Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Getty Research Institute ) https://archive.org/details/egyptianobelisksOOgorr_O I EGYPTIAN OBELISKS BY HENRY H. GORRINGE LIEUTENANT-COMMANDER UNITED STATES NAVY FIFTY-ONE FULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS THIRTY-TWO ARTOTYPES, EIGHTEEN ENGRAVINGS, AND ONE CHROMO-LITHOGRAPH PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR 32 WAVERLEY PLACE NEW YORK COPYRIGHT BY H. H. GORRINGE 1882 Press of G. P. Putnam s Sons New York ARTOTYPE, E. BIEHSTADT TO WILLIAM H. VANDERBILT IN RECOGNITION OF THE ENLIGHTENED MUNIFICENCE TO WHICH NEW YORK IS INDEBTED FOR THE POSSESSION OF ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING MONUMENTS OF THE OLD WORLD, AND OF THE MOST ANCIENT RECORD OF MAN NOW KNOWN TO EXIST ON THE AMERICAN CONTINENT. iii . ' ■ m I ■ >m ■ .H PREFACE. A T the request of Lieut.-Commander Gorringe I long ago promised to prepare for him an account ^ ^ of the transactions which led to his undertaking the important operation so clearly and so fully described by him in this book. From that promise I may hold myself released. He has embodied all the essential features of these transactions in the admirable narrative which has grown under his hands, as I hoped that it would, into a full and interesting history of the Egyptian obelisks. The pains and skill with which this history has been constructed out of the few and fragmentary records which remain to us of these august monuments, illustrate the spirit in which Lieut.-Com¬ mander Gorringe accepted and executed the trust confided to him by Mr. Vanderbilt in the interest and for the benefit of the people of New York. It is easy, and of course it is becoming, to applaud the success of such an enterprise. But no man knows so well as I do the discouragements and difficulties through which success was won, and it appears to me to be my duty, therefore, to bear witness here once for all to the absolute simplicity of purpose and single-minded public spirit to which New York is indebted for the possession of the great obelisk of Alexandria. No arguments were needed to commend the project either to Mr. Vanderbilt, whose liberality made it practicable, or to Mr. Evarts, who put and kept all the machinery of the State Department at work to accomplish it. But from the day in August, 1879, on which Lieut.-Commander Gorringe sailed for Europe on his mission, to the day in January, 1881, on which, in the presence of assembled thousands, the majestic monolith swung at a motion of his lifted finger into its final resting-place in the Central Park, his indomitable energy was confronted at every step, not only with that wholesome and bracing public indifference to such under¬ takings which success always startles into enthusiasm, but with all the obstacles which private greed and the eternal quarantine of official imbecility could put in his way. He has repeatedly acknowledged his obligations to his able and well-selected assistants, Lieutenant Seaton Schroeder of the United States Navy, and Mr. Frank Price, of New York. But his best coadjutors were his own purpose and his own patience, of which he cannot speak, and which I put on record here. W. H. H. V j I 119 CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Removal of the Alexandrian Obelisk, “ Cleopatra’s Needle,” to New York. PAGE. CHAPTER II. The Archaeology of the New York Obelisk. 59 CHAPTER III. Removal of the Luxor Obelisk to Paris. 77 CHAPTER IV. Removal of the Fallen Obelisk of Alexandria to London. 96 CHAPTER V. Re-erection of the Vatican Obelisk. 110 CHAPTER VI. Record of all Egyptian Obelisks. 119 CHAPTER VII. Notes on the Ancient Methods of Quarrying, Transporting, and Erecting Obelisks. 146 CHAPTER VIII. Analysis of the Materials and Metals Found with the Obelisk at Alexandria. 161 Index. 177 , • * I is 9 . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATE. William H. Vanderbilt. .... Artotype. I.—The Alexandrian obelisk, “ Cleopatra’s Needle.” Alexandria, Egypt, October, 1879. . . . . . . . Artotype. II.—Elevation of the obelisk, raised from pedestal, with machinery in position for turning. Alexandria. ..... Photo-engraving . III. —Side elevation. Preparations for releasing machinery. Alexandria. “ IV. —Excavations at Alexandria, showing pedestal, steps and position of crabs. Artotype. V.—The crabs as found. ....... “ VI.—The staging. November 5 , 1879. ..... “ VII.—The obelisk encased and stayed. The hoisting shears with trunnions suspended FACING. Dedication. PAGE. 1 2 2 4 6 8 to them. .... • . Artotype. IO VIII. — Turning the obelisk. December 6, 1879. • 4 4 12 IX. — The obelisk horizontal. December 6, 1879. • 44 H X. — City and port of Alexandria. The overland route proposed. The water route followed. .... • Photo-engraving . l6 XI.—Steps and pedestal. Section and plan. • 44 18 XII.—Preparations for launching. Section through caisson and Obelisk. Caisson afloat. Alexandria. .... . Photo-engraving. 20 a. —Lowering and launching the caisson. • 4 4 20 XIII.—Embarking the pedestal. • . Artotype. 22 XIV. — Embarking the obelisk. • 44 24 XV. — Embarking the obelisk. Section and plan. • Photo-engraving. 24 XVI. — The steamer “ Dessoug,” with obelisk on board , ready for departure from Alexandria. .... • Artotype. 26 XVII. — Disembarking the pedestal. New York. • < t 28 XVIII. — Trucking the pedestal. .... • 44 30 b.— Laying the corner-stone. • 44 32 XIX. — Obelisk on pontoons entering landing-stage at 96th Street, New York. Section and plan of disembarking stage. • • Photo-engraving. 34 XX. — Disembarking the obelisk. • • Artotype. 36 XXI. — Cross section through obelisk and pontoons. Side elevation of obelisk and pontoons. .... • • Photo-engraving. 38 XXII.—Obelisk crossing the Hudson River Railroad. • . Artotype. 40 XXIII.—Route of the obelisk in New York. • • Photo-eng raving. 42 XXIV. — Land transportation. Turning apparatus. Trestle in Central Park. “ 44 c. — Iron channels and marine railway. . 44 46 IX X List of Illustrations. PLATE. XXV.—Transporting the obelisk. ...... Artotype. XXVI.—Obelisk crossing main drive in Central Park. XXVII.-—Turning the obelisk. The obelisk horizontal. .... “ d. —Turning the obelisk. Turned 45°. ..... “ XXVIII.—Placing the obelisk on its pedestal in Central Park, January 22, 1881. Photo-engraving. XXIX.—The New York obelisk. ....... Artotype. XXX. —The four faces of the pyramidion. ..... “ XXXI. —The four sides of the obelisk. ...... “ XXXII.—Antique model of the temple of On (Heliopolis). ... “ e. — Portrait of Cleopatra, photographed from her coins. “ XXXIII.—French apparatus for lowering and erecting the Luxor obelisk. Photo-engraving. XXXIV.—Embarkation of the French obelisk. .... “ XXXV.—The English method of erecting the London obelisk. . “ XXXVI.—The English cylinder for sea transport. .... “ XXXVII.—The London obelisk. ...... Artotype. XXXVIII.—Apparatus for transporting and erecting the Vatican obelisk. Photo-engraving. XXXIX.—The remaining obelisk and ruins of temple at Luxor. . . Artotype. XL.—The obelisks at Karnak. ...... “ XLI.—The obelisk at Heliopolis and Poinpey’s Pillar at Alexandria. . “ XLII.—The Constantinople and Paris obelisks. . . . . “ XLIII.—The twelve Roman obelisks. ..... “ Re-erecting the Constantinople obelisk in the fourth century A. D. XLIV.—Thin sections of the New York obelisk in polarized light. Chromo-lithograph. XLV.—The Khedives Ismai'l and Tewfik. ..... Artotype. FACING PAGE. 48 5 o 52 54 56 58 62 64 70 72 84 86 104 106 108 112 120 122 124 126 128 159 162 1 75 THE ALEXANDRIAN OBELISK. (CLEOPATRA’S NEEDLE.) CHAPTER I. REMOVAL OF THE NEW YORK OBELISK. SITUATION AND SURROUNDINGS OF THE OBELISK IN ALEXANDRIA. T HE standing obelisk of Alexandria was generally the first and the last of Egypt’s numerous monuments to be visited by travellers. The accompanying illustration recalls the feeling of disgust aroused by some of its surroundings. Something more than curiosity was needed to induce one to approach near enough and remain long enough to examine and appreciate it. Situated in the outskirts of the city, near the Ramleh railway depot, it was a familiar object to the foreign element, many of whom live at Ramleh and passed it twice, often four times a day ; and yet no one deemed it worthy of protection and care, even to the extent of preventing its defacement and the accumulation of offal around it. Two men made a business of breaking pieces from the angle of the shaft and edges of the intaglios for sale to relic hunters. The disagreeable odors and clamors for backsheesh 1 hastened the departure of strangers, who rarely devoted more than a few seconds to its examination. It would be impossible for any thing to have been more neglected and less appreciated than was the Alexandrian obelisk by the residents of Alexandria and tourists who passed through the city en route to the Nile. There is, however, much that is attractive and worthy of attention in its former surroundings. The Arab fort, to the left in the picture, stands on the ruins of one of those magnificent structures that adorned the ancient city and made second only to Rome in the beginning of the Christian era. The shore is strewn with huge blocks of granite, syenite, and marble, many of them covered with Egyptian hieroglyphs and Greek and Roman inscriptions. Fragments of columns and capitals lie scattered about and buried in the debris that has accumulated in the vicinity ; the bottom of the sea is so cumbered with the ruins of these structures that the shore is difficult to approach, even in a small boat, nearer than half a mile. The foundation of one very large building is distinctly traceable under water when the sea is smooth; and about one hundred yards from the beach there is a broken column sticking up from the bottom of the sea, nearly equal in diameter to Pompey’s pillar. This was the quarter of the royal palaces, which included the gymnasium, the museum, containing the famous library, and the Caesareum. It was at the entrance to the last-mentioned that the Romans, to commemorate their conquests, re-erected the obelisks that had been removed from the ancient Egyptian temple of On, at Heliopolis. Nothing could have been more out of place and less in keeping with the purposes for which it was designed than was the obelisk as it stood at Alexandria. The gradual subsidence of the land in this part of North Africa has caused the sea to approach nearer to the site of the obelisk, until it was about eighty feet from the base, and its level about the same as that of the lower step. The constant washings of the surf had begun to affect the foundation, and for the last fifteen years the obelisk has been gradually inclining more and more toward the sea. In a few years it must have fallen, and almost certainly have been broken by the fall. But a more ignoble fate threatened it, in the proposition of some of the foreign residents of Alexandria to erect an apartment-house on the adjacent ground around the obelisk, which was to adorn the court-yard. Originally designed to symbolize the highest attribute of nature, the re-creative power; forming an 1 Arabic for gift. 2 Removal of the New York Obelisk . essential feature of one of the most famous temples ever erected by man, in which Moses was educated and of which he became a high-priest; the votive offering of one of the most celebrated Pharaohs, and bearing the records of another equally celebrated, the obelisk had become a Roman trophy to commmemo- rate the subjugation of Egypt, and was threatened either with destruction by neglect, or preservation as a means of advertising a hotel or apartment-house. His Highness, Ismail, the Khedive, who realized the im¬ portance of preserving so valuable and interesting a relic and record of the past, and his own inability to do so, merits the thanks not only of the nation to whom he intrusted its preservation, but of all those of every nation who appreciate the necessity of preserving such monuments as long as they will resist the ravages of time. Some objection has been made to removing it from its “ antique surroundings.” The most prominent surroundings in Alexandria were a railway depot, a new apartment-house, and an Arab fort. NEGOTIATIONS THAT LED TO THE GIFT AND ITS REMOVAL. The first suggestion looking to the removal of an obelisk from Egypt to the United States was made by His Highness, Ismai' 1 , the Khedive of Egypt, at the time of the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, to Mr. William Henry Hurlbert. In September, 1877, after the removal of the prostrate obelisk of Alexandria to England by Mr. John Dixon, Mr. Louis Sterne of London, a friend of Mr. Dixon, being in New York, informed Mr. Hurlbert, then editor of the New York World , that Mr. Dixon, through his relations with Egypt, could secure the gift to the United States of the standing obelisk at Alexandria, and that he would be glad to do this, and to undertake to remove it to New York, if the cost of the operation could be defrayed. Mr. Hurlbert requested Mr. Sterne to open a correspondence on the subject with Mr. Dixon, which resulted in an understanding that Mr. Dixon would secure and bring to America the standing obelisk of Alexandria, if the sum of fifteen thousand pounds sterling could be guaranteed to him. After consulting with Mr. Chauncey M. Depew and Judge Ashbel Green, Mr. Hurlbert put himself in communication with Mr. William H. Vanderbilt, and Mr. Vanderbilt, as the result of a single conversation on the subject, liberally agreed to guarantee the payment of the sum named by Mr. Dixon. This was at once cabled to London by Mr. Hurlbert. A congratulatory reply by cable was received from Mr. Sterne in behalf of Mr. Dixon. But a correspondence followed from which it soon appeared that Mr. Dixon relied upon Mr. Hurlbert to secure the gift of the obelisk through the government of the United States. This materially changed the character of the negotiation ; but finding Mr. Vanderbilt most willing to stand by his liberal offer as long as might be necessary to secure the desired result, Mr. Hurlbert consulted Mr. Evarts, then Secretary of State, who cordially agreed to instruct the agents of the State Department to undertake the matter. At the instance of Mr. Evarts, a letter was accordingly written to him as Secretary of State by Mr. Henry G. Stebbins, then Commissioner of Public Parks of New York City, requesting him to open negotiations with the Khedive for securing the standing obelisk of Alexandria for New York City. Mr. Evarts, in a letter dated October 19, 1877, wrote to Consul-General E. E. Farman that, “in view of the public object to be subserved, you are instructed to use all proper means of furthering the wishes expressed in Mr. Stebbins’ letter,” a copy of which was enclosed. In a letter dated November 24, 1877, Mr. Farman wrote to Mr. Evarts as follows : “ I fear, however, that there will be serious opposition to the removal of the obelisk from the city of Alexandria, so much, in fact, that although the Khedive might personally desire to gratify the wishes of the citizens of New York, he would not think it best to grant their request.” On March 4, 1878, Mr. Farman reported to Mr. Evarts that he had had an interview with the Khedive, who “made no special objection to the transportation of an obelisk to the city of New York,” and that “ during the conversation he (the Khedive) had said that he did not think it best to talk about the removal of the one at Alexandria, but he would take into consideration the question of one of those at Ancient Thebes.” From March 4, 1878, to May 17, 1879, Mr. Farman was untiring in his efforts to obtain an obelisk. His negotiations were conducted verbally until the latter date, when the following correspondence ensued. PLATE 11. EXPLANATION B_ Trunnions C_ Tie rods D_ Steel, heel beams E_ Steel towers F_Wooden, bed beams Cr_ Masonry" piers L_ .Steel bolts for clamping trunnions ELEVATION OF OBELISK RAISED FROM PEDESTAL WITH MACHINERY INTPOSlflON FOR TURNING ALEXANDRIA 03 ^ CU o X | Slo 8 « J % H E-5 CD Pn *o "'MM \ AATOTYPE MAIWOU* ft BIEP9TA0T. N. V THE STAGING Kfovember 5, 1879 Plate VI Removal of the New York Obelisk. 9 Lascari, to move the pedestal of the statue of Peter the Great from the forest of Karelia to St. Petersburg. The mass that was actually moved measured, approximately, twenty-one feet in height and breadth and thirty- eight in length, and weighed about six hundred tons. The route by which it was transported was over a hill and across a marsh to the river bank ; thence by river [to the city quay, and thence again by land to the site. The total distance is forty-two thousand two hundred and fifty-feet, of which fifteen thousand is over land. The essential feature of Carburi’s plan was the substitution of cannon-balls for the ordinary wheels or rollers and metal grooves for the ordinary tracks. A roadway was made across the marsh, and over this the mass of rock was moved, by tackles and capstans worked by two hundred men, a distance of six hundred feet per day. Carburi’s system was adopted. And in order to insure the obelisk against possible injury during its over¬ land transport, and especially over yielding ground, two iron trusses were designed to form a carriage or cradle into which it was to have been lowered and to have remained until it was embarked. REMOVING THE OBELISK FROM ALEXANDRIA. On August 4, 1879, execution of the foregoing plans was begun. A contract for the construction of the turning structure and transporting cradle was entered into with the firm of John A. Roebling’s Sons, of Tren¬ ton. Lieutenant Seaton Schroeder, U. S. Navy, having previously accepted the position of assistant, was granted leave of absence by the Navy Department. A foreman for iron-work, Mr. Frank Price, of Glen Cove, New York, and one for wood-work were engaged; and on August 24th Lieutenant Schroeder, the foreman carpenter, and I sailed for England on the “ Arizona,” leaving Mr. Price to follow on the steamer that took the machinery. Every possible effort to charter an American steamer was made in the interval between August 4th and 26th, but not one available for the work could be secured. We reached Liverpool on September 4th, and spent the ensuing two weeks in fruitless efforts to charter an English steamer. The rates demanded for charter were equivalent to a purchase, and generally the expla¬ nation that the obelisk was to be embarked on the vessel in the manner proposed caused a sneer or a smile. As steamers could be purchased at any time, it was finally decided to make no further effort to charter one, but to wait until every thing was ready for embarking the obelisk before purchasing one. From England we travelled through France and Italy to Trieste with the intention of purchasing timber at Trieste. There we found that there would be no advantage in purchasing and shipping the timber to Alex¬ andria, where, we were assured, there was an abundant supply on hand at rates less, if any thing, than it would cost to make especial shipment. We returned to Venice, sailed on the steamer" Ceylon ” on October9th, and arrived at Alexandria October 16th. The foreman carpenter having been sent by steamer direct from Liver¬ pool had arrived about two weeks earlier. In this interval the Alexandrians had learned that the obelisk was really to be removed, and for the first time in many centuries it became an object of interest. The French waited about twenty-five years and the English nearly seventy-five before removing the obelisks they had selected for removal. There was a feeling in Egypt that the Americans would certainly require a century to perfect their arrangements ; and although it was well known that the obelisk had been given to the United States, no one, not even the Khedive, believed that it would be removed. Our arrival was the signal for the beginning of an agitation by the foreign residents to prevent its removal. Violently abusive articles were published in newspapers, meetings were held, and petitions to the Khedive were circulated for signature ; threats of personal violence against any one who attempted to commence the work of removal were made openly and by letter, and every other means ol frightening us resorted to. One in¬ cident of this nature that occurred on the day after our arrival is recalled, in order to contrast it with another that occurred on the day of our departure seven months later. On both occasions I was passing through the street frequented by the younger merchants and brokers as a rendezvous, on my way to the telegraph office ; on the first, I was greeted with a storm of hisses and a succession of choice epithets; on the last, scores of these very men crowded around me, congratulating me on my final success and wishing me a pleasant and safe voyage. IO Removal of the New York Obelisk. After having established ourselves at Alexandria in apartments near to the site of the obelisk we went to Cairo, and at an hour previously appointed, accompanied by Vice-Consul-General Comanos, we had an audience of the Khedive. He received us very cordially, and made inquiries about the plans for removing and transport¬ ing the obelisk, cautiously and delicately expressing anxiety that it should not be taken down unless we were sure of removing it. This, we assured him, there was no reason to doubt. After a long and very frank discussion about European influences on Egyptian affairs, he promised that orders would be sent to the Governor of Alexandria to formally deliver up the obelisk. Visits were made to all the Ministers, who received us very kindly, and offered, in the usual Eastern manner, to do all sorts of things, which we well understood as with¬ out meaning. Riaz Pacha, Minister of Foreign Affairs and President of the Council of Ministers, gave direc¬ tions that the order to the Governor of Alexandria should be made out without delay. The following is a translation. To His Excellency the Governor of Alexandria: In the time of the ex-Khedive the Egyptian ‘govern¬ ment gave Cleopatra’s Needle, now standing on the sea-shore of Alexandria, to the United States of America, to be erected in the city of New York. His Excellency Cherif Pacha, who was then Minister of Foreign Affairs, communi¬ cated the fact to the United States Consul-General in a dispatch dated May 18, 1879. An American officer having been sent here to receive and remove the said Cleopatra’s Needle, and His Highness the Khedive having confirmed the gift by a decree, I hasten to instruct you to deliver that monument immediately to the said officer, and to offer him the same assistance for removing it from its site and embarking it as was offered at the time of removing the other obelisk that was given to the English government. All expenses will be paid by the officer of the United States. (Signed) MOUSTAPHA RIAZ, Minister of Foreign Affairs. We returned to Alexandria by the first train after the receipt of this order, and on arrival there we lost no time in presenting it to the Governor, and as soon as he had read it we urged him to execute it at once by a formal transfer of the obelisk. This was all accomplished within three days after our arrival. Considering with whom we were dealing there was reason for great satisfaction at the promptness with which possession of the obelisk had been secured. As long as it remained in the control of the Egyptian government there were reasons for anticipating pressure from the European consuls and resident foreigners to prevent its transfer ; but the transfer was effected so quickly and so quietly that these gentlemen had no time to act in concert and with effect before it was too late. To their protests and petitions subsequently presented, the Khedive and his Ministers answered : “Too late ; Cleopatra’s Needle is the possession of the United States officer sent to receive it.” The efforts of foreign residents were then directed to preventing its removal. Although the Governor had formally transferred the obelisk, he had stipulated that work should not be commenced for a day or two, and kindly suggested that the interval could be profitably spent in making our preparations. After a lapse of four days another visit was paid to him, and he authorized us to commence operations, and excused the delay on the ground of a legal complication about the land around the obelisk that he had been obliged to enquire into. At noon on October 27th, a force of laborers having begun clearing away the ground, an incident oc¬ curred that is related in the following letter. Alexandria, Oct. 28, 1879. H. E. The Governor of Alexandria. Sir: I regret extremely that it has become once more necessary for me to have recourse to your good-will and your duty to assist me in prosecuting the work with which I am entrusted by the government of the United States. Yesterday, having received authority from you, I set some men to work to remove the paving stones that surround the obelisk, the owner of the stones making no objection whatever. Another individual arrived, however, and ordered the work stopped. Arriving myself a few moments afterward, I learned that the man claimed possession of the ground and would allow no one to work there. He also added that if we persisted he would apply to the Italian Consul, whose janissaries would be sent to eject us from the premises. Not recognizing his right to interfere, but not wishing to bring about such a disturbance, I went to see the Italian Vice-Consul, accompanied by the Consul of the United ARTOTYP* THE OBELISK ENCASED AND STAYED. The Hoisting Shears with Trunnions suspended to them Plate VII Removal of the New York Obelisk. 11 States, to ask an explanation. He informed me that any Italian subject occupying a property belonging to him had a right to his protection, and that he would protect him, even by force of arms. I thought it strange that he should dare to prevent by main force what your Excellency had authorized me to do ; but before notifying my government that the Italian Vice-Consul had defied the orders of the Egyptian government, and that I am thus stopped in the ex¬ ecution of a work with which I am charged, I thought it best to try to arrange it amicably, so as not to trouble your Excellency. During the dispute on the ground I had offered to the soi-disant proprietor to pay him a rent, just as though it really belonged to him ; but he refused point-blank to rent the ground to me, and informed me through his lawyer that he would not permit the operations for removing the obelisk. Nevertheless, I begged the Italian Vice- Consul to try his best to settle the matter, and he promised to give me an answer by four o’clock this afternoon. If he does not succeed I shall be obliged to request your Excellency to protect me against the Italian janissaries. Failing that, I shall be compelled to telegraph to my government that I have been forcibly ejected, and that Egyptian authority has failed to protect me. I beg your Excellency to so direct affairs as to enable me to begin operations at once, because it is needless to say that if the matter should take an official form between the two governments the situation would only become more grave. I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant, (Signed) HENRY H. GORRINGE, Lieutenant-Commander U. S. Navy. In a subsequent interview with the Governor, he explained that the legal complication he had been in¬ vestigating, that caused the delay in authorizing us to begin work, was the claim that the land around the obelisk was the property of some Italians ; and in further explanation he related the circumstances substan¬ tially as follows : An Italian having been granted authority by Mohammed Ali Pacha, then ruler of Egypt, to build a bathing establishment on the sea-shore near the obelisk, was unfortunate enough to have his property destroyed by the sea during a gale. He subsequently made a claim against the Egyptian government for compensation for the damage done by the sea; and in order to secure himself against a possible adverse decision on his claim, he took possession of the land surrounding the obelisk and erected a shanty on it. This claim was still pending when the international courts were organized for the trial of causes between foreigners and the Egyptian gov¬ ernment and between individuals of different nationalities. It was regarded as so absurd that difficulty was experienced in getting it placed on the docket, but the Italian Consul persisted, and it was finally so placed in the belief that it never would be pressed for trial by the government, and certainly not by the claimants. Four fifths of the claims of foreigners against the Egyptain government have no firmer basis than the one here cited, and at least four fifths of the foreign residents of Egypt have claims that are handed down in wills to heirs, just as this one was, the original claimant having died several years ago. Their attorney had kept himself well informed of the proceedings in connection with the removal of the obelisk, and had in concert with others deliberately planned the prohibition of the work in order to prevent its removal. The Governor expressed surprise at the presumption of the Italian Consul, and requested time to com¬ municate with the Minister of Foreign Affairs at Cairo. I notified U. S. Vice-Consul-General Comanos by telegraph of the circumstance, and urged him to confer with the Italian Consul-General about it; and pending answers from the Governor and Mr. Comanos, I notified the Italian Consul that a suit for dam¬ ages for ;£1 5 ,ooo would be instituted against whoever attempted to interfere with the work of removing the obelisk, and that I limited the time for amicable settlement, by acceptance of my proposition to lease the ground, to four o’clock p. m. of that day. In reply to this the Italian Consul informed our consular agent that the claimant had accepted my offer to lease the ground, and proposed to appoint arbitrators to fix on a suitable sum. This was agreed to, arbi¬ trators were selected, and the lease effected before night. Although there could have been no question as to the result of a determination to proceed without leasing the land, it was deemed advisable to get absolute con¬ trol of the ground that must necessarily be covered with the works, so as to have a right to exclude from it undesirable persons. 12 Removal of the New York Obelisk. On the morning of October 29th work was begun by one hundred Arabs, varying from ten to seventy years of age, divided into three gangs. The middle-aged dug and filled baskets, the old lifted them to the backs of the young, who carried them to the shore and emptied them into the surf. By November 6th an ex¬ cavation of seventeen hundred and thirty cubic yards had been completed. It had laid bare the pedestal and steps, and made a space large enough to construct a caisson in which to transport the obelisk to the port for embarkation. Several interesting fragments of statuary, a number of coins, and a few scarabee and other an¬ tique objects were found by the workmen, to whom liberal rewards were paid for each article delivered. Men accustomed to the work were employed to search the beach for other small objects that having escaped detection would probably be washed up by the surf. In this way many interesting bronze fragments were recovered. The base of the obelisk and the position of one of the metal supports are shown on Plate iv, on the right. This is copied from a photograph taken at the time the London obelisk was being removed. One corner of the obelisk is shown, supported by a piece of stone that had been substituted for one of the metal supports. The corner diagonally opposite to it was supported in exactly the same manner, two of the metal supports having been removed. The two remaining ones were badly mutilated. Their condition is shown on Plate v, which is a photograph of one metal support in two positions and the other in one position. They had been cast in the form of sea-crabs, but when we uncovered them all the legs but one, and all the claws but a part of one, had been broken off and removed, doubtless for the value of the metal. Plate iv also shows the excavation and the condition of the base and steps when they were uncovered. The masonry on top of the pedestal around the base of the obelisk, shown in the picture on the left, was put there about the time the London obelisk was removed ; owing to inferior mortar and other causes it was loose and gave no support to the shaft. Another feature in the picture to the left is the reft in the base of the obelisk, that has been misrepresented as a crack in the shaft, received during its transportation. It is in reality a vein of hornblende, the outer part of which has been decomposed, leaving an irregular shallow notch nowhere exceeding an inch in depth. But for this photograph, made before the obelisk had been lowered, there might have been some question as to the origin of this defect, which is now very noticeable from the drive in the Central Park, the dirt having been washed out of it. The bottom of the lower step was found to be nearly at mean sea level ; as the foundation could not have sunk so nearly uniformly, it is certain that there has been a subsidence of the ground since the obelisk was erected ; and if the level of the lower step was at the same height as the surface is at present, this subsidence is about seventeen feet in nineteen hundred years. Down to the level of the water there was nothing but loose earth and sand, mixed with all sorts of fragments of columns and statuary and pottery. In several places remains of old walls were met with. Surrounding the steps were fragments of a mosaic pavement, composed of alternate squares of white and dark marble. The sea end of the pit was left open down to the remains of an ancient massive wall that ran nearly parallel with the shore and close to the water. This wall served as a breakwater for the pit when the surf was high. While the excavations were in progress another attempt was made to prevent the removal of the obe¬ lisk, through a creditor of the Egyptian government who applied to the International Court to sieze it and keep possession until his claim had been paid. Before serving the writ enquiries were made as to the probable result of doing so. On being assured that no notice would be taken of the writ, and that all the resistance pos¬ sible would be offered to any use of force to take possession of the obelisk, the Court withheld the writ. The object of this proceeding was to arrest the work, get the obelisk into court, and keep the case pending until the attempt to remove it had been abandoned. It is inexplicable that the proposition should ever have been entertained ; and yet it was not only entertained, but the process was actually begun, and would undoubtedly have been pushed but for prompt action that gave assurance of a determination to resist. The United States flag was conspicuously displayed on the obelisk to indicate ownership ; and the means of defending it was provided and arranged in a manner that carried conviction to any one that had been in doubt about our sincerity and our determination to defend it and remove it. TURNING THE OBELISK. December 6, 1879 late Removal of the New York Obelisk. I 3 Soon after this affair had quieted down some of the consuls-general in Cairo, at the instigation of some resident European archaeologists, made an attempt to have the work of removal suspended until the matter could be referred to their governments. It appears that by the terms of a convention entered into with several of the European powers, the Egyptian government agreed to prevent the exportation of any object of antiquity. No attention had been paid to this convention when the English removed the fallen obelisk; and its provisions were commonly violated by the consuls and archaeologists themselves in the shipment of articles to Europe. Besides this, the firman that gave the Egyptian government existence stipulated that it should not make treaties with foreign powers, and it is clear that the convention in question was unauthorized. Fearing that the pressure on the Khedive and his Ministers might become more than they could resist, negotiations were commenced through a prominent, and at that time powerful, Pacha in Constantinople, whom it had been my good fortune to befriend, to insure the prompt confirmation of the gift by the Porte, in case of necessity. To put an end to these annoyances I determined to push the work of removal forward as rapidly as possible by working night and day, so as to get the obelisk off its pedestal. Every effort was devoted to this end, and it was accomplished within a month from the day the turning structure arrived. PREPARATIONS FOR TURNING THE OBELISK. While the pit was being dug a staging was erected around the obelisk for sheathing it with planks, in order to protect the hieroglyphs from injury. (Plate vi.) The sheathing was held together by iron bands, similar to the hoops of a barrel. The top band was heavier than the others, and had a loop at each angle, into which were shackled four steel wire cables. These were secured to anchors at suitable distances from the base of the obelisk, and tightened so as to support it until it was secured in the turning structure. The masonry and concrete piers on which this was to stand were commenced as soon as the pit was dug, and in order to have them dry quickly hydraulic cement was used. These piers are shown on Plates ii and iii. As soon as the staging had been removed four long spars were placed in position, opposite the angles of the obelisk, to form derricks for hoisting the pieces of the turning structure into position. Plate vii illustrates the plan adopted for supporting the obelisk, the sheathing banded around it, and the hoisting shears with the trunnions sus¬ pended to them. For convenience in placing the trunnions on the pillow-blocks, they were hoisted first and left hanging until the turning structure had been erected. The machinery and material for removing the obelisk were shipped from New York on the steamer “Nevada,” of the Guion Line, which sailed on October 7th, and arrived in Liverpool on October 19th. There they were transhipped on the steamer “Mariotis,” which sailed on October 27th, and arrived at Alexandria November 11, 1879. Preparations had been made for their prompt disembarkation and transport from the port, through the town, to the side of the obelisk; and this was completed in four days. The trunnions were the only pieces that gave trouble, owing to there not being a truck in the city suitable for their transport. They were, however, placed on the best truck obtainable, which was hauled by Arabs, who wisely selected the Christian Sabbath for the day to move them, owing to the diminution of traffic on that day. The Arabs were very noisy and attracted a large and increasing crowd, who followed the procession through the town. For this an American missionary roundly abused us from a borrowed pulpit, and took advantage of the occasion to denounce the removal of the obelisk as a work of the Devil. This act of “Chris- tian charity” was of no consequence, beyond the amusement it afforded the editors and readers of local newspapers, who seized on it with much eagerness as evidence of the prevailing sentiment of Americans. In explanation of the missionary’s condition of mind on the subject it may be well to state on his own authority that he wanted the money that was being spent on the removal given to his mission. In connection with this question of Sunday-work, which was commented on in a rational manner by many friends, it is well to recall the fact that the Mohammedan and Christian Sabbaths are on different days. It was impossible to observe both ; and a respect for the opinions of both sects led to the. rule that work would be carried on without intermission, and that the workmen were at liberty to select their own Sunday and observe it in 14 Removal of the New York Obelisk. • their own fashion. Arab Mohammedans and Maltese and European Christians formed the majority of the men employed. The former spent Friday, their Sabbath, in a rational manner, sleeping during the early part of the day, attending services at the mosque at noon, and devoting the afternoon to social intercourse and amusement. The Christians, almost to a man, would devote the thirty-six hours from Saturday evening to Monday morning in drinking, gambling, fighting, and other excesses, and return to work drunk, sleepy, and bruised. By December 2d the turning structure had been placed in position, and so admirably were the several parts fitted that it was not even necessary to ream out a bolt hole. 1 The process of lifting the obelisk clear of the pedestal and disengaging the metal supports or crabs occupied us until the evening of December 5 th. With the bolts that clamped the trunnions together loosened so as to allow the obelisk to pass freely up through them, levers inserted in the turn-buckles of the tie-rods were turned simultaneously with the nuts on the upper and lower ends of the tie-rods. Some anxiety was caused by the buckling of the heel-beams, due to imperfect bearing against the bottom of the obelisk. After this had been provided against by wedges driven in the vacant spaces, the lifting was successfully and easily accomplished. The operation of lifting, here briefly described, will be made clear by referring to Plate ii, where the turn-buckles in the tie-rods C are shown inside of the steel towers, about midway between the trunnions B, and the heel-beams D. And on Plate iii the ends of the tie-rods are seen through the brackets on the trunnions and also through the ends of the heel-beams. Before turning the obelisk horizontal the steel wire-rope truss A, shown on Plates iii, vii, and viii, was placed in position and tightened by means of screws and nuts to an estimated strain of sixty tons ; thereby relieving the section of the obelisk through the point of suspension of this amount of the weight of the ends, and insuring it against fracture when it was horizontal. Plates vii and viii also show a stack of timber piled to receive the upper section of the obelisk should the tackles that were provided to keep control of the turning unexpectedly give way. These tackles were led from a strap round the bottom of the obelisk to posts led into the masonry towers. They were, theoretically, capable of raising fifteen tons. New rope and blocks of the best quality obtainable in Alexandria were purchased expressly for the purpose. The rope previously purchased had been so treacherous, and had parted so many times with inadequate strain, that it was deemed prudent to provide a safeguard against the obelisk revolving past the horizontal. The upper section was known to have a preponderance of three and a half tons of weight, given it to facilitate the operation of turning. TURNING THE OBELISK. On the morning of December 4th an attempt was made to pull the upper end of the obelisk over by means of tackles. This attempt failed, owing to the further bending of the heel-beams, which caused the bottom of the obelisk to bind against the top of one of the crabs. The impression prevailed that the turning structure had settled and was therefore of inadequate strength to sustain the weight. Several engineers and others strongly advised abandoning the attempt to place the obelisk horizontal in the manner proposed ; and letters were received protesting against the destruction of so valuable a monument by any further attempt to remove it. These expressions did not affect in any way the confidence I felt in a speedy termination of this, the first stage of the work, although they caused me great chagrin, and aroused every one associated with me in the work to an extra exertion in order to prove them senseless. Removing the crabs was rendered very difficult by the lead which had been poured into the mortices in the pedestal while molten. The angles of the dowels of the crabs had notches in them (see Plate vi), and the bottom of the mortice was larger than the top. These were devices of the Roman engineer to prevent the removal of the crabs, and they were very effective. The process of lifting the obelisk, already described, 1 The contract for this work was sublet by John A. Roebling’s Sons to the Phoenix Iron Works of Trenton, to which all credit is due for its admirable execution. ARTOTYP* HARROUN & BIERSTADT. N. Y. THE OBELISK HORIZONTAL December 6, 1879. Plate IX * 4 ■ * •* < .. V. * % ^ * * . Removal of the New York Obelisk. 15 was again resorted to, and having raised it clear of the crab the bottom was pushed over to seaward until the obelisk was in the position shown on Plate viii. In this position it remained seventeen hours without affect¬ ing any part of the structure in which it was suspended. Rumors of a possible demonstration by the foreign residents when the obelisk was to be placed horizon¬ tal had been circulated until they reached Rear-Admiral Aslambekoff, of the Russian Imperial Navy, who was in the port of Alexandria in his flag-ship the “ Minim.” He was aware of the feeling that existed among the foreigners, and while unable to land an armed force for our protection, he landed a large force of unarmed trained seamen for the purpose of enclosing the grounds in a cordon of effective men and affording any assistance that was needed at a critical moment. His Excellency, Zulficar Pacha, Governor of Alexandria, the Egyptian officials, and a few acquaintances were notified that the turning would take place at 9 a. m. of the 6th. But his Excellency did not arrive until 11 a. m. As soon as he had reached the platform provided for invited persons, the word was given to slack the tackles. A large crowd of Greeks, Italians, and other Europeans had gathered in the vicinity, and occupied every available spot from which the movement could be seen. While we were waiting for the Gov¬ ernor, the crowd was noisy and at times unruly when they were prevented from going within the inclosure. But at the instant the obelisk began to move there was absolute silence and stillness. As it slowly turned not a sound but the rendering of the ropes around the posts and an occasional creak of the structure could be heard. Immediately following a creak louder than any previous one, the motion was suddenly arrested, then there was a sharp snap—one of the tackles had parted. Instantly the order was given to slack the other tackle rapidly, using it merely to retard the motion and not to arrest it; but the man attending the fall had lost his wits, and instead of slackening, he held it fast and it very soon broke. The obelisk was at that moment about half over; it moved slowly at first, and then more and more rapidly, until it struck the stack of timbers, rebounded twice, and came to rest in the position shown on Plate viii. There was intense excitement; many of the Arabs and Greeks about the grounds had fled precipitously when the obelisk began to move rapidly ; and when it rested on the stack of timber uninjured there arose a pro¬ longed cheer, which was the first friendly manifestation shown by the Alexandrians. The explanation given for the breaking of the first tackle by the man attending it was, that he looked up to see what the noise was, and in doing so involuntarily checked the passage of the rope through his hands ; this brought the whole strain on his tackle and caused it to break. The other man was properly giving his whole attention to the command, and was unconscious of the accident until he saw that his companion had fled precipitately from under the obelisk, leaving him alone. Surely his loss of self-control was excusable. It was to provide against such contingencies that the timber stack was built. The two upper tiers of plank were crushed ; aside from this no loss or injury to any person or any thing resulted from the successful accomplishment of the first essential feature of the work of removal. Simultaneously with the preparations for turning, other equally important parts of the work were being pushed forward ; notably the construction of a wooden box or caisson in which the obelisk was to be carried by sea to the port, and the clearing away of ruins from, and grading of the sea-bed along, the route over which it had to be launched. By way of explanation it is necessary to recall the fact that an iron truss-cradle, moving on cannon-balls instead of wheels, in channel irons instead of on an ordinary rail, had been designed, made in the United States, and brought to Egypt for transporting the obelisk overland to the port for em¬ barkation. The distance overland was less than a mile ; and the route was over comparatively unfrequented streets, except for a short distance across what was once the ancient causeway connecting Eunostos Island with the mainland, and what is now an accumulation of sand and debris, occupied by the most important part of the city. An examination of Plate x will make this clear. Soon after our arrival at Alexandria an unofficial application was made to the Governor for permission to move the obelisk along the proposed route. A conference ensued during which the Governor stated, in effect, that in consideration for keeping the streets paved and clean the government had transferred all con- 16 Removal of the New York Obelisk. trol of them to the foreign merchants. He agreed to ascertain the probable result of an application made to these merchants and to inform us. Several days afterward he advised us not to make the application until every other method of getting the obelisk to the port had been tried and had failed. It appears that the for¬ eign merchants had determined not to allow the obelisk to be moved through the city, giving as a reason the probability of its crushing in the sewers. Guarantees of repairing all damage done were of no avail; the transporting cradle, costing $ 5 ,ioo, had to be thrown away, and the expensive and very dangerous method of sea transport in a wooden caisson a distance of ten miles was the only resource. The expense was least of all in the construction of the caisson, which cost only $ 2,200 ; it was chiefly in the preparations for launch¬ ing it over a shallow bank cumbered with heavy blocks of syenite and granite ; the massive submerged foundations of one of the famous palaces of Alexandria were directly in the way. These obstructions could only be removed by means of divers, a serious undertaking in smooth water, and a most discouraging and almost hopeless task to accomplish on an open coast on which the surf was breaking two thirds of the time. Diving operations were commenced on November 5 , 1879, and continued, whenever the sea would permit, until March 18, 1880. A pier with derricks for lifting out the blocks had to be constructed. The estimated weight of material removed is one hundred and seventy tons. The pieces ranged from three to seven tons in weight. In Alexandria competent divers are scarce, and in order to retain those we employed they had to be paid whether at work or not. The cost of this submarine work was nearly $4,000. It will be shown hereafter that the cost of the caisson and submarine work necesssary for launching it were inconsiderable and unimportant when compared with the cost of launching and the imminent danger involved in the operation of getting it afloat, due to the displacement of the ways by the surf. Plate iii shows the frame of the caisson in course of construction, and Plate viii shows the end sections nearly completed in the pit. The floor timbers of these sections were made to form a part of the timber stacks on which the obelisk was lowered, as shown in Plate iii. Work on the middle section could not be commenced until the pedestal, steps, and foundation had been removed; and their removal could not be accomplished until the turning structure had been released and taken down, and its foundation piers demolished. LOWERING THE OBELISK. The preparations for releasing the machinery and for lowering the obelisk from its elevated position, forty-three feet above the bottom of the pit, into the caisson are illustrated on Plate iii. After the obelisk had been placed horizontal, the upper section was temporarily supported on two spars under the pyramidion. The stack of timber placed to receive it was then removed. After several experiments in building the stacks, the plan illustrated in Plate iii was finally adopted. Planks three inches thick, nine inches wide, and sixteen feet long, were piled in groups of three, at right angles to each other, up to the level of the top of the pedes¬ tal ; the lengths were then fourteen feet for two thirds the remaining height, and finally twelve feet for the remainder. Heavy timber, diagonal shores were placed against the sides and ends of the piles to insure sta¬ bility. Oak beams were slung by iron rods under the obelisk, and fastened to it at the points against.which the pistons of the pumps were to bear ; and other beams were placed on top of the piles for the pumps to stand on, so as to distribute the bearing over the whole pile uniformly. The tops of the stacks were cut down through the middle to give room enough for the pumps to be worked,—(see Plate iii),—the ends being left to receive the weight of the obelisk when it was necessary to shift the pumps down. The pumps were fitted with lowering valves, an indispensable substitute for the ordinary method of tripping the plunger when releasing the strain from the piston. By means of these valves the liquid in the cylinder is allowed to escape to the chamber as rapidly or as slowly as the operator pleases, thereby allowing the piston to descend at any desired speed. \ '- v « cJhv -•* Ip^if i^mmd -.y Mih-nfc ! wsmi mm§ tfelpi I«WkS vw4V* ■p * s - * !*, ' - 3 . X X X