Main Walls—Plan—Construction—Measurements—Summit—Foundations—Chevron Pattern—Ground Surface of Exterior.

PLAN of main wall.—Though popularly spoken of as the “Circular Temple,”[46] the building is of elliptical plan, “a form of temple,” says Bent, “found at Marib, the ancient capital of the SabÆan kingdom in Arabia, and at the Castle of Nakab al Hajar, also in that country.” The resemblance between the temple at Marib and the Elliptical Temple at Zimbabwe is remarkable, and several scientists of repute, who have considered the plans of both these ruins, emphasise the remarkable resemblance, not only in the plan, but in the forms of worship practised by the ancients, as evidenced also by the relics discovered at both temples. For instance, Professor MÜller, of Vienna, the great South Arabian archÆologist (Burgen und SchlÖsser, ii. 20.) compares these two ruins as follows:—

Marib.	Zimbabwe.
Plan, system of curved walls, geometrical building, orientation.	Practically the same.
Inscription on Marib is in two rows, and runs round a fourth of the circumference.	Two rows of chevron pattern run round a fourth part of the circumference.
Half of elliptical wall, on side of inscription, is well built and well preserved, but opposite side is badly built and ruined.	The same at Zimbabwe, where the pattern side of the wall is well built. The other portion is rough.
Temple was dedicated to the goddess Almaquah—the star Venus, which is called in the Himyaritic tongue Ialmaquah, or Almaq = illuminating.	Highly probable that Zimbabwe was a SabÆan Almaquah temple, as it is orientated and geometrically built for astronomical purposes, as in all cases of such buildings used for the worship of Almaquah. Sacred birds found at Zimbabwe are said to represent Venus the “Morning Star.”[47]

Herr Brugsch believes the images of the birds found at Zimbabwe emphasised a SabÆan occupation, while M. Naville is especially of opinion that there exists a strong connection between Venus, the star of the SabÆans, and the goddess worshipped at Zimbabwe. The evidences pointing to the close connection of the South Arabian temples and Zimbabwe are almost inexhaustible. On this point Bent and Schlichter are at one with each other (see Petermann’s Mitteilungen 1892; also The Gold of Ophir by Professor A. H. Keane; and M. Arnaud’s plan of the temple at Marib).

Professor MÜller also states that the elliptically formed wall appears to have been always used in the temple buildings of ancient Arabia, and states that at Sirwah the Almaquah temple is built in an oval form. In these old temples, he says, sacred inscriptions to the deities were set up on stylÆ (stone beams). At Zimbabwe some scores of carved soapstone beams have been discovered in the three temples, also ten birds perched on tall soapstone beams and three other birds detached from their beams, also four miniature birds on pedestals carved out of soapstone.

The Elliptical Temple at Zimbabwe is a much larger building than that at Marib, having a circumference of about 833 ft. as against the 300 ft. of the Marib temple.

On entering the building it is at once seen that the most massive and excellently constructed portions of the main wall extend from slightly north of the North Entrance to the east and south and south-west, and that the other portions, particularly the north-west and west, are slighter, and though showing fairly good workmanship, it is not nearly so well built as the other portion of the wall, the average width of the summit of the poor wall being barely a third of the average width of the better-built portion. The general line of the summit is also fairly level, but it averages some 5 ft. to 8 ft. less in height than that of the northern and eastern walls. The distinct character of the two portions of the main wall is very plainly noticeable on viewing the temple from the summit of the Acropolis Hill.

But this temple does not stand alone in showing its main wall massive and exceptionally well built at one point of its circumference and slighter built on the other part. This feature is common to many ruins in Rhodesia, excepting, of course, ruins of forts and those ruins built upon the angular plan and terraced. Bent was fully aware of this feature, and cites instances of its occurrence. Mr. Swan does the same, and so does Schlichter. At some time or another before the north-west and west wall was built that portion of the original wall had become dilapidated, and the temple had become “half-moon,” “section of a circle,” or “crescent” shaped, these being the terms applied by all writers, without exception, to such of the circular ruins in the First Period Ruins’ Area,[48] where portions of the main wall had fallen down. The published plans of ruins demonstrate this fact. Probably Zimbabwe will again become a “section of a circle,” for it stands to reason that the weaker wall will be the first portion to disappear.

The massive and well-built portions of the ruins, built upon a system of curves, almost always bear the mural pattern of the oldest types, while the slighter portions are without pattern. It is so at Marib, it is so at Zimbabwe, and it is so in some score of ruins built upon the same principles, as shown in the Elliptical Temple. This has been found to be so invariable a rule that on sighting a building of this class of ruin even at some distance one can almost fix the position of the pattern, that is, if the wall is not so reduced in height that the decoration, if originally any, has not disappeared. Assuming no principle of orientation to attach to such ruins, there yet remains something to be done in explaining the directions of the massive curved and decorated walls of the circular ruins, for the existence of so many scores of parallelisms can hardly be explained away as being but so many coincidences.

It has now (June, 1903) for the first time been shown by ocular demonstration that the slighter wall, though ancient, is a reconstruction of a still more ancient wall which curved outwards more to the north and north-west. Recently some thirty tons of granite blocks which lay in the gap on either side of it were removed, and the foundations at this spot uncovered, showing the meeting in a mis-joint at an oblique angle of two distinct walls, the foundations of the massive north wall being 9 ft. 10 in. wide, and that of the later wall 6 ft. wide, while the class of building in the two walls is obviously distinct. The face of the end of the north wall was extended further outwards towards N.W. 40 ft., and the line of its foundation, according to its curve, points in that direction, where, it is believed, the old extended foundation has been come upon at 36 ft. outside the later wall. The slighter wall approaches the massive wall from W. 80. The bases of the foundations are practically on the same level.

Though the later wall is not so well constructed as the older wall, it must not be taken as poorly built. (See “Construction of main wall,” later.)

The wonderful feature is that no joint in the wall has so far been discovered in its south-west portion. Practical builders who have examined the wall on this side for such a joint are perplexed at not being able to discover it, and some consider, from certain circumstances noticeable, that it must have been at the West Entrances where this later wall was commenced, in which case no such joint would in all probability be found.

CONSTRUCTION

The construction of the main wall from the north to the east, and round to the south and south-west, is admittedly by far the finest specimen of ancient constructive work yet found in Rhodesia; it has consequently been made the standard by which the best-known writers and greatest authorities judge of the quality of the work shown in other walls in the country. Certainly two large and important ruins in the Lower Sabi Valley, which are much larger in area but with lower walls than Zimbabwe, closely rival the Great Zimbabwe in construction and boldness of design. But with regard to the more massive and highest portion of the main wall every practical builder who visits Zimbabwe is amazed at the equal distribution of the joints, the conscientious bonding of the outer courses, the good quality of stone selected, the careful dressing and the regularity of the sizes of the blocks, the neat packing throughout the whole width of the wall, and the tiling of the summits of the wall with “throughs.” The filling-in of the wall has been most conscientiously executed, and is seen to have been done course by course with the faces of the wall, as the courses throughout are pronounced to correspond with the outer courses of the wall on either side, and some builders have positively stated that some sort of a levelling instrument must have been used. “Straight joints” for more than two or three courses are absent, and these are rare, “false courses” are also rare, and there is little seen of chips levelling-up the corners of the blocks.

The marvellous symmetry of the batter-back of the dry masonry, especially in the boldly conceived and most excellently constructed sweep of the wall on its inner face from north to north-east and south-west, secures the admiration of every visitor, and forms one of the chief features by which the Great Zimbabwe stamps itself on one’s memory. The scrupulously careful workmanship displayed here, and particularly in the courses near the Chevron Pattern and on the outer face of the north-east portion of the wall, show undoubtedly the most superior of any ancient building yet discovered in Rhodesia, if not also of the important ruins lying at some distance, to the south-east, of which only sketch-plans and a few photographs are yet to hand. The massive solidity and excellent construction, together with its batter (see Architecture, section “Battering of Walls”), which this wall displays, have, no doubt, secured its wonderful preservation in spite of earthquake, effects of tree and creeper growth, and the ravages of some millenniums of time.

The construction demonstrates the fact that the ancients in their own home in the north were thoroughly well-practised in the building with either stone blocks or bricks. Moreover, as suggested by Bent and Schlichter, the extensive use of granite cement in making floors both inside and outside the ruins at Zimbabwe proves that it was by design that the ancients adopted the system of building with dry masonry.

Concerning the construction of the north-west and west portions of the main wall there has been much controversy, Bent and Schlichter being emphatic in stating that not only was it most inferior to that of the other portions of the main wall, but that it was obviously of later construction on contracted lines, but still ancient. These two archÆologists could have arrived at this conclusion only by the measurement of the wall and by its quality of workmanship. Sir John Willoughby, on the other hand, contended that it is built as well as any other portion of the main wall. It is certainly not poor building that renders it less easy to climb along its summit, the difficulty being the number of loose stones which line the top owing to the summit having been threshed by branches of large trees.

This wall—now recently shown to be a reconstruction in a later ancient period[49]—is in every point better built than many walls on the Acropolis, and is superior in workmanship to many of the divisional walls of the Elliptical Temple. The outer face is fairly well constructed.

MEASUREMENTS OF MAIN WALL

The circumference of the outer face of the main wall taken at the level of the threshold of the entrances measures about 831 ft. As the foundations throughout the circumference are, as is shown later, some 3 ft. to 5 ft. below this level, and as the usual Zimbabwe batter-back prevails, the circumference of the foundations of this building may safely be estimated at a further 40 ft., which would make a total circumference of the base of the temple some 873 ft.

The circumference of the inside face of the entire main wall measured at a corresponding level is about 776 ft. 6 in., the foundations, as shown later, being from 3 ft. to 5 ft. below the level at which this measurement was taken.

Granite slabs with painted figures now mark the distances both outside and inside round the main wall, commencing in either case at the south side of the West Entrance and going south. The distances on the outside are marked at every 50 ft., and those on the inside at every 20 ft. A small black spot is painted on the wall just above each slab to denote the exact spot in each length measured.

In this description of the Elliptical Temple all measurements in angular brackets are exterior measurements of the main wall only, and those in rounded brackets are those of interior measurements of the main wall, all commencing at the south side of the West Entrance and going south. For instance, “The North-West Entrance is situated between the following points in the main wall—[656 ft.] and [660 ft.] and (606 ft. 6 in.) and (611 ft.),” or “A large granite beam lies at the base of the main wall at (338 ft.).”

Position of wall.	Point of compass faced.	Height above cleared surface.	Height above bottom of foundation.	Width of present summit.	Batter-back of face of wall.
[0 ft.]	W.	7 ft. 6 in.	11 ft.	6 ft. 6 in.	8 in.
Between [0 ft.] and [10 ft.] summit of wall rises from 7 ft. to 22 ft.
[10 ft.]	—	22 ft.	23 ft. 10 in.	4 ft. 2 in.	2 ft.
[25 ft.]	—	21 ft. 6 in.	23 ft. 6 in.	5 ft. 6 in.	2 ft.
[50 ft.]	—	22 ft.	24 ft.	6 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
Between [98 ft.] and [104 ft.] are traces of a wall of this width running towards S.W.
[100 ft.]	S.W.	22 ft.	24 ft.	6 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
[150 ft.]	S.S.W.	22 ft. 6 in.	24 ft. 6 in.	6 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
Between [161 ft.] and [166 ft. 6 in.] are traces only of wall of this width protruding from main wall towards S.W.
Chevron Pattern commences at [189 ft.] and extends to [455 ft. 6 in.].
[200 ft.]	S.	22 ft. 8 in.	25 ft. 2 in.	10 ft. 2 in.	1 ft. 10 in.
[250 ft.]	S.E.	25 ft.	26 ft. 6 in.	8 ft. 2 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
[300 ft.]	S.E.	29 ft.	30 ft. 6 in.	8 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 8 in.
[350 ft.]	E.	29 ft.	31 ft. 6 in.	9 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 4 in.
At [380 ft.] outer end of drain-hole through main wall.
[400 ft.]	E.	30 ft.	31 ft. 9 in.	7 ft. 4 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
At [425 ft. 9 in.] outer end of drain-hole through main wall.
[450 ft.]	E.N.E.	32 ft.	34 ft.	9 ft. 6 in.	3 ft.
From [450 ft.] to [565 ft.] is Outer Parallel Passage.
Chevron Pattern ends at [455 ft. 6 in.].
At [482 ft.] outer end of drain-hole through main wall.
[500 ft.]	N.E.	33 ft.	35 ft. 6 in.	12 ft. 2 in.	3 ft. 6 in.
At [510 ft. 6 in.] outer end of drain-hole through main wall.
At [530 ft.] line of summit falls to 28 ft.
[550 ft.]	N.E.	19 ft.	21 ft.	13 ft. 4 in.	1 ft. 4 in.
Summit of wall very considerably dilapidated.
Summit of wall very considerably dilapidated.
At [571 ft. 6 in.] to [576 ft. 6 in.] steps of North Entrance.
[575 ft.]	N.E.	11 ft.	(not examined)	14 ft.	2 ft. 6 in.
West side of North Entrance, 11 ft. high, rises to 17 ft. at [580 ft.].
Between [586 ft.] to [590 ft.] wall this width, forming north-west side of North-East Passage, protrudes from main wall towards N.E.
From [610 ft.] to [620 ft.] is gap in main wall and mis-joint of earlier and later walls.
[625 ft.]	N.	16 ft. 6 in.	19 ft.	5 ft.	1 ft.
Original height of wall reduced to 16 ft. 6 in. on west side of gap.
[656 ft.]	N.N.W.	17 ft.	19 ft.	3 ft. 6 in. (ruined)	1 ft. 10 in.
East side of North-West Entrance.
[660 ft.]	N.N.W.	17 ft.	19 ft.	5 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 10 in.
West side of North-West Entrance.
[675 ft.]	N.W.	17 ft.	18 ft. 6 in.	5 ft. 2 in.	1 ft. 10 in.
Face of wall bulges outwards above foundations.
[700 ft.]	N.W.	18 ft.	19 ft. 10 in.	4 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 6 in.
For several feet on either side of [700 ft.] summit of wall is considerably depressed by tree boughs hitting it.
A wall connecting No. 1 Ruin with Elliptical Temple protrudes from main wall between [705 ft.] and [710 ft.].
[750 ft.]	W.N.W.	21 ft.	23 ft.	4 ft. 8 in.	2 ft. 6 in.
[800 ft.]	W.N.W.	20 ft. 6 in.	22 ft. 4 in.	4 ft. 10 in.	3 ft.
From [814 ft.] to [829 ft.] the line of summit breaks downwards abruptly from 20 ft. to 8 ft. in height.
[827 ft. 9 in.]	W.	8 ft.	(not examined)	6 ft.	10 in.
This is the north side of West Entrance.
[831 ft. 9 in.]	This is the south side of the West Entrance, where the first measurement started.

Position of wall.	Side of temple.	Height above cleared surface.	Batter-back of face of wall.	Point in interior of temple.
(0 ft.)	W.N.W.	7 ft. 6 in.	8 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Between (0 ft.) and (10 ft.) is a large rounded buttress projecting into the temple. (See description of West Entrance.)
Between (0 ft.) and (10 ft.) summit rises sharply from 7 ft. 6 in. to 18 ft. 6 in., measurement from present surface of interior soil.
(10 ft.)	W.N.W.	18 ft. 6 in.	2 ft.	No. 5 Enclosure
(20 ft.)	W.N.W.	21 ft.	1 ft. 10 in.	?
Measured from bottom of trench showing an old cement floor now decomposed.
(40 ft.)	W.N.W.	21 ft.	1 ft. 8 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Measured from bottom of trench showing an old cement floor now decomposed.
(60 ft.)	W.	21 ft. 4 in.	1 ft. 6 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Measured from bottom of trench showing an old cement floor now decomposed.
(80 ft.)	W.	21 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 2 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Measured from bottom of trench showing an old cement floor now decomposed.
(100 ft.)	W.	18 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 9 in.	No. 6 Enclosure
Measured from top of dÉbris on summit of low divisional wall.
(120 ft.)	S.W.	20 ft. 10 in.	2 ft. 1 in.	No. 6 Enclosure
Measured from red clay floor, believed to be of Makalanga construction. At (134 ft.) to (138 ft.) are traces only of a divisional wall.
(140 ft.)	S.W.	21 ft. 8 in.	2 ft. 2 in.	No. 6 Enclosure
Measured from a yellow granite cement floor.
(160 ft.)	S.W.	22 ft. 4 in.	2 ft. 2 in.	No. 6 Enclosure
Measured from a yellow granite cement floor.
(179 ft. 3 in.)
Angle of walls.
(180 ft.)	S.W.	21 ft. 6 in.	2 ft.	No. 6 Enclosure
Measured from a yellow granite cement floor.
At (180 ft.) step-down of foundation of 5 ft.
(200 ft.)	S.S.W.	17 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 2 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from summit of old excavated dÉbris, 5 ft. high (since removed).				Sacred Enclosure (west)
(220 ft.)	S.S.W.	22 ft.	1 ft. 6 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from summit of old excavated dÉbris, 5 ft. high.				Sacred Enclosure (west)
(240 ft.)	S.	23 ft. 6 in.	3 ft.	No. 8 EnclosureNo. 8 Enclosure
Measured from summit of old excavated dÉbris, 5 ft. high.				Sacred Enclosure (west)
The large Conical Tower stands between (246 ft.) to (264 ft.).
(260 ft.)	S.	26 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 10 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from yellow granite cement floor.				Sacred Enclosure (east)
(280 ft.)	S.	26 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 4 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from yellow granite cement floor.				Sacred Enclosure (east)
The roughly built buttress at (286 ft.) to (303 ft.) is not ancient.
(300 ft.)	S.	28 ft.	2 ft. 6 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from yellow cement floor.				Sacred Enclosure (east)
There are doubts as to the antiquity of buttress(east) at (306 ft.) to (319 ft.).
(320 ft.)	S.S.E.	29 ft.	2 ft. 4 in.	No. 8 Enclosure
Measured from yellow granite cement floor.				Sacred Enclosure (east). At West Entrance to Parallel Passage.
Granite monolith (conjected) fallen from wall at (340 ft.).
Drain-hole through wall at (352 ft.).
(340 ft.)	S.S.E.	28 ft. 10 in.	2 ft. 2 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
At (352 ft.) is a drain-hole.
(360 ft.)	S.S.E.	30 ft. 6 in.	2 ft. 2 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
(380 ft.)	S.E.	30 ft. 4 in.	3 ft.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
Drain-hole at (391 ft. 6 in.).
(400 ft.)	S.E.	29 ft.	3 ft. 2 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
(420 ft.)	E.S.E.	30 ft. 4 in.	3 ft. 2 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
(440 ft.)	E.S.E.	30 ft. 6 in.	4 ft.	Parallel Passage
Measured from cement floor.
Drain-hole at (442 ft.).
(460 ft.)	E.	31 ft.	3 ft. 6 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from soil surface.
Drain-hole at (471 ft.).
(480 ft.)	E.	31 ft.	2 ft. 4 in.	Parallel Passage
Measured from soil surface.
(500 ft.)	N.E.	27 ft.	2 ft. 10 in.	Parallel Passage
The summit of the wall is much dilapidated. Between (500 ft.) and (520 ft.) the wall is broken, there being a large gap of this width, the bottom of which is 14 ft. above present level of floor.
(520 ft.)	N.E.	13 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 6 in.	Parallel Passage
Between (520 ft.) and (530 ft.) is the North Entrance. Wall on east side 6 ft. high, on west side 6 ft. 6 in. high, but on each side rises sharply within a few feet of the entrance.
From (536 ft.) to (544 ft.) are remains of small banquette below summit, and at 6 ft. above ground.
(540 ft.)	N.N.E.	18 ft.	1 ft. 8 in.	No. 2 Enclosure
Drain-hole at (549 ft.).
(560 ft.)	N.N.E.	12 ft.	2 ft.	No. 2 Enclosure
Centre of line of summit is 3 ft. higher than reduced inside edge.
Between (566 ft.) and (570 ft.) is the mis-joint in earlier and later walls.
(580 ft.)	N.	3 ft.	—	No. 2 Enclosure
At (580 ft.) the wall on west side of gap rises abruptly.
(600 ft.)	N.	18 ft.	1 ft. 10 in.	No. 3 Enclosure
Measured from an old cement floor.
Between (606 ft. 6 in.) and (611 ft. 6 in.) is the North-West Entrance.
(620 ft.)	N.W.	6 ft.	10 in.	No. 3 Enclosure
At (614 ft.) this wall rises perpendicularly to 16 ft.
(640 ft.)	N.N.W.	16 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 6 in.	No. 3 Enclosure
Measured from granite cement floor.
(660 ft.)	N.N.W.	19 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 4 in.	No. 3 Enclosure
Measured from granite cement floor.
Depression on summit caused by a tree.
(680 ft.)	N.N.W.	20 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 2 in.	No. 4 Enclosure
Measured from granite cement floor.
(700 ft.)	N.N.W.	20 ft. 6 in.	2 ft.	No. 4 Enclosure
Measured from granite cement floor.
(720 ft.)	N.W.	18 ft. 6 in.	1 ft. 4 in.	No. 4 Enclosure
Measured from granite cement floor.
Depression on summit caused by a tree.
(740 ft.)	N.W.	19 ft.	2 ft. 1 in.	Wall separating Nos. 4 and 5 Enclosures
Measured from base of divisional wall.
(750 ft.)	N.W.	18 ft. 10 in.	1 ft. 10 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Measured from surface of soil.
Near (54 ft.) summit of wall drops to 9 ft. at north side of West Entrance.
(763 ft. 6 in.)	W.N.W.	7 ft.	10 in.	No. 5 Enclosure
Opening of West Entrance between (763 ft.) and (766 ft.).
(776 ft. 6 in.)	This is the south side of West Entrance, where first measurement started.

SUMMIT OF MAIN WALL

For some fairly extensive lengths along the summit of the more massive portion of the main wall the blocks and stones are higher on the centre of the floor of the summit than at top outer edges on either side, from which edges the measurements of the heights above the exterior and interior surfaces of the ground were taken. Branches of trees beating in high winds upon the summit, the weight of heavy festoons of creepers hanging from the summit, and the growth of monkey-ropes and wild vines in the joints of the dry masonry have destroyed some of the upper courses on either side of the wall. Therefore to the heights stated in the foregoing tables should be added at least 1 ft. or 2 ft., this being a fair average height of the whale-back ridge along portions of the summit of the wall.

An interesting question arises: What was the original height of the massive portion of the wall? There are some evidences that the original height could not have been more than six courses above the chevron pattern which runs on a true level on the upper and outer face of the wall between [189 ft.] and [455 ft.]. The greatest number of courses now remaining over this pattern is five, but these are only found at two points and for the length of a few blocks. At most points above the pattern there are no upper courses remaining; at other points one or two courses are perfect for some distance; the most frequent are three courses; while at several points there are four courses. To the heights given in the tables can safely be added 1 ft. to 2 ft. Were the obviously missing courses to be restored, the raised ridge along the centre of parts of the summit would be cleared, for these ridges of stones are formed of blocks once carefully packed, all on their flat sides, between side walls, and are similar to the existing internal portions of other well-built walls at Zimbabwe.

Adding this further height of from 1 ft. to 2 ft. to the tabulated heights, we can carry the investigation much further. The upper faces of the blocks of the fourth and fifth courses above the pattern are too free from decomposition, weather-stain, and lichen to have formed the topmost courses; in fact, their upper surfaces are decidedly fresh, as if the courses above them had not long disappeared, and when it is recollected that experience shows that the exposed top surfaces of blocks are found to take on signs of decomposition and of exposure to weather, and also to become covered with lichen quicker than the side faces of blocks in the body of the wall, and that the upper courses would have given some evidences of long exposure, which they do not, we may be certain that the wall was carried a further course, or possibly two courses of the wall higher than the fifth course above the pattern. Therefore at many points along the highest portions of the wall, as shown in the tables, 2 ft. 6 in. may be added to the tabulated heights, and this would include the height of the six courses above the pattern throughout its whole length.

Whether the original summit was higher than these six courses is a matter of conjecture. Possibly the wall was two or three courses higher than the six courses. Here, as elsewhere in the first-period ruins in Rhodesia, the best-built portion of the edifice is that which bears the decorative designs. This appears to be an invariable rule in such older ruins. But at this temple the whole wall, and especially the courses immediately above and below the pattern, are the best-built portions of the most superior wall of the building, the courses being far truer. Moreover, a good quality of stone is employed, giving the impression that it was specially selected for the purpose, so much so that their back parts are as well squared as their front faces. It is most obvious, as practical builders claim, that the pattern itself and its enclosing courses show the best workmanship on the part of the ancients, and this notwithstanding that this wall is admitted by all to stand pre-eminent among excellently constructed walls to be found anywhere in Rhodesia.

In removing the wall dÉbris at the outer base of the wall containing the chevron pattern for the purpose of forming catchment areas for draining the ground near the wall, two classes of stone blocks were found, a quantity of large, shallow, flat stones similar to those lying in the middle parts of the summit of the walls, and also a quantity of well-shaped blocks as used both in the pattern and in the enclosing courses, but it was estimated that there were not enough of these blocks to have carried the outer face of the wall more than some two courses above the fifth course above the pattern. It is impossible to draw any corresponding inferences with regard to dÉbris on the base of the interior side of the wall, for excavators have moved this out of all relative position to the wall from which it fell.

But there is also some evidence as to the original height of the wall. Such of the undoubted monoliths as still stand more or less erect on the summit of the wall—and as is shown later, not every upright stone on this wall is necessarily a monolith—have no signs on their faces of having been built in by blocks up to any height above the level of the six courses above the pattern. In the case of any fallen monolith from the faces of which supporting blocks or any of them have disappeared, it can be ascertained to what depth the base of the monolith was built into the wall, and in this respect there is some evidence to guide one in estimating the original height of the ancient wall so adorned. The wearing of their sides by the edges of supporting blocks can almost always be noticed, in addition to which the rain of many centuries is guided to the base by the position of the supporting blocks which guide the water downwards, thus causing small rimlets to form on the lower part of the beams, especially those of slate or soapstone, where the rimlets have become in time beautifully smooth and glazed. Therefore it is highly probable that the height of the six courses above the pattern, with the present height of the wall above its foundations as given in the tables, formed the original height of the massive portion of the enclosing wall.

The discovery in December, 1902, of what are believed to be traces of a line of small round towers on the outer edge of the summit immediately over the chevron pattern—and these are referred to later—affords very strong evidence as to what was the original height of the wall, and points to the limit of six courses above the chevron pattern. The line of small round towers (recently found to have been conical) on the outer edge of the west wall of the Western Temple on the Acropolis have their foundations a few inches below the present summit of the wall. The foundations of the towers on the wall at the Elliptical Temple, now being described, have their foundations on the present surface of the central ridge along the summit of the wall, but were the pattern made good at the height of the six courses alone, the positions of these foundations would be identical in several respects with those of the towers on the Acropolis. Thus these foundations provide a fourth important corroborative clue as to the original height of the wall.

Along the floor of the summit are laid some large, broad, but shallow slabs of granite of irregular form, while down below on either side were a score of others which have fallen off the wall. Bent suggested that the summit was once paved with these slabs. In view of the four proofs just adduced with regard to the original height of the wall being somewhat higher than is seen to-day, the purpose of the slabs could hardly be that of providing a pavement for the summit. Most probably they were the “ties” or “throughs” to bind the wall at its top courses, as invariably found near the summits of the best class of walls, especially so in all rounded ends of walls, summits of rounded buttresses, and in the Conical Tower where, near its summit, the back and inside ends of the blocks are frequently longer than in the lower courses where they are short. Many of these slabs on the main wall lie across the wall on its present surface, but these are frequently covered with laid blocks. The best instances at Zimbabwe of the “tying” and bonding of the highest courses of walls are to be seen on the Acropolis, but this feature is elsewhere in Rhodesia common in several ruins which are not built upon the angular principle. It is natural to suppose that, if the ancients not only carefully tied the upper courses of almost all walls with “throughs,” and also tied several points between base and summit, this main wall bearing the decorative pattern, and once having on its summit, as is now believed, both round towers and soapstone beams, the ancients, admittedly being skilful builders, would regard the effective tying and bonding of such a wall as an important necessity, especially as the wide and commodious summit was, as stated by Bent, in all probability a look-out and much-frequented elevation. The stones which are uncovered are decomposed and lichen- and moss-covered on their upper faces, but are on their under side as fresh and as clean as if they had just been brought from the quarry. Some visitors, supposing these tie-stones to have been fallen monoliths, have placed four of them in an upright position where they now stand, but unlike all true monoliths, they are not weathered or time-eaten all round, and two so erected have all their faces perfectly clean and fresh.

The summit of the north-west portion of the main wall is fairly level, save at north-west and west entrances where the wall is reduced in height, and also at several points where large branches of trees have beaten off the blocks of the upper courses. The narrow width of the summit, as shown in the foregoing tables, and the number of loose stones lying upon it, make it somewhat awkward for walking along it, still this can be done far more easily than might be supposed from Mr. Swan’s description. The battering-back of its outer and inner faces appears to point to its original summit being only slightly higher than its present top at its highest point. If the wall were once more than three or four courses above its present highest point, the dÉbris must have been removed, for no greater quantity of blocks were found than would have sufficed to make good that height.

FOUNDATION

For such massive walls it is astonishing to find that the bottom courses of the foundation are not more than from 2 ft. to 3 ft. 6 in. below the present level of the ground immediately surrounding the building. The foundation has been examined at eighteen equi-distant points along the outer circumference, and in no single part does it rest on formation rock, the nearest proximity of which is at a further depth of 4 ft. on the north, 5 ft. on the west, 9 ft. on the south, and 4 ft. on the east. Nor are the bottom courses formed of large blocks, as is so frequently seen in foundations of other ruins, but blocks no larger than those in the upper courses have been employed almost without exception. Near (177 ft.) there is a step-up in the foundation westwards of 5 ft. 9 in. Near [625 ft.] there runs for a few feet a very narrow step-back in the three lowest courses of the foundation, but this is the only point in the circumference of the wall where this feature can be noticed.

The foundation bed upon which the wall is built is purely artificial. Evidently the ancient architects prepared a level surface for the wall, because there is only from 3 ft. to 5 ft. difference in the level of the foundations all round, notwithstanding that on the south-east the ground towards the “Valley of Ruins” and the temple which is erected on the edge of its slope commands the “Valley of Ruins.”

The surface of the prepared foundation consisted of fine cement, now decomposed[50] to firm dry sand. This cement is in places at least 3 ft. deep, is laid on the granite formation for 10 ft. and 15 ft. beyond the wall on both inside and outside the building, and later, when the lower courses of the foundation had been laid, a further flooring of cement was laid, making the side of the lower portion of the foundations at least 1 ft. 6 in., if not 2 ft. 6 in. deep.

The enormous amount of time and labour required to be expended merely in preparing the surface on which to erect the temple is bewildering to contemplate, and fairly rivals as a demonstration of patient labour, length of time of construction, and good workmanship the massive walls themselves. The decomposed cement, which has now become mere sand, was very finely ground, there being not the smallest splinter of granite in its composition. The cement being yellow suggests that the ancients, to save breaking up large pieces of stone, were content to collect small fragments of granite which had become decomposed, and therefore were easier to grind, for everywhere in this locality, especially in damp places and near any granite boulder or glacis, are to be found quantities of small granite chips all yellow with decomposition. Possibly granite sand from neighbouring streams might also have been utilised.

CHEVRON PATTERN

On the upper portion of the exterior face of the south-east main wall is the celebrated chevron pattern which forms one of the most interesting features at the Elliptical Temple. This pattern runs for 265 ft. 6 in. from [189 ft.] to [456 ft. 6 in.] on the line of measurement of the exterior circumference of the temple, that is, from south-south-east to east-north-east.

The pattern is in two rows or bands, which together are 18 in. deep, and Bent states that “it extends along the part of the wall which receives directly the rays of the sun when rising at the summer solstice.” The portion of the main wall carrying the pattern is in the form of an arc, and is the best-built and most substantial part of the wall. Granite monoliths still stand more or less erect on the summit of the wall above the pattern, but not elsewhere. Over the pattern are the foundations of what appear to have been small circular towers resembling in size and position those on the main west wall of the Western Temple on the Acropolis.

In 1903 a quantity of sections of worked soapstone beams were found on the summit of the wall over the pattern. On no other portions of the summit are there traces of monoliths, round towers, or soapstone beams. Bent was unaware of the existence of the traces of round towers or of the soapstone beams on the wall over the pattern, yet he writes, as seems perfectly correct, “Those parts only of the wall which receive the direct rays of the sun when rising at the summer solstice are decorated by this symbolical pattern.” This statement equally applies to the Eastern Temple on the hill and to the large curved wall in Philips Ruins, also to the Western Temple, only in this latter case the great main wall, which is in the form of an arc and is decorated, receives on its face the rays of the setting sun at the winter solstice. A very strong corroboration of this statement is afforded by several other of the more important ruins in Rhodesia which are built upon the curved plan.

In this pattern the blocks are placed on end with the top of each supported by the neighbouring block on one side, thus forming a series of triangular spaces with the bases alternately up and down. The sides of these angular spaces are about 7 in. long, and the openings have been neatly filled in with small stones set back inside 2 in. or 3 in. from flush with the face of the wall. The pattern is somewhat dilapidated in places owing to creeper growths on the wall and to the swinging of large tree branches, which in every wind beat the pattern and loosened the stones forming it.

Chevron pattern was in ancient times the symbol for Fertility. It closely resembles the Egyptian hieroglyphic symbol for water, and also the zodiacal sign of Aquarius, and represents the sea on such Phoenician coins as have engravings of ships.

This pattern is found on several of the ruins of the oldest type, and not on such as by their style of architecture may be considered to be of a later ancient period. It is found in several of the large ruins between Zimbabwe and the Sabi, also at Umnukwana Ruins. A portion of chevron of small size is to be seen at Dhlo-dhlo.

GROUND SURFACE OF EXTERIOR OF MAIN WALL

Till August, 1902, the area surrounding the Elliptical Temple was mere veld and bush, and trees and shrubs grew so thickly near the main wall that it was impossible at certain points to penetrate the jungle to make a complete examination of the wall, while piles of soil from excavations lay along the base of the wall, and some up against the wall itself, in some cases to a height of 6 ft. above the average level of the exterior ground.

Trenches and deep holes, the main wall forming one side of them, were lined with mud, and filled with ferns and plants which could only flourish in a situation which was perpetually damp. There was every evidence that these trenches and holes were filled with water during each wet season, and that they retained a considerable amount of moisture even during the dry seasons. At two points this constant state of damp held by these cuttings had caused the foundations, which at no place rest on the bed-rock, to sink some inches, thus imparting wave-like lines to the courses of the wall close to such holes.

To remove this source of injury to the wall by causing it to sink and also by stimulating tree and creeper growths which were damaging the wall, it was decided to remove all such dÉbris piles, and also the veld soil, most of which had in the course of ages silted down from the lower slopes of the Bentberg some 200 yds. distant on the south side of the temple, and to leave a floor of hard soil which would serve to drain off all rain-water and protect the bases of the walls from being washed by the storm streams from the higher ground. This work was carried out for a width of some 6 to 8 yds. round the entire circumference of the temple. Five catchment areas were formed on the north-west, west, south, and east sides, and from each such area a run-off now leads all rain-water into a hole sunk in the ground at some 12 yds. distance from the main wall.

These five holes, as shown later, have proved useful in demonstrating certain features connected with the temple which so far had been impossible of examination:—

(1) The rock formation is at almost every point some feet below the lowest course of the foundations of the main wall, in most cases 3 ft. to 4 ft., and in one instance—the south—fully 6 ft.

(2) The ground outside the temple has been raised by the silting of soil from the slopes of the Bentberg, by the spreading out of both ancient and old native dÉbris piles, by the levelling up of the surface for laying clay floors of Makalanga huts, and by block dÉbris from the main and several minor walls. This filling-in, both natural and artificial, averages to a height of at least 5 ft. above the level known to the ancients, thus reducing the comparative elevation of the temple to that extent. It is now clear that the temple once stood on a comparatively higher and far more imposing elevation than it stands at present.

(3) The granite plateau which underlies the soil upon which the temple is built is irregular, and resembles on a larger scale the granite plateaux which extend eastward from the temple.[51]

---