Observing particular expressions in the Journal relative to this subject, the cause of error may possibly appear. The traveller says, “the territory of Siwah is of considerable extent; its principal and most fertile district is a well watered valley of about fifty miles in circuit, hemmed in by steep and barren rocks.”
Now, referring to other descriptions of the fertile district or Oasis of Siwah, it is to be remarked, that such rich and productive spot of country is no where described, as immediately bounded and hemmed in by steep rocks and mountains. Diodorus, lib. xvii. speaking of the Oasis of Ammon, says, it was surrounded on all sides by barren and arid sands: so too, Mr. Brown mentions the fertile soil or Oasis, of from four miles and an half in breadth, to six in length, as bordered and encompassed by “desert land;” intimating plain. In truth, it is such desert border of plain, which further on is bounded by rocky mountains. Mr. Horneman appears to have made no excursions from the town of Siwah, further than of a mile and a half to the ruins, and of one mile to the catacombs of El-Mota. From all these considerations, it may be surmised, that our traveller looking from Siwah, or its adjacencies, to the hills or rocks surrounding him at a distance, comprized in his estimate of rich country, the whole intermediate plain, not having directed due inquiry or consideration in the ascertaining of, to what extent within the area of that plain, the rich and cultivated soil might reach? Or, perhaps, he did make enquiries; but of some patriotic Siwahan, who thought proper to exaggerate the richness and extent of his petty commonwealth, and confirm his hyperbole, by pointing to the lofty boundary in view: or, perhaps, from not sufficiently understanding the dialect of Siwah, (as the traveller himself allows,) he may have confounded the ideas of country occupied, and of territory claimed.
Be these surmises and explanations founded or not, our journalist’s representation of the extent of the Oasis of Siwah, is not only at variance with every other account, but with the internal evidence to be extracted from his own account, and must be rejected as erroneous.
Page 23, of the Journal, to which this note refers, a further subject of inquiry and explanation occurs, where Mr. Horneman, describing the ruins of an ancient edifice in the vicinity of Siwah, gives us dimensions and proportions, in every respect differing from those before stated by Mr. Brown, in description of the same building.
| The length in feet. | The width. | The height. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| By Mr. Brown, | 32 | 15 | 18 |
| By Mr. Horneman, | 30 to 36 | 24 | 27 |
Mr. Horneman informs us, that he was successively interrupted on entrance into the area of these ruins, and was altogether prevented by the jealousy of the natives, from pursuing any plan of accurate examination or admeasurement. The dimensions which he gives us, are therefore to be taken as the result of computation on mere view; and from these and other circumstances, it is further to be presumed, that such computation by view, was made from without; whilst Mr. Brown expressly tells us, that he took his measurements in the clear, or inside of the building.
In this case, a deduction equal to the thickness of the walls, is to be made from the length and the breadth of the building, as described by Mr. Horneman.
The thickness of the end walls may be supposed to be much less than that of the side walls, which being constructed to support the vast and ponderous blocks of stone which formed the roof, must have been built with a proportionate strength and solidity, not necessary, and probably therefore not used, at the entrance or end of the building. Mr. Horneman, indeed, when stating the thickness of the walls to be six feet, makes no such discrimination; but it may be fairly presumed, that adverting particularly (as he does,) to the massive roof, he meant to note exclusively, the strength of that part of the fabric by which it was supported.
Under such probable conjecture, the length and breadth of the building given by Mr. Brown from the inside, and by Mr. Horneman from the outside, may so far agree, as fully to exculpate our Journalist from any charge of inattention in his survey, or inaccuracy in his representations; making those allowances which his situation and circumstances, and (above all,) his own declarations of want of precision, fully intitle him to.
The comparative height of the building is a part of the subject, which suggests matter of new and interesting investigation.