Part 34

Speaking of this magnificent edifice, and of the vast sphinxes and other figures, Belzoni says:—“I had seen the temple of Tentyra, and I still acknowledge that nothing can exceed that edifice in point of preservation, and the beauty of its workmanship and sculpture. But here I was lost in a mass of colossal objects, every one of which was more than sufficient of itself to attract my whole attention. How can I describe my sensations at that moment? I seemed alone in the midst of all that is most sacred in the world; a forest of enormous columns from top to bottom; the graceful shape of the lotus, which forms their capitals, and is so well proportioned to the columns; the gates, the walls, the pedestals, the architraves, also adorned in every part with symbolical figures in low-relief, representing battles, processions, triumphs, feasts, and sacrifices, all relating to the ancient history of the country; the sanctuary wholly formed of fine red granite; the high portals, seen at a distance from the openings, of ruins of the other temples, within sight;—these altogether had such an effect upon my soul, as to separate me, in imagination, from the rest of mortals, exalt me on high above all, and cause me to forget entirely the trifles and follies of life. I was happy for a whole day, which escaped like a flash of lightning.”

Here stood, and does now stand, a fragment of the famous vocal statue of Memnon, which, many writers attest, sent forth harmonious sounds, when first touched of a morning by the rays of the sun. The circumstance being attested by Strabo, Pliny, Juvenal, Pausanias, Tacitus, and Philostratus, it is assuredly not to be doubted. The first injury this statue received was from Cambyses; who ordered it to be sawed in two, in order to get at the secret. It was afterwards thrown down by an earthquake.

Some have supposed, that the sounds alluded to were produced by the mechanical impulse of the sun’s light. Others that, being hollow, the air was driven out by the rarefaction of the morning, which occasioned the elicitation of a murmuring sound. But some assert, that it saluted the morning and evening sun differently;—the former with animating sounds; the latter with melancholy ones. Darwin, in the true spirit of poetry, describes this statue as sending forth murmurs of indignation at the ravages of Cambyses:—

Prophetic whispers breathed from sphinx’s tongue; And Memnon’s lyre with hollow murmurs rung.

In another passage, equally poetical, he makes it view with delight the waters of the Nile, rushing from the cataracts of Ethiopia:—

Gigantic sphinx the circling waves admire; And Memnon bending o’er his broken lyre.

In many parts of the East the custom still remains of proclaiming the sun by the sounding of instruments. That similar signals were given in Egypt is not to be doubted, since the custom is almost as old as solar adoration itself. That the sun was worshipped in that country, is equally established: both being rendered the more certain by the ceremony of sounding harps, at sunrise, having been introduced into Italy by Pythagoras, who had long sojourned with the Egyptian magi. The sounding of Memnon’s statue, then, might have been an artifice of the priesthood; to effect which many methods might have been adopted. Either the head of Memnon contained wires, like the strings of an Æolian harp; or the sounds might have been produced by the touching of a stone[275].

The real cause of the sound has lately been discovered by Mr. Wilkinson:—“In the lap of the statue is a stone, which, on being struck, elicits a metallic sound, that might still be made use of to deceive a visitor, who was predisposed to believe its powers; and from its position, and the squared space cut in the block behind, as if to admit a person, who might thus lie concealed from the most scrutinous observer in the plain below, it seems to have been used after the restoration of the statue; and another similar recess exists beneath the present site of the stone, which might have been intended for the same purpose, when the statue was in its mutilated state.”

This statue has frequently been mistaken for the statue of Osymandyas. Strabo says, that it was named Ismandes. These words were derived from Os-Smandi, to give out a sound; a property possessed, it was said, by this statue at the dawn of day and at sunset. Its true name was Amenophis. It was visited by Germanicus. On its legs are to be seen Greek and Roman inscriptions, attesting the prodigy of the harmonious sounds emitted by this colossus.

After the temples at Karnac and Luxor, the next grand building at Thebes was the Memnonium; that is, the tomb or palace of one of the Pharaohs, whom the Greeks suppose to be the same as Memnon. In the middle of the first court was the largest figure ever raised by the Egyptians,—the statue of the monarch, seventy-five feet high.

“The name MEMNONIUM[276] is used by Strabo to designate some part of ancient Thebes lying on the western side of the river. Some modern travellers have applied it to a mass of ruins at a little distance to the north of Medeenet-Habou, which are by others identified with the palace and tomb of Osymandyas, described by Diodorus. The dimensions of the building are about five hundred and thirty feet in length, and two hundred in width: it is chiefly remarkable for the magnificent colossal statues which have been discovered within it. The ‘Memnon’s head,’ which forms so valuable an object in the collection of Egyptian antiquities contained in the British Museum, formerly belonged to one of these statues. It is generally supposed that the French, during their celebrated expedition, separated the bust from the rest of the figure by the aid of gunpowder, with the view of rendering its transport more easy. They were compelled, however, from some cause or other, to leave it behind, and it was brought away by Belzoni.

“Close to the spot where the Memnon’s head was found, lie the fragments of another statue, which has been called the largest in Egypt. It was placed in a sitting posture, and measures sixty-two or sixty-three feet round the shoulders; six feet ten inches over the foot. The length of the nail of the second toe is about one foot, and the length of the toe to the insertion of the nail is one foot eleven inches. This enormous statue, formed of red granite, has been broken off at the waist, and the upper part is now laid prostrate on the back: the face is entirely obliterated, and next to the wonder excited at the boldness of the sculptor who made it, as Mr. Hamilton remarks, and the extraordinary powers of those who erected it, the labour and exertions that must have been used for its destruction are most astonishing.

“The mutilation of this statue must have been a work of extreme difficulty: Hamilton says that it could only have been brought about with the help of military engines, and must then have been the work of a length of time; in its fall it has carried along with it the whole of the wall of the temple which stood within its reach.

“We have remarked that this edifice, called the Memnonium, is by many travellers identified with that described by Diodorus, under the name of the monument of Osymandyas; his description is the only detailed account which we have in the ancient writers of any great Egyptian building. There is no one now at Thebes to which it may be applied in all its parts, or with which it so far agrees, as to leave no doubt concerning the edifice to which it was intended to apply by its author; and Mr. Hamilton expresses his decided opinion that Diodorus, in penning this description of the tomb of Osymandyas, either listened with too easy credulity to the fanciful relations of the Greek travellers, to whom he refers; or that, astonished with the immensity of the monuments he must have read and heard of as contained within the walls of the capital of Egypt, and equally unwilling to enter into a minute detail of them all, as to omit all mention of them whatever, he set himself down to compose an imaginary building, to which he could give a popular name. In this he might collect, in some kind of order, all the most remarkable features of Theban monuments, statues, columns, obelisks, sculptures, &c. to form one entire whole that might astonish his reader without tiring him by prolixity or repetition, and which at the same time gave him a just notion of the magnificent and splendid works which had immortalised the monarchs of the Thebaid. It is evident that there is no one monument in Thebes which answers in all its parts to the description of Diodorus; yet it is urged that there is scarcely any one circumstance that he mentions that may not be referred to one or other of the temples of Luxor, Karnak, Goorno, Medeenet-Habou, or the tombs of the kings among the mountains. Others think that Diodorus used his best endeavours to describe a real place; and the chief agreements with that now called the Memnonium are in the position of the building and its colossal statues, which are supposed to outweigh the exaggerations of dimension; these being set down as faults of memory or observation. On the colossal statue mentioned by Diodorus as the largest in Egypt, was placed, as he tells us, this inscription:—‘_I am Osymandyas, king of kings: if you wish to know how great I am, and where I lie, surpass my works!_’ He speaks also of certain sculptures representing battle scenes; and of the famous sacred library, which was inscribed with the words, ‘_Place of cure for the soul!_’ Yet from this conclusion we learn that he has been describing what the tomb of Osymandyas _was_, ‘which not only in the expense of the structure, but also in the skill of the workmanship, must have surpassed by far all other buildings.’”

The following observations and history are taken from an exceedingly learned and agreeable work, “Egyptian Antiquities:”

“Those who visit the British Museum cannot fail to have observed, in the room of Egyptian antiquities, a colossal statue of which only the head and breast remain. It is numbered 66 in the catalogue and on the stone. Though this statue is commonly called the ‘Younger Memnon,’ a name to which for convenience we shall adhere, there is no reason in the world for calling it so, but a mistake of Norden, a Danish traveller, who visited Egypt in 1737. He then saw this statue in its entire state, seated on a chair, in precisely the same attitude as the black breccia figure, No. 38, but lying with its face on the ground; to which accident, indeed, the preservation of the features is no doubt mainly due. Several ancient writers, and among them the Greek geographer Strabo, speak of a large temple at Thebes on the west side of the Nile, to which they gave the name of the Memnonium, or Memnon’s temple. Norden fancied that the building, amidst whose ruins he saw this statue, was the ancient Memnonium: though he supposed, that another statue of much larger dimensions than this in the Museum, and now lying in numerous fragments in the same place, was the great Memnon statue, of which some ancient writers relate the following fact:—That at sunrise, when the rays first struck the statue, it sent forth a sound something like that of the snapping of the string of a lute.

“It is now generally admitted, that the real statue of Memnon is neither the large one still lying at Thebes in fragments, nor this statue in the Museum, which came out of the same temple—but another statue still seated in its original position on the plain of Thebes, and showing by numerous Greek and Latin inscriptions on the legs, that _it_ was the statue of which Strabo, Pausanias, and other ancient writers speak. The entire black statue, No. 38, is also _a_ Memnon statue, for it resembles in all respects the great colossus with the inscriptions on its legs, and it has also the name of Memnon written on it, and enclosed in an oblong ring, on each side of the front part of the seat, and also on the back. If this colossus in the Museum (No. 66) was entire in 1737, it may be asked how came it to be broken? We cannot say further than the following statement:—Belzoni went to Egypt in 1815, intending to propose to the Pasha some improved mechanical contrivances for raising water from the river in order to irrigate the fields. Owing to various obstacles, this scheme did not succeed, and Belzoni determined to pay a visit to Upper Egypt to see the wonderful remains of its temples. Mr. Salt, then British Consul in Egypt, and Lewis Burckhardt, commissioned Belzoni to bring this colossal head from Thebes. Belzoni went up the river, and, landing at Thebes, found the statue exactly in the place where the Consul’s instructions described it to be.[277] It was lying ‘near the remains of its body and chair, with its face upwards, and apparently smiling on me at the thought of being taken to England. I must say, that my expectations were exceeded by its beauty, but not by its size. I observed that it must have been absolutely the same statue as is mentioned by Norden, lying in his time with the face downwards, which must have been the cause of its preservation. I will not venture to assert who separated the bust from the rest of the body by an explosion, or by whom the bust has been turned face upwards.’ It will be observed that the left shoulder of this figure is shattered, and that there is a large hole drilled in the right shoulder. We believe both are the work of the French who visited Thebes during the occupation of Egypt by the French army in 1800; and there is no doubt that Belzoni, in the above extract, means to attribute to them the separation of the head and shoulders from the rest of the body. In the magnificent work on Egyptian Antiquities, which has been published at Paris, there is a drawing of this head, which is pretty correct, except that the hole and the whole _right_ shoulder are wanting. It seems that they drew the colossal bust in that form which it would have assumed, had they blown off the right shoulder. From what cause it happened we do not know, but they left the colossus behind them; and Belzoni, alone and unaided, accomplished what the French had unsuccessfully attempted.

“All the implements that Belzoni had for removing this colossus were fourteen poles, eight of which were employed in making a car for the colossus, four ropes of palm-leaves, four rollers, and no tackle of any description. With these sorry implements and such wretched workmen as the place could produce, he contrived to move the colossus from the ruins where it lay to the banks of the Nile, a distance considerably more than a mile. But it was a no less difficult task to place the colossus on board a boat, the bank of the river being ‘more than fifteen feet above the level of the water, which had retired at least a hundred yards from it.’ This, however, was effected by making a sloping causeway, along which the heavy mass descended slowly till it came to the lower part, where, by means of four poles, a kind of bridge was made, having one end resting on the centre parts of the boat, and the other on the inclined plane. Thus the colossus was moved into the boat without any danger of tilting it over by pressing too much on one side. From Thebes it was carried down the river to Rosetta, and thence to Alexandria, a distance of more than four hundred miles: from the latter place it was embarked for England.

“The material of this colossus is a fine-grained granite, which is found in the quarries near the southern boundary of Egypt, from which masses of enormous size may be procured free from any split or fracture. These quarries supplied the Egyptians with the principal materials for their colossal statues and obelisks, some of which, in an unfinished form, may still be seen in the granite quarries of Assouan. There is considerable variety in the qualities of this granite, as we may see from the specimens in the Museum, some of which consist of much larger component parts than others, and in different proportions; yet all of them admit a fine polish. The colossal head, No. 8, opposite to the Memnon, No. 2, commonly called an altar, will serve to explain our meaning.

“This Memnon’s bust consists of one piece of stone, of two different colours, of which the sculptor has judiciously applied the red part to form the face. Though there is a style of sculpture which we may properly call Egyptian, as distinguished from and inferior to the Greek, and though this statue clearly belongs to the Egyptian style, it surpasses as a work of art most other statues from that country by a peculiar sweetness of expression and a finer outline of face. Though the eyebrows are hardly prominent enough for our taste, the nose somewhat too rounded, and the lips rather thick, it is impossible to deny that there is great beauty stamped on the countenance. Its profile, when viewed from various points, will probably show some new beauties to those only accustomed to look at it in front. The position of the ear in all Egyptian statues that we have had an opportunity of observing is very peculiar, being always too high; and the ear itself is rather large. We might almost infer, that there was some national peculiarity in this member, from seeing it so invariably placed in the same singular position. The appendage to the chin is common in Egyptian colossal statues, and is undoubtedly intended to mark the beard, the symbol of manhood; and it may be observed not only on numerous statues, but also on painted reliefs, where we frequently see it projecting from the end of the chin and not attached to the breast, but slightly curved upwards. Osiris, one of the great objects of Egyptian adoration, is often thus represented; but the beard is generally only attached to the _clothed_ figure, being, for the most part, but not always, omitted on naked ones. The colossal figures, No. 8 and 38, have both lost their beards. There is a colossal head in the Museum, No. 57, that is peculiar in having the upper margin of the beard represented by incisions on the chin, after the fashion of Greek bearded statues. It is the only instance we have seen, either in reality or in any drawing, of a colossus with a genuine beard. There is more variety in the head-dresses of colossal statues than in their beards. No. 8, opposite the Memnon, has the high cap which occurs very often on Egyptian _standing_ colossi, which are placed with their backs to pilasters. No. 38 has the flat cap fitting close to the head and descending behind, very much like the pigtails once in fashion. The Memnon head-dress differs from both of these, and has given rise to discussions, called learned, into which we cannot enter here. On the forehead of this colossus may be seen the remains of the erect serpent, the emblem of royalty, which always indicates a deity or a royal personage. This erect serpent may be traced on various monuments of the Museum, and perhaps occurs more frequently than any single sculptured object.

“Our limits prevent us from going into other details, but we have perhaps said enough to induce some of our readers to look more carefully at this curious specimen of Egyptian art; and to examine the rest of the ornamental parts. The following are some of the principal dimensions:—

The whole height of the bust from the top of the head-dress to the lowest part of the fragment ft. in. measured behind 8 9

Round the shoulders and breast, above 15 3

Height of the head from the upper part of the head-dress to the end of the beard 6 0-1/2

From the forehead to the chin 3 3-1/2

“Judging from these dimensions, the figure in its entire state would be about twenty-four feet high as seated on its chair: which is about half the height of the _real_ Memnon, who still sits majestic on his ancient throne, and throws his long shadow at sunrise over the plain of Thebes.”

Many pages have been written in regard to the time when the arch was first invented. It is not known that the two divisions of the city were ever connected by any bridge.

“A people,” remarks Heeren, “whose knowledge of architecture had not attained to the formation of arches, could hardly have constructed a bridge over a river, the breadth of which would even now oppose great obstacles to such an undertaking. We have reason to believe, however, that the Egyptians were acquainted with the formation of the arch, and did employ it on many occasions. Belzoni contends that such was the case, and asserts that there is now at Thebes a genuine specimen, which establishes the truth of his assertion. No question exists, it should be observed, that arches are to be found in Thebes; it is their antiquity alone which has been doubted. The testimony of Mr. Wilkinson on this point is decisive in their favour. He tells us that he had long been persuaded that most of the innumerable vaults and arches to be seen at Thebes, were of an early date, although unfortunately, from their not having the names of any of the kings inscribed on them, he was unable to prove the fact; when, at last, chance threw in his way a tomb vaulted in the usual manner, and with an arched door-way, ‘the whole stuccoed, and bearing on every part of it the fresco paintings and name of Amunoph the First,’ who ascended the throne 1550 years B. C. We thus learn that the arch was in use in Egypt nearly three thousand four hundred years ago,—or more than twelve hundred years before the period usually assigned as the date of its introduction among the Greeks.”

At Thebes have lately been found, that is, about fifteen years ago, several papyri; one of which gives an ancient contract for the sale of land in this city. The following is a translation:—

“‘_In the reign of Cleopatra and Ptolemy her son, surnamed Alexander, the gods Philometores Soteres, in the year XII, otherwise IX; in the priesthood, &c. &c., on the 29th of the month Tybi; Apollonius bring president of the Exchange of the Memnonians, and of the lower government of the Pathyritic Nome._