1850.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



countries, altlioufrh widely separated from each other, may most 

 probably have interchanged commodities, and poods of so portable 

 a kind as bales of linen may well have found their way from Egypt 

 to Assyria. We have the incontestible and contemporary evidence 

 of Ezekiel, that Egypt furnished "tine linen with embroidered 

 work" to the merchants «f Tyre, who it may he presumed supplied 

 tlie markets of Nineveh. There seems therefore no reason to be 

 surprised at finding Egyptian patterns worked on the dresses of 

 tlie personages so carefully rejiresented on the walls of the Ninevite 

 palaces, nor can any conclusion be safely drawn from that circum- 

 stance that there was any identity of design between the works of 

 the artists of those two countries. It may however be here ob- 

 served that in the trappings of their horses there is a somewiiat 

 strong resemblance between these examples and those afforded by 

 the Egyptian paintings in the British Museum."' 



The Honeysuckle ornament so abundantly used in the sculpture 

 before us is, I believe, nowhere seen in early Egyptian work. 

 Nor are there any traces of resemblance between Assyrian and 

 Egyptian design in the beautifully and freely drawn figures of 

 animals so profusely introduced into their work by Assyrian artists. 

 VVe seek in vain here for those stiff and formal and very peculiar 

 ornaments round the neck, consisting of a continued repetition of 

 strokes of the pencil which we see constantly recurring in Egyptian 

 work, especially on the mummy cases. The Assyrian artist seems 

 to have completely relieved himself from the rigid conventional 

 manner of the Egyptian, and to have acquired considerable facility 

 and freedom of execution: examine the slightly-etclied figures of 

 winged bulls and other animals ])ervading the dresses of almost all 

 the larger figures on this sculpture, and we find them drawn, or 

 rather sketched, in a style that would do credit to the best artists 

 of the present day; and when we consider the enormous extent to 

 which this mode of decorating the walls of their buildings prevailed, 

 not only at Nineveh, but at other buried cities which have been 

 recently explored in the same country, it seems fair to presume 

 that the trilling and very subordinate details to which I have been 

 adverting must have been the work of common and ordinary 

 artizans. 



Let us now compare the ornaments under review with the more 

 familiar forms of Greek art: and here I think we find so strong an 

 analogy, and in some cases such a striking resemblance, as to force 

 upon us the comlusion, that tlie artists of Greece derived far more 

 of their art from the banks of tlie Tigris and Euphrates than from 

 the banks of the Nile; and Egypt must, I think, relinquish a large 

 portion of the honour that has been so long accorded to her of 

 having been the mother of Greek art. The honeysuckle ornament, 

 already alluded to as occurring abundantly in this sculpture, is 

 both in form and treatment almost purely Greek. 



The Guilloche scroll, so characteristic a Greek ornament, occurs 

 very accurately chased on the scabbard of one of the swords of the 

 Assyrian warriors. An ornament much resembling (although not 

 identical with) the labyrinth fret, also appears etched as an orna- 

 ment on a dress. The classical enrichment, commonly called tlie 

 bead-and-reel, is here of very common occurrence. The running 

 ornament of animals and foliage grouped together, constantly oc- 

 curring in this costume, is a perfectly classical feature. 



I purposely confine myself to the style of ornamentation visible 

 in these works, and forbear to enter into any similar comparison 

 between Assyrian and Greek sculpture in its higher qualities, for 

 such an enquiry properly falls within the province of the sculptor; 

 but were I to do so, I apprehend we should arrive at the same re- 

 sult. It needs not the professional eye of a sculptor to see in the 

 attitudes and drapery of the figures a regular and progressive, 

 although perhaps a slow, development of art, from these marbles 

 through those of Asia Minor and Sicily down to the works of 

 Phidias. 



Whilst inviting attention to the germ and gradual growth of 

 that beautiful system of decoration which has been handed do«n 

 to us by the Greek artists, and has been the object of imitation 

 during succeeding ages, not excluding even the mediaeval age, I 

 am tempted to suggest whether much of it, perhaps almost the 

 whole of it, may not have had its origin in the use of sacred 

 emblems or in the representation of sacred objects. 



The Bull was deified in the earliest ages, and we see it carved 

 in pi-ofuse variety as an ornament on these marbles. It occurs 

 abundantly in the sculpture of Asia Minor, and in classic art 

 became a favourite ornament. The Lion, also, furnishes us with 

 another very familiar instance of an animal deified by the Egyp- 



* All architect from Vienna informs ttie auttiorof this paper that tiie caparisons of these 

 Assyrian horses strongly remind him ef those now useii in the touthcrn provinces of the 

 Austrian empire, aad the adjacent parts of Turkey. 



tians, and introduced by the artist in every variety of form as an 

 ornament. The honeysuckle which, under the wonderful influence 

 of Greek taste, became so beautiful and so universal an ornament, 

 is here found many centuries before the birth of Greek art as re- 

 presenting the sacred tree before which the Assyrian priest is per- 

 forming his religious rites. The fir cone, which plays so prominent 

 a part in classical decorative sculpture, is in these marbles almost 

 always held as an oft'ering in the hand of the ]iriest. The lotus is 

 another familiar instance. We find it first the object of worship 

 in Egypt, but afterwards converted into one of the most beautiful 

 of all the forms of antique ornament. 



The Rosette, or Patera, is perhaps one of the most universal 

 ornaments in the whole range of art. It occurs in the paintings of 

 the Egyptians, and is carved on Hindoo sculpture; it was em- 

 broidered on the garments of the Assyrians, and ornamented their 

 armlets, bracelets, and even their whip-handles. Nor on the sculp- 

 tured remains of Persepolis is it wanting. The rosette is painted 

 on the fictile vases of all ages, from the earliest to the latest, and 

 has ever been one of the most common of all the ornaments of 

 architecture. May I not venture to claim for tliis form, also, a 

 sacred origin.'' The winged circle was the emblem of the deity in 

 Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia. It occurs frequently in the mar- 

 bles before us, and is usually filled in with what has the appearance 

 of a rosette; but when the circle is large, we find the inserted 

 figure to have a star-like form, or a radiation of tapering flames: 

 may this not be supposed to typify the sun, the great and earliest 

 object of idolatry.' Is it not at least a plausible hypothesis that 

 this figure, whether it be a conventional representation of the sun, 

 or a star, may in the course of time have assumed in the hands of 

 the artificer, the varied and beautiful ornament with which we are 

 so familiar? 



I may here take occasion to advert to that mystical figure of 

 which Dr. Layard gives us a representation in his work, and of 

 which we have examples in the marbles before us, as well as in 

 those of Persepolis. It consists of a circular figure like a wheel, 

 with rays emanating from the centre; and fnim tliis wheel issues 

 the upper part of a man, terminating from the loins downwards in 

 flames; and flames issue from the sides of the wheel, loft and riglit, 

 assuming the general appearance of wings. Tlie general cor- 

 respondence of this figure with those of the cherubim and the 

 wheels, as described in the visions of Ezekiel (chap. i. and 

 viii.), is too striking to escape observation. It is unquestionably 

 a sacred and supernatural form, occurring, as Dr. Layard ohser\ es, 

 usually over the head of a victorious monarch, and may represent 

 a tutelary divinity or an angel. I have already stated that I con- 

 fine my I'einarks, on the present occasion to the ornamental details, 

 but the wliole sculptures w ell deserve far more attention than tliey 

 h:.ve even yet attracted, although I am not insensible of the gro^it 

 value of the learned disquisitions published by Dr. Layard. Tlie 

 glimpses which these interesting monuments aflTord of a primeval 

 architecture are to us especially interesting. 



Dr. Layard has remarked with truth on the I'ery wide difference 

 existing between the style of Assyrian architecture developed in 

 these remains, and the architecture of Egypt. There appears here 

 to have been an almost total absence of columns. Dr. Layard 

 gives us a representation of one instance occurring in a has relief 

 found in the ruins of Khorsabad, w hich he presumes to be of later 

 date than those of Nimrood; and in the slabs in the British Museiiiii 

 one examjile occurs, wherein three pillars are introduced, hut of 

 proportions so slender as to lead to the presumption that tliey 

 were of wood; a supposition the more probable, as they appear to 

 support, not a horizontal entaldature, but the frame-work of a kind 

 of tent; it is worthy of remark, that these pillars have as their 

 capital the horns of the goat so arranged as to suggest at once the 

 Ionic capital, and the Khorsabad examjile is also ot this tyjie. 



The absence of columns may p;issibly be due, in great measuiv, 

 to the flat, alluxial character of the district between the Tigris 

 and Euphi'ates, which furnished the soft alabaster of which these 

 slabs are formed, but no hard building stone suitable for columnar 

 architecture. Rooms, however, 3o feet and 10 feet wide, such as 

 occur in the palaces explored by Dr. Layard, would not have been 

 roofed over without a greater degree of constructive skill in car- 

 pentry than we have any reason to suppose was jiossessed in these 

 early ages. Perhaps, therefore, the horizontal beams of which tlie 

 roof was formed may have been supported by wooden pillars which 

 are now perished, or which may have been burnt when these 

 temples were sacked, a fate which most of them have probably 

 undergone. Tliat pillars were used to support the roof-timbers is 

 the more probable, as it appears that the apartments were lighted 

 from above by apertures in the roof, which would interrupt tin 



