« EelmineJätka »
sity observable in Egyptian columns is so great that it is impossible to specify here all their varieties, which can be learned only by studying them in engravings; equally impossible is it, too, to reduce them to any kind of system, there being neither any peculiar form of capital, or other distinct characteristic, nor any thing in regard to proportions whereby they can be classified; for we find columns similar in portion. differing materially in all the rest, or else vice-versd. Egyptian columns have rarely any distinct base, seldom more than a circular plinth; but they have frequently an ornamental footing, which differs, however, from a base, in being contracted instead of expanded below. It may be described as shaped like the calyx of a flower, the resemblance to which is increased by its being sculptured into some forms of foliage, so that the shaft appears to be set in and rise out of a plant. Of this description are the bases of the columns of the temple at Latopolis or Esné. By some this has been insisted upon as a i. and as indicative of weakness; consequently, contrary to that law of architecture which prescribes that there should be apparent as well as real strength, more especially where the expression of solidity is naturally looked for. Still it may not unreasonably be urged that, as in all such cases, the judgment comes to the aid of and corrects the eye, what is known to be strong cannot fairly be said to appear weak; and the solidity of columns which have stood the test of some thousands of years cannot possibly be called in question. Were we unacquainted with its properties, even the form of the arch might be thought ill calculated for sustaining pressure; by others pendents likewise from vaulted roofs might be deemed blemishes rather than ornaments, as carrying with them a decided appearance of insecurity. The particular kind of Egyptian base here alluded to is certainly not in accordance with Grecian principles, yet it does not therefore exactly follow that it is faulty in itself. On the contrary, it may be argued that the excess of strength which they gave their structure, and the prodigious solidity and durability of the materials employed, allowed the architects of Egypt to contract the diameter of their columns below, without rendering them at all weak. Perhaps, too, one motive for doing so was thereby to produce a still more effective contrast between the columns and the general outline of the building, which, as already explained, sloped upwards. e most usual form adopted for capitals was bell-shaped, that is, resembling a bell reversed, or rather the bell and petals of a flower, with a rim bending downwards, which was sometimes quite circular, thereby giving the whole somewhat the appearance of a mushroom; at others, jagged, the eircumference being divided into a number of convex curves, forming so many distinct petals. The six specimens given in the article Column, vol. vii., page 383, exhibit two of the latter, and three of the first-mentioned variety of the bell-shaped capital. From these it will be seen what variety prevailed in the decorative details, some being cut into distinct leaves, either convex or concave, others embellished with sculpture representing branches and flowers. . It will also be por
- ==== Front of the Temple at Denderah,
ceived that in their general mass the capitals of this class, far from having anything in common with that of the Grecian Doric, bear some general similarity to that of the Corinthian order; at the same time both the foliage itself and its arrangement are altogether of a different character. Yet even were the resemblance more perfect in these respects, there would still exist an exceedingly wide distinction between them and every variety of either Grecian or Roman capitals, namely, in the abacus being a mere square plinth, considerably smaller than the capital itself. Consequently it bears no similitude whatever to that of the Doric, which overhangs the echinus, and extends beyond the architrave which rests upon it; while it is equally remote from that of the Corinthian, since, besides being enriched with mouldings, the latter has its sides curved so that the angles extend to those of the volutes. The Egyptian abacus, on the contrary, is anything but ornamental in itself, and would be a defect, were it not that in the buildings themselves it can
hardly be seen, owing to its smallness, and the projection of the rim of the capital ; consequently, unless it happens to be very deep, it serves chiefly to detach the capital from the architrave, and prevent that heaviness of appearance which would otherwise be occasioned. The first figure among the specimens above referred to shows an o: of what may be termed the double capital, peculiar to Egyptian architecture, for above the usual shaped capital is a square member, sculptured on each of its sides with an Isis’ head, and on this again is placed a small temple, so that instead of a double this may be termed a triple capital. The columns of the temple at Tentyra or Denderah offer another instance of the double capital in some respects similar to, in others greatly differing from the preceding. ere the lower capital consists of four Isis’ faces, disposed so as to form a square, larger than the shaft, the folds of the head-dress hanging down and projecting beyond it: above each face is a kind of fluted abacus; and above is a square temple. The shaft also varies considerably from those shown in the preceding examples; for instead of being striated vertically and banded horizontally, this is covered with hieroglyphics disposed in series of rings. Another remarkable circumstance is the great height of the whole capital, it being not less than two-fifths of the shaft. here is another species of capital of very frequent occurrence, which is totally distinct from either of the above two classes; and although its form may, at first sight, be considered uncouth, it is well calculated for effect; neither is it devoid of simplicity. After sweeping out from the shaft, instead of continuing to expand as it proceeds upwards, it slopes back so as to iminish until it is contracte again to the diameter of the shaft itself. The decoration consists in its
being subdivided into eightlesser shafts, inscribed with hieroglyphics, as are likewise the faces of the abacus, which member here becomes very pronounced, and occasions a picturesque play of light and shade. Capitals of this kind, as well as other varieties, occur at Luxor. In their proportions Egyptian columns vary no less than in other particulars, their height amounting in some instances to no more than three diameters, in others extending to eight or upwards. Yet such difference is not attended by any regularly corresponding one, either as regards the column itself, or the parts connected with it. #. it is by no means unusual to meet with square pillars or tetrapleurons, with either a statue, or a caryatid figure standing before, but distinct from it. The Egyptian entablature is so far from displaying any thing like the same variety as the columns, that it is nearl uniformly the same in buildings which differ very j. from each other in regard to their columns. Unlike that of the Greeks, it consists of only two divisions, the epistylium or architrave, and the cornice; the height of both being generally one-third of that of the columns. More frequently than not the epistylium was enriched with sculpture in hieroglyphics; which circumstance alone constitutes a great difference between the practice of the Egyptians and that of the Greeks. Another singularity is, that the epistylium was included within the convex moulding or torus carried up at the angles of the building, and then returned i. along the front, owing to which the architrave itself (epistylium) appears to be returned downwards, like
that of a door or window. This will be at once understood by referring to the view of Denderah on the opposite page, by which it will also be seen that the cornice consists of little more than a deep cove, enriched with sculpture; a form peculiarly adapted for effect in a climate like that of Egypt, as it not only casts a bold shadow but receives a strong reflected light. With the cornice the building terminated, for the roof being a flat terrace, there was no . of roof; consequently Egyptian architecture is entirely destitute of what are such expressive and highly ornamental features in that of Greece, namely, the pediment, antifixae, and ridge tiles. By way of indemnity for its deficiency in this respect, and the sameness arising from it, greater latitude was allowed to it in others. Not only was there far greater diversity in the forms and ornaments of columns, §. do not appear to have been subject to any regulations beyond those prescribed either by symbolic allusions or by national taste; but columns of very different character appear in the same edifice, and even capitals of different design in the same range of columns; wherein again a kindred spirit may be observed between Egyptian and Gothic architecture, notwithstanding that in treatment they are so dissimilar from each other. Another thing peculiar to Egyptian buildings is the frequent use in the external porticoes of temples of intercolumnar walls, or screens, that is, walls built between the columns and carried up half their height; thereby giving to the open part of the intercolumns above them somewhat the appearance of windows. For an example, we again refer to the view of Denderah, in which instance these walls are brought forward so as to encase the shafts of the columns between them, and fling a shadow upon them. Like every other part of the front in the same edifice, these walls are decorated with sculpture and hieroglyphics; for the Egyptians were exceeding lavish of that species of embellishment, not confining it to particular situations, as did the Greeks, namely to the pediment, frieze, and inner frieze behind the columns, along the walls of the cella, but extending it over the entire surface, in compartments forming tier above tier. These architectural sculptures were generally in very low relief, and some of them also occasionally in intaglio, or hollowed into the surface instead of projecting from it. There are even instances of a combination of both modes, the figures being outlined by a groove or incision, so as to give them greater apparent relief; a mode that has been denominated by some intaglio-rilevato. In addition to this species of enrichment may be added that of colours and gilding, especially in the interior and upon beams and ceilings. In this respect, however, the Greeks displayed a similar taste, for it has been recently established beyond all doubt that their temples were decorated with colours and gilding, externally as well as internally, even those of the Doric order, where what have hitherto been considered mere plain mouldings and surfaces, because they were unsculptured, were, in fact, highly ornamented, and frequently with embellishments remarkable for their delicacy. Having thus given some notion of the elementary parts and features of Egyptian temples, we proceed to describe their general plan and distribution, selecting by way of exo illustration the ground plan of the temple at dfu, or Apollinopolis Magna, one of the largest in Egypt. This, it will instantly be seen, was far more varied and complex than the plan adhered to by the Greeks, which, as has been shown in the article Civil ARCHITECTURE, consisted merely of a cella, either surrounded entirely with columns, or with columns only in front, or at both ends. Here, on the contrary, the temple is placed within an enclosure, forming a court in front of it, surrounded on three of its sides by colonnades; and the entrance to this court was through a colossal doorway, or propylaeum, placed be: tween two enormous pyramidal towers, or moles, covered with colossal figures in sculpture. These vast masses of structure, which rose considerably higher than the temple itself, had the usual cornice, and likewise the torus mou ding running up their angles. Other conspicuous objects frequently accompanying such propylaea, were lofy obelisks, as was the case at Luxor, where there still exists, one in front of each mole. These moles may almost be said to be solid, for although they contained chambers and staircases, such spaces amounted to no more than voids left in the mass. Within the court the colonnades were pycnostyle, which seems to have been the usual mode of intercolumniation adopted by the Egyptians, the columns being o more 2
than a diameter and a half from each other, except in the centre of a portico, where there was generally * doorway between the columns, the lower part of the other intercolumns being walled up, as described above, and as shown in the view of Denderah. Such is the case in that of Edfu, which also agrees with the one just mentioned in the number of its columns in front. Owing to their being
enclosed at their extremities, both these examples answer to a Greek hexastyle in antis [Civil ARCHITEcTURE], or an octastyle; because although there are but six columns, there are seven intercolumns. They agree, too, in having other rows of columns within, parallel to those in front; but in this respect that at Denderah is richer than the other, for while it has three immer ranges of columns, that at Edfu has only a couple. Even this, however, exceeds what we meet with in Grecian buildings, where there is only—neither is that very general—a single row of columns in antis behind those in front, forming the pronaos, or vestibule to the cella—for being inclosed not only at its sides, but in front, by the intercolumnar walls, it answers, more to the character of a pronaos than a portico. The plan of such structures as the propylaea at Athens and Eleusis corresponds more with that of an Egyptian portico than does any thing else in Grecian architecture; they being, like the latter halls, open in front and enclosed at their sides or ends, and having files of columns within. Beyond this portico, or first hall, is one of smaller extent, passages being cut off at its ends by exceedingly thick partition walls. This has three rows of four columns each, so disposed as to occupy the whole area, leaving merely narrow aisles in every direction between them—a mode peculiar to Egyptian architecture, occasioned by the necessity for employing such thickly-set columns to prop the massive beams and slabs of stone composing the ceiling; and hence such apartments have obtained the name
of hypostyle halls. It is hardly necessary to observe that they are altogether different from what has oddly enough acquired the title of an “Egyptian hall’ in this country, (for instance, the large room in the Mansion House, London; the entrance hall at Holkham, &c.), which, besides being utterly unlike Egyptian architecture as to style, has marely a peristyle of columns, or else only colonnades , along its sides. To this hypostyle succeed two chambers, the farther one having smaller lateral rooms attached to it, which, it is conjectured, were appropriated to the use of the priests; and facing its entrance was that leading into the sekos or shrine containing the figure of the deity. While all the preceding vestibules and chambers are placed transversely to the longitudinal direction of the building, the last and innermost apartment is parallel to that direction, and in continuation of the line of approach; the reason for which is obvious enough, it being almost indispensably requisite that the statue of the divinity should be at one end, and directly facing the entrance. In all probability likewise the object . at in disposing the rest as we perceive it to be, was twofold; first, for the sake of having a greater number of apartments to be crossed before the sanctuary was reached and thus rendering it more difficult of access and more mysterious; and secondly, for the sake of contrast; the other divisions of the plan being intended to be merely passed through, but this, on the contrary, being the termination of the whole. If we keep this in view, and the peculiar nature of the worship to which these temples were dedicated, the arrangement must be allowed to be judicious and appropriate, notwithstanding that under different circumstances it might be objected to as constituting a very strong anti-climax, since every portion of it successively diminishes, the last of the sacred chambers being, as the plan shows, hardly equal to the space forming the great doorway between the two moles. Yet what is thus an anticlimax, if we have regard to dimensions alone, became a perfect climax that must have made a powerful impression on those who were allowed to penetrate into the adytum— the most sacred part of the fane—the presence chamber, as it were, of the presiding divinity, where the sanctity of the whole precinct was concentrated in a focus, and to which the magnificence and colossal grandeur of all the rest served merely as preparation and prelude. Such was the general disposition and distribution of an Egyptian temple, which, besides other very obvious distinctions, differs from those of Greece in the columns being situated chiefly within the building, for even the colonnades may be considered in some degree to be so, with respect to the entire plan. The portico, again, was neither prostyle, or advanced before the body of the temple itself, nor peristyle, that is, continued around it, but enclosed by the lateral walls, as is the case with a Greek temple in antis. Except in the particular instances already alluded to, columns are of very rare occurrence within Grecian edifices, except they were of large dimensions and hypaethral (like the Parthenon), that is, open to the sky, #. no roof except over the aisles between the walls and the colonnades along them. A court-like area of this latter description was altogether different in character from the hypostyle halls within Egyptian temples, which, owing to the multiplied files of columns and the narrowness of the intercolumns, presented the appearance of a grove of pillars; and had it not been for the great diameter of the columns themselves, their being set so close together would have been no small inconvenience. But the columns themselves were generally of such prodigious bulk, that the space of a diameter and a half between them would generally be equal to about eight or ten feet, and in some instances to much more. In the vast hypostyle hall at Karnak, which is about 338 feet by 170 in extent, and has 134 columns disposed in nine parallel rows one way, and sixteen the other, the smaller pillars are nearly nine feet in diameter, and the larger almost eleven: In comparison with such enormous dimensions both in this and every other respect—for tha whole structure extended several thousand feet—the most astonishing works of Roman and of modern architecture shrink into insignificance— even the Colosseum and St. Peter's, and the largest Gothic cathedrals, cease to appear astonishing in point of magnitude. Some particulars remain yet to be noticed in respect to the temple at Edfu. Instead of being level, the court has a slight ascent towards the front of the temple; not however in one continued slope, but in a succession of low and very wide steps, each being the width of a column aud
intercolumn, as indicated by the plan; and the columns around the court are not so lofty as those of the portico, whereby the temple itself acquired greater dignity. Of these latter the capitals are bell-shaped, but not uniform as to design; while those of the pillars in the hypostyle hall have quadrilateral capitals with the four Isis’ faces similar to those at Denderah. This hall, again, is not so lofty as the outer one or portico, but the height is proportioned to its other dimensions. As in Grecian, so in Egyptian architecture, doorways are conspicuous and important features, more particularly in the latter, where they occur as distinct parts of the design in the form of propyla ; sometimes standing quite insulated after the manner of arches or gateways; yet more usually placed between and connecting two pyramidal moles that rise to a great elevation above the propylon itself; consequently such entrance is both lower and narrower than the parts attached to it; which is altogether contrary to what is observable in Grecian composition, where the centra is, if not uniformly more elevated than the rest, at least not depressed ; whereas there is here something analogous to what we observe in the façade of a Gothic cathedral, where the portail and body of the church are similarly flanked by towers. In its general form the propylon or gateway resembled the temple itself, yet with this difference, that the proportions of the one are lofty and narrow ; of the other, wide and low, and its opening filled with columns supporting the lintel or epistylium. Their similarity in all other respects is obvious enough, owing to the epistylium of the portieo being returned and carried downwards just as the lintel of the door is in order to form its jambs. The outer angles are similarly inclined in both cases, and ornamented with the same torus moulding on their edge. It should be understood, however, that the jambs of the doorway were, for the most part, not vertical next the opening, but sloped like the external angles, so that the aperture was narrower at top than at bottom, which form seems to have been copied by the Greeks in that of their doors and windows. The lintel and cornice above it were also proportionably much deeper than the epistylium and corresponding member, over columns, in order to produce sufficient mass; otherwise the effect would have been both unarchitectural and disagreeable, too much like that of the mere framing of a door, standing, although not !. insulated, yet distinct from the rest of the composition. ome idea may be given of the imposing magnitude of such doorways or propyla, by stating that the one at Edfu measures 74 feet to its summit, and 51 to that of the aperture, which gives a depth of 23 feet, or nearly one-third of the whole height, for the lintel and cornice. The magnificence of these propylaea was greatly enhanced by colossal statues or obelisks—in some instances both— placed on either side of the entrance. Besides which there were sometimes two or even more propylaea and courts preceding the temple, which were in their turn preceded by avenues of gigantic sphinxes or crio-sphinxes (that is, sphinxes with rams' heads). There are, likewise, instances of avenues of columns crossing the courts in a line from the entrance. The remains at Luxor furnish an example of the kind, where, after the first court (which has a double peristyle), there is a second with a double range of columns extending down it, that are 113 feet in diameter and 56 high, and beyond this was a third court, flanked by colonmades, consisting of double rows of pillars. Having thus far given a sketch of the leading characteristics of the Egyptian style, in respect to the principal forms and details, together with their disposition and the arrangement of the buildings themselves, we shall touch very briefly upon the subject of the pyramids, because, interesting as they are in themselves, they arc structures of so very peculiar and distinct a nature, as to have but little connection with the architecture of the country in general, being, when considered with reference to it, little more than uniform and simple, although enormous masses. They are, in fact, greatly more important in an historical and archaeological point of view than in one purely architectural. Their shape is so familiar to every one that it requires no description, but may be defined as square in plan and triangular in section, its four sides being as many triangles united so as to terminate in a point; and as the height is much less than the width of the base, each side constitutes nearly an equi...teral triangle. Hence, to say nothing of the amazing difference in regard to bulk and dimensions, an Egyptian pyra
mid is altogether dissimilar in character from a Gothic spire, notwithstanding that Murphy and some other writers have considered it the prototype of the latter. The magnitude of these singular erections, to which there is nothing corresponding in the architecture of any other country (except in Mexico), will be rendered more striking by observing that the base of the great pyramid is of the same dimensions as the area of Lincoln's Inn Fields, namely, about 700 feet square and 450 in height, while the corresponding admeasurements of the second and third pyramids are 650 feet and 280, and 400 and 160. Owing to these proportions, which in the latter case are much lower than those above stated, the extraordinary height is combined with imperishable stability and solidity, the whole being nearly one entire mass of the hardest materials, for the inner galleries and chambers form but mere veins and cavities compared with the entire mass. In the Great Pyramid three chambers, hitherto undiscovered, have been lately (1836-7) explored and opened by Colonel Wyse. The largest, measuring 38 feet i inch by 17 feet 1 inch, has been denominated by him the ‘Wellington Chamber; the second (38 feet 9 inches by 16 feet 8 inches) named “Nelson's;' and the third (37 feet 4 inches by 16 feet 4 inches) has been named after Lady Arbuthnot, who was present at the time of the discovery. These chambers vary as to height, and the blocks of granite which form the ceiling of the one below serve as the pavement to the next above it. According to the colonel, were chiefly intended as voids in that portion of the pyramid above what is termed the King's Chamber, the only one that appears to have had any destination—and thereby to lessen the superincumbent mass. Notwithstanding Egyptian architecture is so dissimilar in its character, in the taste and feeling manifested by it, from every modern style founded upon that of the Greeks and Romans, as to offer little that can be directly applied to any modification of the forms we are accustomed to; it is highly worthy of study by professional men, were it only on account of the beautiful and picturesque arrangements, the skilful contrasts, and varied harmony in the distribution of plan, which it exhibits. For our buildings in general it would be utterly inappropriate, but it might be adopted both with propriety and economy in such as require the expression of massive strength: namely, prisons, manufactories, propylaea entrances to railroads, and works of that description; for which purposes it has been recommended by Dr. Macculloch. Neither need it be an objection that it is quite as remarkable for the high finish and multiplicity of ornament, as for its other qualities; because, apart from all that is merely decorative, it is well calculated to produce effect by its forms and masses alone. It must also be admitted that, although its chief monuments are of colossal bulk and extent, such magnitude is not absolutely essential to the style itself, since there are many moderate-sized edifices still remaining; among others, the temple of Dandour, which does not exceed 22 feet by 44, a scale not very extravagant even for a mere ornamental building in a garden. We cannot here, as in the article on Civil ARCHITECTURE, refer to actual examples at home: still there are two buildings in the metropolis which, as far as single features and details go, may be cited as specimens of Egyptian architecture, viz.: the “Egyptian Hall, Piccadilly, and a smaller structure in Welbeck-street. The latter was, as originally erected, the most correct in point of character, but has since been almost spoiled by very barbarous alterations. The other conforms to the style only in certain peculiarities and separate parts, such as the columns, the general outline as indicated by the inclined torus-moulding at the extremities of the front, the cornice, &c., for the composition of the design itself is quite at variance with the principles of genuine Egyptian architecture, the front being divided into two floors with wide windows to both ; whereas windows, wherever they do occur in Fo buildings, which is but rarely, are exceedingly small and narrow apertures; consequently the Piccadilly example must be looked at with some degree of mistrust. It must also be confessed that any imitation of the style is better adapted for situations where no other buildings would interfere with it, than for street architecture, where a building of such design will look small unless actually much larger than any of those around it. Hitherto the taste of the Egyptians has been called in question, as being confined to a feeling for grandeur and magnificence, yet evincing very little refinement or percep- tion of beauty. When examined with unprejudiced eyes, however, many of these forms, especially those of the bellshaped and lotus-leaved capitals, will be found to possess much of the last-mentioned quality; while recent discoveries in the palaces, tombs, and temples of Upper Egypt, communicated to the world in the splendid publications of Rossellini and others, show not only the great variety and taste manifested in decoration and embellishment of every kind, but prove that many ornamental forms we have been accustomed to consider as essentially Greek, and have imitated as such, are really Egyptian. This is rendered strikingly evident by the delineations given in Rossellini of the various pieces of furniture, musical instruments, vessels of gold and silver, and other articles, from the royal tombs and palaces; and in regard to which luxury and refinement appear to have attained the highest pitch. Not only their archetypes, but even the express forms, till now attributed to the Greeks exclusively, are thus shown not to have been of their invention, but borrowed by them from the Egyptians, in like manner as they have since been copied by ourselves, while ignorant of their real origin. In consequence of this highly curious and important discovery, it is exceedingly probable that the subject of Egyptian architecture will engage attention in a much greater degree than it has ever before done. - EGYPTIAN BEAN, a name sometimes given to the bean-like fruits of Nelumbium speciosum, from the notion that they were the beans which the disciples of Pythagoras were forbidden to eat. EHRENBREITSTEIN, a township on the right bank of the Rhine, in the circle of Coblenz, and in the Prussian province of the Lower Rhine. It contains one town and eight villages, with about 6400 inhabitants; an increase of 568 since the year 1817. The town is called Thal Ehrenbreitstein (Vale Ehrenbreitstein), and is situated at the foot of a precipitous height 772 ft. in elevation, opposite to Coblenz, in 50° 23' N. lat. and 7° 36' E. long. It occurs in records of the year 1210 under the name of Mulne or Mullenheim; but in 1533 the name appears to have been changed into Mühlheim and Müllenthal, probably from the number of mills in the valleys of two rivulets close to it. It contains 2 Roman Catholic churches, a synagogue, 11 public buildings, 9 mills, about 270 dwelling-houses, and 2400 inhabitants. The electoral palace is in a state of great decay. The town has a tobacco manufactory; the acidulous spring in the town is of some repute; and it has a brisk trade in wine, corn, iron, clay for tobacco-pipes, &c. Above the town stands the fortress, which has been entirely reconstructed since the year 1817, with the addition of three forts on adjacent heights, which command the mouth of the Moselle and the access to it from the Lower Rhine. These are, Fort Alexander, on a height in front of Coblenz; Fort Francis, on St. Peter's Hill, on the left bank of the Moselle; and the Pfaffendorf redoubt, opposite the flying bridge across the Rhine. The road up to it from the town is about 1200 paces long; it is fortified, and rests almost entirely upon arches built over the chasms in the rock of which the height consists. The ‘Cavalier,' or highest point of this formidable stronghold, is not accessible to strangers, as it affords a full view of the detail and interior of the defences; but the prospects from other points are extensive and beautiful. According to Professor Klein, the Romans had a watch-tower on this height in the times of the Emperor Julian; subsequently the Franks built a burg or castle on the site; and in 1153 it was restored, enlarged, and fortified by the then archbishop of Treves. In 1632 it fell into the hands of the French, whom the Imperialists drove out by famine in 1637. In 1795, 1796, and 1797 it was blockaded by Generals Marceau, Jourdan, and Goullus successively; and in 1799 it surrendered to the French, who the next year razed all its fortifications. EHRETIA/CEAE, a small natural order of exogenous plants consisting of shrubs or trees inhabiting the warmer countries of the world, and having rough leaves, monopetalous regular flowers, a definite number of stamens, a superior ovary, a two-lobed style whose divisions are capitate, and a nucamentaceous undivided fruit. The flowers are more or less gyrate, and the order itself, which contains no species of economical value, is so near Boraginaceae as to render it doubtful whether it ought to be separated. The common heliotrope is the most generally known representation of Ehretiaceae, forming however the type of a sectional division, characterized by the fruit being dry, not succulent.
l, An ovary with the style and double stigma; 2, a ripe fruit with the calyx at the base; 3, a section of the same showing the seeds.
EICHHORN, JOHANN GOTTFRIED, an eminent professor of oriental and biblical literature in the university of Göttingen, and one of the most learned and distinguished scholars of Germany, was born in 1752, at Dorrenzimmern, in the principality of Hohenlohe Oeringen, and at first was rector of the school at Ohrdruf, in the principality of Gotha. Having applied with great success to the study of the oriental languages, he obtained, in 1775, a professor's chair in the university of Jena, where he continued thirteen years, giving instruction in Hebrew, Arabic, &c., and was made, in 1783, a court councillor by the duke of Saxe Weimar. In 1788 he was appointed to the professorship previously held by Michaelis in the university of ‘. of which institution he continued a very distinguished ornament during the remainder of his life, as professor of oriental and biblical literature.
His reputation was equally high as a proficient in oriental, classical, and scriptural antiquities; in philosophical criticism; in the history of nations, and of antient and modern literature and science; and in universal bibliology. He was made, in 1811, a doctor of divinity; in 1813 the directorship of the Royal Scientific Society of Göttingen was conferred on him, and the office of pro-rector of that university; in 1819 he was appointed privy councillor of justice for the kingdom of Hanover (Geheimer Justizrath). He died in 1827, on the 25th of June, at the * of 75. These few incidents, which appear to be all which are published, verify the trite observation that the secluded lives of students furnish but scanty materials for , biographical memoirs. In completing the present notice it is therefore only necessary to enumerate the principal works of Eichhorn, and to give a brief and general account of his doctrines as a divine and critic.
The following statements are made, partly from an examination of the works enumerated, and partly on the authority of several German bibliographical publications, and the last edition of the Conversations Lexicon (3rd vol., 1833). While at Jena, Eichhorn first displayed his knowledge of Oriental literature in a history of East Indian commerce prior to the time of Mohammed (Geschichte des Ostind. handels vor Mohammed), Gotha, 1775. This was followed by a survey of the most antient monuments of the