Ancient Egyptian temples, particularly in their fully
developed state, became complex structures with many different
architectural elements. The essential parts of the temple
proper can be viewed as increasingly sacred zones. Usually consisting of an approach and entrance together with the
outer areas of the temple enclosure, which was open to the
general Egyptian population, its outer courts within the pylons
that were accessible to temple priests and occasionally, some
of the general population, its inner halls where only purified
priests were allowed, and the inner sanctuary, restricted to
the king and priests of a very high rank.
Other religious elements could exist, such as sacred lakes,
and of course, there could be many subsidiary secular
structures as well, functioning as administrative offices,
storage areas, gardens, schools, libraries as well as other
uses.
Many people who visit ancient Egyptian temples will simply
think of the massive pylon gateways as the temple entrance.
Yet this is not really the case, and in fact the pylons were
usually located well within the structure. The actual elements
of the temples entrance usually included the landing quays,
kiosks, gates and processional ways that preceded the temple's
outer enclosure walls, which finally led to the pylon gateways
themselves.
Landing Quays
It cannot be denied that the people of Egypt were given a
true gift of the gods. The Nile
River, with its northern flow,
but predominately southward winds, made navigation
throughout most of the empire proper easy. The Egyptians took
complete advantage of this river system and used it for almost
all of their transportation. Hence, from the very earliest
times, most temples were located either near this sacred
river, or a canal that communicated with the Nile. Thus, a
landing quay often represented the initial encounter with a
temple. Many of these docks were very large. Not only would
they have to accommodate boats carrying the king and his
entourage, but sometimes huge building components such as
obelisks or monolithic statues.
Landing quays were often built on canals cut back from the
Nile both to allow for a more stable waterway free from the
river current, as well as to locate the quay closer to the
temple proper. The advantages of such a canal was very useful
when loading and unloading boats, particularly when
considering objects of great weight. However, even with
canals, the landing quays themselves had to be designed to
handle the variable level of the Nile as much as possible,
though even the largest of these would usually be covered with
water at the height of the annual
flood.
The landing quays were also the initial point of greeting
during the ceremonial journeys made by the cult statues of the
gods. Most temples celebrated these processional
festivals on a regular basis, and it was at the landing quay
that the cult statues would be greeted by officials, common
Egyptians and sometimes even by the royal family.
Causeways and the Path to the Temple Proper
From the earliest times, a path leading from the landing
quay to the temple proper was at least marked, often paved,
and in the case of Old Kingdom mortuary temples, roofed. Also
from early times, this path was frequently marked by statuary along
the route, which from at least the New Kingdom on, also served
as protective elements. While statues of gods or the king
might be found along the paths during earlier times, after the
Second Intermediate Period the most common sculptures were
those of Sphinxes. These protective sphinxes could have a
human head, filling the role of king as guardian of the temple
approach. Others might fuse the body of a lion with any number
of different images for the head, depending on the nature of
the god associated with a particular temple. An obvious
example of the latter would be the ram headed sphinxes along
the processional way leading to the Temple of Amun at
Karnak.
In some instances where the sphinx did not have the head of a
king, a small image of the ruler might also be placed between
the outstretched paws of the lion's body.
As a notation, the processional path leading to a temple
entrance did not always lead from a landing quay, though the
main entrances to the temple enclosure almost always involved
a processional way. Sometimes, such processional ways leading
to the enclosure walls ran between temples as is the case in
the Karnak and Luxor
Temples.
The Way Stations
Undoubtedly the best example of a way station is that built
by Senusret
I. Used as fill in the ninth pylon at Karnak, it
was rebuilt during our modern era. However, other examples
exist, such as that of
Seti I in the forecourt of the Temple
of Amun at Karnak.
These structures seem to have been built as a resting area
for the ceremonial processions, as well as to refresh the
image of the deities that were transported along the causeways
or processional avenues. They were usually fairly simple
structures, with little or no decoration, and only large enough
to house a low altar like base and the god's portable barque
that was placed atop this base. However, in the case of the
Way Station built by Seti I, the structure was designed to
house three of these ceremonial boats for the Theban triad,
consisting of the gods Amun,
Mut and
Khonsu.
The Enclosure Walls
The causeway or processional path leading from the landing
quay eventually entered the temple proper marked by its
surrounding enclosure wall, called sebty during Egypt's New
Kingdom, when they were most common. During that period, they
sometimes were built around whole towns. These walls
actually served several purposes. There was the obvious intent
to protect the temple complex from outright attack, either
during times of civil strife or foreign invasion. Of course,
the wall also marked the boundaries of the god's estate,
sealing it from the countryside and the surrounding
inhabitants. However, more subtly, the enclosure wall blocked
out, both symbolically and physically, the confusion and
disorder of the outside world, creating an atmosphere conducive
the temple's sacred role.
There were also physical attributes of these enclosure
walls that had a symbolic purpose. They were often built with
alternating concave and convex sections that many
Egyptologists believe to have represented the waters of the
mythical primeval waters. Others believe that this wave
pattern was simply a practical method of preventing the walls
from cracking due to shrinkage of the bricks or swelling
ground during the Nile floods. However, it should be noted
that, while other enclosure walls exist, only those
surrounding temple complexes (or areas controlled by the
temple estate) take this form.
This wave pattern could be complex, including a wave design
in the width of the wall. At other times, the wave might be
built into only the upper reaches of the wall above regular
horizontal layers of brick, as we find in the Temple of
Edfu,
or above a regular stone foundation such as that at Philae.
Enclosure walls were almost always built out of mud brick,
though in large temples, they were sometimes laid over a
framework of wooden beams and reed mats. The walls were
certainly not simply ornamental, for many were as thick as 10
meters (30 feet). Some even had rounded battlements and
occasionally, bastions or fortified gateways, features
that took many years for the medieval knights of Europe to
reinvent. usually, and also for defensive purposes, the number
of entrances in the enclosure wall was kept to a
minimum.
Obelisks
Obelisks were one of Egypt's most ancient symbolic
structures that perhaps evolved out of an irregular shaped
upright sacred stone. These predecessors of the fully
developed Obelisks may have originated in the sun cult at
Heliopolis during Egypt's earliest period. We see definite
refinement in their shape in the sun
temples of the 5th
Dynasty, though in those monuments they were more squat,
as well as the very center of attention. However, the fully
developed obelisks were most common during Egypt's New
Kingdom, when they were often erected in pairs. Often, these
were placed in front of the pylons but at times they were also
placed on the central axis of the complex. However, they
usually lay outside of the main temple structure, being
enclosed only as the precincts grew around them.
Obelisks, if one reflects their form, were unusual
constructs that have fathomed the test of time. In there
mature state, they usually consisted of stone, sometimes
weighing hundreds of tons, in an elongated, tapering four
sided shaft that was then polished, inscribed and surmounted
by a sharply pointed pyramidion. They represent some of the
ancient Egyptian's greatest achievements in stone cutting and
handling. Often, they were cut from Aswan red granite and in
those quarries remains the largest obelisk ever attempted, weighing
some one thousand tons, but never completed. When completed,
obelisks were transported on the Nile, raised to a vertical
position and mounted on a pedestal.
However, we still to this day do not exactly know the
manner in which Obelisks were erected, and it is possible that
different methods evolved over time, or were used preferred
depending on the location. Though a relief depicts an obelisk
being raised with the use of ropes during the time of Ptolemy
XII, we believe that they were more probably dragged up some
sort of ramp and then lowered in some banner, base first, onto
their pedestal (socles).
Obelisks were usually erected to commemorate some important
event, such as a Sed-festival celebration, a victory in
battle, or sometimes simply as a major gift to the gods.
Because of this, they were often depicted on the temple walls
in order to record their donor's contribution.

Depiction of Hatshepsut's Obelisks
After erection, many obelisks stood higher than the temple
itself, and with their bright, gilded points, were the first
and last elements of the temple to catch the suns rays as it
rose in the morning and set in the evening.
Obelisks have been very popular since the time of the
ancient pharaohs, and thus today there only remain a few
standing obelisks in all of Egypt. We know that the Assyrian
king Ashurbanipal removed two and erected them in Nineveh.
Later, the Romans took a number of them to Rome and
Constantinople. Even during the 19th century, the continued to
be removed and thus we may today find more of these structures
spread about the world than in Egypt itself.
Colossi Statuary
Often larger in at least volume than even obelisks were the
Colossal statues, usually of kings, cut out of monolithic
blocks of limestone, sandstone, quartzite or granite. We find
such statuary, usually erected along the temple approaches or
major processional ways, as well as in front of the temple
entrance, from as early as the Old Kingdom.
Undoubtedly, they were used to portray the power of the
king placing him on a level with the gods. In fact, some
archaeologists have labeled this monumental statuary as
powerfacts (rather then artifacts). Hence, they were usually
placed in a position where the common people could gaze in awe
upon them (though sometimes only on special occasions).
The largest such statues that we know of were those of
Amenhotep III, known as the Colossi of
Memnon, a naming error
made in antiquity, and the Colossi that Ramesses II produced.
Both were used in the mortuary temples (Amenhotep
III Temple, Ramesses
II Temple) of those respective
rulers on the West Bank at
Thebes
(modern Luxor), and represent some of the
largest objects ever cut from a single block of stone.
However, it is apparent that Ramesses II dearly loved such
statuary of himself, for he had more and larger statuary
carved than any other pharaoh during Egypt's ancient history.
He produced so many colossi that fragments of these statues
seem to continuously turn up in the cultivated fields of
farmers, who simply refer to any monumental fragment as
"Ramesses". And while Ramesses II had to have these
larger colossi carved, this did not seem to quench his thrust,
for he usurped many smaller statues produced by previous
kings.
The artistry of this style of monumental statuary is truly
impressive. Most of the time, the colossi were carved from a
single block of stone with the feet remaining attached to the
base. However, in the case of the colossi of Amenhotep III
south of Karnak, even the soles of the feet were carved prior
to its mounting. No less daunting was the transportation and
erection of these massive statues, which was probably
accomplished in a similar manner to obelisks.
Pylons
We first see pylon shaped structures in the mortuary
temples of the Old Kingdom pyramid builders, from which the
later, more massive structures may have evolved. Not only were
they one of the most distinctive architectural element within
the temple complex, but were also very popular with the
pharaohs. Thus, while they acted as the entrance gateway to
the temple proper, they were very often enclosed within the
temple itself, as successive rulers extended temple complexes.
As the rulers added pylons to the temple complexes,
particularly later in Egypt's history, they often tore down
existing structures that they felt were no longer useful and
stood in their way, and used this rubble to fill the interior
of their new pylons. Interestingly, the material from these
prior buildings was thus preserved, encased in the mortar of
the standing pylon. Some, such as the White Chapel of
Senusret
I and the Red Chapel of
Hatshepsut (in the
Open Air Museum at
Karnak) have been salvaged when pylons have been restored, and
pieced together to form as nearly as possible the original
structure. Their decorations often represent some of the
finest and best preserved examples we have from Egypt's
ancient monuments.
In some cases, blocks from such structures were also reused
in the outer walls of the pylons, as in the case of the first
pylon at the Temple of Amun at Karnak. Later pylons, such as
the one built during the Greek period at the Small Temple of
Medinet Habu, were constructed simply of some combination of
brick and stone.
Like the enclosure walls, pylons served both a defensive
and religiously symbolic function. They provided a physically
defensive position in times of real chaos or attack, but they
also, like the enclosure wall, provided a symbolic barrier to
the chaos and evil beyond the temple grounds. In fact, the Egyptian
name for pylons during the 18th
Dynasty, Bekhnet, seems to
derive from a term meaning "to be vigilant".
Furthermore, the most common form of decorative theme
related to pylons from the New Kingdom onwards is the smiting
of enemies by the King. From the earliest dynastic periods, we
find scenes depicting the Egyptian king, towering over his opponents,
in the act of smiting them with a club or short sword called a
khepseh. This motif may have also adorned earlier pylons,
though most of these are lost to us.
However, symbolically the pylon had one other important
role, mimicking the shape of the akhet, or horizon hieroglyph.
It was here that the sun rose over the earth's horizon between
the outer world and the hidden, sacred grounds of the temple.
Colorful flags decorated with fetishes were mounted on
poles which were than set into the face of the pylons. These
flags had their origin in the very earliest of Egyptian
temples, and their shape was almost surely responsible for the
flagpole hieroglyph for god (ntr and variations such as nutar).
Though not a single example of such a flag has been
discovered, documentary evidence suggests that they may have
been monumentally large, reaching heights of some 60 meters
(200 feet) and weighing more than five tons. It seem, like all
things monumental in Egypt, the raising of these flags into
the pylon niches would have been a difficult task, but it has
been suggested that this was accomplished by a rope/pull
system that may have been used to raise sales on the Egyptian
boats.
Regardless, the pylon represents the end of the beginning,
for through this monumental gateway stood the courts of the
temple proper.
See Also:
References:
| Title |
Author |
Date |
Publisher |
Reference
Number |
| Atlas of Ancient
Egypt |
Baines, John;
Malek, Jaromir |
1980 |
Les Livres De
France |
None Stated |
| Complete
Temples of Ancient Egypt, The |
Wilkinson,
Richard H. |
2000 |
Thames and
Hudson, Ltd |
ISBN
0-500-05100-3 |
| Dictionary of
Ancient Egypt, The |
Shaw, Ian;
Nicholson, Paul |
1995 |
Harry N. Abrams,
Inc., Publishers |
ISBN
0-8109-3225-3 |
| Oxford
History of Ancient Egypt, The |
Shaw, Ian |
2000 |
Oxford
University Press |
ISBN
0-19-815034-2 |
| Valley
of the Kings |
Weeks,
Kent R. |
2001 |
Friedman/Fairfax |
ISBN 1-5866-3295-7 |
Archives
|