In illustration of these views, it first becomes neces sary to examine whether the resources of the state and the ingenuity of the people, were adequate to the pro duction of the numerous and stupendous works, which must thus be ascribed to the first age. Not only is the answer to this inquiry in the affirmative, but with no degree probability can any other date of erection be assigned. We learn from Homer, that in the time of the Trojan war, twelve centuries anterior to our era, Thebes was one of the most magnificent cities then in the world; indeed the terms of the description would induce the belief of its paramount grandeur. - Again, from himself we know that Herodotus admired these very monuments, the ruins of which excite the wonder of present times. This father of history visited Egypt not quite a century after the reduction of that country by Cambyses. Even then the origin of these structures was lost in the obscurity of distant time; consequently they could not be the erections of an age later than this monarch, who in fact laboured to de stroy them. They were on the contrary universally at tributed to the reigns of the early native princes; of whom Herodotus attempts a long though imperfect enumeration, prior even to Sesostris. Carrying these pretensions to antiquity no higher than Homer's de scription, which corresponds with the era of Sesostris, we thus gain two fixed points, which supply an inter val of seven hundred years from the war of Troy to the invasion of Cambyses, that is from 1200 to 526, B. C. During the lapse of so many ages, the whole power and riches of Egypt were placed at the disposal of a society of men «hose wisdom and learning were proverbial, and whose intelligent and active ambition these very monuments testify. Anciently Egypt was likewise remarkably populous, so as to occasion a sav ing, "that instead of beauty nature had con ferred upon its women the more honourable gift of fertility." En joying for a long period the entire commerce of the ancient world, the wealth of this country must always have been great. Even when reduced into a Roman province, and despoiled of much of its original impor tance, the amount of public revenue under the Ante nines was 12500 talents, or two millions and a half sterling—equivalent to a much larger sum. Of the capabilities, both physical and intellectual, of the ancient inhabitants of Egypt to produce the works in question, there can thus exist no reasonable doubts; while by the testimony of history, their erection is re stricted to a period not later than now assigned; but if necessary, we might ascend much higher.
We have thus ascertained the limits within which the primitive school of sculpture in Egypt must have flourished; for in most instances its labours are at tached to, and consequently have been completed at the same time with the architectural remains, of which they have once constituted the profuse and even lavish ornaments. 'We are thus enabled to proceed, with no small degree of certainty, to the examination of the genius, character, and principles of this abori ginal style. Here the examples may be classed un der three divisions; first, colossal statues; secondly, single figures or groups, about the natural size; and, thirdly, hieroglyphical and historical relievos. In each of these, however, is to be discerned a similar charac ter of invention and finishing, varied only in the de gree of excellence or nature of the work. Minuteness of individual description is therefore less necessary.
The works of the first class, many of which still re main both entire and in ruins, from their magnitude fix our earliest attention. Indeed, than a statue of granad sixty feet high, there hardly exists an under taking more laborious or difficult, or an instance more striking of disregard of time and patience of toil. Of these enormous sculptures. some have been rocks hewn into shape alone, and left adhering by their base to the living bed. Of this class the celebrated sphyr.x
ninety-five feet long and thirty-eight high, is an exam ple. Others, as the figures in the Memnonium among the ruins of Thebes, have been built of square blocks, first built and afterwards carved into form. The grea ter number have been sculptured from an entire block finished in the quarries of Upper Egypt, and trans ported to their site by the waters of the Nile. Most of the smaller works of this age are in sandstone and other softer materials, such as the situation naturally afforded; the great statues are universally of granite, seeming to indicate that in their construction time was disregarded that eternity might be secured.
Of these colossal sculptures, the most remarkable, or at least the best known to general readers, are the two statues still remaining in the Memnonium. Ex clusive of the lower plinth of the rude throne on which it is seated, the altitude of each is fifty feet high; but between the two, and scattered around to some dis tance, lie the ruins of a still more gigantic figure of red granite. These, by Dcnon and others, are con jectured to he the remains of the celebrated sounding statue of Memnon, a supposition which is opposed by the inscriptions on one of the others, but is corrobo rated by the head now in the British museum—the most splendid specimen of this primitive style in Eu rope. In both figures the position is exactly the same and may be described as common to all works of this class; the head looking straight forward, arms press ed close to the sides, and hand expanded resting upon either knee, lower limbs perpendicular and apart. This attitude, as will at once be perceived, is little calculated to convey any sentiment of ease or of grace; the whole effect, indeed, is stiffness and constraint. Yet, in these vast though uninformed labours, united as they are with dim and distant recollection, there is something mysteriously grand and solemn. Nor is this produced by association alone. For while it is to be remarked of colossal statues generally, that they exhibit the greatest comparative perfection to which Egyptian sculpture has attained; in them we likewise discover visible approaches to truth and nature, with occasionally, as in the sphynx and the head of Mem non, considerable feeling of the sweet, the tranquil, and the flowing, expression, and contour.
In the second class appear to be comprehended both the earliest and the latest of Egyptian statues. The infant efforts of the art seem to have been exercises on pieces hewn from the living rock, in the process of enlarging or of forming those natural caverns or artificial excavations which were the original scenes of all solemn assemblies and religious festivals, prior to the erection of temples; and during every age, the adorned repositories of the dead. Afterwards statues, thus formed, were loosened from their bed to be trans ported to distant situations, or were sculptured, in what finally became the general mode, from detached blocks. It is not here intended to imply that these two manners are decidedly to be separated, or that the for mer, being discontinued, was superseded by the latter, but simply to express the fact of priority, sufficiently obvious from the habits and history of the people. Hence, perhaps, a circumstance may be explained, intimately connected with the subject, and which has given rise to much discussion. In all Egyptian sta tues of every proportion, and in every attitude, a pi laster is found at the bank as if supporting the figure. Now in all works belonging to the first manner, the ground is never entirely removed, the posterior por tion always remaining undetached; while if the statue has been formed by cutting round it to a recess be hind, a pilaster is carried upwards to the ceiling, evi dently with the original view of increasing strength.