Portraiture in ancient Egypt
This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (February 2024) |
Portraiture in ancient Egypt forms a conceptual attempt to portray "the subject from its own perspective rather than the viewpoint of the artist ... to communicate essential information about the object itself".
Artistic conservatism during the 3000 years of the Dynastic age was a direct result of the ideal of
When discussing portraiture in ancient Egypt it is important to differentiate between the modern concept of
Overview
Idealism apparent in ancient Egyptian art in general and specifically in portraiture was employed by choice, not as a result of lack of proficiency or talent. This is evident in the detailed and realistic depiction of birds and animals.[6] This choice was made for religious, political, magical, ethical and social reasons. What can be defined as a portrait outside of the western tradition? It is difficult to understand the ancient Egyptians' concept of portraiture, and therefore in approaching portraiture from ancient Egypt one must try to ignore the modern concept of what a portrait should be. "The Egyptians sought something very different in their representations of the human, and we should not judge them by our own standards".[7] After understanding why "portraits" were made in ancient Egypt, one can debate whether they are real portraits especially when they are examined "through ancient eyes".[8]
There are three concepts one must bear in mind when looking at ancient Egyptian portraiture: "the person represented may have chosen the particular form, and for him or her, it was real"; "Egyptian may have seen his individuality expressed in terms of conformity to Ma'at"; and "the sense of identity in ancient Egypt was different from ours".[9]
A statue was believed to convey a person's true identity merely by bearing an inscription of its owner's name upon it. The identity of a person fully inhabited it regardless whether there was any physical or facial resemblance. Other factors contributing to the further clarification of the person's identity could include a certain facial expression, a physical action or pose, or presence of certain official regalia (for example, the scribal palette). As to the king's identity, it was determined through his various royal epithets as well as his different manifestations as a human, deity or animal, and as a sphinx.[5] Sometimes certain physical features reoccur in statues and reliefs of the same person, but that doesn't mean that they are portraits but rather a manifestation is a single quality or aspect.[10]
The preservation of the deceased body through
Many royal ideal representations are a "type of countenance ... including iconographic and stylistic details (to convey the king's)
The concept of portraiture is still debated upon with regards to Egyptian art, but also, its modern definition. The debate arises because of the expression of the inner qualities – that have no concrete manifestation – in contrast to the physical resemblance that is more emphasized for the easy identification of the subject. In other words, portraiture is very subjective as it is not a mere photographic shot of the person. Nevertheless, throughout history, the inner life was found to be more important because it is the main characteristic of an individual and continuous attempts are made to further express such a fleeting concept visually. As a result, likeness between the image and the model could be a more exact expression of such concept as the main idea is to convey a huge spectrum of different types of the model's qualities rather than mechanically reproduce the external features.[13]
Idealism, naturalism and realism
Religious and funerary influence on ancient Egyptian art is great as is made it
As to women, few naturalistic works of women prior to Late Period and Ptolemaic Period existed and "the great majority of female representations are idealized".[19] Mainly, noble and high status women were highly idealized to express their eternal youth, beauty and fertility. This is not the case for non-elite women. The latter exhibit more variety of postures, costumes, activity and age as seen in scenes of working women, market places, and mothers and off springs. Such scenes have women with protruding bellies, sagging breasts, deep naso-labial folds ...etc. resulting into sometimes ugly, inelegant effect.
However, the greatest efforts for naturalism and sometimes an almost brutal verism in royal statuary started with the
Artistic framework and the patron
Egyptian artists and artisans worked within a strict framework dictated by ethical, religious, social and magical considerations. They were not free to express their personal likes and dislikes even they were not free to produce what they actually saw. Rather, they expressed the patron's wishes. The statue or relief had to conform "to highly developed set of ethical principles and it was the artist's task to represent the model as a loyal adherent", but still considering the naturalizing tendencies evolving with time, it is possible to say that "something of both the physical and appearance and the personality of the individual was made manifest".[24]
King
Art-historical interpretation
The context of the displayed statue or relief must be put into consideration when studying a piece of art. Was it in the innermost sanctuary of the tomb and meant to be seen only by the gods; or was it monumental, on the first pylon of the temple, and meant to be seen by the public? Context dictates the purpose of the statue or relief, and therefore the patron would have asked for different representations of himself in each situation.[9] Moreover, the intended audience for the piece has great effect on the type of representation required for the piece. If the judges of the afterlife are the intended audience, then the patron would want himself idealized as much as possible in order to adhere to Ma'at and to be capable of inhabiting a perfect and youthful body eternally.
However, if the audience were meant to be the masses, then the patron's political agenda would dictate the nature of the representation: the king would want himself portrayed in as powerful and as godlike a way as possible. Also, some private individuals who had the means to commission pieces occasionally ordered highly naturalistic "portraits". Some of them preferred to have themselves portrayed as old and corpulent to show their wisdom and wealth. Who was the audience for such naturalistic pieces? Perhaps the public, perhaps the gods, but certainly the patrons of such works did not believe that they needed to be idealized like a king.
The state of preservation and condition greatly affect how we interpret and evaluate the work at hand. This because "limestone sculptures were occasionally covered with a thin plaster coat, which received additional modeling. The finishing (layer) will obviously obscure or enhance the details of the core sculpture".[9] Most of the naturalistic statues are found with their plaster coat, while the less preserved the coat is, the more idealized the work appears.
Additionally, the condition of the sculptures (whether they were found full-figure or fragmentary) is also a major factor. A person's identity could be determined by a certain action or pose, so if the body is missing, that means vital information about the individual's personality is missing also. "The missing bodies would have had their own indications of personality or stylistic peculiarities".[28]
Gallery
Portraits from predynastic king Narmer 3400 BCE to 300 AD, Old Kingdom, Middle kingdom, New kingdom, Late Period, and Greco-Roman period:
-
Predynastic 5000 Bce
-
Old Kingdom Prince Rahotep2600 BCE
-
Statue of Raherka and Meresankh. Raherka is depicted with realistic looking musculature
-
Gemiem-hat, Middle Kingdom
-
Nefertiti bust, from the 18th dynasty, New kingdom
-
Portrait ofMeritamun, 19th dynasty
-
Sennedjem funerary mask 19th dynasty, Thebes, Egypt
-
Greco-Roman Period Mummy portraits
-
Fayum mummy portrait of man thin face and with curly hair at MET museum gallery 138
See also
Notes
- ^ Brewer and Teeter, p. 194.
- ^ a b Brewer and Teeter, p. 189.
- ^ a b c d Spanel, p. 5.
- ^ Brewer and Teeter, p. 189
- ^ a b Spanel, p. 10.
- ^ a b c Brewer and Teeter, p. 206
- ^ Spanel, p. 37
- ^ Spanel, title
- ^ a b c Spanel, p. 21
- ^ Spanel, p. 22.
- ^ a b Spanel, p. 19.
- ^ Mysliweic, p. IX.
- ^ Spanel, p. 3,5,11.
- ^ a b Spanel, p. 29.
- ^ Riefstahl, Elisabeth. "An Egyptian Portrait of an Old Man". Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 65–73. Apr 1952. p. 60. The University of Chicago Press. 8 July 2009. JSTOR, The American University in Cairo.<https://www.jstor.org/stable/542256>.
- ^ Dunham, Dows. "Portraiture in Ancient Egypt". Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. Vol.41, No. 246, pp. 68–72. Dec 1943. p. 69,71. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. 8 July 2009. JSTOR, The American University in Cairo.<https://www.jstor.org/stable/4170896>.
- ^ Riefstahl, p. 60.
- ^ Spanel, p. 23.
- ^ Spanel, p. 25.
- ^ Spanel, p. 31.
- ^ Spanel, p. 2.
- ^ Russmann, Edna R. The Representation of the King in the XXVth Dynasty. p. 10. Bruxelles : Fondation egyptologique reine Elisabeth; Brooklyn : Brooklyn Museum, 1974. Print.
- ^ Spanel, p. 33.
- ^ Spanel, p. 11
- ^ Spanel, p. 14
- ^ Spanel, p. 17
- ^ Brewer and Teeter, p. 205
- ^ Spanel, p. 27
Sources
- Brewer, Douglas J. and Emily Teeter. Egypt and the Egyptians. 2nd. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print
- Mysliweic, Karol. Royal Portraiture of the Dynasties XXI-XXX. Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1988.
- Spanel, Donald B. Through Ancient Eyes: Egyptian Portraiture. 2nd. Birmingham, Alabama: Birmingham Museum of Art, 1988.