. The date of these erections is
frequently very difficult to determine, but the chief authorities
generally concur in the opinion that none are found dating earlier
than about 250 B.C., nor later than 500 A.D., so that it is pretty
certain they must have been appropriated to some form of Buddhist
worship.
[Illustration: FIG. 43.--VIMANA FROM MANASARA.]
All the buildings that we have mentioned were devoted to the worship
of Buddha, but the Jain schism, Brahmanism, and other cults had their
representative temples and buildings, a full description of which
would require a volume many times larger than the present one. Many of
the late detached buildings display rich ornamentation and elaborate
workmanship. They are generally of a pyramidal shape, several storeys
in height, covered with intricately cut mouldings and other fantastic
embellishments.
Columns are of all shapes and sizes, brackets frequently take the
place of capitals, and where capitals exist almost every variety of
fantastic form is found. It has been stated that no fixed laws govern
the plan or details of Indian buildings, but there exists an essay on
Indian Architecture by Ram Raz--himself a Hindoo--which tends to show
that such a statement is erroneous, as he quotes original works of
considerable antiquity which lay down stringent rules as to the
planning of buildings, their height, and the details of the columns.
It is probable that a more extended acquaintance with Hindu literature
will throw further light on these rules.
Of the various invasions which have occurred some have left traces in
the architecture of India. None of these are more interesting than
certain semi-Greek forms which are met with in the Northern Provinces,
and which without doubt are referable to the influence of the invasion
under Alexander the Great. A far more conspicuous and widespread
series of changes followed in the wake of the Mohammedan invasions. We
shall have an opportunity later on of recurring to this subject,[8]
but it is one to which attention should be called at this early stage,
lest it should be thought that a large and splendid part of Indian
architecture had been overlooked.
[Illustration: FIG. 44.--BRACKET CAPITAL.]
[Illustration: FIG. 45.--COLUMN FROM AJUNTA.]
[Illustration: FIG. 46.--COLUMN FROM ELLORA.]
[Illustration: FIG. 47.--COLUMN FROM AJUNTA.]
_Chinese and Japanese Architecture._
Although the Chinese have existed as a nation, continuously for
between two and three thousand years, if not longer, and at a very
early period had arrived at a high state of artistic and scientific
cultivation, yet none of their buildings with which we are acquainted
has any claim on our attention because of its antiquity. Several
reasons may be assigned for this, the principal being that the Chinese
seem to be as a race singularly unsusceptible to all emotions.
Although they reverence their dead ancestors, yet this reverence never
led them, as did that of the Egyptians, Etruscans, and other nations,
to a lavish expenditure of labour or materials, to render their tombs
almost as enduring as the everlasting hills. Though waves of religious
zeal must have flowed over the country when Confucius inculcated his
simple and practical morality and gained an influential following, and
again when Buddhism was introduced and speedily became the religion of
the greater portion of the people, their religious emotion never led
them, as it did the Greeks and the Mediaeval builders, to erect grand
and lasting monuments of sacred art. When most of the Western nations
were still barbarians, the Chinese had attained a settled system of
government, and were acquainted with numerous scientific truths which
we have prided ourselves on rediscovering within the last two
centuries; but no thought ever seems to have occurred to them, as it
did to the Romans, of commemorating any event connected with their
life as a nation, or of handing down to posterity a record of their
great achievements. Peaceful and prosperous, they have pursued the
even tenor of their way at a high level of civilisation certainly, but
at a most monotonous one.
The Buddhist temples of China have a strong affinity to those of
India. The largest is that at Honan, the southern suburb of Canton.
This is 306 ft. long by 174 ft. wide, and consists of a series of
courts surrounded by colonnades and cells for the _bonzes_ or priests.
In the centre of the courtyard is a series of pavilions or temples
connected by passages, and devoted to the worship of the idols
contained in them. On each side of the main court, against the outer
wall, is another court, with buildings round it, consisting of kitchen
and refectories on the one side, and hospital wards on the other. It
is almost certain that this is a reproduction of the earlier forms of
chaityas and viharas which existed in India, and have been already
referred to. The temple of Honan is two storeys in height, the
building itself being of stone, but the colonnade surrounding it is of
wood on marble bases. On the second storey the columns are placed on
two sides only, and not all round. The columns have no capitals, but
have projecting brackets. The roof of each storey projects over the
columns, and has a curved section, which is, in fact, peculiar to
Chinese roofs, and it is enriched at the corners with carved beasts
and foliage. This is a very common form of temple throughout China.
The Taas or Pagodas are the buildings of China best known to
Europeans. These are nearly always octagonal in plan, and consist
generally of nine storeys, diminishing both in height and breadth as
they approach the top. Each storey has a cornice composed of a fillet
and large hollow moulding, supporting a roof which is turned up at
every corner and ornamented with leaves and bells. On the top of all
is a long pole, forming a sort of spire, surrounded by iron hoops, and
supported by eight chains attached to the summit and to each angle of
the roof of the topmost storey. The best known pagoda is that of
Nankin, which is 40 ft. in diameter at its base, and is faced inside
and outside with white glazed porcelain slabs keyed into the brick
core. The roof tiles are also of porcelain, in bands of green and
yellow, and at each angle is a moulding of larger tiles, red and green
alternately. The effect of the whole is wonderfully brilliant and
dazzling. Apart from the coloured porcelain, nearly every portion of a
Chinese temple or pagoda is painted, colour forming the chief means of
producing effect; but as nearly everything is constructed of wood,
there was and is no durability in these edifices.
[Illustration: FIG. 48.--A SMALL PAGODA.]
In public works of utility, such as roads, canals--one of which is
nearly 700 miles in length--and boldly designed bridges, the Chinese
seem to have shown a more enlightened mind; and the Great Wall, which
was built to protect the northern boundary of the kingdom, about 200
B.C., is a wonderful example of engineering skill. This wall, which
varies from 15 to 30 ft. in height, is about 25 ft. thick at the base,
and slopes off to 20 ft. at the top. It is defended by bastions placed
at stated intervals, which are 40 ft. square at the base, and about
the same in height; the wall is carried altogether through a course of
about 1400 miles, following all the sinuosities of the ground over
which it passes. It is a most remarkable fact that a nation should
have existed 2000 years ago capable of originating and completing so
great a work; but it is still more remarkable that such a nation,
possessing moreover, as it does, a great faculty in decorative art
applied to small articles of use and fancy, should be still leading a
populous and prosperous existence, and yet should have so little to
show in the way of architecture, properly so termed, at the present
time.