| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Cleopatra's needle
Author: Wilson, Erasmus, Sir
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Cleopatra's needle" ***
Transcriber’s Notes:
Underscores “_” before and after a word or phrase indicate _italics_
in the original text.
Small capitals have been converted to SOLID capitals.
Illustrations have been moved so they do not break up paragraphs.
Old or antiquated spellings have been preserved.
Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
[Illustration: OUR EGYPTIAN OBELISK: CLEOPATRA’S NEEDLE.
ENGRAVED FROM A PHOTOGRAPH.]
CLEOPATRA’S NEEDLE:
WITH BRIEF NOTES ON
EGYPT AND EGYPTIAN OBELISKS.
BY ERASMUS WILSON, F.R.S.
[Illustration: CLEOPATRA’S NEEDLE AT ALEXANDRIA.]
LONDON: BRAIN & CO., 26, PATERNOSTER ROW.
ENTERED AT STATIONERS’ HALL.
TO HIS ESTEEMED FRIENDS,
CHARLES ALFRED SWINBURNE
AND
HENRY PALFREY STEPHENSON,
WHOSE JUDICIOUS COUNSELS
HAVE AIDED HIM IN CARRYING OUT
THE PROJECT OF SECURING
THE BRITISH OBELISK
TO GREAT BRITAIN,
THIS LITTLE WORK IS AFFECTIONATELY
DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR.
PREFACE.
The accompanying pages are intended as an introduction to the
magnificent Egyptian Obelisk which is about to take its place among the
monuments of London. This Obelisk was hewn in the renowned quarries
of Syené, at the extreme southern boundary of Egypt, and was thence
floated down the stream of the Nile to Heliopolis, the City of the Sun.
It was erected, as one of a pair, in front of the seat of learning
wherein Moses received his education, and stood in that position for
about 1,600 years. Shortly before the Christian era it was conveyed to
Alexandria, where it has remained until the present time, and is now
on its voyage to the banks of the Thames. Its age, therefore, may be
computed at upwards of 3,000 years.
At that early period, when other nations had not yet awakened into
the dawn of civilisation, Egypt had made substantial progress in
architecture and sculpture; and the British Obelisk may be taken as
an admirable example of their excellence. The hieroglyphs which adorn
its surface, inform us that it was erected by a powerful Pharaoh of
the eighteenth dynasty, Thothmes III.; and that, 200 years later, it
was carved with the name of another illustrious Egyptian potentate,
Rameses the Great. The sculptures of Thothmes occupy the central line
of each face of the shaft from top to bottom, and those of Rameses the
side lines; so that, at a glance, we are enabled to compare the art of
sculpture at periods of two centuries apart.
Heliopolis was the On of the Bible, and one of the cities of the
Land of Goshen, where Abraham sought refuge when driven by famine
out of Canaan. It was at Heliopolis that Joseph endured his slavery
and imprisonment, and was rewarded by the Pharaoh of his day with
the hand of Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, a priest and ruler
of On. Here he received in his arms his aged father Jacob, and Jacob
fell on his neck and wept with joy at the recovery of his long-lost
and well-beloved son: whilst in the neighbourhood of Heliopolis is
still shown the venerable sycamore tree, under which, according to
traditional report, the Holy Family took shelter in their flight into
Egypt.
These are some of the interesting associations which will crowd into
the mind when we look upward at this colossal monolith, and of which it
was once the silent spectator. Ancient Egypt, Egyptian enlightenment
and refinement, scenes and acts of Bible history—are, as it were,
realised by the presence of this stately object of art in the midst of
our ancient, although, compared with itself, very modern, city. This,
however, is not all; for our Obelisk was a witness to the fall of the
Greek and the rise of Roman dominion in Egypt, and revives in our
memory the brilliant exploits of Nelson at Aboukir, and the grievous
loss sustained by Britain in the death of Abercromby, at Alexandria.
After the battle of Alexandria, in 1801, it had been the eager wish
of the British army and navy to convey this Obelisk to England as a
memorial of their victory. Weightier considerations frustrated their
efforts.
In 1820, the matter was revived, and the Obelisk was formally presented
by Mehemet Ali to the British nation, through His Majesty George IV.[1]
In 1822, a distinguished naval officer, Admiral W. H. Smyth, F.R.S.,
drew up a statement of plans by which the transport of the Obelisk
might be accomplished; and Mehemet Ali offered to assist the
undertaking by building a pier expressly for the purpose.[2]
[1] See Appendix, p. 187. Letter from Consul Briggs to Sir Benjamin
Blomfield.
[2] See Appendix, p. 199.
In 1832, the propriety of making an endeavour to procure the Obelisk
was discussed in Parliament, and supported by Joseph Hume, a sum of
money being proposed for the purpose.
In 1867, Lieutenant-General Sir James Alexander directed his attention
to the same subject, and read a Paper on the existing state of the
Obelisk, before the Royal Society of Edinburgh.[3] In 1875, he visited
Alexandria for the purpose of ascertaining the actual condition of the
Obelisk, and the possibility of getting it into British possession. A
letter from Mr. Arthur Arnold to Lord Henry Lennox, First Commissioner
of Works, dated April, 1876, and published in his book, entitled,
“Through Persia by Caravan,” exhibits one of the results of Sir James
Alexander’s exertions, and may be regarded as the most recent official
report on the Obelisk question.[4]
[3] Appendix, p. 190.
[4] See Appendix: Mr. Arnold’s letter; p. 195.
While in Egypt, Sir James Alexander became acquainted with Mr. John
Dixon, C.E., who had given considerable attention to the subject of
the Obelisk and to the mode of its transport to England. Mr. Dixon had
already made some successful explorations of the Great Pyramid, and had
then brought his skill and experience, as a civil engineer, to bear
on the practical question of the means and contrivance by which the
transport of our Obelisk might be effected.
Such was the state of affairs in November, 1876, when Sir James
Alexander first broached the subject to the author of these pages.
Shortly afterwards the writer had an interview with Mr. John Dixon;
succeeded by a conference, in which he was assisted by the judgment
and advice of two valued friends—Mr. Charles Alfred Swinburne, of
Bedford Row, and Mr. Henry Palfrey Stephenson, civil engineer. The
conclusion arrived at in this conference was, that the undertaking was
practicable; and an agreement was shortly afterwards (January 30th,
1877) signed, by which Mr. John Dixon engaged to set up the Obelisk on
the banks of the Thames safe and sound.
The incidents of voyage, the shipwreck, the abandonment and recovery of
the cylinder-ship “Cleopatra,” together with her subsequent adventures,
form an episode of surpassing interest, which has already been partly
analysed in the journals of the day; but must now be left, for the
completion of its history, until the Obelisk shall have been safely
erected in London, on a site worthy of its antiquity and symbolical
significance, and of the dignity of the metropolis of Great Britain. A
happy chance already points to the precincts of Westminster Abbey, with
its harmonious architectural and classical surroundings:—Westminster
Hall, the Houses of Parliament, the Government Offices, the
Horse-Guards, the Admiralty, Trafalgar Square, the Thames, and the most
beautiful of its bridges, as a possible site; and in very truth, no
better place can be found for it in our great city, even should Queen
Anne graciously condescend to step from her pedestal at St. Paul’s, to
make way for her more ancient monumental companion.
In the compilation of these pages, the writer has availed himself of
all the sources of information which his leisure has permitted him to
consult; and he now takes the opportunity of expressing his especial
obligations to the works of—Birch, Bonomi, Mariette, Sir Gardner
Wilkinson, Sir Henry Rawlinson, George Rawlinson, Burton, Chabas,
Pierret, Sharpe, Lane, Admiral Smyth, Rev. George Tomlinson, Parker, W.
R. Cooper, Bayle St. John, Lady Duff Gordon, and Miss Edwards; although
these authors represent only a portion of the writers in whose pages he
has sought for instruction.
LONDON
_December, 1877._
CONTENTS.
PAGE
ALEXANDER THE GREAT and Alexandria 1
The Cradle of Christian Theology 2
Succession of Persians, Greeks, and Romans in Egypt 3
The Ptolemies and the Cæsars 4
Queen Cleopatra 5
Cleopatra and Anthony 6
Shakspeare’s Cleopatra 7
Queen Berenice: Coma Berenicis 9
Cleopatra’s Needles 10
Inscription on the Bronze Supports of Cleopatra’s Needles 11
Date of Erection of Cleopatra’s Needles at Alexandria 12
Cæsarium; or Palace of the Cæsars 12
The British, or London Obelisk 13
The Pharaohs, Thothmes III. and Rameses II. 14
Signification of “Cartouche” 16
Age of the British Obelisk 17
Battle of Alexandria in 1801 17
Cleopatra’s Needle in 1801 17
Burial of the British Obelisk with Obsequies 18
Obelisks and Needles 19
Monoliths of Syenite 20
Dimensions and Proportions of the Obelisk 21
The Paris Obelisk 22
Beauty and Durability of Syenite 23
Injury done by Sand-storms 24
Probable effect of British Climate 25
Time required to complete an Obelisk 25
Colossal Obelisks 26
Obelisks Carved when Erect 27
Pliny, the Younger, on Obelisks 28
Transport of Obelisks 29
Journey of the British Obelisk 29
Adoption of Obelisks by the Greeks 30
Export of Obelisks to Rome 31
Galleys of the Greeks and Romans 32
Maritime Prejudices of the Egyptians 33
Circumnavigation of Africa 34
The Emperor Constantine’s Love of Obelisks 34
The Obelisk of Constantinople 35
Ruins of Alexandria 36
Pompey’s Pillar at Alexandria 37
Diocletian’s Title to Pompey’s Pillar 38
CAIRO and the DELTA 40
Ismailia, a Health Resort 41
The Marvellous Nile 42
The Seven Cataracts of the Nile 42
Lady Duff Gordon and her “Letters from Egypt” 43
Christianity and Theology 44
West Bank of the Nile 45
Memphis and England’s Colossus 46
The Great Pyramids of Geezeh 51
The Patriarch of Pyramids 52
The Colossal Sphynx 53
East Bank of the Nile 56
The Land of Goshen and Field of Zoan 56
Heliopolis and its Obelisk 58
Cartouches of the Pharaoh Usertesen 60
Temple of the Sun, dedicated to Ra and Tum 61
The Obelisk, Symbol of the Rising Sun and Life 63
Pharaoh’s Needles 63
Napoleon’s Address to the Army of the Pyramids 64
What have the Obelisks looked down upon 64
Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph in the Land of Goshen 65
Village of Matareeah; the Virgin’s Tree 65
Hot Sulphur Springs of Helwân 66
Chronology of Ancient Egypt 68
Manetho, the Egyptian Chronologist and Priest 70
Analogies between Obelisk and Pyramid 72
Ornamentation of Obelisks 74
Scientific Knowledge evinced in their Construction 74
Carving of the Obelisk 75
Legend of the British Obelisk, by M. Chabas 76
The Flaminian Obelisk, of the Porta del Popolo 79
Legend of the Flaminian Obelisk 81
Standard of the King 82
The Grand Assemblies called Panegyries 86
Legend of the Paris Obelisk 87
Legend of the Alexandrian Obelisk 88
Moses and the British Obelisk 89
The Pharaoh of the Exodus 90
Era of Joseph in Egypt 90
Nile Voyage from Cairo to Thebes 90
Habits of the Crocodile 91
Geology of Egypt 92
The Mighty Ruins of Thebes 93
Memnonian Colossi; the Vocal Memnon 94
Earthquake before the Christian Era 96
Granite Colossus of Rameses the Great 98
Queen Hatasou’s Western Obelisks 99
Village of Luxor 100
Tomb Architecture 100
Reign of the Mummies 101
The Pylon and Propylon 103
The Architect of Karnak 106
Colossal Statues and Sphynxes 107
Obelisk of Thothmes I. at Karnak 108
Obelisk of Hatasou, appropriated by Thothmes III. 108
Usertesen’s Sanctuary 109
Lost Obelisks of Amenophis III. 110
The Luxor Obelisks 111
Obelisks of Rameses II. 113
Confusion of Thothmes and Hatasou, Seti and
Rameses, and Rameses and Thothmes 114
Sacred Scarabæi and Manufacture of Antiques 117
Humanity of the Egyptians 119
Symbolism of the Scarabæus 120
Voyage from Luxor to As-souan 121
Unfinished Obelisk at As-souan 122
Mode of cleaving Obelisks from the Rock 123
“Beautiful Philæ” and “Pharaoh’s Bed” 125
Obelisks of Philæ 126
The Bankes Obelisk 128
Resistance of Religious Faith to Theodosian Violence 131
Hieroglyphic Writing; how deciphered 133
The Rosetta Stone 134
Cartouches of Ptolemy and Cleopatra 135
Apotheosis of Egyptologists 137
USERTESEN and his Obelisks, Heliopolis and Biggig 138
Monolithic Monuments of the Hebrews 144
Abyssinian Obelisks 145
Inscription on the Biggig Obelisk 147
Obelisks of Thothmes I. 148
Obelisks of Queen Hatasou 148
Obelisks of Thothmes III. 149
Obelisk of Amenophis II. 152
Inscription on the Syon House Obelisk 153
Obelisks of Amenophis III. 154
Obelisks of Seti I., or Osirei 154
Obelisks of Rameses II. 156
Obelisks of Menephtah I. 158
Obelisks of Psammeticus I. and II. 159
Obelisks of Nectanebo I., or Amyrtæus 160
Obelisks of Nectanebo II. 162
Prioli Obelisk at Constantinople 164
Obelisk of Nahasb 166
Assyrian Obelisks 166
Ptolemaic Obelisks of Philæ 167
The Bankes Obelisk at Kingston-Lacy Hall 167
Albani Obelisk 168
Roman Obelisks 168
Obelisks at Alnwick 170
Obelisks in the Florence Museum 170
The Arles Obelisk 170
Egyptian Founders of Obelisks 172
Aggregate number of Obelisks 174
Bonomi’s List of Altitudes of Obelisks 176
Classification and Distribution of Obelisks 178
Site of the British Obelisk 182
APPENDIX.
PAGE
Extract from “Bombay Courier,” 1802 185
Consul Briggs to the Right Hon. Sir Benjamin Blomfield,
1820; presentation of the Obelisk to George the
Fourth, by Mehemet Ali 186
General Sir James Alexander; Paper read at the Royal
Society of Edinburgh, 1868 190
Plan of Transport of the Obelisk, by Captain Boswell,
R.N. 193
Report by Mr. Arthur Arnold, to Lord Henry Lennox,
respecting state of Obelisk and Plans of Transport,
1876 195
Captain Methven’s Plan of Transport, and Estimate 197
Admiral Smyth’s Plans of Transport 199
Transport of the Luxor Obelisk to Paris, 1831-36 200
Carrick-a-Daggon Monument, in memory of General Browne
Clayton, one of the Heroes of Alexandria 205
The British Ensign; half-mast, March 28th, in memory of
our gallant and victorious Abercromby 207
Translation of the Legend of the British Obelisk, by
Demetrius Mosconas 207
Ancient Heroic Poem in honour of Thothmes III.,
translated from the Tablet of Phtamosis 210
M. Mosconas’ recent Work 213
ILLUSTRATIONS.
BRITISH OBELISK (_Frontispiece_).
ALEXANDRIAN OBELISK (_Vignette on Title-page_).
PAGE
PARIS OBELISK 22
OBELISK AT CONSTANTINOPLE 35
POMPEY’S PILLAR AT ALEXANDRIA 37
THE COLOSSAL SPHYNX 54
OBELISK OF USERTESEN AT HELIOPOLIS 59
CARTOUCHES OF USERTESEN 60
STANDARD OF THE KING 82
MEMNONIAN COLOSSI, THE VOCAL MEMNON 94
PYLON OF A HOUSE OR TEMPLE 103
PROPYLON OF THE TEMPLE AT EDFOO 105
PLAN OF ORNAMENTATION OF THE ENTRANCE OF AN EGYPTIAN TEMPLE 111
SACRED SCARABÆI 116
ENGRAVED UNDER-SURFACE OF SCARABÆI 118
CARTOUCHES OF PTOLEMY AND CLEOPATRA 135
OBELISK AT AXUM IN ABYSSINIA 145
CARTOUCHES OF THOTHMES III. 150
CARTOUCHES OF RAMESES II. 156
BRITISH MUSEUM OBELISKS 161
OBELISK AT ARLES 171
CLEOPATRA’S NEEDLE.
More than twenty-two centuries ago—that is to say, about three hundred
and thirty-two years before the birth of Christ—a Greek general,
after a victorious campaign against the Persian rulers of Egypt, and
a triumphant progress along the eastern boundary of the Delta (at
that time the heart of the Egyptian kingdom), embarked in his galley
on the Rosetta branch of the Nile, and swept down its stream to the
Mediterranean Sea. Veering to the west, he steered along the African
coast, and very soon came in sight of a small narrow island, called
Pharos, lying at a short distance from the shore, and separated from
it by a deep-sea channel capable of floating ships of heavy burden.
This island served as a ready-made breakwater to the channel inside,
and seemed intended to convert it into a natural harbour. It was on
this very spot that the city of Alexandria sprung into existence, in
obedience to the command of the victorious general already mentioned,
who, indeed, was no less a personage than Alexander the Great, King of
Macedonia, the first of a line of Greek kings who reigned over Egypt
for three hundred years.
On the island of Pharos was laid the foundation of a magnificent
lighthouse. The centre of the island was connected with the mainland by
means of a mole, or causeway, three-quarters of a mile long; and this
causeway contributed additional security to the harbour. Warehouses,
docks, and streets, interspersed with temples, palaces, and monuments,
sprung into existence with inconceivable rapidity; and that which
originally was nothing more than a poor little fishing village, called
Rhacotis, was speedily converted into the greatest and most flourishing
city of the world, the chief seaport of Egypt, distinguished alike for
its commercial prosperity and for its influence as a seat of learning.
Here was established the celebrated library of Alexandria, the resort
of philosophers from all the surrounding countries—from Greece, from
Rome, from Babylon, from Jerusalem, from Persia, and from Palestine:
here creeds were argued and debated; here Athanasius and Arian
disputed; here the Holy Bible was translated into Greek (the common
language of the people), for the benefit of the Alexandrian Jews;
here the Evangelist Mark preached the gospel of Christ; and here the
groundwork was laid of a future religion of brotherly love, moderation,
and peace.
It was the habit of the human kind in those early ages—as, alas! is
too often the case in the present day—to be puffed up by success and
enfeebled by indulgence. So it fell out with the princes of Persia;
for, in the latter years of their reign of two centuries in Egypt,
the rulers became indolent and incompetent; they relied on others
for the performance of duties which were inseparably their own; they
enlisted an army of mercenaries in Greece; the mercenaries grew bold
and powerful, and, in due time, seized on the possessions of their
masters. The Greeks, in their turn, rushed forward to a similar fate;
they conquered the world, and then, growing indifferent and luxurious,
it was the easy task of the Romans to conquer them. Too enervated
and too listless to maintain the greatness they had achieved, they
purchased for their defence the help of the Roman soldiery; and the
Roman legions, nothing loth, were not long before they occupied the
throne of their employers. Three centuries saw the beginning and the
ending of Greek rule in Egypt. Pompey and Julius Cæsar, fighting for
the supremacy of the world, precipitated themselves on the oft-disputed
battle-ground of Egypt; Pompey for refuge, Cæsar in pursuit; Pompey
welcomed by false friends with the poniard, while, shortly afterwards,
Cæsar fell by the hand of his colleagues and of his friend Brutus.
And so it happened that Augustus, the renowned Roman emperor, became
supreme sovereign of Egypt just thirty years before the Christian era;
and Egypt was governed by the Romans for seven hundred years.
Ptolemy was the family surname of the Greek kings, and Cæsar that of
the Roman emperors; so that it is not an uncommon thing to speak of the
reign of the Ptolemies and the reign of the Cæsars; but as there were
queens as well as kings among the Greeks, the prevailing name of the
sovereign ladies was Cleopatra. The last of the Ptolemies left behind
him, at his death, two sons and two daughters; both the sons were named
Ptolemy, and the eldest daughter, Cleopatra.[5]
[5] Cleopatra the famous, was the sixth Cleopatra.
Cleopatra, says a popular author on the Greek dynasty (Samuel Sharpe),
“had been a favourite name in Greece and with the royal families of
Macedonia and Alexandria for at least four hundred years. What prettier
name could be given to a little girl in her cradle, than to call her
_the pride of her father_.” Nevertheless Cleopatra was harshly dealt
with by her brother: their father had directed that his eldest son and
daughter should rule conjointly; but Ptolemy endeavoured to secure the
throne for himself, and Cleopatra was obliged to fly the country. In
this emergency Cleopatra sought and secured the assistance of Julius
Cæsar; her brother was beaten in battle and drowned in his endeavours
to escape the pursuit of the victorious army, and she was restored to
the throne by Cæsar to rule conjointly with her younger brother.
After the death of Cæsar, Cleopatra fell into disfavour with Mark
Anthony. Mark Anthony was then at Tarsus, sovereign of the East,
and tripartite ruler of the then known world. Tarsus is familiar to
ourselves as the birthplace of the Apostle Paul, and the city which,
in the infancy of Christianity, was enlightened by his teachings. It
was situated on the river Cydnus; and here Cleopatra was commanded
to appear before her powerful master Anthony, to meet the charges of
misgovernment that had been made against her. “The beauty, sweetness,
and gaiety of this young Queen,” says Sharpe, “joined to her great
powers of mind, which were all turned to the art of pleasing, had quite
overcome Anthony; he had sent for her as her master, but he was now
her slave. Her playful wit was delightful; her voice was an instrument
of many strings; she spake readily to every ambassador in his own
language; and was said to be the only sovereign of Egypt who could
understand the language of all her subjects:—Greek, Egyptian, Ethiopic,
Troglodytic, Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac. With these charms, at the age
of five-and-twenty, Anthony could deny her nothing.”
Our compassion is beginning to be enlisted for the sovereign and the
judge; for behold, the culprit approaches:—“She entered the river
Cydnus with the Egyptian fleet, in a magnificent galley. The stern was
covered with gold; the sails were of scarlet cloth; and the silver oars
beat time to the music of flutes and harps. The Queen, dressed like
Venus, lay under an awning embroidered with gold, while pretty dimpled
boys, like Cupids, stood on each side of the sofa fanning her. Her
maidens, dressed like sea-nymphs and graces, handled the silken tackle,
and steered the vessel; as they approached the town of Tarsus, the
winds wafted the perfumes and the scent of the burning incense to the
shores, which were lined with crowds who had come out to see her land.”
Shakspeare pursues the tempting theme in the same rapturous tone,
having doubtless derived his history of Cleopatra, like Sharpe, from
Plutarch.
“From the barge,
A strange invisible perfume hits the sense
Of the adjacent wharves. The city cast
Her people out upon her. And Anthony,
Enthroned in the market-place, did sit alone
Whistling to the air; which, but for vacancy,
Had gone to gaze on Cleopatra too,
And made a gap in nature.
Upon her landing, Anthony sent to her;
Invited her to supper: she replied,
It should be better he became her guest;
Which she intreated: our courteous Anthony,
Whom ne’er the word of “No” woman heard speak,
Being barbered ten times o’er, goes to the feast,
And for his ordinary pays his heart
For what his eyes eat only.”
The Roman soldier marvelled at the loveliness of his hostess and the
splendour of her entertainment, and was not unwilling to repeat his
visit. Each sumptuous feast surpassed in gorgeous profusion that which
had gone before it, until a bet was laid that Cleopatra would give
a banquet which should cost £60,000. She came to the entertainment
adorned with two magnificent earrings of pearl, the largest in the
world, and part of her suite of crown-jewels. In the midst of the feast
an attendant set before her a cup of vinegar; she took a pearl from her
ear and dropped it into the vinegar, and, when it was dissolved, she
drank off the contents of the cup as a pledge to her distinguished
guest. One of Anthony’s friends, Plancus, adjudged that Anthony had
lost the bet, and taking the other pearl from her ear, sent it to
Italy, where it was cut in two and made into a pair of earrings for the
statue of Venus, in the Pantheon of Rome.
A pleasant compliment had been paid, some two hundred years before that
time, to another great Queen of Egypt, Berenice, the wife of Ptolemy
Euergetes. Euergetes had been called to the wars, and Berenice, who
was remarkable for a splendid head of hair, vowed, in her grief, that
she would cut it all off and offer it as a sacrifice to the gods if
her husband returned in safety. Ptolemy was victorious, the hair was
dutifully cut off, and hung up in the Temple of Venus; after a time
the hair disappeared, and Conon, the astronomer, being appealed to,
declared that it had been carried off by Jupiter, who spreading it
forth in the azure vault of heaven, had made of it a constellation of
seven stars, which, to this day, is known as the “Coma Berenicis;”
literally, Berenice’s head of hair. There must have been grand prizes
to be drawn in those lucky days by the fortunate: to be installed
in the starry firmament could not otherwise be regarded than as a
distinguished and lasting honour; and an astronomer who was desirous of
standing well with the Court, had it in his power to pay an agreeable
compliment. We can fancy Astronomer Conon, after a courteous reception
at the palace, saying, as he took his leave, “Your name, Madam, shall
be enrolled among the constellations, to shine brightly for ever
and ever more.” It was a pretty piece of scientific patronage, and
convincing; for, of course, no further search was made for Berenice’s
curls.
These pleasant stories convey to us, as well as anything can, the
admiration of the Egyptians for their lovely ones, and the ideal
inspiration which associates itself with a name. We can no longer
wonder that two superb obelisks, chiselled in the best period of
Egyptian art, sculptured in the rose-coloured granite of the renowned
quarries of Syené at the extremest limit of the kingdom, and set up in
the midst of the regal city, made doubly lustrous by the presence of
its beautiful Queen, and probably within the precincts of her favourite
palace, should have received the name of Cleopatra’s Needles; nor,
that that name should be borne by them to all futurity.[6]
[6] Cleopatra’s Needle at Alexandria is the subject of the vignette on
our title-page: it exhibits the infirm condition of the base of the
obelisk; and it has been represented to the Egyptian government that,
unless steps are taken to render it secure, it will probably share the
fate of its fellow monolith. In the figure the pedestal is partially
stripped of the earth and rubbish with which it is ordinarily covered.
We assume, therefore, that the name of Cleopatra, associated with
the two beautiful obelisks brought from Heliopolis, represents the
popularity of the Queen, and the affectionate regard of her subjects,
rather than any participation of herself in their transport or
erection; and we are borne out in that presumption by Mr. Waynman
Dixon’s recent discovery of an inscription, engraved in Greek and Latin
on the bronze supports of the standing obelisk. The inscription to
which we refer reads as follows:—
Anno VIII. Cæsaris;—Barbarus, præfectus Ægypti, posuit;—Architectore
Pontio.
“In the eighth year of Cæsar (Augustus), Barbarus, prefect of Egypt,
erected this, Pontius being the architect.”
Now, the eighth year of the reign of Cæsar Augustus, which he himself
dated from the battle of Actium, was twenty-three years before the
birth of Christ; and, consequently, seven years after the death of
Cleopatra. It is not, however, at all improbable that Queen Cleopatra
may have designed as well as contributed to the decoration of the
palace during her lifetime, and that the setting-up of the obelisks may
have been part of her plan. History likewise informs us that this grand
palace of the Cæsars, the Cæsarium, was not finally completed until
fifty years later—namely, in the reign of Tiberius. Mr. Sharpe says
of it, that “it stood by the side of the harbour, and was surrounded
with a sacred grove. It was ornamented with porticoes, and fitted up
with libraries, paintings, and statues, and was the most lofty building
in the city. In front of this temple they set up two ancient obelisks
which had been made by Thothmes III., and carved by Rameses II.; and
which, like the other monuments of the Theban kings, have outlived
all the temples and palaces of their Greek and Roman successors. One
of the obelisks has fallen to the ground, but the other is still
standing, and bears the name of Cleopatra’s Needle.” Both obelisks, and
consequently both Needles, are reported as having been standing at the
end of the twelfth century.
And this brings us to the question:—What are these obelisks? and
more particularly:—What is the British obelisk, of which its fellow
at Alexandria is termed Cleopatra’s Needle? The answer is:—that the
sculptures on the four sides of the monument, its hieroglyphs or
sacred writing, or more popularly, its picture-writing, declare it to
be an invocation addressed to the deities of Egypt; a proclamation
of the grandeur and deserts of the Pharaoh, by whom it is dedicated;
his victories; his construction of temples and monuments; his love of
justice, and his other exalted qualities, not forgetting the erection
of this obelisk; the proclamation concluding with a prayer for health
and a strong life. In the present instance the petitioner-in-chief is
Thothmes III., and in the second place, Rameses II. Thothmes III.,
also called Thothmes the Great, was a distinguished Pharaoh, of a
distinguished dynasty, the eighteenth, renowned for its grandeur and
magnificence; and of his reign it has been said that Egypt could then
plant the boundary of her territory wherever she chose. Rameses II.
was likewise styled “Rameses the Great;” and by the Greek historian
Herodotus, Sesostris: he was a Pharaoh of the nineteenth dynasty;
in his early days a victorious soldier; and during the remainder of
his long reign, a devoted cultivator of the arts of civilisation and
peace. So that those who are discontent with the euphonious title of
“Cleopatra’s Needle,” and prefer to be rigorously precise in their
language, must contrive to familiarise their voice and their ear with
the less euphonious title of “Thothmes-Rameses obelisk.”
This obelisk bears evidence of having been constructed at the command
of Thothmes, inasmuch as the legend of that monarch occupies the place
of honour on its shaft—namely, the central portion of the face of the
monument, extending from the top to the bottom; while the two sides of
each face are devoted to that of Rameses. It is furthermore worthy of
note, that about two hundred years must have intervened between the
action of Thothmes and that of Rameses in relation to this obelisk.
And consequently that the central and side columns of hieroglyphs
represent periods of art of, at least, two centuries apart. It is also
not a little singular that a king of vast renown, like Rameses the
Great, should have preferred to publish the record of his own brilliant
titles by the side of those of his distinguished predecessor, rather
than raise a separate obelisk as an independent memorial of himself.
Was it a submissive deference to the grandeur of his ancestor? Was
it the ambition of linking his own name with that of the magnificent
Thothmes? Or was it a part of that eccentricity of character which led
him to stamp his escutcheon on several other works of his predecessors,
and in some instances to obliterate their names in order to give his
own a prominent place? In the present instance, we should be unwilling
to treat of the combination as a blot, but would rather condone the
offence—if such it be—and congratulate ourselves that the obelisk bears
the insignia of two such grand Pharaonic personages. Thothmes III.
and Rameses II. were undoubtedly the two greatest monarchs among the
Pharaohs of Egypt; and the latter, besides being remarkable for the
construction of temples and for his magnificent sculptures, was equally
so for his eagerness to render his name universal. His cartouche[7]
is to be met with extensively distributed all over Egypt, and also in
those neighbouring countries which had been conquered by the Egyptian
arms. He is the author of a considerable number of Egyptian obelisks;
and his desire to occupy with his titles every vacant space of stone,
is exhibited, not only by the writing on the British obelisk, but also
by his appropriation of two sides of two obelisks erected in the great
temple of Karnak by Thothmes the First. With respect to the age of our
own monument, it seems not improbable that the order for the British
obelisk was given about sixteen hundred years before the Christian era;
and consequently that its age, at the present time, may be taken to be
about 3,500 years.
[7] Cartouche is a word introduced into Egyptology by Champollion; it
signifies a scroll, or label, or escutcheon, on which the name of a
Pharaoh is inscribed. Early Egyptologists had had their interest and
curiosity awakened by observing the enclosure of certain hieroglyphs
within an oval outline; and further research discovered that the ovals
included hieroglyphs representing royal names and titles. The oval,
or cartouche, is to be regarded therefore as the seal, or signet, or
heraldic cypher of a king or potentate, and its presence on an obelisk
or monument confers a right of authorship or proprietorship, and
informs us to whom the monument belongs. The seal likewise typifies
_renovation_ and _immortality_, and on this account was selected as
the badge of kings, to render immortality, which all Egyptians eagerly
aspire to, the more secure. It is impossible to read Egyptian monuments
correctly without a knowledge of the royal cartouches.
We have now lying before us an engraving, for which we are indebted
to Captain Cotton, of Quex Park, in Thanet; an engraving published
by Colnaghi, in May, 1803,[8] which bears the following legend:—“The
obelisk at Alexandria, generally called Cleopatra’s Needle, as cleared
to its base by the British troops in Egypt, and similar to the one
lying by it, intended to be brought to England. From the original
drawing by Lieut.-Colonel Montresor, 80th Regiment, in the possession
of the Right Honourable the Earl of Cavan, then Commanding-in-chief
His Majesty’s forces in Egypt.” In this engraving, Cleopatra’s Needle
stands close to the sea, on a square pedestal mounted on three
step-like plinths; and is surrounded with broken arches, which may
possibly have belonged to a magnificent temple or palace; while behind
it are the towers and ruins of a part of the ancient city wall, and in
the distance, stretching away into the sea, the promontory, on which
stands the smaller lighthouse, or Pharillon. In recent photographs
little is seen of these massive and extensive ruins; the Needle is sunk
in a hole, the pedestal being lost to the sight, in a stonemason’s
yard; and the fallen obelisk is buried in the sand. “In 1849,” says
Mr. Macgregor, the celebrated canoe traveller, “this neglected gift
was only half buried; but, in 1869, it was so completely hidden, that
not even the owner of the workshop, where it lies, could point out to
me the exact spot of its sandy grave.” The Rev. Alfred Charles Smith
corroborates the forlorn condition of the fallen obelisk at about the
same date. “It is not only prostrate,” he says, “but buried beneath
a mass of rubbish; and, I doubt not, is now hopelessly covered in by
the foundations of a house, for which preparations were being made at
the time of our visit. We were so far benefited by the labours of the
workmen, that we had a better view of the prostrate obelisk than has
fallen to the lot of recent travellers, inasmuch as, in excavating
the ground at this spot, the labourers had uncovered nearly the
entire length of the recumbent granite, and as they were just about
to fill-in the earth around, I suppose we were the last tourists who
have looked in upon the open grave of this renowned relic, * * * *
though I am bound to add it is the most dilapidated, weather-worn, and
ill-conditioned of all its brethren on the banks of the Nile.” _Nous
verrons._
[8] The battle of Alexandria was fought within sight of Cleopatra’s
Needle, in March, 1801.
The term “Needle” is familiar to our ear as designating a pointed
shaft soaring upwards into the sky. In this sense we adopt it as the
name of certain pointed rocks rising perpendicularly out of the sea,
such as the “Needles” of the Isle of Wight; and it has been similarly
applied to two of the obelisks of Heliopolis, Pharaoh’s Needles, which
were removed by Constantine. It is a term peculiarly suitable to the
obelisk, which, according to Johnson, is “a magnificent high piece
of solid marble or other fine stone, having usually four faces, and
lessening upwards by degrees till it ends in a point like a pyramid.”
The term obelisk is of Greek origin, derived from the word “_obelos_,”
a spit; conveying the idea of a pointed implement; but its Arab synonym
is still more explicit—namely, “_meselleh_,” which literally means “a
packing needle or skewer;” the ancient Egyptian name of obelisk being
_tekn_.
The Egyptian obelisks have two other important features:—first, they
are monoliths, and secondly, they are hewn out of the quarries of
rose-coloured granite of Syené. By monolith is meant “a single stone,”
from the Greek words “monos,” one or single, and “lithos,” a stone, and
is intended to signify that the object is formed of a single piece;
therefore we have good reason for our wonder when we see before us a
stately shaft of granite consisting of a single piece, very little
short of a hundred feet in height, and weighing nearly two hundred
tons.[9]
[9] The real weight of the British obelisk is 186 tons, seven
hundredweight, two stones, eleven pounds; and its cubic measurement
2,529 feet.
The Egyptian obelisk has another peculiarity; it is rarely uniform
in breadth on all its four sides; the opposites agree, but the
neighbouring sides differ. This difference is clearly not intentional,
but a possible consequence of the method of splitting so gigantic a
shaft from its mother-rock. The British obelisk, for example, measures
7 feet 5 inches in breadth at its base on one side, and close upon 8
feet (7 ft. 10½ in.) on the adjoining side—a difference of five inches
and a-half; while similar measurements of the Alexandrian obelisk
give 7 feet 9¾ inches, and 8 feet 2¼ inches—a difference of only two
inches and a-half. The proper proportions of the shaft of an obelisk,
exclusive of its pyramidion, are said to be ten times the breadth of
the base. Now if we apply this rule to the British obelisk, its height
should be nearly eighty feet, whereas its extremest height, from the
base to the point, is _sixty-eight feet five inches and a-half_. From
its base of 7 feet 5, or 7 feet 10½ inches, it tapers gradually upwards
to a breadth of 4 feet 10 inches, or 5 feet 1 inch; and then contracts
into a pointed pyramid of 7 feet 6 inches high. The Alexandrian
obelisk is hardly so tall as the British obelisk, and measures 67
feet 2 inches. But when the British obelisk shall have been raised on
its pedestal of ten feet square, and mounted on plinths, the monument
will then have an altitude of over eighty feet. Comparing it with the
Paris obelisk, the latter is seventy-six feet and a-half in height,
consequently nearly eight feet higher than the British obelisk: whereas
one of Pharaoh’s Needles, set up before the Lateran Church in Rome, was
originally more than 108 feet high; but having lost part of its base,
at present measures 105 feet 7 inches.
[Illustration: The Paris obelisk, brought from Luxor, and now standing
in the Place de la Concorde. A work of Rameses II.]
The rose-coloured granite of Syené, the so-called “Syenite,” has
acquired a world-wide reputation for its beauty of colour, the lustre
of its polish, and its hardness of texture. In the dry climate of
Upper Egypt, where a rainy day occurs only four or five times in the
year, this granite may be said to be absolutely indestructible; and
therefore it is that the Egyptian sculptures and obelisks, more than
four thousand years old, come down to us almost as fresh as if they had
just issued from the workman’s hand. The engraving of the hieroglyphs
is often several inches in depth, its hollows carefully polished, and
the work comparable to the delicate carving of a gem.
But although the Egyptian climate deals tenderly with these beautiful
objects, the sand-storms are not so merciful: showers of sand are often
precipitated with the violence of small shot against the polished
stone; and the sharp particles of sand, by successive battery, leave
their impression on the surface: at first the polish alone is blurred;
but by degrees the picture-writing itself is worn away. This is
apparent on the Alexandrian obelisk, of which the two sides exposed
to the fury of the land-storms are seriously corroded, while the
sea-face is but little injured. The British obelisk shows similar marks
of wear from causes of the same kind, but has further to complain
of the rapacity of travellers, who have damaged it considerably in
their endeavours to carry away fragments of so brilliant a memorial
of ancient times. The angles of the shaft have been chipped in many
places; and as a refinement of mischief, even the perpendicular sides
of some of the hieroglyphs have likewise been chiselled away. When we
come to the patriarch of obelisks at Heliopolis, that of King Usertesen
I., we shall find that the Nile has been busy with its sheen, and has
left his mark of annual overflow on the lower part of its shaft; whilst
elsewhere we have the account of a fragment of an ancient obelisk set
up in the midst of a garden, in the perfumed atmosphere of luxuriant
flowers, in which the wild bees have puttied up the channels of the
hieroglyphics with their tenacious combs. But another and a graver
trial is in waiting for our obelisk:—How will it accommodate itself to
the climate of the British metropolis? It will endure: of that we can
have no doubt; neither will it fail in our respect and admiration even
when it has lost some of its pristine loveliness, and has submitted to
harmonise its tone with the dulness of its surroundings.
The hewing, the carving, and the burnishing of one of these huge
monoliths, under any circumstances, must have been a laborious
undertaking, and have required a considerable period for its
completion. Thus we are in formed that one of the obelisks of
Heliopolis, one of Pharaoh’s Needles, a work of Thothmes III., occupied
thirty-six years in its elaboration. It is the tallest of its race, and
now stands as a memorial of the Emperors Constantine and Constantius,
in front of the Lateran Church at Rome; whereas another obelisk, now
standing at Karnak (also of the Thothmes period, but executed under the
direction of Queen Hatasou, daughter of Thothmes I., and sister of the
second and third Thothmes), is stated, in an inscription on its base,
to have been, with its fellow, hewn from the quarry and erected in the
short period of seven months. Queen Hatasou’s obelisk is the second in
altitude of the obelisk family, measuring 97 feet 6 inches;[10] while
that of St. John Lateran, when entire, measured about 108 feet.
[10] Queen Hatasou’s obelisk has been stated to be 108 feet high; but
M. Mariette, who makes this statement in one of his books—in a more
recent work, calls it as above, 97 feet 6 inches, which is probably
correct.
It has been suggested as probable that the obelisk was brought, in
the rough state, to the spot where it was to stand, and that it was
smoothed and polished there previously to its erection. And a farther
question arises:—Was it erected plain, and afterwards carved in the
erect position, or was it carved before it was set up? If the former
of these suppositions be admitted, then the hewing and erecting of the
pair of monoliths in seven months is not so marvellous, especially
when we call to mind the vast number of artificers always at the
command of the Egyptian Government. There is clear evidence that
carving after erection was practicable, and not unusual; for it must
have been in the erect position that the side columns of engraving
were added to the British obelisk by Rameses, and no doubt that also
on the Thothmes obelisk at Karnak. The inscription on the base of
Queen Hatasou’s obelisk affords an additional argument in proof of the
ornamentation of the column being subsequent to erection, inasmuch as
it informs us that the whole shaft was gilt from top to bottom; and
although, at the present time, all trace of gold has vanished, the
surface of the stone bears evidence of having been left rough, as if
prepared to receive a thin coating of plaster such as was in common
use among the builders of the temples, when painting was resorted to;
the hollows of the carvings being left smooth and polished. The same
inscription likewise states that the obelisk was capped with gold, the
spoils of war, wrested from the enemies of the country.
Pliny the younger, after mentioning the Syenite granite as sown with
fiery spots, remarks, that a certain king of Egypt was admonished in
a dream to set up obelisks. “The kings of Egypt,” he says, “in times
past, as it were upon a strife and contention one to exceed another,
made of this stone certain long beames, which they called obelisks,
and the very Egyptian name implieth so much.” Rameses, he observes,
“pitched on end another obeliske which carried in length a hundred
foot, wanting one, and on every side four cubits square.”[11] “It
is said that Ramises above named kept 2,000 men at work about this
obeliske;” and to secure its safe erection, “caused his own son to be
bound to the top thereof. * * * Certes, this obeliske was a piece of
work so admirable, that when Cambyses had won the city where it stood,
by assault, and put all within to fire and sword, and burnt all before
him as far as to the very foundation and underpinning of the obeliske,
commanded expressly to quench the fire; and so, in a kind of reverence,
yet unto a mass and pile of stone, spared it, who had no regard at all
of the city besides.”[12]
[11] This may have been one of the Luxor obelisks, notwithstanding
the alleged difference of height; since even, at the present day, the
figures of Egyptologists are remarkably unreliable.
[12] “The Historie of the World,” commonly called the “Natural Historie
of C. Plinius, secundus.” Translated into English by Philemon Holland,
Doctor of Physicke; 1634: book 36, chap. 8.
When the obelisk was completed at Syené, the next step was that of its
removal to the spot where it was destined to stand. This was usually
effected by excavating beneath it a dry dock, and fixing therein two
large barges. When all was properly adjusted, the water was let into
the dock, and as the barges rose they lifted up their burden, and
formed a raft, which was then floated down the stream of the Nile.
In the case of the British obelisk, the destination of the raft was
Heliopolis, a distance, as the crow flies, of nearly 600 miles:
subsequently, as we know, the obelisk was conveyed to Alexandria,
adding nearly 150 miles more, and making a real total of 730 miles. And
if to these figures we allow 3,000 for the journey home, we have reason
to hail our obelisk as a not inconsiderable traveller.
We can hardly be surprised that the Greeks and the Romans should have
been fascinated with the delicate beauty of the obelisks, and should
have desired to possess them. Two hundred and eighty-four years before
the birth of Christ, Ptolemy Philadelphus built a tomb for his wife
Arsinoë at Alexandria, which he enriched with an obelisk fifty-six feet
high. The obelisk had been cut, as usual, in the quarry of Syené during
the reign of the last of the Egyptian Pharaohs, Nectanebo II.; it had
not been engraved, but its date may be stated as about six hundred
years before the Christian era. The architect, Satyrus, transported it
in a somewhat similar manner to that already described. “He dug a canal
to it as it lay upon the ground, and moved two heavily-laden barges
underneath it. The burdens were then taken out of the barges, and as
they floated higher they raised the obelisk off the ground. He then
found it a task as great, or greater, to set it up in its place; and
this Greek engineer would surely have looked back with wonder on the
labour and knowledge of mechanics which must have been used in setting
up the obelisks, colossal statues, and pyramids which he saw scattered
over the country.” It was erected, according to Pliny, “in the haven
of Arsinoë * * * but for that it did hurt to the ship docks there, one
Maximus, a governor of Egypt under the Romans, removed it from thence
into the market-place of the said city (Rome), cutting off the top of
it, intending to put a finial thereupon gilded, which afterwards was
forelet and forgotten.” This description corresponds with that of the
obelisk now standing behind the church of St. Maria Maggiore, in Rome,
which is wanting both in inscription and pyramidion; but its present
height is stated to be only 48 feet 5 inches, in lieu of 56 feet. This
latter circumstance may be accounted for on the supposition of its
having been broken before it was finally erected at Rome—an accident by
no means unusual with the Roman obelisks—and by the probable squaring
of its base for the purpose of securing a steadier foundation.
The Emperor Augustus, the conqueror of the last of the Ptolemies, and
pioneer of the Roman dynasty, who took possession of the throne of
Egypt thirty years before the Christian era, signalised his artistic
taste by sending four beautiful obelisks to Rome: one of the period
of Seti I. and his son Rameses II.; one of that of Psammeticus II.;
and two without inscription or pyramidion, of which one is ascribed
to Nectanebo. These obelisks now occupy places of honour in Rome—one
in the Piazza del Popolo, the elegant Flaminian obelisk; one on the
Piazza de Monte Citorio; one behind the church of St. Maria Maggiore;
and the remaining one in the Piazza Quirinale. That on the Monte
Citorio was originally planted in front of the church of St. Lorenzo in
Lucina, where it acted as the gnomon or pointer of a sun-dial erected
by Augustus; and the two plain obelisks were set up in front of his
mausoleum.
The means employed by Augustus for the transport of these obelisks was
a galley propelled by 300 oars-men. The war-ships of the Greek and
Roman dynasties were sometimes of imposing magnitude and strength,
and were furnished with a number of rams. One of these ships “was 420
feet long, and fifty-seven feet wide, with forty banks of oars. The
longest oars were fifty-seven feet long, and weighted with lead at the
handles, that they might be the more easily moved. This huge ship
was to be rowed by 4,000 rowers; its sails were to be shifted by 400
sailors, and 3,000 soldiers were to stand in ranks upon deck. There
were seven beaks in front, by which it was to strike and sink the ships
of the enemy. The royal barge in which the king and Court moved on the
quiet waters of the Nile, was nearly as large as this ship of war. It
was 330 feet long, and forty-five feet wide.”
This maritime power of Egypt calls to mind two leading prejudices of
the ancient Egyptians, which very much influenced their destiny: they
were averse to change, preferring, in all things, to remain as they
were, rather than risk the uncertainty of reform; and, secondly, they
had a religious horror of the ocean, believing it to be a breach of
the divine law to endeavour to subdue it, and attempt to navigate it.
Therefore, when we hear of ships from Alexandria finding their way
through the Pillars of Hercules (otherwise the Straits of Gibraltar) to
England, we recognise at once the adventure of neighbouring nations,
particularly that of the Phœnicians, who traded with Cornwall,
exchanging wheat for metal more than five hundred years before the
Christian era. The last of the Egyptian kings, Nectanebo II., made a
struggle against this ancient prejudice, and fitted up a fleet in the
Red Sea, manned by Phœnicians. His ships, steering steadily to the
south, and afterwards following the line of the coast, succeeded in
rounding the Cape of Good Hope, and reaching the Straits of Gibraltar,
and so accomplished the circumnavigation of Africa. The voyage lasted
between two and three years, and the captain returned in safety to
Egypt, but without his ships; he consequently failed to obtain credit
for, or belief in, his success.
[Illustration:
The obelisk at Constantinople, standing in the open
space of the Atmeidan, near the church of St.
Sophia. It is square at the base, and supported at
the corners upon four small metallic blocks, which
rest on a narrow pedestal. Its present height is
only fifty feet; but seeing that it was originally
the companion at Heliopolis of the great obelisk
of St. John Lateran, it must therefore have been
shortened, possibly as a consequence of accident.
It was conveyed to Byzantium by Constantine,
and erected on its present site, probably by
Theodosius. The figure is not to be commended for
its exactness; the monument is evidently much too
tall. The mosque in the background is that of the
Sultan Achmet.
]
Constantine, the first Christian among the emperors of Rome, conveyed
to Byzantium, as a decoration for his new city of Constantinople, an
obelisk of the period of Thothmes III., which now graces the Atmeidan,
or Hippodrome: it stood originally at Heliopolis, and was one of the
Needles of Pharaoh. He likewise, in all probability, sent to Arles
the obelisk which is now standing in that city. It was found, in
later times, grown over with bushes, and partly buried in a garden at
the port of La Roquette. Charles the Second and Catherine de Medicis
ordered its disinterment, and it was erected at Arles, as a memorial
of Louis the Great, in the year 1676. Constantine directed the removal
of another obelisk from Heliopolis, and this he also intended for
Constantinople; but dying previously to its arrival at Alexandria,
it was conveyed to Rome by his son Constantius. This latter is the
beautiful obelisk set up in the Piazza of St. John Lateran at Rome: it
is the tallest obelisk known; and although it has lost three feet of
its base, measures at present 105 feet 7 inches. It bears the signets
of Thothmes III. and Thothmes IV., and is the obelisk previously
mentioned as having occupied thirty-six years in the preparation. The
temple of Serapis at Alexandria formerly possessed two fine obelisks,
but both have now disappeared; they, probably, may also have found
their way to Rome. The ruins of this temple were called the citadel;
and all that remains of both is Pompey’s Pillar, which was erected in
one of the principal courts of the temple.
[Illustration: Pompey’s Pillar at Alexandria.]
Pompey’s Pillar is a magnificent column, placed on a hillock just
outside the walls of the old town. It is cut out of red syenic granite;
is beautifully polished, and is said to be the largest monolithic
pillar in the world; its total height, according to Captain Smyth,
being 99 feet 4¾ inches; or, in round numbers, 100 feet, including
the pedestal; its girth, near the base, being nearly 28 feet. It is
surmounted with a Corinthian capital, of a differently coloured granite
from that of the shaft, and of inferior workmanship, and stands on a
short stump of a broken obelisk about four feet high, inverted, and
built into the pedestal; the surface of the obelisk being covered with
hieroglyphs. The column was ascended by the French in 1798, and by
Captain Smyth in the spring of 1822. Captain Smyth wished to ascertain
its qualification for astronomical purposes; but found it too unsteady
for delicate observations; and, moreover, that it had an inclination
to the south-west, in the direction opposite to that of the prevailing
north-east wind. It has an inscription on the pedestal, which cost much
time and perseverance to make out,[13] and was at length deciphered as
follows:—
“Consecrated to the adorable Emperor Augustus
Diocletian, the tutelar divinity of Alexandria,
by Pontius, prefect of Egypt.”
[13] A French writer, referring to the decipherment of this
inscription, which, as it appears, was an onerous undertaking,
observes:—“This scientific labour fell to the lot of two British
soldiers, Captain Dundas and Lieutenant Desarde, and to them we are
indebted for the discovery of ‘a page of history, and a splendid
page.’”
This inscription clearly settles the personality of the column, and is
an answer to those by whom it has been called “The Pillar of Severus,”
and “The Pillar of Hadrian.” One author believes that it might have
been erected by Ptolemy Euergetes, as a record of the recovery of
some thousands of pictures and statues which had been carried off by
Cambyses. But the true story appears to be this:—In the year 297 of
the existing era, Egypt had risen in rebellion against her rulers,
and Alexandria, always contumacious, was subdued by Diocletian after
a siege of eight months. Diocletian, riding among the obstructions
which encumbered the fallen city, was nearly thrown from his horse.
His escape from accident doubtless prompted a grateful feeling in his
heart towards the Father of Mercies, and he erected this pillar as
a witness of his faith, surmounting it with a statue of his horse,
which has long since disappeared. Nevertheless, the ancient prejudices
of our affections are ever ready to spring forth, like buried seeds
in a garden; and a deep-felt regard for the old consul, Pompey, who
had been so treacherously assassinated on the shores of Egypt, now
competes with the better claims of Diocletian for the honour of this
magnificent memorial; just as the obelisks of Alexandria will, to the
end of time, ever be remembered in association with the memory of
Cleopatra.
We have advanced at present no further than the portal of the country
which stands supreme in the production of these interesting relics of
former grandeur, the obelisks; and yet we have made acquaintance with
nearly twenty which have emigrated from their native land. Rome is the
fortunate possessor of ten; France, of two; Constantinople, of two;
and England, of Cleopatra’s Needle and four or five smaller ones. Let
us now take a step further onwards, and visit them in their parental
home. Four hours and a-half in the railway-train (express) suffice to
transport us from Alexandria to Cairo, a distance of 130 miles. Cairo,
the queen of Eastern cities, is the present metropolis of Egypt, the
seat of its government, and the residence of its ruler, Ismail Pasha,
the Khedive, Viceroy of the Sultan of Turkey. It is situated at the
apex or head of the Delta, and forms the nob of the fan, of which the
ribs, radiating northwards towards the sea, are the seven branches of
the Nile; or, we may prefer to regard it as one of the three points of
the triangle termed Delta; Alexandria and Port Said, 140 miles apart,
occupying the other two points. Port Said, indeed, is bidding fair
to become the rival of Alexandria, and will grow in importance with
the Suez Canal, of which it is the entrance. Already we hear of the
defences of the sea-board between Alexandria and Port Said, and the
protection of a work which is identified with the intrinsic prosperity
of England. An Egyptian Bournemouth or Torquay, in the meantime, has
established itself on the line of the canal, and invalids are already
migrating for health to Ismailia, to luxuriate in the balmy and
exhilarating climate of Egypt.
Cairo is comparatively a modern city, being 1,200 years the junior of
Alexandria, and possesses few traces of antiquity. A fragment of an
obelisk helps to pave one of its entrance-gates—alas! to what base uses
fallen!—probably a work of Usertesen, of Thothmes, or of Rameses. But
if we turn our back upon the Delta, the land of prolific produce, the
battle-field of many centuries, and the grave of innumerable ancient
cities, and gaze towards the south, we see before us that wonderful
river, which, rising in the bosom of Africa, and bursting through the
granite rocks of Syené—the As-souan, or gate of Egypt—precipitates
itself, a foaming cataract,[14] into the valley of Egypt, and pursues
its meandering course, without tributary and without bridge, for
more than 600 miles in a straight line from Syené to Cairo. It is
a river of poetry and of fertility; for nine months of the year the
northern breeze (the Etesian wind) blows against its stream from
early morning until night, to waft the travellers, in the sylph-like
Nile-boat, called Dahabeeyah, through their journey of health and
recreation. At night the boat is moored for its rest; the wind is lost
in sleep, but wakens to its duties in the early morn; while rain is a
thing almost unknown. In the month of June the Nile rises at Syené;
and during August, September, and October, the low flat land of the
Delta is converted into a sheet of water, which diffuses richness and
fruitfulness throughout the grimy soil.
[14] The fall of the Nile at Syené, or As-souan, is termed the first
cataract, in consideration of its being the first of seven similar
falls which occur in the course of that river. It is in reality the
only fall in Egypt, the second being in Nubia, 200 miles higher up.
Strictly speaking, it is not a cataract, but a succession of rapids
three miles in length, and studded with rocks. The ascent of the
Dahabeeyah is made without danger between these rocks and through the
more practicable channels; but the descent brings to view dangerous
cataracts of considerable force and volume, demanding much experience
and ability on the part of the captain to shoot them with safety,
and a well-built boat to bear the shock. Hence a prime care of the
traveller, before starting from Cairo, is to secure a vessel capable
of encountering the risks of the cataract. The second cataract, from
its greater extent and more numerous rocks, is practically impassable.
The abundance of the rocks in its bed has suggested for it the Arab
expression of “the belly of stone.”
Lady Duff Gordon, in her agreeable “Letters from Egypt,” under date
1863-5 (the time of the mutiny), tells us how she passed a winter at
El-Uksur, residing in the French house—a ruinous building, which had
been occupied by the French officers who had charge of the expedition
for conveying the Luxor Obelisk to Paris. She takes especial note
of “a whole wet day,” as an event unknown in Thebes for ten years.
During her residence in Upper Egypt, she watched the annual rising
of the Nile, and remarks that the water was at first green, and soon
after blood-red; the apparent colour being, in both cases, probably
due to refraction of light. Some authors speak of the waters of the
Nile as being greenish-brown, and brown; and others as yellow. Mr. A.
C. Smith calls the Nile “yellow, muddy, and sluggish:” when filtered
it throws down a considerable deposit of mud, containing an abundance
of organic matter, but is then sweet, soft, and peculiarly palatable.
As an example of Egyptian veneration for the grand old river, Lady
Duff Gordon observes, that whenever a marriage is celebrated, and the
bridegroom has “taken the face” of his bride—that is, has looked upon
that which is habitually concealed from view, namely, the face—she is
conducted to the river bank to gaze upon the Nile.
Lady Duff Gordon, who had a warm heart for every living thing, tells
us a story which is worthy of reflected thought even in the sunny
atmosphere of the mysterious obelisk. She had a Nubian child offered
her as a slave: when she went to look after the gift, she found it
among the pots and kettles, cuffed and ill-treated by every one,
saving perhaps only the dog. She brought it to her room, warmed it
in her bosom, dressed it, and made it comfortable; nay, indulged it,
and won its confidence—in the world’s language, its love. The child
wept sorely when its good and kind mistress returned home to England;
but the mistress provided tenderly for her adopted, and secured its
comforts during her absence. When Lady Duff Gordon returned to Egypt,
the little negress held a prominent place in her thoughts: she took
it again into her guardianship; but the child was no longer the same;
she was self-willed, she was disobedient; the slave had learnt—alas!
too readily—to despise her mistress! holding her to be an accursed
Christian, a giaour. Verily the father of all evil is ignorance,
which for ever stands sentry over the tree of knowledge. Need we not
all—charity?
On our right hand, as we look forward into the south, is the site
of ancient Memphis, founded by Menes, first of the kings of Egypt.
Here stood once a magnificent temple, dedicated to the god Ptah, the
representative of “Creation;” but at present, a collection of ruinous
tombs, together with some broken colossal statues, partly engulphed
in sand, are all that remains of its original greatness. One of these
relics, a colossal statue of Rameses the Great, is believed to belong
to England, and only awaits removal to a fitting resting-place. It
has the reputation of being beautifully carved in fine sandstone, but
is corroded and blackened by the action of water, in which it lies
immersed at every rising of the Nile. Dean Stanley, in allusion to this
same locality, observes:—
“One other trace remains of the old Memphis. It had its own great
temple, as magnificent as that of Ammon at Karnak, dedicated to the
Egyptian Vulcan, Ptah. Of this not a vestige remains. But Herodotus
describes that Sesostris—that is, Rameses—built a colossal statue of
himself in front of the great gateway. And there, accordingly, as it
is usually seen by travellers, is the last memorial of that wonderful
king, to be borne away in their recollections of Egypt. Deep in the
forest of palms before described, in a little pool of water left by
the inundations, which year by year always cover the spot, lies a
gigantic trunk, its back upwards. The name of Rameses is on the belt.
The face lies downwards, but is visible in profile and quite perfect,
and the very same as at Ipsambul, with the only exception that the
features are more feminine and more beautiful, and the peculiar hang
of the lip is not there.” Of the immediate neighbourhood he says:—“For
miles you walk through layers of bones and skulls, and mummy swathings,
extruding from the sand, or deep down in shaft-like mummy-pits; and
amongst these mummy-pits are vast galleries filled with mummies of
ibises in red jars, once filled, but now gradually despoiled.”
Mr. Bayle St. John, who, for his heresies in Egyptology and floutings
of obelisks, almost puts himself out of the pale of quotation, has
a word to say about the colossal statue at Memphis, which is worth
noting as expressing the views of the tranquil lounger rather than
those of the hurried traveller. In his “Village Life in Egypt”
(1852), he says:—“After a long ride, a reedy pond covered with wild
ducks, a stone bridge, and some sluice-gates, warned us that we were
approaching the buried skeleton of Memphis. Vast mounds rose on all
hands among the palm-trees, evidently the remains of a continuous wall
of unburnt bricks, and we were soon moving along the sward-covered
sloping banks of the lake, in which the palm-groves that cover the
site of the ancient city, admire their graceful forms. Behind, in a
hollow in the ground, was the colossal statue which we had come to
see. It lay on its face, its pensive brow buried in mud, and part of
the features concealed by some still-lingering water. The Arabs call
it Abu-l-Hôn, and say it is a giant king, turned by God, ‘in ancient
times and seasons past,’ into stone for some great crime. They are not
at all astonished at the interest felt by infidels in this petrified
sinner, because we come of the same accursed stock, and feel deserving
of the same punishment. A few hovels rising amidst the palm-trees
near the statue, bear the name of Mitraheny, formerly a place of
some importance, but now not even wearing the appearance of having
seen better days. Here dwelt old Fatmeh, the guardian of the fallen
monarch, who could have told strange things of his history, had any
been curious enough to question her.” On another occasion he says:
“The following morning I went to visit my old friend Abu-l-Hôn, the
father of terror, who still lies nose down in the hollow at Mitraheny,
as he has lain for thousands of years. It is a pretty long walk, first
through the grove to Bedreshein, and then along the winding gisr to
the great grove of Mitraheny. The place is a beautiful one. A small
lake in the cooler time of the year, before the thirsty sun comes
and drinks up every scrap of moisture except the river, spreads in
the centre of the grove, dotted with little islands, that multiply
as the season advances. A close greensward, from which thousands of
palms spring at regular intervals, creeps down on all sides after the
receding water * * * immense numbers of aquatic birds make it their
resort. About sunrise it is perfectly covered with wild ducks, which
come back regularly at evening after dark. Herons dot its shores all
day, admiring, it seems, their ungainly forms, which it reflects; and
a variety of little birds, peculiar to the country, flutter with
dancing flight about its archipelago of sedgy islands. * * * The statue
was near the southern extremity of the lake. During many years it was
under the protection of an old dame, who entirely devoted herself to
its custody. Formerly, various consuls gave her a little pension;
but this gratuity was at length withdrawn, and she subsisted on the
voluntary gifts of travellers, always believing, however, that the
English nation would at length hear of the care she took of their
property, and reward her by a pension of £5 a year. Such was the extent
of her ambition. In this hope she lived and died. I found her son
occupying the same post, and indulging in the same expectations. He had
inherited her little house and some sheep, and professed to do nothing
but watch over the comfort of the petrified king in the hole. * * * It
would be good, instead of spending a great deal of money in carrying
_an ugly obelisk_[15] to England, to devote a little to raising this
extraordinary statue on its old base, otherwise, some fine day we shall
hear of its being broken up to be burnt for lime.”
[15] And this to your friend, Bayle? Hast forgotten thy school
lessons:—Quot homines tot sententiæ.
This colossal statue is recognised as an authentic portrait of Rameses
II., “the celebrated conqueror, of the nineteenth dynasty.” It was
discovered, says Mariette, by Captain Caviglia, about the year 1820,
and was presented to the British nation by Mehemet Ali. For three parts
of the year it lies under water. There is reason to believe that it
stood originally against the pylon of the Temple of Vulcan (Ptah),
its face turned to the north; but of the temple itself not a vestige
remains. According to custom, as evinced at Luxor and Karnak, there
ought to have been another similar statue for the opposite side of
the doorway, but we have searched for it in vain. Beyond the fact of
correct portraiture it possesses no scientific value. According to
Sharpe, the statue is forty-five feet in height.
Further on is Geezeh, with its magnificent group of pyramids, which
are regarded, with much reason, as among the seven wonders of the
world; and skirting the western bank of the river for, may be, fifty
miles are other pyramids of inferior dimensions, amounting in the
whole to close upon a hundred; one while in groups, as at Abooseer,
Sakkarah, and Dashoor, another while in single file. The largest of the
three great pyramids of Egypt was built by King Suphis, better known
by the name of Cheops, as a resting-place for his embalmed body; the
next in size was erected by his brother Susuphis or Chephren; and the
third, which was cased in the red granite of Syené, is that of the
son of Cheops—Menkara, also called Mycerinus. Besides these three,
which are the _great_[16] pyramids, there are six smaller ones in this
group: and, fifteen miles further on, at the village of Sakkarah, is a
pyramid built in steps, or platforms, which is said to be the oldest
in the world;[17] older, by 500 or 700 years, than those of Cheops and
Chephren; although these latter were erected 2,120 years before the
birth of Christ, and, therefore, date back to a period of nearly 5,000
years.
[16] The base of the great pyramid has been stated to be equal in
size to the area of Lincoln’s-Inn-Fields; but a “plan showing the
comparative areas of the great pyramid and Lincoln’s-Inn-Fields,” drawn
by Mr. Bonomi, of the Soane Museum, proves that this statement is
correct only in respect of the long diameter of the square; for whilst
one side of the base of the pyramid would extend westward from the wall
of Lincoln’s Inn (along the face of the houses on the _north_ side of
the square) to the middle of Gate Street, the southern boundary would
overlap the buildings on the south side of the square, and take in
the houses for some distance behind them, in the direction of the New
Law Courts. A magnificent mausoleum! It is said that 100,000 men were
employed for thirty years in its construction.
[17] Built by Ouenephes, the fourth king of the first dynasty. Mr.
Bayle St. John says of it:—“This structure has a very peculiar form,
and as it rises on its vast pedestal of rocky desert, seems totally
distinct in character from all the other pyramids that break the
horizon to the north and south. It has five steps only, five vast
steps, that together rise to the height of nearly 300 feet. It looks
like a citadel with a quintuple wall, five towers of gradually
increasing elevation, one within the other.”
[Illustration: The Sphynx, with the great pyramid of Chafra, Susuphis
or Chephren in the background.]
A quarter of a mile to the south and east of the great pyramid is the
colossal statue of the Sphynx, carved out of the summit of a rock,
which crops up like an island in the midst of the sandy desert. The
statue represents the couching body of a lion, with the head of a
man, the union of power with intelligence, and is typical of royalty.
The face, thirty feet in length by fourteen in breadth, has been much
mutilated; its entire height is 100 feet, and its paws, which are
fifty feet long, embrace a considerable area, having in its centre
a sacrificial altar, and a space for religious worship. This huge
memento of the past dates back to a period antecedent to the pyramids
themselves, and marks the spot where two ancient temples formerly
stood, one dedicated to Isis, the other to Osiris; both of which Cheops
declares, on a tablet preserved in the museum at Boulak, were purified
and restored by himself; whilst a neighbouring site was selected for
the foundation of his own pyramid. The paws of the Sphynx are covered
with inscriptions, among which is the following very interesting one,
transcribed and translated by the distinguished Egyptologist, Dr.
Thomas Young:—
“Thy form stupendous here the gods have placed,
Sparing each spot of harvest-bearing land;
And with this mighty work of art have graced
A rocky isle encumbered once with sand;
And near the pyramids have bid thee stand:
Not that fierce Sphynx that Thebes erewhile laid waste,
But great Latona’s servant, mild and bland;
Watching that prince beloved who fills the throne
Of Egypt’s plains, and calls the Nile his own:
That heavenly monarch (who his foes defies),
Like Vulcan powerful, and like Pallas wise.”—_Arrian._
“Even now,” writes Dean Stanley, “after all that we have seen of
colossal statues, there was something stupendous in the sight of that
enormous head, * * * its vast projecting wig, its great ears, its open
eyes, the red colour still visible on its cheek, the immense projection
of the lower part of its face. Yet what must it have been when on its
head there was the royal helmet of Egypt; on its chin the royal beard;
when the stone pavement, by which men approached the pyramids, ran up
between its paws; when, immediately under its breast an altar stood,
from which the smoke went up into the gigantic nostrils of that nose
now vanished from the face, never to be conceived again.”[18]
[18] “Sinai and Palestine in connection with their History.” By Arthur
Penrhyn Stanley, D.D., F.R.S.
On our left hand, as we still stand gazing forward into the south, in
the direction of the coming wavelets of the tawny Nile, is a desert
plain, afore-time called the “Land of Goshen,” lying between Cairo
and the Suez Canal. It was here that Abraham found an abiding-place
1,920 years before the birth of Christ, when, driven out of Syria by
the floods, he sought in Egypt herbage for his flocks and herds, and
sustenance for his retainers. Here, in various stages of decay, are
the ancient cities of the Hebrews, where Hebrew, until very recently,
was the prevailing language of the people. Here we find On, or Onion,
still bearing its Hebrew appellation, and Rameses and Pithom, and
Succoth and Hieropolis. Nearer the Mediterranean Sea is “the field
of Zoan” (Psalms, chap. lxxviii. ver. 12, 43), with the ruins of the
ancient city of San, or Tanis, remarkable for the vast extent of the
foundation of a once magnificent temple, teeming with monuments and
obelisks. Here, says Mr. Macgregor, “you see about a dozen obelisks,
all fallen, all broken; twenty or thirty great statues, all monoliths
of porphyry and granite, red and grey.” Isaiah had afore-time levelled
his reproaches against San:—“The princes of Zoan are become fools, the
princes of Nopth (Memphis) are deceived; they have also seduced Egypt,
even they that are the stay of the tribes thereof.” (Chap. xix. ver.
13.) And here was the gap through which the nations of Arabia, Syria,
and Persia maintained intercourse with Egypt, one while as peaceful
traders, another while as fugitives and outlaws, and again as enemies
in arms. Here the shepherds or pastors made their predatory incursions,
and conquered and subjected Lower Egypt; here the children of Israel
began their exodus; and here, also, the Persians, the Greeks, and the
Romans found an easy portal for their hostile invasion.
Eight miles away from Cairo, in the midst of a plot of sugar-cane,
verdant with the luxuriance of its foliage, there stands forth
against the sky a magnificent obelisk, the first that we have yet
seen implanted on the spot where it was erected by its artificers.
This obelisk bears the cartouche of Usertesen I.[19] (a Pharaoh of
the twelfth dynasty, who ascended the throne 1,740 years before the
Christian era), engraven on its face. It is not only the earliest
and most ancient of all known obelisks, but it may be said to be the
first page of the monumental history of Egypt: antecedent to it there
is no record of monuments, save the pyramids and some ruined temples
and tombs; but coeval with it, and illustrating the reign and acts of
Usertesen, are the tombs of Beni Hassan, and the sanctuary, with its
beautiful polygonal columns at Karnak, built by Usertesen himself.
[19] In hieroglyphic writing the vowels are generally omitted, and
a license is thereby given to insert them according to the taste or
judgment of the translator: thus, if we assume the consonants s, r, ts,
n, to represent a name, that name may be variously written, Usertesen,
Ousertesen, Osertesen, Osirtasen, Osortasen, and so forth; and so
much difference of opinion on this matter would seem to prevail among
Egyptologists, that scarcely two can be found to precisely agree; and
the same remark applies to other proper names:—for example, Thothmes,
Thoutmes, Thothmosis; and Rameses, Ramses, Remeses, Ramisis, &c. Under
these circumstances we have thought well to adopt the names sanctioned
by the great British authority on Egyptology, Dr. Birch, of the British
Museum.
[Illustration:
The obelisk of Usertesen at Heliopolis, the most
ancient obelisk in existence. In the background
may be seen the Mokattan range of mountains, the
barrier between the valley of Egypt and the Red Sea.
]
The cartouches of Usertesen, as seen on the obelisk, represent his
first and second names: the former, which implies divinity, consists
of the sun’s disk, a scarabæus, and a pair of human arms; and the
oval is surmounted with two figures—a shoot of a plant and a bee,
each supported on a hemisphere. These latter are royal titles, and
imply the dominion of the king, or sun, over the south and the north,
in addition to that part of the globe which is embraced by his own
proper path, from east to west. The second oval contains the letters
which constitute the word “Usertesen,” and is surmounted by a disk
representing the sun and a goose, the latter being the hieroglyph for
“son,” therefore, “son of the sun.” So that the entire emblem may be
supposed to read thus:—“The king; born and being of the sun; son of the
sun; Usertesen.”
[Illustration: The Cartouches of Usertesen.]
On the spot occupied by this obelisk there formerly stood a temple
dedicated to the sun—to Ra, the rising sun; and to Toum or Tum, the
setting sun. It is uncertain whether Usertesen founded the temple
himself, or whether, as was the custom among the Pharaohs of Egypt,
he simply contributed to its decoration and completion. But his name
being sculptured on the face of the obelisk, serves to identify it with
him. The temple of the sun was surrounded with habitations and temples
of inferior mark, and became a city which, in their language, the
Greeks named Heliopolis. Originally, there were two of these obelisks,
as was lately corroborated by the discovery of the foundation of its
fellow; but the shaft itself has long since disappeared, and nothing,
save this one solitary obelisk, remains of the important city, in
which Egyptians and Hebrews were united for many centuries in holy
brotherhood. This monument, like the rest of the great obelisks of
Egypt, was hewn in the quarries of rose-red granite of Syené. It is
67 feet 4 inches in height, and its pyramidion, now bare and without
carving, was originally capped with gilt-bronze or some other metallic
covering. Its hieroglyphs form a single central column, boldly and
clearly carved, surmounted with the tutelar emblem and the standard of
the king, and followed by the proper name and family name of Usertesen.
The obelisk is stained for some distance up its shaft by the waters of
the Nile, and, with its pedestal, is buried six or seven feet deep in
the alluvium deposited by the stream.
While we credit Usertesen with these two obelisks, we have also to
mention that portions of a broken shaft, engraven with hieroglyphs,
which record his name, are to be met with at Biggig, in the Fyoom.
These have been described as parts of a broken obelisk, but of an
obelisk uncouth in its proportions, and terminated by a rounded point
pierced with an opening as if for the purpose of receiving some
ornament or finial. These characteristics of figure have led certain
Egyptologists to treat of it as a monumental stone or tablet rather
than as an obelisk, and the more so as it is situated on the western
bank of the Nile; and supposing it to be an obelisk, is presumed to
be the only monument of that kind met with on the western shore. A
certain poetical hypothesis is also opposed to the belief; for the
obelisk is the emblem of the _rising_ sun and of life, and is therefore
found only on the eastern bank of the Nile; whereas the western bank
is presided over by the _setting_ sun, and is therefore allied to the
pyramids and tombs of the dead. The mounds of Memphis have not as yet
been explored; but if an obelisk should be met with there at some
future time, our dream of the privileges of the living and of the dead
(already disturbed by Mariette’s discovery of the pedestals of two
obelisks, in front of the temple of Queen Hatasou, in Western Thebes),
must share the fate of other pretty but illusory dreams. It seems
hardly fair that the eastern bank should enjoy a monopoly of the sun’s
beaming rays, considering that tombs are also abundant along its rocky
bounds.
But besides the ancient obelisks of Usertesen, there were four or more
other obelisks at Heliopolis: two, which had received the name of
Pharaoh’s Needles, and were removed by Constantine—both of the period
of Thothmes III.; and the two Thothmes-Rameses obelisks, or Cleopatra’s
Needles, which were set up at Alexandria.
When Napoleon, addressing his army in the desert of Libya, and pointing
to the Pyramids, exclaimed, “Four thousand years look down upon you,”
his words had a deeper signification than the mere wakening up of a
soldier’s vanity. What, besides, have those Pyramids witnessed in
that vast space of time? We now, in our turn, are called upon to ask
the same question with reference to the obelisks of Heliopolis. The
most ancient of those obelisks bears a date of seventeen centuries
before the Christian era; not far short of the four thousand years of
the Great Pyramids. The Thothmes obelisks date back about fourteen
centuries before Christ, or more than three thousand years from the
present time; and those of Rameses about twelve centuries, or 3,100
years.
The Heliopolis obelisk, it is true, was not erected until two hundred
years after the arrival of Abraham in the land of Goshen; but it must
have “looked down” on the caravan of Ishmaelite traders who brought
Joseph a prisoner into Egypt, and sold him to Potiphar as a slave;
on his sufferings and adventures in prison; on his skill in the
interpretation of dreams; on his elevation to power by the Pharaoh of
the day; and on that gratifying ceremony, when “Pharaoh called Joseph’s
name Zaphnath-paaneah,” literally, revealer of secrets, “and when he
gave him to wife Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, priest of On.”
And no less does the obelisk point to that moment of filial devotion
when “Joseph made ready his chariot, and went up to meet Israel his
father, to Goshen; and presented himself unto him; and he fell on his
neck, and wept on his neck a good while.”
In the way from Cairo to Heliopolis, and near to the ruins of
the latter, is a village called Matareeah, which has a similar
signification to the word Heliopolis—namely, “town or place belonging
to the sun.” “Just before reaching the village of Matareeah, at a
little distance from the road, on the right, is the garden in which is
shown the sycamore tree,[20] beneath whose shade the Holy Family are
said to have reposed alter the flight into Egypt. It is a splendid old
tree, still showing signs of life, but terribly mauled alike by the
devout and the profane, who, respectively, have forgotten their piety
and their scepticism in the egotistical eagerness to carry away and to
leave a record of their visit. The present proprietor, a Copt, fearing
lest their united efforts should result in the total disappearance and
destruction of the tree, has put a fence round it, which, while it
prevents the ruthless tearing off of twigs and branches, affords those
who are anxious to commemorate their visit, a smooth and even surface,
on which, with the help of a knife obligingly kept in readiness by the
gardener, they may make their mark.”[21]
[20] This is called “The Virgin’s Tree.” The sycamore, or gimmis,
bears a coarse kind of fig, and is therefore sometimes spoken of as a
fig-tree. The trunk of the tree grows to the dimensions of twenty or
thirty feet in diameter, and its wood is remarkable for its durability;
hence it was used for the construction of mummy-cases, and also for
that of gun-carriages and water-wheels.—MCCOAN.
[21] Murray’s Hand-book, 1875; p. 158.
We are now on the confines of the desert, where the air is reputed
for its salubrity; and fifteen miles further on, at a distance of
three miles from the river, Professor Flower takes notice of a warm
sulphur spring, called Helwân, or Helouan des Bains, which has already
been appropriated by invalids, and is likely to become a rival of
Aix-la-Chapelle, the baths of Switzerland, and those of the Pyrenees.
Professor Flower informs us that a commodious bath establishment has
been built on the spot, and has attracted the attention of numerous
visitors. The temperature of the springs is 86° of Fahrenheit. A
quarter of a century ago, Mr. Bayle St. John writes of Helwân as
follows:—“We had resolved to visit the village of Helwân, parts of
which we could just distinguish from our mooring-ground, peeping
between groves of palms, sycamores, and acacias * * * with the bold
line of rocks beyond. * * * The village, which has many neat houses,
is approached on all sides between the lofty mud walls of gardens,
full of trees, that, drooping over, form not unpicturesque avenues. An
expanse of greensward, surrounded with sycamores, extends on one hand:
altogether, the place is more agreeable to the eye than the generality
of the Egyptian villages, principally on account of the great variety
of foliage that nestles around it; for there are palms, and sycamores,
and fig-trees and orange-trees, and locust-trees, and bananas and
pomegranates. An immense number of doves cooed amorously in the
branches.”
The chronology of ancient Egypt is a subject not without its
difficulties, open to a variety of opinion, and involved in perplexing
uncertainty. Nevertheless, the mind naturally yearns for information
as to the time of an occurrence, and the opportunity of comparing it
with coincident events. Ptolemy Philadelphus made a first step towards
a better state of knowledge, when in the year 250 B.C. he commissioned
Manetho, an Egyptian priest, experienced in the learning of Heliopolis,
to draw up a list of the kings of Egypt from the earliest times.
Manetho performed his task ably; but, alas! the book was injured, and
in troublous times a part of it was lost: nevertheless, that which
remains is still a valuable record; and had the book been preserved
entire, it would have settled many problems at present difficult of
solution. Manetho groups the kings of Egypt into thirty-four reigning
families or dynasties, each containing a number of kings, and by
calculating backwards, from the known to the unknown, he arrives
at the year 5504 B.C. as the date of Menes, the first king of the
first dynasty; that is to say, nearly seven thousand years from the
present time. It is only fair to say, however, that several English
authorities, including Sir Gardner Wilkinson, have declared against
his dates, and have assumed the year 2700 B.C. to be more correct;
Josephus says 2320; Bunsen, 3623; and Brugsch, 4455: in fact, a
difference exists, on this point, between the German Egyptologists
alone, of upwards of two thousand years. Under such circumstances
it is encouraging to meet with an authority like Mariette Bey,
Conservator of the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities at Boulak, one who
has the best opportunities of investigation, and has devoted himself
thoroughly to his work, express his confidence in the fidelity of
Manetho’s list, and, at least provisionally, adopt his dynasties and
his dates. Modern discoveries, according to Mariette, have tended to
corroborate Manetho’s calculations; such, for example, as the tablets
of Abydos, of which one is preserved in the British Museum, and more
especially the tablet recently found by himself at Sakkarah, in the
tomb of an Egyptian priest. Next we have the hieroglyphic evidence of
the monuments, beginning with those of Usertesen; and later on, such
further elucidation by the engraving on the monuments as serves to
bring opposing opinion to an exact agreement. Thus, the date of the
reign of Psammeticus I., of the twenty-sixth dynasty, as stated by
Wilkinson, is 664 B.C.; while that of Bunsen and Mariette is 665 B.C.;
even to a year.
All praise to the good old Egyptian priest, who wrote in Greek the
chronology of his country’s rulers; thanks to the industry and labour
of Egyptologists, which have resulted in the corroboration of his
researches; and thanks also to the Pharaohs who, in the midst of a
splendid career of magnificence and victories, have found time for the
meditations of the cloister, and have left behind them a consecrated
attestation of the succession of their ancestors. In a small and
secluded chapel adjoining the sanctuary of the great temple of Karnak,
called the Hall of Ancestors, a record was found of Thothmes III.
making oblations to sixty-one of his predecessors. This record is
preserved in the national library of Paris; and whilst it verifies
Manetho’s list, is especially correct as to the succession of the
eighteenth dynasty, 1703 to 1464 B.C. The papyrus of Turin, so called
from being preserved in that city, contains a list of the kings from
the earliest period of Egyptian government, although the papyrus itself
is broken into fragments. In the tablet of Abydos, preserved in the
British Museum, Rameses II. does homage to fifty ancestors; but the
names of twenty are lost. This tablet is a valuable record of the
twelfth dynasty, 3064 to 2851 B.C., sustained by the family of Amenemha
and Usertesen, and especially of the nineteenth dynasty, 1402 to 1288
B.C., the Ramessean period. A second tablet, similar to the above, and
found in a companion temple, the one dedicated to Rameses II., the
other to his father Seti, agrees in every respect with the British
tablet. And last, though far from being the least, is the tablet of
Sakkarah, found by Mariette in the tomb of an Egyptian priest, by name
Tounar-i, of the time of Rameses II. The belief already existed in
those days, that a well-behaved commoner, when he entered the land of
spirits, might be permitted, as a reward of good conduct, to associate
with kings; and so Tounar-i would seem to have prepared beforehand
a list of his probable visiting acquaintance in the future world.
Here he has assembled the cartouches of fifty-eight kings, closely
corresponding with Manetho’s list, and naturally with a respectful
regard to precedency; so that his prospective visiting list admits of
being turned to useful account by his successors. Saqqarah, or as it
is commonly written, Sakkarah, is supposed to be the ancient Thinis,
the capital of the Pharaohs of the first and second dynasties: the
tablet is preserved in the museum at Boulak. On it we should doubtless
find delineated the oval of Menes, with those of Cheops, Chephren, and
Mycerinus, of the giant Apappus, and the rosy-cheeked but vengeful
Nitocris.[22]
[22] Apappus was a Pharaoh of gigantic build, and a successful general;
he carried his wars into Ethiopia and Asia. He is said to have been
nine feet high, and he lived to the age of 100 years.—The story of
Queen Nitocris, the “belle with the rosy cheeks,” as Manetho calls her,
is, that her brother having been assassinated, she assembled together
at a banquet all whom she thought to be accomplices in the crime; and
when the hilarity of the evening was at its zenith, she let in upon
them the waters of the Nile, so that they were all drowned.
The pyramid and the obelisk have something analogous in their form—the
four sides and the pointed summit—indeed, the apex of an obelisk, in
nearly every case, is a diminutive pyramid, or pyramidion. Both had
mystical attributes assigned to them in relation to the worship of
the Sun, the “organiser of the world.” The pyramid, with its four
sides looking north, south, east, and west, was selected as the tomb
of the mummified body which was destined to rise from the dead, and
be restored to life at the appointed time. When the pyramid was too
costly, a pair of small obelisks stood sentry at the entrance of the
tomb, and were in common use during the early dynasties. A considerable
number of these relics have been found, and preserved in the Egyptian
museum at Boulak. The obelisk of Syenite granite, however, belongs to
a later period; it may have come into use before the twelfth dynasty,
before the reign of Usertesen; but the Heliopolis obelisk is generally
admitted to be the pioneer of the colossal obelisks of the eighteenth
and nineteenth dynasties, of the reigns of the Thothmeses and of the
Ramseses. These latter were not funereal, but, on the contrary, were
triumphal, and took the place of triumphal arches of modern times. On
the facets of the pyramidion, and at the top of the shaft immediately
below it, were usually engraved figures denoting supplication and
gifts, by the Pharaoh who dedicates the monument, to the gods whom
he intends to propitiate; it might be wine, or it might be milk; and
occasionally, as at Heliopolis and at Karnak, the pyramidion was capped
with metal, sometimes gold, from the countries which had been conquered
in battle; sometimes burnished copper or bronze, which might represent
the spoils of war, or by the reflection of its rays, an artificial sun;
while certain of the obelisks are said to have been more extensively
ornamented with metal.
We have ample evidence of the great care which has been bestowed on the
preparation and finish of these Syenite obelisks: for example, the deep
carving of the central column of hieroglyphs, and the shallow cutting
of the side columns; the polish of the hollows of the hieroglyph to
their extremest depth; and more strikingly still, in the gentle swell
of the face of the shaft, intending to correct an error of reflection
of light. This latter feature is especially noticeable in connection
with the Luxor obelisks; and it has been observed, that but for this
slight convexity, the surfaces of the column would have had the
appearance of being concave.
The carvings of the obelisks usually began at the pyramidion occupying
its lower half, and the inscriptions were engraven in narrow columns,
each occupying one-third of the breadth of the shaft, the central
column being the chief. Where the pyramidion was capped with metal,
the engraving was absent on that part, as in the case of Usertesen’s
obelisk. In this obelisk we have also an example of a single column
of inscriptions. In other instances, as in several of the Thothmes
obelisks, and notably the British obelisk, the side spaces which were
originally left blank, have been filled up by a successor of the
founder, as in the case of Rameses II. The columns are to be read
perpendicularly from top to bottom, and the base is sometimes decorated
with symbols of thanksgiving. The inscriptions themselves were, for
the most part, all of a similar character:—The Pharaoh approaches the
deity with gifts, and on bended knee supplicates his blessing; this
the deity vouchsafes; then, with floating banner, the standard of the
king, the potentate recites his origin, his titles, and his deeds of
usefulness and glory, rarely failing to include among them the raising
of the obelisk; lastly, he finishes by a declaration of his power
as a descendant of the sun, of giving life like his progenitor for
everlasting.
Mr. W. R. Cooper, the Honorary Secretary of the Society of Biblical
Archæology, has favoured us with the following translation of the
hieroglyphs engraven on the British obelisk, extracted from Burton’s
“Excerpta Hieroglyphica.” The illustration is, necessarily, limited
to the three sides then exposed to view, and begins with the central
column of each, containing the legend of Thothmes III.
_First Side._—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, crowned in Thebes,
the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-men-kheper; he made (this) in
his monuments to his father, Horemakhou; he erected two very great
obelisks, capped with gold, (when he celebrated) the panegyry of his
father, who loves him. He did (it), the son of the sun, Thothmes, the
best of existences, beloved of Horemakhou.”
_Second Side._—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, ruling in truth, the
king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-men-kheper. For him the lord of gods
has multiplied the panegyrics (intervals of thirty years) in Habennou
(the Temple of the Sun, in Heliopolis), knowing that he is his son, the
elder, the divine flesh, issuing (from himself). The son of the sun,
Thothmes, lord of Heliopolis, beloved of Horemakhou.”
_Third Side._—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, beloved of Ra (the sun),
the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-men-kheper. His father Tum has
established him, making for him a grandeur of name in expanded royalty
... in Heliopolis, (and) giving him the throne of Seb (and) the office
of khepra; the son of the sun, Thothmes, the best of existences,
beloved of the Bennou (sacred bird) of Heliopolis.”
In the lateral columns, Rameses speaks as follows:—
_First Side_, 1.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, son of Tum, the king
of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-ousor-ma-Sotep-en-Ra, lord of diadems,
who protects Egypt and chastises nations; son of the sun, Ramessou
Meriamen, who throws down southern peoples as far as the Indian Ocean,
and the northern peoples as far as the prop of the sky; the lord of the
two lands, Ra-ousor-ma-Sotep-en-Ra; son of the sun, Ramessou Meriamen,
vivifier like the sun.”
2.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, beloved of Ma (truth), the king of
Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-ousor-ma-Sotep-en-Ra, lord of panegyrics like
his father, Ptah Totnen; son of the sun, Ramessou Meriamen, strong
bull, like the son of Nou (Set); none could stand (against him) in his
time, the lord of the two lands (_prenomen_); son of the sun (_name_).”
_Second Side_, 1.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, son of Khepra, the
king of Upper and Lower Egypt (_prenomen_). Golden hawk, of abundant
years, very victorious; son of the sun (_name_). (He) enabled men to
behold (what) he has done; never was uttered denial (against it). The
lord of the two lands (_prenomen_); son of the sun (_name_); splendor
of the sun”....
2.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, beloved of Truth, the king of Upper
and Lower Egypt (_prenomen_); son of the sun, offspring of the gods,
possessor of the two lands; son of the sun (_name_), who made his
frontiers to the place he chose, and got peace through his victory; the
lord of the two lands (_prenomen_); son of the sun (_name_), splendour
of the sun.”
_Third Side_, 1.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, beloved of Ra, the
king of Upper and Lower Egypt (_prenomen_); lord of panegyries, like
his father, Ptah; son of the sun (_name_); son of Tum, from his loins,
who loves him; Hathor generated him; he who opened the two lands; lord
of the two lands (_prenomen_); son of the sun (_name_), vivifier like
the sun.”
2.—“The kingly Horus, strong bull, son of ...... the king of Upper and
Lower Egypt (_prenomen_); lord of diadems, who cares for Egypt and
chastises nations; son of the sun (_name_).”
The Flaminian obelisk is a beautiful example of the species; it was
constructed by the Pharaoh Seti I., otherwise Osirei, the blind king,
or as he is designated by the carvings on the stone, Menephtha Scthai;
and was completed by his son, Rameses II.: we therefore find his
own personal narrative in the middle column, and that of the great
Sesostris in the side columns. This obelisk was originally erected at
Heliopolis, and was brought thence and conveyed to Rome by the Emperor
Augustus in the tenth year before the Christian era. At Rome it was
taken to the Circus Maximus or Campus Martius, where it would seem
to have fallen into neglect, inasmuch as, at a later period, it was
found partly buried and broken into three pieces. It was one of the
five obelisks set up by Pope Sixtus V., and was placed by him in front
of the church of St. Maria at the Porta del Popolo, the old Flaminian
gate, in 1589; and although it has lost a portion of its base, is
the third in height of the obelisks of Rome, measuring upwards of
eighty-seven feet.
The Flaminian obelisk has been made the subject of an excellent
paper, contributed to the Royal Society of Literature, in 1841, by
the Rev. George Tomlinson, and published in the Transactions of the
Society. Mr. Tomlinson produces a careful and exact translation of
the inscription on all the sides of this obelisk; and as there is
necessarily a considerable amount of repetition, we have endeavoured to
curtail it, without, as we hope, doing injury to the sense. On three
sides of the pyramidion Seti supplicates three separate deities:—Thoré
of the sacred bark; Horus-phra, lord of the two worlds; and Athom,
lord of Heliopolis. He appeals as follows:—“The good god, the Pharaoh,
establisher of justice, the son of the sun, Menephtha-Sethai, says:
Give me a life strong and pure. To which the deities reply:—We give
thee all strength; we give thee a life strong and pure.”
On the fourth side of the pyramidion, Rameses II., son of Seti, prefers
a similar request to Athom, lord of Heliopolis, thus:—“The good god,
the Pharaoh, guardian of justice, approved of the sun, the son of the
sun, Ammon-mai Rameses, says: Give me a life strong and pure; and the
deity responds:—We give thee a pure life.”
[Illustration:
The subject of the woodcut is copied from the British
obelisk, and represents the sacred hawk, the symbol
of Horus, the deity of the Sun; surmounting the
standard of the king, the Pharaoh, Thothmes III.
]
At the top of the column, immediately under the pyramidion, is a square
compartment, on which are sculptured figures of the king kneeling
before the respective divinities, and offering gifts, libations, vases
of precious ointment, &c.
Next below the square compartment is another of oblong figure, divided
into three stripes, corresponding with the three columns which descend
the rest of the shaft down to its base. The upper part of the oblong
space is occupied by the sacred hawk, capped with the helmet-shaped
double crown of Egypt, and emblematical of the god Horus. Then follows
the standard of the king in the form of a banner representing a
bull, the emblem of power and moderation, together with the special
attributes of the king. The inscription in the oblong compartment
will therefore read as follows:—The Horus, the powerful; then, in the
case of Seti; sanctified by truth and justice; the piercer of foreign
countries by his victories; the beloved of the sun and justice. Whilst
the legend of Rameses styles him:—The beloved of the sun; the son of
Noubti or Seth; the beloved of justice; the son of Ptha-Totonen; and
the son of Athom.
The vertical columns commemorative of Seti are as follows:—The Horus,
the powerful, sanctified by truth and justice, &c. Lord of the diadems
of Upper and Lower Egypt, Month or Mandou of the world; possessor of
Egypt; the resplendent Horus, the Osiris, the divine priest of Thoré;
the king, Pharaoh, establisher of justice, who renders illustrious the
everlasting edifices of Heliopolis, by foundations fit for the support
of the heaven; who has established, honoured, and adorned the Temple
of the Sun and the rest of the gods; which has been sanctified by him,
the son of the sun, Menephtha-Sethai, the beloved of the spirits of
Heliopolis, everlasting like the sun.
The variations in other columns speak of Seti as “the establisher of
everlasting edifices, making his sanctuary in the sun, who loves him,
the adorner of Heliopolis, who makes libations to the sun and the rest
of the lords of the heavenly world, who gives delight by his rejoicings
and by his eyes: beloved of Horus, the lord of the two worlds:”—“The
scourge of foreign countries, piercer of the shepherds, who fills
Heliopolis with obelisks to illumine with their rays the Temple of the
Sun; who like the Phœnix fills with good things the great temple of the
gods, causing it to overflow with rejoicing.”
The vertical columns in praise of Rameses proclaim as follows:—“The
Horus, the powerful, the beloved of the sun, the Ra, the offspring of
the gods, the subjugator of the world, the king, the Pharaoh, guardian
of justice, approved of the sun; son of the sun, Ammon-mai Rameses; who
gives joy to the region of Heliopolis when it beholds the radiance of
the solar mountain. He who does this is lord of the world; the Pharaoh,
guardian of justice, approved of the sun, son of the sun, Ammon-mai
Rameses, giving life like the sun.”
In another column he calls himself:—“The beloved of justice, who has
erected edifices like the stars of heaven; he hath made his deeds
resound above heaven, scattering the rays of the sun, rejoicing over
them in his house * * *. In the * * year of his majesty he made good
this edifice of his father, whom he loved, giving stability to his name
in the abode of the sun. He who hath done this is the son of the sun,
Ammon-mai Rameses, the beloved of Athom, lord of Heliopolis, giving
life for ever.”
In a third column he is called “The director of the years, the great
one of victories.” In a fourth:—“The Ra, begotten of the gods, the
subjugator of the world, who magnifies his name in every region by
the greatness of his victories.” Again:—he is termed “The lord of
panegyrics,[23] like his father Ptha-Totonen, begotten and educated by
the gods, builder of their temples, lord of the world; a son of Thoré.”
[23] Sir Gardner Wilkinson writes:—“Of the fixed festivals, one of
the most remarkable was the celebration of the grand assemblies, or
panegyries, held in the great halls of the principal temples, at which
the king presided in person. That they were of the greatest importance
is abundantly proved by the frequent mention of them in the sculptures;
and that the post of president of the assemblies was the highest
possible honour, may be inferred as well from its being enjoyed by the
sovereign alone, of all men, as from its being assigned to the deity
himself in these legends:—‘Phra (Pharaoh), lord of the panegyries, like
Ra,’ or, ‘like his father Ptha.’”
At the base of the obelisk, on the north side, Seti kneels before the
hawk-headed deity Hor-phra, Horus, or the Sun, offering gifts: the god
says:—“The speech of Hor-phra, lord of the two worlds. We give thee
vigour, magnanimity, and strength, to have a life pure, and like the
sun, everlasting.”
On the south side he says:—“The speech of Hor-phra, the enlightener of
the two worlds, the great god, the lord of heaven: we give thee all the
worlds, all the countries * * * and to be lord of the south and the
north, like the sun, sitting for ever upon the throne of Horus.”
On the east side of the base of the obelisk Rameses kneels before Athom
(the setting sun), and offers, with his left hand, one of the pyramidal
cakes common in Egypt. The deity says—“We, Athom, lord of Heliopolis,
the great god, give thee the throne of Seb (Saturn), the altar of Athom
* * * the diadems of Horus and Noubti, in a pure life.”
As another example of the inscriptions on obelisks, we quote a
translation of the middle column of the west face of the Paris obelisk,
as follows:—“The sun Horus, with the strength of the bull, lover of
Truth, sovereign of the north and south, protector of Egypt, and
subjugator of the foreigner, the golden Horus, full of years, powerful
in the fortress, King Ra-user-ma, chief of chiefs, was begotten by
Toum, of his own flesh, by him alone, to become King of the Earth, for
ever and ever, and to supply with offerings the temple of Ammon.”
“It is the son of the sun, Ramses-meri-Amon, eternally living, who
constructed this obelisk.”
It may be as well to explain, that the sun being deified by the
Egyptians as the symbol of creation, the maker, the disposer; and the
Pharaohs being supposed to be sons of the sun, the rising sun Ra,
being generated out of Toum, or Tum, the setting sun; the rising sun,
therefore, becomes, at one and the same time, both father and son.
One of the inscriptions on Cleopatra’s Needle at Alexandria is as
follows:—
“The glorious hero, the mighty warrior, whose actions are great on
the banner; the king of an obedient people; a man just and virtuous,
beloved by the Almighty Director of the universe; he who conquered
all his enemies, created happiness throughout all his dominions, who
subdued his adversaries under his sandals.
“During his life he established meetings of wise and virtuous men, in
order to introduce happiness and prosperity throughout his empire. His
descendants, equal to him in glory and power, followed his example. He
was, therefore, exalted by the Almighty-seeing Director of the world.
He was the lord of Upper and Lower Egypt; a man most righteous and
virtuous, beloved by the All-seeing Director of the world.”
The Thothmes-Rameses obelisks, subsequently called Cleopatra’s Needles;
and one of them, now, the British obelisk, were erected by Thothmes
III., in front of the portico of the great temple of Heliopolis; where
Moses pursued his studies and became skilled in Egyptian learning,
and where he afterwards filled the office of professor or priest.
Many, many times, no doubt, must Moses have contemplated the pagan
proclamations on these obelisks, and have contrasted them, in his own
mind, with the simple language of the living God Most High, whom he
himself worshipped. Many times he must have shuddered at the pagan
oppression of his own people, and felt himself appealed to for their
protection. Who shall say that the immolation of the Egyptian who was
discovered striking a Hebrew was not a righteous act. Cruelties had
been suffered by the Israelites until they could be borne no longer,
and this blow from the hand of an Egyptian became the starting-point
of the future exodus. Many years later Moses proved his capacity
as a leader,[24] and conducted his brethren safely across the Red
Sea, pursued by Menephtah III., the Pharaoh of the day, the son and
successor of that Rameses whose oval is impressed on the British
obelisk. The date of Joseph’s advent in Egypt has latterly been
referred to the period of the shepherd kings, who are supposed to
have been of Jewish descent, and therefore more likely to be disposed
favourably towards Joseph than the Egyptian Pharaohs. The dynasties of
the shepherd kings ranged between 2214 and 1703 B.C.
[24] Moses is said to have been eighty years old at the time of the
exodus.
A little fusillade of guns reminds us that the time has arrived when
we must bid farewell to the Queen of Eastern cities, and embark on
the enchanting Nile for the ancient city of Thebes, just 450 miles
away. A shriek from the railway-train on the west bank suggests that
we may shorten our pilgrimage by nearly 200 miles; a well-known pant
from the river tells us that a steam-boat is at hand, destined to
carry passengers and scare crocodiles[25] in its journey to the first
cataract. But we have dreamed of a Nile voyage in the graceful Nile
boat, the “Dahabeeyah,” with its huge lateen sail, for many and many
a month; we have enjoyed, by anticipation, the quiet, the repose, and
the opportunity for contemplation which the voyage of the Nile for
several weeks[26] must afford, and our mind has long since been made
up; the guns again fire their parting salute, the anchor is tripped,
and we spring away from our moorings like a bird enjoying its first
flight on a summer’s morning. Upon either side of the river-stream
is the narrow strip of arable earth, green with its luxuriant crops,
so peculiar to the land of Egypt; beyond are the yellow sands of
the desert; and further off, constituting the frame in which the
picture is set, is the range of orange-red sandstone rocks, which
shuts in the valley of the Nile on both its sides. As we move onwards
we seem to be reviewing a section of the earth—the alluvium of the
Delta behind us; the sandstone, the gritstone, the limestone of the
secondary rocks, rising into a wall on either side, with the porphyry,
the syenite, and the granite of the primary rock awaiting us at the
first cataract, the gates of Egypt. The rocks approach nearer to the
river as we advance, and keep us company to the end of our journey;
sometimes they are so close as to stand up like perpendicular cliffs,
and encroach on the tawny stream; and at other times they recede,
and encircle an extensive valley, such as that on which the grandest
ruins in the world, those of the ancient city of Thebes, are heaped
up. This rock-bound valley is bisected by the Nile: on the one side,
the west, are the ruins of once magnificent temples and royal tombs;
on the other, the east, the up-piled heaps of gigantic _débris_; the
Nile dividing the abodes of the living from those of the dead. On the
west side are temples dedicated to Rameses I. by his son Seti I.; to
Seti I. by Rameses II.; and to Rameses II. by Rameses himself; a temple
to Queen Hatasou, and temples to Amenophis III. and Rameses III. Then
we have valleys enshrined with tombs of kings and queens, dating from
Seti I. downwards to Rameses IV. In the tomb of Seti, Belzoni secured
the beautiful sarcophagus of white alabaster, one of the choice relics
deposited in the Soane Museum; and from the tomb of Rameses III.,
discovered by Bruce, was obtained the sarcophagus of red granite, the
cyst of which is preserved in the Louvre, and the covercle, or lid,
in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge; whilst round and about are
necropolises of considerable extent, for the most part appendages of
the temples.
[25] It is a curious fact that the crocodile is rarely met with now,
even in Upper Egypt, but requires to be sought after higher up the
river—namely, in Nubia. It is said to be a timid creature, and the
steam-boat and rifle have scared it from its ancient haunts. Mr. A.
C. Smith, who is a zealous ornithologist, identifies the bird that
ventures into the mouth of the crocodile in search of leeches—the
crocodile bird—as the spur-winged plover (charadrius spinosus), the
Zic-Zac of the Arabs, which has constituted itself the professional
toothpicker of the crocodile.
[26] Professor Flower mentions that the voyage from Cairo and back
occupies from eight to ten weeks; while that to and from the second
cataract requires a month longer.
[Illustration:
The Memnonian Colossi; one of the two being the “Vocal
Memnon.” They are sitting statues of the Pharaoh,
Amenophis III.
]
Once upon a time there existed on this spot a temple of calcareous
stone; the temple was named Memnonium, from being situated in a part
of the city called Memnonia; and the trumpet of fame has ascribed it
to a mythical king, Memnon: it was, however, erected by Amenophis or
Amunoph III., who, for no better reason, has likewise been termed
Memnon. Egyptologists deplore the loss of this temple, as it no doubt
contained the historical record of the reign of Amenophis; but of its
pylons, its walls, and its columns, nothing now remains save their
foundations; its stones have been broken into bits, and the bits have
been carried away and burnt into lime. Nevertheless, a memorial of its
former existence happily remains in the two gigantic colossal statues
of Amenophis, which were carved out of breccia, a transition rock, that
could yield no lime by the burning. These are the two huge Colossi,
still grand, but much defaced and injured, which sat at their ease in
front of the pylon of Amunoph’s temple, and will sit on, perhaps, for
centuries, although the sanctuary which they once guarded and adorned
is no more. Of another temple near at hand, M. Mariette says:—“The
lime-burners have luckily not yet found their way here. But why?
Simply because there is already so much limestone among the ruins on
the plain, which is, therefore, more easy of acquisition;” but when
this shall have been exhausted, then looms another invasion of those
industrious shepherds, the lime-burners.
No doubt, a good deal of the destruction which we see around was the
handiwork of man, perhaps of the baffled Cambyses; perhaps of Ptolemy
Lathyrus, those two great destroyers; but history reminds us, that
in the twenty-seventh year before the birth of Christ, an earthquake
visited Egypt, and shook it to its very foundations. This earthquake
seriously damaged the Colossi, and more especially the northernmost
one, which had its upper part shaken completely off. But a curious
phenomenon succeeded. Of a morning, when the sun first rose and warmed
the statue, it gave forth a plaintive wail, resembling the sound of
the human voice. This, apparently, resulted from some contraction or
expansion of the material of the broken stump: it has been supposed
that the fractured stone, moistened by the dew of night, crackled under
the drying influence of the warm rays of the rising sun. But whatever
the physical cause may have been, the sound attracted the notice
of travellers; and visitors came from all parts of the surrounding
countries to witness the phenomenon. It would seem that the event was
a little fickle; it did not always manifest itself, nor precisely at
the same time; but it was only at or about the time of the rising of
the sun that it was evoked. To the multitude, this sound was the voice
of Memnon lamenting to his divine mother, Aurora, the injuries his
statue had sustained; and in this wise he sighed forth his lament for
250 years, when Septimus Severus stretched forth his hand to heal his
wounds, and perchance to elicit a happier, cheerfuller note. The statue
was repaired by means of blocks of stone, as in ordinary masonry; the
voice of lamentation ceased, and with it every vestige of sound. Memnon
wailed and sighed no more, neither did his voice come more melodiously
forth as his restorer hoped. The vocal Memnon sunk at once, from an
object of wonder, to the simple rank of the northern colossus of
Amenophis. But the term Colossus is well-earned when we reflect that
the statue itself was fifty feet in height; while its pedestal of ten
feet gave it an altitude of sixty feet. Two figures standing against
the arms of the throne on which the giant sits, are those of his mother
and sister.
Not far away from the ruin of the Memnonium and the Memnonian Colossi
are the fragments of a temple, erected by Rameses II., and dedicated
to himself, the Ramesseum; it has likewise been named the Palace of
Memnon and the Tomb of Osymandias. But the object of chief interest
for us, at the present time, in connection with this ruin, is the
broken Colossus, which formerly stood within the entrance-court of the
temple. The statue is wrought out of Syenite granite; it was brought
from Syené, and is one of the most gigantic monoliths carved by the
Egyptians. It is a statue of Rameses the Great, seated on his throne,
in the attitude of repose, and was originally nearly forty feet high;
whilst its estimated weight was very little short of 900 tons. It
is now broken across at the waist; the lower part is shattered into
fragments; whilst the upper portion is reduced in size by the cutting
out of mill-stones by the Arabs. “It is difficult,” says Mariette, “at
what most to wonder, the patience and labour of the sculptor, or the
pains and force employed by the destroyer.” Miss Edwards, speaking of
this Colossus, remarks, that “the stone is so hard, that when small
fragments are mounted on a handle, they are used as a substitute for
the diamond by engravers of antiques.”
But we must confess to a little, a very little, malice when we turn
the attention of our readers to Deir-el-Bahari, a temple erected to
the honour of Hatasou, also on the western and sepulchral side of
Thebes. “Here,” says Mariette, “we find a temple mounting the rock
behind it by regular steps or platforms, and built of a beautiful white
and marble-like calcareous stone. It was formerly approached by a long
avenue of sphinxes, and heralded by _two obelisks_, of which the bases
alone are now traceable.”
But how, may we venture to enquire, came obelisks, the offspring of
the rising sun, on the Hades side of the Nile? Can the river have
changed its course? Alas! no. It is the whim of woman. Hatasou erected
the grandest obelisks in existence; she covered the whole shaft, with
the exception of the carvings, with gold. She erected a temple that
stepped up the side of a mountain, as if it were a flight of stairs.
She governed Egypt, the two worlds, and maintained the dignity of the
diadems of the upper and lower country during one of the most brilliant
periods of Egypt’s greatness; and now we find her imparting sunshine
to the dead, and by exception proving the rule, that no obelisks are
to be found on the western bank of the Nile, saving her own, and the
flouted fragments of Fyoom. “She hath made this work for her father
Amun-re, lord of the regions; she hath erected to him this handsome
gateway * * * Amun protects the work * * * she hath done this to whom
life is given for ever.”[27] So says the Pharaoh Amun-noo-het, or
Hatasou. Turn we now to the eastern bank of the Nile, and we find the
Arab village of Luxor grown up like a parasitic fungus over the ruins
of once stately edifices, the grand temple of Amenophis III., where the
Colossi of Rameses guard the entrance; and two miles away, the still
more magnificent ruin of the temple of Usertesen and his successors:
but of these anon.
[27] Murray.
The inscription on the paw of the sphynx, already noted, has reminded
us how precious to the Egyptian is every “spot of harvest-bearing
land,” so precious that not a tittle could be spared for the interment
of the dead; the sands were too shifting, and the sandstone rock alone
remained for the purposes of burial. The sandstone rock forms a broad
shelf at the border of the desert, and thence mounts up in terraces to
the summit of the mountain-range. Cheops and Chephren, and the kings of
the early dynasties, had the power and the means of raising mountains
over their embalmed and mummified remains; but for the people, must
suffice a more humble resting-place;—for them a hole was scooped out
on the platform of rock, to be built up at its entrance until the day
of resurrection should arrive. In the neighbourhood of the Pyramids,
the cemetery of kings, the sandstone rock is honeycombed with tombs, in
which the population of every degree have their appropriate sepulchral
niche. In later times these tombs have been ransacked for antiquarian
relics and for the riches they contained; and the desert around is
still thickly carpeted with a profuse accumulation of fragments of
mummies and mummy-cases, and vestments of every kind.
The word mummy is said to be derived from “mourn,” a kind of wax used
in the process of embalming. This process would seem to have been
first employed during the eleventh dynasty, about 3,000 years before
the Christian era, and to have been practised until the 6th century
A.D. Mariette notes differences in the appearance and qualities of
the mummies in accordance with their source—from Memphis or Thebes,
or their preparation in more recent times. The Memphite mummies
are extremely dry, break easily, and are black in colour; those of
Thebes are tightly bandaged, yellow and flexible, bending easily, and
sometimes preserving so much softness as to admit of being indented by
pressure: whereas, in later times, the bodies were saturated with a
kind of turpentine from Judea, and became heavy, compact, the bandages
seemingly identified with the flesh, and so hard as only to be broken
with violence. The Memphite mummies were often filled with amulets
and scarabæi, and by their sides, or between their legs, was placed a
papyrus, a copy of the Book of the Dead. On the Theban mummies were
scarabæi and rings, which were worn on the fingers of the left hand.
[Illustration: A pylon or doorway of a house or temple.]
The essentials of a tomb, for such as could afford the expense, were,
a deep quadrangular well in the rock; in the side of this well was a
smaller cavity for the deposit of the mummy, or of the mummy-case;
after which, the entrance of the cavity, or grave, was carefully
walled up; next followed a chamber in which mourners and friends could
assemble; and after that a portal, or exterior entrance, by which
admission might be obtained. It is easy to understand how this simple
design may be amplified until an entire rock of considerable magnitude
has been hollowed out into numerous chambers; how these chambers may
be ornamented with columns and sculptures; how the portal may assume
an architectural form, and become a pylon, and the front of the rock
be carved into columns and statues of imposing grandeur and beauty.
Indeed, there would seem—as in fact is the case—no bounds to the
intricacy and extent of the sanctuary and its chambers, the elegance
and decoration of the appurtenant halls, and the magnificence and
grandeur of the pylonic front. We should be pleased to imagine that the
first efforts of man practised on the rocks, and thence transferred
to the plain, were the early origin of Egyptian architecture, were we
not aware of the fact, that the work of the mason makes its appearance
seemingly contemporaneously with that of the wonderful excavations, of
which so many examples are to be met with on the banks of the Nile.
Arrived at Thebes, we find the rock and tomb architecture especially
illustrated on the western bank of the Nile; while the masonic element
appears in all its grandeur on the eastern bank, in the temples of
Karnak and Luxor, magnificent in the midst of overwhelming ruin. At
Karnak, the foundation of the principal temple is a mile and a-half in
circuit: it was founded by Usertesen, of the twelfth dynasty, and has
been enlarged by successive additions of courts and halls, by Thothmes
I. and his family, by Seti I. and Rameses II. and their family, and
subsequently by a long series of kings, ending with Alexander the
Greek.
[Illustration:
The propylon, or tower-gate, of the temple of Edfoo,
one of the most magnificent in Egypt. Its breadth
is 250 feet, and height 115. The temple itself,
which is one of the most perfect specimens of
Egyptian temple-architecture, was founded by
Ptolemy Philopater, and the propylon was erected
by Ptolemy Dyonysus. The entire structure is
Ptolemaic, and it is ornamented on every side with
paintings and sculptures. The small buildings at
its base are the houses of the village.
]
One of the most interesting features of these magnificent temples is
the doorway, or _pylon_, which, from the simplest form, ornamented in
the simplest manner, and serving as the humble entrance of the cavern
in the rock, has become developed into an architectural structure of
surpassing grandeur and importance. When it stands independently, in
advance of the proper entrance of the temple, it is termed _propylon_;
and the propylon is often a massive structure, which resembles a tower
or a fortress rather than a simple gate or portal. It consists usually
of a thick wall, pyramidal in its figure, of considerable height, and
terminated above by a broad cornice ornamented over the portal with
the winged orb, the type of the Eternal and of the sun; the centre of
the wall being perforated by the doorway, or entrance. The propylon
is generally furnished with two flag-staves fixed to its front, and
sometimes divides at the top into a pair of towers.[28] As the propylon
is the representative of the ornamented entrance of the temple, the
_fore_-gate, or _fore_-tower, it is a necessary appurtenance to the
temple, and forms a picturesque object when seen from a distance;
whilst its walls are made subservient to the purposes of painting and
sculpture, destined to illustrate the history of its founder. The
propylon of the most modern portion of the temple at Karnak is 140 feet
high, 370 feet in breadth, and 50 feet in thickness; it is approached
by an avenue of ram-headed sphynxes, 200 feet long, and the sides of
the doorway were formerly ornamented with two granite statues, which
are now in a state of ruin.
[28] Miss Edwards remarks, that there is preserved in the Egyptian room
of the Glyptothek Museum at Munich, a statue of the chief architect of
the Ramessian period, Bak-en-khonzu, who, “having obtained the dignity
of High Priest and First Prophet of Ammon, during the reign of Seti I.,
became chief architect of the Thebaid under Rameses II., and received
a royal commission to superintend the embellishment of the temples.
When Rameses II. erected a monument to his divine father Ammon-Ra,”
Bak-en-khonzu “made the sacred edifice in the upper gate of the abode
of Ammon. He erected obelisks of granite. He made golden flag-staffs.
He added very, very great colonnades.”
The peculiar characteristics of ancient Egyptian architecture are,
its obelisks, its pylons or propylons, its colossal statues, and its
superb columns. At the entrance of the temple at Karnak, leading into
the Hall of Rameses II., we have the colossal sphynxes and statues
and propylon, and passing through the latter we enter a spacious hall
decorated with superb columns. At the end of this hall we approach
another propylon, its doorway supported on either side by a statue of
Rameses III.; and this gives entrance to the great Hall of Seti I. and
Amenophis III., enriched with 134 columns, and said to be the largest
and most magnificent of ancient Egyptian monuments. Beyond the great
hall are a third and a fourth propylon, and between them an obelisk,
one of a pair erected by Thothmes I. The obelisk is seventy-five
feet high, and is covered on one face with hieroglyphs descriptive
of its founder, while the opposite face is occupied with sculptured
writing of Rameses II. For the second time we are made aware of this
remarkable combination—shall we call it appropriation?—by Rameses. The
brother-obelisk has fallen, and is broken into fragments.
Through the entrance of the fourth propylon we are admitted into a hall
ornamented with columns whose capitals represent the head of Osiris.
This is the Hall of Thothmes I.; and by the side of its doorway stands
another obelisk, 92 feet in height, and 8 feet square at the base.
There were originally two of these splendid obelisks; but its consort
is fallen, and has been dashed into bits. These are the obelisks that
bear the legend on their base of having been hewn from the rock, and
erected in the short space of seven months; of having been capped with
gold taken from the enemies of the country, and of being emblazoned
with gold-leaf from bottom to top: they were set up by Hatasou,
daughter of Thothmes I., in honour of her father. Hatasou was her
father’s favourite; he, no doubt, discovered in her, indications of
talent fitting her for the throne, and he appointed her his successor.
In this capacity she became the guardian of her brother, Thothmes II.,
who died at an early age; and, subsequently, of the distinguished
potentate, her brother, Thothmes III., who was not admitted to the
throne for fifteen years after the death of his brother. Many grand
works in architecture owe their origin to Queen Hatasou, and to these
her cartouche was affixed; but, in later times, she was treated as
an usurper; her name was erased from the monuments, and that of her
brother substituted in its place.
Beyond the Hall of Osiris we reach the original temple and sanctuary
containing the tomb and funereal chambers founded by Usertesen; and
further on still, and forming the end of the pile, a temple erected
by Thothmes III. Here, therefore, we observe a striking illustration
of the combination of many potentates in the construction of these
wonderful examples of architectural skill. The first stone of this
temple was laid, probably, 3064 B.C., and the building was scarcely
completed in the year 1288 B.C.; a period embracing 1,776, or nearly
2,000 years, being devoted to its construction.
[Illustration:
Plan of ornamentation of the entrance of an Egyptian
temple—_e.g._, that of Luxor. In front and on
either side of the pylon are the obelisks. Nearer
the jambs of the pylon are two colossal sitting
statues of Rameses II., wearing the double crown
of Egypt; then follows the pylon itself, with
its two majestic pyramidal towers. The pylon is
surmounted with an over-hanging cornice, on which
is carved the winged orb, emblem of the Eternal and
of the sun; while two crowned asps, one on each
side of the disk, imply dominion over the north
and the south, as well as the east and the west;
consequently over the whole world.
]
In the neighbourhood of the great temple of Karnak are the ruins of
a smaller temple appertaining to Amenophis III. “It was once adorned
with elegant sculptures and two granite obelisks; but is now a confused
heap of ruins, whose plan is with difficulty traced beneath its
fallen walls.”[29] Of course, the obelisks are lost. The Temple of
Luxor likewise owes its origin to Amenophis III.; and was extended, a
century and a-half later, by Rameses II.; the latter monarch adding a
magnificent hall, a propylon of vast dimensions, two colossal sitting
statues of himself, a pair of beautiful obelisks, and an avenue of
sphynxes nearly two miles in length, stretching away from Luxor to
Karnak. Approaching the temple by the avenue of sphynxes, about 500
in number, we meet with the now solitary obelisk, its consort having
been removed to Paris; next comes the majestic propylon, its entrance
guarded by two helmeted colossal sitting statues of Rameses II., carved
out of black granite, and half buried in the earth. Passing the portal,
we enter the great Hall of Rameses, and, beyond that, reach the
sanctuary of Amenophis. The obelisk bears the name of Rameses, and is
remarkable for the beauty and depth of its carving—a circumstance which
may possibly have influenced the French in their selection. Sir Gardner
Wilkinson made a curious discovery with regard to the Paris obelisk,
which he narrates as follows:—
“Being at Luxor when it was taken down, I observed beneath the lower
end on which it stood the nomen and prenomen of Rameses II., and
a slight fissure extending some distance up it; and what is very
remarkable, the obelisk was cracked previous to its erection, and
was secured by two wooden dove-tailed cramps. These, however, were
destroyed by the moisture of the ground, in which the base had become
accidentally buried.”
[29] Murray’s “Hand-book.”
The hieroglyphs on its face, announce that “the lord of the world,
guardian-sun of truth, approved of Phra; has built this edifice in
honour of his father, Ammon-Ra, and has erected to him these two great
obelisks of stone, in face of the House of Rameses, in the city of
Ammon.”[30]
[30] Miss Edwards.
Besides the Luxor obelisks, numerous others are ascribed to Rameses
II.—namely, the two small monoliths at Rome, one in the Piazza Rotunda
in front of the Pantheon, the other at the Villa Mattei; as also the
ten broken obelisks at San, on the field of Zoan: while two more bear
the joint names of his father Seti and himself; for example, the
beautiful column of the Piazza del Popolo, known as the Flaminian
Obelisk, and that of the Trinita de Monti at Rome.
It is a curious fact in connexion with the history of obelisks, that
two of the most stately—indeed, the next in height to that of St. John
Lateran—should have been the work of a woman, Queen Hatasou, daughter
of Thothmes I., and guardian for a while of Thothmes III. But when the
reins of power fell into the hands of the latter, he seems to have
treated his sister as an usurper, and to have obliterated her name
from the monuments, while he substituted in its place the cartouche of
his own; so that the work of Hatasou is usually ascribed to Thothmes
III. We find a similar illustration in the relation between Rameses
II. and his father, Seti I. Seti was distinguished in his early life
as a warrior, but, unfortunately, was stricken with blindness; he
thereupon resigned the throne to his son, and retired into solitude.
By degrees he recovered his sight, and devoted the rest of his life
to architecture and building. His cartouche is to be found amongst
the magnificent ruins at Thebes; and he was the author of several
obelisks: in the latter instance his name is associated with, and
occasionally replaced by, that of his son. The son of the blind man,
the great Sesostris, Rameses II., must be supposed to have encouraged
this substitution, for he has obtained credit for much that was not
really his own; and to such an extent has misconception been carried,
that Rameses and Seti have been identified as one and the same person;
while a younger son of Rameses, Menephtah, has been described as the
son of the king who went blind. Another element of confusion is the
Greek name—Sesostris, given to Rameses II. Rameses was celebrated as a
victorious soldier; as also was his distinguished predecessor, Thothmes
III. Sesostris is described by Herodotus as a great conqueror; and
as this character applies equally to Thothmes and Rameses, these two
kings, although 200 years apart in point of time, become awkwardly
confounded with each other. It would be ungenerous to suppose that
such a state of confusion was acceptable to Rameses and favoured his
designs; or that it could have led him to adopt that association with
the memory of Thothmes which is implied by the sculptures on the
Thothmic obelisks: although it must be admitted that there certainly
exist grounds for the suspicion. In this respect Rameses would almost
seem to have been the victim of an idiosyncrasy. In fact, Rameses
II. is accused of monopolising the reputation of all the great deeds
enacted during more than 600 years, from the time of Thothmes II.
to that of Shishonk, or, as he is named in the Bible, Shishak, the
conqueror of Jerusalem.
[Illustration:
Sacred scarabæi, or beetles. On the back of the thorax
of the upper pair are engraven mythological figures
and hieroglyphics; the middle scarab is furnished
with wings like the winged orb; the lower one has
human supporters. The scarabæus is the emblem of
future being, or future existence, and is often
introduced into the body of the mummy to take the
place of the heart, which is embalmed separately.
The four figures probably represent the four
keepers to whom the heart is confided, and the
hieroglyphics are verses from the Book of the Dead.
]
We have compared the village of Luxor to a crop of mushrooms
overgrowing a mountain of architectural ruins; and so it would seem to
be: the mud huts of the Arabs and Copts at first sheltered themselves
under the massive walls, then crept up to the cornices and roofs, and
in time, like swallows’ nests, stuccoed every hollow and niche where
sufficient space could be obtained for a resting-place. Only that they
were forbidden, they would have occupied the whole of the temples and
their halls, hypostyle and hypæthral, and have left nothing visible
but themselves. The inhabitants of these huts are poor and ragged;
but, according to Lady Duff Gordon (who lived amongst them for a long
time, and between whom and them a warm attachment subsisted, fostered
by her own humanity and kindness), they are remarkable for cleanliness,
both in their persons and in their huts. Luxor, however, is the great
emporium of antiques, and an active manufacture of scarabæi or sacred
beetles, of statuettes, and even of tablets, is carried on by the Arab
traders. “It is the centre,” says M. Mariette, “of a commerce more
or less legal, inasmuch as the rummaging of tombs is now prohibited
by law. Nevertheless, it requires much judgment, and often that of
the expert, to distinguish with certainty between the genuine and
the fictitious.” Miss Edwards relates that she was once accidentally
ushered into the workshop of a dealer, where she saw tools and
appliances in number for the fabrication of these objects, so eagerly
sought after by the traveller. On the arrival of the proprietor she was
speedily shown out, but overheard the scoldings which were administered
to the unfortunate help who had allowed her to enter. She illustrates
the simplicity of these people by the following anecdote:—One day,
being more than usually pestered by an Arab trader to buy his genuine
antiques, she sharply replied, “I don’t like them: I prefer the modern
ones.” “Bisallah!” exclaimed the pedlar, “then you will like these;
for they were all manufactured by myself.”—“As for genuine scarabs
of the highest antiquity,” says Miss Edwards, “they are turned out
by the gross every season. Engraved, glazed, and administered to the
turkeys in the form of boluses, they acquire, by the simple process of
digestion, a degree of venerableness that is really charming.”
[Illustration: Under-surface of sacred scarabæi, engraven with
hieroglyphs.]
_Apropos_ of scarabs, the toleration by Egyptians of all living
creatures, from the crocodile to the fly, exhibits, in a high degree,
the gentleness and amiability of character of the people. It was
not always love—often it was superstition, or fear, that made them
so lenient; but, nevertheless, we cannot fail to perceive, in their
treatment of animals, a recognition of the rights of all created
beings, as well as of themselves. Lady Duff Gordon looked warily around
her, lest there should be witnesses, when her prejudices led her to
kill a serpent that had intruded itself into her apartment; and she was
unable to induce the Arab mothers to kill the gorged flies which hung
from the inflamed eyelids of their children afflicted with ophthalmia.
The Fellaheen look doubtfully at the sportsman as he fills his bag
with the superfluous pigeons, although to themselves they are almost
a scourge. Different parts of Egypt preferred different animals, and
held them sacred; so that we find a Leontopolis, or city of lions;
a Lycopolis, or city of the wolf; a Crocodilopolis, or city of the
crocodile; a Bubastis, where the cat was held in veneration; and so
forth.
But what shall we say of the venerable scarab, the sacred scarabæus.
Those who are sufficiently acquainted with the natural history of
certain beetles, are aware that they propel, with their hind-legs,
objects of domestic use which they are desirous of storing away in
their caves. Now, on the banks of the Nile, the object of greatest
importance and anxiety to the scarab is its egg. She lays it near the
stream; and, to protect it from injury, she plasters it over with mud,
enclosing it like a kernel in its shell; and, instinctively mindful
of the rise of the Nile, which would wash it away, she sets herself
diligently to work to roll it upward from the river’s brink. It has
to be propelled often to a considerable distance: she must drive it
across the arable belt; for the sepulchre of the scarab, like that
of the Egyptian, is the desert; and the male oftentimes helps her in
her labour. Arrived at the sandy border of the desert, they dig their
well; the precious mummy is deposited therein, to await the return of
the spirit of life, and, at the appointed hour, to rise from the tomb
into renewed existence. Does not the Egyptian see, in the scarab, the
pioneer of his own religious belief?—and hence is led to regard it as
the emblem of the divine spirit—the future “to be,” or “to transform.”
Too frequently this labour of love, on the part of the scarab,
concludes in sacrifice: the exhausted labourer sinks wearily by the
side of the finished tomb, and dies.
Another pleasant sail of 133 miles carries us from Luxor to Syené, or
As-souan (Coptic, _souan_, the opening), Egypt’s extremest boundary,
where Juvenal pined in exile, where the first cataracts burst through
the gates of Egypt, and where those grand quarries are stationed which
have supplied the whole of the roseate granite obelisks of Egypt. We
have already had occasion to mention the existence, in these quarries,
of an unfinished obelisk not yet reft from the parent rock, but bearing
the traces of the artificers’ hands, as though they had unexpectedly
been summoned from their work. The dimensions of the Syené obelisk have
been variously stated: for example, 100 feet by 11 feet 2 inches; and
95 feet by 11 feet: and a flaw was discovered in the shaft, which has
suggested an excuse for its abandonment; while others are of opinion
that the flaw is an accident of subsequent occurrence.
The excellence of the quality of the granite of Syené, and its property
of splitting under the application of suitable force, permitted the
separation from the native rock of a single piece of sixty, seventy,
and sometimes more than a hundred feet in length. The unfinished
obelisk exhibits the contrivance by which these immense stones were
severed from the solid rock. In the course of the line which marks
the boundary of the obelisk, is a sharply cut groove; and all along
this groove, at short intervals, are holes which are intended for the
reception of wedges or plugs of dry wood; when the wedges were driven
firmly into the holes, the groove was filled with water; the dry wedges
gradually imbibed the water and swelled, and the force created by their
swelling along a line of considerable length, was sufficient to crack
the granite throughout the whole extent of the groove. We are but too
familiar with this force in the instance of water congealed into ice; a
small fissure or opening of any kind becomes filled with water in the
winter-time; the water freezes; frozen water expands, and under the
force of that expansion the fissure is doubled in extent. It is this
process which is so destructive to the face of buildings constructed
of laminated stone; it is this which produces the slide of mountains
and the fall of cliffs; and the same force the agriculturist utilises
by ploughing, for the purpose of breaking up the clods of his land and
pulverising the soil. It has been supposed that the Egyptians sometimes
had recourse to another method, which is thus described by our old
friend, Charles Knight, in the “Pictorial Gallery of Arts.”
“One of the modes in which large blocks of granite may be severed from
a rock, is exemplified by what takes place in some parts of India at
the present day. The quarryman, having found a portion of the rock
sufficiently extensive, and situated near the edge of the part already
quarried, lays bare the upper surface, and marks on it a line in the
direction of the intended separation, along which a groove is cut
with a chisel about a couple of inches in depth. Above this groove a
narrow line of fire is kindled, and maintained till the rock below is
thoroughly heated; immediately on which a number of men and women, each
provided with a vessel of cold water, suddenly sweep off the ashes, and
pour the water into the heated groove, which causes the rock to split
with a clear fracture. Blocks of granite eighty feet in length are
severed by these means.”[31]
[31] Sir J. F. Herschel’s discourse; quoted in Long’s “Egyptians,”
referring to an obelisk erected at Seringapatam.
From Syené by the cataract or by the road, a short journey of five
miles brings us to the lovely island of Philæ reposing in the midst of
the placid stream of the Nile, in the golden land of Nubia.[32] “The
approach to the island by water is very striking. The stream winds
in and out among gigantic black rocks of the most fantastic form and
shape, and then unexpectedly, after a sharp turn or two, Philæ comes
suddenly in sight. ‘Beautiful’ is the epithet commonly applied to this
spot, justly considered to present the finest bit of scenery on the
Nile; but the beauty, or rather grandeur, is more in the framework
of the picture than in the picture itself. The view from the top of
the propylon tower at Philæ, of all beyond the island, is far finer
than the view of Philæ itself from any point.”[33] Philæ is outside
the natural boundary and proper frontier of Egypt;[34] and although
enriched with a temple dedicated to Isis, its ruins date back no
further than the last of the Pharaohs. The Temple of Isis was founded
by Ptolemy Philadelphus, and bears the cartouche of Cleopatra; whilst
its completion is due to the Roman emperors. Here also may be seen an
elegant and picturesque hypæthral, or roofless temple, open, as were
many of the temples of Egypt, to the blue vault of the firmament. This
temple is called “Pharaoh’s bed;” but appears to have been the work of
the Ptolemies and of the Cæsars.
[32] The word _noub_ signifies gold.
[33] Murray’s Hand-book.
[34] The learned editor of “Murray’s Hand-book” observes, that in the
Egyptian language the island was called Pilak or Ailak, _the place of
the frontier_,—a word perverted by the Greeks into Philæ.
At the landing-place in front of the chief temple at Philæ, a broad
flight of steps, leading upwards from the river’s edge, is crowned at
the summit by a solitary obelisk, one alone remaining; next follows an
avenue of Isis-headed columns, and then the majestic propylon of the
temple. The obelisk is of fine sandstone, without sculpture, broken at
the summit, and about thirty feet in height. At no great distance is
the pedestal, cupped at the top, which formerly supported its companion.
Another obelisk wrought out of red granite is now at Kingston-Lacy, in
Dorsetshire, and was brought to England by Mr. William Bankes. It is
said to have been carved with the cartouche of Cleopatra, made famous
from its furnishing Champollion with two important letters of the
hieroglyphic alphabet—namely, K and T—after he had previously gained
possession, from the cartouche of Ptolemy, of the five letters P T L
M S. These obelisks are not Pharaonic, but were probably erected by
Ptolemy Philadelphus, or by one of his successors. We presume that this
latter is the obelisk referred to by Sharpe in the following quotation:—
“We possess a curious inscription upon an obelisk that once stood in
the island of Philæ, recording, as one of the grievances that the
villagers smarted under, the necessity of finding supplies for the
troops on their marches, and also for all the government messengers
and public servants, or those who claimed to travel as such. The cost
of this grievance was probably greater at Philæ than in other places,
because the traveller was there stopped in his voyage by the cataracts
on the Nile, and he had to be supplied with labourers to carry his
luggage where the navigation was interrupted. Accordingly the priests
at Philæ petitioned the king that their temple might be relieved from
this heavy and vexatious charge, which they said lessened their power
of rightly performing their appointed sacrifices; and they further
begged to be allowed to set up a monument to record the grant which
they hoped for. Euergetes granted the priest’s prayer, and accordingly
set up a small obelisk; and the petition and the king’s answer were
carved on the base.”
Mr. Walter Ralph Bankes, of Kingston-Lacy Hall, Wimborne, Dorsetshire,
has very kindly furnished us with the following information with regard
to the Philæ obelisk, which was brought to England by his relative,
Mr. William Bankes:—“The height of the three plinths in one block, on
which the pedestal rests, is 2 feet 2 inches; that of the lower member
of the pedestal, 3 feet 4 inches; and of the upper member, 2 feet 5
inches; the whole pedestal being one block: the height of the shaft,
a monolith, 22 feet 1½ inch; making the entire monument 30 feet 8½
inches. The material of the whole is red Egyptian granite.
“On the foot of the obelisk is inscribed:—‘The granite used in the
reparation of this monument was brought from the ruins of Leptis Magna
in Africa, and was given for that purpose by His Majesty King George
IV.’
“William John Bankes, Esq., M.P., eldest son of Henry Bankes, Esq.,
M.P., caused this obelisk, and the pedestal from which it had fallen,
to be removed, under the direction of G. Belzoni, in 1819, from the
Island of Philæ, beyond the first cataract; and brought this platform
from the ruins of Hierosyesimnon in Nubia.
“The inscription on this obelisk and pedestal records their dedication
to King Ptolemy Euergetes II., and two Cleopatras his queens, who
authorised the priests of Isis, in the Isle of Philæ, to erect them
about 150 years B.C., as a perpetual memorial of exemption from
taxation.
“This spot was chosen, and the first stone of the foundation laid by
Arthur, Duke of Wellington, August 17, 1827.”
The following is a translation of the three Greek inscriptions on the
pedestal of the Egyptian obelisk.
The first two are painted in red letters upon the surface; the lowest
is cut into the stone.
_Upper Inscription_ ... “of the gods Euergetes ... gods Epiphanes
... of the gods Eupator, and of the god Philometor, and of the gods
Euergetes, greeting. We have submitted to you the copy of the letter
written to Lochus, our cousin and general, and we permit to you the
setting up of the monument which you apply for ... Pacon 22.”
_Second Inscription._—“King Ptolemy, and Queen Cleopatra the sister,
and Queen Cleopatra the wife; to Lochus their brother, greeting ...
to us ... from the ... a copy ... you shall make ... not to trouble
them”....
_Third Inscription._—“To King Ptolemy, and Queen Cleopatra the sister,
and Queen Cleopatra the wife, beneficent deities; the priests of
the great goddess Isis in Abatus and Philæ, greeting. Whereas those
frequenting Philæ as generals and prefects and governors of Thebes,
and royal scribes, and prefects of the frontier guard, and all other
functionaries and constituted authorities, and the rest who are in
office, compel us to make contributions to them against our will; and
out of this it results that the Temple is deteriorated, and that we
are in danger of not having what is appointed for the sacrifices and
libations to be made for you and your children.
“We request of you, great deities as you are, if it shall seem good, to
order Noumenius, your cousin and secretary for correspondence, to write
to Lochus, your cousin and general of the Thebaid, not to trouble us
in these things, nor to suffer any other to do the same, and to give
us the necessary decrees to that effect; and in them to permit us to
set up a monument, on which we may inscribe your kindness to us upon
these points, that your favour may be perpetuated upon it to all time.
When this shall be done, we and the Temple of Isis shall hold ourselves
obliged. Fare ye well.”
It is worthy of remark, that the Egyptian religion, intended to be
abolished by Theodosius in his sweeping edict of 381 A.D.,[35] still
existed at Philæ seventy years later—namely, in 453, as is proved by
the sculptures on the walls of the temple. And Philæ further claims
the honour of being the resting-place of a portion of the body of
Osiris, to whom a monolithic shrine, now standing in the sanctuary,
is dedicated. Osiris, it will be remembered, was slain by Typhon, or
Set, who cut his body into pieces, and dispersed the fragments over the
country; so that Philæ is not alone in the possession of so sacred a
relic: although Isis, the wife of Osiris, presumedly gathered all the
pieces together, when they became united, and Osiris was restored to
life. Horus, the son of Osiris, was his father’s avenger, and, in his
turn, destroyed Typhon. This fable bears several allegorical readings:
for example—Osiris, as the setting sun, sinks into the regions of Set,
or Saturn, and becomes king of Hades; Isis, or the moon, comes in
search of her lost husband; but the sun rises again from the shades of
Hades, as Horus, and dispels the darkness of Saturn, and the deadly
influences of Typhon.[36] This is, perhaps, more obvious if we join
with the Greeks in calling Horus, Phœbus. Osiris, Isis, Horus, are
one form of the Egyptian trinity, in which the humble worshipper of
the ancient faith still believes. The trinity was the creed of the
earliest family of human beings; and so was the death of one member of
that trinity, his descent into Hades, and his subsequent resurrection;
with the consequent immortality of the soul. This is all pourtrayed in
the Egyptian Triad. Moreover, the name of Osiris among the Egyptians
was an unspoken word; it was a holy secret, breathed with extremest
caution by the priests themselves. Even Herodotus mentions the word
with reluctance; while the most solemn of all adjurations was the name
of “him who sleeps in Philæ.” Here, then, was a secret, a holy secret,
which has descended to Freemasons, and they have since held it, and
must ever continue to hold it, sacred. [35] Athanasius was patriarch of
Alexandria in 327 A.D.
[36] Typhon, the genius of evil, is the great ancestor of the
too-frequent deadly enemy of our own day, typhus and typhoid fever.
In the Egyptian language we meet with many words which are in common
use amongst ourselves at the present time:—Chemistry is derived from
_Chem_, or Shem; _Alabastron_, was a city of Egypt; the Oasis of
_Ammon_ produces ammonia; the topaz and the sapphire are named after
_Topazion_ and _Saparine_ on the Red Sea; the smaragd, or emerald, is
found in Mount _Smaragdus_; and natron and nitre in Mount _Nitria_, &c.
So that the world and all its mysteries are but a chain of mutually
related links.
[Illustration:
Cartouche of Ptolemy, or Ptolemais.—The hieroglyphs
composing the name are—a square cross-barred,
which represents P; a hemisphere, T; a knotted
ribbon, O or U; a lion, L; an open quadrangle,
M; two leaves of a plant, I or AI; the back of a
chair, S; making together, PTOLMAIS; the vowel
_e_ being lost.
]
[Illustration:
Cartouche of Cleopatra.—The hieroglyphs are—an angle,
Q or C; lion, L; leaf, A short, for E; knot, O
or U; square cross-barred, P; eagle, A; hand,
T; mouth, R; eagle, A; then follow an egg; and
a hemisphere t, which indicate sex, and signify
daughter. The whole together making CLEOPATRA, a
daughter.
]
The decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs was a curious accident, and,
at the same time, an important step in the science of Egyptology. The
French, in the year 1799, while digging the foundation of a fortress
at Rosetta, exhumed a slab of black stone—a precious relic, as it
proved to be, now carefully preserved in the British Museum.[37] On
this stone was carved an inscription in three languages:—Hieroglyphic,
the sacred tongue of Egypt; Demotic, the common language; and Greek.
The inscription itself is a decree of the priests in honour of Ptolemy
V., Epiphanes. Twenty years elapsed before the value of this writing
was realised, although the Greek inscription had not failed to inform
its readers that its two companions were translations of itself.
The inclusion of royal names and royal titles within an oval had
been made known by Zoëga some years before; and, comparing the Greek
with the hieratic characters, the signs which indicated the name of
Ptolemy were next made out. But it did not suffice to identify the
emblazonment of Ptolemy alone; it needed the genius of Champollion to
discover that the signs represent the letters of the alphabet. The
word Ptolemy had supplied him with certain fixed signs, when a happy
chance presented him with the cartouche of Cleopatra as certified by a
Greek inscription on the base of an obelisk from Philæ. Comparing the
signs of the two ovals, he was put in possession of three consonants
and two vowels, which were identical in both, and corresponded as to
position in the construction of the words. The three consonants were
P T L, and the vowels E and O. Further research supplied him with the
ovals of Berenice, Alexander, Cæsar, Tiberius, Trajan, and Hadrian;
which together made up a complete alphabet. He was now in a position
to read names in Greek when expressed by hieroglyphic signs. The next
step was to convert the signs of the hieroglyphic text into words; and
these he found to be Coptic, the national language of Egypt. All this
seems to be simple enough when it is known; but Champollion had yet
to discover that some of the signs were simply alphabetical, others
syllabic, and others again symbolic; moreover, that the three kinds of
signs were intermingled, without order, in accordance with the taste of
the writer; and that the words were one while abundantly, and another
while sparingly, interspersed with symbols. Here the funereal hymns of
the Ritual, or Book of the Dead, so often repeated in the papyri, came
to his help; for sometimes, in these writings, the words were expressed
in symbols, and sometimes in alphabetical signs: the latter disclosed
the secret of the former, and so the grammar of hieroglyphography came
to be conclusively established. Shall we not, then, in admiration of
their fruitful labours, invoke the favour of the Horus, the powerful,
the sanctified of truth and wisdom, on these our Egyptographical
pioneers, sons of the sun, lords of the diadems, beloved of science,
children of genius and industry, establishers of alphabets—the de
Sacy, Akerblad, Young, Champollion the resplendent, Lepsius, Hinckes,
Brughsch, Saulcy, de Rougé, Birch, the Tum of the western hemisphere,
approved of the learned, Bonomi, Tomlinson, and all the rest of the
scholarly host, beloved of the birds, which follow in their wake
like the stars of the firmament. To all and every, we, lord of the
panegyrics, piercer of the sheep, convey our warmest congratulations,
veneration, and respect, and wish for them a strong and pure life.
[37] In the centre of the southern Egyptian gallery of the British
Museum, “is placed the celebrated Rosetta stone; it is a tablet of
black basalt, having three inscriptions, two of them in the Egyptian
language, but in two different characters (hieroglyphic and enchorial);
the third in Greek. The inscriptions are to the same purport in each,
being a decree of the priesthood at Memphis in honour of Ptolemy
Epiphanes, about the year B.C. 196. This stone has furnished the key to
the interpretation of the Egyptian characters.” There is likewise, in
the same gallery, “a cast of a similar trilingual tablet found at San,
being a decree of the priests at Canopus in honour of Ptolemy Euergetes
I. and Berenice, B.C. 238.” (_Birch._) San, it will be remembered, is
“the field of Zoan of the Bible.”
As we float gently away adown the sleepy stream of the Nile,
luxuriating in the dreamy ease of Dahabeeyah life, to our far-away
northern and western home, let us try to summarise the results of our
exploration into the history of Our Obelisk and its stately family.
I.—USERTESEN I., a Pharaoh of the twelfth dynasty, corresponding
with the year 3064 B.C., supplies us with the earliest example of an
obelisk, in the venerable monolith still standing at Heliopolis. Its
consort is lost, but the pedestal has been recently cleared of rubbish
to prove its former existence. The Heliopolis or Matareeah obelisk
was originally capped with metal, which has left its mark on the
pyramidion; and its shaft is engraven with a solitary column of boldly
carved hieroglyphs.
Another quadrangular shaft of syenitic granite, covered with
hieroglyphs, and also the work of Usertesen, exists at Biggig in the
Fyoom, on the western bank of the Nile, but broken into two pieces.
The title, however, of this monument to the rank of an obelisk is a
matter of dispute; and for several reasons: first, that it is wanting
in the proper proportions of the typical obelisk; secondly, that it is
rounded, instead of being pointed, at the apex, and is fashioned in a
manner to receive an ornamental finial; and thirdly, and most cogently,
that obelisks being consecrated to the rising sun, appertain solely
to the eastern bank of the river, whereas this has been set up on the
western bank; on which bank it was believed, until quite recently, that
no other trace of an obelisk had ever yet been found.
Putting aside the poetical superstition affecting the eastern and
western banks of the Nile, and the respective claims of Ra and Tum,
the rising and the setting sun, a monolithic shaft, of which the two
fragments together measure nearly forty-three feet in length, without
accounting for a portion which may have been lost, might, without
extreme license, be regarded as an obelisk.[38] It is true that the
apex is rounded; but this may have been the consequence of accident;
or perchance, being the first, or nearly the first, obelisk hewn from
the granite rock, it may simply prove evidence of the “’prentice hand,”
and be merely a ruder example of those more elegant, pointed shafts,
which were afterwards to follow. It had a groove on its summit; but
this was doubtless to bear a cap, like its big brother at Matereeah;
and who knows but that this cap may have completed the point of the
rounded head, and, to outward inspection, have made the shaft an
obelisk complete. Another allegation against the Biggig monolith is,
that it is broader on one side than on the other; but so are the
majority of obelisks, as is evinced by our own Cleopatra’s Needle;
although we are quite willing to confess that the deviation in the
candidate before us is more considerable than usual; its mean breadth
on two of its sides being 5 feet 2 inches, while that of the other two
is 4 feet: its greatest diameter at the base being 6 feet 9½ inches.
Under these circumstances it is, that while, by Sir Gardner Wilkinson
and M. Mariette, the Biggig monolith is accepted as an obelisk, its
privilege to that rank is rejected by Mr. Bonomi.
[38] Sixteen of Bonomi’s obelisks have a less altitude than forty-three
feet, including two belonging to Rameses II.; two of Psammeticus; the
Alnwick obelisk of Amenophis II., so ably described by himself; and the
two obelisks of black basalt in the British Museum.
In a previous page (99) we have alluded to the Temple of Hatasou,
at Thebes, on the western bank of the Nile, and consequently its
sepulchral side, in the front of which Mariette notes the pedestals
of a pair of obelisks. Does not this discovery invalidate, in some
degree at least, the theological hypothesis of the rising and the
setting sun; the shore of the living, and the shore of the dead? We
must confess to considerable hesitation in accepting the sun-theory
as an explanation of the site of the obelisks. Nor do we perceive
any more reason to assume that a superstitious speculation governed
the establishment of the abodes of the living, and of the tombs of
the dead, than that the selection was one of simple convenience. The
Egyptians are an Asiatic people, and therefore we may presume that
they were deeply imbued with theological mysticism from their earliest
origin; but, looking upon them in the light of wanderers in search of
a home, that word _home_, and its necessities, we should expect to be
a stronger and more rational power to govern their choice of residence
than the theosophy of their priests. The first monarchical cities of
Egypt, Thinis and Memphis, were founded on the western bank of the
Nile; and here likewise sprung up a vast city of tombs. At this early
period, the obelisk, the herald of triumph, had not been invented;[39]
it was the manifestation of a more advanced period of social progress,
when Thebes had asserted her claim of being the head[40] place;
and, subsequently, at a time when the western shore was deserted by
ancient temple-builders, the obelisks followed in the train of the
architectural developments of the Theban kings.
The earliest dynasties were too much occupied with cities, and
pyramids, and tombs, to care much for temples and decorative
architecture; but Usertesen, whilst he erected temples and obelisks to
the sun, likewise excavated tombs on the eastern shore of the Nile;
and, as if to exhibit his ignorance of hypothetical sun-worship,
planted an obeliskoid monument on the western shore, in the delicious
oasis of Fyoom.
[39] Mr. W. R. Cooper, in his excellent Monograph on “Egyptian
Obelisks,” just published, makes note of the following curious and
interesting quotation from “Letters from Egypt, by Lepsius:”—“A few
days ago we found a small obelisk erect, in its original position, in
a tomb, near the pyramids, of the commencement of the seventh dynasty
(Memphite, 3500-3400 B.C.). It is only a few feet high, but in good
preservation, and with the name of the occupant of the tomb inscribed
upon it. This form of monument, which is first conspicuous in the
new monarchy, is thus removed several dynasties further back, in the
old monarchy, even than the obelisk of Heliopolis.” This obelisk is
remarkable, as having apparently a funereal character.
[40] Ap, Apé, Tapé, signify, in the Egyptian language, the head or
capital of the country; Tapé, in the Memphic dialect, becomes Thaba,
which the Greeks have converted into Thebes.
Next in the historical series of events followed the five hundred years
of stagnation caused by the shepherd invaders; after which, obelisks,
delayed for a time, again sprung into existence with the family of
their conqueror Amosis, the Amenophs, and the Thothmeses; and once
more a contradiction to the sun-theory is presented, by not the least
distinguished of the last brilliant family, the great Queen Hatasou, or
Amun-noohet.
Furthermore, the legend recorded on the fragments of the Biggig obelisk
corresponds precisely with that found on the other obelisks. Upon the
upper part of this broken monolith, Sir Gardner Wilkinson informs us
that there are five compartments, one above the other, in which are
represented two figures of the Pharaoh Usertesen making offerings to
two deities; below these are hieroglyphs; and on either side of the
shaft is a column of hieroglyphs, including a cartouche of the king, on
one side describing him as beloved of Ptah, and on the other as beloved
of Mandoo.
Mr. Bonomi remarks, that at the time when obelisks first came into
use in Egypt, the patriarchs of the Jews were in the habit of setting
up large monoliths to perpetuate the memory of great events, and to
dedicate the spot to the Almighty. But these stones were taken as they
were found, and were unfashioned by the hand of the sculptor; neither
were they engraven. The Egyptians likewise set up tables, or tablets,
on which legends were engraved; or they carved inscriptions on the
rocks. But the Biggig obelisk differs materially from these, as it does
likewise from the remarkable, so-called obelisk of Axum. This latter
is a very striking and extraordinary monument, and merits exclusion,
both on account of its want of proportion, and likewise the absence
of written inscriptions. At Axum, the ancient capital of Abyssinia,
Bruce, the celebrated African traveller, observes:—“In one square are
forty obelisks, none of which have any hieroglyphics. There is one,
larger than the rest, still standing; but there are two, still larger
than this, fallen. They are all of one piece of granite, and, on the
top of that which is standing, there is a patera (vase), exceedingly
well carved in the Greek taste. Below, there is the door-bolt and lock,
which Poncet speaks of, carved on the obelisk, as if to represent an
entrance through it to some building behind. The lock and bolt are
precisely the same as those used at this day in Egypt and Palestine.”
[Illustration]
The progress of Egyptological science appears, therefore, to demand
that we should adopt the Biggig monolith as a genuine obelisk, however
awkward it may be presumed to be in its proportions. It, no doubt,
stood once in front of the entrance of a temple dedicated to Ptah,
or Vulcan, like the temple of Memphis; and in its broken condition
is still highly reverenced by the country-people, who “look on these
fragments with the same superstitious feeling as on some stones at
the temple of Panopolis, and other places; and the women recite the
Fat’ha over them in the hope of a numerous offspring.”[41] That they
have some ground for their credence may be gathered from the official
legend engraved on the narrow sides, translated by the distinguished
Egyptologist, M. Chabas:[42]—
_North._—“The heaven, the kingly Horus, life of _births_, lord of the
diadems, life of _births_, king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-kheper-ka,
beloved of Ptah of Res-sobt-ef (Ptah of the southern wall), the life of
_births_, golden hawk, good god, master of domination.”
_South._—“The heaven, the kingly Horus, life of _births_, lord of
diadems, life of _births_, king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra-kheper-ka,
beloved of Month, lord of Thebais, life of _births_, hawk of gold, good
god, lord of the two lands,”.... [41] Murray’s Hand-book.
[42] “A Short History of the Egyptian Obelisks,” by W. R. Cooper,
F.R.A.S., M.R.A.S.; 1877.
So long as the Biggig monolith was the only known example of an
obelisk on the western shore of the Nile, there were grounds for
considering it as an interloper and an impostor; but at present,
since the discovery of the pedestals of obelisks in western Thebes by
M. Mariette, it may assert its claim to be admitted into the group of
genuine obelisks.
II.—THOTHMES I., of the eighteenth dynasty, which embraces the period
between 1703 and 1462 B.C., stands next in age to Usertesen, although
about 1,500 years must have elapsed between the dates of their
respective works. The obelisk now standing in front of the propylon of
the Osiris temple at Karnak, is the work of Thothmes I.; the companion
obelisk lies broken by its side. The hieroglyphic exordium of Thothmes
I. occupies the pyramidion and two of the faces of the obelisk; while
the remaining faces have been appropriated by Rameses II. Two hundred
and fifty years therefore must have intervened between the dates of the
two writings.
III.—HATASOU, daughter of Thothmes I., erected two obelisks within
the temple of Osiris at Karnak, to the honour of her father. Like
the preceding, one has fallen to the ground, and one only remains.
The standing obelisk is ninety-two feet high,[43] and is a beautiful
work. It is upon the base of this pair of obelisks that we find the
legend of their having been hewn from the rock, erected and finished
in seven months. The pedestals of two other obelisks are mentioned by
Mariette as standing in front of her temple at Deir-el-Bahari, on the
western shore of the Nile, at Thebes; but the obelisks themselves are
destroyed.
[Illustration:
Cartouches of the Pharaoh, Thothmes III.; his prenomen
or first or divine name, and his surname or
family name; the former being represented by
the three syllables; the suns disk, _Ra_;
a turreted parallelogram, _men_; and the
scarab, _kheper_; _i.e._, Ra-men-kheper.
And the latter by the sacred Ibis, representing
_Thoth_, the god of letters; and the emblem of
birth, which stands for _mes_; making together
Thothmes.
]
IV.—THOTHMES III. follows next in succession with four obelisks, the
four Needles; all erected at Heliopolis; the two beautiful obelisks
termed Pharaoh’s Needles, and the pair at Alexandria called Cleopatra’s
Needles. Pharaoh’s Needles were removed by the Emperor Constantine;
one he conveyed to Constantinople, where it now stands;[44] and the
other was sent to Rome by his son Constantius. The former records
the conquest of Mesopotamia by Thothmes III.; while the latter is
the celebrated obelisk of St. John Lateran: besides the cartouche
of Thothmes III., it also bears in the lateral columns that of his
grandson, Thothmes IV.; and of the pair it is said that, unlike the
obelisks of Hatasou, they were thirty-six years in the artificers’
hands before they were completed. According to Mr. W. R. Cooper,
the obelisk at Constantinople “was originally one of the splendours
of Karnak.” It was broken on its journey to Byzantium; and judging
from its present appearance, the upper part alone has been erected.
An inscription formerly engraved on its pedestal in Greek and
Latin, stated that thirty days were occupied in setting it up, and
unpleasantly reminds us of “fire and sword:”—
“I was unwilling to obey imperial masters, but I was ordered to
bear the palm after the destruction of tyrants. All things yield to
Theodosius and his enduring offspring. Thus, I was conquered and
subdued in thirty days, and elevated towards the sky in the prætorship
of Proclus.” [43] Mr. W. E. Cooper states the height of Hatasou’s
obelisk as upwards of 97 feet; Lenormant giving it 30 metres (97 feet 6
inches) in altitude, and 368 tons in weight. The height of the obelisk
of Thothmes I. is, according to the same authority, 90 feet 6 inches.
[44] According to Mr. W. R. Cooper, the Constantinople obelisk was
brought from Karnak; and sent to Constantinople A.D. 324. It was
erected by Theodosius, seventy-three years later—namely, A.D. 397.
Of Cleopatra’s Needles, one stands at Alexandria; whilst the other,
which had fallen several centuries ago, and been buried in the earth,
will, we hope, soon fill a site on the banks of the Thames, by virtue
of its privilege of being the British obelisk.
Mr. Bonomi admits into his list of obelisks two small granite monoliths
dedicated to Thothmes III., which stand before the Usertesen sanctuary
at Karnak. “I put them down,” he says, in a communication with which
he favoured us recently, “as obelisks—because they stand in front of
a temple, but doubt their claim to be reckoned such, for they never
had the pointed apex. On the north face of the square block are three
figures of the Papyrus of Lower Egypt, and, on the south face, three
of the Papyrus of Upper Egypt. On the east and west sides are figures
of Thothmes embraced by one of the goddesses of Egypt, repeated two or
three times. The figures are in the sculpture peculiar to Egypt,[45]
and a little more than three feet high.” We entirely agree with Mr.
Bonomi, that the monoliths in question, however interesting in other
respects, do not come up to the standard of the typical obelisk; and,
although occupying so distinguished a place of honour as the front of a
sanctuary temple, we must refuse them admission into our present list.
[45] The incavo-relievo.
V.—AMENOPHIS II., another Pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty, is the
author of a small, but interesting obelisk, which was brought to
England by the Duke of Northumberland (then Lord Prudhoe), in 1838,
and now stands in the front hall of Syon House, at Isleworth. It is
a monolith of syenite granite, 7 feet 6¾ inches in height, supported
on a pedestal of 2 feet 8½ inches; making the total altitude of the
monument 10 feet 3¼ inches. Its breadth at the base, on two of its
faces, is 10⅞ inches, and that of the pyramidion 8½ inches; and, on the
adjoining faces, 9⅞ inches, the base of the pyramidion being 8⅞ inches.
It therefore happens that the base on two of the sides is only one inch
broader than that of the pyramidion; whilst on the other sides the base
exceeds that of the pyramidion nearly 2½ inches. The column is broken
at the apex, and was found in one of the villages of the Thebaid. This
obelisk was made the subject of an interesting paper, published in the
“Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature” for 1843, by Mr.
Joseph Bonomi, who observes, with regard to it, that it presents the
peculiar feature of being inscribed only on one face. Its inscription
reads as follows:—
On the _apex_, the god Chnoumis, ram-headed, is seated on a throne;
Amenophis II. kneels before him, offering a pyramidal loaf of
bread, and says:—“Khnoum, resident in the heart (or centre) of Phi
(Elephantine) Ammenhetf (Amenophis II.), giver of life like the sun.”
On the _shaft_:—“The Harmachis, the living sun, the powerful bull, the
very valiant king of the south and north, Aa-aa-cheferu (prenomen of
Amenophis II.), son of the sun, Amenhetf, divine ruler of the Thebaid,
has made his offering gift to his father Khnoum (Chnoumis); he has seen
given to him two obelisks of the table of the sun (the altar of the
sun), that he may make him (the king) a giver of life for ever.”
VI.—AMENOPHIS III., also a Pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty, and the
Memnon of the Greeks, erected two obelisks in front of his temple
at Karnak. The temple is now a mass of ruins, and the obelisks have
utterly disappeared.
VII.—SETI I., or OSIREI, a Pharaoh of the nineteenth dynasty, which
ranges in date between 1462 and 1288 B.C., was the author of two, at
least, of the obelisks ascribed to his son Rameses the Great. He is
said to have been of Semitic origin, and descended from the Hyksos or
shepherd kings, and was struck blind at an early period of his career;
but having recovered his sight, he devoted himself, for the rest
of his life, to the construction of temples and obelisks. Rameses,
who delighted in “the bubble reputation,” even to his father’s loss,
inserted his own heraldic bearings on some of Seti’s monuments—for
example, the Flaminian obelisk, as shown by Tomlinson—and therefore a
certain amount of confusion is imported into the differentiation of the
works of the two Pharaohs, father and son; although the confusion is
at once cleared up when the hieroglyphic writing is investigated. To
Seti belong the beautiful Flaminian obelisk at the Porta del Popolo,
which is regarded as the first ever removed from Egypt, and that of
the Trinita de Monti at Rome.[46] On these his legend occupies the
middle column of the shaft; whilst the titles and praises of Rameses
are displayed in the side columns. The Flaminian obelisk was conveyed
from Heliopolis to Rome by the Emperor Augustus, as a trophy of war, in
the tenth year before the Christian era, and was set up in its present
place by Pope Sixtus V., in the year 1590. We arrive thus at the number
seven for the city of Heliopolis, or more probably _eight_; for, as we
now know, obelisks were set up in pairs; and we have reason to regard
a city adorned with so many of these emblems of the sun, as very truly
the city of the sun. Heliopolis, however, did not possess the greatest
number of obelisks, inasmuch as, through the munificence of Rameses
II., there were ten or more in the ruined city of San.
[46] Mr. W. R. Cooper observes, with regard to the Trinita de
Monti—“From the style of art in which the characters are cut, it is the
general opinion of antiquaries, that the monument is an ancient Roman
copy of the larger obelisk in the Piazza del Popolo.”
[Illustration:
Ovals or Cartouches of Rameses the Great,
prenomen and name; the former signifying
Ra-ouser-ma-sotep-en-Ra; and the latter,
Ra-mer-amen, child of the sun.
]
VIII.—RAMESES II. is the most prolific in the production of obelisks of
all the kings of Egypt. The Luxor obelisks owe their origin to him: one
is still standing in front of the colossal statues of himself and the
magnificent propylon of the great hall of the temple; while the other
occupies an admirable site in the Place de la Concorde, at Paris.
Two obelisks, bearing his name, ornament the public places at Rome;
one in front of the Pantheon, in the middle of a fountain; the other
in the garden of the Villa Mattei, on the Cœlian Hill. The former was
originally placed in the Circus Maximus, whence it was removed, by
Pope Paul V., to the Piazza di S. Martino, and subsequently erected on
its present site by Clement XI., in the year 1711; while that of the
Villa Mattei, or Cœli Montana, was set up by Pope Sixtus V. in the year
1590. An unlucky incident happened in connection with the latter event;
for as the obelisk was being lowered into its place, the architect
inadvertently got his hand entangled between its base and the pedestal;
and as there was no means of lifting the obelisk, it became necessary
to cut off the imprisoned hand at the wrist.
In addition to these four, we must likewise give to Rameses II. the
credit of the ten ruined obelisks at Tanis, the field of Zoan; making
a total of fourteen. But although, in the gross amount, Rameses II.
exceeds all other Pharaohs, he only equals Thothmes III. in the
number of the standing ones. Four only of the Rameses obelisks are
erect—namely, Luxor, Paris, Pantheon, and Villa Mattei; whilst Thothmes
III. equally lays claim to four—Constantinople, St. John Lateran, and
the two Cleopatra’s Needles.
IX.—MENEPHTAH I., a son and successor of Rameses II., also of the
nineteenth dynasty, is represented as the author of an obelisk which
is placed before the front of St. Peter’s at Rome. It was brought from
Heliopolis to Alexandria by Augustus Cæsar, and afterwards transported
to Rome by the Emperor Caligula in the fortieth year of the first
century of the Christian era, and marks the period when Peter was
released from prison and made his entry into Rome (January 18th, 43
A.D.) The obelisk was erected by Pope Sixtus V., in the garden of the
Vatican, in 1586; and is without inscription. It is of this obelisk
that the anecdote is told of the almost failure of the operation of
erection from the stretching of the ropes. Silence among the workmen
had been enjoined under extreme penalties; but a sailor perceiving the
difficulty and its cause, suddenly shouted, “Water the ropes.” Fontana,
the architect, catching the practical force of the suggestion, acted
upon it at once, and the danger which had been imminent was averted.
Need we say that the sailor was not punished for his infraction of
orders, but was handsomely rewarded.
X.—PSAMMETICUS I., a Pharaoh of the twenty-sixth dynasty, corresponding
with the year 665 B.C., is the author of an obelisk which was
originally erected at Heliopolis, and was brought to Rome by Augustus
Cæsar, thirty years before the birth of Christ. It was made to serve
the purpose of a gnomon, or pointer, to a great sun-dial in front of
the church of St. Lorenzo in Lucina; and was afterwards moved to the
Monte Citorio by Pope Pius VI., in 1792. It was found broken into four
pieces, and bears marks of extensive repairs.
XI.—PSAMMETICUS II., likewise a Pharaoh of the twenty-sixth dynasty
(588-567 B.C.), has his name inscribed on a small obelisk which was
set up by Bernini on the back of a marble elephant in the Piazza della
Minerva at Rome, by the command of Pope Alexander VII., in the year
1667. It was probably brought from Sais in the first instance, and was
found amongst the ruins of the Temple of Isis and Serapis at Rome. An
inscription on this monument reminds the reader, in allusion to the
elephant, that a strong mind is needed for the maintenance and exercise
of wisdom.
XII.—NECTANEBO I., a Pharaoh of the thirtieth dynasty (378 B.C.), is
represented by two small obelisks of black basalt, preserved in the
British Museum. Dr. Birch, in a recent communication to us with regard
to them, observes, that they were dedicated to the god Thoth, the
Mercury of the Greeks, “by a king now recognised as Nekht-her-hebi,
the Nectabes or Nekterhebes of the lists; some call him Nectanebo I.
They came from Cairo, and formed part of the antiquities surrendered
by the French in Egypt after their capitulation, and were presented by
George III. about the year 1801.” Both have been broken into several
pieces, and have lost their summit as well as their pyramidion;
their present dimensions being about 8 feet in height, by 1 foot
6 inches on two of the sides, and an inch less on the other two.
Bonomi and Cooper, however, attribute them to Amyrtæus, a king of the
twenty-eighth dynasty. Mr. Cooper states that they bear the cartouche
of Amyrtæus, and mentions, as a curious part of their history, that one
“was first noticed by Pocock as forming part of a window-sill in the
castle of Cairo; and the other, broken in two pieces, was discovered
by Niebuhr, one fragment serving as the door-sill of a mosque in the
castle of Cairo, while a second was the door-step of a house near
Kantara-siedid.... The French army of occupation carried off these
obelisks from Cairo to Alexandria, and they consequently fell into
the hands of the English at the capitulation of that city in 1801....
The hieroglyphic inscription has only been partly translated; but the
portion so deciphered reads:—‘Amyrtæus, the living, like Ra, beloved of
Thoth, the great lord of Eshmunayn.’”
[Illustration: Obelisks in the British Museum.]
XIII.—NECTANEBO II., the last of the Pharaohs, of the thirtieth
dynasty, or 378 B.C., is the author of an obelisk without hieroglyphic
sculpture, which was set up at Alexandria by Ptolemy Philadelphus, in
front of the tomb of his wife Arsinoë. It was subsequently conveyed
to Rome, at the command of Augustus, by Maximus, prefect of Egypt, in
the tenth year before Christ; and its pyramidion was cut off with the
intention of supplying its place with a gilded one: this intention,
however, has never been accomplished. It was originally one of the
pair, both uninscribed, and both without pyramidion, which were set
up before the mausoleum of Augustus in the Campus Martius, and was
subsequently placed by Sixtus V. behind the church of St. Maria
Maggiore, in 1587. The fellow-obelisk is that now standing in the
Piazza Quirinale, on the Monte Cavallo.
Mr. W. R. Cooper remarks, with regard to these two obelisks, that
according to tradition, they “were set up at Memphis by King Pepi
Merira (Apappus of Eratosthenes), of the sixth dynasty, a monarch who
is recorded on the hieroglyphic texts to have reigned for one hundred
years, less one hour.” They were removed from Egypt to Rome by Claudius
Cæsar, A.D. 57, and placed in front of the mausoleum of Augustus. Then
sharing the universal fate of all the obelisks at the fall of Rome,
they became buried in the earth, and when disinterred had lost the
pyramidion, and were otherwise broken. The smaller of the two was
dug out by Pius VI. so recently as 1786; “but it occupies, perhaps, a
finer position than any of its companions in the city of Rome, except
the obelisk of the Vatican, since the architect Antinori erected it on
the place of the Monte Cavallo, between the two splendid bronze horses
called Castor and Pollux, which once adorned the centre of the Baths of
Constantine, and are now the glory of Rome.”
In the British Museum, Dr. Birch mentions the existence of a fragment
which would appear to be part of an obelisk of Liliputian dimensions.
And he further observes that several such small obelisks are known. Mr.
Bonomi likewise includes in his list a small obelisk which formerly
stood at Constantinople, and quotes from the work of Petrus Gyllus, or
Pierre Gilles,[47] as follows:—
[47] Born 1490; died 1555. “Antiquities of Constantinople, written
originally in Latin,” by Petrus Gyllus, a Byzantine Historian.
Translated by John Ball. London, 1729.
“It is very probable that Constantinople had more obelisks than one.
When first I arrived at Constantinople I saw two of them: one in the
Circus Maximus, another in the Imperial Precinct, standing on the
north side of the first hill. This last was of a square figure, and
was erected near the houses of the Grand Seignor’s Glaziers. A little
time after I saw it lying prostrate without the Precinct, and found
it to be thirty-five feet in length. Each of its sides, if I mistake
not, was six feet broad; and the whole was eight yards in compass. It
was purchased by Antonius Priolus, a nobleman of Venice, who sent it
thither, and placed it in St. Stephen’s Market. The other is standing
in the Hippodrome to this day.” But, according to Long, writes Mr.
Cooper, “this obelisk was never removed, but is identical with one
of red granite, which still stands in the Sultan’s gardens, on the
most northern eminence there. From its dimensions, this obelisk is
probably of the period of the middle empire;[48] but as a copy of its
inscriptions has not yet reached Europe, or been elsewhere published,
all speculation as to its original place of erection, or the monarch
who erected it, would be useless.”
[48] The middle empire is composed of eight dynasties, eleventh to
eighteenth inclusive; its date ranges in years between 3064 and 1462
B.C.; and it is made illustrious by the celebrated names of Usertesen,
Amenemha, Amenophis, and Thothmes.
Mr. Cooper also includes, in the series of Pharaonic obelisks, a small
monolith of sandstone, eight feet in length, which was found by Rüppel
lying prostrate on the ground near the wells of Nahasb, in the deserts
of Arabia Petræa. The inscriptions on the three sides exposed to the
atmosphere are obliterated; but on the under-surface, the hieroglyphs,
as far as he could examine them, appeared to be beautifully preserved.
The monument was probably of Saitic origin.
Moreover, we must not fail to notice two obelisks, of large size,
which were removed from Thebes by the conquering army of Assurbanipal
in 664 B.C., and conveyed to Nineveh; where, as they have not since
been found, it is to be presumed that they still lie buried in the
ruins. “It is not stated from what temple these monuments were taken,
and of course it is unknown now, by whom they were erected; but
this was the first instance in which an Egyptian obelisk suffered
transportation.”[49]
[49] Cooper.
This concludes our survey of the Pharaonic obelisks; and next in
order to these follow the obelisks of Philæ, of Ptolemaic origin; the
obelisks constructed at the command of Roman emperors, and regarded by
_virtuosi_ as spurious; and other obelisks of obscure origin. The Philæ
obelisks are three in number—the two of sandstone and uninscribed,
which stood in front of the Temple of Isis, one of which is still
erect, while the other is lost; and a very interesting obelisk of
syenitic granite, which was found by Mr. William Bankes and Belzoni
among the ruins at Philæ, and was brought to England by Mr. Bankes.
This latter is known among Egyptologists as the Corfe Castle Obelisk,
and the Soughton Hall Obelisk, although it has never possessed any
other site than that on the lawn in front of Kingston-Lacy Hall, at
Wimborne in Dorsetshire,[50] and would more correctly be described
as the Bankes obelisk. The Bankes obelisk enjoys the distinction of
bearing the cartouches of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, and was one—and a very
important one—of the sources whence Champollion drew his interpretation
of Egyptian hieroglyphs.
[50] _Vide_ Hutchins’ edition of Dorset, 1st edition.
The obelisks constructed by order of the Roman emperors, include those
of Domitian, Domitian and Titus, Hadrian, and a small obelisk “executed
in Egypt by Santus Rufus ... in honour of one of the Roman emperors ...
and afterwards sent to Rome.” This is termed the Albani Obelisk, and is
now at Munich.[51]
[51] Cooper; quoted from Westropp’s “Hand-book of Archæology.” First
edition, p. 56.
Domitian’s obelisk, also styled the Pamphilian Obelisk, and the Obelisk
of the Piazza Navona, in Rome, is erected on a base of rock, forty feet
high, in the midst of a fountain, and is ornamented at the four corners
with statues of river-gods. It is placed in front of the church of St.
Agnes, and is supposed to occupy the spot where that saint suffered
her martyrdom. The height of the obelisk is 54 feet 3 inches, and its
breadth at the base 4 feet 5 inches. It was set up in its present place
by Bernini, in 1651, at the command of Pope Innocent X.
Domitian and Titus are represented in cartouches on a small obelisk
of red granite, a little more than nine feet high, which stands in
the Cathedral Square of Benevento. It is carved with several columns
of hieroglyphs, but is much mutilated. The inscription records the
dedication of a temple to the goddess Isis by the two emperors.[52] Mr.
Cooper, however, takes no notice of a shorter fragment of an obelisk at
Benevento, which is set down by Bonomi in his list of erect obelisks.
[52] Cooper.
Hadrian and Sabina are commemorated by an obelisk of red granite,
thirty feet in height, which now stands on the Monte Pincio at Rome.
It is one of a pair originally planted in front of a temple in the
Egyptian city of Antinoopolis, A.D. 131; and records the sacrifice of
Antinous, the celebrated favourite of Hadrian. A few years later it was
removed to Rome, and erected on the Monte Pincio, where it shared the
fate of the rest of the Roman obelisks, thrown down and buried; until,
in 1822, it was recovered and set up by Pope Pius VII. “After the
erection of this last obelisk,” says Mr. Cooper, “no more inscribed
obelisks were set up, either in Egypt or in Rome. For this there was
ample reason: the Egyptian language had been entirely supplanted by the
Latin and the Greek; the significance of the characters was unknown;
already Pliny had proved his entire ignorance of the script; and Pliny,
it must be recollected, was the learned centre of all the science of
his time.”
Among the obelisks of obscure origin, are a small sandstone monolith,
without inscription, in the possession of the Duke of Northumberland,
and preserved in the museum at Alnwick Castle; two small obelisks in
the museum at Florence; and the obelisk of the city of Arles, on the
Rhone.
The two obelisks in the Florentine Museum are only 5 feet 10 inches,
and 6 feet high, but differ in breadth, and are the smallest of the
obelisk family. They are fashioned of red granite, the pyramidion
perfect; but being uninscribed, their authorship and origin are
unknown.
[Illustration: Obelisk at Arles.]
The Arles obelisk, from its position in the city of Arles, on the banks
of the Rhone, has suggested the idea that it might have been sent from
Egypt to Arles by Constantine, at the time when he was projecting a
second Constantinople on that spot; but this illusion is dissipated
by the discovery that it is composed of granite of a grey colour,
which is found in the neighbouring quarries of Mont Esterel, near
Frejus. It is uninscribed, and therefore unable to tell the story of
its life; is nearly 57 feet in height, by 7 feet 6 inches in greatest
breadth, and “is probably of Roman workmanship.” Mr. Cooper remarks,
that it must have been left for seventeen centuries on the ground
where it was discovered; and, although royal directions were given
for its disinterment about the year 1389, it was not until 1676 that
it was erected in commemoration of Louis XIV. It is surmounted with a
globe representing the earth, and above it a sun: while “beneath the
inscription in honour of Louis XIV., is another referring to the late
emperor, Napoleon III.”[53]
[53] Murray’s Hand-book for France, 1877.
We have, therefore, brought under our notice a list of thirteen
Egyptian Pharaohs (including one Queen), who have left behind them
proofs of their taste in the construction of obelisks; namely:—
I. USERTESEN I.; _three_, including the
monolith at Biggig; one being lost, one broken, and
one remaining entire at Heliopolis.
II. THOTHMES I.; _two_, one broken, the
other entire, and known as the small obelisk, at Karnak.
III. HATASOU, Queen; _four_, one broken,
two lost, and one, the great obelisk, standing at Karnak.
IV. THOTHMES III.; _four_, all standing,
the four Needles; one each in Constantinople, Rome,
Alexandria, and London.
V. AMENOPHIS II.; _one_, the Alnwick
obelisk, at Syon House, Isleworth.
VI. AMENOPHIS III.; _two_, both broken
and lost in the ruins of his temple at Karnak.
VII. SETI I., or OSIREI, the blind
king; _two_, both in Rome, the Flaminian and
that of Trinita de Monti.
VIII. RAMESES II.; _fourteen_, one each
at Luxor and Paris; two in Rome, in front of the
Pantheon and in the garden of the Villa Mattei; and
ten lost at San, amid the ruins of the “field of Zoan.”
IX. MENEPHTAH; _one_, at Rome, the
Vatican, before the church of St. Peter; uninscribed.
X. PSAMMETICUS I.; _one_, the “gnomon”
obelisk, on the Monte Citorio at Rome.
XI. PSAMMETICUS II.; _one_, the elephant
obelisk, in the Piazza della Minerva at Rome,
mounted on an elephant.
XII. NECTANEBO I., or AMYRTÆUS; _two_,
of black basaltic stone, in the British Museum.
XIII. NECTANEBO II.; _two_, at Rome,
both uninscribed; one near the church of St. Maria
Maggiore, the other in the Piazza of the Quirinal Palace.
We arrive thus at the number thirty-nine; and if to this number we
add the _two_ Pharaonic obelisks, Prioli and Nahasb; the _two_ Theban
obelisks lost at Nineveh; the _three_ Ptolemaic obelisks of Philæ; the
_four_ Roman obelisks of Domitian, Hadrian, and that called Albani; and
_five_ of obscure origin—namely, the sandstone obelisk at Alnwick, the
fragment at Benevento, mentioned by Bonomi, the two Florence obelisks,
and the obelisk at Arles—we shall then have a total of fifty-five, of
which thirty-three are still standing, and twenty-two have fallen.
We cannot pretend, at this distance of time, to have traced
every obelisk issued from the quarries of Syené, to its present
resting-place. We know that there were many important cities with
their temples in the Delta, now in ruins, their place alone indicated
by tumulus-like mounds, where, doubtless, obelisks once stood; nor have
we forgotten the fragment which forms part of the pavement of Cairo;
nor the hieroglyphed stump on which Pompey’s Pillar rests for its
chief support at Alexandria. But, strange to say, of the twenty-nine
obelisks thus ascertained to be standing, only six remain to Egypt
herself—namely, Alexandria, one; Heliopolis, one; Karnak, two; Luxor,
one; and Philæ, one.
To the eminent Egyptologist, Mr. Joseph Bonomi,[54] science is indebted
for a list of thirty-two obelisks, arranged in the order of size, and
ranging in altitude between 5 feet 10 inches, the smallest of the two
obelisks in the museum at Florence; and 105 feet 7 inches, the height
of the giant of the obelisk family, that of St. John Lateran at Rome.
This latter obelisk has lost nearly a yard from its base in consequence
of injury, and would, when perfect, have measured upwards of 108 feet.
Mr. Bonomi’s list is given in the form of a pictorial diagram, from
which we quote the figures as follows:—
Ft. In.
1. St. John Lateran, Rome, Thothmes III. 105 7
2. Karnak, Queen Hatasou 93 6[55]
3. St. Peter’s, Rome, plain 88 2
4. Luxor, Rameses II. —— ——
5. Piazza del Popolo, Rome, Seti I. 87 5
6. Paris, Rameses II. 76 0
7. Monte Citorio, Rome, Psammeticus 75 5
8. Karnak, Thothmes I. —— ——
9. Alexandria, Thothmes-Rameses 69 1
10. Heliopolis, Usertesen I. 67 4
11. Arles, France 59 9
12. Navona, Rome, Domitian 54 3
13. Atmeidan, Constantinople, Thothmes III. 50 0
14. St. Maria Maggiore, Rome 48 0
15. Piazza Quirinale, Rome 47 8
16. Trinita de Monti, Rome 43 6
17. Prioli, Constantinople 35 0
18. Philæ —— ——
19. Hadrian, Rome 30 0
20. Corfe Castle, Bankes 22 0
21. Pantheon, Rome 19 9
22. Piazza Minerva, Rome 17 0
23. Alnwick, Syon House 9 0
24. Villa Mattei 8 3
25. British Museum 8 1
26. Florence 5 10
[54] “Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature;” second series;
vol. i., 1843; page 158.
[55] _Vide_ notes, pages 26 and 149.
It will be seen that Mr. Bonomi omits to mention the height of the
Luxor and of the lesser Karnak obelisk: the former appears in his
table as fourth in altitude; while its companion, the Paris obelisk,
is sixth, with a difference of upwards of ten feet between them. This,
if it be so, may possibly result from the removal of some portion of
the base of the French monument; although it has been always known
that there was some difference of length between them. The smaller
Karnak obelisk is about seventy-five feet high. The British obelisk,
being prostrate, does not appear in the list; but it has now been
ascertained to be taller than its Alexandrian brother, the precise
measurements being 68 feet 5½ inches; and 67 feet 2 inches; while the
latter is actually shorter, by two inches, than the Heliopolis obelisk.
These data serve to place the British obelisk tenth on the list in
point of height. Mr. Bonomi’s researches likewise direct attention to
the following interesting facts in connection with the statistics of
obelisks—namely, that out of twenty-one of these Pharaonic monuments,
eight possess only one column of hieroglyphs; and in the case of the
Alnwick obelisk, only on one side of the shaft; one, two columns; and
seven, three columns; while the remaining five are plain and without
any carving at all.
The obelisks at present erect are distributed as follows, age taking
precedence in each of the divisions:—
ROME—_Twelve_. Ft. In.
St. John Lateran 105 7
Flaminian, Porta del Popolo 87 5
Trinita de Monti 43 6
Pantheon, Piazza Rotunda 19 9
Villa Mattei, Cœlian Hill 8 3
Vatican, St. Peter’s, plain 88 2
Monte Citorio 75 5
Piazza della Minerva 17 0
St. Maria Maggiore, plain 48 5
Piazza Quirinale, plain 47 8
Piazza Navona (Domitian) 54 3
Monte Pincio (Hadrian) 30 0
ITALY, in addition to those at Rome—_Four_.
Florence Museum (2) 5 10
Domitian and Titus 9 0
Benevento, fragment —— ——
EGYPT—_Six_.
Heliopolis 67 4
Karnak, Thothmes I. 75 0
Karnak, Hatasou 97 6
Alexandria 67 2
Luxor 84 3
Philæ 35 0
ENGLAND—_Six_.
Cleopatra’s Needle 68 5½
Syon House 8 0
British Museum (2) 8 1
Kingston-Lacy Hall (Bankes) 22 0
Alnwick Castle, sandstone 33 0
FRANCE—_Two_.
Paris, from Luxor 76 6
Arles on the Rhone 56 9
CONSTANTINOPLE—_Two_.
Atmeidan (shortened) 50 0
Prioli 35 0
GERMANY—_One_.
Albani —— ——
Making a total of thirty-three obelisks at present standing.
With one exception, all the known obelisks are Egyptian; hewn by the
Egyptians, and from the rocks of Egypt itself, granite, basalt, and
sandstone; the exception being that of Arles. Putting, however, the
Arles obelisk out of consideration, obelisks admit of being grouped
into Pharaonic, Ptolemaic, and Roman; while a sub-group may be formed
in each class, consisting of the inscribed and uninscribed. The
inscribed obelisks narrate their own history as if endowed with life;
but uninscribed obelisks are mute, and can alone be identified by their
surroundings. As it may be convenient to view the obelisks from each of
these points of view, we have compiled a few lists, which, we believe,
will be found convenient; adopting in every case an order of seniority.
PHARAONIC OBELISKS.
Heliopolis, Usertesen.
Biggig, ditto.
Karnak, Thothmes I.
Karnak, Queen Hatasou.
St. John Lateran, Thothmes III.
Constantinople, ditto.
Alexandria, ditto.
London, ditto.
Syon House (Alnwick), Amenophis II.
Flaminian, Porta del Popolo, Seti I.
Trinita de Monti, ditto.
Luxor, Rameses II.
Paris, ditto.
Pantheon, Piazza Rotunda, ditto.
Villa Mattei, ditto.
St. Peter’s, Vatican, Menephtah.
Monte Citorio, Psammeticus I.
Piazza della Minerva, Psammeticus II.
British Museum (two), Nectanebo I.
St. Maria Maggiore, Nectanebo II.
Piazza Quirinale, Monte Cavallo.
Prioli, Constantinople.
Nahasb, Saitic.
Nineveh (two), Theban.
PTOLEMAIC.
Bankes, Kingston-Lacy Hall.
Propylon at Philæ, sandstone.
ROMAN.
Domitian, Rome.
Domitian and Titus, Benevento.
Hadrian, Rome.
Albani, Munich.
UNCERTAIN ORIGIN.
Alnwick Museum, sandstone.
Benevento, fragment.
Florence (two).
FOREIGN.
Arles, France.
UNINSCRIBED OBELISKS.
St. Peter’s, Rome, Menephtah.
St. Maria Maggiore, Nectanebo II.
Piazza Quirinale, ditto.
Propylon of Philæ, Ptolemy Philadelphus.
Albani, Munich.
Alnwick Museum, sandstone.
Florence (two).
Arles, France.
The progress of our obelisk to England offers several points of
interest which we must leave to another pen than our own to develop.
Before its transport to London became the theme of discussion, there
were few probably who cared for it; but since the prospect of its
arrival has dawned, many have shown an interest in its disposal. Its
earliest friend was the Earl of Harrowby, who considered it worthy of
one of the noblest sites in London; and sees in that site a “moral
fitness.” Indeed, to ourselves, the question is not so much,—Where
it will look the best; as, Where it will best be preserved and
appreciated:—and we certainly know of no spot in the metropolis so
fitting in every respect as St. Stephen’s Green, otherwise Parliament
Square, with its noble and its venerable monuments and traditions. We
could point out many good spots for its erection, but none better; and
when the great weight of the monument is taken into consideration, and
the obstacles to moving it through a crowded city, we ought to be more
than content with the precincts of Westminster Abbey as its ultimate
resting-place.
To the son of one who has served his country—to a sailor’s son—the
Egyptian obelisk illustrates a brilliant bit of British history, of
“great events, deeds, and characters” of British bravery; of VICTORY
or WESTMINSTER ABBEY. And of the “moral fitness” of the Westminster
site, let us give ear to the gentle teachings of one whose words ought
ever to be received with the deepest veneration and respect—Dean
Stanley—who, preaching from the pulpit of Westminster itself, on
the text—“And who is my neighbour?” illustrating the parable of the
Good Samaritan, and the numerous occasions, at home and abroad,
on which Christian kindness might be rendered—remarked, the great
Egyptian obelisk, now on its way to England, might preach us an useful
lesson. “That obelisk,” he observes, “if ever it should be planted,
will be a lasting memorial of those lessons which are taught by the
Good Samaritan. * * * What will it tell us when it comes to stand,
a solitary heathen stranger, amidst the monuments of our English
Christian greatness—perchance amidst the statues of our statesmen,
under the shadow of our legislature, almost within the very precincts
of our abbey? It will speak to us of the wisdom and splendour which
was the parent of all past civilisation—the wisdom whereby Moses
made himself learned in all the learning of the Egyptians for the
deliverance and education of Israel—whence the earliest Grecian
philosophers and the earliest Christian fathers derived the insight
which enabled them to look into the deep things alike of Paganism and
Christianity. It will tell us, so often as we look at its strange form
and venerable characters, that ‘The light which lighteneth every man’
shone also on those who raised it as an emblem of the beneficial rays
of the sunlight of the world. It will tell us that as true goodness was
possible in the outcast Samaritan, so true wisdom was possible even in
the hard and superstitious Egyptians, even in that dim twilight of the
human race, before the first dawn of the Hebrew law or of the Christian
gospel.”
SO MOTE IT BE.
APPENDIX.
Our narrative of Cleopatra’s Needle would be incomplete were we to
fail in recording some few memoranda which have fallen in our way,
of the personal history of the obelisk: and the first of these to
which we shall direct attention is derived from an extract from the
_Bombay Courier_, of June 9, 1802, courteously communicated to us by
Major-General Bellasis. It runs as follows:—
“The pedestal of the fallen Needle of Cleopatra
having been heeled to starboard, and a proper
excavation made in the centre of the base stone, this
inscription on a slab of marble was inserted, and the
pedestal restored to its former situation. The Needle
was likewise turned over, and the hieroglyphics on
the side it had so long lain on found fresh and entire.
“In the year of the Christian era 1798, the Republic
of France landed on the shores of Egypt an army
of 40,000 men, commanded by their most able and
successful commander, General Bonaparte. The conduct
of the general and the valour of the troops effected
the subjection of that country. But, under Divine
Providence, it was reserved for the British nation to
annihilate their ambitious designs. Their fleet was
attacked, defeated, and destroyed in Aboukir Bay, by
a British fleet of equal force, commanded by Admiral
Lord Nelson. Their intended conquest of Syria was
counteracted at Acre by a most gallant resistance,
under Commodore Sidney Smith; and Egypt was rescued
from their dominion by a British army, inferior
in numbers, but commanded by General Sir Ralph
Abercromby, who landed at Aboukir on the 8th
of March, 1801; defeated the French on several
occasions, particularly in a most decisive action
near Alexandria, on the 21st of that month; when
they were driven from the field, and forced to
shelter themselves in their garrisons of Cairo and
Alexandria, which places subsequently surrendered by
capitulation. To record to future ages these events,
and to commemorate the loss sustained by the death
of Sir Ralph Abercromby, who was mortally wounded at
the moment of victory on that memorable day, is the
design of this inscription, which was deposited here
in the year of Christ, 1802, by the British army, on
their evacuation of this country, and restoring it to
the Turkish empire.”
In the year 1820, we have a more intimate introduction to the obelisk
in a very interesting letter from Mr. Briggs, formerly Consul at
Alexandria, addressed to the Right Honourable Sir Benjamin Blomfield,
one of the ministers of His Majesty George the Fourth.
_Letter from_ CONSUL BRIGGS
_to the_ RIGHT HON. SIR BENJAMIN BLOMFIELD.
“UPPER TOOTING, SURREY.
“_11th April, 1820._
“SIR,
“Having, on my late visit to Egypt, witnessed
the stupendous labours of the celebrated Mr. Belzoni,
and received from him the assurance that he could
confidently undertake the removal to England of one of the
granite obelisks at Alexandria; and the Viceroy of Egypt,
Mahommed Ali Pacha, having frequently expressed to
me his desire of making some acknowledgment for the
handsome equipment of his corvette, the ‘Africa,’ and
for the presents sent him by His Majesty on the return of
that ship to Egypt in the year 1811, I was encouraged
to submit to His Highness my opinion that one of the
obelisks at Alexandria, known in Europe under the
appellation of Cleopatra’s Needles, might possibly be
acceptable to His Majesty, as unique of its kind in
England, and which might, therefore, be considered a
valuable addition to the embellishments designed for
the British metropolis. His Highness promised to take
the subject into consideration; and, since my return to
England, I have received a letter from his Minister,
authorising me, if I deemed it acceptable, to make, in
his master’s name, a tender of one of those obelisks to
His Majesty, as a mark of his personal respect and gratitude.
“It is scarcely necessary to say, those obelisks have for
ages been admired for their magnitude, workmanship,
and antiquity. After the glorious termination of the
conjoint expedition to Egypt in 1801, it was proposed
by some officers of high rank to convey to England this
identical obelisk as an appropriate trophy.
“Representations were actually made, and subscriptions
entered into, among the officers of both army and navy;
but, being found inadequate, the design was reluctantly
relinquished; and it was generally understood to have
been a subject of regret with the administration of that
period, that government had been apprised of it too late
to afford the necessary means towards its accomplishment.
“Among the officers who had ample opportunities, after
the conquest of Egypt, of examining this monument of
art, and who may be competent to give a just idea of
its merit, may be enumerated, Lord Cavan, Sir Richard
Bickerston, Sir David Baird, Sir Hildebrand Oakes,
Lord Beresford, Admiral Donelly, and, lately, Sir Miles
Nightingale, who visited it on his return from India a
few months ago. The two commanders-in-chief of the
Egyptian expedition, Lord Keith and Lord Hutchinson,
had quitted the country before the plan of removal was
in contemplation.
“This obelisk is formed of a single block of red granite
(weighing 183 tons, exclusive of the pedestal and steps),
originally brought from the quarries in Upper Egypt,
near the cataracts. It is now close to the sea-shore at
Alexandria, suspended horizontally on its pedestal, in
the manner it was placed by our officers in the year 1802,
near to the site where the other obelisk is erected. It
is about sixty-eight feet in height from the base to the
apex, and about seven feet square at the base. On the
four sides it is richly sculptured with hieroglyphics in a
superior style, more than an inch deep; and though in
the lapse of ages it has partially suffered on two sides
from the desert winds, the other two are in good preservation.
“The pedestal is a plain block of the same granite,
about eight feet and a-half square, and six feet and
a-half high. All travellers mention it with encomiums.
Clarke, Walsh, and Sir Robert Wilson, lament, in their
works, it was not secured to England; and Denon contemplated
the feasibility of one day transporting it to France.
“The removal to England of so massive a body would, no doubt,
be a work of some difficulty and expense; but
similar undertakings have been accomplished by the
ancient Romans; and this would have been performed
by our countrymen in 1802, had the individual resources
of our officers been adequate to the expense.
“In the present state of the arts and sciences in England,
it may reasonably be presumed no obstacle can
exist but what the munificence of the sovereign can
readily surmount. What Belzoni has already done,
with only common local means, in conveying to Alexandria,
from ancient Thebes, the colossal head which now
ornaments the British Museum, together with the
success of his other labours, is an earnest of what he is
capable of performing; while, at the same time, the unprecedented
extent of the excavations attest the liberal character
of the present ruler of Egypt, no less than the various
improvements he has of late years introduced into the country.
“Eminently brilliant as the government of His Majesty
has been, during the Regency, in arms and politics, it will,
in future times, be no less distinguished for the liberal
encouragement given to the arts and sciences, and for
the splendid embellishments conferred on the metropolis.
Rome and Constantinople are the only cities in Europe
which can boast of Egyptian monuments of this description.
They, however, still attest the power and grandeur of the
ancient masters of the world; and if the bronze column erected
at Paris in modern times serves to ornament that city, and
perpetuate the trophies of the French arms, this Egyptian
obelisk, in the capital of England, would equally remain a
permanent memorial of British achievements, and would be
admired by posterity, as well as by the present age, for
the boldness of the undertaking as much as for its
intrinsic merits.
“I respectfully submit to you, Sir, in the first instance,
this offer of the Viceroy of Egypt, as being in its nature
more personal than official, and, therefore, more complimentary
to His Majesty. Should you deem it proper to take His Majesty’s
pleasure thereon, I shall be happy to convey to His Highness
the Viceroy the acceptance of his offer, if approved. But
should you consider it more correct that I should make this
communication to His Majesty’s ministers, I shall immediately
comply with your suggestion.
“I have the honour to be, with the highest consideration,
Sir,
“Your most obedient and humble servant,
“SAMUEL BRIGGS,”
[Formerly Consul at Alexandria.]
We have next to record the unwearied exertions of our kind friend,
General Sir James Alexander; to whom we are indebted for our first
knowledge that the old Egyptian obelisk was within reach of acquirement
by the son of an old naval officer, from whose lips we had often
listened eagerly to its praises, and to the narration of the brave
deeds of our never-to-be-forgotten heroes, Nelson and Abercromby. Sir
James Alexander’s communication takes the form of a paper read to the
Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1868; entitled, “Observations relative
to the Desirableness of Transporting from Alexandria to Britain the
Prostrate Obelisk presented to George IV. by Mahommed Ali Pacha.” By
General Sir J. E. Alexander, K.C.L.S., F.R.S.E., &c.
“In the month of September last (1867), when visiting the Great
Exhibition in Paris, I was particularly struck with the fine appearance
of the obelisk of Luxor in the Place de la Concorde, and I thought
that, as the French had taken the trouble and gone to the expense of
moving this highly interesting monolith, it was a reflection on our
nation and on the engineering skill of Britain, that the prostrate
obelisk at Alexandria (one of Cleopatra’s Needles, as it is commonly
termed), was not occupying a place of honour in England or Scotland.
“This obelisk was presented to George IV. many years ago by Mahommed
Ali Pacha, who also generously offered to move it on rollers to the
sea, from which it is 30 yards distant, and, embarking it on rafts and
lighters, convey it to a vessel for transport to England.
“The state of public affairs at the time, perhaps, prevented the
accomplishment of this enterprise; now the time may be more favourable
for it.
“Sir Gardner Wilkinson and other writers on Egypt and its antiquities,
are of opinion that Cleopatra’s Needles (one of which is upright)
were brought by one of the Ptolemies from Heliopolis, near Cairo, to
decorate a palace at Alexandria. On the obelisks appear the names of
Thothmes III. (B.C. 1463), of Rameses the Great, and of Osirei I. (B.C.
1232), long before Cleopatra’s time. Sandys, who travelled in 1610,
calls the prostrate obelisk ‘Pharaoh’s Needle,’ and says ‘it is half
buried in rubbish.’ It is of red granite; and, looking down a hole, its
top is seen with crowned hawks sculptured on it. Lord Nugent, writing
in 1845, says the hieroglyphics on three sides are well preserved.
Colonel Ayton, of H.M. Bombay Engineers, informed me, that whilst in
Egypt in 1862, and whilst there was an idea of a memorial for Prince
Albert first started, Mr. Clark, of the telegraph department, uncovered
the prostrate obelisk, removed the sand and rubbish from it, found the
hieroglyphics on three sides in good preservation, and, as the obelisk
was not then wanted, he covered it up again.
“This obelisk, with others, is well ascertained to have been quarried
at Syené, at the extreme boundary of Upper Egypt. It is not easy to
find out how the hieroglyphics were graven on such a hard surface,
and what was the process of hardening the bronze tools used for this
purpose. The Messrs. Macdonald of Aberdeen, and other workers in
granite in this country, might be able to explain this: possibly the
assistance of emery-powder was brought in.
“Denon alludes to Cleopatra’s Needles, and says they might be moved
without difficulty, and form interesting trophies. To remove works
of art from countries where they form ornaments, and are conspicuous
objects of interest, is quite unworthy of a great people; but the
obelisk in question lies in dishonour among low huts in the outskirts
of Alexandria, and might well be spared to ornament one of our capital
cities. In a conversation with Mr. David Laing, the well-known
antiquary, about it, he suggested the open space in front of the
British Museum as the most appropriate for it. Still, it might not
be sufficiently seen there: further west might be better, or in our
Charlotte Square.
“I corresponded with Mr. Newton, the keeper of antiquities, British
Museum, about the obelisk; and he writes—‘It seems to me that if, by
public subscription, a sufficient sum could be raised to transport this
obelisk to England, it would be a just matter of national satisfaction;
but you will understand that, while this may be a case fully justifying
an appeal to the public for a subscription, it may not be one
sufficiently strong to justify the trustees and officers of the British
Museum in moving in the matter officially, because we have to make so
many applications to the Treasury for grants for excavations, &c.’
“I communicated with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation
Company regarding the means of transporting the obelisk; and the
secretary for the managing directors states—‘We would beg to suggest
that the matter should be referred by you to the Foreign Office, whose
agents have made all the necessary calculations on the subject, and
without whose permission nothing could be done.’
“The Foreign Office was accordingly communicated with, and an answer
was returned that the matter is now under the consideration of Lord
Stanley.
“The eminent civil engineer, Professor Macquorn Rankine, was asked what
he thought of the means of transporting the obelisk, and he said—‘I
regret I cannot form any opinion whatsoever as to the best way of
transporting the obelisk without having detailed information, which, I
believe, I could not obtain except by visiting the spot where it lies.
The subject is undoubtedly one of very great interest, and I should
very much like to be present when it is discussed.’
“In the Royal United Service Institution, London, I found thirteen
large plans, carefully drawn, illustrating how, by means of inclined
planes, a flat-bottomed vessel, machinery for raising the obelisk on a
pedestal, &c., it could be sent to and set up in England. These plans
are supposed to have been prepared in 1820, by Captain Boswell, R.N.,
for the government; but no action was then taken in the matter.
“It appears to me (having studied and been employed formerly as an
engineer) that there might be no need for a vessel being built on
purpose to carry the obelisk. A large Clyde lighter, raised upon, might
transport it, across the Bay of Biscay in summer; or, if an old ship,
sufficiently seaworthy, is got, and the masts taken out of her, and
the beams cut across, the obelisk might be taken alongside, raised,
and lowered into her, iron beams being ready, with bolts and screws,
to connect and secure the cut beams of the vessel, then towed by a
steamer to England. Once there, little difficulty would ensue before
it occupied a place of distinction; but not necessarily on a pedestal,
which would change its original character through giving it additional
height. It is 68 feet long, weighs 184 tons, and is 7 to 8 feet square
at the base of the shaft.
“I understand that, in an apartment in the Louvre, part of the
machinery is preserved, by means of which the transport of the French
obelisk was effected. This could be seen, or even lent to assist our
engineers, and save heavy cost; and this need not be heavy, unless with
gross mismanagement and a mere job made of it. Honestly gone about, the
cost would be moderate.
“Lord Stanley wrote me that he was not aware that the parliament would
vote a sum of money to move the obelisk. This might be asked, however.
“I quite concur with Professor Piazzi Smyth in denouncing the barbarism
of breaking off pieces of, and carrying away, Egyptian antiques; but I
think we might remove the prostrate obelisk hidden and buried in the
sand, leaving, of course, the twin obelisk set up in its place, and
always most interesting as a ‘Cleopatra’s Needle.’ The prostrate one
might be converted into building materials ere long, if not looked
after.
“Lately, in Glasgow, I made myself acquainted with the engineer of the
Clyde Navigation, Mr. A. Duncan. I went over the matter with him of
the means of transporting the obelisk, and I suggested an iron casing
or vessel built round it. He approved of this; and on my asking him
to give his ideas on the matter—also to look at the plans from the
United Service Institution—he kindly consented to do so; and his clear
and excellent method for carrying out what is so much desired—the
removal of the obelisk to Britain—is placed before the Royal Society of
Edinburgh.”
A very important result of Sir James Alexander’s agitation of the
question, is made evident by the following letter, addressed to Lord
Henry Lennox so recently as the spring of 1876:[56]—
[56] “Through Persia by Caravan,” vol. ii., page 268: 1877.
“HOTEL ABBAT, ALEXANDRIA.
“_April 1st, 1876._
“DEAR LORD HENRY LENNOX,
“A long time has elapsed since our conversation, in July last, with
reference to the removal of the obelisk, commonly known as ‘Cleopatra’s
Needle,’ as proposed by General Sir James Alexander to the Metropolitan
Board of Works. Detained in Persia by an attack of fever, and by
unlooked-for difficulties in travelling, I have arrived in Egypt later,
by more than three months, than I intended when I left England.
“The taking away of the ancient monuments from a country which they
were originally designed to adorn, is a policy against which there
is much to be said. It is almost pitiful to contemplate upon the now
carefully-protected Acropolis of Athens—a caryatide, rudely carved in
wood, doing duty with her four lovely sisters of marble, in hearing
the entablature of the Erectheum, while the original is in London
instructing the art-world, perhaps no better than would a plaster cast,
in the beauty and grace of Greek sculpture. But these considerations do
not apply, with any considerable force, to the prostrate obelisk now
lying upon the shore of the new port of Alexandria. It forms no part
of any structure; it is not protected, nor in any way cared for by the
Egyptians; and, within fifty yards of the ground in which the English
column is lying, there is another, apparently of the same age and size,
carved with hieroglyphics of similar character. It appears to me,
therefore, that the English people could, if they please, appropriate
this gift free from any fear or feeling that in doing so they would be
‘spoiling the Egyptians.’
“The desirability of removing the obelisk resolves itself into two
questions—the cost, and the value and interest of the monument as
compared with the necessary expenditure. There can be no doubt as to
the feasibility of removal. An opinion has certainly prevailed in
England that the obelisk is so much defaced and broken as to have lost
all interest. But I will venture to say that this opinion has not been
formed by any one who has seen the whole of three sides which have
been exposed by the excavations recently made by Sir James Alexander.
The opinion was formed when but very little more than the upper side
of the base was visible—a valueless part which appears never to have
been sculptured, and to have been intended for burial in the foundation
when the obelisk was in position. The column, as at present exposed, is
at once seen to be a monument of great value and interest; one which,
not only for its antiquity, but also from its quality as a monolith,
would be specially notable in London, which, unlike most of the
capital cities of Europe, possesses no adornment of this character.
The English people cannot see in their own country a carved stone even
approaching the dimensions of this colossal obelisk of red granite. As
to the condition of the monument, I have examined three of the four
sides, and there is no part of any one of the hieroglyphics the carving
of which is not distinctly traceable. The edges of the carving are
somewhat worn, and the angles of the obelisk rounded; but the interest
of the monument is in no place substantially impaired, nor is there
discernable any important fracture of the stone. The dimensions of the
obelisk are:—Total length from extremity of base to apex, sixty-six
feet; seven feet square at base, and four and a-half feet square at
base of apex. The weight is probably about 250 tons.
“In considering the method and cost of removal to England, I have
had the great advantage of the assistance, on the ground, of Captain
Methven, the senior captain and commodore of the fleet of steam-ships
belonging to the Peninsular and Oriental Company. The base of the
obelisk is less than twenty yards from the waters of the Mediterranean;
and within about 100 yards there is a depth of two and a-half fathoms
of water. It has been suggested to float the obelisk by attaching to
it a sufficient quantity of timber. But this is a very crude proposal,
apart from the fact that no sufficient quantity of timber is obtainable
in this almost treeless country. Undoubtedly it would be possible to
remove and to ship the obelisk by constructing a railway on piles for
such a distance as would admit of the approach of a vessel capable of
carrying it securely to England. In this case the obelisk would be
suspended in slings from running-gear, and moved out to sea until it
hung over its destined position in the vessel. But the shore is not
the most suitable for this plan, which, moreover, would involve a very
large expenditure.
“The position of the obelisk is favourable for the adoption of a
third method, which appears both to Captain Methven and to myself to
be the most easy, safe, and practicable; and, at the same time, the
least costly of any that have been suggested. The ground in which the
obelisk now lies seems sufficiently firm (with proper supports at the
sides of the necessary excavation) to sustain girders from which the
column could be slung without any change in its position. To ensure a
proper distribution of the weight, it would be desirable that these
girders should rest on iron plates, and that they should be of greater
substance in the centre, where the weight of the obelisk would be
borne. Captain Methven is confidently of opinion that the obelisk could
be safely conveyed to England in an iron vessel not exceeding 400 tons
of builder’s measurement, 120 feet in length, and drawing, when loaded,
not more than six feet of water. This decked iron vessel, or barge,
would be constructed in England, and sent in pieces to Alexandria,
where it would be put together in the space to be excavated beneath the
suspended obelisk, the channel necessary to get to the deep water being
at the same time formed by a steam dredge, or, if the shore is rocky,
by blasting—a method which has been very successfully adopted, on a
much larger scale than would be requisite here, by the Peninsular and
Oriental Company at Bombay. When the vessel was ready to receive the
obelisk, the intervening wall of earth between the base of the stone
and the sea would be thrown down, and the incoming water would raise
the vessel to its burden. The iron barge could then be towed into the
harbour, when it would be decked, and have so much freeboard added
as appeared desirable. Captain Methven feels quite sure, that by any
competent steam-ship of Her Majesty’s navy the vessel could be towed to
England without danger of damage to the towing-ship, or risk of losing
the obelisk, regard being had to the season and to the state of the
barometer on quitting this port and that of Gibraltar.
“Finally, I would say that Captain Methven seems to be of opinion that
all this could be accomplished at a cost of about £5,000.
“Yours faithfully,
“ARTHUR ARNOLD.”
Our memoranda next lead us to the consideration of suggestions which
have been made, from time to time, for the transport of the obelisk
from Alexandria to England. Thus, in _The Builder_ for 1851, vol. v.,
we find the following communication with respect to two plans proposed
by Captain (afterwards Admiral) Smyth.
“One, by building a pier from the immediate vicinity
of the obelisk into the little harbour, to the end of
which a north-country-built vessel could be brought,
with her stern-frame cut out; the obelisk to be
conveyed along the pier on rollers in such a manner
that half of it should be in the vessel before the
weight was felt.
“His other plan was to excavate the ground on which
it was lying, so as to form a dry dock beneath; then
build under it a lighter, into which the monolith
could be lowered, and then letting the water into a
canal made to the port to float it away; such vessel
subsequently to be towed by a steamer: in either
case, the vessel to be properly dunaged with bales
of cotton and fascines, so that the Needle, being in
midships, would lie easy, and press equally on the
vessel’s frame. This method is very similar to that
mentioned by Pliny.”
These several details relating to the British obelisk, naturally awaken
our interest to everything bearing upon the subject; and, amongst
others, to the method of conveyance of the Luxor obelisk to Paris.
Thus, in the “Pictorial Gallery of Arts,” we find a description of
the transport of the Theban obelisk to Paris, from the pen of our old
friend, Charles Knight:—
“The transport of one of these two obelisks to
Paris was a very remarkable enterprise. When
Napoleon accompanied the French army to Thebes,
he was so struck with these magnificent towering
masses, that he conceived the idea of sending one
of them to France; but his subsequent reverses
prevented the idea from being carried out. Thirty
years afterwards, Charles X. obtained from Mehemet
Ali permission to make the transfer, and he and
his successor, Louis Philippe, proceeded with the
necessary arrangements. A vessel was built of fir
and other light wood, strong enough to bear the
sea, but shallow enough to descend the Nile and
ascend the Seine. The expedition, comprising about
140 persons, sailed from Toulon in April, 1831, and
arrived at Thebes in August of the same year. The
difficulties of navigating the vessel up the Nile
were very great, and the men suffered much from
heat, sand-storms, ophthalmia, cholera, and other
visitations of that climate. The officers, on landing
at Luxor, superintended the erection of barracks,
sheds, and tents; the building of baking-ovens and
provision-stores; and the establishment of such
arrangements as should ensure the comfort of the men
during the operations for the removal of the obelisk.
“The obelisk was upwards of seventy feet high,
weighed 240 tons, and was situated 1,200 feet from
the Nile, with a difficult intervening space of
ground. The first work was the formation of an
inclined plane from the base of the obelisk to the
edge of the river—a task which occupied about 700
Arabs and Frenchmen for three months. The obelisk was
then cased in wood from top to bottom, to prevent
the hieroglyphic sculptures from being injured; and
it was safely lowered to the ground by a careful
arrangement of cables, anchors, beams, and other
apparatus. It was lowered on a kind of stage or
cradle, and then dragged along the inclined plane
by manual labour. The bow end of the ship had been
meanwhile cut off in a singular manner, so as to
present a wide mouth into which the obelisk gradually
glided, while the ship lay high and dry on the sandy
shore of the river. The severed bow of the ship was
then adjusted in its proper place, and the obelisk
was thus housed for the present.
“Although the obelisk was thus placed in the vessel
in November, 1831, it was not till August, 1832, that
there was sufficient water in the Nile to float it.
A period of more than three months elapsed before
the adventurers reached the mouth of the Nile, after
a voyage of great difficulty and tediousness. The
voyage from thence to Toulon occupied them, with
various delays, till May. But as the land journey
from Toulon to Paris (four hundred and fifty miles)
is one which would have been insurmountable with the
obelisk, the vessel sailed round to Cherbourg, where
it arrived in August, 1834, having been towed by a
man-of-war all the way from Egypt. From Cherbourg the
vessel was towed to Havre, and from thence by a
steam-boat up the Seine to Paris. During the year
1835, preparations were made for the obelisk in the
centre of the Place de la Concorde; and in August,
1836, it was placed in the spot destined for it, in
presence of the royal family and half the population
of Paris.”
Another writer, alluding to the same subject in _The Builder_ for 1851,
vol. ix., also supplies us with interesting details, from personal
observation, as to the transport of the Luxor obelisk. He says, that
having for some time—
“Considered the matter of bringing the column of
Luxor to Paris, and that having reached that city
just before the preparations for its erection were
finished, and again before the materials had been
removed, he can give the following particulars:—
“This monolith stood on the east bank of the
Nile, at Luxor, part of the territory or soil of
Thebes—famous for its 500 gates; the ancient and
celebrated capital of Egypt.
“It was executed about 1,600 years before the
Christian era, and about the time of Moses and
the exodus of the Israelites, and is consequently
about 3,500 years old; though some give it 1,000 or
1,200 years more. It is of reddish Syené granite,
beautifully polished, and sculptured with 1,600
figures. The inscription tells us that Pharaoh
Rameses II. erected the great northern temple at the
palace of Luxor, in honour of his father Ammon.
“It was on a pedestal 3 feet 9 inches high, which was
not brought to France.
“England having obtained the fallen pillar, called
Cleopatra’s Needle, at Alexandria, France demanded,
and got the standing one; but those at Luxor being
in a perfect state, whilst those at Alexandria had
suffered from the climate, France requested, and was
allowed to give up, that of Alexandria for that of
Luxor.
“Thebes is about 500 miles above Alexandria; and the
distance it had to be brought to Paris, including the
various detours, is estimated at 3,000 miles.
“The height of the pillar, from the pedestal to the
summit, is 75 feet 10 inches. The breadth, on the
widest face of its base, 8 feet and a quarter of
an inch. The breadth at the top, where the pyramid
begins, 5 feet 8¾ inches. Its weight, between 250
and 280 tons.
“France had, early in 1830, determined on its
removal, and began preparations. A vessel was built
of yellow pine strengthened with oak, of 140 feet
by 28 feet, like a Dutch galliot, intended to draw
only two feet of water. It had a complement of 136
men, including shipwrights, carpenters, masons, and
smiths; twelve enormous beams, 75 feet by above 2
feet; deals, blocks, pullies, anchors, and 20,000
yards of the largest and best cordage, &c., &c.
“This vessel, designed by the French government to
bring this trophy to France, was built at Toulon,
and called the ‘Lusquor.’ It sailed in March, 1831;
arrived at Alexandria in eighteen days, on the 3rd of
May, when it entered the old port, and cast anchor
under the walls of the palace of Mehemet Ali. It
drew nearly nine feet of water, and was a very bad
sea-boat, whence arose the necessity of a steamer to
tow it home.
“It sailed from Alexandria for Rosetta on the 14th
June; it left Cairo, and proceeded up the Nile, on
the 19th July, and reached Luxor on the 15th August.
At Alexandria the stores and machinery were taken
out, and sent forward to Thebes, with carpenters,
smiths, masons, and others.
“The obelisk was dismounted from its pedestal on the
31st October, and safely got on board the vessel on
the 19th December. Four hundred Arabs were employed
with the crew. It required a month to run the obelisk
to the ship, being a distance of 450 yards; the
greatest difficulty was in keeping it straight on
the causeway. It was there detained until the 1st
October, 1832; arrived again at Alexandria on the 2nd
January, 1833. The fall of the Nile is said to be no
more than twenty feet in forty leagues; the rise of
the inundation at Luxor, about seven feet. At Rosetta
the ship was lightened as much as possible to cross
the bay. She was brought down to seven feet, and was
in considerable danger; she had camels to assist her.
She sailed for France on the 1st of April, and once
more reached Toulon on the 1st May, having been towed
by the ‘Sphynx’ steamer, and again sailed for Paris
on the 22nd June. During her progress she arrived
at Rhodes on the 6th April; reached Corfu the 23rd;
10th May reached Toulon, and was there repaired; 22nd
June, sailed; passed Gibraltar the 30th June; and
reached Cherbourg on the 12th August.
“At Cherbourg she was visited by King Louis Philippe
on the 2nd September.
“She put to sea on the 12th September; was taken in
tow by the ‘Phœnix,’ and reached Rouen on the 14th;
and finally arrived at Paris on the 23rd December,
1833. On the 9th August, 1834, the monolith was
dragged out of the vessel.
“Thus the ‘Lusquor’ occupied above four years and
a-half, from the commencement of its building to
delivering the obelisk at Paris.
“On its arrival at Paris, a wooden erection of
similar size, covered with drawings copied from the
original, was placed in various parts of the capital,
that the best locality for effect might be selected;
and the place where it now stands was finally fixed
on. Of the propriety of its position there can be no
doubt; and when it is considered that the Barriere
de l’Etoile cost £400,000, the cost of the obelisk
at £85,000 will not appear too extravagant. It was
raised on its pedestal on the 25th October, 1834.
“The pedestal on which it now stands was cut from a
beautiful black granite rock near Brest, where it is
found in the form of large boulders; such boulders
being of much finer colour than the black granite
formation on which they lie. The property on which
the granite was found belongs to M. Bazil.
“It was thus raised:—The column was first carried
up an inclined plane to the level of the pedestal,
securely placed, the base foremost; and then
the pyramid end was raised by an extraordinary
multiplication of pullies; and thus was the column
lifted into its place.
“And this plan has not improbably been the one
adopted in ancient times—perhaps by the Celts and
Druids of our own island, who were exceedingly fond
of monoliths, of which an astonishing number still
remain.”
It does not fall within the scope of this book to attempt the panegyric
of the brave men who fought like heroes under their country’s flag
in Egypt; but the following extract from one of the illustrated
newspapers, of about the date of April, 1845, and sent to us by the
daughter of the subject of the article, may be considered a not
unfitting conclusion to our present labours.
“General Robert Browne Clayton, K.C., of Adlington
Hall, Lancashire, and of Carrickburn, in the county of
Wexford, entered the army at the early age of
fourteen; rose, during sixty years’ service, through
every gradation of rank; and achieved a well-earned
fame by the side of many of the heroes of the
late war. He was Lieut.-Colonel of the 12th Light
Dragoons, or Royal Lancers. With that regiment he
fought in Egypt, under Sir Ralph Abercromby, taking
part there in the actions of the 8th, 13th, and 21st
of March, 1801.”
In his letters home, he speaks with enthusiastic
language of Egypt:—“Gizeh,” he says, “where
the enemy lies, ten miles off; and, across the
Nile—Cairo and its lofty minarets, with the dreary
Mokattan rising above. In such a situation, one hour
of life is worth an age at home; no time or space
can efface those recollections.... On our approach
to Cairo, which it was expected would be given up
to plunder, numerous bodies of Turks and hosts of
Bedouin Arabs collected; and I was assured that the
Grand Vizier was obliged to issue, daily, 18,000
rations of corn for horses alone.”
“The general’s patriotic services in the campaign
under Sir Ralph Abercromby, have obtained a lasting
testimonial in the erection of a lofty column on
the rock of Carrick-a-Daggon, county of Wexford.
It is a facsimile of Pompey’s Pillar, but not
monolithic; it consists of Carlow granite, and has
a staircase in the shaft: its total height rises
to 94 feet 4 inches; the architect is Mr. Cobden.
Placed considerably above the sea-level, it stands
a conspicuous landmark for mariners. The events of
the campaign are further to be commemorated by the
appointment of trustees, under the will of General
Browne Clayton, who shall annually, at sunrise on the
21st of March (the anniversary of the French attack
on the British encampment before Alexandria), hoist
the tri-colour French flag on the column, which shall
remain until ten o’clock, when the British flag is
to be fixed and kept up till sunset. On the 28th of
March, annually, the British flag is to be raised
half-standard high, as a memorial of the death of
Sir Ralph Abercromby. The first commemoration took
place in March, 1842, General Browne Clayton himself
superintending the ceremony.”
The date of General Clayton’s death would appear to
have been March 16th, 1845; aged 74.
_Translation of the Text of the British Obelisk, by_ DEMETRIUS
MOSCONAS: 1877.
Since the final “Revise” of our last sheet, we have received a quarto
pamphlet from Alexandria, entitled, “Deux mots sur les Obelisques
d’Egypte,” with a translation of the inscriptions on Cleopatra’s
Needle, now on its way to England. The author’s name is Demetrius
Mosconas; and as the text differs somewhat from that derived from
Burton and Chabas, we have thought it well to place it before our
readers.
On each side of the pyramidion is a bas-relief of _offerings_,
representing the sun-god, protector of the city of On, seated on a
throne, adorned with the pschent, or double crown of Upper and Lower
Egypt, and receiving gifts from Thothmes, who is represented as a
sphynx, symbolising the power of the lion. On the other sides, the
sun-god is represented differently: sometimes as a man, crowned with
the solar disk; sometimes with the head of a hawk, surmounted with the
pschent. And the offerings likewise vary: they may be wine, or milk, or
water, or any other thing that shall in itself be pure and good.
Above the god is inscribed:—
“Ra, the great god, master of the city of On, who
giveth eternal life.”
Above and below the king, the inscription runs thus:—
“The king, _sun creator of the world_
(Ra-men-kheper), lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, the
son of the sun, Thothmes, offers libations of wine to
him who gives eternal life.”
Next follows the standard of the king, and below that, the columns
of hieroglyphs; in this instance the middle column representing the
address of Thothmes, on the three sides of the obelisk exposed to view:—
1. “He is Horus (Apollo), the powerful bull, friend
of truth, the king, _sun creator of the world_
(Ra-men-kheper, prenomen), who hath made monuments
for his father, the _sun of the two zones_, and who
hath erected two great obelisks with pyramidions
of gold, which shine with brilliancy at the
panegyries....
2. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, son of truth,
the king, _sun creator of the world_, who hath been
established on the throne of Seb by his father, the
god Toum, who hath given him the dignity of Thoré,
in magnifying his name among the inhabitants of On
and of the whole world, the son of the sun, Thothmes,
giving life like the sun for ever.
3. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, friend of truth,
the king, _sun creator of the world_, the protector
of the temples of the gods, who hath given at every
epoch gifts to the divinities of the city of On, and
to their servants (the priests), that they may live
as saints; moreover, like his grandfather, he hath
established numerous festivals; the son of the sun,
Thothmes, beloved of the god Toum, _sun of the two
zones_, giving life like the sun for ever.”
Of the texts of Rameses II., occupying the side columns, the
translations of five are given:—
1. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, friend of truth,
the king, _sun_, _guardian of justice_, _preferred
of Ra_ (Ra-ouser-ma-sotep-en-Ra, prenomen), the lord
of Upper and Lower Egypt; he who governeth Egypt and
chastiseth foreign countries, the son of the sun,
_Rameses Maïamon_, the ruler and benefactor of the
temple of his father, than whom none has done so much
as he in this temple, the lord of the two worlds,
_sun_, _guardian of justice_, _the preferred of Ra_,
the son of the sun, _Rameses Maïamon_, who giveth
life like the sun for ever.
2. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, son of truth, the
king, _sun_, _guardian of justice_, _the preferred
of Ra_, the lord of the panegyries, like unto his
father the god Toum, the son of the sun, _Rameses
Maïamon_, the germ of his father whom he loveth, whom
the goddess Athor hath nourished, he is the glory
and the lord of the two worlds, the _sun_, _guardian
of justice_, _preferred of Ra_, the son of the sun,
_Rameses Maïamon_, who, like the sun, giveth life for
ever.
3. “He is Horus, the powerful bull in Egypt, the
king, _the sun_, _guardian of justice_, _preferred
of Ra_, the golden hawk, the guardian of flourishing
years, the son of the sun, _Rameses Maïamon_, whose
name eternal the puissant of Assyria have graven
on their rocks, and in the temple of his father,
the lord of the two worlds, _the sun_, _guardian of
justice_, _preferred of Ra_, the son of the sun,
_Rameses Maïamon_, the truthful, the beloved of the
great god Ammon, who giveth life like the sun for
ever.
4. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, friend of truth,
the king, _sun_, _guardian of justice_, _preferred
of Ra_, the sublime, the offspring of the gods, the
son of the sun, _Rameses Maïamon_, the victorious,
the puissant, the watchful, the bull of princes, the
king of kings, the lord of the two worlds, the son of
the sun, _Rameses Maïamon_, _the sun_, _guardian of
justice_, _preferred of Ra_, the beloved of the god
Toum, the lord of On, who, like the sun, giveth life
for ever.
5. “He is Horus, the powerful bull, son of truth,
the king, _sun_, _guardian of justice_, _preferred
of Ra_, the lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, he who
governeth Egypt and scourgeth foreign countries, the
son of the sun, _Rameses Maïamon_; numerous victories
hath he achieved over foreigners, and he hath carried
his conquering arms to the four columns of heaven,
the lord of the two worlds, _sun_, _guardian of
justice_, _preferred of Ra_, the son of the sun,
_Rameses Maïamon_, giving life like the sun for ever.”
M. Mosconas likewise favours us with part of an heroic poem, translated
by Mariette Bey, from a tablet[57] (stèle) preserved in the Boulaq
Museum. This poem is written in honour of the author of the British
obelisk, Thothmes III., and is said to be several centuries older
than Homer, or even than the Bible. It is regarded by Egyptologists
as a precious relic, and as a treasured example of the poetry of that
ancient period. The Pharaoh presents libations and offerings to the
sun-god Amon-Ra, who then recites a long list of the achievements of
the king, assuring him of the divine assent, and informing him, that it
was to the forethought and participation of the deity that he owed his
successes. He speaks thus:—
[57] La Stèle de Phtamosis le Memphite.
“Come to me and rejoice in the contemplation of my
grace, my son, my avenger. Sun, Creator of the World,
living for ever, I am resplendent through thy vows;
my heart expands with thy welcome presence in my
temple; I embrace thy members in mine arms, that I
may infuse into them health and life. Loveable are
thy blessings, through the presentment which thou
settest up in my sanctuary. It is I who give thee
recompense; it is I who give thee power and victory
over all nations; it is through me that thy genius
and the fear of thy power have taken possession of
every land, and its dread hath expanded to the four
columns of heaven. I magnify the alarm which thy
name inspireth throughout the world. It is with my
accord that thy war-cries pierce the very midst of
thy barbarian foes, and the kings of every nation
fall in under thy hand; I myself stretch forth my
arms; I draw together and congregate for thee the
Nubians in tens of thousands and thousands, and the
northern peoples in millions. It is with my accord
that thou hurlest thine enemies beneath thy sandals,
that thou smitest the chiefs of the unclean as I
have ordered thee; the world, in all its length and
breadth, from west to east, is at thy command. Thou
spreadest gladness into the heart of all the peoples;
none amongst them dare trample on the territory of
thy majesty; but I am thy guide to lead thee to them.
Thou hast crossed the great river of Mesopotamia,
conqueror and mighty, as I had pre-ordered; the cries
of war resounded in their caves; I withheld from
their nostrils the breath of life....
“I am come, and with my accord thou smitest the
princes of Tahi (Syria). I hurl them beneath thy
feet when thou marchest through their countries. I
have shown them thy majesty as a lord of light; thou
beamest upon them like unto mine own image.
“I am come, and I allow thee to smite the dwellers
in Asia, to lead into captivity the chiefs of the
Rotennu (Assyria). I have revealed to them thy
majesty compassed with thy girdle, grasping thy
weapon, and wielding it from thy chariot of war.
“I am come, that I might sanction thee to smite the
countries of the East, to force thy way to the very
cities of the Holy Land. I have revealed to them thy
majesty as like unto the star Seschet (Canopus),
which darts forth in flame, and gives birth to the
morning dew.
“I am come, and I permit thee to smite the countries
of the West: Kefa (Cyprus) and Asia tremble with
terror in thy presence: I have shown them thy majesty
like unto a bull young and courageous; he that,
embellished with horns, nothing is able to resist.
“I am come, and I permit thee to smite the peoples
of every region; the countries of Maten (Amatuses)
shake with the terror of thy name. I have revealed
to them thy majesty as like unto the crocodile; he,
the formidable master of the waters, whom none dare
approach.
“I come, to grant thee permission to smite the
inhabitants of islands; the dwellers on the
sea-coasts tremble at the sound of thy war-cry; I
have shown them thy majesty like unto an avenger who
springs upon the shoulders of his victim.
“I come, to permit thee to smite Tahennu (Libyans).
The islands of Tanaou (Danaë) are possessed of thy
genius. I have shown them thy majesty as like unto
a terrible lion, who maketh his couch of their
carcasses, and stretcheth himself across their
valleys.
“I come, to permit thee to smite the regions of the
floods, that those who abide nigh unto the great sea
may be held in subjection. I have made them view thy
majesty as of the king of birds, that hovers o’er its
prey, and seizes what it lists.
“I come, to permit thee to smite the denizens of
the desert, that the Herusha may be brought into
captivity. I have made them look upon thy majesty,
as like unto the jackal of the day—he that maketh
his way in concealment, and travelleth the country
through.
“I am come, and I accord to thee the right to smite
the Anu of Nubia, that the Remenem (nomad tribes)
thou may’st hold in thine hand. I have made them
regard thy majesty as like unto those who are thy
two brothers, their arms stretched over thee for thy
protection.”...
M. Mosconas’ work is illustrated with two pictorial sheets,
representing, admirably, every hieroglyph depicted on three of the
sides of the British obelisk, with its phonetic equivalent in Egyptian,
and its signification in French; the figure and its explanation
standing side by side. It is a work which will be found of great value
by the Egyptological student, and highly satisfactory to the more
learned explorer of hieroglyphography.[58]
[58] “Deux mots sur les Obelisques d’Egypte et Traduction de
l’Obelisque dit de Cleopatre qui doit être transporté en Angleterre
et de la Stèle du Phtamosis le Memphite:” par Demetrius Mosconas.
Alexandrie, 1877. Quarto, 16 pages, with three Plates.
M. Mosconas alleges that the Alexandrian obelisks were brought from
Heliopolis by Cleopatra, and were left neglected for eleven years
on the beach of the eastern port of Alexandria; and that they were
afterwards erected by Barbarus, Prefect of Egypt, under Augustus Cæsar.
FINIS.
BRAIN & CO., PRINTERS, 26, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Cleopatra's needle" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.