" Architecture was therefore the great art, or that which was dictated by utility, and we nmay from this cireumstance alone infer the priority. or at least time superior excellence, of the Egyptian over the Indian art, since the timrmer, borrowing nothing from the latter, has become the basis of all that is the subject of admiration in modern art, and what we have considered as exclusively belonging to architecture. the three Greek orders, the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian. We should theretbre be cautious of entertaining the false idea which is so prevalent, that the Egyptian architecture is the infiincy of this art, since it is, in fact, the complete type." Such is the universal and oft-repeated admiration of modern travellers : had such expressions been used by an ancient and the buildings now demolished, we should have been apt to treat the matter as purely fabulous, hut now they are undoubted realities, and stand as evidence of the truth of history. Such structures could doubtless have been erected so dely under a despotic. government, and probably, for the most part, by captives or slaves, and not by free Egyptians, as we read of the Israelites in the time of Moses being tasked in this manner ; the manual labour employed on such struc tures must have been enormous. It is a matter of the greatest wonder how such immense masses of material were transported from the quarries, and fixed so accurately in their respective places; even in the present day, with all the of machinery and steam-power ‘vhich we possess, the of such structures as those of Egypt would he considered no light undertaking. Notwithstanding the vast magnitude or these erections, they were remarkable not only for their size, but no less for their enrichment ; ornamentation of various kinds was lavishly disLributed over the whole surfit•e. It is true, the buildings appear to greatest advan tage exhibited as a whole, yet each minute portion will bear, Day, ref inire. minute examination ; a close inspection reveal, the most elaborate enrichment, while a distant view exhibits the noble outline and the grander features of archi tectural composition.
No two styles o ould at first sight appear more dissimilar, more atmq.,Tonistie, than the Egyptian and Gothic, the one ponderous and massive, the other light and elegant ; the one fla low proportions, and presenting a great extent of horizontal lines, the other slender, /oily, and aspir ing. What contrarieties do they present ! and yet we shall find that they have many characteristics in common, not indeed in their architectural features, but in the :esthetic principles out in their construction and decoration. The temples of the Egyptians were but the embodiment of their religion; their massive proportions typified the greatness, as the con tinuity of the outline and repetition of parts illustrated the eternity and immutability of their deity. Their objects of worship inspired feelings of profound awe, so likewise did their temples. Nor were their decorations merely the result of caprice, but of studied design ; every detail was sub servient to some great end, and suggested by some urgent reason ; they all have a symbolical meaning, illustrative of the I /ivine attributes, and consist, in short, of a series of religious dogma; and precepts, embodied as it w ere in forms. They were, as is said of the pictorial and carved enrichment of Gothic edifices, the books of the unlearned, each object speaking more intelligibly and more impressively to the eve and mind of the beholder, than would whole volumes of written precepts.
"The materhilisin of Egyptian worship," says a writer on this subject, " rendered all these details essential ; it fixed time imagination on physical nature, and obliged the ecclesiastics to seek those forms best calculated to express the dogmas of their religion. And in contemplating their :trchitecture, it is impossible not to be struck with the manifest influence religion has had in its creation:" In allusion to another shnilarity as regards the circumstances connected with the erection of Egyptian and Gothic edifices, he says, Time priests, who were the great depositories of all knowledge, were the exclusive designers of their religious edifices; they alone directed the taste of the architect and the sculptor; find they employed architectural grandeur, with all its accessories, to influence the minds of those people whose actions they wished to govern ; nor can I imagine anything better suited to inspire religious awe, and a protium(' reverence for the divinity, as well as his earthly agents amongst an idolatrous people, than this style of' architecture." in passing, we may remark upon another aflinity between the two styles, which approaches more nearly to an architectural characteristic, and that is, the practice of copying nature, all the decorative details of Egyptian, as of Gothic architecture, being the most beautiful imitations of the natural of their country—the lotus, palm, reed, papyrus, Sze.
Ilaving thus given a description of the general character of this style of architecture, it will be as well to proceed at once to the consideration of the buildings more in detail, as regards plan, distribution, and arrangement of parts. method of construction, and such like ; in doing which We shall take as an illustration the temple at &him, or Apollinopolis Magna, one of the largest in Egypt.
The size of this temple is much more comprehensive. and its arrangement much more complicated than that of Grecian structures, for whereas the latter consisted of a single cell sur rounded by a wall with external columns, the former was Cont posed of several courts, one within and beyond the other, and having columns for the most part within the walls. The entrance to the whole building was through a door placed between. and somewhat in advance of two enormous pyramidal towers, termed propylaea, which rose considerably above the general mass of the building, and were covered on the sides with sculp tured figures of colossal size. The plan of each pyramnid in this case measures 104 feet in length and 37 feet in w idth at the base, the dimensions diminishing gradually to the summit, where they are 84 feet by 20 feet, the heiligt being about 150 feet. Each mole is finished by a projecting cornice. and is sur rounded on all sides by a build torus moulding. They may be considered as solid structures, for although they contain cham bers with their approaches, still these bear so small a propor tion to the entire mass, that they amount to no more than small voids or cavities. The colossal entrance between the
pyramids is crowned with a cornice, and finished at the angles with a torus-moulding similar to the propyhea, and was probably furnished with folding doors, as the notches for hinges are still visible. This door-way gave admission into a peristyle court having twelve columns on either side, and four on either side of the entrance at a little distance from the propylaea. The pillars at the sides are placed at some distance from a wall, which commences at the moles and sur rounds the entire temple, and the space between this wall and the columns is roofed over, so as to thrum a covered-way or piazza, which leads on either side to the doors of the stair cases in the propyhea, and is continued in a similar manner M front of them, on the entrance-side of the area. The colon nade throughout is picnostyle. which seems to have been time usual disposition, the intereolumn being seldom greater than a diameter a hail, except in the centre of a portico, Nt a intervened. w hid) practic• is identieal with that of the (peek'. as evinced in the Rorie order. The of the colonnade from the base of the columns to the projecting cornice, with which they were sur mounted, is idiom 3:!.; feet, 'Phis etall't is out Ict el, hut has a considerable ascent towards the farthest side. which is effected by a series of low and very wide steps, extending the whole width of the quadrangle. and commencing at its entrance. The width of each step is that of a column and inter mitunn, and the total rise is 5t; feet. 'Phis alteration of level to have been introduced for the pnrpose of gin ing elevation to the grand portico w hick 1i,nus the t10-ther side of the court. and consists of eighteen C01111110s, ill three rows of six each, placed one behind the other, and flanked on either side by a wall so as to resemble a Greek hexastyle in antis, with the exception that here there are three parallel rows tile the other, while in Grecian temples there are never more than two. The portico, however. hears a greater resemblance to the propyhea of the Greeks, titan to their temples. both being ()lien in front, and enclosed on their other sides, having several tows of columns lie this pot tieo, or pronaus. are loftier than those in the court below„ and arc surmounted like them with a cornice. The spaces between row of columns are tilled op to about halt' their height with it screen or dada, which gives the upper part of the inter column the appearance of a window. The middle intercolutnn is treated in at somewhat ditierent manner, the wall or screen being carried up somewhat higher, and advanced :t little in front of the general line ; the sides likewise being flanked tt ith short columns, and the entrance to the pronaos being cut thoitudt the screen. lo the wall at the further end of this first hall, is an entrance into a second of smaller dimen sions, a space being taken off each side for passages. This hall is h? postyle, covered with a fiat of thick slabs of stone, resting on large stone beams. 016,11 are suprorted again by to eke columns disposed in three rows of four each, e osely set, so as to leave only passages between them. From this hall we cone into a chamber, its greatest length in the width of the building, as also has the portico. and having entrances to the passages at of this chamber, and the hypostvle hall, from is obtained by means of steps to the top of the se/cos. Beyond this is another similar chamber of smaller d mensih hax ing a cell on either side, supposed to have been obtained from this •hamber into the sanctuary, which is a small covered (-handier hat ing its greatest length parallel with that of the main building; its size is about 33 feet by 17, and in it was -placed the image of the deity. Bound the two sides and farther end of the sanctuary, is a itassage, to which access is obtained tutu the second chamber, and round this again it larger area of similar shape, into which the smaller one led, and w hick gave access to the top of the sanctuary. lu !Oust instances. in front ..f the whole building. and a sip-to distance in advance of the propylaea, were erected two obelisks of great height, and rot erect with hieroglyphies, and in front of them it long tiVelnie, Or as it is called, tin•med by two rows sphinxes, placed at short intervals from each tither, the space between the two rows forming a way or road to the temille, hStrabo, the historian, 0 ho saw this temple we have been describing, alludes to this at titme—" 'Before pillars or hi' Jot says is a paved road or avenue ;Wont 100 feet in breadth. or sometimes less, and in length from the entrance from 300 to -100 feet, or even more. TI6s is called the drototts; through the whole length of which, and on (-ad) side of it, sphinxes an' regularly placed at the distance of 30 feet from each which forms a double row on each side. Between the sphinxes you advance towards the temple, until you come to a large propylienni or triumphal entrance, through which you pass; and as you advanee, you come to another propylaalm, which you pass through ; then to a third ; and still keep passing on until you come to the entrance into the temple." The above description, although of a particular example, will answer with but little alteration fiir any other all such buildings being built on a similar plan, w:th but slight variations in particular instances. They all consist of a sch-o.v, or sanctuary, of small dimensions, situate near one extremity of the building, surrounded on all sides with chambers, passages, and courts, and approached through a series of covered halls and csdoonadc(I atria, the whole of the buildings being inelosed within an outer wall, and having a grand entrance flanked by two ityramidal moles. \o matter to what date a building- matt belong. or what position it may occupy, the general form is the same, the only differ ence being in the size, and in the number of adjoining courts and tmildings. hi some eases, we have two or more pro and courts preceding the temple, and sometimes avenues of columns crossing the •ourts in a line from the cunt:Ince. The temple at Luxor has as many as three courts, the first with a double lieFisty the second with a double range of columns extending throt»daint its length, and the third flanked by colonnades, each consisting of a double nor of columns. To give some idea of the magnitude of this work, tie may add, that in the second the columns were 56 feet high, and 1 1 feet in diameter.