CHAPTER XI.
ANTIQUITIES OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL. — DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS OF THE MOUNTAIN. — TEMPLE BUILT BY THE TIRHAKA OF THE BIBLE. — VARIOUS OTHER INTERESTING REMAINS AND TEMPLES. — PYRAMIDS. — CIRCULAR AND POINTED ARCH INVENTED IN ETHIOPIA.
Gibel el Birkel is situated an hour’s walk, or three miles and a half, to the east of the small town of Meroueh, and the mountain is 5150 feet distant from the Nile. It is an insulated hill, situated in a large plain; and below it, on the south side, are the ruins, also the cultivated land and the river. The other sides of the mountain are bordered by the desert, which has, no doubt, made encroachments on what was once cultivated land. The height of the eminence is about 350 feet. The exterior is rough, part of it having been worked to furnish materials for the temples, and more recently large masses have fallen, and almost entirely buried two temples which were situated beneath. The hill is of sandstone, of a soft description, which accounts for the dilapidated state of all the remains; for not only would the influence of time and the seasons be greater, but the difficulty would, of course, be less in destroying them. In some parts, the mountain is nearly perpendicular: the form is very picturesque, and highly imposing, particularly at a distance.
My general view (Plate XVIII.), drawn by myself with the camera lucida, will give a correct idea of the site of the ancient city; but it differs so much from the view Cailliaud has published, that it will scarcely be recognised as the same place; and, indeed, nearly all our plans and drawings are equally dissimilar. I can only state, that neither time nor pains were spared, either by my artist or myself, to render ours as accurate as possible. The total circumference of the mountain (see Plate XVII.) is about 5000 feet, which may be divided thus:—
Feet.
From the temple of Isis or Typhonium to the temple destroyed by the mountain 400
From the latter to the Grand Temple 100
To the point where the mountain takes a direction almost to the north, passing the traces of the town, which extends for 500 feet 600
Direction towards the north 700
Ditto towards the north-west 1100
Ditto towards the south-west 100
Ditto nearly south 2000 ---- 5000 ----
[Illustration: Pl. 17.
_From a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr. & L. Bandoni._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The form of the eminence is not very unlike that of the Acropolis of Athens, but there certainly never was any fortification on this rock. Some broken pottery and bricks, on the eastern side, indicate the site of the town. On the opposite, or western side of the mountain, but more in the desert, are two groups of pyramids. One consists of nine, the other, still farther in the desert, of eight. They are surrounded by sand, on the surface of which great quantities of quartz pebbles are disseminated.
Besides the two temples, mentioned as having been destroyed by the falling of a part of the mountain, there are the remains of eight other edifices, principally temples. The one I first arrived at, situated at the south-west corner of the mountain, is perhaps the most interesting of all. (See Plate XIX.)
I admired exceedingly the beautiful and picturesque form of Gibel el Birkel; but the ruins in the distance, scattered beneath the southern side of the mountain, excited to the greatest degree my curiosity. I felt, indeed, that I was undoubtedly approaching the site of the capital of a formerly rich and flourishing region. The situation at once announces it, and the magnificent remains bear testimony to its importance, and, I may truly add, to the taste, knowledge, and refinement of the ancient inhabitants of this now deserted city. Plate XX. is a view of the ruins which first engaged my attention. It shows the remaining fragment of the propylon, and the manner in which the columns forming the first court were ornamented. The head of Isis adorns the eastern and western sides of the columns, fronting the avenue and enclosure, where they would be seen conspicuously, but the other two sides have merely the lotus flower; an economy of sculpture never seen in Egyptian edifices. This drawing also shows the entrance into the chambers which were excavated out of the rock. Plate XIX. is the best point of view that I could fix upon, and indeed a better could not be desired, as it shows seven columns, ornamented with the capitals of the head of Athor, which are all that remain; and it also comprises the only Typhonian pillar that is now entire in the portico. My drawings will, I trust, give the reader a full idea of the imposing appearance of these ruins. I will now enter into a more detailed architectural description of this temple, of which we have given the plan and section, Plates XXI. and XXII.
The length of this temple is 115 feet 6 inches, the breadth (in the interior) 50 feet 2 inches. The pylon is almost entirely destroyed, but sufficient is left to prove that its depth was 11 feet 3 inches, and total width 62 feet 6 inches: there are no remains of the entrance into this portico, but I have restored it according to the usual form. This pylon leads into a portico 59 feet long and 50 feet 2 inches wide. I know not why Cailliaud and others have made two rooms of this portico, and a difference in the diameter of the columns. My artist had sufficient time to make the plan, which, with the section, were drawn out, as I give them, on the spot. This was our habitation, and in my examination of the ruins I did not see any authority to induce me to suppose that there had been two apartments. All the columns were so easily traced, that the plan, with the exception of the propylon, may be considered entire.
[Illustration: Pl. 18.
_On stone by W. Walton, from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
GENERAL VIEW OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
This portico consists of two rows of seven columns each, and two rows of the same number of square pillars. The latter form the centre avenue, while the columns are arranged between the pillars and exterior wall. The centre rows, forming the avenue into the temple, are ornamented on the side fronting the avenue with figures of the deformed Pthah, or what is generally called Typhon, above which is a capital, decorated with representations of the lotus flower, supporting ovals; between the latter are branches of palm trees. One of these pillars remains entire, and the traces of the others are visible. Behind them are circular columns, with the capitals of the head of Athor, above which is the common representation of the monolithic temple with the serpent and globe. On the reverse is the same. The sides are decorated (as I have said in my description of Plate XX.) with the lotus flower, instead of the head of Athor, above which are similar monolithic temples. The sculpture of these heads of Isis is tolerable (see Plate XIX.), but not so bold as on the pillars at Naga. The diameter of the columns is 3 feet 6 inches; their total height 17 feet 6 inches, including the bases. The shaft of the column, consisting of five pieces, measures 9 feet. The head of Athor 3 feet 4 inches, the monolithic temple 4 feet 6 inches. The diameter of the Typhonian pillars is 4 feet 3 inches. The columns with the Athor-headed capital rest on circular bases, 4 feet in diameter, and 8 inches high; the figures of Typhon are 12 feet 4 inches high; the total height of the pillar 17 feet. The height of the legs of this figure is 4 feet 6 inches; the length of the body from the shoulder to its legs 6 feet; the head is 3 feet 8 inches long; making in all 14 feet 2 inches. The difference from the total height of the statue, which is only 12 feet 4 inches, is accounted for by the circumstance of the head of the monster reaching over its breast, the shoulders being nearly on a level with its ears, while its belly hangs down between its legs.
The side walls of the temple seem never to have been above 5 feet 6 inches high, as may be observed in the section. Besides the wall not being broken, the circumstance of the capitals of the columns being ornamented, on the sides fronting the wall, with the heads of Isis, whilst on the north and south sides the architect did not take the trouble thus to decorate them, proves that, from the lowness of the wall, such an ornament was there quite requisite. The circumstance, also, of the sides of the column towards the centre avenue being in a great measure concealed by the Typhonian figures, would suggest the idea of this variation from the general plan, and induce them to erect only a low wall, in order that the columns with the Athor-headed capital might be visible. This portico leads into a room excavated out of the rock, ornamented with two figures of Typhon: the height of these, including a kind of basket above their heads, and plinths (see section), is 12 feet 4 inches. The sides of this room are ornamented with sculpture, representing the king Tirhaka, and his beautiful and royal bride Amentikatah, making offerings and libations to the god Amun Ra, Lord of the Rulers, with the head-dress of a large globe and two feathers; behind whom is Maut, with a plain helmet on her head. On the opposite side the king, with the titles, God beneficent, Lord of the World, Beneficent King, Son of Phre (Pharaoh), is offering vases to the divinity Io, whose head-dress consists of four plain feathers. She has the jackal-headed staff in one hand, and in the other the _crux ansatus_. Behind this divinity is a representation of Koht, with the head of a lioness, sustaining a globe. I have copied the hieroglyphics, as also the dedicatory inscription around the room.
On the columns of the portico scarcely any hieroglyphics are legible; those few that are so I have copied. The room last described leads into the sanctuary, also excavated out of the rock. It is 22 feet 10 inches long, by 12 feet 8 inches broad, and is ornamented with sculpture, representing the king making offerings to the divinities, with the attributes of Amun Ra, Neith, Honsoo, Horus, Kneph, and Thoth. On the west side of the sanctuary is another excavated room, 22 feet 10 inches long, and 7 feet 6 inches wide. This is also ornamented with sculpture, much broken, representing the king making offerings to Kneph, Thoth, and Horus.
[Illustration: Pl. 19.
_On stone by C. Hullmandel, from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
TEMPLE OF TIRHAKA, GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
On the east side of the sanctuary are two rooms, the first 17 feet long by 7 feet 7 inches wide. The sculpture represents the king, with the attributes and titles of Thoth, addressing numerous divinities seated, all with the same figure of a mummy and a jackal-headed staff in their hands. Before the first is a pedestal with a lotus flower upon it. The second room, leading out of the last I have described, is unfinished, and is only 5 feet long and 7 feet wide. The plan will show that the rooms on each side the sanctuary have no direct communication with the latter, but lead out of the first excavated chamber.
This is not only the most curious of all the temples of Gibel el Birkel, four of the chambers being excavated out of the rock; but it is also in every respect the most picturesque and interesting, particularly from being in the best preservation. Though an excavation, it is apparently not very ancient.[25] I found no other name upon it than that of Tirhaka, which is found on the columns of the portico, and also in the interior. This is the Pharaoh, as will be seen by the Historical Appendix, who assisted Hezekiah in his war against Sennacherib. In clearing out the stones and rubbish from the sanctuary, to make it a more comfortable residence, I made the curious discovery of a gutter, 4 inches deep and 9 inches broad, which crosses the ancient stone floor. It was probably to receive the blood of the sacrifices.
The sculpture of this temple has not the striking characteristics of the true Ethiopian style; it more resembles the Egyptian, and is good, though by no means the best. It is not improbable that this Ethiopian dynasty, being possessed also of Egypt, introduced into their own country a taste for the improved style of Egyptian sculpture. Ages must have elapsed before the Ethiopian manner could have changed to one so entirely different as this is.
The next ruin I arrived at is marked D in the plan, and is nearly 300 feet distant from the Typhonium. This space of 300 feet between the two temples is covered with ruined fragments, doubtless part of the city. The temple D is not remarkable for architectural beauty. It is much injured, and the sculpture and hieroglyphics which ornamented the interior are quite defaced; scarcely a vestige of the latter remaining to tell that they existed. The plan of the temple may be distinctly traced. It consisted only of two rooms: the first ornamented with four columns; the second is the sanctuary, in which is a plain stone for an altar: the length of the edifice is 85 feet, and the width 65. I saw no reason to suppose that it ever had an additional portico in front. The defaced state of the hieroglyphics and sculpture is no proof, in this instance, of its great antiquity, but may be accounted for by the peculiar softness of the stone. Close or adjoining to this temple, on the east side, are some walls and columns of other edifices (E in the plan); but, from what remains, little, I think, would be gained by an excavation, as there are no hieroglyphics.
At 125 feet to the north, that is, behind the last-described ruins, are the remains of the propylon of a small temple. (See the foreground of Plate XXIII., and to the right, in the distance, of Plate XXV.) Its south side is ornamented with sculpture, representing the king sacrificing prisoners to Amun; a subject so often repeated on the propylons of Egypt. The other side of the propylon is also ornamented with sculpture. (See Plate XXIII.) It represents a sphinx on a pedestal, under which is a figure with feathers, and also a pedestal with some vases. I copied the hieroglyphics which were legible. They contain the name and titles of a king called Amun Sekon. The upper part of the oval, on the south side of the propylon, is destroyed; but on the north, where it is perfect, it seems to be _Strength of Amun Sekon_. The similarity of the name Sekon and Sethus, the first of the nineteenth dynasty, is curious. The hieroglyphics above the sphinx seem to allude to the offering of an obelisk to the king, and the inscription above the vases states their number to be forty. The width of this temple is 60 feet. The _sekos_ has been destroyed by the falling of part of the mountain; and another temple, C, close adjoining, has suffered in a similar manner. Of the latter still slighter traces remain: a few fragments of columns and part of a wall alone indicate that it ever existed.
[Illustration: Pl. 20.
_On stone by C. Hullmandel, from a Drawing by L. Bandoni Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
TEMPLE BUILT BY TIRHAKA, GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
_Great Temple at Gibel el Birkel._—The temple I next arrived at, 75 feet from the latter, marked F in the plan, had attracted my attention on first arriving at the mountain. It is now little more than an immense confused pile of ruins. One column only remains entire; having the capital of the form of the lotus-bud; denoting its epoch, not only by its style, but by the name still legible on the slab of the capital. Of the vast number of columns which ornamented the porticoes, vestibules, and apartments of this enormous edifice, one only remains; a sad relic of departed splendour: and this, defaced, tottering, and almost bent with age, cannot long answer the purpose of transmitting to posterity the name of its royal founder. It seems almost by a miracle to have survived the ruin which surrounds it: and we may congratulate ourselves on this circumstance; for, if it had fallen a generation earlier, the fragments would have been swallowed up by the desert or carried away by the Arabs; and, consequently, the style of the architecture, and the name of the king who, perhaps, built this splendid edifice, would have remained wrapped in impenetrable mystery.
Few temples in Egypt are more extensive or finer than this must once have been. Sufficient still remains to show its extent and magnificence: traces of columns, fragments of battle-scenes, and sacred processions, display its _architectural_ beauty and the interesting historical events which once adorned its walls. The cruel hand of time, some convulsion of nature, or, what is most probable, the barbarous hand of man, have destroyed them, and thus torn many interesting pages from the history of the world.
A general view of these ruins may be seen in the background of Plate XXIII., which gives a correct idea of the confused mass that now remains; and my view (Plate XXV.), the most picturesque of any that I have of Gibel el Birkel, represents in the foreground the solitary column before mentioned. The separate plan (Plate XXIV.) of this temple I drew myself, and spared no pains to make it as correct as possible, excavating for that purpose: and had I been less acquainted with Egyptian edifices, I could not have succeeded so well. The exact form of the first propylon of this temple is not discernible, being quite destroyed, great part of the stones carried away, and the rest covered almost entirely with the sand which drifts continually from the desert. The dimensions given to the propylon in the plan, I obtained by some little excavation, and by observations of the ground. I do not pretend to say they are quite correct; but, from the dilapidated state of this part of the temple, more exact measurements cannot, I think, now be obtained. To understand fully the following detailed description of this edifice, the reader must refer to my plan. The total length of the temple is nearly 500 feet. The first court is 150 feet long, and 135 wide, and was surrounded by a row of columns, 5 feet 9 inches in diameter, resting on bases 7 feet 6 inches in diameter. Nine only of these columns are now visible. These, however, are sufficient to afford a correct idea of what the court has been. I obtained the intercolumniation by excavation, and have thus ascertained that this court must have been ornamented with 26 columns, and not more, as it has been represented. There were nine on each side, including the angles, and four at each end.
[Illustration: Pl. 21.
_Drawn by L. Bandoni._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
TEMPLE OF TIRHAKA, GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_London. Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The propylon of the second court is also much injured, but not to the same extent as the first. On the south-west side, which is less injured than the other, I found the remains of a staircase leading to the top of the edifice. The depth of this propylon, which is 28 feet, I was able to ascertain with more precision than the other. The second court is 125 feet long and 102 wide. It was curiously laid out, in a manner which first made me conceive it to have originally formed two rooms: the first containing four rows of six columns each, two on each side; and the second room, six rows of columns of three each: but, on further examination, I found that there was no mark on the side walls of its having been thus divided. There is a thin wall, which connects together the seventh and eighth columns of the centre avenue, that is, the last of the columns that would have been in the first room, and the first of the second. This proves that this could never have formed more than one court; for, had it been divided into separate rooms, these columns could not have been connected. I conceive it most probable that, as the architectural part of a temple was generally constructed before the ornamental, the columns may have been erected with the intention that it should have been divided into two rooms; but that afterwards, as the making the whole one apartment formed no very great architectural defect, though it certainly was one, this arrangement was adopted, probably in order to afford a more continued space for the procession which adorned the walls. Otherwise, rooms leading into the sanctuaries, ornamented with six rows of columns, of three each, agree exactly with the general description of an Egyptian temple.
With some little excavation, I found the traces of all the columns marked in the plan on the western side, and two on the other, with a similar connecting wall above mentioned: the width of the centre avenue was 17 feet. The diameter of the columns is 5 feet 5 inches; and they rest on circular bases. A reference to the plan will show that the nine columns on each side, forming the centre avenue, are in an exact line. The six columns of the second row, on entering, are in a line with the intercolumniation of the second and third rows, of what I, at first, erroneously conceived to be a separate portico.
On the west side of the second propylon are the fragments of a battle-scene, now almost unintelligible. Shattered pieces of a warhorse, of a king drawing his bow, and of slain combatants, denote that the historical representation of some celebrated conflict has been sculptured there. The side walls of this court seem to have been covered with splendid processions, perhaps equal to that in the beautiful portico at Medenet Abou; but nothing remains, except, in one place, a few heads; in another, the hawk and jackal standards, and several fragments of feet and limbs; and here and there, one or two hieroglyphics occur. I regret exceedingly that these sculptures are so completely destroyed, as, doubtless, they would have made an interesting addition to the pages of history. The battle, with its horrors—the resistance, flight, and slaughter—the fiery steed, trampling on the dying—the portraits and the names of the vanquished people—the warrior’s triumph and gratitude to the gods, and the processions in commemoration of his victory—were, no doubt, sculptured on these walls. This once beautiful temple, and the historical records with which it was adorned, are now almost entirely destroyed. Sufficient only is remaining to prove the beauty of the style, and make us sensible of the loss we have experienced in its destruction. The nature of the event these sculptures told, may be imagined; but as matter of history it is lost for ever.
[Illustration: Pl. 22.
_From a Drawing by L. Bandoni._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
TEMPLE partly excavated out of the Rock GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The next room is 51 feet long and 56 feet wide, and was ornamented with a row of five columns on each side, the diameter of which is 4 feet 2 inches, and they rest on circular bases: the latter are on pedestals. On each side of this room was a gallery, in one of which there now remain two columns. It seems to me probable, from the space between the last-described room and the sanctuary (see Plan), that a gallery crossed the temple at the end of the third room, out of which there were probably three outlets. Those at the sides would lead into small chapels, and the centre one into the sanctuary. As I have no authority, however, for this supposition, I have not marked it in my plan; but the reader who has studied the construction of Egyptian edifices will perceive its probability.
The sanctuary is, fortunately, in better preservation: its width is about 16 feet, the length uncertain. The wall which enclosed it could only have been of a certain height, perhaps a few feet, as, immediately behind it, on each side, are four columns, the diameter of which is 4 feet. Near the extremity of the sanctuary is a beautiful granite altar, which I found almost entirely covered with rubbish, and got it cleared. The device is very elegant, representing four kings, or, rather, four representations of the same king, Tirhaka, supporting the Egyptian entablature; and the base of the altar is also tastefully ornamented. Between the figures are four ovals: two containing the phonetic name of Tirhaka, accompanied with the titles of Son of Phre, or Pharaoh, the Sun, always living. The other two ovals contain the prænomen of the king Sun, very beneficent; above which is the title King, and below it the hieroglyphics signifying eternal life, or always living. There is a line of hieroglyphics round the figures, containing a dedication of the buildings to his father Amun Ra, &c. On the east side is a subject, not uncommon in Egypt, of the two divinities of the Nile, supporting with cords a pedestal, over which is the name of the king. I copied the hieroglyphics of this tablet. On the west side of the altar is a subject exactly similar to the east, but very much defaced and broken.[26] Behind the sanctuary is a room or inner sanctuary, 37 feet long by 21 feet 6 inches wide. A door leads out of it, on the western side, into two small rooms. To the west of the altar, before described, is a much larger one of basalt, 8 feet 6 inches square. There are no figures on this altar, but some hieroglyphics, all of which I have copied: they contain the name and titles of King Pepi, or, as Rossellini, perhaps more correctly, calls him, Pionchei. The name of this king I found also on the walls; but, on the capital of the column which is still remaining there is an oval almost resembling the prænomen of Amunneith, or, according to Mr. Wilkinson, Amun m gori III. If it be the same, I must candidly state that this is very probably an Egyptian, and not an Ethiopian, edifice; for the name on the columns is generally that of the builder of the temple. There are other rooms (as will be seen by my plan), which I have not attempted to describe, being almost quite unintelligible.
The appearance of this temple, at a distance, is very picturesque; but there is little in the detail to interest the traveller; its architectural ornaments and sculpture being entirely destroyed, except the one column already mentioned, and it, too, is considerably injured, and off the perpendicular. To the architect, this temple is interesting, as its plan can almost be fully traced. The mere painter, seeking only the picturesque, would find few advantageous points of view. But to me these ruins were deeply interesting, since, accustomed as I am to Egyptian edifices, I found sufficient, even in the little that remains, to understand perfectly what it has been. I easily restored, in my conception, the lofty propylons, the splendid courts, surrounded with the most chaste forms of Egyptian columns; the porticoes, sanctuaries, statues, and avenues of sphinxes;—every part enriched by the art of the painter and sculptor;—the walls and propylons covered with the representations of mythological mysteries, military exploits, and animated battle-scenes, which form the _chefs d’œuvre_ of Egyptian art. I could trace, also, the portraits of the heroes, hieroglyphical tablets, containing the history of the scenes, and displaying the king’s piety and munificence in his offerings to the gods. Thus, I restored the temple in my imagination; and, indeed, there was good authority for all that I have enumerated. Were I to refer to a period still more remote, and, filling up the vague, and not sufficiently explicit authority of the historians, describe the bronze, gold, silver, ivory, ebony, and precious stones, with which it was, perhaps, adorned; the Oriental magnificence which was most probably displayed; the mysterious ceremonies of the most mysterious of religions; the sacrifices and burnt-offerings; the deceiving oracles, the crafty priesthood, and the ignorant multitude gazing, with superstitious awe, at their imposing functions,—I might then be accused of rambling into the regions of fancy; for, unfortunately, there are no sufficient records yet to enter into this subject: but if the study of hieroglyphics is still continued, the veil of Isis may, perhaps, be raised. The Arabs have carried away a great part of the materials of this temple; and, in a short time, the little that is remaining of this, the _Selinunte_ of Ethiopian edifices, will be entirely buried by the sand which is daily drifted in upon it from the desert.
[Illustration: Pl. 23.
_On stone by C. Hullmandel, from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
_Other Ruins at Gibel el Birkel._—Twenty yards to the west of the Typhonium, marked in the plan, are the remains of another small temple, excavated in the rock. The first court was ornamented with columns, and on the walls I could distinguish traces of sculpture, but now too much defaced to be legible. Besides the temples already mentioned, situated under the mountain, there are the traces of another, 200 feet from the great propylon of the large temple; that is, about 700 feet from the mountain, towards the river. A fragment of a wall, 6 feet by 3 feet, is all that now remains: 300 feet beyond the latter is a single column, with a lotus-flower capital. From this column to the river are 4100 feet. The mountain is, therefore, 5100 feet distant from the Nile.
To the north of the great temple are the ruins of buildings, chiefly of brick, which seem to have formed part of the city, but they are of no very great extent. Here are scattered numerous pieces of pottery, and fragments of the same description of bread stamps which are found at Thebes, but these are without hieroglyphic inscriptions. To the east of the great temple, in the plain, are columns and traces of other temples, but now almost entirely buried by the sand.
I have described all the temples now existing at Gibel el Birkel, and mentioned the remains and traces of nine, and will now treat of the monumental decorations of its interesting Necropolis. The magnificence, power, and piety of the monarchs of Ethiopia are displayed in the public works erected in honour of the gods. In this beautiful cemetery, we have monuments either of the gratitude and attachment of their subjects, or, more probably, of their own ostentation. The kings of Egypt are supposed, for many reasons, which I will mention at another opportunity, to have had their tombs constructed long before their decease; and this instructive memorial of the transient nature of their earthly greatness was worthy of the wisdom and philosophy of so great a nation. The Ethiopians probably had the same custom; and considering, as Diodorus says of the Egyptians, their palaces only as inns where they tarried for a day, they took care to have a more suitable habitation provided for that state, in which they believed that they were to rest for ages.
[Illustration: Pl. 24.
_Drawn by L. Bandoni._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
GREAT TEMPLE, GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_London. Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The pyramids are on the western side of the mountain. The first group, of two, is 700 feet north-west of the Typhonium, the temple I described as excavated in the rock. (See the General Plan and vignette.[27]) The first, A, is 30 feet square; 40 feet to the west of this, is the other, B, which is only 23 feet square. The pyramid C, in the plan, is 235 feet distant from the latter, and measures 30 feet by 26: twenty feet farther to the west is pyramid D, which is 27 feet square. The one marked E, in the plan above, adjoining the latter, is 36 feet square; and F, partly behind this, is of the same size. Sixteen feet to the north of F, and north-west of the pyramids C, D, E, is the largest one at Gibel el Birkel, which is 88 feet square: the angle of this is more obtuse than that of any of the other pyramids at Gibel el Birkel. The ruined state of this large pyramid, and also of the others already described, will be seen in the distance in Plate XXVII. One hundred and forty-five feet to the north of this large pyramid is a small one, H, which is only 25 feet square. The angle of this is much more acute, the height being considerably more than the diameter at the base. It is scarcely at all injured: the apex of the pyramids at this place, like those in the Isle of Meroe, was never pointed. A flat space was always left at the top for a statue, perhaps, or some other ornament. One hundred and twenty-four feet to the west of the latter is another, I, 23 feet square. This is very much ruined, particularly on one side, but there are the remains of a portico before the south-east side. The other eight pyramids, of which I have given the dimensions, were without this ornament: at all events, there are no traces now remaining, that induced me to suppose that any of them had porches in front. The present state of the pyramids above described may be observed in the distance of Plate XXVII.[28]
[Illustration: PLAN OF THE PYRAMIDS OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL.]
About 600 feet to the north-west is a fine group of eight other pyramids, situated on an eminence, which adds greatly to their effect, and gives them, at a distance, a still more imposing appearance. They extend for 550 feet from east to west; five of them have porticoes, or porches, the direction of which is about south-east, but rarely exactly the same. (See Plan.) Plate XXVI. is a general view of these pyramids, and the vignette represents one in detail. These being accurate camera-lucida drawings, and every stone correct, the reader will be able to judge of the neat construction of some of these edifices, the regularity in the size of the stones (see Plate XXVI.), and the manner in which they are joined together, without cement. Plate XXVII. is a view of a group of these pyramids, which also shows their construction; and in the distance is seen the mountain and the other group of pyramids.
[Illustration: Pl. 25.
_On stone by W. P. Sherlock from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
GREAT TEMPLE, GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The height of these monuments varies from 35 to 60 feet. They consist, according to their height, of from 30 to 60 steps each, receding about 6 inches. They, therefore, may be ascended, but with difficulty. They have smooth borders at the angles, like some of the pyramids at Meroe. The first, marked K in the plan, p. 149., 600 feet distant from the mountain, is about 65 feet square. It seems to have had no portico, but it is quite in ruins; it stood upon a stone basement. Thirty-six feet to the west of the latter is the pyramid L. This is 33 feet square, a mass of ruins, and no traces of the portico to be seen. This pyramid is the first to the right in Plate XXVI.; and although rather indistinct, from being placed in the distance, its dilapidated state may still be observed. Ninety-five feet to the west of this is M, which is 38 feet square. This has a portico before it: the summit of it is visible in Plate XXVI. On the hard cement with which the interior of this portico is covered, I observed some remains of painting, rather indifferently executed. Fifteen feet to the south, and in the view almost covering the last, is pyramid N. This is 44 feet square and 51 feet high, and has a portico before it. Unfortunately, very few figures were distinguishable; but sufficient to prove the identity of the style, which is decidedly Ethiopian. As a further confirmation of this fact, there is an inscription in Ethiopic characters. The masonry of this pyramid is very well executed. This pyramid is the first that may be remarked as entire in Plate XXVI.
[Illustration: PYRAMIDS OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL.]
There are porticoes, as I have said, before five of this group of eight pyramids, almost similar to those before the pyramids of Meroe. Some of these are ornamented with sculpture; but, unfortunately, destitute of hieroglyphics, which never appear to have been inserted upon them. I copied out of the pyramid N, the most beautiful specimen of sculpture that now remains. (See Plate XXIX.) The style may easily be perceived to be Ethiopian, from the roundness of the arms, and the proportions being generally more bulky than those of the Egyptians. This style differs so widely from that remaining in the temple built by Tirhaka, that many ages must certainly have elapsed before such an important change could have taken place. The subject which I have copied is not particularly interesting, being merely a presentation of offerings, but there is a variety and elegance in the groups, seldom surpassed in Egyptian productions. The offerings consist chiefly of branches of palm trees, goats, cattle, &c., and libations. In the highest row, Osiris is represented seated on his throne, as judge of Amenti, and the divinities Anubis and Horus, are also in the same line. The divinity with the globe and horns, in the second row, is probably Isis; and the last in the second row is a figure of Typhon.
A personage larger than the others is holding incense on the same elegant description of tray, having the form of a hand and arm, which we see in Egypt. He is presenting it to the king, or occupant of the tomb, who is represented seated under a canopy, on a lion-shaped chair or throne, which differs, in a very slight degree, from that we so often see in the sculptures of Egypt. The dress of the king is different from the Egyptian. His necklace is curious: he has in one hand a large and strong but beautifully-formed bow, and in the other an arrow and a branch of the palm tree[29]: the goddess of truth, with outstretched wings, is immediately behind his throne. The traces of colour which still remain on this sculpture I marked on my original drawing.
[Illustration: Pl. 26.
_On stone by W. P. Sherlock from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
PYRAMIDS OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
On the other side of the portico, opposite to this sculpture, is another subject, representing about 100 figures, rather curiously grouped; also some large figures exactly similar to those above described.
In the other porticoes no sculpture is perceptible, except some fragments similar to the large figures in this plate.
At the end of some of the porticoes appear traces of the funeral boats, similar to the one I described at Meroe. Notwithstanding some differences, they appear to have the same signification as those over the tombs of the kings. This circumstance, and the representation of the goddess of truth, Osiris, the president of Amenti, and the assistant divinities, Anubis, Thoth, and Horus, are proofs that these were indubitably tombs.
These pyramids seem to have been the object of some learned curiosity or avarice. Deceived by the false doors beneath the boats of the sun at the end of the porticoes, persons have endeavoured, by blasting the stones, to discover some inner chambers, and set at rest for ever the question how, and for what purpose, they were constructed. The rude force of barbarians, perhaps of Arabs, animated, probably, by the hope of discovering treasure beneath, seems to have been exercised in utterly destroying others.
Judging from the pyramids which are almost entirely ruined, and from those that have been partly broken down, I do not conceive that there is any chamber in the interior, but think it more probable that the body was deposited in a small well, above which the pyramid was afterwards erected. Yet Diodorus says that the Ethiopians differed from other nations in the honours which they rendered to their dead. “Some,” says he, “throw the bodies into the river, believing that to be the most honourable sepulture which they can give. Others keep them in their houses, shut up in niches of alabaster, thinking it advantageous for a child to have ever before his eyes the image of his father; and those who wished to preserve the memory of their predecessors enclosed their bodies in a coffin of baked earth, and interred them in the neighbourhood of the temples.” The reader will have perceived, from these passages of Diodorus, that it is not impossible that these porticoes may have been used to contain the coffins; thus enabling the friends or children to visit them, at the same time protecting them, to a certain degree, from the hand of violence and the inclemency of the seasons. The mummies in the Roman tombs in the Necropolis, in the Oasis Magna, were in wells; and the Egyptians usually, but not invariably, interred their dead in those receptacles. Many of the pyramids have no porticoes; therefore, in those instances, the body must be underneath, probably in a well; but the construction of these porticoes may have had its origin in the piety and affection of individuals wishing to have the bodies of their relations preserved in an accessible place, where, at certain seasons, they could visit their remains, recall past scenes, indulge their grief in bewailing their loss, and have ever before their eyes a memorial of the brief sojourn of man in this valley of tears.
The pyramid marked O in the plan is thirty feet distant to the west of N. This is 53 feet square, and the height 58 feet. This pyramid is the second in Plate XXVI., and the B of Plate XXVIII. It will be observed, in the view, that the upper part is very dilapidated; the portico is very much injured; and, in consequence of the broken state of the ground, it does not appear in my view. The sculpture which it contains is of little importance. A figure offering incense to the king, with the head-dress of a globe, long feathers, and short horns. There is also a representation of the funeral boat.
[Illustration: Pl. 27.
_On stone by W. P. Sherlock, from a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
PYRAMIDS AT GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The next (P, in the plan) is 35 feet square. This is the third, from the left, in Plate XII., and is one of the most perfect. The height is 48 feet, and the interior width of the portico is 6 feet 6 inches. This portico is arched. There seems to have been some ornament (perhaps an inscription) attached to many of the façades of the pyramids; for near the summits are circular holes, in which, probably, rivets were inserted. Mr. Waddington found a piece of granite in one. Near the summit of this there are three of these holes.
Q is 36 feet square. There are no traces of its ever having had any portico. This is the second, from the left, in Plate XXVI. The summit is very much injured.
Pyramid R is the first to the left. In the vignette, page 148., and Plates XXVI. and XXVII., it will be observed that it is almost perfect, but that the roof of the portico has partly fallen in. This pyramid is also represented as restored in Plate XXVIII. An examination of this plate will afford to the reader a good idea of the beauty of the architectural forms of these pyramids. A, which corresponds with R in the plan, is 41 feet in diameter, and the height is 46 feet. The angles of these pyramids being so much more acute than those of Geezah, adds greatly to the elegance of their architectural form. The small ornament at the angles is pretty, and enhances very much the effect. The façade of the portico is also pretty, but, as will be seen by the plates, has quite a different form from the façades of the porticoes of the pyramids of Meroe. At the latter place the doorway is between two towers, which, although on a small scale, are almost similar in design to those of the great propylons of Egypt. These, as will be seen by the plate, have more the appearance of small temples. The façade is narrower at the top than at the bottom, the total width of the latter being 20 feet, and at the top 17 feet 6 inches. The square band and the cornice give it more the appearance of a small temple. The architrave over the door is ornamented with the globe and serpents. This pyramid is also arched.
In describing the pyramids of Meroe, I mentioned that the arch I there found was a segment of a circle; but here it is very important to observe that there are not only specimens of that, but also one of the pointed arch. The latter, consisting of six stones, is accurately drawn in the section. The stones are slightly hollowed out to the shape of the arch, but do not advance beyond each other, like the arch near the temple excavated out of the rock at Thebes, but are supported only by _lateral pressure_.[30] The stones of this arch are not joined with cement; but above the roof are a quantity of small stones, which are kept together by a soft description of cement. That these arches are not recently added, is proved, not only by the appearance of the monuments themselves, being exactly of the same description of fine hard sandstone, and of the same colour; but still more certainly by the circumstance, that the portico I mentioned as covered with cement, and painted in the ancient Ethiopian style, is also, fortunately, arched. The interior of this arch is covered with cement, which is harder than the stone, and painted.
The paintings on the arched roof, and the sides of the portico, are evidently of the same period. As I have formerly observed, owing, probably, to its very great antiquity, the painting is nearly defaced; but still there was sufficient to convince me that the style is certainly Ethiopian, of a far more ancient date than the sculpture in the temple of Tirhaka.
[Illustration: Pl. 28.
_Drawn by L. Bandoni._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
PYRAMIDS OF GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_London. Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
The reader will observe, also, in the section, a specimen of a semicircular arch. They are drawn very small, as belonging to the pyramids, but they are not, on that account, less accurate; and, therefore, almost equally useful as if they had been made separate plates. The stone forming the keystone of this semicircular arch is 1 foot 9 inches in length; the stones supporting it, corresponding precisely, 2 feet 1 inch, and the one on each side following these, to the spring of the arch, 2 feet 4 inches. The arch, then, not only the circular, but the pointed, had its origin in Ethiopia. The oldest known in Europe is, I believe, that in the Cloacum Maximum, supposed to have been built in the time of the Commonwealth. The great antiquity, of the one on the Tiber is proved by its singular construction, forming almost, as it were, three arches beneath each other.
I am aware that the learned will be sceptical concerning the antiquity of these. There are no remains in stone to prove that the Egyptians were so far advanced in the construction of the arch as these specimens show that the Ethiopians were. The only stone arch that exists in Egypt is the one at North Der, at Thebes; and that one proves that the Egyptians were acquainted with its beauty, but not its utility and the correct mode of constructing it. The vaulted tomb of stones at Memphis is of the time of Psammitichus, who reigned immediately after the Ethiopian dynasty. The brick arches in the tombs at Thebes, covered with cement, on which are the royal name of Thothmes and Amenoph, prove that the Egyptians were, at that period, acquainted with the arch; but it is rather singular that there is no earlier specimen: whence, I think, we may infer, as those were built soon after the terrible wars commenced, which are represented on the walls at Thebes, that the Egyptians then, for the first time, invaded Ethiopia, and there saw and became acquainted with that useful construction. There seems to me no reason to suppose that the knowledge of the utility and construction of the arch passed from Egypt into Ethiopia: the contrary is much more probable, as we have here far more perfect specimens than are found in Egypt; and as there is no doubt of the very great antiquity of these ruins, can there be any, that the invention of the arch had its origin in Ethiopia?[31]
The sandstone of which the pyramids are built is of a much harder quality than that of the temples, being either from a vein in the mountain which is now exhausted, or, as I conceive is most probable, brought from distant quarries. This is an extraordinary proof that the greatest pains were taken in the construction of these edifices, to enable them to resist the ravages of time.
As to the antiquity of these structures, I conceive it to be very great. Some of them appear more ancient than any that exist in the valley of the Nile, with the exception, perhaps, of the pyramids of Meroe and Nouri. They are the tombs of a dynasty of kings whose names are now unknown. That they were royal sepulchres, and not those of private individuals, is, I think, evident from their being as magnificent as the pyramids at Meroe, which we know to belong to kings from the ovals which they contain; and many of the individuals in these tombs have the serpent, the emblem of royalty, above their foreheads. If this had been the site of Napata, I should conceive that the dilapidated state of the ruins might have been caused by Petronius, who led there the Roman arms; but in the Historical Appendix I will give the reader a further account of that celebrated expedition. I trust that the hieroglyphic inscriptions which I have copied will contain much valuable information; and that, at all events, the name of a place, evidently once so considerable, may again, with certainty, be enrolled in the list of cities. Her habitations and her palaces are utterly destroyed: the desert is swallowing up the remains of her temples; and the sepulchres of her kings are fast decaying. A city where the arts evidently were once so zealously cultivated,—where science and learning appear to have reigned,—is now possessed by ignorant barbarian tribes. Where are the descendants of that people who erected these splendid monuments to their gods? Were they exterminated by the warlike tribe who now occupy this territory, driven into other regions, or blended with the race of their conquerors? These are questions of great importance, which I may endeavour to illustrate in my historical chapter, but which I pass by at present, as scarcely belonging to a topographical description.
[Illustration: Pl. 29.
_From a Drawing by G. A. Hoskins Esqr._
_Printed by C. Hullmandel._
SCULPTURE IN A PYRAMID AT GIBEL EL BIRKEL.
_Published by Longman, Rees & Co. April 6th. 1835._]
It is a circumstance, perhaps, worthy of remark, that some of the most perfect heads sculptured on the pyramids had almost a European profile. The Shageea—the brave tribe of Arabs who now possess the magnificently rich and fertile plain near Gibel el Birkel, and whose territory extends, on one side nearly to the fourth cataract, and on the other to Dongolah—have, notwithstanding the darkness of their complexion, nothing of the Negro features.