James Fergusson (Wikimedia commons)
Dans le texte qui suit, l’auteur complète ses propos sur le caractère “inartistic” des pyramides en soulignant la qualité “unsurpassed” (inégalée) du travail de maçonnerie qui est à leur origine.
Comme précédemment, pour ponctuer l’articulation de l’argumentation, j’ai inséré des intertitres en français.
J’attire l’attention sur la note 1) dans laquelle James Fergusson compare les monuments funéraires égytiens et indiens. Ces derniers sont dotés de deux chambres mortuaires, donc de deux sarcophages, la chambre supérieure étant vide (une “tombre apparente”), alors que celle de dessous abrite la “vraie tombe”.
“The aim of modern constructive art is, that the voids shall exceed the solids in the greatest possible ratio ; and so successful have we been in this, that in some cast-iron erections the ratio is nearly 10,000 to 1 : in the Pyramids we almost see the opposite extreme, as the solid parts exceed the void spaces in as high a ratio, the two forming extremes of a scale whose intermediate gradation comprehends all that is beautiful in architectural art in the world. (...)
Though I have not, as before hinted, one word to say in favour of these buildings as works of fine art, as specimens of masonry they are unsurpassed by anything that has been done since in any country
or in any age. They prove that their builders not only possessed the art of quarrying the largest blocks of granite, for all the roofing blocks in the Great Pyramid measure twenty feet at least in length, and are of considerable width and depth, but also of transporting them from Syene to Memphis ; of squaring and polishing them with the most mathematical precision ; and lastly, of raising and setting them, either to a given incline or horizontally, with a minute exactitude which never, so far as I know, was equalled. There is, besides, infinite contrivance and skill in the way in which the pressure is discharged from any roofs or stones whose stability it might endanger ; and the arrangement and fitting of the portcullises shew not only ingenuity, but great practical dexterity in execution. As the Pyramid was designed, so it was built - as built, so it stands - there is neither settlement, nor crack, nor flaws, discernible in any part of it ; and considering their mass, and the enormity of the weights to be sustained, this is no small triumph ; and displays such skill as could only be the result of long ages of experience, and under the most favourable circumstances ; and which to my mind is far more astonishing than even their mass.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1511/a1511e8278e8ca73e1bc6301f1719ce636751b3c" alt=""
Photo Marc Chartier
If we are to apply to them the usual human test of success in attaining the result aimed at, I fear they must be judged as having failed ; for, as far at least as is now apparent, all the efforts of the builders were directed to keeping the body of the founder concealed and intact during the 3000 years that it data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b910f/b910f4ab3db54a02b5c33a6135a367ea2aece8c6" alt=""
Though from the testimony of the ancients, and the probabilities of the case, it is almost certain that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28d8a/28d8a42922fffcd523e9073800bf261ce769fc0b" alt=""
There are not, that I am aware of, any statues, properly so called, that can claim to belong to this age ; though this may be accounted for by the proximity of Memphis, or at least of Cairo, which has obliterated all the loose fragments of that age, and removed every thing that was removable, so that, even if they had been as numerous as they became during the eighteenth dynasty, we should not be surprised at their disappearance.
Perhaps the same reasoning may account for there being no specimens of architecture, properly so called - no temples, or colonnades, or porticoes, at all commensurate with the Pyramids in size or conception. They may have existed ; it would not be difficult to argue the matter on either side, but my own impression is that the Pyramid was the architectural utterance of that age, the tomb and the temple, the monument the kings were most anxious to erect for their own present glory and future fame ; and that they were also the sacred edifices of a people who looked on their kings as demigods at least, and were content to bow their necks under them in a servitude more complete and abject than ever was known with any other people or in any other age, as these monuments themselves witness with a distinctness that requires no further testimony to corroborate it.”
(1) It is a curious fact, that in most of the great Mohammedan tombs of India there are two sarcophagi. In that of Akbar, for instance, at Secundera, the apparent tomb is on the top of the monument ; but immediately below this, in a vault on a level with the ground, is another somewhat similar, and covering the true grave : the same occurs at the Taje Mehal, and in many others.
1e partie de la note
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire