DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6640#0021
THE OLD EMPIRE.
7
of the stones are known. The red granite came
from Syene, from the very banks of the Nile,
and could be transported by water on the river
or on the canals with a relative facility. But
where did the "black granite come from, the
material out of which so many statues have
been carved ? The opinion which is still now
prevalent is that of Lepsius,4 who believes that
it was dug out of the rocks of Hamamat,
between Iveneh and Kosseir, in the desert. In
fact, the quarries which have been found there
were already worked under the sixth dynasty,
and by Pepi himself. This opinion seems very
plausible in the case of kings who ruled over
the whole of Egypt, but is very different with
those who reigned only over the Delta. W here-
from did the Hyksos draw the stones of their
statues ? Undoubtedly not from Hamamat.
This question has grown in interest lately by
the remark that the old Chalda3an monuments
discovered at Telloh by M. de Sarzec were
made of a stone quite similar to several statues
of Egypt.5 M. Oppert read in the inscrip-
tions the name of Maggan, which applies to the
Sinaitic peninsula, and which, according to the
illustrious Assyriologist, would be the place
where the stone of those statues was obtained.6
Others, on the contrary, maintain that the
material was close at hand, and that it came
from the shores of the Persian Gulf. Thorough
explorations made by geologists are required to
solve the question whether or not there are
quarries in the Sinaitic peninsula.
It is impossible to form even an approximate
idea of what a temple of the Old Empire was like.
That there were temples at that remote epoch
is beyond any doubt, but until now we have
only discovered one, the temple of the Sphinx.
And it is easily comprehensible. No buildings
have been so much altered, reconstructed,
transformed as temples. The sacred character
4 Leps. Briefe, p. 319.
5 Rev. Arcli. 42, pp. 2G4-272.
6 Taylor, in Perrot, Hist, de l'Art, Assyrie, p. 588.
attached to a place lasts through ages; generally,
it even outlives a complete change of religion;
but it is not so with the sanctuary. In the long
succession of dynasties, in proportion as art
and taste changed, as religious ideas were
modified, as the empire was growing in power
and riches, the primitive building underwent
such complete alterations, that nothing re-
mained of its original state except names as at
Tanis and Bubastis, or mere traditions as at
Denderah. It is likely also that one of the
reasons why we find so few traces of the temples
of Pepi and Cheops, is that they were without
any ornamentation or sculpture. They were
built of blocks of polished stone, with mono-
lithic pillars as in the temple of the Sphinx, but
it is very doubtful whether the walls bore any-
thing else than the name of the king. The
cartouches of Pepi were along the door-posts ;
we do not know where those of Cheops and
Chefrea were engraved. Among the numerous
blocks which are heaped up at Bubastis, there
may be some which go up to such a high anti-
quity, but which, having no sculptures or orna-
ments of any kind, are not discernible, especially
as they were re-used in the numerous altera-
tions which the building went through.
There is, however, a sculpture which undoubt-
edly goes back to the Old Empire, and which
struck us from the first by its unusual charac-
ter (pi. xxii. d). On the top of the blocks of the
first hall there was a false door, such as occurs
nearly in all the tombs of the Old Empire, and
which consists of two posts bound together by a
cylindrical drum,where the name of the deceased
is frequently engraved. I cannot account for a
monument of this kind, which has nearly always
a funereal character, being in a temple which
never seems to have been used as a tomb. No-
thing remains of the inscriptions which might
have solved the difficulty. Everywhere they have
been carefully erased, as well on a rectangular
tablet above the door, as on the posts, each of
which had a royal name ; for on the left, in spite
7
of the stones are known. The red granite came
from Syene, from the very banks of the Nile,
and could be transported by water on the river
or on the canals with a relative facility. But
where did the "black granite come from, the
material out of which so many statues have
been carved ? The opinion which is still now
prevalent is that of Lepsius,4 who believes that
it was dug out of the rocks of Hamamat,
between Iveneh and Kosseir, in the desert. In
fact, the quarries which have been found there
were already worked under the sixth dynasty,
and by Pepi himself. This opinion seems very
plausible in the case of kings who ruled over
the whole of Egypt, but is very different with
those who reigned only over the Delta. W here-
from did the Hyksos draw the stones of their
statues ? Undoubtedly not from Hamamat.
This question has grown in interest lately by
the remark that the old Chalda3an monuments
discovered at Telloh by M. de Sarzec were
made of a stone quite similar to several statues
of Egypt.5 M. Oppert read in the inscrip-
tions the name of Maggan, which applies to the
Sinaitic peninsula, and which, according to the
illustrious Assyriologist, would be the place
where the stone of those statues was obtained.6
Others, on the contrary, maintain that the
material was close at hand, and that it came
from the shores of the Persian Gulf. Thorough
explorations made by geologists are required to
solve the question whether or not there are
quarries in the Sinaitic peninsula.
It is impossible to form even an approximate
idea of what a temple of the Old Empire was like.
That there were temples at that remote epoch
is beyond any doubt, but until now we have
only discovered one, the temple of the Sphinx.
And it is easily comprehensible. No buildings
have been so much altered, reconstructed,
transformed as temples. The sacred character
4 Leps. Briefe, p. 319.
5 Rev. Arcli. 42, pp. 2G4-272.
6 Taylor, in Perrot, Hist, de l'Art, Assyrie, p. 588.
attached to a place lasts through ages; generally,
it even outlives a complete change of religion;
but it is not so with the sanctuary. In the long
succession of dynasties, in proportion as art
and taste changed, as religious ideas were
modified, as the empire was growing in power
and riches, the primitive building underwent
such complete alterations, that nothing re-
mained of its original state except names as at
Tanis and Bubastis, or mere traditions as at
Denderah. It is likely also that one of the
reasons why we find so few traces of the temples
of Pepi and Cheops, is that they were without
any ornamentation or sculpture. They were
built of blocks of polished stone, with mono-
lithic pillars as in the temple of the Sphinx, but
it is very doubtful whether the walls bore any-
thing else than the name of the king. The
cartouches of Pepi were along the door-posts ;
we do not know where those of Cheops and
Chefrea were engraved. Among the numerous
blocks which are heaped up at Bubastis, there
may be some which go up to such a high anti-
quity, but which, having no sculptures or orna-
ments of any kind, are not discernible, especially
as they were re-used in the numerous altera-
tions which the building went through.
There is, however, a sculpture which undoubt-
edly goes back to the Old Empire, and which
struck us from the first by its unusual charac-
ter (pi. xxii. d). On the top of the blocks of the
first hall there was a false door, such as occurs
nearly in all the tombs of the Old Empire, and
which consists of two posts bound together by a
cylindrical drum,where the name of the deceased
is frequently engraved. I cannot account for a
monument of this kind, which has nearly always
a funereal character, being in a temple which
never seems to have been used as a tomb. No-
thing remains of the inscriptions which might
have solved the difficulty. Everywhere they have
been carefully erased, as well on a rectangular
tablet above the door, as on the posts, each of
which had a royal name ; for on the left, in spite