During the reign of the New Kingdom pharaoh Amenhotep IV, also called Akhenaten, the art of ancient Egypt underwent a considerable change. This is unsurprising given the fact that the shift throughout Egypt in culture and religion was so immense. So, logically, it follows that the stylistic choices in art during that time period would alter significantly. In order to fully understand the extent to which the artists active during the reign of Akhenaten revolutionized art, it is very important to compare the work of that time period with some of the art created during other prevalent eras in ancient Egypt. The greatest dissimilarity is made most noticeable through the representation of the human figure. Through centuries of static depictions …show more content…
Of most prominence is his mouth and chin. As with a lot of representations of King Akhenaten, he is shown in a manner that depicts the fleshiness of his figure, even in his face. His eyes are the next distinct focus. The eyes are depicted in such a way that their thinness highlights even more the protuberant quality of his lips and chin with their unrealistic proportions and even more bizarre spatial placement. There is an element of the portrait that is almost brutal in its accuracy to real life figures. This element is the quality of the skin that is shown surrounding the mouth and on the neck of Akhenaten. The portrait almost irreverently portrays the aging of Akhenaten. This is a surprising compositional choice, particularly given the precedence of depicting the king in former years at the peak of human fitness and youth. Indeed, the whole face displays a drooping quality that is hard to find a likeness to in other …show more content…
The combination creates a likeness of a regal royal who seems to have a lighter side to his personality than many of his predecessors. If the outside of Seti is any indication of the inside of Seti then the perfect proportions of his face certainly contribute to his list of qualities. Additionally, his smooth skin, calm eyes, and smile, combine to create a vigorous king in the prime of his life. Yet, in creating a facial expression that conveys a seemingly acute perceptiveness, the artist has attributed far more than just boyishness to Seti. The calm nature of Seti’s face suggests a sense of control that Seti, as pharaoh, should, of course, possess. Certainly, this relief strikes an interesting contrast to the relief of Akhenaten. When comparing the statues of Akhenaten and Thutmosis III, the complete abandon of traditional elements of composition in the statue of Akhenaten next to the rigid, conventional structure of Thutmosis is so completely disparate that it is difficult to believe the two are from the same culture. The clothing and stately garments are, of course, obviously different. The attire of these two pharaohs is not what is of greatest interest here; rather, the portrayal of these two kings’ bodies is what really captures the
After her husband, Thutmose II’s death, she claimed the throne as Pharaoh. Soon after she started to depict herself as a man by dressing in traditional king’s clothes and crown. She even put on a fake beard! She did this to assert her authority as a female ruler. In her 20 year reign, she focused on improving the economy and restoring monuments.
Following his father’s footsteps, Akhenaten shunned the Amun worship and Egyptian pantheon in favour of a singular god to worship through the pharaoh. The most significant and valued gods in Egypt were Ra, the sun god, and Amun, the hidden one. Often, the two gods would be combined into one, Amun-Ra, king of gods and god of kings. Hence, Akhenaten chose to worship Aten, an aspect of the sun god Ra, visualised as ‘the sun-disk’, and ostracise Amun and his
This sculpture strived to make it as realistic as possible; soft yet strong features are represented. For example, Marcus face is stern yet shows emotions
While few Egyptians could read the hieroglyphics, I feel as though because the pharaoh, Hatshepsut was so egocentric the iconography in the artifacts portrayed her exactly as what she would have wanted her kingdom to see her as. I believe she wanted to be seen as a great pharaoh, and nothing short of such due to her sex or because she was acting regent of her step-son, Thutmose III. Assuming that Hatshepsut was only meant to be regent while her step-son was too young to assume the role of pharaoh, I believe it is a fair argument to assume Thutmose III was insulted by his step-mother by being shown as her lesser rather than her equal. For example, in the Stele of Hatshepsut and Thutmose, Hatshepsut is shown front and center in closest connection to the god Amun. Additionally in the stele, Hatshepsut stands in front of
There were several inscription found to have provided evidence of at least four military operations under the reign. Her military actions in the Upper East and Nubia were depicted in the wall on the eastern colonnade at Deir Eh Bahri, which provided a relief describing a campaign against the people of Upper Egypt, and the Nubian god, Tetun, who admitted his defeat. In addition to the campaign in the Upper East, Hatshepsut conducted a Nubian campaign which is proven through the Speos Artemidos inscription which is small inscription on a block of stone from a temple she erected. The message was inscribed by the nobleman, Ty, one of Hatshepsut’s chief officials, discovered at Elephantine island, who witnessed Hatshepsut's triumph and proclaimed his loyalty towards her. Accompanying this inscription, Hatshepsut depicted herself as a warrior pharaoh, embodying an image of a sphinx trampling on Egypt’s enemies to upgrade her own army in order to appear superior.
Though they appear to be drastically different, they have some similarities upon further inspection. Menkaure and His Wife is thought to be from the Old Kingdom time period, which was from 2686-2181 BCE. On the other hand, Akhenaten is from the New Kingdom, specifically the Amarna time period, which happened between 1391-1353. Both of the statues were found in Egypt and they have a great many similarities considering they were created many years apart. Both of the statues depict Egyptian kings, or Pharaohs.
Both statues have a frontal pose. Yuny and Renenutet medium is limestone and paint, meanwhile Senusret III medium is yellow quartzite. Both Yuny and Senusret III are wearing a headdress emphasizing their power and royalty through it. Senusret III has a royal traditional headdress on his head behind his ears and Yuny has a fashionable wig as a headdress in front of his ears. Senusret III has a stun arched forehead and Yuny has a much more relaxed forehead.
Major Works Data Sheet In this column, choose five quotations from the text, one focusing on each of the following literary elements: In this column, analyze the significance of your quotations. Allow the following questions to guide your responses: Why is this important? What does this reveal? Why does the author say it this way?
Tiffany Phillips Humanities 1301.Section 192 Professor Jana Haasz February 18, 2017 1. The relief of the Victory Stele of Naram-Sin and the Narmer Palette are different; the Victory Steel of Naram-Sim is sculpted in a way that is protruding immensely from the palette while the Narmer Palette is very shallow in comparison (Cunningham, Pg. 16). 2. Each Palette is depicting a battle but they each have their own uniqueness. Victory Stele of Naram-Sin is showing the Pharaoh on an ascent through a battle ground towards the gods, his foes falling at his feet as he walks and others begging for mercy (Cunningham, Pg. 16).
Through this work, he was trying to express to his people with Naram-Sin at the helm of the monarchy that there was no possible way that they could ever be defeated or taken over. This piece was used to convey the trust and hope that the people should’ve had in their ruler, this sculpture expressed the great supremacy of Naram-Sin and the discipline of the Akkadians beneath him. He was resilient enough to conquer these barbaric and chaotic people and this showed his fierceness to the Akkadians. With this defeat, it is believed that he subjected them to life as slaves and placed them beneath society just as they were displayed placed beneath him in the relief
In 1479 B.C.E. Thutmose II passed the power of Pharaoh to co-ruler Hatshepsut-his sister/wife-because his son, Thutmose III, was too young. During her reign, she proved she was worthy by becoming one of the “most ambitious builders in Egyptian history” (Cole and Symes 34). However, after ruling for 21 years her legacy was tested. Scholars found defaced statues and portraits of Hatshepsut. Some believed Thutmose III was slighted by Hatshepsut and he defaced her image.
King Ramesses II rules for sixty-seven years and passes away around the age of ninety. There is no monument that shows how King Ramesses II actually looks like. There are statues of him but, this does not verify how he actually looks like. This is because the Egyptian artists are not intending to portray “the king in a totally realistic manner,” rather the statues were based on models (Dunn). From the statues it is seen that King Ramesses II is what a king is supposed to look like.
The 1st scene that we can find Prince Sooyang’s neurotic obsession of “The Idealized Image” is “At his birthday party, he asks to face readers whether he has a destiny of become a king”. He wants to test his surrounding people whether they are willing to follow him or not. Most of people answered Prince Sooyang already looks like a king or his face
It is well known that ancient Egypt had an obsession with the afterlife, and apparently, their art was not intended to be seen by the living, but for only those who had passed on into eternity. The statue of King Menkaure and Queen had been found in January of 1910, and when uncovered, was found to be in pristine condition. The statue represented the idealistic masculine and feminine traits of men and women, which King Menkaure and his wife most likely exhibited in their lifetime. The statue had been carved using greywacke, which is a type of sand stone prized for its hardness and dark color.
The three types of Ancient Greek art were a progression of styles than began in approximately 700 BCE under the Archaic style. The Archaic style was very primitive and can be likened to Ancient Egyptian art and sculpture. The Archaic style would display the human body in very rigid and unnatural forms. Archaic sculptures were also well known for the “Archaic Smile”. Historians believe that the Greeks displayed their human sculptures with a smile to signify that they were representing someone who was “alive”.