UUID: d627609c-c57d-11e8-964e-17532927e555
Published by BoD - Books on Demand, Norderstedt
ISBN: 9783748128700
This ebook was created with StreetLib Writehttp://write.streetlib.com
Table of contents
PREFACE
PERIODS AND KINGS REFERRED TO IN THIS VOLUME
CHAPTER I THE CHARACTER OF EGYPTIAN ART
CHAPTER II THE PERIODS AND SCHOOLS
CHAPTER III THE STATUARY
CHAPTER IV THE RELIEFS
CHAPTER V THE PAINTING AND DRAWING
CHAPTER VI THE ARCHITECTURE
CHAPTER VII THE STONE-WORKING
CHAPTER VIII JEWELLERY
CHAPTER IX METAL WORK
CHAPTER X GLAZED WARE
CHAPTER XI THE POTTERY
CHAPTER XII IVORY-WORKING
CHAPTER XIII WOODWORK
CHAPTER XIV PLASTER AND STUCCO
CHAPTER XV CLOTHING
CHAPTER XVI EGYPT’S PLACE IN THE ART OF THE WORLD
PREFACE
This
present handbook is intended to aid in the understanding of
Egyptian
art, and the illustrations and descriptions are selected for that
purpose only. The history of the art would require a far greater
range of examples, in order to illustrate the growth and decay of
each of the great periods; whereas here only the most striking
works
of each period are shown, in order to contrast the different
civilisations. The origins and connections of the art in each age
are
scarcely touched, and the technical details are only such as are
needed to see the conditions of the art. The archaeology of the
subject would need as wide a treatment as the history, and these
subjects can only appear here incidentally.It
should be noticed that the divisions of artistic periods are often
not the same as those of political history. Politically, the
history
divides at the XVIIth dynasty with the fall of the Hyksos, and at
the
XXIInd dynasty with the rise of the Delta government. But
artistically the changes are under Tahutmes I, when Syrian
influences
broke in, and under the XXVIth dynasty, when the classical Greeks
began to dominate the art.The
effect of foreign influence in art is quite apart from political
power; it is due to rival activities which may or may not mean a
physical domination. The reader should ponder different cases, such
as those of the spiral design of early Europe entering Egypt, of
the
Syrian and Cretan art in the XVIIIth dynasty, of the effect of
Persia
upon Greece, and of Greece upon Italy (both through Magna Graecia
and
the conquest of Greece), of the effect of the Goth, Lombard, and
Northman on Europe, and of Japan on modern Europe. Some reflection
on
these great artistic movements will give a little insight as to the
history of art.Regarding
the illustrations, I have thought it more useful to give details
large enough to be clearly seen, rather than to contract too much
surface into a space where it cannot well be studied. Portions of
subjects are therefore often preferred to general views of a whole.
The outlines of artistic value, such as contours of faces or
figures,
are left quite untouched, as an outline cannot be taken seriously
which is dependent on the block-maker clearing a white or black
ground. This latter treatment, unfortunately, puts out of artistic
use many of the lavishly spaced plates of the Cairo Catalogue,
where
art is subjected to bibliophily. The liberal policy of all
publications and photographs of the Cairo Museum being free of
copyright, has enabled me to use many of the excellent untouched
photographs of Brugsch Pasha and others. My best thanks are due to
Freiherr von Bissing and the publisher of his
Denkmaeler Aegypt. Sculptur,
for permission to use figures 39, 44, 46, 48, 62, 111, and 112 from
that work. Over a third of the illustrations here are from my own
photographs not yet published, and principally taken for this
volume.W.
M. F. P.
PERIODS AND KINGS REFERRED TO IN THIS VOLUME
Period.Dynasty.Names.B.C.Prehistoric.8000-5500Early kings.I.Narmer, Mena, Zer,5500-5400II.Kha-sekhem,5000III.Zeser, Senoferu,4900-4700Pyramid age: Old
Kingdom.IV.Khufu, Khafra,
Menkaura,4700-4500V.Nofer-ar-ka-ra, Unas,4400-4200VI.Pepy II,4100-4000IX.Khety,3800Middle Kingdom.XI.Antef V,3500XII.Senusert I, Senusert
II, Senusert III,3400-3300Amenemhat III,3300-3259XIII.Hor,3200New Kingdom.XVIII.Aahmes, Queens
Aah-hotep, Aahmes,1587-1562Tahutmes I, Tahutmes II,
Hatshepsut1541-1481Tahutmes III, Amenhotep
II, Tahutmes IV,1481-1414Amenhotep III,
Akhenaten, Tut-ankh-amen,1414-1344XIX.Sety I, Ramessu II,
Merenptah,1326-1214Sety II, Tausert,1214-1203XX.Ramessu III, IV, XII,1202-1129XXI.Isiemkheb,1050XXII.Shishak kings,952-749XXIII.Pedubast, Pefaabast,755-725Ethiopian.XXV.Amenardys, Taharqa,
Tanut-amen,720-664Saite.XXVI.Aahmes II,570-526XXX.Nekhthorheb
(Nectanebo),378-361Ptolemies.Cleopatra Cocce,130-106Romans.30-A.D. 640
CHAPTER I THE CHARACTER OF EGYPTIAN ART
The
art of a country, like the character of the inhabitants, belongs to
the nature of the land. The climate, the scenery, the contrasts of
each country, all clothe the artistic impulse as diversely as they
clothe the people themselves. A burly, florid Teuton in his furs
and
jewellery, and a lithe brown Indian in his waist-cloth, would each
look entirely absurd in the other’s dress. There is no question of
which dress is intrinsically the best in the world; each is
relatively the best for its own conditions, and each is out of
place
in other conditions. So it is with art: it is the expression of
thought and feeling in harmony with its own conditions. The only
bad
art is that which is mechanical, where the impulse to give
expression
has decayed, and it is reduced to mere copying of styles and
motives
which do not belong to its actual conditions. An age of copying is
the only despicable age.It
is but a confusion of thought, therefore, to try to pit the art of
one country against that of another. A Corinthian temple, a Norman
church, or a Chinese pavilion are each perfect in their own
conditions; but if the temple is of Aberdeen granite, the church of
Pacific island coral, and the pavilion amid the Brighton downs,
they
are each of them hopelessly wrong. To understand any art we must
first begin by grasping its conditions, and feeling the contrasts,
the necessities, the atmosphere, which underlie the whole terms of
expression.Now
the essential conditions in Egypt are before all, an overwhelming
sunshine; next, the strongest of contrasts between a vast sterility
of desert and the most prolific verdure of the narrow plain; and
thirdly, the illimitable level lines of the cultivation, of the
desert plateau, and of the limestone strata, crossed by the
vertical
precipices on either hand rising hundreds of feet without a break.
In
such conditions the architecture of other lands would look weak or
tawdry. But the style of Egypt never fails in all its varieties and
changes.The
brilliancy of light led to adopting an architecture of blank walls
without windows. The reflected light through open doorways was
enough
to show most interiors; and for chambers far from the outer door, a
square opening about six inches each way in the roof, or a slit
along
the wall a couple of inches high, let in sufficient light. The
results of this system were, that as the walls were not divided by
structural features, they were dominated by the scenes that were
carved upon them. The wall surface ceased to be regarded as part of
a
building, and became an expansion of the papyrus or tablet. The
Egyptian belief in the magical value of representations led to the
figuring of the various parts of the worship on the walls of the
temples or tombs, so that the divine service should be perpetually
renewed in figure; and thus what we see is not so much a building
in
the ordinary sense, as an illustrated service-book enclosing the
centre of worship. Another result of the fierce indirect light was
that which dominated sculpture. The reliefs, beautiful as they
often
were, would not be distinct in the diffuse facing light; hence
strong
colouring was applied to render them clear and effective. So much
did
colouring take the lead that the finest sculptures were often
smothered in a stucco facing, laid on to receive the colour. This
almost spiteful ignoring of the delicate craft of the sculptor is
seen in the XIIth dynasty, and was the ruling method in Ptolemaic
work.The
extreme contrast between the desert and the cultivation gave its
tone
to the artistic sense of the people. On either hand, always in
sight,
there rose the margin of the boundless waste without life or
verdure,
the dreaded region of evil spirits and fierce beasts, the home of
the
nomads that were always ready to swoop on unprotected fields and
cattle, if they did not sit down on the borders and eat up the
country. Between these two expanses of wilderness lay the narrow
strip of richest earth, black, wet, and fertile under the powerful
sun; teeming with the force of life, bearing the greenest of crops,
as often in the year as it could be watered. In parts may be seen
three full crops of corn or beans raised each year beneath the
palms
that also give their annual burden of fruit; fourfold does the rich
ground yield its ever-growing stream of life.SCENERY1.
The barren desert background2.
The luxuriance of the plainThis
exuberance amid absolute sterility is reflected in the proportion
between the minuteness of detail and the vastness of the
architecture. The most gigantic buildings may have their surfaces
crowded with delicate sculpture and minute colouring. What would be
disproportionate elsewhere, seems in harmony amid such natural
contrasts.The
strongly marked horizontal and vertical lines of the scenery
condition the style of buildings that can be placed before such a
background. As the temples were approached, the dominant line was
the
absolute level of the green plain of the Nile valley, without a
rise
or slope upon it. Behind the building the sky line was the level
top
of the desert plateau, only broken by an occasional valley, but
with
never a peak rising above it. And the face of the cliffs that form
the stern setting is ruled across with level lines of strata, which
rise in a step-like background or a wall lined across as with
courses
of masonry. The weathering of the cliffs breaks up the walls of
rock
into vertical pillars with deep shadows between them. In the face
of
such an overwhelming rectangular framing any architecture less
massive and square than that of Egypt would be hopelessly defeated.
The pediments of Greece, the circular arches of Rome, the pointed
arches of England, would all seem crushed by so stern a setting.
The
harmony is shown most clearly in the temple of Deir el Bahri
(fig.
1) below its
cliffs which overshadow it. Let any other kind of building be set
there, and it would be an impertinent intrusion; the long level
lines
of the terraces and roofs, the vertical shadows of the colonnades,
repose in perfect harmony with the mass of Nature around them. The
Egyptian was quite familiar with the arch: he constantly used it in
brickwork on a large scale, and he imitated its curve in stone; yet
he always hid it in his building, and kept it away from the
external
forms, instinctively knowing that it could not serve any part of
his
decorative construction.These
principles, which were thus imposed on the architecture of Egypt,
were doubly enforced upon its sculpture. Not only did Nature set
the
framing of plain and cliff, but her work was reflected and
reiterated
by the massive walls, square pillars, and flat architraves, amid
which Egyptian sculpture had to take its place. In such shrines it
would be disastrously incongruous to place a Victory poising on one
foot, or a dancing faun. They belong to the peaks of Greece,
divided
by rushing streams, and clothed with woods,—to a transient world of
fleeting beauty, not to a landscape and an architecture of
eternity.
Egyptian art, however luxurious, however playful it might be, was
always framed on a tacit groundwork of its natural conditions.
Within
those conditions there was scope for most vivid portraiture, most
beautiful harmony, most delicate expression, but the Egyptian was
wise enough to know his conditions and to obey them. In that
obedience lay his greatness.The
truest analysis of art—that of Tolstoy—results in defining it as
a means of communicating emotion. It may be the emotion produced by
beauty or by loathsomeness; each expression is equally art, though
each is not equally desirable art. The emotion may be imparted by
words, by forms, by sounds; all are equally vehicles of different
kinds of art. But without imparting an emotional perception to the
mind there is no art. The emotion may be the highest, that of
apprehending character, and the innate meaning of mind and of
Nature;
or it may be the lower form of sharing in the transient interests
and
excitements of others; or the basest form of all, that of enjoying
their evil. How does the Egyptian appear under this analysis? What
emotions can we consider were intended by his art? How far did he
succeed in imparting them to the spectators?To
understand the mind of the artist we must look to those qualities
which in their literature were held up as the ideals of life.
Stability and Strength were the qualities most admired, and the
name
for public monuments was “firm things.” Assuredly all mankind has
looked on the works of Egypt as giving a sense of these qualities
before all others. Closely connected is the sense of Endurance,
which
was enjoined in words, and carried into practice in the laborious
work on the hardest rocks. It was for endurance that statues were
made of diorite or granite, though they were painted with life-like
hues, so that their material was scarcely seen. Upon these primary
qualities was built a rich and varied character, reflected in the
elaborate and beautiful sculpture which covered, but never
interfered
with, the grand mass of a monument. Truth and Justice were
qualities
much sought for in life, and were expressed by the artist in the
reality of his immense blocks of stone, often more hidden than
seen,
and in the fair and even bearing of all material, without any
tricks
or paradoxes of structure. In all his earlier work his monolith
columns and pillars were a protest that a structural unit must
express unity, that what supports others must not be in itself
divided. The Discipline and Harmony which were looked on as the
bond
of social life are shown by the subordination of the whole, by the
carrying out of single schemes of decoration illustrating the use
of
every part of a building on all its walls, by the balance of the
proportions of the whole so that there seems a perfect fitness of
connection through all parts. And the happy union of vigorous
Action
with prudent Reserve, which showed the wise man in the proverbs, is
the basis of those life-like scenes which cover the walls of the
tombs, but which never betray the artist into attempting
impossibilities or revealing too much.As
true art, then—that is, the expression of his being, and the
communication to others of his best feelings and sense of
things—the
Egyptian work must stand on the highest plane of reality. It would
have been a falsehood to his nature to aspire, as a Gothic
architect
sometimes did, in towers and pinnacles which crush their
foundations
and will not hold together without incongruous bonds. Nor did he
wish
to express the romantic sense of beauty, in structure which may
tend
to exceed the limits of stability. All that belongs to the
atmosphere
of troubadours and knights errant. The Egyptian possessed in
splendid
perfection the sense of Strength, Permanence, Majesty, Harmony, and
effective Action, tempered with a sympathy and kindliness which
cemented a vast disciplined fabric. And these aims of life as a
whole
he embodied and expressed in his art, with a force and truth which
has impressed his character on all who look on his works. He
fulfils
the canon of true art as completely as any race that has come after
him.
CHAPTER II THE PERIODS AND SCHOOLS
Before
we can understand any art the first step is to discriminate between
the different periods and their various styles, and to observe the
characteristics of the several schools. If we consider medieval
architecture, we separate the many periods from Saxon to
Renaissance;
if we turn to painting, we distinguish many stages between Cimabue
and Canaletto, yet these variations belong but to a single
revolution
of civilisation, and are comprised within some centuries; in
Egyptian
art we have to deal with seven revolutions of civilisation and
thousands of years. And not only the period, but also the source
and
traditions of each local branch of the art are to be recognised,
and
we discriminate a dozen schools of painting between Rome and
Venice,
each with its own style. So in Egypt we need to learn the various
schools and understand their differences. In this chapter we shall
notice the essential characters of each period and school as
compared
together; while in the following chapters the more technical detail
of the statuary, reliefs, and paintings will be considered.In
order to grasp more readily the differences of period and of place,
there are given here eight typical examples of different periods
(figs.
3 to 10), and
four examples of different schools during one reign (figs.
11 to 14). These
may be supplemented by reference to subsequent illustrations, but
the
contrasts will be more readily seen in a simultaneous view.THE
PERIODS OF ART3.
Prehistoric4.
Earliest dynastic5.
Old Kingdom (IV)6.
Middle Kingdom (XII)The
Prehistoric work (8000-5500 B.C.) shows much more mechanical than
artistic ability. The treatment of the hardest materials was
masterful; granite and porphyry were wrought as freely as limestone
and alabaster; perfectly regular forms of vases were cut entirely
by
hand without any lathe. But with this there was a very tentative
idea
of animate forms. The feet and hands were omitted, and limbs ended
only in points. The form of an outline was not thought to imply a
solid, and it needed to be hatched over with cross lines (fig.
3) to show that
it was a continuous body. The noses of animals are frequently shown
touching, as in this instance of the dog and addax. In short, the
figures are mere symbols of ideas, with little regard to their
actual
nature and appearance. This symbolic stage of art is found in most
countries, and often with a higher sense of form and expression
than
among the prehistoric people of the Nile; there is nothing of this
age in Egypt to compare with the carvings of the cave men of
Europe.Early.
Late.There
is no sign of progress in art during this time. The slate palettes,
cut in the forms of animal outlines, which were made through the
whole age, begin with recognisable forms; and these were degraded
by
copying, until at the end their original types could hardly be
guessed. The animal figures on ivory combs are passable in the
earlier part of the age, and disappear entirely later on. The human
figures, which are frequent in early times, are very rarely found
later. The flint working shows degeneration long before historic
times. And the pottery loses its fine forms, regularity, and
brilliant finish, and becomes rough and coarse. In every direction
it
seems that the earliest prehistoric civilisation, which was
probably
connected with Libya, was superseded by a lower race, which was
probably from the East.The
first dynasty (5500 B.C.) appears to have brought in entirely new
influences. While the material civilisation naturally went on with
many of the older elements, yet in all directions a new spirit and
moving power is seen. The conquest of the country by a race of
invaders is shown on many carvings, most of which are probably of
the
three centuries of unification, before the start of the dynastic
history of the whole country. One of the most typical of these
carvings is
fig. 4