Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
struction of canes, reeds etc. plastered with mud (v A. Bedawy, “Vaults and Domes
in the Gizeh Necropolis”). h e assemblage of these bricks as voussoirs required
some form of centering. h is cemetery also included a very rare mud brick dome
over a square chamber where bricks in the form of crude pendentives round out
the angles (v A. Bedawy Figs 113, 114).
h is rapid development of arcuated brick construction for funerary purposes
during late pre-dynastic and early dynastic times apparently served to establish
a command of arcuated construction in Egypt—notwithstanding that very basic
ideological concepts were set against its use. With the introduction of i nely dressed
stone masonry (Pharaonic masonry) during the pyramid age, building in i nely
dressed stone was considered to outrank in dignity brick building. Equally in post
Neolithic “round house” times l at (horizontal) rooi ng was considered proper for
rectangular building (i.e. intellectually designed building). h us arcuated brick
rooi ng in theory was of limited application in Pharaonic Egyptian building. It was
acceptable when not exposed to view, i.e. in underground construction and in the
interior of massifs. Also it was deemed in character with utilitarian construction for
workaday purposes, where dignity was perhaps inappropriate. h is basic outlook
remained dominant until Roman rule was established in Egypt, at which time such
symbolical concepts swung round full circle in the ancient world. Nonetheless for
one reason or another in practice there was much brick building in Pharaonic
Egypt (e.g. if there was no time to build a funerary temple for a Pharaoh soon and
suddenly stricken, then it had to be built in brick).
Unfortunately there is no published resumé along these lines of arcuated Egyp-
tian building, and a brief abstract is given here. For this purpose Egyptian building
can be set into three functional categories: utilitarian, residential and religious. In
Egyptian understanding a principal constituent of the distinction was the time
factor. For the former two the (all too) short scale of life was applicable; for the
latter a very long period frequently specii ed as a million years. With this guid-
ing concern Egyptian understanding classii ed all “earthly dwellings” in the short
term building category—artisans' houses, noblemen's houses, and rulers' palaces.
For all such mud brick construction was appropriate. For the religious category of
building, temples of gods and divine kings, tombs housing the magically conserved
(mummii ed) dead, stone was indicated as the appropriate building material.
h e clearest of all distinctions was that of utilitarian buildings, which again for
the sake of brevity can be focussed here on the vital storage buildings for the staf
of life—i.e. granaries. Here not only was brick reckoned adequate, it was enjoined.
h e two design forms universally adopted in the Ancient World for storage prem-
ises were the tall round house (the beehive house) which was specii cally for grain
storage (a silo); and the sets of long narrow galleries in parallel, also for grain stor-
age but as well for other comestibles. h e construction of the silo granaries was
Incidence
of brick
vaulting
371
