Comparison Essay
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.
Subject:
In regards to subject matter, both pieces of sculpture are of leaders, Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II were the pharaoh and queen of Egypt around 2500 BCE., and Caesar Augustus was the Emperor of Rome from September 23, 63 BCE to August 19, 14 CE., shown in this work as a general from Primaport, Italy.
Style:
Both figures are in a very traditional, standing pose for the time period in which they were created. The sculpture of Augustus is based on the Greek classical statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by Polykleitos. He is standing in contrapposto, a very classical standing pose wherein the weight of the body is shifted naturally so the figure’s weight is more on one leg, with the other leg slightly bent behind and the hips tilted. Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II are both in the standard Egyptian canon standing pose, in which the figures are rigidly frontal with the pharaoh’s arms down at his sides and fists clenched. Like Augustus, one leg is slightly ahead and one is behind, but there is no contrapposto, the figure’s weight is shared equally by both legs and the hips are squared and level.
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...
... middle of paper ...
...nt through the women. The power to rule was passed from wife to husband. Kha-merer-nebty II is shown here presenting her husband, Mycerinus, as the pharaoh. Unlike the sculpture of Augustus, this sculpture also has a religious purpose. The Egyptians believed that in order for the “ka” (spirit) to live forever, the body had to be preserved which is why they mummified their bodies. As an extra precaution, sculptures like these were made to serve as a “replacement body” for the ka should something happen to their body.
In conclusion, although Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II and Augustus of Primaporta, do appear very different, come from entirely different geographic regions and were separated by thousands of years, they do have many things in common. When we consider subject, style, and function; perhaps other works of art have more in common than they appear to have.
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.
The statue of Khafre is an example of how pharaohs utilized their wealth to elaborate the power they possessed while they were alive and to utilize while they were dead. They ordered statues to be made in their name to decorate the valley temple. The valley temple is a funerary setting in which Khafre ordered 23 statues to be made for it. In this case, Khafre’s statue was made and place near the
There are several differences between the sculpture of Menkaure and Khamerernebty, and the sculpture of Akhenaten and Nefertiti.
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.
Looking deeper into the statue a trained (or imaginative) eye can see more than what is just given at a glance. The pose given by Hermes is the classical pose of contraposto. Contraposto is a pose developed where the majority of the weight is placed on one leg and the other leg in a relaxed with relatively no weight on it in a position that can both be relaxed and ready to jump to action in the same resting position. The virtually unnoticed half palm tree that Hermes is resting against gives a divine character an almost mortal because of the necessity of support on an earthly object. In the pose where the presence of strength and anticipation of a move, there is also the presence of a mortal presence. The balance of the counter limb activity is present in the contraposto stance expressing a certain diagonal symmetry. In the Lansdowne Hermes both the right arm and the left leg are in the resting position awaiting the next motion. The right arm is resting on the right buttock anticipating some sort of motion or action to be carried out by the seemingly dormant arm.
In the ancient Egyptian culture, any king, or Pharaoh, was seen as a divine figure because he was believed to be connected to the gods/goddesses. He was also believed to be chosen by them. The Triad of King Mycerinus and Two Goddesses is a sculpture that demonstrates this belief. It was first found in Giza, Egypt. Today it can be found in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston.
The Head of Augustus, that is located in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, is a combination of Roman and Egyptian art. The Roman technique used to sculpt Augustus’ head is highly valued, but it is the Egyptian faience practice that makes this work of art significant. To best understand why this sculpture was created under the influence of these two cultures, a brief review of history is discussed.
Egyptian art is infamous across the world - classified by the monumental pyramids, and the Sphinx. Although these are both valid forms of Egyptian art, they do not make up the entire artistic history of the country. On the contrary, perhaps the most replicated example of classic Egyptian art, from the Old Kingdom, can be found in their rendering of the human form. An interest in portraiture developed early in Egypt. (Gardner, 75) Whether painted on pottery, or cut into rock, the figures all had notably Egyptian characteristics. "The seated statue is one of only a very small number of basic formulaic types employed by the sculptors of the Old Kingdom." (Gardner, 75)
Upon viewing the statue of the Royal Scribe Yuni (33.2.1) and the “Gothic stone” statue of St. John of Patmos (17.120.4), I noticed the few similarities and many differences they possessed when compared with one another. Both works reflexed the style of artwork done during it’s period.
The trip to the metropolitan museum was a great trip to learn and to study art. What is art you may ask, well art is an expression you use to show a visual picture. It can be through painting or through sculptures. Some other example of art is music, literature and dancing. For today 's paper we will be talking about art as a sculpture. The two sculptures in this photo are King Sahure and a Nome God and Marble Statue of Dionysos leaning on archaistic female figure (Hope Dionysos). You can find these statues in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. King Sahure and a Nome God is an Egyptian art that was made in 2458-2446 BCE. The artist is unknown. It was during the 5th dynasty and it also belong to the old kingdom. The Marble statue of Dionysos Leaning in the archaistic female figure is a Greco-Roman art. Belonging to the Roman imperial period of the late first century A.D. Augustan or Julio-Claudian period 27 B.C., to 68 AD. It is classified as a stone sculpture and it is made out of marble. The height of the statues is 82 ¾ inches. There is no evidence who was the original artist.
Roman portraiture was known to be one of the most significant and prominent periods in the development of portrait art. Roman portraits are characterized by two major styles the realistic or “veristic” and the idealized elements or “classicizing” both of these styles are known for their unusual realism and the desire to convey images of specific individuals such as gods and emperors. However it is important to understand the early background behind roman sculptures stretches back to the earliest days of Roman history, for example a commend tradition was to create a wax sculpture of the dace of a desist man, which were kept in a special place of the owners home. These sculptures were more of a record the persons existence than an actual work of art, there for it emphasis more realistic details than artistic beauty.
...o understanding and appreciating Greek art is significant, but as seen through the writings of Gazda, Marvin and Ellen, the practice of appreciating Greek sculpture as presented by the conservative historians is of detriment to the writings and perceptions of historians, as well as the general education of the public. Unfortunately, due to the popularity of the abovementioned historians during their times of writings, methodology including Kopienkritik has remained a valued and prevalent approach to judging and analysing of both Greek and Roman sculpture, despite increased criticism. All of these factors serve to undermine the validity of the construct, and show that while the construct may have suited and served the purposes of those who created it, it does nothing to legitimately further proper and rational history of Greek and more specifically, Roman sculpture.
To conclude, both sculptures do not have much in common, but it is obvious that the artists had knowledge in human anatomy and was able to sculpt them spectacularly. It is also obvious the break from somewhat idealistic to realistic human nature. The change is so drastic that one might not believe that both sculptures come from the same Greece because it is so well-known for its astonishing artworks found in temples, building, etc.
Some people think that if they could only change one aspect of their lives, it would be perfect. They do not realize that anything that is changed could come with unintended consequences. “The Monkey’s Paw” by W.W. Jacobs and “The Third Wish” by Joan Aiken both illustrate this theme. They demonstrate this by granting the main character three wishes, but with each wish that is granted, brings undesirable consequences. The main idea of this essay is to compare and contrast “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Third Wish.” Although the “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Third Wish” are both fantasies and have similar themes, they have different main characters, wishes, and resolutions.
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