44 8 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE. BOOK IX. early attained a certain stage of civilisation, and maintained it without change or progress during the whole period of their existence. The syllabic symbols of the Chinese are the exact counterpart of the hieroglyphic writing of the Egyptians, as clumsy and as unlike that of any other contemporary nation, and as symbolic of their exclusive segregation from the rest of mankind. In both countries there was always the same calm contemplation of death, the same desire for an honourable funeral and a splendid tomb, and the same reverence for the dead. In these and fifty other particulars, the manners and customs of the two peoples seem identical, and the perfect parallelism only breaks down when we come to speak of their buildings. There are no tombs in China to be compared with the Pyramids, and no temples that approach those of Thebes in dimensions or in splendour. If the Chinese were as closely allied to the Tartar or Mongolian tribes on their north-eastern frontier as is generally supposed, this difference could hardly have existed. When the inner country has been more carefully examined, it is probable that we may see cause to modify our opinion as to the archi- tectural character of the Chinese people. This will be especially the case if, as is highly probable, the so-called Indo-Chinese inhabitants of Cambodia are very much more closely allied in blood to the Chinese than they are to any of the races inhabiting India ; since by the erection of the buildings described in a previous division of this work, the Cambodians have nobly vindicated their title to be considered as one of the great building races of the world. Considering the short time of their existence, and the limited area they occupied, they may in fact lay claim to having surpassed even the Egyptians in this respect. It will be strange if in Ho-nan and Kwang-si we do not eventually find the links which will confirm the connection of the two races of Cambodia and China, and explain what at present can only be regarded as one of the unsolved problems of architectural history. A little well-directed industry on the spot would very soon clear all this doubt away. Meanwhile there are other minor causes which may have contributed to the absence of monu- mental buildings in China, and which it may be as well to allude to before proceeding further. In the first place, the Chinese never had either a dominant priesthood or a hereditary nobility. The absence of the former class is a very important consideration, because in all countries where architecture has been carried to anything like perfection, it is to sacred art that it has owed its highest inspiration, and sacred art is never
