DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4656#0009
DESCRIPTION OF THE TEMPLE.
fixed point. The angles of the walls were ascertained
by fixing poles at a definite distance from the inner
surface of the wall, where best obtainable. The lines
were drawn on a plane table by means of a sighting
rule. The levels are approximately accurate ; I think
they may be depended on to within 10 centimetres
more or less on either side of the given figures. With
regard to using the plans, the regular workshop rule
should be followed: " never accept any dimension
unless it is plainly figured."
As stated in describing the Temenos, I suppose
that when the reader is standing looking into the
temple at the main doorway, the W. wall is facing
him, the N. and S. walls being to his right and left.
8. To begin with the foundations. The desert
surface slopes from S.W. to N.E. If you hold up this
book so that its left-hand top corner is higher than
its right-hand top corner, and both top corners are on
a higher level than its bottom corners—in fact if a
pool of ink will run from top left to bottom right,
then you will get an idea of the surface of the desert.
The floors of the chambers at the S.W. end of the
temple are 5 • 75 metres (17^ feet) higher than the
N.E. corner of the first courtyard.
The foundations themselves are nothing more
than the untrimmed walls " floating " on the top of
the sand. As the walls are very broad in comparison
with their height, there was enough bearing surface to
support the superstructure without any special founda-
tions. The temple was well above the inundation,
and rain is, and was, uncommon ; so subsidence
owing to marshy subsoil was not a factor of great
importance at Abydos.
There is only one place where any water would
accumulate, near the N.W. corner, and from this spot
water would tend to run to the eastward along the
axis of the temple ; it is clown this axis that the
greatest irregularities in the floor are observable,
though I need hardly remark that the floor is not a
mathematical plane anywhere. The blocks of lime-
stone of which this floor is composed are from 10 to
20 centimetres (4 to 8 inches) thick, and are roughly
rectangular ; but where the floor approaches a column
or a wall, in fact wherever the floor had to be built
round any object that was already in position on the
sand below, that floor was just made up of any odd
bits of stone that came handy to fill up the space
required.
9. The temple itself, like the Temenos, is not
really square. The original design was probably
square, but the laying out of the main walls does not
seem to have been very accurate. The outside walls
were probably laid out a trifle off the square, and then
the inside walls put in to fit the outside ones ; the
result is that the whole building is a trifle askew. If
you took an oblong wooden frame jointed at its
corners, and squeezed it, so as to push the top left
hand corner towards the bottom right hand corner,
you would see approximately what has happened to
the plan of the Temple of Sety. The whole building
has been skewed sideways ; the diagonals from S.W.
to N.E. are all shorter than the diagonals from N.W.
to S.E. All angles at the S.E. and N.W. corners of
courts or chambers are smaller than a right angle, all
the angles at S.W. and N.E. corners are larger than
right angles. The difference is not so enormous as
to have been intentional, but it is a very perceptible
difference. PL. XXV shows what has happened, the
irregularity being very much exaggerated. Pl. XXV1
is drawn correctly ; and in this the difference is hardly
perceptible to the eye, though actual measurement
will show that the diagonals and angles are nowhere
regular. For instance, taking the two main columned
courts and the chapels as one block, the diagonal from
top left to bottom right is 66'40 metres, while the
diagonal from top right to bottom left is 67*28.
In the central chapel the diagonals are n'94 and
12 metres ; in the next chapel to the left the diagonals
arc 11 "95 and 12*5. In the last chapel to the right
the diagonals are 11 • 85 and 11 • 95. In the western
court the diagonals are 23'05 and 23*50, and soon
all through. A glance at PL. XXV will show the
construction far better than pages of print.
The N. and S. walls of the temple are not parallel,
they slope in towards the E. The actual angles at
the corners are :—
N.E.
corner
• 9°° 34'
S.W.
jj
. 90° 16'
S.E.
ij
• 89° 35'
N.W.
>> • •
• 89° 35'
X
» * •
. 89° 0'
O
» *
. 90° 20'
I do not guarantee these figures, as every measure-
ment must be rather on the give and take principle ;
they merely show that the temple is neither square
nor symmetrically crooked.
10. The Outer Courts. — The temple was
approached through two courtyards. The most
easterly one of the two is now buried beneath the
B 2
fixed point. The angles of the walls were ascertained
by fixing poles at a definite distance from the inner
surface of the wall, where best obtainable. The lines
were drawn on a plane table by means of a sighting
rule. The levels are approximately accurate ; I think
they may be depended on to within 10 centimetres
more or less on either side of the given figures. With
regard to using the plans, the regular workshop rule
should be followed: " never accept any dimension
unless it is plainly figured."
As stated in describing the Temenos, I suppose
that when the reader is standing looking into the
temple at the main doorway, the W. wall is facing
him, the N. and S. walls being to his right and left.
8. To begin with the foundations. The desert
surface slopes from S.W. to N.E. If you hold up this
book so that its left-hand top corner is higher than
its right-hand top corner, and both top corners are on
a higher level than its bottom corners—in fact if a
pool of ink will run from top left to bottom right,
then you will get an idea of the surface of the desert.
The floors of the chambers at the S.W. end of the
temple are 5 • 75 metres (17^ feet) higher than the
N.E. corner of the first courtyard.
The foundations themselves are nothing more
than the untrimmed walls " floating " on the top of
the sand. As the walls are very broad in comparison
with their height, there was enough bearing surface to
support the superstructure without any special founda-
tions. The temple was well above the inundation,
and rain is, and was, uncommon ; so subsidence
owing to marshy subsoil was not a factor of great
importance at Abydos.
There is only one place where any water would
accumulate, near the N.W. corner, and from this spot
water would tend to run to the eastward along the
axis of the temple ; it is clown this axis that the
greatest irregularities in the floor are observable,
though I need hardly remark that the floor is not a
mathematical plane anywhere. The blocks of lime-
stone of which this floor is composed are from 10 to
20 centimetres (4 to 8 inches) thick, and are roughly
rectangular ; but where the floor approaches a column
or a wall, in fact wherever the floor had to be built
round any object that was already in position on the
sand below, that floor was just made up of any odd
bits of stone that came handy to fill up the space
required.
9. The temple itself, like the Temenos, is not
really square. The original design was probably
square, but the laying out of the main walls does not
seem to have been very accurate. The outside walls
were probably laid out a trifle off the square, and then
the inside walls put in to fit the outside ones ; the
result is that the whole building is a trifle askew. If
you took an oblong wooden frame jointed at its
corners, and squeezed it, so as to push the top left
hand corner towards the bottom right hand corner,
you would see approximately what has happened to
the plan of the Temple of Sety. The whole building
has been skewed sideways ; the diagonals from S.W.
to N.E. are all shorter than the diagonals from N.W.
to S.E. All angles at the S.E. and N.W. corners of
courts or chambers are smaller than a right angle, all
the angles at S.W. and N.E. corners are larger than
right angles. The difference is not so enormous as
to have been intentional, but it is a very perceptible
difference. PL. XXV shows what has happened, the
irregularity being very much exaggerated. Pl. XXV1
is drawn correctly ; and in this the difference is hardly
perceptible to the eye, though actual measurement
will show that the diagonals and angles are nowhere
regular. For instance, taking the two main columned
courts and the chapels as one block, the diagonal from
top left to bottom right is 66'40 metres, while the
diagonal from top right to bottom left is 67*28.
In the central chapel the diagonals are n'94 and
12 metres ; in the next chapel to the left the diagonals
arc 11 "95 and 12*5. In the last chapel to the right
the diagonals are 11 • 85 and 11 • 95. In the western
court the diagonals are 23'05 and 23*50, and soon
all through. A glance at PL. XXV will show the
construction far better than pages of print.
The N. and S. walls of the temple are not parallel,
they slope in towards the E. The actual angles at
the corners are :—
N.E.
corner
• 9°° 34'
S.W.
jj
. 90° 16'
S.E.
ij
• 89° 35'
N.W.
>> • •
• 89° 35'
X
» * •
. 89° 0'
O
» *
. 90° 20'
I do not guarantee these figures, as every measure-
ment must be rather on the give and take principle ;
they merely show that the temple is neither square
nor symmetrically crooked.
10. The Outer Courts. — The temple was
approached through two courtyards. The most
easterly one of the two is now buried beneath the
B 2