At a first glance, the Victory Stele of Naram-Sin and the statue of Menkaure and his Queen may seem like two works that have absolutely nothing in common, but upon closer examination, both of the statues share some symbolic similarities that are demonstrated through the specific ways in which the subjects are portrayed. The specific portrayal of the rulers says a lot about what their values were and how they approached their duties.
The Stele of Naram-Sin is an Akkadian sculpture from approximately 2254–2218 BCE. The text written on the stele reveals that it was made to celebrate the victory of Naram-Sin, king of Akkad, over the Lullubi, a mountain people of the central Zagros region. In the sandstone sculpture, Naram Sin is shown walking
…show more content…
on top of a hill and literally stepping on the bodies of his enemies. He is holding several weapons, one of which was recently used to stab a man in the throat. His army is standing below him and is looking up at him, while also stepping over the bodies of the Lullubi. Naram-Sin is portrayed as a ferocious warrior and a powerful near-divine leader. The horned helmet paired with the two solar disks at the top of the stele radiating their divine protection toward him, all demonstrate Naram-Sin’s claim to divinity. These details add to the overall mood of the sculpture and help portray Naram-Sin as a powerful god-like leader with unlimited control. The statue of Menkaure and his queen is an Egyptian sculpture started around 2490 BCE but never fully completed.
It depicts a ruler and a queen in their ideal youthful form. Menkaure is portrayed as a relatively ordinary person (only recognizable by the nemes and the false beard), being gently but firmly embraced by his significant other. Both the king and the queen are roughly the same size, and nothing in the statue demonstrates the king’s inclination to violence or his significant dominance over the queen. They are both shown to be taking a step forward – the queen taking a smaller step, and letting the king lead. Both figures are shown to have slight smiles on their faces, giving the sculpture even a greater sense of peace and …show more content…
tranquility. Both of these works depict a person in charge in some way interacting with the people around them. In the Akkadian sculpture, the ruler is shown to be dominant in every way, both literally and figuratively. Naram-Sin is shown as the largest and tallest figure in the composition. His subjects are looking up at him, in need of guidance. Who is left of his enemies is also looking up at him as a final sign of surrender. Everything in the composition, including the celestial bodies is pointing to “Him” – the one in full control. In the Egyptian sculpture, the ruler’s interaction with the people around him, or in this case - the one person, is very collected and reserved. He is not shown as a mighty warrior or a divine ruler. His presence conveys stability and calmness. He is letting the women support him and show affection towards him. His overall interaction with the other person depicted in the piece is very different from the one of Naram-Sin and his subjects. There is a greater sense of relative equality and positive feelings in the sculpture of Menkaure, as opposed to the feeling of total and complete dominance in the Stele of Naram-Sin. Both of the works portray a particular essence of the ruler that the ruler either has or would like to have. The sculptures have a way of saying something profound about the rulers and their values and ideologies through the details of the works. The sculptor of the Egyptian statue did not just sculpt two ideal figures with two ideal faces, but he instead gave them personal features that differentiate them from others. As Dr. Amy Calvert writes, “his facial features are remarkably individualized with prominent eyes, a fleshy nose, rounded cheeks, and full mouth with protruding lower lip.” Through this sculpture, we can see a depiction of a living person filling the role of pharaoh. Menkaure is not shown to be claiming divinity for himself, as a lot of rulers during that time tended to do. Instead he is being portrayed as a human. That shows the kind of attitude he has as a ruler. He does not feel the need to remind people of his absolute authority and importance. His strength does not come from the gods. That strength and power is within him and is only embellished by the presence of his queen. The Stele of Naram-Sin also portrays the essence of the Akkadian ruler. Naram Sin is depicted in a very heroic form. He stands erect and tall, making it easier to display his muscular body. His head is slightly tilted up and he appears to gaze above everyone else, as if he is the only one that knows what is going to happen next. His proximity in size with the mountain in the background makes him appear even higher in the hierarchy of scale and therefore more important. The horned helmet, the celestial bodies, as well as his size are there to convey his proximity to the gods. He wants to appear as important as possible. Unlike the statue of Menkaure and the queen, in this sculpture, Naram-Sin is relying on all of the elements around him to make him look more powerful. The image conveyed in the Stele of Naram-Sin becomes more pronounced by the use of relative comparisons throughout the whole piece.
It is said that we can only understand opposites in pairs, and that is exactly what the sculptor is doing in this piece. Though the sculpture is supposed to celebrate Naram-Sin’s victory over the Lullubi, it becomes an opportunity to place Naram-Sin above everyone. The two elements that are compared here is Naram-Sin and his army and the Lullubi. The comparison could be seen in the way the sculptor demonstrates the fallen members of the Lullubi army. They are depicted in a completely uncivilized and barbaric way – scattered under the feet of the Akkadian people, while Naram-Sin’s army is marching in an organized unison with Naram-Sin being the leader. By using this type of comparison, the sculptor is bringing two ideas together: one of chaos and barbarianism and another one of order and power. When looking at the Lullubi, the Akkadian army becomes the epitome of militaristic
strategy. The two works not only demonstrate a particular image of the ruler, but they also reflect the mentality of the culture during that time period. A lot of times when a ruler is depicted in an artwork, it has some ties to the concept we know today as – propaganda. In most cases, artwork is created that would somehow influence the people through a concept that they have a good understanding of or are tied to emotionally. The stele of Naram-Sin has certain qualities that would categorize the work as propaganda. In particular, the solar disks and the horned helmet all point to Naram-Sin’s divinity which would be a good way of leading the Akkadians to believe in his … It is appropriate to believe that by constructing this sort of image for himself, Naram Sin was trying to appeal to the religious beliefs of the community. It means that the Akkadians were quite preoccupied with religion and serving gods. Naram-Sin’s portrayal in the sculpture is the embodiment of that image that a god must have in the minds of the Akkadian people. They expected a god to be powerful, fearless and in some sense a bringer of justice. Naram-Sin’s portrayal embodies all those qualities and more. The artwork takes the beliefs of the Akkadian people and focuses on shaping them to present Naram-Sin as a near-divine ruler. As opposed to the Stele of Naram-Sin, the statue of Menkaure and his queen carries very little religious connotation, but it is still possible to see the mentality of the ancient Egyptian people through the way Menkaure is portrayed. Artwork at that time was made to serve as a direct reflection of what the audience will understand. Every Egyptian looking at this statue would understand what it is that the artist was trying to say, without deviating from the intended meaning. In this case, Menkaure’s peaceful and solid image would speak to them of the kingdom’s stability and ability to stand its ground no matter what comes its way. By doing this, the ruler was able to gain favor in the eyes of people in a time of unrest or troublesome times. The two works that come from, seemingly, two very different places, are similar in a way that the subjects are portrayed. Both of the sculptures represent a certain image that the ruler has or would like to have in the eyes of his people. The details in both of the works show the apparent differences in the rulers’ ideologies and ways of conducting themselves in relation to the people around them.
These two statues are famous to the Egyptian art era. They represent the woman’s position and the man’s position at that day and age. Traditionally, the rulers of Egypt were male. So, when Hatshepsut, Dynasty 18, ca. 1473-1458 B.C., assumed the titles and functions of king she was portrayed in royal male costumes. Such representations were more for a political statement, rather than a reflection of the way she actually looked. In this sculpture, she sits upon a throne and wears the royal kilt and the striped nemes (NEM-iss) headdress with the uraeus (cobra) and is bare chested like a man. However, she does not wear the royal beard, and the proportions of her body are delicate and feminine.
The victory stele of Naram-Sin was made to commemorate his defeat of the Lullubi, which were a people from the mountains of Iran to the east. It depicts a relief of Naram-Sin leading his well organized army to the top of a mountain, the defeated army is in disarray at there feet. Naram-Sin stands along above his men who are staggered on the front of the mountain (which is what the artist did instead of using registers.) Three stars shine above him as he steps on two dead enemy soldiers.The Stele of Hammurabi however, was not made to commemorate a victorious battle but instead was made to commemorate Hammurabi's now
The kouros was sculpted out of marble and the statue of Menkaure was made out of slate. The kouros is completely nude while the king is clothed in a kilt and a headdress. King Menkaure is making a fist around an object in both hands and the kouros has his hands in a loose fist. The kouros also does not have as much of the stone around him for “support” as the statue of King Menkaure and His Queen do. King Menkaure and His Queen was meant to be viewed from the front and therefore two-dimensional, while the kouros is meant to be viewed from all sides and is a three-dimensional
The difference between an archaic statue such as Kroisos (fig. 5-11) and a classical statue such as Doryphoros (fig. 5-42) may not seem very great in a single glance. In fact, you may not notice any differences in that one glance. Yet, if you were to look at them closely, you can see that these two statues actually have very little in common.
Information from the textbook and Hays’s article help illuminate the events depicted and their significance in culture and art of the New Kingdom, and how the style ties into the art of the time.
The Ancient Egyptian sculpture, “Statue of Nykara and His Family”, was sculpted during the late fifth dynasty. The sculpture is a depiction of Nykara, his wife, Nubkau, and son, Ankhma-Re. The statue is in poor condition with pieces of limestone missing and chips on the three subject’s faces and bodies. The painted limestone shows the conventional colors for the male and female subjects. There is a clear discoloration among Nykara and his son’s bodies. The brownish red color they once were has eroded to a light yellowish color, which resembles the purposeful color of Nykara’s wife. The hieroglyphs on Nykara’s seat insinuate that the sculpture is meant to be viewed from the front view. This is also evident by the way the three subjects are facing forward in frontal view. There are hieroglyphs on both the chair and base of the statue near Nykara’s wife and son’s feet.
The statue of Hatshepsut seated down is made with the material limestone. This limestone is lightly colored, which created a larger contrast with the other statues nearby. Her face was carved bringing out her eyes, eyebrows and other facial features. Her eyebrows also come slightly together towards the middle. Her lips forming a slight archaic smile. The dimensions are larger than an average female size. The statue is of great size, yet still in proportion. The body and head fit well with each other overall. However, it is greatly exaggerated in size.
The Statue of a kouros depicts a Greek man in the nude. Although he looks like a man, the large scale, and the miss proportioned features makes it unnaturalistic. The toes are too long, the genetalia is unrealistically small, and the joint lines are exaggerated.
An analysis of Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II and Augustus of Primaporta, reveals that there are many similarities, but also many differences between these two pieces of sculpture. These similarities and differences are found in the subject, style, and function of both works of art.
Compare and contrast the imagery of the Egyptian Palette of Narmer with the Akkadian Stele of Naram-Sin. How do they represent their respective kings, as rulers and also as human figures? How are the other figures represented? How do the artists approach the narrative (storytelling) process?
I chose this sculpture because I was intrigued by the position of the man and the centaur. I was able to witness that the centaur is trying to invade the personal space of the man. The sculpture showed me that there is a strong relationship between man and creature. The quality of the sculpture made me realize that animals play a big part of a human’s life and can be seen as threatening to humans. It was interesting to see that both the man and centaur were created to have almost of the same structures. This statue has a metallic brown and green, bronze tone and appeared undersized. It has a height of four and a half feet, and six inches. It has long, thin, legs with calf muscles, and bulging thighs. The sculpture evolved from Olympia, Greece. The man and centaur sculpture was created in 750 BCE during an orderly time period. The colors used for this sculpture, proved that it has a longer lasting mold for statues. On the left side of the sculpture, the man has a wrap on his head, that can symbolize, he is some form of a god. On the right side, the centaur has the same head piece as the man, but the body of a horse. It can be seen that the man and
For my final project I chose to compare two works of art from ancient Mesopotamia. A visual work of art and a literary one. The visual work of art I chose was the Statuettes of Worshipers which were created around 2900 to 2350 BCE at the Square Temple at Eshnunna, a city in ancient Mesopotamia. The literary artwork I have chosen is the Epic of Gilgamesh written roughly around 2800 BCE by author or authors unknown. It was set in Uruk, another city in ancient Mesopotamia. Both of these works of art share a common theme; the theme of immortality. It is my hopes that within this paper I can accurately show how each of these works of art express this theme, and how it relates to modern society.
SYMBOLISM: These ancient pieces aid in the belief men’s lives are delicate, frail and liable to death. The position both retain, primarily the warrior upon the east pediment, exhibit the pain men must endure until death. Unclothed bodies further advance the idea, due to the vulnerability a bare figure conveys. One with nothing concealing their body leads to the perceived impression of helplessness, a thought a
Across cultures, continents, and worlds, the majority of things within the scope of our very own humanity can be boiled down to two things: those who are dominant, and those who get dominated. Within these statuses lie stories of power struggles, rebellion, the rising and falling of those with influence, and the interconnection between a being with power and the people under his ruling. Through the visual works catered to this subject, we will discuss themes such as the power of immortalization, divinity amongst humans, what it really means to be a ruler, and many other details making up the ever-present, multifaceted relationship between rulers and their subject. With the assistance of the Blanton Museum of Art, I will be able to showcase
The “Sacred Tree,” (fig. 1) was originally positioned behind the king’s throne. The scene shows two genii, sometimes with birds’ heads and sometimes with men’s heads and the horned hats of gods. Each of the winged figures holds a bucket and reaches out with an oval object toward a stylized “tree.” The composition has been read as being based on bilateral symmetry, with the vertical stalk-like structure crowned by a palmette. A meticulous examination reveals that although balanced, it has many discrepancies on both sides that deviate from perfect mirror symmetry. Ashurnasirpal appears twice, shown from two sides, dressed in ceremonial robes and holding a mace connoting his authority. The figure of the king on the right makes an invocative gesture a god in a winged disk in the top center of the relief. Ashur, the national god or Shamash, the god of the sun and justice, may be identified as the god who confers the king divine right. On the left, the king holds a ring, an ancient Mesopotamian symbol of divine kingship, in one...