[124] In this the Greek architects took the same course as those of Egypt.
[125] Description, Antiquités, vol. v. pp. 120, 121. In their Description Générale de Thèbes (ch. ix. section 8, § 2), the same writers add: "We are confirmed in our opinion by the discovery on a bas-relief of four lotus stems with their flowers surmounted by hawks and statues, and placed exactly in the same fashion as the columns which we have just described. They are votive columns. We are also confirmed in this opinion by the fact that we find things like them among those amulets which reproduce the various objects in the temples in small." This bas-relief is figured in the third volume of plates of the Description, pl. 33, Fig. 1.
[126] Mariette, Karnak, p. 19, pl. 4. Voyage dans la Haute-Égypte, pp. 13, 21, 22.
[127] This explanation seems to have been accepted by Prof. Ebers; Ægypten im Bild und Wort, vol. ii. p. 331.
[128] Maxime du Camp, Le Nil, p. 251.
[129] The Description de l'Égypte indicates the existence of this pluteus both in the Ramesseum (vol. ii. pl. 29) and at Medinet-Abou (vol. ii. pl. 7, Fig. 2). Photographs do not show a trace of it, but many parts of those buildings had disappeared before the beginning of the present century. There is no reason to suppose that the Ramesseum underwent any modification after the termination of the Theban supremacy. In his restoration of Dayr-el-Bahari, M. Brune has introduced a similar detail, which he would assuredly not have done unless he had found traces of it under the portico. Unfortunately his restoration is on a very small scale. That at Dayr-el-Bahari must have been the earliest example of such an arrangement.
[130] The history and signification of this symbol were treated by Brugsch in a paper entitled: "Die Sage von der geflügelten Sonnenscheibe nach alt Ægyptischen Quellen dargestellt."
[131] In this restricted and comparatively mean form the emblem in question is found at Beni-Hassan. (Lepsius, Denkmæler, part ii. pl. 123.)
[132] Lepsius, Denkmæler, vol. ii. pl. 83, and vol. v. pl. 56.
[133] See Chipiez, Histoire Critique des Ordres Grecques, p. 90.