Egyptian Empire | Ancient Egyptian Art | Ancient origins
Articles and Definitions › Contents
- Egyptian Empire › Antique Origins
- Ancient Egyptian Art › Ancient History
Ancient civilizations › Historical and archaeological sites
Egyptian Empire › Antique Origins
Definition and Origins
The Egyptian Empire rose during the period of the New Kingdom (c. 1570- c. 1069 BCE), when the country reached its height of wealth, international prestige, and military might. The empire stretched from modern-day Syria in the north to modern-day Sudan in the south and from the region of Jordan in the east to Libya in the west. Since the empire rose and fell in the course of the New Kingdom, historians refer to the period as either the New Kingdom or the Egyptian Empire interchangeably.
Egyptian history is divided by later scholars into eras of “kingdoms” and “intermediate periods”; kingdoms were times of a strong central government and a unified nation while intermediate periods were eras of a weak central government and disunity. The New Kingdom emerged from the time known as the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1782- c. 1570 BCE) in which the country was divided between a foreign Semitic people known as the Hyksos holding power in northern Lower Egypt, the Nubians ruling to the south in Upper Egypt, and the city of Thebes in the middle representing the traditional Egyptian government.
The Theban king Ahmose I (c. 1570- c. 1544 BCE) drove the Hyksos out of Egypt and defeated the Nubians, uniting Egypt under his rule from Thebes. In his early campaigns, Ahmose I created buffer states around Egypt's borders to prevent any other foreign power from gaining a foothold in the country as the Hyksos had. In doing so, he initiated the policy of conquestwhich would be followed by his successors and give rise to the empire of Egypt.
IN ITS TIME, EGYPT WAS AMONG THE MOST POWERFUL & PRESTIGIOUS EMPIRES OF THE ANCIENT WORLD.
This period is the most famous in Egyptian history. Egypt's best-known monarchs such as Hatshepsut, Thutmose III, Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, Tutankhamun, Ramesses II (the Great), and Ramesses III all reigned during this time and some of the most famous monuments and temples – such as the Colossi of Memnon and the Temple of Amun at Karnak – were built.
The empire flourished through the reign of Ramesses III (1186-1155 BCE) when invasions (primarily by the Sea Peoples ), over-spending which depleted the treasury, corruption of government officials, loss of faith in the traditional role of the king, increased power of the priesthood, and a decline in its international prestige all contributed to its fall. In its time, however, it was among the most powerful and prestigious empires of the ancient world.
THE HYKSOS IN EGYPT
The Middle Kingdom (2040-1782 BCE) during the 12th Dynasty is considered Egypt's “golden age” when cultural and artistic achievements reached their height. During the 13th Dynasty, however, the kings were weaker and more concerned with their own pursuits and court intrigues than the good of the country. During this time, the Hyksos were able to establish themselves at Avaris in Lower Egypt and steadily consolidated their presence until they were able to wield significant political- and military power. The Middle Kingdom fell as the Egyptian central government grew weaker and both the Hyksos in the north and the Nubians in the south grew stronger, initiating the Second Intermediate Period.
Later scribes of the New Kingdom would characterize the time of the Hyksos as an “invasion” and other writers, picking up on this, perpetuated that myth. The Hyksos never invaded Egypt, however; they were initially traders who saw an opportunity to establish themselves in a neglected region of Egypt and took it. Contrary to later reports, the Hyksos were not enemies of Egypt who rampaged through the country burning and looting the temples.
There is ample evidence, rather, that the Hyksos admired Egyptian culture and emulated the Egyptians in many ways. Trade connections between the Hyksos in the north, the Nubians in the south, and Thebes were well-established and the only evidence of the Hyksos destroying temples or sacking cities comes long after their arrival in the land and is thought to have been provoked by individual cities of Lower Egypt or by Thebes. It is also a myth that the Hyksos ruled all of Lower Egypt; their power was limited to just below the Delta region.
Stela of Kamose
Trade went on evenly between the Hyksos, Egyptians, and Nubians until the government at Thebes grew tired of feeling like guests in their own country. The Theban king Seqenenra Taa (also known as T'aO, c. 1580 BCE), interpreted a message from the Hyksos king Apepi – which was probably a request to curtail the Theban practice of hippo hunting – as a challenge to his authority and launched a campaign against the town of Avaris. Ta'O was killed in battle but his cause was taken up by his son Kamose and then by Ahmose I who defeated the Hyksos and unified Egypt.
RISE OF THE EMPIRE
Ahmose I conquered Avaris, drove the Hyksos survivors into the Levant and then pursued them up through Syria. In doing so, he naturally conquered those regions for Egypt and installed his own officials to govern them; this was the beginning of the Egyptian Empire. Ahmose I established the policy of creating buffer states around Egypt's borders so that an “invasion” such as that of the Hyksos would never be possible again. After defeating the Hyksos, Ahmose I marched south and drove the Nubians back beyond the traditional borders, thus enlarging Egypt's territory in three directions – south, east, and north – which included the profitable region of the Levant.
Although the Hyksos were later vilified, they improved Egyptian culture in a number of ways and, significantly, improved their weaponry, too. Prior to the arrival of the Hyksos, the Egyptians had no knowledge of the horse or horse-drawn chariot ; they were still using the single-arched bow, and were equipped with swords which were not always reliable. Egyptologist Barbara Watterson comments on Hyksos' contributions:
The Hyksos, being from western Asia, brought the Egyptians into contact with the peoples and the culture of that region as never before and introduced them to the horse-drawn war chariot; to a composite bow made from wood reinforced with strips of sinew and horn, a more elastic weapon with a greater range than their own simple bow; to a scimitar-shaped sword, called the Khopesh, and to a bronze dagger with a narrow blade cast in one piece with the tang. The Egyptians developed this weapon into a short sword. (60).
The Khopesh (also given as Khepesh) sword was cast entirely of bronze and the handle was then wound with hide and cloth and, with more expensive blades, ornamented. This curved sword was much more effective than any the Egyptians had used in the past. The war chariot, manned by archers with the new composite bow and a large quiver attached to the side, would prove one of Egypt's most significant military assets, and the battle axe, made of bronze attached to a haft, was far more effective than the flint or copper axes bound to wooden shafts used in the past. These would be the weapons of the New Kingdom empire and would be used by a new kind of military.
Egyptian War Chariot
THE ARMIES OF THE EMPIRE
The first standing army in Egypt was established by Amenemhat I (c. 1991-1962 BCE) of the 12th Dynasty in the Middle Kingdom. Prior to this time, the army was comprised of conscripts sent to the king by regional governors (called nomarchs ) from their districts ( nomes ) who were often more loyal to their home-ruler and region than the king of the country. These early armies marched under their own banners and elevated their regional cult gods. Amenemhat I cut the power of the nomarchs by creating a professional army with a chain of command that placed power in the king's hands and was overseen by his vizier.
The army Ahmose I mobilized against the Hyksos was made up of professionals, conscripts, and mercenaries like the Medjaywarriors but under the reign of his son, Amenhotep I (c. 1541-1520 BCE) this army would be extensively trained and further equipped with the best weapons available at the time. Egyptologist Helen Strudwick notes:
By the New Kingdom, the Egyptian army had begun to adopt the superior weapons and equipment of their enemies - the Syrians and Hittites. The triangular bow, the helmet, chain-mail tunics, and the Khepesh sword became standard issue. Equally, the quality of the bronze improved as the Egyptians experimented with different proportions of tin and copper. (466).
Not only were the weapons of the army new and improved but so was the structure of the military itself. Between the time of Amenemhat I and Ahmose I the military had remained more or less the same. Weaponry and military training had improved but not dramatically. Under the reign of Amenhotep I, though, this would change as Egyptologist Margaret Bunson explains:
The army was no longer a confederation of nome levies but a first-class military force... organized into divisions, both chariot forces and infantry. Each division numbered approximately 5,000 men. These divisions carried the names of the principal deities of the nation. (170).
Unlike the early army which went to battle under the banners of their nomes and clans, the New Kingdom army fought for the welfare of the entire country, bearing the standards of the universal gods of Egypt. The king was the commander-in-chief of the armed forces with his vizier and subordinates handling the logistics and supply lines. The chariot divisions, in which the pharaoh rode, were directly under his command and divided into squadrons with their own captain. There were also mercenary forces, like the Medjay, who served as shock troops.
THE AGE OF IMPERIAL EGYPT
These were the troops who forged and then maintained the Egyptian Empire. Amenhotep I continued the policies of Ahmose I and each pharaoh who came after him did the same. Thutmose I (1520-1492 BCE) put down rebellions in Nubia and expanded Egypt's territories in the Levant and Syria. Nubia was especially prized by the Egyptians for their gold mines and, in fact, the region took its name from the Egyptian word for 'gold' – nub. Little is known of his successor, Thutmose II (1492-1479 BCE) because his reign is overshadowed by the impressive era of queen Hatshepsut (1479-1458 BCE).
FOREIGN KINGS WROTE REGULARLY TO AMENHOTEP III ASKING FOR GOLD & FAVORS AND COUNTRIES WERE EAGER TO TRADE WITH EGYPT BECAUSE OF ITS VAST RESOURCES AND CONSIDERABLE STRENGTH.
Hatshepsut is not only the most successful female ruler in Egypt's history but among the most remarkable leaders of the ancient world. She broke with the tradition of a patriarchal monarchy with no evidence of rebellion on the part of her subjects or the court and established a reign which enriched Egypt financially and culturally without engaging in any extensive military campaigns.
Although there is evidence that she commissioned military expeditions early in her reign, the remainder was peaceful and focused on Egypt's infrastructure, building projects, and trade. She re-established contact with the Land of Punt – an almost mythical land of riches – which supplied Egypt with many of the luxury goods the upper classes came to covet as well as necessary items for the worship of the gods (such as incense) and the cosmetics industry (oils and scented flowers).
When Hatshepsut died, she was succeeded by Thutmose III (1458-1425 BCE) who, possibly in an effort to prevent future women from emulating her, had Hatshepsut's name erased from monuments. He would have done this in order to maintain the tradition of a male sovereign, not because he had anything against the queen, and he left her name intact inside her mortuary temple and elsewhere out of the public eye. Even so, later kings knew nothing of her accomplishments and she would not be known to history again for over 2,000 years.
Thutmose III should not be remembered for this one action, however, as he proved himself an able and efficient ruler and a brilliant military leader. Historians have often referred to him as the “Napoleon of Egypt” for his success in battle as he fought 17 campaigns in 20 years and, unlike Napoleon, he was victorious in all of them. He also encouraged and extended trade and was a man of culture who helped preserve Egypt's history.
The foreign and domestic policies of Thutmose III enriched Egypt and expanded its borders, providing the country with a stable economy and a growing international reputation. By the time of the reign of Amenhotep III (1386-1353 BCE), Egypt was among the wealthiest and most powerful in the world. Amenhotep III was a brilliant administrator and diplomat whose prosperous reign established Egypt firmly in what historians refer to as the “Club of the Great Powers” – which included Babylonia, Assyria, Mittanni, and the Land of the Hatti (Hittites) – all of whom were joined in peaceful relations through trade and diplomacy.
Foreign kings wrote regularly to Amenhotep III asking for gold and favors, which he freely granted, and countries were eager to trade with Egypt because of its vast resources and considerable strength. The Egyptian army at this time was formidable and alliances were quick to be made. Wealth flowed into the royal treasury from beyond Egypt's borders and Amenhotep III could afford to pay large crews of workers to erect his temples and monuments. He built so many of these, in fact, that later historians thought he must have ruled for over 100 years to have accomplished all he had; in reality, he was simply an exceptionally able statesman.
Amenhotep III
Amenhotep III's son and successor was Amenhotep IV who, in the fourth or fifth year of his reign, changed his name to Akhenaten (1353-1336 BCE) and abolished the traditional religious practices of Egypt. Although Akhenaten is frequently depicted by modern day writers as a great religious visionary and an exceptional king he was actually neither. His religious reforms were most likely a political maneuver to decrease the power of the Cult of Amun which, by his time, was almost as powerful as the king, and his attention to rule was so minimal that his wife, Nefertiti, took over administrative duties and correspondence with other nations.
The friction between the Cult of Amun and royalty started during the period of the Old Kingdom when the kings of the 4th Dynasty elevated the sect and gave them tax-exempt status in exchange for performing the necessary mortuary rituals at the Giza complex. Since they were tax-exempt, all the produce from their lands went to them directly – not to the government – and so they were able to amass considerable wealth. From the Old Kingdom on, the cult only grew in power and so it is probable that Akhenaten's “reforms” were motivated far more by politics and greed than any divine vision of a one true god.
Under the reign of Akhenaten, the capital was moved from Thebes to a new city, Akhetaten, designed and built by the king and dedicated to his personal god. The temples in all the cities and towns were closed and religious festivals abolished except those venerating his god, the Aten. The Egyptian economy relied heavily on religious practices as the temples were the centers of the community and employed a large staff.
Further, crafts -people who made statuary, amulets, and other religious artifacts were also put out of work. The central cultural value of Egypt – ma'at (harmony and balance) – which was the foundation of the religion and the society was ignored by Akhenaten's administration and so were the diplomatic and commercial ties with other powers.
Akhenaten's successor was Tutankhamun (1336-1327 BCE) who was in the process of restoring Egypt to its former status when he died young. His work was completed by Horemheb (1320-1295 BCE) who erased Akhenaten's name from history and destroyed his city. Horemheb succeeded in restoring Egypt but it was nowhere near the strength it had been prior to Akhenaten's reign.
During the 19th Dynasty which followed Horemheb, the most famous pharaoh in Egypt's history would claim to have finally restored the country to power: Ramesses II (the Great, 1279-1213 BCE). Ramesses II is not only the best-known pharaoh in the present day but also in antiquity thanks to his talent for self-promotion and the skills of his vizier, Khay, who ensured that the king's name would endure through monuments, temples, and towering statuary honoring him.
Ramesses II
Ramesses II may not have completely brought Egypt back to the level of power it had known under Amenhotep III but he certainly came close. He re-established ties with the other great powers, signed the first peace treaty in the world with the Hittites following the Battle of Kadesh (1274 BCE), and, although he had himself depicted regularly as a great warrior-king, concentrated most of his reign on domestic policies, trade, and diplomacy. Thutmose III was actually the most skilled military leader of the New Kingdom, not Ramesses II, but the image of the pharaoh as a mighty warrior was a long-established tradition in Egypt symbolizing the king's powers even if a particular monarch was actually more skilled in other areas.
DECLINE & FALL
The 19th Dynasty continued the successes of the 18th but, during the 20th Dynasty, the empire began to decline. Ramesses II and his successor, Merenptah (1213-1203 BCE) had both defeated invasions by the Sea Peoples – a coalition of different tribes who were responsible for weakening and destroying a number of civilizations at this time – but had not crippled their power. In the 20th Dynasty, under the reign of Ramesses III, the Sea Peoples returned in force and the king had no choice but to mobilize his army and mount a defense.
Ramesses III defeated the Sea Peoples just as his predecessors had but the cost in lives and resources was tremendous. In keeping with the Egyptian practice of elevating the numbers of enemies slain in battle while minimizing their own losses, official records only record the glorious victories of the defense of Egypt. Evidence of problems arising afterwards, however, indicates that a loss of labor resulted in less grain production and a struggling economy. The cost of the war had also depleted the treasury and trade relations with other powers were suffering because Egypt did not have the kinds of resources as before and, also, these other powers were dealing with their own difficulties resulting from raids by the Sea Peoples and others.
At this same time, the Cult of Amun was again as powerful as it had been prior to Akhenaten's attempt to destroy it. The high priest at Thebes was increasingly given as much, if not more, respect than the king, thus weakening the monarchy. The empire's problems were clearly manifested in the worker's strike of 1159 BCE at Deir el-Medina – the first recorded strike in the world – when the wages for the tomb builders were late and the local officials were helpless in rectifying the problem.
Bronze Age Mediterranean Invasions & Migrations
One report from the time cites an official telling the workers that he would give them their grain if he had any but there was nothing he could do. Officials also had no idea how to handle the strike itself – nothing like it had ever happened before – and so they more or less did nothing. The underlying problem was that the concept of harmony – embodied in ma'at – had been ignored and the king was no longer able to keep the balance required to govern effectively.
Ramesses III was the last good pharaoh of the New Kingdom. The problems which would lead to the rapid decline of the empire manifested themselves only toward the end of his reign. After his reign, the country entered what is known as the Ramessid Period when Ramesses IV through Ramesses XI presided over the steady decline of the empire.
By the time of Ramesses XI (1107-1077 BCE), respect for the pharaoh was at an all-time low as the economy floundered, trade with other countries became more difficult, the army was allowed to stagnate, and Egypt's international standing became a memory. The poor economy encouraged tomb robbing and wide-spread corruption among police, magistrates, and government officials who no longer respected the social hierarchy or the religious and cultural values which had sustained Egypt for so long.
A letter from a general during the reign of Ramesses XI exemplifies how fragmented Egyptian society had become by this time when he asks, “As for pharaoh, whose superior is he after all?” (van de Mieroop, 257). This kind of question would have been unthinkable at the height of the Egyptian Empire but, as the priests of Amun became more powerful and the king became weaker, the monarch came to matter less and less to the people.
The 20th Dynasty – and the Egyptian Empire - ended with the death of Ramesses XI. The country was, by this time, divided between rule by the pharaoh in Lower Egypt and by the High Priest of Amun at Thebes in Upper Egypt. Ramesses XI's successor, Smendes (1077-1051 BCE), would attempt to reign like the pharaohs of the past but, in reality, was a co-ruler with the high priest Herihor of Thebes (c. 1074 BCE) at the beginning of the era known as the Third Intermediate Period (c. 1069-525 BCE).
The Egyptian literary work The Report of Wenamun is set during this period and describes the difficulties of an official who is sent on a mission to the Levant to buy wood for the restoration of the Barque of Amun. At the height of the empire, this task would have posed no problems but, the author makes clear, once Egypt had lost its balance and fallen in status with other powers, even the simplest undertaking could become an ordeal. Wenamun is robbed, insulted, ignored, and even resorts to robbery himself.
Like the letter questioning the king's value, the events depicted in The Report of Wenamun would have been unimaginable during the golden days of Egypt's empire. The time of Thutmose III, Amenhotep III, and Ramesses II was over and Egypt's later periods would see few kings like them and know nothing like the grandeur of the Egyptian Empire.
Ancient Egyptian Art › Ancient History
Definition and Origins
The artworks of ancient Egypt have fascinated people for thousands of years. The early Greek and later Roman artists were influenced by Egyptian techniques and their art would inspire those of other cultures up to the present day. Many artists are known from later periods but those of Egypt are completely anonymous and for a very interesting reason: their art was functional and created for a practical purpose whereas later art was intended for aesthetic pleasure. Functional art is work-made-for-hire, belonging to the individual who commissioned it, while art created for pleasure - even if commissioned - allows for greater expression of the artist's vision and so recognition of an individual artist.
A Greek artist like Phidias (c.490-430 BCE) certainly understood the practical purposes in creating a statue of Athena or Zeus but his primary aim would have been to make a visually pleasing piece, to make "art" as people understand that word today, not to create a practical and functional work. All Egyptian art served a practical purpose: a statue held the spirit of the god or the deceased; a tomb painting showed scenes from one's life on earth so one's spirit could remember it or scenes from the paradise one hoped to attain so one would know how to get there; charms and amulets protected one from harm; figurines warded off evil spirits and angry ghosts; hand mirrors, whip-handles, cosmetic cabinets all served practical purposes and ceramics were used for drinking, eating, and storage. Egyptologist Gay Robins notes:
As far as we know, the ancient Egyptians had no word that corresponded exactly to our abstract use of the word `art'. They had words for individual types of monuments that we today regard as examples of Egyptian art - 'statue', 'stela', 'tomb' -but there is no reason to believe that these words necessarily included an aesthetic dimension in their meaning. (12)
"ART FOR ART'S SAKE" WAS UNKNOWN &, FURTHER, WOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN INCOMPREHENSIBLE TO AN ANCIENT EGYPTIAN WHO UNDERSTOOD ART AS FUNCTIONAL ABOVE ALL ELSE.
Although Egyptian art is highly regarded today and continues to be a great draw for museums featuring exhibits, the ancient Egyptians themselves would never have thought of their work in this same way and certainly would find it strange to have these different types of works displayed out of context in a museum's hall. Statuary was created and placed for a specific reason and the same is true for any other kind of art. The concept of "art for art's sake" was unknown and, further, would have probably been incomprehensible to an ancient Egyptian who understood art as functional above all else.
EGYPTIAN SYMMETRY
This is not to say the Egyptians had no sense of aesthetic beauty. Even Egyptian hieroglyphics were written with aesthetics in mind. A hieroglyphic sentence could be written left to right or right to left, up to down or down to up, depending entirely on how one's choice affected the beauty of the finished work. Simply put, any work needed to be beautiful but the motivation to create was focused on a practical goal: function. Even so, Egyptian art is consistently admired for its beauty and this is because of the value ancient Egyptians placed on symmetry.
The perfect balance in Egyptian art reflects the cultural value of ma'at (harmony) which was central to the civilization. Ma'at was not only universal and social order but the very fabric of creation which came into being when the gods made the ordered universe out of undifferentiated chaos. The concept of unity, of oneness, was this "chaos" but the gods introduced duality - night and day, female and male, dark and light - and this duality was regulated by ma'at.
Proto-Historical Statue from Egypt
It is for this reason that Egyptian temples, palaces, homes and gardens, statuary and paintings, signet rings and amulets were all created with balance in mind and all reflect the value of symmetry. The Egyptians believed their land had been made in the image of the world of the gods and, when someone died, they went to a paradise they would find quite familiar. When an obelisk was made it was always created and raised with an identical twin and these two obelisks were thought to have divine reflections, made at the same time, in the land of the gods. Temple courtyards were purposefully laid out to reflect creation, ma'at, heka (magic), and the afterlife with the same perfect symmetry the gods had initiated at creation. Art reflected the perfection of the gods while, at the same time, serving a practical purpose on a daily basis.
HISTORICAL PROGRESSION
The art of Egypt is the story of the elite, the ruling class. Throughout most of Egypt's historical periods those of more modest means could not afford the luxury of artworks to tell their story and it is largely through Egyptian art that the history of the civilization has come to be known. The tombs, tomb paintings, inscriptions, temples, even most of the literature, is concerned with the lives of the upper class and only by way of telling these stories are those of the lower classes revealed. This paradigm was already set prior to the written history of the culture. Egyptian art begins in the Pre-Dynastic Period (c. 6000-c.3150 BCE) through rock drawings and ceramics but is fully realized by the Early Dynastic Period (c. 3150-c.2613 BCE) in the famous Narmer Palette.
The Narmer Palette (c. 3150 BCE) is a two-sided ceremonial plate of siltstone intricately carved with scenes of the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt by King Narmer. The importance of symmetry is evident in the composition which features the heads of four bulls (a symbol of power) at the top of each side and balanced representation of the figures which tell the story.The work is considered a masterpiece of Early Dynastic Period art and shows how advanced Egyptian artists were at the time.
Narmer Palette
The later work of the architect Imhotep (c.2667-2600 BCE) on the pyramid of King Djoser (c. 2670 BCE) reflects how far artworks had advanced since the Narmer Palette. Djoser's pyramid complex is intricately designed with lotus flowers, papyrus plants, and djed symbols in high and low relief and the pyramid itself, of course, is evidence of the Egyptian skill in working in stone on monumental artworks.
During the Old Kingdom (c.2613-2181 BCE) art became standardized by the elite and figures were produced uniformly to reflect the tastes of the capital at Memphis. Statuary of the late Early Dynastic and early Old Kingdom periods is remarkably similar although other art forms (painting and writing ) show more sophistication in the Old Kingdom. The greatest artworks of the Old Kingdom are the Pyramids and Great Sphinx at Giza which still stand today but more modest monuments were created with the same precision and beauty. Old Kingdom art and architecture, in fact, was highly valued by Egyptians in later eras. Some rulers and nobles (such as Khaemweset, fourth son of Ramesses II ) purposefully commissioned works in Old Kingdom style, even the eternal home of their tombs.
In the First Intermediate Period (2181 -2040 BCE), following the collapse of the Old Kingdom, artists were able to express individual and regional visions more freely. The lack of a strong central government commissioning works meant that district governors could requisition pieces reflecting their home province. These different districts also found they had more disposable income since they were not sending as much to Memphis. More economic power locally inspired more artists to produce works in their own style. Mass production began during the First Intermediate Period also and this led to a uniformity in a given region's artwork which made it at once distinctive but of lesser quality than Old Kingdom work. This change can best be seen in the production of shabti dolls for grave goods which were formerly made by hand.
Shabti Dolls
Art would flourish during the Middle Kingdom (2040-1782 BCE) which is generally considered the high point of Egyptian culture. Colossal statuary began during this period as well as the great temple of Karnak at Thebes. The idealism of Old Kingdom depictions in statuary and paintings was replaced by realistic representations and the lower classes are also found represented more often in art than previously. The Middle Kingdom gave way to the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1782 - c. 1570 BCE) during which the Hyksos held large areas of the Delta region while the Nubians encroached from the south. Art from this period produced at Thebes retains the characteristics of the Middle Kingdom while that of the Nubians and Hyksos - both of whom admired and copied Egyptian art - differs in size, quality, and technique.
NEW KINGDOM ART IS DEFINED BY A HIGH QUALITY IN VISION & TECHNIQUE DUE LARGELY TO EGYPT'S INTERACTION WITH NEIGHBORING CULTURES
The New Kingdom (c. 1570-c.1069 BCE), which followed, is the best known period from Egypt's history and produced some of the finest and most famous works of art. The bust of Nefertiti and the golden death mask of Tutankhamun both come from this era. New Kingdom art is defined by a high quality in vision and technique due largely to Egypt's interaction with neighboring cultures. This was the era of Egypt's empire and the metal-working techniques of the Hittites - who were now considered allies, if not equals - greatly influenced the production of funerary artifacts, weaponry, and other artwork.
Following the New Kingdom the Third Intermediate Period (c. 1069-525 BCE) and Late Period (525-332 BCE) attempted with more or less success to continue the high standard of New Kingdom art while also evoking Old Kingdom styles in an effort to recapture the declining stature of Egypt. Persian influence in the Late Period is replaced by Greek tastes in the Ptolemaic Period (323-30 BCE) which also tries to suggest the Old Kingdom standards with New Kingdom technique and this paradigm persists into the Roman Period (30 BCE-646 CE) and the end of Egyptian culture.
Nefertiti
TYPES OF ART, DETAIL, & SYMBOL
Throughout all these eras, the types of art were as numerous as human need, the resources to make them, and the ability to pay for them. The wealthy of Egypt had ornate hand mirrors, cosmetic cases and jars, jewelry, decorated scabbards for knives and swords, intricate bows, sandals, furniture, chariots, gardens, and tombs. Every aspect of any of these creations had symbolic meaning. In the same way the bull motif on the Narmer Palette symbolized the power of the king, so every image, design, ornamentation, or detail meant something relating to its owner.
Among the most obvious examples of this is the golden throne of Tutankhamun (c. 1336-c.1327 BCE) which depicts the young king with his wife Ankhsenamun. The couple are represented in a quiet domestic moment as the queen is rubbing ointment onto her husband's arm as he sits in a chair. Their close relationship is established by the color of their skin, which is the same.Men are usually depicted with reddish skin because they spent more time outdoors while a lighter color was used for women's skin as they were more apt to stay out of the sun. This difference in the shade of skin tones did not represent equality or inequality but was simply an attempt at realism.
In the case of Tutankhamun's throne, however, the technique is used to express an important aspect of the couple's relationship. Other inscriptions and art work make clear that they spent most of their time together and the artist expresses this through their shared skin tones; Ankhesenamun is just as sun-tanned as Tutankhamun. The red used in this composition also represents vitality and the energy of their relationship. The couple's hair is blue, symbolizing fertility, life, and re-birth while their clothing is white, representing purity. The background is gold, the color of the gods, and all of the intricate details, including the crowns the figures wear and their colors, all have their own specific meaning and go to tell the story of the featured couple.
Tutankhamun & Ankhsenamun
A sword or a cosmetic case was designed and created with this same goal in mind: story-telling. Even the garden of a house told a story: in the center was a pool surrounded by trees, plants, and flowers which, in turn, were surrounded by a wall and one entered the garden from the house through a portico of decorated columns. All of these would have been arranged carefully to tell a tale which was significant to the owner. Although Egyptian gardens are long gone, models made of them as grave goods have been found which show the great care which went into laying them out in narrative form.
In the case of the noble Meket-Ra of the 11th Dynasty, the garden was designed to tell the story of the journey of life to paradise. The columns of the portico were shaped like lotus blossoms, symbolizing his home in Upper Egypt, the pool in the center represented Lily Lake which the soul would have to cross to reach paradise, and the far garden wall was decorated with scenes from the afterlife. Every time Meket-Ra would sit in his garden he would be reminded of the nature of life as an eternal journey and this would most likely lend him perspective on whatever circumstances might be troubling at the moment.
TECHNIQUES
The paintings on Meket-Ra's walls would have been done by artists mixing colors made from naturally occurring minerals.Black was made from carbon, red and yellow from iron oxides, blue and green from azurite and malachite, white from gypsum and so on. The minerals would be mixed with crushed organic material to different consistencies and then further mixed with an unknown substance (possibly egg whites) to make it sticky so it would adhere to a surface. Egyptian paint was so durable that many works, even those not protected in tombs, have remained vibrant after over 4,000 years.
Although home, garden, and palace walls were usually decorated with flat two-dimensional paintings, tomb, temple, and monument walls employed reliefs. There were high reliefs (in which the figures stand out from the wall) and low reliefs (where the images are carved into the wall). To create these, the surface of the wall would be smoothed with plaster which was then sanded. An artist would create a work in minature and then draw gridlines on it and this grid would then be drawn on the wall.Using the smaller work as a model, the artist would be able to replicate the image in the correct proportions on the wall. The scene would first be drawn and then outlined in red paint. Corrections to the work would be noted, possibly by another artist or supervisor, in black paint and once these were taken care of the scene was carved and painted.
Paint was also used on statues which were made of wood, stone, or metal. Stone work first developed in the Early Dynastic Period and became more and more refined over the centuries. A sculptor would work from a single block of stone with a copper chisel, wooden mallet, and finer tools for details. The statue would then be smoothed with a rubbing cloth. The stone for a statue was selected, as with everything else in Egyptian art, to tell its own story. A statue of Osiris, for example, would be made of black schist to symbolize fertility and re-birth, both associated with this particular god.
Egyptian Priestess Takushit
Metal statues were usually small and made of copper, bronze, silver, and gold. Gold was particularly popular for amulets and shrine figures of the gods since it was believed that the gods had golden skin. These figures were made by casting or sheet metal work over wood. Wooden statues were carved from different pieces of trees and then glued or pegged together. Statues of wood are rare but a number have been preserved and show tremendous skill.
Cosmetic chests, coffins, model boats, and toys were made in this same way. Jewelry was commonly fashioned using the technique known as cloisonne in which thin strips of metal are inlaid on the surface of the work and then fired in a kiln to forge them together and create compartments which are then detailed with jewels or painted scenes. Among the best examples of cloisonne jewelry is the Middle Kingdom pendant given by Senusret II (c.1897-1878 BCE) to his daughter. This work is fashioned of thin gold wires attached to a solid gold backing inlaid with 372 semi-precious stones. Cloisonne was also used in making pectorals for the king, crowns, headdresses, swords, ceremonial daggers, and sarcophagi among other items.
Pectoral of Senusret II
CONCLUSION
Although Egyptian art is famously admired it has come under criticism for being unrefined. Critics claim that the Egyptians never seem to have mastered perspective as there is no interplay of light and shadow in the compositions, they are always two dimensional, and the figures are emotionless. Statuary depicting couples, it is argued, show no emotion in the faces and the same holds true for battle scenes or statues of a king or queen.
These criticisms fail to recognize the functionality of Egyptian art. The Egyptians understood that emotional states are transitory; one is not consistently happy, sad, angry, content throughout a given day much less eternally. Art works present people and deities formally without expression because it was thought the person's spirit would need that representation in order to live on in the afterlife. A person's name and image had to survive in some form on earth in order for the soul to continue its journey. This was the reason for mummification and the elaborate funerary rituals: the spirit needed a 'beacon' of sorts to return to when visiting earth for sustenance in the tomb.
Egyptianized Statue of Augustus
The spirit might not recognize a statue of an angry or jubilant version of themselves but would recognize their staid, complacent, features. The lack of emotion has to do with the eternal purpose of the work. Statues were made to be viewed from the front, usually with their backs against a wall, so that the soul would recognize their former selves easily and this was also true of gods and goddesses who were thought to live in their statues.
Life was only a small part of an eternal journey to the ancient Egyptians and their art reflects this belief. A statue or a cosmetics case, a wall painting or amulet, whatever form the artwork took, it was made to last far beyond its owner's life and, more importantly, tell that person's story as well as reflecting Egyptian values and beliefs as a whole. Egyptian art has served this purpose well as it has continued to tell its tale now for thousands of years.
LICENSE:
Article based on information obtained from these sources:with permission from the Website Ancient History Encyclopedia
Content is available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. CC-BY-NC-SA License