Beside using the separate flowers, the whole plant was also a favourite subject as a group. In the earliest days we find it entwined around the hieroglyph of union, as we shall notice in considering the hieroglyphs. In the XIIth dynasty the plant appears as a recurrent group in surface decoration; though from the varying form of the flower it might be intended for lotus or papyrus. [Illustration: 127.—R.C. xciii.] [Illustration: 128.—L.D. III. 109.] In the XVIIIth dynasty it is more free, as might be expected in the time of Akhenaten. [Illustration: 129.—R.S. lxxxiii.] It is also seen as a foreign ornament on the dress of a Syrian slain by Ramessu II. at Abu Simbel, but in this case perhaps the tufted papyrus is intended. And in place of the rounded group which is usual in the XVIIIth-XIXth dynasties we find a different treatment on the throne of Ramessu III., in which it is kept more as a parallel pattern. This parallelism became general in later times, and the Ptolemaic walls are ruled over with stiff friezes of lotus and bud. [Illustration: 130.—P. 115.] [Illustration: 131.—L.D. II. 35.] [Illustration: 132.—L.D. II. 64.] These wall basements are preceded by groups of flower and bud in scenes, which are of the same style, as early as the IVth dynasty, on the tomb of Debuhen. Here it may be the papyrus; but in the Vth dynasty, on a basket-work screen, the lotus and bud is clearly shown. This pattern, however, is very seldom found as a general architectural ornament until we come down to the dull sterility of the Ptolemaic and Roman age. Then the lower part of each wall is uniformly ruled with an endless series of flowers and buds on long stems in monotonous order. [Illustration: 133.—P. 88. L.D. iv. 84.] We now come to the ornamental development of the flower into a monstrosity, which is only decorative and not natural, and which requires some thought and comparison to understand its origin. [Illustration: 134.—P. 79.] First there is the _fleur-de-lys_ type, with curled-over sides and a middle projection. This has not been yet explained satisfactorily; but a principle which was first clearly formulated by Borchardt (A.Z. xxxi. 1) will show the origin of this as well as of the succeeding forms. The Egyptian, it seems, consistently drew the interior or top view of an object above the side view. In short, they suppose things to be seen in a bird’s-eye view, and expressed that by drawing—for instance, a cup—in side view and partly in top view above that. A dish would be drawn in side view, and a top view of its compartments and contents placed over it, and the bunch of flowers that lay on it is again placed over the top view. Now on this principle we can see that the projection in the midst of the lotus flower is the third sepal at the back of the flower, the fourth, in front, being so foreshortened as to disappear altogether. [Illustration: 135.—T.A. I.] [Illustration: 136.—T.A. 368.] [Illustration: 137.—T.A. 381.]