Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
RE: Bob Hook
Though, as you said, it does delay the true intention of ancient cultures, we can be grateful today that modern science tries constantly to be objective rather than biased. I have trouble understanding why both of these men couldn’t see how important objectivity is when discovering history and science.The first example that came to mind was the funerary mask of King Agamemnon, which was discovered by the german archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann. He forced the narrative of that time to make those around him believe that this was the mask of the Greek commander Agamemnon and is even believed to have hammered out the mask in the 19th century style to fit his expectations. While this mask itself is believed to be authentic, the markings stronger markings of the eyes and ears are probably not. European archaeologists of that time had their own biases and narratives they wanted to push and this is no exception. Sir Arthur Evens incorrectly labeled the palace of Knossos as a palace, as modern scholars have found indications that it was for aristocrats. He also tried in vain to reconstruct the palace to his ideals, which again, have been proven by modern scholars as incorrect. His intentions were not terrible, but it is important to remain objective when observing pieces of history.
RE: ckocsis
The Egyptians fixation with death to me ultimately is a testament to how dedicated to the gods they were, this focus on the afterlife wasn’t feared at all, but represented and respected. Like you said, they saw it as a time to meet the gods, and we don’t see much fear surrounding it, aside from the book of the dead displaying the weighing of a heart. It just goes to show that above all, the gods decide their fates.RE: Lacey Miller
I really enjoy the palette of King Narmer– it has so much symbolism and care put into it, even as a utilitarian art piece (makeup palette). Much like you said, they never really wavered from the spiritual. I attempted to do something similar, and found that the bust of Nefertiti is one of the few that does not have extensively rich spiritual ties.Within all the art they create, there is some hint of a deity somewhere and heavy focus on the afterlife. We can see this in the Book of the Dead, where various deities are depicted, and it shows their relationship to man, and how much man relies on the deities mercy and power. This is also shown in the many funerary complexes/temples/buildings erected by the Egyptians. Yes, they are meant for the kings and high ranking people, but they are also clearly indicated to be respecting of their gods and the afterlife. Even in Ramses II temple, where multiple images of Ramses are depicted, the god Ra-Horakhty reins above the depictions, showing that even when a deified Ramses is prominent, the god is of higher priority and worship.
RE: Miranda Jackovich
That’s very true of what you said about their environments and culture, I did not consider it that way. The Nile, being the lifegiving force that it was, could have influenced Egyptians to be more religious because of the gratitude they had towards it. The lushness of Egypt is plainly appreciated in their art, as is their respect for their deities.RE: Miranda Johansson
Ooh, I like how you pointed out the similarities with the animals. That makes me think of Assurnasirpal II Hunting Lions vs Ti Watching Hippopotamus Hunt– very similar goals in mind, displaying power and contrasting them with the strong animals while maintaining the hierarchy of scale. It’s amazing to see that cultures throughout time respect the power and might of animals and use it to legitimize themselves.Egyptian culture had a lot of focus on death and the afterlife, and heavy focus on the deities/becoming deified. While Mesopotamian had similar deity priorities, the goal there seems more focused to be to display power and hierarchy and organization. Egyptians spent a lot of their artistic time toward creating depictions or preparations for the afterlife, with less focus on daily life such as the Mesopotamians do. An example of this would be the stele of Naram-sin or the code of Hammurabi. Both of them are meant to legitimize the ruler and focus on their power as it was present at that time. We can compare this to the funerary steel of Egypt or the book of the dead. Each object in their respective culture are “written’ depictions of their perspective of that time, but with different goals in mind. Though, comparing the stele of Naram-sin with the pallet of Narmer, we can see similarities such as hierarchy of scale, leaders becoming deified or condoned by the deities, and displays of power.
RE: Valene
Like you said, there were several different classes within the hierarchy. It’s a shame it had to be that way, but I can understand why a society that new would need the strict ruling, it could easily fall apart as we’ve seen throughout history. While the upper class had more leisure time than the lower class, the rulers certainly had the most leisure time if we look at “Assurbanipal and his Queen in the Garden’.RE: Miranda Jackovich
I like all the examples you gave– showing how important rulers are is probably the biggest element we got on the social hierarchy. I think it’s also important to note the servants and soldiers as contributors to the social formation. Without them there would be no one to rule, and I’m glad that they are depicted in ancient art.I think of the video we watched where we learned about Hammurabi’s code, at the very last second you said eye for an eye doesn’t count if it’s between a slave and a citizen. Property laws and civil laws changed depending on what social standing you were placed in. The carved vessel of Uruk is a great example showing different social standings, literally a hierarchy as the registers go down. Up top we have Inanna, and the priest-king, the highest standing social rank, and then on the second register there are naked men whose purpose only seems to be to deliver/produce the food. The lowest tiers are the source of food and economy itself. It shows us that a society during those days could not run without the foundation of producers and delivers.
RE: Kaitlyn
I’m glad you pointed out other ways their showed their prowess– through the building of complicated artwork or structures. Such a feat would surely ensure their place of power from the perspective of the people, since we want to believe our rulers powerful (leadership qualities). Like you said, the magnitude of the structures would strike awe in those beneath the rulers and those that are in the same social standing as well. To gain respect of other rulers must have been important.RE: Miranda Jackovich
That’s a good point you have there, Miranda– the need for social ranking. Leaders would have to legitimize themselves as something of higher status than the commoner to prove that they had any rights to rule, and with that, likened or connected themselves with the divines. I enjoyed your response.A common theme within the Mesopotamian cultures showing their power is showing their connection to divinity — the right to rule. They would liken themselves to the gods, use hierarchy of scale (stele of Naram-Sin), and depict themselves doing something noble or brave (hunting lions). Hammurabi’s Code depicts him quite literally consulting with a God, elevating himself to the divine as the code falls beneath him. Saddam Hussein had a similar goal in mind by reconstruction of the Ishtar Gate.
RE: Gabe
I liked your last sentence “I personally like taking and emphasizing the aspects of an object which are important because for me”, it hits the nail on the head. That is why I think it can be loosely defined as abstract art, because of that use of gesture and emphasis on the parts that they consider important of symbolic. Though it is in now way modern abstract (I agree), that would be absurd.
