The following article is a guest blog contribution by Anthony Holmes, originally written for Mike Pelletier on The Tales of Ancient Egypt, (January 6, 2012). We send our thanks to Tony Holmes for allowing us to republish this article on BermudaQuest.

The Great Pyramid of Khufu

By Tony Holmes, Guest Blogger

Before entering into a dialogue with you on the origin and purpose of the Great Pyramid or any other ancient artefact for that matter it is best to define the terms esoteric, fantastic and main stream. The correct meaning of esoteric is ‘limited to a select group’. Unfortunately esoteric has become a synonym for fantastic (the product of fantasy). Esoteric is incorrectly used in a derogatory sense when referring to esoteric theories, especially in relation to ancient Egypt.

The main stream theorists are the archaeologists and historians at the opposite end of the spectrum from those of the select group. They represent the conventional wisdom of the time. It is however for each individual to decide whether the currently espoused theories are acceptable or whether they are merely based on presupposition. Naturally the majority sheepishly follow the main stream into the fold without question, so it is up to the select few to challenge currently held beliefs and to put forward alternative possibilities. Such suggestions may be received with disdain or ridicule by those whose status and income requires them to support convention, but such rejection should not prevent those with divergent theories from offering them for discussion.

In seeking explanations for the unexplained, one should be permitted to read any books/articles or watch TV ‘documysteries’; but reader beware – there is a great deal of rubbish out there. So, , when enjoying the tenuous connections put forward by these ‘factasy’ writers always check for the tell-tale signs of invention. Such phrases as ‘statistics reveal’; ‘scientists have ascertained’; ‘it is well known’; ‘by pure chance’ are sure indicators.

The linking of one mystery to support another is often a clue to a lack of solid evidence. [quote David H. Lewis from ‘Mysteries of the Pyramid’ to which you refer: (my comments in italics) "This unusual venture into these secret chambers was costly, not only in a monetary aspect, but in the four lives that were lost in the few short years that followed the expedition - due to this entry and the information gained. (a conspiracy within a conspiracy) Although nothing was removed from these chambers, the microfilms have since proven to be a priceless entity to those who place money in a higher regard than human life. (What does that mean?) It is entirely doubtful now that these micro film clips will ever be displayed for the general public and will remain as guarded as the spacecraft now in captivity at our Air Force Base.” (Another conspiracy for support)]

The Great Pyramid of Giza, Kheop's Pyramid or the Pyramid of Khufu
Image courtesy of Nina Aldin Thune, Wikipedia Commons

So let’s get to that huge pile of stone called the Great Pyramid (GP) of Giza and first review what we know, what we think we know and what we don’t know.

We know:

·         Materials of construction:

The GP is built mainly from approximately 2,300,000 limestone blocks which were quarried in the immediate vicinity of the Giza plateau. Originally, the GP was cased in fine Tura limestone which came from a second quarry across the Nile. The interior chambers are constructed from granite transported to site from Aswan, far to the south of Giza. The blocks of stone vary in mass with the larger granite blocks weighing up to 80 tons or more each (1 ton = 1000kg). The estimated total mass is 5.9 million tons.

·         Accuracy of construction:

Very precise. The overall dimensions are 146.5metres high by 230.4metres side length. The ratio of the perimeter of the base to the height equals 2П (two pi) with 0.05% accuracy. The base is horizontal and flat to within 15mm. The four sides of the base have an average error of only 58mm in length. The sides of the square base are oriented to the cardinal points within 4 minutes of arc (based on true north) and the corners are squared to within 12 seconds of arc. The mean opening of the joints is estimated at 0.5mm. The coordinates of the GP are 29° 58′ 44.68″N 31° 8′ 2.58″E. [The longitude is irrelevant as the Greenwich meridian hadn’t been established and the proximity of its latitude to 30°N probably has no significance, being the position of a limestone plateau on the west bank of the Nile].

There are many other physical dimensions well measured and documented and this is where fact ends and speculation begins.

What do we think we know?

It was a tomb! Who told you that? Show me the body!

There are no inscriptions. In the so-called King’s Chamber there is an empty, damaged stone chest often called a sarcophagus, but no proof that it was used as such. (Note: sarcophagus from the Greek σαρκοφάγος which means ‘flesh eating’ and should only be used when conclusively shown to have contained a body). The term King’s Chamber itself is a modern label.

It was built by/for King Khufu. How do you know?

There are a couple of red painted quarryman’s hieroglyphic daubs in the relieving chamber above the King’s Chamber that may refer to the name of Khufu. The hieroglyphs may have been faked by Richard Howard Vyse in 1837, (Vyse was infamous for his use of gunpowder as an archaeological tool!), but the position of the hieroglyphs makes forgery unlikely. However the presence of the daubs does not prove the GP was built at the time of Khufu. The tomb of Hetepheres, the mother of Khufu was discovered close to the GP. Hetepheres tomb was undisturbed since antiquity, but it appears to be a reburial performed in ancient times. The sarcophagus was sealed but empty. Having your coffin buried next to an edifice doesn’t mean your son built it! Shards and remains were found in the vicinity dated to the 4^th Dynasty, the time of Khufu. So what – I say!

It was built by Egyptians. Most researchers think so, especially Egyptian archaeologists. There is no proof that anyone else was involved, but the absence of proof is not proof of absence! The buildings in Dubai were designed and project-managed by European and North American architects and engineers. The physical work was done by Taiwanese, Indian and Korean and other labourers. Ask a local in Dubaiand you will be told they were built by the Emeratis and in a century no-one will dispute that.

In summary, the GP may have been used during the reign of King Khufu but there is no conclusive evidence it was designed and built at that time, or that it was built by Egyptians and no proof it was designed to be used as a tomb.

What don’t we know about the GP?

Almost everything!

As is the case with any mystery, by not knowing very much we are open to even the most fantastic suggestions. An entire industry of creative fiction has been established on the diverse theories of ‘How? Who? Why? and When?’ of the GP. The least proven concept, but in my opinion the most intriguing aspect is the link between the mystery of the GP and the idea that an ancient body of advanced knowledge pre-existed the ‘Egyptian’ culture. It is variously described a repository of (essentially scientific) information that has been lost or remains hidden to this day.

Let’s try the How? question first:

Look at the facts concerning the GP. The volume of the GP including an internal hillock, is roughly 2,500,000 cubic meters. Building this in 20 years (the supposed length of Khufu’s reign) would involve installing approximately 800 tonnes of stone every day. Similarly, since it consists of an estimated 2.3 million blocks, completing the building in 20 years would involve moving an average of more than 12 of the blocks into place each hour, day and night.

Over the years, pencils, slide rules, calculators and computers have been used to do the sums. Possibly between 10,000 and 20,000 labourers were involved. The only technology around was the lever, the ramp and the roller. Have you seen the GP? It really is awe-inspiring! The internal chambers are a wonderful work of precision. This was not built by a bunch of part-time farmers waiting for the flood to subside so they could sow their crops! But I get ahead of myself.

I have posed the following question to Egyptologists and never have I received a satisfactory reply. The question is: “With the limits to the technology that we assume prevailed, why did they choose to build with such huge stone blocks? Would it not have been easier and quicker to build with small blocks? [The same question applies to many other monolithic and megalithic structures around the world.] A 100 tonne stone block is a bitch to carve out, transport from the quarry, off-load, chisel to perfect dimensions, lift up 60 meters or more and place precisely in a predetermined space using only levers, ramps and rollers. As an engineer I would prefer 1000 blocks of 100kg each, especially if I had plenty of man power. It’s no sweat to carry and place a cube of 10x100kg blocks per side. So what is the only feasible answer?

They did it because they could!

It must have been easy for them, easier that my 1000x100kg block cube – and yet… we don’t know of any technology, even today, that would make it easy. Theories have been proposed as to how the GP was constructed. Outside ramps, spiral ramps, inside ramps and combinations of these. Some suggest pulleys, but there is no other indication that pulleys were invented by 2,500 BC in Egypt. We are left with an undisclosed technology, some method of making the blocks lighter to make them easy to handle. We therefore have to consider reducing the effect of gravity. I will not go into all the possibilities that have been put forward to achieve that. You may already know about sonic power, the negative mass of white gold powder, telekinesis and similar concepts. (By the way, I love the one-liner a physics lecturer put to his class: “Will anyone who believes in telekinesis please raise my hand!”) The actual technology is less important than the probability of its existence, because it suggests the likelihood of the body of ancient wisdom we touched on previously.

I would like to mention at this point the cast-in-situ theory. [This bit was added after the note had been sent to Mike. The possibility was raised by Ishtar in relation to the Bosnian pyramids.] It was proposed by Dr Joseph Davidovits in the 1980's and refined by Prof. Michel Barsoum in 2006. The theory proposes that each block was cast from limestone slurry that was caused to set like concrete. I have certain misgivings. When one looks at the lime stone blocks very closely there is no suggestion of any formwork or shuttering that might have been used as a mould to make a casting. There is an ancient quarry nearby that produced stone blocks and the quarrying technique is still evident. One can see that chisels and wooden wedges were used to separate the big blocks. The geological signature identifies the main blocks as having come from that quarry, although there is some argument about the lack of stratification of micro fossils in the pyramid blocks. The exterior cladding was a very fine-grained, white lime-stone (called Tura) which has been traced to a quarry across the Nile. That leaves the huge granite blocks in the interior of the pyramid. A visit to the granite quarries at Aswan not only provides a match to the type and colour of the granite (which as you know varies considerably), but abandoned quarry works at Aswan show exactly how the granite blocks were quarried. There is a dock that was used to load the blocks onto rafts and with the north flowing current of the Nile, transport to the site at Giza could be easily achieved. So I don't see the evidence or even the necessity for postulating a cast-in-situ theory. I believe the builders used huge blocks of stone and placed them in position making use of, in my opinion, a technology that we have lost or fail to understand.}

Let’s consider the question of ‘Who?’

It was the Egyptians, but only on the basis that the definition of ‘Egyptians’ includes anyone who was in Egypt at the time. The supposition of an ancient wisdom does however require the presence of someone capable of controlling it and directing operations. The locals (all 20,000 of them) probably provided the muscle and a couple of them daubed Khufu’s name on a few blocks. The technically talented individual or individuals in charge may also have had the capability to travel the globe (anti-gravity does that for you!) and could have used their knowledge in other lands and on other sites. So (I hear you cry), where did they come from and where did they go?

My instinct rejects little green men from other worlds. If they exist and are so advanced why would they bother with us? There are other possibilities that exercise the mind. At this point I can only advise you to read up on Multiverse theory and on Multidimensional concepts. A bit heavy if you don’t have much high math. Instinctively I reach for an explanation that suggests that a plane of higher knowledge exists and that we poor folk called homo sapiens or ‘saps’ for short, occasionally experience a ‘leakage’ from that higher plane to ours, possibly deliberately directed from the higher plane and channelled by those who have the talent to do so. The likely answer is therefore that ‘they’ were never here in the physical sense, but were the inspiration in the minds of the locals that enabled them to do remarkable (to us) things. Such inspiration could be the source of genius for the outstanding scientists and artists recorded in history.

The third question in our conundrum is ‘Why’?

At this stage I’m going to disappoint you. I have absolutely no idea! The GP is an incredibly complex building. The other pyramids on the Giza plateau are externally physically similar, but the internal structure is fundamentally a cheap copy of the GP and not even close.

The orientation suggests a relationship to the sun and to the stars. Whenever historians don’t know what’s going on, they say, “It had religious significance!” Well maybe it did have, but as with Stone Henge we can only speculate the form that the religious or stellar observance took until we are made privy to more data.

It is suggested by those who study these things that the king’s body was laid to rest for a limited period while his spirit built up the energy it needed to travel to stars. We have all sorts of explanations as to why the GP was used for this purpose, the current thinking being that the narrow shafts leading from the chambers were pointed at certain stars to ‘project’ the king’s soul towards Sirius or Orion or wherever! This very year 2012AD we might see where these shafts lead us. But as Egyptologists well know, ancient Egyptian belief suggested that souls were able to pass through solid stone in the form of false doors in tombs, so why build shafts.

I could put forward the theories of many others, weird, fascinating and strange as they might be. Could it be a dimensional map of the future (ie from 2,500 BC forwards) left by star people? Perhaps it is a power generator. It sharpens razor blades and preserves meat (not proven). Its dimensions create certain energy levels (this is possible, but not proven). The fact is that it may be generating a form of energy that we are unable to measure.

I believe there is a reason for the GP and it may not be a reason we would recognise - a reason emanating from a different plane of consciousness. Perhaps one day…

Just to mention David H. Lewis’ book about immense chambers deep beneath the pyramid. In my opinion it is as far-fetched and as unbelievable as HG Wells’ ‘The Time Machine’. The sketches in the Lewis book are kind of Egyptian in style, but the whole thing is too ridiculous. A chamber built to house microfilms to contain all the solutions to what ails the world! (Why microfilm? Why not silicon chips or even more advanced tech? Maybe microfilm was the leading edge of technology when Lewis wrote.) His remarkable descriptions may have more to do with his references to sipping Bourbon to wet his dry throat than to reality.

There are natural voids under the GP and under the Sphinx. Ground penetrating radar has shown this to be so, but limestone is prone to this phenomenon. Water from the annual inundation of the Nile would seep through the limestone and the acidic water caused by rotting organic material would dissolve the limestone deep beneath the surface. Are there artificially enhanced voids? Probably! Adrian Gilbert (British author) certainly has made claims in that respect.

But consider the lack of logic in the following claim:

‘An advanced civilization, talented and wise, donated its store of ancient wisdom to an aggressive and possessive race of humans who got to the top of the food chain by dominating every other species by force; a human race that has used virtually every invention and discovery since the Stone Age for the purpose of war.’ (There were bronze swords while ploughs were still made of wood, and atoms bombs preceded power generators.) An advanced civilization would understand that conflict and domination, greed and violence are part and parcel of the human genome. Any additional technology would only serve to increase conflict on earth.

While you are looking for ancient wisdom beneath the GP check out the Emerald Tablet, Thoth’s gift to mankind. It’s worth reading, though not for serious study.

So let’s get to ‘When?’

One theory proposes that the GP was built before Khufu’s reign and he usurped it as a monument to himself. The support for this theory is tenuous to say the least, but it suggests that all three pyramids on the Giza plateau existed before Khufu. To judge by other pharaoh’s actions, each king tried to outdo the previous one in construction achievements. There is a reason for this apart from ego. Each king wanted his name to spoken by the living after he died in order to protect his spirit in the after-life, so the bigger the monument the greater the probability of this happening. It is difficult to imagine why Menkaure’s pyramid is smaller than his father Khafre and Khafre’s pyramid in turn is smaller than his father Khufu (the GP). If however the pyramids pre-existed the 4^th Dynasty, then Khufu would have grabbed the biggest first, Khafre the next and Menkaure would be stuck with the smallest.

Conventional wisdom is that the order of pyramid construction was:

1: Djozer’s stepped pyramid at Saqqara

Image courtesy of Wknight94, Wikipedia Commons

2: Sekhemhet’s stepped pyramid at Saqqara (not built – only the surrounds)

Image courtesy of Pottery Fan, Wikipedia Commons

3: Sneferu’s Meidum pyramid

Image courtesy of Neithsabes, Wikipedia Commons

4: Sneferu’s Bent pyramid at Dashur

Image courtesy of Ivrienen, Wikipedia Commons

5: Sneferu’s North (Red) pyramid at Dashur

Image courtesy of Ivrienen, Wikipedia Commons

6: Khufu’s Great Pyramid at Giza. The pinnacle of pyramid construction!

Image courtesy of Kallerna, Wikipedia Commons

7: Djedefre’s pyramid at Abu Rawash

Image courtesy of AhlyMan, Wikipedia Commons

8: Khafre’s Pyramid at Giza.

Image courtesy of Mgiganteus1, Wikipedia Commons

9: Menkaure’s pyramid at Giza

Image courtesy of Kallerna, Wikipedia Commons

10: and so on…….There are about 35 major and a hundred or sominor pyramids in Egypt and many more in Sudan.

The time between the death of Djozer and the start of Khufu’s reign is only 60 years. The technological jump from Djozer’s stepped pyramid to Khufu’s GP is astonishing. The GP is about 2½ times the height and nearly 8 times the mass. It is far advanced in complexity and accuracy, all in 60 years; and then, just as surprisingly the technology began to fade away again. It’s like going from a bicycle to a jet fighter and back to a bicycle. It is this kind of anomaly that breeds alternative suggestions as to the origin of the technology, whence it came and to where it went. But it would all be possible if talented and skilled design-architects gave of their knowledge and time, and then left the locals to their own devices. The half-life of construction knowledge would be about one or two generations and the knowledge would gradually be corrupted and lost.

To me, the most logical answer to ‘when’ is the time of Khufu (c.2550BC), but the achievement would require superior construction techniques and oversight by advanced technicians.

About the author:

Anthony (Tony) Holmes is a mechanical engineer by profession who became captivated by the history and mystery of Ancient Egypt. After retiring in 2000, Holmes devoted his time to pursuing his love of Egyptology, traveling to Egypt on several occasions and leading groups when the opportunity arose. In 2010, he started publishing his writing on Tales of Ancient Egypt, his personal blog.

Holmes is the author of several books, among which some are: Tutankhamun-Speak my Name, Pharaoh Ay Remembers, The Osiris Enigma, No Time at All, Suitable Vengeance; plus several children’s books including: The Cat’s Princes, The Pharaoh’s Horse, The Cat Flow Over the Pyramids, and The Cat that Rode a Camel; and the ebook and iPhone App “Ancient Egypt in an Hour.” For more information about his books, please email tonyholmes@myweb.co.za.

Egyptian Art - An Overview

by Jose-Pierre Estrada and Melanie Magdalena

A Companion Guide to Gardner’s Art Through the Ages: A Global History (13th edition)

There is more to Egypt than the pyramids left behind thousands of years ago. Egyptian art is easily recognizable: in paintings, heads are turned to the side, chests face forward, and hips and legs face the side; sculptures show rigid stylized pharaohs. Hieroglyphs accompany almost all art. Here, we will take a brief look at the most outstanding pieces of art produced during the Dynasties starting with King Narmer all the way up to Tutankhamen.

Map of Ancient Egypt

The Predynastic and Early Dynastic Periods

The Palette of King Narmer is a flat slate slab, carved on two sides that commemorates unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. King Narmer’s divine power is conveyed with his image on the front as two felines with elongated intertwined necks. On the back Narmer wears a “bowling-pin-shaped crown” that becomes the standard style signifying “the inevitable triumph of the Egyptian god-kings over enemies” (Gardner 56).

Egyptian conventions of representation: composite views (profile with twisted torso), heraldic symbols, registers and hierarchical scale. 

 

Palette of King Narmer (left, back; right, front), from Hierakonpolis, Egypt, Predynastic, ca. 3000–2920 BCE. Slate, approx. 2’ 1” high. Egyptian Museum, Cairo. 

***

The Old Kingdom

The seated statue of Khafre Enthroned is one of a series of carved statues. Khafre Enthroned statue is a diorite portrait of himself sitting upright wearing a kilt the royal linen nemes headdress with the uraeus cobra of kingship on the front. The sculptor creates the statue to maintain a solid portrait, so the statue can “last for eternity and a time less after life.” 

Egyptian conventions of representation: uniform style, idealized, generalized with squared-off, closed forms, and bilateral symmetry. 

Khafre enthroned, from Gizeh, Egypt, Fourth Dynasty, ca. 2520–2494 BCE. Diorite, 5’6” high. Egyptian Museum, Cairo. 

_ _ _ _ _

The Statue of Menkaure and one of his wives, possibly Khamerernebty is another style of portraying the human figure. A person or a deity is portrayed standing, either alone or with others, the Menkaure and Khamerernebty sculpture is an example of double portrait. The statue is a high-relief sculpture because the bodies remain wedded to the block from which they are carved. A double portrait between a man and a woman signifies that they are married. 

Egyptians conventions of representation: uniform style, idealized, generalized with squared-off, closed forms, double portrait, and bilateral symmetry. 

Menkaure and Khamerernebty (?), from Gizeh, Egypt, Dynasty IV, ca. 2490–2472 BCE. Graywacke, approx. 4’ 6 1/2” high. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

_ _ _ _ _

The Seated Scribe is a painted statuary in the seated position. The facial expression and the color that is painted on the statue makes it seem more lifelike. The scribe's body shows that it is a non-elite because a royal body would not be depicted with a large belly or sagging chest muscles. 

Egyptian conventions of representation: less rigid conventions for subjects of lesser status. 

Seated scribe (Kay?), from his mastaba at Saqqara, Egypt, Dynasty V, ca. 2450–2350 BCE. Painted limestone, approx. 1’ 9” high. Louvre, Paris.

_ _ _ _ _

Ti watching a hippopotamus hunt is a painted tomb relief that depicts metaphor for triumph over evil. Ti is depicted as a giant because it reflects his higher rank over the hunters. 

Egyptian conventions of representation: uses two styles - formal and idealized vs. conception and naturalistic. 

Ti watching a hippopotamus hunt, relief in the mastaba of Ti, Saqqara, Egypt, Dynasty V, ca. 2450–2350 BCE. Painted limestone, hunting scene approx. 4’ high.

***

The Middle Kingdom

The fragmentary head of Senusret III reflects realism - the king’s expression now holds a strong mood rather than the previous passive expressions. The pessimistic emotion also reflects the political instability of the period.

Fragmentary head of Sensuret III, 12th Dynasty, ca. 1860 BCE. Red quartzite, 6.5” high. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

***

The New Kingdom

Artwork of Hatsheput is scarce. She self-proclaimed herself as pharaoh after the death of Thutmose II (the fourth pharaoh). Her son, Thutmose III destroyed all of her portraits later during the reign for reasons unknown. She ruled the powerful and prosperous empire for two decades. The reconstructed figure shows her with male attributes, a false she-pharaoh.

Hatshepsut with offering jars, from the upper court of her mortuary temple, Deir el-Bahri, Egypt, ca. 1473–1458 BCE. Red granite, approx. 8’ 6” high. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

_ _ _ _ _

Egyptian art is visible in frescoes and sunken reliefs in temples across the territory. An excellent example are the carvings of the hypostyle hall in Karnak. Columns were used as “image- and message-bearing surfaces.”

Hypostyle hall, temple of Amen-Re, Karnak, Egypt, Dynasty XIX, ca. 1290–1224 BCE.

_ _ _ _ _

Block statues became very popular during the New Kingdom. These statues further simplified the Old Kingdom styles. Senmut with Princess Nefrua displays Hatsheput’s chancellor holding her daughter on his lap.

Senmut with Princess Nefrua, from Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1470–1460 BCE. Granite, approx. 3’ 1/2” high. Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

_ _ _ _ _

The Fowling Scene depicts the deceased Nebamun and his wife and daughter. The fresco shows Nebamun enjoying recreation even in his eternal afterlife. 

Fowling scene, from the tomb of Nebamun, Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1400–1350 BCE. Fresco on dry plaster, approx. 2’ 8” high. British Museum, London.

_ _ _ _ _

The Musicians and Dancers fresco depicts a customary funerary feast that was held one day each year so the living can commune with the dead. 

Musicians and dancers, detail of a fresco from the tomb of Nebamun, Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1400–1350 BCE. Fragment approx. 1’ x 2’ 3”. British Museum, London.

***

Amarna Period

The Colossal statue of Akhenaton is an example of his religious revolution and shift in Egyptian Art. His body is shaped so it has weak arms, narrow waist, large belly wide hips, and fatty thighs. This type of style reflects his revolution in Egypt. He is not trying to be a hero, he is only a leader. 

Akhenaton, from the temple of Aton, Karnak, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1353–1335 BCE. Sandstone, approx. 13’ high. Egyptian Museum, Cairo. 

photo: © 2005 Saskia Cultural Documentation, Ltd.

_ _ _ _ _

The painted limestone bust of Nefertiti, Akhenaton’s queen, expresses sensitivity and delicacy. She is portrayed with a long pensive expression and with a delicate curved neck, showing the standard of spiritual beauty. 

THUTMOSE, Nefertiti, from Tell el-Amarna, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1353–1335 BCE. Painted limestone, approx. 1’ 8” high. Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

_ _ _ _ _

Tiye’s wooden portrait is a relic of the Amenhotep III funerary cult. Queen Tiye was Akhenaton’s mother. The decoration on her wooden portrait is very irregular because the expensive materials were generally reserved for royal portraits. The portrait was most likely remodeled when her son eliminated the old religion.

Tiye, from Gurob, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1353–1335 BCE. Wood, with gold, silver, alabaster, and lapis lazuli, approx. 3 3/4” high. Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

_ _ _ _ _

The family portraiture relief shows Akhenaton, his wife Neferiti, and three daughters basking in the rays of a sun disk. They have unusual shaped heads that show Akhenaton's radical upheaval in art. 

Akhenaton, Nefertiti, and three daughters, from Tell el-Amarna, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1353–1335 BCE. Limestone, approx. 12 1/4” high. Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

***

Post-Amarna Period 

Tutankhamen's coffin was made up of three coffins within one another. The innermost was the most luxurious of the three. It is made of about a quarter ton on beaten gold, inlaid with semiprecious stones. The mask that covered the boy-king was also made of gold and portrays the pharaoh as Osiris. 

Innermost coffin of Tutankhamen, from his tomb at Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1323 BCE. Gold with inlay of enamel and semiprecious stones, approx. 6’ 1” long. Egyptian Museum, Cairo.

Death mask of Tutankhamen, from the innermost coffin in his tomb at Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XVIII, ca. 1323 BCE. Gold with inlay of semiprecious stones, 1’ 9 1/4” high. Egyptian Museum, Cairo.

_ _ _ _ _

The painted chest found in the tomb of Tutankhamen shows a triumph over the Asian enemies. On the lid it shows the the king as hunter hunting fleeing animals. 

Painted chest, from the Tomb of Tutankhamen, Thebes, Egypt, ca. 1333–1323 BCE. Wood, approx. 1’ 8” long. Egyptian Museum, Cairo.

_ _ _ _ _

The Last Judgment of Hu-Nefer is a scroll from the Book of the Dead. The scroll tells the tale of Hu-Nefer crossing the Underworld to visit Osiris to receive the gift of eternal life. This scroll was found in the tomb of Hu-Nefer, the royal scribe and steward of Seti I. There is an unmistakable return to conservatism in the art style. 

Last judgment of Hu-Nefer, from his tomb at Thebes, Egypt, Dynasty XIX, ca. 1290–1280 BCE. Painted papyrus scroll, approx. 1’ 6” high. British Museum, London.

***

References

Kleiner, Fred S. (2009). Gardner’s Art through the Ages: A Global History (13th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth. (pp 52-76).

Images courtesy of: http://schools.nashua.edu/myclass/lavalleev/Art%20History%20Pictures/ch03/index03.html

Ever wonder what the difference between Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia is?

Thе аncіent Egyрtіаnѕ and the Meѕороtаmіans ѕhаred mаnу traits, but differеd aѕ well, dеѕpіte emеrging аround the ѕame yеаrs. Thе Egурtіanѕ, а rеligiоusly оptimiѕtic рeоple, sеt up a burеаuсratiс gоvеrnment thаt evеntuаlly reflеcted thеir ѕoсіаl ѕуѕtеm. In Meѕoроtamia, whеrе life waѕ not vіеwеd аѕ oрtimіѕtiсally, thе mоrе dіvеrѕе ѕociаl sуѕtem led to а dеcentrаlіzed роlіtical ѕуѕtеm. Evidеnсе ѕhоwѕ, hоwеvеr, thаt bоth ѕocietiеѕ truѕtеd іn аn aftеrlifе, еѕtаblіѕhed a uniquе wrіting ѕtructure аnd exсеllеd ѕіgnificаntlу іn the аrtѕ аnd sсiеnсеѕ.

Map showing Egypt and Mesopotamia

Mesоpotаmіa, unfоrtunatеly, did nоt hаvе а sеаѕоnаl flооding from thе Tіgrіѕ and Euphrateѕ rivеrѕ, whiсh wоuld fоrce thеm tо сreаtе an оrganіzеd agriculturаl ѕуѕtem. Thіѕ would exрlаіn thеіr nеgаtіvе viеw of thе afterlіfe and the genеral moоd of thе godѕ. Egyрt, nеvеrthеleѕѕ, ѕtооd alоng thе fеrtile sоіlѕ of the Nilе Rіver vаllеу, which рrоvіdеd а fаmiliаrizеd flooding. Thіѕ allowed the Egуptіаns to ѕее the unіvеrse as orderly and bеnеfіcіal. Sо ѕаcred thіѕ aftеrlife thаt thеу beliеved in prеѕеrvіng the body аt dеаth fоr thе јоurnеy to the аftеrlife bу thе рrоcеsѕ оf mummіfіcаtion. Thе Mesоpоtаmiаns, fеarіng to disappoіnt the godѕ, bеliеved thаt their purposе waѕ to ѕеrvе thе gods аnd thus relіgiоn рlауеd а mоre importаnt rоlе in government. Prіеѕtѕ, fоr еxаmрlе, werе much morе prоminеnt than іn Egyрt. Nо mattеr thе situatiоn, bоth сivіlіzаtіоns thrived іn аgriculturе.

Book of the Dead

Bоth communіtіеs hаd а ѕосial sуstеm brоken dоwn іntо thrеe grouрѕ. King Hammurabі's lаw deсlаred theѕе thrее grоuрs: thе freе landownіng, соntаіnіng rоуаltу, рriеsts, and оffіcіаlѕ; thе dерendеnt fаrmerѕ аnd аrtisаnѕ; and thе slаvе claѕs, whо were usuаllу priѕоnеrѕ of wаr. Temрlе lеadеrs were соnѕidеrеd rоyalty and соntrolled largе еѕtateѕ аlоng wіth thе Lugal (king). Whіlе male dоminаnсе exіѕtеd, wоmеn dіd have rіghtѕ іn Mеsoроtamіa. Thеy соuld own lаnd аnd buѕіnеѕs and could trаdе, but сhіld rеarіng wаѕ preferred. Wоmеn еvеntuаllу lоѕt soсіal stаnding frоm thе ѕрrеad of аgrісulturе аnd thе rіse оf thе mіddlе clаѕѕ. Sоcіаl сlаѕs in Egypt was leѕѕ pronоunced: сonsіstіng оf thе kіng аnd hіs offісіalѕ; thе lоwer lеvel offiсiаlѕ, рriеѕts, fаrmеrѕ, and рrоfеѕѕіоnalѕ; and thе реаѕants аt the bоttоm. Thе реаsant clаѕѕ еxeсutеd much of the agrісulturаl labоr, ѕinсe ѕlаvеrу wаs limіtеd. Obeѕіty, as іn many аnсіеnt civilіzаtiоnѕ, wаs a sіgn of wеаlth аnd ѕtаtuѕ. Fеmаlе ѕubоrdinаtіоn to man іѕ аpраrent іn Egурt аs wеll. Womеn yеt hаd slіghtlу morе rightѕ. Thіs inсludеd оwnіng рroperty, іnhеrіtanсe аnd thе abіlity tо wіll рrорertу to whomеvеr.

Hammurabi

A kіng оf ѕomе ѕоrt ultіmаtеlу ruled both Egурt and Meѕоpotаmіa. Egуptians werе gоvеrned by a bureаuсrасy, where the phаraоh wаs thе suрrеme ruler, fоllowеd bу hiѕ aрpоіntеd offiсiаlѕ. Thе offісіalѕ were сhоsеn by merіt, rather than bу hеritage as in Mesороtаmia. Thе рharаoh was viewed aѕ gоd оn eаrth, grаntеd with the reѕроnѕіbilіtу tо еnѕurе wеlfare аnd рrоsрeritу. The pаlаcе wаs іn contrоl of lоng dіstаncе соmmеrсе аs wеll aѕ соllecting tаxeѕ tо рut tоwаrds сonѕtruсtion and the аrmу. Priestѕ, оn thе othеr hand, dіd nоt рlау а bіg rоle in роlіtіcѕ аs іn Meѕороtamіа. The two сеntеrѕ of рowеr іn Mеѕopоtаmia wеre the templе аnd the palасе оf thе kіng. Thе tеmple аnd the раlacе were uѕuallу thе centеr аnd ѕurrоundеd bу agrісulturаl lаnds, knоwn as a сіty ѕtаtе. Thеse cіtу-stаtеѕ dеvеloрed іndеpendentlу аnd trаded amоng themѕеlveѕ. Thе theoсrаtic kіng was саlled thе Lugal аnd wаs reѕpоnsіblе for рrоperty rіghtѕ, dеfensе, аnd the lаw. Slіghtly dіffеrent from Egурt, thе Lugal wаѕ оnly the reрresеntаtivе or mеdіatоr of the gоdѕ.

Anсiеnt Egурt and Meѕороtаmiа based thеir есоnоmіеѕ оn аgriсulturе. Thіs tеdіоus lаbоr demаnded fоr morе prоduсtivе wаyѕ to wоrk, hореfullу through technоlogіcal аdvаnсemеntѕ.

Cuneiform writing

Both socіеtіeѕ uѕеd the рrоcеѕѕ оf irrіgаtiоn through canals аnd dіkеѕ. Stоnе toolѕ werе the mоst commonlу uѕеd аlong wіth some brоnzе. Egуpt ѕkіllfullу utilizеd simplе machіnеs suсh аs lеvеrѕ аnd pulleуs tо buіld thе magnіfісеnt monuments. Mеѕoрotamianѕ facilіtаted potterу makіng with thе creation оf thе pottеr'ѕ whееl. The mоst conѕidеrablе іnnоvаtіon wаs thе dіstinсtіvе wrіtіng ѕtruсturеѕ of thе two cіvіlizatiоns. Thе Mеѕopotаmіanѕ рrefеrrеd the mеthоd of cunеіfоrm- by сreаtіng wеdgе shарed ѕymbоls with rеedѕ. Fortunatеlу fоr thе disсovеry of the Rоѕеtta ѕtоnе, wе саn іnterprеt thе multitudе оf hіеrоglурhѕ оf the Ancіеnt Egyрtiаns.

Dеѕріte bеing іsolated, both cіvilizаtionѕ mаnаged tо аbide by thе bаsіc ѕtruсturе оf human naturе and аррly thе іndісаtоrѕ оf а cіvilіzаtion. From this сamе the ѕреcifіc quаlіtiеѕ thаt makе uр the clаsѕeѕ оf Mesoроtаmiаnѕ and ancient Egурtiаns.

About the Author : Rohitesh Naik, a Freelance writer and a Internet Marketer who presently writes about the Upcoming Verizon Phones. It includes all the the news and updates about New Verizon Phones.

If you are interested in contributing a guest blog

contact mmagdalena.bq@gmail.com with your post proposal.