This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1906 Excerpt: ...When these are taken together no other result seems possible beside that here followed in the plan and model. It is hardly needful to enter on all the minute reasons for this at length, as in any case a variation would not be important. But this much should be stated to show that there is a minimum of uncertainty, or mere imagination, in this restoration. The only piece of guesswork is the detail of the wall across the entrance; the place of it is known, but the gateways are only what may be presumed on, as likely for such a situation. Doubtless there were many details of the finishing off of the parapets, gangways, and entrances. But as we have no evidences about these, no attempt is here made to restore them in the model. 32. We may now notice the stone-work and Thus they average 2I-I inches, and the variations of the stones from that size have been sorted into each course, so as to get them to rank more evenly together. The lengths are not uniform, varying thus: --38, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 49, 50, 50, 50, si, and 53 inches, The breadths are 21,21,21,21,23,24,24,24,24, 25,25, 25,27, 29, 37, the latter three being in the lowest course, which is a less regular foundation. It seems then that the standard size for the blocks was 50 x 25 inches and 21 inches thick. The surface is the original quarry face with pick-marks on it; but round the edge is a draft about 4 inches wide, slightly sloping down to the joint line. The drafting is seen to be cut with a claw tool where the marks are visible (shown in the elevation, PI. XXVI), such as is very plainly seen in the dressing of the piece of cornice photographed above the view of the wall. The quality of the stone is not so good as that of the Hyksos wall, or the chips of the upper structures; it is full yellow, and i..