The Architecture of Hatshepsut’s Temple at Deir el-Bahari

The mortuary temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari is one of the great architectural experiments of pharaonic Egypt. Built in the early 15th century BCE against the dramatic cliffs of the Theban necropolis, the temple was the work of a single architect, Senenmut, and it broke decisively with the older horizontal layout of pharaonic temple design. The building is laid out in three broad terraced courts that climb the cliff face, connected by ramps and surrounded by colonnades, a design that has been admired, imitated, and analyzed ever since. The wider context for the temple is laid out in The Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut.

A Building Clinging to the Cliff

The temple is built of pale limestone, and it is set against the cliff face of Deir el-Bahari in a way that has no real parallel in Egyptian architecture. The visitor who approaches the temple today follows a long processional avenue, then a ramp, then a series of courtyards that rise one above the other until they reach the cliff face itself. At the very back of the upper terrace, a small rock-cut sanctuary is cut into the cliff, the holiest part of the temple. The whole structure seems to climb the cliff, the building and the natural rock face merging in a single vertical composition.

The setting is not accidental. The cliffs of Deir el-Bahari, with their natural bay, their vertical strata of pale limestone, and their dramatic height, presented a unique opportunity. The 11th Dynasty pharaoh Mentuhotep II had built a smaller mortuary temple at the same site about 500 years earlier, and Hatshepsut’s architects clearly took that older building as a starting point.

The Architect Senenmut

The architect of Hatshepsut’s temple was Senenmut, the king’s high steward, chief minister, and, in the years of the reign, one of the most powerful men in Egypt. Senenmut held more than 60 titles (his representations include at least 25 statues and 80 separate depictions in tombs and temples, an extraordinary number for a non-royal official), including “Overseer of the Royal Works,” “Overseer of the Treasury,” and “Guardian of the King’s Daughter Neferure.” He was responsible for the design and execution of at least five major building projects, including the great obelisks at Karnak and the temple at Deir el-Bahari.

Senenmut’s career is unusual in that he rose from relatively modest origins to become one of the most powerful officials in Egypt, and he left behind more self-representation than almost any other non-royal person in Egyptian history. His statues show him in the company of the princess Neferure, the king’s daughter, holding the young royal in his arms. Senenmut’s later obscurity (his name was eventually removed from many of his own monuments) has been linked to a possible fall from favor late in the reign.

The Three Terraces

The temple is laid out on three superimposed terraces, each one a distinct architectural unit, rising about 30 m (97 ft) up the cliff face.

The Lower Terrace

The lower terrace is the largest of the three and serves as a kind of forecourt. It is approached from the east by a processional avenue, originally lined with sphinxes, which leads to a ramp in the center of the terrace. The terrace itself was once surrounded by a colonnade of square pillars, traces of which can still be seen. The lower terrace was the most public part of the temple, where crowds could gather for major festivals.

The Middle Terrace

The middle terrace is the architectural heart of the temple. It is approached from the lower terrace by a long ramp, and it is surrounded on three sides by colonnades. The southern colonnade preserves the Divine Birth Cycle, a series of reliefs showing the conception and birth of the queen as the daughter of the god Amun. The northern colonnade preserves the famous Expedition to Punt reliefs. At the back of the middle terrace, a second ramp leads up to the upper terrace.

The Upper Terrace

The upper terrace is the smallest and most intimate of the three. It is approached by a ramp in the center of the middle terrace, and it contains a small offering chapel at the back, dedicated to Amun-Ra and the deified Hatshepsut. Beyond the chapel, a small rock-cut sanctuary is cut into the cliff face, the holiest part of the temple.

The Colonnades and the Court

The colonnades of the middle terrace are particularly notable. The southern colonnade, where the Divine Birth Cycle is preserved, has 22 square pillars. The northern colonnade, with the Punt reliefs, has 14 square pillars. The pillars are carved with a delicate relief decoration that includes the standard titulary of the king, the names of the gods, and a series of scenes showing the king making offerings.

The colonnades were originally painted in bright colors, and traces of the paint are still visible on parts of the relief. The most striking aspect of the colonnades is the way they frame the reliefs, drawing the eye toward the central scenes of the queen’s birth and her expedition to Punt. The design is unusual: the reliefs are not just decoration but also narrative, telling the story of the queen’s legitimacy in two parallel visual programs.

The Style: Was It Minoan?

The architecture of Hatshepsut’s temple has been described as a unique synthesis of older Egyptian and newer forms. The most provocative claim, made most forcefully by Eric Cline and others, is that the design shows Minoan influence: the northern colonnade’s profile, the inverted-cone column bases, the bull imagery, and the long horizontal emphasis have been read as echoes of Minoan palatial architecture. The Minoan connection would imply direct or indirect contact between Crete and Thebes in the early 15th century BCE.

I am skeptical. The architectural vocabulary of the temple is overwhelmingly Egyptian; the “Minoan” features are the kind of thing that arises in any monumental architecture working out a problem of horizontal and vertical support. The bull imagery is a long-standing Egyptian tradition, not a Minoan import. The most likely reading is that Senenmut was a brilliant architect working within an Egyptian tradition, with no Aegean influence required. That said, there was demonstrable contact between the Aegean and Egypt in this period (Minoan frescoes at Avaris, the Uluburun shipwreck), so absolute dismissal of influence seems too confident. The balance of evidence, in my view, sits with the skeptics.

The Construction

The construction of the temple required enormous resources. The pale limestone of the cliffs at Deir el-Bahari had to be quarried, cut into blocks, and transported to the site. The columns were carved in a series of standard sizes, and the reliefs were executed by a team of master sculptors. The colors used in the painting were the typical Egyptian palette: red ochre, yellow ochre, Egyptian blue, green frit, and carbon black.

The speed of construction is still debated. The temple was begun in about the seventh year of Hatshepsut’s reign and was substantially complete by the time of the Punt expedition, around year 9. That would mean that the major architectural and decorative work was done in less than five years, an extraordinary feat of organization for a building of this size and complexity.

The Defacement and Restoration

Toward the end of the 20th Dynasty, a campaign was carried out to deface the names and figures of Hatshepsut throughout Egypt. At Deir el-Bahari, her reliefs were hacked out, her statues smashed, and her cartouches replaced with those of her father and brother. The defacement was so thorough that Hatshepsut’s reign was almost lost to history until the 19th century.

The restoration of the temple has been a long-term project. Herbert Winlock for the Metropolitan Museum of Art led the American excavations from 1911 to 1931; his classic report Excavations at Deir el Bahri (1942) remains a standard reference. The Polish-Egyptian Mission of the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology has been at the site since 1961, led initially by Jadwiga Lipińska. The mission has been responsible for the careful cleaning of the reliefs, the conservation of the painted decoration, the consolidation of the cliff face, and the study of the architectural remains.