« PrécédentContinuer »
The weights represented, when they are engaged in weighing gold and silver and other commodities, are in the form of a whole ox, a bull's head, and a conical mass, as well as the square representing the mina; and the three first seem to be the whole, the half, and another subdivision of the talent, or 60, 30, and 20 or 10 minæ. The adoption of the bull for the talent may have originated in the original mode of bartering, and accords with Homer's reckoning the bull as a standard of value. Indeed it is said to have represented a talent. Thus the pecunia of the Romans was taken from pecus.
The Egyptians had also a measure, or weight, apparently of the same name, mn or mna, used for gold and silver, and followed by a similar square sign; which Mr. Birch supposes to have been divided like our pound into 16 parts or ounces, no higher number having been found than 15. These have also a square sign after them, determinative of weight, and are called kit or kiti, the Coptic name of the drachma and didrachma.
The idea of the mina being equivalent to our pound seems to be confirmed by the weights, in the form of lions and ducks, brought by Mr. Layard from Nimroud,* (now in the British Museum); as the most perfect of the large ducks, which was a talent, or 30 minæ, weighs little more than 484 ounces, or 40 lbs. troy and 4 ozs. Each mina is therefore 16 ounces; and the close approximation in the weight of the lions and ducks shows they represented the same quantity.
Of the Egyptian measures of capacity one was small, answering to the modern mid, or nearly 24 pecks English; another larger, also used for measuring grain, distinguished by the king's crook that surmounts it, which, as M. de Rougé suggests, may point to its value fixed by royal authority; or be a royal, i. e. a large measure. It may perhaps be the origin of the modern Egyptian ardéb (the ertôb of the Copts, and the Medish artaba), equal nearly to 5 English bushels; and the smaller one is shown to be the one employed for measuring grain when taken to, or from, the
*See Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, p. 601. In the woodcut he gives, p. 602, the supposed ring on the back of the crouched lion is only the same conical weight seen in the scales.
granary; being the standard like the modern mid, which in size and shape it so much resembled. This name is very like the Latin modius.
The modern ardéb contains 8 mid; and the latter 4 roftów, or 3 roob; and according to another calculation the ardéb is made to consist of 6 waybeh, a name answering to the ouôpi of the Copts, which was equal to 4 roob. The half ardéb, or mid, was called also koros in Coptic.
There was another measure used both for liquids, as wine; and for dry substances, as incense and bitumen; which had likewise a name very like mn or mina.
B. outer chamber with false
arch, "each course projecting." (See p. 304.)
o. View of the modern town of Manfaloót, showing the height of the banks of the Nile in summer. In the mountain range, opposite Manfaloót, are the large crocodile mummy caves of Maábdeh.
— ORDERS OF ARCHITECTURE-SOME DEVICES TOO GREAT SYMMETRY AVOIDED USE OF LARGE ANTIQUITY OF THE ARCH BRICKS- PROGRESS OF ARCHITECUSE OF LIMESTONE
THE interest that attaches to Egyptian art is from its great antiquity. We see in it the first attempts to represent what in after times, and in some other countries, gradually arrived, under better auspices, at the greatest perfection; and we even trace in it the germ of much that was improved upon by those, who had a higher appreciation of, and feeling for, the beautiful. For, both in ornamental art, as well as in architecture, Egypt exercised in early times considerable influence over other people less advanced than itself, or only just emerging from barbarisin: and the various conventional devices, the lotus flowers, the sphinxes, and
other fabulous animals, as well as the early Medusa's head, with a protruding tongue, of the oldest Greek pottery and sculptures, and the ibex, leopard, and above all the (Nile) "goose and sun," on the vases, show them to be connected with, and frequently directly borrowed from, Egyptian fancy. It was, as it still is, the custom of people to borrow from those who have attained to a greater degree of refinement and civilization than themselves; the nation most advanced in art led the taste; and though some had sufficient invention to alter what they adopted, and to render it their own, the original idea may still be traced whenever it has been derived from a foreign source. Egypt was long the dominant nation, and the intercourse established at a very remote period with other countries, through commerce or war, carried abroad the taste of this the most advanced people of the time; and so general seems to have been the fashion of their ornaments, that even the Nineveh marbles present the winged globe, and other well-known Egyptian emblems, as established elements of Assyrian decorative art. This fact would suffice to disprove the early date of the marbles hitherto discovered, which are in fact of a period comparatively modern in the history of Egypt; and recent discoveries have fully justified the opinion I ventured to express, when they were first brought to this country: 1°, that they are not of archaic style, and that original Assyrian art is still to be looked for; 2o, that they give evidences of the decadence, not the rise, of art; and 3o, that they have borrowed much from Egypt, long the dominant country in power and art, and will be found to date within 1000 B.C. This, however, is far from lessening their importance; for the periods they chiefly illustrate-those of Shalmaneser and Sennacherib, so closely connected with Hebrew history-give an interest to them, which the oldest monuments of Assyria would fail to possess.
While Greece was still in its infancy, Egypt had long been the leading nation of the world; she was noted for her magnificence, her wealth, and power, and all acknowledged her preeminence in wisdom and civilization. It is not, therefore, surprising that the Greeks should have admitted into their early art some of the forms then most in vogue; and though the won
derful taste of that gifted people speedily raised them to a point of excellence, never attained by the Egyptians or any others, the rise and first germs of art and architecture must be sought in the valley of the Nile. In the oldest monuments of Greece, the sloping or pyramidal line constantly predominates; the columns in the oldest Greek order are almost purely Egyptian, in the proportions of the shaft, and in the form of its shallow flutes without fillets; and it is a remarkable fact that the oldest Egyptian columns are those which bear the closest resemblance to the Greek Doric.
Though great variety was permitted in objects of luxury, as furniture, vases, and other things depending on caprice, the Egyptians were forbidden to introduce any material innovations into the human figure, such as would alter its general character; and all subjects connected with religion retained to the last the same conventional type. A god in the latest temple was of the same form, as when represented on monuments of the earliest date; and King Menes would have recognised Amun, or Osiris, in a Ptolemaic or a Roman sanctuary. In sacred subjects the law was inflexible; and religion, which has frequently done so much for the development and direction of taste in sculpture, had the effect of fettering the genius of Egyptian artists. No improvements, resulting from experience and observation, were admitted in the mode of drawing the human figure; to copy nature was not allowed; it was therefore useless to study it, and no attempt was made to give the proper action to the limbs. Certain rules, certain models had been established by the priesthood; and the faulty conceptions of ignorant times were copied and perpetuated by every successive artist. For, as Plato and Synesius say, the Egyptian sculptors were not suffered to attempt anything contrary to the regulations laid down regarding the figures of the gods; they were forbidden to introduce any change, or to invent new subjects and habits; and thus the art, and the rules which bound it, always remained the same.
Egyptian bas-relief appears to have been, in its origin, a mere copy of painting, its predecessor. The first attempt to represent the figures of gods, sacred emblems, and other subjects consisted