Part 10

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.