In the Ptolemaic Period, Egyptians represented Osiris as the god of the dead and the judge of the underworld. Osiris was the brother of Nepthys and Seth. He, the father of Horus, was also the brother and the husband of Isis. His brother, Seth, was aggravated. Seth’s jealousy towards Osiris led him to murder his brother; however, Osiris was revived by his wife, Isis. In Legion of Honor, when I saw the sculpture, “Head of King as Osiris,” it reminded me of “Head of Senusret III,” since they are both statues of ancient Egyptian kings. However, the time periods, facial expressions, and details of the two sculptures were different. Therefore, I decided to compare the two sculptures for this essay. Since both Head of King as Osiris and Head of Senusret III are ancient Egyptian arts, the two sculptures have similar facial structure. They both show the Egyptian’s facial structure. For example, both of them have same brow bone shapes. For Head of King as Osiris, Osiris has long and a little bit curved brow bones. Also, as the sculptor made Osiris’ eyes deep, the brow bones look bolder and more solid. Although the brow bones of Senusret III do not look solid as much as Osiris’, he also has curved and long shapes of brow bones. In addition, Head of King as Osiris and Head of Senusret III have long oval shapes of eyes, …show more content…
Head of Senusret III, which was sculpted in 18th century BCE, shows the typical characteristics of king, such as decorated crown and deep and solid face structure with no facial emotions. On the other hand, Head of King as Osiris, sculpted in the Ptolemaic Period, 200 BCE, demonstrates that the sculptors, in the time period, had improved their sculpting techniques as they began to express facial emotions on sculptures. The figure has eclipse shaped lips and high cheekbones. It shows that the sculptors started to include allusions in their
The emotion in the figures is also very different. In the archaic figure, the face contains emotion other than the archaic smile. The eyes are closed with no facial expression. The classical statue on the other hand does not have any facial expressions but has open eyes and no smile.
While they might be in the same stiff stance, the Kritios boy is looser and more realistic. The Kouros Youth is thinner and very sharp. If you look at the legs of the Kouros Youth, you can see that the edges of the muscles are sharp in comparison to the very round legs and body of the Kritios boy. The Kritios boy is looking much more realistic and round. The hair between the two statues is also very different. While the Kouros Youth has long, stylized hair, the Kritios boy has shorter, fuller hair. We are getting closer and closer to the idealized Greek body with even the face on the Kritios boy, with the lips showing a Greek ideal. You can tell that the eyes in the Kritios boy would have been inlaid while the Kouros Youth would have
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 and the Portrait statue of a boy both depict similar subjects, however are greatly different in how they accomplish this task. Through detail, or lack there of, the Greeks and Romans are able to display a certain value they have in its members. These two statues were made about 500 years apart and approach the sculpting process quit differently. The Greek statue seems to use geometric exaggerated lines to form the body while the Romans use a more realistic approach and sculpt the body with a more rounded finish. Statue of a kouros, from about 590 B.C and Portrait of a boy, from about the first century, do not share any great technical aspects and are basically nothing alike.
Apuleius' Golden Ass, the only surviving novel of the Roman Empire, is a tale of a Greek nobleman devoting his life to the goddess Isis following his transformation to an ass and back. Although a work of fiction, the novel reveals a great deal about religion in Apuleius' society. This information, however, must be viewed with a critical eye. He incorporates stories from Greco-Roman mythology not to affirm their validity, but to reveal their commonness to society. Apuleius insults other religions that are not of the Pantheon with severe viciousness, while the general public may have been more open to them. In the end, he praises Isis and Osiris as the supreme gods while giving first hand account of their righteousness. Overall, Apuleius' view of religion cannot be trusted.
...ars after Khafre’s reign, the fourth dynasty was just the beginning. Monumental Egypt, although it existed in burial tombs before Khafre’s reign, truly became a traditional pattern in the fourth dynasty. Khafre’s seated ka statues were numerous and perhaps the beginning of the formulaic sculpting of Egyptian ka statues. The King Khafre Seated that is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art now is not only the best ka statue of Khafre in existence, but perhaps one of the best examples of classic Egyptian sculpture from the Old Kingdom.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art. ‘Egyptian Art’, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Art. New Series, Vol. 41, No. 3, Egyptian Art (Winter, 1983-1984): pp. 1+3-56
Let’s begin with what was going on during the time period for each sculpture. During the 2458-2446 BCE. Userkaf was thriving over his brother Sahure, and he became the new ruler of Egypt. In the start of 2446 BCE, Neferirkare beings his dominant over Egypt. King Sahure and Nome God is a high relief it is still attached to a surface of a stone. The Pharaoh sitting on his thorn wearing a Nemes headdress (it is usually blue and gold striped), fake beard. The king has an emotionless facial expression. It was made for a decoration for the king pyramid complex. The symbol behind this statue could be the gathering of the Nome gods form Upper and Lower Egypt around t...
The pieces of sculpture are both carved using the subtractive method of sculpting from stone. However, the types of stone used were very different. The sculpture of Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II was carved from a stone called greywacke, a dark colored, very hard stone the Egyptians prized for sculpture despite the fact t...
The primary function of monumental portraits in Ancient Rome was to honor political figures of power through repeating social and political themes. The Romans expressed these themes through a form of “realism”. Relics of this era were found depicting the elderly conservative nobility that lived through civil disruptions and war, elaborately individualized through detail of the face expression. Through the features of grimacing heaviness, wrinkles, and effects of old age, the Romans were able to express the reality of their political situation felt by the people whose faces were sculptured into stone. Furthermore, Nodelman discusses the use of sculpture portraits to depict the ideology behind Roman conservative aristocracy. Artists would portray the virtues of gravitas, dignities, and fides, through the use to physical expression and symbolic meaning, rather than through words. A statue of Augustus, for instance, displays the militaristic, powerful, godly perception of the conservative ideology through the use of symbolic detail. The decorative, rich, military outfit on Augustus, represents the power of the military and Augustus’s role as imperator in it. The freely held masculine arm and pointing gesture towards the horizon are Rome’s expanding dreams, clashing with the overall powerful and sturdy stance of the body. The bare feet bring about the impression
Here, we will be looking at a rendition of the high marble statue of Augustus Caesar known as “Augustus of Prima Porta.” Originating from 1st Century A.D., it is said that there is a possibility that the original sculpture could have been of greek descent. Upon a general overview of the sculpture, one can see that Augustus fulfils a millitarial role of some kind. From his very stance to the garments portrayed on him, Augustus is draped in a decorative cuirass and a tunic, accompanied by a figure of Cupid clutching on to his right calf. After taking the general themes of the work into account, one can then began to start unraveling the many symbolic elements embedded into the sculpture that allude to godly themes. Starting from the crown of his head, the very chiselment and structure of his face gives the work a youthful element to it, even though some say that Augustus was around 40 years old. A recurring theme within Greek and Roman culture is the matter of godliness and immortality amongst idolized figures themselves. This idea is usually depicted by displaying powerful human being in a younger light. This
A. A. From Alexander to Cleopatra: The Hellenistic World. New York: Michael Grant Publications Ltd, 1982. Jones, Prudence J. Cleopatra: The Last Pharaoh. London: Haus, 2006.
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...