ABSTRACT
As has been shown, the knowledge which we possess concerning the ancient methods of transporting monuments is very limited; but with regard to their method of erecting them we have no knowledge whatever. In the building of temples Wilkinson thinks that a rude kind of crane was employed, and this seems probable. The side walls, where there was space, could easily have been built by the use of inclined planes; but the sectional columns of the halls and courts would present a difficulty in the matter of vertical alignment if surrounded by earth as they ascended, whereas a scaffolding of poles lashed together by ropes, such as the Japanese build, would easily support a single pulley crane for hoisting the disks or quadrants of which the columns are composed. The walls of Deir el Bahri would doubtless have given us full information regarding the erection of obelisks, but unfortunately the Coptic Christians destroyed it, and it only remains to describe in general terms the methods adopted by modern
engineers in handling the same objects, and try to deduce from these the most probable course
followed by the Egyptians themselves. The Romans, so far as we know from the curious
account by Ammianus Marcellinus, of the original erection of the Lateran obelisk by the Emperor Constantine, A.D. 345, always erected a high framework over the pedestal and lifted the obelisk bodily from the ground by means of tackles, lowering it upon brass blocks placed upon the pedestal. These blocks were usually of the form of crabs because the obelisk in one sense symbolized a ray of the sun, and the crab belonged to A polIo the sun god. The Egyptians always rested their obelisks with the base flat upon the pedestal, and it is therefore probable that they never lifted them bodily. In either case an obelisk is much more firm than its appearance would indicate. Taking the average of those now standing at Luxor, Paris, London, and New York, it would require about 25 tons· pressure at the top to push one over, or about 75 tons if applied to the whole side as in the case of a wind. A hurricane would not exert more than a quarter of this amount of pressure. Fig. xxiv. represents Fontana's method in 1580, which was similar to that of the Romans. He erected a huge structure, composed of beams a metre square, which was nicknamed " Fontana's Castle," and by means of tackles, capstans, and levers, he lifted and lowered the obelisk and transported it to the Vatican where the castle was re-erected and the operation reversed. An
men, with handspikes, attended by others with chocks, or pieces of timber, of different thickness, to be inserted under the shaft, for the purpose of keeping the elevation of the smaller end, effected by the handspikes, and distributing the pressure so equally, as not to risk the accidents which would otherwise be inevitable, with this
very fragile substance. In proportion as elevation was thus gradually obtained for the smaller end, the space below was filled with rammed earth, and the same process was repeated, with the parallel balks of timber, handspikes and chocks; the small end gradually rising at each successive step, the wall behind increasing in height and an inclined plane of solid earth gradually increasing its angle with the horizon, until it equalled that at which solid earth could with safety be employed, when the force required being proportionately diminished, timber alone was employed for its elevation. Finally a scaffolding of timber was erected embracing three sides of the pedestal, and nearly equal to the ultimate height of the obelisk: ropes were applied to the summit of the shaft, in such directions as to steady and check it: handspikes gave the requisite impetus until it felt the power of the ropes, and was ultimately and safely lodged in its shallow receptacle." H ere is a method which is absolutely primitive, and it is well within the bounds of reasonable conjecture that it was derived from the Egyptians themselves. I t is a method that is perfectly safe and is practical whether it is applied to an obelisk of 35 tons or 350 tons. The only limitation is the horizontal space required, for it is obvious that the heavier the obelisk the more
extensive must be the gradually rising platform inclosing the inclined plane, in order to afford room for levers of the necessary length.
