Two unknown works of art

This week I chose to discuss the two unknown works of art, and to try and identify whether the works of art are Cycladic, Minoan, and or Mycenaean.

The first piece (shown below), is of a person holding two bundles of fish, one in each hand. The person looks to me like a man who is fit and appears healthy. The two bundles of fish could represent a plentiful environment and a constructive hunting method.

I believe that this piece is both Mycenaean and Minoan. I think the piece is Mycenaean because their art includes common themes of hunting. And the fish bundled strongly represent the idea that the man is a hunter. Although the Mycenaean culture was influenced by the Minoan culture, so from that aspect I am leaning more toward assuming the painting is from the Minoan culture. Minoan art was full of creative patterns including spirals, triangles, curves, and linear patterns. This painting demonstrates these aspects. For example, the formation of the body is made up of curves creating a thin healthy figure. Triangles are used to create all of the fish, it looks as though they are made of four or five triangles. Minoan art was also known to commonly incorporate fish to demonstrate a naturalistic design and this painting has bundles of fish.

The second unknown piece is a pot (shown below), it starts out extremely small and curves up into a very large pot with two handles. On the center section of the pot there is a scene painted. The scene, to me, portrays a battle. It looks as though one character is on a watch-tower, while the other two are on a carriage being pulled by bulls or some type of animal. These characteristics make me think it is Mycenaean, especially because it demonstrates a battle scene. Mycenaean art was commonly known to depict battle scenes, bull leaping, and hunting scenes as I stated earlier, so it is kind of a given that it must be from the Mycenaean culture. Mycenaean art was said to be brightly colored, which this pot is just showing shades of brown, but maybe time has worn out the bright colors that it once was painted with. The piece is extremely well made and a well description of art from the Mycenaean culture.

Both of these pieces are well made and interesting pieces of the world’s history. The two pieces also relate to pieces we have been talking about previously because of the linear lines, curves, naturalistic elements, and geometric features, so they tie in well. 

Egyptian Art

This week’s discussion is on the similarities and differences about the structures of the Ziggurats and the Pyramids of Giza. These particular structures have more significant differences and few more minor similarities. The similarities have to do with religion, height, and formation. The differences include the way they were created, the religious intentions, and the amount of work put into the creation.

The Ziggurats and the Pyramids of Giza were built with the intentions of religious or symbolic factors. They were of high importance to the cultures and were a place of gathering. Both of the structures were built high up of the ground, likely due to avoid flooding and other destructive factors. The formation of both also included stairs, the sides of the pyramids were stairs throughout and meeting at the top to a point, and the Ziggurats had long stair ways leading up to them.

The differences between the Ziggurats and the pyramids of Giza are more significant. The Ziggurats were created by piling new stones onto rubble from the previous structure which gave it the height to avoid flooding. But on the other hand the pyramids of Giza were built with an intensive work crew and by using heavy stones rolled over logs to move them or slid over wet ground. There was a whole network of living for the workers that was uncovered and showed the extreme hardships that they encountered while trying to build these structures. There was also a great deal of knowledge put into building the pyramids. They used mathematics and calculations to create the pyramids just right. They were placed to follow the suns path and made to where the stones met at the top flawlessly. I feel that the workers were likely treated as slaves to create these amazing structures for the kings.

The religious intentions of the Ziggurats are that they are used as shrines and a gateway to the heavens. The people used the Ziggurats as like what we use churches for, a place to be close to their gods. The Ziggurats demonstrated stability and signified their dedication to their gods.  On the other hand the pyramids of Giza were designed as resting places for the bodies of the three kings from the fourth dynasty. The three kings were Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure, and they each had their own pyramid. The kings would be place in a vault far into the pyramid and closed off with a 50 ton stone! The intentions of using the pyramids versus an average tomb were for protections of the kings. There were separate passage ways made to confuse/trick anyone trying to get to the kings body.

Overall, I feel that the Ziggurats hold more of significance because they were used continuously by the people to worship and be closer to their gods. Whereas the pyramids were used as a resting place and a place to remember the fourth dynasty kings, so there was not a continuous flow of people going to and from using it as a daily place of worship.

week Three Post 2

The piece from the chapter that stood out to me the most and that I chose to talk about was the guardian figures at the gate of the Citadel of Sargon II, on page 42 of our text. The photo of the statues was taken during the excavation of Citadel, in present day Iraq.

                My first reaction to this piece is that this symbolized power of a great empire and security to its people. I believe this place was powerful because the carvings on the guardians of the gate are so particular in there perfection and enormity (forty feet high). Horses were a sign of battle and strength and the guardians resemble horses and man. They also are showing that along with their power they are rich because the dressings on the guardians look like they are made of expensive clothing material, with many accessories and jewels; like hats, earrings, necklaces, and jewels dangling on the legs of both the man and horse. Not everyone of this time could afford this nice of clothing so to use them on the guardians is smart to send the message of wealth, which could lead to fear of the power behind the walls.

                The composition of these statues is that so it makes a grand entrance into the gates of Citadel. It is made with great walls and a maze like entrance to end up at the destination of the place that they are guarding. The guardians are to the right and the left of the entrance and have walls surrounding them that are even greater in size than the enormous statues.

                The medium of the piece looks like rock or a form of cement. Obviously the element that they used was strong enough to last and hold up to today. And to be able to build and fund enough material and workers to create this massive structure shows the wealth of the people and kingdom.

                The style that makes this art really unique is that the guardians are half men and half horse. This could have been done because they were intending to portray that they are of great strength compared to average men. The guardians have the body of a horse with the hooves and body structure, and the head of a man connected to the horse’s neck. The guardians are bulky and thick looking of strong muscle, which was not always true of men in the past because they were so hard working and did not have that much to eat so they would have been more slender. The faces and heads of the guardians are dressed with fancy head dresses, symbolizing great wealth to be able to afford such fancy items. And great wealth comes from great power, so overall these statues get the message of power off to any intruders.

 The color of the statues and entrance is charcoal grey and black shades. This coloring was most likely just done because it is the color of the material they used. The greyish color seems to be common among many structures built in the past due to the materials they had used.

                The scale of this piece is massive, with forty feet high walls. The height also emphasizes on the power of this place because they have the wealth and man power to create such a piece. With walls of this great of height a place is secure and strong.

                The texture of the piece looks rough like our concrete today would be if we just poured it and did not smooth it out. But the piece looks very well done and like a lot of thought and care went into the making of the piece.

                Men are clearly not of the magnitude of the half men half horse figures of these statues, so the proportion is off compared to normal perspectives. But the proportion of the guardian’s heads is a whole lot larger than compared to the neck and body of the figure. The heads being larger is most likely to make the man part of the statue stand out and overpower the horse part, so this way people attempting to break or enter through the walls know that this place holds men of great power and wealth so they are not someone to be reckoned with.

Art 235 week three post

This picture from the early 12^th century is called The Heavenly Ladder. It is described as a Klimax manuscript and a gift from Charles Lang Freer. The picture is 15.6 centimeters in height and 13.2 centimeters in width.

When I first saw this picture I assumed it was a picture of a King or leader with power of some sort (in the bottom right corner) commanding slaves to work (the people climbing the ladder), probably making buildings for him and what not, while he just sat back and gave orders. I thought that they were portraying the King as holy and of high importance because of the halo surrounding his head and the cross and church looking tower in the background just behind him. When I saw it my first reaction was irritated and not that surprised. I was irritated because I hate thinking about the people who had to work so hard for so little and were treated so terribly. I was not surprised though that it would be about slaves working for the king because that is a main part of the history of ancient cultures, they would have thousands and thousands of people building huge palaces and empires even but were treated terrible and forced to work, getting beaten if they refuse. But when I read the title of the painting- The Heavenly Ladder and realized it has the total opposite meaning, here I was assuming it was negative and about slavery but after the name I interpret it as the painter trying to portray God accepting people into heaven. This changed my reaction to a more positive and comforting feeling.

In the painting the composition has me believing that the people are headed to heaven. The figure in the right in my opinion is symbolizing God because of the gracefulness in his posture, the golden halo over his head, his clothing (cloak) resembles the churches wardrobes, and the way he is holding his hand up in a way of judgment. Another indicator is the two figures climbing up the ladder as if they are headed up to the gates of heaven.

The medium to me looks like it is watercolor or something like that, I do not know exactly though.

The style in this painting includes cloaks that resemble ones that the pope and his clergy would have worn. They are all conservative clothes and one has a cap on his head. One of the figures climbing up the ladder does not have shoes.

The colors are more shades of brown, gold, and off whites. There is also blue in the background that looks like it has faded some. The blue may have at one point covered the background to represent the sky which would show the people as climbing the ladder up into the sky to get to heaven.

In this painting the lines are very particular and with hardly any curves. The lines on the ladder show some curves to probably show the round spools for steps. The lines making the church show the church to look like the ones that have been made in Europe with the large dome and interesting and unique architecture.

The texture of this painting I am assuming is smooth, though I am not a hundred percent positive.

For the proportion in this painting, it supports my theory of it portraying God escorting people to heaven. The painter portrayed God and a lot larger and taller than the other two figures that are small. The figure representing God in the bottom right would be shown as larger and more eye catching because God is seen as superior and with having him larger it gets this message through to the viewer. The painter also made the church a lot smaller than God, he towers over it.

Though the two figures climbing the ladder could be seen as smaller because it could be that the painter is trying to show that they are in the background and further away from God, so they would be smaller. Same thing goes for the church because it could also be back in the distance.

I think that the painter was trying to make it so God is larger to add to the message of the fact that he is all powerful and the controlling hand of mankind.