The Queen Of The Night Analysis

680 Words2 Pages

The Queen of the Night, the Real Thing or a Fraud? Whenever a piece of art arises there is always the question of authenticity. Is it really hundreds of years old? Or was it made one month ago by someone just trying to make a quick buck? This is the issue that Dominique Collon address in “The Queen Under Attack- A Rejoinder”. The piece that is the subject of this paper is The Queen of The Night, which is a plaque that depicts Ereshkigal. Ereshkigal is the Mesopotamian queen of the underworld, who in this case is shown nude with talons as feet, holding two “rod-ring” symbols, and wearing a horned headdress. The rod and ring are the ultimate symbols of justice, and it is said that Ereshkigal obtained these when her sister Ishtar came to visit her. Collon discusses how people such as Pauline Albenda doubt the authenticity of The Queen of the Night. He analyzes Albenda’s arguments and states evidence to support how she is wrong. Collon uses strong arguments with supporting detail as well as personal opinions to support his view on the …show more content…

This helps to organize Collon’s thoughts and allows the reader to understand why Collon opposes so much to each part of Albenda’s argument. For example, Collon states that Albenda argues that the head of Ereshkigal was not part of the original artwork, this supported her argument that it wasn’t authentic and was a “pastiche”. Collon provides proof that this is untrue by including a citation from the British Museums Department of Scientific Research. This citation claims that the clay would have been stiff when molded and that they are certain that the two pieces of the plaque go together since they were made in the same way. Throughout the whole paper Collon continues to have a counter argument for every one of Albenda’s arguments he presents. This creates a really solid argument and overall sound

More about The Queen Of The Night Analysis

Open Document