OHRE, where not only the Egyptian, but those of other nations, will be fully explained and illustrated.
The total annihilation of Memphis, Heliopolis, and other structures, at the northern extremity of this won derful valley, has left us only the pyramids, the enor mous sphinx, with vestiges of a great causeway, and some tombs, as specimens of the power which reigned in the second capital ; but these alone, after the expira tion of 3000 years, are sufficient to excite astonishment. Some particulars relating to them have already been fur nished in the historical Part ; but as a full discussion, in all its bearings, does not fall tinder this article, we must, for that species of information, refer the reader to the word PYRAMIDS.
Although Alexandria and Cairo have occupied dis tinguished places in the annals of Egypt, yet possessing little that is connected with its ancient architecture as a distinct school, and that little having been pillaged from the treasures of the Thebaid, it would be quite improper here to enter into any details respecting these splendid cities.
The works connected with the navigation of the Nile, their extensive canals and reservoirs, will be treated of under Inland Navigation and Ports.
But previous to our dismissing the subject of Egyptian architecture, it may not he improper to introduce the following general observations. Although we have not any direct account of the manner in which the immense masses of stone which composed the ancient edifices were raised from the quarries, carried to, and placed in their respective situations ; yet it is evident, from the vestiges of the communications made from the Nile into the extensive quarries on its banks, as at Apollinopo lis, Elephantina, Mice, and other places, that advan tage had been taken of the annual rise of that river, to raise and float the great blocks which they employed. In all that regards the operations which afterwards took place, in removing them from the water to the building, preparing them for, and placing them in their several positions, such as raising obelisks and columns of great magnitude, and covering the latter with platforms which composed their terraces and roofs, we are left wholly to conjecture. In the course of such continued and ex tensive experience, it is natural to conclude, that what ever was the mode they had adopted, they had arrived at a great degree of perfection; but for the last two thou sand years, the oppressed and enslaved natives have been as little qualified to explain in what manner the entrance to Luxor was constructed, as, at this day, the Greeks of Attica are respecting the buildings in the Acropolis of Athens. If descriptions, or intelligence of any kind, were ever committed to writing, they must have been destroyed by Cambvses, the Romans, or Amrou. What the Greeks drew from thence is very indistinctly ac knowledged; for that vain people, as they had a just claim to much, endeavoured to arrogate original merit to themselves in all that regards architecture. Although
the size and quality of the materials, and the principles of construction, are calculated to ensure durability, yet it must be confessed, that the climate is also equally fa vourable ; for even Egyptian structures could not have withstood the effects of our frequent and severe changes of atmosphere during 3000 years.
Plutarch, who travelled to Egypt with the view of in vesti gating all that the priests taught respecting Osiris and Isis, describes their temples as having long wings, and extensive open avenues ; and also as having secret and dark vestries, resembling the adyta of the Thcbans. The result of the researches by modern scientific travel lers amounts to nearly the same. Indeed, the local cir cumstances of the country and people, led unavoidably to the style which was adopted ; there being no rain, it was chiefly on account of shade that the covering parts were required ; their total ignorance of the principles of an artificial arch forced them to use large flat stones; their quarries afforded materials of any magnitude, and they had probably previously inhabited, or at least worship ped in caverns, first natural, and perhaps afterwards ar tificial ; and these circumstances, with the applications of wealth and power in the hands of a numerous priest hood, with cloistered habits, and, for many succeeding ages, pursuing incessantly the same objects, seem to af ford a sufficiently satisfactory explanation of the rise and progress of Egyptian architecture.
Montfaucon is of opinion, that Cambyses established the Mithratic worship in Egypt about 500 B. C. What seems to have chiefly suggested this idea, is the discove ry of a curious representation of a sacrifice to the sun, in an artificial cavern near the ruins of Babain in Upper Egypt. It is hewn out of a rock in the middle of the mountain; it is about 50 feet wide, and as much in height, and between five and six feet in depth. The sun ap pears encompassed with rays, forming a circle 15 or 20 feet in diameter. Two priests, of a natural stature, their heads covered with long caps, terminating in points, stretch their hands towards the sun, the ends of their fingers touch the rays ; two little boys, clothed like the priests, stand by their sides, and reach to them two great goblets; below the sun there are lambs killed, and ex tended on piles consisting each of ten pieces of wood; and below the piles are seven jars or diotas. On the other side of the sun there are two women and two girls, in full relief, joined to the rock by parts of their backs and feet only ; behind and above these and the boys are several hieroglyphics. The tiara on the head of the priests very much resembles those of the Persians in a procession, in the bas reliefs found at Chilminac near Persepolis. The hawk and Ibis arc purely Egyptian. This is a very curious monument, and is well deserving of attention. The whole is certainly very different from the other excavations in Upper Egypt.