HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE
HOW TO
STUDY ARCHITECTURE
BY
CHARLES H. CAFFIN
Author of “How to Study Pictures,” “The Story
of French Painting,” “The Story of Dutch Painting,”
“The Story of Spanish Painting,” “Appreciations
of the Drama,” “Art for Life’s Sake,” etc.
AN ATTEMPT TO TRACE THE EVOLUTION OF
ARCHITECTURE AS THE PRODUCT AND EXPRESSION
OF SUCCESSIVE PHASES OF CIVILISATION
_WITH ILLUSTRATIONS_
[Illustration]
NEW YORK
DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY
1917
COPYRIGHT, 1917
BY DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY, Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author gratefully acknowledges the critical assistance given to him
on certain points by Professor William H. Goodyear, W. Harmon Beers and
William Warfield; and his indebtedness to Caroline Caffin for compiling
the index and to Irving Heyl for several architectural drawings. For
some of the illustrations he has put himself under obligations to the
following publications, through the courtesy of the Librarian of the
Metropolitan Museum of Art--“Histoire de l’Art,” by Perrot et Chipiez;
“Assyrian Sculptures,” by Rev. Archibald Paterson; “Monuments Modernes
de la Perse,” by Pascal Coste; “Ruins of the Palace of Diocletian at
Spalato” by R. Adams, and “The Annual of the British School at
Athens.”
CONTENTS
BOOK I
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER PAGE
I PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS 3
II PRIMITIVE STRUCTURES 13
BOOK II
PRE-CLASSIC PERIOD
I EGYPTIAN CIVILISATION 25
II EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 38
III CHALDÆAN, ASSYRIAN AND BABYLONIAN CIVILISATION 56
IV CHALDÆAN, ASSYRIAN AND BABYLONIAN ARCHITECTURE 65
V PERSIAN CIVILISATION 74
VI PERSIAN ARCHITECTURE 80
VII MINOAN OR ÆGEAN CIVILISATION 88
VIII MINOAN OR ÆGEAN ARCHITECTURE 95
BOOK III
CLASSIC PERIOD
I HELLENIC CIVILISATION 105
II HELLENIC ARCHITECTURE 116
III ROMAN CIVILISATION 147
IV ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 163
BOOK IV
POST-CLASSIC PERIOD
I EARLY CHRISTIAN CIVILISATION 187
II EARLY CHRISTIAN AND BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 193
III MUHAMMEDAN, ALSO CALLED SARACENIC CIVILISATION 212
IV MUHAMMEDAN ARCHITECTURE 220
V EARLY MEDIÆVAL CIVILISATION 232
VI EARLY MEDIÆVAL OR ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE 241
BOOK V
GOTHIC PERIOD
I LATER MEDIÆVAL CIVILISATION 263
II GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE 270
III GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE 281
IV GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND AND WALES 287
V GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS,
AND SPAIN 301
VI GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY 310
BOOK VI
THE RENAISSANCE PERIOD
I RENAISSANCE CIVILISATION 319
II RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY 338
III RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY--CONTINUED 357
IV RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE 375
V RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS,
AND SPAIN 391
VI RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND AND AMERICAN
COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE 410
BOOK VII
POST-RENAISSANCE PERIOD
I CLASSICAL AND GOTHIC REVIVALS 435
II THE MODERN SITUATION 454
GLOSSARY 479
INDEX 497
ILLUSTRATIONS
FACING
PAGE
Stonehenge. Salisbury Plain, England 12
Section and Plan of Treasury of Atreus 12
Teocalli or “House of God,” at Guatusco 12
Section of Pyramid 38
Models of Mastabas 38
Types of Egyptian Columns 38
Temple-Tomb of Rameses II at Abou-Simbel 38
Plan of Ramesseum 38
Model of Hypostyle Hall at Karnak 39
Peripteral Sanctuary, at Philæ 39
Temple of Edfou. Entrance to Hypostyle Hall 39
Example of Carved Decoration 39
“Sargon’s Castle.” Conjectured Restoration 66
Part of “Lion Frieze” and “Frieze of Arches” 66
Details of Wall Decoration at Koyunjik 67
Tomb of Darius I, Persepolis 80
Palace of Darius I, Persepolis. Conjectured
Restoration 80
Type of Persian Columns 81
Hall of One Hundred Columns, Persepolis. Conjectured Restoration 81
The Palaces of Persepolis. Conjectured Restoration 81
Wall Decoration in Palace of Cnossus 94
Lion Gateway at Mycenæ 94
Plan of Acropolis of Tiryns 94
Part of Staircase in Palace of Cnossus 95
Council Chamber, with Gypsum Throne, Palace of Cnossus 95
Some Temple Plans--Hellenic 116
Hellenic Orders (Columns and Entablatures) 116
Roman Orders (Columns and Entablatures) 116
Model of the Acropolis 116
Model of the Parthenon (restored) 116
The Parthenon 117
Temples at Pæstum 117
Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, Athens 117
Temple of Nike Apteros, Athens 117
Portico of the Caryatides, Erechtheion 117
Detail of Ornament--Hellenic 117
Statues in the Round of Persephone and Demeter from the
East Pediment of the Parthenon 117
Figures in High Relief from Procession of Worshipers.
Frieze of the Parthenon 117
Plan of House of Pansa, Pompeii 117
Plan of Theatre of Dramyssus 117
Roman Forum, Conjectured Restoration 162
Maison Carrée, Nîmes 162
Arch of Constantine 162
Pantheon, Rome 162
Section of the Pantheon 162
Colosseum, Rome 162
Section of Colosseum 162
Basilica of Constantine 163
Roman Vaulting; from Baths of Diocletian 163
Gothic Vaulting; from Salisbury Cathedral 163
Theatre of Orange, France. Conjectured Restoration 163
Plan of Theatre of Orange, France. Conjectured Restoration 163
Porta Aurea--Golden Gate--Palace of Diocletian 163
Pont-du-Gard, Aqueduct Near Nîmes 163
Peristyle and Court of the House of the Vettii 163
Wall Paintings in the House of the Vettii 163
S. Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna 192
S. Apollinare-in-Classe, Ravenna 192
Church of Kalb-Lauzeh, Syria 193
Church of Turmanin, Syria 193
Tomb of Galla Placidia 202
Interior of San Vitale, Ravenna 202
Diagram Showing Pendentives 202
Section of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, Constantinople 202
Section of S. Sophia, Constantinople 202
Diagram showing how a dome rests on eight piers enclosing
an octagon, by niches or squinches 202
Exterior of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203
Interior of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203
Plan of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203
Plan of S. Mark’s, Venice 203
Exterior of St. Mark’s, Venice 203
Mosque of El Azhar, Cairo 220
Suleimaniyeh or Mosque of Suleiman 220
Arcades of the Mosque, now Cathedral, of Cordova 220
Court of the Lions, Alhambra, Spain 220
Palace of Ispahan, Persia. Conjectured Restoration of
Pavilion of Mirrors and Gardens 221
College of Shah Hussein, Restoration; Ispahan, Persia 221
Mosque of Akbur, Futtehpore-Sikri, India 221
Taj Mahal, Agra, India 221
Pisa Cathedral, Campanile and Baptistry 240
Interior of Pisa Cathedral 240
S. Ambrogio, Milan 240
S. Michele, Pavia 240
The Certosa, or Church of the Carthusian Order, Pavia 240
Church of Vézelay, France 240
Church of Abbaye-aux-Dames, Caen 240
Remains of the Church of Cluny Abbey 240
Church of the Apostles, Cologne 241
Doorway of Salamanca Cathedral 241
Anglo-Saxon Tower, Earl’s Barton, Northamptonshire 241
Iffley Church, near Oxford 241
S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London 241
Nave of Durham Cathedral 241
Peterborough Cathedral 241
English Romanesque Detail 241
Sculptured Details from Amiens Cathedral Doorway 270
Skeleton Structure, showing method of vaulting, by means of
pointed arch, and concentration of thrusts and counter-thrusts 270
Gothic Detail 270
Gothic Detail 270
Gothic Detail 270
Gothic Detail 271
Gothic Detail 271
Gothic Detail 271
Exterior and Interior Views of Lichfield Cathedral Showing
the Nave Widening 271
Notre Dame, Paris, Plan 280
Amiens Cathedral, Plan 280
Amiens Cathedral 280
Notre Dame, Paris 280
Rouen Cathedral 280
Rheims Cathedral 280
Interior of Notre Dame Cathedral 281
Interior of Amiens Cathedral 281
Interior of Rheims Cathedral 281
Hôtel de Bourgtheroulde, Rouen 281
House of Jacques Cœur 281
Sainte Chapelle, Paris 281
Nave of Norwich Cathedral 286
Salisbury Cathedral, Interior 286
York Minster, West Façade 286
Lincoln Cathedral 286
Wells Cathedral, West Façade 287
Winchester Cathedral 287
Henry VII’s Chapel, Westminster 287
Westminster Hall, Timber Roof 287
Strasburg Cathedral 300
Ratisbon Cathedral 300
Town Hall of Munster 300
Cathedral of S. Gudule, Brussels 300
Cologne Cathedral 300
Cloth Hall of Ypres 300
Town Hall, Louvain 301
Town Hall, Brussels 301
Mechlin Cathedral 301
Antwerp Cathedral 301
Toledo Cathedral 301
Burgos Cathedral 301
Siena Cathedral, Interior 310
San Miniato, Florence; Marble Façade 310
Cathedral of Florence and Campanile 310
Doge’s Palace, Venice 310
Siena Cathedral, Campanile attached 311
Orvieto Cathedral, West Façade 311
Milan Cathedral 311
Milan Cathedral, Interior 311
Pazzi Chapel, S. Croce, Florence 338
Santa Maria Novella, Florence 338
Strozzi Palace, Florence 338
Caprarola Palace 338
Gvimane Palace, Venice 339
Basilica Vicenza 339
Doge’s Palace, Venice; Renaissance Portal 339
S. Maria della Salute, Venice 339
Riccardi Palace, Florence 356
Palazzo Vecchio, Florence 356
Ca d’Oro, Venice 356
Vendramini Palace, Venice 356
Farnese Palace, Rome 356
Court of the Farnese Palace 356
Capitol Palaces, Rome 357
Library of S. Mark, Venice 357
S. Spirito, Florence 357
S. Andrea, Mantua 357
S. Peter’s, Rome 357
Interior of S. Peter’s, Rome 357
Château de Blois. Gothic part built by Louis XII 374
Maison François I, Paris 374
Château de Blois. Part added by Francis I 374
Château de Chambord 374
Luxembourg Palace 375
Plan showing growth of Louvre 375
Pavilion de l’Horloge, Louvre 375
Castle of Heidelberg 390
Another View of the Heinrichsbau 390
Bremen City Hall 390
Pellershaus, Nüremburg 390
Antwerp City Hall 390
Liège, Court of Palais de Justice 390
College of Santa Cruz, Valladolid 391
Court of the Casa de Zaporta 391
Court of the College of Alcala de Henares 391
Elevation and Plan of uncompleted Palace Charles V 391
The Escoriál 391
Plan of The Escoriál 391
Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire 410
Banqueting Hall, Whitehall 410
Haddon Hall, Derbyshire 410
Haddon Hall; the Long Gallery 410
S. Paul’s Cathedral, London 411
S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside, London 411
Old Charlton, Kent 411
Georgian Chimney piece and overmantel 411
Christ Church, Philadelphia 428
Home of the Poet Longfellow, Cambridge, Mass. 428
Washington’s Home at Mount Vernon 429
Another Southern Colonial example, Montgomery, Ala. 429
La Madeleine, Paris 436
S. George’s Hall, Liverpool 436
Panthéon, Paris 436
Arc de l’Etoile, Paris 436
Opera House, Paris 436
State House, Boston 436
Capitol at Washington 436
City Hall, New York 437
St. Thomas, New York 437
Houses of Parliament 437
Plan of the Houses of Parliament 437
Scotland Yard 454
Woodburn Hall, New Windsor, N. Y. 454
Trinity Church, Boston 454
County Buildings, Pittsburg 454
The Breakers, Newport, R. I. 454
Detail of residence of Mr. Thomas Hastings, Westbury, Long
Island 454
Schiller Theatre Building, Chicago 455
Woolworth Building 455
Steel Cage Construction. Scene in lower New York 455
BOOK I
HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE
CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
Architecture, Sculpture, and Painting share the distinctive title of the
Fine Arts, or, as the Italians and French more fitly call them, the
Beautiful Arts; the arts, that is to say, of beautiful design. They are
known by their beauty.
By their beauty they appeal to the eye and through the eye to the mind,
stirring in us emotions or feelings of pleasure--a higher kind of
pleasure than that which is derived solely from the gratification of the
senses--the kind which is distinguished as æsthetic.
The term æsthetic is derived from a Greek word, meaning perception.
Originally it described the act of perceiving “objects” by means of the
senses--“objects” meaning anything that can be perceived through the
senses. But the term æsthetic has come to have another meaning,
especially in respect to sense-perceptions derived from seeing and
hearing. It means that the perception gives us pleasure, because it
stirs in us a sense of beauty. It may do so without any conscious
activity on the part of our mind. We may be absorbed in the delight of
the sensation; or it may appeal to our mind--to our memory or
imagination--in such a way as to set us thinking and feeling not only
about the immediate “object” but also about something which our mind
associates with it.
For example: by simple sense-perception we discover that one tree is
taller than another, or that one tree is an elm, another a silver birch.
Our perception may stop there; but not if we are in a mood to
contemplate. Then the perception that one tree is taller than the other
may be followed by the feeling that the taller tree gives us more
satisfaction. It may seem to us to be a better proportioned tree: its
parts are more pleasingly related to the whole mass; or it may seem to
be in a fitter relation to the spot it occupies and to the other
“objects” near it. Again, having ascertained by pure sense-impression
that one tree is an elm and the other a silver birch, we may find
ourselves thinking about the _qualities_ of difference presented by the
two trees. With what splendid assurance the elm trunk rears up! How
majestically the branches radiate from it and bear their glorious masses
of abundant foliage! On the other hand, how dainty are the stems and
branches of the silver birch, how delicately graceful the sprays of tiny
leaves! “How sensitive!” perhaps we say. For to our imagination the
slender tree may seem to be endowed with senses that respond to every
movement of the air, to every glancing of the sunlight.
In all these cases we have gone beyond mere sense-perception. We are no
longer interested only in the “object.” Our interest has become
_subjective_. We are interested in the _subject_ not the object of the
verb, to perceive--the subject _who_ perceives, in this case, ourself;
how the thing affects oneself; how it stirs in one a sense of beauty. By
this time our thoughts may have been withdrawn from the concrete object
and have passed on to “abstract” ideas, suggested by the object. It is
grandeur of growth, as embodied in the elm, fragile tenderness, as
expressed in the birch, that absorb our thought; and the wonder also how
qualities so different can survive the rude shocks of nature, and find,
each its special function in the scheme of nature’s beauty.
In thus feeling external objects through our own experience of life and
our own sense of beauty, we are employing the sense-perception that is
specially called _æsthetic_. And it is in the degree to which objects of
architecture, sculpture, or painting have the capacity of stimulating
this _æsthetic appreciation_ that they properly belong in the company of
the Fine Arts.
* * * * *
Architecture is the science and art of building structures that, while
in most cases they serve a useful purpose, are in all cases designed and
built with a view to beauty. Their motive is beauty as well as utility.
In certain instances, as, for example, the triumphal arch, the motive
may seem to have been solely one of beauty. On the other hand, when we
recall that the arch was erected as a memorial to some great man or some
great exploit--the Arch of Titus, for example, commemorating this
general’s capture of Jerusalem--the imposing dignity of the structure,
by compelling attention and exciting admiration, would actually serve
the purpose for which it was erected.
Indeed, the distinction which people are apt to draw between the
_useful_ and the _beautiful_ is not necessarily so sharp as is supposed
and is largely founded upon ignorance or a mistaken attitude toward
life. The tendency to be satisfied with the utility of a thing and to
regard beauty as a fad, impractical and wasteful, shows that, although
our civilisation may have progressed in some respects, it has fallen
back in others. For there is nothing more surely certain in the history
of human progress, than that, while primitive man had to exercise his
ingenuity in providing for the necessities of life and in the making of
tools, implements, utensils, and so forth to achieve his needs, he was
not satisfied that his work should be merely useful. He had a mind to
make it pleasing in shape and by means of ornament. And this attention
to beauty grew as men grew in civilisation, becoming most conspicuous as
their civilisation reached its highest point; and continued through the
ages, until machinery began to replace the individual craftsman.
For the individual craftsman, responsible for making a thing from start
to finish, must, if he is worth a hill of beans, take a personal pride
in making it as well as he can. As the Bible relates of the Supreme
Creator, “And God saw everything that he had made and, behold, it was
very good.” And the craftsman, so long as he is free to create out of
his own knowledge and his own feeling, must be able to feel this,
because there is an instinct in him, an imperative need of his own
nature, that he shall be proud of his work. It is a wonderful fact of
human nature that when it works freely, putting forth all its
capacities, it is prompted by this instinct, not only to make useful
things but also to make them well and as beautiful as may be.
But gradually machinery took away the workman’s control of his work. He
ceased to design, lay out, and carry through all the details of his work
to a finish. He has come to be intrusted with only a part of the
operation, and that is performed under the control of a machine that
turns out the work with soulless uniformity. The craftsman has
degenerated into a repeater of partial processes; he has become the
servant of a machine; a cog in a vast mechanical system. And, with the
development of high power machines the output of production has been
increased, until _quantity_ rather than quality has tended to become the
ambition of the system.
It has followed as a logical result of this taking away from millions of
men and women the privilege of being individual craftsmen, creators of
their own handiwork, that they have grown indifferent to the quality of
the work turned out; taste, which means the ability to discriminate
between qualities, has diminished and a general indifference to the
element of beauty has ensued.
* * * * *
Of all the Fine Arts, Architecture is closest to the life of man. It has
been developed out of the primitive necessity of providing shelter from
the elements and protection against the assaults of all kinds of
aggressors. And chief among the aggressors against which primitive man
sought to defend himself were the mysterious forces of nature which his
imagination pictured as evil spirits. To ward off these and to enlist
the support of kindly spirits represented a necessity of life that
developed through fetish worship into some positive conception of
religion. This need was embodied in structures, which, originating in
the selection or erection of a single stone, gradually became composed
of an aggregation of stones variously disposed, in heaps, in geometric
groups of single stones, or in the placing of stones horizontally upon
two or more vertical supporting stones.
In these crude devices to mark the burial places of dead heroes and to
provide for the necessities of religion, primitive man used the stones
as he found them, with a preference for those of enormous size, to
ensure permanency. Meanwhile, in the huts that he erected for the
living, it is reasonable to suppose that, when available, the more
perishable material of timber was employed. And here, again, he would
use at first the smaller limbs, planting them in the ground in a circle
or square and drawing them together at the top, so that they took the
shape of a heap of stones; and covering them with skins, so that they
became the prototype of the tent. Then gradually he would employ stouter
timbers, planting them upright and keeping them in place at the top with
horizontal timbers. On these would be laid transverse beams to form a
roof; the spaces between the beams, as between the uprights of the
walls, being filled in with wattles of twigs or reeds and rendered still
more impervious to weather by a coating of clay or mud.
The efforts of primitive builders, it is true, are rather of
archæological than of architectural significance, yet they have this
much to do with architecture, that in them are to be discovered the
rudiments of the art. For by the time that man had superimposed a stone
horizontally upon two vertical ones, he had hit upon the principle of
construction, now variously styled “post and lintel” or “post and beam”
or “trabeated,” that is to say, “beam” construction. The embryo was
conceived that in the fulness of time would be developed into the
trabeated design of the Egyptian temple and the column-and-entablature
design of Classic architecture. From the colossal, monolithic form,
still preserved, for example, in Stonehenge, there is a direct
progression to the highly organised perfection of the Parthenon.
It is this fact that makes the study of architecture so vitally
interesting. Its evolution has proceeded, stage by stage, with the
evolution of civilisation. Having its roots in necessity, it has
expressed the phases of civilisation more directly and intimately than
have the other Fine Arts; while the comparative durability of the
materials in which it has been embodied has caused more of its records
to survive. Even out of the fragments of architecture it is possible for
the imagination to visualise epochs of civilisation long since buried in
the past; while the memorials that have been preserved in comparative
integrity stand out through the misty pages of history as object lessons
of distinct illumination.
* * * * *
Accordingly, one purpose of this book represents an attempt to study the
evolution of architecture in relation to the phases of civilisation that
it immediately embodied; to find in the monuments of architecture so
many “sermons in stone”--discourses upon the character, conditions of
life, the methods and the ideals of the men who reared and shaped them.
And this involves the second purpose, that we shall try to study
architecture as it actually evolved in practice. Remembering that it
originated in the need of making provision for certain specific
purposes, in a word, that its motive primarily was practical, moreover,
that from the first it has been the product of invention, we will try to
study it in relation to man’s gradual mastery of material and the
processes of building. We will regard architecture in its fundamental
significance as the science and art of building; tracing, as far as is
possible, the stages by which man has met the problems imposed upon him
by the purpose of the structure and by the conditions of the material
available; how he gradually surmounted the difficulties of building,
step by step improving upon his devices and processes and thereby
creating new principles of construction, and, further, how the practical
operations of one race and period were carried on, modified, or
developed by other races, under different conditions and in response to
differences of needs and ideals.
And, while thus studying architecture as the gradual solution of
practical problems of construction we will also keep constantly in mind
the stages by which as man’s skill in building progressed, so also did
his desire to make his structures more and more expressive of his higher
consciousness of human dignity. How age after age built not only to meet
the needs of living but also to embody its ideals of the present and the
future life; how hand in hand with growing skill in workmanship was
evolved superior achievement in artistic beauty.
Our methods of study shall follow, as far as possible, the architect’s
order of procedure. Given a site and the commission of erecting thereon
a building for a specific purpose, the architect first concerns himself
with the _plans_: the _ground plan_, and, if the building be of more
than one story, the several _floor plans_. He lays out in the form of a
diagram the lines that enclose the building and those that mark the
divisions and subdivisions; indicating by breaks in the lines the
openings of doors and windows and by isolated figures the position of
columns or piers which he may be going to use for support of ceilings
and roofs. The disposition of all these particulars will be determined
not only by the purpose of the building, but also by the character of
the site and by the nature of the materials and method of construction
that the architect purposes to employ.
Then, having acquired the habit of thinking of a building as having
originated in a plan, we will follow the building as it grows up out of
the plan, taking vertical form in what the architect calls the
_elevation_, or, when he is speaking specifically of the outside of the
building, the _façades_. Sometimes we shall study one of the diagrams,
which he calls a _section_, when he imagines his building intersected by
a vertical plane that cuts the structure into two parts. The one between
the spectator and the cutting plane is supposed to be removed, and thus
is laid bare the system of the interior construction-work.
In studying the exterior of a building, therefore, we shall keep in mind
the interior disposition, arising out of the planning, and acquire the
habit of looking on the outside of a building as logically related to
the interior. The design of a building will come to mean to us not a
mere pattern of façade, arbitrarily invented, but an arrangement of
vertical and horizontal features, of solid surfaces and open spaces,
that has grown out of the interior conditions and proclaims them.
In a word, we shall regard a work of architecture as an organic growth;
rooted in the plan, springing up in accordance with constructive
principles; each part having its separate function, and all co-ordinated
in harmonious relation to the unity of the whole. For we shall find that
_unity of design_ is a special element of excellence in architecture; a
unity secured by the relations of _proportion, harmony and rhythm_
established between the several parts and between the parts and the
whole. And, since architecture is primarily an art of practical
utility, all these relations are equally determined by the principle of
_fitness_; in order that each and every part may perform most
efficiently its respective function in the combined purpose of the whole
edifice. For this is the first and final criterion of organic
composition.
[Illustration: STONEHENGE. SALISBURY PLAIN, ENGLAND
PRIMITIVE USE OF POST AND BEAM CONSTRUCTION. PP. 8, 16]
[Illustration: SECTION AND PLAN OF “TREASURY OF ATREUS”
AT MYCENÆ. EXAMPLE OF “THOLOS” OR BEE-HIVE CONSTRUCTION. P. 14]
[Illustration: TEOCALLI OR “HOUSE OF GOD”
AT GUATUSCO, COSTA RICA. P. 20]
CHAPTER II
PRIMITIVE STRUCTURES
The various remains that exist of prehistoric structures, though
scattered widely over different parts of the world, present a general
similarity of purpose and design.
The earliest examples of domestic buildings are the lake-dwellings which
have been discovered at the bottom of some of the Swiss lakes, as well
as in other countries both in the Eastern and Western hemispheres. They
consist of huts, rudely constructed of timber, erected on piles,
sometimes in such numbers as to form a fair-sized village. Their purpose
was apparently to afford security against sudden attacks of enemies, the
danger of wild beasts and snakes and the malaria and fever of the swampy
shores, while bringing the inhabitants nearer to their food supply and
offering a crude but ready means of sanitation. The system still
survives among the natives of many tropical countries and has its
analogy in the boat-houses that throng the Canton River in China.
More important, however, archæologically as well as in relation to the
subsequent story of building, as it gradually developed into the art of
architecture are: the single huge stone, known as a _Menhir_; the
_Galgal_ or _Cairn_ of stones piled in a heap; the _Tumulus_ or
_Barrow_, composed of a mound of earth and the _Cromlech_.
The single stone seems to have been regarded as an object of veneration
and a fetish to ward off evil spirits. It may have been the primitive
origin of the Egyptian _obelisk_, the Greek _stele_ and the modern
tombstone. From the galgal and barrow may have been developed the
pyramids of Egypt and the _truncated_ pyramid which we shall find to be
the foundation platforms of temples in various parts of the world while
the cromlech is the prototype of temples.
Two stones were set upright and a third was placed upon the top of them.
This represents in rudimentary form the so-called “post and beam”
principle of temple construction. Sometimes two or four uprights were
surmounted by a large flat stone. It had the appearance of a gigantic
table and is called a _Dolmen_. It is conjectured that this was a form
of sepulchral-chamber, in which the corpse was laid, being thus
protected from the earth that was heaped around the stones into a mound.
If so, the _Dolmen_ is the origin of the sepulchral chamber that was
embedded in the Egyptian pyramid.
Meanwhile, an intermediary stage between the highly developed _pyramids_
and the primitive _dolmen_ is represented in the =Altun-Obu Sepulchre=,
near =Kertsch= in the Crimea. Here the mound is faced with layers of
shaped stones, with which also the chamber and the passage leading to it
are lined. The ceilings of both are constructed of courses of stone,
each of which projects a little beyond the one beneath it, until the
diminishing space is capped by a single stone. In the angle of masonry
thus formed is discoverable the rudimentary beginning of the arch.
It is also convenient here to note, though it anticipates our story, the
more elaborate example of this principle of roofing which is shown in
the so-called =Treasury of Atreus= at =Mycenæ= in Greece. In this instance,
moreover, there is a farther approximation toward the arch, since the
projections of the stones have been cut so as to present a continuous
line. And these contour lines are slightly concave and meet at the top
in a point, for which reason this class of tomb is known as _bee-hive_.
Another form of this method of angular roofing is seen in an =Arch at
Delos=, which is part of a system of masonry that is known as
_Cyclopean_, after the name of the one-eyed giant whom Ulysses and his
followers encountered in Sicily, during their return from Troy. For the
masonry is composed of large blocks of unshaped stone, the interstices
of which are filled in with smaller stones. Here, too, the actual arch
is composed of a repetition of huge, upright monoliths, supporting a
series of single blocks, set up one against the other at an angle.
While, however, these primitive forms of roof construction prefigure the
later development of the true arch, the student is warned in advance
that they represent rather a feeling of the need of some such method of
construction than any approach to a solution of the problem. For the
latter, as we shall find later, consisted in discovering how to
counteract the thrust of the arch; its tendency, that is, to press
outward and collapse; whereas in the primitive construction this danger
was evaded by embedding the roof in a mass of masonry or earth that made
lateral strains impossible. The system, in fact, was more like that
employed in shoring up the excavations in modern tunnelling and mining.
Meanwhile, this rude method of spanning an opening with more than one
piece of stone was the primitive germ of the later development of arch,
vault, and dome construction, just as the placing of a single horizontal
stone on two upright ones is the prototype of columns and entablature.
Thus the instinct of man, in earliest times, reached out toward the two
fundamental principles of architectural construction.
The most interesting examples of primitive structure are the so-called
_Cromlechs_, of which that of =Stonehenge=, in England, is the best
preserved. The unit of this and like remains is the “post and beam”
formation, composed of a block of stone, supported on two uprights. In
the case of Stonehenge this formation was repeated so as to form a
continuous circle one hundred feet in diameter. Within this was a
concentric circle, composed of smaller slabs, which enclosed a series of
five separate post and beam structures on a horse-shoe plan. The latter
is repeated by another series of slabs and in the centre stands the flat
altar stone. Seventeen stones of the outer circle, varying from sixteen
to eighteen feet in height, are still standing and in part connected by
their beam slabs.
This impressive memorial stands on Salisbury Plain, eight miles north of
the cathedral city of Salisbury, in the neighbourhood of which are many
barrows. Was it then the temple of a burying place of mighty chieftains
or was it erected in memory of some great victory in honour of the dead
heroes and the nation’s god? According to Geoffrey of Monmouth (<small>A.D.</small>
1154) who is supposed to have compiled much of his history from Celtic
legends, Stonehenge is a Celtic Memorial, erected to the glory of the
Celtic Zeus.
Rhys, in his “Celtic Heathendom,” accepts the probability of this
account and adds: “What sort of temple could have been more appropriate
for the primary god of light and of the luminous heavens than a spacious
open-air enclosure of a circular form like Stonehenge? Nor do I see any
objection to the old idea that Stonehenge was the original of the famous
temple of Apollo in the island of the Hyperboreans, the stories about
which were based in the first instance most likely on the journal of
Pytheas’ travels.” Pytheas was a Greek navigator and astronomer of the
second half of the fourth century <small>B.C.</small>, who was a native of the Greek
colony of Massilia (Marseilles) and visited the coasts of Spain, Gaul,
and Britain.
Situated some twenty miles to the north of Stonehenge is the =Abury= or
=Avebury= monument. Its remains comprise two circles, formed of _menhirs_,
which are enclosed within a large outer circle of _monoliths_, about
1250 feet in diameter. This was further surrounded by a moat and
rampart, which suggest that the structure may have served at once the
purposes of a place of assembly and a stronghold.
At =Carnac=, in the old territory of Brittany, in France, are the remains
of about 1000 _menhirs_, some of which reach a height of 16 feet,
disposed in parallel straight rows, forming avenues nearly two miles
long. They are unworked blocks of granite, set in the ground at their
smaller ends. The neighbourhood also abounds with _tumuli_, _dolmens_,
and later monuments that belong to the Polished Stone Age.
Furthermore, remains of such monuments as we have been describing are
found in Scandinavia, Ireland, North Germany (in Hannover and the Baltic
Provinces); also in India and Asia Minor, in Egypt, on the northwest of
Africa and in the region about the Atlas Mountains. This fact, assuming
that the monuments are of Celtic origin, testifies to the wide-spread
migrations of this important branch of the Indo-European family which
in prehistoric times swept westward in successive waves. It is known
that this race also overflowed into Northern Italy and Spain. That none
of their monuments of the Rough Stone and Polished Stone ages exist in
these countries seems to point to the migration thither having been made
at a later period.
From the time that the Celtic race finds its way into recorded history
it has been recognised as pre-eminently characterised by artistic
genius. The rude _menhirs_, under the combined influences of
Christianity and art were in time replaced by _Stone Crosses_ that in
form closely approximate the thickset simplicity of the monolith, but
are embellished with carved ornament. And the latter in its detail is
evidently akin to the motives of decoration found upon the weapons and
earthenware of the Bronze Age, combined with the interlace of lines,
suggested by the example of weaving, and the use of motives derived from
plant forms. These same principles of decoration were applied to the
metal-work in which the Celt excelled and later to the decorated
manuscripts in which he reached so high a degree of artistry. The Celtic
artists in time also introduced human and animal figures into their
designs, but always treated them solely as motives of decoration and
never with the purpose of representing them naturally.
The prevalence of these decorative motives in ancient Asiatic and
European ornament may have been due to the extended migrations of the
Celts. But not necessarily; for they are equally to be found in the
primitive ornament of the South Sea Islanders, North American Indians,
and the inhabitants of Peru, Mexico, and Central America. Primitive man,
in fact, shows a tendency to similarity of motives and methods at
corresponding stages of his evolution.
* * * * *
In the last three countries have been discovered some of the most
remarkable remains of the Polished Stone Age and the Bronze Age. For it
was to this stage--after how many centuries of development is only a
matter of conjecture--that the mighty nations of the Incas, Aztecs, and
others had attained, when the Spanish invaders in the sixteenth century
overcame them and wiped out their civilisations.
Hitherto the most famous example has been the ruins of =Cuzco=, the
imperial city of the Incas in Peru, which was captured by Pizarro; but
the exploration of Professor Hiram Bingham has recently unearthed, also
in Peru, =Machu Picchu=, a city of refuge, perched almost inaccessibly on
the heights of the Andes. It is the belief of the explorer that this is
the traditional city of Tampu Tocco, to which a highly civilised tribe
retreated, when they were hard pressed by barbarian enemies and from
which, legend says, they descended later to conquer Peru and found the
city of Cuzco, under the leadership of “three brothers who went out from
three windows.” Now Tampa means a place of temporary abode and Tocco
means windows; and in the principal plaza of this newly discovered city
has been found a temple with three windows.
Thus it is possible that it was actually a deserted city at the time of
the Spanish invasion, held in reverence as the cradle city of the Incas.
Anyhow, it escaped the knowledge and the ravages of the Spaniards and
retains to-day its primitive state, unmixed with the additions of any
subsequent civilisation.
It occupies an immense area, only rivalled by that of Cuzco, and is
constructed of stones, many of which weigh several tons, hewn into shape
with stone hammers. Large portions of the mountain sides are built up
with terraces, which were used for agricultural purposes and suggest an
analogy with the “hanging gardens” of Babylon. No less than a hundred
flights of steps connect the various parts of the city, which is divided
into wards or “clan groups” by walled enclosures, enclosing houses and
sometimes a central place of worship. The typical design of the houses
is much like that of an Irish cabin--a ground story and a half story
with gabled ends, each pierced by a small window. The wooden roofs have
disappeared, but the stones, bored with a hole, to which the timbers
were lashed, are still in place. In the burial caves bronze objects of
fine workmanship have been discovered.
Among other noted remains of early buildings is the =Teocalli= or “House
of the God” of =Guatusco= in Costa Rica. It shows a truncated pyramid of
masonry, rising in steps, the top forming a platform on which the temple
stands. A still more important example of this form of structure must
have been the =Teocalli= of =Tenochtitlan=, the ancient name of Mexico City.
Built about 1446, it was destroyed by the Spaniards and part of its site
is now occupied by the Cathedral. According to accounts it comprised a
truncated pyramid, measuring at the top, which was 86 feet from the
ground, 325 by 250 feet. In the ascent it was necessary to pass five
times round the structure by a series of terraces. On the platform were
several ceremonial buildings, the terrible image of the god
Huitzilopochtli, supposed to be the one that is now in the Museum of
Mexico City, and the sacrificial stone. Upon the latter were sacrificed
immense numbers of human victims; report saying, though no doubt with
exaggeration, that at the dedication of the temple seventy thousand were
slaughtered to appease the sanguinary appetite of this hideous idol.
The exteriors of the latest remains of Central America and Mexican
primitive civilisation are embellished with ornament, the motives of
which exhibit curved and rectangular meanders and interlacings, derived
from the example of weaving and plaiting, as well as vegetable and
animal forms. Often, as in the =Casa de Monjas= in =Yucatan=, the ornament
is so profuse that it obscures the character of the structure, while the
forms are fantastic and extravagant and in some instances horribly
grotesque. Their intention apparently was to strike awe into the
spectator.
Most of what we have been studying in this chapter comes under the head
of archaeology rather than of art. Nevertheless, since it represents the
gradual approach of civilisation toward the artistic conception, it is
well worth attention.
BOOK II
PRE-CLASSIC PERIOD
CHAPTER I
EGYPTIAN CIVILISATION
The most ancient civilisation known to us is that of Egypt, and the
knowledge of it is mainly derived from its architectural remains and the
sculpture, painting, and inscriptions with which they are decorated. In
addition, there are the records written upon papyri, the Biblical books
of Exodus, and the history of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who lived
about 250 <small>B.C.</small> By this time Egypt had been subdued by Alexander the
Great and had passed under the rule of the Ptolemies. So Manetho wrote
in Greek, but only fragments of his work have survived, through
quotations made from it by Eusebius, Josephus, and other historians.
It is from all these materials that scholars have endeavoured to piece
together some sort of connected history of the period covered by
Manetho; the difficulty being increased by the fact that the Egyptian
system of chronology reckoned by dynasties and computed the time by the
years of the reigning sovereign, beginning anew with each succession.
Furthermore, the inscriptions omit references to any interruptions that
occurred in the sequence of the dynasties; recording only the periods of
Egyptian supremacy and leaving out those in which the country suffered
from the domination, short or long, of foreign conquerors.
Accordingly, while Manetho names the first ruler of the First Dynasty as
Menes, there is nothing but the conjecture of scholars as to the date;
and the latter has been variously estimated as from 3892 to 5650 years
before Christ.
It will be a help at the outset to summarise the Dynasties under two
heads: (A) those of Independent Egypt; (B) those of Subject Egypt.
A. Dynasties of Independence.
1. I-X--THE ANCIENT EMPIRE; Capital, Memphis in
Lower Egypt. Lasted about 1500 years.
2. XI-XIII--THE MIDDLE EMPIRE, or First Theban
Monarchy; Capital, Thebes in Upper Egypt.
Lasted about 900 years.
3. XIV-XVII--Hyksos Invaders occupy Lower
Egypt; the Egyptian princes rule as vassal
princes in Upper Egypt: from 400-500 years.
4. XVIII-XX--THE NEW EMPIRE or Second Theban
Monarchy. The Great Epoch of Egyptian
power and art. Lasted about 600 years and
ended about 1000 <small>B.C.</small>
B. Dynasties of Subjection.
5. XXI-XXXII--THE PERIOD OF DECADENCE under
various foreign rulers; sometimes called the
Saitic Period, because the first conquerors, the
Libyans, made their capital at Sais. Lasted
from about 1000-324 <small>B.C.</small>
6. XXXIII--THE PTOLEMAIC PERIOD of Greek rule,
following the Conquest of Egypt by Alexander
the Great; 324-31 <small>B.C.</small>
7. XXXIV--THE ROMAN RULE: Egypt a Province
of the Roman Empire; 31 <small>B.C.</small> to 395 <small>A.D.</small> At
the latter date it became a part of the Eastern
Roman Empire.
In 389 the emperor, Theodosius, issued an edict proclaiming that
Christianity was to be recognised as the religion of Egypt. In
consequence of this change all knowledge of the old form of writing
gradually disappeared and the antiquities of Egypt remained a sealed
book for some fourteen centuries.
* * * * *
The commencement of the modern interest in Egypt, as a mine of
historical, archæological, and artistic lore, dates from Napoleon
Bonaparte’s invasion, for he took with him a body of savants to explore
the topography and nature of the country and its antiquities. The
results of their labours were published in 1809-13 in twenty-five
volumes, illustrated with 900 engravings.
Meanwhile, in 1799, Captain Boussard, an engineer under Bonaparte, had
discovered in the trenches a tablet of black basalt, inscribed with
three kinds of writing, one of which was Greek. From the name of the
village near which it was found it is called the _Rosetta Stone_ and is
now in the British Museum. Various attempts were made to decipher
through the Greek the other two scripts, which were, respectively,
hieroglyphic and the demotic or popular writing-form of ancient Egypt.
Finally, the clue was discovered by the French scholar, Champollion. He
found there had been three kinds of characters which represented
successive developments of one system of writing: that in the
hieroglyphic each letter was represented by a picture-form; that in the
hieratic or priestly writing, these forms were represented in a freer
and more fluent way, which was further simplified in the demotic
characters, used generally by the scribes. Two of these had been
repeated as nearly as possible in the Greek text. It is out of this
discovery that Egyptology, or the science which concerns itself with
the writing, language, literature, monuments, and history of ancient
Egypt, is being gradually developed. Yet the subject is still involved
in great uncertainty, owing to the difficulty in discovering principles
of grammar, so that the translations of one scholar vary from those of
others and all reach only the general sense, without assurance of
accuracy.
* * * * *
The civilisation of a country is always largely determined by its
geographical character and the latter, in the case of Egypt, is of
exceptional significance. Herodotus called Egypt the “Gift of the Nile.”
The great river created it and has continued to preserve it. For the
country comprises a narrow strip of soil varying from 4 to 16 miles in
width, bordering the two sides of the stream, and extending in ancient
times, as far as the second cataract, a distance of some 900 miles;
approximating, that is to say, the distance from New York to Chicago or
from London to Florence. It is bounded by rocky hills, and, as it
reaches the Mediterranean, fans out into a delta of flat lands, the
various streams being kept in place by dykes. The only thing that has
saved this country from being swallowed up in the desert is the annual
rise of the river, succeeding the tropical rains in the interior and the
melting of the snow in the mountains of Abyssinia. This floods the
lowlands and leaves behind an alluvial deposit, so richly fertile that
the soil, warmed by constant sunshine, yields three harvests annually.
Meanwhile, it is a remarkable fact that the records of ancient times
tally with those of to-day, both showing that the amount of the rise
varies but little from year to year.
Before considering how these natural features of the country affected
the civilisation of its inhabitants, a fact is to be noted. At the point
of time when Manetho commenced his history of the Egyptians, variously
estimated from about 4000 to about 6000 years before the Christian Era,
they appear as a people already possessed of a high degree of
civilisation, surrounded by inferior races. An immense interval of
progress separates them from the earliest conditions that we considered
in the previous chapter. By what stages did they reach this footing of
superiority and through what length of time; moreover, what was the
origin of their race? To these questions of profound interest there is
no answer forthcoming. Some recent scholars are disposed to believe that
the civilisation of Egypt, as we first meet with it, had been preceded
by a still more remote civilisation in Babylonia; but as yet they have
not shaken the accepted view that priority in civilisation belongs to
the Land of the Nile. So far as knowledge exists, civilisation appeared
first in Egypt and by a wonderful combination of circumstances,
continued up to historic times.
The tenacity of the civilisation of the Egyptians is a counterpart of
the tenacity of character of the people, as a result primarily of their
natural surroundings. Within the limits of Upper and Lower, that is to
say of Southern and Northern Egypt, the Nile has no tributaries.
Consequently, there was at first no urge to the inhabitants to push
outward; and every inducement to cling to their own strip of territory.
Moreover, since the periodic river floods were constant, there was every
inducement, nay almost necessity, that they should cling to the methods
by which they had learned to utilise them. Hence, _conservatism_ was
forced upon them and became ingrained in their character and
institutions. It was further encouraged by their isolation; for the
adjoining country was desert, meagrely occupied by nomad tribes.
Accordingly, that tendency of every nation to consider itself the salt
of the earth and especially favoured of the gods seemed justified
abundantly in their case.
Again, their dependence on the Nile early taught them the habit of
noting the seasons, while the necessity of husbanding the water in
reservoirs and by irrigation made them skilled in engineering and
generally resourceful. And these characteristics of method and
constructiveness were reflected in the social organisation.
The King was the supreme head of the whole system, descendant of the
Sun-god, Ra, the individual embodiment of the nation’s greatness, while
beneath him the people were divided into the official class, middle
class, and slaves. The first included generals, high-priests, officers,
physicians, overseers, district-chiefs, judges, master-builders,
scribes, and many others--officialdom being spun like a web over the
life of the people. The middle class, composed of merchants, traders,
ordinary priests, artisans, free working potters, carpenters, joiners,
smiths, and agriculturists, enjoyed many of the privileges of the upper
classes, but were not permitted to erect tombs, though their place of
burial might be marked by a _stele_ with inscriptions. The slaves were
mere hewers of wood and drawers of water.
Title to all land, except that attached to the temples, was vested in
the King and the land was worked for the State by slaves or let out at
an annual rental. In connection with this subject compare the story of
Joseph, especially Genesis xli.
Each administrative department had its own troops--or, to use the
modern word, _corvée_--of slaves, under an overseer who kept tally of
work done and rations distributed. It was the troop, not the individual,
that constituted the unit. Agriculturists ranked higher than the
artisans; although the work of the latter was highly esteemed. The
weavers made baskets, mats, and boats of papyrus leaves and produced
linen of the finest quality as well as coarser grades. The carpenter,
notwithstanding the scarcity of timber, did creditable work with the
simplest kind of tools. Little variation was attempted by the potters in
the forms of vessels, which were crude but often finished with fine
glazes. The metal workers used gold, silver, bronze, iron, and tin;
silver exceeding gold in value. Whence they procured tin is unknown, but
the other metals came from the mines of Sinai and Nubia.
The processes of agriculture were of the simplest. The plough was formed
of a sharpened stake, dragged by oxen; the crops were cut with sickles,
and the grain was winnowed by casting it in the air, after which it was
stored in large, tunnel-shaped receptacles, filled from the top by a
ladder. While the Egyptians prided themselves on their immense herds of
cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, and asses, the shepherds, living in the
remote marshes, were “an abomination unto the Egyptians” (Genesis xlvi,
34).
Their recreations included the hunting of wild animals with dogs, while
the men were armed with lasso and spear and occasionally a bow and
arrows. In the marshy districts birds were brought down with a boomerang
or caught in nets and traps. The people indulged in wrestling matches,
gymnastics, ball-playing, quoits, and juggling, while work was performed
to the accompaniments of music and singing, and music and dancing
enlivened the feasts. The instruments comprised the flute and a kind of
whistle, the guitar, harp, and lyre, the last two having sometimes
twenty strings.
The school, “bookhouse” or “house of instruction,” was presided over by
a scribe and attended by children of all classes. The curriculum
included orthography, calligraphy, and the rules of etiquette, together
with practice in the technical work of the department for which the
children were being trained.
The uniform male garment for all classes was an apron fastened around
the loins. To this in early times the King added a lion’s tail and the
noble a panther-skin. In the Middle Empire the apron took a pointed,
triangular shape in front and became longer, while by degrees a single
apron gave way to a short, opaque under-apron with a long, transparent
one over it. The short apron, however, continued to be the sole garment
of the priest. In time, the costume of the King included garments
covering the upper part of the body, a practice which dates from the
Eighteenth Dynasty, when the vigorous Queen Hatasu adopted the male
costume. The uniform dress of women was a transparent robe hung from the
shoulders by straps and reaching from the breasts to the ankles. In
later times it was supplemented with a sleeved or sleeveless mantle.
These, and countless other particulars of daily life, are pictured with
precise details, in coloured carvings and in paintings on the walls of
tombs, so as to continue after death, for the benefit of the _Ka_ or
double, the conditions which the deceased had been accustomed to in
life. This Ka was believed to be separate from the body, mind, or soul
of the individual; an independent spiritual existence which, as long as
it was present, ensured “protection, life, continuance, purity, health,
and joy.” Hence the care with which provision was made to induce it to
remain with the individual when dead. For continuance of life after
death was the cardinal principle of Egyptian religion. It was the
spiritualised expression of the people’s intense conservatism; and the
preservation of the body as a mummy and the taking of measures to ensure
that the Ka would abide with it or, at least, visit it frequently, were
the chief duties of the priesthood. The homes of the living, therefore,
were considered of less importance than those of the dead; and, while
few traces remain of dwellings or even of palaces, Egypt abounds with
Tombs. These are the memorials of individuals, while the Temples embody
the pride and glory of the national, collective life. Indeed, it would
seem that during life the individual, except only the King, who
represented the union of all, was regarded simply as a factor in the
collective organisation of the community, the splendour and power of
which was visualised in the Temples.
Hence the importance which was attached to size and beauty of colour in
the Temple architecture. Evidence shows the Egyptians were not an
intellectual race. That is to say, they were not given to speculation;
nor did they carry their mathematical or scientific studies beyond the
point at which they were needed for material and practical purposes. And
equally devoid of abstract qualities was their imagination. It conceived
of “better” in terms of “bigger,” and “best” in terms of “biggest.”
Through all their centuries of civilisation they did not progress beyond
the crude stage of finding sufficient satisfaction in constructing or
possessing “the biggest thing on earth.” And the biggest was constructed
by sheer force of numbers of slave-workers, at an immense human
sacrifice. It has been computed that every stone in the huge Temples
cost at least one life.
Accordingly, the distinguishing features of their Temple architecture
are colossal height and the spreading out over vast areas, as succeeding
kings added to the original building another Court or Hall to
demonstrate the grandeur of his reign.
And, to repeat once more, it was the conservatism, characteristic of the
race, that encouraged this repetition of motives, while at the same time
establishing conventionalised forms for the details. Individuality of
artistic expression was curbed by the canons of form that the priests
had laid down and enforced age after age. Meanwhile, in the scenes of
life with which they decorated the walls, some latitude was allowed the
painters and sculptors in the direction of naturalistic representation;
and it was increased when, in later times, the influence of Cretan
civilisation penetrated to Egypt.
* * * * *
We will conclude with a brief summary of the part played by the several
Dynasties in the art which is discussed in the following chapter.
It is to be noted that no inscriptions survive from the first three
Dynasties; but that with the Fourth commence the records which have been
recovered from the _Tombs_ or _Mastabas_.
To Snofru (Greek Soris, as given by Manetho) is attributed the
stepped-pyramid at Sakkarah, while the four pyramids at Gizeh are known
by the names of their builders Khufu or Cheops; Khafra or Chephren, and
Menkara or Mycerinus. The Sixth Dynasty closed with the reign of Queen
Nitocris, who is supposed to have faced with granite the Pyramid of
Menkara, in which it is believed her funeral chamber was constructed.
After her reign a period of darkness intervened during which the power
of the monarchy was gradually developed, until, with the beginning of
the Eleventh Dynasty, the Government was established in Thebes.
The Kings of the Middle Empire, Usertesen I, II, and III, signalised
their rule by reaching out beyond the limits of Lower and Upper Egypt.
They conquered Ethiopia to the south and opened up trade to the eastward
with Syria, and recovered possession of the mines of Sinai. Temples were
built and great public works of irrigation carried out, while changes
were inaugurated in writing and education. The process of development
seems to have been continued even during the Hyksos usurpation. For
these Asiatic invaders, whose race and origin are unknown--the term
Hyksos meaning Shepherd Kings or Bedouin Chiefs--confined their
occupation to Lower Egypt, while the Egyptian Kings continued to govern
Upper Egypt as vassal princes.
It was an attempted interference with Egyptian self-rule that
precipitated the expulsion of the Hyksos. The latter’s chief had
demanded of the “Prince of the South” that he abandon the worship of
Ra-Ammon for that of the Hyksos god. A refusal led to war which was
brought to a successful end by Amasis or Ahmes I, first King of the
Eighteenth Dynasty.
With the commencement of the New Empire Egypt entered upon an era of
prosperity and power that were reflected in the grandeur of her art. It
corresponded in Egyptian history to the age of Pericles in Athens; the
Imperial Epoch of Rome, and the High Renaissance of the sixteenth
century in Italy. Amenophis subdued the Libyans to the westward of the
Delta. His successor, Thothmes I, carried conquest as far south as the
third cataract and annexed the land of Cush as a province. Having thus
consolidated authority in the neighbourhood of Egypt, he invaded
Palestine and Syria as far as the Euphrates. His daughter, Queen Hatasu,
fitted out an expedition to the land of Punt (South Arabia) and brought
back incense, wood, and animals, such as the dog-headed ape; all of
which is duly recorded on the walls of her temple at Deir-el-Bahri. But
the acme of power was reached by her half-brother, Thothmes III; for
this monarch made fifteen expeditions, in the course of which he reduced
the rising power of the Hittites and made himself master of the
countries west of the Euphrates and south of Amanus. His two successors
managed to hold together this great empire; but in time these foreign
entanglements necessitated frequent expeditions.
By the time of the Nineteenth Dynasty the federation of the Hittites had
been consolidated and Seti I advanced against them, claiming a victory
which was at least not final, for they threatened his successor, Rameses
II, who, however, made a treaty of peace with them and married the
daughter of the Hittite king. Rameses II also invaded Palestine and
afterwards penetrated as far as the Orontes. He reigned sixty-six years
and it has been estimated that half the buildings in Egypt bear his
cartouche; although in many cases he probably followed the practice of
adding his own cartouche to buildings already existing.
It was during the reign of his son, Meneptah, that the Hebrew Exodus is
supposed to have taken place; an event that indicates the weakening of
the central authority, which was continued under this king’s successors.
Finally, during the reign of Rameses III, of the Twentieth Dynasty,
mercenaries were not only employed but allowed to settle in the country
and during the remainder of the Rameseide Dynasty the monarchs became
the tools of mercenaries and priests. Thus set in the decadence of power
and art, which marked the Saitic Dynasty.
Then followed a short period of Persian domination, which was so hateful
to the Egyptians that they welcomed Alexander as a liberator. He
appointed as king one of his generals, Ptolemy, in whose family the
succession continued through sixteen rulers of the same name. During
this period Egypt became an intellectual centre, its splendid library
being the nucleus of scholarship. It was by order or at least permission
of Ptolemy Philadelphos, about 270 or 280 <small>B.C.</small>, that the Hebrew
scriptures were translated into Greek by seventy scholars, whence the
version is known as the _Septuagint_. The Ptolemies signalised their
rule by the restoration of the old temples and monuments, which had
suffered from the havoc of invasions.
After the victory of Augustus Cæsar at Actium in <small>B.C.</small> 31 and the death
of Cleopatra the following year, Egypt became, as we have already noted,
a Roman province.