DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1035#0070
34 TOPOGRAPHY OF THEBES.. [Chap. I.
Juvenal, who was also a cotemporary of the em-
peror Domitian; since Damis, the companion of
the philosopher, asserts that the " sound was ut-
tered when the sun touched its lips." But the
license of poetry and the fictions of Damis render
both authorities of little weight in deciding this
point. The foot was also broken, and repaired, but
if at the same time as the upper part, the epoch
of its restoration must date after the time of Adrian
or at the close of his reign; as the inscription on
the left foot has been cut through to admit the
cramp which united the restored part. Pliny, fol-
lowing the opinion then in vogue, calls it the statue
of Memnon, and adds that it was erected before the
Temple of Sarapis;—a strange mistake, since the
temple of that deity was never admitted within the
precincts of an Egyptian city,* and the worship of
Serapis was unknown in Egypt at the epoch of its
foundation, f
The nature of the stone, which was also supposed
to offer some difficulty, is a coarse hard gritstone, J
* Macrobius, sat. i. c. 4.
f Macrob. loc. cit. " Tyrannide Ptolemaeorum pressi hos
quoque deos (Satunram et Sarapin) in cultum recipere .... coacti
sunt." The worship of Sarapis having been introduced by the
first Ptolemy from Siuope.
I I am surprised to find it stated, in the review of a memoir of
that distinguished savant, M. Letronne, (Lit. Gazette, June 26,
1830,) that these statues were " originally of a single block of
breccia each .... the inscribed one .... having been restored
.... by thirteen blocks of gneis." Nor can they be said to be
" unconnected with any of the various temples" of Thebes, unless
Juvenal, who was also a cotemporary of the em-
peror Domitian; since Damis, the companion of
the philosopher, asserts that the " sound was ut-
tered when the sun touched its lips." But the
license of poetry and the fictions of Damis render
both authorities of little weight in deciding this
point. The foot was also broken, and repaired, but
if at the same time as the upper part, the epoch
of its restoration must date after the time of Adrian
or at the close of his reign; as the inscription on
the left foot has been cut through to admit the
cramp which united the restored part. Pliny, fol-
lowing the opinion then in vogue, calls it the statue
of Memnon, and adds that it was erected before the
Temple of Sarapis;—a strange mistake, since the
temple of that deity was never admitted within the
precincts of an Egyptian city,* and the worship of
Serapis was unknown in Egypt at the epoch of its
foundation, f
The nature of the stone, which was also supposed
to offer some difficulty, is a coarse hard gritstone, J
* Macrobius, sat. i. c. 4.
f Macrob. loc. cit. " Tyrannide Ptolemaeorum pressi hos
quoque deos (Satunram et Sarapin) in cultum recipere .... coacti
sunt." The worship of Sarapis having been introduced by the
first Ptolemy from Siuope.
I I am surprised to find it stated, in the review of a memoir of
that distinguished savant, M. Letronne, (Lit. Gazette, June 26,
1830,) that these statues were " originally of a single block of
breccia each .... the inscribed one .... having been restored
.... by thirteen blocks of gneis." Nor can they be said to be
" unconnected with any of the various temples" of Thebes, unless