HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE.
the origin and early progress of architec ture, it is in vain to expect much distinct historical evi dence. Being indispcnsible not only for the comfort but the protection of mankind, the art of building must have been practised, and brought to a considerable degree of perfection, before lasting edifices were constructed ; and it is only by means of works of this description, that we derive the earliest information respecting the art itself, and the other early acquirements of men. All the previ ous steps must consequently be unknown to us ; but from observing the conduct of men now in a rude state, and, from the earliest authentic records, tracing the progress of others to civilization, wealth, and power, we are ena bled to form a tolerably distinct notion of the early pro gress of architecture.
Buildings for domestic purposes being, from motives of eeconomy, of slight construction, are, without much trouble or expence, varied, to suit the changes continu ally taking place in society. It is therefore to public buildings that we must have recourse, in order to trace the features of the art in remote ages.
In Egypt, Persia, and Hindostan, there are architec tural works of great magnificence, whose era of construc tion is by no means satisfactorily determined by histori ans. It is also uncertain in which of those countries ar chitecture was first brought to this degree of perfection. Two very eminent authors, (Sir William Jones and Dr Robertson,) after much investigation, infer, from the great and united efforts necessary to accomplish the ar chitectural works found in Hindostan, and from the early and complete separation of the classes of society, that the eastern quarter of the world has a preferable claim to Egypt ; and they also conceive, that Iran, or Persia, fur nished to both the other countries the rudiments of know ledge. Others assert, that Hindostan is wholly indebted to Egypt, that this connection was early established through the means of colonies, who sought refuge in In dia from the tyranny of the shepherd kings, and that, after the expedition of Cambyses, the temples and tombs in Persia were constructed by Egyptian workinen.
The strong resemblance which subsists between many of the leading features in the magnificent tombs, temples, and palaces, in Upper Egypt, and those at Salsette, Ele phanta, and Vellore, and other parts of India, and also some or the splendid remains at Persepolis, is convincing evidence, that there has very early been a communication of architectural knowledge in those countries.
If we were to form a judgment from the style of the architecture and workmanship of the several countries, the great simplicity of the Egyptian certainly establishes a strong claim to originality, and its perfect sameness is a strong eN idence of its having been executed under the controul of one unvarying and despotic power,—a power which left no latitude for the exertion of individual origi nality of genius, and which was itself restricted by modes too sacred to be departed from. A power of this descrip tion indicates a state, whose establishments had been of long duration, and whose wealth enabled it to appropri ate a large portion of unproductive labour. But tlW di rection of this could not have been in the hands of dwpo tic sovereigns, whose operations are too capricious and unsteady : it must have been a permanent establishment, which had also great influence in the state ; and this, during the prosperity of the Thebaid, was precisely the case with the Egyptian priesthood.
The Bramins of India formed a similar establishment, and the tombs and temples of that country are also of great magnitude and splendour ; but in the Iiiudostan edifices, although many parts of the general arrangement and principal features resemble those of Egypt, yet sim plicity has been more departed from, and circular out lines similar to those of pagodas have been introduced. The most splendid of the Indian edifices being wholly formed by excavation, may, most properly, be denomi nated sculptures ; but even for this mode abundance of originals exist in Egypt. The numerous sculptured tombs adjacent to the principal cities in the Thebaid, are perfect examples as far as regards excavations within the natural rock, and the gigantic colossal statues are equal ly so as to isolated forms.
The ancient Persian architecture, with the exception of some tombs, is composed of erections upon the sur face of the ground. The pillars are more delicate, and the decorations of a less severe cast than those of Egypt.
In order to illustrate what has been advanced in this cursory view, we shall lay before the reader some details respecting the architecture of these three countries.