Page:1902 Encyclopædia Britannica - Volume 25 - A-AUS.pdf/657

 ARCHITECTURE II. Recent Archaeological Discoveries. Archaeological research since 1875 has not only enriched the museums of Europe with priceless treasures, but, by the adoption of a much more scientific system of excavation, has been able to complete and rectify the discoveries of earlier explorers, and to fill up the gaps in the history of the origin and development of the earlier architectural styles. In two of these—viz., the Egyptian and the Greek—the researches of Professor Flinders Petrie in Egypt, and of Dr Schliemann, Dr Dorpfeld, and Mr Homolle in Greece, have placed the archaeological history of architecture on a surer and better-defined basis than heretofore. Egyptian. Taking the earliest structures first, we learn from Professor Flinders Petrie’s work on The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh, that the oldest pyramids known are those of Sakkara and Medum (Meidoun), and these were not only

of different construction from any of the others, but when the latter was completed it reached the form afterwards adopted in the true pyramids. The kernel of the Sakkara and Medum pyramids belong to the class known as mastaba tombs. The term mastaba (Arabic for “ bench ”) has been given to the sloping-sided tombs, of about 76° angle and from 10 to 20

603

feet in height (Fig. 1). In their origin they are probably copies in stone of the crude brick dwellings of the Egyptians, the walls of which must be much thicker at the bottom than at the top, to carry the superincumbent weight. Both the pyramids above named are known as cumulative or superposed mastabas 1—i.e., successive enlargements have been made to them, having been after each completion again enlarged by another coat of rough masonry with another fine polished casing outside. The pyramid of Sakkara was never completed, and has retained the stepped form which these successive casings gave to it. In the Medum pyramid the tower-like appearance, at present, of the centre portion is due to two of the lower enlargements having fallen away (Fig. 2). Before the final casing the successive enlargements had resulted in seven steps, the outer angles of which were pyramidal; the last process was to add a smooth casing to one slope from base to top. The angle thus formed was about 52°. These two pyramids are the only ones built in this way; in all the others the full size was settled from the first, though a change from the original size seems to have been made during its construction, in the third pyramid of Menkaura. From Professor Flinders Petrie’s measurements of the Great Pyramids, the original dimensions have now been ascertained exactly. The external dimensions of the first pyramid, that of Khufu, are 755 ft. 8 in. as the mean of the four sides, with an extreme difference of D7 of an inch. The height from the level of the artificial pavement round the pyramid to the apex was 481 ft. 4 in., and the angle of casing, 51 •52°. In the second pyramid, Khafra, the lowest course was in granite, and had a vertical base 11 in. high, against which the artificial pavement was laid. The side dimensions were 706 ft. 3 in. as a mean, with an extreme difference of 5 in. The height was 472 ft., and the angle of casing 53T0°. The third pyramid, Menkaura, was never quite completed, the mean length of the sides was 346 ft., the height 215 ft. and the angle 51'10°. The lower portion of this pyramid was cased with granite to about onefourth up, and the rough surface of the granite casing was never worked off. Part of the outer casing still remains on the second pyramid. The casing stones were not simply triangular blocks filling up the angles formed by the receding steps, but from 7 to 10 feet in depth, so that their bedding must have begun at the bottom.

Fig. 2.—Pyramid of Medum. In the course of his researches at Gizeh in 1881-82, Professor Flinders Petrie made a minute examination of the granite blocks inside the Great Pyramid, and of the debris in granite chips and diorite on the site of the workshops of the masons who built the Pyramids, and ascertained that the typical method of working hard stones, such as

granite, basalt, and diorite, was by means of bronze tools set with cutting points, probably of corundum, as the diamond is not known in Egypt, and that the masons employed straight and circular saws and tubular drills. 1 It still retains a portion of its original casing at the top (see